First blood vs death match.

So the consensus of the debate last night seems to be that the obvious winner was presidential hopeful Mitt Romney.
Obama came across as week, unprepared and unknowledgeable. While Mitt looked certain, confident and capable.

I happened to be at work last night as the debate was going on. That means that, unfortunately I was unable to watch the debate, BUT I did get to listen to it live on the radio as it happened.
To me, listening to this debate, it sounded as if the president was on the defensive for most of the event. He was hemming and hawing and he sounded like he was just not all there. Added to that there was a sense that he was trying to be evasive.

When the moderator asked about one thing Obama had to go over miles of things that he wanted to talk about. He, seemingly, could not stay on one topic throughout the whole debate.
He was consistently using up more time than he was allotted, and he was shaky, only providing generalities when he WAS on topic.

Romney on the other hand generally kept his answers within the time limit EVEN when tracking down ALL the different points to refute that Obama brought up, and his answers tended to have just a little bit more substance.

I heard from people soon after it was over though, and, with a few notable exceptions, they all pretty much said the same things.
“Obama was not engaging, he refused to look Mitt in the eye or look into thew cameras.”
“Obama seemed bored at times.”
“Obama appeared nervous or unprepared.”

On the other side of the coin…

“Romney was confident.”
“He [Romney] had his points well ordered and he expressed himself well.”
“Romney was Confident and appeared honest.”

All good points, and ones that make a real difference.

In trying to find something positive the liberal media outlets seemed to only be able to say
“Obama got in the first Zinger”.

Well wowie! And whoop dee doo!

Here is the thing… I liken this debate to a… well, a duel or a sparring match.

Even if Obama got in the first zinger, that means nothing. I mean after all it is like when in a duel, one of the fighters gets in a cut on his opponent and draws first blood, in some “duels” that would count as a win. BUT this match was not a first blood match. This was a match to the end, or to stay colorful, Death.

See you have to realize that, in a death match, who drew first blood really does not matter. What matters is who gets in the final kill. That is the “blow” that counts, that is the point that wins.

And the general idea seems to be that that person was Mitt Romney.

Sadly after the debates I looked into some of the news feeds that I follow and I found one place where people were commenting on the debate. There were three young men there who were talking about how they thought Obama was the better choice and the better debater.

None of them talked well about it, they could not offer any kind of substance to their contention. Two of these young men were Americans and both had profile pictures that hid their faces completely, almost like they were ashamed. The third man was from England and he kept trying to compare what they have in England to what we have and he was touting the system they have as the better one.

Of course I love to make the point when this comes up that America is NOT England or France or Canada or Australia or…
We are AMERICA and I have always said if you want to live in a country like England then you ought to move to England . the same applies for every other country choice.

I did not actually use that argument in this case but I did point out a few things that seemed to slip his mind. Although I do have to admit that he made one very good point. When another “debater” said “stay out of this, this is American politics, you worry about your queen and royals.” He said that “America does not end at [her] borders, decisions made in America affect the whole world.” His examples of such were

1. America (Bush) “started” the war in Iraq.
2. The collapse of the American Housing market [was a major contributor to] the global recession.
(actually he said it was the collapse of the American economy that CAUSED the global recession.)
3. American conservatives keep supporting the “oppressive” nation of Israel and that is leading to instability in the middle east.

He is right about some of that. But I tried reasoning with him, though I am not sure if I got through.

I tried to respond nicely, I pointed out that we did not start the war that it was terrorism that led to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. He said “the planes that were flown into the WTC did not come from Iraq.” I agreed then pointed out that every one of the allied “spy” groups were certain that the hijackers who grabbed the planes DID get trained in Iraq and that was the basis for the war.

I also pointed out that while it is nice to think that we are solely responsible for the financial conditions we are in, America was NOT the only problem and other nations are turning out to be worse than us in that regard. (it is Greece, Italy and Spain that are having the real problems right now that Europe has to keep bailing out.)

And finally, it is the Palestinians, NOT the Israelis who have declared Jihad against Jews and have stated that the only way there will be peace is when “ALL the jews are dead!”

But I am getting off topic.

One of the young (American) men there, was saying that He felt Obama won . What did he base this idea on?…


Honestly, come to think of it, I do not know. He was unclear and imprecise. Hmm I guess much like Obama himself. Just kidding.

But really where is the evidence that Obama stepped up? It just does not exist.

This young man (who identified himself as someone who relies on the government to survive… maybe that was why he needed Obama to win so bad.) would only say that “Romney is a liar”. Every time he was asked to substantiate his claim he could not. Every time he was challenged he resorted to name calling foul language and threats.

He stated at one point that he was smarter than any of the people he was debating and all of them were just so far under his “intelligence level” that he didn’t know why he bothered.
One of the people he had been debating said “since I have been tested with an I.Q. of 165 and am a member of MENSA, I think the question of who has more intelligence is aimed the wrong way.”

All the other young man could say at that moment was “well you are just an idiotic *^%$% &&(& %^$# %$@# (&%%.”

Talk about an intelligent answer!
But that is the problem, these people are basing their politics on feelings and emotions. They are reaching out trying to get whatever they can with little or no regard for the needs or welfare of others or the nation.

They are reacting to things on a visceral level instead of careful, Sober, thought and facts.

Now if you have followed my blog for any period of time, or if you know me then you realize where my opinion lies. And yes I am rough on those who tend to think differently than I politically speaking.

But this debate was not Obama’s shining moment. As I listened to the debate I identified many places where I though t Romney could have done a better job expressing himself. I do not think that the debate performance that Romney turned in was the best he could have done. BUT it did far outshine the job that the president has done.

And come to think of it, Romney may not be the absolute best choice we could have. But he is what we have to choose from. And in reality I think he will do the same in the presidency as he did in last night’s debate. Maybe not perfectly, but a HECK of a lot better than his opponent.