Presidential Debate #2: The Prizefight

Americans tuned into a Townhall Debate and a fight broke out.

The second Presidential Debate between Republican Challenger Mitt Romney and incumbent Barack Hussein Obama (mm mmm mmmm) resembled Ali vs. Frazier.

Romney answered the questions as a CEO addressing his Board of Investors….straight ahead, look ‘em in the eyes, and hit ‘em with the facts.

Obama got himself whipped up to the point of almost pleading, like Rev. Jeremiah Wright must have when it was time to preach on Tithing. He appeared desperate.

As her predecessors did before her, the Moderator, CNN’s Candy Crowley,  injected herself into the debate, choosing questions that had not really come up in the campaign so far, and cutting Romney off more than she did Obama.

The president really did not seem to handle being challenged very well. While Mitt was answering questions, Scooter was over in the corner, sitting on his little stool, pouting like a petulant child…until he decided he had to interrupt Mitt, in order to save his own backside.

Yes, Obama was more aggressive, but he had no answers to back up his aggression.

All hat. No cattle.

John Nolte, posting at Breitbart.com, makes a great point:

We’re done with the second presidential debate, but it was apparent 45 minutes in that between the questions Crowley chose and her handling of who was allowed to speak and when, that this debate was a total and complete set up to rehabilitate Barack Obama. If these are truly undecided voters, they’re apparently undecided between Obama and Green Party. Moreover, as I write this, Obama’s already enjoyed four more minutes of speaking time than Romney. In a ninety-minute debate, that’s a big deal.

The lowest and most dishonest part Crowley’s disgraceful “moderation” was when she actually jumped into the debate to take Obama’s side when the issue of Benghazi came up. To cover for his and his administration lying for almost two weeks about the attack coming as the result of a spontaneous protest over a YouTube video, Obama attempted to use as cover, he claimed he had called the attack a “terrorist attack” on that very first day during his Rose Garden statement.

Romney correctly disputed that.

Crowley, quite incorrectly, took Obama’s side and the crowd exploded.

Here’s what Obama said that day:

No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for.

Context matters and the context here is that Obama connected this “act of terror” to … a mob action over a YouTube video — not a deliberate terrorist attack. Obama was using the term generically and it would be almost two weeks before he used it again.

Let’s not forget that Susan Rice said declaratively on the five Sunday shows four days later that it was NOT an act of terror.

And during those two weeks the Obama administration lied like a rug. For Crowley to step in and attempt to correct Romney on a statement that is at best arguable, was completely out of line. The debate over this debate has only begun.

Indeed. As I mentioned earlier, Ms. Crowley inserted herself into the debate, rather forcibly. The Washington Times agrees:

Another debate, another debacle for America’s media.

In the runup to the second presidential debate, CNN’s Candy Crowley declared that she would not just be a “fly on the wall” as she played the tiny role of moderator, that she would step in whenever she chose to say, “Hey, wait a second, what about X, Y, Z?”

And boy did she, cutting off Republican Mitt Romney repeatedly and often throwing the floor to President Obama with an open “let me give the president a chance here.”

More, she alone decided the topics for the debate, picking questions from the 80 so-called “undecided” voters chosen by the Gallup polling organization. Her selections were tailor-made for Mr. Obama — Mitt Romney’s tax plan, women’s rights and contraception, outsourcing, immigration, the Libya debacle (which gave Mr. Obama to finally say that the buck stops with him, not, as Hillary Clinton said, with her).

She even chose this question, directed to both men: “I do attribute much of America’s economic and international problems to the failings and missteps of the Bush administration. Since both of you are Republicans, I fear the return to the policies of those years should you win this election. What is the biggest difference between you and George W. Bush, and how do you differentiate yourself from George W. Bush?”

Ms. Crowley, who called Mr. Romney’s selection of Rep. Paul Ryan as running mate a “ticket death wish,” asserted her unilateral power at the outset, telling the audience before the cameras went on that she planned to “give the debate direction and ensure the candidates give answers to the questions.”

After both candidates answered Question One, she blurted: “Let me get a more immediate answer” — whatever that means. But when Mr. Romney sought to correct falsehoods told by the president, she cut him off: “We have all these folks here.” In the end, Mr. Obama would get 9 percent more time.

At Question Two, Mr. Obama, asked by Mr. Romney how much he had cut federal oil permits, took over the floor — with Ms. Crowley’s silent approval. “Here’s what happened,” he said as he filibustered for a full minute. Mr. Romney sought to get the last word — as the president had the question before — but the moderator shut him down: “It’ doesn’t quite work like that.”

When Mr. Romney sought to counter Mr. Obama’s assertion after Question Three, Ms. Crowley again cut him off: “Before we get into a vast array….” she said before asking a completely different question.

The next question was pure Obama — workplace inequality (the president mention at every stop his Lily Ledbetter legislation). But the query gave him the platform to demand Americans pay for contraception for all women, saying the governor “feels comfortable having politicians in Washington decide the health care choices that women are making.”

For the record, Mr. Obama spoke for two minutes, then Mr. Romney, then Mr. Obama again. Ms. Crowley then rushed into the next question.

And, that’s the way it went last night…on and on, ad infinitum.

Obama needed a third round knockout last night.

Considering all the lies Obama told last night, which the pundits on both sides will be rehashing today, I would say that, even though he was definitely more animated than his comatose performance in the first debate, Romney still won last night…by TKO.

About these ads

Tags: , , , , ,

4 Responses to “Presidential Debate #2: The Prizefight”

  1. backwoods conservative Says:

    Listening to so much of Obama last night left me wanting to reach for the Maalox. I sat there wondering how many of the viewers were able to see through his lies and distortions.

  2. cmsinaz Says:

    thank you the analysis, only watched the last 20 minutes and I was upset just watching that section with candy and dear leader vs mitt

  3. Gohawgs Says:

    Facts versus non-fact emotion…

  4. williamwalter (@wallyworkswell) Says:

    It is nice to see people who judge content and desire for results! The Presidents actions for defence are not actions that generated money for a profit from product sales, they were acts for emotional impact of hope,and dreams of change!
    Mitt Romney is bringing business ideas(make quality products at reasonable costs,tax freedom, and Constitutional adherence in Govt!

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 )

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,599 other followers

%d bloggers like this: