Why is she running for office?

[apg]

She is a morons candidate. Stupid people will vote for her so she can say stupid things. Hell, Fox news will back her over Ron Paul.
That's pretty stupid. Looks like the restupidcans are bound and determined to run an unwinnable candidate.
Yea stupid!

Hey...don't knock stupidity. It is the one national resource that we will never run out of.

Bachmann promised that if she was elected, gas would drop tol below $2 a gallon.

P.T. Barnum was right.

 

[capri_auto]

The worst part is people would actually vote for her... How about Palin... she'd actually have a shot at winning that's the sickest thing. I love this country, but our political system has become a joke.

 

[rover4x4]

she makes Palin look like a good idea. I mean how much crazier can the tea baggers and conservatives get?

 

[jrose609]

Go a little further on around 410 to the Northside. It gets better Jason

Brian, we did take a drive around there. It does seem to be pretty nice in the north side of town. Some areas around Lackland......not so much.

We still need to meet up one of these days.

 

[apg]

If I was a public figure and knew that people would be looking for prime examples to make me look like an ass, you can damn well guarantee that you would not find me choosing to eat a foot long corn dog or a banana. Or anything that would leave a big glob of mayo on the corner of my mouth, or that would leave hunks of crud in my teefs. Do these people not have advisors that tell them what not to eat in public settings? Maybe I should market myself as a political meal planning expert. Hmmmm

Capital idea, Jen! I mean, it sounds like a lucrative, niche market.... Not surprising, given that the tea party didn't bother to 'vet' the term "tea bagger' beforehand.

 

[leshassell]

If I was a public figure and knew that people would be looking for prime examples to make me look like an ass, you can damn well guarantee that you would not find me choosing to eat a foot long corn dog or a banana. Or anything that would leave a big glob of mayo on the corner of my mouth, or that would leave hunks of crud in my teefs. Do these people not have advisors that tell them what not to eat in public settings? Maybe I should market myself as a political meal planning expert. Hmmmm

Its close to that already; if you're a journalist traveling with the Bachmann campaign, you're not allowed to photograph her wearing casual clothes. Do so and you're off the bus/plane.

 

[rovercanus]

Do you honestly think Ron Paul has a chance of winning the general election? He doesn't even stand a chance of winning the nomination.

His stance on Iran is game ender for his campaign.

So with 2 wars hopefully winding down we need to seek another?
It's a shame that the republicans think they need a far right wing nut job to run just because of what we have in there now. Of course if we are stupid enough to let the media nominate one for us we deserve it.
Once again, I'll write me vote in.

 

[Mike_Rupp]

Let me repeat: his whimpy stance on Iran is a game ender for him. Wars aren't something that you want, but something that you need to do regardless. Do you think that it's just fine and dandy for Iran to get a nuke?

I know this is painful for Paul supporters to read: he has no chance of becoming president. None.

The funny thing is that Obama is more of a war President than Bush. Not only did he not end Iraq or Afghanistan, he also started a new one in Libya. Yet, I don't ever hear the dunce liberal pundits ever talk about it.

 

[Big_mark]

Let me repeat: his whimpy stance on Iran is a game ender for him. Wars aren't something that you want, but something that you need to do regardless. Do you think that it's just fine and dandy for Iran to get a nuke?

I know this is painful for Paul supporters to read: he has no chance of becoming president. None.

The funny thing is that Obama is more of a war President than Bush. Not only did he not end Iraq or Afghanistan, he also started a new one in Libya. Yet, I don't ever hear the dunce liberal pundits ever talk about it.

Do your research Mike, Obama didn't "start a war in Libya" as I recall the Europeans went in, then begged us to help out. After some time we went in to assist, not run the war.
So we've sent in a few drones and some diplomats to ASSIST THE NATO EFFORTS THERE, this is far from starting a war there.


With that said I agree Ron Paul is a loooooooooooooooooooooooong shot (to say the least) he has some good ideas but his major failing is not his policy on Iran, rather he is one of the few the politicians that is not afraid to stand up to business, and is not afraid to take drastic measures to get our country back on track, putting the lobbyist whores on the back burner. He would actually put the Country first.
In an extreme constitutionalist way.
Change for sure (gold standard, dissolve the federal reserve) if by some miracle he did get elected we'd have another 4 years of nothing getting done, on top of the 12 we've just had.

 

[rovercanus]

Let me repeat: his whimpy stance on Iran is a game ender for him. Wars aren't something that you want, but something that you need to do regardless. Do you think that it's just fine and dandy for Iran to get a nuke?

I know this is painful for Paul supporters to read: he has no chance of becoming president. None.

The funny thing is that Obama is more of a war President than Bush. Not only did he not end Iraq or Afghanistan, he also started a new one in Libya. Yet, I don't ever hear the dunce liberal pundits ever talk about it.

So who do you support?
Is it ok for Pakistan to have nukes? Is it ok for N. Korea? India? Can you give me a list of countries you consider ok to possess nukes?
Please explain to me why Iraq was neccessary for the security of the U.S.
Saddam hated insurgents and hardline Muslim extremists as much as we do. No doubt, he was a scum bag. He killed thousands of his people while the U.N. sat back and took bribes. Maybe we should have armed the Kurds. Oh right, we didn't want to piss Turkey off.
What we have done is created a vacuum in the Middle East, as soon as we attempt to pull out of Iraq what do you think will happen?
But wait! We are defending freedom and the right for Democracy! So why aren't we doing this in Libya, Syria, N.Korea, Egypt, Chechen, China, Tibet and a shitload of African shitholes?

