The Point Is?

Submitted by Phyllis (United States), Jul 31, 2012 at 12:28

The point is that a polarized public finds it difficult to ascertain representation from individuals steeped in committing themselves to agendas of lobbyists and the minions of corporate appeal. If Romney is pacifying the conservative voice then isn't this all in the name of politics, a game gone irreverently array of what actually is meant by the term "representative"? Whatever the Obama administration has done is impacted all the more as a sort of damage control from the Arab Spring which alone has challenged alliances and confidences worldwide. Why is it not apparent in this address in point to see that the actions of one man are never fully or solely his?

We can ask ourselves over and over what would Obama have done "if" and the questions that remain to debate are what would Romney have done differently? Still my question remains, what can one individual do without the impact of forces vying for control at the expense of the general population regardless of nation state or ethnic makeup?

My point dictates that neither Obama nor Romney will be able to impact any difference in the Middle East or Israeli conflicts that have long been sensitive to all of us without surprising de factor decisions well at the expense of being likened to a traitor. For all intents and purposes, the reality that is faced in the Middle East is no more or less significant than it was 100 years ago as the balancing of power among alliances is currently deemed negotiable although nuclear threats have been enlivened. The times in which we live allow us to re-examine the history of viable alliances and, as in many cases, hind sight is always 20/20.

All alliances must be considered gravely before any of the new or old challenges can be addressed. The fear factor, the war on terror, has created yet another paradigm to the racist facts that were fore mentioned. Not only do we abhor absolute power, but we condone it. Oxymoron of action or not, the future will yield a summary far foreign to what many have yet seen or desire along the path of progress for stability and peace.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".