Slog

News & Arts

Line Out

Music & the City
at Night

« Really Enjoying The Dowager Pontiff | SL Letter of the Day: Sometimes You… »

Friday, March 1, 2013

2012 What Is a "Mitt Romney" and Why Do We Care What He Thinks About the Sequester?

Posted by Paul Constant on Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 11:35 AM

What a funny name this fellow has! At first I thought his first name was "Matt," but it turns out, he's called "Mitt!" How silly! And "Romney?" That name rings a bell...something political, I believe. It beckons to me from the past. Ah, yes! A quick Google search informs me that a man named "Romney" ran for president in 1968! Assuming he was 40 then, that means this gentleman is at least in his eighties. He's held together quite well, wouldn't you say? Let's see what the codger has to say:

Okay, first of all, I'm unsure what a political candidate from the distant past who now lives a life of comfortable retirement has to do with anything. Second of all, Mr. Romney is an old-fashioned conservative, whose beliefs clearly have nothing to do with the twenty-first century. He's a relic of a conservatism that doesn't apply to the modern world. Surely, there is a place for this ancient political candidate to share the wisdom of his experiences, but asking him about modern political dilemmas is kind of like asking a neanderthal for favorite poutine recipes. Let the old man go to his retirement with some dignity, rather than asking him to rehash the glory days of his outdated campaign for the entertainment and amusement of modern audiences.

FacebookShare

Comments (15) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment

This was actually one thing that I realized during the election. Most times when a politician loses, you still hear about them in some sort of political capacity, whether they champion their a specific cause (Al Gore) or if they keep on politic-ing(Kerry or McCain) or they become some sort of retarded pundit spouting nonsense (Palin)...

I knew early on if/when Romney lost no one would give two fucks what he thinks. Conservatives didn't really want him, he just wasn't Obama, and he doesn't truly seem to give two shits about real politics.

His fade will be faster than Bob Dole, I think.

Posted by Pick1 on March 1, 2013 at 11:53 AM

The whole issue of sequester is supposed to make Obama look bad. So, it would seem to be "logical" to follow it up with Romney sticking his nose in and saying it's Obama's fault. They can't impeach him, so this is the next best thing in their "thinking". But, gosh-gee-whiz, Americans just are not as goddamned stupid as Republicans seem to "think" they are. The election taught them absolutely nothing.

Posted by Pope Peabrain on March 1, 2013 at 11:57 AM

Do I smell the stench of either a book deal in the works, or perhaps Mitto will just join the ranks of the paid pundits on FOX? Or maybe he has an aftershave in the works ("Eau de Mitt")?

Posted by Sterno on March 1, 2013 at 11:59 AM

Can we do something to speed up his fade, like leave him in the sun or wash him in hot water?

Posted by Clayton on March 1, 2013 at 12:00 PM

Much like John McCain, he will haunt us for years to come.

Posted by very bad homo on March 1, 2013 at 12:07 PM

@2: Since the idea of the sequester came from the Obama administration, are you saying that this is some Machiavellian scheme to purposely make Obama look bad? Why would they do that?

Posted by raindrop on March 1, 2013 at 12:24 PM

You can't fool us for a second Paul Constant. We know you're loving this.

Posted by raindrop on March 1, 2013 at 12:27 PM

@6 It's congress' constitutional duty to write a budget. They have failed in that task repeatedly. Instead the Republican majority has tried to ruin the economy. Machiavelli had nothing on them.

Posted by Pope Peabrain on March 1, 2013 at 12:43 PM

Fuck framed again.

Posted by Machiavelli was framed on March 1, 2013 at 1:05 PM

@6 The GOP has been obsessed with the size, scope, and cost of government since sometime around late January 2009, after spending the better part of the prior decade creating the mess they now want to blame on Obama. The sequester may have been Obama's idea but it is absurd and insulting to our collective intelligence to pretend you don't understand why he came up with it in the first place, nor why our government is incapable of sustaining itself after 8 years of binging on borrowed bombs and unfunded entitlements. Feel free to keep fooling yourself if it makes you feel better because that's the only thing you have to show for it.

Posted by blip on March 1, 2013 at 1:05 PM

I'm still not sure what a Mitt Romney is.

Posted by originalcinner on March 1, 2013 at 1:17 PM