The 2012 Election is Reverse of Bush-Kerry in 2004

Finally someone wrote what a lot of us have been saying.  Romney reminded me in 2008 of John Kerry with all his flip flops but he is worse this time.  According to the Republican Establishment and those who have drank the Romney koolaid, Romney has evolved not flip flopped.  Give me a break, the man will say anything if he thinks it will get him votes just like John Kerry.  Must be the Massachusetts water because Romney is no conservative, never has been, and never will be.  That is not something you discover over night when in 2007 he was part of a group of liberals opposing Sam Alito for the Supreme Court.

Now he has people out scrubbing the net of some of his 'scorched earth' comments against conservatives along with his comments on women like that is going to make a difference as we all have memories of what he said plus a lot of us have the quotes on record.  What if a Democrat spokesman for Obama said they were going to scrub the net.  The Republicans would go through the roof especially some of the conservative Republican media.

The hypocrisy in this election by the Romney supporters knows no end.   Even their critique of Obama using AF One so much is hollow when you remember in 2004 that President Bush used AF One more than any other President to campaign.  It is okay for a Republican to use AF One to campaign but not a Democrat?  Is this what this election has gotten down to criticize your opponent for what you did in 2004?  Beginning to look just like that.

Guess when you have a candidate that is pretending to be something he is not this is what happens.  Happened with Kerry who flip flopped all over the place and now with Romney.  Sooner or later when you have no core values on issues, it comes out.  How can you be an independent, run as a liberal in MA not to mention govern as a liberal until you decide to run for President and then start morphing into a conservative yet expect people to believe you?

This weekend is the Libertarian Convention in Las Vegas.  Will the former Republican Governor of New Mexico Gary Johnson receive their nomination?  The Libertarians are on the ballots in all 50 states this time so he could make the race interesting since he is a true economic conservative.  You know where he stands on issues and doesn't flip flop all over the place.  Reagan had a rule about agreeing with someone 80% of the time and he is your candidate.  If I apply that rule, then Johnson would be my candidate not Romney who I seldom agree with.

• 4/27/12 at 4:41 PM

The 2012 Election Is Bush-Kerry in Reverse

• By Jonathan Chait

The parallels between this year’s presidential election and the one we had eight years ago are striking. Incumbent president with middling approval ratings faces rich guy from Massachusetts with a reputation for flip-flopping. Hilarity ensues. By “hilarity” I mean, specifically, that people get extremely worked up about a series of procedural controversies, and then the two parties trade places on them the next time around. 

It is actually kind of eerie how closely the two elections have tracked each other. How many issues like this have the parties switched places over? Let us count them: 

Air Force One. At the moment, Republicans are raging at President Obama for having made a series of official speeches, at government expense, that also dovetail with his campaign themes. The Washington Free Beacon finds this so outrageous it actually quotes Solzhenitsyn — at length! — to denounce the “lies.” And certainly Obama has been engaging in some pretense here. Conservatives were distinctly less outraged in 2004, when USA Today reported that Bush was “using Air Force One for re-election travel more heavily than any predecessor.” 

Big donors. In 2004, Bush had put together a powerful fund-raising network, and Democrats were dependent on large donations from outside groups. Republicans attacked the Democratic donors. The donors felt it was outrageous they should be attacked. (Large donor George Soros: “I have been demonized by the Bush campaign.”) In response, Dinesh D’Souza wrote in National Review: 

Soros begins with a plea for personal sympathy. Such pleas are always dubious when they come from billionaires who are trying to pass themselves off as victims. But as the man who is the leading contributor to groups like moveon.org, groups that have launched some of the most vicious attacks against President Bush, shouldn't Soros expect to be "demonized" in return?
Now, of course, Republican billionaires are making huge donations, Democrats are attacking them, and the GOP billionaires and conservative pundits are waxing hysterical over the unfairness of the poor billionaires enduring public criticism. 

Flip-flopping. How important a character flaw is flip-flopping? Just about the most important thing in the world, said everybody in the Republican Party in 2004. It was so vital, Bush insisted in 2004, it was better to vote for a candidate you don’t agree with than to vote for one who has changed his mind on something. (“Even when we don't agree, at least you know what I believe and where I stand.”) Even Mitt Romney gave a speech ridiculing John Kerry as a flip-flopper. Now, it’s not such a bad quality, after all, to have the ability to admit when you’re wrong. 

Negativity. The challenger thinks it’s a devastating admission of failure that the incumbent has to tear down his challenger rather than run a positive campaign. Amazingly, Karl Rove, who defined this tactic in 2004, now weeps bitter tears almost every week over Obama’s meanness. 

Politicizing foreign policy. In 2004, Democrats were furious that Bush used the 9/11 attacks as a political asset. Now, Republicans are indignant that Obama is running on having killed Osama bin Laden. (Of course, the difference is that 9/11 was at best something Bush had no responsibility for and at worst a colossal blunder, while killing bin Laden is an actual accomplishment.) 

Attacking the rich guy. Obama implicitly contrasts himself with Romney’s wealthy upbringing, and his allies have explicitly highlighted Romney’s vast fortune. Republicans consider this vicious class warfare. If you want to see some real attacks on a guy just for being rich, get a load of this: 

The Republican National Committee produced a game called Kerryopoly, in which a player earning $40,000 a year "can land on properties like Nantucket, worth $9.18 million, Beacon Hill, worth $6.9 million, or Idaho, worth $4.9 million." A television ad from a pro-GOP group mockingly lists his assets. "Designer shirt: $250. Forty-two-foot luxury yacht: $1 million. Four lavish mansions and a beachfront estate: over $30 million.” 

It does seem that, at least so far, the Republican Party has a greater capacity than the Democrats to generate outrage over something they find perfectly fair when their side is doing the same or worse. Still, Democrats are hardly immune. And it’s worth it for liberals to keep this in mind: Remember how outraged you felt eight years ago, when the president was exploiting his incumbency for reelection and tearing down his opponent? That’s how Republicans feel now. 

Source:  http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2012/04/2012-election-is-bush-kerry-in-reverse.html

These are facts which have been verified which shows the total hypocrisy of the National Republican Committee along with their pundits and elected Republicans who are shilling for Romney.  When Priebus said the other day that Romney was gaining with conservatives.  What conservatives what he talking about?  The wealthy?  The ones I know are more adamant then ever not to vote for Romney after the way they are attacked by Romney supporters when they say they won't vote for Romney on various sites.  They are particularly nasty on Twitter and continue to attack a good friend who refuses to back down.  Where in the Constitution does it say if you are a Republican you have to vote for the Republican candidate?

Establishment Republicans refused to vote for Barry Goldwater in 1964 but now that the shoe is on the other foot they call conservatives names and frankly want us out of the party the way it looks.  The Establishment GOP is now going after good conservative Senate candidates to support more moderate candidates so is this a purge of conservatives from the Republican Party?  If that is the case the rhetoric of 'smaller government' is just that out of some of the leadership in Congress and some of the men and women we elected.  That would explain why Government grew under President Bush and a Republican Congress instead of being cut.  No wonder they didn't want Dr. Coburn in the Senate to join a few others.

On Birth Control, Romney Mirrored Obama

UPDATE from CNN email (11:22, 2/10/12) -- rumors were right that Obama was going to cave:

President Obama today announced a compromise in the dispute over whether to require full contraception insurance coverage for female employees at religiously affiliated institutions.
Under the new plan, religiously affiliated universities and hospitals will not be forced to offer contraception coverage to their employees. Insurers will be required, however, to offer complete coverage free of charge to any women who work at such institutions. 

Female employees at churches themselves will have no guarantee of any contraception coverage -- a continuation of current law. 

*******

Vision to America didn't realize how right they were when they wrote this yesterday. Obama has flip flopped just liked Romney on the issue as now today Obama is now going to allow religious groups to opt out of a mandate which means it is not a mandate and is also going to change its rules for employers as well:

Faced with opposition from religious organizations, the Obama administration will change its rule requiring employers to offer free contraceptive coverage in their healthcare plans and will allow additional religious groups to opt out of the mandate, senior administration officials said today. President Obama is due to discuss the changes at 9:15 a.m. PST.  More soon at http://latimes.com. 

Neither man seems to have any core values that they will stand up and be counted when backed into a corner -- they both do a flip flop and cave.  I have more respect for people who stand or fall on their convictions even if I don't agree with them then I do politicians like Romney or Obama who put a finger in the wind to see which way it is blowing.

