I thoroughly enjoyed the verbal trouncing that President Obama threw down on Mitt Romney last night. It was SO worth the wait. Not only did he confront the multitude of lies and half truths that Romney loves to parrot, he did it with class, intelligence and flawlessly, fluent articulation.
Seriously, check out this great piece by Think Progress: At Last Night’s Debate, Romney told 31 myths in 41 minutes . That’s gotta be some kind of record.
In my opinion, PBO quite literally met Romney toe for toe, as the debate format allowed them to cross physical boundaries. From previous debates, it’s fair to say that Obama does well in this format. It speaks to a kind of mental tai chi. Some folks simply move/think faster on their feet and for a person who is clearly competitive it’s likely a better sparring space, which not only allows you to confront your opponent but dispel energy.
One of the things I thought so cool, was the way Obama dispelled all initial criticisms of his prior debate performance.
Not aggressive enough? Check.
Not passionate enough? Check.
Not present? Listless? Check.
Not engaging? Check.
Not looking his opponent in the eye? Check.
Not enough zingers? Double Check.
We can surely all agree that PBO thoroughly emphasized his strengths, accomplishments and hallmark issues: immigration, women’s right’s, the 47%, Foreign policy experience, veracity, commitment, dedication, consistency and CHARACTER.
Even so, the MSNBC political pundits had teensy complaints this morning. Andrea Mitchell, opined that PBO hadn’t SMILED enough? WTF?! Some other pundit said the debate wasn’t substantive enough (Should be noted that the first debate was criticized as being too substantive), while yet another claimed that neither of Romney or Obama answered the questions put to them.
Chris Todd gets the prize for number one criticism:
“The so-called questions from supposedly undecided voters, and those dissatisfied with the Bush years, seemed to benefit the President, allowing him to hone in on hallmarks of campaign..” Chris Todd, Daily Rundown 10/17/12
Amazing, yes?
- So, are women not supposed to be concerned with women’s rights? Go figure.
- Should parents not be concerned about the potential elimination of education credits and vanishing deductions?
- Are those of Latin descent not supposed to be concerned with immigration?
- Does it seem crazy that an African American male, whose race is currently laboring under double digit unemployment, be concerned as to what the administration’s plans are for the next four years?
- I know, it must seem ludicrous that a man would be concerned about foreign policy and the desperate attempts being made, by the media and the GOP, to turn the administration’s handling of Libya into a scandal…
They all seem like perfectly logical questions to me. The assertion itself is not only illogical but just another flagrant, baseless attempt to cast aspersion on President Obama’s administration. But that’s nothing new. In fact, it’s become de rigueur which is just flat out disgusting.
I’ve plugged my ears to the naysayers. They seem hellbent on picking apart every word and nuance to find fault and amplify it. It’s really, really sad that the public is unable to rely upon so much of the media for unbiased, factual, educational statements as they attempt to pick a candidate and the future direction of our country. Like our political system, the media is b-b-broken. Enough with the sensationalism!
President Obama and Joe Biden did a stellar job in the last two debates and I’m happy to say it’s exactly what I expected, naysayers be damned.
Strategically speaking, I am convinced, somewhat belatedly, that Obama’s first debate performance was partially a tactic to feel out Romney’s strengths and weaknesses. In which case, it came off beautifully :). Looking forward to round 3.
20 days and counting…
Music to my ears as it was, the title and inspiration of this piece deserves a special shout out to The Roots because after last night’s Presidential debate the song below came roaring into my consciousness. HELL YEAH!
It did that thing that all good music does, leaves you buzzin’ on an energy groove. The beats invaded my synapses and neurons, refusing to leave. A mind trip otherwise known as lyrical excellence. It comes in many forms…
Or, if you aren’t a hiphop-o-phile and managed to miss it and would rather the real thing, check it out:
Streams Of Consciousness - Coco Rivers 
I thoroughly enjoyed this last debate, Coco. I’ve never stopped believing in my President to execute! I grew weary of the onslaught within two minutes after the debate ended. I just can’t.
Hi Empress,
Faith is everything :). Besides, I’ve never known a Leo to lay down on the job, it goes against nature lol.
Hey lady! LOL! Leos are among the hardest working of the bunch, girl!
Cool. Nicely said I was overjoyed even in the first few minutes I saw Obama; he was clearly ready to crush that other guy. Although in Romney’s defense, he did do us incompetent, airheaded Massachusetts females a favor by finding *gasp* an entire folder of competent women who (eventually) earned the honor of breathing the same air as him. Cripes.
I do think the media had a point. If we look at it NOT as criticism, but rather as strategy: a smile from the President means a lot to me personally if only because we do look to him as a leader and it’s reassuring to see him smile; more importantly, journalism is not what it used to be. Dan Rather made the superb point that modern debate questions don’t force candidates to answer honestly; instead, they allow candidates to give a stock answer. We can’t let them do that.
Dan Rather suggested someone as Romney to name one thing he thinks Bush did wrong. In fact someone did ask a question like that and it was revealing to hear Romney’s answer. So it’s not a matter of asking different questions, but rather asking them in a way that does not allow candidates to weasel out of a revealing answer.
Awesome post.
Correction: “Ask” not “as”.
Hi Amelie,
Thanks! I think that was an awesome reply :). One the smile thing, I can see merit in your point when it’s broken down like that but here’s the thing, we all have different ways of interpreting expression. A smile may have been considered as a lack of seriousness, or weakness by some. More importantly though, the whole dissection thing goes too far. We’re all humans and it’s entirely possibly that he was so focused he forgot to smile. After all, the stakes are deadly serious.
That said, you are spot on about Dan Rather. I do so love that man. It was Susan Katz of Hempstead LI who asked that brilliant question. It loved it because it exactly cut past all the rhetoric to the core fear of any sane voter.
When you think about it, it’s amazing how much of our system and traditions remain unchanged. It is maddening to hear the debates which are often larger stages for the same talking points used on the stump. It MUST stop. They are doing a grave disservice to the American people and we deserve better.
Thank you for showing how the media does not always favor the president. I hear so much on the opposite end, I feel as if I am alone saying that is not true.
What did you think of Candy?
Hi Rumbly,
She rocked!!!! Candy gets all my respect, she did her job with professionalism, class and journalistic integrity. Many might not have had the guts to speak out and say Romney was lying about Libya. Now, poor womna, she’s suffering a conservative backlash. Tsk tsk. We need more women moderators, they too have much to contribute 🙂