Serious human beings
posted at 7:00 pm on July 17, 2010 by Doctor Zero
Even as the starting bell rings for the first round of the Republican presidential free-for-all, we’ve got a couple of anonymous Mitt Romney advisors coming off the top rope, aiming elbow smashes at Sarah Palin’s back. They said she’s “not a serious human being” and “if she’s standing up there in a debate, and the answers are more than 15 seconds long, she’s in trouble.”
This childish and incoherent nonsense does a lot more damage to Mitt Romney than Sarah Palin. What, exactly, are the criteria for being considered a “serious human being?” Should she just give up her half-hearted attempts at humanity and drop dead? I would think raising a Downs-syndrome child would earn her a certain degree of automatic credit for seriousness. It’s certainly not the kind of thing a frivolous human being would do. Romney should begin his campaign by firing anyone who maintains a Daily Kos diary.
The crack about fifteen-second debate answers is slightly more coherent, but utterly ridiculous. Anybody who can rock a sitting Presidential administration with Facebook posts has nothing to prove to the faceless minions of a voiceless bystander to the ObamaCare drama.
The contenders for the GOP nomination will need to take some shots at each other, but they need to do it without questioning the very humanity of prospective candidates who haven’t even declared yet. In case the Romney machine hasn’t noticed, Palin is popular with the Tea Party folks, who will be producing much of the grassroots energy during the 2012 election. Slouching into agreement with the laziest media caricatures of Big Mama Grizzly is not going to impress them.
Let me offer Romney, and the other GOP contenders hoping to climb into the steel cage with him and Palin, what we’re looking for in a serious candidate.
This election will not be fought over the fine details of a few specific pieces of legislation. It will not be a contest to find someone who can escort an unpopular Barack Obama from the White House, then trot back inside and continue shoveling trillions of dollars into the deficit furnace. We don’t need a national CPA to provide a lecture on deficit reduction during his inauguration, then return for a State of the Union speech in which he explains spending cuts are pretty much impossible, while forklifts roll in with massive new tax packages. We have no use for someone who thinks ObamaCare is an awesome machine that just needs a new transmission and some mag wheels to reach its potential.
We are about to conduct an election about the very philosophy of our government. It is our last chance to avoid the Great Crash which Obama has brought to our doorsteps… but which would have lurked twenty or thirty years in the future even without him. The Obama presidency has begun a fundamental transformation of the relationship between Americans and their government. The groundwork for this transformation was laid over many years, by politicians from both parties. Government bloat has accumulated for decades. The State isn’t really changing all that much under Barack Obama. It’s working to change us.
To reverse this process, we must reach farther back than the administrations of George Bush or Bill Clinton. We are being crushed by engines of regulation, taxation, and corruption that were designed in the first decades of the last century. We’re approaching the end of the story that began during the New Deal. It won’t be good enough to merely rewind the tape a few years. Even such a half-hearted measure, simply returning us to where George Bush left us, would be the most spectacular reduction of State power in our entire history… and it wouldn’t be good enough.
The Republican candidate for president must be determined and sober about the magnitude of the change facing us, but also able to draw strength from an enduring belief in the spirit and capability of the American people. It’s not hard to be a “happy warrior” when you stand in the front ranks of such a mighty force. Our candidate must understand the fatal flaws of Obama’s ideology, not just the weaknesses of individual bills he has supported. A comprehensive knowledge of America’s socialist history, from inception to its current death throes, will be required. The Republican candidate must be able to explain why individual Americans will succeed, where the State has failed. It will be necessary to describe the love of liberty to a people who don’t universally share it. They must learn to celebrate freedoms judged too dangerous for their feeble minds by the Democrat Party. They must learn to focus their will against a leviathan State that has no intention of dying quietly. Like Sarah Palin, they must be ready for their very humanity to be questioned, through dark insinuations of greed and racism.
We certainly do need some serious people to apply for the Oval Office job that will be opening in 2013. Mitt Romney disqualified himself when he failed to speak out against ObamaCare. Next, please.
Cross-posted at www.doczero.org.
Doctor Zero: Year One now available from Amazon.com!
This post was promoted from GreenRoom to HotAir.com.
To see the comments on the original post, look here.
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 3 Next »
And that is why I will not vote for another McCain.
davidk on July 18, 2010 at 7:22 AM
Establishment Republicans are very worried about Palin’s growing influence and prospects for 2012 and beyond. She has been wise to insulate herself from the DC elitists and their campaign minions.
This attempt at a slap fight by Mittens is curiously timed with recent encouraging poll numbers and some sudden journalistic realizations that Palin looks like a force in 2012 (catch on quick, don’t they?).
I simply cannot support Mittens. I will vote for a 3rd party candidate if he is the nominee. If the masses are so willing to swallow the media propaganda that Palin is unqualified, the Tea Party is racist and the incompetent socialist Obama is our savior than so be it.
Heck, I might even decide the media was right. Palin is dumb and Obama drinks beers! Down the toilet for 4 more years!
Mr Purple on July 18, 2010 at 7:40 AM
Very disappointing post from someone whose writing is usually nothing short of brilliant. This is a situation involving an unnamed aide who allegedly said things to liberal Democrat Mark Halperin of TIME Mag. Moreover, the charge that Mitt has not opposed Obama on ObamaCare is simply untrue.
Indeed, the charges against Mitt could not be more unfair or damaging to the potential candidate (who polls tell us at this moment in time most threatens Obama) than if the White House itself had written them and passed them to Halperin in a secret handshake on a note written in invisible ink.
Like Palin, Romney deserves to be treated fairly, and we should not be leaping on an outrage bandwagon based on something as weakly sourced as this story. As a political move, it makes absolutely no sense for Mitt to undermine Palin personally (differences in policy not withstanding) as it only serves to anger the Mama Grizzlies, Papa Bears, and Cubs. That alone should give one pause as to the veracity of this story.
Buy Danish on July 18, 2010 at 7:53 AM
Here’s the problem.
Either Mitt’s campaign is in such disarray that people believe they can make these kinds of statements to the press and it would be okay or this was done with Mitt’s direction as a trial balloon to see if they could undercut Palin.
Mitt’s response…his meaningless TWEET (meaningless in that in the long run, it means nothing. No action will be taken and no corrections will be made)… leads me to believe it’s the latter, not the former.
powerpro on July 18, 2010 at 8:05 AM
powerpro on July 18, 2010 at 8:05 AM
Yes, I agree with your take…
Keemo on July 18, 2010 at 8:21 AM
Mitt did nothing to fire anyone who talked this way to the press.
That said everything we need to know about him.
AnninCA on July 18, 2010 at 8:22 AM
Here’s the differenc between the two:
Mitt wants to be president.
Palin wants the government out of our lives.
jacrews on July 18, 2010 at 8:23 AM
That is one of my reservations about Mitt. How can he be expected to oppose a government healthcare takeover that is simply an extension of his own? Also, his refusal to take the kind of bold stands that Sarah Palin takes paints a picture of a man who doesn’t want to rush to the sound of the guns, but would rather stand there and bemoan the noise.
Everything he does is weak and tentative. To me, he looks like some unsubstantial pretty-boy who believes he really can get by on looks alone. With Mitt, there’s no “there” there. The only thing he’s “serious” about is himself.
Extrafishy on July 18, 2010 at 8:30 AM
romney did exactly what I hoped he wouldn’t do after the last election, surround himself with professional washington political operatives. The same type of people who worked for mccain. These are not conservatives, I would bet good money half of mccain’s higher ranked staff voted for barry. At the same time Sarah Palin has done exactly what I hoped romney would do, get out there and make her positions known on everything barry is screwing up and offer the alternative.
peacenprosperity on July 18, 2010 at 8:31 AM
Another – yup you’re right.
Of Mitt is such a good politician he should be smart enough to have his people on a sort leash regarding Palin. If she’s so unprepared and he’s so wise he should be more than happy to sit back and let her take the liberal broadsides and wipe the floor with her during debates. if she’s all sizzle and no meat that will come out. HAs he not been paying attention to the appeal she has to the very people he needs? He NEEDS the social conservatives in her base and he won’t get them by insulting her now even if it’s done thru surrogates.
I also agree with jacrews – Romney just wants to be President like Obama did – it’s his end goal.
katiejane on July 18, 2010 at 8:32 AM
Exactly, and well said. When something like this happens, you straightaway sack the aide and make a phone call to personally apologize. Then it goes away.
Instead we got a guy who smirks and texts a tweet like some giggly 14 year old. I wasn’t a Mitt fan to start with, this sleazy episode just reminded me why. One of MLKs famous (and on the spot) quotes speaks of judging a person by the “content of his character”. Unfortunately Romney has repeatedly shown that he has no content nor character. Or, at the least, his content is nothing of which anyone would be proud.
I expect that his handlers, realizing how bad this looks, will have him issue a less than heartfelt, belated apology. But, as you said, it will speak more to a god awful incompetent campaign and a clueless candidate than it will of anything else. Basic manners, civility and a sense of decency should not be such foreign concepts to a “serious” candidate. At least to a serious Republican candidate.
whatcat on July 18, 2010 at 8:44 AM
If one can believe the story, it simply makes no sense from a strategic point of view to do this. Anyone with half a brain knows that alienating Palin’s passionate supporters with demeaning, ad hominem remarks is a loser. Neither of them are officially running for anything right now, but both have PACs which rely on public support and the support of the candidates they endorse, fund and campaign for. Surely Mitt and his ‘aides’ know that they cannot afford to estrange the public and these Midterm candidates. It’s a lose-lose proposition.
That being said, Mitt needs to have a stern talk with his staff and make it crystal clear that this sort of stupidity and internecine bickering will not be tolerated (should any of them have the not so brilliant idea that it’s a winning strategy). If it turns out that there is credible evidence that an aide did say this and he is able to identify that unnamed aide, it goes without saying that that person should be fired and Mitt should release a strong statement of reprimand, as well as calling Palin and personally apologizing.
Buy Danish on July 18, 2010 at 9:07 AM
Crossed post…Of course, but that assumes you can identify the aide (if he/she even exists). I suppose what Mitt could do right now is put some heat on Halperin and call him (not delegating this duty to an aide).
Buy Danish on July 18, 2010 at 9:16 AM
Really? That it is a lose-lose proposition has not stopped anyone else from ragging on Palin and her supporters. Why wouldn’t the Romney people think they’re entitled to personally insult her?
Evidence is seen right here at HA. Supporters of other potential nominees seem to think that repeating she’s a quitter, she’s trailer-trash, you’re all brain-dead groupies, etc is going to sway the Palin base over to support their preferred candidate. /s
katiejane on July 18, 2010 at 9:25 AM
Oh whoopteedamdoo. Romney dicussed some 10th-Amendment issues he had, to a population who, by and large, hasn’t the foggiest notion what the 10th Amendment is.
Fishoutofwater on July 18, 2010 at 9:26 AM
Mitt responded to an aide that doesn’t exist in his pitiful “tweet”? That makes sense if you’re running a KeyStone Kops on dope-inspired campaign. What’s next from Romney – a tweet rebuking Bigfoot and the Tooth Fairy?
whatcat on July 18, 2010 at 9:27 AM
I’m fairly confident that this whole incident will go down the memory hole. I don’t think Mitt is particularly interested in following up beyond the tweet…and that, I believe, was only issued after Team Palin smacked back.
So I don’t see any internal investigation or any other measures being taken. I think they tried to diminish Palin and it backfired.
I disagree. I think it benefits Romney greatly if Palin is diminished and he’s the perceived kingmaker in 2010.
I have no problem with him wanting to be President. I think Palin does too. But this incident really makes Mitt look bad. The perception is that he’s so interested in being “the guy” that he’s willing to kneecap his perceived rival at an extremely inappropriate time.
There’s ambition and then there’s ambition…and frankly this stunt reminds some people…me included…that Romney is a bit too invested in the idea of being President.
powerpro on July 18, 2010 at 9:28 AM
Correcting myself here to say, “that, I believe, was only issued BECAUSE Team Palin smacked back so effectively.”
powerpro on July 18, 2010 at 9:30 AM
Some blogger I read wrote that Romney should dismiss any staffers who maintain a Daily Kos dairy. :)
The funny thing is that Romney has learned nothing from the McCain staffers attacking Palin during the ’08 campaign. (Well, maybe he did, but it’s the wrong lesson.)
whatcat on July 18, 2010 at 9:34 AM
are you people insane? IT WAS AN ANONYMOUS COMMENT? That ever happen to Bush? Reagan? Of course it did. Romney can’t fire the person cause he doesn’t know who they are! This thread merely reveals that you pinheads hate Romney and are willing to make conspiracies up about a situation you know nothing about. Sad and unAmerican. You have no idea who said that, yet you act like Palin was personally molested by Romney. Like it or not, Palin will probably not get the nomination, and if she does, she probably will not win the general. Like her or not, those are the facts. She was damaged by the media (unfairly), but what will 2011 look like as the tabloids are reporting on her kid’s reality show and pending divorce? Outside of part of the base, no one thinks Palin is presidential. I think she could be a fine president, but not many Americans share that belief. So stop denigrating another republican and show the same respect you expect others to show Palin. At least look at Facts, no “anonymous advisors”
drballard on July 18, 2010 at 9:36 AM
That’s from this Doc Zero piece. :)
powerpro on July 18, 2010 at 9:36 AM
Now that’s the way to convince others to support your side. /s
katiejane on July 18, 2010 at 9:40 AM
So stupid. If Mitt is our guy and his staff are making these kinds of idiotic mistakes this early on, then we are doomed in 2012.
WarEagle01 on July 18, 2010 at 9:41 AM
If you can be honest, read what people are making up out of whole cloth- Romney giggling like a 14 year old- he hates palin- he’s a commie. Isn’t bearing false witness unAmerican and despicable?
drballard on July 18, 2010 at 9:44 AM
I knew I read it somewhere, lol. When this was “hidden” in the Green Room, off the frontpage.
whatcat on July 18, 2010 at 9:46 AM
And Mark Halprin has the inside track with any of Romney’s advisors? Why not take a quick look at what Halprin has said about Palin- why believe a word of what he says? This is what the left does- divide the Right and it looks like alot of us are falling for it. Enjoy another 4 years of Obama!
drballard on July 18, 2010 at 9:46 AM
Wow. That sure was a bunch of hot air.
