Thank you for visiting Ohio.com. We noticed you are using an outdated browser that may not give you the best user experience. We recommend current browser versions of Google’s Chrome, Microsoft’s Edge, Mozilla’s Firefox. For more specific information on how to update your browser --Click Here or visit your browser’s website.
Last night, we had the second presidential debate, and I'd like to congratulate President Obama for showing up for this one. He acquitted himself better than in the first debate, but in my opinion, it's too late, he did too little, and there are very good reasons not to re-elect him. As I listen to Obama speak, I keep thinking to myself, "Obama talks like he hasn't' been President for the last four years'. He talks about what he wants to do, but he apparently thinks we've forgotten that he's already had four years to do these things. His promises ring hollow.
This following statement by Mitt Romney drives the point home. It came after Obama tried to defend his record. Romney threw the haymaker:
One of the hallmarks of the Obama administration has been it's proclivity to attempt to blame everything on others. The administration's 'The Buck Stops There' mentality was on display yet again in the vice presidential debate. Here's VP Joe Biden trying to blame Republicans for the lack of security at the embassy in Benghazi, Libya:
"Number one, the — this lecture on embassy security — the congressman [Republican Paul Ryan] here cut embassy security in his budget by $300 million below what we asked for, number one. So much for the embassy security piece."
The political left's latest tactic, beyond Big Bird, is to call Mitt Romney a liar every five seconds in the hope that it will distract people from the fact that Romney schooled Obama in the presidential debate. What follows are a few things the left would rather you not focus on as it screams "liar, liar, pants on fire !!!"
None of this is surprising given the first presidential debate, won by Romney in a landslide. While Obama supporters are offering an array of excuses to explain the President's poor performance, I think what happened is fairly simple to explain. For the first time, Romney got to define himself in front of the entire country. Prior to the debate, Romney was being defined by the media and by Obama's negative attack ads. The Obama-media's sophomoric, cartooonish portrayal of Romney as an evil Gordon Gecko type who doesn't pay taxes and who only cares about making the rich richer was belied by the Romney who stood at the debate podum intelligently discussing policy issues and offering solutions to America's economic woes. Team Obama is now sad that their childish Romney caricature has been dashed. Waah.
According to a post-presidential debate CNN poll, 67% of the viewers thought Gov. Romney won the debate, and 25% thought President Obama won the debate. In related news, 67% of those polled actually watched the debate, while the other 25% were too ashamed to admit they watched the Yankees-Red Sox game instead. Btw, the Yankees routed the Red Sox 14-2, which is similar to the way Romney routed Obama.
It was the most lopsided presidential debate victory since CNN started asking the "who won ?" question in 1984.
This is going to be the easiest post I ever wrote, because I'm not going to write it. I read a speech by former Democratic pollster Pat Caddell called 'The Audacity Of Corruption', that is so illuminating, I'm going to bail and let you listen to him instead of me. Caddell has been around for a long time. He has worked for McGovern, Carter, Gary Hart, Biden, and Jerry Brown. Listen to what he's saying now:
"I think we’re at the most dangerous time in our political history in terms of the balance of power in the role that the media plays in whether or not we maintain a free democracy or not. You know, when I first started in politics – and for a long time before that – everyone on both sides, Democrats and Republicans, despised the press commonly, because they were SOBs to everybody. Which is exactly what they should be. They were unrelenting. Whatever the biases were, they were essentially equal-opportunity people. That changed in 1980. There’s a lot of reasons for it. It changed—an important point in the Dukakis-Bush election, when the press literally was trying to get Dukakis elected by ignoring what was happening in Massachusetts, with a candidate who was running on the platform of “He will do for America what he did for Massachusetts”—while they were on the verge of bankruptcy.