With Obama about to launch his re-election campaign on May 5^th (cough cough) his grand strategy for victory has been formulated.

News Flash…Mitt Romney is a radical.

In case you missed it, Obama’s campaign narrative goes something like this:

Romney used to be a flip- flopper with no core and you could not trust him.

But now, since becoming the presumptive Republican nominee, he has morphed into a radical and not just a run-of-the-mill radical, but a Goldwater ’64 radical.

David Plouffe, one of Obama’s highest ranking generals said recently in a NYT interview (where else?) “.. he (Romney) is the most conservative nominee that they’ve had going back to Goldwater.”

Ah… Arizona Senator Barry Goldwater vs. President Lyndon Baines Johnson (LBJ)  November, 1964, the glory days for Democrats, with LBJ winning his only full term in a landslide with 486 electoral votes to Goldwater’s 52.  LBJ received 61.1% of the vote and Senator Goldwater earned 38.5%.

Even worse, Goldwater only won 6 states.

That 1964 election resonates with me because it is the first presidential election I can remember. Now a little background is needed. I was born and raised in the radical Democrat state of Massachusetts, in a Boston suburb, and literally never met a Republican until I was 18 and left for college in Ohio.

On the morning of Election Day 1964, I distinctly recall yelling out the school bus window with fellow students to people on the sidewalks,  “LBJ for the USA” and “LBJ all the way”.

I also remember being told (probably in school) that Goldwater was very dangerous and if elected, was going to blow up the world.

Recalling all this so clearly obviously means LBJ’s message of Goldwater’s radicalism made a huge impact on me as a nine year old and, more important, how that message was so much a part of the ’64 election narrative.

So will Obama’s branding of Romney as a Goldwater radical be as effective?

Will today’s nine year olds remember it when they are in their 50s?

Probably not, because like the flip-flopper label, (after much focus-group testing),  “Romney the radical label will most likely not last.

So then it is on to President Obama’s next feeble attempt at branding which I predict will be “Romney the puppet”.

Expect in the next few months to hear David Plouffe say something like this, “Romney, if elected, would be totally controlled by the right wing radical Congress. He would be their puppet on a string, moving and swaying to their direction and then signing whatever legislation they put in front of him.”

From flip-flopper to radical to puppet to who knows what else after that?

Obama’s strategy reminds me of jujutsu, using your opponent’s own strength against him to your advantage.

From a Republican point of view, Obama is really the radical so if he paints Romney as a radical, it is harder for Romney to say, “No Obama YOU are the radical”, without sounding like the election has denigrated into a name calling exercise. Which it will anyway.

With that thought in mind,  I would like to pose a more serious question, how are we as a nation ever going to endure seven more months of what the Obama campaign is going to put us through?   The lies, distortions and endless promises of spending, oh, I mean investment.

Will someone please check and see if Prozac is included for free in ObamaCare because we are all going to need it even more than we need contraceptives.