War: Romney and Perry bicker over illegal immigration; Update: Palin grades the debate
posted at 10:35 pm on October 18, 2011 by Allahpundit
Via Mediaite, and in lieu of a quote of the day, here’s the closest America has ever come to an actual fistfight breaking out during a debate. (Except for that time Hillary got Obama in a headlock, of course.) So this is what Romney sounds/looks like when he loses his cool, huh? Good lord. The irony is, Perry’s attack on him is years old; in theory, it’s already priced into his stock and shouldn’t do much damage. Maybe Mitt was simply panicking at the thought of losing his huge edge on this issue after Perry’s atomic gaffe last month about in-state tuition for illegals?
Note to self: The unflappable nice guy in the field is both flappable and, when pushed far enough, not so nice. Exit question: I don’t want to start a whole thing here, but I’m seeing quite a bit of Gingrich buzz on Twitter this evening. Is it time? Second look at … Newt?
Update: A little bonus for our Palin fans courtesy of the Right Scoop, replete with extra Newt buzz. Click the image to watch.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 … 5 6 7
Yeah because Romney mentioning Perry working on Al Gore’s Texas campaign was nothing from the past.
Romney deserves to be challenged on the past. Of course he and his supporters wish to declare it all out of line – his past is some scary stuff.
Daemonocracy on October 19, 2011 at 8:04 AM
petefrt on October 19, 2011 at 7:23 AM
Thank you!
kingsjester on October 19, 2011 at 8:05 AM
Uh, sorry WrongMan, but Mitt was right about Newt supporting a healthcare mandate. Second, he employed a landscaper who unbeknownst to him hired illegals. He did not hire illegals. Sorry you don’t understand the difference.
Buy Danish on October 19, 2011 at 8:06 AM
I have noticed your penchant for using the truth by assertion tactic. You are sounding like Perry.
What rational folk took away from that exchange was that Perry was so desperate that he forgot that he agreed to rules previous to the debate that limited his time and allows his opponent to respond uninterrupted. ANYONE who thinks otherwise is delusional. Romney knew it and baited Perry into it further when he asked him if he was just going to keep speaking. Perry’s answer was “Yes I am”. hahaha! Perry is out of his league. Look for more baiting and Perry taking the bait in the future. That is if he last that long. The guy is unable to articulate his ideas consistently. No one is going to want him debating Obama.
He didn’t employ illegals and that issue was laid to rest in 2008. And Romney didn’t say he got the idea of the mandate from Heritage. He said both Newt and Heritage agreed with Romney’s mandate.
csdeven on October 19, 2011 at 8:06 AM
Newt is becoming the present day Dick Cheney……..not gonna get the nomination but a good VP candidate.
sbark on October 19, 2011 at 8:07 AM
Revisting this. If you are in the country illegally, you are not a LEGAL resident and should not be afforded the perks and benefits of legal residency.
Fallon on October 19, 2011 at 8:09 AM
IIRC, that guy was a member of the delusional wing of the St Palin the Victimized congregation. All he is doing is supporting a different candidate using the same damaged thinking.
csdeven on October 19, 2011 at 8:09 AM
anyone else think it is ok for the GOP not to have a candidate that is sooo exciting like Obama? I do not want a candidate that makes me want to have sex… I want a candidate that acts like a PRESIDENT not a “American King Hip Hop golfer”
charmingtail on October 19, 2011 at 8:09 AM
Yes. I thought it was b*tchy and un-presidential, to say the least. But the real Mitt is finally coming out, and for that I am happy.
kg598301 on October 19, 2011 at 8:09 AM
Dick Cheney is the present day Dick Cheney.
Abby Adams on October 19, 2011 at 8:10 AM
Uh, sorry WrongMan, but Mitt was right about Newt supporting a healthcare mandate. Second, he employed a landscaper who unbeknownst to him hired illegals. He did not hire illegals. Sorry you don’t understand the difference.
Buy Danish on October 19, 2011 at 8:06 AM
…And to be clear, Newt supported a FEDERAL mandate, something Romney has always opposed.
Buy Danish on October 19, 2011 at 8:10 AM
So what? If they want to go to personal issues it really opens Obama up for vetting as well. I’d welcome it so the media can finally vet Obama’s past relationships. Don’t think Gingrich won’t jump all over that.
Vince on October 19, 2011 at 8:12 AM
Newt? HA HA HA HA HA HA!
No.
Jones Zemkophill on October 19, 2011 at 8:16 AM
Concise. To the point. Contributes nothing.
Vince on October 19, 2011 at 8:18 AM
What I heard:
“I don’t know what you’re talking about, I’ve never hired any illegals to my knowledge. Stop talking you rude man, you’re breaking the rules. What? The truth? Oh OK then if you insist, I hired contractors who used them- twice! But by golly, I told them I couldn’t do that because well, I was running for PRESIDENT, for Pete sakes!!!”
lol
kg598301 on October 19, 2011 at 8:19 AM
Pitch perfect summation! Wow, did he ever whine last night!
-Aslan’s Girl
Aslans Girl on October 19, 2011 at 8:31 AM
My post was for kg598301 on October 19, 2011 at 8:19 AM
Aslans Girl on October 19, 2011 at 8:34 AM
Don’t worry. Obama will crush him. And even if he doesn’t …
Four more years.
gh on October 19, 2011 at 8:45 AM
Unbelievably… I’m at that point.
For me it’s Cain or Newt.
mankai on October 19, 2011 at 8:51 AM
Hard to believe … it may be down to Newt if Cain doesn’t get his act together.
gh on October 19, 2011 at 9:00 AM
Mitt Romney considers himself a gentleman. For that matter, so does President Obama. I don’t claim to be prescient, but I’ve posted previously that if you get vicious and personal and go after these ‘gentlemen’ in debate, it throws them off, flusters them, takes them off script where they’re liable to make mistakes. Go from Marquis of Queensbury to brass-knuckled street fight, see how they react.
That’s what Perry did to Romney last night, with some success. Since the Obama campaign views Romney as the presumptive nominee and has spent months preparing strategies to counter him, it is in the interest of a media sympathetic to Obama to declare Romney the victor of the debates. David Gergen singing hossannas to Romney’s performance was smoke, with no basis in reality. Romney responded poorly. He was flustered, angry, upset. He even called for help from the moderator. A whiny, plaintive Help me is unpresidential, to say the least.
So did Perry win the debate? No. The downside to making a vicious attack against an opponent is the negative ‘dirty fighter’ bounceback that comes from making such an attack. In this case, though, the payoff outweighed the risk. Perry drew blood. He showed a Mitt Romney who gets whiny and petulant when pressed. So while Perry didn’t win the debate last night, I think he saved his candidacy.
So who won the debate? Newt Gingrich won the debate. If anyone is paying attention, Gingrich wins every debate but he won’t win. I won’t vote for him–and no, not because he’s committed adultery. We all fall short and make wrong moral choices. I won’t vote for Gingrich because of his hypocrisy. Going after Clinton and invoking family values while shtupping a woman not your wife goes beyond adultery, at least from a Christian perspective. That’s how I feel about it, anyway. I wouldn’t vote for Newt Gingrich if his opponent was zombie Che Guevera.
troyriser_gopftw on October 19, 2011 at 9:05 AM
Perry is at 3%. All Romney has to do is let Cain keep the lead and wait for him to implode, which is looking increasingly likely. Then the media will do Romney in.
Unless Cain gets some serious policy advice, he’s in trouble.
So if Gingrich is the nominee will you vote for Obama, not vote, or vote third party ?
gh on October 19, 2011 at 9:11 AM
The attempts by Mittbots to sell Newt as the next flavor is so transparent and funny. Especially after it has become apparent that the Cainmentum will not last.
The fact that Newt can debate has never been in question from the first debate. He is down in the polls not because people are not acquainted with his debate prowess – but because they remember all his baggage from couch time with Pelosi to Scozzafava etc…
TheRightMan on October 19, 2011 at 9:36 AM
WTF?! Were you even paying attention in 2008 when McCain’s 7 homes were discussed by the LSM and Obama’s associations with domestic terrorists was ignored? The media has no interest in fair and balanced. They are only concerned with advancing their progressive agenda and in 2012, that is an Obama reelection.
csdeven on October 19, 2011 at 9:37 AM
Of course that is what you would hear. You aren’t interested in facts.
1) He did not hire the illegal. The contractor he hired did.
2) The contractor fired all illegals and then hired one that falsified his documents. When that was discovered, Romney fired the contractor. I suppose you think Romney should have demanded the papers of every worker on everyday they showed up to work.
3) Romney POLITELY asked him to be allowed to respond. He then asked Perry if he was just going to keep talking. Perry said yes. Having tried to appeal to Perry to be considerate and Perry doubled down on rudeness, he asked the moderator to enforce the rules that Perry himself insisted on.
4) That was funny when Romney admitted that he was concerned because he was running for office.
5) BUT, I do not discount the idea that Romney was being his old duplicitous self by pandering to Hispanics by admitting that in his heart of hearts, he doesn’t REALLY have a problem with illegal immigration.
So, out of your entire jealous screed, you got 1 out of 5 correct. Do yourself a favor, don’t play the ponies.
csdeven on October 19, 2011 at 9:46 AM
Which is why Perry was booed by the base and Romney was applauded by the base.
Oh wait, what debate are you referring to? It must be some imaginary debate in your head, because Perry has had one or two good moments in these debates, and none of them were when he attacked another candidate.
Romney 8itchslapped Perry for insisting that he would not allow Romney to respond after politely asking him to. Perry refused to follow the rules that he himself insisted on. Romney suckered him into doubling down on stupid because Romney can see that Perry is desperate and he is flustered very easily. After Romney deflected Perry’s first lie about immigration, all Perry could do was keep restating his lie. He clearly did not prepare for the answers Romney gave. A good debater knows his opponents arguments as well as his own. He prepares himself by basically being able to argue both sides of the argument equally well.
csdeven on October 19, 2011 at 9:55 AM
Romney should have cut his own lawn.
MaggiePoo on October 19, 2011 at 9:58 AM
The base? Nevada is very pro-Romney and the audience was full of R-Bots.
MaggiePoo on October 19, 2011 at 10:00 AM
So Nevada voters are not the base. Are you going to tell them that?
csdeven on October 19, 2011 at 10:19 AM
Nice renderings. Yours? My wife works on Maya (and antecedents since 1990).
gh on October 19, 2011 at 10:22 AM
More conspiracy theories from the former delusional Palin worshiper? Newt is a real alternative to many of us. Our only issue with him is his personal history.
And who says Cain will fade? Perry is the guy that faded and his very poor performance last night was exactly why he has faded to 3% and isn’t likely to recover.
csdeven on October 19, 2011 at 10:22 AM
http://www.google.com/search?q=laffer+999+consult
Redstate is really slow (page isn’t coming up for me) but google shows:
http://www.redstate.com/streiff/2011/10/18/the-quickly-evolving-9-9-9/
gh on October 19, 2011 at 10:32 AM
Damn. Wrong thread again.
gh on October 19, 2011 at 10:33 AM
Illinois just passed a similar law-and Quinn has said that the police don’t have to report suspected illegals in their care to the INS.
annoyinglittletwerp on October 19, 2011 at 2:06 AM
The Immigration laws are so convoluted that I don’t see how the States can know what they can do and what they can’t. The Feds allow some things and not others. As you said Illinois passed that and I suppose it’s because INS aren’t doing anything anyway. But then I’ve read just this past week that they are deporting, selectively it seems.
The following is from NumbersUSA and sounds similar to Texas.
Effective May 20, 2003, Illinois House Bill 60 allows illegal aliens access to in-state tuition rates. Requirements: Student has resided in Illinois with his/her parent or guardian while attending public or private high school, Student has graduated from an Illinois public or private high school or received a GED from IL, Student has attended an Illinois high school for at least three years, Student has registered to enter the university no earlier than the Fall 2003 semester, and Student provides the university with an affidavit stating he/she will file an application to become a permanent resident of the U.S. once he/she becomes eligible to do so
bluefox on October 19, 2011 at 11:37 AM
bluefox on October 19, 2011 at 2:04 AM
I am having a problem with this particular statement. If you are ILLEGAL, you are NOT a resident. You shouldn’t even BE in the country.
HornetSting on October 19, 2011 at 2:07 AM
Well, I guess a person is an Illegal Resident? I know they shouldn’t be in the Country, but they are and the Federal Government mandates the States to provide education, etc. So I guess since they are living in the States they must be considered Residents. Otherwise the mandate doesn’t make sense and the requirements for In-State Tuition for students wouldn’t either.
My point was that Palin was saying that In-State Tuition could not be taken advantage of by Americans in Texas. Clearly that is not the case. There are requirements of course and that seems to apply to all States for U.S. Citizens. I don’t live in Texas, but as a U.S. Citizen I could move to Texas and receive In-State Tuition as long as I complied with the requirements. I just think Palin should have read the Texas laws regarding that instead of making a blank statement that was inaccurate.
bluefox on October 19, 2011 at 11:46 AM
Wish you would have joined us in the debate thread last night..It was a very good discussion..:)
Dire Straits on October 19, 2011 at 11:58 AM
Not really. She’s on her way back down the mountain.
When she got up there close, she didn’t really want to risk anything so she turned around. Some of here just can’t accept that she wasn’t the fearless warrior she claimed to be. Undefeated? She won’t even fight.
That’s why she won’t sound right any more.
platypus on October 19, 2011 at 2:30 AM
I don’t know why she decided not to run, but that has always been up to her. I was just disappointed that she chose to criticize Gov. Perry about the In-State Tuition with inaccurate information. Disagree with it and disagree with all of the other States that offer it, but at least don’t make a statement that is not correct.
The other Fox News “contributors” always need listened to with various grains of salt. So now, I’ll need to do the same with Palin. I thot better of her, but I should have remembered she quickly agreed with Bachmann against Gov. Perry about the Gardasil issue without checking the facts. She did this also on Fox News.
bluefox on October 19, 2011 at 12:00 PM
I’m running for office, for Pete’s sake, I can’t have illegals!
– Willard Mitt Romney
Punchenko on October 19, 2011 at 2:46 AM
I heard that too and commented on it during the debate, LOL
Confession under stress? ROFL
bluefox on October 19, 2011 at 12:04 PM
Rick Perry, like most of his supporters, come up like night like an a$%%$·
Falz on October 19, 2011 at 12:09 PM
Were you on the live debate thread during the debate?..If you were I missed you..Sorry..:)
PS..Good to see you..:)
Dire Straits on October 19, 2011 at 12:11 PM
Were you on the live debate thread during the debate?..If you were I missed you..Sorry..:)
PS..Good to see you..:)
Dire Straits on October 19, 2011 at 12:11 PM
I was on the thread, but not that chat thingy:-) It goes pretty fast so not seeing someone is understandable!! I have a hard time watching TV, reading the comments and posting, LOL
The debate was certainly a lot more lively! I thot at one time that Romney endorsed Perry, LOL
bluefox on October 19, 2011 at 12:25 PM
Rick Perry, like most of his supporters, come up like night like an a$%%$·
Falz on October 19, 2011 at 12:09 PM
I object:-)
bluefox on October 19, 2011 at 12:27 PM
Yes it was a spirited debate..Despite Anderson Cooper..Romney definitely got a little rattled..Perry did better and needs to keep on improving..:)
PS..You are correct that the thread goes fast during the debate..You need to try to live stream it next time..It makes it a lot easier to keep up with it..:)
Dire Straits on October 19, 2011 at 12:31 PM
Jealous? Who pray tell am I jealous of, since you know me so well? Oh never mind, lol
kg598301 on October 19, 2011 at 12:40 PM
PS..You are correct that the thread goes fast during the debate..You need to try to live stream it next time..It makes it a lot easier to keep up with it..:)
Dire Straits on October 19, 2011 at 12:31 PM
I’ll try that the next time, thanks. I was running behind, setting the recorder, had to format the disc, etc. I let time slip up on me.
Cooper was almost invisible:-) Romney woke him up tho with his SOS.
Boy, Glenn Beck is all against Gov. Perry this am. He better be careful, Perry will deport him:-) Just kidding.
I think Perry did much better and glad to see him improving:-)
bluefox on October 19, 2011 at 12:43 PM
bluefox on October 19, 2011 at 11:37 AM
Being that it’s ILL-annoyz-the other requirements won’t be enforced.
Quinn loves gang-bangers and illegals more than he loves the natives.
annoyinglittletwerp on October 19, 2011 at 1:09 PM
You’re jealous that your guy sucks and Romney whipped his 8utt.
csdeven on October 19, 2011 at 2:02 PM
I think that Romney has presented himself well to the GOP as a whole but I think that his political flip flops are more of an Achilles heel than Cain’s 9-9-9 or Gingrich’s personal life failures (Of course it is not any worse than our old buddy Bill Clinton. And if I was Gingrich and I was attacked on this I would bring up the hypocrisy of the left in how they attack him and let Bill off the hook! In a one on one debate with Obama the pecking order for success is Gingrich, Romney, then Cain. Gingrich could whip Obama right now especially if Obama is foolish enough to accept his debate offers…and Obama knows it. Not so sure about the other two…but If the economy tanks any further then I think even Michelle Bachmann could beat Obama!
Besides Newt has a very attractive wife, and one that looks like if she wanted to could kick his A$$ and maybe he is not so much the stallion now in his older age and would like to make amends by being an excellent and focused President.????
RedLizard64 on October 19, 2011 at 2:34 PM
Personal opinion on the debates last night:
Overall winner: Mitt Romney looks as presidential as anyone on the stage…maybe more so (the only other two with excellent presidential presence are Cain and Gingrich). Reasoned responses, respected time limits, went the extra mile to maintain composure and hold a DIALOG (something Perry found difficult to do…which really concerns me)
2nd place: Newt Gingrich, solid successes and continues to rein the “children in” that Obama is the guy they should be tearing up and that anyone of them would be better!
3rd place: Herman Cain: Defended well against a coordinated onslaught. Properly and consistently corrected his fellow candidates when they did indeed try to mix apples and oranges to induce fear!
4th place: Ron Paul, too libertarian and not pro-defense or Pro-Israel enough for me but getting the concept of eliminating 5 whole executive departments and reducing remaining department’s size by 10-15% is a discussion that must take place and seriously acted upon!
5th place: Michelle Bachmann: Good solid messages but too much “I have a plan” (same with Perry. Gingrich, Romney and Cain have details laid out better than any of the others…and were offered up a long time ago!)
6th place Rick Santorum: Love his conservative values message and it is true…but I fear that the economy has to be righted to a certain degree before those issues can be properly addressed.
7th place: Rick Perry: Until last night his performances have been lackluster at best. He still responds haltingly, like he is trying to call up memorized responses. Additionally his attacks on Romney were somewhat disingenuous (at best) and maligning at worst…he just flat came across as desperate.
8th place: Jon Huntsman: I think he chose not to participate because of the Spanish televisions recent extortion attempts on Marco Rubio, but I could be wrong. Of course he could have showed up and addressed that publicly thereby taking the higher ground and at the same time using the venue to expose the corruptness of the LSM as a whole.
At this point, Hunstman, Santorum and Bachmann are through for sure. I think that Perry’s performance and the audiences’ negative response (remember these are Conservatives and Libertarians) on several of his answers and swipes do not bode well for him. At this point I think I would like to see either Cain/Gingrich or Gingrich/eek…Romney. I think that Romney has presented himself well to the GOP as a whole but I think that his political flip flops are more of an Achilles heel than Cain’s 9-9-9 or Gingrich’s personal life failures (Of course it is not any worse than our old buddy Bill Clinton. And if I was Gingrich and I was attacked on this I would bring up the hypocrisy of the left in how they attack him and let Bill off the hook! In a one on one debate with Obama the pecking order for success is Gingrich, Romney, then Cain. Gingrich could whip Obama right now especially if Obama is foolish enough to accept his debate offers…and Obama knows it. Not so sure about the other two…but If the economy tanks any further then I think even Michelle Bachmann could beat Obama!
RedLizard64 on October 19, 2011 at 2:38 PM
And if NEwt brought up Bill Ayers, Blank Panthers, Operation Fast and Furious, ACORN, Missing Columbia Transcripts, etc. etc you know he’d have his facts straight and they WOULD stick worse than anythin oBama can through at NEwt. Again I reiterate Romney’s flip Flops are more of an achilles heel than Cains 9-9-9/foreign policy cred or Newts personal past/limited dailiances with Progrssives!!!
RedLizard64 on October 19, 2011 at 2:49 PM
Good grief you sure are very personally wrapped up in your candidate, to a bizarre degree. Are you an adult, by the way? Seriously. Because that sounded like something a teenager would say on Facebook.
I would be jealous of the other woman if my husband cheated on me, but Mitt Romney? No. lol You’re just projecting- big time.
kg598301 on October 19, 2011 at 3:04 PM
anyone else think it is ok for the GOP not to have a candidate that
Nomination for BEST LINE in a THREAD!!!
RedLizard64 on October 19, 2011 at 3:48 PM
That’s what’s known as JFK syndrome
chewmeister on October 19, 2011 at 6:12 PM
WTF?! Were you even paying attention in 2008 when McCain’s 7 WTF?! Were you even paying attention in 2008 when McCain’s 7 homes were discussed by the LSM and Obama’s associations with domestic terrorists was ignored? The media has no interest in fair and balanced. They are only concerned with advancing their progressive agenda and in 2012, that is an Obama reelection.
So are you even if you are too stupid to know it
I’m really feeling the enthusiasum that mitt and these others are garnering
wooboy. (
Sonosam on October 19, 2011 at 10:50 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 … 5 6 7