Friday, October 5, 2012
In 2004 George Bush was accused of having a listening device in his back during the debates, and now this year Mitt Romney is accused of using a cheat sheet
However the campaign says it was a handkerchief
Others may respond that only the elite use handkerchiefs
This is all getting to be too much. Wake me up when November ends
In 2004 George Bush was accused of having a listening device in his back during the debates, and now this year Mitt Romney is accused of using a cheat sheet
The debate rehash: A blown chance.. or purposeful tactic?
While I am certainly not a paid analyst that regularly opines on politics are strategies behind candidates surges or splurges, I will say this: The debate the other night was one of the most horrendous public appearances for the President in years. Some are chiding him for losing touch.. losing his fire in his tiny string bean belly. Some are arguing that Michelle Obama was angry the debate fell on their wedding anniversary. Chris Matthews almost had a coronary on MSNBC afterwards, in his anger that Obama doesn’t watch his program on that network with the 5,000 or so others that do. And finally, an immense Al Gore theorized that Obama’s brain was hit because of Denver’s altitude. So with all of these theories, I think mine will be just as good!!
I think President Obama purposely blew the debate. I think he purposely didn’t have the fire in his belly. I think he knew that the unemployment number that was released today was going to be good (And it was, if the numbers are credible, unemployment is now 7.8%) .. President Obama may have felt that letting Mitt Romney win one for the Gipper was good. At the beginning. Get that victory out of the way, let Romney talk about Big Bird and unemployment, and just buy time until the Friday jobs report came out.. reinvigorate the campaign, let the media have a firestorm of positive stories, and come in to the next debate swinging.
That strategy in my mind makes sense. It works. Romney gets good press.. Obama gets shocked media people live on TV with wide eyes speculating about why he did so poor debating Mitt, the man the media think is a twit.
Because Obama knows that the media will come back home again. He knew the jobs numbers would be positive. He knew that there are two more debates. And he knows that October can bring many surprises.
What he may not have bet though is that 61 million people tuned in—the highest number since 1980, then 81 mil watched Carter square off with Reagan. And if 40 million or so don’t tune in to the next couple matches, perhaps the strategy of blowing the debate will work against the President. Time will tell.
I have a last theory, though, on Romney. I think they dug up the folks who did Ronald Reagan’s hair to do Romney’s. He looked like Reagan, in some weird way. He even seemed to want to sound like him. I don’t know if it was on purpose, or maybe it was the red tie, or maybe it was the stage, but Romney gave Republicans a taste of the visual past, looking like a President they loved. While Obama’s downed lips and nervous head nodding gave Democrats a burst of anger.
Perhaps the President needs a teleprompter? Remember in 2004 when people said George W. Bush had a device in his back for Karl Rove to tell him what to say? Perhaps President Obama was hoping somewhere in the audience Robert Gibbs would come to the rescue with a screen to give him answers.
But I think not. I think he gave the match early on to Mitt. And next time the President will win the debate. Third debate? I will not predict that one.
But I will make this final prediction: The Joe Biden/Paul Ryan debate will be a match made in heaven for political observers. It should be filled with nasty comments, fireworks, and verbal mutiny. Maybe a part of Biden’s entourage will be those biker chicks he got so friendly with….?
More images (NOT SAFE FOR WORK)
I guess this could work. Until we see the ‘behind the scenes’ operations.. Factory conditions perhaps unclean?
How many women are involved? Where are they from? Do they bathe beforehand? Are they French!? So many questions.. so many breasts.. so much liquor.
Until answers come, I may stick to beer.
More absolutely amazing images coming from Mars. But these are only intensifying an already existent mystery..
…what are those spiderly black things? Are they dangerous? Maybe!
The odd objects on Mars creates massive speculation..
Wednesday, October 3, 2012
Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Winter storms will now be named ... What about those duds
I have been a long proponent of winter storms being named. They deserve it. The blizzard of 93 would sound much more frightening if it was named El Diablo, after all.
There may have been divine intervention now as the Weather Channel has decided this year to NAME WINTER STORMS! So they are only as official as the Weather Channel. Not the NOAA. Not Accuweather. Just the Weather Channel. And that’s fine. I bet it catches on. It take son to start the ball rolling.
But here is the problem.. And the Weather Channel answers none of these issues: Is there a difference between West Coast and East Coast, Midwest and South storms? What if the storm turns out to be a dud..? Will the storm be named AFTER it strikes or before? We all know computer models show storms in the winter time that never become a storm.. So what then? cancel the name and start from scratch?
What about the possibility that nationwide there are more than 26 storms?
What constitutes a named storm? Wind? snow potential or actuality?
The Weather Channel, narrated by Al Roker, explains why it will be naming storms. I can’t help but thinking the channel is trying to get some attention and press before tomorrow’s 2012-13 Accuweather winter forecast is released..
So my final question, since I am near some areas that get those lake effect snows, is this: What about the snow squalls that dump 20+ inches? Shall we name squalls?
And are cold fronts next?
I have long hoped for a naming of storms. But now when I think about the logistics, I ponder how in the world this naming process will go……
Sunday, September 30, 2012
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)