Mitt Romney is a whore, Tim Pawlenty is not

Romney, like Newt, is a joke. He is imploding now, fortunately, as we see his true colors. I have never and will never vote for him.

We all know by now about how he instituted socialized health care in Massachusetts, and how that experiment is doing (it's failing). As you know by now how Romney refused to admit his mistake in his recent USA Today opinion piece. I've not seen tap dancing like that in a long time. That's great that he's attacking Obama but he has given exactly zero reason to vote for him. None.

But for the main focus of this post, please consider recent news out of Iowa. From RealClearPolitics:
"Romney in Iowa: 'I Support the Subsidy of Ethanol'" by Scott Conroy
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2011/05/27/romney_in_iowa_i_support_the_subsidy_of_ethanol_110011.html

From the article:
"'I support the subsidy of ethanol,' Romney told a potential voter after an event here was cut short by a fire alarm. 'I believe ethanol is an important part of our energy solution in this country.'"


Amazingly, Tim Pawlenty, who is no conservative (believe me, I used to live in Minnesota and saw him up close), comes out of this smelling like a rose. Pawlenty has both admitted past mistakes (support of the global warming agenda) and taken a stand against ethanol subsidies. Pawlenty is also a poor candidate. But he is light years ahead of scum like Gingrich and Romney because he has taken some fundamental first steps: He has admitted past mistakes and he has staked out the correct position on important issues of the day.

Back to the article:
"'The truth about federal energy subsidies, including federal subsidies for ethanol, is that they have to be phased out,' Pawlenty said. 'We need to do it gradually. We need to do it fairly. But we need to do it.'"

"Pawlenty was widely praised in fiscally conservative circles for taking a stance against the subsidies, which cost taxpayers about $5 billion in 2010, while former House Speaker Newt Gingrich has been singled out for criticism by influential conservative media outlets, including the Wall Street Journal editorial board, for his vocal support of subsidized ethanol."