Yes - it was a stinker of a debate, as far as I am concerned. I was glad there was a pretty good baseball game going on at the same time. When I did check in periodically, there were the same old talking points; the same old "assertiveness" (but a bit moreso with President Obama); and the same old "if you can't bedazzle them with brilliance, then befuddle them with B.S." approach. The way the righties are howling this morning about the length of time given to the Dems during the debates (more than the GOPers) and how Candy Crowley screwed up the moderator's job, it appears that they believe Romney didn't "show well."
I reiterate: When the issues are the economy and the President's record, he LOSES. On those points, I do not believe that the majority of the people are dense enough to buy what Mr. Obama is shoveling. His only chance is to invigorate his base (those who would vote for him if he had horns, a pointed tail and carried a pitchfork) and to successfully portray Romney as a wealthy Simon Legree who only cares about himself and his rich cronies.
I still say Obama should fear the "stealth vote" - those who voted for him last time; are unwilling to publicly express their disapointment in things like polls; but who will pull the lever for Romney in the privacy of the voting booth. Women are starting to wake up to the fact that you can't pay the bills and provide for your family's welfare and future with an economy that's in the tank. Recent polling reflects this. I also think this Libyan ambassador faux pas is going to hurt Obama more than they are publicly admitting. That's why they have been trying so hard to keep it off the front pages and portray the problem as some wacko video instead of "real terrorism." It undercuts the "Bin Laden is dead therefore I'm a foreign policy genius" argument.
I felt the same way about the not answering questions. Every other time he answered, I was like "he didn't answer the question again...lol". As for it being lackluster, I would disagree on that one. I thought it was quite lively compared to the last one. At one point, I thought they were going to come out swinging. That would have been some good television. In fact, new Presidential selection process. Thunderdome! 2 men enter, one man leaves. Winner is President for 4 years. After 2 years he can be challenged if found incompetent. Let's put this on the ballot.
....and as for Mr. Obama winning by his "nose" - not so fast. CampusReform.org reports in an article posted online yesterday that a University of Colorado presidential poll - which has a record of 100% accuracy since it was created in 1980 (the last 8 presidential elections) - will "soon" predict Romney as the winner of this year's election. The article goes on to further state the reasons/rationale/determining factors for this prediction:
CNN's Candy Crowley was an absolute disgrace as the moderator of the second presidential debate.
Her outrageous attempt to cover up President Obama's lies about Libya is one of the worst cases of liberal media bias in history.
For some reason, I expected Ms. Crowley to be a bit more even-handed in her treatment of the candidates - especially since she knew that a national television audience would be scrutinizing her performance as moderator. I was surprised by the way she seemed to "take up for" Obama several times. It was rather obvious.
The Rude Pundit hasn't always been a fan of Obama - or especially his foreign policy:
That debate was a joke. Two kids fighting on the schoolyard trying to one up eachother.
Gov.Romney's total disrepect for the President (no matter who it may be)and our President going along with the ridiclousness....
I still think that Romney held back a little so he can "bring it" at the final debate. It might be a good time for him to bring up the "I will have more flexibilty" after the election. I digress with the challange once again of being honest with youself. Are we remotely better off than we were four years ago? Do you want to re-hire someone that could not deliver with previous promises? If you cannot answer these questions with little thought, you have your answer.
"Tell me, do you ever relinquish the role of right wing republican TOOL?"
I'll answer it anyway. I speak my mind, regardless of who thinks what about it. I am my own tool. One is known for what one does and what one says.
So are you.
"Doing better than four years ago?"
Some apparently are - if you consider a 32% increase in welfare spending over the past four years:
...and I never said YOU said the Rude Pundit wasn't a fan of Obama or his foreign policy. I simply made an observation about a source you chose to use which happened to bash Romney. I pointed out that this same source also recently bashed Obama. If you could get past your own agenda, you'd see that I was illustrating that the Rude Pundit is an equal opportunity basher.
Now that's PROGRESSIVE, isn't it?
