Obligatory video: “Will the real Mitt Romney please stand up?”

posted at 4:15 pm on March 20, 2012 by Allahpundit

Not so much “funny ha-ha” as “funny I-can’t-believe-how-long-it-must-have-taken-to-edit-this-thing.” It’s virtuosic, although the cuts come so fast and furious that if you don’t know the Eminem track on which it’s based (and since our readers skew older, I’m guessing many do not), you’ll miss half the joke and might have trouble following along. Even so, stick with it. It’s clever enough to warrant repeat viewings.

We need an entree to go with our video dessert here so here you go: Is Mitt Romney, of all people, really sniffing at delegate math as the province of “insiders”?

“I know a lot of people will talk about delegates and strategies and math and that’s all very interesting to the insiders,” Romney said in an interview on “Fox News Sunday.” “But I think the American people want to see someone who has the leadership, skill and experience to defeat the president, and a vision of conservatism that will get American back on track again.”

But rewind to Tuesday when he told reporters ahead of the Alabama and Mississippi primaries: “This is all about getting delegates. If the polls are right, we’ll pick up some delegates. That’s what it’s all about.”

Later that day, after Santorum won both states, Romney said in a written statement that he was “pleased that we will be increasing our delegate count in a very substantial way after tonight.”…

In an interview on Fox News Wednesday morning, Romney echoed his campaign’s point about the delegate math: “Oh, and by the way, last night I got more delegates than anybody else.”

Good lord. The flip-flops are now coming just days apart. What happens in a few months when they’re merely hours apart? Is it like contractions, a sign that something dramatic’s about to happen? Maybe it signals the beta release of Romney v5.0.

In fairness to Mitt, it’s actually Santorum who’s spent too much time lately mumbling about delegate counts. Note to Team Sweater Vest: If you get blown away tonight in Illinois, which seems increasingly likely, you can probably stop counting.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

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: 1 2 3

It’s obvious race is playing a large part in the Mitt lovefest here. He is to the left of Obama. Yet he is adored by you and others. What, other than the fact he’s not black can explain this?

angryed on March 20, 2012 at 6:20 PM

It only seems “obvious” to the little group of personalities sharing space in your psyche. First of all, Romney is not “left of Obama.” Which means that the rest of your rant is as clueless and bizarre as it is inappropriate.

cicerone on March 20, 2012 at 6:28 PM

Romney is the non-black Obama. And it’s sad, very sad, that 30% of Republicans are actively supporting him due to nothing else but the color of his skin.

angryed on March 20, 2012 at 6:23 PM

Did they teach you this at one of those Media Matters brainwashing camps?

cicerone on March 20, 2012 at 6:30 PM

My life has gotten better since I stopped reading posts from angryed and liberal4life. Yours could too.

Rusty Allen on March 20, 2012 at 6:30 PM

Banned for what? Stating an opinion contrary to yours? Typical liberal, don’t like a differing view, try and silence it. You guys are so much like Obamabots it’s eerie.

angryed on March 20, 2012 at 6:25 PM

You’re the one doubling down on the race card. So who’s talking like the Lefty? That’s you in the mirror, isn’t it…

cicerone on March 20, 2012 at 6:32 PM

It only seems “obvious” to the little group of personalities sharing space in your psyche. First of all, Romney is not “left of Obama.” Which means that the rest of your rant is as clueless and bizarre as it is inappropriate.

cicerone on March 20, 2012 at 6:28 PM

Typical Mittbot response. Don’t rebut with facts. Instead throw ad hominem attacks. It’s all you guys have. You cannot defend the indefensible so you lash out instead. Good luck with that in November.

And yes Obama is to the right of Romney. I have given several examples repeatedly.

Don’t believe me. Look at Romney’s own web site. He wants higher taxes on $200K+ while Obama wants higher taxes for $250K+. That alone should be a red flag to you. And if you were honest with yourself you’d agree.

angryed on March 20, 2012 at 6:32 PM

Romney raised taxes and spending by more than Obama has as a % of taxes/spending. He also wants to raise taxes on $200K+ while Obama wants to raise taxes on $250K+.

