Lombardi's_kid_brother Posted September 8, 2011 Share Posted September 8, 2011 In the first half hour, Paul came out against airport security, disaster relief, and air conditioning in Iraq. Other than that, he was on top of his game, I felt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoony Posted September 8, 2011 Share Posted September 8, 2011 In the first half hour' date=' Paul came out against airport security, disaster relief, and air conditioning in Iraq.Other than that, he was on top of his game, I felt.[/quote'] :rotflmao: He is a walking parody Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnyderShrugged Posted September 8, 2011 Share Posted September 8, 2011 For one thing, attacking Perry about 12 year old girls.I'm not even sure what he was saying. But I especially liked his rant about the TSA...very presidential. and his points were "crazy" how? ---------- Post added September-8th-2011 at 10:02 AM ---------- In the first half hour' date=' Paul came out against airport security, disaster relief, and air conditioning in Iraq.Other than that, he was on top of his game, I felt.[/quote'] Did he "come out against" those things or did he simply propose that they could be better done outside of Federal Bureaucracy? Was he against the functions or the means of managing and paying? ---------- Post added September-8th-2011 at 10:02 AM ---------- :rotflmao:He is a walking parody How so? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellis Posted September 8, 2011 Share Posted September 8, 2011 Funny that the largest applause of the night was for all the executions in Texas. Ron White would be proud. Sad but true. My wife and I looked at each other like, "Did that just happen?" Then we hit rewind on the DVR to see it again. "Yup. Sure did." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tulane Skins Fan Posted September 8, 2011 Share Posted September 8, 2011 Sad but true. My wife and I looked at each other like, "Did that just happen?" Then we hit rewind on the DVR to see it again. "Yup. Sure did." Wasn't that sorta disturbing? I'd like to think even people that are adamantly for the death penalty in certain circumstances would have the decency not to applaud death. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnyderShrugged Posted September 8, 2011 Share Posted September 8, 2011 Wasn't that sorta disturbing? I'd like to think even people that are adamantly for the death penalty in certain circumstances would have the decency not to applaud death. I saw Radley Balko post on twitter something like "Bring on war and torture, Welcome to the right to life party" so sad, but apart from very few in the GOP, so very true Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted September 8, 2011 Share Posted September 8, 2011 Wasn't that sorta disturbing? I'd like to think even people that are adamantly for the death penalty in certain circumstances would have the decency not to applaud death. Is it applauding death?....no more so than those opposed supporting murderers They support the process of law and ultimate justice. single biggest hack question of the debate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted September 8, 2011 Share Posted September 8, 2011 and his points were "crazy" how?Did he "come out against" those things or did he simply propose that they could be better done outside of Federal Bureaucracy? Was he against the functions or the means of managing and paying? How so? Let's ignore for the moment the possibility that one can agree with some or even...most...or...all of Ron Paul's positions. (which would be fairly worrying to me) Can you honestly tell me that you like the idea of him as president? Can you picture him as our president, going to other countries and meeting foreign leaders? Personally I'd be horribly embarrased for our country. To me he just comes off like a guy who escaped from an old folks home. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tulane Skins Fan Posted September 8, 2011 Share Posted September 8, 2011 Is it applauding death?....no more so than those opposed supporting murderers They support the process of law and ultimate justice. single biggest hack question of the debate Maybe a hack question, but I didn't even see Perry applauding the numbers. If you watch the debate, the mention of the number of people put to death drew loud applause. Yes, that is applauding death. The audience knew nothing other than the explanation that Texas had put to death far more people than any other state through its justice system. I'm not even taking a side on the debate itself, but like I said, even people really pushing for the death penalty are often sad to see it enforced. No one should applaud anyone's death like that. Would you not agree that the best option for any state would be to not have to use the death penalty at all? Sorry to sidetrack. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellis Posted September 8, 2011 Share Posted September 8, 2011 The moment that the audience applauded was disturbing b/c all that Perry was talking about was death. There was nothing about laws or justice. It was straight up death. Now had Perry given a long reason for why he executed so many (which he eventually did, to the applause of the audience) then the applause wouldn't have been so awkward. The audience seemed too quick to applaud death with almost no reasoning behind the death other than "they were on deathrow." The applause were just so immediate that it was incredibly awkward to witness. My first thought when they brought up executions were the West Memphis 3. I'm not opposed to the death penalty but their story has shaken my confidence in the justice system of the south. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnyderShrugged Posted September 8, 2011 Share Posted September 8, 2011 Let's ignore for the moment the possibility that one can agree with some or even...most...or...all of Ron Paul's positions. (which would be fairly worrying to me) Can you honestly tell me that you like the idea of him as president? Yes, of course, why not? Can you picture him as our president, going to other countries and meeting foreign leaders? Absolutely, in fact he would be welcomed as a trading partner and as one who is likely to honor their sovereignty Personally I'd be horribly embarrased for our country. To me he just comes off like a guy who escaped from an old folks home. sounds an awful lot like unsubstantiated hyperbole to me. Just opinion little basis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lombardi's_kid_brother Posted September 8, 2011 Share Posted September 8, 2011 Wasn't that sorta disturbing? I'd like to think even people that are adamantly for the death penalty in certain circumstances would have the decency not to applaud death. Notice that when Perry mentioned Bin Laden's death, they did not applaud. In the GOP, our military killing the "most dangerous man in the world" is a meh moment. Rick Perry whacking 200+ anonymous criminals is time to break out the bubbly. Tell me again, which party is in favor of "death panels?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellis Posted September 8, 2011 Share Posted September 8, 2011 They didn't applaud bin Laden's death b/c it wasn't done by "their guy". Plain and simple and retarded. If Bush did it, there would have been a standing ovation and balloons would've fallen from nets in the ceiling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wrong Direction Posted September 8, 2011 Share Posted September 8, 2011 I thought Perry made a little bit of a bad first impression, but is certainly salvagable. First, he wasn't articulate. I think there are a lot of people like me who want the Republican nominee to not be dumb or very old. If Perry can't complete sentences in ways that better defend his positions on AGW and in particular Social Security, that'll be a big negative for me. However, on both subjects, his actual positions didn't seem totally extreme to me. He has outs on both, and will almost certainly continue to prepare himself for those questions. Alternatively, on issues like the death penalty, Perry pretty much nailed the answer, though still with a little bit of stumbling. Can he stop the stumbling? Romney of 2008 is gone with the lone exception being his answer about the mandate. Would someone tell him already that there are other, constitutional, ways to incent people to join plans (e.g., penalties)? Why not just say he chose the wrong mechanism, learned from his mistake and is ready to move on? Otherwise, he's much more polished and consistently conservative this go around, and I think he'll continue to grow on people who watch him. Newt is very effective as a hard hitting and very smart candidate. I honestly think the long process of primary and then general election campaigning could be what he (and the others) need to moderate their negatives. I don't like his chances in the primary, but if Perry stumbles and Newt keeps performing well, he could be the alternative to Mitt. In that case, the race would be very interesting. Nobody wants to be head to head on stage with Newt Gingrich. He's a seasoned debater. Bachmann was just sort of there. Was she purposefully marginalized by MSNBC or were her answers just less interesting? I wonder if she got equal time. I barely remember her being there and I watched the entire debate. Huntsman came across better for me. I think he too adds something to this field, but he simply has no chance with voters on the right. Hopefully he stays in for a while so he can bring some pressure from the center of the political realm. One thing to note. Every single candidate got to speak about immigration and not one called for deporting 11.5 illegal immigrants. Even the very conservative Bachmann said what you bring to your country should be taken into account. Hopefully that straw man argument against R's finally begins to die. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted September 8, 2011 Share Posted September 8, 2011 sounds an awful lot like unsubstantiated hyperbole to me. Just opinion little basis. I'm just going on what I get out of watching him speak. He reminds me too much of 'the crazy old relative' that everyone ignores at get togethers. He takes everything to the extreme and pretty much can't answer a question without sounding wild and slightly delusional. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tulane Skins Fan Posted September 8, 2011 Share Posted September 8, 2011 I thought Perry made a little bit of a bad first impression, but is certainly salvagable. First, he wasn't articulate. I think there are a lot of people like me who want the Republican nominee to not be dumb or very old. If Perry can't complete sentences in ways that better defend his positions on AGW and in particular Social Security, that'll be a big negative for me. However, on both subjects, his actual positions didn't seem totally extreme to me. He has outs on both, and will almost certainly continue to prepare himself for those questions. Alternatively, on issues like the death penalty, Perry pretty much nailed the answer, though still with a little bit of stumbling. Can he stop the stumbling? Romney of 2008 is gone with the lone exception being his answer about the mandate. Would someone tell him already that there are other, constitutional, ways to incent people to join plans (e.g., penalties)? Why not just say he chose the wrong mechanism, learned from his mistake and is ready to move on? Otherwise, he's much more polished and consistently conservative this go around, and I think he'll continue to grow on people who watch him. Newt is very effective as a hard hitting and very smart candidate. I honestly think the long process of primary and then general election campaigning could be what he (and the others) need to moderate their negatives. I don't like his chances in the primary, but if Perry stumbles and Newt keeps performing well, he could be the alternative to Mitt. In that case, the race would be very interesting. Nobody wants to be head to head on stage with Newt Gingrich. He's a seasoned debater. Bachmann was just sort of there. Was she purposefully marginalized by MSNBC or were her answers just less interesting? I wonder if she got equal time. I barely remember her being there and I watched the entire debate. Huntsman came across better for me. I think he too adds something to this field, but he simply has no chance with voters on the right. Hopefully he stays in for a while so he can bring some pressure from the center of the political realm. One thing to note. Every single candidate got to speak about immigration and not one called for deporting 11.5 illegal immigrants. Even the very conservative Bachmann said what you bring to your country should be taken into account. Hopefully that straw man argument against R's finally begins to die. Is the above a real statement by someone who is against mandates? Is this really what we've come to?? You are for penalties for not getting healthcare, but not the mandate that is Obamacare? Is this for real? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grhqofb5 Posted September 8, 2011 Share Posted September 8, 2011 I'm just going on what I get out of watching him speak. He reminds me too much of 'the crazy old relative' that everyone ignores at get togethers. He takes everything to the extreme and pretty much can't answer a question without sounding wild and slightly delusional. Like eliminating FEMA and stuff? I didn't catch the rest of that plan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lombardi's_kid_brother Posted September 8, 2011 Share Posted September 8, 2011 Two things came across to me last night. 1. The GOP field is actually pretty good. Perry and Romney are the front-runners and seem appropriate in that role. Gingrich - despite being unlikeable - obviously has ideas worth hearing. Bachmann fills the "nut" role that every primary needs. Huntsman is a good moderate (who sadly has no chance). Cain is the black guy. Paul is Ron Paul. As in other phases of life, Santorum serves no purpose. 2. Despite being a strong, impressive field, Republicans are scare ****less of their base. All of them know that the base's view on immigration (Build a fence and deport everyone) makes no sense. But they can't say that. Most of the - in their hearts - know that climate change is real, but the base won't let them say that. All of them know that Social Security is popular, but the base won't let them say that. Most of them actually agree with Obama's approach on foreign policy, but they have to attack the scary black Muslim man in the White House. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted September 8, 2011 Share Posted September 8, 2011 Like eliminating FEMA and stuff? I didn't catch the rest of that plan. Honestly, I have trouble remembering specifics with Paul. The thing that jumped out to me was wanting to abolish the TSA and broadly accusing airport security of commiting sexual offenses. The way he said that just floored me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnyderShrugged Posted September 8, 2011 Share Posted September 8, 2011 I'm just going on what I get out of watching him speak. He reminds me too much of 'the crazy old relative' that everyone ignores at get togethers. He takes everything to the extreme and pretty much can't answer a question without sounding wild and slightly delusional. yet you still are only basing this upon appearances and opinion. You have not been able to answer with specificity what is "wild" what is "delusional" and what is "crazy". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grhqofb5 Posted September 8, 2011 Share Posted September 8, 2011 Gingrich - despite being unlikeable - obviously has ideas worth hearing. Isn't it funny how he doesn't stand a chance, yet seems to be the most intelligent and articulate amongst all of them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monte51Coleman Posted September 8, 2011 Share Posted September 8, 2011 One thing to note. Every single candidate got to speak about immigration and not one called for deporting 11.5 illegal immigrants. Even the very conservative Bachmann said what you bring to your country should be taken into account. Hopefully that straw man argument against R's finally begins to die. Doesn't that have less to do with their beliefs and more to do with the significant and growing numbers of hispanic voters? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnyderShrugged Posted September 8, 2011 Share Posted September 8, 2011 Like eliminating FEMA and stuff? I didn't catch the rest of that plan. He feels FEMA is a mess of red tape and hinders actual aid in many cases. He simply proposes there may be a better way than the current approach. Katrina proves he has a point on this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wrong Direction Posted September 8, 2011 Share Posted September 8, 2011 I'm just going on what I get out of watching him speak. He reminds me too much of 'the crazy old relative' that everyone ignores at get togethers. He takes everything to the extreme and pretty much can't answer a question without sounding wild and slightly delusional. He comes across this way to a lot of people, plus he's never asked to defend how to actually implement a gold standard. The man rambles from answer to answer, usually within a line of questioning that is unrelated. I love libertarian tendencies. I certainly err on that side and away from big government, but Ron Paul is not the individual who will ultimately sell that perspective on a broad range of issues to the American people. I suspect we don't know that person today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grhqofb5 Posted September 8, 2011 Share Posted September 8, 2011 Honestly, I have trouble remembering specifics with Paul.The thing that jumped out to me was wanting to abolish the TSA and broadly accusing airport security of commiting sexual offenses. The way he said that just floored me. Yeah, imagine if you're a good, hard-working employee of the TSA, a republican supporter, sitting in your family room with your wife and two kids watching the debate, and you hear this BS comiong from a national candidate. (Did he just call me a sexual predator? What?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.