RSN May Fundraising
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
Print

Intro: "Using newfound energy to slice up Romney's record, the president forced his rival on the defensive. Howard Kurtz on the impact of the second debate."

President Obama answers a question. (photo: Nikki Kahn/The Washington Post)
President Obama answers a question. (photo: Nikki Kahn/The Washington Post)


Editors Note: Due to an addressing issue this morning, some links became mixed up. If you came to this page looking for "Supreme Court Denies Ohio Request to Curtail Early Voting" Click Here. Our apologies!

Obama Seizes the Upper Hand

By Howard Kurtz, The Daily Beast

16 October 12

 

Using newfound energy to slice up Romney's record, the president forced his rival on the defensive. Howard Kurtz on the impact of the second debate.

arack Obama came to play in the second presidential debate Tuesday night, unleashing a series of attacks against Mitt Romney that accused him of favoring the rich and "extreme" social policies.

Romney got in the president's face more than once, repeatedly challenging him and at one point refusing to let him break in: "You'll get your chance in a moment, I'm still speaking." It was a power move that temporarily silenced Obama.

But what became the flashpoint of the debate was when Romney claimed that the president had not initially called the attack on American diplomats in Libya an act of terror, only to be corrected by moderator Candy Crowley-which immediately drew complaints from GOP partisans.

Romney again turned in a solid performance here at Long Island's Hofstra University, but there was one stark difference from the faceoff in Denver: this time he had an active and engaged opponent. And as the evening wore on, Obama gradually took control, repeatedly forcing Romney to respond to his barrage and shifting the discussion firmly onto his turf. Compared to the lethargic figure of two weeks ago, it was as if the Obama campaign had sent a body double.

Romney seemed off balance at times as he tried to regroup and regain the initiative.

Obama strategists were far more upbeat after the debate than they had been last time. David Axelrod said Romney was "outright dishonest" at times, that he was "fact-checked by the moderator," and spent the night "backpedaling ... Tonight you saw a guy who looked like he was trying to pull a bait and switch on the American people."

Romney senior strategist Ed Gillespie was more subdued, declining an opportunity to declare his man the winner. "No doubt the president changed his style tonight, but that doesn't mean he can change his record," Gillespie said.

Former New Hampshire governor John Sununu was more aggressive, saying Obama's comments on Libya were "the most dishonest I've ever heard" in a presidential debate and that Crowley was "wrong" and should not have stepped in.

Romney got off to a strong start, telling college student Jeremy Epstein that he would protect Pell student grants-so much for budget-cutting-and that "the middle class has been crushed the last four years." But the president fought back in the opening minutes.

"Governor Romney said we should let Detroit go bankrupt," Obama said. When Romney insisted to Crowley that Obama took General Motors and Chrysler bankrupt, the president said Romney would have provided no way for the automakers to stay open and "we would have lost 1 million jobs." He pivoted to say that Romney has "a one-point plan: make sure those at the top play by a different set of rules."

In a not-so-veiled reference to Romney's tenure at Bain Capital, Obama suggested his rival's philosophy was to have the rich buy and bankrupt companies, strip their pensions and still make money.

It was during a spat over oil and gas production-Romney insisting it had plummeted, Obama maintaining he had taken away leases from non-producing companies-that the two circled each other like prizefighters poised to pounce, staring each other down while cutting each other off.

Romney reinforced his move toward moderation while defending his tax plan, saying: "I'm not going to have people at the high end pay less than they're paying now."

Obama punched back in a way he utterly failed to do last time, gradually seizing the upper hand as the debate wore on. "Governor Romney's allies in Congress held the 98 percent hostage" because they want tax breaks for "the top 2 percent," he said. Obama said Romney had talked about cutting taxes for everyone-not tax rates-during the GOP primaries. And in accusing his rival of refusing to disclose what tax loopholes he would close, or spending cuts beyond those for Big Bird and Planned Parenthood, he said Romney was peddling "a sketchy deal" that no one should accept.

Sounding increasingly defensive, Romney touted his record in running a business, the Olympics and the state of Massachusetts. "When we're talking about math that doesn't add up, what about $4 trillion in deficits?" When Romney tried to continue one of his answers and Crowley raised her voice and forced him to stop, it temporarily took the wind out of his sails and he seemed grumpy.

After a question about pay equity for women, Obama pivoted to another assault on Romney, saying he opposes a provision in the new health care law to require insurance companies to provide contraceptive coverage.

Another question from a woman in the audience forced Romney to put some distance between himself and the last Republican in the White House. "President Bush and I are different people," he said.

Time and again, Obama went beyond the questions to shoehorn in what were obviously rehearsed lines of attack.

Having invested in companies that are "pioneers of outsourcing to China," the president said, "Governor Romney, you're the last person who's going to get touch on China." He added that Bush didn't propose turning Medicare into a voucher program (as Paul Ryan did), and embraced immigration reform, rather than calling for "self-deportation" as Romney did in one primary debate.

Romney kept returning to the economic failures of the last four years, his strongest suit by far, citing figures on unemployment, poverty and food stamps and recycling lines from earlier in the night.

Obama seemed at his most passionate when a Latino women asked about immigration, saying those here illegally "think of this as their country" and promised during the primaries to veto the Dream Act-a version of which Obama has imposed by executive order.

Again, Romney was forced to explain and deflect. "We're not going to round up 12 million people," he said. By "self-deportation," Romney said, he meant "let people make their own choices."

The president defused another toe-to-toe confrontation with humor. When Romney kept demanding, "Have you looked at your pension?", Obama shot back: "I don't look at my pension-it's not as big as yours." Romney was trying to make the point that Obama's retirement fund also invested in China.

A number of the audience questions in this town hall format subtly favored Obama by focusing on immigration, women's rights and Bush. One exception came in the final half hour, when a man asked about the attack on the U.S. consulate in Libya.

Romney was mounting an effective critique of the administration's shifting explanations of the fatal attack when he overstated the case-and was corrected by Crowley.

"It took the president 14 days to call it an act of terror," Romney said.

Not true, Obama interjected: "Get the transcript."

"He did in fact, sir," the CNN anchor told Romney, effectively defusing the attack.

Even an exchange on gun control enabled Obama to recycle a barb once used against John Kerry, who played Romney in debate prep. "Governor Romney was before an assault weapons ban before he was against it." Obama said, invoking a ban on such weapons that Romney signed in Massachusetts.

Thematically, Romney repeatedly invoked his tenure as governor to portray himself as a hands-on executive pursuing moderate solutions-something he rarely mentioned during the Republican primaries. Obama, while defending his record, spent much of his newly discovered energy eviscerating Romney's proposals and invoking contrasts with his primary rhetoric.


 

Comments   

We are concerned about a recent drift towards vitriol in the RSN Reader comments section. There is a fine line between moderation and censorship. No one likes a harsh or confrontational forum atmosphere. At the same time everyone wants to be able to express themselves freely. We'll start by encouraging good judgment. If that doesn't work we'll have to ramp up the moderation.

General guidelines: Avoid personal attacks on other forum members; Avoid remarks that are ethnically derogatory; Do not advocate violence, or any illegal activity.

Remember that making the world better begins with responsible action.

- The RSN Team

 
+242 # Barbara K 2012-10-16 19:28
Wow! The President did a great job tonight, and nailed it. He was able to point out many of Romney's lies and showed up Romney for the bully he is and then showed he could stand up to the bully, and did. Romney pulled his usual bait and switch again, but didn't get away with it this time.

OBAMA/BIDEN 2012

The alternative is devastating and stupid.
 
 
+7 # HowardMH 2012-10-17 05:39
Agree Barbara,
Now has Obama the Wimp got enough backbone to really deal with congress and call them out on all of their stunts. He sure hasn't so far, but I suppose we could hope - but you know how far that has gotten us so far.
 
 
+21 # Regina 2012-10-17 08:54
It's up to the electorate to rid Congress of the brat pack that has derailed decent legislation and forced the federal judicial system into a dragged-out calendar. Reelecting Obama is not enough -- give him a legislature that will work for their cushy salary, health care, and pension instead of collecting it all for a big sulky spiteful NO.
 
 
+13 # LessSaid 2012-10-17 13:02
Quoting HowardMH:
Agree Barbara,
Now has Obama the Wimp got enough backbone to really deal with congress and call them out on all of their stunts. He sure hasn't so far, but I suppose we could hope - but you know how far that has gotten us so far.

It's not an issue of backbone. It an issue of a group of racist white men doing everything possible to take down a black man.
 
 
+36 # TrueAmericanPatriot 2012-10-17 07:41
Quoting Barbara K:
Wow! The President did a great job tonight, and nailed it. He was able to point out many of Romney's lies and showed up Romney for the bully he is and then showed he could stand up to the bully, and did. Romney pulled his usual bait and switch again, but didn't get away with it this time.

OBAMA/BIDEN 2012

The alternative is devastating and stupid.

RIGHT AGAIN, BARBARA!!! He smacked Mittsy down so hard that he bounced of the Swiss Alps and landed on the sandy shores of the Cayman Islands, FACE FIRST!!
KUDOS to Candy Crowley for checking the LYING DOG, several times during the debate!! All he needed was a DUNCE CAP to complete the photo-op of Mittsy, while seated in the corner...OLD SCHOOL DAYS!!!

OBAMA/BIDEN 2012!!!!
Not only is the alternative devastating and stupid; IT IS DANGEROUS!!!! GET OUT AND VOTE!!! AND GET OUT THE VOTE!!!
 
 
+275 # moreover 2012-10-16 19:44
About the oil price:
Why doesn't anyone say that oil is a globally traded commodity whose price is impossible to influence in any significant way by one president or another?
It is deeply dishonest to bring the day price of fuel into the discussion. This is a fake argument targeted at ignorant people.
 
 
+167 # brux 2012-10-16 20:28
Yeah, it was funny that Romney the business expert said that oil prices would go down if we used our own oil. The fact is that we export a lot of our oil. Is he saying he would ask US business men to take less than the world price of oil for their oil?
 
 
+33 # robniel 2012-10-17 06:37
Like Romney/Bain did when raiding vulnerable U.S. companies?
 
 
+17 # George D 2012-10-17 08:08
I'm glad to see people making the point that oil is traded as a global commodity and not "ours" to control; Or is it?
I am a Socialist when it comes to the topic of who owns "our" natural resources. I believe that our government representatives OWE the American people laws to restrict profiteering on all domestic oil. If it takes a government run oil industry then so be it. By controlling prices on domestic oil, price competition would be created on the world market, and prices would come down.
Can government run oil refineries? Why not?
I want BOTH candidates or ANY candidate to say they will fight for THAT as a "plan" to aid the middle class.
 
 
+13 # dkonstruction 2012-10-17 10:48
Quoting George D:
I'm glad to see people making the point that oil is traded as a global commodity and not "ours" to control; Or is it?
I am a Socialist when it comes to the topic of who owns "our" natural resources. I believe that our government representatives OWE the American people laws to restrict profiteering on all domestic oil. If it takes a government run oil industry then so be it. By controlling prices on domestic oil, price competition would be created on the world market, and prices would come down.
Can government run oil refineries? Why not?
I want BOTH candidates or ANY candidate to say they will fight for THAT as a "plan" to aid the middle class.


Great points George D. We need to reclaim the notion of "the commons" that existed for most of human history before the "invention" of capitalism. Critical resources that are needed for everyone's survival (and society as a whole) and wellbeing should be "owned" in common and not held privately and administered for "profit maximalization" . Since, for many reasons, the word "socialism" is a dirty word in this country we may have better luck with this agenda if we find other ways and words to talk about essentially the same "program" and i think that the idea of "the commons" is a good place to start (except for those that still maintain that "robin hood was still a criminal in the eyes of the law").
 
 
+3 # KittatinyHawk 2012-10-17 15:18
OOPs did I hear some of those checks not flying into the account?
I guess the Chinese are asking for more money, oil prices up so now the Bain like cretins want Romney to slap China on the hand becuase there profits are down....
I thought like that would happen Bain just sold out another Company out west to China...if the Phone and other systems are sold out...well I do not think China is going to stop pushing for more, what then? Wrist slap will be taken as slap in the face but then Romnit is on foreign tactics and policy!
 
 
+87 # mdhome 2012-10-16 20:41
Summer of 08 gas price was about where it is now, went down because of Bush recession, going up now is indicative of better economy now.
 
 
+32 # 666 2012-10-17 03:55
I remember that temporary drop in oil prices in the run up to the election as price manipulation to favor the republicans
 
 
0 # KittatinyHawk 2012-10-17 15:20
Or campaigns need to get boosted accounts
 
 
+98 # Tazio 2012-10-16 20:47
To say nothing of the fact that gas prices were HIGHER under Republican George Bush than under President Obama.
 
 
+43 # RMDC 2012-10-17 02:22
The dishonest thing about Romoney's oil plan is that oil from shale or tar sands cannot be produced at a profit if the price goes below about $90 a barrel. Romney wants huge development of tar sand oil and that means prices of over $100 a barrel forever. Liquid oil is much cheaper. Middle East oil is very cheap because it is so close to the surface. It costs about $2 a barrel to pump oil in Saudi Arabia. If you are going to stick to an oil based economy, wouldn't it be smarter to use Saudi oil? But we should not even be talking any longer about an oil based economy. And tar sands oil should be banned because of the destructiveness of the process to recover it.
 
 
+16 # robniel 2012-10-17 06:41
The original reason we started using foreign crude oil was to take advantage of cheap prices and thereby save our own reserves for the future. What has changed? The politics of the Middle East, which we no longer control.
 
 
+1 # KittatinyHawk 2012-10-17 15:22
Arabs say it is us. I cannot imagine why the Middle East should be nice to any of us...do believe we love bombing them. We have lied and cheated for decades...Daddy Bush was in there wheeling and dealing decades ago in service and cia. Believe me I am surprised they deal with us at all.
 
 
+116 # Art947 2012-10-16 21:21
It is unfortunate that the President did not mention the fact that much of the increase in gas prices is the result of speculators. This is another instance of the greedy taking advantage of the needy!

BTW, When Romney mentioned the XL Pipeline, I was surprised that the President didn't mention either the environmental issue or the fact that the "dirty oil" that would be shipped through this pipeline was slated to go to Asia -- not the United States market!
 
 
+27 # unitedwestand 2012-10-16 23:46
That is because President Obama has not committed to not allowing the XL Pipeline, only delayed until after the election. I wish he had said what you suggest, but no matter who is elected I think this pipeline is a go unfortunately.

Many regards and respect to the wonderful activists who are putting their lives on the line to stop it, but I think business deals have been made that we are not aware of. I hope Pres. O stands with the NO to the pipeline eventually.
 
 
+1 # KittatinyHawk 2012-10-17 15:26
WEll guess whay everyone here spent one hour a day protesting any of these scam industries, I am sure that more ears would perk up but no let the others do it for ya.

I know that the East Coast has bunches of meetings, marches and meetings going on against Fracking Anyone involved?
I remember everyone here saying about OWS and getting involved..guess ya didn't eh?
 
 
+23 # dkonstruction 2012-10-17 05:48
Does the fact that we will be exporting this "dirty oil" make it any "better" for the environment?

While i agree that Obama did much better this time and i was glad to see him go after Romney it is disappointing at best to hear him continue to talk about "clean coal" (sorry, there ain't no such thing) and not to have taken a firm stand against tar sands oil and the pipeline (he is now basically saying that he would support it if there was another route so it misses the big aquafer in the midwest (forgetting which state).

I understand that he has to walk a fine line on environmental stuff (as well as most other things) but to not talk about climate change in a discussion about energy (and particularly oil and natural gas; including fracking which was not even mentioned) is depressing at best as some of the most respected climate scientists have been warning that large scale use of tar sands oil could well mean "game over" when it comes to reversing the effects of climate change.
 
 
+2 # KittatinyHawk 2012-10-17 15:28
I believe he has another debate? I know people in Florida have been fighting that and BP not getting the clean up done,money where it was to go. So perhaps taking one step at a time is what is going on.

Guess President has nothing to do but please everyone .... still would be here bad mouthing him...No one is ever happy, always want more. Remind me of Republicans if you all ever reread your texts.
 
 
+23 # Granny Weatherwax 2012-10-17 05:57
That was to be expected; the President is not going to risk alienating the undecided to please the ecology conscious who are not going to vote for Romney anyway.

Well done, Mr President.
 
 
+30 # genierae 2012-10-17 06:00
Obama is walking a thin line, he must not emphasize the environmental aspects because it is an issue that is not popular. In order to get re-elected, he has to appeal to the same mainstream that Romney and Republicans have polluted with their massive propaganda onslaught. In my area of Ohio coal companies have posted hundreds of signs proclaiming Obama's "War On Coal", and most of the people here believe this crap. You would not believe the rampant ignorance in rural parts of this state. It's almost as bad as W.Va. If he were white he would have more room to maneuver, and perhaps persuade some of these people to vote for him, but as it is, he must walk the knife edge, squeezing out every vote he can.
 
 
+7 # dkonstruction 2012-10-17 07:50
Granny Weatherwaxy and genieria,

Respectfully, i hear ya and I understand that Obama has to walk a fine line on this and other issues but every poll shows that something like 90% of US citizens favor more "green energy" and are concerned about the environment so it is a matter of leadership (and not just during an election campaign) to make the case. So, i believe the support is there if the dems can articulate both the problem and the solutions clearly.

There is no such thing as "clean coal" and so yes, if we are talking about moving away from coal (and or oil and natural gas) we also have to provide real and attractive alternatives to those whose livlihood depends on these industries (and others like logging as well). But this is the challenge isn't it (and not just for Obama and the dems but also for the environmental movement as a whole unless otherwise it is basically saying it doesn't give a shit about these people (or at least this is the perception and why many of these folks will then vote republican).

Avoiding the issue and or pretending that there is such a thing as clean coal or safe nuclear is simply to continue to mislead people which at this point we do at the peril of the planet (or at least our species).
 
 
+2 # genierae 2012-10-17 15:50
dkonstruction, I agree that presidents have to lead on the environment, that's half the equation. But the 90% you speak of are the other half. If most of them are too lazy to get off their butts and organize to save this planet, then what does it matter how much they want green energy? I do think that Obama will be quite a different president if he gets a second term. He has two daughters, and he loves them dearly. I think he will get involved in environmental issues, along with many others that have been suppressed until election day. Please God, let him get a second term!
 
 
+1 # dkonstruction 2012-10-18 05:00
Quoting genierae:
dkonstruction, I agree that presidents have to lead on the environment, that's half the equation. But the 90% you speak of are the other half. If most of them are too lazy to get off their butts and organize to save this planet, then what does it matter how much they want green energy? I do think that Obama will be quite a different president if he gets a second term. He has two daughters, and he loves them dearly. I think he will get involved in environmental issues, along with many others that have been suppressed until election day. Please God, let him get a second term!


Unfortunately, i don't think Obama will be any different in his second term than he was in his first term absent a social movement in this country that creates both the political space/opening and pressure. This was the case for Roosevelt in the 1930s (who did not campaign as a "new dealer" but rather as someone who would balance the budget and maintain the status quo. The same was true of Johnson in the 1960s. One of the big problems politically in this country is the "savior syndrome" where we expect politicians to magically do things without "us" forcing them to do so. The ruling class in this country has never favored progressive reform without feeling a threat to their own security and well being. If we don't make Obama do it, expect more of the same unfortunately.
 
 
0 # genierae 2012-10-18 14:50
I agree that he needs to be pushed dk, but there is a growing green movement, example, 350.org, and he will be pushed, I guarantee it. People are waking up to the danger we are in, here in Ohio there is a growing movement against fracking, and I thing it's just the beginning of a massive shift in consciousness.
 
 
+3 # KittatinyHawk 2012-10-17 15:23
How many things do you think he can remember? I imagine if you write in you can remind his debate team ???
 
 
+24 # JJS 2012-10-17 02:32
The price of oil is also influenced by refineries. The US has lost a lot of its refining capacity. It is way too dangerouse to pump tar sludge through pipes over thousands of miles. Not that I like the idea but maybe Canada should open a refinery at the source. What we really need, in Texas and elsewhere is a WATER pipeline from the Artic ice that is melting so quickly to keep the midwest bread basket from drying up. Let's build THAT pipeline.
 
 
+15 # robniel 2012-10-17 06:54
The XL pipeline crude oil from Canada is loaded with asphaltenes and is difficult to refine and no one wants to put more refining capacity in Canada. In addition, almost all of the refined product is intended for export from North America, not used domestically. As for the "huge" number of U.S. jobs to build the pipeline -- it's actually about 2,500. Canada should ship this crude to Vancouver and send it off from there. A recent worldwide strategy has been to move (add) refining capacity close to the source of the crude oil, which would gain efficiencies and actually lower final product prices. Why ship a whole barrel of crude around the world and pay to ship the dregs as well as the useful products?
 
 
+8 # X Dane 2012-10-17 10:30
robniel.
that awful oil is so polluting and destructive. PLEASE READ more about all the dangerous chemical being used in making it flow, and all the water being polluted....plu s all the breaks that are happening in moving it. It should STAY IN THE GROUND FOREVER.
 
 
+2 # KittatinyHawk 2012-10-17 15:39
Heard there was shakes in the North East I cannot imagine why.
 
 
+2 # KittatinyHawk 2012-10-17 15:39
The Canadians will not allow it. Pipes cannot handle as we were told by EPA, and other Engineers so nice prediction of spills.
We have never been known to listen.

Scam Industries always lie, always lie about job creation Sands in Bethlehem Pa did. These jobs are like Alaska Pipeline, make your money, bank it, and then it is over. Fracking is the same. Liars I have fought so many of thes Industries when Politicians and towns listened but now....pay offs. Even Organizations are paid off. Look at Japan...where is data on food, fish.

We do not need this and people are actually protesting, marching and getting pettitions out ...But people who do not want it are actually putting blockades up. If everyone here who is against it got together ...you could actually go and help them...Hmmmm
 
 
+14 # George D 2012-10-17 08:19
You raise a great point about WATER pipelines. I have said, for years, that the excess flooding in the midwest, while the southwest suffers a drought, is ridiculous.
If an interstate highway system could be created to help America and spur a recovery, why not a "water pipeline" system, designed to move water from where too much exists to where it is needed. The same pipeline that takes it away during flood years can bring it back during droughts.

America needs big ideas that help America; Not just a few "investors" to make money. That is the fundamental difference between the Romney experience and plans for the US versus Obama.

THAT message needs to be understood by the population that thinks a business man is what America needs to govern us. It couldn't be further from the truth.
 
 
+2 # KittatinyHawk 2012-10-17 15:41
Not about People...It is about money

Why aren't Churches and Temples up against this killing of Creator's Earth and the People this could affect? Greed?
 
 
+3 # KittatinyHawk 2012-10-17 15:33
Refineries owners refused to fix, comply, maintain so they are in a state of bad need of repair. Guess we should blame OB for that too Rethugs?

It is same the Greedy one percent do all the time..steel mills, coal, manufacturing.
Profits Profits Profits. People got hurt blamed Unions. People wanted maintenance...C ompanies closed Blamed Unions. I hope China, India etc all Unionize I hope people do here too. It is the only way people know solidarity and working together is when they join Unions.
 
 
+31 # 666 2012-10-17 03:54
and why doesn't anyone (bo) confront mendacious mitty about making interest tax free? That proves how much he's for the 1%. most middle-classers don't have billions of dollars and earn millions in interest. we earn maybe $20/year if that (so, what I pay $1 in tax on that interest). it means virtually nothing to the middle class -- but to the top 1% learning millions every year in interest, it's a HUGE bonus and a major loss of tax revenue. taking away the home mortgage deduction would devastate the middle class -- but the 1% with their mega-mansions would benefit big time.
 
 
+20 # robniel 2012-10-17 06:59
Didn't you notice Romney slipped in making capital gains tax-free? That's where the money is for the 1% who never have to soil their hands. The workers pay a much higher ordinary income tax rate while the 1% leeches sit back and rake in the cash at a much lower tax rate.
 
 
+1 # KittatinyHawk 2012-10-17 15:14
A cap should once again be put in place...
 
 
+191 # peterjkraus 2012-10-16 19:56
Good performance by a vastly superior President. Romney, after bullying the moderator and talking over both Crowley and the President made watchers cringe - we all remember that arrogant boss who didn´t give a damn about civility. And that was Romney´s downfall -- his made up facts showed wear, so even the undecided (!) voters who made up the audience knew he was lying.

Good debate, great Obama. Thank god.
 
 
-19 # brux 2012-10-16 20:31
Thank you Mr. President for showing up and debating.

The big question is why did he let Romney get one in at all?

I really wish the President would quit qualifying everything he says ... he starts our sentences like "I think ..." ... for God's sake, he's the President, he should know, he should not have to say "I think", everyone knows that already, but he sounds more confident if he just makes his statement.

I'm also sick of his blathering on about his Mom and Grandma, because as he does that after about 30 seconds people tune it out and miss what he is trying to say - JUST SAY IT MR. PRESIDENT!
 
 
+17 # Billy Bob 2012-10-17 03:12
You seem sick of him displaying any human traits.
 
 
+13 # Ralph Averill 2012-10-17 04:15
I don't understand the negative votes on your post. You can support a candidate and still have a valid criticism on his style.
 
 
+1 # maddave 2012-10-17 16:28
Unfortunately, Ralph, you are not a political animal. A brief primer:
"Anything my guy does is dynamite, and everything your guy does is ( insert your favorite vile expletive ). And, for God's sake, whatever else you may do, NEVER admit to a fault in your party or your leader.

Example: Do you recall when the late N. Korean president, Kim Jung Il, played golf? He always shot a presidential par: i.e., eighteen holes, eighteen strokes.

You didn't see him losing any elections!
 
 
+21 # Muzzi 2012-10-17 05:49
It is important to talk about his mother and grandmother as they are the ones who raised him, along with his grandfather. His father was gone by his 2nd birthday.
He wasn't raised by a rich Romney family with a married mother and father and a grandfather with plural wives. He didn't go to expensive private schools, he went to public schools.
 
 
+4 # akh752 2012-10-17 09:06
His school in Hawaii was a somewhat expensive private school. He was a scholarship student there.
 
 
+2 # KittatinyHawk 2012-10-17 15:45
According to what requirements you have to have to get, the scholarship could have been given due to his mom's yearly. then too it could have been for his brains and talent or all of the above
 
 
+26 # Granny Weatherwax 2012-10-17 05:59
Being president does not change who you are.
Obama is a careful intellectual - he ponders and I suspect is short-of-pristi ne record for the last four years is the reason why he was less engaged during the first debate.
Romney is a bully
 
 
+10 # bmiluski 2012-10-17 08:36
I think for the first debate,Presiden t Obama came out expecting a civilised, actual debate. I think he was absolutely floored by the blatant lies that Romney shouted out at the camera's, and the bullying.
 
 
+8 # KittatinyHawk 2012-10-17 15:46
Not to mention a poor moderator
 
 
+3 # bingers 2012-10-17 20:24
Quoting KittatinyHawk:
Not to mention a poor moderator


I lost 40 years of respect for Jim Lehrer that night.
 
 
+1 # genierae 2012-10-18 14:54
I think you're exactly right bmiluski, I thought the very same thing when I saw the stunned look on his face. Obama respects the office of the President, and he expected Romney to respect it too.
 
 
+123 # Activista 2012-10-16 20:47
"we all remember that arrogant boss who didn´t give a damn about civility" perfect characterizatio n - arrogant and ignorant boss.
Romney is perfect symbol of the ruling class in his feudalistic future for America.
 
 
+25 # Professorjane Gilgun 2012-10-17 00:05
Well-said. Romney is today's version of the landlords in Ireland and Scotland who owned everything and gave the tenants little and attempted to strip them of their dignity and worth. How anyone other than another landlord-type can even think of voting him into office is beyond me. Feudalism is alive and well in Romney and his "peers." The landlords of the past were as a class also as stupid, entitled, and brutal as Romney.
 
