WASHINGTON — For more than a year Mitt Romney has criticized President Obama from afar. Hopping from state to state, from rally to rally, he has slammed the president over his policies and called for a more conservative path for the country.
Romney finally got his chance Wednesday night to face down the president in person, and he appeared to make the most of it with a direct critique of Obama’s first term that was cogent and sharp.
Comments
Romney came shooting for bear and Obama for squirrel. Where was the president's passion? He got the policy exactly right but needed a STRONG delivery to compete with this bull. There were SO many holes in that Republican that the president could have driven a bulldozer through them. Romney Etch-A-Sketched his entire policy like they said he would do. He says one thing for one audience and another thing for another audience. This is what he does ALL the time. He lies. I wanted the president to LOOK AT THIS GUY STRAIGHT IN THE EYE and call him out on his lies, with passion and with force. I am politically savvy and can see though the lies of Romney and the Republicans. They are DEADLY to the 99% when in office. One need only to look back. What I fear is that those in the swing states will NOT look back and will just see a raging bull and like that presentation and NOT think about policy. Rolling back Obamacare and instituting vouchers WILL kill. Ridding the younger generation of Social Security which is ultimately what Republicans have been wanting to do for 70 years will rob the next generation of at least SOME security in old age when the economy TANKS as IT ABSOLUTELY WILL AGAIN. Our economy is built on sand ONLY for the 1% so when you get the booms and then the busts older people will have NOTHING. Is that what people want? Will people be wise enough and understanding of the history of this nation to get it and not fall for image? That is my worry. It is NOT what Obama said as he was TOTALLY correct but it was his delivery of it. That is my worry.
There were SO many holes in that Democrat that the challenger could have driven a bulldozer through them. Obama Etch-A-Sketched his entire policy like they said he would do. He says one thing for one audience and another thing for another audience. This is what he does ALL the time. He lies. I wanted Romney to LOOK AT THIS GUY STRAIGHT IN THE EYE and call him out on his lies, with passion and with force. I am politically savvy and can see though the lies of Obama and the Democrats. They are DEADLY to the 100% when in office. One need only to look back. What I fear is that those in the swing states will NOT look back and will just see a raging bull and like that presentation and NOT think about policy. Rolling back Obamacare and instituting vouchers WILL save the system. Ridding the younger generation of Social Security which is ultimately what intelligent economists have been wanting to do for 70 years will provide the next generation with at least SOME security in old age when the economy TANKS as IT ABSOLUTELY WILL AGAIN. Our economy is built on sand ONLY for the unions and government workers so when you get the booms and then the busts older people will have NOTHING. Is that what people want? Will people be wise enough and understanding of the history of this nation to get it and not fall for image? That is my worry. It is also what Obama said as he was TOTALLY incorrect, and it was his delivery of it. That is my worry.
There, fixed that for you!
NRosen, would you be thoughtful and provide specifics, when you state that 'Romney lies' and "He says one thing for one audience and another thing for another audience"? You, like so many others, forget that 9/11 happened and the consequences that it had on our economy. If a Democrat was in the White House at that time, the same results would have occured. Its laughable when you read comments from people like you when you state "Our economy is built on sand ONLY for the 1%". Who do you think provides for the so-called 99%, our state & federal governments that employ 15% of the workforce or the businessses that employ 85% of the workforce?
The media had annointed Obama as smart and savvy since he showed up on the national scene. They never vetted him, never questioned his background and qualifications to be President. So, after 4 years as President, he had never even been forced to respond to hard, direct questions. No telepromter, no soft questions from an adoring press. Just a series of real questions, and reactions to his talking points, that once confronted with them, he folded and stammered. It wasn't a pretty picture! Romney, on the other hand, easily handled every questions, with reasoned, in depth answers. He was confident, positive and cheery. Not the monster the president has tried to paint him. Need I say, Romney was Reagan-esq. The country needs him now more than ever!
Ah, well, we all see what we want to see. Since most of the voters have already made up their minds, it would only be instructive to hear from undecided voters who watched the debate. Alternatively, from "decided" voters who may have been tempted to change based on the debate last night, which seems unlikely. Otherwise, the decideds saw different versions of the debate, as usual.
