Torricelli on the Republican National Convention

There's something missing from the Republican Convention. There is a need for a camera behind the curtain where speakers greet friends and family after they speak. Then we could discover if some of the Republican speakers can actually keep a straight face after their remarks.

It's a fair question. Mitt Romney assailed the Democrats for the growth in government spending. I assume that he is aware that there's been a Republican President for the last eight years who governed during most of that time with a Republican Congress. He expressed outrage at the mounting federal debt. Everyone in the convention hall must know that Bill Clinton balanced the budget and was reducing the debt until the  Bush Administration added more debt than any President in history.

My favorite was the assault on Democrats over national security and the continuous praise of American soldiers. I can't be the only one who remembers George Bush sending young Americans into combat without flak vests and in unprotected Humvees. Wouldn't protecting these soldiers be a better sign of devotion?

Then there was Fred Thompson reminding us of the  conservative commitment to individual liberty. He might have forgotten that the Republican Administration has been cited by the Supreme Court for illegal wiretapping, condemned for promoting torture and unconstitutionally imprisoning suspects. Whose liberties are they talking about?

Even in a shameless display, one act has to be the worst. That prize, of course, goes to Rudy Giuliani. His case seems to rest on the advantage that Republicans bring to the war against terrorism. I guess that it doesn't count if the nation is attacked on your watch, you fail to find the chief perpetrator and our nation becomes isolated in this struggle because of almost universal condemnation of our national leadership.

Then there's the convention delegates themselves. Their lapels are replete with buttons promoting energy independence. They cheer at any mention of  drilling for oil. I appreciate their enthusiasm but I don't understand how they reconcile this with the Republican Congress and George Bush fighting automobile efficiency standards for most of the decade. I know that there is a limit to  scientific knowledge in a delegate pool, but can anybody explain how a nation with three percent of the world's oil reserves can drill its way out of this problem?

Perhaps they just don't have any choice but to argue the absurd. After all, the two principal Republican arguments are unavailable. It's hard to make a case for economic management when during the previous Democratic administration  23 million jobs were created in the greatest economic expansion in history. Faltering banks, stagnant growth and mounting home foreclosures make a poor case for economic management.

The only worse case is the very notion of "Country First".

Somebody will have to explain. How is it putting "Country First" when you promote a wholly unqualified junior governor with no national or international experience in line for the Presidency?  Sounds to me like he's putting his campaign first.

There's nothing here, of course, that every speaker at the Republican Convention doesn't already know. I'd just feel better if that hidden camera caught them laughing . I'd rather that they were cynical but smart as opposed to being stupid and sincere.