Tag Archive for huckabee at Zeal For Truth

Tag Archive for 'huckabee'

Why Ron Paul Won in 2008

Published by Colin June 5, 2008 in Essays, Politics and Current Events. 40 Comments

With a headline like this, it must be first mentioned that this is not a paranoid conspiratorial piece on how delegates were STOLEN (all caps), votes weren’t counted or the major media somehow sabotaged the Ron Paul campaign. Rather, it is important to take a realistic look at the goals that Ron Paul’s campaign set out to accomplish, and examine how he fared.

First of all, did Ron Paul actually enter this election to win? Before we start getting our competitive juices flowing, just think about what Ron Paul stands for and what a realistic assessment of this kind of “victory” would have meant. He would have gone to the Oval Office with a congress that absolutely hated and loathed him, departments that feared him and would fight him as though their jobs were at stake (which they would be) and a public (after fickle popular support had waned) which was bewildered with the kind of radical policies and actions that were coming from the president. A Ron Paul presidency may have destroyed the best fruits of his candidacy.

Ron Paul’s campaign has always been a bottom-up phenomenon. Secondly, it is a more purely philosophical and ideological agenda - rather than a pragmatic political one. While many have criticized that this is a bad thing - is it not more beneficial in the long-term to sacrifice an election in order to generate hundreds of thousands of individual awakenings to liberty?

Rather than being humble, Paul was being very honest when he said countless times that the campaign wasn’t about him, but about the people who supported him. Paul’s campaign jarred the intellectually lazy and cynical over a few months (which may have been all they needed), and made them take a moment to consider what freedom, consitutionalism and liberty really mean. He showed us what a free society should look like.

This is key, because rather than end up in a politically neutered position of central power, Ron Paul has lit the spark of changed hearts and minds. And for those that have not changed, especially many conservatives, they have had to reconsider what kind of GOP they now support. Paul’s campaign was in the spotlight for enough time to act as a mirror against the new GOP - and show conservatives just how long it’s been since they took a good look at themselves - many of them no longer recognizing their own faces.

Ron Paul’s expectations have been wildly exceeded by his campaign. For the first time in decades, there is an active block of people who are learning about the evils of central banking, empire-building and welfarism. These aren’t the crazies and kooks who were in the cracks of society, burying guns in Idaho - these are regular folks, who work regular jobs and have become evangelical about the message of freedom.

This movement, which has been scattered and divided across the spectrum: libertarians, constitutionalists, republicans, democrats, independents, anarchists and even some former socialists have been united under Paul’s big tent platform. And while it may be easy to ridicule the conspiracy theorists, it is a testimony to the movement that they now join with college professors, intellectuals and businessmen. Or the atheists, homosexual activists and objectivists now aligning with radical Christians and New Agers. These people now realize that they have more in common than they once thought - and while disagreements remain, there is now more than a undefined dissatisfaction with what has happened in America, but a visible way out.

John McCain or Barack Obama will go to the White House in 2008. But their policies, which favour a continuation of America’s slow decline into the also-rans of history, will prove Ron Paul right again. People like BJ Lawson, Murray Sabrin and Carl Bunce are setting themselves up as future advocates. Many of these would have never thought to seek political office, but have been inspired by the optimism and hope that Ron Paul exampled.

Ron Paul won in 2008, by taking the exact opposite approach of most politicians. Instead of coalition building, compromising, pandering and standing for nothing and everything at the same time, Paul explicitly denounced the problems we have created and boldly proclaimed the solutions found in freedom and liberty. Ron Paul has mobilized many in the coming generation to build a better future. This long-term investment may not have resulted in an immediate gratification, but over time, compounded with interest, this movement may very well pay off.

Mike Huckabee: Right-Wing Socialist

Published by Colin June 2, 2008 in Politics. 113 Comments

Mike Huckabee took the high road in an interview last week, calling libertarian-leaning republicans who don’t support government healthcare and public schools “heartless, callous, soulless” and of course unamerican. Yes kids, advocating an idea of the federal government consistent with the US Constitution is unamerican. This is just further nonesense from a man who has been appropriately dubbed by Reason “America’s Life Coach.”

