Ron Paul doesn't pass the "what if" test on foreign policy. His evasion of the threat to America's security posed by a country like Iran having an atomic bomb disqualified him to be Commander in Chief. It is part of the presidential oath to defend America from foreign enemies and that doesn't mean waiting until they've landed on our shore. This is why , in spite of his laudable and correct position on most domestic issues, he was never a real contender for the nomination. The events happening in Egypt and Libya today are what logically follow from the foreign policy Ron Paul espoused and Obama is practicing

Ron Paul doesn't pass the "what if" test on foreign policy. His evasion of the threat to America's security posed by a country like Iran having an atomic bomb disqualified him to be Commander in Chief. It is part of the presidential oath to defend America from foreign enemies and that doesn't mean waiting until they've landed on our shore. This is why , in spite of his laudable and correct position on most domestic issues, he was never a real contender for the nomination. The events happening in Egypt and Libya today are what logically follow from the foreign policy Ron Paul espoused and Obama is practicing.

And why shouldn't the religion of Islam be criticized? More than any other cultural factor it is what has kept Muslim countries socially primitive and scientifically backward. And they will remain that way until Islam is reformed or junked all together. In the meantime, it's a recklessly stupid policy on the part of the Obama administration to allow an Islamic theocracy like Iran to pursue the development of 20th century atomic bombs that will be regarded with a 7th century mind-set.

Romney should be viewed for what he is - a transitional choice. The Republican primary offered a poor selection of candidates to begin with. None of them could pass Judge N's "what ifs" test. And, "What if Romney is an empty suit..." This is still preferable to someone who actively seeks to deny individual rights and undermine the separation of powers between the three branches of government. More individuals with tea party sympathies, i.e., constitutionally limited government, need to be elected to the House and Senate where spending bills and laws actually originate. Romney can be pushed to the right - Obama can't.

The film critics who smear Mr. Molen's documentary as racist are of the same ilk as Obama's mentors identified in the movie. They do not hold America's founding principle - the individual's right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness - near or dear to their political heart and they don't believe America's status as a beacon of freedom for the rest of the world is worth preserving. As liberals, they won't accept the fact that if you can't be successful in America on your own, the freest country in the world, you can't make it anywhere, you're a loser - and we should add, as did Cheney, "big time."

Capitalism doesn't need religion's sanction. Ask yourself what the worship of God has done for mankind in the past 2000 years beside promote ignorance, superstition and myths to the detriment of reason and logic. In comparison, capitalism, "a social system based on the recognition of individual rights," has enhanced man's life, liberty and pursuit of happiness every where it's practiced. Ayn Rand despised religion because of its inherent anti-intellectualism. She believed that blind faith in God reduces the individual to an "abject zombie who serves a purpose he does not know, for reasons he's not to question."

Capitalism doesn't need religion's sanction. Ask yourself what the worship of God has done for mankind in the past 2000 years beside promote ignorance, superstition and myths to the detriment of reason and logic. In comparison, capitalism, "a social system based on the recognition of individual rights," has enhanced man's life, liberty and pursuit of happiness every where it's practiced. Ayn Rand despised religion because of its inherent anti-intellectualism. She believed that blind faith in God reduces the individual to an "abject zombie who serves a purpose he does not know, for reasons he's not to question."

Clint Eastwood’s genius (which the left immediately understood but unfortunately some slow thinkers on the right didn’t) is that he pulled Obama off his “first black president” pedestal. He named Obama for what he is: an elected politician who has failed miserably in dealing with today’s problems. As such the solution is simple, replace him with a “stellar businessman” and move on. It’s taken a few days but people are starting to realize that Clint is practicing an old cowboy skill – bull riding and the “bull” is losing.

Your post implies the following: Women have no right to have sex for pleasure and if they do and get pregnant they should suffer for it. A woman has no right to decline to be a breed sow for an “unknowable, unobservable, supernatural being?” But a burka is not a good symbol for female subjugation by anti-abortionists because your God is not Allah.

How do you make a “reasoned argument for banning abortion” when it’s the political and moral equivalent of forcing women to wear burkas? First you evade the definition of actual and potential as it would rationally apply to a woman and the clump of cells in her womb. Then you claim, in the name of a supernatural being, that these particular cells have an arbitrary superior right over a woman’s inalienable right to her life, her liberty and her pursuit of happiness in this world. The finishing touch is to cloak the “mean stupidity” of sacrificing the lives of real people to the unborn with the word “pro-life.”

To Troglodyte: Those who take their religion seriously substitute faith for reason. Rand identified it as the “suspension of consciousness” The problem with being irrational in one aspect of your life, for example religion, is that it can’t be compartmentalized. Sooner or later it seeps into other areas of thought. Todd Akin’s idea of how a woman’s body responds to a “legitimate rape” is an illustrative example. Political and personal freedom traced through the Magna Carta to the Declaration of Independence coincided with the decline of religious authority and the rise of secular rule. The philosophy enshrined in those documents is a testament to man’s mind not divine revelation.