Voice of the Kingfisher speaks out …from a different perspective
by Elinor Montgomery
October 23, 2012
Three presidential debates have come and gone, and, where does it leave America in the after-glow of the events? Do we have more information about the direction each candidate will take the country? Do we have more information about the men themselves? Have the men been open and transparent in revealing their character and, most importantly, can one be trusted, more than the other, with the future of America?
Let us take a close look at Governor Mitt Romney, for it is a fact that he has emerged from these debates as the over-all winner, with the momentum going to him as his popularity continues to rise in the polls. At first appearances, he is not exactly a warm and fuzzy charmer, but as the real person emerges, he becomes more like a very good suit that wears well and becomes more comfortable with the wearing.
He entered into the debates a bit like a chased dog on the run. In fact, he was described by his opponent as a very dangerous man who would throw granny over the cliff and choose to give Americans dirty water – you could say, not a very nice person at all. But as it turned out, it appeared not to be that person who showed up to debate the President. In fact Romney proved to be down-right knowledgeable, quick of mind, stronger than the President, much more presidential in demeanor and even a quite likeable person.
What we saw was a man of very sure-footed clarity, and firm in his policies for a strong economy and a strong military. He revealed himself to be a true patriot who loves his country and wants to represent her for the greatness she became, but has lost over the past four years. He went on the offensive, asking to work with, rather than against, the people to restore this same American greatness in every area – education, the economy, the military and a broken and restored Washington, where government begins to function again and never to return to the policies of the past four years, which belong to Obama, alone, and to no other president.
Romney has asked for the opportunity to prove that the successes he has had in all these areas, to date – in business, education and in government on the state level – can be transferred and applied to the Federal level of government. He is running on a firm foundation of success and not on an airy-fairy philosophy of hope and change. Of such is his opponent, who never has had any success as a leader in the business world and now, as a leader in government, which leaves him with no record on which to run, unlike that of Romney.
He can clearly point out to the American people that neither in business nor in government is the nation’s influence greater today than it was before Obama took office, four years ago. Romney would implement a foreign policy for this country, with respect to peace coming through strength as opposed to weakness, and he is very clear on what this entails; it would include being a good friend and complete support to our closest ally in the Middle East, the nation Israel. He would mend the bridges, which the Obama administration has broken in order to cozy up to the Islamic world, which shows no desire whatsoever to be his friend. How is it possible to be a friend to a country that hates you and wants to destroy you?
It seems to me Romney, who has experienced success as opposed to failure, has the smarts it takes to discern what is needed to revitalize the power of America and make her, once again, a leading player on the world scene. Certainly, Obama’s policies have been riddled with failure. In the post-mortem of the debates, looking back on how the two men scored with respect to their correctness of the facts, I can remember no instance of a deliberate lie or unwarranted personal attack on the part of Romney against the President. The same cannot be said of the President, who made it a practice to call Romney a liar.
Now, let us look at and consider the facts concerning this President who has withheld his personal records with respect to his birth certificate, his actual location of birth and his school records, which, it would appear, could very well indicate that he entered college as a foreign student. This would disqualify him from the right to be president only to reveal a truth, which should have been established long before the debates ever began. A liberal judiciary, aided by a liberal media, has kept this information from surfacing before the public, preventing Americans from getting to the root of a most import, basic problem of possible dishonesty, which could have led to the President breaking the constitutional law of America.
What happened during the first debate was exactly what Clint Eastwood had shown at the RNC to be true; there was almost an empty seat again, where the President should have been seated as the incumbent. Instead there was nothing but a shell of a man, which seemed to be emptied of the man. The consensus was nearly unanimous on both sides of the political fence; a knock-out blow had been dealt to the President, with very little resistance from him. He had tried to strike with a bit of rhetoric, but nothing of substance. The problem is that there is not now, and never has been, any substance to lies.
Again, the comments in the post-mortems of the political pundits revealed that Obama lied on many occasions about the facts. In the final debate, there were about three different matters on which he challenged and accused Romney of misinformation. And there were the continual, blatant lies of the President that over-rode all three, in which he stated the economy, under his leadership, is better, the military is stronger and America is more respected by an Islamic world, with which he has made friends by ridding it of bin Laden and weakening the strength of al-Qaeda. However, he had not counted on the American Embassy being attacked at this time in Libya. Nor, in his naiveté, had he provided the badly needed protection for the Ambassador and the three other victims by counting on hope and change, instead of providing the badly needed protection, which his administration denied them.
He exposed four innocent lives for political purposes, and an attempt to create the illusion of a successful foreign policy of his administration, which simply does not exist. In order to muffle lies, the cover-up was carried out with more rhetoric. The style of the man is that of a cheer-leader whose job it is to create enthusiasm for the game but never actually participate in the real sport where wins and losses are experienced, not just talked about. Again, as a player, the chair is empty; but as eye-candy on late-night shows and women’s programs, the phoniness of the political world becomes one with the phoniness of the entertainment world. He is much more at home with the actors as opposed to Romney, who prefers the real world of involvement in the successes and failures of the game, based on merit.
Over the course of the debates, it became a battle between the trustworthy and the untrustworthy, between a record of successes and one of failures, a solid foundation for action and one of no foundation in hope and change. It was a battle between two very different ideologies – one of less government and one of more government. It was a battle of character in which Romney emerged standing head and shoulders over the President, appearing to be ‘Lincolnesque’ and ‘Reaganesque’ in stature, as compared to a man who stood ‘Carteresque’ in defeat. To my mind, on surveying the facts in the after-glow of the debates, one man came out of them, hands-down, the winner over the other.
We cannot overlook the one vice-presidential debate between Paul Ryan and Joe Biden. The question arises as to which man would be most capable of fitting into the shoes of the President, if necessary. As to character, Ryan did not lie, but the Vice-President did. One stuck to the facts and the other performed with bluster and rhetoric, using extraordinary physical gestures to suggest that the straight man, Ryan, was dealing with a laughing hyena. As for filling those vice-presidential shoes, I would personally prefer ‘the brain’ over ‘the teeth’.
And so, you have my take in the after-glow, and it now rests in the hands of the public who has been allowed to see the real men behind the veil put up by the media, which has hidden one and disfigured the other. For the first time Obama had to come out from behind his place of hiding, and Romney was given the first opportunity to reveal the real man and destroy a media and politically-constructed image. Now, may the vote reflect the clear picture and the desire of Americans for a better America, restored to her old role of excellence and exceptionalism? This will happen only if God is with us; for then, who can be against us?