The Hammer of Kraut: “It’s Unequivocal… Romney Won”

---

Real Clear Politics:

Charles Krauthammer: I think it’s unequivocal, Romney won. And he didn’t just win tactically, but strategically. Strategically, all he needed to do is basically draw. He needed to continue the momentum he’s had since the first debate, and this will continue it. Tactically, he simply had to get up there and show that he’s a competent man, somebody who you could trust as commander in chief, a who knows every area of the globe and he gave interesting extra details, like the Haqqani network, which gave the impression he knows what he’s talking about. But there is a third level here, and that is what actually happened in the debate.

We can argue about the small points and the debating points. Romney went large, Obama went very, very small, shockingly small. Romney made a strategic decision not go after the president on Libya, or Syria, or other areas where Obama could accuse him of being a Bush-like war monger. Now I would have gone after Obama on Libya like a baseball bat, but that’s why Romney has won elections and I’ve never had to even contested them. He decided to stay away from the and I think that might have actually worked for him.

What he did concentrate on is the big picture. People don’t care what our policy on Syria is going to be. They care about how America is perceived in the world and how America carries itself in the world. And the high point is when he devastatingly leveled the charge of Obama going around the world on an apology tour. Obama’s answer was ask any reporter and they will tell you it wasn’t so. That’s about as weak an answer you can get. And Romney’s response to quote Obama saying that, ‘we dictate to other nations,’ and Romney said, ‘we do not dictate to other nations, we liberate them.’ And Obama was utterly speechless.

So that is the large picture, America is strong and respecting. What Obama did is he kept interrupting, interjecting and his responses were almost all very small, petty attacks. The lowest was when he’s talking about sanctions that are old. ‘When I was working on sanctions you were investing in a company in China.’ I mean that is the kind of attack you expect from a guy who is running for city council for the first time, that’s not what you expect from the president. A personal attack about an investment when talking about Iran?

I thought Romney had the day. He looked presidential. The president did not. And that’s the impression I think that is going to be left.

---

Jonathan Alter with a rebuttal:

By reversing his views on war and peace, Romney has raised a character issue about his ability to be trusted as a steadfast defender of U.S.—
Jonathan Alter (@jonathanalter) October 23, 2012

---

And there you have it.

---

And the winner is . . . Bob Shieffer!

---

No, seriously.

For the first time in four debates, nobody is talking about the moderator:

Bob Schieffer sets the standard

Finally, the moderator isn’t the story.

The cardinal rule of debate moderation is this: it isn’t about the moderator. But in the first three debates of the 2012 presidential campaign, the moderator invariably became part of the story: Jim Lehrer lost control; Martha Raddatz took too much; and Candy Crowley stole the spotlight when she decided, on a whim, to fact-check the candidates.

Enter Bob Schieffer, who disarmed the candidates with a Texas septuagenarian’s unassuming charm and facilitated their conversation with the calm confidence that comes from two decades as anchor of a Sunday morning news show.

Never once did President Barack Obama or Mitt Romney disregard his efforts to keep time and move the conversation forward, never once did they ride roughshod over him the way they had over Lehrer and Crowley. All six topics were covered, and when the debate ended, there was but a 35-second discrepancy in their speaking times, according to a clock provided by CNN.

Schieffer was far from perfect. Like Lehrer, he rarely interjected. On more than one occasion, the conversation drifted far from foreign policy — most memorably, to teachers unions and class sizes — and Schieffer stayed silent. (His one minor slip-up, when he accidentally called Osama bin Laden, “Obama bin Laden,” drew attention on Twitter but faded quickly) But by and large, Schieffer fulfilled the mission as defined by the Commission on Presidential Debates, which was to facilitate a fair debate but leave control of the conversation to the candidates.

---

When I was a kid all the newscasters were somber, serious men who told you the day’s news, but they didn’t make themselves part of it. They all seemed to have gone to the Joe Friday School of Reporting – “Just the facts, ma’am.”

Debate moderators are like referees and umpires – if people are talking about them afterwards it’s not a good thing. Journalism schools should use Shieffer’s and Candy Crowley’s performances as textbook examples of the right and wrong way to do it.

---

Giants/Cardinals/Obama/Romney/Lions/Bears Epic Drunk Blog

---

The San Francisco Giants are playing the St. Louis Cardinals in Game Seven of the NCLS – the loser goes home and the winner faces the Detroit Tigers in the World Series starting Wednesday night. That game starts about 5 pm Klown time on FOX.

Mitt Romney and Barack Obama are facing off in their third and final debate before the election. The winner goes to the White House and the loser goes back to Chicago or Hawaii or wherever. That match-up starts at 6 pm on most of the other channels.

There is a Monday Night Football game on ESPN featuring the Chicago Bears and the Detroit Lions. Nobody cares what happens to those guys. I’m not even sure what time the game starts. I only included it because Mitt is from Michigan and Obama is from Kenya Hawaii Chicago.

I’m gonna start with the Giants/Cards game and try to switch over between innings and catch some of the debate. I will also be following Twitter. If I end up watching very much of the debate that means I won’t be in a good mood.

Hopefully I won’t run out of beer.

---

Where Obots Come From

---

And they say science majors are for the smart kids:

Surprise! ‘Undecided’ debate questioner at Tuesday’s debate declares for Obama

In a shocking development, the 20-year-old exercise science major who led off Tuesday’s presidential debate seeking reassurance from the candidates about his job prospects has apparently endorsed President Barack Obama.

The Associated Press reports that Adelphi University student Jeremy Epstein said Wednesday he still clings to the “undecided” label, but would cast his vote for Obama if the election were held today.

Epstein told the AP that he was dazzled when Obama gazed into his eyes.

“I felt like he was saying he wanted a bright future for me, that he was talking about the youth of America,” Epstein said.

Epstein did not correctly recall each candidate’s answer to his probing question, however.

Part of Obama’s response to Epstein’s question involved an unsolicited digression about manufacturing jobs.

“I want to build manufacturing jobs in this country again,” Obama said, before he took credit for saving the American auto industry.

Epstein apparently walked away from the debate thinking that Romney, not Obama, had brought up the manufacturing industry.

“Gov. Romney went into a discussion about manufacturing jobs,” Epstein said, according to the Associated Press. “I don’t think people in college like me are looking for that kind of job right now.”

The transcript of Tuesday’s debate shows that Romney made no mention of manufacturing in his response to Epstein’s question, or in any part of the exchange that followed the question.

---

Nobody under thirty should be allowed to vote.

But wait! There’s more!

Did I say he was a science major? I meant “exercise science.” From Adelphi University:

Bachelor of Science in Exercise Science
Exercise Science, Health Studies, Physical Education, and Sport Management

The Department of Exercise Science, Health Studies, Physical Education and Sports Management offers undergraduate programs which lead to career options in exercise science. Specialized tracks in exercise science include fitness specialization, and pre-physical therapy.

In addition to the University’s General Education requirements, students seeking Exercise Science must complete 41 credits of Exercise Science Foundations, including a three credit practicum; 19 credits of Exercise Science electives and 32 additional elective credits. The Exercise Science Program prepares students for careers in strength and conditioning, exercise leadership and personal training. Many students continue on to their Master’s Degree in Exercise Science. Courses include learning objectives for the American College of Sports Medicine, Health/Fitness Specialist Certification.

---

My prediction:

Three years from now this choomer is gonna be sitting in Zuccotti Park whinging that he can’t get a job to pay off his student loans. (Current tuition and fees at Adelphi is about $30,000 year.)

---

---

Preference Cascade Underway?

---

Katrina Trinko:

Romney Seven Points Ahead in Gallup Poll

In today’s Gallup, Mitt Romney has a significant lead over President Obama among likely voters: seven points. Romney is at 52 percent to Obama’s 45 percent.

So what’s going on? I talked to Frank Newport, Gallup’s editor-in-chief, who warned that poll watchers should be careful to remember that Gallup’s daily number is an average of seven days. “It takes a while for any impact, in say the debate Tuesday night, to percolate through,” Newport says. “I think we’re just still seeing the positive enthusiasm on the part of the Romney people that came out at the first debate, and I think it’s too early to tell what’s going to happen” as a result of the second debate.

---

I’m not a bean counter or a number cruncher so I’ll leave that to others. My basic rule of not trusting polls still remains in effect. But I will point out that this poll covers both the first presidential debate and the match-up between Paul Ryan and Joe Biden.

So what does this mean?

Nothing.

Maybe.

The only poll that really matters is the one on November 6th.

---

The real War on Women

---

Obama touts fair pay for women, despite records showing women paid less in his own White House

At Tuesday’s Hofstra University presidential debate, President Barack Obama and Republican nominee Mitt Romney duked it out over pay equity for women, just as they have fought over female votes in the national polls.

While Obama made the empathetic case for his single mother and his belief in equal pay — pointing out that the first bill he signed as president was the Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act — he did not address reports this year that demonstrated that his own White House pays women less than men.

[...]

According to a report published by the Free Beacon in April, the 2011 annual report on White House staff revealed that the median annual salary for female White House employees was 18 percent less than male employees — $60,000 compared to $71,000.

And in 2008, Scripps Howard syndicated columnist Deroy Murdock noted that as in Obama’s U.S. Senate office, women were paid less than men: While the average male staffer brought home $54,397, female staffers averaged $45,152.

Romney detailed his professional history, recruiting women into positions of power during his tenure as governor of Massachusetts. He further pointed out the economic suffering women have endured under Obama, including the loss of 580,000 jobs among women and 3.5 million women in poverty.

---

Obama talks the talk, but he doesn’t walk the walk.

BTW – The Vile Progs are going crazy today over “binders”.

Go figure.

---

“I was undecided between Romney and not voting”

---

Hot Air:

“I was not undecided between Obama and Romney. I was undecided between Romney and not voting.”

That’s the problem for any incumbent President in the final days of the election. They get almost four years to make the case for another term. If voters are still undecided with three weeks left to go, the best an incumbent can hope to do is convince them not to vote at all. That has been the explicit campaign strategy of Team Obama since Romney wrapped up the nomination in May — to make him so toxic that the protest vote against Obama stays home.

Unfortunately, that strategy collapsed after the first debate, and its collapse made the strategy obvious enough to be offensive. Last night, Obama finally decided to show some passion about wanting a second term, but he still hasn’t explained why he wants it or what he’ll do with it, even during last night’s debate. The only case he offered was that he wasn’t Mitt Romney, the same argument that Obama used before the first debate. And he spent most of the evening speaking with an oddly high-pitched tone, as if he was offended that he even needed to go that far.

Obama gave those undecideds no reason last night to vote for him or to stay home on Election Day. That’s why nothing that happened in the debate will change the trajectory of the race.

---

As I’ve said before, we’re not the ones that are going to decide this election. Our votes count, just like everyone else’s, but some voters count more than others.

If you are reading this your mind is pretty well made up. Chances are it’s been made up for a while now. There is really nothing either candidate is gonna do or say that will change your mind.

The people who will decide this election are the ones who live in key swing states and are either undecided or are willing to change their minds in the next three weeks. It’s kinda scary when you think about it.

I recognize that I am biased – I have formed strong opinions about both candidates. So when I watch a debate it’s difficult to guess how those undecided swing voters will react. It doesn’t matter who I think won the debate, it matter who they think won.

But Romney didn’t need to win, he just needed to look presidential. I believe he succeeded.

The polls in the next few days will tell if I’m right.

BTW – Even though it won’t make any difference here in California, I’m going to vote for Romney. Fuck Obama.

---

Presidential Debate Drunk Klown Blog III – Last Call

---

This thread is for the post-debate reactions.

My prediction was correct – I’m really hammered.

---

Presidential Debate Drunk Klown Blog II

---

The first thread is full. Keep it going here.

By now I should be looking pretty good.

---

Presidential Debate Drunk Klown Blog I

It’s Oktoberfest!

---

Forget the drinking games, I’m just gonna keep slamming ‘em back until I run out or pass out.

My predictions:

1. Obama will perform much better than last time (it would be hard not to).

2. Romney will win.

3. The media will declare Obama the winner and talk about his big comeback.

4. Ima gonna get really hammered.

---

Just remember, the more you drink, the better I look.

---

Will Obama unleash his inner Biden?

---

Obama camp tips hand on debate, hints president will attack Romney on Bain

As President Obama began to hunker down at a plush resort here for three full days of debate prep, his campaign team signaled the incumbent may steal a page from Vice President Joe Biden and show a more aggressive tone in Tuesday’s second face-to-face showdown with Republican Mitt Romney.

“Gov. Romney has been making pitches all of his life and he knows how to say what people want to hear whether that was during his time at Bain or during the dozens of town halls he did during the primary,” said Obama campaign spokeswoman Jen Psaki said Saturday. “His running mate also left him vulnerable on a number of issues — admitting there was a $5 trillion tax cut, after he denied it, but again failing to explain how they would pay for it, leaving women worried about their ability to make choices about their own health care and failing to articulate their plan for winding down our presence in Afghanistan.”

It’s significant that Psaki previewed the president’s next clash with Romney with an immediate mention of his time at Bain, a word Obama never mentioned during the first presidential debate, in Denver.

Senior campaign adviser David Axelrod said on “Fox News Sunday” that Obama is making “adjustments” before the debate and plans to be more aggressive.

[...]

Also noteworthy is that Psaki mentioned Romney’s running mate, Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., who faced intense pressure from Biden literally from the first minutes of their one and only vice presidential debate, this past Thursday.

Biden hit Ryan on everything from tax cuts to Iran policy with a ferocity that left Republicans complaining about interruptions and eye-rolling that GOP officials believe will ultimately backfire with undecided voters because of its negativity.

White House officials, however, are raving about Biden’s performance with so many superlatives that they are openly acknowledging that the vice president did a better job of explaining the president’s agenda than Obama himself.

On Friday, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney, a former Biden aide, opened a briefing with reporters by saying he wanted to assert a “point of personal privilege” to laud the vice president.

---

If you think the Obama campaign is really gonna reveal their game plan on national television before the debate then I have some real estate at Zuccotti Park I want to sell you. If I was Romney I would expect nothing and be prepared for anything.

Trying to be more aggressive is a minefield for Obama. First of all, it’s not his style. Secondly he’s not very good at it, and not because of that “angry black man” thing the race-baiters like to refer to.

But the real danger is it plays to Romney’s strength. Mitt is an Alpha male. You don’t put together multi-million dollar investment deals unless you have a pair that clang when you walk. Mitt is older and taller and more accomplished that Obama. And you know he’s gonna be ready for an aggressive attack. If Mitt can’t defend his record on Bain no one can.

On the other hand, what choice does Obama have? He needs a decisive victory and he won’t get one playing safe. I really don’t expect a major change of style. My guess is Obama will try to be a little more assertive but will mainly try to improve on his body language – looking at Romney, smiling and trying to appear confident. He’s probably rehearsed some zingers he can use, especially in his closing statement so Romney won’t have a chance to respond.

Obama’s real problem isn’t Romney. Obama’s problem is his record. He can’t change that in a couple days no matter how hard he tries.

---

The New New Civility – Why Vile Progs Must Be Defeated

---

Some times two posts were meant for each other.

Jonathan S. Toobin at Commentary:

Why Dems Loved Biden’s Boorish Behavior

The morning after the vice presidential debate, Democrats are delighted. Vice President Joe Biden’s obnoxious display was exactly what was needed to cheer them up after a week of morose speculation about why President Obama was so passive and uninspired at last week’s first presidential debate with Mitt Romney. Indeed, the more Biden giggled, smirked and interrupted Paul Ryan, the better they liked it. While his condescending and bullying behavior contradicted liberal doctrine about conservatives being the ones guilty of polluting the public square with political incivility, it embodied their complete contempt for both Republicans and their ideas. Biden’s nastiness may have re-invigorated a Democratic base that wanted nothing so much as to tell their opponents to shut up, even if it may have also alienated a great many independents. But with the main focus of the election still on the remaining two presidential debates, it’s not clear that President Obama can profit from Biden’s example.

The reason for this is not very complicated. The Democrats cheering on Biden’s bullying, while ignoring the fact that he had nothing to offer on the future of entitlements and his disgraceful alibis about Libya, did so because at bottom they really do not feel Republicans or conservatives are worthy of respect or decency. Though they rarely own up to it, they don’t think Republicans are so much wrong as they are bad. By contrast, most Republicans think Democrats are wrong, not evil. Ryan, whose polite behavior was entirely proper but was made to appear passive and even weak when compared to his bloviating opponent, demonstrated this paradigm by patiently trying to explain his positions even when he was constantly interrupted.

Hard-core Democrats would have been happy had Obama treated Romney the same way Biden did Ryan (some even falsely claim that Romney behaved in a similar manner to Biden), and there were plenty of signs that he shares his number two’s contempt for the opposition. But while a vice president, especially one who has often been treated as something of a national joke during his four years in office, might be allowed to get away with playing the buffoon, a president cannot. That means next week the president will have to again behave like a grown up. Given the town hall meeting format at the Hofstra University debate, it will be even more important for him to be as civil as Biden was rude. If, as is very likely, Romney again gives a strong performance and doesn’t allow himself to be run roughshod over (as perhaps Ryan did at times), then the odds are Democrats will again be unhappy with their leader’s showing.

The problem here is not just that presidents and would-be commanders-in-chief must appear presidential. It is that the liberal base of the president’s party is so filled with anger and contempt for Republicans that they can’t abide even a show of civility from their champions.

---

Democrats wouldn’t behave like that, would they?

They not only behave that way, they take pride in it.

John Cole at Buffoon Juice:

Maybe it is just me, but all the doom and gloom of the past two weeks on the blogs I regularly read that picked up after the Obama debate seems to have completely subsided since Joe Biden slapped around America’s greatest bullshit artist, Paul Ryan. Maybe I am alone on this, but it sure feels like Biden did everything he needed. Fired up the base, exposed bullshit lies as bullshit lies, went after Romney at every chance, and at long last showed contempt for the contemptible ideas Republicans are pushing. This was Josh Marshall’s bitch slap theory of politics in action.

Way to go, Joe.

---

Back in the real world, the White House spent most of Friday walking back some of the numerous inaccuracies and misstatements uttered by Joe Biden during the debate. Meanwhile, the general (but not unanimous) consensus seems to be that Joe Biden behaved in a manner commonly known as an “asshole.”

But wait! There’s more!

From the comments at Buffoon Juice:

Joe threw a perfect game, hit a grand slam home run every time up, touched all the bases, and left the field like a gladiator who smiled and laughed because he was glad he ate the lion, the Christians, and everyone in the stands – including the Emperors of the MSM.

And then kicked the game winning field goal, had a hat-trick, drained a trey – all while wearing the yellow shirt the entire race, and leaving Ussein Bolt in his wake in the 100 Meter Dash.

And, he ate all his low-fat protein, spinach, and fruit.

Not a bad night!

We’re in a battle of the hearts and minds of Americans, with the entire lazy MSM, the Republican puke funnel and all of the propaganda machinery the Kochs and their ilk can employ against us. We have the truth and the ability to ridicule on our side, and it needs to be fully deployed. As terrifying as it is, the half-wits who will decide this election will be swayed by the winning/losing narrative, and the Dems need to hone the message into easily digestible sound bites for them for the next three weeks. No one wants to vote for a punch line loser. Obama needs to deliver the knock out takeaway meme at the next debate, and we’re just the ones who can do it.

Unfortunately I think all the people who think it is going to make a difference are grasping at straws. Then again I didn’t think the Presidential debate was going to make a difference.

The difference is that the MSM all collectively decided they were going to make the presidential debate about “Obama’s failure” because the guy has been damn near perfect in every way in the campaign till now. He did just fine but I was surprised how many people on the left bought into it as well. With the Biden debate he basically threw it right back at them and the MSM is just calling it a tie..lol.

---

How distorted is your grasp of reality when you think the mainstream media is against Barack Obama?

---

Well that was different

---

CNN Poll: Debate watchers split on who won VP debate

Call it a draw.

Forty-eight percent of voters who watched the vice presidential debate think that Rep. Paul Ryan won the showdown, according to a CNN/ORC International nationwide poll conducted right after Thursday night’s faceoff. Forty-four percent say that Vice President Joe Biden was victorious. The Republican running mate’s four point advantage among a debate audience that was more Republican than the country as a whole is within the survey’s sampling error.

Half of all debate watchers questioned in the poll said the showdown didn’t make them more likely to vote for either of the candidates’ bosses, 28% said the debate made them more likely to vote for Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney and 21% said the faceoff made them more likely to vote to re-elect President Barack Obama.

According to the survey, 55% said that the vice president did better than expected, with 51% saying that the congressman from Wisconsin performed better than expected.

By a 50%-41% margin, debate watchers say that Ryan rather than Biden better expressed himself.

Seven in ten said Biden was seen as spending more time attacking his opponent, and that may be a contributing factor in Ryan’s 53%-43% advantage on being more likable. Ryan also had a slight advantage on being more in touch with the problems of average Americans.

One of the top jobs for the candidates in a vice presidential debate is to convince Americans that they would be able to step into the top job if something happened to the president. The poll indicates that both men were seen as qualified to be president if necessary, by roughly equal numbers.

---

I had a couple possible scenarios in my head about how the debate would turn out. None of the scenarios came close to reality.

I guess who won depends on who you wanted to win. If you are an Obama supporter you probably think Biden kicked Ryan’s ass. If you are a Romney supporter you probably think that Ryan was incredibly patient with that crazy old man who kept yelling at him. If you are one of those 3-4 people who are still undecided then you’re probably still undecided.

Historically the VP candidates don’t determine the election. On the other hand, I really don’t think Joe Biden’s bizarre behavior did their reelection campaign much good last night.

What do you think?

---

---

Hairplug Joe To The Rescue?

---

ABC News:

Vice President Joe Biden is currently in Wilmington, Delaware prepping for the vice presidential debate Thursday. However, the Obama campaign does not expect Biden, a former senator and chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, to make up for the president’s showing in the first presidential debate, according to multiple Democratic sources.

While Obama campaign senior adviser David Axelrod is on hand in Delaware, sources told CNN his presence is not a reaction to the president’s weak showing at the Denver debate and that Axelrod was previously scheduled to attend. The vice president’s preparations are being run by his former chief of staff Ron Klain, who is in charge of the president’s prep as well.

Biden started his debate practice Sunday and will continue through Wednesday for a total of four days of prep, according to an administration official.

---

For their sakes I hope they aren’t putting all their eggs in Joe Biden’s basket. It’s far more likely that Biden will lose or manage a draw than win, but even if he pulls a Romney and blows Paul Ryan off the stage I doubt it will affect anything. On the other hand, a clear victory by Ryan will add to the Mittmentum.

How bad was last week’s performance by Obama?:

As the first presidential debate ended, senior surrogates for the Obama campaign were noticeably absent from the “spin room” where both sides attempt to put the best face on their candidate’s performance. Representatives for Romney had the assembled media pretty much to themselves for the first ten minutes post-debate.

At the time, Axelrod was one of at least a half dozen people on a conference call that started as the first presidential debate ended Thursday night, according to an administration official. Axelrod, along with White House senior adviser David Plouffe, campaign manager Jim Messina, White House communications director Dan Pfeiffer, deputy campaign manager Stephanie Cutter and former White House communications director Anita Dunn participated in the call, which may have contributed to the Democrats’ delay.

---

Team Obama was already in crisis mode before Obama walked off the stage. They wanted to get their story straight before they talked to the press. You can just imagine the conversation.

“What the fuck just happened?“

“I don’t fucking know, but how am I supposed to go out there and pretend we won?”

“How about if we say the President had a small stroke?“

The best part is Obama thought he had won!

---

Jim Lehrer – “Everybody knows what they saw”

---

Breitbart:

Spin Doesn’t Work If Everybody’s Seen The Event

Sean Hannity, Fox News: “I felt that for you, after the debate, a lot of criticism heaped on you.”

Jim Lehrer, PBS News Hour: “Yeah”

Hannity: “How did you feel about that?”

Lehrer: “Well, you know, I’m not really keen on criticism [laughs], just as a general thing. But, that was right at the beginning. The criticism has pretty much gone away now because people realize that spin doesn’t work if everybody’s seen the event. Sixty-seven million people watched it, sixty-seven million other people reacted to it — saw excerpts [of] it and all of that. So, they know what they saw. So, everybody is pretty well chilled out on this, and nobody’s blaming me for it and blaming me for anything. And the format is what made it possible. Whatever happened, some people look at it in a positive way, some people look at it in a negative way. However, the fact of the matter is it was the format and all I did was implement the format — which was a wide-open opportunity for the candidates to directly address each other.”

---

I think Team Obama made a serious miscalculation when they tried to blame Jim Lehrer. He is widely respected in the media and they tend to defend their own. Remember the War on FOX News? The media took FOX’s side.

---

Overnight Open Thread

---

Watch this clip from last night’s ABC News. The money quote starts around the 1:40 mark – “President Obama seemed to have initially thought all went well that night.”

Apparently his aides had to tell him he screwed the pooch. (The look on Michelle’s face should have done it.)

Best part – they are counting on Hairplug Joe to save them!

See you in the morning!

---

If We Disagree You Are Lying

---

No, seriously.

Gretawire:

CBS Face the Nation asked David Axelrod why he and the President are now calling Governor Romney a liar (“dishonest”) about his tax cut promise for everyone being deficit neutral … and yet don’t call President Obama a liar for his 2008 unfulfilled promise about cutting the deficit in half by the end of his term (didn’t happen) and closing Gitmo (didn’t happen.)

Why is one candidate promiser (Gov Romney) a liar and the other promiser (Pres Obama) is not?

Apparently when it is his guy (Pres Obama) who makes promises that are unrealistic and or unfulfilled, Axelrod doesn’t think it a lie. (As an aside, Axelrod went further and blamed Congress for failing to close Gitmo. He did not explain the 1/2 cut in deficit unfulfilled promise.)

When it is Axelrod’s OPPONENT (Gov Romney), the campaign promise is a lie and the Governor Romney a liar.

---

I’m gonna disagree with Greta here. This is not about a campaign promise, it’s about the effect of a proposal. A broken promise is only dishonest if you never intended to keep it. That’s not the issue here.

I am not a beancounter and I have not reviewed Mitt Romney’s tax plan, but as I understand it he plans to lower the top rate and eliminate some deductions, which he says would have the effect of being revenue neutral.

Some pro-Obama economists say this would be a $5 trillion tax cut. Romney denies this. I don’t know who is right but either way we’re talking about opinion rather than fact. It may be an educated, informed, professional opinion but nonetheless the outcome of the proposed plan is not an incontrovertible fact.

This is more like the Stimulus. When the Stimulus was being debated, Obama claimed it would have certain effects on the economy and on unemployment. It didn’t work out as promised, but I would not say that Obama was dishonest, just that his plan failed.

If Obama and his underlings want to attack Romney’s plan on the basis that it is a bad idea that’s fair game. But they have no reasonable basis to call him dishonest.

What is dishonest is for Axelrod to suggest that Romney blindsided Obama with lies about his tax plan. Here is the relevant exchange:

OBAMA: When it comes to our tax code, Governor Romney and I both agree that our corporate tax rate is too high, so I want to lower it, particularly for manufacturing, taking it down to 25 percent. But I also want to close those loopholes that are giving incentives for companies that are shipping jobs overseas. I want to provide tax breaks for companies that are investing here in the United States.

[...]

So all of this is possible. Now, in order for us to do it, we do have to close our deficit, and one of the things I’m sure we’ll be discussing tonight is, how do we deal with our tax code? And how do we make sure that we are reducing spending in a responsible way, but also, how do we have enough revenue to make those investments?

And this is where there’s a difference, because Governor Romney’s central economic plan calls for a $5 trillion tax cut — on top of the extension of the Bush tax cuts — that’s another trillion dollars — and $2 trillion in additional military spending that the military hasn’t asked for. That’s $8 trillion. How we pay for that, reduce the deficit, and make the investments that we need to make, without dumping those costs onto middle-class Americans, I think is one of the central questions of this campaign.

[...]

ROMNEY: First of all, I don’t have a $5 trillion tax cut. I don’t have a tax cut of a scale that you’re talking about. My view is that we ought to provide tax relief to people in the middle class. But I’m not going to reduce the share of taxes paid by high-income people. High-income people are doing just fine in this economy. They’ll do fine whether you’re president or I am.

The people who are having the hard time right now are middle- income Americans. Under the president’s policies, middle-income Americans have been buried. They’re just being crushed. Middle- income Americans have seen their income come down by $4,300. This is a — this is a tax in and of itself. I’ll call it the economy tax. It’s been crushing.

At the same time, gasoline prices have doubled under the president. Electric rates are up. Food prices are up. Health care costs have gone up by $2,500 a family. Middle-income families are being crushed.

[...]

The second area, taxation, we agree, we ought to bring the tax rates down. And I do, both for corporations and for individuals. But in order for us not to lose revenue, have the government run out of money, I also lower deductions and credits and exemptions, so that we keep taking in the same money when you also account for growth.

[...]

And finally, with regards to that tax cut, look, I’m not looking to cut massive taxes and to reduce the — the revenues going to the government. My — my number-one principal is, there will be no tax cut that adds to the deficit. I want to underline that: no tax cut that adds to the deficit.

But I do want to reduce the burden being paid by middle-income Americans. And I — and to do that, that also means I cannot reduce the burden paid by high-income Americans. So any — any language to the contrary is simply not accurate.

---

Save this link. When somebody tells you Romney lied, tell them to show you where it is in the transcript.

But you better sit down while you’re waiting.

---

Daddy Issues?

“Mr. President, I’m gonna beat you like an ugly step-child.”

---

Roger Simon:

I doubt the president was over-confident, nor do I think he underestimated Romney.

I have quite a different explanation.

Barack Obama was afraid. In fact, on a certain level he was petrified.

Now I admit I have been making my living most of my life as a novelist and a screenwriter, so I may be no more than “creating characters” here, but consider this:

What we have before us in these debates is an almost archetypal confrontation – between a man who was and is an exceptionally good father and a man who was deserted by his.

Good fathering is the story of Mitt Romney’s life. He has five sons who are, by all accounts, devoted to him and vice-versa. These boys grew up with a father who, although wealthy and successful, worked like a demon, doted on them, and apparently devoted an extraordinary amount of time to charitable work, in which he also involved them. Indeed, I’ve never heard of a politician who did anything quite like it.

Almost the polar opposite, Barack Obama’s father abandoned him twice and then ended up an irresponsible drunken victim of multiple car crashes. This sad behavior precipitated a search by Obama that brought him in contact with several father surrogates, notably Frank Marshall Davis and Jeremiah Wright, that it would be hard to brand as anywhere near satisfactory. (Davis was a pornographer and about Wright the less said the better.) No Mitt Romneys there.

If you think this is lost on Barack Obama when he stands opposite Romney, then you think the president is stupid, which he is obviously not. But it’s worse for him yet, because he is standing opposite a father who has worked harder, has more experience, and is more knowledgeable and charitable than he and he, on some level at least, must know it.

Not only that, most of what Mitt Romney has done, including graduating simultaneously from Harvard Law and Harvard Business, is an open book, while almost everything about Obama remains purposefully hidden. (He knows this too, obviously.) Obama lives in fear of exposure – and thus in fear of Romney who, although rich, is much more the self-made man of the two, the ultimate father figure.

The face-to-face clash of these two men is almost out of Greek drama. Obama must rage against or embrace the man who represents what he most dearly needed and never had. If this really were Aeschylus or Sophocles, Obama would be caught between those conflicting goals and end up plucking his own eyes out.

---

I usually don’t go much for psychoanalysis and I never really understood the fascination that so many people (including Obama) have with his father. But that’s probably because I have so much in common with Barack’s childhood.

My parents divorced when I was a baby so I have no childhood memories of my father. My mom remarried for a few years so I had a step-dad for a while but I didn’t miss him when they split up. I was mostly raised by my mom and my grandma.

I knew I had a dad. He used to send me and my sister Christmas and birthday cards with letters inside but I never paid much attention to what he wrote. I never felt a longing for a father figure – I never really even thought about it. It was just the way it was.

That’s why I really don’t understand the daddy issue thing. It doesn’t resonate with me emotionally. But this article has a psycho-babble air of truthiness about it. It sounds plausible and kinda scientific.

My analysis is similar but simpler. Leaving the daddy issue stuff aside, I focus on who those two men are. Barack Obama is a poser. He’s a narcissist with an over-inflated ego but deep in his heart he knows he’s just a con man who is in over his head.

Barack is a wannabe, but Mitt’s the real deal.

Mitt succeeded in school. Then he was wildly successful in business. He succeeded in running the 2002 Winter Olympics. Now he is succeeding in politics. His family life is successful too.

Barack knows he is a failure as president. When he faces Mitt Romney he is overwhelmed by feelings of inadequacy. I am gonna predict that Obama will choke in the other two debates just as bad or worse than the first one.

It’s not about preparation. Obama is overmatched and he knows it. He’s been able to fake his way through life until now but it’s time for him to stand and deliver and he knows he cannot deliver.

Even worse, he’s not somebody who can handle losing. When he lost the primary to Bobby Rush in 2000 he was devastated and depressed. He knows he’s gonna lose on November 6th and it is eating him up inside. He’s a tin man with no heart.

I almost feel sorry for him.

(Just kidding)

---

---

Mitt Admits That What He Said Was Wrong

---

Romney says he was ‘completely wrong’ on ’47 percent’ comment

GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney said Thursday night he was “completely wrong” when he made comments about the 47 percent of Americans who do not pay taxes at a secretly recorded fundraiser in May.

Following the first presidential debate that most observers gave to Romney, many critics faulted President Obama for not bringing up Romney’s “47 percent” remarks or his tenure at Bain Capital, two issues the campaign has hit Romney hard on in advertising.

Appearing on “Hannity” on Fox News, Romney was asked what his defense would have been if Obama had attacked his remarks.

“Well, clearly in a campaign with hundreds if not thousands of speeches and question and answer sessions, now and then, you are going to say something that doesn’t come out right,” Romney said. “In this case, I said something that was just completely wrong.”

In a press briefing shortly after the comments became public, Romney said his choice of words were “inelegantly” stated.

Echoing his debate performance, he said the rich were doing fine under Obama. Rather, it is the middle class and the poor who would be hurt by an Obama reelection, he said.

“The gap between the rich and the poor has gotten larger. The rich will probably do fine if he is reelected,” Romney said. “It is the middle class that is in real trouble. And the poor. I want the poor to get into the middle class. So many have fallen into poverty by virtue of his policies. So this for me is all about the 100 percent.”

---

I’m gonna go out on a limb here and say that Mitt was ready for just about anything Obama or Jim Lehrer threw at him Wednesday night. That’s what “prepared” means. There were some obvious lines of attack and Mitt and his advisors worked on the responses.

But why, you might ask, didn’t Mitt roll these answers out earlier?

Simple – he was saving them for the right time. I always tell people they shouldn’t talk to cops. Any criminal defense attorney will tell you that silence is golden. The only thing you should tell a cop is “I don’t want to say anything and I want a lawyer.”

Save your side of the story for when there are twelve people sitting in the jury box. Then the prosecutor is not prepared for it. (Surprise!)

Let’s say Obama launched a “47 percent” attack and Mitt responded with the answer he gave Sean Hannity. That would leave Obama with no where to go. Look at Mitt’s answer on his tax cut plan – it was simple and on point.

Even better – what if Mitt was ready with a “There you go again” response like Reagan used on Carter?

The latest meme is that Obama was “off his game” and will be much more well prepared for the next face-off. Maybe so, but I bet that Mitt will be ready too.

During the opening prep sessions, the group quickly came to a consensus: At the podium, Romney would be forceful, nearly as assertive as he was in Healey’s living room. His advisers have always admired Romney’s ability to peel apart arguments in private, and they encouraged him to do the same at the debate, with a little polish. The goal was to overwhelm the president with liveliness and information, to force him to confront the messy details of his economic and fiscal record. The strategy, sources say, clicked with Romney for two reasons: He did not want to spend hours tinkering with his mannerisms, and he wanted to focus on internalizing data. He’d take advice on his voice, his posture, and the rest, but he wanted his prep time to be a policy workshop…

The practice made a difference. One longtime Romney friend tells me that Romney markedly improved throughout September as he devoted himself to his briefing books and the mock debates. The friend says Romney didn’t think of the debate as a political dialogue but as a grueling, 90-minute competition that demanded discipline. He prepared in the same way he used to review pending business deals at Bain Capital: He challenged his closest advisers about the most minor points, he spent a lot of time reading, and he constantly bantered with his aides about the other side’s weaknesses and strengths.

---

Ex Post Facto Badass

---

Who was that masked man?

Feisty Obama says didn’t face “real Mitt Romney” in debate

President Barack Obama came out swinging against Republican rival Mitt Romney on Thursday after a lackluster performance in their first debate forced the Democrat’s aides to talk of “adjustments” to his campaign.

Dressed casually in khakis and a jacket, Obama told a rally of some 12,000 people the former Massachusetts governor was untruthful during their 90-minute debate, which most observers said the Republican won.

“When I got onto the stage, I met this very spirited fellow who claimed to be Mitt Romney,” Obama said.

“But it couldn’t have been Mitt Romney, because the real Mitt Romney has been running around the country for the last year promising $5 trillion in tax cuts that favor the wealthy. The fellow on stage last night said he didn’t know anything about that.”

Obama’s campaign has pressed Romney for months over his support for extending Bush-era tax cuts for the wealthy, which the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center estimated could cost $5 trillion over 10 years. Romney rejected that figure at the debate and insisted his plans would not increase the deficit.

The Democratic president was criticized for not pushing back aggressively against his rival during the debate. He adopted an assertive posture on Thursday, however, taking Romney to task on everything from education policy to outsourcing.

“The real Mitt Romney said we don’t need any more teachers in our classrooms. But … the fellow on stage last night he loves teachers – can’t get enough of them,” Obama said.

“The Mitt Romney we all know invested in companies that were called ‘pioneers’ of outsourcing jobs to other countries. But the guy on stage last night, he said he doesn’t even know that there are such laws that encourage outsourcing.”

---

Barack Obama had three problems Wednesday night and none of them had anything to do with Mitt Romney’s honesty.

The first problem is that Obama is a lousy debater. In 2007-2008 he didn’t win a single debate, even against John “Crypt Keeper” McCain. But that fact was mostly disguised by media. The one time he faced any tough questions was the Pennsylvania debate and afterwards he flipped Hillary the bird and refused to do any more debates with her.

The second problem is that whatever debating skills he has have atrophied. He’s been living in a bubble for four years. He prefers to give speeches and statements using a teleprompter and rarely answers questions unless everything is tightly scripted and approved. When he does answer questions it is at a Potemkin townhall or in some one-on-one interview with a friendly reporter or talk show host.

Do you know why cops make good witnesses? Because they testify a lot. If you’ve been examined and cross-examined 100 times you’re gonna be much better at it than someone who has never testified before. Cops are really hard to trip up. On the other hand most amateur liars fall apart under skillful cross examination. They aren’t used to being challenged and questioned by a hostile interviewer.

Obama is really not a very good liar, which is surprising considering how much he practices at it. He’s just gotten away with it all his life.

But Obama’s biggest problem was he had to face the Real Mitt Romney for 90 minutes. For several months now Barack Obama has been fighting a strawman dreamed up by his campaign. This candidate made of straw is a greedy corporate vulture who offshores jobs, gives women cancer, doesn’t relate well to people, makes lots of gaffes and is completely passive.

Barack introduces Strawman Mitt at his rallies and speeches. Then he stands him up on stage and knocks him down, over and over. The friendly audience loves it. Strawman Mitt takes it in silence, never complaining or resisting.

Barack Obama was expecting Strawman Mitt to be there on Wednesday night but instead Alpha Male Mitt the Stormin’ Mormon showed up to kick ass and chew bubble gum, and he was all out of bubble gum.

It comes as a complete shock when your punching bag starts punching back.

I don’t know if Mitt Romney can repeat his performance but I have confidence he’ll do okay in the other two debates. The real question is whether Obama can get his shit together in the next couple weeks.

One thing is for sure, he won’t be overconfident next time.

---

Two Occupiers in a convertible get pulled over in Alabama. When the state trooper walks up to the driver’s door he pulls out his baton and whacks the driver on the head.

“What was that for?” asks the Occupier behind the wheel.

“I was just teaching you a lesson” replied the cop. “Here in Alabama you are expected to have your license, insurance and registration ready when a cop reaches your window. Next time you’ll remember.”

The cop then proceeds to write the Occupier a ticket. Afterward, instead of walking back to his patrol car, the cop walks around to the passenger side, pulls out his baton, and whacks the passenger on the head.

“What was that for?” asks the other Occupier.

“I was just giving you your wish” replied the cop. “In about one minute you were gonna say ‘I wish that cop had tried that shit with me.‘”

---

---