Republicans Know What They Want In A Presidential Candidate

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

http://www.townhall.com/Columnists/PhyllisSchlafly/2007/11/12/republicans_know_what_they_want_in_a_presidential_ candidate?page=full&comments=true

Republicans Know What They Want in a Presidential Candidate

The media have designated the front-runners for Republican and Democratic nominations for the 2008 presidential election and seem to expect American voters to line up behind one of them right now even though the national nominating conventions won't take place until next summer.

Most Republicans are still shopping, and here are some of the statements they would like hear from a presidential candidate. :

[Beowulf]

From the article:
1) Republicans want a president to appoint only judges who will enforce the U.S. Constitution as it was written. They want our president to appoint only judges who publicly reject the liberal notion that the Constitution is "evolving," or that decisions can be based on "emerging awareness" about morals. :thumbup:


2)Republicans want the president to be a leader in protecting U.S. sovereignty and independence from foreign control over our lives and laws.:thumbup:

3)Republicans want him to reject all United Nations treaties such as the U.N. Law of the Sea Treaty, which would make all use of the oceans subject to the International Seabed Authority, the U.N. Treaty on the Rights of the Child, and the U.N. Treaty on Women.:thumbup:

4) Republicans want their candidate for president to announce that he considers it a presidential duty to prevent illegal entry into the United States. He should praise the American people for successfully getting the U.S. Senate to defeat the 2007 Comprehensive Immigration Reform bill earlier this year.:thumbup:

5)
Republicans want their presidential candidate to promise that he will never try to bamboozle them with a similar so-called "comprehensive" immigration bill or a so-called "DREAM Act," which includes amnesty for the millions of illegal immigrants now in the United States.
Republicans want their candidate to tell us now exactly what he will do to prevent the entry of the illegal drugs over the U.S.-Mexico border. They want a presidential candidate to say he will pardon Border Guards Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean who are unjustly imprisoned for intercepting a professional Mexican drug smuggler.
Republicans want their candidate to build the fence on the U.S.-Mexico border legislated by the Secure Fence Law. Republicans want their candidate to promise to enforce the law against employers hiring illegal immigrants.:thumbup:

But for me to support any GOP candidate, they MUST be pro-life and pro-gun. I will not waver on these.

[garlicguy]

From the article:
1) Republicans want a president to appoint only judges who will enforce the U.S. Constitution as it was written. They want our president to appoint only judges who publicly reject the liberal notion that the Constitution is "evolving," or that decisions can be based on "emerging awareness" about morals. :thumbup:


2)Republicans want the president to be a leader in protecting U.S. sovereignty and independence from foreign control over our lives and laws.:thumbup:

3)Republicans want him to reject all United Nations treaties such as the U.N. Law of the Sea Treaty, which would make all use of the oceans subject to the International Seabed Authority, the U.N. Treaty on the Rights of the Child, and the U.N. Treaty on Women.:thumbup:

4) Republicans want their candidate for president to announce that he considers it a presidential duty to prevent illegal entry into the United States. He should praise the American people for successfully getting the U.S. Senate to defeat the 2007 Comprehensive Immigration Reform bill earlier this year.:thumbup:

5)
Republicans want their presidential candidate to promise that he will never try to bamboozle them with a similar so-called "comprehensive" immigration bill or a so-called "DREAM Act," which includes amnesty for the millions of illegal immigrants now in the United States.
Republicans want their candidate to tell us now exactly what he will do to prevent the entry of the illegal drugs over the U.S.-Mexico border. They want a presidential candidate to say he will pardon Border Guards Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean who are unjustly imprisoned for intercepting a professional Mexican drug smuggler.
Republicans want their candidate to build the fence on the U.S.-Mexico border legislated by the Secure Fence Law. Republicans want their candidate to promise to enforce the law against employers hiring illegal immigrants.:thumbup:

But for me to support any GOP candidate, they MUST be pro-life and pro-gun. I will not waver on these.

Alright!! Another voter comes into the Ron Paul camp!:thumbup::claps::thumbup:

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

Ooooweee! Brudder go'n be mad when he reads what you wrote gg, http://www.freeconservatives.com/vb/images/icons/biglaugh.gif. There are no Paulniacs among the core members of FC, only the newbies who've infiltrated to attempt to hijack threads, disrupt posting, and mislead lurkers and other newbies.

[PrezLeefun]

Good list.

[The_Elucidator]

Ooooweee! Brudder go'n be mad when he reads what you wrote gg, http://www.freeconservatives.com/vb/images/icons/biglaugh.gif. There are no Paulniacs among the core members of FC, only the newbies who've infiltrated to attempt to hijack threads, disrupt posting, and mislead lurkers and other newbies.

