LOS ANGELES, November 10, 2011—Finally, a GOP debate worthy of the candidates has occurred. CNBC got the job done, and for the most part they got it done right.
Lesson learned? When debating money issues, bring in the money experts.
Maria Bartiromo, CNBC
Eight Republican candidates have been sparring during debates across the nation, but tonight's debate in Oakland, Michigan, was one of the better ones. The questions were intelligent and substance trumped style.
Credit has to be given to Maria Bartiromo. She started the debate by going to Herman Cain. It had to be a question about the sexual allegations surrounding him. While the question could not be avoided, it did not have to be the first question, which sets the tone for the evening.
It wasn't. She asked him about whether or not the United States should be prepared to bail out Italy.
This let the audience know right away that the candidates were there to discuss issues. Ms. Bartiromo got it right.
Mr. Cain and Mr. Romney both got it right as well, pointing out that bailing out Europe was not the answer. Running for President requires diplomacy, so saying "Europe, go (redacted) yourself you worthless anti-American wastrels" had to be stated in a polite manner. Both candidates effectively communicated the message.
The evening was not perfect. Jim Cramer screams like a lunatic, and could learn a lesson or ten from Jim Lehrer, Bernard Shaw, and Hal Bruno about how to moderate a debate. Cramer kept substituting his own views and pretending they were questions.
In his case he does this in a non-ideological manner, but an agenda is still exactly that.
Herman Cain, Oakland, Michigan (Image: Associated Press)
He thundered that Italy is "too big to fail." Ron Paul disagreed.
As for Dr. Paul, his appearance was very solid. I have been a fierce critic of Dr. Paul for his foreign policy views (Ron Paul supporters, do not use that one sentence as an excuse to astroturf this column), but on economics he often makes plenty of sense. He was calm, crisp, and educated Cramer as to how an economy actually works.
Mitt Romney gave a fantastic answer when challenged on the idea that he is a flip-flopper lacking loyalty and convictions. He pointed out that he had been married to the same woman for 42 years, has gone to the same Church for 25 years, and worked for the same company for 25 years. That is stability.
Getting back to Ms. Bartiromo, one thing she did very well was go beyond the fact that the candidates say that certain things matter. She wanted to know why they mattered. This is called "depth." Many journalists lack it. She wanted to know why tax reform was the path to job creation, if it was.
This allowed Speaker Newt Gingrich to discuss the errors of Ben Bernanke. Congresswoman Michele Bachmann pointed out that higher taxes lead to jobs leaving this country because capital is mobile. Senator Rick Santorum pointed out that a trade war with China is a terrible approach.
Mitt Romney is open to tariffs on China and Rick Santorum is not. This is one of many legitimate policy discussions that debates are supposed to bring out.
Ron Paul, Oakland, Michigan (Associated Press)
When Ms. Bartiromo brought up the accusations against Mr. Cain, she did so in a professional manner. She was not trafficking in sleaze. Mr. Cain gave a vigorous defense of his character. Mr. Romney refused to go after Mr. Cain when prodded to do so. The crowd emphatically cheered Mr. Cain when he defended himself, and cheered louder when the discussion shifted back to the economy.
Ms. Bartiromo was right to bring it up and then right to not drag it out. Mr. Cain handled it well, and the intelligent discussion of issues continued.
Cramer asked whether corporations have social responsibilities or was Milton Friedman right in saying that the sole corporate responsibility is to maximize shareholder wealth.
The correct answer is that Mr. Friedman was and will forever be right, and that corporate social responsibility is complete garbage. Private citizens writing opinion columns can say this. Politicians cannot. So the pandering that all the candidates offered about how both are important and can coexist can be forgiven.
When Cramer brought up the idea of government intervening to help North Dakota with their oil, Rick Santorum immediately rejected that notion as he explained how Pennsylvania handled the Marcellus shale issue privately.
Bartiromo brought up the very valid point that 9-9-9 could become 19-19-19. Yet Mr. Cain was very prepared on this point, stating that "tax codes don't raise taxes. Politicians do." In theory the plan could become 3-3-3, but most politicians do not lower taxes.
Governor Romney does not support a flat tax. Governor Perry does. Again this makes for substantive disagreement worthy of further exploration.
When Ms. Bartiromo asked Mr. Romney why his 59 point plan does not mention housing, he effectively pointed out that "It's not a housing plan, it's a jobs plan."
Mitt Romney, Oakland, Michigan (Image: Associated Press)
The candidates are willing to let housing prices crash. This is absolutely the right thing to do since attempts at artificially inflating anything is where bubbles come from. This is how Barack Obama was created, with the American media being the helium.
Jon Huntsmann was his typical meandering self. He was asked if he would break up the banks. He never answered the question.
Mr. Cain pointed out that necessary legislation was already sitting in Congress. HR 3000 as held up by "Princess Nancy (Pelosi)."
Mr. Gingrich pointed out the absurdity of answering in 30 seconds a question about 18% of our economy. Mr. Gingrich has plenty of gravitas on the healthcare issue, but he nevertheless complied and rattled off specifics including dealing with "brain science" issues such as Alzheimers.
One question that was complete nonsense was the typical drivel about "coming together." Bipartisanship is code for telling conservatives to shut up and agree with liberals. Yet the candidates gave answers about how they would bring people together. Perhaps Mr. Obama can be asked why he has ripped people apart and pitted Americans against each other.
The one major gaffe of the night was offered by Mr. Perry, and it was a colossal disaster. Mr. Perry has struggled in the debates, but this was his worst moment. He stated that he had three agencies he would shut down, and then forgot what the third one was. He eventually remembered it several minutes later, but the damage was done.
The candidates discussed payroll taxes. Several candidates said they would cut it but Michele Bachmann said no. This was yet another disagreement worthy of further analysis.
When Ms. Bartiromo offered the tired sob story about how kids would pay for college, Ron Paul pointed out that they find the money to pay for frivolities such as cellphones. The message was clear. Government is not mommy and daddy.
Cramer asked the candidates how they would make the stock market safer.
Earth to Mr. Cramer. The stock market is risky. Those wanting safety should buy T-Bills, gold, or put the money in their mattresses. Stocks are risky, and people only complain about the risk when they lose. Further regulations would make matters worse, since in many cases the regulators are either incompetent or more corrupt than the Wall Street individuals they should be regulating. Bernie Madoff was regulated. So was Jon Corzine. The real question should be who regulates the regulators. If regulators would do their jobs properly then people would feel safer.
If there is one complaint about the GOP debates, it is that foreign policy has been virtually ignored. An entire debate on foreign policy must take place. Yet that is not what this debate was about. CNBC is about finance and the debate was run by eople who actually knew what they were talking about asked questions in their areas of expertise.
This led to a better debate than those we have seen so far.
The GOP Presidential Candidates (Image: Associated Press)
The candidates refused to attack each other, allowing Mr. Romney to stay unscathed and Mr. Cain to keep the focus on the issues. They were the winners of the night because they did not lose ground.
Dr. Paul had a good night, but his supporters and detractors are hardened in their support and opposition. Unlike the other candidates, he has a ceiling due to his controversial foreign policy views. This gets his supporters hostile, but that only hurts him. Nevertheless, this was one of his better performances.
Newt Gingrich remains the brain on the stage, but he was eclipsed tonight by not getting enough airtime.
Rick Santorum and Michele Bachmann consistently get less airtime, making it tough for them to gain ground.
Mr. Huntsman still keeps showing up for some reason. His presence in the debates has no effect.
Yet the big winner was CNBC. Outside of Mr. Cramer's railing and flailing, they were polished and professional. Ms. Bartiromo was a good moderator because she knew the subject matter.
Hopefully the debates going forward will be as substantive. Voters deserve this.
Brooklyn born, Long Island raised, and now living in Los Angeles, Eric Golub is a politically conservative columnist, blogger, author, public speaker, satirist and comedian.
Eric is the author of the book trilogy "Ideological Bigotry, "Ideological Violence," and "Ideological Idiocy." Eric is 100% alcohol, tobacco, drug, and liberalism free. After years of dating liberals, he has finally seen the light and now only dates Republican Jewish women. His family is pleased over this. Republican, Jewish women, you may contact Eric above.
Follow Eric on Twitter @TYGRRRREXPRESS
Eric Golub is an independent writer for the Communities. Read more from Eric at his TYGRRRR EXPRESS blog.
This article is the copyrighted property of the writer and Communities @ WashingtonTimes.com. Written permission must be obtained before reprint in online or print media. REPRINTING TWTC CONTENT WITHOUT PERMISSION AND/OR PAYMENT IS THEFT AND PUNISHABLE BY LAW.
