Yes. I'm all for the debate facilitator digging in for details and specifics. But when they are only probing for details from one side, it is pretty ridiculous. It's "ok" for Obama's "specifics" about his tax plan to be "the rich pay a little more". But when Romney and Ryan are asked, they need to specify the exact deductions that will be eliminated. It's bad double standard.
LEFT WING MEDIA CONSPIRACY FOR OBAMA! :MARIS61: [video=youtube;KWWgpvjsFfE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KWWgpvjsFfE[/video]
McArdle weighs in: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...-debate-moderator-screwed-up-that-s-life.html
Some interesting numbers in this post: http://ricochet.com/main-feed/Press-Romney-Loses-Debate-Voters-Romney-Wins-Debate
Not surprisingly, no one here (all male so far as I know) mentioned the fact that Romney was unable to say "yes" when asked if he favored equal pay for women. Instead he wandered into "binders full of women", patronizing and untrue. The FACT was that before the gubernatorial election a bipartisan group of women assembled resumes of qualified women to present to whoever was the winner. Romney did not seek out "binders full of women". And the percentage of female staffers declinend during his administration. Bain Capital has no female directors. But who needs equal pay if we can leave early to cook dinner and care for the kiddies (something that apparently men are never resonsible for?) He flat out lied about his position on birth control; he supported the Blunt Amendment which would allow employers to block work health insurance from covering anything they "morally" objected to. Although aimed at birth control, it was so loosely written it could have included prenatal care for single women, HIV and STD treatment, substance abuse treatment. And it's single moms who are resonsible for gun violence. Those sluts! As one commentator said, just think what the President of the United States might have become in life if only he'd had a two-parent family.
These debates are the product of collusion between the two parties. It's literally run by the Republicans and Democrats. If Republicans feel the moderators they actually agreed on and are paying for are biased, well that doesn't speak well of their party. Personally, what I saw was Romney going back to his old bad habit of arguing rules with the moderator. He did it repeatedly during the Republican primaries too. I just can't understand how he thinks that helps him. Obama did it a couple of times, which I also found annoying. But Romney was much worse. It comes off as bossy and arrogant, and it works especially bad when it's a female moderator. It's sexist to say, but it really does hit a raw nerve in a lot of women when they see another woman getting shouted down by a powerful man.
Why should it be a law that everyone receive equal pay? What if one group were cheaper to employ and more productive?
No doubt. But it doesn't mean that that a lot of women perceive that kind of interaction a lot differently from how you, I, Mitt or Candy would. People view these things with their own baggage. A battered woman or a woman employed by a sexist boss is not going to see it the same way. Given that women are so critical in this election, I think it was a bad idea for Mitt to ignore that perception.
I think people are fooling themselves f they think Romney will champion woman issues equal to or more than Obama. If that is a voter's #1 agenda, Obama would be the vote.
What this election comes down to for me is that the economy is in the tank and I think Romney has the best chance of implementing policies to get it going again. Frankly, that's the most important issue to me at this time. Unless people are working and making good money, all of the social engineering in the world won't give the average person a better life. Equal pay for equal work sounds like a laudable goal for our society to achieve, but it loses its luster if both the man and the woman are making $0 because they can't find a job.
Unfortuately, that is how I feel. Time for social issues to take a back seat and for the US to come out of this depressed global economy as the economic world power. Don't know if that will happen but I think Romney gives us the better chance.
come out? we're not even "in" it yet. Last financial is child's play for what's coming. Obama and Bernanke have made it worse.
