I’ve largely ignored the 47 percent argument because of the ridiculousness of it all, but for some reason, the word feckless catches my eye, so today John Podhoretz captures my attention.

He describes the race as down to “feckless” Obama and “clueless” Romney. I sincerely disagree with both characterizations.

To be feckless, one would have to be ineffective and powerless, a failure. Obama is not a failure, he has put this nation as close as he can get to a tipping point through increased debt and entitlement usage, decreased employment, and increase of the amount of non-citizens through amnesty by the stroke of a pen. He also was effective in countering the 47 percent argument by generalizing way past what Romney meant, hoping to connect with his clueless die hards. He is close to reaching his goals of fundamentally transforming the United States. Obama is not feckless.

Feckless is a word I used two years ago to describe the Republican Party.

Romney is not clueless, and I take serious issue with the use of the word here by Podhoretz, because it is overwhelmingly not true. And I like the truth.

If you read the transcript of the dinner Romney was speaking at, you will get the idea that Romney gets it. Read it, Mitt’s very down to earth, uses self-deprecating humor, and doesn’t want people eating cold food on his count. But most of all, the entire talk relates to the average man or woman, trying to get through life under an oppressive government. It is my view that the entire conversation, over 8500 words, twice as long as the Constitution, would connect with your average man or woman. Yet Podhoretz cites a few sentences involving two conflated numbers of people, and marks Romney as clueless.

The funny thing about being in the 47 percent is that the number doesn’t apply to you.

In fact, the whole transcript is a recitation of the goodness of the individual, the greatness of America, and the respect for the American family.

You probably know that I’m father of five and grandfather now of 18—my oldest son just had twins just last week, and so our grandchild nest is getting larger, and they’re a source of great joy. When I was probably halfway through my career at Bain Consulting, I met with a lawyer to draft a will, and she said, “How do you want to divide what estate you might eventually have?” And I said—I didn’t have anything at that point—I said, “I want to divide it equally among my five sons.” And she said, “Well, how much will you want to give to the grandchildren that they will ultimately have,” and I said, “Well, I don’t want to give anything to the grandchildren—I’ll give it to the sons, and they in turn will give it to their children as needed.” And she said, “You’ll change your mind.” And I said, “No, I don’t think so.” So I saw her not long ago, and I said, “I don’t want to give anything to my sons, I want to give it [to all to my grandchildren.]

That’s sweet, funny, and pretty close to what most people think about their grandchildren.

I see these two very different scenarios. One is as America really powering the world economy, with an extraordinary economy here, with China working with us, wanting to see stability in the world, and a very vibrant America, with freedom and prosperity for the great bulk of the American people. On the other hand, I really do see something like Europe.

Stone-cold truth.

By the way, both my dad and Ann’s dad did quite well in their life, but when they came to the end of their lives, and, and passed along inheritances to Ann and to me, we both decided to give it all away. So, I had inherited nothing. Everything that Ann and I have we earned the old-fashioned way, and that’s by hard work and…

How many pundits, arrogant Weekly Standard editors, and liberal political hacks would do that?

The president’s foreign policy, in my opinion, is formed in part by a perception that he has that his magnetism and his charm and his persuasiveness is so compelling that he can sit down with people like Putin, Chávez, and Ahmadinejad. And that they’ll find we’re such wonderful people that they’ll go on with us. And they’ll stop doing bad things. And it’s an extraordinarily naive perception, and it has led to huge errors in North Korea, in Iraq, obviously in Iran, in Egypt, around the world. My own view is that that the centerpiece of American foreign policy has to be strength. Everything I do will be calculated to increasing America’s strength. When you stand by your allies, you increase your strength. When you attack your allies, you become weaker. When you stand by your principles, you get stronger. When you have a big military—that’s bigger than anyone else’s—you’re stronger.

You tell ‘em, Mitt!

If it looks like I’m going to win, the markets will be happy. If it looks like the president’s going to win, the markets should not be terribly happy. It depends, of course, which markets you’re talking about, which types of commodities and so forth, but my own view is, if we win on November 6th there will be a great deal of optimism about the future of this country. We’ll see capital come back, and we’ll see—without actually doing anything—we’ll actually get a boost in the economy.

This is the truth, not a brag. Never bet against the American people, who will work hard and pull us out of this situation Obama put us in, because optimism will be our adrenaline.

I saw Dr. Kissinger; I said to him, “How are we perceived around the world?” And he said, “One word: VEAK!”

Funny and devastatingly true.

By the way, I see today that Mother Jones admits that two minutes are missing from the tape right after the 47 percent part of the tape takes place, and I remember Mitt hoping they would release all of it.

I hope they do, but the transcript I read and enjoyed reading proves Mitt fit to be an American President, not clueless, and shows the desperation of our Divider-in-Chief.

The Obama campaign talks to the people as if they are illiterate and only able to grasp a simple concept. Romney bad, him no like half of you, me like all of you, me give you free stuff….and he’s doing it because that is how he perceives women, blacks, hispanics, gays, every voting bloc he is going after. He thinks he is smarter than everyone, he is a mastermind, and knows how to order things in society. It is my belief that if more people read this transcript, they would know Mitt instantly as a person who connects with people. Obama does not do that, instead he condescends to people, and I think more and more people are understanding that.

I do agree that we can win this thing, Mr. Podhoretz, but let’s not get mired in criticism of Mitt’s inartful phrasing in a private meeting, illegally taped. Read the transcript, and you’ll have a whole lot to praise Mitt about.