While I do not think Obama did poorly, I do believe that Romney did much better.
I also expect you will hear the exact opposite from most of the talking heads in the Main Stream Media.
Update:
So much for the media reporting the opposite:
http://hotair.com/archives/2012/10/03/romney-wins
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1012/82000.html
http://thepage.time.com/2012/10/03/grading-the-denver-donnybrook
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/oct/3/hurt-obama-debater-making-jimmy-carter-look-awesom
Upon brief reflection, Obama really did do poorly. It was not just Romney doing much better then expected, but Obama doing worse. Even without expectations being taken into account, Romney won on style both substance handily.
Wednesday, October 3, 2012
Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Daily Caller Discovers New Obama Tape
This may have done something if it aired at the time, though it is unlikely it would have been enough to change the outcome. I do not see this changing anyone's mind about Obama. Then again, MSNBC is in full RACIST!!! mode, which has me thinking they are worried.
Even if it does not change a single mind, it is another example how much the Main Stream Media was playing 'hide-the-ball' and covering for Obama.
Video embedded below.
Comparison.
Full unedited speech.
"In a video obtained exclusively by The Daily Caller, then-presidential candidate Barack Obama tells an audience of black ministers, including the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, that the U.S. government shortchanged Hurricane Katrina victims because of racism.
“The people down in New Orleans they don’t care about as much!” Obama shouts in the video, which was shot in June of 2007 at Hampton University in Virginia. By contrast, survivors of Sept. 11 and Hurricane Andrew received generous amounts of aid, Obama explains. The reason? Unlike residents of majority-black New Orleans, the federal government considers those victims “part of the American family.”
The racially charged and at times angry speech undermines Obama’s carefully-crafted image as a leader eager to build bridges between ethnic groups. For nearly 40 minutes, using an accent he almost never adopts in public, Obama describes a racist, zero-sum society, in which the white majority profits by exploiting black America. The mostly black audience shouts in agreement. The effect is closer to an Al Sharpton rally than a conventional campaign event."
Even if it does not change a single mind, it is another example how much the Main Stream Media was playing 'hide-the-ball' and covering for Obama.
Video embedded below.
Comparison.
Full unedited speech.
"In a video obtained exclusively by The Daily Caller, then-presidential candidate Barack Obama tells an audience of black ministers, including the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, that the U.S. government shortchanged Hurricane Katrina victims because of racism.
“The people down in New Orleans they don’t care about as much!” Obama shouts in the video, which was shot in June of 2007 at Hampton University in Virginia. By contrast, survivors of Sept. 11 and Hurricane Andrew received generous amounts of aid, Obama explains. The reason? Unlike residents of majority-black New Orleans, the federal government considers those victims “part of the American family.”
The racially charged and at times angry speech undermines Obama’s carefully-crafted image as a leader eager to build bridges between ethnic groups. For nearly 40 minutes, using an accent he almost never adopts in public, Obama describes a racist, zero-sum society, in which the white majority profits by exploiting black America. The mostly black audience shouts in agreement. The effect is closer to an Al Sharpton rally than a conventional campaign event."
Talk Shifting From Preventing Iran From Getting a Nuke to Preventing an Effective Missile
Some truly mind blowing stupidity behind this though. The premise is ludicrousness on its face. You do not need an accurate ICBM to represent a nuclear missile threat; just ask the Soviets who opted for larger bombs over accuracy. With a nuke you can be off by a few blocks and the city is still vaporized. Even trying to be generous and saying that the article is talking about any launch ability, it is still the high of stupidity. There are many different ways to use nuclear weapons that do not involve missiles. Indeed, missiles may actually be the dumbest way for Iran to use a nuke. If they launch a missile, the United States will know within five seconds where the missile came from and would be able to retaliate. If an 18-wheeler driving through a city, or a cargo-ship pulling into a port, detonates and obliterates a city there will be some lag time to figure out where it came from and who is responsible. That means even if Iran has an accurate missile, they are unlikely to use it if they decide to attack.
Not exactly confidence inspiring that Obama would stop Iran from getting a nuclear weapon be force if necessary.
http://ace.mu.nu/archives/333393.php
"Now that Obama has failed (intentionally) a promise he'd made -- that he would not permit Iran to have a bomb -- we're now going to just talk about preventing them from getting an accurate long-range missile.
What a joke."
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/10/02/us-nuclear-iran-bomb-idUSBRE8910JW20121002
"Iran already has enough low-enriched uranium for several atomic bombs if refined to a high degree but it may still be a few years away from being able to build a nuclear-armed missile if it decided to go down that path.
Israel's warning last week that Iran will be on the brink of developing a nuclear weapon by mid-2013 seemed to refer to when it could have a sufficient stock of higher-grade uranium to make a quick dash to produce a bomb's worth of weapon-grade material.
But, analysts say, Tehran would need time also for the technologically complicated task of fashioning highly refined uranium gas into a nuclear warhead small enough to fit on a missile - if it opts for such weapons of mass destruction."
Not exactly confidence inspiring that Obama would stop Iran from getting a nuclear weapon be force if necessary.
http://ace.mu.nu/archives/333393.php
"Now that Obama has failed (intentionally) a promise he'd made -- that he would not permit Iran to have a bomb -- we're now going to just talk about preventing them from getting an accurate long-range missile.
What a joke."
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/10/02/us-nuclear-iran-bomb-idUSBRE8910JW20121002
"Iran already has enough low-enriched uranium for several atomic bombs if refined to a high degree but it may still be a few years away from being able to build a nuclear-armed missile if it decided to go down that path.
Israel's warning last week that Iran will be on the brink of developing a nuclear weapon by mid-2013 seemed to refer to when it could have a sufficient stock of higher-grade uranium to make a quick dash to produce a bomb's worth of weapon-grade material.
But, analysts say, Tehran would need time also for the technologically complicated task of fashioning highly refined uranium gas into a nuclear warhead small enough to fit on a missile - if it opts for such weapons of mass destruction."
"Meet Richard Hayes. He picks up Mitt Romney's trash" - Ad
Beyond being one of the more ridiculous ads this campaign season, and smelling of desperation through absurd grasping, it also may be completly off as Romney has worked as a garbage man.
Video embedded below.
Video embedded below.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Like what you read; Subscribe/Fan/Follow
