As much as we enjoyed seeing Independent American Party candidate Chris Hansen try to wrest control of the debate from Boyd Law School Dean Richard Morgan, there were a few memorable moments of Monday night’s verbal contest between U.S. Rep. Jim Gibbons and state Sen. Dina Titus. And we’ve helpfully collected a few of them for you here.

• Asked about diversifying the economy in light of a push to raise the minimum wage and the challenge of finding attainable housing, Gibbons responded thus:

“We have low taxes. Taxes that I’m very proud to have a part in. In keeping them low, with the Gibbons tax restraint initiative.”

We have oddly phrased answers. Answers that we’re proud to have a part in. In reporting. The answers.

After a few more pro-business platitudes, Titus got hold of the question and, in our humble view, hit it clear out of the park.

“Just to tell you the truth, I don’t want to attract any businesses that won’t agree to pay $6.15 an hour. That’s not the kind of business that we need in Nevada,” she said.

And why is that? Because the lack of health insurance means those folks have to use more expensive community health care, which drives up costs for everybody.

Makes sense. Oh, by the way, both Gibbons and Titus favor an increase in the minimum wage, as do lots of people who are not officers of the Las Vegas Chamber of Commerce or overlords of low-wage-paying jobs.

• Asked about a state surplus, Titus said she’d direct funds into all-day kindergarten, vocational education programs and apprecenticeships, as well as research at state universities that might lead to economic development.

“Well, you just heard it. She’s going to spend every penny of it. Those costs that she’s talking about will go ahead and roll up the cost of government significantly,” Gibbons retorted.

Oh, snap!

Serious side note: This really is the difference between the two candidates. Gibbons worries primarily about the cost and size of government, while Titus worries primarily about doing the things that government is supposed to do. While Gibbons says he’d sock money away in endowments and the rainy day fund — thus avoiding increased costs down the road — Titus would spend it educating kids, in the belief that an educated populace able to get good jobs and pay taxes helps everybody down the road.

Back to the fun-making:

Titus — referring to an Associated Press story that quoted Gibbons saying “We’ve just started learning the process from this side. It’s going to take a few more sessions to make sure we’re 100 percent.” — had a retort of her own.

“Well, we don’t need somebody who needs to take remedial budgeting starting out as our governor,” she said.

Oh, snap!

• Gibbons, answering a question about whether Nevada businesses should pay an income tax, momentarily forgot his central campaign theme.

“The government today in the state of Nevada has a surplus. No one should be talking about raising taxes,” he said. “There is no reason for us to even be talking about taxes.”

And yet, for almost the entire first debate in Reno, Gibbons TALKED ABOUT NOTHING BUT TAXES! WHEN TITUS HAS NEVER TALKED ABOUT RAISING TAXES! We’re not saying he’s bipolar or anything, but we agree with Las Vegas Debate Jim Gibbons and not Reno Debate Jim Gibbons: Taxes are simply not going to be an issue in the near future, if at all during the next governor’s tenure.

Glad we’re all on the same page.

• Or, are we? Despite an admonition from Morgan not to personally attack opponents in closing statements, Gibbons trotted out a new line of assault on Titus.

“Ladies and gentlemen, we are at a crossroads,” he said. “In one direction is government the California way, tax and spend, where everything costs more than it should, where there’s no bureaucratic accountability, government intrusion everywhere you look and creativity buried under mountains of red tape. That’s where my opponent will lead you, where we do not want to go.

“Government the Nevada way, or the California way,” Gibbons concluded. “There are many differences between my opponent and me, but none greater than that.”

Oh, really? So California is bad, is it?

California, which has elected a Republican, Arnold Schwartzenegger to office? And looks poised to re-elect him?

California, the state that elected Gibbons’ political hero, Republican Ronald Reagan, to office back in the day?

California, the choice of 36.1 million people (versus Nevada, where just 2.4 million have chosen to live)? California, with a median income of $51,647 compared to Nevada’s $48,314?

California, home to some of the nation’s finest universities, both public and private? (Think Stanford, UC Berkley, Pepperdine, UCLA, USC, the University of San Diego, the McGeorge School of Law, etc.)

California, which despite Gibbons’ rhetoric about high taxes and the imposition of a state income tax (on both people and business) is still the headquarters of companies including Bank of the West, eBay, Google, Apple, Hewlett Packard, The Sharper Image, Williams Sonoma, Bechtel, Charles Schwab, Wells Fargo and See’s Candies? (And that’s just in and near San Francisco!)

California, home to Napa Valley and its environs, which produce some of the finest wines made in America?

California, home to the film and entertainment industry, the one business that consistently and totally dominates the world?

California, home to beautiful beaches and cities from San Diego to Los Angeles to San Francisco, not to mention our beautiful homeplace, Huntington Beach? Home to Disneyland, Sea World, Knott’s Berry Farm and Six Flags Magic Mountain, which give Nevada a run for tourist traffic?

California, which, despite claims of excessive taxation, has an economy that’s the world’s sixth largest?

That California, congressman?

Because that California seems to be doing pretty damn well if you ask us.