Romney Won It on Points

After you’ve read this special bonus article, Burt hopes you’ll enjoy Deciphering the Left.

If the second presidential debate had been a prize fight, the ringside announcer would have said, “In the right corner, wearing white trunks, is Mitt (“The Gentleman Pugilist”) Romney. In the left corner, wearing black trunks, are Barack (“The Low Blow Kid”) Obama and Candy (“I Wuv You, Barack”) Crowley.

I know that people were complaining about the replacement referees, who officiated at the first few football games this season, but at least they were merely incompetent, they didn’t play favorites.

It figured that at a debate where the live audience was asked not to cheer or boo, the agreement would be broken by Michelle Obama, when she led the applause after Ms. Crowley backed up Obama’s lie about referring to the Benghazi attack as an act of terrorism, in the Rose Garden, on 9/12.

In my eyes, Romney won the night. But he won on a decision. He would have scored a clear knockout if he had been more verbally aggressive. Instead, he came across weakest when he tried to come across strongest, as when he engaged in childish face-to-face squabbling with Obama. It was then that he lowered himself to his opponent’s level.

If I had been prepping Romney for the debate, I would have made certain that he blasted Obama for lying about his plans for immigration reform. During his first two years in the White House, Obama had super majorities in the House and Senate. He didn’t need a single Republican vote, as he proved all too well when he shoved through ObamaCare. In 2008, he lied to Hispanic voters and they rewarded him with two-thirds of their votes. We will have to wait and see if they are equally gullible this time around.

Romney missed a great chance during their exchanges on energy by neglecting to mention that not only had Obama done what he could to destroy the coal industry, to cut oil leases on federal land and doing nothing to counteract soaring gas prices, but he squandered billions of tax dollars investing in solar and wind companies like Solyndra, which quickly went belly up. Apparently, the only collateral these outfits required was proof that their CEOs had donated big money to Obama’s war chest.

What’s more, when asked about the reason that gas is two or three times more expensive in 2012 than when he entered office, Obama said it’s because the economy was so weak in 2009. That is perhaps the looniest answer to a question I’ve ever heard. If the state of the economy had anything to do with the price of gas, shouldn’t the price be the same or even lower in 2012?

Romney also goofed when he let Obama get away with defending Planned Parenthood for providing cancer screenings. They do not offer those services. They merely refer women to places where they are done. Planned Parenthood, which, on top of everything else, flies under false colors, and should be called Planned Non-Parenthood, is in fact the world’s largest abortion mill.

He might also have pointed out that the actual “War on Women” is being waged in the Obama White House, where women doing the exact same job as men, and not an arbitrarily determined comparable job, are paid less than their male counterparts.

When it comes to capitalism, Romney would have done well to point out that Obama is vehemently opposed to the free market version. It’s only crony capitalism that makes his eyes light up and his tail wag.

I also thought that Romney should have done more with the first question from the audience. When 20-year-old Jeremy Epstein, who is apparently a college sophomore, asked Obama what sort of job market he could expect two years down the road, Obama gave one of his canned speeches about the way he planned to improve manufacturing in America. Romney should have pointed out that not only had Obama overseen the loss of many such jobs during his term in office, but, as nice and as necessary as factory jobs are, neither Jeremy nor anyone else goes to college in order to wind up working on an assembly line. But because so many of those jobs require union membership, they are the only ones that Obama really cares about.

Finally, although Romney mentioned the fact that the middle class has been buried for the past four years, it would have been nice if he had mentioned that he heard this from none other than Joe Biden.

As everyone knows or should know by now, the reason that Obama bailed out GM with our tax dollars is because he could then screw the bond holders and turn the company over to his groupies at the UAW.

The most offensive moment during the entire debate came when Obama claimed he had described what occurred at Benghazi as a terrorist attack the day after it occurred, and when Romney tried to rebut, the moderator chimed in to say that Obama was telling the truth. If Obama had actually been telling the truth, we wouldn’t have needed Ms. Crowley to tell us so. The tipoff would have been the moon turning blue and hell freezing over.

Romney’s best moments came when he described his five point plan for restoring America to her full potential and when he described Obama’s agenda as “trickle down government.”

Where Romney’s handlers have let him down is in not providing him with a Reagan-like “There you go again” line with which to underscore every lie Obama tells.

On the other hand, the big story of the evening wasn’t anything Romney said. It was the one-two combination of Obama lying and Candy Crowley backing him up.

If Obama had actually described the attack on our Libyan consulate as a terrorist act, why would he have sent out UN Ambassador Susan Rice five days later on five different Sunday news shows to lay the blame on some dumb video? And why would Obama go to the UN a week later and blame the murder of four Americans on that same video?

For that matter, why would Jay Carney deny the true nature of the attack for two entire weeks, pretending that they needed an FBI investigation to get to the bottom of things, when the consulate cameras and Ambassador Stevens’ own journal told us everything we needed to know about the non-existent demonstration that allegedly led up to the al-Qaeda attack.

And, finally, why 30 days after 9/11, was smarmy Joe Biden still lying about what had taken place in Libya during his debate with Paul Ryan?

Still, I shouldn’t complain. After all, the media has spent four years providing cover for Obama, propping him up and whitewashing his endless lies to the American public. But the one thing they will not abide, we belatedly discovered, is Obama and his stooges lying to them. As a result, instead of the media helping him bury the mess in Libya, they are now helping to bury him.

I found it fascinating that Secretary of State Clinton agreed to go through the motions of falling on her sword for Obama. But that sword was more like a wet noodle. It seems to me that once the Secretary of State takes responsibility for removing security from a consulate and it leads directly to the murder of four members of the diplomatic service, a letter of resignation is called for, and not just a phony pledge to learn from her mistakes and to do better next time.

As we rush towards Election Day, I am reminded of a story a reader sent me a while back. It seems that the director of human resources at a large company was told to hire a black man named Barry to fill an executive position. It was soon discovered that he lacked the necessary skills to do the job, and the director was told to fire him.

When he called the guy into his office to break the bad news, Barry accused him of being a racist.

Patiently, the human resources director explained to Barry that whereas he had been hired because he was black, he was being fired because he was incompetent.

Perhaps during the third debate, Mitt Romney could find the time to share this anecdote. It strikes me as highly relevant.
Now that you’ve read this special bonus article, Burt hopes you’ll enjoy Deciphering the Left.

©2012 Burt Prelutsky. Comments? Write

Author Bio:

Burt Prelutsky, a very nice person once you get to know him, has been a humor columnist for the L.A. Times and a movie critic for Los Angeles magazine. As a freelancer, he has written for the New York Times, Washington Times, TV Guide, Modern Maturity, Emmy, Holiday, American Film, and Sports Illustrated. For television, he has written for Dragnet, McMillan & Wife, MASH, Mary Tyler Moore, Rhoda, Bob Newhart, Family Ties, Dr. Quinn and Diagnosis Murder. In addition, he has written a batch of terrific TV movies. View Burt’s IMDB profile. Talk about being well-rounded, he plays tennis and poker... and rarely cheats at either. He lives in the San Fernando Valley, where he takes his marching orders from a wife named Yvonne and a dog named Angel.
Author website:
  • souvoter

    I agree with all your points, Burt. Mitt Romney did look more presidential. Obama looked like an impetulant child always looking for someone to agree with him; especially when he is wrong. The moderator did what most expected; cover-up for this incompetent, just like the incompetent press has been doing for the last 4+ years!

    • Phil Silverman

      Romney in the 2nd debate looked sweaty, desperate, and was too repetitive. Presidential? No to me. He was better in the first debate. I think you are biased towards Obama. By the way, give me ONE point you say Obama was “wrong” about. Thanks.

      • souvoter

         He lied when he said he called the attack in Lybia a terrorist attack in the rose garden. He only generalized. And for days and days later, he and his administration all blamed it on a stupid video. Now we find out the four Americans that were murdered were begging for more security up to the last day, but were denied. POTUS needs to answer to the American people for this atrocity and their incompetence.

  • souvoter

     Killing babies is not have dignity of others. Maybe you need a lesson on how they are created!

    • Phil Silverman

      the law says that an abortion is allowed within 12 weeks. the law ideally is for rape victims, incest victims, and medically-anatomically challenged women. what’s your issue with that? should an American be forced to deliver a child against Doctor’s orders?

    • choiceone

      I was a victim of forcible rape in 1969. I know, as you apparently do not, that “Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty,” and “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me . . . to preach deliverance to the captives . . . to set at liberty them that are bruised.” No zygote, morula, blastocyst, embryo, or fetus is a captive of a woman or bruised by a rape that caused it: it is free to leave. It is a girl or woman who has been raped and impregnated thereby who is the captive of the embryo or fetus and has been bruised by the rape. The Spirit of the Lord gives liberty to that bruised captive.

  • costhetadtheta

    That logic is awful.  “Anyone incapable of doing that has no respect for the human dignity of others.”  Life begins at conception, which is not arguable it’s a scientific fact, so where is your respect for the human dignity of that life?

    Would you be as vocally in favor of someone having the right to act on his or her belief that another race of people are not entitled to the right to live, to live free, and live well?  Let me answer for you, of course not.  Just because as a free society we have to tolerate poorly thought out beliefs we can still enact laws to protect those whom might be endangered by people acting on those beliefs.

    I have respect for the human dignity of every person.  Sounds to me like you’re the one that doesn’t.  And since Obama seems to share your point of view I will not be voting for him.

  • Mario__P

    Burt, seriously?
    “If the state of the economy had anything to do with the price of gas, shouldn’t the price be the same or even lower in 2012?”

    Did you compare the GDP, corporate profits, and the oil backlog between 2008/2009 and 2012, or are you only looking at the unemployment rate?

    “If Obama had actually described the attack on our Libyan consulate as a terrorist act, why would he have sent out UN Ambassador Susan Rice five days later on five different Sunday news shows to lay the blame on some dumb video?”

    I guess you don’t see the difference between the “act of terror” and the “act of terrorism”. Just think about it, so you can clear your confusion about this issue.

    • brendan horn

      Mariop, Liberals often think that words like “seriously” constitute a solid starting point for a debate. The fact is that Obama has done nothing to bring down the price of oil. High oil prices damage the economy. The higher the price of oil the worse off is our economy except in places like Texas and North Dakota. Obama does not care much about the price of oil. He would like it to sink in the next few weeks and then he will do nothing for four years to keep down oil prices. You are playing a game like most liberals play. You and I know that the average person does not care about the difference between an “act of terror” and the “act of terrorism”. Liberals only care so they can confuse people and change the subject when they know they are on a difficult subject for them. You know liberals are slow to call people terrorists and quick to condemn Republicans. 

      • Mario__P

        Liberals are slow to judge others, because they want to make sure their conclusions are correct. The Conservatives, on the other hand, judging others before thinking, shoot from their waist,  and therefore they make so many blunders when they open their mouths.

        This Benghazi incident is a major issue for the Right, because the Conservatives blur the two obviously different terms, terror and terrorism. If the Right would acknowledge the difference between the two meanings, there would be nothing to bicker about.

        Terror = a state of intense fear.

        Terrorism = use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes.

        How does the average person not care about the two different definitions? Nice try, but no cigar.Regarding the price of oil, the current price per barrel is around $90. What do you wish Obama would do to lower the price, and to what price range?

        • venter

          Terror =  what our representatives in the embassay felt!

          Terrorism =  How threats and  use of violence killed our                         representatives for political purposes!

        • Mario__P

          Thank you venter for understanding the difference between the two. The day after the attack the administration knew what terror the four dead Americans felt. The day after the attack the administration did not know the four American were killed for political purposes, and instead believed the reason was religious.

          If anyone is still not willing to acknowledge the difference between the words TERROR and TERRORISM, and you still claim the average person does not differentiate between the two, then ask yourself whether in tomorrow’s debate you want Romney to continue to interchange the two words as if they were the same, or whether you hope Romney will be careful not to mix the two words. I strongly hope Romney will not see the difference between the two in tomorrow’s debate, so Obama can have his way with Mitt.

        • brendan horn

          Mario, Liberals are not slow to judge others. They are very quick to judge Republicans. They are very quick to distort the words of Republicans. The average person sees dead bodies and wants justice. They do not care about a semantic debate. The Obama administration still refuses to call the Fort Hood massacre a terrorist attack. This has damaged the families of those victims. It is fairly obvious when an attack is a terrorist attack. There is no need for months of analysis. With respect to energy and Obama: at the very least I would like  for Obama to get out of the way of American energy companies. He has given huge handouts to energy companies that have failed and has put roadblocks in front of the most successful forms of American energy. I remember that when he ran for president the first time he said that the energy issues for this country were the most important issues. He has been an incredible failure in his energy policy. His energy policy has actually been a boon for Saudi Arabia and Venezuala. Obama stupidly does not distinguish between American oil companies and foreign oil companies. He wants to end subsidies to American oil companies. Ending these subsidies only benefits foreign oil. 

        • Mario__P


          What is there to be judged when someone says something ridiculous, like “legitimate rape” or a condemnation is an apology? However when something isn’t black or white, and when the average person is seeking revenge, you can’t act on hunches when it comes to human lives.   

          In regards the energy discussion, before I can answer your accusations of what a failure Obama is with his energy policies and how he should do something to bring down the price of oil, I need you to tell me what you believe the price per barrel can be lowered to and with what actions. You avoided giving me an attainable price range. You did mentioned that Obama should get out of the oil companies’ way and he should continue with the subsidies to the American oil companies. Is there anything else he should be doing to lower the ppb?

        • brendan horn

                   Akin is legitimately an idiot. I have not heard anyone defend him. I will not. I am not sure what your “condemnation is an apology” is referring to. I think you are playing a semantic game with that one. 

             The problem with Obama and energy is that he does not value American oil companies, gas companies, and coal companies. If it is good to have our own car companies, it is also obviously good to have healthy American energy companies, healthy banks, etc. We have incredible energy resources in this country. Getting out of the way would be the best thing Obama could ever do. He does not seem to understand the realities of our current energy situation. I will not get into a discussion about the price of oil except to point out that the price is too high now and that Obama has offered no hope and no solution for bringing the price down. 

        • Mario__P


          I hear the Right often complaining that the oil prices are too high and Obama does nothing about it. So I need to know what the Right expects the price of oil to come down to from the current $90. Are they talking only dropping the price to $85  or $80? Or do they expect to drop the price to something like $60 or even lower? It would be helpful to list the desired and achievable gasoline price as well, which currently stands at $3.7/gal. And how would these price drops be accomplished? You complained that Obama isn’t doing anything to drop the oil price, so you have to have a solution and target price. Is your solution to just get out of the oil companies’ way? How can we debate this if you give no specifics?

  • choiceone

    I will vote for the candidate who shows respect for the right of all born people to control their own bodies and particularly their own sex organs.  Anyone who is incapable of doing that has no respect for the human dignity of others.

  • cmacrider

    Burt:  If Gov. Romney did not have the command performance in the second “debate” that he had during the first debate, I suggest it is because this idea of a “townhall debate” is a contradiction in terms.  Either you have a town hall meeting in which the candidates address the concerns of the constituents …. or you have a debate in which the candidates put forward their platform and attempt to discredit their opponents platform.  Any attempt to combine them both is like attempting to combine an all star hitting contest and a world series playoff game into a single event.

    Having listened to the commentaries after the debates, I am surprised that no one focused in on what to me was the most astounding fact.   During the “Benghazi dust up” Obama blurted out to Candy C. “Candy get the transcripts”.   How would Obama possibly know that Crowley had the transcript of the Rose Garden speech conveniently at hand if this wasn’t a set up?????”   Why would Crowley even have the transcript of the Rose Garden speech conveniently at hand so that she could reference it within seconds?  As Alice said in “Alice in Wonderland ” things are getting curiouser and curiouser”.  

  • Artlouis

    Nothing can match “There you go again,” but Romney produced a damn good motto at the last debate: “We deserve better than this.” Sums it up for a lot of people. 

    • GlenFS

      Or as Paul Ryan said via Pink Floyd, “it doesn’t have to be this way”.

  • brendan horn

    Burt, I was surprised when I heard people thought Obama had won the second debate. I thought Obama was the same old Obama I have always seen. He was effective at making excuses, blaming others for his failures, lying,  and in general distorting the records of others. It should take more than that to win a debate.  I think the libs realized they could not be honest after the second debate no matter what happens. They had to pretend that Obama won otherwise the campaign would already be over. 

    Planned Parenthood should change their name to Plan to End Parenthood. 

    • BurtPrelutsky

      Brendan: It’s not really ending parenthood, it’s sole purpose is to prevent it.
      The question of who won the second debate is a moot one.  If you like Romney, he won it; otherwise, Obama won it.  It doesn’t matter.  It’s not the baseball playoffs.  The only debate that mattered was the first one because people got to see for themselves that the vile ads the DNC and Team Obama had been running were all lies.  Romney got to show 70 million people the sort of man he is, and all those millions of dollars that were spent producing and airing the ads might as well have been burned up in a bonfire.


      • Ted

         If life begins at conception, those abortion clinics are ending parenthood.

  • BurtPrelutsky

    Brandt: I limit my Fox watching to Bret Baier’s Special Report and fast-forwarding through Bill O’Reilly.  It’s what I would recommend to others, but they are free to watch whatever they want….although why anyone would waste his time with Sean Hannity or Sheppard Smith is anyone’s guess.