He is to the left of Obama fiscally.

angryed on March 20, 2012 at 6:11 PM

You are an angry idiot. And a liar. Romney inherited a deficit and then ran 4 straight surpluses in uber liberal MA. Obama has run $1.2 plus trillion annual deficits and has increased the debt more in 3 years than Bush 43 did in 8 years.

If you aren’t smart enough to accept Obama’s fiscal record you should join the Democrats. You are an embarrassment to the GOP.

Basilsbest on March 20, 2012 at 6:32 PM

Ciceron:

You can spin all you want. Facts are facts. LDS didn’t admit blacks until 1978. Romney was an LDS missionary in the 1960s. As the saying goes you can have your own opinions but you can’t have your own facts.

Based on these facts it is reasonable to conclude Romney believed in the teachings of LDS which included the idea that blacks were inferior to whites.

If you disagree, how do you explain it?

angryed on March 20, 2012 at 6:34 PM

I certainly don’t agree with everything Ed says, but he is no worse than any mittbot. I do find it amusing the way he is attacked by (some of) the pro-Romneys. He does get under the skin of some people.

JannyMae on March 20, 2012 at 6:25 PM

You should try intellectual honesty some time. You might find it helps you with your problem.

cicerone on March 20, 2012 at 6:35 PM

You are an angry idiot. And a liar. Romney inherited a deficit and then ran 4 straight surpluses in uber liberal MA. Obama has run $1.2 plus trillion annual deficits and has increased the debt more in 3 years than Bush 43 did in 8 years.
mbarrassment to the GOP.

Basilsbest on March 20, 2012 at 6:32 PM

I said he increased taxes and spending (as a %) more than Obama. And he has. Run the numbers yourself.

Balancing a budget doesn’t mean much if it’s done via record tax hikes. That’s all Romney did. He didn’t cut spending and increased taxes by record amounts every year. This is your definition of Mr. Conservative?

And inherited? LOL. Seriously? That’s your talking point??! Mittbots and Obamabots are Siamese twins these days.

angryed on March 20, 2012 at 6:37 PM

Don’t believe me. Look at Romney’s own web site. He wants higher taxes on $200K+ while Obama wants higher taxes for $250K+. That alone should be a red flag to you. And if you were honest with yourself you’d agree.

angryed on March 20, 2012 at 6:32 PM

Apparently that argument doesn’t work, so you’ve decided to go full-blown Lefty whacko and accuse Romney of being a “racist.” Are you trying to impress somebody at Daily Kos? Or are you just seeking attention and will say anything to get it?

cicerone on March 20, 2012 at 6:37 PM

Blacks were always allowed in the LDS church. FACT.

Rusty Allen on March 20, 2012 at 6:38 PM

You can spin all you want. Facts are facts. LDS didn’t admit blacks until 1978. Romney was an LDS missionary in the 1960s. As the saying goes you can have your own opinions but you can’t have your own facts.

Based on these facts it is reasonable to conclude Romney believed in the teachings of LDS which included the idea that blacks were inferior to whites.

If you disagree, how do you explain it?

angryed on March 20, 2012 at 6:34 PM

If it wasn’t so disturbing it would be amusing to watch you attempt to put a positive spin on your anti-Mormon bigotry.

cicerone on March 20, 2012 at 6:39 PM

http://www.blacklds.org/

Rusty Allen on March 20, 2012 at 6:40 PM

Romney increased spending by 26% as governor.
Obama has increased spending by less than 26% as president.
Obama is to the right of Romney fiscally.

Obama has not signed any anti-gun laws.
Romney banned “dangerous” weapons.

Obama has not signed Cap N Trade
Romney did as governor.

75% of judges appointed in MA by Romney were Democrats.
For Obama, that number is probably 100%. So there, on judges, Obama is marginally to the left of Romney.

angryed on March 20, 2012 at 6:40 PM

Blacks were always allowed in the LDS church. FACT.

Rusty Allen on March 20, 2012 at 6:38 PM

Good point. Unfortunately, I’m afraid that angryed is beyond the help of facts. He is in Stage 5 anti-Romney paranoia. It’s not pretty.

cicerone on March 20, 2012 at 6:40 PM

You can spin all you want. Facts are facts. LDS didn’t admit blacks until 1978. Romney was an LDS missionary in the 1960s. As the saying goes you can have your own opinions but you can’t have your own facts.

