So what if Romney was right about Russia?

When you think about it, this was quite an impressive maneuver on Obama’s part. Not did he pander to the masses, but he also managed to simultaneously add an scholarly ring to it. Ironically, by virtue of agreeing with Obama’s incorrect analysis, one was bestowed a certain degree of intellectual sophistication. Obama played up this snark factor during the debate, adding: “Governor, when it comes to our foreign policy, you seem to want to import the foreign policies of the 1980s, just like the social policies of the 1950s and the economic policies of the 1920s.” The message was simple: These rubes and their “war on science” think the Soviet Union still exists!

Timing is everything. Being too far ahead of the curve isn’t helpful. And like the guy who gets hit by a car going the wrong way down a one-way street, being retroactively being proven right is cold comfort. The bottom line is that Romney was right on policy, but Obama was right on politics. And guess who got run over…

Obama’s motive for purposefully misrepresenting Romney’s comments is obvious, and it’s easy to understand why the general public — having been fed a stead diet of Islamic terrorism for more than a decade — would guffaw at the mention of Russia. But I leave you with this question: Why were so many of the smart people in the mainstream media also complicit?