NB Chat: GOP Debate
Are you watching the GOP presidential debate tonight? If so, consider joining us live here at NB as we watch the event. It airs at 8pm tonight on CNN as well as on the CNN website. We'll be posting videos and fact-checks throughout the night but if you want to add your own analysis or snark, this is the place to do it.
As with all NB live events, you are expected to abide by the NewsBusters terms of service. Vulgarity and general obnoxiousness will get you kicked from the chat room.
Update 23:17. The debate is over. Please use this thread to post your comments about it or anything else you'd like.- Matthew Sheffield's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
I'll just be watching... but thanks for the chat.
Submitted by Grumpy in Arizona on Tue, 10/18/2011 - 7:37pm.
After last weeks Bloomburg debate... my computer went "BLOOP - BONK" (in that order - please forgive the techniical terms) and was down for most of the time until yesterday afternoon.
I appreciate the opportunity to "chat" - but cannot afford to overload my computers system at this time. I hope NB will have a post-debate analysis.
Have fun everybody - wish I could join in.
- Grump :o)
Hopefully, Anderson Cooper will try to take on Herman Cain
Submitted by gopcongress on Tue, 10/18/2011 - 7:38pm.
Anderson Cooper probably holds the most pivotal journalist position of the entire GOP debate season with tonight's moderation. I'm sure HE got the memo that Cain must be stopped any way possible, and will do his damnedest to achieve two objectives:
1. Make sure Herman Cain comes out looking like a buffoon, and
2. Make sure Romney has a significant victory.
Watch his questioning strategy to do as much as possible to achieve his two objectives.
Therefore, he's going to give Romney the Obama puff-piece treatment, or giving him softball questions, and avoiding ANY economic questions with Herman Cain.;
"The news and truth are not the same thing." -Walter Lippmann (1889-1974) FOLLOW ME ON TWITTER
Good Cal! !!!
Submitted by Grumpy in Arizona on Tue, 10/18/2011 - 7:41pm.
Agree 100% - Cooper seems to hate conservatives - especially those conservatives with bold ideas!
- Grump :o)
Please see my comment below
Submitted by needle on Tue, 10/18/2011 - 9:20pm.
Please see my comment below
- Looking forward to the self-annihilation of the Manipulated Stories Machine.
GO HERMANATOR!
Submitted by Dave. on Tue, 10/18/2011 - 7:41pm.
I hope somebody will bring up Mitt RINO's people helping the Dear Ruler with Obamacare.
It's time to sink the SS Romney.
-Dave
Vote for the American in November
I'm afraid to watch 'cause I might throw a brick at the screen..
Submitted by Dave. on Tue, 10/18/2011 - 7:46pm.
And I can't afford to replace my largest TV right now.
And just why did the GOP agree to a CNN moderated debate, anyway?
Anderson Cooper?
You have to be kidding.
-Dave
Vote for the American in November
And just why did the GOP agree to a CNN moderated debate, anyway
Submitted by CM on Wed, 10/19/2011 - 12:31am.
Why not? It shows that they aren't afraid of going into a hostile environment. That's more than you can say about most democrats.
Oops Matt....
Submitted by Blonde on Tue, 10/18/2011 - 7:50pm.
I opened a room on Chatzy.
Shall we have a troll booting contest? Self Reported, of course!! :)
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
Want a conservative candidate? fuggetaboutit
Submitted by needle on Tue, 10/18/2011 - 9:18pm.
Why do we practically never get a genuine conservative nominated for President? It does not happen because the whole system, and most especially the debates, favor the slick, witty, and clever, at the expense anybody with real character, integrity, courage, and genuine leadership capability, not predicated on pandering. We don’t need any of that. MUCH!
I do not watch the debates. I must stress I am most certainly NOT a PETA person, but for me watching the debates is like a PETA person watching bearbaiting or a cock fight.
We need to find some much better ways to evaluate presidential candidates than just serving up the best conservative candidates for the unprincipled liberal establishment, media and RINO’s to devour them.
It would be absolutely impossible for Abraham Lincoln to be nominated today even though we as a nation desperately need someone of his character, integrity, and wisdom. (Why, that “dufus” ain’t got no high school edumacation even!)
The whole system is rigged to ensure our country is “served” by the blandest, most opportunistic, PC pandering, unprincipled candidate. That is why there are dozens of debates; they are to ensure this outcome, and that is the focus of the elitist media types. Can they even recognize character, integrity, courage, and genuine leadership capability? I do not think so; they certainly do not care. They even call creatures of their own making – Hollow men like Clinton and Obama – “charismatic!”
All indications are the nation will continue to be misled essentially as it has been for many years. In all likelihood a thoroughly unreliable Northeastern RINO will be the nominee, a choice between Obama straight up and Obama light.
How’s that hopey changy thing working out for ya?
- Looking forward to the self-annihilation of the Manipulated Stories Machine.
Herman Cain is probably the first since Reagan (maybe Palin)
Submitted by gopcongress on Tue, 10/18/2011 - 9:27pm.
Herman Cain looks to be the first top tier candidate who is truly conservative, principled, has communication skills, and most importantly, doesn't succumb to the gotcha game. Only Ronald Reagan had that charisma, and Sarah Palin showed some of it as well early on. I really wish Sarah Palin ran the RNC.
To be blunt: If the mainstream media pushed Cain like they do Obama, Cain would win in a 57-0 shutout. Pure and simple.
"The news and truth are not the same thing." -Walter Lippmann (1889-1974) FOLLOW ME ON TWITTER
It took me a second...
Submitted by GW on Wed, 10/19/2011 - 8:43am.
to get your joke about 57-0. Then I laughed out loud.
Cain doesn't have a chance.
Submitted by PaleHorse on Wed, 10/19/2011 - 9:24am.
Cain doesn't have a chance. His tax plan is a hilarious joke under fire from anyone that knows anything about tax code. He knows nothing about foreign policy. And he can't go a week without saying something moronic. Time to pick a new horse unless you want to guarantee the nomination for Romney (gag).
What's wrong with his plan?
Submitted by Scuba Dude on Wed, 10/19/2011 - 9:34am.
What's wrong with his plan? It is nice and simple. One rate, no deductions.
Our current tax code is a humongous mess.
I would much rather pay 9% Federal tax instead of the current 28% I am in. More money for me to invest and more money to purchase things which grows the economy. I may not care for the 9% Natl Sales tax but if there is a way for it to be locked into place without a way for libturds to raise it, I will live with it.
"His tax plan is a hilarious
Submitted by NC Cop on Wed, 10/19/2011 - 9:44am.
"His tax plan is a hilarious joke under fire from anyone that knows anything about tax code. He knows nothing about foreign policy. And he can't go a week without saying something moronic."
Yet we still have Obama in office. It worked for him.
NC Cop---
Submitted by matthewdean on Thu, 10/20/2011 - 2:27am.
Zing !
MD
As for saying things "moronic"
Submitted by Blonde on Wed, 10/19/2011 - 11:21am.
....you manage to do that every time you post liberal talking points here.
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
He appears to be one of those
Submitted by Scuba Dude on Wed, 10/19/2011 - 11:39am.
He appears to be one of those "conservatives" for who everyone else is never conservative enough. A tactic used by many a troll here. Steve05 comes to mind.
Blonde---
Submitted by matthewdean on Thu, 10/20/2011 - 2:29am.
Double zing !!
MD
Blonde, you don't find the
Submitted by PaleHorse on Thu, 10/20/2011 - 10:08am.
Blonde, you don't find the proposal of an 18% consumption tax to be a least a little "moronic"? The last nine literally doubles most state's sales taxes. Cain's team knows the plan was a mistake and is now already working to change it. Apparently they finally realized that cutting taxes for the rich while raising them for the poor during a recession is not going to garner much popularity.
The Economist's recent headline about Cain's plan was brutal, but accurate, "Dial 9-9-9 for nonsense".
http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2011/10/herman-cain
The National Review had a frank assessment and if you haven't read it, check out the key piece:
"This tripartite scheme makes for a succinct slogan but has little else to recommend it. In particular Cain’s inability to choose between a sales tax and a VAT is puzzling. The two are very similar in their economic effects. The chief advantage of the sales tax over a VAT is that the latter is considered easier for governments to raise, because it is hidden. The chief advantage of the VAT over the sales tax is that it is easier to enforce without stimulating black markets. (Another is that it reduces the risk of taxing business-to-business purchases.) Opting for both as a transitional step means courting the danger of a VAT with none of its rewards: In the first stage, the government would get a new money machine, and in the second it would supposedly destroy that machine and opt for something hard to enforce.
The two-stage scheme is self-defeating in another respect as well. The 30 percent national sales tax, whatever its other merits, would be significantly softer on the poor than the 9-9-9 transitional step, since the larger sales tax includes a “prebate” check to all Americans to exempt the basic necessities of life from being taxed, while 9-9-9 includes no similar provision. Leaving aside whether a major tax increase on people at the bottom of the income scale is a good idea, what is the point of first raising their taxes and then cutting them?"
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/280306/bold-brash-and-wrong-editors
When confronted with this reality during the recent debate, Cain's response was remarkably vague. Essentially proclaiming, Well, my internal team found differently. Not really a great response if you're trying to get people to support your plan.
From Peter Spiliakos:
"Whenever the other candidates talked about how the two consumption taxes and the flat income tax would increase taxes on the middle-class and working poor, Cain would just talk about how his analysis was different from that of independent observers and common sense. His defense seems to be that the 9-9-9 plan is so simple and transparent that Cain and Cain’s economic team are the only people on Earth who understand how it impacts anybody, so don’t worry your pretty little head if it looks like a tax increase."
http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/postmodernconservative/2011/10/18/very-...
So my big question is, What are the Newsbusters missing? How can you be the only people in the country supporting this disastrous plan?
Forgot another good article.
Submitted by PaleHorse on Thu, 10/20/2011 - 10:12am.
Forgot another good article. Even one of the architects of Cain's plan, Stephen Moore, is calling for Cain to drop the 9% sales tax. Not a good sign: http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/188245-architect-of-cai...
Knowledge is king.
Neither your premise, Ashen Equine, nor your ---
Submitted by matthewdean on Fri, 10/21/2011 - 12:01am.
question, were either well thought out or well worded.
Pretty routine, though, for a dipshit liberal troll - assuming as you do that you are correct and any who disagree with you are wrong.
MD
"Neither your premise, Ashen
Submitted by Jer on Fri, 10/21/2011 - 12:50am.
"Neither your premise, Ashen Equine, nor your question, were either well thought out or well worded."
Nor was your above observation, I regret to say.
Jer
Dude?
Submitted by The Vet on Fri, 10/21/2011 - 1:41am.
In order to lay a hit on MD, you sidle up to a nasty little troll whose first line here was a vicious insult to Mr. Cain? His tax plan is a hilarious joke under fire from anyone that knows anything about tax code. He knows nothing about foreign policy. And he can't go a week without saying something moronic. Not to mention his constant nastiness throughout the few scant months he has been here. Whatever, even if you agree with him on this one instance, a stopped clock is right twice a day. No reason to burnish your reputation to help out a nasty little troll.
Settle down, Vet...
Submitted by Jer on Fri, 10/21/2011 - 2:00am.
Not only am I not sidling up to Pale Horse, I didn't even read his comment and I still have no idea what he posted. I'm just laying a friendly grammar "hit" on Matthew because I rarely get the chance.
Uncle Dude
I don't know...
Submitted by The Vet on Fri, 10/21/2011 - 2:08am.
Even a jokey response about well wording still gives comfort to a troll. You may say no no no. But it is really what the troll thinks - he has been given comfort and now can carry on another day.
ATTENTION:
Submitted by Jer on Fri, 10/21/2011 - 2:28am.
My reply to Matthew was not--repeat, NOT!--intended to give comfort to the troll known as Pale Horse. If he should construe, or has already construed, said reply to constitute either explicit or implicit support for his carrying on another day, I must advise him any such construction is woefully misguided.
Jer
Hear that troll?
Submitted by The Vet on Fri, 10/21/2011 - 3:02am.
You is got the lonelies. No back getting on this page.
So tell me, Jer---
Submitted by matthewdean on Fri, 10/21/2011 - 4:52am.
why it is that you take issue with either what I said, or how I said it; as it relates to the last part of Ashen Equines 10:08 a.m. post?
MD
I believe, Matthew...
Submitted by Jer on Fri, 10/21/2011 - 5:32am.
in this instance, the singular "was" should have been used with "neither/nor" instead of "were". And the insertion of "either" seems a bit awkward, if not improper.
But I'm just ragging on you. I still bow to your overall supremacy in these matters.
Jer
Jer,---
Submitted by matthewdean on Fri, 10/21/2011 - 6:45am.
as "either" may be either a pronoun, an adverb, an adjective, or a conjunction; I will stand by my usage as it relates overall to "was' versus 'were', irrespective of tense, i.e., singular or plural.
However, I can't deny that you most certainly earn points for deeming it awkward.
MD
Jer, I'm curious. What about
Submitted by PaleHorse on Fri, 10/21/2011 - 10:44am.
Jer, I'm curious. What about my behavior since joining Newsbusters could be construed as trolling? Because I've shared some opinions that are contrary to the party line around here? I was tagged as a troll from my first post b/c I argued that the Debt Crisis Debacle was manufactured. Was I wrong? I'm pretty sure you argued the same thing.
So why do you call me a troll? Or are you just piling on and listening to the group without any reason?
Wow troll, you are not very bright at all.
Submitted by The Vet on Fri, 10/21/2011 - 11:33am.
Whatever troll, showed you to be the troll you are here, but you keep acting like it ain't on display for the entire planet to see. Plop that butt on your head and start marching around cuz you is King Beclowner.
Long live King Beclowner Palewarts.
PaleHorse...
Submitted by Jer on Sat, 10/22/2011 - 6:43pm.
I honestly don't know what qualifies one as a troll.
I've posted probably in excess of a thousand comments at this website over the past four years, and I still get hit with the "troll" label from time to time. Obviously I disagree.
When it comes to research and sourcing, the Vet is in a class by himself at this website--perhaps any website. His record for exposing retreads is also superlative and unmatched [choselife deserves an honorable mention]. On the other hand, that doesn't mean I always agree with his "troll" identification, but there is nothing to be gained by anyone by inserting myself into the middle of those running battles.
In this case, when I posted that I hadn't even read your comments prior to responding to Matthew, that was the unvarnished truth. The only point of my reply to him was a grammatical issue which Matthew and I raise with each other on occasion--just a good-natured and frivolous diversion late at night. The Vet mistook it as evidencing some sort of alliance with you. My subsequent exchanges with the Vet were solely designed to convince him that my previous comments had absolutely nothing to do with you or the content of your posts. And that's all.
Jer
Jer, Fair enough. I
Submitted by PaleHorse on Sat, 10/29/2011 - 3:46pm.
Jer, Fair enough. I appreciate your reply. Frank and honest assessment. The troll term gets tossed around here constantly and I often disagree. To me a troll is someone whose sole purpose is to derail a thread. Simply having a differing opinion is not enough to classify a person as a troll. I think Vet uses this term too liberally.
As for his sourcing, he is good. I only wish I had that much extra time in the day to dedicate to internet research.
PH~
Submitted by GG_NB on Sat, 10/29/2011 - 3:55pm.
Why did you choose the name "Pale Horse"?
"If not us, who? If not now, when?"
~Ronald Reagan
Nice try troll.
Submitted by The Vet on Sat, 10/29/2011 - 4:28pm.
I do get thrown off when a troll gives me props. I was almost convinced. Unfortunately you blew it. It takes no time at all finding something on the googlies when you already know the truth. But yeah, you act like the Veet spends all his time locked in the basement soichin' and soichin' and then you act like you were sayin' suntin nice, mmmmkay?
Take your backwards insult and shove it up your rear you reptilious frellnit.
Vet, love the list and I love
Submitted by PaleHorse on Fri, 10/21/2011 - 10:42am.
Vet, love the list and I love knowing how much time you wasted to put that together. I went through it and, frankly, I didn't see one bit of nastiness. Good attempt though! Are you a librarian by any chance because your organizational skills and attention to detail are fantastic.
Yes troll, that is how it works.
Submitted by The Vet on Fri, 10/21/2011 - 11:50am.
You just proclaim it so and fooshie fooshie fam zippow it is so. Say, you are the first troll to ever come upon that little nugget of magic. Hold it tight troll. In the meantime, any one with a brain can see you lying like you just invented it.
Let me try it, I am handsome, muscular, brilliant, wicked rich, wicked wicked wicked smart and and and a, a, a, fighter pilot! fooshie fooshie fam zippow ! Awwww. It don't work on monkeymen either.
Oh troll, trollietown is calling, they say you are too stupid even for them. Your troll card has been revoked. You will get paid no Stupid from here on out for all your instances of trolling on the monkeymen.
Another thing trollie, yeah, the list, funny thing, it don't matter how long it took me, how how attempty it is, or how organized or paying detailish attentionings I am, the funny thing is, you ready? the funny thing is it ain't going nowhere. It is here to stay. Like an anchor. Just laying out there ready for me to link to, say let me try it.
Look at the obnoxious insults the lying Palecrack troll puts out and then whines about the level of discourse on this site.
Man, I do love me my lists.
I love how you regress into
Submitted by PaleHorse on Fri, 10/21/2011 - 3:00pm.
I love how you regress into childish behavior as your position become less tenable. So predictable. Your list simply illustrates the fact that I'm an interested Newsbusters reader who has opinions. Isn't that the description of nearly every poster here? No matter how much you try to paint me as a troll, the evidence you present just doesn't support that position. But again, thanks for taking the time to put together an advertisement for me. I've actually saved it for posterity.
Whatever.
Submitted by The Vet on Fri, 10/21/2011 - 11:55pm.
fooshie fooshie fam zippow!
Still not working. But you power on bravely and pretend your every lie is magically turning into the truth.
Matthew, it was perfectly
Submitted by PaleHorse on Fri, 10/21/2011 - 10:55am.
Matthew, it was perfectly stated. There is so much wrong with Cain's plan I had to figure out how to share it all.
And guess what? Cain did indeed change his 9-9-9 plan today by trashing the zero exemption feature. Looks like he's finally figured out how weak and unpopular his plan really is. It's amazing how long it took him to discover that raising taxes on the poor and middle class was a bad idea.
Phweet.
Submitted by The Vet on Fri, 10/21/2011 - 11:56am.
Oh look the troll is enjoying the smell of his own farts. Nice try troll, the loons won't take you in either. You are just gonna be stuck sitting on a rock between trollietown and loonlake.
Say, what do you do for an encore, figure out how to share your farts with passerby? I doubt it, you gonna need a bottle and access to loonlake for that.
Vet, I like how you totally
Submitted by PaleHorse on Fri, 10/21/2011 - 2:57pm.
Vet, I like how you totally ignore the fact that I am right. Cain's 9-9-9 plan was garbage and even he is being forced to face those facts, hence, his recent (DRASTIC) change to the plan. Scream and shout and insult all you want. It doesn't change the fact that my original claim AND analysis were spot on.
Whatever.
Submitted by The Vet on Fri, 10/21/2011 - 11:54pm.
fooshie fooshie fam zippow!
Still not working. But you power on bravely and pretend your every lie is magically turning into the truth.
You, Ashen Equine---
Submitted by matthewdean on Fri, 10/21/2011 - 10:11pm.
have never, EVER, been 'spot on' in a post here, about any subject.
Other than foolish liberal talking points, you contribute nothing.
Even on the best of days, you are a nimrod.
The fact that most posters here, except you, recognize that as truth, means that your plaintive wailing falls on deaf ears.
MD
I got it,
Submitted by Boudin on Tue, 10/18/2011 - 9:32pm.
Thanks,
Not giving CNN one red cent or one minute of my time
Submitted by Slyrr on Tue, 10/18/2011 - 9:49pm.
No way I'm watching CNN. They're nothing but Obama's media slaves, and Pooper is just another one of their limp-wristed, coffee-swilling, metrosexual insult comics.
Why the GOP lets ANY of the main networks run the show is beyond me. Nothing but constant 'gotcha' tactics over the littlest things, with the moderators clearly biased for Obama in their demeanor and in the way they phrase their 'impartial' questions.
It's like asking Rush Limbaugh to appear on the 'Janine Garafolo' show...
→ Who got creeped out?
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Tue, 10/18/2011 - 10:07pm.
Was I the only one creeped out by Romney putting his hands all over Rick Perry?
My skin was crawling. Was that theater for Anderson?
I watched the debate and
Submitted by Dan The Man 2 on Tue, 10/18/2011 - 10:12pm.
I watched the debate and chatted, that was fun. I am saddened to see that Cooper wanted to make it a Perry/Romney fight but Cain dd well. Newt shone through the crap and actually had a good influence on the others.
Cooper gave the Hermanator the shaft
Submitted by Dave. on Tue, 10/18/2011 - 10:12pm.
Not that I didn't see it coming.
-Dave
Vote for the American in November
Tired of seeing some of the
Submitted by Liberallies on Tue, 10/18/2011 - 11:29pm.
Tired of seeing some of the Republican candidates attempting to destroy each other. Focus on getting Obama off the Presidency.
Rick Perry is an ex-Democrat who was way, way high up in Al Gore's Presidential campaign back in 2000. I am sorry, but I have always distruted politicians who switch parties out of political convinience.
For the life of me, I can't understand what is so appealing about Mitt Romney. He is your typical career politician who is for something when the polls tell him so and against it when the polls tells him. he stands for nothing other than his wish to be elected. Republicans that support him baffle me. This man edited his book so no one can take political hits on him. He is a oily, slick, sleezy politician. Any Republican that supports him is no different than the Democrats that support Obama and the Republican fools who voted for Obama or stayed home and did not vote!
Herman Cain...well right now, he is my guy. He does need to better explain 9-9-9. But he is full of energy, positive and a REAL CONSERVATIVE not out of political convinience, but out of conviction. GO HERMAN CAIN!
Ron Paul is a wacko, Santorum I like, but does not have a chance and Bachman lost me with her anti-vaccination talk. Newt, I like him, but too much baggage from his years as a Congressman.
But our candidates, these debates need to be about getting rid of Obama and how they will be different than Obama, not the stupid and petty attacks on each other.
Newt
Submitted by pbthinker on Tue, 10/18/2011 - 11:34pm.
About the only one to really shine in this debate, IMHO, was Newt. He made the best points and tended to stay out of the mud. IF he moves up in the polls, expect the LSM to go into full attack mode. There won't be a day go by without a story about him talking to his wife in the hospital about their marriage breaking up (which isn't true by the way).
After this debate, no matter what you think about Newt, wouldn't it really be fun to watch Obama try to debate Newt. The only thing funnier would be, if Newt didn't get the presidential nod and accepted the vice-presidential offer and debated Biden.
This may be the only year Newt could win because the LSM has no credibility so, when they attack day after day after day, no one will listen. After the second debate with Obama no one will worry about any of the garbage and will concentrate on who has a plan and who could bring a concensus to D.C.
Easy, just let Newt's
Submitted by redfish on Wed, 10/19/2011 - 1:43am.
Easy, just let Newt's daughter go on TV to defend her father. Let progressives attack Newt's daughter if they want. They'll just look like bullies --- hope and change out the window.
These aren't debates these
Submitted by LAM SON 719 on Tue, 10/18/2011 - 11:39pm.
These aren't debates these are MSM live attack ads and the conservatives are stupidly sucking it up.
MSM live attack ads
Submitted by Agnostic on Wed, 10/19/2011 - 8:49am.
Candidates might as well get used to it now because it will only get worse should they be elected. Day after day of attacks on policy, personal issues, acquaintances, answering to media polls, family and, my personal favorite, answering why you don't support the advice of the liberal du jour.
If the nation is to be fiscally saved then we need a President and a Congress willing to push right as hard as the liberals have been pushing left and if they can't do that and weather the media storm the Congress will be lost in two years and the nation will be back on the road to the 'Social Utopia'.
A debate moderated by the
Submitted by BigSky1970 on Wed, 10/19/2011 - 12:23am.
A debate moderated by the same Anderson Cooper that at one time not long ago called Republicans "tea-baggers". Nope. No thanks. Wasn't going to give CNN my eyeballs. Besides, these debates have become tedious with their egging on Romeny and Perry into knock-down-drag-out fights and talking about such pressing issues as gays in the military.
First, a "Debate" is subjective to a degree
Submitted by gopcongress on Wed, 10/19/2011 - 1:01am.
First of all, I'm not at all happy with the political "debate" premise, because they are more indicative of random answering patterns coupled with biased questioning techniques, which are verboten in a real debate format. (I suppose it's like comparing amateur, "real" wrestling compared to professional, "staged or fake" wrestling, but I digress).
I think we all have our biases based upon our own bent. But there is a serious flaw to consider.
I do not accept the premise that we must elect someone because he or she has the best chance to beat Obama. With the exception of Ron Paul, most candidates here would easily beat Obama, no question. While Romney is definitely a RINO, I don't see how any of these people would lose.
But the DANGER is that we can NOT just have a new REPUBLICAN president: We need a BONAFIDE CONSERVATIVE president. And to be even MORE blunt: the more conservative the candidate, the more likely he will win with a larger margin, and in fact, a larger mandate. Therefore, i'm going to assume that everyone in the top two tiers can relatively easily beat Obama. The TRUE question, is: Can he advance our constitutional principles? Extremely important distinction, and potentially fatal in the long term if not understood correctly.
"The news and truth are not the same thing." -Walter Lippmann (1889-1974) FOLLOW ME ON TWITTER
R- Debate (10/18/11) “The Official Grump-Analysis”
Submitted by Grumpy in Arizona on Wed, 10/19/2011 - 8:36am.
Source: “The Grumpy Center for Advanced Studies (GCAS)”
Motto of the GCAS: “What good is a keystone if you don’t have an arch?”
OVERVIEW: The “Republican Feeding Frenzy” has begun in earnest as evidenced by last night’s shameful debate. The only thing missing the debate was Jon Huntsman… who really wasn’t missed at all.
The debate was held in Las Vegas, Nevada in front of an audience of which half seemed to be there expecting to see the Wayne Newton show, while the other half wanted to see the tigers from the former Siegfried & Roy show maul the candidates.
Let’s face it, Las Vegas is no place to have a debate – too many crap tables.
THE MODERATOR/QUESTIONER: Anderson Cooper is to civil discourse what the Mongol hordes were to table manners. He just goes to prove that you don’t have to be smart, respectful, and talented, have integrity, or any sense of professionalism to be named as a “moderator.” However, he did display those talents that propelled him to a top spot at CNN – he was sneaky, manipulative, and displayed a complete disregard to the real issues confronting America in favor of the “entertaining aspects” of creating controversy and dissention within the conservative ranks… Unfortunately he succeeded in doing just that.
PARTICIPANT ANALYSIS: (note: The candidates will be listed in order of their performance – not alphabetically.)
1. Herman Cain – He kept his composure very well and adequately weathered the attacks from his “professional politician” competitors and the always disingenuous moderator Cooper. It was a noteworthy performance and I suspect he won over more than a few of the crowd who (by some accounts) preferred Romney.
2. Newt Gingrich – While some may disagree, clearly Newt was the second place finisher. He did not resort to attacking his fellow competitors on a personal level or question their motivations or qualifications, nor did he try and sling dirt from the past at his fellow candidates, but instead remained his calm analytical self. I doubt he will get the nomination… but the ultimate candidate will be making a big mistake to not consider him as either VP or find a significant role for him in the future administration.
3. Mitt Romney – Finally he got called on “Romney-care” and appeared a little shaken on some of the attacks coming his way. Nonetheless, he recovered quite well and gave his usual insincere, smarmy, and condescending performance one expects from a part-time used car dealer who does the job because he’s bored with his silver-spoon lifestyle and thinks that everybody desperately needs him as their leader. Did I ever mention that I can’t stand this “Value du jour” guy who even gives RINO’s a bad name.
4. Ron Paul – It’s a sad day when Ron Paul seems more reasonable than some of the other candidates. Our very own “Captain Negative” …he displayed all the endearing qualities that make him an icon to some of the most frustrated, confused, and bitter people in world history – An incoherent foreign policy, idea’s for simply eliminating most of the government without providing a positive or practical alternative, and an economic plan (?) based on his own pet peeves rather than bold ideas or realistic opportunities.
NOTE: Bachmann, Perry, and Santorum tied for last place. I have never seen such miserable performances in a debate setting before. So (in no particular order) here are the losers.
Michele Bachmann – She just didn’t have an important presence and around the 60 second mark of the debate she went off on this whiney “women are hurting” (like all of us aren’t?) thing that was actually embarrassing to watch… past that I can’t think of a significant thing she said that was not just a repeat of her talking points… Michele – I like and respect you, but you’ve lost my potential vote.
Rick Perry – Just pathetic! Feeble and wooden do not adequately describe his presence. His “attacks” on Romney were not well thought-out or presented. Honestly, he came across as a person so far out of his element that it was painful to watch.
Rick Santorum – Up until, and including, last weeks debate I still liked the idea of keeping him around in these debates because of his positive social message... That changed last night when he went into a truly desperate attack mode against his fellow competitors. His performance accurately reflected the triviality of his candidacy and highlighted his greatest weakness – he thinks and acts like a professional politician and cannot escape his bureaucratic and unimaginative thinking. It’s definitely time for him to just go away.
Jon Huntsman – Because, thankfully, he wasn’t there to babble his nothings… I score this as his best debate performance so far!
- Grump :o)
→ Great post, Granny
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Wed, 10/19/2011 - 8:44am.
I picked up on the glad-handing, grab the shoulder, used car salesman technique as well.
Your post gave me the chuckles. It's pretty much how I saw it as well, though I saw Romney as losing his cool while Newt was the winner, capitalizing fully on every minute he was allowed.
Cool I think you made the
Submitted by motherbelt on Wed, 10/19/2011 - 9:17am.
Cool I think you made the same mistake I made previously....confusing Grumpy in AZ with GrannyGrump. I'm sure she'll be just as gracious about it as she was with me, though.
I like the analysis; I didn't watch. I think the real smack-down, no BS candidate would be Newt Gingrich, but unfortunately, he's not seen as "electable" because of too much personal baggage. I think any nominee would be stupid to overlook him for VP.
Newt as VP would be awesome. He could say all the things the candidate couldn't say, and be great at it.
IOW, a smart-ass, straight-talking guy like Joe Biden, but with brains.
I saw the clip this AM of Romney treating Perry like a child; he needs to realize condescension won't get it done. It only makes him look even more snooty, if possible.
The more I see of Perry, the more I wonder just how he got to be the Repubicans' supposed ace-in-the-hole! Maybe a case of the hype being impossible to live up to?
→ Apologies to Grumpy
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Wed, 10/19/2011 - 9:29am.
Sorry for the confusion. Still a great post.
Cool: LOL - Someday the curse will pass!
Submitted by Grumpy in Arizona on Wed, 10/19/2011 - 9:43am.
Thanks for your gracious comments! I'm getting used to be confused with the Granny Grump... Can you imagine how confusing a conversation between the two of us would be?
- The Grump (in Arizona) :o)
A great analysis as usual
Submitted by Scuba Dude on Wed, 10/19/2011 - 8:52am.
A great analysis as usual Grumpy. I have to agree with you on all points.
It was sad that except for Cain and Gingrich all the other candidates fell for the LSM baiting them to attack each other instead of Obama.
Herman Cain is growing more and more on me every day. I am not completely sold on 9-9-9 (mainly due to the sales tax) and I think the reason why it is derided by the other candidates is simple, they just do not understand how it works. It is a very simple plan that is more fair than our current tax code. The others are all politicians that do not appear to be able to think outside of the box. I am going to take Herman's advice and read about it and the analysis of it that he mentions.
Newt did a wonderful job of keeping out of the in fighting and made some very good points. Sadly, all the baggage he carries (especially sitting on the couch with Pelosi) is what will prevent him from getting the nomination. But I would love to see him get a position in the administration of whoever wins the election. One of the posters here sees him being Chief of Staff. I think he would do Herman Cain well in that position.
Romney and Perry? Cooper did his best to get those two to fight each other and they did not disappoint. Hopefully the both of them will cancel each other out and let Cain continue to bring his message to others.
All the rest? Pfffft, time for them to drop out of the race.
Scuba Dude: 9-9-9 does need more exploration.
Submitted by Grumpy in Arizona on Wed, 10/19/2011 - 10:00am.
The truth is that I support Cain - I should have made that clear in the analysis for the sake of full disclosure.
But one aspect of the 9-9-9 plan that still has me a bit confused is: "What happens to my mortgage interest deduction?" Candidly, it's the only thing keeping me afloat at this time.
Thanks for the kind comments.
- Just plain old Grump (no Granny's here) :o)
P.s.: MB - Thanks for pointing-out the "Granny-thing" in an above post. :o)
Grumpy, from a quick reading
Submitted by Scuba Dude on Wed, 10/19/2011 - 10:07am.
Grumpy, from a quick reading of the 9-9-9 plan your mortgage interest deduction would go away. The only deductions permitted would be charitable.
But I do not think that would hurt you. I do not know what you earn so I do not know what tax bracket you are currently in but I think you would have more money after paying a 9% Fed Income Tax to put towards your mortgage. I know I would.
I am currently in the 28% bracket and am starting to look to buy my first home. I live in NYC and the additional money that I would retain under the 9-9-9 plan would more than help in paying my mortgage with more than enough left over for other things.
I will be throwing my support to Herman Cain.
Nice, but
Submitted by Boudin on Wed, 10/19/2011 - 9:02am.
I thought Santorum did better then that. I thought when Cooper addresses the Perry Pastor question to him (why would he do that?) He hit it out of the park. I also liked, that he addressed Mitt with Romneycare by saying, your own staff helped write Obamacare. I also liked the fact he said Military cuts are not on the table, considering we have Iran trying to assassinate folks on our Lands.
I thought he did well in fact.
<
Submitted by Boudin on Thu, 10/20/2011 - 7:51am.
>
So, no Amen do I get?
Submitted by Boudin on Thu, 10/20/2011 - 7:53am.
? Poor Rick
Grump~
Submitted by GG_NB on Wed, 10/19/2011 - 10:39am.
Thank you! I didn't get to see the debate until this morning (taped it). As usual, you did an excellent job recapping it! I could have just skipped watching it and relied on the Grump Report.
I have gotten to the point where I watch these debates picturing all of them debating Obama. I love Cain, but I am still nervous for him going up against Obama -- but I do think he can get there. Cain needs to pump it up a level and be ready to answer to the attacks. He's already graceful, but he stood quietly as others attacked 9-9-9, and he did have info to deflect a lot of that. He needs to consult with Newt!
I love hearing Newt; he's always interesting. I agree with the VP comments on here.
Perry is painful to watch...very, very painful. There was a point last night where I swear it looked like he was going to cry. And then he gets all desperate and goes on the attack, but he never comes out clean in the wash (most of the time not seeming to discern where to pick his battles). He cannot even come close to handling Obama's silver tongue and tactics. Just picture the two of them in a debate...oh...my...gosh. He should get out, for his own sake. He looks like a man losing pride in himself who doesn't know how to unring the bell. He's already on the wrong side on key conservative issues -- it's just not going to happen.
I am not a Ron Paul fan, but he is interesting because he never comes off like a politician searching his mind for his talking points. He's never trying to be convincing -- he just says what he believes, without worrying about what bloc of voter he may tick off, and you can't help but find that refreshing. He doesn't appear to ever get rattled, and if you aren't trying to duck and weave and control all the elements, that's what happens.
I thought Santorum had a few really good answers, but he gets mean-spirited and condescending toward the others, as though if he just keeps diminishing them, he'll be the last person standing. One of the biggest problems I have with these debates is that many of them still think it's a bright idea to attack each other. Attack Obama and reveal who the heck YOU are and what YOU think and what YOU will do.
I am sorry to say that Bachmann seems like a string of talking points to me. I never used to think of her as a typical politician, and I hate to admit I now view her that way. She's rehearsed, but not in a wise, prepared way -- in a posturing type way. I used to think of her as brave, but in trying to win, she actually seems like she is losing something of herself.
"If not us, who? If not now, when?"
~Ronald Reagan
Well done, Grump (per the usual)
Submitted by Blonde on Wed, 10/19/2011 - 11:35am.
I have just a few things to add (mostly in the realm of the absurd, today):
The debate was held in Las Vegas, Nevada in front of an audience of which half seemed to be there expecting to see the Wayne Newton show...
That's so funny on several levels....but mostly because Wayne Newton was in the front row! We were chatting and I posted somthing like "OMO! There's Wayne Newton!"
Secondly, Mitt's hair. What is up with it? It goes from grayer, to almost black (and oily, ew!)....and now he's back to Sopranos' Paulie with the white wings!
I actually enjoyed Cooper's little act of egging on Perry & Romney....I thought for a minute there it would come to blows (how very unPresidential, although then again, when thinking of the Iranians, maybe that's not such a bad thing)....but I would love to see the Body Language lady pick apart the Perry performance after that. He was standing there, giving big sighs and rolling his eyes like a Valley Girl!
I really liked Bachmann's jacket....all of the guys thought it was "too military", that she was trying to emulate an admiral or a general, but I, the fashion police, would like to disabuse everyone of that notion. That look is HAWT right now. (No, Moochelle has not worn it)....the Duchess of Cambridge (former Kate Middleton) has sported the look a couple of times this year....and contrary to the Mrs.O suck-ups....KATE is THE style ICON.
I thought the Hermanator comported himself well in the face of a pack attack (h/t to Newt for not joining the fray). Shame on Michelle Bachmann for mischaractarizing the National Sales Tax "9" as a VAT! Utter nonsense. Remember, she represents a profession who would be pink-slipped under Cain's bold new plan. Further Kudos for Herman encouraging each of us to go to his site and "run the numbers for yourself". THAT ALONE speaks volumes about personal responsibility.
All in all, a shameful "debate". The format was AWFUL! (The round table, with participants seated, was far better). And as you noted, Grump....the very best part was No Jon Huntsman. If that group needed a class clown, we could always lend them Deddy, or Orange, or Einstein, or whatever name he's hiding behind this week.
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
Blonde~
Submitted by GG_NB on Wed, 10/19/2011 - 12:20pm.
Since we're now talking about the fun stuff:
1) I liked Bachmann's jacket as well (thought she looked classy), and she looks great in white. Her hair and makeup were lovely. Sorry, guys -- this is girl stuff. Just ignore my post in its entirety.
2) Mitt has pretty nice hair, but he needs to stop slicking it (there's applying a little bit of gel or mousse -- and then there's sticking your head in an oil vat), and he also needs to tone down his stark hair color. Everytime he spoke, the gray strips distracted me. Shave or dye them!
3) I always love the red ties.
4) Huntsman not being there proved Huntsman doesn't need to be there.
"If not us, who? If not now, when?"
~Ronald Reagan
Agreed, GG
Submitted by Blonde on Wed, 10/19/2011 - 12:51pm.
Bachmann DID look terrific last night....but she shot her credibility, IMO, by trying to do a media smear on Cain's Sales Tax.
Time for a couple of these people to get out of the race. Bachmann, Huntsman, Santorum, Johnson. I really like having Newt there for now, though. Perhaps I'll send him a little something as well.
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
Blonde~
Submitted by GG_NB on Wed, 10/19/2011 - 1:16pm.
Those are all the ones I want out as well. I don't yet want Paul out, even though some of the MSM is delighting in finding any way possible to claim he wins these debates -- because, of course, he can't actually win this thing.
I was totally ticked with Bachmann with the sales attack at Cain -- and this is another example of why I see her as a straight-up politician now. She is on the hunt for pieces of info off the others that she can use to try to discredit them, but she is often either 1) not entirely accurate, and I am assuming engaged in puposeful shading and not ignorant and 2) going mean -- which makes her unlikeable and appear desperate. I thought she would be one (like Cain) who would shine in her own right and not get down in the mud for tactical purposes. I have been unpleasantly suprised at her.
But her hair held up beautifully. LOL.
"If not us, who? If not now, when?"
~Ronald Reagan
Huntsman not being there
Submitted by jon_torlin on Wed, 10/19/2011 - 12:52pm.
Huntsman not being there was because of the so-called call to boycott Vegas on the part of Soetoro, which proves he's just nothing more than a shill plant for the bogus potus.
He may as well just bow out and call it quits at this point.
-Jon
Blondie & Georgia Girl – Thanks
Submitted by Grumpy in Arizona on Wed, 10/19/2011 - 1:46pm.
I’m always interested in both your “takes” on the debates.
I’ll also take your word as the fashion-police… despite the fact that IMO, Michele looked like she was wearing a 1950’s Car-Hop uniform - sans the short skirt and roller skates… I was half expecting her to offer-up a policy plan that included a Bonus Burger and a Malted.
As for the hair thing… it’s not something to which I pay attention. Although, I would not be surprised if Romney shows up in the future looking like Cruella DeVille.
Best wishes to you both - Grump :o)
Grump~Hahahaha!
Submitted by GG_NB on Wed, 10/19/2011 - 2:12pm.
Okay, now you have me picturing your take on it and Bachmann rolling out the orders at Sonic. Your second paragraph deserves "Funniest Comment of the Day." :)
"If not us, who? If not now, when?"
~Ronald Reagan
Since Matt has designated this to be the Open Thread
Submitted by Blonde on Wed, 10/19/2011 - 12:48pm.
Has anyone read this yet? Harry Reid thinks it's more important to "save" government jobs....that things are just hunky dory in the private sector. Way to shore up those union dues, Harry!!!!
REALLY?
I am going to be SOOO happy when he (just like Bela Pelosi) is shoved into the obscure minority where we don't have to see his rat face nor hear his little girl whiney voice.
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
Blondie – Thanks for the link!
Submitted by Grumpy in Arizona on Wed, 10/19/2011 - 2:01pm.
“…[Biden said] Republicans are calling the bill a "failure" because they are "using a different benchmark for success than we are."
Yeah, that’s the ticket Joe! More teachers to ‘ejukate’ the roving bands of imbeciles making their mark Occupying Wall Street.
- Grump :o)
De nada, Grump
Submitted by Blonde on Wed, 10/19/2011 - 2:36pm.
I'm always amused when my pals address me as "Blondie"....it makes me smile, so thanks for that, too!
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
Blonde: Ooops, my mistake.
Submitted by Grumpy in Arizona on Wed, 10/19/2011 - 3:05pm.
Glad your not offended with my exquisite, yet refined, typing error. I’m chalking it up as another “life lesson.” - An embarrassed LOL.
BTW, in your post above this current subject you referred to Michele Bachmann’s dress as “HAWT” and I have no idea what that means… “Historical Anniversary of Wearing Tweed?????” = Another thing I’m probably wrong about.
- Grump :o)
No no no, Grump!
Submitted by Blonde on Wed, 10/19/2011 - 3:19pm.
It makes me very happy when I see "Blondie"....from one of my pals....OTOH, when a troll types it, I see red! It's just one of those things....somehow, people who I admire and get along with come up with a certain nickname for me (related to my real name, of course)....same thing with my S/N.
As for HAWT....that's just an affectation of "hot"....it's me getting all wee'wee'd up in imitation of the people who fawn over Michelle O, like that.
IT'S SO HAAAAWWWT! See?
It's just silliness, truly. But why not? Life is way too short not to have some fun!
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
Oh, that HAWT! LOL
Submitted by Grumpy in Arizona on Wed, 10/19/2011 - 3:28pm.
Sort of like my going out for a couple of BHEERS at Happy Hour!
- Grump :o)
The one and same HAWT, Grump
Submitted by Blonde on Wed, 10/19/2011 - 3:31pm.
Just imagine Rick Perry, after his rolling his eyes and sighing....spotting something he likes and saying "Like Wow! That's so HAWWWT!!!!".
And there you have it.
BHEEERS!
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
Grump~
Submitted by GG_NB on Wed, 10/19/2011 - 3:30pm.
I call her Blondie. She absolutely does like it from friends. I swear!
"If not us, who? If not now, when?"
~Ronald Reagan
Ok Girls (Georgia Girl and Blonde (ie))
Submitted by Grumpy in Arizona on Wed, 10/19/2011 - 3:50pm.
Thanks to both of you for the fun conversation and for explaining the parameters. I just tend to be a somewhat formal person when it comes to public interaction. As an example, even though I live in the “relaxed” state of Arizona – I would never consider attending a persons wedding while wearing bib-overalls and no underwear… but that’s just me and all I know about fashion sense in a nutshell.
- Grump :o)
And a Good Thing Too, Grump!
Submitted by Blonde on Wed, 10/19/2011 - 3:59pm.
I draw the line at Bib Overalls!
Totally. Draw. The. Line.
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
What's this? NPR host is the PR person for OccupyDC?
Submitted by kata on Wed, 10/19/2011 - 2:11pm.
Of course, it's not an ethics ethics violation
I liked Grumpy's analysis,
Submitted by FAR52 on Wed, 10/19/2011 - 3:03pm.
I liked Grumpy's analysis, but I disagree with him regarding Cain. From what I saw, he got his butt handed to him on his 9-9-9 plan. He showed an utter lack of ability to explain away the criticisms. I'm sorry Herman, but telling Americans to just do the math themselves is not a defense. If it is such a simple concept, it shouldn't be difficult for you to defend it. And just repeating apples and oranges without any meaningful context doesn't get the job done either. Romney really zinged him with that bushel of apples and oranges comment.
And then Herman made that huge mistake before the debate saying that he could see himself making a similar decision that Israel just made by relasing Gitmo detainees for an American soldier in captivity. He has tried to walk that back, but that's one that is hard to walk back.
Cain may be likeable, but I'm sorry, I just don't think he is ready for prime time. I'm not sure if he will ever be.
Mitt?
Submitted by bkeyser on Wed, 10/19/2011 - 3:58pm.
Is that you?
Perhaps someone can answer this
Submitted by Mister Orange on Wed, 10/19/2011 - 3:58pm.
If 9-9-9 becomes law, and we see a federal sales tax of 9%, states such as Illinois who already have an 11% state sales tax will now have a 20% sales tax. Is this correct?
Ted, really?
Submitted by bkeyser on Wed, 10/19/2011 - 4:08pm.
You don't get this?
There are state taxes and there are federal taxes. Irrespective of what the state taxes are, you still pay federal taxes- theoretically. 9.9.9 replaces the current federal tax structure. Whether it's a viable alternative or not, the conflating of sales taxes is the wrong way to define it.
A sales tax would have a direct cause and effect on both manufacturer and consumer habits. If consumers decide to back off on how much they spend, manufacturers will need to work to reduce prices in order to win back the consumer.
Additionally, with a sales tax, the consumer has greater control over how much they'd like to contribute to the federal government in the form of tax collection. Don't want to fork it over, don't buy a new car every two years; go four instead.
Finally, those who have more will likely continue to spend and the won't be able to shelter their income. The Dan Snyder's of the world will still spend $70M on the Lady Anne, except under Cain's plan, $6.3M will go to the feds as a sales tax. Right now, only the state -presumably- would levy a sales tax on that purchase. For those that want the rich to "pay their fair share", this plan will certainly do it.
A direct quote from US News and World Report
Submitted by bkeyser on Wed, 10/19/2011 - 5:02pm.
from the Politics and Policy section:
Poor BHO; it almost sounds like they're mocking him.
it's the same speech everywhere he goes.
Submitted by kata on Wed, 10/19/2011 - 7:16pm.
At this point it'd better be memorized. Now - where's the video.
Word is the TOTUS is having a late mid-term crisis and is down at the OWS scamming on the gourmet food and hot hippie chicks. Bad TOTUS.
Hot hippie chicks?
Submitted by Radical1979 on Wed, 10/19/2011 - 7:33pm.
I thought he was into hot hippie dudes?
But he'd best hold onto his TOTUS, the redistribution of wealth is REALLY going on at OWS.
LOL. Add that one to the list of Hussein gaffes.
Submitted by SickofLibs on Wed, 10/19/2011 - 7:23pm.
_______town's Finest ALWAYS refers to the police.
_______town's Bravest ALWAYS refers to the firefighters.