Maybe Mitt Romney's speech today at the Virginia Military Institute was a form of public debate prep for the final presidential debate on foreign policy; otherwise, I'm not sure why he gave it. The speech had a soundbite — "The president has made us weaker" — but it had few ideas on how a Romney administration would make us stronger. A tougher policy on Iran, arming the Syrian rebels and making friends with them were a few of his uninspiring and unclear ideas.

While Romney might think recent events in Syria give him a new opening to criticize the president, I don't think it will be an effective strategy. The fact is, President Obama has been an aggressive user, not just proponent, of American power. He has stepped up the use of drones to kill terrorists, and presumably innocents as well, and, according to a new book by one of the leaders of the raid that killed Osama Bin Laden, he didn't place a high priority on capturing the terrorist. The president doesn't seem have a problem authorizing the use of lethal force.

Despite the polls saying few people care about foreign policy, it is admirable for a presidential candidate to address the issue that might consume him once in office. It wasn't the topic of Romney's address that bothers me; it was the speech itself. The there wasn't there.