Based on these facts it is reasonable to conclude Romney believed in the teachings of LDS which included the idea that blacks were inferior to whites.

If you disagree, how do you explain it?

angryed on March 20, 2012 at 6:34 PM

If it wasn’t so disturbing it would be amusing to watch you attempt to put a positive spin on your anti-Mormon bigotry.

cicerone on March 20, 2012 at 6:39 PM

Good boy. You threw out the non sequiter and ad hominem. Now try addressing the facts as stated.

angryed on March 20, 2012 at 6:42 PM

For Obama, that number is probably 100%. So there, on judges, Obama is marginally to the left of Romney.

angryed on March 20, 2012 at 6:40 PM

So your claim is that Romney was the dictator of Massachusetts and was in complete control of all facets of state government? There were Dim-o-crats to deal with in a deep blue state like Massachusetts? Is that what you’re trying to make yourself believe?

cicerone on March 20, 2012 at 6:43 PM

Blacks were always allowed in the LDS church. FACT.

Rusty Allen on March 20, 2012 at 6:38 PM

Good point. Unfortunately, I’m afraid that angryed is beyond the help of facts. He is in Stage 5 anti-Romney paranoia. It’s not pretty.

cicerone on March 20, 2012 at 6:40 PM

From 1849 to 1978, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS Church) had a policy against ordaining black men of African descent to the priesthood. Whereas other churches usually have full-time salaried clergy of whom individual members are often the chief minister to several families, in the LDS Church virtually all male head-of-household church members are part of the priesthood. Under the pre-1978 policy, black men of African descent could not hold the priesthood in this way, and were also prohibited from participating in the temple Endowment and sealings, ordinances that the church teaches are necessary for the highest degree of salvation.

You were saying….

angryed on March 20, 2012 at 6:44 PM

Good boy. You threw out the non sequiter and ad hominem. Now try addressing the facts as stated.

angryed on March 20, 2012 at 6:42 PM

I thought you’d appreciate the fact that I’m now speaking to you in the only style that you can understand. Facts were long ago rendered meaningless in your little world. It’s now all about the raving.

cicerone on March 20, 2012 at 6:45 PM

Blacks were always allowed in the LDS church. FACT.
Rusty Allen on March 20, 2012 at 6:38 PM
Good point. Unfortunately, I’m afraid that angryed is beyond the help of facts. He is in Stage 5 anti-Romney paranoia. It’s not pretty.
cicerone on March 20, 2012 at 6:40 PM

I know, it wasn’t for him. It was for the sensible people. He is not republican, just a kid looking for attention.

Rusty Allen on March 20, 2012 at 6:45 PM

So your claim is that Romney was the dictator of Massachusetts and was in complete control of all facets of state government? There were Dim-o-crats to deal with in a deep blue state like Massachusetts? Is that what you’re trying to make yourself believe?

cicerone on March 20, 2012 at 6:43 PM

LOL. The evil Democrats made him do it. Just like they made him sign Romneycare, ban guns, raise taxes, increase spending by 30%. Poor little Mitt. He was bullied by those mean old Democrats.

I thought he was a tough leader. Which is it?

angryed on March 20, 2012 at 6:45 PM

You were saying….

angryed on March 20, 2012 at 6:44 PM

I said you’re working awfully hard to cloak your anti-Mormon bigotry as a substantive criticism of Romney. Have your caregiver explain “substantive” to you.

cicerone on March 20, 2012 at 6:46 PM

Okay, the video is kinda cute and clever.

But Romney saying that he believes the American people want to hear about X, Y, or Z rather than delegates and strategies and math, and then pointing out that he’s racking up the delegates is not a flip-flop.

Syzygy on March 20, 2012 at 6:47 PM

LOL. The evil Democrats made him do it. Just like they made him sign Romneycare, ban guns, raise taxes, increase spending by 30%. Poor little Mitt. He was bullied by those mean old Democrats.

I thought he was a tough leader. Which is it?

angryed on March 20, 2012 at 6:45 PM

So that’s a yes to my question. You don’t know how government works.

cicerone on March 20, 2012 at 6:49 PM

I said you’re working awfully hard to cloak your anti-Mormon bigotry as a substantive criticism of Romney. Have your caregiver explain “substantive” to you.

cicerone on March 20, 2012 at 6:46 PM

I’m pointing out facts. He belonged to a racist religion for decades. If you think this doesn’t mean he believed in the racist teachings of the church, fine. I think it’s ludicrous to believe he didn’t.

I couldn’t care less about Mormons. I’m not religious at all and don’t care one way or another. All religion is ridiculous. Mormons are just a little funnier than most. And up until 1978, much more racist than most.

angryed on March 20, 2012 at 6:51 PM

LOL. The evil Democrats made him do it. Just like they made him sign Romneycare, ban guns, raise taxes, increase spending by 30%. Poor little Mitt. He was bullied by those mean old Democrats.

I thought he was a tough leader. Which is it?

angryed on March 20, 2012 at 6:45 PM

So that’s a yes to my question. You don’t know how government works.

cicerone on March 20, 2012 at 6:49 PM

So Romney was bullied by the mean old Democrats. And when he’s president and Harry Reid says BOO, what will he do then?

See you guys want to have it both ways. You want to blame Democrats for all the far left legislation Romney signed. But then you also want to portray him as a fighter who will come to DC and take an ax to the govt. Do you really think Harry Reid and Co. will just sit by and allow that to happen?

He couldn’t take on a piddly state legislature, but he’s going to take on Harry Reid and the MSM? LOL. You guys are really funny.

angryed on March 20, 2012 at 6:53 PM

It is possible that the church believes that the banning was wrong internally rather than just paying lip service and glossing it over. We have to give that benefit of the doubt until we have no reason to. It has been a long time and people/institutions do change.

kim roy on March 20, 2012 at 6:19 PM

That’s irrelevant IMO. Romney was a missionary 10 years before the ban was lifted. How can you go around the world and convert people to your church when that church views blacks as inferior, and then say you’re not racist? I couldn’t do that. Could you?

angryed on March 20, 2012 at 6:22 PM

Yes. People/institutions change. I know that I’m not the same person now than I was even 10-15 years ago. Why, about 20 years ago I would have called myself a hard left believer. Sometimes we grow up. ;)

So if Romney has done nothing since the ban to indicate that he still holds those beliefs and states that he’s moved on from them, then I have to give him the benefit of the doubt, just as I do for Gingrich when he says he has moved on from his past. Sometimes people realize they are on the wrong path, right themselves and continue on.

The point you brought up about the LSM grabbing this as a talking point is a good one. Hopefully, he will find a smart and humanizing way to deal with it.

Romney can be many things, but I think it’s unfair to categorize him as a racist without anything more recent than the late 70s. Maybe he grew up too.

kim roy on March 20, 2012 at 6:54 PM

I couldn’t care less about Mormons. I’m not religious at all and don’t care one way or another. All religion is ridiculous. Mormons are just a little funnier than most. And up until 1978, much more racist than most.

angryed on March 20, 2012 at 6:51 PM

At last the troll outs himself. After all that gibberish the truth is told.

cicerone on March 20, 2012 at 6:54 PM

The point you brought up about the LSM grabbing this as a talking point is a good one. Hopefully, he will find a smart and humanizing way to deal with it.

Romney can be many things, but I think it’s unfair to categorize him as a racist without anything more recent than the late 70s. Maybe he grew up too.

kim roy on March 20, 2012 at 6:54 PM

People do change. But that happens in the teens, 20s, 30s. People very rarely change wholesale past their mid 30s. Yet we are to believe that in his 60s, Romney saw the light and became a conservative, just as he was about to run for president.

Come on. That just doesn’t happen. It’s insulting to me that he think I’d believe that about him.

And you know damn well the MSM will pound him mercilessly about this. You think the slut thing was bad? That was warm up to what’s about to be unleashed on Romney.

angryed on March 20, 2012 at 6:58 PM

I couldn’t care less about Mormons. I’m not religious at all and don’t care one way or another. All religion is ridiculous. Mormons are just a little funnier than most. And up until 1978, much more racist than most.

angryed on March 20, 2012 at 6:51 PM

At last the troll outs himself. After all that gibberish the truth is told.

cicerone on March 20, 2012 at 6:54 PM

Outs himself? Huh? I’ve said religion is ridiculous for years here. Did I hit a nerve calling you out for believing in adult versions of fairy tales?

angryed on March 20, 2012 at 6:59 PM

Outs himself? Huh? I’ve said religion is ridiculous for years here. Did I hit a nerve calling you out for believing in adult versions of fairy tales?

angryed on March 20, 2012 at 6:59 PM

Hit a nerve? Nah, I’m used to hearing that kind of junk from clueless Lefties. You’re just the latest…

cicerone on March 20, 2012 at 7:05 PM

Is it too bloody late to get Scott Walker on top of the ticket? The guy is pitch-perfect conservative, has proven to have a massive pair of gonads, and might be looking for a job soon.

Archivarix on March 20, 2012 at 4:52 PM

I am pretty sure Scott Walker will not lose the recall ……

conservative tarheel on March 20, 2012 at 7:06 PM

Hit a nerve? Nah, I’m used to hearing that kind of junk from clueless Lefties. You’re just the latest…

cicerone on March 20, 2012 at 7:05 PM

Of course. Anyone who disagrees with you is clueless.

Dude, you believe in children’s fairy tales as truth. They’re not true. They’re stories told to people 2000 years ago to explain things they didn’t understand like floods and evolution. If you still believe that there is an old man who lives in the clouds you really shouldn’t be calling others clueless. Know what I mean?

angryed on March 20, 2012 at 7:07 PM

And it’s sad, very sad, that 30% of Republicans are actively supporting him due to nothing else but the color of his skin.

angryed on March 20, 2012 at 6:23 PM

I certainly don’t agree with everything Ed says, but he is no worse than any mittbot. I do find it amusing the way he is attacked by (some of) the pro-Romneys. He does get under the skin of some people.

JannyMae on March 20, 2012 at 6:25 PM

I don’t disagree with everything Ed says, but when some a-hole accuses me of racism for supporting a Mormon over the worst President of my lifetime, then I’ll feel free to dump him in the same category with all the other race mongers on MSNBS.

peski on March 20, 2012 at 7:13 PM

Just saw this at Ace’s place. Phew! I’m relieved to see many commenters reacted as I did to the ludicrous contradiction of seeing Obama of the secret history asking the real Romney to stand up.

Buy Danish on March 20, 2012 at 7:15 PM

My life has gotten better since I stopped reading posts from angryed and liberal4life. Yours could too.

Rusty Allen on March 20, 2012 at 6:30 PM

That sounds like a good infomercial although angryed should not be put in the same category as libtard4evah.

arnold ziffel on March 20, 2012 at 7:15 PM

In 2008, Obama ran on HOPE AND CHANGE.

In 2012, Romney is running on CHANGE AND HOPE…
(CHANGE who the president is AND HOPE Romney is more conservative than Obama).

IcedTea on March 20, 2012 at 5:42 PM

lol – you owe me a keyboard …. i am soooo stealing that ….

conservative tarheel on March 20, 2012 at 7:17 PM

Rusty Allen on March 20, 2012 at 6:30 PM

On second thought after reading the preceding ramblings yes, you are right.

arnold ziffel on March 20, 2012 at 7:19 PM

That is so awesome.

Jaibones on March 20, 2012 at 8:19 PM

You should try intellectual honesty some time. You might find it helps you with your problem.

cicerone on March 20, 2012 at 6:35 PM

I don’t have a problem, but apparently you do.

Say, pal! Got any more snide comments you’d like to make to me, to further bolster my point about you Mittbots?

JannyMae on March 20, 2012 at 8:20 PM

Good point. Unfortunately, I’m afraid that angryed is beyond the help of facts. He is in Stage 5 anti-Romney paranoia. It’s not pretty.

cicerone on March 20, 2012 at 6:40 PM

I don’t disagree, but tell me, what is the view like from the opposite side of that coin? Are things pretty cushy there in “Mitt-is-the-most-perfect-candidate-ever-ville,” where you dwell?

You’re just as bad as he is. You’re just too blind to see it.

JannyMae on March 20, 2012 at 8:25 PM

The point you brought up about the LSM grabbing this as a talking point is a good one. Hopefully, he will find a smart and humanizing way to deal with it.

Romney can be many things, but I think it’s unfair to categorize him as a racist without anything more recent than the late 70s. Maybe he grew up too.

kim roy on March 20, 2012 at 6:54 PM

People do change. But that happens in the teens, 20s, 30s. People very rarely change wholesale past their mid 30s. Yet we are to believe that in his 60s, Romney saw the light and became a conservative, just as he was about to run for president.

Come on. That just doesn’t happen. It’s insulting to me that he think I’d believe that about him.

And you know damn well the MSM will pound him mercilessly about this. You think the slut thing was bad? That was warm up to what’s about to be unleashed on Romney.

angryed on March 20, 2012 at 6:58 PM

I was speaking on his past with the banning of blacks to higher positions in the church. I can’t argue that Romney as a conservative is a cypher. I don’t think many are making that argument either – that Romney is a great conservative

What people are arguing is that he’s better or less destructive than Obama would be. I can’t disagree with that, even with the negatives and the lack of conservatism.

I do understand your arguments. It’s a matter of how fast we go over the cliff. I’m hoping that on a slower pace that maybe more people will figure it out and start being smarter and fight back.

One thing I do know about Romney that makes him infinitely better than Obama is that Romney loves his country. That, right now, may have to be enough.

And yes, they are going to hammer him. I’ve said for a long time that they’re going to have him sacrificing and eating babies by November. They’re going to do that with WHOEVER we choose so that’s a moot issue with me.

kim roy on March 20, 2012 at 8:53 PM

Good lord. The flip-flops are now coming just days apart. What happens in a few months when they’re merely hours apart? Is it like contractions, a sign that something dramatic’s about to happen? Maybe it signals the beta release of Romney v5.0.

The point of your rapier is sharp today. Nicely done.

jaime on March 20, 2012 at 10:19 PM

Mitt Romney is a very humble man. Wealthy, but very humble. Most voters do not know the real Mitt Romney because he tends not to brag. This is why he doesn’t fit very well into your basic politician framework. He hates talking about himself and has had to be taught to do so on the stump. His charitable giving is well above the norm, in fact he donated his entire inheritance from his father to BYU. As CEO of the 2002 SLC Olympics, he donated his $ 1.4 million salary and severance package to charity. Afterwards, he and his wife donated an additional one million dollars back to the Olympics. (Harvard Business School actually taught a course on Romney’s stellar turnaround of the 2002 Olympics) He accepted no salary as MA Governor and says he will not accept one as President.
While all you hear from his critics is about the so-called dog carrier incident, you do not hear about the 1996 rescue of a kidnapped teenage daughter of a Bain associate nor do you hear about the 2003 rescue of a NJ family of 6 and their pet dog from a sinking boat. You do not hear these things because Romney does not brag, nor does he want to. Of course you will not hear them from the media either. You could well imagine the likes of Obama, Newt or even Santorum having done these things and not being able to keep their mouths shut tight about it. Mitt is a humble man, raised that way and raised his family that way. He seeks the presidency out of sheer public service, certainly not hubris. I would bet, if Romney was president and able to fix all our problems (unlikey of course) in just one term, he would not seek a second because with Mitt, it is all about public service.

BabysCatz on March 20, 2012 at 11:21 PM

Give it up, AP.

minnesoter on March 21, 2012 at 12:24 AM

(and since our readers skew older,

psssst AP your whole party does (whiter too)

DBear on March 21, 2012 at 2:22 AM

“But I think the American people want to see someone who has the leadership, skill and experience to defeat the president, and a vision of conservatism that will get American back on track again.”

Bwuuuhaahaaa! Too bad that ain’t you, Willard RomneyCare!

insidiator on March 21, 2012 at 7:41 AM

Oh the pettiness. It must be a requirement to being a Santoum supporter.

aloysiusmiller on March 21, 2012 at 8:01 AM

I can’t stand Mittens, but this video looks like someone had WAAAAYYYYY too much time on their hands.

shannon76 on March 21, 2012 at 9:09 AM

I would bet, if Romney was president and able to fix all our problems (unlikey of course) in just one term, he would not seek a second because with Mitt, it is all about public service.

BabysCatz on March 20, 2012 at 11:21 PM

Okeydokey than…of course he doesn’t take any money, he makes sure his cronies are covered with money, it all comes back.
He let Bechtel off the hook for being negligent and killing a woman, the courts forced him to fine Bechtel (one of his most loyal contributors and supporters).
This is a man who has taken more lobbyist money than all the other candidates combined…yeah, a man with a heart of gold (emphasize gold)…18 of his top 20 contributors are Wall Street bailout grabbers, just a coincidence, I’m sure…
He is so humble that he demands that women have the right to abortion…and he hates to talk about himself and has had to be “trained” to? He has made a living off of running for office, for the past several decades, and he has won one office…as a liberal.

right2bright on March 21, 2012 at 10:15 AM

At this point if you aren’t supporting Romney, then you are supporting Obama.

crosspatch on March 21, 2012 at 12:21 PM

Blacks were always allowed in the LDS church. FACT.

Rusty Allen on March 20, 2012 at 6:38 PM

But they weren’t allowed to hold the priesthood which is the only thing that gets you a pass into heaven as anything but a servant. You people really want folks to start copying and pasting direct quotes from your prophets up to and including the ones in the 1960′s and early 70′s?

Portia46 on March 21, 2012 at 3:04 PM

“Will the real Mitt Romney…” question here, can be answered by those who know him, probably by Ann Romney, is that neither side of the media, the MSM or the Fox network does primary source journalism on him.

You get two stories, neither one is the real one.

We from MA don’t listen to the media in the first telling, nor the second telling, and actually that applies to Scott Brown too. Usually the leftist media plants some idea out there, sometimes it is their genuine concern about some liberal thing or other and they hound Romney for days over it. And when Romney finally utters a syllable that can be sound bited to sound either like what they want to hear OR, what they can get the most hype out for conservatives to get mad about, then they phrase it that way.

Last summer Romney supported Paul Ryan and Boehner’s Cut Cap and Balance bill. For many weeks he said so in NH to audiences that had boring people in them, and no conservative journalists.

Then I head Carl Cameron say, Romney has failed to comment on the House bill. I screamed at the tv and sent emails, but no one ever apologized. They liked that spin, Romney ignoring them.

A Large Well Known Tea Party group declared last June that they were going to work against Romney and listed his various sins for their constituents. Going to Foil Romney’s candidacy. Then they ask, why isn’t he very outgoing to tea party groups. Well, in NH, the tea party groups like him. But I guess they don’t count. Kelly Ayotte, Niki Haley, they are faux Tea Partiers. Goofy. Why don’t you know what Romney is about? Two different Tea Parties giving opposite opinions.

Then one day in summer in NH, Mitt attended a conservative Rotary economic roundtable. He talked about all kinds of boring economic things that did not interest the MSM journalist that day, mostly they were mad because they thought Mitt was not letting them into his event. Romney was on his game, speaking off the cuff with Rotary types, I watched a video posted by the Boston Herald. At the end, a ponytailed journalist stood up and asked How was Mitt going to End the Gridlock in Washington? End the gridlock? not even the topic of the entire day. I was able to get things done in MA even though it was 85% democrat legislature, says Mitt naively.

The next day the headline in the LA Times: Mitt Says he can Work With Democrats. Not: Mitt holds Brilliant Economic Roundtable, talks about fixing the Broken Economy.

So that is why you are confused ladies and gentlemen, you can’t trust sound bites, you can’t trust snippets on You Tube, you can’t trust Winning our Future, they say they have no idea what Romney stands for, and He is Not One of US. Not one of Them maybe, but a lot like a gentleman.

If you are serious and you don’t know Mitt yet, there are two large books he wrote, Turn Around and No Apology. I bet you can order one up from the library. Or go on the website and start reading the 57 points, or other economic info that is there. Pretty much in his own words.

If you don’t read it for yourself, you are listening to others that might have an agenda.

Fleuries on March 21, 2012 at 3:05 PM

1000th

Noticed we were getting set to hit 1000. Couldn’t resist. My favorite of the week at the expense of Rmoney.

Bmore on March 22, 2012 at 9:26 PM

1000th

Bmore on March 22, 2012 at 9:26 PM

Whoops wrong thread tab. Douhh!

Bmore on March 22, 2012 at 9:29 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3