Saturday night, although it may have been the most boring debate of this campaign (And that is saying something), this morning everyone woke up and went after Mitt Romney. And finally, an audience today finally applauded at the right places, where being an American mattered more than wanting to be mean against those with little or no power in Washington. And yes, we finally saw the Jon Huntsman that everyone in Utah likes so much.
Now, as far as the over-all ideas, let's start with the fight between Newt and Mitt. Newt, although you got in some good ones, and your point against him not being a politician was spot on, but you were foolish in asking not to be attacked back but that Mitt should attack the Wall Street Journal for what was in your ad. And Sunday morning, you started to look very small toward the end of your attack on Romney when you talked about how wrong it was for Mitt to do an attack ad through his PAC, and then said you had a 27 minute anti-Romney ad that was coming out soon. And Mitt, you stating you had no idea what was in your ad attacking Newt and then repeating it verbatim made you look small, if not a liar. Well, if that didn't make you look small, attacking Huntsman for serving the country sure did. Attacks against other candidates must be surgical strikes, true statements that re-inforce set ideas in voters' minds. Too much, and you look small like Newt, and be pointless, and you look small like Mitt. Now, for certain things the candidates said that set off the alarms, I'll go from worst to best.
Paul-- You were shown how small a niche you really have in this election, first by your own statements, then by Santorum. First, you question the consevative values of a man that is farther right than 85% of the country. You say you personall liked Martin Luther King, but your vlaues say that you think it's fine that business could exclude him because of the color of his skin? This makes no sense. And when Santorum brings up the fact that you have only 1 bill that you've ever gotten passed, you state it shows how out-of-touch Congress is. No, Congressman, it shows how out-of-touch you are and how little you try to get along and try to compromise. Declaration of war is the only way to send troops somewhere? What country do you declare war on if you were going after Al-Queda? And only the Tea Party liked you attacking David Gregory this morning. Your 15 minutes of fame is over.
Perry-- Saturday night, you said the country's biggest problem was the recent cut in defense spending, and Sunday morning you say it is runaway spending. Nice try at consistency. Want to go right back into Iraq? That's not smart, but the reasoning that we are allowing Iran back in the country is just wrong. When were they ever in Iraq. They weren't. These are 2 countries that have fought each other for years. You want the entire country to be Right-to Work? You really don't like unions, do you? The Obama administration is anti-religion? You do know that this is a country of laws, not religion, right? When asked what 3 things you'd cut to help balance the budget, you say the pay of bureaucrats in the 3 departments you were going to eliminate. That'll really cut the deficit! Better do a lot better in South Carolina than you did in Iowa or you're toast. And the lever is down on the toaster already, so no more mistakes, or you'll be history even before that.
Gingrich-- As stated before, toward the end, you looked small and petty. But you started this morning by backing away from your own pamphlet. Not good at all. You started the anti-religious complaints. Again, we are a nation of laws, not of religion. You'd cut the budget by stopping the over $100 billion theft in social security and medicare. Not waste or fraud, but in theft. Really? Over 10% of the money going to these agencies is taken by theft? Even you know that isn't right, or new if it even close to the amount. It happened under you watch, too, if that's true. When Huntsman answered a question about Afghanistan flawlessly, you refused to answer it. And your approving of the Romney ad about how under his presidency, no college grad would be without a job is a lie, and pandering to the base. But, then again, Newt, isn't that what a Washington insider does best; lie, pander, and raise money by promising things and lobbying for causes.
Romney-- You almost got through this weekend unscathed, didn't you? But they finally are starting to put a dent in you. Look, you think you ran a business, but how many people worked for you, Mitt? A hedge fund company isn't really a business, is it? Had to order a lot of materials, did you? Did you have to see if your products would be accepted by the public? Of course not, and if you ran a business, you'd know the difference. You'd know that regulations don't tell companies how to run their business, but give guidelines that must be met to lawfully run the business. Don't want regulations? I can't wait until they put an adult men's club close to a school. It's regulations that stop that. Your stance on marriage is just wrong, legally. Look at your tax form. Where's the block to X if you live with someone and not married? That's right, they don't have that right to put their money together and file together. You want to tap into all our energy resources? Good, start with wind and solar power, and then expand in to natural fossil fuels. The longer you have to run hard right to keep the Tea Party placated, the less chance you'll have have to tack back to the center and win the Presidency. At this rate, the box you're getting put into will doom you in the November election.
Santorum-- I dislike almost everything you stand for, but you state it with conviction and sense, and that counts for a lot. You give thoughtful answers, not the standard 20 seconds sound bite. But tell me how what happens in Afghanistan affects our security? The Taliban we attacked was for their backing of Al-Queda, and now that they are dispersed, why do we need to be there? Want to attack Iran? This info on their nuclear program is from the same group that got Iraq totally wrong. Are you sure you want to listen to them? You want to not only ban all abortions, but you want to ban all contraception. Sex to you is only for procreation. Do you realize the small minority you are in with that view? And you want to send medicare back to the states in block grants. Why? Because that means, sooner or later, you will phase it out. This, to me, is unacceptable. Now, on the good side in these 2 debates, you did point out flaws in both Romney and Paul, attacking them correctly and accurately, and for that, you will go farther than either Perry or Gingrich.
Huntsman-- THE WINNER of these 2 debates. Although you were sluggish Saturday night, Mitt's attack on your service to the government gave you the opening you need. You saying to the question about what you would be doing on a Saturday night, that you'd be talking to your 2 sons in the Navy was perfect, and made Perry's answer of "out hunting" seem very trivial and down-right stupid. You gave well-thought, deep answers to all the questions, making Newt and Mitt look parochial. Your answer about cuts in government made the others look weak. You defended yourself and your sons when attacked. There is a reason every other candidate is attacking you today. If the Tea Party was 25% of the GOP instead of 75%, you'd be a shoo-in for the nomination. But, unfortunately for you, it's the other way around. But that doesn't mean you didn't have a great weekend of debates.
No comments:
Post a Comment