GOP Presidential Debate 15 May 2007

[Annie]

This is my first post on this message board...Glad to be here contributing, by the way...

I just wanted to comment on this post of yours, though.

You sound as though you support Ron Paul, and his position, but yet you advocate a defeatist position because you feel as though that because he's the one REAL candidate on the ballot, he has no chance?

You would giev away your vote to someone else, based on the thought that the person you TRUELY support probably wouldn't win?

So then how has your voice really been heard, then? Imagine 20 million other people who think just like that, who would potentially throw away their vote because they all thought the person they really supported had "no chance"? That could be the difference in whether or not that person would have actually been elected.

Ron Paul's popularity is gaining incredible momentum as the days go on...he beats all the so-called "front runners" in just about every online poll. I have a hard time believing that he can be that popular among millions of people online, but supposedly be a nobody in the mainstream polls.

The man gets up there and says what no other politician has the balls to say. Basically he acknowledges the pink elephant in the room that everyone else is ignoring.

If i am wrong in my perception of your post, please correct me. I just get very disheartened by the fact that people think they can't create a change. This is OUR country! Not the corporations that contribute to the men we're all SUPPOSED to be exposed to. You can sense a fear among the mainstream talking heads and pundits about Ron Paul.

His position speaks for itself. I would be throwing molotov cocktails at soldiers everyday here in this country if some foreign invading force came to occupy it, and kill my fellow citizens without remorse while doing so.

Do i advocate hijacking planes and going on suicide missions against the US? No. Do i understand why they have so much anomosity towards us? Yes.

Our government calls them "islamofascists", which doesn't even make any sense. How could any of the countries we consider to be the axis of evil, be considered "fascist" by definition? The current system of government in the United States represents fascism way more so then any islamic country that we currently deem hostile to our interests.

Ron Paul is the only one conveying this type of message. The only reason i can see people being leery about this man is that they don't feel he has an idea of how to defend the nation, because they misinterpret him on his foreign policy. Why not start by loosening our grip on the proverbial ballsacks of the middle eastern nations we haev intruded upon with our military presence? We have the most powerful military in the world...we should be quite capable of defending ourselves here at home without having to shove our guns down other countries' throats.

Please dear Lord, let this NOT be the previous Tpaul or close to.

 

[Paulie]

Please dear Lord, let this NOT be the previous Tpaul or close to.

I'm assuming you are comparing me to someone else here with that name you mentioned?

I assure you i am brand new here. But you sound contemptuous toward me...care to share why that is?

 

[Annie]

I'm assuming you are comparing me to someone else here with that name you mentioned?

I assure you i am brand new here. But you sound contemptuous toward me...care to share why that is?

Knock yourself out:

http://usmessageboard.com/search.php?searchid=460826

 

[Paulie]

Knock yourself out:

Sorry - no matches. Please try some different terms.

Am i missing something here, Kathianne?

I don't really understand what you are trying to say...why not just SAY it?

 

[Annie]

Am i missing something here, Kathianne?

I don't really understand what you are trying to say...why not just SAY it?

Link works.

 

[Paulie]

Link works.

Not for me, sorry.

You wanna just tell me what you're trying to say, please? I'm losing interest fast.

 

[Gunny]

This is my first post on this message board...Glad to be here contributing, by the way...

I just wanted to comment on this post of yours, though.

You sound as though you support Ron Paul, and his position, but yet you advocate a defeatist position because you feel as though that because he's the one REAL candidate on the ballot, he has no chance?

You would giev away your vote to someone else, based on the thought that the person you TRUELY support probably wouldn't win?

So then how has your voice really been heard, then? Imagine 20 million other people who think just like that, who would potentially throw away their vote because they all thought the person they really supported had "no chance"? That could be the difference in whether or not that person would have actually been elected.

Ron Paul's popularity is gaining incredible momentum as the days go on...he beats all the so-called "front runners" in just about every online poll. I have a hard time believing that he can be that popular among millions of people online, but supposedly be a nobody in the mainstream polls.

The man gets up there and says what no other politician has the balls to say. Basically he acknowledges the pink elephant in the room that everyone else is ignoring.

If i am wrong in my perception of your post, please correct me. I just get very disheartened by the fact that people think they can't create a change. This is OUR country! Not the corporations that contribute to the men we're all SUPPOSED to be exposed to. You can sense a fear among the mainstream talking heads and pundits about Ron Paul.

His position speaks for itself. I would be throwing molotov cocktails at soldiers everyday here in this country if some foreign invading force came to occupy it, and kill my fellow citizens without remorse while doing so.

Do i advocate hijacking planes and going on suicide missions against the US? No. Do i understand why they have so much anomosity towards us? Yes.

Our government calls them "islamofascists", which doesn't even make any sense. How could any of the countries we consider to be the axis of evil, be considered "fascist" by definition? The current system of government in the United States represents fascism way more so then any islamic country that we currently deem hostile to our interests.

Ron Paul is the only one conveying this type of message. The only reason i can see people being leery about this man is that they don't feel he has an idea of how to defend the nation, because they misinterpret him on his foreign policy. Why not start by loosening our grip on the proverbial ballsacks of the middle eastern nations we haev intruded upon with our military presence? We have the most powerful military in the world...we should be quite capable of defending ourselves here at home without having to shove our guns down other countries' throats.

I actually liked what Ron Paul had to say, and I thought Hannity was a mannerless ass for the ruthless attack he made on him after the debates were over.

 

[BaronVonBigmeat]

What are you smoking?

Main Entry: blow·back
Pronunciation: 'blO-"bak
Function: noun
: an unforeseen and unwanted effect, result, or set of repercussions

Michael Scheuer, the former head analyst at the CIA’s bin Laden unit, has weighed in on the controversy surrounding the Republican Presidential debate held Tuesday May 15, when Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) stated that American foreign policy was a “contributing factor” in the 9/11 attacks.

“They attack us because we’ve been over there; we’ve been bombing Iraq for 10 years.” Paul said. He was then denounced by former New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani who said it was “absurd” and that he’d “never” heard such a thing before demanding a retraction.

In an interview with Antiwar.com’s Antiwar Radio on May 18, Scheuer, who was the head analyst at the CIA’s bin Laden unit, Alec Station, and authored the books Through Our Enemies Eyes and Imperial Hubris, said “I thought Mr. Paul captured it the other night exactly correctly. This war is dangerous to America because it’s based, not on gender equality, as Mr. Giuliani suggested, or any other kind of freedom, but simply because of what we do in the Islamic World – because ‘we’re over there,’ basically, as Mr. Paul said in the debate.”

Scheuer also agreed with Dr. Paul’s statement in the debate that the war in Iraq was a diversion from capturing or killing Osama bin Laden and that bin Laden was “delighted” that the U.S. is occupying Iraq as it has become a training ground and recruiting tool for new jihadists joining the movement.

http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2007/05/19/former-head-of-cias-osama-unit-backs-up-rep-ron-paul/

Hmm well, the head of the CIA's Bin Laden unit is probably a commie-lib/hippie democrat who hates america. Let's see what Glenn Beck has to say on the matter:

[ame]http://youtube.com/watch?v=Pm9HTrQfcQE[/ame]

Here's some comments by a filthy hippie named Pat Buchanan:

What does Rudy Giuliani think the political motive was for 9-11?

Was it because we are good and they are evil? Is it because they hate our freedom? Is it that simple?

Ron Paul says Osama bin Laden is delighted we invaded Iraq.

Does the man not have a point? The United States is now tied down in a bloody guerrilla war in the Middle East and increasingly hated in Arab and Islamic countries where we were once hugely admired as the first and greatest of the anti-colonial nations. Does anyone think that Osama is unhappy with what is happening to us in Iraq?

Of the 10 candidates on stage in South Carolina, Dr. Paul alone opposed the war. He alone voted against the war. Have not the last five years vindicated him, when two-thirds of the nation now agrees with him that the war was a mistake, and journalists and politicians left and right are babbling in confession, "If I had only known then what I know now ..."

Rudy implied that Ron Paul was unpatriotic to suggest the violence against us out of the Middle East may be in reaction to U.S. policy in the Middle East. Was President Hoover unpatriotic when, the day after Pearl Harbor, he wrote to friends, "You and I know that this continuous putting pins in rattlesnakes finally got this country bitten."

Pearl Harbor came out of the blue, but it also came out of the troubled history of U.S.-Japanese relations going back 40 years. Hitler's attack on Poland was naked aggression. But to understand it, we must understand what was done at Versailles — after the Germans laid down their arms based on Wilson's 14 Points. We do not excuse — but we must understand.

Ron Paul is no TV debater. But up on that stage in Columbia, he was speaking intolerable truths. Understandably, Republicans do not want him back, telling the country how the party blundered into this misbegotten war.

By all means, throw out of the debate the only man who was right from the beginning on Iraq.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/uc/20070518/cm_uc_crpbux/op_332799;_ylt=Al8V83Af.coHOetUf4C2lFYDW7oF

Looking for motive is not the same thing as assigning blame. Police detectives look for motives routinely, even if the victim is as blameless as Mother Theresa. That does not mean they are blaming the victim.

 

[Paulie]

I actually liked what Ron Paul had to say, and I thought Hannity was a mannerless ass for the ruthless attack he made on him after the debates were over.

So you would agree then, that he deserves to continue being heard by all Americans?

If the man would get more than 2 minutes a shot, maybe Americans could be better exposed to his ideas. He gets hardly any coverage at all. I don't even see him listed in the top 10 candidates in some mainstream polls, but he's definitely one of the most popular candidates, at least in the online community...which let's face it, carries a significant amount of weight these days. He's being unfairly blacked out, and i tend to wonder why that truely is.

 

[Annie]

Not for me, sorry.

You wanna just tell me what you're trying to say, please? I'm losing interest fast.

Anyone else having a problem with the link? Is it just paulitics?

 

[Annie]

So you would agree then, that he deserves to continue being heard by all Americans?

If the man would get more than 2 minutes a shot, maybe Americans could be better exposed to his ideas. He gets hardly any coverage at all. I don't even see him listed in the top 10 candidates in some mainstream polls, but he's definitely one of the most popular candidates, at least in the online community...which let's face it, carries a significant amount of weight these days. He's being unfairly blacked out, and i tend to wonder why that truely is.

I never said he shouldn't be heard. Misrepresentation there. Just saying that they shouldn't spam polls, official or not.

 

[Annie]

So you would agree then, that he deserves to continue being heard by all Americans?

If the man would get more than 2 minutes a shot, maybe Americans could be better exposed to his ideas. He gets hardly any coverage at all. I don't even see him listed in the top 10 candidates in some mainstream polls, but he's definitely one of the most popular candidates, at least in the online community...which let's face it, carries a significant amount of weight these days. He's being unfairly blacked out, and i tend to wonder why that truely is.

Are you saying that he was given less time than the others? There was something unfair?

 

[Paulie]

Are you saying that he was given less time than the others? There was something unfair?

Well, at the debates it would be a little tough to black him out. But otherwise, he gets barely any attention from the media at all, even though he's a very popular candidate.

By the 2 minutes, I meant that when he does get an occasional mention or interview on national media, he gets about 2 minutes. But there is never much discussion about him, like there is with the so called "front runners". He is for all intents and purposes, ignored in the mainstream.

He doesn't suckle off the teat of corporate America, almost 100% of his funds come from individuals.

What is so wrong with adheering strictly to the constitution? If it weren't for that "god damned piece of paper" as Bush calls it, there wouldn't be an America for us to have these discussions, and cast our votes.

The man has never voted for a bill that doesn't uphold the bill of rights, which there have been many of over the years...especially the last 6. That is his job. The oath he took was to uphold the constitution. There hasn't been very much upholding of it lately in our government. If you can't live up to the oath you swore to GOD on, then don't take it. Either you serve the people via the constitution, or you serve the corporate interests. There's really no in-between, as far as i've seen.

That doesn't concern you?

If we can't defend our nation while still upholding the constitution that created and allowed for our way of life in this country, that's pretty sad. Everytime we lose an inalienable right, the government gains more power and control over us.

Are you willing to sacrifice your precious, GUARANTEED liberties for unguaranteed security?

 

[pegwinn]

This is my first post on this message board...Glad to be here contributing, by the way...

Welcome to the jungle

I just wanted to comment on this post of yours, though.

You sound as though you support Ron Paul, and his position, but yet you advocate a defeatist position because you feel as though that because he's the one REAL candidate on the ballot, he has no chance?

I support the concept that RP represents. In my post signature is a link to my personal blog "The Realist". If you take the time to read it you will understand my position isn't defeatist at all. BTW, the reason I am pimping the blog is that I am lazy enough to not want to retype all that stuff. It isn't that I don't wish a civilized discussion at all. It's that I don't want to cover the same ground over and over.

You would giev away your vote to someone else, based on the thought that the person you TRUELY support probably wouldn't win?

There isn't any probably about it. RP will not survive the primaries, let alone get to the general election. The problem is multifaceted and runs the range of voter apathy to the evils of a two party system. Throw in a bit of common sense and the general malaise of the McUSA's and you will agree. The general election is almost always a choice of the lesser of two evils.

So then how has your voice really been heard, then? Imagine 20 million other people who think just like that, who would potentially throw away their vote because they all thought the person they really supported had "no chance"? That could be the difference in whether or not that person would have actually been elected.

"They" don't work for us. That is a specific blog entry as well. "They" are politicians and by definition are only different from sharks in that sharks are honest enough to display a dorsal fin.

Ron Paul's popularity is gaining incredible momentum as the days go on...he beats all the so-called "front runners" in just about every online poll. I have a hard time believing that he can be that popular among millions of people online, but supposedly be a nobody in the mainstream polls.

I generally don't trust any polls. It is too easy to skew the answers. Online polls are the worst since you can "vote" hundreds of times if you are so inclined. The poll that matters normally occurs every other year in November.

The man gets up there and says what no other politician has the balls to say. Basically he acknowledges the pink elephant in the room that everyone else is ignoring.

The problem is he does it in a soundbyte. Thus the pundits have an average of 30 to 1 minutes to excoriate him. Additionally, he is a speaker, not a debater. Gulianni will continue to eat him for lunch in a debate format.

If i am wrong in my perception of your post, please correct me. I just get very disheartened by the fact that people think they can't create a change. This is OUR country! Not the corporations that contribute to the men we're all SUPPOSED to be exposed to. You can sense a fear among the mainstream talking heads and pundits about Ron Paul.

Rather than correct you, I will suggest that as you read my posts here, at my own board, and at my blog you will decide if your perception was accurate or not.

His position speaks for itself. I would be throwing molotov cocktails at soldiers everyday here in this country if some foreign invading force came to occupy it, and kill my fellow citizens without remorse while doing so.

Do i advocate hijacking planes and going on suicide missions against the US? No. Do i understand why they have so much anomosity towards us? Yes.

Our government calls them "islamofascists", which doesn't even make any sense. How could any of the countries we consider to be the axis of evil, be considered "fascist" by definition? The current system of government in the United States represents fascism way more so then any islamic country that we currently deem hostile to our interests.

Fascist is also a buzzword to frame anyone who is authoritarian and intolerant. The dictionary is only a starting place when communicating. You may be willing to fight invaders and even to understand the motivations of the enemy. No problem with that. But I really doubt that any of us can read Bin Ladins mind.

Ron Paul is the only one conveying this type of message. The only reason i can see people being leery about this man is that they don't feel he has an idea of how to defend the nation, because they misinterpret him on his foreign policy.

Again, Paul is a speaker, not a debater. Also, if you step too far away from the party line then you are labeled. IF Paul wishes to avoid the "wayward republican" labels he will have to break with the party and run as an independent.

Why not start by loosening our grip on the proverbial ballsacks of the middle eastern nations we haev intruded upon with our military presence? We have the most powerful military in the world...we should be quite capable of defending ourselves here at home without having to shove our guns down other countries' throats.

I disagree. The reality is that our entire way of life is based on Petroleum. The reality is that after Canada and Mexico we import oil from many who openly wish us ill. The reality is that our role as the worlds policeman was established long before you and I were born. The reality is that if we do not preempt the terrorists, we will simply die in place as they pick the time and place of our deaths.

Hope you take the time to read up a bit. Then, once we each know where the other is coming from, a discussion can occur. Have a good weekend.

 

[Shattered]

He's not bullshitting. The link doesn't work. "Sorry - no matches. Please try some different terms."

 

[pegwinn]

He's not bullshitting. The link doesn't work. "Sorry - no matches. Please try some different terms."

My link works.....
Sorry I just couldn't resist

 

[Annie]

My link works.....
Sorry I just couldn't resist

Well if she or other had problems, try this. Far be it for me or anyone to say anyone was less than honest:

http://usmessageboard.com/search.php?searchid=460878

 

[red states rule]

I actually liked what Ron Paul had to say, and I thought Hannity was a mannerless ass for the ruthless attack he made on him after the debates were over.

How?

By asking him to defend what he said?

 

[red states rule]

So you would agree then, that he deserves to continue being heard by all Americans?

If the man would get more than 2 minutes a shot, maybe Americans could be better exposed to his ideas. He gets hardly any coverage at all. I don't even see him listed in the top 10 candidates in some mainstream polls, but he's definitely one of the most popular candidates, at least in the online community...which let's face it, carries a significant amount of weight these days. He's being unfairly blacked out, and i tend to wonder why that truely is.

Paul already shot himself and is done - the blame America first crap does not fly with Republicans

 

[Gunny]

How?

By asking him to defend what he said?

He wasn't asked to defend what he said. Hannity asked hima question, and Paul was allowed to get maybe three words out of his mouth before Sean launched off on a Republican talking points tirade about why he was "wrong."

He acted EXACTLY like the liberal talk show/debate hosts he rails against, and the reason I quit watching those shows to begin with. I want to hear what the person has to say.

Shouting someone down just proves to me the message is feared.