Thursday, September 8, 2011

Republican Debate Wrap Up!

The Official Commentarama Debate Wrap Up article is upon you. . . guaranteed to by 97% accurate. Who won? Who lost? Who didn’t show? Who had the best answer? All this and more awaits.

Winner: The Republican Party. This was an excellent debate. It was substantive, friendly and yet challenging. No one shied away from attacking anyone else, but they weren’t nasty about it. The whole group came across as intelligent, unified and Presidential. If I knew nothing about the candidates going in, I would feel comfortable that almost any of them would make a solid conservative president.

Loser: Obama. The mighty O took a beating. Each candidate not only blasted him on his record, but made it clear (1) he’s in over his head and (2) that anyone on the stage would be an improvement. Obama also can’t be happy the whole group proved to be strong debaters who will easily destroy our TOTUS-dependent president.

Winner: The Governors. The three governors, Perry, Romney and Huntsman all came across as genuinely solid candidates. They seemed to have strong records, solid experience, command of the issues, and a leadership presence. It helped that MSNBC favored them. . .

Loser: MSNBC. What a bunch of biased sh*ts! First, they favored the three governors. Secondly, Brian Williams spent the first ten minutes blasting each candidate with attack questions. Then they tried to get the candidates to attack each other using a question format like this: “Candidate Y has been called an idiot for their stupid belief in XYZ. Tell us why Candidate Y is an ass, Candidate X.” Fortunately, no one took the bait and Newt put an end to this, causing one of the best moments in the debate. This all unified the candidates. Moreover, Williams tried to attack Perry because Texas executes criminals. Williams acted like this was something to be ashamed of. But the audience gave a huge round of applause to Texas, showing how out of touch Williams is. Williams was visibly shaken by this.

Winner: Newt. Newt was in fine form and gave answers that sounded smart and sensible. But his big score came when he blasted Brian Williams and the Politico Kid for trying to get the candidates to fight each other. He finished this by turning this into a blast at Obama. Heavy applause followed. His performance likely will allow him to keep going.

Winner: Perry. Perry came across as very electable, strongly conservative and highly professional. He dropped all the Texasisms, which will make it hard to caricature him as Yosemite Sam, i.e. the image the Democrats hoped would scare the public. Moreover, no one really laid a glove on him. The candidates tried to hit him over the vaccine thing, but the issue seemed pretty obscure in a debate that centered almost entirely on economics. He was a little unsteady on Social Security, but not enough to hurt him.

Loser: Perry. Perry never quite managed to separate himself enough from Romney to run away with the nomination. Thus, Romney lives to fight another day. Perry also has a problem with many of Texas’ statistics being near the bottom. The obvious answer is “it’s hard to be near the top when 1/3 of your state snuck across the border in the last ten years,” but Perry was unwilling to raise that point in his own defense.

Winner: Romney. Romney survived by not getting destroyed, and he showed some fight and came across as a decent leader. He still seems a tad nervous on stage, but he defended himself well and the attacks on him (e.g., RomneyCare) are losing their power.

Winner: Huntsman. Huntsman has no support, but the moderators treated him like he was tied for first. This will elevate his stature. Also, if you don’t know anything about him, he comes across as smart, competent, a solid (dull) speaker with a solid record, and a man with a good platform. The problem is, he’s lying. Much of what he says is exactly opposite of what he did as governor. For example, his answer on immigration reform sounded very solid, but as governor he gave “driving privileges” and in-state tuition to illegals. His biggest mistake was his defense of global warming, but he lumped it in with being pro-evolution, which will play well outside the religious right.

Winner: Herman Cain. Cain came across much better than before. Last time, he kept saying, “I’ll look into it and fix it.” This time, he told us how he would fix it, and the difference was dramatic. Cain came across as a solid leader with a thoughtful plan, who could plausibly be seen as the President of the United States. That’s a big step up for him. I would not be surprised to see people give him a second look after this. Unfortunately, it’s probably still not enough to launch him into direct competition with Romney and Perry, but I think he kept himself relevant last night.

Loser: Bachmann. Bachmann got hurt. The moderators lumped her with the fringers, which gave the appearance that she was not to be taken seriously. She was also (more than the others) the object of ridicule questions where the moderators asked the others to attack her prior statements. They also avoided asking her the key questions about jobs and economics, which made her seem detached from the discussion. Beyond the moderator bias, she suffered from the comparison to the governors who had vastly more experience to draw upon to answer questions. Thus, whereas they could talk about specific programs and achievements they caused in their states, all she could say was “I opposed XX.”

Loser: Ron Paul. Paul gave a poor showing by Paul standards. As usual, he made some great points, but he always sounds flustered. . . like he’s crazy. Moreover, he is crazy. Indeed, he whipped out the tinfoil hat a couple times, like when he warned us that protecting the border with Mexico was a plot to keep us and our money trapped in the US, or when he blamed 9/11 on big government. Since his support is fixed, I doubt this will hurt him, but this will only cement his “crazy” reputation with the public.

Loser: Santorum. Santorum simply doesn’t belong on this stage. He had nothing memorable to offer and seemed out of place. Whereas the others debated philosophical questions about the scope of government and economic questions related to reshaping the government’s relationship to the economy, he gave answers that sounded like shallow slogans about issues from ten years ago.

Loser: McCotter. McCotter didn’t show up. But before you blame him, he was excluded by the organizers who claimed they only wanted candidates with a serious chance of winning the nomination. . . like Huntsman (1% support) and Santorum (1% support). Still, he lost out.

Missed Opportunities: There were several missed opportunities. (1) On Libya, no one pointed out that the Obama Doctrine is a doctrine of unlimited war. (2) The moderators blasted GE for not paying taxes and no one mentioned that GE’s CEO is Obama’s jobs advisor.... and is shipping jobs to China. (3) On global warming, no one mentioned the “climatologists” faking their warming date, faking their equations, putting out reports they admit were false when they put them out, continuously having the revise their Holy Bible, and the fact that they’ve gone from freezing to warming to freezing.

Conclusion
All in all, this was an excellent debate. The candidates came across as strong and unified and refused to be suckers for the MSM. Obama would have looked like a drooling idiot if he had been on stage. Based just on what we heard last night, I could easily support Perry, Romney, Cain or Newt. I would be a little concerned about Bachmann, who seemed to vanish. And I would have been fine with Huntsman until he got to global warming, where he attacked the party and started my Spidey-senses tingling. Knowing what I know about these people, I am less pleased with them than I was from the debate alone. But who knows how they’ll really turn out when their butts hit the big chair?

Now we need to see what Obama says tonight. . . before the football game. (T-Rav has kindly promised to recap it for those us who would rather not watch TOTUS spew forth.)

161 comments:

Tennessee Jed said...

Thanks for a great wrap-up. I have a bunch of folks in and we are hiking Mt. Leconte today in the Smokies so I had to, unfortunately, miss it. Sounds like a great night.

T-Rav said...

Jeez, I'm already regretting this decision. By the way, why do I not see any of your material attributed to my awesome predictions? :-)

In all seriousness, this pretty much tallies with my reaction. With one exception: I don't think Santorum did that bad. I mean, I'm no more inclined to support him now than I was before, but he had some solid answers and managed to avoid saying anything crazy (unlike Ron Paul). Otherwise, I agree with your assessment.

BTW, I just heard that Bachmann will be giving a response to Obama's jobs speech tonight. Whether this is on behalf of the GOP or simply on her own hook, I have no idea, but I suspect it's the latter.

Scott said...

Great wrap up. Santorum did disappoint. Bachmann did not measure up to my expectations. Newt...old fella still gets my blood racing. No Chris matthews pun intended. Herman Cain and the 9/9/9 plan is a winner on first inspection. i would support any of your final choices as well, but none ofthe others...so far.

StanH said...

The Georgia boys did well, Gingrich, Cain. Perry and Romney did good as well. Romney’s Achilles Heel however is Romneycare, if he becomes the nominee, he’ll be like a vampire running from a crucifix, as he gets pounded from both the left, and the right. How he reconciles conservatism and Romneycare, is beyond me, but we’ll see as things develop.

Writer X said...

Great wrap-up! I wasn't as impressed with Huntsman, although everytime he spoke, I fought the urge to doze off so perhaps I missed some of his more brilliant answers.

I liked Cain's substantive answers. I was more impressed by Romski than I thought I'd be and same with Perry. When Perry spoke, his answers sounded like answers instead of talking points and campaign slogans. I like that.

Regarding Williams and the bald guy, their biases could not have been more obvious.

Obama has a speech tonight?

BevfromNYC said...

Excellent review. I was out last night and missed all the fun.

In all the reviews I have read so far, Perry made an excellent showing and it was pretty much Perry v. Romney as the overall serious leading candidates. I think Bachmann's support is waining.

I'm going to try and brave the speech tonight. I want a new tv anyway, so it won't matter if end up throwing hard objects at it.

LawHawkRFD said...

I liked the Perry followup on the death penalty. He parried the question well. But he really got on base when the MSNBC punks decided to join the debate rather than moderate it by asking: "The audience applauded the number of executions in Texas. What do you make of that, governor?"

Huntsman shares an Obama trait--great speeches with no substance. He has grand ideas with few specifics on how to implement them. But he simply disqualifies himself entirely from a Republican nomination with his constant channeling of Al Gore with the "settled science" crap about anthropogenic global warming. That issue alone is an economy killer.

Perry is right about Social Security (and Medicare) being a Ponzi scheme, but he has to work on explaining why it's a Ponzi scheme and what he intends to do about it.

At the end of the debate, I think that barring further developments, it's down to Perry and Romney. But there's still a long way to go.

Side note: As a former Simi Valley Planning Commissioner who was involved in the original plans for the Reagan Library site, it really made my stomach churn that a debate at a site honoring a great conservative President in a town that is heavily conservative Republican was moderated by a bunch of MSNBC leftists. On the other hand, I suppose they did find out big time that not everybody in America voted for Obama.

AndrewPrice said...

Jed, It was a good debate actually, I'm sorry you missed it. I'm glad you liked the wrap up though.

AndrewPrice said...

T-Rav, You're credited in the footnotes! ;-)

On Santorum, it's not that he said anything bad or horrible, he just really wasn't memorable last night. Of all the people on stage, he seemed the most like "oh yeah, he's here too."

Last I heard, the Republicans weren't going to do a response -- which angered Pelosi because she thought it reduced the significance of Obama's speech. Oh well. I have no idea if Bachmann's response will be official or not, but I guess it's a good way to get some publicity -- assuming anyone even makes it to the end of Obama's speech.

AndrewPrice said...

P.S. Don't worry on the recap, we won't heckle you too much. LOL!

AndrewPrice said...

Thanks Scott! I'm glad you like it. It was an interesting night because it shows the difference between looking at these folks on the record and watching them in a debate. As a group, they seemed much stronger last night than they did on paper. Hopefully that will continue.

I love the 9/9/9 plan! Cain has all the right instincts about how we need to control the government.

LL said...

As a former Obama Administration official (and bigger RINO than Romney), I expected MSNBC to bill him at the top. They never surprise me.

AndrewPrice said...

Stan, Georgia did quite well last night -- great state!

At this point, I think RomneyCare has stopped being a great debate tool because it doesn't seem to have the power to "wrong-foot" him anymore. But you're right that it is still an effective weapon -- especially if used in attack ads where it can be presented very graphically.

But honestly, I don't see Romney as the nominee unless something really unusual happens.

AndrewPrice said...

Writer X, Thanks!

Yeah, Obama's the pre-game! LOL!

I agree with you. I was much more impressed with both Romney and Perry than I expected to be, and Perry really came across as intelligent and capable. I honestly wasn't expecting that.

I thought Huntsman was a bit dull, but he struck me as a solid, capable governor... except when he gave the few hints that set off all the alarms. I think it will have helped him to be highlighted by the moderators, but I still think he's got no chance in a GOP primary. He should have run as a Democrat.

Yeah, I loved Cain's substance last night. He really struck me as a man with a plan and I would love to see that implemented.

On the bias, tell me about it! They made it so obvious that their goal was to attack the candidates. But it really blew up on them.

AndrewPrice said...

Bev, Thanks Bev! I'm sorry you missed it.

Best of luck tonight! Make sure you have plenty of booze to ease the pain! I think T-Rav is planning to mix booze and pain pills. LOL!

I think Bachmann is in trouble because Perry really is the 900 pound gorilla. She really needed to stand out last night, but the moderators really minimized her. It literally felt like she was only being asked questions as an afterthought, and even then, they didn't ask her the big questions. It was like they would asks the governors "how do you make jobs" and then they would ask Herman about his plan and then the governors would retort... and then they would ask Bachmann "you've said some stupid stuff, do you still believe it?" Then then they moved on again for half an hour. That's how it felt.

AndrewPrice said...

FYI, Rush is all over Brian Williams this morning, especially for the death penalty question.

Ed said...

Andrew, Excellent break down! And it was fun reading you and T-Rav and Writer X reviewing the debate as you went. Commentarama makes all things better! :D

AndrewPrice said...

Lawhawk, I know, what the heck were they doing letting MSNBC even host a Republican debate, much less at the Reagan library. What the heck?!

I get the feeling it's down to Romney and Perry now as well, but you never know.

I thought it was hilarious how the audience completely did the opposite of what Williams expected on the death penalty question. Williams looked really shocked.

It is a ponzi scheme, but I think they need to drop the idea of killing the program. The better way to sell it is to say what Cain said last night -- "lets follow Chile's plan."

AndrewPrice said...

LL, I agree. They really worked to make Huntsman seem like he was right up there with the front runners, even though he's polling less than anyone else on the stage. But that's what we get from the MSM.

AndrewPrice said...

Thanks Ed, It was fun to do. Plus, it makes the debates more interesting.

CrispyRice said...

Great re-cap, Andrew! I missed the debate itself, but have enjoyed listening to clips on the radio this morning.

Go Newt!! (But I'm still not voting for ya!)

It makes me feel better about our field in general, though.

Ed said...

Rush said that Bachmann really impressed him last night. I don't see it. I want her to win, but I didn't see it last night. He also thinks Palin is hurting Bachmann by flirting with running, but I don't think I believe that either.

AndrewPrice said...

FYI, A challenge to ObamaCare in Virginia just got tossed out, but it's not really relevant because (1) it was based on state law and (2) the real case is the 11th Circuit Case.

AndrewPrice said...

Thanks Crispy! The debate definitely increased my comfort level with the candidates. They all came across pretty well, and certainly they were all a match for Obama. Frankly, Obama must be pretty nervous about this.

I thought Newt did great, but I also don't think it will help him get elected. He's got too many problems for that.

AndrewPrice said...

Ed, I heard that. I don't agree either. On Bachmann, I think the proof that she got hurt last night is that no one is talking about her today -- they're all talking about Perry. On Palin, I understand his thinking: if Palin bowed out, her support would go somewhere. But I'm not sure Bachmann is that person or she would probably already be getting that support as a backup choice.

BevfromNYC said...

What about Newt the G-Man as VP running mate?

AndrewPrice said...

Bev, That's a good question. I think Newt and Cain kept themselves relevant in the VP race. But I think a lot of it will depend on who wins the nomination and how desperate they are to (1) add diversity, and/or (2) appeal to the center or the right. I can't see Perry adding Newt because he probably needs a moderate. I could see Cain as an outside possibility though for Perry. I kind of doubt Romney will pick anyone on stage, but he could possibly see Newt as a bridge to conservatives. I am more inclined to think, however, that Romney will look for a minority.

I still think Condi Rice is probably near the top of lists.

What do you think?

Libertarian Advocate said...

Didn't get to watch the debate. I wish I had. Of particular interest to me is your assessment that Brian Williams was pushing John Huntsman.

The only support that I can discern Huntsman has in the media and from the proggies. Obviously, the Demoncrats want him to run against Obama; he's Bama's favorite "Republican." Accordingly, he has no chance to be the Republican nominee.

AndrewPrice said...

Libertarian Advocate, Huntsman is getting a lot of support from the left. Even Michael Moore all but endorsed him today. I think they want us to choose him as the nominee. But I can't see that happening as I don't see any support for him on the right.

What Williams did last night was to treat Romney, Perry and Huntsman like the A Team. He always started questions with one of them and then gave the other two a chance to respond before he went to the others. Sometimes he would mix in Cain or Bachmann, but he always included those three.

If I knew nothing about the polls, I would have assumed from the way the questions were handled that Perry, Romney and Huntsman were running neck and neck and the rest were also-rans.

Also, I got the feeling that his questions to the other candidates were somewhat insulting. They tended to be "you don't know what you're doing" type questions, whereas the questions to the governors were more policy oriented. It wasn't 100% like that, but it was enough to make it seem like you had first tier candidates (Perry, Romney, Huntsman) and fringers (everyone else).

DUQ said...

Excellent analysis! This was much like how I saw the debate. I also thought the Newt moment was great. MSNBC sucks.

AndrewPrice said...

Thanks DUQ! And yes they do...

T-Rav said...

Confirmed: All my liberal friends were on Facebook last night and this morning talking about how Huntsman was the most sensible guy in the debate and how he's the only one they'd consider voting for. With endorsements like that...

AndrewPrice said...

T-Rav, As I said yesterday, I would not be surprised if he ended up running with Obama as the VP... once they kick Joe to the curb.

Scott said...

Newt the G-Man for VP? Why the hell not...Cheny would be proud...I think?

T-Rav said...

Thanks for the compliments, Ed! Humor always helps these situations.

Andrew, I have to agree with you on Bachmann. It wasn't that she said anything controversial or ridiculous--I thought most of her answers were pretty good--it was that MSNBC decided to make this "The Mitt and Rick Show (guest starring Jon Huntsman!)" and relegated her to the second-tier with Cain and Santorum. I wonder if this wasn't partially revenge for her making a fool of Chris Matthews so often.

Personally, I still think Rubio will be the first choice for VP. But after last night, I could see Gingrich getting the nod as well.

AndrewPrice said...

Scott, Cheney would be proud! LOL!

I can see Newt as VP, I just don't know if either Romney or Perry would want that? I guess we'll see.

AndrewPrice said...

T-Rav, I agree on Bachmann, I don't think she did anything wrong. In fact, I thought she did quite well. But they really tried to minimize her and that made it hard for her to shine. And since these kinds of debates are about how you compare to the others, that hurts.

Rubio is an interesting choice for VP which I like a lot. He would excite me a good deal.


(p.s. fyi, other comments have shown up at your review.)

Ed said...

T-Rav and Andrew, Any thoughts for tonight?

AndrewPrice said...

Ed, Yeah, I'd say the Saints are too much for the Packers. . . oh, you mean the speech?

Hmm. Frankly, I doubt Obama will offer anything new. He'll propose more spending -- the Democratic cure all. Then he will spend the rest of his time attacking the Republicans while simultaneously talking about the need for us to come together.

I think he will also suggest that the Republicans are unpatriotic and are trying to send jobs to China -- he's hinted at that in several recent speeches.

And don't be surprised if he very strongly hints that Republicans like black unemployment because they are racists.

I guess, what I'm saying is, expect this to be one of his more vile speeches.

T-Rav said...

Ed, the only hard info I've heard is that he will call for a payroll tax cut for middle-class Americans, or 95% of working families, whichever comes first. This might play well with voters, but it's also a stopgap measure that will do nothing in the long term except bankrupt Social Security that much faster.

AndrewPrice said...

T-Rav, I think he's also going to call for the NFL to move kickoffs back to the 30 yard line... but that's just a rumor.

His people keep hinting that he's really going to offer something "new" tonight, but I just can't see it. They've tried everything in their book of tricks and anything new would need to come from the right side of the spectrum.... which they will not touch.

One of the proposal they consider "new" (believe it or not) is to send money to the states to pay for teacher salaries so that states stop laying off teachers. Surprise, surprise, he's going to recommend more federal money for another union supporter. Typical. Not to mention that he already tried this twice. Idiot.

Fortunately, whatever he says is DOA in the House.

Ed said...

T-Rav, Whichever comes first indeed! He is so full of crap with his tax cut claim. Even the Washington Post called it ridiculous and pointed out that his "biggest tax cut in history" was less than a third of what Bush did.

rlaWTX said...

