Faith Focused Dating. Create your Free Profile and meet your Match! Sign Up for Free
A place to learn, mingle, and share

This room is for the discussion of current events,cultural issues and politics especially in relation to Catholic values.

Saint Thomas More was martyred during the Protestant Reformation for standing firm in the Faith and not recognizing the King of England as the Supreme Head of the Church.
Learn More:Saint Thomas More

10/04/2012 new

(Quote) ED-20630 said: I was quite impressed with the way that Romney presented himself. I thought that he did really well c...
(Quote) ED-20630 said:

I was quite impressed with the way that Romney presented himself. I thought that he did really well compared to Obama. Of course, I have never like Obama anyway. I don't think that either one of them make a major gaffe that you will see repeated in the news.

I thought that this was a very good substantive debate, really covering the important issues of domestic policy.... perhaps one of the best for presidential debates.

I have been comparing the after-debate coverage between CNN and FOX. Of all the CNN and FOX (in-house) commentators, every single one of them thought that Romney clearly won the debate. Also, many were saying that it looked like Romney wanted to be there and Obama clearly did not want to be there.

Romney looked very much at ease during the whole debate, and very personal (as opposed to kind of distant or robotic as he has sometimes appeared). He really had a command of the facts and details that he presented.

I noticed that Romney was often making eye contact with Obama when Obama was speaking. In contrast, Obama was often looking down at the podium and pursing his lips when Romney was speaking. That didn't look good to me.

This was definitely the best showing by Romney in a debate. Two thumbs up!!

Ed

--hide--


Being a conservative, I always like to turn to the mass media channels to "listen" to the descriptions they paint to form an argument. One thing was apparent last night before all the hatchet fact checkers and pollsters have their say. The anchors from NBC, CBS, and even George Stephapartisan from ABC said Obama did not have a strong debate. Not surprising. Obama spent the first 15 minutes with pre-canned campaign soundbites about a $5 Trillion Romney tax cut, only to turn around at every corner and say he didn't have any specifics about Romney's plan. Epic fail on team Obama's part. So, like everything else that's sprung forth from the left, where are you getting your information and who are you trying to convince? Obviously, only those who don't know how to read a financial statement. But for me, and as you stated, the debate was won and lost on one aspect. Obama was scribbling like a mad man trying to prepare a framed response for everything, and rarely looking at Romney, while Romney spent 90% of the time staring the president right in the eye and had his game plan ready to attack. I think I only counted 4 times where Romney even jotted "anything" down. But you can see where the arrogance is lost on Obama without his teleprompters. I'm sure his crack team of preparers highlighted this during the 3 day sequester, but Obama, to my recollection, only started one reply beginning a sentence with the word "Look..." I'll have to go through the transcripts to see if I missed any more, but that form of reply has become the trademark sign of Obama's arrogance throughout his presidency that just makes my teeth grind. And since that point, everyone in the mainstream media is seems has copied that mannerism, and to anyone who considers themselves intellectual, it's a complete turn off.

10/04/2012 new

(Quote) Gerald-283546 said: I think it is the "Affordable Care and Patient Protection Act," but since it i...
(Quote) Gerald-283546 said:



I think it is the "Affordable Care and Patient Protection Act," but since it is neither affordable nor affords patients any protection, Conservatives do not like to use the 1984-style spin title given it by the Democrat Comgress. Since it is one of the most unpopular pieces of legislation passed in the last generation, labeling it as "Obamacare" seems to do no harm.

I agree though, it is a little un-nerving to see the President so happy with the title. As if it were his idea. "Pelosicare" or "Pelosi-Reed-Obamacare" would be more appropriate. But this President is obsessed with his legacy. Try massive unemployment, disregard for the Constitution and dead ambassadors along with doubling the national debt in 4 years...that's enough legacy for anyone.

Reminding people about it reminds us that Obama's signature piece of legislation:
1. Was not his creation, yet he loves to glory in it.
2. Was passed in a totally partisan fashion, without acquiring even one Republican vote
3. And actually takes $700 billion from Medicare to pay for it, in addition to something like 17 other taxes that clamp in over the next several years, including the Mandate.

