PDA

View Full Version : Elections Official CNN Tea Party Express Debate Thread


Chocolate Hog
09-12-2011, 05:12 PM
CNN will be hosting the CNN Tea Party Express Debate tonight from 8 pm to 10 pm EST.

Check out the debate live on CNN, CNN International and CNN Radio, or via live stream at CNN.com and through the CNN App for iPhone, iPad and Android.

Moderator: Wolf Blitzer

Participants: Michele Bachmann, Herman Cain, Newt Gingrich, Jon Huntsman, Ron Paul, Rick Perry, Mitt Romney, Rick Santorum

go bowe
09-12-2011, 05:13 PM
ah, where and when billay?

go bowe
09-12-2011, 05:13 PM
and who's gonna be there?

Saul Good
09-12-2011, 06:00 PM
Prediction time:



82.3% of the people say that Ron Paul won the debate and support him to be the nominee. /every unscientific online poll in a few hours

Ron Paul is stuck in the single digits. /every actual scientific poll ever taken

Ron Paul gets 2% of the vote. /every actual primary result

BucEyedPea
09-12-2011, 06:04 PM
Prediction time:



82.3% of the people say that Ron Paul won the debate and support him to be the nominee. /every unscientific online poll in a few hours

Ron Paul is stuck in the single digits. /every actual scientific poll ever taken

Ron Paul gets 2% of the vote. /every actual primary result

Nope, most recent CNN poll has him at 13% with Bachmann dropping as well as Mitt taking a hit but still in second place, Perry still on top. Paul is in third place.


With Palin out of the running, the headline stays the same: Perry 32 percent, Romney 21 percent, Paul 13 percent and all other candidates, including Bachmann, in single digits.


http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/09/12/new-cnn-poll-perry-on-top-when-it-comes-to-electability/

Donger
09-12-2011, 06:05 PM
ah, where and when billay?

I'm guessing CNN.

banyon
09-12-2011, 07:20 PM
Perry and romney at each others throats over ssa.

nstygma
09-12-2011, 07:25 PM
online:
http://edition.cnn.com/video/flashLive/live.html?stream=stream1

Saul Good
09-12-2011, 07:26 PM
Nope, most recent CNN poll has him at 13% with Bachmann dropping as well as Mitt taking a hit but still in second place, Perry still on top. Paul is in third place.





http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/09/12/new-cnn-poll-perry-on-top-when-it-comes-to-electability/

RCP has him at 9.2%.

HonestChieffan
09-12-2011, 07:38 PM
If I was the winner of this election and I were on that stage tonight, I would do whatever it takes to bring ALL of these people into my administration. None of them has the answer but collectively this is a very bright group of people.

Lincoln did it with his team of rivals.

Chocolate Hog
09-12-2011, 07:40 PM
It's hard to believe so many people on twitter try to equate future success in education with the department of education.

HonestChieffan
09-12-2011, 07:43 PM
It's hard to believe so many people on twitter try to equate future success in education with the department of education.

Hard to find any example that defines failure more than the DOE

BucEyedPea
09-12-2011, 07:54 PM
RCP has him at 9.2%.
What's the date? Mine was from today.

BucEyedPea
09-12-2011, 07:55 PM
If I was the winner of this election and I were on that stage tonight, I would do whatever it takes to bring ALL of these people into my administration. None of them has the answer but collectively this is a very bright group of people.

Lincoln did it with his team of rivals.

Not a bad idea. Can Ron Paul be Sec of Defense? :D;)

HonestChieffan
09-12-2011, 07:59 PM
Not a bad idea. Can Ron Paul be Sec of Defense? :D;)
No

BucEyedPea
09-12-2011, 08:02 PM
No

Head of the CIA then. :D

Chocolate Hog
09-12-2011, 08:02 PM
Question about the fed and they don't ask Ron Paul. Interesting.

BucEyedPea
09-12-2011, 08:04 PM
Question about the fed and they don't ask Ron Paul. Interesting.

I don't see it on my tv, and it's here in Tampa. Although, I'll admit I am only looking because it's halftime. Can't miss the game.

What network is it on? Maybe I surfed during a commercial.

HonestChieffan
09-12-2011, 08:12 PM
I don't see it on my tv, and it's here in Tampa. Although, I'll admit I am only looking because it's halftime. Can't miss the game.

What network is it on? Maybe I surfed during a commercial.

It doesn't matter. You won't quite get it regardless. Go back to half time.

SNR
09-12-2011, 08:12 PM
Perry is getting fucking ripped apart.

Chocolate Hog
09-12-2011, 08:12 PM
Bachamnn stomped Perry.

Chocolate Hog
09-12-2011, 08:13 PM
I don't see it on my tv, and it's here in Tampa. Although, I'll admit I am only looking because it's halftime. Can't miss the game.

What network is it on? Maybe I surfed during a commercial.

CNN.

Chocolate Hog
09-12-2011, 08:23 PM
Finally Ron Paul has a great debate performance.

dirk digler
09-12-2011, 08:30 PM
I don't know if Obamacare is good or not, but premiums are dropping and health care jobs are rapidly increasing. I think that is kind of interesting...

Chocolate Hog
09-12-2011, 08:32 PM
Perry boo'd lol

Chocolate Hog
09-12-2011, 08:34 PM
Perry getting bashed again.

dirk digler
09-12-2011, 08:36 PM
Perry is absolutely right about immigrants and going to college

Otter
09-12-2011, 08:38 PM
Perry is absolutely right about immigrants and going to college

I thought illegal immigrants weren't eligible to get on "the government dole" if they weren't eligible for in-state tuition? Hasn't that been the mantra? Make up your fucking minds already.

Michelle Bachman won my vote I think.

Saul Good
09-12-2011, 08:51 PM
I don't know if Obamacare is good or not, but premiums are dropping

That is patently false. In fact, it's not even close to being true. Premiums are rising at around 15% on average.

Otter
09-12-2011, 08:54 PM
I don't know if Obamacare is good or not, but premiums are dropping and health care jobs are rapidly increasing. I think that is kind of interesting...

Oh really? I just got notice my health is going to be raised by 5 to 7% if Obama care is enacted a couple months ago by human resources.

Don't let facts get in your way sweetie.

ChiTown
09-12-2011, 08:55 PM
Rick Perry comes across as an absolute dope. I fear he is going to get the Republican Nomination. :banghead:

ChiTown
09-12-2011, 08:59 PM
Finally Ron Paul has a great debate performance.

He is a dumbass for putting that shit on his website about Americans being the root of the problem for 9-11. How can ANYONE take this jackass seriously. He has some WONDERFUL insights about the economy and the constitution. However, when he opens his meat hole about foreign affairs, he goes full retard.

Saul Good
09-12-2011, 09:01 PM
Rick Perry comes across as an absolute dope. I fear he is going to get the Republican Nomination. :banghead:

I don't think he will. He'll take a lot of the flak, and Romney will likely win.

nstygma
09-12-2011, 09:02 PM
He is a dumbass for putting that shit on his website about Americans being the root of the problem for 9-11. How can ANYONE take this jackass seriously. He has some WONDERFUL insights about the economy and the constitution. However, when he opens his meat hole about foreign affairs, he goes full retard.did he say "Americans" or The Government?

Saul Good
09-12-2011, 09:03 PM
Oh really? I just got notice my health is going to be raised by 5 to 7% if Obama care is enacted a couple months ago by human resources.

Don't let facts get in your way sweetie.

Anthem Blue Cross is running group insurance commercials in which the big selling point is that the second year increase is capped at 9%.

dirk digler
09-12-2011, 09:04 PM
That is patently false. In fact, it's not even close to being true. Premiums are rising at around 15% on average.

Ok so maybe I overstated it. Some insurance companies are dropping rates.

Saul Good
09-12-2011, 09:06 PM
Ok so maybe I overstated it. Some insurance companies are dropping rates.

I haven't seen anything close. They aren't even offering rate holds from what I've seen, and I deal with insurance brokers all day.

Reaper16
09-12-2011, 09:07 PM
Highlights:

Romney saying that America has "great beneficits" [sic].

Santorum, saying of Perry, "Perry gave them in-state tuition, I guess that's how he'll attract the illegal... er, Latino voters."

Chocolate Hog
09-12-2011, 09:08 PM
He is a dumbass for putting that shit on his website about Americans being the root of the problem for 9-11. How can ANYONE take this jackass seriously. He has some WONDERFUL insights about the economy and the constitution. However, when he opens his meat hole about foreign affairs, he goes full retard.

He didn't blame Americans.

Saul Good
09-12-2011, 09:08 PM
This is going to be one of the least watched debates ever.

ChiTown
09-12-2011, 09:10 PM
He didn't blame Americans.

Semantics.

He blamed the American Government, which, the last time I checked, are comprised by American citizens.

nstygma
09-12-2011, 09:12 PM
He didn't blame Americans.
I just listed to Paul's vid, he mentioned occupation as the reason for increased terrorism aimed at the US. I believe that was Rick Santorum who misquoted Paul.

Bearcat2005
09-12-2011, 09:13 PM
He is a dumbass for putting that shit on his website about Americans being the root of the problem for 9-11. How can ANYONE take this jackass seriously. He has some WONDERFUL insights about the economy and the constitution. However, when he opens his meat hole about foreign affairs, he goes full retard.

He blamed government policies to contributing to it, not Americans. Secondly what is "full retard" about a US presence in 135 countries and involved in several unsustainable wars? It is "full retard" to continue such policy costing trillions of dollars and the further radicalization of elements of Arab society. Don't put words into his mouth and take the time to actually look at his remarks.

BTW, if you think an interventionist foreign policy approach will be a winning strategy in the 2012 election cycle since it is "full retard" to think otherwise, you can say hello to an Obama second term, but maybe thats what you want.

Saul Good
09-12-2011, 09:15 PM
Either way, it's blaming the US.

dirk digler
09-12-2011, 09:17 PM
I haven't seen anything close. They aren't even offering rate holds from what I've seen, and I deal with insurance brokers all day.

I remembering reading a couple of stories recently where premiums were dropping or maybe they aren't rising as fast as they were previously . Of course I am probably wrong.

Aetna in NH is dropping their premiums 5-20%. They are probably an anomaly though.

Bearcat2005
09-12-2011, 09:18 PM
Semantics.

He blamed the American Government, which, the last time I checked, are comprised by American citizens.

Sorry but the two are not the same. The few hundred elected American Government officials do not constitute a majority of American thinking.

dirk digler
09-12-2011, 09:20 PM
here is one

http://thehill.com/blogs/healthwatch/health-reform-implementation/178633-gao-new-mlr-rules-leading-to-lower-premiums-cuts-in-agents-fees
GAO: New rules leading to lower healthcare premiums, cuts to agents' fees


By Sam Baker - 08/29/11 03:24 PM ET
A controversial piece of the healthcare reform law is beginning to save consumers money but could also give them fewer plans to choose from, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) said Monday.

The GAO interviewed insurance companies and regulators about the early impact of a provision that governs how insurance companies spend their money. It requires plans to spend 80 or 85 percent of their premiums on medical costs — a calculation known as the medical loss ratio (MLR). Companies that miss the minimum MLR will have to pay rebates to their customers.

According to GAO, some insurers are decreasing premiums or leaving their rates unchanged in order to comply with the MLR requirements. Three companies told GAO that premiums will either fall next year or increase by a smaller amount than they would have without the MLR.

Saul Good
09-12-2011, 09:21 PM
Sorry but the two are not the same. The few hundred elected American Government officials do not constitute a majority of American thinking.

That is a distinction without a difference. The politicians are representatives of those who elect them.

kchero
09-12-2011, 09:23 PM
He blamed government policies to contributing to it, not Americans. Secondly what is "full retard" about a US presence in 135 countries and involved in several unsustainable wars? It is "full retard" to continue such policy costing trillions of dollars and the further radicalization of elements of Arab society. Don't put words into his mouth and take the time to actually look at his remarks.

BTW, if you think an interventionist foreign policy approach will be a winning strategy in the 2012 election cycle since it is "full retard" to think otherwise, you can say hello to an Obama second term, but maybe thats what you want.

This!

ChiTown
09-12-2011, 09:24 PM
Sorry but the two are not the same. The few hundred elected American Government officials do not constitute a majority of American thinking.

You Ron Paulians are very good at the semantics game. Bravo?

kchero
09-12-2011, 09:32 PM
You Ron Paulians are very good at the semantics game. Bravo?

Its not semantics, ask any citizen if their government is an accurate reflection of their beliefs and convictions. Yes, they are elected officials but it is an extreme reach to believe that they are the same.

Saul Good
09-12-2011, 09:34 PM
Its not semantics, ask any citizen if their government is an accurate reflection of their beliefs and convictions. Yes, they are elected officials but it is an extreme reach to believe that they are the same.

Good luck with that.

nstygma
09-12-2011, 09:35 PM
You Ron Paulians are very good at the semantics game. Bravo?Paul was describing the terrorists' reasoning behind their actions.. that it wasn't because they hate us for who we are or our numerous freedoms. they don't like occupation, that was his point.

BucEyedPea
09-12-2011, 09:37 PM
People are not their govt. Especially, these days, when polls show the majority of Americans don't think their reps represent their views anymore. Sad but true....especially when we're really a fascism these days.

nstygma
09-12-2011, 09:37 PM
Its not semantics, ask any citizen if their government is an accurate reflection of their beliefs and convictions. its well known that all Iranians want Israel wiped (http://undoctrination.org/2011/01/11/reading-the-constitution-aloud%E2%80%94a-mullah%E2%80%99s-eye-view/) off the face of the earth. Ahmedinajad said so.

BucEyedPea
09-12-2011, 09:38 PM
He is a dumbass for putting that shit on his website about Americans being the root of the problem for 9-11. How can ANYONE take this jackass seriously. He has some WONDERFUL insights about the economy and the constitution. However, when he opens his meat hole about foreign affairs, he goes full retard.

Well, you took him seriously in the last primary. Did you fall on your head or somethin' since then? :Poke:

BucEyedPea
09-12-2011, 09:40 PM
its well known that all Iranians want Israel wiped (http://undoctrination.org/2011/01/11/reading-the-constitution-aloud%E2%80%94a-mullah%E2%80%99s-eye-view/) off the face of the earth. Ahmedinajad said so.

Yeah, even though they side with those Palestinians when a nuke would wipe them off the face of the earth too.

nstygma
09-12-2011, 09:43 PM
Yeah, even though they side with those Palestinians when a nuke would wipe them off the face of the earth too.my point, as well as yours, was that government is not the people

Saul Good
09-12-2011, 09:44 PM
my point, as well as yours, was that government is not the people

So Iran is a democracy now?

Saul Good
09-12-2011, 09:44 PM
OF the people, BY the people, and FOR the people

BucEyedPea
09-12-2011, 09:46 PM
my point, as well as yours, was that government is not the people

Yeah, I know. I got it. I just wanted to add how illogical it also would be even for Ahmadinejad a man with no power. lol!

BucEyedPea
09-12-2011, 09:47 PM
So Iran is a democracy now?

It is NOT the people, so no.

BucEyedPea
09-12-2011, 09:48 PM
OF the people, BY the people, and FOR the people

Empty words in some places. Remember, Soviet communism claimed to be for the people too.

SNR
09-12-2011, 09:49 PM
Semantics.

He blamed the American Government, which, the last time I checked, are comprised by American citizens.That's like saying Americans are responsible for the bad economy. Is that what you're saying?

BucEyedPea
09-12-2011, 09:51 PM
Perry is getting ****ing ripped apart.

Oh dayum, I missed that! :#

SNR
09-12-2011, 09:51 PM
Americans also:

-Kill their own children

-Have sex with animals

-Hate black people

-Are nazis

Want me to go on? Some =/=all

BucEyedPea
09-12-2011, 09:52 PM
CNN.

Thanks I figured it after I posted. There's was a commercial each time I got to look though.

BucEyedPea
09-12-2011, 09:53 PM
"All you need to know about the tea party can be learned listening to their 'boos' drowning out RP when he dared mention the situation of the Palestinians. These characters are warmongering Republican monsters with a tea leaf as a fig leaf." - Daniel

dirk digler
09-12-2011, 09:53 PM
If you believe Michael Scheuer who was in charge of finding Bin Laden, Ron Paul is right

SNR
09-12-2011, 09:54 PM
Americans also have impeccably poor logic

SNR
09-12-2011, 09:55 PM
One more.

Americans want Matt Cassel to start at QB for the Chiefs

Saul Good
09-12-2011, 10:04 PM
That's like saying Americans are responsible for the bad economy. Is that what you're saying?

I'll say it. We made a fucking mess.

dirk digler
09-12-2011, 10:05 PM
One more.

Americans want Matt Cassel to start at QB for the Chiefs

Fuck that. I will go Jihad over that shit

Chocolate Hog
09-12-2011, 10:06 PM
Semantics.

He blamed the American Government, which, the last time I checked, are comprised by American citizens.

No it's not.


Further more Paul is 100% correct. On the day of 9-11 we had troops on the Arabian Peninsula. The only thing that is semantics is the troop numbers overseas because no amount will keep us safe. Stronger intelligence will.

kchero
09-12-2011, 10:09 PM
Good luck with that.

No sh*t

Saul Good
09-12-2011, 10:09 PM
Spin it however you want, but he is saying that America is responsible for the attacks. That is a fact.

Whether or not it's true is a different matter, but he is blaming someone other than the terrorists.

kchero
09-12-2011, 10:10 PM
its well known that all Iranians want Israel wiped (http://undoctrination.org/2011/01/11/reading-the-constitution-aloud%E2%80%94a-mullah%E2%80%99s-eye-view/) off the face of the earth. Ahmedinajad said so.

Exactly

ChiTown
09-12-2011, 10:11 PM
Spin it however you want, but he is saying that America is responsible for the attacks. That is a fact.

Whether or not it's true is a different matter, but he is blaming someone other than the terrorists.

I'm blaming Todd Haley and Mark Castle.

Saul Good
09-12-2011, 10:12 PM
I'm blaming Todd Haley and Mark Castle.

If the Chiefs were a democracy, Sanchez would be our QB.

nstygma
09-12-2011, 10:13 PM
Spin it however you want, but he is saying that America is responsible for the attacks. That is a fact.

Whether or not it's true is a different matter, but he is blaming someone other than the terrorists.

<object style="height: 390px; width: 640px"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/3NJLzfscMrg?version=3"><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/3NJLzfscMrg?version=3" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="640" height="390"></object>

dirk digler
09-12-2011, 10:18 PM
Ron Paul: On 9/11 Ask The Right Questions And Face The Truth – OpEd

Written by: Ron Paul (http://www.eurasiareview.com/author/ron-paul/)
September 12, 2011
Ten years ago, shocking and horrific acts of terrorism were carried out on U.S. soil, taking nearly 3,000 innocent American lives.

Without a doubt this action demanded retaliation and retribution. However, much has been done in the name of protecting the American people from terrorists that has reduced our prosperity and liberty and even made us less safe.

This is ironic and sad considering that the oft-repeated line concerning the reasoning behind the attacks is that they hate us for who we are – a free prosperous people – that we must not under any circumstances allow the terrorists to win. Though it is hard for many to believe, honest studies show that the real motivation behind the 9/11 attacks, and the vast majority of other instances of suicide terrorism, is not that our enemies are bothered by our way of life, neither is it our religion or our wealth – rather it is primarily occupation. If you were to imagine for a moment how you would feel if another country forcibly occupied the United States, had military bases and armed soldiers present in our hometown, you might begin to understand why foreign occupation upsets people so much.

Robert Pape has extensively researched this issue and goes in-depth in his book “Cutting the Fuse: The Explosion of Global Suicide Terrorism and How to Stop It”. In fact, of the 2,200 incidents of suicide attacks he has studied worldwide since 1980, 95% were in response to foreign occupation.

Pape notes that before our invasion of Iraq, only about 10% of suicide terrorism was aimed at Americans or American interests. Since then however, not only is suicide terrorism greatly on the rise, but 91% of it is now directed at us.

Yes, the attacks of 9/11 deserved a response, but the manner in which we responded has allowed radicals in the Muslim world to advance a very threatening narrative about us and our motivation in occupying their lands.

Osama Bin Laden referred to us as “crusaders” with a religious agenda to convert Muslims, westernize their culture and take control of their resources. If we had targeted our response to only the thugs and criminals who attacked us, and refrained from invading countries that had nothing to do with it, this characterization would seem less plausible to the desperate and displaced. Blaming Islam alone is grossly misleading.

Instead, we chose a course of action that led to the further loss of 8,000 American lives, 40,000 wounded, and has left hundreds of thousands seeking help from the Veterans Administration. We are $3 to $4 trillion poorer. Our military is spread dangerously thin around the globe at the expense of protection here at home. Not only that, but we have allowed our freedoms to be greatly threatened and undermined from within. The PATRIOT Act, warrantless searches and wiretapping, abuse of habeas corpus, useless and humiliating circumstances at the airport, are just a few examples of how we have allowed the terrorists to win by making our country less free. Suicide terrorism did not exist in Iraq before we got there. Now it does. There are no known instances of Iranians committing suicide terrorism. If we invade and occupy Iran, expect that to change, too.

Sometimes it can be very uncomfortable to ask the right questions and face the truth. When a slick politician comes along and gives a much more soothing, self-congratulating version of events, it is very tempting to simply believe what we would like to hear. But listening to lies does not make us safer, even though it might make us feel better about ourselves. The truth is that ending these misguided wars and occupations will make us safer, more prosperous and more free.

kchero
09-12-2011, 10:19 PM
<object style="height: 390px; width: 640px"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/3NJLzfscMrg?version=3"><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/3NJLzfscMrg?version=3" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="640" height="390"></object>

This

T-post Tom
09-12-2011, 10:22 PM
<iframe width="420" height="345" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/hZxQZMSl-o0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

SNR
09-12-2011, 10:27 PM
Fuck that. I will go Jihad over that shitYou may be forced to go Jihad. Ron Paul said Americans caused 9/11.

Dave Lane
09-12-2011, 10:37 PM
You may be forced to go Jihad. Ron Paul said Americans caused 9/11.

Indirectly he is correct. No one is flying jets into Canadian buildings. Why? They dont use their military to project force around the world.

SNR
09-12-2011, 10:42 PM
Indirectly he is correct. No one is flying jets into Canadian buildings. Why? They dont use their military to project force around the world.
Yeah. In this thread you just have a bunch of warhawks looking to be pissed off for no reason at all. So they graft their hatred onto Ron Paul's words. Voila. Instant drug fix.

Saul Good
09-12-2011, 10:42 PM
Indirectly he is correct. No one is flying jets into Canadian buildings. Why? They dont use their military to project force around the world.

Yep. Only the US is being targeted by terrorists.

BucEyedPea
09-12-2011, 10:43 PM
Spin it however you want, but he is saying that America is responsible for the attacks. That is a fact.
No that is not a fact. That's your perspective aka opinion of what he means.

Whether or not it's true is a different matter, but he is blaming someone other than the terrorists.
No he is not saying the terrorists have not done what they did. He is saying what motivated them. You have to have a motive for murder. You actually think these guys would engage in mass murder for "freedom" when they don't even care for that kind of system? Where is the critical thinking? No, if you study their own tribal wars you'll see that they believe in avenging harm done to them, or that they perceive done to them and they do not forget about it either. They will kill for that.

Do you see Switzerland ever being attacked?

BTW taking responsibility for something is not "blame." It's the anti-social that don't have the benefit of any self-criticism.

Saul Good
09-12-2011, 10:45 PM
Yeah. In this thread you just have a bunch of warhawks looking to be pissed off for no reason at all. So they graft their hatred onto Ron Paul's words. Voila. Instant drug fix.

Where are you seeing hatred? I'm not even saying he's wrong, but I am calling a spade a spade.

SNR
09-12-2011, 10:56 PM
Where are you seeing hatred? I'm not even saying he's wrong, but I am calling a spade a spade.Hatred's a strong word, but i don't know what else to call somebody affixing a meaning to something that isn't there just to get pissed off.

BucEyedPea
09-12-2011, 11:04 PM
Hey Saul, would you like to be occupied by China?

Ever hear of the term called "blowback" which is a word our own CIA uses?

patteeu
09-12-2011, 11:21 PM
That is patently false. In fact, it's not even close to being true. Premiums are rising at around 15% on average.

Dirk gets premiums and benefits confused. He meant to say that benefits are dropping.

patteeu
09-12-2011, 11:30 PM
He blamed government policies to contributing to it, not Americans. Secondly what is "full retard" about a US presence in 135 countries and involved in several unsustainable wars? It is "full retard" to continue such policy costing trillions of dollars and the further radicalization of elements of Arab society. Don't put words into his mouth and take the time to actually look at his remarks.

BTW, if you think an interventionist foreign policy approach will be a winning strategy in the 2012 election cycle since it is "full retard" to think otherwise, you can say hello to an Obama second term, but maybe thats what you want.

Blaming government policies is the same thing as blaming America. Own it.

I don't even know what you mean by "unsustainable war" in this context, given that the wars we're involved in aren't particularly taxing on our economy by historical standards. No one wants to sustain these wars beyond the point where we accomplish our goals anyway. They're temporary.

patteeu
09-12-2011, 11:39 PM
If the lady would have had dinner ready when he got home, her husband wouldn't have had to give her two black eyes. It's really quite understandable. /Ron Paul

If the kid would have stopped crying so darned loud, his mom wouldn't have had to burn him with cigarettes to teach him a lesson. Can't really blame her. /Ron Paul

Well, duh. Did you see the provocative clothes she was wearing? /Ron Paul

Jenson71
09-12-2011, 11:48 PM
If the lady would have had dinner ready when he got home, her husband wouldn't have had to give her two black eyes. It's really quite understandable. /Ron Paul

If the kid would have stopped crying so darned loud, his mom wouldn't have had to burn him with cigarettes to teach him a lesson. Can't really blame her. /Ron Paul

Well, duh. Did you see the provocative clothes she was wearing? /Ron Paul

There was a thread here a few months ago that was about a transgender person being dragged to death in Arkansas. I battled a lot of right-wing posters here like Otter and Big Daddy who insisted that the focus of the conversation should be on how the transgendered person was basically asking for it.

I guess I should have gone with the 9/11 analogy.

Chocolate Hog
09-12-2011, 11:58 PM
Blaming government policies is the same thing as blaming America. Own it.

I don't even know what you mean by "unsustainable war" in this context, given that the wars we're involved in aren't particularly taxing on our economy by historical standards. No one wants to sustain these wars beyond the point where we accomplish our goals anyway. They're temporary.

Using your logic it was the American peoples fault they lost their homes and retirement.

SNR
09-13-2011, 12:03 AM
If the lady would have had dinner ready when he got home, her husband wouldn't have had to give her two black eyes. It's really quite understandable. /Ron Paul

If the kid would have stopped crying so darned loud, his mom wouldn't have had to burn him with cigarettes to teach him a lesson. Can't really blame her. /Ron Paul

Well, duh. Did you see the provocative clothes she was wearing? /Ron PaulThis is illogical

Dave Lane
09-13-2011, 12:20 AM
There are consequences for actions. Period.

Otter
09-13-2011, 12:25 AM
There was a thread here a few months ago that was about a transgender person being dragged to death in Arkansas. I battled a lot of right-wing posters here like Otter and Big Daddy who insisted that the focus of the conversation should be on how the transgendered person was basically asking for it.

I guess I should have gone with the 9/11 analogy.

And this is what you've fail to understand the whole time Jenson as well as the point I was trying to make to you when I invited you to Baltimore for a midnight stroll; no one said he was asking for it or deserved it but it was a poor decision and lack of common sense on his part. The people who did that to him were mean, ugly and cruel but there was also lack of common sense on the other side.

The worlds a cruel place.

I'm not going to try to get that thru your head anymore scooter. The thread is there for anyone who wants to read it to decide what I was saying. Start a poll anytime you want to see where the decision rests.

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=242594&page=7


You're a pompous little smug asshole who can't see beyond your own ego and you do a better job of proving that to everyone than I ever will. You're still welcome for that midnight stroll scooter to test your theory on bad decisions and the nature of man kind.

patteeu
09-13-2011, 07:15 AM
Using your logic it was the American peoples fault they lost their homes and retirement.

I have no idea what you're trying to say here. I haven't lost my home or my retirement.

patteeu
09-13-2011, 07:15 AM
This is illogical

I consider this a breakthrough for a Ron Paul supporter. Congratulations.

ChiTown
09-13-2011, 08:10 AM
I consider this a breakthrough for a Ron Paul supporter. Congratulations?

fyp

Brainiac
09-13-2011, 09:01 AM
This is illogical

It's completely logical. If you can't see it, I feel sorry for you.

Cave Johnson
09-13-2011, 10:15 AM
Dirk gets premiums and benefits confused. He meant to say that benefits are dropping.

I don't know what's happening in the private insurance market. Probably costs are continuing to go up, since the health reform law didn't really put any cost containment in place. But in the public sector, costs are "going down".

From 2000 through 2009, Medicare’s outlays climbed by an average of 9.7 percent a year. By contrast, since the beginning of 2010, Medicare spending has been rising by less than 4 percent a year. On this, both Standard Poor’s Index Committee and the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) agree.

All medical spending dropped after the 2008 financial crisis except for Medicare. Why? Because Medicare is guaranteed coverage that was little impacted by the general slowdown of the Great Recession. But after 2010, Medicare spending falls off a shelf, followed at a more leisurely pace by all other medical spending. Medicare and private spending move on opposite tracks when it comes to downturns in the economy, but after 2010 the emerging trend is that they are all going down. The one factor they all have in common is the PPACA.

Zeke Emanuel, an oncologist and former special adviser for health policy to White House Office of Management and Budget director Peter Orszag, is certain that this is what is happening. When I spoke to him last week, Emanuel, said: “This is not mere chance: this is directly related to the initiation of health care reform.” It is not the result of reform, Emmanuel emphasized. The reform measures that will rein in Medicare inflation have not yet been implemented. But, he explained, providers are “anticipating the Affordable Care Act kicking in.” They can’t wait until the end of 2013: “They have to act today. Everywhere I go,” Emanuel, added, “medical schools and hospitals are asking me, ‘How can we cut our costs by 10 to 15 percent?’

“This is doable, since there is so much fat in the system” said Emanuel, a doctor who is well aware of just how often unnecessary tests and procedures hike medical bills, while exposing patients to needless risks.

http://theforvm.org/diary/jordan/medicare-spending-growth-drops-more-50because-obamacare

SNR
09-13-2011, 10:22 AM
It's completely logical. If you can't see it, I feel sorry for you.It's completely logical because you want to believe it's completely logical.

I can choose to believe that I'm the chosen one who will save Narnia and call it "logical", but that doesn't mean that it is. There are counter-examples of all sorts that shred any value Patteeu's analogy has in further analyzing Ron Paul's position on 9/11.

Jawshco
09-13-2011, 10:39 AM
So who do you all think won last night? Huntsman seemed desperate, but the guy is such a horn blower- I'm not sure people will seriously consider him. I respect Paul, but his foreign policy is too radical to win a republican primary. Caine seems like he has some great ideas, but Obama has already shown us that political inexperience is not what we need in the White House. Mitt is too much of a Neo-Con for me. Bachman seems like she's one of the most solid Debaters, and she makes a lot of good points, but her wacky interview quotes might be her undoing. Rick Perry got tore up last night for his contradictions and his executive order in Texas last night. I thought he made one of the worst showings. The only person that I thought didn't make themselves look bad at all was Newt. Newt seemed solid to me, but for some reason he doesn't seem to be gaining much traction in the polls. As far as who could debate Obama- I'd say Romney and Bachman have the edge. I still have no clue who to vote for.

patteeu
09-13-2011, 10:40 AM
It's completely logical because you want to believe it's completely logical.

I can choose to believe that I'm the chosen one who will save Narnia and call it "logical", but that doesn't mean that it is. There are counter-examples of all sorts that shred any value Patteeu's analogy has in further analyzing Ron Paul's position on 9/11.

Narnia is a much more violence-plagued place than the fairytale wonderland that Ron Paul supporters think we'll end up with if we retreat from the world and take a very narrow view of what minding our own business means.