Who you tellin' :ooo:

[Lazarus]

Ooooweee! Brudder go'n be mad when he reads what you wrote gg, http://www.freeconservatives.com/vb/images/icons/biglaugh.gif. There are no Paulniacs among the core members of FC, only the newbies who've infiltrated to attempt to hijack threads, disrupt posting, and mislead lurkers and other newbies. She's right, Garlic... We accept that you support Ron Paul, but that kind of statement serves no purpose except to get this thread moved to Flame Wars with the others...

I know you don't intend for that to happen... You should realize now that there are no undecided potential converts among the ranks here... Give it a rest, ok...

[Naturalized-Texan]

The next to the last 3 items in her list, dealing with the economy and free trade, are nonsense and the first 2 of those 3 could be very damaging to our economy. The third of those 3, dealing with the NAU, shows that she is a conspiracy theorist. In other words, Phyllis Schlafly shows that she has no understanding of economics.

But even more reprehensible is that she never even mentioned by far the most important issue facing the voters in the 2008 elections: WINNING WORLD WAR IV - THE WAR ON TERROR.

There are a few other items on her list that I don't agree with, but they aren't as important as the above.

Phyllis Schlafly doesn't speak for me and never has.

[Rhino]

Alright!! Another voter comes into the Ron Paul camp!:thumbup::claps::thumbup:Only if he wants to surrender to terrorism, which would be quite a stretch.

[Madbomber]

Look I understand that you guys all want the war to continue and all but lets be honest here, Over 70% of the US population is against the war now. No one that is for the war has a snowballs chance in hell of winning. At best you can get on board with the only conservative that is for ending the war OR you can get used to the idea that you'll have another Clinton (or worse) in office again. Be realistic.

[Lubbock]

Look I understand that you guys all want the war to continue and all but lets be honest here, Over 70% of the US population is against the war now. No one that is for the war has a snowballs chance in hell of winning. At best you can get on board with the only conservative that is for ending the war OR you can get used to the idea that you'll have another Clinton (or worse) in office again. Be realistic.

These Ron Paul Bed Wetters simply do not have a grasp on the world in which we live.

I am putting each of them on "ignore" and make a concerted effort to never open a thread where one has posted.

It's my opinion, that we would all do well to never again respond to any post.

It serves no purpose.

Think about it.

[EveningStar]

Phyllis Schlafly doesn't speak for me and never has.
She's no longer relevant. She's become a nut. She thought Alan Keyes was the ideal Senate candidate in Illinois in 2004. She's overstayed her visit needs to get off the stage.

[Naturalized-Texan]

Look I understand that you guys all want the war to continue and all but lets be honest here, Over 70% of the US population is against the war now.
That is a bald-faced lie and you know it. A recent poll showed that a solid majority (53% as I remember) want us to win the war and that was before the tremendous successes of the surge.

No one that is for the war has a snowballs chance in hell of winning. At best you can get on board with the only conservative that is for ending the war OR you can get used to the idea that you'll have another Clinton (or worse) in office again. Be realistic.
Ron Paul is a traitor and he is the one who hasn't a snowball's chance in hell to even get the Republican nomination, much less to become president. Face it, because he wants us to surrender to the terrorists, Ron Paul will never receive more than 3% or 4% in the Republican primaries.

[Madbomber]

That is a bald-faced lie and you know it. A recent poll showed that a solid majority (53% as I remember) want us to win the war and that was before the tremendous successes of the surge.


Ron Paul is a traitor and he is the one who hasn't a snowball's chance in hell to even get the Republican nomination, much less to become president. Face it, because he wants us to surrender to the terrorists, Ron Paul will never receive more than 3% or 4% in the Republican primaries.


All I can say is that you are deluded. If you seriously think 53% of America wants us in Iraq then you obviously did not pay attension to the last congressional elections. We got our asses handed to us.

[Jack_Savage]

We got our asses handed to us.

Don't say we. I'm serious. it was people like you who caused it. The segment of society who are so afraid to fight, they joined with Code-Pink and obstructed the President. What part of that do you call "we"?

[Wyatt_Junker]

All I can say is that you are deluded. If you seriously think 53% of America wants us in Iraq then you obviously did not pay attension to the last congressional elections. We got our asses handed to us.

This didn't have anything to do with it. Cons didn't stay home because of the war, but because they were tired of Bush's half-drunk, pilled-in look.

And they were also cowed over by 6 years of the chronic media shitstorm.

Iraq?

Shit, Americans love war. Don't let the media *** with yer head.

[Madbomber]

This didn't have anything to do with it. Cons didn't stay home because of the war, but because they were tired of Bush's half-drunk, pilled-in look.

And they were also cowed over by 6 years of the chronic media shitstorm.

Iraq?

Shit, Americans love war. Don't let the media *** with yer head.


i donno man. I get the feeling that americans love war as long as americans are the only ones doing the killing. Unfortunately thats is an imposibility. Mybiggest beef tho is why continue a war after you have accomplished your goals?

[Madbomber]

Don't say we. I'm serious. it was people like you who caused it. The segment of society who are so afraid to fight, they joined with Code-Pink and obstructed the President. What part of that do you call "we"?


Um right.... the rubber room is on the left hand side of the hallway. its your next stop.

[Jack_Savage]

Um right.... the rubber room is on the left hand side of the hallway. its your next stop.

No-no. My next stop is Eddies Rib House in Hendersonville, Tn., next Friday night. Right on West Main.

[Wyatt_Junker]

i donno man. I get the feeling that americans love war as long as americans are the only ones doing the killing. Unfortunately thats is an imposibility. Mybiggest beef tho is why continue a war after you have accomplished your goals?

Americans like slasher flicks and video games whose sole purpose is to rack up high scores on the backs of piled up zombie corpses. We also like to eat mutilated cow as a treat, and chew it to the sound of porn. We're not pacifists. And when we're low on funds, we like to listen to AC/DC while sucking aerosol sideways out of a can of whipped cream.

America was built on mountains of pork rinds and heart attacks, a very beautiful thing. We like confrontation and a very good sense of *** YOU ASSHOLE FUKFACE. We not only like pushing the envelope, but the entire pallet, packing peanuts included. We like explosives and shiny shit blowing up on top of gigantic boobies. Nuclear warheads when deployed are an act of sexual release and extremely gratifying. We like dangerous things like clogging barefoot on top of shards of glass and hot dog eating contests. We like beer and we like it a lot. Not because it tastes good, but because we like to get fukked up.

We like to knock kings off of thrones and break shit because we know that most countries suck. And sometimes we like to pour hot sauce in our eye just to see what it will feel like. Just for the sake of shit and ***. We like John Wayne and Clint Eastwood and other dumb, mean sonsabitches. We like all of the Rocky movies and watch them when we have sex with our wives.

Americans like to piss on our neighbor's lawn just because its there and if that's Iraq or Iran then all the better. War is our greatest gift to the world. Its our calling. And we make the world better because of it. *** any hippie who says otherwise.

[Madbomber]

Americans like slasher flicks and video games whose sole purpose is to rack up high scores on the backs of piled up zombie corpses. We also like to eat mutilated cow as a treat, and chew it to the sound of porn. We're not pacifists. And when we're low on funds, we like to listen to AC/DC while sucking aerosol sideways out of a can of whipped cream.

America was built on mountains of pork rinds and heart attacks, a very beautiful thing. We like confrontation and a very good sense of *** YOU ASSHOLE FUKFACE. We not only like pushing the envelope, but the entire pallet, packing peanuts included. We like explosives and shiny shit blowing up on top of gigantic boobies. Nuclear warheads when deployed are an act of sexual release and extremely gratifying. We like dangerous things like clogging barefoot on top of shards of glass and hot dog eating contests. We like beer and we like it a lot. Not because it tastes good, but because we like to get fukked up.

We like to knock kings off of thrones and break shit because we know that most countries suck. And sometimes we like to pour hot sauce in our eye just to see what it will feel like. Just for the sake of shit and ***. We like John Wayne and Clint Eastwood and other dumb, mean sonsabitches. We like all of the Rocky movies and watch them when we have sex with our wives.

Americans like to piss on our neighbor's lawn just because its there and if that's Iraq or Iran then all the better. War is our greatest gift to the world. Its our calling. And we make the world better because of it. *** any hippie who says otherwise.


Totally!!!!

I think......

[TeenageRepublican]

Where did these new Pro-Ron Paul posters come from, besides GG, who I actually enjoy? Did they come from RO, perhaps?

[Jack_Savage]

Where did these new Pro-Ron Paul posters come from, besides GG, who I actually enjoy? Did they come from RO, perhaps?

Orger drones. They stink to much for moveon's people. Now we know why the only place they were welcome was as Ron Paul toyboys.

[Madbomber]

:D:DOrger drones. The stink to much for moveon's people. Now we know why the only place they were welcome was as Ron Paul toyboys.


Sorry to burst your bubble but Ive been here longer than both of you. :D

[Jack_Savage]

:D:D


Sorry to burst your bubble but Ive been here longer than both of you. :D


We know. Its obvious you don't have much to say. You probably have posted 90% of your nothingness on this thread alone. Try actually connecting some dot's.

[Madbomber]

We know. Its obvious you don't have much to say. You probably have posted 90% of your nothingness on this thread alone. Try actually connecting some dot's.


Im sorry. I cant help but respond to stupidity.

[TeenageRepublican]

:D:D


Sorry to burst your bubble but Ive been here longer than both of you. :D

Oh wow, you got here 22 days before me. You must know everything! :biggrin:

[jayson]

http://img217.imageshack.us/img217/8057/1194982556504lx1.jpg

[Madbomber]

Oh wow, you got here 22 days before me. You must know everything! :biggrin:


If you truly are a "teenage" republican I wont do anything to discourage you. BUT, if you ARE still young, believe me there is still a lot for you to learn. IF you have a job, take a look at your next pay stub. Once you realize that you are paying close to 50% of you wages to the federal government for things like wars that we have already won, you might just might have a different oppinion about things.

Call me what you want, you are young and deserver a free pass becuase of it... for now. I would much rather be called an asshole and take it so that a young person will stay conservative than to point out all the areas that they have yet to learn about and shun them to the liberal side of things. Im willing to take it from you becuase you still have a lot to learn, I am not however willing to take it from those that should know better.

Madbomber

[Venus de Smilo]

Totally!!!!

I think......
I see you've met Wyatt. :biggrin:

[Rhino]

Look I understand that you guys all want the war to continue and all but lets be honest here, Over 70% of the US population is against the war now.You need to check your facts.

http://www.pollingreport.com/iraq.htm

I suppose you could hedge on your definition of "against the war", but it isn't 70%. And the number of those in favor of an immediate withdrawal (surrender) is much less than that.

No one that is for the war has a snowballs chance in hell of winning.And yet all the leading candidates do. Hmmmm.

At best you can get on board with the only conservative that is for ending the war OR you can get used to the idea that you'll have another Clinton (or worse) in office again. Be realistic.Voting for Paul realistic??? :lol: Realism isn't a word you should use when debating Ron Paul.

At best I can get on board with a conservative that is for winning the war.

[Beowulf]

:roar::roar::roar:Alright!! Another voter comes into the Ron Paul camp!
:icon133:

Nice try, Garlic! Ron Paul is pro-amnesty. I won't support that either. It's either Fred Thompson for me or Constitutionalist.

[jayson]

Ron Paul is pro-amnesty. I won't support that either.

Your are mistaken on that. From the words of Ron Paul himself:

The talk must stop. We must secure our borders now. A nation without secure borders is no nation at all. It makes no sense to fight terrorists abroad when our own front door is left unlocked. This is my six point plan:
Physically secure our borders and coastlines. We must do whatever it takes to control entry into our country before we undertake complicated immigration reform proposals.
Enforce visa rules. Immigration officials must track visa holders and deport anyone who overstays their visa or otherwise violates U.S. law. This is especially important when we recall that a number of 9/11 terrorists had expired visas.
No amnesty. Estimates suggest that 10 to 20 million people are in our country illegally. That’s a lot of people to reward for breaking our laws.
No welfare for illegal aliens. Americans have welcomed immigrants who seek opportunity, work hard, and play by the rules. But taxpayers should not pay for illegal immigrants who use hospitals, clinics, schools, roads, and social services.
End birthright citizenship. As long as illegal immigrants know their children born here will be citizens, the incentive to enter the U.S. illegally will remain strong.
Pass true immigration reform. The current system is incoherent and unfair. But current reform proposals would allow up to 60 million more immigrants into our country, according to the Heritage Foundation. This is insanity. Legal immigrants from all countries should face the same rules and waiting periods.My emphasis added. That's about as anti-Amnesty as they come... because not only is he wanting to secure our borders, but he wants to take away the reasons they are coming here in the first place... aka entitlements, free healthcare and housing, and all those other lovely services that we Americans fund every April 15th.

[BuckeyeMike]

Man that's Hall of Fame shit right there!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

[garlicguy]

Americans like slasher flicks and video games whose sole purpose is to rack up high scores on the backs of piled up zombie corpses. We also like to eat mutilated cow as a treat, and chew it to the sound of porn. We're not pacifists. And when we're low on funds, we like to listen to AC/DC while sucking aerosol sideways out of a can of whipped cream.

America was built on mountains of pork rinds and heart attacks, a very beautiful thing. We like confrontation and a very good sense of *** YOU ASSHOLE FUKFACE. We not only like pushing the envelope, but the entire pallet, packing peanuts included. We like explosives and shiny shit blowing up on top of gigantic boobies. Nuclear warheads when deployed are an act of sexual release and extremely gratifying. We like dangerous things like clogging barefoot on top of shards of glass and hot dog eating contests. We like beer and we like it a lot. Not because it tastes good, but because we like to get fukked up.

