Obama played the role of barely-controlled Angry Black Man (ABM) who was doing that black panther thing by attacking Romney instead of articulating any kind of vision for the future... which is not surprising, considering that he didn't have such a vision and his re-election would just mean four more years of what we've had: an unending agony of a democrat train wreck.
Everyone watching had their likely "phrase that pays" in the debate. For me, it was when OBAMA said the words
"We've neglected, for example, developing our own economy; our own energy sectors, our own education system, and it's very hard for us to project leadership around the world, when we're not doing what we need to do..."Why? Is this where I point out, Mr. President, that we failed to do these things while YOU were in charge?
And if we haven't got them done in the past 4 years, what makes anyone believe that we'd get them done in the NEXT 4 years?
Talk about shooting yourself in the head.
It was an acknowledgement of his failures. It shows that he knows he screwed it all up. And after 4 years, that is a rather astute and accurate assessment of his disaster of a tenure as our president.
Obama lying about sequestration didn't help: he promised that sequestration "will not happen."
Now his minions have swapped that with SHOULD not happen.
Clearly, there's no lie Obama and his peeps won't utter to get re-elected.
In the end, what needed to happen last night; specifically that Obama needed to leave Romney, if anything, worse than the quivering puddle of goo that Romney left on the floor at the conclusion of Debate One, did not happen... or came close to happening.
Romney came across as the leader, that was clear. Instead of focusing on explaining his own failures and realizing the disaster that has been the Obama foreign policy, where nothing has been accomplished with energy (except, of course, to double the price at the pump) nothing has been accomplished with Iranian nukes (except to increase the likelihood they'll achieve them) nothing has been done about Libya (except to get our Ambassador killed from incompetence) nothing has been done about Syria (except to allow Assad to slaughter 30,000 of his own people) nothing has been done about Egypt (except put terrorists in charge of perhaps the most strategic country in the world outside of Panama (Panama Canal) and those in the Hormuz region (The Straights) because of the Suez Canal) and, of course, nothing has been done about the trade deficits slamming us ever day... and so much more... Obama attacked Romney. Everything Romney said or thought was wrong.
The problem?
The president's RECORD is one of failure, disaster, death and destruction.
One speaks to changing course: the other babbles about running full speed into that iceberg that we all know is ahead, but which we're choosing to ignore... because the Captain rather stupidly believes us to be "unsinkable."
How bad is it when they can't even spell "forward" properly? I'm no champion speller, but dayam.
7 comments:
Guy, I appreciate the clever vitriol, but what are you gonna blame if Obama wins?
Can political analysts just walk away from a train wreck like Bruce Willis in "Unbreakable"?
I dunno, Martin... who you gonna blame when Obama loses?
There is absolutely nothing out there to indicate that Obama wins: hasn't been since we made the dinner bet.
If he does, I re-evaluate my indicators, learn from the experience and move on.
But no one can pee on my leg and then tell me it's raining.
So, Obi-Wan, you seem fixated on telling us things like "Romney never had a chance."
Help me out here: explain that.
I'm always willing to learn.
(I'm assuming I can talk above my wishful thinking.)
Sitting presidents, especially "popular" ones, can beat even a great challenger. (I'm thinking if Christie had run - not Romney, who is weak.) As I've said before, they'd have to leave helicopters burning in the Iranian desert in order to lose.
Sophisticated Party politicos know this, and they also know that Americans don't like losers, so a great effort is made to make the race look close through phony polls to protect the rest of the ticket.
I can't imagine how Obama can lose at the point? (But I'll be buying you dinner if I'm wrong.)
What's problematic here is that Obama's petulance in the debate has cost him his most important asset: that very popularity you refer to.
Essentially, at this point, the house is burning down... and no matter how popular the arsonist, it's unlikely that the guy responsible for lighting the match will be unlikely to be re-elected.
Obama losing?
Nothing to it.
Discouraged democrats stay home in droves, independents break hard for Romney: 300+ electoral votes and Obama is done.
There is absolutely no indicator... including early, party identified voting, to suggest anything but a Romney victory: the only question is will it be Reaganesque or closer to the Bush second election.
When you don't have a job... when you've been lied to as often as Obama has lied to us; when your foreign and domestic policies are an unending, agonizing train wreck... Obama's loss will be much easier than you might think.
Yikes! I don't know what to say? I assume you're serious...
But, news flash, the Salt Lake Tribune just endorsed Obama.
http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/opinion/55019844-82/endorsement-romney-obama-president.html.csp
Mormon country, Olympics rescued, God said Mormons will run the world, Salt Lake City.
the Debates were great for introducing the REAL Mitt Romney to America and America realized that Romney wasn't at all the "evil elitist monster" that the lying Lefties had made him out to be. that's what really happened in the "first debate" to change things.The Leftist morons set that one up all by themselves with their pack of lies. They screwed themselves. Funny.
First, if endorsements meant anything in real time, Marc Boldt, Don Benton and Tom Mielke wouldn't have ever been elected dog catcher.
Second, only downtown Moscow, Russia is more leftist than downtown SLC.
Utah is not a "battle ground state" for example, that leftists endorse fellow leftists is as newsmaking as the Columbian endorsing Moeller... and Romney is between +32 and +51 in Utah.
I repeat, Martin: right now, there is no indicator pointing at an Obama win here. because if there was, there's a good chance I'd know it.
Post a Comment