should the VP announcement choice come fro a swing state? Also unemployment number 9% that came out this am question do you all expect it to come down before election day to SAVE Obama from losing to our nominee ?
Since the Sex Harrassment story has only served to enhance Cain’s popularity and standing, while undermining the lib media, has anyone considered that the story was ‘leaked’ from the Cain camp itself? When you couple that (“in your face” challenge to lib-sex harrassment) with “in your face” smoking Cain ad, and Cain’s dragging out the story (supposedly inept handling by Team Cain, but maybe really ept), hmmmmmmmm.
All Mitt really needs to do in the swing states is hold his own, which he’s already doing in this poll, but I can see him winning almost ALL of these states. For one thing, this is a registered voter poll, and a ‘likely voter’ poll would be a better gauge of actual outcome….and give him a genuine edge over Obama. Enthusiasm among Republicans and Independents will be higher than enthusiasm on the Left next November.
Note that in a majority of these states Mitt has already come out ahead of Obama in polling this year. Everyone else loses, as usual.
Cain is going to take down the whole party with his sexual harrassing mess. This guy couldn’t control himself and has contradicted himself a lot already.
” Veteran GOP pollster Chris Wilson, a Rick Perry backer who worked at the NRA during Cain’s tenure, told Oklahoma talk radio Wednesday that he witnessed Cain sexually harass a low-level NRA staffer at a restaurant in Virginia. He provided zero details but said “everybody involved” with the NRA at the time knew about Cain’s behavior.
Cain revealed that he told Rick Perry’s campaign aide Curt Anderson about a sexual harassment claim against him while Anderson was working on Cain’s failed 2004 Senate campaign. But Cain will not specify which sexual harassment incident he is referring to — not to mention his accusation totally contradicts earlier claims that Cain was unaware of any harassment allegations.”
16. It appears that only Romney supporters keep posting and bringing up the unfounded allegations because they want a response to anonymous sources which is almost impossible to do. It’s like shadow boxing.
As Rush just put ithe past three hours and all week long, “Cain has not tried a coverup! Because, they got nothing. And you can’t prove a negative.”
21. You throw that word (lying) around a lot against conservatives. Have you ever noticed? It seems to be a pattern of other Romney supporters as well.
25 – I can’t find the link on Bing.com that shows 99,999 x 100 being anywhere close to 100,000,000…or anybody seriously claiming Romney has spent that much or Cain has spent that little. I think you’re making things up…funny how a lot of staunchly anti-Romney people seem to make a habit of that.
The fact is that Romney would slash the state far more than anyone we have running…..with the exception of Ron Paul, who can’t get elected. And, according to all the polls, NONE of our guys can get elected except Romney.
Your aspersion that Romney is on the Left is as delusional and absurd as your support of Cain….the serial harasser and SoCon king. 9/9/9 would render Herman unelectable if his personal morality was pure as the driven snow…..and it isn’t.
So you want to elect Obama?? Keep supporting Cain.
I have decided that I read this site way to often and I am not a better person for it. This site is a circular firing squad like non other that I have seen. I have to say that there are some of you on this site that are real pieces of work. Every candidate’s campaign button is represented.
I am an entrepreneur. I love seeing people succeed; creating jobs. I also have had to lay people off as of late because of my miscalculating the depths of this economic mess. I care deeply about the policies that will help me create more jobs. I lurked for a year and a half before the 2008 election on this site and have been lurking here for the last 6 months off and on.
I started the cycle liking Gingrich, Romney, Ron Paul (keeping everyone honest) and Cain. As the campaign has progressed Santorum has impressed me at times and I certainly like some of the things Paul has to say but to me it is a message/messenger thing. I love Gingrich’s demeanor at debates. He has become even more palatable to me over time and I could definitely support him. I like Cain’s optimism but I am now concerned about his preparation and core morally (which is also my main concern with Gingrich).
There is no question that I lean much more towards Romney now. Romney has both disappointed and inspired me. I wish he had Gingrich’s demeanor in debates. To me the ability to articulate and inspire around a good message is critical. Bush was a disaster in this regard (and by poor association, Perry has failed to do anything for me). I guess what ultimately puts me in his camp is Romney can EXECUTE and has gotten great things done while bringing everyone around him up with him. It is rare to see someone so prepared and capable to just EXECUTE!!! Some of his speeches have really been good and others not so much. But he has a history of EXECUTION at the highest levels. And that in and of itself is inspirational even if he can’t quite give a Reaganesque speech. I know how hard execution is no matter how good the ideas. He has both the smarts and the interpersonal attributes to help people on both sides get on board with him to make EXECUTION possible. The RIGHT Ideas/Interpersonal Skills/Unquestioned ability to EXECUTE without excuses have won me over. As I see it after we get our guy/gal in office we will have a chore in front of us like non other. Vigor/expectations for success/Ability to get it done will be paramount.
Additionally I have interacted in business with a couple of his sons and I am more than impressed with them.
We all have opinions thank goodness and I’ve shown mine here. I fail to see why anyone on this board works so hard tearing other candidates down to build theirs up or just to simply tear another candidate down period. We should all be in this together. What we have in Washington is a disaster. What does it serve to tear any of the candidates down with vitriol and half truths or with no sense of allowing for individual shortcomings. Some of you on this board would be painful having dinner with.
I too am disgusted by the Party and where it is heading. In fact last night I signed up for the “Americans Elect” movement and am keeping a close eye in how things develop there. Basically, if Romney doesn’t get the nom, I may well be an active participate in that movement in finding a third party candidate. I can’t live with a Perry, Bachmann, Santorum, and, increasingly, Cain candidacy. I could maybe live with Gingrich.
Man, I wish TPaw stayed in.
Romney is the only Presidential, voice of reason, and experienced candidate on the GOP side. It is a supremely weak field, though I think Romney is a great candidate and would be a fantastic president and support him whole heartedly.
27. Attacking conservative supporters of the one leading in the polls? That’s rich from a supporter of the most moderate candiate in the race. But expected and boring.
30. It it will be alright. Generally these candidates make their own beds and if they can’t deal with the media they are a liability and that is why I am so glad Palin isn’t running.
31. Why do Romney supporters so often threaten to leave the party if he is not nominated? I know others do it as well from time to time but not to that extent. Just curious.
Cain can’t keep up with all the misinformation he is putting out there and folds badly – lashing out when confronted about sexual harrassing women numerous times.
You must not get around much. There are sites that are actively purging Romney supporters or even people who say something complimentary about him. I don’t know of any sites doing that to supporters of any other candidates.
This entire primary has been defined as Romney vs. Not Romney. The press loves it and many people who don’t bother looking into the facts have played along.
I, for one, support Romney and hope he will be the nominee. I think he would be the best President and has the best chance to beat Obama. But I will support the eventual nominee because a 3rd party of just too many people staying home will guarantee a 2nd Obama term. That would be a disaster.
I think you greatly misrepresent the hostility that Romney supporters have shown toward other candidates versus the other way around. Sure, some are passionately against some candidates but on balance, the Romney hate is much greater and it does tend to infuriate people after a while.
I don’t know if anyone here is paying attention to Romeny’s speech right now but it has been a good one.
Too bad he did this on a Friday, Im not saying that is Mitt’s fault, I’m just saying that this pretty good exucted speech will not have the impact that it would have had if it was done earlier in the week or on a Saturday night right before the Sunday morning new shows.
Never do something positive on a Friday, it will evaporate. Dump the bad news on Fridays, use a Monday or Tuesday to do these good speeches…or a Saturday night
Dave, I agree. I came around to Mitt last cycle as well. But came into this cycle with my eyes open and I really have always liked Gingrich’s ability to articulate a great vision. I have a tendency to be an ideologue and for that reason I have waned at times. But I am quickly brought to reality when I have to lay people off. Ideology is nice to read in books. Mitt at his core has the ideology, I am more and more confident of this, but more important he has proven that he can pick his battles to make the RIGHT things happen.
#32 Dang it, Bell. It’s not a matter of “moderate” or “conservative.” It’s a matter of competence. Cain is not competent.
That’s what this time in the process is for: Rise in the polls and let’s take a look at you. My gripe is Cain supporters are willfully ignorant of the fact Cain is not up for the job. I thought he might me; I was willing to give him a fair shot.
30. I have gone through a similar process and came to the same conclusions. Well said.
I am pragmatic and in addition to execution, I am looking for electability as the most important criteria. We have to defeat Obama before he destroys this country and turns us into a Euro-model society.
Right now, Romney is the only GOP candidate who can beat Obama. I was intrigued by Cain early on but he is not electable. I admire Newt’s intellect (and his books) but he is not electable. He could be a good cabinet member or advisor.
Fortunately, most of the likely voters are not paying attention yet and reading/seeing much of all the tearing down of
these candidates. Except the MSM is now all over Cain. And this vetting of all the GOP candidates is good to go thru now. Imagine if Cain was the GOP candidate and these allegations came out a year from now. Whoever our candidate is will go under a microscope by the MSM like we have never seen before. It will be a nasty, horrible, and completely biased process.
I think by early 2012 it will be clear that Romney is the candidate and hopefully most people on this site will rally around him so we can defeat Obama.
#47 I hope you’re right. I have my doubts. It appears the not-romney voters have settled on their man and are not going to budge. They are going to wear their (misplaced) loyality as a badge of honor. The more people attack Cain, the more they will double down on their support.
I don’t see the hate you do. There are people here who do nothing but spam anti-Romney talking points, comment after comment, thread after thread. Romney supporters tend to support their candidate but they also stay on topic.
But in the larger sense, as I said earlier, this entire primary has been portrayed as Romney vs, Not Romney. Its a little difficult for me to work up a lot of sympathy for your position when the focus of the entire process is which candidate can take out Romney, not why is Romney holding so strong and actually doing well in places such as Iowa and SC where we have been assured by all the “experts” he never had a chance.
Boomer Says: “I said earlier, this entire primary has been portrayed as Romney vs, Not Romney.”
You are overthinking it. It’s simply MOST prefer a conservative over a moderate.
That is why Romney is second to A CONSERVATIVE most of the time whether that conservative be a Huckabee, a Trump, a Palin, a Bachmann, a Perry, and now The Cain.
Mitt’s the only one who has a real PLAN to reduce spending to 20% of GDP, he’s the only one with a PLAN to repeal ObamaCare, he’s the only one with a PLAN to get people employed again.
Nobody else has a plan that is as in depth and as comprehensive as Romney. That’s whey he needs to be our nominee.
Why, because you get to define who is and who isn’t a conservative? It’s just nonsense talking points. I have researched the records of all the candidates, well except Cain because he doesn’t have a record in politics, and their level of executive experience and what they have been able to accomplish. I’ve also looked at the environment they governed in.
I’m very comfortable with my choice. You’re free to come to a different conclusion but you don’t get to define who is and who isn’t a conservative for me.
As a Romney supporter, I can understand the flip-flop criticism of Romney. But what is really important when electing Presidents (or someone for any job for that matter) is to look at what that person -does-, not what that person -says- when judging them. In my opinion it matters very little what Romney has said over the years. What matters to me is that every job he’s had, he’s left it looking better than he came into it. He has a record of success.
Whatever crazy flip-flops the guy may have done over the years doesn’t change the fact that the man figures it out when it counts. That’s what matters. I could care less if we had a straight-talker in as POTUS who couldn’t get a thing done right. I’ve known computer programmers in college who couldn’t, for the life of them, get a girlfriend, speak in a complete sentence, or even put deodorant on. But, hell, they knew how to fix a computer problem like nobody else.
Romney may have changed his mind a few times in his life on some things, he may come off as dorky at times, and he may come off as “coreless” (whatever that means). But the MAN UNDERSTANDS ECONOMIES AND FIXING THEM. We didn’t need Romney in 2004, after Bin Laden hit us, we didn’t need Romney in 1996 when the economy was rolling.
But we need a guy like him NOW – and that’s what matters: Right Place, Right Time, Right Man For The Job, Mitt Romney.
42. It’s not like Mitt had a choice. That was when the keynote for the AFP conference was. Also, a lot of what he said in this speech was a repeat of his town hall speech he gave in New Hampshire on Thursday.
BTW, I listened to Cain’s speech, which followed shortly after Romney. Cain is a great speaker and knows how to emotionally connect with voters, but I didn’t hear one concrete ‘policy’ or recommendation he would feasibly propose as president. It was a lot of high-level platitudes.
LOL. Herman Cains “Severance Check” for one of his NRA babes was dated 9/99
Can you believe it ? I wonder if Herman is in to Scientology or the Tarot cards ?
Romney is a watered down version of Chris Christie, who is a watered down version of Ron Paul when it comes to the nation’s finances which are all that matter in politics nowadays.
By what he put out yesterday he’s becoming less tepid, though. There may be hope for him.
We have to defeat Obama before he destroys this country and turns us into a Euro-model society.
This is a little misguided. Euro-model healthcare would reduce our deficit substantially and is an admirable reform. Euro-area investments in non-oil based infrastructure sets them up better in the future than we will be as oil declines in viability. The only thing becoming “Euro-model” are Americans themselves, who want more goodies than they want to pay for and are perpetually robbing their future to do so.
America has already chosen by its actions for thirty years to join Europe in debt-induced suicide.
48 For all of the flip flops you accuse him of, he clearly governed right of center in the most over the top liberal state in the country.
It either shows an agenda by asking that question or it just shows that I probably should just not pay attention to your arguments because your ax grinding gets in the way of any credibility you may think you have to persuade anyone to your opinions.
Keeping a line on taxes and balancing the budget come to mind. It is laughable that he gets derided for fees. That seems like the most conservative position one could take when confronted with the proper role of government. Push the costs to those that would like to take advantages of services and let those that don’t, not have to worry about Robin Hood coming in and forcing them to pay for someone else’s desires.
He inherited policy and an infrastructure built by very liberal preceding administrations. He had to deal with reality not a blank slate on which to impose his ideology. He took the Big Dig disaster, put in place with no controls to weed out waste and corruption, and cleaned that up as well as anyone coming into that situation could have ever hoped for.
He did the same in the Olympics slashing budgets, recruiting volunteers, putting the right energized people in place and turned a potential national and state of Utah embarrassment into a showcase of incredible proportions.
In some of the circle that I have associated, his ability to see possibilities and then turn those into business successes is legendary. I was with a VC in Boston raising money for my company. The topic of Tagg Romney came up as Tagg was a friend of the firm. As we spoke they could not say enough about what an incredible leader Mitt was. There was a sense of admiration for what Bain had accomplished.
I’m not going to keep going as I have to get off this damn site and make something useful happen. I’m certainly not going to convince you Smack but try and be just a little bit more intellectually honest when asking a question like that.
If it comes down to it Smack I would be all over Gingrich without any angst but I can’t look at past histories and see anyone that really holds a candle to Romney’s abilities to execute and solve problems. WE HAVE A LOT OF PROBLEMS. He will solve them in a way that is sustainable and decreases government in our lives of that I am convinced.
Strange weird Romney supporters are making me think why should we vote for Romney when they continuously repeat that they won’t be voting for our Republican candidate choice versus Obama.
To too many Romney supporters it’s nominate Romney or they WILL leave the party high and dry.
Cain struggles to overcome allegations controversy
The threat of a damaging written statement by one of his accusers and shifting explanations by a top aide left Herman Cain’s efforts to handle the issue and even his candidacy in doubt.
68. I saw both speeches as feel the same way. Romney was appealing to their logic, while Cain was appealing to their rhetoric and riled the audience up. I wish Romney was able to weave more of that into his speeches, but his logic and experience is why I support him.
Despite that, it sounds like Romney gained some good feedback on his proposals from Rep. Ryan.
Rush and the Tea Party’s usual suspects are pushing Cain ad naseum while calling anyone who wants to get to the truth of Cain’s problems racists…. These people still have a lot of influence for now, but when this is over I doubt if they will have any credibility left….
Uh oh, Romney’s Medicare plan is almost identical to Ryan’s plan. I guess this gives you Newt supporters another way to attack Romney because he’s attempting “right-wing social engineering”.
“Obama and the Democrat’s usual suspects are pushing Obama ad naseum while calling anyone who wants to get to the truth of Obama’s problems racists…. These people still have a lot of influence for now, but when this is over I doubt if they will have any credibility left….”
I guess you didn’t get the memo Ted but the “I hate Mitt Romney” garbage can be found over at Redstate. Many of the folks here like myself like Romney, though to each his own I guess.
I wonder what things Cain will “misspeak” about over at Americans For Prosperity today? Will we hear more about prisoner exchanges with all of our Gitmo detainees, or more about an electric fence along the border. So if you see the speech, stay tuned to his interview later when he says he was taken out of context.
I’m waiting for the trickle of big endorsements that are likely to come Romney’s way. Perhaps one or two next week timed before the debate just like the Christie endorsement. I presume we will see Demint, Jeb Bush, Paul Ryan, Trump, Huckabee perhaps, Nicky Haley, and many others endorse in the weeks to come. Who else did I miss?
75 – When the inevitable hit job comes down on Romney (assuming he gets the nomination) you’re going to need all of the Cain supporters and the Perry supporters to push back. Keep acting like you’re acting, and a lot of these folks will just do like I’ll do. Namely, just sit back and enjoy the smear campaign that the left unleashes on His Mittness.
#79 Common sense, grown up Republicans are going to have to weigh in for Mitt sometime before the primaries and bring enough Pub voters to their senses.
And there may be some Dem businessmen who care about the country (Steve Wynn types?) who will feel the need to chime in as well.
In the general most of the Cain and Perry supporters will follow orders from talk radio and engage in selective moral outrage accordingly as they do now.
In other words, talk radio will be on Mitt’s side in the general, and the lemmings will follow.
84 – Talk radio might well be on Mitt’s side. It likely will be. But enthusiasm counts for much. And the way Romney supporters are acting like judge and jury on Cain now based on nothing but innuendo and smear won’t be forgotten.
Remember, the onus is on Romney and his merry bunch of Rombots to broaden the tent. Because as of now, Romney doesn’t have enough support to win a national election.
When the hit job comes? Where have you been the last 4 years? Romney’s been hit from every side almost every day. I’ve never heard anyone stand up and defend him from the left OR right.
79
I honestly think Palin will endorse Romney too. I mean it’s either Romney or Cain at this point since she abhors career politicians and crony capitalists. It’s going to depend how Cain rides this storm and IF it doesn’t get any worse.
Oh, absolutely, there is groupthink on this blog. But it comes from within, not in the form of marching orders from talk radio and Evangelical leaders.
Because you haven’t seen anything yet, my friend. When the only thing standing between the first black president and a second term is Mitt Romney, you’re talking a WHOLE NEW LEVEL of smear and character assassination.
And since you think of this election as a sort of quest, to put it mildly, go ahead and kneecap Cain with flimsy evidence at your peril.
So I guess newt and cain are going to have a debate on the Jerry Springer show tomorrow. “you cheated on your wife”, “well you sexually harassed several women” Jerry Jerry Jerry !!!
So your plan is to relentlessly attack Romney, call him Mittens, his supporters bots, knowingly continue to push the dumb flip flopper crap and then tell us we better be nice to you because we are going to need you?
LV – I’m sure Hillary Clinton would tell you differently.
It’s all part of the process. And to be honest, I have essentially zero invested in a Romney victory.
So I’m just saying, as basically a nickel’s worth of free advice, to some of the Rombots here that are ready to burn Cain at the stake for what so far is nothing concrete, if you REALLY want Romney to be the next president it’s probably in your best interests to not poison the well so badly that the Cainiacs sit on their hands when the INEVITABLE Romney hit job arrives.
There are plenty of Cain supporters though that are going to remember how rival campaigns and their supporters were oh so quick to pile on. A lot of them are reachable unless Rombots make them UNreachable.
And for a candidate whose support among the base is shaky at best, it’s something to consider.
just curious when it comes vp speculation list time do we NEED to pick a VP from A SWING STATE is that a MUST or do pick a person off the 2012 debate stage???
Reading through the threads today, the Romney camp has definitely burned bridges to the Cain, Perry, and Newt camps. Plus one or two of the lesser candidates.
64. “Euro-model healthcare would reduce our deficit substantially and is an admirable reform”
Yep, that’s really working out well for Europe right now. And waiting a year or two for routine medical services is also great…..Do you have anything that shows this reduces gov’t deficits? I only see the opposite in everything I read.
103 – I read exactly what you said. You didn’t say anything about a general election – and we’re not even there yet. Republicans will mostly line up behind Romney unless Romney or his supporters screw it up.
One surefire way to screw it up is to do what some of the more zealous Rombots have done and accused Cain of harassment based on no good evidence.
QUESTION on the remaining candidates Do you all expect Everyone that’s in the race to make it to the Iowa primary even i could see a rick santourm or Michelle bachmann out before the iowa primary JAN 3rd ?
96
Boomer, I think you’re one my favorite posters now. Hilarious.
Ted Bell -
Welcome!!! I hope you stick around. This place gets boring when only Romney supporters show up (even though I’m definitely in Mitt’s corner).
As to the discussion about Mitt being the only choice and all others sucking completely and totally – I’m also leaning that direction. I miss TPAW, and I’m also sad that Daniels didn’t run. They would have added some serious quality to this race. I always prefer supporting competent governors for POTUS. Other than Mitt, Perry and Huntsman are the other governors. Well, I didn’t like Perry when I lived in TX, but now I have much more concrete reasons to believe he’d be a disaster as a nominee. Huntsman isn’t worth discussing.
Who else is there? Newt has great ideas, and needs a cabinet appointment, but he has a lot of baggage to be sure, and it doesn’t end with his adulteries. Cain I like… but man has he shown himself to be kinda in over his head. But if Mitt gets hit by a bus, call me a Cain supporter. He’d be so much better with some competent advisors.
I’ll walk over broken glass barefooted to vote for anybody against Obama, but I don’t much hope for a win, nor would I have hope of having any problems actually fixed if it’s anybody but Mitt that we put up.
A larger and earlier-triggering social security program and a far worse population pyramid than the US present in Europe (they have far more retirees than we do) suggests that if all else were equal, the US would probably be toast with its current healthcare regime.
The fact is that it’s bankrupting us at present even without those other disadvantages present in Europe.
Again, it comes down to the fact that Americans want goodies they don’t have to work for. Especially in healthcare. Any nation that devotes 16% of its productive capacity to healthcare and lives the unhealthy, obese lifestyles Americans do, is just wanting to have its cake and eat it too (or four). We are bankrupting our future in the process. As the report highlights, America spends twice as much as the average developed nation on healthcare. Forgive me for noticing but I don’t see Canadians or Brits or French or Italians or Japanese dying in the streets. They actually live longer than Americans, in every case. Aren’t we all about getting the best value for our money? Americans need to pay for the consequences of their obsessive healthcare spending now, and not pass them off into the future via trillions of dollars in additional public debt for future generations.
Every person must succeed or fail on their own merits, with some safety net to help those who fall on hard times provided by their peers. America is subsidizing ridiculous, unproductive healthcare treatments and pill-popping on its children’s money. This generation looking vainly for eternal youth and freedom from the natural frailties and scarcities of life must be forced to reap what it sows. It is evil to shield them from the costs of their behavior by stealing from the nation’s future, and only evil will come of it.
Perry’s supporters are coming back realizing his record of job creation, dealing with border states, fiscal conservatism, military service, and experience as Gov, Lnt Gov, Agriculture Comm, and in the legislature are what we need. We keep getting sidetracked by side issues and word mis-steps or popularity contests. Truth is 40% of all new job creation FOR THE COUNTRY was in Texas the last 2 years and Gov Perry consistently states “We” instead of “I” when showing pride for achievements. Also, many of Perry’s ideas in “Fed Up” are being used by the other candidates in their “ideas” now.
Cain is a motivational speaker whose own wife has NEVER attended a political event with him. If he were to win the nomination both of them will be representing the US. Mrs. Cain didn’t come out when Cain was riding high and cancelled her interview with Fox … there is so much more than is obvious to this story.
It will be down to Perry vs Romney. I think Perry is our best chance and has the record to fight Obama and win the Presidency. I am concerned that Romney’s baggage that the Dems are already airing will sink his chances, but I WILL vote for Romney over Obama. I hope that all Romney supporters will do the same (if he is not the nominee) or the DEMS will have accomplished their mission.
We can’t afford 4 more years of Obama or our one chance to get rid of Obamacare and get REAL health care/prescription cost reforms. Obama wins if he divides the REPs and causes Independents to stay away from voting because their candidate didn’t get the nomination. Keep your eye on the most important goal … get Obama OUT!
105
I’m with the crowd that thinks that the accusations are just dumb when there are zero actual facts or specific allegations brought forward… BUT I completely agree that the Cain camp has been horrendus at handling this. And this is not his first gaffe.
Again… Cain is still my #2, so I’m really hoping he can pull it together and get back in there. He still has some serious business credibility, and I think that would make him a good POTUS.
109
I will support whoever wins… even Perry. Even though I think he’s a snake. He’s nowhere near as repulsive as Obama to me. The only one would make me stay home is Ron Paul – Iran getting nuclear missles is a hard NO for me.
Anyone heard if Perry is SERIOUSLY going to start skipping debates? I don’t know if this would be a smart move for him or not. He’s getting better, and the expectations for his performances are pretty low at this point anyway.
Just a thought..if they’ve been so bad in handling it, then why are the $$$ and poll numbers way up a week later?
Really sems to be that it would be insane to stop whatever Cain’s doing. Perhaps we should all stand up and shout, Keep preaching and singing 999, Brother Herman! And watch the numbers keep rising….
By the way, I can’t believe Obama’s speech overseas talking about our Congress as little children while HE THE GREAT is trying to lead (on his numerous fundraisers around the country). I want a President that says “WE” speaking of pride of America and being patriotic.
Couldn’t believe Chris Matthews (MSNBC) ranting about his disappointment in Obama and for once I agree with his reasons. Most people might have missed this because it is buried in a clip called, “Cain’s Campaign Struggles to get back on track” dated Nov 2. I was AMAZED what he said about Obama and how divisive he has made our country and how it is all about him, etc. This should be all over the FOX and other airwaves. Afraid it might be deleted so please watch and remember WHY we have to get Obama out!
Perry and Romney stated casually that there were so many debates they may become more selective about attending. The media jumped on Perry about it and tied it into his candor about not being the best debator.
Perry said sense that they are committed to at least the next 5, but he wants to spend time on the road getting to talk to the people. It was blown WAY out of proportion. He didn’t get a chance to get his message out in the early debates because he was being attacked by 7 others on stage. It is time to whittle this group down so we can hear from at least the top 5 (Romney, Perry, Cain, Paul, & Newt) I for one am tired of the attacks to get attention taking away from REAL candidates stating their policies and ideas.
So, you’d rather go to war with Iran, then let them get the same nukes that, say, Pakistan has? Like, say, North Korea has? That’s nuts.
You’d totally accept some lame trumped up war party before invading, just like Iraq, where we troll out boatloads of trashy evidence that someone in Tehran somewhere a few years ago looked at an internet site for making a bomb underground and call that evidence?
They sold us that going into Iraq was to stop Saddam from getting nukes. Come to find out he didn’t have even the slightest thing close to it. What a collosal waste of scarce national resources that could have been wisely invested at home. All it did was make the US a byword for oppression and imperialism in the Middle East and inspired more terrorists than the ones the whole charade was purporting to stop.
I would not vote for any candidate that I felt would pull the trigger on invading Iran, unless Iran itself launched a deliberate attack on American forces. And you shouldn’t either.
I’ve got a theory about Libertarians and Paul fans in particular, and here it goes:
(1) They don’t trust well-connected wealthy, powerful, individuals.
(2) Many of these people are Jewish
(3) Israel is Jewish
(4) Therefore they don’t want to protect Israel from Iran
Seriously, if the Libertarian had a guy who could really articulate the message, I have no doubt he would have a great shot at winning. In fact, I attribute most of Ron Paul’s problems, not on his policy or his plan, but his personality and mannerisms.
He just comes off so freaking senile and crazy, he scares the crap out of everyone.
So, MassCon, your allegation is that Paul fans are anti-Semitic?
What about you – I don’t see you standing up to protect the Tibetans from the Chinese government.
You must be an anti-Tibetan hatemonger more than happy to shill for Beijing’s line.
Sarcasm aside, the fact is simply, we don’t have enough money to protect Israel from all the Muslims it decides to tick off. You go contribute your own if it’s that important to you. The US is delusional on Israel and always will be. We could go on and on about why. But this is only a matter of national interest – and its not in our interest to play Israel’s bodyguard. We gain nothing. Washington warned us to avoid entangling foreign alliances. This is just that sort of alliance.
The fact that there always have been and always will be stupid rich Jews that like to play around in the particularly dirty businesses of finance, media, and politics that give all other Jews a bad name. Likewise, there always will be stupid jihadis that give Muslims a bad name. I’m not in the business of thinking we should treat all Jews or Muslims by the actions of a few.
123. I’d go as far as say that he fits all of them except sensible. Ron is articulate – he’s been giving his schpiel for years now so he has most of the thoughts memorized. He’s steady as he will not waiver on anything.
But the “steady” part becomes an issue when you are talking about leading a bipartisan group in getting change to occur. He hasn’t led his fellow Congressmen towards his goals over the years so putting on a different hat doesn’t make me believe that he would be able to get his agenda passed.
The fact that there always have been and always will be stupid rich Jews that like to play around in the particularly dirty businesses of finance, media, and politics that give all other Jews a bad name.
Now, I know what you meant to say, but let’s just say if you plan on getting into politics someday you have a lot of work to do on your word choice.
128 – He doesn’t need to get his full agenda passed. If he wants $1 trillion in spending cuts but only gets $100-$200 billion in cuts, that would be the same as what Romney is proposing. What’s wrong with that?
133 – I’m not sure if he would negotiate but let’s say he didn’t and vetoed a bill that only cut $200 billion instead of the $1 trillion that he wants. The options are either Congress shuts down or they override his veto and there are $200 billion in cuts. To me, either option pushes us in the right direction. If Romney proposed $200 billion in cuts, most likely, it will be negotiated down to $50 billion. Why not start with a bigger number like $1 trillion?
Pastor, being from the South and raised around deep Bible belt Christians (especially Evangelical or old time Baptist), know referring to one another as “Brother or Sister” is extremely common and has nothing to do with race. I know this from living in Okla, TX, LA, AL, GA, and find it even in FL. As a Pastor you would be aware in these states. Personally, I was not raised that way, but one of my grandmothers always spoke that way to any “Christians sharing fellowship” regardless of their denomination. I am sure that Perry did not realize the flack he would get, but is new to the national scrutiny arena.
To answer your other question, I watch Direct TV and can see 8 news channels at once. This is how I discovered that even MSNBC & CNN covered the other candidates (including Perry’s big economic speeches) when Fox did not. After flipping around realized that for whatever reason, Fox News gives Cain the most coverage, but shows most support constantly for Romney by stating he will be the front runner in all of their round table discussions. CNN was the most impartial. I was actually shocked! This leads me to wonder for reasoning behind decisions made at Fox. When they reported Cain’s sex scandals, they said numerous times that this of course happened over 12 years ago. When they reported the Perry “rock” incident (which Cain jumped all over, then backtracked the next day) Fox made it sound like something recent and not 30 years ago! CNN reported the exact facts … again I was surprised.
Other sites I frequent are “redstate” for intelligent conservative voters and “rickperryreport.com” (not a part of Perry’s campaign, just source of information from supporter) as both have very good information that you can’t seem to find through the regular media outlets.
So, you’d rather go to war with Iran, then let them get the same nukes that, say, Pakistan has? Like, say, North Korea has?
Yes. Because neither Pakistan nor North Korea is constantly talking about how badly they want the US gone. Neither of them have made such blatant attempts at destroying us.
An, Iran with nukes is the end of Israel and the end of the United States of America.
They sold us that going into Iraq was to stop Saddam from getting nukes. Come to find out he didn’t have even the slightest thing close to it.
Well, it does appear we never found actual evidence of it. But, it also appears there was a great deal of evidence leading up to the belief that he had or was attempting to acquire nuclear technology.
And, I have doubts that there were never any weapons of mass destruction, there.
When the UN inspectors were finally allowed into Iraq, after months of stalling, they STILL kept them locked in a room for hours while they very likely moved or hid any evidence.
I believe our justification for going into Iraq was sound. I just believe the handling of it was horrible, especially after the Shock and Awe portion.
I think it would be beyond foolish to allow a country that hates Israel and the United States as much as Iran does to get a hold of nuclear weapons.
I would think North Korea is more of a threat than Iran.
1. NK already has nukes.
2. NK is controlled by ONE person.
3. That ONE person hates the US.
4. Iran was close to electing another President and still has the possibility of electing someone else in the future. That will never happen in NK.
North Korea has one of the largest armies in the world and they will do whatever their supreme leader says. NK already has all the capabilities to cause severe destruction (large army, nuclear and biological weapons, a deranged leader, etc.) At this point in time, I’m more afraid of North Korea than Iran.
The North Korea vs Iran Nuke argument is ridiculous. OBVIOUSLY we’d rather NK didn’t have any Nukes. But, that doesn’t mean we should let Iran have them!
147 – It’s ridiculous that we’ve allowed NK to develop nuclear weapons. They are liable to use it against us or South Korea at any moment and we have tens of thousands of soldiers stationed there.
Good quote from Mitt Romney on the flip flop charge:
“I’ve been as consistent as human beings can be,” Romney said in a meeting with the editorial board of New Hampshire’s Seacoast Media Group. “I cannot state every single issue in exactly the same words every single time, and so there are some folks who, obviously, for various political and campaign purposes will try and find some change and try to draw great attention to something which looks like a change which in fact is entirely consistent.”
Read more on Newsmax.com: Romney: I’m no Flip-Flopper
Important: Do You Support Pres. Obama’s Re-Election? Vote Here Now!
WH rejects subpoena request for Solyndra docs byPhilip Klein Senior Editorial WriterFollow on Twitter:@PhilipAKleinPresident Obama’s attorney sent a letter to Congressional investigators on Friday, saying the White House would not cooperate with a subpoena requesting documents related to its doling out a $535 million loan guarantee to now bankrupt solar panel manufacturer Solyndra.
“I can only conclude that your decision to issue a subpoena, authorized by a party-line vote, was driven more by partisan politics than a legitimate effort to conduct a responsible investigation,” Obama’s counsel, Kathryn Ruemmler, wrote in a letter to the top Republicans on the House Energy and Commerce committee. (Read Ruemmler’s full letter here).
Committee chairman Rep. Fred Upton, R-Mich, blasted the White House response:
“We have been reasonable every step of the way in this investigation, and it is a shame that the Obama Administration and House Democrats continue to put up partisan roadblocks to hide the truth from taxpayers. Solyndra was a jobs program gone bad, and we must learn the lessons of Solyndra as we work to turn our economy around and put folks back to work. Our judicious and methodical work over the last eight months has garnered tens of thousands of pages of documents from DOE and OMB that have proven we are on the right track. Now, we need to know the White House’s role in the Solyndra debacle in order to learn the full truth about why taxpayers now find themselves a half billion dollars in the hole. The White House could have avoided the need for subpoena authorizations if they had simply chosen to cooperate. That would have been the route we preferred, and frankly, it would have been better for the White House to get the information out now, rather than continue to drag this out. Our request for documents is reasonable – we are not demanding the President’s blackberry messages as we are respectful of Executive Privilege. What is the West Wing trying to hide? We owe it to American taxpayers to find out.”
“JenniferJJacobs: @NewtGingrich gets about half the crowd at the #ReaganDinner on their feet applauding madly at end of his speech. Only standing O. #iacaucus Retweet”
152.Massachusetts Conservative Says:
November 4th, 2011 at 7:37 pm
Yes, Craig For Losers has used 2 pseudonyms on this thread: Ted Bell and Pastor William Rennick.
Yes. Because neither Pakistan nor North Korea is constantly talking about how badly they want the US gone. Neither of them have made such blatant attempts at destroying us.
An, Iran with nukes is the end of Israel and the end of the United States of America.
Lol! So, just how is Iran going to conquer us, Sun Tzu?
Chavez is the only national leader anywhere that talks about wanting the US gone. And we have yet to invade his country. It appears that intentions do not qualify one for invasion.
Some of the talk here on Iran reflects ignorance of the Middle East. Iran is a Shiite nation, viewed as heretic by the jihadis (who are Sunni). The Taliban during the 90′s murdered a pair of Iranian diplomats in Afghanistan and they never got along. Iran is actually the subject of internal terrorist attacks by Sunni jihadi groups from its isolated southeast Balochi region.
Iran is not an exporter of terrorism – Iran is viewed as a heretic nation by jihadis. There’s no rational reason to not have relations with them. Russia had nukes. We could talk with Russia. China had nukes. We sent Nixon to China. Pakistan has nukes. We worked with them. We can have relations with Iran, too.
You guys need to take a stance. Spend $1 trillion plus, thousands of American lives, continue sending our Mideast reputation to pot, inspire thousands of new jihadis, and invest ourselves in what is sure to be years of guerrilla war. Iran geographically has more in common with the mountainous terrain of Afghanistan, than with Iraq. Not to mention the hundreds of thousands of innocent Iranians who will die in that war.
Or let Iran have nukes, who will act like every other nuclear-armed nation. It’s insane that so many of you would like to see another hugely expensive war and just throw away all the resources, all the standing, all the lives. For nothing.
All this stupid war talk with Iran has the same problem every other good (or not so much) intention in government has. Who is going to pay for it? War can only be tolerated in defense of America against attack by conventional forces. All you hawks need to cool your jets (literally) before you get us into something much worse than Iraq.
First line from the article: Mohammad Mosaddegh or Mosaddeq (16 June 1882 – 5 March 1967), was the democratically elected Prime Minister of Iran from 1951 to 1953 when he was overthrown in a coup d’état orchestrated by the British MI5 and the United States Central Intelligence Agency.
I just fail to see how some Americans can be so dumb.
The Spaniard in the Spanish American war was told to us in the press to be a murderous fanatic.
In the World Wars the Germans were played up as the most evil of humanity, the “hun”, the Italians as degenerate, the Japanese as uncivilized murderous barbarians.
The Russian in the Cold War was an atheist demon.
The Chinese, Koreans, and Vietnamese were likewise insane barbarian races.
Now we are back to the beginning. The Muslims are all murderous fanatics.
These war cases are always the same. The only reason anyone ends up thinking there’s any rationality behind invading Iran is because they’ve been sold by some guy with an agenda that everyone in Iran is a murderous fanatic.
Because a current attack happens AFTER the threat. They’re not the same thing. They WANT to hurt us and if we let them get nukes they’ll figure out a way to use them.
and yet owns nukes, can be rationally expected to be less of a threat than Iran? If this bozo has not decided to play with a nuclear device on South Korea yet, why would the very guarded Iran, who has never fired anything at anyone, go rogue and fire off a nuke? What do they possibly stand to gain?
Preemptive war is always pushed by people with an agenda. And it’s always a mistake. Always a waste of lives. How can anyone believe the government’s war justifications anymore after the crap they threw together on Iraq?
I am not going to support any leader who wants to make a $1 trillion bet that a)Iran wants nukes, not just nuclear power and b)Iran wants to go apocalyptic and use the nukes. They aren’t jihadis. They aren’t even North Korean loonies.
177. I don’t know. I would just really like to keep them from getting into the hands of other countries that are either relatively unstable or that want to harm us.
I’m no historian. I’m no military strategist.
But, when I hear that guy talk (Iran’ PM), I get scared.
Well, Bush was calling them the “Axis of Evil” back when Khatami, an Iranian moderate, was in power and calling for a “dialogue of civilizations”.
I think Americans don’t realize that our leaders can be just as threatening. I daresay Ahmadinejad owes a lot of his popular support to a resentment of American attempts to influence and dominate the Middle East.
So what has Ahmadinejad, the President of a regional power, said that would threaten the most dominant global power in the world?
The truth is, Keith, invading countries to stop them from obtaining nuclear weapons is silly. Because it’s not preventing anything. Do you really think Russia or China back in the Cold War didn’t want to see us fall so they could take over the world? And yet they didn’t use the bomb – because they knew that doing so wouldn’t get them that. They stood to lose just as much.
Iran is a country, just like they are. And frankly a country like Iran with a wide variety of political leaders and functioning legislature has a lot more power moderation than was the case in Stalinist Russia or Maoist China.
November 4th, 2011 at 11:31 am
should the VP announcement choice come fro a swing state? Also unemployment number 9% that came out this am question do you all expect it to come down before election day to SAVE Obama from losing to our nominee ?
November 4th, 2011 at 11:32 am
This is terrific news. If we nominate Romney, we could easily win back the White House.
November 4th, 2011 at 11:42 am
Since the Sex Harrassment story has only served to enhance Cain’s popularity and standing, while undermining the lib media, has anyone considered that the story was ‘leaked’ from the Cain camp itself? When you couple that (“in your face” challenge to lib-sex harrassment) with “in your face” smoking Cain ad, and Cain’s dragging out the story (supposedly inept handling by Team Cain, but maybe really ept), hmmmmmmmm.
…and everyone’s reporting and talking Cain, 24/7
November 4th, 2011 at 11:48 am
Only Cain and Romney matched up against Obama within the margin of error.
Great news for the 1-2 Republican candidates.
Although bad news for Perry.
November 4th, 2011 at 11:52 am
3. (Jack, Shhh. Be quiet. You can’t leak that. Didn’t you get the e-mail two weeks ago?)
November 4th, 2011 at 11:53 am
All Mitt really needs to do in the swing states is hold his own, which he’s already doing in this poll, but I can see him winning almost ALL of these states. For one thing, this is a registered voter poll, and a ‘likely voter’ poll would be a better gauge of actual outcome….and give him a genuine edge over Obama. Enthusiasm among Republicans and Independents will be higher than enthusiasm on the Left next November.
Note that in a majority of these states Mitt has already come out ahead of Obama in polling this year. Everyone else loses, as usual.
November 4th, 2011 at 11:53 am
Cain is going to take down the whole party with his sexual harrassing mess. This guy couldn’t control himself and has contradicted himself a lot already.
November 4th, 2011 at 11:54 am
3. No way or he would have been able to deal with the media better. Perry’s people probably did this as a hail mary for Perry.
November 4th, 2011 at 11:55 am
Jack, Ted,
Glad to see the delusional Right is still alive and well…..try to avoid anything that looks sharp or pointed.
November 4th, 2011 at 12:03 pm
My dear fellow republicans all over the country:
PLEASE WAKE UP NOW before he ruins our chances in 2012. DUMP CAIN NOW!!!!!!
November 4th, 2011 at 12:07 pm
So… Romney is the best choice.. still.
November 4th, 2011 at 12:12 pm
Looks like Cain’s stumbles and our party’s blind loyalty to him are hurting our chances to beat Obama.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/11/04/us-usa-campaign-cain-obama-idUSTRE7A30O020111104
November 4th, 2011 at 12:12 pm
10. Is that you, Jonathan Martin?
November 4th, 2011 at 12:14 pm
9. Well Dave, you who lean left seem to be a problem.
But Cain’s taking care of it.
November 4th, 2011 at 12:19 pm
12. Cain has climbed to now only be 3 back, that is tied with Obama within the margin of error.
That is the same as Romney who has spent over $100,000,000 million running for president for four years.
Cain has spent about $99,999 which is about a hundred times less.
November 4th, 2011 at 12:34 pm
15. Cain is a huge liability
” Veteran GOP pollster Chris Wilson, a Rick Perry backer who worked at the NRA during Cain’s tenure, told Oklahoma talk radio Wednesday that he witnessed Cain sexually harass a low-level NRA staffer at a restaurant in Virginia. He provided zero details but said “everybody involved” with the NRA at the time knew about Cain’s behavior.
Cain revealed that he told Rick Perry’s campaign aide Curt Anderson about a sexual harassment claim against him while Anderson was working on Cain’s failed 2004 Senate campaign. But Cain will not specify which sexual harassment incident he is referring to — not to mention his accusation totally contradicts earlier claims that Cain was unaware of any harassment allegations.”
November 4th, 2011 at 12:39 pm
Ted,
I’m considerably to your right…..I’m just not delusional.
November 4th, 2011 at 12:39 pm
Any way you look at it, this will be a close and difficult race for the presidency. I want someone focused on the job not distractions.
November 4th, 2011 at 12:45 pm
16. A Rick Perry backer said it? Oh, that changes everything. They never lie. <sarc
17. If you support Romney like you claim, you are not to the right of anyone at this site.
November 4th, 2011 at 12:51 pm
16. It appears that only Romney supporters keep posting and bringing up the unfounded allegations because they want a response to anonymous sources which is almost impossible to do. It’s like shadow boxing.
As Rush just put ithe past three hours and all week long, “Cain has not tried a coverup! Because, they got nothing. And you can’t prove a negative.”
November 4th, 2011 at 12:53 pm
I turned on Rush.
And Rush is shilling for Cain like mad.
This is a mistake.
Cain is unvetted.
He has already lied, he is covering it up. And so is Rush. And so is Hannity.
This is disgusting. I am turning off Rush now. This party is gone. We are as bad as the Democrats now. There is no morality.
I do not know that Cain is guilty. But he is lying. What I do know is that there is there there and the right is covering it up.
I am more than willing to hear the full story. But I am not behind sweeping it under the rug and pretending it doesn’t exist.
Rush Limbaugh is a moral reprobate. I guess his own skeletons are so big he identifies with the charges.
This is sick.
I am ashamed.
November 4th, 2011 at 12:53 pm
Rush: “The pantywise (sp) on our side are defending the Politico, folks.”
November 4th, 2011 at 12:56 pm
15 “That is the same as Romney who has spent over $100,000,000 million running for president for four years.
Cain has spent about $99,999 which is about a hundred times less.”
You’re comparing apples and oranges.
Where’d you get those numbers, anyway? Please don’t refer me to your 9-9-9 website for the answer.
November 4th, 2011 at 12:57 pm
21. You throw that word (lying) around a lot against conservatives. Have you ever noticed? It seems to be a pattern of other Romney supporters as well.
November 4th, 2011 at 12:59 pm
23. Bing.com
November 4th, 2011 at 1:00 pm
Who cares what Rush Limbaugh says. He’s an entertainer not a serious policy person or someone who has achieved squat in elective office.
The facts will come out. They always do. Then people can make up their minds whether they think this is something or nothing.
The only thing I have learned from this so far is that Herman has not handled this “scandal” very well.
November 4th, 2011 at 1:02 pm
The problem here is not Cain but slavish Cain supporters.
The problem here is not the sexual harassment allegations. Cain’s strange remarks had him sunk before any of these current questions came to the fore.
The problem here is low information voters who jump on the band wagon for a check-the-boxes but incompetent conservative with a cool personality.
November 4th, 2011 at 1:04 pm
25 – I can’t find the link on Bing.com that shows 99,999 x 100 being anywhere close to 100,000,000…or anybody seriously claiming Romney has spent that much or Cain has spent that little. I think you’re making things up…funny how a lot of staunchly anti-Romney people seem to make a habit of that.
November 4th, 2011 at 1:06 pm
Ted,
The fact is that Romney would slash the state far more than anyone we have running…..with the exception of Ron Paul, who can’t get elected. And, according to all the polls, NONE of our guys can get elected except Romney.
Your aspersion that Romney is on the Left is as delusional and absurd as your support of Cain….the serial harasser and SoCon king. 9/9/9 would render Herman unelectable if his personal morality was pure as the driven snow…..and it isn’t.
So you want to elect Obama?? Keep supporting Cain.
November 4th, 2011 at 1:06 pm
I have decided that I read this site way to often and I am not a better person for it. This site is a circular firing squad like non other that I have seen. I have to say that there are some of you on this site that are real pieces of work. Every candidate’s campaign button is represented.
I am an entrepreneur. I love seeing people succeed; creating jobs. I also have had to lay people off as of late because of my miscalculating the depths of this economic mess. I care deeply about the policies that will help me create more jobs. I lurked for a year and a half before the 2008 election on this site and have been lurking here for the last 6 months off and on.
I started the cycle liking Gingrich, Romney, Ron Paul (keeping everyone honest) and Cain. As the campaign has progressed Santorum has impressed me at times and I certainly like some of the things Paul has to say but to me it is a message/messenger thing. I love Gingrich’s demeanor at debates. He has become even more palatable to me over time and I could definitely support him. I like Cain’s optimism but I am now concerned about his preparation and core morally (which is also my main concern with Gingrich).
There is no question that I lean much more towards Romney now. Romney has both disappointed and inspired me. I wish he had Gingrich’s demeanor in debates. To me the ability to articulate and inspire around a good message is critical. Bush was a disaster in this regard (and by poor association, Perry has failed to do anything for me). I guess what ultimately puts me in his camp is Romney can EXECUTE and has gotten great things done while bringing everyone around him up with him. It is rare to see someone so prepared and capable to just EXECUTE!!! Some of his speeches have really been good and others not so much. But he has a history of EXECUTION at the highest levels. And that in and of itself is inspirational even if he can’t quite give a Reaganesque speech. I know how hard execution is no matter how good the ideas. He has both the smarts and the interpersonal attributes to help people on both sides get on board with him to make EXECUTION possible. The RIGHT Ideas/Interpersonal Skills/Unquestioned ability to EXECUTE without excuses have won me over. As I see it after we get our guy/gal in office we will have a chore in front of us like non other. Vigor/expectations for success/Ability to get it done will be paramount.
Additionally I have interacted in business with a couple of his sons and I am more than impressed with them.
We all have opinions thank goodness and I’ve shown mine here. I fail to see why anyone on this board works so hard tearing other candidates down to build theirs up or just to simply tear another candidate down period. We should all be in this together. What we have in Washington is a disaster. What does it serve to tear any of the candidates down with vitriol and half truths or with no sense of allowing for individual shortcomings. Some of you on this board would be painful having dinner with.
That is all…I had to get that off my chest.
November 4th, 2011 at 1:08 pm
21,
I too am disgusted by the Party and where it is heading. In fact last night I signed up for the “Americans Elect” movement and am keeping a close eye in how things develop there. Basically, if Romney doesn’t get the nom, I may well be an active participate in that movement in finding a third party candidate. I can’t live with a Perry, Bachmann, Santorum, and, increasingly, Cain candidacy. I could maybe live with Gingrich.
Man, I wish TPaw stayed in.
Romney is the only Presidential, voice of reason, and experienced candidate on the GOP side. It is a supremely weak field, though I think Romney is a great candidate and would be a fantastic president and support him whole heartedly.
November 4th, 2011 at 1:08 pm
27. Attacking conservative supporters of the one leading in the polls? That’s rich from a supporter of the most moderate candiate in the race. But expected and boring.
November 4th, 2011 at 1:09 pm
#30- Agree completely.
November 4th, 2011 at 1:10 pm
30. It it will be alright. Generally these candidates make their own beds and if they can’t deal with the media they are a liability and that is why I am so glad Palin isn’t running.
November 4th, 2011 at 1:11 pm
32 – I don’t think he’s a Hunstman or Gingrich supporter.
November 4th, 2011 at 1:12 pm
31. Why do Romney supporters so often threaten to leave the party if he is not nominated? I know others do it as well from time to time but not to that extent. Just curious.
November 4th, 2011 at 1:13 pm
HomeBiz2,
As a believer in competence, why did it take you so long to come around? There’s only one competent candidate in the field.
Mitt believes in Excellence, and he will carry the future with him.
November 4th, 2011 at 1:15 pm
28. Should have typed ‘a thousand times’. Sorry about that. Try Google, too. You can do the math there I’m told, too.
November 4th, 2011 at 1:15 pm
Cain can’t keep up with all the misinformation he is putting out there and folds badly – lashing out when confronted about sexual harrassing women numerous times.
November 4th, 2011 at 1:17 pm
Dave Says: “There’s only one competent candidate in the field.”
You worship at the feet of Romney? The word “only” tipped me off.
November 4th, 2011 at 1:19 pm
36.
You must not get around much. There are sites that are actively purging Romney supporters or even people who say something complimentary about him. I don’t know of any sites doing that to supporters of any other candidates.
This entire primary has been defined as Romney vs. Not Romney. The press loves it and many people who don’t bother looking into the facts have played along.
I, for one, support Romney and hope he will be the nominee. I think he would be the best President and has the best chance to beat Obama. But I will support the eventual nominee because a 3rd party of just too many people staying home will guarantee a 2nd Obama term. That would be a disaster.
I think you greatly misrepresent the hostility that Romney supporters have shown toward other candidates versus the other way around. Sure, some are passionately against some candidates but on balance, the Romney hate is much greater and it does tend to infuriate people after a while.
November 4th, 2011 at 1:19 pm
I don’t know if anyone here is paying attention to Romeny’s speech right now but it has been a good one.
Too bad he did this on a Friday, Im not saying that is Mitt’s fault, I’m just saying that this pretty good exucted speech will not have the impact that it would have had if it was done earlier in the week or on a Saturday night right before the Sunday morning new shows.
Never do something positive on a Friday, it will evaporate. Dump the bad news on Fridays, use a Monday or Tuesday to do these good speeches…or a Saturday night
Too bad, good speech by Mitt.
November 4th, 2011 at 1:21 pm
35. He said he supported Romney as do you. Try to keep up, although I know it’s a bad time.
November 4th, 2011 at 1:21 pm
Dave, I agree. I came around to Mitt last cycle as well. But came into this cycle with my eyes open and I really have always liked Gingrich’s ability to articulate a great vision. I have a tendency to be an ideologue and for that reason I have waned at times. But I am quickly brought to reality when I have to lay people off. Ideology is nice to read in books. Mitt at his core has the ideology, I am more and more confident of this, but more important he has proven that he can pick his battles to make the RIGHT things happen.
November 4th, 2011 at 1:23 pm
#32 Dang it, Bell. It’s not a matter of “moderate” or “conservative.” It’s a matter of competence. Cain is not competent.
That’s what this time in the process is for: Rise in the polls and let’s take a look at you. My gripe is Cain supporters are willfully ignorant of the fact Cain is not up for the job. I thought he might me; I was willing to give him a fair shot.
He doesn’t measure up and that’s a fact.
November 4th, 2011 at 1:24 pm
41. “Romney hate is much greater and it does tend to infuriate people”
The hate here does seem to be coming mainly from the Romney side. Is that peculiar to this site only?
November 4th, 2011 at 1:25 pm
30. I have gone through a similar process and came to the same conclusions. Well said.
I am pragmatic and in addition to execution, I am looking for electability as the most important criteria. We have to defeat Obama before he destroys this country and turns us into a Euro-model society.
Right now, Romney is the only GOP candidate who can beat Obama. I was intrigued by Cain early on but he is not electable. I admire Newt’s intellect (and his books) but he is not electable. He could be a good cabinet member or advisor.
Fortunately, most of the likely voters are not paying attention yet and reading/seeing much of all the tearing down of
these candidates. Except the MSM is now all over Cain. And this vetting of all the GOP candidates is good to go thru now. Imagine if Cain was the GOP candidate and these allegations came out a year from now. Whoever our candidate is will go under a microscope by the MSM like we have never seen before. It will be a nasty, horrible, and completely biased process.
I think by early 2012 it will be clear that Romney is the candidate and hopefully most people on this site will rally around him so we can defeat Obama.
November 4th, 2011 at 1:25 pm
“he has proven that he can pick his battles to make the RIGHT things happen.”
Like what?
What Conservative battles did he pick and won?
And sometimes as a Conservative you have to fight battles that you know you may not win to push the envelope forward.
November 4th, 2011 at 1:26 pm
It’s like ONLY Romney is good. ALL the other’s, very bad. It seems childish.
November 4th, 2011 at 1:27 pm
48. Good questions.
November 4th, 2011 at 1:28 pm
#47 I hope you’re right. I have my doubts. It appears the not-romney voters have settled on their man and are not going to budge. They are going to wear their (misplaced) loyality as a badge of honor. The more people attack Cain, the more they will double down on their support.
November 4th, 2011 at 1:29 pm
HomeBiz2 Says: “This site is a circular firing squad like non other that I have seen.”
You can’t be serious.
November 4th, 2011 at 1:29 pm
46.
I don’t see the hate you do. There are people here who do nothing but spam anti-Romney talking points, comment after comment, thread after thread. Romney supporters tend to support their candidate but they also stay on topic.
But in the larger sense, as I said earlier, this entire primary has been portrayed as Romney vs, Not Romney. Its a little difficult for me to work up a lot of sympathy for your position when the focus of the entire process is which candidate can take out Romney, not why is Romney holding so strong and actually doing well in places such as Iowa and SC where we have been assured by all the “experts” he never had a chance.
November 4th, 2011 at 1:33 pm
53. Romney’s side doesn’t use talking points? That’s funny.
November 4th, 2011 at 1:35 pm
I’m glad the SmackMasterDaddy liked the speech today.
Is the Cain v Gingrich thing still on for this weekend?
November 4th, 2011 at 1:38 pm
Boomer Says: “I said earlier, this entire primary has been portrayed as Romney vs, Not Romney.”
You are overthinking it. It’s simply MOST prefer a conservative over a moderate.
That is why Romney is second to A CONSERVATIVE most of the time whether that conservative be a Huckabee, a Trump, a Palin, a Bachmann, a Perry, and now The Cain.
November 4th, 2011 at 1:40 pm
Gruntsman,
I hope so.
Newt needs this free exposure…and there will be more then we all thought because of this Cain thing that is happening right now.
This debate is in Newt’s wheelhouse…God I hope Cain doesn’t back out.
It’s going to be on CSPAN.
November 4th, 2011 at 1:40 pm
Mitt’s the only one who has a real PLAN to reduce spending to 20% of GDP, he’s the only one with a PLAN to repeal ObamaCare, he’s the only one with a PLAN to get people employed again.
Nobody else has a plan that is as in depth and as comprehensive as Romney. That’s whey he needs to be our nominee.
November 4th, 2011 at 1:43 pm
tweet
ErinMcPike: Crowd at the Americans for Prosperity event is reacting more warmly to Herman Cain than they did to Mitt Romney, despite current events
November 4th, 2011 at 1:44 pm
56.
Why, because you get to define who is and who isn’t a conservative? It’s just nonsense talking points. I have researched the records of all the candidates, well except Cain because he doesn’t have a record in politics, and their level of executive experience and what they have been able to accomplish. I’ve also looked at the environment they governed in.
I’m very comfortable with my choice. You’re free to come to a different conclusion but you don’t get to define who is and who isn’t a conservative for me.
November 4th, 2011 at 1:46 pm
As a Romney supporter, I can understand the flip-flop criticism of Romney. But what is really important when electing Presidents (or someone for any job for that matter) is to look at what that person -does-, not what that person -says- when judging them. In my opinion it matters very little what Romney has said over the years. What matters to me is that every job he’s had, he’s left it looking better than he came into it. He has a record of success.
Whatever crazy flip-flops the guy may have done over the years doesn’t change the fact that the man figures it out when it counts. That’s what matters. I could care less if we had a straight-talker in as POTUS who couldn’t get a thing done right. I’ve known computer programmers in college who couldn’t, for the life of them, get a girlfriend, speak in a complete sentence, or even put deodorant on. But, hell, they knew how to fix a computer problem like nobody else.
Romney may have changed his mind a few times in his life on some things, he may come off as dorky at times, and he may come off as “coreless” (whatever that means). But the MAN UNDERSTANDS ECONOMIES AND FIXING THEM. We didn’t need Romney in 2004, after Bin Laden hit us, we didn’t need Romney in 1996 when the economy was rolling.
But we need a guy like him NOW – and that’s what matters: Right Place, Right Time, Right Man For The Job, Mitt Romney.
November 4th, 2011 at 1:51 pm
42. It’s not like Mitt had a choice. That was when the keynote for the AFP conference was. Also, a lot of what he said in this speech was a repeat of his town hall speech he gave in New Hampshire on Thursday.
BTW, I listened to Cain’s speech, which followed shortly after Romney. Cain is a great speaker and knows how to emotionally connect with voters, but I didn’t hear one concrete ‘policy’ or recommendation he would feasibly propose as president. It was a lot of high-level platitudes.
November 4th, 2011 at 1:57 pm
LOL. Herman Cains “Severance Check” for one of his NRA babes was dated 9/99
Can you believe it ? I wonder if Herman is in to Scientology or the Tarot cards ?
CraigS
November 4th, 2011 at 1:59 pm
Romney is a watered down version of Chris Christie, who is a watered down version of Ron Paul when it comes to the nation’s finances which are all that matter in politics nowadays.
By what he put out yesterday he’s becoming less tepid, though. There may be hope for him.
We have to defeat Obama before he destroys this country and turns us into a Euro-model society.
This is a little misguided. Euro-model healthcare would reduce our deficit substantially and is an admirable reform. Euro-area investments in non-oil based infrastructure sets them up better in the future than we will be as oil declines in viability. The only thing becoming “Euro-model” are Americans themselves, who want more goodies than they want to pay for and are perpetually robbing their future to do so.
America has already chosen by its actions for thirty years to join Europe in debt-induced suicide.
November 4th, 2011 at 2:03 pm
48 For all of the flip flops you accuse him of, he clearly governed right of center in the most over the top liberal state in the country.
It either shows an agenda by asking that question or it just shows that I probably should just not pay attention to your arguments because your ax grinding gets in the way of any credibility you may think you have to persuade anyone to your opinions.
Keeping a line on taxes and balancing the budget come to mind. It is laughable that he gets derided for fees. That seems like the most conservative position one could take when confronted with the proper role of government. Push the costs to those that would like to take advantages of services and let those that don’t, not have to worry about Robin Hood coming in and forcing them to pay for someone else’s desires.
He inherited policy and an infrastructure built by very liberal preceding administrations. He had to deal with reality not a blank slate on which to impose his ideology. He took the Big Dig disaster, put in place with no controls to weed out waste and corruption, and cleaned that up as well as anyone coming into that situation could have ever hoped for.
He did the same in the Olympics slashing budgets, recruiting volunteers, putting the right energized people in place and turned a potential national and state of Utah embarrassment into a showcase of incredible proportions.
In some of the circle that I have associated, his ability to see possibilities and then turn those into business successes is legendary. I was with a VC in Boston raising money for my company. The topic of Tagg Romney came up as Tagg was a friend of the firm. As we spoke they could not say enough about what an incredible leader Mitt was. There was a sense of admiration for what Bain had accomplished.
I’m not going to keep going as I have to get off this damn site and make something useful happen. I’m certainly not going to convince you Smack but try and be just a little bit more intellectually honest when asking a question like that.
If it comes down to it Smack I would be all over Gingrich without any angst but I can’t look at past histories and see anyone that really holds a candle to Romney’s abilities to execute and solve problems. WE HAVE A LOT OF PROBLEMS. He will solve them in a way that is sustainable and decreases government in our lives of that I am convinced.
November 4th, 2011 at 2:05 pm
Strange weird Romney supporters are making me think why should we vote for Romney when they continuously repeat that they won’t be voting for our Republican candidate choice versus Obama.
To too many Romney supporters it’s nominate Romney or they WILL leave the party high and dry.
Well then backatcha.
November 4th, 2011 at 2:07 pm
66. I’m not in that group. I will support any of our candidates over Obama. Just wanted to go on record…;)
November 4th, 2011 at 2:08 pm
59.Smack1968 Says:
November 4th, 2011 at 1:43 pm
tweet
ErinMcPike: Crowd at the Americans for Prosperity event is reacting more warmly to Herman Cain than they did to Mitt Romney, despite current events
—————————————————————
Sweet tweet, thanks.
November 4th, 2011 at 2:10 pm
Cain struggles to overcome allegations controversy
The threat of a damaging written statement by one of his accusers and shifting explanations by a top aide left Herman Cain’s efforts to handle the issue and even his candidacy in doubt.
November 4th, 2011 at 2:12 pm
68. I saw both speeches as feel the same way. Romney was appealing to their logic, while Cain was appealing to their rhetoric and riled the audience up. I wish Romney was able to weave more of that into his speeches, but his logic and experience is why I support him.
Despite that, it sounds like Romney gained some good feedback on his proposals from Rep. Ryan.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/post/exclusive-interview-paul-ryan-has-nothing-but-praise-for-romney-plan/2011/11/04/gIQAgUaSmM_blog.html
November 4th, 2011 at 2:19 pm
Rush and the Tea Party’s usual suspects are pushing Cain ad naseum while calling anyone who wants to get to the truth of Cain’s problems racists…. These people still have a lot of influence for now, but when this is over I doubt if they will have any credibility left….
November 4th, 2011 at 2:21 pm
Romney people tend to forget these same sources pushed Romney to no end last time.
November 4th, 2011 at 2:22 pm
Uh oh, Romney’s Medicare plan is almost identical to Ryan’s plan. I guess this gives you Newt supporters another way to attack Romney because he’s attempting “right-wing social engineering”.
November 4th, 2011 at 2:23 pm
http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2011/11/04/romney-proposes-to-privatize-medicare/?mod=google_news_blog
November 4th, 2011 at 2:25 pm
71
“Obama and the Democrat’s usual suspects are pushing Obama ad naseum while calling anyone who wants to get to the truth of Obama’s problems racists…. These people still have a lot of influence for now, but when this is over I doubt if they will have any credibility left….”
Sounds familiar doesn’t it?
November 4th, 2011 at 2:25 pm
I guess you didn’t get the memo Ted but the “I hate Mitt Romney” garbage can be found over at Redstate. Many of the folks here like myself like Romney, though to each his own I guess.
November 4th, 2011 at 2:28 pm
76
Still Ted, nobody will ban you if you want to stay. Us Romney people still believe in free speech.
November 4th, 2011 at 2:29 pm
I wonder what things Cain will “misspeak” about over at Americans For Prosperity today? Will we hear more about prisoner exchanges with all of our Gitmo detainees, or more about an electric fence along the border. So if you see the speech, stay tuned to his interview later when he says he was taken out of context.
November 4th, 2011 at 2:32 pm
I’m waiting for the trickle of big endorsements that are likely to come Romney’s way. Perhaps one or two next week timed before the debate just like the Christie endorsement. I presume we will see Demint, Jeb Bush, Paul Ryan, Trump, Huckabee perhaps, Nicky Haley, and many others endorse in the weeks to come. Who else did I miss?
November 4th, 2011 at 2:35 pm
75 – When the inevitable hit job comes down on Romney (assuming he gets the nomination) you’re going to need all of the Cain supporters and the Perry supporters to push back. Keep acting like you’re acting, and a lot of these folks will just do like I’ll do. Namely, just sit back and enjoy the smear campaign that the left unleashes on His Mittness.
What goes around comes around.
November 4th, 2011 at 2:35 pm
This blog attempts to hold candid, rational, thoughful discussion, say, in favor of eccentric bomb-throwing and groupthink.
November 4th, 2011 at 2:36 pm
77 – Keep believing in free speech. The smear campiagn against Romney is coming…
Mark my words.
November 4th, 2011 at 2:36 pm
#79 Common sense, grown up Republicans are going to have to weigh in for Mitt sometime before the primaries and bring enough Pub voters to their senses.
And there may be some Dem businessmen who care about the country (Steve Wynn types?) who will feel the need to chime in as well.
At this point ABM (Anybody But Mitt) = Obama.
November 4th, 2011 at 2:36 pm
80
In the general most of the Cain and Perry supporters will follow orders from talk radio and engage in selective moral outrage accordingly as they do now.
In other words, talk radio will be on Mitt’s side in the general, and the lemmings will follow.
November 4th, 2011 at 2:36 pm
81 – There’s plenty of groupthink on this blog too. Just as much as there is on other blogs.
November 4th, 2011 at 2:37 pm
#82 We have never agreed more.
November 4th, 2011 at 2:38 pm
#71 CF
Yes it does…Just change the name…But, the people who supported Rush all these years and made him a billionaire, he’s now calling them racists….
November 4th, 2011 at 2:38 pm
84 – Talk radio might well be on Mitt’s side. It likely will be. But enthusiasm counts for much. And the way Romney supporters are acting like judge and jury on Cain now based on nothing but innuendo and smear won’t be forgotten.
Remember, the onus is on Romney and his merry bunch of Rombots to broaden the tent. Because as of now, Romney doesn’t have enough support to win a national election.
November 4th, 2011 at 2:40 pm
80
When the hit job comes? Where have you been the last 4 years? Romney’s been hit from every side almost every day. I’ve never heard anyone stand up and defend him from the left OR right.
79
I honestly think Palin will endorse Romney too. I mean it’s either Romney or Cain at this point since she abhors career politicians and crony capitalists. It’s going to depend how Cain rides this storm and IF it doesn’t get any worse.
November 4th, 2011 at 2:42 pm
85
Oh, absolutely, there is groupthink on this blog. But it comes from within, not in the form of marching orders from talk radio and Evangelical leaders.
November 4th, 2011 at 2:43 pm
Precisely. When.
Because you haven’t seen anything yet, my friend. When the only thing standing between the first black president and a second term is Mitt Romney, you’re talking a WHOLE NEW LEVEL of smear and character assassination.
And since you think of this election as a sort of quest, to put it mildly, go ahead and kneecap Cain with flimsy evidence at your peril.
November 4th, 2011 at 2:44 pm
Cain’s severence settlement dated September 1999
9/99
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1111/67627.html#comments
November 4th, 2011 at 2:44 pm
#82..
Sojourner Truth…
I think most understand what is coming If Romney is the nominee, but candidates usually don’t get smeared by their own party.
November 4th, 2011 at 2:47 pm
So I guess newt and cain are going to have a debate on the Jerry Springer show tomorrow. “you cheated on your wife”, “well you sexually harassed several women” Jerry Jerry Jerry !!!
November 4th, 2011 at 2:49 pm
KG says “ABM (Anybody But Mitt) = Obama”
You sound brainwashed.
November 4th, 2011 at 2:50 pm
91.
So your plan is to relentlessly attack Romney, call him Mittens, his supporters bots, knowingly continue to push the dumb flip flopper crap and then tell us we better be nice to you because we are going to need you?
Great plan. Let me know how it works out for you.
November 4th, 2011 at 2:50 pm
LV – I’m sure Hillary Clinton would tell you differently.
It’s all part of the process. And to be honest, I have essentially zero invested in a Romney victory.
So I’m just saying, as basically a nickel’s worth of free advice, to some of the Rombots here that are ready to burn Cain at the stake for what so far is nothing concrete, if you REALLY want Romney to be the next president it’s probably in your best interests to not poison the well so badly that the Cainiacs sit on their hands when the INEVITABLE Romney hit job arrives.
November 4th, 2011 at 2:51 pm
92. Romney supporters have now spammed that 8-10 times today.
November 4th, 2011 at 2:54 pm
96 – I never said anything about ME.
There are plenty of Cain supporters though that are going to remember how rival campaigns and their supporters were oh so quick to pile on. A lot of them are reachable unless Rombots make them UNreachable.
And for a candidate whose support among the base is shaky at best, it’s something to consider.
November 4th, 2011 at 2:54 pm
just curious when it comes vp speculation list time do we NEED to pick a VP from A SWING STATE is that a MUST or do pick a person off the 2012 debate stage???
November 4th, 2011 at 2:55 pm
97. Sojourner Truth,
Reading through the threads today, the Romney camp has definitely burned bridges to the Cain, Perry, and Newt camps. Plus one or two of the lesser candidates.
November 4th, 2011 at 2:57 pm
100. Greg,
Someone from Florida, Ohio, or Virginia would be nice.
November 4th, 2011 at 2:57 pm
#97
Sojourner Truth
Did you even read what I said? I’m not talking about the primary, I’m talking about the General….
November 4th, 2011 at 2:59 pm
64. “Euro-model healthcare would reduce our deficit substantially and is an admirable reform”
Yep, that’s really working out well for Europe right now. And waiting a year or two for routine medical services is also great…..Do you have anything that shows this reduces gov’t deficits? I only see the opposite in everything I read.
November 4th, 2011 at 3:00 pm
103 – I read exactly what you said. You didn’t say anything about a general election – and we’re not even there yet. Republicans will mostly line up behind Romney unless Romney or his supporters screw it up.
One surefire way to screw it up is to do what some of the more zealous Rombots have done and accused Cain of harassment based on no good evidence.
November 4th, 2011 at 3:03 pm
QUESTION on the remaining candidates Do you all expect Everyone that’s in the race to make it to the Iowa primary even i could see a rick santourm or Michelle bachmann out before the iowa primary JAN 3rd ?
November 4th, 2011 at 3:09 pm
96
Boomer, I think you’re one my favorite posters now. Hilarious.
Ted Bell -
Welcome!!! I hope you stick around. This place gets boring when only Romney supporters show up (even though I’m definitely in Mitt’s corner).
As to the discussion about Mitt being the only choice and all others sucking completely and totally – I’m also leaning that direction. I miss TPAW, and I’m also sad that Daniels didn’t run. They would have added some serious quality to this race. I always prefer supporting competent governors for POTUS. Other than Mitt, Perry and Huntsman are the other governors. Well, I didn’t like Perry when I lived in TX, but now I have much more concrete reasons to believe he’d be a disaster as a nominee. Huntsman isn’t worth discussing.
Who else is there? Newt has great ideas, and needs a cabinet appointment, but he has a lot of baggage to be sure, and it doesn’t end with his adulteries. Cain I like… but man has he shown himself to be kinda in over his head. But if Mitt gets hit by a bus, call me a Cain supporter. He’d be so much better with some competent advisors.
I’ll walk over broken glass barefooted to vote for anybody against Obama, but I don’t much hope for a win, nor would I have hope of having any problems actually fixed if it’s anybody but Mitt that we put up.
November 4th, 2011 at 3:13 pm
104
A larger and earlier-triggering social security program and a far worse population pyramid than the US present in Europe (they have far more retirees than we do) suggests that if all else were equal, the US would probably be toast with its current healthcare regime.
The fact is that it’s bankrupting us at present even without those other disadvantages present in Europe.
Information on the healthcare system of the US versus Europe:
http://www.kff.org/insurance/snapshot/OECD042111.cfm
Again, it comes down to the fact that Americans want goodies they don’t have to work for. Especially in healthcare. Any nation that devotes 16% of its productive capacity to healthcare and lives the unhealthy, obese lifestyles Americans do, is just wanting to have its cake and eat it too (or four). We are bankrupting our future in the process. As the report highlights, America spends twice as much as the average developed nation on healthcare. Forgive me for noticing but I don’t see Canadians or Brits or French or Italians or Japanese dying in the streets. They actually live longer than Americans, in every case. Aren’t we all about getting the best value for our money? Americans need to pay for the consequences of their obsessive healthcare spending now, and not pass them off into the future via trillions of dollars in additional public debt for future generations.
Every person must succeed or fail on their own merits, with some safety net to help those who fall on hard times provided by their peers. America is subsidizing ridiculous, unproductive healthcare treatments and pill-popping on its children’s money. This generation looking vainly for eternal youth and freedom from the natural frailties and scarcities of life must be forced to reap what it sows. It is evil to shield them from the costs of their behavior by stealing from the nation’s future, and only evil will come of it.
November 4th, 2011 at 3:14 pm
Perry’s supporters are coming back realizing his record of job creation, dealing with border states, fiscal conservatism, military service, and experience as Gov, Lnt Gov, Agriculture Comm, and in the legislature are what we need. We keep getting sidetracked by side issues and word mis-steps or popularity contests. Truth is 40% of all new job creation FOR THE COUNTRY was in Texas the last 2 years and Gov Perry consistently states “We” instead of “I” when showing pride for achievements. Also, many of Perry’s ideas in “Fed Up” are being used by the other candidates in their “ideas” now.
Cain is a motivational speaker whose own wife has NEVER attended a political event with him. If he were to win the nomination both of them will be representing the US. Mrs. Cain didn’t come out when Cain was riding high and cancelled her interview with Fox … there is so much more than is obvious to this story.
It will be down to Perry vs Romney. I think Perry is our best chance and has the record to fight Obama and win the Presidency. I am concerned that Romney’s baggage that the Dems are already airing will sink his chances, but I WILL vote for Romney over Obama. I hope that all Romney supporters will do the same (if he is not the nominee) or the DEMS will have accomplished their mission.
We can’t afford 4 more years of Obama or our one chance to get rid of Obamacare and get REAL health care/prescription cost reforms. Obama wins if he divides the REPs and causes Independents to stay away from voting because their candidate didn’t get the nomination. Keep your eye on the most important goal … get Obama OUT!
November 4th, 2011 at 3:14 pm
105
I’m with the crowd that thinks that the accusations are just dumb when there are zero actual facts or specific allegations brought forward… BUT I completely agree that the Cain camp has been horrendus at handling this. And this is not his first gaffe.
Again… Cain is still my #2, so I’m really hoping he can pull it together and get back in there. He still has some serious business credibility, and I think that would make him a good POTUS.
November 4th, 2011 at 3:20 pm
109
I will support whoever wins… even Perry. Even though I think he’s a snake. He’s nowhere near as repulsive as Obama to me. The only one would make me stay home is Ron Paul – Iran getting nuclear missles is a hard NO for me.
Anyone heard if Perry is SERIOUSLY going to start skipping debates? I don’t know if this would be a smart move for him or not. He’s getting better, and the expectations for his performances are pretty low at this point anyway.
November 4th, 2011 at 3:27 pm
110.
Just a thought..if they’ve been so bad in handling it, then why are the $$$ and poll numbers way up a week later?
Really sems to be that it would be insane to stop whatever Cain’s doing. Perhaps we should all stand up and shout, Keep preaching and singing 999, Brother Herman! And watch the numbers keep rising….
November 4th, 2011 at 3:27 pm
Huckabee praising Romney on Cavuto!
November 4th, 2011 at 3:28 pm
By the way, I can’t believe Obama’s speech overseas talking about our Congress as little children while HE THE GREAT is trying to lead (on his numerous fundraisers around the country). I want a President that says “WE” speaking of pride of America and being patriotic.
Couldn’t believe Chris Matthews (MSNBC) ranting about his disappointment in Obama and for once I agree with his reasons. Most people might have missed this because it is buried in a clip called, “Cain’s Campaign Struggles to get back on track” dated Nov 2. I was AMAZED what he said about Obama and how divisive he has made our country and how it is all about him, etc. This should be all over the FOX and other airwaves. Afraid it might be deleted so please watch and remember WHY we have to get Obama out!
Chris Matthews ranting on Obama (get past the mudslinging for Reps, go a little over halfway through the video where he starts talking about JFK)
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/45141098#45139005
November 4th, 2011 at 3:31 pm
109.
I love when Brother Perry calls Brother Herman “brother” at the debates.
It is so cool of him.
November 4th, 2011 at 3:32 pm
Hmm, Romney gets support from Paul Ryan and Huck in one day after giving a great speech at Tea Party central. It’s almost as if Romney has a plan.
November 4th, 2011 at 3:34 pm
Perry and Romney stated casually that there were so many debates they may become more selective about attending. The media jumped on Perry about it and tied it into his candor about not being the best debator.
Perry said sense that they are committed to at least the next 5, but he wants to spend time on the road getting to talk to the people. It was blown WAY out of proportion. He didn’t get a chance to get his message out in the early debates because he was being attacked by 7 others on stage. It is time to whittle this group down so we can hear from at least the top 5 (Romney, Perry, Cain, Paul, & Newt) I for one am tired of the attacks to get attention taking away from REAL candidates stating their policies and ideas.
November 4th, 2011 at 3:34 pm
114.
Lady,
I would stick to Fox News if I were you. MSNBC will mislead you, my dear.
November 4th, 2011 at 3:35 pm
Mark in PA,
So, you’d rather go to war with Iran, then let them get the same nukes that, say, Pakistan has? Like, say, North Korea has? That’s nuts.
You’d totally accept some lame trumped up war party before invading, just like Iraq, where we troll out boatloads of trashy evidence that someone in Tehran somewhere a few years ago looked at an internet site for making a bomb underground and call that evidence?
They sold us that going into Iraq was to stop Saddam from getting nukes. Come to find out he didn’t have even the slightest thing close to it. What a collosal waste of scarce national resources that could have been wisely invested at home. All it did was make the US a byword for oppression and imperialism in the Middle East and inspired more terrorists than the ones the whole charade was purporting to stop.
I would not vote for any candidate that I felt would pull the trigger on invading Iran, unless Iran itself launched a deliberate attack on American forces. And you shouldn’t either.
November 4th, 2011 at 3:35 pm
List of qualities Americans look for in a president:
Articulate
Intelligent
Experienced
Sensible
Patriotic
Steady
Which candidate fits all these?
November 4th, 2011 at 3:37 pm
120,
That sounds like Ron Paul
November 4th, 2011 at 3:38 pm
I’ve got a theory about Libertarians and Paul fans in particular, and here it goes:
(1) They don’t trust well-connected wealthy, powerful, individuals.
(2) Many of these people are Jewish
(3) Israel is Jewish
(4) Therefore they don’t want to protect Israel from Iran
Bingo.
November 4th, 2011 at 3:38 pm
121
Ron Paul fits all of my list except articulate, sensible, and steady.
November 4th, 2011 at 3:47 pm
123
LOL. You got that right.
Seriously, if the Libertarian had a guy who could really articulate the message, I have no doubt he would have a great shot at winning. In fact, I attribute most of Ron Paul’s problems, not on his policy or his plan, but his personality and mannerisms.
He just comes off so freaking senile and crazy, he scares the crap out of everyone.
November 4th, 2011 at 3:48 pm
Anyone have a link to Romney’s speech today? Would appreciate it.
November 4th, 2011 at 3:51 pm
So, MassCon, your allegation is that Paul fans are anti-Semitic?
What about you – I don’t see you standing up to protect the Tibetans from the Chinese government.
You must be an anti-Tibetan hatemonger more than happy to shill for Beijing’s line.
Sarcasm aside, the fact is simply, we don’t have enough money to protect Israel from all the Muslims it decides to tick off. You go contribute your own if it’s that important to you. The US is delusional on Israel and always will be. We could go on and on about why. But this is only a matter of national interest – and its not in our interest to play Israel’s bodyguard. We gain nothing. Washington warned us to avoid entangling foreign alliances. This is just that sort of alliance.
The fact that there always have been and always will be stupid rich Jews that like to play around in the particularly dirty businesses of finance, media, and politics that give all other Jews a bad name. Likewise, there always will be stupid jihadis that give Muslims a bad name. I’m not in the business of thinking we should treat all Jews or Muslims by the actions of a few.
November 4th, 2011 at 3:54 pm
126
Lol, I was just trying to stir the pot. It worked
November 4th, 2011 at 3:55 pm
123. I’d go as far as say that he fits all of them except sensible. Ron is articulate – he’s been giving his schpiel for years now so he has most of the thoughts memorized. He’s steady as he will not waiver on anything.
But the “steady” part becomes an issue when you are talking about leading a bipartisan group in getting change to occur. He hasn’t led his fellow Congressmen towards his goals over the years so putting on a different hat doesn’t make me believe that he would be able to get his agenda passed.
November 4th, 2011 at 3:56 pm
126
Although you did say this:
Now, I know what you meant to say, but let’s just say if you plan on getting into politics someday you have a lot of work to do on your word choice.
November 4th, 2011 at 3:57 pm
128 – He doesn’t need to get his full agenda passed. If he wants $1 trillion in spending cuts but only gets $100-$200 billion in cuts, that would be the same as what Romney is proposing. What’s wrong with that?
November 4th, 2011 at 3:58 pm
Huge Iowa endorsement for Cain;
http://globegazette.com/news/local/dean-kleckner-endorses-herman-cain/article_db110b1e-066f-11e1-896b-001cc4c03286.html
November 4th, 2011 at 4:00 pm
124 – Have you heard Rand Paul speak? This is a good one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yqLfwyCTIyc
Compare his questioning of Geithner to Rubio questioning Geithner.
November 4th, 2011 at 4:00 pm
Eric – are you saying he would negotiate? because the way he talks he doesn’t act (or vote for that matter) that way.
What makes me feel that he wouldn’t dig his heels in to get the Dept of Ed and the Fed abolished and put DC in gridlock?
November 4th, 2011 at 4:03 pm
Cain’s resume is he is not a politician and our founding fathers were not either. (Corrupted politicians are why we are where we are today.)
November 4th, 2011 at 4:04 pm
Let me expand a bit on a previous comment:
List of qualities Americans look for in a president:
Articulate
Intelligent
Experienced
Sensible
Patriotic
Steady
Which candidate fits all these?
Romney: Perry: Cain: Paul: Gingrich: Bachmann: Huntsman Obama:
Articulate – Articulate – Articulate Articulate Articulate Articulate
Intelligent – Intelligent Intelligent Intelligent – Intelligent Intelligent
Experienced Experienced – Experienced Experienced – Experienced -
Sensible – – – Sensible – Sensible -
Patriotic Patriotic Patriotic Patriotic Patriotic Patriotic Patriotic -
Steady – – – – – – -
November 4th, 2011 at 4:04 pm
^
Wow. Auto-formatting messed it all up.
November 4th, 2011 at 4:05 pm
133 – I’m not sure if he would negotiate but let’s say he didn’t and vetoed a bill that only cut $200 billion instead of the $1 trillion that he wants. The options are either Congress shuts down or they override his veto and there are $200 billion in cuts. To me, either option pushes us in the right direction. If Romney proposed $200 billion in cuts, most likely, it will be negotiated down to $50 billion. Why not start with a bigger number like $1 trillion?
November 4th, 2011 at 4:05 pm
Pastor, being from the South and raised around deep Bible belt Christians (especially Evangelical or old time Baptist), know referring to one another as “Brother or Sister” is extremely common and has nothing to do with race. I know this from living in Okla, TX, LA, AL, GA, and find it even in FL. As a Pastor you would be aware in these states. Personally, I was not raised that way, but one of my grandmothers always spoke that way to any “Christians sharing fellowship” regardless of their denomination. I am sure that Perry did not realize the flack he would get, but is new to the national scrutiny arena.
To answer your other question, I watch Direct TV and can see 8 news channels at once. This is how I discovered that even MSNBC & CNN covered the other candidates (including Perry’s big economic speeches) when Fox did not. After flipping around realized that for whatever reason, Fox News gives Cain the most coverage, but shows most support constantly for Romney by stating he will be the front runner in all of their round table discussions. CNN was the most impartial. I was actually shocked! This leads me to wonder for reasoning behind decisions made at Fox. When they reported Cain’s sex scandals, they said numerous times that this of course happened over 12 years ago. When they reported the Perry “rock” incident (which Cain jumped all over, then backtracked the next day) Fox made it sound like something recent and not 30 years ago! CNN reported the exact facts … again I was surprised.
Other sites I frequent are “redstate” for intelligent conservative voters and “rickperryreport.com” (not a part of Perry’s campaign, just source of information from supporter) as both have very good information that you can’t seem to find through the regular media outlets.
November 4th, 2011 at 4:06 pm
135 – I would add principled as a quality.
November 4th, 2011 at 4:08 pm
139
Every human being has a set of principles. It just depends what they are.
November 4th, 2011 at 4:15 pm
Found it for anyone interested
http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/DreamSummi/start/874/stop/2821
November 4th, 2011 at 4:29 pm
119
Yes. Because neither Pakistan nor North Korea is constantly talking about how badly they want the US gone. Neither of them have made such blatant attempts at destroying us.
An, Iran with nukes is the end of Israel and the end of the United States of America.
November 4th, 2011 at 4:35 pm
119
Well, it does appear we never found actual evidence of it. But, it also appears there was a great deal of evidence leading up to the belief that he had or was attempting to acquire nuclear technology.
And, I have doubts that there were never any weapons of mass destruction, there.
When the UN inspectors were finally allowed into Iraq, after months of stalling, they STILL kept them locked in a room for hours while they very likely moved or hid any evidence.
I believe our justification for going into Iraq was sound. I just believe the handling of it was horrible, especially after the Shock and Awe portion.
I think it would be beyond foolish to allow a country that hates Israel and the United States as much as Iran does to get a hold of nuclear weapons.
November 4th, 2011 at 4:58 pm
I would think North Korea is more of a threat than Iran.
1. NK already has nukes.
2. NK is controlled by ONE person.
3. That ONE person hates the US.
4. Iran was close to electing another President and still has the possibility of electing someone else in the future. That will never happen in NK.
November 4th, 2011 at 5:21 pm
144
The difference:
North Koreans aren’t prepared to kill themselves in the name of God.
Terrorists supplied by Iran are.
November 4th, 2011 at 5:27 pm
North Korea has one of the largest armies in the world and they will do whatever their supreme leader says. NK already has all the capabilities to cause severe destruction (large army, nuclear and biological weapons, a deranged leader, etc.) At this point in time, I’m more afraid of North Korea than Iran.
November 4th, 2011 at 5:54 pm
The North Korea vs Iran Nuke argument is ridiculous. OBVIOUSLY we’d rather NK didn’t have any Nukes. But, that doesn’t mean we should let Iran have them!
November 4th, 2011 at 6:07 pm
147 – It’s ridiculous that we’ve allowed NK to develop nuclear weapons. They are liable to use it against us or South Korea at any moment and we have tens of thousands of soldiers stationed there.
November 4th, 2011 at 6:40 pm
Anybody else think the “new” Ted Bell is the old Craig for Loser?
November 4th, 2011 at 6:52 pm
Good quote from Mitt Romney on the flip flop charge:
November 4th, 2011 at 6:53 pm
149. Hey, as often as C4L changes his name, it very well could be!
November 4th, 2011 at 7:37 pm
Yes, Craig For Losers has used 2 pseudonyms on this thread: Ted Bell and Pastor William Rennick.
November 4th, 2011 at 7:52 pm
Ralph Reed: “We saw what u did 2 Clarence Thomas, we see what yer trying to do to Herman Cain”
November 4th, 2011 at 8:48 pm
SMACK BREAKING NEWS!!
Biggest political story of the year.
WH rejects subpoena request for Solyndra docs byPhilip Klein Senior Editorial WriterFollow on Twitter:@PhilipAKleinPresident Obama’s attorney sent a letter to Congressional investigators on Friday, saying the White House would not cooperate with a subpoena requesting documents related to its doling out a $535 million loan guarantee to now bankrupt solar panel manufacturer Solyndra.
“I can only conclude that your decision to issue a subpoena, authorized by a party-line vote, was driven more by partisan politics than a legitimate effort to conduct a responsible investigation,” Obama’s counsel, Kathryn Ruemmler, wrote in a letter to the top Republicans on the House Energy and Commerce committee. (Read Ruemmler’s full letter here).
Committee chairman Rep. Fred Upton, R-Mich, blasted the White House response:
“We have been reasonable every step of the way in this investigation, and it is a shame that the Obama Administration and House Democrats continue to put up partisan roadblocks to hide the truth from taxpayers. Solyndra was a jobs program gone bad, and we must learn the lessons of Solyndra as we work to turn our economy around and put folks back to work. Our judicious and methodical work over the last eight months has garnered tens of thousands of pages of documents from DOE and OMB that have proven we are on the right track. Now, we need to know the White House’s role in the Solyndra debacle in order to learn the full truth about why taxpayers now find themselves a half billion dollars in the hole. The White House could have avoided the need for subpoena authorizations if they had simply chosen to cooperate. That would have been the route we preferred, and frankly, it would have been better for the White House to get the information out now, rather than continue to drag this out. Our request for documents is reasonable – we are not demanding the President’s blackberry messages as we are respectful of Executive Privilege. What is the West Wing trying to hide? We owe it to American taxpayers to find out.”
Obama goes Nixon on the nation.
November 4th, 2011 at 9:00 pm
The biggest problem I have with this story on Cain is that we don’t know the woman’s name, history…nothing.
Imagine this…..
…………………..what if…….what if………..
This woman has done this 2 other times…filed complaints?
That is just one example.
How do you fight vapor?
November 4th, 2011 at 9:01 pm
“JenniferJJacobs: @NewtGingrich gets about half the crowd at the #ReaganDinner on their feet applauding madly at end of his speech. Only standing O. #iacaucus Retweet”
Newt is on a roll!!!!
November 4th, 2011 at 9:04 pm
Newt is going to win this thing.
Of course it all starting going good for him when SMACKDADDY took the reigns of his campaign right here at RACE42012!!!
hehhehhehehehehehheheee
November 4th, 2011 at 9:08 pm
@jameshohmann just tweeted:
Gingrich received the warmest reception of the night. He was the only candidate to get a standing ovation. Had the crowd laughing. #iacaucus
November 4th, 2011 at 9:27 pm
152. Possibly to get around my Boycott?
November 4th, 2011 at 10:06 pm
Congrats on the speech, Smack
Good news for you inside the brand new Iowa poll tonight.
November 4th, 2011 at 10:17 pm
TONIGHT’S NEW NUMBERS FROM CAIN COUNTRY (IA!):
Tier One
•Herman Cain 30% [26%] ..Surge®!
Tier Two
•Mitt Romney 15% [18%]
•Newt Gingrich 12% [12%]
Tier Three
•Michele Bachmann 8% [11%]
•Ron Paul 9% [10%]
•Rick Perry 6% [6%]
Tier Matt “MWS”
•Jon Huntsman 2% [1%]
..just kidding, Matt
November 4th, 2011 at 10:34 pm
Hey Smack!
Have you heard anything more about Christie reconsidering a run for the nomination, you know, like he is definitely going to announce?
Oh! Did I mention that Christie has endorsed Romney?
November 4th, 2011 at 10:37 pm
Darn! I responded to Ted Bell in another thread.
November 4th, 2011 at 11:37 pm
Yes. Because neither Pakistan nor North Korea is constantly talking about how badly they want the US gone. Neither of them have made such blatant attempts at destroying us.
An, Iran with nukes is the end of Israel and the end of the United States of America.
Lol! So, just how is Iran going to conquer us, Sun Tzu?
Chavez is the only national leader anywhere that talks about wanting the US gone. And we have yet to invade his country. It appears that intentions do not qualify one for invasion.
Some of the talk here on Iran reflects ignorance of the Middle East. Iran is a Shiite nation, viewed as heretic by the jihadis (who are Sunni). The Taliban during the 90′s murdered a pair of Iranian diplomats in Afghanistan and they never got along. Iran is actually the subject of internal terrorist attacks by Sunni jihadi groups from its isolated southeast Balochi region.
Iran is not an exporter of terrorism – Iran is viewed as a heretic nation by jihadis. There’s no rational reason to not have relations with them. Russia had nukes. We could talk with Russia. China had nukes. We sent Nixon to China. Pakistan has nukes. We worked with them. We can have relations with Iran, too.
You guys need to take a stance. Spend $1 trillion plus, thousands of American lives, continue sending our Mideast reputation to pot, inspire thousands of new jihadis, and invest ourselves in what is sure to be years of guerrilla war. Iran geographically has more in common with the mountainous terrain of Afghanistan, than with Iraq. Not to mention the hundreds of thousands of innocent Iranians who will die in that war.
Or let Iran have nukes, who will act like every other nuclear-armed nation. It’s insane that so many of you would like to see another hugely expensive war and just throw away all the resources, all the standing, all the lives. For nothing.
All this stupid war talk with Iran has the same problem every other good (or not so much) intention in government has. Who is going to pay for it? War can only be tolerated in defense of America against attack by conventional forces. All you hawks need to cool your jets (literally) before you get us into something much worse than Iraq.
November 4th, 2011 at 11:47 pm
You guys also need some history lessons.
Read up on our history in Iran, starting here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammad_Mosaddegh
First line from the article:
Mohammad Mosaddegh or Mosaddeq (16 June 1882 – 5 March 1967), was the democratically elected Prime Minister of Iran from 1951 to 1953 when he was overthrown in a coup d’état orchestrated by the British MI5 and the United States Central Intelligence Agency.
As ye sow…
November 5th, 2011 at 12:02 am
165. I’m not defending how Iran became what it is today. But, the fact is they’re a very serious threat NOW.
November 5th, 2011 at 12:03 am
I just fail to see how some Americans can be so dumb.
The Spaniard in the Spanish American war was told to us in the press to be a murderous fanatic.
In the World Wars the Germans were played up as the most evil of humanity, the “hun”, the Italians as degenerate, the Japanese as uncivilized murderous barbarians.
The Russian in the Cold War was an atheist demon.
The Chinese, Koreans, and Vietnamese were likewise insane barbarian races.
Now we are back to the beginning. The Muslims are all murderous fanatics.
These war cases are always the same. The only reason anyone ends up thinking there’s any rationality behind invading Iran is because they’ve been sold by some guy with an agenda that everyone in Iran is a murderous fanatic.
Here you go folks, the murderous fanatics that we must destroy before it is too late:
http://floppingaces.net/2010/08/01/the-myth-that-the-muslim-world-celebrated-the-attacks-of-911/
November 5th, 2011 at 12:05 am
Iran is not attacking anything of ours. How are they a threat, Keith?
November 5th, 2011 at 12:20 am
Because a current attack happens AFTER the threat. They’re not the same thing. They WANT to hurt us and if we let them get nukes they’ll figure out a way to use them.
November 5th, 2011 at 12:33 am
And the total loon in North Korea who fires off his artillery and torpedoes ships whenever he gets bored:
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2010/11/23/skorea-nkorea-fires-artillery-island/
and yet owns nukes, can be rationally expected to be less of a threat than Iran? If this bozo has not decided to play with a nuclear device on South Korea yet, why would the very guarded Iran, who has never fired anything at anyone, go rogue and fire off a nuke? What do they possibly stand to gain?
Preemptive war is always pushed by people with an agenda. And it’s always a mistake. Always a waste of lives. How can anyone believe the government’s war justifications anymore after the crap they threw together on Iraq?
I am not going to support any leader who wants to make a $1 trillion bet that a)Iran wants nukes, not just nuclear power and b)Iran wants to go apocalyptic and use the nukes. They aren’t jihadis. They aren’t even North Korean loonies.
November 5th, 2011 at 12:37 am
MPC, where did you get the idea that it’s either/or? They’re both a threat. One already has nukes and we want to make sure the other does not.
November 5th, 2011 at 12:42 am
Why did we not invade North Korea to stop them, then?
November 5th, 2011 at 12:43 am
You’ll have to ask they guys who were in charge at the time. I imagine if Mitt was in charge he would have tried to stop them.
November 5th, 2011 at 12:45 am
Keith, if Romney was in charge, what should he have done then?
November 5th, 2011 at 12:48 am
Detail? No idea. I sure would want him to try to keep it from happening.
November 5th, 2011 at 12:50 am
If Romney would have had to invade North Korea to stop them from acquiring nukes, would you agree?
November 5th, 2011 at 12:51 am
I say this because in the end you can bet the Bush administration did try everything, save that.
November 5th, 2011 at 1:09 am
177. I don’t know. I would just really like to keep them from getting into the hands of other countries that are either relatively unstable or that want to harm us.
I’m no historian. I’m no military strategist.
But, when I hear that guy talk (Iran’ PM), I get scared.
November 5th, 2011 at 1:21 am
Well, Bush was calling them the “Axis of Evil” back when Khatami, an Iranian moderate, was in power and calling for a “dialogue of civilizations”.
I think Americans don’t realize that our leaders can be just as threatening. I daresay Ahmadinejad owes a lot of his popular support to a resentment of American attempts to influence and dominate the Middle East.
So what has Ahmadinejad, the President of a regional power, said that would threaten the most dominant global power in the world?
The truth is, Keith, invading countries to stop them from obtaining nuclear weapons is silly. Because it’s not preventing anything. Do you really think Russia or China back in the Cold War didn’t want to see us fall so they could take over the world? And yet they didn’t use the bomb – because they knew that doing so wouldn’t get them that. They stood to lose just as much.
Iran is a country, just like they are. And frankly a country like Iran with a wide variety of political leaders and functioning legislature has a lot more power moderation than was the case in Stalinist Russia or Maoist China.