One of the best put downs ever in politics.

[denem]

Axelrod on Romney:

...Taking two positions on every issue, one more on the left and one more on the far right doesn't make you a centrist, it makes you a charlatan.

http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2012/01/axelrod_taunts_romneys_iowa_wi.html

[Warpy]

1. Had Romney run on his record in Mass., he'd likely be a formidable candidate

However, the man really has no core principles, at all, and it's showing rather badly. The worst thing you can possibly be to a religious absolutist is inconsistent. They don't care if you're dead wrong about everything just as long as you cling to those positions until you are dead and buried.

[Motown_Johnny]

3. he would have Huntsman numbers in the primary if he had done that

[Warpy]

10. Huntsman is an outlier because he's worked for a (gasp) Democratic administration

never mind he's biting the hand that's feeding him.

Romney is not only riding his father's considerable coattails, he's been the governor of a major state and has done some things there he could take credit for rather than run from. Add to that he's the party heir apparent.

So I think you're wrong about that. As long as he became an born again antichoicer, the non lunatic right would have embraced him for all the reasons I cited.

[Motown_Johnny]

11. his record in MA includes taxpayer money going toward abortions

he can't survive a Republican primary process running on that

[Jester Messiah]

15. He's an outlier because he's not a complete frothing idiot.

He actually pays attention to things like science and evidence, and dares to think that perhaps party dogma isn't infallible when those things contradict it. No way can they vote for somebody like that!

[Warpy]

17. He's also not owned by the Koch brothers

which means there is likely a considerable whispering campaign against him.

[Major Hogwash]

2. I wish Axelrod was working on the re-election campaign.

He's a freaking genius.

I miss Obama Girl, too.

[jaxx]

4. He is working for the Obama campaign.

You can count on Axelrod.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

5. Good one. Let's hope Axelrod has a good definition of WHAT IS a centrist and how that benefits us.

A "centrist" is what?

Someone who doesn't have real power because he doesn't have enough votes?

Someone who believes that if he doesn't press hard on upholding traditional Democratic values that he will get votes from Republicans?

Whatever Azelrod's concept of what constitutes a "centrist," we know that it does not mean being a liberal or a progressive. Maybe it is sufficient from his point of view if a person has a (D) after their name.

[JoePhilly]

9. Some one who plans to represent ALL Americans ... not 50.01%

[MisterP]

6. centrists ARE charlatans

[coalition_unwilling]

7. I prefer Huntsman's take on Iowa:

"Iowa doesn't pick presidents; Iowa picks corn"

[sabrina 1]

12. Lol, that's even better. And the polls today kind of prove him right. Gingrich appears to be the

front runner after all.

Centrists are Charlatans btw.

[JoePhilly]

8. SMACK!!!

[Surya Gayatri]

13. Oh, snap! Good find... n/t

[Bluenorthwest]

14. Charlatan, Centrist, what's the difference really?

Centrist also takes two positions, makes them one, and pushes them with rhetorical ferocity. The centrist is 'for' the crook and also 'for' the guy the crook stole from. For the hate and the hated, for the bigot and for the target of that bigotry. In short the centrist stands for the centrist, just as the charlatan stands for the charlatan.

[Ikonoklast]

18. That makes no sense whatsoever.

Your understanding that a person taking a centrist political position means that they are for all sides of an issue is sophmoric.

[PotatoChip]

16. HaHa-- awesome! (nt)