11.22.11 Republican Debate Recap Nov23

Share This

Compiled By

F. V. Trebe

gives a fuck about the Oxford Comma. She is also passionate about writing the wrongs in the world.


11.22.11 Republican Debate Recap

Social Issues – Just in case you missed the debates last night… here is a run down. Rick Santorum thinks we should do more profiling of “younger males,” specifically Muslims, Herman Cain can’t seem to get Wolf Blitzer’s name right and wants “targeted identification,” Ron Paul said we need to be careful “protecting the rule of law,” and he doesn’t think Israel needs our help, Mitt Romney (who claims his first name is Mitt) and Jon Huntsman battle about the troops in Afghanistan, and Michelle Bachmann possibly leaks confidential information.

Santorum: The folks that are most likely to be committing these crimes are the ones we should be profiling “obviously Muslims.”

Cain: When speaking to Wolf Blitzer, Cain calls him “Blitz,” whether it’s a cute new nickname or a mistake, Blitzer takes it in stride. However, Cain does let us know that the main objective of a terrorist is that they want to “kill all of us. So we should use every means possible to kill them first or identify them first.”

Romney vs. Huntsman: Mitt Romney and Jon Huntsman battle it out over the amount of troops left in Afghanistan. Huntsman wants most of the troops pulled because Americans are tired of the war and Romney says that leaving only 10,000 or 15,000 would “risk American accomplishments.”

Mitt Romney: Wolf Blitzer began the debate by saying he would like a brief introduction of the candidates and used the example, “I’m Wolf Blitzer–and yes, that’s my real name.” When Romney’s turn came he said, “I’m Mitt Romney–and yes, Wolf, that’s also my first name.” But–it’s not.

Ron Paul: Nope, he wouldn’t back a war against Iran and said Israel doesn’t need our help because they can take care of themselves.

Michelle Bachmann: And last, but certainly not least… It is literally quite possible that Michele Bachmann leaked confidential intelligence — well that, or she was wrong, again, or made it up, or whatever — when she said that “15 Pakistani nuclear sites were vulnerable to jihadist attacks, and that six of the sites had previously come under some form of Islamist attack.”

Since she “sits on the House Intelligence Committee,” (no–that’s not a joke) and “loves to talk about her access to classified information,” it is altogether, entirely possible that she accidentally on purpose let something slip.

Especially considering that “U.S. intelligence and military officials believe that Pakistan has 15 nuclear sites, but no U.S. official has publicly said that all the sites were vulnerable to militant attack or confirmed that any of them had previously come under any form of jihadist attack.”

In other words, she released information that has never been released before, in any capacity. Doh!

But it’s equally as likely that she is wrong, which wouldn’t be a surprise.

Read more at Daily Beast, National Journal, and Gawker.