The “under card” had some very meaningful moments with Bobby Jindal emphasizing that we as Freedom Loving Americans have a responsibility to not just listen to the words of a candidate but we must look at the actions of the different candidates. Jindal is saying that we must understand, just because McCain says he is a conservative does not make him one.
I have listened too many of the “experts” and “pundits” give their analysis of who did well and who did not. It is very clear that many or most of these people were watching the “Victoria Secrets” program and not the debate.
I will give you the facts. Again for the most part I will not mention names except for two of the candidates I will put in the last category. I would divide the candidates in the “main event” into three different categories.
The first category has two and a half candidates in it. These are candidates that profess changing or modifying government to solve the problems we face. These candidates believe that government is still the answer and is more capable of solving all problems than is the individual or free enterprise. These candidates would agree with the Europeans when they told the Founders how foolish they were to think people can rule themselves.
The second category has three and a half candidates in it. These are candidates who profess great nations are built on the backs of a great people and government should adhere to the powers granted by we the people to government in the constitution. These are candidates who are advocating, not reforming government, but truly cutting government and restricting government to those powers we the people gave them. These candidates would have stood with Patrick Henry when he explained the Constitution was not an instrument to restrain the people but is an instrument to restrain the government less it the government should come to dominate our lives and our ideas.
The third category has two candidates in it. These two candidates proved last night that a debate focusing on substantive questions and a format that allows the candidates the time to give meaningful answers is their worst nightmare. Trump and Carson were clearly out of their league in this substantive debate. They revealed their limited command and understanding of economic and defense issues. Trump once again faded as questions led the debate into important and significant debate. The most revealing statement of the night came when Trump was asked a question about the TPP. After Trump had rambled for some time on the evils of China in relation to the TPP, Rand Paul reminded the moderators and the American public that China is not a partner to the TPP. I have seen this very significant moment mentioned only once by the pundits and that was by Charles Krauthammer. This is why Trump always fades when meaningful conversations are taking place; he is incapable of participating in and contributing to a meaningful and issues oriented discussion.
Dr. Carson reacted in a very positive way to the recent attacks on him. His answer was clear and all who listened understood the Carson position. The rest of his night was nothing short of a disaster. Unlike his clear and concise answer to the questions about the recent attacks on him, the rest of his answers were rambling and incoherent. People will ramble and fill time with words and statements that have no relevance to the question asked when they do not understand the question and yet feel compelled to speak, or they do not want those who are listening to understand their position. I would have to assume that Carson did not understand the questions since his purpose for participating in the debate was to clarify his positions.
Carson especially stumbled when he was talking about the role of Dodd-Frank and the minimum wage. Unlike other candidates on the stage who answered the same questions, I have no idea what Carson believes or thinks on either of these issues; both critical to the economic future and growth of our economy. Carson apparently does not know, other than some soundbite thought, what he believes.
Trump and Carson have had a very significant and meaningful role in this primary season. People who would normally not be engaged are engaged. This is good. Trump and Carson have broken through the common political practice of adhering to political correctness; a major contributor to the loss of freedom in our nation. Trump and Carson should, for those reasons, remain in the primary race. We as Freedom Loving Americans should appreciate their contributions but must move on to choose that candidate who can best take the fight to the Marxist/Progressives and will, after victory assuming we have an election, immediately start the process of returning The United States to a nation that adheres to rule of law, limited government, divided government, and rule by the people.