Obama’s cynical strategy of playing the middle and standing for nothing finally blew up in his face last night. His performance was an insult to any of us who’ve supported him, because not only did he clearly not prep for debate, he didn’t debate. He didn’t even know his positions. He had no specifics, no facts, no interest – and sadder still – no ability to actually respond to what his opponent was saying. And because he stands for nothing, there was nothing left.
I am not cynical for seeing Obama as cynical. I love him as a person, such as I can tell, and disparage him as a President. Why? We are in way worse trouble than he is willing to say, and his unwillingness to say it, which has been his policy, left Romney enough room to drive a truck through. Obama is not an angel, and Romney is not a slick lying bastard. This is not good vs. evil; we aren’t children. They are both politicians who have far less difference between them than the range of options that ought to be before us should ever warrant. But mainly it was just sad to see how unable the modern world is to generate a leader that can speak the truth, which is that we have to change course in a big way.
My friend George described Romney like this: “I believe that Romney is pro- whatever will transfer and consolidate wealth and power at the top. If there is substantial profit in war, then he is pro-war. If there is substantial profit in Oil/Coal -then he is pro-Oil/Coal. If only there was profit in peace, aspiration, being a big yellow bird and for each person to live their life with dignity -then he’d be pro- all that. But there’s no money there.” And now I’m sitting wondering how much difference there is between these two guys.
