COVER STORY: THE FIRST PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE

Posted by Francoise Mouly and Mina Kaneko

9:33 AM, OCT 6, 2012 • BY DANIEL HALPER

Bill Maher, a major donor to Barack Obama's super PAC, blasted the president's debate performance on his HBO show last night:

"I'm sorry, he sucked," said Maher last night. "He looked tired. He had trouble getting his answers out. Looks like he took me million and spent it all on weed!"

Maher has given a million dollars to support President Obama's super PAC.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/10/04/some-obama-campaign-aides-shell-shocked-after-debate.html

Some Obama Campaign Aides ‘Shell-Shocked’ After Debate

by James Warren Oct 4, 2012 3:13 PM EDT

The president’s team officially downplayed the debate, faulted Romney’s facts, and pledged to make adjustments. But some aides and alumni admitted Mitt changed the narrative last night. By James Warren

Mitt Romney’s debate performance could well trigger a “restart button” for his campaign, prompting a second look at him from those who have been curious but not really committed, according to President Obama’s former chief of staff.

“People had been set in their ways, with many thinking, ‘Obama is going to win,’” said William Daley, now back in Chicago after serving in the West Wing. “If this is a restart and a second look for those who have been soft, then that puts pressure on [Vice President Joe] Biden in the next big show,” meaning the vice-presidential debate with Rep. Paul Ryan on Oct. 11.

Reporters watch President Barack Obama speak during the final minutes of Wednesday night's presidential debate in Denver. (Doug Pensinger / Getty Images)

“What seems to be a victory in optics for Romney may create an opportunity for those people to take a second look. Looking at the polling going into the debate, he needed that,” said Daley, who oversaw Vice President Al Gore’s 2000 presidential campaign against George W. Bush.

“Opinion is that he had an extremely good night, and that is a big advantage,” said Daley. “That’s big for a guy on the ropes, now perhaps back with solid legs in the ring. Whether that now turns into a fundamental beginning of a reshape of the campaign is unknown.”

At least two current Obama campaign aides were more blunt than Daley and used the term “shell-shocked” over the Obama performance. There were various analyses of what went wrong, including finger-pointing at debate preparations. Those included claims that Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts, who played the role of Romney in mock debates, probably wasn’t tough and aggressive enough. (“He does, after all, want to be Secretary of State,” claimed one aide.)

Partly lost in the fray was Obama’s history as a good but not necessarily great debater with a style at times nonchalant and diffident. That’s what gave rise to the “No Drama Obama” moniker that gained currency during the 2008 campaign. “Sure was ‘No Drama Obama’ last night,” said a campaign aide who, like others in the Obama camp, pointed to what they deemed clearly misleading Romney comments, notably on his own tax and health-care plans.

The rather drab Obama performance might have an unintended consequence: launching a new media narrative declaring a Romney comeback, and a tightening of the race, conceded several people close to the campaign. There was, too, the concession that the president simply did a poor job in messaging the policy highlights of his administration in a telling, emotional way—exactly what former president Bill Clinton has been praised for, both in his own Democratic National Convention speech on Obama's behalf and on the campaign trail so far.

The buzz over the Denver face-off may also serve as a reminder of an errant piece of media conventional wisdom going into the 2012 campaign; namely thesupposedly growing irrelevance of political debates in an era of well-scripted candidates and a fragmented universe in which people get their news and analysis. That proved most vividly mistaken with what proved to be the engaging and important, if seemingly never-ending, debates during the Republican primaries.

“Opinion is that he had an extremely good night, and that is a big advantage,” said Daley. “That’s big for a guy on the ropes, now perhaps back with solid legs in the ring. Whether that now turns into a fundamental beginning of a reshape of the campaign is unknown.”

Now, said one Obama aide, we may have a “debate campaign,” in which the many events both candidates will take part in around the nation take a back seat to the likely hype, and perhaps large audiences, of both the Biden-Ryan debate and the final two presidential confrontations.

“If polls tighten, as they probably would do so normally,” said an Obama confidant, “then we’re frozen in Debate Land.”

http://www.michellesmirror.com/2012/10/this-debate-is-not-over-until-i-say-its.html

Friday, October 5, 2012

This debate is not over until I say it’s over!

Some people credit Big Guy’s debate performance – or lack-there-of – to nothing more than a momentary brain fart.

My turn? I’ll take “Who killed Osama” for $5000, Jim.

Others think it was due to global warming or simply the fact that BO has to bear the weight of the world on his tiny little shoulders.
Regardless of the cause, Team Obama was right back in the game yesterday with all of the“wit of the staircase” they could muster. Being on the campaign trail meant we could still use all of those smart repartees, witty comebacks and clever turns of phrase that didn’t occur to BO while he was standing face to shoes with Mitt Romney.

Butt with the assistance of our Hollywood writers Big Guy was right back on the stump yesterday, staging a one-man do-over. Only this time he had TOTUS stand in for Romney:

Back in the game, back in his comfort zone; debating himself. And WINNING!

BO had dozens of smart sounding sound bites, most of which evolved around one crucial point directed at the Romney camp: “liar, liar pants on fire!”

Oh! And this just in to our news room - our first official October surprise (unless you count the debate): Unemployment falls to 7.8%. Some people call it a “shock” others call it a “fraud.”AP reports, you decide:

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The U.S. unemployment rate fell to 7.8 percent last month, dropping below 8 percent for the first time in nearly four years. The rate fell because more people found work, a trend that could impact the presidential election.

The Labor Department says employers added 114,000 jobs in September. The economy also created 86,000 more jobs in July and August than first estimated. Wages rose in September and more people started looking for work.

The revisions show employers added 146,000 jobs per month from July through September, up from 67,000 in the previous three months. The unemployment rate fell from 8.1 percent in August, matching its level in January 2009 when President Barack Obama took office.

The decline could help Obama, who is coming off a disappointing debate against Mitt Romney.

Actually, it wasn’t really unexpected, we’ve been planning it all year. So although there were only 114,000 new jobs, there were 800,000 people who decided to sign up for those “work-at-home-part-time” jobs just last month! Or at least that’s the number we’re using, based on the Labor Department’s most current household survey.

Well the first Presidential Debate has come and gone..... let's look at the Winners and Losers from last night......

WINNERS

1 ) Romney... clearly exceeded expectations for the first debate. Brought new life to his campaign and took a big step to push aside what had been a stumbling general election campaign in the rear view mirror.... Romney was focused , more energetic , came across as Presidential , out debated the President , appeared to want to be there at the deabte and enjoy himself. Round one for Romney.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/decision2012/romney-obama-debate-could-be-pivot-point-in-campaign/2012/10/03/74fad02c-0d98-11e2-bd1a-b868e65d57eb_print.html

Romney goes on offense, forcing Obama to defend record

By Dan Balz and Amy Gardner, Published: October 3 | Updated: Thursday, October 4, 12:27 AM

DENVER — An energetic Mitt Romney launched a series of attacks against President Obama here Wednesday night, calling into question the president’s record on the economy, health care and the deficit, and arguing that he would take the country in a fundamentally different direction.
Obama sought to parry Romney’s criticisms, charging that his presidential rival favors a top-down approach to the economy that would reward the wealthiest Americans at the expense of the middle class and that the details of the Republican’s proposals don’t add up. But he found himself on the defensive repeatedly during their first debate, held at the University of Denver.
Romney came into the 90-minute exchange after several difficult weeks but appeared rejuvenated by the opportunity to take his case directly to Obama and the American people. He was well prepared and aggressive as he hammered the president. The contrast with Obama was striking, as the president appeared less energetic even as he rebutted some of Romney’s toughest attacks.
The debate is likely to give Romney what he needed most, which is a fresh look from voters — at least those who are undecided or open to changing their minds — and will change the conversation about the campaign, which for the past two weeks has been tilted in the president’s favor. Romney now faces the challenge of trying to build on his performance and keep the president on the defensive in the days ahead.
Romney offered conservative policies throughout the evening but he often sounded more moderate than he does in campaign appearances. He is likely to face a challenge from Obama and the Democrats in the coming days about the contrast in tone and posture on display during the night.
But Republicans were immediately cheered by the aggressiveness they saw in Romney and took it as a sign that he will wage a fierce battle between now and Nov. 6.
PBS’s Jim Lehrer moderated the forum, which included a more open format that encouraged a free-flowing discussion, and most of the exchanges focused on the economy, the federal budget deficit and health care. The debate was generally civil and proved to be one of the most substantive and detailed in recent memory.
The weak economy has long been Obama’s biggest obstacle to reelection. On Wednesday, he argued that, although the country faces problems, it has begun to “fight our way back” because of his policies and the resilience of the American people.

“Over the last 30 months, we’ve seen 5 million jobs in the private sector created. The auto industry has come roaring back. And housing has begun to rise. But we all know that we’ve still got a lot of work to do. And so the question here tonight is not where we’ve been but where we’re going.”
But Romney said the status quo “is not going to cut it” for struggling families. “Under the president’s policies, middle-income Americans have been buried. They’re just being crushed. Middle-income Americans have seen their income come down by $4,300. This is a tax in and of itself. I’ll call it the economy tax. It’s been crushing.”
Romney clearly came to the debate determined to change his image as someone who cares little for ordinary Americans, a view that was heightened by his dismissive comments about the roughly 47 percent of Americans who pay no income taxes.
Throughout much of the early part of the debate, he sought to portray himself as a protector of the middle class, not the wealthy. He said that he would not raise taxes on middle-class families and that he would not reduce the share of taxes paid by the wealthiest Americans.
Obama, however, said that Romney’s tax plan would do just that. He said his rival favors a $5 trillion tax cut and argued that eliminating loopholes and deductions for the wealthiest Americans would not provide enough revenue to avoid deepening the deficit. He said Romney would either have to cut into middle-class benefits or reduce spending on vital programs.
“The magnitude of the tax cuts that you’re talking about, Governor, would end up resulting in severe hardship for people but, more importantly, would not help us grow,” the president said.
Romney repeatedly has declined to specify what loopholes and deductions he would eliminate and passed up opportunities to do so again Wednesday. But he said Obama had mischaracterized his tax plan, saying that it does not include a $5 trillion cut.
“Let me repeat what I said,” Romney said. “I’m not in favor of a $5 trillion tax cut. That’s not my plan. My plan is not to put in place any tax cut that will add to the deficit.”
Obama and Romney clashed over Medicare, with both promising to protect the health-care program for seniors. Obama accused Romney of wanting to turn it into a voucher program, while Romney claimed that the president cut $716 million from Medicare to help pay for the Affordable Care Act.
Romney was eager to launch into a critique of the landmark legislation that he cited as his top example of programs that must be eliminated to close the federal deficit. “I apologize, Mr. President,” Romney added after referring to the program as Obamacare. “I use that term with respect.”
“I like it,” Obama quickly responded, but that was about their only real point of agreement.
Romney argued that the program would raise health-care costs and make it less likely that businesses would hire new workers. He accused Obama of establishing an unelected board to make health-care decisions for patients, and of cutting more than $700 billion from Medicare to help pay for the law. And he chastised the incumbent for “pushing through” legislation of such magnitude without a single Republican vote.
“I just don’t know how the president could have come into office — facing 23 million people out of work, rising unemployment, an economic crisis at the kitchen table — and spend his energy and passion for two years fighting for Obamacare instead of fighting for jobs for the American people,” Romney said. “It has killed jobs.”

Obama pushed back, particularly on the point about the cut to Medicare, which he explained, and independent analysis has shown, does not include direct reductions to benefits for seniors but rather ratchets down payments to providers, including insurance companies.
The president noted that Romney has promised to repeal Obamacare on his first day in office, yet more recently has said he wants to keep some of its provisions, notably its protections for patients with preexisting conditions and the rights of young adults to remain on their parents’ insurance plans.
Obama also reminded viewers that his law was modeled heavily on the health-care law that Romney championed when he was governor of Massachusetts. “We’ve seen this model work really well in Massachusetts,” the president said.
“He now says he’s going to replace Obamacare and ensure that all the good things that are in it are going to be in there and you don’t have to worry,” Obama added. “And at some point, I think the American people have to ask themselves: Is the reason that Governor Romney is keeping all these plans to replace secret because they’re too good?”
Romney defended his plan in Massachusetts, saying he had not raised taxes and had pushed through the bill with significant numbers of Democratic votes.
On energy, Obama said Romney would continue to favor tax breaks for the oil industry. Romney retorted by noting that the Obama administration has invested more than $90 billion in green-energy projects, “about about 50 years’ worth of what oil and gas receives.”
On regulatory issues, Romney attacked the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, which overhauled regulation of the financial industry, but he said that some regulations are needed and that he would keep them. Obama scoffed at Romney’s promise to repeal Wall Street regulation that he signed into law, saying: “Does anybody out there think that the big problem we had is that there was too much oversight and regulation of Wall Street? Because if you do, then Governor Romney is your candidate.”
Near the end of the debate, Lehrer asked the candidates how they might make Washington work more effectively. Romney said he would do what he had done with a Democratic legislature in Massachusetts: work out compromises.
Obama said that might be difficult if one of Romney’s first efforts were to repeal the Affordable Care Act, which he said would anger Democrats in Congress. And he accused Romney of being hostage to the most conservative elements of the Republican Party.
“I’ve got to tell you, Governor Romney, when it comes to his own party during the course of this campaign, has not displayed that willingness to say no to some of the more extreme parts of his party,” he said.

and from Dick Morris , a view of the debate results from Bill Clinton's former main man....

http://www.dickmorris.com/romneys-real-debate-victories/#more-9874

Romney’s Real Debate Victories

By Dick Morris on October 4, 2012

Obviously, Romney won last night’s debate. His passion, charisma, energy, eye-contact, personality, force of argument, and earnest compassion showed through and contrasted with a washed out, tired, hesitant Obama.

But seeing the debate from a professional’s eye, Romney scored a number of key victories in the turf wars that underlie this campaign. These victories are likely to last and shape the final month of this race long after the glow from Romney’s performance has faded.

1. Romney got out from under Obama’s character assassination negative ads. By failing to raise the Cayman Islands bank account, the 47% speech, Bain Capital or the tax return issue in the debate, he almost dismissed them from the campaign. Good-bye two hundred million dollars in advertising.

If Obama really believed that Romney was as callous, heartless, and dishonest as his ads make him out to be, he would have raised the issues in the debate. It almost belies the statement, “I’m Barack Obama and I approve this message,” that begins or ends every one of his negative ads. If the candidate doesn’t believe in his own negative attacks enough to articulate them in a debate, why should the rest of us base our vote on them?

2. Romney insulated himself — with Obama’s consent — from the doubts of the elderly about his policy on their benefits. After the 47% comments, Romney risked losing the elderly for fear that he meant to curtail their entitlements. But Obama helpfully agreed that his Social Security policy did not differ from Romney’s at all and that either way the benefits would be ok. And he agreed that neither he nor his opponent would cut Medicare for those now over 65 or those closing in on retirement. So the 47% is now aimed at welfare, food stamps, and Medicaid which is the target Romney originally intended and Obama let him get away with it.

3. Obama let Romney sell the notion that he was cutting Medicare for current beneficiaries by $716 billion and let Romney repeat that stat without contradiction. And he let Romney inject the 15 member board — the rationing board — into the debate without trying to blunt Romney’s accusation that it would decide on who gets what treatment. Obama could have embarrassed Romney by pointing out that Ryan kept that cut in his budget (since backed away from it) but didn’t do so. Now this campaign will be about two issues, not just one. Now the economy and Obamacare will be the fulcrums on which this race with hinge.

4. Romney was able to make the debate, and therefore the race, about big issues like the size of government, the impact of taxes on growth, the need to drill for oil, Obamacare and rationing. He elevated not just his game but the race to these fundamental questions on all of which Republicans and Romney have an advantage.

5. He explained well how a tax increase for the “wealthy” was really a tax increase on small businesses that hire half of all American workers. By explaining that these owners are taxed as individuals not as corporations (Subchapter S) without getting into the weeds, he made us understand that fighting these taxes is not about battling for yachts and private planes but about creating jobs.

Therefore, Romney took away Obama’s negative campaign, his class warfare, his entitlement issue, the Medi-scare tactic, and much of the president’s case. In subsequent debates, Obama will be bound by what he said last night. He cannot undo his concessions and without doing so, it will be very hard for him to reconquer the ground he has lost.

2) Debate Process amid high viewer tune in for Round One.... Round Two will be huge at this point - note that intial estimate of 58 million now revised up to 70 million...

http://hotair.com/archives/2012/10/04/58-million-viewers-debate-ratings-top-first-debate-from-2008/

58 million viewers: Debate ratings top first debate from 2008

POSTED AT 4:41 PM ON OCTOBER 4, 2012 BY ALLAHPUNDIT

The last time a beating this brutal drew a wider audience was Ali-Foreman, I believe.

More than 58 million people watched the first Presidential debate last night between President Obama and Mitt Romney, up substantially from the first debate in the 2008 election cycle, which had 52.4 million viewers.

Fox News was the most-watched cable news network during the debate, and will likely be the most-watched network on TV, though final broadcast numbers will not be released until after 4 PM.

The second Obama/McCain debate in 2008 drew 63.2 million but those ratings were goosed by off-the-charts public interest in Palin’s VP debate held five days earlier. Ryan/Biden won’t build the same degree of curiosity for Romney/Obama II, but the fact that Romney destroyed The One yesterday might. Casual voters who passed on last night’s show will see the headlines today and wonder if Romney can do it again; pair that with the fact that the next debate is a townhall format, which adds a bit of unpredictability, and you might see huge ratings on October 16. Then again, the first debate is usually (but not always) the highest-rated of the three, probably because of the novelty of seeing the combatants finally together on stage and dueling. That being so, if there’s any debate to which you want to bring your A-game, it’s the first — which is why desperate rationalizations like this are even dumber and lamer than they appear:

I promised you the Luntz focus-group video in last night’s thread but it wasn’t posted until late, so here it is at last. (MSNBC’s focus group also agreed that Romney won.) Can’t wait to see which new persona O rolls out 12 days from now to overcompensate for last night’s deficiencies. If you disliked him as the passive, lethargic incumbent forced to defend a failed presidency, you’ll loathe the angry, table-pounding class warrior who wants to know Mitt Romney’s annual effective tax rates since 1970 and wants to know them now, mister.

Jake Tapper

✔

@jaketapper

Nielsen: An estimated 67.2 million people watched the debate.

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/americas/2012/07/201272910598367218.html

Romney 'supports' Israel's stance on Iran

US Republican presidential hopeful holds high-level talks in Jerusalem on how to handle fears over Iran's nuclear aims.

Last Modified: 29 Jul 2012 16:07

Feedback

Mitt Romney, the presumptive US Republican presidential nominee, has held high-level talks in Israel about how to handle fears over Iran's nuclear ambitions, on a visit aimed at burnishing his foreign policy credentials.

"Like you, we are very concerned about the development of nuclear capabilities on the part of Iran and feel it is unacceptable for Iran to become a nuclear-armed nation," Romney said after meeting President Shimon Peres on Sunday.

"The threat it would pose to Israel, the region and the world is incomparable and unacceptable."

Romney would support Israel if it were to decide it had to use military force to stop Iran from developing a nuclear
weapon, a senior aide said ahead of the planned meetings in Jerusalem.

"If Israel has to take action on its own, in order to stop Iran from developing that capability, the governor would respect
that decision," Dan Senor, Romney's senior national security aide, told reporters travelling with the candidate.
'Nuclear folly'
The Republican challenger, who will face off against President Barack Obama in November's US election, flew in from Britain late on Saturday for a one-day visit expected to focus on Iran's nuclear programme, which Israel and much of the West believes is a covert attempt to develop atomic weapons.
"Iran and its effort to become a nuclear-capable nation [is one] which I take with great seriousness, and look forward to chatting with you about further actions that we can take to dissuade Iran from their nuclear folly," Romney told Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu earlier on Sunday in remarks carried on Israeli public radio.
He also said the two could discuss "developments about the region" including in Syria and Egypt.
Netanyahu told him it was important to have "a strong and credible military threat" because sanctions and diplomacy "so far have not set back the Iranian programme by one iota".
"I think it's important to do everything in our power to prevent the Ayatollahs from possessing that capability," he said.
"And that's why I believe that we need a strong and credible military threat, coupled with the sanctions, to have a chance to change that situation."
Romney was also to meet Salam Fayyad, the Palestinian prime minister, later on Sunday and give a statement on foreign policy.

LOSERS

1 ) OBAMA - can he deliver coherent thoughts without a teleprompter ( note the troubles in denver today and the fact the teleprompter was back by the time he got to Wisconsin )

Wisconsin.....

A Rattled Obama After Debate: Let's 'Export More Jobs'

Fire it up

145

Denver.......

But just a quick read of the commentary from the Left tells you all you need to know about last night...

http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com/2012/10/live-blogging-the-first-presidential-debate-2012.html

10.31 pm. Look: you know how much I love the guy, and you know how much of a high information viewer I am, and I can see the logic of some of Obama's meandering, weak, professorial arguments. But this was a disaster for the president for the key people he needs to reach, and his effete, wonkish lectures may have jolted a lot of independents into giving Romney a second look.

Obama looked tired, even bored; he kept looking down; he had no crisp statements of passion or argument; he wasn't there. He was entirely defensive, which may have been the strategy. But it was the wrong strategy. At the wrong moment.

The person with authority on that stage was Romney - offered it by one of the lamest moderators ever, and seized with relish. This was Romney the salesman. And my gut tells me he sold a few voters on a change tonight. It's beyond depressing. But it's true.

There are two more debates left. I have experienced many times the feeling that Obama just isn't in it, that he's on the ropes and not fighting back, and then he pulls it out. He got a little better over time tonight. But he pulled every punch. Maybe the next two will undo some of the damage. But I have to say I think it was extensive.

*****

http://dailycaller.com/2012/10/04/carville-mitt-romney-came-with-a-chainsaw/

Add CNN’s James Carville to the list of Democrats questioning President Barack Obama’s performance

against Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney on Wednesday.

In CNN’s wrap-up of its debate coverage, Carville, a campaign adviser to former President Bill Clinton

, gave Obama’s campaign high marks but added that Obama probably didn’t go by the playbook his campaign wanted him to.

“Let’s be real,” Carville said. “They have run a very good campaign thus far. I don’t think that President Obama did what this campaign wanted him to do. I think he was off his game tonight. But let’s don’t go overboard here. It will be like a big sort of pushback. … My point is this — President Obama came in, he wanted to have a conversation. It takes two people to have a conversation. Mitt Romney

came in with a chainsaw. He’s trying to talk to a chainsaw.”

****

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1012/82000.html

Left-leaning commentators hit President Barack Obama hard on TV and the Internet after the first presidential debate in Denver on Wednesday night, saying GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney handily defeated his more experienced opponent.

MSNBC hosts were “stunned” by Obama’s performance, suggesting the president was rusty for not having debated in four years.

“I don’t think he explained himself very well on the economy. I think he was off his game. I was absolutely stunned tonight,” Ed Schultz said.

“Where was Obama tonight?” Chris Matthews asked.

Matthews said Romney addressed Obama “like the prey. He did it just right. I’m coming at an incumbent. I’ve got to beat him. You gotta beat the champ and I’m gonna beat him tonight. And I don’t care what this guy moderator, whatever he thinks he is, because I’m going to ignore him. What was Romney doing? He was winning.”

(See also: Obama's best 5 debate lines)

“It does remind you that the last debate Mitt Romney had was seven months ago and the last debate that Barack Obama had was four years ago,” said Maddow.

The Daily Beast’s Andrew Sullivan called Obama “tired,” “bored” and wrote that he might have even lost the election.

“He choked. He lost. He may even have lost the election tonight,” Sullivan wrote, later adding, “Obama looked tired, even bored; he kept looking down; he had no crisp statements of passion or argument; he wasn’t there. He was entirely defensive, which may have been the strategy. But it was the wrong strategy. At the wrong moment.”

Sullivan, an Obama supporter, was even more negative on Twitter, calling Obama’s performance “terrible” and “political malpractice.”

(See also: Complete coverage of the Colorado presidential debate)

“This is a rolling calamity for Obama. He’s boring, abstract, and less human-seeming than Romney!” he wrote. “He’s throwing the debate away.”

Another Obama supporter, liberal comedian Bill Maher, went on a similar Twitter rant, firing off such comments as, “Obama made a lot of great points tonight. Unfortunately, most of them were for Romney.”

Howard Fineman, editorial director of the Huffington Post Media Group, said on MSNBC that Romney delivered “a big wake-up call” to the Obama campaign on Wednesday night.

“It’s a classic case of a president kind of showing up and figuring that because he’s president he going to get extra points. It didn’t work that way tonight. And it’s a big wake-up call to the Obama campaign with 34 days in the race,” Fineman said.

2) Obama's Dream Team of advisers..... Val Jarrett and Michelle - if looks could kill ! the beatings will continue until Obama's performance improves !

If there’s still any doubt in your mind as to how BO did last night, look no further than the faces in the audience of his two chief “advisors”:

h/t for the photo - http://www.michellesmirror.com/2012/10/obama-debacle-not-good-idea-to-believe.html

The smile that says it all: Romney celebrates debate win as top Obama aide admits defeat and promises change of strategy

Mitt Romney revels in aftermath of crushing debate victory

Obama strategist David Axelrod admits presentation is 'not President's strong suit' and promises re-set of debate planning

Democrat comes out fighting in Denver speech to supporters

By TOBY HARNDEN IN DENVER and HUGO GYE

PUBLISHED: 11:54 EST, 4 October 2012 | UPDATED: 15:56 EST, 4 October 2012

Comments (195)

Barack Obama's top strategist said that the campaign will take a 'hard look' at how to approach future debates in the light of last night's failure - and appealed to the media to challenge Mitt Romney on the issues which the President avoided in Denver.

All but stating that the Republican had won the debate, David Axelrod conceded that the performance aspect was 'not the President's strong suit in these events' but insisted that 'I don't see us adding huge amounts of additional prep time.'

The remarks came after the Obama campaign was left reeling by Mr Romney's knockout performance in the candidates' first head-to-head clash, with polls suggesting that voters regarded the former governor of Massachusetts as the debate winner by a margin of more than two to one.

and.....

http://hotair.com/archives/2012/10/04/team-obama-goes-into-emergency-restrategizing-mode/

Team Obama goes into emergency-restrategizing mode

POSTED AT 4:01 PM ON OCTOBER 4, 2012 BY ERIKA JOHNSEN

After that rather embarrassing performance last night, Team Obama is changing tack at warp speed. They’ve certainly got their work cut out for them, considering what will be the most effective ways to tear down Mitt Romney and put President Obama back on top. They’re still using the recent “either Romney must raise taxes on the middle class, or hemust increase the deficit, those are the only two possible outcomes”-line, but adding some fun new framing. As BuzzFeed summarizes,

President Barack Obama and his aides rapidly reversed their strategic course Thursday morning, shifting the center of their attacks on Mitt Romney back toward the oldest criticisms of the Republican: That he’s a flip-flopper.

Democrats had long been torn over whether to portray Romney as too conservative, or too inconsistent, for the electorate — realizing that the attacks are inconsistent with one another. And since this spring, they seemed to have settled on the former, casting Romney as a conservative whose policies of cutting taxes and spending, and on abortion and other social issues, are too far right for most voters.

Thursday they returned abruptly to the earlier line. …

Obama spokesman Ben LaBolt said the campaign’s task over the next several days is to “Make sure every voter understands the positions Mitt Romney danced around last night.”

President Obama was already out on the attack at a campaign rally in Denver earlier this morning, arguing that “the very spirited fellow” onstage last night just “couldn’t have been the real Mitt Romney”:

While the real Mitt Romney has been promising $5 trillion in tax cuts and saying the country doesn’t need more teachers, Obama said, “the fellow onstage last night” said the opposite.

“The man onstage last night, he does not want to be held accountable for the real Mitt Romney’s decisions and what he’s been saying for the last year. And that’s because he knows full well that we don’t want what he’s been selling for the last year,” Obama said.

In much the same vein, Obama for America has released their latest ad, wondering, “Why won’t Mitt Romney level with us?”

David Axelrod lamented about that foxy Mitt Romney during a conference call this morning, via Politico:

“What the president hoped to avoid was a situation where you had two politicians standing there insulting each other instead of offering ideas for the future of the country, but you know, you have to strike a balance,” Axelrod said in a conference call with reporters. “You can’t allow someone to stand there and basically manhandle the truth about their own record and ideas and about yours and not deal with that. I’m sure that is a takeaway from this debate.” …

“This was the first chance for the president to see how Gov. Romney operates in these debates first hand,” he said. “You have to make some adjustments to the fact that, you know, he is kind of a serial, …artful dodger. That makes it a more challenging kind of event.”

So, sounds like Team Obama has decided on their post-first debate “adjustments” and that that’s the type of thing we’re going to be hearing a lot over at least the next few days — Mitt Romney is dishonest, we can’t keep up with his changing storylines, he’s a rhetorical trickster, rabble rabble rabble. Following Team Obama’s lead, the liberal blogs are all buzzing about the $5 trillion tax cut moment as one of Romney’s biggest weaknesses from the night, but here’s a simple explanation from the CSMonitor:

It is true that a central facet of Mitt Romney’s economic plan is a 20 percent across-the-board reduction in marginal tax rates, plus elimination of the estate tax and the alternative minimum tax (AMT). Do the math on how much money the federal government would forgo as a result of this, and it’s about $456 billion a year. Over 10 years, that rounds up to $5 trillion. That’s the calculus behind the “$5 trillion tax cut” figure that Obama cites.

However, that’s only part of the tax plan. Romney has said he would make his overall tax changes revenue-neutral. He’d hack out deductions, exemptions, and other exclusions to broaden the tax base, for one thing. For another, he says that lowering marginal rates would increase economic activity, and hence tax revenue. These changes would counterbalance any revenue lost from rate reductions, according to Romney.

3) Iran - No wiggle room if Obama loses , no more four corner offense approach to nuclear talks.... no more clear space between US and Israel regarding Iran and their nuclear program - and what is or isn't a redline....

http://www.debka.com/article/22392/White-House-irked-by-Netanyahu%E2%80%99s-%E2%80%9Cred-line%E2%80%9D-speech-reverts-to-Iran-diplomacy

White House irked by Netanyahu’s “red line” speech, reverts to Iran diplomacy

DEBKAfile Special Report September 28, 2012, 7:53 AM (GMT+02:00)

Tags: Binyamin Netanyahu

Iran nuclear

Barack Obama

Intelligence

Hillary Clinton

Netanyahu's red line shown to the UN

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton berated Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu for the powerful presentation of his case for confronting Iran with red lines instead of hitherto failed diplomacy and sanctions in his speech to the UN General Assembly Thursday, Sept. 27. This is reported byDEBKAfile’s Washington sources.
Neither released a statement from their conversation of an hour and a quarter one-on-one shortly after the speech.
Our sources report that Clinton made it clear that President Barack Obama would not tolerate the Israeli prime minister having a say in his Iran agenda. He remained committed to diplomacy regardless of Netanyahu’s warning that it was getting “late, very late” to stop a nuclear Iran.
Clinton accordingly announced a decision by the world powers to go into another round of nuclear negotiations with Iran, although after the breakdown of diplomacy in July, they expected an improved Iranian offer. EU foreign executive Catherine Ashton was directed to get in touch with Iran’s nuclear negotiator Saeed Jalilee for another attempt to set up talks, although when the two officials met in Istanbul on Sept. 18, they made no headway.
DEBKAfile: US steps early Friday Sept. 28 put the clock back five days to Monday when Obama dismissed Netanyahu’s advocacy of agreed red lines for warning Iran off its nuclear bomb program as “background noises” which he systematically blocked. This reversal came after White House and Israeli officials had begun discussing moving the critical timeline for that program to late spring, early summer 2013, instead of this year.
DEBKAfile reported earlier:

Addressing the UN General Assembly Thursday, Sept. 27 Israel Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu graphically depicted Israel’s red line for Iran. He held up a simple diagram showing that Iran had covered 70 percent of the distance to a nuclear bomb and must be stopped before it reached the critical stage next spring or early summer of 2013.
He stressed that it is getting late, very late to stop a nuclear Iran.
The best way, he said, is to lay down a clear red line on the most vulnerable element of its nuclear program: uranium enrichment. “I believe that if faced with a clear and credible red line, Iran will back down and may even disband its program,” he said.

Red lines prevent wars, don’t start them and in fact deterred Iran from blocking the Strait of Hormuz.

Israel and the US are in discussion over this issue, said Netanyahu. “I’m sure we can forge a way forward together."
He went on to accuse Iran of spreading terrorist networks in two dozen countries and turning Lebanon and Gaza into terror strongholds. Hoping a nuclear-armed Iran will bring stability is like hoping a nuclear al Qaeda will bring world peace, the prime minister remarked.
DEBKAfile quotes some Washington sources as disclosing that the White House and Israel emissaries have come to an understanding that Israel will hold back from attacking Iran’s nuclear sites before the US election in November, while a special team set up by President Barack Obama completes a new paper setting out the end game for Iran.
He put the team to work after concluding that negotiations with Iran had exhausted their usefulness. Gary Samore, top presidential adviser on nuclear proliferation, leads the team.
Netanyahu’s citing of late spring, early summer 2013, as the critical point on Iran’s path to a nuclear bomb appears to confirm that he has agreed to delay military action against Iran following negotiations with the White House on the next agreed steps. Our sources report that the prime minister was represented in those talks by Defense Minister Ehud Barak and National Security Adviser Yakov Amidror.
According to another view, which is current in Washington’s intelligence community, Israel was finally persuaded to delay by fresh intelligence presented by the Obama administration which showed that Israeli estimates were overly pessimistic in judging the timeline for Iran’s nuclear facilities to be buried in “immunity zones.” That timeline extended to spring 2013, leaving Israel five to six months up to April-May for ordering a military operation against those sites.
However, we have learned that Israeli intelligence circles dispute their American colleagues’ estimate as “interesting” but inaccurate. Netanyahu, in his speech, confirmed that Washington and Jerusalem were constantly exchanging views and evaluations on the state of Iran’s nuclear program.
He also made the point that while intelligence services, American and Israeli alike, had remarkable aptitudes, their estimates on Iran were not foolproof. He was referrng to the Pentagon claim that when Iran was ready to build a bomb, American intelligence would know about it in good time.

4) Europe - as Europe's politicians have chosen Obama , they might find a cold shoulder if Obama loses in November....

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/10/04/us-europe-us-debate-idUSBRE8930Y520121004

(Reuters) - President Barack Obama's lackluster performance in the first U.S. election debate provoked uneasiness in European capitals on Thursday, where hopes are mostly, if unofficially, pinned on his securing a second term.

While a lot can change before the November 6 vote, and Obama and Republican challenger Mitt Romney will go head to head twice more before then, polling conducted immediately after the debate showed Romney came out overwhelmingly on top.

A flash poll by CNN showed 67 percent of viewers thought Romney had 'won', with just 25 percent for Obama. Intrade, an online prediction market, cut Obama's re-election prospects from 74 percent to 66 percent.

In Europe, where leaders and finance officials have worked closely with the Obama administration over the past 2-1/2 years trying to resolve the euro area debt crisis, there was particular consternation at Romney's singling out of deficit-ridden Spain as a poorly administered economy.

"Romney is making analogies that aren't based on reality," Foreign Affairs Minister Jose Manuel Garcia-Margallo told reporters after a meeting of his centre-right party.

Leading Spanish daily El Pais highlighted the fact that Spain was the only European country mentioned, and contrasted Romney's negative depiction of it with Obama's praise for Spain's renewable energy policies during the 2008 campaign.

"Spain has never been mentioned in a presidential debate as a symbol of failure," the left-leaning newspaper lamented. "What happened last night makes history. And not in a good way."

Political commentators in France and Germany registered surprise at Obama's underwhelming performance, saying the election could be much tighter as a result.

"Obama showed a lack of desire to be president, which could put him on shaky ground as a presidential candidate," said liberal German news magazine Der Spiegel.

"It's now clear that to get back into the White House the U.S. president needs running shoes, not flip-flops."

France's Le Monde appeared equally surprised by Obama's sub-par performance. "Where did the favorite go?" it asked on its front page, with a headline below saying: "Obama fails his first televised debate against an incisive Romney."

LEANING OBAMA'S WAY

In private, many EU diplomats have no qualms about saying they want Obama re-elected; it is no secret that many European countries, whether led by centre-left or centre-right governments, are more broadly aligned with the Democrats when it comes to social and tax policy, the environment and a range of foreign-affairs issues.

That is something Obama has sought to exploit in the past. In the run-up to a G8 meeting at Camp David in May, White House officials firmly pressed their European counterparts to rally behind Obama's policy initiatives, according to those involved.

"It was like all of the G8 apart from Russia and Japan were expected to be part of the Obama re-election campaign," the chief of staff of one European leader told Reuters at the time.

Washington has also applied quiet pressure on Europe in recent months about the need to avoid a major blow-up in the debt crisis ahead of the election, in part so as not to rattle the U.S. economy, several EU officials have told Reuters.

Europe's leaders have good reason to go along; they want to keep a politically risky crisis under wraps, too, and they want to expand the close working relationship they have developed with Obama's administration over the past four years.

"The Europeans have a general uneasiness about a Romney presidency," said Jan Techau, the director of Carnegie Europe.

"It's not because they don't like him, but there are a lot of neoconservative policy advisers who would come back into office under a Romney presidency, and that is a prospect that a lot of European leaders are not comfortable with.

"There's a general tendency to stick to what you know and what you have been working with," he told Reuters.

"DEAL WITH IT"

Romney has also not done much to endear himself to the Old World. During a visit to Britain ahead of the Olympics in July he cast doubt on how well prepared London was to host the games, and in Israel days later he appeared to criticise Palestinian culture, leading to widespread condemnation.

One of Romney's advisers on a "Europe working group" is Nile Gardiner, a Briton who was an aide to former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher and now works for the conservative Heritage Foundation in Washington.

In an opinion piece in the Washington Times last month, Gardiner was decidedly downbeat on Europe, saying the continent was in terminal decline and European integration was misguided.

"The European Project is falling apart, drowning in a sea of debt, and driven by bureaucrats in Brussels who lack any semblance of democratic accountability," he wrote.

Those sorts of opinions among the circle around Romney have raised hackles in Europe and fuelled hopes that his challenge for the White House will fail.

Obama still holds an advantage in opinion polls, including a daily Reuters/IPSOS tracking poll that gives him a 47 percent to 41 percent lead over Romney, a margin that has held fairly steady since mid-September.

With just 33 days before the election, Romney still has a hill to climb to unseat Obama, but two more strong performances in the debates could tip undecided voters his way.

In Europe, leaders are watching closely and will be ready to suppress their Romney reservations if need be.

"Even though we have a natural predilection for Democratic presidents, we'll embrace the next U.S. president whoever he is," said one diplomat in Brussels. "We just have to deal with it."

5) Syria - after his poor performance on domestic policy , does Obama have to be " foreceful " on foreign policy now ? Which we be the subject of Debate number two - if so , bad news for Syria....

http://www.infowars.com/report-turkey-demands-us-impose-no-fly-zone-over-syria/

Report: Turkey Demands US Impose No Fly Zone Over Syria

Washington gives green light for Turkey’s de facto declaration of war

Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
October 4, 2012

Turkish Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan has asked the United States to impose an immediate “no fly zone” over areas of Syria in the aftermath of a mortar attack which killed five Turkish civilians, according to a report by Israeli intelligence outfit DebkaFile.

Following the attack, which evidence suggests was actually carried out by FSA rebels and not Syrian forces, Erdogan “Asked Washington….whether the Syrian attack would serve as the pretext for imposing a no-fly zone over northern and central Syria with US Air Force participation,” according to the report.

Obama administration officials flatly refused Erdogan’s request, citing recent intelligence which suggests that Syrian President Bashar Assad will not be able to hold on to power for any longer than six months.

As we saw with Libya, a “no fly zone” is merely a euphemism for aerial bombardment and aggressive regime change.

Having been denied the no fly zone, Turkey responded by using artillery barrages to carve out a 10 kilometer deep buffer strip inside Syria, targeting military bases and outposts.

Although Washington refused to back a no fly zone, they did give the green light for Turkey to launch its own attacks inside Syrian territory, a move that was rubber stamped by the Turkish parliament earlier today. The buffer zone will allow opposition fighters, many of whom are Al-Qaeda terrorists, to more easily acquire weapons to conduct terrorist bombings in Aleppo and Damascus.

Despite the fact that Turkey has authorized and is conducting military strikes inside Syria and killing Syrian troops, not to mention having headquartered, trained, funded and armed militants to carry out terrorist attacks inside Syria, Turkey’s political leaders are still simultaneously claiming they are not at war with Syria.

While the United Nations has condemned Syria for an attack that in all likelihood wasn’t even carried out by Syrian forces, the global body has remained silent on Turkey’s hostile response, an act of war that has killed “a large number of Syrian soldiers.”

Although Turkey claims Syria has “apologized” for yesterday’s mortar attack, circumstantial evidence strongly suggests it was carried out by the same FSA militants being backed by Turkey.

German news channel ZDF broadcast two separate reports that stated Syrian rebels had taken responsibility for the attack in Akçakale.

In addition, a newly released video shows Syrian rebels purportedly in the very region that the mortar attack took place showing off mortar shells and taking credit for the attack.

As we reported earlier, Turkey’s assault, combined with Israel’s posturing in beefing up security on the Golan Heights, mirrors precisely a Brookings Institution report released earlier this year which described the pretext for military intervention inside Syria that would lead to regime change.

WHY WAS OBAMA's PERFORMANCE SO POOR ?

Leading up to the debate , a series of events / gaffes / mistakes / overt attacks the White House and Obama personally against - parameters set forth in the post below.... in addition , consider a couple of additional items from just this week - did they take / have a cumulative toll on Obama who seemed disinterested / passive / unfocused / unprepared and longing to be anywhere else but on stage last night ? First my prior blog post as a starting point , then consider that other items that hit this week.... Personal attacks including so called Chicago Style Politics - taking a toll on Obama it would appear.

http://fredw-catharsisours.blogspot.com/2012/09/things-to-watch-for-in-this-weeks.html

http://hillbuzz.org/time-to-tell-everyone-you-know-about-jeremiah-wrights-down-low-club-barackobama-presobama-26407

Time to tell everyone you know about Jeremiah Wright’s “Down Low Club” #BarackObama #PresObama

Posted on October 3, 2012 by Kevin DuJan // Breaking News, Featured Content

Dr. Jerome Corsi has bravely broken the longstanding embargo on talking about Jeremiah Wright’s “Down Low Club” at Trinity United Church of Christ here in Chicago. You can read his article on this HERE, via WND.

Like “Fight Club”, the first rule of the “Down Low Club” is to never talk about the “Down Low Club”. If you do, you will be murdered. That’s not a joke. There were a string of murders from 2005-2007 that involved men who were killed because they had knowledge of Jeremiah Wright’s Down Low Club and the closeted gay black men who partook in the club’s orchestrated cover-up of their homosexuality.

In Corsi’s article, he talks about three of the murders (including Donald Young, whom you may have heard of). I also believe a string of bizarre assassination-style killings in Boystown around that same time are also linked to the Down Low Club…but these were white men on the north side of Chicago who were murdered in their apartments by someone the police here never would admit was a serial killer. I moved to Chicago in the spring of 2005 and back then the strip of gay clubs called Halsted was plastered with flyers warning guys to be careful with whom they were bringing home since a murderer was loose killing guys who frequented the bars in Boystown; for those who can remember back to the 90s, this is the same area where Jeffrey Dahmer picked up some of his victims. Chicago was also where John Wayne Gacy (a delegate for Jimmy Carter!) also hunted.

Back then, Mayor Daley did his best to cover up the murders and the corrupt, vintage media worked as a Ministry of Truth (Minitrue for short) for Democrats, as always. “Nothing to see here! Move along!” was the motto of the day, but it never made sense why the killings just stopped at around three guys or why those guys in particular were chosen by the killer.

In 2007, when Donald Young was murdered in his home around Christmas I was already working on the Hillary Clinton campaign and was told repeatedly by my black friends that Young was killed because he started talking to people about Barack Obama being gay. Hillary’s campaign knew about Obama’s antics on the Chicago gay scene where he was jokingly known as “Bathhouse Barry”. What conservatives don’t understand is that Hillary couldn’t use anything salacious she had on Obama because she needed the black vote behind her if she won the nomination. Hillary’s hands were always tied when it came to nuking Obama with his homosexuality because if it was tied back to her then blacks would be alienated from the Clintons forever since they “went there” and “ruined” the first viable black presidential candidate. There’s another reason that Hillary Clinton would never out Barack Obama and it’s simply that — despite what the obsessive Hillary-haters have felt for twenty-odd-years — the woman is actually a very nice person who just never wanted to go nuclear on anyone. That right there might mean she wouldn’t have made a good President, if she isn’t willing to dump her biggest weapons on an enemy…but I will leave that up to you to decide for yourself.

To this day, people in Chicago are still scared about being murdered for talking about Barack Obama being gay or about what goes on at Trinity United with the still-active “Down Low Club”. Young, gay, black men are mentored into the club and are eventually paired up with often unattractive and difficult to deal with straight black women who never have boyfriends (since guys don’t want to have anything to do with them). A friend of mine in the “Think Squad” of prominent black professionals I talk to regularly calls these women “heifers” and says it’s very common for “cake boys” to be paired up with “heifers” so that “dummies are fooled” into thinking they are straight. Besides the Obamas, famous examples of this are Steadman Graham and Oprah Winfrey (he’s gay, while she’s just plain nasty and conceited), Star Jones and her gay husband whatever his name was, Terry McMillan and Jonathan Plummer (who eventually came out and left her), and Will Smith and Jada Pinckett (who are actually both gay…which is really rare in these arranged marriages because typically gay guys are not married to lesbians for some reason).

It’s kind of hilarious that straight people can’t see this stuff for what it really is, but then again for many years people believed that Rock Hudson and Elton John were both really married to women for love, too.

In retrospect, that’s laughable and crazy…but so will it be in about 5-10 years when the truth about Barack and Michelle Obama comes out as well. And it will come out, too, as soon as people are no longer afraid of being murdered for talking about it.

Chicago is ruled by fear. Living here, people are terrified of the City coming after them with tickets and fines for all sorts of things. Literally, the City tries to trick you into getting parking tickets by posting sets of signs that restrict parking in ways more Byzantine and tangled than the logic problems on an LSAT exam. Then there’s the very real fear of ever saying and doing something to offend an Alderman…who will often times set out on a course of vengeance against you that results in all manner of fines, your losing your lease, your business license being taken away, etc. These guys operate with impunity like mafia Dons in most cases. If you run afoul of the Democrat Party here in some way, you could lose your job if pressure is applied against your boss to fire you…or you’ll just be beaten by goons hired by precinct captains and ward bosses one day. The police will show interest in ever investigating your beating…or your murder if it was politically ordered by Democrats or friends of Democrats. When you land at O’Hare or Midway and see Al Capone’s face on shot glasses and tee shirts just know that his spirit is very much alive in this city, especially with Rahm Emanuel in the Mayor’s office.

Rahm is gay too. I have friends who have slept with him. And, yes, he’s a total bottom if that’s not too much information for you. For years, Rahm has exclusively hired little gay interns who resemble the Hollywood stars that Rahm years for (if you go to the Mayor’s office and see a lot of guys who look like Zac Ephron hanging around, well now you know why). Rahm’s also been very generous politically with his toy boys…ultimately graduating many of them from his stable into choice positions in law firms and brokerage houses by using his political connections. A lot of these guys are straight, too, by the way…but that’s called “gay for pay” when good looking straight guys and gym bunnies essentially prostitute themselves to older gay men for the chance at gaining access to high-paying careers in a bad economy. You probably don’t want to know what some straight guys are willing to do for a while to land big careers in Chicago. This stuff has been happening for years and is very similar to the way Hollywood studios are run. Very few big name male actors made it to the top without being a bottom for a while on casting couches “paying their dues” to the gay producers, directors, and executives who promised them big things down the line.

Rahm Emanuel is worse than Barney Frank in a lot of ways, but everyone’s always been too terrified of him to speak openly about the things he does. He’s sent people dead fish as warnings…has screamed naked at people in the Congressional gym…and here in Chicago as Mayor he holds the Sword of Damocles over a great many heads with the ability to summon any number of goons to persecute and harass people at will. This is what happens when Democrats are re-elected to office over and over again for generations in a city like Chicago.

All this will end one day, because if enough people ridicule the likes of Rahm and Obama the fear people have will vanish. Ridicule is the antidote to fear. Conservative writers never want to touch these topics because they’re afraid of being blackballed for talking about Rahm or Obama being blueballed and jonesing for the old days when they could just head to the baths any time they want and engage in the activities they liked doing with other guys. Take a look at Erik Erikson at RedState for instance. Do you notice how he’s slowly readjusting what he writes to suit Minitrue’s narratives now that he’s working for CNN and wants to eventually be a full-time personality there? When the big money is pushed in front of conservative writers, they lose interest in writing stories that damage the Left and instead think about all the cool things they’ll get to buy when they sell out completely to Minitrue’s wishes.

I’m surprised Dr. Corsi has put everything on the line and taken on the Trinity United story and the Down Low Club. He’s a brave, brave man. No doubt, he’ll have speaking engagements canceled and will have trouble booking himself on radio and TV shows in the future because when you start telling the secrets about gay politicians there are consequences for you personally and professionally. Minitrue will punish you…but other conservatives will as well since they want to stay in Minitrue’s good graces (in hopes they can become the next Erik Erikson).

A lot of the stuff that people don’t know is because Minitrue doesn’t want you to know any of this…since it hurts Democrats.

But, it’s all there. Like I’ve said a thousand times already, people talk about this stuff NONSTOP in the bars and gay clubs here in Chicago. It’s not a secret to any of us on the ground. Every black person I know has intimate knowledge of the Down Low Club. It’s as well-known as the gospel choir and serves as distinct and important a purpose. Every black church has a “program” like the Down Low Club, though few to none will call it that. Some white Baptist churches have misguided efforts like this too…where clearly gay men are pushed to marry the women in the church that no straight men wants. This prevents the women from becoming spinsters and gives the gay guys the beards they need to be productive (and reproductive, in cases like Obama’s) members of society. What better way to disappear the gay guys in your congregation while simultaneously getting rid of the women that have bad attitudes or are too ugly for straight guys to want anything to do with?

I know it’s bizarre to come to the realization that a closeted gay black man is currently President of the United States…but that is reality, folks. I’ve told you before that I had an aunt who was in LOVE with Liberace all through the 70s and into the 80s…and even ten years after his death she STILL would not admit the man was gay. I heard from my cousin that it was only about five years ago that she FINALLY took down the pictures she had of him in the little shrine she’d created of his memorabilia (and sold it all on eBay). There are older women I know who still walk around brokenhearted over Rock Hudson. In a few years, the teenyboppers of today will be doing the same thing over Taylor Lautner, Zac Ephron, and Leonardo DiCaprio. I don’t know why straight people have such a hard time sometimes picking out gay guys…but then again, I’m oblivious to most closeted lesbians so maybe it’s something that only gay guys can spot in each other.

Trinity United has a lot to lose and will not respond well to Dr. Corsi’s expose. I expect the blowback to be fierce. I hope he’s ready for it. There are a lot of powerful and influential black gay men in Chicago who had their marriages of convenience arranged through Jeremiah Wright who will not want their covers blown. A few Bears players. Doctors. Lawyers. Political figures. Ministers. CEOs. You name it.

And, of course, the current President of the United States too.

But you already knew that.

and.....

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1012/81973.html

The five-year old video showing President Barack Obama talking bluntly about race, Hurricane Katrina and the Rev. Jeremiah Wright is a source of worry for a campaign that’s already on a knife’s edge over Wednesday night’s high-stakes debate in Denver and thinning leads in national polls.

Obama’s aides and top Democratic officials projected an air of nonchalance and nothing-to-see-here Tuesday night as Fox News and Tucker Carlson’s Daily Caller promoted the 2007 speech at Hampton University as a racial rant with the capacity to change the game. But the reelection campaign is concerned especially by the possibility of re-litigating Wright’s role in Obama’s life — a storyline long seen in Obamaland as among the most damaging to the president.

That’s made even stronger by the new focus on the tape coming at a key moment in the run-up to the debate — timing that could become a distraction for the campaign as the president prepares to take the stage.

The larger threat posed by the video isn’t its content — many of the statements Obama makes have been made by the president or other Democrats — but its capacity to stop the campaign’s accelerating momentum. Taken in combination with several other pre-debate problems for Obama — from tightening polls in Florida and Wisconsin and Vice President Joe Biden’s declaration Tuesday that the middle class has been “buried” over the last four years — the tape could be part of a movement that might make the race not the blowout many pundits have been predicting.

(Also on POLITICO: Obama's 2007 speech: How they covered it)

Robert Gibbs, the former White House press secretary, called the video a “distraction,” but added on CBS’s “This Morning,” “If Republicans want to defend the Bush administration’s response to Katrina, I’m sure the president would give them his time during the debate to do that.”

And sources inside the campaign tell POLITICO that they believe Carlson — and the Drudge Report — risked a backlash by emphasizing Obama’s use of church-pulpit African-American cadence. One top Democrat called that a “gift from our enemies.”

The video promoted by several conservative outlets was of then-Sen. Obama addressing a crowd at historically black Hampton University in Virginia in 2007. In it, Obama’s speaking style is markedly different as he spoke bluntly about race, Wright and the federal government’s response to Hurricane Katrina.

The Romney campaign said Tuesday that it played no role in distributing the video, which has shifted the focus of an important news cycle thanks to Drudge’s hypnotic command over much of the national media. And unlike after the last Drudge video leak – a 1998 clip of Obama saying he is for the redistribution of wealth that Drudge unearthed in September – Romney didn’t himself appear on Fox News to talk about the video.

Romney is seeking to draw a bright-line contrast with the president on tonight’s debate stage and the distracting, Drudge- and Hannity-promoted video doesn’t help that goal.

(Also on POLITICO: Romney camp moves away from tape)

To that end, his team spent Wednesday touting the latest misstatement from Vice President Joe Biden, even selling $30 T-shirts with Biden’s face and his Tuesday quotation that the middle class “has been buried the last four years” over an all-caps “honest Joe” flag.

Republicans said there’s no reason to expect that Romney-land will lean any harder into a message on the videotape, which Obama critics on the right say shows a heavily racialized view of politics and government.

In Colorado Tuesday afternoon and Wednesday morning – amid mounting hype surrounding the video – the Romney campaign was trying hard to keep attention on Biden’s “buried” statement.

Despite the heavy cross-promotion on conservative media and discussion on the network morning shows, the tape hasn’t broken through to swing-state undecided voters, according to Obama officials. The campaign hasn’t distributed talking points on the video to its surrogates, former Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland said, and in Iowa it hasn’t come up in a single field report, an official there said Wednesday afternoon.

“No one is talking about it at all,” the campaign official said.

And unlike other straight-to-Drudge oppo dumps, this one didn’t prompt a gleeful, triumphant response from the Romney campaign.

In a line used by other campaign spokespeople Wednesday, Romney adviser Kevin Madden said on CBS’s “This Morning” that voters can “look at that video and make up their mind on that individually.”

“What’s much more important to this debate right now are the president’s policies, the president’s record over the past four years. That’s what’s going to be the most important topic on stage tonight,” Madden said.

A key difference between this Obama video, filmed at a public event and already part of the 2008 campaign ecosystem, and the footage of Romney declaring at a Florida campaign fundraiser that 47 percent of Americans consider themselves victims is the nature of where each man delivered the remarks.

Because Romney was speaking to what he thought was a private audience, the tape of him carries a larger punch than Obama, who spoke to a crowd that included the national and local press corps, Strickland said.

“I just can’t imagine this being significant,” he said. “I do think the 47 percent thing was and is significant but it’s gotten such incredible exposure that everyone knows about it already. I just can’t imagine this old video, which in my judgment is not all that controversial, becoming a big deal.”

Catharsis Ours

Thursday, October 4, 2012

Analyzing the First Debate -Winners and Losers , Post-Mortems ..... What went wrong for Obama and why was he so unexpectedly poor in last night's performance.....