Everybody has been all a twitter recently about a couple of tweets, or to be exact, retweets, by actress Eva Longoria. Since she is co-chair of the president’s campaign, there are people who believe retweeting offensive tweets about the Republican presidential candidates was not a smart move. These were retweeted during the presidential debate on Tuesday and the vice presidential debate last week – the full text of which can be found on The Huffington Post.
At first Longoria tried the Anthony Weiner defense. She insinuated that her twitter account was randomly retweeting on its own. However, she has since come out and apologized if her retweet about Gov. Mitt Romney was offensive to anyone. The tweet, in part, called minorities and women “stupid” if they vote for Romney.
Conservative groups have come out strongly against Longoria, but there are some on the Democratic side who have been critical as well. The Huffington Post reports that the progressive blog Latino Rebels called the retweet about Romney “vulgar.” It reportedly said, “There are better ways to behave when you are officially working on a campaign, and unfortunately, Longoria’s social media blunders are not the way you do it.”
So what do you think? Should Longoria step down from the campaign or is it just something to be expected in the heat of a campaign?
I rest my case after your latest juvenille ourburst.
Obviously, most of the above is sarcastic. We all know Twitter doesn't really just spontaneously send out random things....
I saw the episode where Lawrence O'Donnell challenged Tagg Romney to a fistfight. I thought it was a deplorable excuse for journalism. It was shameless, stupid posturing, and quite frankly O'Donnell should have been fired for showboating like that. But let's not forget Tagg Romney talked about wanting to take a swing at the president, which is also, to my mind, unacceptable. Of course, in his defense, I believe Tagg later admitted he spoke without thinking.
By the way Mitt Romney's use of Religious deferments to avoid service in Vietnam deserves much more scrutiny than it has received. I applaud LO for broaching the subject. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k-aUfq4LJuk
Of course, the crickets will begin now... Here's the question- keep up- why does it matter if you can't say the same about your own?
Don't you get tired having to defend what the left does constantly? Maybe when he loses in Novemeber you guys can get a long needed rest.
But the question is, why do you not condemn something when it comes from anyone else? Because liberals pick and choose who they apply a standard to. that's why. I've never seen such hypocrisy in my life. I'm waiting for the time when a republican crosses a line and watch the defenders of obama demand they step down, crucify them pubically on the front pages of the newspaper etc... Will you defend them the way you defend the left. Of course not. The whole point of the original post is that this woman stands for the presidents campaign. Is that appropriate and why is he not embarrassed that she is representing him? When you don't condemn it, you do condone it. Simple. See, that says a lot about him to me.
"Makes you want to jump out of your seat and you want to rush down to the debate stage and take a swing at him," he said. "But you know you can't do that because, well, first because there's a lot of Secret Service between you and him, but also because that's the nature of the process. You know they're going to try to do anything they can do to make my dad into something he's not." "We signed up for it, we've got to kind of sit there and take our punches, and send them the other way," he continued. Note, it was how it made him feel. No nasty words. You have no case, but still defend the nastiness of the left. The words some of them use is beyond vile. Do you know what the C word is? hard to say outlound, isn't it, but they do easily. All about character to me when I make a jjudgement about someone. EL is co chair of the obama campaign. I rest my case again.
We don't make a big deal out of deferments unless those seeking them have actively supported the war they are avoiding service in. It's not the deferments that are the problem it's the hypocrisy. Clinton avoided serving in Vietnam but he openly opposed the war. He was also pilloried for draft avoidance by the press during his Presidential campaign. Doesn't Romney deserve the same scrutiny?