If Mitt had walked up to Obama and accused him of being a socialist or demanded proof of eligibility; if he had demanded an explanation of Obama's relationship with Wright and Ayres or release of college transcripts, then, yes, that would have certainly been aggressive.
As it is, all Mitt did was defend his own record and positions against leftist distortions. Since when is it considered aggressive to defend yourself?
Romney was barely assertive but Obama is so thin-skinned even this was a shock to his system.
There’s a difference between being prepared - willing to recite your beliefs, and being aggressive.
If you look a man in the eye (something Obama can’t do) and cite your beliefs and plans and reasons why you disagree, and you do this with a smile on your face, and you do it with conviction, it is not “agressive”...it’s called honest.
You are precisely correct. The left is a ‘drive-by’ group - they shout out some insane factoid and off they go. They are not prepared to be challenged in real debate. None of them. It is the modus operandi of left-wing mouthpieces, and we see it all the time on any news show that features some semblance of debate - the leftie shouts out some opinion or unsupported factoid and keeps shouting over everybody else in the conversation. That is why it is fun for me to watch somebody like Artur Davis, because he has the experience to go up against leftie commentators.