@Mattie So, our war against Hitler was unjustified? It was a leftist war fought to kill other leftists who enjoyed killing? If you are just trolling people, I get that. But if you truly don't understand that sometimes violence is necessary to stop more violence or as a means to stop madmen, then there is truly no basis on which to reach out to you in any form of discussion; it is simply like debating with a wall.

I would be skeptical of taking the purely arab stance on the conditions leading to Nakba. Many impartial (non-Arab or non-Jewish alike) historians all agree on the approximate number of refugees, but greatly disagree on the ethnic cleansing charges levied by Arabs. Most impartial historians agree that the single biggest component to the exodus of Palestinians was the 1948 war that was brewing, and people decided to get out before the bullets started flying.

When unborn babies start burning American flags, calling us the Great Satan, running planes into our buildings, suicide bombing our military men and women, or threatening to wipe our allies and us off the face of the planet, I might change my stance on abortion. Until then, your arguement holds no basis in reality and is, at best, non-sequitor rambling of leftist talking points.

The proof of that also lies in Israel. Despite being far and away the strongest military power in the region, who deals with mortar, rocket, and suicide bombers on a near daily basis? Certainly not Iran. Will we fare any different, waiting in our fortress-nation for the world to burn down outside our gates? We can only win, and thereby survive, by taking to the fight to our enemies where THEY live, instead of waiting for the front lines to come to our shores.

I'd be the first to agree that this discussion has gone off the rails some time ago, but to lump everyone who disagrees with Buchanan as a pro-israel angerbot is misleading. Buchanan espouses a worldview that is over 100 years old. The fact is that Isolationism simply does not work with the world as it is today. Not caring what foreign powers do "as long as our military is strong" as Mattie believes simply is not enough in this world. The US deciding to stop actively supporting their interest overseas will not appease any of our enemies. Radical Islam hates the US and Israel. Period. Nothing we do can change that. All isolation will accomplish is saving some money and lives before the bombs start going off on our shores and in our heartland

So you contend that atheists fare well in Islamic nations led by quasi-theocracies? To take it a step further, how well do those who follow a religion other than Islam fare in these nations? The Iranian preacher and his lawyer (by no fault other than defending him in court) who have been in the news recently can tell you it isn't so good.

Israel is the "Canary in the Mineshaft". Israel's fate is a mirror to our own fate in the West. The first line of defense against Islamic extremism lies on those 90 some square miles of real estate on the Mediterranean Sea. If we lose, or chose to lose, Israel, it is only a matter of time before all the west falls, no matter how nicely we lined our tanks and guns up on our border here at home.

As entertaining as the neo-nazi/neo-con leftist name calling is, what this really comes down to is the struggle between interventionist vs isolationist policy. Pat B. and others on this message board have the world view pre-1914, where only direct military actions against the US should be of any consequence to us in regards to foreign affairs. While it may be comforting to some to believe that we can line our tanks and missiles on our borders and turtle up and be forever safe in our fortress nation, such thinking is misguided. This is not a video game. We live in an ever shrinking world, and being a non-player on the world stage will not lead to prosperity, but our eventual downfall.

He can focus fire Obama's even worse record. Obamacare is a worse, steroid infused Romneycare with national implications. Romney has a narrow advantage there, despite what Santorum says. Obama has a double dip recession on his record; Romney marginally improved MA's economy. I think the real problem is we compare Romney to Reagan and balk; sadly, we will not have Reagan running any time soon. If you put Romney side by side with Obama and vote with your head not your reminiscing heart Romney gets the win.

We had an adult in the room, but the early states decided to buy into the media reaction to Perry's gaffes. If GOP primaries of the past had followed that same formula as this one, Reagan would never been nominated nor been POTUS. But, we as conservatives fell for it, and decided to select our nominee like it was American Idol, not the GOP nomination. It's the same mentality that gave us the Obama Disaster. I guess Perry can continue leading Texas in the right direction. Should Obama be re-elected, we'll need them to carry us as a nation 4 more years economically.