[Bill,
November 29, 2007]
Quick thoughts on last night's Republican debate
Obviously, there were a lot of plant questions. Michelle Malkin has the roundup here. That didn't bother me so much. I expect no better from Democrats and CNN.
Quick thoughts:
1. Rudy Giuliani is impressive. I may support him after all. The reason is his answers were the least political and most straightforward and he stuck to his guns even if he knew it wasn't quite the "right" answer for the crowd. For example, on gun control, he pressed his argument (which was pretty reasonable, if you listen to what he said) when he could've just grandstanded. I don't know about Giuliani as a candidate, but I think he'd make an outstanding president. Even though he's a Yankee fan.
2. Mitt Romney is a typical politician. He's tall and good-looking, but that's about it. A face. That's all. Unfortunately, he might actually win the nomination.
3. Mike Huckabee continues to demonstrate that he's a fine individual and skilled politician. I liked his answers, even if I didn't disagree. I think he'd make a fine VP. He's not ready to be president. Giuliani-Huckabee 2008.
4. Fred Thompson ... no air time. Doesn't seem to care all that much. With that wife of his at home, who could blame him?
5. Ron Paul. Um ... obviously he's led an exemplary life. A track star, a doctor, a congressman. I respect that. I respect him. But he comes across, well, let's be kind. The man's lived a better life than I have, and I understand his libertarian sentiments. Let's leave it at that.
6. Duncan Hunter. Straight-up conservative, it seems. I liked him.
7. Tom Tancredo. Seemed to struggle, but other times had some good answers. Seemed to disappear during the debate, but that may not be his fault.
8. John McCain. Came across as nasty at times. Too many swipes at others seems desperate.
Did I miss anyone?
Quick thoughts:
1. Rudy Giuliani is impressive. I may support him after all. The reason is his answers were the least political and most straightforward and he stuck to his guns even if he knew it wasn't quite the "right" answer for the crowd. For example, on gun control, he pressed his argument (which was pretty reasonable, if you listen to what he said) when he could've just grandstanded. I don't know about Giuliani as a candidate, but I think he'd make an outstanding president. Even though he's a Yankee fan.
2. Mitt Romney is a typical politician. He's tall and good-looking, but that's about it. A face. That's all. Unfortunately, he might actually win the nomination.
3. Mike Huckabee continues to demonstrate that he's a fine individual and skilled politician. I liked his answers, even if I didn't disagree. I think he'd make a fine VP. He's not ready to be president. Giuliani-Huckabee 2008.
4. Fred Thompson ... no air time. Doesn't seem to care all that much. With that wife of his at home, who could blame him?
5. Ron Paul. Um ... obviously he's led an exemplary life. A track star, a doctor, a congressman. I respect that. I respect him. But he comes across, well, let's be kind. The man's lived a better life than I have, and I understand his libertarian sentiments. Let's leave it at that.
6. Duncan Hunter. Straight-up conservative, it seems. I liked him.
7. Tom Tancredo. Seemed to struggle, but other times had some good answers. Seemed to disappear during the debate, but that may not be his fault.
8. John McCain. Came across as nasty at times. Too many swipes at others seems desperate.
Did I miss anyone?
I think its just the idea that CNN believes they could get away with it without really trying to cover their tracks.
Anyways, this idea that the states ought to decide whether or not to legalize the killing of innocent babies is inherently vile and evil. Anyone who makes such an argument (like Ron Paul, Fred Thompson, etc.) is by definition a bad person.
To get a better idear of what I'm talking about check out this analysis of Ron Paul's response to a question asked on YouTube about abortion a few months back.
http://www.kgov.com/bel_56kbps/20071016