Should it really surprise that Jen-Jen runs to Romney advisers for answers? No, of course not. However, this says so much about Romney I wanted to highlight it. The rest of her item is the usual trash Newt garbage direct from Romney central, as well. Proceed if you must. The portion I put in bold doesn't even make sense, for God's sake.
A Mitt Romney adviser had this reaction when I asked him about audience participation: "The Commission on Presidential Debates sets the guidelines for the general election. They don't allow audience participation. So it makes sense to select a nominee who can thrive under real-time conditions. If a candidate can't deliver a good performance without a cheering section, it's like picking an Olympic athlete to swim for us who is afraid of water."
Add that to this beyond annoying comment Romney recently made and you start to get a sense of the man. Esquire appreciates the significance of it. Emphasis mine.
"Are there no fair questions about the distribution of wealth without it being seen as envy, though?"
Willard thereupon dropped a bomb on himself.
"You know I think it's fine to talk about those things in quiet rooms.... But the president has made this part of his campaign rally. Everywhere he goes we hear him talking about millionaires and billionaires and executives and Wall Street. It's a very envy-oriented, attack-oriented approach."
Those words, and the entitled attitude with which they are so luxuriously chandeliered, should kill any campaign being conducted in 2012.
They're correct. One doesn't need to portray Romney as an out of touch (and unconcerned) elitist. He does that all by himself. Whether it's an audience, or a discussion of income issues, other than his planned campaign little get togethers with the folks to show he cares, Romney projects the image of someone who believes the important decisions must only be left to the important people in important rooms - or isolated on debate stages. We wee folks, well, if we behave, they may let us look in from time to time. But, other than that, we should mind our own little business and not concern ourselves with important matters.
There's nothing conservative about that attitude - it's Leftist progressive, top down all the way - and beyond repulsive to the average American. One can only imagine the lack of transparency in a Romney administration. Romney may be a real fire cracker in the boardroom, but when it comes to the public square, he's a complete dud. And if you think Obama and Axelrod won't put him and this in the worst possible light in any campaign, leading to defeat, you have stars in your eyes - or maybe little sparklers, like dear old Jen-Jen.


"The Commission on Presidential Debates sets the guidelines for the general election. They don't allow audience participation."
Meaning, of course, questions from the audience a la a town hall meeting.
Not applause.
Who do these flucks think they are dealing with...??? This is a free speech thing.
Now, I don't wonder that Mitten's Myrmidons HATE the idea of people reacting positively to other candidates...
but they can get stuffed if they think that is how you treat Americans.
Posted by: Ragspierre | Tuesday, January 24, 2012 at 11:00 AM
"If a candidate can't deliver a good performance without a cheering section, it's like picking an Olympic athlete to swim for us who is afraid of water."
I did not realize that Mitt Romney rescued the Olympics by eliminating the cheering section.
Posted by: ltw | Tuesday, January 24, 2012 at 12:05 PM
ltw, he wasn't on the field of competition in that case.
BIG difference when you get to sit in the VIP box and watch other people bust their humps.
Posted by: Ragspierre | Tuesday, January 24, 2012 at 03:24 PM
Tin foil hats are in!!
Posted by: sickofrinos | Tuesday, January 24, 2012 at 04:50 PM
Hmmmm..,I think I would say the early rrnteus on this self examination suggest cautious optimism that the Republicans will at least embrace more fully the tenets within their historical program that libertarians find most appealing. I also am more pessimistic than I was that the Democrats will actually act on the reform of appropriations that they made so many noises about.
Posted by: Ateeq | Thursday, February 09, 2012 at 10:40 AM
[...] John McCain won 173 ectreolal votes in 2008. If Rickomnichcain wins the exact same states as McCain in 2012, the GOP ticket would begin the night with 6 [...]
Posted by: Voobox | Saturday, February 11, 2012 at 12:26 AM