Who won the Vegas fight?

posted at 8:45 am on October 19, 2011 by Ed Morrissey

If last night’s debate wasn’t the most edifying of the series this year, it may have been the most entertaining.  The Republican presidential candidates went from last week’s relatively serene discussion of economic policies to last night’s cage match on … well, mainly economic policies.  The evening started off with Herman Cain getting blasted on all sides over his 9-9-9 plan and offering only a repeated complaint of “apples and oranges” in response.  But Cain turned out to be just the undercard, as Rick Perry came alive and slugged it out with Mitt Romney over immigration.

CNN asked me to participate in their media forum after the debate to provide analysis, along with my Salem colleague Bill Bennett and others:

Last week, we expected a full assault on Herman Cain and his economic plan in his first debate as a front-runner in the Republican presidential primary. We got it tonight, apparently after the other candidates took a week to peruse the plan. Cain ended up on the defensive much of the night, mainly on his 9-9-9 plan and the national sales tax proposed in it. Almost every candidate made substantive attacks on Cain, who fell back to characterizing their arguments as “apples and oranges” over and over again. …

As for Mitt Romney, for once he spent most of the night on defense. Rick Perry and Rick Santorum went after Romney hard, and Perry’s attack on Romney for employing illegal immigrants had the former Massachusetts governor rattled for the first time in this year’s debates. Perry didn’t have a great night, but for the first time he didn’t have a bad night, and he remained energetic and on the attack all through the debate.

Bill disagrees on Perry:

Mitt Romney, under fire from all sides, showed that he is not afraid to hit back. He also demonstrated leadership by trying to elevate the conversation on the economy and immigration.

Rick Perry hurt himself tonight. His direct attacks on Romney stepped over the line. Voters want leadership and solutions and Perry neglected that for cheap shots aimed at Romney. The remaining candidates performed well, especially Newt Gingrich and Michelle Bachmann, but have a lot of ground to make up. Rick Santorum is still a presence and he may have put some holes in the armor of the front-runners.

I disagree completely.  Romney got rattled on stage, and everyone knew it.  He lost his temper, raised his voice, and looked decidedly uncool in his efforts to push back on immigration — a topic which Romney used in earlier debates as a club against Perry.  This time, as Politico reports, Perry did his homework and came prepared:

Rick Perry went into Tuesday night’s debate looking to rattle Mitt Romney — and it worked.

Perry’s been under fire for his own immigration record, and resurrecting the 2007 report that Romney had hired illegal workers helped him blunt the advantage Romney had been able to get on the issue as Perry looks to recover from his collapse in the polls.

Plus, according to a Perry source, there was an added bonus: by going after Romney personally — the accusation has to do with Romney’s own house — they saw the potential to make Romney react the hardest.

And despite the headlines at the time, the issue didn’t get the attention Perry’s campaign believes it could have when it surfaced in Romney’s first run for president four years ago, and gives Perry a new opening into coming at Romney as a flip-flopper.

That doesn’t erase Perry’s own problems on immigration — as the Boss Emeritus points out in detail today — but it will make Romney think twice about reaching for the “magnet” argument again.  It’s hard to score points on Perry if Romney has to defend his own lawn as one of those magnets, even after being warned that the company he had hired used illegal immigrants to perform the work.

This is the first debate Romney unquestionably lost.  Perry won to an extent by exceeding expectations and staying in the fight the entire debate, but was it a breakout performance?  Doubtful, although it might be enough to get a few of his supporters back in the fold and regain a little momentum.  But the real winner might be Newt Gingrich, who despite having one bad moment with Romney on the health-care mandate once again came out looking positive, well-informed, and fit for battle.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

g2825m on October 19, 2011 at 2:08 PM

I got it…but you just have a few miles of your 370 built…you can’t get the rest even built. Even with massive fund raising, and that is just 370 miles, Texas has three times that much.
But here is the kicker…Jan Brewer states, just build a fence in strategic locations, and use electronics and other devices to patrol the rest, that is the most effective and cost saving way…gee, just like Perry states and what I support…isn’t that something.
Building a 1200 mile fence is foolish, lavish, barbaric, and a waste of time and money…but strategic fence, with monitors and boots, that is a plan.

right2bright on October 19, 2011 at 2:15 PM

It is nonsense to assert that it would take a decade or more to build a border fence. Just like liberals usually do on most issues, you are lying on this issue in order to have your way to prevail.

You hate the fence because it is “barbaric”, remember? Please stick to your real reason.

Really Right on October 19, 2011 at 1:52 PM

This.

A lot of folks are throwing up imaginary and/or minor squabbles to make the fence “impossible”.

Declare the border a national security emergency – which it is – and order the Army Corps of Engineers to the task. You’ll have a military grade fence in a couple years, tops. Then watch the flow of illegals turn from a torrent to a trickle.

Add in E-Verify, punish employers, end all magnet programs like the DREAM act, impliment Arizona police powers, require proper identification to send money out of the country, etc. – and you’ll have most illegals self deport, and new potential illegals simply decide that it’s not worth it.

The money the American taxpayers are forced to throw away on illegals, would pay for the fence over and over again. More, it will plug up a gap where actual terrorists can get in. The cost/benefit ratio is so out of wack, that the fence opponents have to resort to nonsensical and emotional arguments.

Rebar on October 19, 2011 at 2:15 PM

right2bright on October 19, 2011 at 1:56 PM

“10 years” was a phony, made up, talking point.

Really Right on October 19, 2011 at 2:16 PM

AH_C on October 19, 2011 at 2:09 PM

You are correct..Steyn took some shots at Team Romney for sure..:)

Dire Straits on October 19, 2011 at 2:16 PM

Here’s my assessments on everyone:
Newt: by far the most intellegent of the bunch but baggage issues could hurt him. Would take Obama to school in debates.

Bachmann: Might as well just be Christine O’Donnell at this point. She had potential but then started saying stupid things (like her 666 comment) and was getting portrayed as Palin-lite. Now, she’s not even going to be a footnote.

Santorum: Just looking at him you can tell he is so tight you couldn’t pull a pin out of his ass with a tractor.

Ron Paul: Just when I start to agree agree with him, he takes a hard right turn at the corner of batsh*t crazy and off the reservation. I just can’t get behind someone who’s embraced by the Alex Jones crowd.

Rick Perry: Full of more crap than a port-a-potty at an outdoor rock concert. If this guy’s campaign fell apart any faster, you’d swear it was made in China.

Mitt: Only candidate that can make me support him, not trust him, despise him and be totally apathetic towards him in a span of ten minutes. Watching him pinpoint any of his views is like watching someone playing darts while blindfolded in the middle of dartboard factory. He may hit the board everytime he speaks, but it’s usually not the one he needs to win the game. Pick a position and stick with it. But he does have the private sector experience needed to turn this economy around.

Herman: the most likable of the bunch. The non-politician factor is actually a huge plus when everyone is sick of politicians. Also has huge private sector credentials. Needs to cram on foreign policy issues and needs to be more aggressive in defending his plans and viewpoints.

Like I said, right now, it’s a three man race between Mitt, Newt and Cain.

Pcoop on October 19, 2011 at 2:17 PM

There is a more descriptive word for petunia, but it would put the response in moderation. Petunia does what Romney’s paid political shills do, except she does it for free.

cozmo on October 19, 2011 at 2:11 PM

Petunia = Plant of the “pot’d” variety LOL.

Moby
An insidious and specialized type of left-wing troll who visits blogs and impersonates a conservative for the purpose of either spreading false rumors intended to sow dissension among conservative voters, or who purposely posts inflammatory and offensive comments for the purpose of discrediting the blog in question.

The term is derived from the name of the liberal musician Moby, who famously suggested in February of 2004 that left-wing activists engage in this type of subterfuge: “For example, you can go on all the pro-life chat rooms and say you’re an outraged right-wing voter and that you know that George Bush drove an ex-girlfriend to an abortion clinic and paid for her to get an abortion. Then you go to an anti-immigration Web site chat room and ask, ‘What’s all this about George Bush proposing amnesty for illegal aliens?’”

Dr Evil on October 19, 2011 at 2:20 PM

right2bright on October 19, 2011 at 2:15 PM

“barbaric” again? You are a silly individual on this issue.

Really Right on October 19, 2011 at 2:22 PM

right2bright on October 19, 2011 at 2:15 PM

Why is a fence along the entire border “barbaric”, but not some fencing here and there? Pleasee try to make sense.

Really Right on October 19, 2011 at 2:24 PM

Rebar on October 19, 2011 at 2:15 PM

Well if you accept a post that is not truthful, that is your option. Typical, but your option…

right2bright on October 19, 2011 at 2:24 PM

Well if you accept a post that is not truthful, that is your option. Typical, but your option…

right2bright on October 19, 2011 at 2:24 PM

Dude, dumb as rebar is a top tier Perry hater. Dumb as he is, he probably knows the stupidity of a fence but sticks with it as that is what is getting traction today.

cozmo on October 19, 2011 at 2:27 PM

Fossten…touching a shoulder is NOT the same as allowing Perry to Smack Romney as you suggest. Again you guys are quibbling over topics (debate rules, shoulders) that have no bearing on our country’s future. Romney and others have legitimate plans while we are still waiting on something substantive from Perry.

g2825m on October 19, 2011 at 2:08 PM

Again, you mistake me for a Perry shill. Huge mistake.

Touching the shoulder as Mitt did is condescending and made him look bad. If somebody did that to me in a less public setting I would physically remove the hand from my shoulder. Perry provoked the meltdown, but it was a meltdown nonetheless.

Deal with it.

fossten on October 19, 2011 at 2:27 PM

Declare the border a national security emergency – which it is – and order the Army Corps of Engineers to the task. You’ll have a military grade fence in a couple years, tops.

Rebar on October 19, 2011 at 2:15 PM

Signed,

The New Orleans Levees, circa 2005

fossten on October 19, 2011 at 2:30 PM

Dr Evil on October 19, 2011 at 2:20 PM

I wouldn’t call petunia a Moby. The description doesn’t fit at all. She’s a Romney diehard. She’s not false-flagging as a conservative, and she’s not trying to sap morale.

I am seeing plenty of names on this thread I never see otherwise, however.

DrSteve on October 19, 2011 at 2:30 PM

right2bright on October 19, 2011 at 2:15 PM

Why is a fence along the entire border “barbaric”, but not some fencing here and there? Pleasee try to make sense.

Really Right on October 19, 2011 at 2:24 PM

I am not calling you names…so knock it off. It makes you look foolish and dilutes your message.
We have a disagreement, that happens.
A 1200 mile fence is a statement, it fences illegals out, it also fences us in, the image of Berlin wall, in fact most any wall ever built is one of repression. We are not a repressive nation, we are a nation that has always encouraged legal immigration.
When you strategically build the wall, it is for a specific purpose, and is accepted. The difference would be, a picket fence in your front yard, delineates your property line, as opposed to a 10 foot fence around the whole perimeter, it sends a different message.
Palin’s had a fence, when a obnoxious idiot move in, they build a “fence”, and it made a point.
I don’t feel America needs to make a “point”, it needs to secure the border, and any excess is not needed.
In no way have a abdicated the responsibility of securing our borders…that’s the irony, we each have a different idea and method, yours dates back to 200 bc, I want to be bit more modern and effective…you see it as “silly”, I see it as a difference of opinion.
Added to that, is I detest eminent domain, it is most always abused…and it is against my conservative nature to allow the government (for whatever “reason”) to take land from citizens…our most precious commodity, one that can’t be stolen by any other means.
Land ownership is unique to free countries…

right2bright on October 19, 2011 at 2:33 PM

Dude, dumb as rebar is a top tier Perry hater. Dumb as he is, he probably knows the stupidity of a fence but sticks with it as that is what is getting traction today.

cozmo on October 19, 2011 at 2:27 PM

Just a different opinion…the irony is, I want to secure the border as much as he does…he just won’t give up on the 1200 mile wall, and I think we have better, more effective ways. Better for our country, budget, long term, and it is much quicker to implement…he things a 1200 mile wall goes up quick, yet they can’t get a 37 mile wall built in Arizona…

right2bright on October 19, 2011 at 2:36 PM

Can’t win either way.

fossten on October 19, 2011 at 2:04 PM

He could if he could articulate his positions and defend against the attacks effectively. Romney as we have seen is defending his RINO-tastic policies quite well. If Perry could do the same, he could forgo the attacks and defeat them through a wise defense.

csdeven on October 19, 2011 at 2:36 PM

Wow, you can really tell that Mitt came off badly just by looking at all the Mittbots/Mitt campaign workers flooding these comments with the use of their Jedi mind trick tactics trying to convince us that Perry’s attacks came off bad while Mitt easily deflected it.

It’s also funny how the Mittbots are a bunch of b!tchy whiners about this. They had no problem when Mitt was on the attack, but let a few guys go on the attack against him and they all wet their panties.

thirteen28 on October 19, 2011 at 2:36 PM

Democrats must be salivating over the beating Republicans are giving each other. By the time this is finished, none of them will be electable.

NNtrancer on October 19, 2011 at 2:37 PM

it also fences us in, the image of Berlin wall

“I think this fence business is designed and may well be used against us and keep us in.”
– Ron Paul

Quick! Escape to Mexico and the good life before the Illuminati builds a fence to keep us prisoner!!!!

whatcat on October 19, 2011 at 2:37 PM

I’m running for office, for Pete’s sake, I can’t have illegals!

— Willard Mitt Romney

Punchenko on October 19, 2011 at 2:38 PM

He could if he could articulate his positions and defend against the attacks effectively. Romney as we have seen is defending his RINO-tastic policies quite well. If Perry could do the same, he could forgo the attacks and defeat them through a wise defense.

csdeven on October 19, 2011 at 2:36 PM

Last night was the first time Romney was ganged up on, and he did not fare well at all. These debates are stupid. They are designed according to rules that deny the candidates ample time to defend/explain their positions (see Cain and 9-9-9), while also designed to foster left wing stereotypes about the GOP.

fossten on October 19, 2011 at 2:38 PM

Just a different opinion…the irony is, I want to secure the border as much as he does…he just won’t give up on the 1200 mile wall, and I think we have better, more effective ways. Better for our country, budget, long term, and it is much quicker to implement…he things a 1200 mile wall goes up quick, yet they can’t get a 37 mile wall built in Arizona…

right2bright on October 19, 2011 at 2:36 PM

This is dead on right, I was just thinking the same thing.

The purpose of the ‘fence argument’ is a straw man to try to paint Perry as an illegal-loving amnesty open borders freak, and that won’t wash. The guy wants to secure the border, he just knows that a fence is a poor solution.

fossten on October 19, 2011 at 2:41 PM

Cain is done, IMO. His nomination would give Obama the high ground on both national security and taxes. The telling soundbites wouldn’t help either with regard to his shameless lying about 9-9-9 or releasing Al-Qaeda back into the wild.

Punchenko on October 19, 2011 at 2:41 PM

“I think this fence business is designed and may well be used against us and keep us in.”
– Ron Paul

Quick! Escape to Mexico Brazil and the good life before the Illuminati Federal Government builds a fence to keep us prisoner!!!!

whatcat on October 19, 2011 at 2:37 PM

See, I changed it from a straw man to what Ron Paul actually meant.

fossten on October 19, 2011 at 2:42 PM

Last night was the first time Romney was ganged up on, and he did not fare well at all.

fossten on October 19, 2011 at 2:38 PM

Romney isn’t likable at all. I could actually see Romney losing in the GE to Obama after last night’s awful performance.


Annnndddeeerrrrrssssoooon!!!

Punchenko on October 19, 2011 at 2:43 PM

Pcoop on October 19, 2011 at 2:17 PM

Agree. Pretty much the same as my review (MrLynn on October 19, 2011 at 10:28 AM), but with better metaphors.

MrLynn on October 19, 2011 at 2:45 PM

Regarding Romney…a snake, before it changes it’s skin, is always thin skinned.
Changing from a liberal to a conservative, his skin got a little thin last night. I don’t think he is quite comfortable in his new roll as a conservative.

right2bright on October 19, 2011 at 2:47 PM

“I think this fence business is designed and may well be used against us and keep us in.”
– Ron Paul

Quick! Escape to Mexico Brazil and the good life before the Illuminati Federal Government builds a fence to keep us prisoner!!!!

whatcat on October 19, 2011 at 2:37 PM

See, I changed it from a straw man to what Ron Paul actually meant.

fossten on October 19, 2011 at 2:42 PM

Interestingly enough, worries about the Fence To Keep Americans in isn’t the only common link between Perry and Paul:
NBC News/Marist Poll 2012 Florida Republican Presidential Primary,10-19-2011
Hermann Cain 32%
Mitt Romney 31%
Rick Perry 8%
Ron Paul 6%

Newt Gingrich 6%
Undecided 11%

whatcat on October 19, 2011 at 2:49 PM

Interestingly enough, worries about the Fence To Keep Americans in isn’t the only common link between Perry and Paul:
NBC News/Marist Poll 2012 Florida Republican Presidential Primary,10-19-2011
Hermann Cain 32%
Mitt Romney 31%
Rick Perry 8%
Ron Paul 6%
Newt Gingrich 6%
Undecided 11%

whatcat on October 19, 2011 at 2:49 PM

So what? Newsflash, I’m not a Perry supporter.

fossten on October 19, 2011 at 2:52 PM

Last night was the first time Romney was ganged up on, and he did not fare well at all.

fossten on October 19, 2011 at 2:38 PM

I thought he did fine. He didn’t lose control of his message, defended himself, and even countered the attacks.

csdeven on October 19, 2011 at 2:53 PM

Build the Fence!

g2825m on October 19, 2011 at 12:40 PM

This.

I have perfect faith that the Army Corps of Engineers can handle the task.

If the terrain is too difficult to build a fence, then it’s too difficult for illegals to traverse anyway. We have 350 miles of fence now, and the objective fact is, it works very well indeed, to the point where illegals are forced to cross into the desert where many of them wind up dying.

Rebar on October 19, 2011 at 12:50 PM

Obviously, you haven’t followed the topic of why it’s not feasible. Just because we can, regardless of cost is not an answer, nor a winning political strategy.

You trust the ACOE like New Orleans to build levees? To manage flood waters up and down the Missippi? gee, great. All those homeowners that got flooded out by ACOE last Spring would like a word with you.

As for too difficult to build = too difficult to cross, check my link in the last piece of this comment below.

Long term Boots on the Ground are MORE expensive than a non-living, non-benefits receiving, non-sick days, non-pension earning FENCE!
However, in weak spots or the rocky mountainous areas of AZ, NM, this is where you would employ BP guards and UAV systems to monitor these areas.

g2825m on October 19, 2011 at 1:25 PM

Really??? A non-living structure needs constant maintenance against a living river that constantly reshapes the borders. A flash flood would quickly render parts of the fence “sick”. Plus it takes a huge crew of workers/engineers to build and maintain one mile of fencing than it does to have 6 guards per mile at $200K/year per guard

The river, lakes and dams on the border are one big weak spot.

It is nonsense to assert that it would take a decade or more to build a border fence. Just like liberals usually do on most issues, you are lying on this issue in order to have your way to prevail.

Really Right on October 19, 2011 at 1:52 PM

You have not seen the geographical challenges of building a fence on the river.

So I’ll repeat myself and include the google map link I omitted the first time:

Start here at Amistad Reservoir and go westward for a few hundred miles until you get to Big Bend Ranch State Park, as the river flows all points of the compass. As you overfly the area, you’ll notice large swatches of brown mud flats. These are flood plains that no fence is going to withstand. The “middle” of the river is in constant flux. You’ll see sections where the river used to be deeper inside the US and other times, digging into Mexico.

So do you still think we can tame the “Giant River” with mere fencing. Goes without saying, while destroying the property rights and livelihood of all who depend on access to the River.

AH_C on October 19, 2011 at 12:36 PM

After googling the map, go back Eastward to Laredo, zoom in closer and follow the fence that starts just NE of town and see how much clawback of private property the Govt did, just to build their fence on stable ground. To replicate what was done to Laredo would mean ceding 3 to 5 thousand square miles to the “border”.

As for those who maintain that security trumps liberty & property rights, the Founding Fathers have already spoken on that. By denying access to the river, a navigable river that is protected under international law, we will have destroyed the reason for why a majority of people and businesses live and operate on/near the river.

Whoops, there goes the economy. The key, more than just a fence, is enforcing the laws already on the books and denying benefits & jobs to illegals. Do that and the magnet will be reversed as the illegals self-deport back home.

But do carry on with the “build the fence from sea to shining sea” mantra. It’s not going to happen.

AH_C on October 19, 2011 at 2:54 PM

trying to convince us that Perry’s attacks came off bad while Mitt easily deflected it.

Romney got flustered for sure. Apparently we now have a proof of principle that someone can be a big enough a*****e to break through the Romney Unflappability Barrier. That a*****e? Rick Perry.

DrSteve on October 19, 2011 at 2:57 PM

Interestingly enough, worries about the Fence To Keep Americans in isn’t the only common link between Perry and Paul:
NBC News/Marist Poll 2012 Florida Republican Presidential Primary,10-19-2011
Hermann Cain 32%
Mitt Romney 31%
Rick Perry 8%
Ron Paul 6%
Newt Gingrich 6%
Undecided 11%

whatcat on October 19, 2011 at 2:49 PM

So what? Newsflash, I’m not a Perry supporter.

fossten on October 19, 2011 at 2:52 PM

“So what?” back atcha, I didn’t say you were. At any rate, Perry has all he can handle in just trying to stay at Paulian poll level numbers. Judging by the reaction of the live audience, he didn’t do himself a whole lotta favors last night in that respect.

whatcat on October 19, 2011 at 2:57 PM

“I’m running for office for pete sake, I can’t have illegals!”

– Romney’s bold stance against hiring illegals.

Daemonocracy on October 19, 2011 at 9:01 AM

I thought that was the most stunning admission of the night — and it put Romney entirely in Obama territory. It’s all about the optics, how things look. Romney just proves again and again that he has no principles. It is so damned maddening to have a front runner and likely candidate who is an unprincipled political hack. I guess that’s the only thing that wins presidential nominations these days.

Rational Thought on October 19, 2011 at 3:45 PM

I thought that was the most stunning admission of the night — and it put Romney entirely in Obama territory. It’s all about the optics, how things look. Romney just proves again and again that he has no principles. It is so damned maddening to have a front runner and likely candidate who is an unprincipled political hack. I guess that’s the only thing that wins presidential nominations these days.

Rational Thought on October 19, 2011 at 3:45 PM

Nonsense, it was not half as stunning as the fact that Rick Perry who refused to even support e-verify brought up the whole damn subject in the first place. The fact that a politician would realize how something might look to voters is not exactly stunning. Or at least it should not be.

And considering the fact that people like Rush and Jim DeMint considered Romney to be a conservative just a few years ago I would not think something that small would really make a difference. But then people can be petty.

I thought it was more stunning when Gingrich was forced to admit that the Heritage Foundation actually helped create the plan that was a basis for the much hated Romneycare..well hated by people who do not live in Mass anyway. The people who live there actually like and support the plan by a three to one margin..but what do they know?

I don’t think Romney lost..but then I don’t think anyone won either. But Romney held his own.

I think Perry came off looking mean and petty. Cain got lost in his own answers. Santorum was both desperate and aggressive. In fact Bachmann did better than she has in the last few debates..Ron Paul is Ron Paul..what can you say about that guy?

Terrye on October 19, 2011 at 3:57 PM

I don’t think Romney lost..but then I don’t think anyone won either. But Romney held his own.
I think Perry came off looking mean and petty. Cain got lost in his own answers. Santorum was both desperate and aggressive. In fact Bachmann did better than she has in the last few debates..Ron Paul is Ron Paul..what can you say about that guy?
Terrye on October 19, 2011 at 3:57 PM

When Perry started going off with the brutha lines to Cain, it gave me a genuine WTH LOL moment. Reminded me of this.

Status quo after this debate – with maybe a dip in Cain’s numbers.

whatcat on October 19, 2011 at 4:25 PM

I thought that was the most stunning admission of the night — and it put Romney entirely in Obama territory. It’s all about the optics, how things look. Romney just proves again and again that he has no principles. It is so damned maddening to have a front runner and likely candidate who is an unprincipled political hack. I guess that’s the only thing that wins presidential nominations these days.

Rational Thought on October 19, 2011 at 3:45 PM

Nonsense, it was not half as stunning as the fact that Rick Perry who refused to even support e-verify brought up the whole damn subject in the first place.

Terrye on October 19, 2011 at 3:57 PM

Mark Steyn agrees with RT and devoted a good 10 minutes of airtime on Rush’s show today on that very point. The real Mitt peeked out and exposed himself as indifferent to illegals, except for optics.

AH_C on October 19, 2011 at 4:26 PM

Mark Steyn agrees with RT and devoted a good 10 minutes of airtime on Rush’s show today on that very point. The real Mitt peeked out and exposed himself as indifferent to illegals, except for optics.
AH_C on October 19, 2011 at 4:26 PM

Eh, it’s about as relevant as when Perry confessed he can be bought by cronies for $5000.01.

Of real relevance was the audience’s reaction to such exchanges. It’s obvious they thought Perry was way over the top. When Romney responded in kind to Perry, they didn’t like that either.

whatcat on October 19, 2011 at 4:34 PM

NO YOU’RE A LIAR!
/Buy Danish
fossten on October 19, 2011 at 11:10 AM

One thing for sure: YOU’RE A JACKASS! (No sarc tag).

Buy Danish on October 19, 2011 at 4:37 PM

One thing for sure: YOU’RE A JACKASS! (No sarc tag).

Buy Danish on October 19, 2011 at 4:37 PM

There you go again, with the personal attacks…LOL

fossten on October 19, 2011 at 4:39 PM

“So what?” back atcha, I didn’t say you were. At any rate, Perry has all he can handle in just trying to stay at Paulian poll level numbers. Judging by the reaction of the live audience, he didn’t do himself a whole lotta favors last night in that respect.

whatcat on October 19, 2011 at 2:57 PM

Another Captain Obvious moment. I believe my very first comment of the day was something like this:

Perry didn’t do himself any favors, but Mitt melted down.

fossten on October 19, 2011 at 4:41 PM

I thought he did fine. He didn’t lose control of his message, defended himself, and even countered the attacks.

csdeven on October 19, 2011 at 2:53 PM

He also lied and tried to cover up the fact that Romneycare was a Federally funded fraud.

fossten on October 19, 2011 at 4:42 PM

Daemonocracy on October 19, 2011 at 9:01 AM

ITA with your whole post, but this part is priceless and had me ROFLOL:

and he said it while twitching his head and talking at an accelerated pace as if he were C3PO short circuiting.

-Aslan’s Girl

Aslans Girl on October 19, 2011 at 4:48 PM

“So what?” back atcha, I didn’t say you were. At any rate, Perry has all he can handle in just trying to stay at Paulian poll level numbers. Judging by the reaction of the live audience, he didn’t do himself a whole lotta favors last night in that respect.
whatcat on October 19, 2011 at 2:57 PM

Another Captain Obvious moment. I believe my very first comment of the day was something like this:
Perry didn’t do himself any favors, but Mitt melted down.
fossten on October 19, 2011 at 4:41 PM

Maybe you’ve been spending a little too much time online today? You can go back through everyone’s comments here and while you may find others calling you a “Perrybot” or whatever such silliness, you will find that I have not even alluded to such a thing. So I’m really not sure what you’re supposed to be arguing about here. As I said, maybe it’s just that you’ve invested too many hours online, and you’re a little confused.

whatcat on October 19, 2011 at 4:51 PM

I used to like Bill Bennett, but he is clearly enamored by RINO Romney, so anything Perry does isn’t going to sway him away from that bowl of jello. I’d rather he fall in line behind Newt, who clearly had a good night. I think it goes without saying that Newt is truly the most intelligent of them on stage, but there’s something about him that’s a little off, and I can’t put my finger on it. It’s not his baggage, because they all have some. Nor is it his squeaky high voice, but it’s something.

I was for Perry, but he doesn’t perform well as a speaker, so I don’t think he can impress unless voters look beyond his stage presence. So I’m settled into the “Anyone But Romney” category until someone stands out. Newt has a leg up at this point…

stacman on October 19, 2011 at 4:54 PM

Maybe you’ve been spending a little too much time online today? You can go back through everyone’s comments here and while you may find others calling you a “Perrybot” or whatever such silliness, you will find that I have not even alluded to such a thing. So I’m really not sure what you’re supposed to be arguing about here. As I said, maybe it’s just that you’ve invested too many hours online, and you’re a little confused.

whatcat on October 19, 2011 at 4:51 PM

Or maybe you just didn’t read through the thread, and failed to realize that these glittering gems that you think you’re dropping on us have already been discussed ad infinitum, and maybe nobody’s awed or enlightened by your newly found knowledge.

But yeah, go with the assumption that somebody else is confused, if it makes you feel warm and fuzzy inside.

fossten on October 19, 2011 at 4:57 PM

I *still* can’t believe that Mitt touched Perry. So unprofessional. And he would be leader of the free world? I don’t think so!

-Aslan’s Girl

Aslans Girl on October 19, 2011 at 4:57 PM

Ooh, can you imagine if Romney got nettled by Obama in a debate and Romney touched him? The cries of “racism” would be deafening.

Aslans Girl on October 19, 2011 at 4:58 PM

I used to like Bill Bennett, but he is clearly enamored by RINO Romney, so anything Perry does isn’t going to sway him away from that bowl of jello. I’d rather he fall in line behind Newt, who clearly had a good night. I think it goes without saying that Newt is truly the most intelligent of them on stage, but there’s something about him that’s a little off, and I can’t put my finger on it. It’s not his baggage, because they all have some. Nor is it his squeaky high voice, but it’s something.

stacman on October 19, 2011 at 4:54 PM

I can tell you exactly what it is, and it’s actually FIXABLE.

Newt gets up there and blows away the field, and then forgets to say, “When I’m President I will ________.” He forgets to ask for the vote. It’s like he’s more interested in winning the debate than he is in winning the nomination.

fossten on October 19, 2011 at 4:58 PM

I think Perry walked away from this last night thinking, “I could actually grow to like these things!” LOL.

I’m also starting to think that as Perry does more of these, the American people will get used to his speech pattern and it will cease being an issue.

Aslans Girl on October 19, 2011 at 5:00 PM

Ooh, can you imagine if Romney got nettled by Obama in a debate and Romney touched him? The cries of “racism” would be deafening.

Aslans Girl on October 19, 2011 at 4:58 PM

Precisely, AG. He’s a loose cannon and he lost a lot of Presidential sheen last night. Could you imagine him pawing Putin? HOLY CRAP…

fossten on October 19, 2011 at 5:00 PM

Ooh, can you imagine if Romney got nettled by Obama in a debate and Romney touched him? The cries of “racism” would be deafening.

Aslans Girl on October 19, 2011 at 4:58 PM

No doubt Obozo would have Holder there to charge him with a hate crime on the spot…

stacman on October 19, 2011 at 5:01 PM

I’m running for office, for Pete’s sake, I can’t have illegals!

– Willard Mitt Romney

Punchenko on October 19, 2011 at 2:38 PM

What’s interesting is how thin and feeble the facade was and how easily it came apart. This is all it took? This was the extent of Romney’s capacity to hold together an image?

