Democrats & Liberals Archives

Ten Angry Old White Guys On FOX

FOX News hosted this round of GOP debates and it was obvious why Democrats steered clear of the forum. For the mainstream candidates, it was one “Do you still beat your wife?” question after another.

The questions went something like, "If the generals in Iraq asked for another three hundred thousand troops, would you send them? And if not, why do you hate America?" And, "When you take office, will you attack Iran? And if not, why do you hate America?" And, "True conservatives do not work with Democrats. Why do you want to reach across the aisle?" Does FOX News have an agenda? Duh.

Seriously, I wish every voter would watch the debate. These guys all made it clear that they'll dismantle every single government program and department except the Department of Defense -- and whatever department forces women to have babies.

No, really. When Romney was asked about abortion in the case of rape victims, he said as President he would force them all to have the babies. Ronald Reagan once said the scariest thing he'd ever heard was "I'm from the government and I'm here to help." Under President Romney, the government would say, "I'm here to force you to bear children."

And Medicare and Social Security? Forget about it. If it's not related to defense, it has no place in these guy's America.

I guess my favorite question was when Rudy Giuliani was asked if he was at the right debate. The bizarre question of the night was the Jack Bauer scenario where all the candidates were forced to say they'd torture terrorists. Even McCain. Umm... Yay.

All in all, it was a pretty disturbing debate for anyone who doesn't believe everyone's out to get us. If I had to pick a favorite, it'd be Ron Paul again. He and I share traditional conservative foreign policy views: America should only project power where US interests are at stake. Paul was skewered for that, which just goes to show how far most Republicans have strayed from true conservatism.

Not that I agree with anything else Paul had to say, but I can respect a true conservative. All the other candidates just postured, punctuated their answers with "...like Reagan", pledged to cut taxes for corporations and rich people, and hypocritically accused each other of not being conservative enough. It's easy to see why Republicans aren't happy with their lineup. Where's that old Reagan optimism for the future? On the Democratic side now, I guess.

And speaking of bizarre, where MSNBC had the audience hold their applause until after the debate, FOX encouraged it. In fact, I think they had the "Laugh" and "Applause" prompts going. It made things a little more interesting, but it also made it clear which candidates were playing to a national audience and which were playing to the house. Sorry, Rudy McRomney. Nobody in the auditorium wanted to hear anything even remotely mainstream or pragmatic last night.

Posted by American Pundit at May 16, 2007 11:58 AM
Comments
Comment #220518

AP, apparently the network feed you watched was different from the one I watched. Your analysis is nonsense. I’m quite certain you would have enjoyed more questions like those asked in the MSNBC debate such as, “Do you want to see Bill Clinton back in the WH?” You’re take on the objections to Ron Paul’s comments indicating he believes America deserved 9/11 is as expected. America evil, rest of world good. I only heard two or three references to our greatest 20th century President Ronald Wilson Reagan. McCain was not very good, seeming to me to be tired. Huckabee and Romney were very good and Rudy ran away with the prize.

Posted by: Jim at May 16, 2007 12:34 PM
Comment #220523

AP, you’re right. They should have “called for time”, like some whiny kids, and asked if “they believed in the Iraq war? And, if so, why are you a Bush loyalist?”***

They did a good job; way better than NBC. It’s a shame the Dems are so afraid of FNC; not sure how they would do against the (true) enemies and foes, as President, if they can’t even debate on FNC.

Posted by: rahdigly at May 16, 2007 1:31 PM
Comment #220533

AP,
I saw some of the debate. I was really impressed by just how grossly uninformed these guys seem to be. On nearly every issue the ten angry old white men take a stand which appeals to the small, far-right Republican base, but will earn them a richly deserved trouncing in a national election. They seemed particularly uninformed about what is happening in Iraq. That holds true for Rudy, too; but he alone seems capable of reaching beyond the far-right.

If this group of candidates is any indication, Republicans are in very, very serious trouble come 2008.

Posted by: phx8 at May 16, 2007 2:23 PM
Comment #220540

May…keep your head up Hillary’s or Obama’s behind breathing their hot air as Republicans keep debating real issues for real Americans. Your Liberal candidates won’t debate real issues and hide behing the softball throwing liberal, American hating media. I can’t wait for some brave media type to ask either H or O what they would do if US was attacked again. OH…wait, O has already said he would consult the UN and perhaps send a “Stern Letter” to the offender (or some such lame answer). H would probably indicate that she would have to consult Bill and Bill would advise staging a poll (of those left alive) to see what the poop-ular opinion at that moment was. Nancy P would probably hire more illegals to clean up the mess and ask Congress to impanel a committee to look into George Bush to see if he could be assessed blame. And, of course Harry R would be atop the capital building with a white flag.

Posted by: Jim at May 16, 2007 3:00 PM
Comment #220541

AP,

…and I bet good money that you watched this debate in a totally neutral objective manner.


Couldn’t resist. Your bias is showing.

Posted by: Jim T at May 16, 2007 3:14 PM
Comment #220545

Phx8… don’t you worry about the GOP guy that makes it outta this getting trounced because he is playing too the far right too much at this point… mainstream voters’ memories are not that good, and as soon as the nomination is tied up we will see a LARGE shift to the middle by Rudy McRomney (stole that from AP… LOVE it!).

And yes… this debate was every bit as bad as the first by these old white guys… and every bit as bad as the scripted Dems debate…

Posted by: Doug Langworthy at May 16, 2007 3:24 PM
Comment #220549

One funny development: in the internet polls, Ron Paul won again for the second straight debate. Of course those things are unscientific, but it has got to make people at the RNC start to wonder…

Most of the Republican candidates would do great if it were still 2002. Unfortunately for them, the fearmongering no longer resonates. These candidates are seriously out of touch with the concerns of the electorate.

Most Americans see our soldiers dying in Iraq for no good reason, our money going to Iraq when it could be helping here at home, the stock market making rich people richer, while gasoline prices go up and make it really tough.

On a positive note, the FAIR tax proposals might get some traction for the Republicans. It is the only issue I can see where they might attract more than 40% of the electorate.

Posted by: phx8 at May 16, 2007 4:06 PM
Comment #220561
…and I bet good money that you watched this debate in a totally neutral objective manner.

LOL! You’d lose. What column is this, Jim T? If you want “totally neutral”, go watch the debate and decide for yourself. I linked to it in the article. :)

I can’t wait for some brave media type to ask either H or O what they would do if US was attacked again.

That already happened, Jim. They all said they’d retaliate. Even better, they thought beyond knee-jerk reaction and talked about attack prevention, minimizing the damage if it happened, helping the victims and widening our network of allies and intelligence sources as well.

This is a global war against Islamic extremists, and we’re not going to win it all by ourselves.

You’re take on the objections to Ron Paul’s comments indicating he believes America deserved 9/11 is as expected.

Paul never said America deserved 9/11. He said it was predictable given the liberal interventionist foreign policy Republicans like you have embraced. Bush Sr. didn’t invade Iraq. Reagan never would have done it and neither would Eisenhower or Nixon.

Using American troops to liberate Iraqis from their own government and engineer a new social order for them is a very unconservative (not to mention stupid and naive) thing to do.

Posted by: American Pundit at May 16, 2007 5:37 PM
Comment #220567

I just read where my pick, Ron Paul, demolished the other candidates in FOX’s post-debate poll — at first. Then, all of a sudden, Mitt Romney jumped ahead.

I know FOX wasn’t even going to invite Paul because they didn’t think he was a serious candidate. Did they mess with the poll results when it looked like he would kick ass?

And I can’t find the results on foxnews.com now. Did they take them down after Hannity made a fool of himself drooling all over Giuliani the crossdresser?

Posted by: American Pundit at May 16, 2007 6:06 PM
Comment #220568

The question was “if a U.S. city was attacked and you were certain who it was….”

Retaliation was 4th or 5th on Obama’s list. He was given a second chance a few days later by the darling media and he toughened it up a bit.

Hilary’s answer was a quick and aggresive response, sounded like the second coming of Bush. That had to piss off quite a few lefties, but she’ll make it up. I’m sure soon more tapes of her speaking in favor of both extremes will pop up, like most of her positions depending on the audience.

This country has made it through with presidents from both sides, so I’m not real worried who’s elected. You all say rep. are in trouble, but I honestly can’t see how, if it’s Billary vs. Rudy, how she could win.

And whats up with the title? You can’t have it both ways. I’ve seen the light of liberalism and am offended that you aren’t color blind. I can think of a few funny titles that could be said about your debates.

Posted by: andy at May 16, 2007 6:07 PM
Comment #220570

One last thing, the line of the night “congress spends more than John Edwards in a beauty saloon”. Come on that was funny.

Posted by: andy at May 16, 2007 6:12 PM
Comment #220572

For some, your frankness or sincerity of expression, openness an lacking freedom from from
prejudice, an impartiality without fact, just simply
is not an acceptable commentary!

Posted by: DAVID at May 16, 2007 6:17 PM
Comment #220573

American Pundit- I like your article, an candor.

Posted by: DAVID at May 16, 2007 6:21 PM
Comment #220579

AP,
I saw that too, where Paul led the FOX poll. Given that percentages should change less as the number of votes accumulate, it was odd; but then, it was an unscientific, easily freeped poll.

There was another funny moment, when Alan Combes asked Duncan Hunter: “If abortion becomes illegal and a woman has an abortion, who should go to jail, the woman or the doctor?” For a moment you could have heard a pin drop. Hunter eventually gave a nonsensical reply. But that was a funny moment, when a candidate was confronted with the logical result of his position, and was utterly unprepared to answer.

Posted by: phx8 at May 16, 2007 7:25 PM
Comment #220585

Can’t help but notice how you all keep referring to the Republican candidates as “old white guys”. Seems to me their natural good looks are starting to irritate you so you have to characterize them as old and white. There isn’t a single Republican candidate that looks as old and white as Hillary does on TV. My gosh, imagining her as President of the United States brings back the old images of Madeline Albright as the Secretary of State. I used to have nightmares looking at that. Seems your all just jealous that the Reps have such good-looking candidates. Even John McCain in his seventies looks better and has more color than Hillary (and he has gray-white hair)! And the remark about Edwards beauty secrets was hilarious!
But, we all know the real reason Dems want to point out the whiteness of Republicans now don’t we?

JD

Posted by: JD at May 16, 2007 9:11 PM
Comment #220590

AP…don’t know if you’ve seen this or not….
http://www.newshounds.us/

Posted by: Sandra Davidson at May 16, 2007 9:44 PM
Comment #220594

JD- I think we might consider your last statement

a little off colour, wouldn’t you think!

————————-

Posted by: DAVID at May 16, 2007 10:11 PM
Comment #220599

Nothing wrong with being old or white. If you want to see angry, you might want to read the vitriol on the blue side.

Posted by: Jack at May 16, 2007 10:49 PM
Comment #220602

Dean called it. The GOP is the party of white Christian males.

Posted by: phx8 at May 16, 2007 11:23 PM
Comment #220606

Jim, Your memory must be short, FDR by far was the greatest president of the 20th century. Reagan wasnt even a close second.

Posted by: j2t2 at May 17, 2007 12:36 AM
Comment #220610

Hey DAVID,

You haven’t got complete control yet. Quit jumping the gun, wait till you all have complete control of our thoughts before your weak mind and stomach can call us racist. Look at the title silly.

Posted by: andy at May 17, 2007 1:09 AM
Comment #220611

Yeah phx8 Dean called it alright, he cemented the fact I couldn’t consider voting dem. The party of closed (but brilliant) minds.

Posted by: andy at May 17, 2007 1:12 AM
Comment #220614
I can think of a few funny titles that could be said about your debates.

Go for it. It’s a free country.

And believe me, I’ve been around America enough to know that a Hillary/Obama ticket will never fly. There’s no way Americans are ready to see a white woman and a black guy do anything together.

Sad as that is, though, I rally hope every voter will watch the video of this debate. Nothing the Republican candidates stand for will appeal to most Americans.

Most Americans don’t want to get rid of Social Security, Medicare and public education. We don’t think corporations and rich people should get more tax breaks. We don’t want perpetual war in the Middle East. We don’t want the government deciding whether we have babies or interfering in our life-and-death family medical decisions.

I have no doubt President Hillary can and will protect this country from any threat, foreign or domestic. She will be a cast iron bitch on defense. She’s also a moderate, unlike the radical righties that GOP candidates are packaging themselves as.

Hillary will win the election and America will finally deal with al-Qaeda in Pakistan, disarm North Korea and keep the nukes you Republicans allowed Kim to build out of the hands of terrorists, unite the world against Iran’s nuclear program, balance the federal budget, restore our trade balance with China, free our country from its dependence on Middle Eastern oil and resolve the situation in Iraq.

The Republican candidates haven’t presented any pragmatic solutions to those problems, nor will they. Only the Democrats are concerned with issues far more serious than flag burning gays.

Don’t forget, the Republicans who are running for President right now are all responsible for the current sad state of our economy, our broken military, the rampant corruption in our government and the decline in our moral leadership around the world. Hell, they can’t even lead our military to victory over a few hundred foreign fighters in a run-down third world country like Iraq.

Posted by: American Pundit at May 17, 2007 1:53 AM
Comment #220621

ANDY- My statement had nothing to do with race.

You may want to trade in your crystal ball
for a new one. I generally do not respond to Trolls, unless my name is mentioned, especially
since I had not even read your little diatribe’s!

Posted by: DAVID at May 17, 2007 4:35 AM
Comment #220624

After watching a bit of the debate it is now obviously clear where the neocons pick up their ridiculously foolish ideas. It did not take long to realize that the debate was deliberatly structured to support the Faux News agenda of making anyone who does not agree with the views of republican leadership as traiterous and unamerican. I would like to think that most americans are bright enough to see thru such foolishness. Recent polls suggest that they are. The rest of you are either too stubborn to give up old and outdated habits or you simply are easily manipulated.

The fact that the republicans can do no better than what was standing on that stage is clear indication of just how far down the tubes the party has fallen. To have to participate in such an agenda oriented debate must have been difficult for the candidates knowing that Faux News is loosing credibility with a lot of people. But on the other hand such tactics serves the dems well in that they were smart enough not to have anything to do with the Faux News stage play debate.

Posted by: ILdem at May 17, 2007 7:13 AM
Comment #220627

AP,

“Hell, they can’t even lead our military to victory over a few hundred foreign fighters in a run-down third world country like Iraq.”


Sure they can. And, they have to do it with the dems undermining the repubs (and the military) the entire way. We didn’t have this kind of “politicizing” during WWII; a war we actually won! But, you go on blaming Repubs, that’ll help our troops to victory.**

Posted by: rahdigly at May 17, 2007 7:40 AM
Comment #220647

rahdigly- I believe the Democrats have been only

piratically in control for the past five months. you

give them way too much credit,don’t you think!

-

Posted by: DAVID at May 17, 2007 1:26 PM
Comment #220653

AP, apparently the network feed you watched was different from the one I watched. … You’re take on the objections to Ron Paul’s comments indicating he believes America deserved 9/11 is as expected. America evil, rest of world good.

It’s not we feel AMERICA is evil.. just George Bush.

I only heard two or three references to our greatest 20th century President Ronald Wilson Reagan.

Seriously? Because, the count on the number of times his name was mentioned was 19. Maybe you were in the bathroom trying to remove your stick during that part

Some how I was under the impression that conservative ment Fiscal Conservative… how is it that the “greatest president of the 20th century” and the worst president of ALL TIME have both managed to rack up such a sizable debt?

McCain was not very good, seeming to me to be tired. Huckabee and Romney were very good and Rudy ran away with the prize.

yada Yada yada

Posted by: Raging_Contradiction at May 17, 2007 2:02 PM
Comment #220659

I heard Newt on the radio the other day, he was asked if he thought that we would ever get past the partisan bickering and stalemate that exists today. He said “I am permanently optimistic.” I can’t wait until he declares and sweeps all the Republican rubbish aside. We will then have a true intellectual in the race with actual ideas and solutions to problems. Go Newt…

JT

Posted by: JayTea at May 17, 2007 3:48 PM
Comment #220660

“We didn’t have this kind of “politicizing” during WWII; a war we actually won! But, you go on blaming Repubs, that’ll help our troops to victory.”

This war is nothing close to WWII, and obviously support for this war would be different in comparison. Also in a democracy like ours, if such a large percentage of people are against the war that the Republicans supported, they should be allowed to voice these protests and be recognized. Our chances for “victory” are so low that even Republicans are starting to find a solution of the mess that was made.

Posted by: Tina at May 17, 2007 4:02 PM
Comment #220690

JayTea,

I think your optimism for Newt is due to the lack of optimism for the other candidates. I believe we will settle for one of the current candidates if Newt or another real conservative does not step to the forefront, however, most of us are not content at the moment with so many moderates in the mix. Newt and a pretty good number of fiscal and social conservatives could not change Washington in the 90’s when they tried to wrestle away power from the status quo Democrats and moderates in the Senate. It is going to take not only a majority of true conservatives in the House, but also a majority of true conservatives in the Senate to change Washington even a little. This also reqires a President that will not veto “real legislation” (unlike the new immigration bill, it is not real legislation) to change the way things are done in Washington. If Newt can come up with another Contract for America, with some really good ideas which he is known for, it would certainly be nice. Right now, nobody seems to have the courage to promote any ideas from either Party on the hard issues that America will face in the next eight years.

JD

Posted by: JD at May 17, 2007 11:20 PM
Comment #238003

I, for one, am one angry white guy who’s sick to death of greedy, tired, old and rich white guys telling lies and hiding behind the dainty skirts of religion and apple pie patriotism. As a former repulican voter, Hillary is the brightest, bravest, and most inclined to think outside the KKK-like mentality; she’s already got my vote. I don’t need to watch any more debates.

Posted by: JD at November 10, 2007 9:02 AM
Post a comment