Romney wins the debate season — and the key test for a challenger; Update: Romney hits 50% in Rasmussen tracker, up 4

posted at 9:21 am on October 23, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

Allahpundit linked to National Journal’s Ron Fournier last night in his excellent roundup of the debate analysis, but it’s worth considering again the next morning after the final debate of the 2012 presidential cycle.  Like many pundits after the debate, Fournier gives Barack Obama the edge on debate performance last night, but writes that Mitt Romney won the overall debate season — perhaps because Romney, unlike Obama, understood the stakes:

Mitt Romney wins. That’s not to say he won Monday night’s debate or the presidential campaign, but it’s safe to say he won an important chapter: The debate season.

With an acceptable, though far from exceptional, performance in his third and final face-off with President Obama, the former Massachusetts governor became one of the few presidential candidates to make debates matter.

Bottom line: Obama won Monday night’s debate on points, benefiting from the blessings of incumbency and hard-world experience. But the challenger held his own, and thus the state of the race is likely unchanged.

Debates between the two presidential candidates are ostensibly to force them to defend their agendas.  They mainly get used to produce sound bites, zingers, and gaffes that the media hopes to use to define the race.  Their real value to voters, however, is to test the presidential mettle of each man.  A President is presumed to have more of it, by virtue of his four years in the office already, so the challenger has to work hard to equal or surpass his stature.  Romney did that in the first debate, and in the two succeeding debates solidified his standing as a man at least Obama’s equal.

In fact, Chris Wallace wondered whether Romney was the one with the gravitas of incumbency last night:

Yeah, let me first give you my general opinion. And that was, I thought in the middle of the debate that if I had been on the desert island for the last four years and I had just been parachuted into this debate, I would have thought the guy that had turned out to be Mitt Romney was the president protecting a lead and that Barack Obama was the challenger trying, somewhat desperately to catch up.

Obama was slashing, was personal, was cutting, I thought that Romney was big-picture, seemed to have much more of an agenda for the future than the President did.  I e-mailed one of his top aides in the course of the debate, and said, “What’s behind this strategy?” Clearly he was not taking the bait, not getting into fights with Barack Obama.  This official said, “This is all Mitt Romney’s idea.  This is how he wants to conduct this debate.”

Remember Morrissey’s Axiom on Politics and Dating? Desperation is not an aphrodisiac.  Small wonder, then, that even in a PPP poll that proclaimed Obama the winner of the debate by eleven points in swing states that the net movement for both men wound up in the margin of error (+6 for Obama and +3 for Romney) — and not even among likely voters.

On substance, this was the least-relevant debate of them all.  Not only are voters not really watching for substance — which they could get rather easily by watching campaign speeches, after all — but foreign policy isn’t even really on their radar at all.  This economy is still all about jobs and the economy, as I point out in my column for The Week:

No matter who you think won last night’s presidential debate, it’s unlikely to have much bearing on the presidential election. In the end, voters simply don’t care about the issues of foreign policy anywhere near as much as they do about their own economic security.

That, by the way, is the norm for American presidential elections. In the last four presidential cycles, only 2004′s matchup between incumbent George W. Bush and John Kerry produced a foreign-policy issue with more mentions as “the most important problem” facing the nation among Gallup’s respondentsthan a domestic-policy issue. Not surprisingly, voters expressed considerable concern over the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, two major campaign issues in that cycle, with 23 percent listing wars as among their most pressing problems in the final month before the election. The economy in general only got mentioned by 21 percent of respondents, although 12 percent also mentioned unemployment. …

Gallup’s latest polling among American adults confirms this focus. While foreign policy may be the one arena where presidents have the most impact, it gets the least amount of concern in this cycle. This election has the largest percentage of “net economic mentions” of any of the last four cycles — even slightly higher than 2008, in the middle of the panic over the possible collapse of the financial sector (72 percent to 69 percent, respectively). Almost two-thirds of the responses came from “the economy in general” and “unemployment,” and 12 percent from the federal budget deficit. The wars, which still got 11 percent of the mentions in 2008, have now dropped to 3 percent in 2012.

These numbers do not change appreciably between men and women, either. In fact, women were slightly more likely to mention the economy and unemployment (64 percent) than men (62 percent). Health care came in a distant third for women (10 percent), while for men the federal deficit got the bronze (14 percent). Foreign policy only got mentioned by 3 percent of men and 4 percent of women overall — and in a blow to the Obama campaign’s attempt to stoke their “war on women” meme, only 1 percent of women even mentioned abortion.

This result shows how out of touch and off-key the Obama campaign has been in the final few weeks of the election. While Obama and Co. focused on Big Bird, voters worried about jobs. While Democrats obsessed about “binders,” women across the country were far more concerned with the economy.

Obama can’t win on the economy, and he can’t distract voters away from it.  And in a debate on stage alone with his challenger, he can’t even come up with enough gravitas to make himself look like he already has the job.  With two weeks to go, that’s a bad position for an incumbent.

Update: This obviously doesn’t include reaction to last night’s debate, but Romney hit 50% in Rasmussen’s tracking poll for the first time since early May, and now has a 4-point lead over Obama.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4

Please share with us your reasons for supporting this man of proven incompetence.

rplat on October 23, 2012 at 10:43 AM

I ask the lefties on these threads the same question all the time; what could they possibly want four more years of invasive and incompetent government rule over their lives.
They’re never able to articulate a coherent response, or they just ignore the question.

Right Mover on October 23, 2012 at 11:18 AM

Just caught video of the CBS panel where 6 of the 8 said they would vote for Romeny.

Norah O’Donnell and Charlie Rose looked as if their dog had just died.

WisRich on October 23, 2012 at 11:19 AM

Please share with us your reasons for supporting this man of proven incompetence.

rplat on October 23, 2012 at 10:43 AM

I ask the lefties on these threads the same question all the time; what could they possibly want four more years of invasive and incompetent government rule over their lives.
They’re never able to articulate a coherent response, or they just ignore the question.

Right Mover on October 23, 2012 at 11:18 AM

You have to verbaluce credit. He did answer and it was semi-coherent, however it just solidified his absolute stupidity.

MobileVideoEngineer on October 23, 2012 at 11:21 AM

I really hope so. I’m just worried about Ohio, Penn, Colorado, and Wisconsin. I don’t want to win the popular vote and lose the electoral.

Oil Can on October 23, 2012 at 10:22 AM

Do not worry… No one is going to lose the electoral vote if he wins the popular vote by more than 1% let alone 3% and more…

mnjg on October 23, 2012 at 11:22 AM

I’m not saying this to you budfox, this is just a reaction to what you posted.

So it’s the campaign that is pushing that stupid meme? Seriously? No wonder people who know nothing at all about Ohio keep bringing this up. The auto bailout did absolutely nothing for Ohio, stop saying that. Most of Ohio’s auto industry jobs are either directly or indirectly because of Honda, not Government Motors. I grew up in Marysville Ohio, I think I know a little more than the moronic people in the campaign that only go to Ohio when they need votes.

MobileVideoEngineer on October 23, 2012 at 11:15 AM

Indeed.

GM/Delphi are completely dead in Dayton.

Bitter Clinger on October 23, 2012 at 11:22 AM

You have to give verbaluce credit. He did answer and it was semi-coherent, however it just solidified his absolute stupidity.

MobileVideoEngineer on October 23, 2012 at 11:21 AM

MobileVideoEngineer on October 23, 2012 at 11:22 AM

I can understand Obama not accepting any of the responsibility for his actions, that is who he is. I guess one shouldn’t be surprised when his followers won’t hold him accountable either. Let me guess, you blame Bush?

ShadowsPawn on October 23, 2012 at 11:11 AM

I’m amused that many on your side have managed to defensively use the ‘so you blame Bush’ snark into some sort of inoculation against his economic policies being considered a factor at all.
I – along with the majority of Americans – do consider the Bush admin’s economic actions (and in many cases, lack of actions) to be the the single largest contributing factor to the recession.
So I Imagine that you feel a 3rd Bush term would have fixed all?
That’s what Romney is offering…

verbaluce on October 23, 2012 at 11:23 AM

I – along with the majority of Americans – do consider the Bush admin’s economic actions (and in many cases, lack of actions) to be the the single largest contributing factor to the recession.
So I Imagine that you feel a 3rd Bush term would have fixed all?
That’s what Romney is offering…

verbaluce on October 23, 2012 at 11:23 AM

Majority? Liberals only comprise 21% of this nation. Bush has been out of office for 4 years. This is all Obama’s Economic Policies. Deal with it.

kingsjester on October 23, 2012 at 11:24 AM

They’re never able to articulate a coherent response, or they just ignore the question.

Right Mover on October 23, 2012 at 11:18 AM

I answered…coherently.
I don’t suggest to your approval, but still…

verbaluce on October 23, 2012 at 11:25 AM

Majority? Liberals only comprise 21% of this nation. Bush has been out of office for 4 years. This is all Obama’s Economic Policies. Deal with it.

kingsjester on October 23, 2012 at 11:24 AM

You are uniformed and making wrong assumptions if you think only liberals have criticisms of Bush’s economic policy.
You’ll notice Romney never says ‘George Bush’.
Ever.

verbaluce on October 23, 2012 at 11:28 AM

I ask the lefties on these threads the same question all the time; what could they possibly want four more years of invasive and incompetent government rule over their lives.
They’re never able to articulate a coherent response, or they just ignore the question.

Right Mover on October 23, 2012 at 11:18 AM

They can’t. This is why they spend their time parsing polls to try and eke out an Obama victory. All they have is snark and tactics to demoralize the turnout. They know Obama has nothing to run on. Nothing at all. They know that all that hopenchange nonsense was absurd.

It’s not difficult to pretend to be a liberal, when you talk to them in private they let you know that Obama wasn’t ready to be president, that everything has been a failure. But they can never admit to the central problem, which is that liberalism is failure. And Obama is merely liberalism made flesh.

happytobehere on October 23, 2012 at 11:28 AM

You have to give verbaluce credit. He did answer and it was semi-coherent, however it just solidified his absolute stupidity.

MobileVideoEngineer on October 23, 2012 at 11:21 AM

MobileVideoEngineer on October 23, 2012 at 11:22 AM

Thanks.
You gave me credit twice!

verbaluce on October 23, 2012 at 11:29 AM

Romney won the third presidential debate – and how he did it was encapsulated in a single exchange. The candidates were discussing military spending and Romney had just accused Obama of making harmful cutbacks. The President wheeled out what must have seemed like a great, pre-planned zinger: “I think Governor Romney maybe hasn’t spent enough time looking at how our military works. You mentioned the navy, for example, and that we have fewer ships than we did in 1916. Well, governor, we also have fewer horses and bayonets because the nature of our military’s changed.” The audience laughed, Obama laughed, I laughed. It was funny.

But here’s why it was also a vote loser. For a start, Twitter immediately lit up with examples of how the US Army does still use horses and bayonets (horses were used during the invasion of Afghanistan). More importantly, this was one example of many in which the President insulted, patronised and mocked his opponent rather than put across a constructive argument. His performance was rude and unpresidential. Obama seemed to have a touch of the Bidens, wriggling about in his chair, waving his hands dismissively and always – always – smirking in Romney’s direction. By contrast, Romney sucked up the abuse and retained a rigid poker face all night. He looked like a Commander in Chief; Obama looked like a lawyer. Who would you rather vote for?

Speakup on October 23, 2012 at 9:38 AM

I don’t know on what planet little Bammie’s answer passed the smell test. Governor Romney didn’t mention ‘bayonets and horses’. He mentioned ships and I think boots, and in this century as well as the last, the number of ships in the navy and the number of boots in the army and marines is still a perfectly valid measure of America’s military.

Little Bammie seemed to say that aircraft carriers and submarines don’t count as ‘ships’. Huh?

His reference to going back to the 80′s was bizarre. In the 80′s we defeated the Soviet empire, with a strong military under a real leader. What was bad about the 80′s? I’ll happily take the US Navy of the 1980′s over what we have today.

Little Bammie’s answer came across as rude and petulant and ignorant. I see nothing but Fail in his answer.

slickwillie2001 on October 23, 2012 at 11:30 AM

You are uniformed and making wrong assumptions if you think only liberals have criticisms of Bush’s economic policy.
You’ll notice Romney never says ‘George Bush’.
Ever.

verbaluce on October 23, 2012 at 11:28 AM

Um, that’s because he’s not running against George Bush. George Bush left D.C. back in 2008 in case you forgot.

MobileVideoEngineer on October 23, 2012 at 11:30 AM

Thanks.
You gave me credit twice!

verbaluce on October 23, 2012 at 11:29 AM

I forgot the word give the first time. My brain was working faster than my fingers.

MobileVideoEngineer on October 23, 2012 at 11:31 AM

1st Debate = Big Bird

2nd Debate = Binders

3rd Debate = Bayonets

Obama to Oprah after his first year in office = “A good solid B plus,”

I’m sensing a pattern here.

Brought to you by the letter B, and the number 0.

D-fusit on October 23, 2012 at 11:33 AM

Please share with us your reasons for supporting this man of proven incompetence.

rplat on October 23, 2012 at 10:43 AM

I ask the lefties on these threads the same question all the time; what could they possibly want four more years of invasive and incompetent government rule over their lives.
They’re never able to articulate a coherent response, or they just ignore the question.

