I’m a sucker for a good political speech.
As I drove my truck up Interstate 5 last night I listened to Mitt Romney’s speech at the Republican Convention. He had me right up the line where he mocked President Obama for promising to “slow the rise of the oceans and to heal the planet”. He added: “My promise is to help you and your family”.
Shame on you Mr. Romney for pandering to the know nothings of your party, those who repudiate — or as Sarah Palin might say, “refudiate” — science.
I suppose you could say the implication is that mere mortals cannot hope to control God’s creation, but they can do something about the way they conduct their own lives or about the way their elected government acts. But did not God give us brain power above that of other animals? Are we to despoil God’s creation?
Also, Romney did not mention Afghanistan, where the Obama administration continues to conduct war, but he sharply criticized Obama for not being tough enough and not showing American strength and leadership.
Actually, I think, I would hope, that Mr.Romney is intelligent enough to know that preserving the planet is paramount, but of course he also knows that we can’t simply halt everything we do to make a living and survive in the name of the environmental cause. We have to both survive and preserve our planet. But the political reality is that he has to cave in to the far right know nothings or the shortsighted.
I did not get a chance to see or hear Clint Eastwood, but reading and hearing all the reports, some think he went off the deep end, some think he is senile, and still others think he delivered an ingeniously creative performance. I’ll have to get back to that, after looking up the full video. I have seen some excerpts.
UPDATE: Well now I have watched nearly all of the Clint Eastwood video and I found it presents a muddled message, and although in my original post here I indicated he had said something for pulling troops out of Afghanistan, I no longer am sure what he meant. I think he just took a cheap shot at President Obama, who one has to admit has not found much success there. I don’t know what Eastwood’s view is nor do I know what Romney’s is.
I will say, and I have said this before, and will say it again: You avoid war at all costs. But once the decision is made you fight to win and don’t pull any punches. Did we not drop two atomic bombs on Japan? We meant business. The leaders of the United States, Republican and Democrat, no longer have the guts to fight war to win.
Gone are men such as Generals Eisenhower, Patton, MacArthur, and presidents Franklin D. Roosevelt and Harry S Truman (although he faltered in Korea, but so did Eisenhower for settling for less than victory there.)
To me, fighting a war but settling for less than total victory is a sin, as bad as going to war needlessly.
Romney did, I think, manage to portray himself as more human with all of his folksy talk of family life. And I felt he really meant this stuff. But I doubt he is any more loving of his family than Barack Obama.
The Republicans have made this election out as a struggle for the soul of America between socialism on one side and free will and free enterprise and democracy on the other. I don’t think that is quite accurate, although I grant Democrats push harder for various socialistic type programs within our free enterprise and democratic (small d) society.
I think that despite the necessary political rhetoric we have essentially two moderates running against each other, the Democrat and incumbent President Obama, and the moderate always willing to bend his positions Republican Romney.
As far as I can see both are good men (of course Romney is the hard-nosed business man who would be ready to fire you and Obama is the condescending college intellectual at times).
Romney in my mind has still not made the case as to why he would be a better president, except that he feels that anything you can do to help business is good for America.
I’m sure a lot of folks were sold on that, right up to the great crash of 2008.