Dishonest Reporting: Part II
Here’s a video all those who say that Mitt Romney flip-flopped on the Iraq war, changed his stance, whatever should watch this video. It was posted on YouTube on February 18, 2007.
It seems to me that those who attacked Romney, calling him a flip-flopper etc. because he basically repeated recently what he said a year ago owe Romney an apology and their readers a retraction. H/t Ed. Below the fold follows some criticism of the latest New Hampshire Union Leader article blasting Romney.
And this, this is just sad. This isn’t endorsing someone (John McCain in this case) anymore, this is becoming a propagandist for him. I see people calling Romney’s strategy “smear tactics” and “dishonest,” but it seems to me that his opponents play it far more negative and personal than Romney does.
That newspaper stoop so low in America is something I didn’t know. It’s fascinating to see this happening, although it’s also aggravating.
As a foreigner looking in, I have to say that I’m surprised by the tone of the debate and about the way third parties (meaning everyone who isn’t a candidate or actively working on a campaign) behave.
These aren’t elections, this is war.
This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.
Comments are closed.
PoliGazette Comments Policy
PoliGazette encourages comments from all viewpoints, especially those that disagree.
Comments submitted must, however, adhere to the following standards. Comments that violate
these standards may be edited or deleted without notice at the sole discretion of the editors.
Commenters who repeatedly or egregiously violate these standards or who attempt to argue
publicly with editors regarding the comments policy may be banned from commenting further.
(1) Comments should address the substantive content of the post. Comments that repeatedly
or blatantly misrepresent the content of the post or of others' comments are not welcome. Comments that
respond to something other than which the contributor or commenter may have said are irrelevant and should
not be posted.
(2) Comments should avoid vulgarity as well as racial, ethnic, religious, or sexual bigotry.
(3) Comments should not personally attack the character, personal integrity, or professional
reputation of any PoliGazette contributor or of other commenters.
(4) Comments should reflect the contributions of the commenters themselves and should not
include extensive cut-and-paste reproductions of others' words except insofar as necessary to supplement
the commenter's own arguments. Link spam, trackback spam, and propaganda spam will be instantly deleted.
(5) Public figures are considered open to all substantive criticism of their policies and statements.
Comments that present objectively false factual information about public figures (i.e. "Obama is a Muslim") or
that attack public figures by attacking their families are not welcome. Comments that merely repeat
slogans for or against a candidate without engaging in substantive comment are not welcome.
Questions or challenges to these policies or their application should be directed to the editors
by email only.
