Mitt Romney-- Bad Dog!

I couldn't watch that debate on Wednesday. I knew it would suck. I watched the first 20 minutes and it sucked... so I went hiking in the hills behind my house and got back just as it was ending. I had a nice walk. And, of course, now I've read all about it and watched the YouTubes, etc. Before I left, I tweeted about what I was seeing (about 10 minutes into the debate). I was stunned and surprised-- though I'm not sure I should have been-- and I imagine the President was as well. Greg Sargent imagined it the same way I did: "At yesterday’s debate, Obama repeatedly appeared genuinely flummoxed by Romney’s claims about his own plans, and he did a poor job of adapting to Romney’s strategic obfuscation." As E.J. Dionne points out, Romney last night executed an impressive pivot away from the ideological approach he championed to get through the GOP primaries, and Obama, struggling to keep pace, spent too much time wandering around in a labyrinth of policy arguments and not enough time attacking, exposing, and clarifying the true nature of the ideological differences between the two men." This was my first tweet:

A minute later... this:

And then this morning I tried pointing the same thing out to deranged Bible thumping sociopath Bryan Fischer (although I'm not sure why):

But is "He just lied about everything" enough of a response to Romney's performance Wednesday? Amazing how many in the media-- Villagers particularly-- were eager to declare Romney the winner, completely disregarding how he could have been just makin' it up on the spot-- except he wasn't; it was all carefully calculated and premeditated. Here's the Obama ad that went up in the swing states a few hours after the debate

And then came a flood of articles from reporters and fact-checkers who were surprised anyone would lie so brazenly in front of a national audience. I mean, if Romney did one thing last night, it was to make sure anyone paying attention is aware he's a congenital liar who certainly can't be trusted-- not ever. We went with the 27 myths in 38 minutes narrative first thing in the morning. Barbara Morrill at Daily Kos had a more concise compendium, although she acknowledges that they just scratch the surface:

• When he claimed that "pre-existing conditions are covered under my plan." They're not.
• When he said that President Obama had "cut Medicare by $716 billion to pay for Obamacare." Obama didn't.
• When he denied proposing a $5 trillion tax cut. He did.
• When he said President Obama had "added almost as much to the federal debt as all the prior presidents combined." Not even close.
• When he resurrected "death panels." That was called "one of the biggest whoppers of the night."
• When he stated that half the green energy companies given stimulus funds had failed. Only if three out of nearly three dozen is half.

Krugman came close to calling Romney an out-and-out liar. "[T]he fact is that everything Obama said was basically true, while much of what Romney said was either outright false or so misleading as to be the moral equivalent of a lie."

Jonathan Chait at New York Magazine-- Romney's Successful Debate Plan: Lying. He hones in on taxes and healthcare. But does anyone who reads New York plan to vote for Romney anyway? Daily Kos? And I doubt many Romney supporters watch MSNBC-- and, believe me, Fox isn't fact-checking Romney's torrent of lies and distortions-- or take advice from Robert Reich. Reich mentions that Romney might be a fabulous actor. That might remind a certain subset of political neaderthals of Reagan, who could also sound convincing to lo-info voters.

But what struck me most was how much Obama allowed Romney to get away with: Five times Romney accused Obama of raiding Medicare of $716 billion, which is a complete fabrication. Obama never mentioned the regressiveness of Romney’s budget plan-- awarding the rich and hurting the middle class and the poor. He never mentioned Bain Capital, or Romney’s 47 percent talk, or Romney’s “carried-interest” tax loophole. Obama allowed Romney to talk about replacing Dodd-Frank and the Affordable Care Act without demanding that Romney be specific about what he’d replace and why. And so on. 

...Romney stayed on script. If you look at a transcript of his remarks you’ll see that he repeated the same lines almost word for word in different contexts. He has memorized a bunch of lines, and practiced delivering them. The overall effect is to make him seem assured and even passionate about his position. He said over and over that he cares about jobs, about small businesses, and ordinary Americans. But his policies and his record at Bain tell a very different story.

           The question now is whether Team Obama understands that our President must be more                  aggressive and commanding in the next two debates-- and be unafraid to respectfully pin Romney to the floor.