Democrats & Liberals Archives

Bye-Bye, GOP Candidates. We Hardly Knew Ye.

Oh wait. We did know them. That was the whole problem. After last night’s GOP debate on CNN, most of us will not see some of those candidates again. Let’s take a look back at the various failures.

Huntsman didn't even attend. No one noticed. His campaign started inauspiciously when his staff mispelled his first name on his business cards. He never attracted voters or campaign donations. The only candidate with any foreign policy credentials whatsoever, a decent track record in governance, and a reasoned attitude towards conservative ideals, he had the bad taste to point out most of the other candidates were whackjobs. So much for the Vice-Presidency, John. I mean, Jon.

Like the candidates who never declared- Trump and Christy- Michelle Bachmann enjoyed her brief flavor of the month status. Then she vehemently opposed raising the debt ceiling. First mistake. People noticed she was stupid. But that wasn't a deal breaker. Next, she stared wildly into a camera, and the picture made its way onto a magazine cover. People noticed she always stared wildly, and that she was very probably crazy. Finally, she made the huge mistake of listening to a person in a crowd throw out something stupid and crazy about HPV vaccines, and she repeated it. This veritable gaffe machine became too much even for the whackjobs, who at least retained enough sanity to refrain from funding her campaign.

That reminds me. Let's have a moment of silence for all of those poor bereaved Republicans who saw their wallets tragically emptied in such an untimely manner by a pseudo-candidate who never declared, yet pretended to run: Sarah Palin. She drove around in a flag-draped monstrosity of a bus, showing up in the vicinity of GOP events, fleecing the rubes... Look up "farce" in the dictionary and you should see her picture under the definition.

The campaign of Newt Gingrich imploded early and often, resulting in his staff actually quitting on the former Speaker of the House. Extraordinary measures were taken to resuscitate the campaign, but lack of funding doomed this radical full staff transplant. Supposedly a man of ideas, in truth he... well... had no ideas. During debates, he constantly seemed disgruntled with moderators for asking questions. Newt, it's supposed to be a debate, not show and tell. The whole idea is supposed to be for voters to consider the candidates and their differences. Oh wait. There's that problematic word for Newt again. "Idea." Maybe idea is too strong. Let's try "clue."

Speaking of clueless, Rick Santorum, the Values Candidate, floundered badly the moment the debate turned away from values to virtually any other topic. Ron Paul schooled him on defense spending. It was brutal to watch. At least we know the other candidates are not mean. When Santorum bragged about his electoral wins in PA, no one cared enough to point out Santorum lost his last re-election bid 58 -41, the worst loss by any Senator since 1980. What it really means is that no one takes him seriously as a competitor. Certainly no voters are foolish enough to give him money.

Note to candidates. Do not stand next to Ron Paul. With the exception of Romney, he is way smarter than the rest of you. He's knowledgeable. He knows what he is talking about. He makes the rest of you look like whackjobs. Do you know how bad that is? Ron Paul making you look like whackjobs? He may be wrong. He may be way too hot for the medium. But he's smart. Stay away! Do not engage!

Although Herman Cain is the current flavor of the month, I think it's safe to write him off as well. I'm beginning to suspect he is basically a grifter. You know, he is charismatic. And he's likeable. He has been the CEO of a pizza chain and was given a position with the KC Fed. But for the life of me, he doesn't seem to know much about business or economics. He claims to have a degree in Economics, but it's actually in Accounting. He cannot raise money outside of that given to him by the Koch Brothers through Americans for Prosperity. Apparently, Cain cannot run an organization, a decidedly devastating flaw for someone who wants to be President. He doesn't seem to understand his own 9-9-9 plan, and for some reason, inadequately explains it every chance he gets, to the point that most people don't even realize the 9-9-9 portion is only the second tier in a transition to no personal and corporate taxes, just a national sales tax. The other candidates treat him like a likeable pet. 'Oh shoot, there goes Herman again. Isn't he adorable, folks?' They don't take him seriously. Neither should we.

So! Only Romney and Perry have raised enough money to matter, and Ron Paul's campaign will continue regardless of funding. Unless some donor ponies up huge sums for one of the failures, we'll have to wish these guys and gals a fond good-bye.

Back in the clown car!

Posted by phx8 at October 19, 2011 11:50 AM
Comments
Comment #330745

phx4, while I do not agree with your assessment, it reminds us all of what these “debates” are supposed to accomplish. I wonder if you recall all the dem candidates who appeared on the debate stage back in 2008.

Let’s start with the obvious two…obama and Biden. Then we had Hillary, Chris Dodd, Johnny Edwards, Mike Gravel, Dennis Kucinich, Bill Richardson, Evan Bayh, and Tom Vilsack.

I could easily have some fun with this bunch as you attempted to do with the current Republican flock. But, why bother. The point is, these early debates help us know and understand the folks running.

So, there you sit phx4, providing us with your self believed great intellect, pontificating on those running for president as though we really give a damn what you think.

I suggest the “clown car” you refer to is not nearly as strange and funny as the lineup during the 2008 democrat debates.

And, from this clown car was selected obama and biden. Imagine that. obama reminds me of Jimma Carter except that Carter owned a peanut farm. obama may eat peanuts, but doubtless Jimmy actually worked for a living unlike obama. Biden reminds me of no other Vice President we have ever had. To call this man a dolt would be a compliment.

The point I am trying to convey phx4, is that one of those people on the stage vying for the Republican nomination will be the one who stands against obama for election. That obama is a joke to many Americans is apparent. That obama is a threat to the Republic is considered even more true for many more Americans. We know this devil. We know his intentions. His mask is slipping and the true demon is showing his ugly head…and that, my friend, is not very funny.

Posted by: Royal Flush at October 19, 2011 7:37 PM
Comment #330751

phx8

Royal has a point about Obama.

I always thought he was inexperienced, but I am coming to believe that he has neither the type of intelligence nor the temperament needed to be president. He is in many ways an accident. HE showed up at the right wrinkle in time and became our president. In many ways he is like Jimmy Carter.

None of the Republicans you mentioned would be my choice as a presidential candidate although I am not sure they would be worse than the Obama team.

The great thing about the U.S. is that we are insulated from the damage one president can do. Fortunately, President Obama didn’t get his way. The checks and balances checked and balanced him. But he might be less checked and balanced in a second term.

I believe Obama is a good man, a patriotic man, a man with great academic intellect. He just isn’t very good as president. He is no JFK, no Ronald Reagan, not even a Bill Clinton. At this point, the best comparisons are Gerald Ford or Jimmy Carter.

Posted by: C&J at October 19, 2011 8:06 PM
Comment #330753

Royal Flush,
You say you do not agree with me, yet you cannot provide one word in defense of these conservative candidates? Not one? OK. I understand. My deepest sympathies.

Talking head Ed Rollins, senior manager of Michelle Bachmann’s campaign until last month and manager of Reagan’s re-election campaign in 1984, told her this: It’s not enough to hate Obama. You have to actually stand for something positive, otherwise you’ll never be president.

Posted by: phx8 at October 19, 2011 8:16 PM
Comment #330754

RF, I don’t know if you ever read Powerline, but they do have some good articles. This one is about a survey taken among the OWS protestors:

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2011/10/are-you-smarter-than-a-wall-street-occupier.php

One of the commenter’s quoted Ronald Reagan, “Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they are ignorant, but that they know so much that isn’t so.”

This has to be the best answer to phx8’s comments. This article in the Washington Times best shows Obama’s situation:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/oct/18/hurt-visits-to-small-towns-expose-obamas-big-probl/

America knows what Obama is and what he trying to do and 2012 can’t come soon enough. By the way, now we know why Obama is campaigning in NC and VA.

I’m watching the World Series as I type, and in the opening ceremony, after the National Anthem, the crowd cheered a military family and when Michelle my belle was introduced, the crowd was strangely silent. Of course it is Texas:)

Posted by: Mike at October 19, 2011 8:18 PM
Comment #330757

Mike & C&J,
I will repeat the point I mentioned to Royal Flush, namely, that it’s not enough to dislike Obama. At some point, one of these candidates will have to actually offer something positive. When a president stands for re-election, it is true that the election usually becomes a referendum on the incumbent, and the economy usually determines that outcome of the referendum. If this holds true, then Obama should be easy to defeat. There is one big problem with that scenario- Obama remains personally popular as a president, and despite the economy, his approval ratings are not as low as one would expect. There are mass protests, the Occupy Wall Street movement, yet the discontent and dissatisfaction are not particularly aimed at Obama or even the GOP, for that matter. They are aimed primarily at… you guessed it… Wall Street. And yet, the GOP candidates come up with dandies like these:

“Corporations are people, my friend.”

“Don’t blame Wall Street, don’t blame the big banks, if you don’t have a job and you’re not rich, blame yourself.”

When Cain reaffirmed the latter quote last night, the audience actually cheered.

So good luck with that. Hating Obama and loving Wall Street does not sound like much of a plan for retaking the Executive Branch to me, but by all means, go for it.

Posted by: phx8 at October 19, 2011 8:48 PM
Comment #330759

phx8

Personally, I will go with Mitt Romney.


I understand that it is not enough to dislike Obama’s policies, but since his policies are the current status quo, we have to start with them, explain why they are not working and then move on to why different policies might work better. This is the logical sequence.

If you are advocating change, you first must indicate why the current situation is not optimal. So, indeed, it is not enough to attack Obama policies, but it is the necessary first step.

Re Obama’s approval rating - it is in the toilet. By this time in Reagan’s term, things were looking up. Clinton was starting to do better. Obama is just in the Carter camp.

Posted by: C&J at October 19, 2011 9:08 PM
Comment #330760


“insulated from the damage one president can do.

“That’s right, it takes one president and a Congress working in unison to really put the screws to us.

Royal, here is how the Republicans have it over on the Democrats in the comic relief debates, 1996, 2000, 2008, 2011-12, the Republican candidates line up on stage and, for at least one and usually more debates, play What’s My Line, will the real Ronald Reagan please stand up.

In the 2008 Democratic debates there were only two, well three contenders, Clinton and Obama trading punches with Edwards refereeing. You have to hand it to Obama, coming from left field and getting so many liberals and progressives toking his pipe dream. I’m not saying Obama was the wrong choice, I’m just saying in hind sight, referencing how much Who has flung the dung, old hens are tougher than young roosters. Who do you think sicked the DEA on Rush?

In the current Republican debates there has only been one contender, with the right wingers jumping from one far right candidate after another in an attempt to stop the contender, only to have one after another of those candidates basically bumping themselves out of contention with their views, their policies or their performances.

Posted by: jlw at October 19, 2011 9:10 PM
Comment #330761


Perry attacks Romney for hiring illegal immigrants while 8 out of every ten of the jobs, that Perry is claiming credit for creating in Texas, have been filled by new immigrants, 4 of every 10 jobs was filled by illegal immigrants and 4 of 10 by legal immigrants.

Posted by: jlw at October 19, 2011 9:24 PM
Comment #330762

Jlw,
Your last paragraph sums it up. In the polls, Romney remains mired in the mid-twenties. The GOP keeps bouncing from flavor to flavor, but the alternatives are so bad, so inept, that they cannot hold onto base. Romney has a HUGE cash advantage over the competition, and the only candidate that seems to be able to put enough cash together to make it past the South Carolina primary is Perry. Unfortunately for the GOP, Perry is just a weak candidate with some rich friends. Meanwhile, nothing will change the fact that people just don’t like him. He’s an obvious phony, a rich corporatist pretending to be just one of the guys, with no apparent core beliefs other than his love of corporations and a burning desire to be president.


Posted by: phx8 at October 19, 2011 9:26 PM
Comment #330763

phx8,

“Unfortunately for the GOP, Perry is just a weak candidate with some rich friends.”

Bush was a weak candidate with some rich friends. Romney is a Mormon, and the right wing base are the people that put the mental in fundamentalist.

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at October 19, 2011 9:50 PM
Comment #330764

“Mike & C&J,
I will repeat the point I mentioned to Royal Flush, namely, that it’s not enough to dislike Obama. At some point, one of these candidates will have to actually offer something positive.”

Phx8, not true; polls have shown Obama beat by generic Republicans.

President Obama vs. Republican Candidate
Rasmussen Reports
Republican 47, Obama 43
Republican +4


Today’s polls show Obama:

Gallup
Approve 39, Disapprove 53
Disapprove +14


Rasmussen Reports
Approve 45, Disapprove 54
Disapprove +9

In fact, here is a summary of Obama’s approval/disapproval:

Gallup
10/16 - 10/18 1500 A 39 53 -14
Rasmussen Reports
10/16 - 10/18 1500 LV 45 54 -9
CNN/Opinion Research
10/14 - 10/16 1007 A 46 50 -4
Time
10/9 - 10/10 1001 A 44 50 -6
NBC News/Wall St. Jrnl
10/6 - 10/10 1000 A 44 51 -7
Reuters/Ipsos
10/6 - 10/10 1113 A 47 50 -3
ABC News/Wash Post
9/29 - 10/2 1002 A 42 54 -12


So what we can gather from this info is that Republicans don’t have to have a reason for winning, because Obama has given America a reason for firing him. He has to be the worst president we have ever had, at least he is the worst I have ever seen in my 65 years. He is totally out of touch with America, if he opens his mouth he is lying, and he is in way over his head.

You and the left make a great mistake trying to figure out what conservative voters will do. We have our preferences, but we will all vote for our candidate, whoever he is.

Here’s a good one for you to think about:


http://www.gallup.com/poll/149759/Democrats-Dispirited-Voting-2012.aspx

Obama’s base is failing him and yet conservatives are fired up. The reason Obama is supporting the OWS perverts is because he is hoping he can stimulate his base as he did in 08, but many of these OWS protestors have never even voted and they are angry at everyone. Here is a great example of the left Obama supporters, and what do you suppose they will do in the next election?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UDlfWTaEvBo&feature=related

Posted by: Mike at October 19, 2011 10:20 PM
Comment #330765

According to Gallup, Obama’s approval rating hovers at 39%. Most presidents who have been re-elected saw approval ratings of at least the high 40’s. Rove’s PAC will have $240 million available for attacks and smears. Given the pessimism surrounding the economy, Obama should be very easy to beat.

And yet, you watch a GOP debate and realize the candidates are really weak. The GOP base so out of touch with most Americans, they’re actually cheering for the death of an uninsured guy, cheering for a fence that will fatally electrocute illegal aliens, and booing a gay soldier in Afghanistan. Wow.

Maybe the base will consolidate around Santorum. He just came out against contraception. There’s a winning ticket.

Posted by: phx8 at October 19, 2011 10:21 PM
Comment #330766


For the most part,the same rich friends. The Koch brothers will be trading their 999 tax plan for a flat tax plan.

“put the mental in fundmentalist.”

“I don’t care who your are, that’s funny.”

Posted by: jlw at October 19, 2011 10:23 PM
Comment #330768

“And yet, you watch a GOP debate and realize the candidates are really weak. The GOP base so out of touch with most Americans, they’re actually cheering for the death of an uninsured guy, cheering for a fence that will fatally electrocute illegal aliens, and booing a gay soldier in Afghanistan. Wow.”

All three points are a lie. You better go back and do some research of your own instead of quoting the latest liberal talking points. If you’re going to be a writer on WB, at least have the decency to not make blatant false claims.

Posted by: Mike at October 19, 2011 10:39 PM
Comment #330769

I don’t think the GOP stands a chance — no matter which one out of this sad line up wins the primary.
And it’s not just them that’s sad — the audiences turning up at all these “debates” are so mean-spirited and screw-the-poor-ish and boo-the-gay-soldier-y that the whole thing has been turning off even people who are life-long Republicans.


But you know what — and I honestly never thought I’d say this but… I kind of wish Sarah would jump back into her big bus for another giant Ego Trip!!! Kinda missin’ all those Wink-Winks and Stylin’ Threads and Folksy Flag Wavin’ Rhetoric, and CrAzY-Confused Sentences with lots of extra Alsos!!!

:^)

Posted by: Adrienne at October 19, 2011 10:41 PM
Comment #330770

Mike,

“All three points are a lie. You better go back and do some research of your own instead of quoting the latest liberal talking points.”

Actually it isn’t necessary to resort to “talking points” if you watch it happen during the debates live on TV.

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at October 19, 2011 10:48 PM
Comment #330771

Mike,
Personally, I do not put much stock in generic ballots. There is no such thing as a generic Democrat or Republican.

I don’t doubt for a second that the GOP base will unite behind its candidate, whoever that may be. However, winning the election will require winning the middle as well, and that’s where the debates hurt the GOP so badly. The only GOP candidate who is positioning himself to win the middle is Romney. I admire his political savvy. He throws just enough red meat to the base to make it possible to win the primaries, but keeps his options open enough to eventually appeal to the middle.

Put Romney forth as the nominee, and I think his chances are very good. Put one of those other clowns from last night at the head of the ticket, and it will not be close.

The funny thing is that after all is said and done, and all the compromises made, a Romney presidency will look an awful lot like another Obama term.

Posted by: phx8 at October 19, 2011 10:51 PM
Comment #330772
Phx8, not true; polls have shown Obama beat by generic Republicans.

So run a generic repub Mike. Because when you run a real candidate the race tightens. Run a “real conservative” and you lose.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/story/2011-10-19/Poll-GOP-Obama-Romney-Cain/50831014/1

Posted by: j2t2 at October 19, 2011 11:04 PM
Comment #330775


For generic right wing nuts, having to swallow Romney to beat Obama is worse than eating crow. Trading a center-right Republican for a center-lean-right Democrat can’t be all that bad.

Of course, if the Wall Street protesters hang in there the Republicans will be up against the Greatest Progressive ever to live…again.

Of the protesters, 35% think Obama is doing an ok job and 50% don’t. Sounds like a crowd that is fairly representative of the American people to me.

Posted by: jlw at October 20, 2011 12:30 AM
Comment #330776

Mike,
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/22/republican-debate-dadt-repeal-rick-santorum_n_977105.html
The booing of the gay soldier in Afghanistan happens at the 18 second mark. Notice how not one GOP candidate stands up to defend the soldier or reprimand those who boo.

The audience cheers for letting the uninsured guy die at the 1:03 mark:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b4Am2bWQRNw

Here, the audience cheers the electrified fence at the 2:54 mark:
http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/400077/october-18-2011/indecision-2012—-herman-cain-s-electrified-fence
As an added bonus, you can hear Colbert’s take on Cain. Enjoy!

By the way, the people of Mexico didn’t appreciate Cain’s comment, and you know, Mexico is a little closer than Uzbeki-beki-beki-stan, so making “jokes” about killing Mexicans with an electrified fence might not be such a good idea. Just sayin.

Posted by: phx8 at October 20, 2011 1:47 AM
Comment #330782

loons on the left lying while libating legions of leftists lost in la-la-land.

Got carried away with the letter L.

Loose and lousy but likable little lemons

Posted by: tom humes at October 20, 2011 9:13 AM
Comment #330783

Ah Phx8, trying to go with the ol ‘opinions as facts’ routine.

Isn’t the purpose of such debates to weed out the candidates with the least support? To help us decide if we want or do not want a Presidential candidate who talks with aliens, lies, cheats on his cancer stricken wife, divides us with gun toting, God loving, gay hating rhetoric or promises us the most freebies?

The simple fact is that the media and those who would never not vote in lockstep are NOT the ones who decide who the Republican candidate will be. The Republicans are. So the leftist opinions really don’t matter.

Oh, and was it the soldier who was booed for being a soldier, or was it his political agenda?
Was it a person dying that was cheered or was it the individual right of freedom of choice and living with the consequences of freedom, that was cheered?
Was it innocent people being electrocuted that was cheered, or was it the idea of finally doing something to keep illegals from further ruining our nation?

Eh, maybe the candidates should have just said “lets take them out.”

Posted by: kctim at October 20, 2011 10:08 AM
Comment #330784

kctim, you are correct about your answer to phx8’s misquotes; but “if a man wants to be ignorant, then let him be ignorant”. Sometimes I believe we have a bunch of teenagers who have managed to get on the mommy’s computer and begin typing on WB. Their statements are certainly infantile. They love to quote polls, but when it’s a poll against Obama, then it is unworthy. How many times have we seen liberal’s quote the 84% whose taxes will be raised by Cain’s 999 plan, and yet any quote against their messiah is a lie or can’t be believed.

It doesn’t change the fact that most Americans are fed up with Obama’s socialist agenda, and it will be seen in next years election. Obama is his own worst enemy; it won’t require conservative dollars to make him look bad.

Quadafi is supposedly dead; I wonder how long it will be before Obama takes the credit?

Posted by: Mike at October 20, 2011 10:44 AM
Comment #330785

kctim,
Explaining why people in GOP crowds are booing a gay soldier in Afghanistan, or cheering an electrified fence, or cheering the death of an uninsured person does not make it better. Really, it just makes it worse. The right thing to do is to condemn people who display such inappropriate behavior and such a lack of compassion.

By the way, Mike, I posted those videos because you seemed to think I was lying.

And as far as quoting polls, you and I quoted the exact same poll at almost the exact same time.

I like following presidential politics, especially the season before the primaries. I think it’s fascinating. I’ve always thought a lot can be concluded from a candidate’s ability to create an organization from the ground up, staff it, fund it, and accomplish goals across a wide spectrum of states. This year there is not much of interest on the Democratic side. The incumbent will run, and the only question will be how middle of left he positions himself. OWS provides a wild card.

The death of Khaddafi represents a success for American foreign policy. We accomplished our aims, encouraged the spread of freedom and democracy, and did so without a single US casualty. It’s a credit for multinational cooperation, the military and intelligence people who provided support, and yes, for Obama.

Posted by: phx8 at October 20, 2011 11:42 AM
Comment #330786

phx8,

“By the way, Mike, I posted those videos because you seemed to think I was lying.”

Facts don’t matter to some people on the right. They can’t believe what they see with their own eyes because it doesn’t fit their agenda, and if it doesn’t fit into their little cubbyhole, you are a liar, ignorant, or a child.

They rail on about their vast life experience, yet belittle anyone that doesn’t believe as they do for not having any.
All union members are thugs. I can only guess that includes the policemen and firemen that protect them.

They love America, yet they hate Americans.


kctim,

“Was it innocent people being electrocuted that was cheered, or was it the idea of finally doing something to keep illegals from further ruining our nation?”

First of all the idea that we could stop the flow of illegals with a fence is absurd.
It didn’t work in China where it took hundreds of years, and slave labor to build. It truly hasn’t stopped the violence in Israel, and the Berlin Wall only mostly worked even with the “shoot to kill” gun emplacements.

The lack of jobs in this country has done what a fence could never do.

Oh, and BTW, IMHO the polarization happening in America has done more to “ruin this nation” than any percieved invasion.

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at October 20, 2011 1:08 PM
Comment #330787


It just wasn’t the same without the shock and awe. Besides, Obama is underhanded and sneaky, Bin Laden, Libya, and now in Bachmann’s Africa. Is she really that stupid or is she dumbing down to impress her audience?

Many conservatives believe gay’s are an abomination.

Allowing people like that to die reduces taxes.

The electrified fence was a solution that had the taste of finality. It isn’t good enough to just feed the Mexicans to the alligators in the mote, they have to be fried first. A joke it may have been, but it stinks just like the smell of those old ovens.

Are people capable of cheering on evil as a defence for what they believe is good and right? You betcha.

Posted by: jlw at October 20, 2011 1:45 PM
Comment #330789

phx8 writes; “Royal Flush, You say you do not agree with me, yet you cannot provide one word in defense of these conservative candidates.”

Why should I defend anyone, they are candidates for the nomination, not the candidate of the party yet. It makes no more sense for me to defend any of them than it does for you to make fun of any of them. I may have a favorite at this time, but will reserve my judgement for the primaries.

Mike, thanks for the two links. I read them with interest. The WS mob is uninformed, and those I have heard speak, are mostly illerate. They are merely the exposed part of the “entitleitis” bunch that whines about everything and expects the dems to provide for all their needs and wants at the expense of others.

obama will find, as the other article reports, that Americans are much more savvy about his worthless promises than the last time around. His “silver” tongue has become just base metal.

Posted by: Royal Flush at October 20, 2011 2:44 PM
Comment #330790

Phx8
Of course trying to explain why people would boo a gay soldier does not make it better. Looking at it in proper context and with commonsense, though, does.
So, I’ll ask again: What facts show that they booed the soldier, rather than the gay agenda that he was promoting?

What facts show that they were cheering to fatally electrocute illegal aliens, rather than the idea of curbing illegal immigration?

What facts show they were cheering a man’s death, rather than the mans freedom to live his life as he wished?

Seriously Phx8, how can you expect people to condemn inappropriate actions when intentional lies and half truths are what make them inappropriate?

Rocky
Ok, you don’t believe a fence will work. I happen to agree because we would do it in a half-ass way, not an effective way.

But Phx8 is promoting that people on the right are calling for electrified executions in order to score political points, and I was trying to keep the topic on how wrong he is about that.

Posted by: kctim at October 20, 2011 2:47 PM
Comment #330793

phx8

Ah, yes sing the praises of Obama foreign policy.

But before you sing on key, continue singing off key.

There were many lives lost because Obama waited six months before he half heartedly joined the battle.

Now he has people praising him for his masterful leadership.
Sorry, that should read bastardly leadership.

Obama is trying to get the independent vote by killing off the bastards that should have been killed off but without our intervention. Yes it is good to see the tyrants gone. But those things should be taken care of by the region not by global tyrants killing other tyrants.

Posted by: tom humes at October 20, 2011 3:28 PM
Comment #330794

kctim,

“But Phx8 is promoting that people on the right are calling for electrified executions in order to score political points, and I was trying to keep the topic on how wrong he is about that.”

While I may concede the point about the “electrified executions” I have to disagree with the “political points thing.
I think that Cain trotted out this “idea” and said it in a way similar to throwing red meat to an animal. He got the response he was looking for until he was questioned about it and then “it was all a big joke” until he was questioned about it again and it wasn’t.

If that isn’t about scoring political points, I don’t know what is.

So far all I’ve seen in these debates is a bunch of boobs trying to out crazy each other. This is a dog and pony show and so far the dogs seem to be winning.

I may not vote for Obama, but I surely won’t vote for any of these dolts.
The only GOP candidate that seems even vaguely interesting is Romney, and I’m still not sure about him.

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at October 20, 2011 3:29 PM
Comment #330795

phx8 writes; “The incumbent (obama) will run, and the only question will be how middle of left he positions himself.”

I can’t agree with that comment. Most voting Americans already know where obama stands, and it is most assuredly…very, very left of the middle.

He snookered independents last time around by running as a middle of the road candidate. He had no significant track record. He had nefarious friends, but the main stream media failed to report much about that. His blank record and glib tongue allowed many independent voters to imagine that he might be worth voting for.

This time around, obama has a record to defend. He can’t turn his back on HIS economy, HIS unemployment, HIS record deficits and debt, HIS filling his cabinet with some of the worst characters imaginable, HIS ramrodding through the largest entitlement program ever in the US, HIS appointment of Czars of unimaginable background and character, and…HIS failed promises about open government and bipartisanship.

Who ever becomes the Republican nominee, he/she will have a field day exploiting all of this man’s failures. And, I believe, before election day in 2012, there will be more scandals involving his big spending favoritism and failure to get more bang for the buck.

Taxpayers are weary of this buffoon. Many leading democrats are weary of this dolt. Hispanics, union members, blacks, the anti-war bunch, the environmentalist crowd and the welfare millions are also weary of this guy.

Frankly, I expect obama to do about as well as Carter’s second run or Mondale did. Obama can not even claim a “favorite son” status in any state.

Even if obama jettisons his vp baffoon, biden, he wouldn’t improve his chances much. Running toward the middle will merely make him appear even more hypocritical.

THIS GUY IS TOAST.

Posted by: Royal Flush at October 20, 2011 3:35 PM
Comment #330797

Rocky
Of course Cain was trying to score political points by mentioning an electric fence to keep illegals out, ALL politicians do that. My problem is with the intentional misrepresentation in order to have people believe everybody on the right cheers people being electrocuted to death.

Whether its liberals trying not to offend anybody and promising everything to everybody, or Republicans beating the crap out of each other, all of these 100 man debates are dog and pony shows.

Posted by: kctim at October 20, 2011 3:47 PM
Comment #330801

Royal
I wouldn’t be so confident my friend.
The ‘New Deal’ was a deal to make the people dependent on government.
More people now than ever are dependent on government.
Fear will be used to scare people into throwing away their rights for more “freebies.”

I won’t be surprised if the Obama wins and the House evens out.

Posted by: kctim at October 20, 2011 4:22 PM
Comment #330802

kctim,
I’m surprised you attempt to rationalize the crowd behavior. Whether the crowd cheers the agenda or the person, the results are the same, and in the case of the GOP crowd, it isn’t pretty.

Here, at the 19 second mark, is a Republican crowd cheering the record number of executions in Texas:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pXB8avpzMyI

It’s awfully early to predict whether Obama or someone else will win next November. We don’t even know who the GOP candidate will be, although I strongly suspect it will be Romney.

I wonder if Obama would consider making Hillary Clinton his VP.

Posted by: phx8 at October 20, 2011 4:44 PM
Comment #330803

Phx8
Crowd behavior in support of dealing with illegal immigration is one thing. Crowd behavior in support of intentionally KILLING men women and children is another thing.
Trying to convince people that the former equals the latter is ridiculous.

Executions for those found guilty are legal and are supported by the majority of Americans. Pretending those same people support the execution of an innocent, is again, ridiculous.

What’s all this talk about hillary for VP? What’s wrong with Biden?

Posted by: kctim at October 20, 2011 5:22 PM
Comment #330804

“The death of Khaddafi represents a success for American foreign policy. We accomplished our aims, encouraged the spread of freedom and democracy, and did so without a single US casualty. It’s a credit for multinational cooperation, the military and intelligence people who provided support, and yes, for Obama.”
Posted by: phx8 at October 20, 2011 11:42 AM

It remains to be seen what the result of overthrowing the Libyan government will be. There are organized extremist groups who are more than willing and able to move into the vacuum. As with Egypt, the rulers are now cleansing the land of Christians. So, as been said many times before, it is impossible to build a democracy without freedom of religion and freedom of speech. The 1st amendment, IMO, is the cornerstone of a democracy; and neither of these will ever be allowed in the middle-east countries unless the country is run by the military (i.e. Turkey) or by a dictator, which then also cancels out a democracy.

Jlw even got to the point by saying: “A joke it may have been, but it stinks just like the smell of those old ovens.”

And yes, Cain did say it was a joke, but the jlw continues down the path of his fantasy land by making accusations that Cain is pushing for Nazi ovens. Pathetic…

Kctim, you are asking liberal socialist to take the talking point blinders off and actually understand the truth. It will never happen and it’s a waste of time to expect them to do anything other than continue with the talking points. If the dailykos says the booed a gay guy, laughed at someone dying, or cheered the death of illegal aliens by electrocution; then they will believe the liberal talking points. No matter how ridiculous they sound. Like was said before, teenagers on their mommy’s computer.
RM, I don’t believe all union members are thugs, but I do believe all union leadership are thugs and judging from their eagerness to protest and associate with communists, I would say they are also un-American.

“I think that Cain trotted out this “idea” and said it in a way similar to throwing red meat to an animal. He got the response he was looking for until he was questioned about it and then “it was all a big joke” until he was questioned about it again and it wasn’t.”

And what were obama’s comments to the OWS crowd meant to accomplish? Do you honestly believe Obama or any other elitist liberal politician really cares what happens to these ignorant perverts? His support of them is also “red meat”. Wouldn’t you love to be a fly on the wall of one of Obama’s meeting with Biden or his cabinet? Can you imagine the laughter at the ignorance of these OWS, who think he actually supports them?

“Royal
I wouldn’t be so confident my friend.
The ‘New Deal’ was a deal to make the people dependent on government.
More people now than ever are dependent on government.
Fear will be used to scare people into throwing away their rights for more “freebies.”
I won’t be surprised if the Obama wins and the House evens out.”
Posted by: kctim at October 20, 2011 4:22 PM

The only thing Obama has going for him is the stimulus money went to stimulate failing blue states and cities, bailing out union pensions, and obamacare. The blue cities are already democrat, the blue states are going conservative (i.e. WI, MI, and PA), and obamacare (his crown and glory) is all but finished. Now if Obama had instituted the HC program immediately instead of taxing for 5 years and then trying to implement it, things might have been different and Americans might have become used to it; but Obama knew that once it kicked in, Americans would be upset with their coverage, so he taxed first, to start later. Add to this the fact that there have been a consistent 50-60% of Americans who are totally against it and want it repealed from the very beginning; HC will not help him at all.

Posted by: Mike at October 20, 2011 5:27 PM
Comment #330805


Conservatives know for a fact that Obama is going down, but they wouldn’t be the least bit surprised if he doesn’t.

That is why preventing as may of the lower class as possible from voting is an imperative of the Republican party. They know that ‘I got mine so screw the rest of you’ isn’t going to win out over brainwashed dependency.

Posted by: jlw at October 20, 2011 5:28 PM
Comment #330806

Mike
I am debating differing viewpoints with people who are entitled to their own opinions and whom I respect.

And I agree that the health care fiasco will do the Obama more harm than good.

JLW
If requiring people to prove they are who they are is preventing people from voting, they don’t care very much about voting anyway.
A pack of cigs may get people to vote as told, but it probably won’t be enough to make them want to take the time and get ID. That is the problem, IMO.

Posted by: kctim at October 20, 2011 6:00 PM
Comment #330809

“That is why preventing as may of the lower class as possible from voting is an imperative of the Republican party. They know that ‘I got mine so screw the rest of you’ isn’t going to win out over brainwashed dependency.”

Posted by: jlw at October 20, 2011 5:28 PM

This is a blanket statement, but I am sure jlw has proof that the Republican Party is preventing a class of people from voting. And if he does, perhaps he could get the information to AG Holder; since he won’t bring charges against black panther groups who threaten voters with night sticks, I am sure he would go after Republicans who block a class of people from voting.

Posted by: Mike at October 20, 2011 6:24 PM
Comment #330812

kctim,
Why Biden instead of Hillary? Because Hillary has already been very successful at State, and could be groomed for the presidency in 2016. Biden will never be voted president. In the past, he ran and never climbed out of the single digits. Biden knows his way around Congress, that’s his strength, and he’s been used to advantage by Obama. He’s competent enough to run the government if necessary, but that’s about it. The only reason Hillary Clinton is not president right now is because of Obama. He ran a brilliant campaign against her, defeating a smart, experienced politician with a big organization and a lot of money. No one else could have done that to her, and no one could do it in 2016 if she runs.

Mike,
I don’t know why you would think I’m a teenager. Maybe I should be flattered. I’m 54.

Posted by: phx8 at October 20, 2011 7:08 PM
Comment #330815

“The death of Gaddafi represents a success for American foreign policy.”

Hmmm…it seems to me that the Nobel peace prize winning obama has an awful lot of blood on his hands lately. The same liberals who are so ready to acclaim the killing of an unarmed man…begging for mercy, are the very same folks who decry the death sentence in the US for those actually convicted and sentenced to death.

Why wasn’t Gaddafi allowed to live and stand trial? I believe a trial would have done much more for the world’s sense of morality than an execution in the street. What interesting things may Gaddafi have revealed? Was the CIA there to direct the killing?

I wonder what will follow Gaddafi. Should we feel that Libya will represent less of a threat to us and world security?

Posted by: Royal Flush at October 20, 2011 7:20 PM
Comment #330816

I guess it’s because some of your statements are infantile. Trying to discuss a subject with liberals is like trying to hold a conversation with children. In fact it might be easier with children.

Posted by: Mike at October 20, 2011 7:35 PM
Comment #330817

phx8 writes; “Hillary has already been very successful at State, and could be groomed for the presidency in 2016.”

Then he writes; “The only reason Hillary Clinton is not president right now is because of Obama. He ran a brilliant campaign against her, defeating a smart, experienced politician with a big organization and a lot of money. No one else could have done that to her, and no one could do it in 2016 if she runs.”

I wonder why this woman needs to be “groomed”. If she is so smart and capable, why downgrade her by that statement? What do you know about Hillary phx8 that the rest of us don’t understand?

If the dems were smart about it, they would somehow get Hillary to run now…against the obama.

Social Security advised beneficiary’s that we will receive a COLA increase of 3.9% starting in January, the first increase in three years. COLA’s are based upon a basket of goods and an increase indicates inflation.

Should inflation increase before the election, and unemployment remain the same as now, obama is gone. His major constituencies are not happy with him and he is losing the independents in droves. Why keep this boob around. It makes sense for Hillary to run now, rather than wait for 2016 when she will have to defeat a successful incumbent Republican president?

Posted by: Royal Flush at October 20, 2011 7:37 PM
Comment #330818

Royal, it took $1.1 Billion taxpayer dollars and 6 months to bring about his execution. I never was quite sure why we went to Libya; was it for oil, to get rid of an evil person, to build a democratic nation, to protect the innocent, or was it just to make the American president look like the tough guy on the block?

The libs keep ignoring the latest democracy in Egypt, which kills Coptic Christians. So what follows Gaddafi; can anyone say Muslim extremist takeover?

Posted by: Mike at October 20, 2011 7:44 PM
Comment #330819

Royal, Obama has blocked SS COLA’s for the past 2 years, because there is no inflation… Of course you would never know that if you went to a grocery store. Oh, that’s right; food and fuel don’t count toward inflation. But what else matters to those on SS, food and fuel? My guess is that he allowed a SS COLA in order to keep the Pennsylvainia Old Geezers from protesting in front of the WH. Whose side would he be on then? Would he support the POGs as he has done the OWS? Elections do strange things to people, especially if they are running or re-running.

Posted by: Mike at October 20, 2011 7:54 PM
Comment #330821

Mike, it is really anyone’s guess as to why we were in Libya rather than some other horrible places on the planet. I suppose obama’s friends have some interest there that will make them even richer. Most likely it’s the same reason for going into central Africa. I guess obama and his buddies see the handwriting on the wall and realize they must plunder as much taxpayer money as they can before being booted into the street.

Of course we all know Mike that the official inflation figures are just bogus. This is the most corrupt and dishonest administration ever in the history of our Republic. And the unemployment figures are also cooked to mask just how bad things really are.

I listened to the VP boob biden pontificating about how badly we need to spend billions for cities to protect us from the bad guys. As he put it, without billions for more police we will be murdered in our beds and robbed in our businesses.

It is obvious to me that the vp boob has never visited Texas and some other states where citizens are perfectly prepared to defend themselves. As usual, the lib administration wishes us to believe that it is only them that stands between us and personal violence. Of course, this would be true if they could somehow become successful in disarming our citizens.

This clown biden likes to scare the folks, much the same as obama and his henchmen. Much the same as SD does about his MMGW crap. And of course, the solution to all our problems for the left, real or imagined, is always…always…always…more spending.

Take away a democrats ability to spend other peoples money and there wouldn’t be one idea left among them. They are bereft of ideas. Listen to any of them speak and their ideas are always accompanied by spending our money. If you read SD’s comments, you will notice that he is always talking about spending our money. He has no other ideas about governing.

These folks on the left are all about money…our money. They wish to right every wrong, cure every ill, and bring peace and prosperity to our nation by spending more money. Every speech is about bread and butter, our bread and our butter to be shared…cause it’s only “fair”, it’s only “right”, and, some even believe that it’s constitutional by perverting the “welfare clause”. What a pathetic lot.

Posted by: Royal Flush at October 20, 2011 8:34 PM
Comment #330822

“Royal, Obama has blocked SS COLA’s for the past 2 years,..”

Mike,

Obama has not blocked COLA increases for the past two years. It was blocked by the measure of inflation (Consumer Price Index) used to determine COLA increases. That measure preceded Obama. You may disagree with the measure, but it has nothing to do with Obama.

“The COLA index is based on average price of goods and services as consumed by workers, not by retired people,” says Polina Vlasenko, an AIER research fellow. “Retirees tend to spend more on health-care and goods and services, and those prices increase faster than the national average. So COLA may not fully compensate for what that they spend their money on. The index isn’t ideal for retired persons, but it is what it is.” http://www.csmonitor.com/Business/2011/1017/Social-Security-seniors-to-see-COLA-increase-in-2012

Do you think that SS recipients should get an increase on the basis of health and basic goods, i.e., food inflation? Your are beginning to sound very liberal.

Posted by: Rich at October 20, 2011 8:42 PM
Comment #330823

Do you think that SS recipients should get an increase on the basis of health and basic goods, i.e., food inflation? Your are beginning to sound very liberal.

Posted by: Rich at October 20, 2011

Rich, do you believe the CPI is a fair and representative measure of inflation?

Posted by: Royal Flush at October 20, 2011 8:53 PM
Comment #330824


It cost two trillion or more to hang Saddam and it is still costing us more than Libya has and we have VA hospitals filled with reminders.

Two years of chaos in Iraq after Bush declared victory. Christians began fleeing Iraq and still are today.

Obama works closely with the military, he asks what can or can’t be done, how it can or can’t be done. He consults them before making the decision.

Bush said, Rummy, tell these guys what to do, and he did until Congress said enough.

If conservatives want to make a contrast between how Obama is conducting foreign policy and military actions with how a Republican would conduct it, by all means do so. You will be inviting Bush back into the discussion

Posted by: jlw at October 20, 2011 9:19 PM
Comment #330827

Mike,

What my opinion is of the CPI as a fair measure for SS COLA adjustments is irrelevant. I was simply pointing out that Obama was not “blocking” COLA adjustments over the past few years, it was the CPI measure adopted by Congress long before Obama took office.

You apparently feel that it is inadequate and fails to fully capture the inflation experienced by seniors, such as health care and food inflation. So, once again, do you feel that the SS COLA should have been adjusted upwards over the past few years and increased more than planned for 2012?

Posted by: Rich at October 20, 2011 9:34 PM
Comment #330828

Rich

You need to research the subject. It was an arbitrary decision to not allow COLA for those receiving SS. Just like an arbitrary decision to give 10’s of thousands of dollars in raises to the Admin staff.

So who is throwing the people getting SS under the bus.

It is AARP’s agent, Obama.

Posted by: tom humes at October 20, 2011 10:49 PM
Comment #330829

“You need to research the subject. It was an arbitrary decision to not allow COLA for those receiving SS.”

Tom,

I need to research the subject? The SS COLA is not an arbitrary decision of the executive branch. It is part of the Social Security Act as amended in 1973. The attached links are to the specific sections of the Act and a description of how the COLA works in terms of calculation and the specific CPI index used in calculation. http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/COLA/latestCOLA.html http://www.ssa.gov/OP_Home/ssact/title02/0215.htm#act-215-i

Posted by: Rich at October 21, 2011 6:30 AM
Comment #330836


Shouldn’t Conservatives be arguing that COLAs are an add on to the immoral Social Security Act and part of the liberal/progressive agenda aimed at brainwashing the people into being dependent on the government? I remember paying into the S.S. fund but not the COLA fund.

Isn’t keeping up with inflation supposed to be a function of the individual rather than government? Invest in gold?

Could it be true that even many conservatives have been brainwashed by the progressive agenda?

Posted by: jlw at October 21, 2011 3:24 PM
Comment #330860

You may ever worn a lotugg boots winter
of shoes , the casual one or informal one , the sandals or slippers .
classic tall boots if you want to keep up with the fashion tider then you will not want to miss thesupra shoes on sale , which will bring the sepcial fashionable breath . life is so easy to fall in to boring , having on pair ofsupra high tops will add the colour to your work and lifeclassic short boot . what are hesitate for ?

Posted by: baimizhou at October 22, 2011 3:43 AM
Comment #330909

Rich

I understand the calculations involving COLA’s. In the case of SS it was an arbitrary decision to not allow a COLA paid to people receiving SS. The CPI warranted it, but the bureaucrats said no and gave huge raises to Admin people who were already being overpaid.

Posted by: tom humes at October 22, 2011 4:30 AM
Comment #330910

This is really funny AND hits the nail on the head:

Maher: GOP debates are ‘the roach motel’ of the Republican primaries

Posted by: Adrienne at October 22, 2011 4:53 AM
Comment #330916

I thought it was very telling that a few days ago Royal Flush was of the opinion that the WS mob was not very smart. And said so while badly mispelling the word illiterate. Too funny. This reelection of Obama is going to be so easy, I wonder what he has in mind for the huge remainder of his campaign warchest. And the poster who said Obama is the worst President ever in his 65 years on this Earth, did you have LSD flashbacks from 2000 to 2008? Loved the Bill Maher show last night too Adrienne. Of course, the jokers from the right will never watch the show. So they probably don’t even know that Maher has on clueless Righties too.

Posted by: Ray at October 22, 2011 11:09 AM
Comment #330921

Poor Ray, I explained in detail why obama will lose. He can’t think of a single reason for why he would win.

Posted by: Royal Flush at October 22, 2011 6:21 PM
Comment #330922

Economy in the tank, unemployment at 9%+, his base running away, Who is the one having LSD flashbacks Ray?

Posted by: KAP at October 22, 2011 7:34 PM
Comment #330927

Ron Paul,
Your courage and fortitrude are on display in every GOP debate. They are attributes I find admirable.

Have the courage to delegate your efforts to your son, Rand Paul, who has the energy to compete in the trivial events that consume the media circus.

Ron Paul, step aside and allow your son to continue in your stead. Rand’s “death by natural causes” would be harder to explain.

Protect your vision and your family by allowing your son to carry the fight for liberty. You, Sir, are too old. Your son carries your beliefs with him. Let him lead so you can stay alive and advise him.

I love your efforts, Ron Paul. I want to see them bear fruit. Rand will be more effective in this race than you will be. Hand over the reins to your son and let him continue your fight to restore the intregrity of our constitution.

Posted by: Weary Willie at October 22, 2011 10:02 PM
Comment #330934

Weary Willie,
I’m surprised Ron Paul does not receive more attention from the GOP. No one else even mentioned him in this thread, did they? Paul’s ideas are well-conceived, in contrast with the pablum spouted by the rest of that field of clowns. When Paul talks about a subject, he actually knows it. He understands it. He has a consistent political philosophy and he applies it. While I often disagree with him, he deserves respect, he earns it. The others are punch lines to bad jokes.

Posted by: phx8 at October 23, 2011 5:31 PM
Comment #330936

The Republicans desire with an almost fanatacism the ability to build a large, strong military that they can send into action whenever they want. (Imperialism) And they are especially drooling now that the Democratic Party has handed them the power to do more than they ever dreamed they could, thanks to this president’s abuses…

However, the know that Paul is actually against the use of force (internal ‘totalitarianism’ and external ‘imperialism’) and as president, Paul would deny them that power that is so close to their grasps. So they call him ‘insane’ and ‘dangerous’ and marginalize him at every turn to ensure that if/when they do obtain the presidency they will have that power to use, not have it denied by the current resident.

Posted by: Rhinehold at October 23, 2011 6:04 PM
Comment #330950

The American people rally around any leadership in WDC that sends our military out to correct a serious wrong committed by some tin horn dictator (aren’t the all tin horn). That is one reason he could be bringing the troops home. He will use them to raise his polling up to a level that might buy him some more votes. But where? He will assist in making the case.

Posted by: tom humes at October 23, 2011 10:43 PM
Comment #330953
The American people rally around any leadership in WDC that sends our military out to correct a serious wrong committed by some tin horn dictator (aren’t the all tin horn).

Seemed to have failed from 2003-2008…

Maybe that isn’t always 100% true?

Posted by: Rhinehold at October 23, 2011 10:57 PM
Comment #330957

Phx8, true. Thank yor for that comment. Ron Paul has been marginalized and underestimated thruout his campaigns. He is refered to as “Dr. No” because he votes “NO” when the federal government spends other people’s money outside it’s constitutional boundries.

Rand Paul believes as his father Ron Paul does. Rand Paul has stated he will not seek the Presidency as long as his father is vying for that post.

I would like Rand Paul and Ron Paul to sit down and determine what is the most beneficial means to their end.

I would hope Ron Paul can trust his son to carry on in his stead and bring again, the vibrant energy that Ron Paul has had for the last 30 years, into this debate.

Ron Paul, I have glimpst your head down, and leaning on your podium. I have watched your small steps making your way towards off stage. Your son, Rand Paul, would not have to suffer this, and I would not see this if your son picked up the reins and guided your coach to victory.

Your son, Rand Paul, has said he would not run for the office of U.S. President out of respect for your candidacy. Releave him of this obstical by turning over your campaign to your son, Rand Paul. Let him carry this weight and let him add his energy and youth to your equation.

Think of yourself, Ron Paul. It would be too easy for the people that murdered you to explain your death when you take the steps necessary to get this country back on a sound money footing. You could die of natural causes 1 minute brfore you sign the executive order to return this country to a sound money policy and your age would only reinforce that belief.


Newsflash: President Ron Paul dies from a pinprick that resulted in the entire collapse of his internal structure, starting in his head, and falling into his boots. It’s unfortunate it was a freefall callapse and therefore unstoppable. Ron Paul died, and is a hero. His body has been whisked away and buried at sea, the end. “The Debate Is Over!” Where do we point our military now?

Please stand your ground, Ron Paul. But, hand the victory to yourself by letting your son, Rand Paul, lead the way.

Posted by: Weary Willie at October 24, 2011 1:44 AM
Comment #330968
Rand Paul believes as his father Ron Paul does.

Not entirely true. There are many areas where the two disagree.

Also, Rand is no where here the statesman that his father is, does not have the strength of character that his father has nor has earned the good reputation that his father has.

Your suggestion would not work out the way you think it would.

Posted by: Rhinehold at October 24, 2011 10:02 AM
Comment #330976

The Problem for the Republicans is that they want a political purist for their candidate, who they then intend to try and bully and bamboozle the rest of America into accepting as the better choice than Obama.

The trouble is, Americans are not interested in indulging the GOP’s policies and politics to the extent that the GOP thinks they are. More to the point, the nastier they get about Obama, the more it becomes clear that they have no other means to compete with him other than tearing him down and getting in his way. They can’t win with voters without pouring their energy into battering the other side.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at October 24, 2011 2:12 PM
Comment #330982

And Perry via Trump has resurrected the “birther” BS!

Posted by: jane doe at October 24, 2011 4:04 PM
Comment #331003

Ron Paul is all of those things, Rhinehold. He stands heads above anyone in this race in the charateristics you mentioned. This is true but the media ignores him in favor of the Mitten Perry show.

Do you think that if the American people understood Ron Paul and his record on defending the U.S. Constitution they would continue to consider him a “crackpot”, as some have unfairly labeled him?


Posted by: Weary Willie at October 25, 2011 1:03 AM
Comment #331011

“Do you think that if the American people understood Ron Paul and his record on defending the U.S. Constitution they would continue to consider him a “crackpot”, as some have unfairly labeled him?”

Yes! Because defending the US Constitution as he does would require that we take away the freebies and the ability to buy votes.

Posted by: kctim at October 25, 2011 10:10 AM
Comment #331013


Imagine that, the main stream media treating Paul like he was some kind of wild eyed progressive socialist.

No candidate that is not a supporter of the corporate oligarchy has much of a chance to get either of the parties presidential nomination.

Look at Obama, a promise of change that liberals ate up.

Obama was determined to get health care reform even if he had to accept the fact that he would only get it if the health industry lawyers could write it. Then he had to put down an insurrection by House progressives before Nancy and the blue dogs could pass it.

No president has a chance at reforming our corrupt Congress unless he can shove the bully pulpit right down their oligarchic throats. That might work if it were not for partisans.

Posted by: jlw at October 25, 2011 12:06 PM
Comment #331022

Weary Willie-
Yes.

It’s time for conservatives and libertarians to discover that disagreement with them does not necessarily reflect anomalies in the system or diminished capacity for reason.

A lot of people simply believe that those folks are wrong.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at October 25, 2011 1:09 PM
Comment #331026

They can’t win with voters without pouring their energy into battering the other side.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at October 24, 2011 2:12 PM

That is a very interesting comment. Reps are winning voters because they bash Dems? How exactly does that work? Republican A is running against Democrat B and wins votes by bashing the man…or his politics and ideas?

Sometimes politics is about the candidate alone, and sometimes, more frequently I believe, it is about what the candidate espouses, promotes, and has endorsed.

The only person who is running for the office of the presidency with any experience in that office, and a record of performance in that office, is…obama.

How could anyone running against a sitting president promote themselves except for asking Americans to consider the sitting presidents record against what the opposing candidate believes to be wrong with it, and how he/she would do things differently and perhaps better.

What SD calls “battering” is a sham. Opposition, YES. Disagreement, Yes. Failure, Yes. Battering, I don’t think so.

New ideas relating to taxation, regulations, borders, education, and much more are being discussed by the Rep candidates. I believe this is a good thing. obama is left with defending policies that many Americans believe have failed, and calling for much more of the same.

That many voters in addition to republicans don’t find this obama redo attractive is not surprising. To call Republicans efforts to emphasize these failures as “battering” is surprising.

Posted by: Royal Flush at October 25, 2011 4:04 PM
Comment #331094

I’ve always given Stephen Daugherty’s posts the benefit of the doubt. I’ve always thought he was getting paid by the word to post. I could be wrong and I am sure I am, but still…

The reason I think Stephen Daugherty’s posts are born in profit is because hogging the marketplace makes any other opinion harder to hear.

Think about this! If the Democratic Party and the MSM weren’t colluding to progress the Progressive movement, would another party be allowed to participate in the debate?

The Mitten Perry show is a sham. The exclusion of candidates, numbering in the hundreds in each election, is a crime.

Hit the snooze button again. Sooner or later the Stephen Daugherty will wear off and reality will set in.

Posted by: Weary Willie at October 27, 2011 3:56 AM
Comment #353985

Every one admits that our life seems to be high priced, but different people require cash for different things and not every one earns enough money. Hence to receive good credit loans “goodfinance-blog.com” or just financial loan will be a right solution.

Posted by: credit loans at October 4, 2012 3:35 AM
Post a comment