The Shotgun Blog
« The Kabul Tailor Shop | Main | Free Dominion... sold to Panama »
Thursday, January 10, 2008
The GOP debate
My take on it (for what it's worth) here. Long story short: the big story was Thompson v. Huckabee. The "southern primary" was front and center (of course, the debate was in South Carolina).
Posted by D.J. McGuire on January 10, 2008 in International Affairs | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d834515b5d69e200e54fe789d08834
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference The GOP debate:
Comments
"Paul: He obviously made his supporters very happy, but if he was looking to pick up any new voters, he failed miserably."
If I may McGuire...
This respectable man is 72 years old. He don't care about fame, power or posterity. What you call "failed miserably", is in fact saying the plain and hard truth regardless of the neo-con medias doing a great job not covering his campain and tarnishing his reputation. This strait standing ageing man who dosen't need any pre-written and studied lines like all the other Fou du roi, is the only one adressing the issues directly. He wasen't looking for votes when he started saying the EXACT SAME THINGS 10 YEARS AGO. In fact, he's getting all those votes and supporters BECAUSE he dosen't plays the violin like the other useless puppet candidats.
If he have no chances at all, why all this circus from you funny neo-cons...
"I had no idea how much he focused on foreign policy at the expense of domestic issues (where he and I agree on many, many more things)."
Because talking about any other issues without focussing on the economic problems due to an ridiculous foreign policy is only air, a lost of time.
Take the time to understand he's the only real libertarian or please do like the other neo-cons and completly ignore the man. At least this way you wont look like a complete idiot when trying to find new ways to put a shadow over the only decent candidate. If you don't agree completly with his vision filled with love that is the freedom of his fellow americans, have the respect to go aside of his road when he's talking.
Excuse me for the crude words but for someone who pretend to understand the problems of America, you sound like an amateur - or worst: a neo-con.
He have no chances remember? - he don't need all that attention from you and other detractors.
...or is he...?
Posted by: Marc | 2008-01-10 11:54:21 PM
Well, Marc, I wouldn't call your words "crude." It was rather a succinct defense of the good doctor.
Look, Dr. Paul is a traditional libertarian on foreing policy; the trouble is, as most non-libertarians understand, non-interventionism is not the panacea Dr. Paul claims it is. Most believe (as I think he does) that it hasn't really been tried. My reading of history was that it weas tried by Jefferson and Madison and failed (hence the War of 1812, as we call it). From that point forward, America largely relied on friendly relations with the UK (without British support, the Monroe Doctrine locking Europe out of South and Central America would have been laughable).
I'd also like to know if Dr. Paul stands by his 2001 vote authorizing military force in Afghanistan.
Posted by: D.J. McGuire | 2008-01-11 7:12:43 AM
Entering Afghanistan in 2001 was the just response from a country that have just been attacked. Ron Paul also makes great speeches on the fact that the US stopped fighting this war they've almost won to go after other spheres of interests and keep expanding and continue with this non-sense.
The problem is that your economy is broke and you cannot afford this illusion of imperialism. You say you dislike his policy but, elect another member of the CFR (any of the present front runners pushed by the medias - both Dems or Reps) and watch out for you kids and grand-kids to dislike you and your ideas in the "future".
How about facing the truth and starting to do your job as an american.
Simple questions that you can answer if you wish:
-Why are you in politics ?
-Who's your favorite candidate and why ?
-What do you think of the efforts from those medias to keep him out of the race and when they talk about him is to tarnish his reputation ?
I'm asking because he's the only chance against the Democrats who wish for even more spendings.
Thanks.
Posted by: Marc | 2008-01-11 9:14:48 AM
Is it just me or does it seem odd that more than half the threads on a .ca website are about US politics?
Posted by: set you free | 2008-01-11 10:39:31 AM
Be patient Set You free.
Soon a thread will be exclusivly on miracles and fairy tales.
Posted by: Marc | 2008-01-11 10:46:05 AM
Marc:
How can somebody who has experienced the miracle, then become more loving and has gained inner peace and joy possible be a threat to you?
I know these people and know they are honest people. I don't know who you are.
For all I know, how do I know you're not a fairy-tale character who is a product of your own delusions?
Since I have never seen you, never looked into your eyes, never experienced what you have experienced, how do I know that you actually exist?
Posted by: set you free | 2008-01-11 11:11:32 AM
That's why in these troubled times, we should focus on real matters that affect directly our lives as a North American society.
We will have plenty of time to discuss religion, philosophie and our personnal experiences after dealing with the real problems we're living right now and will change the lives of every of our children.
Nothing personal - I'm just tired of all the Neo-cons crap and the "head in the sand" behaviour the american administration have. Next time you're in montreal send me an email if you wish and it will be my pleasure to discuss philosophie around a parfumed coffee.
Posted by: Marc | 2008-01-11 11:38:58 AM
Marc:
No system devised has ever been able to ‘evolve' human beings into something they are not.
What I like about the US system is that it is based on traditional values of individual freedom and a marketplace based on individual choices, not some utopian/totalitarian solution which regiments its populace into economic slaves of a ruling elite and in which a central committee decides where to use its labour.
The interesting fact about Southern Democrats is their support base, which dates back to the Civil War.
Since Lincoln, emancipator of the slaves, was a Republican ... well, you figure it out.
Yet, the Democrats tend to be more protectionist about their own economy despite the fact Bill Clinton ratified the Free Trade deal with Canada.
Today's US political landscape is still security-obsessed in light of the 9/11 aftershocks. The US administration, although clumsy in its resonse, rightfully identified jihadist extremism as the biggest threat to world peace.
You're probably correct that international opinion may have been more supportive had the US focused their efforts entirely on rooting out these neanderthal cavemen out of Afghanistan.
What you have to understand is that neither party in the US minds being the world's policeman, and does not mind protecting US interests around the world. The mujahadeen who drove out the Commies in Afghanistan were, in fact, helped out by Benezir Bhutto and Democrat regimes.
Clinton took it one step further. Any action he authorized on behalf of the US was in support of Muslim causes as a reward for helping destroy world communism.
Still, Osama bin Laden changed all that and his approval of the 9/11 plot by masterminds Khalid Shaik Mohammad and Ramsi Joussof changed the reality and the geopolitical dynamics.
One of the reasons for McCain's strong showing in the first two primaries is his viewpoint on how to handle Iraq. His was a voice in the wilderness in favour of a troop surge in Iraq, a decision that has noticably lowere the death toll in Iraq.
The Democrat Party in the US invested heavily in the US being on the losing side and now that the tide has turned, has nowhere to turn.
What would be your analysis of the situation, marc, other than name-calling such as ‘neo-cons crap' and ‘head in the sand behaiour."
And, while your at it, mon ami, could you articulate your analysis of what the American voter is looking for?
Our friend, Conrad-USA, said the only issue voters care about is abortion. OK, that's fine and the sanctity of human life issue evolved into something I felt I needed to tell as many people as I could.
My son has travelled to the US. He hates Bush, but found the US citizenry did not obsess abour Iraq as he does. He found US people he ran across are now more concerned about what we call pocketbook issues.
You see, marc, my understanding of what religion is all about and my efforts to understand principles that have been around for thousands of years has helped me understand that these issues have been played out hundreds of times before.
When I see that people are happy and have found some inner peace ... curiously, that's what I'm also striving for and when people are happy, that makes me happy.
I've never seen my exploration of ancient wisdoms as a threat to me or something that others have used to control me. Rather, it's an opportunity to learn even more beyond crude politics.
Posted by: set you free | 2008-01-11 12:31:36 PM
*
Just one question Mr. Fox News: Who gets the more support from troopers in Iraq ?
*
Hint: you never see him on tv.
Posted by: Marc | 2008-01-11 3:31:33 PM
marc: How are you doing? I heard that about Ron Paul, but I really find it hard to believe. Could you provide a link to support that? I think it could turn out like the Fox news poll after the debate last night that showed 35% believed that Ron Paul won the debate. LOL The focus group they talked with thought that Mr. Paul did the worst. Go figure...
Posted by: Markalta | 2008-01-11 3:44:46 PM
"Then again, we are dealing with Mark. Enough said on THAT score."
Hey!!! I resemble that remark!!
Posted by: Markalta | 2008-01-11 4:08:41 PM
Markalta,
I'm doing great ! Just like my favorite hockey team.
Oh yeah, Franck's local focus groups.
Those where you can find the same paticipants in both of them; saying two different things.
You sound like someone who would willingly do the robot talk like they do.
*
"Then again, we are dealing with Mark. Enough said on THAT score."
Exactly, not a neo-con or one of their neo-con zombies.
Posted by: Marc | 2008-01-11 4:10:06 PM
marc: Don't get cocky...it's a long season. :)
Nice duck on that check...does that mean you don't have a link to back up your statement about all the Ron Paul supporters in the military?
Posted by: Markalta | 2008-01-11 7:47:41 PM
Here it is.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=KrpES1Lk7X4
Posted by: Marc | 2008-01-11 7:54:05 PM
Here it is.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=KrpES1Lk7X4
Posted by: Marc | 2008-01-11 7:54:34 PM
Of course. Past this on youtube: watch?v=KrpES1Lk7X4
Posted by: Marc | 2008-01-11 7:55:21 PM
marc: ? So at 2 Republican debates over 5 months they find 1 guy who appears in focus groups at both debates. All that says is that 'Chuck' who is a Republican, likes to be on TV. What does that have to do with your inference that Ron Paul has the mahjority of the military's support? You have lost me mon ami...
Posted by: Markalta | 2008-01-11 8:41:29 PM
"What I like about the US system is that it is based on traditional values of individual freedom and a marketplace based on individual choices, not some utopian/totalitarian solution which regiments its populace into economic slaves of a ruling elite and in which a central committee decides where to use its labour."
They are economic slaves of a ruling elite; wage slaves enforced by mass immigration.
George Fitzhugh..."for it proves that the profits which capital exacts from labor makes free laborers slaves, without the rights, privileges or advantages of domestic slaves, and capitalists their masters, with all the advantages, and none of the burdens and obligations of the ordinary owners of slaves."
Posted by: Dj | 2008-01-11 9:01:10 PM
Here's a suggestion, Dj.
Just sit at home in front of your computer screen and keep your hands clean from such beneath-you activity like working for a living.
In Canada, the percentage of state activity in the economy is much higher than it is in the US. That's a fact.
Posted by: set you free | 2008-01-11 10:50:02 PM
Regardless, your assertion that the US ruling elite does not regiment its populace into economic slaves is bunkum. It enforces wage slavery through mass immigration.
Remember when building a rock garden was an opportunity for an American landscaper to make a reasonable living and pay fair wages? Well times have changed. Thanks to cheap Mexican labor, now you can have your entire yard bulldozed, hillocks piled high, massive boulders positioned, ponds excavated, ornate Mexican fountains installed all for a couple of thousand dollars and you'll never have to leave your easy chair. Better still, if your tastes change, it is cheap enough that you can do it all over again next summer!
Now, amazingly, the American ruling elite can assume the role of an 1800's era plantation owner. Better yet, they don't even have to feed their slaves! Go down to the convenience store, get three competing crews of illegal aliens to give you a fixed price, then pick the cheapest crew to complete your personal Tara. How they or the Americans they have displaced, can afford to eat or fend for themselves is not your problem. If they should become weak, sick or injured you can always hire a new illegal Mexican crew. In the old days, if you had slaves, your investment could be ruined if you overworked them. Just like if you ran your horse too hard. Thank goodness those backward days are behind us. The modern American Wage Slave will do whatever it takes to please you, even if it means living 6 families to a house, bought from an American who lost his home when he lost his job to Mexicans. Plus you can sleep tight at night knowing that the US system "is based on traditional values of individual freedom and a marketplace based on individual choices, not some utopian/totalitarian solution which regiments its populace into economic slaves of a ruling elite".
Posted by: DJ | 2008-01-12 1:09:43 AM
It may be hard to believe that an anti-war candidate would receive the most military contributions, but it's true.
Here's the evidence:
1. http://ronpauldelaware.wordpress.com/2007/07/16/military-favors-ron-paul-over-mccain/
2. http://www.thenation.com/doc/20070730/engelhardt
3. http://thespinfactor.com/thetruth/2007/07/16/military-support-for-the-republican-candidates
If you don't like the Nation, or are skeptical of the blogs, you can check it out on Fox News: http://youtube.com/watch?v=6nwZGRrqhfs
And, if you're still skeptical, you can verify the numbers and the employers by looking at the FEC filings. Here's Paul's: http://query.nictusa.com/pres/2007/Q2/C00432914/A_EMPLOYER_C00432914.html
Here's Paul's TV commercial about it: http://youtube.com/watch?v=1qVmVJJaLkM
There may also be another reason why Paul gets so much military support. I can't seem to locate it, but there was a video of a military man from Paul's congressional district who credits him with receiving timely medical care. The man claims that, without Paul's getting involved, he would not have received life-saving medical care that he was entitled to as a veteran.
Paul is sort of renowned as the go-to guy for getting medals and military awards and benefits that U.S. veterans are due. Look it up. Perhaps some of this is bigger news in military circles than it is in other circles.
In addition, Paul, like McCain, is the only military veteran, having served as a flight surgeon. Maybe that helps drum up some support as well.
At the very least, it puts the lie to the claim that Paul does not support the military men and women. I don't think anyone can make a credible claim to that effect, even though some have tried.
Posted by: P.M. Jaworski | 2008-01-12 3:33:44 AM
DJ -
The situation you describe as "the methods" of the "ruling elite" in your rendition of our American society is entirely in violation of our long time existing laws. When actual slavery existed in America is was LEGAL.
ALL of this illegal immigration (which is a catastrophe in America) is the result of our present President G.W. Bush ANNOUNCING repeatedly in every media venue possible that he would NOT enforce our immigration laws.
He is the first and ONLY President who openly and deliberately and defiantly violated our existing immigration laws; laws for which he is the only enforcement officer (i.e. border laws-international laws are exclusively federal laws).
This is a violation of his Oath of Office for which I intend to see that he is punished with death by HANGING for Treason.
I've accomplished more improbable things than that in my life and I'm not alone.
Our entire congress is fully complicit in this crime (the House of Representatives has the absolute power of the purse and could cut off 100% of all financial support for any and every governmental activity for the President e.g. no Secret Service, no drivers, no heat or light or water or power into the White House, unless and until the President enforced our existing immigration laws, and reaaonably, now that he has greatly skewed and screwed up major economic activity with his Treason - first deport the violent criminals among the illegals, and by getting the message out, the rest will basically leave of their own accord) but the congress did not do this (and we threw the Republican majority OUT because of it, NOT because of the War On Terrorism, as the liars on the Democrat Party TV News would continually tell you).
This is the corruption which has absolutely killed the Republican Party, to the delight of the Democrat-Communists.
It is ONLY the media (aka Democrats) who promote and "support" the creeps like John McCain who supposedly are so popular in America (Hey that's what they say on TV - and everybody loves Hillary too).
Posted by: Conrad-USA | 2008-01-12 9:38:51 AM
The comments to this entry are closed.