I watched tonight's Presidential debate in its entirety. For that I deserve a new car -- or at least a cookie. The clear loser? Jim Lehrer. The clear winner? That’s debatable.
The pundit class compared it to Bush/Kerry I; but in many ways, it put me in mind of Kennedy/Nixon. If the debate had been only on radio, Obama would have won easily. But it wasn't only on radio.
Obama looked bored and disgusted -- and well he should have. Like most of us, he’s grown weary of Mitt's cheap, tawdry, desperate tactics, his vain attempt to portray himself as a severe conservative, and his now even more desperate and vain attempt to portray himself as a man of the people -- someone who cares about the little guy.
Yeah, right. And why does the word “vain” keep cropping up when it comes to Romney?
• • •
Yes, Mitt appeared more self-assured and appeared to have a better grasp of the facts. Problem is Mitt's facts aren't facts -- they're lies, deliberate, desperate lies. And what isn't lies is distortions. Simply put, the truth isn't in this man -- which is why I insist he's a sociopath.
No doubt it's hard to win a debate with a practiced sociopathic liar -- whether his name is Richard Nixon or Mitt Romney. When your opponent's every claim is based on lies and distortions, it's hard to call him on all of them without violating the old adage to never argue with a fool because those watching may be hard-pressed to tell which is which.
Given all that, the pundit class will jump to the conclusion Mitt was the winner; and because of that, he's likely to get a temporary bump in the polls. But that bump won't last, because his lies, distortions, and flip-flops are a matter of lengthy public record, and they will be exposed again and again in days to come -- as they deserve to be.
• • •
What lies in this debate, you ask? To cite the most obvious of many, Mitt completely reversed himself on taxes. He now says he won't be cutting taxes for the wealthy. That isn't likely to sit well with his fat-cat donors, save for the fact that they don't believe that for even a nano-second. Neither do I -- and neither should anyone else with a lick of sense.
Plying his sophistic trade to the max, Mitt claims the 20% tax rate reduction for the wealthy will be offset by eliminating deductions, so the wealthy will still pay the same amount. Uh-huh. And this is supposed to reduce the deficit how?
He also lied boldly and repeatedly when he said he wouldn't raise taxes on the middle-class. In fact, he said he was going to cut middle-class tax rates by 20%. Again, that can't possibly be true if he intends to reduce the deficit. Or if he is going to reduce the deficit, then it will have to be by cutting services for the poor and middle class -- which is simply taxation by another name.
Mitt waves his magic wand and claims the deficit reduction will come about as a result of increased revenues from reduced tax rates. Can there be anyone so foolish as to not recognize this as the same old supply-side Voodoo Economics that got us into this mess in the first place? Sad to say, yes – probably somewhere close to sixty million American voters.
• • •
At one point in the debate, Obama called out Romney on this latest Big Lie, pointing out that Romney had been saying just the opposite for eighteen months, and that he was now completely reversing himself five weeks before the election. He then stared Romney down as if to say "I can’t believe you’d tell such bald-faced lies, and I can’t believe you’re fool enough to think you'll get away with them."
Romney better enjoy his Pyrrhic victory while he can; because it can’t last. He's carrying around way too much baggage and that makes him way too desperate. He may not be sweating on the outside like Nixon, but he’s damned sure sweating on the inside.
Meanwhile, Obama keeps his cool, and in the process makes his opponent look very uncool.
©2012 Tom Cordle