If I were Barack Hussein Obama, here's what I would do...
The Republicans are already tagging me "the campaigner-in-chief." As if Obama's the only potential 2-term candidate to ever engage in campaign fundraising endeavors. And they will continue to berate him for the foreseeable future. Most of Fox's audience eats that shit up - He needs to be doing the job instead of pandering to the Hollywood directors!
Anyway, Obama has been wise to steer clear of the Republican battle royal. Let them rip each other to shreds in a desperate attempt to appease the extreme elements of the far right. Whether it be abortion, immigration, guns, Jesus, or gays... each one, except Huntsman, is smitten with trying to appeal to the hardcore right. Hell, with good reason, that's where the primary votes are.
On abortion, even in cases of rape and incest, most of these embryonic neanderthals want to return to the early 1950's. If the life of the mother is in danger, don't fret... Bristol Palin said she'll step up and assume the role of baby momma.
On the U.S./Mexican immigration fornt, it's all about sending in the military to enforce the boundaries. Hey, why not build a wall of electrocutionary impalement and a mote filled with LSD.
And everyone needs an AKA-47. More weapons is just what this country needs as it spirals into economic oblivion.
We must acknowledge the Christ child as our lord and savior and repent accordingly. We all have sinned, except Newt of course, the exempt hypocrite.
And as for the homos... we must not only discourage their behavior, we must condemn them to hell while simultaneously trying to "cure" them (which is even more messed up).
But Mitt, or Willard if you prefer, crossed a major line. He didn't just make empty campaign promises this time. He unequivocally stated...
Under a Romney administration, Iran will NOT have a nuclear weapon.
With an Obama administration, Iran will have a nuclear weapon.
This was a major proclamation and Obama should call him on it. This isn't like the routine economic or social issues. This is an outright pre-declaration of WAR. We're talking about a commitment to go to war from the Republican party's most likely candidate. Obama should step up and address the nation. Most voters would admit that Obama hasn't engaged in demonizing the Republican candidates. It's really more about appearing presidential and staying above the fray. So it would be a "big deal" if he suddenly ventured in that direction. Reasonable people would wonder why Obama stepping in. And why is he doing it now?
He should say something like this...
Mitt Romney's recent statement crossed the line. Unless he knows something that he's not been sharing with us (outright knowledge of an imminent Iranian attack on the U.S. or its allies), Mitt Romney's promise to preemptively engage the United States on another war-front is unacceptable. Obama should put Mitt directly on the spot and ask, "If you're serious about this, you must explain to the American public exactly how you're going to accomplish this new directive once you obtain office. Americans deserve to know the specific nature of the threat, the resources you'll immediately require and the steps you'll take to offset the Iranians. They need to know the costs up front and the potential ramifications (specifically, the potential for a spike in the price of crude oil). Then, and only then, can we engage in a reasonable discussion on the specifics. But to just throw out a unilateral proclamation like that (and without access to the National Security briefings) is wholly unacceptable.
In my mind, none of the Republican crop is suited for commander-in-chief. Romney's the only one who comes close. Huntsman maybe, if he invested all his personal fortune (he won't). And Obama's timing for this would be perfect. Romney isn't expected to win the Iowa caucus. He's spending little money there after being dismantled in 2008. Fucking Huckabee won the thing. He's pinning all his hopes on the momentum from New Hampshire. Probably the wiser move. Anyway, if Obama gave the "responsibility in campaigning" speech just before the Iowa caucus, it vastly diminishes the credibility of their whole field. Not only do the zealots need lectured, they need wisdom and guidance. If the ring-bearer of the party is being this irresponsible, how could we ever handle the other, more extreme candidates. Hell, if the non-Willard Republican that wins Iowa doesn't have the presidential temperament, how on earth could we trust that which is Romnevitable . This would make the Republican party look really silly and portrays Obama as a responsible prognosticator of how things will inevitably unfold. And it makes Romney look like all the other Bachmannesque, Cainian, Gingrichbread Santorums. Good positioning for the general. Make Romney look like a hardcore right-winger that even the right-wing idiots don't trust.