The First Presidential Debate - The "Puppet Master" Wasn't On The Stage


By all accounts, mine included, Mitt Romney won the first presidential debate. The president came across as not ready for someone who actually presented a criticising approach. Romney came out fighting. Even the very "progressive" and avid Obama fan, Dave Letterman, seemed to feel the president didn't do well (Watch the clip at the bottom of this offering).

It was so lopsided as to be slightly unreal. After all, the president is a highly skilled politician and knows better than to come unprepared for the (or any) competition. So, what's going on here?

Bill Maher, an ultra Obama fan, tweeted, “I can’t believe I’m saying this, but Obama looks like he DOES need a teleprompter.” (Note: Maher subsequently deleted the tweet) I feel that Maher is dead on with his comment.

As we are all aware, Obama is a master at giving a speech. BUT, only when he has a teleprompter. Without one he tends to stumble, fumble, and come across as unprepared. It's as though there's a "pupper master" behind the scenes preparing the teleprompter. With the teleprompter Obama comes across as eloquent, knowledgeable, and "presidential". Without one he comes across as, well, "not so much" the attributes just listed.

Clearly, last night the "puppet master" was not to be found.

To a large degree Obama can blame the very liberal main stream media for his poor performance. By main stream media (MSM) I mean the likes of CNN, NBC, CBS, NPR, ABC (and their subsitiaries). The MSM, since Obama started campaigning before the last election, has NEVER challenged Obama on any issue. They NEVER vetted his experience or credentials. They have NEVER offered him any serious questions on policy, or on anything else for that matter. Only accolades have they offered. By giving Obama a "pass" on all things they have done him a great disservice. It seems as though he has never had to "think" beyond the teleprompter.

Obama, himself, is also to blame. I don't mean because he came to the debate unprepared. Anyone can "screw up" now and then. Rather, I mean his response to criticism. "Insiders" at the White House have offered comments on Obama that indicate he is very resistant - even hostile - to criticism, is mostly appreciative only of his own counsel (i.e., those who agree with him), does not engage with his own appointed groups/committees, etc. For example he has not met with his "jobs council" since January 2012 while unemployment remains such a critical issue for us all..

The presidency of the United States is (most likely) the most difficult management job on the planet. It requires a breadth and depth of experience no one person can possess. My management experiences have taught me that it is best to gather around you people with differing ideas - most especially those with whom you may disagree. Dig into each idea, figure out the best approach(s), and then do it. This president only gathers around him those who have his same ideas. Not a plan for success! Without persons willing (an able) to offer alternate views, one will never be ready to counter criticism.

Obama's "isolation" does not lead to a viable information gathering scenario - to Obama's and our detriment.


As an interesting side note, Voice Analysis Technology performed a vioce analysis on each candidate during the debate. This is a kind of "lie detector test".

Here is the company's stated results:

If Barack Obama or Mitt Romney weren’t telling the truth at any point in last night’s debate, it appears they believed their own lies.

The group that got buzz on Wednesday by paying a security firm to use new truth detecting technology to give both candidates a lie-detector test during the debate said the preliminary results do not indicate any major lies from Obama or Romney.

“The lie detector voice analysis tests of the presidential debate were found to be inconclusive by Voice Analysis Technology,” a spokesman for the group, Americans for Limited Government, said Thursday.

“The technology can detect a deception if the person knows they are deceiving, but if they believe what they are saying is true, even if it is not, it is not picked up,” the group said.

The results are apparently a let down for the group, who had suggested that the test could help voters understand when the candidates weren’t being truthful during the debate.

Prior to the debate, Bill Wilson, the president of Americans for Limited Government, said: “For the first time, within a few hours of a political debate, the American people will know if the candidates are telling the truth, and better be able to judge what promises are real, and which ones are nothing more than political pandering,”

It’s possible more information will come out from the test. On Thursday, the group said they were still going over the results. “We are engaging in further review of these reports.”


Note: if you use Internet Explorer and have a problem viewing the video, click here.


Alternative content