THE DEFICIT OF TAXING QUESTIONS

The CNN 2nd GOP presidential debate was in a word, uninformative. The only candidate on stage that attempted to be more detailed when answering the few foreign policy questions was Carly Fiorina.

Her plan for increasing our military's capacity while building a bigger footprint presence in the Mid-East to counteract Russian alliances in Iran and Syria was at least a game plan. Other candidates promoted war to topple Assad or complained about Obama's temerity without stating a clear outline of how they would contend with the multiple threats to America's national security. 

However the blame for the fluff and puff responses to serious foreign policy concerns was not the fault of the candidates but instead CNN and the network's use of a gossiping style of questioning that pitted one candidate campaign statements to another candidate's ideas.

This two on the same plate, style of debate, covered the meat of the question with so much peppery sauce, that it was forked up with defensiveness and counter claims. It ruined the comprehension of what was being asked, causing the answers to be impossible to digest by the public.

Perhaps even more disappointing were the domestic affairs that were completely ignored by CNN moderators, such as the absent query to the candidates about our huge and growing national debt. The next President must contend with reducing federal spending and breaking our fall into the fiscal abyss.

The budget deficit, and the size of the federal government is a major difference between liberal big government Democrats and socialists versus free market and free living constitutional conservatives and libertarians, yet the questions to the candidates on this topic were lost in the chattering.

Americans know that in order to have a strong military, to save Social Security and meet the goals of securing our borders requires an overhaul of government priorities, but most importantly returning solvency and sanity to federal spending. Yet the 17 trillion dollar debt hanging over our children's heads was the panting dog left in the hot car by a thoughtless media, while they stood in line for a political latte for rejuvenating ratings.  

Unlike the first FOX debate, where the moderators smeared peanut butter on candidates with gotcha gaffes that produced sparse substance to help voters decide, this style of debate by CNN was the other side of the news network debate bread, that contained marshmallow fluff in an attempt to start a schoolroom food fight.

Did some of the candidates stand out and shine brighter? Perhaps, but I doubt the voters paying attention this early in the primary know much more about where these candidates stand on the serious issues swirling around our nation's future and or their doable plans to repeal, replace, fix or shore up our weakened foundation that is in flux, home and abroad.

No questions were asked to any candidates regarding specific government agencies a conservative candidate would be willing and eager to cut (except apparently the IRS), nor were there any questions involving a plan to cure government waste and fraud. Did anyone hear a question and answer involving returning the size of the federal government to its constitutional enumerated limits?

Yes, one can argue that the campaign is early and there will be plenty of time for a hearty helping of stick to the ribs home cooking, serving up satiating solutions to our many problems but if these two debates are the political teasing appetizers, then it should not have the effect of turning our collective stomachs.

In fact, I think I can safely say, Americans are refusing the major networks fast-food liberally biased stuffed sausage on a stick-it to conservatives tray of mockery and directing us to sit in the sunny pick-an-nit table, to eat, and then stand in line for more fool's gruel. Voters' reaction so far has been, to pack up the camper and not stay for all the political tracker and poll analysis to pick a winner.

Some have already saddled their horse to a candidate while some others have given up on the notion of an honest and honorable politician. Most, are just looking for the candidate that will not be an elite puppet, has respect for the rule of law and will fight for American values with tireless tenacity. 

The question is, will we be able to find this person by watching network debates? So far that answer appears to be no, since corporate media's focus is to produce slander-pander performances designed solely to gorge on their ratings feasts. Until they start supplying the public with a forum for the serious airing of contrasting views from those vying to steer our nation's ship through the dangerous waters ahead, it will be hard to choose a hire.

  

Stay tuned, because so far the debates have been flush on entertainment questions while running a deficit on substantive answers, but like all shows, the climax always comes after the commercials.