L.A. Times Does Its Part to Lower Debate Expectations for Obama
As everyone knows, part of the silly game campaigns play in debate season is to lower expectations. That way, they believe, they can claim a “win” when their candidate does “surprisingly” well.
And the editors of the L.A. Times are doing their part:
The New York Times has also done its part:
Mr. Romney’s team has concluded that debates are about creating moments and has equipped him with a series of zingers that he has memorized and has been practicing on aides since August. His strategy includes luring the president into appearing smug or evasive about his responsibility for the economy.
Mr. Obama is not particularly fluid in sound bites, so his team is aiming for a workmanlike performance like his speech at the Democratic convention. He is looking to show that Mr. Romney would drive the country in an extreme ideological direction at odds with the interests of the middle class.
Let’s translate that. If Obama does not come off particularly well, no big deal — the poor guy just isn’t great with the sound bites. Meanwhile, if Romney gets off a good line, that’s nothing to brag about — after all, they’re all prepackaged “zingers” he’s been practicing forever.
Most importantly: if Obama gets off a “zinger” of his own? That will prove it was spontaneous, and that he is brilliant . . . because, unlike Romney, he hasn’t been practicing these things on his aides.
Riiiiight.
The “zingers” bit also gives Obama the chance to play Adult in the Room:
“I know folks in the media are speculating already on who’s going to have the best zingers,” Mr. Obama said, suggesting that he would not be supplying them.
See? He gets his talking points straight from the New York Times article. And the poor dear hasn’t had time to practice because of the crushing responsibilities of his office:
As the candidates prepare, the first trick for Mr. Obama is finding time. His rehearsals have started late and ended early because of events like the tumult in the Middle East. He showed up at one practice just after speaking at a ceremony for the four Americans killed in Libya, and aides found that his mind was elsewhere.
“The ability to find solid blocks of time to do nothing but prepare for debate is almost impossible for a president,” said Dan Pfeiffer, the White House communications director. “The world doesn’t wait for debate prep.”
Awwwwww. How about all those fundraisers? Those have a way of interfering with debate prep — and meeting foreign leaders, too!
Big Media makes me sick. I hope the American public can look past all this utter horse[expletive deleted] and focus on the actual debate.
The worst part is, Mitt Romney actually does kinda suck at this stuff. Remember the $10,000 bet?
Patterico (83033d) — 10/1/2012 @ 7:38 amSo… let me get this straight. a guy who owes his presidency about 90% to a supposedly awesome speech in 2004, is saying he ain’t so good at the talking?
So… why did democrats elect him in 2008? it certainly wasn’t his experience. or his depth of knowledge. or…?
This is just sad.
Aaron "Worthing" Walker (23789b) — 10/1/2012 @ 7:49 amUm uh huh um mmm uh huh let me be clear in huh huh uh um huh uh uh huh it has always been my position uh huh uh uh um mmmm huh inherited worst fiscal crisis uh huh um huh uh uh um mmmm fair share um huh uh uh mmmm uh huh uh
JD (ab8eee) — 10/1/2012 @ 7:50 amAaron has a good point.
I thought Obama was such a gifted politician and public speaker and lecturer that he would overcome his amazing lack of experience.
Thing is, Obama actually is a talented public speaker if he’s on the prompter. I think most viewers won’t cut him a lot of slack even when he’s off it.
There’s a real potential for Romney to draw gaffes out of Obama by holding him accountable for his promises and our economy. Obama’s smoothless requires a careful production that is hard to get in a debate.
Dustin (73fead) — 10/1/2012 @ 7:55 amHis rehearsals have started late and ended early because of events like the tumult in the Middle East. He showed up at one practice just after speaking at a ceremony for the four Americans killed in Libya, and aides found that his mind was elsewhere.
I love that, because that is the one and only presidential thing Obama has done in the past 10 months.
MayBee (c4effe) — 10/1/2012 @ 8:03 amThis is the only transparent thing from the Administration in 4 years. A transparent ploy, that is. I personally feel that O’Bumbles is a master (de)bater.
dfbaskwill (ca54bb) — 10/1/2012 @ 8:16 am#3 Sounds like my everyday discussion with my wife.
Rodney King's Spirit (9ce6d4) — 10/1/2012 @ 8:20 amLook, David Carr’s article in the NYT assures us there is no media bias and that it’s all in the heads of whiny Republicans, and that pointing it out (which you really can’t because it doesn’t exist…)certainly doesn’t help Romney, so clearly you’re just imagining things in this LAT post.
Dana (292dcf) — 10/1/2012 @ 8:30 am#8, Why a circle of Conservative investors can’t raise $1 billion dollars and buy these “turnaround” opportunities is beyond me.
Probably better off doing that than spending billions of campaign donations where 95% of the vote is already locked in.
Rodney King's Spirit (9ce6d4) — 10/1/2012 @ 8:39 amIf Obama whines – hes done
If Obama Blames – he’s done
If Romney can land one punch, one solid punch – Obama’s done.
McCain’s Mistake in debating Obama was that he whined louder than Barack did.
Romney needs to not whine – to be forceful and clear even simplistic.
One solid punch and all the Kings horses-a$$es in the media are going down with him
I see a sea change in the ownership of the media and the supervision of the network and cable news.
Advertizers are realizing that the 47% also have no spending power yet they advertise their goods on stations that cater only to those 47%.
As you are all aware things move painfully slowly yet the MSM has gone soo further overboard that I’m predicting several of the most horrid left vapidheads are going to get the Olby treatment in 2013.
And I dont think they will be replaced with same-same.
EPWJ (8a4ca7) — 10/1/2012 @ 8:42 amHis rehearsals have started late and ended early because of events like the tumult in the Middle East. He showed up at one practice just after speaking at a ceremony for the four Americans killed in Libya, and aides found that his mind was elsewhere.
He showed up at another practice several days after speaking at a ceremony for the four Americans killed in Libya, and aides found that his mind was still elsewhere.
MayBee (c4effe) — 10/1/2012 @ 9:06 amHe showed up at another practice, several weeks before four Americans were killed in Libya, and aides found that his mind was elsewhere.
MayBee (c4effe) — 10/1/2012 @ 9:08 amObama showed up at one practice just after being reminded he had missed intelligence briefings for several weeks, and aides found that his mind was elsewhere.
MayBee (c4effe) — 10/1/2012 @ 9:25 am“Workmanlike” is a pretty low bar to set.
Yaaaah! Everybody gets a ribbon!
Pious Agnostic (7c3d5b) — 10/1/2012 @ 9:38 amWant to bet the leader of the Free World doesn’t flip off his opponent as he did Hill?
Respect the office? Not a chance.
gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 10/1/2012 @ 9:39 am10. Epiphany?
gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 10/1/2012 @ 9:41 amObjective news analysis from Fact Checkers reveals that a ‘Golf Off’ is a more reasonable debate forum than one where economic and foreign policy matters are discussed without Teleprompters.
Next, a special report from ‘Oh, THAT Conservative Media!’ reveals that MSNBC and CNN are openly shilling for Satanist Mitt Romney.
Dustin (73fead) — 10/1/2012 @ 9:44 amMcCain was going through the motions, by the first debate, as per Schmidt and Wallace’s advice.
narciso (ee31f1) — 10/1/2012 @ 9:49 amRomney and Ryan will need to be prepared to make their own opportunities for major strikes in spite of the moderators.
Perhaps Romney should get sick at the last minute and have Ryan step in. That would shake the one’s cool composure.
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 10/1/2012 @ 10:28 amThe media is ignoring Obama’s record of the past four years. No questioning. Now we have Univision doing the heavy lifting. Too bad we can’t have Univision do the debate moderating.
AZ Bob (7d2a2c) — 10/1/2012 @ 11:08 amObama spent our parents money and our children’s money. Next year he will spend our grandchildren’s money. 44 cents out of every dollar he spends is borrowed. Every food stamp applicant,immigration applicant, student loan applicant, mortgage applicant, free phone applicant, every green subsidy applicant, everyone benefits.Free money for all and interest for none.
Unattorney (a8af0a) — 10/1/2012 @ 11:19 amAs the candidates prepare, the first trick for Mr. Obama is finding time. His rehearsals have started late and ended early because of events like the tumult in the Middle East.
— This is true. Going to bed and doing nothing about the Middle East DOES take away precious debate prep-time.
He showed up at one practice just after speaking at a ceremony for the four Americans killed in Libya, and aides found that his mind was elsewhere.
Icy (726345) — 10/1/2012 @ 11:20 am— Years of hangin’ wit da Choom Gang will do that to you. But that’s okay . . . just a bump in the road.
Racists.
Icy (726345) — 10/1/2012 @ 11:21 amIt would be poetic justice if those conservative investors just pillaged the companies, sold off the assets, and shipped all those media jobs off to the newspaper equivalent of a call center in India.
Like those papers are always accusing conservative investors like Romney of doing.
Steve57 (c8ac21) — 10/1/2012 @ 11:37 amYou guys do realize that these papers and networks already have their stories about how the forceful, knowledgeable, dynamic master orator Obama beat the pants off of the floundering, pathetic, gaffe-stricken and sweating Romney, right?
Based upon the idea that so few people will actually watch.
They may not use them, but they have those ready to go.
Steve57 (c8ac21) — 10/1/2012 @ 11:40 amJust like ABC ‘goes back on their head’ and proffers Nicole Wallace and George Stephanopoulos
narciso (ee31f1) — 10/1/2012 @ 11:59 amas proper analysts, complete with clip from ‘Julianne’s Bender’ aka Game Change.
PPP is today tilling the soil of comeback for Romany. NC on the tenterhooks and Willard within a couple in OH.
Right. Urkel is advertising with abandon in WA and MD? He’s trying to avoid McGovern’s fate.
gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 10/1/2012 @ 12:00 pmFor anyone looking for proof that throwing money at a problem doesn’t always solve it, and that legalizing narcotics is probably not the way to go:
Amanda Clayton, who caused a stir by continuing to take food stamps after winning the state lottery’s $1 million Make Me Rich! game show, has died of a possible drug overdose, police said Saturday.
Clayton was found dead by police at about 9 a.m. at a home in Ecorse, Ecorse police Sgt. Cornelius Herring said.
No further details were released by police.
Clayton was propelled into the spotlight after a local news outlet learned she had won the game show in September 2011 but continued to take welfare benefits. At the time, she said she was entitled to the payments because she still needed help.
She was charged by Michigan Attorney General Bill Schuette with felony welfare fraud and was sentenced to nine months of probation in late July. She was also ordered to repay the roughly $5,500 in food and medical assistance she received after winning the windfall.
Icy (726345) — 10/1/2012 @ 12:10 pmI see some poll improvement today for Romney. Just in time to take it away after the debates. You see folks, Romney was starting to do so well and then the debate happened and he got blown away by all the awesomeness of Teh One.
PC14 (87cbf8) — 10/1/2012 @ 12:11 pmhttp://legalinsurrection.com/2012/10/elizabeth-warren-2005-assists-on-paper-regarding-unauthorized-practice-of-law/
narciso (ee31f1) — 10/1/2012 @ 12:17 pmIsn’t Teh Won the greatest speaker EVAH?!
JD (318f81) — 10/1/2012 @ 12:32 pmYou’d think if President “You didn’t build that” really was the greatest speaker ever he wouldn’t need a cast of thousands to help explain what Barack “Polish death camps” actually meant to say when he said of Egypt, designated as one of the original major non-NATO allies back in the ’80s, that he didn’t think it was an ally.
But the same crowd that has to run around fixing everything that comes out his mouth that isn’t put in it by a teleprompter, and many things that are, also insists he’s the greatest speaker the world has ever known.
Mind bending.
Steve57 (c8ac21) — 10/1/2012 @ 1:19 pmThis was just posted over at Instapundit at 4:36 p.m. ET, so I hadn’t read it when I wrote comment #25. But it isn’t like the thought I expressed in that comment isn’t a glaringly obvious thought to have about the thundering “jason blair” herd that is the propaganda wing of the Democratic-media complex:
Here’s a link to the actual opinion piece in US News & World Report.
Steve57 (c8ac21) — 10/1/2012 @ 1:43 pmI don’t think zingers, by which I think they mean one-liners, are the way to go for Romney. And if he lets loose a whole bunch of them that would invite a media narrative that he was mean spirited, desperate blah blah blah.
Romney’s got such a target rich environment. Very forceful ARGUMENTS which strongly imply Obama isn’t honest and that he’s not in the political mainstream are what I’d be focusing on. They would also be harder to dismiss by the Obama spinners in the media than zingers if they were done the right way.
If zingers are what he and his team have been focusing a lot of their time on I think they don’t know what they’re doing. I could see maybe doing one as a counter punch to some anticipated Obama line.
Gerald A (f26857) — 10/1/2012 @ 2:16 pmSteve57, when I read your earlier comment I had just come from Insty’s and read that same USN&WR piece. I was going to link to it, but you beat me.
Everyone should read it so that they can see exactly what we will be facing on Thursday morning.
Pious Agnostic (2c3220) — 10/1/2012 @ 2:19 pmRomney knows how to talk. Ryan even better.
So does Obama, if his handlers would just unloose him from the teleprompter.
nk (875f57) — 10/1/2012 @ 2:21 pmI like one-liners if they relate to the issues and are truthful, and I hope Romney uses several. I’m sure Obama will have some, although they may not be truthful.
Good one-liners help us remember where the candidates stand on the issues and can be memorable. They can define the election.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 10/1/2012 @ 2:31 pmJust ask him about the deaths of Mexicans at the hands of Fast & Furious guns, hundreds of Mexicans.
Then ask him why his administration was supplying guns to South & Central-American cartels through the FL offices of ATF, Chicago street gangs, and cartels and gangs along both sides of the Mexico-Texas Border?
I’m sure he has some pre-packaged “zingers” ready to deflect those questions (except he failed to use them with Univision).
AD-Restore the Republic/Obama Sucks! (b8ab92) — 10/1/2012 @ 2:50 pmComment by nk — 10/1/2012 @ 2:21 pm
Without TOTUS, he stumbles more than a drunk trying to not trip over chalk lines on a football field.
AD-Restore the Republic/Obama Sucks! (b8ab92) — 10/1/2012 @ 2:52 pmI enjoyed the dripping sarcasm in the US News and World Report “pre-review” of the debate which was linked above. Will the people he skewers (but whose names have been changed to protect the author) recognize themselves I wonder?
elissa (e05d64) — 10/1/2012 @ 2:52 pmelissa,
Good question, and no, I don’t think they will. They completely lack the necessary self-awareness …which makes it all the more significant. This is a precious group who do not laugh easily at themselves, let alone see themselves as deserving any sort of criticism or mockery in the least.
Dana (292dcf) — 10/1/2012 @ 2:58 pmRomney should admit that the $3m in taxes he paid in 2011 is too low – since it doesnt begin to cover the taxpayer cost of Michelle’s vacations
Joe-Dallas (a00dc1) — 10/1/2012 @ 3:10 pmPA, another article I recommend is Hugh Hewitt’s at the Washington Examiner, “Obama’s poker tells.”
Some of it is very a much “A Reading From The Book Of Obvious,” but it’s still worthwhile.
Based upon it, some other articles I’ve read, and my own observations I’m pretty sure how the “Dewey Beats Truman” style reporting is going to go.
Obama, as nk observes, knows how to talk. What he doesn’t know is how to talk straight or even talk seriously. So he talks a lot. The further he wants to stay away from the truth, the more he talks. About anything. He obfuscates. As Hewitt points out, this is why he hems, haws, uhmms, and ahs, his way through his answers. He loses track of where he started, just what he said, and has real trouble figuring out how to “land the plane anywhere near where it took off.”
This is why he’s a poor off the cuff speaker, because he’s a poor off the cuff thinker. That being the case this style does several things for him. It burns time. The longer of an answer he gives, the fewer questions he can be asked in the available time. In a debate, it also means the opponent into whose time he’s eating will have less time to respond. And, hopefully from Obama’s point of view, more things to respond to since Obama just vomited so much.
As an aside, as Obama rambles on Hewitt notes he’ll be daring Romney to try to interrupt him as he goes way over time. Hewitt says he’ll also be daring the moderator. PBS’s Jim Lehrer? Who’s Hewitt trying to kid? I wouldn’t be surprised if Lehrer moderates the entire thing while on his knees under Obama’s podium, “Police Academy” style, and every once in a while just pokes his head out to say, “Governor Romney, your response?”
But make no mistake. Obama’s long-winded stream-of-consciousness babbling will be oohed, ahhed, and gushed over in the press as “professorial” and “substantive.” Any concise, on-point responses Romney gives? Oh, those. Those are just “well-practiced zingers.”
I hope Romney does stand his ground on time. Obama will get all pissy like the thin-skinned adolescent prom queen he is. I also hopes Romney calls Obama out on his lies. For instance, people hope that hot on the heels of that Univision/ABC report on F&F Romney brings up Obama’s gun-running scandal so it gets even wider exposure. If he does, Obama will lie and say it started under Bush.
The press, other than a few people like Jake Tapper, let him get away with it. Romney can’t. He needs to point out that even Eric Holder has been forced to acknowledge in testimony before Congress that the Bush-era program Wide Receiver was very different from the Obama admin’s program F&F and was conducted with the Mexican government’s cooperation, not hidden from them, and most importantly did not let guns walk.
And perhaps Romney needs to ask if the only way you can get people in the Obama administration to admit the truth is to put them, like Holder, under oath so they’re afraid of going to prison for perjury?
I think that’d tie in nicely with the recent serial, inept lies the Obama admin has been telling about Libya. And yes, Romney needs to go there, too.
At the very least it should create enough sparks that enough people will watch debates 2 & 3 that the media will be afraid to lie about how well Obama did.
Steve57 (c8ac21) — 10/1/2012 @ 3:20 pm____________________________________________
Now we have Univision doing the heavy lifting.
It’s odd how a Spanish-language network that’s undertaking merely basic, objective reporting in its dealings with Obama seems an outlier and therefore elicits a bit of surprise from various onlookers accustomed to the passive, sycophantic coverage of the English-language part of the MSM. That, all by itself, illustrates just how bad things are in the world of media. How much bias is careening through the newsrooms, hallways and offices of the MSM, chock full of a variety of latte liberals.
Speaking of which, look at a snippet of this article — of this bilge — posted very recently to CBS.com:
Mark (6d5e0d) — 10/1/2012 @ 3:33 pmThere’s only one thing Romney has to do for me: call Obama a failure to his face. And he has to use the word, no euphemisms. Only then will I know who is ahead and who is behind.
East Bay Jay (a5dac7) — 10/1/2012 @ 4:19 pmbetter yet, Romney should channel his inner moron and call Obumbles a SCOAMF.
that would be awesome.
redc1c4 (403dff) — 10/1/2012 @ 4:26 pmwhat would be even better than that would be for our First Failure to take credit for something, and Mitt’s reply be “You didn’t build that…”
THAT would be epic and awesome both. JEFHs head would explode as his pathetic little brain tried to conjure up some sort of coherent reply.
redc1c4 (403dff) — 10/1/2012 @ 4:30 pmI guess I hate to agree with so much of the MSM, but I concur that Romney has to be careful to avoid the appearance of complaining about Obama or his acolytes in the media. Remember how they all got their panties in a bunch four years ago when McCain referred to Obama as “that one”? No doubt they are waiting for just such a moment so that they can shake their collective heads ruefully about how “mean-spirited and angry” Republicans have become, and how there are subtle hints of racism in everything that pertains to opposition to Obama.
JVW (2d0e26) — 10/1/2012 @ 4:35 pm“Barry, you’re a SCOAMF! MITT OUT!”
Boom! Mike hits the stage.
Pious Agnostic (2c3220) — 10/1/2012 @ 4:44 pmThis is why he’s a poor off the cuff speaker, because he’s a poor off the cuff thinker.
Steve, I don’t know if he’s really a poor off the cuff thinker, or if it is that he has too many versions of stories he tells to different audiences at different times and he has a hard time keeping it all straight. It’s easier to think off the cuff when you have principles you aren’t afraid to say and views that are consistent. (Wait, are these people bitter clingers, or the people I was talking to about the bitter clingers?)
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 10/1/2012 @ 4:47 pmHey, America… haven’t we seen more than enough of this sh*theel’s false humility? For the life of me, I never will understand what the empty suit 0bama inspires. Just nauseated at the mere sight of him.
Colonel Haiku (c9aabc) — 10/1/2012 @ 5:08 pmHillary usually did better than Obama in the 2008 Democratic primary debates. Nobody cared.
DN (d1a4f3) — 10/1/2012 @ 5:10 pmA few of you have nailed it. When 0bama is even slightly challenged or asked what would otherwise be thought to be relevant questions, he grows annoyed and somewhat petulant. He has grown so accustomed to being fawned over and treated with kid gloves that he doesn’t seem to know how to respond.
I want to see Romney get under his skin and I want to see it more than once.
Colonel Haiku (c9aabc) — 10/1/2012 @ 5:15 pmOur economy in tatters, tens of millions are either unemployed, underemployed or have grown so despondent and dispirited they’ve given up even looking for a job, the Middle East in an uproar, our military coming home in body bags with nary a notice given by the lapdog media and this incompetent buffoon of a playtime president laughing as he zips from one fundraising campaign event to the next.
This man and his fellow incompetent democrat politicians must be defeated.
Colonel Haiku (c9aabc) — 10/1/2012 @ 5:21 pmGoddam that buffoon!
Colonel Haiku (c9aabc) — 10/1/2012 @ 5:22 pmPush Calls Ask: ‘How Can You Support a Mormon?’…
http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/peter-roff/2012/09/27/obama-supporters-dirty-tricks-to-win-the-catholic-vote
slimy tactics from slimy, slithering, scum-sucking people.
Colonel Haiku (c9aabc) — 10/1/2012 @ 5:25 pm“I want to see Romney get under his skin and I want to see it more than once.”
Colonel – I’d like to see Romney nail him on Voter ID. Ask if he has the same views as his attorney general. I don’t think Obama is on record on the subject.
On the rebuttal Mitt can quote some of more outrageous racial statements Holder has made about it. Public support, including minority support, for voter ID, and large numbers of dead people on voter rolls in various states and ask why Democrats aren’t in favor of fair elections and getting people ID rather than demagoguing the issue.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 10/1/2012 @ 5:39 pmThat’ll work, daley.
Colonel Haiku (c9aabc) — 10/1/2012 @ 5:45 pmDoc @#50,
I think Obama is a capable public speaker, and capable of thinking on his feet, when he believes he can be unguarded about what he really thinks.
But that isn’t the neatly packaged product that was marketed and sold to the American people. He doesn’t really have a lot of stories to keep straight. He has what he really believes, which he’s supposed to conceal, and the approved-for-public-consumption narrative that his handlers have carefully crafted for him.
When he has trouble speaking, and thinking, off-the-cuff is when he’s trying to remain “in role” as the non-ideological dispassionate pragmatic centrist.
The lines that go with that role don’t come naturally to him. When he starts stumbling, uhmming and ahhing, you can almost see the wheels turning. It’s as if, and he quit likely is, trying to think, “what would the character I’m playing say in this situation.”
As an aside, this is why actors who play roles often remain in character when they’re off the set as well. It makes that sort of thing easier.
I also believe that’s why Obama keeps harping on his conception of the role of a President. The President’s role, he claims, is to articulate a vision. To tell a story. I believe that’s what his handlers convinced him it consists of. It’s why he leaves it up the the Congressional Democrats to pound out the details why he plays golf or jets of to New York on a date night with Michelle. His job is done.
It’s also why he acts like it’s absurd to expect him to show up for his daily intelligence briefing. He’s not going to actually use the information. That’s Valerie Jarrett’s job in this theatrical production. And why he, gobsmackingly, refuses to take responsibility for statements his own executive branch departments put out in his name as official US policy.
He’s not a chief executive. His job is to play one on TV. He reminds me of a front man for a band like Milli Vanilli (there’s a blast from the past); lip synching to what someone else recorded back in the studio.
I’m not saying he isn’t intelligent, although I don’t believe he’s nearly as intelligent as his PR flacks in the press would have you believe. Nor that he isn’t talented.
I mean, it did take talent for those two jokers to get away with that Milli Vanilli hoax for all those years, didn’t it?
Steve57 (c8ac21) — 10/1/2012 @ 5:48 pmColonel Haiku, I like the fire in the belly !
I’ll take that hill, Sir, just give the command—(in haiku, preferably) !
Elephant Stone (65d289) — 10/1/2012 @ 5:57 pmTrue he knows what Bell, De Unger, Ogletree, taught him backwards and forwards, the problem is he can’t publically say he doesn’t believe in the law.
narciso (ee31f1) — 10/1/2012 @ 6:11 pmwould be nice to wipe
Colonel Haiku (c9aabc) — 10/1/2012 @ 6:17 pmarrogant smirk off Zer0
send it to Vegas
‘the law is for little people, or maybe just Republican Presidents
http://michellemalkin.com/2012/10/01/lockheed-obama-layoff/
narciso (ee31f1) — 10/1/2012 @ 6:19 pmI’d like to see Romney gut Obama like a fish over the recent Libya fiasco, and the pathetic and dishonest administration public response.
I’ve mentioned before that the insulting thing about this administration isn’t that it lies. It’s the low quality of the lies. But on the storming of our embassies and the murder of our staff and contractors they’ve sunk to a new low in ineptitude. It wasn’t that they came up with a story, and later information came out that blew their cover. This time they came up with a story that came with a cover that was pre-blown, that’s how bad it was.
The best part (if any part of this national disgrace can be called “best”) is that it dovetails with the ridiculous WH assertion that it’s OK for Obama to skip his daily briefings because he’s so sophisticated he can just read what the agencies are saying.
And now the developing cover is that what the admin was putting out was based upon what the
Steve57 (c8ac21) — 10/1/2012 @ 6:19 pm_______________________________________________
It’s easier to think off the cuff when you have principles you aren’t afraid to say and views that are consistent.
That’s why I wish he’d drop the facade and let his true, inner-self come out. I wish he’d reveal to the onlooking public the real Obama, the real ultra-liberal — brimming with all the arrogance and ego he’s known for.
I’d like to see him use the preacher-man, in-da-hood dialect that he’s displayed on occasion, or similar to the voice used by Al Gore during his notorious red-faced sermons.
Mark (6d5e0d) — 10/1/2012 @ 6:21 pmI remember a particular dynamic in the 2000 debates between Bush & The Ozone Man.
The Ozone Man kept referring to The Dingell-Norwood Bill, and it was clear Bush didn’t have a clue what that was. Understandably so, since Bush was a governor, and The Ozone Man was entrenched in national legislative issues for decades, having grown up in DC with his
segregationistSenator Father.Anyhow, I think The Ozone Man’s deliberative strategy in all of that was to refer to nuances of legislative activities that he knew Bush would have no clue about, so as to manipulate the “undecided” voters to “see” that he, The Ozone Man, was a genius, while Bush was not a genius. (Never mind that the undecided voters sitting at home watching on tv had no idea what the Dingell-Norwood Bill was, either.)
I think Romney should adopt a similar strategy by speaking about the nuances of a particular aspect of the financial markets, or an economic theory. Obama doesn’t know jack about that stuff, and it may illuminate for undecided voters sitting at home on their couches that this Romney fellow knows his stuff in contrast to “Uh, umm, well, let me be clear, make no mistake, uh, rich people, fairness, ummm, uh, inherited, Joooos, uh, zzzzzzz.”
Elephant Stone (65d289) — 10/1/2012 @ 6:21 pmColonel, well played.
Elephant Stone (65d289) — 10/1/2012 @ 6:24 pmAnd keep in mind the famous tv commercial of a few years back…hopefully if he goes to Vegas, he will stay in Vegas.
An ironic thing about that bill;
http://lobby.la.psu.edu/001_Managed_Care_Reform/Organizational_Statements/HBC/HBC_New_Dingell-Norwood_Bill_Exposes_Employers_To_Even_Broader_Liability.htm
narciso (ee31f1) — 10/1/2012 @ 6:27 pmexcellent points in #66, stones!
Colonel Haiku (c9aabc) — 10/1/2012 @ 6:37 pmOptical mouse misfire. I was typing along, and it broke me off midstream. I hate this thing.
I was just going to conclude that the Obama admin’s defense which is shaping up is that they were not lying but relaying what the intelligence agencies were giving them.
That’s why sophisticated consumers of intelligence attend briefings. So they can ask probing questions, and just don’t mindlessly accept what intel offers. Sophisticated consumers of intel, like aviators or SEALs, treat the opportunity as if their life depends upon it. Which it often does. Obama treats the PDB as a waste of a good tee time.
If I were Romney, I’d raise the issue. When the pathetic Obama tries to absolve himself of blame and shift it to intel, I’d go into something like, “Mr. President, I thought you were a sophisticated consumer of intelligence? That’s what your spokesmen say? But sophisticated consumers of intel attend these briefings because when they read or listen to these things, they raise intelligent questions in their minds that need to be asked?”
Then I’d list all the questions the WH obfuscations have raised. Starting with the stupid assertion that there was no actionable intelligence. Really? All our allies have closed their consulates in Benghazi because they had actionable intelligence. Didn’t he think to ask, when he was fed that line, why then had all other western nations including the Brits already pulled their people out?
Or, I’d bring up, do the Brits no longer share their intel with us ever since his WH was so eager to spike the football over capturing the underwear bomber that they blew the cover of their operative who made the whole thing possible?
