Your question may be adopted by the foreign affairs debate moderator

[shock]

YOUR QUESTION MAY BE ADOPTED BY THE FOREIGN AFFAIRS DEBATE MODERATOR
=====================================================

This morning, October 22, 2012, the day of the final 2012 Presidential election debates,
a debate intended to reveal the foreign policies of the two presidential candidates, Obama and Romney,
ABC news opened up the doors of the debate hall by declaring that the debate might provide the
"best opportunity for voters to see how these two men look in the role of Commander-in-Chief."

Some might assail such position
and point to the fact that theoretically at least the debate is being held for the purpose of determining the foreign policies of each of the two candidates.


Those supportive of the ABC view, however,
may note in support of their "Commander in Chief" position that
the US Constitution invests the US President with control of our foreign affairs---
in addition to making him commander of our military forces.


Others might say "true but" note in their turn that placing both powers in the hands of one person
is as unwise as allowing smoking in a room filled with gunpowder,
especially since the US Supreme Court, one presently composed of three Jews and six Catholics,
has blacked out the constitution's "fail save" provision
that requires a congressional declaration of war before we can go to war.

Whatever the case, the debate regarding the foreign affairs policies of the two candidates
will take place tonight.

"Terror" will be a word tossed about during the debates
about as much as Gaddafi's living body was tossed around and bayonetted in the anus by thugs that the President as commander in chief had rallied against Gaddafi
so as to support Presidential policy against secularist rulers,
such as Saddam and Gaddafi who had but incidentally nationalized their petroleum assets
at the expense of Western oil companies.

And here we pause to note
that Obama's part in such terrorism was scarce seen,
for it was carried out, and the bullet was taken, by his Secretary of State, Hilary Clinton,
who first asked our thugs for Gaddafi dead or alive,
and who upon seeing Gaddafi's bloody death
informed us that "We (meaning Hilary) came, we saw, he died."

(And tempted by truth, we note Hilary is playing as little a part for the democrats in the presidential election as Carl Rove is playing for the Republicans.)

So, good friends, and dualies, and gentile, and other people,
what questions would you have for our two tall, handsome, loquacious and clever candidates,
and what distinctions do you see as to their foreign policies?

SHOCKLEY

P.S. I do not favor the known foreign affairs position of either candidate.


If I vote in the presidential election I will cast my vote not far a candidate but against the candidate who I believe has the least regard for the American people and their civil and economic rights.

 

[shock]

Will there be discussion during tonight's foreign affairs Presidential debate
of the histories and the trustworthiness and the
roles and skills played in the formulation of Presidential foreign policy by such persons as
CIA Director Petraeus,
Secretary of Defense Panetta,
and Secretary of State Hilary Clinton?

Will there be discussion of the roles, skills and trust displayed in the formulation of such policy by such persons
as Susan Rice and Samantha Powers?


Will there be comparisons of the results achieved by Secretaries of State
such as foreign born Kissinger and Brzezinski and Albright (Korbel)
and American born Condoleezza Rice and Hilary Clinton?


Will we learn anything about the extent to which corporations with overseas interests affect our foreign policy?


Or the extent to which European Union and Britain and France in particular influence such policy?


Or the extent to which Obama's pledge as president have affected our foreign policy and the extent to which the pledges of Obama and Romney to support Israel will have on our future foreign policy?

Will we learn anything of value from lsitening to and watching the debate?


Will the debate affect
whether we vote or not in the coming election
and if we do so whether we will cast a vote for or against a particular candidate?

SHOCKLEY









Will there be discussion during tonight's foreign affairs Presidential debate
of the histories and the trustworthiness and the
roles and skills played in the formulation of Presidential foreign policy by such persons as
CIA Director Petraeus,
Secretary of Defense Panetta,
and Secretary of State Hilary Clinton?

Will there be discussion of the roles, skills and trust displayed in the formulation of such policy by such persons
as Susan Rice and Samantha Powers?


Will there be comparisons of the results achieved by Secretaries of State
such as foreign born Kissinger and Brzezinski and Albright (Korbel)
and American born Condoleezza Rice and Hilary Clinton?


Will we learn anything about the extent to which corporations with overseas interests affect our foreign policy?


Or the extent to which European Union and Britain and France in particular influence such policy?


Or the extent to which Obama's pledge as president have affected our foreign policy and the extent to which the pledges of Obama and Romney to support Israel will have on our future foreign policy?

Will we learn anything of value from lsitening to and watching the debate?


Will the debate affect
whether we vote or not in the coming election
and if we do so whether we will cast a vote for or against a particular candidate?

SHOCKLEY

 

[amrchaos]

When it comes to foreign policy,

Would it not be best for Military and Intelligence agents to question the candidates? I mean, after all, it is their necks on the line!!

 

[daveman]

I have a question for Obama:

Mr. President, why are you taking credit for ending the war in Iraq when the timeline was negotiated by the Bush Administration?

And a follow-up: Why are you pretending you didn't try to extend the US presence beyond 2011?