Now... I have read in various places people complaining about the MODERATOR. Suggesting it was THEIR job to point out when Romney was lying. Bullshit. It wasn't. That's OBAMA's job. It is ALWAYS the job of the person IN THE DEBATE to contest the points being made by their opponent. That he chose to do otherwise, as he has done for four strait years now, is why he 'lost.' And if Romney, against steep odds, manages to WIN the election, it will once again be a case of teh stupid triumphing over the weak.
Barbara Morill over at the Daily Kos did an excellent write-up enumerating Mitt's many falsehoods. Just the highlights:
When he claimed that "pre-existing conditions are covered under my plan." They're not.Well done. And the FACT-CHECKERS are, in general, ripping Mitt apart. Too bad facts are for Liberals, and the rest of the Country keeps hearing about how "strong" Mitt was. (Notice how no one is saying how 'well informed' (or, more accurately, mis-informed) he was.
When he said that President Obama had "cut Medicare by $716 billion to pay for Obamacare." Obama didn't.
When he denied proposing a $5 trillion tax cut. He did.
When he said President Obama had "added almost as much to the federal debt as all the prior presidents combined." Not even close.
When he resurrected "death panels." That was called "one of the biggest whoppers of the night."
When he stated that half the green energy companies given stimulus funds had failed. Only if three out of nearly three dozen is half.
No. He was "Strong."
BEHOLD: Your liberal media!
So once again we're left to choose between the "Strong" and the "Smart."
Oh hell, who am I kidding?
Once Paul Ryan was added to the ticket, there became no doubt at all this was a race between the STUPID (-R) and the WEAK (-D).
That being said, as I just told Steeve, I will continue to vote for the Party that's shitty at implementing great ideas over the one that great at implementing shitty ones.
I think Lehrer was not forceful enough keeping them in line. Obama looked irritated and Mitt was not as crappy as usual. I guess that means Mitt "wins".As much as I detest super PACs and wish I had the moral fortitude of Russ Feingold, I think it is time to take the gloves off and "Big Bird" Romeny.
ReplyDeleteThe brutality of the debate massacre was a bit surprising, because, contrary to a popular righty caricature, the real Obama was, back in 2008, often an effective debater, but Obama's debate performance is actually a perfect mirror of his performance in office. He stuttered, stammered, looked distracted and disinterested, refused to take any offensive, and let Romney roll right over him.
ReplyDeleteThe moderator was an issue, but not a major one. Jim Lehrer did nothing to control the debate, and Romney rolled over both he and the format just as he did Obama. Anyone who wants to blame Lehrer for what happened paid no attention at all.
The extent of Romney's falsehoods can't be emphasized strongly enough. It can't be encapsulated merely by spotlighting individual whoppers: virtually nothing Romney said had any relationship to reality. It was interesting to see him try to become Mitt The Moderate again. At the same time, he was blowing those dog-whistles to the nut right (PBS, the 10th Amendment, etc.). In the last 2 days, Romney has taken about 5 different positions on abortion, as is his custom on every issue (though you'd never know it from most of the press). There was a report that his family revolted against his strategy of pretending to be a far-right ideologue. Sounds like something else that should be fodder for debate. If there was anyone on the other side with whom to have a debate.
The two candidates have no real differences on foreign policy--a "debate" about that would mostly just be more Romney lies (such as his claim that Obama, who has signed multiple "free-trade" agreements, has never signed one, and his "Obama Apology Tour" narrative). Tonight, the VP candidates go at it, and Paul Ryan will lie like a rug, as is his custom--he certainly can't get up in front of the nation and just say he wants to do things like destroy Medicare. Will he be called on it? I guess we'll see.
Looks like he was called on it alright. Biden did an excellent job and the moderator did well. Much better than the last debate.
ReplyDeleteI find it funny that the conservatives are first criticizing Biden's interruptions and facial expressions above anything else. I even read on one site that the moderator did a horrible job letting Biden talk all over the place. I guess they didn't watch the first debate.
I think the first debate was a mix of poor moderation and poor debate prep. The president could have done what Biden did but instead he remained on the defensive and avoided any kind of confrontation. If you watch the VP debate, when Ryan starts spewing his lies and Biden chiming in every bit of the way calling him a liar, Ryan couldn't effectively finish his lines of BS.
"I find it funny that the conservatives are first criticizing Biden's interruptions and facial expressions above anything else."
ReplyDeleteWhen you're screaming about style, rather than discussing substance, you're admitting that you lost. And winners don't complain about the officiating. I'm enjoying much of the angst on the right. Rush Limbaugh described Biden's behavior with a string of adjectives that all apply more properly to Limbaugh himself giving me a great chuckle.