Liberals are shocked and stunned that conservatives, pushing back against their manufactured controversy about Mitt Romney driving with his dog in a protected kennel atop the family car in 1983, had a full day of fun at the expense of Barack Obama, who ate a dog.
Come on. Like if Mitt Romney ate a dog at any point in his life, even as an infant, it wouldn’t be topic one in the liberal media for week. You dickbags made fun of Rick and Karen Santorum for weeks because they honored their dead child.
Workers at the Obama Administration’s Department of Republican Mockery (i.e. Comedy Central) seem especially devastated.
Actually, contrary to the Daily Caller [who speculated that liberals weren’t having fun seeing it pointed out that Barack Obama ate a dog], it’s a lot of fun when the dubious-to-Americans dietary choices of a 9 or 10 year old child living abroad are compared to Romney’s adult decision-making in a ham-fisted effort to play up the president’s “otherness.”
How old was the failed President when Bill Ayers he bragged about his dog eating in his “autobiography” in order to “play up” his worldliness? If you’re going to be the American president, you should probably not brag about eating things, like the dog that Barack Obama ate, that are “dubious-to-Americans.”
And “otherness”? Really. No matter what, they cannot resist trying to turn the most powerful man on earth into some kind of victim in a sympathy play. May have worked in 2008, but there’s no way it can work after he’s been President for 4 years.
And speaking of being “ham-fisted,” what was the Obama campaign doing attacking Romney on the dog thing in the first place? Didn’t Obama read the book that
Bill Ayers he wrote? How could they not realize they were vulnerable on the topic of dogs considering how, you know, Barack Obama eats dogs?
It’s almost to impossible to imagine, but their reaction to our reaction to Barack Obama eating a dog is even better than learning that Barack Obama ate a dog.