Debate

I didn’t watch the Republican debate the other night. That’s the beauty of the Internet, I can watch it on my time rather than theirs.

I did watch it though and one thing struck me through the whole thing. Something that really surprised me: There wasn’t a lot of dancing around the issues. The hosts unsurprisingly peppered the candidates with questions they intended to be “gotcha” questions and none of the candidates, in my opinion, shied away from calling them out and addressing the issues head on.

I’d never deign to try to tell anyone else who to support, but I thought I’d put a couple of thoughts out there for discussion if anyone is inclined.

1. Why does Rick Perry seem to have a lot of support from tea party types? He strikes me as just another big government Republican…just like Romney.

He says what he thinks we want to hear, but if he gets elected, I get the distinct feeling that it will just be business as usual in DC: Ever growing, ever encroaching government, just growing a bit more slowly and with a slightly different flavor than under a Democrat administration.

2. Romney: see my objections to Perry. Add RomneyCare, history of support for gun control and his tax and spend policies as governor and you’ve got a no-win situation in my mind.

2. What is it about Michelle Bachmann that strikes me as…off? Her voting record is excellent, she supports all the right things for me to support her, she doesn’t sound like a babbling moron when she speaks in public, but something just bugs me about her. The bad thing is that I can’t even put my finger on what it is. Someone help me out here.

3. Santorum is out of his depth.

4. I really like Herman Cain, but that doesn’t mean I think he’d make a good president. The jury’s still out on that one.

5. Is Ron Paul as grumpy and inarticulate in real life as he appears in every public appearance I’ve ever seen him in? I hope he doesn’t win the primary because, if for no other reason, the general election is as much popularity contest as about the issues. Ron Paul will lose that battle.

6. Gingrich is another big party Republican. I’d expect business as usual with him as well. Plus his obvious contempt for the “little people”, including his expressed disdain for the tea party, pretty much takes him right out of the running for me.

7. Huntsman. Seriously? If he doesn’t have the intellectual equipment necessary to see through the Global Warming hoax, he doesn’t have what it takes to get my vote. I can forgive a democrat for publicly supporting the AGW hoax…most of the people they have to fool into voting for them have bought into it (although the numbers are dwindling daily)…but for someone to buck the trend of the voters they are trying to win over in support of it MUST be a True Believer…which is a scary thought.

I can picture him in another time losing his butt investing in Snake Oil futures and Perpetual Motion machines.

At any rate, I mostly wrote this down just to help me clarify thoughts in my own head…but any input or other opinions are welcome. Even if they’re wrong.

5 thoughts on “Debate

  1. Perhaps you have clarified something for me. If republicans are dedicated to governmental growth, and democrats are dedicated to growing government even faster, and since we essentially have a two-party system, then why do we not simply accept that growing government is the will of the people and a good thing? And I could go on with other reasons why it makes no difference who the nominees are in the final analysis.

  2. I'll agree that our penchant for putting the same types of people into office over and over again could indicate that ever growing government is the will of the people.

    That doesn't make it a good thing.

    My experience in life tells me that VERY few people actually want to be free. You see, true freedom is a double edged sword. Yes, you're free to make your own decisions and live your own life, but true freedom also means that you have the responsibility to accept the consequences for those decisions and life choices.

    Most people don't want the responsibility that goes along with true freedom, and, so, will give up much of that freedom in order to avoid having to face the consequences of their choices and actions.

    In other words, most people in my experience, are perpetual children.

    I don't want this comment to turn into a dissertation, so I'll stop, but I can cite example after example after example that proves my point.

    In summary, most people will SAY they want to be free. But when the rubber meets the road, all they want is to be taken care of.

    So…with few exceptions, no, it doesn't really matter who wins the elections. We're heading down the same road either way, it's just a matter of velocity.

    But just because slavery is "the will of the people" doesn't make it a good thing. And doesn't mean that I won't do whatever small things I can to change the course…or at least slow it down as much as possible.

    I shudder for the future we're leaving our grand-children and great-grandchildren. For that reason, I'll do what I can, regardless of how ineffectual that ultimately may be.

    "I am only one, but I am one. I cannot do everything, but I can do something. And because I cannot do everything, I will not refuse to do the something that I can do. What I can do, I should do. And what I should do, by the grace of God, I will do."
    — Edward Everett Hale

  3. There you go, introducing the "R" word into the discussion. You are absolutely correct. We, the people, have elected to avoid responsiblity in favor of comfort, ease, immediate self-gratification, whatever.

    I like your little "dissertation." It should be printed on every editorial page in the land.

  4. BFF CB is having trouble with the commenting system so he sent his in by e-mail:

    I agree that we're on one path. A few weeks ago I was talking with one of Gorbachev's old economic advisers. He said we (the US) have a one party system. He called it the Bipartisan Party.

    My take on Paul, Bachman and the rest is a bit different. I don't listen to TV news or do much streaming of soundbites. I haven't watched a "debate" in a couple election cycles. I read a lot and follow their votes and actions when it matters (for example, Andre Carson's votes don't need followed.)

    Given that, I don't care if they're unattractive, short, bald, grouchy, dark, light, one flavor of christian or another, or likely have a penis or vagina.

    I think Ron Paul is and has consistently been on the right read of things. I like the state power things of Sarah Palin. Michelle Bachman seems to be on a good path. I like that Perry stepped up and did an overtly religious thing a couple weeks ago. That'll blow his chances in '12 but he still has great hair so maybe he has a chance.

    I could go on, but like Curt I'll stop and agree that our doom is our own. Too few of us want freedom and we gave it away.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.