http://cnettv.cnet.com/av/video/cbsnews/atlantis2/cbsnews_player_embed.swf
This video contains the entire debate, not just the first hour that was shown on TV. It’s a beautiful quality video this time, by the way, even full screen.
It’s worth listening to the logic of people like Gingrich, absolute moral bankruptcy: covert operations “all deniable”. Deniable – why? A big question.
16:00 on: Huntsman is making great sense.
After 24:00 – Bachmann: “The table is being set for a nuclear war against Israel”.
27:30-ish: Santorum has a good grasp of “real politik” (as they say).
Good for Ron Paul for standing up against torture against the other nincompoops. You’ve got to ask “What are you fighting for?” There’s no point in fighting if you’re offering the same prospectus as the enemy. Huntsman too. Good for him.
Every time Perry talks it’s like “special needs time” and in saying that I feel it’s demeaning to special needs people to even compare him to them. Oh well, he has no chance- hopefully.
About 47:00: Was that a bit of a sinister statement by Huntsman that of 500 million young people in China there are 80 million bloggers whose actions “will bring China down” and he gestured downwards, while the US goes up (gestures). I don’t understand exactly what he means by that. Does he mean that democratic reform in China would bring China down?
59:00 – Cain’s logic is “Anyone we torture is a terrorist”. Wait till it’s your son or daughter.
61:00 – I’m with Ron Paul on lawlessness and legality. The crowd sounds nervous, which is a good sign.
70:00 – Bachmann wants to copy China’s lack of social security. “China is growing”. So if you want to be ants in an ant colony, vote for Bachmann.
75:00 – Santorum “You don’t cowboy this one.” Made sense in context (responding to hijack of a nuclear weapon in Pakistan and he meant just sending in special ops troops by helicopter etc.)
77:00 – Huntsman very authoritative on the “loose nuke” question.
That’s it. I will be a world authority on the policies of the candidates soon. I still predict a Romney / Huntsman ticket. However, the winner doesn’t always pick a running mate from the other candidates. It happened last time but it’s not a given. I was wondering if I could get a bet on that pairing, probably longer odds than the individual candidate, so I checked on William Hill .com and you might be interested in the odds they offer at present. Here you go:
2/5 Mitt Romney
6/1 Newt Gingrich
8/1 Herman Cain
10/1 Rick Perry
20/1 Ron Paul
28/1 Jon Huntsman
100/1 Rudy Giuliani
100/1 Michele Bachmann
“Others on request”. They don’t even quote Santorum – and where did Giuliani come from – is he even in it? A lot of money on Romney, obviously.
Stephen Moran's Museum of Illusions 