Good point on the sovereignty. I live in FL and lived overseas. I welcome legal immigrants, but I am sick of the illegals. They drive down wages and take advantage of our resources WITHOUT paying taxes.
way to break down the premise that we need to make mexicans slaves and work for slave wages just so elitist workers don't have to work in meat packing plants or build houses.
annon 7:25 i hope you're on Tom's side, bc he doesn't much want Illegal mexicans here at all; there are plenty of Americans that can do their work - 75% of the ppl i went to High School with do.
Reagan would be proud of Paul's foreign policy. Four years of occupation is exactly the kind of thing Reagan would not have stood for. Paul and Reagan were colleagues and understood reasonable government.
Absolutely, absolutely. Once again, do we really need the moderator or quizzmasters from the ethernet?
I say no, let 'em go bare knuckled.
Early kudos to Mitt tonight. He's on the attack which makes him appear far more spontaneous and sincere. I do think that Mitt gets kind of a bum rap on the aliens at the mansion thing.
Romney looks and acts plastic. He should have chosen reputable contractors to work on his home who obey the law. He created his own problem by hiring a company without checking it out first.
Um, no. Not even close. Nice try though. My candidate knows about your sanctuary state policy too, and soon all Iowans will. You've peaked. Enjoy the ride down.
McCain has the knowledge as well as the moral authority on this one. Not to smart to debate him on POW issues. Romney should shut-up! He keeps looking worse and clearly does not understand the complexity of the issue. He would not make an effective Commander in Chief.
My friends in the infantry over in Iraq have nothing to do, they are coming home 2 months early. All they do is drive around in humvees doing the job of the Iraqi police(or Iraqi army bc the police are still corrupt)
Have to say that it is pretty obvious why our top five beat Hillary in the polls.
The top five of Rudy, Huck, Mitt, Fred and McCain (no disrespect, its like the manliest of men, John Wayne in"McClintock")look so much more Presidential than the Democrats.
Good question. The space program gave people back in the day cohesively something to look forward to generally. What do we have to look forward to as a society today?
Right On TOM! The future of space exploration is in the hands of private entrepreneurs. NASA is worthless today for its bureaucracy it cannot accomplish anything.
Ted, our top five beat Hillary in the polls because it was Zogby Interactive polling online only, which is wholly unreliable. Gallup had Hillary's usual numbers on that same day, based on the traditional telephone surveys.
actually, NASA is not the future of space exploration; if we want to fund it money should be given to the private companies. My brother is an aerospace engineer, i hear about this all the time.
Children of illegal aliens have no choice in the matter. Their parents brought them across the border.. Do we punish the children of American citizens for crimes their parents make? Of course not.
Plus, the program that Huckabee was talking about had some very stringent requirements..the most notable of which REQUIRED that a non-citizen have applied for citizenship, and be in the legal process to become a citizen..
Let me put it to you another way.. We currently have non-citizens serving in the US Military right now... When they return from serving..should they be denied benefits such as the GI Bill, VA care, etc?
Romney started strong, but deteriorated throughout the night after taking fire over his flip-flopping. He basically had to apologize for everything he's ever done.
Tancredo and Hunter did fairly well for the limited screen time they got. Duncan got to talk about the military and guns, Tancredo got to perform on his signature issue, as well as trash space exploration. Nicely done.
Ron Paul's closing was quite nice, but his biggest missed opportunity was not bringing up cutting the IRS before Huck, who seized it like... old Huck on a granola bar. Paul's waffling on the abortion question just might have been fatal.
Huckabee's answers on the bible and the death penalty were pure gold. His fair tax stance just might bail him out of fiscal hot water, but his abortion stance sure won't.
McCain is yesterday's news, and looked it.
Thompson was good for comedy, and that's about it. He can't get into any issues without putting everyone into deep sleep.
Tough to say who came out on top, but the tangible value is that Huckabee is stronger against Romney than he was before the debate.
Why is it our job to care for illegal children? Why don't we return them to Mexico or where ever they came from so their own country can care for them? We do not have the capacity to provide education and services for every child in the world. If the parents are so unhappy with their own country they can come here legally.
As far as non-citizens in the Military, the distinction there is that they are here legally or became legal to get into the military. I know because i do their paper work. Their families, to get Military benefits (and they get a lot), must show some sort/form of legality as well.
Isolationism was NOT a cause of WW2, far from it. Roosevelt did everything that he possibly could to maneuver us into that war. Last debate McCain said Smoot-Hawley was a cause of WW2. I suppose Il Duce marched on Rome because of Fordney-McCumber.
Not used to seeing Rudy at a podium talking about guns without being surrounded by Chuck Schumer and Sarah Brady.
He talks alot about his crime prevention strategies. Let's not forget that when Kerik took these same strategies to LA, they didn't work.
The black-on-black crime question was an opportunity for someone to knock one out of the park. The absolutely asinine war on drugs and the failed government education system have decimated the black community.
They entrust their future to people like Al $harpton and Je$$e Jack$on who tell them that there is no hope and that they are trapped in a racist system. Because of this, young blacks have no idea about the opportunities that exist for them in America. Therefore, they have no idea how to ACCESS those opportunities.
Back up, brother or sister you need to back up one further analytical step.
WW2 had many "causes", some of which were very much trade oriented. the extent or importance of any one cause remains the source of much historical debate-one in which i will enjoy debating.
But rational historical judgment certainly, and uncontestably, demonstrates that the isolationism of the US and the appeasement policies of France and the UK made ww2 a global conflagration.
Had france and the UK attacked Germany when Adie remilitarized the Rhineland or occupied Austria there would have been no larger European War.
Had we begun rearming earlier than '36, and to a much greater extent we would have been much, much less likely to have a war with Japan. Cannot say for sure there because the Japanese were much more formidible that the Germans until '39 or maybe even '40and powerful elements in Japan wanted war with the US and the UK.
The US was engaged already through Lend/Lease. A land war in Europe WAS NOT OUR FIGHT. Indeed, you had Nazis and Communists wiping each other out in large numbers, where was the problem? Evil fighting evil.
The fact was that the New Deal was a colossal failure. There was a WORSE crash in 37 than the crash of 29 and the NIRA had destroyed our industrial capacity. Most of the New Deal money was channeled into states with heavily DemocRAT populations or states heavy in electoral votes.
There were plans drawn up for a war with Germany (Plan Dog) and Japan (Plan Orange). These two plans coalesced into Rainbow Five, which was leaked on December 4, 1941. The only problem was how to enter the war.
SecWar Stimson, in his diary, stated that there were cabinet discussions regarding the best way to get the Japanese to fire the first shot. Had the United States gone along with Konoye's proposal in 41, we could have avoided the slaughter of our boys at Pearl Harbor.
As for the Smoot-Hawley argument: Total imports were 4% of the GNP at the time and Smoot-Hawley applied to only 1/3 of that.
Are you and McCain legitimately trying to argue that an tariff increase on 1.4% of the GNP triggered the collapse of 5,000 banks, wiped out 5/6 of the stock market, caused a 46% drop in GNP and sent unemployment to 25% AND triggered a war?
What battlefield would you have preferred. After the German global rearmament was prepared for completion?
Maybe after the UK surrendered and the Germans obtained treaty rights to naval bases in Iceland and Greenland, just to make their occupancy of such bases legal?
Do you think history would have resolved itself without some war some time with Japan? War with Japan was inevitable. They obliged us by striking first.
As for Pearl Harbor, they also would have not been slaughtered had the airplanes been dispersed and scrambled when the radar picked up the incoming Japanese flights.
Had we used a more aggressive sub screen hundreds of miles from Hawaii we would have a better result.
Had the fleet been partially at sea we would have had a better result.
If the weather was better and CinCPac got the war communications in a timely fashion we could really have ambushed the first wave adn destroyed it. Think of the mass of anti-aircraft fire that all those battleships, not to mention everything else, could have put in the air-after the Japanese strike fought its way through the American fighters.
Pearl Harbor was the result of grossly reduced vigilance. Something emotional mind could not forsee even if human logic made it seem rather obvious, especially in retrospect. Pearl Harbor was hardly the inevitable result of the American policy of Japanese containment.
You overlook the fact that Hitler DID NOT conquer Britain. If one reads Mein Kampf, you get a glimpse into Hitler's mindset. His vision was that the natural direction for Germany to expand was Eastward, hence Barbarossa. Conquering ze French was the way to secure his rear. The fight with Britain was collateral damage. Not to mention that, when the Americans invaded North Africa, we had to fight ze French in order to land, but I digress.
I have to admit, I am not the first one to propound the idea that we should have just let the Nazis and Communists kill each other off. The idea was first proposed by a Senator from Missouri named Harry Truman.
The Japanese were bogged down in Manchuria. Fumimoro Konoye, the leader of the Peace party and prime minister at the time, went to Ambassador Joseph Grew and told him that the Japanese would withdraw from Manchuria if the United States would lift the embargo on oil and scrap iron.
SecState Hull killed the deal and the only thing left between Japan and desperately needed oil and scrap iron was the American fleet at Pearl Harbor. By October 41 Konoye was out and Tojo was in and the rest is history.
You are right that there were many errors at Pearl Harbor and Kimmel did not have all the information he needed.
they also would have not been slaughtered had the airplanes been dispersed and scrambled when the radar picked up the incoming Japanese flights.
Where were our aircraft carriers? They had all shipped out in the days prior to Pearl Harbor. There was a concerted effort within the Roosevelt administration to get us in the fight somehow.
Romney started awesome tonight . . . thouroughly trashed Rudy and Huck on immigration. Through the night, he got hammered with many allusions to his 1994 statements as the night went on and seemed to be the magnet of many attacks and of many stupid questions.
Huck wins the "funny guy" award (again) but he really flew under the radar on substative questions and answers.
Good night for Huck and Romney . . . not so good for Rudy and Thompson. Others don't matter right now.
I hope folks don't mind me posting a few comments here. I watched the replay of this so I didn't see it live (we had small group), and I did read some of the comments here and on other blogs about it before I watched it. But here are my observations on each candidate's performance tonight:
1) Tom Tancredo is a fine man, but he just fails to cast a presence in these forums.
