Obama lost the debate — wah, wah, wah, but, um, uh, ah, here’s really why

9 Oct

It’s clear from post-debate polls and surveys that Romney decisively won the first presidential debate over Obama, most say by a margin of 70 to 30. Oh, boo-hoo. Since Obama’s lackluster debate performance, Team Obama, their surrogates and aiders and abettors in the liberal media have tried out a cacophonous cascade of reasons (read: excuses) as to why. Some bordering on “the dog ate my homework” to “he cheated.”

Among them have been Al Gore’s inconvenient truth, er, lie that it must have been that Obama didn’t have time to acclimate to the thin air of Denver. Well, as preposterous as that is on its face, he could have planned to be there earlier, like Romney did, couldn’t he, Al? So, it was Team Obama’s poor planning which was at fault? Is that what you’re implying, Big Al? Besides, weren’t Obama’s plane, wherever Obama was staying in Denver and the auditorium in which the debate took place all climate controlled environments, with no “thin air” anywhere? You should know all about climate control and environments, right, Al?

There was also Astroturf Dave Axelrod’s claim that a different Romney showed up than they expected. Maybe he, like Obama, believed the mischaracterizations of Romney portrayed by Team Obama during the entire campaign, so when the real Romney showed up, I can see how they were surprised and Obama was confused. They should have remembered that Romney, as the successful businessman he is, does powerful power point presentations almost as a matter of course and would have prepared to the nines for selling his point of view. If almost anybody on Team Obama had ever really worked in the private sector, as opposed to just being liberal, political ideologues, that might have dawned on them.

Then, famous inside Washington author Bob Woodward helpfully speculated that something personal must have put Obama off his game. This excuse has since morphed into something in an intel briefing he received right before the debate. If that’s the case, then I would suggest “something said in an intel briefing” apparently put Obama more off his game than the first news of 9/11, whispered in his ear while in a classroom of kids, did to George W. Bush in 2001. Bush maintained his demeanor over a real disaster, but Obama could not do so over some info he might have received? Really?

Then, more recently, it was all John Kerry’s fault for not helping Obama adequately prep for the debate. I don’t think I’ve ever seen any politician, much less a president, more quick to throw someone under the bus than Obama. He did it, when he finally had to, to Jeremiah Wright, his pastor and mentor of over 20 years. He even did it at one point to his own grandmother. So, thanks for your help, John, but you’re just one in a long line of Obama’s “It’s not ME, it’s HIM!”

There were more excuses, some exotic and some just obviously ridiculous. Quite frankly, I’m surprised the Japanese tsunami and earthquake and the Arab Spring haven’t been resurrected as pseudo-viable excuses, along with those pesky but undefined “headwinds” Obama talks about regarding his sluggish economy from time to time.

But it has all now been consolidated into a simple, Saul Alinsky-style attack line, “Romney lied.” What was that Obama said in his Democratic nomination acceptance speech in Denver in 2008? “Because if you don’t have any fresh ideas, then you use stale tactics to scare voters. If you don’t have a record to run on, then you paint your opponent as someone people should run from. You make a big election about small things.”

Precisely, Mr. President. That’s exactly what you’ve been doing for the whole 2012 campaign season. “Romney’s this and Romney’s that and, oh, look over here at our latest shiny object to distract you from my abysmal record in office. But, give me four more years to keep doing what we’ve been doing. It’s got to work sooner or later.” Uh-huh.

Romney’s been accused by Team Obama of being a felon, complicit in the death of a laid off steel worker’s wife, a rich and uncaring guy, out-of-touch with everyday people, a vampire capitalist, and a tax cheat. Did I forget any of the charges Team Obama have made against Romney, all with not a shred of evidence?

Now, Obama and his minions are appearing all over their compliant, complicit and slavishly sycophantic media claiming that Obama couldn’t effectively debate Romney because Romney lied so much. Ironic that Obama, often himself dubbed our Liar-in Chief, would dare to make such a charge. I mean, whole, carefully researched, extensively footnoted books have been written about Obama’s lying, and he hasn’t even finished his first (and hopefully only) term yet. Yet, instead of admitting that a tougher, more prepared Romney showed up for the debate than they expected, they want us to believe that it was a Romney which they couldn’t recognize because he told so many lies.

Well, Mr. President, you weren’t quick enough on your feet at the time to call Romney out on his lies? If he lied so much and his lies were so big, it looks like you could have picked at least one on which to challenge him, don’t you think? Aren’t you, at least according to your adoring fans in the mainstream media, the most “brilliant” guy around? I mean, I didn’t even go to law school at Harvard and certainly wasn’t the editor of my school’s law review, as you claim to have been, but they did teach us to think on our feet at my law school. Didn’t they teach you that at Harvard?

And, by the way, Team Obama, specifically what did Romney lie about? I haven’t heard any specifics from Obama’s henchmen and handmaidens, only accusations. Sort of like High Horse Harry Reid saying “somebody told him” Romney hadn’t paid taxes for a decade but offering no proof, when anyone with a brain would know that Obama’s IRS, led by wunderkind whizkid Turbo Tax Tim Geithner, would be all over Romney’s taxes if there were anything really wrong with them. Even a sniff or a hint.

It’s like another Team Obama shiny object distraction which has been run into the ground, about Romney having Swiss and offshore Cayman Island bank accounts. You mean, like many rich Democrats and the Hollyweird limo liberals, with whom Obama so likes to hang, also legitimately have to shelter their millions? Those kinds of accounts? Yeah, I thought so, you hubristic hypocrites.

I guess one of the things most contended between Obama and Romney during the debate was Obama’s claim that Romney wanted to raise taxes on the middle class and the whole $5 trillion dollar thing, which Obama kept numbingly repeating like a talking point, without any evidence to back up his claim, and which Romney kept denying. Was that what Romney lied about?

Team Obama has said, “Even the studies that Romney has cited to claim his plan adds up still show he would need to raise middle-class taxes. In fact, Harvard economist Martin Feldstein and Princeton economist Harvey Rosen both concede that paying for Romney’s tax cuts would require large tax increases on families making between $100,000 and $200,000.”

Hmmm, then why did Professor Rosen say that the Obama campaign had misrepresented his work?

“I can’t tell exactly how the Obama campaign reached that characterization of my work. It might be that they assume that Governor Romney wants to keep the taxes from the Affordable Care Act in place, despite the fact that the Governor has called for its complete repeal. The main conclusion of my study is that under plausible assumptions, a proposal along the lines suggested by Governor Romney can both be revenue neutral and keep the net tax burden on taxpayers with incomes above $200,000 about the same. That is, an increase in the tax burden on lower and middle income individuals is not required in order to make the (Romney) overall plan revenue neutral.”

And then, too, there was that recent, little video snippet of Stephanie Cutter, Obama’s serial lying deputy campaign manager, admitting under questioning on a TV talk show (and not on FOX, either, by the way) that, uh, er, ah, that so oft-mentioned $5 trillion probably wasn’t really $5 trillion.

Speaking in Chicago, GOP vice presidential candidate Paul Ryan said Obama is trying to “throw the kitchen sink” at Romney and “muddle and confuse” voters. Gee, ya think? When you don’t have the facts on your side, you make false claims and hope that some of them stick. That’s what Team Obama has been doing and is continuing to do.

Professor Rosen’s objection followed a similar statement released by the AARP immediately after the debate. During the debate, President Obama claimed that the AARP had stated the Romney plan would “weaken Medicare substantially” and that AARP supported ObamaCare. In response, AARP Senior Vice President John Hishta said, “America’s voters deserve more than talking points.” And, “AARP has never consented to the use of its name by any candidate or political campaign.”

So, who’s really lying, Team Obama? H-e-l-l-o? Crickets. Thought so.

[If Ryan doesn’t make enough of a point about it in his upcoming debate with Biden, which I hope he does, Romney should surely confront Obama with his allegations that Romney’s lied in their next debate and challenge Obama, right there in their town hall meeting, to prove it. Or, what would be even better is if someone in the town hall audience put that question to Obama. “Put up or shut up, Mr. President…..and remember, we’re on national TV, with no filters, no teleprompter and nobody to ‘protect’ you. Go ahead, you have the floor.” (Also known as giving someone enough rope to hang himself.)]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: