View Full Version : Angle lays the smack down on dingy Harry!

10-15-2010, 04:39 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Let’s get the easy part out of the way first:

<span style='font-size: 14pt'>Sharron Angle won The Big Debate.</span>

Angle won because she looked relatively credible, appearing not to be the Wicked Witch of the West (Christine O’Donnell is the good witch of the Tea Party) and scoring many more rhetorical points. And she won <span style='font-size: 14pt'>because Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid looked as if he could barely stay on a linear argument, abruptly switching gears and failing to effectively parry or thrust.</span> ...

As I watched the debate, I felt all the years that Nevada has striven to surmount its seamy image fading away as the nation watched this sad spectacle. As Slate’s John Dickerson wryly put it on Twitter: “After watching the Nevada Senate debate I really wish that what happens in Vegas could stay in Vegas.”

I know we Nevadans get our backs up when the national media condescends. We are a proud bunch; we love our state. But as I surveyed the post-mortems in the 140-character world, where concision often yields brutal truth, you could almost sense the head-shaking as the national types opined:

NBC’s Chuck Todd: “Reid’s problem tonight is that while Angle wasn’t great, his performance made her look passable.”

Politico’s Dave Catanese: “Utterly subpar.”

Political Wire’s Taegan Goddard: “Reid didn’t knock out Angle but she had him on the ropes. Have to give the edge to Angle ...”

Political writer Taylor Marsh may have summed it up best: “Sharron Angle passed the ‘I’m not crazy test’ with flying colors. Focused too. This lady just might pull this off. Reid didn’t take her out.”

<span style='font-size: 14pt'>But did he take himself out</span>, once and for all, with his dismissiveness, his sarcastic and loopy use of “my friend” and Senatese, his shifting of subjects in the middle of thoughts, beginning with his opening statements? ...

Reid called a man he once all but called a liar (Gen. David Petraeus) and a man he did call a liar and loser (Bush 43) his friends. But he also used that collegial term to refer to Angle, as if he were speaking to some senator he despises (they do that on the floor). ...

That is crazy, folks. But that’s not how she came across Thursday, as Reid failed to call her on that and many other topics, making it more likely he has to make an unthinkable call to her on Election Night </div></div>

From the LAS VEGAS SUN. (http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2010/oct/15/reid-lost-debate-angle/)


10-15-2010, 06:01 PM
I didn't watch the debate but I am left wondering why anyone would vote for Reid. I guess that just shows to go that people are gullible.

10-16-2010, 03:25 AM

Watch Angle NOT answer the question.

link (http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/heather/reid-angle-debate-mandates-insurance-comp)

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">This debate was painful to watch. Angle was terrible and Reid was so bad as well he didn't take advantage of it. This portion alone should have been like shooting fish in a barrel and would have been for someone with some better debating skills than Reid has. I'm sure most of the readers of this blog could come up with about a hundred better and more sharp and concise responses that would resonate with the public to Angle's nonsense than Reid did.

Sharron Angle's "free market solutions" boil down to people being "free" to have the insurance companies let them die because they'd rather line their CEO's pockets and pay their stock holders than cover the policies of the saps who paid into them when they actually get sick. </div></div>


10-16-2010, 04:16 AM
Yes ... she's an absolutely horrible candidate.

That is the entire point.

She is a horrible candidate and still stomped a mudhole in Harry and then walked it dry.


Of course you will turn the obligatory blind eye to Harry's countless lies.


10-16-2010, 04:31 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">State Official Orders Insurance Company To Sell Insurance To Children

Washington's insurance commissioner stepped in today to force Regent Blue Shield -- the state's largest provider of insurance to children -- to keep selling children-only health care plans.

"Regence is in clear violation of state law that prohibits insurers from denying insurance to people on the basis of age," reads a statement from Mike Kreidler. "I was shocked and deeply disappointed when Regence announced its decision last week to stop selling insurance to kids."

One of the earliest-implemented -- and most popular -- provisions of the new health care law forbids insurance companies from denying coverage to children with preexisting conditions. Rebelling against the policy, insurance companies have threatened or attempted to stop selling children-only plans. New Hampshire's insurance commissioner likewise stepped in to block the maneuver. </div></div> link (http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/10/state-official-orders-insurance-company-to-sell-insurance-to-children.php?ref=fpb)

What would Sharron have done?


10-16-2010, 06:20 AM
Neither she nor Harry would have any legal standing to anything.

The dispute was over state law and state's rights.


10-18-2010, 07:41 AM
From everything I read (reading from both sides of the aisle), it was a tie.