Posted on 06/14/2011 8:21:17 AM PDT by libertarian neocon
Milt Romney (The Magic RINO and Poser):
Really dude? Where you on Chrystal Meth? Romney looked old and spoke in canned sound bites. And you opinion of Santorum's solid Conservative performance being off because his nose is too small? You are a horses ass or a silly hack troll.
Either way, IBTZ.
You only have one television? What year is it—1956? :)
You can buy a second one for less than it costs to fill up the car with gas.
IBTZ!!
Dittos to everything. Yes, Romney DID look older (that may also be WISER!). Bachman did ‘clean up’. Maybe she’s trying to out shine the missing Palin? Gingrinch did sound strong (we have a deep bench, eh?) but does anybody really think he has a shot? Paul and Cain sounded ‘kooky’, (step aside, please.) Santorum must have hemmoroids. He looks like he’s hurting.
Why do you say that? He's been on FreeRepublic for almost a week.
Duly noted.
Paul came off as an ‘old crank’. He seemed to ramble his answers.
We have ourselves a Noob Troll here. Making fun of Santorum and Cain, but thinking Romney and Gingrich were great. Some solid posting history too. 5 whole posts.
Please report to the JimRob re-education camp ... /sarc
libertarian neocon: "Pawlenty: A bit of a letdown early on."
Wrong. Pawlenty praised Gov. Palin. Up two for him.
libertarian neocon: "Bachmann: She is definitely a star and her debate performance was great.
She was much more polished and confident than anyone else on the stage other than Romney."
Wrong again. Romney's and Rollin's RINO-Wench Bachmann
exposed herself last week as a weak
GOP backstabber, like her honey-pot Romney.
libertarian neocon is an salient RomneyBOT.
Romney had his rearend handed to him when his response to Afghanistan was to “let the Generals on the ground” decide when we pull out, and whoever it was - retorted that this was not ‘leadership’ worthy of a “Commander in Chief”.
There was a debate last night?
Who was there?
Anyone important? didn’t think so....
Everybody watched the “debate” through their own prism. Trolling many sights the comments were similar and as expected. Many said Romney is a Mormon and untrustworthy. Gingrich, a historian that likes to cheat on women. Cain, a nice polite gentleman but with no ability to govern. Bachman, a pretty woman but no real experience. Pawlenty, too mundane. Paul, a guy that hates anything that goes against the Constitution. Santorum, what is he doing there. Most of these comments came from people that probably didn’t even watch the “debate.” Their opinions have been forged by the careful crafting of each candidate by the Old Media. As far as I’m concerned all the candidates had good points and the worse one of the bunch, whoever that may be, would be 100 times a better President than the incumbent.
Did you also notice how King would start trying to interrupt the candidates 20 seconds into their answers?
Sorry, but Romney’s perpetual smirk turned me off. Cain was a disappointment, Paul comes off as somewhat crazy, and Newtie slithered around a bit. And, yes, Santorum’s nose is crooked. I wonder if that was an old injury?
The big loser, however, was CNN for that stupid format and the cutsie-pie questions.
“neocon”
The name fits.
Thanks for wasting 10 seconds of my time.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.