A Debate Tale of Two Candidates: Obama Is Too Laid Back But Romney Is Playing It Safe... Really?

I cannot believe that some in the media are actually trying to pick up on the Republican talking point about President Obama's statement in the final debate about horses and bayonets, just like they sheepishly picked up the Right's talking point about his "not optimal" comment.
This post was published on the now-closed HuffPost Contributor platform. Contributors control their own work and posted freely to our site. If you need to flag this entry as abusive, send us an email.
Republican presidential candidate, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and President Barack Obama shake hands at the end of the last debate at Lynn University, Monday, Oct. 22, 2012, in Boca Raton, Fla. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)
Republican presidential candidate, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and President Barack Obama shake hands at the end of the last debate at Lynn University, Monday, Oct. 22, 2012, in Boca Raton, Fla. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)

Okay, so let me get this straight. When President Obama appears calm and laid back in a debate, he's labeled as "listless" and "ineffectual" but when Mitt Romney appears calm and laid back in a debate, he's labeled as being "conservative" and "playing it safe." And when President Obama goes on the attack in a debate, he's labeled as "snarky" and "trying to pick a fight" but when Mitt Romney goes on the attack in a debate, he's labeled as "energetic" and "aggressive"? Is that correct?

If this wasn't so sad it would be funny! When President Obama appeared laid back in the first debate, everyone chided him for being too controlled and seeming not to care. Pundits strongly condemned his demeanor and argued that he needed to be more energetic and challenge Mitt Romney on his statements. So it appears that in the final debate, President Obama tried to do just that and now David Gregory is saying that Obama was "determined to pick a fight" and other media pundits are saying that he appeared "snarky" and "angry"! Really??

It seems that Mitt Romney has been relegated to the Palin-esque standard of debating that as long as he didn't fall off of his chair dry heaving, he "did what he needed to do." Obama, in usual form, needed to be John F. Kennedy, Douglas MacArthur and Jim Brown all in one!

So it appears, as has been the case in many instances for the past 4-5 years, Obama simply can't win!

And now (to add insult to injury), I cannot believe that some in the media are actually trying to pick up on the Republican talking point about President Obama's statement in the final debate about horses and bayonets, just like they sheepishly picked up the Right's talking point about his "not optimal" comment. (See Jon Stewart's take here.

So for the intelligence impaired who are actually trying to make a federal case over how many bayonets we still have in the military, let's be clear: For the record, President Obama said we have "fewer" horses and bayonets, he did not say we have "none"! Ugh!

Good God are people really that dense?! There are times when I think the media gets a bad rap for doing what is a pretty tough job, and then there are times when I really, really want to slap them silly. I'm sorry but watching the news during election season is like watching a cartoon -- and if I want more Daffy Duck I can turn to the Cartoon Network!

Popular in the Community

Close

What's Hot