Jeff G @ Protein Wisdom:
I noted yesterday that Obama’s excuse for his poor debate showing — raise your hands if you lost your office pool because you had either “Bush” or “The Stafford Act” — was, in fact, a refreshingly candid one: Mitt Romney. Mitt Romney made the President suck.
Turns out though, it was less Romney per se than it was the fact that his words, scribbled in some ancient and indecipherable code on a magical Mormon handkerchief of deception, were so filled with lies that it temporarily stunned the President, who had expected that the debate be among honest colleagues simply out to share their records and competing ideas with a public craving abipartisan exchange of substance, much as Obama has done throughout his historic Presidency of transparent government andhonest interpersonal brokering. And it was that stunned look of betrayal — how could a colleague and temporary rival with a supposed interest not only in his own candidacy but in the country itself, stoop to such a level? How could this man, who by all accounts is a religious man (albeit he follows a false prophet, which kinda puts him in league with Satan), issue lie after lie without a Code Pink harridan dressed as a vulva running through the audience shrieking in protest of such rank dishonesty? And where the fuck was Jim Lehrer to put a stop to the lies in the interest of fairness? — that the American people saw, not an uninformedPresident bumbling through warmed-over Marxist pablum couched in the language of the free market (“economic patriotism” being a personal favorite) but rather a President saddened by the strategy a serial lying GOP nominee, for whom he’d had so muchrespect, suddenly and relentlessly unleashed on him, redirecting the debate from one of discovery and the free competition of ideas — something Obama has always cherished as a guiding principle to fuel his enormous intellect — into a barrage of falsehoodsand fabrications, even and especially about the candidate himself and where he wishes to take the country (which has objectively and fairly been determined by “most experts” to be backward, not forward!) .
And trust me when I tell you, that can be very offputting.
Round One, of Three. . .
Round one of three leaves Obama staggering in a blind stupor.
Obama had 3.5 years to prepare him for that debate. He had the entire government standing ready with facts, figures, details to support him. Romney did not have the inside scoop.
Shame on Obama.
Two things I would have liked Mitt to say:
1. Obama, we were lucky. We were able to attend top rated schools. Our kids are lucky. They attend, or attended, top rated schools. We had a choice about their education. Why then, do you oppose other people having similar choices?
2. Obama care is 2000+ pages, Romneycare is 70. Can you explain how your approach is similar to mine?
The main reason Obama didn’t do so well is that he isn’t used to thinking for himself or having what he says questioned by others. He never had to work to earn a living, and the prapaganda media ALWAYS went along with what the liberals said. Talking to Obama is like a person talking to a ventriloquist’s dummy and expecting the dummy to speek for itself. Someone else’s hand is moving the dummy’s mouth.
Matt Latimer was deputy director of speechwriting for George W. Bush, chief speechwriter for Donald Rumsfeld, and an adviser to Newt Gingrich’s 2012 presidential campaign.
He wrote:
LOL!
Now, even Obama’s PAID mouthpieces are turning against him!
Here’s Stephanie Cutter being quizzed by CNN’s Erin Burnett:
In law, when a point of fact is stipulated, that means BOTH sides accept it without debate.
Romney’s plan won’t be ”anywhere near $5 trillion.”
Put that in your pocket, Romney!
LOL, again.
In the end…affirmative action folks are found out.
what are they thinking of to cover their idol,
it is insane, and now we don’t have any doubt even minute, that they are
all faking to cover OBAMA failure again and again and again,
hey, you DEMS are all uncovered in bright light now, you can’t run.
@Nan G:
Limbaugh and Hannity were on this page Friday. Both were suggesting that the Left create these ridiculous caricatures of conservatives, then have a tendency to believe their own myths.
One other thing that hurt obama in the debate. The audience was not loaded with takers holding up their free cell phones shining brightly like their brilliant leader. Actually when I think about that it, is a metaphor for obama. The free phones probably have a screen light equivalent to a 1/32 watt bulb. (No Lizzie Warren Cherokee reference intended). So he could have proved he is the dimmest bulb in the pack.
@Buffalobob:
Or perhaps the “free” phones of these pro-Obama Stepford sheeple are embedded with programs that send forth subliminal messages from the Obama campaign, (courtesy of China campaign contributor consortium who want to keep their trade status quo,) and the multiple hypnotic images displayed while the faithful twits tweeted, and they overcame Obama.
Maybe the reason Obama kept looking down was to hopefully find a hidden teleprompter to rescue him salvation from mortification.