(Not so) Live Blogging the ABC Debate

I am watching the ABC / Facebook debate on YouTube videos. So I will do a pseudo live blog of that debate.

Huck asked about his "bunker mentality" comment about the Bush foreign policy. Huck starts off sounding like an idiot: Yes I said that, and I will do the same thing. His example of arrogance is that we went into Iraq with 180k troops rather than 400k. Huh? He comes across as an amateur Monday morning quarterback that doesn't understand anything that he is saying.

Fred smacks his hands over changing his mind on this.

Rudy gives a good answer about Bush making the big decision correct, but criticizes him on other aspects of things.

McCain agrees with the Bush Doctrine and gives Bush credit for keeping the U.S. safe from terrorist threat. Ron Paul, of course, disagrees with the proactive use of force to defend the U.S. "They don't attack us because we are free and prosperous..." it is because we have invaded their territories. The AFB in Saudi was the excuse for us being attacked. Romney smacks down both Paul and Huckabee.

But Romney wants to bring Islamic countries into the modern world, which indicates a misunderstanding of the problem. Fred brings up perspective and understanding on the topic of preemption. There there is a bit of a round table thumping on Ron Paul and his complete misunderstanding of foreign policy. Huck keeps sounding like an idiot defending his foreign policy article and proceeds to go back and forth with Mitt in a pissing contest. I'm not sure who won.

Ron Paul keeps showing why he should be excluded from these debates as he is taking the discussion way off base.

President Bush gets to ask the question from his press conference: "What are the principles that you will stand on, in good times and bad times? What will be the underpinning of your decisions?" (Great question). He starts with McCain and Romney. McCain: Uphold nations honor and trust in government. His "principles" for domestic policy are foreign policy and are not principles at all. It is a pragmatist agenda. Mitt is concerned about the future of the country. His principles are honesty and effectiveness. He adds "family" as a principle (huh?). He then goes into policy positions. "Keep America the strongest nation on earth." Is that a principle?

Giuliani: His "principles" are twelve position items like illegal immigration, taxes, etc. Once again, not principles. Huck: Declaration of Independence--preamble. OK, better than some, but it is not a real driving principle. This is like a Miss America contestant saying "World peace."

This question is in Fred's wheelhouse. He lays out a chunk of his stump speech about the Constitution. He talks about Federalism. He talks about fiscal responsibility.

Health Care: Romney touts RomneyCare. Ron Paul goes nuts for a couple of minutes. Fred answers with "Huh" and it was a great answer. He follows up with, "So if we don't print so much money we could bring home the soldiers and provide health care." and that pretty much summarizes the logic by Ron Paul. Great job. Mitt: "I like mandates." Fred: "Beg your pardon?" Great comeback. Boy Mitt looks frustrated when someone dings him. Huck wants to completely change the health care model to a "prevention" system. He starts preaching again.

I'm not sure that Mitt is correct when he alleges that the 47 million do not pay for health care when they go to the ER. I was uninsured for a period of time and the government surely did not pay for mine. The health providers collect very agressively.

BREAK

Immigration to McCain: Whatever he says, he is not credible here. But ultimately he supports amnesty even though he does not call it amnesty. Rudy dodges a bit, but comes out with a form of amnesty (stay in the country, but pay fines). Mitt and McCain get into a spat about what amnesty is and whether or not Mitt called McCain's plan amnesty. They got "into the weeds" as Gibson would put it. Fred forces Rudy to admit that they are saying people would stay without going back. Fred pushes the enforcement through attrition. Huck has an "end of the line" amnesty plan that he proposes. Can't Ron Paul answer a question without going nuts?

Why not vote for Obama? Mitt: this is a time for change. "I've lived it." Not a bad statement, but kind of irrelevant. Fred: Obama has adopted the positions of liberal interest groups (NEA, etc.). His first alternative positions on everything are for the Federal government solution. The Change needed is to return to Constitutional government. McCain gets in a dig at Mitt. I think he is forcing the flip flop comments and is doing so in a personal way. Huck: we are looking for "vertical leadership"--whatever that means.

Gas prices. Ron Paul - monetary policy. McCain brings in environmentalism. Fred gets to give a little economic lesson on supply and demand. He refuses to opt for a windfall profits tax. "We are not going to be energy independent in the next few years." Fred emphasizes using all forms of energy. "We are not a nation that regulates the profits or the losses of our economy." Rudy wants a moon project for energy independence. Fred is the only one realistic here. Huck thinks we can be "energy independent" in ten years. Huck is ready to allow federal regulation on price. This was a subtle statement, but it is clear that he would be ok with it.

I don't know who I would say did best. I think I have more negative statements on the candidates. Mitt was very defensive. McCain was snippy and rude--he really came across as mean. Rudy did OK, but not great. Huck seemed like a Democrat. Ron Paul was a complete loon, as usual--maybe more so. Fred's problem was that he didn't push in to get enough time. He did a great job when he was in there.

Gibson and the ABC team ran the best debate of the election season. Kudos to them.