The New York Times: Boy, Was This Debate Unhelpful
The first debate between President Obama and Mitt Romney, so long anticipated, quickly sunk into an unenlightening recitation of tired talking points and mendacity. With few sparks and little clarity on the immense gulf that truly separates the two men and their policies, Wednesday’s encounter provided little guidance for voters still trying to understand the choice in next month’s election.
Subtext: let’s just pretend that never happened, OK?
Well, yeah. It was unhelpful to Obama.
aunursa (7014a8) — 10/4/2012 @ 9:16 pm“All the news that fits the meme . . . and nothing that doesn’t.”
Icy (537b0c) — 10/4/2012 @ 9:19 pmExactly.
Patterico (8b3905) — 10/4/2012 @ 9:19 pmObama couldn’t keep his promises and expects America to settle for something less than exceptional.
He couldn’t explain that when finally challenged.
I don’t see how the NYT can claim this wasn’t clarifying, except that most of us already picked our side in the battle between entitled and responsible.
Dustin (73fead) — 10/4/2012 @ 9:35 pmWas it unhelpful that Mitt performed a colonoscopy on Obama on live television? We report, you decide.
sybilll (80aaf3) — 10/4/2012 @ 9:43 pmI feel like that description of the debate is perfectly accurate, except for the part about there being a vast gulf between their respective policies.
Leviticus (66a4d2) — 10/4/2012 @ 9:57 pmIn boxing, you might go in with a jab and take the first hit. But after that, you have the measure of your opponent. Let’s see.
nk (875f57) — 10/4/2012 @ 10:08 pm_____________________________________________
“All the news that fits the meme . . . and nothing that doesn’t.”
And yet they’ve long seen themselves as the keepers of the flame, of being THE official registry of news events and newsmakers.
Pfft.
BTW, since they’re so taken with gay rights, with the cause of the GLBT community, with the idea of same-sex marriage, they shouldn’t find the following type of information inappropriate, demeaning or humiliating to one of their beloved Democrats. Even more so since they didn’t mind implying back in 2008 that John McCain was having an illicit relationship with a lobbyist.
^ Again, I don’t think the reporting from wnd.com is any more questionable, or more tabloid-lite, than what the New York Times was willing to run with about McCain during the last presidential election.
Mark (6d5e0d) — 10/4/2012 @ 10:12 pmMark, Mark, Mark . . .
Icy (537b0c) — 10/4/2012 @ 10:23 pmWe could have focused more on Obama’s failures over the past four years, i.e. his record, which is being ignored by the media.
AZ Bob (1c9631) — 10/4/2012 @ 10:32 pmWND. A “news organization” that makes Mein Kampf look good.
nk (875f57) — 10/4/2012 @ 10:48 pm_________________________________________
Mark, Mark, Mark . . .
Icy, Icy, Icy.
Meanwhile, another member of the current wonderful and honorable presidential administration, who also has insisted the recent act of terrorism aimed at the American consulate in Libya was due to an obscure video on Youtube, is feted at a website known for its liberal leanings…
Mark (6d5e0d) — 10/4/2012 @ 11:07 pmhttp://newsbusters.org/blogs/clay-waters/2012/10/04/surprise-new-york-times-actually-takes-seriously-obama-2007-video-prais
narciso (ee31f1) — 10/4/2012 @ 11:12 pmFunny how the NYT infers great telepathic powers which enable them to intuit how an undecided voter sitting in their living room in Dubuque or Colorado Springs is reacting to the debate.
I actually thought it was a very revealing debate.
On the other hand, I know there are people who pride themselves on holding contrarian views; whether they see themselves as being above politics, or they’re more interested in the crease in someone’s dress slacks, or they are intensely judging the beauty contest in terms of classic rhetoric as practiced by the Oxford Debating Society, or their prurient interest lies in gauging the tonal quality of a candidate’s voice.
I say tomato, and you say…look at the crease in his slacks ! (Aint that right, David Brooks !?)
Elephant Stone (65d289) — 10/4/2012 @ 11:14 pmWednesday’s encounter provided little guidance for voters still trying to understand the choice in next month’s election.
You have to remember that all the editors at the NYT voted for McGovern and Carter (twice).
Kevin M (bf8ad7) — 10/4/2012 @ 11:25 pmI guess what really bothered the Times is how every time Obama started talking about his success with the economy and plans for a second term, all Romney wanted to do was accuse him of wanting to raise taxes on the rich. Over and over we heard Romney ranting about the $5 trillion tax hike on the rich.
Oh, wait. What’s that you say?
Kevin M (bf8ad7) — 10/4/2012 @ 11:29 pmShorter NYT:
lalalalalalalallalalalalalalallalalalallal
Jcw46 (b4329c) — 10/5/2012 @ 12:24 amSnort.
Here, the nation was told on the morning radio news that not much was expected of Obama.
At least such derisive nonsense gets corrected in the US – our nations biggest Newspaper has an online poll where the majority state that Obama won even though you know for a fact almost none of the people here even saw the debate.
Then they wonder why the US elects the “wrong” people all the time.
scrubone (0f9852) — 10/5/2012 @ 2:17 amMitt hit barry with a couple of body blows and he never recovered.
mg (44de53) — 10/5/2012 @ 2:31 amRound 2 – Mitt has to stay inside and continue the body blows.
“Subtext: let’s just pretend that never happened, OK?”
If Mitt can put this off again, this attitude can only be a good thing for him – since it’s the sort of attitude that setup Obama for failure in the first place.
scrubone (0f9852) — 10/5/2012 @ 3:30 am8. It really does complete the canvas of the Nihilist.
Sununu’s “lazy” is the warp, where the weft is the Dunam/Davis hatred of the positive, God, love, Truth, tradition, one’s genes.
That’s the connection with Islam, Death cultism.
gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 10/5/2012 @ 4:07 amWhat’s to understand. One guy is evil, and wants to destroy this nation and all it stands for.
The other guy is a mormon.
IGotBupkis, Legally Defined Cyberbully In All 57 States (8e2a3d) — 10/5/2012 @ 4:14 amRighteous post Rico.
gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 10/5/2012 @ 4:14 am22. Seminal distillation.
gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 10/5/2012 @ 4:16 am13. “Senator Barack Obama waded into the minefield of racial politics and accused President George W. Bush of sitting idly by as a “quiet riot” simmered in black communities.”
News is ‘wading’ into a minefield.
So will BootBlack end as an august race hustler or will he just fade away?
gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 10/5/2012 @ 4:24 amold, wrinkly, syphilitic, extremely tired, grey lady…
Colonel Haiku (57340f) — 10/5/2012 @ 5:01 amThat paper is trash liner.
Rodney King's Spirit (9ce6d4) — 10/5/2012 @ 6:00 amRomeny failed to show up wearing horns and sporting goat hooves. Very unhelpful.
If homosexuality is simply another lifestyle choice which we cannot judge, why is this a problem? Obama should embrace it-like Elton John, Frank Ocean and Rob Halford.He could be the first bi president(since by most accounts James Buchanan was the first gay president).
Let’s get some popcorn and see how this is covered. Or not covered. Excpet all the folks leaving the workforce and the invented “birth/death” model will be discussed instead.
Bugg (642d2d) — 10/5/2012 @ 6:13 amSome insightful commentary:
http://drewmusings.wordpress.com/2012/10/04/a-confirmed-romney-haters-reaction-to-last-nights-debate/
gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 10/5/2012 @ 6:32 amThere are so many outrageous things about Obama and so much willingness by so many to cover for it all. The boxing analogy is especially appropriate in the sense that it would be easy to lose by flailing at ever possible target instead of pounding at a few vulnerable places.
The other analogy is judo, and use your opponent’s momentum against him.
Obama, you want to say that Romney just wants to do more of “what got us into this mess”, well, the best that you can do is offer 4 more years of what made it worse- here are your promises in 2008, here are your results, and your only plan is do more of the same and hope it works out better this time?
Clips of the debate talking about tax breaks for going overseas, clips of Obama spinning it the next day, then ask, Mr. President, could you tell us specifically just what tax breaks you are talking about, as Mr. Romney’s accountant still can’t find them.
Perhaps the mission is to out Alinsky and Alinskyites by truthfully playing back what was said and showing the emptiness of it.
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 10/5/2012 @ 6:35 amYes, there was that muddled McClatchy fact check, about repatriated revenue, then the Fox New piece, clearly he doesn’t know what he’s talking about.
narciso (ee31f1) — 10/5/2012 @ 6:42 amOne thing I’ve commented about before was my experience on a jury where a person with a forceful personality dug a deep hole and pulled in several people with her early on in the deliberations. There was no way she was going to admit others had been right and that she was wrong. Bless her heart she figured out a way to latch onto some detail as one she had not considered before and “changed her mind”. No way was she going to admit she had been wrong.
I’m writing this as a form of thinking out loud to myself as well. While in frustration we would like to make our points with more and more force, there are probably many people who don’t like to admit a mistake, and will need to “change their mind on their own” or “make a new choice this time”.
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 10/5/2012 @ 6:45 amDebate porn:
http://drewmusings.wordpress.com/2012/08/11/some-paul-ryan-awesome/
gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 10/5/2012 @ 6:52 amMagic appears among us, our world suddenly the better for it:
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2012-10-05/odd-arima-x-12-statistical-aberration
Anemic increase of 114K jobs following upgrade to prior report of 30K, abracadabra, U3 magically drops 0.3% to 7.8 breaking the back of the 43 month monkey.
You people are living with a god.
gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 10/5/2012 @ 6:59 amSome hack:
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2012-10-05/even-elite-are-conspiracy-wonks-now
gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 10/5/2012 @ 7:06 amAmaizng that a month after durbable goods orders drop dramatically warehousing jobs supposedly rise. What are the warehosue people warehousung if there are less goods to warehouse? Why would you need more people if there’s less product?
Bugg (642d2d) — 10/5/2012 @ 7:06 amTalk about moving the goalposts.
AZ Bob (1c9631) — 10/5/2012 @ 7:18 amComment by Bugg — 10/5/2012 @ 7:06 am
Amaizng that a month after durable goods orders drop dramatically warehousing jobs supposedly rise. What are the warehouse people warehousing if there are less goods to warehouse?
The durable goods that were ordered from factories a few months ago that are not moving out of the warehouse.
Sammy Finkelman (8423d6) — 10/5/2012 @ 7:21 amAs to be expected, Touré the Clown provided some of the best spin. In talking about Obama’s number one quality being likability (God forbid that vision or policies would be the priority) his take on the debate came down to this:
Icy (2b71cb) — 10/5/2012 @ 7:45 amObama couldn’t defend himself because doing so would make him look like an angry black man.
Because, well, all of you racists were waiting in the wings (wascally wabbits!) ready to pounce on the “n-word” if he got uppity . . . or something.
They’ve got letters to the editor, today, Friday, that back up the editorial of yesterday, at least as to Obama being the better candidate.
One letter says it was disheartening to watch Obama blow this. He didn’t bring up the 47% (everybody’s saying that, including John Batchelor last night but MD here explained why that would not have been a good idea – Romney was right there on the stage with Obama and could have corrected a misleading impression) or his “nasty offshore banking practices” She says it was as if Obama had just learned some terrible news.
A second letter praises the debate – no sound bites, no zingers, just a sober exchange of radically different ideas. Both candidates did a great job.
A third letter says Mitt Romney lost the debate. Obama let him overplay his hand, and pander and contradict what he said in the primary debates./ The audience could see the real Mitt Romney. (this is Stephen Gillers)
A fourth letter says the debate shows the Republican Party won, because both candidates were discussing who would most sensibly implement the G.O.P. agenda of cutting taxes and balancing the budget. The editorial was wrong to say it was a clash of two ideologies. Obama did not forcefully defend the stimulus and point out that when it was not continued, teachers were fired. Obama didn’t squarely argue for replacing “our crumbling infrastructure.” He says the debate became an arcane discussion of tax policy, although Jim Lehrer had begun by asking about how the candidates would create jobs.
A fifth letter says this was like 1960: optics versus substance. Obama won the debate on radio. In the next debate Obama should look at his challenger, stop being Presidential, go on the attack and focus on Romney’s flip flops. In this debae Obama was the clear winner on the issues but he was aghast at Obama’s weak televised response to Mitt Romney’s attack.
A sixth letter says that in this debate we saw a different Mitt Romney. Gone was the ultraconservative who appealed to the Tea Party, gone was the executive disdainful of the 47% who pay no taxes, gone was the candidate embracing Paul Ryan’s views. (?!)
A seventh letter says that Romney came across as breathless and aggressive and repeated Republican talking points. He sounded more desperate than Presidential while Obama was calmer and more thoughtful and more specific.
An eighth letter says she agrees Obama didn’t give a stellar performance, but she’s troubled by the emphasis on debates and debating skills. The winner of this election should be chosen on the basis of policies and plans “in the areas of health care, the economy, taxation, immigration, education and global outlook.”
Sammy Finkelman (8423d6) — 10/5/2012 @ 7:55 am______________________________________________
Some hack:
I’m not quite as cynical or skeptical as Welch is, if only because I’ve seen economic statistics from around the middle of the Great Depression in the 1930s when for a year or so the trends in the US started to go up and looked surprisingly good. Without hindsight, a person at that time could have easily assumed the economy was finally turning around.
I’m still surprised that the supposedly official data for the unemployment rate of Mexico, one set of figures even listed as originating from the CIA, indicate a rate hovering around 3 to 4 percent for over 40 years. I saw those statistics and went “huh?!” because they make Mexico look like it has long had a generally robust, ideal, Nordic-type economy.
I know that in Japan, their unemployment rate is so loosely defined that a person who works something like only one day out of the week is lumped together with people who are fully employed.
Mark (6d5e0d) — 10/5/2012 @ 8:08 amComment by MD in Philly — 10/5/2012 @ 6:35 am
The other analogy is judo, and use your opponent’s momentum against him.
This actually happened. Time was not split equally. Obama had the floor for more than 4 minutes more than Romney.
Obama, you want to say that Romney just wants to do more of “what got us into this mess”,
A lie. How can he say that? What? Low regulation? Dodd Frank would have prevented this? And Dodd Frank is now working to prevent a repeat? And let’s say it is – Romney wants to repeal that part of it? He could be asked: Why don’t you explain exactly how Dodd Frank is working to prevent a repeat?
well, the best that you can do is offer 4 more years of what made it worse-
He says it prevented a second Great Depression. Of course it was TARP that was supposed to have done that, and that was passed and signed into law while George W. Bush was President.
here are your promises in 2008, here are your results, and your only plan is do more of the same and hope it works out better this time?
No, he’s got a Plan B:
Raise taxes on the rich like Clinton did in 1993.
It even rhymes.
Clips of the debate talking about tax breaks for going overseas, clips of Obama spinning it the next day, then ask, Mr. President, could you tell us specifically just what tax breaks you are talking about, as Mr. Romney’s accountant still can’t find them.
I think that probably is normal business deductions.
A few business expenses are not deductible. I think too expensive business lunches (half the cost of a 3-martini lunch) and the portion of salaries of over $1,000,000 a year.
If I’m right, the argument is that corporations ought not to be able to deduct the business expenses of such an unpatriotic thing as moving production of something out of the country, but, afraid that people will think that deducting the costs of doing that from income is only fair, they talk about this like it was a special tax break for closing factories!
Sammy Finkelman (8423d6) — 10/5/2012 @ 8:23 amSammy, Gore didn’t carry his own state of Tennessee, that’s why Florida was so pivotal.
narciso (ee31f1) — 10/5/2012 @ 8:28 amComment by Mark — 10/4/2012 @ 11:07 pm
” In her tell all book about her affair with Bill Clinton Gennifer Flowers wrote that when she asked Bill if Hillary is a lesbian he laughed and made reference to her being more experienced with women then he is. ”
Think. Isn’t that the best thing for a married man to tell to his mistress if he can’t credibly claim he’s going to get a divorce? She’s a lesbian and he is not too promiscuous.
He used to meet Gennifer Flowers in Dallas. He was probably telling Hillary the trips had to be kept secret because they were in connection with saving a crookedly run Savings and Loan from the auditors.
Sammy Finkelman (8423d6) — 10/5/2012 @ 8:36 am____________________________________
She’s a lesbian
Well, technically, I’d describe people like her and Obama as bisexual. The ability of such folks to be chameleon-like in their behavior has definitely affected my opinion about the agenda of “GLBT.” Or that there’s apparently a lot more “B” than just a simple, unchangeable “G” and “L” out there in the real world, which runs counter to what the it’s-not-a-matter-of-choice crowd wants the public to believe.
Mark (6d5e0d) — 10/5/2012 @ 8:54 amI recall someone once asking Henry Kissinger’s young, pretty wife what she saw in a wrinkled, accented much older man.
She said, “Power is the ultimate aphrodisiac.”
luagha (5cbe06) — 10/5/2012 @ 10:20 amComment by luagha — 10/5/2012 @ 10:20 am
I recall someone once asking Henry Kissinger’s young, pretty wife what she saw in a wrinkled, accented much older man.
She said, “Power is the ultimate aphrodisiac.”
No, Henry Kissinger said that about himself. As quoted in The New York Times (28 October 1973)
http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F00D15FE3F5D127A93CAAB178BD95F478785F9
“The sayings of Secretary Henry —
POWER Power is the ultimate aphrodisiac.
HUMILITY Every morning I pray to God to give me the wisdom to do the right thing during the day. Then I ask God: “Is there anything I can do for you?
Also November 9, 1982: (where it says he once said it)
http://www.nytimes.com/1982/11/09/science/how-does-power-affect-the-powerful.html?pagewanted=print
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 10/5/2012 @ 10:50 amShe’s a lesbian
Comment by Mark — 10/5/2012 @ 8:54 am
Well, technically, I’d describe people like her and Obama as bisexual
If that were true.
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 10/5/2012 @ 10:51 amComment by narciso — 10/5/2012 @ 8:28 am
Sammy, Gore didn’t carry his own state of Tennessee, that’s why Florida was so pivotal.
He also lost West Virginia, which used to be a very heavily Democratic state..
Somebody used the loss of West Virginia to argue that racism cost Obama some votes in 2008 (they did a survey of Internet searches for the n-word -which turned out to be mainly jokes and determined that the two centers of anti-black racism in the United States were a swatch of territory in southern Ohio, West Virginia and maybe western Pennsylvania I forgot where, plus southern Mississippi)
But Gore lost West Virginia, too. The issues were coal and guns. He lost Tennessee for the same reason he lost West Virginia. What characterizes the Ohio-West Virginia area is nobody moving there.
Would you believe…West Virginia now has fewer people than Nevada!
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 10/5/2012 @ 10:58 am1930 You ZTube video oif Happy Days Are Here Again:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gqsT4xnKZPg
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 10/5/2012 @ 11:08 am____________________________________________
If that were true.
And based on all the allegations going back years — enough to make them more than cheap, erroneous gossip, and the basic inferences that one can make from them — it probably is. Moreover, such a topic is not irrelevant or inconsequential since the left (including the Democrat Party) has made “GLBT” a big part of their agenda. Or certainly when no less than the web pages of the FBI and CIA are actively mentioning how they welcome job applicants who are GLBT.
