GoldenDogs

He got clobbered but I don't think he was off his game. I have said it before and I will say it again: I think Obama is a terrible speaker. He injects into ever sentence copious amounts of "umm, uhh, umm <pause> umm" and he just cannot speak authoritatively. His every sentence carries the same amount of emphasis or lack thereof, and he just becomes dull after a while. Romney spoke with enthusiasm as he spoke, a sense of urgency and gave the appearance of actually trying to get his point across. Obama sounded like someone who was droning on and whether right or wrong it is not his job to convince you nor does he feel terribly interested in trying to do so. Obama's game is to give a speech in front of an audience plain and simple.

Hey QFan... he could have given a speech - phrased everything in that way and looked directly at the camera. Why didn't he?? Or do you think the teleprompter IS his best friend? I was stunned because Obama is KNOWN for slick, polished oratory. I can't even believe what happened last night.

But like I said before... it won't happen again. Obama is too good for that and we all know it...

Eh, the debates never mean as much as the media make them out to be and they never change the polls or voters' opinions in any permanent or meaningful way. Nate Silver, FiveThirtyEight blog at NY Times, pointed this out yesterday or today.

Another thing, maybe the negative feedback will push Obama to start talking about what he wants to do over he next four years in a substantial way.

With all due respect, Ann... if Obama does just that, he can't win. If he elaborates on policy over the last four years, he can't win.

You're one of the few I've seen who thinks he's in trouble because he hasn't been liberal enough. As one adamantly opposed to most of his policies, I really do hope he tells us EXACTLY what his plans for a second term are. I would love for him to go into great detail about those plans!

President Obama fell apart tonight. It wasn't Jim Lehrer's fault. You can't even blame the media on this one. The fault rests squarely with President Obama.

He got shredded tonight. He was uneven, totally off his game. The pinnacle of his unease came when he clobbered his microphone. Perhaps he was wishing it was Romney.

I admit that I'm stunned. I don't expect this to be the storyline following the second Presidential debate, however. Obama will be ready next time.

I expect the VP debate to be particularly bloody for Biden. Ryan will wipe the floor with him... and that will be the second in the overall series of debates. Not good for Obama.

Why is this spectacular when Benjamin "Apartheid" Netanyahu's shelling for Mittens is not? Yawn.

You have to ask?

Always a good sign to see President Obama with some fantastic endorsements... the one from President Francois Hollande of the French Socialist party is fantastic, but to receive an endorsement from the likes of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez is a real coup.

Makes one wonder what all these leaders might have in common...

Time to start hyping the debates. I wonder if the media will try to game a "win" for Romney, as they did with W in 2000.

http://www.politico....0912/81729.html

Hey Carl...

I gotta ask, what media is out there trying to game a win for ROMNEY??? Seriously, all the press I find seems to be doing the opposite. Seriously.

In that case A Very Happy Birthday to You!!!

<iframe width="480" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/tXZaF9s7K-M" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

LOL!! Love it, thanks Wales!!! I remember that commercial, too, and it still cracks me up!

<<Popping popcorn, grabbing a blanket to snuggle under, and watching this forum VERY closely!!>>

How many separate arguments do I have going here? Let's see... I initiate and attempt to discuss one at a time, now I've got... let me scroll up and count...

...four to five people I'm supposed to be responding to and maintaining an ongoing dialogue with? Damn, I'm outnumbered and I can't possibly keep up with this.

I understand that if I respectfully withdraw, it will be spun by a few as if I can't defend arguments or won't respond to posts - but I can't possibly debate in any quality way if I've got this much content to argue with this many people to challenge and respond to. I only have about half an hour in the morning to catch up on the news of the day, research, then respond in some reasonably coherent way. I rarely play in the evenings. I just can't swing this... I have no back up and I hate letting some responses go and I don't want to become obsessive with this and spend all hours on it.

Despite our disagreements on issues or candidates, I don't dislike any of you or hold any grudges... and I hope you guys understand that I can't keep up with this. The odds are against me... LOL! I'm not leaving the forum... I've just got to measure my participation or I'll go nuts. I'm already weird, you know...

Ignorance is bliss.

I see you are now resorting to that...

Typical. As they say, we'll all just have to agree to disagree. I'm really tired of arguing the same points over and over.

Spend some time in California... then tell me you think policies that mirror the President's really works. I get a front row seat each and every day to it...

You said the President's botched foreign policy resulted in the mess we have over there now but you were probably just talking about some other mess.

I'm not playing this game with you, Wales. Obama has a miserable foreign policy record and no amount of baiting one-liners can alter the fact. The man who claimed there would be peace in the mideast as a result of his election has anything BUT peace. In fact, we're hated more now than before he took office.

Don't take my word for it... refer to the brutal rape, torture and murder of our ambassador to Libya. Our closest ally in the Middle East in Israel and the President will not meet with its leader. It is inexcusable and that you have no issue with that boggles my mind.

I had actually given you more credit than this before... but I see now that you are nothing more than your average partisan shill. Wow, I'm dissappointed.

LOL please. He was pandering to the people he was speaking to by insultin people on government assistance as if they're somehow "beneath" them and need to get off their asses. It isn't about the truth hurting. Everybody voting for Obama is not on government assistance or a victim. My dad wasn't some multi-millionaire but he made sure we were provided for w/o government assistance. I didn't even know what a food stamp was until I was well into my 20's so I am tired of certain groups trying to say all pro-Obama or most of them are lazy, people expecting the government to give them money. It is not true and it is insulting.

And do you even know what is on the mind of people who are on food stamps? Do you actually think people want to depend on the government? I am not going to pretend that there aren't people who abuse the system but it is worth it if it means people who actually do need help and are trying to find work can have food for their family.

Yep, truth hurts, Eric. Get over it.

The evidence suggests both. In front of the cameras he is a candidate for all. Behind closed doors he and his billionaire friends complain about how much the poor have and complain that they don't pay enough taxes. Meanwhile, the very guy doing the complaining about the poor hides his money in Swiss bank accounts, won't release his taxes because he knows how little he pays, and shelters it on the Cayman Islands so he does not have to pay his fair tax rate. But the poor...oh, they're horrible for getting welfare.

You can recite every FOX news talking point you can find, the bottom line is a bunch of billionaires were caught on tape complaining about how easy the people on food stamps have it. If you think anything he says, including his ridiculous Drudge Obama video that nobody cares about is going to change that, you are mistaken.

Which FOX News talking points am I reciting?

Again with the one-liners... you guys are offering no substance, just attacks.

Sad.

On the whole topic of how the attacks in Libya would not have taken place if Barack Obama had a better relationship with Benjamin Netanyahu

Who said this?

I have said it is irresponsible not to meet with the man and, instead, go on Letterman. I never said the terrorist attack in Libya - that the administration still won't call a terrorist attack - wouldn't have happened if Obama and Netanyahu had a beer together... Was there someone in the media that said that?

In other news...

WASHINGTON (AP) — Nearly 6 million Americans — significantly more than first estimated— will face a tax penalty under President Barack Obama's health overhaul for not getting insurance, congressional analysts said Wednesday. Most would be in the middle class.

The new estimate amounts to an inconvenient fact for the administration, a reminder of what critics see as broken promises.

The numbers from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office are 50 percent higher than a previous projection by the same office in 2010, shortly after the law passed. The earlier estimate found 4 million people would be affected in 2016, when the penalty is fully in effect.

http://www.google.co...aef95fda77612f7

One of the few things Ron Paul is right about is stop giving away to other countries what you don't have and take care of your own business.

At last, something me and you - and Ron Paul - agree with!

LOL thank you. The most government assistance I got was loans for college so I fail to understand how I'm a "victim" This is more funny than anything. Romney is doing all this pandering and will most likely lose this election. How someone can criticize and speak badly upon the citizens of the country he wants to be the leader of is beyond me.

Okay, Eric... Romney is pandering to voters... yet speaking badly upon them? Which is it?

As for speaking badly upon the citizens, as you say... Maybe people need a little truth for a change. The truth hurts. More people do less in America today, expecting others to take care of them. Do you deny this?

Have Romney's statements victimized you?

People in the 47% to whom he refers are apparently most likely to vote Republican.

Do you believe in government-sponsored healthcare, Wales? Do you believe in redistribution of wealth, Wales? Do you plan to vote for Obama, Wales?

If so, then I'd say Romney has you pegged... you are amongst the 47%.

Remember the good 'ol days when we talked about the 1%... now we're talking about the 47%!

What Romney said about the 47% was true... And the so-called mainstream media has blown this whole thing out of proportion. The proof?

The latest from the Associated Press:

President Barack Obama and GOP challenger Mitt Romney stand about even among likely voters, with 47 percent backing Obama and 46 percent Romney.

What a shock... 47% are supporting Obama. Heh...

Indeed

What is this supposed to tell me, though? That these states are "red" states means nothing. Without knowing WHO these people truly are, the map and the notion of a "Republican" state versus a "Democratic" state means nothing. I'm a registered Republican living in California, by the way. Because my state is a "blue" state, does that mean I am for redistributing the wealth, as our President is? Of course not.

Romney's statement about the 47%, which Jane's research indicates is absolutely true - we all know it's true, or at least that percentage is pretty damn close - does not reference "blue states" in particular. There are people who vote for Obama living in red states, right?

And doesn't it stand to reason that a person who fears losing government benefits as a result of a Romney victory... would NOT vote for Romney?? Who would those people vote for? Ron Paul?

Anyway... reaction to Romney's comments are ridiculously overblown by the liberal mainstream press. When two weeks of the news cycle are dedicated to Romney statements that aren't particularly outrageous or incorrect... rather than a discussion on the President's foreign policy failures, including his indecision over whether or not Egypt is an ally, indicates a bias in the press the likes we've never seen before.

Yeah, there is a lot riding on this election... this is made particularly clear by the way the mainstream press is so willingly sacraficing what was left of their integrity and objectivity.

Media Matters covers press, it's not really press itself. Daily Caller purports to be press - by doing things like having their reporters yell at Obama to get 15 minutes of fame.

I'm confused, Carl... You earlier referenced Media Matters as "mainstream press", then just said they're not press.

Which is it?

Reporters wouldn't have to interrupt and yell questions if they President would occasionally answer one from even the established media. Access Hollywood... Entertainment Tonight? Really? Not Mr. Obama's best moments, frankly. And a sitting President appearing on a late-night talk show? Hmmm. If the dude spent half as much time dealing seriously with foreign and domestic affairs as he does yucking it up on entertainment programs, maybe little issues like the debt or murdered ambassadors could be handled in a more competent manner.

Exactly, the Daily Caller is much more activist that Media Matters is, Media Matters specializes in pointing out biases or falsehoods in press. The Daily Caller just obsesses about Democrats 24/7. Hypocrisy is a ridiculous thing.

Two word for you, Redd: Huffington Post.

WASHINGTON (CBSDC) — A new report put out by the Pew Research Center finds that the median income is worse now than it was during the Great Recession. According to Pew, the Census Bureau showed that the median income for American households in 2009 – the official end of the Great Recession – was $52,195 (in 2011 dollars), while the median income dipped to $50,054 last year, falling 4.1 percent over two years.

“The decrease in household income from 2009 to 2011 almost exactly equaled the decrease in income in the two years of the recession,” the Pew report stated.

And in other economic news...

Nearly 15 percent of Americans now use SNAP benefits, formerly called food stamps, a program administered by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). This translates to more than one in 7 Americans currently using SNAP benefits, a record non-emergency high.

--Manhattan Institute for Policy Research

Exactly, the Daily Caller is much more activist that Media Matters is, Media Matters specializes in pointing out biases or falsehoods in press. The Daily Caller just obsesses about Democrats 24/7. Hypocrisy is a ridiculous thing.

Is the story I linked to wrong?

After you're done elevating the information sources you guys offer up and denegrating mine, how about discussing the meat and potatoes of this thing...

Did Obama's Justice Department collaborate with Media Matters to warp press coverage?

The Obama/Carter stuff is brought up fairly often.

Here's some of the mainstream press coverage bringing up the "bitter" comment as a comparison.

http://mediamatters....-clinger/189956

If Media Matters is considered mainstream press, we're all screwed.

The majority of Americans who don't pay taxes are in Republican held states.

Roman is right on this one... It seems I have heard this before. Or was it that most entitlements are given to those in Republican states?

My question is... are these poor states? Are they unemployed? I don't have time to research right now...

In recent years, just about anything I've seen on CNN or read in Washington Post or Politico.

Link to them... quote them for me... thanks dude!

In January, an article that appeared in Carl's New York Times stated that "Thanks to the recession, and changes in program rules, a large fraction of households receive government assistance, especially those headed by people without a four-year college degree."

One cannot deny that there has always been a significant segment of society - all ages, all races, etc. - who have made a living on the dole. It's true that some work harder to avoid working at all... we've all seen and even know those who do it! The article indicates the largest number of people receiving some form of benefits are those who did not receive a high school diploma. The article does not include old people forced on to Medicaid and Social Security. The article also does not offer a breakdown on race or ethnicity.

I'm not going to go there because Romney NEVER brought race or ethnicity into the argument. If he did, excerpt it for me so I can read it.

http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/01/25/who-receives-government-assistance/

I gotta get ready for work... I can't play any more this morning... LOL!!

Just look at a lot of the media reaction to Romney's awful comments today. Oh, Obama did the same in 2008, it's a wash.

The media loves "strong father" types. They love the idea of Obama as Jimmy Carter. Romney hasn't been able to seal the deal but that's in spite of the "both sides are bad but Democrats are worse" Beltway mindset.

Excerpt some of this for me. I'm not seeing this in the mainstream media. And please don't quote or point to opinion pieces... where is the hard news coverage that portrays the "both sides are bad but Democrats are worse" mindset. Does that comes from the New York Times? MSNBC? CNN? Fox News? The Huffington Post? Politico?