Michelle Malkin » The South Carolina GOP debate; Update 9:26pm Fred goes after Huckabee; 9:36pm - Fred’s on fire, Hume embarrasses Paul; 9:50pm - It’s the battle of the one-liners; 10:36pm Winners and losers

The South Carolina GOP debate; Update 9:26pm Fred goes after Huckabee; 9:36pm - Fred’s on fire, Hume embarrasses Paul; 9:50pm - It’s the battle of the one-liners; 10:36pm Winners and losers

By Michelle Malkin • January 10, 2008 09:00 PM

10:36pm Eastern. The debate is finished. (Here’s the AP’s take. Kind of fun to compare it with mine. Allah has post-debate focus group video and analysis.) Fred will be declared the clear winner. There are a lot of folks on our side of the blogosphere who were pulling for him. He delivered his one-liners better than anyone else. As I noted below, someone gave him some Red Bull. He aggressively attacked Huckabee, showed humor, and looked comfortable on stage.

But.

He doesn’t have the intestinal fortitude to go after John McCain. And judging from the audience reaction, Mike Huckabee’s South Carolina evangelical base is sticking with him.

Romney was a big loser tonight. His delivery was wooden. The other candidates ignored him. In just four/five days, he seems to have completely lost that front-runner status.

McCain didn’t do himself harm. Nothing gained or lost. It’s everyone else who failed to challenge McCain who lost.

What does this say about the state of the GOP?

Brit Hume will be getting a tsunami of Ronulan hate mail for handing Paul his head on his Iran/Strait of Hormuz answer. Brit, they’ll be with you for life.

Here’s the Hume/Paul smackdown vid via Hot Air:

10:29pm Eastern. Thompson: High fences, wide gates. We decide when to open and close it. Fred goes soft on his “friend John McCain” over amnesty. Weak. He doesn’t have the stomach to take McCain on.

Paul: If we subsidize something, you get more of it. Gives economic argument against illegal immigration. Cites health care subsidies and welfare state. Yes. He’s right. “The law is the law and we should enforce the law.”

Huckabee reels off his nine-point plan but says: “We should have the assumption that everybody here is legal, not illegal.”

WHAT!?

Giuliani is asked about sanctuary. He’s defending his sanctuary policy. “He’s very proud of it.” Yes, I’m tuning him out.

Wait. He just made me laugh: “I would be the best at stopping illegal immigration.”

10:25pm Eastern. McCain gets first immigration question from Goler. McCain says shamnesty failed because of lack of trust. Well, it was also because shamnesty is a reckless, bad idea–and because of the arrogant way in which McCain and company wanted to ram this bad idea down our throats. Recycles his Geraldo line about not deporting illegal alien relatives of soldiers.

Smattering of applause.

But how would he remove illegal aliens?

Romney: Secure the border, have the fence, Border Patrol, employer verification. Our difference is what we do with 12 million. They should stand in line. Not be given special pathway or privilege. Applause. Send ‘em home and wait in line.

10:23pm Eastern. Ok, we’re at our last commercial break. It looks like they have saved immigration for last. While we wait, here are the vids of Fred’s made-for-YouTube one-liner moments from the first part of the debate via Hot Air:

Attacking Huckabee’s Dem coalition:

Meet the virgins:

10:19pm Eastern. Huckabee defends his faith, comments on marriage/wife. Gets strong applause from SC crowd. “Marriage is an important institution. It teaches us how to love.” Strong applause from the audience.

Cameron on Paul. “Electability: Do you have any?” Laughter. He appeals to fiscal conservatism to fend off attacks that he less Republican than other candidates. Applause.

10:15pm Eastern. Rudy is asked about 9/11 and what makes him equipped to fight the war on terror, but he answers by saying Democrats will take change out of our pockets. Goes back to reciting his resume. Same stuff from the weekend. Here we go with the Saudi prince line. Did you know that he returned the money? Naww. Hadn’t heard that before.

He’s like the Bill Richardson of the GOP field.

Am I the only one not listening to Rudy anymore?

10:08pm Eastern. Back from the break, Romney’s giving his Obama change speech. Change. Broken Washington. Change. Change. Change. Zzzzzzz.

McCain’s turn to repeat his surge speech, the same change speech he gave during the weekend debate. Can someone please stop the talking points? We heard all of this four/five days ago.

Thompson goes after Huckabee again…this time on his tax record. I ask again: Will Fred go after McCain?

10:04pm Eastern. It’s halftime. The Fredheads will be going wild, with good reason. He woke up tonight. But is it too little, too late? And will it be enough to move South Carolina voters? Thompson’s focusing his sights on Huckabee. But what about McCain. We haven’t touched immigration yet. Will Fred go after McCain?

***

Scroll down for updates from first half of the debate..the debate got off to a slow start, but it’s hopping now…Fred’s seizing the moment, Romney and Giuliani have been non-entities so far…Brit Hume handed Ron Paul his head…the campaigns’ joke-writers worked overtime–it’s the battle of the one-liners…

***
START OF THE DEBATE.

9:00pm. I’m starting a new thread. We’ll see if any of our questions get asked. The debate is livestreaming at FoxNews.com. Got your popcorn? Red Bull? Here we go…

9:02pm. I think this is the first time I’ve ever seen the National Anthem performed at one of these things. Nice!

Introductions of the candidates. Is it just me or does the debate set-up make it look like they’re all going to play Jeopardy?

The bell will ding if they go over time. The bell sounds like it’s from Quiz Show!

First topic: The economy. Chris Wallace is doing the questioning. Are we headed for a recession?

Romney: Maybe we are, maybe we aren’t. Cites Mass. record, economic turnaround.

Oh, no. His first proposal: “Stop the housing crisis.”

Wallace, please follow up!!!! Is he for Bush/Hillarycare for housing or not? If not, what the heck does he mean.

NO FOLLOW-UP.

Wallace throws it to McCain. McCain wants “straight talk.” He’s dissing Mitt’s Mass. jobs record. McCain thinks it’s the federal government’s job to retrain people who’ve been laid off.

This is Clintonspeak.

McCain gives some stump talking points about the need to control spending and reduce foreign oil dependency. “Education and training” is important. No more earmarks. “I’m called the Sheriff…I didn’t win Miss Congeniality.”

Wallace goes to Huckabee, cites his ad on the economy. Do you want an economic stimulus package?

Huckabee cites recession-creating factors: Fuel prices, subprime mortages. There’s culpability on both lender and borrowers… “I commend the president.” Says Bush approach doesn’t involve tax dollars.

Bull.

Huckabee sounds a lot softer than he did a few weeks ago:

In an interview on Fox News recently, you said that the government should not be bailing out people whose mortgages are about to reset to interest rates that they can’t afford. Foreclosures are at record rates right now. Wouldn’t doing nothing — as millions of Americans risk losing their homes — smack of Herbert Hoover deferring to the market as 25 percent of Americans were unemployed in the Depression?

Not at all. What you have is a situation where you have culpability on the part of the lenders and the borrowers. The fact is you need to encourage the lenders to try to work with those who have borrowed to keep from foreclosure because ultimately nobody wins. The banks don’t need an enormous inventory of property on their hands that they can’t move any more than the market can. The lender doesn’t need to be in default and ultimately bankruptcy and out of a home.

But what we don’t need is a government bailout. That is not the purpose of government, to prop people up from every poor decision they make. In fact, when you do that … whether it’s in the world of finance or the world of drug addiction … it creates an enabling codependency. It’s the last thing that really helps people.

Is there some way to bring some resolve to it? Yes. But it needs to be handled by the … people who made the mistake in the first place: overambitious borrowers and greedy lenders, who saw a way to suck people into interest rates that they should have known they couldn’t afford in the long term.

Ron Paul speaks. We’re in a recession because of…the Austrian theory of the business cycle. “The housing market is in a depression.” Lower interest rates? That’s the problem. That allows the inevitable recession to come. Don’t pretend that artificial stimulus is going to help.

Well, miracle of miracles, he didn’t mention the military-industrial complex.

Fred gets a turn. What a great opportunity he has to attack the Bush/Hillarycare approach to the housing crisis…

…never mind. HE WANTS A FISCAL STIMULUS. “It needs to be considered somewhere down the line.”

That’s the end of the economic discussion.

Geez, that was unsatisfying.

Carl Cameron goes to Huckabee on the survival of a Reagan coalition. Huckbee is giving a stump speech. He appeals to social cons and then does his economic populist thing–appealing to single moms.

McCain: The Reagan principles…we’ve gone away from…we came to power to change government and government changed us….cites Bridge to Nowhere…

Dan Riehl points out a new jobs entitlement that McCain’s been apparently pimping.

Romney gets an abortion question. He deflects and answers the Reagan coalition question. Another stump speech.

Someone needs to start interrupting them and throw them off their talking points.

Romney’s droning on. “Strengthen the economy. I’ll make sure they come to Amerca.”

Stop, stop, stop, stop, stop!

FINALLY!!!!

***9:26pm Fred interrupts.***

He wants to address the Reagan revolution. “This is a battle for the heart and soul of the Republican Party.” Fred’ attacks Huckabee. He would be a Christian leader, but he would also be a liberal economic populist, gets NEA endorsement, would close Gitmo, ban smoking.

YES, YES, YES, YES!!

Fred: “That’s not the model of the Reagan revolution. That’s the model of the Democrat party.”

Crowd erupts in appaluse.

Huckabee answers. Sticks to defending Arkansas record. Some applause.

Giuliani gets a question. Cameron asks him to state why he’s a complete conservative “without quoting George Will.” Heh. Giuliani talks about working for Reagan, peace through strength.

Zzzzzzzzzz.

9:31pm Eastern. Cameron goes to Paul on the Truthers. Are you prepared to embrace that rhetoric or abandon it?

I can’t tell them what to do, but I’ve abandoned it.

Cameron: Would you ask them to cease it? I don’t endorse what they say.

Could I please participate in the current debate? Wants to address whether we’ve lost our way.

9:33pm Eastern. Commercial break.

9:36pm Eastern. We’re back. Brit Hume asks Huckabee if US officers responded correctly in the Strait of Hormuz incident. Huck: “Prepare to face the gates of Hell.” Applause.

***Fred’s turn.*** He pulls out a one-liner that gets applause: “I think one more step and they would have been introduced to those virgins they’re looking forward to seeing.” Applause.

I think someone gave Fred a Red Bull. This is the liveliest I’ve ever seen him at one of these debates.

Well, it is do or die time. I’d say he’s doing.

And I’d say Rudy’s dying. He’s talking, but without any pep. More careful now than with conviction. He does make a good point about the NIE and Iran’s perception of American weakness.

Brit asks McCain what he would have done if he were captain. McCain talks about history, freedom of the seas, praises Navy’s professionalism.

***Ron Paul complains about “rush to judgement” and waves the “Bush-as-war-mongerer” flag. Moonbats will be partially assuaged after getting

Brit points out that all the candidates all supported the commander’s decision to be passive. What are you reacting to?

Audience is laughing at Ron Paul.***

Romney - Paul shouldn’t be reading so many of Ahmadenijad’s press releases. (Mix of applause and boos).

9:48pm Eastern. McCain champions the surge on the anniversary of its introduction. Rudy goes after McCain, asserting that he supported the surge, too. Sorry, but Rudy is really a non-entity.

Paul gives his “blowback” speech.

McCain responds, tries to shoehorn in a packaged one-liner. “I’m not interested in trading with al Qaeda, the only thing they trade is burkas. I’m not interested in traveling with them. They only use one-way tickets.”

Thompson’s one-liner on Iraq: “You know it’s good news coming out of Iraq because you read so little about it in the NYTimes.” Talks Pakistan.

Romney talks about Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq, and Iran, but “we need to think more broadly…move moderate Islam to greater strength…ultimately, move the world of Islam so Muslims themselves reject the extreme.”

10:00pm Eastern. Huckabee challenges Paul, gives a strong defense of Israel. Annihilation of Israel, which is what our enemies want, “would not happen under my presidency.”

Appaluse.

Paul: “We treat Israel as a stepchild, undermine their sovereignty.” Why do we arm their enemies? No reason for not treating Israel in an adult fashion. “Besides, we don’t have any money to do this.”

Giuliani chimes in: Idea that it’s treated as a stepchild is absurd. Repeats Huckabee.

Thompson goes after Huckabee on Pakistan. “Our supporting of their military is a good thing.” Hmmm.

Posted in: 2008 campaign

Send to a Friend
Printer Friendly

comments (325)

trackbacks (30)

See what others have said

Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.

Trackbacks

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: « 1 2 3 [4]

#301

On January 11th, 2008 at 3:53 pm, Mr_Conservative_Cat said:

Flenser,

That was a big long whine session you had. That you had time for, but not keeping your word on this (anyone interested might want to read the thread from the bottom up to get an immediate sense of Flenser).

http://michellemalkin.com/2007/11/08/the-kerik-indictment-giuliani-and-the-gop/

I did answer all your questions - in that thread. But you ran away, little Yellow-Stain.

Cry me a river and make all the complaints you want. You’re a liberal troublemaker here to erode support for any given Republican frontrunner. And everyone needs to be told that every time you jump in - these days usually during debate threads - to ridicule the Republican frontrunners.

That’s my first amendment right, and I’m sticking with it.
#302

On January 11th, 2008 at 7:12 pm, Fed Up said:

On January 11th, 2008 at 2:22 pm, navywife91 said:
#294

I will believe my government over the Iranian government anyday.

Look at the video for yourself…

That’s one powerful threat the Iranian’s have…

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4612421707178663123&q=video+of+iran+gulf+iran+tv&total=116&start=0&num=20&so=0&type=search&plindex=1
#303

On January 11th, 2008 at 7:14 pm, Fed Up said:

Conservative_Cat,

Still supporting the Mayor I see…

It seems that many on Hotair are leaning towards 1% in NH, Fred now.

Thoughts?

Fed Up
#304

On January 11th, 2008 at 9:53 pm, navywife91 said:

Fedup
I watched the video already and even went on that “antiwar” website you linked to. The size of the boat is immaterial. The boat that blew a hole in the USS Cole and killed 17 of our Sailors was small in size when compared to a warship, but it still managed to blow a 35×36 foot hole in the side. The difference between you and I is that I’ll give my country benefit of the doubt before I give it to a government that wants to wipe Israel off the map while chanting “death to America”.
#305

On January 11th, 2008 at 10:15 pm, Mr_Conservative_Cat said:

Fed Up,

Yep, I’m still supporting the Mayor of the United States now as much as ever. Nothing has changed at the core: he still has manifest, tangible accomplishments that dwarf every other candidate, and in a world where talk is easy - too easy - I’ll stick with reliable common sense and go with the achiever. There’s too much at stake to put a mere talker in the White House. I’ve posed the question now a few times: find a single candidate - just one - drop the rhetorical posturing and give us his record of manifest tangible accomplishment, things you can see, not just talk or “working for” this and “I’ve always supported that” and put him or her up against Rudy. No one has done it, and in my opinion, no one can. He lowered taxes on the third largest economy in the US (more than Mass or Arkansas) and wound up with a budgetary surplus, plus his handling of criminal issues, organized crime, terrorism and hands-on leadership, well, I could go on. But if you can find me someone running with a better record of tangible accomplishment, I’ll change my vote. For real.

As far as the primaries are concerned, if it isn’t too bad a breach of rules I’ll just repeat what I wrote in another post, because that answers specifically what you’re asking:

No way is Rudy out or near it. It seems that way to wonks like us, but the vast majority of the country is hearing this info like they normally do - as a mere footnote to their daily lives. Is Giuliani’s political accumen up to the standard of his executive skill? That remains to be seen; he’s playing the game as a hare when the turtles are the ones doing pretty well so far. But come Florida, if he does well, his entire situation changes. And it might - might - be an amazingly shrewd move. Huckabee was big a week ago, now he’s hugely diminished. McCain was written off a week ago, today he’s the national frontrunner. No coronations are being bestowed by these initial primaries. Rudy didn’t have a chance in these first couple of states. If he wins in those places that heavily favor him, then he’s way out ahead of everyone again. If he loses, it doesn’t matter anyway because he wouldn’t have carried these states no matter what he did. That’s the kind of practical thinking I personally admire, though it takes guts to play the game like that, and forge ahead during the opening moments of the glamor show. The key to whether it was a srewd or foolish move is how much momentum the candidates are getting from the general public in this very early stage - in other words, how much that momentum carries forward after the next primary or two. It looks like alot to us because we’re all watching this like the Super Bowl. But Huckabees reversal and Romney potentially sinking fast as well as McCain’s surge shows this is as fluid as a river. One big win and it becomes McCain vs Giuliani - where before Rudy’s closest rival was Romney.

I can’t say much for Paul’s chances, but everyone else is firmly in the game, even Fred, though Romney is starting to lose his must-wins at the beginning of the game because his must-wins were just front loaded into the process this time, and so things are beginning to look a little dispiriting for him.

Rudy, McCain, Huckabee, Fred and Romney are all still at least 80% in the gamer, and that’s easily enough for any one of them to wind up being the nominee.

How’s that for an answer, Fed Up?
#306

On January 11th, 2008 at 10:36 pm, navywife91 said:

Cat
I’m afraid you’re being sucked in by a troll (again). Unfortunately, I didn’t notice his OT post above(294) and I responded to it. Just trying to stir the puddin’ he is.
#307

On January 11th, 2008 at 11:18 pm, Mr_Conservative_Cat said:

Navywife,

I know, and I appreciate your situation also, but people like FU and Flenser do give us the opportunity to state our views a little less apologetically than might otherwise be appropriate, and for that we should thank them.
#308

On January 12th, 2008 at 6:42 pm, Fed Up said:

CC, I’ve been battling it out on Hotair.com (they had an open enrollment and I snuck in, lol).

I’ll get to your post later today, but will address NavyWife first.
#309

On January 12th, 2008 at 7:02 pm, Fed Up said:

On January 11th, 2008 at 9:53 pm, navywife91 said:
Fedup
I watched the video already and even went on that “antiwar” website you linked to. The size of the boat is immaterial. The boat that blew a hole in the USS Cole and killed 17 of our Sailors was small in size when compared to a warship, but it still managed to blow a 35×36 foot hole in the side. The difference between you and I is that I’ll give my country benefit of the doubt before I give it to a government that wants to wipe Israel off the map while chanting “death to America”.

The U.S. Cole was docked in the Port of Yemen. Big difference.

Also, regarding Israel and Ahmadinejad:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4mScWWtRfGQ

I support We The People’s right to hold its leaders in check with or without media attempt to propagandize reality.

It says in our Declaration of Independence: “That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”

Fed Up
#310

On January 12th, 2008 at 7:13 pm, Fed Up said:

CC,

You made your point about Rudy in our last conversation awhile back. I understand your position and I can’t say you’re not right in your thinking when it comes to “leadership qualities.”

Where I disagree with Rudy is he isn’t necessarily running on your platform of leadership and experience as he is on fear and warmongering (and somewhat 9/11 this and that).

When did the Republican Party change its platfrom whereby all of the remaining candidates, sans Paul, are on the same page when it comes to the war as well as the Islamofacism mantra?

If 70% of America are still against the war and the Republicans lost the House and the Senate in November of 2006, what makes anyone think that the same platform will be a success against the Dems come this November? The answer is, it won’t.

That said, I do agree that it will be Rudy vs. Hillary come November with Paul as a 3rd party candidate and possibly Bloomberg (interesting scenario with him). I then believe Hillary will win for the reasons I stated, but I’m doing everything in my power to support Paul and will continue to do this through November.

Will be interesting to see what shakes come February 5th!

As you know…I’m not a troll…

Peace!

Fed Up
#311

On January 12th, 2008 at 10:58 pm, Mr_Conservative_Cat said:

Fed Up,

I remember you now - again - you’re the polite guy I disagree with. Okay, I take it back about Trolling, but God do I ever think you’re misguided.

You know, I signed up at Hot Air many months ago, but have yet to post anything there. I have little time for post boards and this, in fact, is the only one I post to/at/on/with.

Where I disagree with Rudy is he isn’t necessarily running on your platform of leadership and experience as he is on fear and warmongering (and somewhat 9/11 this and that).

I have no idea how you could have come to that conclusion. He’s been emphasizing his executive leadship qualities on the debates constantly - how he turned a lost city around, balanced a budget, fought organized crime (sweaty stuff, that last one), dealing with international affairs as leader of the largest city on earth where the UN just happens to be housed.We talk about 9-11/Rudy all the time, but minute by minute actual airtime he mentions it not nearly as much as he should.

My biggest fear about Rudy, quite frankly, is he’d be a magnificent President in a time when we need some who just plain knows how to get things done without the BS, but whatever guides his personality that makes him so gigantically effective in leadership of the no-nonsense business sort also makes him geeky as a candidate - an awful catch 22 if ever there was one. But this isn’t central casting for the role of President, this is for the actual job, and that’s much different.

Reagan had it all, of course, but in the absence of his clone, I have to go with the guy who gets it done - and he isn’t fear mongering; it may just seem that way because while the other candidates talk at length about their strength against terrorists on the campaign trail, they all clam up for the most part on the debate stage - because not a single one of them wants to give Rudy more airtime because on the issue of terrorism he blows them out of the water, as opposed to the issue of having a record of manifest, tangibnle accomplishment, where he mearly crushes them.

What he needs to do is fine-tune his message.He was never a grand, eloquent speaker, which is probably why NYC voted for him as an anti-crime mayor twice in a city that thinks criminals need to be coddled: his no-BS style fits the city. He needs to start speaking more like a President according to central casting, and for him that’s going to be tough.

When did the Republican Party change its platfrom whereby all of the remaining candidates, sans Paul, are on the same page when it comes to the war as well as the Islamofacism mantra?

When Islamic extremists flew 2 planes into the World Trader center, destroying it completely and killing 3,000 people, including a couple of my friends.

If 70% of America are still against the war and the Republicans lost the House and the Senate in November of 2006, what makes anyone think that the same platform will be a success against the Dems come this November?

The stats you cite are a result of a dishonest media. Did you see the thread here where Michelle cites the names of several military operations in Iraq? How many people do you think have heard of them? If we change our view of the war, we are being manipulated by that same dishonest press. The answer is to change minds like yours, not be turned away from what is right and appropriate and necessary. If we pull out of Iraq they come and get us here. Again. And I for one have had too many friends already murder while minding their own business my brainwashed, murdeous madmen. That’s who we’re fighting now. Your man Paul is doing enormous harm to this country and the saftey of it’s innocents by leading people into insensible political waters. If he were President, and he pulled all the troops out, and Iraq became a nuclear terrorist threat and destroyed a major city killing millions, do think he would even own up to what he wrought upon his people? His history suggests not, and that’s enough for anyone to not want to support him.

That said, I do agree that it will be Rudy vs. Hillary come November with Paul as a 3rd party candidate and possibly Bloomberg (interesting scenario with him). I then believe Hillary will win for the reasons I stated

If this is the scenario with Paul bleeding precious blood away from the Republican nominee, then Hillary will win, and we’ll go down an awful road we may never come back from. That will be, in tiny measure, your fault for supporting him an a third-party candidate.

You need to get practical, Fed Up. I think you’re honest. I think you try to be a patriot. I’m not so sure you wouldn’t vote for Hillary. But if you’re indeed with Paul as a conservative, you need to stop supporting someone who could destroy the country by putting Hillary into office.

This isn’t just analytical, theoretical fun. This is deadly serious. Hillary is a nutcase, truly, and there are enough star-struck dopes blinded by a media creation of something she isn’t who are ready to put her into office.

You have already agreed with me on Rudy’s leadership qualities. that’s good. Pick Rudy. Or Romney. Or Huckabee. or even Fred.

But for God’s sake get with the program and get real about Paul. That’s tough talk, I know, but at least think about it - more than you have already.

Fair enough?
#312

On January 13th, 2008 at 1:14 am, Fed Up said:

CC,

Doesn’t use 9/11?

I have no idea how you could have come to that conclusion.

See: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I3tt8dniJXc&eurl=http://flapsblog.com/?p=6105

and

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iSY4-DmJRJY&NR=1

These are the campaign commercials he is running. I haven’t seen any regarding his leadership qualities, but I’m sure there has to one.

Regarding central casting, Ron Paul could use some of that as well. In the last debate you saw a fiestier Paul. He has to become even more fiestier when he has 5 other candidates and the biased media (mostly Fox News) to battle.

Regarding the “New” Republican party losing its way, you say it is related to 9/11/2001 and the ones who “changed everything.” While they did have an effect, they did nothing but escalate the agenda to attack Iraq that was already on the table. This was exposed in the BBC documentary “The Power of Nightmares” which you can find online (it’s 3 hours long and is not from a Left or Right point of view, but exposes the neocon agenda traced to the roots of Kristol (Bill’s father) and Strauss’s philosopies. You can also read Rothbard’s, “The Betrayal of the American Right” for a different perspective that traces the neocon agenda to the late 50’s Cold War battle behind the scenes that caused Rothbard to reassess his political party affiliation.

These are historical facts and I’m not making this up to prove a point. The neocons were upset that Bush I didn’t finish the job with the Gulf War and with Bush II and 9/11, their dreams are being fulfilled. The problem is, this didn’t win the 2006 elections and actually has backfired.

If Ron Paul became President, the rest of the world wouldn’t hate us any longer. I’ve traveled enough to know what others think about our governments actions. Primarily the people from Australia and Canada are very vocal about our politics, and much more informed than the sheep who reside here.

Ron Paul isn’t doing “harm to this country” as you say, but rather walks in the footsteps of Thomas Jefferson who said, “Peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations – entangling alliances with none.” Are you saying Jefferson was wrong? Abraham Lincoln said of Jefferson, “The principles of Jefferson are the axioms of a free society.”

Jefferson also said, “Peace is our most important interest, and a recovery from debt,” and it is this issue that is never addressed by the “New” warmongering Republican party. How are the wars we wage being paid for? The answer is not taxing the people more, but rather the “hidden” tax of inflation. Why is the U.S. dollar so weak? Why is gold breaking out to new highs? How long can America survive on this type of foreign policy?

The comment you make about me being a Hillary supporter is laughable. The FDR socialist agenda is another reason our countries economic system is in shambles. And you think I want Hillarycare to add to this mess? Hardly!

I am a free market, less goverment, sound money supporter. All of the things Ron Paul stands for, and that is why I am supporting him as my choice for President. With 10 more months of getting his message out, maybe the sheep will stop falling off the cliff.

I do appreciate your opinion, but I also hope you listen to and comprehend mine.

Respectfully,

Fed Up
#313

On January 13th, 2008 at 1:33 am, Fed Up said:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V3Kuf9a4SQ4&feature=related

Truth!

Fed Up
#314

On January 13th, 2008 at 3:38 am, Mr_Conservative_Cat said:

Fed Up,

Yes, certainly Rudy uses 9/11 in his TV advertising (I thought you meant his debates as this is a debate thread). That isn’t fearmongering, it’s getting real about where we are in the world.

As you asked I’ve listened and comprehended your point of view. However, it isn;t worth debating because a few remarks you made make it clear how far apart we are:

While they did have an effect, they did nothing but escalate the agenda to attack Iraq that was already on the table. This was exposed in the BBC documentary “The Power of Nightmares” which you can find online (it’s 3 hours long and is not from a Left or Right point of view, but exposes the neocon agenda traced to the roots of Kristol (Bill’s father) and Strauss’s philosopies.

I see. Not from a right or left POV but exposes the neocon agenda. Uh huh. Neocon. Not neolib or neoronpaul but neocon. yet it’s fair and balanced, like the BBC always is. Let me tell you, I love the BBC for Dr Who, but they’ve been so in the tank for the far left that they painted the line n the road that the NY Times followed. You’re watching propoganda. (and yes, I’ve seen enough of that doc to tell me what I need to know about it’s “centerist” viewpoint.

The neocons were upset that Bush I didn’t finish the job with the Gulf War and with Bush II and 9/11, their dreams are being fulfilled.

Well, I’m a neocon, felt that we didnt finish the job with Desert Strom and my dreams aren’t being fulfilled by the Iraq war, so i think your mind-reading capabilities aren’t what you seem to assume they are. The fact that these extremists drove aircraft into the towers shows that we should have finished the job and established ourselves with an ongoing presence there the way we did in Germany and Japan, who are now staunch allies. No, no dreams being fulfilled. You’ve been brainwashed. Sorry, but that’s how it is if you believe that sh*t.

If Ron Paul became President, the rest of the world wouldn’t hate us any longer.

I don’t even know where to start on this.

To begin with, the world doesnt hate us, just parts of the world, and parts of societies. Aussies love us. the japanese are enamored of certain aspects of our culture, as we should be of some of theirs (the japanese culture has such big disadvantages, but some hugely good things also), I know conservatives in London who are sick of their own press and you’ll even find some canadians right here supporting this board and what it stands for. Much of the iternational media tends to hate us, but that’s just another aspect of culture, not a defiition of a complete culture. The world encompasses more that Iran and the BBC.

If you’re this far removed from reality I don;t think i can reach you, and I mean that. I don;t mean to be condescending, but how old are you? I had the unhappy task recently of muddling through my 50th birthday, listening to words like ‘distinguished” which appeal not one bit. I hope you’re young, like early 20’s, because i swear to God I almost can’t stand the thought of anyone over 25 having so little life experience that they could make such a remark and mean it. I don’t have time to explain the entire world from the ground up - yes, I’ve travelled extensively also (London is my favorite place outside of the US, how about you?) and I can assure you that if Ron Paul was elected president certain aspects of the world which hate us now wouldn’t stop hating us, they’d just pour on the juice even more because they know he hasn;t the belly for a fight and that, alas, is how our enemies think.

We are the most altruistic nation on earth. We rebuild past enemies that struck first and allow them to out-trade us by ten-to-one. We forgive billions in international debt to us - payed for by our taxpayers hard-earned dollars - and that includes countries that continually ridicule us and undermine our place in international politics. We’re more than altruistic, in many cases we continue to be fools, so afraid of being percieved as mean-spirited that we let those who would see us plowed under get away with undermining us on the international stage while we keep their lifestyles possible with aid and forgiven debt. We work like hell to save other countries from starvation and disease. We fight for and save our allies from invasion. All we do is give, give, give. And when terroists attack us in violation of every rule of the geneva convention, we still afford them the rights protected under the geneva convention - in outragious condtradiction to all common sense as well as the memory of those who died at their hands.

We aren’t the bad guys of the world. No one with half a brain who knows what we do in the world could ever think so. The problem is being the biggest and the best. It breeds contempt born of envy by many of the same people we give billions to every year (that includes European nations). We’re an easy villian for despots looking for a rallying focus point on which to build their petty dictatorships. We’re a policeman that murderers and despots do not want.

Those who hate us do not hate us for our money that we give them, or our medicines to heal their sick, or the food we give to feed their starving or our support we give when asked, or our billions in yearly forgiven debt. They hate us because we have more and act as policemen to watch over our allies because we have the might to do it; that’s good, that’s right and that’s fair.

If Ron Paul thinks otherwise, well f*ck him along with everyone else who intentionally choose to ignore what we are as a country and the good we do for the world.

Ron Paul won’t improve that. Rob Paul with his refusal to be strong abroad and put boots on the ground when needed will simply be, as stalin put it, a “useful idiot’ to those who hate us for their own selfish goals.

Learn these facts, Fed Up. Real facts. Not propoganda put out by the BBC.

And I’m done on this, my friend. if you really think that some of the world will stop hating us if Ron paul becomes President, then there’s no point in discussing the minutia. What you need, with all due respect, is a multi-year education in the workings of the real world. That sounds blunt and rude, I know, and I apologise for that, but i just can’t figure our a better way to say it that still remains accurate.

I hope you find what you’re really looking for, and what I think you want is elusive and has been long before Plato, but I dare say that you won’t find it in the politics of Ron Paul. Trust me on that.
#315

On January 13th, 2008 at 11:42 am, Fed Up said:

CC,

Interesting you quote Stalin. Good grief. Here’s another quote from Stalin, “A single death is a tragedy, are million deaths is a statistic.”

I could and should have added neolib, so I apologize. It is both the Left and the Right who are taking America down. I didn’t mean to slant it one way, but we are on a neocon site and I am debating a neocon, so if the shoe fits…(this would have been slanted towards a lib if I was on the Huff Post or Daily Kos). See: http://www.afr.org/Hultberg/010808.htm and know that I really don’t like either party (Progressive or “New” Republican, but do like the “Old” Republican party of my parents and grandparents. Also read Rothbard’s, “The Betrayal of the American Right:” http://www.takimag.com/site/article/the_real_american_right_part_i/

As a self proclaimed neocon (you), and as a Christian, which you admitted in a separate post, how can you justify war under Christian Just War Theory? http://biblia.com/jesusbible/joshua3c.htm

The answer is you can’t. Jesus taught us to “Love they neighbor as thyself,” but the “New” Republican Party today can’t comprehend this any longer when it comes to their new party platform.

Ron Paul can: http://electronpaul2008.wordpress.com/2007/06/25/ron-paul-on-the-christian-just-war-theory/

As far as my life experience, you will recall from a previous post that I am just a year younger than yourself. While we can agree to disagree about our politics, I have traveled the world and when I do, I typically go to an Irish bar and talk to the locals. I get in their minds and understand things from their point of view. I’ve been to Europe three times for a month at a time. I have friends in the two countries most vocal about U.S. Politics (more so than our own sheep), and it was the Australian friend who introduced me to the book, “Why Do People Hate America.” “According to the authors, Robert Kaplan and Thomas Friedman are flat out *wrong* when they suggest that “they” hate us for our freedoms, the success of our economy, for our rich cultural heritage. Most good-hearted Americans simply have no idea how big the gap is between our perception of our goodness and the rest of the world’s perception of our badness (in terms set forth below).”

I have a daughter who lives in the Philippines where I have traveled to many times. Why do I mention the Philippines? Because this is how our armed forces should work with other countries. The U.S. was basically kicked out of the Phils, even though there were many jobs lost by the locals: http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9D0CEFD91430F93BA15751C1A967958260&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=2 How did the Phillipine economy respond? The stock market broke to new highs and the Filipino peso, yes, the Filipino peso has appreciated about 27% versus the almighty U.S. dollar (this despite all the corruption there).

The U.S. was invited back to help rid the Philippines of the radical Muslim group, the Abu Sayyaf who had been causing havoc in Mindinao and Basilan, two islands in the far south. We do not do battle with the Abu Sayyaf, but help train the Filipino soldiers and help with logistics. We were invited by the Philippine government to do this. We didn’t just walk in and take matters into our own hands like we do in so many cases via the CIA and now under the Bush administration (I’m not talking about Afghanistan here).

When I travel in the U.S., I take taxis and 9 out of 10 times it’s a Muslim who is driving. So I start in on my questioning. Mostly, they say they have no idea why the U.S. government, and let me be clear here…I’m talking government and not We The People….take the action they do or say what they say when it comes to the Islamofacism battle cry.

I do agree that America can be charitable…that is a separate issue. But a wealthier U.S. citizen, who takes home more of their pay, rather than have that income pay for unnecessary wars via taxes and inflation, can be more charitable too. (I’m a Certified Specialist in Planned Giving and know how benevolent America is.)

The problem is, we don’t see things through the eyes of the innocent. As Christians, we should: http://www.photoactivistsforpeace.org/
and this isn’t a “left” point of view, it is a Christian point of view.

What Bible verse can you quote that gives you the right to “kill them before they kill us?” which is exactly the quote that former Presidential candidate (2000) Gary Bauer emailed to me? When I asked him this question, he said; “this conversation is over” rather than quoting me a verse (real Christlike Gary!). And he runs http://www.ouramericanvalues.org, a Christian website. He’s been a part of the neocon group PNAC who influenced GW to go to war with Iraq: http://www.newamericancentury.org/Bushletter.htm and is part of the neocon group, “Foundation for the Defense of Democracies:” http://www.defenddemocracy.org/biographies/biographies.htm

It is these types who have neuro linguistically (yes, I have studied this aspect to propaganda thoroughly) brainwashed you and all of the other “New” and especially “Christian” Republicans.

And, as a Christian, you want to vote for the abortionist Giuliani? It is you who has to get his Christian roots in order my friend.

I’m not sure if Giuliani or any of the “New” Republicans; ‘Love thy neighbor as thyself’ (Matthew 5: 43)

and you still didn’t address the economics that will pay for the warmongering of the “New” Right…

Talk is cheap CC…I’ve backed everything I’ve said with references, not just words. Obama may be a good orator, but he has no real plan for Change. Reagan was a “Great Communicator,” but even with him, the nations debt grew by over 60%.

Peace (and Ron Paul)

Fed Up

P.S. Speaking of other countries opinions/support of Ron Paul….

International support for Ron Paul: http://www.dailypaul.com/node/2236
#316

On January 13th, 2008 at 12:41 pm, Fed Up said:

Interesting…when I’m “logged in” my last comment shows, post #315, but when I’m logged out, it doesn’t appear.

So this is a test post to see if my reply to your post is banned or just in limbo CC. Maybe I’m banned? Wouldn’t surprise me. The “truth” is sometimes hard to take.
#317

On January 13th, 2008 at 12:45 pm, Fed Up said:

Aha! It was not posted by the Michelle Malkin powers that be!

My last post was #315 when I’m not logged in, but #316 when I’m logged in. So if someone is reading this who isn’t a member of Michele Malkin’s site, they can’t read my reply to you CC.

OK, I’m done posting on Michele’s site.

Look for my book due out in a few months CC.

I don’t have all the answers, but at least from a Christian persepctive, I’m trying to make a difference.

Peace,

Fed Up! (the name of the book)
#318

On January 13th, 2008 at 10:13 pm, navywife91 said:

fedup
I am probably wasting time since you said that you would no longer post here, but here I go.

The U.S. Cole was docked in the Port of Yemen. Big difference.

The USS Cole was docked, but you weren’t talking about the location of our ships. You implied the size of the iranian boats results in no threat, so I addressed the size issue with my post. Based on that, I think my argument is solid. Does that mean that these little boats were actually going to attempt something? Who knows, but if my husband were still on the Port Royal, I’d want them to err on the side of caution.

Also, regarding Israel and Ahmadinejad:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4mScWWtRfGQ

I support We The People’s right to hold its leaders in check with or without media attempt to propagandize reality.

It says in our Declaration of Independence: “That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”

Wow, that link was “educational”. I enjoyed the part where the speaker talked about Israeli soldiers intentionally killing children. Could it be the same man who wrote some of those articles in Ron Paul’s various newsletters that have been circulating lately? Look, I can search the internet too and find people who interpret what he said differently. There is no concensus, but you’ll believe who you want and I’ll believe the truth. This guy denies the Holocaust and wants a world without the United States, but we have nothing to fear? Sure he wants democracy in Israel, but not in his country? You actually take the side of a man who said there are no homosexuals in Iran. Good luck with that. I’m not quite sure why you included the Declaration of Independence quote. Is that with regards to our current government and the neocons you Paulbots think are in charge or are you using it to support Iran’s call for regime change in Israel?

Oh, and I’m sure you and Cat probably covered this in your posts, but I’d like to address the “70% of Americans are against the war” quote. Well, we all know how reliable those polls are after last week, don’t we? Frankly I don’t really care what those people think because my husband is there doing his job so that everyone here gets to go on with life as normal. With all of the bad news we are constantly bombarded with(not lately because things seem to be relatively quiet), it’s a wonder 90% aren’t against the war.
#319

On January 13th, 2008 at 11:59 pm, Fed Up said:

I see they finally put my post up.

navywife,

I didn’t bring up the U.S.S. Cole, you did. I was pointing out that the Cole was docked and the U.S. ships in the gulf were not….therefore, “a big difference.”

The difference is that the U.S. ships are prepared to blow the little boats out of the water, the U.S.S. Cole wasn’t as it was docked.

Regarding the rest, who are we to franshise demorcracy around the world? Besides, we are not a democracy, we are a republic.

What do you mean I am taking the side? I pointed out what is known by anyone who does research (like me) and pointed out facts. It is you who will still belive the media lies.

Regarding the D of I, you said; “I’ll give my country benefit of the doubt.” I said I won’t give my government the benefit of the doubt. They are fighting an “undeclared war” per Article 1 Sec. 8 of the Constitution: http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul57.html

Regarding polls, you don’t have to agree or disagree with them. The only thing that matters is the Republicans lost both the House and the Senate in 2006 with their warmongering party.

What will change this November if they have the same platform? This is what baffles me as far as the current thinking of the “New” Republican party. Garbage in results in garbage out.

As far as the “not lately” comment, 9 soldiers died in two days last week. Undeclared wars always end badly for the soldiers. I don’t want to see anymore die.

Respectfully and thanks for sharing your opinion (I do consider all sides as my friends son died in the war). It was covered in December’s Vanity Fair.

Fed Up
#320

On January 14th, 2008 at 4:05 am, Mr_Conservative_Cat said:

Fed Up, I wrote a (very) long response in which your insultingly high-handed Christian posturing and intellectual dishonesty was taken to task, but the page reloaded for some reason and i
lost it.

I have to (re)comment on this:

It is both the Left and the Right who are taking America down.

While you, on the other hand, are engaged in an act of devine detachment, apart of the ignorant masses, placed in a spiritually-bestowed position of centerist, objective perfection, I suppose. I see.

Incidentally, do you believe in neolibertarians as much as neocons and neoliberals? if so, describe, please, their identifying attributes.

Quite frankly I’m deeply offended by the christian posturing and did a good job of cutting you down but lost it(I’ve been a theological student my whole life and fencing christian theology with me is usually not a fine idea. Re that, not that my faith is any of your business, I’ll reference a certain holiday and direct you to Jeremiah 10, 1-5. That will give you a tiny hint as to how devoted - and knowledgeable of scripture I am. I see in you a man who is the most dangerous there is; the man with only a little knowledge who thinks he knows much, driven by passion. Much like the man whom you believe will bring about world peace, Ron paul).

Realistically we have learned that love will not buy away the murdeous ways of terrorists, and I know of not a single scriptural passage specifically which states that if someone wants to murder your wife that you should stand aside and let them do it.

Giuliani is not an abortionist. he obeys the law, and appropos that, as far as acts are concerned, there is a continual seperation between belief and acts in both testiments which appear to have evaded you. Obey the laws of men, but keep the faith; belief and faith assures salvation, not acts. You seem to have in the aggregate hopelessly confused the two and bundled it all together in your mind into some kind of moral purity, which shows me that knowledgable about scripture you are not enough to be holding these kinds of discussions with any kind of intellectual honesty.

Lastly, your holier-than-thou pasturing is quite offensive. If you were as devoted as you say, then you’d have nothing to do with earthly politics, as it is the government of heaven which is preached in the Bible. But your purity is clearly selective, as are your facts.

Your “backing up” of your statements with evidence is laughable: vanity fair and CNN don’t qualify. I’ll chalk up your scriptural misinterpretation to ignorance.

On another note, you owe navywife an apology; for you to engage her in as insensitive a way as you did considering he husband is in harms way is beneath contempt.

I’m done with you on this, truly. You probably see that as a victory of some sort - people driven by a sense of personal victory as i suspect you are often see the world in that way. If you think Ron paul will bring about world peace have fun. Everyone should have a hobby. I’m done with you this, though. You’ve shown your true colors this time around, and they are as selfish, insensitive, arrogant, foolish and absurd as the man you follow. And that makes sense.

Have the last word if you want, it won’t bother me one way or the other any more than you already have.

Enjoy.
#321

On January 14th, 2008 at 9:02 am, navywife91 said:

fedup

This will be my last word for this off topic post.

I appreciate the fact that you have been relatively respectful to me regarding my opinions. I support the war on all fronts, but consider myself neither a “neocon” (which I feel is a derogatory term) or a “warmonger”. I wish my husband was here at home, but there are many of us who believe this war is necessary and just, not illegal. My heart aches everytime I hear of a soldier, sailor, marine or airman being killed. Not so long ago we were inundated with reports of soldiers being killed almost daily. Now the tide has turned, whether you all like to admit it or not, so as a result,I very seldom see anything on the news about Iraq. I felt I must address that because your comment about me saying “not lately” implied that I really don’t care when someone is killed.

As far as the USS Cole goes, I never accused you of bringing it up! I simply stated you brought up the size of the iranian boats and that they are too small to pose a threat. I think that was pretty clear in my posts.

As far as what I meant by “taking the side”, I thought that was pretty clear too. You would believe a man like Ahmadenijad, who says such contemptable and false things, doesn’t wish harm upon us or Israel. I know you think it’s all about the Zionists(not your words, but they are invoked by others referenced in the link you posted above), but when I hear that it makes my skin crawl. I’m no expert on the Israel/Palestine conflict and don’t claim to be. I think finding links and doing a little internet research doesn’t qualify one as being an expert although it does help to spark the interest about that situation.

Yes, I am well aware we are a Republic, but having more democracies around the world instead of tyrannical leaders who murder, torture, rape and gas their people is more beneficial.

Regardless of how much I disagree with you and the person you support for President, I wish you well.

NW
#322

On January 14th, 2008 at 9:05 am, navywife91 said:

conservative cat
Thanks for the paragraph in the above post. Coming back to this link has been very interesting. I know you’ve got my back if necessary. See you on the next thread! I’m outta here.

NW
#323

On January 14th, 2008 at 12:58 pm, Fed Up said:

CC,

My, my how we jump to conclusions…

I see in you a man who is the most dangerous there is; the man with only a little knowledge who thinks he knows much, driven by passion. Much like the man whom you believe will bring about world peace, Ron paul).

dangerous? what did I say that makes me dangerous? that I want peace on no entaglements with other nations? that I want our government to be more loving of their neighbor?

Realistically we have learned that love will not buy away the murdeous ways of terrorists, and I know of not a single scriptural passage specifically which states that if someone wants to murder your wife that you should stand aside and let them do it.

I said nothing about being pasive if one is attacked/defenseless. You jump to conclusions here cc. I never said that a Christian can’t defend themselves.

Prov. 25:26 - A righteous man falling down before the wicked is as a troubled fountain, and a corrupt spring.

“God has allowed evil to exist for a time, and we are forced to adjust to this circumstance. This evil must at times be resisted with force, or greater evil will result. There is a time for self-defense. Christians are not to wage physical warfare for the advance of the Kingdom, but rather, spiritual warfare.”

Lastly, your holier-than-thou pasturing is quite offensive. If you were as devoted as you say, then you’d have nothing to do with earthly politics, as it is the government of heaven which is preached in the Bible. But your purity is clearly selective, as are your facts.”

So if I quote the Bible or tell a Christian my opinion on what they are doing, I’m “holier than thou?” Interesting you took it that way. All I did was point out Christian Just War Theory and Love Thy Neighbor issues, which doesn’t seem to be the mantra of the “New” Republican party. It sure was of the old.

As far as Giuliani, I should have said, “pro-choice,” rather than “abortionist.” I listened to him on Sean Hanity’s show when he first declared. He said about abortion, “I’m against abortion, but I’m for a woman’s right to choose.” Typical politician. Sorry Rudy, you can’t have it both ways.

Proverbs 31:8-9. Speak for those who cannot speak for themselves, defend those who cannot defend themselves, and plead the cause of those in need.

There are over 1 million abortions a year in the U.S. I will do everything in my power to stop anyone who is pro-choice from becoming President, as I view it as the number one issue with Supreme Court justice nominations on the line.

Ron Paul is trying to take the issue away from the Federal (Supreme Court) level via Roe V. Wade, and I support that. He came up with “The Sanctity of Life Act:” http://www.covenantnews.com/abortion/archives/034987.html

Your “backing up” of your statements with evidence is laughable: vanity fair and CNN don’t qualify. I’ll chalk up your scriptural misinterpretation to ignorance.

Didn’t use Vanity Fair in my reply to you. I used it in my reply to NavyWife as my friends son died in the war and they did an article on him because he went to war because of what Christopher Hitchens wrote.

Christianity issues aside, you still said nothing about the economics of paying for the wars via the inflation on We The People.

If you have a different “Christian” view, then I’d like to hear it. And I am really not claiming any superiority over you, just questioning the support of Giuliani in two issues that don’t seem to follow the Bible; Islamofacism and Abortion.

Naturally, because of our prior conversations, I respect your opinion.

Peace,

Fed Up
#324

On January 14th, 2008 at 1:20 pm, Fed Up said:

Hi NW…thanks for sharing your thoughts on this sensitive issue.

your comment about me saying “not lately” implied that I really don’t care when someone is killed.

Naturally, I didn’t mean it this way NW. And to address CC’s concerns, I apologize if I cam off as rash. I read what I wrote again and didn’t see it that way, but perhaps I could have substituted some words for others. When I write in this small box, it’s difficult to go back and read the entire post again, so I don’t do it. Normally I do it many times to make sure my point is made without being offensive.

Regarding the word neocon, I don’t view it as offensive, but rather descriptive: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoconservatism

You can blame father neocon Irving Kristol and those whom follow the philosophy of Strauss for exactly where our nation is today under the “New” Republicans leadership. Rothbard does a good job of explaining this, via non-neocon writing, in his book, “The Betrayal of the American Right” that I eluded to in my post to CC.

Regarding Ahmadenijad, I never said I support him or even defend him, but rather I try to do my own research on what really happened (or was said) on any issue to form my own views. Ahmadenijad, does not run the country, but rather supreme leader Ali Khamenei who said in 2005, “the Islamic Republic has never threatened and will never threaten any country.”

Peace and I hope your husband comes home soon.

Respectfully,

Fed Up
#325

On January 14th, 2008 at 2:43 pm, Mr_Conservative_Cat said:

Fed Up,

It is you who has to get his Christian roots in order my friend.

Maybe you think this s a fair remark. But coming from guy who thinks that “the world” will not hate us if Ron paul of all people becomes President, that makes sense.

I agree that abortion is among the worst of human sins. God gives us free choice, and so does Rudy. The point he he is againstit, and his public push as Mayor for adoption over abortion earned him the scorn of the NY media for years. And there are other necessry qualifications to be President. Rudy has them, paul does not. And you misspeak too often, my friend. Done.

Navywife,

Always happy to help. God bless your husband and may He keep him safe. Call on me anytime.