The point is not to nominate a person with a greater capacity or will than Romney to maintain an image, but rather to find a truly genuine conservative and individual who believes what he is saying and can express this total sincerity and conviction to the people. That is what people are craving. That is the lesson of Reagan.

rrpjr on October 19, 2011 at 5:02 PM

The only thing the MSM had on Newt was that he spent a lot of money on gifts from Tiffany’s on his wife. How is lavishing your wife in gifts a scandal? His marital issues doesn’t bother me as I am worried about the economy and the US’s standing in the world. We need someone smart to shake things up this time and I can’t carry water for Romney and I’m afraid Perry will come across as a Bush clone.

Punchenko on October 19, 2011 at 12:42 PM

What about when he claimed that the Medicare reform plan in the Ryan budget is “right-wing social engineering”?

youngTXcon on October 19, 2011 at 5:03 PM

But yeah, go with the assumption that somebody else is confused, if it makes you feel warm and fuzzy inside.
fossten on October 19, 2011 at 4:57 PM

Actually I don’t think it’s healthy to spend all day online obsessing over comments at some website. Especially when they upset a person so much – most folks wisely just skip comments they just know will burn in another ulcer. Rage isn’t good, but if a person can’t pry himself off the couch and away from the keyboard, I’d suggest at least mixing in a few funny YouTube videos.

whatcat on October 19, 2011 at 5:07 PM

But yeah, go with the assumption that somebody else is confused, if it makes you feel warm and fuzzy inside.

fossten on October 19, 2011 at 4:57 PM

whata’sillycattoy makes that assumption a lot. He has the same couplea’ memes that he starts over every thread, or so. Most of us have it figured out.

cozmo on October 19, 2011 at 5:08 PM

What about when he claimed that the Medicare reform plan in the Ryan budget is “right-wing social engineering”?

youngTXcon on October 19, 2011 at 5:03 PM

Ya gotta pick yer poison in this race. All of them have flaws. Newt has said a few things that are shaky, but his deeds are mostly good. Mitt, on the other hand, has Romneycare. Perry has the tuition problem. Cain is weak on foreign policy, Santorum is just a douche, and Bachmann is like a whiny robot. Newt looks the most Presidential and other than Bachmann and Cain is probably the most trustworthy.

fossten on October 19, 2011 at 5:08 PM

Actually I don’t think it’s healthy to spend all day online obsessing over comments at some website. Especially when they upset a person so much – most folks wisely just skip comments they just know will burn in another ulcer. Rage isn’t good, but if a person can’t pry himself off the couch and away from the keyboard, I’d suggest at least mixing in a few funny YouTube videos.

whatcat on October 19, 2011 at 5:07 PM

“Thanks” for your concern, but if I ever want any actual help, I’ll seek someone intelligent and thoughtful who doesn’t make wild assumptions about me without ever having met me.

fossten on October 19, 2011 at 5:09 PM

Actually I don’t think it’s healthy to spend all day online obsessing over comments at some website. Especially when they upset a person so much – most folks wisely just skip comments they just know will burn in another ulcer. Rage isn’t good, but if a person can’t pry himself off the couch and away from the keyboard, I’d suggest at least mixing in a few funny YouTube videos.

whatcat on October 19, 2011 at 5:07 PM

We were having a discussion, but if you want to think it’s ‘obsessing,’ YMMV.

fossten on October 19, 2011 at 5:11 PM

When Romney put his hand on Perry’s shoulder Perry raised his hand and I thought he was going to swat it off him. I wish he had, or stepped away from him and fire a pissed off look back at him. I think that would’ve sealed his fate for being an arrogant, pompous blowhard.

I’ve been thinking today about the stark contrast between all of these candidates compared to Reagan’s demeanor on stage. Night and day…

stacman on October 19, 2011 at 5:11 PM

whata’sillycattoy makes that assumption a lot. He has the same couplea’ memes that he starts over every thread, or so. Most of us have it figured out.

cozmo on October 19, 2011 at 5:08 PM

Heh. Thanks for the tip, I’ll keep an eye out.

I’m off work now, see you guys later on. Gotta get to DQ for a nice Blizzard…!

fossten on October 19, 2011 at 5:12 PM

“Thanks” for your concern, but if I ever want any actual help, I’ll seek someone intelligent and thoughtful who doesn’t make wild assumptions about me without ever having met me.
fossten on October 19, 2011 at 5:09 PM

You’d have to get out and meet someone for counseling. Online therapy for such an obsession would be counterproductive.

whatcat on October 19, 2011 at 5:14 PM

This is the first debate Romney unquestionably lost.

Because Perry brought up the lawn care that was brought up in 2007 as his big gun and Romney “lost his temper”? Have you never seen anyone lose their temper? You have got to be kidding.

InkyBinkyBarleyBoo on October 19, 2011 at 5:23 PM

Dr Evil on October 19, 2011 at 2:20 PM

I wouldn’t call petunia a Moby. The description doesn’t fit at all. She’s a Romney diehard. She’s not false-flagging as a conservative, and she’s not trying to sap morale.

I am seeing plenty of names on this thread I never see otherwise, however.

DrSteve on October 19, 2011 at 2:30 PM

Petunia has a posting history on HA, that started way before the current republican primaries, and ardent would be Romney supporter.

I have noticed new names too, but we haven’t had an open registration in awhile maybe they are coming from town hall?

Dr Evil on October 19, 2011 at 5:23 PM

I have noticed new names too, but we haven’t had an open registration in awhile maybe they are coming from town hall?

Dr Evil on October 19, 2011 at 5:23 PM

The old nutballs who have been totally trashed are changing their handles. And Allah is letting some brand new nutballs in to liven things up.

Wouldn’t want it to get boring now would you?

cozmo on October 19, 2011 at 5:27 PM

For anyone who thinks that because Newt does well in these things that he can win, rememeber that he’s done well because no one attacks him. They know he’s no threat so he isn’t worth it. HOWEVER, the one little pushback Romney gave Newt last night about mandates, Newt folded completely! Wait until he’s actually scrutinized on that stage before thinking that he’s “so good at debating”, any one is “good” if they aren’t being challenged!

-Aslan’s Girl

Aslans Girl on October 19, 2011 at 5:30 PM

Aslans Girl on October 19, 2011 at 5:30 PM

Aw, jeeze can’t ya’ let the Newt people bask in the warm glow of what could be for just a little while?

cozmo on October 19, 2011 at 5:32 PM

For anyone who thinks that because Newt does well in these things that he can win, rememeber that he’s done well because no one attacks him. They know he’s no threat so he isn’t worth it. HOWEVER, the one little pushback Romney gave Newt last night about mandates, Newt folded completely! Wait until he’s actually scrutinized on that stage before thinking that he’s “so good at debating”, any one is “good” if they aren’t being challenged!

-Aslan’s Girl

Aslans Girl on October 19, 2011 at 5:30 PM

Newt’s running for veep or a cabinet position, I think even he’s aware of his baggage problem. Probably painfully aware.

whatcat on October 19, 2011 at 5:36 PM

Wouldn’t want it to get boring now would you?

cozmo on October 19, 2011 at 5:27 PM

Absolutely not, I want hot air to put up an open registration just for the OWS crowd. Come on Allah, Ed, let the morons in give us some diversity.

Dr Evil on October 19, 2011 at 5:45 PM

Newt has said a few things that are shaky, but his deeds are mostly good. Mitt, on the other hand, has Romneycare.
fossten on October 19, 2011 at 5:08 PM

Newt was for healthcare mandates (including federal mandates) before Romney devised the Mass plan, so it’s amusing to see you cite Romneycare in this context.

Buy Danish on October 19, 2011 at 6:01 PM

What about when he claimed that the Medicare reform plan in the Ryan budget is “right-wing social engineering”?

youngTXcon on October 19, 2011 at 5:03 PM

Ya gotta pick yer poison in this race. All of them have flaws. Newt has said a few things that are shaky, but his deeds are mostly good. Mitt, on the other hand, has Romneycare. Perry has the tuition problem. Cain is weak on foreign policy, Santorum is just a douche, and Bachmann is like a whiny robot. Newt looks the most Presidential and other than Bachmann and Cain is probably the most trustworthy.

fossten on October 19, 2011 at 5:08 PM

He was not an effective leader as Speaker of the House because his ego overwhelmed everything else, and that has not changed as far as I can tell. But you are certainly right about all the candidates having significant flaws. Everyone on that stage looked pretty bad at some point last night, especially Romney (as previously mentioned). I have never seen him so rattled, and by an attack he could have readily deflected. Instead, he showed his true colors by acting like an entitled child and demonstrated yet again that he is driven by politics.

youngTXcon on October 19, 2011 at 6:19 PM

What is Newt doing on in-Trade right now? I think now would be a great time to put a few dollars on him.

The anti-Romney faction is going to move away from Cain. They have already flirted with Bachmann and Perry. They will go to Gingrich. Gingrich is too brilliant to make a huge verbal gaffe that will send him further down in the polls.

TheQuestion on October 19, 2011 at 6:24 PM

TheQuestion on October 19, 2011 at 6:24 PM

Newt’s trading at 2.6% :

http://www.intrade.com/v4/markets/?eventId=84328

youngTXcon on October 19, 2011 at 6:19 PM

Newt QUIT his speakership. And he’s never been elected to a state-wide race, either.

-Aslan’s Girl

Aslans Girl on October 19, 2011 at 6:30 PM

TheQuestion on October 19, 2011 at 6:24PM

The voters will come back to Perry. Perry has the $$, none of the other alternatives do.

Aslans Girl on October 19, 2011 at 6:31 PM

This is the first debate Romney unquestionably lost.

We must have been watching two different debates, Ed, because this is sheer insanity. Yes, Romney blew his cool, but doesn’t that actually work to his advantage? Hasn’t he been too “robotic” and too “cold” up until now, haven’t the voters been looking for a bit more “fire” from him?

Undoubtedly Perry showed a lot more gusto and interest in actually being at the debate this time, but his intro fell flat, and his incessant attempts at negative campaigning during the debate came across very desperate and hackish.

Romney gave a very good answer about the age-old issue about illegal immigrants ending up working on his lawn, and when Perry tried to bring it up again later in the debate, the audience – and any rational viewer – thought it was crude and ridiculous.

Other than that little kerfuffle, Romney mopped the floor with the rest of them the rest of the time. He gave Cain a lesson about his 9-9-9 plan, he had all the candidates all protecting him against religious bias, and the other candidates were saying “I agree with Mitt” the whole night.

I don’t really see how you can score this as a win or anything close to that for Perry, when all he did was desperate negative attacks on Romney, and nothing much else. His attempt at throwing out some red meat, “defund the UN”, was such an opaque attempt at pandering that it also fell flat.

Perry is done!

The only candidates who came out essentially unscathed and positively were Santorum and Gingrich. Romney got a few cuts and scrapes but managed to fight his way out of every situation and gave a brilliant answer on faith.

Seixon on October 19, 2011 at 6:43 PM

Romney last night whined “Get off of my lawn, wahhh!”

Aslans Girl on October 19, 2011 at 6:51 PM

I must say I am absolutely loving the tears and anger from the Mittbots on this forum… LOL.

Mittbots: How dare that Rick Perry get under Mitt Romney’s skin and show him to be one petulant, whiny, and opportunistic failed politician?

Money quote from last night’s debate:

Romney: I’m running for office, for Pete’s sake, we can’t have illegals…

Bwa ha ha ha ha…

Delicious!

TheRightMan on October 19, 2011 at 6:59 PM

Suggestion for all GOP candidates:

1. You should have taken your own intro time to “introduce” the moderator as a highly biased, name-calling slug for his “teabagging” comments.

2. No matter what Anderson asked, answer using Solyndra and Fast and Furious as examples of Obama’s administration having gone crazy.

fred5678 on October 19, 2011 at 7:22 PM

Newt was for healthcare mandates (including federal mandates) before Romney devised the Mass plan, so it’s amusing to see you cite Romneycare in this context.

Buy Danish on October 19, 2011 at 6:01 PM

He knows that. I know I’ve explained it to him a few times. He has a narrative that he wants to advance and he wont let the truth stand in the way.

csdeven on October 19, 2011 at 7:42 PM

The only candidates who came out essentially unscathed and positively were Santorum and Gingrich. Romney got a few cuts and scrapes but managed to fight his way out of every situation and gave a brilliant answer on faith.

Seixon on October 19, 2011 at 6:43 PM

agree entirely with your short analysis. only thing, Santorum is the biggest idiot. Romney did just fine.

jimver on October 19, 2011 at 7:43 PM

Romney: I’m running for office, for Pete’s sake, we can’t have illegals…

TheRightMan on October 19, 2011 at 6:59 PM

In his own sneaky way, he was probably pandering to the Hispanics.

csdeven on October 19, 2011 at 7:44 PM

Hasn’t he been too “robotic” and too “cold” up until now, haven’t the voters been looking for a bit more “fire” from him?

The beauty of it was that he stayed on point and decimated Perry.

Perry is done!

Seixon on October 19, 2011 at 6:43 PM

Yeah. I wish he would just drop out. It is painful watching him stumble and bumble his way through these debates. And he has now added sheer desperation to the mix and is grasping at stupid issues that Romney has 100% cover on.

Perry does better when he just presents his own ideas and leaves the attacks to the talented candidates. His problem is that any debate with Obama will be exactly like the exchange he had with Romney. He goes in thinking his one dimensional attack will succeed. Then his attack is successfully defended, he knows he looks like a fool, has nothing to counter with, and is left with no other response than to reiterate the same point but more loudly and throws in a “You’re a liar” just for sake of demagoguery. Obama would utterly decimate Perry in a debate.

csdeven on October 19, 2011 at 7:52 PM

There you go again, with the personal attacks…LOL
fossten on October 19, 2011 at 4:39 PM

You’re very good at passive-aggressive tactics.

Buy Danish on October 19, 2011 at 7:59 PM

…I’m also starting to think that as Perry does more of these, the American people will get used to his speech pattern and it will cease being an issue.

Aslans Girl on October 19, 2011 at 5:00 PM

Sorry, I’m not being snarky but I had to laugh out loud at this! You make him sound like one of those creatures on Stargate!

DanaSmiles on October 19, 2011 at 8:01 PM

As for those who maintain that security trumps liberty & property rights,

AH_C on October 19, 2011 at 2:54 PM

It shouldn’t trump property rights, not when there is a very viable solution like Perry’s. Strategic fencing, arial support, sensors, and boots on the ground.

I wish people would remember that river irrigates a huge chunk of our agricultural and ranching land…the food the critics put on their tables for dinner.

tmontgomery on October 19, 2011 at 8:08 PM

This is the first debate Romney unquestionably lost.

We must have been watching two different debates, Ed, because this is sheer insanity. Yes, Romney blew his cool, but doesn’t that actually work to his advantage? Hasn’t he been too “robotic” and too “cold” up until now, haven’t the voters been looking for a bit more “fire” from him?

I don’t really see how you can score this as a win or anything close to that for Perry, when all he did was desperate negative attacks on Romney, and nothing much else.
Seixon on October 19, 2011 at 6:43 PM

Eh, with debates everybody will spin that their guy won, so it’s no surprise when Ed or anybody else has at the spinning. I don’t know how much of an advantage, if any, Romney took away from it, though.

Going by how the audience turned on Perry every time he went personal and tried to talk over Romney during Romney’s time, it certainly wasn’t a good outing for Perry. Romney nibbled at Perry’s bait and got his toes wet in the waters of bad manners (and got the same negative audience reaction), but Perry jumped into the deep end and sunk.

Romney should have played it cool – he’s not in the same spot as Perry, who is desperate to revive his failing campaign. Perry had a really great roll out, but the rolling since then has all been downhill.

whatcat on October 19, 2011 at 8:14 PM

Reagan got angry during a forum like this. Sorry Ed, you’re showing some bias. Your description “He [Romney] lost his temper, raised his voice, and looked decidedly uncool” could be applied directly to Reagan. This show of anger did not hurt Reagan in the slightest.

scotash on October 19, 2011 at 9:28 PM

I *still* can’t believe that Mitt touched Perry. So unprofessional. And he would be leader of the free world? I don’t think so!

Aslans Girl on October 19, 2011 at 4:57 PM

Perry is a bully, he tried to intimidate Ron Paul, (an old man) by doing the same thing. He got what was coming to him from Romney. Here is the link on that.

scotash on October 19, 2011 at 9:38 PM

Scotash,

Reagan’s “I paid for this microphone” comment was a pr-planned statement for effect. Not a display of anger.

It was a reference to Spencer Tracy in “State of the Union”.

Jason Coleman on October 19, 2011 at 9:59 PM

Who won the latest debate?

Obama.

I look at this field and I can only see two possible outcomes in 2012:

Best case: We elect an arch-mediocrity to replace an out right catastrophe.

Worst case: The catastrophe gets re-elected.

SuperCool on October 20, 2011 at 2:49 AM

I didn’t think Perry accomplished anything more than an improved performance for himself, which he desperately needed, but no more. Gingrich was the best on points but isn’t really in serious contention and would likely be a detriment to a national ticket. Romney wins again, the same as he has been, not by winning, but by not taking any serious damage. His fundraising operation and national organization are built for a long war of attrition.

But Perry is clearly correct on the border issue. Fencing works well in populated areas, like San Diego where it has been very effective. In rural areas it still requires physical patrolling to stop breaching the barrier by going over, under, or through. The real reduction in manpower isn’t enough to pay for the huge cost. Plus this would also affect lawful access to the Rio Grande and the border lakes, not only for recreation but an agricultural necessity for cattle and sheep ranchers.

No border solution will stop 100% of illegal border crossings, even with minefields, moats, and machine guns. They don’t have to, in order to be effective, though. But they do have to be both affordable and cost effective, because it is a huge project which remains mainly undone. Those who expect the Great Wall of China

Adjoran on October 20, 2011 at 3:50 AM

. . . are expecting the impossibly expensive which we would be foolish to undertake if we could afford it, which we cannot.

Adjoran on October 20, 2011 at 3:52 AM

Jason Coleman on October 19, 2011 at 9:59 PM

Every candidate rehearses prior to debates.

Reagan was still angry, he stood up, shifted about, “decidedly uncool as Ed would say” and raised his voice in an angry fashion.

Sorry, I’m not buying your excuse that he “planned ahead for an attempt to have his microphone cut off” He was mad.

scotash on October 20, 2011 at 3:55 AM

Scotash,

Reagan knew in advance that he would be challenged on his pre-debate statement because it was discussed in planning for the event.

It was a planned statement, only when and how he would deliver it was in question.

William Casey, his campaign manager discussed this and how they turned it into the Nashua moment at a lecture at Georgetown after the election.

There’s no doubt he was angry, but he was planning on picking a fight before he entered the room.

I’m not disagreeing with you, just clarifying the particulars.

Jason Coleman on October 20, 2011 at 8:36 AM