Here’s a roundup of coverage of the Texas Senate candidate debate I liveblogged on Friday:
Archive for the ‘Media Watch’ Category
Roundup of Senate Debate Coverage
Tuesday, April 17th, 2012Liveblog of the April 13, 2012 Texas Senate Debate
Friday, April 13th, 2012Well, I’ve already been distracted by shiny objects, so I guess I’ll close this out. David Dewhurst was a very poor candidate tonight, and he better hope that not too many Republican voters were watching…
Leppert doesn’t excite the base (with some reason), but he doesn’t make a lot of mistakes either. You can see why he’s hanging around, but a Republican primary doesn’t play to his strengths.
To win, Cruz has to take the fight to Dewhurst, but in tonight’s debate he did it in a way that seemed too programmed and strident. Leppert’s “I’m not a lawyer” line may be a transparent dig at Cruz, but it still comes across as more subtle than some of Cruz’s attacks on Dewhurst. Cruz needs to pull back a little, be a bit less programmed, and a bit more spontaneous.
This debate left a lot to be desired from an organizational standpoint. I appreciate a full hour without commercial interruptions, but the “Here are some polling numbers, how can you possibly oppose them” questions were dumb even by the very slack standards of liberal MSM journalism.
Cruz didn’t win the debate, but Dewhurst certainly lost it. He got worse as the night went on. No wonder he avoids debates. He doesn’t think well on his feet, and he wasn’t prepared for some very obvious questions.
All three of the other candidates had both good and bad moments. Cruz is a good debater, but, as I’ve said before, his decision to always go back to his stock answers was a mistake. He did well on the Cuba question, but I think he would have done better answering the questions straight without always trying to use them to attack Dewhurst
James probably raised his stock more than the others by simply being no worse than Leppert or Cruz. His final speech tried to cram too much in too hard.
Leppert was polished, and came across as reasonable, but his answers tended to allude to positions that were too detailed to cover in the debate format.
James: Apartment boy eviction notice mayonnaise sandwich life story. (Impassioned speech, a little strong.)
Cruz: Attacks Dewhurst. “We need strong conservatives.” Record of conservative.
Leppert: Attacks Dewhurst, attacks Cruz.
Dewhurst: Most conservative Lt. Gov. (Big pause.) Life story. (He’s gotten worse as the debate has gone on.)
Slater brings up the budget-cutting question on Dewhurst. Shouldn’t you cut it in good times.
Dewhurst: Cut state spending. I cut state spending 2003, 11, 12, 13.
(Man, even I’m wincing in sympathy for Dewhurst on this.)
Dewhurst: General revenue decline 10.7%
Asking Cruz the Cuba dictator question.
Cruz: Knocks the question out of the park. DMN retracted.
Hmmm. Washington Mutual question for Leppert.
Leppert: (Very slightly rattled, but recovers quickly.) WAMU’s problems were already in place, and mandated. (Then dances away for his businessman shtick.)
SA reporter on gay civil unions. (Clip of James opposing gay marriage.)
James: All of us will be accountable to God. I do support marriage between a man and woman.
SA Reporter: You’re letting your faith get in the way of (following some liberal poll)
James (doesn’t back down)
Leppert to Dewhurst: You raised more lobbyist money than Nancy Pelosi and (didn’t catch), (And…was there an actual question.)
Dewhurst: Rambling answer “I’ve always done what is right”???????
Cruz To Leppert: Dewhurst wage tax? Did Dewhurst cut or increase the budget?
Leppert: I might as well let you ask the question to Dewhurst. (knives Cruz about his career as a lawyer) To you business is academic, to me it’s a living.
Dewhurst: I have always opposed a state income tax. The facts are wrong. Fed vs. Texas dollars.
James to Cruz: Why didn’t you support Santorum.
Cruz: Santorum is a great conservative. But I wanted to let the voters decide. We need strong conservatives to take the Senate.
Dewhurst just had a senior moment asking whether Craig James would support Cornyn.
James: I’ll support anyone who supports the constitution and the 10 Commandments. (But he would support Cornyn.)
Cruz: I said it would be premature of me, but DeMint, Rand Paul, Pat Toomey all support me.
Candidates ask other candidates questions.
Reporter: 85% love this cherry-picked issue!
Leppert: Don’t invite the government in. (Then talks about how the government manages various sub-issues.)
Cruz: I don’t support then as mandates from the government. TAANSTAFL. Every mandate drives up the cost of health care to buy votes. (Cruz was about to hit a home run, and then went back to the European Dewhurst hit, and turned it into a triple.)
Dewhurst: I’m running for the senate, my opponents are running against David Dewhurst. We got the best stuff, but we can do better. (An ideologically incoherent answer.)
Austin reporter: Here are all the ways that ObamCare is awesome via this narrowly tailored polls.
James: 26 year olds love those provisions because Obama has destroyed the economy. (straddle)
Dewhurst: Democrats talk about more services. Improve health care outcomes and save money. (Revenge of the Vagues.) Ummm, uhhhh. Look at the cost.
James: Opposes the wall, supports sending troops to the border. Wall is not practical, (Oppose his answer, but I give him points for floating an answer that swims against conservative consensus.)
Dewhurst: Supports wall in some spots, but not all. Triple border patrol, a job program for returning vets. (?)
Leppert: (Ducks wall issue) Secure borders, put accountability in the system. Ask border guys what they need. Washington should supply the tools they want. (Don’t think that’s workable answer.)
Border wall question: Do you support?
Cruz: Yes. Triple border patrol. Opposed to amnesty. (Then the attack on Dewhurst.)
Dewhurst: I’ve always opposed amnesty. Cutting in line is wrong. (This concise format does not favor Dewhurst.)
Cruz: Dewhurst assigned bills to liberal democratic committee chairman. Washington plays this game all the time.
James: If an employer doesn’t want tor provide it, they shouldn’t be forced to. (The I’m a businessman schtick)
Reporter: (Liberal talking points on how mandated contraceptives are awesome)
James: It’s about freedom. And Democrats want us to talk about contraceptives rather than jobs.
Dewhurst: Opposes, talks about all the doctors he’s talked to, relatives, etc. Comes across even more scripted than Cruz.
Dewhurst: I’ve always supported, uh, permissive, free market alternatives
Cruz: No on contraception, violates religious freedom, is unconstitutional. (Cruz does have a tendency to go to his standard answers, which he does at the end here.)
San Antonio reporter: Contraception mandate.
Leppert: “The government was trumping individual freedom.”
Reporter: Required to mandate?
Leppert: No. Let patients and doctors make decisions.
James: Leave it to the military. (James is very good in this shorter format.)
James: Need major entitlement reform. MSAs, “This is working for middle class.” (sic)
Cruz: Fundamental entitlement reform, defense reform. (Then back to his points on Dewhurst increasing the Texas budget.)
Dewhurst: I’ve cut it 7-8 times, billions and billions of dollars, inflation + population growth.
Leppert: Rely on our armed forces, get congress out of it. Not questions here, detailed proposals.
Dewhurst: Opposed to the cuts Obama has proposed. Reform procurement.
So far the candidates are clashing more with the panelists than each other.
Dewhurst isn’t great, but so far he’s not awful.
Screw you, panelist, or the yes or no question. You suck
Panelist: Deficit. Cut defense? (no hands)
Cruz: Pork yes, defense no.
Poor job running the panel.
Mod: 1 minute answer, 30 second rebuttal.
Leppert: Why not debate? But the issue is a distraction.
Mod: Why haven’t you shown up?
David: I’ve shown up at a half dozen (Actually bout 3-LP) I have my campaign to run.
James: “Put me in an awkward position. It was unethical. I agree conceptual with Ted, because David hasn’t been showing up.”
Back to the Cruz text message before the debate.
Cruz: “I’m glad Craig got my text. Lt. Gov has chosen to skip 32 candidate forums. Leppert, James, and I attended. Not rigging.”
#belodebate on Twitter.
Just starting. Starting the debate with mention of the Cruz-James text issue.
Just waiting for the debate to start.
Tonight I’ll be liveblogging the debate between Ted Cruz, David Dewhurst, Tom Leppert, and Craig James at 7 PM.
Liveblogging the Texas Senate Debate Friday, April 13, 7 PM
Wednesday, April 11th, 2012I’m livebloggiong the debate here.
This is announcement that I will be attempting to liveblog the Texas Senate debate happening this Friday, April 13, at 7 PM CDT.
Some of the things I’ll be looking at most keenly:
As for Senate debate drinking games, sip every time:
Chug when:
LinkSwarm for April 9, 2012
Monday, April 9th, 2012A LinkSwarm to start your day with:
Keith Olbermann’s Appeal Becomes Ever More Selective
Friday, March 30th, 2012How bad do you have to suck to be fired and replaced with Eliot Spitzer?
Evidently you have to suck as bad as Keith Olbermann. He went from CNN to MSNBC to Current TV (whose audience ratings clock in slightly higher than a rounding error), where he was just fired and replaced with Client 9. To continue the pattern of moving to ever-smaller markets, I guess he’ll next have to host the SUNY Stony Brook Revolutionary Hour of Power on cable access.
I don’t usually spend my time and attention attacking the likes of Olbermann, Bill Maher, Paul Krugman, etc., simply because doing so takes time and attention that could be used describing the many failures of the Obama agenda, and the incompetence, corruption, and cronyism of both the Obama Administration and Democratic officeholders in general. But sometimes your shotgun is in the shop, and you need to restock the barrel with pike…
So Keith Olbermann is out of a job. Meanwhile, Rush Limbaugh’s ratings are up by as much as 60%. So how’s that war against conservative media working out for you, liberals?
(Subject line hat tip for the hopefully tiny number of you who need it…)
The Two Year Anniversary of ObamaCare
Wednesday, March 21st, 2012Today is the two year anniversary of the passage of ObamaCare. Note that Republicans are marking the anniversary of Obama’s signature achievement, while the White House is not. Even Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer admits that it’s an electoral liability for Democrats.
That might have something to do with its stupendous unpopularity, not only among Republicans, but also among Democrats. Obama says that’s because of attack ads against it. Charles Krauthammer says that’s bunk:
There’s a widespread understanding that ObamaCare isn’t good for anyone, especially young people, and it’s a budgetary disaster.
And next week the Supreme Court will hear arguments on its constitutionality. Many are suggesting that a decision in ObamaCare’s favor will actually damage Obama’s reelection chances.
It wasn’t supposed to work out this way. Liberals thought ObamaCare would get more popular after passage. Instead, it was one of the biggest factors in the historic wipe-out Democratic House members experienced in 2010.
More specifically, eight out of the eleven “Stupak Block Flippers” (i.e., the theoretically staunch pro-life Democrats who swore up and down they would never, ever, ever vote for ObamaCare if it included taxpayer funding for abortion, right up until they voted for taxpayer-funded abortion) went down in electoral defeat. At the time, the insistence for public funding for abortion seemed like a tactical error on the part of liberals. After all, why bother with that tiny sop to feminists when you’re busy nationalizing one-sixth of the economy?
But since then, the fervor with which Democrats have pursued imposing this mandate on Catholics (part and parcel of their contempt for religion), their white hot fury at Rush Limbaugh’s (admittedly foolish) remarks, and the continuing overheated, drama queen “war on women” rhetoric coming from the left side of the blogsphere suggests that yes, that was what ObamaCare was really about, and they’re willing to remain a permanent political minority to maintain it.
So be it. If forcing taxpayers to pay for abortions is the hill they want to die on*, I suppose we should let them. (Though not at the cost of failing to mention Obama’s failure on the economy, on creating the conditions for private industry to create jobs, Fast & Furious, or his naked cronyism.) As Mickey Kaus has noted, this issue is a serious political loser for Obama, and we should keep hammering away on it, not despite the shrieks of outrage from liberalism’s feminist amen corner, but because of them.
*”Violent, eliminationist” military metaphor offered up as free rhetorical bonus!
LinkSwarm for March 20, 2012
Tuesday, March 20th, 2012Had a busy day working and keeping track of contractors laying sod in my back yard, so here’s another LinkSwarm:
Up Real Soon Now: Hopefully an interview with another major Texas Senate candidate…
LinkSwarm For February 15, 2012
Wednesday, February 15th, 2012Time for another roundup of this and that:
Jim Schutze on the New Black Panther Party
Wednesday, February 1st, 2012I must admit that I have not kept up with the doings of the New Black Panther Party. I knew of the Philadelphia voter intimidation case, and involvement in the various corrupt practices the likes of ACORN and their ilk get up to (voter fraud, etc.). And it doesn’t surprise me that the New Black Panther Party might be pretty weird, since the original Black Panthers were quite weird themselves. (Search for “Huey Newton, Bobby Seale, bullwhip”…but not while at work or eating.)
But I didn’t realize just how weird until I read this Jim Schutze piece. (Schutze was the source for this critical look at Tom Leppert’s term as mayor of Dallas.) It turns out that Dallas City Council member John Wiley Price has a protege named Aaron McCarthy (aka Aaron Michael) that Price wanted placed on the “homeland security advisory committee” (“whatever the hell that’s supposed to be” says Schutze). And it turns out that Aaron McCarthy is a member of the New Black Panther Party.
And what is it the NBPP believes? Well, hold on to your hats for this quote from NBPP leader Khalid Abdul Muhammad, speaking at a protest in Baltimore, Maryland, February 19, 1994: “Our lessons talk about the bloodsuckers of the poor. … It’s that old no-good Jew, that old imposter Jew, that old hooked-nose, bagel-eating, lox-eating, Johnny-come-lately, perpetrating-a-fraud, just-crawled-out-of-the-caves-and-hills-of-Europe, so-called damn Jew.”
Wow. Even by the very low standards of Black Nationalist rhetoric, that’s a pretty breathtaking dose of Julius Streicher by way of H. Rap Brown antisemitism. If I put that in some of my fiction, an editor would reject it as being an unbelievable caricature. Hell, I think Al Sharpton would send that back to his speechwriter as being beneath even his standards of subtlety and tact.
But wait! There’s more where that came from! Take a look at this fine, grade-A rant from King Samir Shabazz, head of the NBBP Philadelphia chapter:
I hate white people. All of them. Every last iota of a cracker, I hate it. We didn’t come out here to play today. There’s too much serious business going on in the black community to be out here sliding through South Street with white, dirty, cracker whore bitches on our arms, and we call ourselves black men. … What the hell is wrong with you black man? You at a doomsday with a white girl on your damn arm. We keep begging white people for freedom! No wonder we not free! Your enemy cannot make you free, fool! You want freedom? You going to have to kill some crackers! You going to have to kill some of their babies!
You might think these are just some made-up quotes from a random weekly alternative newspaper. (And I would agree that anything that appears in The Dallas Observer should be taken with a grain of salt unless verified elsewhere.) But no, those quotes are directly from the leftist-friendly and conservative-hostile Southern Poverty Law Center, and you can be pretty sure they’re not just whistling Dixie.
While these are particularly virulent quotes, how many times has the media just decided to ignore the latest racist or antisemitic rants from the black community? (Here’s one from today of a black radio host refusing to shake the hands of a black GOP candidate because he doesn’t want her “whiteness” to rub off on him.) How many times has the MSM passed on reporting on corruption and cronyism in the black political community out of political correctness, or because black America is such a reliable vote farm for the Democratic Party?
It doesn’t fit the narrative.