GOP Debate Recap: Reactions from the Breitbart World
by PubliusLast night, to its credit, CNN showed what can happen if a news organization sets aside its political bias and lets the candidates actually debate. If journalism schools exist in the future, they should build a course around comparing the MSNBC/Politico partisan hackery with last night’s CNN debate.
Below is a recap of reactions from your BIG editors:
Andrew Breitbart: Whatever Wolf Blitzer took to make it tolerable for him to be around so many flyover-country Tea Party rubes, he should distribute it to his peers in the mainstream media for the coming election year. CNN put on the show that MSNBC was government-subsidized not to. What was conspicuously missing–and thus making it journalistically fair–was the usual framing of Tea Party concerns as inherently racist. So CNN, especially with its exciting intro package that felt like an ESPN playoff game intro, gets high grades. Maybe I was so appalled by MSNBC’s lower-than-low performance that CNN comes out the winner this evening, simply by behaving professionally.
What Democrats and leftists want is that artificial injection of race. But those who will bring it up in desperation after this Tampa tea party debate will have exposed one of the Democratic Party’s greatest weaknesses: concern over the plight of real minority oppression. None of the Tea Party’s critics will recognize that one of tonight’s questioners was a Tea Party member who happened to be a Muslim woman from Afghanistan. To the modern leftist, this woman is invisible. Her question mark spurring cognitive dissonance across the Daily Kos-Huffington Post-MSNBC bizarro world spectrum.
As for the candidates, there was one moment where Chuck Barris should have gonged Jon Huntsman: his humorously prepared, yet clunkily delivered “no apology” reference to Kurt Cobain. He’s providing no value to the debates, and has no constituency. Tonight should be his last debate. If MSNBC tried to bury Bachmann in the previous debate at the Reagan library, she resurrected herself on CNN tonight. The predictable governor-à-governor sparring of Romney and Perry is already becoming tedious.
Mike Flynn: Now we know why CNN has the brand it does. Hopefully, John Harris, Brian Williams, Politico and MSNBC were taking notes. Wolf certainly got his liberal biases in, from time to time, but not at the expense of a free-wheeling and interesting GOP debate. Newt had the best lines in the debate, but he’s Newt and isn’t going anywhere. Everyone else had some good lines. Rick Perry, yet again, was the subject of attacks from all sides. He was much steadier than in the first debate. He stood his ground, so I score him with the win.
Joel Pollak, EIC Breitbart: The big winner tonight was the Tea Party.
If the Tea Party is racist, then so is CNN. The big loser was Ron Paul, who got booed by the Tea Party when he tried to blame 9/11 on American foreign policy and U.S. support for Israel in particular. One question that remains is why the Tea Party allowed CNN to control the debate being held in its name–especially since CNN seemed to target frontrunner Rick Perry, who is popular among Tea Party supporters.
Larry O’Connor, EIC BreitbartTV: It took the Tea Party to finally put Ron Paul in his place. For years we’ve suffered with this man running for President with an accidental “R” at the end of his name only because he is smart enough to know that he only has a modicum of relevance by staying within the Republican Party. He learned in 1988, when he ditched our party, that he would suffer in obscurity screaming about “militarism” on a street corner like a mad man. Unlike his ideological brother Pat Buchanan, Paul figured out that he could only keep himself from being fully ridiculed by staying within the party and pestering us every four years with his erratic debate appearances.
But not tonight. Tonight, finally, someone said enough. Enough of his blaming America for the 9/11 attacks. Enough of his undermining our troops by constantly labeling ourdefense efforts as “militarism” as if he was channeling Dennis Kucinich or Michael Moore. Enough of his enabling the anti-Semitic fringe followers who see in him the last great hope of finally abandoning Israel like they’ve always wanted. Enough.
The Tea Party audience let Ron Paul hear it and hear it loud. Unlike the establishment Republican audience at the last couple of GOP debates, my pals in the Tea Party booed on Paul. They booed him loud and they booed him long. Unfortunately, I suspect neither he nor his sycophantic followers heard a peep. After all, they are the TRUE Republicans, just ask them. The rest of us are all RINOs.
John Nolte, EIC Big Hollywood:
***UPDATE: What I wrote below was my gut reaction from last night and after reading Dana Loesch’s piece this morning I regret not giving CNN credit for avoiding the kind of divisive social issues no one cares about except for the MSM. That was a big leap froward from previous debates and credit is due.
My list of candidates based on how they did from best to worst:
1. PRESIDENT OBAMA: I’m not saying this to be glib or clever. The plan worked. Wolf Blitzer framed every so-called “tea party” question into a “how awful is Rick Perry” question to hurt our front-runner. The media’s job is to take out each of our front-runners one-by-one, and that’s exactly what’s happening. When you combine this with Mitt Romney’s shameless demagoguery on the issue of Social Security, Obama now has all kinds of fresh talking points and campaign ad material.
Watching the GOP agree to these MSM debates is like watching Christians sign up to meet the lions.
Dumb. Dumb. Dumb.
2. MICHELE BACHMAN: Her hit on Romney and RomneyCare was a thing of beauty. I love everything she said and how, unlike Romney, she’s able to score points against her fellow Republicans without undermining their chances in the general election. This is a woman with grit and courage and she was a tea partier before being a tea partier was cool.
3. NEWT GINGRICH: Unlike the other candidates, he sees The Matrix, he sees that the corrupt media is trying to keep everyone’s eye off the ball and he just keeps bringing it all back to where it should be: at the feet of a failed president we call Barack.
4. HERMAN CAIN: This is a great American with an amazing resume and great ideas. Personally, I’m so sick of the MSM dismissing him as second-tier in these debates I could spit. A large number of primary voters remain undecided and these debates should be about helping us learn more about all eight of these candidates, not the horserace or the corrupt media toxifying our front-runner to help re-elect Obama.
I want to hear more from Herman Cain and had the GOP figured out a way to set up these primary debates so that they serve our interests as opposed to those of the corrupt media, who knows what the field would look like today.
Cain is a casualty of this failure more than any other candidate.
5. RICK PERRY: He took some hits today, especially on the issue of immigration. He has poise though, and I think that will serve him well as the campaign grinds on. He just needs more answers to the charges thrown at him and he especially needs to find a way to back off Romney’s Social Security demagoguery.
6. JON HUNTSMAN: He wins for most-improved but that was a pretty low bar.
7. RICK SANTORUM: The former Pennsylvania Senator’s “What the hell’s your problem” face makes me laugh, but he keeps returning to the same message that didn’t register in the first debate: I won as a Republican in a Democratic State. He needs to adapt or get voted off the island.
8. RON PAUL: His foreign policy ideas scares me.
9. MITT ROMNEY: Shame on Romney. One sign of statesmanship is the ability to win the Republican nomination without undermining your opponents’ chances in the general election in the event they win the nomination. This is about beating Obama and what’s good for America, and Romney’s mercenary impulses are a major turn off.
I’ll support Romney 100% should he win the nomination but he just became the first Republican I’d like to see lose the nomination.
Dana Loesch, EIC BigJournalism: We’ve grown accustomed to the MSNBC treatment: a far left network hosts a debate where the moderators are at odds with the candidates instead of forcing the candidates to go at their own records and the records of others; afterwards the entirely far-left panel of the far left network’s on air talent mock the debate participants and skew the issues. Last night’s debate made MSNBC’s previous effort a tacky, JV affair in comparison.
CNN made an effort to include voices to the “right” including mine, Erick Erickson, Ari Fleischer, and many more. Tea partiers asked questions. No one focused on social issues, which isn’t what the tea party is about, the night was about the economy and foreign policy. CNN fielded questions from the web. It was an impressive effort of which conservatives should take note. Don’t demand a balanced media and throw around terms like “MSM” if you aren’t willing to support conservatives when they go on MSM — or willing to acknowledge a successful effort at a debate which included grassroots more so than any other network to date.
A bar was set last night in terms of how media will perceive the tea party going forward and another bar was set concerning diversity of thought on air. Note this and expect it going forward. Kudos to all who helped put on a great debate.
Email this to a friend | Print |
Share on Facebook
| Tweet this
| 
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
115 Comments
In the M(ore)S(ocialism)from N(itwit)B(iased-socialist)C(lowns) debate, I wore out the "mute" button on my remote by blocking every comment and question from pathetic williams and his side-kicks, the leftist buffoon no-body from politico and the ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT AMNESTY SUPPORTER from telemundo. In spite of that, I could gather from the answers that the questions were full of bias and designed for "gotcha" moments – not meaningful responses. This is the FIRST time my tv has EVER been tuned to the M(ore)S(ocialism)from N(itwit)B(iased-socialist)C(lowns) network, and that will NEVER happen again The GOP candidates who showed up for this farce have all lost some of my respect for them.
In the c(lowns)n(itwits and socialist)n(attering nabobs) debate, I found – to may amazement – that I could actually tolerate the questions from blitzer. I'm still in shock over that.
Newt is 3-for3 in the debates. In the first debate, he appropriately b*tch-slapped slimebag chris wallace for his slimy "gotcha" questions. In the second, he b*tch-slapped williams for trying to incite Repub-against-Repub fighting instead of useful questioning. In the third, he hit a grand-slam home run with his comment that OBOZO is the REAL scare-monger.
My dream ticket = Palin + Gingrich.
The left wing lame stream media loves to say that Bachmann is a moron and when she gets a chance to prove them she usually hits it out of the park. She ate Romney's lunch last night. I think Bachmann is the true conservative in this race and Perry isn't looking too bad.
Blitzer behaved himself, maybe he was afraid of the "violent, racist, terrorist" Tea Party audience.
Is there anyone else out there who was a little uncomfortable with Bachmann sort of flirting with the anti-vax conspiracy nuts?
I understand that parents should have some control over what gets injected into their children, and pretty much agree that it should be a parents choice (just as I also think those parents must live with the consequences if their child gets the measles or pertussis or whatever, and that includes the financial burden). But to flirt with the anti-vax crowd, when there is not a shred of evidence that Gardasil is anything but safe and effective, just struck a wrong cord with me. Although I suppose Bill Maher might stand up and applaud.
Anyway, it was the one part of the debate I wasn't all that thrilled with, and I suspect it may have hurt Bachmann more than helped.
I actually enjoyed the debate..
However, Mitt……
I don't think TEXAS was dealt 4 ACES… More like a pair of dueces nurtured and bluffed into a winning hand..
CA definitely got the 4 Aces and promptly folded…
Good feed back thx. I trust the folks at Big's. Don't always agree with them; but trust them. And that's not an easy get. It's a very strange new world. The interactivity of new tech has lifted a curtain that has had some very dangerous stuff going on behind it for a long time. God help us is all I can say. When anybody telling it like it is and being honest is deemed unelectable by both dens of thieves; No other than God is a weapon with a prayer. Talk to people; people. Not about the weapon; about the target. It's the only way.
Perry and Cain are the winners. I think Bachmann is finished but doesn't know it yet. Same to Paul, Huntsman and Santorium. I'm having a hard time with Romney due to his healthcare reform that passed in Mass. I wonder if any of the people in Mass. had to go to a different state to receive the care they needed. I'd like to hear from them.
Bachmann and Gingrich did the best last night, in my opinion. Perry, I think, has been weakened considerably. The vaccine issue is one thing, but the in-state tuition for the children of illegal immigrants is ridiculous. He's going to get hammered on it from here on out I expect.
I have to take issue with what Larry O’Connor says about Dr. Paul:
"For years we’ve suffered with this man running for President with an accidental 'R' at the end of his name only because he is smart enough to know that he only has a modicum of relevance by staying within the Republican Party."
Relevance? You may not have adopted Paul's stance on foreign policy, but you have adopted his stance on practically everything else. The man is relevant because the Republican party is running on an almost identical platform to the one Paul ran on in the last election — the election when Republicans would roll their eyes each time he talked about debt, monetary policy, and the Fed. He's been talking about this stuff for decades and the party has only now come to the realization that he was right all along.
I fully realize not everyone is going to embrace Paul's views on foreign policy, but folks really need to give him a bit more credit for changing the direction of the Republican party toward a focus on actually limiting the growth of government. That simply wasn't there back in 2008.
So that's why we got attacked on 9 /11.
Perhaps this is a harbinger of MSM coming face to face with the TRUTH.
There is POWER in the Tea Party and NO astro turf.
No racism, no prejudice, just concerned AMERICANS.
In talking about winners last night, the discussion begins and ends with Rick Santorum. He hit it out of the park. Start printing those bumper stickers.
http://www.examiner.com/gun-rights-in-national/de...
David Codrea puts a finer point in his piece today that I have been making regarding these "debates".
Not one of these Candidates has had the courage to step up to the plate and talk about GunWalker. David has made the call to task each candidate, from those who support them, with setting themselves apart from the pack by taking this GunWalker bull by the horns. Task the one you support with stepping up to the plate.
Me? I call on you Sarah, to light up the screen with a snappish GunWalker post and yet again set yourself apart from the Establishment Candidates. DO what you were talking about on Gretta last night regarding talking about something and then witnessing the candidates talking about it in the days afterward.
Put your self out there on GunWalker more than you have so far, Sarah. Call Barry out now that Janet and Robert have joined Holder and Barry himself in saying "they didn't know". Tell the truth and say what needs to be said the way the Establishment candidates haven't and won't. Light em up, Sarah. You know that you want to. Call em out, Sarah, the lot of em!
I have to agree. He is kinda wacky in the foreign policy arena, but his domestic issues are spot on. He may not be presidential material, but he should be placed somewhere that will utilize his tenacity.
Michelle Bachmann was a strong player last night, and completely self-immolated this morning. There's no way that she has a shot (pun intended) at being President after playing the anti-vax card. It's just not possible. What little traction she gained with the more paranoid elements of society wasn't worth blowing out her credibility with the population at large.
Newt may wind up as VP. I never would have thought it before, but the man is delivering one steady performance after another. Lord knows if Joe Biden is qualified to be VP, then I'll give Newt another look.
Otherwise, no change from before. The rest of the pack won't move statistically. Newt up, Bachmann down, and likely out within a month.
You nitwits. None of you noticed the seminal moment when Ron Paul was asked what should happen if someone with a good job chooses to not have health coverage and develops a life-threatening condition. Teatards in the audience cheered for the patient to die. A Tea Party Death Panel of sorts. Congratulations, morons!! Then the moderator FAILED to ask the same question of Rick Perry or Mitt Romney, or even ask for a show of hands for who agreed with the cane-shaking, sansabelt slack-wearing Teatard Death Panel!! Someone should've yanked their oxygen tubes and confiscated their motorized scooter batteries for such an idiotic display!!!!!!!!!!
Of course over on the Huckabee thread you said yesterday that "Take it from me. Romney is the one who will beat Obama and return this nation to Christ.".
What is the point of wasting your time with nonsensical garbage like these posts show? I just don't understand that.
LOL!!! This website is run by the CIA. Pathetic
Of course, that was said before last night's debate.
By the way, the Tea Party was founded by anti-war Ron Paul supporters. The days of the fake conservative big government loving blood-lusting neo-conmen is over. You are all irrelevant.
I'll continue to back her as I am no fan of Romney or Perry.
Cain would be my next choice.
Newt? Cabinet post at best. Definitely not presidential material.
Like the CIA could actually run a website…
Funny.
Count me among the concerned. I was concerned that maybe she was correct about some of the adverse reactions to the jabs. Her "these innocent young girls don't get a 'do over'" comment had me thinking that there might have been something to her stance, so I went to a fantastic online resource about all kinds of drugs and supplements and their "adverse events" (in the trade parlance–I work in pharma marketing), http://www.drugs.com.
