Skip to main content

Ouch! That has to hurt! Longtime George Romney aide criticizes Mitt

Walter De Vries, an aide of George Romney's for seven years in the '60s, just came forward with some interesting commentary regarding George's son and Republican presidential candidate Mitt.

De Vries wrote that Mitt Romney's current campaign is "a far cry from the kind of campaign and conduct, as a public servant, I saw during the seven years I worked in George Romney's campaigns and served him as governor."

He continued with, "While it seems that Mitt would say and do anything to close a deal - or an election, George Romney's strength as a politician and public officeholder was his ability and determination to develop and hold consistent policy positions over his life."

De Vries also seems befuddled on Mitt's claims that his father played a major influence on him throughout his political career, as he said with regard to this, "I just don't see it. Where is it? Is it on issues, no? On the way he campaigns? No. George would never have been seen with the likes of Sheldon Adelson or Donald Trump."

The former George Romney aide also made it known that he intends on voting for Obama over Mitt - George's son - in November.

Well, if that isn't quite the endorsement for President Obama's re-election and quite the blow to Mitt Romney's election bid. Mr. De Vries should further the cause by releasing the following ad:

"I know Mitt Romney. I worked with his father, George, when he was the Governor of Michigan. George Romney was a great man - a man with principles, a man I was proud to work for. If there's one thing I know better than addition, it's that Mitt is nothing like his father. His father was consistent. If Mitt is consistent, my name is Fred Flintstone. But, no, that's not my name. My name is Walter De Vries. I was an aide of George Romney's for seven years in the '60s and will be voting for Barack Obama in November. Mitt Romney's own father would be ashamed of his son, except for his hair, and I'm ashamed for him. I'm Walter De Vries and I approve this message."

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/15/romney-is-attacked-by-his-fathers-longtime-aide/

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i

The verdict is in. To no one's surprise, Jonathan Hoenig has been found guilty of being an idiot.

Just recently, when discussing the Michael Brown shooting and whether or not race had anything to do with it, Fox News contributor Jonathan Hoenig said, "You know who talks about race? Racists." One moment while I provide Mr. Hoenig with the well deserved slow-clap. :: slow-claps for two seconds :: So, that was quite the line by Mr. Hoenig, wasn't it? "You know who talks about race? Racists." Well, wasn't he just talking about race? So, by his own words, I guess that makes him a racist. Also, if he wants to be consistent, does this mean that people whom talk about gender are sexists and people whom talk about sexual orientation are homophobes? With that line of thinking, Hoenig would engage in the following back-and-forths: Hoenig: "So, who are you voting for?" A woman: "The Democratic candidate, because he's been adamant about his support for equal rights for women." Hoenig: "You sexist feminist nazi!"