When your opponent is shooting himself in the foot, you don’t help him.
That was exactly my reaction when I heard about all this right wing high-fiving about the Democratic Convention changing the language in their platform.
Overnight the Republican smear machine launched a campaign about the absence of the word “God” and the reference to Jerusalem as the Capital of Israel from their platform.
The right-wing “blogonuts” sprang up, in almost virtual unison, reporting the news and running the video of the contentious votes by the convention on these changes.
However, apparently in their characteristic short-sightedness, they failed to realize the implications of the event that inspired their jubilation.
Two points they have been making relentlessly are the failure of President Obama as a leader as well as that their own candidate, Mitt Romney, was not bound by his Party’s platform.
One thing that the reporting on this matter has made clear is President Obama’s direct intervention in making this change happen. Given the videos that the reactionary “blogonuts” are so fond of promoting regarding the convention’s vote on this matter it is clear that the canard about President Obama not leading is absurd.
It is reminiscent of the famous story about their most treasured Party icon, Abraham Lincoln, at a cabinet meeting relative to a vote on an issue about the Civil War. Lincoln called for the vote. All the members of his cabinet voted against it. Lincoln voted for it. The President then announced “the ayes have it”.
Contrast this to Mitt Romney’s way of dealing with the Republican Party Platform.
He has disagreed with his Vice-Presidential candidate on the issue of abortion. He has disagreed with his Party’s Platform on the issue.
Did he stand up to change it?
I don’t think so? Excuse me, I know so.
And the Republicans want to criticize the President for a lack of leadership?
Clearly, President Obama would not stand for running on a Platform that he could not endorse.
Equally clear is that his opponent has no such qualms. But, that’s characteristic. In fact, it highlights the issue of character.