Mitt Romney Calls on President Obama to Fire Three Officials / Uses Rhetoric Reminiscent of Reagan’s Challenge of President Carter

[See several photographs below the fold]

High gasoline prices at the pump were one of the key reasons President Carter was trounced by Ronald Reagan in the 1980 presidential election. I remember it well (see vintage photos from 1979 below the fold). Shortages at the pumps resulted in long lines of cars, often down the street and the electorate could not get Carter out of the White House fast enough!

Source: The Wall Street Journal

The Wall Street Journal published an article yesterday (No Relief in Sight at Pump) that outlines the facts behind today’s high gasoline prices and all of the actions (and inactions) taken by Obama that got us to these price points:

U.S. gasoline prices jumped 6% in February, and market experts predict they will climb higher because critical refining operations in the Northeast are shutting down.
[…]
Rising gas prices pose a risk to the economic recovery, which is showing signs of gaining steam after faltering last year.
[…]
“There’s now going to be a question if we can get enough gasoline into the East Coast for summer,” said David Greely, an energy analyst at Goldman Sachs Group Inc. The U.S. Energy Department has warned a shortfall could develop as early as July.

Governor Romney will more frequently challenge President Obama in coming weeks and months, in a number of key policy areas — I believe. Why? It will likely be months before Obama will agree to any 1:1 debates with Governor Romney but Mitt can take the debate to him directly by publicly challenging him when his policy decisions are flawed (quite often as we know). Also, by so doing, he raises his stature to that of “presidential” by allowing the average voter to get a glimpse of how a President Romney would govern. Such direct challenges are in the best interest of the nation to force the debate. Obama is then placed in the position by the press to either disagree or to follow Romney’s recommendations, both of which are positive for Governor Romney.

Today, Governor Romney called on President Obama to fire three senior administration officials. This is not a small action he has taken, though the MSM may attempt to minimize it.

This call to action is a powerful one and is spoken with authority. I hope to see this type of assertive rhetoric more frequently from Governor Romney — I believe we will see him continue to turn up the pressure on President Obama directly (THANK YOU to @ZekeJMilller for his tweeted tip to this article!) — [see photos below the fold]: Click here to continue reading

Open Letter to the All-Powerful Illinois Voters — The Tipping Point is Now!

By Greg Stapley

Much has been said about the faceless “Republican Establishment” that supposedly wants this candidate or that candidate to represent the party in the upcoming presidential election. I don’t know who that is, or if such an Establishment even exists, but the people talking about it ignore one important fact: this thing is in the hands of American voters. And American voters seldom take orders from “establishments.”

Greg Stapley

This, week one state’s voters have the unique and historic opportunity to seal the decision in what could be the last meaningful contest of this primary season. Illinois voters can determine the course of history by finally picking the opposition candidate to Barack Obama.

We have some great candidates to oppose the current occupant of the White House. Every one of these contenders — Mitt, Rick, Newt, Ron — is a faithful son of the party. Each has substantial electoral credentials, and each of course has a record.

Not one of them is exactly like me or you. Each one is conservative in many things, but none of them has been perfectly consistent in all.

For example, Mitt is an economic conservative, but historically has not been as socially conservative as I am.

Rick is a social conservative, but his repeated earmarking, votes for Davis-Bacon and unbridled debt-limit increases make him anything but an economic conservative.

Ron is a monetary conservative, but he is somewhere to the left of Jane Fonda on national defense and foreign policy.

And Newt is a political conservative, but the danger for political conservatives is that they are political, and sometimes that means they compromise when they shouldn’t, and wind up sitting on a couch with Nancy Pelosi.

Nobody’s perfect.

But this is undeniable: Every single one of them would be miles ahead of Barack Obama in getting our economic house in order, putting America back to work, and restoring the American values that we hold dear.

This too is undeniable: None of them can win the general election alone. It will take all of us unitedly fighting together against the Obama machine to put our nominee over the top. And we need to start now.

