-
Elijah Harper, R.I.P.
May 18, 2013 | 1 comment
-
That’s a Lot of Caca in Caracas
May 16, 2013 | 7 comments
-
Canadian PM: Keystone XL Pipeline “Absolutely Needs To Go Ahead.”
May 16, 2013 | 2 comments
-
Has Obama Done Sufficient Damage Control With The IRS?
May 15, 2013 | 8 comments
-
Liberals Surprisingly Re-Elected in British Columbia
May 15, 2013 | 1 comment
The Spectacle Blog
Here are my thoughts on the third and final debate between President Obama and Mitt Romney. The debate took place at Lynn University in Boca Raton, Florida and was moderated by Bob Schieffer of CBS’ Face the Nation.
Although the debate centered on foreign policy a good part of it veered off into domestic matters and both candidates reiterated off their main talking points from the first two debates.
This was the least effective of Romney’s three debates. Romney was certainly aiming to be presidential. Apparently, he took Quin’s advice and used the word “peace” multiple times throughout the debate. But Romney is still the challenger and I don’t think he effectively challenged the malarkey (for lack of a better word) put forward by Obama.
To start with, Romney made no effort to challenge the Obama’s administration deception with regard to the attacks in Benghazi on September 11, 2012. Instead, Romney spoke generally about finding ways in which the Islamic world could reject extremism. It might be a good academic exercise but doesn’t work when debating a demagogue.
Nor did Romney find much disagree with concerning Syria. At the very least, he could have mentioned that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton referred to Assad as a reformer. He also found little fault with President Obama’s policy in Pakistan and his use of drones.
While Romney was more assertive with Obama concerning Iran, his critique was imprecise. Twice during the debate Romney made a point of stating that Obama was silent concerning the fraudulent Iranian “elections” of 2009. Obama was able to deny Romney’s statement. What, in fact, Obama said was that it was “not productive” for him to be “seen as meddling in Iranian elections.” It was a missed opportunity.
Romney was able to distinguish himself from Obama where it concerned Israel. While both Obama and Romney said they would stand with Israel if it were attacked, Romney specified what the United States would stand with the Jewish state miitarily. Obama did not spell out what standing with Israel meant.
But for the most part when Romney did challenge Obama, the President had an answer for him. Look, Obama was his usual imperial self. He must have used the words “I” and “me” close to a hundred times during the debate. It was also hard to believe Obama when he said that he would make the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt respect the rights of women and religious minorities or that our relationship with Israel is as strong as ever without laughing derisively. Obama also made snide and snarky comments about Romney’s investments and interrupted Romney on multiple occasions. But he also effectively defended his policies in a way that he hadn’t in the first two debates.
Towards the end of the debate, Obama tried to have another “check the transcript” moment when Romney was explaining his support of a managed bankruptcy of the auto industry. Fortunately, Bob Schieffer wasn’t having any of it and didn’t play along. Schieffer was a definite improvement over Candy Crowley although he certainly challenged Romney far more than he did Obama on matters such as Pakistan, drones and if the Israeli PM called the White House to say it was going to bomb Iran. On the last question, Romney said that such a scenario would not take place. Still, in a season of bad moderators, Schieffer was the best of the bunch.
My guess is that this was least watched of the three presidential debates. After all, if you weren’t watching Monday Night Football between the Detroit Lions and the Chicago Bears you were probably watching Game 7 of the NLCS between the St. Louis Cardinals and the San Francisco Giants. So I don’t think this debate will change the trajectory of the election.
View all comments (30) | Leave a comment
More Blog Posts by Aaron Goldstein
http://spectator.org/blog/2012/10/22/obama-romney-iii-post-mortem
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- A Nation on the Edge
- Downton’s Class System — and Ours
- Screwtape Talks Turkey
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
mike 3/505| 10.22.12 @ 11:45PM
And for the record...We military folk STILL use bayonets and horses in battle. Horses were a huge part of us helping the Northern Alliance to whip the Taliban...Just FYI
soljerblue| 10.23.12 @ 2:44AM
And if we're 'pivoting to Asia", we'll definitely need more ships. I'm sure Romney knows what an aircraft carrier is, and so do the Chinese who happen to be in the process of building at least one.
Red Phillips | 10.23.12 @ 12:01AM
The winner of tonight's debate was Ron Paul, because both these candidates are interventionist clowns. Although it is telling that Romney toned down the usual chest-thumping rhetoric that he normally feeds to his “conservative” audiences. I think Romney and his advisers know that that crap doesn't sell to undecided voters. In fact, I would think that some of Romney's uber-hawkish supporters should be disappointed in him for not chest-thumping enough.
Bob K| 10.23.12 @ 12:15AM
Who is this Ron Paul guy?
Jack in Wi| 10.23.12 @ 1:13AM
I see Romney took my advice and tried to sound more peaceful. It was the best stragey by far. He will probably win the election if he keeps up a more peaceful tone. There isn't a dimes worth of difference between Obama and Romney on foreign policy. They just were playing pattycake tonight.
Simon Templar| 10.23.12 @ 1:37AM
There is not a dimes difference between you and an Obama voter...there is a nickel difference..they want your nickel and you do not want to give them that nickel.
He took your advice...LOL...
soljerblue| 10.23.12 @ 2:47AM
I dunno, jack -- I don't see Romney whispering sweet nothings about flexibility for Putin to hear. Matter of fact, Romney made that exact point tonight in a zinger to Obama. Can't see that any of the pundits caught it, though. Too bad. It was a good one.
spike59| 10.23.12 @ 5:36AM
Ron who????? i seem to recall some nutjob from the 9/11 truther, John Birch wingtip of the party who babbled on for a few months, then disappeared into the fog of his own senility...was that the guy???
Red Phillips | 10.23.12 @ 9:27AM
He is from the Constitutionalist wing, but you wouldn't know anything about that. It's this document we ratified that we are actually supposed to follow.
Occam's Tool| 10.23.12 @ 11:42AM
Paul is from the Jihadist Catamite wing of the Party, like you, Red.
Tom Kyba| 10.23.12 @ 11:47AM
Don't you mean the Dhimmi wing?
Sean| 10.23.12 @ 7:15AM
It is good to know that our foreign policy is now based on building schools and promoting rights for women in Muslim countries. Oh and Assad has to go because 30000 people were killed in a civil war going on there.
Crassus| 10.23.12 @ 9:30AM
Hey, Red, your boy lost. Get over it.
Occam's Tool| 10.23.12 @ 11:42AM
Actually, Crassus, Ron Paul was gut stomped for being a jihadist ally and traitor.
Occam's Tool| 10.23.12 @ 11:59AM
Ron "Drinker of Jihadist Semen" Paul? You mean that guy? Ron "I wish I didn't live near Galveston Bay when the Iranian Container Ship Nuke Goes Off" Paul? Ron "Never Got a Bill Passed in Decades making Me the Least effective Rep Of All Time" Paul? That Ron Paul?
Red Phillips | 10.23.12 @ 5:04PM
The problem with interventionists like you Occam, is that for you it is all about emotion, not rational logic. This is obvious from your entirely visceral and exagerated responses to Ron Paul and non-interventionism and your tendency to view foreign policy as if it were some playground standoff. Where you either prove your manhood by "standing up" to the bully or you're a wimp. Hence absurd language about Dhimmi or your low brow prison yard references. Grow up.
But the funny thing is that you interventionists are the ones who actually act and think like fearful little children. "Oh no! Muslim Country X is going to kill us all unless we bomb them back to the Stone Age!" Do you not fly because the plane "might" crash? Our profession has a name for this. It's called catastrophizing, and it is an example of unhealthy thinking. Seriously Occam, get a hold of yourself. Take a Xanax.
I'm the one who says to Muslim Country X "If you want some, come get some. Me and my fellow well armed America compatriots got a little something waiting for you if you do." But of course I'm the wimp, and you're the big manly man because you chest thump and want to nuke civilians.
And not only are you a fearful child, you're also an international busy body minding everyone else's business. In this playground in your mind you must run to the teacher and tattle all the time. "Teacher! Teacher! Billy jumped off the swingset!" Yeah, real manly attitudes there Doc.
RJ| 10.23.12 @ 12:01AM
Over the debates, I think Romney-Ryan won an issue that wasn't raised much by the debate questions, but was something that I think they wanted to stress. Obama in debate 2 and 3, as well as Biden in his debate illustrated personalities that undercut bi-partisan bridge building; rude, sniping, snarky behavior. Romney-Ryan many times held their fire to show voters that they are of higher character and are focused on solving problems, not cheap shots. The contrast was clear.
Pecos Pete| 10.23.12 @ 9:41AM
RJ: Damn good point!
Bob Grant| 10.23.12 @ 12:13AM
I didn't watch the debate but based on Twitter feeds and blogs Romney lost only in the sense that he didn't immediately fact check obama's barrage of lies, similar to the second debate.
The same applies to the Ryan and Biden debate. Ryan didn't call out the lies forceful enough.
In the end, however, this debate was not about you or me...it was about the undecides, the low information voters who are only certain of one thing: they've had enough with obama and are looking for something different. An alternative.
Judging from this premise, Romney wins hands down!
RCV| 10.23.12 @ 12:45AM
You obviously didn't watch the debate.
Simon Templar| 10.23.12 @ 1:20AM
For a more substantive, accurate, and meaningful analysis than this cold fish review...
http://www.theblaze.com/storie.....6TgNpp6_6Z
Simon Templar| 10.23.12 @ 1:56AM
PPP poll and others are saying independents are moving again towards Romney. Many do not think the fraud acted presidential.
soljerblue| 10.23.12 @ 2:49AM
He didn't. He hasn't. He ain't about to start now.
Pecos Pete| 10.23.12 @ 9:43AM
"The nation - - - me..."
JeffP| 10.23.12 @ 2:52AM
I hear the word "presidential" bandied about in these posts. Now, what exactly constitutes "presidential" behavior? Having sex with an intern in the White House? Playing a saxophone on national TV? Perhaps taking 100 golf trips over the last 3 1/2 years while blowing off national intelligence meetings? Is that what passes for "presidential" in the 21st century? Regardless, Romney sitting quietly for an hour and a half agreeing with Obama's policies didn't seem presidential. It was discouraging.
This was Mitt's "McCain moment", when he signaled he had little disagreement with Obama's policies and would likely continue most of them. Libya? Iran? Fast and Furious? Never heard of 'em.
Why would the voters elect an Obama copy when the original is still available?
spike59| 10.23.12 @ 5:38AM
if you truly think Romney is an ObaMao copy, then you REALLY have no business near a voting booth; stay in mommy's basement and scarf down another bag of cheetos
Shiori| 10.23.12 @ 3:25AM
I'd like to know what Obama thinks was so awful about 1980's foreign policy. Was it the hostages coming home, the end of the Cold War or maybe the fall of the Berlin Wall that upset him??? He made that adolescent "The 80's called..." crack like everyone agrees or even knows what the hell he's talking about. The goofball actually thought comparing Romney with Reagan was a bad thing? That's exactly the sort of sparkling idiocy that Romney shrewdly allowed Obama to spew without interruption. Another classic is Obama's 'underwater ships' and 'bayonets & horses' gobbledegook. You can't make this stuff up! LOL! Mitt's a freakin' genius.
Brad| 10.23.12 @ 6:37AM
"I'd like to know what Obama thinks was so awful about 1980's foreign policy. Was it the hostages coming home, the end of the Cold War or maybe the fall of the Berlin Wall that upset him???"
Yes.
JP| 10.23.12 @ 12:51PM
Speaking of horses, the city of Detroit still employs a blacksmith despite the fact that they haven't needed one in 47 years.
rocky01| 10.23.12 @ 3:14PM
You left out the biggest outrage, the part where he stated:
"This nation ... ME ..."
I nearly fell off the couch. You have no idea what this guy will do IF Americans collectively loose their minds and let this narcissist in chief become unmasked and set loose in another term. He is warning you.