I just finished watching the CNN Tea Party Debate. While watching, I decided to give a run down of the candidates as I see them. But first, let me speak about the debate itself. It was horrible. There’s not even a nod to fairness. The intro to it focused only on Romney, Perry, and Bachmann. As usual, they totally ignore Ron Paul. Unfortunately for America, Ron Paul makes the most sense.
Instead of asking the same question to the entire panel and then allowing infighting, Wolf Blitzer asked the same question of one or two people, allowed infighting, and then changed the question for other candidates. This allowed people like Romney, Bachmann, and Santorum to monopolize time. It just wasn’t done well and it wasn’t done farily. Speaking of fairly, there was a question about Fair Tax and Ron Paul wasn’t even considered to respond to it. Many questions were directed at all of the candidates and Wolf picked and choose who got to answer.
As for the candidates themselves, the following are my thoughts. I’m going to do my best to go through them in the order that they stood.Jon Huntsman
Seems like he might have done some good for Utah, but he tries to go after Perry, who seems to have done better in a state with 12 times as many people. He doesn’t always answer questions directly. He’s a snake oil salesman. He might have a few good ideas but he spends the bulk of his time attacking other candidates. He’s obviously a bottom-rung candidate, and he acts like it.Herman Cain
One of the three people that didn’t really attack anyone. He has some good ideas, and tons of good experience in the private sector. He’s the only non-career-politician. He wants to trim out what doesn’t work in the government.Michelle Bachmann
Her answer to everything is basically Obamacare. She mentions it almost as much as Giuliani mentions 9/11. I’ve always thought that she’s a nut. She hasn’t really proved me wrong yet. She may have some decent ideas, but there are plenty of better candidates that sound more like they know what they’re talking about and mean it, instead of attempting—rather poorly I might add—to make the soundbites that people will rehash over and over on the networks.Mitt Romney
Even though he seems to agree with Perry on most issues, he clearly sees him as the alpha male in the group because he attacks him so fucking often. It’s really just annoying and sad to watch. He’s like a little dog trying to nip and Perry’s heels and Perry just stands there tall.
Even more annoyingly he brags about Massachusetts while doing it too, which is state with a quarter of the population of Perry’s. He also criticized him for only being up 1% in jobs compared to the country when Bush had 3%. And he ignored that Bush was governor during a booming economy. Perry’s number should be praised in that light. He also tried to purport that he knew better than Perry about how to secure a border. Massachusetts versus Texas? Uh Texas wins.
Romney is the GOPs Obama. A lot of crafty talk, but no substance.Rick Perry
It’s very creepy how similar Perry is to Bush. Except he’s not stupid. I didn’t like Bush. I didn’t like the expansion of government and limiting of rights under him and his shitty Congress. I don’t see the same thing happening with Perry. Perry was also another person who didn’t really attack anyone. He got his points off well. He’s got good ideas. And he seems to be one of the few people that wants to at least give people immigrating to this country a shot at making it on their own instead of with government help. He also realizes that building a wall to keep people out is pointless and stupid.Ron Paul
It’s probably no surprise that Ron Paul is my favorite so far. He’s a Libertarian and he’s running on pure common sense. People booed him for stating the truths about why we were attacked on 9/11—even though they agreed with the actual reason previously. Those people were idiots. He’s right. We shouldn’t have a military presence worldwide. Everyone knows that our army is the strongest. We don’t need to show it off. This only gives other countries the right to criticize our actions just like we do of any country starting problems anywhere else.
Ron Paul is also a proponent of Fair Tax, as long as we guarantee the repeal of income taxes as well. He wants to get rid of a lot of the useless institutions in government. He’s a smart man. He’s a good man. And he’s one of the only honest people up there. He didn’t attack anyone. He didn’t need to. His ideas were what was important.
He also didn’t bring the talk back to earlier points. Most of the others used that to make some sort of soundbite remark. In the end it may hurt him though the media would ignore it anyway. Even so, I respect that. He accepted his lot and made strong points with whatever question was asked of him. He also didn’t face a lot of attacks from other candidates, and that’s because they had nothing to attack him with. Only Gingrich and Santorum were stupid enough to fight with him about 9/11.Newt Gingrich
Overall, Newt wasn’t bad. I didn’t agree with everything. I think he’s wrong about national security and the causes of 9/11. He didn’t really attack anyone, and he didn’t really face attack. He was mainly after soundbites. They didn’t give him much chance to speak. As far as his ideas go, they’re better represented by the other candidates. He just seems like he wants a shot at the helm.Rick Santorum
This guy is just a weasel. Not only do I disagree with his most of the things he’s famous for, I think he just comes off as a real asshole. Whereas Huntsman at least gets some sort of point out, Santorum is devoid of that. He’s twice the snake oil salesman that Huntsman is. Santorum is another bottom-rung candidate hell bent on clawing his way to the top no matter who he’s got to throw off. His nose is cocked to the side. I’m sure that’s from all the people who have hit that guy in the face.
He thinks that we can build a wall to keep out illegals. He’s an idiot. I don’t even think we should. He thinks that 9/11 just happened because people are jealous of America for being free? Yeah, that makes total sense. I mean, those oppressive governments are totally happy that their people protest the fact that their governments suck by attacking us. Like that makes sense, idiot.Overall
Out of all of these candidates, my favorite is Ron Paul, but I wouldn’t mind Herman Cain, or Rick Perry. Those three people are the only ones that seem to understand what they’re talking about. They’re the most honest, and they let their ideas stand for them without resorting to personal attack or having to go back to make some silly “America should be awesome” kind of soundbite quote.
The plain truth is that we’re going down the crapper and because of that we have a real opportunity to fix a lot of crap that went wrong during the 20th century. I mean we’re actually talking about taking power away from the Fed, getting rid of useless departments, ending Social Security, Medicare, other welfare crap, and even the IRS. We’re talking about ending wars, ending occupations, ending Homeland Security, and ending the TSA! People are waking up. People want to fix this shit and get back to the freedoms we used to have. People are interested in not shitting on the Constitution! Now is the time to act. We don’t need lackeys that feel the need to attack others because their ideas aren’t sound. We need true leadership, a willingness to attack issues, and a willingness to get rid of spending that we don’t need.
While Cain and Perry go a long way toward that. The only person who truly espouses all of those things is Ron Paul. And hell, we might even get lucky and get a ticket with Rand Paul. Ron and Rand could do amazing things to bring common sense back into this country.