WSooner or later they get out.
View my Blog and see why. Click on Spiceman above.
Attitude determines the altitude.
"Positive attention gets positive results
Negative attention gets negative results."
“Honesty is the best policy.” Never ever, deceive! If we were honest with ourselves, we could believe that others are honest. So if we do not believe there will ever be an honest President in the Whitehouse, why don’t we elect one? “It is because we cannot distinguish the multitudes of hypocrites from our selves.”
|
|
Mc cain is worse than LIBERAL war monger ,he said expert in security and let BORDER WIDE OPEN AND LET MEXICAN DRUG SMUGGLERS FROM KILLING OUR BORDER AGENTS AND rape US citizen .
Not clue about economy and WONT talk immigration , he will so dangerous for oir future |
|
|
I like Giuliani. He's not my favorite, but I could vote for him if he wins the nomination. He's fairly strong on the issues most important to me (illegal immigration, war on terror which includes Iraq, and cutting taxes). Rudy does have some 2nd amendment problems and is obviously not with the part on abortion. He also was a little too generous to the illegals in NYC, but he did not have the power to do anything about the problem being a Mayor rather than a POTUS or Senator. |
|
McCain: Washington's Chronic Flip Flopper
Claimed Iraq War would be "easy"
Later ridiculed those who thought it would be easy
Reversed himself on Confederate Flag within 3 days
Reversed himself on Gay Marriage within 11 minutes
Voted with Hillary against Bush Tax Cuts
Now wants them to be Permanent
Authored Liberal Amnesty Bill
Now Claims he's against Amnesty
He let young americans die for his pet war project and let all mexicans croos the border and bring cheap labor NAFTA like clinton bush, REPLACING AMERICANS JOBS cuz coorporation tell him...HE is the worse IN GOP even he is not gop only LIBERAL CLOSET,his economy disaster no clue amnesty cost 3 TRILYUN .
Romney 2008
|
|
Lots of chatter ,few facts, fewer answers.If any of the candidates would answer these questions you would know their true purposes.1Would you sign or support the UN Freedom of the Seas Treaty? 2a Is global warming real? 2b Do you favor Carbon credits,taxes or offsets? 3 Would you increase,decrease,or hold steady the number of civilian federal employees? Should President Bush's no child left behind be increased,left in place,or retired?
Answers to these questions would expose the RINO's,and the sad truth is they may all very well be. |
|
I normally don't like to bring religion into argument, but eddie is wrong:
From LDS.org on abortion:
"Human life is a sacred gift from God. Elective abortion for personal or social convenience is contrary to the will and the commandments of God. Church members who submit to, perform, encourage, pay for, or arrange for such abortions may lose their membership in the Church."
|
|
I would like to see income taxes replaced with consumption taxes, and maybe the Fair Tax is the way to go.
But from everything I have read, Huckabee's conversion to that cause was a last minute cut-and-paste job just like his conversion to immigration enforcement.
Now I do think one could do worse. I certainly consider Huckabee better than McCain, who is no cut and paste guy, he has been dead wrong on the issues since the beginning of time and you can take it to the bank that he will be steadfast in sticking to his wrongheaded positions.
The thing is, when Huckabee has just thrown together a platform like that, how sure can you be that he would still pursue it as President. I give him the benefit of the doubt that he would try to follow through with his commitments from his campaign, but when his platform is just something he's basically pasted together in haste, his policies are liable to be sitting ducks if and when he tries to get them passed, because he won't have the depth of understanding of them to defend them.
Contrast that with McCain, who knows Ted Kennedy's immigration platform like the back of his hand, and look at how far McCain has been able to move that policy forward, despite the fact that it is ludicrous and destructive. (although fortunately he hasn't been able to get it all the way to the goal line)
By the way: One more good thing about a Romney victory in Florida is that Florida Republicans would be sending a message to Senator Martinez to go jump in a lake.
|
|
"McCain says he understands the border problem better than anyone becaues he comes from a border state. So if thats true than why hasn't he fixed it?"
When he says he understands the border problem, what is he means that he understands that the problem with the border is that it exists.
He is an erase the borders guy.
So, why hasn't he fixed it? Well he has tried to erase the borders but the American people blocked him. |
|
"We have a clear choice now, between
a Turd Sandwich and a Giant Douch."
Maybe it's supposed to be self-evident, and maybe I am just dense, but could you please identify which one is McCain and which is Romney?
|
|
FF: Why not Romney/McCain or vise versa? That way we pull more independents.
Sorry I will not vote for McAmnesty ever.
I will vote 3rd party if McCain is on the ticket.
Romney is a great fundraiser and executive.
Huckabee is a great communicator and will be the next Reagan.
I voted for Reagan in 1976 against Gerald Ford in the Republican primary. Even Reagan was not conservative enough for the folks here at townhall. Reagan did 4 great things.
1. He cut income taxes.
2. He rebuilt our miltary.
3. He reduced government regulations/redtape.
4. He was a true leader who inspired Americans to believe in themselves and their Country as a shining city on a hill.
Huckabee will do all of the above things.
Huckabee knows how to connect with the average voter and win elections even in Democratic Arkansas.
Huckabee will help Romney win because of his great communicator skills which will make the Republican party attractive to the average voter.
|
|
McCain says he understands the border problem better than anyone becaues he comes from a border state. So if thats true than why hasn't he fixed it?
When he had a chance to fix it, all he came up with was a backdoor deal with kennedy. The most liberal dirtbag in the senate, and guess what? The plan failed to address border security.
If you care about the security and the sovereignty of your America then you cannot possibly vote for McCain.
|
|
his National Director of Hispanic Outreach is none other that Dr. Juan Hernandez, notorious for his open borders stance.
Traitor. |
|
For fiscal year 2006 alone, there were 29 confirmed incidents along the U.S.- Mexican border involving Mexican military and/or law enforcement personnel, 17 of which involved armed Mexican government agents.
Moreover, between 1996 and September 30, 2006, there were 253 confirmed incursions into the United States by Mexican government personnel.
http://judicialwatch.org/archive/2008/FY2006MexicanIncursio nReport.pdf
McCain is a Traitor. |
|
|
McCain reminds me of the typical Junior High School bully who, when he can't persuade with logic, he yells, threatens, swears at, and personally attacks the person that won't fall in line. That is not a leader, that is a demagogue, and with enough power he could turn into a dictator. |
|
It is silly to accuse McCain of being a traitor. On the other hand, he has gone out of his way to alienate the conservative base of the party for many years. Particularly egregious to me is his willingness to throw First Amendment protections under the bus just to protect incumbents. McCain-Feingold is a travesty.
Even with those strikes against him, I could swallow hard and vote for him but for his single most disqualifying characteristic, which is his lack of emotional control. Anyone who would yell profanely at his peers in the Senate, or who takes such great delight in revenge, has no business being the Commander-in-Chief with his finger on the nuclear button. I can't support McCain in the general; I fear giving that much power to him. |
|
|
So you're going to call McCain a traitor? Maybe you ought to look up the word. That's just pathetic. Just because you disagree with the guy, he is a traitor? |
|
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGrWt-XICHc
This traitor is trying to hijack the conservative party. |
|
8. The fair tax plan is based on the false assumption that the states will set up agencies or expand existing agencies to collect this tax, distribute it to the feds and issue prebate checks. This is not in accordance with the US Constitution under the 10th amendment and separation of federal and state governments. The 16th amendment does not give authority to the federal government to mandate to the states to implement the cost of federal programs. This is Big Government walking right into your state and telling your state officials what to do. To make this tax Constitutional there would have to be an amendment to the US Constitution plain and simple. The fair tax states that the states have the right to incorporate this fair tax into their existing state tax plan. They also have the right NOT to.
OK, eddie, I hope that is enough for you to chew on for awhile. I got to go...I'll be back later to see if you can justify annnny of this Big Government plan...this my friend is the reason that Washington is broke. They haven't the faintest clue what conservatism is........... |
|
5. If implemented today, the profit from the sale of large expenditures such as houses or cars bought under the IRS tax plan would be taxed again when the consumer buys goods paying the estimated 23% sales tax.
6. The fair tax is based on the assumption that by eliminating corporate tax on business the price of every good purchased will fall the same amount of the implemented tax rate. This is absurd. If prices fall 15% and the corresponding tax percentage calculated is 17%...the buyer loses on every good involved. There is absolutely no guarantee that the calculation of price fluctuation would ever correspond to the calculated tax rate.
7. The cost of this bureaucracy to collect sales tax on every product and service in this country and redistribute prebates has to be huge and is hidden from common sense somewhere in pages of calculations. It is also based on 2007 budgets…which will change over the years so the federal sales tax will be subject to instantaneous change. The simple fact remains, any time government expands, the citizens pay. The Huckabee statement that all hidden taxes will be eliminated is false. The presumption of the fair tax that the size of the Federal Government sector relative to the rest of the economy would remain constant is hogwash. This is not being TRANSPARENT. The fair tax plan transfers the implementation to the state government and there in lies the truth. The size of the state government would have to grow substantially. This is still government GROWTH.
|
|
2. Huckabee admitted that everyone gets a prebate (per Huckabee “benefit”). Under this plan the federal government would collect a tax on everyone, handle that money and then redistribute levels of prebates. This is Big Government in everyone’s pocket book. (of what use is it to make the tax so high that prebates to everyone is necessary…other than to handle your money?)
3. Huckabee lied when he said during the Florida debate that the so called fair tax would not tax groceries. H.R. 25 currently in front of Congress or so called fair tax will tax “all consumption of goods and services in the United States.”
4. Federal excise tax and “other” taxes will NOT be eliminated. State sales tax will still exist. All state and local taxes will exist. The fair tax is a FEDERAL income, SS and medicare tax elimination only. The estimates that Huckabee quoted saying most taxpayers now work until “May” to be tax free included ALL taxes. He said that the fair tax would eliminate these taxes. He either does not know the fair tax or he lied.
|
|
eddie:"I wonder if the
self-proclaimed economic conservatives really understand that all of the candidates but one endorse the income tax and oppose the Fair Tax, even though the income tax is a tax on productivity. How can a economic conservative support a taxation system that penalizes productivity?"
Huckabee had his chance to make his case for the Fair Tax on national TV on MSNBC during the debate in Florida and he failed to make one good point voters could take away to back up a plan that would throw out the current tax program that has successfully kept our country functioning financially for nearly 100 years. The reason he failed is because it is impossible to defend this Big Government plan to an audience of conservatives. As much as voters are disgruntled about the flawed system we have now, to throw it out and replace it with the so called fair tax would be to give government a much larger power over daily life in this country. The so called ‘fair tax’ is full of more holes than Swiss Cheese and smacks of socialistic Europe. This tax, in fact, is a perfect example of the loss of conservative Regan values in the Republican Party. H.R.25 has been around for years.
1. Lower income people who are now able to live without any interference of government in their lives would be forced to be dependent on a monthly “prebate” check to be able to shop for essentials when an estimated 23% federal sales tax is implemented on every good and service. (some estimates are 30%)
|
|
I don't put much stock into what Coulter says. I have heard 2 major trains of thought. One, that Romney is the only one who can beat the Dems because he has the best chance of uniting the base. And two, that McCain is the only one who can win because he will pull independents and moderates in and enough of the base will unite behind him. So which is the correct choice? I know I have no idea. If I have to swallow either one, I guess I will.
|
|
Worse than Dole. I wasn't excited about Dole, but I wasn't pi$$ed off at him, so I voted for him. What's the likelihood of anyone who has been called names for wanting the gov't to actually enforce the laws, to vote for those jamming amnesty down our throats?
|
|
I think Romney has the best chance of winning in November. He is the competent change candidate. If he cannot win, no one can. McCain, to paraphrase Coulter, is an older, grouchier, and less conservative Bob Dole. Just like Rudy faded in the polls when the race heated up, so will McCain fade when the Clinton machine and the MSM unload their firepower on him. Romney will eventually pick up support from everyone who wants competent leadership without partisan rancor (note that will not include most Democrats)
I don't think Romney would ever pick Huckabee as VP, but I think Thompson would be a great choice. |
|
|
Why not Romney/McCain or vise versa. That way we pull more independents. |
|
If Romney wins FL and Rudy drops out, Romney will need Huckabee's help to defeat McCain.
If I was Romney I would offer Huckabee the VP spot right after FL. Huckabee would take the VP job.
A Romney/Huckabee would heal the divisions in the Conservative movement and provide a very strong ticket for November.
|
|
|
You are mistaken. The LDS religion is staunchly pro-life. |
|
|
Can Romney win the Presidency? This time around, the nation is so sour on the Republicans, I just have to wonder if he can pull enough votes from the Independents to stop Hillary. |
|
|
I'm not a big horror movie fan, so I would just as soon not think about the consequences of a monolithic Democratic takeover of Washington. |
|
I just set a donation to the RNC on Wednesday. We do need cash flow to fight the Democrats. We all focus on our candidates on the primary battlefield, but the GOP must first and foremost win the war against the Democrats in November. Lets all keep that in mind.
Tampa Dave |
|
|
What he said is that he signed a bill in Massachusetts that was a compromise worked out between interested groups, but that he would not sign legislation further restricting 2nd Amendment rights. He made it clear that because existing law was adequate it should be enforced and there is no need for additional regulation. That answer works for me. |
|
Romney may have to be good enough this time around. We may only have this election to stop the illegal inundation. McCain, Clinton, or Obama will try again on amnesty. One more and we're done. 1 in 8 residents of the U.S. is foreign born. That is higher than ever. This is not like previous immigration when immigrants became Americans. 1 in 8 households speak Spanish. The birthrates of illegal aliens are astounding. We are running out of time to save our country.
|
|
|
Mitt Romney said he would have signed an extension to the original ban. Is the new bill just an extension of the old one? So would he sign this one? |
|
|
Spot on. ChuckP, what if the Dems win the Presidency and extend their majorities in the House and Senate? |
|
|
There are no assault weapons for sale to the general public in the U.S. You need a class III license to own automatic weapons, since the '30's. There is no need for legislation to ban something that is not legal in the first place. What is being contemplated is a "scary-looking gun" ban, not an assault rifle ban. There is no difference between semi-auto rifles in terms of lethality or rate of fire, only appearence. |
|
|
Flycatcher, I think you are missing the point. I don't think the bill stands a snowball's chance in H-ll of becoming law, either with our current president or with our next President if it is Romney. |
|
|
The "Assault weapons ban" expired September 13, 2004. The new one that is in the House of Representatives (HR1022) is the "Reauthorization of the assault weapons ban". Both the old and new targeted semi-auto guns not full-auto on the basis of looks alone. The new one goes even further than the old one. Chuck, you should actually read the bill, it should make you take a step back and think. |
|
|
I visited the NRA website and the ACU website. Neither had anything indicating that either organization endorsed Romney. Maybe Keene did it personally, but he did not do it for either organization. |
|
If so the ban is very ineffective. I can go to any sporting goods store and buy one today.
My weapon is a semi-automatic, not automatic. I think that is the difference. Automatic weapons have been prohibited for many decades. |
|
ChuckP, you do know your Mini-14 is on the list of the "assault weapons ban".
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h110-1022
|
|
|
I agree that politicians evolve, but Romney has evolved on MOST true conservative issues. I did notice something else last night that disturbed me. Romney promised a $20 billion bailout to Mich., a $250 billion stimulus package, and more incentives to grow our military. How are we going to pay for it, and is that true conservatism? |
|
First let me say that I am an ardent supporter of the 2nd Amendment and realize that our liberties are much safer when good, law abiding people are armed and prepared to defend their lives and liberty. I have numerous weapons, including a 30-06 that I got for my 12th birthday and a Mini-14 that I bought myself over a decade ago.
There are some that would disarm us, as if by so doing they would make our society safe. Nothing could be further from the truth, and those people should be denounced. However, there are some who infer rights under the 2nd Amendment that were not meant to be. No one would seriously argue that we have an individual right to own any weapon, including stinger missiles, tanks, or even nuclear weapons. We have to draw a line somewhere, and prohibit the ownership of heavy weapons while allowing ownership of the weapons that we need to defend ourselves, or our country if there was a need to do so.
My perception is that Romney is, like many others, looking for the appropriate place to draw the line, and it seems as though he has found the right place. |
|
|
Romney supports the federal income tax (the modern feudal system of serfdom). Romney is lukewarm on pro-life (his religion is not pro-life at all). He is also lukewarm on Second Amendment rights. Those are the facts. If you see them clearly, then ending the federal feudal system is not important to you; and pro-life and Second Amendment rights are low on your list of priorities. Those are the facts. Also, you have every right to take those positions, as does Romney. I am not going to go along with those positions unless I have to, to beat the Dems. |
|
support any anti-gun legislation, which is why he has the support of so many pro-gun advocates. I don't know how he personally feels about guns, but I believe that he will keep his promise to the voters. I base that on two reasons: he would need to maintain the support of middle and western America, and the fact that he kept his promises to the voters that elected him governor of Mass.
I don't mind a politician "evolving" their position to fit mine before an election -- as long as they will honor/remember that is why I voted for them after they get elected. |
|
any of the GOP candidates, but I do prefer Huckabee over all others because he understands the damage the federal income tax system (the modern feudal system) is doing to America. The only thing doing more harm to America than the federal income tax system are keeping abortion, embryonic stem-cell research and euthanasia legal; and increasing attacks on Second Amendment rights.
Huckabee is the strongest candidate on pro-life issues, Second Amendment issues, and eliminating the federal income tax. He is also strong on the War on Terrorism, the battle for Iraq and immigration. He is the truest conservative in the presidential race. If you vote for anyone else, you are voting to remain a serf of the federal government. You have that right, to choose to remain a serf. I just do not understand why you would want to remain a serf. |
|
|
|
|
GOP voters will not,not just roll over with poll pushing, or push polls! My bet is that the vote in Fla. will be very close. Yes, Mitt did well last night. And if nominated I will support him. Still early voting may surprise many. I liked the fact that all 4 of the candidates, not Ron, attacked Hil and the Dems. I wonder how they will go after Obama if he gets the nomination. And when will a national campaign begin? The RNC is strapped for cash and the Convention may not be enough time for the GOP to actually unite all 3 of its wings. |
|
|
I admit I was surprised by that. I am going to have to do some investigating as to what Keene's motives might be. At face value, it is disturbing to me. |
|
|
But does the endorsement by Keene mean anything to you? I'm not sure he is as wishy-washy as you think he is. |
|
Contrary to what you seem to think, I've investigated all the candidates for over a year now. I don't think Romney is perfect, but I think he is heads and shoulders above the others. I come by that after much thought, reading and observation.
No candidate in my life has ever had my blind support. |
|
|
PC, of course that bill passed in Mass. Mass. is a very liberal state, but the governor (claiming to be a conservative), has no business signing it if he believes in the 2nd amendment. And if you read what actual police officers say, the "assault weapons ban" did nothing to curb violent crime. To me there are certain things that are un-negotiable, and the second amendment is one. I can't support a candidate that is wishy washy on that. |
|
|
don't confuse PC with the facts. It does not matter what Romney stands for, he has PCs blind support. |
|
I'm not an expert on this, I just know that law enfocement groups are overwhelmingly in favor the assault weapon ban because it is the weapon of choice for drug dealers, gangsters and the like. Among other things, they penetrate body armor quite easuly. I simply think that it is a reasonable position to not want law enforcement put at a disadvantage.
I don't necessarily agree with it, because I don't know enough about it. But my husband owns guns, my father was a pretty regular hunter until he took up golf, so you know where I'm coming from.
Also, Romney signed the assault weapon ban in Mass because a huge majority of voters and the legislature wanted it. He has said that he supports the 2nd amendment and that he will not try to change any laws.
That may not be good enough for you, but at least he has the endorsement of the no 2 man at the NRA. There must be a reason for that. |
|
True assault weapons are automatic rifles, already illegal, except for class III license holders. All of my semi-automatic rifles fire just as many rounds as any of the guns previously banned as assault rifles, the big differnce is they aren't "scary looking". "Scary looking" rifles are still illegal in CA and elsewhere, but equally lethal, equally rapid fire guns that aren't "scary looking" are legal.
What the libs want to ban is all guns, what they think they can ban first are the "scary looking" ones by mislabeling them as assault rifles.
Like they mislabel illegal aliens as undocumented workers or undocumented Americans instead of citizens of other countries, illegally in our country. |
|
|
I fear the consequences of electing someone who is lukewarm on Second Amendment rights. The Second Amendment is our final defense against tyranny. |
|
|
thinks of himself as a conservative, but continues to support keeping the income tax system. The tax system that penalizes productivity. How does he see that as a conservative position? Anyone know? |
|
|
Just because a gun looks scary doesn't mean it's any more dangerous than any other gun. If you actually read what the "assault weapons ban" got rid of, you would scratch your head. Should we get rid of cars that has a scary looking paint job? Should we get rid of my mother-in-law because she is scary looking? OK, scratch that last one. |
|
|
How is that reasonable? How do "assault weapons" put law enforcement at risk? |
|
Don't forget that David Keene (vice pres, soon to be Pres of the NRA) has endorsed Romney. Romney's position of regulating assault weapons that put law enforcement at risk is reasonable.
|
|
I know you are all for healing, but I couldn't disagree more about Huck.
He used religion to exploit anti-Mormon sentiments among evangelicals. His is a deceptive and divisive campaign. He has a clear contempt for Romney, but Romney does not return the rancor.
Huckabee is a liberal with serious ethical problems and is the real flip-flopper in this campaign. He is also gaffe-prone and his comments against Romney have been petty and small - like the one last night which made him look like a fool.
I don't want Huckabee in my party. His actions and statements have been beneath the dignity of the GOP. I sincerely hope he fails to win any more delegates, and I think he is trending that way. SC was a bust for him, and if he can't win there, where can he?
Goodbye Huckabee. We will not reward you for your ignoble behavior. |
|
|
Dan, I hope you are wrong. If Romney gets the nomination, I think I'll just sit out. I can't vote for a guy that thinks the 2nd amendment can be played with. |
|
|
|
|
would make an acceptable president because if he tried to precipitously pull our troops out of Iraq he would be impeached. If you take his position on the Iraq war out of play, he is an acceptable candidate. The uncertainty on what his election would do to the war in Iraq is what makes many people look for someone else. |
|
|
self-proclaimed economic conservatives really understand that all of the candidates but one endorse the income tax and oppose the Fair Tax, even though the income tax is a tax on productivity. How can a economic conservative support a taxation system that penalizes productivity? Under the current income tax system the better you perform economically the more you are punished. |
|
Did you see him on stage? He looked like he was about to keel over. He was mumbling, stumbling, making jokes that absolutely tanked.
Our party won't support a pro-amnesty, anti-tax cut candidate no matter how much the MSM kisses up to him.
Romney won big last night. He'll ride a win in Florida to steal California and other big states from McCain and win the nomination. |
|
The rising current concern over the economy plays to Romney's strength in debates. And right now, increasing numbers of voters are putting the economy at the top of their list of issues.
McCain does not have the experience with economic matters that Romney has, nor the same level of understanding, and it shows. As long as most conservatives believe that Romney will continue to work with the Joint Chiefs to find some acceptable solution in Iraq, McCain's perceived advantage on the war isn't all that great. By a wide majority, after all, American's have not embraced nation building as something they can continue to afford to do. If the economy trumps the war, and the debates and public focus increasingly on it, then Romney would appear to have the edge. And perhaps that's what we're seeing some of in Florida. We cannot do much about Iraq other than stay the course for awhile, which is why so little is said about it. But people can talk about the economy. And it's clear that Romney may actually have the best grasp of economics of any of our modern Presidents. |
|
He will make everyone see that Hillary has nothing for the economy. She is the "stupid" in the saying "It's the economy, stupid!"
She'll raise taxes. He'll cut them.
She has a socialistic health care plan. He has a free market plan.
She won't close the border. He will. She has no experience at governing. He does. He has been successful. She hasn't. He'll continue the fight against the terrorist. She'll roll over for them.
Most of all remember that people want "change" and she isn't it. Mitt is he is our best hope. Rah! Rah! Romney! Go! Go! Go!
|
|
"I don't think [Giuliani] even mentioned that he turned around the 17th largest economy in the world"
Ah, Yes, he did. But it would seem nobody was listening.
Pitty.
|
|
|
I always liked Rudy the best. I thought that he was (except for the 'social issues, of course) the most conservative candidate in the race. He had the most clear records of opposing liberals and reforming a government and a city that had been ruined by liberals. he never stood up and fought. He never said "I am the conservative!" Last night I watched McLame get away with all his lies and BS without Romney or Rudy saying, "Hold on a minute, thar, Babalooey!"and ATTACKING him as a liberal. Huckabuttboy seems to be doing for McLame what John Edwards is doing to Her Thighness, two libs working together. But Rudy's lame non-confrontational performance has probably doomed his candidacy. |
|
|
I know Romney said he wouldn't back new legislation, but the 2nd amendment is non-negotiable for me. And by the way, would this be considered new legislation or just an extension of the old bill for Romney?http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h110-1022 |
|
|
Was anyone else concerned about how Romney said he would have backed the assault weapons ban? |
|
From Pat Buchanan's piece today:
In 2004, the voters of Arizona, by 56 percent to 44 percent, enacted Proposition 200, requiring proof of citizenship before an individual may vote or receive state benefits. Forty-six percent of Hispanics voted for Prop. 200, giving the lie to those who say Hispanics support the illegal invasion of their country. Over 190,000 Arizonans petitioned to put Prop. 200 on the ballot. As it simply required proof of citizenship before receiving the benefits and privileges of citizenship, who could oppose it? Answer: the entire GOP congressional delegation, led by Sen. John McCain. This is the same John McCain who battled the border fence and colluded with Teddy Kennedy on the amnesty bill rejected by Congress last year after a national uproar. Bottom line: If the presidential race is between Hillary and Amnesty John, the border security battle is over and lost. |
|
If we are angry, it is because the truth is being silenced and the bias is getting utterly ridiculous. Ron Paul is the only man on that stage who truly understands economics. Further, he is the only one who is admitting that the huge financial crisis facing our nation is real. If you have not already, please watch this video from the Government Accountability Office (GAO) regarding this issue:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=KjZBOCAgR64
In summary, we are facing a $40 trillion dollar future deficit from promised payments in Social Security and Medicare. If we keep on our current course, by 2040, our entire government budget will be consumed by paying the interest on these loans. We need corrective action NOW in order to avert this impending disaster.
Instead, we have four candidates who basically want to "stay the course" of the Bush administration with big government spending and never ending wars. If they give tax cuts, it will only deepen the already enormous national debt which grew from $4 trillion to $9 trillion dollars in the last 7 years alone.
Go ahead and dismiss us Ron Paul supporters, but the truth will not go away. And the crisis goes much further than just the economy. Our very sovereignty is under threat as well as our personal liberties. The dollar is collapsing as we speak.
But go ahead and ignore this. Everything is fine. The economy is fine, and there will be no problems at all. We can continue to live well beyond our means without any threat of payback. We can continue to abuse our laws without any risk of corruption or loss of liberties.
On that day when the United States as we know it today is an interesting historical footnote, remember that when you were offered a chance to save your country you voted for the fraud.
|
|
|
as a candidate. He tried to do too much to too many different groups starting out and the economy coming along as the top issue has helped him find an overall comfort level.This thing is still far from being over because no one really knows where voters will break when thier hand goes on the lever.There's just too many conflicts haunting voters. As soon as you make your mind up,you change it.It's too bad all these guys can't be president by committee because of their various strengths. The military is the most important issue so I'm voting for Mccain. Life is most important so I'm voting for Huck. The economy is most important so I'm voting for Romney. Terrorism is most important so I'm voting for Rudi. There's nothing that going to crown a consensus candidate. It's actually the downside of the candidates that will do them in not their strengths annoiting them. |
|
|
the ron paul zealots, they will rip you a new one. check out mary katharine ham's thread on ron paul. i thought dan in sc was mean... |
|
For the sake of the country I implore the Republican Party to nominate Mitt Romney!
Signed,
A Dedicated Liberal
|
|
Is there any doubt that he is intelligent? None
Successful in a difficult business? None.
Did he make a success of the Olympics? Absolutely.
Does he have strong family values? Look at his family.
Does he have strong business and analytical skills? Consider his success.
Is he genuine? Ask Bob Gray about Mitt saving his daughter's life.
Is he really pro-life? Look at what he did as governor, google "An Open Letter Regarding Governor Mitt Romney."
Ask James Bopp, the legal counsel to the National Right to Life committee.
Does he have the ability to lead? Ask all those volunteers in the Olympics.
Is there any evidene that he holds grudges? None.
Romney is as good a candidate as we have had since Reagan. |
|
50% of what ron paul says is just nuts, but the other 50% is brillant. you know they can't wait to knock him out of these debates, but his poll numbers are too high.
he will never win, but he deserves a seat at the table. |
|
Well, I've watched every Republican and Democrat debate so far (all 2 million of them lol) so nothing new was said, but I'm glad that Romney is doing so well!
It was also amusing to watch the studious effort on all the candidates' part to be as upbeat and kumbayah as possible, as a counterpoint to the Dem's debate a few days ago. |
|
And Ron Paul received by far the least amount of time. A video compilation of all of Ron Paul's portions of the night was 10:25, but that included McCain's response to Ron Paul's question. He received by far the fewest questions despite having handily beaten Giuliani in multiple states, having a second place finish in Nevada, and quite likely a first place finish in Louisiana (still being determined).
The bias against Ron Paul should be alarming to anyone who values democracy. |
|
Imagine the Cartoons ::
General Hillary Clinton
Bubba wandering around the white house
LOL |
|
|
has questioned the inordinate amount of time given to Romney during the debate. Some estimated that out of the nearly 80 minutes of the debate, Romney was given 24 mintues or 78% more time on average than his opponents. This apparent bias by MSNBC in favor of Romney remains unexplained. |
|
|
Florida political scene are in awe of the number of commercials that the Romney campaign has been able to bombard the Florida media markets. His name recognition has skyrocketed over the other Republican candidates. This is being reflected in the polls. |
|
The same would have been said of King Saul in the Old Testament. He was a born leader, but he led Israel away from God.
I am not saying that Romney is necessarily bad, but we need to be careful to take too much credence in a person's charisma. After all, Hitler by all accounts had an incredible amount of charisma, and the anti-Christ will dwarf them all (he is Lucifer after all).
We need to judge a man by his character and his deeds. While Romney appears to be sincere in his recent "conversion" to conservative values, it still seems awfully convenient to have switched critical Republican positions just in time for the presidential election. I would feel better about his positions if he had run as governor with his current platform. His past record makes me very leery of him, and his charismatic charm therefore doesn't work for me.
|
|
|
Huck can be funny but his joke about Romney's sons inheriting his money was tasteless. I'd rather have a serious president than a perfomer who scores on 7 out of 10 haha moments. |
|
|
People kept predicting Romney would out at every turn. His numbers will continue to rise, as they have from day one. He just has it. This is what someone said that heard him speak in person, "I also had a chance to hear him address a small group of MBA students at Harvard in person, and all I can say is he is larger than life. He is a Leader’s Leader. I have heard leaders speak from all over the world, but I can count on one hand the leaders who move and shake the ground and truly know how to bring about change like Mitt Romney. This country would be foolish to not elect him to the presidency." Bryan |
|
"However, it is now clear that he is a real Christian with a real testimony and not some lip service/self service panderer."
Don't be fooled by what Huckabee says. It was indeed a very well stated response, and it almost moved me as well. But then I remembered what the Jesus said:
Mat 7:17 "So, every healthy tree bears good fruit, but the diseased tree bears bad fruit."
