Obama will have to "kill Romney" in 2012
By Alex HeiglAugust 9th, 2011, 11:30 amComments (20)
Now, don't get your hopes up that the 2012 election has become a Most Dangerous Game-style manhunt — this is just the latest news on the presidential election: a senior campaign adviser to the White House said the most likely strategy Obama has for re-election at this point is a personal takedown campaign of likely GOP frontrunner Mitt Romney.
"Unless things change and Obama can run on accomplishments, he will have to kill Romney," Politico quoted the "prominent Democratic strategist" as saying, declining to note whether the adviser was seated in a 1960s egg chair, stroking a large white cat, when he made the statement.
Apparently the twofold attack will see Romney painted as "inauthentic, unprincipled and.... weird," which has become some kind of watchword for Romney within the Obama camp, Politico notes. "There's a weirdness factor with Romney and it remains to be see how he wears with the public," the adviser continued.
The attacks on Romney's financial history will probably center on his time as CEO of Bain Capital.
David Axelrod, the president's chief strategist:
"He was very, very good at making a profit for himself and his partners but not nearly as good at saving jobs for communities... His is very much the profile of what we've seen in the last decade on Wall Street. He was about making money. And that's fine. But often times he made it at the expense of jobs in communities."
Well, it is that time again. By which I mean the run-up to election season during which we see political opponents portrayed as flip-floppers, moral relativists, armchair Satanists, and draft-dodgers.
Frankly, I'm not really crying for Mitt Romney — I'm mourning for the old Obama, the one that was elected based on his promise of working to change the way Washington works. I have no idea where that guy went, but apparently he's plotting to kill a Mormon.
Commentarium (20 Comments)
You're going to be wishing for any Obama if this Mormon douchebag gets elected President. You can't change the way Washington works when the un-informed, misinformed masses such as the author of this post elect pseudo-religious, Ayn Rand-worshiping racists whose only goal is pissing on anything that resembles progress, liberalism, or Keynesian economics. Do us all a favor and read a book, what are you, 14? What the hell has happened to this site? Your "don't pick on the poor mormon" tirade equates to "don't pick on the poor entitled millionaire whose beliefs are influenced by the only religion on earth that is less-grounded in reality than Scientology."
As disappointing as parts of Obama's policy has been at times (mostly hampered by conservatives in congress and in public opinion), it pales in comparison to the damage
that would be done by electing ANY of the Republican candidates and potential candidates for 2012.
Invoking the name of Ayn Rand as an invective needs its own Godwin's Law at this point. Your whole comment was inane, and essentially amounted to a long string of ad hominems. I do applaud your wonderful use of rhetorical understatement by calling Obama's policies failures merely 'disappointing.' You're right, of course, failing to deliver on promises of closing Guantanamo, ending any of our foreign wars (plus adding a third that had absolutely nothing to do with European oil interests in Libya), failing to try unlawful detainees in U.S. courts under U.S. law, failing to undo the Bush-era police state policies he campaigned against (and increasing them at every opportunity), as well as a laundry-list of other failures is very 'disappointing.'
Unfortunately, you're probably right that Romney, or Rick Perry, or whoever the Republicans nominate wouldn't be any better than Obama, but invoking Ayn Rand, racism, or the red herrings of 'progress', 'liberalism', or 'Keynesian economics' doesn't make that point.
Mustard, while I agree with you in the specific, to be fair I don't think any religion is technically "grounded in reality." I'm just saying.
Thanks, Mustard, for raising the level of civil debate in America. Obama scolded us to do as much after the Gifford shooting. Good to know our president, too, is practicing what he's preaching.
Why trash Ayn Rand? She wrote several of the best novels of the 20th century after all.
First of all, Critic, if you think Ayn Rand wrote several of the best novels of the 20th century, then...you lived in a different 20th century than I did. And you have horrible taste in literature.
Fame: All the attacking talked about above by myself and the president is metaphorical...I am sure no one is advocating shooting Mitt Romney in the face.
Anon: I agree totally. But the mormon religion is particularly culty, bigoted, and dangerous.
D: Just because you apparently don't understand a reference or an argument doesn't make it innane. Believe me, if invoking Ayn Rand's name was as taboo as Hitler we wouldn't have several of the problems we are facing today. And you might want to look up 'ad hominem' before you go throwing it around with the grown-ups, mmkay?
@MeanMrMustard. You didn't make an argument. An argument is an attempt to persuade using reason or evidence. You didn't use any. Instead of making an argument, you attacked characteristics of the people you 'argued' against, such as their supposed racism, their supposed worship of Ayn Rand, and their religion. I didn't choose ad hominem lightly. The very definition is attacking the person not their argument. Your tirades are childish. Oh, and you spelled inane wrong.
Thanks, I'll hire you to check for typos in my next rant. For the record, you still don't understand the concept of an ad hominem logical fallacy, so do yourself (and the rest of us) a favor and before you appoint yourself official-hall-monitor-of-the-internet, don't just throw out terms you've heard other trolling posters use in a comment thread and assume you comprehend them. Here read this, it might enlighten you a little bit before you start throwing latin around. https://plover.net/~bonds/adhominem.html
Oh, and you spelled your name wrong, it has a "ouchebag" on the end.
It's not me who thinks Ayn Rand wrote several of the best novels of the 20th century, it's the Library of Congress.
I'm concerned that "weird" is a bigoted code word for "Mormon." It would be stunning and disheartening to see the Obama campaign resort to the same tactics as the "birthers," whose challenge to Obama's citizenship and religion were barely disguised racism. I do wish Obama would take the gloves off and fight hard politically, but playing on bigotry is beyond the pale.
I love you. Internet hug!
I concur with the slurs against Romney but not the comments about racism wrt Obama. And believe me, I know racism. I'm from Arizona and I'm leathery.
The LDS church constantly fights and lobbies against, among other things, homosexuality and sexual expression. To acknowledge, protest, and combat this is not bigotry, it is the opposite.
And I agree with MeanMrMustard. But there is a difference between opposing political positions or even disagreeing with moral positions and institutions. But attack Romney for those positions, attack the institution for its acts. Don't attack them because their religion is "weird" to you; that would be bigotry.
The same "uninformed misinformed masses" voted for Obama last time. Unless they've gotten smarter over the last few years, they probably will again. By the way, a milquetoast moderate former Governor of Massachusetts is not likely a "Ayn Rand-worshipping racist".
I like your idea that you're not misinformed. I admire your imagination!
Like they should have voted for McCain-Palin instead? That's funny.
What we really need are some leathery racists, eh, Haboob Heigl?
does anyone else think that picture of obama looks fake?
Good catch. Definitely photoshopped.
Now you say something