From my reading of the "prescribing information" (information provided by the manufacturer and vetted by the appropriate regulatory authority–in Canada it's PAAB (http://paab.ca), the Pharmaceutical Advertising Advisory Board; in America, I believe FDA handles this role) Gardasil has a similar adverse event profile as placebo. Here's a link to check for yourselves: http://www.drugs.com/pro/gardasil.html.
So, it seems Ms Bachmann may have overreacted with the "do over" business. (She probably got some bad information from someone, because I do not believe she is stupid.) That said, I do believe she is correct about an "opt-in" rather than the "opt-out" approach being the proper conservative (i.e. individual rights-based) approach.
There is a combination of not wanting to deal with the question of US citizenship, freedom of choice, the Islamic jihad threat to America and the failing Social Security system. Not feeling confident about any of them.
Why should a person who could afford insurance get medical care because they chose not to buy insurance. If the person could pay on their own for their expensive care, then, by all means, they should receive that good. You missed the point. It's about responsibility, not death panels. Death Panels are more of Obama's expertise.
Damn Ralph….now the bots are after you too……..
Cain is awesome, but America has never elected someone to be President who wasn't either an elected official or a general. In all seriousness, he'd be perfect as a cabinet member, but there's just no possibility he'll be President at this time. I really do enjoy how Cain is able to launch his 9/9/9 plan at almost every turn, and gain it some ground. Despite what he says, you do need some understanding of how Washington works if you intend to change it, and I think most people realize that.
Bachmann would be the first President since Abraham Lincoln to be voted into the Presidency with nothing on her resume but a bit of time in the House. Even before this morning, it was clear she wasn't Abraham Lincoln. Now she's crossed hard over the line from "passionate advocate of conservative ideals" to "wide-eyed lunatic." None of the big donors or the independents will go near her at this point. She has only marginally more experience than Cain, and a fraction of the common sense.
I agree, although it's not enough to turn me away from supporting Bachmann at this point. I don't believe that the Government should be mandating what vaccines or medicines we should or should not receive (apparently Dick Durbin is trying to limit over-the-counter medicine. http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=46145 )–it should be left to the free market.
I do believe that people need to be educated about the benefits and risks of vaccines from reliable sources. Bachmann probably hurt herself the most after the debate when she fed more into the anti-vaccination debate, as opposed to the government-interfering-in-personal-decisions discussion.
That is not the truth. Ronulons had nothing to do with 'founding' the Tea Party. If they had, I would not identify with them. Ronulon supporters are scary! So get over your delusion of grandeur.
All about personal responsibility
Well they have your number then don't "THEY"
I thought it was a good debate. I honestly didn't expect Wolf Blitzer to behave himself. I expected him and Newt to get into a tussle. But the whole thing was run very well. He butted out for the most part and let the people ask many questions that were relevant.
I notice that the stage was set up with the two highest polling candidates and went out from there with the least polling on the ends. That put Romney and Perry right next to each other and they were allowed to actually debate one another for awhile.
I think it is somewhat early yet, but it is beginning to look like Romney and Perry are the ones that we are going to pick from if polls are accurate. I hope Newt stays around as long as he can and Bachman too.
While I like Herman Cain most among all of them, he doesn't seem to be picking up much steam.
I am looking forward to the next debate.
P.S. Take a hike huntsman.
Would someone be so kind as to drop me a quick e-mail when the CNN love-fest is over?
Thanks.
I agree about the opt-in/opt-out argument, although from what I understand, even here I think Bachmann overplayed her hand since even Perry's original executive order already had broad opt-out provisions. The only real argument Bachmann had left was the fact that Perry had chosen executive order rather than going through the legislature–a tactic which Perry himself has previously already acknowledged was a mistake. So the only thing Bachmann really gained was to force Perry to remind everyone of a mistake he had already conceded long ago. I'm not sure that was a good trade-off for her.
You are setting up a false dichotomy: False Dichotomy . The fallacy of false dichotomy is committed when the arguer claims that his conclusion is one of only two options, when in fact there are other possibilities. http://mind.ucsd.edu/syllabi/98-99/logic/falsedic...
Someone (Ron Paul, perhaps) said that churches used to handle situations like this… which really should be the issue. Way back, when I was studying economics at the U of Saskatchewan, a lefty academy if ever there was one, I learned about how governmental "charity" crowds out private philanthropy. (Come to think of it, I probably read this in my off-course reading of the Austrians, most notably, Ludwig von Mises http://mises.org/, because this sounds antithetical to my dear old alma mater's ideological bent.) Whomever it was who said that bit about the churches was hinting at this phenomenon.
Want to learn more? I did a quick Yahoo search and came up with this: http://www.tacticalphilanthropy.com/2011/02/gover....
No, I didn't miss the point. The cane shaking, oxygen sucking, motorized scooter ridin' crowd captured the Teazombie ethic perfectly: "No insurance, you die!!" I didn't say the person should get care, I said ALL candidates should have had the opportunity to state their Tea Party loyalties by yelling, "Pull the plug!!" In a humane, life-affirming way, of course.
I agree. I think her point was it should have been an opt-in.
What's more, I am concerned about whether or not Perry instigated this law as a favor to a campaign contributor.
Correct, if you don't advocate universal coverage, and trust the medical authorities will do the "right" thing and take a powder while the chump dies in agony. Otherwise, we taxpayers get to foot the bill for the moron's "bad choice." It's up to the individual to decide if they are pro their own life or not, right? Or should they have that choice?! It's so confusing trying to be pro-life, anti-death panel, and hard line pro personal responsibility!! Help me Jeebus!
Chickens for long-term critical care! That's the way to do it! Barter!! One kidney for three months care, what do I hear in return? Auction off life-saving treatment on the public square!! That'd show them dang Canadians who's humane and efficient!!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non_sequitur
The Gardisil thing is a minor issue because it never became law. No girl was forced to have the shot, nor were any parents forced to opt out. Perry had a major brain fart by entertaining the idea, and he admitted his error. Further, he admitted that not bringing the issue to the TX legislature was also a mistake. Contrast that with Romney doubling down on Romneycare, even though the libs in MA overrode all his vetos on it, and it's an abject failure. Who would you rather have in the WH–a man who admits his mistakes, or a man who doubles down on them?
According to the National Cancer Institute: From 2004-2008, the median age at diagnosis for cancer of the cervix uteri was 48 years of age. …The age-adjusted incidence rate was 8.1 per 100,000 women per year. http://seer.cancer.gov/statfacts/html/cervix.html.... So, my daughter has a 0.00008% chance of getting cervical cancer once she's sexually active. Right now, she has a 0% chance. With early detection of cancerous precursors already available, I'm just not convinced that she needs the vaccine. Until there's a substantial body of proof otherwise, I'm saying nay.
Excellent points.
You obviously haven't learned that post hoc, ergo propter hoc is a FALLACY.
Sorry, but just because Ron Paul has been all libertarian for a long time does NOT make him a "founder" of the Tea Party. Too bad so sad.
Whoa, you were watching a different debate on Planet Zero. The Tea Partiers were cheering about NOT BEING OBLIGATED to pay for everyone else's poor decisions.
You posted the winning ticket IMO. Sarah and Newt.
Ewww…three trolls together, are you guys going to breed?
Perry's problem now is his alignment with the Merck Drug company and forcing younsters to get a shot while he was accepting huge $$ from this companies lobbyists. No way guy! As a Tea Party member you will NOT get my vote because the liberal media and Democrats will use this against you from day one if you were to get elected. Sorry ole' boy but you're all washed up! This is the exact thing we, as America are trying to get away from and your feet have this mud all over them.
The Tea Party, I for one is one of them, was NOT founded by Ron Paul or anyone close to him and his ideology. Rick Santelli was the "starter of the movement" and it is not a PARTY but a caucus friend. Smaller government, fiscal responsibility and conservative agenda is what it is all about.
Good debate.
Hey, John Nolte. You can't name one nominating contest for either party where the media wasn't all about taking down the front runner. That's what they do. If the top candidate an't take it, tough $hit, they're being vetted. Little Richard can't take it because some of his major stances are laughably stupid. You seem to sense that, and don't like it being pointed out. Romney can win, Wick Pewwy can't. it's that simple.
I agree.
It was a good debate.
Currently, as with Bush, we have a foreign policy of nation building, not very popular with Americans IMO.
As for Iran having a bomb, why don't they ask all the rest of them what they are going to do about it, let's not except the pat answer of–Iran just cannot have a bomb, are they going to war, are they going to bomb Iran??.
Paul's policy would allow Israel to take care of the problem themselves, a scenario that, likely, would have already been carried out years ago, except for the US policy of meddling in other countries business–IMO a good answer.
I enjoyed the debate.
I believe Perry came out the winner.
He took all they had to give.
Newt and Perry had the two best soundbytes.
Newt with the zinger about GE, and Perry with the one-liner about Government spending our money, to give US programs we don't want.
Inside:
You're obviously not an insider or you will know that the Tea Party was found to stop the outrageous growth of Obama is trying to do. We want a balance budget, repeal of Obamacare, for agencies such as the EPA and the National Labor Relations Board from interferring with our lifes.
Walter Hanson
Minnneapolis, MN
Agree about the media using this against him.
But $5000 is "huge $$"? Really? Obama's last campaign war chest was, what, $800-million? $5K to citizens is a lot of money, even though it ain't what it used to be. In politics, $5000 is nothing.
Perry's taking offense at the suggestion that he could be bought for 5 grand was wrong headed because it seemed to suggest that he could be bought, but that it'd take a helluva lot more than a measly $5K.
The liberals at work were talking about this. It was teabagger this and teabagger that. I did have fun though.
I discovered that thanks to the MSM you can now call them Pavlov's Liberals. All you have to do is say "Palin" with in ear shot and they immediately stop what they are talking about and start foaming at the mouth and barking.
Gingrich deserves more air time. I started out supporting him, and while I feel he badly misspoke with his comments about Paul Ryan's plan, Perry and Romney both have at least as much if not more baggage than Newt. Unless it looks like Perry needs each and every vote to beat Romney, I'm voting for Gingrich.
Perry is a slow talker and kinda twitchy with his head movement. More importantly he was ill prepared and his immigration policy is the same as Obama, Bush and Mcsame. He also missed shocking those CNN libtards by hammering the EPA.
I enjoyed the debate too. I'm a glutton for punishment in the realm of political theatrics.
