Video: Gingrich schools Pelley on “rule of law” on terrorists

posted at 10:59 pm on November 12, 2011 by Ed Morrissey

I missed tonight’s CBS debate, mainly because I spent a great evening with some of my blogging friends here at FreedomWorks’ BlogCon2011.  When I returned, though, I got a few messages about one particular moment in the debate, where CBS moderator attempted to lecture Newt Gingrich on the “rule of law” regarding American citizens who join the enemy to wage war against the US.  Big mistake.

The two worst aspects of this exchange?  The smug look on Pelley’s face when he challenged Gingrich on this point, and the “no” you can hear him utter just as Gingrich started his smackdown of Pelley.  Regardless of the context of this exchange, this is a perfect encapsulation of why these media debates are utterly worthless, and why the Republican Party needs to force a format change.  Pelley isn’t running for President, and we don’t need to have Pelley debating the presidential candidates.  We need them to debate each other.  It’s only made more ridiculous when a moderator-turned-participant ends up as far out of his depth as Pelley was on this question.

As I mentioned, I didn’t watch the debate, but from my Twitter feed and a few e-mails, it seems that many thought that Gingrich and Romney were strong as usual, Rick Perry did surprisingly well, and Herman Cain spent too much time deflecting with promises to have a team of experts look at the issues once he’s elected President. I don’t know how Rick Santorum did in the debate, but his team sent out their spin e-mail with the subject line, “Draft Template,” which leads me to conclude that he at least flunked the post-debate.  Either that or he’s looking to back a new candidate named John R. Template for the Republican nomination.

We already have one open thread for the debate, but feel free to add your opinions on the debate in this thread, too.

Breaking on Hot Air

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: 1 2 3 4

Ummm…I said MY neo-con masters. Might want to read that again.

bmowell on November 13, 2011 at 5:31 PM

Would you like to hear some of them?

bmowell on November 13, 2011 at 5:23 PM

If they were as persuasive as your current missives, I doubt that they would add much value the discussion.

CalFed on November 13, 2011 at 5:32 PM

Ummm…I said MY neo-con masters. Might want to read that again.

bmowell on November 13, 2011 at 5:31 PM

So CBS news was your “neo-con master”?

Amazing

CalFed on November 13, 2011 at 5:36 PM

If they were as persuasive as your current missives, I doubt that they would add much value the discussion.

CalFed on November 13, 2011 at 5:32 PM

I am assuming that this must mean that you have full faith and trust in your government. Do you? Is there really nothing in the case made below that gives you pause?

Giving a President the authorization to use all necessary force in the prosecution of an undeclared war is a danger not only to civil liberties, but lacks the recognition of the fact that vesting unlimited, unchecked power in the hands of one man is NOT in keeping with a constitutional republic.

Do you trust your government to not abuse that power? Do you trust that unlimited authority in the hands of this President?

If you trust his SECRET panel reviewing UNDISCLOSED information who’s method of adjudication is UNKNOWN with the power to decide the use of ultimate force against a citizen of the United States – regardless of their likely being a scumbag – then I would say that you ignore a history rife with examples of the abuse of Presidential authority from John Adam’s time onward!

Two weeks later we assassinated Awlaki’s 16 year old son who was also a U.S. Citizen. Why was he assassinated? Again, we are not given details. Although his friends on Facebook seemed rather upset about it.

Regardless of which party happens to hold the executive branch I will NOT place my full and abiding trust in their authority. It is the duty of the citizen of a republic to remain ever skeptical. Unless, of course, you’re given to tyranny.

bmowell on November 13, 2011 at 5:39 PM

So CBS news was your “neo-con master”?

Amazing

CalFed on November 13, 2011 at 5:36 PM

Do you think that is what I meant?

Still waiting for you to make your case.

bmowell on November 13, 2011 at 5:41 PM

You’re not getting your information from CBS. Your getting your information from memes propagated by the bi-partisan foreign policy consensus that exists on Capitol Hill.

bmowell on November 13, 2011 at 5:27 PM

bmowell on November 13, 2011 at 5:42 PM

Crickets.

bmowell on November 13, 2011 at 5:48 PM

I guess I could talk about all of the UN resolutions that Saddam ignored, or his potential WMDs, his gassing of the Kurds, his bellicose attitude toward inspections, etc.

Take your pick.

bmowell on November 13, 2011 at 5:56 PM

Or in regard to 9/11, how the Patriot Act was necessary to protect us from the terrorists. It wouldn’t be permanent and the government would not expand on those powers, etc.

I made that case on many occasions to a local libertarian candidate that I was trying to convert.

Recently, I apologized and told him that he was right and that I was wrong.

bmowell on November 13, 2011 at 6:00 PM

Crickets.

We’ll meet again.

bmowell on November 13, 2011 at 6:15 PM

Cain – Gingrich – CSPAN

And the fun part is it doesn’t need to be sponsored by the RNC as CSPAN will take up the torch of civil discussion and presenting it to the american people. It doesn’t matter if the RNC ‘sponsors’ a debate, this is a free country and candidates can talk or debate or do as they please with each other in civil forums.

.
ajacksonian on November 13, 2011 at 8:03 AM

Good point -except for one reality you missed – look what the entrenched establishment GOP did to Sarah Palin for not submitting to their gate-keeping veto. Any who debate without the GOP’s nod will have to deal with the entire Washington GOP pundrity shaking their collective heads and saying over and over “she’s not ready”
and that’s before you have to deal with the left/TOTUS/ and The View making you the enemy of America and little children.

Just the same, it would do my heart good to see these folks announce new formats because of the MSM bias – they fail to differentiate between selecting what is news and selecting the next GOP candidate they’s like to play with.

Don L on November 13, 2011 at 8:50 PM

We’ll meet again.

bmowell on November 13, 2011 at 6:15 PM

God I hope not. You’re getting flecks of spittle on my computer.

smellthecoffee on November 13, 2011 at 9:03 PM

We’ll meet again.

bmowell on November 13, 2011 at 6:15 PM

God I hope not. You’re getting flecks of spittle on my computer.

smellthecoffee on November 13, 2011 at 9:03 PM

On the next thread bmowell debates himself for 500 plus comments, and loses.

profitsbeard on November 13, 2011 at 9:23 PM

On this past “Eye of Sauron” debate, time and questions per candidate were not equal (nevertheless the mess online and cut off to allow regular programming to continue).

I am thinking on a lateral solution. On next “debate”, bring up this issue mentioning CBS directly and instead of the stupid 30-second answer, allow the conversation go for up to seven minues or more depending on the duration of the event.

Not a “debate per se” nor what would be called an interview, but essentially prep them in advance to what they offer, where they come from, short bio and goals for when they step in to the WH, if chosen. Seven minutes or more of that w/o infighting would be refreshing indeed, no interruptions from neither of them and keep questions exactly the same. Heck, bring one by one and keep the rest away till they get called in without knowing what each of the other ones said. Play from the old fashioned Miss Universe handbook.

This could cover all issues the country faces, or which candidate prefers to bring to Americans as how to move forward with this. Each will shine on their own, and instead of going back to prior debates set up by lib media, it could raise a lot of viewers.

They want answers and not bickering. Each of their messages can be controlled on their own experience/expertise and point out their strengths; America can see their mistakes, and poll THAT. If they want to go after O’s yugular so be it, throw their kitchen sink and whatnot. Let us evaluate on their proposals to FIX the country NOW.

Perhaps I am asking for too much since the media is used to the Neanderthal way and that’s the way candidates have to work with. Free advertising, and will attract donors according to their views.

Just trying to do some lateral thinking and change it up for our benefit. Now go ahead and bash me.

-PPF

ProudPalinFan on November 13, 2011 at 9:54 PM

Obama Weighs In!!
===================

Obama calls waterboarding ‘torture’ during APEC news conference disputing Cain and Bachmann – @AP

30 Minutes ago
Hot

http://www.breakingnews.com/
******************************

Obama calls waterboarding ‘torture’
Nov 13, 10:29 PM EST
***********************

KAPOLEI, Hawaii (AP) — President Barack Obama says the interrogation technique known as waterboarding constitutes torturing, disputing Republican presidential candidates who say they would reinstate the practice.

Obama called waterboarding “torture” and said it was “contrary to America’s traditions” during a news conference at the Asian-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit.

Republicans Herman Cain and Michele Bachmann said during a Republican debate on Saturday that they would reinstate the technique that former President George W. Bush authorized and Obama banned.

The practice simulates drowning and is viewed as torture by many.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_OBAMA_WATERBOARDING?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

canopfor on November 13, 2011 at 11:18 PM

On the next thread bmowell debates himself for 500 plus comments, and loses.

profitsbeard on November 13, 2011 at 9:23 PM

I’m assuming that this means you have a response. Make your case.

bmowell on November 14, 2011 at 12:12 AM

God I hope not. You’re getting flecks of spittle on my computer.

smellthecoffee on November 13, 2011 at 9:03 PM

Still waiting on a substantive response.

bmowell on November 14, 2011 at 12:14 AM

It’s easy for you gentleman to defend a war when you do not have to look at the maimed and mutilated bodies of soldiers, the dead corpses of women and little children, the destruction of cities and homes and livelihoods.

3000+ innocent people died on 9/11 as a result of a decades-long callous, imperialistic attitude that undermined the sovereignty of other nations, deposed elected leaders and installed dictators and puppet regimes, directly and indirectly lead to the deaths of hundreds of thousands, and stole resources that we had no claim to other than that of being the mightiest nation in the history of the world.

You’re right. The residents of the Middle East should just “take it” and like it in the name of democracy. After all, might makes right…

…and we would certainly have no problem with a mightier nation were they to do the same things here.

bmowell on November 14, 2011 at 12:30 AM

Still waiting on a substantive response.

bmowell on November 14, 2011 at 12:14 AM

You got several. They completely debunked your BS. You ignored them and repeated your BS. You are a boring paulbot of a troll.

Chirp, chirp!

Bye.

JannyMae on November 14, 2011 at 12:31 AM

You are a boring paulbot of a troll.

Chirp, chirp!

Bye.

JannyMae on November 14, 2011 at 12:31 AM

This ‘troll’ has been reading HotAir multiple times a day since it’s inception.

Again, try a substantive response.

bmowell on November 14, 2011 at 12:35 AM

You got several. They completely debunked your BS. You ignored them and repeated your BS.

JannyMae on November 14, 2011 at 12:31 AM

Referencing extra-constitutional laws that contradict Jefferson and Madison(in his later years)isn’t a debunking, so much as a reliance on the same failed foreign policy stance that I argue against.

Feel free to trust your government and lose your liberty.

I, however, will remain skeptical and seek to ensure protections from said government’s overreach and abuses.

bmowell on November 14, 2011 at 12:56 AM

What exactly is it that the residents of the Middle East are taking in the name of democracy that is being facilitated by might?

blink on November 14, 2011 at 12:54 AM

For decades in the Middle East we have undermined the sovereignty of nations, deposed elected leaders and installed dictators and puppet regimes, resorted to actions that both directly and indirectly lead to the deaths of hundreds of thousands, and stole resources that we had no claim to other than that of being the mightiest nation in the history of the world.

Maybe you should do a little research.

bmowell on November 14, 2011 at 1:00 AM

Goodnight. Bedtime.

bmowell on November 14, 2011 at 1:00 AM

Pelley is to the far left of Obama. That is hard to accomplish. The candidates let him question them? Ridiculous!

HellCat on November 14, 2011 at 1:24 AM

God I hope not. You’re getting flecks of spittle on my computer.

smellthecoffee on November 13, 2011 at 9:03 PM

Still waiting on a substantive response.

bmowell on November 14, 2011 at 12:14 AM

What is this, “Occupy HotAir?” Isn’t there some Paulbot blog you can go be annoying on? Go away.

smellthecoffee on November 14, 2011 at 8:54 AM

It’s easy for you gentleman to defend a war when you do not have to look at the maimed and mutilated bodies of soldiers, the dead corpses of women and little children, the destruction of cities and homes and livelihoods.

bmowell on November 14, 2011 at 12:30 AM

And like many of us…you have?
Yes, it is horrible when you look at the maimed bodies of what dictators around the world have done, and heartening at looking what efforts we have taken to prevent that spread of death and destruction.
Chamberlain had the same attitude as you…many “good” people, dead good people, had attitudes like you.
The sheep never like the sheep dog, until the night comes…

right2bright on November 14, 2011 at 10:36 AM

Battle of intellects with Newt? Pelley brought a rusty butter knife to a bombing range.

PJ Emeritus on November 14, 2011 at 12:45 PM

Completely unrelated, but drool-worthy.

Could you just imagine Newt as White House Press Secretary?

PJ Emeritus on November 14, 2011 at 12:49 PM

“Regardless of the context of this exchange, this is a perfect encapsulation of why these media debates are utterly worthless, and why the Republican Party needs to force a format change.”

Can we get a truly impartial debater moderating panel? No, not David Gregory.

the_souse on November 14, 2011 at 12:59 PM

bmowell on November 14, 2011 at 1:00 AM

No, idiot, we helped the mujahedeen depose a Soviet backed puppet regime. What did we get for our trouble? Thanks for the help, but we are giving aid and comfort now to a man who wants to kill you, and we are okay with that. We also saved one Muslim nation (Kuwait) from another an invading force from another Muslim nation (Iraq). Don’t forget Clinton bombing Christian Serbs in Bosnia to save Bosnian Muslims. So tell me Paulbot, what grievances do they actually have. Maybe you should do some research.

celtnik on November 14, 2011 at 1:12 PM

3000+ innocent people died on 9/11 as a result of a decades-long callous, imperialistic attitude that undermined the sovereignty of other nations [rest of insane gibbering deleted].

bmowell on November 14, 2011 at 12:30 AM

So what list of errant foreign policy attitudes explains the sarin truck bomb in Jordan, the Madrid train bombing, the London underground train bombing, the destruction of the Khobar Towers, the murders of Christians in Libya and Egypt in the wake of Arab Spring, the taking of hostages in Beslan, the coordinated bombing attacks in Mumbai, the bombing of the Air India flight off Ireland, the car bombing outside the nightclub in Kuta, Indonesia that killed 350 people…

The list could go on all night. Anybody who actually thinks the 9/11 attacks were because of American arrogance is too f**king stupid to be engaged in discussions, and needs leave foreign policy to adults who are responsible enough to examine facts and respond to them.

philwynk on November 16, 2011 at 11:39 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4