 
+5 # dkonstruction 2012-10-17 09:50
Quoting Professorjane Gilgun:
Well-said. Romney is today's version of the landlords in Ireland and Scotland who owned everything and gave the tenants little and attempted to strip them of their dignity and worth. How anyone other than another landlord-type can even think of voting him into office is beyond me. Feudalism is alive and well in Romney and his "peers." The landlords of the past were as a class also as stupid, entitled, and brutal as Romney.

Quoting Granny Weatherwax:
Being president does not change who you are.
Obama is a careful intellectual - he ponders and I suspect is short-of-pristine record for the last four years is the reason why he was less engaged during the first debate.
Romney is a bully


"Feudalism is alive and well" in far more than just "Romney and his peers". The banks now make more money from fees than they do from making loans. This is the equivalent of feudal rent. The entire system (wtih the assistance of both dems and repubs so we can't just blame this on the repubs) is being restructured through so-called "financializati on" so that feudalistic rent is beoming as important (if not more so) than more "capitalist" types of profit and debt is more and more the "post modern" WMFD (weapon of mass financial destruction) and social control.
 
 
+2 # KittatinyHawk 2012-10-17 15:47
Have them here...slumlord s
 
 
+85 # readerz 2012-10-16 20:37
This was much better. Women were actually mentioned, and other issues, because the moderator had better control. Not much on the environment, but jobs. I hope that people haven't already early-voted for Romney, because this time they got to see him whining and bullying.

No matter whether Romney has a bad idea or a good idea (after shaking the etch-a-sketch), that bullying tone is going to cause a war somewhere. People are concerned about Iran and nukes; have they forgotten that China has nukes, and is testing its imperial muscles right now with Japan? I'm not saying that the trade imbalance and human rights abuses are good things, but that there are different way to approach a bull, and it is probably not a good idea to run around a bull waving stuff in its face.

I'm glad that the President didn't say that Republicans cut the money for defense of diplomats (even though it's true), because what he did say was so much more heartfelt, and not passing the blame always looks better.

No matter what they said, now it is most important to get out the vote. In Ohio and most other states, voting has started already. If just a few votes per polling place might be missed, it could change the outcome. Vote early: paper ballot.
 
 
+9 # Granny Weatherwax 2012-10-17 06:10
Everyone with half a brain cell knows that even a nuclear-armed Iran could not use it for a first strike without being blown to smithereens.

Hillary stated it clearly for those who do not have half a brain cell, and the Iranians have more.

The contrast is not so much with China, one of the first five countries with the bomb and a permanent member of the security council expected to know its interest, but the difference in treatment between Iran, North Korea and Libya.

North Korea: crazy with the bomb - leave alone.

Khaddafi: crazy who forewent the bomb (and gave Abdul Kader Kahn to boot) - deposed and dead.

What do you think a rational actor (as the CIA qualifies Iran) would do: forgo its nuclear program and be invaded or otherwise deposed?
Ali Khanemei (the actual boss) stated that the bomb was against Islam, but even if the Iranians don't actually want it they will never, never officially give it up, because they saw what happens when you do.
 
 
+10 # bmiluski 2012-10-17 08:38
My greatest fear is that because the race is so close, the republican made voting machines will be rigged in favor of romney and no one will say anything.
 
 
+1 # KittatinyHawk 2012-10-17 15:53
I want a copy of my vote...I am going to call tomorrow and ask how I can get that.
I think we should all be entitled to it.
It is computer could spit out a receipt in seconds.
If you want to know how you voted, when you come in you are given a number, ask for that number and then demand to see how it came in. Election Board has that information in your County. For all the comments and intelligence not a one seems to think things out
 
 
+2 # bingers 2012-10-17 20:27
Quoting bmiluski:
My greatest fear is that because the race is so close, the republican made voting machines will be rigged in favor of romney and no one will say anything.



Did you ever notice that Diebold ATMs always get it right and Diebold voting machines always get it wrong? Coincidence?
 
 
0 # KittatinyHawk 2012-10-17 15:49
Wonder who cut their budget? And how do we know the CIA didn't do this one too?
 
 
+121 # bingers 2012-10-16 20:42
I loved it when Mittens advanced on Candy Crowley with that famous and disgusting smirk lying about Obama taking two weeks to admit it was a terrorist attack and basically telling Obama to shut up when he tried to set the lie right. Did you see the huge smile as Obama figuratively handed him the rope to hang himself?

Mittens's ability to lie constantly with a straight face marks him as a sociopath or perhaps, a psychopath.
 
 
+117 # psadave 2012-10-16 21:46
I have suspected he is a sociopath for months with much evidence. His lying, greed, lack of empathy and conscience, delusions of grandeur, feeling that rules don't apply to him, self-serving, never wrong and therefore, never needing to apologize (this goes so far that he titled his book 'No Apologies' and his obsession with what he calls Obama's 'apology tour'), dominant and win at all cost attitude, leading to most of his flip-flops.

America, BEWARE! I speak not just as a progressive, I have two degrees in psychology.
 
 
+26 # lourdmar 2012-10-16 23:12
I agree wholeheartedly and I'm surprised no one else has taken notice of his very obvious problems. I was married to a sociopath (no longer) so the symptoms are recognizable. Mitt frightens me like none other - interestingly Bush never did, he was just a bad joke but Mitt is dangerous. Thank you for pointing it out.
 
 
+21 # genierae 2012-10-17 06:26
A couple of weeks ago, Anne Romney said that she was worried about his "mental condition". What is that supposed to mean? He just doesn't look or behave as if he is a stable human being, and whenever Obama gets the better of him, he begins to whine like the spoiled little rich kid that he is. I don't think he ever grew up. In fact, I think that the Republican Party is a haven for those who never matured past high school. Arrested development would certainly account for their bratty behavior.
 
 
+6 # feloneouscat 2012-10-17 12:14
I agree. When the argument started going badly Romney veered off course. Like about getting guns off the street. What did that have to do with single parents? Or was that a dog whistle to say that Obama was actually a psycho-killer? Very confused moment, in my mind.
 
 
+3 # KittatinyHawk 2012-10-17 15:55
Perhaps she is a victim...
But his sons were really up and patting his back. Got some followers in the household?
 
 
+4 # KittatinyHawk 2012-10-17 15:54
Doesn't say too much for his Religion either
 
 
+21 # BlueReview 2012-10-17 05:18
I heard Ms. Crowley actually backing President Obama up on that one. Kudos to her for that, fact-checking on the fly, so to speak.
 
 
+3 # bmiluski 2012-10-17 08:39
No, he's just a very good used car salesman.
 
 
+73 # tclose 2012-10-16 20:43
Yes, to the first three comments here. It was a good night for the President, who finally showed up at this debate.

Now, however, we have to channel the energy given to us by the President to really get out the vote. There cannot be any person who is leaning towards Obama not making it to the polls. Lets all pull together to make that happen.
 
 
+58 # psadave 2012-10-16 21:49
VOTE! It is important to get out the vote, especially in all the states where the GOP's war on voting has tried to suppress the vote with their laws and even billboard ads attempting to intimidate people they don't want to vote. Make sure people get registered and vote.
 
 
+3 # KittatinyHawk 2012-10-17 15:57
How about getting involved and getting people to the Polls wow what a concept.
 
 
+3 # bingers 2012-10-17 20:31
Quoting KittatinyHawk:
How about getting involved and getting people to the Polls wow what a concept.


I do that every election. I volunteer to take people who don't have a ride through the local Democratic HQ, but they also get Republicans to the polls in the true American spirit. Can you imagine Republicans doing that for Democrats?
 
 
+64 # LeeBlack 2012-10-16 20:45
One of the key moments in the debate was when Governor Romney advocated marriage as a method to establish gun control.

This is a key tenet in Mormon belief and Governor Romney has urged his own single-mother parishioners to give their children up for adoption.
 
 
+14 # genierae 2012-10-17 06:37
They want to drag women back to the dark ages where they are dependent on men to survive. Mr. Romney, we will not go back! We will have true equality, and we will have it sooner than you think! Once we occupy our rightful place in this society, there will be no more wars, no more plutocrats, no more attacks on the social safety net, and truth will be the law of the land. That will be a very good day!
 
 
+10 # feloneouscat 2012-10-17 12:19
Quoting LeeBlack:
One of the key moments in the debate was when Governor Romney advocated marriage as a method to establish gun control.


Which had me do a double-take. Most single parents are on VERY TIGHT budgets. Does he seriously think they have the cash to be buying assault rifles (which was what the question was about)?

Romney won't tell us what his plan is (but he assures us he has one, we're just not allowed to know), avoids talking about what he did in business but all the while saying "I was a businessman" - you know, I've known a few CEO's in my time and he strikes me as one of those "messed up in the head" CEO's. The one's that "let" others fix his screwups.

Don't vote for this guy. He is seriously dangerous.
 
 
+1 # genierae 2012-10-18 15:00
My next-door neighbor is a single mom of a teenager, she lives from paycheck to paycheck. I noticed when I came home the other day, she has a Romney sign in her yard. Can you believe these people?
 
 
+4 # KittatinyHawk 2012-10-17 15:58
Obviously he did not see that his own women family members could have done this on their own? I would think that a slap in my face but then Anne is the obedient wife?
 
 
+72 # LeeBlack 2012-10-16 20:47
I was also alarmed at Romney's "drill, baby, drill" attitude while at the same time advocating deregulation.
 
 
+87 # X Dane 2012-10-16 20:51
I heeeeeaved a BIG sigh of relief. The President was back where we wish he had been about a week ago. He thought fast on his feet, and got in a lot of the important points he needed to make.

