This website is a member of Liberty Alliance, which has been named as an company.

The democrat strategy: talk fast, interrupt, call names, and lie … plus a good Romney next move.

Written on Friday, October 12, 2012 by

peirsmorgan

 

One of the most disgusting displays I’ve ever seen by a politician was on the Piers Morgan show. It was by a politician who I’d never seen before (thank God), former Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm. In a fast talking, high energy tirade she said that the fact checkers found “27 lies that Mitt Romney spoke in a period of 38 minutes” … as if she really expected anyone to believe such an outlandish claim. But given the sound bite nature of politics in the media, maybe some unfortunately did. I have to admit, it greatly angered me to see a politician stoop that low.

 

It astonished me that a perpetrator of such disgusting lies and the interrupting, fast-talking way she delivered them could become a governor in this country. How could that happen?

 

Another disappointing aspect of this show was that Newt Gingrich, who was on a 3 way split screen with her and Piers Morgan, didn’t effectively counter and correct her. During the GOP primaries it was thought that Newt might be the most formidable challenger to Obama (or any democrat) in a debate. But that proved to not be the case, at least in this interview. The same expectations are being made of Paul Ryan against Biden. I hope that he comes through on Thursday. I think that he will.

 

Regarding strategy for Mitt in this next debate, I would say that he should right off the bat say, “you and your campaigners have been repeatedly calling me a liar, which is not only unfounded, but a disgusting level for a president to stoop to. So now, let’s go point by point and clear up some of your slanderous accusations so that America won’t be fooled by them and so America can see the true nature of the democrats.” I think that if he did that, it would greatly throw off and rattle Obama into another poor, stammering, guilty performance and take away the bluster that has been exhibited by him on the campaign trail and his cohorts. But if Obama tries to stand behind them, then he injures himself by showing that he is willing to stoop to trying to push lies.

 

One more point. After the last debate, the dems criticized Obama for not bringing up Romney’s 47% quote, which also surprised Republicans that he didn’t do that. But no one that I heard mentioned what I think was the real reason why he didn’t. I think that he didn’t do it because he knew that Romney would adequately refute it and thereby take away one of the stronger dem attacks against him.

 

What I think that we saw in the last debate was someone and their party talking slanderously about their opponent behind their back, but when confronted directly with that opponent in person, and his great ability to diffuse their accusations of him, Obama became sheepish when confronted with the reality of how well Romney did. It’s easy to talk bad about someone with lies behind their back, but not so easy when they are standing right there and there are 67 million people watching and your job is on the line. The spin has been saying that Obama looked “annoyed” and “disinterested.” But to me he looked guilty and scolded.

 

Byline: Dennis Marcellino is the author of The Plague Of Liberalism (which can be seen at www.ThePlagueOfLiberalism.com) and THE Solutions (which can be seen at www.TheOptimumPoliticalSolutions.com). He is also available to speak: www.BiblicalValues.com, where you can also donate to his PAC: Americans for Biblical Values.

 

 

Posting Policy
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse. Read more.