Tuesday, October 23, 2012
The 3rd & Final Debate, foreign and domestic repairs
It took but half an hour or twenty minutes or so before businessman Romney veered off into more comfortable domestic terrain, done on purpose and killed a small block of time and Obama happily took the bait (geez Dad can we rap about birth control again? I see an opening!). Not exactly two Kissingers squaring off against each other and sure enough Obama obliquely got his pills in (I'm beginning to think he takes bc pills himself) when he said Romney has social policies more from the '50s, a Mormon cross between Robert Young and Leave It To Beaver but onto to Syria and some other more pressing matters. Bashar al-Assad to date has killed about 30,000 of his own citizens, brings to mind Stalin's old quip that one death is a tragedy 30,000 is a statistic to paraphrase. Obama kept talking sanctions up the kazoo whereas Romney agreed but said while there would be no military involvement under his administration we really need to arm the rebels the right ones anyway. I pretty much watched the whole thing with a quick sidetrip for a whizz and a refill and in my notes there's everything. Obama took out Osama bin Laden which in a foreign policy debate is perfectly fair to point out and also somehow took out Khadafy. The evening started out with Mideast terror/Benghazi of course and perhaps the best line of the evening was when Romney said we can't kill ourselves out of this terror situation but really need to engage the Muslim world to reject extremism (hey Sat the real War Against Women can best be capsulized in the pic of little Malala recuperating in her British hospital room, just thought I'd get that in). So how'd that reset go with Putin Mr. Obama? Romney sees Putin more as a geopolitical foe, I see him as nostalgic for the Cold War and not wanting to move on but Obama somehow sees him in less menacing terms, dunno. Iraq, status of forces agreements, the Red Line with Iran, future talks between the U.S. and Iran not being true, tensions with Israel which even many Dems are concerned about, Obama's global apology tour. Geez this blogpost is beginning to resemble an updated version of We Didn't Start the Fire. Rom's feeling is that the world's worst leaders saw weakness in Obama and this made events in the world worse and yeah China was ripe for discussion (we'll save that for the comments section). Leaving Afghanistan in '014 (we hope) and Romney was quite straight about Pakistan being an ally after all they have about 100 nuclear warheads and if Pakistan somehow became a failed state we wouldn't want them getting into the wrong hands. DRONES, education, a strong economy and the overwhelming need for a strong military which in my view Obama seemed particularly weak on, kind of stammered. I finally figured out the media's formula for determining the winner in these things, if Obama didn't do horribly then he won. Of the three debates this was the most pivotal imo. Of course when I go to my e-mail later and find out who's trending today on Yahoo I may revise that. Oh yeah Bob Schieffer a class act:)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I was right, Honey Boo Boo.
ReplyDeleteCan someone tell me anything Mitt Romney would do differently than President Obama?
ReplyDeleteNot degree stuff, like more of the same, only deadlier, but different?
Will he go into Syria? Stay in Afghanistan? Piss off China more? Drop Pakistan? Change Cuba policy? Send troops to Iran? Send bombers to Iran now?
Something, anything... please.
Can't help Dave. The shapeshifter
ReplyDeletehas uttered so many conflicting
positions that only a diehard GOP
guy like Z-Man can answer....
Two sides same statist coin Dave.
ReplyDeleteRead the Drudge report this morning and read what the MSM has been hiding. See what Obama did that Romney would not do
ReplyDeleteHow them apples Davy Boy?
What do you think about MR. Apology now ?
Darth, as usual you've provided no links or answer. As to your apology tour claptrap, that has been debunked by many credible sources. Please provide one speech where President Obama, on behalf of the US said we apologize or we are sorry, necessities when dealing diplomatically.
ReplyDeleteHe as much as Cheney did when Cheney gave the standdown order on 9/11. Two sides, same coin. WTF ya gon do? Statists gonna state.
ReplyDeleteDoes this help?
ReplyDeleteIt should.
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/10/email-alerts-describe-911-benghazi-consulate-assault-unfolding/
As for the question about Obama's apology tour, I guess it all depends on how you want to interpret the word apology. Bo he didn't say the words "I'm sorry" but he did indeed do so in other words.
ReplyDeleteWas that before or after he sent the drones in?
ReplyDeleteJarhead, as to the apology, what words are you interpreting to mean we, as a country are sorry?
ReplyDeleteI've been trying for years to get a conservative to explain this and you are closer than any. At least you admit he never said those words.
As to my other question, problems with Benghazi does not show us what Romney would do differently than Obama. He spent all night Monday agreeing with Obama on foreign policy...
Hey folks remember the good ole days of Boris Yeltsin the drunk? Romney sure did spend alot of time agreeing with Obama Monday night Dave, no doubt about it but I didn't get Obama's "horses and bayonets" comment though as regards why it's right to downsize our military. For me Obama doesn't evince strength, I mean he pulled our missile defense system from Poland when Putin griped about it. BB if I'm a diehard GOP guy you're a diehard Dem fan. As usual Chris sees nobody apart from Ron Paul being any good. Finally nobody discussed Africa because nobody really cares, Mideast taking up most of our time.
ReplyDeleteBTW did anybody catch those two excellent specials last night on PBS about the Cuban Missile Crisis? I mean we were thisssss close to an all-out E=mc2 kind of war esp. with that Soviet B-59 nuclear sub in the warm waters of the Caribbean and the one commander on board who overruled the nut who was gonna launch one. Wish there were a Cuban Spring right now, I want my Cuban cigar!
ReplyDeleteHey Dave, try using goole.
ReplyDeleteAnd try hare to have an open mind. I know that you folks on the left have a hard time believing that your affirmative action president has a serious lack of intellectual ability and can do no wrong, but try hard, everyone on the right can't be that wrong.
I honestly think that if he were a white man he would be reviled and hated for his attitude. He got a pass all his life and the result is he really thinks he is above all our laws and our Constitution.
Listen to how he spoke to Romney, he didn't have the slightly amount of respect for him as his opponent and any gentleman would have with his snarky remarks .
He apparently believes it is beneath him to play on an fair playing field.
It is my understanding they sent a drone up and watched the battle unfold right before their eyes and yet he lied about it for almost 2 weeks, and sent in his stooges and his VP to lie for him as well. Quit drinking the Koolaid, and admit it, Obama has been caught numerous times as Liar in Chief, false promises with idolatry followers. Chose the values God has given us, not this false messiah. The truth will set you free.
The truth and with God's help, re-electing this imposter of a president will not happen.
Actually Con, everyone on the right can be that wrong. They can prove otherwise, as can you, by just providing the exact quotes where President Obama says we, as a nation apologize.
ReplyDeleteYou don't do it because that quote does not exist. It is a necessity in diplomacy between countries.
Z, I was on the road do I missed that special...
.."try using Google"..
ReplyDeleteOK. Since 1980, there have been
26 attacks on US embassies. I do
not recall any criticisms of the
first 25.
Maybe because. Bush was in office, mat as we blame him again. Don't you ways?
ReplyDeleteHow many of those attacks were coved up?
ReplyDeleteDuh!
Z-man... I would certainly agree that publicly at least, Obama does not project the same type of leadership internationally that George Bush did when he was President.
ReplyDeleteSome might call it resoluteness. Others a type of arrogant certainty. Some bluster.
It does seem as if people here expect their president to project that big stick. It's funny that when Bush ran for president, he advocated a humble foreign policy, stressing respect for our allies and other countries around the world. I liked when he said that.
Foreign policy to me demands a certain level of nuance that some people voting seem to distain.
Here's a question... should we ever appear weak or humble if it means we would achieve a foreign policy objective?
