Categorized | News, Opinion

GOP Debate Losers: Obama, CNN and Grunt Master John King

Ugh, Ugh, Ugh, Ugh.

John King’s most repeated line of the night. Honestly, I have never been so glad to here “up next is Anderson Cooper” in my entire life.

King spent the entire night grunting and asking stupid questions like “Coke or Pepsi” and trying to get the GOP candidates to turn on themselves and leave Obama alone the entire evening.

On a Sunday talk show, Candidate Tim Pawlenty went on the offensive against fellow GOP hopeful Mitt Romeny by coining the phrase “ObamenyCare” reminding people that Mitt Romney shoved a similar program down the throats of Massachusetts residents while governor.

Pawlenty was asked prior to the debate if he was going to use the phrase to attack Romney during the debate. He replied he was not going to do so.

Not so fast! King went out of his way to pick a fight between the pair during the debate, and to the candidate’s credit, they did not take the bait.

King looked foolish.

The questions asked by the audience morphed into totally different questions between their original asking and the question King eventually asked. He did his best to put questions designed to paint each candidate in the worst possible light while giving as little opportunity as possible to candidates to put forth solutions. As soon as a candidate started laying out a plan, King commenced with the Cave-man like grunting. Over and over again. It was disruptive, transparently partisan and totally unprofessional from a journalism standpoint.

I hope the GOP learned a lesson about their selection of hosts in the future. Letting an organization that is basically a part of the Obama campaign host a debate is a really bad idea, and despite the opportunity to reach viewers that watch CNN – though for the life of me I cannot understand why – you know their objective is to make Republicans look bad.

Stop shooting yourselves in the foot!

For the most part, the CNN question selection gave the candidates little opportunity to explain their positions AND expound on an idea. With only 30 seconds to give details, even Madison Avenue Ad Agencies would be hard pressed to come off looking appealing. No doubt that was by design.

And it gave the liberal media the perfect opportunity to report “nothing of substance” from the debates.

Most of the answere started out with:

“Well, Obama has caused the jobs market to collapse because”

At which point King got his motor revving with guttural sounds like Grunt, Grunt, Grunt. I, I, I. Da, Da, Da.

Of course they didn’t say anything of substance. The format was designed to prevent that from happening.

Despite the juvenile behavior from John King, there were a couple of moments worth viewing. And the candidates managed a few important glimpses of their platforms.

The good news: all are pro life, although Mitt has been known to waiver on this, and other things.

Newt Gingrich managed to come out in favor of neither amnesty nor deportation for illegal aliens, a slimy position at best. The negative points on my scorecard for that answer alone put Newt in dead last place.

Following close behind Newt for the next to last spot was Herman Cain. Not that he did anything stupid, but after we heard his “How’s that working out for ya” bumper sticker in the first debate with the Junior Varsity team, he has really shot his wad. There was nothing left to amuse the common man. That is not to say Obama is a better president than Cain would be, that is not true at all. Cain has at least held a job. But he was really out of his element in this round and it showed.

Next up from the bottom is Rick Santorum. He seemed to have plenty of time to talk about I, me moi. We know what Santorum has done in the past. Including his mega landslide loss in 2006. We really don’t need another narcissist in Washington. Weiner and Obama more than fill the quota. I think Santorum gets the “most irritating” award. Not just for the debate, but in general.

Ron Paul came in squarely in the middle at #4 on my score card. He has a lot of great ideas on the economic side of things, but he has a completely unrealistic view on a lot of issues with the most glaring being foreign policy and drugs. I hear him. I understand his position. I simply think he is quite wrong on some issues. Oddly, King stayed away from the drug questions for Paul. My theory is that if Paul’s position on drugs ever became known in the liberal community, most of the left wingers would jump ship and actually learn to spell Libertarian. Same with IRS and Federal Reserve questions. How can anyone go two hours with Ron Paul on stage and not ask about drugs and the hated IRS and Fed is beyond me. CNN is scared of Ron Paul because they know he would appeal to a lot of their viewers.

I put Mitt Romney third. He didn’t really get any good questions, but managed to take charge and answer the question actually asked by the audience a couple of times. Still, Obama Care and Romney Care are two sides of the same dung pile. They will never pass the smell test. Mitt’s hands are dirty on this issue. Had he not stepped around King and answered the question actually asked, Romney would have been fighting Newt for a lower position.

Tim Pawlenty came in second. I must say, I have been predisposed towards T-Paw, but he has managed to take that Gomer Pyle “Minnesota Nice” act a bit too far. (H/T to JoshuaPundit for the Minnesota Nice label, I heard it there first). T-Paw had a lot of potential had he been able to evolve his persona. Sadly, that has not happened. In fact, it has gone the other way. I am being generous giving him second place as he probably deserves a lower station, bt that would have forced me to move Romney up and that would be far more egregious.

Which leaves Michele Bachmann taking top honors in a sub par debate. I like Bachmann as a Congresswoman. Really great at her job. A smart lady and eminently more qualified than Obama. But she, like Cain, is too inexperienced to serve as President at this point. It is easy to give her the number one position because of what the lady brings to the table. If only the guys had her fight! Especially those with experience as Governor and not named Mitt.

The only question left to answer is Rick Perry. I think we need him in this. And I think Ambassador to some place in Asia would be a fitting place for John Huntsman.

Overall, I would rate the quality, format and moderation of the debate as a solid “D”. CNN failed to allow a debate that would actually allow the candidates to say something to give America a clue as to who they are.

Obama, King and CNN were all losers, but the American People lost out on an opportunity to fairly compare the Republican candidates. CNN gets an epic fail for this disaster.

About Tom White

Tom is a US Navy Veteran, owns an Insurance Agency and is currently an IT Manager for a Virginia Distributor. He has been published in American Thinker, currently writes for the Richmond Examiner as well as Virginia Right! Blog. Tom lives in Hanover County, Va and is involved in politics at every level and is a Recovering Republican who has finally had enough of the War on Conservatives in progress with the Leadership of the GOP on a National Level.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

CommentLuv badge

Tom White Says:

Nothing is more conservative than a republican wanting to get their majority back. And nothing is more liberal than a republican WITH a majority.

Sign up for Virginia Right Once Daily Email Digest

No Spam - ever! We send a daily email with the posts of the previous day. Unsubscribe at any time.
* = required field

Follow Us Anywhere!