Here's a big bowl of pudding laced with proof.
Washington (CNN) -- Days before the one-year anniversary of the raid that killed Osama bin Laden, top surrogates for President Barack Obama and presumptive Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney took to the national stage to argue the politics of the attack.
Senior Obama campaign adviser Robert Gibbs defended the campaign's use of the event in a recent Web video and in a speech from Vice President Joe Biden. Meanwhile, senior Romney adviser Ed Gillespie characterized the political steps surrounding the death as a "bridge too far."
Team Obama released a video on Friday, partially narrated by former President Bill Clinton, that praised the president's decision to order the killing of the al Qaeda chief one year from Tuesday and questioned whether Romney would have made the same choice. Biden similarly questioned the former Massachusetts governor in a campaign-style speech on Thursday.
Gibbs, the former White House press secretary, said the video was "not over the line" and criticized comments Romney made on the issue during his first White House bid as "foolish."
The video quotes Romney in 2007 during his first White House bid, saying, "It's not worth moving heaven and earth, spending billions of dollars just trying to catch one person." Days later, he said, "We'll move everything to get him (bin Laden)."
There's a difference in the roles they would play as commander in chief, and I certainly think that's fair game," Gibbs said Sunday on NBC's "Meet the Press."
During his second White House bid, Romney has repeatedly praised the president for launching the raid on bin Laden.
Gillespie, a former aide to former President George W. Bush and former chairman of the Republican National Committee, said utilizing the raid for political purposes is one of the reasons Obama has "become one of the most divisive presidents in American history."
"He took something that was a unifying event for all Americans, and he's managed to turn it into a divisive, partisan political attack," Gillespie said in a separate interview on the same NBC program. "I think most Americans will see it as a sign of a desperate campaign."
These kinds of shenanagans are, in large measure, empirical evidence that the accusations about politicans being "out of touch" are valid and true.
Because "the American public" knows the difference between good and evil and has no problem with the extermination of evil, regardless of the name tag on the exterminator.
If an incumbent asking for re-election is, rightly, expected to be held acountable for all that he or she has not accomplished in the job they were given, then simple reason dictates that those things that have, in fact, been accomplished can, and should, be highlighted as well.
Here's politics in plain English...while childishly whining amongst themselves goes on over whether credit should be given where due for eliminating evil, you are not being given credit for having enough intelligence to decide for yourself.
Speaking of credit where due, by the way, Gillespie is absolutely right when he says "I think most Americans will see it as a sign of a desperate campaign."
He's just a little off on which side will get the blame they deserve for not giving you the credit you deserve.
No comments:
Post a Comment