DEMOCRATS!!!

"In a stunning move, House Democrats today revealed they will attempt to rewrite House rules that have gone unchanged since 1822 in order to make it possible to increase taxes and government spending without having to vote and be held accountable."

National Review Online
May 16, 2007

Whatever happened to taxation without representation? If these thieving, lying, cheats succeed why shouldn't the rest of America take their constitutional right under the fourth amendment for a walk straight to Washington D.C. and take back our government... at gunpoint! Throw every last Democratic Bastard OUT on their ears!

THIS congress-- particularly the Democratic leadership and every sorry bastard that votes in favor of making our voices moot on ANY discussion of taxation --is the most corrupt congress this nation has ever seen.

BAR NONE!!!

And they've held the reins of power just under four months! Imagine what they could do if given a year... or more!!!

Call your congressman, call your senator. Demand they denounce this stratagem. And demand accountability from every single thief who even suggests this is a good idea.

"I have fought a good fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the faith: henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give me at that day: and not to me only, but unto all them also that love his appearing."


2 Timothy 4:7-8

I've added a couple of new links in the 'Founded on Rock' category. My motivation for doing this [and I'm surprised at myself for not doing it much much sooner] was last post's discussion in comments about God and Science and evolution.

I don't believe Christianity and Science are mutually exclusive disciplines. To my mind they are mutually complementary. For if God created man and his capacity for reason, He created Science as well.

The first is God and Science

The next is Reasons to Believe

A little science never hurt anyone... Least of all Christianity!

Is online and available for viewing now... Haven't found a transcript yet, but then I don't expect to. The video is also available on YouTube.

"You've taken a battle, but that's all it was-- a battle. Humanity needs me. Now more than ever. I have the virus. I have the will. And I will not fail."

Dr. Thomas Werner Mittlewerk
Formerly of The Hanso Foundation

Al Sharpton get's called out for bigotry!? America's premiere bigot is accused of religious bigotry!? What else is new? He once had some very nice things to say about 'Jew interlopers' and now he's added Mormons to his long list of peoples to hate.

Huh! Imagine that.

Problem is, Sharpton's right. Mormon's don't believe in the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob; They don't believe in the God who clothed Himself in flesh and took the name of Yehoshua (Joshua)... you know, the guy the Greeks called Jesus?

In Mormonism, Jesus is a creation, the product of relations between god and his goddess wife who used to be people from another world (Mormon Doctrine by Bruce McConkie, pp. 192, 321, 516, 589). Jesus is the literal spirit brother of the devil and of you and I (McConkie, pp, 192, 589). Also, in Mormon theology, God has a body of flesh and bones (Doctrine & Covenants, 130:22.) as does his wife and together they produce spirit offspring in heaven who inhabit human bodies on earth.

And the book of Mormon, written by Joseph Smith is an archeological fraud... Mormons in Transition. Where multitudes of evidence exist to support the historicity of the Bible, none exists for the cities and peoples of The Book of Mormon...

The simple truth is Mormonism is NOT a 'brand' of Christianity. It is not Christian.

And according to the doctrine of Mormonism Blacks are 'cursed' with dark skins because of Cain-- the pigment of their skin the 'Mark of Cain'.

"THE NEGROES ARE NOT EQUAL WITH OTHER RACES where the receipt of certain spiritual blessings are concerned, ...but this inequality is not of man's origin. IT IS THE LORD'S DOING, is based on his eternal laws of justice, and grows out of the LACK OF SPIRITUAL VALIANCE OF THOSE CONCERNED IN THEIR FIRST ESTATE [the Mormon pre-existence]." LDS "Apostle" Bruce R. McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, p. 527 - 528, 1966 edition, emphasis added.

"Though he was a rebel and an ASSOCIATE OF LUCIFER IN PRE-EXISTENCE, ...Cain managed to attain the privilege of mortal birth.... [H]e came out in open rebellion, fought God, worshiped Lucifer, and slew Abel.... AS A RESULT OF HIS REBELLION, CAIN WAS CURSED WITH A DARK SKIN; HE BECAME THE FATHER OF THE NEGROES, and THOSE SPIRITS WHO ARE NOT WORTHY to receive the priesthood are born through his lineage." LDS "Apostle" Bruce McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, pp. 108-109, 1966 edition, emphasis added.

And according to Mormon tenets, Blacks weren't allowed to serve in the Mormon priesthood... until 1978. What, allow a cursed descendant of Cain to serve in the Mormon Tabernacle!? Scandalous!

"Negroes IN THIS LIFE are denied the priesthood; UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES can they hold this delegation of authority from the Almighty." LDS "Apostle" Bruce R. McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, p. 527, 1966 edition, emphasis added. (See also LDS Pearl of Great Price, Abraham 1:20-27)

As much as I detest Sharpton, he's right about that much. His bigotry remains, however, in that he chooses to speak condescendingly of Mormons. Mormons, in and of themselves, aren't monsters! Donny and Marie turned out okay. Is Mitt Romney really a bad guy simply because he's Mormon? Orrin Hatch, republican senator from Utah isn't a monster. But there are, of course, exceptions. In every race, caste, class and religion, there are exceptions... Monsters aren't cultivated from a single plot of land, they spring up indigenous on every acre of dry land as far as the east is from the west. But Harry Reid springs immediately to mind as an example of a Mormon gone bad.

Still. Sharpton is merely reaping what he's sown, especially in light of the Imus imbroglio. Sharpton IS a bigot, though everyone but himself seems able to see it. He IS a bigot, despite the truth he spoke of Mormon's.

The Reverend Al Sharpton-- a Black man speaking truth to Bigotry.

It was once pointed out to me by someone equally tired of poison pills,

"Of these things put them in remembrance, charging them before the Lord that they strive not about words to no profit, but to the subverting of the hearers."

II Timothy 2:14

...but I, with the patience of stone, could teach mules stubbornness.

When I found blogging, about 5 years ago, it was all mostly online diaries and nothing about which to get ones kettle whistling. I didn't give God more than a passing thought, or more than casual acknowledgement. Church visits were rare, but not unheard of, and as a Christian I was languishing in too many of my fathers' sins, handed down to me, and me hoping deep within myself to pass them no further down the line. Being single, never married... no offspring... was, as it were, my one 'saving grace'. Another of my fathers' sins was a quiet detachment from attachments to friends, loved ones, and an inability to trust enough or long enough to build friendships.

As a result, I hide in my solitude. And I've been fine with this. Until "Pocket Full of Mumbles"... and one night with an answer to fervent honest prayer and the overwhelming presense of God standing in the midst of an MRI... comforting me in a very very very tight place. Until that day, God was someone you went to when you needed something. Jesus was the name with which you signed-off each request. Nevermind the years and amount of study that served me prior to that night, nevermind the hours I spent absorbing scripture, nevermind the earnest attempts to hear his voice and find, as Paul too sought, succor from a thorn in the flesh. But aside from the initial rush and the accompanying knowledge that I belonged to Him one fall evening in 1976, He remained silent and enigmatic. Until two years ago... the night of that MRI. That is my testimony! That God is real. And He loved me enough to set aside His glory to put on rags and walk in filth for thirty and more years, only to die painfully on an altar hewn by rough and evil men.

For me.

I don't know what He wants with me, but I know He wants me. And He wants me in His will. His will for my life. The purpose he purposed in my shaping before the foundation of the world, and like the shapes of rain pulled inexorably from the heavens to shape stone over seasons, centuries, and ages, what say had I, the stone, in the shaping?

'What is my purpose?' I ask. He is still silent. Perhaps I am not asking the right question. Perhaps I'm not ready to hear. Perhaps I am not yet in His will. Maybe there is still too much of my father in me. Whatever it is, I am at this moment, angry. And shut-off from the intimacy of friendships.

Yet there it is... The answer: I am angry. I can rationalize why that is, and my rationalizations would carry the weight plausible undeniability, for we are, each of us, shaped by the rains of experience; moments, hours, days, years... and decades. I am a product of this sinful world, and I don't want to do good. At least my flesh doesn't!

I am angry. Angry enough to say enough is enough, and resort to taking a stand. Who do I have if not Jesus? WHAT do I have if not Jesus? And in the midst of a spiritual war I cannot see, it's bad enough that I have to learn, at so late a stage, to put on the whole armor of God, and brandish the weapons He's provided me, to fight an enemy I can't even see, but now I have to fight, almost daily it seems, an enemy that claims to be a brother in arms!

"Of these things put them in remembrance, charging them before the Lord that they strive not about words to no profit, but to the subverting of the hearers."

Which brings me to my point.

Trying to make a difference. Doing what I can with what He has given me, while the one I should be able to rely upon to watch my back, is instead bent on tearing down each tabernacle I build.

I once sent an email to Dan Trabue, wherein I wrote, "I've hesitated in [the] past to call you brother-- though I have on occasion --but no more. We'll laugh about all this on the other side. That, at least, is my hope."

It was a concession, as much as a call for truce. Yet it seems now I've conceded ground that was not mine to concede, to a man for whom the word truce, it would further seem, was, and remains, utterly meaningless. I say, 'it would seem' because he offers few concessions of his own, choosing instead to be a stumbling block to everything I'm trying to do. Were his actions toward me merely the honest attempts of a brother to keep another brother 'honest', his comments would not be almost solely bred to division and strife, and the tearing down of tabernacles.

I cannot say that Dan is NOT a child of the Most High. Only God knows for certain, but the author of MY salvation gave me a Comforter, Who is the express image of Him every bit as much as Jesus is of His Father. And this Comforter will never lie to me. Jesus said I will know a tree by its fruit, and so the Spirit within me should agree with Dan if we were brothers. But since we agree on so very very little, what else am I to believe? I sense nothing in my spirit to lend me toward the belief that Dan and I are brothers.

I cannot say Dan IS a child of the Most High God. I see no evidence of it. What I do see is contention and strife... evidence of the Enemy... not God, not the love of Christ. Not the loving rebuke. Instead, his love seems reserved only for those whose doctrine marches to drums of deceit and disillusionment, rather than the trump of God.

After his most recent comment at my previous post (comments have since been closed for reasons I may or may not disclose later), I decided to google "Dan Trabue" & "I'm on a mission", and this is what I found (emphasis wholly mine)...

"...

"If pacifism is a "pet issue" of mine, it's only because I see it as part of my mission to confront and challenge the church to biblical orthodoxy and sticking to the message of Jesus - an area in which, in my mind, the church is largely apostate.

"Jesus spent much time talking about peacemaking, economic issues, challenging the powers that be - in short, the Good News as Jesus defined it. The Church has, instead, made the gospel about opposition to abortion, gays, sex, drinking and cussing and a few other areas (with some differences depending upon the flavor of religion). And so, I'm "on a mission from God..." a task I'm sure you wouldn't want me to shirk?

..."

Posted by Dan Trabue
March 29, 2006
@ Stones Cry Out

He began that comment with the words, "I apologize if what I've done is "thread-jacking..." And the irony therein is that this is something Dan is very good at. That, and sowing discord among the brethren... subverting the message... and seeking, as the fowls of the air, to devour what little seed I am able to sow. What's most frightening to me about this comment is Dan's equating of 'talking about peacemaking, economic issues, [and] challenging the powers that be' with the Gospel, for nothing could be further from the truth. The Gospel can be summed up in a single verse, John 3:16, "For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son that whosoever believeth on Him should not perish but have everlasting life". That's it. Nothing about raking leaders over the coals, establishing welfare states, or endless rounds of peace talks.

He has had a virtual free pass here because I was unwilling to give up on him, but I will not continue to allow ANY 'sweet as honey' snake to lay unmolested on the greensward of this blog any longer. Neither will I turn comment moderation on. I don't even ask him to leave. But neither will I continue to debate points of scripture with Dan... or ER. I won't give what I deem 'ignorance' a platform. To that end I will delete any comment that subverts or seeks to destroy the seeds I sow here.

I check my mail often. Any comment I see as trying to tear down what I am trying to build will be deleted.

Yes, I'm angry. But not without cause. Praise God, I don't hate anyone! And as far as I'm concerned Dan hasn't anything to apologize for... he is simply being who he is, and because of this he's merely speaking "...evil of those things which [he] know[s] not: but what [he] know[s] naturally, as brute beasts, in those things [he] corrupt[s] [him]sel[f]." Jude 1:10

But it's not my place to judge Dan. Instead I'm choosing to obey the Lord by marking him and avoiding him, per Romans 16:17-18

"Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them. For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple."

I'm not perfect. Never said I was. But I am, by the blood of Jesus, made righteous in HIM. And whatever anyone may think to the contrary, I don't have to put up with the kind of crap I've freely allowed to be posted here thus far.

Yes, Dan's on a mission, but not from God; every comment he leaves at every blog he finds fault in, appears to seek confrontation... to confront the Church and drag it kicking and screaming to a new orthodoxy... suffused to its reeking and brittle bones with the commandments and doctrines of men... making proselytes that are two-fold the children of hell... seeking to divert any seeking soul, at this blog and others he finds fault in, from finding faith in the very Lord he claims to love. Well not here. Not anymore. He may not feel it necessary to defend Christ, but I do.

At this point I couldn't care less if I didn't receive a single comment from this day forward. There will certainly be no comments on THIS post! Anyone have anything to say? expletive-filled criticism? glowing praise? anything in between? You can find my email on my profile. Use it. Or don't... as you see fit.

Have a very nice day, and may God richly bless you all! and give every man according as his work shall be.

"He that is unjust, let him be unjust still: and he which is filthy, let him be filthy still: and he that is righteous, let him be righteous still: and he that is holy, let him be holy still.

And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be."


"...Even so, come, Lord Jesus. The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen."

[What follows arrived in email just under an hour ago. I highly doubt they'll mind my posting here in toto]


Just a quick note to let you know that the debate went wonderfully.

When I say "wonderfully," I have to qualify it. It was like an open air with an unreasonable and loud heckler. The "heckler" in this case wasn't just the two atheists we were there to debate, but the fifty atheists in the audience. As per ABC's stipulations, the audience was composed half-and-half -- fifty Christians and fifty atheists. The Christians were very quiet and polite -- the atheists weren't. It was very apparant who was who in the audience. It seemed that no matter what we said, it was completely ignored by Brian and Kelly (the atheists) and then followed up with their anger, mockery, and insults. But as with a good open air, the heckler is simply a platform to speak to the crowd who is listening. In this case there is a crowd of millions who will hear clear, concise evidence for the existance of God. How incredible. So I am delighted, because of what we were able to say.

Below is the press release and the information you need to watch the debate Wednesday. Thanks for your prayers.

God bless,
Ray Comfort

A 100-year-old Baptist church in the heart of New York was the venue Saturday for an ABC debate on the existence of God. Actor Kirk Cameron and best-selling author Ray Comfort "faced off" against two atheists from the "Rational Response Squad," in a debate moderated by ABC Nightline's Martin Bashir.

"We were delighted ABC gave us the opportunity to present our case," said Comfort, "but we were taken aback by the aggressive nature of the debate. The audience was evenly divided between believers and atheists. The believers were very polite and quiet, while the atheists were extremely vocal. 'Nasty' is an appropriate word. We felt life a couple of goldfish in a pool of hungry Piranhas, and were getting a sense of what the early Christians must have felt in a Roman coliseum."

In the debate, Comfort presented proof for the existence of God, while Cameron offered evidence to show that the theory of Darwinian evolution is unreasonable and unscientific. They pointed evolutionists to www.IntelligentDesignVersusEvolution.com, where they're offering $10,000 to anyone who can provide a genuine, living transitional form supporting evolutionary claims. The debate also addressed such questions as "Who made God?" and "What about the heathen in Africa who've never heard about God?"

"The atheists made it very clear they didn't like what we said," Cameron explained. "They were full of mockery and sarcasm, belittling the many great scientists and intellectuals who recognize the existence of a Supreme Being. But the average American isn't viciously anti-God. In fact, polls show that more than 90 percent believe in His existence. Our hope is that the program will cause people to think deeply about the evidence presented, and challenge them to consider this most important issue of life."

While Comfort and Cameron will have to wait until Wednesday to see what the public thinks of the debate, they report that they've already received encouraging email from one audience member who commended their presentation: "Good job last night! Although I received my invitation to the show via the atheist camp, I must confess that I was impressed with the two of you (and that I was embarrassed by at least two atheist audience members, whose hostile questions bordered on heckling--I admired your calm and courteous responses). ...I find the 'Design means there was a Designer' argument to be perfectly logical. I just have yet to come across convincing evidence that this Master Designer of the Universe inspired the Judeo-Christian Bible.'"

Another encouragement, Comfort added, was that both mothers of the two atheists in the debate are Christians--one of whom was in the front row of the audience. Comfort stated, "Both sincerely thanked us for our stand, and said that they were earnestly praying for us."

The entire debate will be streamed Wednesday, May 9, at 1:00 p.m. EDT ( 10:00 a.m. PST) on http://abcnews.go.com/nightline/, then again at 2:00 p.m. EDT (11:00 a.m. PST) on http://abcnews.go.com/abcnewsnow/, and an excerpt will be aired that night on ABC's Nightline.

We will have the debate available for viewing online from our video sharing accounts. The videos will be available for viewing after ABC streams it live on their website Wednesday, May 9. You can visit the following link to find the video when it is available. Keep checking after ABC streams it live.

I don't usually remember my dreams, and I'd never actually post them if I did, and yet here I go...

For some reason my dreams always involve rescuing someone from something, or performing heroic deeds, call it my sub-conscious 'Walter Mitty' but last night's was far different, which is why I'm making note of it.

There are two parts to this one; both related somehow, beyond my ability to understand, and yet very different.

I was basically minding my own business, driving around on a cooler looking golf-cart, call it a 'sports-cart'. And I was driving it everywhere, even into what looked like a post office, but was a more official place. At one point I abandoned the cart because the people inside told me I shouldn't be driving it inside the building so I drove it back outside, parked it, and walked back in to explore.

The next thing I knew there was a bunch of people in there, many of them dressed in period clothing-- I'm wanting to say 'Roman' but that wasn't quite it, it was more a mix of Roman and Victorian.

There were people there who knew me, though I cannot now remember if I knew them. Just outside this building was a small pond surrounded by a boardwalk on the building side, and stone and grass on the outward side. Some of these people were admiring the water, but I looked and couldn't see any life, no fish at all, until I saw an eye beneath the water turn its gaze toward me. It was then that I discerned the shape of a snapping turtle, a BIG snapping turtle and I pointed it out to the aforementioned period-dressed folk, who then smiled and thanked me. I can only assume that the reason no fish were in the pond was because the turtle had eaten them all.

I then reentered the building and saw a group of people to my left sitting and chatting. I approached and saw that there was one seat available on a small sofa beside an attractive young woman, and completely contrary to what my waking-self would do, I sat down next to her and put my arm around her.

She didn't pull away and none of the others, among whom were a few who knew me, raised an eyebrow or acted as though what I had done was the least bit remarkable or inappropriate. It was then that my waking-self realized what I had done and my dream-self [oddly subject to my waking-self's sensibilities] apologized and tried to pull my arm away from around her shoulders [my arm wasn't merely over the back of the sofa but over her shoulders and my hand upon her opposite shoulder and upper arm... affectionately] but she quickly moved her hand [her right hand-I was sitting on her left] and grasped my retreating hand and pulled it back to where it was, affectionately draped across her shoulders.

Then she said something odd [to my waking-self. I get the impression that my waking-self was along for the ride on this dream which is perhaps why this dream was markedly different from the ones I usually remember]:

"You can meet with Mr. ______ [(?)...began with a 'W'] on Wednesday at _______ [(?) a public place... restaurant? office? Neither my dream-self, nor my waking-self recognized the name]. He's my pastor at Cloverdale Baptist Church. We can't see each other unless he approves. Do you go to church anywhere?"

I don't remember responding to her question, but my waking-self was thinking 'Praise God, I do!' And yet I was also troubled by what she said [whether troubled in my dreaming-self or waking-self I cannot now say. Perhaps both], but I can't say why [I didn't immediately respond], perhaps it was because I had just met her, even though she had yet to give me her name.

I still don't know her name.

I do remember being troubled by the fact that I had to meet someone who wasn't her father [of that I am sure] to win approval to date her. And why her pastor? Why HIS approval?

[Interesting note on Cloverdale Baptist Church. It's less than two miles from where I live, and less than one mile from the flowershop where I work mornings. About six weeks ago the boss-lady, her chief designer, and myself spent an entire afternoon at Cloverdale Baptist Church dressing it for a wedding. Our floral designer will not make arrangments at the shop then cart them to the church because there is too much risk associated with transporting them. So everything; flowers, containers, filler, everything you can possibly imagine a designer needs to create arrangements... glue-guns even!... was carted to the church and carried to the sanctuary where he put everything together. It took about 4 hours... About two hours longer than I thought it should take!]

I was also troubled by feelings of doubt despite the voice that kept saying, 'this IS what you've been praying for...'

Call me old fashioned but I'd like to get to know someone before I contemplate marriage, and that is exactly the impression I received from her in her telling me what would make our seeing each other possible... 'Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers' [2Cor 6:14], and was the context of my dream-self's recollection of my walking-self's adventure at Cloverdale Baptist Church. This woman was talking potential marriage. Hmmmm.


The dream moves on from there...


In the same building was a Roman style bath, though not as spacious as the baths of ancient Rome. I was in a smaller room-- a changing room I believe --with a group of men in toga's armed with short-swords. There was tension in the room, even in me. Someone was breaking through the outer wall and these men with swords were waiting for the stone and tile to tumble in and when it did they began attacking the men trying to climb through the hole.

I had no sword. I was in a corner where I could look through the doorway and see the far wall of the other room. That wall was being broken through as well, but because of the din of fighting in the room where I and the sword-wielding toga men were, they didn't hear the sound of crumbling stone and tile in the other room.

Seeing what was about to happen I ran from the room I was in, into the room where the new attack was emerging, and into a rest room of sorts with stalls. There were other people in this room. Seven men. All were attempting to hide somewhere. I managed to find a stall to hide in, which was small enough that I could lift my feet up, pressing my back to one side and using my feet and legs against the other to keep my body suspended above the floor.

There came a great noise of fighting from the outer room and soon the rest room's door swung open and the seven hiding men were herded out.

Lastly, a man who looked remarkably like Brad Pitt opened the door where I was hiding and asked, 'How do we chose so that we will overcome the others?'

I stood up and said, 'We choose first.'



And that's where my memory fails me. Was I leader to this second party of attackers that included, of all people, Brad Pitt? I don't know. Yet if I was, why would I have attempted to hide myself unless I couldn't have been sure who would win the battle in the other room? As to why I responded to Brad Pitt the way I did, I can only assume I said 'We choose first' because when choosing from seven, he who chooses first ends up with 4 while he who chooses second is left with only 3.

Bizarre, I know. Was it just a dream? My own 'Dream no. 9'?

If you read my post detailing the quality of questions asked of Republicans last week, this post detailing the questions asked to Democrats is little different in terms of format. I won't list by number the questions I thought were fair since the ones I object to are so few in number... 4 to be exact.

Judging strictly by the pie chart above, the questions were markedly different. Night and day different.

Forget any initial commentary on the debate itself for now, let's move on to the questions I had 'problems' with.



Fair Questions: 51


Bogus Questions: 2
[By their corresponding numbers]

34. Bogus only because it displays colossal ignorance on the part of ‘Auggie’ who seems to have no understanding of the differences between 'Profit' and 'Profit Margin', and well as no grasp of the 'Laws of Supply & Demand'.

55. This last question hearkens back to one of Matthews' ridiculous questions to the Republicans. If it was bogus there it's bogus here. Biden, by the way, deftly answered, 'Absolutely, yes, there's a winner. Taking myself out, I'm looking at a bunch of winners right here.'


Irrelevent Questions: 2
[By their corresponding numbers]

30. This one came from an online viewer, and offers nothing more than an opportunity for the candidate to preen and strut for the camera. A pointless question.

52. A pointless question accept, perhaps, to give the candidate an opportunity to engage in a game of one-upmanship with Al Gore, and John Edwards. Over all, a thoroughly stupid question.



I was very impressed with Brian Williams... a complete professional.

What really get's me about this debate, is that the questions were honest, prefaced, and not the least bit 'softball'. These Democratic candidates would have received the same fair treatment from FOX News, yet several of these 'Candidates' feared they'd be mishandled by 'Republican shills' at FOX, and yet the treatment they received at MSNBC was anything but a cake-walk.

This is the kind of debate the Republicans deserved... but didn't get.


The Questions:

_________________________
(s) = Email or Audience question asked by David Stanton
(w) = Brian Williams


1. Senator Clinton, your party's leader in the United States Senate, Harry Reid, recently said the war in Iraq is lost. A letter to today's USA Today calls his comments "treasonous" and says if General Patton were alive today, Patton would "wipe his boots" with Senator Reid.

Do you agree with the position of your leader in the Senate?

2. Senator Biden, same question to you, which is: Do you agree with Senator Reid that the war is lost?

3. Senator Obama, you have called this war in Iraq, quote, "dumb," close quote. How do you square that position with those who have sacrificed so much? And why have you voted for appropriations for it in the past?

4. Senator Edwards, you made a high-profile apology for your vote in favor of the Iraq war resolution. You have said, quote, "We need a leader who will be open and honest, who will tell the truth when they made a mistake."

Was that not a direct shot at your opponent, Senator Clinton?

5. Congressman Kucinich, do you think one can be against the war and yet still fund it?

6. Governor Richardson, if you were representing New Mexico in Congress, despite your opposition to the war, do you think you would vote to fund the troops?

7. Senator Dodd, as I understand it, you've cosponsored something called Feingold-Reid, which would, in effect, cut off the funding spigot by about a year from now... and draw the troops out. Is that possible, the notion of no more troops in Iraq?

8. Senator Gravel, for those who may not be familiar with your past, two-term U.S. Senator from Alaska. You played a role in the fight to cut off money for the Vietnam War. What would be your advice, Senator, for the elected officials on this stage who are at a conflict, opposed to the conflict, but also feel the need to keep on funding the conflict?

9. (s) Senator, Marsha from here in Orangeburg in South Carolina says, "As a spouse of a 19-year active duty professional soldier, who has served in Iraq and worldwide in numerous deployments, what would you consider to be a "mission complete" status in Iraq?

Next phase: (w) "We enter now the second phase of tonight's conversation. The in-house title for these questions was "Elephants in the Room," according to our political staff -- what may be uncomfortable questions about issues or beliefs attached, for whatever reason, to all of you -- perception issues, for lack of a better word."

10. Senator Obama… you've promised in your campaign a new kind of politics, but just this week the Chicago Sun-Times reported on questionable ties you have with a donor who was charged last year for demanding kickbacks on Illinois business deals. Aren't you practicing the very same kind of politics that many of the others on this stage have engaged in?

11. Senator Edwards, you've spoken with great passion and energy and eloquence about the issue of poverty in the United States, your "two Americas" theme.

And yet I want to read you a quote from the political journalist Roger Simon: "Many people miss the point about the haircuts. The point is not the cost. John Edwards is a very rich man and could afford even a $4,000 haircut. But why did he pay for his haircuts out of campaign funds?" Senator?

12. Senator, I have a follow-up for you. On modern day America, you've been of counsel to hedge funds. Do hedge funds make America any better in any way?

13. Senator Clinton, you represent the state of New York. How is America a better place because of all these burgeoning hedge funds?

14. Governor Richardson, you were one of the last people on this stage to call for the resignation of the attorney general, Attorney General Gonzales. When asked by a journalist why you were taking long to make up your mind about this, you replied, quote, "It's because he's Hispanic. I'm honest." Is that the right way to make personnel decisions?

15. Senator Dodd, while you represent the Nutmeg State in the U.S. Senate, you may be the most Washington of all the people from Washington on this stage here tonight: son of a U.S. senator, in the Senate for two decades yourself, a committee chair, and you've been rather unabashed about accepting money from lobbyists. How then do you make the case with people that you will reform or change Washington ways?

16. Congressman Kucinich, you were anti-war before the anti-war position started surging in the polls. The question is, why don't you think you have more traction politically in the United States?

17. Senator Biden, words have, in the past, gotten you in trouble, words that were borrowed and words that some found hateful. An editorial in the Los Angeles Times said, "In addition to his uncontrolled verbosity, Biden is a gaff machine." Can you reassure voters in this country that you would have the discipline you would need on the world stage, Senator?

18. Senator Gravel, at a forum earlier this year -- I want to get this right -- you said it doesn't matter whether you are elected president or not, so then, why are you here tonight? Shouldn't debates be for candidates who are in the race to win the race?

19. Senator Clinton, recent national polls indicate the majority of the general public has an unfavorable view of you, right now, at this point in time. Why do you think Republicans are looking forward to running against you with so much zeal?

Next Phase: Public Policy

20. Senator Edwards, on the topic of abortion. Our most recent NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll indicated a majority of Americans approved of last week's Supreme Court decision to make so-called partial birth or late-term abortions illegal. Most of the people on this stage put out statements and criticized the ruling. A lot of American families find this just a hideous topic for a discussion. Is this a case, do you think, of the Supreme Court and the public with opinions in one place, and yet a lot of elected officials in another?

21. Senator Biden, as president would you have a specific litmus test question on Roe v. Wade that you would ask of your nominees for the high court?

22. Senator Dodd, you were the only senator on this stage to vote to confirm Chief Justice Roberts. Do you regret your vote?

23. We'd like to ask the same question of all of you, down the line, in order, and it calls for you to say a name or to pass. And, Governor Richardson, we're going to start with you. The question is your model Supreme Court justice?

24. Senator Clinton, a question for you: Did the government -- did any role that federal government plays fail those students at Virginia Tech?

25. Because our producers are learning about the consumption of time, we have our first "show of hands" question tonight. (Laughter) How many of you, in your adult lifetime, have had a gun in the house? One -- Senator Gravel, Senator Biden, Senator Dodd, Governor Richardson, Congressman Kucinich.

26. Senator Biden, the kind of flip side of the question I just asked Senator Clinton: What could the federal government have done to save those kids at Virginia Tech?

27. Let's talk about health care, an issue that currently ranks a solid second in virtually every opinion poll in the United States. Senator Edwards, you have said you would raise taxes to pay for a health care plan. The question is: Which ones?

28. Governor Richardson, you are perhaps the most strident on the position against raising taxes to pay for this. But how could it possibly be the domestic Marshall Plan some people say it must be without that kind of revenue?

29. (s)This is from Daniel in Eastover, South Carolina. He says, "I would like a comment concerning the ban on South Carolina from the NAACP; and why they, the candidates, are in South Carolina if they support the NAACP"

"The NAACP has asked tourists, groups and sporting events not to come to South Carolina until the confederate flag has been removed from the statehouse grounds. Do you agree with that?"

30. (s)The next question is a short-answer question; one sentence. And I am going to ask each of you, beginning with Senator Gravel.

This is from Paula in Conway, South Carolina: "What is the most significant political or professional mistake you have made in the past four years? And what, if anything, did you learn from this mistake which makes you a better candidate?"

31. (s) Senator Clinton, if you were currently the president, would you defy the majority of American citizens and offer a form of amnesty for illegal aliens?

32. (s)Senator Biden, "In comparison to countries like Japan, China and India, we have the least number of young people going for advanced degrees in science and engineering. How are you going to reverse this brain drain?" From Darren in Evanston, Illinois.

33. (s)Senator Dodd, this is from Joe, and he asked, "I have to pass a drug test to earn a paycheck. Shouldn't the welfare recipient have to pass one to receive a check, as well?"

34. (s) Senator Edwards, this is for you from Auggie in Darlington, South Carolina. "Concerning the astronomical windfall of major oil companies again in the first quarter. Why is gas still on the rise?"

35. (s)Representative Kucinich, this is from Ashley in Elgin, South Carolina. "I am what I consider a middle class American. It is almost to the point where I am consider dropping my medical insurance because premiums are just too high. What are you planning to do to help Americans have affordable health care premiums?"

36. (s)And this from Susan in West Colombia, South Carolina, again, for all of us, one sentence, and the question is this: "While sitting in the Oval Office on the first day of your administration, name the first thing that you want accomplished by the end of that first day."

Next Phase: Signing off on NBC Affiliates and Cable, but continuing online

37. We're going to switch categories now to what we are calling non-Iraq foreign policy. Senator Obama, what are America's three most important allies around the world?

38. Senator [Obama], thanks. I'll give you a follow-up. I didn't hear you mention Israel, and I ask because there is a quote attributed to your name. You said recently, "No one is suffering more than the Palestinian people." Do you stand by that remark?

39. Senator Biden, from the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, what three nations, other than Iraq, represent, to you, the biggest threat to the United States?

40. Senator Edwards, Russia has been in the news of late. Just today, they suspended an arms deal over a squabble. Simply, do you regard them as a friend or a foe?

41. Governor Richardson, with your forays into diplomacy, four nominations for Nobel Peace Prizes, when you consider that President Bush said he once looked into the soul Putin, how would you do things differently with Russia?

42. Senator Clinton, a friend of yours from back home, said this week: Quote, "the Democrats do not understand the full nature and scope of the terrorist war against us."

Another quote: "America will be safer with a Republican president."

How do you think, Senator, that it happened that that notion of Republicans as protectors in a post 9/11 world has taken on so?

43. Senator Dodd, same question [but distinct enough to warrant its inclusion in this list]. How has this label been attached to the Democratic Party, that the Republicans will protect America best?

44. Second "show of hands" question: Do you believe there is such a thing as a global war on terror?

45. Congressman Kucinich. Why is your hand not up?

46. Senator Obama, if, God forbid a thousand times, while we were gathered here tonight, we learned that two American cities have been hit simultaneously by terrorists and we further learned, beyond the shadow of a doubt it had been the work of Al Qaida, how would you change the U.S. military stance overseas as a result?

47. Is anyone on this stage willing to enter into Congressman Kucinich's effort to impeach Vice President Cheney? Is this a proper use of public congressional time and energy?

48. Senator Dodd, the state of Connecticut has legalized civil unions for gay people. Tell me, is there a difference between gay marriage and civil unions?

49. Senator Biden, a quote from Tom Friedman in The New York Times: "Unfortunately, today's presidential hopefuls are largely full of hot air on the climate energy issue. Not one of them is proposing anything hard." What would you propose for the average American that would be hard?

50. Governor Richardson, Fidel Castro is still alive. How do you feel about normalizing relations with Castro's Cuba?

51. Senator Gravel, your two terms in the Senate representing Alaska have sat on top of, of course, a huge reserve of oil. With the French system as the model, is the United States, in your view, woefully behind in its use of nuclear energy?

52. What in your personal life, Senator Obama, have you done personally to make for a better environment? Personal life?

53. Senator Edwards, who do you consider to be your moral leader?

54. Senator Clinton, overall, is Wal-Mart a good thing or a bad thing for the United States of America?

55. Senator Biden, a question for you. A friend of mine who's in the leadership of the Democratic Party says that if the party goes down a third straight time, what will happen is what he defined as modern-day extinction of the Democratic Party. Putting yourself aside, perhaps, is there a winner on this stage tonight, and does your party have what it takes to reverse this trend and win the White House?

JRR Tolkien may have died way back in 1973, but his son Christopher has done a masterful job of keeping his father's legacy alive. At the ripe old age of 81 Christopher Tolkien gives us what will likely be his father's last work of fiction, The Children of Hurin.

As far as Tolkien goes, among his larger works The Hobbit is the most accessible, followed by the trilogy, The Lord of the Rings, and the Silmarillion. The language in each of these grew successively more archaic, and The Children of Hurin is the most difficult to read because of its language. But that's not to say it isn't an enjoyable read. I thoroughly enjoyed it.

The fact that this latest novel was pieced together from unfinished fragments is not entirely seen by the casual read. But it does carry with it, throughout the story, a sense of... incompleteness, for lack of a better word. While The Silmarillion greatly employed 'archaic' language forms, it was filled with rich vibrant light; color, sound, texture, it was all there, but not so with The Children of Hurin, this last story is a but a shadow of The Silmarillion.

Despite this, it was, as I said, an enjoyable read. It offered a broader glimpse into Middle Earth just after the Nirnaeth Arnoediad, the fifth (and second to last) battle for Middle Earth against Morgoth, whose evil surpassed that of Sauron. Yes, Sauron was bad, but Morgoth was badder.

The cowries I shelled out for this book, hardbound, was well worth the price. Not simply because it sprang from the mind of Tolkien himself, but also because of the numerous illustrations by Alan Lee, the conceptual artist for The Lord of the Rings films.

Don't let this review fool you. The Children of Hurin is still an easier read than much of what Cormac McCarthy has written, and I absolutely LOVE Cormac McCarthy!

This post is divided thusly:

1- Initial commentary on debate and this post's format
2- Delineation of which questions I deem to be Fair, Bogus, and Irrelevant, including an explanation, short or involved, as to why I labelled each question the way I did
3- Final commentary of the overall debate
4- All 78 questions for your reference

You will need to use the Here's more... link to see everything beyond #2
____________________________



As I stated previously, I didn't watch the debate when it aired. I have since had the opportunity to watch the debate online, and my impression of Chris Matthews is not particularly favorable. I don't know who chose Matthews to moderate the event; maybe they pulled his name out of a hat, but on several occasions the debate felt more like an episode of Hardball, than a presidential debate. Matthews was less than courteous on several occasions and more than a few of the questions flirted with condescension. In short, Matthews, in my estimation, was ill-suited to his role as moderator. I don't imagine Keith Olbermann would have done better. Who else does MSNBC have?


As to the questions posed by Matthews and "readers of Politico.com", I categorized them as either,

'Fair', to mean there's nothing wrong with that question (whether I liked it or not)

'Bogus', to mean the question's premise was either flawed or the question itself reeked of political bias, was tainted by uninformed opinion, or reflected a personal antipathy toward either the candidates on stage or the Republican party as a whole

Or 'Irrelevant', to mean the question was simply stupid and had no bearing on why ANY of the candidates should or shouldn't be elected president.



Fair Questions: 42
[since I'm not commenting on the questions I think were fair, I'll simply list them here by number]

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 17, 19,
23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 36,
43, 44, 46, 47, 51, 52, 53, 54, 56, 58, 61, 62,
69, 71, 75, 76


Bogus Questions: 25
[By their corresponding numbers]

6) What percentage of that 55% actually knows anything about war in general, or anything about this war in particular; knowledge they gleaned on their own SANS the tripe the MSM has been feeding them? 'Why shouldn't they have a president who will listen?' Do the people really want a president who takes direction from the uninformed? The president has access to information the bulk of Americans never see, as well as advisers. We elect presidents to make the hard decisions, not throw a moistened finger into the air to determine where public opinion is blowing.

16) Anyone capable of thinking for himself should know that Middle Eastern sentiment toward the West in general, and the U.S. specifically, has been one of bitter toleration only because of our perceived, albeit very 'real' strength. But Americans have been killed by Muslims for decades simply for being American. Hostages on passenger jets shot, their bodies thrown to the tarmac, simply because they were American. 69 year old Leon Klinghoffer from New York, killed by terrorists while a passenger on the Achille Lauro in October of '85. This question presupposes that hatred of America by radical Islam began with George W. Bush, which is complete rubbish.

18) And everyone laughed when Matthews referred to the Constitution as 'divinely inspired' and yet the question is puerile at best. There is a reason why our Constitution requires a candidate be a natural-born citizen of the United States to be eligible to run for the office of President? But let me ask, do other countries allow foreigners to ascend THEIR political thrones?

20) 'What do you dislike most about America?' Wha!? What candidate in his right mind would actually answer that question!?

21) '...thousands of reputable scientists have concluded with almost certainty...' 'certainty' in their own minds, at least, and yet the debate rages across the American, and the world's, landscape. Vehement disagreement. There are plenty of reputable scientists who have concluded with almost certainty that Global Warming is nothing more than the latest 'Chicken Little' flavor of the month.

22) This was a question from a savvy politico.com reader. Presidents can't force Americans to sign organ donor cards. And if they could this would be a fascist state akin to China who routinely sells the organs of convicted prisoners; to say nothing of its one-child-per-family policy and the system of forced abortions that enforces it, and that is not what America is. The best ANY president can do is seek to educate the public.

38) there was a round of laughter at the question 'is Karl Rove your friend?' What possible relevance does Karl Rove have, especially in the context of the question, to do with this presidential debate? The second question, whether or not the candidate would want to keep Rove on at the White House, is an obvious political jab designed to single out the candidate unwary enough to say 'yes' as un-fit for the Oval Office. Karl Rove in this context makes this question hugely bogus.

39) This question is essentially the same as #38. I give it 'distinct' status because Matthews was unwilling to let this fish go. The antipathy toward Rove by the Left AND, by extension, the Media, borders on apoplectic. I half expected to see Matthews drooling like a wild-eyed lunatic when he asked this question.

40) I wonder if any Democrats got this question: 'Has the increased influence of far-left anti-war nut-bags in your party been good for it?' Sheesh!

41) 'What's with your party and all this corruption?' PUH-leeze! What a hypocrite!

45) A juvenile question if ever there was one! I realize some of these questions came from online viewers via email, but the hosts CHOSE to read these questions on air. And why? Because these moderators were enjoying themselves taking pot-shots at the candidates.

48) This question hearkens back to question 22. Again, the solution this question asks for is beyond the pervue of presidents. The president can't erase hatred from the hearts of his people. Absolutely stupid, and therefore bogus, question.

49) This one hearkens back to question 20. What candidate in his right mind would answer that question by naming one of his competitors?

55) 'That makes no sense.' He's right, it's a stupid question.

57) More laughter on this one. This question demonstrates their obvious disdain for Senator Lieberman, and was nothing more than a political fishing expedition.

59) Does McCain believe in Evolution!? So what!? And why was this question asked if not to give people who might be thinking, 'Hey, I like this guy!' reason to brush him off as a religious kook if he answers 'no'? Another 'hit' question, this one.

60) By all means let's ask EVERYONE this question!

63) Ugh! What a reprehensible question. I can't wait to hear it asked to a Liberal at the next Democratic debate.

64) 'Do you trust the mainstream media?' !! After the kind of questions you've asked so far!?? Hello!?

65) Another stupid question. Of course his personal religious views direct his decision making, and would if he were elected president. Such views have guided every elected or unelected official in the history of the world, whether they believed in a god or not. Everyone has religion, whether they believe in God or not. This question was obviously crafted to single out those who might run the White House as the hated George W. Bush, who wears his faith on his sleeve, has.

66) 'Most significant weakness...' Again! Why would any candidate in his right mind answer such a ridiculous question?

68) 'Scandals plaguing the current administration' Huh!? 'corruption and cronyism' Wha? Scandals manufactured by Democrats for the most part, many of which were NON-scandals, and eagerly hyped by a gleeful dishonest Media. And completely hypocritical in light of their own scandals, past and present.

70) And if he's off by even one soldier wounded or dead is he somehow not eligible to be President? This, if I'm not mistaken, was another question from an online viewer... a smarmy online viewer. I will grant the question this much: Being in the general ballpark at least shows the candidate is keeping up with the media's constant, gleefully delivered body-count. Over-all, however, this question is pointless puerile.

77) This question is essentially the same as question #76, yet it's fundamentally different. In 76 it was an innocent enough question. A fair question. But with this iteration, Matthews calls the White House, Bill Clinton's 'Home'. What a completely bogus question.

78) This one is as interesting as it is bogus. The question, interestingly prefaced, presupposes that Bush like every other president before him had to clean someone else's mess, which on the surface is ridiculous... Presidents make what changes they can depending on how amenable or hostile Congress is toward that particular president and his desired changes. What's interesting about this question is the underlying, unintended-and-hidden-from-view question, 'What mess of Bill Clinton's did Bush have to clean up?'



Irrelevant Questions: 11
[By their corresponding numbers]

8) Completely irrelevant. Governor Huckabee WASN'T president last year. Furthermore, Governor Huckabee isn't George W. Bush! It's a smear question.

9) Well, we know that's what Democrats and the Media would like to see! Anything to further cripple this president. Another pointless question.

34) What would a Mormon have to say about the Roman Catholic Church's decision to deny communion to supporters of infanticide? Ridiculously irrelevant!

35) 'Interference in public life'? What happened to 'Separation of Church and State' fella's? Oh, that's right! It's okay for State to squash Church, but how dare Church squash State! Irrelevant and hypocritical.

37) What does this question have to do with the coming presidential election!? It's more suited to 'Hardball with Chris Matthews' than a preside... oh, that's right. It WAS 'Hardball with Chris Matthews'. It's still irrelevant.

42) '...serious problems of ethics violations'? Hypocritical, and not the least bit relevant.

50) '"An Inconvenient Truth"'? Completely irrelevant! If he HAD seen it, would that make him a viable candidate for president? It's just an attempt to get one candidate to smear another in a forum that was ill-suited for a debate to begin with-- Especially in light of the fact that this was anything BUT a debate... it was a news conference.

67) 'Do you find any faults in Mayor Giuliani?' Again, where's the relevance to the man's fitness for the office of President?

72) Irrelevant, and a trap to boot.

73) Answering this question loses the candidate who says 'yes' votes, and the moderator knows it. It's a pointless question.

74) File this one under, 'Please, would someone like to fall into my evil trap?' No bearing on Election Night '08 at all.




Final Note:

Overall, this debate was an embarrassment for MSNBC, though I suspect they didn't see it as such. I've said it before, and I'm saying it again: Foolishness is rarely seen as such by those who perform it. Or rather, a fool never looks in the mirror and sees a fool.

This debate was anything BUT a debate. For one, there were too many contenders on the stage and no repartee to speak of, and no opportunity for rebuttal. It was as someone said, 'a glorified press conference'-- that, and a convenient forum for Democratic operatives in the Drive-by media to attempt to make damaged-goods of the Republican field of candidates. Thankfully the Drive-by's were unsuccessful.

In light of, but not solely because of MSNBC's abysmal performance, it was also hugely hypocritical for Democratic candidates to pull out of a debate that was to air on FOX for fear of biased and unfair questions. They feared they would be handled roughly by Republican "shills" from FOX News, but perhaps the reason they thought this was because it is exactly what THEY would have done... and did. But THEY would have gotten better treatment at Fox than Republicans got at MSNBC. Of that I have little doubt.




The Questions:
___________________________

1) In the NBC-Wall Street Journal poll, just 22 percent believe this country is on the right track. Mayor Giuliani, how do we get back to Ronald Reagan's "morning in America"?

2) Senator McCain, most of the public pessimism today has to do with Iraq. How -- what would you need, as commander in chief, to win the war in Iraq?

3) Do you need anything beyond what the president has now to win the war?

4) Governor Thompson, if you're commander in chief and you want to win this war in Iraq, what do you need to do to win it?

5) Recent polls in the Islamic world reveal a sea of hostility toward the United States, feeding what General Petraeus calls the central front of al Qaeda in Iraq. How do we win this war if every dead terrorist is so easily replaced?

6) Governor Romney, in that same NBC Wall Street Journal poll, 55 percent of Americans say victory is just not possible in Iraq. They've made up their minds on this war. Why shouldn't they have a president who will listen?

7) How do you deal with the problem, revealed in a recent Zogby poll, that in countries that are moderate, you mentioned -- like Jordan, Morocco, Turkey, another Islamic country -- 10, 12 percent of the people support us; the rest are angry at us. Doesn't that create a sea of recruitment opportunity for our enemy? And how -- I'm just asking, do we have to reduce that temperature of hatred before we win the war, or simply continue to fight the terrorists?

8) Governor Huckabee, I'd like to get your views about how you balance loyalty and accountability. Would you have fired Don Rumsfeld before last November?

9) The Rumsfeld removal was perhaps timed to the election. Do you think a general shake-up in this administration's Cabinet right now would be good for the administration?

10) Congressman Paul, you voted against the war. Why are all your fellow Republicans up here wrong?

11) Senator McCain. Former Tennessee Senator Fred Thompson said that Iran has already committed acts of war. Do you agree? And secondly, as part of that, what's your trip wire for a U.S. strike in Iran?

12) Let me follow up a little bit, Senator… What is your tripwire? Is it the building of a nuclear weapon? The threat to use a weapon once built? A delivery system? Is it preemptive or preventive?

13) Congressman Tancredo, along those lines, imagine you're president of the United States and this is a likely or possible scenario, certainly plausible. You get a call from the prime minister of Israel, the prime minister of Israel, who's now Ehud Olmert, saying Israel's about to strike Iran's nuclear sites and he wants U.S. help. What do you say?

14) If the prime minister asks you for help, you say you will say yes?

15) Governor Gilmore, of Virginia, when speaking about Osama bin Laden last week, Governor Romney said, quote, "It's not worth moving heaven and earth, spending billions of dollars, just trying to catch one person." Senator McCain called that naive. Who's right?

16) Is President Bush partly responsible [hostility in Middle East toward U.S.], for that, in your view?

17) Senator McCain, would [you be] comfortable with Tom Tancredo, a staunch opponent of illegal immigration, as head of the Immigration and Naturalization Service?

18) Should we change our Constitution, which we believe is divinely inspired, to allow men like Mel Martinez, the chairman of your party, born in Cuba, great patriot, senator from Florida, and Arnold Schwarzenegger to stand here some night? [Schwarzenegger is in the audience]

19) Mayor Giuliani, [is] there's anything you learned or regret during your time as mayor in your dealings with the African-American community?

20) Governor Romney, what do you dislike most about America?

21) Governor Huckabee, thousands of reputable scientists have concluded with almost certainty that human activity is responsible for the warming of the Earth. Do you believe global warming exists?

22) Congressman Tancredo, do you have a plan to solve the shortage of organs donated for transplant?

23) Congressman Hunter, do you consider yourself a compassionate conservative, like President Bush?

24) Congressman Paul, if you were president, would you work to phase out the IRS?

25) Would the day that Roe v. Wade is repealed be a good day for Americans?

26) Governor Gilmore, you have said in the past that you believe in the first eight to 12 weeks of pregnancy, that a woman should have the right to have an abortion. Do you still stick with that exception?

27) Governor Thompson, do you have any nuance on this, or you're just happy with the repeal of Roe. v. Wade?

28) Governor Romney, in recent months you've said you were, quote, "always for life," but we've also heard you say you were once, quote, "effectively pro-choice." Which is it?

29) Senator Brownback, could you support a nominee of your party who is not pro-life?

30) Mayor Giuliani, became very well known for standing up against the use of public funds for what many people considered indecent exhibits at the Brooklyn Museum and places like that. Why do you support the use of public funds for abortion?

31) Senator McCain, we’re in the house of Ronald Reagan. Every cab driver in America knew what Ronald Reagan stood for: defeat communism abroad, reduce big government at home. Can you, Senator McCain, restore that kind of unity of purpose?

32) Dr. Paul, how do you reconcile this moral -- moral leadership kind of role of conservatism with the very libertarian strain of conservatism, the Barry Goldwater conservatism that you represent? How do you put together what [McCain] just said with what you believe in a unified national purpose?

33) Governor Thompson, if a private employer finds homosexuality immoral, should he be allowed to fire a gay worker?

34) Governor Romney, what do you say to Roman Catholic bishops who would deny communion to elected officials who support abortion rights?

35) Do you see that as interference in public life?

36) Governor Huckabee, you've criticized Governor Romney for saying his faith wouldn't get in the way of his public life, his governing. Do you want to back that up tonight?

37) Gentlemen, let's talk a bit about the future of your party. Congressman Hunter, Governor Schwarzenegger -- who is here tonight -- has won the state twice by downplaying partisanship and taking centrist positions on the environment, immigration, abortion. Is that the way to win for Republicans?

38) Governor Gilmore, you know Karl Rove and you've worked with Karl Rove. And -- is Karl Rove your friend? Do you want to keep him in the White House if you get elected president as the president's chief political operative?

39) But you, as commander in chief and chief executive, would you employ Karl Rove?

40) Mayor Giuliani, has the increased influence of Christian conservatives in your party been good for it?

41) Senator Brownback, Jack Abramoff, Mark Foley, Duke Cunningham in prison for bribes. Just last month, FBI raids of two Republican members of Congress. What's with your party and all this corruption?

42) Congressman Tancredo, you want to respond to that question… about these serious problems of ethics violations?

43) Senator McCain, when you announced last week, you took a couple shots at incompetence in government. You talked about you wouldn't put up with having police and fire radios on different frequencies, and I somehow got the idea you were talking about New York City.

44) Senator McCain. Chris Harris from Manhattan, Kansas, is very concerned about the budget and about deficits. He wants to know what specific programs would you cut if you were president?

45) Governor Huckabee, a Politico.com reader wants a letter grade; he wants to know A through F, how would you rate the Bush administration's handling of the Iraq war?

46) Governor Romney, you said that being a pro-life president entails more than just appointing strict constructionist judges. A Politico.com reader wants to know what you meant by that, and whether that was directed specifically at Mayor Giuliani?

47) Mayor Giuliani, do you want to respond to this? Because it seems like across the room here there's strong, unrelenting -- with the exception of Governor Gilmore -- an unrelenting pro-life position. You seem to have a nuanced position on this. Many people think you're pro-choice. Could you define it in a couple of seconds?

48) Governor Thompson, is racism still a problem in our society? And can a president do anything about it?

49) Congressman Tancredo, beside yourself, who do you think should be the Republican nominee for president of the United States, and why?

50) Congressman Hunter, [have] you watched Al Gore's environmental documentary, "An Inconvenient Truth"?

51) Congressman Paul, perhaps the most important skill a good president must have is the ability to make good, sound decisions, often in a crisis situation. Please cite an example when you had to make a decision in crisis.

52) Governor Gilmore, women are the fastest growing prison population. Most are mothers who are non-violent, first-time offenders. What will you do to address the issue of mothers behind bars and the children left behind?

53) Mrs. Reagan wants to expand federal funding of embryonic stem cell research. Will that progress under your administration?

54) Governor Romney, a year ago, it seemed that you couldn't wait to tell the world about your health care experiment in Massachusetts. Since then it's been criticized by conservatives as something Hillary Clinton could have devised. You hardly mention it on your website. What's changed?

55) Senator McCain, some of your colleagues have been hit pretty hard on flip-flops. But you now support extending President Bush's tax cuts, but you originally voted against them. That makes no sense.

56) I want each candidate to mention a tax he'd like to cut, in addition to the Bush tax cuts, keeping them in effect.

57) Senator McCain, you said you plan to appoint a Democrat to a major Cabinet post. Tell us some of the Democrats you've got in mind. We'll give you bonus points if you give us a name other than Senator Lieberman.

58) Congressman Hunter, name one thing that the federal government does really well and one thing that it does poorly?

59) Senator McCain, yes or no, do you believe in evolution?

60) Is there anybody on the stage that does not believe in evolution?

61) Governor Romney, which Cabinet official would be at the top of the list of those you'd like to carry into your administration if you're elected?

62) Mayor Giuliani, what is the difference between a Sunni and a Shi'a Muslim?

63) Governor Gilmore, explain [why] none of the other candidates deserves to label themselves as the true conservative.

64) Congressman Paul, do you trust the mainstream media?

65) Senator Brownback, [do] your personal religious beliefs influence your foreign policy thinking?

66) Mayor Giuliani, what do you consider to be your most significant weakness as a candidate for the president of the United States?

67) Senator Brownback, do you find any faults in Mayor Giuliani? I saw you looking attentively waiting for him to say something?

68) Governor Huckabee, in light of the scandals plaguing the current administration and its allies, involving corruption and cronyism, which mistakes have you learned not to repeat?

69) Congressman Tancredo, will you work to protect women's rights, as in fair wages and reproductive choice?

70) Governor Thompson, how many American soldiers have lost their lives in the Iraq war and how many have been injured to date?

71) Mayor Giuliani, explain it and defend it: a national tamper-proof ID card.

72) Do you think Scooter Libby should be pardoned? Governor Romney?

73) The judge is going to rule on [Libby’s] case next month and decide whether he will be imprisoned during his appeal. Would you let it go, let him be imprisoned?

74) Does anybody want to pardon him? I want to save time here. Does any gentleman want to raise his hand and say pardon him?

75) On the Terri Schaivo case. Again, it was a question of whether the United States -- the U.S. Congress should have intervened and passed a law to advise the appellate court whether to act or not in this case, the district court it was. Terri Schaivo, should Congress have acted or let the family make the decision, the husband?

76) Seriously, would it be good for America to have Bill Clinton back living in the White House?

77) Congressman Hunter, Bill Clinton back home?

78) Every president, if you look back to Ike, was elected to fill the problem of the previous president. We are of course correcting all the time in this country. It's how democracy works. How will you be different in any way from President George W. Bush?

----

I thought when I started this post that I'd give the Democratic debate this same treatment, but since I've spent the better part of 8 hours working on this-- including the graph --the best I'm going to do with that one is make a list of the questions... maybe a graph... but not much else. All that's really needed is to lay out the questions the Democrats were asked to justify my calling them hypocrites. I have no doubt they did not suffer the same treatment as the Republicans did.

Thanks for wading though all this.