The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

Romney Debates Crowley And Obama On Benghazi, Wins

Posted on | October 17, 2012 | 30 Comments

by Smitty

Benghazi was the pivotal moment in the town hall debate, in my opinion, and that of some others:

 

Via BlueGrass pundit:

What a sad, pathetic joke that Obama has to have a woman attempt to stand up for him. Romney’s five sons were no doubt writhing at the raised eyebrows at 0:20 in the clip, recalling their own sad attempts at sliding one by dad, and getting thoroughly crushed by the Brows Of Doom.

The Administration’s pathetic attempt to walk back the 12 September Rose Garden speech is thoroughly debunked here. If Obama’s claim is true, that he properly labeled Benghazi terrorism initially, then shifted ‘narratives’ to call it a spontaneous riot due to Nakoula’s handiwork, then Obama’s sordid performance would be an example of postvarication, where the truth shifts to a lie upon the retelling, instead of the truth remaining in the forefront.

However, what we have here is a creep show Administration that owes Americans straight answers, but can’t even tell itself a straight story. Maybe Petraeus could offer such. Where is that guy? Stuffed under the bus behind Clapper?

Kudos to Mitt. You could see that hours of preparation that went into this debate on display. That the topic would come up was fairly obvious. But the delivery was polished, and Obama’s body language and shout to Crowley for a lifeline were sweet, sweet tells. Romney should have ended his exchange with Crowley by saying “Thank you, Madame President.” As graphically put:
And Crowley then walked back her shilling. Fortunately, these Lefty creeps no longer retain an iron grip on matters. While viewers at the time called it a draw or gave the edge to #OccupyResoluteDesk, further analysis is going to show that, as in the previous debates this season, the Republicans are holding their own despite having two opponents.

Say whatever else you want about the debate: seeing Romney have the sack to call out Obama for lying, to his face, was pure chewing satisfaction. As with the previous debate, I may have to trundle over to the Romney campaign site for a wee donation, I’m so pleased by this. And as for Candid Candy, I hope she doesn’t spend all 30 pieces of silver in one place.

Further linkage at Instapundit, but don’t miss Michelle, violating the rules, clapping in support of falsehood. I’m not ashamed of my country, in general, but the 2008 election sure was a hiccup. And, for those wondering what the debate would have looked like if you dropped some acid before viewing:

In the second presidential debate, President Obama stood up proudly for his record, offered a positive vision, called out Romney’s lies in a calm and cool way, and, most importantly, showed some real fire in the belly.

Update: Memeorandum thread, also linked at Protein Wisdom, Daily Pundit, WyBlog, and Obi’s Sister.

Category: Barack Obama, Debates, Election 2012, Mitt Romney

LIVE AT FIVE: 10.17.12

Posted on | October 17, 2012 | 3 Comments

— compiled by Wombat-socho


TOP NEWS
Candidates Tangle In Fractious Debate

The nonperforming SCOAMF tries for a comeback

President Obama tries to stay on attack after lackluster first debate


GOP Pushes Hard On Libya Attack
Senior Obama aides whine about “politicization” of Benghazi attack

Senators Demand Answers On Grants To Bankrupt A123 Systems
Are taxpayers going to be on the hook for this battery maker?



POLITICS
Boston Globe Carries Water For Obama On Romney’s “Binders Of Women” Remark

Ah, the fabled objectivity of the press…

More “fact checking” by the LameStream Media


US Appeals Court Overturns Tribunal’s Conviction Of Bin Laden’s Driver

Trayvon Martin’s Parents Launch Campaign To Roll Back “Stand Your Ground” Laws

Louisiana Selects First Black Chief Justice

9th Circuit Orders Montana’s Political Contribution Limits Kept In Place Through Election

