On Thursday's "Good Morning America," reporter Chris Cuomo saw dark motives in Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney's attacks on Democrat John Edwards and his "Two Americas" rhetoric. The GMA host conducted a combative interview with the 2008 contender and even alleged that Romney's comments could even be construed as an example of "ignorance."
After playing a clip of the former governor dismissing Edwards's contention that there is a rich and poor America, Cuomo argumentatively asserted, "When you say, 'This is one America,' that could be a unity statement or it could be one of, perhaps, ignorance to the fact that in this country you have the rich growing at ten times the rate as the working class. Do you deny that is the situation in this country?" The ABC journalist then helpfully added, "You trying to make a different point?"
Romney responded by informing Cuomo that, of course, he realized there are many differences between Americans, but the common good is more important. This, apparently, wasn't enough for Cuomo. He prompted the GOP contender, "And recognize there are issues underneath that will need to be addressed?"
Other questions from Cuomo included wondering whether Mike Huckabee's surge has been the result of Romney airing negative ads about the ex-Arkansas governor. He offered asides that seemed to contain no actual question. After the candidate claimed he was simply pointing out the differences between himself and Huckabee, Cuomo retorted, "Describing the differences. Perception is negative, instead of just saying what you do well, what they don't do, inside and outside of party." Another query included the host asking, "...How long can you go without a victory?"
A transcript of the segment, which aired at 7:10am on January 3, follows:
DIANE SAWYER: And now we're going to head over to former Governor Romney and Chris Cuomo. Chris.
CHRIS CUOMO: All right, thank you, Diane. Certainly, nobody has put more energy and time into Iowa than Governor Romney. Very good to have you this morning.
MITT ROMNEY: Thanks.
CUOMO: Good luck to you today.
ROMNEY: Thank you.
CUOMO: So, let's take a look at where things stand. It was always assumed you would start a little slow nationally and the plan seemed to be let's focus on Iowa and New Hampshire, a lot of time and money. But today when we look at the polls, you're in a dead heat at best with Huckabee who was a relative unknown. In New Hampshire, you have McCain hot on your heels. What do you think went wrong?
ROMNEY: Wrong? Hey it couldn't be better, are you kidding me? I started off as an unknown. And here I am the only guy that's in contention for the top spot in both states. Governor -- or Senator McCain, really not top contender here in Iowa. Of course, Mike Huckabee not a top contender there. So I'm at a good spot in both of these two states. I'd like to win 'em. But if I don't win, coming in second in these states is a strong statement. Then we go on to Michigan. In a good position in Michigan. South Carolina, also tied for the lead there. Nevada, tied for the lead. Wyoming. So I'm pretty pleased at the prospects. And frankly our guys are working real hard. And I'm a guy not terribly well known to most people in the country but making progress.
CUOMO: Optimism now, but how long can you go without a victory?
ROMNEY: Well, I'm hoping that I get some victories. So I'm not forecasting for anything other than success. I don't know whether we're going to win this particular caucus or the next primary. But I expect to continue to do well, to be a top contender in each of these early primary states. And I'll pick up some of the key wins.
CUOMO: Headline for you recently has been negative ads, going after your opponents in party and outside of party. You have Ed Rollins from the Huckabee campaign saying he wants to hit you in the mouth he's getting so upset at the negative ads. Do you regret a little bit the strategy recently? Do you think maybe that's why you've taken a hit in the polls?
ROMNEY: No, actually, I've been rising in the polls. I was 22 points behind Governor Huckabee here just a few weeks ago --
CUOMO: But you were up before that.
ROMNEY: Now we're tied neck and neck. And I think the reason I've been able to be successful is not just the time I've spent here and all the people I've gotten to know across the state, but also we're focusing again on issues and I think it's important that campaigns describe issues and people's positions on issues. If one didn't look -- for instance, that Governor Huckabee has been providing or being in favor of providing in-state tuition and scholarships for illegal aliens that would be an issue that people wouldn't know about. Likewise if you weren't aware of the fact that he dramatically risen, grown -- both spending and taxes, that would be something he'd get away with. And of course, giving out over 1,000 pardons and commutations. Those are differences in our record or positions and I hope people make the decisions based on positions and issues and that's why I've been running ads describing our differences.
CUOMO: Describing the differences. Perception is negative, instead of just saying what you do well, what they don't do, inside and outside of party. Let's take a quick listen to what you said about the Clintons.
ROMNEY: And I'll tell you, when I watched John Edwards from time to time get up and talk about two America, I'm tempted to -- well, offer an expletive like baloney and, uh, because, you know, we are one America!
CUOMO: Let's talk about this. You're talking with Edwards there about how two Americas versus one. Let me ask you about that for it (sp). When you say "this is one America," that could be a unity statement or it could be one of, perhaps, ignorance to the fact that in this country you have the rich growing at ten times the rate as the working class. Do you deny that is the situation in this country? You trying to make a different point?
ROMNEY: I think you probably heard me enough to know I start off by saying there's a lot of differences between Americans. They're rich, poor, Democrat, Republican, male, female, coast-livers, heartland-livers, but when it comes to the matters that matter most, supporting our nation in times of great need, that we come together as a nation. And I think it's that point that we're wise as people running for president to talk about unifying our nation, not talking about dividing our nation, and I think that Senator Edwards' comments are divisive in nature and that the great way forward for Americans is to come together, to work together for our common good.
CUOMO: And recognize there are issues underneath that will need to be addressed.
ROMNEY: Of course we have differing views on a wide range of issues. And not everybody agrees with those issues, but pointing out the issues I think is essential to a successful campaign.
CUOMO: Governor, thank you for joining us this morning. I wish you the best. I hope your health holds up.
ROMNEY: Thank you. You too.
CUOMO: Back to you, Diane.
—Scott Whitlock is a news analyst for the Media Research Center.





















Editor at Large
Comments Policy
shades, not a gap and a leap
January 3, 2008 - 14:35 ET by wizardjrPersonal wealth is not a couple of wealth pools with a great gap between. It is a continuum from 'filthy' rich to filthy poor. The class warriors would have you believe otherwise in order to put over their income redistributionist nonsense which, in the end, is merely a grab for personal power over you and me.
The real dirty secret is the mobility of individuals from one income group to the other. High paid execs become 'poor' when they retire as they no longer make "income" and kids move up to 'wealthy' as they get more education and experience and move up the income ladder.
Income is only static for those that quit trying.
Excuse me, but who died and
January 3, 2008 - 14:37 ET by motherbeltExcuse me, but who died and made Chris Cuomo King?
He decides that America is racist, he decides that Romney is "ignorant" if he's not aware of the "two Americas" (which, as a matter of fact is NOT a fact, but a metaphor invented by John Edwards.)
Frankly, I'm sick of hearing from him.
Actually, I think the "two
January 3, 2008 - 18:17 ET by Ruths husband BenActually, I think the "two Americas" metaphor was invented by the American Communist Party some years ago. John Edwards just popularized it recently. Funny he isn't giving them credit where credit is due.
Those who beat their swords into plowshares usually end up plowing for those who didn't. - Ben Franklin
Here's a link that shows it.
January 3, 2008 - 18:21 ET by Ruths husband BenHere's a link that shows it.
Those who beat their swords into plowshares usually end up plowing for those who didn't. - Ben Franklin
Chris Cuomo is
January 3, 2008 - 14:41 ET by fonzie2178a blithering idiot! He is completely (probably purposely) missing the points Gov. Romney is trying to make! As for his "issues underneath," doesn't he realize there are state and local governments to deal with them? And plenty more that government shouldn't even have a hand in? The thing that really pisses me off about the MSM is that they never take the stance that the president must fix everything when they're interviewing one of the libs... They get red carpet treatment and someone to massage their feet while they get asked softball questions, probably ones they wrote themselves, and the good guys are treated with complete disrespect and ignorance! I guess the only real surprise here is that I'm still surprised by this total lack of sense. People like Chris Cuomo have no idea how ridiculous and stupid they look!
"Never argue with an idiot, they will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience."
Cuomo. Funny, no need to address under Clinton?
January 3, 2008 - 15:28 ET by Gary HallScott. I'm going to copy a comment I made yesterday - I suspect that the MSM will give me a new change almost every day now. Sad.
CUOMO: Let's talk about this. .. ignorance to the fact that in this country you have the rich growing at ten times the rate as the working class. Do you deny that is the situation in this country? ..
Yea, let's talk about it and add a picture here to highlight your own "ignorance" and hypocrisy.
Yesterday, it was the NY Times -- blames it on Bush yet again... "and the rich have become richer.."
Now take a look at this chart - in the NY Times - about the rich getting richer. The headline was "Not Since the 20's Roared."
You'll note that the article was prepared and published in 2005 -- but it was about the Clinton era -- look carefully at the chart and the language in the attached description..