We like to knock kings off of thrones and break shit because we know that most countries suck. And sometimes we like to pour hot sauce in our eye just to see what it will feel like. Just for the sake of shit and ***. We like John Wayne and Clint Eastwood and other dumb, mean sonsabitches. We like all of the Rocky movies and watch them when we have sex with our wives.

Americans like to piss on our neighbor's lawn just because its there and if that's Iraq or Iran then all the better. War is our greatest gift to the world. Its our calling. And we make the world better because of it. *** any hippie who says otherwise.

:claps: Wyatt! If you aren't running for elective office, you darned well should be!

(I understand there's a need for comedy writers just now on the West Coast - in case you'd like to get paid for what you do so well.)

[d'urville]

Your are mistaken on that. From the words of Ron Paul himself:

My emphasis added. That's about as anti-Amnesty as they come... because not only is he wanting to secure our borders, but he wants to take away the reasons they are coming here in the first place... aka entitlements, free healthcare and housing, and all those other lovely services that we Americans fund every April 15th.

He's voted six times not to deploy troops on the border.

[DesertFox]

americans love war as long as americans are the only ones doing the killing.Americans love war, period. And they should. War is fun, man. It stiffens the upper lip and dries up the tear ducts. America was born in the fires of war, started a war with herself when nobody else would play and has kicked ass everywhere she went. Only the Aussies rival Americans in terms of ass-kicking, and they never did learn how to take names.

[garlicguy]

He's voted six times not to deploy troops on the border.

I certainly do not KNOW his reasoning for this. But the Congressman often does such things to point out other truths such as: We don't HAVE the troops to spare at the moment.

Before this year's races, I didn't realize that the US has military installations in 130 of the 250 countries of the world, numbering about 700 bases outside the US and the personnel it takes to staff them.

I do remember the closing of many bases in the US, especially including those in Illinois when I lived there and in Montana, where we now reside.

But I admit to the above explanation as being speculative on my part.

[Rhino]

I certainly do not KNOW his reasoning for this. But the Congressman often does such things to point out other truths such as: We don't HAVE the troops to spare at the moment.

Before this year's races, I didn't realize that the US has military installations in 130 of the 250 countries of the world, numbering about 700 bases outside the US and the personnel it takes to staff them.Where on earth did you get that figure?

Even the antiwar nutjobs don't make such a claim.

<img src="http://www.ppu.org.uk/pm/US-military-bases-2001-03.jpg" height=339 width=502 border=0>

[Rhino]

As of 2005, the United States occupied over 700 military bases in over 36 countries worldwidehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_of_the_United_States

[garlicguy]

Where on earth did you get that figure?

Even the antiwar nutjobs don't make such a claim.


Oops! Don't remember for sure. But they were firmly in my addled brain when I posted them.

Your post and link and a bit of searching indicate the numbers more like:

730 bases in over 50 counties of the 194 on the globe as of 2005.

It still is nearly beyond reckoning for the scope of the thing. Why do we need to keep such an immense presence?

[Rhino]

Because our strategic interests are immense.

[Naturalized-Texan]

All I can say is that you are deluded. If you seriously think 53% of America wants us in Iraq then you obviously did not pay attension to the last congressional elections.
So, you're admitting that you have been brainwashed by the liberal so-called mainstream media and the DNC. Why am I not surprised?

The last congressional elections were NOT about the War on Terror. They were all about Rep. Foley and the word "macaca."

We got our asses handed to us.
Yeah, you Paul-heads ARE getting your asses handed to you every day here.

[Jack_Savage]

So, you're admitting that you have been brainwashed by the liberal so-called mainstream media and the DNC. Why am I not surprised?

The last congressional elections were NOT about the War on Terror. They were all about Rep. Foley and the word "macaca."


Yeah, you Paul-heads ARE getting your asses handed to you every day here.

They're Ass-heads.

[Naturalized-Texan]

Way back in the 1970s and early 1980s, when Ron Paul was still sane, he was our congressman. Back then he was even a Reagan conservative. Unfortunately, after the Democrat state legislature gerrymandered him out of office, he deserted the ranks of Reagan conservatism and went waaaayyyy off the deep end. He is now too mentally unbalanced to be trusted with any office higher than dogcatcher or trash collector.

[EveningStar]

Way back in the 1970s and early 1980s, when Ron Paul was still sane, he was our congressman. Back then he was even a Reagan conservative. Unfortunately, after the Democrat state legislature gerrymandered him out of office, he deserted the ranks of Reagan conservatism and went waaaayyyy off the deep end. He is now too mentally unbalanced to be trusted with any office higher than dogcatcher or trash collector.
:claps:

[Madbomber]

You need to check your facts.

http://www.pollingreport.com/iraq.htm

I suppose you could hedge on your definition of "against the war", but it isn't 70%. And the number of those in favor of an immediate withdrawal (surrender) is much less than that.


