Watch The Inaugural Republican Presidential Debate Live (With Realtime Audience Reaction Overlay)

Tyler Durden's picture

The inaugural GOP presidential debate will begin shortly in New Hampshire. The sevan candidates who will be exchanging shots over all sorts of irrelevant matters will be Michele Bachmann, Newt Gingrich, Ron Paul, Tim Pawlenty, Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum. For those who are not watching the Stanley Cup which is concurrent with this game show, this muppet spectacle should provide for at least an hour of delightful entertainment.

Watch the CNN stream below live.

And for a parallel view showing the collocated audience reaction at any given nanomoment, below is a separate feed with a reaction feed (red is republican, yellow is indepdenent):


Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
ZeroPower's picture

Would watch it, but will be paying attention to the Canucks bringing home the cup!

Arkadaba's picture

Oh please no. I'm a proud Canadian but rooting for the Bruins. And they are kicking!!

ZeroPower's picture

Ouch. Home-ice advantage indeed.

Bay of Pigs's picture

That's pretty funny considering they're getting blown out again. Two clown shows going on at once.

Bananamerican's picture

in summary...

"My fellow Americans. As a young boy, I dreamed of being a baseball. But tonight I say, we must move forward, not backward; upward, not forward; and always twirling, twirling, twirling towards freedom!"

tarsubil's picture

Oh, when The Simpsons was funny...

topcallingtroll's picture

I don't know how anyone could say there is not a difference between tea party republicans and socialist democrats.

Tea party republicans forced the retirement or defeated incumbent republicans in primaries who had voted for the bailouts.

Only a minority of republicans voted for the bailouts.  The democrats were the ones who managed to get this passed, although it started under Bush.


The tea party wants to cut taxes and shrink the federal government. 

the tea party wants to end a lot of transfer payments and turn medicare into a voucher program.  this is the only way to save money short of complete government takeover and micromanagement (assuming that medicare continues in some form or another.  the easiest way to save money on medicare is just to end it.).

How many democrats want to cut taxes and curb entitlements?

the only people who try to convince us there is no difference between the parties are the socialists.  that is how they hide their socialism.  they say it is not republican versus democrat, but rich versus poor.  However I fear their definition of rich.  It starts at 250,000 annual family income.  Such a definition of rich is clearly big government socialism in disguise.

Long-John-Silver's picture

The TEA Party should be replaced by a Guillotine Party. This would be the only way to bring about real "change".

topcallingtroll's picture

I wouldn't have a problem with that.

Yes_Questions's picture

At one point, earlier in its conception, the "TEA Party" was on trajectory to be the Guillotine Party.  Corporate money, ever sensitive to the public's real mood, killed that quickly. 

By installing itself as the primary underwriter of this little, noise making clique, American corporatocracy quickly dispatched the TP to the custody of the republican party.

Sad, really. 




bigkahuna's picture

Some of the republicon party was dispatched to the Libertarian Party.

snowball777's picture

I think you've put your cart before Dick Armey's horse.

topcallingtroll's picture

I would say you are a socialist pretending not to be if:

You believe rich starts at 250,000.

You believe that so called rich (250,000 annual family income) are not paying enough taxes

You want to divide up the money in the economy more "fairly"

You believe that if the government just had more money it could solve a bunch of our social problems.


How many of those above fit you?

ebworthen's picture

Tea Party versus Socialists

Left versus Right

Old Hat. 

It doesn't matter. 

You could spend 20 years, the rest of your life, supporting the "Tea Party" or the old line "Donkey" party and both sides will sell you out.

Politics is theater.  I could avoid the show but the actors are lawyers who take influence bribes and impose tyrranny.

Vic Vinegar's picture

+ a billion, trillion and whatever number comes after that.

People bag on Hollywood but at least those actors & actresses are talented, entertaining and pleasant to look at. 

Not only are politicians bad actors and hard on the eyes, but they give legitimacy to a construct that is detrimental to your well being.

Ben Fleeced's picture

Washington is Hollywood for ugly people.

bigkahuna's picture

it is also the gateway to hades - thats why persephone is atop the capitol.

akak's picture

Oh, I thought it was Eleanor Roosevelt.

Isn't that why they put that statue on top of the Capitol building --- so nobody would have to look at it too closely, and possibly be turned into stone?

jeff montanye's picture

imo most of the so called rich (quarter mil family income) are probably paying enough in taxes.  who are not paying enough in taxes, statistically, are the absolutely don't doubt it for a second rich (several mil). (but see the excellent "bonfire of the vanities" on how a million a year can leave you poor.) 

the difference is at the higher level wages aren't as important a source of income as the far more favorably taxed capital gains (real or spurious).  or the just getting the money tax free when the estate or trust activates (all taxable capital gains having been wiped out at date of death under long standing tax law).

p.s. obama signed the nicest-to-the-rich estate tax law in recent history (he's such a socialist): 


mophead's picture

You suffer from class envy. Why does a mother or father work hard? You don't suppose it's to provide for their children? And so when you pass down the family business and/or assets you're expected to pay half to the IRS? That's fair? And what happens in the case where the siblings help build a family fortune, all the while paying income taxes only to end up paying again, a second time when a trust is created or assets are split up. The estate tax is double taxation, plain and simple.

DoChenRollingBearing's picture

@ top,

Someone once said: "There's not a dime's worth of difference." (I forget who, Will Rogers maybe).

My stand: yes there is a difference.  At least 12 cents.  Maybe even a quarter (there has been inflation since then).

Dr. Acula's picture

"The tea party wants to cut taxes and shrink the federal government."

AFAIK these guys want to use socialist child concentration camps to teach the Constitution, and they want to use coercion to prevent Americans from peacefully engaging in free trade with Mexican laborers.

SSDD - Same socialism, different designation.


jmc8888's picture

ROFL tea party is wrong ideology trumpeted by banksters.

End medicare = millions of seniors to rot to death (how is this better than even a bankster approach??? it isn't)

Voucher program = you're fucked after each voucher is used on tests.  Oh none left for the actual surgery or after care?

Tea Party is a farce and won't lead nowhere but doom.

Real americans who want to save america, aren't fooled by empty dangerous rhetoric. 

What we need is Glass-Steagall, not throwing people to the wolves.

Might as well be a bankster if throwing people to the wolves is your style.

End the fed, End the bailouts, Stop the fraud in the system, no free trade, etc, etc.  You don't need to be corporate tea party for that one.

Besides, socialist is a bankster monetary ideology.  Let the banksters do what they want, and then poor more printed money and give it to the poor.

There's a better way, and it starts with not allowing banksters to control the debate from a bankster ideology position.....Bankster Keynesian vs Bankster Austrian.

Cutting taxes is about the structure...get rid of the banksters and I can see people get more AND people are taxed less. 


Hugh G Rection's picture

I think a lot of the initial teaparty momentum was real grassroots dissent. It just got hijacked by establishment fuckheads.

PuppetRepubl1c's picture

agreed the tea party had real momentum and was grassroots when it was started by Ron Paul during the presidential election.  Once Obama was elected the Ron Paul movement continued to grow and expand to other like minded conservatives.  Then of course Fox News latched on to the movement knowing it was the only hope of rebuilding the republican brand after the disaster that was the Bush Administration.


It remains to be seen if the same strategy will be replayed on the other side of the aisle after the disaster that is the Obama administration!


mchadellis's picture

Yes. The liberal mob capability showed itself in Wisconsin. If the TeaParty gets what they are voting for, chaos insues and civil war is a very real possibility. Those same Ron Paul revolutionaries were protesting union protesters in Madison. Get ready folks, the proverbial fork in road is upon us. Can we unite against the top 1%  banker criminial class or will they divide and conquer us AGAIN. Will we be so stupid as to bicker ourselves into capitulation? Can blue and red turn purple and win a fucking war that has been waged on 99% of mankind? Will this turn into a genX vs. babyboomers? Let em starve I guess. They are the ones who jacked up the credit card. Fuck that. I aint payin. Off the grid and out of the system. What taxes? I am Jack's tax return. I get filed, I kill Jack.

Voluntary Exchange's picture


"Bankster Austrian" ????????????????????

You poor ignorant fool!

Read, study and otherwise understand:  Everything written by Ludwig Von Mises ("Austrian" economist), Murry Rothbard ("Austrian" economist and free market society advocate), and Hans-Hermann Hoppe ("Austrian" economist and free market society advocate). 

Then digest material from


Then as further penance read, watch, or otherwise comprehend the following:


To get a pespective on the history of the "state" you can check out:

"Hoppe on the Impracticality of One_World Government ..."

"People Of The Lie: The Psychopathology Of The “Public Servant” And The Sociopathology Of The State"

"Positively Wrong: Positivism, That Is"

"The Governance Of A Free Society"

"Non-Aggression Principle"

"Sunset of the State" -

"On the Edge W M Keiser, Voluntarism" -

"Statism is Dead - The Matrix" -

"Statism is Dead - Free Range Humans" -

"Statism is Dead -Terrorism" -

"The Story of Your Enslavement" -

"I'm Allowed to rob you!" -

"State or Private Law Society" -

"No Treason, No. 1"

"Disproving the State" -

"A Virus of the Mind" -

"The Story of Our Unenslavement" -

"The Myth of the Rule of Law" -


"Property Rights in Celtic Irish Law"

"Brehon Law: a Pragmatic System Based on Property Rights"

"Irish History - Brehon Law - Part 1 of 11"

"Stateless Societies: Ancient Ireland" (pg. 3)

"The Love Police"


on free markets

"Free Market Myths Debunked!" -



After all that if you have a mind that works, maybe then you will have cured yourself of your affliction!






Everybodys All American's picture

The tea party is not the problem.They have been against the bankster bs and in fact Rick Santelli would tell you the birth of the party came from the bailouts. But apparently you forgot.

Dr. Acula's picture

"End medicare = millions of seniors to rot to death"

Keep medicare = millions of iatrogenic deaths from soviet-style medicine and an ever-expanding government black hole that engulfs the economy. Also, immoral acts of robbery and people who want to opt out being caged or shot.

jmc8888's picture

Two different things.  You see what we have is a false debate

Bankster Keyneisan Healthcare

Bankster Austrian Healthcare

What we had up to Obamacare was neither, Obamacare decidely put it into Bankster Keynesian Healthcare

You want a clearer picture here's two things about Austrian school (no need to debunk keyneisan since we all know that here)

A good quote from the 2nd one about Austrian

"The whole purpose of the school from the beginning, was to target for destruction the American System of political economy, which had been brought to Germany by Bismarck against the bitter opposition of those two degenerate monarchies. The tactic was a simple one, the same in use today: to falsely identify the American System of Alexander Hamilton and Friedrich List (the latter a special hate object), with the socialism of Saint-Simon, Hegel and Karl Marx. Once the British and their Habsburg satellites turned against Hitler, the equation was extended to equate the American System with "fascism" as well as "communism," as in Friedrich von Hayek's book, The Road to Serfdom, which Rand Paul periodically, worshipfully rereads."

The America System is not Keyneisan or Austrian...and neither of those monetarist schools of non-thought hold a candle to the true American System this country once had.

It also fucks up the debate so it is important to know the difference, and not follow into the same predictable traps. 

I am not defending the Bankster Keyneisan Obamacare.  I'm just saying we don't need Bankster Austrian Vouchercare.  Both are idiotic, and only 'necessary' due to the bullshit fraudulent debt that has been foisted upon us.  Which can be cancelled via Glass-Steagall.

Why pay off fraud? In a real America, we can decide that we won't.  Did anyone hear what idiot bachman said? The #1 thing we should pay is our debt payments.  Fraudulent debt doesn't matter, just pay it off I guess.  What else could Bachmann mean? Unless you separate the two you are just guaranteeing to honor fraud.

I don't expect anymore truth from any future democratic debate as well.  We have two bankster debates....democrats = Bankster Keynesian debates and republicans = Bankster Austrian debates.  Both are inherently anti-american viewpoints.

And again, any debate without Glass-Steagall is pissing in the wind.


acabrer's picture

Very wonderful to read someone else gets this.

G. Marx's picture

Umm, hey, ignorant one. Try cracking open a book written by an Austrian economist. You'll soon discover that the term "Austrian Vouchercare" is a contradiction. No such animal exist. Maybe "Supply-side Vouchercare", but not Austrian.

You know, when being a critic it's best to have read what was written by those you criticise and not shaping your criticism on the view of critics (they can be wrong or attempting to take advantage of your ignorance, which seems to be the case here). Such an approach is intellectually dishonest and lazy.

To reference the fascist LaRouche is enough in and of itself to discredit you, but you're at least honest enough to admit the source of your ideas, so I'll give you that much.

citizen2084's picture


Yeah right "Austrian vouchercare". 

Well... as long if the voucher was a private instrument agreed between two parties, and no one was forced to use, and it was not funded by force, then yes there may something that one could describe as Austrian voucher.  

If the voucher is a govt instrument forced upon anyone (use or accept) and funded by force - then no it could never be considered in anyway to be part of that economic school thought.


G. Marx's picture

You tell me which version he meant? Did you read his LaRouche links? If you did, you'd know.

I'll ask, under what Austrian system would such a voucher system arise? Maybe a wealthy individual seeking to help out needy individuals? In such a situation, could that model ever become large enough to be a national system for all? I have my doubts. And again, I've never read any such system being advocated by an Austrian economist. He shouldn't confuse Austrians and Supply-siders. The fact he does is telling. And given LaRouche mixes the two, clearly shows he's trying to misinform and misdirect because I know that LaRouche knows the difference between the two schools.

Voluntary Exchange's picture

+1  Getting tired of ignorant people trying to use "Austrian" almost as if they were being paid to distort the meaning. 

Bankers would hate "Austrian" - with such features as free market justice, and no such thing as limited liability,  no government mandated paper money, only free market money with people free to reject the  bad bankers paper money, and reward the few honest bankers that might come into existence if the bankers had to honor their notes 100% for species (gold/silver) redemption as a free market in money would again move to such an honest system. Then the bankers would face personal family liability if they defaulted and would have no government monopoly justice system to rig the game their way.

It has always been government that the bankers could buy  like the Hamiltonians did from the start in America.   And the British bank of England system also was a creature of captured government that protected the super thief.

What is this ridiculous worship of "Glass-Steagall"?    It is a product of a monopoly justice-adjudication system. I prefer free market justice with no way for the murders, frauds, and thieves to rig the system with monopoly government to thus evade justice and  restitution for their huge crimes. 


What is this worship of the Constitution?  "Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes..." - that is what you need to know about the Constitution - it is an organized crime syndicate!  The people of America won their independence fighting for the principle that people are endowed with the right to choose to obtain security and justice services (what most call "government")  through consent.  That means contractual security and adjudication. That means voluntary exchanges ONLY - not imposing a tax against someones free will at the point of a gun (and getting wealth destroying  monopoly "service" in the process).


What is this worship of Ron Paul?  Please understand, I think he is a decent man. He remains the only politician I have ever given a donation to in my entire life. But if finally dawned on me.  The US government and all governments on this planet are organized crime syndicates. Do you expect to eliminate systemic crime by getting a decent person to head up the mafia?  This US mafia (government) serves those of criminal intent, not those who wish to create wealth and human well being through voluntary exchanges. Best case, if Ron Paul was not murdered or otherwise neutralized (which would be a miracle in itself) it might give you 4-8 years of arrested development of tyranny but the mafia does not exist to "serve the people". It exists to serve the criminals.


