Romney won on substance

Submitted by Kepha Hor (United States), Oct 17, 2012 at 21:02

In my deep indigo part of the country, our reliably social democrat news radio had a professor on this morning who said Obama won on style, Romney on substance. Frankly, it is heartening to me that we may have a detail-oriented businessman with state-level executive experience in the Oval Office late this coming January.

As for Romney's gaffe about no mention of terror attacks after the Benghazi incident, this administration's talk of terror attacks quickly got lost in a cloud of blame poured on the justly obscure Nakhoula Nakhoula, as if America's First Amendment is just too dangerous to be left lying around where the yokels can use it.

Further, I agree that Obama came out swinging in this debate, as the MSM puts it. However, I don't think that's about all there was to his performance. We have someone who gets deeply offended when someone isn't giving him adulation and who is too intellectually lazy to think through the details--and this shows horribly in energy policy. This laziness appears as well in that Mr. Obama apparently isn't watching his own Department of State when there are international crises going on, or else seems to expect Dame Billary to keep the campaign narrative that "Osama's dead; we've won" going even as Egyptian mobs chant, "Obama, Obama, we are all Osama."

Yes, I am disheartened that a large chunk of the American people apparently goes for style over substance. But maybe it will take four more years with an aborted economic recovery (thanks to anti-energy and anti-capital policies) for the USA to wake up--if it hasn't by now.

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".