ROMNEY'S GRIEVOUS FLAWS EXPOSED IN THE THIRD DEBATE

ROMNEY'S TWO DISQUALIFYING FAULTS 


I watched the third presidential debate last night. Romney's flip flops, lies and his faux pas on basic knowledge and geography reveal Romney as not up to "prime time" standards.

 One glaring error, among many, was his faulty knowledge of elementary Middle East geography. I would expect a presidential candidate who has stated in the past, and even repeated during the debate last night, that "Iran is the USA's greatest threat", and was also the candidate who blustered and threatened how a "Romney president" would "bomb Iran" to prevent it from gaining the "capability" of building a nuclear weapon.

But last night Romney revealed he has not even a passing knowledge of that nation's geography or location in the Middle East. In a glaring error, he stated for the entire world to hear that "Iran needed Syria as a means of reaching the sea". He apparently did not know that Iran has a huge coastline of its own. I giggled at this stupidity when I heard it. But it was not funny. It is frightening that a man in his position, potentially the leader of the free world, has such limited knowledge of the part of the world he would turn our nation's awesome power against and perhaps start another world war. With that level of expertise one wonders what nation in the ME would he bomb accidentally.

So for me, at that instant, Romney revealed himself to be an intellectual lightweight. One wonders too about his ability to choose advisors....for those who "prepped" him for this debate were apparently deficient as well.

 This last debate proved that all those years as a businessman typically concerned only about the "bottom line" and not the "details" did not serve him well as preparation for the highest office in the land. I conclude his experience, training and preparation for the office of the POTUS does not meet minimal standards. His second fault is one of character. Romney's lies, flip-flops and 180 degree turns on policy and his "death-bed conversion" to more moderate positions solely to smooth his path to election, are dangerous for a President and paramount world leader. During the third debate he agreed with all of President Obama's foreign policies, a "180" from his previous positions. His behavior raises the question of his character. How can we trust anything that this man says? In foreign policy, as our Republican friends would assert, a la Reagan, that nothing is more potent in a leader than the knowledge that what a President says is what he means. Even President G W Bush, with whom I had little in common, could be believed (as erroneous that his positions were) at least on what he said he would do. Romney's character flaw, on his relationship to the truth, precludes that trust, and weakens him, and his administration were he to be elected to our highest office. His failure to be able to be believed makes him dangerous to his nation and the world. Get the picture? rjk