Open thread: The last Fred-less GOP debate; Update: Huckabee clashes with Paul over the surge; Update: GOP candidates smack Fred; Update: Rudy defends his personal life
posted at 8:30 pm on September 5, 2007 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | regular view
Eight elephants in a room and another who isn’t. The only one likely to mention Fred is Huckabee, who’s been knocking him regularly of late to try to boost his profile as a social con alternative. Count on a video highlight or two here later; the obligatory “Fred announces on Leno’s couch” clip will get its own post shortly after midnight. (FYI, the taping’s over and he’s already made it official.) Standard rules apply — if you’re watching and you see something, say something.
Some reading while we wait. Carl Cameron, who contributed to today’s earlier Fox News bombshell about Fred and who called the world’s attention to the fact that he rode around the Iowa state fair in a golf cart, kicks off the coverage tonight by noting how pissed the New Hampshire Republicans are at him for skipping the debate. Rush Limbaugh piles on by smacking Fred for devaluing the office of the presidency by announcing on Leno, an odd gripe for someone as media savvy as he is. Meanwhile, the last guy to announce on Leno takes a hard look at the electoral master stroke the GOP is trying to pull off in his state and comes out against it, naturally. And Rudy’s campaign trumpets the fact that he’s locked up Robert Duvall’s endorsement, which is somehow viscerally, if not logically, impressive, even if it does possibly reinforce the increasingly poisonous image of the party as “very old-fashioned, very old and not in touch with the realities of today’s society.”
I’ll leave you with Hillary’s awful new cookie-cutter ad about “change” with “experience.” It’s good at moments like these to remember the big differences with the other side.
Update: Brit wasn’t going to let them dodge the elephant in the room. Here’s the very first question of the night, preceded by a transparent slap at Fred ducking the debate by the head of the New Hampshire GOP.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 ... 5 6 7 8 Next »
Huckabee brings up Steven Colbert. Oy.
amerpundit on September 5, 2007 at 11:12 PM
cadetwithchips2,
Those would be Country Club liberals.
Buy Danish on September 5, 2007 at 11:13 PM
So… a virtual tiger… or a paperless tiger?
Discuss
cadetwithchips2 on September 5, 2007 at 11:13 PM
Don’t disabuse them of their illusions; I don’t want them leaving their parents’ basements to actually vote for Dhimmitude.
steveegg on September 5, 2007 at 11:13 PM
wow Mitt bombed today. he may win Iowa, but if he loses in NH he is likely done.
The Sinner on September 5, 2007 at 11:14 PM
ROFL, though shouldn’t that be “internet photon tiger”?
steveegg on September 5, 2007 at 11:14 PM
No actually they don’t.
doriangrey on September 5, 2007 at 11:16 PM
LOL Man, we such DORKS!
cadetwithchips2 on September 5, 2007 at 11:17 PM
Hah! ROTFL Ok – mum’s the word :-D
RD on September 5, 2007 at 11:17 PM
we’re^
cadetwithchips2 on September 5, 2007 at 11:17 PM
Heh. That’s funny. I used to live right there. Went to grad school in Hamilton.
And, yeah. Country Club. Not that there’s anything wrong with that.
nailinmyeye on September 5, 2007 at 11:18 PM
Gulliani and Fred are still my choices.
-Mccain I like what he has said recently but his past idiocy I just cannot shake out of my head.
-Romney Not only is he the pretty Repub canadate summon the browney guy logo he just sounds to much like a clinton finger in the wind BS canadite
-Hukabee like him on the Fair tax ideal thats it he has NO chance short VP
-Hunter Fuckin Aaaaa man I feel you 100% on the GWOT but unfortunately I doubt you have a chance short maybe a slim VP shot
-Tacreneo ahh he is a one issue canadite Immigration, short of that he doesn’t even exist. His one regretted “threaten to nuke Mekka if they attack agaiin” idea being the exeption.
-Paul I like the small government and domestic ideology but to me the SOLE REASON and I mean SOLE reason we pay taxes as per constitution is keep our little corner or box safe and protect our interest around the world hence a military. That means if 3rd world f*ck balls want to throw we show them why they should consider some other nation ALA Barber Wars back in the founders days. F*ck with US die like the Rest. Of course if I was pres that Iraqi oil would be free flowing to the US as occupation payment until they get their sh*t together enough to control their own radicals. But hey I am old school…
C-Low on September 5, 2007 at 11:18 PM
It doesn’t matter, they just like texting.
infidel4life on September 5, 2007 at 11:19 PM
Sorry ’bout that – I knew what you meant :-)
RD on September 5, 2007 at 11:19 PM
Fred who? In my book he was out months ago. The real surprise of the evening for me was *gasp* McCain who came off much stronger than I’ve seen him in years. Rudy needs to find a reference point other than his years of experience managing NYC. Mitt took some hits both in questions, and struggling with answers. Tancredo seemed nervous as a wh0re in church. And Paul? Well, he can be Fred’s running mate for all the chance either of them have.
thedecider on September 5, 2007 at 11:19 PM
Technically it should be “+3h !|\|73|2|\|3+Z |o4|o3|2 7163|2!!!oneone1111!!!” but noone wants to bother with the netspeak employed by the average Ron Paul voter.
BKennedy on September 5, 2007 at 11:19 PM
he is a true reagan republican, peace threw strength. You got to remember he was reagans go to guy on the star wars program. Reagan sent him to europe to convince our allies of the benefits of strong missle defense. 27 years on the armed services committee and chairing it for 4.
Hunter for President
CaptainObvious on September 5, 2007 at 11:20 PM
Biggest winner tonight. Fox news and their grownup commentators
William Amos on September 5, 2007 at 11:21 PM
Some tough questions all around… no one came out unscathed. And thats a good thing!
cadetwithchips2 on September 5, 2007 at 11:24 PM
While I really like Hunter sadly he just doesn’t have a chance. Thompson/Hunter would be a great ticket.
doriangrey on September 5, 2007 at 11:24 PM
Hey, look: Paul is still winning.
Question: Have the Paulites started using their parents’ cell phones yet?
At the same time, the people who can’t cheat (monitored while turning the dials), didn’t approve of Paul. Hmm.
amerpundit on September 5, 2007 at 11:25 PM
In the update section on Rudy, he gave a really great response. Again, I’m starting to tire of hearing his time managing NYC used again and again. Not that they aren’t relevant, and not that he didn’t do a very good job – just saying we need a new subject or experience for him to draw from in response to questions.
thedecider on September 5, 2007 at 11:26 PM
This is the natural byproduct of a 20-month Presidential campaign season
cadetwithchips2 on September 5, 2007 at 11:27 PM
You didn’t miss the talking snowman?!?!
infidel4life on September 5, 2007 at 11:30 PM
Go Tanc!
infidel4life on September 5, 2007 at 11:30 PM
I wonder how long it will be before they start implementing some kind of caller ID single vote per ID checking system and kicking out the multiple votes?
doriangrey on September 5, 2007 at 11:31 PM
Colmes is such a fool.
infidel4life on September 5, 2007 at 11:32 PM
Hunter won his house seat in a 70 % democratic district in Sandiego. he has already announced he is giving up his seat (hopefully taken over by his 2 iraq tour 1 afghanistan tour marine son). The media has been feeding the top three rinos in one way or another for a reason. A full fledged conservative with 27 years of consistant conservative principles getting out to the base would be a disaster for their goal of ridding us of conservativism. Im not giving up. This race is too important to allow the MSM to dictate what is best for this country
CaptainObvious on September 5, 2007 at 11:33 PM
As opposed to Rudy who can’t go 60 seconds without bringing up 9/11 or NYC, or Romney who can’t take a stance and maintain it for 60 seconds.
But you go ahead and underestimate him- it’ll be that much sweeter when your dreams are crushed and Fred wins the nomination.
Hollowpoint on September 5, 2007 at 11:34 PM
So true.
thedecider on September 5, 2007 at 11:35 PM
Wow, Fox is pissed that Fred didn’t participate. They just can’t let it go.
Hollowpoint on September 5, 2007 at 11:37 PM
I read that initially as “Paul is still whining.”
baldilocks on September 5, 2007 at 11:37 PM
Fred is more of the same. His record is terrible with regards to immigration no matter what he feeds in lip service. and his hiring of Abrams was a coffin in my view.
CaptainObvious on September 5, 2007 at 11:37 PM
You Fredheads are starting to sound like the Paulites.
csdeven on September 5, 2007 at 11:38 PM
I live in San Diego and have voted for him 4 times, so its not that I am giving up on him, I just don’t think he is getting the traction to be electable as POTUS. However he would get the traction were he to serve either 4 or 8 years as VP first, then Duncan would be a force to be reckoned with.
doriangrey on September 5, 2007 at 11:40 PM
Abraham. sorry its past my bedtime
CaptainObvious on September 5, 2007 at 11:40 PM
Ron Paul took up that slack
William Amos on September 5, 2007 at 11:41 PM
And you have sounded like a kos kiddy about Fred from day one.
doriangrey on September 5, 2007 at 11:41 PM
Live by the exclusive, die by the exclusive.
steveegg on September 5, 2007 at 11:42 PM
TOOFER ALERT!
steveegg on September 5, 2007 at 11:43 PM
Ron Paul: THERE’S NO PROOF THAT IRAN IS FUNDING AND SUPPLYING IEDs TO KILL OUR GUYS! If we leave them alone they’ll give us a puppy! Raaawwrrr.
Hollowpoint on September 5, 2007 at 11:45 PM
Well you know I would have loved to see Fred’s awesome platform for the country but it appears he had pressing business with his longtime Hollyweird friend Jay Leno, and couldn’t be bothered to show up and talk to the people of NH or the Republican Primary Voters.
BKennedy on September 5, 2007 at 11:46 PM
Here’s the problem I’m having. A few years back, when Alan Keyes had ALREADY announced his candidacy and wanted to get in on the debates, they wouldn’t let him. Now Thompson, who hadn’t even announced before this debate is getting creamed because he’s not ready to appear in a debate yet. Obviously, the difference is that Thompson has a better shot at getting the nomination than Keyes, but for the life of me I can’t see how anyone can claim Thompson is DEVALUING the office of the Presidency by waiting until the next debate.
eclark1849 on September 5, 2007 at 11:46 PM
Game over, man. Game over!
steveegg on September 5, 2007 at 11:48 PM
By the following comment, it appears the Fred groupies think that poll means something also.
When are we gonna purge the conservative movement of clowns like this?
csdeven on September 5, 2007 at 11:49 PM
Well you see, there is this group of political internet bogsphere junkies, and like see they think everyone should do exactly what they tell them to. And yes Rush falls into the group…
doriangrey on September 5, 2007 at 11:51 PM
thats the problem he doesnt have a platform. what has he come out and said he will do as POTUS? Hes great at giving platitudes but not one thing has he given specifics. cant remember the author but even one of the townhall regulars has commented to this effect.
CaptainObvious on September 5, 2007 at 11:51 PM
As soon as you leave????
doriangrey on September 5, 2007 at 11:52 PM
What excuse will you use when after spending far less time and money Fred goes on to win and the $31 million dollar man who’s lived almost exclusively in IA and NH falls flat? You might want to keep the suicide hotline number handy.
Hollowpoint on September 5, 2007 at 11:52 PM
AMEN!! Not only that, he couldn’t be bothered to allow the American public an opportunity to have his opinions (whatever they are?) debated. Fred is out! Tell you what…save this thread to your internet favorites and wait a few weeks when all these Fredheads suddenly start to sour on their favorite candidate. It’s just a matter of time. You know that.
thedecider on September 5, 2007 at 11:54 PM
No seriously you want other top behave in a manner that you absolutely refuse to? How hypocritical is that…
doriangrey on September 5, 2007 at 11:55 PM
Fred was completely marginalize tonight. His announcement will be anti climatic and he will spend the next few days explaining why he skipped the debate, why his campaign staff is falling apart, and why he is soft on immigration.
That puts him on the path to drop out of the race and funnel his cash to his family. Just like he did in his last non-campaign for the senate.
csdeven on September 5, 2007 at 11:57 PM
That won’t happen because Fred’s numbers are all fluff and pomp. He is leeching off the idea that we “don’t have any good candidates.” As soon as he enters the fray his poll numbers will plummet because he will no longer be a great hypothetical, he’ll just be the most mediocre late announcer/debate dodger in election history.
