A Viagra moment!

“Well, you know, I guess we better unzip him and let the real Mitt Romney out because he is not!”

………..Ann Romney, April 2, 2012

All I can say is that this is a very interesting statement from Mrs. Romney.

I am not at all sure what she is trying to say here.

The statement was in response to a question on radio station WBAL in Baltimore, where the interviewer asked….

“And one of the things, Ann Romney, that folks talk about with your husband, Mitt Romney, and I’ve seen him in casual conversation-He comes off very smooth and okay. But sometimes he comes off stiff. Do you have to fight back some criticism, like ‘My husband isn’t stiff, OK?’”

And Mrs. Romney, without missing a beat responded with…” Well, you know, I guess we better unzip him and let the real Mitt Romney out because he is not!”

( http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/04/ann-romney-says-campaign-will-unzip-the-real-mitt/ )

So…what is she really trying to say?

Romney’s enemies could easily jump on this and say that even his wife of many years thinks he is a dick...after all, if you unzip him, the “real” Mitt Romney will come out?

I am sure the Obama camp can get a lot of time with that sort of campaign thinking; although it would have to be late night television that cares little for sensibilities…I am sure the likes of Bill Maher would have a field day with calling Romney a dick!

But I think that is far too juvenile for Mrs. Romney to have done…no, I think there is something far more calculated in this comment.

The reality is that I believe Mrs. Romney is positioning herself to be the next Viagra commercial star. (After all it is not unusual for primary contenders to look to drug companies as potential income sources – remember Bob Dole with his Viagra/ED commercials?)

You see…the criticism of Romney has often been couched in terms of him being too stiff…but apparently that is not the case at all, as Mrs. Romney clarifies very quickly…let’s just unzip him…and you will see he is not stiff at all….

I can see the Romney Viagra commercials now…lots of interesting twists…from his wife wanting to unzip him through to his large number of children being testament to the effects of the wonder drug.

Nope..I am convinced Mrs. Romney was not calling Mitt a dick, but rather laying the foundations for a new career in advertising should this Presidential gig not turn out the way they hope.

Now…onto something more serious…Debbie Wassermann Schultz…oops…did I say serious?

I apologize for including the word serious in the same sentence as Ms. Schultz.

I had the extraordinary misfortune of stumbling across her doing an interview with Greta Van Susteren a couple of night ago (I was channel surfing and didn’t realize I was about to be inundated with such stupidity in such a short period of time!)

Greta was trying to get to the bottom of a lack of budget coming from the Senate. In an effort to be fair and not get into the weeds about who is right and wrong, she simply wanted to understand why we have not had a budget through the senate in over 3 years.

Of course, Ms. Schultz took this as an invitation to tell us that the Ryan budget would kill grandma and destroy the world as we know it…and she also presumed to call it the Romney/Ryan budget in a very transparent attempt to color Romney with the failings of a budget he had nothing to do with (except for supporting in theory).

When Greta pressed her by stating that regardless of content, the House had passed a budget….Ms. Schultz went on the defensive…stating that Obama had produced a budget which would save the world, create wealth for every living soul, abolish poverty and was the greatest thing since sliced bread.

But she didn’t answer the question about why the senate has no budget.

She said we have to ask Harry Reid about that.

OK…she is a member of the House and can’t speak for the Senate…I get that.

Of course, I do have to wonder why, if Obama’s budget is so perfect, it did not garner a single vote from any Republican OR Democrat went it crashed on the house floor with 414 votes against and ZERO votes for? I so wished Great would have asked Ms. Shultz why she didn’t vote for what just 2 minutes earlier she had proclaimed as the miracle budget.

And this is the woman who is the head of the DNC?

If she was in any way connected with my preferred party, I would be ashamed….I would want her institutionalized, or at the very least, embargoed from opening her mouth in any public forum.

Unfortunately, she has the right to say whatever she wants…and the Constitution protects her speech. It does not prevent stupidity.