1. We’re not making conspiracies up. We’re responding to what was reported and Romney’s weak counter response. Ironically, with your comment, it’s in fact YOU making things up. Are you now un American too?
BTW… I don’t hate Romney and I’m not a pinhead. I don’t believe he’s got my back though and I don’t recall seeing him on the battlefield for our Republic. And I don’t trust him to hold firm convictions after a few too many flip flops.
2. No we don’t know who said that but given the situation, there are only a couple viable alternatives that I posted above. Neither of them make Romney look particularly good.
And what’s with this…”you act like Palin was personally molested by Romney”? Drama queen much?
Like I said above. This kind of speculation is absurd. This is precisely what a campaign is for. If Palin runs, it’ll be up to her to make the case for herself. And yet here you and other Romneyites are…as well as the faux Palin supporters (the “I really love her but she’s too damaged” mobys) are calling the race more than two years out!
Kind of makes you look a bit desperate, chap. Let’s see how she does in a primary when she’s running for office. I suspect her numbers will start to go up once she lays out her platform and makes the case for a Palin presidency.
Dude, this is a totally self inflicted wound. Doc Zero would not have written this had Team Romney not stepped in it. How about they get their facts straight and their house in order and how about they cease with the anonymous snipes to try to make their guy look better by comparison, hmm?
powerpro on July 18, 2010 at 9:48 AM
And the idea that Romney has complete control of his staff is nuts. Try as I might, I can’t control what my staff says anonymously. Can you control what people in your family or church say, especially if you dont know who said it? Let me know if you can
drballard on July 18, 2010 at 9:49 AM
I didn’t see Romney deny it.
I only saw a bit of CYA once Team Palin thwapped them back.
And quit with the unAmerican stuff. You’re coming across as a reactionary.
powerpro on July 18, 2010 at 9:50 AM
Like you’d be giving Palin a pass for some incendiary ad hominem quote from an anonymous adviser. “If she has no control over her staff, how could she run a country?” is EXACTLY what we’d be hearing. Quit moving the friggin’ goalposts.
ddrintn on July 18, 2010 at 9:52 AM
powerpro- please tell- how many people have worked for romney? thousands? Do you know a thousand people? Have any of them ever said anything damaging about you? Sure about that?
drballard on July 18, 2010 at 9:52 AM
You’re absolutely correct, I upped the age a bit too much.
I agree with those defending Romney for this that this demonstrates he has no control over his campaign and hasn’t the ability to make a personal phone call to apologize. But I’m not sure he wants to make that his campaign slogan because, if nothing else, is a tad too long.
whatcat on July 18, 2010 at 9:53 AM
ddrinth- so now you’re saying none of palins supporters have denigrated romney- please check the facts before commenting.
drballard on July 18, 2010 at 9:53 AM
Your staff goes behind your back and berates your presumed competitors without your knowledge?
I’m sure you’d probably rush right to TweetDeck and deliver a harshly worded 140 character smackdown right?
powerpro on July 18, 2010 at 9:53 AM
I’ve never heard of Palin or her staff making any derogatory comments about Republicans except in reply to some slam or other.
ddrintn on July 18, 2010 at 9:54 AM
you know the funniest thing about this- I doubt the folks that everyone on this site loves- Nikki Haley, Chris Christie etc, feel the same way you do- why dont you ask them how they feel about romney. Why dont you see who supported them when they were starting? And powerpro- dont for a second tell me you know what I feel in my heart about another person- last I checked, there’s One person who can do that, and you’re not Him. When I say I like Palin and think she’d make a good president, why the hell cant you just accept that and not judge me a liar.
drballard on July 18, 2010 at 9:58 AM
In fact, he acknowledged it. Otherwise, if the best he could do is tweet a few meaningless words they would have been “This sux, it’s like total BS!!!!!!”
whatcat on July 18, 2010 at 9:58 AM
I never said you didn’t like Palin or that I could see into your heart.
You sure have an active imagination.
powerpro on July 18, 2010 at 9:59 AM
That’s not the point. That’s AVOIDING the point.
ddrintn on July 18, 2010 at 10:00 AM
If you can’t tell the difference between Hot Air commenters and Romney’s aides, I can’t help you. And may I mention that you exaggerate the criticism of Palin by Hot Air commenters. Much, if not most, of the criticism is aimed not at her but at her less rational supporters (like, er, you!).
He responded that it was from TIME Mag – i.e. consider the source.
Your logic is illogical. 2012 is a long way off – there is absolutely nothing to be gained by alienating Palin supporters (who is the favorite candidate of Republicans right now). If Mitt decides to run and if Palin decides to run, he will have to engage her on the issues, on experience, and so forth – not by using schoolyard slurs (something which is demonstrably contrary to how he has conducted himself throughout his life).
Buy Danish on July 18, 2010 at 10:00 AM
ddrintn- open your eyes. there’s this thing called “google”.
drballard on July 18, 2010 at 10:00 AM
2012 is a couple years off but November 2010 is just around the corner.
powerpro on July 18, 2010 at 10:03 AM
this is a waste of time- you keep making stuff about about what romney does behind closed doors, how did that feel when the media did that to palin?
drballard on July 18, 2010 at 10:03 AM
Indeed, two years out from an election (and in the middle of an off year election, yet) the Romney campaign’s classless Pearl Harbor sneak attack is pretty unique. Thankfully.
whatcat on July 18, 2010 at 10:03 AM
I agree – let Mitt carry out the attacks on Palin, not the media.
whatcat on July 18, 2010 at 10:05 AM
powerpro- why dont you google what romney has done for the party for 2010? Why dont you look at what romney did for christie, Haley, and Brown- 3 races that have changed the country for the better? I know Palin has done good as well, but you dont see me denigrating her, do you? Just you.
drballard on July 18, 2010 at 10:05 AM
whatcat- please dont lie or bear false witness- romney did not attack palin. that is a lie, and liars go to hell
drballard on July 18, 2010 at 10:06 AM
There’s also a thing called a “link”. Provide one.
ddrintn on July 18, 2010 at 10:07 AM
Huh? What “facts” are you talking about?
Exactly. Which is why it makes no sense. As I already noted, what does Mitt gain by losing support of the candidates he supports (and hopes will support him, should he run). Do you think the people on that long list would take kindly to slurring Palin in the way that has been alleged by TIME magazine? Many of those candidates have also been endorsed by Palin. Think about it.
Buy Danish on July 18, 2010 at 10:09 AM
http://www.wowowow.com/pov/palins-pals-mock-mitt-romney-bear-ad-287538 that took .01 sec on google.
drballard on July 18, 2010 at 10:10 AM
LOL…riiiiight. Most of the anti-Palin stuff is of the following variety: “Anyone can see that Palin is not a serious human being…quit being a mind-numbed zombie Palinista Kool-Aid drinker and realize that!”
ddrintn on July 18, 2010 at 10:12 AM
I’m done. I hope and pray people here can simple not lie and make crap up about any one at all- we do that, we’re just liberals with a pickup truck
drballard on July 18, 2010 at 10:13 AM
I know about the races he’s been involved in.
It doesn’t mean that I think he’s dependable on the issues. Because I don’t think he is. He’s too flip floppy for my tastes. It makes him come across as a people pleaser willing to say the right things to get the votes rather than one who really believes in core principles.
And it doesn’t mean he’s the kind of fighter we need for such a time as this.
And this isn’t tit for tat here. I don’t have a problem with Romney because I like Palin. I have a problem with him because I don’t like what I see. He comes across as very plastic to me and perhaps a tad too ambitious for his own good. And I don’t trust him to do the major heavy lifting necessary to roll back decades of statism.
I see him as someone who thinks he can fine tune disastrous legislation rather than scrap it.
What we need is someone to go in with a machete and rip things to shreds…not micromanage the bloated super bureaucracy with a little less fervor than the hard left.
powerpro on July 18, 2010 at 10:14 AM
It took even less time to figure out that C4P is NOT Sarah Palin or staff. Try again.
ddrintn on July 18, 2010 at 10:14 AM
Sheesh. Are you suggesting that ‘drballard’ is not telling the truth about what Mitt has done for those candidates? You’re asking for a link to info that is not arcane but is widely known, but hopefully this will help.
Buy Danish on July 18, 2010 at 10:16 AM
We all agree, doc, that Romney’s campaign is out of his control. The problem is that when you’re the guy at the top, you accept responsibility for what your flunkies do.
So the consensus we all share is as I noted before: 1)Romney is not in control of his own campaign and 2) he is unable to pick up a phone and say “I’m sorry” (although his packagers and handlers will likely order him to do so anyway).
whatcat on July 18, 2010 at 10:16 AM
Heh. That’s a good video. Thanks for sharing!
PS. Do you not know the difference between a production from a politician’s fan site and quotes from a politician’s advisors?
powerpro on July 18, 2010 at 10:16 AM
Palin hired at least one person from C4P to work for her. Just sayin’.
Buy Danish on July 18, 2010 at 10:17 AM
why did she “call romney and apologize”, of make a statement codemning the ad? Are you saying she didn’t know about it? I guess, by your definition, she’s a coward, like romney? Sorry, that’s my last word on the thread- you speak, but don’t hear. Bye
drballard on July 18, 2010 at 10:17 AM
Sheeesh. Read before posting. The question was one of attacks from Palin and advisers, not about Romney’s campaign activities.
ddrintn on July 18, 2010 at 10:18 AM
Which doesn’t make Palin and staff responsible for anti-Romney attacks. Just sayin’. Good Lord, you Romney fans are starting to sound like moonbats.
ddrintn on July 18, 2010 at 10:19 AM
If, and I do stress the “if” these advisors went rogue on Romney, then the facts are who were they. But like I said, I suspect this will be dropped like a hot potato.
I guess we just have to disagree.
I think the plan was if the attack were effective, Palin’s influence would decrease and his would increase. Because right now, I think the perception is that she is leading in that regard. And the further perception is that if she comes out of this cycle as a perceived kingmaker, the primary season would be practically a cakewalk.
powerpro on July 18, 2010 at 10:21 AM
If it’s not produced from someone on her payroll, how is she responsible for it? Maybe she apologized for it because she’s classy and didn’t want a personal attack to bear her implied imprimatur. Ya think?
ddrintn on July 18, 2010 at 10:21 AM
I can’t improve on that.
whatcat on July 18, 2010 at 10:22 AM
No, most of the “attacks” are against those supporters who will accept no criticism of her.
Buy Danish on July 18, 2010 at 10:22 AM
…
And? Is C4P an official Palin site? Does her staff oversee it and manage it? Do they have final approval rights over anything written or produced on the site?
Let me end the suspense. The answer is “no”. The fact that RAM was hired by Governor Palin is not germane and the only motivation I can think of for mentioning that factoid in this discussion is to cloud the issue.
powerpro on July 18, 2010 at 10:24 AM
“Accept no criticism of her” is a straw man and you know it. Most of the attacks are directed against brain-dead zombies who just can’t see the reality that Palin is polarizing-hated-white trash-unqualified-quitter-with too much family drama- who can’t speak- who’s ignorant- who’s unelectable. Give me a friggin’ break.
ddrintn on July 18, 2010 at 10:24 AM
Uh…again. Not an official video. Not produced by Palin. She has no say what her fans and supporters produce.
And speaking of not listening… I didn’t call Romney a coward. I alluded to him being an overly eager opportunist and an old school politician.
Bye.
powerpro on July 18, 2010 at 10:27 AM
The real issue to me is that Romney is nothing but a return to Bush. The public already voted against that once. They aren’t going to go for it. The second issue is that Romney is really a lot like Obama in style. Even this latest nonsense is absolutely identical to what Obama pulled in his own primary/election. He never said stuff. He just made sure someone else did. Then he’d come out with some lame apology statement, after the attack dogs were done feasting.
Come on. This game won’t play in today’s very serious situation. We want real grown-ups.
AnninCA on July 18, 2010 at 10:27 AM
What’s amazing to me is that if they had a plan for the massive backfire and blowback it consisted of a weaselly tweet. Even if you find the attacks uncalled-for and distasteful, you’d expect a “serious” candidate to have a better response than that.
whatcat on July 18, 2010 at 10:28 AM
Yes, and I’m ready for a big push-back on that. Even George Will, for crying out loud, has pointed out that “We are the ones you have been waiting for!” wasn’t exactly in-depth rhetoric.
AnninCA on July 18, 2010 at 10:31 AM
I’m not saying it does. And (DUH) the same can be said about Romney, but in his case you seem to be immune to that argument. No candidate is responsible for what a blog or its commenters says about them. And that’s very fortunate because many of Palin’s supporters at this blog make her look like a blooming idiot (which she very clearly is not). The fact is Sarah did hire a C4P person (can’t remember her name), which just struck me as funny as you cited that blog to support your argument. However, if Mitt hired a commenter from Hot Air…
Buy Danish on July 18, 2010 at 10:31 AM
Quit trying to obfuscate. C4P is NOT Palin’s staff. The anti-Palin slam in question came from a Romney adviser, not from a support group or from blog commenters. Stay on-topic.
ddrintn on July 18, 2010 at 10:33 AM
And I’m not sure how literally attacking someone’s humanity out of the blue qualifies as “criticism”.
It’s surprising to me that anyone would find it a problem to at least say this attack was wrong and to call on Romney to apologize.
whatcat on July 18, 2010 at 10:35 AM
No it’s not, and other well-respected conservative websites have noticed the same trend. Like, say, this one.
Buy Danish on July 18, 2010 at 10:35 AM
So you accept this attack from the Romney campaign as “criticism”. Interesting.
whatcat on July 18, 2010 at 10:41 AM
Awwwww, poor widdle Erick. That sort of whining is unbecoming a website owner. A commenter in that particular thread put it pretty well:
Exactly.
ddrintn on July 18, 2010 at 10:46 AM
True. There’s also this scenario. A blog or GOP insider or commenter reports that Palin eats kittens for breakfast. It starts as a trickle but by the end of the day, someone follows up by posting that Palin not only eats kittens, but she serves them up with fava beans an a nice chianti.
Palin supporters, noticing how absurd and insane this now widespread report is come out and say, “For goodness sake, of COURSE she doesn’t eat kittens!”
The detractors…libs, Romneyites, whoever go…”AHA!! See??? Look at the Palin cultists rushing to protect their goddess who they blindly worship! They can’t stand any criticism at all of her, the fools!”
powerpro on July 18, 2010 at 10:55 AM
I’m no moby, Palin was my VP choice long before anyone was talking about her. I think the McCain campaign ruined her image and it won’t be repaired by 2012.
I told my coworkers I was going to the McCain Palin rally in Tucson recently, and the general response was “she’s a crazy person”. It pisses me off to no end, but people are set in their views of her.
commodore on July 18, 2010 at 10:58 AM
I’m not off topic, what are you talking about? My comment about Palin and C4P was meant to be, hold on for this…humorous. Sorry if it fell flat – now you can stop ordering me around.
What?? That makes absolutely no sense.
One last time for both of you: We don’t even know that this alleged attack by an unnamed aide to a liberal democrat reporter in a liberal magazine even occurred. And with that I’m off to enjoy a beautiful day summer day, in a location where the Obama’s can’t ruin it for me.
Buy Danish on July 18, 2010 at 10:59 AM
And that’s from 6 months ago – can you say “desperate irrelevant diversion tactic”? :^)
I think anyone trying to defend Romney for the attacks we are discussing here would be very hard pressed to find any conservative writer who has excused them as “criticism”.
whatcat on July 18, 2010 at 11:00 AM
One last thing before I go: Everything you said in that post about attacks on Palin could be said about people who attack Romney. These sort of attacks are unhelpful no matter who is launching them, or who the target is.
Buy Danish on July 18, 2010 at 11:02 AM
No it was meant to be — wait for it — a tu quoque sort of argument equating bad things said at C4P and this site with bad things that might come straight out of the Romney camp. And yeah, it fell flat.
And it wasn’t an order, it was a request. Futile in any case.
ddrintn on July 18, 2010 at 11:03 AM
Most people who attack Romney do bother to touch on, you know, the issues.
ddrintn on July 18, 2010 at 11:05 AM
-So you accept this attack from the Romney campaign as “criticism”.-
Understood – I, and others, have noted your inability to concentrate on the question at hand: the Romney advisors’ attacks on Palin and his inability to make a phone call to apologize.
Yes, sort of like Mitt’s “alleged” tweeted response to his advisors’ attacks, lol. As I asked before: what’s next? A tweet to ET or Jolly Green Giant?
whatcat on July 18, 2010 at 11:11 AM
Romney’s opposition to Obamacare should have been based on what a disaster Romneycare turned out to be. Instead he just wined about a few of the issues of Obamacare, and only a very little bit.
Slowburn on July 18, 2010 at 11:21 AM
Mitt has shown his true colors–a wayyy overprivileged, upper-echelon entitledment monger. Born with a silver spoon down his throat, he only knows how to regurgitate what he thinks others want to hear from his out-of-touch perch. He’s as out of touch in his manse as Ugbama is in his ACORN office. He makes the odious Huckabee look like Ronald Reagan. Palin is teflon against the likes of him. His implosion is imminent.
Western_Civ on July 18, 2010 at 11:34 AM
I will say this, whomever thE GOP puts up in ’12 better be able to FIGHT, and with gloves off, ya dig? maybe this incident shows us Team Romney can dish out and take whats needed to overcome the Chicago tricks that took my Clintons down.
Romney ’12/ Hillary ’16 / Sarah ’24
ginaswo on July 18, 2010 at 11:37 AM
Wrong on both counts. This only underlines that Romney is capable of uncalled for gutter sneak attacks on Palin. If he were a “serious” candidate he would be focused on attacking Obama.
The attacks on Palin and his refusal to apologize to her only demonstrate his cluelessness and ability to turn off a huge amount of Republican voters. As Tammy Bruce noted:
“the Decent Man-of-Faith Mitt Romney is so decent, so trustworthy, that his first plan of action, his first choice of attack is to call into question not Palin’s ideas, or strategy, or approach, but her very humanity; an attack which blatantly attempts to dismiss her as a silly girl, someone not with whom he disagrees, but beneath complete human status. Normally, your first plan of attack is your best, most thoughtful plan. This says volumes about Romney’s nature and character and it will not be forgotten.”
whatcat on July 18, 2010 at 11:51 AM
Sarah Palin sets off a ‘mama grizzly’ war in the GOP race for governor
Political Insider
The Georgia Newspaper Partnership poll out today gives Handel a lead of 29 percent, but that lead zooms to 34 percent among women – an advantage that stands right at the margin of error of plus-or-minus 5 percent.
Mitt Romney is a lite weight…..Mamas are cleaning house.
Meanwhile Mitt Romney is coming of as one more CAREER politician that is only interested in HIMSELF. What is the public opinion of self serving career politicians “these days”
Sarah Palin gets results and she doesn’t behave like a spoiled ingrate with in the Republican Party…she behaves like a team player. Team Mitt doesn’t think people don’t notice?
Dr Evil on July 18, 2010 at 12:09 PM
Why is it that Political Women are better at Branding than the Men..
Hillary Clinton supporters: PUMAS
Sarah Palin supporters: MAMA GRIZZLYS
Mitt Romney supporters: Country Club Republicans.
When was the last time a RINO lead Republican Party swept an election cycle?
Oh and I have no idea what to call an Obama Supporter at this point? I have read Obama Zombies. Team Obama’s brand is suffering the most.
Dr Evil on July 18, 2010 at 12:14 PM
You’re kidding, right?
Mittens attacks her through one of his unnamed aids (and make no mistake, Mitt either knows who it is and/or had them attack her at his request) and then tries to apologize via the Twitters?!
Please.
What a coward.
So FIFY!
Jenfidel on July 18, 2010 at 12:17 PM
I dunno…Nixon 1972,Bush 43 2002?
Jenfidel on July 18, 2010 at 12:19 PM
- Romney 2002 campaign website
Source: 2008 GOP debate in Boca Raton Florida Jan 24, 2008
In 2002, before the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court declared same-sex marriage protected by the Constitution, Romney denounced as “too extreme” the effort by pro-family groups to enact a preemptive state Marriage Protection Amendment prohibiting homosexual marriage, civil unions and same-sex public employee benefits.
- Boston Phoenix, May 14-20, 2004
MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough: “Do you support a national constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage?”
Governor Romney: “Boy, I sure do. You know, that’s a topic that’s really, I think, very important to the country because marriage is not just about adults.
Almost five years after he refused to sign a “no new taxes” pledge during his campaign for governor, Mitt Romney announced yesterday that he had done just that, as his campaign for the 2008 Republican presidential nomination began in earnest.
- Boston Globe, January 5, 2007
During a debate, Romney declared: ‘I believe that abortion should be safe and legal in this country. I have since the time that my mom took that position when she ran in 1970 as a US Senate candidate. I believe that since Roe v. Wade has been the law for 20 years we should sustain and support it.’ “
Planned Parenthood gave to the gubernatorial candidates in 2002, Romney answered ‘’yes” to the question, ‘Do you support the substance of the Supreme Court decision in Roe v. Wade?’
“Every decision I have made as Governor in a very liberal state has been on the side of favoring life.” – Governor Romney
There are many other flip flops as well, such as his stance on ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’, or stem cell research, or teaching the ‘gay’ lifestyle in school.
In fact the trick is to find a subject that he hasn’t flip-flopped on, or flop-flipped and re-flipped again as the case may be.
Do some people seriously expect THIS MAN to stand up to the entrenched interests in Washington?
Has Mitt Romney stayed consistent on any subject beyond wanting Mitt Romney to be president?
No, he is not a serious human being!
sharrukin on July 18, 2010 at 12:30 PM
I think you’d have to temper Nixon with McGovern and 2002 coming on the heels of the 9-11 terrorist attacks. Every election cycle has it’s own set of circumstances.
whatcat on July 18, 2010 at 12:34 PM
We have two Progressive Presidents back to back. Their Political Brand doesn’t mean much if they won’t adhere to their Brand’s core principles. Reagan set out the rules, you don’t attack a fellow Republican, you don’t shoot into the tent.
Mitt Romney’s failing the test. Sarah Palin is passing.
Dr Evil on July 18, 2010 at 12:43 PM
I merely answered your question.
You didn’t say anything about “circumstances.”
Jenfidel on July 18, 2010 at 12:51 PM
I agree about Sarah and Flip Flopney, but other than that, I don’t know what you’re trying to say.
Jenfidel on July 18, 2010 at 12:53 PM
If he has, he hasn’t generated enough interest for anyone to research and find out :) Mitt Romney does not ENERGIZE anyone….his vacillating on principles is just one reason.
If Romney is trying to be a political Chameleon, he isn’t a very good one. When compared to his Peers, it’s very easy to point out his short comings. This may be the fault of his political team. Maybe he needs new advisers – you know some serious human beings ;)
Dr Evil on July 18, 2010 at 12:54 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »