You are on page 1of 1

Biweekly 5 Name, Date, Block: Mike Liao, 10/22/2012, 3A Title of Show viewed: Third Presidential Debates Obama vs.

Romney Date, time, and network: 10/22/2012, 9:00 pm -9:30 pm, and NewYorkTimes Name of host: Bob Schieffer Name of guest: Barack Obama and Mitt Romney The foreign policy debate begins with the moderator, Bob Schieffer, who begins the debate by introducing the two candidates. The first segment is about the changing Middle East. The first part is the concerns of the Middle East and the events around it. Romney starts first by stating the importance of the Middle East and the changes occurring. He names several good examples like Syria’s civil war and Mali being taken over as bad changes that Americans should help. Obama counters by saying the president should only protect its citizens as the high priority, for example Bin Laden is dead. Next, Obama mentions the actions he took after the events in Libya was exactly as the president should have done. Afterwards, Obama attacks Romney by saying his plan is as good as no plan. Romney defends by saying his plan is broad and generic so that Muslims would reject violence. Thus Romney said his plan is long term rather than Obama’s short term. Obama turns Romney’s recognition of Al-Qaeda as the biggest threat to America against Romney. Obama said, “The 1980s are calling now asking for their foreign policy back.” Thus, Obama is essentially saying Romney is old-fashion and not up-to-date. Obama’s entire argument is that Romney keeps changing his policies and only wants to please the voters. At the end, Romney brings the debate back to the policy. Romney defends his position by clearing up Obama’s accusation. Obama and Romney then started talking over each other about troop deployment in the Middle East. Obama is allowed to talk and states his agenda which is 1) make sure these countries support counter-terrorist methods 2) make sure they standing up our interest in Israeli 3) these allies protect minorities 4) economic development 5) nation building with American leadership. Schieffer then directed the debate to Syria. Obama says we have supported the Syria opposition indirectly with the international community, but America won’t directly provide arms or go in without global support. Romney says if we do help, then Syria could provide to be a strong ally in the future. Both agree that any help (firearms) needs to be with care and Assad needs to go. The difference is Romney wants a direct American leadership role while Obama rejects Romney as too reckless. Romney keeps stressing the need for firearms. Obama provides a good point saying Romney has no better idea than the Obama administration has. The debate was overall successful in giving details towards both candidates’ stand in foreign policy, particularly the Middle East. I thought each candidate thinking before they said anything was a good idea for the debate. On the first topic of the Middle East, I thought Romney had the better plan but Obama had the better outline. Romney stated that his plan was to have the Muslims reject violence on their own thus solving the violent problems of their world. Though it seems redundant, I believe it does make a lot of sense and Romney did back up his plan by saying Muslims scholars agreed. The weakness of the plan was Romney did not do a great job of selling it. I understand that the plan is broad but if Romney what Obama had done, then he would have been much better and won the debate so far. The reason being is that Obama consistently attacks Romney as being too unsure and contradicting. On the other hand, Obama began with stating the job of the commander-in-chief so I knew at least the incumbent knows what he is doing. Then, Obama stated his foreign plan out in the Middle East 1) make sure these countries support counter-terrorist methods 2) make sure they standing up our interest in Israeli 3) these allies protect minorities 4) economic development 5) nation building with American leadership, he gave the audience something they could really focus and agree with. However Obama makes a little logic error between his Middle East plan and the job of the commander-in-chief. By saying the president should first help its citizens, then number 4 of his plan should really be done in America as oppose to the Middle East. For me, I would go with Romney since I understood his foreign policy as a long term policy which would beat a short term one. Next, the current new Syria I felt was won by Obama. The reason being is Obama pointed out that Romney would not do anything else that Obama would not do. The significance of the debate over Syria shows the US government is not too dominate in the global community and that the scope of the government is hugely focused on domestic policy, which is the way it should be.