 

[Mike_Rupp]

I don't support anyone at this point.

I am generally a fan of nukes, but I feel somehow safer when nukes are in countries that are a democracy. You libertarians love to ridicule religion, but then aren't concerned about theocracies holding nukes.

Try to find a post where I advocated going to war to setup a democracy. Democratic govts are earned by the people, not handed to them. I definitely am not a neo-con. I prefer the Ronald Reagan model of foreign policy: spend money where it is in our advantage and bomb the living fuck out of someone who fucks with us.

 

[rovercanus]

I don't support anyone at this point.

I am generally a fan of nukes, but I feel somehow safer when nukes are in countries that are a democracy. You libertarians love to ridicule religion, but then aren't concerned about theocracies holding nukes.

Try to find a post where I advocated going to war to setup a democracy. Democratic govts are earned by the people, not handed to them. I definitely am not a neo-con. I prefer the Ronald Reagan model of foreign policy: spend money where it is in our advantage and bomb the living fuck out of someone who fucks with us.

Libertarians don't ridicule religion, I don't know where that is coming from. They just don't want a state religion.
I agree with you 100% that democracy is earned. The are countries out there right now trying to earn it.

 

[Mike_Rupp]

I just read what I posted and realized I meant to write: I am generally not a fan of nukes ...

Anyways, if you aren't a fan of state religions, you of all people should be deeply concerned about Iran acquiring a nuke. Are you just too much of a pacifist to want to have anything done about it or do you have a deep seated desire to see Israel wiped off of the map?

 

[seventyfive]

im not speaking for walter, even though i also feel the exact same way he feels about politics (from what i've read), but would you rather see israel wiped off the planet or continue to watch once productive U.S. towns slip down the drain, because we won't invest there to spur some kind of economic growth? or do we sell once productive american towns to china, korea, india, etc?

until we keep our nose out of other peoples business we will continue down the path (the commies and towel heads) intended us to follow.....economic failure. keep drinking the kool aid and believing it's in our best interest to spend billions of dollars fighting a 'boogie man' while america becomes more and more like that sexy bitch everyone wants to fuck until she turns her head and exposes her fucked up grill.

as far as israel being wiped off the planet, that is a farce. if you are ex military you know what we can do when tested...when the muzzle is taken off and given full authorization. the proudest/coolest thing i've ever seen is when we took a carrier air wing picture, just got finished humping ordnance from the santa barbara and looked around to see enough ships to destroy a planet....now park two of those carrier air wings outside of the middle east and beg those idiots to throw a missile out of their shit hole, but instead we use this as yet another issue to divide us into two polar opposite americas.

we are not allowed to ship american cars to korea but they can build factories HERE?!?!?!? education costs are 400% what they were 15 years ago, we don't produce anything other than debt, weed is still illegal, PENNSYLVANIA"s turnpike IS still under construction after 25 years, and we are supposed to be worried about some dipshit making nukes? cut israel off and send those monthly blank checks to buffalo, cleveland, detroit, st. louis, newport news, any where here other than there.

 

[jim-00-4.6]

Picture:
the guy in the background is wanking while he watches her eat that.

Jen:
Just because YOU would never put something like that in YOUR mouth...

Jim's War Plan:
Bad guys kill 1 American: we kill 100 of "them"
Bad guys explode a grenade: we blow up a village
Bad guys explode some big ordinance: we flatten 5 square miles
Bad guys don't get hint: we carpet bomb everything within 250 miles

"but you killed innocent civilians"
"yeah. so stop fucking with us, and your culture might have a chance to see next week. Anyone else have any questions?"

The US is the only country that should have nukes.
Someone else starting to build them?
Drop a nuke on the factory.
"Did I or did I not tell you to stop fucking with us?"

Winning hearts and minds?
Bringing democracy to the who-ever-the-fuck?

Stick a knife (or better yet, a long-range missle) in their hearts.
Erase their minds.
Democracy is not a drive-thru take-out item.
If "they" want democracy, they can go to the democracy store and get their own.
It's not a one-size-fits-all thing anyway, so "our" democracy (yes, i know, we don't have one) won't fit them, so they need to get their own.

 

[rovercanus]

I fully believe Israel will take care of Iran when they feel the need. If Iran throws a nuke if they get one, they will have the rest of the world to deal with. Fanatics? Yes. Stupid? As much as we like to picture them as goat fucking camel jockeys, I don't think so.
Mike, I totally agree with you as far as Reagan is concerned, I credit him with the downfall of the Soviets with his don't fuck with us policies.

.

 

[Mike_Rupp]

Who said that they were stupid? They are most certainly not. For a group of religious fanatics to be able to hold power since the fall of the Shah, they have proven themselves to be quite cunning.

Frankly, that is the only thing that we can hope for once they acquire a nuke. Like most people in power, they want to stay in power and even those fanatics are smart enough to realize that if they were to nuke Israel, they would be nuked themselves.