Thoughts on the Debate in Nevada

By Rich Kozlovich

First off let me say I no longer watch debates, even for a few minutes.  I find these candidates are completely unembarrassed for their performances.  I'm not sure if that's true of those who watch. They absolutely have no shame making it hard to stomach it all.  I do admire those who are paid to watch these sickening displays in order to report on them. 

Monica Showalter has been one of my favorite writers because she has a way with words, and she certainly knows how to cut through all the crap into the core of a matter. Her description of the debate starts out like this:

The Democrat debate was an exercise in futility, a bunch of mice scurrying over scraps........Tails entangled together, they also fought each other like a rat-king........

She goes on saying:

....they nattered on about a whole host of irrelevant, stupid stuff you don't hear people talking about in the grocery stores or on the barstools. What they didn't bring up at all was the economy....maybe they're just cowards.....

She ends her article with this:

Trump gets people jobs -- and rising incomes. Anything the Democrats can sell after that feat is miserable gruel. No wonder they're not big enough to bring up the economy.

Andrea Widburg described the event as a sharp focus on the candidates’ personalities, saying:

It wasn’t pretty. They were the six unappealing dwarfs -- Supercilious, Shrill, Angry, Confused, Smug . . . and that unpleasant nameless something that is Klobuchar.

After outlining her views on these "Dwarfs", she concluded:

Not a single person on the stage is a leader or a statesman. Without exception, they are small people, and that’s true with or without standing on boxes. There’s something almost tragic about the fact that the essence of the Democrat Party – the oldest continuously existing political party in the world – has been reduced to these six uninspiring, unqualified people.

 It gets worse. Patricia McCarthy notes how strange this whole clown show has become calling it "a bonfire of their vanities".

Bloomberg beat on Bernie saying:

“We’re not going to throw out capitalism. We tried that. Other countries tried that. It was called communism and it just didn’t work.”

  But as she notes:

 He is right about that but he’s not very likeable and Warren made him squirm when she asked him to release all the women who have sued him from their non-disclosure agreements (NDAs).

She notes none of them discuss how they’re going to pay for all the free stuff they’re all saying they’re going to deliver to the nation, nor how they’re going to get Congress to authorize it. None of them talk about the national debt, nor do they wish to talk about how their promises will send that debt into the stratosphere of unpayability and bankruptcy. 

One thing they’re all clear about and agree on: They all hate America, they hate the wealthy, unless it involves their wealth. She makes a point that resonates with me:

It is a mystery how Bernie’s supporters can put up with his relentless hectoring, his whole-arm finger-jabbing and his hatred of any and all persons who have worked hard and succeeded. He despises the people who make the country function……

 Her article clearly outlines they’re all clueless, arrogant, bumbling, economically ignorant, and I include Bloomberg since he seemingly only understands his personal economics, and with the exception of Bloomberg, the rest are mostly unaccomplished in their lives, especially in their political lives.  The author ends her article saying:

This debate was a sad commentary on the quality of the Democrat candidates…..They are angry, hate-filled and tend toward violence which Bernie is hard pressed to disavow……..the NBC audience was packed with Marxist socialists who cheered the five radicals and booed Bloomberg. Chuck Todd was his usual buffoonish self; the moderators had no control over the participants. This debate was not just a bonfire of these candidates’ vanities, it was a “dumpster fire” ” (Paula Boyard).  

On a personal note I hope someone noticed the three articles I presented were all written by women, and one of them cites another female writer.  I did that deliberately!

The woman's vote has traditionally been a huge Democrat constituency. It appears to me the two really big constituencies of the Democrat Party are women voters and black voters. And both of those constituencies seem to despise the Democrat party apparatus, their radical actions and these candidates in particular, and in larger numbers than we've seen in my lifetime.

Maybe that's what it really means to be Woke!