More on Romney’s infatuation with the commingling of the government and green energy:
I also want to see us become more energy efficient. I’m told that we use almost twice as much energy per person as does a European, and more like three times as much as does a Japanese citizen. We could do a lot better. I’d like to see our vehicles, and our homes, and our systems of insulation and so forth become far more efficient. I believe that we have a role in trying to encourage that to happen.
— And by “we,” Romney off course means government — or rather, he means all of us with the proper nudging and counsel and reasonable regulations provided by government, for our own good.
Perhaps Romney hasn’t seen a map of the US, and compared it with maps of European countries, or even Japan, because if he had that would have gone a long way toward informing him why the US uses more energy per person as a matter merely of logistics. Couple that with the fact that the US has long been the most productive user of energy, and Romney would have a clear argument for how our energy use equates with our growth and prosperity — and he’d be positioning himself to make the case for cheap energy, taking advantage of all the shale and coal and natural gas we have here in this country that is left untapped.
Instead, our “serious” conservative candidate is positioning himself as yet another subsidizer of useless energy boondoggles — and as a man easily swayed by the extremists in the EPA and Interior.
That is, he’s missed a great opportunity to speak to conservative, pro-growth, anti-regulatory principles, and instead has decided to pander to the ignorant and the emotionally retrograde and retarded.
This is serious?
Good lord. Won’t any of these “serious” candidates on our side just please shut up, go away, and leave us the fuck alone?
(h/t newrouter)
I’m sorry, but when I read the title of this post I heard Mel Blanc’s “smooth, generic upper-class accent” saying it in the same manner as, “Wile E. Coyote, Super Genius.”
I don’t think the existence of Romney annoys me as much as the fact that the members of the pundit class who are supposedly on “our” side continue to claim that he’s a viable candidate for the GOP presidential nomination, even though he seems to stand against most of the conservative principles GOP candidates are theoretically supposed to support. They apparently give him a pass on that stuff.
Still, I don’t think he can win the general election, which is small comfort because with MBM support he could keep candidates more in line with classical liberal thinking out. For our pundit class, that would be a good thing, because keeping out the Cains, Palins, and Bachmanns of the world is very important to them.
Actually cranky, I think Romney could win the general, giving us a new face for the same old crap, and a Republican scapegoat for the coming collapse.
I can’t believe you guys are talking about Mitt this way. You obviously didn’t read Noonan’s article this morning in the WSJ:
On top of that, the two most visible Republicans the past 10 days were Sarah Palin ,on her magical mystery tour, and him. They got all the coverage, and for a moment it seemed like a two-person race. Meaning a lot of Republicans got to think, “Hmm, Palin or Romney—a trip to Crazytown or the man of sober mien.” That did not hurt him.
Do you want a trip to Crazytown or a man of “sober mien.” Listen to your betters. They’re trying to help you.
Ahhhh more social engineering, but his time with less smart power and more seriousness.
We need to make sure the EPA has SWAT teams. You know, in case you maliciously dry up a “wetland” by fixing your gutter, or go around being less energy-efficient than a Japanese…
Gack.
This “electability” shit will only end if it stops working.
I think a lot of people would refuse to vote for Mitt. I know I won’t. I think the only place he beats Obama is in the telephone polls. Why vote for Mitt when you can get the same thing from Obama?
Lewis Black once suggested we should elect a dead guy for president. Black riffed on the fact that any country that would elect a dead guy is automatically assumed to be crazy. Lewis figured any country that wanted to mess with the US would think twice, because it isn’t smart to mess with crazy.
Crazy works for me.
“Zombie Reagan: 2012”
Romney: Ushering in America’s Amish Era, One Carbon Credit at a Time.
One big benefit of having the lights shut off is that all these guys in their pajamas will be sitting in the dark, and not publicly questioning the wisdom of their betters.
Romney should do us all a favor and challenge Obama for the Democrat nomination.
Better fit all around.
I’m told that we use almost twice as much energy per person as does a European, and more like three times as much as does a Japanese citizen.
I’m told that former governors can shit out their mouths more than four times as many made up statistics than the average Chilean. Only about one third as much as the average former US Vice President though, but I hear if the ex-governor runs for US President that gap narrows quickly.
I’m told that we use almost twice as much energy per person as does a European, and more like three times as much as does a Japanese citizen.
Don’t worry Mitt, you shithead, unemployment cures all.
There is no difference in the 2 parties. They are both big government. I knew we were fucked the moment the orange guy from Ohio started crying on election night. If the Republicans want to be taken serious, they need to act like they won and quit supporting a candidate because he or she is next.
Mitthead.
I almost like that more than “Mildred.”
Mitt/Huntsman 2012!
Let’s see…we’ve already figured out the Mitt converts to Shitt easily enough. What could we do with Huntsman?
Punt? Runt?
Gee, I wish I could think of something
inappropriate…Mitt Romney: Serious as a fucking heart attack.
And about as desirable.
Squid: The “Alabama Hot Pocket” ticket…
Elk Huntsman?
You know, for the
spanishhispanic vote…Regardless of how badly the MBM, and the Rockefeller Rethugs! like Noonan, want to promote Romney, the simple fact is he’d never beat Obama in the general election. He’s Obama-lite, and the same folks that refused to vote for McCain won’t vote for him-ever.
I still stand by my prediction that he won’t even win the nomination.
In fact, I think he’ll have his lunch eaten on Monday at the debate in NH; Either by Cain, if not also by Bachmann or Pawlenty.
Same old crap indeed. And it is the same old crap because it’s the crap that’s favored by the Ruling Class and their wholly owned-subsidiaries in the MSM. Of course Romney is the purported Republican front-runner, a Romney v. Obama race would insure four more years of the same old crap.
But thanks to the internet it’s getting harder to peddle the same old crap. It’s no longer possible to control the flow of information and shape the narrative to the degree that it was just a few years ago. The harder they try the more obvious it becomes that they’re trying and the lower their credibility becomes.
Sadly, we’re still battling the 50% of the voters who pay no attention to the issues, the 50% who vote Democrat/Republican because their grandma was a Democrat/Republican, and the 50% who are just plain idiots. I fear they may have us outnumbered….
Must be some overlap of those groups, or else it leads to a “Yogi Berra-ism”:
But your point well should be taken. Just as at the time of the American Revolution, there is a percentage of the population, around half of all adults, that could’ve given a damn about it or their personal liberty on the whole; as long as their bread and circuses are undisturbed. Which, not coincidentally, is remarkably close to the percentage that don’t participate in elections today…
As long as they can watch American Idol and Lady Gaga, who cares if the nation is going to hell in a handbasket…
It is like Newt’s implosion created a vacuum that Mitt had to fill.
It is like Newt’s implosion created a vacuum that Mitt had to fill.
Good. Let Mitt jump into Newt’s political grave, and let us bury them both.
I still stand by my prediction that he won’t even win the nomination.
At this point, it is probably Tim Pawlenty or Rick Perry, the latter clearly entering the fray now.
The pundits are not looking at this the same way you are. When they talk about a serious candidate, they mean things like good hair. For a male candidate, good hair seems to be a serious leading indictor of success.
On this basis, Perry is our man.
While I do agree that Romney would be a poor choice for President, I do not agree that he is just as bad as Obama. Romney has decent ideas about foreign policy. That would make him a huge improvement over our current child president. Were he our nominee, I would vote for him and probably even campaign for him on that basis.
Jeff, ot but check this out: http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/driehl/2011/06/10/the-undefeated-review-our-story-not-simply-sarah-palins/
http://video.foxnews.com/v/961366897001/
While even a reasonably well-mannered pot of petunias (with good hair) would be a marked improvement over the The God Who Bleeds, there’s the whole “deck chairs on the Titanic” thing to be considered. If you’re of the opinion that our financial DOOM! (and/or another World War) is just around the corner, then niceties like “won’t keep throwing our allies under the bus” and “doesn’t actually hate this country” aren’t going to cut it.
(Though personally I’m of the opinion that we’re doomed no matter what — even if Cain/Palin/Bachmann somehow got elected, with R majorities in both houses, there’s no chance that Congress would act boldly enough to forestall the coming disaster. The Ryan plan isn’t sufficient, particularly if we wait two more years before implementing it.)
If the choice were Romney and Obama, yes I would vote Romney. Huntsman and Obama? Never going to happen, but I think my stock piling of weapons, ammo and preserved food would accellerate.
Oh, set that bar a little lower, please. There’s still room for a slime mold to get under it. ;-)
They do! American Idol and Lady Gaga wouldn’t exist if the nation wasn’t going to hell in a handbasket.