Comments on Debate #2

Yes, President Obama did much better in the second debate and Romney did less well.  But that was more a factor of the difference in the Democrat’s performance.  Romney remained solid but he suffered because he was not so much better than his opponent this time around.

*****

Who thought up the idea of uncommitted voters asking candidates questions?  Perhaps this is unfair, but it would seem that any voter undecided at this stage of the presidential campaign is suffering from self-imposed ignorance.  And the viewing public is supposed to expect intelligent questions from this group?

                                                       *****

The President’s strongest moment came when he took exception to Romney’s suggestion that the Administration had misled the American people as to the cause of the Benghazi attack which resulted in the deaths of our Libyan Ambassador and three other Americans.  His expression hardening and his eyes flashing anger, Obama said he found that claim “offensive”.

But why?  The Administration took two weeks to acknowledge that, indeed, the attack was by terrorists and was not generated by a YouTube Video mocking “the Prophet Mohammed”.  And yet, there had been clear evidence shortly after the 9/11 attack – intelligence to which the Administration clearly had access -  that undercut its public view.  (Remember that U.S. Ambassador Susan Rice devoted the following Sunday – five days after the attack – to talk show appearances repeating “the video caused it " line.

An easy answer is that the Obama team believed that concealing the truth would be in the best interests of the President’s re-election bid.  It would not be helpful, after all, to admit that our terrorist enemies were resurgent.  Wasn’t the death of Bin Laden supposed to signal the end of Al-Qaeda?

I think, however, that Obama was genuinely offended.  He believes what he says.  He’s not Bill Clinton.  As a committed ideologue and a great man in his own mind, he cannot admit to himself that any posture he takes is less than virtuous.  So if he does something, in his eyes it must be right.  Wouldn’t you be offended, too, if you had that self-appraisal and someone questioned the purity of your motive?  Looking back on the President’s statement “taking offense”,  it seem as if he was more offended at the idea of someone questioning his integrity than he was by the attack on our Consulate!

*****

The recent poll numbers have given increasing confidence to the view that Mitt Romney will be our next president.  But if such is not to be, I offer the following thought as solace:  Just think of 2013 and the mess Obama will be in as the result of the policies of his first term - it’ll be even bigger than the one he inherited four years ago!.