I thought Romney did a pretty good job of calling Obama out on the differences. Most importantly to me were the lack of bipartisanship in the passing of Obamacare, and the fact that it is a States Rights issue. Romney actually turned the topic to his own advantage, because Romneycare was Bipartisan, and responded to the needs of a leftist State. I'm not sure I bought his claim that it reduced costs...would have to look at that one more closely. But, clearly, Romney is not going to try to impose from the Federal level something that belongs at the state level. The Tenth Amendment will survive under him.

--hide--



The reason Obama has become fond of the term is because he knows when his presidential library is eventually built, Obamacare is going to be the second thing people read about when they enter the building.

And as far as the medicare portion of the debate last night, Obama just rolled over and played dead when Romney went after him about taking $716B out of medicare. The best he could come up with was that he wanted to take the "savings" from the war (in other words, a paper shuffle from current defense spending to healthcare spending) and apply it to medicare. Does anyone really buy into that?

10/04/2012 new

(Quote) Gerald-283546 said: Wow! My reaction to the first debate:Impressive: an intelligent man versus a mediocre ma...
(Quote) Gerald-283546 said:

Wow! My reaction to the first debate:

Impressive: an intelligent man versus a mediocre man. A man of accomplishment and understanding versus a man who is an ideologue and a puppet and who has just taken from government handouts his whole life.

It appeared to me that Mr. Romney's vision was vibrant, mostly realistic, and likely effective. He is a leader but also understands the 10th Amendment. He is a man who can work across the isle. Yet, he defended himself well against Obama's mischaracterizations of him, and led the discussion always back to what would create jobs and preserve freedom.

On the contrary, Mr. Obama gave more lame spin, straw man demagoguery and generalization. He is a man who has refused to work across the isle in any way. And in true Saul Alinsky fashion, he accused his opponent of doing exactly what he himself was in fact doing, refusing specifics. Mr. Obama's Chicago political machine lying through his teeth came out again and again.

Perhaps I am a little biased, since I do not like Mr. Obama's vision of big government and socialism.
But, I was so impressed that Mr. Romney was hard hitting, bold but not rude, assertive, reasonably specific for a general debate.

No question in my mind who should lead the USA and the free World.

What say you?

--hide--


So, did anyone see Valerie Jarrett sitting in the front next to Michelle Obama? I honestly believe that Obama is not running the government - he is merely the spokesman - in - chief for Valerie Jarrett (at least that's what I've read and heard), et al. And, without her telling him what to say and his teleprompter, Obama was absolutely lost. This is actually frightenening, because if any true crisis happened and Valerie Jarrett, et. al were unavailable, who knows what Obama would do - he is clearly incompetent!

And, being a former teacher (before I became a physician), my grade for the debate for Romney is an A (he would have gotten A+ if there were a couple more good zingers) and for Obama is a D+ (I rarely failed anyone). Would anyone else here care to grade the contenders?

10/04/2012 new
Bring on Biden.

Ryan debating Biden

will look like a celebrity roast

without the profanity. cool
10/04/2012 new

(Quote) Patricia-29176 said: So, did anyone see Valerie Jarrett sitting in the front next to Michelle Obama? I hones...
(Quote) Patricia-29176 said:



So, did anyone see Valerie Jarrett sitting in the front next to Michelle Obama? I honestly believe that Obama is not running the government - he is merely the spokesman - in - chief for Valerie Jarrett (at least that's what I've read and heard), et al. And, without her telling him what to say and his teleprompter, Obama was absolutely lost. This is actually frightenening, because if any true crisis happened and Valerie Jarrett, et. al were unavailable, who knows what Obama would do - he is clearly incompetent!

And, being a former teacher (before I became a physician), my grade for the debate for Romney is an A (he would have gotten A+ if there were a couple more good zingers) and for Obama is a D+ (I rarely failed anyone). Would anyone else here care to grade the contenders?

