Exactly. A Julieannie supporter wrote it and you posted it without mentioning that tidbit about the author. That’s called spinning because you failed to identify the spin put on the ball by the author so that the readers of what you post would know how to assess it’s trustworthiness, its degree of spin. So you spun the article as if it were a true, trustworthy assessment of Romney.
WHEN IN FACT ITS A HIT PIECE BY ONE OF HIS OPPONENTS, a backer of someone who is against everything the anti-Mitt “true conservatives” supposedly stand for.
Now let’s see if I understand this: Mitt Romney is EEEEEEEVVVVVILLLLLLLL because he’s not a TRUE CONSERVATIVE.
A supporter of rabidly pro-abortion Julie the Cross Dresser supporter writes a crocodile-tears piece about Romney, saying that Romney’s not a true conservative on, say, abortion or on the rest of the litany of “true conservative” issues..
But you just incuriously fail to mention that the author supports the most un-conservative candidate in the entire Republican field.
For you, the enemy of my enemy is my friend. Which means that you are just plain unprincipled—you’d take help from the Father of Lies himself if you thought it would help.
You’re not much of a principled conservative, now, are you?
Before June, Mitt will be an “also ran” then you can go back supporting Clinton