The Truth About Mitt Romney

Looking For 101 Reasons Why Mitt Romney Would Be A VP Disaster???
Check out these articles and links below to complete your search...

Here's the deal with Romney:

McCain will be announcing his choice for VP soon. I think he has an excellent chance of beating Obama, but only if he chooses a GENUINE social conservative, someone like Huckabee.

Like most of you, I'm not thrilled about McCain, but he is the only obvious choice for us if we want any shot at overturning Roe Vs. Wade and keeping the veto power over Pelosi & Reed (which is the only thing stopping them at the moment from launching a fast-track barrage of successful liberal legislation.)

There are many ways Huckabee would offer the best choice to McCain, but 2 stand out to me that make him the polar opposite of a choice like Mitt Romney.

1. Huckabee as VP would set up a viable 8 year run of a socially conservative president from 2012-2020. McCain is not likely to run in 2012 for re-election, and the GOP not only needs to keep the White House, but groom for the future by positioning an heir apparent.

2. Because McCain has tendencies that are undoubtedly immoral, our best shot at salvaging the moral character of our next president is someone who will have a righteous influence on him, and will not compromise their convictions. Every secular King or Pharaoh needs a Daniel or Joseph, in order to bring God's blessing on a nation that has chosen their leaders foolishly.

As it stands, Romney appears to be the VP favorite, despite many flaws that could very well cost the GOP everything for the next 4-12 years. Even if the GOP does find success with this moderate combination, it will surely spell trouble for the true conservative movement within the Party. For these reasons, and many more listed below, I suggest that everyone who supported Mike Huckabee (or any other true social conservative) get busy sending constant signals of disagreement with the Romney-loving media. The McCain camp, the GOP, the media and the Internet community must hear this rejection loud and clear.

We are running out of time to try and influence this decision. Please check out and pass along the items below. Every Republican needs to see this info ... ESPECIALLY JOHN McCAIN!!!

The truth about Romney is compelling at http://www.trueromney.com/

What Romney said about McCain that gives Dems great attack ad material if they team up. See it here http://romneyonmccain.blogspot.com/

This is a post I wrote about McCain/Romney in May that you may find interesting: http://mikefordperspective.blogspot.com/2008/05/romney-sees-vp-chances-slipping-away.html
Romney Sees VP Chances Slipping Away
"Despite the hype around the Memorial Weekend gathering in Sedona at Sen. John McCain's ranch, only Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal is being given serious consideration for the vice presidential nomination, say McCain insiders with knowledge of the ongoing vetting process. And even that serious consideration can only go so far.

"Jindal is the only one, but there seems to be general agreement that we need him to be the best governor he can be and a leader of the Republican Party more," says one McCain campaign adviser. "McCain has gotten a good look at [Mitt] Romney as a competitor and as someone who is running in support of his candidacy, and frankly he can't tell the difference. It's been a very educational process. Let's just leave it at that." -The American Spectator

READ FULL ARTICLE AT: http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=13271

Hmmm. I'll go out on the edge here and risk irritating some of our readers who may have supported Romney. There are several valid points that seem to be ignored by the "establishment" Republicans who are obviously in unanimous awe of this guy. http://www.trueromney.com/ I will touch on a few because it's important. Loosen those ties, boys! I'll try to go easy on him.

His most valuable "potential employees" have been pimping him hard on the airwaves since January. I suppose if I had the financial security that Rush, Hannity, Coulter and Beck have, I might be tempted to support the flirtatious tycoon just in case he attempts to buy my contract again, a la Clear Channel/Bain Capital buyout. Several RNC members want to see him locked in. And, he had a decent following for those who couldn't swallow the Giuliani pill but can't be seen with a right winger in public.

Point blank: McCain/Romney would be a disaster for the GOP in a year when we can ill afford any more setbacks, although many are in the forecast. While we may be in hot water on Capitol Hill, I believe the easiest candidate to beat since Jimmy Carter 2.0 is on the way to the slaughter, compliments of the Democrats. That is, of course, Barack Hussein Obama.


