I thought McCain and Huckabee were on very good form, and Romney did better than he has in the past – largely because he was not attacked. But again, when I hear him lambasting Hillary Clinton on healthcare as if she were far out on left field, I recall the extreme similarities between her vision and Romney’s mandated individual, government-enforced private sector insurance policy in Massachusetts. Now I know there’s a difference between federal and state policies in this regard, but Romney’s ability to treat his own policies as if they were utterly anathema to him is … how to put it? … unsettling.
The big take from the debate is the Republican unanimity on the Iraq war: it’s been a great thing and we should keep at it. Maybe it helps with base voters (although I doubt it), but it’s going to be a real issue this fall and every single one of them is now wedded to it. McCain’s attempt – again – to describe those who favor withdrawing from Iraq as people eager to wave the "white flag of surrender" is offensive. If you believe that staying in Iraq for ten thousand years, as McCain said is feasible, actually hurts our ability to defang Islamist terror, you may be wrong. But you are not in favor of surrendering. And framing it in that way is Dolchstoss-style Republicanism.
But what do I know? Here’s the objective voice of reason:
Tim Russert and Brian Williams … threw hard balls at the former Massachusetts governor and he hit them all, many out of the park.
Romney displayed
a memorable and effective display of the sort of energy and tactics the GOP candidate must make every day for the next eight months… Romney won the night, and perhaps the nomination as well.
If Romney wins this, one small consolation will be the immense pleasure so many of us will draw from the continued insights and brilliance of Hugh Hewitt. Oh, and keeping Tagg! around, of course.
The Dish 