Well Bro Sebe, I was using Compassionate Conservatism to point out what happens when one allows themself to be fooled by Republican lies.
And we have not been fooled be the Democrats lies?
Better off then 4 years ago.... Well how about just about the same. Furlough days. No pay raise at my job in 5 years. Military Retirement cost of living adjustments that are a joke. Property taxes went up... Now we wait until after the election to see what the budget disaster does to all of us.
Hi Jimmy: When I review the recent "social media" by the partisans, I don't see much "compassion" on either side.
But Dubya ran on that slogan undoubtedly to counter some slogan put up by the other side - although the only Al Gore "slogan" I can recall is "Lock Box." And more recent slogans have proven to be equally false - think: "Change We Can Believe In."
Anyhooo - neither side has cornered the market on "lies," that's for sure. But I'm tired of the old lies; let's see what some new lies bring as we move Forward toward Hope and Change.
As for taxes going up - they rarely seem to go any other way. That must be why a whole lot of people are "better off now than they were four years ago." Those folks now have what they really need to prosper in our society: cell phones, food stamps, and free access to birth control. They're out of work and record numbers have stopped looking for jobs, but they do have cell phones, food stamps and birth control - which they have the "freedom" to not actually use.
I guess that's what passes for a "compassionate" society nowadays....
There you go again. I never said anything about you - personally - being on the dole. Nor did I "blame society" for anything. I was commenting on Jimmy's comment. I believe what I said, and my beliefs are based on a lifetime of experiences. Sorry if my experiences aren't the same as yours, but that's life.
You always want tp take things personally - or perhaps you just come across that way in order to start arguments.
Lighten up. You'll live longer.
Ladies and Gentlemen: Welcome to the latest edition of "The Bickersons." (You can take THAT personally if you want.....)
....and Romney takes the lead in the Electoral College.
But can he HOLD it?
...but before I forget:
Our barbs were your ticket out
To that old sand box you got mad about
Well, the names haven’t changed
Since you hung around
And the blogs have remained
But they’ve turned around
Who'd have thought they'd lead ya
(Who'd have thought they'd lead ya)
Back here where we need ya
(Back here where we need ya)
Yeah we tease ya a lot
‘Cause we like ya on the spot
Welcome back, welcome back, welcome back
I got ya Murr! This means your whole family's on "WELFARE" and you all live under the same roof! Si...
Seb, Murr...into the Thunderdome. 2 enter, 1 leave. Whoever is the winner, their candidate gets to be President. Anyone giving odds?
Well Murrelet your full of BS.
I happen to be a Democrat and voted that way last time, Not this time.
My military retirement is ok, not great and I worked and gave up a lot for it. My last pay raise on my retirement was $21 a month. As far as my full time job goes, no pay raise, but furlough days, meaning pay cuts.
I have the lowest cell phone plan I can get, and no home phone. I can't get a FREE phone that I am paying for, because I make too much.
At least, I had more sense not to buy land in the Sand Hills. I love my quite neighborhood. "GRAMMER QUEEN". BOOM BOOM BOOM BOOM...
Why do people on here take personal jabs at people that comment on these blogs? Is that the intent to make people who lashes out with personal jabs feel better about themselves? Why can't we as muture adults just simply stick to the subject matter, and debate on that issue at hand? Personal jabs are being thrown out here as if you personally know these people who are commenting here on this site. We can agree to disagree can't we? Lets make this a fair argument without sending out personal jabs or insults toward each other.
"Why do people on here take personal jabs at people that comment on these blogs?"
Sporty: Thanks for giving the opportunity to be more sanctimonious. As you've noticed, the "people on here" are essentially one. And the answer (I'm afraid) is that they just can't help it. And like automobile accidents and plane/train wrecks, some are fascinated by the chaos created by the "dust-ups," but that's neither here nor there.
I've taken it upon myself to try to defuse the dust-ups as best I can, especially when I am involved. I guess that makes me a "hypocrite" (in the Bizarro World).
The "jabs" are actually tantamount to blog hijacks. If everybody would focus on debating IDEAS and not personal provocation, we wouldn't have the dust-ups, right? It's just a matter of trying to disagree without being disagreeable. But that doesn't come natural to everybody. In those case, one has to work at it. One has to WANT to treat others and their opinions with respect. It involves the application of The Golden Rule. For "mature adults," you would think that wouldn't be too difficult. But when you see "mature adults" in action during road rage incidents or while spectating at sporting events, it makes you wonder where the maturity of adults in our society has gone.
Some DO seem to make it a habit of trying to elevate themselves by denigrating others. It's the new national pastime, don'tcha know? We see it all around us every day, and at the highest levels of our government. We've seen it most recently on television during those scrums called the Presidential and Vice Presidential debates.
President Barack Obama has racked up such a huge debt that Americans have been forced to concede that even Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was right when he warned that America could potentially collapse due to its mounting debt.
I think Osama bin Laden was quoted as saying he was trying to disrupt - even bankrupt - the United States in two ways: substantial attacks on our financial centers (i.e., New York City), and by causing us to spend huge amounts of money on homeland security. By racking up an additional four trillion dollars worth of debt over the past four years, our government only contributes to the "collapse" that has been the goal of al Qaeda and Ahmadinejad.
The last debate is about foriegn policy, should not be hard for Romney to denote:
- Lost respect and credibility
- Middle East fiasco, cannot blame on Bush anymore as he has had four years!
Need I say more....
I will be off of the airwaves all next week as I am taking my beloved wife to the mountains to get back to nature... not Ned Beatty style mind ya! Have a great week and go Romney!!!
My Gaaawwwwwwd, Holla!!! 55 to NOTHING!!!???
I cannot in my memory regarding BI football losing to ANYBODY by that margin. It could be the worst loss in BI history.
"Sporty: Thanks for giving the opportunity to be more sanctimonious. As you've noticed, the "people on here" are essentially one. And the answer (I'm afraid) is that they just can't help it. And like automobile accidents and plane/train wrecks, some are fascinated by the chaos created by the "dust-ups," but that's neither here nor there."
You are right sebekm. But you know,it is very distasteful, and very juvenille when you take personal attacks on people just because you don't see eye to eye. That is not a good, and fair debate. Hitting below the belt will get you attention, but attention in a negative light. People should just stick to the subject matter and fairly debate on the issue.
I heard about the hammering Bradwell Institute got from the hands of Glynn Academy. To lose in that fashion is down right embarassing. If Coach Walsh is not ashamed, then I am ashamed for him. He really need to step down for the good of Bradwell Institute. I said that approximately 3 years ago. What will it take for Walsh to steo down? Complete meltdown of the Football Program? Right now, this program is in disaster mode. It is in serious shambles, and while he is there, I will say that the he, and the program are incorrigible.
To get a new coach, they program will have be demolished, and rebuilt from the ground up. I said a couple of years ago that Bradwell Institute have a lot of talent, but they don't want to play for Walsh or have anything to do with him.
The current players that Bradwell Institute have (GOD Bles their Herats and Soul) look like Junior Varsity Players. We need a new coach with a new direction, and vision to bring Bradwell Institute Back to prominence.
The time is ticking......
Jimmy D, GolfNut31316, sebekm, Iknowyou, HMJC, and Hollabackk,
I do think that Bradwell have ever lost at home 55-0 in it's school history. Quite Embarrassing.
Bradwell may have lost that bad in the very early days before Delargy during Rigdon's tenure as coach.
Perhaps in a game or two with Claxton in the early fifties.
As far as I can remember, (60's) Bradwell Institute has "NEVER" lost at home by that margin. This the very first that I know of in it's history.
Embarrassing at the very least...
...but back on the debates:
It's interesting that this HUGE story hits the news two days AFTER the last debate, sparing the President from having to explain those 10 days after the attack when the WH was orchestrating its "spontaneous demonstration" cover-up:
The Republicans are going to make some hay with this one.