Republican Debate 9-22-11

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by moreluck, Sep 22, 2011.

  1. moreluck

    moreluck golden ticket member

    I think Perry is losing ground because of his immigration thoughts & actions. I have a friend in Texas who absolutely loves Rick Perry, but I'm not feeling it with him.

    Like in-state tuition discounts for ILLEGALS !!!! Unacceptable !
  2. brett636

    brett636 Well-Known Member

    Perry is still strong in the polls, but my man is Herman Cain. I am not a fan of Perry's immigration ideas, but if it comes down to Perry or Obama I am voting Perry everytime.
  3. moreluck

    moreluck golden ticket member

    Herman Cain was great............He always injects some humor somewhere in the debate night. He made quite the point about his quick cancer treatment saving his life where he would've been dead under Obamacare.
    I'm afraid his following isn't big enough to get him the candidacy. Romney/Cain??
  4. The Other Side

    The Other Side Well-Known Troll Troll

    The debate was filled with softball questions and i find it hilarious that not one of them can give a straight answer without having to blame OBAMA first. I think Rick Santorum is a nut, Newt is appearing invisible, Cain is silly, Paull is wasting his time, Gary Johnson needs to smoke more pot, Bachman is trying too hard, Huntsman is sounding better, but of the two front runners:

    Perry is sounding like BUSH, bumbling, stumbling and sounding like he cant remember what he was told to say. He is not a quick thinker on his feet. His jokes about Romney are ill timed and mis spoken, his foreign policy positions are silly and uneducated and I believe the american right will reject him at the end of the day only because he is appearing more like BUSH everytime he opens his mouth.

    Romney is trying to hard to attack Perry. He needs to stay on message and let Perry Kill himself. Its clear that Romney is way smarter than Perry, but then again, isnt everybody smarter than rick perry?

    I think Romney turns it around after this debate and perry begins his slide to oblivion.

    I only wish that the field would start wittling down begining with Bachman, and ending with Huntsman. Santorum talks about our deficit, but wants to continue to spend 4 billion a month in two wars that have no clear objectives and no reason to continue.

    Americans want us out of those wars and our troops sent home. As Huntsman said, only Iraq and Afghanistan can save themselves. We cant do it.

    Anyone who promotes keeping those wars alive fails to know what is killing america.

  5. island1fox

    island1fox Well-Known Member

    Not perfect but a very fair analysis on last nights debate. I agree with you 100% on the wars. I am tired of wasting young lives in situations that will never change. I also know that in the financial condition we are in the money is needed here for our schools,roads and bridges.
    Any nation building we are involved in should be our own. Not to misslead you , after I would pull all of our troops out of every country, If there was a very clear and present danger such as terroist training camps, the skies would open with wrath !

    I always pray for peace in the world but know that true evil will always exist and must be dealt with .
  6. Monkey Butt

    Monkey Butt Dark Prince of Double Standards Staff Member

    Romney did well last night and he is the Republican candidate that will appeal to the middle of the road voters.
    While he is not my choice if I got to choose who would be president, I want a someone who can beat Obama.

    We have all observed how a Socialist leaning President and Congress can destroy the dreams and freedoms on which this country was founded in a short two years.

    That is my goal - anyone but Obama and ... a Republican Congress to repeal all the Social experiments implemented by the previous administrations and get the debt under control and create an environment where private companies start to hire people again.

    And just as important, get either the Senate or the House back in Democrat hands in 2014 so the Republicans don't start spending like they did in the Bush administration.

    That's what I want for Christmas.
  7. island1fox

    island1fox Well-Known Member

    I can feel your pain but be careful what you ask for. A Dem Senate would block all attempts to roll back any program. If the Repubs have not learned their lesson on spending money we do not have --then throw them all out. This would not be a good time for gridlock --massive changes have to take place-Tax code, Healthcare, SS etc.
  8. Monkey Butt

    Monkey Butt Dark Prince of Double Standards Staff Member

    I agree ... go back and read my post again.
    In 2012 there will be a Republican controlled Presidency and Congress.
    In 2014, get Democrats back in control of the Senate or House.
    Repubs get 2 years to fix it ... otherwise, they are little better than the Democrats in the long-term. They'll just start spending money again just like they and the Democrats have in the past.
  9. trplnkl

    trplnkl 555

    Two very good posts gentlemen.
  10. moreluck

    moreluck golden ticket member

  11. bbsam

    bbsam Moderator Staff Member

    Hoax, you again show that you have no idea what a socialist is and throw the scare word around dutifully as your masters would have you do. Call it what you will, but with Obama standing in deficient bridges and talking infrastructure, these austerity candidates are being backed into an impossible corner. Investing in infrastructure that puts folks back to work and paves the road for tomorrow's industry is not socialism, it's smart. Congress should pass the jobs bill now before Obama confines the populace that it needs to be even bigger.
  12. Lue C Fur

    Lue C Fur Evil member

    Wow!!! You really have been drinking the Messiahs Kool-aid and inhaling the smoke he has been blowing.
  13. brett636

    brett636 Well-Known Member

    The jobs bill is dead. Obama can't even get a majority of democrats to support it making it a moot point to begin with.
  14. bbsam

    bbsam Moderator Staff Member

    Maybe. Probably get him re-elected though. Lose the battle, win the war.
  15. bbsam

    bbsam Moderator Staff Member

    So roads, bridges and such are not infrastructure, or are they not necessary for tomorrow's economy? Or is it that it wouldn't put people to work? Roads build themselves, bridges magically fix themselves? What's in your Kool-Aid?
  16. Lue C Fur

    Lue C Fur Evil member

    Just like the Messiahs first stimulas package...LMAO!!!!
  17. Monkey Butt

    Monkey Butt Dark Prince of Double Standards Staff Member

    I have little doubt that I understand what "Socialist leaning" means better than you. I have posted the definition of Socialism in the past so everyone would understand what it means and I have read your posts in the past so I understand that you have blinders on when it comes to understanding the steps that Obama and the Democratic party have taken to push the United States towards a "Western European Socialist Democracy" (look that up).

    I understand that neither Europe (anymore) nor the US are headed towards a form of government that conforms exactly to the definition of a Socialist State.

    I also have little doubt that if Obama had his way, he would take the US beyond the point that the European governments went (BTW, these European governments called themselves Socialist States and the people that headed those governments declared themselves Socialists - you can go argue with them what Socialism means).
    Obama's political belief is that the European governments did not go far enough and that is why they failed as Socialist states.

    As to infrastructure investment, I agree with that but the problem is really all about creating jobs. The Obama administration's decision to invest in infrastructure creates relatively few jobs due to the mechanized and technological way that infrastructure is created in this age. Simply taking the idea that the New Deal way of the 1930's of creating jobs in building infrastructure and applying it in this age has created very few jobs for the capital investment. A mile of road created now takes only 7% of the workforce that was used to create that mile in the 1930's.
    I just made a road trip from Georgia to Wyoming to Arizona back to Georgia and what I saw was a lot of road construction going on (of which at least half seemed unnecessary) and a lot of heavy equipment and relatively few actual people (jobs) working on these roads. Even the equipment did not seem new ... most of it looked 10 to 30 years old so there did not seem to be that very many jobs were created to manufacture the equipment being used and if they were, they were probably created in Mexico or Canada.

    Too late, Obama has caught on that the investment needs to be made in industries and companies that have payroll as 60% or more of their operating costs. This is how you create jobs. I did see quite a few windmill blades being transported so hopefully that created some jobs for Americans.

    Not saying that the Republicans would not have made the same mistakes if they had made these decisions but I do think they would have involved actual business people in making these decision rather than Ivory Tower intellectuals that have very little or no experience in the real world of business and consequent job creation.

  18. bbsam

    bbsam Moderator Staff Member

    "Actual business people in making these desisions...." Not really inspiring a lot of confidence there. Remember when people used to bemoan the fact that government was not run like a business? Guess we got to see how businesses were running themselves in 2008.
  19. bbsam

    bbsam Moderator Staff Member

    Oh. Peace. Seems that's the fashionable way to end a post these days.

  20. Monkey Butt

    Monkey Butt Dark Prince of Double Standards Staff Member

    Poor reply ... I know even you can do better. :dissapointed: