Originally published by Communities @ Washington Times
SAN DIEGO, September 15, 2011—Both Mitt Romney and Rick Perry have serious flaws. That’s certainly no breaking news flash, merely an unfortunate fact. Time does not permit us to discuss every flaw. This is a column after all, not a War and Peace sized book. Instead, I will be brassy enough to ghost write two small speeches which could turn things around for the candidates. Each testimony is a little more honest and penitent than what we generally observe in a debate or television interview where talking points run out the clock and suck oxygen out of the room before a follow up question can make its way out of the gate.
Romney: “No more double talk about my Massachusetts health care plan. No more Newspeak style distinctions about how mandatory insurance is OK on a state level but unconstitutional as federal law. That may be technically true since states can write their own constitutions, but when I appeal to the conservative base by promising to end Obama Care, I cannot pretend that allowing states to do the same thing is really any more palatable. I’ve been kidding my voters and kidding myself to think that any of them will buy this reheated Jiffy Pop. It’s like a used car salesman selling a car without brakes and then later on selling his disgruntled customer brakes as an add-on. ‘Oh did you want brakes? You should have ordered the deluxe model.’ Enough of this! I made a stupid mistake with Romney Care. I am not going to defend it by fitting a square peg in a round hole. Instead, rest assured; if anyone knows the pitfalls of government health care, it is I, your ol’ pal Mitt.”
With Perry, the redemption is a bit trickier. We would first need to give him the benefit of the doubt. Possibly he never even read Mitt Romney’s book which came up last week in the CNN sponsored debate. Perhaps he referred to such literature in response to one of his campaign advisors. Nobody knows at this point, but that interpretation alone allows Perry to place the best smiley sticker he can on an otherwise disastrous evening.
Perry: “I was less than truthful during our last debate. No, I did not lie, but I repeated faulty information. When I insisted that Governor Romney also called Social Security criminal, I was following a suggestion from one of my advisers. What Mitt actually said in his book was that it would be criminal for the government to raid our Social Security system after promising that money was being set aside for retired citizens.
Here is the actual quote:
‘Let’s look at what would happen if someone in the private sector did a similar thing. Suppose two grandparents created a trust fund, appointed a bank as trustee, and instructed the bank to invest the proceeds of the trust fund so as to provide for their grandchildren’s education. Suppose further that the bank used the proceeds for its own purposes, so that when the grandchildren turned eighteen, there was no money for them to go to college. What would happen to the bankers responsible for misusing the money? They would go to jail. But what has happened to the people responsible for the looming bankruptcy of Social Security? They keep returning to Congress every two years’ (Mitt Romney, No Apology: The Case For American Greatness).
When Mitt confronted me and asked to be quoted in context, I had no idea in the heat of the moment if my opponent or advisor was telling the truth. Wanting to win the debate, I went with my advisor. But I have since learned and now freely admit that I was wrong. I didn’t lie. I was misled. I’ll have to check my records to see what my debate advisors are being paid for these catchy little zingers, but off hand, I’d say whatever the amount, it’s too much.”
I believe each man would help his campaign by light years if such words poured out of their hearts.
“Dream on,” some of you are saying to yourselves right now. “Santa sliding down the chimney and accidently hitting a calendar-challenged Easter Bunny seems more believable than politicians coming clean and admitting they were less than truthful.”
Perhaps, but two things should be remembered:
1) People can be very forgiving when mistakes are confessed. Indeed, these candidates might just gain a new respect from many.
2) This would distinguish the Republican hopefuls from our current president who doesn’t seem capable of taking responsibility for anything other than helping women who faint in the middle of his speeches by asking somebody to fetch a cup of water.
This is Bob Siegel, making the obvious, obvious.
Share this on
