Rainville/Shepard Debate: the short version

I realize that my post about the Rainville Shepard debate was long, so I want to sum a few things up.

Here’s a quick summary of their views from the debate:

Shepard:

• Thinks the US needs to get out of Iraq as soon as it is stable enough (a year or two, tops).
• The government is too powerful and spends too much of our money. He favors less bureaucracy and lower taxes.
• He opposes No Child Left Behind and Medicare part D.
• Supports privatizing social security.
• He is pro-life.

Rainville:

• She thinks we need to stay in Iraq as long as it takes. She hinted at needing to go into Iran at some point.
• Gives lip service to fiscal constraint, but also said the government needs to fund “unfunded mandates” (aka spend more money), touted a new bureaucracy to oversee ethics, supports Medicare part D, and the goals of NCLB, but notes that it is too cookie cutter.
• Does not support privatizing social security. Says we need to strengthen it long term without cutting benefits, raising payroll taxes, or raising the retirement age. (Yet did not propose how to pull off that magical feat.)
• She is pro-choice, but supports parental notification and opposes late-term abortions.

So there is the gist.

The reason I like Shepard is because he has a philosophy that is consistent throughout – the Federal government has too much power and spends too much of our money. You can see this strongly throughout all of his answers.

Rainville has the same problem liberals do. She lacks a philosophy about the role of government. She takes the issues one by one, which means there is a lack of consistency in her answers.

I bet you that I can guess Shepard’s position on any issue and be right 90% of the time, or better. The same cannot be said for Rainville.

As for Rainville, if she is going to go on and face Welch, she needs to lose the long-winded answers and cut to the chase. Shepard gave short and to the point answers. She wanted to wander into the nuances of every issue. She might think that gives her depth, but in the age of the sound bite, her words will just get taken out of context as they were here by those wily Dems.