-
Alan Abelson, RIP
May 10, 2013 | 20 comments
-
South Carolina on My Mind
April 30, 2013 | 31 comments
-
Dream Sequences
April 26, 2013 | 62 comments
-
Just Like a Woman
April 25, 2013 | 35 comments
-
Missing So Many
April 19, 2013 | 41 comments
Ben Stein's Diary
He Called You a ‘B**ch,’ Gov. Romney
Is it too late for Mitt Romney to talk like man?
Ronald Reagan won the election of 1980 because of a single sentence. Recall, we had endured three and a half years of total incompetence from one of the major fools of all time, Jimmy Carter. Nevertheless, the Mainstream Media was totally on Carter’s side. The liberals had painted Reagan as a pitiful, doddering has-been cowboy actor. They sought to portray Carter as a brainy and trustworthy peanut farmer and nuclear engineer (neither of which he was, of course). The polls favored Carter.
Then came the Carter-Reagan debate. Carter began to go on a long winded harangue about some imaginary complaint. Reagan looked at him like a long suffering employer confronting a malingering clerk and said simply, “There you go again.”
In an instant, Reagan was revealed as smart, sharp, strong, and unable to be bullied and the election was his.
Mitt Romney had just that kind of opportunity last week — and took an entirely different direction. When the question about Libya began the debate, Gov. Romney could have said, “More in sorrow than in anger, I must note that you and Mrs. Clinton and Susan Rice have concocted the most egregious series of coverups of a diplomatic and defense failure that has happened in this country since Pearl Harbor.
“You allowed these murders to happen. Then you covered up, as is your custom, by blaming the United States instead of the terrorists whom you knew from the first day were the killers.
“We know you will not apologize. We also know that when I am President, we will not cover up for al Qaeda. And we will classify Major Hasan’s mass murders as terrorism, which they are, and we will stop doing the kowtow to terrorists anywhere.”
Then, when Mr. Obama sputtered about Mr. Romney “politicizing” the murders in Benghazi, Gov. Romney could have said, “There you go again, still covering up. Since when is it unseemly in a democracy to point out the blatant incompetence of an administration? Are you going to put me in prison the same way you put that poor devil who made the irrelevant video about Mohammed in prison? Is that your plan?”
It is not too late for Gov. Romney to do this in commercials. But he obviously has chosen conciliation and affection, and it may well work for him. Let’s hope it does. Maybe the times and the electorate have changed so much that the admonition that “he who holdeth his temper is greater than he who conquereth a city…” wins elections, if followed. I assume Mr. Romney knows what he’s doing.
Speaking of “there you go again,” when the heck is the GOP going after Mr. Obama for his condescension in discussing aircraft carriers and submarines? When is Governor Romney going to ask, “Mr. Obama, what the hell do you know about submarines or aircraft carriers? When did you, a peace activist and community organizer, get to be an expert on defense hardware?”
Is it not terrifying, by the way, literally life or death terrifying, that Mr. Obama explicitly plans for unilateral disarmament? Isn’t amazing that in a world as dangerous as ours, he plans deep cuts in the Navy, Army, Air Force, and Marines? Isn’t it amazing that while Iran races toward nuclear weapons and missiles to deliver them on Israel, Western Europe, and the USA, Mr. Obama refuses the slightest effort to build an ABM defense? And that he plans to unilaterally disarm the U.S. nuclear force in the face of enemies with nuclear weapons? Whose side is he on? This by itself makes a vote for Romney a necessity.
And while we’re at it, here is an idea that my pals at FNC put in my head: The U.S. has satellite photos of everything on earth. There are cameras at every U.S. consulate. When rockets are being fired at a U.S. consulate in Benghazi, there is data about it going to the President immediately if he is not playing basketball or hanging with Jay-Z. That means Mr. Obama might well have known that the attack was happening as it was happening.
That means it was probably the Big Kahuna himself who screwed up big time. Suddenly it all makes sense: why go into total panic mode, total lying mode, get the media into PROTEKTO BAMA RAMA mode unless the boss himself is on the line?
It all makes sense now. It just now hangs together. It isn’t some State Department officer who denied aid to the U.S. Ambassador. It was Barry himself. Think about it. If it was Mr. Obama himself who let the ambassador and staff be murdered, then there absolutely has to be a coverup.
Finally, just for tonight, let me ask my loyal pals in Spectator land, have you ever seen such nerve as for Barack Hussein Obama to brag about how much domestic oil and gas production have gone up in the past few years? That hypocrite. Yes, the energy minerals tally has gone way up — with Mr. Obama fighting the oil companies every step of the way. Oil and gas production have risen despite Mr. Obama’s hatred of oil and gas and yet he has the brass to brag about it? That creep, and yet why hasn’t Governor Romney beaten him to a pulp over it?
Mr. Romney may win this election. I hope he does. But if he does, it will not be because of following the road map that Ronald Regan laid down for him. A soft answer turneth away wrath. Does it win elections? We will see.
About the Author
Ben Stein is a writer, actor, economist, and lawyer living in Beverly Hills and Malibu. He writes “Ben Stein’s Diary” for every issue of The American Spectator.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (121) | Leave a comment
More Articles by Ben Stein
More Articles From Ben Stein's Diary
http://spectator.org/archives/2012/10/30/he-called-you-a-bch-gov-romney
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- Sarah Palin’s Rack
- Razing Reagan
- Ailes: A Voice for the Silent Majority
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Aristocat| 10.30.12 @ 6:26AM
Romney stood up to Obama and took him on, unlike McCain, Boehner, and McConnell...He won the debates....
Jacob McCandles| 10.30.12 @ 8:16AM
Agreed. I've stopped second guessing Governor Romney. He's a very intelligent man, and if he thought laying off Benghazi was the best thing to do, who am I to whine about it? His poll numbers have continued to rise despite his "rope-a-dope" at the last 2 debates. The Benghazi debacle will be handled in due time, alas, after the election. But pushing hard on the issue, when BHO has a great line of defensive lies at the ready, would not help.
Jeff R| 10.30.12 @ 8:44AM
Jacob, you read more like an Obama drone than a thinking conservative. Of course, Romney should be questioned and criticized when there's a conviction that he's erred. This nonsense that Romney's an "intelligent man" so shut up and let him proceed is not what we conservatives do.
Kudos to Ben Stein for raising this issue and counseling Romney to articulate a case against the president's awful misjudgments and cover up regarding Benghazi.
It's critical beyond mere politics for Romney to lay markers on the Benghazi debacle, and it's all the more important that if Romney wins next Tuesday, he doesn't subsequently let Mr. Obama off the hook in the name of "healing wounds" and "national unity."
A great injustice was done four dead patriots. And the president's cover up is an affront to the American people. The president needs to be held to account, without excuses.
Bob Grant| 10.30.12 @ 8:58AM
Jeff,
The problem with your criticisms of Romney regarding the handling of the Benghazi episode is much of the information you mentioned was not available at the time of the third debate.
It would have not Romney in the least to throw all sorts of accusations obama's way based on speculation and theory.
It was pure strategy to play it safe during that third debate in order to appeal to a certain demographic who places much stock in taking a firm but cautious approach to foreign policy, especially after being bogged down in 2 questionable wars for ten years.
You can criticize Romney all you want about being a "wimp" during the third debate but this WAS his strategy and he had the discipline to stick to that strategy, which is in and of itself is yet another test of a presidential candidate.
I say let his OPERATIVES beat obama over the head with this stuff. Do you hear that McCain, Graham, Portman, Bolton, Issa, Chaffetz, ??????
Jeff R| 10.30.12 @ 9:11AM
Bob, I think Romney had more information at the time of the third debate than you suggest. I really don't believe that the governor and his people don't have sources in government (specifically at Defense, State, and, perhaps, within the National Security apparatus) to have advanced a measured case against Mr. Obama then.
Having said that, what Stein is suggesting is that in the closing week of this election, Romney needs to raise this very critical issue - the Benghazi cover up - not only to win votes, but establish a baseline. The president shouldn't be permitted to wiggle off the hook post election, even if he loses (which is more and more likely). There will be a very quiet but insistent effort from Democrats and some Republicans to bury Mr. Obama's culpability. This mustn't happen, and by Romney speaking up now and on the record, it establishes some commitment on his part to see that justice is pursued up to and including Mr. Obama.
TLP| 10.30.12 @ 9:27AM
I agree with your last paragraph.
There is still time to Cut this Chicken's Head Off.
If I could get anywhere near the Governor, I would tell him to remind everyone that THE VERY NEXT MORNING after these Brave Men were Killed, this THING in the White House, hopped a Plane to Vegas to Fund Raise for Himself, and to Party with Jay Z, before these Men's bodies were even Cold.
Stephie| 10.30.12 @ 10:10AM
I read yesterday and excuse me if someone has already posted this, that obama and his circle of jerks has gone ahead and make the video of the men fighting and dying in the Benghazi attack and all documents that haven't already be made public, have now been classified Top Secret.
So now what. Jennifer Griffin and Catherine Herrige, both from FOX News have done a stellar job in bringing much of this scandal to light, unlike the "reporters" at the big 4 who are working tirelessly to cover it up in order to save their coward of a president.
Jacob McCandles| 10.30.12 @ 12:47PM
"Circle of jerks.." nicely put Stephie. I think from Day 1 Romney have been laser focused on the economy in this race. The third debate was designed by Obama and friends to portray Romney as the next W. Bush. He dodged this bullet very skillfully, and it would have indeed been a deadly bullet. The independents, who Mitt is slowly gathering in, have been fed up with the wars for a LONG time.
Benghazi is something that Obama cannot lie his way out of. There is a paper trail, videos, etc. Romney's job is to get elected, not prosecute Benghazi. Romney pushing hard on this in the debate would have only muddied the waters (with Obama's filthy lies) and taken the focus off of Romney as President.
Jacob McCandles| 10.30.12 @ 12:49PM
Obama had a well-rehearsed answer for the third debate. He was baiting Romney time and again to directly confront this thing. He was hoping to "put it to rest" for a while. Romney denied him the opportunity.
Simon Templar| 10.30.12 @ 3:42PM
Exactly Jacob! Some people just refuse to see the obvious.
Bob Grant| 10.30.12 @ 9:36AM
I totally agree obama shouldn't be let off the hook but you should at least admit there's also a political element to this as well.
The unfortunate truth is the vast majority of the electorate who tune into debates are low-information voters who have a fraction of the needed information to process 2-minute presentations against obama's handling of this disaster. They simply don't have the information you and I have. It's the wrong forum. Especially when obama can just lie, deny, and filibuster to the point of having those low information voters' heads spinning so fast they could create their own gravitational field.
You have to look at it from their perspective. He needed to look presidential...a Steady Commander-In-Chief. (I hope that didn't sound too Peggy Noonanish). They already are open to voting for him and what he needed to do was close the deal in their minds, not start some Bengahzi-debate "thingy".
Pure strategy. And I believe it may have worked.
Jeff R| 10.30.12 @ 10:10AM
Bob, perhaps you and I can agree that in the last week of the campaign, Romney needs to work in some talking points about Obama and Benghazi?
I think some folk (not suggesting you) believe that if Romney speaks to the Benghazi issue and mentions the president, that he can only do so with hot rhetoric. Romney can be understated in his analysis and criticism of Mr. Obama's Benghazi debacle; no need to spit bullets.
Nonetheless, I believe it's important for Romney to go on record more explicitedly for the reasons I've already stated.
Stephie| 10.30.12 @ 10:13AM
Speaking of Peggy Noonan, has anyone read her latest opinion piece in the WSJ? She does obama no favor and pretty much sums him up as a looser.
Bob Grant| 10.30.12 @ 11:31AM
Peggy was the pioneer of the obama-is-a-loser narrative. She's been giving examples of his Loserdom for the past several months.
CJW| 10.30.12 @ 12:56PM
Peggy is having buyer's remorse since she endorsed and voted for obama in 2008, along with the rest of the Manhattan Republicans, like Christopher Buckley and others. She knows Romney will win and wants to re-establish her credibility as a Republican.
Occam's Tool| 10.30.12 @ 1:22PM
Romney was going for Independents. Seems he's winning them.
Look, Romney actually responds to polls and feedback---he's a pragmatist. Taxes are going to be cut, ObamaCare is going to die, the military will not be slashed if he's elected. He's not going to stomp on religious freedom, and he's friends with Bibi, so his ME approach will be realistic. All safe, popular things.
Everyone, just go out and vote. Minnesota is in play, and I'm setting my alarm in NW MN for 5 AM to be waiting at the polls with my Thinsulate 150g Gloves on when they open. I expect even that retard Cheesehead Jack will vote for Romney.
KennesawJack| 10.30.12 @ 3:32PM
He has said he will, Occam. I take him at his word. By the way, my wife and I voted early yesterday (I'm going to be out of town on Tuesday) and we waited in line 1 1/2 hours. Bantering with those in line around us, not a single Obamarx supporter. Granted, this is in the enlightened State of Georgia, but four years ago a good bit of the talk was of the "One". Four years ago the number of African Americans in line to vote was very, very large. Yesterday, but three. I'm hesitant to say landslide but I think this will not be as close as people think unless the "Jeep" comment hurts Romney in Ohio. No matter it was true, it's dismissal by Fiat will matter to some degree.
Bob Grant| 10.30.12 @ 3:43PM
I voted at a grocery store (Randalls) in the People's Republic of Texas (Austin, Tx). The wait was unexpectedly long (about 30 minutes) and many, many in the crowd seemed to be obama voters. I'm not sure 'cause I kept to myself but that's the vibe I was picking up.
The People's Republic of Texas, mind you, is an outlier of the state in general. A tiny, blue dot in a sea of red.
I felt better when I went home and accessed the Secretary of State of Texas' website where it reported most of the early voting far outpaced '08, and the areas where the voting was down (the PRT included) were blue ones.
Alej| 10.30.12 @ 9:35AM
Stein leaves out half the equation. The American public of today is not by a long shot the American public of Reagan's day.
Romney's target is not us true believers (that obama must go; not that Romney is a panacea), but that incredibly insipid herd known as "undecideds." He has to palliate wailing females about war; he has to court people who can tell you who won "Dancing With The Stars" last night, but who can't find Afghanistan on a map.
Strategy.
Cobalt| 10.30.12 @ 11:12AM
In 1980, Ronald Reagan ran for President in a different world.
When Reagan ran for office in 1980, the MSM was not nearly as bad as it is today. CNN was not even launched until June 1, 1980.
Cell phones were not in general use in 1980, and most people had never heard of the internet, which didn't become popular until the mid 1990s.
It would be interesting, if not fascinating, to see how Ronald Reagan would run a campaign for President in 2012 against an arrogant, petulant Obama.
mike 3/505| 10.30.12 @ 8:47AM
Or maybe BECAUSE of his rope-a-dopes
DTOM| 10.30.12 @ 9:26AM
Question 1: Would you rather Obama lose the debate and WIN the election?
Question 2: Would you rather Romney win the debate and LOSE the election?
Question 3: Would you rather Romney win the popular vote and lose the electoral college?
You people are not focusing on the bottom line. Romney is - that's why he let Obama run free until September when the bulk of the electorate really start paying attention.
How much did Obama throw away on lying, stupid negative ads depicting Romney as the second coming of Frankenstein's monster? It took ten minutes in the first debate to render all that cash wasted.
Romney is well inside Obama's OODA loop.
Obama may have gotten through Harvard Law School, as a minority.
Romney got through Harvard Law and Graduate School of Business as a WHITE guy, simultaneously. Can't hide that...
DTOM
Occam's Tool| 10.30.12 @ 1:23PM
Graduated with honors from both, as a White guy.
RCV| 10.31.12 @ 1:53AM
And that's what's important, isn't it?
E B | 10.30.12 @ 5:20PM
I agree with you completely, Jacob. He's played his game very well, and done a good job at tuning out the criticism hewn at him from both left and right. He does what he needs to do, and he does it well. Surely you all realize at this point that griping against Romney isn't going to win him any votes? And you realize that he's more conservative a candidate than we've seen for awhile, whether or not he embraces your own exact positions? Or are you secretly in the tank for Obama?
www.conservativemormonmom.blogspot.com
Jacobite| 11.1.12 @ 2:51PM
Well, first, your radar better be on when a candidate decides not to do what's right in order to win an election. Second, remember Mitt's dad, George (Mr. the-military-brainwashed-me-about-VietNam, himself)? Bad genes there. Finally, the fact that Mitt refused to get in O'bwana's face when an obvious scandal/coverup is in progress doesn't demonstrate much character, which is where the GOP pols always let us down.
Alan Third Party Voter Brooks | 10.30.12 @ 9:41AM
"Recall, we had endured three and a half years of total incompetence from one of the major fools of all time, Jimmy Carter."
Yes, because of him, Brezhnev got his troops into Afghanistan-- and now ours have been there longer than the Soviets' were there.
Alan Third Party Voter Brooks | 10.30.12 @ 9:43AM
...in other words, Jimmuh-Boy opened the can of worms.
Jack in Wi| 10.30.12 @ 11:10AM
Baloney Ben: Iran is not developing nuclear weapons and even the Mossad has said so.
Romney had a more peaceful stance on foreign policy in the last debate. He and Obama have virtually the same foreign policy. There will be negotiations, with Iran, no matter who is elected. The only people who want to bomb Iran are a few neoconservative luntatics and Bibby Nutanyahoo. The thing we should do with Iran is what Nixon did with China, open talks and discuss all differences in a sane manner. Then we can send an ambassador, reopen diplomatic relations, end illegal and immmoral sanctions. Then we can trade with , have cultural exchanges with, and send turists back and forth. the world would be a far better palce and the price of oil would collapse. This country doesn't need another world war, gas at 20 dollars a gal. and more huge inflation. Romney is the man to get it done. The only person to address foreign policy at the Republican convention was Condi Rice. Her stance has been for negotiations and settlement.
Jeff R| 10.30.12 @ 1:19PM
"Iran is not developing nuclear weapons and even the Mossad has said so."
This statement is simply preposterous.
Jack in Wi| 10.30.12 @ 4:19PM
The statement is completely true. The Mossad has said that Iran is not developing nuclear weapons at this time. Our own combined inteligence agencies in The NIE report of 2007 reconfirmed in 2011 has stated that Iran stopped all nuclear weapon development in 2003. That is the same year Iran offered to settle all differences with the USA. Powell, Rice, and Armitage wanted to start immediate negotiations. Bush listened to Cheney and the Neocons and didn't do it. It was a huge mistake. Rice is still for negotiations and she is the one who has romney's ear, not all those lying neocons he has stinking up his campaign. Effriam Halevey former Mossad chief has recently stated that there should be talks with Iran. A war could be disasterous for Israel and the whole region and the world.
Occam's Tool| 10.30.12 @ 1:25PM
Right.
No, the question is whether Israel can attack alone, not whether the loonies want the bomb.