Hiatt... regarding the similarity of the foreign policy goals of Romney and Obama, you are correct in that both of these guys are essentially playing the same tune.
ReplyDeleteAny difference between them is really one of degree. There is no discernible difference in the end and no real new strategic thinking or policy initiatives.
Let's take Europe for example... why is it that neither candidate is dealing with the statements of former Sec Def Gates [A Republican] that those countries need to pay up and take care of their own security?
Why is that America's responsibility? Isn't it a conservative value for people to not expect others to care for them? We've certainly created a giant sucking monster there. Jesse jackson was right in 1988 and Ron Paul too when they both called for Europe to step up.
This type of thinking would bring a ton of $$$ home for deficit reduction and other investments here on our soil.
Sorry Z-man... maybe I am just giving you a stream of consciousness here...
And Darth... the attack was not covered up. The simple fact that the entire world knew about it pretty quick proves that.
Maybe the administration got the response wrong and they are fumbling around trying to explain that. That is certainly possible.
But I would ask this of conservatives... Is it possible that the government and the Administration just made a tragic mistake? And that there was no horrible plot behind any of their actions, they just made a mistake?
I ask because if the answer is no, it's not possible, when Mitt Romney wins the election, and I believe he will, should we apply the same standard to his administration?
Just askin...
David said
ReplyDelete"And Darth... the attack was not covered up. The simple fact that the entire world knew about it pretty quick proves that.
Maybe the administration got the response wrong and they are fumbling around trying to explain that. That is certainly possible"
And I say, are you freaken kidding me? Or do you really believe that Horse manure!
Jarhead, what part of the attack was covered up? Isn't the fact that we know about the attack, proof that it was not covered up?
ReplyDeleteOh please, don't make yourself look like a bigger fool then you already have.
ReplyDeleteyou're beginning to sound like Chris Matthews liberal butt kisser extraordinaire.
Why is it people are unable to converse on a blog without resort to name calling?
ReplyDeleteLook, the admin screwed up the response to what happened in Libya, and they have dissembled in their response.
But if we are going to characterize every action, or even excuse government gives us in the worst possible light when we do not agree with them, we've got a big problem.
Did conservatives like it and agree when libs said Bush lied to get us in Iraq? No they didn't. We screwed up. Our intelligence community made a mistake. George Bush did not knowingly send our soldiers into harms way and anyone who thinks otherwise is just wrong.
Just like folks who are constantly looking to ascribe the worst possible understanding to every actions our government take.
A healthy skepticism is good. A pathological need to personally attack those with whom you disagree and question every motive of ones political opponents shows an inability to think critically and logically about some very diverse and challenging situations.
Obama never apologized? Remember the Cairo speech?
ReplyDeleteHaven’t we heard enough about “Big Bird” and those silly Biden jokes?
These people do not hold themselves accountable, or responsible for anything, and will lie about anything, they have no morals, no conscience. And in my eyes this cover up is way bigger than Watergate was, The big difference is that during Watergate no one died and our national security was never at stake. Where is Bernstein, Woodward and Deep Throat when you need them?
And briefly, isn’t it about time that Colin Powell STOPS calling himself a Republican?
Yes, Colin Powell should stop calling himself a Republican. He
ReplyDeletehas always been a moderate.
..Dave, your last paragaph was so
pithy, I quoted it elsewhere as a commonsense response to invective
and ad hominum inanity.
Forget this silly nonsense, but ask yourself this: Are you going to be stupid enough to put the same incapable, inept bunch back in White House who did all this damage to our country all over again for another 4 years?
ReplyDeleteThe unemployment after 4 years is still over 7.8%. If Americans are out of work why not the President!
US debt is over 16 trillion dollars and counting. He tripled the debt.
Hope and Change did not come! How pathetic.
Question of the day!...Is Biden just an idiot or mentally unstable?
ReplyDeleteIs Romney just another typical rich man or a pathological liar? Wait, is there a difference?
ReplyDeleteCmon. Give me a break with this juvenile shit, will you?
Give us a break with that being rich is a bad thing shit!
ReplyDeleteBeing rich is not bad.
ReplyDeleteNot caring about anyone else is.
Gullible ain't you!
ReplyDeleteWhich part of Obama is anymore compassionate Saty the part where he cares for other citizens vis a vis domestic social programs by stealing and plundering other citizens or the part where he sends in the drones thus killing innocent men, women, and children (some of them even American citizens)?
ReplyDeleteCWHiatt... clearly our drone program is a problem, but sadly, neither candidate is advocating a change in that. Both seem content to drone on and categorize the dead as terrorists under the "you are known by the company you keep" doctrine.
ReplyDeleteIt's a crappy plan, but works well for people who want to think that dead people in countries where we are not liked is American leadership.
I've never seen anything like it before and Obama and Romney if he wins will one day have to answer for this. If not here, in the hereafter.
On the domestic side though, our country has a long history of, in a sense taking from the rich and helping the poor.
Maybe that's because left to their own, people with money will not provide for the less fortunate at levels necessary to make a difference.
On that side, President Obama seems to be the stronger advocate for the poor, who grossly outnumber the rich in our increasingly divided society.
Personally, yes, Mitt gives lots of money to his church, so he is seen as a giving and compassionate man personally.
But are his policies?
How can we tell? He has been strong on cutting programs to balance the budget, as have many right leaning politicians.
How is it that with the election only a few days away, we still have few, if any identified programs that they want to cut?
Maybe it is because those programs are skewed to help poor folks. At least that is the impression that is out there and they have done nothing to argue against it by suggesting otherwise.
I'm just thinking here...
CW... any thoughts on the recent economic news that puts Germany and England, two countries now seeing economic stagnation and lots of austerity measures as falling behind us in economic activity?
ReplyDeleteThe types of spending cutbacks many in the GOP and elsewhere are advocating are exactly what these two countries did and now their economies are tanking.
Our 1.5 - 2.0% growth is looking pretty good against the austerity governments of Europe right now...
A better advocate for the poor? By what measure because his rhetoric sounds better? An advocate for the poor wojld not exacerbate the Keynesian stimulus and inflationary policies of their predecessor if one were truly concerned with the poor. Unless......
ReplyDeleteAs for your second question the answer lies in monetary reform young padawan. America's "growth" hinders on it's monopoly as the country of the world's currency. The end is nigh and the country's "leaders" know it which is precisely why they state that "America needs a strong military." No one in their right mind would voluntarily accept a worthless fiat from a country with as bad a history with paper money as America.
Soapbox kid you sound ridiculous
ReplyDeleteAnd you seem uncapable of anything but ad hominem and juvenility.
ReplyDeleteIs the best you have?
ReplyDeleteI did better than that in kindergarten
I agree with what. Beth said, and that also applies to the Obama administration as well.
ReplyDeletehttp://spectator.org/archives/2010/03/05/not-the-american-way?nomobile=1
ReplyDeleteRasmussen told you only one man could beat Obama and it surely wasn't Romney.
ReplyDeleteAnd it wasn't the ass-hole that you were pushing either.
ReplyDeleteI have come to the understanding that the USA has become a nation of left wing progressives ass holes and is beyond saving. It was a great run while it lasted.
Hey Obimmer, stop slapping yourself on the back and trim on the TV and watch the people all over New York and Long Island who are suffering . This is Your Katrina.
ReplyDeleteCognitive dissonance. Look it up. It was Ron Paul. And you'd do well to ask yourself why it is then the pundits and as well Jim Demi t and others are right out of the gate this morning saying the Republican party needs to move further in that direction if they ever want to have any chance of remaining a viable party.
ReplyDeleteLOL
ReplyDeleteNot quite as LOL as believing Romney had a prayer's chance in hell of beating Obama.
ReplyDelete