[Hey, T-Rav, I checked the footnotes - you're not there! I'd sue!]

Seriously though, thanks for the wrap up. I really enjoyed reading your color commentary last night, but this is helpful too.

semi-on-topic: I have a friend - a serious hard-core social & econ conservative - who seems to have acquired a soft spot for Newt since at the last debate... I'm not sure what's up with that...

AndrewPrice said...

Ed, I saw that article. They said his tax cut claim might work if he just said "broadest" (might) but the way he said it was clearly a lie.

AndrewPrice said...

rlaWTX, Thanks! I'm glad you liked it. It was fun doing the color commentary and the I think the wrap up is good for people who couldn't see the debate.

Newt did a solid job last night, but his record (personal and professional) is just really a turn off. I would be surprised if he got any new permanent support from last night, but it's interesting to hear about your friend.


Are you sure about the footnotes? I'm pretty sure T-Rav was in there somewhere.... must be my research assistant's fault! ;-)

T-Rav said...

Ed, when you've lost the Washington Post...

I can't imagine there'll be anything revolutionary or exciting about the speech tonight. Obama is not only a hard-core leftist, he's an intellectual lightweight who ran out of ideas a long time ago. He needs to go big to resurrect his sagging poll numbers, and I don't think he can.

T-Rav said...

rla, do you know any lawyers? ;-)

I wouldn't be too worried about your friend. I don't see any way Newt can win the nomination, and I'll admit, if all I knew about him was what I saw last night, I'd have a lot more than a soft spot for him. Now if your friend was a Ron Paul supporter, on the other hand...

T-Rav said...

Andrew, just say it was the Boiler Room Elves' fault, and I won't sue :-)

Incidentally, I saw on Drudge a while ago that a straw poll declared Ron Paul the winner of the debate. Using the same parameters as last night, I just held a poll of my own, which declared that everyone participating in that poll is @#$%ing retarded.

(BTW, I've responded to the new comments in my article. Between the debate last night and a couple other things, this afternoon was the first time I could go through them.)

AndrewPrice said...

T-Rav, When you've lost the Washington Post you've lost the world... if you're a liberal.

And you're right about Obama being an intellectual light-weight. I can't think of a single idea the man has had other than "I want to be President." Even his staff are light-weights. They are way out of their league.

AndrewPrice said...

T-Rav, I would never wrongly blame anything on the BRE... they don't take kindly to that, and they're thugs. "It would be a real shame if something happened to your internet." Ah!!!

Paul wins all the polls but loses all the votes. That's been his story all along. He has dedicated supporters who will flood internet sites and phone polls, etc. But there aren't enough of them to matter when the elections roll around.

Patti said...

andrew: i only caught the last 30 minutes (in my pain stupor, i forgot it was on), but in that short time, i came to the conclusions that the moderators were embarrassing themselves and that perry did pretty good, while bachman lacked. i did catch paul rail against the media with "you don't have to be a socialist to care about hungry school children" (paraphrasing), which made me do the pointed guns thing with my hands while i gave the moderators a "PEW PEW PEW!"

wished i had seen more, but really, in that short time, i think i got a pretty good overall feel. and for the record, that the event folks excluded mccotter pissed me off. but i bet you already knew that;)

T-Rav said...

Well, the official talking points for tonight's speech are up, and they look pretty droll. As expected.

http://dailycaller.com/2011/09/08/white-house-releases-talking-points-to-liberals-ahead-of-speech/

Nearly every one of them can be disproven, of course. Darrell Issa had a series of tweets earlier today taking them apart, and asking how we could trust the WH on economic issues after they claimed the stimulus was necessary to keep unemployment from going to 8 percent.

AndrewPrice said...

Patti, Yeah, the announcers were horrible.

Perry did pretty well. He wasn't spectacular, but he was solid.

Paul had some great answers at times and I loved the one you're talking about. Sadly, he also went into Whacko Land at times. I think it was generally not one of his better performances.

All in all though, I thought it was a good debate and I felt more comfortable with the field afterwords.

I hope you're feeling better! :-)

AndrewPrice said...

T-Rav, It looks like a real snoozer, doesn't it? I hope you've added no-doze to your booze supply for tonight!

Issa really is impressing me a lot these days. He's been absolutely tenacious at taking Obama's lies apart and exposing his corruption.

Here's your link: LINK

Ed said...

I wonder if Obama will send out Biden to warm up the crowd?

AndrewPrice said...

Ed, Good thinking. He can come out, tell a few racist jokes, tell us about having sex with his wife, and then praise the Chinese labor camps. That would be a great start to warm up the crowd!

T-Rav said...

And the craziness goes on--now the Paulbots are claiming Perry assaulted their leader last night, because there's a picture circulating from one of the commercial breaks where Perry can be seen with a hand on Paul's forearm and holding up a finger in front of his face. Yeah, totally assault. Perry's probably a secret agent of the Federal Reserve, sent to assassinate Paul at the first opportunity or something.

It's All A Conspiracy said...

He was injecting Paul with debate dehancing drugs! It was a set up to save the Fed! Audit reality!! Up with GOLD!!!

T-Rav said...

