The flaming feminist liar vs the cold post racialist gasbag…forget the pre mordem. Live from the Jimmy Kimmel Theatre, here is the Pennsylvania Polka democratic debate recap. Keep in mind that when MSNBC cannot be happy with liberals, then there is nothing positive to say.
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/04/16/905215.aspx
http://michellemalkin.com/2008/04/17/nutroots-ballistic-we-demand-a-stultifyingly-dull-debate-or-else/
Oh, and the John McCain appearance on Softball with Chris Matthews was a complete waste.
Ok, now the recap. To quote former boxing referee Judge Mills Lane…”Let’s get it on!”
Speaking of complete wastes, Barack Obama’s opening statement was exactly that. Hillary Clinton’s was not much better. Maybe the candidates are useless, but it could just be that opening statements themselves are pointless. ABC then went to a commercial after the opening statements, possibly sending a signal that a couple well placed product placements would keep people awake.
Moderator Charles Gibson asked a question brought up by Mario Cuomo, who was famous for being overrated to begin with. He wants the winning candidate of the primary to promise to take the runner up as their Vice Presidential running mate. This is idiotic on its face, since the candidates should be free to choose whoever they like.
Obama refused to take the pledge. Hillary promised to close ranks behind the nominee, but would not take the pledge. Both candidates bashed President Bush.
Obama was asked about his snobbery regarding the bitter people who believe in God and own guns because the constitution allows this.
Obama did say that he mangled what he was trying to say. He also stated that it was not the first or last time. He then explained that he was referring to economic anxiety, and that when wedge issues get exploited, economic issues get ignored.
Hillary announced that she was the granddaughter of a factory worker from Scranton. Perhaps she channeled the body of John Edwards before the debate. She also spoke about her Methodist faith. She very calmly played the “offended” card, taking umbrage at Obama’s remarks. She then spoke of listening and respecting one another after bashing President Bush again.
George Stephanopolis asked Hillary if she felt Obama could beat McCain. She stated that it was imperative that McCain be defeated. She then made it clear that McCain had the wrong idea, and how she knows what the republican party “dishes out” because she has been on the receiving end of 16 years. Stephanopolis pressed her to actually answer the questions, and she said, “Yes. Yes. Yes.” She then emphasized why she was better and stronger.
The same question was asked of Obama, and he made it clear Hillary can win, but he thought he was better. He then addressed the elitist issue. He said he could not be elitist towards religious people because he was one. He could not be elitist towards gun owners because some of his constituents are gun owners. This is nonsense, but he may have believed what he said. He then very smartly brought up Hillary’s 1992 “baking cookies” remark, saying that she was not elitist. This was a brilliant move, because he delivered the attack, said it should not make her look bad, but it does. He said she learned the wrong lesson from that.
Hillary got defensive and stated that it was not just she who was offended by his remarks, but voters. She then stated the election should be about what they have done with their lives politically. Then she held up two blank pieces of paper, one for her and one for him. Just kidding. She spoke of her 35 years before i fought the urge to slip into a coma. That could have been the after dinner sugar snack.
Obama was asked why he rescinded his invitation to Pastor Jeremiah Wright to attend the inauguration. Obama ducked the question, instead stating that Pastor Wright has done good things and bad things. This issue simply vexes him, and he has yet to figure out how to address it.
Hillary was asked about the idea that Pastor Wright has his positives. Hillary very smartly brought up Pastor Wright’s anti-American sermon shortly after 9/11. 9/11 still evokes anger in pennsylvania. Hillary then got off a great line about how “You get to choose your pastor. You cannot choose your family, but you can choose your Pastor.”
Obama kept insisting that he did not hear the remarks, although Charlie Gibson was not buying it. Obama then tried to insist that Hillary’s Pastor defended Wright, which is the “everybody does it” tactic.
Stephonopolis asked if he thought Wright loved America as much as Obama did, and what will happen after the Wright videos are played endlessly if he wins. Obama smartly answered that he had enough faith in the American people to see through that. When asked if Wright was patriotic, Obama stated that “He was a former marine. He loves his country, but he is angry.”
Hillary naturally felt the issue deserved further exploration. She then spoke about bringing people together and overcoming anger and bitterness. She deliberately used the word bitternessm abd could barely contain her smile as she stuck in the dagger. She brought up Farrakhan, Hamas, and said these issues “raise questions.”
Stephonopolis then shifted gears and brought up a Pennsylvania poll that showed only 39% of voters found her honest and trustworthy. Hillary then said, “I may be a lot of things, but I’m not dumb.” She said she is embarrassed by the incident, has apologized for it, and it was a mistake. She then shifted to how proud she was to have gone to Bosnia, and that General Wesley Clark, who was in the audience, supports her. She then spoke about her experience going to 80 countries. She said she will try to get more sleep in the future.
Obama was asked if Hillary has been truthful about her past. Obama said she had a strong record to run on, and that he has not commented about her Bosnia remarks. Stephonopolis pointed out that his campaign has, which apparently is the same thing to everyone except him. Obama then brought the focus back to issues.
Obama was asked if he believed in the American flag since he does not wear one. Obama stated that he “reveres the American flag.” He then made it clear that he loves this country for all it has given him, and that his life embodies the American dream.
Both candidates looked like deer in the headlights, although Obama handled this question very well.
Stephonopolis then asked Obama about his friendship with bomber William Ayers. A visibly irritated Obama then stated that he barely knew the guy, and this guilt by association was politics at its worst. He pointed out that he was 8 years old when those bombs went off. He then tried to state that he was friends with Oklahoma Republican Senator Tom Coburn, who has made incendiary remarks regarding abortion. Mr. Coburn was not there to defend himself against charges by his “friend.”
Hillary went on the attack, lashing Obama for associating with somebody who made “deeply hurtful” comments to the people of New York, who she claims to care about. She then made it clear that since the republicans will bring it up, it should be brought up now. She then made a remark that showed how disgusting she is.
“The republicans should apologize for the Bush-Cheney years and refuse to run a candidate.”
At that point Obama took the gloves off. He brought up the pardons that the Clintons gave the Puerto Rican terrorists from FALN, which was more serious than his thin association with Ayers. He then stated that Hillary keeps saying she can take a punch, as she has proved against republicans, but he can take a punch because he has taken many from her.
In a surprising move, Hillary decided not to rebut the charge. She was given the option, and she said she would wait. Perhaps she felt she was winning, and did not want to say too much.
ABC then used a biracial couple as a prop, having a question about Iraq asked by a black woman with her arm around her white male partner. The question itself was whether or not troops would be coming home in 60 days after the election regardless of the realities on the ground.
Hillary apparently does not believe in reality, since predetermined withdrawal is fine by her. When asked if she knew better than General David Petraeus, she said no, that nobody had all the answers. Yet she wants to remove all the troops. She claims that Afghanistan has been neglected, which apparently is news to our soldiers fighting there.
Obama stated that he also would leave no matter what. He then made a bold but odd statement that “The President sets the mission.” He felt that President Bush was too deferential to General Petraeus. Obama then stated that he would always listen to military generals regarding tactics, but that he would set the mission. This is hubris at its most Obamaest. His nose might have been in the air when he said it, but his ears tend to distract from that on television.
Obama was asked if an Iranian attack against Israel would be considered an attack on America. Obama replied that he would do whatever it takes to keep Iran from getting nuclear weapons, but that he would sit down and talk to Iran. He completely ducked the question, only saying that all options were on the table. He was so cold and detached, only saying that an attack by Iran against Israel would be unacceptable. He stammered throughout the entire question.
Hillary stated that any attack against Israel would be met with massive retaliation by the United States. Yet she then stated this was not about Israel, and that all allies of the USA would face this. Again, it was also a cold detached answer, although slightly less icy than Obama’s response. She also uttered nonsense about “skillful diplomacy” with Iran. However, she would not meet with Armageddonijad directly, which was a thinly veiled swipe at Obama’s willingness to do so.
The debate shifted to the economy, and a statement by John McCain that both Hillary and Obama would raise taxes. Stephonopolis asked both candidates if they would pledge not to raise taxes on people making less than $200,000 per year. Hillary stated that she would roll back the Bush tax cuts on the wealthy even if the economy weakened because she did not believe that it would cause harm. She tried to cite the 1990s, forgetting that the Clintons had nothing to do with the economy. It was the internet boom.
She then inadvertantly dropped a bombshell that should be in republican campaign commercials forever. She said that with regards to the Clinton tax hikes, “We used that tool during the 1990s to very good effect, and I think we can do so again.” However, she would not raise taxes on the middle class. In the 1990s the taxes were raised on the middle class. Bill Clinton denied this during the 1992 campaign, but even the Jayson Blair Times called him on it.
Hillary Clinton turned into Walter Mondale on taxes, and this needs to be shouted from rooftops until somebody in the media is forced to listen. This is bigger than John Kerry’s voting for the 87 billion before he voted against it. This vow to raise taxes must be repeated ad nauseum.
Hillary then did something that no democrats has done before. She defined the wealthy. She may be a class warrior, but most class warriors will not give a number. She did. In her world, the middle class are people making less than $250,000 per year. Even if that is combined household income, the statement shows how little she knows. A combined household income of $250,000 is upper middle class, but it is not wealth. She does not get it, and never will.
Obama stated that he will cut taxes for “middle income” families, which to him means those making $75,000 or less. Families that have each earner making $37,500 are not middle income. They are struggling.
What is it that the socialist woman and the arugala loving elitist man do not understand?
People are not angry and bitter now, but they will be if either of these people get power, especially if the issue is Israel or taxes. Palestinians are probably lighting rockets in the air in celebration listening to this drivel. Then again, they do that anyway, but still.
Obama also wants to raise the capital gains tax from 15% to 28%. Charlie Gibson pointed out that when the capital gains rates were lowered, more revenues came in, and that 100 million people own stock.
Obama meandered that he would “look at” the issue of raising it, and that he wants to restore “fairness.” If there was ever a moment to make English the official language, listening to Obama talk about taxes was a justification.
Gibson again brought up that the lowering of the tax raised revenues, and Obama said “that might happen.”
No Barack, it did happen. For the love of all things holy, somebody make him take an economics class.
Hillary babbled more class warfare about how the Bush economy was bad and the Clinton economy was good. Actually, the Bush economy was better.
Hillary then stated that she “did not want to take one more penny of tax money from anybody.”
She should just give more money. She is 109 million dollars richer than a few years ago, she should just give a bunch of it back. No wait, that would allow her to avoid being hypocritical.
She wants us to “invest” in renewable energy. That is not investment. That is an expenditure. Expenditures are not wrong, but to call them investments is brazenly dishonest.
She then praised Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell, because he has his machine backing her. She also stated that President Bush perhaps “does not care” about fixing problems, because after all, she knows what is in his heart.
Despite her lengthy answer, it was not an answer. Gibsona sked her again if she would raise the capital gains tax. Bill Clinton lowered it from 28% to 20%, and President George W. Bush lowered it further to 15%.
Hillary then really offered a spliced answer. She would consider raising it, but not above 20%. After all, even though both times the rate was lowered, revenues were raised (Yes, I keep repeating this), it was good when her husband did it, but not when President Bush did it. Had Clinton lowered it one point and Bush done the rest, she would be standing on stage saying that we can raise it from 15% to 27%, but lord knows not 28%.
Either a policy works and makes sense or it does not. Only in Hillaryworld can two politicians make the same policy decision, and have it be good when a democrat does it and bad when a republican does it. This woman gets more obnoxious by the minute.
If I did not need my television so much (especially during football season), I would have shattered it by now.
She then said “I don’t want to raise taxes on anybody.”
Well the don’t Hillary.
She also attacked Obama’s cap proposal. Obama clarified his cap proposal.
To quote the late Lloyd Bridges in the movie, “Airplane,”…”I picked a bad week to stop drinking/smoking/sniffing glue.”
When Obama insisted that his proposal was not a tax, Gibson stated that it absolutely was a tax. Obama protested, and insisted that many Americans were between $97,000 and 200-250,000. Obama insisted that we should be honest in how we present our ideas. I guess he exempted the two liberals running for President.
Hillary then went on a Bush bashing session simply because shrill is as shrill does.
Obama scoffed at the notion of a commission on Social Security as being worthless. Hillary disagreed, citing Ronald Reagan working with Tip O’Neill in 1983. Obama pointed out that the 1983 commission raised the retirement age and payroll taxes, which Hillary claims she will not do. Hillary also claims she will not raise taxes on working families, but she will of course. Hillary then stated that there are more “progressive ways of doing things.” I shudder to think what she meant by that.
Charles Gibson mentioned that April 16th was the one year anniversary of the Virginia Tech school shooting, and that we should keep Virginia Tech in mind. It was very classy of him. He then segued into gun control, pointing out that both candidates have long supported curbing gun freedoms, yet now are trying to talk like they care about gun owners. Heck, Hillary blasted a duck as a kid and loved it. Maybe the duck was republican.
The reasons why democrats are starting to embrace God and guns is because they are tired of losing elections. Period. They lost West Virginia twice after 100 years of winning it. It would be nice if they embraced both religious tolerance and tolerance towards gun owners, but they do not mean it. Their records are clear as day. Obama’s comments were condescending, but Hillary feels the same way. She was just lucky enough that Obama made the arrogant statements before she had a chance to do so. Besides, she has 35 years of experience with insincerity and 15 years of triangulating. He is a novice at such repositioning.
Hillary spoke about the 100,000 cops during her husband’s tenure. She promised to reinstate the assault weapons ban.
My jaw dropped because Hillary actually took a stand. She is completely wrong on the issue, but at least now she can admit that she wants to issue a ban that will help criminals who by definition will disobey such laws. That is why they are called criminals. Hillary then stated that she respects the Second Amendment and lawful gun owners. She may claim to respect them, but she does not understand them. The real fun on this issue will be when the Supreme Court rules on gun issues in June.
Obama was asked about the outright gun ban in Washington, D.C. that is being addressed in the Supreme Court, and whether or not that ban was consistent with the Second Amendment. Obama offered up one of his most gutless remarks, by saying that he had not “listened to the briefs and looked at all the evidence.”
He then babbled about how the Second Amendment clearly conveys an individual right, but that a city or state can constrain that right. He compared this to the right to own private property, but governments can enforce zoning ordinances. A much better parallel would be comparing it to the eminent domain rulings, which were enacted by liberals, and hurting Americans of all stripes.
Obama was again pressed by Gibson about his favoring of registration of guns. Obama wanted a “common sense” approach. Thank heavens, that tells me where he stands. Sensible approaches are good, less sensible approaches are bad.
When asked if she supported the D.C. ban, Hillary turned into Strom Thurmond and started advocating states rights, or in this case, the rights of cities. Then she had the gall to claim that the Bush Administration had no position on the issue. President Bush has been a staunch supporter of the Second Amendment, and let the assault weapons ban expire. That stand will not please everybody, but he took a stand. Hillary acts like she despises President Bush, and then she hides behind him when it is convenient, even if her claim is a bald faced lie.
She then stated that Vice President Cheney was against the ban, which is true, which somehow shows confusion in her mind. Stephonopolis again tried to find out where she stood, rather than everybody else.
Hillary could not answer the question, or more importantly, would not. She favors “sensible regulation that is consistent with the right to bear arms.” Somebody should ask her that question again June. When asked again if the D.C. ban was consistent with that right, she stated that a “total ban, with no exceptions, might not be, but the court might not, I don’t know the facts.”
If these two candidates were eaten by wolves, I would at this point become pro-wolves. At least with wolves, there are clear answers. Besides, wolves eat deer, which these candidates, again in the headlights, were for the entire evening.
When asked if she favored licensing and registration of guns, she replied that she favors “what works in New York.” She stated that what works in New York City might not work in Montana. Her newfound conversion to states rights notwithstanding, I was hoping a states rights argument on abortion would be asked of her just to show the contrast.
Stephonopolis had had enough. He pointed out that when she ran for the Senate in New York, she was in favor of licensing and registration of guns. She admitted that she did because in New York, those rules worked. No they did not. I wish Rudy Giuliani had been in the room to look her in the eye as she tried to explain that anything she believed contributed to the drop in crime in the 1990s in New York.
To the relief of both of these candidates, the gun debate finally ended. The candidates probably then became devoutly even more religious before that the next question would be a softball. Unfortunately for them, Larry King and Chris Matthews were not in the room. Nevertheless, an affirmative action question came up. Should affirmative action be changed so that rich blacks are weaned off it and poor whites are given help? Should it be class based, and not race based?
Obama felt wealthy blacks can be given help in some situations, but would not clarify. He tried to clarify, but his answer made no sense. With Obama, everything can be looked at or studied. This is why people like him. It is difficult to offend people when you say nothing.
Hillary said she supported early childhood education and was against high student loan rates. Maybe she is deaf. The question was about affirmative action. She wants health care for everybody. She then offered a new slogan. She wants to “affirmatively invest in young people…” This is in contrast to investing in them negatively. I wish I could latch onto anybody that would affirmatively tell her to sit down and stop talking.
The ban on both of these people speaking could be lifted when they had something valuable to say or never, whichever came first.
The candidates were then asked what they would “do about” gasoline prices. I expected them to blame President Bush, greedy oil companies, and mention that Dick Cheney worked at Halliburton, in addition to blathering about green collar jobs. I did not expect them to mention dealing with Islamofacist governments that want to kill us, rolling back the gasoline tax that liberals passed with force from Bill Clinton,or allowing us to drill in Alaska. I was neutral on whether they would praise ethanol subsidies since they were now past the Iowa Caucus by several months.
Hillary is going to investigate gas prices. She believes there is market manipulation among energy traders, similar to Enron. Ok, so I said Halliburton instead of Enron. When it was pointed out by Charlie Gibson that John McCain supports a moratorium on the gasoline tax, Hillary tried to insist that democrats favored that. No, they do not. They control Congress now. They have not proposed such a measure. She also wants a “windfall profits tax” on oil companies. She should blame foreign governments, not American corporations.
Obama echoed virtually everything Hillary said, and then stated that we should reduce gasoline demand. This man is an absolute scholar. Perhaps he thinks we should increase the supply as well.
John McCain has taken flack for not being an expert on economics, but his opponents claim to know everything that they do not know, and have no idea about things that a child in kindergarten would understand. I call this “selective stupidity.”
The next question for was a good one, because it gave both candidates a chance to either be classy or arrogant. Stephonopolis was asked how he would as President use George W. Bush, since former Presidents have been good ambassadors, with the exception of Jimmy Carter.
Hillary laughed and stated that she “would have to give serious thought to that.” She and her husband have been treated very graciously by President Bush, but that graciousness has not come close to being returned. She praised him for using her husband with Tsunami relief, but that is a pathetic example. She is basically saying, “You are awful at everything, but you realized how great my husband was, which was right.” She stated that she would use all the former Presidents, before babbling about how we all have got to come together as a nation.
I would have preferred that these candidates be forced to try and come up with positive things to say about President Bush. Even if it was something such as saying pleasant things about his wife and daughters, that would be a start. Most likely they could not so it because they simply see him as evil. It is difficult to “come together” when both of these candidates are ripping a man apart, and by extension, the many people who believe in him. Even among those who do not approve of his job performance, many of those people like the man personally. This question was a chance to show some decency, and as expected, Hillary Clinton failed that test. She even stuck the knife in at the end of the answer, when speaking about our current leader, by saying “that would take some careful thought on my part.”
Obama was less vicious than Hillary. His answer was still a dig at the current President, but it was much more subtle. It was actually brilliantly clever. He said that he would be much more likely to seek advice from President George HW Bush, because his foreign policy was wiser than that of his son. Obama could have mentioned Jimmy Carter, who is now toxic to most Americans. Yet by praising an individual republican President, it allowed him to say something complimentary while still contrasting with the current President Bush. It was a back door entry, but it was effective. It is in stark contrast to Hillary, who cannot praise any republican unless they are self loathing.
The last question dealt with the Superdelegates, and how each candidate would make the case at the convention in Denver as to why they should get the nomination. In effect, this really was a way to just have the candidates give closing statements.
Hillary spoke about being a fighter, despite the fact that people are tired of fighting. She bashed Wall Street, and can give the money back to people she thinks deserve it. We will get back to “shared prosperity,” which is code for socialism. We know where she stands. She stands nowhere and everywhere.
Obama spoke about a planet in peril and our economy in shambles. Yes, this is the man who speaks of hope. He will not take money from Pacs or lobbyists. Many people like him, including people that have never liked a politician before.
Charlie Gibson praised the audience for not disrupting the debate with applause. I did not even think about that until the evening ended, but the audience was overwhelmingly polite.
Of course, the only thing worth clapping about was the end of the debate. Gibson and Stephonopolis were solid. In terms of substance, this was a fabulous debate in terms of questions. Gibson did a great job last time as well.
In terms of responses, this was the very worst debate. I came into this debate disagreeing with these candidates. I ended the evening understanding why the democratic party is worthless.
Are these two lightweights the best the demagoguic party can do?
Yes. That is why the party has been irrelevant for almost half a century.
John McCain won this debate by not being either Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama.
Hillary and Obama are pathetic. They have showed positive qualities in the past. There was nothing positive to say about them in this debate.
Osama Bin Laden also won this debate by not being mentioned.
I would say that the demagoguic party is a joke, but their stances are not funny.
Democrats are the party of pusillanimousness. They are scared of the voters.
With views like theirs, they should be. Luckily the voters are smarter than these liberal contortionists and their parsings. Al Gore and John Kerry found this out, and the ash heap of historical irrelevance awaits whichever one of these disgraces emerges from the primaries to join them in several months.
This was not a debate. It was a debacle. It was a draw, which in temperature terms would be absolute zero.
An hour of Windex should be enough to scrub my television from this vile event.
eric
