|
||
|
|
|
|||||||
| Register | FAQ | GFWiki | Members List | Donate | Arcade | ChocoJournal | Mark Forums Read |
| Welcome to the Gamingforce Interactive Forums. |
|
GFF is a community of gaming and music enthusiasts. We have a team of dedicated moderators, constant member-organized activities, and plenty of custom features, including our unique journal system. If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ or our GFWiki. You will have to register before you can post. Membership is completely free (and gets rid of the pesky advertisement unit underneath this message).
|
![]() |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools |
|
Fox GOP Post-Debate
Looks like the Press can't ignore Ron Paul anymore. That whole thing was an awful clusterfuck, and I like how nothing was done to silence the audience despite the outlaying of the format. I suppose Paul won't be getting the candidacy, but this debate just confirmed to me that every candidate except Paul is a fucking monster.
![]() |
|
I couldn't believe Rudy's childish outburst, but maybe it served to harm him (doubt it.) It's at least encouraging that Paul did well in the text-message poll.
A koopa never lived who had an ounce of integrity.
|
|
It'll only hurt Rudy if GOP voters care to look up the facts, which is that we've had several reports claiming that our intervention in the Middle East inspired the 9/11 terrorists and Al-Qaeda.
As an aside, I can't wait to see what praise crooksandliars will come up with for Paul through the bile in their throats. Footage of Paul's statement and Giuliani's response. Transcript of Paul and Sean Hannity's exchange post-debate: Spoiler:
![]()
Last edited by Bradylama : May 16, 2007 at 04:03 AM.
|
|
This thread should be subtitled: "or More Ron Paul Circle-jerking"
I like how most of the Beltway Journalists' reviews said that Giuliani got the largest response from the crowd when it is clear Huckabee got the biggest response with his John Edwards/beauty parlor line. (though that was a bit off-topic) Facts don't deter our media from telling you want they want to tell you, especially It also seems like Giuliani is going to attempt take Paul down in flames with him. Aside from the fact that he announced he is pro-choice, pro-gay-rights, and pro-gun-control, his outburst may very well come back to haunt him, if Paul's campaign can play this up just right. Of course the most infuriating thing about Faux News was the fact that they pretty much focused all of their questions for Paul on his views on the war knowing this is could potentially alienate him from the sheeple Republican voters.
Last edited by packrat : May 16, 2007 at 10:21 AM.
|
|
So, are they ever going to ask Paul about any issue OTHER than Iraq? If the Media hates Paul as much as Brady thinks they do they could start by, I don't know, asking him for his stances on issues which a large majority of America considers his opinions to be "extremist nutjob" territory, not the one issue they AGREE with him on.
|
|
They want to ask him questions on issues which the Republicans generally would disagree with him on; not the rest of the American public. Remember, these are debates for the Republican nomination, not the full presidency.
To many "conservatives" these days, a laissez-faire foreign policy is "extremist nutjob" territory. |
|
Well, I think Paul could play his views on the CIA just right. Like he's said before, he is not against the notion of a CIA as a channel for intelligence gathering; he is against the notion of the CIA as a channel for interference in other nations' affairs, like inciting coups, assassinations, revolutions, etc. I think most Americans AND Republicans will agree with him on this for the most part.
|
|
And yet his proposed solution is "throw the baby out with the bathwater".
I still maintain that if Americans were exposed to Paul's beliefs on most issues he'd have about the popularity of Tancredo. |
|
|
I'm surprised nobody wants to call him on placing the Disaster Response HQ in the WTC, despite the 1993 bombings.
I never thought I'd actually want to see McCain move on to the primary, but after last night it's hard not to considering that he and Paul are the only candidates against torture and excessive spending. Paul calls Giuliani ignorant on Wolf Blitzer:
![]()
Last edited by Bradylama : May 16, 2007 at 08:50 PM.
|
|||||
|
Um, with the exception of the crowd (which gradually stepped across the line set by Fox News), it was EASILY the most well-run debate for either side, thus far, and contained the best set of questions. Speaking of babies and bathwater, it's not fair to lump Brit Hume and Chris Wallace (the 2 who run the serious shows on the channel) in with the rest of the Fox News broadcasters, especially after their stellar job in South Carolina.
I'm surprised that the National Review-type crowds praised Guiliani as the far-and-away winner. For me, he didn't do himself any favors (never mind his various stances) when he used Paul as a prop to puff out his chest. What an ass. Me? Depending on the Democrats' choice for vice-president, I'd love to see a Mccain-Huckabee ticket. Hopefully, Huckabee would have his various problems (in my eyes) adjusted after 4 or 8 years under Mccain and could make a run himself. Of course, that's just my opinion. "At this point I'm pretty sure most people would be open to all of Paul's views with the exception of the Gold Standard, and that's only one knock against him in a gaggle of Neoconservative sadsacks and War Party Dems." Naw. Sooner or later, even the slowest of people would recognize that he'd never marshal support in the legislative branch or his executive branch's own bureaucracy. He'd be a lame duck by year 2. |
|
Would that really be a bad thing?
![]()
Last edited by Bradylama : May 17, 2007 at 03:45 PM.
|
||||
|
hay arainach
![]()
Last edited by Bradylama : May 19, 2007 at 04:23 PM.
|
||||||||