Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Hugo Chavez on September 15, 2006, 11:48:15 PM
-
Link to entire debate:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/44434364#44434364
-
just caught the last half
they all seem nutty except for Huntsman
Unless someone else gets into the race it's going to come down to Perry or Romney
-
Lets post the link to the entire debate here so everyone can watch and vote.
-
Lets post the link to the entire debate here so everyone can watch and vote.
Posted in the first post.
-
just caught the last half
they all seem nutty except for Huntsman
Unless someone else gets into the race it's going to come down to Perry or Romney
Next to Obama anyone seems perfectly fine.
-
just caught the last half
they all seem nutty except for Huntsman
Unless someone else gets into the race it's going to come down to Perry or Romney
Yep
-
Next to Obama anyone seems perfectly fine.
yes, we know how you feel about Obama
that wasn't the question in the title of the thread
-
yes, we know how you feel about Obama
that wasn't the question in the title of the thread
How is Romney nutty?
-
yes, we know how you feel about Obama
that wasn't the question in the title of the thread
lol, I wonder how many times he repeats the same thing for us during the primary.... I'm taking a guess about 10,000 times lol...
-
Even if one likes Ron Paul, he defnately did not win tonight. He needs to focus better.
-
Even if one likes Ron Paul, he defnately did not win tonight. He needs to focus better.
yep
-
Even if one likes Ron Paul, he definitely did not win tonight. He needs to focus better.
He is the only one tonight that had his questions from the moderator sounding more like an attack. The tone of questions given to everyone else seemed calm in comparison.
-
What questions were asked of Huntsmen? What tone was used in comparison to the other candidates?
And yes it matters. This is on MSNBC with Brian Williams and some hack from the Politico....these debates give the moderators and their handlers ample opportunity to push this or that about particular candidates via certain lines of questioning, who gets asked what, who doesn't get asked anything and the general tone and if they try to start fights etc.
-
I thought Ron Paul was very underwhelming tonight. He needs to stay away from the tinfoil hattery with comments like the fence keeping people in. No one wants to hear that shit and it certainly isn't going to help him.
I liked Cain tonight. The guy is articulate and from what I watched he didn't dodge any questions.
just caught the last half
they all seem nutty except for Huntsman
Unless someone else gets into the race it's going to come down to Perry or Romney
What was nutty about them? They all came off better than Obama does.
What's nutty is your blind worship of a guy who, at this point, can do little more than incite class warfare while he reads off a teleprompter.
-
LOL @ Ron Paul....
"They build a border fence... what makes you think they wouldn't use it to KEEP US IN"?
lol (paraphrased)
-
Paul had a chance to destroy some candidates but its not in him. Too bad. Usually he comes out with some great answers, but nothing stood out tonight becasue he was barely given a chance to speak and when he did he rushed it too much. Unfortunately they never asked him one question about the Fed, monetary policy or foreign policy while they did with the other candidates.
-
From NBC, this one comes with comments too, many RP supporters out there.
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/09/07/7658608-who-do-you-think-won-the-republican-debate-at-the-reagan-library
Who do you think won the Republican debate at the Reagan library?
Ron Paul
43.5%
(20,596 votes)
Mitt Romney
21.4%
(10,144 votes)
Rick Perry
16.4%
(7,754 votes)
Jon Huntsman
7.8%
(3,679 votes)
Newt Gingrich
4%
(1,897 votes)
Herman Cain
2.9%
(1,376 votes)
Michele Bachmann
2.7%
(1,278 votes)
Rick Santorum
1.3%
(600 votes)
-
Almost ALL the comments are for Ron Paul. lol
He was clearly ignored during the debate, but every time he was allowed to talk, he ROCKED IT!
Ron Paul was asked maybe three questions and he still had more substance than all the other candidates combined.
He's the only consistent one.
i think Paul won cause all the posers started trying to sound like him on the issues
Ron Paul makes more sense in 5 minutes than any other candidate makes in an hour.
Was Ron Paul even there? Either way he has my vote!!!!!!!!
-
Why is Romneys graph almost as large as Pauls when paul is destroying him? Perry's graph is way wrong too. lol
(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-Y9CbRPKChSo/TmhE1AEiEfI/AAAAAAAACTo/kOZpbCRDaxs/s500/mostDeceptiveGraph.jpg)
-
lol. Stop punishing yourself. lol
-
lol. Stop punishing yourself. lol
When you laugh I know you are actually dying inside. Its killing you and I love it.
-
When you laugh I know you are dying inside. Its killing you and I love it.
LOL! Really? Dude I have no horse in this race. I just think it's funny how you fanatics jump on these online polls, media conspiracies, etc. Just look at the actual primary voting results and you'll have a much better perspective on what will happen during this election cycle.
BTW, here is a question I've asked before: how do you think Ron Paul can win the nomination if he's unable to win his home state of Texas?
-
LOL! Really? Dude I have no horse in this race. I just think it's funny how you fanatics jump on these online polls, media conspiracies, etc. Just look at the actual primary voting results and you'll have a much better perspective on what will happen during this election cycle.
BTW, here is a question I've asked before: how do you think Ron Paul can win the nomination if he's unable to win his home state of Texas?
Is the graph accurate or not? Its a subtle thing but it still gives off a false representation of facts. I think its done on purpse and theres been enough evidence out there to support it. Ie. Jon Stewert video explains it perfectly. This happens time and time again. Even others noticed he didnt get fuck all time to talk tonight. As always you try to change the issue.
-
When you laugh I know you are actually dying inside. Its killing you and I love it.
lol, poor BB... ;D
-
Is the graph accurate or not? Its a subtle thing but it still gives off a false representation of facts. I think its done on purpse and theres been enough evidence out there to support it. Ie. Jon Stewert video explains it perfectly. This happens time and time again. Even others noticed he didnt get fuck all time to talk tonight. As always you try to change the issue.
No the graph isn't accurate. But the online poll results are meaningless. Perhaps the person who did the graph knows they are flooded by Ron Paul fanatics?
How do you think Ron Paul can win the nomination if he's unable to win his home state of Texas?
-
No the graph isn't accurate. But the online poll results are meaningless. Perhaps the person who did the graph knows they are flooded by Ron Paul fanatics?
How do you think Ron Paul can win the nomination if he's unable to win his home state of Texas?
Whats that supposed to mean?
-
Online Polls don`t win elections.
-
Whats that supposed to mean?
How do you think Ron Paul can win the nomination if he's unable to win his home state of Texas?
-
Perhaps the person who did the graph knows they are flooded by Ron Paul fanatics?
Whats that supposed to mean?
-
Whats that supposed to mean?
I see. You ask me a question. I answer it. I ask you a question, you respond with a question. lol
-
I see. You ask me a question. I answer it. I ask you a question, you respond with a question. lol
Its more like, I ask you, you derail.
Goodnight BB.
-
Its more like, I ask you, you derail.
Goodnight BB.
It's ok. It's only a message board. No hard feelings. :)
-
If so many people support Ron Paul, why does he always do so shitty come Primary time? Do the followers just not show up or are they just widely dispersed so that they never have a majority in any one area?
-
If so many people support Ron Paul, why does he always do so shitty come Primary time? Do the followers just not show up or are they just widely dispersed so that they never have a majority in any one area?
that's easy to answer!
-
Calm down gramps:
(http://i.imgur.com/PMSBK.jpg)
-
I was very proud to be a Republican tonight. Hard to say who won. They were all very impressive. Even Bachman, who I have really come to despise in the past couple of months or so, was more disciplined than usual and she came off with some very good comments. I particularly like when she pointed out that Reagan himself had agreed to a tax hike/spending cut deal very similar to the hypothetical one that the GOP candidates said they would not agree to in the last debate. He got burned, and the reason no GOP candidate will ever take that kind of deal is because they know that they will get burned by either the current Congress or future Congresses. Not because of some stupid tax pledge that Nordquist wants them to sign.
Huntsman was very impressive. If he didnt shoot himself in the foot by basically telling Republicans that theyre stupid for not believing in Global Warming (even though the same people who are pushing that nonsense were wrong about every single other scare in the past 50 years) , and if he had not worked for Obama, he might have an outside shot at the nomination.
I was very impressed with the way Perry carried himself. He obviously has been coached to act more presidential, and it showed. Im not sure if he has persuaded me to put my support to him from Romney, but he definatley showed that he is for real and that he deserves to be one of the front runners. He was a bit shaky in terms of substance when answering some of the attacks on the Texas record, but as the debate went on he started to catch fire, and I thought he did a good job later on in answering the attack on Texas education.
Romney did well on the immigration issue by pointing out how a lot of liberal policies on illegal immigration such as DREAM act help encourage MORE illegal immigration.
-
If so many people support Ron Paul, why does he always do so shitty come Primary time? Do the followers just not show up or are they just widely dispersed so that they never have a majority in any one area?
Because the countless number of people who like him politically end every discussion about him with; "He won't win though, so I'm going to vote for someone else."
Who knows why people latch on to ideas the way they do? Similar to the way the average person hears the word "steroids" and immediately thinks "OMFG! They kill everyone!" but hears "cocaine," "heroin," or any other drug with higher health risks and thinks "That stuff isn't that dangerous..," the self-fulfilling prophecy given by RP fans of "he won't win, so I won't vote for him..." has somehow disproportionately attached itself to Ron Paul, and RP alone.
-
Obama won.
-
Obama won.
Did you happen to see today U.E. claims report and the revisions to last weeks numbers?
He isn't winning.
-
Obama won.
LMFAO! ! ! !
Are you kidding?
Romney, Perry, Huntsman, Paul, Cain, Newt all did fine.
-
LMFAO! ! ! !
Are you kidding?
Romney, Perry, Huntsman, Paul, Cain, Newt all did fine.
how did bachmann do, 33?
-
how did bachmann do, 33?
She did ok, but got overshadowed. her answer on the Reagan tax cut and spending was her best line of the night and should be repeated by everyone any time it is brought up.
The demo commie dirtbags simply can't be trusted on any issue to make a deal.
-
IMO, she has made a very solid run for Veep at this point.
I think as her campaign runs out of money and people flee, she should back out with dignity like TPaw did. Don't stick around long past any relevancy like Newt.
-
With Obama's current presidential record, any one of those GOP candidates will wipe the floor with him in a debate.
-
With Obama's current presidential record, any one of those GOP candidates will wipe the floor with him in a debate.
do you think so?
do you think an extremely intelligent guy like Huntsmann would do equally well as the pompous, smirking Perry?
Some of them were poor against their GOP peers. Obama beat up on people named hilary and mccain to get to this point.
-
do you think so?
do you think an extremely intelligent guy like Huntsmann would do equally well as the pompous, smirking Perry?
Some of them were poor against their GOP peers. Obama beat up on people named hilary and mccain to get to this point.
BECAUSE HE COULD LIE HIS ASS OFF SINCE HE HAD NO RECORD WHATSOEVER!
With his horrible record of disaster, failure, bankruptcy, incompetence, and treason, he can't get away with the same lies he told in 2008.
-
BECAUSE HE COULD LIE HIS ASS OFF SINCE HE HAD NO RECORD WHATSOEVER!
With his horrible record of disaster, failure, bankruptcy, incompetence, and treason, he can't get away with the same lies he told in 2008.
he had NO record in 2007, and he managed to wipe the floor with better and more experienced candidates.
His record today? Depends who you ask. He killed bin laden. He chased out kadaffi. he declared wins in afghanist and iraq. He inherited a mess and kept this boat afloat. nobody has taken over the world. he hasn't touched gun rights. things are, essentially, what we had under dubya, but the world hates us less.
is all this true? of course not. But he can sell it - the dude is a helluva salesman if nothing else.
-
he had NO record in 2007, and he managed to wipe the floor with better and more experienced candidates.
His record today? Depends who you ask. He killed bin laden. He chased out kadaffi. he declared wins in afghanist and iraq. He inherited a mess and kept this boat afloat. nobody has taken over the world. he hasn't touched gun rights. things are, essentially, what we had under dubya, but the world hates us less.
is all this true? of course not. But he can sell it - the dude is a helluva salesman if nothing else.
Because he lied you moron! Its easy to beat people when you lie your ass off and say whatever you think will garner points.
He is not heck of a salesman. He is an affiramtive action hire who was pushed forward by the MSM and is down to 39% approval for gods sake!
how fucked in the head are you?
-
Calm down gramps:
(http://i.imgur.com/PMSBK.jpg)
I wonder what the exchange was there.
-
Because he lied you moron! Its easy to beat people when you lie your ass off and say whatever you think will garner points.
He is not heck of a salesman. He is an affiramtive action hire who was pushed forward by the MSM and is down to 39% approval for gods sake!
how fucked in the head are you?
you aren't separating morality from political strategy.
Evil liar, yes. Politically effective? Also yes.
-
Calm down gramps:
(http://i.imgur.com/PMSBK.jpg)
you don't put your finger in the face of ANYONE like that. Much less a 70 year old man who is the only completely honest person onstage.
His brashness and entitlement - the belief it's okay to do things like that - and the uncontrollable anger behind it - OH, that will come out in the debates. Soccer moms see that, and they don't like that. Neither will RPaul supporters, and there are many of them.
-
you aren't separating morality from political strategy.
Evil liar, yes. Politically effective? Also yes.
Yeah ok - he couldnt even sell his own party on his last budget, cant sell the public on anything he has done or id dong, etc.
I posted the clips of his lies from 2008, debate to debate, glad you think that is perfectly fine.
-
Yeah ok - he couldnt even sell his own party on his last budget, cant sell the public on anything he has done or id dong, etc.
I posted the clips of his lies from 2008, debate to debate, glad you think that is perfectly fine.
I called it morally evil. Do you want me to elaborate further past that? LMAO
-
he had NO record in 2007, and he managed to wipe the floor with better and more experienced candidates.
His record today? Depends who you ask. He killed bin laden. He chased out kadaffi. he declared wins in afghanist and iraq. He inherited a mess and kept this boat afloat. nobody has taken over the world. he hasn't touched gun rights. things are, essentially, what we had under dubya, but the world hates us less.
is all this true? of course not. But he can sell it - the dude is a helluva salesman if nothing else.
The problem is that every economic indicator shows he did not keep "this boat afloat". You seem to think that he will be able to dodge all the comments he made in the past 3 years regarding how the stim bill was going to keep UE under 8% and how health reform was so great. Yet over a thousand corporations have obtained waivers from it and it hasn't even taken full effect.
Right now the main concern on people's minds is economic stability. Obama has not provided that and the GOP candidate will fry him on that issue. He won't be able to keep blaming Bush during the election campaign. That will be just another talking point that the GOP will use against him. Any one of those candidates will wipe the floor with him. You give too much credit to Obama's "salesman's" ability for winning in 2008. Seems like you are not taking into account the economic realities of that time and how most people were blaming only the GOP for those economic woes. Guess what? The shoe is on the other foot.
-
see, I think Bush could have done BETTER against obama than mccain did.
WHY?
Because he would have defended and justified his actions. mccain was scared to do so, or be called McSame.
Obama will have the ability to lie, spin, and explain his policies, which mccain COULD NOT do with the Bush policies. See what i mean?
-
see, I think Bush could have done BETTER against obama than mccain did.
WHY?
Because he would have defended and justified his actions. mccain was scared to do so, or be called McSame.
Obama will have the ability to lie, spin, and explain his policies, which mccain COULD NOT do with the Bush policies. See what i mean?
Dear God are royally fucked up. Try this - turn off MSNBC, and start reading WSJ, RCP, BI, etc.
-
Dear God are royally fucked up. Try this - turn off MSNBC, and start reading WSJ, RCP, BI, etc.
stop attacking me and address my point...
obama was able to punch bush all day - Bush was not there to defend himself. Mccain didnt defend bush policy. So obama went unchallenged. Agreed?
This time, you'll have obama arging back on every single point, reminding us of his few success.
God, you are so emotionally involved here that you can't even accept a simple fact like this. Seriously man, relax, it's just an election and most things don't change anyway.
-
stop attacking me and address my point...
obama was able to punch bush all day - Bush was not there to defend himself. Mccain didnt defend bush policy. So obama went unchallenged. Agreed?
This time, you'll have obama arging back on every single point, reminding us of his few success.
God, you are so emotionally involved here that you can't even accept a simple fact like this. Seriously man, relax, it's just an election and most things don't change anyway.
Wrong - all Obama has is still blaming Bush since EVERY single measure of the economy is worse than when he was elected.
by doing that - all it highlights is how pathetic, weak, incompetent , and disastrous his record is.
-
see, I think Bush could have done BETTER against obama than mccain did.
WHY?
Because he would have defended and justified his actions. mccain was scared to do so, or be called McSame.
Obama will have the ability to lie, spin, and explain his policies, which mccain COULD NOT do with the Bush policies. See what i mean?
240. Come on now. I know you really don't believe what you just posted.
The economy was declining and the media was so anti-Bush that his explanations would have fallen on deaf ears. The Dems campaigned on a vote for McCain would be a vote for a third Bush term.
Obama was elected because of Bush. Hate to borrow from Trump, but he is right when he says that because of Bush we ended up with Obama.
Rob, it is still 2011. We are only 3 years removed from Obama's election in 2008. Try rewriting history with your great grandchildren.
-
Clearly the graph in this thread is wrong. All the bars should be eqqal becasue according to MSNBC 0 is the same as 10. ;D
-
Graph at MSNBC is still waaaay off compared to the other candidates totals. lol
Ron Paul
50.2%
(66,251 votes)
Mitt Romney
17.2%
(22,676 votes)
Rick Perry
14.3%
(18,855 votes)
-
It's ok. It's only a message board. No hard feelings. :)
None at all. :)
-
I stick to my contention that Ron Paul is his own worst enemy when it comes to these debates.
He crests at 10-12% because he can't focus in his approach. Everyone knows he is great on the issues and is an oracle of truth on a lot of stuff. But he rambles endlessly.
If he keeps refusing to go after the far left and Obama he is going nowhere. Its sad really. If he simply used his abilities to go after Obama instead of attacking other repubs and rambling, he would be the front runner by far.
Sad but true. Is it fair? no. But its reality. Ron Paul is done unless he starts changing his approach in these debates real soon. And why didnt he bring up F&F when he had a chance! I'm sitting there shouting - F&F moron! Had Ron Paul attacked oobama on the F&F fiasco when he had a chance - thats all anyone would be talking about today.
-
I agree 333. I find myself watching RP and going "yeah! You tell em!" but 2 minutes later I'm shouting "STFU you said enough already!"
He is my favorite at this point, but I see it changing due to his inability to focus.
-
bush wasn't there to defend himself. had he been there, obama would have showed much less balls, or came off like a thuggish asshole. bush's absense helped obama.
but you don't see that
-
For the people that really like Ron Paul, do you agree w/his foreign policy positions? And do you know if he would leave covert ops in foreign countries or pull them out as he'd like to pull out visible troops?
-
bush wasn't there to defend himself. had he been there, obama would have showed much less balls, or came off like a thuggish asshole. bush's absense helped obama.
but you don't see that
Give me a break.
You are delusional. But, you don't see that.
-
For the people that really like Ron Paul, do you agree w/his foreign policy positions? And do you know if he would leave covert ops in foreign countries or pull them out as he'd like to pull out visible troops?
I do like Ron Paul, and I do agree with this:
A PRO-AMERICA FOREIGN POLICY
As an Air Force veteran, Ron Paul believes national defense is the single most important responsibility the Constitution entrusts to the federal government.
In Congress, Ron Paul voted to authorize military force to hunt down Osama bin Laden and authored legislation to specifically target terrorist leaders and bring them to justice.
Today, however, hundreds of thousands of our fighting men and women have been stretched thin all across the globe in over 135 countries – often without a clear mission, any sense of what defines victory, or the knowledge of when they’ll be permanently reunited with their families.
Acting as the world’s policeman and nation-building weakens our country, puts our troops in harm’s way, and sends precious resources to other nations in the midst of an historic economic crisis.
Taxpayers are forced to spend billions of dollars each year to protect the borders of other countries, while Washington refuses to deal with our own border security needs.
Congress has been rendered virtually irrelevant in foreign policy decisions and regularly cedes authority to an executive branch that refuses to be held accountable for its actions.
Far from defeating the enemy, our current policies provide incentive for more to take up arms against us.
That’s why, as Commander-in-Chief, Dr. Paul will lead the fight to:
* Make securing our borders the top national security priority.
* Avoid long and expensive land wars that bankrupt our country by using constitutional means to capture or kill terrorist leaders who helped attack the U.S. and continue to plot further attacks.
* Guarantee our intelligence community’s efforts are directed toward legitimate threats and not spying on innocent Americans through unconstitutional power grabs like the Patriot Act.
* End the nation-building that is draining troop morale, increasing our debt, and sacrificing lives with no end in sight.
* Follow the Constitution by asking Congress to declare war before one is waged.
* Only send our military into conflict with a clear mission and all the tools they need to complete the job – and then bring them home.
* Ensure our veterans receive the care, benefits, and honors they have earned when they return.
* Revitalize the military for the 21st century by eliminating waste in a trillion-dollar military budget.
* Prevent the TSA from forcing Americans to either be groped or ogled just to travel on an airplane and ultimately abolish the unconstitutional agency.
* Stop taking money from the middle class and the poor to give to rich dictators through foreign aid.
As President, Ron Paul’s national defense policy will ensure that the greatest nation in human history is strong, secure, and respected.
http://www.ronpaul2012.com/the-issues/national-defense/
-
dario, who would have fared better against obama in the 2008 debates...
mccain or bush?
-
For the people that really like Ron Paul, do you agree w/his foreign policy positions? And do you know if he would leave covert ops in foreign countries or pull them out as he'd like to pull out visible troops?
Yes
and
I don't know.
-
For the people that really like Ron Paul, do you agree w/his foreign policy positions? And do you know if he would leave covert ops in foreign countries or pull them out as he'd like to pull out visible troops?
Depends on the need and the mission:
A PRO-AMERICA FOREIGN POLICY
* Avoid long and expensive land wars that bankrupt our country by using constitutional means to capture or kill terrorist leaders who helped attack the U.S. and continue to plot further attacks.
http://www.ronpaul2012.com/the-issues/national-defense/
-
For the people that really like Ron Paul, do you agree w/his foreign policy positions? And do you know if he would leave covert ops in foreign countries or pull them out as he'd like to pull out visible troops?
I like him, but not his foreign policy views. His comments about Iran were pretty alarming. His plan to pull troops from everywhere around the world doesn't make a whole of sense. I doubt the military community agrees with him. He would not be a good CIC.
-
For the people that really like Ron Paul, do you agree w/his foreign policy positions? And do you know if he would leave covert ops in foreign countries or pull them out as he'd like to pull out visible troops?
That's my favorite part about Ron Paul!!!
"It is our true policy to steer clear of entangling alliances with any portion of the foreign world."
~ George Washington
The Original American Foreign Policy
by Ron Paul
I have written before about the critical need for Congress to reassert its authority over foreign policy, and for the American people to recognize that the Constitution makes no distinction between domestic and foreign matters. Policy is policy, and it must be made by the legislature and not the executive.
But what policy is best? How should we deal with the rest of the world in a way that best advances proper national interests, while not threatening our freedoms at home?
I believe our founding fathers had it right when they argued for peace and commerce between nations, and against entangling political and military alliances. In other words, noninterventionism.
Noninterventionism is not isolationism. Nonintervention simply means America does not interfere militarily, financially, or covertly in the internal affairs of other nations. It does not mean that we isolate ourselves; on the contrary, our founders advocated open trade, travel, communication, and diplomacy with other nations.
Thomas Jefferson summed up the noninterventionist foreign policy position perfectly in his 1801 inaugural address: "Peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations — entangling alliances with none." Washington similarly urged that we must, "Act for ourselves and not for others," by forming an "American character wholly free of foreign attachments."
Yet how many times have we all heard these wise words without taking them to heart? How many claim to admire Jefferson and Washington, but conveniently ignore both when it comes to American foreign policy? Since so many apparently now believe Washington and Jefferson were wrong on the critical matter of foreign policy, they should at least have the intellectual honesty to admit it.
Of course we frequently hear the offensive cliché that, "times have changed," and thus we cannot follow quaint admonitions from the 1700s. The obvious question, then, is what other principles from our founding era should we discard for convenience? Should we give up the First amendment because times have changed and free speech causes too much offense in our modern society? Should we give up the Second amendment, and trust that today's government is benign and not to be feared by its citizens? How about the rest of the Bill of Rights?
It's hypocritical and childish to dismiss certain founding principles simply because a convenient rationale is needed to justify interventionist policies today. The principles enshrined in the Constitution do not change. If anything, today's more complex world cries out for the moral clarity provided by a noninterventionist foreign policy.
It is time for Americans to rethink the interventionist foreign policy that is accepted without question in Washington. It is time to understand the obvious harm that results from our being dragged time and time again into intractable and endless Middle East conflicts, whether in Iraq, Iran, Syria, Lebanon, or Palestine. It is definitely time to ask ourselves whether further American lives and tax dollars should be lost trying to remake the Middle East in our image
-
you don't put your finger in the face of ANYONE like that. Much less a 70 year old man who is the only completely honest person onstage.
His brashness and entitlement - the belief it's okay to do things like that - and the uncontrollable anger behind it - OH, that will come out in the debates. Soccer moms see that, and they don't like that. Neither will RPaul supporters, and there are many of them.
Looks really disrespectuful to me...
LOL, someone commented, "I checked Thor's prostate with this finger.. imagine, just imagine what I would do with you!"
-
I think Huntsman won last night even though I am a Ron Paul guy 100%. The reason I do not think Paul won is because his lack of participation which was no fault of his own. I mean what kind of question is "Would you feed starving children?". I wish he wouldn't of made the "fences keeping us in" comment only because people take that at face value and not the deeper meaning. For third I pick Cain.
-
The staunch Federalist George Washington and Ron Paul do not exactly go together. Oil and Vinegar in most respects.