Was this the format to particularly show a side of the Republican candidates that wasn't too attractive? I didn't find the bickering attractive at all, what about you? On the other hand, they might not be spending the money Obama's going to spend, but these guys are spending and putting in a lot of energy and who expects them to keep the gloves on when they're together??
PERRY IS TOAST, in my opinion. He stands, physically, like one of the kids in The Little Rascals (no offense, Alfalfa), unfitting suit, chest out, arms back, it was embarrassing; that shouldn't matter but it does to me. He spoke rather haltingly and I just don't think he's got what it takes.
Which leads me to Ron Paul; I shouldn't care about someone's ability to look presidential, but RON PAUL as PRESIDENT? :-) And, frankly, his stances are beginning to win me over. But, still..........President? REALLY?Cain has humor and honesty and isn't afraid to say he was wrong. He's just who he is, which I think is pretty great, and I like that very much.
Santorum appeared to be so sincere and very up on the topics, if he'd had a bit more time, which was denied him because of the format. Did you see the end, when people come up on stage? Santorum had absolutely nobody approach him and looked befuddled and wandered off the stage..........
The FORMAT prevented most from getting a chance to speak as often as Romney and Perry because, as I said above, each time Romney talked, he attacked Perry, and likewise, and when that happened, Cooper'd say "Mr. Romney, you want to respond?" It was like a boxing match between Romney and Perry and other guys sparring around the ring rope!
Bachman...I don't know what to say. Do I think she can win? No. Do I think she's really smart and really earnest in wanting to fix America? Heck yes. She's resolute but I don't think she's got a chance. I very much liked her idea of invoicing Iraq for all we did there....I blogged on that the other day; when Iraq can financially help Iran support Syria, it's time for Iraq to PAY US FIRST.
Newt......I'm conflicted. He's SO smart and so experienced, but I feel he has no chance in a general election. He actually criticized the format ten minutes after I had that exact thought......How can all get a chance to speak when it's all back/forth/back/forth because Romney kept mentioning Perry and Perry kept mentioning Romney, which prompted a rebuttal opportunity? Ridiculous format.
Mitt Romney... I can see now why he's kept gloves on; he's not attractive when he's attacking. I did like when he stopped the proceedings about immigration and reminded America that ALL the candidates on the stage are 100% for LEGAL immigration. I felt that was important and good of him.
Romney....blech! But, he does have his moments that I kind of like him. Awfully slick; I don't love slick.
So CNN's Gloria Borger says, after the debate, "OH, they were so angry!" With that format, how could they not be? How can CNN be so shocked when candidates attack each other!? Then there's that dope Donna Brazile saying Perry did well. WHAT? And that AWFUL David Gergin, turncoat, "Obama won tonight."
B.S.
What do you think? Did you watch?
z
61 comments:
Michele Bachmann: Obama 'Put Us In Libya. He Is Now Putting Us In Africa'
------
She's really smart.
so??
Libya is in Africa.
you get the idea of what I was trying to say, don't you?
%-0
Ducky...she should have said UGANDA, you're right.
But it's tiresome to hear this kind of nitpicking.
I'm thinking Bachmann just might be a tad tired by now, too, and deserve a break. If I was talking all day long to groups, and radio and TV interviews, and doing my political job, too, I'm sure I'd slip up from time to time..wouldn't you?
Obama makes a REAL stupid remark and SNOPES does this:
http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/57states.asp
man
Sue, I think this was the worst yet; it promoted practically a two-way only debate between Romney and Perry!
I liked the last one where they were able to ask each other questions.....
Ah, the GOP debates. Where the candidates and audiences have cheered for a execution record of a candidate, cheered the idea of letting uninsured patients die and jeered a gay serviceman. Tonight they cheered Cain's comment about blaming the unemployed. Morons.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/18/herman-cain-unemployed_n_1018798.html
Ah, here's Bd citing Huffington Post to us while he slams FOX every chance he gets :-)
Please provide a link to the dissing of a gay serviceman because what really happened was nothing at all about that.
Also, I'd love a link about how any Conservatives wants to let someone die.
It's Huffington Post, by the way, which CRASHED from the weight of "Good thing the bastard's dead" type of comments after Tony Snow died of colon cancer.
Nice job, leftwingers...and you have the GUTS to insult the RIGHT?
WOW
Z - During the 2008 presidential debates one of the things I didn't like was the 'raise your hand' and 'YES-NO' questions. That raising your hand thing made me think the candidates were being treated like school children.
There is hardly anything I can answer with just one word. :-)
I wish I had seen that part where they asked each other questions.
That is a good idea.
and there were bloggers there, Sarah Rumpf, who was at the debate, tweeted to say “Only a few booed. Many shushed & hissed at the booing.”
the last comment was aimed at BD who incorrectly stated that the candidates booed the gay serviceman
actually BD lied but hey...
and come on BD who really believes that you watched the GOP debate
Whoever they choose, i just hope they'll be enough to kick out hussein. That's pretty much it for me.
The Perry-Alfalfa comparison is hilarious, and spot on!
CNN did this on purpose, making them look like a bickering knot of mean conservatives.
The RNC should be kicked square in the #$$ for turning these debates over to the liberal media.
Conservatives should be moderating these debates and sitting on the panels, not smirking lefties who have everyone on the stage, and those of us at home watching them.
Could someone tell me why Uganda wasn't even mentioned?
It was Jarhead
Michele Bachmann: Obama 'Put Us In Libya. He Is Now Putting Us In Africa'
Z-that Snopes link was unbelievable. I guess Snopes is one of the 30 media outlets Soros is invested in.
I wish Newt could win because he could out-debate Obama until he looks like the wicked witch getting a bucket of water dumped on her.
Soemone showed me this site where you can create our own video. I just made one for this post:
http://goanimate.com/movie/0_DsaEBCg-lo/1
Elbro...that's exactly what really happened.
Every time Republicans do the slightest thing the left can jump on, even if it's 2 in a crowd of 2000, the leftwing media takes advantage.
Like the very few placards SOME say they've seen at TP events....ONE 'racist' placard, and the whole Tea Party is maligned. As you know, they're finding that even those 'racist' placards have been plants.
Jarhead, welcome and yes, it should have been mentioned.
Ducky, when Republicans mean "mentioned", they mean in depth and appropriate.... it should have been brought up and Obama exposed for what could happen there in Uganda...or anywhere in Africa, for that matter.
Silverfiddle, thanks! I had to laugh at Perry standing there like "Gee WHIZ!" and thought "what's he reminding me of..? " Then it hit me.
He is toast.
And, yes, from the coverage on CNN this morning, it was a definite ploy; NO candidates could have survived the format without finally going for each others' necks.....that EVERY TIME A CANDIDATE MENTIONS ANOTHER CANDIDATE, THE MENTIONED CANDIDATE CAN REBUT was NUTS and created just the havoc CNN desired.
Why the Right allows itself to be played like that is beyond me, but the smiles on Cooper and the other lefties afterwards said it all.
Lisa....isn't that amazing? I've seen MANY Snopes pieces that they HAD to cover which were truthfully negative about Obama and they ALWAYS dig up some excuse and give him a pass.
I should have kept them all and did a post on it...it's hilarious.
But, of course, there's NO BIAS, right? :-) (sarcasm here, of course)
Will see your video later; got to go to work! xx
I wrote this on my Facebook status this morning:
"It really annoys me to see these Republican candidates attack each other. A house divided against itself cannot stand. They need to focus solely on what they can do and will do to improve our country."
Fast forward to the Republican National Convention:
The nominees will be Romney for President, and Perry for Vice-President.
I don't like it, but it is what it is.
Mark, I think there is NO WAY Perry will go ANYWHERE, VP included.
VP will be Cain or Rubio, in my humble opinion.
Do you believe Perry did himself any good last night? Some are saying 'yes', but I sure didn't think so. This guy started high on that mountain Trump epitomizes 'someone Conservatives liked who'd speak his mind,etc.' and has sunken like a lead balloon.
I thought Romney revealed a part of himself he ought not have; if I ever had a fleeting fond thought of him it was that he WAS presidential and kind. He got so nasty last night he completely turned me off.
But, of course, I have to remember: ANYBODY BUT OBAMA.
IMO the only thing the debates prove is, who's the best debater. Nothing more nothing less.
I'd much rather read a hard copy on a candidates viewpoints that listen to debates.
Scotty, and I think they'd have all been a LOT better off if that was all we got considering how they looked last night.
Romney and Perry's bickering made the rest look more presidential!
Given that America is in the middle of a crisis of faith in herself, at this point squarely resulting from President Obama's handling of the Wall Street induced real estate/credit debacle, I've got a question.
Who among this crowd of debaters, even remotely sounded the positive hopeful notes that candidate Reagan did in his run to the presidency?
I did not see any.
That is why many pundits are saying Obama was the winner last night.
Z, as to the debate format, we the people, get what we want and will watch. Unfortunately, people want their news and debates in short snippets.
A real debate of the type Gingrich covets, will be shredded by the people as a conversation between intellectuals. It will be seen as boring and irrelevant by the masses.
I for one would love to see Obama and Gingrich engaged in a real debate. As the two most studied and intellectual folks in the race, that, to me would be a hoot.
You might be right, Z.
I'm thinking there are two camps, one Romney's, and one Perry's.
They are diametrically opposed to each other. If the GOP hopes to unite these two camps they will have to run them together.
Remember the potshots Joe Biden took at Obama in the Democrat's debates? How did that argument end up?
I think it goes without saying, the GOP movers and shakers will eventually nominate Romney for President. They don't like true Conservative candidates. Remember McCain. They will need to balance the ticket with someone who is Conservative, but not too Conservative. Hence, Perry.
I like Cain/Bachmann or Bachmann/Cain or Gingrich/Cain or Cain/Gingrich or Cain/Santorum or any combination of those candidates.
But it won't happen. As I said, the GOP likes RINOs and not-too-Conservative candidates.
Hey Ducky, Obama said people in Austria speak Austrian.
You've never made a mistake? That'd be surprising since you talk so much out of your "cul."
I didn't watch the debate. I'm set on my candidate and it's the same stuff at this point
Wall Street induced real estate/credit debacle
Let's look at the definition of 'induce'
1. To lead or move, as to a course of action, by influence or persuasion. See Synonyms at persuade.
2. To bring about or stimulate the occurrence of; cause: a drug used to induce labor.
Who created the conditions of real estate housing for all? Did Wall Street force people to buy houses they can't afford or did they use the opportunity created by government and Federal Reserve policies to encourage the market estate bubble?
Dave Miller, you're a fool. Like the European who are collapsing and think the free market is what make them tank, you typical leftist confuse symptoms with causes.
I watched the debate and did a play by play analysis on it as it unfolded.
Perry got Romney flustered , very flustered and Romeny lost his cool demeanor shown in the other debates. Santorum riled him as well and he was about ready to smack Santorum but heck I feel that way every time I see
Santorum or hear him open his mouth.
Santorum about broke his arm patting himself on the back for his "wins" over democrats in Pa. but failed to mention that he got taken to the woodshed in 06 by a 15+ point margin in the vote. He said he was going to introduce his plan soon. He's been saying that since the first debate. Time to put up or shut up. He has no plan as was shown in my blog post on his stands. Santorum needs to go on back home and then look for job with Tony Perkins and the Religious Far right when he is kicked out next election term.
Cain, was Cain to a point but he seemed to have lost a bit of his humor but when you have 6 people ganging up on you it's hard to take time to be congenial and smile. He needed to take the gloves off and slap hell out of Bachmann and her
"experience as a tax accountant" BS remark. Cain defended his 999 plan well but still has not explained how the consumer tax will work and has not mentioned again the safety net for incomes under $40K as he did earlier this year. Looks as if some of his advisers are asking him to drop the consumer tax in favor of a payroll tax. Will have more on this on my blog later today.
Paul is just Paul as you said Z. Some good ideas which should be taken up by who ever is nominated and WINS the election. Otherwise I'd put him in charge of the Fed Reserve.
Gingrich made some good points last night but mostly agreed with Cain through out the debate. Could that be a sign of a deal working? Don't think so but it is an interesting thought. Ginrich in a role as an adviser is more likely.
Bachmann, is clueless. She never offered anything new just her usual Blah, blah, blah. Time for here to go back to work and earn the $$$ the folks of Mn elected her to do.
Who did I miss? Huntsman didn't show, saying he is boycotting.
Johnson didn't show but then who missed him. He just takes up space and time best left to real contenders.
That's my take on the debates last night other than to say it provided the Left with lots of ammo, mostly blanks but it makes a noise and the uninformed leftist voter likes a lot of bang and no substance.
Cain + Gingrich would be great for me.
I love Gingrich intellect but he's too establishment for my president choice. We need someone who's going to clean house yet can guide him through the establishment while he is using his business skills.
So that sounds ideal.
Perry to Cain,
I’ll bump plans with you, brother
Just a hunch, Perry's plan is tax cuts and deregulation.
vs. 999
Talk about bumpin' uglies.
Hey leftists on this blog, how do you feel about Occupy Wall Street being endorsed by the US Nazi Party?
Dave Miller said...Z; I'LL RESPOND IN CAPS
Given that America is in the middle of a crisis of faith in herself, at this point squarely resulting from President Obama's handling of the Wall Street induced real estate/credit debacle, I've got a question.
Who among this crowd of debaters, even remotely sounded the positive hopeful notes that candidate Reagan did in his run to the presidency?
I did not see any.
That is why many pundits are saying Obama was the winner last night.
THAT'S FUNNY, DAVE, BECAUSE I'VE HEARD PUNDITS THIS MORNING TALKING ABOUT HOW OBAMA HAS NEVER RISEN TO THE POINT OF RALLYING ALL AMERICANS IN ANY KIND OF HOPE SINCE HIS PRE ELECTION SPEECHES.
I AGREE WITH YOU; THE CANDIDATES DIDN'T SOUND HOPEFUL BUT IF THEY HAD SOUNDED TOO HOPEFUL, THEY'D HAVE BEEN WRITTEN OFF BY THE LEFTWING MEDIA AS TOO FRIVOLOUS OR UNINFORMED BECAUSE WE HAVE SERIOUS PROBLEMS AND EVEN I DON'T SEE MUCH HOPE, FRANKLY.
THE FORMAT ALLOWED ONLY FOR CONSTANT BICKERING; CNN DID A GREAT JOB OF THAT, DIDN'T THEY....AND MADE IT THAT THE STORY OF LAST NIGHT'S AFTER-DEBATE CONVERSATION AND WHAT I SAW THIS MORNING, TOO. THE DOPES FELL FOR IT IN SPADES. YOU CAN'T HAVE "EVERY TIME YOU MENTION ANOTHER CANDIDATE'S NAME, HE CAN RESPOND" IN ANY SERIOUS DEBATE FORMAT. ABSOLUTELY RIDICULOUS.
Z, as to the debate format, we the people, get what we want and will watch. Unfortunately, people want their news and debates in short snippets.
ACTUALLY, I BELIEVE THE SHORT SNIPPETS ARE LESS WHAT WE WANT AND MORE A PRODUCT OF ADVERTISING; EACH TV CHANNEL HAS ONLY SO MANY MINUTES BETWEEN ADVERTISING AND, JUST WHEN WE'RE GETTING GOING AND SINKING OUR TEETH INTO IN-DEPTH DISCUSSIONS, IT'S OVER AND THOSE WHO WERE ARGUING AND MAKING GREAT POINTS ARE SUDDENLY ALL SMILES FOR THE CAMERAS AND "AND NOW A WORD FROM OUR SPONSOR!"
IT'S HORRIBLE AND I THINK IT AFFECTS US ALL, THAT SHORT SOUNDBITE THING......
A real debate of the type Gingrich covets, will be shredded by the people as a conversation between intellectuals. It will be seen as boring and irrelevant by the masses.
I for one would love to see Obama and Gingrich engaged in a real debate. As the two most studied and intellectual folks in the race, that, to me would be a hoot.
I'M AFRAID MOST COULDN'T AGREE WITH YOU ON 'MOST STUDIED' BUT I WOULD DEFINITELY LOVE TO SEE NEWT AND BARACK GO AT IT.
OH, YES, I WOULD ADORE THAT AND NEARLY EVERYONE I KNOW HAS SAID THE SAME THING. BRING IT ON.
As for last night, Cooper egged on that bickering. He was the moderator, and to me it was obvious that back and forth between Romney and Perry was encouraged by Cooper.
Romney should not have touched Perry, and he did it twice. Not good. He lost his cool IMO, and seemed forced to me.
So far, I think Newt comes across the best. His knowledge is obvious, he's direct, and avoids going after the others.
Dave said: "A real debate of the type Gingrich covets, will be shredded by the people as a conversation between intellectuals. It will be seen as boring and irrelevant by the masses."
Dave, we saw that sit down, and relaxed type of debate Gingrich calls for, between Cheney and Lieberman and it was great.
As for the masses, I take it you think you're not amongst them? We all are, and anyone who tunes into the debate in the first place, is not likely to be bored with that format.
It's up close, more personal, and insight into the people participating. Much more interesting and informative IMO.
Thank you Frog for being civil. Like Beamish and Imp, you now join the ranks of people who resort to name calling if you disagree or do not like the opinions of others.
I have always felt that type of behavior, or action, was part of our problem in politics. Once we start to use pejoratives to label people, it becomes too easy to consider them our fellow man.
As to your criticism, are you saying that banks have no culpability at all for the current mess we are in? Perhaps I did not include all the players, but I believe consumers, and congress too, have some blame to share.
Z, as for the debate style, you, me, and your readers are outside of the mainstream when it comes to politics.
We are the folks who want to see the detail, and get involved. The majority of American voters are not like that.
I will be interested to hear your thoughts when the general election debates start. Those formats are specifically negotiated by the campaigns to work to the strengths of their candidates.
It has nothing to do with the best format for America or her people.
Also, I am not saying Obama has risen to any level of positiveness. I am just saying that none of the GOP candidates did it either.
The pundits I have read are saying the GOP has to give a reason other than vote against Obama, for them to win.
Sorry to apparently offend you to the point you felt you needed to shout through CAPS.
Pris, that was a good debate.
Dave...I CAPITALIZED to distinguish your words from mine. I was absolutely not offended...
I can't imagine who can't see a reason for not voting for anybody but Obama, Dave...whatever the pundits you're hearing are saying. In my opinion, all of the Republican candidates are less big government, less sneaky, more experienced, more pro America, and far less insulting than Obama is.
I think Newt is trying to play nice with all the other and get the VP spot.
Hey leftists on this blog, how do you feel about Occupy Wall Street being endorsed by the US Nazi Party?
The same way you, hopefully, feel about the white supremacist Stormfront endorsing the Tea Party. How about Council of Conservative Citizens.
Poor Santorum. I like Cain, but now I am very concerned about his 999 plan. Because it is going to hurt my family or any middle-class family financially, we will have to pay out more taxes.
Thank you Frog for being civil. Like Beamish and Imp, you now join the ranks of people who resort to name calling if you disagree or do not like the opinions of others.
Fool is name calling?
Let's view the definition of fool:
1. One who is deficient in judgment, sense, or understanding.
So that applies to you and all the people who can't look at Europe, what's been done there and understand that the same solutions create the same problems.
Einstein would describe you guys as insane actually, not fools.
" Like Beamish and Imp, you now join the ranks of people who resort to name calling if you disagree or do not like the opinions of others."
My oh my. I guess I'm going to have to stop watching / listening to...Oberfurher, Maddow, Shultz, O'Donnell, Gore, Waters, Pelosi, Biden, Feinstein, Boxer, Sharpton, Jackson, Malik Shabazz and Matthews to name a few?
Oh...and bd and duckster too?
Like Prez Zero advises.."they bring a knife, you bring a gun" ( or a sharp tongue ) to the "debate".
Craig do you even have a clue of what regulations cost this country ? Doubtful but then again I have yet to meet a Lib who had any knowable facts to back his ignorant remarks as you made concerning Perry and Cains plans. I doubt you even know the basics of Cain's 999 much less have a knowledge of the plan.
I suggest for your enlightenment(and aren't all you Libs supposed to be enlightened) that you visit Maggies Notebook and view this:
http://www.maggiesnotebook.com/2011/10/economic-freedom-in-america-compare-contrast-what-regulations-cost-americans-video/
"aren't all you Libs supposed to be enlightened)"....
Ahhhh....yes, you've nailed it Ticker. On the damn money. Yet....They're oh so super sensitive when the rhetoric exceeds the levels they themselves initiate!
They expect the opposition to be...."gentlemanly" when they hurl lies, deceit, misinformation and accusations of unfounded racism against average Americans who oppose the direction this lousy President...this offal of a government has forced upon this country.
Obama....needs... Please Jesus to be back at at a Baskin Robbins...or a student of Ayer's....bomb factory 101.
Obama sucks...his staff sucks...his "presidency" based upon lies, disinformation, fraud and forgery...SUCKS.
He is...and always will be...a lying red scumbag. Happy Craig that Obummer is...."A Fraud, a Liar and the most unqualified Quack" to have ever occupied the WH due to GUILT? Your GUILT.
Do I make you uncomfortable Craig? Bd...and the other nonsensical wine taster...ducky? Hey...I'm just what I am....Fook ya all.
I said: "Where the candidates and AUDIENCES....jeered a gay serviceman."
And here it is:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1HGo-B39Fhw
With each debate is becomes more clear that the GOP has no one except a bunch of losers trying to out crazy each other to a moron base that is rapidly shrinking.
"Is Occupy Wall Street treated as racist and anti-semitic?"
God Bless you Z. You know the answer too. Of course not. These....these....panderers of class warfare...of so called "inequality"...can only and understandably blame...the Jews! Of course it's their fault. Of course they manipulate / control our lives.
Of course.
Bd.."rapidly shrinking?" in your dreams.
As for the gay soldier..SO WHAT? Everyone there said the crowd booed down the people who hooted when he brought up gays in the military...it was a reaction TO THE GAYS IN THE MILITARY point, NOT HIM. (can't you figure that out!? :-)
Remember, COnservatives didn't SPIT on Vietnam soldiers when they returned...you guys did.
Bd...take your anti semitism and anti capitalism rubbish and shove it, okay? thanks.
Leticia, Cain's plan will NEVER get implemented; I look at it as a plan that needs work, but at least HE has the guts to do SOMETHING........
Not at all Imp... that's what they do, my point is, and remains, are we civil with each other.
It's just how people should treat one another.
Now I agree that a lot of liberal commentators, and bloggers too for that matter, can be pretty offensive. As can a lot of liberal activists, but that does not make it right.
How we as individuals says a lot about our character, how we expect others to treat us, and our values.
I cannot, nor can you, control how others act, whether it is on MSNBC, FOX News, or some other place.
But we can choose to be civil with each other.
Dave, when calls for civility come up, it seems to me it's only the left castigating the right and, frankly, we're a little tired of it.
I watched Cain on Piers Morgan tonight (he's an amazing human being) and Piers said "but, Herman, the Tea Party is "overly racist!"...
so, millions of American too tired or too unintelligent just buy into that.
SO much of that happens to the Right, that're just a LITTLE tired of being civil back.
Chris Matthews, the other day, said that Republicans will never actually vote for a Black man because they're racist........do you know how that feels?
Did you hear that someone's said she was raped in a tent at the Cleveland Wall St protest? Hannity said something like "And president Obama gives even more support to the OWT EVEN WHILE SOMEONE'S ACCUSING A GUY OF HAVING RAPED HER"
I'm surprised at Hannity because THAT is EXACTLY the kind of rubbish MSNBC and, sometimes, CNN, uses..........it was beneath Hannity; as rough as he can get on the Left, that phrase was nuts and I'm not even sure he realized what inference he was making.
ALL of this has to stop.
Republicans are NO more racist than Democrats are ..which is ZILCH........but every group has some nuts in it, and I'm SO SO TIRED of America implying it's "MOSTLY THE RIGHT"!
INSANE. civility? Let's stop it on all sides.
Z what you just said is exactly what we should be hearing from the president,but I won't hold my breath on him trying to bring unity to the country. I think Gingrich has more presidential skill to bring the country together unlike the rabble rouser inciting unrest like some third world dictator
Lisa, imagine the GOOD Obama would have done had he come down hard on the Flash Mobs? Or if he'd say something about kids wearing their pants around their knees, or how important it is to not do drugs and do well in school, or maybe if he'd go to a mixed church? He's publicly gone to church 3 times since his inauguration, at my count, and it's the FREE SLAVE CHURCH..
Which is FINE but do NOT tell America how you're uniting people, pal. Or inspiring people....
he's afraid of his base and he has NO PRO AMERICAN, INSPIRING UPBRINGING, what do we expect? In contrast to Cain who was on Piers Morgan tonight and blows my mind with his amazing values and how he handles his having had Stage 4 cancer and how he thinks something CAN be done to straighten out our country.
uh...BD...did you watch that video..cuz I did and I didn't see one candidate jeer that soldier. Perhaps you're even denser then we originally thought.
In fact Santorum pretty much followed the progressive line of, whatever you do in your bedroom is your business.
Dave, I appreciate what you say about being courteous in an argument. There's no reason that all people who comment on this blog cannnot be polite, unless they are replying to ducky or bd. It is tempting to respond in kind.
Now, having said that it would be very difficult to comment positively on our Chief Executive. My attitude, here, reflects one of the problems. We might respect an individual, but we do not respect that individual's political viewpoint.
This is a political blog, and Z does a good job keeping things in some sort of order. My approach in moderating comments is to let it fly, except for profane language.
Z,
As long as you're venturing even a modicum of support for Ron Paul, would you be a dear and remove my quotes from your sidebar? I'd do almost anything for you, but putting my quotes on the sidebar of a blog for Ron Paul is... disgusting.
Elbro...:-)
Bob...I try, but I know my posts can sound pretty angry and provoke the leftwingers. Why shouldn't conservatives be angry, right?
Most of us try hard to get news out and opinions out that our leftwing media's not getting out; and to give our feelings about those situations...
I USUALLY try to stop profanity (although I leave some; and that's MY call), and I try to stop the typical leftwing smirking and demeaning (which can also lead to deletion depending on my mood); it gets us nowhere and we can hear that on MSNBC. I don't need or want it here.
I am disturbed to find Z giving ANY stances of Ron Paul a modicum of support. I find it despicable to be quoted in the sidebar of a blog that can not forthrightly dismiss Ron Paul at all. To me, it is analogous to quoting Z on a website dedicated to Armenian genocide denial.
To answer the comment about the American Nazi Party endorsing the OWS protests.... of course they would. For one, they're leftists, and for two, Ron Paul's supporters are already there.
All I ask is that my quotes not be displayed on a blog "swayed by Ron Paul."
Please remove my quotes, or add the following disclaimer:
"Quoting Beamish in no way indicates Beamish supports the racist, anti-Semitic, economically and historically illiterate stances of the Texas Twit Ron Paul."
Well done is better than well said. ~ Benjamin Franklin
Excuse me for my confusion. We have an epitome of a "well said" empty suit in the nation's highest office who is taking our nation to new lows. Our answer is to quibble on who our best "wewll said" person is and can we change the rules to make sure they are favorable to the best "well said"?
Personally I don't watch the debates. I am going to go with the achievement angle and other factors.
Post a Comment