This guy is even more past his sell-by date than is Lehrer. He'll have about as much control over the last debate as the referee does in a WWE rasslin' match.
Posted on 10/06/2012 11:34:26 AM PDT by RoosterRedux
Watching the debate reminded me of a child set out on his own after being raised by parents who failed to teach him responsibility and accountability and let the child think that he was above being corrected or disciplined. This was the time that Chris Matthews could not jump in and tell the people what Obama meant to say." Indeed, Obama has been brought up by an adoring and overindulgent liberal media who have coddled him for the last eight years on everything from his appearance to Jeremiah Wright, Tony Rezko, and his caught-on-a-live-microphone secret handshake with Russian President Medvedev, where he promised that he will have "more flexibility after the election" to work with the Russians on missile defense. Additionally, we have the age-old public displays of media affection, including Dave Brooks' awe over the crease in Obama's pants and the "thrill up" Chris Matthews' leg. With a sycophantic media like this, who needs accountability?
Until Univision took Obama to task over his promise on immigration, Americans had rarely seen President Obama being held accountable by the media to match his word with his record. An unsteady, flustered, and out-of-gas Obama was bewildered as to how Univision's Jorge Ramos could have missed the "how to conduct an interview with President Obama" memo.
Wednesday's presidential debate revealed the same tight-lipped, flustered president -- unprepared for Jim Lehrer's reluctance to intervene and stop Romney from daring to question and attack his record.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Liberals do swallow all manner of nasty things. Conservatives question the BS being served up and indeed generally decide to go elsewhere in search of less rank sustenance. FR for example.
One morning a lady called in who was obviously a black from her accent and started into Lisa about not knowing what it was like to be black. WHOA, did Lisa open a can of whoop ass on her. Ed is a middle of the road progressive who had to endure a full week of SGT Sam and Lisa when Mark was on vacation.
I’m here for the principles, but some of the people I’ve had to take with a grain of salt. Present company excepted. ;^)
President Obama has had an answer for everything but, a solution for nothing ever since he’s been on the public stage. Obama may (I emphasize ‘may’) be a smoother politician than Romney but, it is clear he is no where near the practiced and trained problem solver that Romney is.
Romney looked to me like a man who knew how to be a CEO and a decision maker. He also looked like a man who not only knew how to defend his position but, also how to challenge the positions of other (Obama in this case) without being disrespectful. Finally, Romney looked like a man comfortable in his own shoes.
Obama, on the other hand, looked out of his league from the get-go. His platitudes fell flat and seemed empty. He had no idea how to spar ‘in the arean of ideas’ with Romney. Isn’t ‘political sparing’ the mothers milk of politicians? If so, where were his skills that were supposedly built up over a life time of politics?
It’s one thing not to believe in the conservative ideology but, it’s complete incompetence not to understand its strengths and weaknesses in terms of the strengths and weaknesses of the liberal ideology. No wonder Obama can’t work with the GOP House!! He doesn’t understand their ideology. Worse yet, he doesn’t understand liberal ideology either. I would have done a better job defending his positions and I completely disagree with them
In short, Obama looked like a little-leaguer trying to play short-stop for the Yankees while Romney looked like....the next President of the United States.
Obama is only going to diminish further when he again shares the stage with Romney. He’s lucky there is only two debates left. He’s also lucky the media is in his corner. Still, if Obama doesn’t have a video of Romney leaving a shady hotel room with a woman who is not his wife, it’s unclear to me how he fakes his way into another term.
Expect the “gotcha” questions. Like Stephanopolous did during the primaries, “Can states ban birth control?” Or asking “who is the Third Secretary Second in Command of the Nicety-Nice of the Republic of Brobdingnang?” and if you can’t name him/her, then YOU’RE STUPID! They will huff and moan that EVERYONE knows the answer to that question, how could Romney be so dumb? They’re going to ask him questions out of left field, apropos of nothing, and then berate his flabbergasted response 24/7 until the whole country believes that knowing the name, birthdate and favorite color of the Third Secretary Second in Command of the Nicety-Nice of the Republic of Brobdingnang is vital to our national security.
I’d like to have Romney turn to Obama just after he’s spouted off one of his “$5 trillion here, $4 trillion there, plus another $1 trillion to boot” diatribes and ask him the following two questions (giving him 10 seconds of his time to answer):
1) President Obama, could you tell me how many zeros follow the number 1 in one trillion?
and
2) President Obama, could you tell me how many billions there are in one trillion?
I would guess that the odds are about even that he gets both questions wrong. If he gets them right, Romney should say “Just checking” and move on. But if he gets them wrong, Romney gets to explain how he finally understands how a President of the United States could run up such a ridiculous debt on in less than four years, and why even the Democrats in the Senate voted down his submitted budget unanimously.
Incidentally, ask the next 4 people you talk with the above two questions. You’ll be surprised how many can’t answer either one correctly. But the President should certainly know.
You’re not kidding.
I’d really have liked to have seen some fresh blood in these debates, from the moderator side. Of course, that would mean including “new” media, a.k.a. pajama warriors, and we can’t have that.
Romney is way smarter than I have him credit for. He got Obama to fold like a house of cards wo coming across harshly or negative. His 5 boys line was a nuke.
In David Gelernter's book, America-Lite, he explains that the current breed of college-educated liberals are not like the old lions of liberalism. They don't have a set of (erroneous) values that they can discuss and defend. They have merely absorbed the liberal cliches and shibboleths in school through osmosis and regurgitate them. He calls them, Obama included, "Airheads".
Hey, you can’t do that. That’s racist math!
Put it in more understandable terms like, ‘How many seeds in a trillion watermelons?’
The man doesn’t even know how many trillions this nation is in debt!
It is delicious irony that the media has enabled this guy, and Romney just outed him and stripped him of his training wheels.
Ooooo. I like this article.
Good post!
I got the second answer right (I guessed) and I got the first one wrong. I said 16. I still had to Google them though.
I like it when the Prime Minister says ‘I refer you to my previous answer’
Absolutely.
To borrow a phrase from Michelle-ma-belle, for the first time in my adult life, I LIKED Mitt Romney!
;-)
I was not aware of this book (America Lite) or of this term but, I am definitely aware of what you are speaking about. I meet liberals who don’t understand the underpinning of the philosphy they champion. They have never heard of either John Locke or Rosseau.
A tenent of liberal thought is that man is basically bad. A tenant of conservative thought is that man is basically good. When I throw that fact out to the Omamanacs they get all mad at me. They don’t even realize how ignorant they are. When Obama counters Romney next time, he needs to argue in these terms and related concepts but, I’m certain he knows not one of them.
Obama just has this ‘classic’ chip on his shoulder about how rich people, banks, and big business are evil and how all poor people are virtuous and being held back by ‘the man’. These ‘chips’ play well on the emotions but, unless defended in some larger philosophical context one comes off looking like Obama did on Wednesday...that is like a dunderhead.
Also, he’s certain America deserves the contempt from other countries although he never says it because he’s too gutless. During last Wednesday’s debate, he was too gutless to say a lot of things he believed because he was afraid Romney would further embarrass him with his intellect.
My true impression is that Obama is a dunderhead. His good looks, charming personality, and his blackness (yes blackness) has carried him to the highest office in the land. These are all necessary attributes of a president to be sure (not counting the blackness) but, one also needs a resume of accomolishments, a proven track record of workig with people, and the kind of confidence that can only come from proven success during trial by fire.
Based on this criteria, there should be no question that Romney should win this election. If, however; Obama does win, I’m going to buy that book you mentioned. I’ll need to know more about the idiots running this country...and their supporters.
Affirmative action ruined obama way before the media knew who he was.
A million is a really big number. Try counting to 1,000. Now consider doing that counting 999 more times. You’ll have counted 1,000,000 numbers when you finish.
A billion is almost unfathomable. After you’ve done the first task, do it again, and again, 1,000 times in all.
A trillion is beyond the imagination, even if it’s put in terms like how many times around the earth would a stack of dollar bills placed on edge go. Repeat the task of counting to a billion, 999 more times.
Yet we are borrowing, each DAY, 3x the unfathomable billion dollars in this country, and if you do that for 365 days, you actually manage to borrow (not spend—govt spends 2-3 times what we borrow) the “beyond imagination” trillion dollars in one year. Can’t last. Won’t last. Has to stop or we’re bankrupt within a decade.
Is that a typo?
Most conservatives believe man is basically bad and cannot be trusted. From a Christian perspective I believe in original sin, but even apart from that, experience shows us the truth of such maxims as “power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.”
Liberalism, by contrast, affirms the inherent goodness of man.
That is a very serious error and leads to horrible abuses.
I did not make a typo. You are wrong. Two famous philosophers wrote books on the nature of man.
Conservatives believe that man is basically good hence, the need for less government (John Locke).
Liberals believe that man is basically bad, hence the need for more government (Reussaeu).
I’m admittedly over simplifying here but, you probably get the gist. I encourage you to research the subject more. I took an entire philosophy class on this subject way back in college
Todays conservatives believe in the ‘free market’ because they trust the nature of man. The liberals believe in the governemnt because they do not trust in the nature of man.
Notice how Obama is always attacking Romney, big oil, rich people, etc. He does this because he thinks they are evil, so to speak, and does not trust their motives. Romney never goes for this personal stuff. Like most conservatives, he beieves Obama is a good person but, very misguided.
Think about most liberals on the View and MSNBC. They are full of vile and personal attacks all the time. Go to Fox and you’ll see attacks mostly on misguided ideas but, rarely on the people or on the intentions of the ideas.
It’s all pretty clear once you understand what you are looking at.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.