Republican Debate

[HBGOnline]

I finally got a chance to see a Republican debate.

I have to ask myself how the hell is Huckabee still in this race. Predicition, he's done after Florida. Yes even Chuck Norris can't save him. He has no real ideas, just recycled BS. Forgot he does have one main idea the Fair Tax. Fuck that!!! Sounds even more fucked up than the current tax codes.

John McCain, yes he is an admired war vetern and I'm sure he loves this country, but under all that gray hair he is a liberal democrat. When he talked about the enviroment I thought Al Gore was going to morph from his skin.

Ron Paul, WTF!!! I've read thru months of postings on this board about Ron Paul and his positions. Where were they tonight? Was he even part of the debate? Consitution this and blah blah blah that. In my opinion a real whack job. If elected president I can't see him tackling any issues facing this country effectively. The Social Security question asked to him late in the debate, knock him completely into outer space. I don't care what you Ron Paul supporters say anymore about him, he is a true nut job.

Rudy looked like a deer stuck in headlights and sounded like one too. Except his answers regarding the enviroment. He is correct, we do need more nuke plants in this country.

Romney in my opinion was the total package. The man proved his business background is important especially when dealing with the economy. He doesn't want government run health care for all, unlike Hillarycare. Great answers on trade issues with the rest of the world, mainly dealing with the slant eyes trying to kill us all. Social security issue was right on target and truthfull. Plus he had the balls to say with Hillary you get Bill and both will try to run the country. (or something like that)

I wish they would ask both parties the same questions. The Democrat debate was all about how fast would you get out of Iraq, how black are you, how much taxes would you increase and how bigger can you make the government.

I'd like that Social Security question asked at the next Democrat Debate.

Months ago I was leaning towards Rudy. A few weeks ago I wasn't leaning towards anyone. After tonight I'm leaning more towards Mitt. I would like to actually see more debates before I land in any camp.

Hopefully another network will host. That Tim Russell give me the creeps!!!!

[freddyv]

admin said:

The Social Security question asked to him late in the debate, knock him completely into outer space.

He wants to give young people the chance to opt out of social security. The contention is that by the time we are eligible to access social security benefits, there will physically be no funds available to us as it will be bankrupt.

There is obviously money in the social security fund right now as they are paying out benefits to seniors. One of the things that Ron Paul wants to do to provide relief for seniors right now is to not tax their social security benefits when they are paid out. Currently they are being taxed when they get their benefit checks, which is questionable. he also wants to stop the government from dipping into social security to pay for other things.

I think they asked him three or four questions during the course of the entire 90+ minute debate, so he didn't really have much opportunity to showcase what he's all about. If you want, I can find youtube links for you of previous debates to give you a better picture.

To me, it kinda felt like the Mitt Romney show. At one point they asked him three or four questions in a row. Giuliani and McCain got a decent opportunity to speak as well. They pretty much ignored Huckabee.

All in all, not the best debate I've seen. Having watched a few of them at this point, you start to see the candidates regurgitating a lot of the same material.

Did you notice how Giuliani brought up Sarbanes-Oxley? I haven't heard any of the candidates talk about that, then after Ron Paul put out his press release (the thread I started "A REAL Economic Stimulus Plan") suddenly it's a topic of discussion. This isn't the first time that I've seen this happen. Not to say that multiple candidates wouldn't come up with similar ideas independently...just seems like a pretty big coincidence.

[Mickulz]

Jim, how many of the democratic debates have you seen?

The questions on the republican debate were pretty much the same between 2 democratic debates.

[freddyv]

freddyv said:

I think they asked him three or four questions during the course of the entire 90+ minute debate, so he didn't really have much opportunity to showcase what he's all about.

I just checked the transcript...it was four questions, and a 30-second rebuttal:

1. Does government -- should government, in your view, have any role at all in stimulating the economy like this?

Ron Paul: Well, sure, indirectly. They shouldn't stimulate it by interfering in the market rate of interest. That's where our basic problem comes from.

And when you do that, you get into these problems, and then everybody wants to solve the problem by printing more money and spending more money and asking the Federal Reserve to, you know, lower interest rates. And that just makes the problem that much worse.

The government does have a responsibility, but it's supposed to lower taxes, get rid of regulations, and devise a monetary policy that makes some -- makes some sense. But, to continue to say that we just appropriate more money, which is more deficit, then expect us either to borrow it or expect the Federal Reserve to monetize it, it makes our problems worse.

Just look at what's happening today. The dollar is crashing. And why -- and Tim there suggests that we think of the economy, but not in foreign policy.

You can't do that. They're one in the same. That's where all of the money is going.

We're spending nearly a trillion dollars a year overseas maintaining this empire. And then, there's never been a war fought without inflation and destruction and devaluation of a currency.

And this -- this is what we're doing today to ourselves, is we're literally spending ourselves into oblivion. But nobody here is willing to even suggest that we cut something overseas. But we have to.

We don't need to cut anything here at home. I would like to see things frozen. I'd like to see massive tax cuts, but we need deregulation.

I was one of three people that voted against Sarbanes-Oxley. I knew that would be a problem. And it is a problem to the financial markets.

So this is the kind of thing we need. We need the government out of the way, but it should have sound money, low taxes, less regulations, and a sensible policy where we're not wasting our money overseas.



2. Why should the American people continue a Republican in the White House with that kind of economic record, Senator McCain?

Congressman Paul, please take 30 seconds of your own.

Paul: Well, you know, I think that we can't run on that program. I think what we have to run on is the old-fashioned Republican program. I can't be identified with this. I'm known as the taxpayer's best friend. I have never voted for a tax increase and I voted for the least amount of spending. So I'm not part of that crowd.

But what we need to do is reinstate Republican principles. Then we could run on it. But we have drifted a long way from that. And that is because of all of these programs.

But there was never -- my participation in this -- I was waving the flag the whole time, saying, "Slow up, slow up." This isn't going well.

And here we are, we're at the verge of bankruptcy. We're moving into a new era, believe it or not, with the dollar and our economy and the world economy, this is a new era.



3. Russert: Congressman Paul, was the war a good idea, worth the blood and treasure that we have spent?

Paul: It was a very bad idea and it wasn't worth it.

The Al Qaida wasn't there then. They're there now. There were no weapons of mass destruction, had nothing to do with 9/11. There was no aggression.

This decision on policy was made in 1998 under the previous administration, because they called for the removal of Saddam Hussein. It wasn't worth it and it's a sad story, because we started that war and we should never be a country that starts war needlessly.



4. Russert: Dr. Paul -- Congressman Paul, I'd like to talk about Social Security.

The last time you ran for president, a Libertarian Party candidate, you filled out a questionnaire asking about Social Security. And you said, "Abolish it."

There are 3.5 million people in Florida who rely on Social Security payments. Are you still in favor of abolishing Social Security?

Paul: Yes, but not overnight. As a matter of fact, my program is the only one that is going to be able to take care of the elderly.

I'd like to get the young people out -- out of it, just the younger generation, because there's no money there. And they're going to have to pay 50 years and they're not going to get anything. There's no money there.

Now, I'm saying, I'd take care of all the elderly, all those who are -- who are dependent, but I would save the money from this wild spending overseas. We can save hundreds of billions of dollars and still take care of the elderly.

Right now they're getting behind because they're having a 10 to 12 percent inflation rate and we give them a 2 percent increase. So they're really hurting.

I don't want taxes on the Social Security benefits that they receive. I have a bill in that would secure the trust fund, where none of that money could be spent in the -- in the general revenues.

So, in many ways, though the goal would be to get us out of this program that is a failure, it doesn't work, and is going to bankrupt this country, that the only way you can do that is save enough money, tide the people over, let the young people get out. Because they're going to be paying all these years and they're not going to get anything.

So, ironically, I, who defend the position that, you know, the federal government probably should have never been involved, I probably have the only program that would really help the elderly, because the way we're going now, the money is not going to be there. There's no way these cost of living increases are ever going to keep up with their -- you know, their benefits. They're never going to keep up with the cost of living.

They're decreasing. I say my program has a better chance of helping them than any other one.



5. Congressman Paul, the other campaigns have said to you that their worry is that you won't stick to your party. If you look at yourself and see yourself some day as unelectable, perhaps you would launch a third party movement and hurt the Republicans.

Paul: My biggest concern is they won't stick to the party principles that Republicans stood for, for so long. And you know, being conservative and balanced budgets, and limited government, and individual freedom, no, I have no intention of going into another party.

I've been elected 10 times as a Republican. I was from a Republican family. And no, I don't plan to do that.

I wish they would worry about it, you know, just in case. But, no, I have no intention of doing that, but it might keep them on their toes.

But, no, I just think that the Republican Party has a problem because we don't act like Republicans. And we talked about this earlier, you know, that we're spending money that we don't have, we run up these deficits.

We -- instead -- you know, in the old days, we used to be against the Department of Education. Now we doubled the size of it. No Child Left Behind -- even the Democrats are running against some of the things that we do, and they used to love that kind of stuff.

And it used to be that we used to stop the wars. We stopped the Korean War. We were supposed to stop the Vietnam War that Democrats started. And here, we're starting these wars. So that's why we've lost our way.

So I don't think it's a matter of me leaving the Republican Party. If they would look toward what we're doing and the number of people who want to come into the party, they shouldn't be obstructing us. They should welcome.

The party is getting smaller. Yet they say, oh, you're too strict on the Constitution. Why shouldn't us, who believe strictly in the constitutional rule of law, be excluded? That's the way a lot of the people that gather around my candidacy think they're being treated.

So I would say, why don't we have a big tent and welcome those of us who believe in liberty and believe in the Constitution? That's what it's all about, and that's what the Republican Party used to stand for.