<TABLE style="BORDER-COLLAPSE: collapse" borderColor=#111111 cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width=600 border=0><TBODY><TR><TD width=600 colSpan=7>"From what you know about the U.S. involvement in Iraq, how much longer would you be willing to have large numbers of U.S. troops remain in Iraq: less than a year, one to two years, two to five years or longer than five years?"

</TD></TR><TR><TD width=20></TD><TD width=114></TD><TD width=93></TD><TD width=93></TD><TD width=94></TD><TD width=94></TD><TD width=94>.

</TD></TR><TR><TD width=20></TD><TD width=114></TD><TD vAlign=bottom align=middle width=93>Less Than
A Year
</TD><TD vAlign=bottom align=middle width=93>One to Two
Years
</TD><TD vAlign=bottom align=middle width=94>Two to Five
Years
</TD><TD vAlign=bottom align=middle width=94>Longer Than
Five Years
</TD><TD vAlign=bottom align=middle width=94>Other/
Unsure
</TD></TR><TR><TD width=20></TD><TD width=114></TD><TD align=middle width=93>%</TD><TD align=middle width=93>%</TD><TD align=middle width=94>%</TD><TD align=middle width=94>%</TD><TD align=middle width=94>%</TD></TR><TR><TD width=20></TD><TD width=114>10/12-16/07

</TD><TD align=middle width=93>45</TD><TD align=middle width=93>27</TD><TD align=middle width=94>12</TD><TD align=middle width=94>5</TD><TD align=middle width=94>11</TD></TR><TR><TD width=20></TD><TD width=114>9/14-16/07


</TD><TD align=middle width=93>49</TD><TD align=middle width=93>23</TD><TD align=middle width=94>12</TD><TD align=middle width=94>5</TD><TD align=middle width=94>11</TD></TR><TR><TD width=20></TD><TD width=114></TD><TD width=93>

</TD><TD width=93></TD><TD width=94></TD><TD width=94></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>


According to your facts 72% of the people polled want us out within 2 years or less. Its a full year until the election now. Ron Pual says he couldnt withdraw all troops in less than 3 month's time. That means that 72% of the people polled on your site Agree with his timetable.

Now were werent Talking about him but why we lost the previous elections. You guys say it wasn't becuase of the war, but it had a great deal to do with it. Most republicans that stayed home did so becuase of the Fiscal ineptitude of the then current congress and president. The war has cost us over $500 billion. It was a huge contributing factor. If Bush wanted support from his Fiscal base he should have cut a lot of pork if he still wanted the war to go on.


Madbomber

[TeenageRepublican]

:roar::roar::roar:
:icon133:

Nice try, Garlic! Ron Paul is pro-amnesty. I won't support that either. It's either Fred Thompson for me or Constitutionalist.

What about Tancredo?

[Beowulf]

What about Tancredo?

TR, long ago I said I would support Tancredo because of his stance against illegals. I still would if he were nominated. Problem is, he's kind of faded out. In a way, it's not bad. He's one firm Conservative vote in Congress and we need every one of those we can get.

[Rhino]

According to your facts 72% of the people polled want us out within 2 years or less.That isn't what you said. You said "Over 70% of the US population is against the war now". That is a far cry from wanting the troops to come home in two years. I'd like them to come home in two years too, but I'm not against the war. You're just trying to manipulate the data to support your assertion. Unfortunately for you, the data refutes what you said.

Its a full year until the election now. Ron Pual says he couldnt withdraw all troops in less than 3 month's time. That means that 72% of the people polled on your site Agree with his timetable.Three months is very different than two years. Also, Paul wants us out whether we are successful or not. Polls show that the public would like us to win first.

Most republicans that stayed home did so becuase of the Fiscal ineptitude of the then current congress and president.From what I've seen, immigration was the main issue, and I agree with that.

[Madbomber]

That isn't what you said. You said "Over 70% of the US population is against the war now". That is a far cry from wanting the troops to come home in two years. I'd like them to come home in two years too, but I'm not against the war. You're just trying to manipulate the data to support your assertion. Unfortunately for you, the data refutes what you said.

Over 70% of the country want us to leave within 2 years or less. Nothing in that question said anything about "winning" Which we already have done. You and your cronies are just crusaders that can never be satisfied until they are all dead. (Its not a very christian attitude since the only way you will be satisfied is if we continue a war. But there are a lot of people out there pretending to be christian arent there.)

Three months is very different than two years. Also, Paul wants us out whether we are successful or not. Polls show that the public would like us to win first.

