the debate that wasn’t, quite: Updated

Okay, so Mitt did better than we expected, which isn’t really all that big a deal since we, well at least I, expected so little.

Obama looked like he’d rather have been just about anywhere. He seemed resigned. Or tired. I was frustrated by how Mitt almost without exception got the last word, and that Jim didn’t do a better job making them a) conform to their time limits and b) alternate more conscientiously between who went first and who went last.

Of course part of that was because Mitt was just frequently rude, and would keep talking and talking. And then there was that idiotic grin at the end of every statement, like “HA! Didn’t think I’d have an answer for that one did ya’? Well I did, so there.”


The arguments Obama should have made:

1.  No, Mitt, you must not have the right accountant, since you had enough money left in this country that you had to pay any taxes at all.

2.  Money spent on the oil industry is a subsidy paid to companies that don’t need it, and money down the drain; money spent on green energy is an investment in the future of the planet and in our ability to compete down the road with the Chinese, who are spending a lot more on green energy infrastructure right now than we are, and we will rue the day if we don’t do more to keep up with them. Speaking of jobs. We were speaking of jobs, right?

3.  Speaking of jobs, Mitt claims he will create 12 million jobs. Of course, like every other one of his promises or “plans,” that’s all we get — the statement, “I will create 12 million jobs.” Out of Play-Doh?

(Speaking of the plans, a friend posted on facebook last night: Obama: “Let me tell you about my plan…” Romney: “Forget that – awesome stuff for everyone!” Obama: “Details?” Romney: “(Details to be announced.) But did I mention how awesome it’s going to be?” and a friend of his commented: “I don’t know numbers, but I know awesome, and let me tell you: it is a plan, and it is awesome. Yes, this plan is a very planned plan…and it is definitely awesome. You might say it’s an awesome plan.”)

Something like that.

4. Mitt lies. Over and over, making up stuff. Obama cut 716 billion from Medicare? Mitt wants to cut taxes for the middle class? (Since when, yesterday morning?) (Another lie: Mitt’s health care plan would cover preexisting conditions. But not really.)

Obama didn’t call him out on any of them. Was he asleep? Wishing he were having dinner with Michele?

5. Mitt will lower tax rates and then eliminate loopholes so that the same amount of money will be coming into the federal government as before. Umm, isn’t this then, like the same thing? Oh, you’re right, it’s not. Because the elimination of the loopholes will operate on a sliding scale, he actually admitted this last night, so that it has less impact on those at the upper levels of the income scale, which means the poor and middle class will pay more in taxes and the rich will pay less.

6. Mitt “reached across the aisle” to pass a government-based health care plan, with 87% of the legislature being Democrats. This is an example of his ability to get things done in Washington and work with everyone. Not much of a reach really, when 87% of the legislature is already with you, plus a lot of the Republicans since government-based health care was originally a Republican idea. Way to go, Mitt!

No mention of the fact that the Republican legislator’s primary stated goal in 2008 was to keep Obama to a single term. Guess that would have sounded petulant and defensive.

7. He likes coal!


Where was my president? Too polite to go too far over his allotted time? Too conscientious to force revelations into barely-related questions?

This is probably going to seem mean-spirited, but I found this clip to be mildly amusing.


4 Responses to “the debate that wasn’t, quite: Updated”

  1. October 9, 2012 at 9:11 am

    That video summed up a lot of what I think of Romney. 🙂

    A couple of other bloggers and I were discussing how Romney’s been behaving more and more like a bully, especially during and since the debate. Bullies somehow know, or are taught, that lying in front of a crowd is very effective because when the other person tries to call them out, the other person somehow appears weaker. Even reciting well-researched facts in response to lies doesn’t work when the liar smiles and calmly repeats the lie. I really think President Obama was reacting to that during the debate. Since he can’t play the dozens and expect to get re-elected, I suspect he had to hold in his anger and wait for the campaign ‘huddle’ to figure out a new strategy for the ‘new’ Romney.

    People who know the truth get angry, but those strange people who still don’t know their own minds and hearts (why else would they not already know which candidate’s views are closest to their own) fall for the “Why does he keep calling Romney a liar? How is that presidential?” line of republican spin. As if it IS presidential to tell bald-faced lies about subjects that don’t impact national security. If it’s not about military secrets, it’s about bullying us.

    Bush was too simple-minded to be a good bully. Romney excels at it. His behavior is sickening. That’s my two cents.

    • October 9, 2012 at 9:16 am

      Yeah, I think you’re right. Husband and I talked about this very thing — first of all, that Obama was so caught by surprise by how blatantly Mitt was changing his policies from everything he had said before, and second, that he (Obama) didn’t want to risk the fallout if he appeared defensive, or bullying himself.

      We also tried to have confidence that all of the lies and misrepresentations would be pointed out in the weeks to follow; plus there is always the VP debate, where the VP can look a little more assertive/aggressive and get away with it better than the President can.

      I was VERY disappointed that Jim Lehrer didn’t do a better job of making Romney conform to the time constraints, and to make sure that Obama had the last word every time MR had the first one — I think the only last word Obama got was the last question before the closing statement. That really should be one of the moderator’s most important tasks, don’t you think?

      And do you think Jim should have tried to point out Mitt’s lies when Obama didn’t? I’ve read that a few times, too.

      • October 9, 2012 at 9:31 am

        Heck yeah. I agree with what you say about Jim Lehrer. I know he’s a respected newsman, but he seemed shocked at Mitt’s misbehavior, when he needed to be capable of reining him in. He wasn’t prepared for Romney’s weirdness any more than Obama was, and that was bad for the debate all around.

        Did you watch The Newsroom series on HBO? I loved that show, but I cried when the fictional station pitched their idea for the debates, how the moderator’s main purpose would be to ask real questions and know the facts so they could keep the candidates talking about reality and not their own spin. I cried because we all need that so much.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

Reader Appreciation Award

Share This

Share |

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 177 other followers

Follow me on Twitter: sheriji1

Blog Stats

  • 114,539 hits

%d bloggers like this: