Nov. 28th GOP Debate

[quote]tedro wrote:
Rocky101 wrote:
Beowolf wrote:
I’d like Huckabee if I didn’t think he had serious mental issues (he believes the Earth is 6000 years old).

This is the reason that keeps me from supporting Huck.

After this debate I think Rudy is done, especially after the story of him using taxpayer dollars to fool around with his mistress.

The one question of the night that made me cringe was the dude holding the bible saying “Do You believe everyword in this book?”. The candidates looked more nervous on this question than any other one.

Oh yeah McCain came out like a dick in his exchange with Paul. He had to pull his POW card. Shit I got 2 uncles who were POW’s in Korea and Nam and they never, ever discuss it with anyone. the only reason i even found out my one uncle was a POW was when I was a kid and didn’t eat all my dinner he told me his POW story. Needless to say I finished every dinner since then.

I thought McCain looked very good and made Paul look like an idiot. He was just stating things as they are.[/quote]

How is Paul an idiot when his facts are accurate?

[quote]Rocky101 wrote:
tedro wrote:
Rocky101 wrote:
Beowolf wrote:
I’d like Huckabee if I didn’t think he had serious mental issues (he believes the Earth is 6000 years old).

This is the reason that keeps me from supporting Huck.

After this debate I think Rudy is done, especially after the story of him using taxpayer dollars to fool around with his mistress.

The one question of the night that made me cringe was the dude holding the bible saying “Do You believe everyword in this book?”. The candidates looked more nervous on this question than any other one.

Oh yeah McCain came out like a dick in his exchange with Paul. He had to pull his POW card. Shit I got 2 uncles who were POW’s in Korea and Nam and they never, ever discuss it with anyone. the only reason i even found out my one uncle was a POW was when I was a kid and didn’t eat all my dinner he told me his POW story. Needless to say I finished every dinner since then.

I thought McCain looked very good and made Paul look like an idiot. He was just stating things as they are.

How is Paul an idiot when his facts are accurate?

[/quote]

How is McCain a dick for being a POW?

[quote]JeffR wrote:
Sane people don’t need more reasons to vote Republican.

However, I’ll toss one more in:

cnn + clinton = more planted questions.

Oh, I’m laughing at you people who are underestimating Rudy.

I hope your candidates losing doesn’t make you too bitter to vote.

JeffR[/quote]

Exactly why I said I don’t like big businesses sponsoring these things.

Anyways, I think it’s pretty funny. The candidates did answer his question, he just didn’t get the answer he wanted.

[quote]tedro wrote:
JeffR wrote:
Sane people don’t need more reasons to vote Republican.

However, I’ll toss one more in:

cnn + clinton = more planted questions.

Oh, I’m laughing at you people who are underestimating Rudy.

I hope your candidates losing doesn’t make you too bitter to vote.

JeffR

Exactly why I said I don’t like big businesses sponsoring these things.

Anyways, I think it’s pretty funny. The candidates did answer his question, he just didn’t get the answer he wanted.[/quote]

tedro,

Let’s be real clear here. It’s false to claim that “big businesses sponsoring” are the problem.

Specifically, it’s cnn + clintons.

In addition, it’s the hypocrisy of the slapnuts on here like lumpy/100meters/bradley and biased europeans who think they are cute when castigating “Fox.”

Imagine their uproar if Fox had pulled a stunt like this!!!

First of all, this guy asking the youtube question WAS A MEMBER OF rODHAM’S STEERING COMMITTEE.

Second, cnn knew full well who this guy was.

Check this out:

http://media.newsbusters.org/stories/scarborough-total-crap-cnn-didnt-know-gay-questioner-hillary-campaign.html?q=blogs/mark-finkelstein/2007/11/29/scarborough-total-crap-cnn-didnt-know-gay-questioner-hillary-campa

JeffR

I like when Christians who happen to be former clergy members talk about how hard it is to execute someone.

Dr. Paul is the only one that understands anything. The rest of the bunch are just a bunch of posturing politicians…like all the dems – but call me biased.

[quote]tedro wrote:
Rocky101 wrote:
tedro wrote:
Rocky101 wrote:
Beowolf wrote:
I’d like Huckabee if I didn’t think he had serious mental issues (he believes the Earth is 6000 years old).

This is the reason that keeps me from supporting Huck.

After this debate I think Rudy is done, especially after the story of him using taxpayer dollars to fool around with his mistress.

The one question of the night that made me cringe was the dude holding the bible saying “Do You believe everyword in this book?”. The candidates looked more nervous on this question than any other one.

Oh yeah McCain came out like a dick in his exchange with Paul. He had to pull his POW card. Shit I got 2 uncles who were POW’s in Korea and Nam and they never, ever discuss it with anyone. the only reason i even found out my one uncle was a POW was when I was a kid and didn’t eat all my dinner he told me his POW story. Needless to say I finished every dinner since then.

I thought McCain looked very good and made Paul look like an idiot. He was just stating things as they are.

How is Paul an idiot when his facts are accurate?

How is McCain a dick for being a POW?[/quote]

No, he came off like a dick in his exchanges with Paul(nothing to do with him being a POW). McCain actually came off like a wounded animal especially when he played the Hitler card. It is ironic that MCCain called out Paul. I guess he needs to make himself feel better for the military giving Paul more contributions. Paul shows that he has a spine and doesn’t play used car salesman politics like Mitt and Rudy. We all know Paul would never get the nod because he is too honest and don’t play the pandering game.

[quote]JeffR wrote:
tedro,

Let’s be real clear here. It’s false to claim that “big businesses sponsoring” are the problem.

Specifically, it’s cnn + clintons.

In addition, it’s the hypocrisy of the slapnuts on here like lumpy/100meters/bradley and biased europeans who think they are cute when castigating “Fox.”

Imagine their uproar if Fox had pulled a stunt like this!!!

First of all, this guy asking the youtube question WAS A MEMBER OF rODHAM’S STEERING COMMITTEE.

Second, cnn knew full well who this guy was.

Check this out:

http://media.newsbusters.org/stories/scarborough-total-crap-cnn-didnt-know-gay-questioner-hillary-campaign.html?q=blogs/mark-finkelstein/2007/11/29/scarborough-total-crap-cnn-didnt-know-gay-questioner-hillary-campa

JeffR

[/quote]

I agree with you about the problem being cnn + clintons, but the conflict of interest with any network hosting a debate still bothers me.

This whole situation is just comical. The whole thing is just blowing up in Hillary’s face. I just hope she manages to hold on to the democratic nomination so she can embarass herself again before next November. Obama is the only one that worries me now, as long as he doesn’t get the nomination, it should be a clear path for the republican nominee.

[quote]Rocky101 wrote:
No, he came off like a dick in his exchanges with Paul(nothing to do with him being a POW). McCain actually came off like a wounded animal especially when he played the Hitler card. It is ironic that MCCain called out Paul. I guess he needs to make himself feel better for the military giving Paul more contributions. Paul shows that he has a spine and doesn’t play used car salesman politics like Mitt and Rudy. We all know Paul would never get the nod because he is too honest and don’t play the pandering game.[/quote]

McCain didn’t look like a wounded animal, I thought he simply looked like he was fed up with Paul’s naiveness.

And I am pretty sure it is not his honesty and lack of games that is going to prevent him from getting the nomination.

Man, I think I’m just going to stay at home this time instead of voting. This whole thing is a joke.

[quote]skaz05 wrote:
Man, I think I’m just going to stay at home this time instead of voting. This whole thing is a joke. [/quote]

It is your right not to vote.

However, it certainly isn’t the right thing to do.

JeffR

[quote]skaz05 wrote:
Man, I think I’m just going to stay at home this time instead of voting. This whole thing is a joke. [/quote]

Why do you feel that way? It’s kind of pointless to make a post like that without some supporting arguements.

I think there are a number of good candidates this year. I don’t agree with any of them 100%, but it is unreasonable to believe I will ever agree with someone 100%. I am happy to say that I don’t think I will have any problem voting for the Republican nominee in the general election.

Unless Giuliani wins.

[quote]tedro wrote:
McCain didn’t look like a wounded animal, I thought he simply looked like he was fed up with Paul’s naiveness.

And I am pretty sure it is not his honesty and lack of games that is going to prevent him from getting the nomination.[/quote]

McCain is doing horribly. Paul is stealing all of his support. His point about spending time with the “troops” over Thanksgiving was pointless and cheap rhetoric.

The real naivety in this whole race is coming from everyone who thinks more government is the solution rather than the problem.

Paul was absolutely right in his assessment about our foreign policy. It is a policy of destruction and will ruin us. History shows this to be the case for every Empire. The UK realized this a long time ago. We cannot spread civilization with destruction and death. Only hatred is spread this way.

“Power to the peaceful.”

[quote]Rocky101 wrote:
… Paul shows that he has a spine and doesn’t play used car salesman politics like Mitt and Rudy. We all know Paul would never get the nod because he is too honest and don’t play the pandering game.[/quote]

How can you say this?

Paul voted for a war he didn’t support and has based his whole campaign running against.

Paul weasel worded the abortion issue by claiming he wants the states to decide. He should just come out and say he wants it to be illegal. I recall the founding fathers writing something about life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. Not very much a stretch to think the meant the Federal government could play a role in protecting life.

Paul has been given many opportunities to distance himself from the 9/11 “truthers” and he refuses to do so because he needs their support.

[quote]
tedro wrote:
McCain didn’t look like a wounded animal, I thought he simply looked like he was fed up with Paul’s naiveness.

And I am pretty sure it is not his honesty and lack of games that is going to prevent him from getting the nomination.

LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
McCain is doing horribly. Paul is stealing all of his support. His point about spending time with the “troops” over Thanksgiving was pointless and cheap rhetoric.

The real naivety in this whole race is coming from everyone who thinks more government is the solution rather than the problem.

Paul was absolutely right in his assessment about our foreign policy. It is a policy of destruction and will ruin us. History shows this to be the case for every Empire. The UK realized this a long time ago. We cannot spread civilization with destruction and death. Only hatred is spread this way.

“Power to the peaceful.”[/quote]

McCain WAS doing horribly. He has improved a lot ( OxBlog )- and it’s Thompson and McCain who are cannibalizing each other greatly. Most of the Paul supporters think (with some justification I might add) that McCain has an authoritarian streak (but in fairness it’s not as bad as Guiliani’s). I’d agree - if McCain were better on the First Amendment and at brooking dissent I’d be much happier with him.

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
Rocky101 wrote:
… Paul shows that he has a spine and doesn’t play used car salesman politics like Mitt and Rudy. We all know Paul would never get the nod because he is too honest and don’t play the pandering game.

How can you say this?

Paul voted for a war he didn’t support and has based his whole campaign running against.
[/quote]
No he didn’t. He voted for going after al Qaeda in Afghanistan. He didn’t vote to illegally invade Iraq. Get your facts straight.

No he didn’t. He is saying the same thing he has always said. Abortion isn’t a federal issue. He wants it to be illegal in theory…and in Texas but will not force his opinion on other people in other states until the constitution is amended.

Why should he distance himself from those people. He has already stated he doesn’t believe 9/11 was a conspiracy. People are free to believe what they want. He doesn’t support them, they support him. Guilt by association is a fallacy and an extremely weak argument; I am not supprised to see you make that kind of argument.

I wonder how many sexists support the other candidates. I wonder how many Jew haters support Giuliani and McCain and all the others…this is just typical politicking bullshit. People have no other way to attack Paul other than to attack his supporters…it’s WAY WEAK!

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Rocky101 wrote:
… Paul shows that he has a spine and doesn’t play used car salesman politics like Mitt and Rudy. We all know Paul would never get the nod because he is too honest and don’t play the pandering game.

How can you say this?

Paul voted for a war he didn’t support and has based his whole campaign running against.

No he didn’t. He voted for going after al Qaeda in Afghanistan. He didn’t vote to illegally invade Iraq. Get your facts straight.

[/quote]

He has continually opposed our actions in Afghanistan although he voted for them. He has even written about it. You have provided the links to lewrockwell. I have my facts straight. You are in denial that the man has flip flopped twice on Afghanistan.

Why isn’t it a federal issue? The federal government is certainly empowered to protect life and has been since the founding fathers day. Paul is using the fallacy that the federal government is not empowered to hide behind because he does not want to lose his supporters that are pro abortion.

As soon as he says he doesn’t think it is a conspiracy he says it needs more investigation. Total two faced weasel wording. He could say “it wasn’t a conspiracy period!” but he will not because those loons are very important to his campaign.

I am attacking Paul for his positions, not his supporters although they are certainly full of horrible people such as the stormfront crowd.

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
He has continually opposed our actions in Afghanistan although he voted for them. He has even written about it. You have provided the links to lewrockwell. I have my facts straight. You are in denial that the man has flip flopped twice on Afghanistan.
[/quote]
you are not very snesible. He voted to go after al Qaeda, not to nation build–that is what he is speaking out against.

We went for al qaeda and instead ousted the Taliban…? Bad people but not terrorists.

…and it happened.

I knew it would, but I thought we could at least get through two pages first.

[quote]tedro wrote:
…and it happened.

I knew it would, but I thought we could at least get through two pages first.[/quote]

Yup, it sucks. I should know never to argue with a Paulie.

Huckabee and McCain were strong, especially Huckabee. The more people that are exposed to Huckabee the stronger his candidacy is going to be.