E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSWASHINGTON -- At his speech before newspaper editors in DC today, Mitt Romney also made this not-so-subtle point: It's time for Republicans to wrap up the nomination process as soon as possible.
Asked during a question-and-answer session after his remarks whether he has spoken to Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich about exiting the GOP contest, Romney quipped, "No, I haven't. But now that you bring it up..."
As laughter subsided, he added that "people are free to make their own decision."
But he noted confidently, "I hope that we're able to resolve our nomination process as soon as possible." He added, "I'd like to focus our time and attention on those key battleground states and raising the funds to be somewhat competitive with the president and his billion-dollar quest."
Leave a Comment:
O-o-o-h getting impatient are we??? Hmmm, is Ann itching to measure the drapes?. You've got plenty of time dear, four years from now you can start working on that!
@GM - Four years will be too late. With our presidents failed policies our debt is on track to reach close to $23 Trillion. Obama's plan doesn't address this, instead choosing to spend $1.5 Trillion/year more than we have. The democrats in the senate don't even have a plan, passing over their fiduciary responsibility for going on four years. (And no, there cannot be a filibuster in the senate on a budget.)
"However, the filibuster cannot be used to block a budget resolution. That's because the Budget Act sets out a specific amount of time for debate in the Senate -- 50 hours. If a specific amount of debate time is enshrined in the controlling statute, the filibuster is moot. So a simple majority -- not 60 votes -- is all that's required to pass a budget resolution."
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/feb/13/jack-lew/white-house-chief-staff-jack-lew-says-budget-requi/
Mitt Romney 2012
I guess Romney has now decided it would be better if the entire GOP nominating process were wiped clean so that he be declared the winner.
While I doubt that there is nothing to overturn the current standings and that Romney will be nominated for the GOP, someone needs to remind him that there is still a democratic process that needs to be completed.
Aside from all that, I can't see why he is in such a hurry. Once he wins the nod for the repubs he's going to get his head handed to him first by President Obama when they debate, then by the voters at the polls.
We'll see about that nomoresameo.
Rational,
The Ryan budget increases our debt to $22 trillion.
As for spending, budgets do not control spending. Spending bills control how much we spend. Just last December the Republican lead House passed spending bills that totaled $1.3 trillion more in spending than the projected revenues.
So who is doing the real excess spending?
The Republican led house is running on the last budget passed back in 2009. Until a new one is passed are you suggesting the Republicans renege on the Democrats promises and shut down the government?
The Ryan budget doesn't come anywhere near $22 Trillion in four years. Nor does it affect seniors or anyone older than 55. Quit demagogging it.
Like I said budgets DO NOT control spending ... ever.
Spending bills control spending.
Dennis,
You can spin it anyway you want, but the Ryan budget doesn't do a thing for our debt. It has not and will not be passed even if voted on in the Senate. The Senate refuses to do their job and create a budget of their own and then have a joint conference with the House to come up with a budget. Since they don't want to write their own why doesn't Reid use the Obama budget and bring it to a vote? Pass it, he has the votes, and then conference with the House to try and come up with a compromised budget that can pass both House and Senate.
You are right, budgets do not control spending appropriation bills do. However no spending can be approved without the consent of the Senate and signed by the President. So to answer your question as to who is doing the real excess spending, my answer would have to be the House, Senate and President since it takes all of them to approve spending.
Not you, too.
Just to clarify: The Ryan budget begins affecting those who are older than 55 the day after it becomes effective. And every day thereafter when someone else turns 55.
No demagogguery there.
And even if the Ryan budget doesn't increase the deficit to $22 trillion, from what I heard, it also does nothing to reduce it, not one thin dime.
Leaving that same old debt problem to your grandchildren and mine, with no end in sight.
So how has that suddenly become acceptable?
And if deficit has always been the issue, then how will we ever pull the economy out of the doldrums?
Or doesn't that matter, as long as Republicans are in charge and they'll make sure to take care of you?
At least you think they will. Until all the other ready sources that feed their greed, like your grandparents and the disabled, have dried up.
Ryan’s plan would not balance the budget until 2040. So over the next 27 years we will add to the
National Debt.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/2chambers/post/house-approves-ryan-budget-plan-to-cut-spending-taxes/2012/03/29/gIQAdUXQjS_blog.html
Hi Sarge,
IMO the honest truth about a Senate budget is that neither side can write and submit a budget that would pass. Neither side can get the 51 votes needed. That is why Reid hasn’t submitted a budget … he can’t even get 51 Dems to support it. On the other side McConnell hasn’t tried to bring a Senate Republican created budget to the floor either.
Romney's all but begging Ricky and Newt to bow out now so he can have an easy path to the GOP nomination.
