Republican Presidential Candidate Debate #2 - Columbia, SC 05/15/07 - Official Discussion Thread

May 15, 2007

[CounterCounterCulture]

Republican Presidential Candidate Debate #2 – Columbia, South Carolina 05/15/07 - Official Discussion Thread

Watch live coverage of the First-in-the-South Republican Party Presidential Candidate debate on FOX News Channel and FOXNews.com on Tuesday, May 15, at 9 p.m. EDT (6 p.m. PDT).

• Sam Brownback
• Jim Gilmore
• Rudy Giuliani
• Mike Huckabee
• Duncan Hunter
• John McCain
• Mitt Romney
• Ron Paul
• Tom Tancredo
• Tommy Thompson

The 90-minute debate will air from 9 p.m. to 10:30 p.m. ET (6 p.m. to 7:30 p.m.) and will be moderated by "Special Report" anchor Brit Hume. Questions will be posed by two panelists — "FOX News Sunday" host Chris Wallace and White House correspondent Wendell Goler.

[MNJohnnie]

My that was impressive. You managed to read my post, then read the whole Fatwa, think about it and come up with your response in only 4 mins?

Maybe NEXT time you try actually READING the link?

[FreedomForce]

Duncan Hunter is who I’m supporting at this point. Hoping he’ll gain ground as he gets more exposure. I might change if Fred Thompson gets into the race, but then again I might not. Huckabee isn’t too bad, but I doubt there’s much chance of his popularity growing much(still don’t like him as much as I do Hunter or F. Thompson though.) Tancredo is good on the issues but lacks Presidential demeanor.

Romney—Bad on the 2nd Amendment. That’s my litmus test.
Rudy—Bad on a lot of issues.
McCain—Don’t trust him at all. Never have.
Brownback—Non-entity.
Tommy Thompson—Another non-entity.
Gilmore—Yet another non-entity.
Paul—Entity from some other reality.

[omnivore]

"Ron Paul is nuts."

I'm with you.

[guido911]

So your point is that Hannity is Mussolini? Well done.

[meandog]

McLame can try to run from his record but it speaks for itself. He trampled all over the first amendment with McCain-Feingold and will never earn forgiveness from me. He has been the media’s darling and LIBS best friend on everything except the war.

WRONG again Devil! The libs best friend is the man currently serving in the White House...he's the reason there is a Democratic majority in Congress, he's the reason that everything that Reagan built is being torn down conservative piece by piece before our very eyes, and he's the reason we'll have to deal with the Clintons UNLESS McCain gets the nod...because, at least, McCain has an idea how to win a war because he won't listen to foolish "they'll welcome us as heroes" advice from (5-times Vietnam deferred Cheney), or "let us completely tear down their police and military and build it from scratch" Bremmer, or idiots who are the real architects of defeat: Rumsfeld, Perle and Wolfolwitz.

[cva66snipe]

Reagan was sworn in as POTUS at that time.. The Iranians knew he was a man to be reckoned with.. a strong leader of the fr4ee world who would brook no nonsense from the Islamic Terrorists..

I understood you. But Mommar underestimated him though and learned better. I was on active duty when the 79 Iranian crisis happened. One shipmate in my shop said he wasn't voting for Reagan because he would get us in a war. It didn't happen. It didn't have too happen. He made a few mistakes or rather underestimates like Beirut.

I'm going to get flamed royally for my next comment but it's true and shows just how far out of touch with reality both parties are on foreign policy. Two names Albright and Rice. Why in the name of common sense did Clinton appoint Albright and Bush Rice when they are dealing with cultures who do not respect women in positions of power or authority? If you had a serious message to send another leader be it a threat or warning would you send someone you know they would consider an insult? It doesn't matter what you or eye think about women in elected or appointed positions of power. It matters how we are perceived to the nation we are trying to convince.

I would have appointed someone like Bob Barr whom the enemy feared and could not make blink. Someone who would give them a cold stare. Our nations own Political Correctness is costing us on foreign policy. Which brings us back to Reagan. A POTUS who used good judgement and some good old fashioned common sense.

[cva66snipe]

I’m none of those, I’m A Reagan Republican.

And I'm Howard Hughes. Need some money?

[plain talk]

Yes. Consider this. Even Hillary Clinton voted for the Iraq War yet Ron Paul did not.

[cva66snipe]

Yes. Consider this. Even Hillary Clinton voted for the Iraq War yet Ron Paul did not.

Ron Paul did ask for a formal declaration of war. He asked that if we did it that we did it right. And indeed his concerns were well warranted. A Formal Declaration would have bound Congress to the war as well as Bush. Had it passed Ron Paul would have stood by it. Had it been passed Bush would not be wasting our money on his insane nation building. Had it past the war in Iraq would have been likely limited to military mission and over two years or more ago with Iraq in ruins which is the purpose of war some seem to forget in this so called kinder gentler GOP. The Coward GOP and the Coward Dems in office sent people to war yet lacked the guts to obligate themselves to it's completion. They deserved better than the GOP version of Gulf of Tonkin Resolution part 2 or at least some of us think so.

[AliVeritas]

MSNBC vs. Fox

Video that compares the questions:
http://media.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NTIyYmJiMzE3NjExM2YxM2NkYzZiMjBmOTgyM2M0M2E=

[JerseyDvl]

That was rambling nonsense. McCain has NO SHOT at the Republican nod. He is an over the hill, loose cannon, ill-tempered RINO.
Sorry.

[FredHunter08]

“Silly is thinking today anyone of those candidates,except Rudy, can beat Hillary.”

Rudy can’t beat Hillary. In reality, a Rudy candidacy would make sure Hillary won.

[plain talk]

Ron Paul did ask for a formal declaration of war. He asked that if we did it that we did it right.

Ron Paul's opening comments on the Iraq Resolution:

"Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to this resolution. The wisdom of the war is one issue, but the process and the philosophy behind our foreign policy are important issues as well. But I have come to the conclusion that I see no threat to our national security. There is no convincing evidence that Iraq is capable of threatening the security of this country, and, therefore, very little reason, if any, to pursue a war."

Now what were you saying?

[cva66snipe]

But I have come to the conclusion that I see no threat to our national security. There is no convincing evidence that Iraq is capable of threatening the security of this country, and, therefore, very little reason, if any, to pursue a war."

Iraq had a minimal Army. Iraq had no viable Air Force and few missiles. Iraq had no Navy. What was the threat? Did Iraq blow up the COLE? Yet Okie Dokie from two Presidents to Yemen on this not even having those responsible once caught turned over to us.

I doubt Paul would have been against taking out Saddam in principle but what the GOP does not want you to know and understand was it could have been done by a Letter of Marque or Reprisal. Bush Corporate friends wouldn't make money on contracts that way though.

The single biggest threat to our nation is the same threat that allowed the attackers in to start with. A pathetic immigration and border control policy which Bush refuses to address as well as Lax and undermanned and equiped national defense which he is still cutting. I would have much rather seen all the money that went into the war in Iraq note here I am saying Iraq put toward a fence with Mexico and a much stronger southern border which allows anyone to come and go as they please. Or correct the pathetic VISA program which allowed the terrorsit to stay longer than permitted. That is real prevention and national security.

Bush has done everything but that including having his puppet USAG treat us all as if we are suspects until proven otherwise by recording our private acts and deeds. Yet Bush wants to open the doors and say welcome to many of Mexico's worse all is forgiven? What kind of national and foreign policy is that? A failed one that what kind it is.

Bush has used and abused the WOT for almost every bad idea the man has ever had in his two terms and far too many elected Republicans have gone along with it.

[cva66snipe]

BTW name me the Iraqi 9/11 hi-jackers.

[Antoninus]

So your point is that Hannity is Mussolini? Well done.

Uh, no. Try re-reading.

Here's the point for the slow witted: Because someone receives praise for doing something good, it does not innoculate them from criticism when they do someting bad.

All the good Sean Hannity may have done can not excuse the way he's sold his soul to a liberal like Rudy Giuliani.

[plain talk]

What you believe Paul thought or meant is irrelevant.

Paul said "I have come to the conclusion that I see no threat to our national security. There is no convincing evidence that Iraq is capable of threatening the security of this country, and, therefore, very little reason, if any, to pursue a war."

He is an ostrich in a dangerous world. And someone like Paul who chooses to ignore well-known facts that Iraq did gas the Kurds and did attempt to assassinate Bush, Sr. is not credible and not worth paying any attention to.

In post #2949 you said "Ron Paul did ask for a formal declaration of war. He asked that if we did it that we did it right.".

Yeah, right. I base my statements on what he said on the floor of Congress when it came to a vote. The man is a nut case along with Kucinich. Even Hillary voted for the Iraq War.

[cva66snipe]

Even Hillary voted for the Iraq War.

Well good now you have someone to vote for POTUS in November 2008 you can agree with then.

[Kevmo]

Here’s today’s latest InTrade changes. It appears to me that McCain lost. Rudy gained some (yesterday’s he was at +5, so it has settled down a bit).

http://www.intrade.com/jsp/intrade/contractSearch/

sorted by Change:

Contract Bid Ask Last Vol Chge
2008.GOP.NOM.GIULIANI 26.9 28 28 85050 0.9
2008.GOP.NOM.PAUL 0.4 0.5 0.5 22800 0.1
2008.GOP.NOM.ROMNEY 17.9 18.2 17.9 65800 0
2008.GOP.NOM.HUCKABEE 2.2 2.3 2.3 36266 0
2008.GOP.NOM.BROWNBCK 0.4 1 0.4 25453 0
2008.GOP.NOM.THOMPSON(T) 0.2 0.5 0.3 25317 0
2008.GOP.NOM.TANCREDO 0.2 0.4 0.2 17126 0
2008.GOP.NOM.HUNTER 0.1 0.2 0.1 20773 0
2008.GOP.NOM.GILMORE - 0.1 - 13365 0
2008.GOP.NOM.THOMPSON(F) 13.9 14.2 13.9 15655 -0.1
2008.GOP.NOM.BLOMBERG 1.3 1.4 1.3 25737 -0.1
2008.GOP.NOM.HAGEL 2.8 2.9 2.7 32495 -0.2
2008.GOP.NOM.MCCAIN 27.6 27.9 27.6 83228 -0.4
2008.GOP.NOM.GINGRICH 3.6 4.2 3.8 35854 -1.1

Here it is sorted according to Ask price. Hunter is stuck down in the noise level, so for those of us who really do think he has a chance to win, we could make some money at the same time as putting our money where our mouth is.

Contract Bid Ask Last Vol Chge
2008.GOP.NOM.GIULIANI 26.9 28 28 85050 0.9
2008.GOP.NOM.MCCAIN 27.6 27.9 27.6 83228 -0.4
2008.GOP.NOM.ROMNEY 17.9 18.2 17.9 65800 0
2008.GOP.NOM.THOMPSON(F) 13.9 14.2 13.9 15655 -0.1
2008.GOP.NOM.GINGRICH 3.6 4.2 3.8 35854 -1.1
2008.GOP.NOM.HAGEL 2.8 2.9 2.7 32495 -0.2
2008.GOP.NOM.HUCKABEE 2.2 2.3 2.3 36266 0
2008.GOP.NOM.BLOMBERG 1.3 1.4 1.3 25737 -0.1
2008.GOP.NOM.BROWNBCK 0.4 1 0.4 25453 0
2008.GOP.NOM.THOMPSON(T) 0.2 0.5 0.3 25317 0
2008.GOP.NOM.PAUL 0.4 0.5 0.5 22800 0.1
2008.GOP.NOM.TANCREDO 0.2 0.4 0.2 17126 0
2008.GOP.NOM.HUNTER 0.1 0.2 0.1 20773 0
2008.GOP.NOM.GILMORE - 0.1 - 13365 0

[patriciaruth]

Season Finale coming up, 2 hours starting at 8 pm Monday.

Be there or be dead.

Thanks for the photo!