Maybe it's because I mostly read liberal sources, but that initial focus on Romney's big win sort of took second place behind the headlines that followed. For one day we had all the stories and lists of lies and distortions that Rmoney told. Then headlines about the good unemployment numbers and the big flap about that, as Republicans screamed "It can't be true."
New York Times columnist Joe Nocera summed it up well: "Whether the Republicans like it or not, the economy is slowly getting better. Awful, isn't it?"
Now we're getting the second wave of scrutiny, with people saying: "Wait a minute."
Case in point: On Friday, conservative/moderate New York Times columnist David Brooks wrote a glowing account of the "moderate" Mitt Romney that had finally returned in the debate, revealing at last his "authentic" self and policies.
The letters about it in the Times Saturday are all scathing, not only about Romney but about Brooks for drinking the Kool Aid (my phrase).
One writer says this 11th hour "return to his authentic self" proves that only one thing is authentic about Romney: "his cynicism about the intelligence of his audience as he plays to the crowd and tells it what he thinks it wants to hear."
Another scorns Brooks for telling readers that we should ignore what Romney has been saying daily for a year and accept as genuine what he said on Wednesday. He ends with: "I truly hope that the electorate is more discerning than Mr. Brooks." Amen to that. And I think they will be, that is those who haven't also drunk the Kool Aid.
But my favorite is from Paul Oppenheim who dismisses Brooks' statement that Romney "at long last began the process of offering a more authentic version of himself." Mr. Oppenheim replied:
"Authentic people don't offer 'versions' of themselves."
Here! here! I couldn't have put it better myself. And somehow I have a hunch that, with a little more time, a few more voters than not will conclude the same thing.
Ralph
No comments:
Post a Comment