Ross Perot Endorses Romney

8th Circuit Rules Missouri Town’s Funeral Protest Ordinance Constitutional



THE ECONOMY, STUPID
Oil Closes Above $92 On Spanish Bailout Hopes; NYMEX $92.09, Brent $115.07
Citigroup CEO Pandit Resigns Abruptly After Row With Board
Battery Maker For Electric Cars A123 Systems Files For Bankruptcy
Asian Shares, Euro Gain On US Earnings, Spanish Bailout Hopes
Target To Match Online Competitors’ Prices This Holiday Season
Wall Street Rallies For a Second Day On Strong Earnings
Murdoch’s Iron Grip On News Corp Dealt An Illusory Blow
Flip, Slide, And Touch: New Machines For A New OS
iPhone Maker Foxconn Admits To Employing Underage Interns
Taxi-Hailing App Pulls Out Of NYC After Six Weeks
EU Regulators Find Legal Problems In Google’s Privacy Policy
Reddit Mod Fired From Job After Gawker Expose
Pokki Brings The Start Menu To Windows 8



SPORTS
VERLANDER DELIVERS: Tigers Just One Win From Sweep And Pennant

Justin Verlander, Yankee killer

Tigers ace holds punchless Yankees to three hits in 8 1/3 innings

Players Cautiously Optimistic After NHL Offers 50/50 Revenue Split

San Francisco, Miami Bid For 2016 Super Bowl

Lin Wanted To Retire A Knick

NJ Sports Betting Law Spurs Tantrum By NCAA


Richard Sherman Starts Walking Back Brady Comments

Pats’ Belichick Praises Tim Tebow…

…As LaDanian Tomlinson Says Jets Are Losing Faith In Sanchez

Cricket, Anyone?



FAMOUS FOR BEING FAMOUS
Alessandra Ambrosio To Model $2.5 Million Bra

Alessandra Ambrosio

Will be on display during upcoming Victoria’s Secret Fashion Show


Kate Gosselin Clipped From Coupon Gig

Blake Lively Envisioned Her Wedding Down To The Last Detail, Says Her Planner

Paramount Lands Scorsese/Dicaprio Film “Wolf Of Wall Street”

Lindsay Lohan Has “Liz & Dick” Producers Foot Her Hotel Bill In Exchange For Doing Barbara Walters Interview

Beyonce To Headline Super Bowl 2013 Halftime Show

What The Hell Is Happening To Will Smith?

A-Rod Playing The Field Instead Of Cheering On Teammates



FOREIGNERS
Rotterdam Art Thieves Take Valuable Paintings In Dawn Heist
End Of The Exit Visa In Cuba?
In Pakistan’s Swat Valley, A Girls’ School Is Gripped By Fear
Aussie PM Gillard To Meet Indian PM Singh
Former Bosnian Serb Leader Karadzic Goes On Trial
Nationals Mock Gillard’s Redefinition Of Misogyny
UK Deals Blow To US Extradition Treaty, Blocks Handover Of Hacker



BLOGS & STUFF
WyBlog: Hofstra Debate Flashback – Four Obama Promises He Failed To Keep
American Power: Candy Crowley Shills For Obama At Hofstra Debate
AmSpecBlog: Obama-Romney II Post-Mortem
Sense Of Events: What Tonight’s Debate Was Really About
Jim Geraghty: Obama, Romney, And The Libya Exchange
NewsBusters: Candy Crowley Disgraces Herself With Outrageous Tag-Team Hit On Romney Over Libya
Gateway Pundit: Former Obama Aide Says “It’s Stunning That He’s In Politics, Because He Really Doesn’t Like People.”
Weasel Zippers: Obama Campaign Disavows SecState’s Owning Responsibility For Benghazi
Lonely Conservative: Obama Has No Comment On Benghazi Question
SFGate Blog: Green Party Candidates Arrested At Hofstra Debate
Joanne Jacobs: French President Pushes Homework Ban
Jammie Wearing Fools: Michelle Obama Claims Barack Doesn’t Have A Big Ego
Scared Monkeys: Food Stamp Enrollment Hits Record High

Category: Live at Five

‘STAKE THROUGH HIS HEART’: Your Official Town Hall Debate Thread

Posted on | October 16, 2012 | 46 Comments

UPDATE 10:50 p.m. ET: Watching MSNBC so you don’t have to:

UPDATE 10:22 p.m. ET: WHAM! Mitt just hit Obama with “Fast and Furious.”

UPDATE 10:16 p.m. ET: That was a very long back-and-forth about Libya.

UPDATE 10:11 p.m. ET: Obama gets specific question about failure in Libya, and doesn’t even begin to answer, but instead lectures about how AWESOME his policy is.

UPDATE 10:07 p.m. ET: Obama LOVES him some illegal immigrants.

UPDATE 10:03 p.m. ET: Obama loves him some illegal immigrants.

UPDATE 9:58 p.m. ET: Now for Romney, immigration question from El Votera Del Undecidia.

UPDATE 9:54 p.m. ET: Obama is now ahead 5:34 on the time-split.

UPDATE 9:51 p.m. ET: As Obama ends this answer, he is ahead 2:55 on the time-split.

UPDATE 9:46 p.m. ET: A Bush-hating woman asks Romney how he’s not like Bush. She’s an “uncommitted voter” (nudge nudge).

UPDATE 9:40 p.m. ET: Some chick asks a question about the alleged “pay gap” between men and women — straight out of the bogus statistics they teach in Women’s Studies classes — and we’re supposed to believe she’s an “uncommitted voter.”

UPDATE 9:35 p.m. ET: Candy Crowley always gives Obama a chance to talk back to Mitt, but keeps cutting off Mitt — or trying to cut him off — when Mitt tries to answer.

UPDATE 9:30 p.m. ET: Obama slams “top-down economics.”

UPDATE 9:25 p.m. ET: Now Mitt gets to talk numbers. He loves him some numbers.

UPDATE 9:21 p.m. ET: There was all kinds of fireworks now. My wife and kids thought they were getting ready to fight.

UPDATE 9:16 p.m. ET: Romney “I was in coal country and people grabbed my arm and said, ‘Please, save my job.’ ”

UPDATE 9:15 p.m. ET: Romney: “Let’s look at the president’s policies, instead of his rhetoric.”

UPDATE 9:11 p.m. ET: Obama just said Romney “doesn’t have a five-point plant, he’s got a one-point plan.” And Obama’s got 57 states! When Mitt wants to argue back, Candy cuts him off.

UPDATE 9:04 p.m. ET: “First-time voter” is college student named Jeremy who asks about jobs — straight into Mitt’s wheelhouse. This is encouraging.

UPDATE 9:02 p.m. ET: And we’re live! Candy Crowley introduces her close personal friend The President of the United States, and also, that Republican guy over there.

* * PREVIOUSLY (8:30 p.m. ET) * *

Let’s start with this: The very notion of undecided voters in New York three weeks before Election Day is implausibly absurd. So we’re probably going to see a steady barrage of lefty “gotcha” questions aimed at Mitt Romney, while Barack Obama gets questions like, “Mister President, why do these hateful racist homophobic Republicans want to steal Social Security checks from Grandma?”

Can Mitt possibly win this debate? Can Obama possibly stink it up worse than he did in the Oct. 3 debate? This seems too much to ask, so you need to pray very hard right up until the debate at Hofstra University starts at 9 p.m. Eastern, and don’t stop praying until it’s over.

Miracles sometimes happen, and this is what Ace is describing:

So there was, I think, a preference cascade potential. But that potential only became real during the debate.
If Romney had not given what could well be the most dominating debate performance in the entire modern age of politics (since TV, in 1960), it seems very possible — possibly likely — that none of this would have happened.

Read the whole thing. Events can’t be predicted, but contingencies — the “if/then” consequences of events — are predictable.

Going into the Oct. 3 debate, nobody expected such a one-sided win for Romney, but we could have predicted that if Mitt did exceed all expectations (and if Obama disastrously underperformed) then the polls would shift dramatically toward Romney.

The interesting thing? The polls were already starting to shift toward Romney before the first debate. Check the RCP national average, and you see that Obama’s lead maxed out at 4.3 points on Sept. 29, and by Oct. 3, had shrunk to 3.1 points. Why?

It’s got to be Libya: By early October, it was becoming obvious that the Obama administration’s “blame the YouTube video” excuse was false, and that the administration was trying to hide its failures in the Sept. 11 attack on the Benghazi counsulate. So Obama’s lead was already fading and his disastrous performance in the first debate exacerbated growing perceptions of his incompetence.

Romney moved ahead in the RCP average Oct. 9. Beginning with the first full three-day track by Gallup after the first debate, five polls have shown Romney ahead, three have shown Obama ahead and two have shown a tie. So while there has been a shift toward Romney, the bottom hasn’t fallen out for Obama . . . yet.

A few headlines from Memeorandum:

Romney Holds Advantage Tonight,
Regardless of Format
— Real Clear Politics

Obama feels ‘fabulous’ in advance of second debate
— Politico

Tuesday’s debate moderator confirms
plan to ask follow up questions
— The Hill

And finally, from Toby Harnden at the London Daily Mail:

The Romney campaign goes into tonight’s second presidential debate confident that the race has shifted decisively in their direction and that a below par performance by Barack Obama could doom him to defeat on November 6.
A senior adviser to Mitt Romney told MailOnline: ‘The President could drive a stake through the heart of his own campaign tonight if he’s not careful.
‘If he doesn’t give a vigorous enough defence of his last four years in office, if he tries to place blame everywhere else, if he doesn’t articulate what the next four years will look like beyond just giving away free stuff – if he fumbles all that, he drives a stake through his own heart.’

The debate starts at 9 p.m. Eastern, but Duane Lester and the Campaign Trail Report have begun their debate hangout already, so check it out, and I’ll be back to do some live-blogging, as well as the usual Twitter snarkfest.

 


Category: Barack Obama, Debates, Election 2012, Mitt Romney

Ott, Green, And Whittle Should Be Moderating Tonight

Posted on | October 16, 2012 | 6 Comments

by Smitty

A fine Trifecta to grease the skids for tonight’s propaganda-fest:

Category: PJTV

Ross Perot Endorses Romney, New Polls Confirm Shift, Will #p2 Dems Panic Now?

Posted on | October 16, 2012 | 36 Comments

“Disaster is now coming at Democrats from multiple unexpected directions.”
— Robert Stacy McCain, Oct. 11

A lot of news today, starting with this Hot Air headline:

Romney hits 50%, leads by 4
in PPP/Daily Kos national poll

And it’s also 50-46 in the latest Gallup tracking poll.

This is the quite specific circumstance — Romney leading national polls by four points going into the second debate — I described Oct. 7 as the “Fear and Loathing” scenario that could trigger a complete meltdown among Obama supporters. They’re up against the wall and they know it, and if Obama doesn’t score a clear win tonight . . .

Well, “don’t get cocky,” eh?

Monday night I had a phone conversation with Ali Akbar in which he wanted me to give odds on tonight’s debate result, which I refused to do. We simply cannot predict such an event in advance. It could be a disaster for Obama or a disaster for Rommey. We know that if Obama does OK — if the debate is no worse than a draw for him — the liberal media will spin it as an Obama “win,” just as they initially cheered the “Crazy Uncle Joe” show last week, before it became obvious that swing voters were turned off by Biden’s weirdness.

As Ed Morrissey says, it’s unlikely that tonight’s debate will be the kind of game-changer we saw Oct. 3 — hey, who called it, huh? — but you just never know, especially with the “town hall” format. When we were kids, we played a card game called “Dr. Pepper,” which is poker where 2’s, 4’s and 10’s are wild. With twelve wild cards in a deck of 52, just about anything was possible, including five of a kind. So it is with a “town hall” debate, and nobody can predict the outcome in advance. However . . .

We can reasonably predict contingencies — “If X, then Y” — and therefore: If Mitt somehow pulls off a second clear debate victory tonight, then Democrats will go into Full-Blown Freakout Mode. And here’s another predictable contingency:

Citing bad economy, Ross Perot backs Romney

If Perot had endorsed Obama, then this item would have sailed to the top of Memeorandum, with all the liberal bloggers trumpeting it as the ultimate proof of Obama’s worthiness for re-election. But instead — if/then — we’ll see the Perot endorsement either ignored, or else subjected to scoffing as the act of an irrelevant dingbat.

Remember the scorn heaped on Lindsay Lohan for her Romney endorsement? Celebrities routinely line up to endorse Democrats, but let one starlet stray from the Hollywood herd, and suddenly “slut” becomes an acceptable term among otherwise oh-so-“civil” liberals.

Likewise predictable: If there is any glimmer of encouragement in polls, then Nate Silver starts whistling past the graveyard again.

So while it is still wwaaaaayy too early to predict the outcome on Nov. 6, we are beginning to see possible signs and omens of future events.

‘All Is Proceeding as I Have Foreseen’

UPDATE: Yet another panic signal? “Romney Closing In On Obama In Pennsylvania, Quinnipiac University Poll Finds.” If Obama can’t turn it around in tonight’s debate, so that the momentum shift toward Romney continues enough to put Pennsylvania genuinely in doubt, the whole thing could fall apart for Democrats.
 




 

RECENTLY:

Category: Debates, Election 2012, Polls

Not Understanding Drudge Juxtapositions

Posted on | October 16, 2012 | 9 Comments

by Smitty

What is the point of ‘Women Turning Away’, and then putting up Robert Plant and Bruce Dickinson below #OccupyResoluteDesk? I guess that’s why he is Teh Drudge, and I’m just a lowly sidekick.

Category: humor

BHO: “We Got Back Every Dime”

Posted on | October 16, 2012 | 11 Comments

by Smitty

This blog must leap to the defense of #OccupyResoluteDesk for his claim: “We got back every dime we used to rescue the financial system. . .”

Actual number of $0.10 pieces used in the rescue: 0.

So, the taxpayers got back every actual coin used in the rescue. This blog salutes BHO, and hopes he can continue his winning streak of strictly, literally factual claims.

“The cost to the federal government of the TARP’s transactions (also referred to as the subsidy cost), including grants for mortgage programs that have not yet been made, will amount to $24 billion,” said the CBO report, which was released on the same day Obama spoke.

Why does the CBO have to be staffed with humorless buzz-kills?

Category: Barack Obama

Fake Celebrity Account Fools Drudge, Crashes Twitter With Endorsement

Posted on | October 16, 2012 | 33 Comments

If you were on Twitter last night, you might have noticed that the notorious “fail whale” made its unwelcome appearance for a while: Twitter was over capacity, and now we know why:

Drudge Report posted a headline that would likely perplex anyone who has followed the politics of various Hollywood celebrities.
Actor Jake Gyllenhaal, the news site read, has officially endorsed Republican candidate Mitt Romney for president.
The proof? Well, the outspoken liberal celebrity tweeted it . . .
Except one thing. That’s not Gyllenhaal’s actual Twitter account.
As others have documented before, the Twitter handle @Jake_Gyllenhaal is a fake account made by a fan.

The traffic surge from the mistaken headline — which appeared atop the left-side column at Drudge — was enough to push Twitter past capacity until the headline was removed later in the evening.

Speaking of Drudge and Twitter, I noticed this from Michelle Malkin:

What’s up with that? Why would Drudge be linking articles from 9/11 Truther Alex Jones’s InfoWars site — a Friday article by Michael Snyder and a Monday article by Paul Joseph Watson were both headlined by Drudge — rather than linking Malkin’s Twitchy site?

Considering how much traffic a Drudge link throws, why encourage an obnoxious conspiracy theorist who (and I remember it well) sicced a mob on Malkin at the 2008 Democratic convention?

Desperate to salvage the fizzled demonstration, 9/11 nutball Alex Jones started barking at me and attempting to make a scene and incite a riot.

Here’s the video in which you’ll see Charlie Martin of PJ Media acting as ad hoc bodyguard for Malkin while Alex Jones calls them “neocons” who “help destroy this country” and “sell it out to the New World Order,” declares that 9/11 was “an inside job,” then begins whipping up the anarchist mob that shouts, “Kill Michelle Malkin!”

Well, it’s a free country, but exactly why the hell would Matt Drudge want to throw traffic at someone like that?

Category: Celebrities, Drudge Report, Michelle Malkin
« go back — keep looking »

    About

    This is an area on your website where you can add text. This will serve as an informative location on your website, where you can talk about your site.

    Subscribe to our feed

    Search

    Admin