In coverage of the first Presidential Debate of 2012, even though Mitt Romney told more lies than Barack Obama,  he was judged the winner because he was aggressive. Never mind the substance, never mind the falsehoods, flip-flops, the breaking of the debate rules; none of that matters to the media, who judged Romney the “Winner”.

By using such logic: John Dillinger made a number of successful bank withdrawals; Jeffrey Dahmer was a chef; Charles Manson was a philosopher; Jim Jones was a wonderful charismatic preacher; and Adolf Hitler was a genetic scientist.

Seriously, how did this country get to the point where honesty, integrity, and the rule of law do not apply to politics? Politicians lie, steal, and cheat, and far too many of us re-elect them anyway. And they rightly take that re-election as permission to act in manners that are even more corrupt. And the media plays right into the hands of these scumbuckets, by focusing on stories and people who add to their profit margins instead of promulgating accurate information.

Yes, Obama sucks at debate. As we have seen before, he brings a rubber chicken to a gun fight, and never seems to learn that “republicans” are not an honest, honorable, law-abiding party. So he gets pummeled in the eyes of the uniformed because he refuses to recognize how big a lot of sociopathic scuzballs his opponents are. But that does not mean that Romney should be judged the “winner” of a contest when he cheated outrageously during said event.

The media as a whole (and the debate moderator) are making the NFL Replacement referees look good. That is how bad the parties and the media have gotten.

Mr. B & C