And he was smart in using a question to pivot onto the women's issues and made the big contrast between Romney and himself. Very correctly he pointed out that contraception is not just a women's issue. It concerns the whole family, because it is a costly issue, and having it in your insurance is very important.

In the end Romney put himself in jeopardy and the President immediately got him on it and mentioned that Romney felt that 47% of the population were not taking responsibility for themselves.

The President pointed out that the 47% were military at war, retirees, Students, and people not earning enough to pay federal taxes. That was a GREAT parting salvo, and it was THE LAST WORD.
 
 
+3 # KittatinyHawk 2012-10-17 16:02
He was in a comfortable situation I do not think he likes to be behind a podium. I think he likes walking, thinking on his feet. I believe there is alot about the first debate we may not know. But I do know that the Lehrer gentleman had not control and didn't care.
I do not like where the next debate is. It should be in Dakota, Oregon, Ohio but Florida I have no good thoughts on this
 
 
+14 # Carbonman1950 2012-10-16 20:51
The President did much better tonight and I think, gave somewhat better than he got, but early response stats I saw indicate that it was essentially a three way tie (Obama, Romney, & no winner) with a very slight edge to Obama.
 
 
+54 # Walhalla 2012-10-16 20:56
I was going for the "off" switch when President Obama started talking about his grandmother (again)...but he made it short and got to the point.
I especially enjoyed O's response to R's fib about the public land oil leases
Second half of debate was certainly Obama's and his alone.
 
 
0 # KittatinyHawk 2012-10-17 16:04
Yes heaven forbid he should bring home comments by using something he knows. why do something like that and get people to see what he is like
Republicans like you want to skim around family love, family relationships because you do not have them. Believe me it shows. Attitudes and remarks speak loudly.
 
 
+51 # brenda 2012-10-16 21:07
I always thought the Prez would come through. It's 1:02 Am, the day after the town hall debate. Right now Romney is having a diarreah attack and downing tranquelizers.
 
 
+78 # Art947 2012-10-16 21:15
Romney once again demonstrated that he is nothing but a schoolyard bully! On issue after issue he lied, lied and then lied some more. Let us examine just a few of the issues that were discussed this evening. 1. Outsourcing to China. Has anyone paid any attention to the Sensata factory situation? Here is a company that is located in Illinois, and currently controlled by Bain. The employees of this company, which by the way has been producing a profit, have been forced to teach Chinese workers how to do their jobs in preparation for the company closing down and moving to China! NOTE that Romney continues to receive money from these employee's work. 2. Taxes. Romney must be working with blue smoke and mirrors. Does any sane individual really believe that tax rates can be cut by 20%, eliminating any taxes on dividends, capital gains, etc., retain revenue at current levels, without eliminating deductions for the typical American taxpayer? Anyone want to buy a bridge? There are at least 3 that span the East River in NYC that are for sale :;)! 3. Jobs. Would someone please tell me why the creation of public service jobs that were one of the ways that the Federal government has typically helped get us out a recession, were NOT approved by the Republicans in Congress during this economic downturn? Note that every Republican president who faced this problem in the past was granted this type of stimulus. There is lots more...
 
 
+11 # BlueReview 2012-10-17 05:32
Yeah, I love that "eliminating any taxes on dividends, capital gains, etc."--since the Romneys of this world have more socked away in savings and stocks and other investments, their dividends from these stocks and savings are quite a bit more than mine--so how would eliminating those taxes NOT benefit them even more than the Bush tax cuts? How stupid does Mr. Romney think I am?--Don't answer that.

That was when I had to stop watching. I found myself with the remote in my hand, ready to throw it at Mr. Romney's image on my TV. I used it to change channels instead.
 
 
+10 # Granny Weatherwax 2012-10-17 06:19
Regarding the cutting of benefits (second question, I think) I was disappointed that Obama did not mention the obvious: balancing the budget while cutting taxes and increasing expenses means the money needs to come from somewhere, namely the deductions listed but also social security, medicare, medicaid etc.

Similarly when Romney pointed out more people on food stamps I waited for Obama to point out that the recession he inherited from BUSH did put people in poverty and what would Rmoney have done? Let them starve? Thankfully there is some kind of safety net, if not as thick or high as I wish it were.
 
 
+4 # feloneouscat 2012-10-17 12:22
From some of Romney's other responses in the past (like letting Detroit go bankrupt when, at the time, there was no way to get a loan - period) - yes, Romney would have let them starve. Said "that's the breaks" and "free market" and other rubbish.

He has no concept of what "country" mean. To him, we are all individuals and so what if one of us suffers as long as it isn't him.
 
 
+2 # KittatinyHawk 2012-10-17 16:07
Let them go under and Bain get a Chinese Company to take over...Lexus?
 
 
+2 # bingers 2012-10-17 20:33
Lexus is Japanese
 
 
+1 # KittatinyHawk 2012-10-17 16:07
He didn't have to reiterate the obvious. We all know these points and they had a clock so it is better to stat focused, not have the moderator tuning you up, and making the real points.
Time...Time...time... He gave the right answers. Two weeks ago you raved he didn't answer, here I am and he did not do enough. Tell the TV Stations
 
 
+11 # robniel 2012-10-17 07:06
[quote name="Art947"] The employees of this company, which by the way has been producing a profit, have been forced to teach Chinese workers how to do their jobs in preparation for the company closing down and moving to China!

If your job is history why help the traitors to train the enemy army? I would refuse and quit if necessary.
 
 
+6 # dkonstruction 2012-10-17 09:21
Quoting robniel:
[quote name="Art947"] The employees of this company, which by the way has been producing a profit, have been forced to teach Chinese workers how to do their jobs in preparation for the company closing down and moving to China!

If your job is history why help the traitors to train the enemy army? I would refuse and quit if necessary.


Chinese workers are not our (American workers) enemy. They are hyper exploited workers (the only reason chinese products are so cheap...it is fundamentally about low wages and not that they are "cheating" on the value of their currenty...whic h frankly we do as well whenever the FED acts to prop it up) just like American workers are. As long as we continue to see Chinese workers as our enemy (not saying you are saying this) instead of seeing them as allies with whom we have to organize together and make common cause against "the bosses" (in reality, China is every bit as capitalist as we are it is just a different type of capitalism) the ruling elites in both countries will continue to laugh as they enrich themselves at all of our expense.
 
 
+2 # KittatinyHawk 2012-10-17 16:13
They are an enemy like scabs who Contractors pick up and pay under the table.
Chinese workers had jobs making items that they were excellent at. I know I do crafts and need their items but alas they are now making Morgan Tshirts, Wrangler Jeans.
I am sorry we have the right to not appreciate them. If they were allies then perhaps it is time for them to start protesting, Unionize. Want jobs back, then let them demand better wages, hours. Chinese want to be westernized...l et them start now. There is more of them than Government like here, yet both of us allow ourselves to be dictated to.
No we should not teach them our jobs, let them go to 'help' in the program and learn just like we do on their gadgets.
They are better workers than us we were told, work faster. more production lower wages than good let them figure their jobs out.
Keep buying foreign made...
 
 
+1 # dkonstruction 2012-10-18 08:53
Instead of making racial stereotype generalizations about how chinese workers are the "enemy" and "scabs" you would do better to understand that chinese workers are some of the most exploited in the world and have far more in common with american workers than with the chinese or american gov'ts or the ruling class/elite in either country. it is illegal for chinese workers to unionize (i.e., have independent trade unions) yet despite this estimates are that there are nearly 10,000 strikes per year. To blame chinese workers for "our" plight is to fall for the propaganda of the US 1%. Jingoistic nativism is not the answer now or ever.
 
 
+65 # moreover 2012-10-16 21:19
The best part was when Obama asked how any business plan to spend 7 trillion dollars would be received if the it came with no specifics and only the plea to "trust me".

Anyone but an idiot would say: Scram! After November 4th we'll be able to count the idiots.

A witty spoof website makes the same point: http://www.romneytaxplan.com
 
 
+6 # BlueReview 2012-10-17 05:48
Wow. Just visited that website you mentioned--perf ect! Thanks for sharing that one!
 
 
+2 # feloneouscat 2012-10-17 12:25
Excellent!
 
 
+56 # seniorcitizen 2012-10-16 21:20
Good job tonight, Mr. President. Please , on the next debate, explain that gas prices are not influenced by the president, but by traders in oil. It would also help to answer questions directly, without your talking points. It would not sound canned, but sincere. Romney follows a canned talking points approach, which can be easily rebutted with a few facts and figures that show his lies.
 
 
+67 # citizen vox 2012-10-16 21:27
It's always a good day when a liar is called out for his lies. Good job, Obama.
Yes to above comment; let's work to make sure Obama wins.

Candy Crowley was fantastic. She's obviously not someone to be bullied. That's how Jim L. should have responded. (Incidentally, Jim L. and Mark Shields are a bit emblematic of the Newshour needing fresh energy.)
 
 
+5 # feloneouscat 2012-10-17 12:27
I was so happy when Crowley didn't let Romney walk all over her. We both said "excellent!".

Romney was so rude to her. Since when did rudeness become an accepted Republican trait?
 
 
+43 # Muzzi 2012-10-16 21:34
Obama did much better in the New York air. I think the high altitude in Denver had a negative effect on his brain. Romney was so obnoxious at times I switched to the ball game. I couldn't listen to him patting himself on the back over and over again. One of his lies is his "bipartisan" job as Governor in Massachusetts. The Legislature sent laws to him for his signature. He vetoed 82% of them. They had to reconvene to overturn those vetoes. Is that bipartisanship? They also had a terrible deficit that he doesn't talk about. He also fails to mention that the reason he agreed to go along with their Health Care proposals was because the hospital emergency rooms were running into so much red ink because of all of the visits by uninsured citizens. This caused financial problems for the state. The Health Care program helped to turn that around. It wasn't his idea, it was the Legislature's.

He also kept harping on being a "missionary". That was how he dodged the Vietnam War! It wasn't because of his religion. There were pictures of him lying on the beaches of southern France writing love notes in the sand to Ann. I haven't seen other missionaries do that.

I was glad that the President mentioned his grandfather being a Veteran of World War II and going to college on the G.I. Bill. Romney's father and grandfather were in Mexico having plural marriages.
 
 
+1 # bingers 2012-10-16 23:16
I gave you a thumbs up, but his father wasn't into polygamy, his father was a very decent guy and in this case, the apple fell VERY far from the tree.
 
 
+1 # Granny Weatherwax 2012-10-17 06:22
Besides, Massachusetts being the most liberal state, a R governor cannot but be somewhat bipartisan lest he be shredded.
 
 
+56 # Muzzi 2012-10-16 21:37
A lot of the questions suggested that the President had powers to make changes that he cannot do without Congress. That was misleading. No one mentioned the JOBS bill that the President sent to Congress last year. It was fully paid for. Whose desk is that sitting on while they argue about women's reproductive rights?
 
 
+1 # KittatinyHawk 2012-10-17 16:19
Job plan was vetoed by Senate months ago
 
 
+2 # bingers 2012-10-17 20:38
Quoting KittatinyHawk:
Job plan was vetoed by Senate months ago


That was the Republican one that consisted mostly of huge tax cuts for the billionaires, not the Jobs bill Obama sent them last year that they haven't even allowed to be voted on.

It should be noted that the Pelosi house sent up 44 jobs bills and all of them were filibustered by the piggish 'pubs.
 
 
+41 # debraslone 2012-10-16 21:37
I just wish he had hammered back that Fast & Furious was a Bush program that he continued!
 
 
+7 # Independentgal 2012-10-17 06:36
Yes, it was surprising that he didn't. Can't remember what the last debate is supposed to cover, but perhaps he will have another chance to do that if Romney brings it up again.
 
 
+41 # DaveM 2012-10-16 21:38
"Self-deportati on" means "let people make their own choices", according to Mitt Romney. So....what happens when their choice is to remain in the United States?

Has it occurred to anyone that the various industries (the auto industry notable among them) which have established countless factories throughout Mexico, Central, and South America should pay their workers there something resembling a living wage? If they did that, people would stop coming to the United States to look for high-paying jobs. Furthermore, it would level the playing field and allow American workers to compete. My "American" car was assembled in California, but less than 6% of the parts in it were made in the United States (the rest came from at least six different countries). Given the chance, I expect our American auto workers would be happy to make the other 94% of the parts in my car. In the process they would get off unemployment, pay taxes, and reduce that nasty deficit people keep talking about.

Do either of the major candidates have a way of bringing this about. The President tried various "stimulus packages" with mixed result. Mitt Romney appears to have nothing to say on the subject.
 
 
+2 # KittatinyHawk 2012-10-17 16:27
Brewer will send her men to shoot them.

Wages in those other Countries have nothing to do with US Companies...if so then all the other jobs would have to rise and these other Countries do not want people to stay, or to have money. Again we would have to get the companies to want to come back. To tell you the truth many companies if you paid attention to Romney going to slap China on the wrist. Companies have had to pay warlords, now cost of shipping is eeking into their profits, cost of shipping here not just cargo. Losses on products. Companies are rethinking ask Hershey who sold out jobs.
Got to research, listen, think...is it better elsewhere? I do believe that the Greed Dream isn't working as well as Bain,Koch, Adelson promised. It would be nice if OB got in, that we keep that ball in our court if they decide to come back. No going to min wage, have to go back to 70% of wage left employees at, must give those employees they destroyed first option at return full benefits.

Got to think ahead. Believe OB said that he isn't thinking about yesterdat but tomorrow because he has an investment in tomorrow two beautiful daughters, one day grandchildren. OB believe in leaving something good. Rethugs leave toxins to clean up after
 
 
+38 # jlg 2012-10-16 21:53
After the first debate, I seriously wondered whether Obama was phased by the shocking torrent of lies coming from Romney - especially when the Moderator was too spineless to intervene (too shocked himself?) Tonight, the President was ready and didn't fall for the same tactics again - thank goodness!
 
 
+7 # Independentgal 2012-10-17 06:39
Lehrer defends himself by saying that's the way the debate was supposed to go -- his staying out of the way. I guess he's forgetting what to moderate means. It was shocking to see how he "moderated" the debate.
 
 
+1 # KittatinyHawk 2012-10-17 16:30
He is full of hisself!!!

Lehrer is a bore and rethug
 
 
+1 # bingers 2012-10-17 20:40
No, for decades he was the mid to late 1900's version of Edward R Murrow. What we saw in the debate was a former great man becoming senile.
 
 
+1 # KittatinyHawk 2012-10-17 16:29
Moderator is a bore from way back and more than likely a Romnit fan. He was to keep debate flowing. He did not. I think OB was shocked at this and Romnits.
Perhaps OB thought if he answered will Lehrer make an ass out of me so he allowed mittens lie and make an ass of himself.
I do believe last night's format, was more to his liking. I do not believe he likes to be put in one spot and told to bark.
 
 
+19 # Rick Levy 2012-10-16 22:01
Could it be that Obama "threw" the first debate in order to lull Romney into complacency so that in the second debate he would catch Romney off guard?
 
 
+6 # grindermonkey 2012-10-17 03:49
That was my sense of it too, Obama jujitsu at its very finest. Use your oponent's off balance attacks to your own advantage. A fine brawl well executed.
 
 
+2 # Merschrod 2012-10-17 04:38
Could it be that Obama has been throwing the congressional game all during the first term so that he could lull the tea party into complacency for the second term?

Sri Rick but you dropped your guard :>)
 
 
+6 # Granny Weatherwax 2012-10-17 06:25
I think he thought that he commanded the topics because it has been his job every single day for the last four years, and discovered that being prepped for a debate is not an option.
 
 
+1 # bingers 2012-10-17 20:42
Quoting Rick Levy:
Could it be that Obama "threw" the first debate in order to lull Romney into complacency so that in the second debate he would catch Romney off guard?


If you recall, the debate was on Michelle's birthday and the night before was the time Syria first shot missiles into Turkey. It's a good bet he had been up at least 36 hours by then and I believe that's what actually caused his distracted demeanor.
 
 
+11 # Lasereye 2012-10-16 22:05
Well - you know the old saying, “give a man enough rope and he will hang himself". Looking back it was brilliant that Obama held back during the first debate - allowing Romney to dig himself a hole of lies and deception. It seems like the emperor want-to-be has no clothes.
 
 
+1 # KittatinyHawk 2012-10-17 16:32
With all the judgements I had said there could have been alternative..th en there was the look of fear that came over OB perhaps he was threatened.
Lehrer poor moderatorship was key
Letting Nittens hang himself twice now is crucial...
 
 
+17 # moby doug 2012-10-16 22:19
Poor old Jim Lehrer, at age 76, was just not up to the task of nailing Romney's many, many lies in the first debate. Here's another area where the Democrats should attack: Many of Romney's "security advisers" are the same NeoCon chickenhawk lunatics that lied us into the Iraq Disaster. Do we really want to see THAT nightmare again?
 
 
+10 # angelfish 2012-10-16 22:28
Well done, Mr. President!
 
 
+6 # Nel 2012-10-17 03:00
This time President Obama had to take anti-hematemesi s medication to be in the same room with Romney, a repugnant traitor.
 
 
-11 # lobdillj 2012-10-17 04:28
Get real!

They are not debates--they are scripted performances. Neither of these charlatans gave a direct answer to any voter's question. They used each question as a point of departure to rattle off statistics, say what they'd done or would do (all lies), and avoid real issues and worries people have.

Watching these fraudulent displays will make you wiser like standing in a garage will make you a car.
 
 
+4 # feloneouscat 2012-10-17 12:33
Quoting lobdillj:
Watching these fraudulent displays will make you wiser like standing in a garage will make you a car.


Some of us seek wisdom on our own. We watch the debates to see if the person who wants to be the leader is up to the task.

Obama I am sure of. Romney looks worse and worse.

Debate 1: He wants to kill Big Bird and tells lies.
Debate 2: He finds "binders full of women" and tells lies.

Let's face it. Romney can't go up against someone like Obama.

If Romney were President how the heck do you think he would fair against foreign leaders? I'll tell you, badly.

I like smart people as President. Dumb ones haven't worked out so well.
 
 
+2 # KittatinyHawk 2012-10-17 16:36
I see him playing too many foreign people against each other...that would have horrendous outcome when the showdown comes

I see Nittens making CIA worse than they are already
 
 
+5 # rockieball 2012-10-17 15:02
I will re quote the last part of the poem at the Statue of liberty. "Keep ancient lands, your storied pomp." She cries with silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breath free, The wretched refuse of your teaming shore. Send these, the homeless, the tempest-tost to me, I lift my lamp besides the golden door."
Romney seemed to not know those words when he made the remark about wanting people to come to this country with their diploma stapled to their green card willing to invest in this country.
 
 
+2 # KittatinyHawk 2012-10-17 16:34
OB did a great job answering questions very directly but one
Romney tried lying his ____ off and got caught

But I agree these are not the debates I remember but they are getting better
 
 
+9 # Merschrod 2012-10-17 04:36
One point on Romney's statement that his tax plan would still leave the top income brackets paying the same share (60%) of the total tax collect. Pres. Obama should have pointed out the same percent of a small tax bill equals less taxes. That is, the wealthier 1% would pay less taxes - still 60% of a smaller pie - very slick!

Then Point two, Pres. Obama should have pointed out that going that route Romney would have greater deficits or by reducing spending would put the country into an austerity trap.
 
 
+4 # feloneouscat 2012-10-17 12:35
It goes without saying but I'll say it anyway.

A Romney Presidency would have horrendous deficits. Then, like Dick Cheney, they would merely pronounce that "deficits don't matter"...
 
 
0 # KittatinyHawk 2012-10-17 16:37
He did on both in his words...He brought up the taxes and whose going to bolster them more than once
 
 
+9 # fredboy 2012-10-17 04:47
Glad you are a fan. And glad the President brought his focus and command. Will someone please oh please coach him in delivery and body language? Throughout the debate his left hand was often clinched in a tight fist with his wrist bent. Seems tiny but sends the wrong "body language" message. Teach him to share an open demonstrative hand--it signals comfort, openness, and forthright expression. The clinched fist with a bent wrist signals frailty. Sorry, I coach this, and someone should have noticed. It's the little things that can distract and disrupt effective messaging.
 
 
+3 # X Dane 2012-10-17 09:35
Fredboy.
Easy, please call or write the White House or the campaign. I am sure they will pay attention, when you point out the importance.
 
 
+2 # feloneouscat 2012-10-17 12:36
I listened on the radio. PBS of course. ;)

I saw no left hand.
 
 
+2 # KittatinyHawk 2012-10-17 16:41
Perhaps being a human is still his to be.
Coaching people is nice but Romnit is coached, been primed for years...he looks it.
I will take a Biden anyday over a Ryan or Nit

No offense to your career but he has some tells they all do. But he was upset during the Libya, I believe because the CIA lied...again. Overall his stature was great, he looked comfortable, towards us, away from us. I believe he was comfortable and coach all you want. Someone being comfortable is a good message. Stiff, gone over smiles, too precise answers...Not a winner
 
 
0 # bingers 2012-10-17 20:45
Might have something to do with being left handed.
 
 
+13 # jcdav 2012-10-17 04:47
Donno where BO was in debate ONE, but he did well last nite...Rommney showed himself as a liar and bully- he is all the jock frat dolts I wanted to deck when I was working my way tru college. Privileged tru no efforts of their own, entitled to your undivided attention and subservient opinion, entitled to make up their own facts. This delusional world they occupy cannot survive in reality- it does not work. So the Pres did his part now we must GET OUT THE VOTE!
 
 
+16 # Billy Bob 2012-10-17 05:20
As I predicted over a week ago, Yahoo is now saying THIS debate "didn't matter".

In Yahoo's words:

"Obama wins the second debate. Too bad it's not the one that mattered."

HUH?? How does that even make sense. Either ALL of the debates matter or NONE of them matter.
 
 
+4 # feloneouscat 2012-10-17 12:37
Oh, it mattered, it mattered a lot.

This is the President America wanted to see.
 
 
0 # KittatinyHawk 2012-10-17 16:44
Yahoo has a way of not being present, up to date. I do not know who runs the site but it does not show itself of any great integrity or professionalism . Very sloppy, perhaps on purpose to get the sheeple to follow
 
 
-31 # Cary 2012-10-17 05:23
If Romney seemed off balance at times like you suggest, clearly anyone will be thrown off based by a moderator who obviously selects one candidate (Obama) to advance his agenda. Women talk about the war on women... (by the way, I am a woman) but it is women like Crowly who make sure women are not taken seriously. She was unprofessional, biased and untruthful. Her refrasing of the questions to bail Obama when Romney asked point blank questions that the President should answer to the american people will ensure she will not be invited again to be a moderator in any future presidential debate. Biased comments by a moderator are out of line and rejected by serious americans. I am one of those people who these debates are trying to reach, Women and independent and I am sorry to say that President Obama did nothing to earn my vote. He was evasive to all the important questions, went directly to attack Romney or to his talking points and ignored the questions, consistent with his presidency. He has ignored what is really important to the american people and has gone for 4 years to advance his personal agenda on the backs of the american people. His retoric is not working this time around. Scoring points of "winning the debate in a point" is not going to be enough to win women votes.
 
 
+10 # Walhalla 2012-10-17 11:22
Cary - let me just say that Mr Romney set the tone for this, the 2nd, debate by behaving like a bully in the former, the first, debate when he walked all over the President, Jim Lehrer interrupting both and telling the moderator that he would be out of a job should he, Romney, become President (God forbid)
I also strongly resent your statement that women like Crowly "make sure that women are not taken seriously" when it comes to the "war on women"...You are totally off base here.
 
 
+8 # feloneouscat 2012-10-17 12:55
Obama has gone to bat MANY times for women: the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act which Romney STILL refuses to say whether or not he would have done the same.

Obama promotes Planned Parenthood funding which Romney would eliminate.

Romney doesn't know the first thing about women. It's obvious when he had to ask for a "binder full of women" to determine who to staff: did he not know of any women as a businessman? Seemed rather odd to me.

Frankly, I trust Romney very little. Obama has been a pretty decent President. Romney, if you go by the things he says, like corporations are people, is just in it to wreck our economy - again.

Heck, Romney thought the middle-class were those who made $200,000 to $250,000!!! I don't know about you, but I sure don't make that kind of money!

Crowley did a very good job considering how rude Romney was to her. That put me off immediately.
 
 
+4 # rockieball 2012-10-17 14:51
Well one thing Obama's campaign should jump on is Romney's remark about immigrants coming to this country should be helpful. That he would like to see their diploma or references stapled to their green card to insure that they could be productive to this country. Seems he does not know about those words on the Statue of Liberty "Give me your tired, your hungry, your poor, your masses yearning to be free. Not give me your diploma, your investments, your rich, yearning to make a profit. He seems to forget his father came from Mexico with nothing and lived of of welfare and government handouts while he built the fortune his son has today.
 
 
+5 # Billy Bob 2012-10-17 16:58
His father came from Mexico because his grandpa moved there to escape American anti-bigomy laws.
 
 
+4 # KittatinyHawk 2012-10-17 16:48
You are a phony, you wanted to hate OB and do...Good for you
If Romney gets in...good for you.
What do you know about the American People?

If you need a debate to research and think for yourself, why bother voting at all, you have an attitude.

If not for Biden and OB making comments prowomen, we would be laughed at. Romney believes as does Ryan women have aplace at the back of a pew or in a room without windows.

Romney ignored intelligent, creative, grads because he doesnot want women in any place that could be a decision maker.
Better review his heritage and his Faith.

Republicans Lie...
 
 
+7 # rsstein 2012-10-17 05:34
I ewas disappointed that the President did not confront the Governor's contention that his support of fossil fuels was an aid to the US economy. The President repeatedly said that his policies took the future into accopunt. What about the effect of the CO2 evolved from the burning of these fossil fuels? Most of the world's climatolfgists predict than continued CO2 evol;ution will result in climate deterioration leading to a declining economy in the future. This should be made clear to the public.
 
 
+1 # KittatinyHawk 2012-10-17 16:51
Did you send that question in? I believe if we get him in, we can get him environmental but then it takes everyone
 
 
+19 # fredboy 2012-10-17 06:13
The greatest lesson of the second debate, shared by both Obama and Hillary Clinton, was one of leadership: they TOOK RESPONSIBILITY for a tragic event that happened on their watch. On Sept. 11, 2001, after countless and even precise warnings, more than 3,000 Americans were murdered and our greatest city was attacked--and no one in the sitting administration ever, ever took responsibility. They lied, made up excuses, and continue to try to weasel out of any responsibility whatsoever.

This clearly defined the difference in parties. Obama and Clinton showed leadership.
 
 
+5 # X Dane 2012-10-17 10:09
fredboy.
So true. They NEVER took responsibility.
It always infuriated me to hear republicans insist that W kept us free from terrorist attacks????...W HAT THE DEVIL WAS 9-11 ??....OH THAT!!

It is as if THAT didn't count at all. It was the attack that STARTED all the misery. ALL the BILLIONS being spent on trying to keep us safer and all the RIGHTS that are being infringed upon in order to presumably keep us safer.

AND I know many will be angry at me for saying that the terrorists really won round one.
BECAUSE they lured us into an unwinnable war in Iraq and Afghanistan, and pretty much bankrupted us in the process.

Most of what needs to be done to move OUR country forward is put on the back burner. Go on the internet and search: BRIDGES of CHINA. It will blow your mind seeing the spectacular bridges and here ??? OUR BRIDGES are badly in need of repair and rebuilding.

Bush and the republicans have so much on their conscience....I F they have one. We can NOT HAVE A REPEAT OF THE 8 BUSH YEARS
 
 
+4 # KittatinyHawk 2012-10-17 16:54
9-11 perhaps was not a terrorist attack as most of us American believe. They said it but no one listened.

OB has gone to do Bridges, roads but Senate and Congress said not. Is it because it is Union work and they want it more I said more privatized so their buddies get the work? More than likely and bust up more Unions Do not want Americans in good jobs with good pay or heaven forbid benefits.

We have to make changes, get our heads out of..... and take charge. This is our Country, we scream it enough but we do nothing about it HMMMMMM
 
 
+5 # feloneouscat 2012-10-17 12:57
And how long did it take for the 9/11 Commission to finally get set up? OVER ONE YEAR! Political will? There was none.
 
 
+2 # KittatinyHawk 2012-10-17 16:55
Like NRC and GE going to Japan We do not want to rush things eh
 
 
+9 # drew 2012-10-17 06:40
The Prez was better but still not good enough. When speaking on women's issues he failed to mention the Equal Pay Act or the Violence Against Women Act he fought for (both filibustered). He failed to mention that oil prices are set on the global market (Presidents have little affect on prices) and that speculators and Iran tension has done more to raise prices than anything else. mostly he doesn't mention (strongly enough) that we've gone from 750K job loss/month to +100K+/month - a HUGE turnaround! Similarly with GDP, which turned from negative ~9% to +1.5% - also a huge turnaround! Housing is finally turning around, as is consumer sentiment and unemployment is below 8%. He fails to mention the EPIC obstruction in Congress, which blocked his Jobs Bill (which is estimated to shave another 1-2 point off unemployment)! He fails to mention that more people are employed in cleantech than fossil fuel industry. And there are several more accomplishments he simply doesn't tout. He has plenty of room for improvement for round 3!
 
 
+10 # jjj 2012-10-17 07:55
I am tremendously relieved and heartened after hearing a portion of this debate and reading the comments above. There may still be a chance for President Obama (yes, flawed but at least fair) to be re-elected! I make less than $30,000.00 a year but I contribute to RSN (BLESS YOU RSN!!!) and I'm joining the one million in contributing to Obama's campaign today. May I invite other RSN readers to join me in both? Every little bit counts and together we matter. Respectfully-jj j
 
 
+5 # jwatersphd 2012-10-17 07:59
Certainly this was a much better job but he could have done a lot better if he'd used the "Etch-a-Sketch" term that actually came from Romney's own team. That just sums up in a memorable way what we are seeing now: Romney's now a moderate who supports regulations, Affirmative Action (in his cabinet appointments "binder of women"), Pell Grants, and who knows what else. This guy's a moving target.
 
 
0 # ATrueFreeThinker 2012-10-17 08:25
How does "eating crow" taste after Candy Crowley has retracted her comment on CNN?
The President finally showed up. Let the battle begin!
 
 
+10 # bmiluski 2012-10-17 08:47
I'm surprised that whenever romney mentions the deficit that president Obama doesn't remind everyone that part of that deficit is the war budget (that Bush omited from his budget), the unemployment compensation payments to people who lost their jobs due to a republican administrations disasterous policies, and more people on food stamps because of the same disasterous policies.
 
 
-1 # Human Right 2012-10-17 08:56
We voted for Obama & change
What they got was a president who took the entire defense department bureaucracy of a previously discredited administration into his administration inclusive of the Generals, Secretary of Defense and all the rest ( this has never happened before); then gave us more phony war. While president Obama was receiving the “Nobel Peace prize” he respiratory simultaneously and successfully defended the architect of torture in a San Francisco federal court. In addition, he sidetracked attempts of the ACLU to remove the illegal overseas prisons and never gave even a feeble attempt to close the infamous Guantanamo prison. He has never tried to return our revered habeas corpus or remove the immoral, illegal, Patriot Act. As this is written he has placed ill advised military intimidation and economic sanctions over innocent Iranian people and continues to fund the illegal Zionist settlers three generations removed from WWII, (many from New York) in the Middle East. Recently Obama signed a law (National Defense Authorization Act) making the “Patriot Act” permanent and the USA is now officially a military/police state with the habeas corpus long gone.
 
 
+6 # feloneouscat 2012-10-17 13:06
You have two options:

1. Stay with Obama.
2. Go with Romney and have the same thing AND a war with Iran and possibly a cold war start with Russia. Oh and a massive deficit since there is no way he is going to be able to balance the tax cuts. Romney represents change, but all for the worse.

I look to the future past the current candidates. We can reach that future far more easily through an Obama Admin than a Romney Admin.
 
 
-5 # seeuingoa 2012-10-17 13:44
I am sure that

kill list
indefinite detention and
tar sand pipeline

will not disappear in a Romney
presidency.

But listen !!

Wasn´t it started under the Obama
presidency?
 
 
+4 # KittatinyHawk 2012-10-17 17:06
Debate was refreshing. I saw a comfortable President. He like Biden answer well, and put the comments at the right time
President got the laugh over his investments, Romney didn't stop proving he is over the edge on subjects. OB is probably confident in his investments and that is good. He is not a trillionaire.

I expect other place like Yahoo to have more ranting and raving but I believe it is below us to continue expecting him to be more and more in one night.

Debate One: He had a bad, really bad moderator. I have seen better in middle school but they are not pro rethugs. Nittnes was on Meth.

Debate Two: Good moderator, had her stuff quick. Able to tell them both to stay. He was comfortable and his movements showed it. He is not a stander, or sitter. He walks and thinks, has to for a living. He is quick to respond that is why first debate was strange. I would not want to have watched more, seen them tire, get sloppy on answers.
The President used his time...he did use 4 extra minutes so I am sure Rotnit will bring that sniveling up
But I am ashamed of most of you who still were not satisfied. It tells me you never will be.You sure to talk the talk but you do not walk the walk.

I have had three debates, OB has spoken usually the truth. He was more stand up last night. He followed Biden well.
Yes there are lots of questions unanswered....t here always will be
 
 
+5 # Innocent Victim 2012-10-17 18:20
Yes, one question is why the moderator, Martha Raddich, a reporter, tacitly assumed in one of her questions that Iran is a threat to the US. That sounded very much like the kind of reporting that took us into war with Iraq and Afghanistan. Unfounded then; unfounded now.
 
 
0 # Innocent Victim 2012-10-17 17:22
Obama's Uneven Performances Explained

My explanation for Barack Obama's inferior performance, two weeks ago, and his more vital performance on Tuesday is simple:

Barack Obama is a narcissist, a man persuaded of his superiority. He has a grandiose vision of himself as President, a leader who could overcome partisanship, make Afghanistan into a democracy, and set fraudulent corporations on a path to righteousness without bothersome investigations, prosecutions, and re-regulation. He thought he could do these things by virtue of his great intelligence (his estimate) and affability.

A narcissist does not have to get down into the dust and gravel of conflict. He thinks he can remain aloof from his challengers and prevail. Two weeks ago, he had a cold shower and was made to realize that even he could be displaced and by a shoddy, business executive. The President's advisers settled him down to deal with the real world in place of the glorious one he inhabits in his mind. Will he recover from the first "debate" and win a second term? Makes no difference! Both candidates are not friends of any but the 1%.
 
 
+2 # bingers 2012-10-17 20:55
Not even close, your psychobabble proves to me that you haven't the slightest idea what you're talking about.

Now it might better apply to Romney, but Romney is definitely a sociopath of some sort.
 
 
0 # Innocent Victim 2012-10-19 07:20
Bingers: Your ignorance of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM) published by the American Psychiatric Association together with blindness to Barack Obama's unmistakable personality hallmarks explains your disbelief. Look up "Narcissistic Personality Disorder" and you will find Obama to a Tee. All the great scourges of history have been NPD cases. Fortunately, the political constraints on are President are still too strong for him to join his historical predecessors.
 
 
+4 # docproctoo 2012-10-18 07:14
I am offended by Romney on many fronts, but he offended me more in the most recent debate than at any other time. I was really angered, when he indicated that the President should sit down and "wait his turn" because the master was still speaking! Even if he hates Obama, as he and many of his elite Republicans do, his remarks were the height of arrogance and disrespect! If he does not respect President Obama, he MUST respect the office of the President! Is no one else offended by his "Slave Master" condescending remarks?
Had I been debating him, I would have been sorely tempted to deck him and suffer whatever consequences may have resulted from my actions!
 
 
-3 # Depressionborn 2012-10-18 07:30
For the record, when Obama became a Senator in 2005, he listed his net worth as $328,442. Now in his fourth year was POTUS, Obama's net worth is $11.8 million. All while in four years many good jobs are lost and median household income declines by $4,520. Go figure. Maybe even follow the money?
 
 
0 # Innocent Victim 2012-10-19 07:28
How did this inexperienced former senator manage to increase his net worth from the $0.3 million you reported to the present, almost $12 million? He was not a financial expert. Presumably, he has been busy with his meteoric political rise and being a family man, moving from Chicago to Washington, to the White House. How did he manage to almost quadruple his personal wealth, especially with the bad times of the past four years?
 
 
0 # Muzzi 2012-10-20 20:15
You wouldn't be happy if I told you. You are trying to destroy his reputation by insinuating something illegal was done. He didn't get $20,000 for each job he eliminated like your buddy Mitt. He isn't hiding his money overseas like your buddy Mitt. He is paying his fair share of taxes unlike your buddy Mitt.
He does have excellent financial advisors like your buddy Mitt. It is just that he is honest in his financial affairs, unlike your buddy Mitt.
 
 
-1 # Muzzi 2012-10-19 22:25
He has made money on the sale of his books. Your buddy Romney made $20,000 as a bonus on each employee's job he sent to China. I guess you think that is ethical? Your buddy Romney has NOT reported all of his income, preferring to hide it in the Cayman Islands and in his Swiss bank accounts. Obama is not hiding his money. He pays taxes on it.
 
 
0 # Innocent Victim 2012-10-20 11:39
You are as naive to believe he went from $0.3million to almost $12.0 million, a multiplier of more than 36 as you are to think I am a "buddy" of Romney. The major difference between your idol and Romney is that the former is already a war-criminal and the latter wants to be one.
 

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.

RSNRSN