By The Tribune-Review
Published: Tuesday, Oct. 9, 2012, 9:05 p.m.
What an enjoyable first debate between President Obama and Gov. Romney. Anyone seeing them for the first time would have assumed Romney was the informed incumbent and Obama was the incompetent challenger.
Throughout the debate, Obama looked confused and almost angry at the treatment he was receiving from Romney. Obama was made to stick to the facts and not his usual rhetoric about what a great opportunity we have with him as our leader.
Obama was very ill prepared for what he was doing. I did agree with him when he said before the debate that he was just an “OK debater.” He can be better prepared for the next debate, but cannot change the results of the last four years.
The irony evident in the first debate is that while given a free ride on all his many failures by the mainstream media, they may have helped Obama lose the election in November by never challenging him to explain anything. The sun was shining on America the morning after the debate.
Upper St. Clair
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Beneficial, irreplaceable
- Proven success
- Funding priorities questioned
- Prison plan & the public’s say
- Ukraine & history
- Shredded Wheat & ‘Low T’