Romney, McCain and timetable

according to CNN

“The sharpest exchange in the debate came when Romney, the former governor of Massachusetts, was asked about the McCain campaign’s charge that he once said he favored a strict timetable for removing troops from Iraq.

Romney has consistently denied ever having backed a timetable and said McCain was taking a small portion of a quote out of context.

“It’s simply wrong,” Romney said. “By the way, raising it a few days before the Florida primary, when there was very little time for me to correct the record, falls in the kind of dirty tricks that Ronald Reagan would have found reprehensible.” But McCain, the Arizona senator who has strongly backed President Bush’s Iraq policy, accused Romney of hedging after public support for the war waned.”

OK, if it is so why state talker McCain would not say in a few days before the Florida primary that “Romney of hedging after public support for the war waned” instead of lying about Romney embracing a timetable foe withdraw ?

 McCain may be right that Romney should support surge back then in more clear words. I would agree with McCain in that.

But I am troubled by the fact that instead of criticizing Romney for not clear enough supporting the surge  , McCain start making stories about Romney accepting a timetable. Why in order to make a legitimate point McCain has to lie?

Is it the high moral ground on which McCain is making gains?

my vote goes to Mitt Romney!

I have no time to write for my blog: business is going very well and takes all my time. However few notes I have to post. As a Floridian republican I am going to vote in Florida Republican primary tomorrow and my vote goes to Mitt Romney!
Why not McCain?
Because , in addtion to everything I wrote previously( here and here):
1.
McCain’s attack on Romney with accusations that Romney has a timetable for withdrawal : it is a lie. And it is disgusting when a candidate such a McCain, who built a campaign on “higher than others moral ground” is lying. The fact that Romney is willing to discuss an end of Iraq war (not a timetable!!!) is a very good sign for me. It shows that Romney is a real pragmatist and as such he sees that we have a mission in Iraq and as long as soon as that mission is completed, we have no further business there. Romney is not for capitulation, Romney is not for withdrawal due to ideology. Romney is for victorious end of the war, is anything wrong with ending the war victoriously and going home? McCain wants us to stay in Iraq forever and wants our troops to serve and protect Iraqis (which is very silly in my view). I do not want our troops there in harms ways serving Iraqis. So Romney position is clear: get the job done, take care of results and then get out!
2. McCain is continuously mocking the fact that Romney is rich and therefore spending his wealth for elections. Since when it is a stigma to be rich in America?
I am for Romney because:

• Romney is smart, unlike McCain (who was  ranked fifth from the bottom in a class of about 800 graduates) Romney was a brilliant student

graduated from a joint Juris Doctor/Master of Business Administration program coordinated between Harvard Law School and Harvard Business School. He graduated cum laude from the law school and was named a Baker Scholar for graduating in the top five percent of his business school class. McCain, on other hand, graduated near the bottom of his class from Annapolis Naval Academy. (read more)

• Romney is successful, he is campaigning in depth and seriously (unlike Thompson and Giuliani).
• Romney is a man of moral convictions and does not play with his faith as McCain does: today McCain is “Episcopalian,” tomorrow Baptist, after tomorrow he might be a Mormon.
• He is a successful guy and a proven manager (which by definition make him an excellent leader) as I wrote previously. I see no contradiction between leader and manager.

If not Mitt Romney who can be a better president ?