Go for it!
Okay people try to stick to the issues….
Deflectors and dodgers stay away.
87 thoughts on “Debate Open Thread”
Comments are closed.
-
Follow
Following
Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
Go for it!
Okay people try to stick to the issues….
Deflectors and dodgers stay away.
Comments are closed.
Blogs For Victory 
Perrys best debate by far. Probably won’t be enough to save his campaign and make him the anti-romney but still a very good preformance.
Why is my gal Michelle always attacking romney’s closet opposition? Does anyone want the vp that bad?
In other news Gov Haley endorses Romney. Goodbye TEA Party cred?
My gal Michelle certainly is acting like she wants to be Romney Mitts Vice President. Last three months or so she has been attacking his closet rival. I just can’t see the attraction to the vp slot. Well, anyone would be a vast improvement over the choo choo.
Karl Rove talking up Jeb Bush for 2016 already?
http://theplebrevolt.wordpress.com/2011/12/15/ron-paul-calls-out-newt-for-being-a-chicken-hawk-draft-dodger/
LOL
At least the old feeble man served his country when called up for the draft.
From what I saw, with Bachmann as VP there would be a reason to go to the polls.
How so Bardolf? You would cast a vote on just who the vp would be? I may be critical as all hell on the rinos but that doesn’t mean that i would want something bad to happen making the vp the president.
All I can say is that if a rino gets elected and governs accordingly the republic and all that it stands for has deserved what it has gotten.
I would like a reason to vote. A big government GOP candidate would make unlikely to show up to the polls. With Bachmann as VP I could at least HOPE, since SOMEONE in the WH would be a fiscal conservative.
Plus I don’t want to be seen as rigid or I won’t get invited to all the B4V cocktail parties!
GMB
doesn’t mean that i would want something bad to happen making the vp the president.
WHEN??
OOH !
2012…..OK
dolf’s involvement in the political process is evidently as shallow and superficial as he is, fluttering along on the surface, looking for something sparkly to get his fleeting attention.
Point in favor of Mr.Paul. Another point is domestic agenda. His foriegn policy I’m afraid will start WW 3.
Nobody lives forever.
Who would do this fighting in the WW3 that you are worried about so much?
There is already an Islamic country with nuclear weapons (Pakistan). There have been anti-capitalist countries with nuclear weapons for your whole life. There have been anti-American countries with nuclear weapons your whole life.
Israel can defend itself in the Mid-East and every country knows that to be true (including the theocracy running Iran) Canada is our main supplier of oil. We export refined gasoline. The oil fields in the Dakotas will relatively soon come on line.
No country benefits from a military invasion of the US or Europe. The legal and quasi-legal diffusion of immigrants across borders is more likely to overturn cultures than anything else. China, the number 2 power in the world is heavily dependent on exports to the west so it hardly wants to go to war.
If WW3 is such a big scary likelihood why aren’t our allies who are more in danger than we are ponying up their fair share?
The real problem is what to do with all the intelligent men and women who are in the military and who would otherwise be unemployed if they were not being used as the world’s policeman. The DHS can only get so big 🙂
You must of missed this.
“Nobody lives forever.”
What do you think I meant by that.
There are several places that could potentially start a third world war. India-Pakistan. India-China. China-Vietnam. North Korea-south Korea. Iran-Iraq again. Vermont-New York.
Any one of these spots could lead to something big and i dont think A Ron Paul Administration would be able to handle them.
Again. Nobody lives forever.
Ron Paul actually has a foreign policy that is to the left of Obama, and Perry is an idiot, other than that, I thought everyone else did well. That being said, I think Romney and possibly Gingrich are the only two that can beat Obama – and that is paramount. At this point, getting Michelle Obama out of the White House will save all of us a lot of money.
HA! Ron Paulyanna’s foreign policy is to the left of Neville Chamberlain. His debate performance is always impressive for a doddering old fool.
Nikki Haley joins a growing list of TEA Party faithful endorsing Romney.
I love the way those not involved with the TEA Party think they can dictate what it is we believe, or who it is we endorse. As a former altar boy I say the same thing we used to say about the Pope regarding sex; you no play-a da game, you no make-a da rules!
I can easily get behind Romney, he was my first choice in 2008, but I also still like Newt. I have to think that all the hysteria on the left about Newt, means that they are worried about him. I think Obama has been planning for Romney all along, and I don’t think he knows how he would handle Newt.
Ron Paul is the only one of the Republican candidates with a Republican foreign policy. Who pushed McKinley to get us involved in the Spanish American war? The Democratic party. Who got us into WWI? Woodrow Wilson. Who got us into WWII? FDR. Who got us into Korea, Truman and the UN. Who got us out of Korea? Eisenhower. Who got us into Vietnam? Kennedy and LBJ. Who got us out of Vietnam? Nixon. Who escalated George W. Bush’s wars and got us into Libya and Uganda? Obama.
Ron Paul is the only person in those debates that mesh with the definition of the word ‘conservative.’ The rest of the candidates are a bunch of Trotskyite neo-conservatives. How did Lenin, Trotsky, and Stalin work out for Russia? How’s the Soviet Union doing these days? Oh yeah that’s right, just like Ludwig Von Mises predicted, it collapsed… You should study history before you go off spouting your crazed neo-con Trotsky loving nonsense.
http://www.lewrockwell.com/dmccarthy/dmccarthy23.html
Ron Paul is the only one of the Republican candidates with a
Republicanbat poop crazy unrealistic foreign policy.fify
Ron Paul’s foreign policy is that of George Washington and Thomas Jefferson. Can you explain how the foreign policy of Thomas Jefferson and George Washington were “bat poop crazy unrealistic.”? These were men that accomplished more in one lifetime than you could ever accomplish in ten. You appear to be a Trotskyite neo-con so you probably think those two American heroes were bad.
“I deem [one of] the essential principles of our government [to be] peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none.” -Thomas Jefferson
“Commerce with all nations, alliance with none, should be our motto” -Thomas Jefferson
Jesse,
Please ground yourself in reality before espousing anymore political philosophy. Wars are not the action of one – rational adults recognize this fact, and take action when either attacked or threatened. Should we have just ignored the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor? Should we have just ignored the attack on 9/11, or when Saddam Hussein invaded our ally Kuwait? Is that what you’re espousing? Or are you in the Ron Paul mode and prefer to blame the USA for all of those egregious actions.
Finally the world is a bit more complex, and due to technology, quite a bit smaller than when Jefferson and Washington were around, don’t ya think? Or maybe you don’t, who in the hell knows. Anyone that would post what you just did, has an infantile mind.
Well, it is certainly a change to be called a Trotskyite, after so many years of being called too conservative.
And entertaining to see the words “Trotskyite” and “neocon” linked in such a creative manner.
So which is it. Am I a trotskytite or am I a neocon?
Trotskyism.
1.version of socialism: an interpretation of socialism advanced by Leon Trotsky, asserting that fully developed Marxist principles and practices would culminate in a world revolution by the proletariat
Neoconservative.
1.supporter of return to conservative values: somebody who, during the mid-1980s, began to support conservatism in society, and in politics in particular, as a reaction to the social freedoms sought throughout the 1960s and early 1970s
I don’t see how you can be both. Please do explain.
getting Michelle Obama out of the White House will save all of us a lot of money.
and dumping Ochimpy could save the Republic.
PS
I didnt watch ANY of the moderated Q&A sessions.
when they have a real “debate” I’ll watch.
until then NONE of the recycledl losers.
M ay I please inform
E veryone in my congressional district that
R epublicans and Democrats ought
R ally together each
Y ear at this time to
C ommerate in a non-offensive way
H olidays that are
R espected or celebrated by the
I ndisputable majority of our
S teadfast constituents.
T his message has been
M eticulously crafted so
A s to neither endorse nor make
S lighest mention of you-know-what. show more
The Fraud Of Kwanzaa
Good article about the fraud of a holiday called Kwanzaa:
Blacks should be outraged by attempts to stamp out Christianity from Christmas celebrations while accepting Kwanzaa as mainstream, says a black minister.
Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson, founder and president of BOND, Brotherhood Organization of A New Destiny, and author of WND Books’ “Scam,” notes that while public school administrators and city officials attempt to ban nativity scenes, Christmas carols, candy canes and even Christmas trees from public places, Kwanzaa has been accepted as mainstream.
While commonly viewed as an “African” holiday, observed from Dec. 26 to Jan. 1, Kwanzaa actually was created in the U.S. in 1966 by Dr. Maulana “Ron” Karenga, the head of a violent black-power group, United Slaves Organization, which was a rival to the Black Panthers.
In the 1970s, Karenga served four years in prison for conspiracy and assault in the torture of two female followers. Karenga was convicted of whipping them with electrical cords and beating them with a karate baton after stripping them naked. He placed in the mouth of one of the victims a hot soldering iron, also scarring her face with the device. He put one of her big toes in a vise, and detergent and running water in both of their mouths.
http://floppingaces.net/2005/12/26/the-fraud-of-kwanzaa/
Members of Congress barred from saying ‘Merry Christmas’ in mailings…
the end is near…
School District Bans Christmas Cookies, Cake, Candy, Soda…
commie basta-ds
Lib Radio Host Bill Press Tells Tebow: ‘S-T-F-U’ (Shut the F**k Up) About Jesus
“I think he’s a disgrace. I think he’s an embarrassment.”
uuh bill, ESAD Mfer
Rabbi: Tebow Super Bowl Win Would Lead Christians to Burn Mosques & Banish Immigrants
“…emboldened faithful can do insane things…”
WTF? X10,000
who ARE these people???
Oh wait……….demonRATS
The WAR on Christianity continuous……
Is an NZ Billboard Showing Mary Holding a Positive Pregnancy Test Offensive?
It’s merry kook fest to the donks, they don’t celebrate Christmas remember, they wanna take Christ outta everything.
Snoozer. No 9-9-9 tax plans, or any plan other than to cut their own millionaire taxes. No Bomb Iran flamethrowing. Gingrich edits himself, while still cashing the Freddie Mac check. Bachmann congratulates herself for her good fight with Obama, whatever that means, but gets a “pants on fire” from Politifact. Huntsman declares illegal immigration is over. Paul whines about the government doing anything, anywhere, ever. Mitt Perry and Rick Romney something something bla bla bla yawn, and even OWS can’t get arrested.
How in the world will Obozo top that?
…or any plan other than to cut their own millionaire taxes. – bozo
Do you mean extending the current tax rates?? If so, Obama and the democrats have done that twice now just in the last year. It’s strange how loud liberals complain about higher taxes, but when the rubber meets the road, they don’t do anything. I guess they just like foaming up their base, and bozo is a prime example.
How will Obozo top that? It will be fun to watch Obama try and defend his record. That will be must see TV!!
??? I don’t complain about higher taxes. I’m a liberal. I complain about unfair taxes. Regressive taxes. Anytime anyone says “raise taxes” I ask “who’s taxes, by how much and why” before passing judgement.
Raise my taxes if it means veterans will get the medical care they need and the job training and home loans they deserve. Raise my taxes if it means the sick will be treated and the old will be treated with dignity. Raise my taxes if it means my neighborhood won’t be filled with illiterate teens. But don’t raise my taxes to lavish big oil with taxpayer cash, or bail out Wall Street banksters.
Just to rattle on some more since none of this amounts to a hill of beans here: raise everyone’s taxes the same and nothing changes. Wealth is relative. If everyone’s wealth is taxed the same, proportionate wealth remains flat. The ratio’s the same. That’s the balance I believe Reagan Republicans were trying to get to when they raised capital gains taxes to be the same as ordinary income. If you then do proportionately better as a result of your investments, you do so because you’re smarter or luckier, not because you get favorable tax treatment.
But, again, I ain’t complainin’ about higher taxes. You are. Obama lowered all of us 99%ers taxes and left the bazzilionare’s taxes at historical lows.
But it’s sad just how ungrateful conservative whiners are about Obozo’s tax cuts. And just odd that you’re ok with letting your cuts expire, but somehow Bill Gates NEEDS those Bush cuts.
“Who’s taxes, by how much, and why?”
Paging the “who’s” police…
I don’t complain about higher taxes. I’m a liberal. I complain about unfair taxes. – bozo
Well then you should be complaining about the 47% who don’t pay any federal income tax, while the rich pay one out of every three dollars. Unless you have a really strange definition of fairness
So, let me get this straight. Even with unprecedented wealth flowing to the top .1%, you are calling for a tax hike on the unemployed, retired and poverty-level working poor who pay no federal taxes, and advocating a cut in Warren Buffet’s tax rate because he just pays too darn much?
What.ever.
Well, finally a Lib admits to being a Lib. Don’t hold your breath waiting for a definition of Liberal from any of these Pseudo-Libs, even though freakzo has laid claim to the label, but at least he stepped up and announced that he IS a Liberal.
Not that there could be any doubt, not with posts of such silly nonsense as claiming Republicans “…are calling for a tax hike on the unemployed, retired and poverty-level working poor who pay no federal taxes, and advocating a cut in Warren Buffet’s tax rate because he just pays too darn much?”
Only a Liberal could inject so much hyper-emotional hysteria into a calm and rational economic philosophy, and then fold in lies such as the claim that there is a call “..for a tax hike on the unemployed, retired and poverty-level working poor…”.
Classic Pseudo-Liberal spewing, full of righteous outrage and totally lacking in fact.
Ron Paul isn’t correct to whine about government intervention in our lives and economy? Let’s review the facts.
Currently the US Federal government is the largest government the world has ever seen in all of human civilization. Here are the results: Extreme poverty is at an all time high. Food stamp recipients are at an all time high. The national debt is at an all time high. The cost of living is at an all time high. Unemployment is through the roof. Social Security is paying out more than it is taking in. The trade deficit is horrific. Kids are graduating from government high schools and they don’t even know the value of x if 2 + x = 4. The value of the dollar is at an all time low, a measly 1/1,600 of an ounce of gold.
Meanwhile countries with vastly lower taxes and way more economic freedom than us are booming. See Hong Kong, Singapore, Switzerland, Qatar, and The United Arab Emirates.
We have a giant federal government you liberals say you want. Stop pretending like we don’t have the government and taxes you desire and instead tell us where the results are.
Now Jesse that was a great post. Like Ron Paul, you should stay on the economics, and let the adults handle foreign policy
Well, Jesse, it is the “whining” thing that sets MY teeth on edge. You know, it is possible to make sound economic statements without sounding querulous and whiny. As a matter of fact, conservatives do it all the time. Ron Paul is not the first to make his points, nor the only one to do so. In point of fact,he echoes the sentiments of most if not all conservatives on economic issues.
It is the goofball attitude toward issues like Iran getting a nuclear bomb that has us looking at Paul as a lunatic as well as an appeaser.
His absolute disconnect with reality in his effort to link MADD with a nuclear Iran is downright scary. Newt nailed it on that, correctly pointing out that MADD only works with nations who want to survive. Fifteen minutes of looking up references to the 12th Imam and the theology/philosophy of radical Islam would have shown him the reality of a nuclear Iran, which is the ability to create the worldwide chaos, blood in the streets, death of millions and mass destruction necessary to pave the way for the return of the 12th Imam and Islam taking over the whole world.
And elevating A-Jad to the level of the prophet who brought about the triumph of Islam over the world.
Not quite the same motivation as wanting your nation and its people to survive.
How will conservatives ever defeat the brain trust for the democratic party??
“The unemployment insurance extension is not only good for individuals. It has a macroeconomic impact. As macroeconomic advisers have stated, it would make a difference of 600,000 jobs to our economy,” House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) said at a briefing on Capitol Hill.
Just imagine if we were all unemployed.
Cluster,
This Parrot Pelosi is simply repeating (badly) what the Keynesians have been saying all along; if the government spends money, it goes into the economy and because more money is circulating business will respond by hiring. Give money to someone who will spend it and voila! You have more money!
This has never worked, not even in the short-run. Churchill admonition regarding taxes applies here, “We contend that for a nation to [steal from one, give to another] tax itself into prosperity is like a man standing in a bucket and trying to lift himself up by the handle.”
They never learn!
All in all I thought it was a pretty good debate (show & tell session) and has defined the characters in this play a little better. Still haven’t decided who I am for since the scorched earth smear campaign and suspension of Herman Cain’s campaign but I do know who I have excluded.
Then again–we all know that Republicans are evil, greedy, fascist, racists because people like Senator Pelosi have told us so over and over again. No matter what the truth is–that is: http://youtu.be/x-oS4WLui3Q
I liked Michelle Bachmann, she really did good last night.
Newt did good, too. Let’s Go Newt!!!
I think Bachmann thinks all that makeup will cover up the crazy.
meow
Well you beat me to that one Amazona. kudos. 🙂
unpatriotdaddy
so you only like the “guys” bwany for vp with larry , berry and buddy (reggi) loooove?
pathetic
Eagle Eye beat ME to it, as well.
I’m dealing with a broken and dislocated finger and have been on the sidelines for a while. Still doing hunt and peck but have a little more time today to do it the slow way.
Looks like snide cattiness is obvious to a lot of us.
Michelle Bachmann has more brains than Obama ever dreamed about having, or will have.
Maybe it’s just my laptop, but these posts seem to show up in a semi-random arrangement. Sometimes it nests posts properly, and sometimes it just seems to shove posts into random slots.
And Green seems to responds to a non-existent post by Amazona. Wacky WordPress?
blowzo
I sure there is a LOT going on, on your laptop.
Good one, neo.
My wife and I DVR’d the debate and watched it last night. If I had to pick a winner, I’d say Romney, but they all did well, even Ron Paul — well, except for his tin-foil hat foreign policy answers. It was nice to finally have Rick Santorum get asked more than one question. Now we wait until January and see what happens. Obama’s re-elect numbers just keep dropping, as I think more and more people have come to realize that we simply won’t survive 4 more years of him.
spook
RP is bat S**T crazy and appeals to the radical libertarians who are equally bat S**T crazy in their purest forma though I like SOME of their ideas.
How did this not get brought up during the debates? I would have thought conservatives would be outraged, unless they’re all doing it:
Perry collects state pension and salary
Perry be gettin’ him some big slice o’ that sweet public pension pie. Howdedoodat?
Nah, we leave overheated OUTRAGE to you hyperemotional Lefties.
After all, it’s really all you’ve got, isn’t it? Lacking any kind of objective commitment to a coherent political philosophy and all……
I still have a fond hope of a surge for Santorum. I have always liked him a lot and found him to be very impressive. He has matured in this campaign and looks and acts more and more presidential, and he is the only candidate I could support without a single qualm. I will need to overlook something I don’t like with every other candidate, including Bachmann, whose really stupid gaffes have made her look downright silly. Not that I think she IS silly, on the contrary I think she is quite competent and bright and I agree with her policies and ideas, but she made some rookie mistakes that have cast a shadow on her candidacy.
I think that once Bachmann gets out of campaign mode, she is a lot more impressive, but the effort to stand out in a strong field of wannabes has her trying to outrun them instead of just being herself.
If I could wave a magic wand and skip the election, and just put a team into the White House, it would be Santorum/Bachmann or Santorum/Bolton. I actually think either of these teams could beat Obama, but it is getting the nomination that is going to be the speed bump. Being the nominated candidate would give Santorum the ability to discuss his ideas and policies, which he hasn’t really been able to do very much in the debates because most of the time has gone to the perceived front-runners. When he does have the spotlight he is VERY impressive, but he has been limited by the efforts of the Left and the media to focus on Romney and Gingrich.
Perhaps the lack of strong conservative support for either Romney or Gingrich will lead to a brokered convention where the will of the people might give us a better candidate.
Amazona,
I only wish that what you say could happen. You are right and I agree with you completely. Unfortunatley, reality sets in and neither of those are electable and I do not forsee a “brokered” convention which would only show the nation the caos on the right…Santorum has been religated to “unworthy” candidate by the media and Bachmann has had a “Palin” done against her. I keep bouncing around from candidate to canidate…First Bachmann, then Perry, then Cain, then Newt…But I am leaning more and more towards Romney. He may be the most electable at this point. We have to get our marxist/socialist president out of office.
Ama
I too like Santorum
I just might vote for him in Jan.
I disagree with the statement that a brokered convention would show “chaos” on the Right. I think that instead it would show commitment to principle, and a dedication to doing what is right for the country, even if that means going up against the Establishment GOP—which I believe is necessary.
Look at how we have been herded, like sheep, by the Complicit Agenda Media intent on nudging us toward the Republican candidate they think will do the least harm to the Liberal cause, given the likelyhood that Obama will lose. Look at how the GOP faithful (as opposed to conservatives) have done similar herding, working to keep a strong conservative out of the race.
I see the real danger to be a lackluster commitment to a lackluster candidate picked for us by people with different agendas than that of returning the nation to its conservative, Constitutional, principles.
So what do we make of the candidates’ failure to touch the subject of what they’ve learned from our nine-year adventure in Iraq? After all we’ve spent over a trillion dollars there and indebted ourselves even more, we’ve lost thousands of America’s finest to death, dismemberment and traumatic brain injuries, the nation has become more bitterly divided over this war than over any other since Vietnam – surely the moderators ought to have asked such a question. A debate is the time and place. Surely it would give us a window into the candidates’ ability to draw wisdom from recent experiences of enormous national magnitude and geopolitical consequences.
As Richard Cohen rhetorically asked, “Does it make you cautious about promising war with Iran and aligning yourself too closely with Israel’s right-wingers? Have you learned something about the limits of air power or about upsetting the balance of power? Have you visited the amputee ward of a VA hospital and seen the pain – the constant, throbbing pain? Have you looked into the eyes of a wounded man or woman and said, ‘Sorry, we’re moving on’?”
Nope. Instead, silence. Or passing criticism of Obama for bringing the troops home prematurely. No mention of America’s divide – between military families bearing the entire brunt of two wars, while the rest of the nation gets tax breaks, watches sports and goes shopping. Remarkable, really. Perhaps Fox News, the preeminent cheerleader in its early days, would rather America forget its role in urging this war upon the nation. Never mind the unpaid costs, the uncounted deaths and destruction – those things are better off unmentioned now. Fox and the candidates have better things to do than contemplating lessons learned – like demonizing the current president for anything they can.
Listen on the video linked below to what Col. Lawrence Wilkerson has to say about his party, the GOP, its attitudes regarding the Iraq war and its relation to the political environment now:
Of course I’m sure some self-appointed critic of Col. Wilkerson, with even more impressive creds than his, will step forward to challenge or refute him…
http://video.msnbc.msn.com/the-rachel-maddow-show/45677455#45677455
Dennis,
It appears you’re going to have to step up your game a bit if you’re going to bait anyone into responding to your drivel. I mean, Rachel Maddow? She’s so last week.
dennistooge
I thought YOU, LEFT – DEPARTED – AMF’d – SCRAMMED – RAN – DUMPED – DITCHED – B4V ?
HEH
flame meet moth….
Neo,
I think that was Cory who said he was leaving B4V and not coming back. I think he got tired of having his intellectual dishonesty exposed over and over. To be honest, I’m not sure why people like Dennis and Cory come here. It isn’t as though they’re trying to change people’s minds. If they were trying to do that, they’d cite people they agree with who have offered solutions to the problems we face and try to initiate a dialogue where we actually attempt to find common ground. Instead they come here and cite some obscure Conservative who either thinks that Bush is an idiot or that Obama is simply well-meaning but misunderstood. It’s gotten really old, and, I for one think the Conservatives on this blog should learn to just ignore them until such time as they actually attempt to engage in meaningful discussion.
Several of us, myself included, have made attempts too numerous to count to engage the Lefties who come here in a sincere and civil way. I can count the civil, rational and constructive discussions between Right and Left on this blog in the last 7 years on one hand and have fingers left over. You simply can’t have a philosophical discussion without outlining the principles from which your argument emanates, and very few of our Lefties over the years have ever been able or willing to engage in that exercise; unwilling, I suspect, because Leftist principles are, in the end, difficult to defend.
Well, spook, it seems like you all had a perfectly fine opportunity to engage in a sincere and civil way. Dennis asks a perfectly reasonable question, “So what do we make of the candidates’ failure to touch the subject of what they’ve learned from our nine-year adventure in Iraq?” Seems timely considering the last troops left Iraq last night. It did cost us over 4,000 American lives.
Instead of engaging Dennis, you all criticize the fact that he cited a Rachel Maddow video, or if you’re Clown, just post nonsense.
satstooge
or if you’re Clown, just post nonsense.
LOL you Morons just cant resist, you are like monkeys in the zoo behind a glass partition.
Well, spook, it seems like you all had a perfectly fine opportunity to engage in a sincere and civil way. Dennis asks a perfectly reasonable question, “So what do we make of the candidates’ failure to touch the subject of what they’ve learned from our nine-year adventure in Iraq?”
First of all, Watson; Dennis is in error when he states that the candidates failed to touch the subject of Iraq. Even though the question was not asked by the moderators, Ron Paul brought it up a couple times, bemoaning the Iraq War as an ill-advised adventure that cost America dearly in terms of blood and treasure. NOT ONE OF THE OTHER CANDIDATES disagreed with his assessment. I guess the reason I didn’t engage Dennis is that I’ve grown really tired of correcting things that you Lefties come here and offer as fact.
Personally, I would not like to see us engage in another “Iraq War” unless we’re directly attacked, but history will judge whether or not the war that ended last night (I watched the last combat troops cross the southern Iraq border at around midnight last night) was worth the blood and treasure expended. Pardon me if I don’t accept some Lefty blog commenter’s assessment that it was not.
watstooge
It did cost us over 4,000 American lives.
pales compared to this
http://www.streetgangs.com/topics/2003/042403drama.html
See, spook? It wasn’t that hard. You said, “Ron Paul brought it up a couple times, bemoaning the Iraq War as an ill-advised adventure that cost America dearly in terms of blood and treasure. NOT ONE OF THE OTHER CANDIDATES disagreed with his assessment.”
Maybe because there aren’t any positives to come out the Iraq war. To me, it was a disaster. An incredible waste of human life, not to mention treasure. Aside from that loss, what we got out of it was a much stronger Iran. Thanks, George W. Bush, Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld. We’ll live with the effects for decades. You’re correct that history will be the judge, but in the meantime we have to decide whether that kind of leadership merits another run. In 2008, we obviously decided that it did not.
Meanwhile, I caught a bit of Romney on Fox this morning. He couldn’t come up with much on Iraq either, except to criticize President Obama for bringing the troops home. Same as McCain. I guess they would prefer Iraq to become a colony. It that that the kind of conservative “philosophy” that you favor?
Meanwhile, I caught a bit of Romney on Fox this morning. He couldn’t come up with much on Iraq either, except to criticize President Obama for bringing the troops home. Same as McCain. I guess they would prefer Iraq to become a colony. It that that the kind of conservative “philosophy” that you favor?
Watson, I also watched Romney on Fox News Sunday, and he reaffirmed, in my estimation, that he’s the best candidate to lead this country. To say that he “criticized Obama for bringing the troops home”, reflects a tactic that you use all too often: make a point by distorting or telling a partial truth. What Romney criticized Obama for was not showing leadership by failing to reach an status of forces agreement with the Iraqi leadership to leave a small security force behind. But saying it that way, doesn’t fit into your narrative, does it? And again, history will be the judge of whether or not Obama screwed up, not you or I.
Oh give it a rest, spook. You claim that everyone that might disagree with you has a “narrative,” or is merely following talking points, or has some other agenda. Can’t you ever accept that people are communicating with you from their own point of view?
Romney said, “But I think you’re going to see another lesson learned. I think we’re going to find that this president by not putting in place a status in forces agreement with the Iraqi leadership has pulled our troops out in a precipitous way and we should have left 10,000, 20,000, 30,000 personnel there to help transition to the Iraqis’ own military capabilities.”
He used the phrase “pulled out the troops in a precipitous way.” I said he criticized Obama for “bringing the troops home.” Sorry I didn’t have the exact phrase handy. Yes, he mentioned a status of forces agreement and I did not. So that means I have a narrative?
And perhaps you and Mitt Romney forgot, but there _is_ a US-Iraqi Status of Forces Agreement between the United States and Iraq, negotiated in 2008 by the Bush administration and signed on Nov. 18, 2008 by US ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker–all before President Obama took office. It calls for all US forces to be out of Iraq by December 31, 2011. Do you remember that?
You and Romney and John McCain can criticize President Obama for not achieving a modification of that agreement to keep troops in Iraq past the end of the year, but the fact is, Iraq is a sovereign state. THEY DON’T WANT US THERE. It’s their country, for better or worse. Or do you not accept that? Just what is it that you would have us do at this point?
Just what is it that you would have us do at this point?
Well, at this point, there’s not much we CAN do, is there? Wait, there’s always HOPE. Hope got Obama elected, maybe HOPE will win the day in Iraq. Gee, I sure HOPE so.
They want to defeat this man. They want to bring this man out of the White House. They want to embarrass this man. They want to put this man through every kind of turmoil they can possibly put him through politically. So, they will take almost any stand even – and this is what really grates on me as a Republican – even if it`s not in the interest of this country, they will take a stand and have repeatedly taken stands that oppose the president simply because they oppose the president. It’s not America. It’s not the United States. It’s not our best interests. It’s certainly not our national security interests. It’s getting rid of this president.
Ooh YOU BET, we cant be rid of this filthy commie muslim fast enough, the sooner the better, impeach, or six packs a day does not matter.
JR, my post wasn’t about Rachel Maddow. It’s about the Iraq War and lessons learned or not. And my “drivel” wasn’t from Maddow, it was from Col. Wilkerson who happened to be her guest when he said it. Respond to him if you can.
Blatant deflection from the topic. You flunked, but I’ll give you a “D” for denial.
No, It was you, Dennis, who entirely missed the point of my post. I know who Larry Wilkerson is. He’s the darling of the Left-wing, because he’s a supposed Conservative who loves to bash America. The only places he gets a platform are shows like Maddow, and websites like Media Matters and HuffPo.There really isn’t much point in trying to have a rational discussion with someone like him — or you, for that matter. “Rational” is simply not part of your lexicon.
Dennis,
That was quite the drama queen rant, and possibly one of your most hyper sensitive posts I have read in a while. J.R. and Spook and have beat me to the punch on this one, so I will leave it at that.
Random post placement check. Just to annoy bozo. Please continue about your normal business.
REPORT: Obamas’ 17-Day Vacation To Cost $4 Million…
what low life POS grifters
Communist Dictator Kim Jong Il Dead!!
anddddddddd another one bites the dust OOOOH YEAHHHHHHHHH!!
AMF lil man
Spook, this thread may have gone dormant while I was working in the real world, but what I addressed above was the candidates’ failure to touch the subject, not of Iraq generally, but particularly what they’ve learned from our nine-year adventure there. I gave pointed examples of the kind of issues they never addressed: “Does it make you cautious about promising war with Iran and aligning yourself too closely with Israel’s right-wingers? Have you learned something about the limits of air power or about upsetting the balance of power?” These are extremely relevant matters on which Americans deserve to know the thinking of any would-be president.
You said, “Dennis is in error when he states that the candidates failed to touch the subject of Iraq.” You’d do very poorly in college with that kind of reading comprehension. This kind of misrepresentation and over-simplification of others’ positions happens constantly here. If you’re tired of correcting things you believe others are in error about, maybe you should get some new reading glasses and slow down a bit. Make sure you understand and respond to what is actually being said, not some straw position you can easily brush aside.
poor dennistooge
“This war started out with many parents but has ended its days an orphan, tarnishing the reputations of those who launched it and the useful idiots who gave them intellectual cover. Nobody has been held accountable; few accept responsibility…. Today, withdrawing the troops is about the only truly popular thing Obama has done in the last two years. Polls show more than 70% support withdrawal, roughly two-thirds oppose the war, and more than half believe it was a mistake. But there is a difference between regretting something and learning from it. And while there is ample evidence of the former, there is little to suggest the latter.”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/dec/18/us-blind-price-paid-iraqis
Neocon, the party doesn’t matter. Not even a little bit. They ALL were wrong who supported, approved or enabled the Iraq war – Democrats and Republicans alike. But there’s a special place reserved in hell for those who pushed a war without just cause on false premises – a war that has made carnage of countless thousands of human beings with families, hopes and dreams, loved ones, little children – and made cold-blooded killers of countless others.
There are large moral lessons to be learned, but where is the conversation about this among the would-be commanders-in-chief? They are silent, except maybe for Ron Paul – the one least likely to become president of anything.
dennistooge
They ALL were wrong who supported, approved or enabled the Iraq war –
yeah and YOU are the only “right” one….take ur meds.
dennistooge
check the murder count in the USA for the same period of time, then get back,
PS
Washington DC was more dangerous than baghdad at the height of the war……..
take a deep breath and click your heels together………..