Some Leftie pundits have complained about Obama not making any references to Romney’s “47%” comments (Michael Moore did on Twitter – and I believe I read about someone else who did the same, but I forget who); but isn’t it obvious that the “president for all/uniter” trope the Obama campaign put out in response to “47%” sounds hollow and dishonest in the aftermath of Obama’s racially charged comments from that Hampton University speech Fox News dusted off last night?

Not to mention Romney would have rubbed Obama’s face all over the president’s own ‘Us vs. Them’ rhetoric from 2007 if “47%” had even gotten one mention.

Maybe that’s why Obama looked so bummed and restrained.  He had that 47% ace in the hole, but he dare not use it.   In that sense, the Fox News/Drudge/Daily Caller stunt was a game changer after all.  It neutralized Obama’s – and the Left’s – weapon of choice.

UPDATE: Related thoughts from Ed Driscoll. With names of a couple of pundits who lamented not hearing about “47%”. As Ed points out via Iowahawk, normal human beings wouldn’t be upset about the “47%” speech. And I know exactly what he means by that. I agree. But then, mainstream opinion-shapers in this country are not exactly normal. And they twist and parse statements until it fits their message du jour…

About these ads