Too Bad The Debate Won’t Matter

It is way too late in the game for the groundswell of Santorum supporters to turn back and take a gamble on Newt.  At stake is handing the Republican nomination to an establishment Republican with a liberal tax plan, timid economic plan, and nothing more than a strong business reputation to run on.  But after last night’s debate, the choice for the Republican nominee is as clear to me as the day I endorsed him.

I was proud of Newt for making a supremely important point in the debate over contraception.  The issue isn’t a debate between someone who wants to keep birth control pills legal and someone who wants to ban all contraception and chain women to the kitchen sink.  The debate is between someone who voted to make it legal for doctors to kill babies after they are born and the eventual GOP candidate who simply wants to protect religious organizations from having to pay for abortion pills.  The radical here is most definitely Obama and both Newt and Mitt pointed that out.

Santorum struck out more than once.  He came across as arrogant, angry and mean.  He has already taken a great deal of heat for dismissing unprincipled votes as “taking one for the team”.  This is the opposite of what anti-establishment Republicans are looking for.  I will give Santorum one very good mark though for making clear that when he talks about what is wrong with the family in America, he id not proposing that we use the government to solve it.  I mentioned that a couple days ago as something Santorum has not done a good job making clear.

Romney did a poor job connecting.  He has put up a conservative facade, but his opponents consistently poked holes in it.  In the end, he will keep his diehard supporters and establishment Republican allies, but he continues to disappoint.

Ron Paul continues to live in a time machine fantasy world where we supposedly can ignore what Iran is doing because we made them do it in the first place and ignoring them will make them go away.  Ron Paul does not seem to understand that on a scale of rationality, radical Islamic terrorists make the communists and fascists seem like Locke and Des Cartes.  Mutual guaranteed destruction is no great incentive for peace when offered to suicide bombers.

Unfortunately, Newt does not have the ground organization to convince Santorum voters to switch back.  But after last night’s debate, we may be kicking ourselves for a long time for overlooking him in 2012.

6 Responses

  1. The funny thing is, these guys continue about religious organizations needing to be exempt, yet they already are. Religious organizations whose sole purpose is to spread the message of their faith and only hire those who share those beliefs are exempt from the mandate.

  2. David, I’m glad you said that. I think there is a great deal of ignorance in America about what religion’s role actually is, especially with the government trying to usurp that role. You have people like Obama telling you the mandate on religious organizations is ok because organizations who solely exist to share their faith are exempt. But most religious organizations, in fact almost all are also dedicated to providing humanitarian aid, relief for the poor, services for children, etc as part of their Biblical mandate. I think we need to expose this ignorance and teach people that religious organizations are rarely solely about sharing their faith.

  3. Also, the question here is not about Christians who just want to share their faith being forced to provide abortion pills. It is about people who are clearly Christian being forced to provide abortion pills. Therefore, instead of feeling ok because proselytizing organizations get an exemption, we should be asking ourselves about non-religious institutions that are owned by Christians and the violation of their first amendment rights by forcing them to provide abortion pills. You are taking this debate in the completely wrong direction from where we should be looking. Obama is taking away our first amendment rights and he, and you, think it’s all ok because he has a narrow exemption for a tiny percentage of religious people out there.

  4. Religion is a big issue, certainly. But the candidate who wins in 2012 will be the one who convinces a majority that he can lead the way through economic perils. Candidates should be On Message about this. Candidates who focus on other issues are hurting themselves. Unfortunately, another economic jolt is likely to happen between now and November, and this will benefit the candidate with the strongest economic message.

  5. Would that make you a Newt fan then? Because frankly, Mitt Romney’s tax plan is timid class warfare, and his call to raise the minimum wage and tie it to inflation is guaranteed to keep unemployment among the most vulnerable groups high. Romney has not much more than a good financial background to run on, not any specific financial magic pill plan.

  6. The guy who convinces the majority that he’s the best one to take us through an economic downturn will win. Right now, the discussion is about other things; and that is counter-productive. That’s all I’m saying.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: