Romney Attacks McCain for Serving His Country
January 29, 2008
I can’t find a transcript anywhere, but Mitt Romney made some curious attacks on McCain in his speech tonight. He tried to build a case for why he should be sent to Washington. I will paraphrase here, but he said something like “you can’t reform Washington by sending the same people back to sit in different chairs.”
A pithy line for sure. But will anyone buy it?
Much of the conservative ire over McCain’s success seems to be based on McCain’s track record of distancing himself from the party to reinforce his decade-long image as reformer. Are people going to forget eight years of careful branding of McCain as “Maverick” just because Romney had a good sound byte? I know we have a short term memory, but seriously.
Even more, Romney went on to indirectly attack McCain for never having a private-sector job. Romney wants to position himself as the economic candidate. Shoot he says he has the economy “in his DNA,”whatever that means. And his claim is that we need someone in the White House who has actually had business experience.
But his rhetoric and tone seemed to be attacking McCain for never having a real job. Forget for a moment that if Romney had real credibility on the economy he wouldn’t have to go around bragging he was born with it. The bigger issue is that it would be completely unreasonable to expect McCain to get business experience while serving six years as a POW in Vietnam.
Am I crazy? Is Romney for real?
Comments
6 Responses to “Romney Attacks McCain for Serving His Country”
Got something to say?
-
Exposing It
“Are people going to forget eight years of careful branding of McCain as ‘Maverick’ just because Romney had a good sound byte?”
I’m sorry, but this question does not make sense.
McCain is considered a ‘maverick’ precisely because he is so often at odds with conservatives. Often times McCain goes his own way simply for the sake of it, it seems. If anything, he has been consistently more liberal than anything approaching conservative.
McCain-Kennedy (amnesty for illegal immigrants)
McCain-Feinglold (squelching free speech)
McCain-Leiberman (anti-industry)
These are the credentials of a liberal.
It’s obvious that you are just now starting to pay attention to the presidential race if you haven’t heard Romney’s standard stump speech ever before. As a rookie I should go easier on you, but when you laughably suggest that Romney has not had a “real” job I just can’t let it go. How many businesses does a person have to have run in order to qualify as having a real job in your mind?
Hanging around in Washington eating expense luncheons and making back room deals like John McCain is far less ‘real’ than the hard work Romney has put into his lifelong and impressive, by any objective measure, private sector (real world) career.
The fact that a person was a POW should not be the one and only criterion looked at when deciding who should be president.
Jasmarsden, Sorry if I wasn’t clear enough, I was attacking Romney for attacking McCain for not having a real job. And I’m not saying John McCain can’t be attacked for his positions on the bills you mentioned. But Romney didn’t. He attacked him for being “Washington” and for never having had a job in the private sector. Given McCain’s strengths, I think Romney is making a big mistake.
Oh, and just because you’re carrying water for Romney doesn’t mean I’m doing the same for McCain.
Armchair Analyst’s last blog post..BioFuels finally getting due scrutiny
I don’t care whether or not you “carry water” for McCain so long as you don’t vote for him.
If knowing what I want in a candidate, doing the relevant research, and then advocating said candidate is “carrying water”, then I’m guilty.
Hell, I don;tcarry water for either of them. I was saddened by Fred’s departure and no by Guiliani’s departure. But what Romney was saying had nothing to do with his military service. He was talking abnout how McCain has been in Washington for a long time, and you can’t change Washington with someone that has been there as long as John McCain. If it was up to me, i wouldn;t vote for either, and will probably write in Fred Thompson. But Thompson is out and the only one left standing that has similar ideals as me is Romney.
But is it is McCain as the Republican nominee I will try and get him elected, but reluctantly. I would rather have thebackstabbing Republican than a all out Socialist from the Defeatocratic Party
stix1972’s last blog post..Gary McCoy
The idea that Romney would be attacking McCain for serving his country seems like a pretty far reaching stretch.
He served his country valiantly as a member of our military and prisoner of war. That said, while McAmnesty, the New York Times, and Lindsay Graham may think he has served his country during his career in Washington, I would have to disagree.
Sam Pierce’s last blog post..Collecting the rebates Americans won’t collect?
John MCcain is an old staple of old ideas. He is so very arrogant , so smug.
we need change, Mccain does not remotely represent change. As Romney says “It’s poltics as usual. This country is willing to give the Clintons another chance at dirty poltics again. God help us all.