2) I'm a big Duncan Hunter guy, and I loved his answer on America's image in the Islamic world (as did my wife). However, if I hear to one more time that he built "that fence in San Diego" I may just start pining away for more Ron Paul neo-con references. Speaking of which...
3) Paul is right about our domestic spending/economy, and he's right about Iraq not working in the long run. However, the notion he continues to repeat about our military base in Saudi Arabia being the basis for Islamic Jihad against America is historically unfounded and ignorant. Perhaps someone should remind Congressman Paul why the Marines were established, why the Holy Roman Empire was formed, and what happened to central hubs of Christianity in Syria and Turkey? Long before there was a Saudi Royal Family, or a United States of America, radical Islam has been at war with Christendom/Western Civilization. It's endemic to their worldview, and as flawed as our policy is/has been at times they would've come here even if we didn't have it because radical Islam has been coming for Christendom/Western Civilization since before Saladin's voice changed. And when Congressman Paul talks about bringing the troops home and spending the money on Americans he sounds like he's reading off of the MoveOn.org talking points sheet, not a libertarian platform.
4) Fred Thompson had one shining moment at the end of the debate on entitlements/social security. Beyond that, however, he's the political equivalent of a once feared but now aging pitcher who has lost his fast ball. Think Steve Carlton; not as a Phillie but later on as a Cleveland Indian.
5) This is the second straight debate that I thought John McCain did very well, although his early immigration answer was awful. Still, he's back to being the old John McCain, which is also his biggest problem. The old John McCain has sold out conservatives more than Ted Kennedy, and conservatives have long memories. Plus, the old John McCain is someone the American people already know. This election is about fresh faces, so while the media loves him the GOP electorate simply doesn't. If Thompson is an aging, American League Steve Carlton than McCain is Joe Montana -- as a Kansas City Chief. Still effective, still feared, but no one cares anymore.
6) I thought this was by far the worst night Rudy Giuliani has had as a presidential candidate, and it couldn't have come at a worse time in a worse state. He's pinning a lot of his campaign on Florida, and outside of his individual star power at appearances he told a Southern audience he's pro-choice and pro-Gun control. I give him credit for staying true to his beliefs, but those beliefs are wrong in that room. His dust-up with Romney over immigration at the beginning didn't do either one of them any favors, in my view. Rudy just didn't look like the cocksure candidate he's been in most of these forums. Which is understandable since the majority of his views and past policies aren't in line with the majority of Republican voters.
7) Mitt Romney had some real highs (great tie, looked great in HD, gave one of the best policy answers of the night on farm subsidies, and I loved his answer to black-on-black crime), and some real lows. As my wife continually points out, he gets defensive when you challenge his choreographed answers and obvious flip-flops. He got hammered on gays in the military, we found out he's got illegals working at his house, John McCain flat-out scolded -- and I mean the way Jim Tressel schools Lloyd Carr -- him on tortue, and his answer on the Word of God was so bad it was painful to watch. Romney was at times shaken, and stirred. It's obvious to me none of the other candidates care for him, especially McCain. He did little to hide his utter disdain for Romney at times.
8) This brings us to my guy Mike Huckabee. I actually think it's working to his advantage not getting as many questions as the other guys, because that's less time folks have to go on the attack. Which means he's the one guy on stage that always leaves the audience wanting more, which is a good thing. His answers on being pro-life and pro-death penalty and on the Bible were, well, awesome. The timing of his one liners are always spot on, unlike Thompson. He's likeable, which is an important characteristic for a presidential candidate to the general public and may be why Tancredo never gained traction. However, some of the soft stuff in his record is just now getting the scrutiny of the spotlight so he needs to toughen up his rhetorts, if he has the proof to respond. I wasn't all that impressed with how he responded to Romney's attack about educating the children of illegals in Arkansas at the beginning of the debate, but the fact that a flip-flopper like Romney who used to support the Bush-McCain immigration scam was the one on the attack and not, say, Tancredo, gave Mike a break there. I thought he was really good the rest of the way after that, though. He's not just my guy, but he ought to be the GOP's guy because he's their best shot to win. You need someone that can share a stage with the Democrats. Mike's winsomeness and real world folksiness contrasts nicely with the Clinton Contessa. And he has a personal story of overcoming the odds and making it that compares nicely with the affable Obama, too. Giuliani fits that category, too, but there is no way a non-pro life Republican can win the presidency. It will split the vote of the GOP's most loyal demo, something you can't afford in elections that come down to turning out your base, not reaching independents and moderates as the media falsely portrays.
Anyway, those are my thoughts. Thanks for helping me to piece together my opening monologue for the show Thursday!
Richard Roberts said that God told him: "We live in a litigious society. Anyone can get mad and file a lawsuit against another person whether they have a legitimate case or not. This lawsuit ... is about intimidation, blackmail and extortion."
Mark Klein right now is leading in all the unofficial polls in Iowa He has Iowa and New Hampshire clearly won. I drove by Frank Stalone's campaign headquarters today as he admitted that there is no fighting the Klein onslaught. Amazing that all these candidates build organizations make phone calls and work hard only to lose to Mark Klein's Caucus machine.
141 comments:
This format seems most demeaning to the entire process.
7;09 AND NO QUESTION YET. GEEZ
ridiculous
I'm confused. Is this supposed to be news, or entertainment?
