You don't know what he was going to say. :-p No one does.

What he did make clear was that he was paying his own way to the extent that he was not in debt to lobbyist or any special interest group. In other words, he will not owe anyone for his election. Of course, what you hope is that you can catch him in a lie!

quite correct, supernovia. i don't know what he was going to say next. not with certainty. i also don't know whether i'll stumble into 1,000 tons of jello when i leave the office this evening. again, not with certainty.
but on both counts, i'm pretty sure of the outcome.
but that reporter, by interrupting a hair too soon, kept us all being entirely sure that mitt romney was on his way to telling an unambiguous lie rather than just something that might technically be true, if you parse the transcript.
point taken.

Really, by saying "Johnson, by interrupting Romney a moment too early, didn't give the good candidate time to finish telling his lie."

Where is the lie, there are, in fact NO lobbyist running his campaign? There are advisers "advising" his campaign. I do not care if a lobbyists hold Mitts hand in the can. They are not RUNNING his campaigm. Do they have influance, yes, but no lobbyist is running Mitts campaign.

Why doesn't Johnson interupt liberal candidates when they "actually" lie? Because, their lies Johnson buys into.

Give me a break, this is a reporter making news where there is no story. But, a hack is still a hack.

He was going to say "front porch." I'll bet anything.

I love the woman at the end that says, "I think you're rude and ugly."

Wow, like that exchange and the constant replay of it actually have anything to do with helping people sort out what they think of the candidates' positions on the real issues facing this country.

Too bad we can't just tell candidates they have six weeks' worth of free web space on which to post position papers and respond in writing to questions mailed in by the press and the public, then have a general election and be done with it.

It's not like governance and election results are actually related to each other any more. Doesn't matter if the lobbyist is, or is not, running Romney's campaign. He'll be helping Congressmen draft legislation again when the campaign is over because that's what the lobbyists do for the corporations paying them to do it.

Ever wonder why people can see the EXACT SAME CLIP and come to completely opposite conclusions? Some find Romney to be coolheaded and adept at clarifying his intended meeting and the role lobbyists have in his campaign while others see him as angry and evasive?

Well, I saw an interesting article today that may be related. It answers why Mitt is stuck with the label flip-flopper depsite that his competitors have changed their positions just as much. Have a look: http://www.vanderbilt.edu/news/releases/2008/1/18/vanderbilt-poll-explains-why-romneys-flip-flopper-label-sticks-political-scientist-says-anti-mormon-bias-finds-cover