E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
Alex Wong / Getty Images
Former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman, former Sen. Rick Santorum, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, and Rep. Ron Paul, gather on the stage prior to the NBC News- Facebook Debate on 'Meet the Press' Jan. 8, 2012.
Updated at 10:40 a.m. ET
CONCORD, N.H. -- The second debate in 12 hours for the six GOP presidential hopefuls was book-ended by moments of scrutiny for Mitt Romney, the former Massachusetts governor and prohibitive favorite to win New Hampshire's Tuesday primary.
Mitt Romney found himself under fire from conservative detractors in the opening and closing moments of an NBC News-Facebook debate, broadcast on "Meet the Press" Sunday morning. Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich and former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum led the charge against Romney, questioning just how conservative of a nominee he would be for Republicans.
2012 GOP presidential candidates square off in a debate from New Hampshire hosted by NBC's David Gregory.
The heat on Romney fizzled during the middle of the portion of the debate before re-emerging toward the end, when Romney and Gingrich did public battle over the negative ads run by various super PACs in Iowa and New Hampshire, which have affected the trajectory of the GOP campaign.
The scrutiny represented a last effort by the other five Republican presidential candidates to draw contrasts with Romney with just 48 hours to go until Tuesday's New Hampshire primary.
VOTE NOW: Did the NBC News-Facebook debate change your pick for president?
"If his record was so great as governor of Massachusetts, why didn't he run for re-election?" asked Santorum, who battled Romney to a virtual draw at last Tuesday's Iowa caucus. "If it was that great, why did you bail out?"
Mitt Romney and Jon Huntsman discuss what they would do to cut lower federal taxes on the American public at the NBC News/Facebook debate in N.H.
But Romney kept the focus on his own record and eschewed attacking candidates, especially Santorum and Gingrich, who are expected to pose little threat to his strong lead in advance of the primary.
"I'm very proud of my record and I think the one thing you can't fool the people of New Hampshire about is the record of a governor next door," Romney said in response to the pile-on, largely avoiding making direct attacks against his detractors.
At one point, though, when Santorum interrupted him, Romney snipped: "Rick, it's still my time."
The attacks on Romney were an element largely absent from another GOP debate Saturday night in Manchester. The rest of the Republican field is looking to draw distinctions with Romney in the remaining 48 hours before the New Hampshire primary, in which, according to polls, Romney is leading.
We live-tweeted the NBC News/Facebook debate – check out what was said
Gingrich, who had vowed to draw more stark contrasts with Romney in New Hampshire after having been assailed by ads in Iowa run by a pro-Romney super PAC, voiced criticisms of Romney similar to the ones he'd voiced while barnstorming through the Granite State this week.
"I think that a bold Reagan conservative, with a very strong economic plan, is a lot more likely to succeed in that campaign than a relatively timid, Massachusetts moderate who even the Wall Street Journal said had an economic plan so timid it resembled Obama," Gingrich said.
Watch additional coverage from New Hampshire as 2012 GOP presidential candidates square off in a debate hosted by NBC's David Gregory.
But the former speaker also said that he didn't think that Romney was unelectable -- backing off from the language contained in a flier distributed by the Gingrich campaign calling Romney "not electable."
Gingrich and Romney sparred again in the waning moments of the debate, in which Romney said he hoped a super PAC spending on his behalf would delete any inaccurate material from its ads about Gingrich. Those ads were particularly effective in diminishing the former speaker's support in Iowa. But Romney said the criticism of Gingrich contained in the Restore Our Future ads were largely accurate.
Special weekend First Thoughts: Rivals pile on Romney
"I'm glad, finally, on this stage, weeks later he has said, 'Gee, if they're wrong, they should take them down,'" said Gingrich, who's complained vocally about the ads.
The gathering featured a number of secondary storylines, particularly former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman's bid to gain traction in New Hampshire, and the bickering between Santorum and Texas Rep. Ron Paul.
Overcoming a past debate gaffe, Rick Perry successfully named the three government departments he would cut to laughter and applause at the NBC News/Facebook debate in N.H.
Huntsman sought to make a final pitch to voters in New Hampshire, where he has concentrated his campaign on winning Tuesday's primary, but has stuggled to gain traction in the polls. He defended his service as ambassador to China for President Barack Obama, but also emphasized his fiscal plans as most in-line with conservative principles.
"The American people are tired of the partisan division. They have had enough," he said, making a pitch to independent voters. "And I say, we've had enough, and we have to change our direction in terms of coming together as Americans first and foremost and finding solutions to our problems."
And in one of the morning's undercard battles, Santorum and Paul sparred over the libertarian congressman's scant record of legislative accomplishments, and Paul's foreign policy favoring more limited international involvement.
"The problem with Congressman Paul is that all the things Republicans like about him he can't accomplish, and all the things they don't want him to do, he can do day one," Santorum said.
Paul has drawn boisterous crowds in just a handful of rallies here in New Hampshire. But he ranks second, at 22 percent, in this week's NBC News-Marist poll of likely GOP primary voters in the state.
Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney talk about how Republicans and Democrats can reach across the aisle to make a divided government function at the NBC News/Facebook debate in N.H.
He defended his legislative record as evidence that it's Congress that's out-of-touch.
"That demonstrates how out of touch the U.S. government and the U.S. Congress is with the American people," he said.
The gathering represented another chance for candidates to draw contrasts with each other after a Saturday night debate did little to alter the trajectory of the campaign. Romney went relatively unscathed in that outing.
New Hampshire voters head to the polls on Tuesday to vote in the nation's first primary of the 2012 cycle, and the second nominating contest following last Tuesday's Iowa caucus. Romney battled Rick Santorum to a virtual draw in the Hawkeye State, earning an 8-vote victory over the former Pennsylvania senator.
Leave a Comment:
Hey Guys, News Flash!!!
Racist Newsletters attributed to Dr Paul DEBUNKED!!!
Finally an investigative reporter took this issue on and investigated it.
About two weeks ago I stated that this needed to be done, if they are connected to Dr Paul he needs to own them and take responsibility.
Dr Paul has rejected them and denied his involvement, that hasn't satisfied most liberals who have launched a campaign of accusing Dr Paul of being a closet RACIST.
Here we GOOOO!!!
ALL 240 of his newsletters are available for inspection! they have been inspected!
here is the link
www.youtube.com/watch?v=95CagSkXZYc&feature=player_embedded
In fact they know who was responsible for editing the newsletter when they were wrote AND WHO WROTE THEM!
Guess what? Dr Paul was telling the truth!!
I bet that is going to stick in some people's craw, but anyone that is reasonable cannot attribute this to Dr Paul any longer.
I guess we are going to find out just who the racists really are now!
Ron Paul is a racist.
Ron Paul is a racist.
Ron Paul is a racist.
You mad bro?
James, less mad than exhausted by the lunacy of the Reichwing.
It hasn't stopped for nearly 40 years, and it is only getting more daffy.
Alice in Wonderland is starting to seem like natural realism by contrast to the Party of No and Baggers.
Ron Paul recent words are what indict him:
"Mr. Paul has long argued — and reiterated Sunday on CNN — that the act, which liberated untold millions of African-Americans from the tyranny of Jim Crow, "destroyed the principle of private property and private choices." In other words, forcing a restaurant to take down a "Whites only" sign infringed the rights of the restaurant's owner. A similar argument was made by segregationists in 1964 — and by slave owners in the 1850s."
Never, you are a great example of whats wrong with this country. Do us all a favor take a long walk off a short bridge.
Actually, republicans are not an example of whats wrong, but actually whats wrong with this country...hypocrisy.
They claim to be for the constitution and small government, but then won't extend rights to people they don't like (minorities, immigrants, gays) or people they wish to subjugate due to religious doctrine (women). They want to increase the scope of government into bedrooms and odctors offices....yeah real conservative.
robtzu, only after you make a long distance phone call from the other end.
@Never Stop Asking Questions: Wake up buddy, there is no right or left, we are surrounded by pro-war, pro-corporation, pro-death neo-cons in congress. With very limited exceptions.
We need more and bigger government to protect and give more to the people. Only the government can take care of the people of America. FOUR MORE YEARS. FOUR MORE YEARS.
James, I do think that you are right with that.
Short of the Bernie Sanders, Dennis Kucinnich types (both whom I would vote for), we really are governed by plutocrats from both sides.
If we are not being represented, are we obligated to pay taxes?
First... I realize we have such a double standard in this country, Ron Paul has no affiliation with the offensive and bigoted news letter’s, however during President Obama's campaign he was accused of being racist and Anti-America(n) because of his affiliation to the church where Rev. Wright preached and spoke the truth. Second, you can’t have it both ways!! Third, Wikipedia, youtube, facebook & internet blogs aren’t notable sources of information…
@Never Stop Asking Questions Libertarian Philosophy is about the individual. Racism is a Collectivist Idea. Ron Paul is a libertarian that sees everyone as an individual not in a collectivist group. By the Way, as for the "ReichWing" I think Barack Obama can be included in that. Look at his fascist actions during his term and tell me I am wrong.
interesting times.
So Ron Paul was associated indirectly with these comments but denied his involvment, even though they were posted in a newsletter associated with Ron Paul. Would you think a person associated with his own newsletter should have the responsibility to read what is basically written in his name? He denied the allegations only after questioned about them, not before.
You can sugarcoat this discussion all you want, but the fact remains that this is a man who does not believe in equal rights for ALL American citizens. The problem is that those in love with Ron Paul cannot see that because of his position on other issues. Or perhaps its because these same people WANT our country to step back into the 19th century.
If it were early America, late 1700's or early 1800's, Paul would have been a much stronger candidate. But this isn't that time period, this is the 21st century. His ideas of our military presence, which mirrors the Monroe doctrine in many respects, is also out of step with world events.
As a few Paul supporters have said, do your own research. Just don't stop because you've gotten to points that you like as you do a disservice to yourself and to your country. There will never be a candidate that a person likes on every point unless you're a puppet.
@Dan-475751 Look regardless of what was said in a Newsletter Ron Paul is the only candidate on stage promoting individual liberty and the constitution. He is the only one that stands up for our rights that have been lost over the past century. If anyone is going to restore rights for All Americans, it will be Ron Paul. Both partys, and presidents over the past decade have taken away our rights. Look up the Patriot Act, and the recent NDAA provision which allows for indefinite detention of ANY american citizen. Ron Paul is the only candidate against that NDAA provision.
