Just what we need, another flip-flopper:
The ad was put out by The American Right To Life Action group and is pretty damn good. On top of that the English major appears to have hit a “meaning of is – is” snafu:
A defensive Romney was peppered with questions today on exactly what he meant when he said — most recently on Meet the Press — that he “saw” his father march with Martin Luther King Jr. Recent articles have indicated that his father, the late Michigan Gov. George Romney, didn’t march with the civil-rights leader.Admitting that he didn’t see the march with his own eyes, he said, “I ‘saw’ him in the figurative sense.”
“The reference of seeing my father lead in civil rights,” he said, “and seeing my father march with Martin Luther King is in the sense of this figurative awareness of and recognition of his leadership.”
“I’ve tried to be as accurate as I can be,” he continued, smiling firmly. “If you look at the literature or look at the dictionary, the term ‘saw’ includes being aware of — in the sense I’ve described.”
The questioning did not relent. “I’m an English literature major,” he insisted at one point. “When we say I saw the Patriots win the World Series, it doesn’t necessarily mean you were there.” (He meant the Super Bowl, of course.)
The back-and-forth continued to go south for Romney, who had intended for the story of the day to be about his slams on Mike Huckabee for easing penalties for meth users. Romney had to correct an earlier statement that he had himself “gotten tough on methamphetamine” (His proposed legislation as governor never made it through the Massachusetts House.)
“I’m making sure that that’s correct as quickly as I possibly can,” he said. “If there’s any confusion there I’m sorry for any confusion.”
Romney was increasingly exasperated with the questioning, especially when a reporter tied in these instances of word-parsing with the governor’s past missteps on the trail — such as his suggestion that he was endorsed by the NRA.
There is only one that tells it like it is, Fred Thompson is today what he was yesterday,and will be tomorrow. The only one that has a chance, the other being Duncan Hunter.
Mitt can’t be trusted. He has the perfect family man demeanor combined with his male-model looks and the ability to say anything sounding as sincere as he sounds on anything else. Can’t be all bad, managed to hoodwink Tancredo.
the ability to say anything sounding as sincere as he sounds on anything else
I don’t agree. I think one of Mitt’s problems is that (for a politician) he’s a terrible liar. Compared to Edwards and (Bill) Clinton, both of whom have an amazing natural talent for deception, he’s a piker. Which leaves me kind of torn; on the one hand, I wish Romney had had the guts Giuliani did, to basically come out and say ‘I’m from the liberal wing of the Republican party, and you might not like that, but look at my accomplishments!’. Instead he’s done a sort of unconvincing job of reinventing himself. But the fact that he doesn’t do a very good job with his BS leaves me with the impression of a man who is (or would like to be) honest on some level, and is stuck playing a poorly chosen role.
Well, he sounded reasonably sincere to me. Actually of all the frontrunners other than Fred he is my favorite (which is sad based on what it says about the field). He is a talented businessman and he has done good things for other people in his life. He is just not a conservative and I also don’t believe he can win because of his faith, I’m also sad to say.
I put the hard question to Mitt when he was here in November. He stared right at me and delievered the talking points one by one. The thought popped into my head: Is this what he thinks I want to hear?
Hard to judge a man’s sincerity on television, or even in one face to face meeting. Politicians are politicians after all.
Mitt seems to be the safe choice for a lot of regular Republicans who aren’t necessarily movement-type conservatives.
Nothing wrong with that. The GOP is a big tent after all.
Hmmm…. I thought we were downplaying Single Issue Politics.
Downplaying it? Not sure I get your meaning. No one has accused Mitt of being a one issue candidate and abortion is one issue out of many. If I post on a candidates take on one issue do I now need to post on all the other issues on the same post?
jpm100,
If you want to see the issues and websites, there is a posting done here about two weeks ago for you on all major Republican candidates’ positions. I posted the top three in my mind, but gave links to all the campaign websites so you can see the rest. I even tried a thrid party reference site which list them side by side (and has Democratic one also).
How is that for easy reference?
Ugghhhh…. Cookies did not work today.
Sorry, the “Anonymous” above was me.
I think it’s totally safe to discount anything that Mitt says. You judge a guy like that by how he has lived his life. Nobody other than long-term, mole-like foreign agents and escaped criminals lives their life as a complete fake. What would be the point? Mitt has lived a pretty good life and achieved a lot. To get ahead, he said whatever he needed to say. What will he do as president if elected? He will cut government waste, and the rest will depend on how much resistance he gets. He will compromise on most things to get something done, that is to TRY to get something done. I can’t imagine him leaving an important footprint. Just another Ah-nold, but won’t pinch anyone’s tush.