The first step, if our opposition nominee is going to win the general, will be for us as voters to pull them all off of the hamster wheel that this primary has become. You know what I’m talking about: the increasingly cruel and counterproductive exercise in which the candidates are forced to constantly run around the country trying to “out-conservative” each other just to get that next block of delegates. It’s wearing all of them (and us) out, and it will ultimately damage our cause in the Fall.

And so without descending into the quagmire of which one is better than the other on this particular issue or that, it seems like it’s time to pull back and look at the big picture. It’s time to finally figure out which one is best positioned to carry the banner for American values and priorities in the upcoming general election. It’s time to put the debate amongst ourselves to rest. [more photos of romance below the fold] Click here to continue reading

Mr. Santorum: He Could Win Pennsylvania’s Popular Vote & Receive Zero Delegates — A Goose Egg — Indeed! (“his time has passed” / “terrified”)

THE UNPREPARED, UNTESTED MR. SANTORUM

In the last week, we have all read articles or seen interviews with Santorum and Gingrich operatives passionately stating how their candidate is in this race to the end and to win it. Keep in mind the reasons they are so vociferous. Every one of them receives a salary from the campaign. It is in the self-interest of each campaign worker to keep their candidate in the race as long as possible and so they will always continue to talk him up!

Dan Hirschhorn wrote an Op-Ed in The Daily yesterday that provides outstanding insight into Pennsylvania politics as related to Mr. Santorum. It is titled, “NOT PENN. PALS — Even if he wins his home state, Santorum could walk away without delegates”

Santorum Delegates: As in NONE.

BTW, if you have not read Karl Rove’s latest, it is worth the read to see why Obama is really worried!

EXCELLENT reporting by Hirschhorn!:

As Rick Santorum desperately tries to make a dent in Mitt Romney’s formidable delegate lead, he faces an unlikely obstacle on the primary calendar: his home state of Pennsylvania.

Yes, Santorum is currently favored — though hardly a lock — to win the popular vote in the state he represented in Congress for 16 years.

But Pennsylvania’s non-binding primary rules for distributing delegates raise the prospect that Santorum, who has said he’ll win the vast majority of the state’s delegates, could actually come away from next month’s primary empty-handed at a time when he can ill-afford it.

Which means the April 24 primary could represent yet another chance for Romney — who kicked off his Pennsylvania campaign this week by trotting out supportive Republican leaders — to finally deal Santorum a knockout blow.
[…]
Interviews with about two dozen Pennsylvania Republicans and a review of the delegate candidates brings Santorum’s challenge into focus.

The ranks of delegate hopefuls are littered with Republican state committee members, elected officials and others with close party ties, who will ultimately be more beholden to a state party leadership that, while officially neutral, is visibly leaning in Romney’s direction and increasingly vocal in its fear that Santorum could hurt the party in a general election — especially after witnessing his 18-point drubbing in 2006.

Romney, Ron Paul and even Newt Gingrich got some of their supporters on the ballot as delegate candidates. But Santorum’s campaign officials, who have struggled with ballot organization issues across the country, privately concede that they just didn’t have the time, nor resources, to organize their own supporters to run as delegates when the paperwork was due earlier this year.

“At this point the delegate candidates are lined up everywhere but with Rick,” said Charlie Gerow, a longtime GOP strategist supporting Gingrich.

The state party has so far not made an endorsement in the race. But Bob Asher, a Republican National Committeeman and one of the most powerful forces in state politics, is backing Romney. So are top party fundraisers and members of Congress from the Philadelphia suburbs who, like many elected and party officials, worry that a Santorum candidacy would send independents fleeing from the GOP and damage their prospects in down-ballot races.

“I think most people recognize we have to put forward the best candidate to beat Barack Obama,” said Rep. Jim Gerlach, a suburban congressman and Romney backer who’s also a delegate. “There’s a lot of support to make sure Gov. Romney is ultimately our nominee.”

Added a top Republican fundraiser who’s neutral in the race: “People like Rick, and they often like his policies. But his brand is so tarnished and we’re all terrified at the prospect of him on top of the ticket.” Click here to continue reading

Barack Obama’s Team Admits Losing to Mitt Romney

In case you missed it, the Obama camp admitted two days ago that it could lose the election for President to Governor Romney. But why go negative? Why not try to convince your supporters with all the positive things your candidate possesses? Check it here:

President Carter / Single-Term President

Friend,” Obama campaign manager Jim Messina wrote today, “If the general election were held today, President Obama would lose to Mitt Romney — according to the latest poll from Washington Post-ABC News. Now, many other polls put the President on top, but all point to the same reality: We’re looking at a race that will be tighter than you think,” Messina warned.

Messina didn’t even bother praising the president when he asked for money. “If the idea of a President Romney scares you, it’s time to own a piece of this campaign,” he said before appealing for donations of $3 and up.

Gotta love it! Mark March 13, 2022 on your calendar as the first day the Obama team began its whining. From now until November, we will hear all kinds of whining from Obama, his surrogates, the MSM, union leaders, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, every actor in Hollywood (except the best one there — A TRUE AMERICAN HERO: Gary Sinise), Barbara Streisand, and about 50,000 other celebrities who love throwing money away.

Be sure to watch the video on the next page. Click here to continue reading

2012 Cycle: Snapshot / Analysis / Mormonism Fading / Prediction / Video

This is a great snapshot of the race and a good look to the future delegate line-up:

The Wall Street Journal had some good analysis yesterday. The above chart came from this article — here are some of the better quotes:

“The reality of this race from here on out is that any day that Santorum doesn’t cut into Romney’s delegate lead is a day that Romney wins,” said Josh Putnam, a professor who tracks delegate tallies at North Carolina’s Davidson College.
[…]
There are just four winner-take-all contests left: Washington, D.C., on April 3, Delaware on April 24, New Jersey on June 5, and Utah on June 26. Mr. Santorum failed to get on the D.C. ballot.

The Journal also carried an article about Romney’s faith in which it states that it is not as much a factor now as it was in the 2008 cycle.

John Green, a University of Akron political scientist who studies religion and politics, said the Romney religion question has attracted less attention this year in part because it is old news.

“Back in 2007, this was something people didn’t know. Now people know a lot about Mitt Romney,” he said.

Polling also suggests the issue is receding. In a Wall Street Journal/NBC poll in October, 57% of Republicans said they felt comfortable with Mr. Romney’s Mormon faith, up from 50% in December, 2007. The share who said they didn’t feel comfortable dropped to 14% from the 21% of late 2007.

The WSJ Op-Ed page carried this article about Santorum’s success Tuesday in the South. Reference is also made to Gingrich:

[… ] His goal increasingly seems to be to stay in the race to win enough delegates to deny Mr. Romney a majority and force a brokered convention.

Even in that event, however, Mr. Gingrich won’t be the man the GOP turns to. His negative ratings are too high, even among Republicans. His weekend comments that the U.S. mission in Afghanistan may no longer be “doable” may not hurt him with a war-weary public. But the remarks had the air of political opportunism as he grasps for any issue to re-ignite his campaign. The Georgian needs to look hard at whether his continued candidacy divides conservatives enough to deny Mr. Santorum a better chance at the nomination.

Finally, are your discussions of politics costing you friends? Maybe they are and you don’t know it. I found this both interesting and amusing for those who are political junkies (video clip) ——-> THE FIVE

Prediction: Ron Paul will drop out of the race soon after Newt Gingrich does.

.
.

Santorum & Gingrich Want Obama as President for Five More Years — Truth Revealed by History & Logic — Powerful Video Indeed!

