Policy change or more living on change?

Submitted by trans-parere (Canada), Aug 7, 2012 at 19:41

It seems to me to be rather simplistic intellectually to categorize Romney's speech as "one or the other" partisan POV/criticism. I think it maligns a very sincere conversation with the people of Israel about the nature of a Romney Administration. The Israelis have had four years to get to know Obama. It is unjust to assume that this first meeting with Romney should or could in one speech make up the difference.

I should think the warmth of Romney's address to the people of Israel was the intent. To suggest it was so to glean some funding back home is specious. Mitt Romney is not having any problem acquiring election campaign monies. And I further doubt Romney is deluded into thinking some kind words in Israel are going to reverse the years of American Jewish progressive liberal voting habits.

If there was any subliminal Middle-Eastern message in Romney's speech, it may well have been that under a Romney administration the US will no longer be saying one thing and doing the opposite, while demanding everyone accept they are the same and equal. No one and I mean no one has flip flopped on the issues, both foreign and domestic, like Obama.

I suppose the most laughable comment was the one where someone said, "they /the US" didn't need a return to Bush policy under a Romney administration. For the last four years under Obama it has been nothing but the continuation of Bush policy.

If Romney holds the least "TEA Party" belief in smaller, less intrusive Federal Government, Constitutionality in the Rule of Law and a return to State's Rights... He wont be implementing Bush policy. After all it was Bush policy that caused the TEA Party to organize in the first place.

So if I may, let me assuage any erroneous partisan thinking on behalf of a Romney Administration. No it wont be a Obama Administration but, it wont be a Bush Administration either. Way too many TEA Party Representatives in Congress for that. Just ask Obama and why he is always blaming Congress for not being allowed to further Bush mandates today without a stacked Democratic Party Congress.

Maybe a Romney Administration if elected would finally be the change Americans can believe in. God knows they have waited long enough.

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".