In Search of Answers from Mitt Romney

In the article, the author is somewhat attacking Mitt Romney for different points he made during the political debate. He breaks up very nicely the “lies”(points) that Mitt Romney made against some of the policies that the president supports. In my opinion he presented his points correctly, but is wrong in thinking that Romney is “attacking” the president. I think it seems like an attack from one side to the other, but really, it was a debate and he is supposed to bring up points about what the president has done or has said he will do. Romney presented his points during the debate in a calm manner like he was expected to and did not directly attack the president, but disputed his position. The author of the editorial seems to be more of a leftist considering the key words he used to start sentences about Mitt Romney. He says things such as “attacked” or “outright lie.” Whether or not what Mitt Romney said was a lie, there’s no need to put such negative connotations to Romney, and these things are only said to sway sympathy toward the president. I don’t directly agree or disagree with the author about who is a liar and what not, but I don’t agree with him specifically attacked one side just because he agrees with the other. He’s not debating Mitt Romney’s points, he’s making them look foolish and rude. The article’s over-all format and presentation are very good, and are presented in an orderly fashion. I’m not sure of the author’s credibility, other than the fact that he wrote an article the New York times thought good enough to publish.