Those poor racist Obama haters, I almost feel sorry for them.1. Speaking to the NRA, Romney said, "The Obama administration has decided that it has the power to mandate what Catholic charities, schools, and hospitals must cover in their insurance plans.... Here we are, just getting started with Obamacare, and the federal government is already dictating to religious groups on matters of doctrine and conscience."In Massachusetts' governor for one term, Romney took the same position Obama has adopted. He somehow forgot to mention this.2. Romney also told the NRA audience, "We need a president who will enforce current laws, not create new ones that only serve to burden lawful gun owners. President Obama has not, I will."The grammar in this sentence makes it hard to understand, but the implication seems to be that Obama has created new restrictions on gun laws. That's a lie.3. Romney also claims to be a "lifetime" member of the NRA.In reality, Romney used to oppose the NRA, but became a "lifetime" member fairly recently by buying the honor from the group.
What's your opinion? Does old Tricky Mitt even stand a chance?
Please leave a comment.
Romney stands an excellent chance. Solid Republicans and solid Democrats don't change their minds, so that group can be ignored. The twenty percent of undecided or swing voters is the target here, and the economy is weak. Obama looks weaker. This election will be a lot like 2004, down to a few key states like Florida and Ohio.
ReplyDeleteBut I have two questions for Maddow:
1. Why did you have problems with the grammar of the sentence?
2. Have you heard of Bill Clinton?
"If you voted for Obama in 2008 to prove you're not a racist, you'll have to vote for someone else in 2012 to prove you're not an idiot."
ReplyDeleteorlin sellers
I see that Mike is still plagued by comments from folks with double-digit IQ's.
ReplyDeleteI see no problem, keep your retarded little fingers away from the keyboard, idiot...
DeleteMud_rake, I see that you're another blogger who's unwilling to open up articles for comment, but has no problem commenting on the sites of others. But consider a few points:
Delete1. IQ is a questionable measurement, as Stephen Jay Gould discussed in his book, "The Mismeasure of Man." (Citation, Democommie, citation!) It's a raw number that may or may not tell us anything about the abilities of the person measured. In addition, the act of measuring has a considerable risk of cultural bias skewing the results.
2. That being said, how is it that you've determined the IQs of people commenting here? One's political or social philosophy is not causally linked to one's intelligence, despite what that nonsense study purported to say.
3. "IQs" requires no apostrophe, since it's not possessive or a contraction.