I think the camera shots of the
audience behind The Romney and Obama were telling. While Obama was
speaking, they looked engaged; they were smiling and attentive.
While The Romney was speaking, they were bored, looking elsewhere, and
fidgeting. The audience voted for Obama last night, and it was due
to the differences in style and content of the two.
Candy Crowley was a decent enough moderator; The Romney's bulldozer
tried to run her over and she would have none of it; one funny
tweet last night was "Candy clearly was a nanny for bratty,
spoiled children. She's putting the smack down on @MittRomney."
But her best moment was the stuff about the consulate in Libya.
That questioner was clearly a The Romney plant.
In our embassies, marines have one duty - to destroy records
if the embassy were to be overrun; they are there to protect the
documents, not the staff. [ See Marine Security Guard "The primary mission of the MSG is to provide security, particularly the protection of classified information and equipment vital to the national security of the United States at American diplomatic posts. "] Consulates have no such collections of
documents, ergo they have no marines guarding them. Obama clearly
knew the name of the State department official but did not wish to
implicate her - Christine Lamb - who had turned down the request
for guards at dozens of consulates in the region, not just
Benghazi.
I thought most of the questions were less than brilliant, but what
does one expect of an undecided voter? These are, to some extent,
the mouth-breathers, the intellectual carp, the lazy. Obviously
there are exceptions. We saw a couple last night: the woman who
asked The Romney what differentiated him from Bush, the young woman
who asked about gender inequality in the workplace, the question
about automatic weapons. These were great questions with telling
responses.
How on earth did The Romney segue from AK47s to pregnancy? That was so
bizarre, but not the weirdest The Romney moment in the debate.
"Binders full of women" takes that prize. That was too silly for
even Sean Hannity.
I think the press corp found it difficult to maintain its
anti-Obama stance, but it will do its best to make the Villagers -
as Krugman calls them - seem like seers, not bozos. The Post
struggles to find good things to day about The Romney. I am sure "both
sides were wrong" will emerge as their main argument. In the
Times, Peter Baker is, for a change, a bit more realistic. Jeff
Zeleny, also in the Times, is his usual hateful self. He needs to
work for Fox full time instead of faking it at the NY Times. He
reminds me of Elizabeth Bumiller - aka Bu"LLShit"miller - during
Bush and Kerry. We will see the spin doctors emerge in the next
week, trying to say The Romney actually won.
I admired the way Obama never let The Romney steal a march. Obama was
funny, witty, and engaging. The Romney was bullying, intellectually
sterile, and humorless. The Romney retreated to his talking points so
often I wondered if Ms. Crowley would complain about his lack
of responsiveness, and to her credit she did.
This was a clear victory for Obama, but the Villagers and their
minions will try to turn this, just as they did with Gore's sighs
- they never happened - Naomi Wolf's alleged 'brown tones' clothes
advice to Gore - never happened - the Love Canal lies, the
internet lies, the 'Love Story' lies.
The media is pro-Republican because they are getting paid $250k a
year, and they are voting for their guy who will protect the 1%.
In the meantime, Obama whooped some serious ass, and the audience
last night knew it.
Wednesday, October 17, 2012
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment