Values Voter Debate 2007-09-17
From WhyNotWiki
- Can order DVDs, etc., view results
- Transcript
I watched it on DVD and I'd give it 
for its informational value. All of the candidates who participated I thought did a commendable job of representing themselves. I wouldn't mind any of them becoming the next president, although some of them seemed like slightly stronger candidates than the others.
One complaint regarding the format of the debate: During the "speed round", they asked yes/no questions. Most of the time, all of the candidates gave the same response, making it impossible to differentiate between them and determine which candidate had a better answer/solution to the answer. Worse, some of the time, only 1 or 2 candidates (usually Ron Paul) would give a different response than the others. And we were left wondering, "Well, why did he vote differently? What is he thinking? Maybe he has a good alternative viewpoint, a good reason for responding the way he did?" But since they weren't allowed to speak unless they wanted to use one of their very limited 2 1-minutes, we didn't get to hear from them. I think they should have been allowed at least 15 or 30 seconds just to make a quick response, if they wanted.
http://valuesvoterdebate.com/.
“How can we expect these no-show candidates to take on Osama Bin Laden and other world leaders when they’re afraid to show up and answer questions from Phyllis Schlafly?” asked Rabbi Aryeh Spero of the Jewish Action Alliance, and Values Voter debate panelist.
Rick Scarborough, President of Vision America, and Values Voter Debate Committee member added, “If you care about our votes, you need to care about our values enough to show up.”
Opinion: After watching the debate, I would say Mike Huckabee was my favorite candidate and has the best chance of winning. Ron Paul would be my second choice, but he doesn't have as good a chance of winning because he comes across as a bit whiny. My next choices would be: Tancredo, Brownback, Hunter, and Keys.
[edit] Questions/issues it raised
[edit] Gag laws. 501c3 of IRS code preventing pastors from [speaking about political candidates].
How do you/I feel about this? Should they be able to?
I can see how it might be potentially dangerous if pastors were overtly political and, for example, gave an entire "sermon" in support of a political candidate or party. That would be wrong. That would be abuse of their role as pastor.
But I think it is even more dangerous to have a low against doing that, because it limits our freedom of speech. Sure, pastors may abuse their freedom of speech, but that's better than having to deal with heaps of bogus litigation because someone from party A didn't like the supposedly/allegedly political statements of pastor B (who happens to lean slightly towards party C). Don't mess with freedom of speech. That's a slippery slope and just a bad thing to do.
[edit] Employer Non-discrimination Act
...
[edit] Abortion
(Obviously)
[edit] Hate Crimes Laws
[edit] Involvement/membership in the UN
[edit] School choice
[edit] Department of education, funding
[edit] Abolishment of IRS; [flat] tax
[edit] Immigration (illegal and legal), borders
[edit] "Multi-culturalism"
??? What's that? And why do some thing it is bad?
[edit] Involvement in Iraq
[edit] North American Union
[edit] NAFTA Super-highway
[edit] Chaplains praying in Jesus's name
[edit] Quotes
...
[edit] Would I share this debate with others?
Yes. I think people need to see and hear these candidates! I think people should be confronted with some of the issues and questions presented in this debate also. Some of them a bet many people were not even aware of or had not considered before.
If these candidates are going to get the coverage on the mainstream media that they deserve, then I guess it's up to the grassroots to spread the word.
However... It could be offensive to some. Some of it is overtly Christian and quite opinionated and it might make some people uncomfortable if they don't have the same viewpoints. I was a bit uncomfortable at a few occasional times even though I am a Christian.
Would I recommend editing it and sharing an edited version? Perhaps...
Would I recommend sharing the for-sale "voter's guide" edition that groups their answers together by candidate? That would probably be the safer bet to share. (Or I could share both in case they wanted to choose.) Then I could just ask them to listen to what one candidate (Huckabee) had to say, at the very least, since that wouldn't take long...
