Liveblogging the SC GOP Debate

This is my first time “live blogging” so bear with me.

Starting off w/ war in Iraq…

The first questions revolve around creating benchmarks.  Bland response from McCain.  Tommy Thompson evades question about how he can force a freely elected Iraqi government to live up to particular benchmarks, talks about oil revenue distribution a la Alaska.  Romney said something.  Brownback condemns Democrats, suggests working together here (good luck), advocates the Biden “split up Iraq” plan.  Rudy warns that terrorists will come to the U.S., cites recent Ft. Dix arrests.  Tancredo says that we will be in Iraq for a “long time.”  Paul was asked if he is seeking nomination of wrong party since 77% of ‘Pubs don’t want to pull out.  He responded that the decision to enter into this war has shrunk that GOP base (i.e. 77% of a smaller number), cites Reagan’s admission of fault for Marine bombing in Lebanon.  Huckabee tries to be folksy with a (supposedly) southern saying that I have heard used all over the country.  The former VA governor whose name I can never recall said something.  I shall refer to this candidate as VAgov.

Time for taxes…

Romney called “Flip Flop Mitt” for refusing to take a tax pledge.  Romney then promised not to raise taxes.  Probably will be a common theme tonight.  Says Washington is broken.  Says he will cut out government waste.  I’ve heard that before.  Suggests benchmarks for Washington.

McCain recognizes that Bush tax cuts have increased revenue.  Realizes that “rolling back tax cuts” amounts to a tax increase.  Uses drunken sailor analogy for Washington spending.  If I had a nickel…

Huckabee cites the FairTax, touts virtues.  His stock rises.  Great joke about John Edwards spending money in a beauty shop.  That should get some replay time for the next day.

Rudy talks about cutting taxes/spending in NY.  Invokes Reagan’s name.  Take a drink.

Brownback brags about his hybrid family car.  Thinks that the best way to become energy secure is to increase domestic production.

Thompson asked which 3 federal programs he would axe.  He proceeds to brag about his stats in WI.  Never mentions a single specific program he would eliminate.  Stock drops.  Can’t fall much farther.  Moderator presses him.  He then cites the CDC stockpile program.

Paul tackles the question with vigor.  Dept. of Homeland Security, Dept. of Edu….  Then talks about changing philosophy of what government should do.  Republican position should not be more bureaucracy.

VAgov talks entitlements.  Broad platitudes, no specifics.  Boasting about time as gov of VA.  Takes swipe at pro-choice candidates on the stage – way off topic.

Hunter is asked about trade w/ China.  Advocates stringent enforcement of current trade laws.  Talks about removing corporate taxes to bring back companies (referring to FairTax?).

Tancredo mocks the fiscal discipline of other Republicans.  Derides NCLB, prescription drug entitlement.  Stock goes up.

Break in the action.  First impression – Tommy Thompson should go ahead and pack up.  The so called second tier candidates need to cut out the generalities and get specific.  Paul leads the pack there.  Huckabee comes across well.

VAgov asked about his “Rudy McRomney” comments.  Rudy = abortion.  Huckabee = taxes.  Romney = socialized healthcare.  Didn’t mention McCain.

Rudy responds that “Rudy McRomney” wouldn’t make a bad candidate.  Polite haha.  Rudy extols the virtues of personal choice.  Moderator chides him for nonresponse to question about his “liberal” beliefs.  Rudy says he “absolutely believes” in a woman’s rights to choose.  I admire his eventual candor in that environment.

McCain brags about his ability to reach across the isle.  Mentions immigration reform.  Didn’t mention he favors amnesty.

Huckabee laments his name not being included in VAgov’s “moniker.”  Says he could use name recognition.  No kidding.  Brags about 94 tax decreases.  If memory serves, the Cato Institute gave him a D or less on taxes.  I’ll check later.

Romney talks guns & “one man, one woman.”  Gays & guns.  I don’t know if he mentioned God in the same breath.

Brownback is asked if his stance on immigration is Reaganesque.  Take a drink.  Immigration is policy is failed.  Then advocates “alternate” flat tax.  I smell a weasel.

Embryonic stem cell question for Thompson.  Yawn.

Rudy gets another abortion question.  What a waste of time.  Rudy beats the “keep government out of people’s lives” drum.  GOPers should be receptive to that, but I won’t hold my breath.

Huckabee uses “culture of life” quote.  I bet he supports death penalty.

Brownback gets an abortion question.  Staffer pulls the cord on his back.

ANOTHER friggin abortion question, this time for Romney.  Then: “Personally pro life.”  Now: “People should decide abortion, not the court.”

Tancredo tossed a softball about immigration, specifically the positions of McCain and others.  Predictable response.

More immigration questions…

Paul is asked AGAIN about whether he is seeking the wrong party’s nomination b/c of Iraq.  After his response the moderator then asks if 9/11 changed non-interventionist policy.  Paul suggests that the historic U.S. presence (intervention) in the middle east incited such actions.  Rudy demands he retract that assertion (to great applause).  Paul does not, and elaborates his position.  I smell a witch hunt.  Questioning interventionist policy could get one labeled as nonpatriotic.  Thou shalt blindly proclaim that the U.S. is always right, others are always wrong, and to say otherwise is heresy.

McCain asked if South Carolina should be allowed to fly the Confederate flag.  The crowd responds audibly to the question.  McCain tiptoes around the question, and suggests that “we all should move on.”  Significant applause.

Tancredo softly mocks global warming, but suggests moving away from the use of petroleum products.  Chastises Paul for criticizing interventionist policy.

Another break.  I haven’t heard Reagan’s name in a while.

Here come questions about a fake, but supposedly plausible terrorist attack.

McCain asked about torturing suspects.  McCain: torture is bad.

Rudy would permit interrogators to use “any method they could think of.”  Yikes.  In context – this is in response to a direct, imminent threat.

Romney: “We should double” Gitmo.  Use “enhanced” interrogation techniques, not torture.  What the hell does that mean?

Thompson invokes Reagan (”Trust, but verify”).  Take a drink.

Hume asks Brownback if he would go to the UN before attacking a known (suspected?) terror camp.  I’ll let you guess what his answer is.  Remember, this is a GOP debate.

Hunter says that a “one minute” conversation with the SecDef would be all it takes for him to act.

McCain considers “enhanced” interrogation to be torture.  This guy has been on the receiving end, he knows better than anyone else on the stage what torture is.

Question: how would you ensure that the economy continues to grow in the face of a terrorist attack on, say, a shopping mall?  VAgov blabbers.

I find the previous question odious.  This is not a command economy (yet).  It is not the function of the government to “grow” the economy.

Paul: the lower the taxes, the better (in general), but specifically in this situation.  Lists off into critique of Iraq policy.

Tancredo: If nukes are going off in the U.S. “I’m looking for Jack Bauer.”  Applause.

Moderator asks VAgov why there are no minorities running on GOP ticket.  VAgov offers platitudes, moderator cuts him off and demands straight answer.  Still, no good answer.

When asked about a position he has taken counter to the party, Romney says he used to advocate the elimination of the Dept. of Edu., but has since changed his tune.  Now supports NCLB & DoE.  Stock drops.

Hunter gets asked a second question about China.  Did these moderators do any planning?  That is the second time the same person was asked essentially the same question.

End of debate.

The biggest sound bite of the evening will doubtlessly be Rudy’s response to Paul.  That really let him highlight what is his signature issue.  The claim that we were attacked solely for our freedom, culture, etc. is quite fatuous, though.  For one to suggest that our foreign policy has NO influence on actions against us just doesn’t make sense.  There is a fine distinction between explaining and excusing actions.  I think it is reasonable to say that the foreign policy of the U.S. doesn’t make every one our friend.  As such, it might encourage some to attack us.  That explains the attack, but doesn’t excuse it.  If you attack us, we’re going to smack you down.  By the way, did Iraq attack us?

Huckabee gets a gold star for the funniest line of the night with his Edwards quip.

My take on the debate.  Rudy will be perceived as the winner.  I *think* that he is going to be able to out run abortion criticism for a while, at least until Fred Thompson enters.  Romney didn’t fare as well as in the previous debate.  McCain did better than before, but I would still place him just behind Romney.  As for the so called second tier candidates.  Paul was the only distinctive one, but he probably took himself out of the running for the GOP nomination, if he was really in it before.  There is no room in the GOP for apostates who dare question interventionist foreign policy.  What’s funny is that it wasn’t that long ago that many Republicans expressed disdain for interventionism.  Paul still has my vote, but I’m not terribly optimistic about the rank and file GOP.  I don’t even think Tommy Thompson or Sam Brownback fielded a question in the second half of the debate.  Huckabee probably fared the best of the lesser known candidates.  Hunter, Tancredo, VAgov, all gave ho-hum performances.

The moderators, despite repeating questions to particular candidates, did a great job of keeping the candidates in line.  They didn’t take fluffy, non answers.  When necessary they pressed for greater clarification and even interrupted on occasion.  As with the previous debate, I thought there was WAY too much time spent on abortion.  I still don’t think there are any “stand out” candidates among the field.

Update: Hannity was interviewing Huckabee after the debate and discussed the FairTax and mentioned the rally that was held in town just before the debate.  Hannity estimated the crowd to be 10,000.  How much longer will the politicians ignore the people?

Update II: From a technical point of view (and maybe from a content point of view, you decide) the “live blogging” was quite a failure.  Although I routinely saved my post like a good little boy, I forgot one critical step: publishing it to start with.  So, instead of being “live” it was decidedly after the fact.  Live.  Learn.

Update III: I’m slogging through the Hannity & Colmes after party waiting for them to interview Paul.  They’re conducting a text message poll and with 20,000+ votes Ron Paul is winning with about 30%.  On a Fox News poll.  Hannity is making light of it.  Duncan Hunter claims it is because Americans think he is entertaining.  I respectfully must disagree.  Paul interview has begun…

Paul just handed Hannity his ass on a platter.  Classic.  Hannity, who is very good at his job, tried to ask one of his “box in” questions and suggested the U.S. had a moral obligation to intervene in situations like Iraq.  Paul turned the table on Hannity by bringing up a situation in which Reagan (Hannity’s idol) didn’t intervene.  He went on to mention other similar situations where the U.S. didn’t intervene.  Hannity didn’t have a coherent retort.

Their unscientific poll now shows Romney and Paul tied for the lead with 27% each.  If one assumes that the majority of respondants to a Fox News poll are “conservatives” then I am heartened to see Paul faring so well.   Rudy is in third with 19%.  Maybe the GOP can be wrested from the control of the extreme social conservatives yet.