Reaction to the Second Republican Debates
I watched the Fox News web stream of the Republican presidential debates last night.
Here are some of the things that stood out in my mind.
Ron Paul is an absolute nut!!!!! (IMHO)
His position on Iraq is one that I TOTALLY do not support and want no part of.
It was a shame because some of his positions on the size of government I did like. He might have been a great person to have on tap for a special committee whose task was to downsize a bloated government. As it stands now, I would not come within 10 feet of him. Rudy Giuliani should thank him for opening his mouth; Giuliani’s hard-hitting slam at Paul will, out of all his answers that night, be the one thing that he will be remembered for. They gave him extra time to explain himself, which only made the others want to engage him more on his wrong-headed idea on why America is responsible for what happened on September the 11th.
Jim Gilmore stood out as the only person that I know of that had any kind of a record that would lead me to believe that after they were elected, they would continue to be a strong model of conservativism. He seemed a bit timid answering the question on minorities in the Republican Party -- which if he was, there was no need for.
Duncan Hunter did well. He answered the questions that were put to him in a way that led me to believe he did mean what he was saying. He just has to beat that perception that he is a long shot, and with the cameras in love with “Ruddy McGiuliani” as Gov. Gilmore called him, he has a totally uphill fight going on.
Mitt Romney looks good, but as I have with Rudy, there is something in me that wonders just how conservatively he will govern once all the votes are counted.
Fox news’ handling of the debate blows away anything Chris Matthews and his ilk could have done. The questions were more relevant, and the organization and conduct of the meeting were not appearing to be something “slapped together” at the last minuet as the first debate did. They spent way too much time on abortion for my taste: each person seemed to answer questions on abortion 3 times at least. But other than that, it was good.
Last, but certainly not least: John McCain. I will try not to cuss. With all due respect to the Senator’s former status as a prisoner of war, I DO NOT need him to reach across the aisle to Ted Kennedy and the Democrats! That is not why I would have him there. I would have him there to enact a conservative agenda, and if elected to the White House, I would CERTAINLY want him working on a TRUE conservative agenda, not the self self-aggrandizing, “John the maverick,” “Pirates of the DC Caribbean” follies that I have observed thus far .
Tell me, if you believe that you are on the right side of an argument or cause and your loony liberal left opposition (like Ron Paul) is on the opposite side of that argument, why would you compromise with them? What good would come from it? That’s like trying to create a half-truth. Combine this with the fact that he voted against the tax cuts (both times) and DID nearly nullify my Second Amendment Right with his kooky campaign finance law and you will know why I have a special place that I would like to reserve for our media darling “maverick” Republican RINO.
That is a quick summation of what stood out in my mind, what stood out in yours?
Here are some of the things that stood out in my mind.
Ron Paul is an absolute nut!!!!! (IMHO)
His position on Iraq is one that I TOTALLY do not support and want no part of.
It was a shame because some of his positions on the size of government I did like. He might have been a great person to have on tap for a special committee whose task was to downsize a bloated government. As it stands now, I would not come within 10 feet of him. Rudy Giuliani should thank him for opening his mouth; Giuliani’s hard-hitting slam at Paul will, out of all his answers that night, be the one thing that he will be remembered for. They gave him extra time to explain himself, which only made the others want to engage him more on his wrong-headed idea on why America is responsible for what happened on September the 11th.
Jim Gilmore stood out as the only person that I know of that had any kind of a record that would lead me to believe that after they were elected, they would continue to be a strong model of conservativism. He seemed a bit timid answering the question on minorities in the Republican Party -- which if he was, there was no need for.
Duncan Hunter did well. He answered the questions that were put to him in a way that led me to believe he did mean what he was saying. He just has to beat that perception that he is a long shot, and with the cameras in love with “Ruddy McGiuliani” as Gov. Gilmore called him, he has a totally uphill fight going on.
Mitt Romney looks good, but as I have with Rudy, there is something in me that wonders just how conservatively he will govern once all the votes are counted.
Fox news’ handling of the debate blows away anything Chris Matthews and his ilk could have done. The questions were more relevant, and the organization and conduct of the meeting were not appearing to be something “slapped together” at the last minuet as the first debate did. They spent way too much time on abortion for my taste: each person seemed to answer questions on abortion 3 times at least. But other than that, it was good.
Last, but certainly not least: John McCain. I will try not to cuss. With all due respect to the Senator’s former status as a prisoner of war, I DO NOT need him to reach across the aisle to Ted Kennedy and the Democrats! That is not why I would have him there. I would have him there to enact a conservative agenda, and if elected to the White House, I would CERTAINLY want him working on a TRUE conservative agenda, not the self self-aggrandizing, “John the maverick,” “Pirates of the DC Caribbean” follies that I have observed thus far .
Tell me, if you believe that you are on the right side of an argument or cause and your loony liberal left opposition (like Ron Paul) is on the opposite side of that argument, why would you compromise with them? What good would come from it? That’s like trying to create a half-truth. Combine this with the fact that he voted against the tax cuts (both times) and DID nearly nullify my Second Amendment Right with his kooky campaign finance law and you will know why I have a special place that I would like to reserve for our media darling “maverick” Republican RINO.
That is a quick summation of what stood out in my mind, what stood out in yours?
Labels: 08 election, 08 election; conservativism
posted by Alpheus at 12:55 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home