Thursday, October 29, 2015

The CNBC Debate

Everything I'm seeing on both sides of the aisle, and of sanity, says that CNBC's moderation was real bad. Luckily for the GOP, quite a few of them realized that they could attack the press to seem tough. Thus you get the moment of the night - Ted Cruz, being asked a question about the debt ceiling, yelling at the moderators to ask about the issues! Presumably the debt ceiling isn't the issue he was looking for.

Other than that, the only news is that Jeb continues to suck.

Clearly up on CNBC, Pietro wants the RNC fired for hiring those Commies...
As I predicted yesterday this disaster is attributable to the braindead RNC.

Why, for the love of God, would they allow known libtards like CNBC to host a debate.

Somebody's ass needs to get canned, but nothing will happen because in DC no one is ever really responsible.
Savage Beast thinks CNBC is very much like Goebbels.
Why did they agree to participate in such a "debate" under the influence of such "moderators"?

Didn't they know that the entire event would be a Leftist propaganda extravaganza very much like Hitler's Nazi propaganda events back in the 1930s?
hoosiermama thinks be best attacks are ones that dog-whistle accuse the Clintons of murder:
He left out Huckabee line about taking on the Clintons and still being alive.
Best attack line against the democrats
DAC21 thinks Benghazi still plays in the GOP. He's probably right:
Another good moment, forgot whom it was, but they hammered the media about taking a Cancklebeast victory lap after the hearing. While failing to mention she was proven a liar in said hearings.
Meanwhile, ncpatriot sees to think there was good conservative content in the debate:
I wonder how many people watched this debate. I bet a lot. That means many Dims heard what conservatives believe and stand for.
I'd mock wita for spending his time finding random liberal zealot loons on twitter to mock, but then I look at this blog...
Speaking of dems, watching the twitter comments scrolling below the debate was to say the least interesting. Some big names, and not so big making absolutely idiotic comments.
Liz is also hitting Benghazi:
The uber-liberal media moderators copped the same smug-superior attitude as Hillary the Benghazi hearings. These self-satisfied Demoncrat types despise Republicans---especially conservative Republicans----and have no compunction about showing it full-face.
HarleyLady27 didn't watch much, but Trump, guys!
I watched as much as I could...then went to the thread on here...the thing I liked was how all the candidates took down the press...

Some have been saying that Trump is to soft skinned when it comes to the press, guess last night proved him right once again..
The_Media_never_lie is also completely Trump oriented:
The remark about Trumps ties being made in Mexico was one of the most disrespectful, snarkiest in history. These guys are biased 100 per cent of the time, and are GOPe, democrat shills.
mazda77's metaphor is great - it makes Rubio into some sort of superman:
As I said at one thread, Rubio made a fantastic field goal attempt by dressing down the media and JEB but in doing so he kicked it through the roof and it went through the goal posts behind him. Spectacular on its face but no points are awarded for kicking it through the opponents goal.
LS has a great plan for Republicans to never answer another question again!
I think it was important for others to begin attacking the media-—not just Trump (”Do you write this stuff?”). EVERY SINGLE REPUBLICAN should begin with “the premise of your question is downright stupid. I’ll answer what I think the American people would find useful in that question . . . .”


  1. Didn't want you to miss this one. I think we've been witnessing the slow (well, slow-ish) transition of freerepublic to stormfront in the last few years. This thread, about the South Carolina cop-bodyslams-student incident, proves that the transition is complete. The worst comment, by far, courtesy of a freeper named "Tau Food":

    "I'm afraid times have changed.
    There was a time when a father could discipline his daughter by acting just like this sheriff's deputy did. However, if a father disciplines his daughter in that manner these days, he will more or less automatically be arrested and taken to jail on a domestic violence charge.

    There was a time when a husband could discipline his wife by acting just as this sheriff's deputy did. However, if a husband disciplines his wife in that manner these days, he will more or less automatically be arrested and taken to jail on a domestic violence charge. It would not be a defense to argue that the wife was in fact disobedient.

    Should a sheriff's deputy have more latitude than a parent or husband to act this way when a child is disobedient? Who do you trust more to discipline children - police officers or parents? I think this case raises interesting questions like that.

    Times have changed. Fathers and husbands have lost many of their rights to discipline disobedient children and wives in ways that were once considered legitimate."

    1. Totally saw that. But that's actually a Freeper being reasonable talking to wardaddy - he's not actually in facor of those things.

      wardaddy later accuses that poster of being a woman ('split tail') because he thinks women should vote.

    2. D'oh. Forgot to include a link to the post:;page=1

  2. Wardaddy has to be one of the most despicable posters on FR, and that's saying something.

    A "good ol' Southern boy" who wishes that the USA was more like the confederacy where blacks and women knew their place and all of society was polite about it.

    I've never seen such cognitive dissonance with regards to women and marriage, however. He claims that his wife is the love of his life but generally despises women in general, particularly if they have a voice or a vote.

    I bet his idea of an "ideal" Christian marriage is if he can smack her around a few times until she makes him a sandwich.

  3. It will be nice to have beauty and taste back in the WH.

    <a href="></a>