Posted By Karen,nj : October 22, 2007 4:50 pm

Bill Clinton was impeached by the house on Dec 19, 1998. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment_of_Bill_Clinton . Stating otherwise is an outright Lie.

Ken, Pleeeze, you think we were attacked because we are a Christian nation? That's called propaganda. I think it's far more likely that they hate us because we're constantly meddling in their countries, throwing our American presence around and disrespecting their culture. Why are we always doing this? Because we want to have control over the region, because we need oil. period. Why do you think we have the largest embassy in the world in Iraq, because we were going to bring them Democracy and leave? Why didn't we take the billions spent in Iraq and develop alternatives to oil? Because people in power are making lots and lots of money on that oil. But if we'd develop alternatives, we wouldn't be sending all our oil money to the middle east and they'd be back in the stone age again because they have few other natural resources, and they wouldn't have the power or incentives to bother with us.

Have you ever stopped to think why people hate the U.S in the first place? I don't see Al Qaeda attacking Norway. Maybe because they do not try to strong arm the rest of the world. Your socialist theory is absurd and your criticism of Paul shows you are scared that your Neo-Con or Marxist candidate will lose. I choose to elect you as village idiot in '08. Congrats.

In fact, and contrary to both of your comments and speculations of some on this board, GOPers are using an excellent strategy by identifying strengths and weaknesses within their party lines (who is most capable) and opportunities and threats on the outside (that of an opponent). Planning of a good strategy always results in arguments, squabbles, disagreements, and quarrels (this is nothing unusual).

This being said, Hillary is more of an opportunity to the GOP field than the threat. This woman has got too much baggage on her to even be considered a serious threat (a fool can realize that). Hillary, no doubt, will get Dems nomination, and she will, no doubt, lose general election. Simple as that – it'll be fun to watch though.

Romney 08!

Good points, I did not mention him because he won’t get the nomination. The top tier candidates have too much money, he unfortunately can never compete. He would make a great Secretary of State……………………………………………………

You wrote, "Ron Paul is the only candidate with something new and different to say but the above article makes no mention of him. Why is this?

-–

Ron Paul was heavily booed after his little rant about the Iraq war (even his 200 minions couldn't cheer/scream loud enough). Ron Paul has no chance of being the Republican Nominee. He has as much chance as Dennis Kucinich for the Democrats.

Most media aren't going to waste their time with fringe candidates.

A definition of war that has been taught in military course for years states that ,"War is an extension of diplomacy, when diplomacy has failed". War hence is based upon political/diplomatic failure, end of statement. It is the members of our military that must must pay the price when politians fail.

With an administration that refuses to talk with any nation it disagrees with, I would call this politcal not diplomatic.

When the adversary is not a nation state, the action is called a crimmianl matter. On the subject of mass murder ther have been several instances in history where nations have held individuals accountable for mass murder.

As to who as Commander in Chief he is duty bound to Protect, he is duty bound to protect just what is stated in his oath of office, "....to protect and defend the Constiitution of the United States of America from all enemies, foreign and domestic...."

Through out its history the United States has gone out of its way to avoid the initation of hostile actions against an enemy, why, because once you instute first strike you lose what moral high ground you had to begin with.

As far as preemptive strikes go, there is nothing preemptive about them,nor is there a 100 percent certainty on any military action, it becomes a question of who fires the first shot. No soldier fires the first shot, he fires the last shot. The first shot is fired by the attacker who loses standing by attacking first and status is gained by the nation that suffered the attack.

As to learning from history had this administration been around at the time of the Cuban Missle Crisis we would not be having this debate today, we would not be here. Learn from past historical events, the entire course of recorded history going back to the middle ages, you do not make it a matter that might seem religious in nature, in other words you do not have a urban cowboy stand before the media and proclaim a "crusade against terror", you do not interact with a arab nation as you would interact with a western nation, you look back at the history of the region and examine the problems that the Britsh had during their rule and the errors they made to include in the drawing of national boundaries. You look back at the Soviet activitities within Afganistan and what errors they made as we were pumping money and guns in to the hands of our allies the Taliban. At the completion of the Vietnam era we stated that never again would be get involved in nation building, nation building by any other name is still nation building. What we are doing in our unfinshed wars is nation building.

