11 pm. Oh, and Diane was much better this time. But why is Stephanopoulos still droning on on Sunday morning when Jon Karl and Jake Tapper are so, so, so much better at what they do – and much less compromised by their past?
10.57 pm. One more thing – and I acknowledge I have no clue about sports. A reader notes:
Gingrich would be watching the "championship basketball game" at home, then gets embarrassingly corrected, after which Santorum agrees that he too would be watching "the game."
Unfortunately the BCS Championship college football game between LSU and Alabama is Monday night. Granted, I know the schedule for presidential candidates is grueling, and they don't have time to sit around and watch college sports as I do, but if you're going to shamelessly pander to make it seem like you're a regular Joe, you might as well have your condescending lines right.
Or more succinctly from another reader:
Romney and Santorum would spend tonight watching a football game being played on Monday. Newt would be watching a basketball game being played in April.
10.45 pm. My rough take: Romney sailed through this one, although he is digging into positions and rhetoric that really seem extreme for the center. Maybe I'm biased, but I thought Paul was a stand-out, because he didn't seem to be pandering. His fight with Gingrich over the draft was, to my ears, devastating. Huntsman did fine, and I devoutly wish his saner, calmer conservatism would prevail. But he has an awful tin ear. Slipping into Mandarin to answer Romney on China? Like his idiotic decision to insult Iowans, it's just incompetent rhetoric and politics. His sensibility worked in Utah, the way Perry does in Texas. But he has been unable to break out as a national candidate.
Santorum is such a vile person it is hard for me to judge his performance. But he seemed to me to come off as the prize asshole he is: nasty, extreme, reactionary, callous. Perry was irrelevant. But his bid to send troops back to Iraq was insane; and yes, he did say that Iran would literally move at the speed of light into Iraq. It reminds me of the wonderful quote from a former Palin spokeswoman who said that the world was "literally her oyster." Ewww.
My gut tells me that Paul may gain strength in the ornery independent state in the next few days. And Romney's decision to leave New Hampshire this week may have been an error. But I know the odds are now perishingly thin that Romney can be stopped. And Newt balked at going for the real jugular.
But the real lesson of this debate is that this crew is the worst assembled for the nomination of a major party that I can recall. They make you pine for Tsongas. As one reader notes:
I used to be a Republican. Still consider myself conservative. But I just donated $25 to Obama's re-election after watching this GOP debate. Obama should encourage all his supporters to watch these debates. It would make them want to donate.
The Democrats must be thrilled.
10.44 pm. Perry would be at a firing range at 10.44 pm on a Saturday night. Ron Paul's answer was self-mocking and funny. Huntsman reminded us that his sons are in the military that Gingrich dodged all those years ago.
10.40 pm. A reader writes:
I'm watching this debate with my wife, and it's the first one that we've watched. She just asked me: "Do these guys know they're running for president?"
Another:
Dammit, Ron Paul is really singing my song this evening. I loved the Iranian fisherman story today, and I am so glad he picked it up. He is bringing ideas to the table that both parties should be co-opting. Rick Santorum is a vile person. He is pretty strongly saying that Obama is a traitor.
So is Romney. Another:
Have you noticed that Ron Paul has essentially been the star of this debate? What a difference Iowa made!
10.36 pm. Romney threatens a trade war with China. It's a big theme for him, and he dinged Huntsman on working for Obama as China ambassador. It's strange to see a Republican threaten a trade war against a vital trading partner, and even use leftist rhetoric like "stealing our jobs". It's even stranger to hear a Republican speak Mandarin in public.
10.34 pm. Romney says that Obama has managed to complete no free trade deals. He knows as much about this as he does about the right to privacy. Last October, Obama signed free trade agreements with South Korea, Panama and Colombia. Again, Romney lies. He will say anything.
10.32 pm. Santorum says that class does not exist in America. There is no middle class. And there is no economic inequality. Then he cites his appeal to "blue-collar workers", not Wall Street. Yes, he said all that in the same answer.
10.30 pm. Romney again describes Obama in ways I simply do not recognize in his record. The idea that Obama is trying to create a European socialist entitlement-state in America is literally surreal. Again, we have a fantasy about what has happened these past three years, and an even greater fantasy about the eight years before that.
10.26 pm. A reader writes:
He states that no state wants to ban contraception, but the Mississippi personhood amendment would have outlawed many – if not most – forms of contraception. Mitt told Huckabee, on camera, that he "absolutely" supported the personhood amendment.
10.22 pm. Ponnuru notes that Santorum's protected tax deductions amount to almost the whole thing. Huntsman again backs Bowles-Simpson, but without adding to revenues. He also has a good line:
None of the debates, oddly, have asked whether the president has a Kenyan anti-colonial worldview.
10.16 pm. Romney argues that government is important to ceate jobs by infrastructure but is simultaneously the major obstacle to economic growth. He needs to unpack that. Again, he repeats the lie that somehow raising the top tax rates to the Clinton era (far, far lower than under Eisenhower) is a radical new socialist departure. Eisenhower presided over rates of growth that Americans today would be gobsmacked by. And yet the top tax rate was close to 90 percent, and huge public monies were sunk into transportation, and education. Was Eisenhower a socialist?
10.14 pm. A meta point. Despite all the hype, Romney isn't being put on the spot at all. Where are Gingrich's and Paul's attacks on him? Or Perry's? He has nothing to lose. And Romney appears supremely relaxed and confident. I can see why.
10.13 pm. A reader writes:
I've got to say that the Paul Gingrich exchange over military service looked different to me. I don't really like him, but Gingrich's identification with veterans and veterans families rang true to me. And it seemed like he was pointing out some real problems that veteran face in NH, which seems like fair game in the NH primary. Paul's blustering about his response to the draft might have resonance with the boomers, but sounds slightly archaic and over the top to one who never faced it. I'd give the point to Gingrich.
10.07 pm. Paul makes the obvious constitutional point that declaring war requires full Congressional debate and authorization. Again, Santorum outrageously says that Obama backed Ahmadinejad in the Green Revolution. Obama did not condone the Tehran regime. The opposition did not want our direct intervention in that conflict. They asked us to keep out of it. Why? Because it hurts them with their fellow countrymen and allows the theocratic regime to portray the opposition as CIA tools. I think I have some cred on this. The Dish stood side by side, day by day, with the heroes of the Green Revolution. And Santorum's reading of what happened is both uninformed and outrageously slanderous toward this president, who has done more to damage, isolate and weaken Tehran than Bush ever did and that Santorum ever could.
10.05 pm. Romney does not rule out sending troops back into Iraq! We would have both a war against Iran and possibly a war against Iraq! These candidates have not moved past the Bush-Cheney mindset in any way. Except, of course, for Huntsman and Paul.
10.02 pm. Santorum implies we should never have left Iraq and should stay in Afghanistan until our national security is assured. But when you're as paranoid as Gingrich, there's never any national security. He seems to believe we need to launch a new Cold War. Rick Perry wants to send troops back to Iraq right away, in violation of Iraqi sovereignty, and against the formal agreement made by George W. Bush.
10.00 pm. Huntsman rallies, elegantly dismissing Romney's pathetic dodge that he would never challenge generals on strategy. Then he describes our role in Afghanistan as policing a civil war.
9.56 pm. Perry says that Obama is waging a "war against religion". It's an absurd hyperbole. But typical coming from a proud anti-gay bigot. I note that Romney's rhetoric on this is much softer tan the callous Santorum, who seems unable to make a point about homosexuality without hissing contempt and loathing. Seriously: to say an imprisoned dad who cannot even father his child is better than two loving mothers so so deeply indifferent to its own cruelty that it again boggles the mind that a Catholic could use such rhetoric. Where is the caritas in Santorum? I see it nowhere.
9.53 pm. Gingrich is calling the decision of the Catholic to refuse to offer adoption services at all, rather than risk any tolerance of gay couples. Romney says that 3,000 years of human history should not be discarded. Yes: Romney, a leader of a religion that fought for polygamy only a century or so ago. Oh, and, by the way, there is more discrimination in America against Christians than against gays. Christians are included in federal anti-disrimination laws; gay's aren't.
9.50 pm. Santorum says that marriage is a state matter, but should be overturned by a federal constitution amendment. And if such an amendment passes, I would be forcibly divorced. Amazing, isn't it, how a Catholic is arguing for forcibly divorcing couples and delegitimizing their children. Almost as amazing as a Catholic endorsing torture and pre-emptive war.
9.47 pm. What Gingrich is talking about is a religious "sacrament", not a civil right. So marriages between atheists are not truly marriages. It's quite staggering to see Gingrich simply abolish any distinction between church and state. Huntsman actually uses the word "dignity" with respect to homosexuals. I've never heard that before in a Republican debate. The idea that we are human beings, that we should be spoken of with respect is very novel in this party.
9.46 pm. Santorum wants to overturn Griswold – a decision now in force since 1965. It would allow states to ban contraception if majorities want.
9.42 pm. Romney seems completely at sea on the contraception question. He seems to have no idea about Griswold vs Connecticut. Then Romney says that Griswold – a decision he was unaware of two minutes ago – was wrongly decided. Ron Paul reveals he has forgotten more about the Constitution than Romney has ever known.
9.40 pm. Chuck Todd notes that Ron Paul voted for the MLK national holiday. Gingrich voted against. I find the notion that Ron Paul is a racist to be preposterous.
9.37 pm. A reader writes:
Go, Ron! In your face, chicken hawks! I love it! (Not to be confused with any desire to see Paul as President.)
9.35 pm. Ron Paul tackles the racial imbalance in the enforcement of the drug war. It's a libertarian argument that should resonate with minorities. No other candidate on that stage would ever say such a thing, ever talk about institutional racism in the criminal justice system. Paul started off rocky. I'd say he has won each exchange with Newt Gingrich.
9.31 pm. Ron Paul devastates Newt Gingrich on the question of his avoidance of military service. Newt's response – a desperate pander to New Hampshire on healthcare, and a mention of his being an army brat. He denies that he asked for any deferments. Gingrich says he was married with kids and therefore didn't fight. Paul knocks him out by noting that he served as a married man with kids.
9.29 pm. If we do not have the capacity to fight two wars at once, our "freedoms" are at stake. But a defense authorization that allows for the president to detain an American citizen indefinitely without charges is no problem.
9.27 pm. I simply do not recognize the portrait of Obama's foreign policy that Romney describes. "Error after error …" When asked to cite an error, he mentions Obama's careful avoidance of undercutting the opposition in Iran by associating the US with him. That was not an error. The opposite would have been an error. Not understanding in any way what the Iranian opposition wanted, what Iran's history with the US suggests for our policy.
9.26 pm. I so want Huntsman to be persuasive, commanding, smart … and yet it never quite works.
9.23 pm. Paul notes how Santorum is a classic example of big government conservatism, a recreation of the Bush-Cheney administration, but on steroids.
9.17 pm. They all seem a little subdued tonight, their voices more gravely, the energy lower. Santorum at least admits he finds libertarianism "disgusting." Santorum is now describing his working as a board member for companies he had helped in Congress as "private sector" work. Paul notes Santorum's big spending, pro-union, pro-industrial policy record. Here's a summary of some of the things Santorum has voted to fund:
National service, promotion of prison ministries, “individual development accounts,” publicly financed trust funds for children, community-investment incentives, strengthened obscenity enforcement, covenant marriage, assorted tax breaks, economic literacy programs in “every school in America” (his italics), and more. Lots more.
9.10 pm. If you want to see the half-hour Gingrich-friendly ad against Bain, it's above. Romney parries rather effortlessly. Romney insists that his net job increase as a Bain consultant was 100,000 jobs. That will be worth investigating. He counts all the jobs that occurred long after he had left the scene (but not jobs lost afterwards). I smell bullshit myself. The question I'm interested in is how someone still earns $26 million a year from a company he left years ago. That doesn't happen very often in ordinary jobs in the regular workplace.
9.08 pm. I'm actually sympathetic to Santorum's argument that the presidency is not suited to a CEO. Romney basically says it's all about leadership, not management.
9.04 pm. Romney is saying that Obama deserves to be blamed for the recession he inherited, but that he gets no credit for any improvement. That sounds about right.
9.03 pm. Once more unto the breach, dear readers … And it's a chance to see whether Diane Sawyer really was just sick last time around. Among other things, of course.
The Dish 