Mitt Romney, changed his story on hunting … again. Here’s where he started:


Mitt Romney said he had hunted "pretty much all his life." Then the press asked his staff to confirm … and he had hunted only twice (and once at a fundraiser no less!).

Now Romney has clarified. He hunts "varmints":

Romney, a former Massachusetts governor, said during a fundraising stop Thursday that he had also hunted smaller animals in Utah.

"I’m not a big-game hunter. I’ve made that very clear," he said. "I’ve always been a rodent and rabbit hunter. Small varmints, if you will. I began when I was 15 or so, and I have hunted those kinds of varmints since then. More than two times."

Three times? Wabbits? Not mousetraps?

As I said when his hunting problem emerged, it reminds me of his gun problem. He couldn’t figure out whether he owned a gun or not:

So Romney went from having a gun, to not having a gun, to having two guns. Except they are his son’s guns. At (one of) their vacation homes in Utah. That’s "his" gun.

The issue is, of course, not really about whether he has hunted or has a gun or not. The issue is that he has so many stories about basic facts like whether he has hunted, whether he owns a gun, or what his favorite movie is. These shouldn’t be hard. These don’t even need to be poll-tested. He can’t figure out an answer to these questions… And he wants to run a country?

Categories:

8 Comments

ee2793 · April 6, 2007 at 8:02 PM

The seriousness of this is almost comparable to McCain’s verions of how he approached Kerry to join the Democrat ticket in 2004…

bjalder26 · April 7, 2007 at 3:59 AM

This is stupid, I’ve known quite a few guys who grew up in Utah and about half of them have told me stories about killing rabbits or squirrels. I used to make fun of that fact telling people that Utah boys love killing small animals. That’s just Utah’s culture if you ask me, so what if that doesn’t make him a “real hunter” in your books, it’s a non-issue. These attempts to catch Mitt in his words are just downright deceitful. Saying that you have hunted “pretty much all his life” doesn’t mean that he is some sort of Rambo. I for one am glad he was a little to busy getting a dual degree from Harvard Business School and Harvard Law School to pursue his boyhood interest in hunting. I don’t know why but somehow that makes me actually feel better about him as a candidate. And somehow I don’t think the fact that he has hunted varmints with his cousins and presumably his sons makes him comparable to Elmer Fudd who didn’t get into Stanford, didn’t graduate as Valedictorian from BYU nor did he graduate at the top of Harvard’s class. Maybe it’s just me but I have a sneaking suspicion that some people are scouring every word Mitt says in an attempt to get voters to focus on a stupid little non-issue rather than trying to paint an honest and full picture of who he is.

eye · April 7, 2007 at 8:31 AM

But part of the “honest and full picture” is a man who will say anything, make up facts, etc., just to win.

What is so stupid is that the guy can’t keep basic facts straight.

Rachel · April 7, 2007 at 9:20 AM

bjalder, this isn’t about his hunting skills. Its about his being a phony.
He is one of those dumb politicians who thinks the second amendment is about hunting.

And touting all those degrees does nothing to improve his image as a phony.

Rachel · April 7, 2007 at 9:24 AM

bjalder, this isn’t about his hunting skills, its about Romney being a phony.
He is one of that politcians who thinks the second amendment is about hunting.
As for touting all the degrees he has, they don’t do a thing to cover up his phoniness.

ee2793 · April 7, 2007 at 1:05 PM

Excellent use of sockpuppets.

eye · April 7, 2007 at 1:09 PM

ee2793, no sockpuppets here. You surprised that someone is believing the plain truth?

Some advice for Mitt Romney « Swing State · April 7, 2007 at 10:55 AM

[…] Be vewy, vewy quiet…; Romney changes hunting story (again) […]

Comments are closed.