Libertarian123, racism is a sentiment, a psychological phenomena, not a sociological, collectivist phenomena. Therefore, anyone can be a racist.
With that, Ron Paul is a racist.
However, as James has suggested, we are ruled by plutocratic oligarchs...which I agree with.
Unfortunately, the Party of No started this trend with St. Reagan, and the Democrats have gradually capitulated to line their pockets.
However....bottom line...Ron Paul is a racist.
I agree with social libertarianism, but not economic libertarianism...as capitalism is a viral, immoral, self-destructive, consumes all beast...unless regulated.
I think the research you speak of should be done on all candidates including the current President of the United States. Then we all will find that we are constantly being fed a line by one group or another.
Sorry, he was the publisher of the newsletters. It was his "good name" that they were being issued under. I find it hard to believe that he never bothered to pay attention to something that was associated to his name. I find it hard to believe that he did not print a retraction or disavow the stories at the time - not wait until they came up during a campaign and then feebly saying he had nothing to do with them. If he paid so little attention at the time....how can we count on him to pay attention to the details of the job of President when so much has to be delegated?
If you see everyone as an individual than it is hard to judge them as a group. Categorizing people into a group based on their skin color is a collectivist idea. How could you deny that? Both Parties are owned by the Plutocrats my fiend, and it starts at the Federal Reserve - which is a private banking syndicate. Which candidate speaks out against the Federal Reserve? I think you know the answer to that one!
Boomer, the "government" is the people! Or at least it use to be before the supreme court handed OUR goverment to MULTI-NATIONAL CORPORATIONS.
Never stop asking..
Obama is a racist, Oprah is a racist, Jeremiah wright is a racist, Jesse Jackson is a racist, Al Sharpton is a racist. Do I need to go on?
And Ron Paul signed every one of those news letters that he never read or knew about. LOL The Paulies are so funny to listen to in trying to debunk the racist and downright insanity of Ron Paul.
@Never Stop Asking Questions - What do you favor besides Capitalism? Socialism in this reality, is almost always dominated by a group of oligarchs at the top, as is Capitalism. The Oligarchs would have citizens all poor together while they rule from the top. At least in Capitalism we are not set to the same poor standard. What we need to do is dethrone the Oligarchs- the Bankers, who control our government and the world
This type of statement clearly demonstrates our lack of education in this country. If you had bothered to learn your history you'd realize how uninformed this statement is. Let me remind you that it is Lincoln, a Republican who freed the slaves. Eisenhower, a Republican signed into law the 1st Civil Rights act. In May of 1919, the Republican controlled congress passed the Amendment for Women's right to vote. The first Women elected to congress was a Republican. During the Reconstruction Era the Black members that were elected to Congress were Republican.
Other then Bobby Kennedy, who continued to fight for civil rights and Johnson who appointed the first black to his cabinet, Democrats have done virtually nothing for various individuals in this country other than white males. For the record, Martin Luther King was a Republican. Gee I wonder why?
Now get off the boards with your non-sense and go open up a few history books.
@Sandy - And the other candidates, including the President, aren't insane? We have a debt crisis and a dollar crisis looming, and most of these clowns are leading us off a cliff
Bottom line, obama is a racist.
Just a personal opinion. But if these Republicans are tearing each other down to get top billing, exactly what are Americans to deduce from their savagery of each other? That none of them are worth voting for? That they are prize fighters in a political boxing ring vying for the championship belt? That their political records are so full of BS that even they realize their only competition is each other?
This is the typical Republican smokescreen. Show one scene for the public and then go behind closed doors and take your marching order from Herr GOP Party Boss from whom all almighty power transcends. roflmao. Nertz to this bunch. Their savaging of each other portends what a Republican presidency would be like. No thanks...One Bushian Era is enough.
Egilman
Hey Guys, News Flash!!!
Racist Newsletters attributed to Dr Paul DEBUNKED!!!
_____
Whether Ron Paul is ignorant of history, or consciously chooses to ignore it, is uncertain. That his supporters are ignorant of history is certain. And that is because they are political and history illiterates.
While such supporters were still in diapers, if they'd been born yet, Ron Paul defended the racist contents of his newletters during the 1980s and 1990s. That being the facct, they cannot be debunked as being fasle becasuse they are not false.
"Libertarians" love to refer to the 1950s as some sort of paradise. Thee reality is that nothing stopped the racist desgreation against blacks, or the lynchings, until the 1964 Civil Rights Act was enacted. Those who arre for a perfect purity in law are ignorant of the purposes of law. Law and "liberty" are not opposed -- in fact, the Framers were for liberty WITHIN the law, not in spite of it.
Laws -- the Bill of Rights an example -- secure and protectt rights. And when the rights of a specific class of people are being violated, it is proper to enact laws tto protect those rights -- even if those laws apply only to the class of people whose rights are being violated. "Libertarians" -- racists -- would oppose anti-lynching law as being "race-based" becasue they would protect only those who are the targets of lynching; it would not protect those who are not the targets of lynching -- because they don't need such protecction. Such laws are not "extra" rights; they are laws which ensure equal rights in a reality that is, despite "Libertarian" blindness, imperfecct.
Our system of laws is based upon a balancing of rights. Property rights when implicating public accomodations, are countered by the right not to be subjected to discrimination in public accomodations. And that is all the Civil Rights Act of 1964 does.
Those who oppose the Act are ignorant of both history -- reality -- and law, beginning with the equal protection clause in the Constituion.
The Occidental World has had a mixed economy since the Early Modern Period.
Except in "communist" countries such as North Korea, Cuba, a brief period in Cambodia, and China (which is now a de facto mixed economy...see Shanghai), there has never been a pure Capitalist or a pure Socialist economy.
Capitalism has been a handmaiden of the State since the 16th century.
Democratic Socialism works exceedingly well...see Scandanavia.
If you have never been there, I suggest that you take a trip and see the best fusion of democracy with regulated capitalism in the history of the world.
Ron Paul is an ethereal anachronism of a Adam Smith world that never was and never has been.
Pretty straightforward, really.
Libertarian...How about you get that Libertarian party to own up to the profiteers who are funding Libertarianism? You know...like Americans for Prosperity...99% of whom are rich butts and NIMBYS who like dumping their archaic views on everyone else but themselves?
Sorry if Libertarians have to pay taxes like the rest of the American population. Sorry if Libertarians are so narrow minded that their gospels of "small government" is really an intent to dismantle democracy and turn it into Libertocracy under "Libertarian rule".
I've been to Librtarian meetings...just to see what they were all about. Anyone who thinks Libertarians suffer from the ideas of exclusivity needs to go to a Libertarian meeting. You'll come away thinking it was Orwellian "1984". Suspicious little men with noses in everyone else's business just don't you dare stick your nose in theirs.
A vote for Ron Paul is a vote for a Texas Libertarian who hides under the Republican label. No thanks...we've had enough of the autocrats telling good, decent Americans how to live and where they can and can't work.
Interesting that the Republican contenders for their party's nomination are now savagely attacking the one person--Romney-- who has a chance of actually being nominated. The Republican establishment has offered no support to the other clowns in this circus.
If this is the way a Republican would govern, by attacking everyone else on the political stage instead of talking about an agenda for America, it is good we see that now before it is too late.
The GOP has no clothes.
OBAMA/BIDEN 2012
I always enjoy reading the different view points. Just want to say to robtzu, the saying is "take a long walk off a short pier" Just wanted to comment.
Just read the "special edition" controversial newsletter that supposedly demonstrates that Ron Paul or someone he associates with are racists. The newsletter is entitled "How to survive urban violence". It, supposedly, is the most egregious example of the blatant racism portrayed by Dr. Paul and his ilk.
If this is what the people who are making the claims of racism are going on then they are full of crap. There is nothing racist about the newsletter. Unless, of course, you are predisposed to deem everything and everyone who points out facts as racist. Nowhere in the newsletter did it even mention race except for this:
refers to gangs. In fact the whole newsletter is about ideas on how to protect your home and yourself from the threat of urban violence that was seen in many cities following the riots in L.A. in 1992.
Never Stop Asking Questions......here's one.
Do you or anyone else have any real examples that you can attribute to Ron Paul? If so, will you post a link to them because if this newsletter is the best you and the others have.....it shows nothing.
Please let us not confuse Racism with freedom of choice.
Being Pro Individualistic and being Racist are two different things. Freedom of choice will not change racism any more than current government regulations have!
If you own a business and you dont like hiring a certain sect of people, then you arent going to hire them anyway. The business owner will simply use "loophole" type decision making to deny employement to whichever sect he doesnt like. IE: If a business doesnt want to hire a black man, a woman etc. for a certain position in his company, he simply claims that he/she wasnt quailified or over qualified etc. (and so as not to get slammed by the fanatical posters Racism applies to all genre of people not just blacks and women, these are just examples)
Racism still exists in america as it will always exist regardless of Freedom of Choice. Racism isnt about laws set forth by government restricting our god given right to think for ourselves. Racism is about cultural conditioning, as a collective. Racism cant be "Cured" by government because Racism is not about rules its about how we are conditioned in our homes, in our families, in our society.
Racism isnt just about blacks, gays, women etc. Its really about cultural differences. If the world at large would recognize What drives racism and allowed for some rights of segregation perhaps we could actually reduce the violence that is caused by "Forced Non Racism" There is nothing wrong with being allowed to live in and near people that are CULTURALLY similiar to you. Being forced to live, work, and play around people that are not "Confortable" to your way of life is truly the crime in america. It can only provocate frustrations, angst, and eventually violence with those around you. We as people regardless of our color or sex feel more comfortable when being surrounded by our "Comfort Zones". These comfort zones are created in us from early birth, how we grew up, what preferrences we chose as we matured. If people would understand this and allow for secular segregation racism would be less prevalent !
If you allow me to leave my comfort zone and come sample your culture than I am given the opportunity to get used to you at my own speed so to speak. This allows me to reach out to you when I am open to your differences and test the waters at my own pace. Releaving the flight or fight mechanism we all have as humans. This type of sampling will make the average human more open to ACCEPTANCE of your differences. If i am forced to meld with you because of state statute etc. then I am immediately opposed and the transition will either take longer or not at all, this method of forced integration will only make the average human OPPOSE the differences.
Would you bring a strange dog into your home and just throw him in a cage with your other dog and hope for the best or do we bring the dog home and slowly ease the relationship with the other dog.
By disallowing freedom of choice we are perpetually "Forcing the integration of social differences" and never allowing the relationship to be developed at each indivuals own pace.
FREEDOM OF CHOICE does not necessarily promote racism, it actually opens the door to allow comfortable integration. Racism sadly will still exist in some indivuals regardless.
Government regulations and forced integration does not cure nor diminish racism in america, if anything it hinders the ability for those that are willing to try to adjust to anothers preferrences, because it forces the issue and creates aggression.
Ron Paul is for Freedom of Choice, not Racism. why not give it a try. We have had government forcing this issue since i can remember and we still have many of the same issues in our society regarding Racism. Maybe something different might just work.
Can someone please enlighten me where in our Constitution it says anything about religion guiding our morals and principles? I, for one, don't believe it is anywhere in there. Remove organized religions from the equation of a presidential candidate and it would remove all the hate associated with gays, minorities, immigrants, and other individuals not deemed 'acceptable' by the 'moral' religious community. I put those words in ittalics because in my opinion, the religious right is neither religious nor right. I deplore their model of what is moral and acceptable, and that is where my vote goes every voting year....to the candidate that keeps both their religion and their morals to themselves and OUT of the way of running the country.
Looks like the liberals are having a hissy-fit again. Jump on the ole Liberal Wagon, if things aren't going your way, call your opponent a RACIST, slander your opponents name. Proof or facts not necessary, slander away, attack attack attack.
Get over it, Ron Pauls no racist, not even close. Here's your proof, see it and weep.. NEXT STUPID QUESTION?
www.youtube.com/watch?v=95CagSkXZYc&feature=player_embedded
Stevefoo-
You don't need religion to hate someone based on cultural or racial identities- people are perfectly able to do that outside any type of religion. You're using that as an excuse to bash religion. That seems to be a neat trick the Left has been using lately when all other arguments fail. Cry religious based racism!
Careful- your bigotry is showing...
Heh, you can spot the sheep, because they're the ones who vehemently demand that everyone call him "Dr. Paul."
And yet you do not counter his point. The constitution specifically mentions that the government shall not establish a religion. Two of the founding Fathers, Jefferson and Madison, strongly advocated for a Separation of Church and state. You have no argument.
I wasn't making an argument- just pointing out a fact.
His argument was that if you take religion out of the argument- and all hatred goes away. In fact it does not.
His argument is therefore false. I was pointing that out.
Mr Anon- I'm not sure where your argument is...
This is the bottom line:
Ron Paul disavowed those newsletters long before he ran for president.
Barack Obama disavowed Reverend Wright during his run for president.
Really, the facts speak for themselves here. You can't criticize one without being a flaming hypocrite on the other.
clb-462357 @ 1.24 .... your history is a bit shakey the Republican Party has changed quite a bit since 1861 when Lincoln won his first term....in fact they changed their name to Union National Party during the run up to the second election but wound up still being labelled as Republicans. There were many factions of different parties and they moved like waves in the ocean so to go back and take a label that was used over 100 years ago and apply it to an event, happening or mind set today is a pretty far reach .... but nice try. Hopefully we have advanced as a race since then (although sometimes I wonder).
Eisenhower also gave us a very clear waring in his farewell address as to the dangers of the Military Industrial Complex, he was a General, a Republican, and white ..... why is it that you are not highlighting that message from this very wise American????????
Your selective use of history is somewhat typical of people who have no substantial facts to base an argument on.....Woman's Suffrage was an issue for a considerable period of time and through several administrations, vehemently fought in many States the mind set was women should be in the kitchen blah blah blah....but the Founding Fathers who so many of the "strict constitutionalists" now claim are to be followed to the letter .... did not provide for women to have the right to vote, how strict do you want it to be applied?
Civil Rights, Woman's Rights, Freedom of Speech Rights and most Individual Rights have for the last 40+ years been championed by the Democratic Party (for their own benefit I admit as they are career politicians) and in that same time the Republican Party has pressed hard in the opposite direction to oppose expansion of the Rights guaranteed in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights to any one other than the Rich White Moneyed Class, the Military Industrial Complex, and their campagin financiers, except for 2nd Amendment Rights which they claim to be the gaurdian of they want everyone to have a gun.....but not a vote.
It is not a party or a "label" from history it's a mind set of groups and individuals. One of the biggest insults hurled by the North Armies against the men of the Southern Armies, according to most Civil War historians, was sending Negro Troops against them, how dare the North steal their property, arm them, train them, then send them against us.....Negro troops were never allowed to surrender they were bayoneted in place or shot......that was the attitude of the Southern Troops it was a mind set and had nothing to do with Parties, labels or governments.....If you have ever been around the South you would know that the mind set has not completely dissipated and who knows if it ever will.
If one act by or the passage of a law by one party be it President or majority congress means that everything else they do falls into the catagory of "pro" or "again" then by that deduction the Democrats are pro war against Asians and the Republicans are pro war against Arabs....it's just not that simple to take isolated incidents of history and apply them to justify or explain current events.
Don't start advising people to read history books until you have read....and understood them yourself.
When did U tube become a reliable source for finding the right information. Liberals are not attacking Paul they would love to se the old senile man run the republicans out of Washington. The racist thing is a dead issue its about having a publication with your name on it and not contriolling the people who put it out. There are many things larger that Paul says that make him as scary as bachman. The fact he spouts some of this crap out in public is a slap in the face to his supporters. Go back and look at hi voting record. He picks and chooses the fights he has with the windmills. He is as bad as Bachman
Didn't Ron Paul ever hear of proofreading? I would never have anything put into print under my signature without proofreading it first. That just shows me he isn't capable to be a leader if he can't even do something which would save him from embarrassment.
To be fair, I don't think Ron Paul's comments about business owners being allowed to discriminate makes him a racist. I'm pretty sure as a doctor, he helped folks of all creeds and colors. If he said, "Sorry, I won't treat you because you're black," well then THAT makes him a racist. Defending another individual's right to be a complete a$$hat and deny service to certain people does not. He's often said that the best way to stop that kind of behavior is for folks to just not do business with folks like that. Let market forces show the business owner the error of his ways by boycotting the business and drive it into bankruptcy rather than have the government legislate it away.
I mean, look at those yahoos from the Westboro Baptist Church. Overwhelming majorities of folks think these folks need to be shut up, but, like it or not, they are allowed to go out with their horrible signs and hateful message and all we can do is ignore them and hope they go away. Does that make ever judge that has ruled in their favor bigots against the gay and lesbian community?
To be fair, I haven't read the newsletters. I'm only going on what Paul has said in interviews and debates. And, y'know, I'm pretty left leaning. Go look me up on Newsvine and read my posts. You'll see I pride myself on being pretty darn progressive. But I cannot conclude that Ron Paul is a racist by defending the rights of others to be racist. I don't like it (Heck, Paul may not like it for all I know), but I think he's right in saying that (Constitutionally speaking) people have the right to be complete d*uchebags to other people unless we get an amendment in there that says otherwise.
Comment # 1 restored for clarity.
robtzu, you are suspended for a day for violating rule # 1 of the Code of Honor.
@Toasty People call him "Dr. Paul" because he is a doctor. That is his actual profession. He has delivered over 4000 babies. Sometimes in civil society people are called by the titles they have earned.
For example: Doctor, Father, Rabbi, Reverand, Sargent, President, General, etc...
Questions for Romney: How many jobs did you obliterate when CEO of Bain Capital? Is that your definition of job creation? How many millions of dollars did you personally and others in addition make in depriving all of those people from employment?
If that is your definition of a successful businessman, why would you do any different as President?
I hope at least one of the other candidates asks that question. I would like to hear the answer.
That question will never come up because they all live in glass houses!!!
He was asked a similar question last night. He avoided any mention of specific companies with which Bain had invested. He said Bain had created hundreds of thousands of jobs and that of course there were winners and losers. He never touched or was asked about how much he profited.
OBXRon...You raise a good point. Another question I would like answered by Romney is this...
Why, after leaving office when you decided to run for president, did you destroy thousands of emails, papers, etc from your tenure as governor. And why did you allow your office people to buy their hard drives and wipe them all out? Now there is no record of what you did. Are you so ashamed of your tenure that you had to destroy evidence? Or did you just destroy the stuff that makes you look bad.
OBXRon a question you have to ask yourself is, were all these jobs necessary? How many were redundant? No job is above being eliminated in a truly free market economy. The people you see complaining about the job that they lost due to Bain 's decisions are just bitter and need to move on. Dwelling on the past is no way to live your life and be happy. I have been downsized many times and continue to go forward. Life does not always go as we planned and you have to take the good with the bad.
Now then if Mr. Rommeny, and I am no fan of his as he is a moderate ( rino if you will ) were to slash thousands of government jobs would that be a good thing or a bad thing in your mind? In my mind this would be a very good thing. I am a Conservative, truth be known a reformed a n a r c h i s t by definition, and think that they should actually have the size of the federal government at minimum.
Yeah, yeah, yeah. Flame away for that last paragraph on this board. Guess what I don't care what you think about me. You should know that it is likely i feel the same way about you! I have to deal with it. A lesson I am trying to learn and so should some of the posters on this board. Why do I feel anger towards people. My anger does not affect them but it affects me in a mental and physical way. my anger does them no harm but harms me. Peace.
I think most of us would be p-ssed if we lost our jobs and some billionaire that created that misery in your lives walked away with millions of dollars in profits. That is hardly irrational behavior nor something that should be dismissed from memory.
It is one of the great conundrums of free enterprise. It seems like Romney believes corporations are people but doesn't really care about actual people. A company in my town sold out to one of these capital groups. The very next week they called the employees together outside the building and told them they were locking the doors and that they could call an 800 number and arrange a time to get back into the building and clear their things out. And of course to anyone who had a pension they were told that was now gone and anyone who held stock options that those were gone. No pay for earned vacation, nothing. It wasn't the parent company that had once hired them any longer and this new firm had no legal obligation to pay them anything. And that is also the reality of the free market.
The example above is surely but one of hundreds of such incidents. By the way the jobs that were lost here were almost immediately outsourced overseas.
How many jobs were created with the half billion +$ given to Solyndra only to put them back on the street when the company went broke? What a waste of taxpayer money most of which came from the rich percentage of the total wise.
Asked and answered. As much as I dislike Romney, he claims Bain create 100K jobs net. That some jobs were lost is not disputed, but he claims a net win.
Ron Paul is a racist.
Please see collapsed thread above for further explanation of post below (I don't believe in collapsing posts and am not spamming).
The Occidental World has had a mixed economy since the Early Modern Period.
Except in "communist" countries such as North Korea, Cuba, a brief period in Cambodia, and China (which is now a de facto mixed economy...see Shanghai), there has never been a pure Capitalist or a pure Socialist economy.
Capitalism has been a handmaiden of the State since the 16th century.
Democratic Socialism works exceedingly well...see Scandanavia.
If you have never been there, I suggest that you take a trip and see the best fusion of democracy with regulated capitalism in the history of the world.
Ron Paul is an ethereal anachronism of a Adam Smith world that never was and never has been.
Pretty straightforward, really.
How did the term moderate become such a taboo in this country? I don't guess I will ever understand. Why is not being a fanatic ideologue a bad thing?
@VOX - your point is valid. The propensity to feel wronged and bittered by such a scenario is very valid. I think that tidy's point is that although what you are saying is unfair and would invoke the appropriate response of outrage from any sane person does not change the value of "TOO BAD" the world is not fair.
His point is this - yes these things are wrong - yes you have the right to be upset - yes it is unfair.
Now move on and fix what life threw at you. Life is not fair. Simple fact.
You can dwell on it, blame others, be mad, all of which will only affect you. Or you can accept it, bite your tongue and exert your energys in a way that will benefit you.
A good message for all ! sadly life isnt fair but the only one that pays the price for dwelling in a negative manner on events in your life is you.
"Never Stop Asking," your reasoning, logic, and facts collapsed much sooner than your thread did. You may need to do some study, then try again.
What, in you mind, is a "racist?" Is, for instance, everyone who studies sociology (difference in culture and race) a "racist?" Anthropology? History? Criminology? Is anyone who studies the behavioral sciences, and/or knows the differences between the races, cultures, societies, and nations, a "racist?"
If you've accomplished anything here, it is in having demonstrated ideological bias and bankruptcy for unbiased information.
I have read those comments relating to losing jobs, then there are those with the holier than thou attitude and want you to suck it up and move on because life isn't fair. Does that mean you tell the slaves that they should suck it up because life isn't fair or tell Americans that clean water is not fair so suck it up and accept it. I could go on and on but I hope you get my drift. Corporate America has been using the American worker for decades to make them millions and when they think they can make even more they will fire workers and either hire those who are willing to work for a lot less or they will outsource those jobs to countries. Corporate America and their puppets are trying to force more American workers to live below the poverty line so they can enslave the American people as they do in 3rd world countries. Wake up America and realize that we are on the verge of another industrial revolution. I wish those who make comments would think things through before they post their idiotic comments.
So far, in spite of their differences, it seems the GOP candidates all agree on trickledown economics. We have learned from experience that the only thing that trickles down is warm, wet, and yellow. You can use it to write in the snow.
I agree Romney is picking up momentum. Like a snowball rolling downhill to destruction.
Each new debate is worse than the last, when it rains it pours.
Oh! did I mention this is the Winter of our discontent? Vote out all the obstructionists.
Doug claims and proves are a long way apart lets see the numbers jobs lost vs jobs created. Amount paid in jobs lost vs amount paid in jobs created thats a number I'd like to see.
Sorry lonereb, posted this before I read your response as I would like a response on this too.The question that should be asked about Bain and Romney's input about the 100,000 new jobs. What kind of new jobs were created? Were they the same income or better? Do they have benefits that kept these workers from needing government programs to support their families? I expect the answer is the usual, low pay, no benefits, needed government programs, jobs in hospitality and food industries.
How can anyone believe that Romney saved any of these companies, thats a falsity beyond Pants on fire. He worked for an investment firm that did leveraged buyouts, you don't do a leveraged buyout on a company to hold it and watch it grow you do it to cook the books so that the company looks solid so you can sell all of it or pieces of it to some other sucker. And thats exactly what he did,look people this was all for profits, he didn't then and doesn't care now if any of those companies ever stayed in business because their money was never involved. You never read how much Bain invested in a company because they didn't all they did was facilitate a mortgage for the company take the interest of the sale and then walk away leaving the company with debt they can't pay back. Look at staples the man who started staples needed investors Bain helped them get the money, they didn't run the store they didn't make payroll, the guy who wanted staples did, they didn't build clientele the guy who wanted staples did. All they did was co-sign and get paid off with stocks and whatever else and if staples floundered they would have made a mint and if staples made it they'd be printing the mint. And now he's saying he helped create it, what a joke and some of you are falling for it.
Its amazes me that people think we need a military as big as the one we have, why? Where light years ahead, technically speaking, where the biggest, bad-as* on this globe. Do we need 900 military bases around the world? Whats the cost of all that. Stop all this misnomer foreign aid and call it by what it is military contractor subsides.
That the Govt size should only be 19% not 24% of GNP. Make the GNP grow and it will be a self-fulfilling prophecy and I’ll bet it will be spiraling downward.
The only subside should be for researcher on new medicines and finding replacement for oil, Brazil has done it. The biggest lies told was that the fruit of our labor should be our wealth; it’s not our wealth we are building it for our labor enriches the wealthy that doesn’t compensating us.
Santorum could have mention for the gays all the great work being done on CCR5 so it would have seemed like he cared. So far Santorum is clue less in NH
@Vox - Obama is spending millions of taxpayer dollars partying like a rock star, wasting billions on hairbrained business ideas like Solyendra, while 24 million are out of work, many no longer receiving unemployment, and not being counted at all. How do you think those folks feel about things?
@Navy - Obama believes and acts upon his belief in trickle down. He just encouraged Congress to pass and extend the payroll TAX CUT saying it was good for the economy.
When will liberals ever be honest about anything?
Vote out the liberal (of all parties) spending fools hell bent on their own enrichment and power, while caring not one whit about Americans.
Practical Libertarian
Why stop with the liberals, What about the conservatives? The ones who say that giving away money to the rich will trickle down to the poor? When will they be honest about anything?
OBX,
Check the facts. After the WMUR Debate, ABC did the fact checking and found that Romney did add jobs. Besides if a failing company is brought back to life by laying a few people off retains the rest of the employees, then that is a major win. The flip side would be the company goes out and all are let go. Simple common sense.
Most of what he did was to downsize companies and which meant in most case cutting jobs, don't turn him in to the great job emmanciator none of them with their anti regulation rhetoric for companies can guarantee more jobs.
All economic practices believe that tax cuts can be good for the economy. Trickle down economics focuses on tax breaks for the wealthy. The Payroll Tax could be improved if the cap for high income earners was removed and it was kept flat.
We've had more than 10 years of the Bush tax cuts, if tax cuts were so incredibly necessary, why do we have a downturn in the economy? Why back in 2006, did George Bush cut us a check from the treasury dept for $1425 with a letter that arrived 2 days prior with instructions to go out and spend it, Why? because the economy was slowing back then and they knew it. And an analysis of that stimulation attempt showed that 60% of Americans did not go out and spend it, they either paid off debt. or saved it, which is the big problem that started this economic slowdown, and that is the American people have extended their personal debt way too far and it hit a social saturation point where hardly anyone was purchasing and savings was at a historic low.
How do you expect to attract moderate voters in November when your taking positions against birth control, are anti-gay and anti-abortion - all positions that most Americans disagree with you about?
I would like to know why government has any say in peoples ultimately personal live. wether your gay and want to get married, or you choose to have an abortion or take something to prevent pregnancy is something that is up to each individual not something that should be "governed". It would be better for government to concentrate on issues that effect the military, economy, and how we deal with the world. Instead they skirt issues that are the true job of federal government by involving themselves in private concerns.
Lopez, how could u leave out anti-Hispanic? Veto the Dream Act?
Yes, this is true. Why does the government have the say over who is or is not married? Why do they determine whether or not you're divorced? Why can we not determine for OURSELVES who are next of kin is or is not at ANY given moment?
Why is it if you are a rural white person, regardless of income, you must vote Republican? Why is it if you're black, you MUST vote Democratic?
There is too much government in all cases.
I have wondered the same thing for years! When I was young I voted 1 way because everybody told me all us vote this way. Now that I am more analytical and informed I notice that most of the time I dont agree, with republicans or democratics on some issues. I am so offended by all of the laws and legislation passed by state and federal govt, that damn near infringes in our personal lives as though we cant make good decisions. As the years go by they have passed laws about our marriage, family, children, relationships: We have to face laws before we can make decisions.. The politicians/officials have become our pimps and we work for them. They show up with the smooth talking, draw you in, they know you are in a vulnerable position and your trust has fused out. You vote! Watch it all change! You are now just another blah blah blah!..You become poorer and them richer! We are all part of the trade and barter system now. So, why doesnt the voters registration card include options on whether you are a Republican, Democrat, Independent or just an American. I am so tired of everybody arguing over who is who, while they sit back in their CASH, LUXURIES, JETS and PERKS, watching and listening to us become more divided as a country. We work hard to maintain what we have whether we are middle or low income. Lets be real we know what we see and endure everyday so what do WE do about it? I'm Just Sayin!
Vetoing the dream act is not anti anything. It is common sense.
I hope you right wingers realize that your party keeps demanding that government stay out of Americans lives but then make statements that further intrudes in our lives and they keep trying to impose their beliefs on the rest of us. They have shown that they are the hypocritical party as well as anti middle class. On all their issues they have also proved that they think the top 1% should get corporate welfare but those who really need help should starve, die because they can't afford healthcare, live on the streets because they can't find a job that pays enough to rent, cut education so the poor and middle class Americans can't afford education. They say our country is the land of opportunity for all but we all know that only applies if you are wealthy and can afford to get a good education. Hogwash, more untruth babble and lies. Unfortunately there are those in our country who are buying their babble and hopefully we will never have to experience the America the Repubs want us to live in.
They will win if they do by pulling together a coalition of the groups disenfranchised by the liberal establishment. Those christians who feel their 1st amendment rights are in danger from overzealous PC teachers who punish their children for saying things like God Bless you or Merry Christmas are creating a revolution. "Gee we're sorry" after the parents storm the school in protest just don't cut it anymore. There is an angry undercurrent that feels it has to fight for the rights of its children.
The government dosent do anything well,i wouldn rather have people in their own state make decisions that effect their lives. The world that the elitist Obamas want us to live in is one of a nanny state with big government telling us what to do,or worse yet handing over decisions to the UN.
I just dont see what people like about Obama,he is a disgrace and anyone who values their freedom well vote for someone else.
w
I'd like you to live one week if you took everything the govt. does for us from building infrastructure to making publications for cancer patients, you'd be begging for government.
Paul-2793107 I could live without the excess of Govt. That is what the states are for. Govt. is for certain things but not all. At this time we have more useless laws on the books than Obama and the Congress has money. Do we really need more laws and regulations.
What laws and regulations are you referring to? What is excessive? Each state has different laws, policies, your agrument almost sounds like you could quantam leap back to pre civil war days with basically individual rights defined by states. You said govt. is for certain thins but not all, please explain that to me.
Ex. A roll of toilet paper in the U.S. must meet or exceed EPA mandates of biodegradability. Is that excessive? An electrical outlet next to a sink has an internal circuit breaker, codes that must be met for safety, is the excessive? FDA has numerous policies & procedures for testing drugs, is this excessive?
What is too excessive and what should be done away with??
Here goes the liberals trying to pit the candidates against each other instead of addressing countries problems.
Yeah. Those pesky liberals is why the candidates are ripping and tearing at each others proverbial throats. LOL.
As an independent, I've discovered the Republican candidates are pitting themselves against the other candidates. Pathetic you would blame this on liberals. If the candidates had more backbone, they would address the countries issues instead of wasting time attacking each other. And yet you don't see that in the debates, do you?
Telling the truth makes one a "Liberal". OK, I'll accept that.
GOP Tea-Retards keeps focus on 1%, let's not make another mistake like "W" !!!
Hey bannedbytyleragain, my mind goes right to thinking banned by tyler durden again, here is a little web page to show you where the money is. http://www.opensecrets.org/parties/index.php looks like the dems have more money than the repubs which I am willing to bet is almost always the case. That point aside both parties are corrupt. All current members need to be removed and new blood needs to be put in so that they can be corrupted too. What we need is people with ethics and morals in office. Alas schools don't teach them and fewer and fewer families teach them today.
Hugh, liberals don't have to do anything since the repubs are pitting themselves against each other which is an excellent example of their inability to govern.
Yeah, all those pesky liberals forcing the GOP candidates to rip each other a new one can be annoying, can't they?
right cuz obumma and hillary didnt attack each other at all. this selective memory and senseless bickering is why our nation is going to hell at light speed.
Lack of Intellect is why our country is going to hell at light speed. The average IQ in america is currently set around 85 to 125. WOW. What can you expect when the Democrats and Republicans have been making legislature that continually cuts pay to teachers and mandates every move we as americans make. They (the government) dont want us to think or have to think. They continue to diminish our capacity to require us to govern our own lives and limit what we can or cant do. They continue to diminish our school system and its faculty. So unless you want to end up as a bunch of Star Wars drones doing exactly as you are told and slaving away at your current job , wake up , educate yourself, and start making cognitive, informed decisions. ORRRRRR........ just keep blogging and regurgitating the same ole idioms.
The entire point of a debate is to draw contrasts, by its nature the candidates are going to disagree.
That idiot liberals think this is somehow wrong, or as one states that it means "an excellent example of their inability to govern" only shows the IQ of these posters is in the low teens.
I think the GOP debators are doing that fine on their own in the debates without "liberals" in the way.
What ever happened to civility in rhetoric?
I suppose if I was running for President, I'd desperately say anything that people would WANT to hear. Then, if elected, I could refute the statements that won votes.
I am afraid that you have no idea what makes a person a liberal.I am a liberal.We true liberals are against unfairness in government. We are against oligarcy. We are against our government ,irrespective of what nationality , from commiting an injustice against anyone. We are the first of the political groups that governments attempt to silence.If you were to study any gov. you would see that repressive governments always punish us among the first groups that they do punish.
Excellent ... yes the inmates of the right-wing asylum beating each other-up again as the tragic-clown show in continuam ...
This isn't a liberal problem this is a archaic concept from the past that all these conservative Republicans can't get away from, and that there exists a TYPE of Ronald Reagan savior that will emerge with exact principles of Reagan that simply are not true.LIKE, Reagan was this "fiscally" responsible President. He never balanced a budget, that he would put a clamp on terrorism, he named the Islamic insurgents & those that call themselves Taliban as the GREAT FREEDOM FIGHTERS vs Communism. He created jobs, he almost broke us with massive military expenditures like Stealth Bombers and a massive Naval fleet and then had the gall to tell us that the problem was welfare. There are no more Ronald Reagans, go prepare for the future you Republicans since what you are now is more like George Bush then anything.
Reagan created a larger government than any pres. before him, and we alll know how hard it is to reduce the size of government.
Well I hate to say it but the field still does not impress me..... With these choices President Obama will get my vote..... It is not that he is that much better, it really comes down to the lesser of the 2 evils.....
it's idiots like you.......
I agree OHGuy. But my addition to your comment is that the problems with President Obama are made minimal to non-existant when compared to the ills that would rain down on us if one of these candidates got into office.
Except for Ron Paul, I would say. And Jon Huntsman, but what are the odds of him getting anywhere?
And its people like you OHGuy, that will help destroy this country as we know it! Hail, Obama, Hail, Obama! We will be saying that if we continue on with this Marxist in office.
The economy is improving, and there have beenhundreds of thousands of jobs created during President Obama's term. Why are you believing the lies against the reality from the lunatic fringers who are pretending to be legitimate Republican ccandidates for office?
Wait a sec here.......... All the Repub candidates are calling Obama a socialist.
Which is he? Marxist, Socialist..............?
Can you "Fights" describe what the difference is between the two?
The fact is that President Obama is way too for to the right and the Affordable Care Act and the Dodd-Frank Act didn't go nearly far enough. The US should have a universal single payer health care system and strong as steel banking and corporate regulation.
Canada has a universal single payer health care system allowing all Canadians to get whatever health care they need IN CANADA, and let Canadians live 4 years longer than Americans with insurance-run health care do. Canada has very strong unions, very strong banking and corporate regulation and a minimum wage averaging $10.20 an hour - also Canada has had NO FAILED BANKS, a stronger economy than the US has had in a decade, and an unemployment rate of 7.5%, and as low as 7.0% in the recent past 1% to 2% lower than the US has had for the last decade.
You will condemn us with a vote for Obama.
@Fights - What an utterly ridiculous and paranoid statement. Pure hyperbole on your part.
Face it...when you have to resort to the patently irrational to make your point it usually means you're hiding something. When guys like you holler, "Marxist", "Socialist", "Kenyan", it's pretty clear what you REALLY want to say instead.
@soupson-1503534 -
It rings a little hollow when the guys who cry, "You will condemn us with a vote for Obama" are the same guys who gleefully brought us 8 years of George "We don't need to pay for no stinking war and tax cuts for the rich create jobs" Bush.
How did that work out for everyone? Obama extended those tax cuts in the name of bipartisanship...where are the jobs? Where were the jobs when Bush had implemented them for nearly a decade?
Face it...you guys crapped the bed like there was a German gang bang going on in it and NOW you have the nerve to stand around and complain it's not getting cleaned fast enough or to your liking. Sorry, but your hysteria just won't fly here. Unlike you, most folks don't have the memory of a goldfish.
I'll vote for Obama, but I wish he would be more confrontational with the Teatards. My heart is with Canada for President, see youtube offering Canada as presidential candidate.
http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/317433
@EnronHubbard Sadly, I think most people do have the memory of a goldfish.... And to be honest, I never stop finding it surprising that political tv ads can influence a person's vote. I always just found them ridiculous, worthless, and obnoxious - pretty much like every other advertisement. I think most people hates ads, and yet these continue to influence people? Sadly, this shows that people not only have the memory of a goldfish, but they are also highly open to suggestion.
These polititions are all the same, liberal socialist and big Govt. only diff is who will get rich .Dems will give tax payor money to the whole world . Rep.will give taxpayor money to the whole world. Dems love people who wont work . Reps love rich people . rich people creat jobs because they own bussnesses {lessor of 2 evils ?}. One major fact is WHAT DID OBAMA MODEL HIS HEALTH CARE BOONDOGGLE ON, A FAILED HEALTH CARE PROGRAM STARTED BY ROMNEY !!! One thing for sure if we dont get Obama out and get some body in who will stop spending tax payor money like its free we will see the end of America .when America was founded we had over 50 diff political partys why do you think there are only 2 now they are the same and control all the power and spending .
John Murphy, if we were more like Canada then everyone with a net income over $10,800 would pay taxes at 15% (that would be okay by me). They only have 4 tax brackets, 15%, 22%, 26%, 29%. More people contribute unlike they do here. The Provinces also have their own taxes. I asked a guy from Canada who now lives here in th USA what he thought about the health care. He said he liked it and that they charged a 15% national sales tax to pay for it. This is in addition to the National and Provinces income tax and other taxes. We (my brother & I) asked him why he left their if he liked it better. We are still waiting for an answer.
Its easy when you have a neighbor who is willing to spend insane amounts on its military.Saves your country an lot of money.
time jumper1, you are suspended for a day for violating rule # 1 of the Code of Honor.
Ask the candidates what they plan to do about poverty in this country. Beyond jobs, and the almost insulting rhetoric - specifically - HOW will people be put back to work.
These candidates are not concerned about poverty. They probably think it is an urban myth since none of them know what poverty is. Their answer to that question is this is a land of opportunity and if you don't take advantage of it, then you need to be weeded out. Survival of the fittest :)
what wrong with that? even great books like the bible have the dont work you dont eat ology. we have created a nation of the super lazy (not talking about people who are unable to work)
Not to worry. What do you care how as long as it is done? Doesn't make sense. Maybe you have too much time on your hands. Obama will take care of ALL unemployment. If people don't get jobs the government will see to it that unemployment compensation continues. If mortgages are in danger, they will be adjusted or forgiven. Quit worrying and register to vote if you aren't. FOUR MORE YEARS. FOUR MORE YEARS...
Uhhhh, Elaine, poverty has increased dramatically under the wonderful care of Obama. And its even higher among blacks.
This election process is as fake as pro-wrestling. Why aren't the candidates talking about the real issues? Things like 30 million people out of work; trade policies that allow corporations to extract money out of the country; custom designed tax loopholes for corporations; the counterfeiting of our money by the Federal Reserve; the bailouts of criminal corporations that caused our financial mess.... and nobody went to jail; the progressive erosion of our civil liberties in the name of protecting us from "terrorists;" the perpetual wars of choice that are draining our coffers and accomplishing nothing but creating more people who hate us. By the way, Ron Paul has addressed many of these issues and perhaps that's why the media has made a practice of ignoring him.
To see just how meaningless the election process is, read Matt Taibbi's excellent article: "Iowa: The Meaningless Sideshow Begins.
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/taibblog/iowa-the-meaningless-sideshow-begins-20120103
Thats good news actually for the liberals, since it means more Dem voters..
Fights
Uhhhh, Elaine, poverty has increased dramatically under the wonderful care of Obama. And its even higher among blacks.
_____
Substantiate.
We knew you couldn't.
I feel the breeze from lips flapping in the east!
Quick, we need more hot air in the West. Keep those lips flappin'!
"That demonstrates how out of touch the U.S. government and the U.S. Congress is with the American people," he said.
He sure got THAT right... The bigger problem is that NONE of these guys are "in touch" either.... I say, DON'T ELECT ANYONE ANYWHERE FOR ANYTHING THAT HASN'T BEEN TO A GROCERY STORE (SHOPPING) IN THE LAST 6 YEARS!
None of them have any idea what poverty is like in this country... I can see it now... Mitt, when was the last time you were in a grocery store trying to shop for your family?
Mitt - Errrr... well, when I was in France I often had to go to the grocery store until I adjusted to that rich, french cooking...
JN
How about this?
In 2010, 15.1 percent of all persons lived in poverty. The poverty rate in 2010 was the highest poverty rate since 1993.
http://www.npc.umich.edu/poverty
Or this?
The number of people using food stamps hit an all-time high in May 2011. According to the USDA, 45,753,078 Americans and 21,581,234 households use Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), more commonly known as food stamps.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/03/food-stamp-usage-highest_n_917038.html
Elaine Winters: ..."Ask the candidates what they plan to do about poverty in this country. Beyond jobs, and the almost insulting rhetoric - specifically - HOW will people be put back to work?"....
Why, THAT'S an easy question to answer, Elaine.
First, you cut taxes for the Richest people in this country.
Then, you eliminate the tax burden for wealthy corporations - maybe even give them subsidies.
Then you force Union workers to go back to robber baron wages and pay for their own healthcare.
Then, you make 9 to 13 year olds clean dirty toilets and urinals.
Then you force everybody to abandon their religion if they don't practice Christianity.
Then, you force every migrant farm worker to flee the country for fear of being arrested and deported..rotting vegetables bedamned.
Then you make the onus on citizens to prove they deserve their garranteed rights by producing I.D. when they want to vote. The onus is, then, no longer on the government to prove that they are entitled to deny you your rights.
Then you drug test poor people before they are allowed to receive a government check, but give a free pass to Government employees like congressmen, senators and govenors (everyone knows that THEY don't do bad things like hire male prostitutes to bring them Meth). they get to have government healthcare, paid vacations and pensions without the scrutiny.
Lastly, you protect MegaCorporations from bearing any responsibility for poisoning the water and air and food.
All these things will definitely put people back to work.
You saw how well it worked during the Bush administration, didn't you? Or don't you realize that losing almost 800,000 jobs is better than losing far less jobs?
Some of that sounded good.
Obama has increased poverty at a higher % than any President in modern history. He has done more to damage low income blacks than any President in modern history.
But you libbies just keep shaking the pom pom's. This is why we think you are loons.
we need some radical change ron paul is this countrys only!!!! hope.
Yes, he is the only hope of returning to the 1800's
based on what?
His comments.
wow! brilliant can you tell me even one of the comments? or are you just gabbing with no facts?
Make damned sure that you like his nomination for VP because at his age he may not make it through 4 yrs. or 4 more yrs.
chuckler #9.3 -- that is like saying "because I said so" If you want to participate in the debate please mention specific comments that will "return us to the 1800s"? if you cant reference any comments than please stay out of the debate you have no knowledge of.
breeze - another brainwashed Ron Paul supporter. See my response on a previous post and you might get a small clue. Ron Paul's positions would have been great for the early 1800's and if he were running back then, even might have won. His positions on our support (or lack thereof) to other countries mirrors the Monroe doctrine, great for that time period, impractical in the world today. He wants laws that give equal rights to ALL Americans to be repealed, sending our country back into an early 19th century mentality. Rights for white men only. If you have the guts to dig deeper, you'd see Paul is more interested in seeing women back in the kitchens, blacks and Asians subservant to whites, and all Hispanics sent back to their country of origin (including Legal Hispanic citizens).
But go ahead and vote him into office. Just be prepared to watch our country weakened militarily, wrecked economically, and crumbling internally.
Dan-475751 - Which Rock do you live under? A Libertarian, as Ron Paul is, wants to promote rights for every individual, and restore constitution rights that have been taken away. He wants the nation to turn back into a republic, and not be an empire that polices the world. He wants the private banking syndicate called the federal reserve to be reined in and be abolished. The Federal reserve has a crippling stranglehold on our economy. He wants to bring back the ideas of the founders, and rid the nation of the current soft-fascist grip that comes out of both PARTIES
Dan....please tell me if Ron Paul is so wrong....then why was he one the few that voted against the Iraq war...?
How did that war go for us??? How has your so called modern day foreign policy worked for us?? We are 15 trillion in debt, involved in wars and occupations all over the Middle East and world and our econonmy is crumbling here at home.....
He is the only candidate that is porposing doing ways with the FED and our Fiat currency.....He is the candidate that recieves the most campaign contributions for active duty military personnel which I think says a lot.....
How dont see how there is a lick of difference between all other candidates repub or democrat who our all bought and paid for....
heindl
chuckler #9.3 -- that is like saying "because I said so" If you want to participate in the debate please mention specific comments that will "return us to the 1800s"? if you cant reference any comments than please stay out of the debate you have no knowledge of.
____
And as you don't do as you preach -- provide specifics -- your are practicing, "Because I said so."
Ron Paul is a doddering fool who DEFENDED his racist newletters during the 1980s and 1990s; so they cannot be debunked. That's why he has for years been supported by the Neo-Nazi/White Supremacist "Stormfront".
I agree with you. Ron Paul is the ONLY hope. It is ridiculous that he gets less attention than even Michele Bachmann .
For goodness sakes Dr. Congressman Paul came in third in Iowa. I can understand why more attention is given to Romney and Santorum but why Gingrich who came in a relatively distant third or the rest of the pack behind him?
It just isn't fair and to me implies that the "free" press has its own agenda and doesn't really want any of us to consider the most important issues but just silly, inconsequential things.
What a circus. I am discusted by the whole thing.
Ron Paul actually attended and spoke at the psycho convention of the John Birch Society. Those paranoid, racist backwards insane assylum candidates support Ron Paul as one of their own. They want us back on a gold standard monetarily, want isolationism, keep ranting about the "Jewish Bankers" ruining the economy, the lazy minorities in this country accepting government dole, and the danger of foriegners coming to this country to take our jobs and turn us to communism. They see a communist under every bed. They are just plain wacko and so is Ron Paul by association. He defends his racist newsletters and thinks he is above any criticism. Basically Ron Paul is an arrogant SOB. He reminds me of my demented Grandfather who is an embarrassment to our family.
That's another asinine statement JNagarya!!!!!!!!!
there are some really stupid people on here who enjoy misrepresenting Ron Paul's TRUE views. he didn't like the civil rights act because it infringed on property rights. meaning you can't make someone serve someone whatever service. but those businesses that excluded people would fail because they automatically exclude a potential customer base.
those "racist" newsletters weren't written by him. check his voting record and any idiot can see that.
IMHO, YOU are the embarrassment to America. the John Birch Society was right. EVERYTHING they predicted has come true. leave it to a dips@#t like you to conveniently ignore that. educate yrself, twit : what is the difference between isolationism and non interventionism? Ron Paul is the best candidate hands down but because our nation is infested w/ mental midgets like IMHO, the Banksters' candidates have a great chance at continuing the downfall of our once great nation. obumma = perry/gingrich/santorum and romney.
if Paul gets screwed out of the GOP nomination i will just write him in, consequences be damned. if he runs as a 3rd part candidate, HE CAN WIN because he will draw from the right, left AND the independents. he could win with only 36 % of the vote. RON PAUL IN 2012!
this is a PROPHETIC speech at the John Birch Society talking about how the NWO would destroy America and its ALL come true.
www DOT youtube DOT com/watch?v=AZU0c8DAIU4
john birch society nails the NWO plan to a T.
Libertarian, if Ron Paul wants to promote rights for every citizen, please explain how many laws he has been instrumental in bringing before Congress concerning rights for all. How many has he written? How many has he introduced? Why is he interested in rolling back the civil rights gains from the 1960's? Being from Texas, why isn't he working to protect the rights of all Texan citizens? How often has he protected the rights of Hispanic American citizens both within his state or the country?
fb - I agree with Ron Paul that the war in Iraq should have never been waged. We had not finished what we had started in Afghanistan (or for that matter gotten Bin Laden) when that war was started. I have no problem with his stance on that issue. What I have an issue with is his stance on how our country should address world issues in general. Yes, we need to take care of our country and it's citizens first, but not at the expense of basically ignoring possible outside problems that other countries might have towards our country which might weaken it. Like it or not, we are the lone superpower. As such, every non-superpower nation either look up to us, envy us, or want to destroy our way of life. We cannot ignore those countries who might want to do us harm and we cannot protect ourselves if we close all our bases around the world. Yes, some should be closed as protecting our interests can be done without being everywhere. What Ron Paul calls for is more about reverting back to an era of the Monroe doctrine, which is not practical in this world environment or a strong US and world economy. What his principles would lead to is a collapse of our economy.
