When you get a headline like “Why Was President Obama So Bad?” from Fox News it’s one thing, but a bit of another when it’s Chris Cillizza at the Post. Cillizza accounts for Obama’s poor performance with four reasons:
The problem with these as excuses for poor performance is that they were all dead obvious long before the debate. Get used to being to challenged, dude, that’s what debating means! Get rested. Work around your weaknesses to your strengths. And of course a right-wing Texan is gonna screw you if he can; duh! You have to be ready to defend yourself.
In my opinion the real reasons for the poor performance are somewhat different. I’ve got two biggies that Cillizza appears to ignore, and the first is the Presidential attitude. Incumbents generally approach debates as places to avoid fucking up rather than to find ways of scoring. This approach significantly reinforces the second reason, Obama’s major flaw as a public servant, namely what appears to be his constitutional incapacity to fight. What he displayed last night was an inability to defend himself from blatant falsehoods, an inability to call bullshit when bullshit was brandished. That’s why he’s sucked as a President. He’s gotta be able to stand for something. Other than re-election.