So Where Do the GOP Presidential Candidates Stand on Abortion, Immigration & Terrorism?
- Posted on November 7, 2011 at 7:06am by
Billy Hallowell
- Print »
- Email »
The Associated Press has assembled an extensive article highlighting where the Republican presidential candidates’ stances on abortion, debt, the economy, education, energy, the environment and gay marriage, among other issues. Below, find the AP’s analysis and see which candidate most readily agrees with your values:
WASHINGTON (AP) — Here’s where the 2012 Republican presidential candidates stand on a selection of issues.
They are Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann, businessman Herman Cain, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, former Utah Gov. John Huntsman, Texas Rep. Ron Paul, Texas Gov. Rick Perry, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum.
ABORTION:
Bachmann: Backed efforts to declare the unborn “persons” under the Constitution, the most direct challenge to the Supreme Court’s affirmation of abortion rights. Signed pledge to advance only anti-abortion appointees for relevant administration jobs, cut off federal dollars for clinics that perform or finance abortions, and support a ban on abortions after the fetus reaches a certain stage in development. Introduced bill to require pregnant women to see and hear the fetal heartbeat before having an abortion. Promoted other anti-abortion bills, including some that contained exceptions for rape, incest or the life of a mother. Sought to put abortion restrictions into Minnesota’s constitution while in state Legislature.
Cain: Says president should only nominate anti-abortion judges, “the Constitution contains no right to take the life of unborn children,” and he would support amending the Constitution to ban the procedure. Took contradictory positions, saying there should be “abortion under no circumstances” yet it is “not the government’s role” to decide the question but rather a decision for women and families to make.
Gingrich: Signed anti-abortion pledge. “Principles to protect life” platform calls for conservative judges and no subsidies for abortion but not for constitutional abortion ban.
Huntsman: Signed abortion restrictions into law as governor, favors constitutional abortion ban.
Ron Paul
Paul: Says federal government should have no authority either to legalize or ban abortion. Yet signed pledge to advance only anti-abortion appointees for relevant administration jobs, cut off federal dollars for clinics that perform or finance abortions, and support a ban on abortions after the fetus reaches a certain stage in development.
Perry: Now supports constitutional abortion ban after saying states should decide their own laws on such issues. Backed Texas law that attempts to discourage abortions by making doctors describe the fetus’ size limbs and organs to the woman, and make available an image of the fetus and the sound of its heartbeat to her, before she can have the procedure.
Romney: Opposes abortion rights. Previously supported them. Says state law should guide abortion rights and Roe v. Wade should be reversed by a future Supreme Court. But says Roe vs. Wade is law of the land until that happens and should not be challenged by federal legislation seeking to overturn abortion rights affirmed by that court decision. Would not sign pledge to advance only anti-abortion appointees for relevant administration jobs, cut off federal dollars for clinics that perform or finance abortions, and support a ban on abortions after the fetus reaches a certain stage in development. “So I would live within the law, within the Constitution as I understand it, without creating a constitutional crisis. But I do believe Roe v. Wade should be reversed to allow states to make that decision.”
Santorum: Favors constitutional abortion ban and opposes abortion even in cases of rape because “I would absolutely stand and say that one violence is enough.” Previously supported right to abortion in cases of rape, incest and to save the life of the mother.
—
DEBT:
Michele Bachmann
Bachmann: Opposed the agreement worked out by Congress and the White House to raise the debt ceiling and avoid a default. Said U.S. could have paid only the interest on debt while working out a plan to cut spending more deeply.
Cain: Opposed deal to raise debt ceiling and avoid default. Favors unspecified spending cuts to balance federal budget.
Gingrich: As House speaker in mid-1990s, engineered passage of a seven-year balanced-budget plan. It was vetoed by President Bill Clinton but helped form a bipartisan balanced budget two years later. Supports constitutional balanced budget amendment. Said that without a balanced budget, the U.S. had no choice but to raise its debt limit in the deal that avoided a default.
Huntsman: Only candidate to endorse the deal that averted a default on U.S. debt payments, “a positive step toward cutting our nation’s crippling debt.”
Paul: Would eviscerate federal government, slashing nearly half its spending, shut five Cabinet-level agencies, end spending on existing conflicts and on foreign aid.
Perry: Was non-committal on the deal that avoided default and raised debt ceiling. Proposes to cap federal spending at 18 percent of gross domestic product, down from about 25 percent today, but no specifics on major spending cuts other than raising retirement age for Social Security and Medicare benefits for future retirees. Favors constitutional balanced-budget amendment. “No more bailouts.” Freeze size and salaries of federal civilian work force until budget is balanced.
Romney: Defended 2008 bailout of financial institutions as a necessary step to avoid the system’s collapse, criticized the bailout of General Motors and Chrysler and said any such aid should not single out specific companies. Cap federal spending at 20 percent of gross domestic product, down from today’s recession-swollen 25 percent. Stayed silent during debt-ceiling negotiations, only announcing his opposition to the final deal shortly before lawmakers cast their votes. Favors constitutional balanced budget amendment. Proposes 10 percent cut in federal workforce, elimination of $1.6 billion in Amtrak subsidies and cuts of $600 million in support for the public arts and broadcasting.
Santorum: Opposed the financial-industry bailout and stimulus programs of the Bush and Obama administrations. Supports constitutional balanced budget amendment.
—
ECONOMY:
Bachmann: Voted for $192 billion in stimulus spending in July 2009; voted against two earlier stimulus packages totaling nearly $900 billion and against housing aid and auto-industry aid. Opposed extension of jobless benefits. “Government overregulation is the single biggest jobs killer.” Repeal the financial-industry regulations enacted in response to the subprime housing crisis.
Herman Cain
Cain: Proposal for 9 percent tax on income, business and sales is centerpiece of economic platform. Reduce regulations. “Ultimately, the free market, aided in part by the watchful eyes of investors and consumers, will regulate itself.” Supported Wall Street bailout, says it was executed poorly.
Gingrich: Repeal the 2010 financial industry and consumer protection regulations that followed the Wall Street meltdown, and repeal the 2002 regulations enacted in response to the Enron and other corporate and accounting scandals. Restrict the Fed’s power to set interest rates artificially low. Make work training a condition of unemployment insurance and have states run it.
Huntsman: End corporate subsidies, cut regulations, lower taxes, spur jobs through energy development, seek repeal of President Barack Obama’s health care law.
Paul: Return to the gold standard, eliminate the Federal Reserve, let gold and silver be used as legal tender, eliminate most federal regulations.
Perry: Spur economy by repealing rafts of regulations, Obama’s health care law and the law (Dodd-Frank) toughening financial-industry regulations after the meltdown in that sector. Create jobs in energy sector by removing obstacles to drilling and production. Cut corporate taxes.
Romney: Lower taxes, less regulation, balanced budget, more trade deals to spur growth. Replace jobless benefits with unemployment savings accounts. Proposes repeal of the law (Dodd-Frank) toughening financial-industry regulations after the meltdown in that sector. Proposes changing, but not repealing, the (Sarbanes-Oxley) law tightening accounting regulations in response to corporate scandals, to ease the accountability burden on smaller businesses. “We don’t want to tell the world that Republicans are against all regulation. No, regulation is necessary to make a free market work. But it has to be updated and modern.”
Santorum: Spur jobs by eliminating corporate taxes for manufacturers, drill for more oil and gas, and slash regulations. “Repeal every regulation the Obama administration has put in place that’s over $100 million. Repeal them all. You may have to replace a few, but let’s repeal them all because they are all antagonistic to businesses, particularly in the manufacturing sector.”
—
EDUCATION:
Bachmann: Wants to abolish Education Department, which she calls unconstitutional. Says federal government doesn’t have a role in education; jurisdiction is with state and local governments. Tried to pull Minnesota out of No Child Left Behind law.
Cain: “Unbundle education from the federal government down to the local level,” expand charter schools and school choice.
Newt Gingrich
Gingrich: “Dramatically shrink the federal Department of Education, get rid of virtually all of its regulations.” But supported Obama administration’s $4 billion Race to the Top grant competition for states, which encourages compliance with national education standards, because it also promotes charter schools.
Huntsman: “No Child Left Behind hasn’t worked for this country. It ought to be done away with.” Favors more school choice.
Paul: Abolish the Education Department and end the federal role in education.
Perry: Turned down federal education aid to Texas worth up to $700 million because he saw it as imposing national standards on Texas schools. Says No Child Left Behind law gave Washington too much power to interfere with local government.
Romney: Supported the federal accountability standards of No Child Left Behind law. In 2007, said he was wrong earlier in his career when he wanted the Education Department shut because he came to see the value of the federal government in “holding down the interests of the teachers’ unions” and putting kids and parents first.
Santorum: Voted for No Child Left Behind law. Wants “significantly” smaller Education Department but not its elimination. Criticized early childhood education programs as an attempt by government to “indoctrinate your children.”
—
ENERGY:
Bachmann: Reduce regulatory impediments to drilling. Voted to open the outer continental shelf to oil drilling. Voted against tax breaks for renewable energy and conservation.
Cain: “Responsibly” relax regulations on energy industries. Policy should be “drill here, drill now.” End restrictions on exploiting Western shale oil deposits. Opposes ethanol subsidies.
Gingrich: Let oil and natural gas industries drill offshore reserves now blocked from development, end restrictions on Western oil shale development. In Alaska alone, “We could liberate an area the size of Texas for minerals and other development.”
John Huntsman
Huntsman: Used tax credits to promote clean energy in Utah but says he has learned that “subsidies don’t work and that we can no longer afford them.” Favors phasing out all energy subsidies and cutting regulatory obstacles to drilling and production. Says nation’s fuel distribution network should be subject to Federal Trade Commission and Senate Judiciary Committee review because it gives oil an unfair advantage over natural gas. “We need to break oil’s monopoly as a transportation fuel, and create a truly level playing field for competing fuels.”
Paul: Remove restrictions on drilling, coal and nuclear power, eliminate gasoline tax, provide tax credits for alternative fuel technology.
Perry: Proposes authorizing more development on federal lands and slashing regulations to spur drilling in restricted areas and open off-limits waters and lands to production, including the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and the Southern Atlantic and Alaskan outer continental shelves. Opposes federal restrictions on natural gas production, including environmentally risky fracturing techniques and horizontal drilling.
Romney: Accelerate drilling permits in areas where exploration has already been approved for developers with good safety records. Supports drilling in the Gulf of Mexico, Atlantic and Pacific outer continental shelves, Western lands, the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and offshore Alaska; and supports exploitation of shale oil deposits. Reduce obstacles to coal, natural gas and nuclear energy development. Says green power has yet to become viable.
Santorum: Favors drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and scaling back “oppressive regulation” hindering drilling elsewhere.
—
ENVIRONMENT:
Bachmann: Open federal lands to economic activity by “repealing radical environmental laws that kill access to natural resources.” Voted to bar Environmental Protection Agency from regulating greenhouse gases. Opposes cap and trade.
Cain: EPA has gone “wild with abuse.“ The science establishing the existence of global warming is ”poppycock.” Says climate change poses no real threat.
Gingrich: Convert EPA into an “environmental solutions agency” devoted to scientific research and “more energy, more jobs and a better environment simultaneously.” Supported tougher environmental regulation early in congressional career.
Huntsman: End the EPA’s “regulatory reign of terror.” Acknowledges the scientific evidence that humans contribute to global warming. As governor, supported regional cap-and-trade program to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and urged Congress to cap them. “I will break down barriers to the continued, safe use of fracking,” an environmentally risky technique for extracting natural gas.
Paul: In 2008, said “human activity probably does play a role” in global warming and part of the solution should be to stop subsidizing the oil industry and let prices rise until the free market turns to alternate energy sources. Now calls the science on manmade global warming a “hoax.” Says emission standards should be set by states or regions, not Washington.
Rick Perry
Perry: Manmade global warming is a “scientific theory that has not been proven and from my perspective is more and more being put into question.” Proposes repeal of EPA’s authority to regulate greenhouse gases and elimination of all EPA programs to restrict carbon dioxide emissions. Opposes restrictions on coal industry under the Clean Air and Clean Water acts. Says environmental regulation and conservation are best achieved at state level and EPA should be converted to a “research and advisory” agency with no enforcement powers except when states ask for federal arbitration of regional disputes. As governor, cut money for clean air programs, cut the budget for Texas’ environmental watchdog by a third and sued EPA to avoid enforcing clean air laws. Signed law that requires Texas to consider the effect of new regulations on the economy before passing them. Supports environmentally risky techniques for extracting natural gas.
Romney: Spending a fortune to cut the emissions linked to global warming “is not the right course for us.” Has acknowledged the scientific consensus that humans contribute to global warming: “I believe the world is getting warmer, and I believe that humans have contributed to that.” But now says: “My view is that we don‘t know what’s causing climate change on this planet.” Proposes to remove carbon dioxide from list of pollutants controlled by Clean Air Act, and amend clean water and air laws to ensure the cost of complying with regulations is balanced against environmental benefit. Says cap and trade would “rocket energy prices.”
Santorum: The science establishing human activity as a likely contributor to global warming is “patently absurd” and “junk science.”
—
GAY MARRIAGE:
Michele Bachmann
Bachmann: Supports constitutional amendment banning gay marriage. Says federal law trumps state law on the issue but she “would not be going into the states to overturn their state law.”
Cain: Says traditional marriage should be protected in federal law and no longer believes the question can be left to each state.
Gingrich: If the Defense of Marriage Act fails, “you have no choice except a constitutional amendment” to ban gay marriage. Under the act, the federal government does not recognize same-sex marriage and no state is forced to recognize a same-sex marriage validated by another state.
Huntsman: Supports same-sex civil unions, with many of the rights of marriage, and says states should decide their own policies.
Paul: Says decisions on legalizing or prohibiting should be left to states. Supports federal law allowing one state to refuse to recognize the same-sex marriages of another state.
Perry: Now supports constitutional ban on gay marriage after saying states should choose their own courses.
Romney: Favors constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage, says policy should be set federally, not by states. “Marriage is not an activity that goes on within the walls of a state.”
Santorum: Supports constitutional ban on same-sex marriage, not leaving decision to states. “We can’t have 50 marriage laws.“ ”Abraham Lincoln said the states do not have the right to do wrong. I respect the 10th Amendment, but we are a nation that has values. We are a nation that was built on a moral enterprise, and states don’t have the right to tramp over those because of the 10th Amendment.”
—
HEALTH CARE:
Bachmann: Promises to seek repeal of Obama’s health care law. Favors limits on medical lawsuits as a way to control health care costs. Voted against expanding Children’s Health Insurance Program and against regulating tobacco as a drug.
Cain: Repeal Obama’s health care law. Expand tax-advantaged medical savings accounts. Control medical malpractice lawsuits in hopes of lowering costs in health care system. Set up state or federal insurance pools for people shut out of insurance because of pre-existing illness.
Gingrich: Repeal Obama’s health care law if Republicans win congressional majorities. Prohibit insurers from cancelling or charging discriminatory rate increases to those who become sick while insured, which is an element of Obama’s law. Offer the choice of a “generous” tax credit to help people buy health insurance or the ability to deduct part of the cost from taxes, another feature similar to the existing law. Limit medical lawsuits to restrain health care costs and let people in one state buy policies in another. “Block-grant Medicaid and send it back to the states.” Previously supported proposals that people be required to carry health insurance.
Huntsman: “Let the states experiment.“ Says government should ”absolutely not” require anyone to have health insurance, although he once said a mandate would be necessary for any comprehensive change to succeed. Open to restricting Medicare benefits for the wealthy. Seek repeal of Obama’s health care law.
Paul: Opposes compulsory insurance and all government subsidies for health coverage. Favors letting people deduct full cost of their health coverage and care from taxes. Says doctors should then feel an obligation to treat the needy for free.
Perry: Repeal Obama health care law. Raise eligibility age for Medicare benefits, limit benefits for the wealthy and give people the choice of receiving federal aid to help purchase their own insurance instead of getting the direct benefits of the current system. Proposes turning Medicaid over to the states with no-strings federal support. Texas has the highest percentage of uninsured people in the nation. Signed a law that would allow Texas – subject to federal approval – to band together with other states and take over the role of providing health care coverage for the elderly, the poor and the disabled.
Mitt Romney
Romney: Promises to work for the repeal of the federal health care law modeled largely after his universal health care achievement in Massachusetts because he says states, not Washington, should drive policy on the uninsured. But would retain the prohibition against denying insurance to people with pre-existing conditions. Would expand individual tax-advantaged medical savings accounts and let the savings be used for insurance premiums as well as personal medical costs. Would let insurance be sold across state lines to expand options, and restrict malpractice awards to restrain health care costs. Introduce “generous” but undetermined subsidies to help future retirees buy private insurance instead of going on traditional Medicare. No federal requirement for people to have health insurance. His Massachusetts plan requires people to have coverage, penalizes those who don’t, and penalizes businesses of a certain size if they do not provide coverage to workers. His state has highest percentage of insured in nation. On Medicaid, proposes to convert program to a federal block grant administered by states
Santorum: Would seek to starve Obama’s health care law of money needed to implement it. Supported Bush administration’s prescription drug program for the elderly.
—
IMMIGRATION:
Bachmann: Favors fence all along the 1,900-mile U.S.-Mexico border, not just the 650 miles built at a cost of $2.6 billion. Opposes government benefits for illegal immigrants and their children.
Cain: Secure the border with “whatever means necessary” and “empower the states” to deal with the issue. “We can have high fences and wide open doors, all at the same time.”
Gingrich: Make English the official language. Divert more Homeland Security assets to fighting illegal immigration at Mexican border.
Huntsman: Unrealistic to deport all illegal immigrants. Says a fence is probably a necessary step to securing the border even though “the thought of a fence to some extent repulses me, because it is not consistent with the image that we projected to the rest of the world.” In Utah, threatened to veto a bill to repeal cheaper in-state college tuition rates for children of illegal immigrants.
Paul: Do “whatever it takes” to secure the border, end the right to citizenship of U.S.-born children of illegal immigrants, no social services for illegal immigrants, aggressive deportation of those who overstay a visa or otherwise break U.S. law.
Perry: Opposes complete U.S.-Mexico border fence, which he calls “idiocy,” instead wants more border agents. Supports continued U.S. citizenship for U.S.-born children of illegal immigrants. Illegal immigrants can get in-state tuition at Texas universities if they meet other residency requirements. Neither employers nor state agencies required to run job applicants through a federal database to determine their legal status. Illegal immigrants have access to services for drug treatment, mental health and children with special health care needs.
Romney: Favors complete U.S.-Mexico border fence, opposes education benefits to illegal immigrants. Proposes more visas for holders of advanced degrees in math, science and engineering who have U.S. job offers, and would award permanent residency to foreign students who graduate from U.S. schools with a degree in those fields.
Santorum: Supports complete border fence, opposes letting children of illegal immigrants qualify for cheaper in-state tuition and says federal government should not require states to offer any social services to illegal immigrants. Favors making English the official language.
—
SOCIAL SECURITY:
Bachmann: Keep Social Security for older workers and “wean everybody else off.“ Says it is ”very likely” that the age for retirement benefits will have to go up for new workers.
Cain: Give younger workers the option of diverting Social Security taxes to private retirement accounts. Keep Social Security intact for older workers. Ultimately “wean people off the current system,” pare down federal entitlements and leave the needy to be helped by states, cities, charities and businesses.
Gingrich: Give younger workers the option of diverting Social Security taxes to private retirement accounts.
Huntsman: Open to raising the retirement age to qualify for full benefits and to restricting benefits for the wealthy.
Paul: Says younger workers should be able to opt out of Social Security taxes and retirement benefits.
Perry: Proposes raising retirement age for full benefits and restricting increases in benefits for the wealthy. Previously branded Social Security a “disease” inflicted by Franklin Roosevelt, now says system should be saved for future generations while younger workers are given the option of building private accounts instead of paying taxes into the entitlement.
Romney: Says raising the age for benefits and reducing inflation adjustments for rich retirees are among options that should be considered.
Santorum: Supports option of private retirement accounts instead of Social Security taxes and benefits for younger workers.
—
TAXES:
Bachmann: Eliminate estate tax. Tax holiday followed by low tax rate, 5 percent, for U.S. companies operating overseas that repatriate their profits.
Cain: Replace the federal tax code – with its multiple levels of income, investment, Social Security and investment taxes – with 9 percent tax income, business and sales taxes. Exempt people at or below the poverty level from income tax; reduce or eliminate business tax in certain poor neighborhoods. Keep income tax deduction for charitable giving.
Gingrich: Cut corporate tax to 12.5 percent from maximum 35 percent, eliminate capital gains and estate taxes, let companies write off all new equipment in one year. For personal taxes, let people choose whether to file under the current system or pay a 15 percent tax, preserving the mortgage interest and charitable deductions.
Huntsman: Favors lower income tax rates coupled with the elimination of deductions and loopholes. Cut corporate tax to 25 percent from a maximum 35 percent, and phase out all subsidies.
Paul: Eliminate the federal income tax and the IRS. Meantime would vote for a national sales tax, supports certain excise taxes and certain tariffs. Favors massive spending cuts to defund close to half the government and eliminate the need to replace the income tax at all.
Perry: Let taxpayers choose between current system and 20 percent flat tax on income. Under the flat-tax option, mortgage interest and charitable contributions would continue to be deductible. For each individual or dependent, $12,500 in income would be exempt. Flat-tax plan would eliminate taxes on Social Security benefits, inheritances, dividends and long-term capital gains. Also proposes to cut corporate tax rate to 20 percent from 35 percent.
Romney: No one with adjusted gross income under $200,000 should be taxed on interest, dividends or capital gains. Cut corporate tax rate to 25 percent from a high of 35 percent. Opposes proposals to replace current tax system with national sales tax because he says it raises taxes on middle class while lowering them for rich and poor. Make Bush-era tax cuts, including for the wealthy, permanent. Eliminate estate tax.
Santorum: Proposes zero corporate tax. “If you manufacture in America, you aren’t going to pay any taxes.” Opposes any national sales tax.
—
TERRORISM:
Bachmann: Expand Guantanamo, no Miranda or constitutional rights for foreign terrorist suspects.
Cain: Said he would not be comfortable nominating Muslims to the Cabinet or the courts out of concern they will try to force their faith on public policy and the law.
Gingrich: Supports continued use of Guantanamo Bay detention for suspected terrorists. Supported creation of Homeland Security apparatus, because “we need some capacity to respond to massive events.“ ”Only a grand strategy for marginalizing, isolating, and defeating radical Islamists across the world will lead to victory.”
Huntsman: Said Homeland Security Department has been heavy-handed, conveying a “fortress security mentality that is not American.”
Paul: Opposes the surveillance and search powers of the Patriot Act. Says terrorists would not be motivated to attack America if the U.S. ended its military presence abroad.
Perry: Said it was “unprincipled” for Republicans to vote for creation of the Homeland Security Department. Supports continued use of Guantanamo Bay detention for suspected terrorists.
Romney: No constitutional rights for foreign terrorism suspects.
Santorum: Defends creation of Homeland Security Department as an attempt to fix a “complete mess” in the domestic security apparatus. Voted to reauthorize Patriot Act.
—
WAR:
Bachmann: “Defense spending did not cause our budget crisis and we must maintain our military strength.” Opposed U.S. intervention in Libya, saying the effort might be helping terrorists there. Called Afghanistan a war “we must and can win” provided generals have sufficient troops and money.
Cain: No defense cuts except wasteful spending. Opposed intervention in Libya. “I want to be out of Afghanistan and all war-torn countries as much as the next person. But I am not going to propose a half-baked plan based on half the information I would need to make the right decision, just to pretend I know everything.”
Gingrich: Initially criticized Obama for not intervening in Libya, then did an about-face after the president had sent in U.S. war planes to support the rebels fighting the government. “I would not have used American and European forces.” No cuts in defense spending except waste. Supported Iraq war and opposed early timetables for withdrawal. Praised Obama’s decision to bolster troops in Afghanistan two years ago; noncommittal this year on when and how they should withdraw.
Huntsman: Proposes scaling back U.S. involvement in international conflicts and, in contrast with most rivals, says Pentagon budget should be cut. Opposes U.S. military assistance of new Libyan government. Opposed U.S. military intervention in Libya absent congressional approval. In June, said the pace of withdrawing U.S. troops from Afghanistan was too slow, and questioned whether the battle against the Taliban and other anti-government insurgents served U.S. interests any longer. Says to end nation building abroad “when this nation needs to be built.”
Paul: Bring all or nearly all troops home, from Afghanistan and other foreign posts, “as quick as the ships could get there.” Opposed U.S. intervention in Libya. “We’ve been fighting wars since World War II, technically in an unconstitutional fashion.” Cut Pentagon budget.
Perry: Criticized Obama for announcing withdrawal of troops from Iraq by end of this year and from Afghanistan next year but has not said how many troops should remain or for how long.
Romney: Has not specified the troop numbers behind his pledge to ensure the “force level necessary to secure our gains and complete our mission successfully” in Afghanistan. Said Obama was wrong to begin reducing troop levels as soon as he did. Would increase strength of armed forces, including number of troops and warships.
Santorum: Said in September 2011 that 20,000 to 30,000 U.S. troops should remain in Iraq. Says U.S. troops should withdraw from Afghanistan “a little slower” than Obama is planning. “When we engage in Iraq and Afghanistan, we engage because we want to be successful. We want victory.” In May, accused Obama of “dithering” in Libya and creating a “morass” because he let the international community take the lead in aiding Gadhafi’s opponents. Opposes closure of U.S. bases abroad. “We have to have the ability to confront those threats from around the world, which means we need basing around the world.”
Popular Stories
Paper Details Obama Admin’s Alleged Secret Note Sent to Iran: If Israel Attacks, We Won’t Get Involved 585 Comments
‘Made Up Religion’: TV Historian Enrages Muslims, Receives Threats After Producing UK Documentary Questioning Islam’s Beginnings 413 Comments
This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 412 Comments
Roseanne Barr: Most Billionaires ‘Violent Pedophiles’ & ‘Heartless’ Cocaine Addicts 374 Comments
President Obama Issues Major ‘Green Energy’ Executive Order 368 Comments
Faith
- This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 412 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 413 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
- President Obama Issues Major ‘Green Energy’ Executive Order 368 Comments
- 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 151 Comments
Bernanke & QE3: Here’s What You Need to Know Read More- ‘Extortion’: Why Did the Labor Department ‘Drop the Hammer’ on Oregon Farmers? 303 Comments
Technology
- This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 412 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 (226)
YoungBloodNews
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 10:04amLOL BLAZErs, good job giving Dr. Paul like 2 sentences on each point and everyone else mad paragraphs. Just like the Lame Stream Media ignoring him or giving him the least time in debates. Then you go and misconstrue some of this points. Im sure you screwed up on other candidates as well but Im not going to waste time reading more of this poorly researched article.
Report Post »Founding Father2
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 10:26amThat‘s right they don’t mention his flip-flops and his worse issue stances. And everyone says that Romney is bad with his stances. Romney sounds more consistent when matched against Ron Paul. Interesting enough I think Romney is more consistent on things like abortion than Ron Paul is. Romney like Reagan made a conversion, Ron Paul continues to change his position in legislation and stance. Romney’s stances are under scrutiny, ( http://www.thedailycandidate.com/projects/nov/flip_flop_central.html ) why aren‘t Ron Paul’s.
Report Post »GilbertAcct
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 10:36amFF… “Romney’s stances are under scrutiny, why aren‘t Ron Paul’s.” Haha, I think that is a question you should try to answer yourself! Again, saying that Romney is more consistent than RP is borderline hilarious. All the Romney supporters I know are at least intellectually honest in admitting that RP is at least consistent (although they think he’s a kook). One of the strongest Romney supporters I know, in response to someone telling him they like Paul’s consistency said, “Sadly, you are right.”
FF… You are walking down an incredibly ignorant and dishonest path in your comparison. Why are you the one concentrating so much on the past? I‘d rather talk about how bad Mitt’s current views are. What is your defense for his plan to put sanctions and tariffs on China through Executive Order?
Report Post »YoungBloodNews
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 10:46am@FF
Were‘nt you the clown in the other thread saying he’s a flip flopper for running 3rd party when the man said he won’t??? Your either a shill or to lazy to do your own research. Nice link though, all the Romney pics really show the site’s true colors. Can’t expect a un-bias review from that place…
Report Post »Delta_River_Folk
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 10:54amPart (1)
Report Post »Fellow Americans, have you grown weary of listening to Federal Politicians discuss what they are willing to give States? Should it not be the States deciding what they are willing to give to the Federal Government?
At the end of the Revolutionary War, some States were reluctant to sign the Constitution. For they feared the Federal Government would become what they had just fought against.
In writing the Constitution, Founding Fathers wanted the States to control the Federal Government and prohibited the Federal Government from collecting money directly from citizens.
Early attempts by the Federal Government to tax citizens directly were stopped by the Supreme Court on Multiple occasions.
Until the 1910’s when Americans let down their guard and within about 2 month period in the spring of 1913, politicians in control at the time passed two amendments to the Constitution.
Amendment XVI allowed the Federal Government to collect taxes directly from citizens, and Amendment XVII stripped away a State’s right to appoint Senators to Congress.
Our Founding Fathers’ Fear had come to pass.
States no longer have the power to control the Federal Government, so the Federal Government has grown into what we know today: overbearing, complex, corrupt, unaccountable, ineffective, etc.
A system where if State decides not follow Federal Regulations then the State does not receive money that was theirs in the beginning.
Delta_River_Folk
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 10:55amPart (II)
All States are unique and they should not be blackmailed by the Federal Government into following regulations that a majority of its citizens are against.
Report Post »Fellow Americans, the good news is that the Founding Fathers had enough foresight to give us the right to correct mistakes made by past generations.
If you truly believe in the Constitution and that our current system has deviated from the Founding Fathers’ plan, then here are 3 BOLD actions we must insist on:
1) Restore States’ Power by repelling the amendments passed in the 1910’s that allowed the Federal Government to tax citizens directly and stopped the States from appointing Senators.
2) Create a new tax system where States collect 100% of taxes and then forward a percentage of the money collected to the Federal Government. Percentage is based on State’s population.
3) Reduce the Federal Government’s spending to include only military defense, foreign relations, and other responsibilities initially outlined in the Constitution. Individual States would take over all other spending.
To serve one’s country one doesn’t just have to join the military, sometimes all you need to do is to get involved and do your own research. We are only borrowing this Great Nation for a brief period of time. So, please help put the “s” back at the end of the United State.
Founding Father2
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 11:16amI am just putting it out there, why don’t you oppose it or join one of their panels and fight it, don’t fight me. Though I have looked through it and can’t find much to contend with. What about you? Plus there is only one subject, we will have to see.
Report Post »AZindependent
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 11:48amWhen and where did Ron Paul propose or support a Federal National Sales Tax? So far, only Herman “FED/bankster shill” Cain has proposed this type of VAT tax. Ron Paul is opposed to most types of taxation, he has said that excise taxes like those on gasoline to pay for roads would continue.
I actually wouldn’t mind a national sales tax of 5% of all retail (including internet sales) with exceptions for food and medicine, but I would couple that with a $25K/taxpayer and dependents deduction with a flat income tax of 15%. So under my plan a family of four would have to have a taxable earned income or investment income (cap. gains, dividends, rent, etc..) of $100K+ to owe income tax (eliminate all other deductions), every dollar over $100K would be taxed at 15 cents. Corporations should just have a flat tax of 15% with no credits, deductions, depreciation, interest expense deductions, etc.. Make a $1, pay 15 cents. Lose money, pay nothing.
Report Post »ashestoashes
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 12:03pmDoes Illegal immigration even matter now? Guess what has been going on while we have been being barraged with the OWS protestors? The Dream Act was passed by Executive Order on Friday with little or no media coverage.. Can you believe that? Google it. See? The OWS ers are being used to get things done… it’s like a look over here…while we do this here. An individual on a news team told me the other day that they think that a lot more is going to come out…yeah..when it’s all said and done. Wake up… Rise and Shine.!. Vote Ron Paul 2012
Report Post »bruce_baker
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 12:36pmTry as they may to ignore Ron Paul, he’s the only one who really supports limiting the Federal government to doing only what the Constitution allows. Any candidate who supports any deviation from the Constitution does not support the rule of law. Plain and simple.
The basic trouble with our Federal government is that it has not stuck to the Constitiution for over 100 years! Much deviation is now accepted as Standard Operating Procedure, so it’s next to impossible to get across to the American voter what really needs to be done.
Thank Heaven Obama was elected instead of McCain. If we had elected McCain, there would be no TEA party, and things would have gone on as they are for many more years, until we failed. Obama’s rampant socialism woke a lot of people up, but only the ones who tended to be rational and observant beforehand.
It may take another 4 years of the Socialist in Chief to wake up the unwashed masses to the madness that is socialism. Far, far too many of the “Dancing with the Stars” crowd still doesn’t get it. My fear is that it will take a full scale financial meltdown to wake up the majority of Americans to the fact that we can’t afford the welfare state that the progressives want, and the fact that trying to acheive it is ruining the country. I fear that we’ll have to actually ruin the country to wake them up to the fact that socialism is the cause, not the solution, to the mess.
Report Post »ashestoashes
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 12:36pmGot news last night that Wisconsin is shaping up to be the swing state..the information indicated that George Soros owns the company that tabulates the votes..Last election. as I understand/ .Acorn handled the voting..didn’t a communist once say that it matters not the amount of votes a person gets..but the ones counting the votes.?.makes ya feel all warm and fuzzy doesn’t it?
Report Post »LibertyGoddess
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 12:37pmThe average age of the world’s greatest civilizations from the beginning of history, has been about 200 years’
‘During those 200 years, those nations always progressed through the following sequence:
1. From bondage to spiritual faith;
2. From spiritual faith to great courage;
3. From courage to liberty;
4. From liberty to abundance;
5. From abundance to complacency;
6. From complacency to apathy;
7. From apathy to dependence;
8. From dependence back into bondage’
Report Post »junior1971
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 12:42pmYou aint kiddin! This candidate is the only one who is actually trying to follow the constitutional directives of our founding fathers. So many so called conservatives are blasting him from all angles while claiming to be constitutional conservatives. What a joke! We are all going to have to choose between apples and apples when this is all said and done. Or should I say, lemons and lemons!
Report Post »colt1860
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 2:30pm@MILS And how did McCain loose in 2008?
Report Post »JRook
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 2:42pmA) who cares what Bachmann thinks about anything. B) the greatest threat to living wage jobs and homeland terrorism are illegal aliens. And the greatest inducement for illegal aliens is availability of jobs. It is time to fine the companies who hire illegal aliens $250,000 per occurrence until they stop hiring them or go out of business. The argument that they can’t adequately check their status is a joke at best. The notion that they can’t find Americans to work for slave wages, no benefits, etc. to insure they can make above average returns on their investment is probably valid. Yet many of these same companies and there owners cry about taxes. Yet their hiring of illegal aliens for cash is nothing less than tax fraud and of course results in higher taxes for the rest of us.
Report Post »SamFox
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 3:22pmThis is for Founding Father, there was no ‘reply’ after their post.
So FF, how about you give us that comparison. Show us Dr. Paul’s flip flops. Talk is cheeep! :-)
There is NO consistent or more PRO-Constitution candidate running than Ron Paul.
Ron has been at his “restore the Constitution to it’s rightful place as the law of the USA” for over 3- years. NONE of the others even come close. Most of them that talk ‘constitution” have not been doing so for very long. If you look you will find that only since Ron Paul’s message has started a huge, un & under reported very popular political grass fire across the USA that other candidates have taken up his ‘Constitution’ message.
Where were they say, 10 years ago, when Dr. Paul was already into 20 some years of HIS Constitution talk AND walk!?? Find out. It’s a critical issue for a critical time.
If you can show us a more consistent, longer advocating PRO Const. candidate, please tell who.
SamFox
Report Post »AmericanPatriot01
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 3:47pm@Ashestoashes posted:
Got news last night that Wisconsin is shaping up to be the swing state..the information indicated that George Soros owns the company that tabulates the votes..Last election. as I understand/ .Acorn handled the voting..didn’t a communist once say that it matters not the amount of votes a person gets..but the ones counting the votes.?.makes ya feel all warm and fuzzy doesn’t it?
————————————–
I saw the same thing and was completely enraged!!! This criminal soros has been buying up local judges all over the nation and has his fingers in many of the organizations that are responsible for so much of the fraud in democratic political action. Its not legal so get the judges in the pocket to make it appear legal.
As a part of his plans (which he has announced in interviews over the past decade) requires that there be an ELECTION CRISIS. He need there to be a revolt of confidence and therefore allow him to have people in place to fill the vacuum immediately to “keep the peace” “protect the nation and its people” “to establish law and order”. These are his own words and he fancies himself a GOD and thinks it’s fun to play this game.
HE HAS DONE THIS 4 TIMES IN THE PAST!!! Look it up
WAKE UP!!!
Report Post »AmericanPatriot01
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 3:56pm@ Founding Father2 =Troll, or one of the least informed people I have ever seen attempting to be relevant.
Please get a clue. Have you ever studied anything about Ron Paul? I have, and I have seen videos that were a decade old that when compared to what he says now match up damn near word for word. Not a single candidate on the stage today can say that they have that kind of consistency. OPEN YOUR EYES MAN, FOR GOD”S SAKE, INFORM YOURSELF BEFORE YOU TRY TO CONVICE ANYONE THAT YOU ARE TO BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY. You make yourself IRRELEVANT!
