Let's see if the Reps can top the show put on by Hillary, Barack, and whoever the third guy was the other night. [TRANSCRIPT]
OFF THE BAT: McCain objected when Russert said that McCain has repeatedly admitted that his expertise is in national security rather than economics. Here at the Romney site are the sort of quotes Russert's apologists have in mind:
Sen. McCain Says He Doesn't Understand Economic Issues:
Sen. McCain: "The Issue Of Economics Is Not Something I've Understood As Well As I Should." "Like Mike Huckabee, who joked recently that he 'may not be the expert that some people are on foreign policy, but I did stay in a Holiday Inn Express last night,' McCain suggested to reporters Monday that American consumer culture offered a short cut to expertise. 'The issue of economics is not something I've understood as well as I should,' McCain said. 'I've got Greenspan's book.'" (Sasha Issenberg, "McCain: It's About The Economy," The Boston Globe, http://www.boston.com/, Posted 12/18/07)- Sen. McCain: "I Still Need To Be Educated." "On a broader range of economic issues, though, Mr. McCain readily departs from Reaganomics. His philosophy is best described as a work in progress. He is refreshingly blunt when he tells me: 'I'm going to be honest: I know a lot less about economics than I do about military and foreign policy issues. I still need to be educated.'" (Stephen Moore, "Reform, Reform, Reform," OpinionJournal.com, 11/26/05)
That will teach him to engage in self-deprecating humor.
Huckabee says he was the only bear at a Republican debate in Dearborn. That was Oct 9 and represented Fred Thompson's debut. Here is Huckabee:
You know, a lot of people are going to be watching this debate. They're going to hear Republicans on this stage talk about how great the economy is. And frankly, when they hear that, they're going to probably reach for the dial. I want to make sure people understand that for many people on this stage the economy's doing terrifically well, but for a lot of Americans it's not doing so well. The people who handle the bags and make the beds at our hotels and serve the food, many of them are having to work two jobs, and that's barely paying the rent. And you know what else? They don't think that they can afford for their kids to go to college; they're pretty sure they're not going to be able to afford health insurance.
And so I hope in the course of this we can talk about a how a fair tax really lifts up everybody, including those at the bottom of the economic spectrum, and untaxes the poor people in our culture.
SURGING: Interesting that McCain singled out Hillarity as waving the white flag of surrender in Iraq at the recent Dem debate; it is not as if Obama is a table-pounding hawk.
Huckabee defends the invasion of Iraq and explains the WMD debalce by assuring us that we didn't find every Easter egg that was planted. Not because we didn't look!
Broadly, McCain and others are taking the line that the concept of the war (imposing by force a stable democracy in Iraq) was plausible and desirable but mismanaged by Rumsfeld. As to the mismanagement, there won't be much disagreement; however, the hard line anti-war view is that the war could never have been "won" because the ultimate objective was never realistic.
LATE IN THE GAME: Tim Russert is asking the candidates about Social Security, which is surely topical in Florida. However! I really do not like seeing the serious Republican candidates standing on the same stage with Ron Paul while he goes on about his plan to abolish Social Security. It's a non-starter that makes Republicans look bad.
MCCAIN'S APPEAL TO REPUBLICANS:
McCain: But look, I won the majority of Republican vote in both New Hampshire and South Carolina.
Hmm - per the New Hampshire exit poll Romney beat McCain among Republicans 35 to 34; McCain beat Romney among Independents by 40-27.
In South Carolina Huckabee beat McCain among Republicans by 32-31; among Independents, McCain beat the Huck by 42-25.
Looks like McCain gave us a Straight Shot, not Straight Talk.
Thanks Tom!
Posted by: Ann | January 24, 2008 at 09:01 PM
live feed link for a legal gringo immigrant in Mexico?
Posted by: windansea | January 24, 2008 at 09:05 PM
I think McCain hired Hillary's makeup artist. :)
Posted by: Ann | January 24, 2008 at 09:07 PM
Very observant Ann!
Posted by: centralcal | January 24, 2008 at 09:09 PM
nevermind got it
Posted by: windansea | January 24, 2008 at 09:09 PM
McCain is already grouchy, it shouldn't take long for him to erupt into flames.
Posted by: centralcal | January 24, 2008 at 09:10 PM
Huckabee thinks a highway to somewhere will save America.
Posted by: JM Hanes | January 24, 2008 at 09:13 PM
Why is Ron Paul on stage instead of Fred? I miss him!
Posted by: Ann | January 24, 2008 at 09:16 PM
How many voters in FL are staying up this late to watch?
Not many of McCain's supporters...they ate dinner at 4 pm and probably were headed for bed right after the local news.
Posted by: hit and run | January 24, 2008 at 09:16 PM
Romney puts McCain on the defensive, but also gives him a chance to hit his anti-pork message.
Posted by: JM Hanes | January 24, 2008 at 09:17 PM
Why is Ron Paul on stage instead of Fred?
$$$
Posted by: hit and run | January 24, 2008 at 09:18 PM
Sheesh I was blogging it over in the Tiger thread. What a drag!
Posted by: Jane | January 24, 2008 at 09:18 PM
Thanks JMH for the heads up.
Posted by: Jane | January 24, 2008 at 09:19 PM
McCains economic policy
no more bridges to nowhere!
deep
Posted by: windansea | January 24, 2008 at 09:19 PM
I miss Fred too! Damn.
Posted by: centralcal | January 24, 2008 at 09:20 PM
JANE'S COMMENTARY ON THE TIGER THREAD:
------------------------------------------
The Economy:
Romney - are you bummed out that the President didn't follow your plan?
Romney wishes he went further. He notes his permanent tax cut and a savings plan. Talks about capital investment, and jobs, and the FHA crisis.
McCain - will you vote for the compromise?
Yes, and I'm disappointed that it didn't make the tax cuts permanent and cites uncertainty in people who are planning their 2010 budgets. Slams income tax and says it is important to not add pork - (good). He emphasizes tax cuts and spending restraint.
Rudy: Do you think it is a mistake that tax cuts are not in the package?
It doesn't go far enough. My tax package is better. It will make America more competitive. We are running business out of the country because of regulation.
Economy has taken precedence over national security. McCain you admit you don't know the economy very well.
McCain: Not true because I was at the Reagan revolution. I'm very well versed in economics and lots of economic savvy people support me, like Jack Kemp.
You are all tax cutters. Huckster, do you trust Romney?
That's up to the voters, I was great, and made great tax cuts (watch his nose grow) I'm concerned that we are borrowing from the Chinese and we will buy Chinese goods with the rebate. Instead, let's make I95 2 lanes wider and used American workers. I say that because I made a highway in Hope Arkansas and now it is the best place on earth.
Romney do you trust Mccain and Guiliani?
Yeah I trust them. We all want to see spending go down and taxes down. I did it in MA without raising taxes. (It's all changed Mitt, we are once again Taxachusetts.) Criticizes McCain's vote against tax cuts. He spent his life in the private sector and will create jobs.
McCain is raising fees the eqivilant of raising taxes. I voted against tax cuts because of spending. (These poor guys have to repeat everything over and over and over and I'm getting sick of it.) But he's proud of his record. And he's consistent and he will stop pork (YAY)
Paul: Should gvt have any role? We should not get involved in the funds rate. Gvt should lower taxes and get rid of regulation. And now his voice goes up another octive. The war is bad, bad bad bad.
Posted by: hit and run | January 24, 2008 at 09:20 PM
I like Giuliani on the global economy, don't know if it will sell in Peoria though.
Posted by: JM Hanes | January 24, 2008 at 09:21 PM
Straight Talk! Drink up!
Posted by: centralcal | January 24, 2008 at 09:22 PM
Interesting take from the Corner:
Posted by: hit and run | January 24, 2008 at 09:22 PM
I'm going to be drunk before the night is over. Everytime I hear the words "my friend" and "straight talk" I take a shot. Loopy already!
Posted by: Sue | January 24, 2008 at 09:24 PM
My straight friends talk....
Posted by: hit and run | January 24, 2008 at 09:24 PM
I'd like to see one of the other candidates decisively counter Huckabee's economic stance, because that's what they're going to have to do when they get to the general and face an admitted Democrat.
Posted by: JM Hanes | January 24, 2008 at 09:26 PM
Doesn't seem to be a lot of energy on the stage so far.
The democrats have and 18 point advantage in public opinion in dealing with the economy and he cites all the bad stats none of the good ones.
McCain - the democrats will continue spending. then says they won't give us enough entitlements.huh? Then on to pork, music to my ears.
Huckster: I wasn't in Washington, so it's not my fault. I was the only one saying the economy was bad, but I knew it was bad for the poor. Goes into healthcare, waitresses, bag handlers, talks about "trickle up" economy, single moms and he predicted it, and understands the totality of the pix.
Romney: I'll run on my record. Washington is broken. Talks about washington failures. We are the party of change and fiscal responsibilty. When republicans act like democrats America loses.
Rudy: I'm the only one who turned around an economy.
Posted by: Jane | January 24, 2008 at 09:27 PM
From the NRO Corner:
The editorial board of The New York Times is endorsing
Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton for the Democratic
presidential nomination
and Senator John McCain as the
Republican nominee.
I don't think that is helpful for McCain.
Posted by: Ann | January 24, 2008 at 09:32 PM
Good for Romney, taking on the Democrats on Iraq.
Posted by: JM Hanes | January 24, 2008 at 09:34 PM
"and Senator John McCain as the
Demublican nominee."
There. All fixed.
One of these geniuses might mention the growth in GDP over the past seven years. It ain't a hidden number.
Giuliani is looking very good.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | January 24, 2008 at 09:36 PM
Paul : I'm not part of that crowd. I insert my earmarks and then vote against the bill. It's a new era.
McCain: Our army is on the verge of breaking, we can't sustain our troops and Iraq, how will you do it economically and militarily?
Ans: You are wrong. We can sustain our army. He raises Hillary saying we want to surrender. Defends the war. Rumsfeld yadi yadi. Ignores the economics. "Let us win".
Romney: McAfree says the army is too small and poorly resourced. How do you double the size of it, without a draft.
Mitt recommends that we add 100,000 troops. Puts an economic bill in to give education to troops, improve the deal. He also comments on Hillary's surrender comment. "We cannot turn Iraq over to al Qaeda."
How audacious and arrogant for the democrats to take responsibility of the war. It's Petreaus not General Hillary Clinton.
6 out of 10 Americans say removing Saddam was not worth it (applause). Will you say the war was a good idea.
McCain - it was worth getting rid of Saddam and it was all Rumsfeld's fault. Now we are on the right track. The war was a good idea.
Good for him.
Rudy: Says Hillary was in favor when the polls were in favor. I'm for it not because of polls but because America is in a war, and we have to succeed. You can't have polls push you around.
Paul - it was bad and not worth it, and al Qaeda wasn't there. The Clinton administration made the policy in 1998.
Huckster: I supported the president and we owe him that he had courage. He made sure Saddam would not attack us. When the president acted this country was not united and it's important not to back away when polls go badly.
Mitt - I supported it then and now. Had some bad times but now it is going well. Retreat is a bad thing.
Posted by: Jane | January 24, 2008 at 09:38 PM
Well I like the fact that Paul said it was Clinton's war. Hillary probably had a heart attack.
Posted by: Jane | January 24, 2008 at 09:42 PM
Anybody notice that the Huckster is -- very politely, of course -- undermining McCain? Huckabee's not part of that Washington crowd, it's easy to second guess a president, etc.
Posted by: JM Hanes | January 24, 2008 at 09:42 PM
I find myself wishing the commercial break was longer. Sigh.
Posted by: JM Hanes | January 24, 2008 at 09:43 PM
Another Corner quote:
Posted by: hit and run | January 24, 2008 at 09:44 PM
Interesting that Romney directs his question to Giuliani. Interesting in that it's not necessarily a hostile question, but a potentially informative one.
Posted by: JM Hanes | January 24, 2008 at 09:45 PM
ooohhh - McCain is going after Huckabee. Whoopee Doo.
Posted by: centralcal | January 24, 2008 at 09:47 PM
McCain is going after Huckabee. Whoopee Doo
Sure, now that he's gotten Sylvester Stallone on his team, Chuck Norris isn't quite as scary.
Posted by: hit and run | January 24, 2008 at 09:49 PM
LOL, Hit! Now Paul is going after McCain. No one has gone after Romney yet? Who's left?
Posted by: centralcal | January 24, 2008 at 09:51 PM
When Huckabee loses, he should be the spokesman for the Fair Tax Movement. He understands it.
Posted by: vnjagvet | January 24, 2008 at 09:52 PM
Chuck Norris isn't quite as scary.
I am so glad you are here tonight, you do make me laugh.
Posted by: Ann | January 24, 2008 at 09:53 PM
No one has gone after Romney yet?
What? I thought everyone hated romney, jealous of his money and looks and wife and kids and smarts and success and optimism and...
Posted by: hit and run | January 24, 2008 at 09:54 PM
Huck asks a very pointed question of Romney on the Second Amendment. Answer could have been more forceful.
Posted by: vnjagvet | January 24, 2008 at 09:54 PM
By the way, I'm not watching the debate, I am second hand commenting on what I read here and elsewhere.
Much more fun, for I have a very vivid imagination.
My debate is MUCH more entertaining than the one you are watching.
[VIMH: Good times!]
You said it.
Posted by: hit and run | January 24, 2008 at 09:58 PM
I'm surprised McCain didn't say the way to address catastrophic coverage is to invest in green technologies. McCain is just one long series of generalities.
Posted by: JM Hanes | January 24, 2008 at 09:59 PM
So Giuliani says it for him.
Posted by: JM Hanes | January 24, 2008 at 09:59 PM
Hit: Thank you for injecting (very needed) humor in this very droll discussion (can't quite call it a debate!)
Posted by: centralcal | January 24, 2008 at 10:00 PM
vnj: "Answer could have been more forceful"
Not if you're Mitt Romney!
Posted by: JM Hanes | January 24, 2008 at 10:00 PM
Geraghty:
HAH!
Posted by: hit and run | January 24, 2008 at 10:01 PM
McCain was opposed to the tax cuts in 2001 and 2003; and they contributed significantly
to the economy.Question, did he vote for the Reagan tax cuts when he was in the House.The New York Times floated some fellow named Berman, who figures, declare when tax cuts will fold; it will bring more income. This is the same brilliance that
cut the deductability of interest on real estate dependent S&L portfolios. (Hello, McFly; is anybody home) People say they care about earmarks; but that's because they want the other district's earmarks! His economic advisor in 2000 was Kevin Haskell, author of Dow 36,000! People say they want to balance the budget; but they really don't (unless it's in a area where the cuts aren't readily seen in the short run (like Defense and Intell.)Consequently, the Company had the smallest number of CTs in the mid 90s. Under Deutch, they closed CIA bases in Hamburg!,Dusseldorf, and at least a dozen locations in Europe, purged 1,000 Agency assets, reprimanded a half dozen high level CIA personnel forincidental
reasons (Ward, Bearden, Andersen, et al)On other fronts, it's not a coincidence that Clinton 'balanced' the budget, the same way and right around the same time Enron changed the way it accrued profits; using dodgy accounts .The subprime mess is going to so slow down and then crescendo around 2010(Which really makes you think why they would want this prize right now)Citicorp, Merrill, Morgan, all knew the game, but they bided their time. One has to throw Goldman in to the mix although it usually
provides the lion's share of economic and other staffers (Corzine, Rubin, (when he brokered the HNG/merger that placed Lay atop Enron, the Mexican deals predevaluation
and bailout, Bolten, Paulson et al)Soros of course, along with Buffett, is always betting against the dollar;the latter shattering currencies in South Asia that made it a haven for AQ (Abu Sayyaf, Gemma
Islamiyah)Jim Rogers among a whole host of speculators and institutional investors are
always betting on Chinese, Brazilian, anything but American stocks. They use GAAP rules there right; please.
Posted by: narciso | January 24, 2008 at 10:01 PM
Cap and Trade, a.k.a., Voodoo Economics
Posted by: JM Hanes | January 24, 2008 at 10:01 PM
Candidates ask other candidates stuff.
Romney talks about China. Rudy - as we compete with China, how do we make sure we compete equally, what can we do economically to level the playing field.
"The reality is" is getting to be an old phrase. We need to work with China, get the ability to sue in China, careful of imports, see this as an opportunity. We can sell energy independance, health processes, technological processes. We need to overcome bill Clinton's peace dividend where he cut the military.
Mccain asks Huckster about the fair tax. How do you answer the criticism that it wouldn't hurt poor people?
People want the IRS abolished, quotes Dr. phil. It encouages work. The poor come out best of all because everyone gets $$$ back up to the amount of poverty. No one is working under the table.
Tim interjects - 93% of americans pay 15% or less. Huckster says that doesn't include the embedded and invisible tax.
Paul: to Mccain: What is your opinion of some group (I missed it)
McCain is gonna rely on Sec of treasury and all the people who now support him.
Huckster to Mitt: Re: 2nd Amendment - you supported Brady and a ban on assault weapons.
Mitt: I support the 2nd amendment and I would have supported assault weapons ban that was embraced by pro- and anti gun people, but I don't support new legislation.
Rudy to Mitt:
Property insurance - do you support a national catastrophic fund? He invokes McCain who retorts.
Mitt supports some kind of national catastrophic effort. Invokes the "poor people who live on the coastline" who of course all have multi-million dollar homes.
but other than that... Mitt talks about his health insurance plan.
Mccain gets to rebut - it's a terrible problem and weather is violent, we have to address this issue - talks about a government and not a free market solution. Ahhh finally mentions working with the insurers.
Russert brings up global warming. Rudy you are against a mandatory cap on greenhouse gasses. Rudy talks about technology as a solution, nuclear power plants, coal, incentives, biofuels, etc. Need a major national project. Negative incentives would ruin American industry and China and India would keep polluting.
McCain you are in favor of caps. "No I'm in favor of capping trade". It has to be a global agreement. We need nuclear power. Climate change is real. It causes violent weather changes.
Posted by: Jane | January 24, 2008 at 10:02 PM
I think there was an agreement in the green room to be civil, therefore making the democrats look like useful fools.
Posted by: Ann | January 24, 2008 at 10:04 PM
We are missing "Ace of Cakes"
Posted by: Jane | January 24, 2008 at 10:04 PM
McCain: Manmade global climate change is real but just suppose it isn't.
Me: Okay. I suppose it isn't. Or I suppose it is real but not manmade.
McCain: I get to have it both ways. I can say it is real but I'm covering my butt in case it isn't.
Me: Straight talk.
Drink up!
Posted by: Sue | January 24, 2008 at 10:04 PM
It will be fun to watch Hillary hedge on surrender.
Posted by: Jane | January 24, 2008 at 10:05 PM
"It causes violent weather changes."
Only when the change is bad. Otherwise, it's just weather.
Posted by: JM Hanes | January 24, 2008 at 10:05 PM
It causes violent weather changes.
Uh, like REDUCED hurricane activity.
Posted by: hit and run | January 24, 2008 at 10:06 PM
How to increase the Army by 400k without a draft? I dunno, ask Reagan or HW Bush. The Army was 400k bigger during their terms.
Why not a segment where the candidates ask the moderators questions?
"Tim Russert, Andrea Mitchell said Valerie Plame's CIA employment was well-known. Did you know about it? If not, why did you never challenge her on that statement?"
Posted by: bgates | January 24, 2008 at 10:06 PM
Well, Voodoo Economics is probably the best approach to a nonexistent problem. I'd rather see a lot of spells cast and incantations recited than money spent.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | January 24, 2008 at 10:06 PM
Incantations are the best weapon against harridans, witches, harpies and the like, aren't they Rick?
Posted by: vnjagvet | January 24, 2008 at 10:09 PM
Drink up!
Done! All I have is half a bottle of crappy organic wine (don't believe the hype) but I'm drinking. Please keep the drink cues coming, I can't watch the debate. My husband refuses to turn it on.
Posted by: Porchlight | January 24, 2008 at 10:09 PM
On the reduced hurricane
activitystrength, PLEASE read this post on the Corner...David Freddoso called the reduced hurricane strength -- as a joke! -- six weeks ago, before the real report came out.
Posted by: hit and run | January 24, 2008 at 10:10 PM
Did McCain, in fact, get a majority of Republican voters? We're waiting for states without Democrat & Independent crossover, for that test. I can understand why McCain won't address Republican objections point by painful point.
Posted by: JM Hanes | January 24, 2008 at 10:10 PM
Nothing like a glass of Port to polish off for the debate. Warms the innards.
Posted by: vnjagvet | January 24, 2008 at 10:11 PM
My husband refuses to turn it on.
In today's republican campaign, the question is not whether the debate is interesting, informative or entertaining.
No, the real question is, when you turn the debate on, does it return the favor?
Posted by: hit and run | January 24, 2008 at 10:13 PM
Thank you all for sparing me the agony of actually listening to this.
Posted by: clarice | January 24, 2008 at 10:14 PM
Mitt is suddenly the focus. Russert and Williams knows who to address the hard questions too? No?
Posted by: centralcal | January 24, 2008 at 10:15 PM
Any of these guys could win a lot of votes taking a shot at Tim Russert.
Posted by: bgates | January 24, 2008 at 10:16 PM
I do think Romney is dominating this debate.
Posted by: JM Hanes | January 24, 2008 at 10:16 PM
Oh, Hit, that has to be the worst ad on the air right now!
Posted by: Porchlight | January 24, 2008 at 10:16 PM
Rudy: Latest polls say you are losing. What has happened.
This is a very competitive race and I'm going to come from behind like the giants. (uh Rudy they are gonna lose next week) I've lulled everyone into a false sense of security.
McCain: Your mother said the republican party will have to hold its nose and vote for you.
How will you unite the party?
I'm proud of my record on Judges. I won the majority of republican votes. National security is the biggest issue and I can fix the economy. Conservatives are concerned about climate change. I can keep Israel independant. Rumsfeld again. Pork. I pout my country above my party.
Romney: Hillary is a team with Bill. How would you run against that.
I can't imagine Bill in the WH. I'm not running against Bill. Hill is so out of step with the american people, she's bad on taxes, healthcare, her approach to Iraq, just get out. She is exactly what is wrong with washington. That's the last thing America needs. Change.
How much of your own money have you spent on this race this far.
We will report that when it's due. Russert perseveres, I've raised more money than anyone else, and I haven't spent as much as Corzine, Bloomberg or Forbes. I think it is important to invest my own money and I don't owe anyone.
Are you trying to buy the nomination.
I care deeply about this, and I've been succesful enough to save this money and I want my kids to inherit a great country.
I think he knocked it out of the park.
Back at him. A mormon would have a hard time uniting the country.
Mitt: I don't believe that Americans will choose a president based on his church.
Paul: Social security - he wants to abolish it. Get the young people out, end the war.
Yada yada yada/
Posted by: Jane | January 24, 2008 at 10:17 PM
What has NBC done to threaten the audience if they respond in any manner? Is there an audience?
Not good!
Posted by: centralcal | January 24, 2008 at 10:17 PM
That is why NBC - MSNBC tanks in the ratings, month after month!
Posted by: centralcal | January 24, 2008 at 10:18 PM
Thanks Hit, I watched that while Ron Paul was talking and increased the volume enough so I didn't hear his answer. Darn
Posted by: Ann | January 24, 2008 at 10:20 PM
I can agree with McCain on something for a change: "Conservatives are concerned about climate change". Damn right we are. It's a bunch of nonsense invented by the Goracle. I drove my pickup a couple extra miles today to help reduce hurricanes.
Posted by: Bill in AZ | January 24, 2008 at 10:20 PM
centraical:
Williams has admonished the crowd not to clap etc.
Posted by: JM Hanes | January 24, 2008 at 10:22 PM
Did McCain, in fact, get a majority of Republican voters?
CNN entrance polls in SC, Huck 32, McCain 31 in registered republicans.
Posted by: hit and run | January 24, 2008 at 10:22 PM
Y'know what guys. Even the worst of the worst of our candidates are better than the Democrat options!
Posted by: centralcal | January 24, 2008 at 10:22 PM
Clarice, I was just going to post that I wished Clarice was here. Good to see ya, as always.
Posted by: Ann | January 24, 2008 at 10:23 PM
If they have the brass to go after Mitt on the Mormon question will they ask McCain what brand of walker he prefers? I'm betting no.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | January 24, 2008 at 10:24 PM
Russert has a truly obnoxious manner.
Posted by: JM Hanes | January 24, 2008 at 10:25 PM
oh, JMH, usually I agree with you. But, actually he has much more than an obnoxious mannner. He IS obnoxious personified.
Posted by: centralcal | January 24, 2008 at 10:26 PM
Thnx, Ann. I am grateful that Jane and Hit are here. Jane, for the facts. Hit, to keep me awake.
Posted by: clarice | January 24, 2008 at 10:29 PM
The audience doesn't care for the New York Times. Who'd a thunk it?
Posted by: JM Hanes | January 24, 2008 at 10:29 PM
centraLcal
;-)
Posted by: Spelling Gestapo | January 24, 2008 at 10:30 PM
Huck: "McCain doesn't lack rigor"
Give it a couple hours, that fades.
Posted by: bgates | January 24, 2008 at 10:31 PM
ooh spelling gestapo - puhleeze give me some slack. I am drinking coctails and trying (with handicaps) to type at the same time. whew!!
Posted by: centralcal | January 24, 2008 at 10:34 PM
Huckabee doesn't want to impose his faith on anybody -- he just wants to bring the Constitution in line with God.
Posted by: JM Hanes | January 24, 2008 at 10:34 PM
O.K.
I've come to a conclusion on McCain. McCain is a doofus. There, now I feel better. Global warming, bah. Go after Bin Laden, bah. All Rumsfelds fault, Bah. A pox on McCain. If McCains on the ballot in November I'm writing in Fred. In fact, I'm writing in Fred on February 5th. Damn the Torpdoes and all that.
Posted by: Pofarmer | January 24, 2008 at 10:34 PM
oops. cocktails. It is getting harder and harder to type.
Posted by: centralcal | January 24, 2008 at 10:35 PM
HUckster - how will you save social security - first he attacks Mitt and his money and he looks like a jerk.
The fair tax will fix it. (Russert - that's unlikey) Huckster - we have to talk about what we can do not what we can't do.
Romney: will you do what social security what reagan did (we hear someone whisper - "raise taxes") who was that. Romney won't raise taxes.
You can have personal accounts, you can change the benfit calculation for wealthy, you can push out the retirement age.
Rudy: Immigration plan calls for all people to learn English why do you have a spanish ad.
"The reality is"
Stop people at the border. Teach new behavior.
Rudy - the wet foot dry foot policy - why should a cuban be allowed to stay here but not others.
The policy came in the 60's, Castro is bad, there is a presumption in the immigration law that you are fleeing a bad dictator, otherwise you have to prove it.
Huckster; Chuck Norris said McCain was too old. Do you agree or disagree. I didn't disagree with him because he was standing next to me. Boy he can fling it can't he?
McCain - now I have Stallone he will take care of Norris. What's the deal with McCain's nose?
Rudy: NY Times endorses Clinton and McCain, they say you are narrow, secretive vindictive man, how can you defend?
I probably never did anything the NY times wanted and if I had I wouldn't be a conservative republican. Good answer.
"The reality is" we haave serious ideological differences"
Another campaign faxed us that Mitt changes positions like the wind. NY Times said you were most disliked.
I'm not going to DC to make friends with politicians. Look at my record as governor.
This is great they are getting their questions from the NY Times. No bias there.
McCain: LA Times says you have a temper.
It's not an impediment. He praises Rudy.
Huckster said his use of faith in the campaign gave him a queasy feeling.
That's his problem. It's who I am.
Paul: You won't stick to your party and might launch a 3rd party. (No one is worried about that I don't think). Good riddance.
Paul: I'm not leaving. We don't act like republicans yadi yadi yadi. We stopped the vietnam war that the democrats started. WOW
I assume this is the end.
Posted by: Jane | January 24, 2008 at 10:35 PM
Oh please. Did they really have to end the debate on Ron Paul?
Posted by: JM Hanes | January 24, 2008 at 10:36 PM
Huckabee's good on the religion answers. Scares me. Are they listening to anything else he says?
Posted by: Sue | January 24, 2008 at 10:37 PM
Well from my perspective Mitt won hands down. He was good tonite. The moderators sucked of course.
Posted by: Jane | January 24, 2008 at 10:38 PM
Is anyone else doing analysis besides these bozos?
Posted by: Jane | January 24, 2008 at 10:39 PM
Go Mitt! Down with NBC. Macacca!
Posted by: centralcal | January 24, 2008 at 10:40 PM
This is what I got out of this debate, I still want Cindy McCain's wardrobe and Ann Romney looks like a first lady.
I know....HEH!!
Posted by: Ann | January 24, 2008 at 10:43 PM
Oops, channel surfing here, posted these on the wrong thread:
Andrea Mitchell thinks McCain was reassuring to Republican conservatives? She'll probably deny that's what she meant tomorrow.
I love Mitt's opener on the Billary question, btw. Probably because that's exactly how I feel. Russert was hoping for something juicy when he asked "What does that mean?" -- like we don't know exactly what that meant? -- a question Romney wisely ignored
Huckabee has been running against the Clinton machine in Arkansas all these years!
Posted by: JM Hanes | January 24, 2008 at 10:46 PM
Muchas gracias, Janeo!
Posted by: JM Hanes | January 24, 2008 at 10:47 PM
Oh Lordy, Chris Matthews & Tim Russert as simultaneous talking heads -- Yikes!
Posted by: JM Hanes | January 24, 2008 at 10:49 PM
I don't know if I know how to link a youtube video but here is a link if you guys want to cleanse your palate. I found myself wanting him to run for president. And he's a Canadian. ::grin::
http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=6n3SdV2cwn4&NR=1>Kickin' Ass and Taking Numbers
If you don't know the background on this, google Mark Steyn and Canadian HRC.
Posted by: Sue | January 24, 2008 at 10:51 PM
Jane,
Thanks again. I agree with your assessment concerning Mitt winning. I would also note that Mario Cuomo's PR flack targeted Mitt with the toughest attack while tossing softballs to the geriatric. The NYT endorsement today of McCain was a lovely touch - a go to source for every Republican as they make their decisions.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | January 24, 2008 at 10:52 PM
Yeah, the NYT endorsement is like the curse of football teams on the front page of Sports Illustrated.
Posted by: Ann | January 24, 2008 at 10:55 PM