It's hard to catch a greased pig, but Obama let one get away.
Mitt Romney made a number of claims over the last year that he disavowed on Wednesday night. Obama should have been able to point out where and when and subject Romney to the lawyer's question: "Are you lying now or were you lying then?" Obama did not and looked pained and frustrated that Romney was able to lie his way out of his own history.
Jim Lehrer stunk worse than Obama in this debate but not by a whole lot. Lehrer looked like my grandmother trying to separate fornicating dogs. How many years has it been since he has felt his own testosterone?
Romney wasn't great in the debate but he was good enough. He kept on message, hammering again and again even falsehoods like the $716 billion in cuts to Medicaid. The president addressed the issue once but let Romney repeat the claim without rebuttal a second and a third time.
A simple message is effective, even if false, because it is simple. The response has to be simple and forceful. Being forceful is part of the message. Obama failed to deliver either because he assumed that Lehrer would establish control or he felt that he had made the case and could let the facts speak.
He was wrong. Romney won the debate because a lie told over and over with passion does become true. It is the package, Mr. President, not the content. It doesn't matter if you have distaste for that, it doesn't matter if Romney changes the content and the package every time he speaks, it doesn't matter if he says he will do the impossible and you have to defend what you have done.
Take off the gloves, Mr. President. No more Mr. Harvard Law Professor.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
"Greasy Pig?" Add a watermelon and?
Tsk, tsk, tsk.
And here you bludgeoned that poor soul on the vague, implausibly racist remark of 'boy.'
Caught ya.
I've thought some more about this blog. And, here it is:
No, no , no, no! You've missed the best debate for the greater good, the elegance, the sublime, the dubious charm of Jon Stewart and, his decent foil, sort of like a wayward Friar Tuck, Bill O'Reilly.
Jeez.
Simple messages are the gift of the greatest PR kings, why they are paid a gazillion dollars for "just do it."
But PR is not a message, it has nothing to do with the truth. Messages sell concepts, brilliantly. Messages are a stand alone kingdom. Messages shut down dialogue. PR messages cut off debate -- they create the appearance that everything has been settled, and the entirety of what matters is condensed into a small set of monosyllabic words.
Which circles back to your sweet, fictional account of trial lawyers -- you know, the 'were you lying now or were you lying then' thing. The lawyer is not seeking an answer, will not get one from the horrified witness, and will be forfeit an answer because of the jumping bean lawyer at the next table voicing their objection. None of that matters. The question was a message to the jury: this witness is a career liar -- the fact that the other lawyer popped a blood vessel and threw an objection, hard and fast, into the judge's hands cements the perception.
Now. Who would separate fornicating dogs? How will non-rural children ever understand one of the best positions for sex? Is there no decency left for nature? Where is the discovery channel when you need them (oh, that's right -- filming fornicating lions; lions are way more cool).
Fornicating dogs and Jim Lehrer. Fornicating dogs and 'felt his own testosterone. What is the take away here? What is the visual on 'felt his own testosterone.' Curious minds want to know.
--
Actually, where Eye grew up there was a game where boys (as in youngsters) tried to catch a greased watermelon. Tough to do and it didn't wiggle and squirm and shift like a Romney.
Erudite though Anonymous you be, referring to a greased pig as difficult to capture is related to calling our president "boy" how?
You caught nothing, wag.
You spent so much more effort on my quick disdain of Jim Lehrer than I did. As you ask, what is the take away here? That you respect Mr. Lehrer's performance? Or did you just want to give me the Big Bird?
Nice shunt re Jim Leher, Eye.
"Lehrer looked like my grandmother trying to separate fornicating dogs. How many years has it been since he has felt his own testosterone?
Explain. Hah. a message in under 45 seconds.
PS I didn't even watch the debates, don't know anything about Jim Lehrer except some sort of NPR assocation, maybe.
Hah. still under 72 seconds
You spent so much more effort on my quick disdain of Jim Lehrer than I did. As you ask, what is the take away here? That you respect Mr. Lehrer's performance? Or did you just want to give me the Big Bird?
Post a Comment