Debating the Chameleon: Obama vs Romney

Mitt Romney, in his first debate derailed the President by embracing the idea that government regulations are necessary to the operation of a free market and he also said he would not resist taxing the billionaires.  "I never said I wouldn't be open to that."

So how do you argue with the man who suddenly agrees with you on the two most important points you have been hammering him on?  

You might point out this is a jail house, a death row, conversion, and no more convincing. 

Suddenly Mr. Romney is only against bad government regulations, and he will not specify exactly which regulations those might be--although you can expect him to have a list this Tuesday.  Until now, Mr. Obama might point out, Republicans have been saying all the only thing standing between prosperity and the American people are government regulations and interference, but now, regulations are a good thing.

And suddenly, after adamantly refusing to tax the billionaire, who Mr. Romney has insisted is the "job creator," after saying you don't want to burden these rich people who might react by simply not hiring any body, suddenly, he is open to this idea.

Well, Mr. Obama might say, since you agree we need some government regulations and we need to tax the billionaires so they pay their fair share, you really can concede right now. 

I'd love to hear Mr. Obama heap scorn on this man, who is and always has been and always will be in the pockets of the big money men who have bought and paid for the Republican party, senators and congressmen and presidents, suddenly, he is willing to tax these big spenders.

The big question is: Does Mr. Obama have it in him to trade punches with a slippery and dishonest opponent?