Right Mover on October 23, 2012 at 11:18 AM

Ah yes, the crowd that just can’t begin comprehend why the economy hasn’t returned to full employment after a financial crisis only comparable to the Great Depression, and in the aftermath of an asset bubble collapse so severe that the average middle class family lost 1/3 of its net worth. After all, Glenn and other radio entertainers say it’s all Obama’s fault that unemployment remains higher than the rate in 2007!

Policies initiated by both Bush and Obama (with obvious help from the Fed) held the economy from falling into another depression. The impact of saving this country’s manufacturing base represented by the auto industry can’t be underestimated in keeping the overall economy intact.

http://www.businessinsider.com/us-bailout-success-2012-9

How you believe that 20% across the board income tax cuts and higher defense spending can ever be part of a strategy for seriously reducing the deficit is even more elusive to grasp. The number simply don’t add up. Perhaps you believe in magic.

bayam on October 23, 2012 at 11:34 AM

Obama’s strong and substantive FP performance will be a real factor for undecideds.

Because they see just how out of his depth and over his head lil barry is.

I wouldn’t bother looking at any polls ’til next week.

Can’t say I blame you, slick.

verbaluce on October 23, 2012 at 10:19 AM

Spin it any way that makes you feel better…but, your boy’s a loser. And Americans don’t like losers.

Solaratov on October 23, 2012 at 11:36 AM

If Romney wins, one of the most interesting consequences will be watching Hot Air and it commenters forced to shift gears to be supportive of their country’s leadership, rather than destructive. During the Bush years, we got to see how Fox News operates as a government house organ, and it won’t take much for them to shift back to doing that job.

But Hot Air and the right-wing blogosphere as we know it didn’t really take off until Obama was elected and vitriolic, spittle-flecked assaults on the executive branch became the order of the day.

Can Hot Air be Hot Air when you folks have to build a barn rather than burn one down? It will be fascinating to see.

Drew Lowell on October 23, 2012 at 11:36 AM

Um, that’s because he’s not running against George Bush. George Bush left D.C. back in 2008 in case you forgot.

MobileVideoEngineer on October 23, 2012 at 11:30 AM

I didn’t bring up Bush.
This was in response to someone who did.

verbaluce on October 23, 2012 at 11:37 AM

How you believe that 20% across the board income tax cuts and higher defense spending can ever be part of a strategy for seriously reducing the deficit is even more elusive to grasp. The number simply don’t add up. Perhaps you believe in magic.

bayam on October 23, 2012 at 11:34 AM

The stupid is strong in this one.

D-fusit on October 23, 2012 at 11:37 AM

The stupid is strong in this one.

D-fusit on October 23, 2012 at 11:37 AM

Nothing better than an ad hominem attack in response to a deficit reduction plan designed to appeal to the feeble minded. After all, what this country really needs is a larger military, and a President brave enough to approve every pet project of the military industrial complex and defense lobby, esp. those not requested by DoD.

bayam on October 23, 2012 at 11:42 AM

Drew Lowell on October 23, 2012 at 11:36 AM

Drew thinks we burned down Obama’s barn. Heh.

Mitsouko on October 23, 2012 at 11:42 AM

Which man would you want to be your representative in any negotiation : divorce,peace treaty, trade dispute?
Heck, which man would you you want to try to decide what football game to watch on TV?

My answer on who to vote for was decided a long time ago, the undecided were the target audience last night.

barnone on October 23, 2012 at 11:45 AM

Ah yes, the crowd that just can’t begin comprehend why the economy hasn’t returned to full employment after a financial crisis only comparable to the Great Depression, and in the aftermath of an asset bubble collapse so severe that the average middle class family lost 1/3 of its net worth. After all, Glenn and other radio entertainers say it’s all Obama’s fault that unemployment remains higher than the rate in 2007!

bayam on October 23, 2012 at 11:34 AM

Funny you should mention 2007, what happened on January 3, 2007?

Why congress, both houses were taken over by the dems, and one had a veto proof majority…who spends money? Who had the power since 2007?

Yes, the liberal dems had the power, at that time, in January, the unemployment was under 5%, dow over 14,000, a robust economy…Bush warned against the mortgage crisis, but, the dems had control of all of the committees…

Thanks for remembering 2007, a watershed year…where gas was under $2.00, and all the economic indicators were strong.

Obama, when taking office had control of both houses, one a super majority, he could pass and do anything he wanted to do…he could have closed Gitmo (like he promised), pass immigration reform (like he promised), bring down unemployment to 5% (like he promised), decrease our debt (like he promised), hold back the tides, bring the country together, meet with Republican’s be bi-partisan, and resolve middle east problems, become energy independent, and “green” energy would drive our economy like the Silicone Valley did…every one of his promises, every one of his decisions regarding those promises were wrong, and each one went the opposite way which he promised.

Unemployment soared, debt soared, ObamaCare costs more than any one ever predicted, no immigration, energy independence a joke, green energy nothing but payoffs to contributors and billions lost, and he never met earnestly with Republicans, took him 14 months to have the first meeting with Boehner…

By every measure, his promises were hollow, and by every measure his policies were and are a failure…and meanwhile, he doesn’t meet with his security council…good grief, what a sham of a president.

right2bright on October 23, 2012 at 11:46 AM

I’m amused that many on your side have managed to defensively use the ‘so you blame Bush’ snark into some sort of inoculation against his economic policies being considered a factor at all.
I – along with the majority of Americans – do consider the Bush admin’s economic actions (and in many cases, lack of actions) to be the the single largest contributing factor to the recession.
So I Imagine that you feel a 3rd Bush term would have fixed all?
That’s what Romney is offering…

verbaluce on October 23, 2012 at 11:23 AM

So basically yeah, Obama (and by extension you) won’t accept responsibility for his failed “government down” policies and you just want to blame Bush for everything.

What we’ve seen here is a perfect example of progressive government policy over four years. It doesn’t work, it never has worked, and it never will.

At this point, I’d rather my 3 month old run the government than Obama.

ShadowsPawn on October 23, 2012 at 11:48 AM

The number simply don’t add up. Perhaps you believe in magic.

bayam on October 23, 2012 at 11:34 AM

That’s what Obama keeps saying…you know the guy that brought us an additional 4 trillion in debt, can’t sign off on a simple natural gas pipeline, has held a 10% unemployment record for 3 years…yeah, that guy who can’t add up his losses and debts he has run up…

Meanwhile, you can’t understand that putting people back to work, literally solves all of our problems within a few years…duhhhhh!!

Do the math, 23 million people out of work = economic disaster, 23 million people working = economic boon…you don’t understand that?

right2bright on October 23, 2012 at 11:50 AM

Can Hot Air be Hot Air when you folks have to build a barn rather than burn one down? It will be fascinating to see.

Drew Lowell on October 23, 2012 at 11:36 AM

We’ll still be rooting for smaller less intrusive government. There will be no barn building. The point is to burn down the entitlement/regulation state that is destroying our future. We are trying to get the government out of our way. You seem to be conflating the idea of supporting America with supporting larger and more intrusive government.

We are a people with a government, not the other way around. We will be rooting for President Romney as he tries to dismantle all of the garbage that the federal government has erected to stop the progress of this great nation.

happytobehere on October 23, 2012 at 11:53 AM

The libs’; argument for Obama’s mishandling of the economy has morphed from ignoring Obama’s own stated promises (to cut the deficit, to create jobs, etc.) to “it was such a horrid, horrid economy that even the Lightbringer, with all of his unique skills, could not possibly fix it.” I’m calling this the Humpty Dumpty excuse.

Nonetheless, let us look at it this way. If I had a department in my company that was bleeding money, not making its sales targets and suffering the effects of poor planning by its prior leader and if I hired a guy to fix it who promised me that he had the wherewithal to get the job done and if, after almost four years, not only had he not fixed it but had made it considerably worse, I would fire him. (Frankly, I would have kicked him to the curb after two years.) I’m sure he’d try to excuse his abysmal performance with some version of Obama’s “It was worse than I thought” argument but, you see, that just doesn’t fly.

Obama was hired by the American people because he held himself out to be the expert who understood the problems with the economy and who had a plan to turn them around. If he then tries to say “Oh, it was worse than I thought” he is admitting — admitting– his own shortcomings in his ability to accurately assess a situation. If you cannot accurately assess what you’re trying to fix, you cannot fix it. He is also admitting that his plan (the famously ineffective ‘stimulus’), based on his erroneous analysis, was flawed in the extreme.

So, any way you slice it, bayam, verbaluce, et al, your guy FAILED.

natasha333 on October 23, 2012 at 11:54 AM

I – along with the majority of Americans – do consider the Bush admin’s economic actions (and in many cases, lack of actions) to be the the single largest contributing factor to the recession.
So I Imagine that you feel a 3rd Bush term would have fixed all?
That’s what Romney is offering…

verbaluce on October 23, 2012 at 11:23 AM

January 3, 2007 my friend, it is hard for you to understand how strong we were before the Republican’s lost both houses…and how quickly those little liberal committee’s took us down the rabbit hole…

Who spends the money? Congress or the President?

The House, now led by Republican’s, had no problem passing a budget….How has the Senate been doing with the budget (is it 1,000 days yet without a budget?)? How was the presidents budget received, the last two budgets how many votes did it get, hint—the number is less than ONE!!

right2bright on October 23, 2012 at 11:54 AM

Moochelle is calling for quotes from movers.

bayview on October 23, 2012 at 9:26 AM

I’ll bet there are a lot of people here who have pick-up trucks who’d be glad to help out.
Even the traditional beer and pizza would be optional.

Solaratov on October 23, 2012 at 11:55 AM

Bayam, think of it as a sale. If Walmart had a 20% off sale would they sell more products and make more profit? (No coupons)
Well a 20% tax cut without deductions is the same thing.

The day after the election I am either closing 2 locations, laying off 27 people, and semi-retiring or placing an order for 600K in inventory for 2013.

barnone on October 23, 2012 at 11:57 AM

So I Imagine that you feel a 3rd Bush term would have fixed all?
That’s what Romney is offering…

verbaluce on October 23, 2012 at 11:23 AM

It’s Bush’s fault that Obama promised to lower the unemployment to 5%, decrease or deficit (by 1/2)…is that what you are saying? That Bush made Obama make those promises?

It’s Bush’s fault, It’s Bush’s fault…whaaaaaaa, whaaaaaaaaa, whaaaaaaaa, it’s the video’s fault, whaaaaaa, whaaaaaaa, Back to the Bush’s years, whaaaaaaa, whaaaaaa….

That’s all I hear, blaming and whining…surely you can come up with an adult response to Obama’s promises.

Bush overspent, and he allowed congress without a fight to overspend…that was Bush’s downfall.

And Obama has far exceeded that, so yeah, Bush ran up a deficit 1/5 of what Obama has done…and you fear Bush’s budgets??

right2bright on October 23, 2012 at 11:59 AM

verbaluce on October 23, 2012 at 10:40 AM

Condescending little snot, aren’t you.

Solaratov on October 23, 2012 at 12:00 PM

Old/busted:
 

Ah yes, the crowd that just can’t begin comprehend…
Perhaps you believe in magic.
 
bayam on October 23, 2012 at 11:34 AM

 
New eight minutes later hotness:
 

Nothing better than an ad hominem attack in response to-
 
bayam on October 23, 2012 at 11:42 AM

 
Even newer and, incredibly, even in the same post sentence hotness:
 

- a deficit reduction plan designed to appeal to the feeble minded.
 
bayam on October 23, 2012 at 11:42 AM

 
Hilarious.

rogerb on October 23, 2012 at 12:02 PM

Moochelle is calling for quotes from movers.

bayview on October 23, 2012 at 9:26 AM

I think they’ll drive a u-haul to hawaii :)….

jimver on October 23, 2012 at 12:04 PM

The libs’; argument for Obama’s mishandling of the economy has morphed from ignoring Obama’s own stated promises (to cut the deficit, to create jobs, etc.) to “it was such a horrid, horrid economy that even the Lightbringer, with all of his unique skills, could not possibly fix it.” I’m calling this the Humpty Dumpty excuse.

natasha333 on October 23, 2012 at 11:54 AM

Here’s the real danger with that defense. It’s not this election so much as future ones. Let’s say Romney wins in 2 weeks and then gets this economy back on track(while balancing the budget or at least closing the deficit) by 2016. He’ll have effectively debunked all of Obama’s excuses and made the Democrat Party look like a bunch of morons. What the hell are they gonna run on in terms of domestic policy for the next decade or two? They’ll be out of power for a very long time much like what happened in the wake of the Carter Administration.

Doughboy on October 23, 2012 at 12:04 PM

Hilarious.

rogerb on October 23, 2012 at 12:02 PM

Liberal cognitive dissonance. We’ve seen a lot of that today. Well done :)

ShadowsPawn on October 23, 2012 at 12:05 PM

ask the lefties on these threads the same question all the time; what could they possibly want four more years

Right Mover on October 23, 2012 at 11:18 AM

Food stamps
Welfare
ObamaPhones
Living for free while foreclosures are slowed to a standstill
ObamaCare
Wealth redistribution

They got plenty of free stuff in the past 4 years, they sure want more of that more…

riddick on October 23, 2012 at 12:05 PM

Condescending little snot, aren’t you.

Solaratov on October 23, 2012 at 12:00 PM

Assuming he knows words over two syllables and what they mean…

right2bright on October 23, 2012 at 12:08 PM

One thing I think Mitt has missed in all three debates…Obama has proposed two budgets, and not one of them has received even one vote, not even from his most strident supporters, he has received no vote, not a single vote.

That alone would show how little faith even his most faithful have in him…

right2bright on October 23, 2012 at 12:11 PM

Food stamps
Welfare
ObamaPhones
Living for free while foreclosures are slowed to a standstill
ObamaCare
Wealth redistribution

They got plenty of free stuff in the past 4 years, they sure want more of that more…

riddick on October 23, 2012 at 12:05 PM

I have a little more self worth than that. To get most of that you have to basically be driven to poverty. I’d personally much rather have the ability to pay for all of my necessaties and then some.

MobileVideoEngineer on October 23, 2012 at 12:12 PM

If Walmart had a 20% off sale would they sell more products and make more profit?
 
barnone on October 23, 2012 at 11:57 AM

 
But if they sold more they wouldn’t bring in… wait..
at a reduced cost then government would be missing out on tax…
er… revenue… not, um… and…
 
BILL GATES!

rogerb on October 23, 2012 at 12:12 PM

Ah yes, the crowd that just can’t begin comprehend why the economy hasn’t returned to full employment after a financial crisis only comparable to the Great Depression, and in the aftermath of an asset bubble collapse so severe that the average middle class family lost 1/3 of its net worth. After all, Glenn and other radio entertainers say it’s all Obama’s fault that unemployment remains higher than the rate in 2007!

bayam on October 23, 2012 at 11:34 AM

Hey moron, are you old enough to remember Crater years? You know, the first Hussein (and still one kissing muslim azz).

How did Reagan bring the economy back? Simpler tax code with lower rates, which then easily stimulated the economy back to life. The more people keep the more they spend, its a nice cycle.

And idiot liberals insist they are the the “educated” lot? Education in communist doctrine that only leads to repressive re-distribution and nothing else. “What’s yours is mine” is the only thing you idiots understand. Some education, indeed…

Learn some simple math and economics before you start arguing with adults. Have you covered algebra in school yet?

riddick on October 23, 2012 at 12:14 PM

And on Foreign Policy, he’ll also continue Obama’s successful approach here..

verbaluce on October 23, 2012 at 11:03 AM

Why would Romney pander and bow to our enemies, while losing our allies?

Solaratov on October 23, 2012 at 12:16 PM

Ah yes, the crowd that just can’t begin comprehend why the economy hasn’t returned to full employment after a
How you believe that 20% across the board income tax cuts and higher defense spending can ever be part of a strategy for seriously reducing the deficit is even more elusive to grasp. The number simply don’t add up. Perhaps you believe in magic.

bayam on October 23, 2012 at 11:34 AM

Aww, but this is the same crowd that put hopey and changey in office in 2008, so let me wrap my head around your ‘analysis’ here: crowd electing Hopey in 2008 – good and broad-minded; crowd (same crowd, mind you) refusing to give hopey another chance after 4 abysmal years in office – bad and feeble-minded (let them eat cake :)….heh, quite the analyst you are there….but you know, unfortunately for you and your 2-cent ‘analysis’, in politics the crowd is there to stay…. and also never underestimate what they say, that karma is a beoitch, what comes around brought by the crowd, goes around, taken away by the crowd :)…same crowd, ironically :)…

jimver on October 23, 2012 at 12:21 PM

But if they sold more they wouldn’t bring in… wait..
at a reduced cost then government would be missing out on tax…
er… revenue… not, um… and…

BILL GATES!

rogerb on October 23, 2012 at 12:12 PM

Nope, SpaceX :), his newest obsession…

Gates and Apple: out
SpaceX: in

jimver on October 23, 2012 at 12:24 PM

You’ll notice Romney never says ‘George Bush’.
Ever.

verbaluce on October 23, 2012 at 11:28 AM

Because Romney knows who has been in office the past 3.5+ years; and whose “economic policies” (lol) are to blame for the current state of the economy. And Mitt lays the blame squarely on the head of obama – who is the one at fault.

Solaratov on October 23, 2012 at 12:25 PM

Resist We Much on October 23, 2012 at 10:46 AM

Ooh, snap.

rah1420 on October 23, 2012 at 12:28 PM

Obama better hope Gloria Allred has something pretty juicy because if these Gallup and Rasmussen numbers are correct, it’s over.mitchellvii on October 23, 2012 at 10:12 AM

The only thing that Gloria can do at this point is to claim that she had an affair with
Romney.

Uniblogger on October 23, 2012 at 12:35 PM

You’ll notice Romney never says ‘George Bush’.
Ever.

verbaluce on October 23, 2012 at 11:28 AM

Why would he, he’s up against an incumbent with an abysmal record called Obama :)

jimver on October 23, 2012 at 12:38 PM

The only thing that Gloria can do at this point is to claim that she had an affair with
Romney.

Uniblogger on October 23, 2012 at 12:35 PM

Allred’s bomb against Trump’s bomb :)…

jimver on October 23, 2012 at 12:40 PM

You’ll notice Romney never says ‘George Bush’. Ever.
 
verbaluce on October 23, 2012 at 11:28 AM

 

“My plan to get the industry on its feet when it was in real trouble was not to start writing checks. It was President Bush that wrote the first checks. I disagree with that.”
 
Mitt Romney on October 22, 2012

 
I’m sure the foundations of your more difficult arguments are solid, though.

rogerb on October 23, 2012 at 12:41 PM

Drew Lowell on October 23, 2012 at 11:36 AM

Awwww. Sour grapes much, lil feller?

It’ll be interesting to watch dkos, du and huffpo change directions to tear down the country, as they did while Bush was in office.
Can’t wait, either, for the re-emergence of codepink and the rest of the anti-war mob who have been giving lil barry a pass for so long.

Solaratov on October 23, 2012 at 12:42 PM

And on Foreign Policy, he’ll also continue Obama’s successful approach here..

verbaluce on October 23, 2012 at 11:03 AM

Only if you are a muslim can you ever claim “successful” foreign policy under Hussein. What was so successful about it? Middle East now under full control of Al Qaeda? And more to follow in Syria? Oil prices making Middle East richer while Idiot in Chief refuses to allow domestic drilling? Giving money to Egypt, Libya and Pakistan that then quickly ends up in Al Qaeda’s pockets to fund killing of our own citizens? Refusing to provide protection to our embassies and consulates around the globe? Allowing Russians do whatever they fell like? And then promising them even more freedom to do same in his second term? Saying to Argentina they are entitled historically British island? Throwing Israel under the bus, time and again, and delaying delivery of munitions to them depleted during their war with Hezbollah? Weakening USA around the globe via his humongous budget deficits? Kissing muslim azz each and every time he gets? Good thing he doesn’t go “bathhouse” on them on TV.

Anything I missed describing “successful” foreign policy of past 4 years?

riddick on October 23, 2012 at 12:43 PM

Drew thinks we burned down Obama’s barn. Heh.

Mitsouko on October 23, 2012 at 11:42 AM

Lil bam-bam dropped a butt while sneaking a smoke.

Solaratov on October 23, 2012 at 12:45 PM

verbaluce on October 23, 2012 at 10:19 AM

I have been loading up on dead chickens for you…and gumby

lovingmyUSA on October 23, 2012 at 12:47 PM

Bottom line is it’s over.

To tie in Ohio at current D82/18 – Obama, R89/11 – Romney, I54/46 – Romney Splits – Obama has to have a D/R/I split of 40/30/30.

It’s over. And I think they know it.

D+10 to tie? Any Republican turnout greater than 30% in Ohio and Obama loses. The “polls” will swing.

A split of D/R/I 36/30/34 gives Romney a 2% win in Ohio. Is D+6 even possible?

You can’t have these internals and show these guys tied without taking D + 10 samples.

oldroy on October 23, 2012 at 12:48 PM

bayam on October 23, 2012 at 11:42 AM

sorry but history disagrees with you there. in EVERY instance of the US beefing up its military spending the growth and boom in manufacturing has followed…. when the government goes big military then the military gets to spend all that money buying things we make here in this country like guns , ammo ,vehicles etc,we as a country have turned manufacturing into an art form , we are the only country in the world whos economic make up allows us to rather quickly retool our manufacturing to turn it to whatever makes more profit and is in more demand. we can recover and massive military spending WOULD actually help. the question of funding it is entirely different though

katee bayer on October 23, 2012 at 12:49 PM

Anything I missed describing “successful” foreign policy of past 4 years?

riddick on October 23, 2012 at 12:43 PM

Yes, He killed Osama :)…

jimver on October 23, 2012 at 12:52 PM

I think they’ll drive a u-haul to hawaii :)….

jimver on October 23, 2012 at 12:04 PM

Maybe they could ship their stuff on the Intercontinental Railroad. It’s fast, with good rates.

Solaratov on October 23, 2012 at 12:53 PM

I think they’ll drive a u-haul to hawaii :)….

jimver on October 23, 2012 at 12:04 PM

Maybe they could ship their stuff on the Intercontinental Railroad. It’s fast, with good rates.

Solaratov on October 23, 2012 at 12:53 PM

Underwater ship…

riddick on October 23, 2012 at 12:55 PM

I think they’ll drive a u-haul to hawaii :)….

jimver on October 23, 2012 at 12:04 PM

Maybe they could ship their stuff on the Intercontinental Railroad. It’s fast, with good rates.

Solaratov on October 23, 2012 at 12:53 PM

Underwater ship…

riddick on October 23, 2012 at 12:55 PM

Dang, you beat me to it :)…I wonder if anybody explained to this genius of a military mind that it’s never a good thing when a ship goes under water :)…

jimver on October 23, 2012 at 12:58 PM

Maybe they could ship their stuff on the Intercontinental Railroad. It’s fast, with good rates.

Solaratov on October 23, 2012 at 12:53 PM

Amtrak doesn’t go to Hawaii?

oldroy on October 23, 2012 at 12:58 PM

I wonder if anybody explained to this genius of a military mind that it’s never a good thing when a ship goes under water :)…

jimver on October 23, 2012 at 12:58 PM

Submarines are “boats“, not ships. Always have been.

Solaratov on October 23, 2012 at 1:02 PM

Amtrak doesn’t go to Hawaii?

oldroy on October 23, 2012 at 12:58 PM

They cut that line out in favor of a multi-billion-dollar high speed rail system – on the San Andreas Fault. What could go wrong?

Solaratov on October 23, 2012 at 1:04 PM

Gallup today:

Romney 51

Obama 45

+6

Resist We Much on October 23, 2012 at 1:05 PM

How you believe that 20% across the board income tax cuts and higher defense spending can ever be part of a strategy for seriously reducing the deficit is even more elusive to grasp. The number simply don’t add up. Perhaps you believe in magic.

bayam on October 23, 2012 at 11:34 AM

It’s very simple and ‘taker’ democrats never get it

if you tax people less they spend more
and more businesses hire people

this brings in more tax revenue

look at the years 2003-2007
highest growth in government tax revenue

Obama doesn’t understand this and never will
he is too busy wanted to take away from the doers and give to him voting minions

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=prWtWEnLl9c

full video even worse

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c4iy2OfScQE

audiotom on October 23, 2012 at 1:14 PM

bayam on October 23, 2012 at 11:34 AM

C’mon Bayam you gutless coward. Just let your inner Stalin out. Tell us what you would do to us if you were in power. You godless reprobate…

tom daschle concerned on October 23, 2012 at 1:30 PM

audiotom on October 23, 2012 at 1:14 PM

His 5th grade teacher is still trying to explain this simple math and FACTUAL LOGIC to him as we speak. He’ll be back online after lunch break… Probably munching on Moochelle approved snack now.

riddick on October 23, 2012 at 1:31 PM

Gallup today:

Romney 51

Obama 45

+6

Resist We Much on October 23, 2012 at 1:05 PM

Rasmussen and Gallup starting to look awfully similar. No outliers here.

And, curiously, no gumby here, either.

Right Mover on October 23, 2012 at 1:33 PM

I wonder if anybody explained to this genius of a military mind that it’s never a good thing when a ship goes under water :)…

jimver on October 23, 2012 at 12:58 PM

Submarines are “boats“, not ships. Always have been.

Solaratov on October 23, 2012 at 1:02 PM

Doh, U-boat…you’d think the smartest an on the planet has seen a WW2 movie or somethin’…

jimver on October 23, 2012 at 1:35 PM

And, curiously, no gumby here, either.

Right Mover on October 23, 2012 at 1:33 PM

No internet access before homework is done.

riddick on October 23, 2012 at 1:35 PM

And, curiously, no gumby here, either.

Right Mover on October 23, 2012 at 1:33 PM

He’s too busy eating popcorn watching the same GOTV bus drive back and forth past his playground.

ShadowsPawn on October 23, 2012 at 1:36 PM

Doh, U-boat…you’d think the smartest an on the planet has seen a WW2 movie or somethin’…

jimver on October 23, 2012 at 1:35 PM

Oh, come on, its not like Hollywood has invested money in this moron.

riddick on October 23, 2012 at 1:36 PM

Gallup today:

Romney 51

Obama 45

+6

Resist We Much on October 23, 2012 at 1:05 PM

Rasmussen and Gallup starting to look awfully similar. No outliers here.

And, curiously, no gumby here, either.

Right Mover on October 23, 2012 at 1:33 PM

Oh, don’t conjure the atomic figurine up…to paraphrase, if you ‘build’ it, he will come :)…

jimver on October 23, 2012 at 1:38 PM

And, curiously, no gumby here, either.

Right Mover on October 23, 2012 at 1:33 PM

He’s too busy eating popcorn watching the same GOTV bus drive back and forth past his playground.

ShadowsPawn on October 23, 2012 at 1:36 PM

ROFLMAO (literally!!!) :)… And coffee all over :)…

jimver on October 23, 2012 at 1:40 PM

Drew Lowell on October 23, 2012 at 11:36 AM

I see the desperation is strong in this one…and I’m lining up a dead chicken for you too!

lovingmyUSA on October 23, 2012 at 1:45 PM

Like many pundits after the debate, Fournier gives Barack Obama the edge on debate performance last night

I really don’t get this. I feel like they watched a different debate.

Did they notice Obama scowling the whole time ?
Did they notice Obama looking to teacher-Schiffer to give him some help ?
Did they notice Obama getting smoked on his apology tour ?
Did they notice Obama blathering like an idiot about “ships” that go underwater, “submarines”
Did they notice Obama shouting “ME” ! about something or other.

Plus I never heard any “points” on which he won ? Which ones did he actually win, please ?

Mitt was very good imo, no stumbles, strong, confident, articulate (clean), command of facts, etc.

Maybe CSPAN put up a debate from 2008 and the pundits didn’t notice.

I stand with Charles Krauthammer.

williampeck1958 on October 23, 2012 at 1:53 PM

Oh, and have you noticed the pats on the back 0bama gives Michelle ? My wife noticed this beta male patsy taps on Michelle’s back.

and so did Tammy Bruce on Twitter, “no love there”, LOL.

williampeck1958 on October 23, 2012 at 1:56 PM

People who think Romney won are clearly in denial. His performance was weak and uninformed. We spend 700 billion on our military. Why can’t we cut out the tanks and all the wasteful spending. You don’t need hundreds of thousands of troops to fight a terrorism war. You don’t need miltary bases in Europe or Japan. Dumb answers.

Faramir on October 23, 2012 at 2:22 PM

The important question here is: who do you want sitting across from Putin / the Chicoms / Kim Jong Jr. / etc. during tense and important negotiations?

Certainly not Obama. He may be able to lie his butt off in the debates – and be sorely misinformed – and get away with it, but foreign dignitaries are going to see through his smokescreen and know that he is a fool. And that bodes ill for American interests.

I don’t want kiss ass Romney either. Romney basically said he would diplomacy. Isn’t that what we are already doing without success.

Faramir on October 23, 2012 at 2:24 PM

So I Imagine that you feel a 3rd Bush term would have fixed all?
That’s what Romney is offering…

verbaluce on October 23, 2012 at 11:23 AM

Well, since we just lived through Jimmy Carter’s 2nd term, a 3rd Bush term doesn’t sound so bad…

Strike Hornet on October 23, 2012 at 2:28 PM

People who think Romney won are clearly in denial.

Faramir on October 23, 2012 at 2:22 PM

And delusional brigade is back.

Tell me, idiot, just what did Hussein say during the 3 debates that was TRUE? He LIED and then LIED some more.

He should serve time for being complicit in the murder of our consulate personnel in Benghazi instead of appearing on TV and spewing LIES.

LIES. All the idiot in the WH has. And nothing but LIES.

riddick on October 23, 2012 at 2:30 PM

Why can’t we cut out the tanks and all the wasteful spending. You don’t need hundreds of thousands of troops to fight a terrorism war. You don’t need miltary bases in Europe or Japan. Dumb answers.

Faramir on October 23, 2012 at 2:22 PM

There, there, lil leftoid drone. It’ll be all right.
Just because you don’t know anything about the military doesn’t mean that you’re a bad person. Just ill-informed.
It does, however, mean that we shall laugh cruelly at your ignorance and mock you scathingly if you continue to display that ignorance.

Just go back to class so that you can graduate with your friends. Perhaps you’ll even get into a nice college if you work hard.

Solaratov on October 23, 2012 at 2:32 PM

People who think Romney won are clearly in denial.

Faramir on October 23, 2012 at 2:22 PM
And delusional brigade is back.

Tell me, idiot, just what did Hussein say during the 3 debates that was TRUE? He LIED and then LIED some more.

He should serve time for being complicit in the murder of our consulate personnel in Benghazi instead of appearing on TV and spewing LIES.

LIES. All the idiot in the WH has. And nothing but LIES.

riddick on October 23, 2012 at 2:30 PM

Right, he did lie – so why didn’t Romney call him on his failure with Israel and failure in Libya. Romney should have said he would have kept Mubarak in power, and maintained stability.

Faramir on October 23, 2012 at 2:37 PM

Why can’t we cut out the tanks and all the wasteful spending. You don’t need hundreds of thousands of troops to fight a terrorism war. You don’t need miltary bases in Europe or Japan. Dumb answers.

Faramir on October 23, 2012 at 2:22 PM
There, there, lil leftoid drone. It’ll be all right.
Just because you don’t know anything about the military doesn’t mean that you’re a bad person. Just ill-informed.
It does, however, mean that we shall laugh cruelly at your ignorance and mock you scathingly if you continue to display that ignorance.

Just go back to class so that you can graduate with your friends. Perhaps you’ll even get into a nice college if you work hard.

Solaratov on October 23, 2012 at 2:32 PM

See, I am not a leftoid. I am a fiscal conservative. Just saying Romney, the TARP supporting liberal, performed like a milquetoast middle of the road liberal.

You don’t need 700 billion to fight terrorism.

Faramir on October 23, 2012 at 2:38 PM

See, I am not a leftoid. I am a fiscal conservative. Just saying Romney, the TARP supporting liberal, performed like a milquetoast middle of the road liberal.

You don’t need 700 billion to fight terrorism.

Faramir on October 23, 2012 at 2:38 PM

I am not a big fan of Romney as judged by my posts on the subject for the past half year. That said, I have no idea what you are, but you calling yourself a “fiscal conservative” is so wrong on so many levels.

Anyone with half a brain KNOWS that Romney was actually AGAINST TARP. You simply keep repeating liberal LIE. He was also against GM and Chrysler bailouts. Romney’s Bain background simply points out that he, of all people, understands how managed bankruptcy and selling chunks of companies work for the benefit of bond holders.

