• Share

Happy Thanksgiving, folks!  I hope the Black Friday black eyes aren’t too sore….

Now: Anyone who claims that Ron Paul is being “suppressed” in these debates (you know who you are…) should not be able to say that with a straight face, here.  Roughly 1/3 of this debate focused on agreeing or disagreeing with his stances on foreign policy.

Okay.  From Constitution Hall, Washington, D.C.: CNN’s Wolf Blitzer moderating, the Heritage Foundation and the American Enterprise Institute hosting.  Let’s rock:

Newt Gingrich: The current front-runner began with a superb distinction between criminal law and war against terrorism.  Newt also discussed how one could disable Iran as a power before the need would arise for military force.  He laid out the need to make the defense budget more efficient, and streamlined.  He had excellent points on the need to severely reform Social Security, and asserted how it could be done without harming recipients.  He trod the line—quite a bit—in his arguments on the immigration problem…but overall, Newt was brilliant.  He wins.

Mitt Romney: Mitt began well, briefly laying out the problems with the TSA—and then laying out why Islamic terrorism is a matter of war, not crime.  He expressed why withdrawal from Afghanistan must be gradual, and why a commander-in-chief must listen to the commanders on the ground.  He discussed effective and intelligent spending cuts, and defense innovations hindered by foolish cuts.  His fiery defense of Israel and condemnation of Iran was superb.  He also gave a good showing on immigration, legal and illegal.  He was very knowledgeable on the issues, overall—and wins.

Herman Cain:  Herman Cain’s bleeding in the polls, due in part to his lack of expertise in foreign policy—Libya in particular—but to his credit, he’s reading up on those issues.  Here, his remarks on the TSA (let the professionals do their job) and the PATRIOT Act (reform, not repeal) and the need to kill the enemy were excellent.  His banter with Blitzer/“Blitz” was cute.  His comments on the border, Syria, and clarity regarding Iran were clear and firm; and his words on cyber-attacks were fascinating.  He wins.

Rick Perry: Rick laid out his solution to privatize the TSA, which was well received.  His points on foreign aid and trade zone were interesting.  His fiery condemnation of Obama’s foreign policy was superb, and his comments on bipartisanship were good, though at times problematic.  Rick also had great remarks on the border.  He did all right, leaning towards a win.

Michele Bachmann:  Michele articulated the dangers of extending constitutional protections to non-citizen terrorists.  Her points on exchanging intelligence along with foreign aid were good—and her remarks on a balanced budget, and the dangers of indebtedness to China, were excellent.  She challenged Newt over illegal immigration, and what she saw as advocating of soft amnesty, and laid out the problem of terrorism at home.  She wins.

Jon Huntsman: Jon began with a nice nod to Tom Ridge, who was in the audience—simultaneous with a rather vague statement on liberty vs. security.  He also brought up term limits, and the need to watch Pakistan.   His rather naïve “we’ve done all we needed to do” in Afghanistan is problematic—he seems to underestimate the danger of a returning Taliban.  Borderline.

Rick Santorum: Rick began on shaky ground—while his points on profiling were fine, his wording was awkward.  He recovered from this, and had a clever moment beginning with “I agree with Ron Paul…” and using that to lead into the problem with radical Islam.  His remarks on “compromise” with the other side were excellent.  He had good points on legal immigration and manufacturing, and the spread of socialism in Latin America.  He wins, overall…albeit slightly.

Ron Paul: Ron constantly failed to distinguish between Timothy McVeigh and today’s terrorists (a much bigger threat).  He also set up straw men about a “police state”, etc.— and  used scare tactics about sacrificing rule of law.  He had good points on finances, and baseline budgeting—and his remarks on immigration and the welfare state were well made.  Still, Ron’s drug-war remarks were problematic—a “baby/bathwater” moment.  His remarks on our Arabia bases “motivating” Al-Qaeda on 9/11, and his apologies for the Taliban, were frankly pathetic.  He loses, here.  (Please, no tomato-throwing.)

Until next week….