Unfortunately for Obama, he wasn't facing an old, tired warrior who shuffled onto the stage, seemingly muttering to himself. Unlike McCain, Romney was a sharp, focused, confident, upbeat and well-prepared opponent eager to enter the ring and smack Obama around. Obama, in contrast, appeared weathered, mostly disengaged, and solemnly defensive. He had no spark whatsoever. There was almost no trace of the supremely self-assured candidate of four years ago who was able to beat beat back the formidable Clinton machine. The presidency, with its endless responsibilities, seems to have sucked the life out of Obama. After that performance, it is difficult to believe that Obama really wants four more years. It may be time to drape a towel over his head and give him some needed ice packs.
Have you ever heard of a head fake? You just witnessed the President providing one that all the pundits missed.
When Barack Obama can't read Axelrod's scripted remarks on the teleprompter, he looks far less presidential. Why did Obama, Pelosi and Reid pursue health care reform for a year when the housing market was the immediate crisis? We still have lots of homes in foreclosure and banks are afraid to make mortgage loans because of a maze of Dodd-Frank regulations. The unemployment rate is higher than it needs to be because so many people can't sell their homes and move to find job vacancies they can fill. We need business experience in the White House, not a disciple of Saul Alinsky and Bill Ayers.
This comment has been removed.
Obama is an empty suit without that teleprompter. Get used to the words "President Mitt Romney".
Obama met adult intelligence & personal integrity in the form of Gov. Mitt Romney. It is amazing to find the media trying to defend Obama. Some are actually rewriting the deabate with their comments that, "Obama, could have said . . . or "Obama should have said ... " No Telepromter to help Obama last night. TOoooooo funny!!! Saturday Night Live skit.
The cut to PBS would reduce their revenues by $44.4M per year ($444M over 10 years). Looking at their last fully released annual report you will see they made $40M of profit and add to a cummulative profit surplus of $319M. Looks to me like losing the revenue would mean they need to raise $4.4M more per year or eat into their surplus. They also have $22Mper year in management salaries so they could also cut back there. http://www.pbs.org/about/media/about/cms_page_media/29/2010PBSFullFinancialReport.pdf
The Kid's Brigade is gearing up this morning to pass an amendment to lower the voting age to three years old. SAVE SESAME STREET from the mean, mean Mitt Monster!
This comment has been removed.
Further more - Gov. Romney could have asked Obama, "What kind of secrets does he plan to discuss with PUTNIN after the November elections?????
Don't you mean what kind of "secretion" he will get on "PUTNIN"? Mmmmm . . . . buttersketch putnin . . . . .
No matter where you stand, having single-party control of the government is not a good thing. All the more reason why Massachusetts is such an important state this election season. In the likely event Governor Romney is elected President and the House remains controlled by conservative Republicans, it is important that the Democrats remain a slim majority in the Senate to counter-balance any radical conservative agenda proposed by Republicans. Given his voting record on the issues that really matter to voters in Massachusetts, Senator Brown cannot be counted on to deliver a well-balanced approach. He has yet to stand-up, nationally, for the values he professes to hold at home. This is very suspect and rather dodgy in my opinion.
This comment has been removed.
TheSystemWorked: No need to get cheeky. The national Republican party has lost its way and has given too much power to conservative Southern and Mid-west Republicans. Senator Brown has little clout or will to counter that power. Had he been engaged as a moderate at the RNC, I'd probably think otherwise, but he wasn't. So yes, having such a delegation in D.C. should make moderate, fair-minded person like me, cringe. For the record, if William Weld, Charlie Baker and other like-minded moderate Republicans were running in my district, they'd earn my vote. I actually hope Charlie Baker runs for Governor again as he would be a great Governor and counter-balance for the Democrats. For the time-being, though, Massachusetts has fared quite well through the recession and post-recession with its legislature and Executive Branch dominated by Democrats.
What did Pres. Obama have to brag about. The $6 trillion added to the debt or the 20 million more people on food stamps and millions added to the unemployment rolls....take your pick.
I know on the foreign policy debate he will brag about his Las Vegas fund raiser he went to while our ambassador & others were murdered and consulates were burning.