“Boy you got that right. I think last night was his Dean Scream moment.”
Which moment was that?
Cheap shot to take one screenshot that shows someone in mid-word looking silly.
When Libs do the same to Bush to make him look like a monkey, FReepers scream.
It’s an immature line of argument.
What did you oppose?
His message of limited government and the relationship between limited government and civil liberties?
How taxpayer backed easy credit has caused the housing crisis, and that the solution isn’t more easy credit?
That we shouldn’t force Israel to get a permission slip from daddy America to defend themselves?
I guess it’s easier to cut down the person based on a screenshot than their ideas, hmm?
I will say it was scary watching him in the post-debate Luntz focus group.
I say that because while he was talking, I was largely agreeing with his point, but the ratings for him were dropping through the floor.
The problem is that when you start talking about bombing people, it just seems to really get the base excited. Paul was right — there was NO NEED to go to war over a few speedboats, and the Navy both knew that, and did the right thing by confronting the boats and then letting them walk away.
But Paul saying that wasn’t popular. What was popular was people saying we should have blown them up. Some poor guy is ordered by his crazy boss to drive his speedboat around a navy ship, and a lot of pro-lifers here think it would have been great if we had killed the guy, even though he never took a shot at us.
If one of our candidates had just said we should nuke Iran and get it over with, he probably would have broken that agreement meter.
He may be smart economically but he's dangerously uniformed about foreign affairs. He actually accused us of another Gulf of Tonkin incident in his reply to the Iranian gunboats question. He sounded just like a 9/11 truther during that answer.