David Brooks, "Moderate Mitt Returns!": "The Man Who (I Think) He Truly Is"

By now, you have probably seen the 2007 video in which Obama told his audience of Reverend Wright's dramatic influence on his life and adapted his angry remarks and vocal accent to his audience (see: http://dailycaller.com/2012/10/02/obama-speech-jeremiah-wright-new-orleans/). Obama, of course dissed his racist pastor of twenty years and abandoned his drawl upon becoming a viable presidential candidate in 2008.

We have yet to see the tape of Obama's 2003 tribute to Palestinian "activist" Rashid Khalidi at a farewell party in Chicago, which is locked away in the offices of The Los Angeles Times (see: http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/226104/i-l-times-i-suppresses-obamas-khalidi-bash-tape/andrew-c-mccarthy).

I think I know who Obama truly is, and I shudder to think what we might see if he is re-elected and unveils his radical inner self with nothing to lose going ahead.

In his latest New York Times op-ed entitled "Moderate Mitt Returns!" (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/05/opinion/brooks-moderate-mitt-returns.html?_r=0), David Brooks sings paeans to Romney's debate performance earlier this week and welcomes his shift to the middle:

"Yes, it’s true. Romney’s tax numbers don’t add up. Yes, there’s a lot of budgetary flimflam. No, Romney still doesn’t have an easy answer to wage stagnation (neither does Obama). But Romney’s debate performance signals the return of Governor Mitt. Democrats call it hypocrisy; I call it progress.

. . . .

Most important, Romney did something no other mainstream Republican has had the guts to do. Either out of conviction or political desperation, he broke with Tea Party orthodoxy and began to redefine the Republican identity. And, having taken this step, he’s broken the spell. Conservatives loved it! They loved that it was effective, and it was effective because Romney could more authentically be the man who (I think) he truly is."

Romney did a marvelous job on Wednesday and flattened Obama, who, owing to Denver's high altitude (yeah, right) or the absence of a teleprompter, never managed to get himself on track.

But do we know who Romney "truly is"? I know he wants to be president.

Bottom line: I am delighted that Romney is moving to the middle as we approach election day and am convinced that he will have to maintain this moderation if, as president, he is to work with Democrats in an effort to remedy America's disastrous economy. Moreover, he will be answerable to the electorate in 2016 should he fail.

On the other hand, I am extremely wary of Obama's agenda, if he moves to the extreme left in a possible second term, after an "uninspiring" (I'm being kind) first term, and reveals who he truly is.