Santorum and Gingrich seem determined to repeat history and hand the election over to Obama for a second term. And nobody knows history better than Mr. Gingrich (Santorum does not seem to care about history and would that we all believe what he says and just vote for him).

Over the years, I have not been a big fan of Dick Morris as he always seemed to me to have similar DNA to that of Gingrich, Blagojevich, and Trump — that of possessing stratospheric levels of self-esteem, leading to frequent bouts of condescending rhetoric. But I must admit, his analysis these last several months has been quite reasonable, measured, intelligent, and spot-on (what has gotten into him?!!).

There have been four conventions with since 1960 with “floor fights” — two Democrat and two Republican (’64, ’68, ’72, and ’76). In all four cases, the resulting nominee lost the general election!

Both Santorum and Gingrich now know they cannot win the nomination by garnering enough delegates outright with the remaining schedule of states in the primary cycle. Their only hope?

To force a floor fight at the end of August, which leaves virtually no time to take the fight to Obama before the November election. History is totally on Obama’s side if Republicans opt for a floor fight at the convention — Obama knows it; Santorum knows it; and Gingrich knows it. And since this is true, both Gingrich and Santorum (and any person that votes for either of them) effectively acknowledge they want Obama to be President in a second term.

Listen carefully to the simple logic laid out here by Morris about voting in Alabama and Mississippi:

Four years ago, I was an ardent supporter of Governor Romney, fully expecting him to win against Huckabee and McCain. Even when the trend was for McCain to win, I wanted nothing more than for Governor Romney to take it all the way to the convention and force the showdown. Absolutely!

Instead, he did the right thing. He stood down and went all out in support of McCain — becoming his strongest surrogate — even raising $20 million for him! Why? Governor Romney decided to do everything within his influence to unify all Republicans early behind the obvious winner in order to build the strongest campaign possible against the Democrat nominee. Like millions of Romney supporters, I was very disappointed. I wanted to go all the way and fight it out, knowing that my candidate was the right candidate. What would Mitt do in this very situation? We know what Mitt did!

Quoting Dick Morris from this video clip:

“This fight is over!” “It’s over.”

“Anybody who votes for Gingrich or Santorum in Mississippi, Alabama, Missouri, or Illinois is basically voting for a deadlocked convention.”

“Vote for Romney now…Why? Because I want to beat Obama, and you can’t do that if you go to into the convention without a candidate. Not if your convention is the last week of August.”

“It’s over. We’ve made our choice. Romney has 54% of the delegates at this point.

What drives Santorum and Gingrich at this point, when they know that their only chance is a knock-down, dragged-out fight at the convention? For they know that the result of that process is sure victory for Obama and the probable loss of more Senate and House seats. Obviously, Gingrich and Santorum are highly motivated to stay in the race through the convention, for they have said as much. What then is their motivation?

Ego? Revenge? Bigger book sales down the road? I would like to give them the benefit of the doubt. Four years ago at this time in the cycle, Governor Romney was in full campaign mode in support of our party’s candidate. Governor Romney fully subordinated his ego and personal ambition at that time and went to work! And you know what? He worked harder than any other surrogate on the campaign trail for John McCain! Look it up.

The title of this article states that Senator Santorum and Speaker Gingrich want Obama to be President for five more years. I do not believe they do. However, their desire to do whatever they can to take the Republican race to a floor fight at the convention in late Summer will certainly seal the deal for Obama and they know it. Those who vote for them at this point, know it as well.

If it is true that they do not want Obama to have a second term as President, then they are motivated by something other than solid Republican principles — indeed, they are driven by ulterior motives not associated with the best interests of this great nation.

Mitt Romney: A Man of Compassion, Personal Sacrifice, Servant Leadership, and Integrity (guest post)

By Doug Stevens

I have become increasingly angered by the tone and tenor of today’s news media. I am old enough to remember the day when news services put accuracy and the people’s interests first, ahead of ratings and punditry. I have wonderful memories as a young adult listening to the comforting analysis of news events by Walter Cronkite. Only recently was I surprised to learn that he did have a liberal progressive bias, but never saw any evidence of that in his reporting.