Republicans need to be Republicans. The greatest threat to classic Republicanism is not liberalism; it’s this new brand of libertarianism, which is social liberalism and economic conservatism, but it’s a heartless, callous, soulless type of economic conservatism because it says “look, we want to cut taxes and eliminate government. If it means that elderly people don’t get their Medicare drugs, so be it. If it means little kids go without education and healthcare, so be it.” Well, that might be a quote pure economic conservative message, but it’s not an American message. It doesn’t fly. People aren’t going to buy that, because that’s not the way we are as a people. That’s not historic Republicanism. Historic Republicanism does not hate government; it’s just there to be as little of it as there can be. But they also recognize that government has to be paid for.

Huckabee tries to rewrite history and declare that libertarianism is “new” (and has not been historically a part of the Republican Party). In 1975 Ronald Reagan embraced the libertarian movement, and while he acknowledged that he was opposed to the “no government” shade of the philosophy, he said:

If you analyze it I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism. I think conservatism is really a misnomer just as liberalism is a misnomer for the liberals–if we were back in the days of the Revolution, so-called conservatives today would be the Liberals and the liberals would be the Tories. The basis of conservatism is a desire for less government interference or less centralized authority or more individual freedom and this is a pretty general description also of what libertarianism is.

Now, I can’t say that I will agree with all the things that the present group who call themselves Libertarians in the sense of a party say, because I think that like in any political movement there are shades, and there are libertarians who are almost over at the point of wanting no government at all or anarchy. I believe there are legitimate government functions. There is a legitimate need in an orderly society for some government to maintain freedom or we will have tyranny by individuals. The strongest man on the block will run the neighborhood. We have government to insure that we don’t each one of us have to carry a club to defend ourselves. But again, I stand on my statement that I think that libertarianism and conservatism are travelling the same path.

Huckabee, on the other hand argues that historic republicanism is, well, his right-wing socialism. Really? Historic republicans supported public education and government healthcare? Cutting taxes and eliminating government is “not historic Republicanism?”

Again, Reagan made it quite clear, saying “I don’t believe in a government that protects us from ourselves.” Yet Huckabee’s view of Government as the prime shaper of social values, habits and benevolence completely contradicts this idea.

Even though I no longer consider myself a republican in any way - I have some nostalgic love for the party that birthed my understanding of economic conservatism. Despite the complete takeover of the party by the Neo-Conservative exiles from the FDR left, there was once some good in them. Sometimes I feel like Luke Skywalker pleading with Darth Vader to acknowledge the sliver of good still lingering after years of evil.
Continue reading ‘Mike Huckabee: Right-Wing Socialist’

Links: LP Presidential Race, Christians Protesting Marriage?

Published by Colin May 30, 2008 in Current Events. 11 Comments

Pragmatism and purity butt heads at the Libertarian Party convention: “The purists don’t want a political party as much as they want a church,” [Richard Burke] said. “They need a place to worship.” Read the article: Who Isn’t Trying to Take Over the Libertarian Party? We’re being talked about again.

Maybe The Gospel Of Judas isn’t what we thought it was?

How My Mother’s Fanatical Feminist View Tore Us Apart - a revelation from Rebecca Walker, whose mother wrote the famous feminist book The Color Purple.

Student researching al-Qaida tactics held for six days

Home prices dropped 14% last quarter.

Here’s a not-so-hypothetical question: when California law redefines marriage to include gay couples, should Christians stop getting marriage licenses from the government? The new and improved definition of marriage is detestable to God. “Would getting such a license be an example of Christians signing up to participate in an institution that is fundamentally, in its very definition, ungodly?”

Mike Huckabee blasts libertarianism:

Republicans need to be Republicans. The greatest threat to classic Republicanism is not liberalism; it’s this new brand of libertarianism, which is social liberalism and economic conservatism, but it’s a heartless, callous, soulless type of economic conservatism because it says “look, we want to cut taxes and eliminate government. If it means that elderly people don’t get their Medicare drugs, so be it. If it means little kids go without education and healthcare, so be it.” Well, that might be a quote pure economic conservative message, but it’s not an American message. It doesn’t fly. People aren’t going to buy that, because that’s not the way we are as a people. That’s not historic Republicanism. Historic Republicanism does not hate government; it’s just there to be as little of it as there can be. But they also recognize that government has to be paid for.

In response, Libertarian Party spokesperson Andrew Davis issued the following statement:

Huckabee is right that Libertarianism is a threat to Republicanism. The Republican Party, with the help of people like Sen. John McCain, has done nothing but increase the scope and power of government while throwing fiscal responsibility to the wind. It’s the ‘compassionate conservatism’ touted by people like Huckabee, McCain and President Bush that has caused a soaring national debt and a society where prisons are overflowing because of Republican ‘compassion.’ Libertarianism is unquestionably the American message because libertarianism is the only political message that empowers the American people by giving them more control over their lives and their wallets. Huckabee proves once again that there is very little difference in the messages of Republicans and Democrats, and shows that McCain and Obama might as well be running in the same political party.

More on Huckabee and his nonsense on Monday.

Weekly Links: Romney Gone, Ebay Changes, M-Words

Published by Colin February 8, 2008 in General. 103 Comments

Mitt Romney has officially suspended his campaign. But at this website, we really don’t care about Mitt Romney, so the more important question is: what does this mean for Ron Paul?

The Death Blow Scenario - With Mitt Romney out, that leaves Huckabee, McCain and Paul going for the nomination. Romney’s supporters will likely back Huckabee over McCain, but some will pick McCain. With Romney’s votes, McCain gets the required delegates to make it to the convention unopposed. Ron Paul drifts quietly into the night.

The Brokered Convention Scenario - If Huckabee drops out soon, then Christians, pro-lifers and immigration advocates only have one rational choice - Ron Paul. Pro-war republicans will have to swallow their dislike of Paul, and vote for him because McCain holds positions closer to Hillary Clinton than Ronald Reagan.

What the media doesn’t get in all of this (but McCain and Huckabee are very aware of this) is that Ron Paul has significantly more delegates than his poll numbers would indicate. His campaign reported 42 after Super Tuesday. He won’t have enough to win, but he may have enough to be the kingmaker in a brokered convention.

eBay Changes Feedback Structure
eBay stops the tit-for-tat feedback cycle that has been happening lately. The problem is that sellers are conserably more likely to leave retaliatory feedback. The new rules are designed to fix this by basically removing sellers from the feedback equation.

As both a buyer and seller on eBay, I can definitely confirm that the seller has way to much advantage in the current feedback system. However, the problem could be fixed if this issue were looked at more fundamentally. The sellers are claiming that they have rights to leave the last word on feedback because “buyer satisfaction” is part of their requirements. In other words, unless the buyer leaves positive feedback, then they haven’t “completed” their part of the transaction. I think this is garbage - a petty excuse to preserve an etiquette system that allows them to retaliate. I propose that the seller should be required to leave feedback once they have shipped the item (this is when the item is legally the buyer’s responsibility) or the buyer has confirmed they have received the item. Are you listening eBay? I propose!

Money
Wesley Snipes was acquitted of tax fraud, conspiracy.
Euros are starting to become accepted in New York city.

Maniacism
FBI wants palm prints, eye scans, tattoo mapping

Medicine
Assisted suicide, sans doctor, in Oregon. Husband arrested for murder of wife with Lou Gehrig’s Disease.
Finnish patient gets new jaw from own stem cells

Ministry
5 Reasons Why The Emergining Church Is Fading
Cigarette Silence: When will the Church comment on the evils of Big Tobacco?

Ron Paul a Racist?

Published by Colin January 14, 2008 in Current Events. 84 Comments

The following is an editorial and represents the author’s opinion and not any views of this site, its other authors or contributors.

Both the left and right political establishment are salivating over a rare opportunity to knock around a man who has had no scandals, no marital issues, no political waffles, no changes of heart, no demagoguing and represents the most constitutional, conservative approach to enter the mainstream of politics since Senator Robert Taft. There has literally been no ammo whatsoever for the neo-socialist liberals or the big government conservatives who are terrified of what Ron Paul represents - a man of integrity, whose personal life and principles are nearly as pure as the gold standard which he advocates.

