Posted on 09/27/2007 9:29:16 AM PDT by ansel12
A NY Observer hit piece from last month is NOT Breaking News.
Good Hit Piece
Well, it depends on his polling data...back in 1967-68, when he hid from the draft and there was a big uproar over Vietnam, he was probably anti-war like his old man. But, in running for the presidency, his position has been "I longed to serve but had a high draft number" when before veterans groups. The abortion issue is no different and, if somehow an appeal for undocumented "guest workers" from Mexico became the top issue for those demanding cheap labor, you can bet he'd be right there with an arm around Vincente Fox and thanking him for the expedited methods he had in getting them across the border.
“a carefully crafted position intended to sound more firm than it was,” as the paper put it. “
If he can sell out them..He can sell out us.
I have never figured out much of that whole posting page, I almost clicked extended news (would that have been the correct one?). What is the proper box to check, and is there any chance you guys could make the posting page easier?
FrontPage = Front Page News Sidebar
Activism=Act/Chap Sidebar
This should have just been posted as topic Politics/Elections and left at that - old NY Observer articles from last month generally doesn't belong in sidebars.
“Breaking=Breaking News Sidebar”
I really didn’t want it to go to that side bar, or any side bar, I just wanted it to get on the thread.
Regardless of breach of posting etiquette, the piece pretty much says it like it is, so I was interested to read it.
Of course, given that the NYP is in the tank for Rooty, people in glass houses.
“”Well, it depends on his polling data...back in 1967-68, when he hid from the draft and there was a big uproar over Vietnam, he was probably anti-war like his old man. “”
He switched from the draft dodge to “longing” to serve in Vietnam.
“”””I longed in many respects to actually be in Vietnam and be representing our country there and in some ways it was frustrating not to feel like I was there as part of the troops that were fighting in Vietnam.”””
Now he is back to his anti-war position.This is from yesterday.
“”” “One questioner asked Romney what he thought about his father, former Michigan Gov. George Romney, saying in 1968 that he had dropped his support for the Vietnam War despite being subjected to “a brainwashing” by U.S. generals during a tour of Southeast Asia. The elder Romney suffered amid misguided questions about his mental health.
Mitt Romney said: “He didn’t mean, literally, `brainwashed.’ It was a metaphor, an expression, to suggest we weren’t told the truth. ...He said to me, `In politics, being right too early is always a mistake.’ But he didn’t care. He was right too early.”
Kornacki”s clairvoyance is awesome. Since he can get into a subject's mind and know his motives, he is the ideal person to write a hit piece.
This is not a hit piece, it provides an important look into the depths of the man. People are puzzled at their inability to learn about the inner Mitt, this piece helps them understand why.
This article reveals new information that most non-Mormons have never heard of. It is a dramatic look into the chameleon.
“He sought to preserve his political options in both states, taking steps so that he could plausibly claim residency in either, depending on what he decided when the games wrapped up.
Abortion, though, presented a formidable obstacle. In Massachusetts, he had famously invoked his mother and the story of a relative who had died from a botched back alley abortion to convince the state’s socially liberal electorate that he was pro-choice. But even the hint of such rhetoric would sink him in Utah, where G.O.P. nominations are essentially awarded through a state convention dominated by fanatical abortion foes.
And so, not for the first time, Mitt set about shifting his public posture on abortion. After the Salt Lake Tribune wrote about Mitt’s stated interest in political office in Utah – and singled out his abortion position as problematic at any state G.O.P. convention—he responded with a cryptic letter to the editor. “I do not wish to be labeled pro-choice,” he wrote, words that instantly breathed life into the Romney-for-Governor-of-Utah talk.
Mr. Romney elaborated no further in the letter, citing his non-political Olympics role—but one his closest friends (who now bundles money for the Romney presidential campaign) told the Tribune that Mitt’s Massachusetts abortion rhetoric had been “a carefully crafted position intended to sound more firm than it was,” as the paper put it.
By keeping his letter to the editor vague, Mr. Romney kept his options alive in both liberal Massachusetts and conservative Utah. And as it turned out, Governor Swift’s administration unraveled in Massachusetts, and when the Olympics wrapped up in February 2002, the Bay State’s G.O.P. begged Mitt—awash in glowing national press coverage—to come home and rescue them.
And when he returned, he promptly downplayed his half-step to the pro-life side, returning to the passionate pro-choice pleadings that he had espoused before but had muted in Utah. He began bringing up his mother again, praising her “courage” for speaking pro-choice language in the pre-Roe era and promised the National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League that he would “respect and will support a woman’s right to choose.”
“””Just like now, his sincerity came into question. And just like now, he feigned exasperation. In ’02, he told his Democratic opponent, Shannon O’Brien, that it was “unbecoming” of her to suggest he had been less than forthcoming on his abortion views.”””
She is correct, let’s ROLL TAPE:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_w9pquznG4
Mitt’s a hollow man, a Manchurian candidate....a mile wide(he can be as liberal or conservative as need be) and an inch deep( no core convictions, only feigned ones)
As I’ve suspected from the get-go, he’s simply inauthentic, a political chameleon able to hold to, depending on where he’s running, with a straight face and complete conviction, wildly divergent political views.
He’s simply a fake and most Republicans get it.
It is a good thing some conservatives weren’t around when Saul of Tarsus decided to becme Paul the Apostle. People change. Get over it. Your obsession doesn’t change the fact that Romney is a talented, experienced, principled candidate. Name me one candidate who is 100% on all the issues and has never changed positions.
“As I’ve suspected from the get-go, he’s simply inauthentic”
It is sad for me to admit that early this year I did not know that.
I knew that Mitt was no heavy hitter, but I thought that it was still good to have him in reserve.
When his campaign started rewriting Reagan’s history and image and then his critics here started posting his campaign videos and such, I came to start seeing him as about the creepiest, weirdest guy in the race from either side.
Romney isn’t just weak and dishonest, he really doesn’t belong in Republican politics at all.
If you want to play an interesting game, start looking at all of the Romney pictures that you can find on the net.
Eventually you realize how they all start looking like an automated stepford device, the same 3 or 4 looks repeated endlessly.
His followers could have 3 or 4 cutouts made and just hold them up at appropriate moments, this would capture all of the complexity and depth that is available to that empty man.
“Neither you nor Kornacki know anything about whether his responses were feigned.”
Watch the 2002 reaction on tape and see if it looks feigned to you. I know it is our personal opinion, but we can watch the video ourselves and link it to you right here.
ROLL TAPE:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_w9pquznG4
My hot button issue is the Second Amendment and I don’t trust Mitt with my guns. He’s a phony who’ll say whatever it takes to get elected.
You are seeing what you want to see.
And you didn’t answer my question.
“I don’t trust Mitt with my guns. He’s a phony who’ll say whatever it takes to get elected.”
Remember you can choose to believe him or not believe him, he covers both sides of the position.
ANTI-GUN ROMNEY:
“These guns are not made for recreation or self-defense. They are instruments of destruction with the sole purpose of hunting down and killing people.”
“That’s not going to make me the hero of the NRA.”
“We do have tough gun laws in Massachusetts. I support them. I won’t chip away at them. I believe they protect us and provide for our safety.”
PRO GUN ROMNEY:
Romney Became “Lifetime” NRA Member...LAST AUGUST joining 8/06
“I’m after the NRA’s endorsement. I’m not sure they’ll give it to me. I hope they will.”
I’ve Been a Hunter “Pretty Much All My Life.”
“I have a gun of my own.” Later, Romney was forced to admit to reporters in Orlando that he in fact did not personally own any guns
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.