WAKE UP!!
Report Post »WAKEUPUSA2012
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 4:28pm@FF lol do some research Ron Paul is the ONLY consistent person is WASHINGTON!
Report Post »Protoham
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 4:57pmI don’t think I have ever heard Dr Paul say he was in favor of a Sales Tax. Considering the US Constitution says the Fed can collect taxes on income… I am not sure a sales tax would be legal. Since when is sales considered income.
Report Post »Wolf
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 5:53pmPaul has been around the scene for a very long time so most his stances are well known. Too, the report seems to be the way Paul talks: succinct and to the point. There was enough about Paul to tell me he’s got 100% of my support. The only other even close is Bachmann. Between those two, I’d love seeing a Bachmann/Paul ticket (only ‘cuz Paul is a bit long in the tooth).
Report Post »As for the rest of the field- they’re all on another field dismantling the Constitution. Huntsman is a joke as a GOP runner. gNewt isn’t worth the air he breathes. Romneycare should be tarred and feathered and run out of the country on a log. Perry should get a date with his hair dresser and stay in TX. And those others- not worth mentioning.
azjeff1963
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 6:09pmFF always talking through your azz cause your face knows better…haha your disimformation will not work here…GFYS
Report Post »Mitchina
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 7:34pmYeah, I was hoping for a graph – would have been better and I would have actually looked at it.
Report Post »ashestoashes
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 7:37pmOPWILLIY wrote Nov 7 7:55 AM Too bad you Paulies are not bright enough to understand Mr. Cain’s tax plan but then, what can you expect from people who think we should “just try to make friends” with people who think their god wants them to kill us. Okay..I concede taht we cannot be friends with Muslims. Jews are still God’s chosen people and were blinded in part until the fulness of the gentiles have come in. blinded in part means that they worship the same Father that we do..they have not recognized the Son. Romans 11 25- Chapter 12.. But as for Cains 9-9-9- plan..here’s a full explanation of what it is so we can all understand.
Report Post »http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Q1R6VQMZCU
SerikFox
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 8:04pmRon Paul is pretty blunt. His views don’t need a ton of explanation.
Report Post »slimster
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 11:27pmRon Paul is not splitting the vote. If he doesn‘t win this time then it doesn’t really matter who does win, they are all as bad as Obama when it comes to ruining our country.
Report Post »mzk1
Posted on November 8, 2011 at 3:11amDon’t plame the Blaze; this the AP’s garbage. There are a whole lot of non-Paul related issues here, such as referrign to fracking as “environmentally risky”, the language used for abortion, etc. This is a problem with the Blaze; they at least ought to put a discalimer on top wanring the readers. I know one pro-Israel blogger, a strong supporter of Beck, who has complained about this copying from the AP without analysis.
Of course, a lot of other people do this also.
Report Post »mzk1
Posted on November 8, 2011 at 3:39amRegarding Paul and the others, I agree. He is the only one who is actually worse than Obama.
Report Post »SweetOlBob
Posted on November 8, 2011 at 9:06amYoungblood: If they had laid out (Dr.) Pauls true comments and positions, someone would surely have sent for the men in the little white coats. OK for nukes in Iran ? Cut pentagon budget ? Legalize all drugs ? Abondon Israel ?
Report Post »Somebody get the net !
searching for the Truth
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 10:04amFurthermore, the success of the next President will be weighed by his or her ability to cajole the bicameral house. There is in my mind, only two, hopefully I’m wrong – One of whom is not running for President ( as of yet ) ; and the other – well, will have to ask the Lord for ” Wisdom.”
Report Post »Vechorik
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 9:59amThe person writing this article made SEVERAL mistakes. I know Ron Paul’s stance and can catch the errors for him.
The largest is that Ron Paul supports a national sales tax…..that’s also called a VAT tax. Ron Paul staunchly opposes that. The article says he supports it. WRONG Here’s proof.
Report Post »http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_VsYp0q9BQ8
11
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 10:31amWhile Dr. Paul does say that the Income Tax doesn’t really need to be replaced at all, he is supportive of a consumption tax (sales tax) if necessary which is NOT the same as a VAT (Value Added Tax).
http://www.ronpaul.com/on-the-issues/taxes/
Report Post »Vechorik
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 11:54amYou are WRONG — listen to it from Ron Paul’s LIPS
Report Post »http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_VsYp0q9BQ8
ashestoashes
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 12:32pm@VECHORIK Thank you so much for posting that video.. why is there so much mis information about Ron Paul.? .First…little to no coverage..then a diversion from the truth..Paul is the only man running that is not NWO.. A pastor from World Ministries told us at a conference that he doesn’t even know if the progression into the NWO can be reversed…We all need to be on our knees praying… God’s will be done.
Report Post »11
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 1:42pm@VECHORIK
In the video he was talking about Cain’s 999 plan and how bad an income tax AND sales tax together would be. My point is simply that Paul is NOT dead set against a national sales tax (read it from his own website) but mostly I just wanted to correct your misstatement about Sales Tax and VAT being the same (they very much are not).
For the record, I am 100% a Ron Paul supporter and I strongly support a flat national sales tax in place of (not in addition to) income tax. Yes, he would prefer to have no sales tax, instead relying on other existing tax methods such as excise tax. The excise tax may be one of the few places where I disagree with Dr. Paul as I feel the excise tax gives the government too much control to pick winners and losers. The sales tax is more fair and transparent.
Report Post »Protoham
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 5:06pm11 – Did you even read the link you gave:
To provide funding for the federal government, Ron Paul supports excise taxes, non-protectionist tariffs, massive cuts in spending.
VAT is not mentioned anywhere. Do you know what a excise or tariff is?
Report Post »11
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 6:13pmPROTOHAM – “Did you even read the link you gave”
Did you even read my comments? I don‘t know how to answer your question as it doesn’t seem to be in response to what I said. Maybe you should re-read my comments.
PROTOHAM – “To provide funding for the federal government, Ron Paul supports excise taxes, non-protectionist tariffs, massive cuts in spending.” … “Do you know what a excise or tariff is?”
I am well aware that Dr. Paul prefers to make up for the income tax with these methods and my opposition to excise taxes clearly demonstrates my understanding of what they are. An excise tax, quite simply, allows the government to pick and choose what items to tax which is why I support a national sales tax over excise taxes.
PROTOHAM – “VAT is not mentioned anywhere.”
Report Post »When did I say that my link said anything about VAT? I was explaining that sales tax and VAT are not the same thing while also stating that RP does (reluctantly) support a consumption (sales) tax. Here is a direct quote by RP from that link:
“I see a consumption tax as being a little better than the personal income tax, and I would vote for the Fair-Tax if it came up in the House of Representatives”.
You do understand that the Fair-Tax is a national sales tax plan, right?
searching for the Truth
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 9:49amYou know, these guy’s can promise the Milky Way; yet, the President has limited powers put in check supposedly by the two houses of congress. So, if my memory of civics is correct a President can only proffer a bill, veto a bill, declare a war supposedly with the permission of Congress, and throw a temper tantrum if things don’t go his way. Consequently, if a new tax proposal is offered by the President, it will probably pass; on the other hand, if the President demands dismantling a bureau, the process will require a huge majority of one of the Houses of Congress. Ergo, one will most probably add an additional new tax structure without checks and balances.
Report Post »Vechorik
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 10:07amRon Paul talks about Obama as president. A president can do a heck-of-a-lot
Report Post »Ron Paul: Is Obama America’s First Elected Dictator?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DOKcSmlhpVM
searching for the Truth
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 10:17amAccording to the Constitution, The President has limited powers. Whatever else they do – we have absolutely no control.
Report Post »ashestoashes
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 1:56pm@Vechorik In response to “Is Obama’s first elected dictator.?”. Ron Paul video I realize that in this video Paul is talking about how the President is using Executive Order to fulfill political agendas..and that the Constitution was so well written that it took this many years to grow to such a huge government. But is he the first elected dictator? If by community organizing and illegal voting got him there..was he really even elected? Will he really be elected the next time? I made the statement in front of a liberal after his appointment that we now have a dictator and welcome to Communism..The liberal poked their head back in the door and said…give him a chance..you just might be surprised at what he can do.
Report Post »GilbertAcct
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 9:45amThis article points out a few reasons why Romney is not strong on economics and why he doesn’t understand the fundamentals of the free market. The first quote is something Obama would say.
“Regulation is necessary to make a free market work.”
Defended 2008 bailout of financial institutions as a necessary step to avoid the system’s collapse.
Supported the federal accountability standards of No Child Left Behind law. In 2007, said he was wrong earlier in his career when he wanted the Education Department shut because he came to see the value of the federal government in “holding down the interests of the teachers’ unions” and putting kids and parents first.
But would retain the prohibition against denying insurance to people with pre-existing conditions.
Conclusion: Romney will give us more of the same… I like his views on energy policy… but every candidate is offering those things. He is likely the most liberal among the candidates.
Report Post »Founding Father2
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 9:57amYou make his stance on No Child Left sound horrible. If we can’t shut it down and give it back to the states why not shrink it and give it distinct guidelines. Romney was right, there need to be teacher standards, instead of No Child Left Behind, he is in favor of No Teacher Left Behind, which some states are trying to pass to test the teachers not the students. Sadly no state has been able to pass it. That is the one thing Romney was accepting of when it came to No Child Left Behind, the Teacher Evaluation. I am completely against No Child Left Behind, but the teacher evaluation needs to stay whether repealing everything but that, like Romney had suggested or rewriting it like No Teacher Left Behind, he is on the right path. The teachers unions are destroying our students, watch ‘Waiting for Superman’ Romney is right that if the states can’t regulate the teachers, giving us better teachers than maybe the Feds might have to do it since the Unions are a federal issue, not just a state… and that is the real issue spoken of in his stance.
Report Post »GilbertAcct
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 10:05amFF… Thank you for your additional support to my argument that Romney is not a friend of the free market.
Report Post »Founding Father2
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 10:36amYou’re right, we should allow the unions take over our companies and put undo strain on the economy. It is not regulation that allows them to do this, look at the right to work states, that is regulation. Regulation allows people to choose whether to be part of a union or not. A union with no restrictions, like the Dems want, would destroy our society, look at the powers they have right now being unlimited in their powers thanks to the Democrats… I think this is where it is a double edge sword.
Under this govt there is no way the US would ever be a true free market society. Nice pipe dream, maybe something to work for, but until then sometimes we have to keep the Dems and liberals at bay with the right regulation, like those of Reagan.
Report Post »YoungBloodNews
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 10:59am@FF
Gotta agree on this, NCLB was a disaster. Read ‘Suicide of a Superpower’, just came out and really interesting. Basically it says the problem is NCLB assumes all children are EQUAL which is just wrong. Some kids are not as smart as others, this is fact (that no one will acknowledge). Everyone knows if you dont have the athletic skills then you wont make the team, same should be for education. Once a child has hit their ‘peak’ learning they should be removed from the classroom so others can flourish. Its the bad students and the ones who dont want to learn that hold back the real learners… No matter how much cash you throw at the school system or the quality of teacher it will never get better because it comes down to the kids and their genetic level of intelligence.
Now we could also examine that girls learn different than boys and that boys are discriminated against because of this in the current system.
What a mess, if you have kids consider homeschooling please. Your kid will thank you one day.
Report Post »GilbertAcct
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 11:00amFF… You are proof that Romney supporters also need to learn a little bit more about free markets. You work under the assumption that we need to solve too much regulation by implementing more regulation… Just like those who think we can solve our debt and spending problem with more debt and spending, or our war problems with more war. Question: Are unions a natural product of a free market?
Report Post »ClunkerT
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 9:42amIf the Republican candidate is not Pro-Life they should be a non-starter as far as the nomination goes. When the candidate has a microphone shoved in front of his face and asked the any question about abortion they all should respond with a question of their own. “Have you witnessed an abortion? If you haven’t I highly recommend that you watch the Youtube presentation of an abortion created by Dr. Bernard Nathanson called Eclipse of Reason (google it) and get back to me so we can have an intelligent INFORMED debate.” End of conversation, that is the way to inform the public as to what an abortion is.
A similar tactict should be used when ANY question is asked about their position on homosexual rights or don‘t ask don’t tell or homosexual marriage. Answer a question with a question. “Do you know that they are teaching 6th, 7th and 8th graders that there are THREE kinds of sex – Oral, ******* and Anal? Do you have a problem with a man enjoying having another man’s penis in his rectum? I do believe that is the definition of Anal Sex, right?” End of conversation, they will never ask the question again.
Report Post »searching for the Truth
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 12:11pmSick – I would have been expelled by fighting this!
Report Post »Texas Chris
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 12:20pmI don‘t think the real debate is over abortion’s rightness or wrongness. The debate is over legality. for me, abortion is murder.
The sad truth is that we do not have the power to change this at the federal level, and we will not for a generation, if not longer. But we do at the state level, in many states, and that is where the battle should be waged. This is a Ron Paul position, and as far as I know it is his alone among the GOP candidates.
Further, we weaken our pro-life credentials when we on the right are seduced by the pro-war wing of the GOP. We cannot be pro-life and pro-war, the two are mutually exclusive. What we need is some consistency. Again, among the GOP contenders, a Ron Paul trait.
Report Post »KICKILLEGALSOUT
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 9:39amI like Cain in many ways but I like Ron Paul a whole lot more. I can‘t get over Cain’s support of the Wall Street bailouts and his comments that the Federal Reserve is transparent and doesn’t need to be audited (how ironic he was a part of the Fed) only later to reveal the trillions in hidden bailouts the Fed gave to foreign banks of Americans money! If the economy is so important why can’t people see that the Fed is the source of all our problems. A private global banking cartel controls our currency supply and is outside the rule of law and our government. As Mike Maloney once said “The Fed is the greatest Ponzi scheme on earth, in order for a dollar to enter the US economy the Fed creates it out of thin air, then they make us pay it back with interest, the problem is where do you get that second dollar from to pay back the first?”
Go to http://www.ronpaul2012.com and find out how you can volunteer in your State and take back your Freedom! Only YOU are in the way of Ron Paul not winning in 2012, don’t be deceived!
Report Post »Vechorik
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 9:46amI’m a Ron Paul supporter and know his stance well. This article is very misleading about global warming etc.
Ron Paul will abolish the EPA (operating outside the Congress) and wants TOUGHER POLLUTION controls. He wants polluters to be tried in court and fined-big-time. He has NOT waivered on his stance of global warming — he said there maybe some man-made effects on the environment, but the green movement uses it to push their agenda of wealth redistribution and global government.
Ron Paul says pollution laws should be TOUGHER!
Report Post »http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XsZ6-2BdpIQ&feature=uploademail
Texas Chris
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 12:23pmHuman activity DOES effect the climate, but not to the level of causing a global ice age or world wide heatwave. Local weather patters have been proven to change with urban expansion, rain patterns shift, it tends to be warmer in summer and colder in winter, etc. Earth-shattering? No. But present, still.
Ron Paul’s position, as in all things, is that it is NOT the government’s job to regulate our behavior to avert “global warming”. At the very least, not at the federal level.
Report Post »Insuranceman
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 9:18amPontiac blaze comments are not for substance. Any one who gets their info from the blaze is going to vote republican. Please try to stay in the spirit of this place. You obviously like the 9999 and good for you. The last 9 I added = cain’s percent in general election.
Report Post »Founding Father2
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 9:48amMEDIA TRASH AND SPIN…
See I hate this trash media spin on everything. Cain was trashed for an alleged ‘harassment’ case. Romney has been trashed for his supposed flip-flops… but are they true… maybe not. In the case of Cain the verdict is still out, time will only tell what will come out in the future. For Romney all of it is in the past and may not be truly a flip-flop. That is why the people need to investigate it, not the media. I am watching Project Flip-Flop as they look into the allegations, we will have to see what they come up with but the first one, abortion is pretty thorough on all the quotes and videos I knew of and then some and it looks like he may have had a true conversion to Pro-Life as he’s been saying: http://url2it.com/jcji
Would this help or hurt his campaign to find out he wasn’t as much of a flip-flopper as the media says he is.
Report Post »donotdrinkthekoolade
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 5:05pmSome people like the 666. NOBAMA!
Report Post »Bakko Bomma
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 9:16amRon Paul 2012
Report Post »GatorMarine-Prepper
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 9:53amRon paul 2012!!
Report Post »GatorMarine-Prepper
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 9:54amRon Paul 2012
Report Post »TelepromoterNChief
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 10:09amRon Paul sucks 2012
Report Post »SilentNoLonger
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 9:00amMakes me an even stronger Paul supporter
Report Post »Founding Father2
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 9:17amThis is the reason why people don’t like Ron Paul. He is too extreme and not in the way people believe. He is also someone that won’t get off the fence over running third party. He is more of a flip-flopper than Romney. And that is being questioned right now in a new study called Project Flip-Flop: http://url2it.com/jcji . Could it be that Romney had a true conversion to being Pro-Life? Interesting concept that the media is trying to call him a liar and throw doubt. Even Michael Reagan wrote and article about his dad’s conversion from pro-choice to pro-life. Why couldn’t Romney.
Report Post »KICKILLEGALSOUT
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 9:48amYou know Ron Paul is extreme, because what the American people really want is $5 Trillion added to the national debt in 3 years, billions of taxpayer money lost in sweetheart deals to Solar companies, our family members killed by runaway guns our government gave to foreign gangs, mosques at ground zero, our states sued for trying to protect our citizens and public funds by enforcing immigration laws that the Federal government should already be doing, illegal wars around the world that were not from the authority of congress and on top of that while we are bankrupt and borrowing from Communist China, running tens of billions a month in trade deficits with the Commie Chinese, allowing the Chinese to run the largest espionage campaign in the world against our universities, corporations, military, and government and the list goes on and on and on.
Yes, Ron Paul’s views are too extreme when you want a normal America like I mentioned above.
Report Post »LIBERTYFADING
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 9:49amLOL, you crack me up… Still talking about Ron Paul as 3rd party, yet the blaze, the freaking blaze’s last post on Ron Paul was one about how he is not going to run 3rd party.
You are whats wrong with this country, uniformed and spreading lies, promoting one candidate over another when you really know nothing. Why would you settle for Romney when there are such conservative candidates other than him. I hope Romney wins the nomination so that Obama wins again. You get what you deserve.
Report Post »GilbertAcct
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 9:55amFF… Saying that Paul is a bigger flip-flopper than Romney is laughable at the least. Even Paul’s strong opponents have to admit that he is the most consistent politician out there… Even Romney’s supporters have to admit that he has changed his positions time and again – it is just a matter of whether all the changes were genuine versus politically planned. Even if I give Romney the benefit of the doubt on all his epiphanies, I still think his CURRENT views are bad for America and that he is just more of the same. He is not a strong proponent of free markets, and he is weak on economics.
Report Post »Vechorik
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 10:02amRon Paul is so unwaivering that Saturday Night Live did a comedy sketch about it, saying “idealogically pure and tough as nails.“ Jokes only work if the majority of the listeners ”get it.”
Report Post »Vechorik
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 10:04amMaybe you wouldn‘t think Ron Paul’s ideas are too extreme if you knew the logic (Constitutional) basis behind them and if this article spent more than two sentences explaining them, as they did for the other viewpoints. Why is that? Ron Paul got less sentences than any other candidate?
Report Post »This_Individual
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 11:13amRon Paul will not implement 50,000 pieces of regulation like Bush did, undo the departments of socialism , and create a path back to the cosntitution. Everyone else is part of this bi-partisan dictatorship which our nation has been in since the 1930′s. We can’t be timid about this, and vote in a candidate that continue this comfort zone of socialism that some here do not want to wake up from.
Report Post »Vechorik
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 11:58am…and Ron Paul said he would NOT run 3rd party, so get off it.
Report Post »UBETHECHANGE
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 8:59amGingrich/Cain 2012!
Report Post »WAKEUPUSA2012
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 4:37pmUBETHECHANGE watch this please
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hfYJsQAhl0&feature=youtu.be
Report Post »AmericanPatriot01
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 9:25pm@WAKEUP THAT IS AWESOME!!!!!!
Im gonna start using that one. I’ll give you full credit for the discovery of course, LOL!
WAKE UP!!
Report Post »Countrygirl1362
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 8:58amThank you for this infomation. It has helped me see who stands where on what. There are some that are just to far apart from what I feel is right and others very close.
Report Post »Insuranceman
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 9:07amCloseness can breed contempt.
Report Post »martinez012577
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 8:49am@Koy
I dont think Ron Paul is getting cheated. I think he is not taken serious by alot of the rightwing media ( fox and talk radio ) because of his views on the middle east.
Step back for a minute and think. We have had the same policy in the middle east for 60 years. Helping overthrow who we want and dictating to them what we want. All presidents before this election have been on the try to fix the middle east kick. Its not working, our policy has failed. There is only one guy that will fix it and wants to change our middle eastern policy.
HERE IS A QUOTE FROM A PRETTY SMART GUY.
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
Report Post »Albert Einstein
Read more: http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/a/alberteins133991.html#ixzz1d1kgxnfn
Insuranceman
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 9:03amJust because you run doesn’t mean you have to be taken seriously. If fox thought Paul had a chance of helping their ratings they would promote him more. As is he just makes their viewers upset by not agreeing with them 100%. You know fox viewers want consistency .
Report Post »Vechorik
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 9:48amInsuranceman, Fox New (Murdock) is a neo-con — that means they want war to promote the global government. You want that?
Report Post »searching for the Truth
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 7:14pmHere is a better quote, ” Insanity is not accepting Jesus as Savior.” – me.
Report Post »AmericanPatriot01
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 10:14pmI am a veteran and I think Paul has the right answer when it comes to the middle east. All those people want is, to do it themselves, for the most part, its the Big Bad Groups that want to control it and they see America being just another one of those Big Bad Groups. Bossing them around and forcing our ideals on them rather than providing an example and getting out of the way. Just seems like many of the candidates (especially Cain) Would love to see us go to war with Iran. If the U.K. or Isreal requests our help then we will go balls to the wall for them in that case, but Isreal is a STRONG country and can defend itself just fine, in fact, better than we do our own soil. We do not need to be involved unless requested by our DECLAIRED allies. Isreal doesn’t want our money because it comes with BIG strings attached to it. I don’t know about ever being freinds with them, in fact we may have to go to war, but lets don’t encourage it or be the reason for it.
WE ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO BE THE POLICE DEPARTMENT OF THE WORLD
(We are not getting paid for it)
WAKE UP!!
Report Post »Eyes_of_Deception
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 8:42amGo Perry!!!
Report Post »Insuranceman
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 8:56amYou forgot to add far away.
Report Post »Bakko Bomma
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 9:17amlol !!
Report Post »trench99
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 9:46amReally?? Kidding right?
Report Post »YoungBloodNews
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 10:39amAhhh Rick “Super-Highway” Perry, look it up ;)
Report Post »modilly
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 8:18amThe ESTABLISHMENT is counting on your vote for “anyone” but Obama and will see that their man gets it. Don’t fall for gimmicks and clever “ideas” from so-called intellectuals who are but retreads from previous attempts to lead. The records of the candidates are revealing if you will only look. And some, like Obama, don’t even have a record to research.
Report Post »Pontiac
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 11:03amThe 9-9-9 plan is an intermediate plan to transition to the Fair Tax. Why do people ignore this?
This much is obvious:
Tax Lawyers (Bachmann) hate the 9-9-9 plan and the Fair Tax, fewer excuses for messing up your taxes, landing yourself in trouble, and needing a lawyer.
IRS employees hate the 9-9-9 plan and the Fair Tax, no need for that huge bureaucracy.
Tax consultant hate the 9-9-9 plan and the Fair Tax, not enough loopholes to keep them gainfully employed.
Lobbyist hate the 9-9-9 plan and the Fair Tax, no way to manipulate politicians in giving certain business an advantage over others.
Progressive Politicians hate the 9-9-9 plan and the Fair Tax, they can’t stay in power playing class warfare games with the tax code.
Foreign nations & outsourcing Corporations hate the 9-9-9 plan and the Fair Tax, they can’t sell their goods without their share of taxes being collected on goods purchased.
Ron Paul said he would vote for the Fair Tax, that it is better than what we got.
Report Post »Are these posters actually Ron Paul supporters or are they paid disinformationist?
Vindex.Dogood
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 3:23pm@PONTIAC
“intermediate plan to transition to the Fair Tax”. Is that like “pass the bill to know what is in it”, or “increase the debt ceiling then we will work on reducing spending”, or “deal with the illegals (give amnesty) then we will close the boarder”, or “read my lips, no new taxes”? Do you really still believe these empty promises? Cain is a snake oil salesman. He can’t be trusted.
We must return the Federal government to the boundaries of the Constitution and do it now.
Report Post »Pontiac
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 4:18pmThat ended up in the wrong thread…
@Vindex.Dogood
Report Post »So, mind telling me the details of Ron Paul’s excise tax?
Like what he will be taxing and at what rates?
Or is he going to wait for lobbyist to dole out money first?
The Magotaur
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 8:05amI agree with Investlite. Our economy is the biggest issue right now and Cain has the best plan to bring it back up. Our second biggest issue is securing the border, and Cain said he would secure the border with “any means necessary”.
Report Post »Cain 2012!
Insuranceman
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 8:21amAny means means what? Cain‘s tax plan only appeals to simpletons who don’t think past the next 5 min. Cain hasn’t spent a whole 5 min thinking about it just a slogan that gets the yahoos nodding.
Report Post »encinom
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 8:24amCain has no plan just a slogan. His plan would add to the debt and countine to enrich the wealthy while placing additional burdens on the middle and working class.
Report Post »KTsayz
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 8:37amAdding a nat’l sales tax without abolishing income tax is ridiculous. DC doesn’t need more tax money, it needs to be guillotined. Cain never officially said what he would cut so I doubt he would cut anything. He’s a Fed man – he wants to see the fiat money.
Report Post »Putting up an electric fence is also pretty lame. Next he’ll suggest a huge ditch filled with water and piranahs.
Fallenwalls
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 8:40amPaul: Says” federal government should have no authority either to legalize or ban abortion.”
The federal government already have laws against murder!
Paul: “and support a ban on abortions after the fetus reaches a certain stage in development.”
“The embryo is a new human life
which is genetically distinct and which has
energy and a direction of its own from the moment of conception.”
Medical University of South Carolina
“Before I formed you in the womb I knew you.”
Report Post »Jeremiah 1:5
Pontiac
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 8:57amArticular mentions nothing about about phase II of Cains Tax plan which is the Fair Tax.
@Insuranceman
My, so much ‘butthurt’ in your comments. All snide remarks with no substance. Bravo for trolling hard.
.
.
Lets keep the current tax system fellas, we don’t want Tax Lawyers to be out of their jobs.
Goodness if IRS agents can‘t consistently fill out a tax form for someone or treasury secretary Timothy Geithner can’t figure out his taxes, it must be a good system, right?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vGIfbAt8voU.
Report Post »qpwillie
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 8:57amToo bad you Paulies are not bright enough to understand Mr. Cain’s tax plan but then, what can you expect from people who think we should “just try to make friends” with people who think their god wants them to kill us.
Report Post »Stopit
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 9:03amIn regard to terrorism, does any other candidate acknowledge the insidiousness of the enemy we face as Cain has…PC be damned?
Report Post »Economy & terrorism & support for Israel he wins hands down in my mind.
Would like that he’d be more like Paul and Huntsman in regard to the military policing the world, but that is not something he’s been difinitive about yet.
sonnetswan
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 9:21amRomney, Gingrich, Huntsman, Cain and Perry are UNELECTABLE. As I look for a candidate to stand by the Constitution and on principle, I must do the same. RON PAUL 2012.
Paul is aligned with us ‘nobody little people’ from the newly awoken conservatives and the disillusioned left. His policies will unite the American people again. That is why the establishment fears him so much.
America is great because Americans are good.
Report Post »Pontiac
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 9:42amRon Paul is for the excise tax. Which is similar to the Sin tax. The government gets to decide who the winners and looser of this tax system will be and that of course will be dependent on which lobbyist donate the most money.
Report Post »Ron Paul doesn‘t believe the US should be ’policing’ the world. Yet Ron Paul does not say who should considering non of our allies will take up the slack. IOW it will be China (the same people that will skirt the excise taxes) and/or Russia.
Ron Paul is for non-protectionist tariffs. Which I guess means he doesn’t want to keep Americans seriously employed for any period of time at all. At least with the Fair Tax China/India will have to pay something to our system to continue undercutting us.
GilbertAcct
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 10:02amQPWillie… why don‘t you explain Herman Cain’s 9-9-9-9 plan for us? Explain what a family of four making $50,000 would pay under our current system, under Cain’s plan, and then under Perry’s plan (I do not support Perry or Cain)… I’ve done this extensively on other threads, but I’d like to see what you come up with since you are the tax expert here.
Report Post »Fella
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 10:11amEnlighten us then Willie. I noticed you weren’t bright enough to add any substance in your defence of 9999. Probably just drunk again, as usual.
Report Post »Vechorik
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 10:23amI believe in birth control pills, but I oppose abortion.
Report Post »I have to vote on a state law this Tuesday regarding abortion — that life begins at conception.
I’m really torn about it. Many forms of birth control wouldn‘t be allowed and abortion wouldn’t be allowed.
Which is best?
Wolf
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 6:04pmYah, sure: Cain’s 9-9-9 tax… on top of all the state taxes we’ll also have to pay. He’s also stated his tax is a 9-0-9 tax for ghetto babies. So the only difference in his plan and the current program is a name.
Report Post »RepubliCorp
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 7:45amPaul: Do “whatever it takes” to secure the border, end the right to citizenship of U.S.-born children of illegal immigrants, no social services for illegal immigrants, aggressive deportation of those who overstay a visa or otherwise break U.S. law.
Ron Paul (Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) told debate moderators that such a fence could be used against Americans.
“The people that want big fences and guns, sure, we could secure the border,” the congressman noted. “A barbed wire fence with machine guns, that would do the trick. I don’t believe that is what America is all about.”
Report Post »“Every time you think about this toughness on the border and ID cards and REAL IDs, think it’s a penalty against the American people too. I think this fence business is designed and may well be used against us and keep us in. In economic turmoil, the people want to leave with their capital and there’s capital controls and there’s people controls. Every time you think about the fence, think about the fences being used against us, keeping us in.” Thanks Alex Jones!
KTsayz
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 8:29amIntroduced HJ res 46 “Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to deny United States citizenship to individuals born in the United States to parents who are neither United States citizens nor persons who owe permanent allegiance to the United States.”
http://www.opencongress.org/bill/110-hj46/show
They used fences to keep the Japanese ‘in’ during WWII, didn’t they?
Also, Ron Paul said he would only vote for a nat’l sales tax if they did away with all the other taxes, especially the income tax, but he would be afraid that they wouldn’t do that.
Report Post »Will4Freedom
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 7:44amThanks for trying to encapsulate the candidates, but I think attempting to summarize someones position in a single sentence does not do any o f them it justice.
I would encourage anyone who has not settled on a candidate to visit their websites to get a deeper understanding of their views. But also look at their records, not just the words.
Report Post »Insuranceman
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 8:13amThe web sites reflect what they think will appeal to the most primary voters. Will be modified after nomination.
Report Post »UrsaMajor
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 9:08amThis article is no better than the thirty-secon soundbites from the debates. I learned a heck of a lot more watching Cain and Newt in their 90-minute Lincoln/Douglas style debate than any television soundbite; newspaper blurb; or (especially) damn InterNet message raving by Jew-hating, conspiracy theorist Truthers who would rather see Obama be re-elected if their hero doesn’t win the Republican nomination.
Report Post »waluman353
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 7:43amfunny how the blaze allows one sentence paragraphs for Ron Paul’s views when they are hands down the only way to save our future. people please do your research to save this country! Ron Paul 2012.
Report Post »qpwillie
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 7:55amPlease understand that although you have been convinced that only Paulies are informed and do research, it’s not the case. In that way, you are identical to the 0bamabots who have also been programmed to think they are the informed ones.
The difference is, ALL your “research” comes from pro-Ron Paul sites and Ron Paul books while we research everybody via various sources.
Report Post »koyettsu
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 8:08amFunny how no matter the situation you guys always claim Ron Paul is being cheated, how about you guys grow up and stop blaming everyone else for the guys lack of support.
Report Post »KTsayz
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 8:41amWaluman – it’s an Associated Press piece, the blaze didn’t write it.
Report Post »Fella
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 10:15amWillie, you have never EVER made a cogent argument in favor of any policy one way or another. You add nothing to any conversation. Pretending you are informed is laughable at best.
Report Post »GilbertAcct
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 10:29amI‘m a strong supporter of Ron Paul and I’m honestly getting tired of seeing all the complaints about Paul’s coverage (even if it is true)… I’ve come to this mostly by seeing Cain, Romney, and Perry supporters whine and cry all day about the unfair treatment by the media. I don’t think complaining about lousy media helps any of the candidates. I’d rather debate the issues… Like Cain’s 9-9-9-9 plan, his ignorance on everything foreign, his confusion about abortion, etc. Or Romney’s declaration of trade war with China, his support for TARP, or his horrible Healthcare plan in MA. Perry is no longer in the top tier, so I’ll leave him out.
Report Post »resme
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 5:56pm@qpwillie, What are these various sources? (rush, mark levin, sean)
Report Post »shpierce
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 7:39amVery long article..
Report Post »Insuranceman
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 8:23amExhausting! The yahoos need simple.
Report Post »Eliasim
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 7:38amLike the evil emperor in Star Wars, ‘Yes, yes, feel your anger, feel your lust for control, feel the power of the dark-side, protect unborn children in the Constitution, and I will also have fetuses getting voting rights before you know it, and pregnant democrats will count as two votes, and if that isn’t achievable right away, then at least I will have ultimate say over your pregnancy.”
Report Post »koyettsu
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 8:11am*beep beep beep* Lib alert *beep beep beep*
Report Post »SpankDaMonkey
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 7:30am.
Abortion, Immigration & Terrorism
I’m against all that………….
With an Immigration exception for HOT Supermodel Babes………….
Report Post »Vechorik
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 10:27amLOL It gets too intense at the Blaze (guess that‘s why it’s named that) and your humor is appreciated!
Report Post »JDF10487
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 7:30amMichelle Bachmann seems to have the best overall platform. I just can‘t understand why she doesn’t poll better. Maybe Herman Cain will ask her to be his VP.
Report Post »Insuranceman
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 8:27amMichelle is too thoughtless even for republicans?
Report Post »Insuranceman
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 8:30amDon’t know for sure but she is probably afraid to be alone with Hermie given his apparent history.
Report Post »trench99
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 9:43amBachman comes across as a busybody, a snot, she isn’t “likeable”. I like her stance on several issues however I don’t trust her; her husband & her own a behavioral clinic ( $$ from govt agencies ) & she tauts her 21 “foster kids” another $$ scam. No, too in bed with what I think we need to shut down.
Report Post »Eliasim
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 7:29amI didn’t even have to read passed their views on abortion, because the ignorance stands for itself. If they place abortion and/or declaring unborn children as human beings in the Constitution then it will be opening many, many, many new cans of worms that pro-controlling and pro-abortion people will use against anti-abortion people. The nearest to the correct answer is Ron Paul but even he won’t keep his fingers off the lever if once he was to get elected. It’s the American people, their ungodliness the problem.
Report Post »tifosa
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 9:30amSeems the further to the right one goes, the more they like the government to be in our GYN offices.
Report Post »joe1234
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 9:46am“Seems the further to the right one goes, the more they like the government to be in our GYN offices.”
yeah the left’s holy communion of killing unborn babies is at risk.
Report Post »notreally
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 7:25amAny one of them would be a 1000% improvement over what this incompetent klutz Obama has been.
Report Post »investlite
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 7:33amAgreed, I like cain on the economy, but not so much on other issues. But right now we need someone who can turn this economy around.
CAIN 2012!
Report Post »Detroit paperboy
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 7:41amI would vote for a dead possum on the side of the road before i would vote for the marxist, community organizer, class warfare, food stamp , welfare loving low life commie clueless assclown that we currently have in the white house, you see dead possums can at least do no damage !!!
Report Post »Insuranceman
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 8:15amDead possum must be some kind of code for Paul. And you would get the stink you deserve.
Report Post »tifosa
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 9:21ampaperboy, you’ve just summed up the Teapublicon field. Call it the “hold your nose” vote ;^)
Report Post »This_Individual
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 12:35pmSCHIFOSA, take your socialism back to Europe.
Report Post »resme
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 5:58pmGovernment can’t fix the economy, they can only move out of the way. Let the free market do its job.
Progressives have ruined republicans.
Report Post »SamFox
Posted on November 7, 2011 at 6:23pmNOT REALLY, “Anybody but Bush!” got us 0. Beware the “Any body but…” slogan. Most of the candidates, Ron Paul excepted, would be more govt & take over from where Bush & 0 left off. There would be diff details & speed at which the US is collapsed, but it would happen under any of the others out side of Ron.
Bachmann voted to extend the ‘Patriot’ Act that Cain said was “..90% right on!”.
Ron Paul has the only & longest PRO-”return the US govt to it’s constitutional size!” platform. I know that some of the candidates now copy what Ron Paul says, but there is little to no indication, going by their records, that they mean it or would walk their talk.
Report Post »SamFox