REVISIT – October 4

(This is the final op - ed “bonus” column this week. My regular column called WACKO is scheduled for Saturday, October 6.)

There was no clear winner in last night’s TV Presidential Debate. Both candidates fulfilled their missions by stating their claims of superiority, and although Mitt Romney was light on specifics, he came across as a knowledgeable opponent to Mr. Obama.

Remember, this was the ultimate TV reality show, and both were more than adequate survivors to achieve the amazing race. I personally felt Jamie Dupree’s tongue - in - cheek idea of placing the contenders at a round table — sans a moderator — and let them go at it for 90 uninterrupted minutes would have better served the voting citizenry.

I did enjoy reading the handful of emails I received in response to my original thoughts yesterday. Most were favorable, but a few prompted this second “bonus” column.

Mitt Romney won a few rounds, no question, but President Obama proved once again to be the master of restrained patience in providing the electorate a shining example of tolerance — particularly when it comes to understanding the nuances of governmental necessities.

To follow Romney’s directives would be to ignore all requirements of the highest office, namely to succumb to the sophomoric ideas of the status quo. He seemed to espouse exactly what his followers wanted to hear, and nothing else was either new or different. To expect individual states to show dominance in protecting individual rights is the essence of hope over reality.

Mr. Obama’s inherent grasp of such ephemeral necessities as Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, not to mention that bugaboo “ObamaCare”, makes one wonder if a second term should not be automatic. Romney will, however, make a noticeable impression in 2015. Beyond that, little else matters.

But until then, let’s hear it for Barack Obama. The other TV debates should be a hoot.



Copywrite©2012 by Robert A. Mills, all rights reserved