Keith Koffler pans Ann Romney’s speech

Koffler writes at TheWhitehousedossier.com and I usually agree with his take on things so this doesn’t fill me me great optimism. I hope he’s wrong, for once.

Where Mrs. Romney really came alive and sounded most natural was in her praise for her husband. And that’s because wife of Mitt and mother of his children is the main role she’s played in life.

Even there, for me, she pointed to the weakness of the candidate. Mitt, she said, will work hard. He’ll care. He’ll “move heaven and earth” to “fix problems.” Not once did she say he was a conservative or that he had any guiding philosophy.

And that’s exactly the problem with Mitt. He thinks he can assemble America’s Best and Brightest in a boardroom – in this case the Cabinet Room – and just figure things out.

 

 

13 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

13 responses to “Keith Koffler pans Ann Romney’s speech

  1. Anonymous

    Go read the comments. His merry group of regular commenters are not so merry today, lamenting both his topic and tone. Some wondering if while on his vacation, he got abducted by the Obots! He got pissy the other day about Mitt’s hair. Has he gone to the dark side?

    • Vacation can do strange things to people, especially it it’s taken on a beach where rum is served but I don’t know – I sense another George the First presidency here, and that certainly didn’t turn out well.

  2. Mazama

    “…that’s exactly the problem with Mitt. He thinks he can assemble America’s Best and Brightest in a boardroom – in this case the Cabinet Room – and just figure things out.”

    Well, excuuuuse me, 1) but that’s how top business and/or government executives do things. Not that a reporter would know anything about running a complex organization.

    Ane 2) how is that different from how Obama has operated, even to the degree that he’s ceremoniously called in “experts” to – as Obama put it in one instance – “tell me whose butt to kick?

    At least Mrs. Romney has apparently been proud of the U.S. BEFORE her husband was nominated to run for president. That by itself elevates her above Michelle – Michelle Antoinette – Obama in my book.

  3. Pinzgauer

    …… He thinks he can assemble America’s Best and Brightest in a boardroom – in this case the Cabinet Room – and just figure things out.

    He can’t?
    Besides, is it even possible to have less experience than O when he ran first for President?

  4. Al Dente

    I want a man who will do the job, put things back on track. Period.

    I don’t care if he “cares” about me. He can show his concern by getting unemployment down, reducing regulations, keeping our national security as his highest priority.

    A choice of the most skillful surgeon, or the doctor with the best bedside manner: I’ll take the skill.

    • But “back on track” to where? The last two Bushes ran Gentlemen Republican administrations and their fellow Republicans, aided and abetted by the Democrats, ran the government in a manner indistinguishable from the worst Democrat ones.
      More is required.

  5. hmmm

    i am with mazama…

    that’s what successful people do they delegate authority to the people best able to handle a certain subject matter….right?

  6. My rant

    Something tells me he’ll be good. Some of those Mormons are superachievers and won’t stop ’til they get it right. This guy knows nothing but success professionally.

  7. Westchesterer

    “…that’s exactly the problem with Mitt. He thinks he can assemble America’s Best and Brightest in a boardroom – in this case the Cabinet Room – and just figure things out.”
    “Well, excuuuuse me, 1) but that’s how top business and/or government executives do things.”

    No Mazama, the government does not act that way. In fact, they acts in the opposition to it. Government don’t care about their decisions because they have no consequences and they carry a large deal of immunity from civil liability. Thugerments assemble the worst and dimist in the room. The thugerment is a black hole.

    Free markets do, on the other hand, work in such a way. Why? There’s a profit motive to be efficient and “move earth.”

  8. Inagua

    “Some of those Mormons are superachievers and won’t stop ’til they get it right. This guy knows nothing but success professionally.”

    The first Mormon is Congress was Reed Smoot. Ever hear of the Smoot -Hawley tariff? And if you think Romney is a professional success, please explain the success of RomneyCare. I know he was successful in passing a piece of leglisation, but shouldn’t the effects of the leglislation be considered?

    Our gracious host is almost certainly correct that Romney will be a worthy successor to our other recent bumbling Republican presidents: Nixon with wage and price controls and the EPA; Ford with WIN buttons; Bush Sr. with his violated tax pledge, and Bush Jr. with TARP, Iraq, and TSA.

  9. anonymous

    the good news is that Keith gave Paul Ryan’s speech a stellar review, called it Reaganesque. Worth reading

    http://www.whitehousedossier.com/2012/08/30/paul-ryans-reaganesque-rise-stature/

  10. Peg

    Inagua seems to think that Republican presidents have put bad policies into place. He’s correct.

    To me, the issue isn’t whether any given candidate is going to be a superlative president or not. (We can always hope, but….) To me, there is one basic question: which candidate is going to be superior.

    I’m not sure how good a president Romney might be. Yet, I am utterly convinced that he would be significantly superior to Obama. That’s why he will get my vote.