NR vs. WSJ on Immigration: It's on
I would so scalp tickets to this
By krempasky Posted in Immigration | immigration bill | NR | WSJ — Comments (12) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
Kudos to NR for proposing a serious debate on the immigration. Kudos to Steve Moore at the WSJ for accepting - with apparently Bill Bennet as moderator. This is going to be fantastic.
« Federal Jobs Illegal Immigrants Can’t Do — Comments (12) | Plutocracy and defiance. — Comments (85) »
NR vs. WSJ on Immigration: It's on 12 Comments (0 topical, 12 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
Bennett will put us asleep after five minutes. He also is unable to ask a fair question.
Maybe have Hewitt and Medved moderate.
Mike C
Please tell me that this will be televised? If nothing else, will it be broadcast on the internet? I can't imagine that it would just be closed door.
This short debate between Griswold (CATO) and Rector (NR) certainly went well. If the WSJ/NR debate goes anything like this one I'm sure it will be, at the very least, entertaining.
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MWZiOTVlZmQyYmExZTQ3ZWI5ZDY0Y2U...
Dan Griswold - Debater, Moderator and Town Crier. The look on Rector's face as Griswold moderates instead of debates is priceless.
___________________________________
The absence of war is not peace.
Harry Truman
unfortunately. I listened to the first 80% of it and wound up stopping it because it was so one-sided.
Griswold's overused talking points sound, on the surface, very laudable. Unfortunately there was no true moderation of this "debate" and Griswold ran over Rectors time and kept interrupting him. Rector also did not take the opportunity to tear apart the alleged "enforcement" law that passed before and expose it for the worthless piece of paper it was.
Rector does great research, but it doesn't appear he's much at presenting a verbal case.
I didn't see it, but what you describe is what happens daily on the "news commentary" shows. Three people talk at once, the Dem's monopolize the "open" time by going over, then interrupting their counterparts. Unless the moderator controls the microphone fairly, it's an exercise in futility.
Just because a person is knowledgeable doesn't mean he can "debate" well, especially in a fixed fight.
Of course the Cable TV news channels are not interested in providing information; they are interested in presenting controversy because they think it gets ratings. I think they're wrong, but that's JMO.
We've traded our National Sovereignty for cheap roofing and yardwork.
so I could cancel my subscription. I don't take kindly to being called "irrational" by somebody who fails Logic 101. The first clip (WSJ link) is eye-opening. No wonder the MSM can't get away from "the crazies just want to kick all the furriners out!"
John Fund is the only one on the board who is halfway thinking at all.
Investors' Business Daily is far superior, even if circulation is lower. And its editorial positions make sense.
We've traded our National Sovereignty for cheap roofing and yardwork.
and I don't care what it costs, this is cage match fighting time and I am pumped up.
We've traded our National Sovereignty for cheap roofing and yardwork.
Moore is an old friend of mine and absolutely brilliant, I will look forward to learning more about this, any logistic information yet?
Kevin Price is Host of the Houston Business Show (Monday at 1 PM on CNN 650), Publisher of the HoustonBusinessReview.com and writes frequently in his www.BizPlusBlog.com.
and not published on-line, i would pay scalpers prices to see it too!
LOL
"Wubbies World" - MSgt, U.S. Air Force (Retired): "Call to Me and I will answer you, and I will tell you great and mighty things, which you do not know." -Jer 33:3-