Woman Tells Romney that Obama Should Be Tried For Treason

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/OTUS/woman-tells-romney-obama-treason/story?id=16297198

Taking the microphone, a woman told Romney that Obama had been "operating outside the structure of our Constitution." Pausing after her question, she remarked to another member of the audience, "I agree, he should be tried for treason."

All I can say is, wow!!!!

Romney is pandering so badly for the RW vote, he is accepting RW hysteria. Clearly, remarks such as these make me conclude he is the wrong man for the job. This plus letting his foreign poicy expert go because if his sexual orientation indicates to me Romney is not in charge.

Juxtapose that with Pres Bush Sr or Pres Reagan, et al, at least they were in charge.

 

Did you even read the story you linked? Or... are you just lying?

Your thread title: "Romney states Pres Obama should be tried for treason."

ABC News story title: Woman tells Romney Obama ‘should be tried for treason'

The difference is you attributing something to Mitt that he never did... why would you do that?

 

This is the same as when Sen McCain ran and the woman claimed Pres Obama was a Muslim. At least Sen McCain discounted that. Here we have Romney clearly accepting the worst, like Sen Santorum.

Raytri created a thread that highlights the misleading form the right, and here is another example of when Romney should step up and correct this. He might as well have said it.

 

No different than that old hag at that McKook townhall back in 2008 calling Obama an Arab which backfired on McKook for grabbing the mic from her and backing-up Obama *as a decent man* ..

Just more bat(*)(*)(*)(*) nuts conservatism …

 

Where did Romney state that "Pres Obama should be tried for treason"?



_

 

I have it that his foreign policy expert quit of his own recognizance. Where in the world did you get that Romney let him go? Better check your sources, maybe?

 

Either ignorance or dishonesty. Which is worse, in your opinion?

 

What's wrong with the picture ...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=9V8aMagOIdU

 

I got excited until I read the article and found out someone in the audience said it under her breath and Romney didn't silence her so he may as well have said it...

One thing that is absolutely clear (and worse imo) is that Obama is putting Romney on trial for Capitalism.

In his speech on Saturday when the president said, "I don't care how try and explain it Corporations are NOT people..." I just about tossed my lunch. Who exactly does he think corporations consist of anyway? Butterflies? Unicorns?

Obama didn't need to bring that into the campaign and it only makes him look foolish and desperate.

 

I disagree. That court case occurred during his presidency, and it speaks a lot about what the Republican platform seems to be all about. Less taxes for the rich and the corporate and they will save us.

What I don't understand is this. Corporations are people, but poor people are not? It's okay for profitable Corporations to get welfare, but not real living breathing people who actually need it?

 

Yes, you're right. But at least McCain made a point of correcting the old fool. Apparently Romney doesn't have that courage!

 

The old hag was a plant by McKook to somehow make McKook look *reasonable* ... this one for Romney is so far-wacked it defies sensibility and logic and should be embarrassing even to those conservatives without scruples ...

 

"Romney states Pres Obama should be tried for treason."

Actually he never did. Please change the thread title. Would hate to see this wonderful thread get deleted.

 

That is exactly mmy point. Ironically Sen Santorum said it was not his job/problem/et al when one of his supporters makes an invalid claim, yet he complained to Google when a web search of "Santorum" came up with less than flattering links.

 

Why would you make a blatantly false title for the thread which you yourself then immediately contradict in bold within the initial post? You might want to consider leaving thread creation to the more capable.

 

Jebus....that title is dripping with honesty....reminds me of a HuffPo/Media Matters/Think Progress lead in...

Do progressive leftists possess any shame whatsoever?

 

Obama Spokeswoman Says Romney Response to ‘Treason’ Comment Proves He Won’t ‘Stand Up to Hateful and Over-The-Line Rhetoric’

http://www.politicker.com/2012/05/0...and-up-to-hateful-and-over-the-line-rhetoric/


President Obama’s campaign spokeswoman, Lis Smith, sent out an outraged response after the president was blasted by a woman who said he should be “tried for treason” and a local politician made a speech slamming him for taking vacations at Mitt Romney’s town hall event in Euclid, Ohio.

“Today we saw Mitt Romney’s version of leadership: standing by silently as his chief surrogate attacked the President’s family at the event and another supporter alleged that the President should be tried for treason,” Ms. Smith said.

“Time after time in this campaign, Mitt Romney has had the opportunity to show that he has the fortitude to stand up to hateful and over-the-line rhetoric and time after time, he has failed to do so.

If this is the ‘leadership’ he has shown on the campaign trail, what can the American people expect of him as commander-in-chief ?”

 

corporations are not people...... the right thinks they should run the country is why they want to call them people..

government of the people, by the people, for the people

is walmart a PERSON, NO wallmart is a corporation, walmart hires PEOPLE and sells to PEOPLE, but it is not a PERSON

 

So...If they are not a person, they are not a citizen. Therefore...they cannot be taxed as a citizen. Thanks for the stock dividend.

 

Corporations wanna be like people they should pay alternative minimum income tax like people. Huge hole in deficit filled by VVF wisdom.

 

Wisdom from feces is still feces. Corporation shareholders' dividends are already taxable income. Leave it to a leftie to want to tax somebody twice for the same income.

Obama is a stupid fool for what he said today, and by that statement proves that he knows absolutely nothing about how businesses are run or even structured.

 

Indeed but I was talking about corporate profits not paid out to shareholders (though those rates should be treated as income IMHO). Before you dust off your, "but corporate taxes in America are the second highest in the world" Pavlov's dog rightwingy talking point... the effective tax rate on corporations in America is the second lowest in the world.

 

For some corporations perhaps.

Friends of Obama and the ones who hire the best accountants and CFO's.

That makes tax rates in America a casino where a few gamblers win and rest go home with empty pockets.

 

She's black?

 

Tax breaks does not equal welfare.

Allowing companies to keep more of their own money that they earned does not equate to government giving people money they did not earn.

Get your head out of your backside.