Fred the winner. Rudy did well. McCain nodded off for most of it. Romney looked frenzied and frantic most of the time. Huckabee talked only in platitudes. Paul was... well... PAUL.
I agree with Warner and Ct, I loved Fred's answers, especially about windfall tax.(remember the windfall tax on yachts?) Paul, well, kinda looks like Achmed, has no chance. Then the dems, the breck girl took a swing a the Hill(we (Osama Obama and myself)came in first and second in Iowa). ZING! Richardson didn't seem to want to get in the b*tch slapping event.
All in all, things seem to be looking up for Fred: He's making strides in polling and looking good in debates, Romney's getting a little frayed, Huckabee got a conservative death-sentence (read: MSM endorsement), Giuliani and McCain seem to be falling back, Hillary's coming apart at the seams (though we all know her propaganda machine will be stitching away), Obama's under attack by both sides of the aisle, and Edwards is still being his fake, fringe-appeal self.
Still, I'd like to hear him admit his support of McCain-Feingold was wrong. That'd be the final word to get my full support.
www.rhjunior.com Great comics with a hefty dose of Christian and anti-nutjob goodness.
"With your mind as high as Mt. Fuji you can see all things clearly. And you can see all the forces that shape events; not just the things near to you." -Miyamoto Musashi
Warner, given your extreme dislike of Romney and Mormonism, anything you say about him must be taken with a grain of salt.
Having said that, Fred did have a decent night. He seemed to be the sage of the dais....except that a couple of times he seemed to get lost in the midst of long answers.
Mitt seemed to be a lot more animated and facially expressive than usual. What's next? Rumpled hair?
McCain was quarrelsome and seemed even older than Thompson. (Is he?)
I agree about Huckabee. Talking in platitudes is a good discription .
Paul was "tolerated." I think debate organizers will be looking for ways to dump him.
Rudy had a good, strong image, but he told blatant half-truths several times, particularly about amnesty.
Education:
- B.S.L. Western State University, 1968
- J.D. Western State University, 1976
Military Experience:
- U.S. Army, Lieutenent, 1969-1971, Vietnam War
Political Experience:
- U.S. Representative from California, 1981-Present
Religion:
- Baptist
Fred Thompson
Age: 65
Education:
- B.A. Philosophy & Political Science, Memphis State University, 1964
- J.D. Vanderbilt University, 1967
Military Experience:
- None
Political Experience:
- Chief Republican Counsel, U.S. Senate Watergate Committee, 1973-1974
- Special Counsel to Tennessee Governor Lamar Alexander, 1980
- Special Counsel to the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, 1980-1981
- Special Counsel to the U.S. Senate Intelligence Committee, 1982
- Appellate Court Nominating Committee Member, TN, 1985-1987
- Assistant U.S. Attorney, Middle Tennessee, 1969-1972
- U.S. Senator from Tennessee, 1994-2003
Religion:
- Church of Christ
John McCain
Age: 71
Education:
- B.S. United States Naval Academy, 1958
Military Experience:
- U.S. Navy Pilot, Captain, 1958-1981, Vietnam War
- POW in Vietnam, 1967-1973
Political Experience:
- U.S. Representative from Arizona, 1983-1987
- U.S. Senator from Arizona, 1986-Present
Even all the pundits are agreeing that Fred won hands down. You should see some of the positive stuff coming from TownHall.com pundits. They all are giving a thumbs up to Fred.
Rush Limbaugh stated that of the top 5 Republicans running for the presidency, only one was a true conservative. http://www.fred08.com/
Fox News' Dick Morris: "I thought that Mitt Romney won the debate." (Fox News' "Live," 1/5/08)
- Morris: "You have to see this debate in two contexts. Partly, it's a popularity contest but partly its an audition to see who's the toughest fighter, to see who would be the best boxer in the ring with Hillary or with Obama. Then he came across hands down as the toughest boxer." (Fox News' "Live," 1/5/08)
- Morris: "I really felt fundamentally Romney really made the field." (Fox News' "Live," 1/5/08)
National Review's Jonathan Adler: "At his best, [Romney] was persuasive and presidential." (Jonathan Adler, "Re: Spin Room," National Review's The Corner, http://corner.nation..., Posted 1/5/08)
National Review's Kathryn Jean Lopez: "Romney showed a steadiness under fire, sounded like a guy who knows what he's talking about on a number of issues, and introduced more of his biography than he has at debates. I thought Romney's performance was a good start to a weekend of debates where he had to do well – if he does very well tomorrow night, kicking it up a notch, he might show he's a turnaround artist yet in this primary process." (Kathryn Jean Lopez, "I Second The Levin Emotion," National Review's The Corner Blog, http://corner.nation..., Posted 1/5/08)
- Lopez: "Romney is really in his element talking about substantial policy here. He knows this health-care stuff." (Kathryn Jean Lopez, "They're Doing The Work Of The Free Market," National Review's The Corner Blog, http://corner.nation..., Posted 1/5/08)
- Lopez: "I think this seminar format suits Romney, who is a wonk, who loves data and problem-solving (and has even done some of it)." (Kathryn Jean Lopez, "On Domestic Policy," National Review's The Corner Blog, http://corner.nation..., Posted 1/5/08)
The Atlantic's Marc Ambinder: "And Romney is in his wheelhouse. He's been very strong so far and seems very eager to get in on every question, but his answers aren't forced. The Real Mitt Romney..." (Marc Ambinder, "Health Care," The Atlantic Blog, http://marcambinder...., Posted 1/5/08)
Commentary's John Podhoretz: "Mitt Romney is the most impressive performer this evening, striking a judicious tone of urgency and fluency." (John Podhoretz, "New Hampshire: Halfway Through," Commentary Blog, http://www.commentar..., Posted 1/5/08)
- Podhoretz: "But as a matter of performance solely, he is far and away the best and he's delivered it when he needed it most." (John Podhoretz, "New Hampshire: Halfway Through," Commentary Blog, http://www.commentar..., Posted 1/5/08)
National Review's Mark Levin: "I thought Romney actually held up pretty well, given the onslaught." (Mark R. Levin, "The Debate," National Review's The Corner Blog, http://corner.nation..., Posted 1/5/08)
Riehl World View's Dan Riehl: "If you were looking for substance across the board on issues, I think Romney was the clear winner in tonight's debate. McCain's well-known temperament problems lingered barely below the surface much of the evening, especially when someone dared disagree with him. Except of course, for his hugs for Hillary and slaps on the back for Fred. This is a change election and old hands from the Senate will not get it done." (Dan Riehl, "ABC Debate: It Was Romney's Night," Riehl World View Blog, http://www.riehlworl..., Posted 1/5/08)
- Riehl: "I've been watching the debate on ABC. I guess we can dispense with the nice guy image for Huckabee. He came out with one agenda - attack Romney. Romney handled it well. And as everyone else was on point and not looking to just attack, it left Huckabee looking like a jerk. Maybe he needs bookshelves floating behind him to make the nice guy image work? Just a thought." (Dan Riehl, "The Republican Debate," Riehl World View Blog, http://www.riehlworl..., Posted 1/5/07)
"There seems to be a post-debate realignment towards Fred going on. Jon Adler was already on board, but now Mark Levin, Mark Steyn, Andy McCarthy, Peter Robinson, Rich Lowry, and even Kathryn Jean Lopez are praising his performance and talking him up as the conservative alternative to Huck and McCain."
National Review is having buyers remorse with their endorsement of Mitt, and it's obvious why.
Rush Limbaugh stated that of the top 5 Republicans running for the presidency, only one was a true conservative. http://www.fred08.com/
MARC AMBINDER’S SUM-UP on the Republican debate. “On points, Fred Thompson won the debate. Every answer was thoughtful and well-crafted; his tone matched the tone of the question; he wisely refrained from interjecting in the back and forth squabbling. He very deftly reminded viewers that he served on key Senate national security panels and is bringing his experience to bear. Even his insults were subtly and gently constructed.” http://instapundit.com/archives2/013761.php
Rush Limbaugh stated that of the top 5 Republicans running for the presidency, only one was a true conservative. http://www.fred08.com/
Fred Thompson was awesome: he slammed Paul good, and responded well to that Marxist political director who used the phrase "excess profits".
I also liked Giuliani.
Huckabee impressed me not at all. McCain sounded so much like a Leftist on occasion it made me ill, especially with his health care talk. Drugs are cheaper in Canada according to him...but does he know WHY?
They always want to bury those kind of 'pesky details'.
And look at all the extra restrictions (15 new requirements) before the fence is even allowed to have funds released and double fence went poof in the omnibus funding bill.
Kay Bailey Hutchinson from Texas isn't catching a lot of love from the locals because she has a hand in that mess.
I loved this format. This is the way a debate should be. Could have stood a couple of more hours of this! (for our side!)
Mitt was the one on the hot seat. Both McCain and Huckabee were going after him. Thought he did well though. looked Presidential. Had no problem giving as well as he got. He's got the right attitude, and what I think will be a winning message in the general. He has no problem saying America is the greatest country in the world. He exudes optimism. He ain't perfect, but he ain't bad.
Was very surprised at Fred. He was very good, very forceful. Knows what he is about. Kinda fumbled a bit, but he's for real.
Rudy was very forceful, and very positive. Had no problem going after Ron Paul. Honestly, he's went from a tie with Mitt Romney (in my mind) to a close second. We could do worse.
McCain, Like Huckabee, is running for the wrong party's nomination. When the question got around to oil. He had to throw out the global warming card. Instant disqualifyer, had he not already been disqualified on ileagal immigration. Also, the snide remarks he made to Romney. It's OK for someone to go after the other candidate, this is for keeps. But after Romney repeatedly called him on it, he started chuckling to himself after every jab. Kind of immature.
Huckabee looked like he was just glad to be there! Never said anything of substance. Not a leader. I know my bias goes into this, but wouldn't vote for this guy on a dare!
Ron Paul is insane. No matter what the subject, it's all about the fact we are "printing money" and Iraq. Another blame America Firster. The guy either doesn't know history, or is a total phony. He must have forgotten about the Barbary Pirates, who were at odds with the world's navies before America was even born. Same old tire dimocrat talking points, how it's all America's fault for having bases in Saudi Arabia. Back to Rudy. He was very good at explaining to Paul, and the audience, how the "religion of peace" thinks. (the radical part anyway) Paul kept saying ALL religions have their radical element. That may, or may not be true, but like most dimocrats, he is talking moral equivalency, were there isn't any. Ranks right up there with Rosie's comment to Elizabeth Hasselbeck. Frankly after the first few times he spoke, I just banged my head against the wall. Found myself screaming at the TV!
As an aside, the Paulites are going insane over the fact Fox didn't invite their man to the roundtable tomorrow. It's all a conspiracy. Fox is in the tank for Rudy!
Was disappointed when the talk got around to oil. No one flat out stated we need to drill for the damned stuff! Rudy is the only one though, that said what I've been saying for a while. We need a program similar to Kennedy's moon shot. It will take something that focussed. We drill for what we got, use the technologies and fuels we currently have in great abundance, and work on new and emerging sources of energy.
Watched some of the dim debate. Had to move on. Not much life there. Richardson doesn't have a clue. Couldn't last to make more observations.
When I said "looks Presidential", I meant it to imply he exhibited leadership skills. Has nothing to do with his physical appearance, although he is a handsome guy.
Like I said, Fred impressed me. Have been a fan of his acting for years. Until Bush got in the 2000 race, I was excited thinking he would run. He is head over heels better than the best the dims could ever offer.
I started out being a die hard Rudy Guiliani supporter, but liked Mitt's style. (again, the way he carries himself, his leadership style, not his looks) The more I see Romney, the more I like him.
But Fred, Rudy, or Romney would make great Presidents. Both Rudy and Romney can look you in the eye, not flinching, and state America is the greatest country the world has ever known. That kind of attitude is what American needs in a leader. I know it's become a cliche, but that's the attitude Ronald Reagan brought to the table. That's the attitude that will beat the dims.
I can honestly say I can vote for Romney, Fred or Rudy over any Demoncat.
But McCain is now flat out lying about Immigration and is a moron on Global Warming just like the Huckster. McCain would probably compromise on tax and spend liberal legislation if it was to do good things in his mind like fight the mythical man-made global warming. Oh wait he already did!
This is why I generally wouldn't vote for a Senator or Congressman for President. It's my real pick on Thompson. But a guy like McCain, who is so used to compromise, he has lost the skill to lead. I guess most folks feel the same way, as it's generally a Governor or VP who wins the White House.
Some beliefs should never be compromised on.
One of the things I truly admire about President Bush is the fact he has certain core beliefs, and sticks to them come hell or high water. When pretty much everyone was turned against the war, and the dims and the media were going for a full court press, Bush exclaimed that he didn't care if Barney was the only one on his side, he would hold steadfast on the war. That's leadership. When the whole world was seemingly against him, he still did the right thing! And now we are winning the battle in Iraq.
As to your first sentence, Gary: countless Americans agree with you whether they admit it or not. There IS a reason no Senator has won the Presdency since Kennedy. No Rep has won the White House since 1880, IIRC!
Governorships and the vice presidency tend to be the breeding ground for presidential material.
Yes sir. It's one thing to set with a bunch of people and create legislation. It quite another to actually be in charge of something. Executive experience is essential. Being President of the United States is arguably the most important job in the world. No place for amateurs!
The more of McCain I see and hear, the more I realize that he should never be President. I used to think he is a decent man who is just misguided, but now I think differently. In this morning's interview he flatly misrepresented his positions while constantly talking down to voters.
And last night's debate was revealing, too. McCain was petty, quarrelsome and took open pleasure in his meaness.
Huckabee is just a liberal/socialist who happens to be pro-life.
Fred Thompson won the debate much to my delight as WT Houston can always be counted upon to be correct.
On another note, the Steelers lost a great game, but the Jag's quaterback, David Gerrard is the classiest act with Big Ben in the NFL.
Gerrard was gracious in winning and Ben waited until Gerrard's interview was over to congratulate him.
Tip of my hat to Jack Del Rio the coach for putting together a great team...........now go beat the stuffing out of those cheating Patriots!
It was the first game of the season, wasn't it. Plenty of time for 15 other teams (most of them better than those "mighty Jets") to bring the Pats down a peg.
But I'm glad we've got some things to argue about that make absolutely no difference in the overall scheme of things.
I "hate" the Patsies, especially Tom Brady, scumbag rent-a-player Randy Moss, and their coach, The Unabomber, but I respect them because they are pretty damn good!
I always cheer for them to lose. I think it is a part of the makeup of Americans: always cheering for the underdog.
I predicted to the wife that the Steelers would come oh-so close, yet choke once again. The Jags deserve the win, and hopefully have an answer to the Pats.
Not a huge Steelers fan, but I was rooting for them to win with that awesome come from behind 4th quarter, "the face mask from Ward was obvious, that was he only black mark.
Who can help but admire (secretly or openly) the past accomplishments and current precision of the Pats.
If you can't appreciate the dominance they display, there's something wrong with you.
There are two teams my Cowboys want to face before holding the Lombardi aloft. The Seahawks, to exorcise last years fumble, and the Patriots, to bury any question of legitimacy.
I grew up in Oklahoma and I got tired of the Cowboys being shoved down my throat as "America's Team." You have no idea the ire it raises in me to hear that term applied to any team that's not in the Olympics. Anyway, I soon learned to root for everyone who plays against the Cowboys. I have stated before, and I will say it again in this public forum; I would root for Communist China if they were playing the Cowboys. The Pats want to see the Colts again for sure. However, the Jags are mean. That would be a helluva game, but to see the Pats put the wood to the Cowboys in the Superbowl would make me absolutely giddy.
If you're from Oklahoma, and speaking of great football players, can you light a fire under J.C. Watts and get him back into some serious mainstream political life.
That's the problem with good conservatives. They eventually feel the need to earn a living rather than pig out at the public trough.
I'm with you! It's always been hard for me to root for the team that beats my Steelers, but I will be in Jacksonville's corner if they go to New England.
On a side note, the Steelers' Special Teams coach should be fired immediately. I've been saying that all season, and once again a long kickoff return hurt them.
You are right about Garrard and Big Ben, They are both classy. They are both winners.
And we can only hope that the next President has a heart half the size of Hines Ward!
Didn't watch much of it, but what I saw I will say the format is by far the best. Let them go at at it little bit like guests on a topical show taking sides and jumping at each other a bit.
I did see McCain jab a couple times at Romney, and then kick back smiling like a possum, very proud of himself....while Romney just gave him the look of "very nice, little boy - let me know when you're finished and I'll get back to my substantive answer." Fred did it too, but more well-placed and timely and it fit right in.
As for substance, I was flipping back and forth from football so I didn't really pay good attention to it. Fact is, it's not necessarily that we're seeing the candidates debate too often (but we are), but moreso that it's basically the same replies to pretty much the same general questions, and I'm speaking of the substantitive ones, not the YouTube stupid ones that make a mockery of the forum.
The best whimsy of the night was when the undisputed preeminent Democrat expert on foreign policy, Gov. Bill Richardson, when asked what he would do about the threat of nukes falling into the hands of terrorists, promptly responded that "I will seek immediate negotiations with the Soviet Union ... to reduce the number of nuclear weapons."
Mitt needs to go into states where the abortion vote is high and days before the primary buy 1 or 2 abortion clinics and with a big press showing bulldoze them on live TV.
You know, I hate to keep bringing up Ronald Reagan. He was one of a kind. One of the most inspirational men I've ever seen. But on things like abortion, he too had a change of heart. The flip flop moniker will be thrown around, but the truth is, as we age, we grow. My dad had a saying: "The day you quit learning something new, is the day you are dead." I know as I've aged, some of my beliefs have changed.
Is not a belief that you can lightly change. You either think it's OK or you think it's not. If you do change your view on it, then I posit that you had no core values upon which the original or the current belief is based and are therefore just following polls.
It's where the athiests lose the moral argument each and every time. If there is no absolute right and wrong, as they posit, then it is society as a whole which decides right and wrong and that changes over generations. This philosophy means that there was nothing wrong with slavery, because society at the time felt it was OK. There is nothing wrong with Islamic "honor killings" of rape victims because their society thinks it's OK.
The day that "politician" became a career choice is the day we started losing the Republic. Let's get it back! Alan Keyes '08.
I agree with you. But frankly everyone gets smarter as they get older. They also care about different things. Now I've never thought abortion was a good deal, but as a younger guy, I wasn't passionate about it. I fell into the trap of thinking I wasn't a woman, and maybe didn't understand. I've come to realize that it's not OK, period.
Of course, for me, I'm still trying to reconcile the fact that dims think it perfectly fine to kill innocent babies, but is the horror of horrors to execute a murderer, or fight a war against those who wish to kill us! T
All the GOP candidates did well, except McCain (too grumpy), Huckabee (too combative with Romney) and Ron Paul, who got schooled by ALL of the other candidates on his ridiculous blaming of U.S. foreign policy for terrorism. It was classic, the look of shock and dumbfoundedness on Ron Paul's face, when Giuliani, Romney, etc. just laid out the elementary facts that directly contradicted him. Romney, in particular, demonstrated coolness under pressure (from all sides), and was extremely articulate and well-studied.
For all the talk of Romney belonging to the "Mormon cult," tonight illustrated that Ron Paul and Mike Huckabee have built what can only be described as cult-like followings, but nothing more substantive than that. Paul and Huckabee will not be able to expand their support beyond a narrowly-focused fan base who pick a hero first, and find out about their credentials later ... if at all.
On the Democratic side, I thought Bill Richardson was clearly the standout. His executive experience was something none of the other candidates could touch, and it showed in their responses. Edwards was bragadocious and repetative. Obama seemed bored. Clinton is still speaking in generalities, and can only talk of her experience using phrases like 'I'm proud to have helped with trying to get ________ legislation passed .
Comments Policy
Fred the winner. Rudy did
January 5, 2008 - 22:06 ET by Warner Todd HustonFred the winner. Rudy did well. McCain nodded off for most of it. Romney looked frenzied and frantic most of the time. Huckabee talked only in platitudes. Paul was... well... PAUL.
Warner...
January 5, 2008 - 22:16 ET by Clear thinkerI agree with your assesment.
Sure I'm a huge Fred Head, but I do try to be as even handed in my critique as possible.
Rush Limbaugh stated that of the top 5 Republicans running for the presidency, only one was a true conservative. http://www.fred08.com/
I agree
January 5, 2008 - 23:14 ET by FOXFANI agree with Warner and Ct, I loved Fred's answers, especially about windfall tax.(remember the windfall tax on yachts?) Paul, well, kinda looks like Achmed, has no chance. Then the dems, the breck girl took a swing a the Hill(we (Osama Obama and myself)came in first and second in Iowa). ZING! Richardson didn't seem to want to get in the b*tch slapping event.
All in all, things seem to
January 6, 2008 - 02:59 ET by CortillaenAll in all, things seem to be looking up for Fred: He's making strides in polling and looking good in debates, Romney's getting a little frayed, Huckabee got a conservative death-sentence (read: MSM endorsement), Giuliani and McCain seem to be falling back, Hillary's coming apart at the seams (though we all know her propaganda machine will be stitching away), Obama's under attack by both sides of the aisle, and Edwards is still being his fake, fringe-appeal self.
Still, I'd like to hear him admit his support of McCain-Feingold was wrong. That'd be the final word to get my full support.
www.rhjunior.com Great comics with a hefty dose of Christian and anti-nutjob goodness.
"With your mind as high as Mt. Fuji you can see all things clearly. And you can see all the forces that shape events; not just the things near to you." -Miyamoto Musashi
In the interest of full disclosure
January 5, 2008 - 22:38 ET by RJWarner, given your extreme dislike of Romney and Mormonism, anything you say about him must be taken with a grain of salt.
Having said that, Fred did have a decent night. He seemed to be the sage of the dais....except that a couple of times he seemed to get lost in the midst of long answers.
Mitt seemed to be a lot more animated and facially expressive than usual. What's next? Rumpled hair?
McCain was quarrelsome and seemed even older than Thompson. (Is he?)
I agree about Huckabee. Talking in platitudes is a good discription .
Paul was "tolerated." I think debate organizers will be looking for ways to dump him.
Rudy had a good, strong image, but he told blatant half-truths several times, particularly about amnesty.
As long as it is a
January 5, 2008 - 23:29 ET by Right2thePointAs long as it is a recognized religion I'm good with it but now if you try somebody as atheist or totally secular or scientologist then I have issues.
But I will give that anyone who tried as even a certified moderate Muslim would be toast.
The only one older than McAmnesty (71) is Ron Paul (72)
January 6, 2008 - 01:31 ET by PopularTechDuncan Hunter
Age: 59
Education:
- B.S.L. Western State University, 1968
- J.D. Western State University, 1976
Military Experience:
- U.S. Army, Lieutenent, 1969-1971, Vietnam War
Political Experience:
- U.S. Representative from California, 1981-Present
Religion:
- Baptist
Fred Thompson
Age: 65
Education:
- B.A. Philosophy & Political Science, Memphis State University, 1964
- J.D. Vanderbilt University, 1967
Military Experience:
- None
Political Experience:
- Chief Republican Counsel, U.S. Senate Watergate Committee, 1973-1974
- Special Counsel to Tennessee Governor Lamar Alexander, 1980
- Special Counsel to the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, 1980-1981
- Special Counsel to the U.S. Senate Intelligence Committee, 1982
- Appellate Court Nominating Committee Member, TN, 1985-1987
- Assistant U.S. Attorney, Middle Tennessee, 1969-1972
- U.S. Senator from Tennessee, 1994-2003
Religion:
- Church of Christ
John McCain
Age: 71
Education:
- B.S. United States Naval Academy, 1958
Military Experience:
- U.S. Navy Pilot, Captain, 1958-1981, Vietnam War
- POW in Vietnam, 1967-1973
Political Experience:
- U.S. Representative from Arizona, 1983-1987
- U.S. Senator from Arizona, 1986-Present
Religion:
- Episcopalian
Mike Huckabee
Age: 52
Education:
- Ordained to ministry Southern Baptist Convention, 1974
- B.A. Religion, Ouachita Baptist University, 1976
Military Experience:
- None
Political Experience:
- Lt. Governor of Arkansas, 1993-1996
- Governor of Arkansas, 1996-2007
Religion:
- Baptist
Mitt Romney
Age: 60
Education:
- B.A. Brigham Young University, 1971
- J.D. Harvard University, 1975
- M.B.A. Harvard University, 1975
Military Experience:
- None
Political Experience:
- Governor of Massachusetts, 2003-2007
Religion:
- Mormon
Ron Paul
Age: 72
Education:
- B.S. Biology, Gettysburg College, 1957
- M.D. Duke College of Medicine, 1961
Military Experience:
- Air National Guard, 1965-1968
- U.S. Air Force Flight Surgeon, Captain, 1963-1965
Political Experience:
- U.S. Representative from Texas, 1976-1977, 1979-1985, 1997-Present
Religion:
- Protestant
Rudy Giuliani
Age: 63
Education:
- B.A. Political Science, Manhattan College, 1965
- J.D. New York University School of Law, 1968
Military Experience:
- None
Political Experience:
- Associate Attorney General, 1981
- U.S. Attorney, Southern District of New York, 1983
- Mayor of New York City, 1994-2001
Religion:
- Roman Catholic
Huckabee: Raising Taxes OK
The Anti "Man-Made" Global Warming Resource
-
January 6, 2008 - 11:44 ET by dahliatraversThanks for the info, PopTech.
Post Mortem?
January 5, 2008 - 22:10 ET by BlondeWe're all over on Candance's forum thread.
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
I was over at Malkin's
January 5, 2008 - 23:00 ET by Right2thePointI was over at Malkin's thread but also watching in another tab the goings on at FireDogLake which is always a treat.
Clinton denials
January 5, 2008 - 22:28 ET by obxrayHill says the surge is not working. I know, nothing new .
Win Guiliani Romney, Lose Paul McCain, Draw Huckabee Fred
January 5, 2008 - 22:57 ET by Daniel BakerRomney talked about issues and got a well spoken say on everything. Guiliani came back into the light.
Paul is a nut, and McCain riveled him with his Romney obcession
Fred was not jumping lived up to "disinterested". Huckabee stayed quiet still thinking about Iowa
Daniel...
January 5, 2008 - 23:02 ET by Clear thinkerWhat debate were you watching?
Even all the pundits are agreeing that Fred won hands down. You should see some of the positive stuff coming from TownHall.com pundits. They all are giving a thumbs up to Fred.
Rush Limbaugh stated that of the top 5 Republicans running for the presidency, only one was a true conservative. http://www.fred08.com/
Fred did the best
January 5, 2008 - 23:08 ET by well99I was getting tired of Romney taking all the time.
Pundits liked Romney's performance hands down
January 5, 2008 - 23:08 ET by Daniel BakerFox News' Dick Morris: "I thought that Mitt Romney won the debate." (Fox News' "Live," 1/5/08)
- Morris: "You have to see this debate in two contexts. Partly, it's a popularity contest but partly its an audition to see who's the toughest fighter, to see who would be the best boxer in the ring with Hillary or with Obama. Then he came across hands down as the toughest boxer." (Fox News' "Live," 1/5/08)
- Morris: "I really felt fundamentally Romney really made the field." (Fox News' "Live," 1/5/08)
National Review's Jonathan Adler: "At his best, [Romney] was persuasive and presidential." (Jonathan Adler, "Re: Spin Room," National Review's The Corner, http://corner.nation..., Posted 1/5/08)
National Review's Kathryn Jean Lopez: "Romney showed a steadiness under fire, sounded like a guy who knows what he's talking about on a number of issues, and introduced more of his biography than he has at debates. I thought Romney's performance was a good start to a weekend of debates where he had to do well – if he does very well tomorrow night, kicking it up a notch, he might show he's a turnaround artist yet in this primary process." (Kathryn Jean Lopez, "I Second The Levin Emotion," National Review's The Corner Blog, http://corner.nation..., Posted 1/5/08)
- Lopez: "Romney is really in his element talking about substantial policy here. He knows this health-care stuff." (Kathryn Jean Lopez, "They're Doing The Work Of The Free Market," National Review's The Corner Blog, http://corner.nation..., Posted 1/5/08)
- Lopez: "I think this seminar format suits Romney, who is a wonk, who loves data and problem-solving (and has even done some of it)." (Kathryn Jean Lopez, "On Domestic Policy," National Review's The Corner Blog, http://corner.nation..., Posted 1/5/08)
The Atlantic's Marc Ambinder: "And Romney is in his wheelhouse. He's been very strong so far and seems very eager to get in on every question, but his answers aren't forced. The Real Mitt Romney..." (Marc Ambinder, "Health Care," The Atlantic Blog, http://marcambinder...., Posted 1/5/08)
Commentary's John Podhoretz: "Mitt Romney is the most impressive performer this evening, striking a judicious tone of urgency and fluency." (John Podhoretz, "New Hampshire: Halfway Through," Commentary Blog, http://www.commentar..., Posted 1/5/08)
- Podhoretz: "But as a matter of performance solely, he is far and away the best and he's delivered it when he needed it most." (John Podhoretz, "New Hampshire: Halfway Through," Commentary Blog, http://www.commentar..., Posted 1/5/08)
National Review's Mark Levin: "I thought Romney actually held up pretty well, given the onslaught." (Mark R. Levin, "The Debate," National Review's The Corner Blog, http://corner.nation..., Posted 1/5/08)
Riehl World View's Dan Riehl: "If you were looking for substance across the board on issues, I think Romney was the clear winner in tonight's debate. McCain's well-known temperament problems lingered barely below the surface much of the evening, especially when someone dared disagree with him. Except of course, for his hugs for Hillary and slaps on the back for Fred. This is a change election and old hands from the Senate will not get it done." (Dan Riehl, "ABC Debate: It Was Romney's Night," Riehl World View Blog, http://www.riehlworl..., Posted 1/5/08)
- Riehl: "I've been watching the debate on ABC. I guess we can dispense with the nice guy image for Huckabee. He came out with one agenda - attack Romney. Romney handled it well. And as everyone else was on point and not looking to just attack, it left Huckabee looking like a jerk. Maybe he needs bookshelves floating behind him to make the nice guy image work? Just a thought." (Dan Riehl, "The Republican Debate," Riehl World View Blog, http://www.riehlworl..., Posted 1/5/07)
Cheerleading cut and paste
January 5, 2008 - 23:16 ET by Right2thePointCheerleading cut and paste for one guy doesn't mean a thing.
As the opinions on all come out then we can evaluate the total field.
All you did here is spend too much on a press release for one you want to hype.
Comparisons of remarks would have much more worth while
Good work, Daniel
January 5, 2008 - 23:20 ET by RJIn addition to our assessments, it's good to see how the pundits saw it.
Thanks!
Daniel...
January 5, 2008 - 23:22 ET by Clear thinkerOk, but.....
"There seems to be a post-debate realignment towards Fred going on. Jon Adler was already on board, but now Mark Levin, Mark Steyn, Andy McCarthy, Peter Robinson, Rich Lowry, and even Kathryn Jean Lopez are praising his performance and talking him up as the conservative alternative to Huck and McCain."
National Review is having buyers remorse with their endorsement of Mitt, and it's obvious why.
Rush Limbaugh stated that of the top 5 Republicans running for the presidency, only one was a true conservative. http://www.fred08.com/
Daniel, I almost forgot...
January 5, 2008 - 23:51 ET by Clear thinkerMARC AMBINDER’S SUM-UP on the Republican debate. “On points, Fred Thompson won the debate. Every answer was thoughtful and well-crafted; his tone matched the tone of the question; he wisely refrained from interjecting in the back and forth squabbling. He very deftly reminded viewers that he served on key Senate national security panels and is bringing his experience to bear. Even his insults were subtly and gently constructed.” http://instapundit.com/archives2/013761.php
Rush Limbaugh stated that of the top 5 Republicans running for the presidency, only one was a true conservative. http://www.fred08.com/
That whole energy level
January 5, 2008 - 23:11 ET by Right2thePointThat whole energy level thing is a strawman
Paul was like richochet rabbit on sterroids and speed , kinda blows that whole energy argument to pieces.
Substance like Fred always hits on and no games is what makes his message good.
Snake oil sales and broad generalities don't carry the day with me.
Comments
January 5, 2008 - 23:48 ET by UnsaneRomney impressed me.
Fred Thompson was awesome: he slammed Paul good, and responded well to that Marxist political director who used the phrase "excess profits".
I also liked Giuliani.
Huckabee impressed me not at all. McCain sounded so much like a Leftist on occasion it made me ill, especially with his health care talk. Drugs are cheaper in Canada according to him...but does he know WHY?
Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.
I vote for live chat for
January 5, 2008 - 23:01 ET by Right2thePointI vote for live chat for each debate here to talk it out.
Me too
January 6, 2008 - 00:49 ET by timotheLet's have chat tomorrow night for the next GOP debate.
Dems Cut and Run Al
January 5, 2008 - 23:05 ET by Right2thePointDems
Cut and Run
Al Gore is right on global warming time to screw the country with a goberment fix
Socialized medicine for all
War BAD money better spent on socialist programs
Tax the rich to help the poor middle class (guess they need an Xbox in every room or more 180.00 tennis shoes for their kids)
Put the rest on welfare
And one more thing -
January 5, 2008 - 23:12 ET by reasonsjesterTax the rich to make everyone poor while you're at it
The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to
escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane. - Marcus Aurelius
The debate format was
January 5, 2008 - 23:09 ET by pocomocoThe debate format was better than the others.
Except for McCain's convoluted ‘no it isn’t amnesty’ amnesty program, all acquitted themselves well - but no winners or losers.
They went back to the Regan
January 5, 2008 - 23:24 ET by Right2thePointThey went back to the Regan amnesty
But both sides on this issue skip over the other 9 amnesty programs that have been enacted since then.
For example amnesty for political refugees from Honduras.
Those never get mentioned.
They were telling half truths about the "Reagan amnesty"
January 5, 2008 - 23:34 ET by RJYes, Reagan signed off on amnesty, but for a MUCH smaller group of illegals, and in exchange for a promise from Ted Kennedy to seal the border.
Naturally, Kennedy reneged.
They always want to bury
January 6, 2008 - 00:21 ET by Right2thePointThey always want to bury those kind of 'pesky details'.
And look at all the extra restrictions (15 new requirements) before the fence is even allowed to have funds released and double fence went poof in the omnibus funding bill.
Kay Bailey Hutchinson from Texas isn't catching a lot of love from the locals because she has a hand in that mess.
Yes
January 6, 2008 - 00:34 ET by well99Republican or Dems it doesnt matter they are sticking it to us again.
-
January 6, 2008 - 11:48 ET by dahliatraversDisgraceful. And Washington wonders why we don't trust them on illegal immigration.
Woman claims Bush is trying to kill her...
January 5, 2008 - 23:10 ET by Clear thinkerI could not find the open thread for today so I thought this thread was as good as any to post this.
This woman actually thinks Bush has put out a hit on her.
http://lorizarlenga.townhall.com/Default.aspx?mode=post&g=145e5621-fee8-456b-927b-7677d0ed2760
Rush Limbaugh stated that of the top 5 Republicans running for the presidency, only one was a true conservative. http://www.fred08.com/
Oh my! Talk about someone
January 5, 2008 - 23:58 ET by Gary P JacksonOh my! Talk about someone who needs a lifetime supply of tin foil!
I have to agree with most
January 5, 2008 - 23:47 ET by Gary P JacksonI have to agree with most here.
I loved this format. This is the way a debate should be. Could have stood a couple of more hours of this! (for our side!)
Mitt was the one on the hot seat. Both McCain and Huckabee were going after him. Thought he did well though. looked Presidential. Had no problem giving as well as he got. He's got the right attitude, and what I think will be a winning message in the general. He has no problem saying America is the greatest country in the world. He exudes optimism. He ain't perfect, but he ain't bad.
Was very surprised at Fred. He was very good, very forceful. Knows what he is about. Kinda fumbled a bit, but he's for real.
Rudy was very forceful, and very positive. Had no problem going after Ron Paul. Honestly, he's went from a tie with Mitt Romney (in my mind) to a close second. We could do worse.
McCain, Like Huckabee, is running for the wrong party's nomination. When the question got around to oil. He had to throw out the global warming card. Instant disqualifyer, had he not already been disqualified on ileagal immigration. Also, the snide remarks he made to Romney. It's OK for someone to go after the other candidate, this is for keeps. But after Romney repeatedly called him on it, he started chuckling to himself after every jab. Kind of immature.
Huckabee looked like he was just glad to be there! Never said anything of substance. Not a leader. I know my bias goes into this, but wouldn't vote for this guy on a dare!
Ron Paul is insane. No matter what the subject, it's all about the fact we are "printing money" and Iraq. Another blame America Firster. The guy either doesn't know history, or is a total phony. He must have forgotten about the Barbary Pirates, who were at odds with the world's navies before America was even born. Same old tire dimocrat talking points, how it's all America's fault for having bases in Saudi Arabia. Back to Rudy. He was very good at explaining to Paul, and the audience, how the "religion of peace" thinks. (the radical part anyway) Paul kept saying ALL religions have their radical element. That may, or may not be true, but like most dimocrats, he is talking moral equivalency, were there isn't any. Ranks right up there with Rosie's comment to Elizabeth Hasselbeck. Frankly after the first few times he spoke, I just banged my head against the wall. Found myself screaming at the TV!
As an aside, the Paulites are going insane over the fact Fox didn't invite their man to the roundtable tomorrow. It's all a conspiracy. Fox is in the tank for Rudy!
Was disappointed when the talk got around to oil. No one flat out stated we need to drill for the damned stuff! Rudy is the only one though, that said what I've been saying for a while. We need a program similar to Kennedy's moon shot. It will take something that focussed. We drill for what we got, use the technologies and fuels we currently have in great abundance, and work on new and emerging sources of energy.
Watched some of the dim debate. Had to move on. Not much life there. Richardson doesn't have a clue. Couldn't last to make more observations.
On oil
January 5, 2008 - 23:52 ET by UnsaneNONE of the candidates would admit that most of our oil comes from Canada and Mexico. I kept asking the TV, "Madrassas? In Canada? In Mexico???"
But at least they had the guts to talk nukes. Props to Rudy for citing the French nuclear example.
Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.
Nice read, Gary
January 5, 2008 - 23:55 ET by RJDidn't find much in it to disagree with you. And the debate format was refreshing. Gibson was decent. It was like finally getting an adult venue!
Minor quibble Those
January 6, 2008 - 00:34 ET by Right2thePointMinor quibble
Those 'energy level' and 'looks Presidential' tags put on people only reinforce we need a YouTube cut fluff job to be pres.
If that was the case Edwards would be way out in Front of Hillary in the polls.
To many good counter examples of how those yardsticks mean nothing.
Truman was a durn good president and Ike wasn't all that bad, but none of them could have won a beauty contest like so many want to have today.
Give me substance and only Fred and Rudy deliver that.
When I said "looks
January 6, 2008 - 01:13 ET by Gary P JacksonWhen I said "looks Presidential", I meant it to imply he exhibited leadership skills. Has nothing to do with his physical appearance, although he is a handsome guy.
Like I said, Fred impressed me. Have been a fan of his acting for years. Until Bush got in the 2000 race, I was excited thinking he would run. He is head over heels better than the best the dims could ever offer.
I started out being a die hard Rudy Guiliani supporter, but liked Mitt's style. (again, the way he carries himself, his leadership style, not his looks) The more I see Romney, the more I like him.
But Fred, Rudy, or Romney would make great Presidents. Both Rudy and Romney can look you in the eye, not flinching, and state America is the greatest country the world has ever known. That kind of attitude is what American needs in a leader. I know it's become a cliche, but that's the attitude Ronald Reagan brought to the table. That's the attitude that will beat the dims.
I'll vote for Romney, Fred or Rudy
January 6, 2008 - 01:45 ET by PopularTechI can honestly say I can vote for Romney, Fred or Rudy over any Demoncat.
But McCain is now flat out lying about Immigration and is a moron on Global Warming just like the Huckster. McCain would probably compromise on tax and spend liberal legislation if it was to do good things in his mind like fight the mythical man-made global warming. Oh wait he already did!
John McCain - McCain and Lieberman Push for New Anti-Global Warming Legislation (The National Center for Public Policy Research)
John McCain - Senators McCain and Lieberman Propose Energy Tax (The National Center for Public Policy Research)
Paul? Over Hillary or Obama, yeah I would vote for him.
Huckabee: Raising Taxes OK
The Anti "Man-Made" Global Warming Resource
This is why I generally
January 6, 2008 - 02:39 ET by Gary P JacksonThis is why I generally wouldn't vote for a Senator or Congressman for President. It's my real pick on Thompson. But a guy like McCain, who is so used to compromise, he has lost the skill to lead. I guess most folks feel the same way, as it's generally a Governor or VP who wins the White House.
Some beliefs should never be compromised on.
One of the things I truly admire about President Bush is the fact he has certain core beliefs, and sticks to them come hell or high water. When pretty much everyone was turned against the war, and the dims and the media were going for a full court press, Bush exclaimed that he didn't care if Barney was the only one on his side, he would hold steadfast on the war. That's leadership. When the whole world was seemingly against him, he still did the right thing! And now we are winning the battle in Iraq.
Sens and Reps
January 6, 2008 - 07:03 ET by UnsaneAs to your first sentence, Gary: countless Americans agree with you whether they admit it or not. There IS a reason no Senator has won the Presdency since Kennedy. No Rep has won the White House since 1880, IIRC!
Governorships and the vice presidency tend to be the breeding ground for presidential material.
Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.
Yes sir. It's one thing to
January 6, 2008 - 07:30 ET by Gary P JacksonYes sir. It's one thing to set with a bunch of people and create legislation. It quite another to actually be in charge of something. Executive experience is essential. Being President of the United States is arguably the most important job in the world. No place for amateurs!
Spot on!
January 6, 2008 - 00:55 ET by Teamcheeser"Not a leader."
And there it is in a nutshell. What everyone in the MSM is missing (on purpose?) about Huckabee.
Thompson, Romney, Rudy -- the only leaders in this race!
We need to do what we can to whittle it down to these three and let the chips fall where they may.
Meanwhile, the media wants Huckabee or McCain to win.
January 6, 2008 - 12:09 ET by RJThe more of McCain I see and hear, the more I realize that he should never be President. I used to think he is a decent man who is just misguided, but now I think differently. In this morning's interview he flatly misrepresented his positions while constantly talking down to voters.
And last night's debate was revealing, too. McCain was petty, quarrelsome and took open pleasure in his meaness.
Huckabee is just a liberal/socialist who happens to be pro-life.
Fred Wins
January 5, 2008 - 23:57 ET by Lame CherryFred Thompson won the debate much to my delight as WT Houston can always be counted upon to be correct.
On another note, the Steelers lost a great game, but the Jag's quaterback, David Gerrard is the classiest act with Big Ben in the NFL.
Gerrard was gracious in winning and Ben waited until Gerrard's interview was over to congratulate him.
Tip of my hat to Jack Del Rio the coach for putting together a great team...........now go beat the stuffing out of those cheating Patriots!
*HIC IACET ARTORIVS REX QVONDAM REXQVE FVTVRVS
"those cheating Patriots"
January 5, 2008 - 23:59 ET by RJ...already whining and making excuses, cherry? THAT didn't take long....
RJ, I didn't see any
January 6, 2008 - 01:03 ET by TeamcheeserRJ,
I didn't see any whining or excuses in Lame Cherry's post. Hoping that the cheating Patriots lose is not excuse-making for a Steelers loss...
Defensive much?
Translation
January 6, 2008 - 07:06 ET by Unsane"Cheating Patriots" = "I hate the Patriots because they are too good and are too successful. They need to lose to give other people a chance."
Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.
Exactly, Unsane.
January 6, 2008 - 10:36 ET by RJI've read several sports writers who said that, even though it was against the rules, it was known to be not uncommon around the league.
Typical for the big man that he is, Belechik just paid the fine instead of whining about it. I think that P.O.'d the Patriot-haters even more.
Anyway, the way the whiners take on about the issue, you'd never know it happened way back in the beginning of the season. :^)
}}---> Exactly, RJ
January 6, 2008 - 10:44 ET by Cool ArrowIt was the first game of the season, wasn't it. Plenty of time for 15 other teams (most of them better than those "mighty Jets") to bring the Pats down a peg.
But I'm glad we've got some things to argue about that make absolutely no difference in the overall scheme of things.
I ♣ My Seal
I "hate" the Patsies,
January 6, 2008 - 10:50 ET by Roger the ShrubberI "hate" the Patsies, especially Tom Brady, scumbag rent-a-player Randy Moss, and their coach, The Unabomber, but I respect them because they are pretty damn good!
I always cheer for them to lose. I think it is a part of the makeup of Americans: always cheering for the underdog.
I "hate", but I also respect.
Yeah, that Randy Moss is a real team "disrupter"
January 6, 2008 - 10:55 ET by RJAnd what about that disgusting loudmouth braggart, Tom Brady?
Gee, Roger, could it be that Belechik knows how to COACH? Remember that old concept?
Could it be that other team fans are whining because Belechik shows up the other coaches who can't manage their players? Could it? :^)
}}---> Team disrupter
January 6, 2008 - 10:58 ET by Cool ArrowI'm reminded of Eagles receiver Terrell Owens attempting to dance on the Dallas Star.
But do we ever love him today.
I ♣ My Seal
Nice attempt at a reversal, teamcheeser
January 6, 2008 - 10:27 ET by RJ....but no cigar.
cherry is already setting up his excuses and that constitutes a whine. :^)
I predicted to the wife that
January 6, 2008 - 00:26 ET by Roger the ShrubberI predicted to the wife that the Steelers would come oh-so close, yet choke once again. The Jags deserve the win, and hopefully have an answer to the Pats.
roger
January 6, 2008 - 00:33 ET by shawn228Not a huge Steelers fan, but I was rooting for them to win with that awesome come from behind 4th quarter, "the face mask from Ward was obvious, that was he only black mark.
What Da Hal was with that 4th and 2?
There were quite a few bad
January 6, 2008 - 08:36 ET by Roger the ShrubberThere were quite a few bad calls, on both sides. the phantom holding penalty when the Steelers went for 2 was pretty bad, too.
It was a great game, one that Big Ben single-handedly almost won and ultimately lost , but I respect Jax alot, and hope they do well next week.
}}---> Steelers/Jaguars
January 6, 2008 - 09:19 ET by Cool ArrowI wish I could've seen that game. I was at work following it on the Net and we were all pretty much amazed at what Big Ben was doing.
Even more amazed at the Pisarcik/Romo moment shared by the Pittsburgh Defense as Gerard scrambled free to set up the win.
We Cowboy fans grew up hating the Steelers, but for the most part, I think that's the truest form of respect when it comes to the NFL.
I ♣ My Seal
CA
January 6, 2008 - 09:34 ET by OldSailor88Is that why EVERYONE is hating on the Patriots right now?
Faciem durum cacantis habes
}}---> Yes, Sailor
January 6, 2008 - 09:47 ET by Cool ArrowWho can help but admire (secretly or openly) the past accomplishments and current precision of the Pats.
If you can't appreciate the dominance they display, there's something wrong with you.
There are two teams my Cowboys want to face before holding the Lombardi aloft. The Seahawks, to exorcise last years fumble, and the Patriots, to bury any question of legitimacy.
Bring it on Sailor. See you at the top.
I ♣ My Seal
You're on CA
January 6, 2008 - 10:00 ET by OldSailor88I grew up in Oklahoma and I got tired of the Cowboys being shoved down my throat as "America's Team." You have no idea the ire it raises in me to hear that term applied to any team that's not in the Olympics. Anyway, I soon learned to root for everyone who plays against the Cowboys. I have stated before, and I will say it again in this public forum; I would root for Communist China if they were playing the Cowboys. The Pats want to see the Colts again for sure. However, the Jags are mean. That would be a helluva game, but to see the Pats put the wood to the Cowboys in the Superbowl would make me absolutely giddy.
Bring it on, CA. See you at the top!
Faciem durum cacantis habes
}}---> Hey Sailor
January 6, 2008 - 10:09 ET by Cool ArrowIf you're from Oklahoma, and speaking of great football players, can you light a fire under J.C. Watts and get him back into some serious mainstream political life.
That's the problem with good conservatives. They eventually feel the need to earn a living rather than pig out at the public trough.
I ♣ My Seal
I wish I could.
January 6, 2008 - 10:14 ET by OldSailor88He's a good man. A helluva football player too. That was back in the old wishbone offense days. You don't see fun like that anymore.
Faciem durum cacantis habes
Offensive Co-ordinator deserves a lot of credit
January 6, 2008 - 00:47 ET by timotheThat 4th and 2 call was perfect!! And even though Garrard didn't have a fantastic game, he made it happen when it counts.
But that guy from Arizona State, the OC, he's what's making the Jags a viable Super Bowl team. His offense moves the chains and keeps defenses honest.
I hope they beat the friggin Patriots!!
Dejected Steelers Fan
January 6, 2008 - 01:00 ET by TeamcheeserLC,
I'm with you! It's always been hard for me to root for the team that beats my Steelers, but I will be in Jacksonville's corner if they go to New England.
On a side note, the Steelers' Special Teams coach should be fired immediately. I've been saying that all season, and once again a long kickoff return hurt them.
You are right about Garrard and Big Ben, They are both classy. They are both winners.
And we can only hope that the next President has a heart half the size of Hines Ward!
Didn't watch much of it,
January 6, 2008 - 00:40 ET by GregEDidn't watch much of it, but what I saw I will say the format is by far the best. Let them go at at it little bit like guests on a topical show taking sides and jumping at each other a bit.
I did see McCain jab a couple times at Romney, and then kick back smiling like a possum, very proud of himself....while Romney just gave him the look of "very nice, little boy - let me know when you're finished and I'll get back to my substantive answer." Fred did it too, but more well-placed and timely and it fit right in.
As for substance, I was flipping back and forth from football so I didn't really pay good attention to it. Fact is, it's not necessarily that we're seeing the candidates debate too often (but we are), but moreso that it's basically the same replies to pretty much the same general questions, and I'm speaking of the substantitive ones, not the YouTube stupid ones that make a mockery of the forum.
Did anyone see the Dems
January 6, 2008 - 00:59 ET by well99Did Charlie Gibson say God love all of you for making this argument.It was Raise your Hand For Change Video.So much for non bias.
http://abcnews.go.co...
Dem Bushbash, er, I mean, Debate
January 6, 2008 - 01:00 ET by chazskiThe best whimsy of the night was when the undisputed preeminent Democrat expert on foreign policy, Gov. Bill Richardson, when asked what he would do about the threat of nukes falling into the hands of terrorists, promptly responded that "I will seek immediate negotiations with the Soviet Union ... to reduce the number of nuclear weapons."
Good luck Billy.
How Mitt can win over Abortion Voters
January 6, 2008 - 01:48 ET by PopularTechMitt needs to go into states where the abortion vote is high and days before the primary buy 1 or 2 abortion clinics and with a big press showing bulldoze them on live TV.
"Mitt Romney - He Bulldozes Abortions"
Why has no one thought of this?
Huckabee: Raising Taxes OK
The Anti "Man-Made" Global Warming Resource
}}---> Good Idea PopTech
January 6, 2008 - 02:19 ET by Cool ArrowI'd love to see him do it as a show of his seriousness on the issue.
And it would only help the construction industry in NH.
But like all those Sunday School kids saving money to buy back slaves in the Sudan. All it did was make the slave trade more lucrative.
But a one time deal by Mr. Romney would be a tremendous show of support.
I ♣ My Seal
Popular Tech
January 6, 2008 - 02:50 ET by shawn228Although I do not like the fact you you post in any thread about how bad Hucklebee is that is fine with me.
Thing thing is I am curious. It seems Romney is your candidate of choose right?
I kind of have a problem with that, I do not hate Romney like your infatuation with getting Huckabee to lose but I do trust him at all.
You know, I hate to keep
January 6, 2008 - 02:50 ET by Gary P JacksonYou know, I hate to keep bringing up Ronald Reagan. He was one of a kind. One of the most inspirational men I've ever seen. But on things like abortion, he too had a change of heart. The flip flop moniker will be thrown around, but the truth is, as we age, we grow. My dad had a saying: "The day you quit learning something new, is the day you are dead." I know as I've aged, some of my beliefs have changed.
More than Momneys beliefs
January 6, 2008 - 02:55 ET by shawn228More than Romneys beliefs have changed Gary.
Help me out. What else has
January 6, 2008 - 07:32 ET by Gary P JacksonHelp me out. What else has he changed on?
Killing innocent children
January 6, 2008 - 11:55 ET by c5thenIs not a belief that you can lightly change. You either think it's OK or you think it's not. If you do change your view on it, then I posit that you had no core values upon which the original or the current belief is based and are therefore just following polls.
It's where the athiests lose the moral argument each and every time. If there is no absolute right and wrong, as they posit, then it is society as a whole which decides right and wrong and that changes over generations. This philosophy means that there was nothing wrong with slavery, because society at the time felt it was OK. There is nothing wrong with Islamic "honor killings" of rape victims because their society thinks it's OK.
The day that "politician" became a career choice is the day we started losing the Republic. Let's get it back! Alan Keyes '08.
I agree with you. But
January 6, 2008 - 18:10 ET by Gary P JacksonI agree with you. But frankly everyone gets smarter as they get older. They also care about different things. Now I've never thought abortion was a good deal, but as a younger guy, I wasn't passionate about it. I fell into the trap of thinking I wasn't a woman, and maybe didn't understand. I've come to realize that it's not OK, period.
Of course, for me, I'm still trying to reconcile the fact that dims think it perfectly fine to kill innocent babies, but is the horror of horrors to execute a murderer, or fight a war against those who wish to kill us! T
When Conservatives Attack, or When Liberals Can't Over Themselve
January 6, 2008 - 02:18 ET by qapilotAll the GOP candidates did well, except McCain (too grumpy), Huckabee (too combative with Romney) and Ron Paul, who got schooled by ALL of the other candidates on his ridiculous blaming of U.S. foreign policy for terrorism. It was classic, the look of shock and dumbfoundedness on Ron Paul's face, when Giuliani, Romney, etc. just laid out the elementary facts that directly contradicted him. Romney, in particular, demonstrated coolness under pressure (from all sides), and was extremely articulate and well-studied.
For all the talk of Romney belonging to the "Mormon cult," tonight illustrated that Ron Paul and Mike Huckabee have built what can only be described as cult-like followings, but nothing more substantive than that. Paul and Huckabee will not be able to expand their support beyond a narrowly-focused fan base who pick a hero first, and find out about their credentials later ... if at all.
On the Democratic side, I thought Bill Richardson was clearly the standout. His executive experience was something none of the other candidates could touch, and it showed in their responses. Edwards was bragadocious and repetative. Obama seemed bored. Clinton is still speaking in generalities, and can only talk of her experience using phrases like 'I'm proud to have helped with trying to get ________ legislation passed .