2nd post GOP Sunday debate: Disrespect, misstatement, deflecting responsibility

Posted on January 8, 2012 by


More examples of not quite right.

RICK PERRY– “I make a very proud statement and of fact that– we have a president that’s a socialist.”. A statement thrown out by many without substantial evidence.

RICK SANTORUM, when asked why, if we have coexisted with the Soviet Union (now Russia) and North Korea which have nuclear weapons, we can’t do so with Iran:  “They’re a theocracy that has deeply-embedded beliefs that– that the afterlife is better than this life….So when your principle virtue is to die for your– for Allah, then it’s not a deterrent to have a nuclear threat, if they would use a nuclear weapon.

His statement is partially true but there is a concept of Heaven and Hell in Islam.

But though some wind up with Satan, the Koran says, “Warriors who die fighting in the cause of God are ushered immediately to God’s presence (2:159 and 3:169);” So Muslim theology provides for some going to Paradise while others reside with the Devil.

MITT ROMNEY– About Pres. Obama’s appointments to the National Labor Relations Board, “You stack the deck with labor stooges.” Stooges has a negative connotation. Would Romney say that to the appointees face-to-face? Have Republicans handled such appointments differently?

JOHN HUNTSMAN, MITT ROMNEY In a back-and-forth about Huntsman serving as ambassador to China under Pres. Obama, Huntsman said he did serve under a Democrat, just as his two sons are in the U.S. Navy. “They’re not asking what political affiliation the president is. I want to be very clear with the people here in New Hampshire and this country. I will always put my country first.”

Romney countered, “I don’t disrespect your decision to do that. I just think it’s most likely that the person who should represent our party running against Pres. Obama is not someone who called him a remarkable leader and went to be his ambassador in China.”

Here’s Huntsman’s response: “This nation is divided, David, because of attitudes like that.” RP agrees strongly with Huntsman. He was applauded by the audience, too.

Romney’s statement is purely an attempt to score cheap political points that backfired. It might be tough for some politicos and media pundits to understand, but praising the other side is not a sin. It is, in fact, respectful and the kind of example we need to set for our children.

NEWT GINGRICH, RICK SANTORUM, MITT ROMNEY– Gingrich and Santorum criticized Romney for not running for a second term, citing his statement about how successful he was as governor.

Part of Romney’s reply: “Run again? That would be about me.”

The statement makes no sense. He had talked about how he ran in the first place to advance the state. So he didn’t want to advance it in a possible second term? Why is running for a second term about the candidate?

MITT ROMNEY, NEWT GINGRICH As they discussed ads by a pro-Romney super PAC, Gingrich repeated what he’s said before, that they contained lies about him. Romney responded, “If there’s anything in them that’s wrong, I hope to take it out. I hope everything that’s wrong is taken out.”

A candidate should not simply hope that they would end them. It’s his responsibility to tell them to cancel them. After all, Romney admitted it was his staffers who set up the PAC.