Multiple Choice Mitt Romney Strikes Again
Tweet
I’ve now watched this game for Mitt Romney for 8 years and it is still hilarious. When Romney ran for governor of Massachusetts in 2002 he claimed to be pro-choice. Ever since then, as he tried to get national office as a conservative Republican he’s tried to revise history. In 2008 he claimed to be “effectively” pro-life, despite all the video to the contrary. And now he’s claiming he never called himself pro-choice.
As some like the late Sen. Kennedy noted, Mitt Romney’s been on every side of every issue. If by some trick of fate he were to become the Republican nominee in 2012, I would advise President Obama to just send tape of Romney to the debates.
More: Mitt Romney
35 Responses to “Multiple Choice Mitt Romney Strikes Again”
GOP Rep. Spencer Bachus Facing House Ethics Probe For Insider Trading
Jennifer Aniston Reportedly Pregnant With Twins
PHOTOS: Tamara Ecclestone At The Langham Hotel
Red Front? “Center For American Freedom” Logo Echoes Communist Style
Romney Calls For Defunding Planned Parenthood, Wife Was A Donor
GOP Fundraising Email Asks Supporters To “Knock Out” Obama
Romney Comes Up Limp In Nevada
Obama Opens Lead On Romney In New Poll
Latest Entries
Why Do Liberals Support Drone Strikes?
Weekly Standard Rolls Out The Iraq Argument For Iran
Equal Polarization, My Ass
Some Crazy Stuff That Happened In World War II
Maryland Republican Campaign Funds Used To Defend Voter Suppression
The Obama Jobs Record In One Graph
Martin O’Malley All In For Marriage Equality
Newt Gingrich, Filled With More Excrement Than Your Average Politician
New Year, Powerline Still Stupid
Thanks Again
Meta
Blogroll
Disclaimer
The views on this site are mine and mine alone, and do not reflect the views of my employer, Media Matters for America
© 2000-2011 Oliver Willis
Like when Obama wiped the floor with GOP congressmen in an open debate?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/01/29/transcript-of-president-o_n_442423.html
Keep trying to convince yourself that Obama isn’t a charismatic speaker. Maybe not quite at a Clinton or Reagan level, but still quite good.
I know, right? No way Obama will ever be elected president!
And if not Romney, that McCain guy just might pull it off yet! Just needs to un-suspend his campaign one more time!
So, Donna, you gonna talk about the subject of the thread, or are you content to mimic Dennis with OT anti-Obama screeds that demonstrate that you must have been dropped on your head at some point in your childhood?
Actually, you’ve been bashing Obama, using Romney as some surreal template of political perfection. Try saying something positive about Romney that has nothing to do with Democrats, and maybe you won’t get the replies you’ve been getting.
I’m not sure whether Romney ever reversed himself on killing lots of furriners, which is probably the only thing that matters to some parts of his audience.
He might have, but that’s probably last week (before he changed his mind back again)
Ain’t that the truth, how about a little consistency in your political life?
At least the democratic candidate Obama (*cough*Patriot Act) shows a consistent (*cough* Closing Gitmo) philosophic theory (*cough* 9-11 trials in NY) when it comes to his (*cough*no increase in taxes for the middle class) core beliefs (*cough*public option)!
Phew, gotta go get a Ricola……
…and then you woke up.
My theory is that Dennis got tired of doing all that google searching to find his “look over there” material, so he invented this new persona, “Donna”, who just comes on and posts brainless shit.
Dennis, Donna: D*nn*s> D*nn*. More than coincidence?
I mean, “Denise” would just be too obvious.
I love it when wingnuts tell me why I should be upset with Obama.
They’re mad at Obama not for using a teleprompter, but for actually being able to read it. Jealous bunch of bitches.
Looks like Mitzy is going to run again in 2012. This time it’ll be even funnier.
You have to give Dennis more credit than that. I mean, c’mon. He tries a lot harder than Donna.
Donna: So do you agree with the basic premise of Oliver’s post (Romney is a shameless oportunist)? A simple yes or no, please. If you disagree with the premise, make your case. Otherwise, what’s your point?
Is it irresponsible to speculate?
it is, so by all means, continue.
Mitt has the pre-internet mentality. He doesn’t understand people can watch his old speeches and interviews on youtube
Sorry jr, all that youtube stuff is just leftist conspiracy to change history and make Republicans look bad and stuff….
Being his campaign manager must be an easy gig – just tell him to say whatever shit he has to to please his current audience.
Lyn Nofziger on Ronald Reagan:
” He was tremendous at reading teleprompters. I have come out of speeches where he was reading teleprompters and people said, ‘My goodness, how did he do that? He memorized that speech perfectly.’ The camera was really one of his strong points.”
Your point being?
Hey look, Romney is a Mormon and has only one wife. That’s a total lack of commitment.
Donna, you are too stupid to live. Does your caretaker get tired of feeding you by hand? Because I can’t imagine that you can operate a fork by yourself without losing an eye.
On topic: Romney is emblematic of everything that everyone, irrespective of political party, should despise. I expect some amount of pandering and inconsistency on issues with my politicians, but Romney raises it to an art form.
It really is like he doesn’t understand that there was a documented prior reality that he once existed in, and that only the current position he takes is what matters.
Oh, Paul, you joker. Everyone knows that Reagan couldn’t read.
Donna: Unlike Obama, Romney can speak WITHOUT a teleprompter and a stacked audience.
Thank you for mindlessly echoing a wingnut talking point.
Now, back on the topic at hand, do you agree or disagree with the contention that Romney is trying to claim he never said what he said?
Donna: What was Obama’s before running for President? A street agitator/ ACORN hack and backbencher in Illinois legislature and U.S. Senate.
Thank you for mindlessly echoing a demonstrably untrue wingnut talking point.
Now, back on the topic at hand, do you agree or disagree with the contention that Romney is trying to claim he never said what he said?
Donna: I talked about Romney in my posts but others decided to talk about something else.
Thank you for mindlessly saying something so easily shown to be a lie.
Now, back on the topic at hand, do you agree or disagree with the contention that Romney is trying to claim he never said what he said?
Good luck with that one, Sean. I pose these kinds of yes/no true/false questions to our resident trolls frequently. The crickets are deafening. But they’re very adept at “Hey, look over there!”; and “Oh yeah? Well, some Democrat somewhere at some point in time said or did something similar.” They almost NEVER directly answer what would appear to be straightforward and simple to answer questions. Kinda like my teen-aged son.
What’s kind of depressing about Romney is that, for my money, he’s the smartest and most capable of the plausible GOP candidates. I mean, if Lucifer or someone similarly authoritative came to me and said “The next president will be a Republican, and all you can do is choose which one,” Romney would probably be my choice.
From this perspective, backtracking on his earlier positions is just a sign of his shrewdness. At least he had enough brains and integrity to take those positions in the first place. Holding to them is probably more than can be expected from anyone in that party, at least anyone who has a hope in hell of winning.
romney is probably the best one out of the bunch of nutjob republicants
Yeah, I know. But I once spent a week or so noting how all of Farris’ links say exactly the opposite of what he claims (yes, I’m taking some credit for the meme) and am pondering the likelihood of getting “Thanks for the mindless talking point” to become everyone’s standard response to Donna.
Donna could be:
1. Dennis by another name
2. A pathetically shitty wingnut troll
3. A faux wingnut troll (and not an especially clever one)
4. Something different
It doesn’t matter which is true. Donna is insufferable and prolly ought to be ignored.
Donna– why are you so THIN SKINNED?
…and that’s exactly why he’ll never ever ever be the Republican nominee. He’s relatively (!) sensible (in a cyclops in the land o’ the blind kinda way) even when he’s transparently pandering with “double Gitmo” and shit. He’s quoted as believing in Evolution (whoops!), for example. Plus there’s the Underwear Problem.
And he’s hopelessly screwed because a) he’s on video saying he’s pro-choice and b) he wears magic underwear, i.e., he’s a Mormon.
The GOP nomination process for 2012 is going to be high comedy.