NB Chat: GOP Debate in South Carolina
Are you watching the GOP presidential debate tonight? If so, consider joining us live here at NB as we watch the event. It airs at 9pm ET tonight on FNC as well as on the Fox News website. We'll be posting videos and blog posts throughout the night but if you want to add your own analysis or snark, this is the place to do it.
As with all NB live events, you are expected to abide by the NewsBusters terms of service. Vulgarity and general obnoxiousness will get you kicked from the chat room. You will need a Flash-enabled browser to participate.
Update: The debate has ended and so has the chat.
- NB Staff's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
Nah.
Submitted by Newsbubba on Mon, 01/16/2012 - 8:41pm.
I think that I'll watch reruns of Hell on Wheels. The heroes in that show have much more courage than anything I can find in today's "Repubican" Party.
What a pack of whiny wimps.
There's a new Pawn Stars on
Submitted by MightyMouth on Mon, 01/16/2012 - 8:47pm.
There's a new Pawn Stars on tonight. Just saying... it might be worth a look...
Oops. My bad.
Submitted by Newsbubba on Mon, 01/16/2012 - 8:59pm.
Someone just sent me this link. Now here are some Republicans that I can like.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GnDyXrSwJnA
The University of Tennessee finally did something that I think they can be proud of.
Are you watching the GOP presidential debate tonight?
Submitted by Dave. on Mon, 01/16/2012 - 9:01pm.
Nope, as I'm about all GOP'd out.
Somebody wake me up when they stop ripping each other and start attacking the Dear Ruler in earnest.
They should be ripping him a new one every time they open their mouths.
And if they don't start going after Little Caesar Obummus the exact same way Ronald Reagan went after Jihad Jimmy Earl, it isn't going to much matter who wins the GOP nomination.
Besides, this crop of candidates leaves me cold.
-Dave
Vote for the American in November
~There's another debate?
Submitted by Wrathful Brunette on Mon, 01/16/2012 - 9:30pm.
.
Bru,
Submitted by Dave. on Mon, 01/16/2012 - 10:58pm.
I wish.
-Dave
Vote for the American in November
How many RINOs and Democrats
Submitted by MightyMouth on Mon, 01/16/2012 - 9:07pm.
How many RINOs and Democrats does it take to screw up a light bulb?
MM, Not ver many, apparently
Submitted by Dave. on Tue, 01/17/2012 - 1:05am.
I wonder how long before these totalitarian pukes ban lantern fuel?
-Dave
Vote for the American in November
Dave
Submitted by MightyMouth on Tue, 01/17/2012 - 1:18am.
The pukes are going to want to know why you need lantern fuel. And based upon the Emperors' answer he will decide if you can have it. Don't count on light.
Go ?Herman Cain.
Submitted by Dan The Man 2 on Mon, 01/16/2012 - 9:14pm.
Go ?Herman Cain.
I'm not watching because now
Submitted by motherbelt on Mon, 01/16/2012 - 9:29pm.
I'm not watching because now that Huntsman's out, I just don't care about anything any more.
You forgot your /sarc tag
Submitted by Blonde on Mon, 01/16/2012 - 9:33pm.
:D
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
Glad you added that, blonde.
Submitted by Newsbubba on Mon, 01/16/2012 - 9:40pm.
For a minute there I thought mother had one belt too many!!
Nb, Yeah, for a minute there, I thought mb's NB account...
Submitted by Dave. on Mon, 01/16/2012 - 11:13pm.
...had been hacked by a jackass in an elephant suit. :-O
-Dave
Vote for the American in November
Banned from the chat? Very
Submitted by VBaxter on Mon, 01/16/2012 - 10:52pm.
Banned from the chat? Very disappointing. I hope someone can explain this to me.
Ron Paul 2012
Dangit I cant get on the live
Submitted by Dan The Man 2 on Mon, 01/16/2012 - 11:10pm.
Dangit I cant get on the live chat. My script blocker is preventing it
watching right now
Submitted by lrgon on Mon, 01/16/2012 - 11:46pm.
Foreign policy and strong defense for US.
Panelist: Congressman Paul would you close US bases in USA?
Paraprase of Congressman Paul:
Congressman Paul: NO I would increase them! I would cut the waste in military spending on wasteful spending projects like building the biggest embassy in the world in Baghdad. We spend a huge chunk of the defense budget on non defense related projects like building a huge embassy overseas. Bring the troops home and re-open American bases on US soil and the soldiers will spend their paychecks in US stores.
The hypersonic C-5 is in research phase only...
Submitted by Unsane on Mon, 01/16/2012 - 11:48pm.
You and Paul are obviously idiots when it comes to logistics.
"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)
Well at least Ron Paul's
Submitted by MightyMouth on Tue, 01/17/2012 - 12:13am.
Well at least Ron Paul's heart is in the wrong place. If we bring all the troops and Navy we have scattered around the world to the shores of the USA we can totally start all over from WWI and be forced to kick ass all over the world once again. Which means hundreds of thousands of our boys giving their lives for land we have already taken. Sounds like a good plan for someone out of touch with reality, but liberal assholes don't seem to be out of touch with anything.
If Ronpaul is the answer,
Submitted by UpNorth on Tue, 01/17/2012 - 12:18am.
it's a really dumb question.
Every time I see his name,
Submitted by drsamherman on Tue, 01/17/2012 - 12:29am.
I think of either RuPaul or Pat Paulson. Either one would be a better choice than Ron.
We really need a LIKE button
Submitted by Blonde on Tue, 01/17/2012 - 12:39am.
Well played, UpNorth.
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
I don't know about you guys....
Submitted by MightyMouth on Mon, 01/16/2012 - 11:56pm.
but I was glued to every word Juan Williams had to say at the end of the debate.
Ron Paul is a liberal
Submitted by okie-pastor on Tue, 01/17/2012 - 12:35am.
Ron Paul is a liberal pretending to be a conservative.
A poll showed that a majority of Ron Paul supporters would not vote for the republican candidate if Ron Paul is not the republican candidate. This tells me that Ron Paul supporters are just frustrated liberal obama supporters. Remember Obama sounded just like him: "I'm going to shut down gitmo" "we are in too many wars" etc.
Santorum called him out on the fact Ron Paul was using left wing liberal organizations (George Soros) talking points.
Ron Paul is the most
Submitted by VBaxter on Tue, 01/17/2012 - 12:47am.
Ron Paul is the most conservative of all the candidates. If Romney wins the nomination, I'm not voting for him, because HE'S the one that's a liberal. Not a single one of them would cut any spending or repeal bills like the Patriot Act or the NDAA. They're big government Republicans, not conservatives.
Ron Paul 2012
VB, Ron Paul has the domestic angle down cold...
Submitted by Dave. on Tue, 01/17/2012 - 12:56am.
Problem is, he is blowing the foreign policy angle at every level.
This planet is now sprinting towards Armageddon, and no amount of isolationism is going to change that.
-Dave
Vote for the American in November
With all due respect, you
Submitted by VBaxter on Tue, 01/17/2012 - 1:30am.
With all due respect, you should look up the definition of isolationism. Freely trading, traveling, diplomacy, and gatherings are not isolationist.
I think we would be better off not bombing countries left and right. How would you and I feel if they were bombing us? I'd be pissed, that's for sure.
At the funeral of the Iranian scientist last week, people were chanting "Death to America". Assassinating foreign citizens (and even our own citizens) is not helping us internationally or domestically.
Besides, let's just say that you will never come around to Ron Paul's foreign policy. Would you rather have a President that takes away all of your Liberties while adventuring the world, or would you rather have all of your Freedoms here at home and bring the troops home?
Ron Paul 2012
THEY did bomb us, VB.
Submitted by Newsbubba on Tue, 01/17/2012 - 8:08am.
Are you forgetting?
Are you pissed?
Are you pissed enough to insist that our government destroy THEM?
Trust me. You do not want to know how you'd feel if THEY were constantly bombing you.
VBaxter blames America first, last, and always
Submitted by Unsane on Tue, 01/17/2012 - 9:39am.
There we go: Blame America First.
I realize nothing disgusts you more than the thought of the United States defending itself, but if those other countries you sympathize with more than your own citizens simply left well enough alone, the United States wouldn't have to do much of anything!
Operation Eldorado Canyon occurred, for instance, because Libya kept attacking our citizens. When they went after our military in West Berlin that proved to be the last straw. Had Khadafy, that recent winner of the death pool, just left well enough alone, we wouldn't have bombed Libya.
As for this "bombing countries left and right" business, I have no idea where that comes from.
Maybe you should just admit you sympathize with America's enemies and support them above and beyond your own country and be done with it.
You (and your hero) are beyond naive because you both think "maximum freedom" is there just for the asking. It must be fought for, it MUST be earned, by FORCE. Instead of pontificating here on behalf of America's enemies, your time would be better served studying history and show me where exactly freedom "just happened".
"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)
VB, in a global economy,
Submitted by motherbelt on Tue, 01/17/2012 - 9:45am.
VB, in a global economy, economic isolationism is impossible. That's why Ron Paul doesn't talk about that.
He is clearly talking about isolationism in the military sense. Putting lipstick on that pig ain't gonna work.
Yet more on Paul
Submitted by Unsane on Tue, 01/17/2012 - 10:06am.
IIRC, he has talked about economic isolationism as well. Paul is, again IIRC, anti-free trade.
He is a classic example of a reactionary. The Paulbots on this page clearly don't know what that is. Besides, IMHO, the reason people like him is because he is pro-legalization of drugs. To wit, check out the head shop here in town. It has quite possibly the BIGGEST Ron Paul sign in town out front. And in a way, it makes sense. If you want to check out of life and become a loser druggie, the last thing you need to worry about are distractions like national defense and foreign policy.
"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)
Just in case you never noticed, the Iranians
Submitted by UpNorth on Tue, 01/17/2012 - 5:34pm.
have been chanting "Death to America" since 1979.
"Assassinating foreign citizens (and even our own citizens) is not helping us internationally or domestically". Really? So, will you post the proof you have that the U.S. was, in any way, involved or a participant in this so-called assassination? You must have the proof, to accuse the U.S. of being involved, correct? Or, is it just that Ronpaul thinks we were involved, so you ran with it?
Besides, most of the thinking people here will never come around to Ronpaul. Why didn't you just post that, because that's far closer to the truth than the eye wash you posted.
Ron Paul the reactionary
Submitted by Unsane on Tue, 01/17/2012 - 1:02am.
Ron Paul is NOT a conservative. In any way, shape, form, or fashion.
He IS, in fact, a reactionary.
By the way, how can you have maximum freedom if you are unwilling to defend it?
"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)
What are you talking about?
Submitted by redmike on Tue, 01/17/2012 - 1:15am.
What are you talking about? Why do you think Ron Paul wants a strong defense? It's to protect Americans and American freedoms. What he doesn't want to do is commit the US troops without a declaration from Congress.
Ron Paul understands that using the military is about killing people and destroying things. And you better have a pretty darn good reason before you commit to such an action.
redmike in an alternate reality
Submitted by Unsane on Tue, 01/17/2012 - 9:50am.
Nothing makes Ron Paul more sick than the Department of Defense. He has sworn to gut the DoD and has made it plain that he refuses to defend the country.
It is very refreshing to hear that he won't commit US troops without Congress making a declaration. It would be nice if you and him would actually read history - not what you WANT to see and hear, but what is actually there. Back in the days of the Founders that you and him so deify, there were military actions that the President directed. Such as the "war" against France waged on the high seas under Adams and the military actions against the Barbary States under Jefferson.
And this might come as a deep shock to you and your hero, but the world today has much better communications and faster, deadlier weaponry. The Declaration of Independence took seven or so weeks to reach the court of King George III. Today things like that are known to the world in seconds. If an ICBM attack (ICBMs are - forget it...) were to occur, I don't want a President who is first going to go to Congress to make a flowery speech before asking for a declaration of war. If we are attacked by more conventional means, I don't want the military to sit on its ass and get attacked waiting for Congress to "do something".
Maybe the real reason you love Ron Paul so much is because he will endeavor to make whatever drugs you are currently consuming legal.
P.S. I find it very amusing that this "Mr. Constitution" that acolytes such as you swear up and down Paul is served in the military - in an unconstitutional branch of the military.
"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)
He wants to increase national
Submitted by VBaxter on Tue, 01/17/2012 - 1:25am.
He wants to increase national defense. Decrease nation building.
Ron Paul 2012
War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Weakness is defense.
Submitted by Unsane on Tue, 01/17/2012 - 9:54am.
Increasing national defense by making America a whiny laughing stock?
What is Paul going to do if something happens in the world counter to our interests? Get on TV and start crying "HEY! STOP THAT! STOP THAT! STOP THAT! STOP THAT!"?
Maximum freedom does not happen for the asking, contrary to your beliefs.
"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)
Ron Paul isn't the most
Submitted by redmike on Tue, 01/17/2012 - 1:08am.
Ron Paul isn't the most conservative candidate, he's the ONLY conservative candidate. I couldn't believe that Romney said he would vote for detaining American citizens indefinitely on suspicion of some anti-american activity and that we should just trust him not to abuse the power. You've got to be kidding me. No way do I want that guy at the helm.
I agree. If Romney becomes
Submitted by VBaxter on Tue, 01/17/2012 - 1:33am.
I agree. If Romney becomes the nominee we are looking at
Pro-NDAA vs. Pro-NDAA.
Pro-Patriot Act vs. Pro-Patriot Act.
Pro-Nation Building vs. Pro-Nation Building.
etc, etc.
Very scary, if you ask me.
Ron Paul 2012
But..
Submitted by Unsane on Tue, 01/17/2012 - 10:08am.
And if your hero becomes the nominee, America's enemies will be licking their chops.
I'd rather those enemies be filled with FEAR.
You cannot have "maximum freedom" if you are unwilling to defend it. And it doesn't happen for the asking.
"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)
reactionary
Submitted by Unsane on Tue, 01/17/2012 - 10:02am.
Even a blind squirrel will find an acorn from time to time, but Ron Paul is not remotely a conservative. He IS a reactionary.
"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)
All you need to know about Ron Paul can be summed up
Submitted by bkeyser on Tue, 01/17/2012 - 1:16am.
in this stumbling, bumbling example of what appears to be the early stages of dementia. This guy, in his attempt to swindle the young and developmentally disabled drug users, is more dangerous than... okay, equally as dangerous as Barack Obama. If he wins the nomination, I'll sit out the presidential section of the vote. Or as Mark Levin says, write in "orange juice can". No way I'd put this idiot in charge of anything meaningful.
"A Golden Rule in Foreign Policy"
Submitted by Blonde on Tue, 01/17/2012 - 1:23am.
Brilliant!!!!
And the Paulbots actually buy this?
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
Well, obviously we have very
Submitted by VBaxter on Tue, 01/17/2012 - 1:37am.
Well, obviously we have very different views. I, for instance, am a very Christian Conservative that believes in the teachings of Jesus Christ, which include the Golden Rule. I am also a supporter of the Just War Theory and a strong national defense, not an adventurous offense.
Ron Paul 2012
Sorry, VBaxter
Submitted by Blonde on Tue, 01/17/2012 - 1:51am.
We are never going to agree on Ron Paul's "foreign policy".
Nation states don't have a Golden Rule. That's patently absurd.
If we didn't look so weak right now, thanks to Obama's pathetically wishy-washy and appeasing stance (which Ron Paul squares or maybe cubes), Iran would never threaten the Straights of Hormuz. And now that they have, they should be told, by Mrs. Clinton, in no uncertain terms, that they are welcome to try it. But to be prepared for the consequences. And if they do, we sink their Navy, and destroy their Air Force. In an hour.
Newt had the quote of the night...."Andrew Jackson knew what to do with an enemy. Kill him."
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
Naivete on parade
Submitted by Unsane on Tue, 01/17/2012 - 10:00am.
To see where your "Just War Theory and a strong national defense" leads you, go visit Pearl Harbor sometime. What you disparagingly call an "adventurous offense" could have saved 35-40 million lives and could have helped attenuate, if not prevent, the most expensive war in both terms of blood and treasure the world has ever known.
It is obvious to me that you look at the study of history with absolute contempt.
Me, I'd rather spend a little now than a lot later. (Save it: the military budget has nothing on entitlement spending and other projects the federal government uses to baby people.) The best defense on many occasions is a good offense.
"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)
Spot on. And may I add...
Submitted by Unsane on Tue, 01/17/2012 - 10:44am.
Really? We are gearing up for a war with Iran?
How? In what way?
Ron Paul hasn't the remotest clue about how these things work (but then, a lot of people don't)...
"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)
R- Debate (01/16/12) “The Official Grump-Analysis”
Submitted by Grumpy in Arizona on Tue, 01/17/2012 - 8:31am.
Source: “The Grumpy Center for Advanced Studies (GCAS)”
Motto of the GCAS: “Don’t give me ’policy’ – Give me facts! (i.e.: The density of distilled water is 0.998 at 50 degrees Celsius. (Hope that helps)) ”
First a personal note: It’s been almost a month since I last posted here at NB and I missed chatting and debating with you all very much.
OVERVIEW: The Monday evening debate was sponsored by Fox News, The Wall Street Journal and the Republican Party of South Carolina.
.
Three decent candidates, one preening wishy-washy ‘moderate’ trying to pass himself off as a conservative, and one completely out of touch old egomaniac participated.
THE MODERATORS/QUESTIONERS: Brett Baer moderated and (IMO) did a very good job. The other questioners were the WSJ’s Kelly Evans (Wow! What a babe… not that that had anything to do with her decent questions presented efficiently while wearing a modest dress that was just tight enough to stir the intellectual imagination) and Jerry “Sty” (?) (whose last name I didn’t really catch even though his questions were very good) and Fox News contributor Juan Williams whose questions were severely out of place.
PARTICIPANT ANALYSIS: This debate seemed to have one specific theme: “Get Mitt.” But in fairness, a few other questions seemed appropriate when addressing the real issues of the entire campaign.
This time I’ll list the candidates in order of who I thought “won” the overall debate, but in a full-disclosure mode, let me say my favorites (in order) are: Gingrich, Perry, and Santorum... (the other two just make my skin crawl).
1. Newt Gingrich – Of course. Coming off two disappointing caucus/primary contests he needed to rekindle the fire that he had displayed during the earlier debates… and once past the “Super Pac” ad questions (a subject in which he seems to be taking the full blame while the Romney-Paul ads attacking Newt get a pass from the MSM) he did a great job expressing and defending his big bold ideas. At this point, I’m convinced that only Newt has the skill and ability to get the needed reforms and dramatic changes to “The era of Big Government” actually done… nobody else comes close.
2. Rick Santorum – He got his appealing message out… I thought he was very effective in challenging Romney over the use of misleading and negative ads. His ability to put the overall issues in perspective and in priority was refreshing. I had given-up on him earlier, but now I’m glad to see that he is still around, and hope he keeps going.
3. Rick Perry – I like his common sense attitude and his unapologetic pro-military and 10th Amendment stance. He was very effective in challenging Romney about releasing [Mitt’s] Tax returns and I hope that particular attack registers with conservative voters.
4. Willard “Mitt” Romney – Good grief!!! Can it get any plainer that this guy is just the “King of the RINO’s??”
Here’s a newsflash for everybody: “Mitt’s ONLY PLAN for the future is to get Mitt Romney elected President”… past that he has no plan – Just vague promises that things will get better under his watch. You folks in Iowa and New Hampshire should hang your heads in shame for giving this ‘poser’ the wins.
6. Ron Paul – It absolutely amazes me that anyone could give this creep any credence whatsoever. He has had only two great ideas in his life, the first being his call to have the Fed audited – the second being that he will not be running for reelection to his congressional seat (a promise which I’m sure he will renege upon once he doesn’t secure the nomination). The man is completely incoherent, and so completely separated from the reality of our society and the world that if elected President, the oval-office would have to be redecorated in ‘traditional padded-cell.’
- Grump :o)
Thanks Grumpy! I like your
Submitted by motherbelt on Tue, 01/17/2012 - 8:37am.
Thanks Grumpy! I like your analysis.
I thoroughly agree with your take on Romney. For decades, it's been the governors who have had the edge in presidential elections, so Romney served one term to check off the box, and then quit and started running for president. Could anything be more obvious?
Unfortunatly,
Submitted by Boudin on Tue, 01/17/2012 - 8:53am.
SC is another open primary State. So the conservative vote will be watered down bigtime. This is the exact type of nonsense, why I really cant stand Repubs.
Anyone see the graphs after the debate, with Paul winning all of them. Good grief his supporters must have no life what-so-ever
MB - Thank you!!
Submitted by Grumpy in Arizona on Tue, 01/17/2012 - 8:57am.
I agree with you that 'governors' are the preferred choice for President... and you are absolutely correct that Mitt's term as a governor was merely a 'ticket-punch.'
My real hope is that I will not (once again) have to hold my nose when voting for President... which I will have to do if Mittens gets the nomination.
- Grump :o)
delete double
Submitted by motherbelt on Tue, 01/17/2012 - 9:20am.
delete double
Yeah, I hear you,
Submitted by motherbelt on Tue, 01/17/2012 - 9:19am.
Yeah, I hear you, Grumpy!
I'm with Newt saying Why would you nominate the guy who lost to the guy who lost to Obama?
This is gold, Jerry.....GOLD!! --Kenny Banya
What, he deserves another shot??
Good ever-loving grief!!
Grumpy!!!!!!! I was
Submitted by Scuba Dude on Tue, 01/17/2012 - 9:50am.
Grumpy!!!!!!!
I was mentioning last nite in the debate chat I had not heard from you in while. Glad to see you're still around!!
Spot on analysis as usual.
I liked the spanking that Newt gave to Juan Williams. I do not think Juan asked a single question to Newt for the rest of the debate. :-)
Thanks Scuba!!!!
Submitted by Grumpy in Arizona on Tue, 01/17/2012 - 10:49am.
Yeah, Williams got a good slap-down! I did like the two WSJ reporters questions and have to admit they also made JW look foolish by asking better questions. Since the major theme of this election is about the economy and jobs... I think it would be wise if Fox used Cavuto as their primary questioner in the future. Just an opinion.
Sorry for being gone so long... there was a fatality in my house - My computer died. (That and a few medical issues kept me away.)
Best of luck to you this new year!
- Grump :o)
Good morning Grumpy
Submitted by cocodrie on Tue, 01/17/2012 - 10:57am.
Did you do an Elvis on it with your .45 when the POTUS came on?
Jesus Loves You so much He died for you
Cocodrie & Scuba... (lol)
Submitted by Grumpy in Arizona on Tue, 01/17/2012 - 11:13am.
When it comes to the POTUS coming on... well, let's just say I'm drunk more “Pepto-Bismol” in the last 3 years than in my entire life!
I have no idea what happened to the computer… the kid at the shop where I take it doesn’t speak English… he only speaks techno-geek. (Probably grew-up using Phonics).
- Grump :o)
I think Cavuto, Bolling or
Submitted by Scuba Dude on Tue, 01/17/2012 - 10:59am.
I think Cavuto, Bolling or Megyn Kelly would have been better than Juan. And it was refreshing having intelligent questions asked by the two WSJ reporters though there were one or two "What a stupid question that was" thrown in. Can't remember them right now so maybe someone else can fill in my blank. ;-)
Sorry to hear about your loss :-( What was it? Viral infection? I have at least two, no make that THREE backup computers. :-D
delete
Submitted by motherbelt on Tue, 01/17/2012 - 9:14am.
delete
The draft was changed to a lottery in 1969
Submitted by lrgon on Tue, 01/17/2012 - 2:15pm.
http://www.landscaper.net/draft.htm
Paul and Perry served in the military.
http://2012.republican-candidates.org/Military.php
Doctor Paul was called up and served his time.
Newt dodged the draft and according to Wikipedia asked for numerous deferments [ excuses]. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N...
But he was there, so claimed Newt in a previous debate and explained his service this way: Newt says he came from a "military family," and his dad was in the Megong delta. And he visited WWII battle sites.
That was brave of him!
"Oh,Leroy, where are you hiding? This is your draft Board calling. Come out, come out, wherever you are.You aren't skeeered of the army are you Newt old boy? Come on boy act like a man! Take off that dress!"
So in Newt's bizarre way of looking at the world, he served because his dad served and he was a "military brat."
That's good enough for the neocon hero board so Newt you get their vote!
Mr. Constitution
Submitted by Unsane on Tue, 01/17/2012 - 6:30pm.
Paul served unconstitutionally by his own logic. But don't let that stop you Paulbots from gushing endlessly about Paul.
"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)