Mitt Romney Wins All-Important BS Contest

readersupportednews.org, Rolling Stone by Matt Taibbi | Oct. 6, 2012 (Opinion)

I didn't watch the debate - I just couldn't. I read it in transcript form afterwards. I know it is widely believed that Mitt Romney won, but I don't agree. I think both candidates lost. I think they both sucked. Romney told a series of outright lies - the bit about the pre-existing conditions was incredible - while Barack Obama seemed unaccountably disinterested in the intellectual challenge of the exercise, repeatedly leaving the gross absurdities hurled ... Full Story »

Posted by Dwight Rousu

See All Reviews »

View

Review

Randy Morrow
4.5
 by Randy Morrow - Oct. 7, 2012

Romney’s performance was better than Obama’s, but only if you throw out criteria like “wasn’t 100% full of shit from the opening bell” and “made an actual attempt to explain who he is and what his plans are.” Unfortunately, that is good enough for our news media, which drools over the gamesmanship aspects of these debates, because it loves candidates who sink their teeth into the horse-race nonsense that they think validates their professional lives. —— It’s one thing for reporters to talk shop behind the scenes about which candidate they think is doing a better job of slinging bull. But to legitimize it as real is just nuts. —- Romney’s entire debate performance was like this. He said absolutely nothing, but got lots of credit for style points.

Mr. Taibbi sums up the first debate.

See All Reviews »

Randy's Rating

Overall
4.5

Good
from 11 answers
Quality
4.5
Information
4.0
Insight
5.0
Style
4.0
Context
4.0
Expertise
5.0
Originality
4.0
Relevance
5.0
Responsibility
5.0
Popularity
4.5
Recommendation
5.0
Credibility
4.0
More How our ratings work »