"Ever since FDR we've had the capacity to be engaged in two conflicts at once and he's said no, we're going to cut that back to only one conflict," the GOP presidential nominee said of his rival.Now, I can't find any actual evidence that the president actually said that the United States would henceforth only maintain capability for one major conflict at a time. Even if that were true, however, the Smirking Mitt seems completely unfazed by either the human or financial cost we've incurred by waging two large-scale simultaneous military operations over the course of roughly the past decade. None of that matters to him: Mitt wants to mix it up two-at-a-time (Iran being one, with the other probably being determined by a random drawing).
The good part, though? Nobody showed up to listen:
A Romney campaign staffer told The Hill that it expected between 5,000 and 10,000 people at the rally in the pivotal region. Afterwards another staffer said only 2,700 people had shown up after 5,000 tickets had been distributed. That's a big drop from a rally Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Sarah Palin held in the same park four years ago this week, which drew approximately 20,000 people.Romney. Meh.
That's not a good sign for voter enthusiasm in region that Romney admitted "could very well determine who the next president is."