Much of the commentary this morning is on moderator Candy Crowley's intrusive mid-debate "fact-check" of Mitt Romney. (Video here.) Charles Krauthammer rightly observes that Crowley contaminated the issue with her inappropriate and misleading interference (which she partially clarifies here). See Jim Geraghty for a good discussion of that whole mess.
Romney certainly could have done better there, though it's tough when, as is so often the case in these debates, it's two against one. Along those lines, here's a graphic sent to me from reader Pseud O'Nym:
Romney beat him senseless on all the important individual issues like the economy, health care, deficit, and taxes.And via Ben Shapiro, here's how:
I think you know better. I think you know that these last four years haven't been so good as the president just described and that you don't feel like you’re confident that the next four years are going to be much better either. I can tell you that if you were to elect President Obama, you know what you're going to get. You're going to get a repeat of the last four years. We just can't afford four more years like the last four years.It's the failed record, stupid. The RNC has wisely put much of that into an ad.
He said that by now we'd have unemployment at 5.4 percent. The difference between where it is and 5.4 percent is 9 million Americans without work. I wasn't the one that said 5.4 percent. This was the president's plan. Didn't get there.
He said he would have by now put forward a plan to reform Medicare and Social Security, because he pointed out they're on the road to bankruptcy. He would reform them. He'd get that done. He hasn't even made a proposal on either one.
He said in his first year he'd put out an immigration plan that would deal with our immigration challenges. Didn't even file it.
This is a president who has not been able to do what he said he'd do. He said that he'd cut in half the deficit. He hasn't done that either. In fact, he doubled it. He said that by now middle-income families would have a reduction in their health insurance premiums by $2,500 a year. It's gone up by $2,500 a year. And if Obamacare is passed, or implemented -- it's already been passed -- if it's implemented fully, it'll be another $2,500 on top.
The middle class is getting crushed under the policies of a president who has not understood what it takes to get the economy working again. He keeps saying, "Look, I've created 5 million jobs." That's after losing 5 million jobs. The entire record is such that the unemployment has not been reduced in this country. The unemployment, the number of people who are still looking for work, is still 23 million Americans. There are more people in poverty, one out of six people in poverty.
How about food stamps? When he took office, 32 million people were on food stamps. Today, 47 million people are on food stamps. How about the growth of the economy? It's growing more slowly this year than last year, and more slowly last year than the year before.
The president wants to do well. I understand. But the policies he's put in place from Obamacare to Dodd-Frank to his tax policies to his regulatory policies, these policies combined have not let this economy take off and grow like it could have.
You might say, "Well, you got an example of one that worked better?" Yeah, in the Reagan recession where unemployment hit 10.8 percent, between that period -- the end of that recession and the equivalent of time to today, Ronald Reagan's recovery created twice as many jobs as this president's recovery. Five million jobs doesn't even keep up with our population growth. And the only reason the unemployment rate seems a little lower today is because of all the people that have dropped out of the workforce.
The president has tried, but his policies haven't worked. He's great as a -- as a -- as a speaker and describing his plans and his vision. That's wonderful, except we have a record to look at. And that record shows he just hasn't been able to cut the deficit, to put in place reforms for Medicare and Social Security to preserve them, to get us the rising incomes we need. Median income is down $4,300 a family and 23 million Americans out of work. That's what this election is about. It's about who can get the middle class in this country a bright and prosperous future and assure our kids the kind of hope and optimism they deserve.
One more thing. I was awake for this part but I must have been groggier than I thought because Obama's "reasoning" on why gasoline is so painfully expensive made absolutely no sense to me:
PRESIDENT OBAMA: Well, think about what the governor — think about what the governor just said. He said when I took office, the price of gasoline was 1.80 (dollars), 1.86 (dollars). Why is that? Because the economy was on the verge of collapse; because we were about to go through the worst recession since the Great Depression as a consequence of some of the same policies that Governor Romney is now promoting. So it’s conceivable that Governor Romney could bring down gas prices, because with his policies we might be back in that same mess. (Audience murmurs.)Yeah, we murmured at home, too. Let's all murmur our way to the polls on November 6th.
Entire debate transcript here.
***
Many thanks to Michelle Malkin for linking.
***
Most recent posts here. Follow us on Twitter here. Amazon store here.



I just worry that Romney doesn't see the really big picture. When he's doing well, he's stepping back. But he often doesn't step back and show us Sniveling Obama, and sometimes he gets wonky, which reveals his lack of vision. Sigh.
ReplyDeleteobamabot --- you're a moron!
DeleteHuh?
DeleteI don't think "wonky" reveals a "lack of vision", Leila. Truth is complicated.
DeleteI remember in Spring of 2010 Michele Bachmann and that disgraced Weiner guy were on Hannity talking about debt. She and Sean were trying to point out that the deficit run up in the month of January 2010 was more than the deficit of all of 2007. They both fumbled a bit, and you had to pay attention to get it. Switch over to Weiner, and he had a simple line: "Bush did it! Bush ran up all these deficits! Bush!"
It was effective. Simple lies are often easier for us to believe than complicated truths. We're a fallen creature.
I thought Romney did well last night. That was a tough forum.
Gasoline prices have steadily increased ubder O as supplies have not kept up with demand (R was right about O's disastrous policies - -but should have hit him on giving Brazil $2B load to make offshore oil there rather than take care of us here (supply+jobs). As well, QE1, 2, and 3 have all cheapened the US dollar. This is the disaster of O's policies: where is yo' dollar? It is now only worth 50-70% of its value from 4 years ago.
ReplyDeleteJohn
"One more thing. I was awake for this part but I must have been groggier than I thought because Obama's "reasoning" on why gasoline is so painfully expensive made absolutely no sense to me: "
ReplyDeleteJoin the crowd. But on the flip side, Obama blamed the low gas prices in January 2009 on Bush. This reminds me of people we would talk to and afterwords wonder if they caused us to lose some of our brains. We called the affect, "negative intelligence."
No matter if the pundits in the MSM give Obama the win on style, because Romney killed Obama on substance. Obama had nothing new to offer except an assault weapons ban that merely bring the Fast and Furious Fiasco to the forefront. There is no way that Obama swayed independent voters with his BS, completely doubt anyone was dazzled. Only the Obamabots are going down with him. I suspect that the vast majority of the squishy middle have made up their minds about the Obama disaster and will vote Romney/ Ryan, in fact, I am expecting a RR landslide along the 330EV range. After last night I am even more convinced that only the Koolaid drinkers will stick with Obama and some of them may not even vote. TexasMom2012
ReplyDeleteThe President is not an idiot! Write that a hundred times on the blackboard. It's not the President that is screwing things up.
ReplyDeleteIt's his POLICIES that suck. It's Progressivism that sucks. The economy is failing because Progressive economic policy ALWAYS fails. It's failed in the USSR, Cuba, Africa, Asia...everywhere. If you want America to look like Cuba or Europe (with chronicly high unemployment) then by all means, press ahead because we don't have a magic wand to make the thing work. America can look just like Greece, Cuba, you-name-it.
And if you make the problem this President then we will get a replacement; not this time, but in 2016. Progressivism will march forward even if this president does not.
Where I live Husker Fever is endemic. Good season, bad season, the fans come out. Win or lose they are "our" team. Good year, bad year "Go Huskers." Support "our" team. Lose a close one..it's still "our" team; Go Huskers.
Politics is like this where elections are like a season and the debates are like a game. Your team has a bad year, no matter, they are still our team. Maybe some poor players this time, or bad officiating but they are still our team. Support our team.
Conservatives have failed to reach the People and make them want to support our team. In fact, the Progressives have eroded what was our team into their team. And so we lose elections. But more importantly, we lose the basic arguments; or, worse, the arguments are waged from their standards and language. Pretty soon we will lose the Republican Party just as British conservatives have lost the Conservative party. The Republican party is, after all, a retail political outlet. If they can't elect politicians under one ideology they will use another.
Conservatives put all their faith into the belief that Conservatism and Americanism are the same thing and that the American People will automaticly gravitate to the conservative point of view. There are no grounds for this belief.
The President is not an idiot and he hasn't failed. He can lose a debate and his team will still support him. Want to beat him? Then build a base of supporters that will turn out for the team we need to field in order to get the ball back down to the other end of the field.
Brad Ervin
Brad Ervin
Hi, Brad. You've got a point. I think at least 40% of likely voters in every election would vote Democrat even if they ran Scooby-Doo. The American Ed. Blob works tirelessly to create more such.
DeleteDo your bit - educate and persuade. Sending friends and acquaintances to Prager University is a good method:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=ThnKDSGwwgk
Walt
ReplyDeleteThanks! So true. America's chief unrepentant terrorists did not give up bombs for chalk boards for redemption. The result is a tilt toward progressive baselines. Why is it taken for granted that if the government doesn't give something to you (ie: paid for by someone else) it is thereby made unaccessable? Why do we take it for granted that the government must "invest" in things? Why will people not have healthcare if they do not have health insurance?
These positions, and many more, are the positions of old line communists; and we accept them as the new gold standard of society.
This shift away from an America of self achievers that looked to themselves for life's solutions to an America of dependants looking to others for support was brought about by our educators. As the American family has been destroyed the schools and teachers have largely filled the void left by child parents that have gone AWOL in the raising of their children. And, as they say: this is a feature (of Progressivism), not a failure.
Indeed, if the policies of Progressivism had succeeded in revitalizing the American economy those policies would have been a failure to their intended purpose. The new is presaged by the wrecking ball demolishing the old.
For a take on an underutilised alternative to public indoctrination, I mean school, see this:
https://www.nationalreview.com/nrd/articles/328699/last-radicals?pg=1
Thanks again
Brad Ervin