I thank God for no more perfect storms like Clinton/Perot to derail us from the White House, but one of these days our luck will run out. Despite having an unstoppable pattern of weak candidates to represent the GOP in EVERY election after Reagan, the liberal shot callers have managed to produce the primary energy necessary to offer up the same old disaster for the last 12 years: The most liberal pinko socialist they can find.


America will not elect someone so liberal and out of touch with every day America as Gore, Kerry, She-Clinton or Obama. They come close, and regardless of how weak Bush 1 and 2 were, or Dole was, or McCain is, they cannot close the deal. They never learn.


But neither do we. Something has got to give soon. And, while it looks like the Dems are hell bent on another losing Marxist, they would be winning by landslides with another moderate and traditional candidate like JFK. Not because America wants or needs another JFK, but because we have been determined to offer the poster boy for the GOP country club negative stereotype that keeps us from growing into America's majority party.


Suit & tie. Expensive education. Wealthy family. Lot's of special interest. Elite to the core. Out of touch with most Americans.

Sure, we'll produce an "American Hero" if we have to, but it's still another dose of Washington that fails to inspire the masses. It's a shame that we have to be attacked by terrorists or lose some astronauts in a tragic accident in order to get goosebumps when a Republican leader speaks these days. Close your mouth, it's true.



Now, Romney has all the goods, if you're looking for the Manchurian Candidate. Good looking, lot's of money, fresh new slogans, a positive demeanor, wink and a smile (probably an excellent baby kisser), financial background, good speaker, etc, etc, etc.



However, he falls apart on the conservative principles that drive the Party. Sure, he says he's pro-life and pro-gun. He says he's a fiscal conservative and supports the War On Terror. He says he loves (his) Jesus, family and the American way. "Washington is broken", and he claims he can fix it.

But, as a Huckabee organizer, one of my primary jobs was to research the heck out of the guy, and I have been beside myself at how "too perfect" he is to the media and many social conservatives who fail to research or just ignore this man's profile.

http://www.trueromney.com/ will give you a glimpse of some, just some, of the baggage that comes with this guy.

But even without the facts that he voted for Paul Tsongas, has a record of pro-gay & pro-abortion support, admits he is not a Reagan-Bush Republican, was not even registered Republican in the 90's, favors socialist health care like Hillary, raised taxes/fees in Massachusetts by over $740 million, lied repeatedly during the presidential primary, failed to leave the Governor's office with a favorable approval rating, and just flat out ran a nasty campaign, (whew! I'm out of breath!) I can still give a logical analysis of why he could likely burn the GOP at the worst possible time if he is picked as VP.

First off, and most importantly, the GOP must have a Socially Conservative Southern Evangelical Christian on the ticket if they want to win. Having 2 moderate to liberal Republicans on the ticket that favor the Northeast and Washington DC wing of the Party won't cut it. History has shown time and time again that it is a recipe for disaster. (Remember Dole/Kemp?)



And having a "Progressive -Yankee- Mormon" to add insult to injury along with McCain on the ticket would be asking for a nightmare of resentment and distrust from the base of the American voters in both parties, who as Christians, make up 68% of the nation's electorate. I know that's an unpopular thing to say in this era of political correctness, but it is a legitimate factor that we must address. Whether it should matter is a debatable issue that is irrelevant to winning and losing. Race, gender and religion have always played a factor in politics, and 2008 is no exception.



Secondly, since Mitt refused to honor the 11th Commandment of Ronald Reagan, "Thou shall not speak evil of thy fellow Republican", and ran one of the worst smear campaigns in GOP primary history, he has successfully given the Democrats hours of soundbites that rip McCain. And they will use them, too. The market is very promising to Democratic strategists this year. They have the opportunity to run an inexpensive TV campaign without giving the appearance of Obama being a mud-slinger. Just roll the tape of the Republican VP candidate telling you in his own words why John McCain would be a bad president!

Can you imagine a McCain/Romney ticket where Mitt is traveling the country to promote McCain and debate why he should be the next president? Either his topics would be extremely limited or he would have to lie and say he had a change of heart. The guy left no stone unturned in his onslaught to publicly demonize McCain on social, economic and legislative issues. So, what's left? "Obama is wrong for America, McCain knows the military and the weather is very nice today." Is that the gist of it? Heck, put me on the VP list!

