Saturday, November 05, 2011
A Debate Of Substance
Tonight, a Texas Tea Party organization held an hour and a half debate between GOP presidential candidates Herman Cain and Newt Gingrich on budgetary and entitlement reform without gotchya questions, snide comments or personal attacks. The press was banished and both candidates were given as much time as they wished to discuss in detail their specific reforms. Both men ran with the format and gave the audience 90 minutes of substance - fearlessly taking on every Washington sacred cow. What a refreshing change! You can see the entire debate in the video clip below.
Gingrich and Cain would do themselves and the country a service by doing one of these debates each week at different Tea Party events around the country and speak directly to the people about ideas and substance concerning the full spectrum of policy.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
1 comments:
Thanks for highlighting this, Bart! I can't stand insubstantial, sound-bite debates where nothing of value is accomplished. They rapidly lose my interest or make me cringe, which is why I usually only watch bits and pieces.
I think it was absolutely brilliant that Congressmen got to pose questions that they wrestle with, and that it was a pair-wise debate rather than involving all candidates at once (I think all candidates should debate all other candidates, even fringe candidates, just not always simultaneously). This is the kind of subject-oriented debate (discussion?) I'd like to see publicly in our government even when there isn't an upcoming election.
I may tend even further libertarian in my principles than Cain or Gingrich, but either would be an immense improvement. I was impressed by how cordial and supportive they were of each other, as Cain demonstrated right off the bat. The only downside of the debate is that I didn't hear enough about how they are different in order to choose between them, so I'm left with subtleties and issues besides entitlements that weren't really discussed. e.g. I don't quite like Cain's 9-9-9 and I think he should admit its imperfections so it doesn't limit his identity.
I loved how it ended, with Cain asking Gingrich what the first thing is he'd like to do as Vice-President! That was awesome. :) Both men are honest, but Cain's directness virges on artlessness which is appealing in a politician. Meanwhile, Gingrich is artful and brilliant.
After this debate, I think I'd be happy with either a Cain-Gingrich or Gingrich-Cain ticket. I might even lean toward the latter, but it sadly occurs to me that that might be a racial liability, given our national sensitivity to race demonstrated in the election of Obama.
Cheers to more debates like this. I'd love to see a similar, thoughtful debate between them on 9-9-9 and other tax plans, as Gingrich mentioned.
Kevin
Post a Comment