freecounterpoint: Crybaby Romney

Friday, February 01, 2008

Crybaby Romney

Ooh, the fighter pilot isn't being nice. Now that's not nice, Mr Fighter Pilot.

12 comments:

Tecumseh said...: How about crybaby McCain in 2000, when he alleged W was playing dirty tricks on him? That was all a bunch of crap, and he never apologized for that BS.; 2/01/2008 6:09 PM
Mr roT said...: I didn't want McCain in 2000. Did you since he was a crybaby then? We should go for a crybaby election. Romney and Hill.; 2/01/2008 6:23 PM
Mr roT said...: Incidentally, tu quoque.; 2/01/2008 6:24 PM
Tecumseh said...: Not quite: What gets me is the hypocrisy of it all. In fact, it's a more general phenomenon: most of these guys just dish it out, and then can't take it. When someone points out one of their foibles, they cry "personal attack"! And then turn around, and hit the kneecaps. It all sounds like the kind of stuff I was doing, oh, in first grade, in the schoolyard: sticking my foot out when some other guy was running around. Any of you guys ever did that? At least, now I kind of feel guilty about it...; 2/01/2008 7:01 PM
Tecumseh said...: Brooks chimes in: John McCain is exhausted. He hasn’t had a full-night’s sleep in forever. It took him 10 hours to get to California because of flight trouble. He underperformed in the debate Wednesday night, as his staff understands. He took some shots at Mitt Romney that were gratuitous considering the circumstances, as he privately acknowledges.

Crybaby McCain.; 2/01/2008 7:10 PM
Mr roT said...: And Romney's whining about it...; 2/01/2008 7:26 PM
Tecumseh said...: Everybody says McCain over-reached -- even he does (in private), apparently. Only JJ denies the undeniable. Why not concede the point, and fork over that long-overdue VCP, so that we can MoveOn?; 2/01/2008 7:36 PM
Mr roT said...: All this from AI, Mr Nasty to kick a man while he's down...; 2/01/2008 7:43 PM
Tecumseh said...: Me? I'm the sweetest of guys. I don't kick a man when he's down -- but I may, on occasion, trip him when he's running around. That's different.; 2/01/2008 8:33 PM
Mr roT said...: nothing wrong with that... do it alla time; 2/01/2008 10:44 PM
Arelcao Akleos said...: I wanted McCain in 2000. Actually, I remember in the SC primary [which seemed to turn the primaries to Bush] quite a bit of nasty play by the HOB. Not that it didn't work, of course.
Anyway, I'm convinced that McCain facing a 9/11 would have done substantially better than the conflicted and Saudi cossetted Bush admininistration. That said, I am not at all convinced he is the best man for 2008. There is such a thing as the right man who misses the right time and so is no longer the right man.
The trouble is, who the hell is?; 2/02/2008 7:07 PM
Tecumseh said...: I think those alleged nasty things that W did to McCain in 2000 were almost completely figments of his imagination. The Establishment endorsed W, and that was that -- perhaps not fair, but that's politics.

I kinda doubt McCain would have responded much better than Bush in 2001 -- surely right on 9/11, when W was abysmal, like almost everyone else, but perhaps only marginally better afterwards. One thing he probably would have done would have been bring in more ground troops in Iraq -- had he decided to go after Saddam.

At any rate, this is all alternate-history speculation. In the first place, it's not at all clear to me McCain would have carried the day in 2000 against Gore -- he would have had pretty much the same problems he has now with the "base". Only thing is now his problems got worse, after 8 years of showing his finger on all things domestic -- and 8 years of not getting any younger. Plus, the political climate now is much tougher for the Republicans, than right after Monica and the near-impeachment of Bubba.; 2/02/2008 10:00 PM