Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Bachmann Teas off against Mitt (Bachmann attacks Romney as "flip flopper")
The Boston Herald ^ | 2011-06-26 | Jessica Fargen

Posted on 06/25/2011 10:56:55 PM PDT by rabscuttle385

Tea Party queen U.S. Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) is touting her airtight conservative credentials in a veiled dig at GOP presidential nomination opponent Mitt Romney.

Bachmann, speaking via Skype.com to the National Right to Life Convention in Florida last week, didn’t mention Romney by name, but it was obvious she was taking aim at him for his previous wavering on the abortion issue, the Huffington Post reports. The 2012 race is “not the time for Republicans to put up a candidate who is weak on this issue and has a history of flip-flopping on this issue,” she said.

(Excerpt) Read more at news.bostonherald.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: Massachusetts; US: Minnesota
KEYWORDS: 2012gopprimary; america; bachmann; bachmannnegatives; catfight; economy; first; michelebachmann; realconservatives
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-110 next last

1 posted on 06/25/2011 10:57:02 PM PDT by rabscuttle385
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: rabscuttle385
I thought she was Mitt's stalking horse. Now, are those the floated that lie, including Tammy Bruce, going to apologize for that smear?
2 posted on 06/25/2011 11:00:45 PM PDT by RINOs suck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rabscuttle385


3 posted on 06/25/2011 11:02:25 PM PDT by KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle ("If you're not fiscally AND socially conservative, you're not conservative!" - Jim Robinson, 9-1-10)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rabscuttle385
in a veiled dig at GOP presidential nomination opponent Mitt Romney.

Quite thinly veiled.

4 posted on 06/25/2011 11:10:36 PM PDT by Mr. Mojo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rabscuttle385

I have no problem with Michelle stating the truth. If that applies to Romney, then that is fine. Facts are hard to dispute.


5 posted on 06/25/2011 11:14:44 PM PDT by Deagle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Romney? Huntsman? aaaa..........What?

Who are these jokers?

July will bring Sarah....and then, the road to reality.

6 posted on 06/25/2011 11:26:01 PM PDT by NoRedTape
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: RINOs suck
I thought she was Mitt's stalking horse. Now, are those the floated that lie, including Tammy Bruce, going to apologize for that smear?

Maybe she's been reading some of the posts here and decided that if she wants to win this election, she'd better start attacking the right people.

Has she apologized for having Ed Rollins call Sarah Palin stupid?

7 posted on 06/25/2011 11:42:53 PM PDT by P-Marlowe (LPFOKETT GAHCOEEP-w/o*)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: P-Marlowe
Has she apologized for having Ed Rollins call Sarah Palin stupid?

He didn't call her stupid. He said she wasn't a serious candidate. Bachmann did tell him to apologize.

8 posted on 06/25/2011 11:46:16 PM PDT by RINOs suck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: RINOs suck
He didn't call her stupid. He said she wasn't a serious candidate.

IIRC he said that the choice was between an attractive woman who was smart and someone who was just attractive. The implication was that Sarah Palin was stupid.

Bachmann did tell him to apologize.

You got a link to that order? I must have missed that one.

The hiring of Ed Rollins was a stupid decision. She should have fired him.

9 posted on 06/25/2011 11:50:25 PM PDT by P-Marlowe (LPFOKETT GAHCOEEP-w/o*)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: P-Marlowe
The hiring of Ed Rollins was a stupid decision.

No argument there.


10 posted on 06/25/2011 11:52:23 PM PDT by KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle ("If you're not fiscally AND socially conservative, you're not conservative!" - Jim Robinson, 9-1-10)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: rabscuttle385
Michele is running for VP so she will build up her credentials in the evangelical base without burning bridges. No way will she trash anyone by name.

She is in too liberal a state to run for Senate so this is her chance to move up.

11 posted on 06/25/2011 11:53:02 PM PDT by byteback
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: byteback
No way will she trash anyone by name.

So far the only person trashed by her campaign has been Sarah Palin.

12 posted on 06/25/2011 11:55:31 PM PDT by P-Marlowe (LPFOKETT GAHCOEEP-w/o*)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: P-Marlowe
So far the only person trashed by her campaign has been Sarah Palin.

Fair point so I'll rephrase to say that she won't trash any serious candidate by name.

13 posted on 06/26/2011 12:02:56 AM PDT by byteback
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: byteback

“She is in too liberal a state to run for Senate...”

Rod Grams.


14 posted on 06/26/2011 12:04:37 AM PDT by BuddhaBrown (Path to enlightenment: Four right turns, then go straight until you see the Light!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: byteback
Fair point so I'll rephrase to say that she won't trash any serious candidate by name.

If she trashes Sarah Palin and Sarah Palin doesn't run, then Bachmann just lost the only person who could give her enough support to beat Romney.

Frankly I think it is Bachmann who is not the serious candidate. She is a candidate for Romney's VP slot. That is why she won't mention him by name.

If Palin doesn't run, she will most likely lend all her support to Perry. Bachmann may have burned the bridge to nowhere and she is stuck on the wrong side.

15 posted on 06/26/2011 12:09:12 AM PDT by P-Marlowe (LPFOKETT GAHCOEEP-w/o*)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: P-Marlowe

“The hiring of Ed Rollins was a stupid decision”

Is rocketing toward/into the lead generally a sign of a ‘stupid decision’ on campaign staffing?

If she gets any stupider she’ll be president.


16 posted on 06/26/2011 12:14:33 AM PDT by BuddhaBrown (Path to enlightenment: Four right turns, then go straight until you see the Light!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: BuddhaBrown

She’s not going to win.

It’s going to come down to Romney and either Perry or Palin.

If neither Perry nor Palin runs, then it’s going to be Romney.


17 posted on 06/26/2011 12:19:21 AM PDT by P-Marlowe (LPFOKETT GAHCOEEP-w/o*)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: BuddhaBrown

With all the guff that Sarah Palin has taken in her career in the limelight, being called stupid by Ed Rollins has to rank somewhere way up there between a single flea bite and a mildly stubbed toe. While hunting moose for dinner.


18 posted on 06/26/2011 12:19:38 AM PDT by HiTech RedNeck (Hawk)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: P-Marlowe

“Bachmann may have burned the bridge to nowhere”

Irony. Ouch!

Palin infamously flip-flopped on that bridge, as you will recall, and is now in favor of its non-existence.

Burn away.


19 posted on 06/26/2011 12:32:14 AM PDT by BuddhaBrown (Path to enlightenment: Four right turns, then go straight until you see the Light!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: RINOs suck; sickoflibs
I thought she was Mitt's stalking horse. Now, are those the floated that lie, including Tammy Bruce, going to apologize for that smear?

They will. Right after Obama apologizes for Obama care. ;)

20 posted on 06/26/2011 12:32:23 AM PDT by Impy (Don't call me red.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: All

““not the time for Republicans to put up a candidate who is weak on this issue and has a history of flip-flopping on this issue,”’

Somebody had to say it!


21 posted on 06/26/2011 12:33:55 AM PDT by Sun (Pray that God sends us good leaders. Please say a prayer now.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: P-Marlowe

“She’s not going to win.”

I’ve heard that about Bachmann since her first state senate victory slaughtering a long-term Republican incumbent. And before her first congressional victory. And before her second House win. And the third.

She is the winningest loser in the race.

Reagan heard the same. Palin too. Michele is in good company.


22 posted on 06/26/2011 12:39:26 AM PDT by BuddhaBrown (Path to enlightenment: Four right turns, then go straight until you see the Light!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: HiTech RedNeck

“With all the guff... being called stupid by Ed Rollins... a mildly stubbed toe”

Yes, I believe Sarah herself probably has that properly uninterested attitude toward the whole silly, puffed up Rollins related whining.


23 posted on 06/26/2011 12:43:47 AM PDT by BuddhaBrown (Path to enlightenment: Four right turns, then go straight until you see the Light!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: rabscuttle385
Tea Party queen U.S. Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) is touting her airtight conservative credentials...

Anti-socialist Bachmann got $250K in federal farm subsidies
Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) — so fond of accusing the Obama administration of foisting socialism on an unwilling America — has apparently been the recipient of about a quarter of million bucks in government handouts.

Michele Bachmann Literally Praised Government Pork In Letter To Obama OfficialA Freedom of Information Act request for communications the Minnesota Republican has had with the Department of Agriculture shows that she leaned heavily on federal officials for help -- never more so than when it came to aiding the pork and dairy producers in her state.

On Oct. 5, 2009, Bachmann wrote Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack praising him for injecting money into the pork industry through the form of direct government purchases. She went on to request additional assistance.

24 posted on 06/26/2011 1:42:11 AM PDT by Berlin_Freeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Deagle

Disputing is wholly different from accepting.


25 posted on 06/26/2011 1:56:35 AM PDT by monocle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: monocle

Heh! Not a lot of difference here... I dispute the argument and not only think that it is specious but false as well.. After all, Romney has made so many turns in his political career that it becomes difficult to pinpoint where he stands today. If Michelle points that out, more power to her.


26 posted on 06/26/2011 2:08:36 AM PDT by Deagle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: P-Marlowe; rabscuttle385; RINOs suck; KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle; BuddhaBrown; HiTech RedNeck
The hiring of Ed Rollins was a stupid decision.

Perhaps.

While hiring Rollins is not necessarily the best decision for campaign strategy execution you seem to forget that Jack Kemp hired Rollins in 1996 for his own presidential run.

Would you also like to dump on Kemp -- pioneer of Reagan's 1981 30% across the board Income tax reduction plan that made up the core of Reaganomics and the entire '80's boom?

Seems a little history lesson is due here.

Rollins was an adviser to Reagan's campaigns even as Sears got the boot in 1980. Was Reagan ill-advised or did you fail to recall that it was Rollins who was the National Campaign Director for the Reagan-Bush '84 campaign, winning 49 of 50 states?

Like it or not Rollins is a player, and he has a track record. For all we know Michelle may have enough on the ball to keep this jackal at close quarters, making him unavailable to other Washington "darlings," so as not to botch or bog down the Tea Party message.

Friends close, enemies closer.

We all think so linearly around here sometimes. For some Freepers their presumed mastery of keeping their well-meaning "eyes-on-the-prize" just results in alot of "perfection-enemy-of-the- good"-style tunnel vision.

In the end, all we end up doing is sniping at our natural allies. Yeah, you're "perfect," but "they" win. Our enemies are content with the odds in that battleground.

Try thinking a little asymetrically.

Pass a little less judgment and think a little more strategically.

FReegards!


27 posted on 06/26/2011 2:11:54 AM PDT by Agamemnon (Darwinism is the glue that holds liberalism together)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Agamemnon
While hiring Rollins is not necessarily the best decision for campaign strategy execution you seem to forget that Jack Kemp hired Rollins in 1996 for his own presidential run.

Ah, yes. Followed, in turn, by the Kemp Inauguration, and two four-year terms for the fabulously successful Kemp administration. ;)

28 posted on 06/26/2011 2:16:41 AM PDT by KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle ("If you're not fiscally AND socially conservative, you're not conservative!" - Jim Robinson, 9-1-10)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: RINOs suck
He didn't call her stupid. He said she wasn't a serious candidate. Bachmann did tell him to apologize.

Did he apologize publicly?

If he did not, why hasn't she fired him?
29 posted on 06/26/2011 2:17:13 AM PDT by SoConPubbie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: rabscuttle385

Mitt is much lower than a flip flopper!


30 posted on 06/26/2011 2:19:38 AM PDT by SWAMPSNIPER (The Second Amendment, A Matter of Fact, Not a Matter of Opinion)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Agamemnon
Rollins was an adviser to Reagan's campaigns even as Sears got the boot in 1980. Was Reagan ill-advised or did you fail to recall that it was Rollins who was the National Campaign Director for the Reagan-Bush '84 campaign, winning 49 of 50 states?

Like it or not Rollins is a player, and he has a track record. For all we know Michelle may have enough on the ball to keep this jackal at close quarters, making him unavailable to other Washington "darlings," so as not to botch or bog down the Tea Party message.


I believe the last MAJOR candidate that he has advised across the finish line was Reagan and I'm pretty sure that Reagan with or without his help would have won.

Not much of a track record if you ask me.
31 posted on 06/26/2011 2:19:52 AM PDT by SoConPubbie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: P-Marlowe

I think the woman intends to win. This is not a sorority.


32 posted on 06/26/2011 2:21:56 AM PDT by des
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: P-Marlowe

We agree. If Perry gets in I think this is where Sarah goes in with her support. Bachmann won’t win mostly because Republicans like Governors or VPs after the last non-Governors Dole and McCain ran. Nixon and Bush the elder being VPs and even Goldwater who was before my time.

T-Paw isn’t catching on so it’s looking like Romney or Perry to me and Huntsman is new but I just don’t see where the support is. So the rest are looking at VP or maybe launching cable tv careers which Palin and Huckabee have already successfully done.

My bet on Palin is that she will run for McCain’s seat when he steps down once he finishes out his term. If Romney wins then I think McCain could get Sec Def and Palin gets the appointment to Senate but I have no idea what Perry would do. Perry might run with her as VP but I’m just guessing what Sarah would want to support him.


33 posted on 06/26/2011 2:45:09 AM PDT by byteback
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: rabscuttle385

It will be interesting to see the media turn their guns on Bachmann—”Remember all that stuff we said about Palin? Well, okay, maybe we went a little overboard there, but trust us, THIS one is a REAL loon!”

Bachmann seems to be gaining credibility just because of her audacity, pardon the word. She’s just running.

That could make her the ‘candle that burns twice as bright lasts half as long,’ while Palin looks slower and steadier and more toughened by battle with the media. Or, she could be a contandah...


34 posted on 06/26/2011 2:46:20 AM PDT by Darkwolf377 (You can't go! All the plants are gonna die!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SoConPubbie

“...why hasn’t she fired him?”

I know this will seem far fetched to some, but... ah... just maybe she LIKES winning.

And maybe, just maybe, she is adult enough to realize Rollins did nothing but give an honest opinion, unfavorable as it might have been to someone not currently running for anything. He was asked. And, doubtless from an old fashioned campaign guy’s point of view, building an audience and making tours and such are fine and dandy.

But a ‘serious’ candidate (again, from his perspective) is someone who is instead building election machines, winning or taking a different position before quitting your current one, staying as an active part of the political and governing processes, and making your intentions clear and your level of commitment credible.

I’m not sure why that is so difficult to comprehend for some.

Rollins expresses his own opinion of one of the non-candidates. RollinsPhobes freak out.

Dog bites man. Non-story.

By the Rollins-hating Bachmann bashers’ own logic, if Palin does not disown them, then she is unworthy of a conservative’s vote.

Irony bites bashers. Film at eleven.


35 posted on 06/26/2011 3:05:39 AM PDT by BuddhaBrown (Path to enlightenment: Four right turns, then go straight until you see the Light!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Deagle

I was restating the concept of cognitive dissonance which commonly afflicts those passionately committed to any movement whether it be religous, political and, even, scientific.


36 posted on 06/26/2011 3:08:48 AM PDT by monocle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: RINOs suck

How could the article be credible with such an egregious error in the headline? Tea is a beverage. Spell-checking does not prevent obvious ignorance.


37 posted on 06/26/2011 3:18:54 AM PDT by Rapscallion (Obama is a foreigner. He occupies the office fraudulently. His SSN belongs to another person.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: rabscuttle385

Bachmann the RINO and Romney sweetheart
DID NOT MENTION ROMNEY BY NAME.

This is paid advt by Romney, Rollins and Bachmann
the RINOs working for Carter and Obama.

Ms. Romney-Bachmann STILL has not fired Rollins
or publicly apologized.


38 posted on 06/26/2011 3:43:24 AM PDT by Diogenesis (Nothing surpasses the complexity of the human mind. - Leto II: Dar-es-Balat)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rabscuttle385

My head hurts. I thought Bachmann was a stalking horse running for Romney’s VP and preventing Palin from getting the nomination... but Palin isn’t running and now Bachmann is attacking Romney. I’m confused... any Freep conspiracy theorists care to take a stab?


39 posted on 06/26/2011 4:08:40 AM PDT by wolfman23601
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BuddhaBrown

I thought it wasn’t a flip flop. I thought she was offered the funding and said to put that money to rebuilding the bridge on I35.


40 posted on 06/26/2011 4:10:39 AM PDT by EQAndyBuzz (Sarah Palin, the only candidate to be vetted by the NY Times, the Washington Post and NBC.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: SoConPubbie

I agree. Rollins has not much of a track record and what he does have is from long, long ago. Talk about hiring a tired old race-horse based on his glory. It shows very poor leadership abilities on Bachmann’s part that she a) hired him, b) kept him on after his “Palin is stupid” remark.

But then, where is somebody with House experience going to get a chance to learn leadership? That’s why House members never (in modern times) become President.


41 posted on 06/26/2011 4:10:39 AM PDT by samtheman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: RINOs suck

Why would Rollins apologize? Palin is not a serious candidate... or an unserious candidate. She is not a candidate at all at this point. She has until 9/11 before my money gets committed to a candidate.


42 posted on 06/26/2011 4:13:01 AM PDT by wolfman23601
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle
Ah, yes. Followed, in turn, by the Kemp Inauguration, and two four-year terms for the fabulously successful Kemp administration. ;)

I didn't imply that Rollins was successful with Kemp's primary. In fact I started out by saying he is possibly also not the best adviser for Bachmann -- if in fact she's taken him on as an adviser in the real sense at all.

My point was this: should Kemp's judgment be called into question for his choice even as the self-ordained potentates of what is supposed to pass for "good judgment" around here dive at Bachmann for her strategy of choosing Rollins at this moment?

Kemp had his reasons, Bachmann has hers. Will you deny that he was selected as Dole's running mate, and if Dole was a credible opposition force and not another McCain-like personality, Kemp (like Palin) could have actually served as Vice-President?

Some here on FR have knives out for Bachmann for some reason, and are trying to assert that her pick of Rollins is a lapse in judgment. I happen to think her plan is alot better formed than alot of posters here who claim to be so "informed."

I submit that they don't think strategically and know squat; they fall for media invented stories about alleged personal friction between Bachmann and Palin, and the media just laughs as they play the conservatives for fools chasing their tails.

This is one pretty smart and gutsy lady. Strategically thinking in the context of moving ahead the Tea Party agenda, I think she's head and shoulders above any of the couch potato snipers who show up around here, intent on slinging their barbs.

FReegards!


43 posted on 06/26/2011 4:28:36 AM PDT by Agamemnon (Darwinism is the glue that holds liberalism together)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Agamemnon
[...] dive at Bachmann [...] knives out for Bachmann [...], etc., etc.

I "deny" nothing, thanks for asking. Whatever it is you're arguing, however, is (plainly) only tangentially connected, at best, to anything I've asserted thus far. Breathe, f'chrissakes. ;)

44 posted on 06/26/2011 5:01:36 AM PDT by KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle ("If you're not fiscally AND socially conservative, you're not conservative!" - Jim Robinson, 9-1-10)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: RINOs suck
He didn't call her stupid. He said she wasn't a serious candidate. Bachmann did tell him to apologize.

And frankly, is Palin a serious candidate for POTUS if she hasn't even declared yet?

45 posted on 06/26/2011 5:02:44 AM PDT by ScottinVA (Imagine.... a world without islam.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: SoConPubbie
Not much of a track record if you ask me.

So say you. What are you, like 20 years old with the command of history comparable to something you might find under a Snapple bottle cap?

Get real. Diminish an accomplishment like that and Rollins' strategy in 1984 all you want. Lest you forget, it was not necessarily going to be a cake walk for Reagan after the bombing of the Marine barracks in Lebanon in Fall 1983, resulting in the subsequent withdrawal of US forces without any significant retribution. It took the shine off the previous Grenada rescue where Reagan's welcome aggressive foreign policy was concerned.

The economy picked up in late 1983 following the last tax cut installment in August, and the economy was humming a year later. Rollins steered the course of the message in that direction, successful guided the wrapping of Reagan's persona around that message and that brought the unmatched success in 1984.

Rollins may not be being brought on board by Bachmann as an adviser so much at this point, as it might be a strategy to put the old time Washington strategist in a "box."

Where the Tea Party's message is fresh -- and she wants to keep it that way -- she doesn't necessarily want a Rollins out there working his remaining talents through some other candidate. This could result in diluting the message with strategies which were more appropriate for campaigns 25 years ago. Those messages are not necessarily relevant to the current political climate, where the Tea Party message is in its ascendancy, and Bachamnn in a big way is leading the charge.

Bachmann's got her reasons. I for one will choose trust her judgment and her instincts. With 5 kids of her own and 23 foster kids in her care at one time or other, I think she knows a thing or two about handling perosonalities on all ends of the spectrum -- from curmudgeonly malcontents to babies. And she knows how to bring them to heel.

FReegards!


46 posted on 06/26/2011 5:03:03 AM PDT by Agamemnon (Darwinism is the glue that holds liberalism together)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: RINOs suck
I thought she was Mitt's stalking horse. Now, are those the floated that lie, including Tammy Bruce, going to apologize for that smear?

Of course they won't. The irony though is Bachamnn taking a swipe at Romney's position on abortion whilst Palin cheerleader Tammy Bruce has been celebrating the recent passage of the 'gay marriage' bill in the New York legislature.
I wonder if Bruce touts her support for gay marriage, as well as abortion, in her appearance in The Undefeated?

47 posted on 06/26/2011 5:03:21 AM PDT by jla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: RINOs suck
I thought she was Mitt's stalking horse. Now, are those the floated that lie, including Tammy Bruce, going to apologize for that smear?

Is Rollins still with her? If so, I am not.

48 posted on 06/26/2011 5:13:12 AM PDT by Caipirabob ( Communists... Socialists... Democrats...Traitors... Who can tell the difference?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: P-Marlowe

Then he did not call her stupid and someone is telling a big one. That little statement is nothing more than a little zinger. I see you with a little tiny shovel desperately trying to make a mountain out of a mole hill.


49 posted on 06/26/2011 5:52:45 AM PDT by org.whodat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: byteback

ROFLOL, now that was a good zinger.


50 posted on 06/26/2011 5:54:33 AM PDT by org.whodat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-110 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson