Under the Obama-nation we currently reside in, one often hears the following question being asked; do you feel better now after Obama has increased our debt by an additional four trillion dollars? Has the economy become so much better that it was worthwhile spending all those trillions? The answer to both are of course a resounding no.
I’ve got a similar question to Mitt Romney but with a slightly different angle. You’ve won Michigan, your home-state with barely over 3% after you and your super-PACS have spent approximately of millions dollars in negative ads. Do you consider the results favorable? Is this the path you will put forward until the convention? Have these results assuaged your guilty conscience for the countless blatant mis-truths you’ve engaged in at every debate and opportunity possible? You’ve sent utterly misleading robo-calls using quotes people had said in 2008 as though they were current and your ads had more holes than truths in them; will you learn anything from the weak victory in your home-state? Or will you continue in your acts of hypocrisy and falsehood?
You seem be unaware of this, Mitt, but the actions you’ve engaged in can best be described using one word; hypocrisy. Since you and your supporters are oblivious to your hypocrisy, here are two quick examples in a one-time attempt to educate.
Firstly, one of your most compelling cases you’ve got against Santorum is his reelection loss by 18 points in 06. It sure sounds like a strong point … when you omit all the information such as that his staunch support for the war and his outspoken record against Iran caused the left to paint him in negative ads as a warmonger during a time when anti-Bush and anti-war sentiments were skyrocketing high in liberal Pennsylvania. Yes – Santorum lost his seat. However, the cause behind it is actually a very positive one. It proved that Santorum preferred losing his seat and job rather than losing his principles.
Mitt, you can focus all you wish on Santorum’s loss in 06 but the facts won’t change. Santorum had repeatedly proven capable of winning – he was elected twice to the House and twice to the Senate by running as a conservative in a blue state. You Mitt, on the other hand, lost your first run for Senate as a liberal in the liberal state of Massachussets with the same sweeping loss that Santorum lost his fifth election. Santorum, the conservative, was thus reelected by the Pennsylvanian people to serve their interests in Washington for many more years than you were able to keep your governor’s seat despite (or perhaps because of) your lack of consistency and principle.
Secondly, when a guy tattles on another guy for shoplifting while his own pockets are bulging with stolen items, his actions are far worse for he’s not only a thief but a hypocrite too. So too, when you’ve pounded Santorum for supporting the “No Child Left Behind” Act in ads, debates, and speeches one would’ve thought you were one of those who opposed it from the start or at least had not had a public opinion at the time. The truth, though, turned out quite differently. Videos surfaced of not one but three separate instances where you praised the bill at the time. Your actions are thus far worse than Santorum for he has admitted he’s erred with his vote, apologized for it, and vows to repeal it. You, on the other hand, pretended to be righteous while simultaneously accusing him of doing that which you yourself have done. What a shame and disgrace.
Whether Santorum ultimately wins or loses the primary he will be a winner for he will be remembered and respected as a dignified principled individual. You – Mitt, on the other hand, will unfortunately be looked upon as a serial hypocrite, liar, and thug even if you will eventually secure the title of GOP nominee or/and president.