Mother Jones - Comments for "Whack-a-Mitt: The Republicans Debate in NH"

広島　不動産

高知　不動産

募金

出会い系

ソニー損保

Go Mitt!!! The other republicans looked like children who didn't get their way, so they go crying to the teacher. Showed MaCains and Huckabees true characters. Mean and devious.

Mitt Romney deserved all the jabs he got. He's flipped on issues of morality like pro-choice and gay-rights. Yet his Mormon beliefs have remained the same. There isn't anyway to spin that other than to say he'll change his views to pander to whatever group will get him elected. We need a president that has moral courage and conviction. Romney is just a sell out.

Another chance to attack Mitt eh? There is an obvious reason Mitt got attacked tonight....he is the one to beat. You, the other candidates and the MSM media know that all too well. I thought he handled it in style. He is obviously the the best choice for president. The constant stupid attacks will only make him stronger.

Vis a vis Ron Paul - your punching bag comment caught my eye. I thought his polemic on the effect that the devaluation of the dollar has on the price of oil in the United States was a masterpiece.

Ron Paul has drawn a strong distinction between defending ourselves against imminent threats from terrorist thugs and preemptive invasions of countries like Iraq. Much of Rudy G.''s argument relies on confusing these two - we did not have to invade Iraq in order to kill Al Qaeda. There were no Al Qaeda in Iraq prior to the invasion (but there are now).

We do not need to spend hundreds of billions of dollars on bases in 130 countries in order to defeat Al Qaeda. It is unfortunate that this "Ron Paul wants to let the bad men come and kill us" argument carries as much weight as it does with people. But then again, many of these people believed that Iraq had nuclear bombs because that is what the current administration told them. I am hoping that Republicans will take a look at Dr. Paul and understand how sensible a non-interventionist foreign policy is.

The way I see it after the debates.

Repubs-You've got your warfare/welfare candidates.

Dems-You've got your healthcare/welfare candidates.

You've got some repubs/dems that want both warfare/healthcare/welfare.

Then you've got Ron Paul. I think I'm going with Ron Paul.