Huckabee has lied repeatedly throughout the campaign. He has been brought up on 14 charges of ethics violations including 5 in which he was officially reprimanded.
http://brainshavings.com/2007/10/blood-in-the-water-huckabe es-e.html
His backhanded comments are also not befitting a Christian.
It should also be noted that he was opposed to the recent reformations in the Southern Baptist Church -- a movement that most would agree was long overdue and very much needed in a denomination that had drifted far doctrinally. While the rest of the Southern Baptist convention moved back toward a solid Biblical foundation, Huckabee resisted as leader of the Southern Baptist churches in Arkansas.
Chuck Baldwin also has an excellent article detailing the problems with Huckabee:
http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/c2007/cbarchive_20071102.ht ml
I fear anyone who uses the name of Christianity as a major political tool. Contrast this to Ron Paul's statement of faith to see what I mean:
http://www.covenantnews.com/ronpaul070721.htm
|
|
|
People kept predicting Romney would out at every turn. His numbers will continue to rise, as they have from day one. He just has it. This is what someone said that heard him speak in person, "I also had a chance to hear him address a small group of MBA students at Harvard in person, and all I can say is he is larger than life. He is a Leader’s Leader. I have heard leaders speak from all over the world, but I can count on one hand the leaders who move and shake the ground and truly know how to bring about change like Mitt Romney. This country would be foolish to not elect him to the presidency." Bryan |
|
I noticed with appreciation that the GOP debates demonstrat a much higher level of intellects, morals and an all around positive, upbeat quality, plus much more "tranparency".. especially in comparison to the Dem's lame debates.
No doubt, if the Dems were to be grilled the way that the GOP candidates were; there would be no Democrat debates, period.
Speaking of Libs, it seemed to me that the LSM went easier on McCain..pulling the best out of him, while interjecting his 91 yr old mommy.. perhaps attempting to neutralize McCain's age.. which seemed to make him almost gidddy.. Ahhhhhhhh
However, the winner was Mitt.
GO ROMNEY..
|
|
IN ONE LINE
ROMNEY would blow Hillary out of the water
by explaining why her dumber than utterly
stupid idea to
FREEZE interest rates for 5 years would
1. destroy our economy in 2 months
2. IS NOT a PRESIDENTIAL POWER (she says she is experienced) WHOA
3. Banks are NOT OWNED BY THE GOVERNMENT
4. ONLY HILLARY and HUGO CHAVEZ are communist dictators
5. WE::::: citizens::::: shareholders:::::
OWN THE BANKS
we::::::::::: citizens:::::: shareholders have investments in MORTGAGE BACKED SECURITIES that have guaranteed us a specific rate of return:
Hillary is dangerous: pathetic dumber than utterly stupid demented idiot |
|
Please do another interview with Brett Doster.
|
|
scottbushee,
Yes, this site ignores Ron Paul just as they tried to marginalize him in this debate. Despite trashing Giuliani in all but one state, Ron Paul received half the questions of the former mayor and had by far the least amount of time to speak.
Why? Because they fear the threat he means to the establishment. He threatens the oligarchy that rules our nation and gives us the illusion of democracy and choice by wanting to return the power to the people of this nation. He offers truth when they continue to feed the nation lies.
Ron Paul is the only intelligent and knowledgeable candidate left in the race, and that is why they will ignore him. |
|
Unlike communist Hillary hugo chavez clinton
who announced that as President she would exceed Presidential powers
freeze interest rates for 5 years
That would implode Wall Street and turn this country into a 3rd world country in 2 months and the
Bank shareholders (mostly Seniors) would be fleeced !
SHe is really dumber than utterly stupid and has zero powers to FREEZE interest rates: LAWDY::::
and she graduated from College::::Law School !!
|
|
Unlike McCain_Lieberman bill proposing
a massive tax increase on Energy
that will be an intollerable burden on Seniors
Romney will NOT RAISE TAXES on Energy
as an Energy Plan
or to save the globe from waring:
Frankly right now we welcome some global warming:
|
|
I watched the debate on my office computer. I got the impression that the party started to heal tonight. There are differences but no real hatred.
NBC ran a very good debate. They allowed each candidate to address perceived weaknesses but there did not seem to be any agenda journalism. Good hard questions that should be ask and that needed answered were the rule.
I felt that this was Romney's best performance. He looked, acted and sounded Presidential. He had very good answers for every question. He is really coming into his stride.
McCain did well but he looked like a very talented politician. He looked like a Senator next to Romney. Side by side I would give an edge to Romney who just looked and sounded like a President.
Rudy also did well. However, he just can't measure up the the 9/11 halo. He was adept. He had some good solid answers and has very good political skills. However, Romney looked and acted more like a President.
I felt Huckabee had some good moments. I have been very critical of Huckabee but now I have some respect. Up until now, to me he was a pandering politician who used his religion to get votes. Tonight his closing statement revealed him as a true "Christian" and I mean that with respect. I disagree with him on the unfair tax and I do not think he is ready to be President even though he does have considerable campaign skill. However, it is now clear that he is a real Christian with a real testimony and not some lip service/self service panderer. |
|
|
I think the argument that you have to win independents, and that only McCain can do that is overblown. What percentage of people vote in the elections? Isn't like 10 to 20% or some similarly paltry number. If a candidate can simply inspire and motivate a sufficient number of conservatives to get off their fannies and get to the poll booths, they could pull off a victory without needing to appeal to independents. Right? |
|
Mitt did great (probably a A-) and the others played it safe (B-).
I wanted to vote for Rudy, but, don't think I can. He doesn't seem like he REALLY wants it...and I'm in FL. |
|
I too was surprised by the tame nature of the debate. I think it goes something like this:
Rudy knows his Florida strategy has failed. He can't meet Mitt's ante to compete for the next 5 days. His only chance is to grab some big delegate winner take all state on Feb. 5
Huck is running for VP with McCain or Rudy.
McCain was trying to "act" the part of a "momentum candidate" even though he can feel Florida slipping away. If he came after Mitt hard it might reinforce him looking desperate. He thinks he can run well in California, and with Rudy fading could do well in the north east.
Everything is breaking for Mitt in Florida. He didn't need to take risks tonight - but looked confident and did well. His numbers climbed 15 points on Intrade post debate. Looks like the Romney with more money and better organization, and are going to take Florida and everyone else is looking at how they can make a Feb. 5 stand.
|
|
HE DID IT ! Didn't talk and talk and talk
He DID IT ! NOT all Talk and no show:
When this country was so miserable, FLAT ON ITS FACE right after 9/11
The Real man of the hour was Mitt Romney, AND that man of incredible inspiration at this country’s low point did not get the credit
Romney did NOT cancel the Olympics because of 9/11 !
Despite the hand wringing, screaming from the wimps here in the USA
And around the world to cancel it !
ROMNEY gave this country back its SPIRIT, pride, inspiration, GLORY, INCOME, grace, dignity, courage, SUCCESS, FOOT in face of evil: when he
Proceeded with holding the Olympics and had
100% of the nations participated:
NO Nation BACKED OUT
NO SECURITY GLITCH
AND they RAKED IN HUGE new MONEY FOR THIS COUNTRY
And the Olympic organization
WHEN ROMNEY took over the Olympics, it was
Doomed, devastated
falling apart
Had a sea of red ink
HE LEFT IT IN THE BLACK
Did not take a dime for his 3 years of work:
THAT IS INCREDIBLE PROVEN LEADERSHIP
|
|
can the conservative vote be fractured enough between Huck/Giuliani/Romney to give McCain the edge. I have heard the argument that due to the early vote in FL, Giuliani's early support could have been enough to keep McCain from gaining too much of an advantage.
I don't trust that any of the polls can take into consideration such a complicated field. The pollsters have only had to consider two, maybe three candidates by now. I really liked Romney and secondly Giuliani. I have not had a good taste for McCain, and tonight he looked like he didn't have it together like he had in previous debates. Maybe I'm a bit biased so let me say he looked like a sterling alternative to the Democrat field, just a distant third in my opinion.
I though the Huck was funny as hell, there was just very little substance to his retorts. They even seemed a bit contradictary at times.
Then there was that other guy...never mind, his name escapes me. Every other word was some miscontrued interpretation of the Constitution though.
I can't wait to see what happens. As for me I will fully back the Republican nominee. |
|
but he somehow did a great job of not ticking me off tonight. All the MSNBC liberals are saying Romney won, so, applying Bozell logic, Real Conservatives should now distrust him. Right? Well, that's what they always say about McCain...
McCain did fine, but I like McCain, so I'm biased. Yes, he should have somehow reminded people that he's the only one who can beat any of the Dems, based on poll after poll. He may not have "won", but the only people who will say he did just horrible are the most committed, irrational Romniacs, like Hewitt.
I'm actually very impressed with all of them, a four-way tie to me. But only McCain has any appeal to Independents in the general. |
|
McCain all talk and never do has run its course
he is a 25 year DC fixture do nothing
and biggest backstabber in the GOP
We are all so tired of the GOP wimps in DC
and the
Communist Democrats, who hate America: Hate our troops;
Romney is refreshing, shows a spirit of strength, inspiration and that good old American grit:
SUCCESS BREEDS SUCCESS\
EARN IT
DO NOT dump the poor wife to marry the Ultra rich trophy wife, drug addict
like McCain did
we are so tired of
Newt
Larry Craig
Tom foley
and the list goes on and on and on:
|
|
The writer of this article is absolutely correct.
Romney will be our Republican candidate for President and then the FUN begins,especially if the CLINTON'S are the Dem's choice (again).!
Get ready and get a "frontrow" seat for the match! |
|
I disagree that McCain's greatest argument is that he has the best chance of beating Hillary. Frankly, I think its way too early to anoint any candidate in a general. Just over the course of the last two months alone we have seen poll numbers fluctuate all over the board, and at times come out completely wrong (e.g. Hillary's win in NH and Romney's large margin of victory in NV).
Point being, if it looked like Mitt, Huckabee, Rudy, etc. were going to win the nomination, more people would get behind them and their poll numbers against Hillary would rise. Its a fluid process. |
|
The writer of this article is absolutely correct.
Romney will be our Republican candidate for President and then the FUN begins,especially if the CLINTON'S are the Dem's choice (again).!
Get ready and get a "frontrow" seat for the match! |
|
|
Romney is slowly building speed. He made some great points and demonstrated he is the only candidate of either party that has the experience, intelligence, and plan of action to lead the US and world into the future. |
|
This site just is absurd. Regardless of how you feel about Ron Paul, the man does exist. He also got second in two of the most recent caucuses, maybe even first in LA after the voting dispute is cleared up.
Townhall, are you that afraid of the Constitution? |
|
|
It was a Rudy-Romney race. |
|