Perry took all sorts of body blows and weathered them somewhat well in the first part of the debate. By the end of the ordeal, the bruises left by the punches were beginning to show and he had a clear shiner going over his left eye.
There were several good soundbites but as the circus was winding down, I think that Herman Cain had a good one-liner when he said that he'd bring a sense of humor to the White House.
The Teazombie yelling "Let 'em die!" wasn't talking about any such thing. He was expressing his opinion as a member of the ad hoc Death Panel.
with you, Mme. Rogue.
creepy.
opt in/out is ludicrous with vaccines. Small pox would not have been eradicated by that route.
our four-year old got chicken pox in pre-school (she was vaccinated so had a mild case) because British
idiot Mom doesn't "believe" in vaccines.
he's called a "provocateur."
best to ignore
Perhaps he was more fearful of Newt.
Sorry guys – missed it. Come on Monday Night Football! No, I wouldn't have watched it if it was on a Tuesday either. The idea of watching conservatives argue against each other when the real problem sits in the White House is repulsive to me. To be fair some would argue we have to weed out contenders, to this I say have them each lay their cards on the table on what they would do about our current situation and let the best man or woman earn the vote. All their doing now is providing fodder for the MSM spin machine.
From what I understand, the vaccine works best when it is administered pre-teen, although it can be given as late as the mid-20s. I know it came along too late for me, because when I asked my doctor about it I was told it had not been approved for adult women (I'm not sure what the cutoff age is, but I suppose I could look it up if I had the time). All I know is, when my daughter is old enough, I do plan on having her vaccinated.
They are keeping their powder dry. Issa and Grassley are going to blow this wide open and everyone benefits. Jumping in and stirring the pot right now, only gives Obama and Holder a chance to play off some gaff instead of deal with the steadily closing in case that is being built around them, brick by brick.
I so understand your impatience and desire to out this. This is the big one. This has every opportunity to push Obama out. No one wants to give away the game plan by making a verbal mistake from the outside. You might appreciate the work being done on this by Tom Fitton at Judicial Watch and Matthew Boyle an investigative reporter at DailyCaller.com.
I'll amend my comment, John, because you are enough of a student of history to know the MSM has only played the game of "Let's Kill the Front Runner" since Watergate. Prior to that, it was a white gloves affair, Marquis of Queensbury, etc.
I have to agree with you about Bachmann and Newt. She's hurt herself and he's done nothing but prove over and over why he was chosen to be Speaker of the House. If Newt didn't come across so impersonable and if his perceived ethical lapses weren't present he'd be well beyond the rest of the field and a shoe-in for the nomination.
Utterly agree. Cain and Bachmann are still in the running. I have issues with Newt, but he's got a brain and thinks fast on his feet. Without teleprompters.
I would have thought being as smart as you are you would have understood that the questions was , "should he be allowed to die"…"allowed"…It's not up to you or me or anyone else to "allow" someone to die. You somehow think the government death panel beats the individual making a choice…and it is a choice, like it or not. Get a job, pay for catastrophic insurance instead of vacations and TV's etc. The question said he was young and had a job and was doing well…then he can pay his own. When he chooses not to prepare for it, that's his choice. You are just so intent on hearing what suits your already prescribed view, that you are not really listening…just hearing what suits your agenda.
After Newt's KO'ing the Moderators in the previous, two debates, I'm sure Wolfy boy got the memo not to disturb the uncaged tiger on stage that is Gingrich.
Isn't it just too bad the liberal media exercises selective vetting? While they piled on McCain they went very easy on Obama. I expect them to do the same when he debates whoever the GOP nominee winds up being.
not just that my friend this green comp that just folded and was raided by the fbi and leads all the way to obama
Newt's line about GE is very salient, when one considers how intimately connected it is to the hospital appliance industry. They make a lot of very hi-tech diagnostic medical devices.
I'm with you on Gingrich. He's consistently performed the best in these debates to my ear, and was the only, other person I was considering besides Bolton, who to my disappointment has decided to sit this election out. I still hope he'll be used (SOS) in a GOP administration.
Newt's "baggage" is mostly personal, scandalous stuff, and political stuff like his sitting with Pelosi and seeming to subscribe to APW (Anthropogenic Global Warming) but I think on this last issue he's probably more informed now than he was then. People have a hard time forgiving others' personal sins.
Even with these ethical warts I think Newt's the most well-qualified, prepared individual, but sadly, I don't think he's going to hold sway with early caucus and primary voters. Too bad, too, because he really does have the most wherewithal. Is this yet another instance where style trumps substance?
I'm certainly no Newt fanboy but after watching these debates I can't understand how anyone cannot see that Next
is the quickest, sharpest and smartest guy in the room. He would destroy Obama in a debate.
These "debates" aren't debates for starters. They're staged events where the questions are asked in such a way to provide political theater. Even though CNN and Wolf kept it classier than the horrid stink-bomb of a "debate" put on by MSNBC they're still far short of executing what a genuine debate should be – an opportunity for the candidates to really discuss issues.
Secondly, the arrangement of the candidates is all wrong. These candidates shouldn't be standing side-by-side at podiums! They should be seated, in the round, so they all face one another. One moderator should be in the center, not to ask questions so much as to help move discussion points around the table and to invigorate discussion. These media people need to dig out the old discussions Fred Friendly used to conduct, if they want to see how a real master did the job.