Reagan knew what he was talking about here. And the talk radio gods, who ignored the Gipper's 11th Commandment advice, will only assist in making the GOP look more schizophrenic. Rush, Hannity, Beck and Coulter can give the Dems even more countless hours of ammo because of their hypocritical approach to this primary season.

You reap what you sow, and they were not sowing Reaganisms. They were sowing vicious slurs against McCain and Mike Huckabee more than they were against Clinton and Obama. Whoops! It must be a reality check to learn that they don't have nearly the influence they thought they did to swing an election. And now, most of the exclusive interviews and ratings will go to the competitors of these so called "conservative icons". Welcome back to Earth, you sold out blowhards!

And since Romney has backed his VP options into a corner by limiting his ability to promote McCain, we know he can sure talk about himself! The only problem is that, the more this guy is under the national microscope, the more of a liability he will become to the GOP.

How long will it be before Obama decides to disarm his social health care program like he did Hillary's? After doing a little research on Mitt's plan (that provides $50 abortions, subsidized by the state taxpayers), we find that they are no longer offering it to everyone. It has cost the citizens of Massachusetts 40% more than he projected and has left their state in a financial crisis.

It's no wonder Romney failed to build the Republican Party in his home state. The Massachusetts GOP is not exactly the national model, and as Bush and Cheney have proven, our presidential teams can make or break registration trends for both parties. (FYI- Democrats have 3 million more new registrations than we do now).

Known for being a "money man", Mitt has gained the respect of the Party elite. But, once those stats go public, we might find that he has lost his magic touch with investing your money into his dream. Just ask his campaign contributors how much he spent on each vote, and compare it to the other candidates. Or, as it really matters, how much money was spent per delegate?

Romney came in dead last in campaign finance efficiency of the entire GOP pack, spending over $289,256 for each delegate.
What does this say to tax payers?
"Washington is broken, and I propose we buy another one!"

By comparison, Huckabee came in first in CFE (and finished second place behind McCain in winning delegates) spending $48,951 per delegate.
What does this say to voters?
"Let's see if Super Glue and Duct Tape will hold Washington together and we'll invest the rest into America's needs!"

Romney is a ticket killer. We have to win the Evangelical South, or it's going to be a long 4 years of the Obama Administration.

I will soon post some thoughts on Mike Huckabee's potential value to the McCain ticket. Until then, if you are thinking what I'm thinking, or would like to explore why Huck would be a legit VP option, check out http://teamhuck.com/ .

-Mike Ford,
Un-associated Press
Contributing to Rare, Conservative Media
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Who’s the best Manager??
HUCKABEE SPENT SEVEN TIMES LESS PER VOTE THAN ROMNEY
Huckabee $11.77 per vote, Romney $77.44 per vote
DEBT: Romney $44.3 million, Huckabee ends in black

Based on quarterly filings with the FEC, Mike Huckabee has been the best financial manager of his campaign of the GOP candidates. Mitt Romney has not lived up to his reputation as a “great financial manager” — his campaign has the worst efficiency and debt problems.

Huckabee spent a thrifty $11.77 per vote so far. Romney splurged, spending almost seven times as much as Huckabee per vote, a whopping $77.44 each.

”Can you buy the White House? Mitt Romney sure gave it a try,” said Lucas Roebuck, Public Affairs Officer for HucksArmy.com. “If you want someone who can make your tax dollars stretch, it would be Huckabee.”

Romney’s campaign also has the biggest credit card. His campaign reported $35 million in debt, more than 360 times the amount of debt carried by Huckabee ($97,000), and he still couldn't make the sale.

“If Romney were helping run this country like he ran his campaign, our national debt and budget deficits would be astronomical,” said Roebuck. “Only Huckabee ran a surplus operation.”

Much of Romney’s debt came from personal loans to his campaign.

*Sources: AP, CNN.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under Federal Election Commission regulations, candidates cannot close their committees until they repay their debts or have a repayment agreement approved by the Commission. These rules are why many of these financial obligations are lingering from previous campaigns. (FEC RULES: http://www.fec.gov/law/law.shtml)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As quoted by Trucker Randy from Michigan: "Romney or Hillary can't run for Dogcatcher until they pay off their campaign debt." So Romney has removed all obstacles to being VP, and offered the carrot of his huge donor network to McCain.
Now Romney is seen as being so noble as to covering his own-induced debt, so he can show McCain that he is shifting his fundraisers to his campaign. Now, Sen. McCain, this will be your HUGE TEST OF CHARACTER. Is it all about MONEY? We don't think you think so, or you wouldn't have worked so hard all these years to cut corruption and spending!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Romney will Eat Campaign Loanshttp://www.boston.com/news/politics/politicalintelligence/2008/07/romney_will_eat.html
[quote] July 16, 2008 08:00 PM

By Michael Kranish, Globe Staff

WASHINGTON -- Mitt Romney, whose prospects to be John McCain’s running mate appear on the rise, is preparing to formally declare he will not seek donations to repay $45 million in personal loans he made to his failed presidential bid — the biggest ever made by a candidate in a primary campaign.

The move could clear away the last remnants of a divisive primary race, insuring that he and his financial supporters are focused on helping McCain, but it could also put him at odds with McCain’s campaign reform message.

Romney spokesman Eric Fehrnstrom said today that the former Massachusetts governor is preparing to have the loans ‘‘reclassified as contributions’’ and will write a letter to the Federal Election Commission explaining that he is ‘‘forgiving the outstanding loans.’’

Some analysts said McCain, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, might undermine his reform message if he picks someone who bankrolled so much of his own campaign.

‘‘Democrats would use it as an issue,’’ political analyst Stuart Rothenberg said today. ‘‘They would they try to undermine his reputation as ‘Mr. Reformer.’ "

He said it might also undercut McCain’s effort to criticize Democratic rival Barack Obama for switching his position and rejecting public financing for the general election.

Still, Romney’s investment in his own campaign and the donor network he built may have helped his vice presidential stock go up. The $45 million helped win widespread name recognition for Romney, who also raised more than $65 million from donors. Since McCain clinched the nomination in March, Romney has asked his supporters to contribute to a Republican National Committee fund that will be used to help McCain’s candidacy and he has urged his campaign finance team to work for McCain.

If Romney became the vice presidential nominee, the rules appear to allow him to give or loan unlimited funds to McCain if the ticket rejects public funds, according to Michael J. Malbin, executive director of the nonpartisan Campaign Finance Institute. McCain, however, has said he will take public funds for the general election, a decision expected to translate into a major financial disadvantage for the Republican ticket.

Romney declined a request today from The Globe to talk about his campaign loans.

During the primaries, he and McCain had unkind words for each other as they skirmished over illegal immigration, the economy, and other issues. They had some of their most bitter arguments over McCain’s landmark campaign finance reform legislation. Romney said the 2002 law ‘‘hurt my party, it hurts First Amendment rights. I think it was a bad bill.’’

McCain responded that the legislation is at the core of his candidacy, and after Obama last month rejected public financing for the fall campaign, he is highlighting the measure in a just-released TV ad that touts him as a ‘‘maverick’’ who ‘‘tackled campaign reform.’’

The 2002 law that McCain cosponsored with Senator Russ Feingold, a Wisconsin Democrat, eliminated unlimited donations to political parties, tried to lessen the advantage of wealthy candidates financing their own congressional campaigns, but did not restrict how much money a presidential candidate could loan or contribute to his or her own campaign.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Here's the MI Democrats attack ad against Romney. They're just getting warmed up.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KKLOSsPoyIw

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dick Morris makes valid points about McCain's running mate below (particularly those I highlighted red). But Morris fails to mention that Colin Powell, Condi Rice & Joe Lieberman are all pro-abortion. Also, Morris could have included Romney's recent pro-homosexual statement on Dec 16, 2007 on Meet The Press. Transcript & link pasted at bottom. Romney expressed support for state ENDA laws---Employment Non-Discrimination Act.

ENDA is dangerous legislation that would force employers---including Christian businesses, schools & daycare centers---to hire LGBT, transgenders, transvestites & cross-dressers, or face a $25,000 fine. No religious exemptions. Romney expressed support for this 7 months ago---well after his convenient "conversion" on conservative issues. Since then, similar ENDA legislation has been introduced in the Ohio House & Ohio Senate.
~Lori Viars, Warren County, Ohio

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Romney: A mistake for McCain by Dick Morris July 23, 2008

You've probably heard the story about the tycoon who wanted to bring out a new kind of dog food. He spent lavishly. He hired the best marketing person, the top PR firm, the best ad agency, the No. 1 packaging expert, the most powerful distributor -- but the sales were flat after six months. He summoned his consultants to a meeting and asked why the food wasn't selling. "The dogs won't eat it," was the answer that came back.

And so it is with Mitt Romney. Despite outspending his rivals by huge margins throughout the primaries, the dogs won't eat it. He lost Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, Florida and California. The only primaries he won were in Michigan, where Dad was governor; LDS states; and a few states on Super Tuesday in which his California-obsessed rivals couldn't spare the cash to advertise. Only John Connolly in 1968 had a worse cash-to-delegates ratio.

And John McCain rightly did not like Romney's tactics during the primaries. Using his gigantic money advantage to dominate television, he seized early leads in virtually all of the primary states, only to lose them later on. And, when they started slipping away, he resorted to unfair, distorted, scorched-earth negative ads, betting that his opponents couldn't afford to spend enough for the truth to catch up to his charges.

Would Romney help McCain? I don't see how. Social conservatives and evangelicals cannot but smart over his former earnest declarations of his determination to "protect a woman's right to choose" and his famous statement during a campaign debate that he would be a better senator for gays than Ted Kennedy. In the primaries, evangelicals all backed Huckabee rather than Romney.

Would he help McCain win fiscal conservatives? If Obama's tax plans don't accomplish that, one has to wonder about their sanity. McCain should, at a minimum, choose a candidate who won't cost him votes. And, at a maximum, he should go with a vice presidential choice that redefines his candidacy.

With the nation in the grip of a fundamental re-appraisal of its past rule by white men, both Condi Rice and Colin Powell suggest themselves as excellent alternatives. They would excite voters, turn them on and give them a way to vote against Obama without ruffling their consciences. Either candidate would make an excellent spokesman in putting down Obama's lack of foreign policy experience or expertise and would make the statement, by his or her very presence on the ticket, that national security concerns should impel McCain's election.

Or McCain could send a statement to Democrats and independents and become the first candidate since Abraham Lincoln to cross party lines and put a person from the opposite party on his ticket by selecting Joe Lieberman. By making his ticket a kind of coalition or fusion, he would tell moderates from both parties and those who follow neither one that McCain is the place to go. Putting Lieberman on his ticket would be a coup of immense proportions.

Any of these three choices would make a "wow" statement that would make voters see McCain in a new light. If McCain wants a slightly less radical course, he should select Mike Huckabee. During the primaries and caucuses, Mike demonstrated an appeal to voters that went far beyond the limited logistics of his campaign. If Romney had the worst cash-delegate ratio, Huckabee had the best.

With almost nothing but his innate skill as a speaker and his warm, friendly personality, Huckabee was able to energize the evangelical base as nobody has since Pat Robertson. But, in the process, he challenged it to move on to new issues and embrace causes like global hunger as ardently as the right to life.
Powell, Rice, Lieberman, Huckabee -- but not Romney!
---Dick Morris [Red Emphasis Added]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

TRANSCRIPT: MEET THE PRESS with Tim Russert - December 16, 2007
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22273924/page/6/

MR. RUSSERT: You said (in 1994) that you would sponsor (Sen. Ted Kennedy's federal) Employment Nondiscrimination Act. Do you still support it?
GOV. ROMNEY: At the state level. I think it makes sense at the state level for states to put in provision of this.

MR. RUSSERT: Now, you said you would sponsor it at the federal level.

GOV. ROMNEY: I would not support at the federal level, and I changed in that regard because I think that policy makes more sense to be evaluated or to be implemented at the state level.

-------------------------------------------------------------------
What You Would Get in a VP Romney
(You might want to consider bookmarking this site. Gregg Jackson is pretty good!)

http://rffm.typepad.com/republicans_for_fair_medi/2008/07/what-you-would-get-in-a-vice-president-romney.html
------------------------------------
Obama Considering Romney As V-P Choice: No, McCain Considering Romney As V-P Choice: The Former A Better Fit by Gregg Jackson and John Haskins

BUYER BEWARE! What You Would Get In a Vice-President Romney

(Hint: A demagogue who has already changed history)

When Ann Coulter endorsed Mitt Romney she called the former Massachusetts governor "manifestly our best candidate" -- though the paper for which she is "chief legal correspondent," Human Events, ranked Romney the #8 RINO (Republican In Name Only) in the nation in 2005.

GOP establishment pom pom girl Laura Ingraham and water boy Sean Hannity evangelize Romney on their radio shows as the second coming of Ronald Reagan.

Curiouser and curiouser!

Romney the wallflower bats his eyelashes and coyly pretends not to notice the increasing speculation of a McCain-Romney ticket--even as he criss-crosses the country campaigning and fundraising for McCain--the same John McCain who Romney said during the primaries was "almost indistinguishable" from Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton.

But perhaps Romney intended that as a compliment, since Romney was a virtual GOP clone of Barack Obama, until he repackaged himself to seduce conservatives.

As a Boston talk radio host and writer-researcher (respectively), who both initially supported Romney (author Gregg Jackson lived out of state in 2002 and co-author John Haskins voted for him in 2002), we have followed Romney closely and know the truth about his record as very few people in America do. The truth is that many of the leading "conservative" lawyers, radio pundits and pro-family leaders whom we trusted for years have ruthlessly distorted and suppressed the truth about Romney's hideous record as governor -- even after all his "conversions."

It took one hundred million dollars of Romney's personal fortune to waterboard Americans with Orwellian propaganda from "conservative" talk radio, Fox News and "pro-family" lawyers and religious mercenaries. Their consensus is they've rewritten enough history enough to fool enough of the people enough of the time.

Many pundits and political prognosticators are now calling Romney the odds-on favorite to be chosen as McCain's running mate--making it more urgent than ever conservatives--the field slaves of the Republican Party--know the true record of this man.

After reading the truth about this soulless demagogue, whom most of the GOP elites have airbrushed into a quasi-conservative, ask yourself if Mitt Romney is somebody, who as Dr. James Dobson of "Focus on the Family" stated, "is a man pro-family voters could support?"

1. Romney illegally imposed homosexual marriage as he had secretly promised "Log Cabin Republicans" a homosexual activist group he would, given the pretext of a legally meaningless court opinion. He publicly admitted that the four outlaw judges who belched forth the Goodridge opinion (urging the legislature to make sodomy-based "marriage" legal) had violated the state Constitution and their oaths of office. But bizarrely, he flatly contradicted the state constitution he had sworn to uphold by pretending he was bound by this opinion. He also opposed a citizen-led effort to remove the four judges!

He then authorized illegal changes to, and issuance of, still legally null and void marriage licenses to homosexuals in violation of the marriage laws which the state constitution explicitly says only the legislature can change (the same court has admitted this). But Romney and his hired "conservatives" falsely claimed that "everybody (knew) that the (judges) legalized same-sex 'marriage'."

2. AFTER his stage-managed "pro-life conversion" Romney's signature healthcare plan established abortion, with a taxpayer-subsidized $50 co-pay, as a "healthcare benefit." He also created a permanent, official government role for an unelected Planned Parenthood representative on his healthcare board -- but no pro-life appointee. (Again, AFTER HIS PURPORTED "PRO-LIFE CONVERSION").

3. Romney increased government funding for anti-family, anti-morality homosexual propaganda, starting in kindergarten, and refused to defend school children and parents' rights against this indoctrination. When running for the Senate in 1994, Romney promised the homosexual Log Cabin Republicans that as Senator he would be more pro-gay than Ted Kennedy stating in a letter to them, "As we seek to establish full equality for America's gay and lesbian citizens, I will provide more effective leadership than my opponent."

4. Romney opposes a ban on homosexual boy scoutmasters and supports sexual orientation non-discrimination laws that would force private businesses and religious institutions to, for example, hire cross-dressers and transvestites or face criminal fines and punishment.

5. Romney's former staff member and others have revealed that in 2002, in return for the homosexual "Log Cabin Republicans" endorsement, Romney secretly promised to let judges exceed their legal power and unconstitutionally impose homosexual "marriage."

6. Romney cited a non-existent state law to force Catholic Charities, the state's largest adoption and foster care agency, to provide children to homosexuals even when normal mother-father families were lined up to give them a home. Even former governor liberal Democrat Mike Dukakis pointed out that this "law" Romney was using was no "law," but merely an executive regulation that a governor can cancel with a stroke of his pen.

7. Romney's GOP mercenaries pass him off as a "fiscal conservative." Yet his "signature" achievement as governor, his government-run "universal" healthcare plan that was endorsed by Ted Kennedy, Hillary Clinton, and Planned Parenthood, has been a total economic failure according to the Wall St. Journal, Boston Globe, and Cato Institute.
8. Romney increased taxes and fees by over $800 million which devastated the Massachusetts economy. He also opposed the Bush Tax Cuts earning him praise from uber-liberal Barney Frank.
9. Romney lies without apparent shame, and has boasted falsely of "seeing his father march with MLK," being a "life-long hunter," having earned the "NRA's endorsement," always "being for life," etc....

10. Romney supported McCain-Feingold "campaign finance reform" which shamelessly outlaws political speech -- an unalienable right guaranteed under our state and federal constitutions and for which countless of our young soldiers and sailors have died.

11. Romney backed the McCain-Kennedy "comprehensive immigration reform" (i.e. amnesty), and parts of the McCain-Lieberman "carbon cap and trade" bill.

Here's the bottom line: The ruthlessly ambitious and greedy GOP elites have been claiming that Mitt Romney is a fiscal and social conservative who would aid McCain in shoring up grassroots conservative support among Evangelicals and "pocket book conservatives." But McCain would be selecting a soulless and ruthless snake oil salesman, a Republican Barack Obama -- to the left of even McCain himself. After all, Romney, as the Founding Father of Sodomy-Based "Marriage" and $50 dollar taxpayer-funded abortions alone, has accomplished what no Democrat has been able to, much less John McCain.

The charade required to successfully portray Romney as a conservative who bravely resisted homosexual "marriage," who opposed the giving of parent-less children to homosexuals and opposed his own $50 abortions involved a massive media campaign of bare-faced lying about the law, the powers conferred upon judges and the legal obligations of the governor himself under the brutally clear Massachusetts Constitution. It required perpetual and overwhelming propaganda assistance from the fervently pro-homosexuality and anti-family news mafia and commentariat (can you even tell the difference anymore?).

That the self-styled "conservative" elites took the lead in this Bolshevik-style subversion of a state constitution and in enabling government funding of industrial scale abortion is a frightening indication of why America is slipping into tyranny. Romney's bare-faced lies about the law, his criminal subversion of the oldest functioning constitution in the world -- and California governor Arnold Schwarzenegger's (similarly illegal) copy-catting -- mark the unofficial end of any semblance of the rule of law in America on the issues that define any society.

As every senior homosexual activist and Democrat strategist understands, the consequences will be sweeping: the end of freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of association and parents' rights, as already evident in Canada and much of Europe.

As Justice Antonin Scalia warned of the Lawrence v. Texas opinion in which a United States Supreme Court majority pretended to have the constitutional authority and power to "strike down" the anti-sodomy laws of states, "this could be the one that swallows the rule of law."

It is still swallowing. Lawrence invited Goodridge. Goodridge invited the anti-constitutional and legally void California opinion that Schwarzenegger has used as a justification for trashing the constitution he swore to defend and uphold. And long before the swallowing is done, it will be too late to reverse it.

"Citizens, please return to your shopping. All is under control."

This is what we call "conservatism" today.

Caveat Emptor. Voter Beware!

Gregg Jackson is the author of "Conservative Comebacks to Liberal Lies: Issue by Issue Responses to the Most Common Claims of the Left from A to Z" and talk radio show host on WRKO in Boston.
-------------------------------------------------------------------