--hide--


I agree with what you have said, Patricia. Sometimes, separating Obama from Jarrett actually helps the right thing to get done. We do have an example of what happens in a crisis with Valerie Jarrett out of the White House. The Bin Laden-Abottabod raid was timed just for that eventuality. From what I read, she had been blocking the raid for about 6 mos, so Panetta timed a crisis conference for when Jarrett was out for a day, and told the President the planes were already in the air and if he cancelled it the world would know we had him but let him go. Without Jarrett to naysay the plan, Obama reluctantly gave the go ahead. It was Jarrett's absence that allowed the raid to go forward. At least that's what I heard from a high placed source.

As with most presidents, it is the team that he surrounds himself with that makes the most important difference in how the Country is run. Yes, he gets to make the final decisions, but no one person can run it all. The scary thing is we know nothing about Valerie Jarrettt. I do not believe there were Congressional advise and consent hearings on her. Yet, she appears to be Obama's live in teleprompter. It is a little scary.

10/04/2012 new

(Quote) Gerald-283546 said: I agree with what you have said, Patricia. Sometimes, separating Obama from Jarrett actu...
(Quote) Gerald-283546 said:



I agree with what you have said, Patricia. Sometimes, separating Obama from Jarrett actually helps the right thing to get done. We do have an example of what happens in a crisis with Valerie Jarrett out of the White House. The Bin Laden-Abottabod raid was timed just for that eventuality. From what I read, she had been blocking the raid for about 6 mos, so Panetta timed a crisis conference for when Jarrett was out for a day, and told the President the planes were already in the air and if he cancelled it the world would know we had him but let him go. Without Jarrett to naysay the plan, Obama reluctantly gave the go ahead. It was Jarrett's absence that allowed the raid to go forward. At least that's what I heard from a high placed source.

As with most presidents, it is the team that he surrounds himself with that makes the most important difference in how the Country is run. Yes, he gets to make the final decisions, but no one person can run it all. The scary thing is we know nothing about Valerie Jarrettt. I do not believe there were Congressional advise and consent hearings on her. Yet, she appears to be Obama's live in teleprompter. It is a little scary.

--hide--


So true. I think Obama is way over his head, and unable to demonstrate any actual leadership. As for Valerie Jarrett, I believe she was fired by the Daley administration for screwing up (don't remember the details). But, I would guess you would have to be really bad to get fired by the Daleys - you know how this town runs! And, she comes from a very wealthy and well connected black family - I think she is the one that actually got Obama's career started and hooked him up to the Chicago "gang". I think she achieved her goal of getting a "puppet" president into the White House - but hopefully that will end in November!!!

10/04/2012 new

(Quote) Gerald-283546 said: Wow! My reaction to the first debate: Impressive: an intelligent man versus a mediocre m...
(Quote) Gerald-283546 said:

Wow! My reaction to the first debate:

Impressive: an intelligent man versus a mediocre man. A man of accomplishment and understanding versus a man who is an ideologue and a puppet and who has just taken from government handouts his whole life.

It appeared to me that Mr. Romney's vision was vibrant, mostly realistic, and likely effective. He is a leader but also understands the 10th Amendment. He is a man who can work across the isle. Yet, he defended himself well against Obama's mischaracterizations of him, and led the discussion always back to what would create jobs and preserve freedom.

On the contrary, Mr. Obama gave more lame spin, straw man demagoguery and generalization. He is a man who has refused to work across the isle in any way. And in true Saul Alinsky fashion, he accused his opponent of doing exactly what he himself was in fact doing, refusing specifics. Mr. Obama's Chicago political machine lying through his teeth came out again and again.

Perhaps I am a little biased, since I do not like Mr. Obama's vision of big government and socialism.
But, I was so impressed that Mr. Romney was hard hitting, bold but not rude, assertive, reasonably specific for a general debate.

No question in my mind who should lead the USA and the free World.

What say you?

--hide--



I absolutely agree, Gerald. The beautiful thing about the debates is that if the voter actually watches them, the spin doctors of the main stream media can't "unring the bell" of a solid performance or of a mediocre performance. Romney came across as extremely knowledgeable, capable, and able to handle pressure well. I almost had to laugh when Obama tried to bolster his performance by mentioning that he had gotten rid of Bin Laden. Can't wait until he has to explain why the embassy in Libya was safe enough for the ambassador to be in and now is not safe enough for the FBI.


- Elizabeth

10/04/2012 new

(Quote) Jim-624621 said: Actually, I had quite the opposite feeling when Romney said to turn it over to the states. The fed...
(Quote) Jim-624621 said:

Actually, I had quite the opposite feeling when Romney said to turn it over to the states. The federal government is supposed to work under the guidance of the US Constitution. In the Constitution, there are enumerated powers that have been GRANTED to the Federal Government by the States and the people. We are the masters of the Federal government, not the other way around. SINCE there is no enumerated power for Healthcare, the Federal Government should not even have been talking about it, (And the Supreme Court should have thrown out Obamacare for this reason as well). Any power not specifically assigned to the Federal Government (enumerated) belongs to the States and to the People (who are sovereign). The only way that the Federal Government should be addressing healthcare is for there to be an Article V Amendment convention in which a quorum of the states passed an amendment to the Constitution to add the healthcare enumerated power to the Constitution. The founding fathers were VERY clear, that the General Welfare clause was NOT to be used to build any infrastructure the Federal Government wanted to take control away from the states, but this is exactly what has been done over the last 144 years. The comment he made about allowing competition in the insurance industry is spot on. Also needed is tort reform to eliminated frivolous lawsuits which drive up the cost of insurance for everyone. Those two things would have actually helped. All that other stuff in Obamacare is to "decrease the surplus population" and simply for control of the healthcare economy and all humans.

Regarding education, all of the reforms that are going around the country right now are designed to put the federal government in control of the curricula in schools, and even home schools, and leaving parents without say. Having a voucher to choose which school to send your kid to is NOT the same as controlling what curricula your child is going to learn. Again, there is no enumerated power in the US Constitution for a Department of Education (nor is there an enumerated power for Interior, Commerce, or Energy). Since the early 80s when this agency was created, they have spent billions of dollars, and have not increased test scores or improved American children's standing in knowledge in the world; in fact, American students now rank around 17th in the world. How can that be? Because Mitt Romney was right about something else too, the private sector can do everything better than government can, which is why we need smaller government; not no regulations, but less oppressive and intrusive one-size-fits-all control from the Federal Government.
--hide--

Jim, I agree that the federal government should not control our health care system and/or our educational system. My concern is whether the state governments should be controlling either of these activities as well. If we have really accepted as truth that the government, be it state or federal, is the only vehicle able to deliver medical and educational services, than the left has won the ideological war and the government leviathon will plod on (probably on us). The truth is both of these services are controlled by third party payer systems which distort the relationships (doctor-patient and teacher-student) necessary for these services to be effective. Vouchers are a nice idea to give control back to patients/students, but I doubt it will take long for the government to force its edicts onto private health care and schools since they are supplying the money behind the vouchers.

10/04/2012 new

Al Gore blames Obama's poor debate performance on altitude sickness (oxygen deprivation), since Denver is at 5000 feet elevation. Apparently Romney had the advantage because he did his debate preparation in Denver and had more time to acclimate.

Watch the video of Al Gore's comment on his "Current TV" program...

www.newser.com


Also in the Washington Post:

www.washingtonpost.com



I'm surprised that Al didn't blame Obama's performance on Global Warming... as he does with just about everything else. laughing


Ed

10/04/2012 new

Interestingly enough, the headlines on the web are relatively silent about the debate. On Yahoo, the headlines are still as if the debate is yet to occur.

The libs must still be in shock so that only those whose IQ is questionable, like Al Gore's, have yet to weigh in with the spin to try to make this Obama disaster (so what else is new) seem like a rousing success.

According to some polls, the result of the debate was to increase the number of undecided voters. That would indicate a defection from the lib side. That is because the way the polls have been going, the decided in favor of Romney have been steady and slightly growing. As poor a performance as Obama delivered had to have shaken his "I will hold my nose and vote for him" out of their complacency.

When you recall Obama's comments before the debate about how he found the prep sessions tiresome and combine it with his innate intellectual arrogance, it was almost a foregone conclusion that he would stumble.

I am sure he will not find the prep for the remaining debates as tiresome. So we may still see some fireworks iin the remaining debates, especially if he and his staff can figure out a way to get a teleprompter set up for his use. laughing

Just my opinion.

Posts 41 - 50 of 150