No one should EVER let a lie go unchallenged. Do so at your own peril /nt

[still_one]

[seabeyond]

1. spend all his time correcting romney lies and not present what he is doing? nt

[still_one]

6. I am reading the posts here, because I didn't see the debates, and it sounds like the unanswered

lies is all they are talking about

[BlueStreak]

10. And if that is the story in the mainstream media after everybody has a night's sleep?

[seabeyond]

22. and in the morning, the lies, and big bird. nt

[NYC_SKP]

2. Don't worry, they won't go unchallenged.

Patience, grasshopper.

Obama and his campaign know what they're doing.

Romney will have to own his words, tonight wasn't the time.

[flamingdem]

3. Agree, Romney would have controlled the debate if Obama spent time on that

Lehrer was unable to control Mittjitter, that's on him on Obama

[still_one]

5. Then the President should have interjected /nt

[iemitsu]

7. was mitt on crack?

or coffee?
he seemed overtly nervous to me. not assertive but almost frantic.
his smile was weak, when he shut up. as if a high-strung lap dog ready to attack any comer.
obama was cordial and respectful.
obama had the better answers too but since romney is a liar the comparison format set obama up to appear less clear on their differences. not that he wasn't prepared or without information but romney simply denied things and policies he has supported in the past and insisted he was going to do what ever was best for workers and the middle class, thus nullifying any distinctions obama might have drawn.
in the immediate sense and for an uncritical audience mitt seemed to have scored some points. but in the longer term he will be seen as the liar he is.

[flamingdem]

12. Debating Mitt is like trying to nail down jello! n/t

[iemitsu]

19. yep, he is oily.

i love the reference to jello, the traditional food of the faithful.

[still_one]

4. why wasn't it? John Kerry did that, and we paid for it /nt

[NYC_SKP]

9. Only the first of three debates. Until tonight, Romney has been vague and unspecific.

Obama really had nothing to push back against, unless he'd done it in the moment.

He went in deliberately without an intention of challenging Romney, not yet. He wasn't about to come off as a bully.

Had this been the last debate or the only debate, it would be troubling.

But taken as the first of a series it makes sense to have kept a low profile.

IMHO.

[still_one]

18. Perhaps, but as I understand it isn't the first debate the one watch the most? /nt

[treestar]

17. True, instant gratification is lacking

and instant gratification is often not the best idea.

[BlueStreak]

8. 90% of the people watching this debate don't matter

I'm sorry that sounds harsh, but the only people who matter live in Ohio, Nevada, Virginia, and maybe Florida. The lies will go challenged there big time. Obama made a conscious choice to not risk appearing unhinged in front of a whole bunch of people who will not have a thing to say about the outcome.

We'll see if he made the right call.

[still_one]

11. Interesting an accurate observation, however, the President still should not have let the lies go

unchallenged

[berni_mccoy]

13. Obama did challenge the lies

[RichGirl]

14. Obama team needs to do an ad....

Of the many faces of Mitt. Like the 47% speech followed by his huge concern for the poor in the debate. His emergency room solution followed by providing healthcare for all. etc...

[JDPriestly]

15. Romney told so many that Obama could never have challenged them all.

Buy I do wish that Obama had pointed out that the Republicans in the House did not bring a single realistic jobs bill and refused to vote for his.

[treestar]

16. If you know it's a lie, how do you need it challenged?

Rmoney isn't even subtle. He just says things - why do we need Obama to formally tell us they are wrong? We know they are.

[gulliver]

20. No, that isn't necessarily true.

If someone lies in a way that other people can begin to see for themselves, you are often better off not challenging the lie. What you want to do in that case is get them to repeat it and amplify it until it becomes obvious and irredeemable.

[smackd]

21. the look on his face over and over...

really reminded me of Bill Maher a few weeks ago...

He got so frustrated with a right wing guest he finally just threw up his hands and said 'I give up! We can't even have an intelligent debate when you won't even agree on the FACTS!'

I imagine that's how the president felt many, many times tonight.

There were many times he seemed to physically be biting his lip, looking down, taking notes...I finally decided he was making notes for his campaign speeches and things to bring up later.

[iemitsu]

23. your observations seem spot on to me.

i have been around a pathological liar. the lies are disarming in the sense that they come from so far in left field (or right field) that any response is difficult. responding legitimizes the lie and the tactic.
how does one respond to ghosts, figments, assertions from nowhere?
obama was right to let romney spew whatever he wanted to without challenge. at some points it seemed that romney was making up stuff on the fly. saying anything to convince us that things he'd said earlier he didn't say.
liars are like that. they expect you to believe anything they say and if you don't they get mad at you for not being taken in.
you are at fault for remembering earlier statements wrong.
liars have no respect for others or themselves. they can't be trusted.