Santorum endorses Obama over Romney

[DrJonescaptain of 1,000]

LA Times: 22 March 2012
http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la ... 9900.story

Santorum told a crowd in San Antonio, according to NBC News. "If you're going to be a little different, we might as well stay with what we have instead of taking a risk with what may be the Etch-A-Sketch candidate of the future."

Romney's campaign, eager to punch back after the Etch-A-Sketch moment went viral online, seized on the comment, emailing the this statement to reporters in the candidate's name:

"I am in this race to defeat Barack Obama and restore America's promise. I was disappointed to hear that Rick Santorum would rather have Barack Obama as president than a Republican. This election is more important than any one person. It is about the future of America. Any of the Republicans running would be better than President Obama and his record of failure."

The Etch-A-Sketch controversy mushroomed quickly Wednesday after Fehrnstrom mentioned the toy in response to a question about whether positions Romney has taken during the primary would be too conservative for him to win in November.

"I think you hit a reset button for the fall campaign. Everything changes. It's almost like an Etch-A-Sketch. You can kind of shake it up and restart all over again," Fehrnstrom said.

Romney portrayed Fehrnstrom's comment as a reference to the nuts and bolts of his campaign organization being "reset" for the general election, not his political views.

[Juliettecaptain of 1,000]

Nothing about Santorum impresses me. His remarks are that of a immature, spoiled, child. If he were elected President, I don't see him
handling matters in a rational way. He's a cry babie...

[natashacaptain of 1,000]

Nothing about Santorum impresses me. His remarks are that of a immature, spoiled, child. If he were elected President, I don't see him
handling matters in a rational way. He's a cry babie...

That has been my take lately, too, Juliette. Both Santorum and Gingrich are, as my husband says, "winey babies". After Santorum's statement about Obama over Romney, I don't see how he could ever get behind Mitt now if he is the nominee. He would just not be believeable at all. It seems he is grasping at straws now. Funny about the etch-a-sketch deal...when I heard the staffer say that, I knew exactly what he meant and couldn't believe how they twisted it around!

[sbsioncaptain of 1,000]

"........we shall lead the opposition....." NWO plant, obviously

[sadie_Mormoncaptain of 1,000]

Nothing about Santorum impresses me. His remarks are that of a immature, spoiled, child. If he were elected President, I don't see him
handling matters in a rational way. He's a cry babie...

I agree. Something about him just bothers me. He's like a whinny child who didn't get his way. The one who always goes and tells on the other kids... teachers pet. I can't stomach when he speaks.

[LateOutOfBedcaptain of 100]

"........we shall lead the opposition....." NWO plant, obviously

imo, this is the answer. Right now TPTB want Obama back in office pretty badly because he's doing such a magnificent job destroying our country according to their plans. They'll, however, take Romney as a last ditch alternative because he probably won't destroy it at the rate they'd like him too... just a bit too slow for what they want. So, they are using Santorum and Gingrich to discredit "the somewhat less desirable opponent". It's all a big dog and pony show.

-- Geoff

[tmaccaptain of 1,000]

From the outset, that was essentially my take on Rick Santorum. In the early going he didn't have any traction at all. Everyone else (including Pawlenty early own) was dropping out, but he stayed in. Even then I concluded that the only reason he would be doing that was if he had made a deal with the devil, so to speak, to do their bidding, and was simply waiting his turn. My conclusion is that he is completely bought and paid for (although aside from RP, I'm not sure that isn't the case with all of them. Personally, I think TPTB have things set up so that they will be comfortable with whoever is nominated by either party. Nothing has happened that would lead me to believe otherwise.

[PunaGabecaptain of 100]

Here we go getting stuck in the left right paradigm AGAIN.BOTH parties are controlled by the same puppet masters.It doesnt matter if its a repub or a dem neither of them have any morals.

[LateOutOfBedcaptain of 100]

Here we go getting stuck in the left right paradigm AGAIN.BOTH parties are controlled by the same puppet masters.It doesnt matter if its a repub or a dem neither of them have any morals.

+1. I wish more people would accept and understand this concept.

-- Geoff

[Fiannancaptain of 1,000]

At this rate the next thing we will hear is that Rikki Santorum has a meltdown and starts running nude through the streets of San Diego and screaming obscenities like that guy who made the Kony 2012 video.

[InfoWarrior82captain of 1,000]

LOL. Two big government republicans arguing back and forth about who is a better big government republican.

[Col. Flaggcaptain of 10,000]

=)) LOL. Two big government republicans arguing back and forth about who is a better big government republican.

My sentiment exactly IW - and, how ironic that Rick says we may as well stick with Obama over the 'etch-a-sketch' guy (Romney) who, by his actions and voting record, may as well be Obama anyway. Ron Paul is the only man for the job and it's obvious he isn't going to get the nomination because of how corrupt the whole thing is as well as the political illiteracy of most Americans who believe whatever they are told by the media and Washington, DC , so I will be writing Ron in for president in November.

[Juliettecaptain of 1,000]

=)) LOL. Two big government republicans arguing back and forth about who is a better big government republican.

My sentiment exactly IW - and, how ironic that Rick says we may as well stick with Obama over the 'etch-a-sketch' guy (Romney) who, by his actions and voting record, may as well be Obama anyway. Ron Paul is the only man for the job and it's obvious he isn't going to get the nomination because of how corrupt the whole thing is as well as the political illiteracy of most Americans who believe whatever they are told by the media and Washington, DC , so I will be writing Ron in for president in November.

And that doesn't surprise me. Why not write in Obama? Why not just STAY HOME?? Your vote is useless and a waste of time.

[uglypitbullcaptain of 1,000]

My sentiment exactly IW - and, how ironic that Rick says we may as well stick with Obama over the 'etch-a-sketch' guy (Romney) who, by his actions and voting record, may as well be Obama anyway. Ron Paul is the only man for the job and it's obvious he isn't going to get the nomination because of how corrupt the whole thing is as well as the political illiteracy of most Americans who believe whatever they are told by the media and Washington, DC , so I will be writing Ron in for president in November.

Speaking of 'etch-a-sketch'.....

[Original_Intentcaptain of 1,000]

=)) LOL. Two big government republicans arguing back and forth about who is a better big government republican.

My sentiment exactly IW - and, how ironic that Rick says we may as well stick with Obama over the 'etch-a-sketch' guy (Romney) who, by his actions and voting record, may as well be Obama anyway. Ron Paul is the only man for the job and it's obvious he isn't going to get the nomination because of how corrupt the whole thing is as well as the political illiteracy of most Americans who believe whatever they are told by the media and Washington, DC , so I will be writing Ron in for president in November.

And that doesn't surprise me. Why not write in Obama? Why not just STAY HOME?? Your vote is useless and a waste of time.

No, it is not useless and a waste of time.

For one thing, your actions (or inactions) in regard to government are something you will be judged for. Evil wins when good men do nothing. Who will be under greater condemnation, the person who votes their conscience even though they feel there is no chance, or the person who does nothing? In my opinion, the latter.

For another thing, there are many more offices being voted for other than president. The John Birch Society has long promoted the view (and I concur) that our choices for members of the House of Representatives is far more important than our votes for President. It may take a little study to figure out why that is, and I am not going to explain it as my experience has been that knowledge not worked for is generally not appreciated and is usually rejected.

For right now I feel that it is my duty to support Ron Paul. I have never voted for the lesser of two evils; however, I will say that come November as election day draws near, I will go to the Lord with my choice, and I will truly seek confirmation or a "stupor of thought" to determine if my choice is what the Lord wills, and I will strive to know the mind of the Lord on the matter and act accordingly. My default action is to follow the counsel to seek the good, wise supporter of the constitution. It is not my job to "pick a winner". There is no counsel given to "do what you have to to keep the worst candidate out" there is no counsel to "support the priesthood holder" or the most likely to be a "Hezekiah". The counsel to me is clear. Good, wise, honest, and supporting the original intent of the constitution. But again, the Lord's ways are not man's ways. I will confirm before acting.

Speaking of throwing your vote away - there is NO WAY that Mitt does not carry Utah. Therefore, why go vote for Mitt? He is going to get all of Utah's electoral votes regardless of what you do - so by your same reasoning as you express to Ron Paul supporters, you are wasting your time voting, it will not affect the outcome so WHY BOTHER?

I would suggest that we bother because it is a commandment. As long as you can walk confidently into that voting booth confident that you are voting as the Lord wants, you have to answer to no one! If you thing such things "don't really matter in the eternities" - you will be corrected of that misconception!

My opinion is that lack of faith in following the Lord's instruction is why we continue to be saddled with the incredibly poor leadership that we have (and will continue to have until we repent.)

[LateOutOfBedcaptain of 100]

No, it is not useless and a waste of time.

For one thing, your actions (or inactions) in regard to government are something you will be judged for. Evil wins when good men do nothing. Who will be under greater condemnation, the person who votes their conscience even though they feel there is no chance, or the person who does nothing? In my opinion, the latter.

For another thing, there are many more offices being voted for other than president. The John Birch Society has long promoted the view (and I concur) that our choices for members of the House of Representatives is far more important than our votes for President. It may take a little study to figure out why that is, and I am not going to explain it as my experience has been that knowledge not worked for is generally not appreciated and is usually rejected.

For right now I feel that it is my duty to support Ron Paul. I have never voted for the lesser of two evils; however, I will say that come November as election day draws near, I will go to the Lord with my choice, and I will truly seek confirmation or a "stupor of thought" to determine if my choice is what the Lord wills, and I will strive to know the mind of the Lord on the matter and act accordingly. My default action is to follow the counsel to seek the good, wise supporter of the constitution. It is not my job to "pick a winner". There is no counsel given to "do what you have to to keep the worst candidate out" there is no counsel to "support the priesthood holder" or the most likely to be a "Hezekiah". The counsel to me is clear. Good, wise, honest, and supporting the original intent of the constitution. But again, the Lord's ways are not man's ways. I will confirm before acting.

Speaking of throwing your vote away - there is NO WAY that Mitt does not carry Utah. Therefore, why go vote for Mitt? He is going to get all of Utah's electoral votes regardless of what you do - so by your same reasoning as you express to Ron Paul supporters, you are wasting your time voting, it will not affect the outcome so WHY BOTHER?

I would suggest that we bother because it is a commandment. As long as you can walk confidently into that voting booth confident that you are voting as the Lord wants, you have to answer to no one! If you thing such things "don't really matter in the eternities" - you will be corrected of that misconception!

My opinion is that lack of faith in following the Lord's instruction is why we continue to be saddled with the incredibly poor leadership that we have (and will continue to have until we repent.)

Exactly how I feel OI... Except replace Utah w/ Arizona.

-- Geoff

[believercaptain of 100]

Newt Gingrich said a similar thing about Obama being better than Romney.

[Juliettecaptain of 1,000]

Newt Gingrich said a similar thing about Obama being better than Romney.

Wrong..

[DrJonescaptain of 1,000]

Rick Santorum called in to Glenn Beck today; transcript FWIW:

Transcript of interview below:

GLENN: The headline on Drudge is Santorum Snaps. I thought he sounded sleepy

PAT: Yeah. He didn’t sound ‑‑ yeah

GLENN: Santorum snaps. Obama preferable to Romney. Rick Santorum is with us now. Hello, Rick.

SANTORUM: Good morning.

GLENN: How are you, sir?

SANTORUM: I’m doing great. I’m ready for Louisiana.

GLENN: Have you come down off of your tantrum apparently that ‑‑
Advertisement

SANTORUM: There was no tantrum there. All I was saying was what I’ve been saying a hundred times. If we have a choice between Twiddle Dumb and Twiddle Dee that the American public is not going to support out nominee. We need a stark contrast. That’s all I was saying. I’ve said repeatedly, as you’ve heard me said on this program, I would vote for Rick for Republican, I would vote for Ron Paul, I would whoever the Republican nominee is. The point is whether voters will vote for someone who doesn’t have a clear contrasting vision for this country.

PAT: Yes.

SANTORUM: And that’s the point I was making in that speech. I’ve made it in every speech I’ve been given and I’ll continue to make that point and governor ‑‑ you know, it’s funny. I didn’t get one question on that afterward.

GLENN: But hang on. It’s not just ‑‑ it’s not just the Republican thing. It is ‑‑ there is a difference between ‑‑ I mean, Mitt Romney has ‑‑ is not now and never has been a member of the communist party. (Laughter.)

SANTORUM: Okay. You’re right.

PAT: Okay.

SANTORUM: All right. Sorry. Look. What I’m talking about are the big issues of the day which is, you now, Obamacare, cap and trade, the bailouts, government control of people’s lives and this is a guy who, you know, who, in my opinion, and if you saw this ‑‑ it was his Etch‑A‑Sketch comment. He’ll say whatever he needs to say in front of whatever group he needs to say it in front of to win the election and that’s not going to win this election. I mean, you know, pandering to voters and saying what people want to hear is not going to win. What people want is someone they can trust, someone who knows that, you know, that they want to, as I said the other night, tear Washington bureaucracy out by its roots and do some big changes in Washington and that’s the kind of contrasting vision we need and that’s not what we’re getting in the Romney campaign. We get this parsing position that we see on all these positions.

GLENN: Now, let me take this a piece at a time. First of all, on the Etch‑A‑Sketch thing, we’re split here in the studio. I think that Romney strikes me as an Etch‑A‑Sketch guy. I mean, I have ‑‑ let me just give you the quote here from Romney. You know, he came out Monday and said, you know, this gas hike trio, the three that are on a mission to drive up the price of gas, lean on energy so they can finally get their solar and their wind and more price competitive, that’s what they want to do and then he claimed that people are trying to drive up the price of energy which is absolutely accurate. However ‑‑

SANTORUM: Yeah

GLENN: He said in 2006, I don’t think now is the time and I’m not sure there’s going to be a right time for us to encourage the use of more gasoline. I’m very much in favor of people recognizing that high gas prices just probably here to stay. So, if that’s not Etch‑A‑Sketch, how do I know what he really believes?

SANTORUM: That’s the point I was trying to make and I probably didn’t say it as articulately as I needed to say it, but I’ve been saying it repeated ed, that we need someone who you can trust, someone who provides a contrast, not someone who is just ‑‑ I would make the argument he is better on some issues about Barack Obama. There’s no question about it but on the big issues of the day, you know, of government, you know, control and crushing our economy and our energy, he has just been wrong so much that it makes ‑‑ it makes it ‑‑ it makes it a hard ‑‑ much harder election than it needs to be.

GLENN: Okay. Let me ask you this: Jim DeMint came out yesterday and said he’s excited, excited about the idea of Romney being the candidate

PAT: He’s the first person ‑‑ he’s the first American known who have said excited and Mitt Romney in the same sentence. That’s the first time that’s happened in a country of over 300 million people and now we’re putting him in the Guinness Book of World Records and ‑‑

GLENN: And that’s a pretty big piece. He’s ‑‑ I mean, here’s a guy who the Tea Party ‑‑ I mean, what happened there?

SANTORUM: Yeah. Was he excited when Mitt Romney went down to Puerto Rico after I said that Puerto Ricans have to learn English in order to be a member of the ‑‑ be admitted to statehood, since only 15% of Puerto Ricans speak English and Mitt Romney who believes that English should be the official language of our country and is against bilingual education went to Puerto Rico and in order to get 20 delegates said he would admit Puerto Rico into the union even if nobody spoke English?

PAT: Wow.

SANTORUM: This is the problem. That’s what he said. He said, no, there’s no English language for the people of Puerto Rico in order for him to support statehood. Now, how can you ‑‑

PAT: That got very little coverage. That got very little coverage.

GLENN: It will get coverage.

SANTORUM: It got huge coverage in Puerto Rico and the reason he got 80% of the vote is I stood up and said what was the truth which is there’s no way that any state is going to be admitted to the union if people don’t speak the language of the country and that’s not that they don’t ‑‑ they can’t speak another language but they’ve got to be able to speak English.

GLENN: Yeah, but you had your shirt off by a pool.

SANTORUM: Wait a minute. (Laughter.)

GLENN: Okay.

SANTORUM: 15 minutes I laid on that. 15 minutes.

PAT: You can’t do that.

GLENN: Can I tell you something? I saw that photo ‑‑ I saw that photo because, honestly, I went to ‑‑ for Christmas I went to Hawaii with my family. I did not go ‑‑ we stayed right at a hotel right there at the beach and I did not go to the beach without my shirt on ever because I knew ‑‑

STU: The people there thank you for that, by the way.

GLENN: No, no, no. I know what I look like without a shirt on and I saw that picture of you ‑‑ I saw that picture of you and I thought, oh, that’s unfortunate. That’s just ‑‑

SANTORUM: Yeah, it was.

PAT: It wasn’t that bad.

SANTORUM: I’m worried about the gastric distress I might have caused people with that photo.

GLENN: All right. So, let me share something with you that I haven’t even shared with the guys here. In the last three weeks, a very, very prominent person approached me, mainly because he certainly doesn’t know me if he approached me with this and he said, Glenn, you could be the guy that could be the turning point in this election and you could really help, you know, pick the next President if you could just convince Rick Santorum to drop out because you and I know it’s time for him to drop out and just convince him to drop out and I said, A, I think you’re ‑‑ I think you’re overestimating my Jedi mind trick and, also, I believe in divine providence. Right. I believe in divine providence. I believe that if it’s supposed to happen and we’re living our lives the way we’re supposed to, it will happen, but convince the average person that, you know ‑‑ and don’t bring in Newt Gingrich because I love the way nobody’s saying this about Newt Gingrich. Just you. Convince the people that this is the right thing to do, for you to stay in and not start to unify the country behind one candidate.

SANTORUM: The best thing we can do right now is to nominate a conservative against Barack Obama. That’s what we need to do. That’s the best chance for us to win the election, No. 1. No. 2, the ‑‑

GLENN: Wait, wait. Explain that for anybody ‑‑ hang on just a second. Explain that again why you say that for anybody who just doesn’t understand that.

SANTORUM: Well, one time in the last 100 years a Republican has defeated a Democratic incumbent, once, and most of the time when we’ve run against Democratic incumbents, we tried to run moderates because we had to win and, of course, we’ve only one won once, Ronald Reagan, when we provided that clear contrast and that’s what we need in this election. You can’t win this election unless you get your base and the people of our party, like in 2010, excited about who the nominee is and that the people who are in the middle, if you will, are ‑‑ can share that excitement and like the person they’re voting for and relative to the person they’re voting for. That’s what happened with Reagan. He had a clear vision. He had someone who was out there who was ‑‑ they had trust in, that they could relate to and that’s, you know ‑‑ unfortunately, you know, you look at Governor Romney and he’s having troubles on all those fronts and Governor Romney ‑‑

GLENN: Excuse me. I have a lot of ‑‑

SANTORUM: Because he’s overwhelmingly spending whoever he’s running against. That’s not going to happen in the general election

GLENN: You know, you can’t say you can’t relate to him. I’ll have you know I have many friends who have $50 million houses who enjoy him he very much. (Laughter.) I have friends who own cars and car dealership and car companies and race teams that relate to him a great deal.

STU: It’s one of those things where I feel like these cries of unify feel to me ‑‑ and let me know if you agree with this, Rick. Does it feel to you the same way as right now we’re saying unify but it’s unify around one. In 2008 the country said change but change to what? You can’t just rally around the verb. You’ve got to ‑‑

PAT: And forget that the election in 2008 between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama went down to, what, June?

GLENN: June.

PAT: It was June and nasty and they were tearing each other up and they won

GLENN: And they were saying the same thing.

PAT: And they won and they were saying the exact same thing. So, tell people to shut up.

GLENN: The Drudge will report that as him snapping.

SANTORUM: We have to realize the shorter the race is, the better it is for the Republican party. Why? Because Obama’s going to have the media and a huge money advantage and he will not be able to unleash that money advantage or the media on the nominee unless ‑‑ until we have a nominee and once we ‑‑ once a nominee is, quote, decided and if it’s decided early, then Barack Obama has literally hundreds of millions of dollars he can start just pounding away at the Republican candidate and that Republican candidate is going to be shooting back with a pea shooter. We wait until the fall to have a nominee and we’ll have all of our forces and all of their forces. Yeah, they’ll be able to outspend us, but will be diminishing returns after awhile. There will be so much money concentrated in such a short period of time, in a sense, their money advantage is negated, their media advantage is negated. We want this election. We want this election to be short. We want it to be two months. We want it to be focused instead of a drawn out process where they can just destroy the Republican nominee over the course of the next five months.

STU: But, really, do you think you can do better than Joe Biden as a VP if you were to win?

SANTORUM: You know, I seem to do worse.

GLENN: (Laughter.)

PAT: No. I don’t think he can.

GLENN: I wanted to really put some thought into that, but, no, I don’t think you can. Thank you very much, Rick. Best of luck to you this weekend.

SANTORUM: Yes.

PAT: Going to win Louisiana tomorrow.

STU: Yeah.

PAT: Yeah. You could help him do that by going to RickSantorum.com.

STU: Do you have to end every interview by giving his website?

GLENN: This is the worst. This is the worst.

PAT: Somebody has to. He didn’t do it. So ‑‑

STU: It’s true. He’s not shilling for himself enough apparently

GLENN: It really bothered me when this individual came to me and said, you know, you do that. Isn’t that the kind of stuff that we hate? Isn’t that the kind of stuff that is bad, the back room deals?

STU: It does happen. Everybody knows that, but I feel like, A, it’s someone who doesn’t know you well enough to know that you would never do that and it also is someone who doesn’t know Rick Santorum well enough because he’s not going to listen to you or anybody else

GLENN: No.

STU: He’s going to stay in the race as long as he feels like it’s the right thing to do

GLENN: That’s one reason I like him, because he did go down to court Puerto Rico and he did say that because it’s consistent, that’s what he believes, and so he said it. Even though it cost him the race, that’s what he did.

STU: Yeah. You know, this is what sucks about primaries, because I like Mitt Romney. He seems like a nice guy. I think he’s really smart. I think he does a lot of good thing. I like Rick Santorum. It’s like everyone just gets in these fights where it’s just constant everyone going back and forth.

GLENN: We’re really not enemies.

STU: Not at all

GLENN: Although I think we’ve created some which is not necessarily ‑‑ but you know what? Rick can’t be the President because we like him and there’s just no way that we could have a President that actually likes us.

PAT: Now we’re setting a new precedent here. This is a brand new precedent we’re sitting

GLENN: We were at the airport yesterday and we were talking about the race and I just looked and Pat said, Romney will hate us by the time he would get into office.

[Oldemandaltoncaptain of 1,000]

Did “Santorum endorses Obama over Romney”? Only if you take him out of context.

I have heard his oft repeated stump speech and the point he was trying to make, not very well this time, is that if you are going to beat Obama you need to elect someone with a stark contrast not an “Obama lite”. (Ron Paul would be an even more stark contrast but he’s not doing too well) The voters have in the past chosen the “real thing” rather than a wishy washy moderate. They chose Bill Clinton over Bob Dole/Bush I and Obama over McCain. To many conservatives, Romney looks and talks like another McCain/Dole/Bush. These guys’ strategy was to not sound extreme (Conservative/Libertarian) so they could pander to the supposed “moderates” to get their vote while counting on their conservative base to vote for them. This tactic many times just leaves their base sitting at home disgusted with their party's candidate. It did not work for Dole Bush or McCain even though they tried. Reagan beat the progressive Carter because he ran as an un abashed conservative and thus gave the voter a stark contrast to Carter’s liberalism. He was not apologetic about his conservatism nor his religious beliefs and said what he believed no matter the consequences. In poll after poll the great majority of the American voters, when asked on specific issues, are found to be conservative/libertarian not ‘moderate’ or ‘liberal’. IMO trying to go ‘moderate’ will not work for Romney this time either. That’s why he hasn’t sealed the deal yet in the primaries. His positions on government (State) run health care, belief in manmade global warming, gun control, etc. reminds many of the conservatives in the Republican Party of Romney being just another Dole or McCain. A wishy washy, Country Club, Establishment Republican. THAT is the perception.

If Romney DOES finally win the Primary, then the only chance he has to win vs Obama is to pick a Conservative/Libertarian V.P. (Rand Paul?) and get out of the middle of the road and go right. The American public needs a stark contrast to the far left (Marxist) Obama administration not another lukewarm moderate or “Obama lite”.

"Look, I was an independent during the time of Reagan-Bush. I'm not trying to take us back to Reagan-Bush." Romney.

"I think people recognize that I'm not a partisan Republican, that I'm someone who is moderate, and that my views are progressive," Romney told reporters in Worcester on a campaign stop in 2002.

BTW Rick did say that he would endorse, whole hardily, whoever wins the Republican Nomination be it Romney, Newt, or Paul over Obama. DUH!

[LateOutOfBedcaptain of 100]

"I think people recognize that I'm not a partisan Republican, that I'm someone who is moderate, and that my views are progressive," Romney told reporters in Worcester on a campaign stop in 2002.

I think this quote from Romney himself is the kind of things that scare me the most about him...

But thanks OMD for putting this topic in perspective.

-- Geoff