    • wally

      Many on Fox news have a point to make. Even Hannity,although I will admit he is the counter to MSNBC so maybe that is  worthwhile. I enjoy Greta on some of her shows and watch Stossel and Cavuto to get another perspective.
        In Brant’s comments I see the worst side of Liberals of spewing hate.
      He calls his blog Artist’s?
        I seem to recall that during the women’s rights portion of the debate, Obama stated that contraceptives are a economic issue. If that is the case, why would any insurance company pay for them. They should only pay for medical procedures and medicines for illness and infection. To pay for economic issues would be great as long as I can get a new car from the insurance company.  

    • Larry B

      With TV and radio personalities such as Hannity, they and he begin to get tiresome and annoying as time passes, even though you might agree with them.  His stupid little football (I could give him advice on where to stuff it!), his endless repeating of mindless phrases (“Let not your heart be troubled”), his referring to women panel guests as “guys,” and his endless questions (someone wrote that Hannity once asked a question with 172 words!), all indicate he’s worn out his welcome with me.  The arrogant and nasty Shepard Smith is in a class all his own.

  • Brandt Hardin

    Candy did a great job.  All the negativity comes from the sore losers- the talking heads guarding the inhabitants of Bullsh*t Mountain from rejoining the world of the sane.  Fox News is a propaganda machine which dumbs down America by the day through disinformation and their slanted agendas.  See the whole gang of anchors spewing forth feces from their mouths in my visual homage to the network on my artist’s blog at

  • Dave O’Connor

    I’m cerainly not alone with my perception of Mitt Romney as being a bit ‘stiff’. (“Even {his} best friends”… say so.)However, he has the capacity, a talent (maybe the missiony gig), of inviting some people (of course not inoculated liberals) up to a higher level.Note, please, I used the term “invite”.In his campaign for governor, his opponent, Shannon O’Brien, among other offers to show she was one of the guys,  commented about showing him her tatoo.  (Pretty much, an in your face – and the voters’s faces, too – manuever.)Mitt’s comment was simply to the effect “That’s not becoming (sic)”.  Of course, it wasn’t the knock-out punch; but the folks kinda liked it.
    He only allowed himself the quip to lift  the sophomore in OBrien to a higher level of dialogue.  Then, not indulging, he got right back to figues.
    A bit stiff?  Yup. But, some folks enjoy some decorum.

    • BurtPrelutsky

       Dave:  When people insist that Romney is stiff, I believe they are merely echoing what liberals say.  If you watched him at the recent Al Smith dinner, it was Obama who came off as stiff while Romney was channeling his inner Bob Hope.


      • cmacrider

        Bingo!!!  May I add that after a few years of the Romney presidency, when America has been exposed to Mitt Romney, they will discover that they elected a good and decent man who has restored dignity to the office of President and respect for America throughout the rest of the world.

        • Dave O’Connor

          Quite right, cm.  He may well elevate the wqhole dialogue.

      • Dave O’Connor

        I quite agree, Bert, having served on the MA GOP State Comm.
        He possesses a n artistic subtlty in his humor.
        Maybe more than the public can handle.

  • Tdivison

    I never did like the idea of Candy Crowley moderating the debate. Back 2008, I watched Crowley interview then Candidate Obama. She was so giddy and overcome by the vapors that she could hardly get her questions out. I remember at the time thinking how embarrising that was. TV commentators should go back and watch that 2008 interview.

    • BurtPrelutsky

       Td:  I didn’t recall the earlier interview, but Obama seems to have that effect on a great many male TV interviewers, including Jon Stewart, David Letterman and Chris Matthews, which is really creepy.


  • GlenFS

    Burt,  I enjoyed your redux of the debate.  I too had been waiting for Romney to play the Solyndra card during the energy debate.  It must have been a strategic decision not to revisit it since he’d already impaled Obama on it in debate #1.

    I agree that he should have stayed out of the childish Obama: “did too/did not”, and noticed that it played to Obama’s advantage every time Romney addressed him with a direct question.  He won based upon the lies he forced, all of which were plain for everyone to see… including his Rose Garden nuanced gambit/lie.

    • BurtPrelutsky

       Glen: I hope Romney learned his lesson.  When Romney speaks directly to us, he is unbeatable.  When he confronts Obama, he just looks churlish.


  • Bruce A.

    As a business owner I absolutley hate having to let someone go.  As a taxpayer, parent, grandparent & voter I will truly enjoy pushing the Romney Ryan button on Nov. 6 2912.

    • BurtPrelutsky

       Bruce: Please don’t wait 900 years to do it.  Election Day is just 17 days off.  My wife and I have already voted.  Neither of us is getting any younger and we didn’t want to risk dying before doing our part to help save this great nation.


      • Bruce A.

        I’m not that old,  but then again yo never know.