The data is about the Clinton boom-bust cycle, but the hate is pointed at none other than Bush. Would someone tie the Times Board to a chair, tape their eyes open and force them to stare at that chart for a few weeks - and the one below, as well.
The Times board says, "the seriousness of the problems he [Bush] has helped create." No No No No folks. Look at your own data in the chart (that vertical leap into the wealth ozone was before 2001, not after) - while the media went nuts promoting hatred of Bush when they saw your piece, the rich (and the CEO's) were racking it up during the late 1990's -- under the leadership of none other than Bill Clinton. With the collapse of the bubble economy during the last year [2000] of the Clinton era, these very same rich folks, and corporate America went south - way south. You bet - 5 years of good solid econmic growth under Bush, and eventually here, it will get back to where Clinton had it.
They love what they call greed under a Democrat and then turn tail and condemn it under a Republican - can it be any easier to see?
And one more - everyone in America understands that this did not happen under the great Bill Clinton. Clinton delivered fairness for workers, keeping corportate America under wraps (shhh - don't mention the corporate scandals and accounting fraud of the late 1990's) -- see, here's your proof. Or is that proof that liberals simply cannot read or see their own data, because of their internal bias? The op ed went on to spew it's false perceptions:
Let's review the facts, please. Advance the slide:
Oops.
If you're Cumuno, got to love those Clinton years.. and hate the Bush years.
Gary: How in the world
January 3, 2008 - 16:05 ET by stratmanGary:
How in the world did you insert an image that displays in your post?
That is a sorely missed feature in this forum, thought it does keep bandwidth usage lower.
Killing them with kindness isn't working. Time to get scrappy with the Donkeys.
stratman
January 3, 2008 - 16:45 ET by Gary HallIt's only available to those with blogging privileges. And then, I only use it here when I sense that it truly adds weight or context to the subject matter. My wish in this instance is that Cumono would stop by and take a peak - perhaps if he were confronted with a picture (tells a thousand words) he'll understand the bare facts.
I take it, you appreciated the data? (;~> gary
Yes, I did appreciate the
January 3, 2008 - 17:29 ET by stratmanYes, I did appreciate the data. It was an excellent post.
Since Cuomo has the presumed ability to research and think for himself, I can only believe it is willfull neglect and journalistic malpractice on his part for such blatant inaccuracies. I also cannot help but think he parrots these DNC talking points distributed by the NYTimes as a way of making his "bones" to join the upper levels of the effete elite Liberal hierarchy (not that he needed help given his family tree). In fact, he is nothing more than a hitman errand boy used by those who will never consider him an equal.
Shameless, disingenuous agitprop hack, he's well on his way to becoming the next Dan Rather. Enjoy your time in the lights, dogboy, for it is fleeting and your clock is already counting towards zero when you will be discarded like so many sycophants before you.
Killing them with kindness isn't working. Time to get scrappy with the Donkeys.
If the MSM was honest
January 3, 2008 - 15:50 ET by c5thenThey would investigate the cause of Poor people not being able to claw out of that poverty. It's the "progressive" tax system (both state and federal) that significantly penalizes increases in income. If the Goverenment would stop stealing our money every pay-day and allow people to keep what they earn, there would be a clear path out of poverty.
The day that "politician" became a career choice is the day we started losing the Republic. Let's get it back! Alan Keyes '08.
I think I would give good
January 3, 2008 - 18:06 ET by USA4freedomI think I would give good money to see one of these guy do a Thompson on them.
With a, look here you little runny nose snot, I’m not here for you to make me jump through hoops.
Here is what I want to do for America and its people. Here is what I believe in. I stand for this and that. Every one of the candidates lets these un elected, leftists jerks run the interview.
With the lines, if you loose.. if you finish third.. now that you are behind..
Take over these interviews, show them you have a set. Stop being a whipping dog. These candidates should remember: WE HATE THE PRESS..
These are the boys of Pointe du Hoc. Ronald Reagan- 40th Anniversary of D-Day
}}---> This is bad?
January 3, 2008 - 22:37 ET by Cool Arrow"you have the rich growing at ten times the rate as the working class. Do you deny that is the situation in this country?"
Why is it a bad thing that the ranks of the rich are growing ten times faster than the working class? Looks like Mr. Cuomo is lumping a bunch of retirees with significant 401k's into his figures.
I'm surprised the rich class is growing so quickly. But it isn't necessarily a bad thing. Sure as hell can't expect Nanny Care to come to the rescue.
I ♣ My Seal