What I saw last night resembled the first round of a prizefight where a challenger takes on the champion by coming out with a flurry of blows aimed anywhere and everywhere, including a few low blows here and there. The president’s response was akin to the champion’s buttoning down and covering up the vital parts, i.e., weathering the storm, until the challenger’s blows diminish in intensity and start failing in their purpose by the process of ineffectuality (I think I just made this word up, kind of like Romney’s claim that he wasn’t going to reduce taxes on the rich.) This is the first in a series of debates, and with a "win" Romney will now be forced to elaborate on his claims. Possibly crass, but the first debate was foreplay.
It will be interesting, therefore, to observe what happens in rounds two and three of this prizefight. The challenger has laid bare his proposals which, if anyone was listening, sounded exactly like Obama’s proposals. “I will give you everything in Obamacare except that I won’t call it Obamacare.” “I will take care of the middle class.” “I believe in education and will fund it appropriately.” “No tax cuts for the rich?” Really?
The right wing will awaken to the realization that Romney threw the Tea Party and his veep candidate, the fair-haired chairman of the budget committee, under the bus last night in yet another shake of the etch-a-sketch. The reason Romney sounded more reasonable than usual was that he sounded like a Democrat.
Just saying . . .