Reminder: GOP Presidential Debate Tonight on Fox News Channel at 8:00 p.m. CDT

From what I saw, Ron Paul was the smallest of the pygmies. He did not do well, Ken. You gotta realize that. He does not speak well. He is not clear. It isn't clear that he has any answers for real problems. The only halfway decent response he gave was about declaring war, and that wasn't even a response to the actual question, as I recall.

 

What do you mean "Ron Paul sycophant"? What are the traits of such an individual?

 

A sycophant is a fawning parasite. They are people who are so agog over Ron Paul that they fawn over anything he says without stoppingn to consider the viability of it. They have attached themselves to him like a parasite.

It is not hard to listen to Paul and realize that he is short on workable solutions.

 

Ken, Name calling is not substance over style. Red State Facists, Brownshirts, and the like is pure style without substance. But in looking for substance, Ron Paul does not appear to have workable substance. And that is concerning.

 

I am in favor of none of those things and I see nothing workable in what I have heard from Paul. I am sure that there are many others. So your statement is wrong. It shows a lack of critical thinking that you would even make it.

Sure. I completely agree. I am not sure how name calling helps though. Why not argue on substance?

As for the DHS, Paul may be right about its inefficiencies. But is his solution workable? Outright disbanding probably isn't workable. And that is the problem. Paul does not see hte long term consequences of his choices, and does not seem to have any grasp as to how to get along in a partisan government. And that is not workable.

 

I would've liked to have seen that. Let me know if you come across a transcript or a video online.

 

6,744 votes in on the MSNBC "Rate the candidates Poll"

Favorability Ratings:

1. Paul - 64%
2. Romney - 21%
3. Giuliani - 15%
4. Huckabee - 14%
5. McCain - 13%

 

Why do you say this kind of stuff Ken? Why can you not engage in dialogue? Outright disbanding will not work because there are levels of communication and organization that have to be rearranged. If the DHS ceased to exist tomorrow (outright disbanded), who reports to whom? At the very best you need a time of transition. Dealing with people and organizations isn't like dealing with numbers.

 

And what is your idea of someone that has workable solutions? George W. Bush, Dick Cheney? It is their honesty in government or their leadership that impresses you the most?

It seems in most of these political threads, you are willing to defend the status quo of the Republican Party regardless of how they have betrayed liberty, conservatism, and morals over the last seven years. Maybe you dont like Ron Paul. Maybe he would fail. I look at it this way. He certainly could do no worse than the collection of clowns we have running this nation now from both parties.

Personally, I hope him and Tom T make a ticket together. I think both parties should be dismantled, with two new parties from the ground up, parties that care for the American people.

Special interest apologists, lobbiests, those who rob the American people daily, need to be locked up and the key thrown away.

It is my sincere that McCain, Romney, and Giuliani get voted out of the race on the first primary day.

 

KenH does not help his cause by acting, as Charles Johnson says, "like the nasty little chihuahua, biting everyone's ankles when noone's looking...."

Everyone that disagrees with him gets words put in their mouth, and belittled. That won't help. You can support a candidate and not insult people at the same time, can't you ?

What do you guys think of the Shah reference Paul threw out ? I wished he could have elaborated without Rudy interrupting.

 

"America deserved 9/11 for bombing Iraq during the sanctions period, not that Iraq has anything to do with 9/11. Please don't ask me to explain my positions, these debate forums are not in the Constitution."

Did Ron Paul really say that ?

 

I really didn't get that impression. Colmes and Paul were poorly teaming up. Paul wasted too much time stammering. He clearly has a lot to say and needs to take better advantage of his opportunities. He seemed unable to decide if he was standing by his "we invited 9/11" comment or not, which during the debate seemed to give Rudy a safe way to peddle out of his hole dug by his answers on abortion. I'm no conspiracy theorist, but I'd like to know if Rudy has written any checks to Ron Paul lately :laugh:

I thought the debate was better than the MSNBC debate. It's a shame the Dems won't debate on Fox News.