Written on February 9, 2012 by V2AOn Birth Control, Romney Mirrored Obama

Cracking down on contraception was never the way for Mitt Romney to ingratiate himself with voters in Massachusetts, even the Roman Catholics who mostly see it as a moral neutral. Now that that position is coming back to haunt Romney like the ghost of Christmas past, he’s taking cover with the religious right. And after last night’s surprising three-state sweep by social conservative Rick Santorum he’ll need all the cover he can get. 

Some Catholic leaders in Massachusetts are already (finally) speaking up against what they see as Romney’s politically convenient about-face in the emergency contraception debate. C.J. Doyle, executive director of the Catholic Action League of Massachusetts, told Salon he didn’t want to “let Romney off the hook because the initial injury to Catholic religious freedom came not from the Obama administration but from Romney’s administration”; he explained that there was a preexisting exemption for religious institutions already in the Massachusetts law that was stripped out on the advice of Romney’s gubernatorial legal counsel. “President Obama’s plan certainly constitutes an assault on the constitutional rights of Catholics, but I’m not sure Governor Romney is in a position to assert that, given his own very mixed record on this.”
Doyle said Romney was “very consistent at working both sides of the street on the same issue,” but his record on this has been “one of cynical and tactical manipulation.” 

Post Continues on www.salon.com 

Looks like what we had were religious leaders in MA staying silent on Romney when they knew the truth.  Finally they are speaking out what he was like as Governor.  He didn't take office until January of 2003 which is less than ten years ago but we are supposed to swallow the koolaid that he has changed his core values now that he is running for President?  Give me a break.  With all his gaffes when he pretends to be conservative, it shows he is trying to play the part of a conservative but doesn't have the core conservative values.

Romney supporters are all over the net this week trying to tell 'real' conservatives to sit down and shut up about Romney because he is really conservative.  Not working and frankly getting irritating to hear the Reagan 80% quote when I don't agree with Romney even 20% of the time.  In fact, I am not sure I can agree with him any more than Obama because I frankly don't know how Romney would govern.  All we have to go on is his time in liberal Massachusetts where he signed Romneycare into law bragging about it and Florida AG Pam Bondi's comments that she will serve on his healthcare task force to mandate healthcare in every state when he is President.

That is not conservative so no matter what he says in his speech I would hazard to guess that most conservatives will not buy into his speech.  We have all read the stories of the establishment telling him he has to hit a home run with this speech.  Be prepared for loud cheering from his peanut gallery he once again has bused into CPAC -- pays their way, for their food, and for the straw poll ballot which makes the straw poll meaningless.

All that money in spent on advertising and he loses all three states last Tuesday to Santorum and yet the establishment and his supporters are still pushing him as a the front runner?  When he most likely wins Michigan where his father was Governor, we will be hearing it all over again that Romney is the inevitable nominee but Michigan and even Arizona with the large Mormon contingent mean little.  Michigan has some conservatives, but we would bet they have a lot more moderate Republicans.  Hope we are surprised and Romney loses Michigan or Arizona or at least it is close.  Romney just does not relate well to regular people and a lot of his crowds come from heavily Mormon participation or people who bought into the koolaid that Romney is the inevitable candidate.

Stay tuned for the Romney spin from CPAC as he attempts once again to play the part of a conservative Republican.

IBD Editorial: Romney's Doomed '3rd Rail' Attack on Perry

Is it possible since Romney has Bush 41 and Rove on his side, that he and his supporters think all of the Bush people are going to support Romney?  How else can you explain the Romney people giving Marc Thiessen, a former Bush 43 speech writer, their plan of action?  If so, that was stupid.

Conservative are more galvanized then I have seen them since 1980 in wanting to turn the Country around and want someone who understands what they are going through on a daily basis with this horrible economy.  In 1980 it was high interest rates with inflation.  Now it is lack of jobs, raises, and inflation with groceries and gasoline even if the powers at be in Government won't admit it as they took them out of the inflation criteria.  Go buy groceries and see prices going up almost every week and then tell us there is no inflation.

This is what happens when someone very wealthy runs for office -- they are out of touch with most Americans who work for a living to buy a home, a car, pay utility bills, buy groceries and gas for the car while hoping to have enough left over for cell phones and cable TV.  Vacations were pretty much out of the picture for a lot of people this year with the high cost of gas since taking a family on a trip by air is expensive not to mention the cost hotels and meals.

Romney is getting ready to tear down a 3,000 sq foot home on the beach in La Jolla, CA to build a $12M mansion.  I don't care if he builds a $20M mansion, but trying to tell most of us he understands as he is unemployed himself is a total insult.  With those comments, it became personal for me after what I have seen happen in the last few years.  Want no part of a candidate who builds a $12M mansion and compares himself to someone who is really unemployed.

Is Romney so clueless that he doesn't understand young people are upset that Social Security they have paid into over the years is most likely either not going to be there, or they will receive a small pension if something is not done.  Most young people understand Social Security needs action not just bandaids and words to ensure solvency.  Romney is against raising the cutoff for how long people have to pay into social security which is now $106,000.  Why?  He calls it a tax increase -- most of us call it fair.  If someone makes $105,000 and has to pay social security on his whole income, why doesn't someone making $250,000 a year have to pay social security on his whole income?  

Any way you slice it, Social Security is a ponzi scheme for young workers whether Romney wants to admit the truth or not.  Commentary Magazine has this to say:

Whatever the case, on substance, Perry is quite right. For younger people, Social Security is almost the definition of a Ponzi scheme. It takes money from the current generation in order to pay out money to support (among others) current retirees. Younger workers are led to believe they are putting money away for their retirement when in fact, they’re giving money away to others. There is no “trust fund” and no “lock box” – and because of demographics the younger generation cannot count on anything like the support past generations have received.

Romney attacks on Perry on the 3rd rail are going to backfire like the attacks on the letter that he sent to Hillary Clinton when he was the Texas Ag Commissioner:

In a letter to Clinton, who is now U.S. Secretary of State, Perry wrote: “I think your efforts in trying to reform the nation’s health care system are most commendable.” 

“I would like to request that the task force give particular consideration to the needs of the nation’s farmers, ranchers, and agriculture workers, and other members of rural communities,” Perry continued, noting his administration’s focus on economic development for rural Texans. 

“Rural populations have a high proportion of uninsured people, rising health care costs, and often experience lack of services.”… 

Asked by TheDC about the 1993 letter, Perry’s presidential campaign defended it, saying the full scope of Clinton’s healthcare plan was not yet known when Perry signed it. 

“You need to read the letter,” top Perry political strategist Dave Carney told The Daily Caller. 

“He praised her efforts in trying to tackle the issue and urged her not to overlook rural Americans. The letter was at the onset of her efforts before she proposed anything. No one could have imagined the horrible monstrosity she cooked up, in fact not to be outdone until ObamaCare years later.”

Rove has lost it after all those years inside the beltway if he thinks that Romney is going to pick up steam and votes by wanting Social Security to remain the status quo or getting someone to release this letter to Hillary that shows Perry was looking out for the farmers and ranchers.

In fact, with all of Romney's flip flops in recent months he is reminding us of another Massachusetts candidate, John Kerry, who was legendary when it came to flip flopping on the issues.  Romney is rapidly closing in on him.  Not only is Romney sounding like the flip flopper John Kerry but when Romney launched his campaign on April 11, 2011, he stole the slogan of his campaign from Kerry:

Mitt Romney's launched his exploratory committee today with a dynamic new slogan: "Believe in America." 

If that slogan sounds a little familiar, that's because it was the title of John Kerry's cross-country tour in August of 2004, as CNN reported a two-week, 3,500-mile, coast-to-coast trip, dubbed the 'Believe in America' tour, that will take them to 21 states and 40 cities."

Romney and his people cannot even come up with an original slogan using the one for Kerry instead.  Tell me again why he is running for President.

Romney is also sounding more like Bill Clinton by the day with putting his finger in the wind to see which way it is blowing on Global Warming and now Social Security and then doing a flip flop.  Add his 'me too' mentality like now saying he may go into Iowa after dissing their straw poll in order to take on Perry in Iowa is laughable.  He wanted no part of Iowa but now may challenge Perry in Iowa?  Good Luck with that in a farm state like Iowa.  What is he going to do offer Iowans more of an ethanol subsidy and make the rest of the country mad?

The Romney campaign has the look of 2008 when he was put on his heels by McCain and never recovered.  He started grasping at straws then and is now doing the same thing.  He never should have run in 2012 when he couldn't beat McCain in 2008.  Now more people I know are even more galvanized against Romney for saying he was going to support McCain and help him win when he dropped out but he did virtually nothing in the campaign.  It is payback time!

Editorial: Romney's Doomed '3rd Rail' Attack On Perry 

Posted 06:16 PM ET 

Election '12: Mitt Romney reportedly intends to use the "third rail of politics" — touch Social Security and you die — to kill Rick Perry. But the winning strategy next year may be something novel for politicians: the truth. 

For unexplained reasons, Mitt Romney's people in New Hampshire told former George W. Bush speechwriter Marc Thiessen about their grand strategy to defeat Texas Gov. Rick Perry — and the plan couldn't be more out of sync with the anger currently raging at the Republican grassroots. 

"Romney strategists are quick to note that in his book, 'Fed Up!,' Perry writes that 'By any measure, Social Security is a failure' and calls the program 'something we have been forced to accept for more than 70 years now' that was created 'at the expense of respect for the Constitution and limited government,'" Thiessen wrote in the Washington Post on Monday. 

The Romneyites promise their man "will use Perry's book to scare seniors in early-primary states with large retiree populations, such as Florida and South Carolina." And, he says, they'll charge that Perry is against the very idea of Social Security and Medicare. 

There is, dare we say, a RINO-sized problem with Romney taking this approach. The former Massachusetts governor is already at a disadvantage as the least conservative, establishment-favored major candidate in what for rank-and-file Republican voters are very anti-establishment times. 

On top of explaining away his "Obomney Care" health reform, plus flip-flops on carbon emission restrictions, the minimum wage, capital gains taxes, abortion and other issues, does Romney really want to be guardian of the big-government status quo on entitlements too? 

Perry rightly has charged that "Deceptive accounting has hoodwinked the American public into thinking that Social Security is a retirement system and financially sound, when clearly it is not." 

Perry compares it to an "illegal Ponzi scheme."Subscribe to the IBD Editorials Podcast 

He obviously knew such stark language would give ammo to opponents in a presidential run. 

"But by remaining quiet," Perry wrote in his book, "politicians are really saying they think the American people won't understand it if we share the grim details of our financial future ... Is that how we should respect our fellow citizens? By underestimating their intelligence, their desire to retire with greater stability, or their commitment to the next generation?" 

The unfunded liabilities of Social Security and Medicare now exceed $100 trillion. Perry might just think laying out the frightful facts about entitlements to the American people is the way to the White House. 

Moreover, targeting Perry on Social Security would be yet another Romney flip-flop: In early 2008 he told Glenn Beck he supported "giving people more of their income going in, or their Social Security withdrawal going into, private accounts." 

Can Rick Perry use his high voltage rhetoric to switch that electrified "third rail of politics" to another track? 

Instead of reform-minded politicians being the ones in danger, will those who support spending as usual have to beware the voters?  

'The People'

Gov Crist (R-FL) is following in the steps of Flip Flopper Sen Kerry (D-MA)

UPDATE: Crist just digs the hole deeper and deeper. We wonder if his flip flop again had to to with the comments of the White House Press Secretary Gibbs:

At the White House, Robert Gibbs, the press secretary, seemed to indicate you can’t take back a hug. Asked whether Mr. Crist had seemed to endorse the package, the spokesman said: “I think he was very supportive of the legislation and supportive of the benefits that it would have and has had for the state of Florida in seeing positive economic growth,” Gibbs said. “I would say yes, yes.”

Crist is showing more and more that he cannot be trusted to say what he means and stick to it which is something the US Senate does not need as there are enough Democrats a few Republicans already. Crist is looking more and more like a Democrat-lite.

Crist says he still supports stimulus concept, if not bill (digging a hole deeper alert)
The South Florida Business Journal
2009-11-06 Michael Hinman

Florida Gov. Charlie Crist says he is not flip-flopping when it comes to support of the federal stimulus package championed by Democrats, saying his comments earlier this week to CNN’s Wolf Blitzer were more about the actual stimulus legislation passed by Congress, and not the effort itself.

“I think the question posed to me was, ‘Did you endorse this specific bill?’” Crist told reporters Friday after speaking to the National Governors Association Center for Best Practices policy institute in Tampa. “And I said, ‘No, I didn’t,’ but the concept I thought, and still believe, was important, necessary and it helped Florida.”

Crist told Blitzer earlier in the week that he did not endorse the bill and didn’t “even have a vote on the darned thing. But, I understood that it was going to pass, and I wanted to be able to utilize it for the benefit of my fellow Floridians.”
So much benefit, in fact, that Crist appeared with President Barack Obama at a Florida rally in February – pictures of which that have been used by some conservative Web sites to try to paint Crist as being apart from Republican philosophy as he prepares for a primary run for a U.S. Senate seat.

Excerpt: Read more at southflorida.bizjournals.com

*****
How ironic that the candidate in 2010 that resembles John Kerry and his being for something before he was against is Republican Florida Governor Charlie Crist who is running for US Senate in 2010. Kerry has been lengendary over the years with his flip flops from the Iraq War to recently Cap and Trade and a host of other issues. There was a reason that flip flops were used for Kerry in 2004.

Now it looks like that Crist is the heir apparent to the Kerry flip flops being for the stimulus and Obama before being against the stimulus for political purposes. The worst part is Crist thinks that everyone forgets his support of the Obama stimulus along with his welcoming him to Florida earlier this year. Just a little reminder picture in case you forgot.


Floridians have an opportunity to send a tax cutter (Rubio) to the US Senate or send a flip flopper (Crist) who will most likely support the Obama agenda after elected. Like the Kerry campaign, Crist is already doing dirty tricks to win. Not going to work as voters in Florida are taking notice of flip flopping Crist and are turning to Rubio. This should serve as a warning to Democrats who want to raise taxes and spend like there is no tomorrow -- American voters are tired of big spenders and flip floppers on issues.

Gov. Charlie Crist backpedals on stimulus

Gov. Charlie Crist, a U.S. Senate candidate, has been trying to distance himself from President Barack Obama and the federal stimulus package.

BY AARON SHAROCKMAN
St. Petersburg Times

Facing a potentially bruising Republican primary for the U.S. Senate, Gov. Charlie Crist continues to run from any assertion that he is linked to President Barack Obama.

Last week Crist told reporters he didn't know Obama was traveling in Florida. On Wednesday, Crist told a national television audience he didn't endorse the $787 billion federal stimulus bill pushed by Obama and passed by Congress in February.

``I didn't endorse it,'' Crist told CNN host Wolf Blitzer. ``I - you know, I didn't even have a vote on the darned thing. But I understood that it was going to pass and I wanted to be able to utilize it for the benefit of my fellow Floridians.''
This, from the same man who skipped a Florida Cabinet meeting to campaign with Obama for the stimulus in Fort Myers in February? Who went on national talk shows and across the state selling the plan?

As the interview continued, Crist got on a roll.

``You know, unfortunately, the president thinks that everything we need to do for every problem that comes along is spend more money and that's just wrong,'' he said.
``Frankly, enough is enough. And I know that the people understand that. And I understand it. And I understand it because I'm the grandson of a Greek immigrant who came to this country with nothing, really taught me the value of a dollar, because his first job in America, in Altoona, Pa., was shining shoes for a living for $5 a month.''

Crist's comments about the stimulus startled conservatives, Democrats, and frankly, us, who all remember things differently.

The conservative Club for Growth responded Thursday with an online television ad, criticizing Crist's support for the stimulus plan. And the Democratic National Committee blasted Crist's comments to reporters across the country.

HISTORY'S CONTRADICTION

Let's go back to earlier this year, to see what Crist had to say then.

From Hardball with Chris Matthews on Feb. 3: Speaking of the stimulus, Crist said, ``It's going to help [Floridians'] children. It's going to help their traffic situation. It's going to help produce more jobs here in the Sunshine State. That's a perspective that I have to have as, in essence, the CEO of Florida. And that's why I support it.''

From Time on Feb. 10: ``I see this package as a pragmatic, common sense opportunity to move forward. I didn't campaign for Obama, we don't agree on everything, but he's my president, and my job is to help Florida stay in the black.''

From Meet the Press on Feb. 22: Q: Why would you buck your own party, which did not vote for this plan in Congress, as you know, to support the stimulus?

Crist: ``It's not a matter of bucking the party, it's a matter of helping the people. I mean, I really view it as an issue of what can I do that's best for the people of Florida? We've got almost 20 million people that live in the Sunshine State now. I think my obligation is in essence the CEO of the state, to do everything I can to help us get through this tough economy. Certainly this stimulus package, about $12.2 billion to Florida, will help Florida an awful lot.''

And that's just a sampling. But then there's the rally in Fort Myers on Feb. 10. Crist skipped a Florida Cabinet meeting and a lunch with former Gov. Jeb Bush to tout the stimulus bill in person. If you've forgotten, there's photos and video to jog your memory.

Excerpt: Read more at Miami Herald

Compare Crist to Senate candidate and Former Speaker of the FL House, Marco Rubio. When Rubio took over as speaker he made a bold move because the property tax situation in FL was out of hand so he wanted property taxes abolished except in 30 rural counties where it would crush their budget.

Interesting that Crist sat on the sidelines in the debate and although the plan was eventually shelved, Rubio was given credit for the fact that the spotlight was shown on the outrageous property taxes people are paying in FL. Today home prices have tanked all over FL and in some areas home owners are seeing some relief in property taxes but in other areas nothing has changed.

We are posting this article from 2007 to show you that Rubio isn't afraid to stand up and be counted while Crist flip flops. We have to wonder how much then Governor Crist did to help tank this plan without it ever going to a vote of the people.

Speaker pushes for change
By ALEX LEARY
Published March 31, 2007

TALLAHASSEE - For House Speaker Marco Rubio, it was a rallying cry to abolish property taxes. But he sounded a little desperate.

Support for his plan to eliminate property taxes on primary homes and raise the sales tax was eroding fast, and Rubio was trying to salvage his signature issue.

"If this House doesn't put out bold ideas, no one will," he told his fellow Republicans.

For 15 minutes Tuesday, the 35-year-old House speaker from Miami issued an unmistakable challenge: "We will be judged on this session by what we do or fail to do on this issue."

Ignore the naysayers on editorial pages and the woe-is-me refrain from city and county commissioners, Rubio said, reading from prepared notes in a departure from his normal off-the-cuff style.

Rubio did not need to say what many already knew. It is he, more than anyone, who will be judged by the outcome of the property tax debate.

By striking fast with an ambitious plan, Rubio eclipsed Gov. Charlie Crist and the Senate as the face of change for Florida's tax system.

Now, as Rubio's plan encounters silence from a skeptical Senate and only polite encouragement from Crist, the speaker faces criticism that he reached too far, too fast.

"The risk of going for a home run is nothing happens," said Rep. Carl Domino, R-Jupiter, who opposes the Rubio plan because it would raise sales taxes by 2.5 cents per dollar. "I didn't get elected to vote for a tax increase."

The second youngest speaker in modern history, Rubio opened the 2007 session as the hotshot, second only to Crist in star power. Rubio was the guy with all the potential and a book brimming with ideas.

When he announced his property tax plan, he called it the most significant tax cut in Florida history, even as it included giving Florida the highest sales tax in the nation.

The frenetic pace at which the plan proceeded signaled Rubio intended to dominate the debate. The same morning he unveiled it, a House committee considered the legislation.

One of the few people who objected was a Polk County commissioner who just happened to be in Tallahassee.

Six weeks later, the plan lies in limbo, hobbled by relentless criticism. It has gone through several mutations, making it easier for Senate Republicans to criticize, even though they have yet to unveil their own plan.

Thirty rural counties were excluded from the plan's proposed tax rollback because House leaders were convinced it would crush their budgets. Hospital districts were spared, too.

Then, with county officials clamoring for more of a voice in the debate, Rubio announced the biggest change yet: Voters in each of Florida's 67 counties would decide how much more sales tax they would pay, and the beneficiaries would only be homeowners - not business owners, snowbirds or renters.

At that moment, the tepid Democratic support for Rubio's plan vanished.

Excerpt: See Full Article at: St. Petersburg Times Archives