Lastly, and this is a reply to Mr. Nolte's comment, that if "the GOP figured out a way to set up these primary debates so that they serve our interests as opposed to those of the corrupt media," the field might well be different.
All it would take is someone with willingness and money (that's the tough part) to buy air-time from any station willing to sell it for hosting a debate. Mr. Breitbart, you could do just that. I asked in another post why Dana Loesch or other conservatives are not getting to serve as Moderators. The answer's simple: the stations are wielding the giant-robot controls simply because they have the stations, cameras, channels and so on. They should be airing these debates free-of-charge if they served the public trust but that's another issue. But they are in the business of making money, so why not buy air-time from one of them and host a debate of our own, where we can control the vertical and horizontal? If the station likes it can put up its own disclaimer saying "The views represented are solely those of the speaker, blah blah blah."
What do you think, Mr. Breitbart? I'd contribute to seeing that idea become a reality.
Then you are an advocate of assisted suicides, or suicide through the negligence or refusal or simple end of care. Good for you! Die, Terry Schiavo, DIE!!!!!!!!!!!!
Make no mistake, I appreciate the work done by so many who have put in work to ensure that mainstream media, Old media, Establishment media (whatever we will call it) was and is unable to sweep this all under the rug. However, I despise the intentional slow playing that has been going on with this because justice is due. I submit that justice intentionally delayed is justice intentionally denied.
It has gone on long enough, heck that, too long, already.
As I said in frustration last February, this is bigger and more meaningful than Watergate. This time, the playing of politics has gotten a large number of people killed. This madness has got to be stopped – and not on an election cycle timeline.
If you are talking conscious self determination I am …how you equate what I am saying to suicide by negligence is a reach, unless you mean failure to thrive, which yes, I would support if the person is legally their own person and able to make this decision without duress. Yes, someone should be able to refuse care, and in fact they are and do it every day. I believe that's between you and your god, or if you have named someone to make the decision for you and they follow what you asked them to do in good faith.
And, Terry Schiavo did not ask to die…she was caught in the limbo of subclinical consciousness. There were competing family members with agendas. I work with neurological physical therapy patients and I have seen the selfish warping of man's free will, by families, friends, medical personnel, social workers, and political idealogues like you that are driven to turn everything into a high drama to validate yourseves. Just like your very course and thoughtless comments here. The end of Terry Schiavos life was hijacked by people like yourself. Why you exalt yourself in that I have no idea, but somehow it serves your purpose. I'll leave that to God to figure out. Do not assign your behavior to me or apply your silly Alinsky rules of ridicule…I am immune. I deal with life and death every day…you're behavior is inconsequential
That's the thing about Gingrich though. He has the best style of all of them.
See….I guess I will take the damage…LOL….Momma always told me being a smartazz would get me in trouble….She was right again…..
You seem to be worked into a frenzy tonight.
Must be seeing the end.
I don't agree with all the praise of CNN or Blitzer. Sure, they were better than MSLSD. But, who isn't? Nevertheless, Blitzer asked several shamelessly loaded questions. My favorite of the evening was his "what if someone is dying on the hospital steps. Would you cruel teabaggers refuse him gub'mint paid for health care?" That was yet another low in journolism.
This reminds of good teams football practice section –
We our selves silly and times makes some look bad at the end of the season we have very strong team
Perry took a beating but took held his ground
Mitt gained – as did several of the others.
I saw a very strong Cabinet in that group – Key is to beat OBama
The political enemy continues to host the debates…. Picking who answers what!!! Choosing who is on the hot seat….Morphing the questions into their questions!!!! These Obamanistas are enjoying huge ratings by airing and dictating their opponents debates!!! They are all trying to appease the TEA (Taxed Enough Already) party…Isn't that ironic!!!!!? They are befriending those who they have labeled as terrorists!!! All these status flow Republicans are now cow-towing to the Constitutional guard of America….The Taxed Enough Already people (TEA party)…..How convenient, that they now see it our way and PRETEND to give voice to us/US!!!! I feel Bachmann, Gingrich, Cain and Paul are fed up with the "Progressive" fantasy land preachers and teachings….Perry is one of them, schooled by them, but is rejecting his education/indoctrination (Same category as Andrew Brietbart), Romney is still the progressives servant (Wolf in sheeps clothing)!!! Huntsman is a "Progressive" plant (The chameleon of the bunch) The rest don't have a chance…….Unless Palin gets in, hopefully she will wash all her dirty laundry (Admit all her sins)…Because they can and will be used against her!!!! While we may not know anything about the Demonrat (Sorry typo Democrat), we will know all about the Republican (The Media's mortal enemy)!!!! If you love your Liberal leader…Go to his/her Mansion, pick their flowers, camp out in their guest room for the weekend…They won't care, they are "Liberal"… they like to share!!! If you do.You soon find how "Conservative they are with what is theirs….In the back seat of the squad car handcuffed…..Covered in blood from the takedown….Facing Felony tresspassing charges, among many other predetermined convictions!!!! You will be on National news (N.E.W.S. …..Information broadcast to all corners of the round world….North East West South). Everyone will know your name..But no one will be the wiser….In reality you are innocent..They do the same thing to you…You can't conserve what is yours from them, they have the right to liberate everything you possess..And you can't call the Law on them….They are Justified…..They are the Law!!!! Another election Cycle…..We'll see what happens…..Their power vested in the destruction of the Constitution and The Bill OF RIGHTS is enormous!!! Wake up as many friends, neighbors and acquaintances as you can…It is our/your only hope……….If not…Prepare to be assigned a god over you…You will be servant to it/him/her!!!! Lots of marriages end up that way too….but you can divorce that bad decision….You won't be able to divorce Obama and his merry men/women/it's!!!
I don't think Gingrich has much chance of securing the nomination, but he does keep things focused and grounded. And he does challenge the media.
I think you're right. She should have backed up on that. She really miscalculated that one. That was a wide open door for rebuttal on whether she thinks all immunizations are invasions on innocent children—at least that was what I was getting from her post debate comments. I'm guessing she hauled her babies in at the appropriate ages for the scheduled shots, without much thought on the invasiveness. Unless she says yes, they are all inappropriate based on her own comments, she looks hypocritical.
And accusing Perry of accepting bribes….that went over the top. Unless she can back that up, she'll just look desperate and foolish.
That, and I'm having a hard time with Romney on his flip-flopping. I don't know that he's really as right of center as he'd like to project. I think the MSM and Left to some extent take it easy on him, because he's more left than he's letting on. I think he'd be their choice.
I wish they'd let Thaddeus McCotter play in the sandbox. I always enjoy his random geekiness.
I think Newt's style is acceptably gracious and personable even though – to his credit – he doesn't suffer fools and frauds gladly. I've no disagreement with the way he addresses the liberal media and he certainly comes across "presidential" but I wish he'd speak with even more authority, invoking more expressions like "As president I would…"
His style and conversation is the product of decades of political experience, what some disparagingly call "establishment," or "insider." One doesn't get to Newt's level of dialogue being an "outsider."
The style over substance remark was speaking of glitz over guts. Too many people want "pretty." For heaven's sake, we're electing a president here, not choosing a floral arrangement!
Bilderberg Perry lost big time…alot of his support and his credibility…because he is nothing more than an 'empty suit'….and a Bilderberg!
If you can't see that…you are truly one of the deaf, dumb and blind of 2012!
This was no over reaction…what she spoke was the truth…you just can't handle the truth!
Forcing young girls in TX to get the cardasil vaccine by Executive Order =
http://www.pharmalot.com/2011/08/rick-perry-and-t....
http://www.whale.to/m/sterile.html
DEATHS DUE TO CARDASIL?
“As of June 22, 2011 there have been a total 68 VAERS reports of death among those who have received Gardasil® . There were 54 reports among females, 3 were among males, and 11 were reports of unknown gender. Thirty two of the total death reports have been confirmed and 36 remain unconfirmed due to no identifiable patient information in the report such as a name and contact information to confirm the report. A death report is confirmed (verified) after a medical doctor reviews the report and any associated records. In the 32 reports confirmed, there was no unusual pattern or clustering to the deaths that would suggest that they were caused by the vaccine and some reports indicated a cause of death unrelated to vaccination.”
http://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/vaccines/hpv/gar...
http://www.naturalnews.com/022140.html
Cancer is NOT a contagion…and therefore…does not need a vaccine. We only wish the day would come that we could have a vaccine to prevent cancer!
Interesting that Blitzer raised the Federal Reserve question and passed over Ron Paul, the oly one who understands the problems it causes, has wriiten bboks about it, holds hearings and is now educating his opponents and his critics.
That'e spelled L-E-A-D-E-R-S-H-I-P.
http://www.ronpaul2012.com
The big winners…in alphabetical order…
Bachman…Gingrich and Santorum…all are showing they can lead…and know what needs to be done and all are knowledgeable in how to do it!
~~~
2012 RALLY CRY – “BACK TO THE FUTURE – BACK TO GROUND ZERO”!
~~~
I just finished watching it on Youtube, and I'll tell ya Im not a Newtie either but he looks the most presidential, and, he has the most experience on stage.
Still, I'd like to chop up all the candidates and just take parts from each and make one really solid candidate.
I'd take Newt in that one, I think hes a grappler, if he got wolfie on the ground it would be over.
I agree MOSTLY with Paul on domestic issues, but his foreign policy scares the hell out of me. I do think Bachmann made some good points, and Gingrich is really hitting a stride, Cain needs to have more attention, Santorum, Pawlenty,and Huntsman are done, they need to get out of the way so the adults can talk.
also I would like to see some one on one debates there are too many candidates up there to get a solid feel for any one of them, there should be a bracket style debate, with some good solid conservatives asking the questions.
Although I will (begrudgingly) give points to CNN, they did a much better job than those a$$hats at MSNBC.
Look, the WORST thing possible would be for the candidates to latch on to this yet, because if they do, then its political instead of criminal, and I for one, want to this to be a criminal case. I am as pro 2nd amendment as anyone in this country, and probably more than most. BUT. let us not forget that there is a dead Border Patrol officer involved in this. Turning the gunwalker scam into political fodder at this point greatly diminishes the ability to bring the people responsible to trial. This has to go criminal, if it doesnt someone WILL try it again in the future, and for the long term stability, and relevance of the constitution Issa and Grassley have to keep it within the confines of a criminal investigation.
You must be logged in to post a comment.