Mark (6d5e0d) — 10/5/2012 @ 11:10 am51. I do not believe it is true. First of all, these are rare, much rarer than the GLBT community would like you to believe. And it is hard to hide, too.
The rumors about about Hillary were deliberately spread by Bill Clinton for a variety of reasons, in my opinion..
The one about Obama – what’s the real source?
Who is this Robyn, who is this Hazel? Is WND the only recipient of these leaks?
Michelle Obama “just about grew up in Jesse Jackson’s home.”
Well, is that true or not true? That should be easier to verify.
Jesse Jackson suggested she’d make a good wife for Barack Obama, and Jesse Jackson, and Jeremiah Wright seconded the motion??
Now I do think Barack Obama’s choice of Michelle Robinson was strategic – she needed to be black. Before, all of his girlfriends had been white.
He really did have girlfriends. We now have some of their names. We have no names or hints of any non-females.
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 10/5/2012 @ 11:38 am52. Uh, Sammy, if you want names, fine, John Drew, Kevin DuJan, Larry Sinclair, Norma Jean Young.
Please do your homework before tapping the keyboard.
gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 10/5/2012 @ 3:01 pmThis is pretty close to the definitive example of the term “sour grapes”.
Milhouse (15b6fd) — 10/5/2012 @ 3:06 pmMark #45 – I thought that Eliot Spitzer was the buysexual ?
Alasdair (bec714) — 10/5/2012 @ 4:08 pmThe Return of The Chair — TheNewYorker cover .
htom (412a17) — 10/5/2012 @ 6:17 pm_____________________________________________
51. I do not believe it is true. First of all, these are rare, much rarer than the GLBT community would like you to believe.
Sammy, I second Gary’s post #53. I’m not sure if you’re being purposefully naive or innocent, even more so when you think that Bubba Clinton wants to sleaze up Hillary’s image behind her back for some ulterior motive. The fact his wife puts up with an obvious marriage of convenience makes it even more likely that what her old man has said about her is accurate.
Moreover, her long-time association with Huma Abedin, who, in turn, is hitched to a guy who probably also swings both ways (Anthony Weiner), seems to be more than merely coincidental.
The GLBT community is very busy trying to make the public believe that homosexuality is analogous to race or ethnicity, so they certainly don’t like dwelling on the countervailing matter of the commonness of bisexuality. IOW, there’s a lot more free will and free choice (and bad choices, at that) than many on the left care to admit. Hardly surprising since the repercussion of poor choices, crummy decisions and lousy judgment have never been very important in the world of liberalism.
Eliot Spitzer was the buysexual?
[Ba-da-bump]
Mark (6d5e0d) — 10/5/2012 @ 8:13 pmJon Stewart puts it well.
“Romney won even though he was lying his ass off, the entire night”
Stewart runs down the list
And Romney ended up getting fact checked by his own advisors. No, his insurance proposal does not cover preexisting conditions.
No defense of Obama’s performance. Romney gave a better one.
sleeeepy (b5f718) — 10/5/2012 @ 8:33 pmLet’s get it on record, I for one don’t care what the President does with his bung hole as long as he is doing it somewhere besides the White House come January.
papertiger (e55ba0) — 10/6/2012 @ 1:33 pmNot that an honest gay would have an even chance for my vote, there is nothing honest, no socially redeeming merit with this c*ckb*te.
gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 10/6/2012 @ 5:36 pm__________________________________________
Not that an honest gay would have an even chance for my vote
I’d have no qualms voting for a truly conservative gay — and one who was legitimately to the right, and not the BS, faux-centrism of an Andrew Sullivan — over a liberal heterosexual any day of the week. Such a person, however, probably is rarer and tougher to find than the Abominable Snowman or Lochness Monster.
Mark (6d5e0d) — 10/6/2012 @ 5:54 pm