We already have won in Iraq. The objectives that we had when we set out to do it have been accomplished in Iraq. Saddam is dead. there were no WMDs, and as a bonus the Iraqis have a democratic government. Now its thier turn to defend it. There is no way Paul could be in the possition to end the war for another 13 months, add 3 months into the timeline for withdrawl and you get 16 months which falls in the middle of the current 1-2 year withdrawl rage on the poll, quit spinning. People saying they want out in 2 years or less mean 2 years or less from now and you know it.

From what I've seen, immigration was the main issue, and I agree with that.

It was a culmination of many issues. Yes, Immigration had a lot to do with it too. Do you have an opinion on why we have so many troops defending several countries throughout the world and yet have none on our borders protecting us? The idea that we are safer with our troops protecting someone else while our borders are wide ass open is flawed.


Madbomber

[Rhino]

Over 70% of the country want us to leave within 2 years or less.Which, as I pointed out, was not what you originally claimed.

Nothing in that question said anything about "winning"...Exactly. Since polls indicate that most Americans want us to win first, most of that 72% was probably thinking along those lines. That's one of the problems with taking polls so literally. The questions are most often too vague to be able to glean meaningful conclusions from them.

...Which we already have done.Maybe according to your definition, but not according to that of most Americans.

You and your cronies are just crusaders that can never be satisfied until they are all dead.:lol: You might want to try reading some of my previous posts before sticking your foot so far into your mouth.

We already have won in Iraq. The objectives that we had when we set out to do it have been accomplished in Iraq. Saddam is dead. there were no WMDs, and as a bonus the Iraqis have a democratic government. Now its thier turn to defend it.They can't yet. That was one of the goals that you apparently overlooked, so we haven't won yet. However, we are getting much closer, which is very good.

There is no way Paul could be in the possition to end the war for another 13 months, add 3 months into the timeline for withdrawl and you get 16 months which falls in the middle of the current 1-2 year withdrawl rage on the poll, quit spinning.He wants to leave without winning, which is contrary to what most Americans want. And since I have already pointed that out, it is you that is spinning.

People saying they want out in 2 years or less mean 2 years or less from now and you know it.True. I want us out in that timeframe too, but not without victory. Wanting us out of Iraq and abandoning Iraq are two different things. Paul wants to abandon Iraq, and you are futily trying to twist that poll to support him, when it simply does not.

It was a culmination of many issues. Yes, Immigration had a lot to do with it too. Do you have an opinion on why we have so many troops defending several countries throughout the world and yet have none on our borders protecting us?I have several.

1. It's against the law.

2. We don't have enough of them.

3. Congress won't support it.

The idea that we are safer with our troops protecting someone else while our borders are wide ass open is flawed.The idea that our troops can only be used for one thing at a time is flawed.

[Madbomber]

Which, as I pointed out, was not what you originally claimed.

What I said originally was that there was no way in hell that someone that wanted to continue the war could win. Why? Becuase 70% of the people wanted us out, and according to your own site 72% of the people DO want us out within the first year of the next presidency (49% want us out before then) These people are not going to vote for someone that insists that we need to stay there.

Exactly. Since polls indicate that most Americans want us to win first, most of that 72% was probably thinking along those lines.

Prove to me how you know what the people being polled were *probably* thinking.

That's one of the problems with taking polls so literally. The questions are most often too vague to be able to glean meaningful conclusions from them.

Nice, now that you see that your own poll doesnt support you youre going to discount it.


You might want to try reading some of my previous posts before sticking your foot so far into your mouth.

Im not sticking my foot in my mouth, only defending my possition. The people that stick thier foots in their mouths are the ones that's only recourse is name calling. Which I noticed your moderators dont seem to care about and participate in. What are your standards for mods? Foaming at the mouth religious fanatics?

They can't yet. That was one of the goals that you apparently overlooked, so we haven't won yet. However, we are getting much closer, which is very good.

that is thier problem, they have been dragging thier feet for years now, its time to stand up on thier own.

He wants to leave without winning, which is contrary to what most Americans want. And since I have already pointed that out, it is you that is spinning.

We have already won.

True. I want us out in that timeframe too, but not without victory. Wanting us out of Iraq and abandoning Iraq are two different things. Paul wants to abandon Iraq, and you are futily trying to twist that poll to support him, when it simply does not.

We have already won. (this is getting old isnt it.) We have provided the Iraqis ample opportunity to get it together, if they havent that is thier own fualt not ours.

I have several.

1. It's against the law.

Mind posting the law that says we are responsible for protecting the rest of the world?

2. We don't have enough of them.

We have enough tropps to secure our borders, they are just off protecting others at the moment.

3. Congress won't support it.

Probably right there.

The idea that our troops can only be used for one thing at a time is flawed.

The idea that a person can be in two places at one time is also flawed. Also, Our troops deserve a rest do you know that the ammount of time a solder can be deployed now is 15 months straight, A year and 3 months away from his or her families. Bring them home.


Madbomber

[Rhino]

What I said originally was that there was no way in hell that someone that wanted to continue the war could win. Why? Becuase 70% of the people wanted us out, and according to your own site 72% of the people DO want us out within the first year of the next presidency (49% want us out before then) These people are not going to vote for someone that insists that we need to stay there.Already refuted.

Prove to me how you know what the people being polled were *probably* thinking.You can't. That was my point. You apparently seem to think you can, though.

Nice, now that you see that your own poll doesnt support you youre going to discount it.As I said, other polls do. Some of them are at that link. The number wanting us to leave Iraq before it is stable is far less than 70%. It's in the 50s.

Im not sticking my foot in my mouth, only defending my possition. The people that stick thier foots in their mouths are the ones that's only recourse is name calling.You attributed a position to me that I not only never stated, but that I have opposed. That's sticking your foot in your mouth. It also highlights the fact that truth isn't important to you in making your arguments. Of course, all this tap dancing you're doing in an attempt to deny the fact that you were proven wrong, was already evidence enough of that.

Which I noticed your moderators dont seem to care about and participate in. What are your standards for mods? Foaming at the mouth religious fanatics?You forgot sharp teeth. And I seem to recall that you have engaged in plenty of name calling as well. You're also free to leave any time you want, if you dislike us so much.

that is thier problem, they have been dragging thier feet for years now, its time to stand up on thier own.I don't think they have been dragging their feet that much, but yes there are a number of areas that they need to be making more progress on. That still doesn't mean we should abandon them. You seem to overlook the fact that democratic government is a totally new concept to those people. Many things that seem axiomatic to us, are completely alien to them, so in many instances we could be using a scorecard that isn't really applicable. But they are making progress, and we shouldn't abandon them as long as they are. I have always had doubts about their ability to sustain the democracy long term, but we committed to it and we are there. Abandoning our commitments would have implications that reach far beyond Iraq.

We have already won.In your opinion, yes. I already know that.

We have already won. (this is getting old isnt it.)Yes, it is.

We have provided the Iraqis ample opportunity to get it together, if they havent that is thier own fualt not ours.I disagree. Not about fault, because it isn't an issue of fault. I disagree that they've had more than enough time.

Mind posting the law that says we are responsible for protecting the rest of the world?We were talking about the border. It's called the Posse Comitatus Act.

We have enough tropps to secure our borders, they are just off protecting others at the moment.Moot point since we can't use them for that.

The idea that a person can be in two places at one time is also flawed.I wasn't speaking of one person. We have more than one person in the military.

Also, Our troops deserve a rest do you know that the ammount of time a solder can be deployed now is 15 months straight, A year and 3 months away from his or her families. Bring them home.No argument that they deserve a rest, but the overwhelming majority of them don't want to come home without finishing the job.

[The_Elucidator]

Im not sticking my foot in my mouth, only defending my possition. The people that stick thier foots in their mouths are the ones that's only recourse is name calling. Which I noticed your moderators dont seem to care about and participate in. What are your standards for mods? Foaming at the mouth religious fanatics?


Foaming at the mouth religious fanatics? Yeppers! And proud of it! This ain't yer daddy's, roll over in the fetal position, turn the other cheek religious fanatics anymore! These "religious fanatics" as you put it, are tired of liberal, atheistic, pro-homo, anti-military, anti-christian, anti-semite, blame America for everything trolls like yourself forcing their way into every fabric of our lives. You invade a conservative board promoting a nutjob candidate who is an OBVIOUS anti-semite and all of a sudden when we fight back we get our own religion thrown in our faces. Not anymore skippy! The fact that Rhino, Doc, Homes, Suzie and DF have "allowed" you to pollute this forum is a tribute to their complete respect for the 1st A. That is something you won't find on many of the Nazi boards that DO support Ron Paul.

[Maggie_T]

:claps::claps::claps:

Well, at least the first part of his name describes MADbomber to a T. :rolleyes:

Ron Paul makes Howard Dean seem reasonable and dignified by comparison.

[Timberwolf]

Ummmm...not to nitpick MADbomber, but you said:

Look I understand that you guys all want the war to continue and all but lets be honest here, Over 70% of the US population is against the war now.
That's not true and has been shown to you more than once. You need to quit drinking so much kool-aid, it ain't good fer ya.

[garlicguy]

You need to quit drinking so much kool-aid, it ain't good fer ya.

As is often the case, Tw, you are spot-on!

But the occasional shot of Jameison's can do wonders for a soul, especially if swilled right after shouting, "Remember the Alamo!"

:D

gg:cowboy: