International Media: You Know, This Obama Chap is Pretty Incompetent

Posted by on Oct 04, 2012 at 12:32 pm
obamaprompter2

You think the U.S. media is in total meltdown? Get a load at the view from abroad, where the observers apparently don’t service the administration before their readers.

There’s no need to detain ourselves with any questions over who won last night’s first television debate: the President was trounced. Curiously for a man capable of inspiring a generation, and running the most effective political campaign in History, Barack Obama knows how to look completely uninterested in politics. Indeed, the lugubrious, professorial suit who turned up yesterday looked and sounded like Andrew Mitchell after a bad day at work, short on patience, condescending and out of touch.

A bad day at work? When was the last time he merely had a day at work?

From Australia, via Tim Blair:

MITT Romney scored an easy win over Barack Obama in their first televised presidential debate just five weeks before US voters go to the polls, according to results of an early opinion poll.

A snap CNN poll conducted shortly after the presidential rivals met for their first one-on-one encounter today showed viewers believed the Republican challenger triumphed over the Democrat President by a margin of 67 to 25 per cent.

Mr Obama, while known as a powerful orator, was restrained and at times got bogged down on detail as tried to counter Mr Romney’s claims about his handling of the economy, taxes, financial regulation and healthcare.

Know as a powerful orator only by those who declared him a powerful orator. I’ve now dubbed him The Wizards of Uhhs. Seriously, if you kept track of how many time he said uhhh last night it had to reach a thousand. I tried during one two-minute segment and lost track after 20 or so.

More from Australia:

Barack Obama, the man considered by many to be the greatest political orator of his generation, was left rambling and flat footed many times during the first presidential debate.

Moments after the debate ended Mitt Romney was declared the winner by TV commentators and millions following it on social media.

In the end there were no zingers; no knockout blows; no major blunders. But there was a winner: Mitt Romney. After several reboots and roll-outs he finally, finally found his voice. He wasn’t likeable, but he was believable. Gone were the gaffes, the stiff, wooden persona and the excessive caution. He came out fighting and he kept on swinging.

Fluent, strident, confident – he made his case.

Barack Obama on the other hand appeared nervous, distracted and unprepared. After four years in the Oval Office, he’d lost his voice. Gone was the charisma, the optimism and the eloquence. Defensive, halting and verbose – he looked tired and that made his presidency look tired. Both campaigns set low expectations, but only Obama met them. If you were watching without knowing who was the president, you wouldn’t have guessed it was him.

The Daily Mail, never understated:

Barack Obama has been savaged over his performance in last night’s presidential debate, with one commentator even suggesting that he was less effective than the hapless Jimmy Carter.

Even those who have been the President’s most enthusiastic cheerleaders in the past lined up to denounce the evening as a ‘disaster’ for Mr Obama, and worried that Mitt Romney’s resounding win would allow him to turn around his struggling campaign.

Prominent Obama fans admitted the President as ‘off his game’, with one even saying: ‘I don’t know what he was doing out there.’

But perhaps the most stinging blow came from the Right, with one conservative commentator quipping: ‘Not since Jimmy Carter faced Ronald Reagan has the U.S. presidency been so embarrassingly represented in public. Actually, that’s an insult to Jimmy Carter.’

From Canada:

Written off by much of the American media as a long shot, Romney had everything to prove in this, the first of three debates that will sharpen a bitterly divided country as it enters the home-stretch to Nov. 6.

It was expected to come in the form of “zingers.” And while there were a few — “trickle-down government” was the go-to rhetorical device, as Romney made the case for replacing Barack Obama — it was more the sheer comfort level of the former Massachusetts governor that carried the night.

RECAP: U.S. presidential debate

Obama, by contrast, played the debate with extreme caution, maintaining a calm, professorial demeanour and avoiding several obvious counterattacks as he wandered through the policy weeds of the past four years.

The president’s performance was that of a front-runner protecting a lead. A rusty front-runner, even, this being his first unscripted, head-to-head encounter since 2008.

For the instant-opinion commentariat, there was no question — Romney won on points, and plenty of them.

What most Americans got to see for the first time also was Romney uncensored. As most ignore primary debates this was the first time millions have seen him as he really is, a polished, competent effective leader with the ability to think on his feet and not left to rely on scripted talking points and demagoguery, that which has passed for the so-called soaring oratory the leftist media has long been enthralled with. Obama was exposed for the first time in years, nobody left to protect him or to to softballs to. He got hit and got hit hard. For once someone finally punched back, and punched back hard. Obama’s glass jaw was shattered.

19 Responses to “International Media: You Know, This Obama Chap is Pretty Incompetent”

  1. MT Geoff on 4/04/12 at 1:00 pm

    So many reporters seem astounded by the emergence of a personable Gov Romney and a stiff, stumbling and arrogant Pres Obama. Funny, the president I’ve heard described is the same one I’ve seen all along and so is the challenger. Last night may only have reminded us of who we’re looking at rather than showing us anything new.

  2. jukin on 4/04/12 at 4:09 pm

    Thus proving one of two things:

    A) Reporters are not too smart.

    B) Reporters are thoroughly indoctrinated and have closed minds.

  3. OldmanRick on 4/04/12 at 6:07 pm

    What more can one expect from a small community agitator tied at the hip to a teleprompter? BO was and is nothing more than a reader of what others wrote.

  4. Lightwave on 4/04/12 at 10:50 pm

    John Sununu was correct today. Obamee simply is “not that bright”. He is “lazy”. He is “incompetent”. He is “detached”. He is at best a middling politician raised, as all African-American Democrats are, to a totally undeserving position by affirmative action.

    Compare Obamee to Allen West, Herman Cain, or Mia Love. These are three people who would have annihilated President Affirmative Action in a debate.

    African American Republicans are far more intelligent (as are Republicans in general, wealthier, more educated, more financially successful, more stable.) They have to be, given the immediate reaction to any African-American heretic enough to stray off the Democrat slave plantation.

  5. lyle on 5/05/12 at 12:19 pm

    The president’s performance was that of a front-runner protecting a lead.

    Uh huh. Even the Canandian press can’t bring themselves to admit BO is and always has been an empty suit, skating by on his “blackness” his entire life. If you think that sounds racist, go read his autobiography. He admits as much.

  6. Benson II on 5/05/12 at 2:34 pm

    If you watched closely Obama was not disinterested or tired or any other false description you want to come up with. He was exactly who he’s always been when confronted with truth instead of a$$ kissing. His looks of contempt and softly veiled threat match totally his presidency of secrecy and lies. The only time Obama could ever win a debate is if there was no one else on the stage with him to counter his continuous lies. All Romney did was tell truth to the lies Obama and the press have forwarded for 4 years.

  7. Mike G on 6/06/12 at 3:08 pm

    “Curiously for a man capable of … running the most effective political campaign in History”

    The name of the man who did that was David Axelrod, not Barack Obama. We saw the difference that night.

  8. Tex Taylor on 6/06/12 at 3:26 pm

    I continue to be bewildered that anybody fines Obama a master orator.

    Obama is a master TOTUS and malignant narcissism. Nothing more. He’s of average intelligence, poorly read and shallow, a marginal debater, and a man of no real accomplishment.

    I read this today on another board about The One and his performance and thought it almost perfect.

    ——–

    This debate was most likely the first time in Obama’s life that he was NOT the automatic recipient of Affirmative Action in any significant endeavor.

    And the results clearly showed what happened when he had to compete on an equal basis with his adversary.

  9. richray on 6/06/12 at 4:27 pm

    I just remembered how President Obama started the debate by saying something like the most important thing he would say during the debate was that he was the luckiest man in the world because Michelle Obama married him 20 years ago. He needed to say her last name too? I believe he was looking for some sympathy because it was his anniversary.

    They could have easily had the debate another night. He and his minions chose that night for the debate. If he loves his wife so much why not have the debate the day before or after and spend their anniversary together?

    Romney even bested Obama about his anniversary with his comment on how they were spending it together on stage.

    It was pathetic how Obama would just keep talking about 5 trillion dollar tax breaks for the rich and middle class tax increases no matter how many times he was shown to be wrong. Dare I say lying?

  10. Jack Lifton on 6/06/12 at 5:06 pm

    Imagine if the debate were the first time you had seen, heard, or heard of Barack Obama. Would you call him a “great orator,” “professorial, ” “economically sophisticated, ” or “confident?”

    I remember reading in 2008 that George W. Bush remarked to one of his staffers during the transition that “this fellow doesn’t know what it’s going to be like.” Whether or not former President Bush had said it I recall thinking that no one without executive experience can imagine the demands that the US presidency or, quite frankly, of any executive position.

    Lieutenants do not become generals without going to (war) college and graduating. With Barack Obama we see the end result of pushing a man ahead of his abilities. Simply put: he has failed.

  11. Marty on 6/06/12 at 5:14 pm

    I suppose it’s a defense mechanism for them to say Obama “lost his voice” or say in some other way that he is less than he used to be.

    Because, he NEVER actually demonstrated anything more than the ability to read an empty speech to a friendly audience. The content of his most successful speeches is extraordinarily thin when you read them rather than watch him deliver them to a crowd that so wants to believe that their blissful reaction is divorced from the content.

    Truly the emptiest of suits… or, chairs.

    Regardless of who wins in November, who would have thought the defining political metaphor of the campaign would come from Clint Eastwood?

