Posted on 07/16/2008 3:29:43 PM PDT by Plutarch
On Monday night, at a fund-raiser in New Mexico, John McCain said this about his former mortal enemy, Mitt Romney: “I’m appreciative every time I see Mitt on television on my behalf. He does a better job for me than he did for himself as a matter of fact.” This may not have been a joke.
Yesterday, Romney sat down for an interview with CBS News. It is a striking interview, in part because Romney seems to be making the McCain argument better than McCain, or McCain's campaign. There is a clarity to the soundbites that McCain has mostly lacked, a clear line of attack against Obama's experience and McCain's plans. Add to that whatever fundraising burst Romney could provide as a VP candidate, as well as Romney's strength in key swing states like Michigan and Nevada, and it's not hard to see why McCain may end up with a running mate whose hand he didn't shake in the primaries.
[See video at link]
EXCEPT: Mitt says in the interview that McCain distinguishes himself from Obama on drilling in the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge. This is wrong, according to the latest McCain statements. Both McCain and Obama oppose drilling in ANWR.
(Excerpt) Read more at time-blog.com ...
“So truth is now slander, hmm ? You liberals just kill me.”
No, your slander is now slander.
Calling me a liberal is yet another of your many lies.
Failing to admit you are telling lies is another of your many lies.
Are you positing that if someone else had posed the question, say Sean Hannity, Sanford’s answer to the very same question would have been different? If your answer is yes, please explain.
Sure you are. Do you need a taxi ? I don't know how you're gonna get home with all your limbs missing.
Oh. A mere 0.15% margin in 1980 and a mere 41% of the vote for Republicans in MA in an election where he trounced Carter by over 8% or so. And 56% of Massachusetts voters picked a liberal candidate (Carter and Anderson).
I stand corrected.
Do you understand the difference between minority party with viability vs. dead party with NO viability ? The former is pre-Weld/*omney. The latter is post-*omney.
When will Slick Willard EVER take responsibility for his incompetence ?
FYI, I grew up in MA. Lived there for over 25 years. Our friend here visited once in 1994 for three months but he’s the expert on MA politics.
As a *omneybot, you are a liberal, and you keep having your butt handed to you. Haven’t you had enough yet ? I squash you with my pinky finger.
Isn’t Sean Hannity infatuated with the Slick one ?
Weak.
You know very well that you don’t need to send me any more information. You know that I’ve thanked you publicly and personally for the time and trouble you took to compile the information. And you know that there is one point on which I’m not buying the Romney conversion because of your efforts.
Let’s just stay on track, shall we? I asked if it was inaccurate for you to say that Romney abdicated his responsibilities as Governor to whore after the Presidency. I think that he started to whore after the Presidency after his term was done. I hope that Jindal also whores after the Presidency after his term is done in 2012. You understand, of course, that this is in the interest of accuracy.
And you fled the state after *omney was done.
How CONVENIENT. You working on burying the MN GOP now ?
BTW, where do you keep coming up with a figure for how long I was up in MA ? I’ve told you endlessly, I never stated how long I was there. You’re just pulling facts and figures out of thin air. But that’s what we love about you *omneyesque. ;-)
I thought you said he was paid off?
You have to pick one. Either he’s infatuated or paid off?
Or have they all been paid off according to you?
Hmmm
I don’t give a large mammal’s posterior. You want some other name in the question, I’ll indulge you. How about it Rush Limbaugh or the now deceased Morton Downey Jr. had asked the same question? Is it your assertion that Sanford would have seemed more prepared/mature/on the ball then?
No, I said it was his goal all along to “whore” after the Presidency. The MA Governorship was just a stepping stone. He could care less what mess he left behind. Indeed, his most militant followers on here have stated frequently, too, that they also “don’t care” about what he did there. To say that one “doesn’t care” about the ACTUAL Governing record of a candidate is nothing short of astonishing. Besides the character of the candidate, their record IS the most important issue.
As for Jindal, let’s let him do his job. And I don’t want to see ANY Republican whore after the Presidency. When they’re doing that, that’s exactly the person you DON’T want to be President.
Paid off indicates corruption. Infatuation (with the liberal *omney) indicates shallowness, stupidity and/or gullibility.
What was the question Sanford was hit with again ?
You told me 90 days. I remember it quite clearly but, since you insist I’m wrong, care to correct me on the length of time you spent in MA? Months? Years? Decades? Had a stop over at Logan once? What?
No. YOU said 90 days. I never told you.
And you can’t even answer that question, can you? How long were you in MA?
Long enough.
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.