Tough first question. Rudy is giving a good immigration answer.
....... and a targeted and very well made attack by Mitt on the same subject.
Rudy strikes back, hard. Good start boys. Real clash.
Sanctuary mansion. funny
zingers:
rudy 1
mitt 0
ooooohhhh this is really getting good! omg.
Mitt's analogy is flawed. How long before Mitt goes to the Hamptons on this one. He looks really mad, and it is kind of a low blow about the mansion.
But then again all is fair in politics. Mitt is looking very commanding right now. This is his best debate moment of the season thus far.
lets ask Tom about immigration, how about that
Oh..Fred's there too.
Good point on the sovereignty. I live in FL and lived overseas. I welcome legal immigrants, but I am sick of the illegals. They drive down wages and take advantage of our resources WITHOUT paying taxes.
Fred was looking pretty good until he went negative. I think he should have just ended on the applause-more like Dutch.
zingers
fred 1 mitt 0
fred 3 rudy 0
mccain saying he never proposed amnesty is like bill clinton never having sexual relations, not one single time, with monica.
no, worse because no one knew clinton was lying when he said.
Nice of them to let Tancredo get in on his signature topic.
Go tank!
zingers
tank 1 cnn 0
Wow, McCain just lost major points with me
way to break down the premise that we need to make mexicans slaves and work for slave wages just so elitist workers don't have to work in meat packing plants or build houses.
tank is right on!
Can't you just see a cutie like Duncan Hunter in GI tee shirt and combat boots pushing a wheel barrow?
Good close for Huck on the first immigration question.
Mitt on the attack again with Huck. Mitt is looking to come out swinging tonight.
A change of character for Mitt, and he looks good doing it.
Huck's answer was tough. Our team makes the Dems look like mutts.
The format has improved. I'm glad he's letting them rumble a bit.
"Its the Queen, the Pope, the Rothschilds and Col. Sanders, before he went teats up."
Romney just made a total jerk of himself. He is really looking bad tonight.
annon 7:25
i hope you're on Tom's side, bc he doesn't much want Illegal mexicans here at all; there are plenty of Americans that can do their work - 75% of the ppl i went to High School with do.
NICE AXE MURDERER QUOTE SPORER!
Mitt looks awesome. Doing a great job. Good field all around, we can be proud.
rudy nooooo
repriortize spending. cut some, expand others. don't give blanket cuts across the board. that legitimizes each agency.
cut programs. cut departments. cut cut cut out.
huck had the gold answer...cut the IRS!!!!!!!!!
Thats true, more people are afraid of an audit than a mugging.
Ron Paul, started out with a great response to the "Washington changing us".
The internationalist punch comes early and hard from McCain on Paul tonight.
BS ALERT ON MCCAIN!!
He's on video stating he would sign the FairTax into law as President!!!
BS ALERT!!!!
BS ALERT!!
Fair tax -
Huck- yes
McCain- no
Iraq is McCain's strongest point, maybe his only strong point...
Stop kidding yourself Ron you are too an ISOLATIONIST!
mccain opposed the bush tax cuts....what!
bs alert bs alert
Another lie from John McCain. He fought like crazy to maintain high taxes.
Ron Paul is a foreign policy weakling. What would Reagan think? Paul is an embarrassment.
uh oh...farm subsidies
mitt - yes to subsidies
rudy - yes
Here is the link to the video of Sen. McCain stating that he would sign the FairTax into law..
http://easylink.playstream.com/fairtax/McCain-WaukeeIA.wvx
Reagan would be proud of Paul's foreign policy. Four years of occupation is exactly the kind of thing Reagan would not have stood for. Paul and Reagan were colleagues and understood reasonable government.
Mrs Soprano forgets that Rudy broke the back of the mafia and put the don's in prison.
I smell the hand of Tony Soprano in the Hamptons nonscandal.
That should be every candidate's trade message-"BUY AMERICAN".
Good Lord do we need some economic patriotism.
I'm loving this debate so far...Lots of jabs and hooks...
Absolutely, absolutely. Once again, do we really need the moderator or quizzmasters from the ethernet?
I say no, let 'em go bare knuckled.
Early kudos to Mitt tonight. He's on the attack which makes him appear far more spontaneous and sincere. I do think that Mitt gets kind of a bum rap on the aliens at the mansion thing.
Great gun question.
Ted do you secretly have aliens cleaning your office?
Romney looks and acts plastic. He should have chosen reputable contractors to work on his home who obey the law. He created his own problem by hiring a company without checking it out first.
from Ork.
Romney doesn't think you have to look into who the company has hired
Rudy does win the crime fighter kudos. Mitt has a good retort about being a mayor, but Rudy did do something amazing about crime in the Big Apple.
Yes, he should be more like Mike Huckabee and give taxpayer-financed breaks to illegal aliens.
A sanctuary state, creating magnets for illegals to come here is a much better thing.
Viva la Huckabee!
A sanctuary state??
Um no..that was not Arkansas..
That was Massachusetts and New York City there anon Romney staffer..
Nice try!!
I don't think I know anyone who thinks women who obtain abortions should suffer any adverse legal consequence.
Dr. Paul is right on there. The doctor committs the crime if abortion becomes illegal if Roe against Wade is reversed.
Why are Republicans so conserned with making abortions illegal? Democrats are only going to be the ones getting them anyway.
I'm Pro-Choice. Go Rudy! Empowering the individual to determine morals over the govt. and respecting states rights. Fantastic answer!
This is a great answer by Huck on the Death Penalty!
Um, no. Not even close. Nice try though. My candidate knows about your sanctuary state policy too, and soon all Iowans will. You've peaked. Enjoy the ride down.
The conflation of the death penalty and abortion is very simplistic.
Huckabee nuked the death penalty question.
that last questioner was really creepy
super creepy...odd question too, overly simplistic...it was a waste of air time
Nothing like raising one of the greatest theological issues of the last four thousand years (heating up even more so about 2000 years ago).
I'm not sure the 30 second sound bite works on something this complex.
When is the next Polk GOP meeting? My invites have been getting lost in the mail.
WOW
Huck blew it out of the ballpark on that one.
Rudy's commercial was hilarious.
oh..I just got back. had to take a quick cold shower after hucks response on the bible.
The WoT is Rudy's strong suite. Good answer tonight.
Just ask the French if they speak much German.
Good answers by all on terrorism.
I'm hot for huck. how deep is that dimple, btw.
The torture question has an easy answer, Sen. McCain's position is informed by a personal emotional experience.
I'd rather think I was drowing than have my head sawed off.
umm... i would gladly inflict "water boarding" on terrorist. Sign me up
"You're talking nukes? I'm looking for Jack Bauer".
Tom Tancredo said it all.
Not just yes, but hell yes.
Why on earth wouldn't we march Osama up Pennsylvania like a Roman triumph and crucify him upside down on the mall.
Now that smells like the kind of victory that the medievel psychopaths with whom we are at war understand the complete nature of their defeat.
hey nicole
why don't you change teams and become a huck girl? I think we need a huck version of the obama girls. You could lead it. Hucks cuter tha obama.
Damn right.. :)
Jack Bauer for VP
I was so excited about the mental image that I forgot to type some words. Ooops.
McCain has the knowledge as well as the moral authority on this one. Not to smart to debate him on POW issues. Romney should shut-up! He keeps looking worse and clearly does not understand the complexity of the issue. He would not make an effective Commander in Chief.
My friends in the infantry over in Iraq have nothing to do, they are coming home 2 months early. All they do is drive around in humvees doing the job of the Iraqi police(or Iraqi army bc the police are still corrupt)
Paul looks like a stuttering moron up there...
Huck's version of the obama girls? You must have no idea who I am.
Hell yes, John McCain!!!!
I'm so tired of this massive historic lie. They wanted to surrender after the were crushed in the Tet Offensive.
Tremendous answer for McCain!!!!!
McCain is doing very good in this debate. (Hi Mr. Sporer - Jacob VS)
Two cheers for Ron Paul's rose-colored glasses...
Hi Teddy!
Listen little sister, around these parts most people call me "Mr. Chairman."
Thanks for playing tonight.
Waxwing-has Ron Paul's isolationism made your head explode?
Ok..who wants to rate the peformances here so far??
Some Ron Paul volunteers in FL told me that Rudy Giuliani wants to bomb Iran. Hmm... I have yet to hear anything like that.
The Ron Paul campaign as a whole has about made my head explode..
However..i keep telling myself that Paul is "full of fury, signifiying nothing"...
Some Ron Paul volunteers in FL told me that Rudy Giuliani wants to bomb Iran. Hmm... I have yet to hear anything like that.
Gays in the military. Again, how cliche.
Well..this is CNN, Mr. Chairman..what do you expect out of Anderson Cooper..
Have to say that it is pretty obvious why our top five beat Hillary in the polls.
The top five of Rudy, Huck, Mitt, Fred and McCain (no disrespect, its like the manliest of men, John Wayne in"McClintock")look so much more Presidential than the Democrats.
So much time on such a trivial issue.
This is the attempt by CNN/YouTube to make the Republicans look "bigoted"...
Fred was great on Iraq and has been very good on social security.
Thus far FDT has been our best social security/entitlement reformer.
Good question. The space program gave people back in the day cohesively something to look forward to generally. What do we have to look forward to as a society today?
Hillary should be on the first spaceship to Mars.
hahahahahahah
the zinger of the night
Go Huck!
That's right, CNN Cliche News Network.
Right On TOM! The future of space exploration is in the hands of private entrepreneurs. NASA is worthless today for its bureaucracy it cannot accomplish anything.
I have to strongly disagree Nicole..
NASA has been responsible for some of the greatest scientific discoveries of our time..
I believe that we should continue fund science/space exploration...
If we do not..well..then scientific discovery will suffer as a result..
South Carolina state capital flies that flag
You're both right. NASA has become sclerotic like most federal bureacracies.
Hell, Bubba made Confederate Flag Day an official state holiday in Arkansas.
ron pauls commercial is all footage of the straw poll.
we look good as a backdrop.
Thanks Ron!
True Ted..but I do have to agree with Romney's response.. we have better things to freakin worry about..
Infrastructure question. Good question.
Rudy good answer about the budget. Complex subject.
