Perhaps we should call it the curse of the front runner. Romney has made two gaffes and managed to put himself on the wrong side of the left and right. But the second gaffe, the one to correct the first, should have conservatives thinking twice.
First, Romney was trying to explain how he was focused on the middle class. But he didn’t say he was focused on the middle class, instead he said he didn’t care about the poor. Reasonable people know what he meant, but not everyone in the political world is reasonable. For example: Democrats. But as Romneyites have pointed out over and over in this campaign, the Republican nominee is going to have to deal with the unfair media and lies from the Democrats and we can’t go nominating someone who is unpredictable and brash who is going to say something off the wa…oh wait.
I know what he meant.
But then Romney tried to fix things by proving to liberals that he cares for the poor as much as they do. Romney promised to raise and index the minimum wage to inflation. I wonder if Coulter will defend that one. Raising the minimum wage is a great way to get poor people to vote for you. It helped Democrats in 2006. And then shortly after raising the minimum wage, unemployment among teenagers, college students, and single mothers skyrocketed to record levels.
The idea of the federal government telling states what they should impose on private businesses as a minimum wage should give any conservative, including Ann Coulter and Mitt Romney, pause. Frankly, the idea that someone who parks cars in Burbank should make the same as a burger flipper in Mobile is pretty crazy by itself.
The proper response would have been something like this: No, I’m not going to raise the federal minimum wage. I am going to raise wages for everyone by shrinking the size of government and growing the size of the private sector so that everyone can get better jobs for better pay because we will have a better economy. And I will abolish the federal minimum wage and trust the states and local governments to handle that themselves like the constitution requires.
Mitt has a problem that needs fixing quick if he is going to be the nominee. He is a panderer. If he is not careful, Republicans will start asking the same question they did in 2006, no matter how stupid and irrational it is. Wouldn’t it be better to let Democrats win so everyone can see how terrible they are than to elect a RINO so that Republicans can screw it up? Hint, no. We’ve had almost six years now of “wouldn’t it be better to let Democrats win” and it has nearly destroyed our freedoms and capitalist system.
So somebody please remind Romney what side he’s supposed to be on in the debate on the size of government. This is important.
Filed under: Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich, President Obama | Tagged: 2006, 2012, ann coulter, burbank, conservative, coulter, democrat, friday, Gingrich, inflation, is romney a conservative, is romney a liberal, liberal, minimum wage, newt, Newt Gingrich, obama, poor, Republican, RINO, romney and the poor, romney raise minimum wage, student unemployment, unemployment, whitehouse 2012, whitehouse12, whitehouse12.com |