http://drinkingliberally….dent_romne.html
While doing a search on technorati about beloved Mr. Romney, I found this article on the blog Drinking Liberally. Which in itself the sites name I found amusing. But, getting to the crux of why I care to mention them.
In the blog entry it states:
The Wall Street Journal today ran an editorial about our guy Mitt probably running for Chief Brush Clearer in 2008. I hate him now more than ever.
Two of his quotes really bothered me:
He praises George W. Bush on the war: “The president is right to point to an international jihadist movement aimed at the collapse of the United States,” he says. “He has gone after that threat in the right way and with great energy and vigor, and I applaud the fact that he has taken it on very seriously and has not considered it just a criminal action but instead a war action, which requires a military . . . response.”
Romney is a little punk a**. Stop kissing ass! No one can say we’ve dealt with this terror thing “in the right way,” and the fact that he repeats the right wing talking points which paint liberals with this “terrorism is MERELY criminal” approach makes me sick. Someone please slap him.
The other part that got to me:
Mr. Romney is a scathing critic of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court’s 2003 decision imposing same-sex marriage: “We’ve got a liberal activist court . . . and I have now seen firsthand the perils of a court that decides to substitute its values for that of the founders.”
What a well-trained dog he is. “liberal activist court.” Wow, Mitt. Did you think of that all on your own?? And big word here: perils! Listen up everybody. The “founders” had a lot of jacked up “values” and I’ll be the first to say it really loud. I welcome an activist court that would substitute its values in place of a bunch of child-labor using, women-disenfranchising, native people-murdering, slave holders.
What I find incredibly interesting about these points is that the insults are directed at him in the way that he’s a “lapdog” for the administration. It’s not really challenging the points on their merits, it’s in a word “Bush bashing”. You really have to credit these liberal minded individuals for their small mindedness. Is that all you got? Even the admittance that the founders would be against gay marriage, and it’s legality. In a roundabout sort of way this blog is actually in praise of Mr. Romney in terms of that point. As for the founders being child-labor using, women-disenfranchising, native-people murdering, slave holders. I don’t agree with this assessment. But, if the author of this blog entry feels so strongly about these feelings, the founders put in place a way to change laws. That’s through constitutional amendment. This blog entry reminds me of a child having a temper tantrum when realizing they’re wrong, but yet they have to get their last fit out of the way.
This last point was classic of the above mentioned point.
I hope Mitt runs and catches a big time GOP hate-filled smackdown. Wait till they accuse you of having an illegitimate black baby, Mitt. Then come crying back to Massachusetts.
I’m sure they hope that Mitt goes down during the primaries. You can just smell the fear. If he gets the nomination then they know they’re doomed. He’s the strongest candidate, and has the strongest chance of taking down any Democratic nominee that gets put up for the job.
As for crying back to Massachusetts…hmmm…I think we can see who the crybaby is here.