Comments on: Oh No They Didn’t: Candidates’ Slams from the Iowa Debate

By: Eric

Eric — Sun, 11 Dec 2011 23:33:00 +0000

Ron Paul no more supports Iran’s development of nuclear weapons than he does the nuclear arsenals of Pakistan, India, or North Korea. But the best way to address the prospect of Iranian membership in the nuclear club is to renounce our current policy of regime change, promise annihilation of any country that employs nuclear weapons against the United States, and leave Israel free to do what it believes is necessary to defend itself…”

By: Derek Wain

Derek Wain — Sun, 11 Dec 2011 19:48:35 +0000

In the debate which she won hands down, MB’s courageous reference to our broken Federal income tax system underlines why she is truly the one Constitutional Conservative in the race.
47% of American families pay no Federal income tax. Everyone should pay their fair share, including the 47% who consume tax money and do not pay a dime. Everyone makes “enough money” to pay at least a nominal Federal income tax. Bachmann does not demagogue the issue, as does Team Obama media as well as the politicians seeking votes from the 47% who are tax consumers at the expense of the 53% who are tax payers.

By: Todd Hamilton

Todd Hamilton — Sun, 11 Dec 2011 14:22:10 +0000

I am a former Cain supporter. I watched that debate last night and Ron Paul is the only one who seems to understand we need to CUT spending in Washington in a massive way. He won that debate hands down. And yet after the debate, ABC mentioned EVERY candidate’s name- but not his once. And here I read this article and again- not mentioned once. I don’t agree with him on everything, but rather than vote for one of the other phonies, I’m gonna vote for Paul- even if the media won’t mention him.

By: searambler

searambler — Sun, 11 Dec 2011 14:12:17 +0000

LOL! You Ron Paul supporters are hilarious. And delusional, if you believe he has a snowballs chance in hell of being chosen by the GOP as their candidate. He’s already run and lost twice before. Lost very badly, I might add. His libertarian ideology is not shared by mainstream America. Period. But please, feel free to write in his name on the ballot next November. A vote for Paul will help Obama defeat the GOP candidate, Willard Mitt Romney……

By: MMD

MMD — Sun, 11 Dec 2011 12:42:05 +0000

Didn’t watch the dabate. Since I live in Louisiana my vote really counts for nothing in the Primaries. Let’s admit it, once Iown NH and SC have completed their voting, it’s done and over with. So, why watch something where my vote isn’t even counted.

By: Louder

Louder — Sun, 11 Dec 2011 11:02:00 +0000

Nice article. You forgot something though… RON PAUL WON THE DAMN DEBATE!!! Hands down, he had answers that NOBODY could deny. When talking about taking an oath in office he said “where does the fight come from?” You see, Everyone swears to uphold the constitution and really the only one that can 100% say that he has done that is RON PAUL. You failed to report the winner! You fail at journalism bud. :)

By: Jacob

Jacob — Sun, 11 Dec 2011 10:06:10 +0000

Worthless article by Matt Negrin. What are you afraid of? You have (intentionally?) left out any mention of Ron Paul who unleashed the most powerful slams of the debate, especially the one that leveled Gingrich, bam, it was phenomenal. Nobody could touch Paul, somehow the moderators tried to steer it away from Paul as if he was going to do too much damage to the “front men” and change the discussion to real matters. This is all obvious to the people, we saw it with our eyes. History will judge the yellow-bellied propagandist. And yet, Paul managed to pull off the single greatest total debate performance I have ever witnesses. Well done Paul.

By: MarkP

MarkP — Sun, 11 Dec 2011 08:14:03 +0000

It seemed like Ron Paul won. He showed his honesty, straightforwardness, and common sense. I believe ABC’s ignonring of him in their coverage, highlights their lack of credibility. The establishment fears him.

By: rick powers

rick powers — Sun, 11 Dec 2011 07:36:04 +0000

I used to doubt this talk of a deliberate Ron Paul media blackout…but after this joke of a debate…I’m becoming a believer. I also think he and Bachmann won the debate.

By: Gail Fernandez

Gail Fernandez — Sun, 11 Dec 2011 07:35:32 +0000

I think Bachmann was the unspoken winner of the debate tonight if not certainly tied for first place with Gingrich. Tying both Romney and Newt together, forcing them to go at each other in order to try to distance themselves, was a brilliant debate move by Bachmann. It was clever and inventive to consolidate the similarities of Gingrich and Romney into an imaginative phrase “Newt Romney” almost as if they were both two sides to the same person. It was like killing two political birds with one stone, raising doubts as to Newt and Romney’s “consistent conservatism” by exposing their positions on health care mandates, cap & trade, tarp, payroll tax, and immigration. Because of that, she was able to influence 74% of the Yahoo audience to ask for clarification from “Newt Romney.” Also, instead of rebutting Rick Santorum’s evaluation of her “fighting and losing,” it was a smart decision to spend her debate time to appeal to former Cain supporters especially at the end when candidates were asked the one thing they learned from each other at the debates.

Santorum’s statement about how he fought and won was disingenuous since he entered the Senate in 1994 during the Republican take over compared to Bachmann’s service under Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Santorum can’t really brag too much about his “consistent conservatism” can he when he supported a moderate, Arlen Spector, for Spector’s Presidential campaign in return for “key political staff” for his 1994 U.S. Senate campaign (See Wikepedia – “Specter provided him with key political staff for his successful run in 1994.”) One might say that because of that Santorum’s track record of “consistent conservatism” is “dinged” which would ratify Bachmann’s statement that she is the only “consistent conservative” in the race.