ROMNEY'S BACKERS; HANNITY, etc.
When is a trip a debacle?
The idea that Sean Hannity is trying to paint Mitt Romney, his idol and the potential Republican candidate in the 2012 presidential election, as a prince in shining armour makes for the "Ridiculist" (a CNN, caricature feature).
He, Hannity, interviews two former Olympic gold medalist, who are purported supporters of Romney, and asking them about Romney's role in the Salt Lake City Olympic Games that he took over in 2002 as CEO., to make him look exceptional. All they (interviewees) could do was to add more ambiguity to the issue.
In other words, the two people were there to save face for the Republican candidate of his London Olympics fiasco, which for that alone disqualified him to be leader of anything, let alone the leader of the free world; if in case he wins the election.
He has infuriated the Mayor of London and the British Press, and that in itself is a shameful episode; but to try and turn that around by saying that Romney has used his magical managerial expertise to reverse a project in a $400 million dollar deficit into a $100 million surplus is ridiculous.
However, the truth is that the Salt Lake City Olympics happened to be a boondoggle, until the American tax payer, through the U.S. Congress, has seen it as an entity qualified for "earmark" funding.
"Mitt Romney oversaw a wide-ranging lobbying campaign to snare tens of millions of dollars in federal earmarks for the Salt Lake City Olympic Games at a time critics were charging the games had become a prime example of out-of-control “pork barrel” spending, according to Senate lobbying records." (http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/02/18/10444876-salt-lake-city-olympics-earmarks-a-double-edged-sword-for-romney?lite).
.... and Rick Santorum, another candidate running in the Republican Party nomination race with Romney, has pointed out that Romney's political influence put him there at the SLCOG, and that he has no place in the games, but because of that (influence).
Yet, whatever Hannity and the RNC do to eradicate what Romney has gone through in London, the damage has already been done to the image of the United States for good. He must remember that the United Kingdom is the closest friend to the U. S. than any other country.
The fact that he has not been given a Royal audience in the U. K. of all places for a person running for president in the name of a major political party, was proof that he, Romney, has been slighted or even rejected, because he failed the test of diplomacy.
Queen Elizabeth ll happened to be at the same venue as Romney, at the London Olympic Stadium, but no introduction of any kind between the two has been reported. Why? Because the guy is a complete Ninny to represent the U.S. in the eyes of many people. (The Newsweek magazine called him a "Wimp").
One is not saying all that to boost President Barack Obama's chances to defeat Mitt Romney at the November 6th general election, but that the truth must be told about him for American voters to know the person they are supposed to vote for as a possible future president.
Hannity must respect the rights of the American people to know something before they commit themselves to it. They have to be very careful, in order not to have another "I am not a crook," president.
He, Romney, will have the chance to redeem himself as much as he can at the Republican Party Convention in Tampa Bay, Florida, (August 27 - 30, 2012), when he is officially presented and be accepted by a majority of the party; otherwise, any damage control right now by the Romney campaign or anyone else will be deemed as a mere whitewash.
The two people, who have been in the video with Hannity can peg their support for Romney, but what they are not supposed to do is to throw a "red herring" in other people's way. It is alright to show their loyalty to Romney, and by telling their personal stories to favor him, but they cannot disengage him from an almost failed project, which has gotten the help of the tax payer to become successful in the end; namely, the SLCOG.
Besides, they must bear in mind that it is easier to handle a project in the middle of the desert (or nowhere) than the magnitude of one in a metropolis like London; and that Romney is no genius as they are suggesting Americans must believe.
Also that they cannot use their personal experiences with Romney to divide the American public.