Posts
I watched the debate last night but refused to watch it live. Instead, being a hockey fan, I chose to watch the 6th game of the Stanley Cup playoff between Vancouver and Boston. Since moving to Canada it has become expected of me and in spite of the fact that I had never been a great hockey fan, I realize now what I've missed. It's a great game and after seeing the repeat of the debate on CNN last night, I reallzed that I made the right decision.
Don't get me wrong--I thought it was a relatively good showing by our Republican hopefuls; it's just that CNN cannot possibly suck enough when it comes to pretending they're unbiased and fair. John King was also disarmingly annoying when he made "uh-uh-uh" sounds in an attempt to cut off responses to the open-ended questions he asked that required more than a yes or no answer. It was almost bizarre.
Personally, I believe Michele Bachman and Mitt Romney did very well. Cain needed more financial questions thrown at him, but it was, after all, CNN. Tim Pawlenty was rather meek and not very dynamic, but his answers were good, and Newt, well he was Newt. His answers were good, he speaks well, but now he has to hand out his own flyers because his staff is gone. Ron Paul was, as always, interesting, if not a bit unrealistic. Santorum was decent too, but I truly believe that it's too early to call. It's so early, in fact, we may have more on the menu next week.
It seemed that CNN wanted to avoid having the candidates talk about anything substantive--you know, something that might point out Obama's miserable failures in his three years of playing president--like, say, the economy. But Republicans don't really have to worry too much about that issue because we have an ally doing the talking for us. Who, you ask? Debbie Wasserman Schultz, the chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee.
"But she's a Democrat; how can she help the Republican cause?"
Simply by allowing her to speak. For instance, after appearing on "Meet the Press" with David Gregory, she was shown a graph depicting how, when Obama was inaugurated, unemployment was at 7.3% and today is at 9.1%, up 25%; our national debt was at $10.6 trillion and now at $14.3 trillion, up 35%; and the cost of gasoline was $1.83 gal. and now at $3.74 gal., up 104%. Gregory asked her, "Why should Americans trust Democratic governance right now on the economy, particularly the president's?"
Debbie answered: "Because we were able to, under President Obama's leadership, turn the economy around. When President Obama took office--"
Gregory: "Let me just stop you right there--clearly the economy has not been turned around; Americans don't believe that's the case."
I could have fallen over and wet my Carhart's--it's rare that one actually hears Dick Gregory burn a liberal for breakfast. It just doesn't get any better than that. I honestly cannot imagine Obama keeping Debbie Wasserman Schultz in the position of DNC Chair much longer--she really belongs on The View with Joy Behar and the "softer side of stupid."
Please feel free to comment
Tweet
Don't get me wrong--I thought it was a relatively good showing by our Republican hopefuls; it's just that CNN cannot possibly suck enough when it comes to pretending they're unbiased and fair. John King was also disarmingly annoying when he made "uh-uh-uh" sounds in an attempt to cut off responses to the open-ended questions he asked that required more than a yes or no answer. It was almost bizarre.
Personally, I believe Michele Bachman and Mitt Romney did very well. Cain needed more financial questions thrown at him, but it was, after all, CNN. Tim Pawlenty was rather meek and not very dynamic, but his answers were good, and Newt, well he was Newt. His answers were good, he speaks well, but now he has to hand out his own flyers because his staff is gone. Ron Paul was, as always, interesting, if not a bit unrealistic. Santorum was decent too, but I truly believe that it's too early to call. It's so early, in fact, we may have more on the menu next week.
It seemed that CNN wanted to avoid having the candidates talk about anything substantive--you know, something that might point out Obama's miserable failures in his three years of playing president--like, say, the economy. But Republicans don't really have to worry too much about that issue because we have an ally doing the talking for us. Who, you ask? Debbie Wasserman Schultz, the chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee.
"But she's a Democrat; how can she help the Republican cause?"
Simply by allowing her to speak. For instance, after appearing on "Meet the Press" with David Gregory, she was shown a graph depicting how, when Obama was inaugurated, unemployment was at 7.3% and today is at 9.1%, up 25%; our national debt was at $10.6 trillion and now at $14.3 trillion, up 35%; and the cost of gasoline was $1.83 gal. and now at $3.74 gal., up 104%. Gregory asked her, "Why should Americans trust Democratic governance right now on the economy, particularly the president's?"
Debbie answered: "Because we were able to, under President Obama's leadership, turn the economy around. When President Obama took office--"
Gregory: "Let me just stop you right there--clearly the economy has not been turned around; Americans don't believe that's the case."
Please feel free to comment
Tweet
No comments:
Post a Comment