But a REAL “fiscal conservative” understands all of those issues. And you don’t. So…

Either stop spewing talking points LIES here or prove you are “fiscal conservative” and actually learn a thing or two about someone you post about.

riddick on October 23, 2012 at 2:49 PM

You don’t need 700 billion to fight terrorism.

Faramir on October 23, 2012 at 2:38 PM

Which shows why you and fools like you should never be tasked with defending the country.

Just keep talking like that, and you’ll prove how little you know. It sounds as though you don’t have much of a grasp on reality. Do you believe that, somehow, we can cut out military spending and the rest of the world will just make nice-nice all the time?

You’re no ‘fiscal conservative’. You’re an idiot.

Solaratov on October 23, 2012 at 2:49 PM

You don’t need 700 billion to fight terrorism.

Faramir on October 23, 2012 at 2:38 PM

But tanks, aircraft carriers, and “”ships that go underwater” are necessary to contain North Korea and balance growing Chinese power. The Russians respect power, too.

0bama can’t just jump out of a helicopter and kill the People’s Liberation Army the way he personally killed bin Laden.

Now go back to Kos and take your ABO “true conservative” concern trolling with you.

MidniteRambler on October 23, 2012 at 2:50 PM

Perhaps you believe in magic. Me, I believe in Paul Krugman.

bayam on October 23, 2012 at 11:34 AM

Fixed.

Del Dolemonte on October 23, 2012 at 3:05 PM

Another Sleeper Cell activated.

kingsjester on October 23, 2012 at 3:10 PM

During the Bush years, we got to see how Fox News operates as a government house organ

Drew Lowell on October 23, 2012 at 11:36 AM

Prove it. You know you can’t.

BTW, after Bush landed on the aircraft carrier in 2003, MSDNC’s Chrissy Matthews was his biggest cheerleader.

Remember this?

http://mediamatters.org/research/2006/04/27/mission-accomplished-a-look-back-at-the-medias/135513

Mission Accomplished: A look back at the media’s fawning coverage of Bush’s premature declaration of victory in Iraq

-snip-

Chief among the cheerleaders was MSNBC’s Chris Matthews.

MATTHEWS: What’s the importance of the president’s amazing display of leadership tonight?

[...]

MATTHEWS: What do you make of the actual visual that people will see on TV and probably, as you know, as well as I, will remember a lot longer than words spoken tonight? And that’s the president looking very much like a jet, you know, a high-flying jet star. A guy who is a jet pilot. Has been in the past when he was younger, obviously. What does that image mean to the American people, a guy who can actually get into a supersonic plane and actually fly in an unpressurized cabin like an actual jet pilot?

MATTHEWS: Do you think this role, and I want to talk politically [...], the president deserves everything he’s doing tonight in terms of his leadership. He won the war. He was an effective commander. Everybody recognizes that, I believe, except a few critics. Do you think he is defining the office of the presidency, at least for this time, as basically that of commander in chief? That [...] if you’re going to run against him, you’d better be ready to take [that] away from him.

[...]

MATTHEWS: Let me ask you, Bob Dornan, you were a congressman all those years. Here’s a president who’s really nonverbal. He’s like Eisenhower. He looks great in a military uniform. He looks great in that cowboy costume he wears when he goes West. I remember him standing at that fence with Colin Powell. Was [that] the best picture in the 2000 campaign?

-snip-

MATTHEWS: We’re proud of our president. Americans love having a guy as president, a guy who has a little swagger, who’s physical, who’s not a complicated guy like [former President Bill] Clinton or even like [former Democratic presidential candidates Michael] Dukakis or [Walter] Mondale, all those guys, [George] McGovern. They want a guy who’s president. Women like a guy who’s president. Check it out. The women like this war. I think we like having a hero as our president.

On the May 1 edition of CNBC’s The News with Brian Williams, Williams, now anchor of NBC’s Nightly News, said of Bush:

WILLIAMS: And two immutable truths about the president that the Democrats can’t change: He’s a youthful guy. He looked terrific and full of energy in a flight suit. He is a former pilot, so it’s not a foreign art farm — art form to him. Not all presidents could have pulled this scene off today.

The print media joined in the collective swoon the following day. From a May 2, 2003, article in The New York Times by staff writer David E. Sanger:

But within minutes Mr. Bush emerged for the kind of photographs that other politicians can only dream about. He hopped out of the plane with a helmet tucked under his arm and walked across the flight deck with a swagger that seemed to suggest he had seen Top Gun. Clearly in his element, he was swarmed by cheering members of the Lincoln’s crew.

Even in a White House that prides itself on its mastery of political staging, Mr. Bush’s arrival on board the Lincoln was a first of many kinds.

Never before has a president landed aboard a carrier at sea, much less taken the controls of the aircraft. His decision to sleep aboard the ship this evening in the captain’s quarters conjured images of the presidency at sea not seen since Franklin D. Roosevelt used to sail to summit meetings.

As the Media Matters article (be sure to read the whole thing) amply indicates, your problem is that every other media outlet was also acting as house organs for the Bush White House. Not just “Faux News”.

Just curious, kid…can you give us credible, multi-sourced examples of Faux News committing journalistic fraud to the same extent that C-BS “News” did in 2004 with the Fake Documents, or that CNN has done on a semi-regular basis for decades (such as falsely accusing US soldiers of murdering Iraqi journalists). Be sure to get back to us when you find ‘em!

F-

Del Dolemonte on October 23, 2012 at 3:14 PM

the military industrial complex and defense lobby, esp. those not requested by DoD.

bayam on October 23, 2012 at 11:42 AM

If not for that complex, you wouldn’t have a computer to expose your idiocy on a regular basis here at Hot Gas.

G-

Del Dolemonte on October 23, 2012 at 3:15 PM

I think they’ll drive a u-haul to hawaii :)….

jimver on October 23, 2012 at 12:04 PM

Maybe they could ship their stuff on the Intercontinental Railroad. It’s fast, with good rates.

Solaratov on October 23, 2012 at 12:53 PM

Underwater ship…

riddick on October 23, 2012 at 12:55 PM

Actually, they’ll drive out-after all, Hawai’i has not 1, but 3, Interstate Highways!

Del Dolemonte on October 23, 2012 at 3:21 PM

Nothing better than an ad hominem attack in response to a deficit reduction plan designed to appeal to the feeble minded. After all, what this country really needs is a larger military, and a President brave enough to approve every pet project of the military industrial complex and defense lobby, esp. those not requested by DoD.

bayam on October 23, 2012 at 11:42 AM

Nicely done. How do you live with yourself? You make an ad hominem attack while chastising someone else for the same thing.

chemman on October 23, 2012 at 3:31 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4