I have nothing against civil liberties. What most people forget is that freedom is not free. Like it or not, living in a free society comes with responsibilities, both from it's government and from it's citizenry. Unfortunately, many no longer feel a true civic duty to their country. Most talk about it, but rarely if ever actually act. And if they do act, it's only when it serves their own self-interests and not the collective interests of the American citizenry. If people would open their eyes instead of seeing and hearing only what they want to hear, they would understand that fact. I don't hold out hope, we've become a nation of selfish citizens.
The next time you think otherwise, be honest with yourself and ask yourself if you're asking "What's in it for me" or "What's in it for every US citizen". I don't know specifically how each person might answer. What I've experienced over a lifetime is that most will answer the latter but really mean the former.
ou812: (#9.5) That's what I said about BOTH candidates in 2008...McCain's age cast a doubt (in my mind) that he would survive the demands of a 4-year term, and I feared that the racist climate in the US would result in Obama not being able to compete a full term either.
Imagine my despair when their VP candidates were announced...I would hate to have either of them as President!
I agree with a lot of what Ron Paul stands for and I do not believe he is a racist, but my biggest problem with him is the free market ideology. I am all for giving the private citizen BACK the freedom we were given by our founding fathers and repealing about 99% of these personal freedom and morality laws that the conservatives have forced down our throat but as for industry I think it should answer to the people it serves, the public of the United States, and I think that public should have the right to regulate industry according to the will of the majority, not just the stock holders. Given the opportunity big business will sell you a poison and tell you it's good for you while dumping toxic waste in your back yard. Even now they skirt the regulations, infiltrate the agencies and bribe the regulators so just imagine what they would do if we let this imaginary hand of the market (god) decide. Consumers cant let their wallet speak for them and punish bad companies when the companies LIE THROUGH THEIR TEETH to get toxic chemicals put in our food or when companies control an entire industry as monsanto does. They force us to eat their poison by making sure they own all the food, so how does this invisible hand of the market punish a company like that?
The issue for me is that the Govt has come in and legislated every area of our lives. We cant even take a dump in a toilet that is not Govt legislated. I feel that Ron Paul is simply saying he does not agree with Gov't infringing on our choice of what to buy, where to buy, WHO to hire or anything that involves common sense choice.
So Dan do you think we should be allowing Govt to take control because you feel most people make decisions based on their own need as opposed to common good? So do you really think when most laws are made today, its for the good of the people. Its a manipulation tool for a group of few making the laws to profit. Once you start making laws imposing people to change their behaviors...someone else is benefiting(usually the lawmakers or lobbyist).
Seems like alot of folks here cant live without the government helping them,SAD! Ron Paul is the answer,the rest and Obummer are the same old crap that got us where were at.
Ron Paul is a racist.
His "libertarian" views are just a mask that covers his desire to allow racists freedom to discriminte against whomever they dislike - not an attempt to grant fairness and freedom to anyone else. Spare me.
That's exactly the OPPOSITE of freedom to the disenfranchised.
And, if Ron Paul is so "consistant," your claim that he's changed his stripes with regards to the racist newsletters he signed and the bigoted statements he's made are ancient history. You can't have it both ways.
He's a racist, homophobic, paranoid little hermit who wants everyone to build a little bunker in their backyard and fight their own battles against whatever.
Here come da Revenu'rs!
He's a Republican.
Gimme a break.
justsomeguy - Ron Paul may not have personally written the garbage in his newsletters but he did collect the money - as a Congressman he has to list outside income Case in point - 1993 - $943,000
The John Birch Society has been banned for years in participating in political discourse - ironically just now they have been let back into the fold of the Republican Party - why? the Koch Brothers father was a key member - coincidence? I think not - since the Koch Brothers have their slimy fingers in about everything bad that is going on in this country and are the backers of the Tea Party
Huntsman backs the Ryan Plan ... he's now joined the most-hated man in America Club after Bush & Ryan ... sad.
6 trillion debt reduction over 10 years all in entitlement cuts, we will retire when we are 80 and we can eat fiber filled dog food for nutrition.
Nothing like wathcing a bunch of grown men argue like little kids in the park. An other pathetic display of "vote for me". I wonder, are the politicians of this world so blind as to not see what is right in front of them. We have more pressing things to worry about, we don't need more banter and bullsh!t from yet another round of plausible denial.
Question for Dr Ron Paul: It was reported on Coast to Coast AM last night that one of your greatest fears for the economy is the estimated 600 Trillion, yes, trillion...in derivative instruments still out there - essentially 'bets' on the our, and the worlds economy What can you do about this?
For sure jobs are important but what good is a job or even trying to find a job if you are unhealthy or don't have food to feed your family i.e. unemployment and foodstamps?
what is the differance between OWS protesters and the protesters in the arab world,an why do we support there right to protest an condemn the ones going on in our supposedly free society.
Here is your difference. OWS was wasteful, and clearly a vast majority of the people there had no idea what they were talking about. Protesters in the arab world are protesting the right things and people. I am 100% behind freedom of speech and the right to protest, but OWS was a disgrace.
Here is the difference: OWS is here, Arab spring is over there. That is what the conservatives see.
The Arab Spring has caused major rifts in the Arab World, which is what the CIA and Israel wants. Just that much easier to take control of a region's oil if they are too busy fighting amongst themselves. OWS hit too close to home and is a direct indictment of the regime in power.
Ask the candidates what the First 3 things they would do if they were elected President.
All of them stated issues that would adversely affect the poor, working poor, and lower middle class. Nothing that would affect corporate welfare to corporations already making billions in profits.
Hey, pssst, moderate, what you just stated here sounds exactly what Obama has done.
Not so Fights. President Obama has been fighting an uphill battle with congress to help the middle to poor classes and making the wealthiest pay a fair share.
Could we keep it to just two things for perry?
Or maybe just one for perry? LOL
Its nice wanting to help people.To bad it isnt funded! The dept put on my kids really angers me. We need term limits in washington really bad.
@ModerateIndy
I still find it hilarious when the same people who talk about the wealthy paying "a fair share" are the same people who love to point at Canada as an example of how our health care and other systems should be run. Realistically, Canada's tax system is very similar to one's proposed by various conservatives, only instead of 9/9/9 you have numbers closer to 15/22/26/29. This idea that the wealthy paying 50%-70% and no one else should pay anything is ridiculous, as is the idea that these people have magicians making their income 100% tax free. The wealthy already shoulder the bulk of the taxes paid in this country. Whta needs to happen is our tax code needs to be stream-lined and simplified, so that it no longer discriminates against types of earnings (whether wage, dividend, or other investment based) and stop paying tax credits to people who are already paying nothing in taxes. A block on wasteful spending and redundant entitlement programs combined with fair contributions from ALL the working citizens of this country, is what's needed to get the country out of the hole we've dug for ourselves. One could also hope that if everyone pays some amount in taxes, people will actually feel a certain investment in the way those dollars are being spent and we'll be a little wiser in our choices of elected officials.
2012 GOP presidential campaign.....whittling down to the best of their worst........
Choosing the lesser of a few evils, weeding out the crabgrass, whittling down to the best of their worst. With these Republicans to choose from, I'm sure glad Ron Paul is running in 2012.
Ron Paul.
Ron Paul.
Ron Paul.
Nope.
No matter how many times I shout it, he's still a deluded, racist, homophobic, "Small government", dangerous Republican.
Have a nice day.
If you keep shouting "Ron Paul," your neighbors will think you're voting for him. Or crazy.
People of goodwill can come together? Where are these mythical creatures in the tea party-flavored GOP?
Of all the candidates, Huntsman makes the most sense. Romney was born with a silver spoon in his mouth; much like George Bush. So out of touch with the working middle class whom they are so wanting to eliminate!
You're probably right about Huntsman. His problem is he is not seen as conservative enough and has no base support from the wing nut right. Mitt is a dirt bag but is backed by big money. Huntsman just isn't a big enough dirt bag to win a GOP nomination. He should consider an independent run or starting a new party.
Ron Paul's sensible too, except most Republicans aren't.
Huntsman, from what little I know of him, seems moderate. So he wont go anywhere in the primary. But his somewhat more rationale ideas probably would have been okay in the general election...appealing to Independents and some centered Dems. Huntsman is the only GOP candidate who DIDN'T sign grovers
threatpledge.Romney will get allot of negative attention, once he releases his tax forms. And I agree with Lawrence...he just doesn't relate to most people. He'll get the nomination because of his wallet. He'll probably do okay, because of the repub's 'I hate Obama' feelings; but wont win. It will be interesting to see who he picks as VP.
Go home Ron, you've had your day. Resign from congress too, we'll be better off without you.
I hope not. Then we would only have less, L.E.S.
I would have considered voting for Huntsman until he came out in favor of the Ryan Plan. I think the Ryan Plan is unacceptable.
Unless your asleep things are so bad that by the time the election rolls around Obama well get canned and replaced.Both party suck.
Lawrence - Jon Huntsman's father is a billionaire - look's like Jon was born with a gold spoon in his mouth
The thing I hate about all these debates are, Nobody seems to answer any questions, Why can't someone step up and explain how they will get things done! Everyone can say what they want to do, I want to know how they will get bills passed with the sen and congress!
EXACTLY, I find it interesting that they all want to repeal Obama Care imediately but offer no kind of alternative plan AT ALL. I've worked in Healthcare for 25 years so I would be real interested in what their alternative is because the current system is BROKEN. Canada, Germany, U.K., France..etc all have Universal Healthcare and they all outlive us. We pay over twice as much per person in this country for Healthcare and yet they outlive us. Trust me when I say their is no such thing as a Non Profit Hospital in America anymore.
Be patient. The game is simple. First The republicans argue amongst themselves and then narrow it down to who will fight Obama. Then those debates start taking on more of the criteria that you posters are looking for.
Thats actually the problem with Ron Paul,he can have all the good ideas in the world but if the partys wont work with him. Now we have a president with horrible ideas and the republicans trying to fight off the destruction of our nation. Man we need term limits.
ron - Our President has "horrible ideas"? Name one, like fixing our infrastructure, developing alternative energy, Health Care for all, especially the insurance companies cannot deny coverage for pre-existing illness and allowing your kids to stay on your policy until 26, clean air and good drinking water, ending our ridiculous wars, streamlining our military, and finally trying to save our shrinking middle class. Which of these horrible ideas don't you like?
Purchasing tools for the military that they can actually use is a good idea instead of adding more weapons they can not use is a good idea.
However, the health "care" for all is two faced statement. The HCR provides health insurance (not health care) for all by adding a mandate that everyone purchase health insurance. It provides 45.7 million new clients to the health insurance industry which locks in the monopoly.
If you watching the debate - Here's a handy guide to decodes some of the Republican Talking Points.
As an IT Professional, Please ask the Candidates how they will deal with Corporation that continue to outsoure the IT roles and support role overseas
Do you not have the opportunity to move overseas and continue to work? Well, do you? Please note, I did NOT ask if you wanted to or not, only if you have that option. Many people could go to work but want people to bang on their doors and beg them to stay in their area and work for them.
Boomer, you are one frightening hate-filled person.
ModerateIndy #21.2 why do you interpret those comments as hate-filled? He asks a simple question:
Do we not have the opportunity/choice to move to where the work is at? If we fail to do that than shame on us???
Boomer; It would be nice if YOU moved to a third world country.
There is already a brain-drain going on in this country. Our best and brightest ARE moving to countrys where the work is. Not a good solution.
That's why I support Canada for president. They have some of the same problems we do. Like ugly ignorant foriegners from down south coming up there and taking away their jobs. Canada for president!
http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/317433
Boomer: So that's your solution? People should leave the US and move where the jobs are. We should just give up on this country, it's a lost cause? Really? Are you kidding?
I second that, and I think President Canada should pick Switzerland as a Vice President.Switzerland is one of the few countries with the balls to stand up to monsanto and toatlly ban GMO's.
Canada/Switzerland 2012
Oh boy, the clowns will be at it again....I watch all these dudes spar with each other and I ask...Is this REALLY the best America has to offer up for President?? If so, we are in BIG trouble....and I don't mean this as a conservative slam either. I don't see any better on the liberal side, from ANY branch LOL
Please ask,
With interest on the Federal debt approaching 500 billion dollars
per year, why shouldn’t the government call in all the old debt and replace it
with new debt at the current lower interest rates?
Thank you
This is done by the US Treasury already. T-Bills are issuied for limited periods of time and the older notes with higher interest rates are retired (bought back at face value) and the investor has to buy current T-Bills at lower interest rates.
That is IF you get your money back.
There is so much ignorance when it comes to the national debt. First of all, the interest that the US pays on the national debt is substantially less, as a fraction of the budget, than it was when Reagan was President. This is because of the interest rates that the government now pays on treasury securities.
Secondly, ever wonder where the money comes from to borrow? A lot of it comes from foreign countries like China. When we run a trade deficit, that country ends up with a surplus of dollars. As they don't want to buy anything from us, because we make so little nowadays, they return the dollars to the US in return for other assets. Before 1971, we would give up some gold held by the federal reserve. Since we are no longer on a gold standard, the assets we give them are treasury bonds - debt is an asset when you're the one earning interest on it. So even if we were to balance the budget, as long as would run a trade deficit with the rest of the world, the foreign countries will be looking to get part of our national debt in return for their surplus dollars.
Third, as money drains from our economy due to the trade deficit, it goes into the world economy. While some of it comes back when exchanged for treasury bonds (national debt assets), a lot of it is used overseas to buy goods and services between other countries as the US dollar is a world reserve currency meaning it is a currency nations trade with. But when this money drains out of our economy, it must be replaced with new money or we will simply run dry and that would be very very bad. The federal reserve creates this new money by buying treasury bonds (national debt) and paying for it with new money they have printed out of thin air. So all new money introduced into our money supply is money that is lent to the federal government by the federal reserve. (BTW, the federal reserve earns interest on the $2.4 trillion of the national debt they own and they give that back to the federal government . So it is interest the government pays itself - it's all artificial debt)
If we were to balance the budget without correcting the trade deficit there would be a big big problem. Money would still drain out of the country. Foreign nations would continue to buy up existing national debt with their surplus dollars until they owned it all, but then we could not back up their dollars with the full faith and credit of the US govt as there would be no more treasury bonds to sell. Secondly, there would be no way for the federal reserve to add money into the system as it drains out to foreign nations. This did happen during the Clinton administration when the budget was balanced. The fix was to instead use mortgage debt to add money to the money supply rather than federal debt. The result of that "fix" was overly easy credit, massive housing inflation, and a nasty crash 10 years later (in 2008).
So while everyone gets their knickers in a knot over the national debt, the real problems right now are the trade deficit which runs at between $500 billion to almost $1 trillion and the extremely large mortgage debt (about twice the national debt) in this country. If we had responsible and enlightened politicians, they would focus on fixing the real problem than needs fixing - the trade deficit. Fixing it would create jobs, restore US prestige, naturally increase taxes, reduce the need to sell national debt to foreign nations, and reduce the need for the federal reserve to print new money. I find it totally shocking that we have six candidates running for the Republican nomination and yet Ron Paul is the only one that ever understands this issue - and yet his kooky ideas are too extreme and weird to be a real solution. We're doomed if we can't have a president that can understand what is wrong with the nation.
Or the villagers with the torches and pitch forks may accidently burn all the bills we owe along with everything else.
Its funny how Obama and the rest of the establishment dont talk much about the insane dept,only Ron Paul.He is the only one willing to do whats neccesary to save our country and gets knothing but crap from everyone.
Just a note that most probably dont know. The US currency is the global currency at this current time. The significance of this is that by being the global currency you are basically allowed to print as much money as you wish without it being backed globally by actual assets. No other country can do this. Translated we "The U.S.A." can basically print as much money as we wish. We still have to account for it. In laymans terms we can get unlimited UNSECURED LOANS. The down side is that as we continue to do this we weaken our global position and we cause a ripple effect across the globe. At some point the rest of the world no longer feels secure in our ability to pay back these unsecured loans and they take away our printing press. At this point we then have to account for our debt and we cant just print money to pay it. If this happens we lose our financial stronghold on the world and our own country. That is when the Proverbial sh!& will hit the fan. Ron Paul is very accurate in his account of this economic problem and his platform is to try to reverse this paradigm before its too late. If this trend does not get reversed then the american people will see a depression that would make the depression of yore seem like a day at the beach.
After reading these comments on here, all I can say is all of you sound like a bunch of cry babies that are afraid a republican is going to be elected and you will lose all your welfare benefits. Well, guess what, too bad. Obama is history. Your little Muslim leader has merely proven he is a ignorant goof off. LOL
It's time we have REAL leadership in our country and those that don't like it can go back to Kenya with Obama and family. Have a nice one way trip.
I'll bet you wouldn't make racist comments like that in public. You cowardly closet racist! You would
be surprise at how little support you would have standing there in small numbers. If you can't say what you feel on the job or before a large crowd then you are nothing more than a cowardly piece of Dog doo who will forever hide behind a keyboard expressing your little thoughts on the net. You have NO
brains, NO balls and NO purpose. With that said, you might not want to procreate since you have nothing worth passing on to an offspring but more SH!T!.
Teatard tantrums.........great entertainment value............(more fanfare than a Kardasian wedding with only half the substance or commitment.....)
If you watching the debate - Here's a handy guide to decodes some of the Republican Talking Points.
thebottom99percent.com
I wonder how the 99% will vote in November, looks like republicans are talking like they don't care.......
No chuckler they dont care because they will not allow anyone to win except the "chosen one". They will cheat like they always do. The Moral Majority was never moral but most importantly they were never the majority, they just told us they were, and kept telling us they were until we believed them.
Everything the right does revolves around disenfranchizing, defunding and dehumanizing the left. This is a trick they learned from the Old Testament where anyone who occupied land the Jews wanted were dehumanized which set the stage for later extermination. Throughout history the emperical desire of the human/neanderthanl cross we now know as conservatives have used various religions as weapons to enslave or exterminate all who stood in their way of total world domination.
They will either con the people into voting for their choice or steal the election the way they did in 2000 and 2004
NO hand book needed here it always 2 things
1. Failed trickle down that never worked
2. Anyone of us is better than the half black country destroying, socialist, foreigner, elitist, Muslim, racist, God hating, law professor, social activist, ignorant, uneducated in the workings of finance or the world, food stamp king from poor white trash OBAMANATION .
Yes, I too am one of the #2 Simplton. LMAO
Keep it up you arrogant SOB teatards.
I couldn't stomach much of the debate but the little I saw made me sick. When Romney was asked about the government starting projects to help the infrastructure (which is a mess) he never answered the question. He skipped it all together and started in on job creation. If this is the best we got we are in big trouble.
Yes. i explained our dept to my kids and they told me i should be president since Obama is so bad.
Or how were fighting wars that cant be won since the enemy dosent ware a uniform and we really cant know when we have won.
Presidents for forty years have talked about energy independance,yet we havnt built a nuclear plant in years. No new refinerys and now were shutting down coal plants.
Perot was right about jobs leaveing and gee now there arent any.
We need true leadership,the president dosent know how to do it. Ron Paul,yep he is old as dirt but he is right on most issues.The rest are whores n scum bags who got us where were at.
It won't post empty. So, when it is impossible to edit a post in time, this is what I do.
What is the infatuation with Ron Paul?? His policies from foreign affairs, to domestic policy is so far out in space, were talking about a different dimension. Rod Sperling's dimension. I think this is a group of protest voters not liking Republican or Democrat, so we have a Libertarian stuffed in the skin of a Republican.
Hey roni:
Before you become president, I would think you would want to take an English class and learn to spell and use correct grammar!
President Ron Paul in 2012? Yes!!!
Perry: I will tell you two things... He learned not to count to three.
"Mitt, make Santy your VP!" Love you 2 together, economize our country!