‘British’ Double Agent Foiled Plane Bomb Plot
This guy, Obama needs to be raked over the coals for his numerous and successful assaults on the security of this nation. And this is Romney’s chance to remind the voters just what a disaster he is.
Steve57 (c8ac21) — 10/1/2012 @ 6:37 pmSo y’all want Romney to be mean, disrespectful, and politicize the deaths of Amerixans. Gotcha.
JD (ab8eee) — 10/1/2012 @ 6:43 pmMore like ‘Administration burned Saudi asset, then claimed credit’
narciso (ee31f1) — 10/1/2012 @ 6:44 pmObama’s entire presidency has been mean, insulting, and has politicized everything to include his own daughters (that’s why he couldn’t meet with the GOP to negotiate a budget deal).
If it’s racist or whatever to talk about what a debacle his entire presidency has been, what’s left to raise at the debates?
Steve57 (c8ac21) — 10/1/2012 @ 6:50 pmBy the way, Colonel, I found a clip at YouTube, low and behold. Gore asks Bush about the Dingell-Norwood Bill twice in this clip. It includes the famous scene where Gore creepily walked too closely toward Bush when Bush was speaking—and so Bush turns, looks at Gore, then nods. Check it out…it’s less than a minute long.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oAUcyfKESts&feature=related
Elephant Stone (65d289) — 10/1/2012 @ 6:55 pmFor that to happen the moderator has to bring it up in the first place.
I’m expecting a bunch of “When did you stop beating your wife” questions directed at Romney.
Something like,
Then there’ll be something about Romney proposing tax cuts for the rich when he only paid 13% tax rate etc. etc. I’m not sure there’ll be a single question on unemployment, the rising cost of energy, etc.
I hope the Romney team sees that stuff coming but I’m not sure they do. I don’t get the feeling that bunch is good at anticipating things. I also doubt Romney has a plan to bring up the economy if they keep asking about other stuff. If they do avoid those topics then at a minimum he not only should bring it up himself but also draw attention to the fact that they didn’t ask about it in his closing remarks. I think Newt would do that. While I wasn’t a big Newt fan I’d feel better about having him in the debate.
Gerald A (f26857) — 10/1/2012 @ 7:05 pmRomney may have some room to manuever…
format for 10/3 is: Domestic Policy…
“The debate will focus on domestic policy and be divided into six time segments of approximately 15 minutes each on topics to be selected by the moderator and announced several weeks before the debate.
The moderator will open each segment with a question, after which each candidate will have two minutes to respond. The moderator will use the balance of the time in the segment for a discussion of the topic.”
Colonel Haiku (77c4c2) — 10/1/2012 @ 7:11 pmlol… that smarmy, wooden, lithping Gore. Yeah, I remember that idiotic move, stones. This may have been before that loopy Naomi Wolf ordered Big Al to wear the brown, “earth” tones.
Colonel Haiku (77c4c2) — 10/1/2012 @ 7:16 pmOne thing you will not see is Romney grabbing 0bama by those jug ears and giving him a good skull f*ckin’…
Colonel Haiku (77c4c2) — 10/1/2012 @ 7:21 pmAlthough 0bama deserves it more than any politician alive…
Colonel Haiku (77c4c2) — 10/1/2012 @ 7:22 pmObama’s Achilles heel is his thin-skin, opened to attack by arrogant ignorance.
What Romany has to do is cut the bastard good on a few of myriad flaws when the opportunity presents.
Newt believes he is more than capable. I’d say Steve57 isn’t far off, he simply has to do so bloodlessly.
If he gets StepInIt pissed Indies will be revulsed. He’s got nothing but badass bluster to hand out.
gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 10/1/2012 @ 7:25 pmWell if you saw the agonizing Warren/Brown debate, tonight, that’s sort of what it will be like, David
narciso (ee31f1) — 10/1/2012 @ 7:26 pmGregory was the moderator ‘for reason’s passing understanding’
Good heavens, Tony Romo…
Elephant Stone (65d289) — 10/1/2012 @ 7:31 pmWhat happened with the Brown-Warren debate, narciso? Was it agonizing merely because Warren and Gregory were involved, or did Brown mess up?
elissa (05951f) — 10/1/2012 @ 7:34 pm53. I see Col. has his number.
gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 10/1/2012 @ 7:41 pm83. Not to undercut narciso, Prof. Jacobson is on this race like, well, you know.
gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 10/1/2012 @ 7:42 pmThe former, I think Brown did well, but it was teaming together, like the two villains in the last Batman film,
narciso (ee31f1) — 10/1/2012 @ 7:44 pmI can’t really disagree with any of this analysis (not just because of the kind mention).
Neither can Charles Krauthammer, at least with the first paragraph.
Krauthammer’s Take: Obama’s Debate Weakness is His Thin Skin
I guess as sort of a nod to JD I should say Romney shouldn’t be insulting. Although I’ve got to admit it wouldn’t bother me if he were considering how insulted I am by this administration’s eagerness to rewrite yesterday’s timeline based upon the assumption I’m too stupid to remember what I had for lunch.
Apparently, that’s off-putting to the precious independents who need to be wooed in a way that doesn’t offend them for making a clearly idiotic choice in 2008 and may commit the country to national suicide in 2012 if forced to confront the fact they screwed up.
There’s a reliable bunch I want on my side.
No matter. Romney just needs to call Obama’s competence into question. The Dems made the whole convention about how nobody could have done better. But our theoretical allies didn’t drop the ball and get their diplomats killed in Benghazi, for instance. We’re the only idiots who managed to accomplish that.
I think if Romney can contrast the core competencies that the office of the presidency demands as opposed to the core incompetencies this walking talking disaster has demonstrated while in office he’ll have a good chance of proving that no sane human being would trust him with another four years.
But nicely.
Steve57 (c8ac21) — 10/1/2012 @ 7:52 pm66. On the subject of economic competence, a thought-provoking article:
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2012-10-01/guest-post-risk-convergence-over-determined-systems-and-hyperinflation
Hyperinflation is no imminent but Ben’s hole card has likely busted his hand.
gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 10/1/2012 @ 8:37 pmI think his Achilles heel is the facts. You just have to present them in a competent way. This idea of trying come up with some way to get under Obama’s skin as a debate strategy doesn’t make much sense to me.
If Romney is aggressive enough and skillful enough in presenting the facts THAT probably will get under Obama’s skin far more than any zinger. In fact he’ll almost certainly try to rebut them with lies.
For example Obama’s claim that he inherited the huge deficits from Bush. When he lies Romney has to have something prepared to clearly suggest Obama’s lying without using the word “lie” and if Obama continues to insist on the lie then he has to have something even stronger.
For example:
The single biggest reason Obama still has a chance to win is that he’s been able to lie without being directly challenged on it. Strongly coming back at Obama on his lies will unnerve Obama far more than a zinger. It also takes more effort and skill than zingers.
Obama’s biggest theme is that Bush caused the mess and Romney will take us back to Bush. Obama will certainly try to restate that in the debate. Taking that apart in the debate can be done very effectively also. But it takes some skill to do it right.
But I have a feeling Romney will just robotically get his talking points in and when Obama lies not say anything. They probably aren’t even thinking about the lies Obama is likely to tell and how to rebut them in their preparations.
Gerald A (f26857) — 10/2/2012 @ 7:32 am@28: Re Legalization of Narcotics / Lottery Winner Death
A sometime lucky, yet greedy and entitled, person died of her choices. This outcome is an expression of her dignity as a moral agent, able to choose. Where’s the problem? Would you rather she was treated as less than human?
And what does it have to do with the most successful foreign aid through agricultural price support program evah?
phunctor (6e8a27) — 10/2/2012 @ 7:36 amPhunctor, if I wanted to treat her as something less than human I wouldn’t have gotten the warm cozy feeling that I did when she was charged with a felony for collecting welfare after winning the lottery.
Steve57 (c8ac21) — 10/2/2012 @ 7:50 amI guess as sort of a nod to JD I should say Romney shouldn’t be insulting.
I was joking. Stating facts will be portrayed as insulting. And racist. And, Kyoto.
JD (318f81) — 10/2/2012 @ 8:02 am87. Drat, Krautscheisster beat me to print once again.
89. Facts, whose facts? The Ministry of Truth has all the fake facts Il Douche could need. He will simply reiterate the government line when confronted with reality, its his words that are his downfall.
His proposals have not changed in four years.
gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 10/2/2012 @ 8:07 amNotice this.
NOW, notice the absolute lack of any connection to the HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS of fraudulent registrations done for the Dems by ACORN, which, of course, the Obama DOJ made at most a cursory “investigation”…
This is not a trivial one person job, here, this is sufficient that, in the county that Indianapolis, IN is located in, the voter roll was 105% of the eligible-age residents of that county. Others in the MidWest were similarly skewed….
Now consider — with all the supposed “polls” claiming The One is sooooo far ahead, despite lots of evidence to the contrary…
What do you think the average Obama voter is going to think when Romney wins by a decent margin? You think they’re going to scream that “The GOP STOLE THE ELECTION!! AGAIN!!!” and have a massive temper tantrum?
I think they’re setting up for that. I really do. Because THEN what happens? Obama gets to reject the results as clearly fraudulent…?
HHMMMM?
IGotBupkis, Legally Defined Cyberbully In All 57 States (8e2a3d) — 10/2/2012 @ 12:02 pmThe media can spin it how it like the facts are the facts! Check out this hilarious YouTube video showing how wrong Obama really is for our country!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MOWr2AzK2uY
Zachary Chandler (565ce3) — 10/2/2012 @ 6:40 pm#95
Not bad!
Gerald A (f26857) — 10/2/2012 @ 6:56 pmWe are a bunch of volunteers and starting a new scheme in our community. Your site provided us with valuable information to work on. You have done an impressive process and our entire neighborhood will be grateful to you.
handy (3ae821) — 10/18/2012 @ 2:58 pm