Articles Comments

SENTRY JOURNAL » Uncategorized » Live CNN National Security Debate

Live CNN National Security Debate

I will be live updating starting at 8:00.

8:20- Ron Paul and Newt Gingrich have a good healthy debate that goes to the heart of our national security. At what point does policing future terrorist crimes become too Orwelian? Paul’s stance is that we shouldn’t give up liberty for the sake of safety. Gingrich likely sees his position, of strengthening the Patriot Act, as an Act that doesn’t limit American liberties but the liberties of our foreign enemies. Of course, that’s probably not going to pass for a number of conservatives and most libertarians.

8:30- I actually think that Cain might have the best answer here, which is perhaps the simplist. We need to have an ever evolving screening processess in certain areas (airports for instance). It’s not about being Muslim or from North Africa (necessarily), because they might not be our greatest threat in 2030. Still, the question becomes, what if the people in our federal government decides that conservative bloggers who write under an alias are the threat? Would I then be profiled? What does that mean for me?

8:40- Remember when national security was a lock for the GOP? Our involvement in the Mid-East has completely debacled our approach to national security. Is there any greater evidence than our current debate that illustrates how much damage OBL did to us on 9-11?

8:50- Israel attacking Iran – would you support? Cain took the easy way out with the “only if there was a totally awesome and guaranteed victory to tie my name to”. It has nothing to do with the philosophy. Paul is correct in the idea that we are trying to “buy friends” and only make more enemies…but the entire world is “buying friends”. We need to get deeper into the issue of how we make and break friendships if we’re not giving foreign aid.

9:10- Remember the great Jefferson vs Adams debate about our envolvement in France? It would be worthwhile considering when processing this debate.

9:12- Wolf gets a national security debate back to taxes/super comittee. Amazing.

9:20- This has been one of the most boring debates that I’ve seen in a while. Perhaps it is because I’ve watched them all and we’re learning nothing new from the candidates. The answers are all packaged and the questions are all standard.

At half time I would give Gingrich the lead in the debate, but that’s kind of by default. Sadly, I’d put Romney second, not in terms of personal agreement, but in how well he is debating for his cause (winning). Romney is talking conservative enough convincingly enough to suck in anyone close to being a moderate.

Cain is out of his element. Many, at the moment, are tweeting that Bachman is doing well. I disagree. I just don’t think she is very convincing in her answers…but she is no doubt doing better than she normally does. Perry has had some interesting things to say, but he says them so unwell.

9:30- Did Gingrich really just say that someone’s church activity should be considered when “picking the winners and losers” of his form of limited amnesty?

10:00- This is not a very good debate IMO. Perhaps I’m just getting pessimistic and tired of hearing these issues over and over again. If the election were tomorrow, ladies and gents, I think Mitt becomes our nominee. He simply knows how to get out of his own way whereas the others aren’t polished. Sadly, I think Mitt is actually more conservative than Bush ever was in the debates (at least in his rhetoric). We shall see people.


Written by

Yeah, I tweet. If you want to follow me on Twitter, just click on the link below. I hope you do.

Filed under: Uncategorized

opinions powered by
  • Steve Dennis November 23, 2011 at 5:09 AM

    I have to agree about the debate, it was not very interesting in my opinion. As far analysis, I thought Gingrich was okay until he brought up amnesty and a guest worker program, Mitt seemed a little off but was still pretty good, Perry was better than usual, and Cain is over his head on foreign policy.
    As far as Paul goes I think his comment on the success of the US prosecuting McVeigh was a little odd and Newt nailed hm by reminding him that McVeigh succeeded.
    Steve Dennis recently posted..The Super Committee fails, is anyone really surprised?My Profile

  • Bunkerville November 23, 2011 at 11:26 AM

    I am starting to have to concede that Romney is what it is going to be. Other than Cain, I did think no one crashed and burned.
    Bunkerville recently posted..Mark Levin – A Neurosurgeon calls in about Death Panels, HHSMy Profile

  • Teresa November 23, 2011 at 9:16 PM

    This debate was boring, it so uninterested me I stopped watching about a half hour into the debate. I did see the Ron Paul Newt Gingrich exchange via Youtube though. I mostly agree with Paul, but somewhat agree with Newt. I just don’t think terrorists or suspected terrorists should be treated as criminals. Even the 9/11 Commission’s report concluded that America having treated terrorists as criminals is what led to 9/11. I think we need to learn lessons from past history. But, I agree with Paul about the Patriot Act. It either needs to repealed or drastically changed to be in conformity with our Constitution.
    Teresa recently posted..Super Committee: Both Sides Seriously Committed – Republicans To Finding Solutions, Democrats To FailureMy Profile