A word on the third debate

In a word – dull.

Lackluster.
Vapid.
Unfocused.
Catatonic.

OK, that was more than one word. But it’s tough to accurately capture last night’s snoozefest of a debate – if you can even call it that.

Romney looked tired. Obama looked like he was ready to bare his teeth and rip into Mittens’ tender neck. Nothing substantive was said.

Romney missed several opportunities to pound Obama on foreign policy, including the doozy about expecting the Muslim Brotherhood to abide by Egypt’s treaty with Israel.

Are you shittin’ me?

He did, however ding the President on the “I’ll have more flexibility after the election” comment to Medvedev.

Overall, it was anticlimactic. Obama trotted out the $5 trillion lie again, while Romney rambled something incoherently about nation building and installing a new leader in Syria, as if that’s somehow our responsibility.

The winner? No one.

The loser? America.

That is all.

2 responses

  1. The problem with this debate was the target audience. Romney wasn’t there to win us over, but to win the “undecideds” over. It was smart to try and out-left him on some issues. The “You can’t kill your way out of this mess” comment should resonate with independents. At the end of the day he was just another politician saying what he thought a group wanted to hear.

    Like

  2. Politicians – The primary and self defining argument to reinstitute human sacrifice, … and who to use.

    When does the Revolution, part deux, start?

    Like

%d bloggers like this: