Skip to comments.Why the Reagan Library GOP debate sucked
Posted on 09/08/2011 4:51:40 AM PDT by JSDude1
Readers want to know who I thought won the GOP debate at the Reagan Library last night.
My answer: Twitter.
Its where quick-fingered conservatives who actually care about conservatism freely debated and dissected the bone-headed questions and condescension of liberal D.C./N.Y. moderator Brian Williams, Politico staffer John Harris, and ethnic representative Jose Diaz-Balart of Telemundo throughout the MSNBC telecast. (Why not a minority journalist representing every race and ethnicity in the U.S. next time for a full Identity Politics-palooza!)
The questions ranged from the predictable (querying Perry about low-wage jobs created in Texas) to the hostile (Williams asking Perry how he could sleep at night based on his death penalty record) and calculated (Harris lobbing a softball invitation to Jon Huntsman to identify the crazy Republicans in the room). Transcript excerpts can be found here.
I have still not settled on a candidate. Im not on any team. My operating question is not Who are you for? but WHAT are you for?
And: Does your record match your rhetoric?
What I found most striking and informative was not anything discussed in the debate but what was left out.
A Twitter user likened the Reagan Library GOP debate on MSNBC to the Yankees network interrogating the Red Sox.
Or more to the point: Imagine the Democratic presidential candidates submitting to a debate at SEIU headquarters, moderated by Rush Limbaugh, with Andrew Breitbart and me asking questions.
We live in bizarro times when that scenario is beyond preposterous, yet the MSNBC/Politico Reagan Library theater of the absurd is now a part of hallowed presidential election history.
(Excerpt) Read more at michellemalkin.com ...
Had to cut out a bunch to get this article to fit in the 'excerpt' category..better just go ahead click on the link to Michelle Malkin's website.
Malkin is right-on here. What a waste. Thanks for posting. Always good to see a well-known conservative put into words what I have been thinking......
To be agenda-correct, it should be the Red Sox network interrogating the Yankees.
[red sox are generally leftists]
[[exception: Curt Shilling]]
Precisely why I didn’t watch the debate. I mean come on, it was on MSNBC. Who couldn’t see it was going to be an excersize in propaganda?
But I’m guessing everyone except Huntsman seemed like a true statesman compared to The One Some Thought We Were Waiting For.
That John Harris is a weird cat. The facial tics and nervous hand gestures were disturbing. A true nerd who I’m sure had to pay for sex his young adult life.
I wont watch PMSNBC....and from all I have read they made a mockery of the Reagan Library with their Keynesian steered questions...
I will watch clips here on line...and listen to Rush who has the uncanny ability to cut through the RINO$h!t with his clips....
Well, I agree to a point about having the PMSNBC people as questioners/mods but this is the lind of lamestreamers they’re going to face on the campaign traail.
Truthfully, I enjoy seeing the field of candidates debate...and then watch how the media tries to spin as adversarial. I thought the candidates got some jabs in (and I got a chuckle between the job creation duel between Romney and Perry) but what impresses me the most is the collegial and classy way the candidates conduct themselves...and redirect the focus not so much on each other...but on 0bama. I think we’ve got a competent field; each candidate had some good things to say...The Democrats couldn’t hold a candle to any of them.
I look at it from a different angle.
I’m not bothered by the fact liberals asked the debate questions, because it’s important to view how those candidates handle their messaging under a hostile interview situation. IMO, considering a major gaffe was expected of Perry, he acquitted himself pretty well overall.
Jesus! For once in your life DEFY the liberal media. Why do these nitwits continually agree to play on a communist field with communist ground rules. Tell that moron Williams to GFHS! NBC can shove their stooge debate UTA!
No, I won’t participate!!!! Is it too hard to say???????? Jesus, get some principles and stand on them for once in your miserable life!
Very true... they kept their rhetorial crosshairs (ooohhh... too soon?) on 0bama. Any one of them would be eminently more qualified to hold the office of President than the arrogant POS who occupies the White House now.
..Huntsman should have been arrested for that tie—it scared my wife...
I had to watch it online, through all the skips and buffers. With my Dish Network account, MSNBC is a "premium" channel, which I prefer... I wouldn't want my 2-year-old granddaughter exposed to the filth that emanates from it.
It sucked because it had liberal moderators. If the Reagan Library is going to host a Republican debate, why not get Republican moderators, like Rush, Mark Levin, or even Chris Plante of WMAL in DC (who’d be great!)
I have enjoyed the debates, as another poster mentioned, this is a very competent, talented group of people. There are only a couple I consider to have the experience set to be a chief executive, but there are several others who have performed very well.
As Malkin mentioned, I’d like to see some more in-depth answers to questions like borders, global warming and such. They know the questions are coming, and these are opportunities to not only hit it out of the park, but also educate the public.
The questioning from all media outlets has been awful, but I’ve felt that for a couple election cycles. Most questions are just massively irrelevant to the actual issues of the day. Other than the health care topics, hardly anything was relevant.
Why the HELL are the GOP idiots allowing themselved to be grilled by these left-wing media libtard presstitutes?????
JUST DONT GO ON CNNBCBSPBSMSNBC any more
AND STOP TALKING TO THEM~!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I understand the criticism of the moderators; their questions and tone were suspect. However, I would much rather the candidates get grilled by the Left now so that when the Left asks the questions in the real debate, THE CANDIDATE is prepared.
If they got Limbaugh and a couple other conservatives, it would be the most viewed primary debate EVER.
Doc, I couldn’t agree more. The thought of the Republican candidates playing toady for that bunch of liberal scum was repugnant. I didn’t watch and will not watch these so-called debates. It’s demeaning and beneath them to engage in these travesties.
What I enjoyed was the promo insert of that dude, Rachel Maddow, standing there and ranting off some nonsensical platitudes with that asinine “Lean Forward” tag. It was as if MSNBC had to take a moment to remind us lurker viewers how crazy they are over there.
The winner of the debate last night was Sarah Palin! Merely for the fact of not showing up to a commie hack attack debate format. Now, peeps should understand why Sarah hasn’t declared as yet. Would you have participated in that commie msnbc clusterfark?
What I dont understand is how Brian Williams and all the other liberal media whores did not burst into flames upon entering the Reagan Library.
Normally, I try to watch a t least one replay to find what I may have missed on the first go-around, and before I will make a complete ass of myself in commenting on the proceedings.
This so-called debate was an exception. There was absolutely nothing worth watching, let alone listening. I refuse to dignify this waste of time with the word "debate". Moderators? Provocateurs would be a better description. The only part of the whole evenings load of crapola that I enjoyed was the setting, where I was fortunate to visit a couple months ago for the first (but not last) time.
NBC and Politico should be ashamed. The participants being (questioned) (lambasted) (Shat upon)...select one of the above....should be disgusted by being there for this shameful exhibition.
My choice for the winner of this thing (and the last one) is Newt. Why? Because he was the only one who spat back at the "moderators". The real winner would have been the first declared candidate who would tell them what he/she really thinks would have been the winner. Newt was closest.
I lost respect for every candidate that participated in that charlie foxtrot last night.
They would get much more relevant, pointed and meaningful questions from the likes of Rush and Malkin than they ever will from the lamestream liberal media talking heads.
We know what we want answers to, they (liberals) know what questions they want to avoid getting good answers to and thus tailor the debate to elicit the responses they want and cause infighting.
There’s no need for the repub candidates to go delving into the macabre stance of the left. Let them debate real issues that the people are interested in, get them on record!
Worth repeating...especially for all the PDS'ers who have been howling at her to announce so that she would have to participate in these travesties.
“.......MSNBC/Politico Reagan Library theater of the absurd.............”
Anticipated that MSNBC/Politico absurdity, and therefore didn’t watch.
If these candidates don’t have the leadership skills to even shape their own debates and moderators, they don’t have the skills I’m looking for in a future president.
The real problem is that these are not really “debates”.
They are an overt attempt at the ever present “gotcha” question in it’s full blown splendor.
As Michelle says, I go by their record.
Disclosure: I didn’t see the debate.
That would be a hoot. Limbaugh, Ingram, Hannity. Oh, and imagine Ann Coulter!
In fact, imagine a democrat debate with that lineup asking the questions.
I just made my own day, just thinking about it.
I disagree. Our eventual nominee is going to have to go through a lot of gauntlets to run against the MSM’s messiah Obama - they will be out in droves to get them.
All of the candidates that participated in the debate last night (with the exception of Huntsman) did great - I could vote for any of them against Obama. I disagree with your comment that Palin won the debate last night - the candidates that participated last night showed they were able to go into the lion’s den, and that is admirable on their part.
We’ve got a great group of candidates running this time.
I like Sarah Palin a lot, but frankly I am growing tired of waiting for her to declare (one way or the other) and I do think she has been badly damaged by the media, so I'm now looking at the others to see where they stand. I was impressed with Cain more than any other, but thought Newt & Perry did fairly well, even Mitt had a moment or two there. Bachmann & Santorum are in over their heads, Ron Paul is a wacko and Huntsman was a plant. Not totally on board with any of them, at this point.
Absolutely correct. The problem wasn’t with the fact that it was MSNBC, or the moderators, or the questioners. The problem was the quality of the people on the stage.
When you have no core, when you can’t articulate your principles (if you have any), when you’ve spent your whole life telling people one thing and then doing something else, ...
I’m looking for someone who can articulate conservative principles and someone who can respond to stupid questions with “We’re 200+ trillion in debt, we have 17% unemployment in this country and you’re asking me THAT? Mr. Williams, are you a moron or are you that biased that your main interest is try to make us look like fools?”
Just once. Please!
Newt got the closest, but we pretty much all know where his candidacy is going.
You do know that the presidential election is in November 2012 and NOT November 2011, right?
and I do think she has been badly damaged by the media...
So you're willing to concede victory to the Rats and vindication for their Alinsky tactics? You're willing to give up and let them win?
You know, whenever I see this whole "MSM has damaged her too badly" spiel, I just want to hurl. Instead of sadly shaking your head and giving up in the face of their attacks, why don't you get out and do something about it?
The Politico guy was a disaster——it was hard to watch his sophmoric efforts. As Judge Judy would say:”Stop fiddling with those papers.” If he couldn’t stand the intense debate heat, he should have declined the offer.
And tell me why the Telemundo guy agreed to be a political prop?
Did we have to be reminded once again that illegals are hijacking our political system........targeting our form of government for extinction to install a Third World on US soil?
The MSM uses them to marginalize the GOP candidates.
This Was An Inquisition Not A “Debate”
Being in a remote rural area I don’t get cable nor would I have watched it after learning who the panel of inquisition consisted of. Because from what state media is picking up and reporting as the result. It sounds like to me that is exactly what it was, an inquisition not a debate.
To advance the precepts of limited government you don’t assign clergy who believe the sun revolves around the earth to become the Cardinal inquisitors .Inquisitors who demand answers to their framed agenda driven questions and control the debate.
Then getting responses that would never satisfy the inquisitors from people who know the earth revolves around the sun.
For this to happen in The Reagan archives was an insult ti Reagan
I had to switch channels after about 15 minutes but I bet they never asked them specifically to explain their detailed positions on ‘immigration reform’. Better yet, ask Perry how he can be against amnesty and for the Dream Act, and Romney out-right lied about his position on it.
Just what do you suggest *I* do? I’m not going to waste my dwindling money and energy “campaigning” for someone who has been playing peek-a-boo with declaring and who some have placed up on a pedestal of “can do no wrong” while covering their eyes & ears to any other candidate. I have a lot of liberal-leaning friends, who might listen to something I say about Cain or even Perry ... but Sarah ... no way. She has become a laughing stock to them, and no amount of righteous indignation on my part will turn that around, Sarah has to do it herself. She needs to take it to people who get their news only from MSNBC or HuffPo, not her adoring throngs. Participating in the debates (no matter how biased and “gotcha”) might be a good start.
Fantail 1952 you said:
“My choice for the winner of this thing (and the last one) is Newt. Why? Because he was the only one who spat back at the “moderators”. The real winner would have been the first declared candidate who would tell them what he/she really thinks would have been the winner. Newt was closest.”
Exactly. I know Newt has a lot of baggage, but he nevertheless showed up as the smartest guy in the room.
Even though I havent chosen to back any of them as yet, I still would crawl over broken glass to vote for any of them over Obama. (I can say that now knowing how much that would hurt...stepped on some glass the other day and it was not fun!)
Face it. None of them can be totally honest about it.
Don’t be surprised, if Obama loses, to see him grant amnesty by EO.
One thing though, they were given one minute to answer. I doubt much detail could be covered.
The best forum for that was DeMint’s last weekend.
Then stay on the porch and shut up if you're not willing to fight.
I did have to chuckle on the long thread last night.
One FReeper, can’t remember who, said “what’s next, are they going to trot out Richard Simmons to ask them about gay marriage”?
That was funny in light of the Telemundo fella being trotted out for immigration.
(1) The president is going to have to lead all Americans of every political stripe.
(2) If our conservative ideas are actually better than those of the progressives, we should be able to convey that, through reason, in any environment, hostile or not.
As a matter of fact, it'd be a great idea if Fox produced/moderated Democrat debates, and MSNBC/whatever moderated GOP debates all the time.
I thought that most of the debate was pretty sedate...I expected something a bit more, I don’t know...frisky.
What you’re seeing with the left is that they ask questions from some base ASSUMPTIONS. They are not trying to “steer” their questions, it’s that they simply cannot see another viewpoint except from the basis of their invalid assumptions.
Not recognizing that they, or we for that matter, have these basic assumptions, makes understanding, communication, and debate impossible.
” they never asked them specifically to explain their detailed positions on immigration reform. Better yet, ask Perry how he can be against amnesty and for the Dream Act, and Romney out-right lied about his position on it. “
” When will the Stupid Party learn how to run a debate, and choose the moderators? “
It is almost as if they want to lose. Nobody is this stupid, or obtuse.