Friday, October 5, 2012
The Monday morning political analysts are hurling barbs at BHO, and partially they are correct. He was a somnambulist on stage and didn't come off as the orator we are used to. But, isn't it easier for Romney to be critical of the POTUS who has been there than it is for the incumbent to defend himself. After all, Obama has tried and the Repubs from day one have undermined him every step of the way. So Romney lies his way through the debate and just because he seems chippie they claim him the winner. Well, when you are the POTUS you have more on your mind than a debate, or you should. And it's much easier for Romney to throw crap against the wall that nobody will remember just a month from now. Hopefully the American voters will READ the debate rather than judge by the TV version. The debate reminded me of the little drops of sweat on Nixon's upper lip during the Kennedy debates in 1960. Yes, I do remember that and many people believed that was a sign that Nixon wasn't quite presidential enough. They later changed their minds but that's another story. So, as I told my daughter Anna, don't just watch them, read them. And remember that it's easier to be on the offense when you have nothing to lose.
Thursday, October 4, 2012
Does a debate without any real meat persuade anyone to vote for either candidate? Romney completely threw his campaign speeches under the bus. Obama was lackluster and looked as though he would rather have been having a 20th anniversary dinner with the Mrs. But in the long run, to me, it shows how our system no longer works. Two candidates is just not enough to choose from. There was no real concrete difference between the two of them because all we heard were empty words. Ugh.