What’s the most overlooked story this week?

It’s something that is overlooked because it didn’t happen – the debate over the debates. As far as I know, there was absolutely no question at all that presidential debates would happen this year, and any arguments about format were settled long ago and without any publicity at all.

Yesterday, PostScript conducted a symposium on how happy we here in the Lamestream Media are that the game is irrevocably changed. The New World Order is still falling into place, but we have some important updates to the Old World Order, as seen in Charles Krauthammer’s column today and the commenters’ reactions to it.

Krauthammer describes the NWO as being very similar to the OWO, except that now the media can no longer obscure the truth about Mitt Romney and Barack Obama. Now, as Krauthammer says, media bias is totally impotent:

“Disappointed 2008 Obama supporters . . . watch Romney in this debate and ask: Is this the clueless, selfish, out-of-touch guy we’ve been hearing about from the ads and from the mainstream media? And then they see Obama — detached, meandering, unsure. Can this be the hip, cool, in-control guy his acolytes and the media have been telling us about?”

So now that the media can’t cover up the truth, we can believe them? It’s all so confusing! PostScript is here to help, and she, in turn, is being helped by Commenters, who are amazingly sure of themselves. We are now about to tweeze wheat from chaff, truth from lies.

Lie: Any suggestion that the race is not over, or that Obama might win. Truth: The race is over, and Obama — exposed for the empty suit he is — goes down.

daveprice74

Romney just about wrapped up the election last night. He was already ahead using any reasonable 2012 turnout numbers. Of course, you probably live in the lefty bubble, so you think Obama’s been winning.

Get ready for a POP! Next month.

After his lackluster performance at Wednesday’s debate, I was very close to putting President Obama’s visage on a milk carton until I saw his feisty, energized and pointed performance at a Denver campaign rally the next day. As for Mitt Romney, I’m still trying to figure out how he’s going to lower tax rates by 20 percent and not “under any circumstances raise the taxes on middle-income Americans” to pay for it. Perhaps he thought if he repeated that assertion enough folks would ultimately believe it to be true.

Meanwhile, The Daily Caller played the race card with a five-year-old video of an Obama speech that was widely reported at the time. A Romney surrogate called the president “lazy” during a television interview yesterday. And Teddy Roosevelt finally won the President’s Race at Nationals Park on the same day the Washington Nationals clinched for the first time a playoff berth on their way to the World Series.

So, sharpen your pixels and get crackin’ to find out what whether Honey Boo Boo p-Ops up in the quiz.
Mitt Romney poses for a photo with workers as he makes an unscheduled stop at a Chipotle restaurant in Denver, Tuesday, Oct. 2, 2012. (Charles Dharapak/AP)

Possibly the only thing we in the Lamestream Media like more than the term GAME-CHANGER is an actual occurrence of a change in the game. It’s freaking delicious when something actually happens after about a month of an election being on a steady course. We went nuts when John McCain chose Sarah Palin because it was a totally new thing to write about. We write about the thing itself, and then we write about all the changes to the game it represents. Everything is different now! Let me tell you all the ways!

(A game-changer also helps disguise things if our predictions are maybe not coming true. Of course we were wrong before! The game is totally different now!)

So despite our lockstep socialism here in Obama’s tank, we are utterly delighted to have ourselves a game-changer. Seriously, five more weeks of Obama up by around six points, and home free in the swing states? We might have to look extra close at old, discredited game changers. Who was the baby Barack Obama II born in Hawaii whose birth certificate they stole?

Now, it’s unnecessary.

Sure, since the conventions, Obama had been cruising along in the polls, not because he’s doing great — he’s not — but because Romney was terrible. Romney’s been comically evasive, refusing to explain financial details of policies everyone knows can’t work. He’s been awkward, getting caught on tape giving up on half the country, attacking entitlements and tax breaks that people happen to like. He’s made weird little jokes and laughed at them like someone you move away from on the bus.

But now! Obama totally sucks at debate, all feeble and irritated! He’s petulant. He’s tired. Romney is a human who isn’t just out for himself and his buddies! He makes recognizable jokes! Okay, he’s still not telling us policy details, but . . . the game has totally changed and we Lamestreamers are giddy with the possibilities!

And there will be totally new things to write about it tomorrow! Whoo Hoo!

But for the commenters on Matt Miller’s piece today, nothing has changed all that much except that Obama finally revealed himself for the shallow shell they always knew he was, and Romney is a flip-flopper. Miller writes that Romney won this debate, no contest, and he did it by totally subverting our expectations of him, with Obama unwittingly assisting by being, uncharacteristically, a lump. But the commenters always knew this of our heroes, and they’ve been waiting for everyone else to catch up:

mmarii knew it all along:

Four years ago, as a Senator Hillary Clinton Supporter, I mentioned that Obama was a Media Social Construction; he was inexperience[d]. For years later, he confirmed my comments. No Obama! He doesn’t deserve four more years!

Last night’s presidential debate in Denver was not only notable because of the reset it gave Mitt Romney’s floundering campaign. Or because it was a wake-up for a seemingly somnambulant President Obama. The 90-minute showdown will be notable for what was never discussed: Poverty.

Sure, Romney rattled off a host of troubling statistics on the number of people on food stamps and other forms of government assistance. But nothing was explicitly said by either candidate about what they would do to break the grip of poverty on millions of Americans, especially children.

Advocates have been ringing the alarm about the deafening silence on poverty during much of the campaign. First Focus, a bipartisan group pushing to make children and families a priority, released a “Children's Budget 2012”in June that showed only $.08 of every federal dollar is invested in children.