Ron Paul, a true conservative. Returning to the days of Benjamin Harrison.
Hey Ron..
That goverment you "want out of our lives"... is the one who fixes, builds and repairs that infrastructure you nimrod!!
Ted, our top five beat Hillary in the polls because it was Zogby Interactive polling online only, which is wholly unreliable. Gallup had Hillary's usual numbers on that same day, based on the traditional telephone surveys.
We're still behind.
Ron..
You're not a Republican..
You're a Libertarian..Dont confuse the two...
Totally agree with Mitt and Waxwing. Why on earth are we even taking air time talking about the Confederate Flag????????
That's more insignificant than remuneration.
rage, yes but I also think that the winds are swinging in our direction. we are going to take this one.
08 is the come back year for the House and the White House. The Senate looks bleak.
actually, NASA is not the future of space exploration; if we want to fund it money should be given to the private companies. My brother is an aerospace engineer, i hear about this all the time.
Ok.. Its time to size things up..
Who won tonight Mr. Chairman??
Huckabee had much appeal. But defending illegal alien children is not a Republican ideal.
Nicole..
Look at the point Huckabee is making..
Children of illegal aliens have no choice in the matter. Their parents brought them across the border.. Do we punish the children of American citizens for crimes their parents make? Of course not.
Plus, the program that Huckabee was talking about had some very stringent requirements..the most notable of which REQUIRED that a non-citizen have applied for citizenship, and be in the legal process to become a citizen..
Let me put it to you another way.. We currently have non-citizens serving in the US Military right now... When they return from serving..should they be denied benefits such as the GI Bill, VA care, etc?
Giuliani got trashed.
Romney started strong, but deteriorated throughout the night after taking fire over his flip-flopping. He basically had to apologize for everything he's ever done.
Tancredo and Hunter did fairly well for the limited screen time they got. Duncan got to talk about the military and guns, Tancredo got to perform on his signature issue, as well as trash space exploration. Nicely done.
Ron Paul's closing was quite nice, but his biggest missed opportunity was not bringing up cutting the IRS before Huck, who seized it like... old Huck on a granola bar. Paul's waffling on the abortion question just might have been fatal.
Huckabee's answers on the bible and the death penalty were pure gold. His fair tax stance just might bail him out of fiscal hot water, but his abortion stance sure won't.
McCain is yesterday's news, and looked it.
Thompson was good for comedy, and that's about it. He can't get into any issues without putting everyone into deep sleep.
Tough to say who came out on top, but the tangible value is that Huckabee is stronger against Romney than he was before the debate.
Oops. I said "abortion stance" on Huck when I meant "amnesty." durn crossed wires...
CNN is going to get HAMMERED on this one..
Apparently Brig Gen. Keith Kerr who asked the gays in the military question is on Hillary's LGBT steering comittee..
Nice of them to disclose that...
Cedar:
Why is it our job to care for illegal children? Why don't we return them to Mexico or where ever they came from so their own country can care for them? We do not have the capacity to provide education and services for every child in the world. If the parents are so unhappy with their own country they can come here legally.
As far as non-citizens in the Military, the distinction there is that they are here legally or became legal to get into the military. I know because i do their paper work. Their families, to get Military benefits (and they get a lot), must show some sort/form of legality as well.
If Mike Huckabee's tax hikes as Governor of Arkansas were bricks, not even Chuck Norris could break them all!
-Yoda
Who the hell was McQuisling's history teacher?
Isolationism was NOT a cause of WW2, far from it. Roosevelt did everything that he possibly could to maneuver us into that war. Last debate McCain said Smoot-Hawley was a cause of WW2. I suppose Il Duce marched on Rome because of Fordney-McCumber.
I wonder how many other questions came from libs and Dems?
Not used to seeing Rudy at a podium talking about guns without being surrounded by Chuck Schumer and Sarah Brady.
He talks alot about his crime prevention strategies. Let's not forget that when Kerik took these same strategies to LA, they didn't work.
The black-on-black crime question was an opportunity for someone to knock one out of the park. The absolutely asinine war on drugs and the failed government education system have decimated the black community.
They entrust their future to people like Al $harpton and Je$$e Jack$on who tell them that there is no hope and that they are trapped in a racist system. Because of this, young blacks have no idea about the opportunities that exist for them in America. Therefore, they have no idea how to ACCESS those opportunities.
Back up, brother or sister you need to back up one further analytical step.
WW2 had many "causes", some of which were very much trade oriented. the extent or importance of any one cause remains the source of much historical debate-one in which i will enjoy debating.
But rational historical judgment certainly, and uncontestably, demonstrates that the isolationism of the US and the appeasement policies of France and the UK made ww2 a global conflagration.
Had france and the UK attacked Germany when Adie remilitarized the Rhineland or occupied Austria there would have been no larger European War.
Had we begun rearming earlier than '36, and to a much greater extent we would have been much, much less likely to have a war with Japan. Cannot say for sure there because the Japanese were much more formidible that the Germans until '39 or maybe even '40and powerful elements in Japan wanted war with the US and the UK.
Teddy:
The US was engaged already through Lend/Lease. A land war in Europe WAS NOT OUR FIGHT. Indeed, you had Nazis and Communists wiping each other out in large numbers, where was the problem? Evil fighting evil.
