Exclusive to OpEdNews:
OpEdNews Op Eds

Meek Romney

By (about the author)     Permalink       (Page 1 of 3 pages)
Related Topic(s): ; ; ; ; ; ; ; , Add Tags Add to My Group(s)

View Ratings | Rate It

opednews.com

Become a Fan
  (14 fans)
- Advertisement -

AP photo

If life were accordingly fair -- as in an evenly-balanced journey in which the chips don't just fall where they may, but rather where they are supposed to -- we might have seen Clint Eastwood stage an intervention during Monday's final presidential debate.  

Fairness would have meant that in less time than it takes for Joe Sixpack to suck down that first cold one, Mr. Sixpack and the rest of us would have witnessed Eastwood make his way onto the debate floor with the same chair that he made headlines with during the GOP convention, place it between Romney and the President, and politely ask Mitt to take a hike.

It was necessary.   That's because during this debate, rather than stand and deliver, Romney decided to sit and concede.   Once again Mitt pulled his "empty suit" move, but this time in a way that perfectly correlates with the dumb symbolism of Eastwood's empty chair.  

Anyone expecting a Patton-esque bad-ass to show up looking for a showdown found him or herself stood up.   As might have been expected, "severely conservative" Mitt failed to show.   But even "moderate" Mitt was nowhere to be found.  

Instead, viewers got "me too," Mitt.   Thus, any expectation among the Tea Party crowd of a "serious" philosophical debate -- during which the merits of an amped up, take-no-prisoners foreign policy/national security approach would be made in conjunction with an insightful unraveling of Obama's weak-kneed apology-based agenda -- probably dwindled faster than Dan Rather can spit out a colorful colloquialism.

History will show that on Monday night "Mittens" was as meek as a kitten; more a missionary than a militarist.   He flat out sold out to the max; jumping ship on the hawkish, foreign policy big-shot persona used to light the trail he blazed through the GOP primaries right on through to this final face-off with the current Commander-in-Chief.  

- Advertisement -

In general, points made by Obama on foreign policy/national security were met not with a compelling philosophical alternative from Romney, but instead with a flourish of overly-nuanced "me toos."    He pretty much disused his compulsory, if not handy hard-right persona and essentially became Obama by virtually adopting in nearly word-for-word dulcet, Obama's foreign policy/national security doctrine.   

For example, when asked a question on Syria, part of Obama's response included the following:

""ultimately, Syrians are going to have to determine their own future. And so everything we're doing, we're doing in consultation with our partners in the region, including Israel " coordinating with Turkey and other countries in the region that have a great interest in this" And we have to do so making absolutely certain that we know who we are helping, that we're not putting arms in the hands of folks who eventually could turn them against us or our allies in the region."

Just moments later, Romney offered a response that merely echoed that of the President:

""the right course for us is working through our partners and with our own resources to identify responsible parties within Syria, organize them, bring them together in a form of -- if not government, a form of council that can take the lead in Syria, and then make sure they have the arms necessary to defend themselves. We do need to make sure that they don't have arms that get into the wrong hands."

- Advertisement -

 

And so it went.   Thus, on the Monday night, his base saw Romney firm in command as engineer of the once-immovable GOP national security locomotive as it barreled backwards off the rails yet still on a trajectory to roll over the Tea Party Express, itself stuck on the tracks since the 2010 mid-terms.

At its conclusion, snap-polls declared Obama the winner.   But on this night, the previous debate's ultimate fighters provided an ultimate letdown.   It was an interesting turn of events that seemed to reflect a kind of odd irony relevant to the debate coinciding with the 50th anniversary of the Cuban Missile Crisis, an experience moderator Bob Schieffer described as "the closest we've ever come to nuclear war."   

Next Page  1  |  2  |  3

 

Anthony Barnes, of Boston, Massachusetts, is a free-lance writer who leans toward the progressive end of the political spectrum. "When I was a young man, I wanted to change the world. I found it was difficult to change the world, so I tried to (more...)
 

Share on Google Plus Submit to Twitter Add this Page to Facebook! Share on LinkedIn Pin It! Add this Page to Fark! Submit to Reddit Submit to Stumble Upon


Go To Commenting

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Writers Guidelines

Contact Author Contact Editor View Authors' Articles
- Advertisement -

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

SURPRISE! Chris Christie's 2016 Gambit

Starlight and Shadows

PIG TALES

ISRAEL'S SHAME

ERRORS AND NO FACTS: Business as Usual at Fox News

"Smart-Ass White Boys"

Comments

The time limit for entering new comments on this article has expired.

This limit can be removed. Our paid membership program is designed to give you many benefits, such as removing this time limit. To learn more, please click here.

Comments: Expand   Shrink   Hide  
1 people are discussing this page, with 1 comments
To view all comments:
Expand Comments
(Or you can set your preferences to show all comments, always)

Unfortunately, there's no downside to Romney's con... by Anthony Barnes on Thursday, Oct 25, 2012 at 9:31:36 AM