If Fred removes his mystique as the unknown hope, he has no shot of winning. Announcing the day after a debate in which he placed an ad directly before is likely the last damning move in a campaign that was falling apart before it officially started.
I imagine Chuck Norris would poll at 18% if anyone seriously believed he might be running for president.
And so what if Mitt is spending money. Do I care? I’m not a fan of class envy. Every dollar Mitt raises and spends is his to do as he pleases.
BKennedy on September 5, 2007 at 11:57 PM
Please take your instant gratification blogsphere political junky goggles off and remember that in spite of this campaign starting a full year early the average vote isn’t paying any attention yet, and wont for a couple more months.
doriangrey on September 5, 2007 at 11:58 PM
Looks like Sean is lining up to give Fred another tongue bath.
csdeven on September 5, 2007 at 11:59 PM
Fred! on the Leno show: “I’m running for President of the United States!”
RD on September 6, 2007 at 12:00 AM
So speaketh the head clown…When are you going to start behaving the way you demand everyone else behave?
doriangrey on September 6, 2007 at 12:01 AM
Anyway, Mitt did pretty well for being the big target tonight. I’m glad to see him falter a bit, as all growth comes from adversity.
Rudy was hammered pretty hard and I thought he was better prepared than Mitt was.
Hunter sounded good.
Huckabee is starting to rely on his folksy little sayings way too much. He was stumbling pretty good a couple times.
Brownback. Done.
Ron Paul. Loon
Tanc was very knowledgeable, but I think he bombed on the Iraq pull out issue.
McCain did fairly well, but as Luntz pointed out, his increase in support was on image and not substance. He still has the shamnesty and CFR bills hanging around his neck.
Over all, Mitt under performed. Rudy was OK. McCain did OK. Huckabee did worse than I expected. The rest do not matter.
csdeven on September 6, 2007 at 12:08 AM
csdeven,
I thought you said you were going to change your tune after Fred announced his candidacy…?
RushBaby on September 6, 2007 at 12:09 AM
Fred!’s line going into commercial break: “…and I’ll tell you something else: It’s a lot more difficult to get on the Tonight Show than it is to get into a Presidential debate.”
RD on September 6, 2007 at 12:09 AM
I could’ve swore it was (and I’m paraphrasing), “I’ll change my tune if Fred? won the nomination (over my steamrolled body).”
steveegg on September 6, 2007 at 12:11 AM
haha you’re probably right, steveegg
RushBaby on September 6, 2007 at 12:13 AM
Well first of all, dorian, I’m hardly a “political junky” but do consider myself an average voter. I see in your marvelous Fred a man afraid to enter the fray and have his opinions and ideals fully debated as the real men (Ron Paul excluded) of this campaign have been willing to do. Yet even the ridiculous Ron Paul had more courage than your would-be hero. Yes this debate began early. Using that as an excuse to forgive Fred of his curious absence places you at a disadvantage since he really hasn’t presented anything of substance, and his ideals (whatever they may be) have not had the opportunity to stand up to real scrutiny such as tonight’s debate would have offered. I stand by it – in a few weeks you will have scorn for your dear Fred.
thedecider on September 6, 2007 at 12:15 AM
I never said I was going to turn into a Fred groupie. But I have removed the “?” from his name (and the “!” from Mitts name) and actually capitalize his name.
He still has all the issues I mentioned that he will have to answer for, just like I demand from Rudy, Mitt, and the rest. Of course the issues I focus on will be the real ones and not what shoes he is wearing today.
csdeven on September 6, 2007 at 12:20 AM
I gotta admit that this Leno appearance wasn’t Fred’s best performance- he looked a little uncomfortable. His message was solid, but the delivery needed work.
Hollowpoint on September 6, 2007 at 12:25 AM
Nope. I will vote for him if he gets the nomination. He had to announce and then I’ll give him the same credibility I give the other candidates. But I don’t have to like Brownback, Paul, McCain, or Fred. At least he finally announced. But in the same act, he snubs the debate and the NH voters.
Not smart and is probably an indication that his organization has no clue what they are doing.
csdeven on September 6, 2007 at 12:26 AM
As long as he remains unable to debate his competitors, it’s unlikely he’ll ever get the nomination. Tell me, do you know what his campaign platform is? Do you know where he really stands on important issues? No? Neither does the rest of America.
thedecider on September 6, 2007 at 12:31 AM
The last 2 winners of the NH primary in a contested year haven’t gone on to take the nomination.
On the other hand, “gaming” the debate is a one-trick pony, and that was already played by the Thompson team.
It will be an interesting 5 months until Super-Duper Oversized Tuesday. Since I don’t see a single candidate sweeping Iowa, the increasingly-irrelevant New Hampshire, and Florida, that’s going to be the nomination.
steveegg on September 6, 2007 at 12:37 AM
Ron Paul 2008!
RightWinged on September 6, 2007 at 12:43 AM
I’m going to bed, just hoping AP gets a 700+ post and doing my best to achieve that end.
Thanks for the forum tonight. It was fun.
VolMagic on September 6, 2007 at 12:43 AM
FYI that was totally a joke, intended to excite the few Paulites who think they may have turned me…
Anyway, just catching the debate on DVR and laughed my ass off at Wallace asking Paul if he’s saying we should take our marching orders from Al Qaeda.
RightWinged on September 6, 2007 at 12:47 AM
I would *virtually* shake your hand. Thanks.
RushBaby on September 6, 2007 at 12:47 AM
Well, we’re at 667. Good night.
Oops, better make that 668 (at least) as I take my leave.
steveegg on September 6, 2007 at 12:49 AM
The numbers game is always disgusting and pointless, but what is Paul talking about when he says we’ve lost over 5,000 Americans in Iraq and Afghanistan?
RightWinged on September 6, 2007 at 12:53 AM
That was about the time I started to unleash a string of expletives on the Dhimm Toofer, but methinks he wanted us to take our lumps of 9/11 (and the Cole, and the 1998 embassy bombings, and a couple of bombings in Saudi Arabia, and the 1993 WTC bombing, and Saddam’s attempt on GHWB) without punching back.
steveegg on September 6, 2007 at 12:57 AM
Who can say? What are the other conspiracy idiots talking about when they quote 400K Iraqi’s have died because we’re in Iraq? Where do any of these numbers come from? I suspect there’s an anti-military; anti-American website they get these numbers from. Just fyi…I hear it’s a site called the daily kos. Don’t know…just sayin’…
thedecider on September 6, 2007 at 12:58 AM
In case anyone missed it (like I did):
I ‘DVRed’ the whole thing and uploaded it to VEOH
where you can view and/or download it (180Mb .wmv file).
Only got to see a few minutes of it myself, so far. From the little I saw, Hunter and Tancredo both looked good. Mitt and Guliani didn’t seem as good as in previous debates. Might have to change my mind when I get to watch it all though.
LegendHasIt on September 6, 2007 at 1:00 AM
Other than Ron Paul (the village idiot) this debate was different from the last one FOX hosted. Interestingly, McCain made a much stronger showing this time. Romney and Rudy came off looking weaker. Tancredo was too nervous this time.
thedecider on September 6, 2007 at 1:19 AM
Well, first off… I’m not sure where the 400k came from, because it used to be 650k… either way, those numbers and the “study” that came up with them have been completely debunked. I feel that the left-wing “Iraq body count” is even high at 78k, but it shows just how ridiculous the Lancet study figures are. Anyway, Paul pulled the 5k Americans dead figure out of his ass, at least these “hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis” folks are getting them from somewhere.. again, it’s bogus, but at least they heard it somewhere… WTF was Paul talking about? Side point: Of those 78k dead in Iraq, how many are actually “innocent” and how many are jihadists, militia, and those involved in civil war… and how many were killed by other Iraqis and terrorists!?
RightWinged on September 6, 2007 at 1:21 AM
Paul:
“We ought to be talking about ‘how do ya get along with some people that are deadly?’!”
lol… wtf!?
RightWinged on September 6, 2007 at 1:28 AM
That 400k came out of the same place the 650k did (namely, their cowpie holes).
As for the 5k, the toofer is at least close, if one rounds up to the nearest thousand. If memory serves, the KIA in Iraq is somewhere around 3,300, with the KIA in Afghanistan somewhere around 1,200 (and that’s over 4 and 6 years of combat operations respectively).
steveegg on September 6, 2007 at 1:41 AM
After watching the debate and the 15 min vid on Fred08, I think I am leaning to Fred.
He has the presidential look and feel.
1. He is strong on defense
2. right on 2nd amendment
3. prolife
4. looks down on the clintons
5. he looks the part
He now needs a debate finalize it for me.
Dersu on September 6, 2007 at 1:58 AM
The number comes from whichever extreme ideology supports the extreme ideology they want to portray and support. It’s all irrelevant and factless. They are first and foremost Bush-haters and don’t care if America fails. That’s all we really need to understand.
thedecider on September 6, 2007 at 1:59 AM
Being mayor of NYC is more akin to being a punching bag.
mylegsareswollen on September 6, 2007 at 2:09 AM
Yeah, but when you’re talking about a number in the 4,000s, who the hell rounds “to the nearest thousand”? I’m not insinuating you would, just pointing out how dumb that would be. Further, if I recall, Paul said “over 5,000″. I suspect his campaign staffers have been pulling figures from Truther sites for him to repeat.
Wrong. They care whether or not America fails… They desperately WANT America to fail. They are running on nothing outside of praying for negativity on all fronts, in hopes that people will vote Republicans out, rather than truly voting Dems in. The only thing Dems have promised are tax hikes (which they’ll deliver on) and universal health care (which is par for the course in the Dem campaign promise game… it’s all about saying whatever will get them elected). Democrats want anything and everything to go badly for our country, because it’s the only way they stand a chance of winning. I’m sure people even here will act like I’m some sort of extremist in saying this, but if anyone has paid attention over the past couple years, and is honest about it, it’s quite clear that this is the case.
RightWinged on September 6, 2007 at 2:41 AM
Wow, what a lacking debate. I am more disenchanted and disgruntled about this field than I have ever before, this coming from someone who has liked what he’s heard in other debates and liked a number of the candidates. But my two favorites, Romney and Giuliani, both had terrible nights and I feel real iffy on both of them. And other than McCain and Tancredo (and Paul but let’s pretend he’s not there) I felt like I being served BS and fluff the entire time. Not something unusual with politicians, but tonight it was very revealing and a very sad development. On Iraq, I didn’t particularly like what I heard. The general state of the debate within that, of finding a viable exit strategy, etc. really rubbed me the wrong way. Romney (almost sounding like a moderate democrat) and Huckabee (”mistake,” “broke” thing we need to fix) particularly on Iraq really bothered me. And it wasn’t put in context of the global war against islamofascism (a word, btw, never used, Giuliani’s “islamic terrorism” was the only thing close) as much as I would have liked. McCain’s answer in that context was the best answer of anyone of the night by far. And on immigration, I didn’t feel comfortable with any of what the leading candidates were saying.
I don’t think anyone other than McCain had a good night. The focus group was dead on in that he was about the only guy up there exhibiting leadership, conviction, and maturity. But sadly of course, as many of you have already noted, as a conservative voter he isn’t viable and can never be.
To elaborate more on Romney and Giuliani’s nights, first off both had the toughest questions (especially Romney) and both didn’t do too well at answering them for the most part. A particularly disturbing theme I’m noticing is Romney’s push to the middle, with the moderated stance on Iraq, Iran, having a global test, wanting be united with the democrats, etc. just really isn’t what I’m looking to hear. I’m looking for bold, conservative, Reaganesque leadership, not Baker-Hamilton crap. And sadly I believe most of this is deliberate posturing decided by him and his handlers in an effort to become more “electable” in a national election in their view. Dead wrong.
On Giuliani, like others noted, is too stuck in his canned answers about what he did in NYC. It’s tiresome, shallow, and unnecessary. Not only this, but the main reason I’ve been attracted to Rudy is because of his hawkish foreign policy. I didn’t hear much from him tonight in that regard that separates him from anyone else. Very disappointing.
So what’s a conservative like me to do? I’ve always liked Romney and Giuliani and have defended them against attacks from the right, but I’m starting to feel blase and dissapointed in both. I like what I hear from McCain, but can’t trust him at this point after his history. And Thompson to me is an old, lazy, empty suit, a candidate likely to fizzle after being exposed. But at this point, one has to hope he’s more, right? For the first time I’m starting to see why so many have been looking for someone else. We’ll see.
Patriot33 on September 6, 2007 at 2:43 AM
Ugh, I read about it at nut job sites, but just seeing the H&C reairring… Ron Paul, according to the stupid text messaging poll, stomped everyone in the debate… The nuts are going wild with this, all over the internet, while ignoring the fact that this couldn’t be less scientific and couldn’t be more stupid. It’s not a “poll”, it’s a “whoever wants to waste money text message bombing, wins!”. It’s f**king pathetic, and Ron Paul people disgust me. Their dishonesty is disgusting. Not just the fact that these idiots run around the internet with this crap, but that a few hundred of these losers have these little text parties to mislead people in to believing that Paul is any kind of real candidate… even worse, Fox News puts this sh** on the screen! What the hell is wrong with them? Ugh, this crap is so annoying.
Okay Fox, we get it, you’re hip because you know what “text messaging is”, we don’t need to have the GOP embarrassed for you to prove it. It’s as pathetic as Kos, etc. sending their readers to online MSNBC polls and then posting the following day that 90%+ Americans want Bush impeached (yes, this happened a couple years ago).
RightWinged on September 6, 2007 at 2:46 AM
Heh. lol….wtf!? is the perfect response to anything Paul says. Just imagine how great it would have been if Hume or Wallace had laughed and said wtf!? after Paul said something during the debate.
forged rite on September 6, 2007 at 2:54 AM
Fred & Tank…, Fred & Huck…, Fred & Donald Duck… Just give me Fred and someone who’ll stay out of his way when he’s right, won’t embarrass him, and cares more about the nation than his ego inflation.
Honestly…, I’d like to see Keyes and Rice nominated, elected and successful in the White House, just to put an end to the Liberal lies about Republicans being the ones who wouldn’t EVER nominate or elect a Black, a woman, a Homosexual or a Muslim…, based on that status alone. I’d love to prove to the world that the lying Left are the racists, sexists and homophobes… I can dream.
It seems we get accused of the very things the Liberal DO and the stupid / dishonest half of the population take it all in at face value… I’m sick of that. I’d vote for a Black, Lesbian, Muslim woman with conservative values, including a love of America and respect for the Constitution over ANY Liberal Democrat, regardless of his / her charisma, character or courage. A socialist is a socialist is a socialist…!
Rugged Individual on September 6, 2007 at 5:05 AM
Did you even read the thread before you posted? Seems you conveniently overlooked this comment in your zeal to attack someone you think is a Fred fan:
The real question is when are we going to purge the conservative movement of clowns like you?
Gianni on September 6, 2007 at 7:15 AM
Second best comment on the thread. The best was yours about csdeven. Thanks for that, by the way…
nailinmyeye on September 6, 2007 at 7:19 AM
Pretty much my take too. During the night I woke up and my thinking was that Rudy makes me feel safer about the terror issue than the others there. I agree that there’s something about the whole NYC thing that is getting old. It bothers me that he seems to have only that to fall back on.
As for Thompson, I’ll have to see him in few debates before I can comment.
JiangxiDad on September 6, 2007 at 7:33 AM
Huckabee’s rationale for staying in Iraq – “We broke it, so we have to pay for it” – is patently absurd.
We have to stay in Iraq because if we leave, there is a great chance that chaos will ensue, and that the situation there will become more of a danger to our national security than before we invaded. Add to that the fact that we lose lots of credibility by the perception of many countries that we’re cutting and running before the job is finished.
asc85 on September 6, 2007 at 7:41 AM
Now I’m pretty sure that Fred is off my list!!!! LOL
jeanie on September 6, 2007 at 8:11 AM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 ... 5 6 7 8 Next »