११ ऑक्टोबर, २०११
"New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie will endorse Republican presidential hopeful Mitt Romney at an event today in New Hampshire..."
An emailed news alert from CNN, citing "multiple sources."
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
८९ टिप्पण्या:
I can't imagine any endorsement by anyone swaying any self respecting voter to vote a certain way. It's hard to understand the attention from the media that endorsements are paid.
It's a little early in the game for this kind of endorsement, but, hey, Christie's got a couple of buffets to hit yet today.
It got late early.
Time to go after Obama, not each other.
Here's another one.
"Well, that's a big endorsement."
Try the veal.
Agreed, AA. Sniping time is over. Ready the carpet bombing.
what a fat punk
No to Mitler
Christie throws his weight into the ring.
RINOs closing ranks against the Tea Party.
I just hope the real Gov. Christie doesn't make Mitt wear 'earmuffs' when speaking directly to the press.
(The SNL cold open last weekend looks even more relevant now.)
I think this is good. I'm for Romney. Romney can straighten the country out. We don't need a wild card. We need someone who's been vetted, who has business experience, and as David Brooks said in NYT last week, "Someone who doesn't throw interceptions."
David Brooks just convinced me to vote for anybody but Romney.
It's not that he's not a "real conservative". I mean, he's not, but as a libertarian I probably have greater disagreements with the clown than most conservatives would.
It's that he's so consistently wrong, or at least has been for a good number of years. Whatever he recommends, on the whole one is best off doing the opposite.
Maybe Christie can explain why ObamaCare is bad, but RomneyCare is good. Romney certainly can't (or won't).
To the surprise of almost no one...
Ann Coulter could not be reached for comment.
Like most pro-Romneyoids, Olson likes Mittens because...he's white .and doesn't compromise with hispanics..or blacks. The best crypto-klansman of the bunch (in LDS tradition ).
If Romney does pick up the nomination then the emphasis must oshift to electing senators and representatives who will hold his feet to the fire.
(Well, and McConnell's and Boehner's feet, as well.)
Another reason I was never a big Chris Christie fan. Oh I love his straight talk and willingness to engage in direct conflict, I love that a lot. But his positions are not conservative enough for me. Just like Romney.
Trey
Anyone surprised? The RINOs and the establishment will close ranks around Romney. He's going to win.
Perry killed himself on illegal immigration and by saying a lot of stupid things about SS.
"
Perry killed himself on illegal immigration and by saying a lot of stupid things about SS."
Romney said similar things about SS before he said the opposite. It's just that Romney's support base doesn't really care about ideology very much, so they don't reject people for that kind of thing.
The right, on the other hand, will search for a reason to reject someone. That means someone like Perry who led as a conservative for decades in multiple offices, whose few mistakes represented nearly universal opinion in a red state, can be rejected even though that probably will lead to a far less conservative nominee.
Conservatives should rally around someone who will beat Romney, not someone who wants Romney to be the nominee so he can be the VP on the ticket with him.
Perry is 80-90% with us. That's as good we're going to get this time.
And he supports a balanced budget amendment, and if you look at the hassles this creates in Texas, it's a lot better than the exploding debt. There's no comparison actually.
Romney would run the leviathan far more competently than Obama, but wouldn't reform it like Perry would.
I respect Christie's opinion, but I firmly disagree.
btw, Perry's done more to secure the border than any other candidate.
Some condemning Perry for his more realistic solution (realistic because he actually has to implement it as an executive) supported similar measures in congress.
Perry has rejected amnesty, and he's not a flip flopper. Those comparing his squish on tuition to Amnesty should realize they are being played, and the alternative is going to be softer.
The Global warmist politicians are flocking together like hockey sticks on a flim flam graph made of Billions of green dollars stolen from tripled power bills.
Mitt knows how to work a Bain on our capital as good as the Obama Gang does it.
Are you surprised by this? Seriously? He may look like Clemenza, but this is a Tessio move (he thinks Romney is going to win).
Perry could have been a contender for Christie's love if he did not implode in the debates (although I suspect Christie really ♥ Huntsman, because he is so dreamy!).
Regional jealousy is a large part of national politics.
The Bush Patriarchy of Connecticut and Maine was OK if it ran as Texas cowboys to win the national elections.
But a natural born Texan of Texan parents ( Hat tip to Mick)is not going to get Northeastern RINO votes in this lifetime.
Mr Romney is from a Michigan super rich parents, and he moved to Massachusetts to feel more at home.
The war has been between Romney and his money and Perry and his money.
Waiting in the wings and being the voter's favorite all along is a real leader named Cain that knows how to beat Obama.
Let me give you a Mormon insider's view of Mitt.
BTW, my ancestors go back to the very start and include prominent names in the history of Mormonism. I haven't checked but I'm probably related to Mitt somewhere back there.
So my thoughts:
1. There is no doubt in my mind that Mitt is an honest and descent person with a strong desire to help all people, and that he'll be fair and just as best as he is able.
2. He certainly does have a veneer of politician. I know many of you will say this is a thick veneer. I don't agree it is thick,but it is there. There is plenty of "live and let live" in Mormonism to allow him to come in more centrist for a Republican, as he did in the Massachusetts races.
3. He has served as a lay church leader in the Boston area, which means that he has served and worked closely with all kinds of people from all kinds of classes and economic conditions. I do not believe he is at all out of touch with the common man. Rather, his Mormonism forces him to worship weekly with all classes of people. He can't pick and chose his congregation like in other religions.
4. In 2008 he seems to abandon any semblance of what I would call a Mormon voice, and he seemed to talk more like an evangelical than a Mormon. This time he's moved closer, I'd say, to sounding like what I would expect a Mormon to say. He's not totally there, but I hear more of his Mormon background coming through more this time, but still not 100%.
A more Mormon voice would be similar to this Brigham Young statement:
"Are we a political people? Yes, very political indeed. But what party do you belong to or would you vote for? ...We will vote for the man who will sustain the principles of civil and religious liberty, the man who knows the most and who has the best heart and brain for a statesman; and we do not care a farthing whether he is a whig, a democrat, a barnburner, a republican a new light or anything else. These are our politics."
The smart move tonight is to go after Obama.
One moderate endorses another. Big news? It seems odd that some wanted Christie so badly when it is apparent to anyone paying attention that he is a good solid moderate republican but hardly a right wing conserevative.
yeah quote Brigham Dung
next put up some of Young the polygamist's statements on blacks and jews--Der Fuhrer of Utah. Mitt's roots
This time he's moved closer, I'd say, to sounding like what I would expect a Mormon to say. He's not totally there, but I hear more of his Mormon background coming through more this time, but still not 100%.
Maybe 20 - 25% closer, but not more than 50%. He's still speaking in a familiar American political voice, when as a Mormon he could easily articulate a view of government that supports the constitution and condemns the parties and the weasels.
Another Brigham Young as an example:
"It is a pretty bold stand for thsi people to take, to say that they will not be controlled by the corrupt administrators of our general Government. We will be controlled by them, if they will be controlled by the Constitution and laws; but they will not. Many of them do not care any more about the Constitution and the laws that they make than they do about the law of another nation."
"That class trample the right of the people under their feet...."
We have OWS and we have Owls. Can you see the ying and yang here?
And Perezoso, that is why I am predicting Romney/Cain. To divert some of that. Because they know it is coming.
yeah quote Brigham Dung. next put up some of Young the polygamist's statements on blacks and jews--Der Fuhrer of Utah. Mitt's roots
Well, there you have it. A shining example of enlightened discourse in American politics.
Quayle, Mitt is a careful methological guy. That is why he comes off poorly sometimes. His style is both his strength and his weakness. I knew people who knew him and they absolutely loved the guy. He is a wonk.
My problem with Mitt is not LDS. My problem with Mitt is his pragmatic GOP politics. We need someone who is conservative enough not to be sucked into traps that Christie, Pawlenty, Daniels, Huntsman, and (sometimes) Perry would walk right into.
Quayle, yeah there are going to be people like Perozoso out there on LDS. A minority but a potential danger for Mitt. Which is why I think Cain may be seriously considered as a Veep. A black conservative to play Palin to Romney's McCain.
But I hope Cain directs his fire against Obama tonight.
"1. There is no doubt in my mind that Mitt is an honest and descent person with a strong desire to help all people, and that he'll be fair and just as best as he is able."
Then you don't know what the heck you're talking about. Mitt is provably a liar. He simply lied to us about when swearing he would "never waver" in supporting abortion on demand and Roe V Wade as "good law".
He simply lied to us about many of his positions, flip flopping as soon as it benefits him to do so.
He even condemned Perry for pointing out that Romney deleted a section from his book hoping Romneycare would be a model for the entire country. Romney also banned guns and imposed massive increase in the MA gun tax to $100, which is completely contrary to the Book of Mormon.
The guy is a rank hypocrite and a politician of the lowest order.
You use his religion as an argument to support him, which is equivalent of saying the religions of his opponents are not good enough. Let's leave religion out of it. Mormons are justifiably ticked off when someone criticizes Romney for his religion. I think we should simply pick an honest leader who did a good job running a government.
We should also reject those with zero credibility because they are both MIA when it's tough to stick your neck out, and they flip flop because they can't take the heat.
Just google Romney 's abortion stance in 1994 and 2002. He is promising never to change on this heartfelt view he's had for over 30 years. This is an honest man in your book? Just because he goes to the right church?
"Waiting in the wings and being the voter's favorite all along is a real leader named Cain that knows how to beat Obama.
10/11/11 1:42 PM"
I like Cain. I agree he knows how to beat Obama.
Does he know how to run a large government? Can you point me to evidence of it?
Speaking of BY quotes on the Jews and Blacks, where you referring to these:
"We have a great desire for [the Jews] welfare, and are looking for the time soon to come when they will gather at Jerusalem, build up the city and the land of Palestine, and prepare for the coming of the Messiah."
Or this one:
"...time will come when [African Americans] will have the privilege of all we have the privilege of, and more" (Brigham Young, Feb. 5, 1852)
There you go, perp. Your hero Brigham Dung, like the historical facts , not LDS hype. Perhaps we link to some of his genocidal comments on blacks and jews. ,
You're the one who can't write Qualye--as in Dan.
Mormons are not christians, nor even really Americans. In fact most of them are secessionists
If we add the GOP's N. E. Brahmins and the Mormon western states and the Bush family operating the Karl Rove Fund we have a nominee picked by money. Christie has bowed to that.
But those darn voters are still Tea Partying away as if they have a say.
Somebody is going to be very disappointed when this is over.
Frankly I don't give a damn anymore for the Princes of wealth like Romney and Bush inheriting the power.
Cain is all the Tea Party has left now. And if Cain will not bow to the Race Hustler systems of the Democrats, then he will never surrender to Romney either.
ricpic said...
RINOs closing ranks against the Tea Party
Bingo. Give that man a prize.
As a bottom line, practical, will it really make a difference matter, the distance between Romney and Zero does not justify driving to the polls to vote.
I'd say you're playing between the 48 yard lines, but really, you're playing between the 15 and the 17 on the big gov't end of the field.
I think this is good for the Republican rank and file because it will temper some of the youtube fever that's gathered around Christie, which led people to forget that he is a successful governor of a very blue state.
If your excitement about Christie comes from watching videos of his straight answers to political questions, then there is a whole side of him you don't know about.
He is great for New Jersey, probably not great for the country.
Brigham Dung,comin' up:
on Jews--
"I would rather undertake to convert five thousand Lamanites [native Americans], than to convert one of those poor miserable creatures [Jews] whose fathers killed the savior... Yes, I would rather undertake to convert the devil himself, if it were possible... I would say, leave them, and come home, the Lord does not require you to stay there, for they must suffer and be damned... [L]eave them to live and die in their sins and ignorance... [T]hey take pleasure in their wickedness..." (Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, Vol. 2, p. 143, 1854)
On Africans (the race of Cain):
It is a great blessing to the seed of Adam to have the seed of Cain for servants.... ...suppose we summons them to appear here, and here declare that it is right to mingle our seed with the Black race of Cain, that they shall come in with us and be partakers with us of all the blessings God has given to us. On that very day, and hour we should do so, the priesthood is taken from this Church and Kingdom, [7] and God leaves us to our fate. The moment we consent to mingle with the seed of Cain, the Church must go to destruction; we should receive the curse which has been placed upon the seed of Cain, and never more be numbered with the children of Adam who are heirs to the priesthood until that curse be removed. Therefore, I will not consent for one moment to have an African dictate me or any brethren with regard to church or state government..."
'Nuff said (though there's much more). Mormons are masons--utah chapter of the klan
Read it again, Alt-tards
Does he know how to run a large government? Can you point me to evidence of it?
Running a large government is the same skill set as running large corporation.
A skillful CEO knows how to decide priorities, analyse the best course of action and most importantly know how to delegate.
CEOs do not "run" the corporation as an individual. They cultivate a tier of competent individuals or department heads who know their own particular area of expertise. These Department Heads are responsible for carrying out the vision and orders of the CEO.
The buck stops at the CEO's desk. If he hasn't chosen good people, hasn't exercised proper oversight, hasn't prioritized the tasks for the best results for the corporation, the CEO takes the blame.
The CEO of the corporation is not the be all end all of the company, rather he is the coordinator. Similar to the conductor of the orchestra. The conductor doesn't need to personally be a master cello player or flautist. He coordinates and creates a beautiful product.
Cain has run several successful corporations. I would trust him to run the government.
Teabugs routinely forget that the government's not a corporation, and definitely not a chain of pizza joints. That Herman Frankencain says he'll cut your taxes doesn't mean jack either--besides, how much does DBQ-Co bring in a year--20 grand? if that. So saving a few20s---doesn't matter.
Send Cain back to its radio hour.
So far, the only republican I could vote for...unless he tacks too far right. The assumption is he is not really that stupid but wants to placate those that are in his party. At least he is a grownup.
My question about Romney is - will he resist the temptation to be all things to everybody? Will he use the power of POTUS to meddle with every frigging issue even when it is better suited to be left to the states or to the whiners themselves?
Whoa.
Perezoso, concern troll moby! Your true colors come out. So who are you are voting for: Ron Paul or Obama?
Perezoso has to be J. It's the only explanation.
Perezoso, so help me out here and tell me what exactly, in plain words, BY was saying in your quoted paragraphs.
Was he saying Jews are scum, inferior, or less than Mormons or whites?
Was he saying anything similar about the African Americans?
No on both counts.
As is usual and typical for virulent anti-Mormons, your single quotes, removed from the entire body of nearly 50 years of Brigham Young's statement, have all the sound and fury of some big "gotcha", but none of the substance, when actually analyzed.
Prophets see with different eyes. You're quoting Brigham Young a full 80 years before the Holocaust, and you object to his using the words 'miserable' to describe the condition of the Jews in the world. Who was seeing truth and who is obfuscating?
You also seem to object to Brigham's observation of Jew's own decisions and of the likely return on effort to proselyte to them (i.e. their likeliness of being converted to Christianity) which is the real meaning of his statement, isn't it.
...or whites?
was intended to follow the next question regarding African Americans.
@DBQ
Agree entirely. One of Obama's biggest failings is that he is an extremely poor leader / executive. See Suskind's "Confidence Men" for numerous examples.
Cain, Perry and Romney all have demonstrated the leadership chops. Romney and Cain have just been far more effective than Perry in the debates. The commenters on this blog to the contrary, Tea Party folks are rallying to Cain and establishment types to Romney. Now that Cain is pulling ahead in Iowa, he will be tested in the debates the way that Romney and Perry already have been. Will Cain handle the increased scrutiny and pressure successfully like Romney or more like Perry? We'll find out tonight.
Perezoso has to be J. It's the only explanation.
Yes, it is a rather...distinctive voice.
Has anyone asked how much Perezoso benchpresses?
Romney also banned guns and imposed massive increase in the MA gun tax to $100, which is completely contrary to the Book of Mormon.
Please cite to chapter and verse, because this is a patently absurd statement.
Just google Romney 's abortion stance in 1994 and 2002. He is promising never to change on this heartfelt view he's had for over 30 years. This is an honest man in your book? Just because he goes to the right church?
I'm not arguing that anyone should vote for him because of what church he goes to. Not at all. Vote for whoever you want.
I'm merely giving my view of how he looks to a pretty mainstream Mormon. I'm giving you the view of Mitt from his own culture.
And his political wiggling sticks out and bothers us. No question about it. My wife has vowed to not vote for him because if it. I really bothers her that he wiggles around.
Regarding abortion, you are attributing positions to Mitt that he has never taken. I don't believe for a second that he has ever been pro abortion.
However, he certainly has taken his religions very high value of free will as giving him room to say he wouldn't seek to overturn Roe v. Wade.
Mormonism has an essential tension between free will, live and let live, and using the powers of the state to enact laws based on morality.
And that tension is seen in Mitt, and he's, unfortunately, using that tension to map out different politically expedient positions.
And I personally wish he didn't.
But I don't doubt that he is a fundamentally honest person and would be fair and honest.
I say that based upon what I think I know about him, and just as readily as I'd say that Harry Reid, Mormon not withstanding, is a lying weasel and a conniving jackal.
Just as Brigham Young said, vote for the best person regardless of his party, and I'd say regardless of his religion.
But one think Rick Perry may have to face is that if his Pastor friends keep up their Mormon bashing and Perry get the nomination, Perry may be the first Republican in quite some time to lose Utah.
Just as Brigham Young said, vote for the best person regardless of his party, and I'd say regardless of his religion
Vote for anyone who isn't Obama.
An explanation for this endorsement: * Christie thinks Romney is going to get the nomination
* Romney probably bought Christie's endorsement (maybe a promise of a position in Romney's cabinet)
* Christie is OK with Romney's politics
Perry may be the first Republican in quite some time to lose Utah
not that Utah is any big electoral prize. But, as Trooper would say, just sayin.
A candidate's religion is not an issue unless people think that he/she is a true believer.
So Romney is safe. He will take whatever position works best...for the moment.
Perry has a small problem with religion since he is guided by it, unless a large donation is at stake.
And the worst one of them all is apparently Tim Tebow who thinks God plays NFL football. How dangerous can you get.
The compromise is the famous teaching that "renders unto Caesar the things that are Caesars."
Romney can be counted on there. Mormons expect to rule whole planets later; and are easy to do business with on this planet.
Perezoso
I am pretty sure Romney would not endorse Brigham Young's views on African Americans and Jews.
A lot of questions can be asked about Romney but his faith should not be one of them.
Mormons expect to rule whole planets later; and are easy to do business with on this planet.
Mormons expect that the good will prevail in this world, and that definition of "the good" includes some Mormons (the good ones) and lost of other good people that are not Mormons.
And Mormons believe that the essential unifying principal of this mixed group will be their determination to let others be, and to protect the rights of others.
I don't mind being personally criticized for what I believe, as long as it is something that I actually do believe.
Romney said similar things about SS before he said the opposite.
Like what exactly? Please provide a link to a quote from Mitt Romney that is the equivalent to what Rick Perry said and then a link to a latter quote in which he says the opposite of what he (Romney) said in the first quote.
Romney makes John Kerry look like he has principles and convictions.
What were Christie's options?
It's not the greatest selection.
Ditto on Callahan.
Quayle, those of us who know a little bit more about this country than J know that Mormons were serving this country as early as the Mexican War.
Shows how scared the Lefties are.
If you think Romney's instincts aren't conservative enough, you should pursue the "Operation Counterweight" strategy.
We could do a lot worse than Mitt.
Calculating and compromising, sure, but I think he's a good guy who really does try to do his honest best.
I like Mitt. Maybe I'm a little biased, he lives down the road from my mom's house where I grew up.
If a Rino like Mitt Romney gets the nomination I will be actively looking for a third party conservative to support next year.
edutcher
Actually tt was Perry's pastor that criticized Romney's Mormonism.
Perry is scared he will lose. The left is not really too worried about Romney since he is not really that far to the right. I think he could beat Obama but I can take Romney over anyone else in the GOP field because he is a moderate [who just happens to be acting like a far right loon so he can win the primary].
In 2008 all the conservatives work hard to defeat Romney and Rudy. That worked out great, now we have two liberal Supreme Court justices for 20+ years
Romney also banned guns and imposed massive increase in the MA gun tax to $100, which is completely contrary to the Book of Mormon.
Correct me if I am wrong LDS members, but there are no mention of guns in the Book of Mormon.
Romney can be counted on there. Mormons expect to rule whole planets later; and are easy to do business with on this planet.
Anyone who utters this sort of horsecrap's gotta be mormonic (it's the usual LDS-stoner troll, Byro Osmondly).
If a Rino like Mitt Romney gets the nomination I will be actively looking for a third party conservative to support next year.
Yup. I'm telling everyone I know that as well.
Correct me if I am wrong LDS members, but there are no mention of guns in the Book of Mormon.
You are NOT wrong. There are none.
The book purports to cover the time period between 600 BC and 400 AD.
No guns.
Perhaps he was referring to the tax as being against the Book of Mormon, not the guns.
On which the Book of Mormon has six references, which are basically against excessive taxes.
In one part it describes a wicked king saying he laid on the people a 20% tax on their property and income.
In another place, where it is describing a different wicked government leader it said the tax was "grievous to be borne; yea, he did tax them with heavy taxes; and with the taxes he did build many spacious buildings."
In another part, a government leader held up as good says, "And even I, myself, have labored with mine own hands that I might serve you, and that ye should not be laden with taxes, and that there should nothing come upon you which was grievous to be borne....
So, maybe Mitt went against the Book of Mormon because the $100 tax on guns was "grievous."
Quayle, I really appreciate your viewpoint on Mitt.
I Agree with ScottM right out of the box...it seems awfully early for this, unless the Republicans are trying to cohere behind one individual for the purpose of beating Obama, but I'm not sure they are.
What I should have said: I appreciate being able to see a Mormon point of view on Mitt. Thanks!
Stepping away from the computer before I post again....:)
lot of questions can be asked about Romney but his faith should not be one of them.
The mormon issue is not the only issue but it does matter. Some have said Romney belonged to a racist LDS church for some time. Many Americans probably would find that objectionable (along with his Nixonish-politics .He also consistently supported BushCo). And could LDS rules--say on alcohol, caffiene, smoking--have some impact on Romney's politics?That's a reasonable concern.
".. who just happens to be acting like a far right loon so he can win the primary]..."
I'm curious Matt, what loony far right positions is he acting on? Just wondring what constitues loony far right
The book purports to cover the time period between 600 BC and 400 AD.
Yes, purports. Smith purported to tell a story of a tribe of Israelites ...in the New Worlds, centuries before Columbus--with no historical or archaeological evidence whatsoever, just as he could not produce the "Golden Plates". And..amazingly--it sounds nearly identical to the OldTestament, KingJames version, with a few name changes, and some masonic claptrap added.
Some mormons might be pleasant people (supposedly) but their religion has no basis in reality (the Bible does have connections to history..at times; ie. Pontius Pilate existed --recorded in roman history) .
What would you call a reverse kiss-of-death?
Quayle, thanks for what you've been doing in this thread. I'm a pretty faithful reader of AA, but an infrequent commenter. And I'm also a Mormon. Other than a few trolls, the dialog here has been fairly good. But there's another thread going on today over on Ace of Spades that's really disheartening. I hoped conservatives would be above that kind of stuff. But if Romney does get the nomination, I'm sure what's on Ace today will pale in comparison to what will come from the left.
Quayle - thanks for being the adult on the board and offering some insights on Romney and Mormonism. I learned some new things.
============
DBQ - There are many attributes a CEO has that are PART of the skillset needed to become a governor or President. But not all.
A CEO is a boss in a dictatorship, sure he reports to a Board and stockholders, but generally gets a free hand to sink or swim on how he runs the business.
Government exec is a different thing. Certain skills are not generally acquired as CEO of a business, they have to be acquired. The main thing is that a governor or President is NOT boss of the whole operation. They have to deal with a legislature, a legal system, and perhaps most importantly, an unaccountable to the Exec career civil service. They have foreign interests many CEOs do not have.
The record of "pure private sector business execs" is mixed in office. Many lose because they don't seem to have the ability to move to a new executive sphere. Many disappoint after becoming gov or President. But it seems we should have execs that show ability to successfully run a smaller government before getting the biggest one. I would add Ike into that - a General has to have the skills of a governor because their organization in the military ultimately answers to other agencies.
as others have noted, perezoso = the commenter known as J--what is it about these douchebag commenters that have to adopt separate on line identities to spew their same bullshit?
What were Christie's options? It's not the greatest selection.
I agree, Titus. It's almost like Christie did Eeny-meeny-miny-moe...
Strange. After reading this, my attitude toward Romney is unchanged, but my estimation of Christie has been dropped.
Scott M said..."It's a little early in the game for this kind of endorsement . . . "
The whole point of Christie is that he is not playing the game that people expect.
Bold move, Guv.
Two Small Problems with Christie and Romney for the GOP base...
http://tinyurl.com/3jcrqqh
At least Romney was more subtle with this endorsement, and it wasn't an IMMEDIATELY visible cash transaction like Pawlenty's...
Media wants Romney, because he is McCain's twin brother separated at birth. So they hope he'll produce McCain magic and loose to Obama.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा