Liveblogging (sorta) the GOP Debate

Didn’t mean to; couldn’t help it. There it was, right there on TV in front of me on Sunday morning, no less – another GOP debate. I missed the Democratic one yesterday… I’m sure it was online everywhere, but I’m not as good at the internets as the DailyKos people are. So I had to settle for second-tier political theater this a.m., but there you have it.

I’m doing this while I work, so impressions may get random.

There’s Rudy Giulini tooting his own horn on terrorism. I don’t know about Rudy. Yeah, he did a good job of cleaning up the crime in NYC and making it livable for Joe and Jane Sixpack from everything I’ve heard, but I’m pretty sure police abuses went up during his tenure, too. And I know he kept closing museums that dared exhibit shows he took issue with while he was mayor. Do we really want another arrogant, bullying, my-way-or-the-highway prick in the White House so soon after W?

Moreover, Giulini only ‘looks good on terror’ because George Bush was such a chickenshit on 9/11. If the president hadn’t been struck dumb with fear before going into hiding on 9/11, he could have been the face on TV, calmly assuring the nation from the Oval Office (really a set on Air Force One built for this purpose) that America was still on its feet, kicking ass and taking names. I don’t blame Bush for going to ground on 9/11 – I’m certain the Secret Service wouldn’t have taken “no” for an answer even if Bush hadn’t been too trembley with terror to even move of his own volition – but the fact that he disappeared from the public conscious at our weakest, most vulnerable, exposed moment gave Giulini the opening he needed.

And he nailed it. Fucking nailed it.

But you know who else nailed it on 9/11 (besides the highjackers)? Don Rumsfeld, incompetent, obtuse dickweed former SecDef. There’s footage of him running around the outside of the Pentagon in the immediate aftermath of the attack – fire, smoke, chaos, not knowing if a second wave was coming – running around with the first responders. That’s some serious cajones, my friend.

But all this proves is that being good in the clutch, being brave in the face of danger even, doesn’t necessarily bestow a person with the kind of good judgment we need and currently so desperately lack in a president. You may follow them into battle, but for fuck’s sake don’t let them draw up the plan!

There’s an interesting question. Apparently one of the pillars of our (ahem) plan … for Iraq seems to be to give every man, woman and child in the country a cut of the oil revenue. That sounds awfully socialistic to my ears for one thing, and even more to the point, if it’s a good idea for Iraq, why is it a bad idea for us working shmoes here on the homefront? Why do Iraqi citizens’ fates rate higher in our government’s eyes than its own do?

Oh, a question for every candidate. Let’s have a look at the field…

Tommy Thompson, oh please. He looks like a fighter that’s stayed in the ring too long. By years. That may be facile, but he’s a Republican. I wasn’t going to vote for him anyhow.

Mike Huckabee seems like a nice guy. I’d like to have a beer with him. NEXT!

Ron Paul, of course, is terrific. I personally like the way each of the major parties has allowed a totally off-message truth-teller to participate in their little staged extravaganzas so far. It’s very egalitarian of them and Paul and the crazy Dem guy (Gravel) have produced some of the best soundbytes from the debates by far.

Mitt Romney is even more nakedly politically calculating than Hillary. He’s the kind of flip-flopper that John Kerry could only dream of being. Hmmm...

Plus all these assholes (except possibly Ron Paul I suppose) who claim to be across-the-board self-proclaimed ‘pro-lifers’ are all also pro-death penalty, the government-sanctioned taking of a citizen’s life. That should be the worst kind!! And nobody is asking them to reconcile that conundrum because the death penalty is a total loser, politically, even for the network stiffs who are posing the questions. Americans in big numbers are creepily in support of the death penalty. But as always, the sheer hypocrisy of the alleged “pro-lifers” makes me want to gag.

Okay, Romney just spanked Obama and he’s actually making sense. That’s what I was talking about when I mentioned judgment. Obama looks good on TV, but he was wrong about unconditionally talking to any world leader, and he was wrong to say we’d walk all over Pakistan to nail a suddenly available Osama if Pakistan didn’t move quick enough. Of course we would do it, but it shows shit judgment to say we would do it.

I like Barack, but he needs some seasoning. Think about what an awesome President he’d make in 20 years, seriously. Maybe after a couple terms in the Senate and a couple as governor of Illinois. Some dignified gray in his temples. He could be a titan! But right now he’s the charming new kid in school that everyone wants to sit next to, but you’re better off not copying his test answers.

Now the GOP boys are all wheeling out their big nuclear dicks. Look, Brownback’s is bigger than Tancredo’s! Oooooh!

Wow! Tommy T just went after the women’s vote big time, promising to “end breast cancer by 2015 for all the women in America.” Isn’t that the year same year that Bush promised to have us on Mars by? I mean, it was a well-set-up line, powerfully delivered and he may even be sincere. But either he has an oncological trick up his sleeve that he’s not telling us about, or he’s selling us the Brooklyn Bridge.

Sam Brownback blathering on again about family, vowing to overturn Roe. Why doesn’t he just go fuck himself? I hate all these Bible-thumping creeps. Having religious zealots at the head of state have never taken any country in a good direction. Plus, he’s an idiot.

Duncan Hunter wants to restore “economic patriotism.” That’s why you’re scratching your heads and saying “Who the fuck is Duncan Hunter?”

In the end, I guess I came away with the strongest impressions of Romney and Giuliani. I think they’d be the most formidable candidates, but ultimately, it’s incumbent upon the electorate to remember that what a candidate says means NOTHING. In 2000, Bush ran on ‘compassionate conservatism’ and an oath to ‘bring honor and integrity back to the White House.’ He campaigned against nation building. I could go on and on.

My point being, what a candidate says means nada (that’s why these ‘debates’ are political theater and very little else) and should be disregarded out of hand on issues of substance. What a candidate has done is the indicator we should be looking at to figure out what they’ll do in the future.

By that measure, Romney looks like the best of this bunch. Most level-headed and potentially likely to triangulate the country back to civility, if such a thing is even possible in wake of Bush/Cheney. Personally, I'm not optimistic. It may take a generation till we’re back on our feet.

Just when we’ll need you most, President Obama.