Romney to Obama: Cowboy up on foreign policy
posted at 8:58 pm on April 21, 2009 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
A guest shot on CNN to follow his NRO op-ed from this morning. It’s odd that he’s hitting The One on his actions abroad: Obama’s been much better there than on domestic policy, and Mitt’s dedication to flexing America’s muscles abroad has never been suspect, unlike his dedication to conservative mores. Strange that he’s hitting Obama for shaking hands with Chavez instead of on abortion and stem cells — although, as Karl notes, even this subject is ripe for criticism.
I’m suspicious of Mitt’s knocks on him for North Korea policy. We can’t afford a war in Asia, in any sense of the term, so lying low and hoping for the best re: North Korea’s missile launch seems to me to have been the smart thing to do, even if it made us look weak superficially. I appreciate Romney wanting to remind Kim that all options are on the table, including the military one, but that bravado would be a cold comfort if it spooked that nutjob into attacking Seoul. Let’s deal with Iran first, yes?
Even so — dude, he’s running.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2
Carter-Reagan
Obama-Romney
RobCon on April 21, 2009 at 9:58 PM
No, there just might be better options than starting something with Iran that we inevitably might get dragged in.
Like I said, a few air strikes may be OK. But suppose they need more than that? We are stuck with another war.
ckoeber on April 21, 2009 at 10:00 PM
Yep, but those barbarians are proving to be a pain in the a$$. They take a lot of money and time to resolve.
ckoeber on April 21, 2009 at 10:01 PM
Romney? Let’s wait and see what comes out there first. In 2004 no one expected Obama to REALLY get the nomination. It was all Hillary…
ckoeber on April 21, 2009 at 10:03 PM
Lets see, Mittens, not really a conservative. Invented flip-flopping. Southern evangelicals won’t vote for a Mormon. Does have nice hair. Looks like the 2012 presidential campaign has already started. I’ll put money on Obama’s organizational machine against any goopers. Mittens can’t be trusted by voters on either side. Talks tough, looks like a metrosexual. 5 sons, zero in the military. hmmmm
athensboy on April 21, 2009 at 10:03 PM
No, Obama has been disastrous in both areas.
Certainly not “much better.”
Gives us a nice two-pronged arena of worry.
Alana on April 21, 2009 at 10:04 PM
oh great. we will be able to see Huckabee and Romney go at each other again.
deidre on April 21, 2009 at 10:06 PM
He is the antithesis of Obama in style, and forcefulness. He looks like a guy who could slap things into shape.
So I’ve started to think he may actually have a chance in the future, once things have gotten desperate enough; Mormon or no.
Alana on April 21, 2009 at 10:08 PM
athensboy on April 21, 2009 at 10:03 PM = jealous, wierd dude.
I dont think being criticized by a guy named “Athensboy” is a bad thing. That name brings reminders of Perez Hilton does it not.
I mean we all know what Athens boys do, right? right? yeah, we know. I think Perez considers himself an Athens boy.
The Wall on April 21, 2009 at 10:15 PM
GREAT JOB ALLAHPUNDIT!!! THAT WAS ALMOST A WORD BY WORD QUOTE FROM NEVILLE CHAMBERLIN. YEAH, IGNORE THE NUTCASE TESTING NUCLEAR WEAPONS….TERRIFIC ANALYSIS!!!
The Wall on April 21, 2009 at 10:17 PM
You can’t see the forest can you? Time and inaction will only serve to create a more powerful, emboldened foe. Today the Isalmists focus on the little Satan, tomorrow it will be us. nObama has shown his cards to the world with public announcements of US appeasement, nuclear disarmament, the elimination/reduction of our most capable weapons systems and the potential prosecution of formal officials for crimes against humanity. nObama is a legitimate threat to our countries survival and an enemy of the very Constitution he swore to defend.
dmann on April 21, 2009 at 10:18 PM
If you have got some good ideas that the Israelis have not been smart enough to come up with and evaluate then I am sure they would very much like to hear from you. Maybe you could drop them an email.
I doubt, if they decide to have a go at Iran, they would do more than a few waves. How would we be stuck with another war in any case? They will presumable do what is in their best interests and we will presumably, dare I say with Obama, do what is in ours.
MB4 on April 21, 2009 at 10:19 PM
LOL. That’s funny. Let’s see what 2010 brings first.
ckoeber on April 21, 2009 at 10:19 PM
Yeah, I agree AllahPundit, that is passing strange. Its as if something recently happened in the news to cause this to happen. I dunno. Hey, did TOTUS go to South America or something recently? I MEAN WHY WOULD ROMNEY CHOOSE THIS PARTICULAR SUBJECT AND NOT STEM CELL RESEARCH!! WHAT ROMNEY DOING….READING THE PAPER OR SOMETHING???
AP, I have never been more amused at your poor commentary as what attaches itself to this thread. You MUST be smarter than that…you usually are.
The Wall on April 21, 2009 at 10:20 PM
How many of Reagan’s boys joined the military?
omnipotent on April 21, 2009 at 10:22 PM
Perfect.
Oh, how I wish it were Romney now instead of this amateur, this community organizer.
petefrt on April 21, 2009 at 10:22 PM
AP Quote:
That would be hard to afford. We could easily afford the Elvis nutjob who runs North Korea launching nukes at South Korea or Japan though. The genius analysis continues.
The Wall on April 21, 2009 at 10:22 PM
Bring back the nuclear mines and artillery rounds and the games reversed! Besides little Kimy loves his luxuries and unlike little Mahmoud I don’t think he believes in any twelfth Imam.
MB4 on April 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM
But Palin’s first sone is fighting in Iraq and according to Culvahouse, Mccain’s vetter, she knocked national security questions out of the park during vetting and that’s why she got the nod edging others, including Pawlenty and Romney.
Romney is good at telling people what they need to hear. But he’s even more of a pussy than Obama.
promachus on April 21, 2009 at 10:26 PM
OK, let’s take your argument logically forward and put McCain in Obama’s place so we can have a realistic view of what the alternative might be. McCain continues most of the foreign policy of Bush which most likely would embolden Israel to go ahead and go with the strike(s) against Iran.
Where would that leave us? Sure, Israel would come away high-fiving themselves for (maybe) slowing Iran’s quest for Nukes down, but that doesn’t stop the violence. On top of that, Pakistan will destabilize even further as you have Hezbollah gaining more support from people.
Terrorism will increase against us as well, since we are the “Evil Zionists” that helped Israel once again kill more Muslims.
This will go down as a short term win for Israel and a long term loss for both Israel and the US.
ckoeber on April 21, 2009 at 10:27 PM
As long as his sons don’t beat the war drums loudly, like say a Ted Nugent, what’s the problemo?
MB4 on April 21, 2009 at 10:27 PM
The Wall is positively giddy today.
promachus on April 21, 2009 at 10:28 PM
More like
Clinton-Dole
Obama-Romney
ddrintn on April 21, 2009 at 10:28 PM
Wow, a gay quote…digging on some dudes hair.
Another gayish quote. He looks like a metrosexual? You prefer bi or homo or something? Dude, youre the guy named Athensboy. HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!!
The Wall on April 21, 2009 at 10:31 PM
Well, it may sound funny to you, but I have no particular horse in this race. I’m an independent. And I’ve been very good, for many years, at predicting who will win, based on considerations such as “looks like.” In fact, I predicted Obama would win, almost a year before the election, and I was right.
Often I think a lot of people here on Hot Air are actually too close to things, and too politically involved and aware, to be able to see what the average person sees, and the sorts of things that shape their votes.
What I’m seeing right now is simple: Romney is the antithesis of Obama. He offers everything Obama doesn’t, right now. That could all change, of course, and doubtless will. But I see his personna as being very attractive to those who want the antihesis of what Obama offers.
Apparently nobody doubts Romney’s expertise on things economic, so it’s actually kind of smart for him to position himself as the antithesis of Obama on foreign affairs.
Alana on April 21, 2009 at 10:36 PM
And 9/11 was run by a jackass in a cave on the opposite side of the planet. I guess I’m mostly just impressed that you can still type with your head stuck that far in the sand.
commenter on April 21, 2009 at 10:41 PM
OK, so you are hedging everything on Obama losing the public.
Good strategy if he loses the public’s goodwill. But what if he doesn’t?
I feel a better strategy would be to give people a reason to go on your side.
Get some principles first The get people who stand by them.
Romney just seems like another talker.
ckoeber on April 21, 2009 at 10:46 PM
If Romney were truly the antithesis of Obama, we’d know the sexual habits of his sons in detail right now. And if Romney ever were to be seen as truly the antithesis of Obama, he’d get a similarly nasty and relentless drubbing in the media. Then Mitt would be just so totally uncool, like Sarah Palin is now.
Look, the only way Obama’s losing in 2012 is if we have 25% unemployment and terrorist attacks in 20 cities. So, a Romney/Pawlenty ticket sounds good. Let’s have something a little more moderate at the top and bottom of the ticket and see how that works out.
ddrintn on April 21, 2009 at 10:46 PM
Of Forests and Trees…the threat from militant Islamists and those that support them will not go away because we ask, it will only end when we submit. At best we can keep them at bay by helping them grasp and fully understand the reality of their total and complete destruction when they act against us and our interests. These interests should include a demand to stop with the evil Zionist propaganda, recognize Israel’s right to exist and attempt to understand other cultures and values can and do exist. Until then, a wary eye and a loaded weapon will keep them honest.
dmann on April 21, 2009 at 10:50 PM
Obama has done only two things right on foreign policy, from what I see, namely: (1) expanding our military presence in Afghanistan, and (2) maintaining our Predator attacks in Pakistan. Other than that, the guy’s been a total bust, with negatives heavily outweighing those two positives. Going around to foreign nations and apologizing for America’s actions to placate the “blame America” crowd, almost doubling over to bow to the Saudis, trying to make nice with dictators in Cuba and Venezuela, and releasing a previously-classified memo on interrogation tactics isn’t exactly my idea of racking up accolades on the foreign policy front. On top of all that, Obama is now sending signals that he is open to proseuctions of Bush Administration officials over interrogation techniques.
Saying that Obama’s foreign policy is “better” than his domestic policy is like saying that Diane Feinstein looks “better” than a rotted corpse.
OneVision on April 21, 2009 at 10:53 PM
I am sorry, lying low with north korea is definitely the wrong way to go. As ronald reagn said, peace through strength. We are supposed to have deployed a missile defense system in the pacific, why didn’t we use it? It was the perfect oppurtunity to test it out on a real world target.
paulsur on April 21, 2009 at 11:23 PM
That has worked so well with the constant terrorism that happens.
Look, you can play big bully on the block and no one will stand up to you.
But when you turn your back don’t be surprised when people throw rocks at you.
ckoeber on April 21, 2009 at 11:34 PM
Monster lighting on Mitt here. Is CNN afraid of Romney?
Monster lighting means his face is lit from beneath, casting unusual shadows on the subject’s face. Compare the shadows under Mitt’s nose (none) with the shadows under Wolf Blitzer’s.
Also, was there no one available to pat down Mr. Romney’s sunburned nose a bit?
Ralph64 on April 21, 2009 at 11:44 PM
Only because if Obama doesn’t lose the public’s goodwill sufficiently by that time, it won’t matter who runs against him.
Alana on April 21, 2009 at 11:47 PM
Yeah, you are right. He has done nothing but talk his entire life. No accomplishments…no executive experience…absolutely nothing…just a talker.
Unlike ckoeber who is a REAL DOER!!! YEAH, CKOEBER IS A DOER BUT MITT ROMNEY IS JUST NOTHING BUT A TALKER.
Palin/ Huckabites are deffo low IQ types, arent they???
The Wall on April 22, 2009 at 12:00 AM
Your point is stupid.
When I same Romney is just a talker it means that he will say all kinds of things just to please the base but never really stand on principle on his points.
A person like Ron Paul actually introduces legislation and VOTES on his principles.
You can call Ron Paul all kinds of stuff but he votes and acts on his principles. Unlike a good percentage of politicians out there.
ckoeber on April 22, 2009 at 12:07 AM
The look on Mitt’s face when Wolf says the UN… yeah the UN is a joke.
There is no need to be nasty about Mitt. I was his supporter, I don’t think he’ll run again. Unless there is healing in the party, that obviously has not even begun. I think he just wants the Country back on track.
I wish reality was such that he was President during this bank crisis, car crisis… etc. Mitt would have been the right person but that was not to be.
I don’t think he is running again. Why should he put himself through that again? Mitt Romney has an actual life.
petunia on April 22, 2009 at 12:21 AM
The biggest problem with Romney is this: he’s a great executive.
The problem with a executive is that they work to drive consensus to move the organization ahead. In a corporation, that’s an admirable quality. In a country where you can endlessly go into debt and print money, that’s bad.
We need a staunch conservative, who will make no compromises on fiscal responsibility. I don’t think that’s Romney.
beatcanvas on April 22, 2009 at 12:28 AM
Romney’s speech at CPAC was underwhelming, at least compared to the other speakers. He didn’t beat McCain, and he can’t win in the South, which is absolutely necessary. Bank on that. I have a huge family spread out around NC, SC, GA, and AL. All solid Republicans–not one would vote for Mitt and tell me their friends would not either. Small sample but I think significant.
The One will have screwed up our foreign policy so badly by 2012, we need a nominee with brass ones….big ones…seriously.
howIroll on April 22, 2009 at 12:35 AM
Obama’s no better on foreign policy than he is on domestic.
n0doz on April 22, 2009 at 12:46 AM
I get amazed at the ridiculousness of many of the posters here. Too many of us treat this like it is a sports event and our team has to win.
RAH RAH PALIN
RAH RAH HUCKABEE
RAH RAH RON PAUL
We tear apart our own people like they are scum and electing them would be worse than Obama. Frankly it is a JOKE!!!!!!!!
When one of our guys steps up and says something helpful get behind them instead of throwing spitballs. I back EVERY Republican that is saying the right things. I do not plink at them just because I have some kind of petty agenda about 2012. It’s ridiculous.
What Romney said is on target. He is just flat right. So get behind him and cover his back like a good conservative Republican should. If Palin says the right thing back her too. Same for every leader in our party. If we ever want to get out of the mire we are in we have to stop0 this petty garbage and start acting like we are together on something.
Hawthorne on April 22, 2009 at 12:52 AM
Well said.
Loxodonta on April 22, 2009 at 12:56 AM
I love the way Wolfie pushes the “Obama landslide” narrative, claiming that the dimwits who voted for Obama did so because of his foreign policy promises to walk softly and forget the big stick.
The overwhelming majority of Obama voters supported him because he was young and cool and black and the Un-Republican. Hope and change, baby. They didn’t know–or care–what Obama’s policy positions were.
How could they? Obama himself doesn’t know what his policy positions are. He’s making it up as he goes along, God help us.
Meredith on April 22, 2009 at 1:18 AM
Translation: Romney talked about technical things that usually require a good high-school education to understand. I prefer Palin talking cuz I understand her and she’s purdy too
Translation: ” My family is spread out amongs the backwoods…you know sorta like Deliverance. In fact, I dont understand what was wrong with the people in Deliverance that were having some fun with them out-of-towners.
I get my big ol brains and stuff from my family…we are dumb together….and we dont understand them big words that Mitt Romeny uses and he thinks he is all smart with those fancy duds.”
Great post dude. Thanks for admitting your Mensa membership. HA HA HA
The Wall on April 22, 2009 at 1:54 AM
The only cowboying Obama seems to want to do with terrorist leaders is the Brokeback Mountain style of cowboying.
bullseye on April 22, 2009 at 1:54 AM
HA HA HA HA HA HAH AH AH AH AH A HAH A HAHA HA HA HA!!!!
Where does HotAir get these clowns.
Yeah, Mitt is going to convert from Mormonism to Catholicism or evangelicalism in order to have a better chance of POTUS.
The only problem with your crack analysis is:
1) He believes in his church.
2) He wants to spend eternity in heaven…not hell.
The Wall on April 22, 2009 at 2:01 AM
Sir, your endless apologist pump into this thread is astounding.. I’ve never seen someone so misread a situation. I can’t counter all your points because there are so many and each & every one of them is imho wrong on every level. Let me just state a few quick facts..
A) Allowing Iran to develop nuclear weapons will alter the balance of power ON THE WHOLE planet which is unacceptable for not only Israel, but the western world including almost EVERY single arab nation in the region who are all ONBOARD and consider iran a greater threat than Israel. I might add that the USA views such an event as a national strategic threat of the highest order.
B) An Iranian nuclear weapon is guaranteed to end up in the hands of terrorists, making all your ‘increased terrorist points’ seem absurd in light of the fact that inaction would lead to a nuke going off in Israel, and possibly in the USA..by terrorists. These are catastrophic events! Even in your worst case scenario (which is wholly erroneous I might add), we are comparing increased conventional terrorism VS nuclear terrorism. Absurdity.
C) You have totally disregarded the fact that when Israel engages terrorists terrorism drops monumentally, it does not increase as you state. After Sharon’s defensive shield terrorism in Israel dropped by an order of 90+% from the west bank. After Israel took on Hezbollah, there has not been a terrorist incident in 2+ years. Your points are all factually incorrect.
D) I think you are totally oblivious to the situation in Israel regarding our public & leadership, we will not allow a nuclear Iran period end of story. We will fight anyone & EVERYONE if necessary. This is the basic founding principle of the State of Israel, never again. It is the whole reason the state exists!?!
E) We already have plans and full capability of striking. American assistance is a great benefit, but we are perfectly able & willing to do without if forced. We are leading the world in intelligence on the Iran nuclear issue, and we have all the weapons required for the job. We give your President some time out of respect for our ally but when that time is up, we will strike with precision & ferocity no matter what he says about it.
F) Israel can SIMULTANEOUSLY engage the entire region at once militarily, and has done so on multiple occasions already, in this scenario the region is with Israel.. Whatever reaction there might be will be for the newspapers & platitudes. This is the Arab way, in reality they are in full support.
G) Israel already struck a nuclear target in an Arab Muslim country, not once but twice now, just last year again in fact.. Where was the terrorism, world outcry, where are all the scenarios you outlined? None of them manifested, no one said a word in fact, in actuality we invaded MUSLIM airspace to do it on top of it all (Turkey). Further, in this case Iran is Persian, not Arab.. There would be less fallout than previous strikes which as outlined above led to NO fallout whatsoever.
H) We can blow up the whole planet if necessary, we are the regional superpower by orders of magnitude and guardians of the gate to the west.. Not only does everyone know we will strike Iran if we deem it necessary, they expect it.
I could go on & on.. but what is really going on here to my eyes is you apologizing for your very weak President who has in reality alarmed the entire region with his actions & inactions on this issue.
I would like to add that 95% of the American Congress supports Israel as an ally fully, and that over 70% of Americans have open sympathies with your ally Israel. Many Americans pray daily for our success, just as we pray for a strong vibrant America here. Obama is the one out to lunch on the issue, even Europe is scratching its head and making noises of disapproval – Not with Israel but with Obama’s pronouncements on the Iran issue.
If his administration were to challenge Israel after a strike as ‘punishment’ as the left gets all wet about, I promise you the fallout would be not a rock solid 60% support level that you quip about after 3 months.. but a single term in office.
The President of the United States is on a path to make the biggest mistake of his thus far short, and WHOLLY unimpressive career.. The only person left flapping in the wind will be President Obama, not Israel. He has shown himself to be a foreign policy neophyte thus far, and is on track to challenge carter as the worst President on foreign policy ever.
His bumbling policies are an international embarrassment and make a mockery of the leader of the free world, the United States of America. He has in 3 months turned the greatest country in the world into a lackey on the international stage with his endless apologies and appeasement to the dregs of our planet. Don’t worry, we will pick up the slack and defend American interests in these matters for you, that’s what alliances are all about.
I apologize if my post seems harsh, but we are facing possible nuclear anihilation and you are talking about some Palestinian & Hezbollah terrorists.. My friend, we kill these people for a living. We have been hunting & killing terrorists around the world for 60 years now – we are not scared of them, they are scared of us..
saus on April 22, 2009 at 2:26 AM
Saus – Excellent post!!!
I couldn’t agree with you more. I applaude Israel and its people for the strength that they hold and the alliance that they have with the U.S.
Obama is definitely a neophyte and has no backbone. He’s more concerned with being well-liked, than being confrontational in order to defend his country and its allies.
His stance on Iran worries me too. People here, especially left-wingers, don’t seem to understand the gravity of the situation that is brewing in the Mid-East. If Iran gets a nuke, we’re all screwed…Israel, being the first in line. If we lose Israel, we lose a valued friend, incredible people living within (some friends) and the entire region.
Your “harshness” bears facts that are a breath of fresh air. It’s not all rose-colored glasses and the Left doesn’t understand this. You can’t talk your way out of ALL situations. Sometimes you have to fight but they are apparently afraid of breaking a nail.
I’m hoping that Obama has only 1 term. The damage he’s already done is irreparable and it hasn’t been 100 days. I can’t stand the thought of 4 years, let alone 8.
Let’s hope that he has only 1 term because of his economic policies and not his lack of action in defense of nations…yours and ours.
ayrab on April 22, 2009 at 5:31 AM
Is there a North Korean missile headed for La Jolla or something? Sheesh.
Anyway, I’m sort of scratching my head, trying to make sense of Allah’s puzzling criticism here. Hopefully he won’t have a similarly snarky theme every time Mitt talks about issues of national security. As for N. Korea – he clearly said that while military options should not be off the table (which is, you know, reasonable) that there were many things that could be done, like cutting off credit, yadda yadda yadda.
Buy Danish on April 22, 2009 at 7:36 AM
I have to agree. Although I think he should have used the new super tracking radar there was no chance this darn thing was going to fly anywhere of consequence. In principle I agree with this NYT Op-Ed.
As long as we keep NoKo bottled up we should just ignore the little freak.
rcl on April 22, 2009 at 7:43 AM
So is Newt.
BacaDog on April 22, 2009 at 7:50 AM
or great just what we need another RINO to give pretend to be a conservative until he gets into office and then if he wins precede to give conservatism a bad name for 4 years.
Here is a thought let’s just nominate a real conservative ESP a fiscal conservative. Palin comes to mind
unseen on April 22, 2009 at 8:28 AM
Why is Mitt still hanging around? If he lost in a primary to McLame why does he think he could even come close to beating the One. There’s only one person who can beat Zero and we all know who she is. Newt need not apply either, he can get back on the couch with Nan.
Kissmygrits on April 22, 2009 at 10:11 AM
Romney is a remarkable man. Wish we could have a guy with his logic and intellect in the whitehouse. Instead we have a real wimp.
Lori on April 22, 2009 at 11:31 AM
Obama hasn’t been better. He is being better received by our enemies, at least until he leaves town.
Obama is apologizing for the US, taking blame for the world’s ills, and signalling he may not be as tough as the last President if challenged. For the wimps in EU, he not only agrees there is global warming, he blames the US
We have no idea what he is saying behind closed doors. I assume he says little to the EU wimps since he despises them apparently. I assume Obama tries to be ‘One’ with the leftist third worlders, and islamic potentates. Obama may truly be ‘One’ with them or he may be the jackass they lead by the nose. Hard to tell
He has created an image of arugula eating leftist who laps up third world insults like candy. Is this a Scarlett Pimpernel making world cutting deals with Raul and Abdallah behind the scenes?
I have my opinions. I do consider him to be a man of little depth and much rancor. A narcissistic Count of Monte Cristo who may not have endured a hellish prison and escape but may believe he has. Meanwhile various nations will revise their actions based upon his public image
This image creation is what Romney is writing of.
Romney is running for office. Good. We need someone who can read history as well as Marx
entagor on April 22, 2009 at 12:20 PM
Good analysis, but I’ll change one point:
They won’t stop when we submit. They’ll only subject us to dhimmitude, which is basically cultural (if not physical) genocide in slow motion.
Basically, it won’t stop until we’re dead.
Chaz706 on April 22, 2009 at 12:35 PM
My thoughts during the primary.
hanzblinx on April 22, 2009 at 3:01 PM
Carter-Reagan
Obama-Romney
RobCon on April 21, 2009 at 9:58 PM
O would that it will be so!
max1 on April 22, 2009 at 3:20 PM
ddrintn on April 21, 2009 at 10:46 PM
Yeah because Romney wasn’t slammed by the press or anything during the primaries…
They dug up and spun a story about his dog from 25 YEARS ago to try and make him look bad.
They camped out in front of his house for months and interrogated landscapers!
Its not Romney’s fault they found more ammunition to use on Palin than they did on Romney. It certainly wasn’t for a lack of effort on the media’s part.
thecountofincognito on April 22, 2009 at 4:01 PM
The intensity level to smear Palin vs that to smear Romney wasn’t even comparable. No way. And ammunition? Everyone provides plenty of that, if the media is willing to hammer at it. Even Ivy League grads with executive and managerial experience, with great hair and a Gleem smile.
Like I said, I don’t dislike Romney at all. But believing he will beat Obama in 2012 is sheer fantasy.
ddrintn on April 22, 2009 at 5:21 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2