Alright, now we can get to the first presidential debate between Democratic incumbent Barack Obama and Republican challenger Mitt Romney...in a word, 'Wow!'
Gov. Mitt Romney eviscerated a staggering and bewildered President Barack Obama tonight in one of the most lopsided presidential debates in American history. Throughout the debate, which focused on domestic policy, Obama looked shaken, rarely looking at the camera, reciting old talking points and filibustering as Romney gave a master class at the University of Denver.
If you didn't catch all of the debate, theRightScoop has compiled a collection of segments, culminating in its entirety. However, I think this segment illustrates a nice portrayal of how well the night went for Mitt...and not so blissful for Barry...
Ok, so this section was on the role of the federal government. Per Obama's initial response, if the President truly believes that "the first role of the federal government is to keep the people safe," then two questions immediately come to mind: What the hell happened in Benghazi? And what the hell's happening on our southern border? Defense is not simply "it's most basic function," that's it's PRIMARY function. But of course, that's not what Obama sees as the federal government's primary role. Rather, that's reserved for what he touched on next:
"But I also believe that...the federal government has the capacity to help open up opportunity and create ladders of opportunity and to create frameworks where the American people can succeed."
There's the central planner talking. Now of course he follows that up with all the words we'd like to hear: free enterprise, freedom, Abraham Lincoln, education...but his 'ladders' and 'frameworks' derive not from any of those influences, but of overarching regulation and subsidization by hook (with congressional dominance during the first two years of his presidency) or by crook (by executive fiat throughout his reign).
Romney quickly corrected Obama's insinuation that he doesn't care about education, and then gave that excellent explanation for the role of government:
"Look behind us. The Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. The role of government is to promote and protect the principles of those documents.
First, life and liberty. We have a responsibility to protect the lives and liberties of our people, and that means a military second to none. I do not believe in cutting our military. I believe in maintaining the strength of America's military.
Second, in that line that says we are endowed by our creator with our rights, I believe we must maintain our commitment to religious tolerance and freedom in this country. That statement also says that we are endowed by our creator with the right to pursue happiness as we choose. I interpret that as, one, making sure that those people who are less fortunate and can't care for themselves are cared by one another.
We're a nation that believes that we're all children of the same God and we care for those that have difficulties, those that are elderly and have problems and challenges, those that are disabled. We care for them. And we look for discovery and innovation, all these things desired out of the American heart to provide the pursuit of happiness for our citizens.
But we also believe in maintaining for individuals the right to pursue their dreams and not to have the government substitute itself for the rights of free individuals. And what we're seeing right now is, in my view, a trickle-down government approach, which has government thinking it can do a better job than free people pursuing their dreams. And it's not working.
And the proof of that is 23 million people out of work. The proof of that is 1 out of 6 people in poverty. The proof of that is we've gone from 32 million on food stamps to 47 million on food stamps. The proof of that is that 50 percent of college graduates this year can't find work.
We know that the path we're taking is not working. It's time for a new path."
Reaganesque!
Lehrer steered the discussion further towards government's role in education, and there was one moment where I almost fell out of my chair, when Obama said this:
"You know, this is where budgets matter, because budgets reflect choices."
Seriously? A man and his party who haven't chosen to pass and sign a budget in 4 years -- that's right, running the federal government budgetless -- just said "this is where a budget matters." Astounding.
After rambling on, misinforming about Congressman Ryan's budget proposal, attempting to lob a few insults, then somehow segueing into college affordability (he mentioned 'cutting out the middleman'...well that's sorta his master plan for EVERYTHING, and make it ALL government's role!), Romney managed to zigzag through all of Obama's maze, and then some! "Mr. President, Mr. President, you're entitled as the president to your own airplane and to your own house, but not to your own facts." Quickly debunking Obama's claim that Romney was going to cut education funding, the hammer was dropped... (I'll condense for brevity's sake)
"But you make a very good point, which is that the place you put your money just makes a pretty clear indication of where your heart is. You put $90 billion into...green jobs. ...look, I'm all in favor of green energy. $90 billion...that would have hired 2 million teachers. $90 billion.
Look, the right course for America's government, we were talking about the role of government, is not to become the economic player, picking winners and losers... The right answer for government is say, How do we make the private sector become more efficient and more effective? ...And by the way, I've had that experience. I don't just talk about it. I've been there."
That of course was the second time Romney hammered Obama on the failure of green jobs and the exorbitant spending thrown away in that endeavor...here's the first!
"You put 90 billion dollars, like 50 years worth of breaks, into solar and wind, to Solyndra and Fisker and Tesla and Ener1. I mean, I had a friend who said 'you don't just pick the winners and losers'. You picked the losers!"
But that segment on the role of government was just one individual portion of last night's debate. In nearly every topic, from the economy to taxes to entitlements, the same could have been said: Romney showed strength, appeared energetic, engaged and knowledgable; Obama...not so much. The guy who ran and won on emotion four years ago, the media-deemed Great Orator, was reduced to tired, old, unreliable talking points.
"The President, and his rhetoric, has never been exposed for what it is like it was exposed tonight." ~ Sen. Marco Rubio
Beyond the excuses that will assuredly be made for Obama's poor performance, I think Jeffrey Lord makes an acute observation...
The great James Taranto of the Wall Street Journal and The American Spectator long ago posited what is called the "Taranto Principle." In short, it means that the liberal media so coddles liberal politicians that they have no idea how to cope outside that liberal media bubble. ...forced to be alone on a stage with a very serious, very prepared candidate -- Barack Obama was in trouble. Big Trouble. And he has no one but himself -- and his media coddlers -- to blame.
Additional transcript resources: Fox News
