Romney the Bully

Is this the correct place to bring up Obama's admitted high school drug abuse?

The point of my reply was in response to your comment: Any such test applied to Obama?

According to Obama's book, it was not just pot.But again, the issue is not what they did in high school.I am trying to point out to you your comment about later acknowledging the incorrectness of that behavior. I see your comment as indicative of a double standard.Can't you see that as well?

No, I do not claim these are comparable incidents.Schoolyard bullying in those days was good for a trip to the principal's office, and maybe detention for a few afternoons.Pot and cocaine use were then, and still are, mentioned disparagingly in many a statute book.But you condemn the former as a character flaw which must persist nearly 50 years later, while excusing the latter, which, for all we know, may have continued up to the present unless I've missed a renunciation somewhere.Yes, I see a double standard there.

I think the outrage that is being expressed in this thread is related more to the fact that Romney is now the presidential candidate on the other side than the actual merits of what he did 50 years ago.But I guess you have to excuse the foibles of your side while pointing out the foibles of the other side, no matter how ancient, eh?Meanwhile, all of these side issues are being brought up to avoid the main issue--the economy is in the dumper and the unemployment rate is way too high--and it's too late to blame it all on Bush. Meanwhile, Obama's policies have made things worse rather than better.Sounds like Alan Dershowitz's advice for defending cases:

If the facts are on your side, pound the facts into the table. If the law is on your side, pound the law into the table. If neither the facts nor the law are on your side, pound the table.

They need to decriminalize or legalize it.But the anti-drug war is a big business now, so don't look for that any time soon.

But you are missing the entire point of all of this: the point is character assassination because of political differences. Rather than fight the battle over issues, it is easier to just attack an opponent's character. Most any charge will suffice, as long as it can be repeated often enough.We'll probably be hearing next about bed-wetting or nose-picking or something equally fatuous.

Someone has a character problem all right.But it isn't Romney.