Wednesday, October 10, 2012

Downsizing American Expectations (4)~~Debating the Campaign Debates

The debate Wednesday was a “reset” of the presidential campaign.

~~ Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R,N.H.), Fox News Sunday

Luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity.

~~ Seneca

Luck is not always the residue of design, and Romney was lucky that the first debate concerned the economy . . . America can be . . . a society in which markets — the voluntary collaboration of creative individuals — allocate opportunity.


If the debate can become an inflection point, a launching pad for the rest of the race, it won't be merely the end of the beginning of the general election campaign. It could become the beginning of the end of the failed Obama presidency. 

~~William Kristol, The Beginning of the End?

It is common knowledge that a politician would promise anything and everything just to secure the electorates’ votes.  A joke very popular in Philippine college campuses in the sixties I deem most appropriate to illustrate this popular belief.

The narrative goes: a politician in the campaign stomp pompously promised, “if I’m elected I’ll build you the most magnificent bridge you have ever seen in your lifetime.”  To which a heckler interjected: “but we don’t have any river hereabouts.”  Whereat the politician retorted, “I’ll build you an equally splendid river to go with it, you impertinent dolt.”

Unfortunately, “we the people” are more often than not taken in by every two-bit politician’s subterfuge and machinations.  Else, if such were not the case, no career politician would ever prosper on the taxpayers’ dime and retire from politics far wealthier than when he/she first entered the arena.  And there would have been far more politicians who would manage to earn the grade into being recognized and remembered as honorable statesmen, and/or stateswomen as the case may be. suggests that the labels politician and statesman may be deemed synonymous and interchangeable.  I strongly beg to disagree.  The simplest difference between the two is the statesman happens to be a politician with a conscience.  The statesman approaches governance and policy formulation with principled moorings.  On the other hand, the politician’s reckonings don’t go beyond expedience and leverage for future and more lucrative political gains.


Secondly, a statesman has the ability and intellectual fortitude to reach out for that much needed honorable compromise with the opposition to get one’s agenda implemented.  Pres. Obama bullied, bribed, and squandered the people’s money to get ObamaCare passed in Congress without a single vote from the opposition.


Colby Hall of, showcasing Pres. Obama’s statesmanship  skills, chronicled thus:

Mr. Obama had this to say about the GOP joining Democratic efforts for reform: “They can come for the ride, but they gotta sit in back.” One can only imagine the imagery this comment will conjure for all parties involved.

The one factoid that was missed, nay, deliberately avoided noticing by everybody in pundit-land with the notable exceptions of Rush Limbaugh and Donald Trump was that Pres. Obama is a fraud.  He was built up by the media in 2008 as the “Manchurian Candidate,” and the nation had swallowed the goodies hook, line and sinker.

Contrary to the media narrative, I assert, contend and maintain that Barack Hussein Obama has been the dumbest individual to have disgraced the Oval Office.  Here is the compelling bill of circumstantial particulars:


1.           He is reduced to an incoherent blob when deprived of his teleprompter as demonstrated in last Wednesday’s debate;

2.           He spent reported $millions on a horde of lawyers to keep his college records~~transcripts, theses, term papers, etc. sealed off from the public;

3.           He is unique in being the President of Harvard Law Review without a single article, scholarly or otherwise, attributed to his by-line;

4.           He has never passed a budget in his first term because he could not persuade a single vote in Congress to support his agenda.

These are not hallmarks of leadership.  These are hallmarks of a loafer and a dolt.  He fiddled and hob-nobbed with celebrities in Las Vegas and Hollywood on campaign fund raising stomps while our sovereign territories were crushed and burnt in the four corners of the globe throughout the Islamic world.  How low can a President get before you recognize the symptoms and come forth with the proper diagnosis of the disease?

Contrary to liberal media spin, the debater who showed up last Wednesday night was the real unadulterated Barack Hussein Obama, a.k.a. Barry Soetoro, liberated from the protective cocoon of the Kool-Aid drinkers in the non-Fox media.  Sans the teleprompter, the Lord of the Realm proved to be indisputably as bare as the instant he was born, regardless of whether or not it was on United States territory.

The ultimate measure of a politician’s potential to evolve into a statesman is the way he handles the fallout of any debacle.  So far Pres. Obama has failed miserably this putrescence test, respecting last Wednesday’s debate.  Not only has he indulged ad nauseam in Argumentum ad hominem, as behooves a Chicago rabble rouser, he also had deployed the entire Democratic Party machine to foment at its basest abyss the politics of personal destruction.

Undoubtedly, this demeans the dignity of the Presidency as an institution.  Above and beyond that, it diminishes the pride and glory of history that has been the Idea of the United States of America. 

Considering that there are still two debates scheduled, for the sake of civility and to recalibrate his bearings, I beseech the President to heed the counsel of William Shakespeare in, Henry IV, Part II, to wit:

“Then, happy low, lie down!

Uneasy lies the head that wears a crown.”

Recalibration is absolutely necessary for the President shall be circumscribed by Agatha Reed’s standards for fairness in the movie “Goodbye, My Fancy” to “never play fair unless you respect the person you are dealing with.”  Ergo, as he continues to scornfully demonstrate his contempt for Gov. Romney in the campaign trail, his endless pontification on fairness would be reduced to an hideous exhibition of hypocrisy, putridly repugnant to a populace hungry for leadership.

 [Next~~ Downsizing American Expectations (5):

The Campaign Debates Part 2]


{Below catalogues remarks some in Pundit-Land has recorded for posterity on the first Presidential Debate as reflected in my short reading list}


 “. . . Political operatives say they hate oppo because they hate to lower the tone of the national discourse. The truth is, oppo is bad for business. The press goes into full Lascivious Puritan mode, spreads the dirt and then tries to nail the provider. When everyone knows a strategist won dirty, he becomes controversial . . .”


“. . . Mr. Obama has skated by with platitudes, lies, misrepresentations and "cool," while the nation we love, still "the last best hope of earth," seemed to be sliding toward the drain.

“. . . Obama seems to be identifying a problem, except that his description is false. And if it were true, why did Obama do nothing about it when his party controlled both houses of Congress?”


“America is not prospering economically. No matter what Obama says he's done, the facts are that personal income is down, good jobs are hard to get, the debt is north of $16 trillion, and everybody who has health insurance is paying higher premiums. And don't even ask about gas prices.”

~~Bill O’Reilly, The Debate Report Card


“It was the biggest rout since Agincourt. . . . With a remarkable display of confidence, knowledge and nerve, Mitt Romney won the first 2012 debate going away.

“Romney didn’t just demonstrate authoritative command of a myriad of domestic issues. He was nervy about it, taking the president on frontally, not just relentlessly attacking, but answering every charge leveled against him — with a three-point rebuttal.”

~~Charles Krauthammer, Romney by two touchdowns


“As the president makes his case for four more years, he does so without emphasizing what he has accomplished or what he intends to do. Instead, he concentrates on the culture of personal celebrity.


“When backed into a corner, as in Wednesday’s debate with Republican challenger Mitt Romney, he defaults to class warfare.


“If Obama wins re-election, he may claim a mandate to advance a class-based, redistributionist agenda — because that is exactly what he has run on.”


“The problem for Obama is not that his performance was disastrous, but rather that it was his normal workmanlike coasting. But this time, and for the first time, he was pitted against a skilled debater who had both the better argument and the better intellectual artillery to deliver it. . . . For Obama to win the next debate, Romney will have to be uncharacteristically bad, Obama will have to be uncharacteristically good, and the moderator will not only have to be engaged but also unashamedly hyper-partisan. All of the above can happen, but it is unlikely.”

~~Victor Davis Hanson,

The Problem Last Night Was Not Just Obama


“Sans teleprompter, he repeated the talking points of his television ads and, when Romney responded sharply, he had nothing to fall back on.

We saw the president who found it fitting to jet off to campaign in Las Vegas the day after the first murder of a U.S. ambassador in 33 years.

. . .

Obama will surely perform better in his next two debates. Romney may not perform as well. But the first numbers suggest the firewall may be crumbling. We'll see if it holds.”

~~Michael Barone, Romney's Debate

Win Opens Cracks in Obama Firewall

1 comment:

  1. This is 4th in a continuing series leading to the election on how the Obama Regime is cutting down "to size" anything American to fit into his post-colonial ideological template that all the ills of the world have been caused by Americans using a disproportionate share of the world's resources at the expense of the rest of the world.