MAMA BEAR CROWLEY DOES EVERYTHING BUT SIT POOR LITTLE BARRY ON HER LAP
Help me, Candy – help me!
As I watched the disgraceful Candy Crowley do her damnedest to protect poor little petulant Barry from big bad Mitt Romney last night – it was hard to decide at whom I was most angered: the blatantly-biased, so-called “moderator” – or the RNC for agreeing to allow this obtrusive left-wing jackass to referee the fight. In the end, it was a draw. The focus of my anger, that is – not the two-against-one battle.
Now that that’s out of the way, a few observations are in order. While various fact-checkers have given the edge both candidates, Mitt won the debate. Here’s why:
As is almost always the case with political debates, unless one of the candidates delivers a knockout punch or comes up with a memorable line – which did not happen last night, the post-debate discussion over the coming days will be focused on everything but the facts. And – as was the case in the first debate, much of that discussion is already focusing on the behavior of Barack Obama. This time – a brutish, pinched-up image of an obviously-distraught president about to be separated from his office.
Desperate to rescue a failing campaign in free-fall, O shot out of the gate, full of piss and vinegar, almost glaring, and answered the first question – which was asked by a college student. O nervously stared right through the guy – and gave a robotic stump-speech answer that had little to do with the poor kid’s question.
Moreover, throughout the debate, as Romney answered questions, O glared at him from behind as if he wished Mitt would burst into flames. It was apparent from the outset how much genuine hatred O harbors for a man whom, by all accounts, it a very good and decent man – irrespective of O’s disdain for everything for which Mitt stands. Did O make it personal and petty? You bet.
And then, of course, we had Ms. Candy. Throughout the debate, this partisan hack did her best to make sure her boy got the last word. Several times, she asked follow-up questions of Mitt that she obviously wished her boy had asked. By the end of the debate, she had given her boy nearly four more minutes to speak. Worse? She frantically jumped in and actually defended her boy during the lone Libya question – insisting to Romney that O had in fact, referred to the attack on the consulate as “terrorist” the day after it happened. (She subsequently backtracked on her comment – conveniently after the tens of millions of viewers were out of earshot range.)
At the end of the day, O scored some points; Mitt scored some points. Both camps claimed victory. But…
Think about it: what do the vast majority of people remember from the first debate? Again, O’s behavior. Disengagement, sneers, vacant stares and plaintiff looks to Jim Lehrer to get him off the hook. Such will be the case with this debate; O came off like a petulant child. His body language was that of total disgust. He was often rude for rude’s sake. Other than sarcastically smiling at Crowley more than a few times as they mind-melded over their mutual disdain for Romney, O showed zero warmth – not even to those whom’s questions he answered.
Throw in the perception of millions of viewers – other than the Obamabots, of course – that Crowley’s shamefully-partisan behavior was blatantly unfair to Mitt – and you’ve got another Romney win. And a new president in January, as well.
Categories: Huh?, Liberal Media Bias, Mitt Romney, Obama Media Group, Obama Reelection Campaign, Planet Obama, Romney Campaign, Telling it Like it is, The Shady Side of Liberalism, Wake up and Smell the Bias