In the HuffPo commentary section of last night debate there were two interesting comments worth mentioning. First, it was Ryan Grim’s observations that Audit the Fed has become largely mainstream in the Republican Party. He writes:
The bruised relationship between the Republican Party and the Federal Reserve was on dramatic display in response to a question about whether the Federal Reserve should be audited. Such a look-see into the workings of the central bank was considered radical just a few years ago; it was only over the staunch opposition of Wall Street and the leadership in both parties that a watered-down measure to partially audit the Fed became law in 2010. But the policy now seems to be uniformly backed by the GOP’s presidential contenders.
“Of course we should see what the Fed is doing,” Romney said.
Michele Bachmann, Herman Cain and Rick Santorum all backed a Fed audit, as well, while arguing that it should no longer focus on increasing employment, restricting its focus to inflation.
Rick Perry stood by his controversial Fed comments from earlier in the campaign, when he said that Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke would be treated “ugly” in Texas and that his monetary policy was “almost treasonous.” Perry slightly softened the charge, saying that Bernanke himself wasn’t a traitor, but that using the Fed for political purposes was “almost treasonous.” Bernanke is a Republican.
Secondly, was John Ward’s summary of Paul’s critique of Perry’s job growth program:
The second key moment in the debate tonight, as it relates to Rick Perry’s fortunes, came when Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) went after the Texas governor. Paul was asked if Perry should get credit for Texas’ job growth. Not only did Paul say no, he said that under Perry, his taxes have doubled, the state’s debt has tripled and 170,000 of the state’s new jobs were government jobs.
That came moments after Romney had gotten in a nice jab at Perry, saying that under the previous two governors, Democrat Ann Richards and Republican George W. Bush, job growth per year was higher: 2.5 percent for Richards, 3.5 percent for Bush and 1 percent for Perry.
Perry is looking good overall, but the shots from Paul will bloody him a little. Maybe a reason why Perry should have avoided going after the Texas congressman in the last debate.
Overall, this was a fine debate for Paul. Paul took the opportunity to make some salient observations on a variety of issues and once again had the opportunity to defend his consistent record against the interventionist foreign policy.<>
<>
