We have to organize against the MSM as well. For years now we have been complaining about these bozos but doing precious little else to stem the tide of their Orwellian "Newspeak" and globalist propaganda.

Now we must start boycotting this garbage wherever we come across it. Eventually even they will understand that this shoddy Kabuki Theater of the Absurd has worn itself out! Now they seem little more than a Nazis or Communist propaganda organ similar to Pravda or Izvestia.

Send a message, stop watching, listening or reading their garbage!!!

The man has a gift for remembering and processing everything that he hears. It is similar to photographic memory. A powerful trait! Oh! I forgot to mention that even his Liberal/Progressive law professor said that he was the smartest student that he ever had.

Perhaps it is the time to take on the media in a principled and coordinated manner. It is time to organize against the Orwellian media that we now have.......Perhaps Reince Priebus will grow a pair and lead the charge. Enough is enough!

I couldn't agree more. I'm happy to see many of them say they want to be the ones who set the terms and decide more about the debate. We need a fair and honest debate where the questions aren't skewed like the CNBC debate and allow them to give answers, and push them to answer the question asked not give some drivel.

The only way for these candidates to get a fair chance to put their ideas out without playing the idiot press' "gotcha" game is for the R's to buy their own time on national media, pick their own "honest" moderators and discuss the issues and presented solutions only. Let the public have a clear understanding of their ideas.

The same for the debate between the D's and the R's (and any I's, etc.). Find an honest broker (obviously not in the MSM) and conduct a real debate (soap box style).

The only way to get integrity back into what has become a media beauty pageant and liberal coronation!!!! For what its worth!

That was not a debate. It was a question and answer session!

It's about time! I hope it starts a trend that says we're not going to take this crap anymore, and stick to it. When they ask a stupid question that no one can answer without admitting something negative, point it out forcefully, then go on to making a sensible statement.

Dwlievert: Very well stated and thorough summation of last night's debate. Thank you.

The media has, for a long time, been the enemy here. Candidly speaking, I consider most of the mainstream media- rotten to the core. It is the modern method of collective indoctrination.

When one considers that there are a great number of people who actually believe what they read in the news and hear from TV -"If the news said it, it must be true"- has created a nation of sheep that follow the pied piper of the socialist left right over the cliff....

I think most of them would go along with regulating the news, too. They'd be confident that their side would get to appoint the officials who decide, and they'd likely be right. It was a sad day for them when the end of the Fairness Doctrine enabled Limbaugh to go on the air.

OK, Cruz showed the way on how to deal with the Liberal/Clinton media. Rubio was great, too. Now let's hope that the other candidates can do the same. We Conservatives should never let the media dictate to us or set us up. They have in the past but after last night, no more.

I thought the CNBC apparatchiks lost control of the debate with the first stupid question they asked. Funny, I didn't hear anyone ask Hillary or Bernie such a stupid question. And I, too, was encouraged. Hope and pray we get a Republican in the White House.

Last night was the best debate, so far, in my mind. The candidates actually beat someone else up, rather than each other. It wasn't the comic slugfest that CNN put on...that's for sure.
One highlight was Carly's repeated desire to debate Hilarity. That is a show I would dearly love to see, though the Clintons aren't called "slick" for nothing.

The probing and powerfully relevant questions posed by the intellectual parrots in front of the stage during the previous Democrat debate might best be summed up as, "which of you is more handsome and why?"

Contrast that farce with how the disgustingly shabby representatives of the fourth estate practiced their craft during last nights potential Republican circus, that, thanks to CNBC's journalistic zealots, turned into a very instructive and worthwhile show.

I can't remember when I chose to no longer watch CNBC's morning business fare. Owing to my addiction to most things financial, I had enjoyed it. I previously had determined that CNN was just another version of the political claptrap we had all been receiving from the three networks for years, and I found CNBC somewhat refreshing. Anchored by Mark Haines, with Joe Kernan providing colorful common sense, it had more than made up for the other political mannequins, led by the amiable, though politically corrupted, Becky Quick and the newly-hired far less amiable, Carl Quintanilla.

When John Harwood was hired in 2006, my antenna were seriously alerted. He is unquestionably the worst of the lot. Though intelligent, carrying all the visual and audio trappings of what Roger Ailes would subsequently merge with reasonable objectivity and "balance" - along with "gender diversity," Harwood's pedigree and biased "perspective" soon prompted me to say goodbye to CNBC.

In my judgment, last nights display may mark a turning point in the travesty that has become of what our nations founders believed were the guardians of our liberty. Of course, just as much of what occurs politically will ultimately be determined by those claiming to represent said liberty, this potential opportunity may be squandered by same. However, I remain ever-optimistic. The "World Series Pitch" handed to the Republican Party by Harwood, Quintalla, and Quick - together with their unseen infrastructure slithering in the media grass behind the playing field, should be able to be hit out of the park. We shall see.

Meanwhile, the length of rope that the "mainstream" liberal establishment media has been given and eagerly taken, is now sufficient to tie the knot around their necks, awaiting only a credible Republican leadership to spring the loosely secured trap door on which they intellectually stand.

One can only hope............

Considering that CNBC has many liberal viewers the "debate" provided the GOP candidates with an ideal stage to illustrate MSM bias. It is abundantly clear that the "moderators" had an agenda and it was their intent to influence rather than to stimulate the flow of information. That reveals them as propagandists rather than journalists.

"Encouraged" is not what I felt or feel, but I understand your reaction.
"Outraged" is still my own, but I must also admit I didn't watch it; nor did I watch any of the others.
I know they all, "news" people and candidates, begin from the premise of government, and phooey on individual rights, with the occasional exception of Rand Paul.
But I too am "encouraged" by the general response to Ted Cruz's lambasting of the "news" knuckleheads.

Excellent analysis. Yes, the "news" personnel start from the premise of government, which they generally LOVE ... except, sometimes, involved in their own field. Then, they remember the First Amendment.

Exactly! And cheers for Rubio's pointing out
the Democrats' biggest Super-Pac: The
main=stream=media.....A home-run!!

To see those empty suit shills put in their places had me grinning.
The reaction from the audience made it even better.

I think that Cruz might have put on a breakout performance last night. His recitation of the gotcha questions to the other candidates was a choice cut.

Rubio won the debate on points, and is definitely a great debater. Does that make him a great leader, though?

Christie showed that he is a fighter and can think on his feet when he followed up Bush's answer about regulating Fantasy Football by saying "why the hell are we talking about Fantasy Football when we have a 19 trillion dollar deficit and have ISIS and Al Qaeda on the march?"

Bush lost by giving a straight policy wonk question about regulating Fantasy Football and in his exchange with Rubio about missing votes in the Senate. Rubio had already killed that question when it was asked by one of the CNBC apparatchiks, then Bush tried to embarrass him with it right after. Talk about walking straight into a swinging haymaker; I was embarrassed for him. But I won't miss him when he drops out.

The CNBC apparatchiks lost control of the debate after they tried to embarrass Ben Carson with a question about gay marriage, and the crowd loudly booed it. From that point on it was Republican candidates supporting each other against the mainscream press foe.

I was somewhat encouraged by the whole thing.

I was so glad to be listening as Cruz spoke. It was simply great to have someone finally say what was long overdue.

I also was so happy to hear a few of the candidates defending each other during the debate. Unless I missed something, I think Cruz was the leader on that as well.

I am surprised they even let CNBC have a go at them, it was purely a setup from start to finish. At least Trump calls it right, and said that it was a setup 6 hrs before it even happened. And I don't even like Trump, other than as an alternative to horrible reality shows....

It's amazing he remembered all the bogus questions and to whom they asked each one.

I don't know the right way to answer that bogus question. The premises are ) the America voters want a problem solver who will find a way to go deeper in debt and b) continued borrowing calms the financial markets. I think B is wrong and A is unclear. There's no substance to the question apart from whether those premises are true. They should have come out and directly asked those questions.

Well nobody can say Cruz can't think on his feet. He really laid into them, and I think it played out rather well. I don't know if that meant he "won" the debate, but it probably didn't hurt either.