Mitt Romney closes the deal
Americans look to political leaders to do three basic things: Define the relevant issues, examine potential solutions and weigh the guiding principles and competing values at hand, then explain why he or she believes a certain course would serve America best.
The editors at Human Events have become increasingly critical of the record of President Barack Obama and most notably, his legacy of spending at a rate faster than the nation has ever known, which has produced a deficit bigger than the current generation can afford. We’ve seen an overweening government whose regulations and intrusions at best dampen the aspirations of individuals, and at worst stall progress and innovation for entire sectors of the economy.
And when we examined the president’s jobs plan for the future, released only last week, we found little to cheer about. As our story on page 8 points out, the president’s plan calls for “hundreds of billions of dollars in spending—deficit spending—aimed at creating a few unsustainable jobs without the benefit of any real private-sector growth.”
When we looked to Mitt Romney, read his biographies, covered his campaign and examined his proposals, we found a person of accomplishment and experience, whose ideas comport with America’s founding principles—limited government, free markets, respect for the individual and expansion of opportunities for what those individuals might want to achieve.
And most recently, we saw a candidate who is not in the thrall of advisers, or of polls, or of towering ego.
At a recent lunch with several people close to the Romney campaign, we learned that some members of Romney’s inner circle strongly advised against the selection of Rep. Paul Ryan, with his edgy proposals on budget and health care, as the running mate. We had long heard the favorite was the seasoned Sen. Rob Portman of Ohio. Not only did Romney select someone less favored by the Republican establishment, he kept a knowledgeable Portman close as well, making Portman his able debate practice partner.
Prior to the third presidential debate, Sen. John McCain urged Mitt Romney to “go after Benghazi.” Romney demurred that night and it seemed a surprising error. Later, emails surfaced revealing that the president and the State Department knew early on that the attack was by terrorists, and had nothing to do with a video or a “spontaneous protest.” The Obama administration claims that Romney “shoots first and aims later.” We see the opposite taking place.
Finally, in the third debate, President Obama seized on the question of Israel to preen—he told viewers that Romney had traveled to Israel to host fundraisers, but he, President Obama, had visited Yad Vashem to think about the Holocaust, to reflect, and become a better president. Romney sat quietly and said nothing.
Romney, in fact, had visited Yad Vashem in 2007; we have the story on page 8, and pictures on our web site. But that evening, Romney had the humility not to counter with “me too,” even with the stakes so high. We find his small but significant gesture appealing, telling and rather presidential.
He has closed the deal for us. Mitt Romney for president.