October 5, 2012

Truth Will Out

Photo courtesy The New York Post - EPA
There is a saying in Italian which literally translated means “lies have short legs” (so they don’t go very far), and which roughly corresponds to “Truth will out” in English. This seems to particularly apply to what happened Wednesday night at the first presidential debate.

John Podhoretz in the New York Post:

Mitt Romney’s spectacular debate performance Wednesday night was the result of a parlor trick only Republicans get to play — the same parlor trick Ronald Reagan used in 1980 to deliver the crushing debate blow to President Jimmy Carter.

After months and months of media portrayals painting him as a vicious plutocrat who tortured his own dog, cut a gay kid’s hair in 1965 and made a steelworker’s wife die of cancer, Romney stood before tens of millions of Americans and . . . wasn’t a monster.

Simple as that.

Reagan did the trick in 1980 with a shake of the head and a “there you go again.” Romney did it Wednesday by spending 90 minutes forthrightly asserting his policies would help Americans, especially middle-class Americans, while the policies of his rival had hurt them and would continue to hurt them.

Great piece. Read it in full here.



Recommend this post on Google!


1 comment:

  1. What could defeat Obama could well be the cheap and ruthless tenor of his own campaign. Probably like many others, I get daily email doses of pro-Obama presidential rubbish that I can do nothing about blocking. How can such cheap, unwanted soliciting do justice to a potential candidate as President of the USA?

    To give him some credit he has bulldozed through what other US Presidents have failed to achieve, but because Obamacare was bulldozed through, and at such a critical period, it cannot possibly function as well as it should. Such an ambitious health scheme has to be established gradually, bit by bit, almost on a trial and error basis, to eradicate the faults that are bound to appear during a more 'careful' process.

    Obama seemed to prefer to try to have everything set up during his first mandate, which might have been a miraculous accomplishment had it succeeded, but could turn out to be a very costly error if so many unanticipated flaws cause it to fail.

    It wouldn't do Obama any harm by losing the elections. It would be another hole for him to climb out of. More humility wouldn't do him any harm at all.
    He leaps and swaggers about displaying his phoney 'so near the people, especially the ladies' stance like a hack B film celebrity of the 60's.

    It might do more harm to the USA if he won the elections. It's doubtful that another four years of Obama would be in the interests of the world either.
    Maybe if his campaign team continue to use their cheap tactics, they will decide for him, and perhaps this would be just as well.

    ReplyDelete

Related Posts with Thumbnails