. . or, actually, HE said it. Perfect description. Thanks, JK.
In today's WaPo, EJ Dionne
( http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/give-em-hell-barry/2012/05/27/gJQASckGvU_story.html) compares Obama-Romney race with Dewey-Truman, making the point that while Dewey and Romney both poised themselves for general election as "moderates", Dewey really WAS a moderate, "trying hard not to be ensnared in the agenda of the GOP congress." Romney on the other hand , "has largely endorsed his congressional colleagues' agenda".
More..
Obama’s task is to argue that whatever moderate sounds Romney made during his career in Massachusetts politics, these are irrelevant to how he would govern with the GOP likely to be in the congressional saddle.
Of special relevance here. .
And if Republicans wish to argue that Obama’s vigorous anti-Romney campaigning is un-presidential, they have to answer for George W. Bush’s unashamed attacks against Democrat John Kerry in 2004. Sara Fagen, an adviser to Bush in that campaign, recently told Peter Baker of the New York Times that Bush “almost never mentioned” Kerry, “certainly not this early.”
The truth of this depends on what the meaning of the word “almost” is. In February 2004, for example, Bush mocked Kerry — he referred to him as “one senator from Massachusetts” — as being “for tax cuts and against them. For NAFTA and against NAFTA. For the Patriot Act and against the Patriot Act. In favor of liberating Iraq and opposed to it.” The next month, Bush accused Kerry by name of being “willing to gut the intelligence services” with a “deeply irresponsible” proposal to cut intelligence spending. There is no record of Republicans complaining that these political assaults were beneath a president.
= new reply since forum marked as read