Hoystory

I had to work this evening, as I do most evenings, so I was unable to live-blog the debate. This is the second-best thing.

The Los Angeles Times representative looks constipated.

First Q: Are you better off today than you were eight years ago?

They’re not running against an incumbent president. Who cares? Tell us what you would do.

Anderson Cooper’s a little annoying.

Romney represents a “change.” I understand the political strategy to be the “change” candidate, but it annoys the h-e-double hockeysticks out of me.

McCain’s for the Bush tax cuts — now. Wants Alternative Minimum Tax repealed. All good answers.

I revise and extend my earlier comment: Cooper’s really annoying.

Huckabee identifies some of the economic problems. Offers platitudes and not real answers.

Ron Paul is still a nut. Blah, blah, blah.

LAT reporter says McCain is really a mainstream Republican. Romney responds with some of the laundry list I made in this post.

McCain is proud of his conservative record because he reaches across the aisle to get things done with Democrats? You need to do that sometimes, but other times you shouldn’t. Reaching across the aisle isn’t the be-all, end-all. McCain doesn’t address any of the complaints — instead goes on attack against Romney.

This could be good — if it was one-on-one. Why are Huckabee and Paul still around?

Romney does a good job of defending his record against McCain’s assualt and he does it persuasively.

Huck vs. Rush. Huckabee whines about not getting to talk. Not presidential.

Politico question coming. Is Romney a conservative (re: health insurance and raising fees)? Likens health insurance reform in Massachusetts to welfare-to-work.

LAT question: Global warming “gases” — can states set their own rules? McCain says he’s pro-federalism. Goes into “if I’m wrong about climate change, we’re better off anyway” — tell that to the people who lose their jobs because of what would be draconian emissions rules. McCain won’t agree to a global deal without China and India, but apparently is willing to hamstring the U.S. unilaterally.

Romney is for getting off foreign oil. McCain’s cap-and-trade would be 50-cent per gallon tax on gasoline and 20 percent rise in utility bills.

Huckabee’s a federalist. So is Ron Paul. He’s also for property rights.

Cooper cuts off Paul. If you weren’t gonna let the guy talk, then why’d you invite him?

Huckabee opposes the tax rebates — wants public works projects instead. He says people will use money to buy sneakers from China.

But won’t the construction workers on the highway also use the money they’re paid to buy sneakers from China? Looks like the rebates are just cutting out the middleman.

Good line about people pointing fingers at other motorists in traffic “one at a time.”

Romney is in favor of infrastructure, but says that it’s too slow to give the economy a kick.

Ron Paul: Our foreign policy is to blow up bridges overseas. Cuckoo! Paul keeps on talking about “our empire” — I do not think that word means what he thinks it means.

McCain thinks there are greedy people on Wall Street that need to be punished. For what crime? Apparently for being greedy. McCain’s fine with crapping on the First Amendment (McCain-Feingold), and now the Sixth Amendment appears to be fair game.

LAT reporter challenges McCain on his reasoning for opposing the Bush tax cuts. Reason now: They weren’t accompanied by spending cuts. Reason then: They favor the wealthy.

McCain doesn’t appear to be answering the question. Nope, not answering the question.

Romney gives McCain a feeble challenge on his non-answer. Romney talks about reining in entitlements.

Cooper not interested in following up on that issue. It would’ve interested me, however.

Birthright citizenship is the Politico question. Useless question. That’s set in constitutional stone. You’ve really got to be out on a wingtip to think that’s an issue nowadays.

Romney on immigration — no amnesty, no pathway to citizenship for people in the country illegally.

I’m not sure how workable that is. Good in principle, but I don’t think it’ll fly.

McCain is challenged on whether he would vote for his original immigration bill today. Refuses to answer the question. Looks and acts evasive.

Question: Was Sandra Day O’Connor the right choice for Supreme Court? What the …? Is this the 2008 election or the 1984 election? Why the clever ploy when you’re basically asking the candidates about what kind of judges they would appoint.

Ron Paul is cut-off again. If you didn’t want to hear from him, why is he there? Paul’s a nut, but Cooper’s a butthead.

Did Bush destroy the Republican Party?

Romney: No.

Oh…now we get to the good part. Romney is asked if he supported a timetable for withdrawal from Iraq. Romney: “No.” McCain’s contention is “a lie” and a “dirty trick.”

What’s McCain’s response? He doubles-down on the lie and throws out his shoulder patting himself on the back. As Paul Mirengoff put it: “Guilt by association is, of course, the hallmark of a smear. McCain went one step further to allege guilt by word association.”

I kinda hate to say this: McCain is an ass — or he’s just dim. He’s not dim, so he’s an ass. McCain is continuing to be an ass. Wow. Does McCain think this is helping him?

Ron Paul is a nut.

Huckabee is a whiner.

McCain is right — it’s not about whether we have troops in Iraq — it’s about casualties. No one complains about the troops we have in Japan, because they’re not getting killed in combat. He’s gonna have to have surgery on that shoulder if he keeps on patting himself on the back.

What makes McCain more qualified than Mitt Romney. McCain apparently believes the profit motive is an evil thing. Maybe he should run against Vladimir Putin.

Romney says he’s better than McCain on the economy. Cooper tries to interrupt him — and fails. Paul would do well to follow his example.

They flip it around: Why is Romney more qualified to be Commander-in-Chief? Why’d they even invite Huckabee and Paul?

McCain says to judge him by the people who support him — like The New York Times editorial page. OK, he didn’t cite the NYT.

Ron Paul — rightly — says the president doesn’t “manage” the economy. He’s right on that one. But he’s still a nut.

Huckabee: Romney sees a whole lot of America as invisible. Not exactly persuasive on that one.

Romney likens himself to Reagan.

McCain, instead of doing likewise, goes after Romney.

Paul: At least he’s modest enough not to presume what Reagan would do. Paul hits monetary policy again.

Huckabee: Follows Paul’s lead. Oh, good line. Huckabee endorses Reagan. Always a good move.

Debate over. Maybe they want turn off Cooper’s mic.

Sen. John McCain won the Florida primary Tuesday by almost five points. Following wins in New Hampshire and South Carolina, McCain has definitely become the GOP frontrunner. If the rumors of a Giuliani endorsement prove true, then McCain will likely be the GOP nominee.

Color me unenthusiastic.

Should McCain become the nominee, then I’ll hold my nose and vote for him. He will be better than Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama or John Edwards.

But, of all the Republicans running for president, McCain would’ve been my penultimate choice — coming in ahead of only Ron Paul (Nut-Texas).

Next Tuesday, I’ll head to the polls and vote for Mitt Romney. Romney is far from perfect. His Republican and Democratic opponents can fairly tag him with the “flipper” label (to be a flip-flopper, he’d have to go back to being pro-choice, etc.). You have to take the candidates at face value, unless they give you a simultaneous reason to doubt their sincerity. (For example.)

On every issue except winning the war in Iraq, Romney, Rudy Giuliani and Fred Thompson are better on the issues than McCain. Fred’s out, of course. And Rudy may be out later today.

I know some of you are McCain backers, but I don’t think you should vote for him and not know where he’s wrong — and he’s proudly, arrogantly wrong.

• Campaign-finance “reform” — an assault on the First Amendment
• Immigration “reform” — his “promises” of securing the border first ring hollow
• Judges — I fear McCain would get us more Kennedys and Souters rather than Scalias, Alitos, Roberts’s or Thomas’s.
• Judges II — His decision to throw some good judges under the bus to preserve the extra-constitutional filibuster run by the Democrats was despicable.
• Waterboarding — He’s taken an obnoxiously utilitarian line on this one. He denounces it as “torture” and says it should be illegal while at the same time saying that the president should be willing to resort to “torture” in the ticking-time-bomb scenario.
• Health care — He’s suggested that we re-import drugs from Canada and that pharmaceutical companies are “evil.” Apparently the only good drug company is a broke one that can’t afford the R&D to develop new drugs. McCain would cut off his nose to spite his melanoma-free face.
• ANWR — McCain has likened the desolate Alaskan National Wildlife Refuge to the Grand Canyon. Maybe McCain needs new glasses.
• Global warming — McCain argues that something must be done, even if global warming is natural and unstoppable. I believe the phrase he uses is “What could it hurt?” Well, you could be a one-term president because the economy tanked under your draconian global warming rules.
• Tax cuts — It’s not necessarily that he was opposed to the Bush tax cuts. It’s the rhetoric he used to rail against them. I would’ve admired McCain for standing on principle and urging spending cuts to go along with tax cuts. Heck, I would’ve applauded him. But McCain went to the Democratic class-warfare rhetoric — that’s a bridge too far.

McCain’s attitude towards conservatives is the topper. It’s almost as if he takes some perverse delight in telling us to take a hike. You get the feeling that he wouldn’t treat Democrats this way. Here’s hoping that an “Anyone But McCain” movement crops up soon.

For those who think that McCain can win over enough independents to defeat sens. Clinton or Obama — I wouldn’t use that as a basis for your vote. It was just a few years ago the Democrats picked their presidential candidate based upon who they thought was “electable” and you saw what it got them.