.
Feedback

Romney Hammers Obama in First Presidential Debate

"Patch Back" columnist Lisa Bigelow says Republican nominee former Governor Mitt Romney handily defeated President Barack Obama in the first presidential debate.

 

Romney was clear. He was (almost) concise. He was specific and he was energized.

In what can only be described as a brilliant performance, Republican nominee Mitt Romney dominated President Barack Obama in Wednesday evening’s first debate, when the questions pertained to domestic policy, specifically the economy, health care and the role of government.

President Obama appeared lackluster while speaking and did not project confidence, even as he described his vision for a “new economic patriotism” while attempting to scare undecided voters by stating that “the only way” to cut taxes — as Governor Romney plans through tax reform — is by cutting education and other important domestic programs.

While Obama gazed at the ground or spoke directly to moderator Jim Lehrer, Romney projected enthusiasm as he directed his answers directly to Obama.

Romney clearly and unequivocally denied Obama’s assertion that his tax reform plan would do anything other than help the middle class. Although Obama did not offer any specifics to improve the American economy, Romney pointed to his five-point plan, which, he claims, will broaden the tax base by putting more Americans back in the workforce.

Energy independence is Romney’s first economic goal, which he believes will create four million jobs. He also wants to open up Latin American trade, eliminate Chinese “cheating,” improve skills training and education, balance the budget and “champion” small business.

'Trickle Down Government'

Romney observed that new business startups under Obama are down to a 30-year low.

“Trickle down government is not the answer for America,” Romney said, thus spinning a well-worn liberal slogan to a conservative advantage.

Romney expressed disbelief, and rightfully so, that President Obama would choose to focus the first two years of his presidency on passing health care reform, which Romney noted did not receive one Republican vote, instead of working to put Americans back on the job — and on the tax rolls.

President Obama appeared tired and nearly disinterested as he repeated worn and inaccurate Democratic talking points pertaining to tax policy, education and entitlement programs.

Romney, on the other hand, appeared presidential, energized, knowledgeable and forthright — especially during the countless number of times he pointed to putting people back to work as his top priority: “this is about jobs”, “my priority is jobs”, “create more jobs” and “putting people back to work” were heard consistently throughout the evening from Romney.

Obama mentioned his desire to hire 100,000 math and science teachers; to this point, Romney retorted that with Obama’s green jobs plan, he could have hired two million teachers.

“My friend told me, [Obama] doesn’t pick the winners and the losers, [he] just picks the losers,” when it comes to investing in green jobs, Romney said, referring to Solyndra and other failed taxpayer-funded green business initiatives.

The Middle Class

For the most part, Obama refrained from blaming the George W. Bush administration for the failures of the past three-and-a-half years. But he was unable to refute Romney’s observations that the economy is growing more slowly now than it was last year or the year before that and that gas, food, energy and health care costs — important issues to middle class voters — have all risen under Obama.

“I call it ‘the economy tax,’” Romney said.

Romney also criticized Obama for failing to reduce the deficit as promised and for failing to take advantage of the reforms suggested by the Simpson-Bowles fiscal commission.

“You should have jumped on that” recommended bipartisan reform, Romney said.

Obama’s response that his new plan would take into account elements of Simpson-Bowles felt too little, too late. And Obama’s claim that he listens to all ideas regardless from whom they come rings false, as any close observer of the 2009 stimulus package knows.

In fact, each of Obama’s “plans” are warmed over talking points from 2008. The difference is, he’s had 3.5 years to deliver and has failed to do so. And all we have left is a higher cost of living, a stagnant job market, a precarious foreign affairs predicament and a tarnished international reputation.

Obama performed better when he spoke about entitlements, such as Obamacare, Medicare and Social Security, although Romney won the point when he said his entitlement policy would be, “I would ask myself, ‘is the program so critical that we have to borrow money from China to pay for it?’”

Ultimately, the difference between the two candidates was most stark near the end of the debate when Lehrer asked about the role of government in society.

Obama noted that he believes government offers people a “ladder of opportunity” and that “some things we do better together.”

Romney, on the other hand, pointed to the words written on the backdrop behind the candidates from the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.

The president should “promote and protect the principles of those documents,” Romney said.

“We are seeing a belief that government can do a better job than the individual,” he continued. Yet “college graduates can’t find work, more Americans are on food stamps.”

Obama also noted his responsibility to keep Americans safe.

I can’t help but wonder what the diplomatic staff in Libya thinks about that. 

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from New City Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Loading comments ...
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Kathleen May 21, 2013 at 08:55 am
CANDLE Night at the Rockland Boulders Game Join CANDLE for a fun(d)raising game on May 23rd as theRead More Rockland Boulders take on the Trois-Rivieres Aigles. Proceeds from tickets purchased through CANDLE* will support programs that educate & empower youth and reduce substance abuse and violence in Rockland County and beyond.
Heywood Jablohme May 21, 2013 at 02:48 pm
I agree with most of your points, but surely you are not implying that teachers are expected toRead More produce funding to correct school roofs, right? I think you got a bit off topic here, but I agree that our educational infrastructure is in disrepair and is in desperate need of rehabilitation. Maybe if our teacher's unions allowed a little more leeway we could allocate funding a little more appropriately and fund the important things instead of overpaying paying dinosaur teachers who lost interest a long time ago and fight any and all forms of teacher benchmarking.
WGMom May 20, 2013 at 09:10 am
It's entirely true that every professional has out-of-pocket expenses. But as someone who worked asRead More a corporate trainer, I can guarantee you I NEVER had to pay out of pocket expenses for supplies to teach classes. Every piece of paper, supply, and even snacks for the participants were fully covered expenses. If I had to spend out of pocket money to procure supplies, I could submit for a reimbursement, and receive it, no questions asked. I am now in school to become a high school teacher and I can see the stark difference in how the education of folks in a corporate environment is incredibly different, and privileged, than the public school environment. I've sat through numerous classes in the Clarkstown and Ramapo districts, doing observations required for my education certification, and while Clarkstown certainly benefits from certain advantages, the shabbiness of being a public school is still there. Furniture, such as teacher desks, that looks like it was purchased in a garage sale 30 years ago... faculty bathrooms that are dark and dingy, nearly crumbling, and sorely in need of updating. Etc. The public expects teachers to have professional training, act professionally, but they lack sometimes basic resources and are expected to function in an environment that feels more like a dungeon than an institution of learning. The citizens of Clarkstown, if they could get a tour of some of the facilities they are expecting children to learn in, and teachers to teach in, would be very surprised. We do supply some great technology, but then we put it in classrooms with windows that won't stay closed when it's windy, as one example. I spent most of my time in South, which is the best of the bunch, facilities-wise. Clarkstown North is a mess, Woodglen's woods are littered with fallen trees no one's cleaned up after Sandy, Laurel Plains had to be shuttered thanks to that whole foul stench... the district is in a situation where there are major capital improvements that are going to be needed. Buildings are aging, and it seems it's only the most basic of upkeep that happens. The district can't even fix the roofs of the buildings without applying for a state grant.
Heywood Jablohme May 18, 2013 at 07:17 am
What professional doesn't spend $500 per year on out of pocket expenses related to their jobs?Read More Staples offering 10% (or 5 in some cases) is hardly an example of the community getting involved. Thankfully, there are other examples of the community and PTA's getting involved and providing needed services. Clarkstown and surrounding areas hardly have substantial unmet needs in their classroom, thankfully.
Truth4all May 16, 2013 at 11:37 am
I guess better late than never. LaCorte is serving his 4th year as Mayor and was Trustee for I thinkRead More 4 years before that. This year is the only time he has brought the idea to the village about participating in this program. He is motivated by the opportunity of getting positive press for his County Executive campaign. The village should have been involved in this program ( as well as the Americorps program) long before this. On a positive note, hopefully the Village will continue this worthwhile partnership for many years to come.