It's not fair bringing in the little kids, Gerard.

Those girls didn't choose a public life in the White House and they don't deserve to be hurt or abused in our snarky political battles.

I think the children of political figures should be off strictly off limits if we still possess any sense of common decency.

I have to agree. I don't like Obama, but I'm glad to see him having a happy moment with his youngest daughter.

Yeah, it's snarky...but probably more correct than you'd like to think.

This is e beneath you, Gerard. Extra bilious, today?

I am not sure that you are right, Daphne, only that you should be right, that we hope an understanding steeped in decency will always apply universally. But with you or without you a communist fellow traveler will sacrifice his children for the cause with barely a pause. It happened to Obama. It happened to the Rosenberg children, and uncounted others. They love a concept more than they love family; they are sterile beyond belief. You can't imagine he doesn't love his children. I can't imagine he loves anyone.

Not ours. If you hear from our lawyers it's in error. This time.

The point James, is that they are still children, and should not be included in our potshots at el presidente. It should be our standard. They are not 18 yet.

He can be a total piece of shit, James. I don't care.

That doesn't excuse us when we fall to his level.

His children should be off limits for decent people.

James, I hope his daughters never read your last sentence.

Daphne,

You are absolutely correct in your assertion that children are off limits, and should be held blameless for the excesses of their parents.

Which fact does not in any way negate James's essential point, that narcissists are incapable of loving anybody else.

If their father loves them, my sentence will have no hold and no significance, if he does not, it will by then be old business and not new wounds. You cannot protect them from what he will not spare them himself. All great affection admits to a sacrifice, and this is a man without the latter capacity.

I thought the caption was far from the rungs of hell it seems to have been assigned. But you ladies are the keepers of civilization, so I'll keep your opinion close by.

What can one say to "No fair?"

I view it as a gentle rebuke to a vile and violently inclined strange man pretending to be president who rose to the office by pretending to be an American.

The daughter is there for context, nothing more and I fail to see the "meanness" there.

There's a kind of residual niceness still persisting in this entire conflict that really, and utterly, holds the side of the angels at a disadvantage. And it's a disadvantage that the Left is at pains to enforce in one direction while holding it's own immunity to like charges in reserve.

What I hear is, "Uh, oh... there;s a kid there. Unfair. Ten yards and loss of down."

This tends to blind one to the real point of the item which is the phoniness of the original book that played such a big part in lifting this strange alien being into the presidency.

I, for one, am not persuaded by the rebuke which I think is standing not on solid ground but on a very narrow spline.

Fair enough, Gerard. I don't think you're an evil bastard by any means.

I'm still not climbing off of my position though. I'm sick to death of adults using children to bash their opponents, sell legislation or market their particular agendas.

Maybe this state of affairs is as old as Moses, but I'm sick of it.