previous post next post  

Partisan Kibbles

The 2012 Presidential Campaign has surely gone to the dogs. 

First the Democrats had some kittens over the fact that Romney once transported his pooch inside a sealed kennel, and latched the whole contraption to the roof of his car.



Then someone reminded us that while our C-in-C may have not transported dogs on the roof of his car, he surely did transport some inside his belly.



Doggoneit!

BOQ

11 Comments

I've said here that I wouldn't eat any myself but wouldn't condemn anyone who did so. I'm not going back on my word, even though I'm tempted. However, I do think it is something to bring up if you can fit it into the conversation. I wouldn't depend on it to swing many votes but I have a feeling we'll need every vote against Obama to counter all those the other side is going to 'find' in the trunks of cars all across the country.
 
This is a losing battle for the Republicans.  They should pick something smart to attack Obama on if they want to do that.  Obama was too young at the time to be considered responsible and it was in Indonesia where eating dog meat and other non Western food is not that unusual.  It also drives home that Obama wasn't a Muslim.
 
Argent - I don't think this is a serious line of political attack.

Except by Boq.

Besides, it's fair to mock of the equivalent attack coming from the Obama supporters.
 
It is always fair.  But is it smart?
 
Serious line of attack? Nah - It's more like a *slap* - backatya kinda in response to the usual democrat sniping.

Or as I heard this morning,  At least Romney didn't have his dog on the roof of his mouth. :-()
 

What's good for the goose is good for the gander:

Alinksy's Rules for Radicals, Rule #5:  "Ridicule is man's most potent weapon. It is almost impossible to counteract ridicule. Also it infuriates the opposition, which then reacts to your advantage."

Keep it up.

 
Greetings:

I'm of a mixed mind about this. There's an interesting scene in the movie "Hombre" in which Paul Newman plays a white man raised by Apaches. During the proverbial stagecoach ride, he's asked by the wife of the local indian agent, who is absconding with funds meant to help those same Indians, if it's true that the Indians eat dog. Mr. Newman's character responds, "Lady, if you get hungry enough, you'll eat dog and fight for the bones." 
 
I'm with Boq on this; snipe back.

Romney has been sniping back, if somewhat cautiously for now. I like this, as I'm sick of conservative/Republicans who are too scared of what names will be thrown at them to speak up.

I don't doubt Romney knows he'll get slimed top to bottom by Obama, so what's to lose?

Given the outcome of the Ann Romney fiasco (among others) it look for now as if Romney is fighting smarter than Obama.
 
As I recall, its Red Wine with dog, and White Wine with cat.  At least that's what my Field Artillery comrades told me.
 
 There are real names associated with this story.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/post/david-axelrod-and-eric-fehrnstrom-twitter-frenemies/2012/04/18/gIQAJcRyQT_blog.html

David Axelrod is Obama's slimeball, and we all need to be protected from him.  This is something that works.  Molly Ivins would be so pleased.


 
 Argent, what is the relationship between being smart and  politicians? If you can't find any good reasons, then good,  neither can I. I know, in the near future, many of us will hold our nose and vote. This is not directed at either  party, just looking at  the historical facts of the recent past 40+ years.

If either of these characters become “The President of the  United States”, do you honestly believe that it will be best for our Nation? The alternative is voting for the person who will do the least long-term damage to this Nation.