Rudy Giuliani | MY Vast Right Wing Conspiracy

Archive for the 'Rudy Giuliani' Category

(Chronologically Listed)

Hey, Pennsylvania: Obama is better than you hicks!

What an arrogant, elitist, out-of-touch, ignorant, closed-minded asshat.

You go into these small towns in Pennsylvania and, like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing’s replaced them…And they fell through the Clinton administration, and the Bush administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not.

Oh, but he will. LOL. That’s not the good part, though.

And it’s not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.

Shorter Obama: You’re all a bunch of ignorant, xenophobic, fundie hicks, but that’s okay, because you little people can’t help it.

I’m not a Pennsylvanian or a small-towner (well, maybe I am, compared to those in the liberal meccas of Chicago, San Francisco, Boston, or NYC), but I’ve known more small-towners in my adult life than not. In fact, I married two–one from Pennsylvania, in fact, and the other from the southern tier of New York State (for all practical purposes, just like PA). I’ve got news for Obama and his ilk: You don’t know jack about those people. Far be it from me to defend my exes, but damn. “Those people” are very representative of America as a whole, Barry. You FAIL. Your contempt for “flyover country” will not be forgotten.

This is typical liberal elitist crap that his latte liberal supporters “know” is the “truth”–at least in their sheltered, pretty little world. I’m sure his remarks didn’t strike anyone in his audience at the time as remarkable; in fact, they probably were nodding their heads in agreement. I’m sure Obama didn’t even understand how his remarks would appear to the rest of the voting public outside his little amen corner.

What’s funny: his apparent disdain for religion. It just goes to show how his “church” and his “spiritual mentor” have nothing to do with Christianity, but instead, class warfare. And worse, limousine liberal class warfare, because they think they know what’s best for the “little people.” In fact, they have absolutely no idea–everything they stand for is old, tired, and failed. If liberals gave a damn about the “little people,” they’d support things like school choice, school vouchers, and lower, flat taxes (unlike them, I’ve done the math). They wouldn’t look at children as “punishment.” They wouldn’t be pushing the disadvantaged and minorities to abort their children at every turn, regardless of whether they believe it’s “better” for those people to have fewer children. It’s not The Elites’ decision to make.

Mayhill Fowler at the despicable Huffington Post (the first comment says: “he is right”), who reported Obama’s faux pas:

Wednesday in Levittown, Obama told his audience, “We can find areas of common ground.” But if we are going to move from divisiveness to comity, then Obama must show that he can lead us to see one another at our best and to measure one another at our highest worth.

Exactly. Obama is quickly becoming even more polarizing than Hillary Clinton, because he just can’t hide his true self forever. Common ground? Frankly, I can find more “common ground” with Shrillary than I’d ever find with Obama. “Just words” is all he has, and those words, those platitudes, are so obviously false that it makes me howl with derision.

Here’s common ground I’ve found with Billary: “Give me a break. This whole thing is the biggest fairy tale I’ve ever seen.”

Oh, I forgot. Criticizing Teh Obamessiah is “racist.” Go to hell, lying leftard bottom-feeders.

HopeChange™. NO THANK YOU. I spit on his elitist, arrogant latte liberalism.

UPDATE: The McCain campaign responds:

“Barack Obama apparently believes that for Americans less privileged than him, religion is an economic-based and not faith-based condition,” Mark Salter, a senior campaign adviser for Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., tells ABC News.

“It is hardly news that Senator Obama’s ‘new’ approach to politics is based on the presumption that voters are easily fooled,” Salter continues, “but the arrogance and elitism he shows here is truly astonishing, and very revealing about how he would govern this country.”
[...]
McCain adviser Steve Schmidt called Obama’s thoughts on small town Pennsylvanians a “remarkable statement and extremely revealing…It shows an elitism and condescension towards hardworking Americans that is nothing short of breathtaking. It is hard to imagine someone running for president who is more out of touch with average Americans.”

Breathtaking, indeed. To put it politely.

From South Flyover Country to you, Barack Obama:

Johnny Cash finger

A brokered convention? Let’s hope not.

God, I hope not. In the Washington Post’s The Trail blog, the possibility is considered.

Yes, yes, we know. Every four years, the political class, including wise-acre journalists, gets all caught up in breathless speculation about the prospect of a brokered convention. After all, no presidential nomination has required more than a single ballot since 1952 and the prospect of actual drama seems like such a refreshing thought at conventions that in recent times have been sucked dry of any suspense whatsoever. And then every four years, the notion evaporates as modern political reality takes hold again.
…
The talk has only escalated as Iowa and New Hampshire voters weighed in. “None of our candidates seem to be able to break through,” former Pennsylvania senator Rick Santorum said on Fox News last week as voting began in the Granite State. “And if you look at the candidates, all have serious problems. I think, it’s my prediction, I think we’re headed for a brokered convention. I don’t think we’re going to get a nominee.” Former House speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) even postulated that a contested convention could be a useful thing for a Republican Party trying to find its way after President Bush. “I just think there’s nothing unhealthy about the Republican Party having a serious discussion,” he said Sunday on ABC’s “This Week.” “We are at the end of the George W. Bush era. We are at the end of the Reagan era. We’re at a point in time where we’re about to start redefining … the nature of the Republican Party in response to what the country needs.”

The conventional wisdom, of course, is that a brokered convention is good news for political journalists and junkies but bad news for a party. While the opposition rallies around a single leader in the spring, your party is divided and wasting resources with internal fighting all the way until the end of summer.

Well, why the hell do you think Kos wanted Romney to win Michigan? (For the record, I doubt they had much effect on the outcome–I think Romney would have won without the idiotarian help.)

But the point is correct: the longer this drags out, the faster the candidates’ campaign war chests drain. Well, except Romney’s, of course, but I’m not yet confident that he can win in November anyway. And let’s face it–Hillary and Obama have massive war chests. Our guys? We’ve got a lot of catching up to do, and we won’t catch up until we have a nominee, if we do at all. Remember, Bush had a huge pile of money going in to the primaries in 2000. This time around, we’re scraping around to get money for ad buys in each state because the big donors are waiting for a sure thing. I mean, if you’re looking to wisely invest big bucks, which one do you bet on? Thompson, who hasn’t even come close to a primary win (yet)? McCain, who has only won New Hampshire and has issues with many conservatives, but as of now is the only candidate who polls a win against the Democrats? Huckabee, who’s only won Iowa but has a dedicated base? Romney, with his “two golds and two silvers” but whose support looks soft? Or Giuliani, whose campaign looks dead but promises to come to life in Florida? A year ago, I figured Giuliani would be the nominee. Hell, two years ago, I figured George Allen would be the nominee. Who knows? Michigan didn’t decide anything, and apparently, neither will South Carolina.

I don’t want a brokered convention–at all. Nor do I think there will actually be one. Sure, it’d be fun to watch, but I want to WIN. Badly. I just wonder if other Republicans want to win as badly as I do–or more to the point, as badly as the Democrats do.

What this year’s primary season is showing, though, is the huge diversity of views in this country; the issues important to Michigan voters, for example, are not the issues important to Iowa or New Hampshire voters. And as we’ll see in South Carolina, Florida, and on “Super Tuesday,” those states’ issues will be different as well. Whichever candidate can best represent the issues of all regions should rightfully be the nominee. This is why I think Fred Thompson made a mistake getting in to the process late–he didn’t have the early months for his views–approved of by most conservatives–to become well-known. This is also why I have doubts about John McCain, Rudy Giuliani, and especially Mike Huckabee: they all have things that are objectionable to most Republican voters to varying degrees. But so does Mitt Romney, and I have doubts about Romney’s electability in November. I personally can live with the disagreements I have with each of them, some more than others, but can and will other Republican voters?

How badly DO Republicans want to win? And are those like me the only ones who think a Democratic presidency in 2008 would be a disaster, not “good for the GOP” as some conservatives say (wrongly, IMHO)? Why are we demanding perfect candidates now when we never did before? I say that it’s because we’re more informed about the candidates’ voting records and things they’ve said, thanks to the 24-hour news cycle and the internet (especially with blogs and YouTube). No longer are we stuck with the spin machines and sound bites; we can do our own research and either confirm our biases or find things that are “unacceptable. I’d say that even if Ronald Reagan were running in 2008, there would be people who would find things “unacceptable” as well. Remember, Reagan was once a Democrat, and a union president (the SAG) at that! (Oh noes, a flip-flop!)

Again, I don’t think we’ll have a brokered convention, but if voters insist on perfection and we end up with no candidate having enough delegates, it could happen–and this won’t be a brokered convention like those that existed decades ago, not with 24-hour news and the internet. We also won’t end up with a “perfect candidate,” either. If it happens, I assure you, we will not win in November.

(Note: I left out L. Ron Paul Hubbard and sadly, Duncan Hunter, because they’re irrelevant to the discussion, obviously.)

Political Endorsements for Geeks

This is my favorite candidate endorsement post ever. I’m not going to excerpt it, because it won’t make sense in excerpts. Just go read it.

Related, in plain English.

Fox News Republican “Forum” (Debate)

I hate live-blogging with a passion, but I’m gonna sorta wing it.

Loved that pissing contest between Mitt & Huck, especially “You make up facts faster than you talk.” It’s the truth, isn’t it? Heh.

I’m glad to see Fred talking about Social Security; it needs fixing, and his remark that “nobody makes the case” (cough W cough) for what needs to be done is exactly why it unfortunately wasn’t fixed earlier in Bush’s Presidency.

Oh, brother…Huckabee and his populism. Excuse me while I throw up with the class wars. I’m not sure if Millionaire Mitt should be the one to slap that populist crap down, though–although it’s hard to argue with the knowledge of someone who’s made $200+ million on his own.

God, please, someone, destroy that FairTax nonsense since Chris Wallace mentioned it. Yes, we need IRS reform (or abolition), but not not not with the unFair Tax, “pre-bates” be damned. Giuliani is avoiding the subject altogether, instead talking about how he reduced poverty and welfare in New York City.

OMG, yay–Fred’s talking about a “flatter” tax. Yay! Flat Tax is the way to go! Like he said, what’s good about the Fair Tax is 1) reform, and 2) simplicity, but that’s it. I’m sorry, why the hell isn’t every conservative supporting Fred when he talks about taxes? Hello?

Oh no. They’re going to talk about “change.” I had enough of that last night during the Dems’ debate, thanks. Blech.

McCain mentions the change in Iraq, and that’s the most significant “change” we’ve seen in a very long time. No arguing with him on that–and it really, really matters. Mitt says someone from Washington can’t change Washington; I don’t really agree. I do think John McCain knows how to implement reform–he’s made it a focus of his political career, including with McCain-Feingold (regardless of how much we don’t like it, it was “change”). Of course, I think Mitt could have a reforming effect as well; he’s done it in the real world.

And…once again, Fred says the right thing. It’s not about “change,” it’s about leadership.

Yeah, Rudy! Hillobama wants “change” in the form of tax increases and retreat and defeat in the war. Damn right.

Break time, time to celebrate RON PAUL NOT BEING THERE! Yay!!! This round’s on me!
stein hoist
Read the rest of this entry »

Sooper-seekrit note to the 2008 Republican candidates’ e-campaigns

I get email from all the top-tier Republican candidates’ campaigns (I’ve asked for it), and I just have to give this quick constructive criticism.

When your emails are mostly criticism or attacks on other candidates, you are really losing my interest fast. Tell me why your guy is the one who deserves my vote–quit wasting bytes by telling me how bad Candidate X sucks. Please.

Some campaigns are doing this e-campaign better than others, and they deserve credit for it. Kudos to the McCain and Thompson campaigns for selling them. It’s no accident that those two are (by far, mostly due to the issues) my top two candidates at this point–I’ve had more about them dropped in my lap by their respective campaigns, and far fewer negative comments (and I hesitate in saying “negative” in their cases) on other candidates from them. Thank you, Patrick Hynes and Jon Henke, for keeping on point and for allowing Fred Thompson and John McCain to continue looking “Presidential.” And they do have that “Presidential” quality. Extra kudos to Patrick Hynes and John McCain for your energy and persistence, despite the quite vocal naysayers on the internets. It’s a testament to the strength of the candidate and the campaign that despite some serious differences on a couple issues, McCain is in my top two. There was once a time when I was vociferously against John McCain’s candidacy, but that time is long gone. Iraq is be the main reason for it, but it’s not the only reason.

Come on, you guys, I like Rudy, Mitt, and Mike, too. Quit bickering–and good grief, call off the dogs in blog comments, please. These three candidates all have a good chance at the nomination, but you’re going to lose that chance if you don’t knock it off–at least among people like me who haven’t taken a blood vow to any candidate yet (and there are a lot of us). You’ve all got to overcome some problems on the issues as it is. I don’t demand ideological purity or perfection, but you’re not doing a good job convincing me why I should be comfortable with your guy on those issues (abortion, taxes, guns, illegal immigration, spending, etc.). Maybe I’m just asking too much, expecting to be spoken to like a reasonably intelligent and inquisitive voter.

This isn’t the time for this level of negative campaigning. The general election season is that time.

The DNCNN-YouTube-Idiocracy Debate

Summed up nicely from the brilliant Wuzzadem:

Republicans' CNN/YouTube debate

I laughed out loud.

All the dirt from the GOP’s Idiocracy Debate at Michelle Malkin’s (and more by following the trackbacks).

Let this be the nail in the coffin for stupidity like YouTube debates. PLEASE.

Best comment seen so far, from Tim Lamb of Waynesville, Ohio:

This is a stupid format. What is next? Dancing with the Presidential Candidates!! The Great Presidential Race!! Presidential Idol!! Give me a break. How about a serious format?

Amen.

Oh, and yeah, I did watch it after all. If I were a good blogger, I’d have posted my commentary about it here. Instead, everything I had to say during the debate is over in the comments at Ace’s. You know, where people actually comment.

Winners & Losers:

Most Presidential: McCain, as usual. Plus, he got extra bonus points for his Presidential demeanor in contrast to the barking moonbat debate troll standing next to him. You know who that is. I personally would have been happier if McCain had roundhouse-kicked RP, but that’s not gonna happen. Oh well.

Most Charismatic (not in the religious sense): Mike Huckabee, as usual. He comes across really well in these debates, but eventually people are going to look deeper and I suspect not like everything he’s for.

Most Surprising (and Welcome) Line: “I was wrong.” Well played by Romney on the abortion issue.

Funniest Line: The bit at the end with Rudy and the Yankees. Other than that bit, he was off last night.

Most in Danger of Hemorrhaging Support: Fred. Fred, oh Fred…wherefore art thou, Fred?

Candidate with the Most Soft Support and Weakest Campaign: Duncan Hunter. I have yet to see any conservative speak ill of Duncan Hunter, but dude’s got like $86 in his campaign. He was good in the debate as always, but it’s meaningless–especially when he only gets in about three sentences. Then again, Huckabee once was in the same boat. I don’t see it with Hunter, though.

Failure of Imagination: Tom Tancredo, on the Mars program. Also Huckabee (and Mitt?), but Tancredo especially. Just one more reason why I wouldn’t vote for him.

Crazy Troll Who Needs To Take A Xanax Before The Debates: Obviously, Ron Paul. I loved that someone asked him the CFR question, because he showed his crazy conspiracy theorist ass for the whole country. And again, McCain should’ve roundhouse kicked him on that Vietnam crap. As soon as I heard it, I was just waiting for McCain’s response. But no point in continuing on the Troll–I detest everything about him, everything he says. He could say “kittens and babies are adorable” and it would irritate me, because he is apparently incapable of speaking without sounding like a raving lunatic (again, contrast that with McCain).

Winner of the Debate: Hillary Clinton, courtesy of the Clinton News Network. Again.

Loser: Ron Paul, because I despise him and his supporters. Okay, the real loser: CNN. What a disgrace.

Update: Ace says General Kerr was the winner.

The clear winner of the Republican debate was Gen. Keith Kerr, a member of Hillary’s LGBT steering committee, given approximately half as much time to voice his opinions as Tom Tancredo or Duncan Hunter or Fred Thompson.

Exactly. More post-mortem from the disgraceful Idiocracy Debate there, too.

Illegal Voting

On November 28, 1872, a U.S. deputy marshall came to Susan B. Anthony’s door and arrested her. The crime: on November 5, 1872, Susan B. Anthony cast her vote in the Presidential Elections. The charge: Illegal voting.

The Fourteenth Amendment, adopted in 1868, had declared that all people born in the United States were citizens and that no legal privileges could be denied to any citizen. Anthony decided to challenge this amendment. Saying that women were citizens and the amendment did not restrict the privilege of voting to men, she registered to vote in Rochester, New York, on November 1, 1872. Four days later, she and fifteen other women voted in the presidential election. All sixteen women were arrested, but only Anthony was brought before a court.

Her trial, United States v. Susan B. Anthony, began on June 17, 1873. The presiding judge opposed women’s suffrage and wrote his decision before the trial even had started. Refusing to let Anthony testify, he ordered the jury to find her guilty, then sentenced her to pay a $100 fine. She refused to pay “a dollar of your unjust penalty,” and no further action was taken against her.

Anthony spent the next fifty-plus years of her life fighting for the right to vote. She would work tirelessly: giving speeches, petitioning Congress and state legislatures, publishing a feminist newspaper–all for a cause that would not succeed until the ratification of the Nineteenth Amendment fourteen years after her death in 1906.

—–

The right to vote.

On November 7, 2006, I voted a straight Republican ticket, despite my misgivings about the direction the Republican party has taken, despite the fact that it has abandoned every one of the conservative values that are the core of my political agenda. I cast my vote based on one issue, the War on Terrorism, despite the fact that I have seen this administration make concessions to and negotiate with terrorists. I did this because anything is better than the cut and run appeasement policy that the democrats stand for. I cast my vote for people who want to do things I am dead set against, such as pro-amnesty Charlie Crist, who, thanks to my vote, is now Governor of my state.

I was not alone in this and although I shared their feelings, I was horrified at the number of conservatives, and the number of republicans, who stayed home. None of the democrat wins were really big wins, races were decided by a few thousand votes, but in the end, it was a big win, and they won, because we stayed home. If you think your one vote doesn’t matter, look at the numbers on the Webb/Steele race.

And now, I watch President George Bush fawn over the leader of the most active terrorist group in the world, all a flutter on the chance to reward them for their constant and continuous terror attacks with a state of their own, mapping out an appeasement strategy, even while their minions were busy killing innocents in Israel.

Either the entire world has gone crazy, or I have.

And now I’m supposed to believe that a stark raving liberal who believes that Americans have the wholesale right to kill babies and that they should be able to do so at the taxpayers’ expense, a man who believes that I should pay for healthcare for criminals who sneak across the border, a man who believes in taking away my right to bear arms, is the great white hope for this Country and for the conservative movement. Sorry, but I don’t believe it and I am already so damm sick of having Rudy shoved down my throat, what will next few months be like?

I owe something to people like Susan B. Anthony, who tirelessly and endlessly sacrificed for my right to vote, and I realize that the perfect candidate is not going to ride out of the sunrise on a white horse anytime soon. I know there will never, ever be a perfect candidate.

But how much compromising on my personal beliefs am I supposed to do?

I considered it last November, but now, for the first time ever, staying home truly seems like a viable option.

and I hate that!

Musings of a paranoid leftard

Linda S. Heard, a ’specialist writer’ on middle east affairs, unburdens herself on the pages of Gulf News, with her opus “Giuliani is Mideast’s worst nightmare”.

This woman’s paranoid leftard bilge is so self-evidently idiotic that it’s almost beyond satire. I could have been reading The Onion.

As the months pass, the next election looks like a race between Democrat Hillary Clinton and the former mayor of New York Rudy Giuliani for the Republicans. I’m no fan of the coolly calculating Clinton but given the alternative, she’s the one I’ll be rooting for.

At the same time, I have serious doubts as to whether certain American states are ready for a woman president and although the American voters have shown they’re fed up with Republicans they may reluctantly settle for the usual middle-aged white man over a former First Lady, no matter how bright and formidable she may be.

Note the standard lefty disclaimer that she doesn’t like Hillary (lefties always retain the position that nobody is liberal enough; that way when Hillary doesn’t nationalize grocery stores they can ‘march’, bang pots and complain that she’s in the pocket of Big Retail). And I wonder which states she might be thinking aren’t ready for a woman President…..possibly the RED ones? You know, the ones where Margaret Thatcher is fondly-remembered, widely-revered and heroine-worshiped?

Still, on to the case against Giuliani.

A clue to Giuliani’s leanings emerged during the visit of Prince Al Walid Bin Talal to Ground Zero in October 2001. Bearing a $10 million donation for disaster relief, the Saudi prince suggested the US reexamine its Middle East policies and adopt a balanced stance towards Palestinian aspirations. Giuliani’s response was to hand back the cheque.

Yeah. How awful. Giuliani refused to accept the implication that the 19 Saudi nationals who had just slaughtered 3,000 Americans were driven to it by our Middle East policies. What a heel.

Giuliani makes no bones about the fact he would use military force to set-back Iran’s nuclear programme. In September, he promised to use America’s military might to prevent Iran pursuing its nuclear ambitions should he be elected president.

She doesn’t even attempt to deny that Iran is developing nuclear weapons, which presumably is of no concern. What she dislikes is Giuliani stating clearly that he’ll prevent the suicidal psychopathic rogue state from obtaining weapons that could be used to attack the United States or our allies. One of whom, Israel (who she obviously hates; it’s on the lefty must-do list), Iran has repeatedly and explicitly stated should be ‘wiped off the map’.

It’s also worth recalling that in 1995, he banned the former Palestinian president Yasser Arafat from attending events held in New York to celebrate the UN’s 50th anniversary and ordered his removal from a concert held at the Lincoln Centre. It’s not surprising that a panel of eight Israeli experts assembled by the daily Ha’aretz determined Giuliani is the best presidential candidate for Israel.

Ahh yes, he banned the ‘former Palestinian president’ Yasser Arafat from attending events held in New York. That would be the same Yasser Arafat that wanted to address the UN wearing a sidearm, who repeatedly funded and supported deadly terror attacks against Israel, who sponsored kidnapping, torture and murder of Israeli military personnel, who embezzled hundreds of millions of dollars in aid intended to assist the poor souls living under his corrupt and brutal reign, etc, etc, etc. It’s shame that nobody has the balls to ban Ahmadinejad and Chavez from entering.

A Giuliani presidential tenure would also be extremely bad news for Americans who value the few civil liberties they have left. He strongly backs the controversial Patriot Act; is an advocate for wire-tapping and domestic spying, and isn’t sure whether “water-boarding” or sleep deprivation should be considered as “torture”.

Where do you start? Which civil liberties is she referring to? Those of possible Al Qaeda operatives? And when did Giuliani state he supported ‘domestic spying’? That is simply unsubstantiated nonsense.

As things stand, Clinton holds a small tenuous lead over Giuliani in the polls overall. But in some of the states that count, such as Florida, the latter is ahead. Giuliani is also grabbing a large chunk of the evangelical vote despite his penchant for divorcing his wives for girlfriends.

No mention of Mrs. Clinton’s penchant for staying with a husband who used the Oval Office as a knocking-shop for servicing the White House interns.

But, she saves the best ’til last:

These already dangerous times are becoming even more dangerous. It’s a pity that Nobel Peace Prize recipient Al Gore has refused to put his crusade against climate change on hold to join the fray and perhaps even save the day.

No further comment needed.

Florida GOP Debate - live blog

First, you can either listen to–er, read–me babble, or you can read the live-blogging at The Fred File (the official Fred! campaign blog). They’re also live-blogging it in Spanish here.

I’m not gonna do a play-by-play of every single thing said, but here we go…

HAHA, Fred! gets in a dig at lardass Ted Kennedy. “I didn’t know there was anyone to the left of Kennedy. I didn’t think there was anything to the right, either.”

They’re all making the case for why they’re The Conservative candidate right now. Uh oh, friendly fire. Fred goes after Rudy saying he agrees with Hillary Clinton more often. Rudy fires back saying Thompson blocked tort reform. Fred says he supported tort reform, but he supports it being at the state level. Hits Rudy again about NYC being a sanctuary city; Rudy touts his record in lowering crime in NYC and says Fred has no executive experience.

Whew. Now to McCain. He’s low-key as usual, no problem. Romney says he “respects his service,” but disagrees with him on certain issues. After crediting McCain’s service, says he was “fighting” liberalism. Oh God, please don’t compare that with McCain’s service in the Navy, please.

McCain says “lawyers are the last people we should be turning to in a crisis.” Watch the left spin that line, although anyone with a brain ought to know what he meant. Romney says if there were ever a crisis, he would act immediately to protect American citizens, in an attempt to defuse the “lawyers” meme. Defends Bush, saying he went to Congress for Iraq and got approval.

Oh, damn. Ron Freakin’ Paul. He “didn’t understand” the question about gay marriage. Argues against a Constitutional Amendment, says it should be a state issue. Romney asked why he supports a ban when the other candidates do not; says he is from a state with legalized gay marriage, says there should be a nationalized standard.

I’m sorry, I was distracted by Mitt’s hair. What? Oh. Blah blah blah, gay marriage bores me. Wow, Rudy says if it gets to be a problem with states all going around changing standards, then he would support an amendment. Hmm.

Heeee. Huckabee is happy he wasn’t involved in the first few minutes of the debate when the others were fighting with each other, saying they can have that part. Mentions that among the Founding Fathers there were many clergymen. Excellent point, Huck.

Fred’s talking about his work with Planned Parenthood as clients, noting that it was his job, but when he was a Senator, he always voted against PP’s interests.

McCain is now discussing “reconciliation” with the social conservatives/religious right/whatever. Zzzzzz.

WTF is Tancredo still doing here? Again, he’s got that agitated tone. God, he’s annoying. Yay, Duncan Hunter–it sucks he’s not doing better. Dude is awesome. “We’re the party of freedom.”

Oh, God, health care. Wake me up when this is over, because they all need to just keep their hands OFF of it. Obviously, this is all going to be No Hillary-care. Yay, Ron Paul. Let me guess: deregulate everything, if you want to see a doctor, get a job. LOL. GAWD, he’s got that raised voice thing going on again, just like the old crank he is. And basically, I wasn’t far off. “Take care of the poor people, but work toward a market-only system.” Whatever. Pie in the sky utopianism, as usual. Free kittens and unicorns too, courtesy of the marketplace, no details necessary! Yippee! (Just to clarify, I’m no fan of restricting the marketplace; I’d just like a little bit of reality in the plan.)

BWAHAHAHAHA. My daughter is watching this with me, asking “who’s he?” about them. She thinks Huckabee is funny but “he has big ears.” LOL! Thank God for kids, because this part is boring to me. She just asked me why teachers “hated” Giuliani, after Wendell Goler said “teachers hated you.” I told her he made them do their jobs (the simplest explanation), and see? An eight year-old gets it. She says, “That’s a good thing!”

Well, as usual the media, in this case Chris Wallace, has already anointed Hillary as the Democratic nominee–not that I think they’re wrong, though. Audience is not pleased, unsurprisingly. Heh.

UGH. I just lost a whole paragraph. Rudy did well in the “bash Hillary” topic; McCain got a standing ovation when mentioning that he was a little “tied up” when Hillary’s people were at Woodstock. Excellent. (UPDATE: Video of McCain’ moment here.) Huckabee said, “I like to be funny, but there’s nothing funny about Hillary Clinton being President.”

Sigh…missed Fred, I’m busy being a parent. Jon Henke saves me here:

8:57 It’s Fred Thompson’s turn - I’m not skipping all of the specific quotes! - and he says we need to stick to the basic principles on which our government was founded - free markets, individual freedom, limited government - and avoid the “comfortable mediocrity” offered by the Democrats.

HAHA, Ron Paul is on and did the audience just boo him? HA! Really? I sorta missed it, dammit. Ranting about privacy and other paranoid crap, “back to the basics.” Because he is of course the only one interested in the Constitution, blah blah blah, heard it all before. Black helicopters!!!

Ugh, back to health insurance. Again, wake me when it’s over. OK, they’re actually talking about cutting entitlement spending and fixing Social Security. I’m sorry, I’m being totally distracted here and can’t keep up.

OK, good question to Romney from Brit Hume: “You saw what happened” when the President tried to do Social Security reform–nothing–and asked, “what are you going to do about it?” Eh, he said, “Learn from his mistakes.” FAIL. Next?

Yay! Mike Huckabee is NOT for killing off old people to save money on Social Security! w00t! I love that guy.
Ron Paul, though, just might be for it. Ranting again, and I’m tuning it out. Shut. Up. Old. Man. Haha, get rid of Social Security and health care and everything! Dream on, pal. That’s sure gonna happen. “It’s not in the Constitution!” LOL!

OK, OK, we get it. Republicans are for less spending and lower taxes. This isn’t exactly groundbreaking stuff here. Another shocker: Tom Tancredo is angry about illegal aliens. Yawn. Bored.

Now Russia: McCain says “When I looked into Mr. Putin’s eyes, I saw three letters: K-G-B,” and “he’s a dangerous man.” Next Duncan Hunter–he wants to keep missile defense strong, as Reagan intended. Rudy wants to expand NATO to look further geographically, i.e. Australia. Also re: Russia and China: “We can engage a country commercially,” while being strong strategically.

Fred! on Turkey and the PKK: “Turkey is a friend of ours,” and our bases there are critically important, particularly Incirlik. (Remind me to write about Incirlik, the Kurds, and the PKK in Turkey some day. Been there, done that–or two out of three, anyway.) Says we have friends in the Turks and Armenians, but Nancy Pelosi jumped the shark (not his words, mine).

Gawd, here we go again with Ron Paul: We suck, America has done everything wrong. “What if Mexico came here and started putting missiles here like we do in Europe?” Yeah, it’d be exactly the same thing, Mr. Savior of Freedom. We just need to “talk to people.” Bite me. HAHA, the audience is loudly booing him again! Yeah!

Wendell Goler asks RP if the party has left him, or vice versa. RP sez everyone else has abandoned “our platform.” Everyone except him is a Republican! Whatevah. More ranting and complaining about “neocons!” More booing! He sucks. “Our platform” for Ron Paul is the platform of the John Birch Society. Next?

OK, Fred! is back, defending himself against charges of “laziness.” Lots of things mentioned that he’s done: Condi Rice, Bush, John Roberts, etc. More importantly, five kids including two little ones. Haha!

Finally, it’s over. I missed a bunch of stuff, so check out The Fred File. I’ll probably add more links to this post as they come along.

Post-debate thoughts:

Fred Thompson: Relaxed, confident, at ease with himself and with the debate. Lots of good points raised, although obviously I wasn’t able to write any of them down (thanks to my daughter!).

Rudy Giuliani: Did particularly well this time, and I’d say probably better than he has in most other debates. Surprising revelation: He may support a Constitutional amendment on gay marriage, if needed.

Mitt Romney: No mistakes stuck out, no problems, although again, nothing to knock ‘em dead. Well, except his hair. Dude’s got great hair.

John McCain: Looks more bored by the process every debate. I dunno, does he still want this? Big, big reaction when he contrasted Woodstock and Vietnam, though. If it weren’t for that, his presence would have been pretty much missed.

Mike Huckabee: As usual, he didn’t get the same airtime as the big four, but he always gets attention when he speaks. Audiences can’t help but love him, and I see why.

Duncan Hunter and Tom Tancredo: Barely there. Hunter was strong and knowledgeable as usual, but again, nothing earth-shattering. I think he forgets that speaking in a Presidential debate or a Presidential campaign speech is different from speaking on the floor of the House, and that’s a shame. Tancredo? Starting to look like a troll, just there to waste people’s time. Sorry, dude.

Last but definitely least: the Reverend Doctor Saint Ron Paul, Messiah. Booooo hisssss. He was definitely not appreciated by this audience, and that just warms my heart. God bless you, Florida. ♥

Speaking of Florida: my dear friend Janette is there in the spin room right now. I can’t wait to read her report from it! I’m just watching the spin room activity on the teevee right now waiting for her to wave her tiara up for the camera. ;-)

Another thought: I think debates are a huge waste, a silly show. Just watching each of the candidates speaking after the debate, there’s a huge difference. Mitt Romney, when just speaking extemporaneously, comes off so much better than in debates it’s not funny. Fred! said these debates aren’t really his thing, that he’s a “laid back guy.” Heh. He seemed perfectly at ease to me! Anyway, I really wish we could just do away with this debate format. There’s nothing said that couldn’t be read in a press release; it’s basically a formal hazing process. See if anyone fails miserably, and weed ‘em out. Other than that, it’s dumb. Can’t we just cage match ‘em instead? OK, not really, but I’d much rather see the candidates sit down and discuss things rather than this timed Q&A thing. Whatever.

HAHAHA!!! Ron Paul “won” the call-in text-vote on Fox News! Hannity said “they’re stacking the votes again!” Frank Luntz just polled the focus group, asking who thought RP won. NOBODY did. Not one. PWNED.

Luntz’ focus group loved Huckabee, unsurprisingly. I’m telling you, people love that guy. Huck apparently just won over a few new supporters, at least in that group. (Ron Paul? Not so much. LOL.)

By the way, if you want to vote, text to 36288. I have no idea what the numbers are specifically; I just voted how my daughter told me to vote. Heh. All I know is that the Paulbots are spamming Digg like crazy right now with their boy’s text-vote number. Freaks.
Here are the numbers:
Giuliani: R1
Huckabee: R2
Hunter: R3
McCain: R4
_{Paul: R5}
Romney: R6
Tancredo: R7
Thompson: R8

[UPDATE] Others on the debate:

Jim Geraghty says “Everybody Was Good; Fred, Rudy, and Huck Were Best.” I absolutely agree.

Matt Lewis at Townhall:

Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney both did well, but they always do well. Mike Huckabee is still the best debater, but there’s nothing new there.

I think Fred Thompson did quite well. Once again, he ended strong. People tend to remember the first thing and the last thing they see, and if this is true, Fred Thompson had a very good night.

Tonight, John McCain “the Statesman” showed up.

Stephen Green of Vodkapundit for PJM:

Thompson exceeded expectations, I think, keeping him running. McCain had the best soundbites, Rudy had the best instincts, and Mitt turned out his worst performance to date. Tonight’s winner: Hillary Clinton, for being the focus of 15 minutes of a short debate.

Complete report at Fox News:

The claws were out Sunday night as the GOP presidential candidates went for each other’s jugulars trying to prove to Republican base voters that each is the most conservative candidate in the race for the White House.

The line that makes my heart sing:

Other than Hillary Clinton, Ron Paul has been the only presidential candidate to receive audible disapproval from the crowd tonight.

:mrgreen:

Video of the high points (including the booing!) at Ian Schwartz’ site.

Best Iowa Straw Poll Campaign Summary, Ever

It’s long, but it’s perfect. Russ from Winterset wrote it at Ace’s “Open Blog” weekend thingy (where my Bratty Brother Vinnie also made an appearance), and it’s an hilarious must-read. Just one quick snip from it–and hell no, it’s not all about The Loony One, but I can’t pass up an opportunity to laugh at the Paultards again:

Paul’s supporters will make a big deal out of the 1,300 people who voted yesterday, but I think this crowd is at least 90% or more of the hardcore Ron Paul voters (and believe me, “hardcore” is the least you can call them) in the State of Iowa. Plus this event didn’t make you prove Republican registry, so some of his voters will probably vote Green, Democrat, or even “Monster Raving Loony” in the election. I think a portion of his fanbase are just in this to help drive the GOP towards an anti-war position. Unless Ron Paul starts putting psychotropic drugs in the water supply, I think he’s peaked out. Fortunately, the Iowa Caucus will have 5 to 6 times as many voters as the Straw Poll, so Paulitards will be lost in the shuffle. God willing.

(Hey, maybe Russ can replace Karl Rove!)

Rudy’s 12 commitments

Unveiled.

I will keep America on offense in the Terrorists’ War on Us.
-I will end illegal immigration, secure our borders, and identify every non-citizen in our nation.
-I will restore fiscal discipline and cut wasteful Washington spending.
-I will cut taxes and reform the tax code.
-I will impose accountability on Washington.
-I will lead America towards energy independence.
-I will give Americans more control over, and access to, healthcare with affordable and portable free-market solutions.
-I will increase adoptions, decrease abortions, and protect the quality of life for our children.
-I will reform the legal system and appoint strict constructionist judges.
-I will ensure that every community in America is prepared for terrorist attacks and natural disasters.
-I will provide access to a quality education to every child in America by giving real school choice to parents.
-I will expand America’s involvement in the global economy and strengthen our reputation around the world.

I am particularly gratified that Rudy! did not feel the need to make some nincompoop pledge to reduce global warming, a concept I believe to be the biggest scam effected against the human race since Islam.

Star of the GOP Debate: Wolf Blitzer!

Wolf Blitzer. Anyone surprised by this? :rofl:

Yeah, I got this from Senator Chris Dodd’s site. Gotta give the Dodd people credit for sharing their gadget on “our” night! (The formatting’s a little screwy, but hey, you get what you pay for.)

I don’t have a whole lot to say about the debate; my opinion of the candidates is pretty much the same after this one. I still think McCain did better than he’s given credit for, this time too. Not that I expect people to give him a lot of praise–it is John McCain, and he’s on everyone’s shi’ite list these days. Mitt Romney…not a great night for him. Ron Paul is just a troll in this race. (Don’t feed the trolls!)

I just can’t believe there have already been three debates, a year and a half before the general election. I like watching debates, but damn.

LOVED it when “God struck” Rudy with lightning. Hilarious! Wolf Blitzer aside (eyeroll), I think he definitely won the night.
,
I still wish Mike Huckabee were one of the front-runners. He’s got no chance, but you know, I could listen to him all day. If nothing else, I hope he stays in it for a long while so more people get a chance to hear him speak. I’m tired of Christian-bashing, so tired of it, and he turns that lie about Christian “intolerance” right on its head, as it should be. He’s the anti-Falwell, without being “anti.” He is a “compassionate conservative.” You saw when he spoke of the “culture of life.” I think it’s obnoxious and insulting that the Republicans are being drilled on their beliefs, but Governor Huckabee gets it right every time. I like that he’s not shy about his faith when asked. And yes, I do “believe” in evolution just as I “believe” in math, but I don’t think evolution was an accident, either. Maybe his being in this race will open some anti-Christian bigots’ minds a little.

OK, so here are the highlights via Hot Air, in case you missed it.

All that aside, I look forward to Fred Thompson being in the debates. I’m with Fred!
Video of his appearance on Hannity and Colmes also at Hot Air, along with video of Ann Coulter being…well, Ann Coulter. You know how it is–if you don’t march in lockstep with her, you’re a RINO (or a liberal!). :eyeroll: