AP ‘Fact Checks’ Perry, Romney & Bachmann’s GOP Debate Claims
- Posted on September 8, 2011 at 7:13am by
Billy Hallowell
- Print »
- Email »
Editor’s Note: The following “fact checking” was conducted by the Associated Press and not The Blaze.
Above: Wednesday evening’s GOP debate (in full)
WASHINGTON (AP) — When Mitt Romney and Rick Perry thumped their chests over their job-creation records as governor during the Republican presidential debate Wednesday night, they left the bad parts out.
Yes, employment has grown by more than 1 million since Perry took office in Texas. But a lot of those jobs are not well paid.
True, unemployment dropped to 4.7 percent when Romney was Massachusetts governor. But the state‘s employment growth was among the nation’s worst.
A look at some of the claims in the debate, and how they compare with the facts (as compiled by the Associated Press):
PERRY: “Ninety-five percent of all the jobs that we’ve created have been above minimum wage.”
THE FACTS: To support the claim, the Perry campaign provided federal statistics for December 2010 showing only 5.3 percent of all jobs in Texas pay the minimum wage.
But those figures represent all workers, not just the new jobs, for which data are unavailable. And that does not account for low-wage jobs that may be barely above the minimum wage. According to the Texas Workforce Commission, 51 percent of all Texas workers make less than $33,000 a year. Only 30 percent make more than $50,000 a year. Nationally, Texas ranked 34th in median household income from 2007 to 2009.
About 9.5 percent of Texas hourly workers, excluding those who are paid salaries, earn the minimum wage or less, tying Mississippi for the highest percentage in the nation.
—
ROMNEY: “At the end of four years, we had our unemployment rate down to 4.7 percent. That’s a record I think the president would like to see. As a matter of fact, we created more jobs in Massachusetts than this president has created in the entire country.”
THE FACTS: To be sure, 4.7 percent unemployment would be a welcome figure nationally. But Romney started from a much better position than President Barack Obama did. Unemployment was only 5.6 percent when Romney took office in 2003, meaning it came down by less than 1 percentage point when he left office in 2007. Obama inherited a national unemployment rate of 7.8 percent.
—
PERRY: “Michael Dukakis created jobs three times faster than you did, Mitt.”
ROMNEY: “Well, as a matter of fact, George Bush and his predecessor created jobs at a faster rate than you did, governor.”
PERRY: “That’s not correct.”
ROMNEY: “Yes, that is correct.”
THE FACTS: Romney was correct.
Romney accurately stated that George W. Bush – even without his predecessor – saw jobs grow at a faster rate during his 1994-2000 years as governor than Perry has during his 11 years governing Texas. Employment grew by about 1.32 million during Bush’s six years in office. Employment during Perry’s years has grown about 1.2 million, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
As for Perry‘s claim about Romney’s record and that of Dukakis, he was at least in the ballpark.
Democratic Gov. Dukakis saw Massachusetts employment grow by 500,000 jobs during his two divided terms, 1975 to 1979, and 1983 to 1991, a rate of more than 41,000 jobs a year.
Romney, governor of Massachusetts from 2003 to 2007, saw employment grow from 3.23 million to 3.29 million, growth of about 60,000 jobs, or a rate of 15,000 a year. That means Dukakis‘ job growth rate was nearly three times Romney’s.
—
MICHELE BACHMANN: “Obamacare is killing jobs. We know that from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, but I know it firsthand from speaking to people. We see it this summer. There are 47 percent of African-American youth that are currently without jobs, 36 percent of Hispanic youth.”
THE FACTS: The health care law that Obama pushed and Congress passed last year has long been labeled a job killer by Republicans, who often cite a Congressional Budget Office analysis to buttress their claims. But the CBO at no point said the law would result in job losses. Instead it made the more nuanced assertion that fewer people would chose to work.
“The legislation, on net, will reduce the amount of labor used in the economy by a small amount – roughly half a percent – primarily by reducing the amount of labor that workers choose to supply,” the CBO said in an analysis. That’s not job-killing, that’s workers choosing not to work because of easier access to health care. The budget office said some people might decide to retire earlier because it would be easier to get health care, instead of waiting until they become eligible for Medicare at age 65.
The Minnesota congresswoman also states the percentages of unemployment among minority youth. But there is no evidence that the health care law is responsible for that level of unemployment. In fact, the health care law is still largely unimplemented, with some of its key provisions not taking effect until 2014.
PERRY: On global warming, “The science is not settled on this. The idea that we would put Americans‘ economy at jeopardy based on scientific theory that’s not settled yet, to me, is just, is nonsense. … Find out what the science truly is before you start putting the American economy in jeopardy.”
THE FACTS: [Note: These are the Associated Press' views on the matter.] The scientific consensus on climate change is about as settled as any major scientific issue can be. Perry’s opinion runs counter to the view of an overwhelming majority of scientists that pollution released from the burning of fossil fuels is heating up the planet. The National Academy of Sciences, in an investigation requested by Congress, concluded last year: “Climate change is occurring, is very likely caused primarily by human activities, and poses significant risks to humans and the environment.”
BACHMANN: “It’s wrong for government, whether it’s state or federal government, to impose on parents what they must do to inoculate their children.”
THE FACTS: She was correct that Perry supported mandatory immunization of girls to reduce future risks of cervical cancer, although the measure was blocked by Texas lawmakers and parents would have had some ability to file a conscientious objection to the requirement. Perry signed an executive order in 2007 directing his state health department to make the human papillomavirus vaccine available to “mandate the age-appropriate vaccination of all female children” before they enter sixth grade. Texas would have been the first state to require the immunizations.
—
PERRY: “What I find compelling is what we’ve done in the state of Texas, using our ability to regulate our clean air. We cleaned up our air in the state of Texas, more than any other state in the nation during the decade.” He specifically mentioned successes in reducing nitrous oxide emissions by 58 percent and ozone levels by 27 percent.
THE FACTS: Texas has reduced emissions as Perry described, but most of those reductions were required under the federal Clean Air Act. However, the Environmental Protection Agency recently rescinded the state’s authority to grant some air pollution permits because the state did not comply with federal regulations. Texas, home to America’s oil and gas industry, still emits more carbon dioxide – the chief greenhouse gas – than any other state in the country, according to government data. Several metropolitan areas in Texas still violate health-based limits for smog, and the county that is home to Houston is one of the biggest emitters of hazardous air pollution in the country. The Texas Legislature also passed, and Perry signed, a law that will delay enforcing stiffer clean air regulations by two years.
Popular Stories
MSNBC Host Snaps in Heated Segment: ‘What in the World Is Riskier Than Being a Poor Person in America?’ 684 Comments
Does Misstated Marathon Claim Prove Paul Ryan Is Dishonest? (POLL) 647 Comments
‘Jumah at the DNC’ Speaker: ‘Muslims Visited America Prior to Columbus’ & ‘It Was a Muslim’ Who Guided Him to the ‘New World’ 523 Comments
Obama: RNC Like Watching ‘Black-and-White TV’ Because Romney ‘Did Not Offer a Single New Idea’ 361 Comments
Roseanne Barr: Most Billionaires ‘Violent Pedophiles’ & ‘Heartless’ Cocaine Addicts 314 Comments
Faith
This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 175 Comments- Pakistani Muslim Cleric Accused of Framing Disabled Christian Girl in Koran-Burning Case Read More
- ‘Made Up Religion’: TV Historian Enrages Muslims, Receives Threats After Producing UK Documentary Questioning Islam’s Beginnings 211 Comments
Meet the Controversial German Imam Accused of Brutally Beating His Wife & Pushing Sharia Law Read More
‘Self-Proclaimed Messiah’ & Unification Church Leader the Rev. Sun Myung Moon Has Died — Here’s His Life Story Read More
Business
- Germany’s Upcoming Court Ruling Will be Huge for the EU Read More
Ford Looks to Beat Toyota for Best-Selling Car in 2012 With This Model 146 Comments
Bernanke & QE3: Here’s What You Need to Know Read More- ‘Extortion’: Why Did the Labor Department ‘Drop the Hammer’ on Oregon Farmers? 300 Comments
Scathing New Ad Capitalizes on Rep. Ryan‘s ’Fading Obama Posters’ Remark 124 Comments
Technology
- This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 175 Comments
‘TaserDrone’: Hackers Weaponize Quadcopter With Actual ‘Shocking’ Technology Read More
Ever Heard of the Wild ‘Burning Man’ Festival in the Middle of the Nev. Desert? Here’s Your Primer Read More
Stanford Develops Technology ‘Better Than Steroids’ for Athlete Recovery Read More
Have You Pretended to Know What ‘the Cloud’ Is? You’re Not Alone Read More
Submitting your tip... please wait!
Comments (393)
Juliedoesnotgiveup
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 7:58amIt was an entertaining debate to be sure. I found it funny that Romney was more of a perry cheerleader than even supporting himself. Perry did well and probably gets a bump in the polls from this. Cain came off as the new Black Ron Paul, and I liked his 9 9 9 tax plan. I did not like romney’s plan to have no taxes on people earning 200 k or less. That just creates a whole new problem of non paying tax payers. Ron Paul was definitely less crazy this debate, but not presidential. Newt kicked a$$ as usual and I wish he was more electable. I hpe perry chooses him for a cabinet position because he will be a valuable asset. Bachmann appeared weak with perry in the field and huntsman was all vague with his ideas. He kept using the keyword, our “core” needs fixing and the orange tan was annoying. Santorium was bland.
The debate was pretty tight to decide who was a real winner, but I think perry edged up of his opponents.
Report Post »zorro
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 8:44amYou summed up the night very well. Santorum is the guy I‘d like to see more of but you’re right, he was very bland.
Report Post »Islesfordian
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 9:13amI thought Romney wa saying that he would eliminate capital gains and estate taxes on those earning less than $200.000.
I actually thought Paul sounded a little MORE crazy than before. Maybe it’s just the combination of his rigid ideology and his age that makes him sound crazy. He comes accross as cranky bordering on senile.
Report Post »blue_sky
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 9:18amAP sucks.
Report Post »HERE IS MY FACT CHECK ON AP AND MEDIA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CcbNseGKegs
Gonzo
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 9:24amYou’re right, Newt would probably do the best job as president but, it’s not going to happen. The good news is…they are ALL better than Obama.
Report Post »Insuranceman
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 9:26amWhat is going on here? You are trying to reason this out . I prefer the racist anti-intellectual
comments that usually appear here, so I can feel superior to all you right wing yahoos. Let’s
step it up. Or these forums will not be relevant in the republican race.
Educator101
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 9:27amIf you check the MSNBC after debate poll you will see Ron Paul won by a landslide. He received 48% of the votes as of 8:30 this morning Thursday September 8th. That’s more votes than Romney and Perry put together. Apparently many disagree with your acessment of the debate.
Report Post »loveoursoldiers
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 9:27amHuntsman is just another pretty boy .. I never did trust pretty boys.
Report Post »Juliedoesnotgiveup
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 9:31amIsles ford, I was unsure how he idicated the tax, an probably should have listened better. He said it so fast, and it only registered as no tax in my old brain. I could be admittedly only half right! I hep some one asks him to elaborate on that one. My fear is that perry picks Romney as a running mate, and I will have to hold my nose to vote for that one.. Regardless, I will vote for the republican nominee over Obama. We cannot afford another four years of a seriously dangerous lame duck potus. I do not know if we can defeat the union vote, but we have got to mobilize to get out peers out there and voting. I’ve heard that every democrat vot must be countered with at least two to three republican votes. We have to make that happen.
Report Post »Juliedoesnotgiveup
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 9:46amEducator, no one asks you to agree with me. In fact the opposing debate is what makes this field of candidates great. The best will rise to the top. Ron Paul always polls well with the liberal leaning polls like msnbc. That in itself should scare the pants off people. If the liberals love you, that is cause for alarm. Unfortunately, ( know I’ll get flamed for this), but Ron Paul tends to campaign on ideas and not actions. That expains his popularity with the young voters. He has lots of good ideas about the ideal leader and lives in a strict constitutional fantasy world, but doe not have real world examples of actions he takes to achieve that. Thus there is nothing concrete to judge him on when he talks high ideals. It is a hard thing to talk down, but people need to vote on concrete records of results and not just empty suit talk about what people want to hear. Paul is in no way like Obama, but Obama had that same talk and no walk kind of campaign. It is a cult of personality that draws the young vote when you are encourage by talk you like to hear and not by others who have faced the demons of the truth with mistakes and failures mixed in with successes.
Report Post »b.mclane
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 9:56amONLY MSNBC would say there is no debate in the Science community on “global warming”..uh, uh I mean Climate Change. What a stupid phrase. The Earth’s climate changes all the time. Once all the land masses were just one huge chunk and the climate was arid. Once it broke apart and mankind and SUV’s were not involved, a rainy climate developed. Of course, there is climate change but mankind has nothing to do with it. Its the chicken little syndrome and the belief that History started when they were born. Scare people into being sheep and don;t tell the truth.
Report Post »Juliedoesnotgiveup
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 9:58amInsuranceman, sarcasm I hope. It’s early and I have a hard time with subtle humor until I the caffeine actually kicks in. ;)
Report Post »Secret Squirrel
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 10:16am.
Report Post »Hello AP?
Where can I go to read your “Fact Check” of Obama’s speeches?
I’ve been waiting since 2008 to see that.
Okie from Muskogee
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 10:16amAmericans, wake up and listen to what Glenn has told and shown us. Progressives are left and right. Remember, the parties have moved us from Constitutional left of Anarchy to left of center. That is where our Republican Party is, left of center. Democrats are as far to the left as possible. Again, the Constitution is just to the left of anarchy and we have a choice of total left, left of center. How is that not progressive?
So knowing our Republican party has been influenced and infiltrated by progressives, John McCain example #1, how is electing another going to change anything? It will only continue the progression from our Constitution.
Libertarianism is the base, the core, of being a conservative. Ronald Reagens own words. So how is the Republican party rejecting Libertarianism (it’s base and roots) make it more “conservative”, especially when trading Libertarian ideas (Conservatism’s base and roots) for Progressive socialistic ideas? Think about that. Take out the base core values, Libertarianism, and replace it with Progressive values and call ourselves “Conservatives”.
Restore America and the Constitution by truly voting Conservative and vote Ron Paul 2012 Republican Libertarian Conservative
Report Post »encinom
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 10:35amb.mclane
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 9:56am
ONLY MSNBC would say there is no debate in the Science community on “global warming”..uh, uh I mean Climate Change. What a stupid phrase. The Earth’s climate changes all the time. Once all the land masses were just one huge chunk and the climate was arid. Once it broke apart and mankind and SUV’s were not involved, a rainy climate developed. Of course, there is climate change but mankind has nothing to do with it. Its the chicken little syndrome and the belief that History started when they were born. Scare people into being sheep and don;t tell the truth.
__________________________________________________
Actually, AP, leading Universities and Research centers, the scientists, all the major governments, anybody who believe that the Intelligent Design is a load of Bunk, people with three or more working brain cells.
The rest are either paid mouth pieces of Big Energy and Tea Party members who haven’t left the trailer park or militia compound in 10+ years.
GETLIFE
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 10:46amSo, the AP is now fact checking!?
Did they fact check on ALL participants?
Why are we only hearing about Bachmann, Perry, and Romney?
Way too early for so much elimination. EVERYBODY is still in (–except for maybe Santorum : )).
We need to keep listening to all. I was surprised at how much the debate clarified the candidates in my mind. In general, it seemed Gingrich, Cain, and Bachmann were concerned with getting across their political IDEAS, whereas Romney, Perry, Huntsman, and Santorum were more concerned with the political IMAGE they project.
Ron Paul needs his own “Office for the Respect and Preservation of the Constitution” in the White House attic, from which he can watch over our institutions and keep reminding us of the overall direction we need to take.
Report Post »jb.kibs
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 10:50amPERRY: “Ninety-five percent of all the jobs that we’ve created have been above minimum wage.”
THE FACTS: To support the claim, the Perry campaign provided federal statistics for December 2010 showing only 5.3 percent of all jobs in Texas pay the minimum wage.
the facts, they state, have nothing to do with the statement…
Report Post »he claimed that 95% > minimum wage. (greather than minimum wage)
their facts state, 5.3% = minimum wage. (equals minimum wage)
* why wouldn’t they do the percentage for greater than and not equals? “…pay the minimum wage” that is a very technical comment… they ONLY counted jobs that pay minimum wage. that’s fine…. how many paid minimum wage and GREATER… include those too please you morons.
ccr
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 10:54amI’m listening to Beck on radio………Beck is SUCH A PERRY PROMOTER!! Beck is “setting his listeners up” to support PERRY. And he is “targeting” Romney!
Romney is NOT so divisive and extreme as YOU are, Beck! While some of your principles I totally agree with, I totally do NOT agree with your “extreme” bashing and “targeting” of Romney……..and your “setting up” Perry (I know that is a play on your “setting up” comments!)
I have done my research on Perry…….and do NOT find him a man of INTEGRITY. I’m so surprised that Beck is SUCH A PERRY supporter!!!
Beck’s mission (including, radio, Blaze, glennbeck.com and GBTV when it arrives) is to: Target Romney and “Set up” Perry to win the GOP nomination.
We see YOUR agenda. We see YOUR propaganda.
Report Post »IntegrityFirst08
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 11:22am@ OKIE – You must be the first Ron Paul guy thats come out in a descent way and explained your position and thoughts without smearing each and every other canidate. Generally its done with conspiracy theories and shouting by you ron paul guys. But thank you for keeping your tone civil because I can tell you Ron Paul gets a bad reputation from the other supporters.
Unfortunatly I disagree with your stance. If you have watched Glenn you would know hes not a RP supporter at all. Fiscally I think he likes him. In his interviews where he talks about RP he says he tried to Audit the fed 9 times, etc. Glenn like most of the CONSERVATIVE people in this country ALL agree how to proceed on fiscal idealogue. But where LIBERTARIANS and CONSERVATIVES cross is on social issues and National Defense.
In my opinion you guys would cause a DISASTER if left in charge. Buts thats my opinion.
Report Post »RabidPatriot
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 11:25amRon Paul sometimes sounds brilliant and sometimes sounds certifiably insane. The type of guy that has the plans for world peace and a collection of all his toe nails from birth on the same shelf at his house.
Report Post »Okie from Muskogee
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 12:04pm@Intergrity
I appreciate your kind words. In defense of my Ron Paul supporters I will tell you it is from being attacked from many. Sinking to the same level is all that is wanted. I get there sometimes but try not too.
Let’s talk about this; If Libertarianism is the base of Conservative values, how do Conservatives and Libertarians differ on Social issues or defense without one progressing from the other?
Libertarian‘s believe in a set moral code based on God’s law, or natures law depending your religious view. Either way it’s the same base law. Life, Liberty, and Pursuit of happiness.
Social issues based upon Libertarianism is the direct opposite of Progressivism. That is the most Conservative one can be, to believe you can decide best, not Government. Force of religious ideas is progressive and not in the base of being a Conservative.
Defense; Libertarianism defense is that exact word, defense and by the Constitution. That is as Conservative as one can be speaking in terms of Military. Today’s “conservatives” have progressed from that making it offensive and not by the Constitutiin.
So again, how can Conservatives call themselves “conservative” while bashing the one person who holds and stands in the core base Conservative beliefs?
Report Post »ProbIemSoIver
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 12:28pmExactly, OKIE. I just decided to vote for RON last month. The night he night of the debate, when he brought me to the realization that we ARE NOT the world’s police, and these WARS were a LIE to continue the financing of the Military / Industrial Complex.
Report Post »@INTEGRITY If you think the NWO, Or the Military /Industrial Complex is a “Conspiracy theory” you really need to become edified, utilizing unbiased news sources. I hate to break it to you, but blaze is MSM with a twist, and partial.
ProbIemSoIver
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 12:33pmI Forgot to add that I am called Names for no reason. I just decided to vote for him last month, and then overnight I am referred to as a Paulbot, a Paulitarian,
Report Post »and whatever other ridiculous monikers people have conjured up.
Okie from Muskogee
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 12:42pm@Integrity
To back my argument up even further, go back and listen to the words of David Horowitz at the 11:13-14 CST of the today’s radio program in which Glenn Beck whole heartily agreed describing how you know if you are a Conservative.
God put an angel outside the Garden of Eden because human, sin, is the problem. A Conservative knows you can not fix man, sin. Progressives, authoritarians, try to fix this problem thru force, and to be a redeemer.
Force of religious social policies is not Conservative. That is trying to fix man and be the redeemer. Conservatives allow man to choose. You agree?
So a truthful statement is Ron Paul is the most Conservative candidate on the stage. The others are all Progressive in one form or another.
Report Post »johnnycarson
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 12:50pm@ SECRET SQUIRREL:
Try doing a search for something before suggesting it doesn’t exist:
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/aps-fact-check-hammers-obamas-speech/
Report Post »GWBram
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 2:25pmThat was eliminate CAPITAL GAIN taxes on people earning 200G or less.
Report Post »No wonder you thought Romney lost!
wordweaver
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 2:27pmWhat kinda bugs me is that they call this event a debate in the first place. You can’t have a true debate with 8 podiums on the stage. These events are more like panel discussions in which questions are thrown out and respondents have a very brief amount of time to answer. So, they can do little more than provide sound bites and provocative comments that they know will be repeated over and over by the media the next day. Once this field is whittled down to two or three true candidates, then I want to see a true debate in which each candidate prepares remarks for what they intend to do, and then they each have chances to rebut each other. That’s a debate. This was a sideshow to see who could grab the most microphone time.
Report Post »old white guy
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 2:34pmeveryone who makes over 25 thousand dollars a year should pay some income tax. as far as facts go, one guy‘s facst are another guy’s lies. the truth cannot be perverted. he either did or did not create an environment for job growth but he did not create jobs. government does not create wealth producing jobs . all government jobs destroy wealth.
Report Post »Bete Noire
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 2:38pmYou did not hear what Romney said. He said he would eliminate taxes on interest, dividends and capital gains for people earning less than $200k.
Report Post »missionarydad
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 2:44pmMitt Romney won the debate hands down and you people who are supporting Perry have the blinders on so tight it is squeezing your brains out. If Perry gets the GOP nomination which I think is a very remote possibility he will need a train to carry all of his baggage he brings into the general and the lamestream media which is holding off on him for Obama’s reelection sake will turn on him like a shark feeding frenzy. Take off the blinders and do your homework on this new world order, progressive, bilderberg hand picked darling. If he becomes President which never will happen as the media will destroy him, but if he did he would be a playboy enjoying all of the perks and attention that comes with it and ten times worse than George Bush. Perry has never had to fix a bad economy in Texas, he is way out of his league and would be a fish out of water.
Mitt Romney has been as prepared and molded for our very chaotic and turbulent times, just like George Washington was for the Revolution, Abe Lincoln for the civil war and JFK for the Cuban missile crisis. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/09/AR2007120901473.html
Report Post »Libertarian
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 3:04pm@Juliedoesnotgiveup
I agree with your view on the debate. Newt is a very smart man and well spoken, but I don’t trust him. My favorite is Ron Paul because I have read his views extensively. These sound bites are not doing justice for Ron Paul, hopefully he will hang in there until there are 2 or 3 candidates left so the debates are more in-depth. The office of presidency has a tendency to make liars out of candidates and turn them into moderate Democrats or Republicans.
If we elect Perry, Bachmann, Cain, Romney, Huntsman or Santorum we are getting Bush version v3.0. I really think Ron Paul is the only one that would go in there and mix up the status quo.
It‘s America’s last election.
Report Post »chalkdust
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 3:21pmPerry is an open borders guy. I do not trust him and see him as just another slickster. I think his getting too close to the other candidates made him look far too aggressive. It didn’t play well. I think Perry missed his calling in life as an actor. This guy is not trust worthy.
Oh @Encompitent, A growing number of scientists do not agree with the church of global warming. Lots of evidence to the contrary of anthropogenic forced climate change. Saying the National Academy of Sciences believe that the science is settled is like asking the Catholic church if God exists.
Report Post »You should ask yourself if you could be convinced that climate change is not man caused. You might find out you’re part of a new religion. A dogmatic belief system is not science.
Jim in Houston
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 3:43pmencinom: You are such a disgusting little troll. The one with only one or two functioning brain cells and a single digit IQ is YOU. By the way most of us have never lived in a trailer park nor a militia compound, but I suspect you might fit right in the trailer park if it were really scruffy.
Report Post »Jacque
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 3:45pmDid anyone see O’Reilly after the debate? I am sorry but if Ron Paul thinks we should leave Iran alone and “talk” with them and allow them to have nukes, he is crazier than I thought. Iran has made it VERY clear they want to destroy Israel and America and have sharia law throughout the world. Sorry Ron, I am pro-active I will not wait for that to happen. If we waited and “talked’ to Hitler we all would be speaking German and we all would be white.
Report Post »johnnycarson
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 3:55pm@ JIM IN HOUSTON
You seem pretty angry with Encinom …Rather than call her names why don’t you try to dispute her claims? I’d love to see you try.
This climate change denial BS is sad and embarrassing, and YES, anyone who buys into it is being willfully ignorant.
I‘d love to see your data that suggests it’s NOT happening. PLEASE, please…Let’s see it.
Report Post »HappyStretchedThin
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 4:07pmJonnyCarson,
Report Post »If you’re not beyond intellectual honesty, check my post below with links. You wanted substantive discussion, so let‘s see if you’re willing to talk specifics and be open to changing your mind when it‘s demonstrated you’re not right.
ProbIemSoIver
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 4:09pmHere is how Perry conducts himself during debate commercial breaks.
http://img.ibtimes.com/www/articles/20110908/210639_ron-paul-debate-rick-perry-gop-debate-september-7.htm
Report Post »TheWholeTruth
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 4:31pmAll you Perry fans should get a kick out of this article. http://www.infowars.com/pictures-suggest-perry-attempted-to-physically-intimidate-ron-paul/
Report Post »US_SOLDIER
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 4:34pmHow many time will you people be duped by the now fading “Mainstream Media?” It doesnt take a genius to see that they always throw the people out front that they want you to vote for and the american people blindly follow their drumbeat. Look where the Conservative/Republican and Liberal/Democrat parties have gotten us so far. Ron Paul destroyed everone of them in the polls and look who they choose to talk about time and time again. It’s blatantly obvious and you choose to ignore it and follow your “masters” bidding. Im disgusted at what kind of people we’ve turned into. Were in the middle of a depression and all i hear at work is football and basketball and meaningless nonsense. Ive made my preperations and I continue to try to get the people around me to do theirs but they pay attention for two seconds then go back to their nonsense. I really do think that if we have any chance of turning this ship around in time that the only one that can do it would be Ron Paul. Regardless where your loyalties lie, just think about it. The two main parties are the ones who got us into 14 trillion dollars of debt with each having their own pet projects. Common sense says if you kept stepping on a shovel laying on the ground and it kept slapping you in the face, why on earth wouldnt you pick a different way around the shovel? Just think about it people
Report Post »Armed Patriot
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 5:14pmI own a Firearms Dealer Business. I will not hire as I dont know what this administration is going to add to regulations (not passed by congress). They might say that I need to double my workers salaries, pay for their entire health care, give them $100,000 in unpaid compensasion, etc. Dont believe me about the abuses of this administration??? Look at backdoor amnesty by Executive Order, against the LOUD will of the American public, Nomama2012 care (against the will of the American public) and how about the Libyian War (in violation of the War Powers Act). We no longer live in a Constitutional Republic. We now live in a Communist Banana Republik. All Hail Nobama 2012. Death to the Emperor.
If you agree with any part of this, you are the resistance.
Report Post »johnnycarson
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 5:38pm@ HAPPYSTRETCHEDTHIN
Your links aren’t very usefull:
First you have committee membership information from the NAS…OK. Other than your take on why we should question their judgement, I don’t see anything here that supports the beliefs of climate change deniers.
And, secondly, you offer a link that backs up MY argument.
Show me PROOF, reasonable data, that supports your claim that climate change doesn’t exist, and then we can have a discussion.
Report Post »tower7femacamp
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 7:59pmhttp://www.infowars.com/pictures-suggest-perry-attempted-to-physically-intimidate-ron-paul/
Report Post »only Ron Paul was telling what he really would do, the others are lying and will do
Satan’s will, Just like Bush and Obama
HappyStretchedThin
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 9:31pmLet it not be said that JonnyCarson does not entertain substantive discussion!
Report Post »But he does act with a closed mind, and cherry-pick his engagements. Sobeit.
Substance: you want proof, but you don’t like the idea of the burden of proof being on YOU. You did NOT engage my point about consensus in science. It’s a huge problem. You claim 97% on your side makes your point. Actually, when you think it through, it rather makes MINE: my point is that it doesn‘t MATTER what percentage is against me IF I’m simply scientifically accurate. If the matter was really the kind of “settled science” Al Gore claims it to be, there would be 0% on my side.
But you want specifics, fine. Here they are from crowd-sourced, and therefore presumably edited with equal fervor from all sides, wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientists_opposing_the_mainstream_scientific_assessment_of_global_warming
That’s both data that there is disagreement, AND, when you read their interventions, data of HOW 97% may have it dead wrong.
Read it, and think it through–I particularly like Roy Spencer and John Christy.
p.s. I did offer only opinions as to why not to trust the NAS committee’s findings, but they’re solidly reasoned opinions that you also did not engage…
bpitas
Posted on September 9, 2011 at 12:45pm@Juliedoesnotgiveup
Report Post »Not sure how you can say that Ron Paul is all words and no action. He has been in Congress for 30+ years, and has voted 100% consistently to follow the constitution every time. You don’t get any better then that. Now if you want to say that some of the OTHER candidate‘s actions don’t follow their words, then that’s fine (and true) but you cannot possibly think that about Ron Paul – the record is clear.
I support God's Israel!
Posted on September 9, 2011 at 5:36pmThe big problem I have with all these debates ARE THE QUESTIONS. They are clearly NOT the questions I would ask or any NORMAL American citizen would ask. And, LOOK AT WHO IS ASKING THE QUESTIONS.
PROUD REDSTATER:
I am a Ron Paul fan, but wasn’t always until I did my homework. I AM ALSO A CHRISTIAN WHO STANDS WITH ISRAEL, so stop with trying to make people believe that if we are a Ron Paul supporter, we are anti-Israel. THAT IS THE KIND OF LIE THAT THE BIG NETWORKS TRY TO TELL THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. Not all Americans are dumber than a box of rocks, like you are, and like you THINK we are.
Do something REALLY CONSTRUCTIVE. Try researching these politicians (FACTS) before you blatantly tell your lies. Rick Santorum? Mmmmm, better do your homework on him. I did and it convinced me THAT I DO NOT WANT HIM AS MY PRESIDENT. I won’t tell you why. I want you to actually do your own homework, but you won’t because you are a coward hiding behind THE BLAZE.
Report Post »Cocheta
Posted on September 9, 2011 at 10:29pmEncinom, as a scientist, I can assure you that there is no consensus on human-induced global climate change (formerly known as “global warming.”) In fact, there has been so much outright data fraud and bastardization of the scientific method that I am surprised any objective scientist would sign off on the so-called conclusions.
The fact is that the earth’s climate is dynamic, constantly changing due to short and long term solar cycles. These cyclic changes in the sun’s radiant energy, which appear to correlate with sunspot activity, have infinitely more to do with global warming or cooling than human activity.
In reality, the roots of the global warming concept have nothing to do with a natural or anthropogenic climatological phenomenon. It was, and still is, a strategy to abolish free markets, redistribute wealth to third world nations and unscrupulous entrepreneurs (e.g.. Al Gore) under the pretext of “saving the planet.”
“Protection of the environment may be used as a pretext to adopt a series of measures designed to undermine the industrial base of developed nations. It may also serve to introduce malaise by lowering their standard of living and implanting communist values.” – Natalie Grant Wraga (Deceased – Expert on the art of disinformation and a leading authority on former Soviet Union deceit.)
Report Post »Zorro6821
Posted on September 10, 2011 at 6:02amSeems lke the only one telling the truth was Ron Paul. No Surprise
Report Post »PoliticalJunkieToo
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 7:56amThe Blaze is EXTREMELY SLOW IN POSTING and it is not busy so THAT cannot be the excuse.
Report Post »Slayer
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 8:36amThere’s no way to have any kind of debate/discussion with anyone on these boards because whoever is in charge of censoring all the comments reads at something like 5 words a minute. So it’s an eternity before your comment ever goes up. In some cases, the person you were trying to debate with has passed on to the afterlife while you’re still waiting around for a reply.
Report Post »Firebrand
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 11:35am@slayer
Agreed.
Also, are you the cure for hippies?
Report Post »John 3:16
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 12:09pmI like and better yet trust Michele Bachmann the most and Herman Cain is second on my list of those that were present; nevertheless, anyone there would be better than Obama the seditionist. Secret Squirrel is right on, right on, right on: Let’s fact check the criminal Obama then jail him and erase his name from the list of American presidents. Once he has served his time deport the traitor.
Report Post »Firebrand
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 12:52pm@john
Report Post »Obama is not a traitor or an idiot. He is inexperienced and an ideologue. He builds his policies out of pipe dreams and justifies them with straw man arguments. If being ignorant to the way the world works was a crime, almost everyone would be in prison. Being a bad President doesn’t make you a criminal, even if you think his actions are. Let’s be rational and meet them on the battlefield of ideas, not mud.
Teaparty-grammy
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 4:27pm@ Firebrand who Posted: “Obama is not a traitor or an idiot. He is inexperienced and an ideologue. He builds his policies out of pipe dreams and justifies them with straw man arguments. If being ignorant to the way the world works was a crime, almost everyone would be in prison. Being a bad President doesn’t make you a criminal, even if you think his actions are. Let’s be rational and meet them on the battlefield of ideas, not mud.”
I’m sorry, but you are being WAY too kind to the Liar-in-Chief. Nobody but the most delusional fan would deny that the man is a pathological liar who would not know the truth if he saw it. Moreover, he is both a traitor, AND an idiot. He hates this country, and thinks he is on some kind of anti-Colonialism mission to punish America for the sins of the past by bringing it to ruin. Is he incompetent? You betcha. Is he way out of his depth, competency-wiise? Unquestionably. But let us not forget that he is an evil little puppet of larger forces who are hellbent on turning the USA into another “workers paradise” in the utopian wonderland of a one-world government. I do not think it is stupid to be realistic about assessing who he is and what he is trying to do. He may be cluelss as to how the world works, but that does not mean he is as innocent and benign as you suggest. I would insist that he most certainly is NOT.
Report Post »Firebrand
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 5:00pm@grammy
I think that we need to be careful not to have knee-jerk reactions. Just because we don’t agree with his policies, doesn‘t mean he’s a traitor, it just means we don’t agree with his policies. That’s what voting is for. He (and his supporters) didn’t like where the country was going and they voted in who they liked. We should do the same, but we shouldn‘t try to claim treason just because we don’t agree with him.
You have to understand the reasons for his stance. He feels like there is a large population of people that have been dealt an unfair hand in life. He wants to try and enforce fairness. All of his policies reflect this. They aren’t traitorous, just really stupid ideological policies. Everyone knows that life isn‘t fair and that you can’t dictate rational thought or logic. He isn’t an idiot, just ignorant. I’ve heard him speak. Though I think what he says is stupid, he isn’t. I question some of his advisors though.
We can be the party of rationality, logic, and truth or we can be the ignorant that make irrational arguments and draw conclusions (not facts) to suit an agenda. I choose the former, not the latter. What crimes has he committed? Being ignorant or saying what I don‘t like isn’t a crime. He’s an American who wants to change America. He has that right, and we have the right to vote his tail out of office for trying it. I never said he operated without a motive. As always, thanks for your input and civility.
Report Post »PoliticalJunkieToo
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 7:55amIllegals drive down wages in Texas. But this is Perry FAULT because he REFUSES to build a border and gave illegals in-state college tuition and PANDERS TO ILLEGALS to get the hispanic vote. The whole USA is now pandering to hispanics because we are getting Rubio as VP ONLY BECAUSE OF HIS RACE and not his abilities.
Report Post »zorro
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 8:47amYou’re right that illegals bring down the education numbers and I agree Perry has fault in this. But your assesment that Rubio would get VP only because he is Hispanic is not accurate at all. The fact he is Hispanic is probably the cherry on top. The guy is a winner, man. He, as far as I can tell, is the real deal.
Report Post »blue_sky
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 8:54am@zorro, Rubio is for endless wars and torture. Do you want to continue borrowing from China to pay troops? Or printing paper money to give more inflation tax the poor and senior?
Report Post »zorro
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 10:43amBlu_sky…you’re right. We don’t want endless wars. But we have them. This is the reality. And the reality is we can’t just walk away from it. It’s easy to say, both Obama and Biden swore they would. I will never forget Biden on the debates saying, “We will end this war!” Bottom line is, you can’t just walk away. It’s a terrible and nasty reality. But it’s the truth. You walk away, the situation will become worse with Iran unchecked. At least Rubio is telling you the truth. I’d rather hear the truth no matter how bad than be lied to and told we will just leave.
I wish Ron Paul would win. I would be OK with that. But if he did, he wouldn’t be able to do 90% of the things he claims.
Report Post »John 3:16
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 2:26pmFirebrand I disagree with your opinion of Obama and you disagree with me. He has violated his oath of office and the Constitution of these United States: He (dumbo) is a seditionist and a traitor to this country period. He is directly innvolved in a conspiracy to destroy this country and it’s Constitution. He has lied to the American people every time his lips have ever moved. We have a liar, president who used lies and the gullability of the American people to decieve them, while all the time planning the demise of our way of life and to destroy the greatness of this country. He sould be held accountable and be used as an example to how we treat traitors to our great country. He should be jailed then deported to his muslim relatives with no American benefits other than a one way ticket out of here. He has caused the death of many of our citizens that should have been safely living within their own borders.Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reed should also be jailed for their part in destroying this country.Nevertheless, I will support your right to disagree with me.
Report Post »missionarydad
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 2:51pmMitt Romney has been shaped and molded his entire life to be one of the greatest Presidents in our history. Just like George Washington was shaped and molded for the critical times of our founding and Abe Lincoln was for the Civil War, and JFK for the Cuban missile crises. Mitt is by far the very best choice and has one of the best resumes and the kind of experience our country needs for these turbulent times. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/09/AR2007120901473.html
Report Post »Firebrand
Posted on September 9, 2011 at 1:27am@jon
Report Post »We can agree to disagree. The burden of proof lies on you to provide facts about not only how the law was broken, but proof of the conspiracy to overthrow the government by BHO.
SamIamTwo
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 7:55amI’d rather see the Blaze take apart this article…such as, I think Mitt was talking about his state had a higher unemployment rate when he took over and it dropped to 4.7…and a rate is a rate, is a rate.
And what is the Cost of living in TX vs NY…come on blaze do some work…I don’t have time to do it.
Report Post »AynRandLives
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 8:59amTexas has the 2nd lowest cost per living in the country. NY and CA are off the charts. So why would the liberal Fact Check folks want to compare median income? If you live in those expense, highly taxed and regulated states you better be making 25% – 50% more just to breakeven. They have an agenda folks…
Report Post »epeel2
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 9:00amI read that a person making $50,000 in Arkansas (similar to Texas) would need $127,000 to live the same way in NYC.
Report Post »TheBMT
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 9:53amand thats why people should really consider “moving” when it comes to cost of living.
Report Post »CrazyTexan
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 9:55am“About 9.5 percent of Texas hourly workers, excluding those who are paid salaries, earn the minimum wage or less, tying Mississippi for the highest percentage in the nation.”
They also EXCLUDED in the numbers those who are salaried, which considering the number of fortune 500 companies with world corporate headquarters in Austin, DFW, and Houston is very misleading.
Report Post »ccr
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 11:05amhttp://www.rightspeak.net/2011/09/rick-perrys-texas-on-brink.html
There are some interesting facts for you on Texas’ “wonderful” statistics! Take a SERIOUS look at Perry on your own……..NOT Beck’s view…….if you don’t want Obama back in the WH. People who say they don’t want to hear about “electability” (guys like Beck), will have to be responsible for another 4 years of BHO!
I like TX! But touting Perry as THE one for the GOP……is ridiculous, especially beyond the GOP nomination. The Dems will tear him apart over many of the % in that article………..and the Obama will be back in the WH for another 4 years because Perry is more propaganda than truth! ((And not counting on TRUTH from Blaze or Beck on anything regarding Perry! Oh, and add the Perry Faux News Channel, too, who are big time promoting Perry on America!))
ps……….I use to love Beck and the Blaze. I canNOT reconcile the Perry promotion.
Report Post »adiospantalones
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 11:29amAnother little fact that AP fails to mention is that all “service” jobs where your primary income may be tips (servers, bartenders, valet, etc) are only required to be paid 1/2 of Federal minimum wage because of tips. Compare that to California where you are required to pay California minimum wage ($9.25/hr) on top of tips. Outside of oil & gas, Texas has a huge service sector and these jobs are dragging down the averages while the workers still make decent money.
Report Post »starznbarz
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 7:55amHaving AP fact check anything is like having a group of monkeys counting the bananas in a bunch, the number will be wrong and when it`s done there will be fecal matter all over the place. Anybody watch the “panel” discussion after the debate? – now that was comedy, particularly good ol` Al making fun of Perry for the Galileo comment, and referring to it as “Galeo”- way to show off that education Al, you should have just leaned over and axed Maddow – she might know the correct name – maybe. http://www.starznbarz.com
Report Post »biohazard23
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 8:24amHa ha ha!!! You are so correct in your assessment of the AP. That;s like relying on Keith Blobbermann for honest, unbiased reporting……
Report Post »truthseekerusa
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 8:36amAP has discredited itself long ago so disregard anything that comes out of that poor excuse for nonbiased reporting. It has helped to kill the newspaper business in the US because too many of them depended on it instead of using investigative reporters as in the past. AP=All Pap!
Report Post »FindOut
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 8:41amGreat observation.
“particularly good ol` Al making fun of Perry for the Galileo comment, and referring to it as “Galeo”- way to show off that education Al, you should have just leaned over and axed Maddow – she might know the correct name – maybe”
Even provided the right name AL would not have been able to pronounce it right.
Report Post »Remember the ““resist we much” gaffe?
That was his teleprompter messing up his tongue, this time is hi pure ignorance.
HappyStretchedThin
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 8:46amAstute and colorful analogy. I was just troubled enough on their man-made global warming “fact check” to actually look up the National Academy of Sciences study. Check out the committee here: http://dels.nas.edu/Committee/Committee-America-Climate-Choices/BASC-U-08-04-A
Report Post »I see some scientists (whose bias we can assume), but I also see a bunch of politicians, public policy PhDs, and some community organizers. Even the scientists are a mixed bag of earth-related fields, and not strictly climatologists.
That’s also how the UN report got skewed (including non-climatologists).
But then there’s the troubling matter of the U of Illinois survey which showed 97% of climatologists actively publishing agreeing on MMGW. Check out CNN’s take here: http://articles.cnn.com/2009-01-19/world/eco.globalwarmingsurvey_1_global-warming-climate-science-human-activity?_s=PM:WORLD
Don’t have time to delve, but 2 thoughts: 1. You can’t currently get funding for CHALLENGING MMGB research, so by looking at “actively researching” climatologists you’ve excluded the critics–even in science, you have to follow the money; 2. The survey was ONLINE, meaning the people with the strongest personal or political motivations responded, which would further skew to the MMGB crowd.
The whole idea of consensus in science bugs me anyway. There is 100% consensus on the gravity constant, because it’s no longer considered opinion, but fact. When they have facts, I won’t need a survey of their “opinio
JohnGalt
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 8:58amI think that was the most honest and low key I’ve seen MSNBC, not that I could stand it for more than a few minutes.
Report Post »encinom
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 10:39amI realized that the little bit of sanity this article brought into the Blaze Asylum would be soon rejected.
Report Post »Bad_Ashe
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 1:14pmI tend to agree. In particular, I enjoyed this bit of “fact checking”:
The scientific consensus on climate change is about as settled as any major scientific issue can be. Perry’s opinion runs counter to the view of an overwhelming majority of scientists that pollution released from the burning of fossil fuels is heating up the planet.
Tell that to CERN:
Report Post »http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/08/25/cern_cloud_cosmic_ray_first_results/
HappyStretchedThin
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 1:46pmEncicom pretending to be able to judge sane from insane again. Funny!
Report Post »But let’s entertain him for a while: what’s the definition of insanity again? Trying the same things over and over and expecting a different result?
Doesn’t that perfectly describe the actions of a troll like Encicom–trying to convince thinking Blazers to change their minds, but without actually making a specific argument or offering a specific refutation?
The rest of us know which side more resembles an asylum, troll…
Pappaw
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 7:53amWhen I see it’s an AP political story, I skip the story and head straight for the comments to get the sensible scoop…
Report Post »NJTMATO
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 8:13amExactly!
Report Post »Stoptheblather
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 8:15amAmen!
Report Post »momsense
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 7:50amWhy put any creedence in what the AP says. They’ve shown for years just how anti- American they are.
Report Post »encinom
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 11:16amNo, the Tea-Party is anti-america, AP is just providing the facts.
Firebrand
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 11:49am@Encinom
The TEA party is neither anti-government or anti-american. They are anti-BIG-goverment. Most of the TEA party members I have talked to support the following things:
Lower taxes (different than no taxes)
Government spending on necessities ONLY
Representative government (The TEA party members of congress are representing their districts, but the left insists on calling them crazy because they won’t “get with the program”)
- I want to expand on this one a little. If the government is running correctly, it should barely be running. The back scratching and special interest groups have completely destroyed the intent of how the government SHOULD work. You see, you’ve been duped by politicians into believing that there should always be compromises. THAT IS NOT TRUE. In fact, if the Legislative branch operated the way it should, then you would have 535 people that disagreed on just about everything. They would come together when something benefits EVERYONE or is just a REALLY GOOD and LOGICAL IDEA that is apparent in its brilliance. Instead we now have a system where people believe everyone should GET cake, instead of no one NEEDS cake. People ask, “What can government DO FOR me?”, instead of “WHY does the government NEED to do these things for me?”.
When did it become American to ask for a handout? To demand stuff you didn’t work for? To spend money you don’t have? How are those American?
Report Post »encinom
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 12:01pm@Firebrand
Report Post »When did it become an american trait to abandon the needy, the old the sick. To not provide a helping hand when others are in trouble because it costs of doing so are not offet. When did it become American to rejoice in ones on bigotry, to quetions ones religon? When did it become American to spit on the working class, to place more and more burdens on the shrinking middle class, while gleefully giving handouts to the wealthy?
Firebrand
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 1:15pmCan you find me one instance of any TEA party member saying that they think that people who NEED help shouldn’t get it?
Report Post »Your logic breaks down on the bigotry. If a girl plays volleyball, and volleyball players wear knee pads, that DOESN’T mean that the girl is wearing knee pads. Similarly, if bigots exist, and if some tea party members are bigots, that doesn’t mean that all TEA party members are bigots. I know that some in the media and those that want your vote want to convince you of it, but really think about it. Do you really believe that all TEA party members are bigots?
The religious argument about Obama being a muslim is a really dumb one, but again, it is not a TEA party platform. Once again, it’s a non sequitur and straw man on the lefts part. You want to believe its true to validate mischaracterizing a whole group of people unjustly. I know people here do it all the time about the left (I’ve done it too, but I try to correct myself when possible).
Are you gonna lower yourself to that level?
How is ensuring that the middle class gets to keep their own money spitting on them? How is guaranteeing that anyone can do a job and not only select union members be anti-american? How is demanding that only necessities be under the control of the government anti-american?
Why should the wealthy be punished just for being wealthy? If you really wanted life to be fair shouldn’t everyone pay the same % instead of left with the same amount?
Firebrand
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 1:34pmTo expand a little bit more on a topic.
There are 6 basic groups of people in this country:
Those that work hard and are wealthy, those that don’t work hard and are wealthy, those that work hard and are middle class, those that don’t work hard and are middle class, those that work hard and are poor, those that don’t work hard and are poor.
The right would try to convince you that everyone that is wealthy works hard and that everyone that is poor doesn’t work hard. The left on the other hand would have you believe that those that are poor work hard and those that are wealthy don’t work hard. Both arguments are incomplete. But, I do want to ask you which of the groups is rewarded by the government. The right would have you believe that it’s the poor, and the left would have you believe that it’s the wealthy. These are undeniable truths.
So the real truth (from the point of the government)? It’s also a mixture. The poor, not only pay NO taxes, but get money back. For what? Being poor. That seems like 2 rewards. The wealthy pay taxes, but find loopholes that decrease the amount they pay. That’s 1 reward. The middle class pays taxes and don’t get any loopholes, that’s 0 rewards. There’s the actual issue.
How to fix it? Stop paying people for being poor, close loopholes, treat corporations like individuals (which we should already). NO ONE should get a reward for citizenship, whether you are poor, middle class or wealthy. That’s fair. Period
Report Post »encinom
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 2:58pm“Can you find me one instance of any TEA party member saying that they think that people who NEED help shouldn’t get it?”
Rep. Cantor’s comments about FEMA after the earth and in the run up to Hurricane Irene (even Chris Christie call him to task for that); Beck on why it was right to let a man’s house burn down
“You pay it and they put your house out. If you don’t pay it, they don’t put your house out.”;
http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/46276/ ; Ron Paul on getting rid of FEMA (made during Hurricane Irene, basically leaving the States to fend for themselves).
As for the Bigotry, look at Cain‘s and West’s comments regarding Islam, the Birther issue (and who are the majrity that hold that view), look at the signs carried at Tea Party rallies, Beck’s statements, you are saying there is not Bigotry, I am saying the majority of memebers by their deeds and actions prove you wrong.
As for the economics, the GOP held hostage the middle class tax breaks to insure that the wealthy continued to receive the W. welfare for the wealthy. Taxes are at the losest they have been since WWII, the GOP will sell out their own Grand Motehrs to protect the weathy’s tax breaks from the Oil Company loopholes and subsidies to the W. tax break, despite the GOP’s “concern” about the debt. Gov. Wlaker and the rest of the Tea Party Gov. have made it a crusade to crush unions. This has lead to a true gras roots revolt in those state
Report Post »Firebrand
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 5:24pm@Encin
Rep. Cantor isn’t a TEA party member.
The man whose house burned down wasn’t in NEED. When his house burned down, he needed to get it put out, but he could afford the $75. He was given a choice of pay, sign a hardship waiver, or have your house burn down. He CHOSE the last one. Also, the mayor who enacted the law and the Fire Chief who enforced it, not TEA party members. No city official HAS to help you. Police can watch you get mugged and they don’t have to do anything about it. That’s the law. With that being said, it was a horrible thing to have happened. Also, has Glenn ever said he was a TEA party member? I‘ve looked and couldn’t find it. If you do will you let me know?
Not agreeing with someone’s religion is not being a bigot. It’s not agreeing with someones religion. Otherwise every atheist and agnostic would be a bigot. It’s a term that should be reserved for people that are truly bigots. It doesn’t make you a bigot to say you feel uncomfortable around a certain group of people that have had a few nuts do something crazy. You can’t change human nature. I also don’t see why it would be unreasonable to ask believers of Islam to act with sensitivity when it comes to 9/11. Since the motivation for the attacks was political AND religious. That’s not bigoted.
Report Post »I know that you want to brand everyone on the right as rich, ignorant, close-minded, racist, white people to fit your agenda, but who does that make ignorant,racist, and cl
HappyStretchedThin
Posted on September 10, 2011 at 2:24amExcuse my late post, but Firebrand you’re hot stuff! You not only provoked Encicom into providing actual examples (as twisted as they were) rather than his usual baseless, unsupported name-calling, but you also got him so fired up he lost most of his grip on the basics of spelling.
Report Post »There‘s another possible response to Encicom’s charge that Tea partiers want to neglect the downtrodden though:it’s projection! What party has diminished the means of the people to care for themselves, let alone the needy? What party wants us all to trust the govt, and then spends the govt so flat dead broke that it can’t fulfill the promises we trusted it with? What party stifles business and destroys the middle class by taxing them and their job-providers into lower brackets and eventually onto the dole?
Encicom’s ideas are guilty of every charge he makes of the tea party, because liberalism always generates the opposite of its stated intent.
dsm
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 7:50amWhy are we to believe anything from the AP? Blaze, have you fact checked AP’s fact checker?
Report Post »Firebrand
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 11:53amThat would be like demolishing earth to build an intergalactic highway, wouldn’t it? It doesn’t matter anyway, the truth is that the answer is 42.
Report Post »flyoverbob
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 7:47amBlaze how can you put this out there as if the story is factual?
Report Post »Locked
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 8:16amJust curious: which parts aren’t? I‘d imagine in particular you’re upset about the global warming portion; but do you find all the figures cited incorrect?
I’d say, at a glance, most of the information seems correct… if liberally slanted.
Report Post »zorro
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 8:51amI can‘t wait until the AP tears apart the President’s speech tonight. They will, right?
Report Post »Firebrand
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 11:55am@locked
Ever heard the expression, there are lies, damn lies, and statistics….
@Zorro
Report Post »Who do we get into contact with to demand this?
bandi9
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 7:44amexactly why, Blaze, are you using anything the AP says? They are liars.
Report Post »sissykatz
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 8:10amBand
Report Post »You are right…… I don’t know about the jobs that Bush created are the things Duchacas did. I do know
that Obama care has been a job killer that they say is not. Anyone with a business will tell you they are not hiring because they do not know about the cost of Obama care. That is a job killer. My insurance has increased tremendously because of it already and so have the businesses that are paying the policies. We know the Climate statement is not accurate either. I think I would prefer someone “INDEPENDENT” to do the fact checking, on both us and Obama.
Okie from Muskogee
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 7:43amRick Perry also forgets to mention that 30% (300k) of the 1 million jobs, “he” created are Government jobs.
Please see each one of these 3 candidates are only speaking half truth to you, not the hard full truth we deserve and need like Ron Paul speaks.
What is Rick Perry so upset about after the debate?
Rick Perry angrily grabbing Ron Paul.
http://digg.com/news/politics/rick_perry_threatens_ron_paul_after_debate_http_i305_photobucket_com_albums_nn239_thinbev_perryvspaul_jpg
Report Post »RepubliCorp
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 9:03amPaul wants to get rid of the CIA. Are you kidding me? The CIA is vital to our national security. Ron Paul believes that the CIA “runs everything.” He has also suggested in the past that the CIA has conducted a “coup” in America
Report Post »http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2dECSYm5bSM&feature=player_embedded#!
Okie from Muskogee
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 9:36am@Republicorp
What does the CIA and their former operatives say about the CIA? Might wanna check that out so you don’t look and sound so dumb.
Why do you spend so much time attacking one candidate without endorsing your own or spending time talking about your candidate? Only haters act as you….
Ron Paul thanks you because several donors, myself included, have united in sending $10 bucks every time Ron Paul is falsely labelled and attacked by posters as yourself. We put our money where our mouth is. So keep it up, more join our cause everyday because of your false smear campaigns. Have a great day!
Report Post »CrazyTexan
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 10:05amOkie,
Report Post »Why, because you people go out and spam every website, every on line poll and every story here NOT related to politics to skew your numbers and create more observed support than there actually is. To say that is not only rude, but dishonest is to speak the truth. That is why when a real poll is taken Paul averages < 10%.
By the way, come up with an orgional idea, you took the $10 donation thing from Jules from Texas in relation to the Perry haters posting crap on the website about the fires when people from the site here were having their homes burn down. What a fraud you are.
Okie from Muskogee
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 10:29am@Crazy Texan
Sound a little angry, Crazy Texan, why? Why would you be angry supporters who believe in something speak out and stand in truth? Aren’t we to stand for others to speak, you know, responsibility as Glenn said?
I donate all the time and yes I have a pact with friends to donate when haters like Republicorp spam all day against Ron Paul.
It is horrible so many are losing their homes in the fires in Texas. It is even worse when someone tries to use these tragedies for politics.
Fraud? Hmmm. Your handle is Crazy Texan. You expect anyone to listen to someone calling themselves crazy? Enough said. I hope your day is great.
Report Post »CrazyTexan
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 11:11amNo Okie, not angry just disappointed, you see, I voted for Paul the first time he ran (back when I was young, niave, and didn’t think through much politically). It is the way in which you go about trying to ram him down everyone’s throats, and avoiding discussing truth and consequences.
Rather than actually discussing the plausibility and consequences of a proposal you would rather conduct hit and runs. For instance, if Ron Paul is correct, and we were attacked on 9-11 because we have bases overseas, how is it that countries that do not conduct their foreign policy as we do, also have a problem with attacks from Al Queda? Or how is it that Ron Paul has advocated for a fence and troops on the ground when it would involve both enacting eminant domain and/or the quartering of military troops on private property? Or what are the direct consequences of legalizing drugs and prostitution on a society that no longer is virtuous?
That is the problem, and usually the response from his supporters is not about the issues, it goes something like this “Well, your candidate did this” rather than discussing the plausibility of what Paul advocates. So what I am saying is that this country is in trouble, and we need to focus on thinking proposals through and considering the real world consequences of them, so we do not get some ideological utopia that causes more harm than good.
Report Post »CrazyTexan
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 12:44pmYeah, no response, thought so, he sounds good and promises/suggests a lot, but when you apply logic to it it doesn’t pan out.
With Paul what do you have in the end? Another big talking politician who can’t deliver on his promises and this is different how?
If you want people that are not simply a herd of cattle to vote for Paul you will have to lay out exactly how he proposes to do the things he has advocated. Simply pointing out the flaws of others without desplaying a viable plan from your guy accomplishes nothing than attracting knee-jerk voters.
Think beyond the rhetoric. Many of Paul’s platforms necessitate dictatorial powers to implement and are beyond the Constitutional restrictions placed on the Executive branch.
Report Post »Okie from Muskogee
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 1:41pm@“Crazy” Texan
You believe you can “fix” man thru imposing your moral view and that is not Conservative. Listen to Glenn’s Program today from 11:13-14 to hear just that. The base of Conservative is Libertarianism, life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness.
Responsibility you are not taking for the imposition of these forced moral laws. After our country was formed was “drugs” or “prostitution” illegal? No. Using your logic you are saying our founders were more corrupt then we are today or that YOU need to SAVE us from our own choices. You are not a redeemer. The ban of drugs created the narco state Mexico which also causes thousands of deaths and rapes along our border. Take responsibility for that. Own it just as banning alcohol created organized crime.
Are you referring to countries having US embassies bombed in their country or countries who were allies with us in wars in the ME? Either way they are attacks against us for meddling in affairs that isn’t Americans business. Listen to the CIA. Are you saying the CIA is wrong and your right?
Have you spoke to border residents begging for troops and/or a fence? They will gladly allow free passage in exchange for security. Ask them and listen.
Does this clear things up for you? Please, keep insults to yourself.
Report Post »CrazyTexan
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 2:45pmYou are confusing morality with virtue. An example of this is radical Muslims. They are doing right according to their interpretations of their scriptures, and beliefs thus moral. But are they virtuous? Our Founders who you seem to be referencing in other posts, wrote many times on the subject that the form of government they created for us would not work unless the people were virtuous. To try to return to a purist view of the constitution at this point in our society is foolhardy.
Morality is the turf of parents, so is virtue for that matter, but it is the realm of government to make sure that your exercise of rights do not infringe upon mine.
As for the terrorist attacks, India,Chechnya,Herzegovina,Czechoslovakia,Russia the Philippines, and parts of Africa as well, all have had problems with terrorism not related to America, Imperialism or its allies but to the fact that they will not just roll over and recognize sharia law.
I have openly admitted that many land owners along the border would like to have something done about it and yes, I know some pretty big land owners down that way, but they also don’t like the concept of eminent domain, as they have watched their land access cut off by environmentalists, public roads and such over the generations, by the state. Once you have opened that gate for the FEDERAL government to do something like that you will not be able to close it. Either you are for the powers of Federal eminent domain, or you are
Report Post »missionarydad
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 2:55pmMitt Romney won the debate hands down and you people who are supporting Perry have the blinders on so tight it is squeezing your brains out. If Perry gets the GOP nomination which I think is a very remote possibility he will need a train to carry all of his baggage he brings into the general and the lamestream media which is holding off on him for Obama’s reelection sake will turn on him like a shark feeding frenzy. Take off the blinders and do your homework on this new world order, progressive, bilderberg hand picked darling. If he becomes President which never will happen as the media will destroy him, but if he did he would be a playboy enjoying all of the perks and attention that comes with it and ten times worse than George Bush. Perry has never had to fix a bad economy in Texas, he is way out of his league and would be a fish out of water.
Mitt Romney has been as prepared and molded for our very chaotic and turbulent times, just like George Washington was for the Revolution, Abe Lincoln for the civil war and JFK for the Cuban missile crisis. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/09/AR2007120901473.html
Report Post »CrazyTexan
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 3:09pmI am still undecided, in the process of eliminating people. On a personal level I don’t want Perry to win because I think our Lt gov. stinks. Would like to see less political platform talking points slam and bam crap and more people laying out exactly how a candidate plans to put the big promises into action, within the constitutional confines of the power of the Executive branch.
Report Post »Okie from Muskogee
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 9:54pm@Crazy Texan
How can Islam thrive under the Constitution? It can not. Only leaving the Constitution will open the door for Islam to thrive here.
Believing in the Constitution is not foolish at all. Leaving the Constitution to force your interpreted virtues is foolish and you trying to be a redeemer, which is not Conservative.
Many land owners would gladly welcome any help they can get and yes they would even consider giving up some of their land for border security. That should tell you something.
Our founders setup moral law and said we must be FREE to hold virtues or not to, not force them. The moral law, God‘s law or Nature’s law, doesn’t force virtues, but prevents others from imposing on holding these virtues.
How do you not see you hold a progressed view…..Amazing….
Report Post »CrazyTexan
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 10:37pmOkie, You really don’t understand the difference between morals and virtue do you? What are the so called morals that I want to force on you? That you pray to God? You can pray to a russet potato for all I care, are you a virtuous person, one who cares as much about his fellow man’s ability to exercise his rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness as they do their own. That you should not be allowed to lower my property values because you want to get high? That is simply a restriction on you exercising your “right” to destroy your life and mine in the process. The Founders yes, allowed free choice but also pointed out that choosing not to uphold virtue, had consequences mainly that the form of govenment set up in it would FAIL.
In 2007 there were a total of 408 land owners in Texas affected by the Federal government trying to build a border fence, this required surveyers to come in. 258 granted access, 40 refused and 110 wouldn’t respond initially. The Federal Government wanted to force them to not only allow access but to take the property through the courts.
If your viewpoint is that the right of the individual is trumped by the right of the collective then you really don’t understand the Libertarian stance at all. That is COMMUNISM.
Where exactly did I suggest that believing in the Constitution is foolish? No, just that a society as screwed up as ours cannot prosper under it. (Read The Original Argument , by Beck)
Report Post »Okie from Muskogee
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 11:21pm@Crazy Texan
Force of virtues, say drug wars, you preventing me from drugs, created the cartels which brings down the property value of land owners on the border due to the violent crimes. Your force of “virtues” is hurting the land owners property value. I do not partake in any drugs, alcohol included, but I also do not hold the authority to prevent someone else from making that virtuous choice.
What is the difference in saying you can‘t do drugs because of virtues and can’t eat salt because of virtues? Nothing….You can’t force me into not forcing to fail. That is not your place, your power, nor your duty. Our duty is to allow choice aced on simple moral law.
Individual rights is what I stand for. Force of virtues is collectivism, virtues of a believer isn’t the same as a non believer and forcing one virtues over another is collectivism. You want to force “virtues” for the collective good.
That is communism, Crazy Texan.
Report Post »RepubliCorp
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 11:30pmOKIE FROM MUSKOGEE you have been drinking at the well of Alex Jones to long. If anything of what you say is true the CIA would plant Ron Paul’s a$$ next to JFK. Kooks!
Report Post »Okie from Muskogee
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 11:53pm@RepubliCorp
Notice how you simply insult and nothing more. Is that all the value you give yourself, the value to spew insults only? That is sad.
Truthfully I’ve heard Alex Jones twice and that is all.
Whenever you obtain self respect, honor and integrity we will hold a conversation. Until then, I will not pay attention to smears as seen assaulted against TEA party members and Ron Pal supporters..
Report Post »CrazyTexan
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 11:54pmOkie, You didn’t get it the first time so I will write it in large letters. Some people DID NOT WANT TO SELL and the government tried to take it though eminent domain. They have no recourse!!! Look up eminent domain, find out what it is.
I can assure you that I am indeed a libertarian and have been for over 20 years, probably longer than you have been alive. I am also an expert in Communism because my mother was persecuted under it and have studied the enemy to the point where I can tell you just about everything about it. Communism has no morality, they advocated for prostitution, drug and alcohol use without restriction, no marriage and no religion. They called it Freedom. Sound familiar? It evolved from a Nihlist philosophy. Libertarianism, shares some of its philosophies like Anarchism, and there are different forms of Libertarianism.
Ron Paul is a Libertarian that calls himself a Republican, because we have a two party system. His form of Libertarianism is closer to Anarchy than mine, as it sides most often with Anarchists/leftists. I am a Cosmo-Libertarian, the Anarchists hate us and call us pretty much every name in the book because we look at things from a practical rather than utopian view. Look it up on the Libertarian Party website. What I just told you Beck spent about a week going over on his FOX show, I am sure you can find a Youtube video of it and you need to watch it.
Report Post »CrazyTexan
Posted on September 9, 2011 at 12:21amOkie,
Report Post »There are two posts for you that I put for you on page 8 with some information that you really need to check out, regarding who is ultimately further to the left me or Dr. Paul, you must have missed the week Glenn discussed how the two ends of the line actually form a circle connected at Anarchy with Libertarianism to oneside and Communism to the other. (yes you can be so far right that you are left)
Okie from Muskogee
Posted on September 9, 2011 at 12:47am@Crazy
As I said, I’ll listen to the land owners. If the land owners want security, they will either give up land to be secure or they won‘t and won’t be secure. Pretty simple. Their choice.
I don’t care if you have a P.H.D. In Communism and lived under Stalin, if your forcing your virtues, or the lack there of, your communist and doing so for the collective good.
Iran believes they are virtuous by stoning gays, woman, etc for any crime they make up. We know they are not because it breaks the MORAL law. Iran uses Government to FORCE in their view, virtues. Same as communism or socialism.
If you are a Libertarian, as you say, you will hold to and agree upon the Non-Coercion Principle.
Remember, there are two sets of tracks.
Far left Far right
Progressivism Center. Constitution. Anarchy
Progressivism does not lead to Anarchy, it leads to the other set of tracks, socialism or communism, the place your taking us. Libertarians are right in line with the Constitution.
When America woke up in 07-08 we found our Government center left and since has been closing in on far left which will lead to communism you say your so familiar with. It doesn’t lead back to anarchy, unless Government is reset.
Report Post »Okie from Muskogee
Posted on September 9, 2011 at 12:58am@Crazy
Ron Paul makes no bones about declaring to be a Conservative Libertarian.
Are you completely ignorant to the fact Libertarianism is the base and soul of being a Conservative. You can’t be Conservative and bash your own roots. Cut your roots and you don’t survive.
This is exactly what has occurred, and how our “Republican” party has found itself left of center, not just right of Anarchy. Progressives hijacked the Republican party and took out the base beliefs, Libertarianism, and installed progressive core beliefs. Over time no one noticed and actually believe those fake core values are their real base leading them to bash Libertarians, their original base.
Are you denying Republicans have been hijacked by progressives?
Believe how you wish. It is sad you believe forcing of virtues for the collective good isn’t communism. Amazing. Have a good night.
Report Post »CrazyTexan
Posted on September 9, 2011 at 1:25amYou didn’t bother looking any of the things up I suggested did you? As for the arguement of eminant domain, you just contradicted what Dr. Paul and 99% of libertarians have been saying about it for decades. They argue that at its base it is unconstitutional because it was formulated for the 5th ammendment by referring to common law!!!! I tried to help you out on that one but you missed it. You also missed an episode, which is why I was telling you to go back and take a look. Glenn realized that it was actually a circle, he covered it on both his radio show and tv, that the two met at anarchy with libertarianism on one side and communism at the other.
Report Post »What purpose does government serve? Why did the Founders have a government at all? If everyone is free to do what ever he or she wanted regardless of morality why did they go to the trouble of setting up a government at all?
To protect rights, not just your right to act like an idiot, but mine as well to not have my life, property, or my pursuit of happiness destroyed by your choices. As far as I am concerned you have the right to destroy yourself in anyway you see fit, it is no skin off my nose but I have the right to protect myself from your damaging behavior. You can do drugs, your choice, but I can fire or not hire you in the first place, legalized or not, my choice.
Okie from Muskogee
Posted on September 9, 2011 at 1:48am@Crazy Texan
I’ve seen every show and need not go back to look.
You can’t have total government and no government. You have to be completely stupid to argue that. It is virtually impossible. Yes, one may lead to the other as Karl Marx suggests but not together at once.
Why do you believe I am for immanent domain? I said listen to the border land owners. Government and land owners can find the best solution. Not me, someone who does not live on the border. Land owners will either find some way to work with Government for security, or they won‘t and probably won’t be secure. I’m not an immanent domain advocate.
Morality and virtues are different, remember crazy Texan? Government was formed for defense of moral law, rights, given by God to each of us. Life (opportunity to live from conception), Liberty (Freedom, without virtuous persecution), Pursuit of happiness (chasing of what makes me happy).
If some crazy Texan wants to smoke dope, that does not infringe upon me, at all. Force of my virtues, drugs are bad, does infringe upon crazy texans right to smoke dope. If some crazy Texan wants to pay for sex and an STD, that does not infringe upon my rights not to do so. Force of my virtues, hookers are bad, does infringe on crazy texan’s right of happiness.
It can not be any clearer for you. If I need to draw pictures, let me know.
Report Post »CrazyTexan
Posted on September 9, 2011 at 7:36amYou refused to even talk to Republicorp, so now who is name calling? Why I still bother with you is beyond me. “You cannot have freedom without responsibility” another one of Glenn’s favorite sayings that you seem to have missed. You have not read The Original Argument , which is very apparent in you discussion and you don’t remember a presentation that Glenn made that was a keystone, all of which leads me to wonder if you are one of those liberal plants that Glenn talked about yesterday.
Under martial law you can have an anarchy of the population either caused by or resulting from one or the other. So yes, you can have a totalitarian government with anarchy amongst a population simultaneously.
And I never said you were for eminant (not imminent domain). I said Ron Paul is against it and has advocated a constitutional ammendment to remove it.
Like I said, do drugs, knock yourself out, but the same freedom that will allow you to do that will allow me to not hire you or fire you for it. Paul conveinently forgot to mention that little tid bit.
You still have not answered the fundamental question that should decide who we vote for, which is how does your candidate take all of his promises and make them a reality within the confines of the Constitution and his 4 year term in office?
Report Post »CrazyTexan
Posted on September 9, 2011 at 8:26amYou may find this article since it discusses the issue of “moral rights”
“a truly free society means the freedom to discriminate — against any group for any reason.”
http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig8/preston6.html
Think this guy is a nut? He sure does like Ron Paul.
Report Post »Okie from Muskogee
Posted on September 9, 2011 at 9:27am@Crazy Texan
I refuse to call names back and forth without talking facts and until Republicorp quits his trolling, hit and runs as you call it, I won’t. Every post Republicorp posts is negative, name calling, and hardly factual.
Thank you for correcting my spelling.
Correct, you can’t have freedom without responsibility. It isn‘t your responsibility to force your view of virtues on me unless you’d like me to force mine on you. The responsibility is to allow freedom to others, even those you disagree with. Do we need to post Glenn’s responsibility list?
I understand fully the rights of a business owner, including drug testing how I see fit. That does not mean I can force some Crazy Texan not to do drugs.
Is Martial Law a form of Government? YES, an authoritative military Government. Therefore, you do not have anarchy. You have Government to suppress the unruly citizens. Anarchy has NO authority. You do understand the difference in something and nothing. Between 0-1. Between present and absent. Between night and day. Between hot and cold. One has, the other has not. It ain’t rocket science bubba…
The answer to how we should vote is simple: do you vote to progress or do you vote to restore. Ron Paul has been very clear in saying restoring our country won’t happen over night but he will begin the process and point the country in the right direction.
Now I’m a Liberal plant and you can mind read on what books I have or have not read. Hmmm
Report Post »goofyfoot2001
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 7:43amWhy has every article in the press today completely ignored the other candidates? Huntsman did a good job and so did Cain. Hell, Newt wasn’t so bad either. Bachman looked terrible as did Perry and Romney. none of the leading candidates impressed me at all.
Report Post »OlefromMN
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 7:40amIt should read “AP Fact Checks Debate Candidates…With It‘s Own ’Facts’ “
Report Post »LIBSALWAYSLIE
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 7:39amIts no longer called the MAINstream media, there is NOTHING mainstream about it. From now on, it is called the LIBERAL media. Lets be factual about THAT!
Report Post »loriann12
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 7:36amBush saw more jobs created as Governor because he didn’t have Obama as president. Obama is following the Cloward and Piven plan, to destroy our country. He wants a Marxist system.
Report Post »Juliedoesnotgiveup
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 7:46amGood point
Report Post »MONICNE
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 8:12am“A child of five would understand this. Send someone to fetch a child of five.” (G. Marx)
I have to agree with LA12 that then was then and now is now.
Governor Bush benefitted from President Clinton and Speaker Gingrich working together. These days, there is no cooperation and it negatively affects our nation.
Mister Obama is at fault for not defeating the “Party of No” attitude these days. He has stubbornly reached out time after time to the loyal opposition, but we will not shake his outstretched hand.
TEA
Report Post »zorro
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 8:55amIt was a different economic time as well.
Report Post »saranda
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 9:27amHey Lorraine, you do know that Perry has been governor of Texas since 2000. He had the entire Bush presidency as well as the first almost 3 years of Obama. Stop making excuses for this guy. He is the worst case scenario for this country.
Report Post »Huntsman is my choice but the TP won’t rally around him.
ares338
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 7:35amI would vote for almost anyone on the face of the earth over Obama except for any Democrat ever.
Report Post »Liberty-or-Death
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 8:05amIt seems that anyone would be better than Obama…but think about it. If the financial system collapses, (read Gata.org , zerohedge.com) who could we trust to restore the system? Bachmann, Perry, Romney, Gingrich, Santorum…? Gimme a break, we’re screwed. Maybe Herman Cain, he at least is a free market supporter, but he has a lot of other issues. Like everyone else here, four years ago, I thought Ron Paul was a lunatic. Now, I’m not so sure. Some of his views are hard to swallow, but he is almost always right. (watch some mises.org stuff on youtube) We need someone who won’t trample the rights that we stii have; as in suspending habeus corpus or declaring marshall law. Glenn has said that the next president would have to give the power back. wtf!? At least if it is Obama, the resistance goes on. Any of the other stooges will crush the republican party forever, and leave us with nothing. There is only one answer, return to the Jefferson/Madison principles of a restrained federal gov’t, CAMPAIGN FOR LIBERTY now, before it is too late. (disclaimer: I am a recovering republican progressive/neocon)
Report Post »flyoverbob
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 7:35amWhy would we beleive the AP,when they say the planet is warming?The fact is it is not warming
Report Post »amuzed_right_guy
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 7:34amWhat a joke: “AP fact checks” the Republican candidates? What’s with these people? It seems they only “fact-check” Conservatives. With all the lies, distortions, and corruption coming out of the current Administration in Washington, AP should focus its attention on the current liar in the White House and his deceitful cronies in the House and Senate. It seems AP is only interested in promoting “facts” when they support the liberal ideology that has wrecked our free market economy and is destroying our nation. The “fact” is, AP is a mouthpiece for the DNC and a propagandist promoting the aims and the agenda of the progressive, liberal ruling class in DC.
Report Post »hillbillyinny
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 7:31amThe “science” may be “settled” on global warming and other things, but I, personally, based on the l lies, fabrications, and partial truths DO NOT BELIEVE THE SCIENTISTS who have put this “science” and others forward. Evolution, global warming/cooling, and many other areas of science (which cannot be PROVED WITHOUT A DOUBT), are still THEORIES!
I, personally, will throw my hat in the ring of Belief and Faith and go with a God Who shows Himself continually through His creation, His timing and His miracles. If I’m wrong, I’ve lost nothing, but if I‘m right I’ve gained much. And in the meantime, I, nor any of the faith-believing candidates will belittle you if you don’t believe in a God or His control of His creation. But, we will pray for scoffers salvation, goodness and new believers’ fruit bearing.
Thank you Lord!
Report Post »RushEcho2
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 8:12amYou are correct—good insights, and a good comment. “He watching over Israel, slumbers not nor sleeps.” That would be the Creator. As explained by Dr Roy Spencer, His children have a cloud cover that moderates temperature and rays. More clouds when it is warm and water becomes water-vapor.
The official climatologist for Rush Limbaugh (who says Algore is a hoax and a fraud) is the author of “The Great Global Warming BLUNDER” and you can read the best updates on AGW, manmade global warming at:
http://www.drroyspencer.com/latest-global-temperatures/
AP really revealed their hand when they said we have ‘settled science’. Perry is right, we don’t.
If anything is settled, it is that eMails show the Fraud & Hoax for money. AP ignores that.
Report Post »Stopit
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 11:23amGod, who designed, created, and sustains his creation, knows where the thermostat controlling the temperature of the earth is located, and He has the “remote control” in his possession;
“And the fourth angel poured out his vial upon the sun; and power was given unto him to scorch men with fire. And men were scorched with great heat, and blasphemed the name of God, which hath power over these plagues: and they repented not to give him glory.” Rev 16:8-9
Report Post »SpankDaMonkey
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 7:30am.
Report Post »Pick a RINO any RINO……I sure hope this is not the best we have…….The kid who cut’s my grass has more of a clue than this bunch…………
mardec
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 7:29amRomney pointed out the major differences between Massachusetts and Texas, such a the huge fact that Texas is by and large run by Republicans with a Republican Legislature, whereas Romney was a Republican governor in an overwhelmingly Democrat state with a miniscule number of Republicans in the Legislature. He also pointed out the natural resources that Texas has compared to little to none in Massachusetts…not to mention the physical difference in size of the 2 states. So it is inherently unfair to compare the two. Romney’s 4.7% unemployed will match anyone else running for office.
But it is also unfair to compare the wages in these 2 states, because the Cost of Living in Massachusetts is significantly higher than in Texas. So the lower wages in Texas should not be compared to the high wages paid in Massachusetts or New York, both of which have higher taxes as well as much higher housing costs, etc.
Report Post »Stuck_in_CA
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 7:43amRomney had a hostile environment, for sure. I thought he did very well last night. Looked/acted presidential. Perry came across as nit-picky and mean.
Report Post »americanfirst
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 10:06amI agree. I think Romney is the grown-up in the bunch. Good night for Newt he is the politically astute candidate. Perry, I think, very clearly suffers comparatively. I disagree w/ several Perry die-hards but, I don’t think he had a good night. He doesn’t speak well and his thoughts are scattered. I agrred w/ him on capital punishment but so would have any of the candidates.
I think Texans, in particular, are at risk of voting fo their Governor simply because he is Texan. That is significant when it is obvious he is not the man for the job.
Again.. Texas Trans Corridor
Mandatory Vaccinations
Bilderberg meeting attendee (by invitation only) 2007
Texas Dream Act
against Arizona Illegal Immigration Enforcement
former Democrat
defended global warming in the past
Texas Chair to elect Al Gore
should I go on???? what will it take?
…and I am a staunch Tea party conservative from Texas.
Rick Perry is much better than Obama – but clearly NOT the best candidate in the GOP field by a long shot.
Report Post »bolsen00
Posted on September 9, 2011 at 1:20amAmericanfirst–I agree with your analysis. Romney graduate with double degrees from Harvard in law and in business. Romneys answers are more substantive and he shows a deep understanding of the issues. Perry reminds me of Obama’s speech and campaign style, speaking in platitudes, and broad sweeping generalizations. Perry complains about the economy but has produced no plans, he complains about lack of healthcare coverage among Texans but has no plan to deal with the problems. He complains about social security but has no plan to deal with the problems. Perry is reading kissinger’s book to understand foreign policy. Romney discusses his plans and can speak in detail.
Report Post »UBETHECHANGE
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 7:26amThe left leaning AP really? Blaze fail.
Report Post »loriann12
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 7:33amI wish the AP had vetted Obama as well as they tear apart what Republican nominees say. I don‘t see them pointing out all the lies that come out of Obama’s mouth. And Obama hasn’t increased even low paying jobs, so what’s the problem there? He just increases unemployment benefits and welfare recipients.
Report Post »Stuck_in_CA
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 7:39amMy memory may be failing a bit, in my old age, but I don’t recall AP or anyone else, coming out with fact check so quickly, for the claims BO made in 2007. This must be in record time
Report Post »HKS
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 7:53amIf the AP was doing its job so well, why did we get a pig in the poke at the last election? If this is the source of trustworthy data how about applying it to the governments job claims for a real unemployment rate or how about calling temporary service jobs real jobs or cycling government employees in and out to count them as more jobs? Everyone knows they stop counting you after you have been out of work for some period of time. It would be nice to pay your house payment that way, forget the past due stuff and just pay the current payment and your OK. If they consider themselves some kind of watch dog I have news for you, I see a lap dog.
Report Post »MONICNE
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 8:18amGoogle: (Obama+AP+fact+check) and be prepared to see 3.7 million headlines like, “AP Fact Check destroys Obama’s Libya speech” dated the day afte the speech.
Like the TEA Party, AP Fact Check did not exist during the 2007 election cycle. But now it’s fast and pretty accurate.
TEA
Report Post »RushEcho2
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 10:45amDear Moni-babe; I took your suggestion to Google fact+checking+Obama (the plus signs indicate that specific words must be included: {Obama+AP+Fact+Check} and get 4.5million hits. Here is the most frequent:
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/aps-fact-check-hammers-obamas-speech/
Report Post »Sleazy Hippo
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 6:04pmHa ha ha I went to your link and saw the SAME posters who are against the AP on this thread, saying stuff like, “Hats off to the AP!” – Ha ha ha.
Report Post »Marylou7
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 7:25amAND the AP isn’t biased at all, right? I believe nothing I read or hear anymore without checking it out myself.
Report Post »jens63
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 7:22amI still have objections to blaming global warming on human activity. What human activity caused the following….? (from wikipedia, medieval Warm Period) “The Vikings took advantage of ice-free seas to colonize Greenland and other outlying lands of the far north.[25] Around 1000AD the climate was sufficiently warm for the north of Newfoundland to support a Viking colony and led to the descriptor “Vinland”. The MWP was followed by the Little Ice Age, a period of cooling that lasted until the 19th century, and the Viking settlements eventually died out. In the Chesapeake Bay, researchers found large temperature excursions (changes from the mean temperature of that time) during the Medieval Warm Period (about 950–1250)[10] and the Little Ice Age (about 1400–1700, with cold periods persisting into the early 20th century),[10] possibly related to changes in the strength of North Atlantic thermohaline circulation.[26] Sediments in Piermont Marsh of the lower Hudson Valley show a dry Medieval Warm period from AD 800–1300.”
Report Post »jens63
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 7:27amI guess basically what I am saying is I don’t think a lot of their fact checking, at least in this department…
Report Post »SamIamTwo
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 7:58amWiki is more credible than AP, that’s for sure.
Report Post »RushEcho2
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 8:29amWikipedia is a great source. I am an editor. But on AGW they also say the science is settled, ignoring the vast cache of eMails showing the Hoax and Fraud for your money, trillions.
Conservative editors have to bow to the Liberal editors in Wikipedia, due to their great number and passion for Political Correctness (defined by Liberals throughout the world.) Liberals want to ‘feel good’ and think they make a ‘difference’ regardless of facts and true science.
Even in the page/article on “Global warming controversy” they have to throw in “In the scientific literature, there is a strong consensus that global surface temperatures have increased in recent decades and that the trend is caused mainly by human-induced emissions of greenhouse gases. No scientific body of national or international standing disagrees with this view,[3][4] though a few organisations hold non-committal positions.”
What about the sun? Are the people on/in Mars also causing Mars to warm as it is, like Earth?
Report Post »blue_sky
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 7:16amGovernor Perry,
Let it be clear: It is not that you supported Al Gore that worries us.
- It is that you supported Hillary Clinton’s health care plan.
- You pushed for a federal bailout and stimulus funds.
- You support welfare for illegal immigrants.
- You tried to forcibly vaccinate 12-year-old girls against sexually transmitted diseases by executive order.
- You raised taxes twice.
- And, state debt has more than doubled in your tenure as governor, pushing Texas to the brink of our constitutional debt limit.
It’s that you supported ALL of these bad ideas that are inconsistent with how most Republicans understand conservatism, yet you now try to swagger your way into the Tea Party.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CtDBp1OrCwI
blahntosh
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 7:24amNot to mention the comment at the end of defending/explaining his Vaccine mandate…”I will always ‘err on the side of saving lives”
Report Post »Charb
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 7:32amI’ve not been a proponent of Ron Paul. However, I do enjoy that he’s the least “political” and offers the least spin on his viewpoints. That said, if there is ANY time to say, “Give the guy a chance,” that time would be now. There’s nothing to lose when replacing the socialist-machine that currently resides.
Report Post »Juliedoesnotgiveup
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 8:10amThe time for trying to discredit perry has come and gone. That ship has sailed.
Report Post »RushEcho2
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 8:19amThere are more Republican debates: CNN on Mon 9/12/2011 and FoxNews on 9/22 Thurs.
Report Post »Rush Limbaugh says if the debate were held today, Obama is Landslideable, BUT that
there are 14 months until the election and a lot can happen between now and then. Be vigilant.
JohnGalt
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 8:46amI really Liked Herman Cain, he didn’t bother getting into the mudslinging, he just proposed solutions to our problems.
Report Post »RepubliCorp
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 8:57amRon Paul / Dennis Kucinich 2012
Report Post »http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qx9a4hNeIRo&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x4DRZP9JgBA
Trenaway
Posted on September 8, 2011 at 9:20amBlue_sky, stop posting your cultist Ronnie stuff here.
Report Post »proud redstater
Posted on September 9, 2011 at 12:26amyou paul people need to get a life and leave glenns blog alone. you dont support israel – your as bad as mel gibson. ron paul is not a republican as rush limbaugh says he will ruin the party and sean hannity thinks hes dangerous. ron paul says the wars should end but there are people trying to kill us all the time and they wont let up. we need to be fighting these people on their homeland and invade them untilt they cry uncle. rick santorum will defend america by fighting utnil we win.
Report Post »