Live Blogging of the South Carolina Debate Part III

Last segment…

Question 41: McCain wouldn’t torture someone because of world opinion, but he’s sure okay with occupying other countries.

Question 42: Guiliani doesn’t want to be responsible…just use “any method you can think of”

Question 43: Romney has been diffusing bombs during his time as governor of Massachusetts. And combing his hair.

Question 44: The obvious follow up question for Thompson is whether or not we will build a nation after we wipe out the African nation.

Question 45: Brownback bangs the podium like McCain bangs on the microphone.

Question 46: Hunter fixed his hair. “High pressure techniques”. I actually like that answer.

Question 47: McCain is doing a good job here backing up his position on torture.

Question 48: Gilmore recites his resume. He’d go to the U.N. That is the wrong answer. Especially because he was asked about the economy in the face of an attack, not the U.N.

Question 49: Huckabee totally ignores the question.

Question 50: Ron Paul wanders around this question…not a very good response.

Question 51: Screw Reagan, Tancredo invokes the name of Jack Bauer. Now that will get him some votes.

Question 52: Gilmore is stalling while he tries to figure out how he wants to answer this question. Chris Wallace calls him out on it. There will be minorities running in our party (but not this year).

Question 53: Romney support NCLB…ick! Kids aren’t getting the education they need because the government is in charge of it.

Question 54: Hunter gets a softball that lets him get back to his stance on China and trade.

Live Blogging of the South Carolina Debate Part II

After the break…

Question 21:  That’s funny that Gilmore lumps those three together.  I like to do that with “Republicrats”.  He is doing a great job of not naming names.  And now he’s naming names.  This could get good.

Question 22:  Guiliani is basically asking McCain to be his running mate.  I guess he’s been anointed?   Wallace busts his ass for not answering the question.  And he still does not answer the question.  He may become un-anointed.

Question 23:  McCain is going to turn this into “reach across the aisle”.  Wait for it…there it is!  I should be writing for him.  A least I know what he’s going to say already.  Three “reaces across the aisle” so far.
Question 24:   What if 80% of the citizens in Huckabee’s state voted for him to jump off a cliff…would he do it?

Question 25:  Poor Mitt Romney.  He had to fight so hard in Massachusetts.

Question 26:  Ronald Reagan gave amnesty to everyone.  Not one of these guys would support that.  It doesn’t poll well.

Question 27:   Thompson looks like a substitute science teacher talking about embryonic stem cells.  Actually, he looks like a vice principal filling in because there isn’t a substitute.

Question 28:  Guiliani gets another question.  This is now being made Guiliani vs. Huckabee…a nice “bump” for Huckabee.  He turns it into a blast on Islam.

Question 29:  Brownback at least stands by principle no matter the circumstances.  If you believe we are all children of God, his stance makes since.

Question 30:  Back to Romney.  I admire people who can separate their personal views and wishes with the role of government.  Unfortunately, Romney is just a flip-flopper.

No questions for Ron Paul in that round.  Hmmm……

Question 31:   I think Tancredo forgot the question.  The “Road to Des Moines” line was good.  Bonus points for that.

Question 32:  McCain wants a bi-partisan solution…a reach across the aisle.

Question 33:  Mr. Romney, we don’t need an employment verification system if we have big programs that give everything away to those who don’t work.

Question 34:  Rebuttal from McCain.  This is getting ridiculous.

Question 35:  Let’s put Guiliani’s database into Al Gore’s lock box.  He isn’t addressing the statements of his past.  This is becoming a pattern with him.

Question 36:  Duncan Hunter built a fence in San Diego.  That’s nothing compared to inventing the internet–good thing he doesn’t have to run against Gore.  His hair is messed up.

Question 37:  Didn’t Ron Paul answer this question before?  “Follow the Constitution” should be his campaign slogan.  Back to Reagan again…

***Guiliani butts in and breaks the format, and of course it is allowed by the moderators.  It is getting Ron Paul air time…I’ll take it.  Paul isn’t saying that 9-11 was justified, he’s only giving their justification.  He’s not condoning their reason, just saying that it was the reason.

Question 38:   McCain is taking his right answer and claiming that it was wrong.  It is up to the State of South Carolina.

Question 39:   Huckabee thinks “Missouri” ends with an “a”.  That’s a state issue, not a national one.

Question 40:  Tancredo gets confused on every single question.  He debates like an 8th grader.

Live Blogging of the South Carolina Debate Part I

Not really live…there’s about an 18 minute TiVo delay plus pausing for “I can’t believe he just said that” moments.

Question 1:  McCain seems like he is just trying to fill up a minute’s worth of talking

Question 2:  Thompson isn’t answering the question at all.  What he should say is, “If they don’t do it our way, we’ll leave–that’s how I can require them.”

Question 3:  Romney answers the question immediately.  He at least has a firm grasp on what he believes, assuming that it is within a reasonable foreign policy to be there.

Question 4:  Brownback, I think the base of the question was whether or not winning the war has anything to do with politicians.  You missed where he was going with this.  How do you use politics with people who only understand killing.

Question 5:   Guiliani makes a great point about the Democrats’ timetable.  That is a planned retreat–stupid tactically.

Question 6:   So basically, Tancredo would do exactly what Bush is doing…wrong answer.

Question 7:   Ron Paul is basically quoting how war is supposed to be declared constitutionally.  Channeling Ronald Reagan again…good move.

Question 8:   Hunter is more interested in presenting his resume where he “didn’t do anything special”.  That’s funny.

Question 9:  Huckabee looks like Kevin Spacey.  I believe in God, and the only thing I’m afraid of is  Mike Huckabee.

Question 10:   So will you or won’t you rule out striking Iran?  I’m confused.

Question 11:  How could you have raised taxes in Massachusettes?   They are so high they can’t be raised anymore.  “Washington is broken”–that sounds like something I’ve heard before.  Romney is the most impressive speaker.

Question 12:   Yes, spending is out of control McCain.  And how long have you been in Washington?  Yes, you are repeating your story.  Get some new material.

Question 13:  Huckabee throws the Fair Tax out there. I’d like to see how many of these clowns agree with him.  “John Edwards at a beauty shop”–that’s a lame and contrived line.  Minus some points for that one.

Question 14:  Guiliani catches on and invokes Reagan’s name.  Reduce government by attrition.

Question 15:  Brownback is a butt hook.  As soon as you start talking about how you can affect the markets as president, you’ve lost my support.  Let the providers increase supply if the market demands it.

Question 16:  Thompson looks like he’s reading his answer.  If he is, he should find someone to write a better answer for him.  He didn’t even name one program that needs to be eliminated.  And he got busted for it.  He immediately goes to his own department.

Question 17:   And Ron Paul names three DEPARTMENTS that need to be eliminated…not just programs.  I love this guy!  He is so on point it is unbelievable.  When have we ever had a Department of Homeland Security in any of the other wars we won…why do we need it now?

Question 18:   Gilmore is riding Ron Paul’s coattails in talking about making people independent of the government.  Pimps his website and blog.  I can respect that.  🙂

Question 19:   Hunter attacks China for devaluing their currency.

Question 20:  Tancredo has to think about whether or not debt is bad.  Everyone is now questioning the federal government’s role.  Ron Paul may not be able to win, but he’s moving the debate in the right direction.

South Carolina Debate Format Upsets Leaders

According to this article, the leaders in the polls are grumbling about the format of the South Carolina debate tomorrow.  My question is, why?

The questions in tomorrow’s debate will be asked by the moderator with no back and forth between the candidates.  In my mind, this actually favors the leaders.  They can continue to spout their status quo rhetoric without fear of being challenged by their opponents.

How great would it be to see Ron Paul confront Guiliani face to face about his mockery of Paul’s defense of habeas corpus?  What if he could question them on the constitutionality of their answers?

Having a corporate media reporter moderate and control the conversation plays right into the hands of the front runners.  It allows them to prop up the exact candidates they choose.

Ron Paul’s Coverage After the S.C. Republican Debate

Will the mainstream media continue to ignore Dr. Paul’s campaign, or will they wake up and smell themselves? It may be a time for them to start giving Dr. Paul’s campaign some serious coverage.

After the Reagan Library debate, Ron Paul was ignored by big media, in spite of winning post debate polls conducted by MSNBC and ABC. ABC went as far as to delete comments posted on their site by Ron Paul supporters. His performance in the polls was dismissed as “…based on Web traffic over the past week, is that Paul supporters have mastered the art of “viral marketing,” using Internet savvy and blog postings to create at least the perception of momentum for his long-shot presidential bid.”

The danger for big media, and what they should guard against, is that this could become a self-fulfilling prophecy. What if those of us who are “internet savvy” actually did start working hard to boost Dr. Paul’s presence in a non-organic way? There is a very real danger of this happening should the media continue to ignore the Paul campaign.

The smart move for big media is to cover the campaign and present it to the people on their terms. This is the only way they could actually control (spin) the information in the way they choose. Continuing to ignore its existence is only going to create a bigger firestorm down the road over which they have no control.

Isn’t it amazing that it is damn near impossible to keep good ideas quiet in a free speaking society? It’s almost as if someone intended it to be that way.

As a Paul supporter, it may seem odd that I’m willing to write the play book for the media, but I seriously doubt they would follow such a course. This is more or less so that I can say “I told you so” down the road.

Ron Paul’s Campaign Being Squashed by Big Media?

I was reading this article on ABC.com about Ron Paul’s success in the post debate polls and was pretty disgusted by the article in general. Then there are the absolutely ridiculous statements like this:

Since online polls aren’t scientific — people choose to take them, and many people vote multiple times — doing well in them doesn’t necessarily mean a campaign is on the move.

This statement paint ABC into a corner. If this statement is correct, the multi-billion dollar conglomerate that is Disney (ABC’s parent company) is so technically inept that they can’t conduct an online poll without stopping people from voting several times. Even simple, freely available poll software can handle this. Surely, someone at ABC can handle this. If not, I’ll be forwarding my resume ASAP.

But maybe that’s not what happened at all. Maybe only Ron Paul’s rabid supporters were the only ones who chose to participate. Does that mean that ABC.com is so insignificant and out of touch with the mainstream that only fringe crackpots like Paul supporters want to participate in their poll? I don’t thinks so.

The other possibility is that this statement is simply not true. But then, why would a big media company want to publish an untrue statement like this? I mean, it’s not like huge corporations have something to gain by making sure that one of the big government Republicrats gets elected, right?

Right.

Uh…Me Either

According to this, Rudy Giuliani is completely out of touch with the average American because he’s not exactly sure of the price of bread and milk.  Ironically, I stopped on the way home today to get a few things from the grocery store, including bread and milk, and I have no idea what I paid for either one.

It isn’t because I’m rich, or because I’m out of touch.  It’s because I had to buy them.  It doesn’t really matter what they cost.  I’m sure I’d do a double take if they were $5 or so, but c’mon.

In more irony, I happened to see the Seinfeld tonight with Giuliani and actually thought, “he’s the only candidate to over appear on Seinfeld!!!”

I still wouldn’t vote for him.

GOP Debates on May 3rd will Feature Nine Candidates, Including Ron Paul

Sandy Price sizes up the candidates who have accepted invitations, and had this to say about Ron Paul: 

Congressman Ron Paul is the sole candidate who believes in a limited government and a “hands off” position as far as our individual choices goes. Dr. Paul has also stated that he is against the Iraqi war and will close it down when possible.

Who will ask the questions to these men about the level of lies and deceit that has developed since the Bush Administration was organized? I have never seen a weaker group of men running for any position with the exception of Dr. Paul. I cannot even imagine any Republican trying to clean up the current mess.

I’m really looking forward to this.  Hopefully Dr. Paul will remind fiscal conservatives where their roots lie while also making some headway with anti-war Democrats.  I look forward to seeing him challenge the other candidates directly on their positions.  As was evident in his interview with Maher, even the slickest debaters have a tough time refuting rational thought and common sense.  Politicians in general, especially today’s Republicans, are woefully void of both.

Alaska Libertarians for Ron Paul

Mainstream Libertarian says that the Alaskan Libertarian Party is considering an endorsement of Ron Paul for president.

I would be pretty surprised to see any state party officially endorse a candidate in another party this early on.  Whether or not it is official is really trivial though.  Quite a few LPers are already behind Paul because he has a chance to make some noise.

My one disappointment with the Ron Paul campaign so far is that they aren’t making it as easy as they should to get the word out.  There is a lot of support for him in the blogosphere, and plenty of people who would provide free ads/endorsements on their sites.  I’ve asked for some “official” information to post here, but to no avail.

If anyone knows of any available, please pass it on.

100 to 1

From The Liberty Papers on Ron Paul’s election chances:

I’m going to support Ron Paul for as long as he’s in the field. I have my concerns about a few of his positions, but he is far and away better than any other Republican or Democrat currently under discussion. Most candidates will force us to hold our noses simply to keep from retching if we vote for them; Ron Paul’s odorous positions are like mild B.O. in comparison. If he’s running when the primaries come to my state, I’ll vote for Paul. If he manages to secure the nomination, I’ll vote for him in the general election. And I’m not doing so simply to vote for the “best” Republican over other Republicans, because I will likely vote Libertarian if Ron Paul is out of the race. I’d rather vote for Ron Paul, a 95% libertarian running as a Republican, than vote for a 100% Libertarian Party candidate who doesn’t have a chance of even being invited to the debates.

I’d have to agree with this. I have a tough time with his hard stand on immigration, but I can live with it. If we’d stop giving our country away we wouldn’t have to worry about immigration. The people who want to work and succeed would come here and thrive. The others would starve or go home.