New Poll: Who won the Iowa GOP Debate?


Time for a brief post on my impression (and yours) of the Thursday evening Iowa GOP debate.

Mitt Romney remains the steady even-steven frontrunner. He gave the impression of being presidential, made few mistakes and had no deer-in-the-headlights moments like he did during the 2008 debates. When asked about healthcare and Romney care, his answer was still very much the government is the answer solution. He still remains committed to the concept of government-mandated healthcare which drives conservatives crazy. At least I will give him credit for being firm on an issue many believe is wrong.

Michele Bachmann again, did very well. She held her own in a field of men of which three strongly attacked her. At one point, the debate became a verbal joust between the Minnesota twins of Pawlenty and Bachmann. Michele gave very principled and committed answers on both fiscal and social issues. At one point, Byron York asked her a theological question about wives submitting themselves (Ephesians 5:22) in which she returned a very wise and personal answer. At this time, she is my favorite candidate because I identify with her positions more than any other candidate.

Let’s face it, Tim Pawlenty was a disappointment. He cannot seem to shake his passive aggressive temperament and presentation and this really became manifest when he attacked Congressman Bachmann. Pawlenty is having a tough time convincing voters that he is a fighter or has the fire in the belly to take on Obama (although I think anyone can beat Obama right now.)

In contrast to Pawlenty, Rick Santorum really stuck out as the righteous anger passionate candidate tonight. He was forceful and commanding in his arguments. He had me believing he was on the move until his anger turned on Michele Bachmann and then he came off as bitter and critical. His temperament lost me.

Newt Gingrich also stood out tonight. Just as Romney won the war, Gingrich won the battle in tonight’s debate. His answers and presentation gave the perception that his campaign may be on the road to recovery. Newt is probably the smartest guy on that stage but he does not convey executive leadership and I think almost everyone sees that clearly. After the Republicans win back the White House, Newt should be the top choice as Secretary of State or Secretary of Education, if that department doesn’t get eliminated.

Herman Cain was also somewhat of a disappointment. He had a few great answers but he did not command the stage and stand out as a strong leader contrasted to the other candidates. He seemed to get lost as an observer to the other fireworks show on stage.

Frankly, I’m surprised that John Huntsman is even running as a Republican. His presentation was extremely staged and the positions he holds and argued are more in line an Independent candidate. My guess is that he won’t remain in the race too much longer.

Then there’s the angry old man from Texas, Congressman Ron Paul. You’ll probably be surprised to know that I happen to agree with his philosophy on the role of government. (Although I am slightly torn about his position on the war and isolationism.) It’s just that the wrong Paul is running for President. Paul does not convey leadership but rather that of an alarmist. If his son, Rand Paul, were in this race, I’m sure that he would be doing much better than his father. A note to the Paulistinians out there who read this: I’ve included Ron Paul on the online poll but I would ask you not to flash mob it.

Finally, there’s much to be said in the days ahead about the Governor of Texas. Governor Rick Perry was not part of tonight’s lineup because he was probably sitting at home watching the GOP Vice-Presidential debate. No seriously, Perry has indicated that he will announce this Saturday that he is entering the race. This will have the effect of throwing a wrench into the campaign machine of Mitt Romney. Perry has every chance and likelihood of quickly overshadowing Romney in all areas with the exception of campaign cash on hand. Unlike Romney, Perry is currently serving as Governor of a state that is prospering especially in job growth compared to every other state. Perry is tremendously popular and can certainly brag about recent accomplishments that reflect the conservative agenda. And most important, Perry does not have to worry about a record of making deals with Democrats for his own political survival. When Perry enters the race, the Republican primary will essentially become a two man battle between him and Romney. At that point, Bachmann becomes the dark horse or top VP pick. All the other candidates will need to prepare their resumes for cabinet positions.

The new poll is up and we’re asking who you think won the debate. Feel free to share the poll with others but I’d also like your comments on the debate and where you think the race is going at this point in time.

 


Comments

  1. Dax Richardson says:

    You are classic Repub neocon! Michelle Balkman? Dumbest one on the panel. I knew you would call Congressman Paul the angry old man that’s typical and the best you could do because you know he is right you just said it in your review. What in the hell is an Isolationist? Does this mean Jefferson and some of the other fore fathers were Isolationists as well? Does that mean the inventors of The Constitution were Isolationists? C’mon, He never says he wants to isolate the U.S. from anyone just stay out of others business but he wants to trade freely with all nations, how do you not hear that? Would an Isolationist want to talk to Cuba about removing sanctions, I don’t think so?

    • I wouldn’t agree with an angry old man . Maybe more like an old 19 year old .
      I like what Paul stands for . Just doesn’t sell it well .

      • Time4RealChange says:

        It sells well enough for those paying attention!

        • Paul is a one isue candidate, his supporters make us dislike him, we get threatened and told they will vote Democrate if we do not support him. Ron Paul encourages his supporters to be nasty so support him, NO!!!!

          • TryTheConstitutionForOnce says:

            If by one issue you mean the economic collapse HE PREDICTED while a lot of those other guys laughed at him (some onstage with him 4 years ago at the time)…the only issue that matters…

            …then GOOD. I’m glad he is a one issue candidate.

            Also, how did the general election work out for you guys when you elected a liberal Republican named McCain and we Ron Paul supporters didn’t vote for him?

            Oh yeah, you lost.

            It’s Ron Paul or 4 more years of Obama…decide who you hate more. The country is yours to save or destroy. We aren’t comprmising with you liberal Republicans anymore. Restore the Republic NOW!

          • PrettyPretty says:

            So Ron Paul sipporters turn you off well I am a Republican and the Tea Party trying to take over my party turns me off !No I won’t vote for Obummer if Paul isn’t the GOP candidate, I will vote 3rd party again like I did in 2008 when the GOP picked McLame! I do believe we need to mind our own business and take care of our own first! If Paul wins the GOP nomination he will pick up Independence and I have even heard some Democrats say they would vote for Paul,so go ahead put Paul down and build up all the CFRERS,FEDERAL RESERVE PEOPLE AND RUIN OUR COUNTRY and WE WILL GET OBUMMER AGAIN!!!

          • I won’t vote democrat, but if he’s not the nominee I’ll simply write his name in. Tired of voting for lesser of evils. For me anyway, it’s Ron Paul or bust…. :)

          • Clark_Kent says:

            when you go to church, have fun pretending to be a real christian.you obviously don’t believe in ending the needless bloodshed going on in afghanistan,iraq,yemen,libya,pakistan.phoney

          • He encourages his supporters to be nasty? Show me a link or something point toward this assumption, I guarantee he doesn’t. As a matter of fact go look on youtube.. he tells his supporters to be enthusiastic but at the same time be peaceful, non-violent. So get your facts straight before you try and slander someone.

          • Ron Paul is most certainly not a ” one isue candidate” he speaks about taxes, wars, the monetary system, terrorism, the US roll in the world, the economy, and many other things!
            he talks about how he would address these problems and what kind of action he would take to help fix that problem, the roll of state vs. govt. in that issue.
            so not only is your statement wrong, its a flat out LIE.

      • Clark_Kent says:

        How do more dead american men and women sell?Does it sell well like hot cakes after you go to church? To know that thousands of men and women are stuck in Iraq and Afghanistan and their blood is dripping on the rag we call a flag because you care about who sells better and promotes the lies more?

        I guess this is the real truth about the GOP insiders.You don’t give a damn! about what men and women sacrifice.YOU DONT GIVE A DAMN! what your grandfathers gave in war.YOU DONT GIVE A DAMN! about the truth!and about preserving the u.s. constitution and liberty for your future children. IM SO DAMN SICK OF THE LIES.someday you will no longer have your Mitt Romney phoneys to sell .You want to play fantasy football with the troops?GET The hell out of my country.

        • What’s up with the constant church references? Sounds like you haven’t the slightest clue as to what goes on inside one, apart from some stale rumors or what actually goes on with our military – as stale, dry and cardboard cut-out as the church concepts.

          Having lived out for a couple decades, on two other continents wth wildly different regional dangers, I can attest that Ron Paul’s pronouncements on international geopolitical relations are pathetically uninformed, narrow-minded and horribly simplistic, and totally abandons the 200 year success of the Jeffersonian restructuring of our failed coastal defensive structure for an aggressive projection military structure as developed in response to our two very first wars, the Quasi War with our short-lived allies the French and the Barbary Wars with the Muslim pirating despots of North AFrica Libya, Tunisia and ALgiers.

          And seriously, it’s not rocket science out there, it’s common sense and some reasonable investment in actual history and global regional conflicts. Seriously, I never talk like this, but since the Left DEMANDS actual EXPERIENCE before anyone can have an opinion on a subject, the “Infallibility Card” I HAVE to mention it. In return I get to demand what international, geopolitical experience other people have to back up their statements about how awful it is out there and how cold-hearted we all are. EVery tiem Ron Paul opens his mouth he exposes he doesn’t know anythign beyond his narrow, poorly informed and in really peculiar echoing of a Hillary Clintonistic, hard Left viewpoint.

          Bad governments ally to gang up on good governments. Good governments need to band together sometimes to protect each other. If good governments ignore their fellow good governments and let them be overrun by bad governments, then when their necks are on the block, no one will be left to help them. Survival. IF Bin Laden in a remote, nowhere town in Afghanistan could coordinate a massive simultanoeus attack on two cities on US soil on 9/11, with literally a tiny budget for some airline tickets, then the world is a very small place these days and we’d better stay sharp and reactive.

          This weeping and irate theatre is ridiculous. You think humanitarian aid is any easier or safer than soldiering? It ain’t. Usually it’s worse – no protection at all. Did you shed tears and rend your clothes for the American missionary who was burned to death with his two sons by radical Hindus? Did you see his widow and his surviving children at the huge memorial service a year later as his widow before thousands of Hindus forgave his murderers? DO you know how many missionaries are out there in the world’s poorest countries providing medical care to suffering people too poor to afford even the transport to a hospital, much less a doctor before they provide spiritual care?

          I’m beginning to think that the Left wants to knock Christians only so they can justify the Left’s total lack of sincere giving for other people. The Left doesn’t GIVE, it TAKES.

          • so why is it that Ron Paul has the highest support of active servicemen and women (twice that of all the other candidates combined)? are they all “pathetically uninformed, narrow-minded and horribly simplistic” as well?

  2. I agree with you on about everything here . And even Perry . But Perry is not known to others like he is in Texas . And MANY Texan’s like me voted for Perry for Governor . But only cause he was the best choice . But do not want him has POTUS .
    Perry gets credit for Texas . But Texas is what makes Texas ,Not Perry …Perry would have Texas in debt . But Texas binds the hands that spend . Perry is more big Government . Won’t protect the borders. And only won last time because it was a three way race . So he won big . But all this will come out in time .

  3. thebigpicture says:

    Your crazy. Ron Paul stole the debate. He is honest. Dosent throw stones and is the only one who dosent sound like a talk radio host. GO RON PAUL

  4. Practice your English says:

    “If his son, Rand Paul, were in this race, I’m sure that he would be doing much better then his father.”

    Better “than” his father. Please learn English if you are going to write.

    • Practice that is why most of us will never support RP, is he as nasty as you?

      • Matthew Filicicchia says:

        I am going to make an observation here. He corrects your grammar. You call him or her “nasty” then call RP nasty? Where is your logic?
        Or will you be fighting the good fight of political servitude by reports of “threats” and “crazy supporters” without any merit this election period?
        It’s amazing how the reports of supporters for Paul are always reported as a “mob,” or “angry groups.”
        But a rally for the other candidates are never portrayed in such a light.
        I wonder if thats not to dissuade folks from even listening to what he is really saying? And, or. To make the undecided not see political terrorist when they see a Ron Paul for President sign, or meeting or group?
        I have noticed that making people scared of whomever the neocon cry “boogyman” is a useful tool of a certain political party. Especially since Bush was such a great wielder of that verbal judo.
        The problem is Bush has been caught lying after the fact so many times its pathetic. But it got him what he wanted.
        Ron Paul has been right so many times over the last 20+ years about things, that I think it offends you. But when you say he and his followers are “crazy and violent” or that he is “To old.” I have to look for all these reports of “Threats” made by angry, rude, mobs of Ron Paul supporters.
        Where are they?
        Where are the police reports of arrest and detentions for making a threat?
        Where are the rules that say What “Presidential” is supposed to talk like or look like? Or is that based on the standards that you and the MSM give us to go by? Because that has failed miserably as any kind of standard so far.
        If saying that I will not vote for a candidate that I feel does not “represent” me, is a threat. Then you do not have the best interest of my family and nation, but that of corporate interest and a bought political system.
        I wish you a good day and peace and safety.
        I don’t know who I will vote for yet. But I will pay more attention to the RP agenda to see what you and many bought and paid for politicians are so afraid of.
        Your objectivity is so obviously lacking. You may want to try another tactic, since this one is really exposing your agenda.

    • Corrected. Thank you fellow Grammarian. It was a late night.

  5. jesus “angry old man” Ron Paul is by far the wiset man on the panel. All the others are just pathalogical liars who change their positions according to the whims of the voters just so they can get their votes. Just like what Obama did that very very very good Orator. I hope America wakes up and stop supporting politicians who frankly do not care about them or their country.

  6. Time4RealChange says:

    You sound like you don’t understand Ron Paul at all. Isolationist?? do you know what an isolationist is?? Just because he wants to bring troops home and end these unjust wars and stop wasting trillions of dollars on a foreign policy we can’t manage, that doesnt make him an isolationist. He’s a NON-INTERVENTIONIST! learn the difference!

    And yes, he’s a bit old — but you know what they say — With age comes wisdom. And he’s by far the most brilliant man up there.

    its either Ron Paul or the status quo. no other GOP can beat Obama other than Ron Paul.

    Wake up America! Check out the results on Fox’s own online poll results and look at the map. Only ONE state did Ron Paul not win in!

  7. Time4RealChange says:

    “I’ve included Ron Paul on the online poll but I would ask you not to flash mob it.”

    oh man, thats pretty sad.

    Why do you suppose no other candidate ever has “flash mob” votes the way Ron Paul gets? why don’t flash mobbers ever choose any other candidate??

    The answer is simple; They dont have near the integrity, consistency, honesty, nor even the remote amount of support Ron Paul has. Period.

    Don’t blame the “flash mob”, blame the lack of any other good representatives of the people.

    • They are just preparing there excuse when he wins. They know he will, so they have to pre plan a way to discredit it.

    • Typically what happens on these online polls is the Ron Paul supporters send out a rapid response message to other supporters and the poll gets swarmed. When this happens, the data becomes an outlier on the overall poll when in reality, the actual numbers are dramatically different. Fortunately, our poll can limit repeat voting by blocking duplicate IP addresses.

      • This is ridiculous.

        First of all, Ron Paul has a huge following for a reason. We are not crazy lunatics. We are sick and tired of big government, corrupt politicians and wasteful spending.

        Second, what is wrong with sending out information to people who think like you do?

        Third, “Fortunately, our poll can limit repeat voting by blocking duplicate IP addresses.” – yes, so why are you worried about people “flash mobbing” the poll if a person can only vote once?

        We are REAL people and we are passionate about Ron Paul. We are all mostly lower to middle class Americans living pay check to pay check. We have families we care about. No other politician out there has the grass support that Ron Paul has, and like I said, that is for a REASON.

        ===============================================================

        WHO IS RON PAUL?

        Ronald Ernest Paul (born August 20, 1935) is a 10th-term Congressman, obstetrician (M.D.), and a 2008 presidential candidate from the U.S. state of Texas, seeking the nomination of the Republican Party.

        As a Republican, he has represented Texas’s 14th congressional district in the U.S. House of Representatives since 1997, and represented Texas’s 22nd district in 1976 and from 1979 to 1985.

        Paul advocates a limited role for the federal government, low taxes, free markets, a non-interventionist foreign policy, and a return to monetary policies based on commodity-backed currency. He has earned the nickname “Dr. No” because he is a medical doctor who votes against the bills that he believes conflict with the Constitution.1 In the words of former Treasury Secretary William Simon, Paul is the “one exception to the Gang of 535″ on Capitol Hill.2 He has never voted to raise taxes or congressional pay, and refuses to participate in the congressional pension system.3 He has consistently voted against the USA PATRIOT Act, the Military Commissions Act of 2006, and the Iraq War.

        He has NEVER voted to raise taxes.
        He has NEVER voted for an unbalanced budget.
        He has NEVER voted for a federal restriction on gun ownership.
        He has NEVER voted to raise congressional pay.
        He has NEVER taken a government-paid junket.
        He has NEVER voted to increase the power of the executive branch.
        He voted AGAINST the Patriot Act.
        He voted AGAINST regulating the Internet.
        He voted AGAINST the Iraq war.
        He DOES NOT participate in the lucrative congressional pension program.
        He returns a portion of his annual congressional office budget to the U.S. treasury every year.

      • Thomas Johnson says:

        Your website provides a great outlook in a free and open market of ideas. Thank you. My question is this. If the open free market poll you provided is open to everyone, and tools like facebook, twitter, google, and a whole host of other tools is freely and openly available to supporter of all candidates, then why would supporters of Ron Paul have an advantage? These tools and methods are widely known to the internet using population. All tools being equal, how does he win? Why does he win? Who helps him win?

        Answering these questions logically with honesty to ones self will provide you the answer. I leave that to others to determine and think out for themselves.

      • Oberserve says:

        Look at the bright side, Shane. You’re blog traffic went up 1000% or more!

        There’s always a bright side. :)

  8. Info warrior says:

    The only people who continue to tell “The People” that Ron Paul is unelectable is big media. We are not under that spell. This is an organic movement no GMO, no vaccines, no fluoride in my water, down with big government. The true heartbeat of America – 1776 knocking on the door my friend.

  9. Mr. Wikfors,
    Firstly, I have to state that I do support Ron Paul’s positions on most everything, especially his domestic and foreign policies and feel he is dead on! I don’t understand why you would attach a funny little name to anyone who agrees with a certain candidate’s positions? Am I to be considered a PAULISTINIAN as well for merely agreeing with a candidate that seems to be honest, intelligent, and whose integrity and constitutionally compliant thirty year voting record has remained consistent? You use the term PAULISTINIAN, not in an endearing way but as a put down, why sir? And why is it always Ron Paul’s supporters? I look through your entire article and see no other feigned attempts at humor towards the other candidates supporters, why? I would like to think you are better than that, it just seems a bit juvenile especially if you desire a reputation whereby people will read your blog and take you seriously. This may be a contributing factor as to why you have (at present count), a total of only seventy seven out of millions of potential readers who decided to cast a vote that visited your blog.
    People who consider themselves Neo-Conservatives are on the way out, period! Just look at how depleted their power base is. You and others like you have to face up to the fact that this country is going through revolutionary changes of thought! If you continue to hitch you horse to the old guard’s wagon you do so at your own peril. The Tea Party is in its infancy and look how dramatic their influence has already become! In time the people will come to disregard the fake Tea Party candidates like Pawlenty, Palin, Bachmann, Rubio and others like them, as their voting records will be their own downfall. The people in this country and around the world are awakening to the machinations of government, and in case you haven’t noticed, they are pissed off!
    I would like to share with you the difference between ISOLATIONISM and NON-INTERVENTION. Although, I would expect you would know that there is a distinct difference between these two separate positions giving that you have been in Arizona politics for what, 21 years or so? I’d like to afford you the benefit of the doubt and suggest that you just didn’t know there was a difference, as opposed to knowing there is a distinct difference and that you were being disingenuous or even worse, attempting to consciously mislead your readers. I prefer to think it is the former, rather than the latter. Judging by your piece here, you may not realize there is a distinct difference between the two! Have I mentioned that there is a distinct difference between the two positions? Great, because when you attempt to combine the two separate positions into one meaning as if they were interchangeable, you do so either from ignorance of the distinctness of the two different positions or you do so with the intent to mislead, either way this does not bode well for your reputation in the blogosphere.
    FROM WIKIPEDIA OF COURSE:
    NON-INTERVENTIONISM: is a foreign policy which holds that political rulers should avoid alliances with other nations, but still retain diplomacy, and avoid all wars not related to direct territorial self-defense. This is based on the grounds that a state should not interfere in the internal politics of another state, based upon the principles of state sovereignty and self-determination. A similar phrase is “strategic independence”.[1] Historical examples of supporters of non-interventionism are US Presidents George Washington and Thomas Jefferson, who both favored nonintervention in European Wars while maintaining free trade. Other proponents include United States Senator Robert Taft and United States Congressman Ron Paul.[2]
    NONINTERVENTION is distinctly different from ISOLATIONISM, the latter featuring economic nationalism (protectionism) and restrictive immigration. Proponents of non-interventionism distinguish their policies from isolationism through their advocacy of more open national relations, to include diplomacy and free trade.
    Isolationism: is a foreign policy adopted by a nation in which the country refuses to enter into any alliances, foreign trade or economic commitments, or international agreements in hopes of focusing all of its resources into advancement within its own borders while remaining at peace with foreign countries by avoiding all entanglements of foreign agreements. In other words, it asserts both of the following:
    Do you see the differences? Great! From now on though, you have no excuse for surreptitiously combining the two meanings and then averring that this is Ron Paul’s position on the matter of foreign policy, because then that would be misleading or at the very least disingenuous.

    • Very well written. :)

    • Stephen,

      If you have the ability for honest introspection, you could re-read your own post and see why people do not like Ron Paul or his followers. The answers are all there.

      Here’s a hint: Look for arrogance, intransigence and histrionics.

      • @ Travis, yes sir I do, the real question is do you? Please share with my why people don’t like Ron Paul supporters. This might be refreshing. Looks like someone has bought themselves a new Thesaurus? I’m real proud of your command of the English language by the way, I can tell you enjoy attempting to create an aura of superiority by using words not normally found in daily casual dialogue. That’s grand, now use this wonderful skill set to make a point Sir.

        Arrogance? Ron Paul is arrogant? that’s rich. Kind, honest, principled integrity comes to mind when I think of Ron Paul, and so do most of his colleagues. Dr. Paul just doesn’t bend on issues that are not constitutionally compliant. I would consider that an attribute wouldn’t you?

        Intransigence,
        I disagree with you here as well, no surprise huh? Example: he doesn’t believe the constitution allows for all these departments to be created on the federal level but he has stated that he wouldn’t immediately cut them but would rather phase some of them out that we have taught people to be dependent upon. He believes in States rights, rather than the Federal Government dictating to the states what to do in matters not enumerated in the constitution.That is not being : bullheaded, dogged, hardheaded, obstinacy, mulish, obdurate, obstinate, opinionated, pertinacious, pertinacity, pigheadedness, self-opinionated, self-will, stubborn, or even willful. See, I’m real smart too, just like you.

        histrionics,
        lol, i know you don’t really want to go here do you? compare Ron Paul to any other politician and you have the unmitigated gal to accuse him of being a phony? wow, you couldn’t be further from the truth on this one. If its one thing you can say about Ron Paul, its that he sincerely believes in the positions he takes.

        • ok now pounce on my typos and avoid making a point or refute my response. I know that’s what your going to do, so get it over with but please have a lucid response Mr. Travis.

      • lol i think some people don’t like Ron Paul because of honesty myself. some people really have an adverse reaction to being in it’s presence and they instantly try to discredit it.

    • “The Tea Party is in its infancy and look how dramatic their influence has already become! In time the people will come to disregard the fake Tea Party candidates like Pawlenty, Palin, Bachmann, Rubio and others like them,”

      Ah yes. You, Stephen V, are one of those dilusional Ron Paul supporters who believe the Tea Party was started by Paul years ago and taken over by the likes of Bachmann, Rubio etc. Last night, Paul came across as flustered and incoherent not to mention, dilusional about the real world.

      No matter how loud Paul supporters cheer and how many times they show up to vote in polls, he will never win.

    • Stephen,

      Do you support the existence of the Jewish State of Israel? Much of the interaction I’ve had with Ron Paul supporters has been antagonistic toward Israel. I am going to give the benefit of the doubt that this is not driven by an anti-Semitic worldview.

      So I refuse to disobey the Biblical admonishment found in Genesis Chapter 12:3.

      For the most part, I agree with your assessment above regarding foreign entanglements. Even our first President warned us about this.
      However, we live in a world that is almost entirely interconnected and that means we cannot avoid adopting a “bunker mentality” – especially when it comes to issues like widespread famine or genocide. We have a moral obligation to stand up against inaction and evil. After all, our forefathers believed we were a shining city on a hill and that carries a moral responsibility.

      If you read my comments below, I hold that we should bring our troops home from lands where they are no longer needed and I do believe the embargo against Cuba is archaic.

      • Thomas Johnson says:

        I support the existence of the Jewish State of Israel wholeheartedly. I would even consider going and defending her, by joining her military ranks as a volunteer, depending on the specifics of the situation she was in. I, however, do not believe that any valid authority exists to send my neighbors to defend her. Maybe they would wish to defend her opponent with their lives and that is their choice as their lives are ONLY theirs and not mine or yours. In a free society, people could support whomever and whatever they choose as long as it doesn’t infringe on the rights of their fellow citizen. Basically you cannot infringe on the Life, Liberty, or Property of your neighbor.

        Prior to WWII, many Americans went to Germany to fight for her of their own free accord and many others went to fight with the British against Germany. Should we have taken their liberty on how to lead their lives and say they couldn’t go to Germany or even Britain? Stopped them with the use of force? Where would we get a lien on their life?

        So one can support the right of Israel to exist, but not support enslaving their fellow neighbors and American’s lives in her defense. There is no right, authority, or duty for America to protect Israel and defend her like she is some half-wit, incapable, non-sovereign vassal state that cannot take care of herself. With over 200 nukes and the most advanced military in the region she is a deathtrap to any aggressor.

        So I support Israel’s right to exist, but not the non-existent right to confiscate my neighbors life to defend her. However, I do have the right to go fight for her myself if I wish as I am the legitimate owner of my Life, Liberty, and Property.

      • Shane,
        Did you even read my post? My point revolved around your previous post of how Ron Paul was an Isolationist and I refuted your premise rather succinctly and asked that you support your accusations with facts and you attack my entire piece with, “are you an anti semite”? seriously? I am so disappointed with your response, and saddened by your diversionary tactics that I can not in good judgement respond any further. I was under the assumption that we could have a healthy and honest discussion of what is contributing to our country’s problems, and how we could learn from each others different perspectives and possible solutions. I am so sorry for wasting your time Shane. Take care and have a pleasant life. Buy some silver though, now, before it becomes too expensive, this way here when the crap really hits the fan your family may have something to fall back on. trust me it isn’t going to be pretty. I certainly hope you have prepared for the inevitable downfall of the dollar because this country is in for a lot of pain my friend. Take care Sir.

    • Thomas Johnson says:

      Thank you for the logical and informative post.

  10. Michelle Bachman was the one who was attacked last night and she handled it with grace. The way Pawlenty attacked her made him look desperate. One blogger said Ron Paul came across as a crazy uncle and that sums it up for me. His supporters would turn me off even if I supported what he stood for (and I do like a lot of what he says). His supporters are obnoxious, rude and condescending.

    • FormerEvangelical says:

      Bachmann changed her story on submission because the way she’s told it for years won’t fly with the public. It is not a theological question; it’s a question of who will dictate policy, herself or her husband. Based on her own previous story, submission means doing what you don’t want to do because your husband (lord and master) tells you, and he is superior to you. Bachmann of course cherry-picks her scriptures. She doesn’t mind wearing man’s clothes (i.e., pants), gold, jewelry, and plenty of other adornments, which the New Testament Epistle writers found objectionable. She doesn’t mind making up stories to fit her latest goal, which is a violation of the commandment “Do not bear false witness.” And, most importantly, she is a Christian Dominionist candidate — which is not Christian but sure it Dominionist. They believe only Christians should rule the world, and not just any old Christians, just in case you think Catholics, Methodists, Anglicans, and Lutherans are included, because they, my friends, are heretics in her theology. If you want to sign up for public stonings of murderers, heretics, witches, and adulterers — Bachmann is your gal.

  11. People who are already biased toward or against a particular candidate have no objectivity and are useless commentators. The point at present is to find out through a process, who has the qualifications to be President. I’ve been browsing the internet today to find an unbiased viewpoint and it’s been hard. I found most comments by the author here to be pretty accurate with the exception of one. Although I agree with his points, Gingrich ended up looking like a crybaby because he kept complaining about the questions. Ron Paul has some good ideas, but his view on Iran was seriously scary. I have really like Bachmann in recent weeks, but didn’t like the cat and dog show she and Pawlenty entered into. Huntsman…blah. Santorum showed up, but no one seems to have noticed, Cain was uninspiring although intelligent. Please not Romney, please, please please.

  12. LEO IN TSN says:

    WOW—you were sure right about those angry, rabid Paulistas. None of them seem to know that betraying Israel to the muslims is not “non-intervention” and would certainly be a spear in the heart of America.

    Mitt Romney is a liberal, the one who created Obomneycare. Like a good Massachusetts chameleon, he will talk the big conservative talk until the votes are counted. Don’t forget his buddy Scott Brown, who wasn’t even unpacked in DC before he was giving the one-finger salute to the people who elected him. Wasn’t Romney a liberal in Wisconsin or somewhere before he moved to the liberal pastures of Boston? Could a true conservative ever have gotten elected in the land of “Speedo” Teddy, which now gives us John F’ing Kerry, who fought in Vietnam?

    Rick Perry, likewise, is no conservative. He is the one who decreed, by executive order (sound familiar) that every juvenile female in Texas would submit to the Planned Parenthood vaccination program. At the time, it was reported that Perry had a large financial interest in the vaccine company too. As governor he runs a sanctuary state while he waits for the federal amnesty to come along. Let’s re-examine his entire record before we grant him the executive mantle.

    There is only one candidate who has always been and continues to be a true conservative. She has lived her life and conducted her political affairs in the manner that daily shows her patriotism and love for this country, and her intention to protect and preserve it. It has to be Michele Bachmann in 2012. Get over the fact that she’s a girl, and listen to what she has always said and look to what she has done and will do for US.

    God bless America, and all patriots who want to save her now.

  13. Most pundits were all over Newt Gingrich’s attack against Chris Wallace, like he was Harry Potter defending against Voldemort. Unfortunately, it was really just a snow screen to hide the fact of his abysmal campaign. Chris Wallace and Byron York need to continue asking these hard questions of Republican Candidates to see who flinches. The MSM will be much, much nastier come next September/October.

    Bachmann proved herself quite capable of handling anything thrown at her. She continues to impress me with her aplomb.

    The diamond in the rough last night was Rick Santorum. He called it right in distinguishing between showmanship and leadership. He demonstrated genuine command of the numbers and presence of mind to respond to tough questions on both social conservatism and foreign policy. Unfortunately, you never know which Santorum will show up at any event, the animated and passionate one, or the sleepy, milk-toast candidate.

    The straw poll Saturday should begin to thin the herd, since fundraising will begin to dry up for those who fair poorly. The next debate, if it includes Rick Perry, will definitely begin to separate the wheat from the chaff. The Republican candidate will be very well vetted. The Taranto effect is in full bloom. Now, where is the Progressive candidate to challenge Obama?

  14. Joshua McBride says:

    Ron Paul may not be considered the strongest GOP candidate running for the nomination, but I believe you have forgotten to take into consideration just how many independent voters are supporting RP and only RP.

    Don’t forget that most of the political ‘middle’ still blames the Republicans for the disastrous Bush presidency (and rightfully so). So while nominating Perry or Romney may result in standing ovations from the republicans, be rest assured there will be a mass exodus of independents shortly after.

    Obama won the 2008 election thanks to the mobilized, younger independents, a fact he and his party seems to have forgotten, which is why the GOP has a real chance to use that same weapon against the Dems this time around. But only if we get Ron Paul.

    You think independents will vote for Perry? Perry is cut from the same cloth as GW Bush and no amount of smoke and mirrors will convince us otherwise. Hell, Perry even has many of the same mannerisms as Bush.

    The 2008 election was a game changer and I fear the GOP has failed to recognize that fact. Republicans and Democrats will no longer be the final say in who gets to be president. It will be the independents, and you would do well to listen to what they have to say.

  15. Cmillerpa says:

    Bachman voted for the patriot act. Front runner? Not even close. Ron Paul has enough followers from both parties and the independents. Ron Paul is the anti-war candidate, and the only one with military experience. I have to say My countrymen are silly if they think to elect yet another commander and chief without it.

  16. I would suggest taht the writer of this article pick up a dictionary and learn the word “isolationism”. Not wasnting to KILL everyone or INVADE a country is NOT “isolationism”. The fact that he wants to OPEN trade with Cuba, and not so many sanctions against Iran means to me that he is LESS “isolationism” than the rest of the candidates. How in the world do these media people get these jobs without knowing defitions of things they speak about?

  17. Another article trying to sweep Ron Paul under the rug. And to those saying that “Ron Paul supporters are nasty…” etc. you need to go ahead and open your eyes. Ron Paul supporters are tired of the media blacklist against him, trying to write him off regardless of how much sense he makes and how worthy he IS to be President.

  18. Old Man Paul??? You can tell that this person is against what he has to say. He is the only one that will bring real “change”, unlike the rest of these corrupt Republicans and Democrats. Paul for President!!!!

  19. Here’s my liveblog of the whole thing – warning: it gets a little blue.

    http://theklute.livejournal.com/1141999.html

  20. Oh, you’ve included Ron Paul in the poll you say? That’s so nice of you. He doesn’t seem overly angry at all when you become aware of how much is going on that merits true outrage. He’s our only hope, like it or not. Any of these other clowns and we’re screwed.

  21. I do agree with many of Ron Paul’s positions but he does not possess executive leadership and the temperament to be president. As I mentioned, I would much rather see his son, Rand Paul run.

    Regarding isolationism. I think it is a deadly mistake to completely withdraw from foreign policy activities. We cannot allow the Chinese to attack the free people of Taiwan or even park an aircraft carrier off the shore of San Francisco while we do nothing.

    Neither can we turn our back on Israel and allow Islamic fundamentalists still stuck in the 13th century to launch attacks on Israel.

    I do agree that we should lift any remaining embargo on Cuba and swarm that island with free market economics to be consistent with what we’re doing elsewhere. And I do believe that we should finish up what we’re doing in Afghanistan, Iraq and even Bosnia and bring our men and women home.

    Frankly, the only way I could see Ron Paul ever elected by the majority of Americans in this country is if the entire economy and political system collapses.

  22. Yep! Looks like the Ron Paul people have flash mobbed yet another online poll! I hope they realize that they have actually created a data point outlier which is automatically dismissed in the final results.

    • Thomas Hägg says:

      Are you telling me that some people should not be allowed to vote, since they would vote for the wrong candidate ?

      Voting is the whole point of having a poll isn’t it ?

  23. nightcrawler says:

    Like many posters above, I also share many of Ron Paul’s opinions and beliefs. Many, but not all. RP is an intelligent man who makes his case in a non-confrontational and convincing fashion. He is a sincere and honest man who would be welcome at many dinner tables in America. The real issue is does RP the man, not the legend, possess the requisite leadership (including military) and managerial skills to run this vast and complex nation ? We are talking about the executive branch where hard decisions must be made every day.

    As far as US intervention abroad is concerned, this is the American way. The US does what it does because it is in our best interest to do so from an economic, military or in some cases humanitarian point of view. Go back to the Monroe Doctrine as a case in point. Is it all about the oil and resources ? Sure. Imagine this country without fuel. It would literally come to a standstill. As a nation we need to recognize who we are, how we got here and what we need to do going forward.
    1776 is great, but that was then and this is now. The founding fathers were truly inspirational men with a vision, but they were not gods.

  24. Clark_Kent says:

    “scale down”

    “reduction of the troops presence”

    “transition the government into the hands of the afghans”

    Sounds like you will all be fooled Thrice.That is 3 times.

    Sounds like all the candidates want to occupy Iraq and Afghanistan, hey if you advocate it send your own kids there. Enlist your grandchildren,your unborn children,enlist your kids right now! ENLIST ENLIST ENLIST. If you really believe the war is an absolute threat and necessary ENLIST YOURSELF at age 50-70 years old. GO HEAD COWARDS, enlist if you think its really a legitimate war.GO THERE cowards.

  25. Sgt Flapjaw says:

    Ron Paul may well be a bit of a wacko, but nothing like the suicidal maniacs that support him. Our country is in the throws of destroying itself from within because of our current President.
    If anyone ever had no chance to win, it’s Ron Paul. I prefer to refer to him as the modern day Lars “America First” Daily. Some of you might know who he is. He was based in Chcago in the 50′s and 60′s. Old Lars consistantly ran for every office including President. To show the difference between then and now, Lars had no followers.
    After reading these posts from the Paulists, I see that the best friend Barack Obama has is Ron Paul.

    • Oberserve says:

      LOL, look how the McCain candidacy turned out. How’d that one work for ya?

    • John McCain says:

      I want you to enlist for a 100 year war. Remember me? I want you,your children,your childrens children and your money. I want to start ww3, BOMB BOMB BOMB, BOMB BOMB IRAN!

      Im crazy,and this message was approved by you and John McCain. neo-con money slut.

  26. “Don’t flashmob me”? Are you baiting us? What do you expect? The majority ground is held by those who don’t believe Mormomney is mainstream.

    End the Fed, end the wars, rebuild America.

    • Steve Calabrese says:

      As a Ron Paul supporter, but one who worries that Paul – and his organization – lack the ability to actually win a primary, I would ask you to leave a candidate’s religion out of it. There are plenty of things that make Mitt Romney look bad, but identifying yourself as a Ron supporter and then referring to “Mormomney” just makes you look like a bigoted moron. That’s not a big deal, but your actions also reflect on Dr. Paul, and that bothers me.

  27. NadePaulKuciGravMcKi says:

  28. NadePaulKuciGravMcKi says:

    Bob Seger System “2+2″ with Vietnam Footage

  29. Oberserve says:

    Regardless of whether you support Ron Paul as president, you ignore him at your own risk.

    On the constitution and economics he is dead on and has the same message and record since 1970 – over 40 years. No one comes close.

    Now, precisely what he has been saying would happen has happened. Perfectly avoidable.

    Good luck to your kids and grandkids’ futures, prosperity, freedom and taxes. You, as parent and grandparent, only have yourself to blame for the current situation our nation finds itself in.

    And as long as your maintain your current (false) pride, the more secure you make that future for your kids and grandkids.

    Bible: read it.

  30. Conservative Guy says:

    After reading many of the comments here I have decided I am going to invest in a company that manufactures straight jackets. I have a feeling there will be a huge demand for them when Ron Paul loses.

    The thing that frustrates me is not Paul’s message. I agree with most of it. The problem I have is the delivery of the message and his followers (not all of you, just the loud obnoxious ones). You can deliver a factual and important message but the method of delivery is what will attract people. For example, if I am running down a street naked telling people that the economy will collapse if we don’t change Washington, even though the message is true and very important, most normal people will think I am a lunatic.

    Conclusion, I would much rather have someone who shares Paul’s message but who isn’t Paul, because he looks a little crazy.

    • Oberserve says:

      LOL. This is a great illustration of the point regarding false pride I wrote above.

      You can BELIEVE what you want, but the TRUTH is what is going to happen (and the TRUTH will set you free.)

      The truth is the truth whether you BELIEVE it or not.

      You can BELIEVE what you want, but you still need oxygen to stay alive.
      You can BELIEVE you are a constitutionalist, but shoot it full of holes with your positions, turns out you are NOT a constitutionalist, regardless of what you say or your BELIEFS.
      You can BELIEVE in taxing and regulating a nation into prosperity, but the TRUTH will come a’knocking, regardless of your BELIEF. And here we stand with our economy today.

      The truth has been laid bare before your feet and you still refuse to look. We know what the bible has to say about that! (7 generations, hate to tell ya!)

      Bible: read it
      Mirror: point to yourself, Mr. “Conservative” Guy when you think about the state of the nation.

      • Sgt Flapjaw says:

        Oberserve, you talk as if you just got here. We are not playing bean bag here, the future of the country is at stake. Your man cannot win! He impresses people as though he is a raving goofball, those types don’t win. Ross Perot comes to mind.
        A more sophisticated and mature person would work for his candidate until or if he loses, then back someone else who can beat the socialist that is running the country now. Your, and many others, all or nothing attitude says much about your ability to cope with the real world. Learn from History.

        • Oberserve says:

          Like I pointed out above, how did the McCain candidacy work out for ya?

          He was your “most likely to win” choice last time and you got it wrong.

          So what credibility do you have? You were wrong last time.

          • Sgt Flapjaw says:

            McCain was not the Consevative choice, He was never my choice, but I didn’t go out and vote for some third candidate. All I am reading here today is that you Paulists will not vote for any Republican except Paul. That’s just stupid, going to some third party clown or sitting home will ensure another Obama term. That is what happened in 2008. Learn your History! Your guy will not win. Stay with him as long as you want, but when he is out, don’t go away crying, stay and fight for someone who can win.

          • I’m not going to vote for someone I don’t believe in. The 2 party system is BS, get a backbone and stand up for something you believe in. Most of the candidates are the Republican equivalent to Obama. Just a puppet for the party who has fallen far away from their beliefs over the years. Name one candidate you can honestly trust and why? And don’t give me some mainstream media reason. The number one conservative TV channel, Fox News, took down multiple polls because Bachmann or Romney weren’t in the lead. One poll had about 30,000 votes and 20,000 were for Ron Paul. O’Reilly, prior to the debate, firmly stated that Romney, Perry, or Bachmann were the only ones who have a chance and they are all terrible politicians and we can’t risk the chance of getting another community organizer type in the White House, it doesn’t work.

      • Conservative Guy says:

        Observe, what are you talking about? Did you just try to bible bash me? (or whatever it was that you were doing). I will go read the Bible tonight since I really don’t recall where Jesus says that Ron Paul is the only conservative choice and that those who don’t support him are against the constitution. Once again, I agree with much of what Dr. Paul believes however I do not choose him as a spokesman for me and do not want him as my commander in chief. Just as I believe in the same Bible as you but, given your last comments, wouldn’t want you preaching to my kids.

        • Oberserve says:

          Hi Conservative Guy,

          In your particular case, the two areas I’d concentrate on are the Golden Rule and The Ten Commandments. Not your personal interpretation of them, but what the actual words say.

          I pray for you that you can understand the simple language of them which were written clearly to be understood as God intended by the least of us.

          If you feel you need to “interpret” them, then I pray for your soul.

    • So, another person who gets hung up on appearances.

      Out of curiosity, how would you rate Einstein?

      • Conservative Guy says:

        Bambi, It is not as much appearance as it is composure and tone. I agree with Shane in that I cannot see Paul being a leader but more an alarmist. You can disagree as I know you do but Paul does not come across as someone who can lead the free world. He is a fantastic Congressman but he is nit my choice for President. If you think I base this from physical appearance then you have missed my point entirely.

      • That’s one of the smartest comments I’ve read so far and exactly what I was thinking. Thank you for using your obvious intelligence. I don’t give a rat’s ass what Ron Paul looks like or how old he is (he’s a doctor after all and probably in decent health). I care who is going to give us CHANGE and make this country a place that I want my children to grow up in. Ron Paul is the ONLY choice and YES, if he isn’t the GOP candidate, I will either write in his name or I will vote for Obama because I can’t stand any of the other BS, status quo, lying, crooked, snake in the grass career politicians representing the GOP.

        • And btw, I have NEVER voted for ANY of the crooks in my life but I (along with most of my never voted before friends) will be voting for Ron Paul.

    • HAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA, THANK YOU, YOU HAVE MADE SITTING HERE READING THIS TRIPE FROM RP SUPPORTERS WORTH EVERY MINUTE.

  31. Half of all people are below average in intelligence. Those incapable of rational assessment of ideas will instead focus on appearances, for example, “the angry old man from Texas” might overwhelm other considerations such as, “I agree with his philosophy on the role of government”.

    When electing a president, which consideration is more important?

    Some people just repeat what they’ve heard. Some of those refer to Ron Paul as an “Isolationist”, when in fact he is a non-interventionist. There’s a huge difference. An isolationist says, “I don’t want anything to do with other countries.” A non-interventionist says, “I don’t want to tell other countries what to do.” Isolationists seal their borders, don’t trade with other countries, and are, well, ISOLATED from the world. North Korea is isolationist. Non-interventionists trade with other countries, exchange goods and ideas, but don’t drop bombs on other countries unless directly threatened or attacked. Switzerland is an example of a non-interventionist country.

    The US has been an INTERVENTIONIST country for some time. An interventionist country goes into other countries and tries to change them or take them over, either by stealth (CIA) or brute force (dropping bombs, rolling tanks). An example of an interventionist entity would be the old Soviet Union or the current USA.

    For that matter, what is the difference between us dropping bombs on Libya or invading Iraq (neither of which had done anything to us, not even posing a threat) and the USSR invading Czechoslovakia or Poland? Or the Nazis invading Poland and France, for that matter?

    There we have it – the author is on the side of the Nazis! (Okay – just kidding… … … sort of.) But at least you now know that Ron Paul is NOT an isolationist, something you would already have known if you’d listened to any of many different speeches in which he has said, “I am not an isolationist. I am for free trade and peaceful interactions with all countries” … or words to that effect.

    So go back, admit your ignorance, and apologize… then let’s get on with winning back our Country.

    Ron Paul 2012!

    • People who think the CIA is as adept as God, given what the agency have been claimed to have been doing all these years, are exactly what they claim OTHER people to be. Not a shred of critical analysis, like, “Wait a minute, is this actually POSSIBLE?”

      The CIA as super duper ominpresent bogie man was invented by the SOVIETS and endlessly retreaded by Hollywood, who NEVER mention the meddling, oppressive KGB. The Soviets literally soaked the Third World and other nations in their brand of manufactured CIA folklore. Absolutely marinated. But how many Americans stateside know that? And that the Left parrots ALL of it. Now we hear from supposed Righty Ron Paul supporters, spouting practically boilerplate Left.

      The very same people then quote the CIA as source infallible when the agency political hacks who were SUPPOSED to be by the agency official MANDATE to be advising the president to the best of their abilities were attacking George Bush, by pushing a patently stupid report from Democrat Joe Wilson whose claim to fame was an Ambassadorship eslewhere and sent by his Beltway Spy wife in nepotistic contracting glory to Niger, for a highly techincal evaluation in a field in which he had zero credentials, where he sucked down mint tea all day long poolside at the hotel, riding on his “experience in Niger” which was as an entry-level Embassy GSO services officer, years before.

      Given his big talk for nothing, we wonder if he was the Embassy genius who thunked up swimming pools as “water reservoirs” so the Niger Embassy staff could get the USG to PAY for them for their their residences. We know, we were in the region and it was all abuzz jealous back in the mid-80s about how the Niger Embassy was wrangling POOLS financing and no one else in the Sahara desert Embassy circuit could get them approved.

      SO far wrong on all that and we need to “bring our troops home!” Why? Just because? No blood for oil? Then why the push from the VERY SAME PEOPLE to send US troops to Darfur, since it’s all about controlling the oil reserves there? I asked every single American who brought up “We need to help Darfur if they knew WHY there was conflict there. The answer? The vapid, “Well, people just have to learn how to get along.” Ask the Khartoum street sweeper with no education and he’d say, “We want the oil.” SInce human history began, people have killed for less than a dollar, what woudl they do for a trillion dollars? Oil is like carrots, you can SELL it.

      For all the Americans we met who cried, “We need to get out of Iraq and into Darfur,” I would be RICH if I had told them, “I’ll bet you $100 if you can point Darfur out on a map in 30 seconds.” But LIberals never pay up on bets, too cheap.

      We cannot afford the debt the Democrats have run up, we also cannot afford no-nothings in charge of our foreign policy, no matter which political part they claim to represent.

  32. I don’t understand why things get so irrational or personal on blogs. Shane, your post is just asking for people to defend Ron Paul because of the words you wrote. Paul’s supporters can be pretty passionate, but what do you expect with politics and isn’t that what you want from voters who truly believe in the ideas and plans of a candidate? Can we do religion next?! And, of course, they want to express their satisfaction with his answers last night and believe he won the debate, so they vote on polls that ask them to vote.
    Ron Paul knows that we can’t even protect our own borders or afford being the world’s bodyguard, so why not kill two birds and bring them home. It is not necessary to have over 600 bases in almost 40 countries, while engaging in false wars that cost us considerable amounts of money and lives. And it has to show you something when the military backs Ron Paul more than any other candidate and their own Commander in Chief. You mention his lack of leadership, but what happen to checks and balances. The Executive Branch isn’t suppose to have all the power. He has over 30 years as a congressman, 11 terms, which shows he is capable of leading without over stepping his boundaries.
    Most impressive is his consistency, which is a myth nowadays in politics. He has a strong nuclear family, he’s never cheated on his wife, never voted for a congressional pay raise, never voted for a tax increase, doesn’t participate in congressional benefits, gives back part of his annual salary to the Fed, he called the financial collapse over a decade ago, he predicted a 9/11 style attack on us after Clinton invaded Afghanistan (people really don’t like you in their backyard), blah blah blah. I’m sure you’ve heard it all before, which is another amazing fact. No other candidate can even come close to that consistency, intelligence, foresight, or tenure in politics. Approaching a candidate with bias because of hearsay or hating him/her because of their followers isn’t a way to approach a very important decision, like a vote.
    Educate yourselves on a candidates stances (past, current, future) based off of non-mainstream news outlets, voting records, videos of them answer tough questions on various policies (all over youtube), etc. It’s a big election coming up, make a smart decision, not a popular one!

  33. Viramontes says:

    ***Clarification***
    @neo48. Although I may be a Ron Paul supporter, I’m not this “stephen” in the above thread. Anyone who knows me in the political world knows I don’t use my first name, sorry to disappoint you.
    @shane. I agree w/ your entire critic in the original post; Ron Paul is not cut from the executive cloth.

  34. David-other says:

    I came here from a Sonoran Alliance tweet and voted for Ron Paul. Not part of any Ron Paul conspiracy, but I’m still classified as an outlier. I invite people to watch any video of him or read his books back through the 80s. I think you’ll find him consistent in his beliefs. See if you think he is “angry” or just upset with the direction of the country. Listen to what he says and decide if it is isolation or non-intervention.
    If Ron Paul is a non-entity as his opponents claim, then I really don’t understand the need for the bile directed at him.

  35. Andy Goss says:

    Shane, I think your analysis of the debate is pretty accurate. It is a shame that the Ron Paul suppporters cannot be more civil (uh oh, that word again). Like you, I agree with Paul on a few things but living in the real world as I do, having fought in wars and lived overseas, he comes off as a nut concerning foreign policy. He’s just plain wrong. And yes, age does matter in this whether Paul supporters like it or not. It matters because it demonstrates inflexibility in some matters where you cannot be inflexible; like foreign policy. He just looks old and small and set in his ways, like looking at the rest of Congress on C-Span. I don’t know about you, but I am tired of geriatric booger eaters making decisions that affect my life and livelihood. Look around Congress today and this includes the Senate and you will see that the majority of them are well past their prime and I have a big problem with that. We need more Rubios and Chaffetzes and Wests, not more 70 plus year olds who are out of touch and think by virtue of their age and experience in spending our money they know better than us.

    Ron Paul is NOT going to win this nomination. He just isn’t and we all know it. It’s fine to support him and send him money but the reality is, he is not going to win. While Romney is not my guy, I am starting to get a feeling of inevitability about him. I think he is going to win the nomination despite Perry’s entrance today. I think the only way he doesn’t win is if Christie gets in. That’s not necessarily a bad thing, anyone right now is better than Obama. The others are auditioning for cabinet spots right now and I think some of them would be great picks. I think we have to include Gingrich and Santorum and Bachmann in the Cabinet and even my guy, Herman Cain. But it looks to me like Romney is going to be our next president and while I don’t agree with him on everything, I can live with Romney as president as long as we take the Senate in 2012. I am hoping we will have a shake up within leadership in the Congress. I don’t want Boehner or Cantor to be Speaker any longer. They are sissies and have wrapped dog poop up in a nice bun and told us it is roast beef too many times. I don’t trust them and I don’t like them for their lack of courage. We have a lot of work to do between now and November 2012 but I like our chances a lot. I think we are going to beat Obama. It will be fun to watch.

  36. Veritas Vincit says:

    Mittens the Romney can’t beat Obama. Its pretty simple, Romney is stiff, and it the consummate ‘Astroturf’ candidate with the perfect hair. He’ll run a campaign with about as much passion as did McCain the last time he lost to Obama.

    Perry has what it takes. Get over the whole highway thing if you want to give Obammy the Pink Slip

  37. How long will you allow your country to be run by special interests? How long will you allow the establishment hacks who lie to your face and kiss your baby while they stab you in the back? When will you realize that YOUR the problem? When will you realize that it is your lack of education on the truth and blind belief in the established media? When will you realize that the only politician who has ever told you the truth is now running for president to save you from ignorance you hold? When will you realize that Ron Paul is, has, and will always tell you the truth? Will it be too late when your country falls as they always do when corruption is the rule? Make a choice NOW. No one has a record like Ron Paul. No one says it how it is like Ron Paul! And no one will give us back our future like Ron Paul. Remember you vote for your children’s future. If you don’t know Ron Paul please just educate yourself. There is a reason his supporters are so adamant. There is a reason. And we need you! Please just educate yourself. Ask questions. Don’t believe it because its on FOX or CNN. Use alternative media sources. They are the only one’s telling the truth. WAKE UP NOW!!! Please!

  38. “People” keep saying they want change…but then vote other-wise, this time I am voting change = Ron Paul

Trackbacks

  1. [...] BLOG                                               Sonoran Alliance                    Freedom [...]

Speak Your Mind

*