Yes, Conspiracy, sure it was. Let's go with that.

Speaking of stupidity, time for me to go through my pre-speech checklist. Let's see here...

Grain Alcohol: Check.
Barbituates: Check.
Soundproof Insulation: Check.
Paper Bag: Check.
Antipsychotics: Check.
Plexiglas: Check.
Automatic Defibrillator: Check.
Flamethrower: Check.
Duct Tape: Check.
Turkey Baster: Check.
Handbook on the Rites of Exorcism: Check.
List of Countries without Extradition: Check.

(I'd explain some of this, but it gets a bit technical.)

AndrewPrice said...

T-Rav, Sounds like you're ready! LOL! The book on exorcism should come in very handy!

55 minutes to go.... you can do it champ! Fight through the pain... and stupidity.

T-Rav said...

My final prediction: The Packers-Saints game will do more to turn the economy around than this turd.

AndrewPrice said...

Here it comes...

AndrewPrice said...

T-Rav, That goes without saying.

Koshcat said...

T-Rav-

You deserve a medal if you make it through another Obama speech. I would rather smash one of my testicles with a hammer than listen to him.

Didn't get home from work until 8:30 so I missed the debate (okay, I wouldn't say I MISSED it, it was already over when I got home). I appreciate the update. I have to remember that it is going through Andrew's filter, but that's ok.

AndrewPrice said...

Koshkat, Yep, it's going through my filter -- which is why I only promise 97% accuracy. :-)

T-Rav said...

Only 5 minutes late. Change! :-)

Why are they treating this like the SOTU? This thing got bumped up an hour for FOOTBALL.

AndrewPrice said...

It's no honor.

ScottDS said...

I'm late to the party...

I caught a few minutes of the debate last night and I have to say I was a bit unsettled by the death penalty applause... and I'm PRO-death penalty! I mean, it's a necessary evil but it's not a sporting event.

Other than that, I didn't watch enough (and I'm not politically astute enough) to have much of an opinion at this time. :-)

T-Rav said...

FORTY-THREE MINUTES????? GAAAAAA!!!!! WHERE'S THAT @#$%ING TELEVISON....

AndrewPrice said...

Stop the circus... I want to get off.

T-Rav said...

Oh, I forgot. Tennessee Rep. Marsha Blackburn invited the CEO of Gibson Guitar to sit in the gallery while Obama speaks. Awkward...

AndrewPrice said...

Scott, It is odd to applaud the death penalty, but I think it was probably a response to the snotty assumption in William's question that somehow the death penalty is something evil we should be ashamed of.

AndrewPrice said...

"everything in this bill will be paid for"? By who?

T-Rav said...

No, Barack, the only thing getting jolted right now is my nervous system.

AndrewPrice said...

Does he sound glib to anyone? Like he's selling something in an infomercial?

AndrewPrice said...

Wait... don't pass this jobs bill just yet! If you order in the next ten minutes, I'll throw in....

AndrewPrice said...

An American Airport and a Chinese Airport don't really compete.

T-Rav said...

Step 1: Rebuild roads and bridges.
Step 2: Destroy roads and bridges so our workers can continue working to rebuild them.
Step 3: Repeat.

T-Rav said...

I drive that bridge, and it sucks. But that's not gonna turn the economy around.

AndrewPrice said...

T-Rav, And fixing schools isn't going to improve education -- this is the same old liberal BS about money=education.

AndrewPrice said...

Uh... they already require that dipshit.

AndrewPrice said...

Sorry... President Dipshit.

T-Rav said...

You know what'll also put teachers back to work? Breaking the unions.

AndrewPrice said...

Pander pander pander pander pander pander pander pander pander pander pander ... repeat.

AndrewPrice said...

What does Obama know about dignity?

T-Rav said...

What is the importance of work?

A. It puts food on the table.
B. It is dignified.

AndrewPrice said...

What is it with this guy and tailoring everything?

"If you are unemployed for 47 days and have a tattoo of a turtle on your butt, then you get a tax break!"

AndrewPrice said...

Wait, I thought taxes were good?

T-Rav said...

Wait. Are you admitting that letting tax cuts expire results in a tax increase?? Did you mean to say that?

AndrewPrice said...

This sounds like gibberish.


Ahhh... pay their fair share. There it is.

AndrewPrice said...

So tax hikes are destructive unless they are aimed at people with money. They need to be taxed.

AndrewPrice said...

"those who are most fortunate" as if being rich is pure chance...

AndrewPrice said...

Well, Buffett's an asshole, that's the problem there -- a crony capitalist, a hypocrite and an Obama supporter. He should be taxed at 100%.

T-Rav said...

"Fair share"..."those who can afford it"..."tax breaks for the rich"...I'm going to explode. WARREN BUFFETT DOESN'T EVEN PAY THE TAXES HE'S SUPPOSED TO PAY, YOU !!!!!!!!!!!!

T-Rav said...

(pound) (pound) (pound)

AndrewPrice said...

Yeah, what T-Rav said....


Of course it's class warfare President Dipshit!!!!

T-Rav said...

Yes, Obama, yes, I'm afraid it is grandstanding.

Chris Matthews' Leg said...

Oh God, this speech is turning me on.

AndrewPrice said...

I feel like the Incredible Hunk... turning green, growing, ouch - shorts getting tight...

AndrewPrice said...

Uh... you've been sitting on those trade agreements jerk off... you haven't sent them to Congress yet for approval!!!!!

AndrewPrice said...

Only 800 more points to go and then you can get to the football game...

T-Rav said...

Um, how are you going to do that? Answer me, jackass! I said, how are you going to do that?

T-Rav said...

Do you, Obama? Do you really?

AndrewPrice said...

Uh... I didn't mean that. Yeah, I didn't mean to repudiate my entire term.

AndrewPrice said...

Basic protections like killing California to protect the smelt?

T-Rav said...

This speech is so paint-by-numbers it's not even funny.

AndrewPrice said...

I reject you.

T-Rav said...

Yeah, that mercury's lurking around every corner, ain't it Barry?

AndrewPrice said...

T-Rav, It's Obama walking through his constituencies promising them that he's going to protect them, one at a time.... gays should be coming up soon.

"We need a tax break for gay clubs."

T-Rav said...

Um, we would probably be financially stable. Just a thought.

T-Rav said...

I'm sorry. I didn't know community colleges were the glue that held our country together.

AndrewPrice said...

This speech is nothing but bait and switch. "The GI bill was good... so let's give money to unions."

Atheists said...

He said God!

AndrewPrice said...

To quote my mother: "Oh please, a guy who doesn't even wear a flag."

AndrewPrice said...

Bullsh~t.

AndrewPrice said...

Let's take all the good things on his list and send it back to him. Forget all the class warfare crap, but send him the tax cuts and regulatory cuts.

T-Rav said...

God, we have 14 more months of this, don't we? Thanks for reminding me, jerk.

T-Rav said...

Translation: If you don't pass this bill, I will demagogue you until you do.

AndrewPrice said...

... in a Canadian built bus that you taxslaves paid for.

AndrewPrice said...

Our problems are man made... one man... Obama.

AndrewPrice said...

Oh thank God he's done!

F*** him and the horse he rode in one.

T-Rav said...

I have two words in response to that speech. The second one is "You." You guess the first.

AndrewPrice said...

Man that jerk makes me angry.

AndrewPrice said...

T-Rav, I don't think I've even hated a President as much as I hate this turd.

T-Rav said...

I don't dare put the channel on MSNBC. The whole panel is probably breaking into a sweat over how awesome The One is.

T-Rav said...

I just read that Dow Futures for tomorrow are down 40 points in the past 15 minutes.

AndrewPrice said...

I'm on football. They're worried about Peyton Manning's neck.

Before I left CNN though, Wolf Schnizel said, "that's a serious threat that the President will take his case to the people."

Yeah Wolf, that would be the same people who give him 38% support. Does CNN put stupid pills in their water?

T-Rav said...

Oh thank God. NBC is switching over to the game.

Ed said...

Brilliant guys, brilliant. His speech was garbage, but you two truly felt my pain!

Ed said...

Scott, I took the death penalty thing the same way Andrew did, as an expression of "shut the hell up liberals", not as "yeah! let's kill some people."

T-Rav said...

Ed, I sure hope not. I'm in enough pain as it is without feeling anyone else's.

Just don't--I repeat, DO NOT--turn over to MSNBC right now. Their arrogance is even more insufferable than the Teleprompter-in-Chief's.

Ed said...

I never turn to MSNBC, except last night. I have an image of them smelling their own farts, like the South Park episode about the Smug Cloud.

Ed said...

Andrew, I agree with you about never having hated a President as much as this turkey. I really feel anger just seeing the jerk.

T-Rav said...

Ed and Scott, that's the same way I took it. I was thrashing this out with a friend of mine on Facebook for several hours, which really upset me because I had to defend Rick Perry. Not fair.

Ed said...

Now, through the magic of the short attention span, Obama's speech will be forgotten as a small brown inflated pig skin gets kicked into the air! :D

Koshcat said...

God that was entertaining to read! Especially since I wasn't watching so didn't have context to associate with the comments. I will now go do some more work and go home smiling.

AndrewPrice said...

Koshcat, I'm glad our pain entertained you! LOL!

AndrewPrice said...

Ed, Let's hope! I would love to forget the last half hour!

T-Rav said...

Okay, excuse me while I snap back to reality...

That speech was one of the greatest hack jobs in recent memory. I mean, it's not like we should expect anything different by this point, but there's something blatantly offensive about seeing the supposed leader of the free world use a joint session of Congress for a campaign speech. It's even more offensive than having Maroon 5 open up the ball game with this gay little song of theirs.

(continued)

AndrewPrice said...

Anxiously waiting part 2...

AndrewPrice said...

T-Rav, I agree entirely.

This speech was a shameless political speech and should never have been done before the entire congress.

And nothing he said was new or intelligent:

1. Targeted tax cuts for people Obama likes.
2. Money for teachers.
3. Expanded union rights.
4. Money for unions.
5. More environmental protection.
6. More money for unions.
7. Hire more teachers and cops.
8. Targeted tax cuts for teachers and the unemployed.
9. Build high speed airports to compete with Chinese airports.
10. More money for unions.
11. Continuing support for the GI Bill.
12. Fix some bridges.
13. More money for unions.
14. Cut some pointless regulations.
15. Increase regulations to protect us from everything.
16. Build more schools.
17. Tax the rich.
18. Tax the rich.
19. Tax the rich.
20. Tax the rich.
21. Tax the rich.
22. Demonize the Republicans.

Ed said...

I think they got T-Rav. He wrote "continued" some time ago. Watch out for the black helicopters!

Ed said...

Andrew, You missed money for the unions and I think he wants to tax "the fortunate."

T-Rav said...

(continued)

For those who didn't watch it, first off, congratulations. You are the more intelligent and in less pain for your decision. Secondly, what you missed was a formulaic Obama speech. I could seriously make a checklist of all the typical bullet points he hit. Did he talk about how his plan was all bipartisan and stuff? Yes. Did he proclaim the American people were on his side, and not the Republicans'? Yep. Did he invoke millionaires and billionaires who weren't paying "their fair share"? You know it. Did he say he was willing to meet the GOP halfway, "but first you need to pass my bill"? But of course. Like I said, this was completely paint-by-numbers.

And it's not like this is going to make a dent in the underlying economic problems. I think the expected number for the tax cut is something like $450 billion. Remember what our debt is? I'm sorry, but this is like giving someone Pepto-Bismol when they've got the Ebola virus.

(continued)

T-Rav said...

(continued)

But the most offensive part for me was the demagoguery. Obama made it unmistakably clear that if this plan was not passed immediately, he would "go to the American people" and mobilize them against their representatives. Forget the fact that he generally sucks at doing this; he's basically asking that Congress rubber-stamp his legislation without examining it, or else he'll demonize them for all he's worth. This is exactly the tactic he tried during the debt negotiations. And while it's true that the best laws are those which are rushed through the legislature without debate or reflection, like in the French Revolution, or after the Reichstag Fire, that's still asking our representatives to shirk their constitutional duties. But I guess things are too urgent to worry about that, right? Wait, if they were so urgent, why did you wait so long to come up with a jobs plan? And why weren't you more inflexible about a time slot?

Ah, screw it. I'm tired of thinking about this crap, and I want to watch football. Peace out, homies.

LawHawkRFD said...

Did anyone catch that Obama said that the skies are too congested, then proposed we build new airports and upgrade and expand the older ones? I'm may be a bit thick, but I don't see how building more airports will make the skies less congested. I suspect he meant that airports are too congested.

AndrewPrice said...

Peace out homies indeed.

I agree T-Rav, 100%.

P.S. Thanks for recapping. Very nicely done! :-)

AndrewPrice said...

Lawhawk, I like how he tried to compare Chinese airports to American airports -- as if they were in direct competition. Huh?!

T-Rav said...

Andrew, don't you know? China is cool and has good students and they get stuff done without debate, so we should be like them. Duh!

Thanks very much :-)

AndrewPrice said...

Thank you! :-)

On China, yeah, they're great. All dictatorships are great.

LawHawkRFD said...

Andrew: Not to mention China can build twenty airports in the time it takes an American company to prepare the environmental impact report for a new tool shed. But that will all end, now that Obama has promised that he will cut regulatory interference so long as it doesn't "endanger the health, safety and security that have been protected for decades." Yeah, right. Wait 'til the EPA discovers that the tool shed will destroy the habitat of a previously-unknown snail that is vital to the survival of the entire North American eco-system.

BevfromNYC said...

Yeah LawHawk - no environmental impact studies and an unlimited supply of expendable slave laborers can get just about anything built in record time.

AndrewPrice said...

Lawhawk, I think about that sometimes, whenever I see something like Hoover Dam... they couldn't build that today because liberals wouldn't let them. It's amazing how times change.

AndrewPrice said...

Bev, Are you sure the Pharaohs didn't have an environmental impact statement done first?

T-Rav said...

Hey Bev, what's the word on Anthony Weiner's district? I hear the Democrats are worried enough about the upcoming special election they're pouring in $500,000 to keep it out of GOP hands.

LawHawkRFD said...

Andrew: New York's another example. The Empire State Building took two years, from drawing board to spire, using 1920s technology during the Great Depression. Government got out of the way, and the job got done. Obama and the EPA would be fretting over the damage to the habitat of the Asian cockroach and the brown wharf rat. What a difference.

LawHawkRFD said...

Bev: I'll be touching on the "slave labor" thing in tomorrow morning's post about America's standing in global competitiveness.

rlaWTX said...

y'all are AWESOME!!!!!!!!!!!!

T-Rav and Andrew deserve... IDK what's big enough for actually sitting thru TOTUS!

and reading the comments out of context is lots of fun. often there was enough to know what the topic was, but some - just fun imagining!

AndrewPrice said...

T-Rav, I understand that the Republican is winning and the Dems are getting truly desperate. Today they even tried comparing the Republicans to 9/11 terrorists.

AndrewPrice said...

Lawhawk, It is amazing when you think about it that almost none of the great structures of the past could be built today because of government regulation.

AndrewPrice said...

rlaWTX, Trust me, you are better off reading the comments than watching the speech!

Post a Comment