Romney Gets Riled

I wish the media wouldn't be so biased. Maybe try an article saying something nice about Romney? I don't understand how someone that so much good has come out of can be so bad. The wisest man that ever lived taught us that we can know whether someone is good or bad by their fruits (works, accomplishments). I don't understand stand how Romney with a great family, a great life a service, a great business career, a great service career, and a great religious career can be so bad. It seems like there is something wrong. Something the media is trying to hid from us. Why are they so negative to such a positive man?

I love blogging. I just started doing it about two months ago and I never realized how biased the media is. I love the title of this one, "Romney gets angry." Why didn't they call this "Jerk reporter calls Romney Liar," or "Glen Johnson attacks Romney again." After the last few month, I've learned the real people you can't trust is the Media.

Romney is a good man. It is funny how people have to take things out of context to get "a good news story" i.e. dramasode, you know the things that the left wing media companies rely on to blindfold the helpless masses.

Romney's point was he is not a washington insider. He has no backs he needs to scratch when he is president. (almost- added later on read through) Everyone else is in the pockets of big business and lobbyists.

Anyone who takes that out of context is only doing so because they are blinded by the media or anti-romney and will grasp onto any bit of doubt about Romneys validity.

Mitt Romney is an honest man who has, in sight of his record, has done nothing but to progress himself - morally and physically. Mitt has been called a flip flopper or a panderer. A flip-flop is to go from one position to another and them back to the other position. Example a fish that flip flops --> starts on its left side, flips to its right, then flops back to its left side. Romney has never left a stance to return to it - He has only progressed. Thereby clearing his name as being a flip flopping panderer. Those who say such things either have their own agenda or have the cognitive depth of a child???s wading pool.
I am disgusted by anyone who calls themselves a conservative and then berates a person who converts to pro-life.

"Mitt has the most votes, most delegates and is the only candidate to be competitive in every state.
How long will the media keep excusing his successes" ?? Great point! Thank you for that comment!

It is the issues that are important, lets stay focussed on the issues and what each candidate has planned on how to deal with them.

For holyroller, the comment about gay rights was from a long long time ago. Ergo it is removed from the context of these happenings. Yes he was courting votes from gays/liberals but I also believe he attempted to keep those promises in a way that he felt was most appropriate.

As for the anti-mormon comments on here, this is about politics and not religion.

Hope you all have a good day. :o)

And more on the big dig here. If there is any political responsibility to be born for the Big Dig mess (above and beyond the engineering and construction failures), it clearly lies with the Dem. legislature in MA, not Romney. I suppose that's why we don't hear his openents even whisper about the Big Dig.

"This isn't the first time Romney has tried to take on the Dig. In early 2003 and late 2004, he attempted to create an independent commission to recover the cost of faulty work and investigate tunnel leaks. No dice, said the legislature. In March 2005, Romney petitioned the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts for an advi sory opinion on how he might legally remove Amorello from the MTA, complaining the bureaucrat was "secretive" and had resisted "oversight of his own board." The request was
denied for lack of "urgency."

Apparently, that urgency has now made itself manifest. Within days of Del Valle's death, the overwhelmingly Democratic legislature took a near unanimous U-turn and handed Big Dig inspections over to Romney. Likewise, the Supreme Judicial Court soon gave Romney the green light to remove Amorello. The chairman chose to resign before he could be fired."

In response to bigBillyBoy and his assertion that Romney is responsible for the Boston Big Dig mess, I read this from a columnist in Boston:

"The Big Dig's reputation precedes it in an exceedingly negative way. Few here will assign Romney blame for a mess two decades in the making. Instead, after years of inaction, people see Romney on television nearly every day, articulating step-by-step solutions, taking responsibility for their implementation in press conference after press conference, describing in detail the issues at hand, showcasing an almost bizarrely detailed understanding of engineering minutiae, and even drawing diagrams on the fly."

Can you check your facts on that and get back to us? Best I can tell, the Big Dig mess has absolutely NOTHING to do with Romney. In typical Romney fashion, he has taken responsibility and moved to fix a problem that he didn't create. Looking forward to your reply.

Romney gets riled? Hardly. Leave it to Newsweek to make something more that it really was.

It's unfortunate that someone has to cause controversery where there is none. Why would Mitt lie about that? He wouldn't. It's public information about who the staff members are and who gets paid. Romney is truthful and has integrity. I know that he would be the best candidate to be president and if he doesn't become president, the American people will have made a decision that will ultimately affect our economy negatively. He knows how to turn things around. He's been doing it his whole life and has seen incredible success doing such. Why send more Washington people back to Washington....especially John McCain? All he ever talks about is war war war. He only knows how to do one thing...and he does is so mediocrely that it can hardly be called a strong point in his campaign. I hope people realize what the situation is here. Mitt Romney is by far the best candidate America has seen in decades.

I don't know why Mormonism is even an issue. Romney is not running for President of the Latter Day Saints; he's running for President of the United States. Some citizens are members while most are not. I have other issues with Romney and this is the least of those issues. It seems obvious that Romney is stating the truth, but not the whole truth in saying that he doesn't have lobbyists running his campaign. While they may not be "running" the campaign, this suggests that they at least have the "ears" of the campaign and this could be much more damaging than simply having them "run" things. All this reporter was doing was uncovering the whole truth which may not have been uncovered in the mainstream press any other way.

This article didn't reference Mormonism, but here here to chrislow's comments anyway. This video shows Romney being accused of lying and with all the pressure he is under, with everyone trying to get him to bow out, he actually handled hiimself well. He was riled, but he kept his calm, didn't make snide remarks, didn't use a diversion (like McCain or Huckabee would have been able to keep their cool like that). When he saw that the guy wasn't going to leave it alone he decided to not let it ruin his time with the other reporters and went on and offered to talk to him later. He wasn't using "semantics' like some people have said. The guy is a FRIEND an advisor-- but not a PAID advisor and is NOT involved in any DECISION MAKING on the campaign. There IS a difference and this guy was telling Mitt he was lying about that. The BEST part is when Romney explains that no one puts this kind of work/resources (personal resaurces) out just so they can do what OTHER people want. He is using his own money so he is not like most Washingtron politicians who are owned by someone to some degree. He doesn't have favors to repay-- I bet McCain has some stuff like that in the chamber...

I really enjoyed reading this article, and subsequently viewing the video for myself. I'm no fan of Mitt Romney, by any means, but looking at these two side-by-side really brings home what is meant by "media bias". The article very intentionally gives the reader the impression that Romney lost his squash and lashed out under the pressure of some intrepid reporter that was calling him out on a blatant lie.

After watching the video, though, this was clearly far from what really happened. While it's certainly true that Romney was doing his usual shtick of deceptive claims, he handled the amateurish volleys from this young reporter very neatly. Seems to me that this is a complete non-event, except perhaps for the young reporter, who can now go tell his Halo Night buddies how he, "really got in Romney's face." Ha! Please...

Yet another example of how Mitt Romney is just a carefully orchestrated phoney who some handlers standing in the shadows thought could fool us with his smile and fake charm. Glad to see that the American people can see this.

Romney supporters are ridiculous to blame this story on media bias. If Romney wouldn't quit lying then he wouldn't get pressed on his lies. It's obvious that Kaufman is an integral member of Romney's staff, yet Romney still grandstands about not using "lobbyists." Romney and his supporters can argue ad nauseum about what the meaning of "is" is, but people with any common sense can see that this is just another example of Romney pretending to be something he is not.

I personally think its about time for somebody called Romney's transparent lies.

It is obvious that Glenn wasn't there to objectively report. I was undecided on who to vote for, but the bias of the media has earned my ire--I'm voting Romney.

Let's face it; Glenn wasn't there to objectively report. I'm getting fed up with media bias. I wasn't so sure about who to vote for, but it looks like the media made up my mind--I'm voting Romney!