Posted on 08/10/2015 5:07:50 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
Last week’s Republican primary debates have quickly become a cultural and political phenomenon. Even progressive pundits have been forced to acknowledge the high quality of the Fox News moderators, the toughness of their questions, and the sheer entertaining excitement of the shows. Contrary to the usual soporific political debates, with robotic recitations of prefabricated talking points, this one had fireworks and substance. Let’s hope this new paradigm for presidential debates carries through all the way to next year’s presidential debates.
But there’s another value to the debates. A lot of progressive received wisdom was exploded last Thursday night. First is the notion that Democrats are smarter and better informed than Republicans, who are typically dismissed as badly educated, anti-science, stuck in the racist and sexist past, and tools of capitalist hegemons. The great variety of candidates, the intelligence of their answers (with, in my view, the exception of Donald Trump), the freshness of their ideas, and the range of personal experience and achievements, exploded that cliché, and all contrasted starkly with the other side’s anointed candidate.
Hillary Clinton, an old pol well beyond her sell-by date, cannot stand comparison to the fresh, young best of the Republican field. She is the quintessential Washington insider and operative, without a fraction of the achievements of Carly Fiorina or Dr. Ben Carson or any of the governors on the stage, or a particle of the charisma of Marco Rubio or Ted Cruz. She is a grotesquely hypocritical class warrior, a denizen of the 1%, as shrewd a financial manipulator and piratical capitalist as the Wall Street fatcats she routinely demonizes––and who contribute to her campaign. She talks only in vague ignorant bumper-sticker slogans like “income inequality” and “war on women.” And when she does offer something specific, like her wacky plan to raise taxes on capital gains, even liberal economists slap it down as kindergarten economics. So far she has said nothing that bespeaks intelligence or wisdom, instead recycling progressive dogmas, on everything from “climate change” to foreign policy, which reality has discredited for decades. As for Bernie Sanders, a self-proclaimed socialist from a state with fewer people than Fresno County, he makes Hillary sound like Solon and Donald Trump sound like Milton Freidman.
The second bead on the progressive rosary is the reflexive attacks on Fox News. Even the president conjures up “Fox News” as a combination straw man and bogey, an epithet useful for deflecting attention away from his epic incompetence and punkish personality. “Fox News” is a progressive talisman, a simple device for warding off facts and arguments that expose the bankruptcy of progressivism––its creepy totalitarian instincts, its blatant hypocrisy and elitist sensibilities, its slavish obeisance to dubious authority (“The science is settled!”), and its lack of sound argument and evidence on virtually every topic.
Unlike the network news programs and anchors who indulge all the same un-journalistic dysfunctions, Fox News, with some exceptions, goes after the facts and stories––the Planned Parenthood fetal organ industry, for example, or the Benghazi scandal––that the networks try to ignore. This high quality and journalistic integrity that has long helped Fox News eclipse its rivals was on display last Thursday. The debate moderators––Bret Baier, Megyn Kelly, and Chris Wallace––were tough, prepared with smart questions, and even-handed, despite Donald “tough-guy” Trump’s post-debate whining. Contrast their performance with the despicable Candy Crowley, who during the 2012 presidential debate intervened to rescue Barack Obama with a blatantly false “correction” of Mitt Romney. Indeed, one of the highlights of last Thursday was the confrontation between one of the smartest of the Republican candidates, Carly Fiorina, and a long-time court scribe of the Obama administration, Chris “tingles” Matthews. If you haven’t already, watch Fiorina beat Matthews like a rented mule during her post-debate interview on MSNBC.
If the Republicans have any sense, they will not allow debate moderators to be dominated by such Democrat Party minions and flaks from the networks or CNN, but insist that Baier, Kelly, and/or Wallace be on stage to give the proceedings some fairness and journalistic professionalism.
Debate night, however, was the occasion for another event that calls to mind the bankruptcy of progressive ideology. Jon Stewart broadcast his last show, and anyone who enjoys truly incisive political satire will be glad to see him go. For too long Stewart has been lauded as some sort of comic genius and political oracle, even by a few conservatives who should know better. From what I’ve seen over the years, he is the king of juvenile snark, oozing smug, unearned arrogance, and toadying to the powerful who share his ideology.
Just watch his interviews with Barack Obama, whom, it now appears, Stewart secretly visited to get his political marching orders. Or Hillary Clinton’s cameo on the last show, saying of Stewart’s retirement, “And just when I was running for president. What a bummer.” Hillary obviously knows whose side Stewart was on. Sure, Chris Christie, Lindsey Graham, and John McCain made cameos too, but those were just self-promoting gags. And yes, occasionally Stewart would nip, like a lap-dog, the progressive hand that feeds him, but that’s nothing compared to mocking probes of Dick Cheney or Donald Rumsfeld or any number of conservative denizens of the progressive demonology.
Nor is he (or his stable of writers, who I wager actually write most of the material) that smart. Just watch his two-part, embarrassing schooling at the hands of John Woo (here and here). Throughout his career most of his jokes revolved around progressive clichés and Democrat Party talking points. More important, to me he was rarely that funny, depending on F-bombs and bug-eyed gesticulation, screeching, and smirking to raise a laugh from his callow studio audience. Indeed, Stewart’s success depended on a demographic, millenials, who happen to be the worst-educated cohort in American history, a group that thinks a parody of a news show is actually a reliable source of information or analysis. Getting a laugh from them is like getting a laugh from a drunk. Compared to Dennis Miller, James Lileks, or Andrew Klavan, Stewart was a piker.
Are these two events, transpiring on the same night, a sign that America’s six-year-long jag on the progressive Kool-Aid might be coming to an end? That we’re ready to put the grown-ups back in charge? That finally we realize the old, fossilized ideology of progressivism not only doesn’t work, but makes things worse? That it lessens our freedom, compromises our security, destroys our economy, and endangers our security? Stay tuned for next week’s show.
What debate did he watch?
This one:
http://spectator.org/articles/63732/whining-isn%E2%80%99t-winning
[BIG SNIP]
“..And another question Wallace asked, about Trump’s business bankruptcies, was a disaster. His answer…
>>>TRUMP: Because I have used the laws of this country just like the greatest people that you read about every day in business have used the laws of this country, the chapter laws, to do a great job for my company, for myself, for my employees, for my family, et cetera.
I have never gone bankrupt, by the way. I have never.
But out of hundreds of deals…
WALLACE: No, but the concept sir…
TRUMP: Excuse me. Excuse me.
WALLACE: … that’s your line, but your companies have gone bankrupt.
TRUMP: Excuse me, what am I saying? Out of hundreds of deals that I’ve done, hundreds, on four occasions I’ve taken advantage of the laws of this country, like other people. I’m not going to name their names because I’m not going to embarrass, but virtually every person that you read about on the front page of the business sections, they’ve used the law.
The difference is, when somebody else uses those laws, nobody writes about it. When I use it, they say, “Trump, Trump, Trump.” The fact is, I built a net worth of more than $10 billion. I have a great, great company. I employ thousands of people. And I’m very proud of the job I did.
Again Chris, hundreds and hundreds of deals. Four times, I’ve taken advantage of the laws. And frankly, so has everybody else in my position.
WALLACE: Well sir, let’s just talk about the latest example which is Trump Entertainment Resorts, which went bankrupt in 2009. In that case alone, lenders to your company lost over $1 billion and more than 1,100 people were laid off.
TRUMP: Well, I…
WALLACE: Is that the way that you’d run the country?
TRUMP: Let me just tell you about the lenders. First of all, these lenders aren’t babies. These are total killers. These are not the nice, sweet little people that you think, OK?
You know, I mean you’re living in a world of the make-believe, Chris, you want to know the truth.
And I had the good sense to leave Atlantic City, which by the way, Caesars just went bankrupt. Every company, Chris can tell you, every company virtually in Atlantic City went bankrupt.
Every company.
And let me just tell you. I had the good sense, and I’ve gotten a lot of credit in the financial pages, seven years ago I left Atlantic City before it totally cratered, and I made a lot of money in Atlantic City, and I’m very proud of it. I want to tell you that. Very, very proud of it.
WALLACE: So…
TRUMP: And by the way, this country right now owes $19 trillion. And they need somebody like me to straighten out that mess.<<<
That’s a terrible answer, for a number of reasons. First, you absolutely never brag about going bankrupt. And second, you never.........”
[BIG SNIP]
If the Republicans have any sense, they will not allow debate moderators to be dominated by such Democrat Party minions and flaks from the networks or CNN, but insist that Baier, Kelly, and/or Wallace be on stage to give the proceedings some fairness and journalistic professionalism.
OK, the tabloid debate. Yes, I can see why the liberals love it. I don’t recall lofty political debate from that night.
Apparently one where Trump wasn’t singled out and called a liar from the get go and where Rubio didn’t land softball questions.
I would like to see a real debate.
“Shillman” Journalism Fellow, is he?! Love it!
Good grief. This guy’s happy pills must be phenomenal. The…the HIGH QUALITY of the debate’s moderators??!! ROFLMAO
In Trump’s one response quoted above, I count Trump using the word “I” 24 times in that one answer; “my, myself and me” = 8 times.
He’s ready to play in Obama’s narcissism league.
“........the high quality of the Fox News moderators, the toughness of their questions, and the sheer entertaining excitement of the shows.”........
What “debate” was this guy watching? As far as I am concerned, the so-called “debate” was nothing more than a question and answer session with an agenda, being to destroy Trump from the get go. The first two questions set the stage for that “circus” and the outcome has given all the media fodder for more of their propaganda. That second “debate” turned out to be a total disaster on the part of FOX.
Excellent article.
I loved the debate. I loved the gotchas. Every one of those candidates wanted to be there. They’re running for highest office, and the job is much tougher than any candidate forum.
Ask them questions they don’t want, press them to answer straight. Require them to explain their past mistakes and convince us they’ve learned from experience. Make them drop the talking points and speak directly. Make them tell us where they stand and convince us they’re up to the job. Let them squirm.
Do we really want another whiner in the White House?
Folks, the Presidency is much tougher than a 2-hour debate. If they can’t stand the heat, they shouldn’t be there.
Frankly, I thought all the candidates did well under pressure.
May the CNN debate next month be as tough.
I’ve watch debates for decades. The moderators were never the main talkers. In this reality TV performances, the moderators were the stars, the candidates were mere props. It was beyond pathetic.
The Clinton Foundations’ shady donors: Not quite the ‘everyday’ Americans Hillary claims to champion.
Some Clinton Foundation donors and board members’ shady dealings and criminal convictions should make voters sit up and take notice. The blockbuster “Clinton Cash” book details the power couple’s sordid circle.
•The SEC charged a Clinton Foundation trustee with misallocating $9.5M from his database company. Shareholders sued for using the company jet to fly the Clintons around and paying Bill Clinton a $3M consulting fee.
• A Clinton Foundation trustee was accused of paying Bahraini executives (roughly $52 million) to win sales contracts for US-based Alcoa which later settled with the DOJ for $384M.
• A Clinton Foundation trustee donated to Hillary’s campaigns...gave the Clintons millions in honoraria and millions more to the foundation. The trustee was arrested for allegedly defrauding a bank. He pleaded guilty in a Bklyn court to “funneling more than $180,000 in illegal contributions to three federal candidates,” Hillary among them.
• An Indian legislator sat at the head table at the Clinton Global Initiative and dined privately with the Clintons at their home. He gave between $1-5 million to the Clinton Foundation....then was arrested for bribing members of parliament WRT a US-Indian nuclear-technology agreement....he was booted from his party, ending his political career.
• Claudio Osorio fundraised for Hillary and supported the Clinton Global Initiative. He falsified federal applications and bilked US taxpayers to score a loan of $10M tax dollars to build homes in earthquake-ravaged Haiti. Osorio was convicted of financial fraud, using humanitarian assistance “for personal benefit,” and got 12 years in federal prison.
• He was on the federal terrorist no-fly list yet a Lebanese-British businessman donated $460,000 to Miami Democrats for voter-registration and attended the Clintons’ WH Christmas party. He was later convicted of money-laundering and “aiding a criminal organization WRT billions of dollars stolen from Nigeria.
His company pledged $1 billion to the Clinton Global Initiative. The eco-minded Clinton awarded him a prize for “sustainable development.”
Yo Bruce. I'd insist that Rush Limbaugh, Mark Levin, Mark Steyn, Andrew McCarthy .... be on stage to give the proceedings a true conservative perspective on issues that matter.
Nice attempt at a snowjob. Polish the fecal bolus (Look that up in your Funk & Wagnalls) that Faux News blew out Thursday night and see if you can sell it as a great event and a new model to be followed in the future.
Sorry. You can even link it to the Horowitz name and I still ain’t buying. And if Mr. Horowitz actually concurs with your appraisal of Thursday night’s charade, all I can say is, I beg to differ. Everybody occasionally burns their toast. Sorry about your toast, Mr. Horowitz.
Thursday night’s disappointment can best be described as 2 hours of snide, triumphalist gotcha “questions” couched as an accusative condemnation, rather than a query, for a few of the candidates. Virtual ignoring of one or more others - how ya’ feeling Ted Cruz, my man? And brown-nosing, flattering statements masquerading as questions for a few “preferred” candidates. I’m sure YOU feel the love, dontcha, Jebby?
And as for “even progressive liberals learning something from it”....My view is that they learned, or they HAD WHAT THEY ALREADY KNEW REINFORCED....That if you have the host network, Faux News, and the “moderators”, Baier, Wallace and Kelly prostituted to the plan to sandbag some candidates and provide tee ball rests for certain others, the sham debate should go just the way you want it to go.
Too bad Mr. Trump didn’t roll over and play dead for the faux mods. And how gauche and ungentlemanly of Mr. Trump to instantly perceive that the fix was in, to eat the mods’ lunches and bitch slap them with their empty lunch sacks.
Worse luck next time!
I will be interested to see if your panel scrutinizes (or at least gives equal time to) Trump’s policies and party affiliation over the years - along with his donations (majority to Democrats) and endorsements and accolades.
Walker does the same thing...But he uses the word 'we'...Apparently wants to spread the blame around a little...
Gov. Scott Walker works with people - the voters, legislators, etc. - that’s why he wins.
Looks like there’s a lot of “burning toast” these days.
Maybe you are mistaken and it’s not burnt toast but Trump roast.
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.