The odd Couple.
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.
It’s 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. I’m 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 ...
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.
“Keynesian steered”
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. “
Correct
” 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.
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 has a large and devoted following just waiting to help her out, but waiting is all anyone really has for Sarah Palin for now.
I certainly understand why they went with 'lean forward' - progressive and all that. But all I can think of is Obama 'leaning forward' before other world leaders (since he wasn't bowing). And how, as a network, they 'lean forward' towards the back-side of 'the one'...
Probably got his orders from Mexico. I'm surprised Diaz didn't ask the candidates about federal financing of reconquista.
Too bad they forgot to trot out Richard Simmons to ask about gay marriage..........
Also forgot to run videos of melting icebergs to remind us about "global warming."
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.
Great article by Michelle Malkin. Thanks for posting it!
Your bias is showing!
Your post #41 is right on the money. Well said.
” I’m surprised Diaz didn’t ask the candidates about federal financing of reconquista. “
R O T F L O L
Dont laugh
LOL
Youve given them ideas for the next debate...
“Governor Perry, will you pledge to sign legislation to give La Raza $XXX Billion if you are elected president?”
“Si”
“Governor Romney, same question. Will you pledge to sign legislation to give La Raza $XXX Billion if you are elected president?”
“This is something that is dear to my heart. Blah blah blah.”
“But will you?”
“Si. Blah blah blah”
“I have to cut you off, Governor Romney. Governor Huntsman, will you pledge to sign legislation to give La Raza $XXX Billion if you are elected president?”
“What they said”
“So thats a yes?”
“Yes”
“Congressman Paul, same question?”
“Will it get the troops home any faster? We need to put the troops on the border. If so yes.”
“Ms Bachmann?”
“No and heres why...”
“We have to move on. Mr Cain? Same question.”
“No, why would we give...”
“Times up. Mr Gingrich? Will you pledge to sign legislation to give La Raza $XXX Billion if you are elected president?”
“Whats the money for?”
“So thats a No?”
“I never said No. I just asked...”
“We dont have time for discussion. Mr Santorum?”
“NO!!!”
To me, that Politico guy didn't look human. There was *something* about his face and head that didn't 'look right'. I thought it was my flat screen TV so I kept changing the zoom and aspect ratio, nothing helped.
He still looked like an Android.
The odd Couple.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.