"Kill Romney"

Barack Obama's 2012 plan: 'Kill Romney'


“Unless things change and Obama can run on accomplishments, he will have to kill Romney,” said a prominent Democratic strategist aligned with the White House."



Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/08 ... z1UaWzNWF8

I had to click on the link to see the explanation of what was meant. I can see why you left it out.

WayneH wrote: I had to click on the link to see the explanation of what was meant. I can see why you left it out.

Sorry Wayne, that is way to cryptic for me.

The next two paragraphs after where you stopped quoting:

"The onslaught would have two aspects. The first is personal: Obama’s re-elect will portray the public Romney as inauthentic, unprincipled and, in a word used repeatedly by Obama’s advisers in about a dozen interviews, “weird” ...

"The second aspect of the campaign to define Romney is his record as CEO of Bain Capital, a venture capital firm which was responsible for both creating and eliminating jobs. Obama officials intend to frame Romney as the very picture of greed in the great recession – a sort of political Gordon Gekko."

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/08 ... z1UbVR0pvm

Politics of personal destruction. The Chicago way.

I have no doubt the democrat/union machine will try to personally destroy the republican candidate. They can't argue on their own merits, so they must destroy the opponent personally.

IMHO, Romney is not the best rep candidate, but anyone is better than Obama. I sure wish Hillary would run a primary challenge against him. At least she has a clue....

WayneH wrote: I had to click on the link to see the explanation of what was meant. I can see why you left it out.

Point being that the left was the group that decried the use of the word "target" when applied to members of their party and yet they have no qualms about using the word "kill" when describing members of the other party. Do such uses of language inflame passions or don't they Wayne? If the left believes that they do, then why do they seek to inflame passions? If they don't, then why did the left pretend so recently that they did?

And where did you get the idea that the left "have no qualms about using the world 'kill' when describing members of the other party"??? Did you poll them?? Did you read that somewhere? Or did you just make it up?

I think it was ill advised. Would you be as offended if he said "destroy" instead?

So only the "other side" need be politically correct I guess.

PrintSmith wrote:

WayneH wrote: I had to click on the link to see the explanation of what was meant. I can see why you left it out.

Point being that the left was the group that decried the use of the word "target" when applied to members of their party and yet they have no qualms about using the word "kill" when describing members of the other party. Do such uses of language inflame passions or don't they Wayne? If the left believes that they do, then why do they seek to inflame passions? If they don't, then why did the left pretend so recently that they did?

Yep....I didn't like the use of the word target when applied to candidates or the use of crosshairs, I certainly don't like the use of the word kill, no matter what the text surrounding it, I am sad that our political commentary has come to this and I will always criticize those who engage in it.....period.

On another note, why are the righties here suddenly jumping on the "violent rhetoric is bad" bandwagon when they defended the same rhetoric from their own side?

I get that from the recent manner in which they have conducted themselves. And I, personally, am not offended by the use of either "kill" or "destroy" because I don't deliberately misapply the context in which either is used for the sole purpose of demagoguery of those with whom I have an ideological disagreement as those on the left have done. If the use of that word was "ill advised" it is only because of the earlier pretense established when the left thought there might be some political gain to be had by conducting themselves in that manner. There was never a problem with the use of "targeting" when referring to defeating an opponent as earlier pretended by the left. The left had no intention of ever toning down the rhetoric to help bridge the divide between the ideologies, so why pretend otherwise?

I do hope the left enjoy the taste of their own feet because that particular disingenuous act is going to have them removing their feet from their mouths for quite some time to come. Every time a Democrat or one of their sycophants in the mass media go on a bender as they have recently done with the TEA Party, or use a common colloquial phrase as was done here, they will be feasting on their earlier words regarding the damage that occurs in our society when people act in such a manner. They've boxed themselves in as a result of their earlier conduct, and I for one find it entertaining to see them be placed permanently on the defensive and forced to live within the narrow confines they drew earlier.