A General by the name of Powell created a doctrine at while serving our nation called the Powell Doctrine which outlined the criteria for placing our military forces in harms way, to paraphase, the mission must be defined and acheivable, adequate forces must be employed to acheive the military objectives that have been defined and upon the completion of these objective the forces come home. Talk about a doctrine that was not followed.

Finally, terrorist activity is something that has been around for years. In the 70-80-90s they were targeting US military personnel overseas, of course this did not gain much uproar from the population, after all we were expendable. The problem was not confined to the mideast, but included Europe, they did not go off the deep end, the individuals invovled were terrorist, they were crimminals, we did not let them rule our lives, we were aware and we did not give they special status, they were crimminal. You will never defeat terrorist, because when you kill one another one comes forward, but you can catch and jail crimminals, crimminals are not self generating. Thank our government for giving crimminals a standing that they never had in the past.

So have a very nice day Stephen.

A Officer, a Repblican and Yada, Yada Yada

http://www.ronpaul2008.com

--

Because, Rodney, the individual that wins the Republican nomination will become the next President of the United States. The democrat party has already decided Hillary will be their nominee. Karl Rove, the RNC, and political insiders know the unacceptable flaws Hillary brings (Hsu, China-town, socialist agenda, etc) and will drive Hillary's already historically high negative ratings through the roof.

The only contest we're watching on the Republican side – who wants to be the next President?

This was your list:

National Debt
Lack of government oversight for virtually every program, housing, commerce, health, education, port and border security…………………………………………
Our dead and wounded from to the Iraq war
The infringement to our liberties as Americans
The lack of care or respect for our veterans
The established laws of our country being ignored for political gain

1. National Debt. Ron Paul has never voted for an UNbalanced budget. He was labeled "The Taxpayers best friend" by an independant group.

2. Lack of Government oversight. Ron Paul wants to end the huge gov. agencies that lack this oversight.

3. Our dead or wounded in Iraq. Ron Paul was one of the first to point out the problems with our Veteran Hospitals.

4. Infringement to our Liberties. Ron Paul is a strict Constitutionalist. Look up the Bill he introduced OCT. 15th to restore the Constitution.

5. Lack of respect for laws for politcal gain. Ron Paul is labeled Dr. No for voting against his party, against pork for his own area, and for fighting anything that seems to go against the intent of the Constitution.

ronpaul2008.com

With three questions thrown his way, you couldn't see all that. Go back through the last 20 years and read his CONSISTANT defense of the Consitution...most of which you can find at his website.

Here is what matters:

National Debt
Lack of government oversight for virtually every program, housing, commerce, health, education, port and border security…………………………………………
Our dead and wounded from to the Iraq war
The infringement to our liberties as Americans
The lack of care or respect for our veterans
The established laws of our country being ignored for political gain

The people who have run this country, republicans and democrats alike for the last 6+ years have failed our nation. Some of them criminally…………..

It is time to hold them all accountable! It is time to get rid of the enemy from within and it is time to select the best qualified to lead our nation.

I did not see one during that debate!

Actually the process by which states interact with other states is called diplomacy, not politics. And war has conventionally been called "diplomacy by other means" and there are a number of instances where wars have been highly successful in the pursuit of foreign policy objectives. Having said that, maybe you can provide the historical references which deal with situations where the adversary is not a nation state but an organisation or other structureand from which the candidates have not learnt. As for preemptive strikes would you ignore any risk of an attack until it became, post -facto, a one hundred per cent certainty, thereby causing significant loss of life to the people who as Commander-in-Chief you were duty bound to protect?

half of them look like they are about to fall over and die.

Frankly, as a woman it was a complete turn-off to see a bunch of middle aged men ganging up on the one woman running for president. I tend to take offense when I perceive men making denigrating comments at women, regardless of their political ideology. They better tread carefully with all the Hillary bashing lest they offend many women, we are the majority and we do vote.

The candidates would serve their party and their electorate better if they concentrated on their proposals and left Hillary Clinton out of their rhetoric. Also, why do they keep calling her "Hillary" or "Mrs. Clinton"? Its' senator Clinton, boys!!

Actually Karen, he was impeached and then found not guilty by the Senate. Impeachment is the bringin of charges which happened in December of 1998. Would you like to super-size that sock?

Just keepin' it real

Posted By Karen,nj : October 22, 2007 11:20 am

Wow, how funny. I was for sure that Billy was infact impeached. Silly me! The idiocracy of that statement is scary, and this my friends is why Hillary will win the nomination, and the Presidency. The sheep simply cannot think for themselves, because when they do, they come up with things like that. But I sleep well at night knowing that Karen will not get a day pass from the looney bin to vote.

My vote shall go to the person that best represents my views and is willing to maintain an open mind. Proclaimig yourself pro-defense, when the only thing that you have done for the military and veterans is insure an annual pay raise is not pro-defense. Proclaiming yourself a person driven by your faith is kind of like proclaiming yourself a compassionate conservative, the lies only go so far, if you were compassionate you would not be conservative and if faith really drove your life you would not be in politics at national level. I shall not be voting for individuals preaching from the stage what they think I want to hear, I will be voting for individuals thats have a past track record that represents my beliefs and priorities, so much for my party of choice. The last Republican I voted for was George HW Bush, he was not a great President but I thought he was competant and at least honest.

Todays canidiates share only two things, they think that the nation desires to have religion thrown in to the forefront. So to each canidate that wears his religion on his sleeve, goodbye, you have lost my vote. And to each canidate that thinks premptive military action saves lives and is good policy, goodbye you chicken hawks, never did learn a thing from history did you. The use of military action is a result of a failed political policy, advocating the use of force is admitting you are a failure.

To those extreme anti-abortionist, I do not beleive in abortion and have no intention of ever getting one, but in the same regard, I rember before legal abortions in this nation, so mind your own bees wax, and stop trying to force your morality on everyone else.

At one time I was considered a right wing extremist by my friends, today I am considered a moderate by some and a liberal by other, but you know what, my views have not changed, but the definitions most definetly have and todays Republican canidates are attempting to place themselves so far to the right, that I am not sure they even qualify as Republicans anymore.

Finally, I thought the debate was to expose the views of the canidates to the public so that a canidate in the Republican party could be choosen to run for President. I sure did not hear much in the line of views other than what appears to be an over occupation with one of the democratic canidates. It sure appears that the vast majority of Republican Canidates are afraid of Clinton, they sure spent alot of time talking about her.

Posted by twaska, Tulsa, OK

---

I imagine getting smashed is about the only way most folks could get into the frame of mind to cast a vote for Hillary. Why don't you try this drinking game.... Every time Hillary or one of her Democratic compadres mention "Bush" – you take a shot. You'd empty 3 tequila bottles before the first commercial break! What is especially odd about Hillary and the Dems... they must be oblivious to the US Constitution which limits candidates to TWO terms as President. George Bush isn't a candidate, Helloooooo Democrats!?

-–

Hmmm – was this the same Ron Paul that was practically booed off stage after he went into his rant about the Iraq War?

Ron Paul isn't a Republican and he has ZERO chance of winning the nomination. But y'all RP disciples keep holding your breath!

Posted By Karen,nj : October 22, 2007 11:20 am

Bill Clinton was impeached by the House of Representatives.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment_of_Bill_Clinton

Hillary and Barack look like geniuses compared to these apes.

Go Hillary!