I laugh every time I hear liberals sprout that conservatives “just don’t get it” and yet they elect stupid people like Ms. Schultz to head the DNC?

Maybe they should all try viagra too...blood flow to the brain may restrict stupidity!

Stupid is as stupid says….

…..devereaux

Another arrow in the heart of our Republic.

"I'm confident that the Supreme Court will not take what would be an unprecedented, extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected Congress,"

……….Obama, April 2 2012

It appears that Obama has decided that America is a democracy, and no longer a republic.

Although I suspect that he fails to appreciate the difference.

Let me explain.

A republic is governed by the rule of law. A republic relies on a constitution to determine what a government may and may not do. A republic relies on a court system to protect the country from government overstepping its constitutional duties. In the Republic that is America, the Supreme Court is appointed by the President to defend the constitution and to prevent government from stepping on the constitutional protections provided in the constitution.

On the other hand, a democracy is nothing other than mob rule. Elections mean that the person with the majority of votes wins, and has the say. Without the rule of law, and the independence of a court system appointed to protect that rule of law, a democracy falls into nothing more than the rule of the majority …with no concern for the rights of the minority. It is mob rule, pure and simple.

And Obama made it clear today what he wants for this country.

He wants a tyranny of the majority…he wants his position as President to interfere with the rightful actions of the Supreme Court. He wants the world to believe that simply because Congress voted for a law to be passed, and he signed said law, that its constitutionality should not be questioned by the Court.

Friends, there is no other way to say this…he wants mob rule.

He wants the destruction of the Republic.

He wants tyranny.

This could not be clearer than what he said himself.

Notice that in the quote above he did not speak of right or wrong….he did not speak of the Court fulfilling its purpose of defending the constitutional rights of the citizen…he spoke only of his confidence that the Court would not take “an unprecedented, extraordinary step”.

Listen to me Obama…the declaration that a law is unconstitutional should never be discounted simply because it is “an unprecedented, extraordinary step”.

To be fair he also said "I'm confident that this will be upheld because it should be upheld,"

Really?  It will be upheld because it should be upheld?

What sort of double speak crap is that, Obama?

I know you believe that the law is constitutional…or you want everyone else to believe that….but you also believed that the waters would recede, global warming would reverse, the economy is strong and that if you had a son he would look like Trayvon….didn’t you?

Let me see…according to the latest fake data from the leftwing conservatives, global warming has not reversed and the sea level is not dropping. I guess you were wrong on that count!

The economy is strong only in the drug induced dreams of the cocaine sniffers surrounding you and advising you. The people on the street know that…but you don’t. You are wrong again Mr. President!

As for your son looking like Trayvon, unless you were having an illicit affair with his mother that would hardly be the case…. But who knows? Are you suggesting some sort of questioning on Trayvon’s parentage is in order?

You see Obama, you don’t have to look too far to find examples of you being wrong before….

So why is it so hard for you to imagine that you could be wrong this time too? For a supposed constitutional expert, you are really are very dumb, sir!

You see, it is not up to you to declare something constitutional or not.

That is the job of the Supreme Court.

Trying to bully the Court to decide in favor of you is just another page out of the liberal playbook, and certainly not unexpected.

But a real leader…a real American…would have stood up proudly proclaiming the expectation that the Supreme Court would take its duty seriously and, after conducting a full investigation, would come to the right conclusion. A true American would say that he expected the Court to deliberate carefully, and that in the final balance he hoped they would agree and find the bill constitutional, but if they did not, then Congress would need to revisit the law and make the necessary adjustments etc etc

A real American would not threaten the Court, would not try to direct its thinking, and would not publicly set up the Court for his scorn should they decide against him.

No…a true American would support the Republic with his very life…not replace it with the mob rule of democracy.

Just another day…just another stupid statement from Obama…just another arrow through the heart of this Republic.

…..devereaux