R
rlg94086
Guest
I’m not sure a Giuliani endorsement really does much for you.
- Status
C
Caldera
Guest
I still believe he is the right choice. He will crack a whip and fix the country if elected. It’s hard to say for sure about the others, but you never know…
H
havana1
Guest
Isn’t Ronald Reagan the one who first relaxed immigration policies - to the point that many of the same Republicans (especially Newt) are now doing their best to un-alienate Latino voters? And more importantly, what does it say about Republican leadership that they can’t formulate any new idea of their own, i.e., they have constantly go back twenty, thirty years to toss Ronald Reagan’s name around like it’s a magic wand. Let the guy rest in peace already - he’s not a football you can still toss around. The fact is, a lot of firefighters and first responders’ lives could have been saved on 09/11/11 if it weren’t for Guiliani (stories corroborated elsewhere from countless sources), so his endorsement is meaningless.
C
Caldera
Guest
I fail to see the immigration problem of Newt’s IF we first secure the border, THEN resolve the issues with the current illegals. Meaning:
- Anyone here more than 25 yrs but not integrated and having no roots in American society will be deported…
A
_Abyssinia
Guest
VIDEO: Romney ad asks: “Is this government program so important that it’s worth borrowing money from China to pay for it?”
National Review: There is a surprising degree of agreement within the GOP field, the White House is winnnable… but Gingrich should not be the candidate…
“Gingrich’s colleagues were right to bring his tenure [as Speaker] to an end. His character flaws — his impulsiveness, his grandiosity, his weakness for half-baked (and not especially conservative) ideas — made him a poor Speaker of the House. Again and again he combined incendiary rhetoric with irresolute action, bringing Republicans all the political costs of a hardline position without actually taking one. Again and again he put his own interests above those of the causes he championed in public.” - NRO Editors
The underdog candidates question the conservative credentials of Gingrich and Romney during Iowa debate - Politico
* Mitt: ‘I changed my mind’ on abortion - Politico
* As Romney steps cautiously, Gingrich duels with others - New York Times
* Gingrich defends conservative credentials - Washington Examiner
* Romney Regains Stride; Gingrich Shows Old Newt At Sioux City Debate - NPR
* “This final debate leading into the Iowa caucuses was a positive one for all GOP candidates. Why? Because the questions from the Fox team were less “gotcha” questions, or questions that divide the GOP from many Americans (e.g. “Should we spend a fortune to put up a fence to keep those Hispanics out of this country?”), and more questions that allowed the candidates to attack Obama’s failed presidency and propose remedies for his errors.” - NRO
R-i-c-h becomes a four letter word in GOP politics
“The GOP is supposed to be the party that celebrates individual success and achievement. Leave the politics of envy to the Democrats, Republicans always say. The GOP is about dynamism, unleashing the creative forces of growth and rewarding the hard-working, job-creating wealth builders. Or they used to be. Last night saw a remarkable moment in the changing politics of wealth. One Republican candidate accused the other of being “wealthy.” And it wasn’t mean to be a compliment. Mitt Romney – net worth $190 million plus – told CBS News that rival Newt Gingrich (net worth more than $6 million) is too wealthy to be in touch with the middle class.” - WSJ
“The polling data I’ve seen over the past two or three days suggests that Newt Gingrich’s momentum has stopped — and has probably reversed itself.” - Nate Silver
For Romney, no states are too small or vote too late in the primary cycle as he prepares for long fight to win nomination - WSJ
National Review: There is a surprising degree of agreement within the GOP field, the White House is winnnable… but Gingrich should not be the candidate…
“Gingrich’s colleagues were right to bring his tenure [as Speaker] to an end. His character flaws — his impulsiveness, his grandiosity, his weakness for half-baked (and not especially conservative) ideas — made him a poor Speaker of the House. Again and again he combined incendiary rhetoric with irresolute action, bringing Republicans all the political costs of a hardline position without actually taking one. Again and again he put his own interests above those of the causes he championed in public.” - NRO Editors
The underdog candidates question the conservative credentials of Gingrich and Romney during Iowa debate - Politico
* Mitt: ‘I changed my mind’ on abortion - Politico
* As Romney steps cautiously, Gingrich duels with others - New York Times
* Gingrich defends conservative credentials - Washington Examiner
* Romney Regains Stride; Gingrich Shows Old Newt At Sioux City Debate - NPR
* “This final debate leading into the Iowa caucuses was a positive one for all GOP candidates. Why? Because the questions from the Fox team were less “gotcha” questions, or questions that divide the GOP from many Americans (e.g. “Should we spend a fortune to put up a fence to keep those Hispanics out of this country?”), and more questions that allowed the candidates to attack Obama’s failed presidency and propose remedies for his errors.” - NRO
R-i-c-h becomes a four letter word in GOP politics
“The GOP is supposed to be the party that celebrates individual success and achievement. Leave the politics of envy to the Democrats, Republicans always say. The GOP is about dynamism, unleashing the creative forces of growth and rewarding the hard-working, job-creating wealth builders. Or they used to be. Last night saw a remarkable moment in the changing politics of wealth. One Republican candidate accused the other of being “wealthy.” And it wasn’t mean to be a compliment. Mitt Romney – net worth $190 million plus – told CBS News that rival Newt Gingrich (net worth more than $6 million) is too wealthy to be in touch with the middle class.” - WSJ
“The polling data I’ve seen over the past two or three days suggests that Newt Gingrich’s momentum has stopped — and has probably reversed itself.” - Nate Silver
For Romney, no states are too small or vote too late in the primary cycle as he prepares for long fight to win nomination - WSJ
A
_Abyssinia
Guest
I think Newt has always had this position on immigration, it is not new.
S
Scott_Lafrance
Guest
So, you’d rather vote for a politically inconsistent guy who polls well and promises to carry on the big-government, pro-war policies of the GOP over the last 30 years? Sounds…I’m not sure I’m allowed to say.
S
Scott_Lafrance
Guest
If it isn’t completely obvious, spend all of this taxpayer money of foreign wars and foreign aid makes our country better and means everyone will love us. That should be perfectly clear,.
C
Caldera
Guest
Fox News Iowa Republican Presidential Debate - 12/15/11
constitutionclub.org/2011/12/15/fox-news-iowa-republican-presidential-debate-12-15-11-full-complete-video/
constitutionclub.org/2011/12/15/fox-news-iowa-republican-presidential-debate-12-15-11-full-complete-video/
R
rlg94086
Guest
I will vote for whomever the candidate is in the general election. I’m not 100% on my primary choice, but I’m leaning towards Romney. He is conservative and I think he can win. Paul is also conservative and consistent, but I put his chances of winning at slim to none.
C
Cider
Guest
It certainly isn’t a positive in my book to have his endorsement.
S
scipio337
Guest
Paul isn’t perfect in this respect. Have you seen his record on earmarks (which far and away exceeds what we spend on foreign aid)?
Not that I expect a Paul supporter to accept any honest criticism of Paul.
C
Cider
Guest
See I don’t think Paul is conservative, he is libertarian to the extreme. I guess we could argue conservative but IMO Romney is not as conservative as most of the other candidates. Although I thought he did a good job last night, but it was Gingrich’s turn to be the target so.
S
smndtupidisaftr
Guest
Weren’t satisfied in his answer at the debate yesterday I see.
S
scipio337
Guest
Not really. Bbarrick’s last response was “can you blame him”?
I’ve seen every excuse offered, except for why, if it is done above board, it isn’t done at the legislative phase. I have family in state poltics, so I’m aware how the process works (very similar to the federal level).
There is absolutely NO difference between federal money in an appropriations or omnibus bill being earmarked for the Gravina Island Bridge, and what Paul does.
Paul states they shouldn’t take it in the first place, and he’s just asking it back. Fine and dandy. He’s voted against budgets in the past as a matter of principal, he should refuse earmarking on the same premise.
Until then, he’s just another career politician greasing the palm of his constituency to get re-elected.
S
Scott_Lafrance
Guest
Thing about me is, I don’t think he is perfect and I do acccept criticism like this. I just think he is the best of the bunch because I believe that the majority of our problems stem from monetary policy and he has been the most consistent on it.
C
Caldera
Guest
Full Fox News Iowa GOP Debate - 12/15/11
youtube.com/user/RonPaul2008dotcom#p/a/f/0/V-lD3YqP9Sw
youtube.com/user/RonPaul2008dotcom#p/a/f/0/V-lD3YqP9Sw
L
LisaA
Guest
You know the thing that amazes me most about the Paul-inistas is their rabid and unswerving support for what many of us think is absolute nuttery. But I must admit, hearing that DENNIS KUCINICH and Paul are of one mind only makes me less inclined to listen to anything Paul has to say. I thought he sounded totally off the wall last night in the debates.
Also please do not assume that if we disagree about “non-intervention vs isolationist” that WE are the stupid party. It just might be that Paul’s non-intervention theories are isolationist and quite frankly IMO very dangerous.
Lisa
S
Scott_Lafrance
Guest
Ya, and starting all these foreign wars has worked out sooooo well…
L
LisaA
Guest
You are mixing apples and oranges and setting up a strawman. Being a forum elder this tactic surprises me Scott. But it makes my point about the Paul-inistas being IMO totally blind to the flaws in their candidate’s ideas. I think the man lives in dreamland where if you retreat beyond your borders and keep completely out of other countries’ affairs that life will be rosy. I disagree–but that doesn’t mean I am up for every ‘foreign adventure’ cooked up by politicians safe in their offices here at home.Ya, and starting all these foreign wars has worked out sooooo well…
I think there is a clear difference between non-intervention and isolationism. I believe Ron Paul is on the outer banks to a dangerous level of ignoring reality. That being said, I have no particular support for having bases in hundreds of countries. I think the US should have a critical self interest before we deploy our troops or station them anywhere.
Also I think we as the richest country in the world with the most generous spirit, should be ready to help in humanitarian crises if our presence can be a positive force for humanity.
I think Mr Paul is quite unrealistic in his theories and I hope his candidacy does not give Barack Obama another four years. He’s done quite enough!
Lisa
- Status