Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.
#1 I was surprised at the comment itself, but told myself that what was gonna count was not what Mitt said, but what he would do when (not if) he was attacked for stating the truth. Thus, I was very much more surprised, and pleased, to hear him standing by his comment. I'm sending his campaign money shortly after this friday's paycheck comes out, and will add a note specifically stating that it was his backbone that impressed me to send it.
Posted by Ptah 2012-09-19 09:24||
#2 Chris Christy tutoring sessions needed asap.
Posted by Besoeker 2012-09-19 09:28||
#3 Good comment, Ptah. You beat me to it.
I got caught last night watching ABC News with that disreputable old tart Diane Sawyer last night when they were talking about Romney's remarks. It pissed me off because they were not content to air the remarks but they spent a couple of minutes afterwards spinning, interpreting and wondering about the so called "fallout" that they were certain would follow. The whole tone of it was all about how Romney had made a huge mistake and the clever journalists had caught him at it. I was so upset that Mrs. Uluque sent me out of the room.
Posted by Ebbang Uluque6305 2012-09-19 11:18||
#4 I would not thought it possible to be both Carteresque AND Nixonian, but the Obamination manages to do it. At least it wasn't 18 minutes.
Posted by SteveS 2012-09-19 11:22||
#5 I wonder if those Obama educational records will "leak".
Bet the MSM won't cover them if they do.
Posted by Bright Pebbles 2012-09-19 13:05||
#6 Ebbang: the spin was the essential part of the story. The issue isn't what Mittens said, it's what the press can do with it.
We don't have a press: we have Obama cheerleaders with bylines.
Posted by Steve White 2012-09-19 13:35||
#7 And in 10 years half of them will be out of jobs. I'll be shocked if the NYT lasts another 5, but phony accounting can last you a long way I suppose.
Posted by Charles 2012-09-19 14:12||
#8 Romney's campaign should be doing its own recordings. Then, the second some bullshit like this comes out, release the unedited version.
The media lies. Count on it. Be prepared.
Posted by Iblis 2012-09-19 16:45||
#9 Bill Jacobson has been doing yeoman work this year. I comment over at LI occasionally and left a thought on this issue as well --
I'm not clever enough to know for certain if the camera moved or not, or whether the source edited the video. But the video we do see shows Mittens as a true conservative, as an excellent dinner speaker, and as someone who is engaging, comfortable and clear-thinking.
We may never know what is in the missing video. But I'm comfortably certain that the missing video doesn't hurt Mitt in any way. More important, the video we DO see doesn't hurt Mitt in any way.
If the Romney campaign has any sense they'll make TV and radio ads from these video clips.
Mr. Corn and Mother Jones: thanks for bringing the video to the public's attention. Well-played, gentlemen, well-played.
Posted by Steve White 2012-09-19 17:04||
#10 My gawd the RoseMary Wood Virus is back in the wild!
Posted by Shipman 2012-09-19 17:13||
#11 I assume you read the confidential findings report from the investigating committee.
I flipped through it.
I was especially interested in the section on Arroway's video unit. The one that recorded the static?
The fact that it recorded static isn't what interests me.
What interests me is that it recorded approximately eighteen hours of it.
That is interesting, isn't it?
Posted by swksvolFF 2012-09-19 18:26||
#12 We don't have a press: we have Obama cheerleaders with bylines.
That's why I started ranting and raving and Mrs. Uluque had to send me out to the patio.
Posted by Ebbang Uluque6305 2012-09-19 18:55||
#13 I'm not sure who this blogger is, other than tht the Instapundit linked to this post, but he has done a LGF analysis on the gap between the two vidoe segments put up by Mother Jones. Link
Posted by trailing wife 2012-09-19 22:57||
#14 Not sure it matters. The lies are in the context of framing the story. They pretend as if he only wants to govern the 53% instead of saying he won't waste time campaigning trying to convince the 47% to vote for him which would be a waste of time and money. I think most Americans would agree that's sensible and further one might quibble with the 47% being the right number for those addicted to the government cheeze but certainly those that are would be unlikely to vote anyone else in power.
Posted by rjschwarz 2012-09-19 23:43||