Thursday, July 19, 2012
There are two ways to respond to an onslaught of negative, vicious attacks. One is to say they are negative and vicious and to try to disprove them. But like birthers, the ones making the attacking continue to claim there is an "open question." The other is to go on offense.Revelations?
Romney seems to have seized the opportunity to pivot away from talking about when he resigned and his tax returns to this revelation about Obama's underlying philosophy. In a speech in Pennsylvania he hit his stride[.]
Barack Obama is your dream opponent if you want to make your election about broad philosophical issues. His entire first term has been about expanding the entitlement state, and during his previous campaign, he so blatantly attacked American individualism that even mainstream reporters were reminded of Ayn Rand.
Romney's pivot is no clever move, but a pragmatist's expedient grasp at an opportunity to get out of a jam. Romney could have easily attacked Obama's governing philosophy from Day One. Should Romney manage to lose to such an opponent -- whose latest utterance also seems to have been anticipated by Ayn Rand, this time in Atlas Shrugged (aka Obama's Playbook) -- it will be an quite an achievement. (Sadly, it has already been equalled by John McCain.)
If Romney wins, those of us who understand individualism and the proper role of government better than the man who signed ObamaCare into law before it became known as ObamaCare will have to take over from Obama the task of reminding the public that the entitlement state places freedom and prosperity in grave danger.
The fact that Romney wasn't on offense to begin with both speaks volumes about him and his underlying political philosophy, which is quite similar to Obama's. He is intellectually bankrupt, but his opponent has bailed him out -- for now.