I thought all 10 candidates did well in representing the large tent aspects of the Republican Party.
Unlike others, whose comments I read immediately afterwards, I was not upset by MSNBC's selection of the (spitting) Chris Matthews as moderator nor was I upset or bothered by the largely nonsubstantial questions posted to the Candidates. In shortform, each candidate had only a very small time in which to respond to questions.
And indeed, most all the questions had a liberal flair of attack versus serious questioning. I figured this to be round one in the Presidential Candidate Debates to determine how well a Republican Candidate showed restraint in not reaching out and slapping the moderator silly. In this matter, all 10 passed the test.
But I do disagree with John Tabin's assessment that Rudy Giuliani did not do well, in specific with regard to the "abortion question". Quite the opposite, I think Mr. Giuliani showed he had long since understood the question and where responsibility for this type of decision lay. His instant breadth of numerous subjects was perfectly contained within his short response time. Further, his responses in re President Bush's handling of the WOT, and on the WOT itself, were the best.
Mitt Romney is a handsome man as well as he is knowledgeable and decent. He did very well. He's very likable.
These were the two big winners, IMHO of last night's debate. And of course, they were flanked by some wonderful fellow Republicans who scored good points themselves. Sam Brownback did a marvelous job being the mid tent Emcee, in my assessment.
In this writer's final analysis, Rudy Giuliani was the fittest, most clearly and immediately ready to assume the position of POTUS.
Scouring the net afterwards, I was able to determine that females on both sides of the aisle thought Mitt Romney was best.
So, let's cut to the chase: Of the two-herein-named GOP Candidates -- would Americans vote for a decent, knowledgeable man versus a pro-Bush, pro-Victory Candidate: The Dem Anti-Corruption and Anti-Victory personifications of two GOP Candidates.
And I witnessed (both aisle) females in support of the anti-corruption candidate over the pro-Victory Candidate.
Of the two issues, WOT and Corruption, the former is real whereas the latter has been largely imaginary -- and both issues were the creation of the Democrat party.
Do we have the will to win this war, I ask myself again this morning, after reviewing much criterion?
On the hopeful side, however, this was only the first round. Allegedly TownHall will be featuring another GOP panel interview on May 15.
Unlike others, whose comments I read immediately afterwards, I was not upset by MSNBC's selection of the (spitting) Chris Matthews as moderator nor was I upset or bothered by the largely nonsubstantial questions posted to the Candidates. In shortform, each candidate had only a very small time in which to respond to questions.
And indeed, most all the questions had a liberal flair of attack versus serious questioning. I figured this to be round one in the Presidential Candidate Debates to determine how well a Republican Candidate showed restraint in not reaching out and slapping the moderator silly. In this matter, all 10 passed the test.
But I do disagree with John Tabin's assessment that Rudy Giuliani did not do well, in specific with regard to the "abortion question". Quite the opposite, I think Mr. Giuliani showed he had long since understood the question and where responsibility for this type of decision lay. His instant breadth of numerous subjects was perfectly contained within his short response time. Further, his responses in re President Bush's handling of the WOT, and on the WOT itself, were the best.
Mitt Romney is a handsome man as well as he is knowledgeable and decent. He did very well. He's very likable.
These were the two big winners, IMHO of last night's debate. And of course, they were flanked by some wonderful fellow Republicans who scored good points themselves. Sam Brownback did a marvelous job being the mid tent Emcee, in my assessment.
In this writer's final analysis, Rudy Giuliani was the fittest, most clearly and immediately ready to assume the position of POTUS.
Scouring the net afterwards, I was able to determine that females on both sides of the aisle thought Mitt Romney was best.
So, let's cut to the chase: Of the two-herein-named GOP Candidates -- would Americans vote for a decent, knowledgeable man versus a pro-Bush, pro-Victory Candidate: The Dem Anti-Corruption and Anti-Victory personifications of two GOP Candidates.
And I witnessed (both aisle) females in support of the anti-corruption candidate over the pro-Victory Candidate.
Of the two issues, WOT and Corruption, the former is real whereas the latter has been largely imaginary -- and both issues were the creation of the Democrat party.
Do we have the will to win this war, I ask myself again this morning, after reviewing much criterion?
On the hopeful side, however, this was only the first round. Allegedly TownHall will be featuring another GOP panel interview on May 15.