Little does Marvelous Mitt know how rocky it's going to get for him.
OBAMA/BIDEN 2012
GBM---please don't suggest that Romney will do this all again in 2016 if he isn't elected this year. Watching it once has been bad enough.
Speaking of "Marvelous Mitt," kaybee, you should market bath mitts for kids under that name when you re-open the franchise, which I'm sure you'll be able to do when Mitt turns the economy around.
Dennis,
I agree totally, that is why, IMO, the snipping and ridiculing any budget plan that has no chance of passing is really a waste in energy and time. So we will continue to see our government run on continuing resolutions which really is a sorry way to run a government.
Yeah, since when do we have contested primaries, vetting of candidates, and all that other democracy crap? All you other candidate need to drop out now! It's Mitt's turn, so move aside.
Psst, conservatives... I think Buddy Roemer is running on Americans Elect, and Gary Johnson is running as a Libertarian. And of course you can always write-in the name of a candidate you really support.
Or, just reelect President Obama, who we already know is doing a much better job than Mr. Tax Evader could ever hope to do.
Actually a filibuster-proof super majority of 60 votes would be needed in the case of Dems trying to pass the president's proposal, or even Simpson-Bowles -- which the Teapublicans filibustered.
It's best to just go with the people's budget until the voters can throw out the Tea Party obstructionists. If right-wingers were intellectually honest, they would stop spinning and demand that the Teapublican House actually show up for work and compromise on something both Parties can pass.
Budget resolutions are not bills/laws and only require a simple majority.
Also Budget resolutions can not be filibustered.
Yeah, I get that... and the legislation voted on in the House was merely based on Simpson-Bowles, a faux version leaning to the Right, and yet couldn't pass with full Republican support because per Norquist's crazy definition had tax increases in it. And the Dems also voted against it (not as overwhelmingly), but because it had too many cuts without enough revenue.
When talking about doomed bills, isn't that a reference to the Senate where the Dems lack a filibuster-proof super majority? Well anyway the "threat to filibuster," because they don't actually filibuster any more--another problem.
What ever, the claims that the impasse is due to lack of leadership from the White House, or that the Dems don't support the president's proposals, are all chicken crap as these matters are far more complex than that.
Anna Molly, great idea!
Marvelous Mitts for the bath (and for washing cars) and dog sweaters with the slogan "Mutts against Mitt".
I'll become a one percenter! ;)
Go for it. Just remember your friends, when you do. ;-)
Poor Mitzi is looking like a fool everyday now !...I noticed his wife hasn't said another thing are her disastrous "UNZIP MIT" comment..so low class! I just cant see a woman like that in the White House
Resolve the nomination ASAP? Oh, sure, as long as it resolves in Romney's favor.
Conservatives, and especially women, please take note. There's a clue here somewhere, if only you can see it.
Apparently, that's what he means by "people are free to make their own decision."
As long as it's the same as his.
Apparently, that's what he means by "people are free to make their own decision."
As long as it's the same as his.
___________________________________________
Yeah, don't you hate it when Barry gets like that. What are those SC Justices thinking? That they can make their own decisions on ClunkerCare??
AM.....some would call this being a bully. Do as I want, I like to fire people> Mah..vellous! Dahling.
Anyone who votes Republican, has to be losing whatever commonsense they may have had.
Obama's people, and the media did the same thing to Hillary back in 2008. Even though, he was losing almost every primary towards the end of the nominating cycle. So please don't try to pretend that Romney isn't doing/saying the same things that every candidate did/said/would say under similar circumstances
Reality is setting in guys. All we're gonna have is Mitt.
Gone are Newt, Bachmann, Paul, Perry, Cain, Santorum. Those were the days.
We have to look and listen to Mitt from now until freakin' NOVEMBER when the hooks arrives to drag him off stage.
Until then - well, I don't know. Brutal.
7 more months of Mitt and his 5 photogenic sons.
Shoot me.
The man from Bain has spoken!
What do you think you have proven here except that they're all liars? Should we just accept the lies since everyone does it?
Tell you what, J. Merle. Hold that thought for the next time someone runs a red light and broadsides your car at an intersection.
Because they'd swear that light was green.
Nice to see you again, J. Merle.
Honestly, I am one person who just doesn't see it. Every time I look at him, I see fangs.
@ Gingerbread Mamma --
Exactly so. Bully or authoritarian. Women in particular should be concerned.
And you know just where to hit me, Joe.
Right at the intersection of Marbury and Madison.
RationalOne (there's an oxymoron for you) -- Although you say that no-one over the age of 55 will be affected by the changes in medicare, where do you suppose the money is going to come from to pay for senior's healthcare if no-one is left paying into it.
AM - I was thinking today that he sort of looks devilish. Replace or supplement your fangs with horns. Tell me you don't see it.
LoL I definitely see that, too, Bryan, so I'll add the horns, rather than replace, because I really like the vampire metaphor. The whole thing would make a great addition to his otherwise rather dry biography --
ramboet --
Exactly. And this actuarial accident waiting to happen is where the rubber will really meet the road. Especially since the seniors who are left in the program will be those who can't find private insurance, and thus probably the most expensive to cover.
Details. Details. The Devil's in 'em, that's for sure.
He better, 'cause there won't be any financial SUPERPAC money left! The banks are broke now! One million homes in FORECLOSURE!! One in every ten or eleven homes are now VACANT! Just wait until 2013!!! Some WALLSTREETER will be able to buy America! All he'll get is their debts, but he'll own AMERICA!!!
Begging for your government handout, are we?
Yes, must resolve nomination now, before more fundamentalist heavy states vote in May.
You know, I bet if Santorum runs as an independent candidate, that he wins more states than Romney.
Nathan..........I doubt it. Santorum isn't that well liked by mainstream Republican types.
Look at which states Santorum wins over Romney. Then imagine a three way race where Obama takes every blue or moderate state leaving Romney and Santorum to fight over only the deepest of reds. That's Santorum country. Or at least it's evangelical protestants who would never consider voting for a Mormon country.
The Nervous Nelly in Romney coming out.
I, Mitt Romney, am putting my foot down, and upon whose neck it lands, I care not. All hail your glorious lord and master, ME. Let the word go forth through out the land; there can only be ONE. HHHHAAAAAIIIILLLLLLLLL!
(looking at you, Spentorum)
Guess it's time for Romney to start working on that VP list, too. Here's some helpful advice from across the pond from Hadley Freeman of The Guardian (U.K.):
"And so, as widely dreaded, the Republican primaries have dragged on into April. Well played, everyone! In a country so ruthless that TV shows can get cancelled after just one episode, maintaining such a long-running entertainment programme is an achievement. Admittedly, this is largely due to the fact that all of its featured stars are so uninspiringly bad but, seriously, do you know how much a two-minute advert during the Super Bowl costs? Not even Mitt Romney could buy the kind of TV exposure these guys have had.
Yet, as that great political commentator Nelly Furtado once observed, all good things must come to an end and it does look like the end is in sight – the end of the media having to pretend that someone other than Mitt Romney might be the Republican presidential nominee. Of course, one must not underestimate the impulse of Romney's own party towards the ABR tactic – Anyone But Romney – one that has led to a sex-obsessed homophobe in a sweater vest and the Pillsbury Doughboy, AKA Newt Gingrich, being touted as sorta serious contenders for a presidential election. But even the party is beginning to concede that their time would be better spent fighting against Obama than among themselves. Rick Santorum, owner of the aforementioned sweater vests, is predictably digging his heels in, like a toddler refusing to go to bed even though it's at least two hours after his bed time, showing the deluded tenacity one would expect of a grown man who believes
that restricting access to contraception reduces unwanted pregnancies. Last weekend he insisted that he would not go, even if the GOP establishment believes voters "need to have Romney shoved down their throats". Oh Santorum, how we'll miss your weirdly double entendre ways.
Nevertheless, it does increasingly look as if, after all the bloodletting and financial expenditure of the past months, the Republicans will end up with the nominee who was always going to be the nominee. Hasn't this been an excellent use of everyone's time and energy?
But if you think this signifies the end of the bursts of crazy fun Santorum and Gingrich provided, don't worry! Despite the vice-presidency being the most high-profile and pointless job outside the royal family, the Republicans have a knack for picking some doozies as running mates. There was Ken doll Dan Quayle, who thought he was JFK and couldn't spell potato; Dick Cheney, the human Heart ofDarkness; and of course, Sarah Palin, who needs no elaboration.
Whoever Romney picks, they will be mainstream Christian, establishment and unwaveringly rightwing. In other words, everything Romney is not. So who is in the Veepstakes, as one is legally bound to call it? Let's find out.
Marco Rubio
Pros: Has what is frequently described as "Latino Appeal", which I think means he sports J-Lo's latest perfume. Has reportedly spent $40,000 investigating himself so Democrats can't whip out any gotchas …
Cons: … but this is because he was gotcha-ed, badly, last year when his oft-repeated claim that his parents were forced to leave Cuba when Fidel Castro came to power was shown to be nonsense. Also, shouldn't a man know himself if he has a dodgy past?
Random fact: Married to a former cheerleader. Duuuuuude!
Bobby Jindal
Pros: Fun Bobby, as fans of Friends and absolutely no one else calls him, is the governor of Louisiana and
not a middle-aged white dude, therefore potentially useful to Romney.
Cons: Has said dumb things, probably waiting to run for president himself. Those two qualities tend to go together.
Random fact: Named himself after a Brady Bunch character.
Paul Ryan
Pros: Ugh, Paul Ryan. Sorry, we're in the pros section, right? I mean, yay Paul Ryan? Fond of making extreme
budget cuts for the needy while sparing corporations, which is a good thing in the eyes of the GOP.
Cons: The budget Ryan devised and which was passed last week was compared by Paul Krugman in the New York Times to "pink slime".
Random fact: Like George Galloway, Ryan likes making comparisons between events in his country and the Arab spring. Unlike Galloway, he does not do so favourably.
Bob McDonnell
Pros: So generically handsome that when he and Romney stand next to each other it will look like a convention of Just For Men male models. Sexxxxxy!
Cons: He's the muppet who supported the clause that stated all women in Virginia who wanted an abortion would have to be raped by a probe first. He eventually insisted that the bill be changed, thus annoying both
anti-abortion and pro-choice groups. Yeah! That guy!
Random fact: Now known as Bob Vaginal Probe McDonnell. With a name like that, I bet he always has a date on a Friday night. Amirite ladeez or amirite?
Chris Christie
Pros: The avuncular governor of New Jersey is possibly the only man in the country who could make Romney seem human. Vetoed the bill to legalise gay marriage in his state, which should please the GOP homophobes.
Cons: Imagine an American, rightwing John Prescott. A man with a temper and little filter, judging by the time
he called a Navy Seal who interrupted him at a meeting an "idiot".
Random fact: Hates "Jersey Shore".
Rob Portman
Pros: A senator from Ohio, Portman is about as safe, bland and establishment as they come. Good news for Romney, bad news for journalists who always go for cheap laughs.
Cons: Could cure insomnia.
Random fact: So boring there are no random facts."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2012/apr/03/who-mitt-romney-running-mate
Oh, Guardian, I'd blow kidney pie out of my nose for you any day. Pretty funny stuff.
JoAnne, this is brilliant. They call them as they see them. Thanks for sharing.
Hey, JoAnne....
I read that Jindal was born less than 9 months after his parents immigrated here...maybe Jindal is an 'anchor baby'......lol
...and McDonnell, well his probbing went too far!
I wonder if he were in the shoes of Santorum, Gingrich, or Paul if he would have the same opinion.
Shake that etch-a-sketch, Willard and all will be well, right?
GAME ON!!! Mr. Willard want the office . . . really? Remember, this is a bigger job than being a CEO. It means representing all the people, even the ones that don't vote for you. Oh, and you can't fire us! Don't think the Pres is ready to turn it over to the GOBP whom he wrestled it from. As I said, "Game On! Want it . . .come get it, but be prepared . . . this ain't Newt, Rick or Ron!" GAME ON!!!
Ya just gotta love the comments on here. I mean the smart ones. The ones who tell it like it is! By that, i mean anyone not fooled by the talking heads from Faux News, and the great one, Ruskie Slimeball! The party of No must GO!!! OBAMA/BIDEN 2012
Romney thinks in terms of a billion, while Obama has $125 million so far. That is chicken feed to Romney. He would like it if his contenders went away, but the Republicans who are voting are still denying him a majority of their votes. They either do not trust him or do not like him, or both. His only strength is his Wall Street bankroll and six years of preparation. Normally, those facts would be insurmountable odds for other candidates, but Romney himself is abnormal. He is just one of the losers to a phantom candidate that is not running.
ObamaCares will not do it for Romney .. he has to show that he cares ... if he cant connect with mom and pop he is a sure loser
Romney will be a good President. Not as strong as I would like but a hell of alot stronger than current.
Romney could help the Republicans nominate their candidate by withdrawing from the race. He has the greatest trust deficit of any Republican candidate in decades. He has lied, equivocated, and had no answers so often that his character has sunk along with public confidence. The strongest Republican candidate is not in the race. Romey is just the front loser.
Romney took a list of his own weaknesses and systematically blamed Obama for each of his own flaws. He is trying to lower the competition by obfuscating his flaws for public consumption. How about the Obama wants to destroy Medicare one, or Obama is attacking women's health care?
Romney is the biggest liar to ever run for the office, as all other candidates in 2008 and 2012 have pointed out his lies. The issues about his lack of integrity and Etch-A-Sketch "convictions" demonstrate that Wall Street is selling another toxic asset, hoping to reap huge profits from tax cuts, deregulation, military spending, and any other favors Romney bestows on his 1% colleagues.