If you're new here and enjoyed what you read, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed so you don't miss a thing. Thanks for visiting!

Well, I have to post the funniest part of the night first, of course. There had been some technical problems with the audio system at the debate tonight because of lightning outside - it was messing with the system and making strange noises. The moderator told everyone what was going on, and then went on with the night. A short time later, the moderator was reading a question to Rudy Giuliani - it was a letter sent to him by a Catholic priest saying that the position that Giuliani has taken on abortion of “I personally hate it but I can’t impose that view on others” was the same view Ponscious (sp? too lazy to look up) Pilate had given on the crucifixion of Jesus Christ - he didn’t want to do it, so he washed his hands of it and let others do what they wanted. Which I thought was a very good point, and considering Giuliani is Catholic and this was coming from a Catholic priest, this must have really been hard for him. I wish it had been hard enough on him that he would change his position on abortion, but it didn’t happen.

Anyway, all of that is lead up to this video:

Even if you’re on dial-up and have to take two hours to download that, it’s worth watching. God made his feelings known tonight.

About Mitt Romney: I think he did really well. There are answers that he absolutely knocked out of the park, such as his stance on immigration (Enforce the laws already on the books! which has never been done, and which is really frustrating, so I loved that and so did the crowd) and although this is a strange one to mention, I liked his answer on the first question - “If you knew then what you know now, would you have gone into Iraq?” Romney said basically that that was a non-question, because there was no way to go back in time and change history. Despite what fans of “Back to the Future” might think, there is no time traveling car anywhere on this planet. Asking that kind of question is ridiculous, because it gets us nowhere. Asking him if he supported Bush on the invasion of Iraq (which he did, btw) is an honest question because it’s something that you can actually answer. These mystical “but if you could just go back in time and fix all the mistakes ever made by mankind would you do it” questions are worthless.

The moderator said, “That’s fine, but you didn’t answer my question - if you knew then what you know now, would you have invaded Iraq?” Romney responded by saying exactly the same thing I was yelling at the computer screen (he was so much nicer about it than I was though) “I did answer that question - it can’t be answered!” or something along those lines. I am paraphrasing everything here, but it’s close enough. I liked the fact that Romney stuck to his guns and didn’t let the moderator goad him into a philosophical debate because of a worthless question.

While we are on the topic, I was not very impressed with CNN tonight. I didn’t like the questions, I didn’t like the set-up, I didn’t like the incredibly short amount of time given to answer the questions, I didn’t like the fact that there were about 6 people too many up there (I think we’re down to McCain, Giuliani, Romney, and Huckabee at this point) - I just wasn’t impressed, period. Fox did a much better job last debate than either of the other two debates have done. Show ‘em how it’s done, Fox!

Romney did do a great job, but I’ll admit, as Evangelicals for Mitt mentioned too, that the answer given by Mitt Romney on the Spanish commercials and website wasn’t a strong one. I’m sure he’s kicking himself right now for that one. He could have said something along the lines that his son learned Spanish serving his church on his mission, just as Romney learned French while serving his church on his mission, and that this kind of bilingual talents shouldn’t be wasted, that they should be used, because like it or not, the world is growing smaller every day, and our ability to communicate with people who don’t speak our language is extremely important, and should never be something to be ashamed of.

I know quite a few immigrants from Mexico whose children speak English fluently, but the parents don’t speak much more than yes and no. (Hey, I live in potato and cow country in Idaho. There are more Mexican restaurants in my city than there are stoplights, and I’m not exaggerating in the slightest.) Back to my point: It’s difficult for an older person to learn a new language. I think that many times, it isn’t that they don’t want to learn English because I’m sure that they know, better than anybody, that being able to speak English would help them out money-wise in a very huge way. I think the problem lies in the fact that in order to make ends meet, they are out working very, very hard in the hot sun for 15 - 18 hours a day, and they don’t have the time or the energy to learn another language after all that. Not to mention that they probably don’t have the money to take a class either. So they depend on their children to do their translating for them.

So yeah, there are a lot of people who live in this country who don’t speak fluent English, which brings up my other point on this subject: Even if someone speaks English fairly well, but it is their second language, they are going to understand and appreciate a commercial in Spanish better than one playing in English. Unless they are completely bilingual (which is not very common) Spanish is going to be their stronger language. Why not speak to them in it? Use your strengths! And this is one of Romney’s strengths.

Well, enough of that topic. Overall, I think the debate went well, I think some great points were made, and I think this just reinforces more than ever that this field has simply GOT to be weeded out. I can’t stand another night of listening to 15 second answers because there are 6 too many people up on the stage. Do it quick, and do it now.

Hava

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!