Mittens on thursday:
Reacting to suggestions that -- based on an op-ed he wrote for the New York Times in 2008 -- he would have allowed General Motors and Chrysler to be liquidated:
"I can't even listen to that. Of course I wouldn't have allowed them to be liquidated."
Not to be a condescending dick, but what's the difference between "let them go bankrupt" and "I wouldn't have allowed them to be liquidated"? I'm sure there is a legitimate difference in the technical detailing and I would like to know the exact difference, but in rhetoric this shit is obviously very confusing for the average voter.
On the federal auto rescue:
"I didn't agree with the process. But the outcome has been wonderful. The companies are more competitive, profitable and they're adding jobs."
*facepalm*
http://www.freep.com/article/20120217/NEWS15/202170439/What-Romney-said
