Tag Archives: Fox news
At 9pm Eastern on Monday, Fox News will be hosting the next Republican Presidential Candidate Debate.
Mitt Romney has strengthened his position in the polls since winning in New Hampshire and is set to pull off a win in socially conservative South Carolina despite the religious Family Research Council’s support of Rick Santorum. Super PAC ads vilifying his time at Bain Capitol have both helped and hurt Romney’s campaign as a recent poll showed that voters are split over whether his time with the venture capitol firm would make them more or less likely to vote for him.
Jon Huntsman has dropped out of the race after a disappointing finish in the granite state despite focusing all of his efforts there.
Newt Gingrich and Santorum may be switching places according to a recent Fox News poll. In nationwide surveys, Santorum has pushed into second while Newt has dropped to third. Ron Paul is holding on to fourth with Rick Perry bringing up the rear.
Tonight’s debate will be a key point for Rick Santorum’s campaign. Anti-capitalist rhetoric coming from Gingrich and Perry the last week has left Santorum an opening to establish himself as the Conservative alternative to Mitt Romney.
Ron Paul is holding on to his support from die hard Paul followers and some moderates, but his campaign is struggling to grow a base due to his foreign policy stances and ineffective messaging.
Who will be at the debate:
Bret Baier of Fox News and the Wall Street Journal’s Gerald Seib will moderate the debate.
- Newt Gingrich
- Ron Paul
- Rick Perry
- Mitt Romney
- Rick Santorum
Where to watch:
- Cable: Fox News
- Internet: FoxNews.com
- CDN Live stream
Poll: Who Won the Debate?
I’ve been thinking about this video you’re about to watch all day, and I still cannot find an adequate way to sum it up for you. Alan Colmes can be a difficult pundit to listen to on even his best day, but I think he finally crossed the kind of line that can’t be uncrossed. On FNC, Monday, he was asked to weigh in on Rick Santorum’s recent surge in Iowa. As you can see in the video below, Colmes had many negative things to say about Santorum, so I think he could have easily left out the most offensive one of all. Yet… somehow, he didn’t choose to. In short, he needlessly and mercilessly ridiculed the way that Rick Santorum’s family grieved over one of their dead children. The horrific display starts just after the one minute mark.
I don’t know where to begin. I do know the word “unprofessional” does not even begin to cover it. I know that much for sure. But to be honest with you, this is par for the course when it comes to Left Wing punditry. It’s never good enough for them to just criticize a Republican’s policies. For some reason, they feel compelled to add personal attacks to the mix also. Whether it’s Ed Schultz calling Laura Ingraham a slut, or David Letterman calling Sarah Palin a slut, or an MSNBC panel talking about Michele Bachmann’s “crazed, bulging eyes”, the Left constantly feels it’s necessary to make personal attacks toward Republicans. It’s never good enough to just discuss policies or issues. But this time, it’s too much. When you make fun of the way a family grieves the death of their child, you have crossed a line you cannot come back from.
Alan Colmes must have thought he was on the Jerry Springer show, where you’re paid to goad and insult the audience. Where it’s your goal to stoke fires of indignation. But you know what… Even Jerry’s audience would have no part in what Colmes was selling. I’m ashamed for him. And I’m ashamed America’s top rated cable channel even let him finish the segment. I’m not sure Jerry would have let him stay on after saying that. But like I said… this is par for the course with Liberal pundits.
CDN is not liable should following these tips cost you a girlfriend, wife or significant other. Use these tips at your own risk.
Fox News hosted yet another GOP Primary debate on Thursday night and the entire field was there…well, besides Gary Johnson, but is he in “the field” these days, really? From the top the thing that interested me the most was that this debate seemed to be set up as the “are you conservative enough” debate. I liked that. I like to think the tea party has played a big role in making this election about conservatism more than any other in recent years.
Every question asked seemed to be tinged with the inquiry “Are you conservative enough?” It was obvious Gingrich and Romney were the two candidates under the most pressure to answer that question with authority. Gingrich spent a large amount of his time invoking Reagan and defending himself against the “lobbyist” label. Not surprisingly, Gingrich did his best to remind voters that he basically forced Clinton to sign welfare reform in the nineties…and also he is the smartest candidate ever in the history of Presidential primaries. In case you didn’t know. But in all seriousness, Newt is the smartest guy in the room and it always shows. Newt’s issue on Thursday wasn’t could he convince voters he’s smart, but could he convince voters he is a true conservative. The jury is still out on whether he did that or not, but now that he has attained “front-runner” status, Gingrich is seeing an increase in attacks on his conservative credentials. I think he maintained in this debate. He did not do anything to worry his supporters but I don’t think he made many new fans either. As with the debate last Saturday night, Americans will need to decide if they are satisfied with a Debater-in-Chief, or do they want more when it comes to a Gingrich candidacy.
Ron Paul started out very strong. As always, he is masterful in his understanding of domestic economics. It’s the spending, stupid! Ron Paul was on fire Thursday night until it came to the foreign policy segment. Then Ron Paul said something about warfare vs. welfare in Washington and how Iran would be totally willing to play nice if we weren’t so bossy and suddenly you could hear crickets chirping. Even Paulbots seemed slightly subdued by his answers. Perhaps they knew that even with so much support for his ideas behind him, Paul always manages to sound like a kook to the general audience when he starts talking foreign policy. I’m sure he lost no support at all. Paul supporters are nothing if not loyal (read rabid). However, with surging Iowa numbers in recent days, Thursday’s debate was a great opportunity for him to seize the lead. This performance was not his best, and will most likely not contribute to an Iowa lead. If anything, Paul proved that all Obama would have to do in a general election is bring up Iran and foreign policy and that would be the end of a viable Paul candidacy.
Santorum and Bachmann were definitely the most solid in terms of conservative principals on the debate stage. Santorum gets Iran. It’s a shame the MSM (and many on our side of the media spectrum as well) has labeled him as the “social conservative”. I believe that label keeps people from really hearing his valid and dire warnings about the dangers of a nuclear Iran. Rick Santorum gets Iran. Whether we vote for this man for President or not, that is something that more Americans need to be paying attention to.
Bachmann was also very solid. In her home state of Iowa she seemed comfortable, relaxed and she looked fantastic. Did you know that Bachmann is 55?! I’ll have what she’s having! Bachmann doesn’t garner much mainstream favor with her Midwest accent and her Evangelical brand of Christianity, but the woman knows her facts and she is smart. If voters are looking for a true conservative, she’s one to look at.
Even Perry did well Thursday, looking much more comfortable and even applying a little good natured self-deprecation. Perry has many other qualities to recommend him to the position of POTUS besides his debating skills. In our desperation to find a formidable debate opponent to Obama I hope we don’t overlook other important qualities for a good GOP candidate.
Should I mention Huntsman? Ok, fine. Jon Huntsman was there. He talked. He said stuff. He talked some more. I wish he would stop doing that.
As the debate season rolls on and Republican voters duke it out for their favorite candidates, the process becomes more and more frustrating. People are beginning to express election fatigue already, and are frankly nervous about selecting the right opponent to Obama. That’s understandable. I share those nerves. However, Thursday’s debate should be heartening to conservatives. Oh, the battle still rages, but when the underlying question of a national primary debate is “Who can prove they are the most conservative candidate?”, that is a win for conservatism in general.
Fox News and the Republican party of Iowa will be hosting Thursday night’s GOP Presidential candidate debate in Sioux City, Iowa at 9pm Eastern.
Attending the debate will be Michelle Bachmann, Newt Gingrich, Jon Huntsman, Ron Paul, Mitt Romney, Rick Santorum and Rick Perry.
With former Newt Gingrich still holding the top spot in Iowa polls, albeit by a slim margin over Rep. Paul, he is likely to be the target in another game show style debate.
With only 3 weeks to go before Iowans choose their nominee, the race in that state has tightened. According to a PPP poll, Gingrich is holding the top spot at 22%, Paul at 21%, Romney at 16%, 11% for Bachmann and the rest of the field ending in the single digits with Gary Johnson in last place with only 1% of the survey.
Where to Watch
The debate video below is the entire debate, plus pre-debate commentary from FoxNews.
Tired of paying 13 bucks for a pack of cigs, Bill Schulz finds a place in NYC that lets you roll your own smokes. Buying it loose leaf and putting it through a machine that they have on site, you can assemble your own pack of cigarettes for a little more than three dollars. Hope and change, indeed. The down side? City officials in New York are rumored to be shutting places like this down. (that’s what happens when you get in the way of their “sin” tax)
What do you guys think? Is it even worth going to shops like that to roll your cigarettes? If you’re a heavy smoker, it might be, but if you don’t smoke that much, the added time and hassle might not make it worth your while. Still… It’s nice that this option exists (for now). And if New York City does shut this operation down, how do you feel? Is that the government trying to maximize the taxes it collects from us? Or is it just looking out for our health? (a line I’m sure they’ll try to use)
Let us know in the comments below or on Facebook. And as always, we’re looking out for you. (or something like that)
Last night two GOP Presidential candidates squared off in what was referred to as a Lincoln-Douglas style debate. CSPAN really came through in a grand scale by airing the complete debate, and they should be commended for that decision. The debate was sponsored by the Texas Tea Party Patriot PAC, and was more of an informal sit-down discussion between Herman Cain and Newt Gingrich ,than it was an actual debate. The sit-down was held in Houston Texas, and the timekeeper was Rep. Steve King of Iowa, a staunch conservative favorite of grassroots Patriotic Americans across the nation, including the Tea Party groups that played a major part in rejecting big-government Liberals in the 2010 mid-term elections. Rep. King was obviously chomping at the bit to jump into these discussions, and stated so a few times. Why not allow him or other members of Congress in on some of these discussions in future sit-downs? This sit-down was more informative than all of the past media-circuses posing as 2012 GOP Presidential debates….. combined! This event was limited to 3 main topics: How to reform Social Security, Medicaid and Medicare. Very good choice of three very important problems facing America in the very near future.
The timing of the event was somewhat problematic for politically active college-age voters and football fans in general, as it aired at the exact same time as what was billed as the college football game of the century between #1-ranked LSU and #2-ranked Alabama. (LSU beat Bama in a game of field goals 9-6 in overtime, by the way.) Personally, I flipped over to C-SPAN during a commercial while watching the game and never went back. Yes, the Cain-Gingrich sit-down was that interesting to me, once I caught a glimpse of the totally relaxed atmosphere, and the fact that both candidates were given the full amount of uninterrupted time to explain their solutions to today’s problems if elected as our President in 2012.
Now comes the time for some hard truths that came out of this sit-down. While it should come as no surprise that Herman Cain was in over his head in going up against the super-experienced and very government-savvy Newt Gingrich, what did come off as a surprise was the fact that Mr. Cain was shown to be largely incapable of thoroughly explaining realistic, unique solutions to today’s problems in America during this sit-down. (Other than relying on past soundbites and following Mr. Gingrich’s lead on most occasions last night.) For those who may think I am being too hard on Mr. Cain here, I,ll give you an example:
Mr. Cain constantly says that he will use the “Chilean Model” when asked about how he would deal with our Social Security impending insolvency. He repeats how Chile fixed their SSI problem decades ago, and that he would just use that system here in America. While that makes for a good soundbite, the fact is that Chile didn’t have anywhere near the unfunded liabilities that our SSI program is facing today, their economy is miniscule compared to America’s, and Chile installed their program before their economy grew by leaps and bounds, allowing them to create a sustainable program in a growing economy. The differences can be seen here, from traveldocs.com, in which we see the following related facts:
Chile has pursued sound economic policies for nearly 3 decades. ( America simply has not, as we are now $15 trillion in debt ) Chile’s approach to foreign direct investment is codified in the country’s foreign investment law, which gives foreign investors the same treatment as Chileans. Registration is simple and transparent, and foreign investors are guaranteed access to the official foreign exchange market to repatriate their profits and capital. Net foreign direct investment in Chile in 2010 was $18.2 billion, up 43% over 2009. Chile is moving forward with true free market principles that are based on a very limited and transparent government. This is the direct opposite of the direction Barack Obama is taking America. During the most recent recession, Chile was basically unscathed and actually grew their economy by a very healthy 5.2% 2010. America? Our credit rating was downgraded for the first time in U.S. History.
Simply stating that what works in Chile will work in America just doesn’t cut it as being a viable answer as to how we can fix our SSI problems. Mr. Gingrich laid out a complete plan to reform our Social Security program last night, in which it starts out with making SSI the separate program it was originally designed to be. Take it out of the general budget. Force politicians to quit using it to prop up our national debt that they have racked up over the past 4 decades. Newt elaborated on how the government is basically robbing the people blind and how they are lying to our youth when forcing them to pay into an SSI system that simply will not be there for them when they retire. While that hard truth will have Liberal heads exploding across America this week, this is the exact kind of truth in messaging we must have in America today. Absent this kind of truth-telling, we will never be able to resolve our entitlement programs looming insolvency, and will not be able pass on the American freedoms and prosperity opportunities to future generations of Americans that past generations have enjoyed. While telling the truth about the actions of our government seems to be taboo in most political circles today, this sit-down in the great State of Texas is a must-see event for all Americans. “The truth shall set you free.”
In summary, Herman Cain was the student and Newt Gingrich was the professor during this sit-down. While that was pretty much to be expected, we can’t ignore the amount of very important information that came out of this sit-down on how to move America forward and get this country back to running a surplus, ( as opposed to today’s trillion dollar deficits) by reforming our entitlement programs. Mr. Cain wrapped up this event with a hilarious question to Mr. Gingrich that asked what would Newt do first in his position as Vice President, alluding to the situation that when Cain was elected President, he would select Newt as his VP. Newt was laughing so hard he had trouble answering the question. Finally newt replied along the lines of that he would take a lesson from former VP Dick Cheney and “Not go hunting.” This was a marvelous display of the self-sacrificing teamwork/expressed desire to unite to defeat Obama that the GOP needs to show the people more of as we head towards next year’s presidential elections. A team of 8 dedicated Conservatives (as opposed to 8 individuals fighting against each other) will show the nation they mean business in taking America back from the Liberal Party in 2012.
For those who may have missed the debate, you may watch it in it’s entirety here. Special thanks go out to our friends at the Texas Tea Party Patriots PAC that brought us this very informative event. Thank you again, C-SPAN for airing it. The Cain/Gingrich sit-down will also be re-aired several times on C-Span today. Get involved. Get educated. Watch that event.
Footnote: Did I forget to mention the fact that NO TV station would sign on to air this debate? Why is that? Because they would not be allowed to ask their “gotcha questions” or attempt to embarrass the GOP by starting petty fights, or maybe it was because they couldn’t ask them what kind of pizza they prefer? Fox is supposed to be fair and balanced, yet proved themselves to be just as hypocritical and embarrassing to truth-seeking Americans as the rest of the media puppets of today, when it came time to air this event. Shame on all of you, as that was a huge disservice to all concerned Americans today.
You might have recently seen Herman Cain’s campaign ad that features a middle-aged white guy smoking a cigarette while telling you that “America’s never had a candidate like Herman Cain before.” You may have seen the ad, but you may not have understood it. Well, Cain went on Hannity tonight to explain the ad, and…. I still don’t understand it.
What about you? Do you understand it? Let us know in the comments below. Most of us at CDN are still confused…
Many people thought of Steve Jobs as a Liberal, and I can’t say that I’d blame them. Al Gore is on his board of directors, he had offered to help Barack Obama create a campaign ad, and he was into all sorts of “hippie” stuff in his free time. He even professed a love for the New York Times. So imagine my surprise when I found out he was good friends with Rupert Murdoch. How good of friends? He joked that he would hide the knives in his house to protect Murdoch from his (admittedly) Liberal wife. Upon learning this, I was fascinated.
Walter Isaacson’s biography of Jobs details the relationships that the gifted C.E.O. had with many titans of American business; from Silicon Valley to even the publishing world, Jobs was connected. Steve was convinced that his iPad could do for news papers what the iPod had done for music, and as such, he had set about trying to convince publishers to create content for the iPad. In particular, he was very worried about the New York Times. He felt that they were declining, and that it was “important to the country” for them to figure out how to be successful in the 21st century. He went so far as to make helping the New York Times “his personal project, whether they wanted it or not”. Amazingly, the Times didn’t appreciate Jobs’s help, but do you know who did? Rupert Murdoch.
Murdoch was open to the idea of making a newspaper that caters to the “USA Today crowd” that is only available on Apple’s iPad. Many critics have panned the newspaper (called “The Daily”), but in working on that venture, Steve and Rupert formed a friendship that many would not have expected.
Admittedly, Jobs was not a fan of Glenn Beck or Sean Hannity, but he felt like their shows didn’t represent the Rupert Murdoch that he knew, and as such he ended up developing an admiration for the owner of Fox News. Steve found a kindred spirit in Rupert. They both believed each other to be men who had created and grown large companies that had managed to retain their “culture”. They lamented how companies like Sony had stumbled and failed in that regard. They also shared a desire to change the school text book industry. They saw that the future was in digitizing text books, and with Apple’s iPad, Jobs had a keen interest in seeing that happen.
I found this chapter in Steve’s biography to be very interesting, and if you read the book, I strongly suggest that you don’t skip past it. One of my favorite lines is when Jobs discusses inviting Murdoch to spend his final birthday with him. He tells of how he had to “make sure that Laurene (his wife) didn’t veto the plan”…
“It was my birthday, so she had to let me have Rupert over.” -Steve Jobs
You might remember our story about Adam (Fox News is an evil f**k*ng channel) Levine from the other day. You know, the “rocker” that tweeted he doesn’t want Fox News to play his songs on their “evil channel” anymore. Anyway, the fellas from Fox’s popular late night show, Red Eye, finally got around to responding to the rocker’s tweet, and they did it on air. Enjoy.
So what do you think? Were the Red Eye boys too hard on him? Did they hit him just right? Or should they have dropped the jackhammer on him? Let us know on Facebook or in the comments below. Or G+ or Twitter or Myspace. I just write this stuff, I don’t really make or enforce the rules.
That adorable piece of man-meat in the photo above happens to have a potty mouth, or at least a naughty set of fingers, as evidenced by a tweet he sent to Fox News this afternoon. (we’ll get to that in a second…) But first, who is this cute, little guy in the shortie robe? Why it’s Adam Levine, front man for Maroon 5. You may not recognize him in the photo above, but you might recognize his sweet, falsetto voice crooning in videos like the one below.
And if not, who cares? All you really need to know is that he’s a paint-by-numbers Liberal singer in Hollywood that eats tofu and has a man crush on Che Guevara. (you know the type) So about those naughty fingers of his…. It seems that he sent a random tweet out to Fox news, telling them to not play his music earlier today. I’d tell you why he sent it (or what song triggered the tweet), but even Rolling Stone didn’t seem to know, so who knows? Anyway, here it is below.
But wait…. It gets better. (or more bizarre; take your pick) Keith Olbermann retweeted it and added his own special commentary to it. Take a look.
And then……. TV’s Andy Levy had a response to the Adam Levine tweet. (I know, you already forgot who he is and just wondered who Adam Levine is again…)
So there you have it. Some feminine, socialism-loving “rock star” told the “evil” Fox News to stop playing his music, and no one knows why. But don’t worry, we’ll keep you updated when he finally explains why Fox news is “evil” and why he doesn’t want them to play his songs. As a bonus, I’ll leave you with this cute tweet he sent earlier in the month. Hat tip to BigHollywood.com for pointing this out.
Yeah… as with most entertainers in Hollywood, you’re a conflicted man, Adam.
Let us know what you think of this “professional hippie” in the comments below. Just don’t get your hopes up on the possibility of understanding him; I bought their first CD, and even I can’t figure him out.
You may have remembered Rick Perry’s less than stellar showing at the Fox News/Google debate from Sep 23rd, you know, the one where he said, “I don’t think you have a heart”. Well, it looks like Ricky Perry has spent a lot of time remembering it too, and he’s decided to walk back that statement and better explain some other ones.
Above is a segment of an interview he did with Newsmax.com. In it, he did a much better job explaining what his positions are on many aspects of immigration. Besides the famous “you don’t have a heart” line, he also addressed how he feels about a border fence. He says you can build one, but without personnel to man the fence, it’s not going to keep anyone out. He also brought up concerns about how a border fence would affect private property.
I think he clarified a lot of things in the interview, but I’m still not confident he can give solid answers when he’s under the pressure of a debate. I’ve seen him strike out three times so far, but I would be glad to see himself do a better job in the future ones. What do you guys think? Did this interview help redeem the poor performance he had in last week’s debate? And do you think Perry can handle the next debate, or is he just not good answering questions under pressure? Let us know in the comments below; we’d love to hear from you.
On the same weekend that Morgan Freeman was saying the Tea Party is “racist” and that they want to “get the black man out of here”, Tea Party voters in Florida were voting for a black man. I think the real “problem” is that they were not voting for the black man that Morgan Freeman wanted them to.
Sadly, this is what Liberals do. They will try to discredit and ruin the lives of fellow citizens just to win a game. Everyone is a pawn or a useful idiot to them. In my mind, their disregard for the well being of their fellow man is on par with the mentality that goes behind human trafficking. But, I digress… Here is a video I made summing up my thoughts on Morgan Freeman’s cruel and inaccurate charges. I hope he sees it. Better yet, I hope he apologizes for demonizing people that don’t agree with him. I won’t hold my breath.
In happier news, congratulations, Herman Cain, for winning the P5 straw poll in Florida last weekend. You truly had a breakout week in Florida to include your inspiring performance at the Google/Fox News debate. We salute you.
Sarah Palin might not have been on the stage at last night’s Tea Party Debate*, but she was, however, on the minds of many tweeters. That’s the impression I got from reading my time line, anyway. So… where was she?
We always tease our current president for leading from behind, but if that’s the case, then what is Sarah doing? Leading from an underground bunker? Because that’s what I see… She’s like the sitcom neighbor standing outside of somebody’s house, looking in the kitchen window and watching the person inside doing all the work. Right now, she’s having it both ways. She gets to stick her head in the kitchen and give her two cents about what to cook, but she doesn’t have to sweat like the rest of the people.
At this rate, Tim Pawlenty has put in more work than she has, and he quit the race weeks ago. She shows up at the same events that actual candidates are at, she speaks on the same issues (from friendly bunkers like Hannity’s show), but she never has to take the fire that “real” candidates do. I don’t see her trading jabs with Mitt Romney or Rick Perry. I don’t see her standing under the hot lights being asked questions by Brian Williams. If she wants to be the president, then where is she? To continue the kitchen metaphor, it’s almost as if she’s going to come in with a store bought side dish after everyone else has cooked up most of the Christmas dinner.
Now, I didn’t say I don’t like Sarah Palin, because I do. But if she really is going to run for the presidency of the greatest nation on earth, I’d like to see a little more work out of her. I’d like to see her engage a news outlet that doesn’t rhyme with “clocks snooze”, for starters. I’d also like to see her show up for some of these debates and not just come in after the “weak” candidates have been picked off. And I definitely want to see her make a case for herself to the near majority of Americans that don’t like her. As things stand, her support is narrow, but deep. She needs to broaden it up, and if she wants to sit in the Oval Office, she should have started doing that over a year ago.
I think Sarah Palin can be qualified to be president, but I don’t think that she’s taken the steps that are necessary to get her to the White House. Here’s probably my biggest pet peeve… She had almost three years to work on an image make over, and she pretty much squandered them. She made sure to please her base, AKA the people who will buy her books, but she never tried to undo the (unfair) demonization she suffered back in 2008.
Here’s what she’s done… Imagine there’s a fire in your back yard. But the truth is, you don’t care for your back yard anyway. You don’t really go there. So you let it burn down and then never try to rehab it at all. You just work on your front yard. But even then, you don’t keep up the whole thing. You just focus on some bushes that you really love. Then one day, you realize that you might want to sell the property. But even then, you’re not sure. You advertise on television that you might be selling it, but you never put it up for sale. Well, for whatever reason, there’s a deadline to sell it, so you put in on the market in hopes of making a good sale. The problem is, you never really prepared the property, and while prospective buyers see potential in it, they’re not sure that they’re sold.
And there you have it. Sarah has pruned the hell out her Tea Party bushes, but the rest of the yard has been somewhat neglected. And if she plans to sell the joint, she’s going to need to make some corrections pretty soon.
I like Sarah Palin, I really do. I’ve wanted her to vindicate herself in the eyes of Americans since day one. She has been demonized and persecuted unfairly. She’s been picked over with a finer comb than most candidates who are actually running. And through it all, I’ve always wanted her to make the media look like fools for the abuse they’ve shown her. I’ve wanted Katie Couric to have to drink a two liter of Diet Pepsi to wash down the crow that Sarah would feed her. But it hasn’t happened. Over two years later, we still have a woman who hides in her bunker. She only goes on Fox News, and she mainly stays on the programs that let her talk without being challenged. I’m sorry, but our president needs to be tougher than that. Rick Perry might have a lot of explaining to do about Gardasil, but at least he stands under the hot lights and does it.
I’ll say it one last time… I like Sarah Palin, but as things stand, she hasn’t given me much of reason to respect her as a potential candidate for the highest office in this land. I want her to step her game up, but even then, that would require she takes the field.
*Note: “Last night’s debate” is a reference to the CNN Tea Party Debate that was held Monday September 12, 2011.