I FEEL LIKE IT̢۪S PART of my editor-ly duties to keep up, at least minimally, with what̢۪s going on in politics. That̢۪s why I watched the CNN/YouTube debates for both the Democratic and Republican candidates, aside from the fact that they̢۪re pretty amusing.
The more recent of the two, the Republican debate, took place last week, sometime while I was in class, I̢۪m sure. I watched it later, on YouTube, from the comfort of my room. No pants need apply.
One of the recurring themes from all of the Republican candidates — and actually, all of the Democratic candidates as well — was the necessity for a departure from the problems of the Bush administration.
But where is this change going to come? The questions users asked the candidates — and the answers the candidates gave — did little to set them apart from the neo-conservative values that have governed the operation the White House and the United States for the last seven years.
Some of the pressing issues addressed in the debate included the following questions:
If abortion were illegal, what would the punishment be?
On the death penalty, what would Jesus do?
Should openly homosexual people be allowed to serve in the military?
Do you believe every word of the Bible?
And my favorite: How many guns do you own?
Answers didn’t deviate much from party lines, aside from Mike Huckabee’s admittedly clever, “Jesus was too smart to ever run for public office.â€Â
Even up and coming candidate Ron Paul, whose primary appeal seems to be to conservatives disenfranchised with the Ronald Reagan brand of Republicanism, reaffirmed his affiliation with the party, aligning himself with the rest of the candidates on stage, those running the country, and thus, the current state of the party.
“I am a Republican. I have won 10 times as a Republican.â€Â
This from the candidate whose campaign hinges on exploiting the extent to which he is “different.â€Â
The questions and ensuing “debateâ€Â — which seemed more fittingly a “consensusâ€Â — did little to substantiate these current candidates’ claims of differentiation.
And if the public truly does want “something new,â€Â — and candidates of all parties claim that we do — then these candidates’ apparent fear to stray from neo-conservative values might bode poorly for Republicans, come 2008.
Comments may be used in the print edition of the newspaper. Be sure to pick up next Friday̢۪s issue of The Collegian for featured comments.
The Collegian reserves the right to edit material for length, content, spelling and grammar, as well as the right to refuse publication of any material submitted. All material submitted to The Collegian becomes property of The Collegian.
Whatever • Dec 6, 2007 at 10:49 am
It’s a little early but I wish more questions focused on actual policy instead of should-be trivial ‘moral values’ concerns. I know that’s what people respond to but candidates should have a responsibility to explain their plans to make the country more successful.
We have a serious national debt problem and things could get really messed up in the next 20 years. I think voters, and younger voters, would jump at the chance to get behind a forward-thinking candidate who will ensure a stable future.
We seem so concerned with pie in the sky schemes and ridiculous character-judging rhetoric. Candidates get off easy with these kinds of questions when this (http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5ihnanCfQA-TdKL5GX_BbvRAmRtkQD8TA43H00) is the reality.
We hear about how candidates are “good” based on trivial matters. It’s pathetic for such a strong nation to be so seemingly out of it. Young people are a big part of it, but it’s not only them.
Whatever • Dec 6, 2007 at 5:49 pm
It’s a little early but I wish more questions focused on actual policy instead of should-be trivial ‘moral values’ concerns. I know that’s what people respond to but candidates should have a responsibility to explain their plans to make the country more successful.
We have a serious national debt problem and things could get really messed up in the next 20 years. I think voters, and younger voters, would jump at the chance to get behind a forward-thinking candidate who will ensure a stable future.
We seem so concerned with pie in the sky schemes and ridiculous character-judging rhetoric. Candidates get off easy with these kinds of questions when this (http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5ihnanCfQA-TdKL5GX_BbvRAmRtkQD8TA43H00) is the reality.
We hear about how candidates are “good” based on trivial matters. It’s pathetic for such a strong nation to be so seemingly out of it. Young people are a big part of it, but it’s not only them.