Obama Ad: If Romney’s Extremities Get Any More Extremely Extreme, His Limbs Gonna Fly Off And Hit Somebody

Posted on | April 28, 2012 | 18 Comments

by Smitty

This Obama campaign ad is kind of a hoot:

I suppose the point here is to terrify the ‘hen-house’ with the notion that Mitt is some big, bad wolf. Thoughts:

Are women, in general, the kind of dupes implied by this ad, who can easily be driven about the chicken coop with plays to fear? Not the likes of the ladies who link this blog, that’s for sure.
How is, exactly, anything on the social conservative agenda even a little bit extreme, in relation to Shari’a Law?
This ad risks making Romney more appealing to SoCons than it does stir up trepidation among Independents.
What kind of loser is #OccupyResoluteDesk that, instead of making a positive case for the swell job he’s done the last 3 years, he has to focus on demonizing the opposition? I’m guessing the three dimensional sort:

via Breitbart

Update: linked at The Lonely Conservative who has an extremely long post. Well, actually average-sized post on extremism.

Update II: Heh: “Da Preezy of the United Steezy“

Category: Barack Obama, Mitt Romney

Comments

18 Responses to “Obama Ad: If Romney’s Extremities Get Any More Extremely Extreme, His Limbs Gonna Fly Off And Hit Somebody”

Which Party is Ideologically Extreme? | The Lonely Conservative
April 28th, 2012 @ 9:52 pm

[…] power allow Republican input? It only happens when they have absolutely no other choice.Update 2: Here’s the latest from the ideological extremists on the left. They’re projecting again.google_ad_client = […]
ThomasD
April 28th, 2012 @ 10:13 pm

Stacy, why are you wasting your time on this stuff? It’s not like the moderates who are just falling all over themselves to vote for squishy Romney are going to be fooled by this blatant leftist propaganda.

It’s in the bag.
Adobe_Walls
April 28th, 2012 @ 10:22 pm

Give Obamsky a break #OccupyResoluteDesk doesn’t have any positive accomplishments. Is it fair to expect him run on nothing ?Maybe he can redistribute someone else’s positive accomplishments, you know because he didn’t get his fair share.
QuoVadisAnima
April 28th, 2012 @ 10:35 pm

Too funny. This would actually help Romney more than it would hurt him!
Darienduchesne
April 28th, 2012 @ 10:37 pm

That aspirin thing works, every time, and it’s really cheap.
John David Galt
April 28th, 2012 @ 10:49 pm

This topic is a total waste of time for both sides, because the SoCon agenda *is* dead forever. The question that matters is how much will Romney cut spending (not just slow its growth)? The answer I get from his time as Governor is: none.

Vote Gary Johnson. He’s America’s only hope if Ron Paul isn’t nominated.
lonely conservative
April 28th, 2012 @ 10:59 pm

Vote Gary Johnson and get Obama reelected. Whee!

Oh, and my post wasn’t that long. My whole family fell asleep while watching some TV so I had a little bit of spare time. 😉

Unfortunately, I just wasted some of my free time watching that White House Correspondents Dinner. There’s a few minutes of my life I won’t get back.
Team Obama: Mitt is so extremely extreme that his extremities might fly off in an extreme fashion or something « The Daley Gator
April 29th, 2012 @ 12:04 am

[…] Smitty has the story […]
Adjoran
April 29th, 2012 @ 1:15 am

From a $ 3 billion deficit to $2 billion surplus in four years, with a legislature which varied all the way from 85% to 90% Democratic, and you worry that total spending wasn’t less?

Every vote for Gary Johnson is in effect a vote for Barack Obama. There are two choices in this election, and ONLY two. One of ONLY two men will win.

You can cast your vote as you choose, but don’t pretend you are doing anything but supporting Obama’s reelection if you don’t vote for the GOP nominee. It’s only a matter of degree between actually voting for Obama, a third candidate, leaving the top line blank, and staying home altogether.

Man up and be responsible for your actions.
Adobe_Walls
April 29th, 2012 @ 3:21 am

Who’s Gary Johnson is that huntsman’s running mate? If so how many asterisks are in his name?
Adjoran
April 29th, 2012 @ 6:36 am

He’s one of the guys out on the balcony passing around a Doobie.
Pathfinder's wife
April 29th, 2012 @ 10:20 am

Actually, you are wrong: we have to deal with people’s private sexual behavior (and the consequences thereof) driving up medical expense, in law enforcement (because sometimes their private behavior is predatory and abusive to others), with the loss of people in our workforce (due to the consequences of their sexual proliclivities), we have to deal with the legal wranglings of people wanting their private sexual behavior to be accepted and even celebrated in public.
On top of the welfare state.And I’m not just harshing on the usual suspects here — the freaky runs strong in the human species.
It’s a lot like the idea of legalizing drugs…making it “ok” will not fix the problem, which goes back to human nature (which isn’t very nice: de Sade should always be read as companion pieces to Rousseau; Paglia was right…although unlike her, I’m not cool with it).

While I’m not in agreement with the SoCon agenda all the time, I do understand that the SoCon issues are not going to go away. In fact, if you think they are dead and buried you will ultimately find out that they have come back to bite you, quite nastily, in the tuckus — it’s better to just address them.
Pathfinder's wife
April 29th, 2012 @ 10:31 am

As for welfare reform: truly, that needs to be addressed as well, but with 40% give or take of the population on some form of welfare (and those entitlements are not the whole picture of welfare in this country), just cutting “welfare” programs will do nothing more than create conditions which I’m sure nobody will like.

There is no quick and easy answer to problems that have been fomenting for nearly a century — trying to go that route will only cause other problems (and I might add: most likely will result in even more loss of liberty).
Pathfinder's wife
April 29th, 2012 @ 10:37 am

He’s the Libertarian Party canidate, was running in the GOP primary then dropped out.
Mind you, many of his positions are very worthy of consideration — for a person who considers themselves of a libertarian persuasion he does provide an attractive alternative to what the GOP wants to serve up.
Bob Belvedere
April 29th, 2012 @ 5:02 pm

Adj: That surplus came about because of the doings of then Democratic Speaker Tom ‘The Felon’ Finneran, who is a fiscal conservative and an old time Irish pol. In the Bay State, the Speaker has more power than the Governor. Also, Willard’s budgets were literally laughed at and discarded.
McGehee
April 29th, 2012 @ 9:22 pm

Every vote for [anyone but the Etch-A-Sketch] is in effect a vote for Barack Obama.

You just keep telling yourself that, loser.
Morning Reads – April 30, 2012 — Peach Pundit
April 30th, 2012 @ 9:04 am

[…] Presidential campaign ads are getting pretty […]
Morning Reads – April 30, 2012
April 30th, 2012 @ 10:09 am

[…] Presidential campaign ads are getting pretty […]