"Turists"---yup, you were a Catpain of Industry, all right. Not a Captain, a Catpain.
Anthony| 10.30.12 @ 11:21AM
Yeah really Aristocat. Mighty big talk from a neurotic nebbish who runs to his shrink every week, Stein.
Romney doesn't need to sink to Obozo's 3rd grade mentality and those lefties here at TAS, like vtwin and Purp.
Romney is kicking Obozo's ass, and next week, the Muslim Marxist won't know what hit him. He'll be on his prayer rug for a week.
And the whores in the lefty media will also be on their knees.
Anthony| 10.30.12 @ 11:27AM
Besides Stein, when a limp wrist like Obozo calls another man a bitch, he's just acknowledging the superiority of the other man, or Hillary.
Am I right vtwin, is that how it goes down with these guys?
CJW| 10.30.12 @ 1:05PM
This article is silly.
Who belives that Obama is a macho man and more macho than Mitt? Maybe the purps of the world. Remember Obama's throw to home plate?
Look at this photo of obama and his roomie:
http://gillreport.com/2011/11/.....n-college/
Darin| 10.30.12 @ 6:28AM
What happened in Benghazi is criminal. Four Americans were hung out to dry, left to fight for their lives for 8 hours, all on video. The excuses being spun by Obama, Hillary, and Panetta are ridiculous. "We don't send our military into an unknown, dangerous situation"? Seriously? So why did we invade Normandy on June 6, 1944? That's what the military does (I did it for 20 years). Obama got his 3 am call, and he failed miserably. Instead, he went to Vegas for a fund raiser.
drudge ette obama| 10.30.12 @ 6:38AM
Mr. Stein, where is your public outrage? Have you expressed your internal and seething anger outside your safe zone in the American Spectator? Rather than criticize Romney, why aren't you blasting white hot on the CBS/ABC/NBC airways and directing your blame accordingly? Why do you get to fight quietly with critical words that don't inspire me to anger. Get your own gloves off, sir.
SUBVET| 10.30.12 @ 9:15AM
drudge.....plus 1
Pecos Pete| 10.30.12 @ 6:43AM
Mr. Stein: Obama is a failed man. He has no honor, no morality, no sense of responsibility for his actions. You are correct that Obama killed four people in Benghazi and his actions are being covered up by the MSM and by his fellow criminals in his administration. The truth will come out and there will be criminal prosecutions. Those responsible in the chain of command are traitors.
Jeff R| 10.30.12 @ 8:50AM
"The truth will come out and there will be criminal prosecutions."
Don't be too sure about "criminal prosecutions" or serious accountability. There will be powerful forces at work post-election (even if Romney wins) to advance the Benghazi cover up for Mr. Obama and hold him blameless. It's naive to think otherwise.
KennesawJack| 10.30.12 @ 3:57PM
Pete, you got everything right except the "man" part. Nothing manly about this twerp, nothing at all.
Kitty | 10.30.12 @ 6:46AM
There you go again, Ben Stein.
TLP| 10.30.12 @ 8:27AM
Nice kitty.
Seriously, how does this little dweeb even have a column, every week? (apparently it IS wha ya Bl*w) What am I missing, here?
Even Miss Canada can see the Light from her shack in Canukastan. Even she knows that we either Stand Together, or Fall Seperately, and she doesn't even live here, and she hasn't lived here since she had her heart broken by Soupy Sales. (Something to do with a Cream Pie, or some such thing)
So, here comes the Human Sleeping Pill - AGAIN - ragging on this Country's last best hope. "IfIwasthereIwouldhavedonethisandthat. Whydidn'thedothisandthatlikeRonaldReagandid? He'sanawfulcandidatebecauseheseemstowanttodotheoppositeofeverythingthatIwoulddo. Andhetalkssomonotoneallthetime. Notlikemeatall."
We've got Democrats driving Van Loads of NON ENGLISH SPEAKING SOMOLIANS up to the Voting Stations in Wisconsin, to vote early. But Mr. Monotone is worried that the guy who Mopped the Floor with President "Let'em Die. I'm going to bed. I gotta get up early and fly to Vegas" isn't snazzy like he is.
Someone please explain how Early Voting is Constitutional - as that Document clearly SPECIFIES the Exact Day for Voting - without a Constitutional Amendment.
Jeff R| 10.30.12 @ 8:53AM
TLP: Kool-Aid drinker.
TLP| 10.30.12 @ 9:30AM
I don't get it.
JmsA| 10.30.12 @ 4:48PM
He's projecting, TLP.
Bob Grant| 10.30.12 @ 9:03AM
"Andhetalkssomonotoneallthetime. Notlikemeatall."
I suffered a little coffee spewage after reading that.
Heh.
SUBVET| 10.30.12 @ 9:23AM
Timmy..............LANDSLIDE
JP| 10.30.12 @ 7:26AM
As far as the Benghazi attacks are concerned, Mitt Romney would have not gained anything politically by pounding the President. His goal during the final debate was to show the world he was in fact ready to occupy the Oval Office.
On the other hand is was very strange the way he completely avoided the subject. Even the moderate Charles Krauthammer wondered why Mitt ran from the subject. Some have speculated that Romney began receiving intel briefings that week and he would have looked oppurtunistic. No one really knows. Politically it looked like the smart move. For the 1st time, Mitt looked totally in control of things. He wasn't just another campaigner -to many he looked Presidential.
If you want to be upset at someone besides the President, look no further than our own GOP lawmakers -especially in the House. Boehnner seems to still be deathly afraid of Obama and his ilk. The other lawmakers aren't much better.
Americans deserve better.
DTOM| 10.30.12 @ 9:30AM
The objective of the last debate was to capture the few remaining undecideds. Coming out breathing fire about the poorly covered Benghazi-gate would have driven those week-kneed undecideds away back to the evil they know in Obama.
The idea is to win the election, not the debates.
Only the final score counts; nobody wins based on a big half-time lead.
Wise up, people.
DTOM
ggoblue| 10.30.12 @ 7:49AM
take heart ben...out here in the fields, romney is winning.
I am right here in michigan...working at GM...and not a single obama yardsign to be seen... not even an obama bumper sticker in the uaw parking lot... we are taunting them on the shop floor...these dems are so beat, they don't even steal my romney yardsigns...and i'm right on the [13] mile road. obama will lose to romney by the same margin he beat mccain. or worse.
we will punch the bully in the nose when it counts. on nov 6.
7 days to go
Jacob McCandles| 10.30.12 @ 8:18AM
Great to hear that. I've got lots of friends up that way and they all feel the same way you do. Only the die hard union drones are hanging on at this point.
ggoblue| 10.30.12 @ 9:14AM
thanks for the follow up...we don't need to turn the dems...we just need them to stay home...that way obama takes the whole party down with him.
Cobalt| 10.30.12 @ 8:03AM
One popular theory is that Romney's debate performance was structured to appeal to the undecided independent voters. Who knows?
Hardcard| 10.30.12 @ 8:04AM
Dear Benny..... Get real, you whimp. Gov. Romney does not need your advice. You giving advice on how too be tough is laughable, you lunch money weasel.
ElGordo| 10.30.12 @ 8:04AM
It's time for the Republican Super Pacs to put out those ads using words similar to the ones Ben Stein used.
Jeff R| 10.30.12 @ 8:55AM
I second that motion.
Russel| 10.30.12 @ 8:11AM
Stein lost my interest millenia ago . Even a quick peruse : Reagan had the perfect opportunity to hammer Carter over the hostage debacle and didn't . Ditto Romney . Both proved a presidential character by not giving into the tempation of taking advantage of a sitting president in presidential trouble . Integrity and character , not a gutter attack ( which Zero would jump on ) .
swimdog| 10.30.12 @ 9:54AM
Excellent correlation- Perhaps Bennie's zeal for the provocative clouded his ability to clearly see through the 'fog-of-war'.
Mike Rogers | 10.30.12 @ 8:28AM
Ben is almost as inconsistent as the libtard woman he faced off against on ABC his weekend.
After calling for higher taxes to balance the budget because he can afford them, Ben proceeded to give a spirited defense of much smaller government: clearly, if you believe in dramatic reductions in the federal government, it doesn't need more money!
Jeff R| 10.30.12 @ 8:57AM
Ah, ad hominem attacks on Stein. How about countering his argument? Or is that a bridge too far for you?
DTOM| 10.30.12 @ 9:33AM
JeffR:
I believe the core of Mike's complaint was Ben's calling for higher taxes, then shortly thereafter calling for smaller government. That ain't ad hominem in my book! It's reasonable criticism. Do we have to counter such an obvious self-contradiction? Really?
Don't Tread On Me
Jeff R| 10.30.12 @ 10:36AM
I stand corrected, DTOM.
TLP| 10.30.12 @ 9:35AM
Okay, okay. I'll counter his argument.
He's an Idiot. He's Boring. And, who gives a Sh*t what he thinks anyone should do, anyway?
Kinda like you - Newbie.
Jeff R| 10.30.12 @ 10:35AM
If Stein is all you say, why read what he writes and bother to post on this article blog? Huh?
Yeah, we have our share of dolts on the right, too. You're one of them.
Mike G| 10.30.12 @ 8:29AM
Mr. Stein, you keep wondering why Romney isn't doing what Ronald Reagan would have done. But the simple fact is that Romney isn't Reagan. Reagan was a conservative who believed in smaller government (even though he was unable to get the Dems in Congress to work that far with him). Romney is a moderate liberal, but a helluva lot better that the socialist we have now.
DTOM| 10.30.12 @ 9:34AM
And it ain't 1980 anymore...
DTOM
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 10.30.12 @ 8:30AM
Ben: I live in an area in Silver Spring, Md. My Hispanic neighbors are placing Romney/Ryan signs in their front yards. They took them down with the storm coming but soon those signs will be back up. I was surprised, nay shocked to see those signs.
Perhaps the American public isn't as stupid as Obama and his minions believe.
Louis Jenkins| 10.30.12 @ 8:50AM
Thank you Mr. Stein for writing an article that didn't speak of your power boat, your dog, or your Mrs. You can be a political writer afterall. I found Romney's behavior a little puzzling, but his handlers are better at gauging the political feel of the country better than I. Being a Monday morning QB is far easier than fighting in the fray. In my esitmate Romney agreed far to often with Obama. Truly, Romney is not a Conservative, but he's better than the socialist we now have.
Nancy in NC| 10.30.12 @ 8:56AM
Perhaps Romney decided it would be unwise to interrupt Obama while he was shooting himself in the foot.
Bob Grant| 10.30.12 @ 9:08AM
Yep,
Part of the strategy. And it seems to have worked. Obama got nothing out of the third debate whereas Romneys numbers ticked up a bit.
TLP| 10.30.12 @ 9:38AM
Nancy, you Minx.
"Russia called. They want their Foreign Policy back."
Whatever are talking about?
bison cookie| 10.30.12 @ 9:02AM
AN URGENT MESSAGE FOR AMERICA. WATCH HERE: http://bwcentral.org/2012/10/a.....r-america/
Bob Grant| 10.30.12 @ 9:21AM
The picture above of obama pointing at Romney is another example of the continued coarsening and rudeness of our society.
Since when is it acceptable to point at others when conversing with them. At one time in our society over gesticulating with one's hands and finger-pointing was a sign of an inarticulate person; someone who over wise cannot get their 'point' across.
Yet you see some leaders make a habit of doing this to either get their 'point' across or as an intimidation tactic.
obama, elijah cummings, and john conyers are some of the bigger offenders of this practice that I have noticed.
Bob Grant| 10.30.12 @ 9:22AM
correction: that would be "otherwise"
gene| 10.30.12 @ 9:33AM
All right already, Mr. stein. YES, Romney took the "high road" and did not attack on this. However, Honest Media and people like yourself can keep attacking until Election Day. President Obama is finished and even his own people know this. Even cringing little toadies like Chris Matthews know it. Even after his DOJ threats forced Gallup to change their formulas to reflect more minorities, what happened? He is STILL 6 points behind. I drove through Waukegan yesterday and saw hundreds and hundreds of signs for local candidates. None for Obama/Biden. Even with the Polls remember that many people will not publically deny this President. But when the curtain closes, those same people in a Secret Ballot are going to send this man packing.
Chill out already and put some steel in your backbone. It ain't as bad as you think. We are not as dumb as you think.
swimdog| 10.30.12 @ 9:46AM
Bennie, Bennie, Bennie, nice try almost- The disillusionment you're acting upon should have been directed toward the so called fourth-estate...you know, the mainstream press...those stalwarts of liberty and justice (not quite). Those pontificators who are generously given a forum to espouse tomes of wisdom (you bet) upon the 'bitter clingers'. So-called journalists like yourself...But of course that would require the hard work of specifying and delineating facts, timelines, event sequencing and ultimately discerning who actually has failed the public trust with their overt cover-up of the facts. However in your case all it would take is a quick look in the mirror. Perhaps you're right- at least in your case anyway, it is too late.
Paul A'Barge | 10.30.12 @ 9:47AM
I'm sure you're probably right, but just to put it to the test, when are you going to run for something?
Who Knows?| 10.30.12 @ 10:35AM
Wow!
Ben Stein throws a stone at Romney, and it’s a bull’s eye!
Here’s a football analogy---
If your team has superior players, especially a mobile, agile and hostile offensive line, say, and at least decent running backs and quarterback, there is a foolproof way to win. Run the ball down the throats of your opponents!
If, play after play, when you run from the right side, for example, and gain at least five yards every time, well---since the object is to WIN, it’d be foolhardy to NOT USE YOUR ADVANTAGE.
We all wonder why Romney isn’t ahead by 10 or 20 points.
Like all leaders of the stupid party, he refuses to use all his power. And, telling the truth about Libya, and/or just ASKING pointed questions about it, or any other subject where Obama is vulnerable, should be AUTOMATIC!
Just run the damn ball!
Worrying about the “independents” is proof that one is living in fear---that they can’t handle the truth,
And, it is the truth that MUST be spread, not the wealth!
Elections are precious opportunities to educate people, and it sure looks to me like Romney is too meek to go for it, even as America is continuing to speed toward the abyss.
KittyAmerica| 10.30.12 @ 5:11PM
Good post Who Knows. Thank you.
woodsman1st| 10.30.12 @ 12:10PM
At the beginning of the battle between Obummer and Romney, Romney fought like some imaginary Knight of old; and did not participate in the gutter fight Obummer was waging....Romney did not do very well.
Then suddenly Romney got up on his hind legs and began to fight back trading blow for blow and Romney surged upwards in the polls.
Once again romney is back to wrist slapping instead of deep body blows....body blows like demanding answers about Benghazi from Obummer; body blows like pointing out Obummers obvious lies.
If Obummer wins, America can blame Romneys silly rules of fair play; fair play does not exist in a gutter fight with a thug from the ghetto.
C'mon Mitt, ask the dam** questions that must be asked and sink Obummer for good!
Simon Templar| 10.30.12 @ 12:28PM
You seem like an intelligent person.
Benny forgot to mention that Reagan DID the same thing with Carter over the Iran issue during the debate. He backed off a bit and did not fall into the trap of appearing too aggressive or politicizing the crisis. Everyone knew his position on the matter but he chose not to emphasize his disapproval or get into to much detail.
It is our job to demand answers and our representatives to do the same; I think Romney is made it very clear as to what he thinks of Bam's foreign policies and blunders.
Simon Templar| 10.30.12 @ 12:21PM
Benny, you are the last person on this planet that I would expect to be criticizing someone for not talking like a man. You come out here, every once in a while, with your unmanly, whining, and nasal congested manner spinning ridiculous tales about one thing or another.
Romney is no wimp. What he did was smart not safe. He was smart enough unlike you to see he was being set up and Obama was chomping on the bit for him to take the bait to paint him as a warmonger. It is the economy, stupid. So drop the liberal narrative.
Heard you on the radio the other day telling the host you 'had very little problems with Obama.'
Really?
Frank Drackman| 10.30.12 @ 12:42PM
to EICOTUS's(Evolver in Chief of the United States) "The 80's called" resnark
Romeny should have said,
"OH YEAH? well THE SEVENTIE'S called, they want their Economy back!!!!!!!!!!"
and if somehow EICOTUS had something up his limp-wristed(notice the pink bracelet?)sleeve, counter punch with
"OH YEAH, WELL "YOUNG MC" CALLED, HE WANTS HIS HAIRCUT BACK"
Right there Romeny increases his Black support 100%(from .001% to .1%
Frank "Robert KKK Bird Called, he wants his Sheet back" Drackman
andrew| 10.30.12 @ 12:57PM
Mr. Stein,
With due all respect, you're acting like Pres. Obama "being small" and believe that will win the election. If The Gipper's "zinger" was the "game changer" as you have assumed, then you really have a "high" opinion of the electorate. Yes, just vote for the candidate that provides the best one-liner. If that were the case, then we all should vote the "best stand-up" comedian into the oval office. You are a brilliant man but lately you sound so despondent. Why is it, Mr. Stein? Is it because your soothsaying skill is diminishing and you are seeing your prediction might not come through. Let's see- I remembered you said Pres. Obama will get his second term, way back then. Are you still sticking to your prediction? Or just prevaricating on small issues to get away from your own prediction? Just a thought.
John II| 10.30.12 @ 1:11PM
We all recall the first debate as a decisive turning point, but I think Romney hit his stride with the third debate. A few points:
1. He handled the Benghazi affair with exactly the right note of indirection, considering that it was still in the early stages of unraveling. Perhaps he was coached to do so in the expectation that the Professor would be prepared with a cheap-flashy response calculated to bury the issue. But we should remember that Romney is looking to win over voters who supported the Professor in 2008--a too severe criticism would rub the bad judgment of those voters in their faces.
2. What struck me overall about the third debate was the restraint consistently displayed by Romney amid the petulant sound-bite barbs tossed out by his opponent. The Professor looked and acted like the emotional 16-year-old he is. Romney looked and acted presidential.
3. The so-called undecideds to whom Romney, in his stride, was appealing seem to me, as a class, to be almost as contemptible as the corrupt MSM jerks who carry water for the Professor. But the former are not nearly so stupid. Debating points be damned; in his stride, Romney emerged from the last debate as the better man--and that's what "undecided" viewers will remember.
John II| 10.30.12 @ 1:12PM
To continue with Ben's Biblical reference (Proverbs 15:1-2):
A soft answer turns away wrath, but a harsh word stirs up anger.
The tongue of the wise dispenses knowledge, but the mouths of fools pour out folly.
You need to be a little less selective in your citing of Scripture, Ben.
Simon Templar| 10.30.12 @ 1:07PM
Rules for Conservatives:
Number 1 - Do not repeat liberal narratives either on issues or our candidates.
Number 2- Do not forget who controls the MSM, do not fall into their traps or be played by them.
Number 3- Do not believe the MSM polls, their narratives, nor their reports.
Number 4- Never forget where independents largely get their information...THE MSM...so be careful and control your message so it id not easily misrepresented.
Number 5- Do not trust a liberal, moderate, nor a celebrity, particularly one that says he has not have many issues or problems with your enemies.
Simon Templar| 10.30.12 @ 1:12PM
I will never understand why this web magazine lets you submit articles here, Benny....
oldeham| 10.30.12 @ 1:38PM
Ben what are missing is Gov. Romney allowed Obama to act and put on display exactly what he is in his own words - a street thug.
Remember what Napolean said: "When your enemy is destroying himself - don't help him."
andrew| 10.30.12 @ 2:06PM
Maybe that is why the libs always believe they are more intellectual and moral superior than conservatives. Because conservatives are "sucker" for every little tricks they've thrown at us. If I were them I believe it too. Very good example displayed here.
andrew| 10.30.12 @ 2:06PM
Maybe that is why the libs always believe they are more intellectual and moral superior than conservatives. Because conservatives are "sucker" for every little tricks they've thrown at us. If I were them I believe it too. Very good example displayed here.
mystified| 10.30.12 @ 2:18PM
Mr. Stein is spot on as usual. Mr. Romney is a gentleman. Unfortunately, in presidential politics you need to be a gladiator. Short of divine intervention, Mr. Romney will lose this election because he failed to deliver the knockout punch when he had Obama on the ropes.
Simon Templar| 10.30.12 @ 3:37PM
'Short of divine intervention', get lost troll..you are not fooling anyone.
gene| 10.30.12 @ 2:26PM
President Obama will be lucky if he garners 45% of the vote and that is WITH illegal voting. I cannot believe that someone thinks Mr. Romney will lose this election. The MSM can not save Obama from himself or from Biden.
Appleby| 10.30.12 @ 3:33PM
I did wonder why Mr. Romney didn't answer the 100,000,000th iteration of the "$5 trillion tax cut/$2 trilion defence spending" blovation with "There You Go Again." He wouldn't have had to say another mumblin' word and he'd have won the debate.
Simon Templar| 10.30.12 @ 3:35PM
The guy wins the debates, carries a 15 point lead with independents, locks up Florida, Virginia, and NC, makes gains even in Blue States, wins with women, has a 50 percent approval rating, confronts Bam on second day of Benghazigate, raises more money, has incredible inside poll statistics particularly on the economy, ties in states that no one ever thought possible, and runs an aggressive ad campaign..but not good enough...time to whine, play a blame game before the fact, and get cynical. Some of those in these threads are obviously liberal trolls pretending to be conservatives. Some of you need to take a breath and work on some of your personal mental health issues, and others are so-called liberaltarians who could give a damn who wins and would not be bothered in the least if the Fraud in the white house wins.
Two out of three Americans are self identified conservatives. Many of them do not vote. If Romney were to lose, take a look in the mirror, the culprit is right there.
Bob Grant| 10.30.12 @ 5:12PM
ST,
You summed it up nicely.
I say put this comment in a commercial with George C. Scott as the voice over.
JmsA| 10.30.12 @ 5:00PM
Very good post, ST.
KittyAmerica| 10.30.12 @ 5:07PM
I'm starting to think that Romney is engaging in the willful blindness that Andrew C. McCarthy writes about. Too bad that Romney does not listen to Stein or McCarthy.
Bob Grant| 10.30.12 @ 5:15PM
Kitty,
Please read Simon Templar above @3:35 p.m. and take heed.
I'm pretty sure he directed it at you.
n_bourbaki| 10.30.12 @ 6:25PM
Here's the campaign: Terrible convention, awful September, one great night which gave Mitt a lead, which he squandered starting with the Crowley, and which he totally threw a way with his cowardly performance in debate 3. If he loses, and he will, the reticence in Benghazi will go down as an act of campaign malpractice.
Ken (Old Texican)| 10.30.12 @ 7:17PM
bourbaki, I can only pray that you are as stupid as you sound.
n_bourbaki| 10.30.12 @ 9:51PM
Ken,
Disappointing to see that on a conservative site. I guess if you're not one of those people crowing about the impending "landslide", you're not in the club.
Ted R.| 10.30.12 @ 10:53PM
This whole Benghazi controversy is just more classic Con manufactured outrage, ginned up to get maximum electoral advantage. Here's the proof: if Romney pulls a victory of out the hat next week (probably only with more electoral-college chicanery), all these complaints conservative sites are filled up with about Obama and Benghazi, are going to evaporate. It's a non-issue, nothing but fodder for politics. Nobody is going to pursue Obama over it, if you achieve your political objectives. After all, it's all about power for you guys - ALWAYS has been.
Bob Grant| 10.30.12 @ 11:11PM
Predicting what will happen in the future is no more "proof" than obama predicting the Tigers would win the World Series.
Worthless.
Second, obviously if obama is removed next week he won't be as vigorously pursued. No sh** Sherlock! His removal will resolve much, if not all, of what is wrong with our foreign policy.
As far as I know he did not break any laws, only displayed incredibly bad judgement which if re-elected will get many, many more Americans killed overseas. Not to mention an unintentional major war with some country who will attempt to take advantage of his obvious weakness.
Admit it, your boy's a disaster and G*d willing will be removed next week. Much of what ails this country will immediately disappear.
Ted R.| 10.31.12 @ 12:06AM
He's been a great president, and history will recognize it, win or lose. In fact, if he loses, the effect will be to further rehabilitate Carter's historical rep. Carter is already seen today as a conservative Democrat who began the process of rolling back regulation, and, with his appointment of Volcker to the Fed, finally breaking the back of inflation. Carter was undone, as even some Cons have admitted, by having single bad debate with Reagan. A fickle and gulled electorate put Reagan in. That's what will have happened again, if Romney wins.
It mystifies me, the personal animosity that Cons have for this president. Totally. He hasn't raised your taxes. He saved us from the Great Depression II. He was instrumental in bringing down Khadaffi.
Really, it's your boy Junior's world; we're all just living in it. His positive neglect of the safety of our nation was central to the success of the 9/11 attacks, with the trillions in spending down the drain they led to.
Oh, but we didn't hear a peep from you hypocrites about Bush's spending, now did we? George W. Bush was the worst two-term president the country has ever had, probably he's in the bottom 3 of all presidents. We'll be dealing with the fallout from his administration past 2020. For all those who voted for him: We hold YOU responsible.
Simon Templar| 10.31.12 @ 12:26AM
Wow. not only do you sound unhinged, you sound like you are attempting a preemptive strike pf historical revision. Comrade, why not wait until next Tuesday before attempting this revisionism?
Comrade, you can do better than that!
Have you ever formulated an original idea?
Your rhetoric does not even seem original.
It sounds like you took a whole host of conservative talking points and reversed the names, circumstances, blame, and responsibility.
Love your latest commercials with vulgar grandmothers shouting obscenities. Loved the Hitler youth group singing your version of liberalism and hatred of conservatives.
Yeah, you are going to lecture us about truth, civility, responsibility, and what is good for America. It really is a good thing that we are not in the same room and are separated by an electronic information highway created by Al Gore.
Bob Grant| 10.31.12 @ 9:40AM
How about a little consistency, huh?
I'll concede Carter deregulated ONE industry - the transportation industry - and bringing in Volker was good in the long term but extremely painful in the short term.
However, he was an abject failure in handling the economy in general, an abject failure in handling the energy crisis, and abject failure in handling the Iranian Crisis, an abject failure in staunching Soviet aggression...
Oh, and he brought us the Community Reinvestment Act: the legislation that seeded perhaps the largest financial crisis not only the United States has ever known, perhaps in World history.
Jimmy Carter was seen as an abject failure when he left office in 1981, ten years later in 1991, thirty years later in 2011, and will so in the year 2025!
If find it ironic the two acts you cite as success are rooted in conservative principles, and then you go on to criticize Reagan for expanding these successes into creating the largest economic growth in our country's history.
Thanks for unwittingly helping the conservative cause!!
Marc Jeric| 11.1.12 @ 4:38PM
This far-left creep beggars the imagination. Poor Bush suffered the Democrat majorities for the last 2 years of his presidency. The only reason for our economic disaster has been the Community Reinvestment Act, enforced by threats of gigantic fines and prison, which forced our banks and mortgage companies to give 600,000 houses to "underserved minorities" who had no snowball's chance in hell to ever pay for them.
Marc Jeric| 11.1.12 @ 4:46PM
The Obama Administration has promoted the “Arab Spring” in African Arab countries, telling us that those protests were aimed at introducing democracy in those dictatorial countries. When the jihadists mounted a well-planned attack on the US Embassy in Benghazi and executed our ambassador and three of his aides on the 9/11 anniversary in direct retaliation for the execution of Osama bin Laden, the Obama Administration by common accord among Obama, Hillary Clinton, and our UN Ambassador Susan Rice blamed an obscure U-tube video trailer for the Arab reaction during more than two weeks of loud propaganda. Finally the evidence surfaced of a well-prepared and extremely well-armed attack by the jihadi terrorists. What has been hidden so far from the American public is the following fact: the US ambassador once captured alive was undressed naked, was then by force bent over and sodomized by a wood handle of a broom (according to the report and the photo by a Lebanese reporter), before being executed by a bullet into the head. That’s the kind of friends Mullah Obama, our Marxist Muslim President from Kenya, nurtures and appreciates and helps with the US taxpayers’ billions. Let us hope that our Republican congressional wimps find the necessary courage to unmask this disastrous policy of “friendship” with the jihadists.
Ted R.| 10.31.12 @ 12:39AM
Sure, when you can't bring the argument, bring the threats. Wanker.
BackToBasics| 10.31.12 @ 12:55AM
Even if Romney won't say these things I'd like to see a PAC ad do something along the line of 2 men watching the 3rd debate and commenting on some of Obam's whoppers. For example:
"We have these things called aircraft carriers where planes land on them." Men commenting, "What, he sounds like he just found that out last week."
Men ad-libbing, "We have these ships that go underwater, ahhhhh, what's the name I'm looking for? Nuclear submarines."
Run some ads with lines like these in areas that still manufacture defense equipment, ships or have military bases.
Commander Kelly | 10.31.12 @ 6:09AM
Love Ben's impassioned commentary. Libya just gets uglier day by day....http://americanconservativeinlondon.blogspot.co.uk/
tularockstar| 10.31.12 @ 12:55PM
Ben, as much as I like to agree with you, I just can't! If Mitt Romney was called the B word by Obama in a bar, I'd bet he would pummeled that communist down with one punch! But, this contest is not about physical abilities, but more of intellect abilities. Romney doesn't need to lower himself to the level of Oloser and his thugs. So far, he's been more Presidential and has shown more leadership than Obozo did in four years!
HR| 10.31.12 @ 5:59PM
I have great respect for your knowledge & experience, and so enjoy your musings, usually. But these recent rants against Gov. Romney are just disheartening.
I certainly don't mean to suggest that he shouldn't be held to account-- as a previous commenter noted, that's not what we conservatives do. And if he becomes president, he will rightly be subjected to much greater scrutiny, still. But I've found little of real concern in most of your indictments. I tend to think Benghazigate was largely ignored in the last debate because the reports are doing a fair amount of damage on their own, and I suspect Romney's strategy was to keep from providing Obama another platform from which to spew his doubtless well-rehearsed lies on the horrifying incident.
I was unenthused at first by Gov. Romney's nomination. It's hard not to be unenthused after 4 years of one of the worst presidential administrations we've ever endured. I still have a very real fear that we will not, in fact, end it at four.
If you will not be voting for Gov. Romney and Rep. Ryan next week, I understand your position well, I think. Will you reluctantly choose them as the "lesser of two evils"? If so, maybe I understand. But I'm having a hard time figuring out the strategy of incessantly dogging the candidate you support. I'm reminded of a Biblical truth, here. Everything is certainly permissible, Mr. Stein, but not everything is beneficial.
All the best, still, sir.
Ralph Novy| 11.1.12 @ 2:57AM
You're not a good person, Ben.
For all your talk about honesty, decency and kindness, you've devolved into a person possessing none of those qualities.
You should retire from public political commentary before you embarrass yourself -- and your descendants -- any more.
Marc Jeric| 11.1.12 @ 4:56PM
Hello komrad Novy - watch how Mullah Obama, your marxist Muslim President from Kenya, fades into the dustbin of history!
shoenews| 11.1.12 @ 2:12PM
I am sending Romney this article!
Ralph Novy| 11.1.12 @ 4:12PM
Bob Cesca puts your Benghazi fixation in proper perspective:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/.....59227.html
Marc Jeric| 11.1.12 @ 4:34PM
Mr. Stein is the only one so far who wrote it "like it is"! Bravo! This former refugee from a communist hell could not write it any better.