|
FOX Republican Debates!
Did you watch the FOX Republican Debates?
Ron Paul is some kinda NUT! Who do you think won the debate. I loved the comment Mitt Romney made about John Edwards "Raising taxes like John Edwards in a beauty salon." Also enjoyed Rudy Guilliani's reaction to Ron Paul's statement that America "deserved" 911. I'm all for waterboarding these radical jihadist. McCain makes me nervous...he's been two-faced in the past. Wish Condolesa Rice would run. |
not on for another 32 minutes.. I agree.. Ron Paul is a nut! I watched his small interview on Real Time with Maher.
|
Dora,
You have gone and done it now. There a couple of Ron Paul fans on here who have not realized yet what a nut he is. I hope they watched the debate if his true colors came out. Even many of his rational stands would not work. He is an "isolationist" Republican who believes if you ignore the rest of the world they will just go away and leave you alone. Wrong! I did not watch the debate because it is WAY too early in my opinion to be thinking about the 08 election. I do follow politics avidly though and no doubt Mitt Rommney is the most polished and Presidential looking and acting. If only he were not a Morman. That really bothers me. Also the fact that he is a recent convert to social conservatism and I have a feeling that is just so he can win the Republican nomination. He was very much pro abortion until just a couple of years ago. He and Rudy J. would both be much better than any Dem running but it would sure be hard for me to have to vote for a social liberal. The debates don't matter anyway because Fred Thompson is going to enter the race by sometime in July and shake everything up!!!! |
why does Romney's religion bother you? Utah is a very red state!!
|
John McCain
Age: 70 Religion: Episcopalian Family: wife, four sons, three daughters Career: U.S. Senator '87- present, distinguished Naval service, '59-81 Ron Paul Age: 71 Religion: Protestant ?? Family: wife, five children Career: Tx U.S. Rep. '76-'77, '79-'85, '97- present Libertarian Presidential Nominee, '88 Rudy Giulliani Age: 62 Religion: Catholic Family: wife, one son, one daughter, one stepdaughter Career: Mayor NYC, '93-'01 U.S. Attorney, '83-'91 Tom Tancredo Age: 61 Religion: Presbyterian Family: Wife, 2 sons Career: Co. U.S. Rep, 99- present Official, U.S. Dept. of Education Mike Huckabee Age: 51 Religion: Baptist Family: wife, two sons, one daughter Career: AR Gov. '96-'07 pastor, AR Babtist Ministry Jim Gilmore age: 57 religion: methodist family: wife, two sons career: VA Gov. '98-'01 Chairman, RNC '01-'02 okay.. i'm tired... can't do the rest.. |
Quote:
It probably is an irrational "bother" as he is a very intellgient man who has a proven track record of leadership. My problem is that I believe Mormanism is a cult and I have a hard time holding anybody in high esteem who would believe Jospeh Smith's fake religon. However Orrin Hatch proved that a Mormon can make a great national leader as he served as a United States Senator. |
Quote:
|
I am now watching a few minutes of the debate being rerun. Ron Paul just made outragous statements regarding 9-11 and the war but Rudy J. slapped him right back down into his place. The audience that had been quiet as I am sure instructed roared in approval and clapped when Rudy put Ron Paul in his place. I hope the Paulites on AFF catch this debate.
|
The thing to watch was there were 10000 people across the street at a Fair Tax Rally!
It is time. www.fairtax.org |
Whats so nutty about Ron Paul? Just because he said America deserved 9-11? Personally I do grieve over such tragedy. But America deserves far more than that. Her judgement will stun and shock us when it comes in fulness.
|
Quote:
How about considering that possibly Satan was responsible for the evil done on 9-11 and not a wrathful God. Is that just asking too much of you guys? |
Quote:
|
Sorry folks,
However I just finished reading the Book of Ezekiel and the first 34 chapters was absolutely NOTHING but YHWH threatening judgement and wrath upon a people he both called and chose. And yes when I look around at America it is clear that 9-11 is just the tip of the iceberg of judgement heading this way. But dont worry the Islamics, Communists, and all other sinful nations will be punished and broken before the Great God and Saviour Yeshua. |
So based on THAT Ron Paul is nutty?
|
Quote:
show us America in prophecy! |
Quote:
I consider the concept that if we just ignore the rest of the world they will go away and leave us alone as childish and not worth consideration. Anyone that advocates it is dimwitted in my opinion. |
When will Christians in the US acknowledge that George Bush has been a disaster and that in spite of his shortcomings, Bill Clinton was the most effective president the US has had in recent history? You should be out there campaigning for Hillary!:couch
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
Non intervention has been the republican stand up until Bush and, to quote Ron Paul, it has served them well. |
1st Question Addressed To Ron Paul.
Congressman Paul you are one of 6 House Republicans who, back in 2002, voted against authorizing President Bush to use force in Iraq, Now you say we should pull our troops out. A recent poll stated that 77% of republicans disapproved of setting a timetable for withdrawal. Are you running for the nomination of the wrong party? Answer You have to realize that the base of the Republican party shrunk last year because of the war issue so that percentage represents less people if you look at 65-70% of the American people... they want us out of there... they want the war over. In 2002, I offered legislation to declare war, up or down, and nobody voted for the war. And my argument there was that if we want to war and if we should go to war the congress should declare it. We don't go to war like we did in Vietnam & Korea because the wars never end and I argued the case and made the point that it would be a quagmire if we went in. Ronald Reagan, in 1983 sent marines into Lebanon and he said he would never turn tail and run. A few months later 241 Marines were killed and the Marines were taken out. Reagan addressed this situation in his memoirs and he said "I said I would never turn tail and run but I never realized the irrationality of middle eastern politics" and he changed his policy there. We need the courage of a Ronald Reagan. |
From Jim Bovard's Blog-
Wednesday 16th May 2007 Ron Paul’s Radical Mix: Truth & Politics 7:38 am | Bovard | Bush | Attention Deficit Democracy | Comments: 0 Hats off to Ron Paul for another great performance in the Republican presidential debate in South Carolina last night. For almost six years, politicians have acted as if it is federal crime to speak bluntly about 9/11. On the day of the attacks, George Bush proclaimed that the hijackers attacked because they hate America for its freedom. This has been treated as a revealed truth ever since. (When I saw Bush on TV that day, I was perplexed how the US government could know the motive before it knew the identity of the hijackers). Ron Paul has never kowtowed to this dogma, and last night he deftly debunked the 9/11 catechism. From the transcript: MR. GOLER: Congressman Paul, I believe you are the only man on the stage who opposes the war in Iraq, who would bring the troops home as quickly as — almost immediately, sir. Are you out of step with your party? Is your party out of step with the rest of the world? If either of those is the case, why are you seeking its nomination? REP. PAUL: Well, I think the party has lost its way, because the conservative wing of the Republican Party always advocated a noninterventionist foreign policy. Senator Robert Taft didn’t even want to be in NATO. George Bush won the election in the year 2000 campaigning on a humble foreign policy — no nation-building, no policing of the world. Republicans were elected to end the Korean War. The Republicans were elected to end the Vietnam War. There’s a strong tradition of being anti-war in the Republican party. It is the constitutional position. It is the advice of the Founders to follow a non-interventionist foreign policy, stay out of entangling alliances, be friends with countries, negotiate and talk with them and trade with them. Just think of the tremendous improvement — relationships with Vietnam. We lost 60,000 men. We came home in defeat. Now we go over there and invest in Vietnam. So there’s a lot of merit to the advice of the Founders and following the Constitution. And my argument is that we shouldn’t go to war so carelessly. (Bell rings.) When we do, the wars don’t end. MR. GOLER: Congressman, you don’t think that changed with the 9/11 attacks, sir? REP. PAUL: What changed? MR. GOLER: The non-interventionist policies. REP. PAUL: No. Non-intervention was a major contributing factor. Have you ever read the reasons they attacked us? They attack us because we’ve been over there; we’ve been bombing Iraq for 10 years. We’ve been in the Middle East — I think Reagan was right. We don’t understand the irrationality of Middle Eastern politics. So right now we’re building an embassy in Iraq that’s bigger than the Vatican. We’re building 14 permanent bases. What would we say here if China was doing this in our country or in the Gulf of Mexico? We would be objecting. We need to look at what we do from the perspective of what would happen if somebody else did it to us. (Applause.) MR. GOLER: Are you suggesting we invited the 9/11 attack, sir? REP. PAUL: I’m suggesting that we listen to the people who attacked us and the reason they did it, and they are delighted that we’re over there because Osama bin Laden has said, “I am glad you’re over on our sand because we can target you so much easier.” They have already now since that time — (bell rings) — have killed 3,400 of our men, and I don’t think it was necessary. MR. GIULIANI: Wendell, may I comment on that? That’s really an extraordinary statement. That’s an extraordinary statement, as someone who lived through the attack of September 11, that we invited the attack because we were attacking Iraq. I don’t think I’ve heard that before, and I’ve heard some pretty absurd explanations for September 11th. (Applause, cheers.) And I would ask the congressman to withdraw that comment and tell us that he didn’t really mean that. (Applause.) MR. GOLER: Congressman? REP. PAUL: I believe very sincerely that the CIA is correct when they teach and talk about blowback. When we went into Iran in 1953 and installed the shah, yes, there was blowback. A reaction to that was the taking of our hostages and that persists. And if we ignore that, we ignore that at our own risk. If we think that we can do what we want around the world and not incite hatred, then we have a problem. They don’t come here to attack us because we’re rich and we’re free. They come and they attack us because we’re over there. I mean, what would we think if we were — if other foreign countries were doing that to us? **** Giuliani’s snort is the best answer the Republican establishment can offer for the hard facts that Paul presents. But such snorts will not be enough to perpetuate Republican control over the American people. Ron Paul is the type of candidate that the Founding Fathers envisioned - someone who cherishes the Constitution and understands why it leashed politicians in perpetuity |
2 Question addressed to Ron Paul.
It was a question concerning what areas of government he would cut out etc. The question was asked of another candidate and then addressed to Ron Paul. Answer I'd start with the departments. The Department of Education, the Department of Energy, the Department of Homeland Security. The Republicans put in the Department of Homeland Security. It's a monstrous type of bureaucracy. It was supposed to be streamlining our security and it is unmanageable. I mean, just think of the efficiency of FEMA in its efforts to take care of the floods & the hurricanes. So, yes, there's a lot of things that we can cut. But we can't cut anything until we change our philosophy about what government should do. If you think that we can continue to police the world and spend 100's of billions of dollars overseas and spend 100's of billions of dollars on a welfare state and entitlement system that has accumulated 60 trillion dollars worth of obligations and think that we can run the economy this way? We spend so much money now that we have to borrow nearly 3 billion dollars a day from foreigners to take care of our consumption and we can't afford that. We can't afford it as a government and we can't afford it as a nation. So tax reforms shoud come but spending cuts have to come by changing our attitude about what government should be doing for us. Additional question asked... You would eliminate the Department of Homeland Security in the midst of a war sir? Answer Well I think we should not go to more bureaucracy. It didn't work. We were spending $40 Billion on security prior to 9/11 and they had all the information they needed there to deal with the threat. It was inefficiency. So what do we do? We add on top of that a gigantic bureaucracy that they're still trying to put together along with a tremendous increase in funds. So I don't think that the Republican position ought to be more bureaucracy. Why did they double the size of the Department of Education? (Bell rang... time up) |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
PLEASE tell me you are joking????????????????????????? |
Quote:
|
After hearing the debate there is NOT one of these guys I would waste my time going to the polls to vote for.
The top three are Democrats and most of the rest are LULUs. Where is Fred Thompson? You Tennessee guys get busy. |
Quote:
Since none of the other canidates have "caught fire" I think Fred could step in and wipe them out pretty quickly. He may be waiting though so he doesn't peak too soon. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
These debates are useful only for posturing. The fun hasn't really started yet! :)
The fun starts when Fred Thompson declares he is running! The guns will really start blasting then! The other Republican candidates know he will be the frontrunner, but they can't say anything until he declares. The Democrats know he can win the election, so you can bet they have people looking into every crevace of his life trying to find something negative. |
Quote:
After watching the debates...right now, I am heavily leaning towards supporting Mitt Romney. John McCain....where I honor his service to our country, and the sacrifices that he has made...he has made me a little weary in his debates. Awkward. Rudy...where I thought he would be the person I favored....speaks out of both sides of his mouth when he talks. He has done this over and over again. I am not talking "flip-flopping" (as I think it has become a "norm" in politics) but in the same sentence he will "flip-flop" his views. I really would like to see a Romney vs. Edwards presidential election. |
Quote:
Quote:
George Washington said, "The great rule of conduct for us in regard to foreign nations is—in extending our commercial relations—to have with them as little political connection as possible." James Madison wrote, "Of all enemies to public liberty, war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded, because it comprises and develops the germ of every other. War is the parent of armies; from these proceed debts and taxes; and armies, and debts, and taxes are the known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few." John Quincy Adams said, "Wherever the standard of freedom and independence has been or shall be unfurled, there will be America’s heart, her benedictions, and her prayers. But she does not go abroad in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all. She is the champion and vindicator only of her own." 19th century politician Henry Clay explained to Hungarian patriot Louis Kossuth that if America gave aid to his cause, we would have abandoned "our ancient policy of amity and non-intervention." He explained further: "By the policy to which we have adhered since the days of Washington. . . we have done more for the cause of liberty in the world than arms could effect; we have shown to other nations the way to greatness and happiness. . . . Far better is it for ourselves, for Hungary, and the cause of liberty, that, adhering to our pacific system and avoiding the distant wars of Europe, we should keep our lamp burning brightly on this western shore, as a light to all nations, than to hazard its utter extinction amid the ruins of fallen and falling republics in Europe." Lincoln's Secretary of State William Seward (the man who bought Alaska from Russia) responded to France's request for the United States to help Poland by defending, "our policy of non-intervention—straight, absolute, and peculiar as it may seem to other nations." A Yale University professor in the late 1800s named William Graham Sumner opposed the expansionist leanings of the then-current Administration when he said regarding the founding fathers, "They would have no court and no pomp; nor orders, or ribbons, or decorations, or titles. They would have no public debt. There was to be no grand diplomacy, because they intended to mind their own business, and not be involved in any of the intrigues to which European statesmen were accustomed. There was to be no balance of power and no 'reason of state' to cost the life and happiness of citizens." |
You Paulites can dream on. He is the choice of a whopping 2% of Republican voters in every legitimate poll.
He is going to fade a lot faster than the midget from TX did a few years ago. |
BTW - I am quite familiar with the isolationist wing of the Republican party through history. I do not agree with it. It was naive then and it is naive now.
You guys would have sat and ate popcorn while Hitler rolled through all of Europe and Africa. What are the isolationist going to do when Iran has a nuclear weapon? Do you guys think that just because you will have pulled out of the Middle East and left the oil and Israel to the whims of Middle Eastern despots that Iran and others will not explode one in America? Naive I say! |
Quote:
John Quincy Adams said, "Wherever the standard of freedom and independence has been or shall be unfurled, there will be America’s heart, her benedictions, and her prayers. But she does not go abroad in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all. She is the champion and vindicator only of her own." 19th century politician Henry Clay explained to Hungarian patriot Louis Kossuth that if America gave aid to his cause, we would have abandoned "our ancient policy of amity and non-intervention." He explained further: "By the policy to which we have adhered since the days of Washington. . . we have done more for the cause of liberty in the world than arms could effect; we have shown to other nations the way to greatness and happiness. . . . Far better is it for ourselves, for Hungary, and the cause of liberty, that, adhering to our pacific system and avoiding the distant wars of Europe, we should keep our lamp burning brightly on this western shore, as a light to all nations, than to hazard its utter extinction amid the ruins of fallen and falling republics in Europe." Lincoln's Secretary of State William Seward (the man who bought Alaska from Russia) responded to France's request for the United States to help Poland by defending, "our policy of non-intervention—straight, absolute, and peculiar as it may seem to other nations." |
Quote:
|
Quote:
If you don't like the founding fathers' non-interventionist policies, I strongly suggest that you work toward having the Constitution changed to allow the United States to carry out your globalist tendencies. |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:02 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.