The best they could do up until this point were the logical fallacies of middle-school cliques: ad hominem attacks on him (he’s “crazy,” or a “kook”), his supporters (Ron Paul is supported by prostitutes and white supremacists, therefore he must be bad) or his ability to win (Ron Paul isn’t “electable” - therefore we don’t have to pay attention to the truth he speaks).

When Ron Paul began to actually gain traction, proving that he was no kook, his supporters are mostly normal, mainline Americans and that he was indeed electable - the establishment and their hacks stood in frozen panic for a couple of months. When he raised the most money in the fourth quarter of 2007, there was nary a whisper in the media.

The Blessing and Curse of Grassroots Support
Ron Paul has always been supported by a grassroots effort. The only inherent disadvantage of this is that supporters get a larger say in representing a candidate. If you have even one supporter who has radical, immoral or unethical views and gets his hand on the mic, then you have a moment of discomfort. However, if you happen to represent even a slightly credible threat to the establishment and the acolytes of the “lesser of two evils” then you will be the victim of muckraking.

And so the major media and blogosphere alike, especially those invested in the same old story of every other candidate, have jumped on the first so called “scandal” associated with Ron Paul. When Paul was out of office in the eighties and nineties, newsletters were published under his name, edited and written by supporters - but most of which the congressman never read, wrote or even really cared about.

The Muckrakers
In every election he’s ever ran in since, the remarks of those supporters became “breaking news” rehashed over and over again. The apologies from Ron Paul, for remarks he never wrote or read have been quick and proficient every time. The man has every right to come out swinging against the muckrakers who dig it out every election, but instead, like a true leader and ethical man of integrity, he apologizes again and again - despite having nothing to do with it except his name.

But this doesn’t stop so called conservatives (where the majority of the attacks come from) from acting like children and bored old women, suspending their high and mighty preaching about morals and values to churn out negative gossip-columns before even doing the most basic research on the issue.

Ron Paul has never been seen or heard saying anything racist. In fact, he has the most support among blacks in the Republican party. His individualist message is the most open and tolerant concerning issues of race, and has always been. There is no evidence whatsoever that he has any racist leanings - yet the witch hunt goes on.

The NAACP itself has come to Paul’s defense. Yesterday, Austin President Nelson Linder, who has known Paul for over 20 years, maintained that Paul was being attacked because he represents a threat to “the establishment.” He remarked further:

Knowing Ron Paul’s intent, I think he is trying to improve this country but I think also, when you talk about the Constitution and you constantly criticize the federal government versus state I think a lot of folks are going to misconstrue that….so I think it’s very easy for folks who want to to take his position out of context and that’s what I’m hearing

The Real Kooks Reveal Themselves
Ironically, the major media have been the first to admit their mistakes in this whole joke of a story. Wolf Blitzer had Ron Paul on right away and finished his interview declaring, “You and I have talked a lot… and I was pretty shocked, because it certainly didn’t sound like the Ron Paul that I have come to know, and our viewers have come to know.” Fox News, who has been blatantly anti-Ron Paul, didn’t even bring it up in their most recent debate.

Tucker Carlson told the author of the story that it was “right over his head” when he accused Ron Paul of speaking in “racist code” as part of his covert racist agenda. Ironically, many of the conservatives who openly dismiss Paul as a “kook” are jumping on an anti-Ron Paul bandwagon driven by a man who thinks Paul is speaking in “racist code” as a “transmitter.” The author also admitted he “had no evidence” of Ron Paul actually saying racist things.

But the so called “conservative” under-media continue to revel in their hypocrisy. Like all self-righteous entities, they boldly proclaim themselves, their candidates and their causes moral and just - sounding the biblical trumpet of pride as thy announce their moral superiority - while simultaneously exposing their ignorance and unabashed hostility towards the closest embodiment of true conservative principles in the modern era. Many who use this example of yellow journalism will call Paul a kook, and base this accusation on a man who thinks Paul is a “neo-confederate transmitter” of “racist code.”

Even the left-leaning New York Times printed a retraction on a story from last year accusing Paul of being tied with white supremacists. It will be interesting to see if the conservative media and their followers will bear even a shred of the integrity the Times has, and retract their ungrounded accusations.

The Blowback Generation of Conservatives
The false conservatives publications, authors and pundits, many paying lip service to the free market, strong national defense and the constitution, have been revealing their true colors the past few elections. This incident has now proven that they are desperate and the era of big-government conservatism will likely not endure. The moral “majority” soon will have a choice - make the full transition to Huckabee and Hillary-style moral socialism, or repent and return to the way of freedom, limited government and individual responsibility.

Ron Paul will not win this election, but he if he maintains his status as a fund raising, conservative magnet, then the next election will move a little closer to the right. Politicians are predictably eager to go where the wind blows, and a significant gust is brewing in the form of Ron Paul republicans. For the first time in my lifetime, the mainstream media is broadly and openly questioning the federal reserve, the constitutionality of previously sacrosanct government programs and the war on drugs. Paul is educating and inspiring a new generation of conservatives, armed with the moral and political principles that the current generation has either forgot or abandoned. We will never vote for a faux conservative again. We are the generation of their blowback. And the siren song of their big-government pundits is wasted - gradually decreasing into baseless accusations, and the whining of a faded empire.

Education Reform & Republican Presidential Candidates

Published by Sadie January 9, 2008 in Politics. 8 Comments

I am a teacher in the public school system with an M.Ed from the University of Oregon. Over the last several years, I have seriously studied the American educational system and worked in it as a kindergarten and first grade teacher. These are my thoughts on the educational policy statements made by some Republican Candidates for President. I wanted to include all candidates in this article, however after three weeks of researching and writing it, I have decided to publish it as is.

Parents and teachers alike should look closely at candidates statements on educational policy. Many candidates make “feel good” statements offering little or no solution as to how they actually plan to implement their grand ideas for improving the state of public education. Additionally, candidates often have track records in other areas that set a precedent that suggests how they might handle or implement their educational policies. It is also important to remember that most people view education in one of two ways:

Education is the role of the state: the government is ultimately responsible for educating children, and as such is also responsible for the quality and regulation of education across the board: public schools, private schools, home-school laws. Thus, because the state has total authority, secular state values supersede parental values.

Education is the role of parents: a child’s guardians or parents are ultimately responsible for educating children, and as such are also responsible for the quality and regulation of their children’s education regardless of if they attend private, public, or home schools. Thus, because the parents have total authority, parental values supersede secular state values.

Rudy Giuliani
Giuliani claims he wants to reform the public school system by allowing parental choice via vouchers or charter schools (which are publicly funded and thus government controlled schools). These are not subject to the same regulations as other public schools, and there are a number of problems with them. For example, most students are unable to enroll in such a school as there are long waiting lists and the state controls how many charter schools can be created.

Real Actions: He recently created an “Educational Advisory Board” to work on school choice, although he claims that parents should be the ones making the choice on how to educate children. Creating an advisory board (such is the function of the Dept. of Education) is relatively harmless, although I fail to see how this board full of government people is a step towards parental choice and control (seems like creating more government bureaucracy to me.)
Guiliani has proposed to open schools on weekends for remedial students to catch up. This idea sounds a little backwards, especially considering how poor the schools were to begin with in New York. If the schools were not working for children attending them Monday through Friday, how will sending them for an additional day using the same methods make a difference?
He started a Charter Schools Initiative.
Guiliani also sought greater power and control over Schools. This means greater government and less local control as the legislation would have given power over to mayors instead of school boards, yikes!
Guiliani also created the Bilingual Education Task Force. This move also maintains the idea of reform coming down from the top levels of government, i.e. more centralized government control is the solution to failing schools. However, Giuliani does appear to at least be consistent in his statements.
He views education as a “civil rights” issue. This is NCLB language by the way, but, I’ve got to hand it to him on opposing the teachers unions, that takes some guts. In all, Guiliani talks some semi-interesting talk, but his actions or attempted actions don’t always match up in the end.

Mike Huckabee
Huckabee wants to release “Weapons of Mass Instruction” in arts and sciences and believes schools should be judged by “results” (does not say what these results should be based upon, standardized tests or what?). He takes credit for raising test scores as governor and claims to support parental choice, to want more charter schools and wants a “clear distinction” between federal and state roles in NCLB.”States must be allowed to develop their own benchmarks,” according to Huckabee. However, he is either grossly misinformed or he is just repeating republican rhetoric because states currently DO set their own standards under NCLB (that promise won’t be hard to achieve). As such, he supports NCLB as it stands today, which has significantly increased the role of the federal government in regulating and controlling schools - minimizing local control. Ultimately, NCLB will lead to federalized government schools that offer a nationally standard curriculum. Huckabee also claims to strongly support homeschoolers. He recently answered many questions regarding his educational policy. Huckabee does not believe that vouchers are practical and prefers improving public schools instead.

Real Actions: Passed the Omnibus Education Act 2003 in Arkansas which allowed the State to consolidate nearly 200 of the state’s 308 school districts as a way to afford a broader curriculum. This legislation effectively replaces local school boards and gives broader authority to the state.
Created the Smart Start, Smart Step, and Next Step programs, which put state selected facilitators in schools to help guide the principal and teachers in their professional development. From what I understand, these programs increase state control of teacher development and school wide goals as opposed to a teacher/principal himself choosing how to further their education.
He helped revise Arkansas’ public Charter School law in 1999. Charter schools are promoted as school choice, however, they are in fact a “faux choice” because of limited enrollment opportunities as well as the fact that they are public schools and cannot opt out of state control and state laws.
He supported the creation of Teacher-of-the-Year legislation which makes the teacher an ex-officio member of the state Board of Education and allows the teacher to travel across the state training others during the school year. Yes, that makes sense, if you have a good teacher, by all means pull them from the classroom to do state sponsored bureaucratic activities.
Huckabee raised teacher salaries and public school funds at the expense of taxpayers. Now, that’s nice but it is certainly not small government, nor is it supportive of true school choice as it simply reinforces the government monopoly on education.
Based on these kinds of actions, it’s really no surprise that the NEA has endorsed him. I happen to belong to this teacher’s union (as mandated by my state) and I know for a fact that this union believes that education is the role of the state, and is anti-homeschooling, anti-school choice and vouchers.
Huckabee signed and allowed Arkansas state legislature to pass new laws that were more restrictive for homeschooling families.
Huckabee opposed a legislative proposal by the Murphy Commission (a think-tank he started) to reform the education system and start a voucher system in the state of Arkansas. Huckabee may “believe” that parents should be able to make a choice, however, he certainly does not act on that belief.

Continue reading ‘Education Reform & Republican Presidential Candidates’

Liveblog: The Iowa GOP Debate

Published by Colin December 12, 2007 in Politics. 7 Comments

For the first time, we are going to liveblog today’s GOP debate (before the blog, a long time ago, there was this, this and this). It is the final debate before the Iowa Caucuses. The debate starts at 1:00 EST. Stuck at work? No cable? You like hacks like us? We’re going to bring the action live, with commentary. Tune back here around 2:00pm EST.

1:55 - Welcome everyone. Looking forward to getting this thing started.

1:57 - I wonder if John Cox is still ticked off that he isn’t invited to these debates.

1:59 - I’ll be watching via the fox news stream, where all the candidates seem to be practicing at being statues before the cameras come on. What terrible audio!

2:02 - Thank goodness, no discussion on Iraq.

2:03 - They seem to have a grip on the applause. Another positive. A well disciplined audience gives a lot more time to the candidates.

2:06 - Giuliani says that economic crisis is not a issue of national security - thank goodness. Ron Paul says it is, and ties it to foreign policy.

2:09 - Tancredo miraculously does not tie this question to immigration.

2:09 - Thompson speaks truth - the debt is going to really hurt future generations. Romney decides to sound upbeat and polished. His breathing and pacing is quite measured.

2:10 - Huckabee speaks to his socialistic/protectionst roots: a country is responsible for feeding itself, fueling itself and fighting for itself.

2:11 - Keyes argues to abolish the income tax, replace it with a sales tax.

2:12 - excellent question: what sacrifices should the American people make to relieve debt. Giuliani says its not the American people, it is the government. “Rather than relying on government as a nanny government, we should rely on people to make their own choices”

2:14 - Paul goes to foreign policy again… wow. “No need to sacrifice… we need more liberty!”

2:14 - Huckabee calls current healthcare model “intervention based” - is this a rip off of Paul. Are these geeky libertarian words becoming cool again?

2:16 - The tenor of this debate is so different than other debates. All the candidates sound like radicals compared to their former selves at the start of the campaign. They are demanding to “follow the constitution” and seeking to radically cut taxes and spending. Tancredo right now “don’t ask the government for womb to tomb protection.”

2:18 - Thompson says he’ll run debts for military and infrastructure. The guy that a lot of conservatives loved before he entered, is the biggest left-winger on the stage right now.

2:19 - Question: who is paying more than their “fair share” in taxes?

2:20 - the interviewer tries to interrupt Alan Keyes while he’s bouncing back and forth like a muppet - bad idea.

2:21 - Thompson is quite witty - would like to be rich like Romney so he doesn’t have to care about taxes.

2:22 - Ron Paul talks about the “inflation tax” as the “most evil of all taxes.” Iowa republicans say “wha?”

2:23 - free statement time! Wasn’t this supposed to be a debate. And now a round of commercials from the candidates…

2:25 - Paul asked about keeping foreign markets open while protecting American jobs. Paul talks about opening individual trade agreements, and fixing monetary problems. Again, probably over everyone’s head.

2:27 - Huckabee with another “three things” speech. How simple all our problems are! I’m surprised Huck doesn’t pull out the chalkboard.

2:28 - McCain - “I’m the biggest free-trader” Ha! But then makes a bold point about eliminating subsidies for farms. Guy has gusto!

2:30 - Tancredo: “NAFTA is a disaster” - here he goes on immigration now. Hits up on national sovereignty also. Duncan Hunter, peaked eyebrow and all, “trade deals are business deals between nations” - awesome!

2:32 - Paul: “We have no chance if we don’t restrain the government.” Thomspson talks about how afraid we all should be about terrorists.

2:33 - Thompson fights the host and wins some applause. Anarchy has now broken out. Everyone talks about global warming at once.

2:34 - Giuliani: climate change is real. Everyone else doesn’t want to answer the question, but they all want to speak. Such are the quandries of politicians.

2:36 - Keyes started out with a great moment after the anarchy… then goes on a rant unrelated to global warming. He’s waddling again. He’s unstoppable. Thompson just makes fun of him. Best debate ever!

2:38 - Huckster: “We don’t own this earth.” I think someone just started humming “Imagine.”

2:39 - Huck: “Let the government be the marketplace and we’ll create the demand that lowers the price.” This guy is insane.

2:40 - Tancredo makes the best statement of the season on global warming - the government has no idea how to set mandates, they have no clue what they are doing. I trust the market ore than the government.

2:42 - Huckabee cites the founding fathers. Yes, they really would have loved that last statement on making the government the market.

2:42 - Going to education now. Let’s see if anyone can tie it to terrorism. Go!

2:44 - Giuliani calls current education model a “government command” model. Duncan Hunter tells campfire stories about education as a response. “Let’s inspire them to reach for the stars.”

2:47 - Romney wants the fed to be like his state program - give free tuition to students in the top 25% of graduate exams.

2:48 - Huck says that education should be a state issue, and then says that the federal government. Huckabee says to release “weapons of mass instruction.”

2:49 - Keyes is fighting the host and wins. Get’s 30 seconds, and demands one minute. This lady is going to get fired. Claims he’s being ignored. He uses his time to preach. There goes the bobbing. This guy should never be at another debate again.

2:50 - Back to Paul, who politely waited for Keyes to stop babbling. Wants to get rid ofDept. of Education and give tax credits to teachers and encourage homeschooling. Wants parents to have control again. Very strong answer - first for Paul on the night.

2:52 - Thompson calls out the NEA. Have fun swimming with the fishies!

2:53 - Tancredo gives a strong answer and gets applause attacking Huckabee. Nice one! Huckabee gives back cool word-twist: “communicator in chief.”

2:55 - Romney attacks the Union too, but he’s got an army of Mormons to fight for him. Thompson only has a bunch of actors on his team.

2:57: Duncan Hunter: “The sky is falling!” Talks about all the potential enemies we could have and how we should strengthen the military.

2:58 - Paul, in one year, would end the war and reestablish diplomatic relation.

3:00 - first mention of “radical Islam” - took a whole hour. Astounding!

3:01 - Romney is ready for universal health care. Huck says that the president should be “a president of all the united states.” Does this guy ever say anything of substance?

3:02 - Keyes is probably the only motivational speaker that can hold a flame to Huckabee. Talks over the host again. Still going… Still going…

3:05 - Keyes plugs his “political army of america’s revival.” Only has to be reminded to shut-up once.

3:07 - Video time.

3:09 - Keyes attacks Romney about flip-flopping. Then says that our creator is more important than the constitution. Attacks Giuliani. Is asked to shut-up twice.

3:12 - Thompson says that the intelligence and military has been “neglected” and that is why no one trusts their reports. Says we need to rely on other country’s intelligence.

3:13 - More videos.

3:14 - Huckabee asked about examples in healthcare and education. Guy is quick witted. Takes the golden rule and applies it to health care. Missed the last bit - as my internet broke and is restarting.

3:19 - Tancredo grilled on foreign policy. Says debate can be narrowed to the idea that we can’t leave Iraq, but we can stop being the police-force in Iraq.

3:20 - Paul grilled on how in the world he’s going to do all this stuff. Other candidates laugh. “Freedom is unifying,” says Paul. Claims that he has the ability to unify congress. Me thinks not.

3:23 - New years’ resolution time. Keyes dodges it. McCain asks for unity. Huck says he’ll be careful about what he says. Romney, wants to “come together.” Thompson wants to be a better man. Tancredo actually answers, by saying Huckabee is poor on immigration, Paul says follow the constitution, Hunter says to buy american, and Giuliani says we should have a sense of optimism.

3:25 - Debate is over.

The GOP Debate (in short)

Published by Colin June 6, 2007 in Politics and Current Events. 28 Comments

I have very little time to post a lot of verbiage about the debate - so I will just mention a few quick observations.

Tom Tancredo
Tancredo really had a lot going for him going into this debate. While everyone could see he was the most outspoken on immigration - he really seemed to stand for limited government. Last night he had the opportunity to discuss the caveat of the English language. Quite frankly, I was appalled. He refuses to have his website in Spanish, and then, in the most outrageous proposal of the year from any politician thus far, declared that all immigration (both legal and illegal) be stopped:

We talk about all the immigration reform we want, and what it’s got to get down to is this: Are we ready for a timeout? Are we actually ready to say, “Enough is enough”? We have to stop all legal immigration except for the — for people coming into this country as family members, immediate family members, and/or refugees.

Granted, Tancredo also had the best statement in the debate on what Role he would have for George W. Bush if Tancredo was president:

Some time ago, 2003 I think it was, I got a call from Karl Rove who told me that because of my criticism of the president, I should never darken the doorstep of the White House. I have been so disappointed in the president in so many ways… I would have to tell George Bush exactly the same thing Karl Rove told me.

Beautiful. Just beautiful.

Mike Huckabee
The most memorable moment of the night for Huckabee, was his literal sermon on God. I really couldn’t doubt the man’s sincerity. Very eloquent, specific and unashamed about his views on creation.

Duncan Hunter
I think Hunter’s idea about a border fence are all washed up. I watched a great episode of Penn and Teller BS [WARNING: ADULT LANGUAGE] that demonstrated just how weak his fence was (physically and in terms of policy). He hammered on it over and over, making his aluminum fence sound like stone ramparts.

John McCain
As in the last few debates, McCain has had responses more scripted than dialogue from Titanic. I think even God got a little tired of it.

Mitt Romney
Romney got asked directly about his blatantly socialist health care system. He then proceed to write a second book on doublespeak. His system is virtually identical to Hillary’s plan, and identical in principle. Sorry Mr. Romney, but “mandated” and “free market” do not belong in the same sentence.

Zeal For Truth