I think Michelle Bachmann will win it because Republicans like their candidates to be real nutty.

1-Ron Paul (has the best ground game)

2-Santorum (2 days ago he would have won, 2 days from now he would be 5th)

3-Romney (will be spun as a "loss" and the MSM will immediately focus on Huntsman)

Bachmann drops out...

I can't even vote for any of these 2nd rate candidates. All destined to help Obooboo get re-elected.

Ron Paul will win. People are sick and tired of war and the debt.

Amazing how far down the previous anti-Romneys have fallen...

Newton at 3% when he was LEADING just weeks ago...

Anal sex by-product will not win, lol.

Man on dog Santorum by a nose over Weathervane Willard.

Makes no difference who wins...they are all wasting their time.

Why would anyone vote for Romney who made his $millions from the Bain Capital Management hedge fund that specialized in corporate buyouts and "turnarounds" that cost thousands of American jobs.

Ron Paul knows how to creat jobs and cut government waste and abuse.

No matter who wins, they're all losers. This is primary is already an ugly, back-stabbing mess. And, it's going to get worse for each candidate before it gets better.

Judging from the poll swing, he probably wins in Iowa, but it's not the preacher vote although they are included. He hasn't garnered any attention major media attention either. He has done this by spending the time on the ground meeting anyone and everyone.

Weathervane Willard...

Now that's funny! Thanks, Al! I needed that!

Who knows who will win here, it's too close to call until the votes are counted. My take is that Romney will not win except in those districts where moderate republicans still exist, eastern Iowa and in the larger cities.

Too bad Huntsman did not to bother with Iowa. His reasons were the same ones that Romney used to justify spending very little time here but it never pays off to simply ignore any state completely. Had Huntsman at least made some effort in the more moderate districts, and made his voice heard, he could have filled the anti-Romney, anti-evangelical void for moderates. For any candidate, right or left, it is a big mistake not to play at all and instead put all their eggs in one state's basket. Who knows, though, this year's GOP primary campaign has been anything but normal.

Ron Paul will not decrease the debt, he will add to it. You can't eliminate taxes and debt at the same time. Sure, he can eliminate every government agency we have, get rid of public schools, etc., but what kind of country would this be? Anyone who takes Paul's extreme views as serious policy needs to take a deep breath because purist ideology fails every time--just ask the USSR how a pure political stance works, someone or small group is the winner and everyone else the losers. I do not care to live in a Ron Paul country which will be anything but "exceptional".

Last night, as I was watching 'The Bachelor,' I was thinking how like Romney the young fool is on this show. He's looking at a gaggle of 25 beautiful women, trying to decide which one to give his rose to for the night (no kidding) all the while, mother nature is telling these girls, it really isn't his decision, it's the girls who will ultimately decide his fate. Romney proclaims he's "going to win this thing," meaning the primary, but, alas, he doesn't realize he's already lost the general election. We've seen what the Republicans have for candidates, and the nation is secretly choosing to re-elect the President.

OK, in my defense, I was just watching The Bachelor because nothing else was on, and I got a new TV for Christmas.

Ron Paul is the only one really talking about the issues! The rest are just more of the same. Of course that goes for the President too! The poll and Ron Paul's Standing in Iowa shows the people want new solutions not just a Switch from one party to the other. The Democrat and Republican Parties are practically the same except on a few issues. Its time for real change in Washington!

Give it a rest, Ron Paul will not win Iowa. He will do better than he would do if this were a primary, as opposed to a time consuming caucus, because his core supporters blindly love him. Even though most don't know his position on 70% of the issues. Paul is seen by the majority of Republicans as a fringe candidate at best, and a nut by most. Paul has lost support among the youth who liked his opposition to drug laws, and his stance on the war, but have been appalled at his racist, homophoebic news letters. Also college students and HS seniors historically haven't attended Republican caucuses in large numbers. The youth vote turned out in large numbers for President Obama 4 years ago today, but you can not compare Obama's ground game to any of the GOP candidates. Biden, Dodd, and Richardson all had better ground operations than anyone in the current GOP field. Robo calls to all Iowa cell numbers urging them to caucus for a candidate isn't a ground game. Yesterday my son's friend told me he was going to caucus for Ron Paul I asked if he knew where his caucus site was. He had no clue, he knew where he was to go if he went to the precinct his college dorm is located, but not in his city of permanent residence. The likelihood that he will drive 2 hours to caucus for Paul at his college address precinct, is slim (to almost none), and it is almost as unlikely that he will make the effort to find out where to caucus (based upon his parent's home).

I picked Ron Paul as the winner only because "Some Idiot" wasn't listed as a choice.

I have never seen such a gander of geese since they flew south last September from my hometown. A vote for any of these people instead of Obama is a high risk vote (high risk for our country) driven by the belief of the lying right wing media or just pure bias and ignorance. You can call Obama "left" or "too progressive" or "a tax and spend president" or pick your talking point, but the truth is that he manages more towards the center and is very pragmatic. At any rate, what we need now, and what we have now, is a slow and steady hand that "lets" us recover without radical cuts, wars, religion, or legislation... so which of these clowns fits THAT bill? None.

My guess is with Paul. Hawkeye is right, his supporters blindly follow him, which is why they are going to be the loudest ones in the room when the caucus begins. It's the Paul supporters that will be shouting for Paul while those that support the other candidates will be mostly drowned out.

My prediction: Paul, Santorum, Romney.

Ron Paul is hoping his supporter's fanaticism will carry the day. Has any of them really looked at his stand on issues?? (other than unregulated drugs and prostitution...) It's koo koo time...

Time to get the kooks out and rally around a single GOP candidate that can debate O on the serious issues of today. Not the kooky ones...

All I know for sure is Willard is hoping everyone stays in the race. That way his 25% will hold as the others divide up the other 75%. It's a winning situation for him.

phinephancy-4252115,

agreed. And also it's gonna continue the GOP clown-fest which is good if you're an Obama supporter like I am. Rally around Obama for the serious issues. Seek out the GOP candidates for your daily dose of entertainment, reality shows, sitcoms, and tabloid gossip!!

@Big Al-369306

your man Ron Paul is the biggest poor excuse of a presidential candidate since Goldwater or George Wallace. It's good that Ron Paul has no chance and your vote for him is totally wasted since he would be the biggest embarrassment as President of all time!!

Obama 2012!! and let freedom keep ringing!!!!!!!!!!!!

People WANT to vote for RP, but they know in the hearts he can't win in the general. The votes will swing to Romney- though I think Rick "the flavor of the month" Santorum will finish second and Bachmann drops out. Huntsman is betting the farm in NH- but he finishes 3rd at best and drops out after NH. Santorum will hit the end of the road in SC. If Gingrich doesn't do better than 3rd in SC- he's done and it will be Perry & Romney and Romney wins the nomination.

I hope Ron Paul wins! He gives us the best entertainment value...bring on the clowns. None of these clowns have a chance in hell of defeating President Obama so it really doesn't matter to the left who wins...it'll be fun!

@Give it a rest!,

"Enough with the copy and paste already. If people didn't like your posts..."

same for your incessant blabbering about the old a$$tard Ron Paul...

The Republican Party needs Ron Paul to win. Ron Paul is the only true constitutional conservative. All of the others move with the wind (and the $$$$$$.) As the President has said, its like trying to nail jello to the wall to pin them down on their positions.

From "Progressives and the Ron Paul fallacies" Featured on Salon.com

“the anger [Paul] inspires comes not from his positions, but from the tensions that modern American liberals bear within their own worldview.” Ron Paul’s candidacy is a mirror held up in front of the face of America’s Democratic Party and its progressive wing, and the image that is reflected is an ugly one; more to the point, it’s one they do not want to see because it so violently conflicts with their desired self-perception."