I suggest we reboot America back to 1776 and learn again what consent means and only work with a system of voluntary exchanges with free market adjudication and free market defense/security. Then America truly would be a domain of freedom that could stand as a shining example that could inspire the rest of the world so that people could finally free themselves from the parasites and predators that infest "governments" all over this planet!

jaffi's picture

Wow, now that is funny.  First, you state that the American System of Hamilton is anything different than socializing the monetary system under a central bank.  You apparently do not know the Hamiltonian system is merely the English system brought to America, there's nothing new or "American" about it.  Then you state that Austrians support a voucher healthcare system, which is a completely erroneous assertion.  You also state that the Austrian school is "monetarist", when in fact it is the Chicago School that is "monetarist".  I take it that you have never read any economic treatises, let alone any Austrian literature.  

I took a look at your links, and they are just as idiotic and misinformed as you are (which explains a lot).  Not only are both links entirely unsourced, but they also make claims that are almost the exact opposite of the facts.  I also find it funny that you're trying to equate Lincoln's greenback (which was actually Bizmarck's idea, not the other way around) with Hamilton's English banking system- the have nothing in common other than that they are backed by government debt.

Dude, you really need to actually do some real research and/or read the Austrian literature rather than listening to unsourced web propaganda.  You're just making yourself look foolish and uneducated.  

i-dog's picture

It's all Hegelian dialectic.

End the Feds (both FRB and!

Astrolabe's picture

1. gee, how does germany manage, what with it's socialist medicine?

2. the tea pary opposed the bailout. hahahaha. the only thing they would be allowed to succeed at is austerity for the proles - never for TBTB. get it?


anony's picture

1) Here's your answer--thank me later

The United States' population hasn't been the size Germany's, currently, since 1860.

2) the diversity of people in the United States is unequaled anywhere in the world--as such, we don't give a crap about most of the people who are here, particklelerly new immigrants, legal and illegal, and in fact don't much care about each other

3) we are spread out over a land mass 10 times the size of Germany.

4) Size MATTERS!!!

G. Marx's picture

Ahh, yet another ignorant rant. There is no such thing as "Bankster Austrian" as those who are devotees of the Austrian school, believe either in "free banking" (look it up, today starts your self-education) or a gold standard. Austrians do not believe in a central banking model. Of course you'd have known that if you had actually read a book by von Mises, Hayek or Rothbard, you obviously haven't (and probably never will, I'm guessing that big words confuse you?). It's obvious you're nothing but a mindless shill for the brown-shirt LaRouche.

jaffi's picture

It is funny that he calls the Austrians banskers, but then in the next breath he supports the Hamiltonian banking system which is nothing more than the English banking system (i.e. private central banking).  This cat is really confused and apparently hasn't even taken the time to read any economic works, let alone Austrian literature.  Also, did you notice that there was not one single citation in those LeRouche articles?  Not a single one.  It's funny how people will believe anything that they read, even if it is unsourced.  

PuppetRepubl1c's picture



"Only a minority of republicans voted for the bailouts. "


FAIL, you lose for revisionist history

behold the Senate vote count for the bailout signed by George Bush in Oct 2008 (40/51 Democrats vote yes and 34/49 Republicans)

however if you remember your history you will know the few republicans who voted against it only did so because they had "cover" from their fellow yea voting members.  They knew the bill would pass without them, thus letting candidates in contentious districts throw their constituents a bone even though they would have voted for it if their party had required it.  


If you follow politics in the US you will notice this "cover" system of "dissenting votes" is strategically used to protect memebers in contentious districts while at the same time guaranteeing whatever bill at issue is still passed.



jeff montanye's picture

thank you.  

there are anti-authoritarians in the republican party (and in the democratic party).  just not enough, apparently.  yet.  

anyone who thinks obama is significantly more socialist than bush is not paying attention.  they are both crony capitalist fascists.  

ron paul '12 

lawrence1's picture

Agree.  Remember, most republicans reserve the right to create facts, revise or forget history.  End justifies the means, and be meaner than hell.  And democrats, ¨Let us not dither our of fear, but let us not fear to dither.¨

But both parties are bought, making democracy a farce, but most republicans are mean whores.

topcallingtroll's picture

So you agree there is a difference!

topcallingtroll's picture

I was refering to the house vote.