  12. Carol Bowser on 6/06/12 at 5:47 pm

    I consider Obama a good campaigner but most of that credit goes to the workers of his campaign and his speech writers. I don’t find him a good president nor a good speaker. His cadence of short sentences drives me crazy. It is as if he is pausing for applause. I often wonder who is running the country. Obama’s priories are so off it is so saddening. Who decided we needed the cost of Obamacare while still reeling from a recession? Who used his political capital the first two years to insult the other half of Congress.

  13. X Contra on 6/06/12 at 6:02 pm

    Erstwhile law school faculty now wants an “I” incomplete grade, like slacking students around the world begging for a “do over” for a lost semester.

    Unfortunately, lives are at stake with the president.

    So… He was unprepared for his oral examination. Grade → F.

  14. Tish on 7/07/12 at 5:51 pm

    There is a very simple reason why Obama is perpetually distant and disengaged, why he is remote and isolated and truant from important meetings. It is because he has a massive Inferiority Complex. His arrogance and bluster, exaggeration of his own achievements and bragging (i did this, i did that) and overestimation of his abilities (i know more about foreign policy then my foreign policy experts, etc) are merely a cover for his own sense of inadequacy and low self esteem.

    Recall that he spent much of his formative years getting high and “chooming” instead of being in school and learning. So, as time went by, he fell more and more behind. However, at some point, he also discovered that most people will believe whatever lies you tell them, provided you say it with a sense of authority and conviction. He thus learned how to appear to be knowledgeable without really knowing much of anything at all. He was basically a mile wide but only an inch deep.
    The more he practiced the illusion, the more confident he became in his ability to con people and play whatever role he wanted. By the time he finagled himself into Columbia and Harvard, he was a full blown con artist. He “cheated” his way into those institutions through a combination of affirmative action and shady connections made possible through earlier dealings going back to enablers such as his “mentor” Frank Marshall Davis and his roommate from Occidental College and others. He specifically cultivated those and similar relationships for the express purpose of “getting ahead” using “connections” instead of ever having to do any “real” research and hard work. The far left wing “professors” at Columbia and Harvard were more than happy to welcome a “fellow traveler”.
    If he were to release his transcripts, people would likely be shocked at what classes he actually took (or the lack thereof) and what actual grades he got in them. Did he ever publish any scholarly paper or submit anything for publication while “president” of the Harvard Law Review? Hardly. He would have been a laughing stock. In short,he basically conned his way to the top, never staying in any place too long lest people discover how limited and meager his true abilities actually were.
    Amazingly, he was able to continue this con, with the aide of various leftwing organizations, Chicago politics, dubious “preachers” and other enablers, etc. all the way to state government, the State Senate, the US Senate and finally, the Presidency!
    However, in none of these positions did he ever actually “DO” anything of any significance, preferring to “vote present” in order to avoid making any hard commitments or having to research what the effects of some particular legislation might entail. Better to simply “play it safe” and only stay long enough to make new connections to propel him into higher and higher positions of power.
    He honed the art of campaigning and began to imitate other influential “preachers”,
    adding soaring and lofty rhetoric (and black slang when needed) to his toolbox. His entire time in the oval office was essentially one giant, never ending campaign.
    Unfortunately, since he spent 100% of his time perfecting the art of self-promotion, he never actually learned anything else. He never learned how to solve any of the problems that a chief executive would encounter since he never owned a business or held any job that even remotely required such skills. When he managed to pass his signature healthcare legislation, he pawned off the responsibilities to others. He only “campaigned” for it but none of the actual details were of any interest to him. So long as he could get others to perform the actual work (while he took the credit), he was “safe”.
    However, to “remain safe”, he needed to assiduously avoid any prolonged contact with any “expert” who would be able to spot his inadequacies in fairly short order When in the white house, Valerie Jarrett served as the gatekeeper who controls all access to Obama and whose main responsibility is actually to specifically keep other people away. That actually serves both their interests since it prevents his “secret” from becoming known to all but a few people and it enhances her power in the administration.
    When speaking in public, he uses the teleprompter (once even in an Elementary School!) as a crutch whereby he can recite a carefully scripted and practiced speech on his own time and almost always to a receptive audience (note how he avoids the white house press conferences even though they generally only throw him slow balls). During the rare occasions when he goes off the prompter, you can quickly begin to get an idea of the real person (the mispronunciations, the gaps in general knowledge, the barest functioning knowledge of economics, world history, etc.). Attempting to wean him off the prompter was a disaster and had to be nixed.
    Thus, his isolation and avoidance is really a necessity for him to maintain the illusion (which the main stream media has happily promoted) of being the “smartest man in the room” when, in fact, nothing could be further from the truth. Those who remember Ronald Reagan will recall someone who never shied away from other people. Hopefully, Romney will add to that Reagan legacy.