Observations from Debate

After watching the second Republican debate Tursday night, I offer a collection of unrelated observations:

Fox's format was much less annoying than CNN's. Time was managed via a simple clock (as opposed to the CNN moderator's constant interruptions and over-talking the response of the candidates.

The audience was enthusiatic bur respectful. It was a full house which was completely engaged.

Newt Gingrich gained the most ground, displaying intelligence and passion in his answers. He set the tone fpor straight-talking, a tone soon adopted by the others.

Mitt Romney continued to hold the high spot. His answers in all areas were practical and clear, except perhaps his history on health care.

Michelle Bachmann continued to exhibit a principled and clear-headed viewpoint on all topics. In a tussle with Pawlenty, she came out ahead.

Compared to Barack Obama, every single candidate displayed positions and an attitude of leadership which was superior. Saying that, Ron Paul and Jon Huntsman are my least favorite.

Several potential candidates were not there: Rick Perry, Sarah Palin, Paul Ryan. The entry of any of these would change the chemistry, and possibly narrow the field.

Liberalism continues to mystify me. The liberal viewpoint was present in the form of the media hosts. They continued to harp on tax increases in any and all economic conditions. They advocate abortion rights, but exhibit overt sexism toward female candidates. When I was a kid, liberalism stood for the rights of the individual; now it seems to stand for centralized statism and collectivism. It's so 1917 ...