Mitt Romney, up until about a week or two ago, seems like he has been Mr. Nice Guy while on the campaign trail. Then, one of Obama's surrogates decided to accuse Romney of a felony and Obama has been unfairly attacking and lying about him for his work as a businessman.
Today, in Reno, Romney went of the attack. From the Las Vegas Sun: In one of his most pointed assaults, Romney questioned whether the
White House was complicit in a series of leaks to the New York Times,
accusing the administration of leaking sensitive information for
political gain.
“This conduct is contemptible,” Romney said. “It betrays our national
interest. It compromises our men and women in the field. And it demands
full and prompt investigation, with explanation and consequence.”
And in what appeared to be a slip from the prepared remarks, Romney labeled Obama “corrupt.”
“A healthy American economy is what underwrites American power,”
Romney said. “When growth is missing, government revenues fall, social
spending rises, and many in Washington look to cut defense spending as
an easy way out.
“That includes our corrupt president.” http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2012/jul/24/romney-delivers-stinging-indictment-obamas-foreign/
Even if he didn't mean it, it doesn't even make up for all the lies Obama has told about Romeny.
Corrupt president- you got that right.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
duplicitous, deliberate deceptiveness, even though it seems to go with the territory, I cannot imagine George Washington, or any of those in the beginning being that base. I do think that Romney is essentially at his core, honest. I do not think that obama is at his core, anything other than ulterior, hidden, by his nature. I do think that obama was raised sort of by institution, welfare of various kinds, and held no real convictions other than suspicion regarding all that he did not, and could not know, fiction, imagined, not real. I also think that obama has no association with the true nature of the country he inhabits. From that non-vantage, he will never actually be a part of, or belong to, this nation. It might be good or bad, but he has no country really. Bill Clinton is similar in that he has no real depth associated to meaningful interpersonal relationships, he also, belongs to no one, and cannot give that depth, or truth either.
ReplyDeleteThey are both like war children who's parents have been killed, they just wander. So, they find groups to fool, they get elected through their own need to be liked, or belong, but they find they also cannot deliver in reciprocity that which they also simultaneously desire. They each, are empty. The problem is that they then oversee a large area, a nation, from a psychological profile that is essentially synthetic, amoral. These types are not gifted at all, not terribly intelligent either, though they posit that they are ceaselessly. They are not, only average people with a mental pathology. That inherent pathos is predatory in nature, a condition. Like those who seek fame, just for fame, not having anything to do with a particular or specific talent.
They are not as corrupt, or even corrupt, as they are actually just stupid.
Ideas are free, if you are the real thing, you will simply have good ideas, and these will be obvious and apparent without having to sell them. Freedom and liberty, these are good ideas.
E Tal