Doug Stevens

Oh, yes, I have heard from various news sources the explanations of the new and improved role of news outlets. I have heard the difference described between a commentator (one with a perspective) and a news reporter (provides the facts for the viewer to decide). The problem today is that we seem to have already moved from news reporting, to commentating, and I fear now to propagandizing (defined as ideas spread widely to harm a person or persons). What has moved me to put down my thoughts on these topics is the stark difference I hear in all news outlets (including FOX), regarding Governor Romney.

My perspective comes from years of observation of Governor Romney from a distance, but first hand. I would not characterize my connection with Governor Romney as a relationship, but I have known him through my sister-in-law that has lived near his Massachusetts home. This has permitted me to observe him for some 30 years. She has attended the same church with the Romney family. In the 1980’s, my corporate headquarters was in Boston, so I was there somewhat regularly and would sometimes stay over the weekend and attend worship services with my sister-in-law’s family. Governor Romney was called as the pastor of that congregation in 1981. Click here to continue reading

THE SOUTH: Resistance — Obstacles — Head Winds — Impediments — Contention — SUCCESS IN SPITE OF…

********** This Site is Worth Setting in Favorites **********

For those of you seeking additional insight beyond the mere political, I highly recommend the writing of our friends over at Article 6 Blog. Their research is second to none and their writing is intellectually stimulating as they bring to light those who attempt to obfuscate or otherwise distract from truth. Their exposure of the ignorant I find to be refreshing; even cathartic. Frankly, I am inspired by their tireless efforts to promote the most qualified presidential candidate this country has presented in decades — these three men, Lowell, Reynolds, and Schroeder provide an invaluable service to America as they inform us and denounce the ignorant among us.

Craig and Dad

Many of you leave comments in the published posts here at Mitt Romney Central referring to overt bigotry you have discovered in your research of those who support candidates opposing Governor Romney or you ask why Governor Romney does not seem “to connect” to many in the South. Keeping up on the work of Lowell, Reynolds, and Schroeder will help you understand that Governor Romney’s remarkable success to date is all the more impressive when you understand who opposes him out of ignorance, fear, or bigoted agenda.

The kind of resistance we are seeing right now against Governor Romney in the underground is nothing compared to what is brewing in the Obama camp.

Lowell, Reynolds, and Schroeder often refer to “The Question” — What is it? —-> CLICK

Who are these guys? What drives them? ——> CLICK

Two Recent Samples from Article 6 Blog:

HUMOR: Related to Obama Having No Flaws or Weaknesses

Or this recent post by John Schroeder about a Santorum surrogate, soon to become an Obama surrogate:

THINGS ARE ABOUT TO GET REALLY INTERESTING

As a frequent visitor to MRC, you may have wondered why we generally do not write about or report on the obvious religious undertones that “reporters” touch on in their coded missives. Maybe you have considered us ignorant to the obvious — we are not. Maybe you have considered us shy on the subject — we are not.

An important guiding principle of the MRC contributors is to promote Governor Romney’s candidacy with fact, truth, the record, and light. In part, we feel confident in doing so because we know our candidate will overcome the unseemly no matter how passionate his opponents are in promoting the dark side. Additionally, we are confident that others more qualified than we will handle the subject — they are Article 6 Blog.

Mr. Santorum & Mr. Gingrich: What Would Mitt Do? A Matter of Principle, Integrity, and Character

Santorum and Gingrich should be asked continuously why they stay in the race until they admit they are driven by self-interest. Ron Paul has already given his answer.

What would Mitt Romney do right now if the tables were turned and he were in Gingrich’s or Santorum’s shoes? No guessing needed. We only need to look to 2008 for the answer. At about this time in the race in 2008, Governor Romney dropped out of the race and did a lot of heavy lifting for Senator McCain. He and Huckabee knew there was no practical way either of them could win the nomination and yet Huckabee stayed in three months longer out of self-interest (to inflate his value to FOX News).

Do Character, Principles, and Integrity Matter?

By David Parker

Vince Haley, an advisor to Newt Gingrich seriously suggested that Mitt Romney bow out of the race and allow the “conservatives” a debate on how to take on Obama. Although, he couldn’t have been serious, could he? What Mr. Haley fails to recognize is that the only true and principled conservative in the race, whose life reflects immeasurable integrity, is not Newt Gingrich nor Rick Santorum, but Mitt Romney. Actions always trump words, and character, principle and integrity are self-evident in what one does and not what one says. Character, principle and integrity are borne out in how a person lives their life — are they self-absorbed or committed to the service of others, and how is such manifest?

David Parker

In a brief retrospective — in February 2008, having lost Florida and fully aware of the complexion of the impending 26 state Super Tuesday campaign, Governor Romney quickly realized that math can be a stubborn thing. Notwithstanding that he would prevail in certain states on Super Tuesday, and could continue to contest with John McCain and Mike Huckabee for the Republican nomination, the question arose — but to what end? Personal accommodation for ego’s sake? Power and influence at the 2008 Convention? Notoriety and fame? Denigration of the other candidates? Vindictiveness for the rough and tumble campaign that preceded Super Tuesday? A want to be right when everyone else was wrong? Advocacy for posture and position?

Mitt Romney knew that he would not win the nomination outright; the math wouldn’t bear it out. He also knew that the general campaign against the Democratic nominee, whether Obama or Clinton, would be hard fought and difficult at best. He could have continued his pursuit of the nomination, even to the Convention, but in doing so would only impinge on the Republican Party’s coalescing to the greater good. For to shorten the time window of the Party’s competing in the general election would severely impact much needed Party unity, Party fundraising and advocation of Party principles and its conservative platform in a hotly contested general election. So Mitt Romney willingly subordinated his personal interest to the greater good of the Country, in spite of very vocal protests to the contrary by his supporters. The audible response at CPAC was very evident — he was then and is now, a solid fiscal and social conservative and those at CPAC knew it. His speech at CPAC in 2008 and the actions that followed thereafter clearly illustrate that Mitt Romney is a man of principle, character and integrity — he put Country and Party first, and subordinated personal interest.

He stood with and supported the presumptive nominee, John McCain, and then went to work — he was one of the most active surrogates for Senator McCain and was a catalyst to raise in excess of $20 million for the general campaign. As the Democratic Party subsequently chose their nominee, Barack Obama, Mitt Romney pressed forward knowing how critical it was to stand with the Republican nominee and advocate for the conservative values that made America great! It was the Republican Party’s only shot to derail the pending disaster. To quote Senator McCain, “no one worked harder for my campaign.” Mitt Romney proved his character and integrity by recognizing and accepting early-on the pragmatic realities, subordinating his self-interest, and acting on core values and principles to assure viability in the pending general election. Click here to continue reading

Mitt Romney Compared to Ronald Reagan (Best Op-Ed of March Thus Far!) — George Will Should Read This

William McGurn of The Wall Street Journal wrote this outstanding opinion piece that was published last Tuesday, titled, REAGAN WAS A SURE LOSER TOO.

NOTE: I had to truncate this article — I highly recommend you read the entire article at the link above

Not since Herbert Hoover has a party out of power had such an opportunity to run against everything that troubles the American family—prices, interest rates, unemployment, taxes, or the fear for the future of their old age or the future of their children—than is now presented to the Republican Party.

The Republicans, however, haven’t figured this out. This is their basic problem. They have no strategy for defeating an Obama administration that is highly vulnerable on both domestic and foreign policy.

That’s the conventional wisdom in a nutshell, isn’t it?

It will come as no surprise that these words appeared in a Feb. 29 column in the New York Times. They are reproduced here exactly as written, save for one small adjustment.

The president whose failings they describe is Jimmy Carter, not Barack Obama. The lines were written in 1980, not 2012. The author was the then-dean of conventional wisdom, James “Scotty” Reston. The headline was “Jimmy Carter’s Luck,” a reference to Reagan’s victory in the New Hampshire primary three days earlier.

It appears the conventional wisdom hasn’t changed much. Today’s narrative holds that however weak President Obama’s hand, Republicans find themselves in no position to capitalize on it. A glance back to where we were at this exact point in the 1980 primaries suggests otherwise.

The Republican candidates in early 1980 (from left): Philip Crane, John Connally, John Anderson, Howard Baker, Bob Dole, Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush (photo: Bettmann/Corbis)

Then as now, the Republican primaries opened with a bang, when George H.W. Bush upset Ronald Reagan in the Iowa caucuses. By late February, this loss would lead to Reagan’s firing of his campaign manager, John Sears, in a disagreement over strategy.

Then, as now, Republicans feared that an unhappy contender might bolt the party to mount an independent campaign. In 1980, that was liberal John Anderson, not libertarian Ron Paul. Mr. Anderson did end up running as an independent, whereas Mr. Paul will likely be constrained by the effect a third-party run would have on the future prospects for his Republican son, Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul.

Then as now, the chattering classes wondered aloud whether a candidate who could win the Republican nomination could prevail against President Carter in November. On March 1, former President Gerald Ford amplified that view when he told a New York Times reporter, “Every place I go and everything I hear, there is the growing, growing sentiment that Governor Reagan cannot win the election.”

Then as now, some put their hopes on a late entry, in the same way that some now pine for Jeb Bush or Mitch Daniels or Chris Christie to enter the race. In the same interview where Mr. Ford predicted that Reagan’s nomination would mean a repeat of 1964, he also declared himself open to a draft if there were a genuine “urging” by the party.

In retrospect, we forget how seriously the Ford possibility was taken, or how popular it was in the polls, or how lingering its effects would be (at the convention, there would be speculation about a “co-presidency”). A Harris Poll released just about this time in 1980 bolstered the case for Mr. Ford by reporting that, in a head-to-head matchup, Ford (the noncandidate) would trounce President Carter 55% to 44%. The same poll showed Reagan (the front-runner) trailing Carter 58% to 40%.

Nor was candidate Reagan without baggage. As governor, Reagan had pushed through the largest tax hike in California’s history, had signed one of the nation’s most liberal abortion laws, and—as George H.W. Bush pointed out—presided over the doubling of the state budget over his eight-year tenure, to $10.2 billion when he left office from $4.6 billion when he entered.
[…]
Later he would face Santorum-like fears about his social message, especially after appearing at a mass gathering of Christian fundamentalists and evangelicals. A minister with whom he’d shared a stage was taped saying “we’re being attacked by satanic forces,” which Times columnist Anthony Lewis declared “the scariest piece of television” he’d seen in some time.

President Reagan

Yes, the parallels to 1980 take you only so far, and Mitt Romney is no Ronald Reagan. Still, at this same point in his campaign for the GOP nomination, neither was Reagan. The President Reagan we rightly admire for bringing down the Berlin Wall, reviving the U.S. economy, and attracting into the GOP millions of disaffected Democrats was still to come.
[…]

[emphasis added]

Quotes by President Ronald Reagan:

“Welfare’s purpose should be to eliminate, as far as possible, the need for its own existence.”

“When you can’t make them see the light, make them feel the heat.”

“While I take inspiration from the past, like most Americans, I live for the future.”

“Within the covers of the Bible are the answers for all the problems men face.”

“Without God, democracy will not and cannot long endure.”

“You can tell alot about a fellow’s character by his way of eating jellybeans.”

.