Five Random Observations After the Oct. 16th Presidential Debate

1.  Some of the television coverage "building up" the second presidential debate got really crazy.  News anchors and correspondents were all but saying this event WILL determine the outcome of the election.  While I could accept it was important for President Obama to rebound, I reject the notion that a 90-minute "performance" on television should ever be labled as that dominant a factor.  What does that say about our system?  It's one of a thousand reminders that our process is all about the media's influence.  It's the media that places the incredibly distorted, enormous weight on debates and the media that then subjectively "scores" the debates.  It's then the media that then "creates" "momentum" for one candidate and negativity for the other.  For example:  This year, the media went way, way overboard in its emphasis on Romney's supposedly "huge win" over Obama in the first debate.  (I argued that Romney lost because he relied on enormous lies)  What if the media had chosen to be more "balanced" in that post-debate coverage?  Well, Romney might not have been able to burst even with Obama. The media fueled a sizeable chunk of Romney's "momentum."  The media has become far too powerful in this whole game -- period.  Case closed.

  2.  It's 48 hours after the event and I am still disgusted that Mitt Romney treated the President with open disrespect in several moments during that debate.  I've never seen an incumbent President treated that way in my life.  Gee, I wonder why that happened. (sarcasm)  Romney thought he could get away with that and it reflects on his character, in my opinion.  First, Romney can act like a rude little baby at debates; he displayed that in Republican primary debates, when he became all uptight when any opponent really challenged him to his face.  He fussed about the moderators and the rules.  (He acts like he's back in a prep school competition..)  Second, he's been disrespectful in his rhetorical attacks and barbs aimed at Obama consistently on the campaign trail; so, this was an extension of that.  Third, and the big, ugly reason in my opinion:  Romney treats Obama condescendingly because Obama is black, and even if Romney himself is not racist, he acts like other white people who inexplicably still feel they don't have to apply the same standard of decency, respect and reciprocity to minorities.
How else can one explain Romney getting in Obama's face when: a)  he asked him rudely & sharply what permits existed for drilling oil, or, b) when he told Obama, in an abrupt, curt manner,  to stop asking a question and wait his turn, and, c) at the end, when Romney tried so hard for his "gotcha" moment by asking the President if he had just said he called the attack on the Libyan embassy "an act of terror."  Romney seemed to forget who he was talking to.  He acted like he was in a debate competition with "just another opponent" and all that mattered was his getting a win - by any means. 

3.  Romney's spontaneous reference to "binders with women" (referring to his recruitment efforts when he was the newly-elected governor of MA.) was very typical of an uncountable number of instances in this campaign when he's revealed he acts like a character out of a 1950s TV series.  Yes, to Romney, he still thinks it was a big deal that he and his team "found" so many qualified women to serve in his administration.  Romney, one senses, seems to be "stuck" in a time tunnel.  He seems to fit in with the Cleaver family or perhaps on "Father Knows Best" - although these shows might have been too far ahead for old-school, old-fashioned, old-values Mitt.

4.  I think, at the very end of the debate, when Romney thought he had "caught" President Obama in a contradiction, his very serious expression and his ultra-competitiveness were on display.  I've sensed for a long time that Romney would do almost anything to win this election.  Romney seemed oblivious to the fact that the President has just scolded him on national television for taking advantage of a tragedy to make political points.....Romney didn't care about that at all.  He was too busy trying to go for the jugular.  Question:  Would Romney "go for the jugular" for all the people in this country OR or just his elite constituents who are not in the infamous "47 percent" of the public who, Romney said, are dependent on governent and makes not effort to be responsible for themselves?

5. Romney demonstrated, again, that he's willing to lie openly, to deny, to distort just about anything in an  attempt to "look good" to voters and win.  When Obama pointed out the factual differences between him and Romney on women's health issues, Romney felt compelled to issue a quick denial, arguing, falsely that he didn't want to take decisionmaking away from women.  The facts all indicate Romney and Ryan support doing just that.  And, again, when Obama explained, this time, even more persuasively, that Romney's tax cut plan doesn't add up, Romney offered an empty reply about how one might pick any one of several tax deductions to eliminate as a way to pay for his cuts.  His answer was so openly a BS job to "sound good" and confuse voters. 
The problem is that the media, after this event, doesn't seize enough on Romney's deceptions.  Hopefully, the media will try to steer its audience toward the truth more in the last few weeks.  If not, Romney might suceeed in lying and distorting his way to the presidency.