and half way through it I went to bring up on my screen David Corn's article with the reference to Monty Python, then finished reading and saw you were already referringto it . For the others, here is the link http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/10/romney-obama-debate-october-3 I think it's a good analysis, or at least it matches pretty well my own perceptions and interpretations. Here are the Monty Python paragraphs:
The president was also placed at a disadvantage when Romney adopted what might be called the Monty Python defense. Obama repeatedly accused the former Massachusetts governor of proposing a $5 trillion tax cut that would likely increase the deficit, force massive cuts in government spending on education, health care, research, environmental programs, and the like, and lead to higher tax bills for the middle class. In response, Romney essentially said, "It does not."
Obama referred to studies that supported this conclusion. Romney said that there are other studies that say it does not. When Obama insisted he was accurately describing Romney's plan, Romney said, no you're not, and claimed that he would not pass any tax plan that added more to the deficit. Obama said that there was no way Romney could lower tax rates and remain revenue neutral without removing deductions that would hike the tax bill for middle-income families. Nope, Romney said, not so: "I will not add to the deficit with my tax plan."
Romney was throwing his tax proposal under the bus. But Obama didn't appear to have a good response to this reality-defying tactic. He wasn't able to nail Romney squarely for his long-running evasions regarding the deductions he would eliminate to make up for the revenue lost due to lowered tax rates. Romney seemed to be engaged in magical thinking concerning his economic planand perhaps discerning viewers picked up on thisbut Obama couldn't quite rattle him.