Public Wants Obama to Debate Herman Cain Or Ron Paul

reply to post by getreadyalready

That point alone is debated plenty enough. On top of that, it is pretty easy in hindsight to see that we are now deeply involved in full-scale wars in Iraq and Afghanistan as a result of "going after" OBL, and then we finally got him with a small seal team in Pakistan? Why are we in two full-scale wars in two other countries, if it only took 20 guys to go kill him in Pakistan?

I agree it's plenty debated here...but the rest of the country isn't too big on believing 9/11 conspiracies (and I really don't want to get into now myself...and it most definitely won't be talked about in a debate).

Iraq was a mistake obviously and we should have stayed the course going after Bin Laden. The American people want us out of Afghanistan...especially now that Bin Laden is gone.

reply to post by getreadyalready


to be fair it took a whole lot of screaming americans that scared the crap out of obl to run for the border.

that said we need to get the hell out of iraq,agfhanistan,pakistan,libya,and yemen.

bring em all home and take a more specialized approach to "the war of terrorism"


to the op i wanna see paul debate obama but kinda wanna see cain debate obama.

dont like cain tho like paul more.

Originally posted by David9176
reply to post by getreadyalready

 

Ron Paul is going to have to explain why he wouldn't have went after Bin Laden as well....that's asking a lot for people to accept. His argument is for the rule of law...i understand....but this was BIN LADEN.

He is after all the man behind 9/11 which killed 3000 Americans.

-------------------
I really wish people would fully investigate all candidates and not take as gospel what others say, including me, but especially what TV "journalists" and those with specific agendas say.
Ron Paul did NOT say he would not have gone after Bin Laden; Ron Paul wants the Constitution followed; the Constitution calls for Letters of Marque and Reprisal and that's the METHOD Ron Paul wanted used to get Bin Laden. Ron Paul was against the METHOD that was used.

I'm not saying I believe Bin Laden is even dead; although he may be. Did he just die when Obama announced it? I don't know. He was announced dead in 2001, 2002, 2005 and many other times. But let's say that he really is dead and he really just died in 2011.

Did you know that Ron Paul called for these Letters of Marque and Reprisal in 2001 (HR 3076). Bin Laden could have been captured/killed/whatever in 2001:

"...After the attacks on 9/11, Congressman Ron Paul introduced a bill in the Congress, which would have specified the scope for a mission to take down the terrorists responsible for the attacks on 9/11. First and foremost, the proposal was Constitutional and secondly, it was highly targeted and wouldn’t have resulted in thousands of Americans being killed senselessly. Had Congressman Ron Paul’s proposal for letters of Marque and Reprisal, HR 3076, been passed by the United States Congress in October of 2001, trillions of dollars and thousands of lives would not have been lost in the search for Osama bin Laden..."
ronpaulcc2012.blogspot.com...

reply to post by neo96


LOL! Well ya, there is that little detail. The wars drove out the taliban and got rid of his safe have and comfort zone.

Still, I think the american public is tired of these faux wars where we never get a clear victory, we never see the spoils, and instead we spend tax payer dollars rebuilding our enemies? It would be different if we had seized the oil and sent it home, or if we were building a bright and shining democracy somewhere, but we didn't and we aren't.

If I were ron paul, I could defend my stance by pointing to the root cause for obl in the first place, and pointing to our domestic problems that deserve our focused attention.

reply to post by getreadyalready


i agree im a right winger who wants them all brought home

a decade of war is enough instead of the never ends drain of resources materials and personell.

put some on the south of the border .

whoever does that has my vote but i can guarantee that wont be obama

reply to post by Habit4ming

Ron Paul was against the METHOD that was used.

That's what I was referring to with "rule of law." Look, it doesn't matter what I think anyway...what is going to matter is what the public thinks of this. I'm willing to bet most people simply don't care how it was done and were happy that IT WAS DONE.

That's the point I'm trying to make.

I'm watching the debates right now it's the same BS.

Some different faces...same rhetoric...no real answers...no details.

reply to post by David9176
Ditto. Perhaps this is the 'perfect storm' of elections, one in which an outsider can get elected. The repub's we saw on tv said nothing, and offered nothing other than "I'm not Obama".

Obama doesn't have the intellectual fortitude to go against Ron Paul.

His extremely dangerous support and escalation of the War on Drugs is proof on that. Paul will tear him a new one and Obama will stick to his usual talking points and opinions without scientific or intellectual merit.

Personally speaking, I'd prefer to watch Mrs. Palin debating Mr. Obama.

It would be like watching a couple of clowns throwing custard pies at each other !

People are crazy to vote for Herman Cain!

THE GUY RAN A BRANCH OF THE FEDERAL RESERVE.

The guy is trash.

Why the hell no MSM ever say that he ran a branch of the FED? They always say that he runs a pizza joint... WHY DO YOU THINK THEY ARE HIDING THAT?

reply to post by FTD Brat


Vote for Ron come on ATS

reply to post by HelloJCneedsomehelp


Ron Paul all the way CJ!

Originally posted by David9176
I would like to see Ron Paul debate Obama....certainly don't care about Herman Cain though.

Despite what the previous poster said...Obama is a good debater IMO...well at least against McCain he was.

However, Obama will have to answer for extending the Patriot act and the 3 or 4(?) wars we have going on, the bailouts, etc.

Crackdown on marijuana, his healthcare bill which nobody including myself likes... there are a list of things about Obama that he'll get shot down on. I don't like the idea of Ron Paul as president, I think he'd be an absolute disaster for this country and should never be elected if you want true progress, but at the same time, I don't believe Obama deserves to be elected again as well. So where does leave the country in my opinion? With the lesser of the worst, and I certainly don't see Ron Paul as the least worst.

Not sure how anyone can argue with the logic brought to the table.



Seriously watch this and then honestly tell me that he can't run this country as a president?