@jinsd,

I call that a bunch of santorum....lol

NewtPig, you still can't come up with anything that doesn't involve "tard" in it. You are SO creative. Now why don't you run along and let the adults talk okay?

Anyone who supports the NDAA Bill disqualifies them in my book. Tyranny is not accepted! Restore the Bill of Rights, restore the U.S. Constitution and restore America. Vote Ron Paul, the only candidate qualified.

I would love to see the good Dr win it just to see the talking heads have to discuss it on the evening news while their faces turn purple.....;-0)

Be careful what you wish for. You may get change with Ron Paul, but you might not like what you get. His economic policy may sound good, but if he actually does what he says, the economic state of this country will get a whole lot worse before it gets any better. Jody is right. You won't want to live in the country that is the result of Ron Paul's policies.

@Newt

The next time you post something with any modicum of intelligence will be the first time.

I hope Ron Paul wins it. I'm getting sick and tired of the media writing him off as unelectable and a crackpot.

I see the young Cult of Paul is out in force today. How's the polish on your boots? I think we can disregard that part of the poll as misleading. Maybe Mitt doesn't get first, but he'll get second. It would be a shame if he didn't win this fairly meaningless caucus, after he spent his own version of the national debt on commercials here.

What does Franky the Dog think?

I think Santorum wins in an upset.

He might but in a general election my guess is only Ron Paul has a chance against Obama. The others are too far right to win.

Please let Gingrich win it. Then let Gingirch get the Republican Nomination. Then we know Obama will win in a landslide.

Most likely outcome:
Romeny - 1st

Paul - 2nd

Santorum - 3rd.

And all the rest.. sent packing down the road where they can no longer look like fools on national television.

vote Ron Paul if you are tired of getting screwed. thanks.

How cum no one is predicting Newty-on-the-Rooty as anything but LAST to second LAST?

Vote Ron Paul if you want to get screwed (and not in a good way)...... a lot!

(See no tard in there either!)

Personally, I think it is hilarious that the media tries as hard as they can to ignore Ron Paul, and yet over half the people who voted on this poll think he'll get the nomination.

Don't get me wrong, I don't support Ron Paul. His foreign policy is great for this country in my estimation, but his domestic policy is frightening.

I really don't think it matters who gets elected or re-elected this year, there are too many puppet masters and special interest groups behind the scenes pulling the strings. This country will continue to go in the same direction it has been going for the past 12 years. Looking at the chess board, I'd say we're going to enter WW3 within the next 10 years. Hope I'm wrong though.

Ron Paul needs to:

1. address the racism issues in the Newsletters better
2. explain how ignoring Iran until they can send a nuke to Israel or our way is gonna work
3. a better explanation why 9/11 was our fault
4. how ignoring Al Qaeda or the Taliban is going to protect American citizens in any way from violent mass terrorist attacks???
5. how letting the country fall apart when there is NO regulation or agencies making sure cut-throat corporations aren't screwing the 99% is gonna work out!!

You people are a bunch of herded sheep, and it makes me sad to see. You want America to be a better place but you ACTUALLY consider voting for candidates who have continuously supported things for the last 20 years that have engineered this economic catastrophe, and then lied to your face about it.

Everyone running for President today has been in support of unbalanced budgets, huge debt, continuous wars, and the degrading of our Bill of Rights. They have all been in support of things our Founding Fathers warned about over and over and over and over.

"Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence, (I conjure you to believe me fellow citizens) the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake; since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of Republican Government."- George Washington

"I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around [the banks] will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered. The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs." - Thomas Jefferson

"America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." - Abraham Lincoln.

ASK YOURSELF YOU BLIND SHEEP, why does the media try its hardest to discredit Paul and NO ONE ELSE!? Why are the huge corporations, banks, and media conglomerates all getting together and financing the campaigns of Romney and Obama and doing everything it can to discredit Ron Paul. Please, someone who is in their right mind, who doesn't have their head on totally backwards, tell me how Ron Paul is crazy when he says we should stop spending TRILLIONS of dollars we don't have!? And everyone else who is saying its ok, is sane!? What is God's green Earth is going on?

Paul has been warning about this stuff for decades now, echoing what the Founders warned about, and the media has been trying to call him crazy. The whole world wants us to vote Ron Paul. If you people really don't elect him into office you WILL see destruction. And honestly, you'll deserve every bit of it you sad bunch of fools.

@manfromTucket and other Ron Paul trolls regarding this poll,

These polls are ALWAYS skewed because some a$$tard posts on some stupid a$$ web page, twitter or Facebook that a poll is up on MSNBC. Then the RonPaul trolls all come here to flood the poll. Then people like you claim it's because of his overwhelming support..... lol. Too bad you can't legitimately do this for a REAL election!

• GET REAL!!!

So then why does Ron Paul win all the straw polls in every state? Iowa, California, Ohio, etc.? Is it because all his supporters fly all around the country to each one? Or because he may have a lot of support?

NewtPiggyPig: You need to get real. Stop hating the Ron Paul Revolution and try supporting whomever it is that you like.

Let's hope the Caucus in Iowa matches the votes on the vine, at this point in time Ron Paul 56.5%, more than twice Mitt Romney at 26.8%. Such a resounding victory would more or less force the media to acknowledge that Ron Paul is a real candidate who could, potentially, become President of the United States.

Remember, Obama won Iowa, tied NH, Lost MI, Lost FL, won Nevada, Won SC, split Super Tuesday and then Obama took the majority of the other delegates. Prior to Iowa, the media was crowning Clinton with Edwards her possible VP as the runner up. NO ONE was paying any attention to Obama.

However, President Obama, except for a few short months, has been saddled with a Senate which has not eliminated the ability to filibuster, thus unable to accomplish most of his goals.

A Ron Paul Presidency would be faced with similar obsticles. Maybe he will be smart enough to pick a strong VP candidate (Huntsman ?) who will be able to take over once the aged Dr. keels over from frustration in dealing with Congress.

newt the supposed Obama supporter why do you spend so much time spamming GOP boards putting down Ron Paul, something about you really smells

The RNC will never allow Ron Paul to be their standard bearer. Ron isnt a puppet and wont stand for corruption so Grover couldnt continue his ciminal enterprise with him as president. They will rig the vote for the primaries just as they will for the national election. They have already came out and said as much "if we dont win the presidency we will lose America and we arent willing to do that". The freak show that controls the conservative movement and the republican party truly believe that their imaginary friend wont come back and take the to heaven if liberals are in charge when he wants to make his visit. They think "he" is watching to see if we are having kinky sex and using alternative energy, if so he will make us wait another 2000 years. We need a good oil soaked white christian in office or none of us get to go to heaven.

Poor old paul hes got one foot in the Grave and hes winning nutty Iowa ??????

Actually, I think at this point Iowa is irrelevant. I knew that the republicans would play dirty....

Check some of these out...

presstv.com/usdetail/219170.html

Radio Interview....

www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQXVB9buAmc

She pretty much predicts the Iowa results the day before the caucus....

Iowa shouldn't be first in the nation... Politics is a Dirty Business but to be this bold faced about it...

Big AL! You need to know that Newsvine is basically libtard heaven and that any slamming of Obooboo will get your comments collapsed. Much like this one will.

Say it isn't so - Do you consider Christians in general cult members, or is it denominational? Are Catholics cult members, or how about Baptists. Maybe you consider Pentecostals, or Assembly of God members cultish. I'm wondering if you generalize about anyone that has the audacity to believe that Christ is risen from the grave as a cult member.

Pretty sure all of them are the wrong choice for America. Not one candidate, not even Huntsman, represents real American values and where real Americans actually come from. They are a disgrace, and it is even more disgraceful because America will have to put up with this sideshow for at least 4 more months, just so the Republicans can finally land on someone who represents the filth they have become.

@Brianb He is talking about Evangelicals. If you don't believe that is a cult, watch the documentary Jesus Camp. It's on Youtube. Here's a link:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rBv8tv62yGM. Try to deny the insanity that Evangelicals are after that.

@Brianb-999431 ...Yeah. You guys are. Dedicate your life to a higher power trying to get to a "promise land"? Believing in a book of "rules" from that higher power? Sounds pretty culty to me.

But go for it in my opinion. Believe in what you wish, as long as it doesn't get me involved in it.

Michigan - Any one of them stands heads above Obama. Talk about a disgrace. Maybe you actually like the president going on world tour and throwing America under the bus. Maybe you like watching our debt grow by trillions and the leader of this country doing nothing to stop it. I dunno that's pretty disgraceful in itself. Maybe you don't have any hope in America...

Kris - the choice is yours to make, and yours alone. Nobody can speak for you or take on your personal responsibility. That's all on you. Nobody can force you to decide... Isn't it wonderful that we all have personal choices to make and are accountable for those choices? Everything we do has consequences... By all means, enjoy the fruit of your choices...

I get the impression you absolutely know for sure what happens when you die. I'm not that fortunate. Going into a different dimension after life may have surprising results. But then if you feel that you have no soul, and all ends when you die, by my guest to ridicule those of us that believe.... You are accountable for your actions... if not now.. later.

Brianb-999431....yes they are all religious cult members !... the choice is yours to make, and yours alone. Nobody can speak for you or take on your personal responsibility. That's all on you. Nobody can force you to decide.. Then why do the religious cult member try to ram their beliefs down the throats of America? And if you don't believe as they order you to ...your dammed ....

@Brianb

Umm...... sorry but what you are saying is that Michelle "Let's Bomb Iran Now" Bachmann, Rick "I Don't Know What Government Programs I Would Kill, But I'll Kill them Anyways" Perry and Rick "I Hate Fags And Am Godamit I'm Proud Of It" Santorum, are all better than Obama?

Please, that's so insane I can't even believe you believe it. We'll I guess I shouldn't be surprised by Republicans these days. My bad.

If you argue with a fool, its just two fools arguing. You have your opinion and I have mine. Its not worth arguing over.

@Just me

Or more like 7 fools arguing, in the same room, trying to get the vote of a completely un-American party.

Every single member of that band of merry nutcases would be unelectable in any other election in any other year in American history. I tip my hat to the Republicans for failing so badly, and making Obama's reelection-the one thing they don't want the most-as easy as possible.

Brian, Christianity became unholy when some believers took the view that it somehow glorified GOD for them to cram their personal views down other people's throats. When they decided that it was ok to legislate those views and deprive others who hold different views of their liberty because they do not agree with them. That is not Christianity. It is hypocritical to tell someone that they should be individually responsible for their morality and actions (backed up in Biblical viewpoint) but then legislate and try to Force people to conform to your own moral standards or act only in a way of which you approve. The Bible in fact tells believers outright to Not force their ways on others. Those that do, in fact, will wield the Mark. The Mark will be bestowed by "believers" who honestly think they are doing right, but when they approach Christ to be judged will be turned away as unrecognized. Living a Christian lifestyle is great if that is your choice, but GOD plainly gives everyone that choice and tells believers not to remove that choice, that those who chose to live by other standards will be judged by God and God alone. Justifying removing that choice by any means is not Christian. Tell your minister to teach you how to glorify GOD, but you are not interested in his Opinion about how you should vote. THAT would be the Christian thing to do.

Maybe you like watching our debt grow by trillions and the leader of this country doing nothing to stop it.

Maybe you should figure out what Congress is supposed to be for.

Say it isn't so
"Santorum is a crazy religious cult member"
Your statement is precisely what is wrong with America today. Every other word, every other statement is about demeaning someone else void of any concrete fact simply because you don't like something you were inaccurately told, or deduced, about a religion, fellow citizen from another region or of another race.
I am not a Roman Catholic, but Santorum is. The only people who call this denomination of Christianity extreme are a few truly extreme Protestants sects OR the anti-religious that are so extreme themselves that they don't respect others who believe the slightest bit different from them.
The biggest offenders I find are the Leaders of the Democratic Party – who claim there are no $1,000,000 dollar job creators, when the IRS clearly recognizes thousands of them.

Brian: I have no trouble letting you and Santorum believe whatever you want. What I have trouble with is when you want to make those beliefs part of the American law. For instance. As it now stands, if anyone objects to getting an abortion, they don't have to. Under Santorum's law, those who do not hold to his belief system would be prevented from getting an abortion. Now, schools, as agents of the state, cannot favor any religion. Under Santorum's law, they would have to promote Christian prayer. Now, civil rights are in the process of being granted to gays. Under Santorum's law, gays would be denied the same rights as everyone else in America. In other words, keep your beliefs out of my life.

Amused - Everyone is accountable. Even those people that distort the truth. To take an entire religion and say that one or two people speak for that religion is completely rediculous. Of course those one or two people can have their belief system but they don't effect you, me, or anyone else. You may believe in little green men. How does that effect me? How does it effect anyone else? Personal belief is a choice everyone makes.

What the liberals are doing is saying that those who express their beliefs are wrong. Shall I say it about you, or anyone else that expresses an anti-God position? If I were like liberals, I would speak out about it, but since I know everyone thinks differently, or expresses themselves differently it would be quite foolish of me to do so... that's one of the distinguishing differences I have with liberals. I invite you to believe how you want to.

Some Christians do try to cram their beliefs down other people's throats. I've seen it happen. If I'm face to face with that particular person, I tell them that my belief is different than theirs and I'm not interested in their version. Usually that ends it. If you aren't strong enough as a person to do that, than suffer what they say, especially if you find it offensive. Don't blame other Christians for the faults of one or two. If you do, then it's your problem, not mine or anyone else's.

The religion argument from the left is completely unjustified and only meant to demean people that do have their faith. If that person has faith, who are you to condemn it?

If you feel condemned by the Christian teachings then again, that's your problem not mine. I didn't write the Bible, nor did I choose the words written in it. I certainly can't change those words. You have one of two choices, believe it, or or don't believe it. Whatever you choose, you have to live with it, not me.

See, the choice is all yours, not mine. I've made my choice and I am perfectly content with it. My choice may be different than yours... so be it. It all boils down the act of choosing. Be content in your choice... I am.

It is not religion that is corrupt, it is man who corrupted religion. As long as one tries to live a moral, decent life what does it matter?

Jamie - no American president will change the abortion law. It doesn't work that way. I am against abortion in all cases. To me it's the murder of an individual soul. Can I change the law? Not at all. All I can do is express my opinion about it. The president doesn't have the power to change the abortion law... so it really doesn't matter what a president thinks about it, now does it? just because you feel that a mother can destroy the fetus doesn't make it right either.

Your objection isn't based on how the laws in this country work. Congress sets the laws and the Supreme Court can change case law. The president has no power over the law.

Hello phancy! It is mankind that corrupts. From what I believe it was all caused by a piece of fruit. Blame the fruit! LOL.

BB

I just baked an apple pie! :)

@Brian,
No, the POTUS does not set abortion policy, but the SCOTUS can change the laws, and it's probable that the next POTUS will make one more SCOTUS nomination in the next 4 years. That's just one of the thousands of reasons to vote for Obama. Your comments that an unborn baby is a soul is completely founded on religion, and in no way should affect our laws. If you don't want abortions to happen then start advocating proper sex education for our children, instead of useless abstinence only programs. Government doesn't belong in the doctors office.

fbikerchick - Congress involves 2 branches. Neither of them agree on anything. It's the president that requests the debt increases. It's liberals that go all weird when congress says no. They blame republicans for not readily agreeing to a debt increase... so exactly what are you trying to point out?

phancy - you're safe. I don't believe it was an apple. Somewhere along the way I either heard, or was told that it was a pomagranite. LOL

DBAkron, I applaud your post.

It is indeed unfortunate that democrats- particularly those who are Obama worshippers- choose to use inflammatory statements and ridicule to "win" support for their idol. Included in this kind of zombie thinking are the hosts of this site.

They put that inflammatory statement in the blue box outside of this article.

Yet another example of liberal tolerance. . .

Dem in Texas - Without using any religious reference... do you have a soul? If you say no, then case closed. If you say yes, then tell me exactly when the soul enters the body. At what magical point does the soul exist?

Sex education should be a parent's job. So many parents are afraid of talking to their kids about it that kids are completely uneducated. The school's have sex education teachings.. but do you really think kids listen? They don't take it seriously. One thing about abstinence is that it is guaranteed not to create an unwanted pregnancy or spread VD. If there's something wrong with that, by all means express it. Now if you want to interject the lack of personal responsibility, then that's the issue, not sex education. Do tell me though... considering abortions, when do two wrongs make a right?

Brian B - Wanted to add to the conversation about choice. The choice to be a Christian or an atheist or the choice to be a Muslim, is up to that person. You have to live with that choice. I agree. I think what a lot of people are saying, some more diplomatically than others, is the GOP spends too much time mixing religion with politics.

Regarding your statements on abortion, however I am not against all abortions. What about rape, incest, the life of the mother? As you state, only God should judge. Why would I have the audacity to judge a woman who chooses to have an abortion. Do I know her situation, her finances or her reasons.

As you state the president can not change the law, so why do Republicans push this issue time and time again during presidential elections? The President can only change the makeup of the court.

But you are right. Choice is all important! That is why even though I, as a Christian, personally disagree with the reasoning for the majority of abortions. I believe that there is still a choice that a woman has. A choice, that the courts have lawfully determined as a freedom and right of her privacy. The husband, family all have the right to try to influence how she decides. The doctor obviously has a voice when it comes to the life of the motehr. But it is still her choice.

You can't take choice away.

MSNBC does it again...... They left off the choice of "None of the above" Which is what I would choose.

Shame on you MSNBC.

The biggest offenders I find are the Leaders of the Democratic Party – who claim there are no $1,000,000 dollar job creators, when the IRS clearly recognizes thousands of them

Cool! I guess the unemployment problem is solved!

News flash: sitting on $1,000,000 doesn't make you a job creator. Creating jobs does.

Republicanspeak would crack me up if they weren't so successful with it.

Yellowdog - Thanks... a bit of reasonable influence into the argument. There are levels of my angst against abortion. First of all I don't have the right to make any choice for a woman when it comes to abortion. I do have the right to express my opinions on it though. It angers me for women to use an abortion as a method of birth control, or the government to influence a decision based on population control. Call me a zealot, but there are other methods to prevent pregnancies. To waste a life because of a momentary lapse of self control, or just not following safe methods is inexcusable to me. In the event of rape or incest, those two are always brought up in the defense of abortions. Those two produce offspring only on very rare occassions. It would be unfair to say the mother shouldn't have a choice, although I am still against the destruction of a fetus, even in those situations. As far as the mother's life - she deserves the right to live and if it means the loss of the fetus, although unfortunate, she comes first. Again a very rare occurance.

The abortion issue being brought up by candidates is nothing more than a wedge issue. A lot of people are against the outcome of roe v wade and candidates that use abortion as a campaign promise are pandering to that base of people. The same with religion... they are trying to win the evangelical vote.

At what magical point does the soul exist?

At the point you realize that you have one. In other words, when you realize that YOU exist. Not until. And once again, I ask that you read your bible. I think you will find passages there that will lead you to the conclusion that you do not have a sole prior to having a conscious. The Bible tells us that an infant at birth is innocent and will not be judged. I think it would do a lot of Christians a lot of good to ponder the meaning of that for a little bit and forget the pastoral extremism.

Brianb999431 - and what about the man who also had this "lapse of self control?" Oh wait, I forgot - for the far right it is only the woman's issue. The fact that you would choose to force a woman to carry a child conceived through rape or incest to term tells it all. As a man, you have no concept of what this puts a woman through. The choice of abortion has to be left to the mother. Although I would probably choose not to have one - except in the case of rape - it is still clearly the choice that the mother should make. Outsiders should have no say on the subject. Plus, until everyone insisting that a woman not have that choice has adopted at least one child, they should keep their mouths shut. I'm amazed by the far right that wants every child born but then turns away if help is needed in providing for that same child. What could be more hypocritical?

Yellowdog

There are people who hold the sanctity of life so high, that ending any life prematurely is for anything other than a crime is criminal. If you think about this, this is a much higher standard than whatever I want is right.

Where the Christian strays is that this is a lost world. In the Bible, God gets that and because he does he proclaims that he hates divorce, but he allows it because of the callousness of people.

Santorums supports exceptions to abortion even though he personnally is against abortion in all cases. It appears he has a more mature Christianity than quite a few Christians. As a protestant, I would tell you that I don't see very large numbers of Christians, protestants or catholic, that achieve that kind of maturity in that area.

no joe, no bo, nj

Sorry that you believe that us "Obama Worshiping", "Idol supporting", "zombie thinking" democrats show so much "liberal tolerance" with our "inflammatory statements".

Do you people even listen to yourselves? Do you seriously think you made any sense at all?

What blue box? What inflammatory statement?

You bring it on yourselves.

I voted for Ron Paul because his supporters are the most passionate, and you have to be passionate about your candidate to be willing to sit through a caucus. (You can't just check a box and leave, as they do in primary states.)

Yeah

Ron Paul

If you want to bury your head in the sand and have another 9/11 or worse.

We can have dead soldiers, or mass casualty dead civilians........? Not an easy choice.

Yeah

Ron Paul

If you want to bury your head in the sand and have another 9/11 or worse.

Yea, because if we had had the patriot act or NDAA 911 would not have happened? Nevermind not a SINGLE WARRANT was requested even though we had GOOD intel about a threat to fly airplanes into buildings.

So in your opinion if we just keep bombing the middle east we will be safer... even though us bombing the middle east is a reason given from the highjacking nutjobs for organizing an attack on us?

Let me ask you, how many more terrorist do we create when we cause the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Muslims? How many brothers, fathers, and uncles will hate the US and have nothing to lose at the same time?

911 did not happen because we had Ron Paul's foreign policy, it happened because we DIDN'T have his foreign policy AND we didn't act on the good intel we already had i.e. specific threats to use planes or defend our borders HERE by tracking down visa stay violators.

We can have dead soldiers, or mass casualty dead civilians........? Not an easy choice.

Where did you purchase your false choice? I recommend returning it.

Amy--I think you make a good point about Ron Paul's organization---his supporters are supposed to be very passionate about him. We see that here on FR every day---his supporters are the only ones who are positive about their candidate, not just negative about President Obama. Wonder if all the college kids are back in school, though.

Where did you purchase your false choice?

Fux Noose where else?

I recommend returning them.

Very sound advice indeed. Too bad it won't be heeded.

Steeler Fan -

I agree with you and Amy about Ron Paul's organization and the loyalty of his supporters. I don't know about your neck of the woods, but over here in eastern PA - and out in Lancaster County, where I spent some time on Saturday - the ONLY Republican lawn signs and bumper stickers I've seen so far are for Paul - though even they're out-numbered by the "McCain/Palin" signs still flapping from a few telephone poles.

Of course, the early lead in the bumper sticker polls here is still easily "Obama 2012".....

"We see that here on FR every day---his supporters are the only ones who are positive about their candidate, not just negative about President Obama."

Thank you for the kind words Steeler Fan. Although I don't like your football team ;), I appreciate your take. We try to focus on positives and improving our country. Trust me, I am no fan of President Obama, but I'd rather focus on why I believe Ron Paul is better instead of why I don't like President Obama. Too much of politics is focused on negatives and why one candidate isn't good enough, and not enough is focused on positives and how to make improvements. It's not enough to simply criticize someone if you can't offer up a solution.

Ron Paul is racist bigot. You want to know, who he really is? read his books from early years, he of coarse denies his own writings and endorsements. If you really think that guy that tells woman if you being sexually harassed at your job, quit that job is right choice for president, it either you ignorant, stupid or just like him? One that believe that employer can do anything they want to do with their business even if it abuses their workers is ok, then ok go vote for him. But Ron Paul is dangerous for America and very extreme.

Mr Rogers - The terroists came over here to destroy our country they are still active. They came over before 911 and continue to work behind the seens - we have simply foiled what they have dreamed of in recent years. If you let them and Iran continue, they will come again, and again, and again.

I voted for Ron Paul is this poll, not because I support much of anything he says, but by my own process of elimination. Paul has the best organized GOP caucus group and the most loyal supporters than the others. Paul's supporters will not be swayed by the other's speeches or arm twisting. Santorum will likely get the biggest share of evangelicals simply because Rick Perry's problem is, as an Iowa GOPer put it, "we don't need another flag waving Texan" plus he makes George Bush look smart. Romney will get the votes of the more moderate GOP but Gingrich will get some of those moderates.

Odd ball out, here. I chose Willard - he just spent so darn much money, I'd hate for him not to get the win he paid for! :0)

DB Akron, fear will defeat us far quicker than any terrorist; fear led to irrational decisions to start an unnecessary war as well as using fear as a political weapon to keep people in line to support those wrong-headed decisions. I prefer FDR's words, "the only thing we have to fear is fear itself."

Paul, the problem with such a choice of either dead soldiers or mass casualties is that those soldiers are less than one-half a percent of the total population. Maybe when we reinstate the draft to affect everyone, the answer to the question is less clear, those in power less likely to invade and start a war for no good reason.

Steeler Fans- Iowa colleges are not yet back in session, and don't start back up until late January. It is unlikely that any measurable amount of out of state college students will travel back to their Iowa college or university to caucus for Ron Paul. 2008 was the first time the caucus was held before colleges were in session. In 2008 Obama (and the other two campaigns with lots of money) did provide buses from the Chicago suburbs (where most out of state students at the 3 state schools live) for out of state students who wanted to caucus at their college.

Paul's organization is better than most in the field, but I've never seen such a poorly organized GOP field. I received a Robo call on my cell from Paul's campaign inviting me to attend the Ames straw poll (free transportation and ticket included) despite being a registered Democrat. Paul's campaign called every cell phone in Iowa, that isn't organization, that's the equivalent of junk mail sent to "current resident". Rick Perry has Bobby Jindal doing robo calls to all cell numbers. Again that isn't organization. My son voted in the 2010 GOP primary (hoping the unelectable GOP candidate would win the governor's race- which would ensure the Democratic governor's re-election), he changed his registration back to Democratic a few weeks later, but given he is on the 2010 GOP primary voter registration list one would expect him to be inundated with GOP candidate material. Despite having voted in the 2010 GOP primary he has not received any literature from Ron Paul. He has received plenty from Rick Perry.

Ron Paul did have out of state college volunteers canvasing my neighborhood New Years Eve. Obama also had people going door to door in late 2007, but his effort was targeted to registered Democrats and people identified as Democratic leaning Independents. Obama's volunteers broke out alone to cover more ground. Paul had three volunteers going to each house. They had no idea whether they were knocking on a GOP, Independent or Democratic household. Having 3 people go together to each house instead of three people covering the development individually shows a lack of basic organization, and failing to target homes to registered GOP and Independents was more evidence that the people calling the shots have no clue what they are doing.

Jody

IGNORANCE of the consistent history of radical behavior of the factions in the middle east and persistant to get what they want. To them, they have nothing, so they are plenty willing to lay their life down to any leadership to destroy whatever thier leader says is evil.

You fail to recgonize why Truman dropped the Atomic bomb on Nagasaki and Hiroshima. It wasn't fear, it was recognizing the huge loss of American lives we would have to suffer to hand combat every single japanese soldier who really would die for his emperor and absorb every harikari pilot that would hit ships. Even 50 years after japan surrendered, there still another japanese soldier who did not surrender. http://www.wanpela.com/holdouts/registry.html

Over half of the Gitmo Detaines released - returned to work for El Quaida.

This is not fear, this is documented FACT. Somewhere you have to live in the real world and deal with it as it really is!

Wow Connie - Can I borrow your crystal ball? I could use the sports scores this week to place some winning bets on. After all your statement is filled with certanty. I understand you think he can't lose, but have you considered all the negatives he's carrying? You might want to weigh those negatives with his potential to win before being so positive... unless it's wishful thinking.. and in that case, there is no certainty.

Who you gonna believe.....your ideological delusions...or the polls, which show Obama LOSING, and helping the GOP to take Congress as well.

@Connie not after passing National Defense Authorization Act New Year's Eve... or the fact he might pass the Stop Online Piracy Act. That's complete crap and those educated in politics will not stand for that.

@Brianb - Like how all last year Republicans claimed they would take both the House and Senate? Please, let's get real. Your party seems to forget these things so easily. Also, who do you think is better than Obama? Big business Romney or nucking futs Paul?

@Bob Turn off Fox for just a second, and actually site a source to back up your claims, that is not Fox News.

I'm going to be voting for Ron Paul and even if I was going to vote for whoever the actual republican nomination is, (which unless it's Ron Paul I won't), but I don't see anyone beating Obama next election. We have the best candidate for America, who everyone treats like a crazy kook and like he has no chance, then we have the typical slime balls, who will now even try to jump on the religious bandwagon and those candidates have chance in hell.

Religion serves no place in our government. People, we have do have separation of church and state for a reason.

A good reason.

That was supposed to say "no chance in hell".

helping the GOP to take Congress as well.

The GOP already has Congress. I know it's hard to tell, since they haven't actually DONE anything with it.

Connie, Obama SHOULD win. Woe upon all of us if the GOP gains conrol of Senate AND wins the presidental race. It will be worse than when Bush was president.

And Obama NEVER promised a quick turn around to the mess we were in when he got elected. NEVER. He said on several occasions it would take time. Let's not make the same mistake we made with Jimmy Carter...we kicked him out just when his policies were starting to turn around things for the better, and Regan got in there and took credit for all the good Carter did but ended up making the country worse off economically and in foreign policy. Carter would never have allowed what Regan did in Afghanastan, for example. We lost out when we voted Carter out...I pray it doesn't happen again this time. I honestly believe by 2016 we will be better off with Obama but if we get a GOP candidate in there we will be worse off by 2016.

I understand Obama isn't perfect. I don't rubber stamp every decision he's made, but I honestly do think we'd be FAR worse off if McCain had won instead. We would still be in two wars, if not more. McCain would have likely taken the Ghadaffi situation further and launched war against Iran.

If the debt has gotten deeper under Obama, a lot of that was because of policies put in place by Bush that Obama has worked hard to reverse but the GOP in control of the senate won't budge on any of it. If they can't keep the top 1% happy and keep corporations raking in billions of dollars they don't care if they screw the rest of us in the process. If we could get back to the tax code we had under Clinton then the deficit would not get so huge. But the GOP is hardended to not increase taxes on the top 1%. That should tell you who they work for...they are NOT working for the working class Republicans anymore. They are a shell of the former party they were 25 years ago or more.

I am curious to know how many working class citizens are supporting a GOP candidate this year? If you think you will be better off four years from now if you get one of them in the White House, you are deluded. And don't come back complaining about the GOP president when the economy tanks into a depression.

With the cast of clowns the GOP has running there is no doubt in my mind that Obama will win...and I'm sure this will send you repubs in a tizzy, but unless you all are successful in your voter suppression, there is no way Obama should lose.

If you're so sure, they have a candidate that can beat Obama please tell me who.

A. Rick "Oops" Perry

B. Mitt (Willard) "I used to be indecisive now I'm not so sure" Romney

C. Rick " Contraceptives are not OK" Santorum

D. Newt "Sly Dog" Gingrich

E. Michelle "Bibically Qualified" Bachmann ( I had to chuckle just typing that one)

F. Ron "KKK" Paul

G. Paul Huntsman.....well I don't see him as being so bad, he seems to be the only one with good COMMON sense ...which is why He would NEVER get the GOP nomination.

Brent-independent: The reason people treat Ron Paul like a Kook, is because he is a kook. I used to feel sorry for Paul, because of the lack of attention he received, and his treatment on Fox. However the more his views were revealed (not just his newsletters) it was clear he is a nut. He was caught on tape recently telling an Iowa fan that he can't publicly mention that Bush may have had knowledge of 9/11 before hand, because he'd be killed in the media. He didn't tell the truther she was nuts, or avoid her question, he sympathized with her, and explained why he couldn't publicly give his opinion on the matter. And his former aide has said Paul does believe that Bush was warned in advance about the attack. When a birther asked Newt Gingerich about Obama not being born in the US, he didn't side step it, he clearly said there is no doubt Obama was born in HI.

Ron Paul actually said in one of the GOP debates he would get of the FAA, that he thinks that air security and air safety (both of planes mechanically and flight patterns) should be the airlines responsibility and not the governments. That is as crazy as any of his other opinions. Would you get on an airline if United, American, Jet Blue etc was solely responsible for the safety of their airplane, and there was no agency to oversee air traffic control? I know I wouldn't, and I've yet to meet a single person who actually would.

YES, You go girl! Connie is exactly right....none of these clowns stand a chance in Hell of winning an election agains the President....no chance at all and my crystal ball don't lie!!! I still hope Ron Paul wins for the entertainment value...

Do you like voicing your opinion on here?Some people here make no sense and blabber off at the mouth just to be typing.But,that is their "Right"(not "privilege)to say whatever they feel like saying.Even if it is said for a inflammatory response.Or to be slanderous,and even just down right nasty!Do you like to hear those kinds of statements?Or how about when someone spouts off some certifiable B.S and you are able to respond with facts to disprove such crapola.It is an awesome "right " (not privilege)to be able to bounce these ideas off one another.It inspires people to view the subject from many different frames of reference.Now isn't it just soo cool!

So who do you think is fighting to keep that "right"(and all the other ones)?And who just signed a bill to limit some of those precious "rights",that so many people have died to protect and defend.The same "rights" that have made us the envy of the whole civilized world?Our President (whom I voted for)Barrack Obama.He said there was change coming!But this isn't what we thought he had in mind,is it?

The more I watch ANY "news" channels,the more I have noticed how there is definitely a anti-Paul agenda.Every single channel either,A:ignores and denies his successes,B:Down play his record of voting for The Constitution.C:Talk completely around his standings in the race.Or ,D:Lies unanimously over his following.ie Hippies,college kids,conspiracy theorists,etc...

Yet he keeps rising in the polls.Steady.Not surging.They say he is an isolationist.Isn't saying I get ALL the power and will delegate to those I wish to,a isolationist view with heavy grandiose narcissism?Do we win more favor by being a bully or an ally?Should we be forcing ourselves on the world as though they should be happy to have us occupy them?We didn't like being occupied by the brits.I have been doing as much searching as I can on here.And I can not see where anyone wouldn't vote for the only person who has fought for our "rights" like Ron Paul.Yes his views sound outside of the mainstream.Outside of the mainstream politicians.I haven't been able to find anyone who has defended EVERYBODYS "rights".Nobody that holds any federal office is willing to see him succeed,for fear of losing their department and all of its entitlements.We didn't bomb the USSR when they had their 30k nukes pointed at us.We worked it out through,get this.....diplomacy.lol.I know it sounds crazy.But it worked.We are doing the same thing to Iran we did to Japan before Pearl Harbor.Sanction after sanction.With that direction war will be imminent.

If you like how and what our country was founded on,you would vote for who best protects those "rights and privileges"that great document has afforded us! And the only person that fit that description is Ron Paul.

Ex! Obama Supporter!

Ron Paul 2012

And who just signed a bill to limit some of those precious "rights",that so many people have died to protect and defend.The same "rights" that have made us the envy of the whole civilized world?

Funny I don't remember Obama signing the voter ID laws to suppress our rights to vote. Or were you talking about some other bill.

I suggest you do more research on your candidate..

Those laws are not to stop you from voting (unless you do not have that right), its to stop those who have not pledged their allegiance to our nation by becoming legal citizens, from voting. And to any of you who say " oh but I can not get my i.d bc I don't have a ride", well how are you going to vote? and those wonderful federal programs from medicaid to medicare will provide a taxi at the taxpayers expense for you to see you doctor and/or go grocery shopping, I am sure they could work out something for you to get an I.D. And if you are a recluse who never leaves your house and votes by mail, how can you expect to make and or use your vote to its full advantage if you are not out in the real world everyday dealing with everyday issues?

Our great and wonderful constitution gives citizens the right to vote and now we want ppl to prove they have the right to vote. The argument that they are trying to suppress your rights stopped way back when you had to have an I.D to buy alcohol, cigs, drive a car and even write checks or use a credit card. Those things were not rights given by the Constitution and they mandated those. So why can't we mandate voter I.D to make sure those who are voting have in fact the right to vote? Do you really want ppl voting who do not believe in america and therefore in our constitution and have no wish to pledge their total loyalty to our nation and its constitution? But its ok to abuse our constitutionally given rights for themselves while avoiding prosecution for breaking our immigration laws and continuing to invade a country. Some immigrants are more than willing to pledge allegiance to america and to uphold her ideals, and yes they may have to wait a while to have their legal voter I.D cards but we did not free this country in a day, so they need to be patient, they will get their cards and vote with us bc they stood up and said " I want to be an american, I want to fight for america, I will stand by and support america and her constitution, I will have no other allegiances to my home country or any other foreign nation." I am proud of those who will stand up and say their pledge....

I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform noncombatant service in the Armed Forces of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform work of national importance under civilian direction when required by the law; and that I take this obligation freely without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; so help me God.

You say this and I will fight for your right to vote, but first I wanna see you have pledged, so show me your I.D and I will stand beside you and support your rights under the constitution you have asked to be protected under and that you asked to protect.

I also would be really ticked if someone decided to vote under my name and voted demo!!!

RP 2012

Texas gal please step off your soap box before you fall and hurt yourself.

1. If the voter ID laws were trully meant to keep those from voting who don't have the legal right to vote, Then WHY aren't they required to vote in the republican primaries?

2. You have an issue with non-citizens voting in our elections....Its funny you don't have an issue with non-citizens fighting for your freedoms in our military.

wow Connie I have never been so insulted in my life, or hurt by such a hateful comment..guess I will just flip over and let anyone vote who wants to. After-all the republicans allow the non legals to vote so why dont we just all do it . You are soooo right Connie, sooo right please step aside and let the non-legals vote, which is not supposed to be legal but well you just make such a good point bc republicans let them do it, we should too. I bow to your apparent superior intelligence.

And I happen to think anyone who is serving in our military had better be an american patriot and if they want to be citizens then serving our country in this manner had better lay out a golden carpet for legal citizenship. But if you are serving my country but do not actually serve this master, who is your true master and when will you stab us in the back?

I did not say I have no problem with non-citizens in our military fighting for our freedoms and if you are so busy coming up with witty soap box comments to actually read between the lines then I am not gong to bother with you! All you see is that I do not glide smoothly along with your ideas and thus I can not possibly have a valid point. Thank you for your oh so wonderful and ingenious comments!

Wow, you said sooo much but yet you said NOTHING at all.

bc republicans let them do it, we should too.

You darn RIGHT. Don't impose a law on me that you are not following yourself.

I won't waste my time addressing all your gibberish.

Bottom line, it was said that the repubs main goal was to make Obama a one term president, and these voter laws along with the whole birther movement (NH is trying to resurrect) are just some of the tactics that they will use to try to make make that happen

Hey I am not completely against our POTUS, and yes I have a similar belief that no law should be enacted that they do not want to follow themselves. Laws of that nature should be fair, all or nothing, either everyone for every vote must show I.D or no one does(total chaos). I just happen to think it should be an ALL show situation. And only Obama can make himself a one term POTUS, I did vote for him so you can stave off the republican hatred, but at heart I am a conservative and at times a radical constitutionalist.

But I firmly believed him when he said we needed more border protection and a fence. That is important down here and he flipped on it. So I have not lost all hope in him bc he is after all just a man but I see everyday what the undocumented are asking for and/demanding and while I would have no issue if they truly wanted to be Americans, I do have an issue with them standing in the streets with signs saying give it back or we will take it.

And coming across the border asking for S.S of all things, then medicaid, then housing assistance, and bc they will work so cheap we have these darn OWS folks whining about low wages. Nobody looks at it from a single starting point and follows to the results. Fine give them amnesty if thats what they want, but down here in my area of Texas they do not want amnesty, they want aztlan and for us Texas (f- expletive-ers) to get OUR IMMIGRANTS BUTTs OFF THEIR LAND!!!

If Republicans say no I.D for this vote then flip and say you must have one for this vote, yes that is stupid. So make any vote an I.D required vote.

I did address the issues you brought up. Voter I.D Republicans rules are wishy washy, and I addressed the illegals in the military issues. So what did I miss, other than taking offense at your soap box comment. This is a comment about the "article" thing not a name calling and best cut-down match!

I just happen to live in an area where all the illegals voices are loud and demanding and tend to get nasty. So yes I am alittle prickly on the possibility of voter fraud bc afterall we have a lot of criminals running our govt'.

Heck I would go so far as to say make your I.D your thumb print, see now how is that hard. Nice, neat, clean and easy.

you must be from Fla. J/K =O)

It's possible it won't let you vote twice.

Hey Seymour,

Thanks for inventing the mini skirt...

Its amazing how over 9000 votes has been cast and Ron Paul is leading...so I'm sure your theory of "Falsely constructing a non-biased poll" can be summed up as USER ERROR..

Typical...making a mountain out of a mole hill

Being Newsvine - I'd have exected Romney to be the pick to win.

YES VOTE FOR RON PAUL IF YOU WANT TO DISMANTLE THE GOVERNMENT, IF DON'T CARE ABOUT LABOR, IF YOU RACIST BIGOT, THEN GO AHEAD VOTE FOR HIM.

want to know who he is, go read his books and endorsements from earlier years. He suddenly denies it, but it is hard to do so. Because it all over media. lol

Maksim - it is safe to presume you didn't read his books. I bet you may have read the selected out of context excerpts provided for you by some organization. Expect a tar and feather job from those who did!

The racism charge is over eight lines he did not write, and is pretty safe to say he probably did not read - and should have read - put a stop to. I also am aware that there were two civil rights bills, he vote for the better one, the majority voted for the watered down one - because that was all that could get past the closet racist democrats at the time.

Not to mention a couple of groups that would and have disagreed.President of the NAACP,and ACLU.And the ACLU gave Ron Paul a higher rating than OBAMA!How can he be considered a racist with those two entities alone?People you need to do research before you say things unless you enjoy the taste of your foot.Insert foot now.

Ron Paul!!!

LMBO, finally someone else noticed that all of these minority associations have thrown their vote in to RP. Wow wondered how long it was going to take. And the main reason they support him is bc he supports the constitution which support their rights to change the way their states run and as to just how much control the federal govt' has over their people.

FREEDOM BABY!!!

Ron Paul 2012/2013.....

Well JoAnne, I can't tell you that but I can tell you that religion serves no place in our government. People, we do have separation of church and state for a reason.

(Wohoo! No typos that time).

Brent---I have always thought that one of the reasons our country has been so successful is the separation of church and state. I just don't get how Republicans treat this like it is a terrible thing.

Brent -

I beg to differ. No, not about religion; you're absolutely correct there.

But I do believe it's "woohoo", not "wohoo"...... :)

JoAnne,

Didn't you hear? Michele is predicting a "MIRACLE". She probably petitioned God for it personally. With all those "Positive Ways" she can't lose man!!

LMAO :)

fuzzy,

But, but, but I thought Rick Perry had God on speed dial?

Think that's Frothy that has the lord on speed dial....or hell, with this bunch it could be a Conference Call..

Steeler fan "always thought" doesn't count.

Read the federalist papers, and the minutes to the Philadelphia convention. Seems the convention was ready to break up before one member suggested they open the next day in prayer.

Separation meant No religion was to be the state religion (Italy, Brittain, France . . . ). Congress was not to make a law in favor of A specific religion (denomination) or specifically against A religion (denomination). Those lines were deemed to create a "separation" of church and state and not an exclusion or else they would not have used the Bible in the courts and used prayer to open each session of congress. Yes, those things are still done today.

Yes they are.But are we better for it?Are we more governed by its (the bible) message.Or the words of the Deist author of the declaration of independence?The latter.

Sorry but Rick just needs come back to Texas and stop embarrassing us. I promise he is not normally so....weird(all I could come up with). And yes he has become a little more out with his religion but well thats why we have the freedom of religion and speech. And I am fairly sure there is a cute little clause somewhere that says he even has the right to embarrass his state. I propose we amend that clause to say "but when you are acting like a drunk fish you must go home."

Ron Paul 2012/2013

"Santorum -- google it."

This message brought to you by the Committee for People Against Insane Evangelical Catholics.

flbikerchick

Use Dogpile.com instead. Google Filters based on who pays. Filters on Time relevancy and HHS has been known to pay google for the priviledge.

Recently on Newsvine a number of people made the erroneous claim that Justice Thomas, and Anthony Scalia never have recused. Google showed ZERO, but Dogpile found many times where these guys recused themselves. Worse yet, Google showed 1 Recusal for Kagen and Dogpile showed 21.

I think Obama lost all chance at reelection the minute he admitted that there were no shovel ready jobs.

Shouldn't you be asking how it was, and still could be, possible that there are no "shovel ready jobs" in America while our infrastructure crumbles all around us? It's been neglected for 35 years now.

Amy,

funny, when I heard Romney passionately shouting down the wackjob loons heckling him, by correctly saying "corporations are people, too" , I thought he may have won the election;

This was his Reagan " I paid for this microphone" moment.

Probably neither is true, he didnt win nor lose the election with one statement.

Most Amercians arent zealot anti-business wackjobs, and realize corporations provide services and jobs

True but most Americans also know that corporations are not people.

Amy, I work for a corporation. Every time you attack it you attack my livelihood and how I provide for my family. Out of curiosity what is the source of your income? Does it come from an "acceptable" source?

True but most Americans also know that corporations are not people.

So what are they? Do people make the decisions? Do people execute the plans? Do people produce the goods and services that corporations supply? Would the world be a better place without corporations? If so, what would you replace them with?

For an Administration that desperately wants to create jobs it seems they have a poor understanding of how jobs are created.

So what are they?

They are legal entities formed for the purpose of doing business.

Do people make the decisions?

Yes, they're called "managers," and as individuals, are already guaranteed their rights by the Constitution. They don't get more rights through being employed.

Do people execute the plans?

Yes they're called "employees," and like managers, are already guaranteed their individual rights by the Constitution. They are not entitled to extra protection just because they collect a paycheck.

Do people produce the goods and services that corporations supply?

Yes, and people also BUY the goods and services that corporations supply. In fact, that is WHY corporations supply those goods and services. Without customers, there would be no corporations. It is the middle class, the consumers who create jobs through demand, not the other way around.

I work for a corporation too. Guess what? I don't want that corporation to be able to undermine our electoral process by virtue of the fact that it can spend far more money as a corporate entity than I can as an individual, and I am nowhere near foolish enough to believe that my employer or any other corporation has my best interests at heart.

Thanks, flbikerchick, you explained it better than I could.

@ Allan NJ..Couple of questions: Since people make "corporate" decisions, If those decisions are criminal then why are so few corporate CEOs in prison?

Why do corporations have the luxury of using the bankruptcy code when homeowners who are upside down in their mortgages do not?

Just askin!

Yeah, thanks, flbikerchick, for the assist. It saved me a bunch of typing. You stated it perfectly.

Since people make "corporate" decisions, If those decisions are criminal then why are so few corporate CEOs in prison?

Send your question to Michael Holder at the DOJ because I would like the answer to that too

Why do corporations have the luxury of using the bankruptcy code when homeowners who are upside down in their mortgages do not?

Again a very good question. Because Visa/MC lobbied to change the law so that individuals could not declare bankruptcy and wipe out their debts. However, the congressmen/senators who voted for this bill were not voted out by the majority of their constituents. Therefore, the majority must have wanted this change - democracy in action. Did your congressman vote for this change and if so did you vote against them in the subsequent election.

The one difference that no one mentioned is that no matter how much money a corporation has it cannot vote, and no matter how little money an individual has they can vote. So use your power and don't listen to corporate propaganda. If you feel so strong about this have Occupy, Move-On etc start selecting candidates for a general election and get them on the ballot.

I work for a corporation too. Guess what? I don't want that corporation to be able to undermine our electoral process by virtue of the fact that it can spend far more money as a corporate entity than I can as an individual, and I am nowhere near foolish enough to believe that my employer or any other corporation has my best interests at heart.

See above regarding who can vote. However, on a broader point the simplest way to reduce corporate power is as follows.

1) Repeal all Corporate Taxation, thus removing all subsidies and loopholes

2) All government contracts must be open bidding with the individual responsible publicly stating their reasons for why a specific contractor was chosen.

3) All income derived by an individual in the form of dividends or capital gains shall be subject to the same tax rates as earned income.

Interesting Allan....Then corporations and their lobbyists are protected under the 1st amendment. The problem I have is that they are not transparent which is what Newt was complaining about...And just how do you reconcile that? It is not 1 dollar 1 vote. It is 1 person 1 vote.

Corporations and their lobbyists have corrupted the democratic process.

@TY

Can't disagree with you. The transparency issue is wrong. IMO money will find its way into politics so total disclosure is the way to go.

Also, as I said above if corporations don't pay taxes then they will not pay so much money lobbying for loopholes. This to me is a pro-market (not pro business) approach. This stops the government from attempting to pick winners. Move all taxes to the individual and you will create many benefits. Apart from having less incentive to lobby, companies will be encouraged to invest for business reasons rather than a short-term tax benefit. Also, the more money they distribute through dividends the higher the taxes so they will be encouraged to retain capital for investment.

If corporations are people too,Why can't we execute them?

If corporations are people too,Why can't we execute them?

You mean like Arthur Anderson after Enron? (Or would you prefer to wipe out the employees..you know the people?)

It's really fairly simple: Corporations are not people. People have a natural lifespan, corporations can last for centuries.

Money is not speech. Both money and speech existed when the Constitution was written. The founding fathers would have conflated the two if they had thought they were the same thing. They didn't because they aren't.

ROFLMAO....ron paul....LOL, LOL, LOL, LOL

I'm voting for Ron Paul as well and I actually see him pulling out the victory in Iowa.

Call me a rebel but we need a non- A-typical president in there who did not win on his looks, is not thought to have won on his color, does not win just by his party, and has a long standing record of consistency on issues. LONG STANDING!! Oh and is liked by some pretty heavy civil rights groups (not just KKK folks, get over it).

Vote out A-typical politicians!!!

Ron Paul 2012/2013

In a few days, the Iowa caucus won't be much more than an afterthought.

I never gave it much thought in the first place. It's not like it's representative of the rest of the country.

I think more than half the Republican field would faint if they actually got elected. They aren't actually looking for a job, they just thought campaigning was an easy way to get into a slot at FOX News.

You can't speak for Paul, who has explicitly stated he is in it to win it.

squidman,

I'm quoting Paul himself. He stated he doesn't expect to win the nomination. So much for "In it to win it!"

he's in it to win it. You weren't listening carefully to the question. He said he doesn't see himself in the White house. That doesn' mean he doesn't want to win. It's a hypothetical question. Sort of like someone asking me if I can see myself driving 250 miles an hour around the nascar track in a lamborgini. I don't see it, but give me the opportunity.

The federal government does not recognize the UN to place the U.S. government under its laws, and consistently acts unilaterally in regard to national defense.

This should not be so difficult. Ron Paul will win

It's blatantly obvious the media tries to downplay R Paul at all times. Do you think he scares the hell out of them? Independents will decide the 2012 POTUS election. Independents are just that because we don't like the status quo, A/K/A DEM or REPUB. While Paul may be running for the GOP spot his libertarian views shine through and that is what will carry him to the White House.

mmc(SS)

That is because Ron Paul is unelectable in the general election. He is way too far out there to be considered Presidential material, by anyone who is not as extreme as he is.

Anyway, no one who has won the Iowa caucus has gone on to become the nominee, in either party, since Jimmy Carter, (I believe that he was the last one)

Well, that's the line the media and the mainstream parties want to promote. That was said about Obama too but look what happened. The fact is Americans are fed up with the way the two main parties have run our country. Both seem to have unbreakable ties to wall street and it's starting to look like people are beginning to see that. It's way too early to predict what will happen in the general election but if Paul wins Iowa and even just finishes second in New Hampshire he just might have the independents which will swing the election from Obama.