Rightbloggers Say Romney Won 2nd Debate, And If He Didn't No Fair Because Liberal Media Bias

tomt200.jpgDon't look now, but the Presidential race seems to be neck-in-neck with just 16 days to go. Nervous? Think how they feel. Both Romney's and Obama's campaigns undoubtedly spent last week gearing up for the final push with phone banks, GOTV, last-minute ad blitzes, election fraud monitor training, etc.

Rightbloggers spent much of it arguing over who won the second Presidential debate, and why what Obama said about Benghazi was not about Benghazi. And that was among their more intelligent efforts.

At WorldNet Daily, Joe Kovacs told the troops in advance of Tuesday's town-hall-style Hofstra University debate how to perceive it: "MEDIA: OBAMA 'WINS DEBATE BEFORE IT EVEN STARTS'" he headlined. "...left-leaning reporters and analysts have their Obama-as-victor copy already written in advance." Kovacs' source was Rush Limbaugh.

To make his argument even more airtight, Kovacs quoted "former debate moderator and left-leaning journalist Carole Simpson," who said Obama had the edge going into the second debate -- an uncontroversial statement, as the town hall format would seem to favor the community organizer over the plutocrat. Matt Hadro of Newsbusters also jumped in: "Liberal journalist Carole Simpson is at it again." Neither mentioned that the 70-year-old Simpson is pretty much retired from journalism, including liberal journalism.

When it was over, polls by Gallup, CNN, Reuters et alia showed that normal people appeared to give Obama a slight edge. Rightbloggers either didn't see it that way, or did their best to make sure you didn't.

Some, like Bryan Preston of The PJ Tatler, bravely held the party line: "Mitt Romney Wins Debate on Smooth Presidential Performance, Obama's Ignorance," he said. "...Romney is clearly the more informed and presidential of the two candidates. He can speak in numbers and facts, while Obama speaks in mere rhetoric." (Note to budding reviewers: Always make sure you stick in a couple of obvious pull-quotes.)

Others had a harder time keeping it up. "ONCE AGAIN, OBAMA'S RECORD WINS IT FOR ROMNEY," headlined David Harsanyi at Human Events, but in the body copy he hedged: "On style points it was close," he wrote, "but it's unlikely anyone won by a wide enough margin to alter the fundamentals of the race." (Hansanyi held out hope for the next debate: "It would be interesting," he suggested, "if someone - perhaps at the next Townhall debate - would ask Obama to define what the free enterprise means to him." Surely Romney can afford to hire someone to do that.)

"I will say that President Obama did better this week, but that doesn't mean 'he won,'" said Shane Vander Hart at the Des Moines Register. "I'm not going to declare Romney the winner either." Well, that clears that up.

ccrowley.jpg
Biggest liberal journalist monster since Cronkite -- maybe Murrow! (For two or three days, anyway.)
"I think Mitt Romney won the debate, but not by much," allowed RedState's Erick Erickson. Then he appeared to read out loud the scratched-out parts of his column notes: "While more thought Barack Obama won the debate, largely because his last performance was so bad, clear majorities outside the margin of error thought Mitt Romney would be best on the economy, jobs, the deficit, etc. That suggests Romney did win, but people viewed Obama's debate performance as an improvement over the first one."

Erickson then left the world of spin for that of clairvoyance, telling us that "[Obama] actually wanted the audience to believe that the economy is going gangbusters now as a reason for $4.00 gasoline -- a delusion the undecided voters clearly did not buy." Perhaps Erickson only saw a reenactment of the debate, in which the quiet, well-behaved audience of the event we saw were replaced with enraged mooks throwing trash and beer cans. Erickson was also pleased that "Romney, at one point, commanded the President shut up and sit down and the President did so like a dog told to sit. It was masterful." If the election doesn't go his way, Erickson can always warm himself with his memories.

Probably the wisest course was to shrug the debate off, as did for example Doug Gibson at the Standard-Examiner ("Obama edged Romney in the debate, but does it really matter?"). But there was still some pedantry to spare, as rightbloggers attacked moderator Candy Crowley for backing up Obama when Romney disputed his contention that the President had referred to the Beghazi attack as an act of terror the day after it happened.

The schtick became a rightblogger word game: Though Obama clearly said "no acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation" in that address, rightbloggers insisted he was referring to other acts of terror which did not include Benghazi. Reasoning for this interpretation varied in particulars, if not in absurdity.

"From the context, it was clear that his reference to 'terror' was general," sniffed Henry D'Andrea at the Washington Times. "Not once did he apply that characterization to Benghazi."

"It's clear that the president only made an oblique reference to 'acts of terror' -- and not an explicit, purposeful condemnation of a premeditated attack," said Donald Douglas at American Power. "The exact wording provides presidential wiggle room, and then progressives will just continue to shill for the administration's cover up."

"The reference to 'acts of terror'" was "plural," explicated loyal Romney retainer Jennifer Rubin, and thus could not refer to "the singular attack on Benghazi," but must have been "in reference to 9/11/01 and other jihadist attacks," since "plural," as every good grammarian knows, means "anything but Benghazi."

"He'd also spent the previous two paragraphs discussing the 9/11 attacks and the aftermath," threw in Alana Goodman of Commentary. "'Acts of terror' could have just as easily been a reference to that." Could have? Alana, don't be a weak sister!

In a Twitter argument, Goodman's editor John Podhoretz suggested that because Obama referred to the attack as a "senseless act of violence," he couldn't have also called it an act of terror, since these are opposites.

This kind of nonsense was too much for some rightbloggers. "Later fact checkers can clarify the dispute between the two men over Obama's contention that his Rose Garden address on 9/12 called the Benghazi attack a terror attack," bailed the normally more sure of himself Thomas Lifson at American Thinker. "But moderator Candy Crowley entered the dispute, essentially calling Obama correct, the clearest indication of her bias."

Indeed, attacking Crowley for confirming Obama's remarks (thus committing an "act of journalistic terrorism," being "duped by David Axelrod to do President Obama's bidding," etc) was a comfortable fallback for many of the brethren.

The chivalrous Robert Stacy McCain pointed out that "not one" of his rightblogger comrades "felt it necessary to point out that Candy Crowley is fat, and I'm happy for that, because too many people resort to such cheap insults when they're angry, and it hurts the feelings of fat people everywhere. This kind of cruelty toward BBWs and plumpers also bothers 'chubby chasers' like Dan Collins, whose appreciation of Rubenesque ladies is so often misunderstood." One can easily imagine McCain and Erickson making an evening of it.


Sponsor Content

My Voice Nation Help
19 comments
TRUELY
TRUELY

50/50 CHANCE ONE OF THOSE GUYS WILL BE PRESIDENT

 

NOW MOVE ON CHILDREN

Djur
Djur

The chivalrous Robert Stacy McCain pointed out that "not one" of his rightblogger comrades "felt it necessary to point out that Candy Crowley is fat, and I'm happy for that"...

 

Other than the ones calling her "Meat Loaf", that is.

mommadillo
mommadillo

"From the context, it was clear that his reference to 'terror' was general," 

 

Oh, so NOW we care about "context" and think it matters, unlike when Obama's "You didn't build that" was gleefully taken completely out of context and used to attack him.

 

Jesus H. Fucking Christ, but these are some worthless excuses for human beings.  I bet every time one of them dies, the mean IQ of the human race goes up at least a couple of points.

AtticusDogsbody
AtticusDogsbody

"Neck-in-neck"?

 

Is that some type of new-fangled intertube speak that the kids are all into?

Sonshine4You
Sonshine4You

@villagevoice and "LeftBloggers" say what? Let's hear the same tired talking points, we know them by heart by now. No whining. Read facts.

GrandpaDave
GrandpaDave

As well as debating the President, the Governor had to debate "Meat Loaf" too. Two on one, that's no fair... but, this wasn't supposed to be a fair debate anyway.

lisaconnor1958
lisaconnor1958

just as Tracy explained I am surprised that some one able to make $8029 in a few weeks on the computer. have you seen this web site Sky40.com

 

substancemcgravitas
substancemcgravitas

"act of journalistic terrorism,"

 

Acts of terrorism are getting so common these days.  I committed an act of terrorism against a plate of spaghetti just moments ago.

Leedsman
Leedsman

Not one of my comrades felt it necessary to point out that Mitt Romney is a lying sack of shit, and I'm happy for that, because too many people resort to such cheap insults when they're angry, and it hurts the feelings of scum-sucking sociopathic greedheads everywhere.

AtticusDogsbody
AtticusDogsbody

WTF is going on with these comments? As we speak, it is 15 minutes since I posted my first comment, yet on my screen I have a reply from JohnEWilliams from six hours ago.

 

They told me. They said "Atticus, you're not a timelord. You're not. If you can read Ulysses then you can't be a timelord." But I lied. I can't get more than 12 pages into Ulysses. I've tried many times. What if I am a timelord? What if I'm actually Irish? What if I'm both? Oh God!

JohnEWilliams
JohnEWilliams

And don't you dare delete me as a bot Edroso

 

GeoX
GeoX topcommenter

 @GrandpaDave Aw, was da poor widdle guvvner not allowed to spout bullshit with impunity?  My heart bleeds for him.

AtticusDogsbody
AtticusDogsbody

P.S. JohnEWilliams, I'm not Edroso and I don't think you're a bot. I'm sure you're very nice.

Now Trending

New York Concert Tickets

From the Vault

 

Loading...