While we’re waiting for Dave Freddoso to return from CNBC and make our TV work here in the Examiner war room, we have come up with the questions we would ask the candidates, but that we don’t think the CNN moderators will ask.
Here’s my rewording of the questions we came up with.
Phil Klein: Sen. Santorum, as a Senator, you opposed right-to-work laws, supported dairy subsidies and steel tariffs, and made earmarks. You defend these policies now on the grounds that they served the interests of your state. But if this is a valid defense, how would you, as a conservative President, convince lawmakers to look beyond their own parochial interests.
Tim Carney: Dr. Paul, you have consistently defended the practice of congressional earmarking as the prerogative of the legislative branch. What do you say to the conservative argument that earmarks are a “gateway drug to a spending problem,” and that they fuel corruption of elected officials?
Phil Klein: Gov. Romney, you justified your individual mandate in part because it would save the state money by stopping the uninsured from freeloading off of emergency rooms. But Massachusetts has spent much more subsidizing individuals’ health insurance than it has saved by reducing freeloading. So was the mandate a failure under your own plan.
Charlie Spiering: Dr. Paul, you recently said that Republicans’ talking about social issues is a losing strategy. But you distinguish yourself in large part by staking out minority and unpopular viewpoints, such as letting the housing crash and not targeting Osama bin Laden. How much should the Republican presidential nominee worry about what’s popular and what’s not?
Tim Carney: Sen. Santorum, you have spoken recently about many social issues, giving your opinions both on policy and on personal morals. What do you think is the federal government’s role in fostering and enforcing morality.
Tim Carney: Speaker Gingrich, would you support the U.S. military intervening to aid the Syrian rebels?
