His problem is that he has a mid-life crisis several times a year.

Instead of saying something he’ll have to backtrack from in a couple of days.

Also, since Mitt’s the responsible family man, he’ll be able to grasp our debt. I stole this from someone, but it simplifies the math:

If federal income and spending where a household budget:
Annual family income: $21,700
Money the family spent: $38,200
New debt (this year) on the credit card: $16,500
Outstanding balance on the credit card: $142,710
Budget cuts: $385

That was from September 2011, and hasn’t improved. He’ll understand, intellectually, but I don’t think he (or any of them, for that matter) have the political will to make the necessary changes.

There’s been a lot of argument and “fact” and, of course, hate, directed against those of traditional values who base their values on texts rather than “science.” But the science has changed, hasn’t it? And was Oliver Wendall Homes, Jr., vindicated or challenged?

Don’t wanna be against science. Who would be? And why?

But it wasn’t just science, it was logic in the abortion dispute. And Margaret Sanger, well, hey , how about justifying her logic? Kill niggers. This is Planned Parenthood’s beginnings? Kill the niggers? And somehow they, because they are receiving dollars from the same people killing them, agree? Sounds like vulture Capitalism to me.

I love life. I love the small limbs, the first smile, the “I love you, Daddy,” and the “Mom, can I help you,” statements.

I (We) love those. We are not hate. We are love. We are love. We are love. And Love never fails.

Is there a direct object to his understanding?

Part of Clinton’s charm (to which many on the right are immune, but a lot of other people are susceptible) was his air of being perpetually boyish, a lovable scamp. Even George Bush had that frat-boy quality that drove people on the left nuts.

The last “adult” president in the sense I’m thinking of it was George H.W. Bush. He was the quintessential “adult.”

I set up a straw man and you called me on it. Good point.

“The JL argument is close to the liberal argument that super brilliance is the key.”

Where in my comment did I say anything that resembled that “super brilliance” is the key?

I said business sense, and a sense of how to run a large operation to effect certain goals. And how can that not matter? If you are on an airliner, or a large ship, you want someone who can pilot that vessel, operate its controls, and give the correct commands to bring about what needs to be done.

I mean, if you do not think Romney has those skills, or that another candidate has them more, or if you think those skills are trumped by other skills in the present situation , then okay. But on some level, competence, skill and an ability to run an operation must matter for something.