Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Tuesday, October 09, 2007
Amanda Carpenter :: Townhall.com Columnist
Giuliani and Romney Spar on Spending
by Amanda Carpenter
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


The two leading candidates for the Republican nomination for President elevated a battle over each other’s past records on taxes and spending in Tuesday afternoon’s televised debate.

MSNBC’s moderator Chris Matthews asked former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani and former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney to describe their differences on taxes and spending at the debate held in Dearborn, Michigan.

“I brought down taxes by 17 percent, under him [Romney] they went up 7 percent,” Giuliani said.

Romney called that accusation “baloney.”

“If you live in New York City, your state and city combined [taxes] could reach as high as 10 percent,” Romney shot back. “In Boston, it’s more like 5.3 percent.”

Romney charged that Giuliani “fought to keep” a $400 million commuter tax on those who traveled to New York City to work.

“I cut taxes by over $9 billion dollars. I couldn’t cut every tax… but I cut every tax I possibly could under that period of time,” Giuliani responded.

After several exchanges, Romney conceded both have worked to cut spending and brought up another point of contention. “The Club for Growth looked at my spending and said it grew 2.2 percent and said yours grew 2.8 percent,” Romney said. “The place we differ is the line-item veto.”

Romney has often bragged on the campaign trail that he used line-item veto power as Governor of Massachusetts 844 times and that he wouldn’t hesitate to similarly use that power as President.

“I believe in the line-item veto” Romney said.

Giuliani on the other hand, described his fight as New York City Mayor to defeat the line-item veto, which was passed by Congress with an overwhelming majority in 1996. The Mayor worked to defeat the line-item veto in 1997 when President Clinton sought to use it to deny $200 million in federal Medicaid money for 89 New York City hospitals

Giuliani successfully challenged the line-item veto’s constitutionality in a case taken to the Supreme Court. The resulting 6-to-3 ruling against the line-item veto stated it was of “profound importance” to the separation of powers instilled by the Constitution that the President not be allowed to cherry-pick spending items in bills passed by Congress for elimination.

“It’s unconstitutional,” Giuliani said, referring to the Supreme Court’s 1998 decision. “What the heck can you do about that if you are a strict constructionist?”

He lauded his accomplishment. “I took the line-item to the Supreme Court and beat Bill Clinton, and it’s a good thing to have beaten a Clinton!” Giuliani said.

The battle between Romney and Giuliani over both spending, taxes and the line-item veto had been made between their campaigns in the media, but this was their first public confrontation over these issues.

Before the debate had ended both the Giuliani and Romney campaigns sent fact sheets to members of the media attacking each other.

The hit-sheet from Romney's camp was titled "Big City Spender" and reiterated points Romney made in the debate. It said "FACT: President Bill Clinton Used the Line-Item Veto to Cut Spending."

The Giuliani campaign's email contained a subject line that read: "Don't Take Our Word for It...Ted Olson on the Clinton Line-Item Veto." It attributed a quotation from the former solicitor general that said, "The line-item veto is unconstitutional, and I'm a strict constructionist. The line-item veto--if we want, it has to be done by constitutional amendment."

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Amanda Carpenter is the author of “The Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy's Dossier on Hillary Clinton,” published in October 2006.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Amanda Carpernter. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
Romney's answer to BG...
MITT RESPONDS: BG, that's an outstanding question, and I sincerely thank you for it. Just an outstanding question.

My candidacy is about optimism. We're the greatest nation on earth, and I intend to keep things that way by unifying a united America. I cannot tell you how incredibly great this great nation is, and I'll be the one to carry on its greatness when I'm president.

Thank you.

[Romney sheep in the audience applaud hysterically]

Question for Romney
Someone needs to ask Romney this question.

Many conservatives are not comfortable with your recent changes in position on some social issues and many do not know much about your religion.

In the past, Reagan did not balance the budget, Bush 41 raised taxes, Clinton took up with Monica and lied under oath, Bush 43 did not veto anything for 6 years and refused to protect the border. Is there anything that you can say that would reassure the average Republican voter that you will not do something unexpected, strange or against the base when you become President?



Open letter to Conservatives

I've got this terrible sick feeling that FOXnews, the WSJ, the Republican National Committee and ALL the other RINOs are going to force a RINO candidate on us again! Please- CAN WE STOP THEM??!!.

I have been behind Fred Thompson because I thought he was the only one other than Rudy who could get the nomination. BUT I don't think that either the LEFT MSM nor the RIGHT MSM will actually give him a chance.

Is it too late to unite behind someone like Duncan Hunter? I cannot bear to fight my own party for another 4-8 years.

Is Rudy the next Bill?


Politico-On the campaign trail this year, Rudy Giuliani has cast himself in the model of Ronald Reagan.

But one of his senior aides, in a 2004 book, offered another parallel: William Jefferson Clinton.

John P. Avlon’s “Independent Nation” has rarely been cited this campaign season. But with Giuliani joining Bill Clinton and John F. Kennedy on the cover of the 2005 paperback edition, the pages offer a different view of the former mayor than the portrait of rock-ribbed conservatism being presented for the purposes of the Republican primary.

It’s a view that matches more closely with Giuliani’s political success in New York, and one that could preview his more moderate general election appeal. It’s also, at its core, a warning to Republican conservative partisans that Giuliani’s feelings toward his party’s right edge may be less respect than “contempt.”

READ MORE

http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/giuliani-aide-like ned-boss-to-bill-clinton

Mitt, most presidential??
I guess Mitt was presidential if disingenuous double-speak is presidential. And maybe it is - we got tons of it from 1993-2001. This conservative, however, prefers a, well, conservative over a panderer. Eight years of Bill Clinton was enough.

I couldn't disagree more with your assessment that Mitt would win the northeast and Bible belt. He'll lose his own state and the rest of the north east, and don't think the Bible Belt will vote for him either. He simply gives conservatives no reason to show up to the polls. He's hasn't been consistently pro-life, he's signed gun control legislation into law, and he's a phony double-speaker. Plus, people in the Bible Belt aren't likely to vote for a Mormon. Sad? Bigoted? Absolutely, but it's true.

I'll tell you who won't be a winner in 2008: anyone who promises to carry on with our foreign policy the way Bush has. Over 70% of Americans are fed up with foreign adventures. If we throw out someone who promises more of the same, say hello to President Hillary.

But realistically, what are the significant differences between Rudy/Mitt and Hillary anyway? Seems like we'd need to start splitting hairs on this one.

Ron Paul came across as a screaming nut
He may be a good guy, I'm sure he's smart but not a winner.

I like Hunter but I don't think there is a chance that he would win either but he might be an excellent VP cantidate. Same
with Huckabee.

Rudy is a terrific guy and he did great things for NYC. He could win but he isn't a conservative. He isn't a Marxist, like Shillary either.

Romney is the most presidential and has the managerial and personality edge but the Dems are doing their best to demonize his religion. fortunately, most people don't care that much. They tried it in MA too.

Best bet: Romney can carry the North East, midwest and West. Huckabee would give him the boost he needs in the "Bible Belt.

If Romney and Huckabee team up, they'll CREAM "Shrill Hill".

sorry

Spelled speech wrong.

September12Republican

I'm glad to hear you are at least willing to listen to Ron Paul. So if you have not already please go to youtube and put "Ron Paul" "Nashville" and "speach" in the search engine and watch Dr. Paul speak. It's pretty long but if you start on part 3 you won't miss much but introductions. If after watching you don't feel different please let me know what it is you disagree with. In return I would be happy to listen to any other candidate you recommend and do the same. I know for a lot of people 9-11 was a deciding factor in who they support (at the time I thought invading Iraq was a good idea) but Ron Paul's position on the subject is clear. He was not opposed to invading Afganistan, only Iraq.

As to Paul supporters being annoying about their self-righteousness, you may have a valid point. However, I believe it's because we are so sick of the current state of Washington that our emotions tend to run high.

by the way
By the way, I agree with those who contend the economy is in the toilet.

We do have what appears to be a strong economy, it has the same strength as the strength that someone on Cocain thinks they have.

Our economy is built on a bubble of debt.

The bills are finally coming due.

Our way of dealing with it is to devalue the dollar so all the debt can be paid off in confetti.

The American people will find their prosperity has dried up when the "money" they buy things with is actually nothing more than glorified confetti.

amnesty
Virginia Patriot said:


"Same as W.'s, make them all legal. Regularization is his favorite euphamism for amnesty, same as Hugh Hewitt. Huckabee too. That was Romney's stand as late as January of this year as well. "


I agree the field is bleak, but I firmly believe some are worse than others.


We don't know if a President Romney would try to get amnesty for illegal aliens, but at least he now claims he would not.

But a candidate that openly advocates amnesty is a sure bet to support it as President.

I am talking about Giuliani and Huckabee.


With Giuliani or Huckabee, you KNOW you're dead in the water.

With Romney there's at least some hope.





Hunter alone aswered correctly . . .
that question about selling part of a stock exchange to a Flakey Middle Eastern Sheikdom. (FMES)

As Duncan Hunter (decorated Army Ranger, enlisted) recited with great command the grisly facts of how FMES officials helped nuclear bomb triggers through their "borders" en route to help the renegade Pakistani nuke scientist,

the others stood there with the proverbial "deer in the headlights" facial expression.

Now, as for the Democrats - they still haven't figured out the USA has enemies. The Democrats are all less than worthless. They are fools.

Duncan Hunter alone is the right man at the right time.

Sept. 11, 2001 was airplanes. Due to FMES, next time might be dirty bombs or worse.

Only Hunter can help - he's the only one paying attention.

http://www.GoHunter08.com

VOTE AMERICA FIRST

Dolly Llama
Record economic growth, record revenues to the federal government, record low unemployment, record stock market, record home ownership.
I believed you used the word " shambles" to describe this economy.
Liberals use emotional hysteria and facts be damned.

style over substance...
that's what I'm seeing a lot of on this thread. I think if you vote based on looks rather than principles, you probably should do the honorable, responsible thing and sit home on Election Day. People who vote style over substance hose things for voters who care about important stuff... like how a candidate will legislate rather than how a candidate looks during a press conference.

As for Paul "talking down" to opponents, I don't see that. I see him saying "follow the Constitution and do not violate the Supreme Law of the Land." And if another candidate needs to consult with his attorneys for interpretation of a simple clause in the Constitution, he probably should be admonished.

Interesting that someone who's serious about following the Constitution is branded an extremist by Republicans.

piano girl
your opinion is noted. ACK!

Where's Paul.??. He should be able to straighten out piano girl. I mean he owes her something for her ardent support.

Mitt's likeability:
ACK!

Romney vs Guliani
Keep watching these two candidates!

Mitt will be able to keep his cool and use a sense of humor to "disarm" Hil. Rudy will show his "angst" toward Hil because their chemistry ignites when they get together!

In the end--go with MITT! He can beat Hillary on ideas,leadership,tact,likeability!

WHO LOOKS LIKE A PRESIDENT?

.....C'mon Amanda let's get real ...

.....Presidents are not selected on issues any more ...all that talk about taxes ...deficits and healthcare just makes the voters eyes glaze over ...what's really important is what do they look like ...the template was set in the first TV debate when a young, handsome, energetic JFK blew away a dour, rumpled, serious Richard Nixon ...

...Giuliani: Looks like Michael Corleone's consigliori ...

...Romney: Looks like a slicker Reagan in "Knute Rockne - All American" ...

...Thompson: Looks like the host on "Tales from the Crypt" ...

...McCain: Looks like the General in Dr. Strangelove ...

...Paul: Looks like Woody Allen in "Sleeper" ...

...Huckabee: Looks like a small town preacher ...

...Tancredo: Looks like a used car salesman ...

...Hunter: Looks like a High School principal ...

...Brownback: Looks like that guy at the party whose face looks familiar but you just can't remember the name ...

.....COLOSSUS

To onceanmarine:
Try exercising a little patience. I find that if I wait a bit, and then refresh the page, my first post always appears.

over-excitable, squeeky-voiced alarmist
Setember12Republican has a point. I too notice those qualities in Ron Paul's debate performance. However, having followed Mr. Paul's political career for more than a decade I do not believe he is either over-excitable or alarmist. His voice is his voice, just as his physical appearance is what it is. Neither attribute says anything about his ability to perform as POTUS.

It may be that Mr. Paul comes across as a little frenetic because he is trying to convey complex ideas in soundbite terms. He does not come across that way in speeches where he has adequate time to express himself.

What in H, big H...

...is going on at TH. I go through not 3 or 5 or 8, but 10 F% cycles. Do not see my post and so I repeat it. Then on the same cycle both copies come out simultaneously. What gives.


Bill - (!0) F5 cycles later I repost....

Your punch line, is the line. Fabulous words of "fear" that should be pondered by all. Fear the devil, but run like H&ll from his wife. Do not get the b¡tch mad at you. She'll skip breakfast, lunch and dinner to chew your butt off out of pure spite.

Ms. Hellary is max poison. If elected she will be the last woman elected for 50 years. Only someone who hates this country and everything it stands for could want this demon from hades in a position of responsibility, less even a position of almost infinite power. Imagine that, the most powerful person on the planet, Hellary Robthem Clintstone.


Bill

Your punch line, is the line. Fabulous words of "fear" that should be pondered by all. Fear the devil, but run like H&ll from his wife. Do not get the b¡tch mad at you. She'll skip breakfast, lunch and dinner to chew your butt off out of pure spite.

Ms. Hellary is max poison. If elected she will be the last woman elected for 50 years. Only someone who hates this country and everything it stands for could want this demon from hades in a position of responsibility, less even a position of almost infinite power. Imagine that, the most powerful person on the planet, Hellary Robthem Clintstone.


Romney, the one I fear
My great fear is that Romney will win the Republican nomination and run against Hillary. I would have to vote for him. I would rather have the devil as president than the devil's wife. Bill D.

DocJ -- Ron Paul is not a "nerd"

He's an over-excitable, squeeky-voiced alarmist.

There's a difference. A nerd is someone you may not want to hang with after the debate, but at least you can be comfortable that he or she is capable of handling the important stuff. An alarmist, on the other hand, is not someone your typically want to put in charge of anything important. Even if the alarmist is right on principle, which he (or she) sometimes is, the risk is thatthe alarmist's response will more often than not be completely out of proportion to the problem.

Ron Paul appears to be a bright guy. I happen to disagree with his assessment of our nation's proper role in foreign relations -- but I'm not an authority on the subject and stand to learn something from his views.

What I cannot reconcile myself to is his (and his supporter's) tendency to take a juvenile stand on virtually every issue -- paraphrased as "I'm right, and the rest of you don't have any idea what you're talking about".

I will continue to listen, but the more I hear the less convinced I become that he ought to hold an executive position.

More Debate Reaction
Want more debate reaction? Come watch a liberal and a conservative hash it out. Defend your candidate and discuss your thoughts at http://www.thecoin.org

World War II
The United States DECLARED WAR on Japan December 8, 1941. Ron Paul agrees with officially declaring war. What he is opposed to is undeclared wars, such as those we've been in ever since World War II.

Link not posting?
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/polls/

Amanda, Babe have you looked at
the polls?

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/polls/

Romney is in a distant 4th place. I fail to see how this was a debate between the two "leading Republicans". He was right though. RINO Rudy is the one who lead the charge against the line item veto, no matter what his lame "I spited Clinton" message was. In actuallity, the line item veto was a "contract with America" item from a Republican Congress. He was spiting his own party, that is if you consider him a Republican.

debate transcripts vs Flexerol
I just read the debate transcripts (time difference and work schedule didn't allow me to watch it live). I think that transcript was more apt to put me to sleep then medication for a pulled muscle in my back. :)
I think everyone had good things to say and of course they were canned and planned how to answer likely questions in advance. I can't imagine voting for someone who didn't prepare in advance for a debate. Thompson was also given a lot of time along with Rudy and Mitt but Thompson didn't impress me as having anything original to say.
The line item veto debate was interesting but since Supreme Court declared unconstitutional it would need an amendment and that is not likely to pass anytime soon.

Interesting discussion on the use of preemptive strikes. Agreement of everyone except Ron Paul that you go to congress if there is time but in imminent threat you take action. Ron said that “. If there's an imminent attack on us. We've never had that happen in 220 years.” And I thought what about 7 Dec 1941 but hey maybe he believes that if he knew about that on 6 Dec 1941 we shouldn’t have done anything or even after the attack we shouldn’t have had any response until Congress declared war.
http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/documents/t ranscript_republican_debate_100907.html?hpid=topnews

For the life
of me I cannot understand why anyone with an ounce of integrity or commonsense will call Rudy a 'conservative'. The man claims that the NRA is 'extremist', that the line item veto is 'unconstitutional', that taxpayers ought to fund abortions, and that NYC can be a sanctuary for undocumented aliens. And that is not even touching on the fact that he has betrayed two thirds of his wives, participated in gay rights parades in drag, and appointed every liberal lawyer to municipal judgeships on the Brooklyn and King's County benches.

If he is conservative, I must be the Pope.

Giuliani's for
taxpayer funding for abortions.

So everything else he says is a load of crap.

End of story.

portlandmom...
I find it interesting that you claim Giuliani and Romney are rising to the top in the credibility dept. How do you figure? Because they're both gun-grabbers who disingenuously claim to be Second Amendment proponents? Because of their storied legislative efforts to enforce immigration law (NYC = sanctuary city)? Because of their clarity on abortion (Mitt-flops)? Because religious conservatives have already declared they will absolutely not support Rudy, hence, rendering him useless in the general? Because they're both northeasterners with liberal track records? Because of Mitt's canned, phony responses?

At least Mitt had a moment of integrity in the debate saying he'd have to consult with his lawyers on pre-emptive, undeclared war. That's just what we need in the White House - someone who simply cannot successfully interpret an unambiguous statement in the Constitution. What a credible candidate!

Ron Paul's event was NOT the debate...
It was the rally after the debate. Dr. Paul spoke in a notable speech to over 2000 people at the University of Michigan. Inspiring, intelligent, and exactly what America needs to hear right now.

This 30 minutes of Ron Paul oratory makes up for the short shrift he was given at the "debate." LOL

http://rp4.us/2007/10/09/after-the-michigan-debate-ron-paul -speaks-to-a-rally-of-over-2000-people/

Giuliani a strict constructionist?
I had to laugh tonight. Giuliani became a strict constructionist seemingly at the time he fought to protect his prescious 250 million dollar earmark. His fight against the line item veto was all about getting his greedy hands on federal taxpayer's money. I don't trust him.

Other complaints about debate
I agree that the questions are not fairly distributed across the candidates. The media reinforces the perception that Rudy and Romney are the only two candidates worth considering by giving them most of the questions. Tancredo and Paul got the short shrift but Paul at least made the most of his answers. The second complaint is that the post-debate wrap-up is comprised of the usual talking heads who don't represent what the average voter is thinking. I would rather have heard from the Michigan voters in the audience. Third, the moderator's let the candidates get away with giving non or vague answers with no follow-up. McCain was asked a tax question about Hedge fund traders who get taxed 15% on their earnings vs. Joe Six Pack who gets taxed 30%. He would not answer the question but gave some general comment about tax fairness which sounded like apple pie and motherhood. And this debate was supposed to be about the U.S. economy but their were no questions about how they would fix Social Security or our Health Care System or why Seniors have to pay more for their drugs because Medicare is prohibited from bargaining whereas the Veterans Adminstration can bargain. And I want to know the differences between the candidates on the issues. I already know they don't like Hillary's positions on anything but that should be left to the debate between the final two candidates for office.

DocJ
Of course you would think that Romney and Giuliani were the winners -- they were the only ones who were allowed to speak for 50% of the time. Your only complaint about Ron Paul is that he "comes across as a nerd"?! Heaven forbid that we have an intelligent person in the White House who actually knows what the problems are and has a plan to fix them. We might actually usher in a new era of progress and prosperity! That would be unthinkable.

Seriously, this debate was terrible. It lacked structure or fairness while supporting those with the loudest voices. The All American Presidential Forum was by far the best debate so far. Every candidate was asked the same question and given the same amount of time to respond. You could compare and contrast candidates, and it was very orderly and professional. These other networks should sit up and pay attention. Too bad the frontrunners all decided to bail out. I guess they would rather go where they can buy debate air time to debate pointless issues and compare the size of their egos.

Rudy's Answer to Illegal Aliens
Same as W.'s, make them all legal. Regularization is his favorite euphamism for amnesty, same as Hugh Hewitt. Huckabee too. That was Romney's stand as late as January of this year as well.

HUNTER FOR AMERICA

Securing the border and enforcing the law is the only way we get to keep our rule of law, our representative Republic, and our Constitution. We must elect a President who WILL secure the border and enforce the laws. If citizenship becomes meaningless, this will no longer be the United States of America.

If the GOP thinks they can continue to import cheap labor for their donors at the expense of the citizens, they will. I will not vote for that again. If we continue to play the game of "the other guy is worse", we will lose our country. Sorry, but I will not participate in that game any longer. The GOP power brokers think we will vote for "anybody but a Democrat" so they can continue to ignore securing the borders and enforcing the laws. I'm hoping GOP primary voters give the party elites some surprises in the primaries. The levers of power and the money in the GOP are all in the hands of the cheap labor express. They do not want Duncan Hunter as the candidate. He WOULD enforce the laws and secure the border. WE have to make him the nominee by voting in the primaries. We have to talk to our friends and neighbors about him. He is not going to get media coverage. It's going to have to be a grass roots effort. I WANT to vote for a GOP candidate in Nov.'08, I WILL NOT vote for any of the amnesty supporters. If it takes crushing the GOP so a new party representing American citizens can arise, so be it.

http://www.gohunter08.com

Romney & Giuliani
were the winners. Thompson seemed vague. Ron Paul may well be correct but comes across as a nerd with this "understand the monetary system" talk. Take off your tinfoil hats, Paulites.

I am worried. We don't have a strong standard bearer. How will we survive as a country with a socialist like Hillary? She will turn us into pre-Sarkozy France.

Romney's money won't matter
Should he by some chance get nominated, the MSM, movealong., the Daily Krap, and the rest of the left-wing goon squad will mutilate him over religion, which they neither understand nor like.

Pathetic
field for the GOP. Democrats are happier than hell. Here's why:

Romney will get slaughtered in the general because of his religion, no matter what people say in surveys, they won't vote for a Mormon (especially the South).

If Rudy beats long odds and wins the general, Democrats will be just as happy as if Hilary had been elected. They're both cut from the same cloth.

peace

Yes I did watch the debate.
Ron Paul is the only one who talked like a true conservative and not a neocon who wants to go to war at the drop of a hat. He represents what America is really feeling, not these canned politicians like Romney and Rudy. We also need more presidents who understand and respect the U.S. Constitution. Romney and Rudy should at least knock off the oneupsmanship game. It comes across as childish.

The winner is....
I know it can't possibly mean anything because the Paulites wear tin hats that allow them to vote multiple times in on-line polls but last I checked, Paul was leading with a mere 75% of the vote.

Unlike other Paulites who want to return to paper ballots, I propose we hold the Presidential elections over the Internet.

In Spite of Chris Matthews...

And Ron Pauly...

This debate had substance... Especially compared to the Democrats. We do have candidates with a message... No More Socialism!

Why have we put up with Bush so long!

Bob were you watching the same debate
I was? The hands-down winners were Guiliani and Romney. Both men are rising to the top in the credibility dept. There are other good men - in fact all are pretty good with the exception of Paul, but Guiliani and Romney are clearly the ones that are the strongest in debates and the most convincing with credible and in-depth answers. I agree Romney's answer about lawyers was awkward, but in the end every one of them gave the same response, except the crank, and indeed it does come down to correctly interpreting the constitution when the US is threatened and a president needs to defend the American people.

Tin Foil Readings
Well I didn't even see the debate but since I was wearing my tin-foil hat, I know without question that Ron Paul once again dominated his galvanically-challenged opponents.

Ron Paul - the only honest Republican
Ron Paul hit a homeroom with his comment about Mitt Romney "consulting attornies" before deciding to go against war in Iran. Shades of George W. Bush checking with attornies to see how he can get around the U.S. Constitution. Romney was the big looser in this debate; he still comes across as a used car salesman with his canned attacks and way of making disparaging remarks. This country doesn't need any more of that style politics.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.