Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
Posted at 12:30 PM ET, 12/14/2010

Mitt Romney opposes tax deal

By Jennifer Rubin

Mitt Romney has raised some eyebrows with a USA Today op-ed opposing the tax agreement -- which garnered 83 votes in the Senate last night.

It is a bit, shall we say, odd that he's only now piping up and making an argument that doesn't quite hang together. First Read picked up on the internal contradiction, remarking that Romney is "calling the tax compromise a 'bad deal,' because it's 'only temporary' and it adds to the deficit. (Although, if they were made permanent wouldn't that add MORE to the deficit?)" Well, yes.

Moreover, his argument seems to be it's a bad deal, but the alternative is worse: "The deal keeps current tax rates from rising to pre-Bush era levels for two years. But in 2013, unless Congress acts again, rates will increase dramatically. Of course, delay now is better than an immediate tax hike." I think that's the argument in favor of the deal.

But this is the perpetual Romney dilemma: how to convince the conservative base he's one of them. In 2008, he tried to present himself as stalwart social conservative. Now, he seems to be making a play for the DeMInt-Palin-Tea Party faction of the Republican primary base.

His latest maneuvering has produced a fair amount of eye-rolling. The reaction of one Capitol Hill Republican was typical: "It is unclear if he thinks the 'base' appreciates the pander, or he thinks the 'base' appreciates being hit with across-the-board tax hikes. Killing a very good deal struck while GOP remains out of power, out of desire to pay lip service to an impossible better deal is not responsible leadership."

And that really is the nub of the matter. Romney and other deal critics would rather Republicans say no, allow the rates to increase and then -- after the wave of bad press has swept over them -- try to negotiate something better, risking a veto. This is the equivalent of the Newt Gingrich-engineered government shutdown.

But memories are short and Romney is trying to connect with the part of the base that has never quite accepted him. He risks reviving the same credibility problem that plagued him in 2008. Perhaps the whole endeavor is fruitless from the start. Is the base likely to forgive and forget that it was he who championed the individual health insurance mandate? Will they disregard RomneyCare's failure to control health-care prices in Massachusetts? Well, now you know why he's trying to make a splash on the tax deal.

By Jennifer Rubin  | December 14, 2010; 12:30 PM ET
Categories:  2012 campaign, Mitt Romney  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: A failure of liberal jurisprudence
Next: Ahmadinejad shows who is in charge

Comments


OUTSOURCING MADNESS


The liberals have come up with the ultimate in OUTSOURCING MADNESS.


The liberals now want to have foreigners handle the surrogancy.


So, let's say a liberal couple is too busy making "Bush Lied" signs for their rallies.

And they want to have children....


They now have surrogacy firms - which ship the "ingredients" overseas - and a baby comes back - FEDEX.


IS THAT COMPLETE INSANITY.


The liberals MUST BE STOPPED.


.

Posted by: RainForestRising | December 14, 2010 12:55 PM | Report abuse

Poor Mitt. All those brains, and yet no political instincts whatsoever.

Posted by: 54465446 | December 14, 2010 12:56 PM | Report abuse

When Obama goes for a "class struggle" message, all Obama does is go AGAINST THE AMERICAN DREAM.


Everyone wants to be rich - few want to tax them.


That is the American Dream. And all Obama is doing is proving that he is not American.


Obama is NOT American at heart.


That is the charge against Obama and it sticks. Not only does it stick, Obama is constantly proving it to be correct.

.

Posted by: RainForestRising | December 14, 2010 1:06 PM | Report abuse

Mitt "Meh...." Romney

Posted by: danw1 | December 14, 2010 1:17 PM | Report abuse


The Illustrated History of the U.S. Credit Collapse
"We constructed with data from today’s release of the Federal Reserve’s Flow of Funds. They are both stunning and frightening as they illustrate the cardiac arrest that took place in the credit markets. The collapse in credit issuance/borrowing began in 2008 and would have been net negative without the Federal government. In 2009, for example, the Federal government was 141 percent of total net credit borrowings.
If, as the President says, ‘the flow of credit is the lifeblood of our economy”, the country would have died in 2009 had not the policymakers taken the extraordinary measures they did. These charts illustrate how close we were to the abyss and should give a clearer perspective on what Bernanke & Co. were/are up against. They are heroes, in our book, for stabilizing the situation and pulling us back from the abyss. The jury is still out, however, on long-term structural adjustment and preventing a global sovereign debt crisis."

http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2010/12/the-illustrated-history-of-the-u-s-credit-collapse/

Add another Trillion to the above.

Posted by: rcaruth | December 14, 2010 1:39 PM | Report abuse

To me, Romney's once again demonstrating his "finger in the wind" posture. The deal was reached on Dec. 6 - Krauthammer published his criticisms on the 10th - the Senate voted on it yesterday, the 13th, when Romney finally weighed in. Romney doesn't weigh in until it's clear there's going to be a little flurry of dissatisfaction on the Right. He doesn't lead, he finds a band to get in front of. I think he's been listening to Hugh Hewitt too much.

Posted by: Maidrya | December 14, 2010 2:17 PM | Report abuse

"But this is the perpetual Romney dilemma: how to convince the conservative base he's one of them."

JR considers herself the personification of Conservatism,so Conservatives,don't have an opinion,ask JR,what is her opinion,and that becomes THE OPINION. When was the last time JR admitted error on any opinion she has uttered? JR,will you inform us?

Posted by: rcaruth | December 14, 2010 2:52 PM | Report abuse

rcaruth,

Its because "JR" has an opinion that you find yourself constantly commenting on her posts. Get over yourself, an opinion is precisely that, an opinion. She's entitled to it, just as anyone else and I appreciate her boldness and confidence in giving it. I don't agree with her all the time, but I value her insights because its thought provoking and frankly entertaining to me to engage in her ideas. So quit with the immature, smart ass comments of someone who it seems is too envious that "JR" gets paid for what she does.

Posted by: stevendufresne | December 14, 2010 3:25 PM | Report abuse

I had high hopes for Romney in '08, based in no small part on the strong endorsement by the late, great Dean Barnett.

But what a disappointment. Romney either doesn't know who he is, or doesn't want us to know who he is, and what's worse is that it is all sooo embarrassingly transparent.

Posted by: mattman26 | December 14, 2010 3:36 PM | Report abuse

Give Romney a few days .... he'll flip-flop ... again.

Posted by: knjincvc | December 14, 2010 4:20 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: stevendufresne
I admit it,I do find NeoCons fascinating,like Evangelicals,Fundamentalists,Mormons,Christian Scientists,Scientologists,and other Cults in general,I see JR as a Female Jim Jones figure. It's also fascinating where the NeoCons came from,the Trotskyites. It's quite educational to use Excel to plot how much these two superficially opposite philosophies,have in common.
PS,I think JR is a big girl who can take care of herself just dandy without your helping hand.

Posted by: rcaruth | December 14, 2010 4:43 PM | Report abuse

stevendufresne/ So quit with the immature, smart ass comments of someone who it seems is too envious that "JR" gets paid for what she does

I have accepted the Economic injustice of this fallen world with saint like grace. And Steve,it's always about the money,when the BS is burnt away,Right? If you think I'm envious of JR,imagine my envy of Beck,Limbaugh,Hannity,and Palin,it must know no bounds.

Posted by: rcaruth | December 14, 2010 5:01 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2011 The Washington Post Company