Presidential Debate #3

The third presidential debate was tonight (Oct. 22) and was ostensibly about foreign policy.  A few quick thoughts.

Where was Benghazi?  Schieffer broached it, Obama danced around it and Romney didn’t nail him on it.  Why?

I guess Obama wasn’t that bad on a performance basis.  It was mostly the same old crap.  As Romney said:  “Attacking me is not an agenda.”  His whole “…the ’80s called…” snarky bit came off petty (and mostly wrong).  By the way, we still use bayonets and horses (see:  Afghan terrain).  Also, bin Laden, bin Laden, bin Laden!  Plus I don’t know how taxing “rich” people more and spending (wastefully) more is supposed to reduce the deficit.

Romney, I think, held his own pretty good.  He seemed versed on the issues.  I do think he should have embraced defense cuts (we can’t knock $50B/yr out of $1T/yr?).  That way he can say “we’re willing to cut spending we like (and which I might add is an actual function of the federal government) why won’t you?”  Spending is our biggest problem.

I think Bob Schieffer was OK.  I guess I can’t hate too much.

Overall I don’t think Romney’s foreign policy is going to be all that different, which is a shame.  He may have clearer vision than Obama (I don’t really know what our foreign policy is now) but there wasn’t much different going on in the debate.  Ugh…


Presidential Debate #2

Ugh… Do I have to write about this?  Anyway, quick hit on the Oct. 16 presidential debate.

The president wasn’t as sedated as the first debate but it’s the same old crap with him.  More government, more taxes, blah blah blah, progressive crap.  He straight up misrepresented the Arizona immigration law.  He said he wasn’t politicizing Benghazi (which has been politicized since Sept. 11, S. Cutter basically said as much [see here and here, via HotAir]) then goes on to do just that.

Speaking of Benghazi I think Romney dropped the ball a bit on that (it didn’t help the Crowley “fact checked” incorrectly).  He should have hit Obama hard on the lack of security and lying about it in the aftermath.

I do think Romney did pretty good on the economic stuff, which he usually does.

Crowley wasn’t as bad as I thought she was going to be, but still terrible.  Obama got more time again.  Incorrect “fact checking.”  Seemed like Obama got to follow up much more than Romney.

I didn’t care much for the “undecided” questioners.  Some questions were not so bad but others were ridiculous.  Like the unequal pay, war on women crap.  Then there was the “what kind of man are you” bs at the end (BTW Crowley chose all the questions in advance).

Personally I think Romney did better, especially on economics.  The flash polls were showing Obama winning overall but Romney winning on the economy, taxes, healthcare, leadership…go figure (see CNN, CBS and numbersmuncher).  I’m not sure why the numbers shake out that way.  Ace has some thoughts on “performance points” (plus more about the flash polls).


The next debate on Oct. 22 is about foreign policy.  Romney needs to do his homework and be prepared.  He has to keep on the Benghazi fiasco, I think.  Hopefully the moderator won’t run cover for Obama but I won’t hold my breath.  That just means Romney has to be at the top of his game.


Added a couple links regarding Benghazi.

Presidential Debate #1

The president and GOP contender Mitt Romney had their first debate Wednesday October 3rd.  I don’t know what I was expecting but Mr. Romney pretty much demolished O.  I don’t think that it’s so much Romney was that good but that the president wasn’t very good.

I don’t know if the president just wasn’t prepared or that it’s hard to defend leftist policy (which it is, because it doesn’t work, and has been proved not to work over and over again).  Plus it’s hard to spew DNC talking points, platitudes and various strawmen when you have someone there to rebut it all.

I do like Romney correcting the president on his lying about Romney’s tax plan.  The comment about being in business for 25 years and not knowing what the hell the president was talking about in regard to the tax code (subsidies to off shore-ers) was pretty good.

I like Romney’s energy plan.  He want’s Americans to get at American resources.  Approve Keystone XL.  Just the oil/gas exploration and retrieval and the pipeline would create a lot of jobs, not to mention bring the supply up and bring the price down for these products.  The “loser” line in regards to “green” spending was pretty good.

I do like the federalism argument against O-care although I don’t like R-care (but I guess that’s baked in the cake).  I also like how he pointed out that O-care was passed without any Republican support or input and then contrasted that with his plan in Massachusetts (again, still don’t like R-care, but at least it’s at the state level).

In regard to Medicare I’m glad someone is finally talking about doing something.  I think Romney’s move to a “premium support” model (vouchers) has some merit and will bring some competition back into the system.  Not doing anything, in fact putting price controls in place (as O wants), would be devastating.

As to education Romney touting local control and school choice (vouchers) is good policy.  However I don’t think the Feds should have any role in education.

I know this is just kind of a “quick hit” post on the debate and I’m sure I’m missing some points.  I wasn’t a big Romney guy but I do think he’s at least making a move in the right direction.  He’s still too “big government” for me but we aren’t going to get a straight up libertarian and it  took the lefties 100 years to get us to this point.  We have to start somewhere.