mean absolutely nothing and so I'll keep them to myself.
(other than the Newt take-down of King which made my heart sing)
Something I've always hated is when any political figure makes a speech or engages in what passes for a debate, the after-show talking heads come on and tell us what was just said. I know what was said because I just listened to it, but secure in their pomposity, they assume we're too stupid to understand what was just said.
"You just don't understand", is loony left code for, "The discussion is closed because you're stupid and I'm smart." It's dismissive, and it's a way to stop any conversation they know they'd lose because they have no facts to back up their statements. Most people can handle someone hating them or loving them, but if you want to drive someone into a state of rage, just dismiss them and pretend they're irrelevant.
I have deliberately avoided reading anything having to do with the debate, particularly in regard to the ones who proudly claim who "won" the debate. I'll decide who "won" the debate based on what I saw and heard. Please don't assume I'm dumping on the many fine conservative bloggers who have posted fine articles about the debate, because I am most assuredly not. I just don't want to be swayed in my opinions by anyone, and reading many opinions tends to confuse. I would rather take time to ponder and "trust but verify" all by myself.
That being said, allow the kitteh to speak to the loony left: