It was bound to happen. Somebody, and then a lot of some bodies were gonna call out Willard for being a wimp. Wimp is really too nice a word–gutless would be more to the point.
We got some indication of this just by looking at how Bain operated. It’s basic business model was to so structure the take-over so that Bain made money no matter what happened to the company they were restructuring.
Others say that Willard is uncomfortable among those not of “his kind” and gets flustered. This explains why he avoids the press–he fails to anticipate the question, hasn’t thought much about it anyway, and tends to be fairly unaware of what is coming out of his mouth. Thus the silly references to “trees being the right height”, a funny picture reducing him to “guffaws”, and so forth.
He has no real convictions I’m convinced, and thus it is of little consequence from his point of view to change his position to satisfy whomever stands before him. He has no courage to stand up. If you have watched him over the last week with his new “attack dog” motif, you can surely see the fake-ness of it all. There is nothing authentic about him, thus nothing authentic sounding about anything that pours forth from his lips.
The latest pander, by the way, is to declare Jerusalem the rightful capital of Israel, something no American president has done since 1948. The UN has declared it an “international city” and frankly Willard seems not to realize that to claim to intend to move the American embassy to Jerusalem is to whip the winds of war in the Middle East.
More talking out of both sides of his mouth came when he praised the Israeli health care system–a system that has been socialized since its inception in 1948. What is good for Israel is not of course good for America apparently.
Ψ
I just thought this was funny. I think the headline should be “don’t drink and drive”. How ’bout you?
Ψ
Justice Scalia has put an ad in the paper asking anyone who may find it to return his brain. This looney-toons thinks that the proper way to interpret the Constitution is the use the plain meaning of the words as meant at the time the document was formed.
Therefore. . . .this idiot claims that the only restrictions that can be placed upon the 2nd Amendment are limitations that would have been “reasonable” to the people at the time. He cites that a misdemeanor for carrying a head ax was proper because such a weapon was considered frightening at the time.
Do you think that a rifle made to look like a AK-47 might be frightening to-day you moron? According to Scalia, it doesn’t matter. If the locals of 1770’s couldn’t foresee such a weapon, it is not illegal today. Nor are hand-held rocket launchers, under his theory that any hand-held weapons are protected, which a cannon would not be. (I suppose that refers to “keep and bear” obviously meaning hand-held?)
Oh, if you find any screws around, send them to him too, he’s obviously lost all of those too.
Ψ
Enjoy your day. There is no more news. Trust me.
Related articles
Existential Ennui 
“He has no real convictions I’m convinced, and thus it is of little consequence from his point of view to change his position to satisfy whomever stands before him.”
Oh, he has convictions all right. To him, money is lord, and any act in the service of grabbing money is virtuous.
On a more serious note, however, I increasingly suspect that something is off about him, both emotionally and morally. Well-adjusted people just aren’t that … hollow.
I agree Ahab, the only thing that is important to him, is that he wishes to be president, as he is of the class of people who are naturally entitled to it. And I also agree that there is something not right about him. Not sure what it is, other than massive insecurity, but something allows him to lie with utter impunity, almost with a entitled arrogance.
I agree with you completely, Ahab. I seriously think that Romney is some sort of sociopath or, at least, he’s got a personality disorder that prevents him from feeling empathetic towards those who are suffering or who have less. A Romney presidency would be devastating for the 99% of this country and for the world as well. He has no grasp on foreign policy and taking a couple of trips to foreign countries doesn’t count. Hell, we know how that went, after all.
” If the locals of 1770′s couldn’t foresee such a weapon, it is not illegal today.”
Yes, this is the “original intent” theory people like Scalia apply to the Constitution. How in the world he can accurately presume what the framers meant when they wrote the Constitution 235 years ago is a bit absurd. He may be able to cite some of the words of people like Madison to back him up but there were others who held a more open view of the Constitution like Hamilton, yet you will never hear Scalia and Thomas, Alito and Roberts refer to such people. Nor will they even consider that others who were there had ambiguous views on some of the subjects that Scalia is convinced were chipped in cement.
He’s an activist judge of the worst kind. The kind that presumes that arrogant aristocratic white males over 200 years ago could speak to the needs of all people hundreds of years later.
Madison and Hamilton had a well-documented debate about the constitutionality of the federal bank only three years in. So it appears they were not quite sure what the constitution permitted either. You are entirely right. It is just activism hidden under the guise of naturalism.
Scalia’s problem is, yes, being an activist judge, but the root of his crazy talk is his bizarre Catholic upbringing. He really is disordered.
oh I agree. He actually contends that he should impose his Catholic beliefs in rendering decisions. That is essentially unheard of among most Catholics who are in the political mainstream.
Willard the Wimp. has a nice ring to it 🙂
I rather like it. lol
If he wins, I think his victory speech will be straight out of Sally Fields: “You like me! You really like me!”
God forbid! lol
I love it
Then I have been successful! lol..thanks so much. !END