The fact was that the New Deal was a colossal failure. There was a WORSE crash in 37 than the crash of 29 and the NIRA had destroyed our industrial capacity. Most of the New Deal money was channeled into states with heavily DemocRAT populations or states heavy in electoral votes.
There were plans drawn up for a war with Germany (Plan Dog) and Japan (Plan Orange). These two plans coalesced into Rainbow Five, which was leaked on December 4, 1941. The only problem was how to enter the war.
SecWar Stimson, in his diary, stated that there were cabinet discussions regarding the best way to get the Japanese to fire the first shot. Had the United States gone along with Konoye's proposal in 41, we could have avoided the slaughter of our boys at Pearl Harbor.
As for the Smoot-Hawley argument: Total imports were 4% of the GNP at the time and Smoot-Hawley applied to only 1/3 of that.
Are you and McCain legitimately trying to argue that an tariff increase on 1.4% of the GNP triggered the collapse of 5,000 banks, wiped out 5/6 of the stock market, caused a 46% drop in GNP and sent unemployment to 25% AND triggered a war?
Not our war?????
What battlefield would you have preferred. After the German global rearmament was prepared for completion?
Maybe after the UK surrendered and the Germans obtained treaty rights to naval bases in Iceland and Greenland, just to make their occupancy of such bases legal?
Do you think history would have resolved itself without some war some time with Japan? War with Japan was inevitable. They obliged us by striking first.
As for Pearl Harbor, they also would have not been slaughtered had the airplanes been dispersed and scrambled when the radar picked up the incoming Japanese flights.
Had we used a more aggressive sub screen hundreds of miles from Hawaii we would have a better result.
Had the fleet been partially at sea we would have had a better result.
If the weather was better and CinCPac got the war communications in a timely fashion we could really have ambushed the first wave adn destroyed it. Think of the mass of anti-aircraft fire that all those battleships, not to mention everything else, could have put in the air-after the Japanese strike fought its way through the American fighters.
Pearl Harbor was the result of grossly reduced vigilance. Something emotional mind could not forsee even if human logic made it seem rather obvious, especially in retrospect. Pearl Harbor was hardly the inevitable result of the American policy of Japanese containment.
You overlook the fact that Hitler DID NOT conquer Britain. If one reads Mein Kampf, you get a glimpse into Hitler's mindset. His vision was that the natural direction for Germany to expand was Eastward, hence Barbarossa. Conquering ze French was the way to secure his rear. The fight with Britain was collateral damage. Not to mention that, when the Americans invaded North Africa, we had to fight ze French in order to land, but I digress.
I have to admit, I am not the first one to propound the idea that we should have just let the Nazis and Communists kill each other off. The idea was first proposed by a Senator from Missouri named Harry Truman.
The Japanese were bogged down in Manchuria. Fumimoro Konoye, the leader of the Peace party and prime minister at the time, went to Ambassador Joseph Grew and told him that the Japanese would withdraw from Manchuria if the United States would lift the embargo on oil and scrap iron.
SecState Hull killed the deal and the only thing left between Japan and desperately needed oil and scrap iron was the American fleet at Pearl Harbor. By October 41 Konoye was out and Tojo was in and the rest is history.
You are right that there were many errors at Pearl Harbor and Kimmel did not have all the information he needed.
they also would have not been slaughtered had the airplanes been dispersed and scrambled when the radar picked up the incoming Japanese flights.
Where were our aircraft carriers? They had all shipped out in the days prior to Pearl Harbor. There was a concerted effort within the Roosevelt administration to get us in the fight somehow.
Romney started awesome tonight . . . thouroughly trashed Rudy and Huck on immigration. Through the night, he got hammered with many allusions to his 1994 statements as the night went on and seemed to be the magnet of many attacks and of many stupid questions.
Huck wins the "funny guy" award (again) but he really flew under the radar on substative questions and answers.
Good night for Huck and Romney . . . not so good for Rudy and Thompson. Others don't matter right now.
Are you kidding jeff? Romney bombed. Worst deabte yet. You just wait, the pundits will agree.
I hope folks don't mind me posting a few comments here. I watched the replay of this so I didn't see it live (we had small group), and I did read some of the comments here and on other blogs about it before I watched it. But here are my observations on each candidate's performance tonight:
1) Tom Tancredo is a fine man, but he just fails to cast a presence in these forums.
2) I'm a big Duncan Hunter guy, and I loved his answer on America's image in the Islamic world (as did my wife). However, if I hear to one more time that he built "that fence in San Diego" I may just start pining away for more Ron Paul neo-con references. Speaking of which...
3) Paul is right about our domestic spending/economy, and he's right about Iraq not working in the long run. However, the notion he continues to repeat about our military base in Saudi Arabia being the basis for Islamic Jihad against America is historically unfounded and ignorant. Perhaps someone should remind Congressman Paul why the Marines were established, why the Holy Roman Empire was formed, and what happened to central hubs of Christianity in Syria and Turkey? Long before there was a Saudi Royal Family, or a United States of America, radical Islam has been at war with Christendom/Western Civilization. It's endemic to their worldview, and as flawed as our policy is/has been at times they would've come here even if we didn't have it because radical Islam has been coming for Christendom/Western Civilization since before Saladin's voice changed. And when Congressman Paul talks about bringing the troops home and spending the money on Americans he sounds like he's reading off of the MoveOn.org talking points sheet, not a libertarian platform.
4) Fred Thompson had one shining moment at the end of the debate on entitlements/social security. Beyond that, however, he's the political equivalent of a once feared but now aging pitcher who has lost his fast ball. Think Steve Carlton; not as a Phillie but later on as a Cleveland Indian.
5) This is the second straight debate that I thought John McCain did very well, although his early immigration answer was awful. Still, he's back to being the old John McCain, which is also his biggest problem. The old John McCain has sold out conservatives more than Ted Kennedy, and conservatives have long memories. Plus, the old John McCain is someone the American people already know. This election is about fresh faces, so while the media loves him the GOP electorate simply doesn't. If Thompson is an aging, American League Steve Carlton than McCain is Joe Montana -- as a Kansas City Chief. Still effective, still feared, but no one cares anymore.
6) I thought this was by far the worst night Rudy Giuliani has had as a presidential candidate, and it couldn't have come at a worse time in a worse state. He's pinning a lot of his campaign on Florida, and outside of his individual star power at appearances he told a Southern audience he's pro-choice and pro-Gun control. I give him credit for staying true to his beliefs, but those beliefs are wrong in that room. His dust-up with Romney over immigration at the beginning didn't do either one of them any favors, in my view. Rudy just didn't look like the cocksure candidate he's been in most of these forums. Which is understandable since the majority of his views and past policies aren't in line with the majority of Republican voters.
7) Mitt Romney had some real highs (great tie, looked great in HD, gave one of the best policy answers of the night on farm subsidies, and I loved his answer to black-on-black crime), and some real lows. As my wife continually points out, he gets defensive when you challenge his choreographed answers and obvious flip-flops. He got hammered on gays in the military, we found out he's got illegals working at his house, John McCain flat-out scolded -- and I mean the way Jim Tressel schools Lloyd Carr -- him on tortue, and his answer on the Word of God was so bad it was painful to watch. Romney was at times shaken, and stirred. It's obvious to me none of the other candidates care for him, especially McCain. He did little to hide his utter disdain for Romney at times.
8) This brings us to my guy Mike Huckabee. I actually think it's working to his advantage not getting as many questions as the other guys, because that's less time folks have to go on the attack. Which means he's the one guy on stage that always leaves the audience wanting more, which is a good thing. His answers on being pro-life and pro-death penalty and on the Bible were, well, awesome. The timing of his one liners are always spot on, unlike Thompson. He's likeable, which is an important characteristic for a presidential candidate to the general public and may be why Tancredo never gained traction. However, some of the soft stuff in his record is just now getting the scrutiny of the spotlight so he needs to toughen up his rhetorts, if he has the proof to respond. I wasn't all that impressed with how he responded to Romney's attack about educating the children of illegals in Arkansas at the beginning of the debate, but the fact that a flip-flopper like Romney who used to support the Bush-McCain immigration scam was the one on the attack and not, say, Tancredo, gave Mike a break there. I thought he was really good the rest of the way after that, though. He's not just my guy, but he ought to be the GOP's guy because he's their best shot to win. You need someone that can share a stage with the Democrats. Mike's winsomeness and real world folksiness contrasts nicely with the Clinton Contessa. And he has a personal story of overcoming the odds and making it that compares nicely with the affable Obama, too. Giuliani fits that category, too, but there is no way a non-pro life Republican can win the presidency. It will split the vote of the GOP's most loyal demo, something you can't afford in elections that come down to turning out your base, not reaching independents and moderates as the media falsely portrays.
Anyway, those are my thoughts. Thanks for helping me to piece together my opening monologue for the show Thursday!
Richard Roberts said that God told him: "We live in a litigious society. Anyone can get mad and file a lawsuit against another person whether they have a legitimate case or not. This lawsuit ... is about intimidation, blackmail and extortion."
This surprises me, Steve. Huckster, like Bush, is basically a pro-life Democrat.
Tom Tancredo and Duncan Hunter should just drop out.
Charlie Crist a rising star?
Please Uncle Ted.
There was no debate, and there will continue to be no debate until Mark Klein is included.
Why are you people so afraid of that man?
Anon..
Yeah..Charlie Crist is a rising star in the GOP.. he took everyone to the woodshed in his last election..got a HUGE Hispanic turnout for him..
He's going to be someone that the GOP nominee will look at VERY seriously as a VP nominee...
Think about this..NO GOP candidate has won the Presidency without carrying Florida...If we want to win in 08.. We HAVE to win Florida..
Much the same way the Dems HAVE to win in California..No Democrat has won the Presidency without carrying California..
Mark Klein can WIN Florida hands down. Wake up people! This man, this prophet, Mark Klein is our only hope!
Mark Klein right now is leading in all the unofficial polls in Iowa He has Iowa and New Hampshire clearly won. I drove by Frank Stalone's campaign headquarters today as he admitted that there is no fighting the Klein onslaught. Amazing that all these candidates build organizations make phone calls and work hard only to lose to Mark Klein's Caucus machine.
Post a Comment