Debate tonight at 8:00 CT

page: 17
10
<< 14  15  16   >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 12:18 AM
link   
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 





Not really...because it also allows states to outlaw people speaking any other language than English.

You know damn well they can't do that. Stop making stuff up.




posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 12:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by KonquestAbySS
Dang they are hiding the debate...I had to scroll through all the channels just to find it. Luckily I caught it at a good time... Why is Newt still convinced that Jihadist were behind WTC? This dude makes me sick, and I don't see any excitement coming out of the crowd when RP speaks. Dang Floridians you are boring...


100% agreed.

I actually found it easier to google for the stream than to look through the website.

Don't get me started on Newt though... It's not like I actually considered him to have any credibility or sanity, but when he started talking about "Jihadists" in South America that want to destroy America, I lost it. I honestly cannot possibly fathom how there are people left in the US who think "Oh, yeah! Those Jihadists that hate us because we're free! And now they're in South America? Send in the troops, they're a danger to our national security! Them and their Muslim-stuff!"

I unfortunately did not see the enter debate, but had I been Ron Paul, I would have had a hard time keeping quiet. I probably would have jumped up and started yelling "Does anybody else actually HEAR THIS?" and followed up with a long list of expletives.

And the way Romney and Gingrich talked about the consequences of Fidel Castro's death reminded me of how "sanctity of life" really doesn't mean "sanctity of life" in these circles.

Romney: "Well first, you thank heavens that Fidel Castro has returned to his maker!"

And Gingrich chimed in with" "I don't think Fidel is going to meet his maker, I think he's going to the other place!"

I was speechless.
Granted, I don't think Castro is a particularly wonderful human being, but the way they described him surely did remind me of the way the US government is treating its citizens nowadays... I have rarely seen such a wetched hive of scum and villainy in my entire life.

But as always, Ron Paul absolutely killed it on the foreign policy questions.


Edit:
One of my favorite comments below a video of the Castro-debate:


Why should any American hate Castro? He hasn't sold my job to Asia, like Mitt Romney has. He hasn't tried to police my personal life, the way Rick Santorum wants to. He hasn't sent my children off to die in foreign wars for profit like George W. Bush. The Republican Party is a far greater threat to the interests of the middle class American than Castro.


Spot on.
edit on 24-1-2012 by Whipfather because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 12:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by cavrac

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher

I have always said I agree with Ron Paul on foreign policy.

But am pretty much 100% opposed to his domestic policies.


OK so you do not agree with all of his policies.

Do you think Ron Paul is an honest man?
Do you think he is running for office to obtain power or wealth?
Do you think Ron Paul is a typical politician, saying anything to get elected?



Why would I base my vote on anything else besides his policies?

But to answer your questions...No, I don't think he is an honest man....any man running for President wants the power to be able to do something, and yes I think he is a typical politican...he just has a different base so his rhetoric is different.



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 12:39 AM
link   
Ron Paul is getting SIGNIFICANTLY less time to speak than the other candidates..it's damn near a 3 man debate



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 02:09 AM
link   
I just skimmed through this thread looking for a response similar to something I noticed during the debate... did not see one.

Every time Ron Paul spoke and you could see Newt, noticed how Newt was actually paying attention to what Ron was saying. The others stood there staring straight ahead. And, after the question was posed to Paul if he would support Newt it all fell into place in my mind. It seems Newt is already trying to figure out how to get the Ron Paul people on board with him if he can just talk the good Doc into dropping out.

Toss out a few supporting statements of Ron Paul's stance on certain issues. Pander a bit to the Doc. Give him a hearty pat on the back for a job well done but, eh "maybe next time." And, pray he drops out and offers an endorsement.

Of course, I don't think Newt understands Ron Paul supporters. As one myself, I would rather write in Paul than vote for any of the other 3.



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 04:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by Sagittarian69
I just skimmed through this thread looking for a response similar to something I noticed during the debate... did not see one.

Every time Ron Paul spoke and you could see Newt, noticed how Newt was actually paying attention to what Ron was saying. The others stood there staring straight ahead. And, after the question was posed to Paul if he would support Newt it all fell into place in my mind. It seems Newt is already trying to figure out how to get the Ron Paul people on board with him if he can just talk the good Doc into dropping out.

Toss out a few supporting statements of Ron Paul's stance on certain issues. Pander a bit to the Doc. Give him a hearty pat on the back for a job well done but, eh "maybe next time." And, pray he drops out and offers an endorsement.

Of course, I don't think Newt understands Ron Paul supporters. As one myself, I would rather write in Paul than vote for any of the other 3.

I think it was the victory speech in SC where Gingrich spoke about Ron Paul and agreed on some stuff he said (don't remember the exact stuff he agreed on now..) and I was watching it live, and the first thing that popped up in my mind, was a strategic move to try to get Ron Paul supporters to 'give newt a chance' and look at Newt as a Number-2-Ron Paul.

So it doesn't surprise me if Newt is studying Ron Paul deeply to see if he can make something himself out of what he gets from Ron Paul to make his supporters vote for Newt.

But yeah, I agree, I don't think Newt understands RP supporters.. Think most of them are woken up enough to see how Newt is operating..
edit on 24-1-2012 by spire because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 05:13 AM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 06:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
Why would I base my vote on anything else besides his policies?

But to answer your questions...No, I don't think he is an honest man....any man running for President wants the power to be able to do something, and yes I think he is a typical politican...he just has a different base so his rhetoric is different.


Thank you for answering.

Policies are important to me too, but if I can not believe a word coming out of the candidates mouth, then their policies do not mean much to me.

I do not agree with Dennis Kucinich's economic policies, but I believe he is an honest man and would rather see him become president before Santorum, Romney, Gingrich, and most other potential republican and democratic candidates.

I happen to agree with Ron Paul's policies and I believe he is an honest man, who is not in it for personal power or wealth.

I voted for Ron Paul in the 08 primaries, before that, the last time I voted was for Ros Perot in 96, so Ron Paul has cured me of my apathy towards politics and has given me some shred of hope.

Now I know it is very unlikely that people like Ron Paul or Dennis Kucinich will ever become president.
The PTB will not allow such a thing, but I think they can cure more people of their apathy, and wake them up to the realities of how much the U.S. political system is a scam.


Peace



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 08:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by Wookiep
Personally, I hope Newt and Mitt tear each other apart limb from limb while Paul keeps quietly awaiting a question like an adult while Santorum cries as usual. This will be a Newt/Mitt show, but there might be some entertainment behind it.

Maybe by some miracle a light bulb will turn on in minds of establishment sheepish republicans and they'll realize just how ridiculous three of the candidates really are.......pfft, nah.



No more Mr. nice guy.

Mitt looked desperate and will lose Florida also.

Ann Coulter looked very desperate and sad last night. Her heroes Mitt Romney &
Chris Christie are on the ropes.
edit on 24-1-2012 by Eurisko2012 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 08:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by CoolStoryMan
I have no respect for NBC as a news entity, appalling is all i will call this


All 4 candidates should have attacked Obama all night and just completely
ignored the moderator.
edit on 24-1-2012 by Eurisko2012 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 01:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sagittarian69
I just skimmed through this thread looking for a response similar to something I noticed during the debate... did not see one.

Every time Ron Paul spoke and you could see Newt, noticed how Newt was actually paying attention to what Ron was saying. The others stood there staring straight ahead. And, after the question was posed to Paul if he would support Newt it all fell into place in my mind. It seems Newt is already trying to figure out how to get the Ron Paul people on board with him if he can just talk the good Doc into dropping out.


Actually, that's just good debate tactics (from a formal debating standpoint) because it implies attention to the speaker and makes the audience think that you really do listen to other people. He's also evaluating the other debater's information and setting up his next debate point.

The gods know what the others are doing -- perhaps going over their usual canned speeches. But Newt isn't missing anything, and that's what makes him horribly effective. I think that when you're talking to him face-to-face you probably get that same look of interested attention.

This is something you cultivate; you practice. When listening to someone, just listen and don't start setting up your next conversation or debate point. It's not easy to learn, but once you learn it you can become VERY effective in a panel/forum.

(and I'm speaking from personal experience.)



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 03:08 PM
link   
Tonight at 8pm cst the president will be giving his Sate of The Union Address. I don't think there will be any debates tonight while that is going on. This is probably why you don't see a listing for a debate, it is the State of The Union Address someone is confusing for a debate, unless you are referring to last nights debate, which makes sense now. Hope everybody tunes in to the State of The Union, this ought to be interesting watchig Obama try to convince us that he is doing a great job and everything will be alright.
edit on 24-1-2012 by govspy911 because: Added Text



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 03:58 PM
link   

In the meantime, Osama I mean Obama is grinning ear to ear, licking his chops at another 4 years of unfulfilled promises and getting another Nobel Peace Prize for starting a war with Iran. And any other countries that have brown people and oil...


It's only funny because it's true...

Of course, it really wouldn't change if either Romney or Gingrich got in either... While in different parties, they serve the same masters...i.e. U.S. corporations.



posted on Jan, 25 2012 @ 03:32 AM
link   
reply to post by Gazrok
 


Whereas Ron Paul would simply level the playing field and let corporations be EVERYONE's master.

Much fairer.





top topics
 
10
<< 14  15  16   >>

log in

join


Haters, Bigots, Partisan Trolls, Propaganda Hacks, Racists, and LOL-tards: Time To Move On.
read more: Community Announcement re: Decorum