ChiTown
09-13-2011, 10:41 AM
So who do you all think won last night?

Obama

BucEyedPea
09-13-2011, 11:21 AM
Either way, it's blaming the US.

So you're a collectivist now?

BucEyedPea
09-13-2011, 11:23 AM
Semantics.

He blamed the American Government, which, the last time I checked, are comprised by American citizens.

No the govt is comprised of politicians, officials and bureaucrats. If we can argue that govt usually screws things up, that it is not efficient then we cannot exempt foreign policy. Other than that, your post here is collectivistic or herd mentality. Not all Americans think the same or would do the same—not even those in govt.

Jawshco
09-13-2011, 12:25 PM
Obama

Ha! You might just be right about that. I'm not sure that Romney can beat Obama, but that seems to be the path we're headed down.

Jenson71
09-13-2011, 12:27 PM
No the govt is comprised of politicians, officials and bureaucrats.

. . . who are American citizens.

BucEyedPea
09-13-2011, 12:29 PM
The ringleaders of the hijacker’s ringleaders made clear their goal—that they were going to punish the United States for occupying the holy land of Saudi Arabia and for supporting Israel’s repression of the Palestinians.

Donger
09-13-2011, 12:34 PM
The ringleaders of the hijacker’s ringleaders made clear their goal—that they were going to punish the United States for occupying the holy land of Saudi Arabia and for supporting Israel’s repression of the Palestinians.

Occupying the Kingdom? Really?

HonestChieffan
09-13-2011, 12:39 PM
Are the new RP numbers out yet? How big is his lead now?

SNR
09-13-2011, 12:44 PM
. . . who are American citizens.:facepalm:

Do they not offer classes in philosophical logic at Iowa City?

The Rick
09-13-2011, 01:11 PM
So who do you all think won last night? Huntsman seemed desperate, but the guy is such a horn blower- I'm not sure people will seriously consider him. I respect Paul, but his foreign policy is too radical to win a republican primary. Caine seems like he has some great ideas, but Obama has already shown us that political inexperience is not what we need in the White House. Mitt is too much of a Neo-Con for me. Bachman seems like she's one of the most solid Debaters, and she makes a lot of good points, but her wacky interview quotes might be her undoing. Rick Perry got tore up last night for his contradictions and his executive order in Texas last night. I thought he made one of the worst showings. The only person that I thought didn't make themselves look bad at all was Newt. Newt seemed solid to me, but for some reason he doesn't seem to be gaining much traction in the polls. As far as who could debate Obama- I'd say Romney and Bachman have the edge. I still have no clue who to vote for.
Good synopsis.

Like I said after the last debate, I had high hopes for Perry based on what I had heard and the hype. After seeing him in two debates now, I'm beyond unimpressed. He's made some questionable decisions in the past (I don't like the executive order thing at all) and he just doesn't seem to have the commanding presence I expected him to have. He stammers around a bit too with a lot of the questions. For me, there just isn't substance there.

I'm afraid of Romney, but he's by far the smoothest and has the most commanding presence. He's done a good job laying out his plans regarding the economy.

I thought Huntsman did well at the last debate, but he really fell back down to me this time around. I just don't trust him, and you're right, he's desperate and a horn blower. His presentation and the way he carries himself got old for me real quick.

I thought Bachmann did really well last night. It's like she knew she had to come out and attack Perry to win back some support, so that's what she did.

I like Newt too and don't get why more people don't like him. He's definitely a great intellect, but I don't know if he has everything it takes. I just don't see him as being electable.

This field of Republicans is making things really difficult for me. I like all of them for the most part, but I don't really like any of them. I'd take any of them over Obama. If Romney and Perry are the front runners and I have to choose one, I guess I'm choosing Romney while wishing there were someone better.

One thing I will say...this election should be and needs to be all about the economy and simply fixing the country by setting us on the right course of action for future generations. I think we're at a breaking point and there's no room right now for social issues, etc.

If Bachmann were to remain focused on the economy, getting rid of Obamacare, and getting the country back on track without getting caught up on the social stuff that makes her toxic to some, she'd come across as much more electable.

Taco John
09-13-2011, 01:21 PM
Are the new RP numbers out yet? How big is his lead now?

The most recent poll taken (Sept 9-11) has him at 12%:

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2011/images/09/11/rel15a.pdf

BucEyedPea
09-13-2011, 01:29 PM
Are the new RP numbers out yet? How big is his lead now?

I don't know and I don't care. Truth is still truth even in a world gone mad.
This idea is starting to seep into Republican circles with more Rs agreeing we're overdoing things in FP.
The Liberty Movement is not going away even if Ron Paul doesn't get the nomination.

BTW, someone who attended last night's debate said Paul won a pre-debate strawpoll with 51%.

BucEyedPea
09-13-2011, 01:32 PM
Like I said after the last debate, I had high hopes for Perry based on what I had heard and the hype. After seeing him in two debates now, I'm beyond unimpressed.

Yet, he is soooooooooo sexy, in a very manly way, to look at — even with all those wrinkles. I LIKE looking at Perry and not at Paul. In my dreams I see a younger and a current Perry with Paul's words being spoken from his mouth. What a great combination that would be. He'd be the winner! :D

BucEyedPea
09-13-2011, 01:47 PM
Paul must have worked on his delivery because he spoke much better about his positions last night than I've seen in earlier debates.

Also, pay attention ChiTown and living Constitutionalists like Amnorix, who think the Constitution was written on rubber. It starts at 3:10 with the questions of a voter from Portsmouth Virginia on abuse of Executive Orders and Paul's answer about their abuse and the proper use of them.

I got a good laugh at bankster puppet Santorum on whining about "blame America" for finding a motive for 9/11.

<iframe width="640" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/z6n51UEt1F4" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

go bowe
09-13-2011, 02:12 PM
Americans also:

-Kill their own children

-Have sex with animals

-Hate black people

-Are nazis

Want me to go on? Some =/=all

i dunno...

doesn't that depend on what kind of animal?

i mean, when't the last time you fucked a lizard?

Calcountry
09-13-2011, 02:15 PM
I don't know if Obamacare is good or not, but premiums are dropping and health care jobs are rapidly increasing. I think that is kind of interesting...You will in 2014, if Hussein gets re elected.

Cave Johnson
09-13-2011, 02:38 PM
The uninsured dying, f yeah!

<iframe width="640" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/irx_QXsJiao" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

America, moreover, has a law on the books that makes it a crime not to treat and try to save a human being who walks into an emergency room. So we have already made that collective decision and if the GOP wants to revisit it, they can.

Here's how: offer an honest proposal from the GOP to repeal the emergency room care law. Why not? If you are going to repeal universal health insurance, then make your libertarian principles coherent. And make the case that people unable or unwilling to buy health insurance deserve the consequences. That makes sense. And the question of why Perry or Ryan or Bachmann support this free-rider loophole in contradiction to their principles is one worth asking again and again.

http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com/2011/09/indecent.html

Cave Johnson
09-13-2011, 02:39 PM
You will in 2014, if Hussein gets re elected.

His middle name is Hussein? Thank you for this entirely new information.

Cave Johnson
09-13-2011, 02:40 PM
Yet, he is soooooooooo sexy, in a very manly way, to look at — even with all those wrinkles. I LIKE looking at Perry and not at Paul. In my dreams I see a younger and a current Perry with Paul's words being spoken from his mouth. What a great combination that would be. He'd be the winner! :D

BEP, voting with her vagina. Thanks, 19th amendment.

Inspector
09-13-2011, 02:48 PM
BEP, voting with her vagina. Thanks, 19th amendment.

I find that visual both interesting and intriguing.

I'm also curious what sort of voting machine modification would need to be made to accommodate this action.

Something to think about.

Later.

Before going to sleep.

BucEyedPea
09-13-2011, 02:48 PM
BEP, voting with her vagina. Thanks, 19th amendment.

LMAO Only, I am not going to vote for him. I enjoy looking at him. Pay attention silly! :banghead:

BucEyedPea
09-13-2011, 02:51 PM
The uninsured dying, f yeah!


Did you even watch it to see what he said about anyone who is uninsured dying?
Apparently—NOT! He practiced medicine before there was Medicaid and he said there were church hospitals and no one was turned away. This must be why your side wants to get rid of religious influence in our country—so the govt can be a monopoly with everyone dependent on it. That just winds up reducing or destroying freedom.

Cave Johnson
09-13-2011, 02:57 PM
Did you even watch it to see what he said about anyone who is uninsured dying?
Apparently—NOT! He practiced medicine before there was Medicaid and he said there were church hospitals and no one was turned away. This must be why your side wants to get rid of religious influence in our country—so the govt can be a monopoly with everyone dependent on it. That just winds up reducing or destroying freedom.

I'm just asking for an intellectually honest position. If you don't support health insurance mandates, then repeal the law requiring treatment. Personal responsibility! Some charitable hospitals can still choose to prove free care. I won't go to them, since they pass the cost on to their insured/paying patients, but you might.

But none of the R's are willing to do so, because it looks extremely callous.

BucEyedPea
09-13-2011, 03:04 PM
I'm just asking for an intellectually honest position. If you don't support health insurance mandates, then repeal the law requiring treatment. Personal responsibility! Some charitable hospitals can still choose to prove free care. I won't go to them, since they pass the cost on to their insured/paying patients, but you might.

But none of the R's are willing to do so, because it looks extremely callous.

I think his answer was intellectually honest. And some in the audience were honest by saying yes. You just didn't like his answer, because you don't like the idea, which you show here as well, taking it on themselves. I have no problem with that even if they pass on some costs to their consumers. I do that sometimes if I want to take on a smaller account that hasn't enough money while still charging more to a corporation because the bottom line is it doesn't involve coercian and THAT is what freedom is all about.

SNR
09-13-2011, 03:08 PM
i dunno...

doesn't that depend on what kind of animal?

i mean, when't the last time you fucked a lizard?I've never fucked a lizard but I'll bet someone has. Probably a larger one like a gila monster or something.

According to patteeu, Americans have sex with lizards. A few people had sex with lizards. They are Americans. Therefore, Americans have sex with lizards.

DON'T TRY TO TELL ME IT'S MISLEADING. YOU'RE ONLY ARGUING SEMANTICS AND NOT GETTING AT THE TRUTH. AND THAT TRUTH IS THAT AMERICANS HAVE SEX WITH LIZARDS

go bowe
09-13-2011, 03:13 PM
Indirectly he is correct. No one is flying jets into Canadian buildings. Why? They dont use their military to project force around the world.

they have buildings in canada?

SNR
09-13-2011, 03:13 PM
You know what? I'll bet there are some politicians out there who caused 9/11 and also fuck lizards. Big nasty ones, too. Like a monitor lizard.

Americans caused 9/11 AND fuck lizards. Man, fuck those guys

Cave Johnson
09-13-2011, 03:17 PM
I think his answer was intellectually honest. And some in the audience were honest by saying yes. You just didn't like his answer, because you don't like the idea, which you show here as well, taking it on themselves. I have no problem with that even if they pass on some costs to their consumers. I do that sometimes if I want to take on a smaller account that hasn't enough money while still charging more to a corporation because the bottom line is it doesn't involve coercian and THAT is what freedom is all about.

It's a totally BS answer. Paul's position is that the catastrophically-injured uninsured guy expects to be taken care of because of socialism/welfare. That's bogus. He expects medical treatment because of the ER law. Put some courage behind your convictions, repeal the law, and let it be every man for themselves.

Cave Johnson
09-13-2011, 03:18 PM
You know what? I'll bet there are some politicians out there who caused 9/11 and also **** lizards. Big nasty ones, too. Like a monitor lizard.

Americans caused 9/11 AND **** lizards. Man, **** those guys

What other kind of lizard are you going to f***? Ever try to f*** a gecko?

BucEyedPea
09-13-2011, 03:20 PM
What other kind of lizard are you going to f***? Ever try to f*** a gecko?

Too small for most men. I'm overrun with them here though, if you want to insist. ;)

BucEyedPea
09-13-2011, 03:21 PM
It's a totally BS answer. Paul's position is that the catastrophically-injured uninsured guy expects to be taken care of because of socialism/welfare. That's bogus. He expects medical treatment because of the ER law. Put some courage behind your convictions, repeal the law, and let it be every man for themselves.

No he was talking about how it was before the ER law. I understand you don't agree with a non-govt approach but it's your opinion only, that his answer was bogus, yet, consistent for an egalitarian like yourself.

go bowe
09-13-2011, 03:21 PM
Blaming government policies is the same thing as blaming America. Own it.

I don't even know what you mean by "unsustainable war" in this context, given that the wars we're involved in aren't particularly taxing on our economy by historical standards. No one wants to sustain these wars beyond the point where we accomplish our goals anyway. They're temporary.

wow, that's a good thing that they're temporary...

of course, 10 years seems like a pretty long instance of temporary...

and historical standards wrt the cost of wars is of little help in judging the real cost of today's wars...

historically, we weren't so broke we couldn't pay our bills without borrowing trillions...

in today's economic world, borrowing trillions to pay for our wars is simply unsustainable (beyond the temporary duration of 10+ years, of course)... :Poke:

SNR
09-13-2011, 03:22 PM
What other kind of lizard are you going to f***? Ever try to f*** a gecko?You know what I've always wanted to do? Fuck a velociraptor.

Oh shit... sorry my perverted mind mixed into the American conscious now. I guess we're all velociraptor-fuckers now.

Sorry, guys. My bad.

BucEyedPea
09-13-2011, 03:24 PM
patteeu uses the GDP numbers to say the war isn't costly, which is just a way to make his argument look more convincing, because using that obfuscates matters when GDP includes govt spending. He doesn't even mention that a lot of the costs are off-budget.

go bowe
09-13-2011, 03:25 PM
There are consequences for actions. Period.

terrorist!

quit blaming reality and common sense!

go bowe
09-13-2011, 03:43 PM
I've never fucked a lizard but I'll bet someone has. Probably a larger one like a gila monster or something.

According to patteeu, Americans have sex with lizards. A few people had sex with lizards. They are Americans. Therefore, Americans have sex with lizards.

DON'T TRY TO TELL ME IT'S MISLEADING. YOU'RE ONLY ARGUING SEMANTICS AND NOT GETTING AT THE TRUTH. AND THAT TRUTH IS THAT AMERICANS HAVE SEX WITH LIZARDS

yeah, and ron paul blames the lizards, or america and not the lizards, or something...

patteeu
09-13-2011, 03:54 PM
wow, that's a good thing that they're temporary...

of course, 10 years seems like a pretty long instance of temporary...

and historical standards wrt the cost of wars is of little help in judging the real cost of today's wars...

historically, we weren't so broke we couldn't pay our bills without borrowing trillions...

in today's economic world, borrowing trillions to pay for our wars is simply unsustainable (beyond the temporary duration of 10+ years, of course)... :Poke:

What do you mean by unsustainable? So far, it appears that we've been able to sustain these wars. Remember a few years ago when Bush was in office and people were squealing about how the military was being broken because of overuse? I wonder what happened with that.

patteeu
09-13-2011, 03:56 PM
patteeu uses the GDP numbers to say the war isn't costly, which is just a way to make his argument look more convincing, because using that obfuscates matters when GDP includes govt spending. He doesn't even mention that a lot of the costs are off-budget.

Whether the costs are on budget or off budget is irrelevant. If you've got a better estimate of national production capacity than GDP, let me know.

go bowe
09-13-2011, 04:07 PM
What do you mean by unsustainable? So far, it appears that we've been able to sustain these wars. Remember a few years ago when Bush was in office and people were squealing about how the military was being broken because of overuse? I wonder what happened with that.

yes, we've sustained the wars in large part by borrowing trillions...

we simply can't afford it any more...

and i do think that the military is stretched way to thin for the missions that we have given them...

either change the mission or significantly increase war related spending...

i don't think our economic situation allows us to significantly increase war spending so to a very limited extent i agree with ron paul: we need to change the mission...

go bowe
09-13-2011, 04:08 PM
Whether the costs are on budget or off budget is irrelevant. If you've got a better estimate of national production capacity than GDP, let me know.

well, i'll have you know that ms. peabrain is definitely off budget...

patteeu
09-13-2011, 05:38 PM
yes, we've sustained the wars in large part by borrowing trillions...

we simply can't afford it any more...



Rather than pinching pennies when it comes to national defense, I think we should address the elective spending we borrow to finance including the entitlements that really are unsustainable.

SNR
09-14-2011, 01:50 AM
I thought this was funny:

The Media's Love Affair With Jon Huntsman Is Officially Over
Grace Wyler | Sep. 13, 2011, 12:54 PM |

After a breakout performance in last week's presidential debate, Jon Huntsman appeared to have established himself as the media's darling in the 2012 race.

For a brief moment — about six days — mainstream reporters and pundits thought they had found a moderate diamond in the rough of a rabidly partisan 2012 field. Huntsman looked like that rare Republican willing to admit he believes in evolution, climate change, and maybe even civil unions.
But the media's tryst with Huntsman ended as quickly as it began last night during the CNN/Tea Party debate. The former Utah Governor surrendered his high ground, and regressed to lashing out his opponents with lame jokes and petty one-liners. Basically he was the most annoying kind of smart-ass — the kind that's not funny.

Here's a rundown of the snarky remarks that paved Huntsman's road to irrelevance:

-On Social Security:"You've got Governor Romney, who called it a fraud in his book "No Apology." I don't know if that was written by Kurt Cobain or not." (He later continued with this theme, calling for an end to America's "heroin-like addiction to foreign oil").

-On jobs: "I know that everything's bigger in Texas, and Rick likes to talk that way. And I know all the smart people reside in Massachusetts. But let me just tell you, Utah, the great state of Utah, was number one in job creation at 5.9 percent during my years as governor."

-On Rick Perry's immigration record: "Let me say for Rick to say that you can't secure the border I think is pretty much a treasonous comment."

-On Mitt Romney: "I think we can spend all night talking about where Mitt's been on all the issues of the day. And that would take forever."

-On national security, he inexplicably lavished praise on NGOs — not a major selling point with the Tea Party set: "When we start shining again, it's going to help the women of Afghanistan, along with any other NGO work that can be done there and the collaborative efforts of great volunteer efforts here in the United States."

-And finally, when asked what he would bring to the White House, Huntsman made one last ditch effort to maintain his street cred: "My wife's going to kill me for saying this — but I would bring my — as a 40-year motorcycle rider, I would bring my Harley-Davidson and my motocross bike."


http://www.businessinsider.com/the-medias-love-affair-with-jon-huntsman-is-officially-over-2011-9#ixzz1XuIMCxm3

BucEyedPea
09-14-2011, 08:31 AM
No the govt is comprised of politicians, officials and bureaucrats. If we can argue that govt usually screws things up, that it is not efficient then we cannot exempt foreign policy. Other than that, your post here is collectivistic or herd mentality. Not all Americans think the same or would do the same—not even those in govt.

Make that our govt is comprised of bankster-multicorporation controllers.

ChiTown
09-14-2011, 08:57 AM
Basically he was the most annoying kind of smart-ass — the kind that's not funny.


LMAO

go bowe
09-14-2011, 04:27 PM
Rather than pinching pennies when it comes to national defense, I think we should address the elective spending we borrow to finance including the entitlements that really are unsustainable.

i think we should address both...

cuts to all the large programs (ss, medicaid and defense),and at some point increased taxes...

there is no other way to fix the deficit to the point that we can begin to address the debt...