I was not particularly impressed by either candidate’s performance in the foreign policy debate. The focal point was Benghazi and whether or not President Obama knew about it and withheld telling the American people it was an act of terrorism. The news since the debate that a drone was flying over Benghazi taking video of the insurgence that the president saw it in real time accounts for about three-quarters of closure. Though I don’t believe Obama intentionally harbored terrorism, it is a likely scenario that because Bin Laden was killed on Obama’s watch and to disclose immediately would weaken his credibility running on his claim that Al Qaeda is no more, or at least no longer a threat. I don’t think he anticipated five people would be killed, but he must be held accountable nonetheless.
One issue that came up in the debate was when President Obama discussed his proposal to take funds from the military and reinvest it into social programs. He said he talked to the Generals and Admirals and they said they don’t need it. This is a communications flaw in the character of Mitt Romney although I am still voting for him for president. If the debate were a golf course, Mitt Romney does not select the right clubs at times. He talks about how we have the smallest Navy since WWI in 1917. This is like hacking away at a ball on the fairway with a pitching wedge when he should take one whack with a seven-iron and chip that ball up on the green. Romney mentioned Obama not investing in more battleships and Obama shot that down by mentioning technology and that we don’t buy a lot of horses and buggies either. Romney should have handled it this way:
Mr. President, are you not the Commander in Chief? You should have said, Mr. General, Mr.
Admiral, I am your commander in chief and that is not your decision to make. I say you do
need the money and you are going to get it. You handle the men and women in uniform,
I’ll handle the military budget…
This is not about standing up to an enemy. This is not about standing up to an ally in doubt or negotiating with an uncommitted nation to become our ally. This is our own military—forces that are undoubtedly on our side. If president [Obama] cannot stand up to our own, who can he stand up to? Generals and admirals are human beings to who don’t always get it right. That is why the president is Commander in Chief and does not base his decisions on opinion polls of generals and admirals. Yes, by using high tech aircraft carriers instead of the early twentieth century battleships used in the days of the Lusitania, you do not need as many ships at one time, but you have to have spares in case [God forbid] any get shot down in a battle deemed a necessary evil that we [have] to fight. If Mitt Romney handled it that way, he would have won the debate hands down or at least convinced a large group of people on that issue. And if he still needed a closer, let’s not forget that the military is the one and only service the Federal Government is constitutionally obligated to provide. To cut funds from this one required service and reinvest it into New Deal-esque social programs for which there is, never was, and never will be a constitutional mandate. Even if the Republican congress lost on the floor and the president signed into law, the Supreme Court would have a case to determine the constitutionality of such legislation. Did you all remember we have three (3) branches of government?
Well, whatever your politics, don’t be a spectator. Vote for somebody. I recommend a Republican vote, but I have more respect for someone that opposes me than someone that doesn’t give a feather or a fig. Vote on November 6!