At about 10:28pm tonight, as Mitt Romney pivoted from a question on tax loopholes and started in with, “the real issue is vision,” I had recorded this thought in my notes, “He just clinched the nomination.” [emphasis mine]Puleeze. I swear this is just what I feared. People would just ooh and aah all over his slippery answers. But what do you get when you buy what he's selling? Do you even know? Romney's vision? What vision?
Romney’s performance throughout showed discipline, preparation and also the ability to adapt to circumstances in a way that was superior to that of any other candidate.Yeah, but what exactly did he say? Preparation? Are you serious?
1965 Griswold v. Connecticut case which, on ridiculously spurious constitutional grounds, overturned that state’s unenforced law (Massachusetts still had a similar one on the books) purporting to ban the sale of contraceptives.
Why was the law unenforced? If it was unenforced, how did it get in front of the court? Answer: The left deliberately and blatantly had the law violated in order to get somebody arrested and charged so that it could end up in court.
Why in the world would they want to do that? Answer: In order to get the result that they were seeking, which was a ruling on a right to privacy. Sounds like a plan. But what is the defense? Was it not the same kind of slippery, ineffectual, unprepared and lazy, slipshod, halfhearted defense that we saw from Romney in the debate?
I mean, what does it take for this distinguished member of the commentariat to make a few observations and deductions? This was a blatant attack on our culture and their response then as now was tepid and ineffectual. But, is this a reason to be so impressed with Romney? For goodness sakes, why???
Is it because he looks good on TV and they can't pin him down? Is that now the standard for politicians to strive for, to be a slick Willy without the Bimbo eruptions?
No comments:
Post a Comment