Friday, December 21, 2007

More on Mitt

Not to be piling on or anything, but this quote from Mitt Romney in a recent interview with Tim Russert has just got me grinding my teeth. The gist of the answer is that Romney supports the 1994 (so called) Assault Weapons Ban and would sign one if he were President. Then he goes on to say:

"And if there is determined to be, from time to time, a weapon of such lethality that it poses a grave risk to our law enforcement personnel, that’s something I would consider signing. There’s nothing of that nature that’s being proposed today in Washington. But, but I would, I would look at weapons that pose extraordinary lethality…"

This has to be one of the stupidest things I have ever heard any politician say. "Extraordinarily lethal"? So that would make you "extraordinarily dead" instead of just dead if one of these weapons were used on you? Does it also kill your wife and firstborn child when it kills you, even if they are in a different part of town? Are you any less dead from taking a 30mm cannon round (think A-10 Warthog) through your head as you are from taking a .22 cal round (think Ruger 10/22) through the head? I know cleanup would be more of the pressure-washer variety than just stuffing you into the body bag, but you're still dead!

Maybe they could take you to Miracle Max if you weren't "extraordinarily dead" and get you back on your feet that afternoon! You're only mostly dead!

No politician spouting this kind of twaddle should be on the ballot for Dog-Catcher, let alone President of the United States!

No comments: