The Republican Debate
I just finished watching the Republican debate. It wasn't too painful, though there were moments I had to leave the room to avoid hearing some excrutiatingly embarrassing answers. Some observations:
Kudos to Ron Paul for standing up to Rudy's bullying. Rudy claims he never heard the explanation that the 9/11 attacks were in retaliation for our army being stationed in Arabia, even though that explanation was provided by bin Laden himself. It certainly makes a lot more sense as a motivation than hating us for our freedom and wealth and way of life.
Tom Tancredo didn't do terribly, but he really has a hard time getting to the point. He missed a big opportunity to make a powerful attack on "comprehensive immigration reform" by wasting about 30 seconds going on about "conversions" just to throw out a "Road to Damascus" vs. "Road to Des Moines" joke. He's blowing a golden opportunity to move the anti-immigration debate forward.
Duncan Hunter was fairly effective. I thought he gave strong, spirited responses, though probably not enough to break through.
As far as the big three, I thought they all held up well, and mixed it up a bit.
Unfortunately, Rudy comes off great in these forums, and this debate was not exception, particularly in his clueless but honest outrage at Ron Paul. This is too bad because I am certain that Rudy would make the worst president of all. If you think that George Bush has set a new standard for hiring incompetent flacks, Rudy can outdo him. Think Bernard Kerik. And his denial of ever even hearing that 9/11 was motivated by our military involvement in Arab lands, despite his close involvement in that tragedy, speaks volumes about his intellectual curiosity.
All in all, an entertaining hour and a half, a good job by the Fox moderators, and a rather depressing display of our political leadership.
Kudos to Ron Paul for standing up to Rudy's bullying. Rudy claims he never heard the explanation that the 9/11 attacks were in retaliation for our army being stationed in Arabia, even though that explanation was provided by bin Laden himself. It certainly makes a lot more sense as a motivation than hating us for our freedom and wealth and way of life.
Tom Tancredo didn't do terribly, but he really has a hard time getting to the point. He missed a big opportunity to make a powerful attack on "comprehensive immigration reform" by wasting about 30 seconds going on about "conversions" just to throw out a "Road to Damascus" vs. "Road to Des Moines" joke. He's blowing a golden opportunity to move the anti-immigration debate forward.
Duncan Hunter was fairly effective. I thought he gave strong, spirited responses, though probably not enough to break through.
As far as the big three, I thought they all held up well, and mixed it up a bit.
Unfortunately, Rudy comes off great in these forums, and this debate was not exception, particularly in his clueless but honest outrage at Ron Paul. This is too bad because I am certain that Rudy would make the worst president of all. If you think that George Bush has set a new standard for hiring incompetent flacks, Rudy can outdo him. Think Bernard Kerik. And his denial of ever even hearing that 9/11 was motivated by our military involvement in Arab lands, despite his close involvement in that tragedy, speaks volumes about his intellectual curiosity.
All in all, an entertaining hour and a half, a good job by the Fox moderators, and a rather depressing display of our political leadership.
posted by ziel | 5/15/2007 10:37:00 PM
2 Comments:
Watching the debates so we don't have to, eh? God bless you, man. Selfless and brave.
I swear, it was really a pretty good watch. I'm not sure what it was exactly, but the Fox format made it kind of peppy with the air of seeming spontaneity. So it was only a minor sacrifice - one, of course, I'm all too happy to make for my legions of loyal readers. It's too bad the Dems won't do Fox, so I could watch them debate too.
Post a Comment
<< Home