Presidential Debates

[Metalject]

Romney destroyed Obama in this first debate and it seems most on both sides agree. Will be funny to see how anyone tries to spin this the other way...I'm not sure it's even possible. Either way this race just got a whole lot closer.

Next debate should be pretty interesting. Town hall meeting with undecided voters asking the questions. I'd say this will be the make or break debate for both of them. The 3rd debate is on foreign policy and with the current situation that should give Romney a leg up in that debate, but at the same time most voters don't seem to care about that topic too much. The town hall meeting will be the deciding factor. Honestly though, I don't understand how anyone can be undecided at this point. It's a pretty cut and dry option...you support a free market society with less government intervention at the federal level or you government taking a more active role is a necessity. How anyone cannot see the contrast difference makes very little sense to me.

[Ernst]

I'd have to give the first debate to Romney.

I eagerly await the next.

The contrast difference? Between these two it's not all that much, honestly...

[Metalject]

I'd have to give the first debate to Romney.

I eagerly await the next.

The contrast difference? Between these two it's not all that much, honestly...

Really? In my opinion they're couldn't have been a bigger contrast.

[Capebuffalo]

Romney kicked ass.

[SEOINAGE]

Obama bent over and took it up the ass. stuttered with his head down a frown on his face while he got plowed.

[bigZthedestroyer]

I missed the debate. Thankfully I can get an insight on it from you guys. From the previous 2 posts, I've gathers it was full of fighting and sex!


I always miss the good stuff lol

[Vettester]

It's been real easy for President Obama to publicly troll this illusion about who Romney is, that Republicans want dirty air & water, will do nothing but lookout for rich people, etc., all while getting shielded by the mainstream media on all the stuff about Solyndra, the unemployment, the food stamps, the list goes on ...

This is the result of a guy that has been jet setting now for the past year, running around on The View, Letterman, Beyonce, Leno, and doing the most fundraisers of any president in history. It's like a heavyweight champ analogy. In 2008, Mr. Obama was conditioned, objective, and on target. His proposal for the most transparent Government ever, and the bullet points of how he would stimulate our economy was not only impressive, but did indeed give millions and people the hope and change they were looking for. For every punch that McCain got in, Obama got in 3 punches! Last night was like a cocky champ that just figured he could roll em over, because that's what the champ does. What you saw in Romney was a contender that is training hard and wants the belt real bad!!!

You thought that was intense, wait til we get the upcoming 12 rounder with Biden -vs- Ryan. Whether anyone likes him or not, make no mistake, Paul Ryan is also going to step into this primed and conditioned every bit as good as Mitt Romney was. If Joe Biden shows up with his angry tone, and these stupid lines like, "They're going to put y'all back in chains", he's going to get his clock cleaned even more than President Obama.

[SEOINAGE]

It's been real easy for President Obama to publicly troll this illusion about who Romney is, that Republicans want dirty air & water, will do nothing but lookout for rich people, etc., all while getting shielded by the mainstream media on all the stuff about Solyndra, the unemployment, the food stamps, the list goes on ...

This is the result of a guy that has been jet setting now for the past year, running around on The View, Letterman, Beyonce, Leno, and doing the most fundraisers of any president in history. It's like a heavyweight champ analogy. In 2008, Mr. Obama was conditioned, objective, and on target. His proposal for the most transparent Government ever, and the bullet points of how he would stimulate our economy was not only impressive, but did indeed give millions and people the hope and change they were looking for. For every punch that McCain got in, Obama got in 3 punches! Last night was like a cocky champ that just figured he could roll em over, because that's what the champ does. What you saw in Romney was a contender that is training hard and wants the belt real bad!!!

You thought that was intense, wait til we get the upcoming 12 rounder with Biden -vs- Ryan. Whether anyone likes him or not, make no mistake, Paul Ryan is also going to step into this primed and conditioned every bit as good as Mitt Romney was. If Joe Biden shows up with his angry tone, and these stupid lines like, "They're going to put y'all back in chains", he's going to get his clock cleaned even more than President Obama.

Oh gosh a debate vs Biden, I must see this schooling. I just want to curb stomp Biden though.

[JohnnyVegas]

^^^ I am interested in watching the VP debate. I may not like Ryan's social ideas, but he is an economy dork (in a good way) and I think he will dominate if he can keep from getting too deep into the numbers.

[Vettester]

Now you have the president running around stating that the Romney that showed up last night was a completely different guy, who basically lied about everything he's been promoting for this year. He went on to say that Romney doesn't want to be held accountable. Fvcking seriously?? Isn't this the pot calling the kettle black?? Where is President Obama to defend the comments Romney made about his record with Solyndra and others that we lost all that money on? Where's the president to defend the unemployment numbers, and the money that will be taken out of medicare? If President Obama has a good product, then that's all he has to stick to. Just talk up your product, how good it is, and it will sell. Well, unless your product isn't that good, then that's when you stop talking highly on your product, and that's when you start down talking your competitor's product.

I'm telling you, Mr. Obama better find a way to connect with the independents! His base is sold, he doesn't need to keep sitting around acting like the "eye candy" he thinks he is. Independents want the solutions on the table. Mr. Romney needs to clarify his plans a little more in the next debate(s), but President Obama won't win the battle unless he also can elaborate exactly how "he" will restore us as a great nation. Independents don't want blame, they want solutions.

[gixxerboy1]

I agree Obama looked like shit. Romney gave a much better performance. But Romney did bullshit in the debate. About the cost of the tax breaks. Also the head of staff for Romney campaign said after the debate that Romney's medical plan he would implement probably will not cover pre existing conditions. Yet Romney said many times it would. All the fact checkers have pointed out many things in Romney's statements.
Now im not agreeing with Obama or his preformance but the fact is Romney was not good either

[JohnnyVegas]

Most entertaining part of the debate for me was when Romney said he would sit down on day one with all the leaders and work on bipartisanship.Obama said, "you are going to have a busy first day since on day one you are also going to repeal Obamacare which is going to upset of a lot of Democrats."

Ha!

I would have liked to see Obama be more like that, even though I am conservative. I like an exchange of ideas, not just two people repeating talking points.

[zaggahamma]

Mitt did well

I honestly think the most dems will be glad Obamacare will leave..I think they just followed suit..maybe Pelosi and Reid will retire as well ...and hopefully we can get our supreme court back

[JohnnyVegas]

Mitt did well

I honestly think the most dems will be glad Obamacare will leave..I think they just followed suit..maybe Pelosi and Reid will retire as well ...and hopefully we can get our supreme court back

Despite being a fiscal conservative, I am not sure I would want the Republicans having power in all branches of government. We need some balance. We need checks and balances.

Having the heavily Christian influenced Republican party in charge would probably not be the best for women, gays, the poor or science.

[warmouth]

Mitt did well

I honestly think the most dems will be glad Obamacare will leave..I think they just followed suit..maybe Pelosi and Reid will retire as well ...and hopefully we can get our supreme court back

Thank you! P.S.- I am a conservative.

[gearbox]

Despite being a fiscal conservative, I am not sure I would want the Republicans having power in all branches of government. We need some balance. We need checks and balances.

Having the heavily Christian influenced Republican party in charge would probably not be the best for women, gays, the poor or science.

I can see why not for gays and the poor. Why not for woman and science?

[gixxerboy1]

I can see why not for gays and the poor. Why not for woman and science?

for women they are going against planned parenthood, The house put a record amount of bills forward trying to limit or close down abortion places. Republicans fought against the renewing the violence against women act. They tried to approve that your employer can decide if your birth control would be covered under health insurance

[JohnnyVegas]

I can see why not for gays and the poor. Why not for woman and science?

In my opinion:

Women: Abortion and contraception are the hot button issues. Defunding Planned Parenthood which does a lot of great work, especially with lower income women. Against sex ed and wants abstinence only education.

Science: Against stem cell research. Wants to teach creationism. Disputes evolution. Thinks the universe is a few thousand years old. I will mention global warming (climate science) in passing since that is a debate unto itself and one that I am pretty neutral on. Will dispute any science that conflicts with their preconceived ideology. Would prefer faith over scientific literacy.

I also think other areas will take a hit. Things that Republicans think are "useless crap" like the arts.

I am so grateful that Santorum or Bachman didn't come close. I am horrified they had supporters.

[RaginCajun]

love Al Gore's comment about Obama last night.

must have been the altitude!

hahahaha!

[zaggahamma]

very good points jv

but i'll take it over them taking Christmas and God out and replacing with Muhammed

[gixxerboy1]

very good points jv

but i'll take it over them taking Christmas and God out and replacing with Muhammed

But that's not happening at all. And no offense that's the shit that makes me vote against the republican s this year. Making up phony attacks and fear.
Who isn't allowed to celebrate Christmas? Not all of us believe in god so it gets old hearing politicians constantly taking about God, religion and their faith. And were is anything getting replaced with Mohammad?

[zaggahamma]

no offense taken

thats some fine line that makes u vote one direction...

its not that u cant celebrate Christmas is that traditions, statues, etc. trying to be taken down all the time...trying to take God out of pledges of allegience, stuff like that....

just seems like more leniency towards muslim religions, imo

i also like romneys military plan....strengthen...shouldnt even be an option, imo...probably the only thing i didnt like about ron paul as i believe in smaller gov't and some of jv's points make sense as i am no Christian finatic or pro life is such a small issue to me actually a non issue but abortion definitely shouldnt be subsidized by government

u gotta have other reasons other than the like of what i said about "the war on Christmas"

[JohnnyVegas]

trying to take God out of pledges of allegience, stuff like that....

Interesting fact: "under God" was ADDED to the pledge of allegiance, I believe as part of McCarthyism.

Original pledge:
"I pledge allegiance to my Flag and the Republic for which it stands, one nation indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."

EDIT: saw that Gixxer already said this.

I have no problem with Government buildings and institutions not promoting any religious imagery. I don't believe it is "anti-Christmas" I think it is "non-religious" (not even "anti-religious"). I had an interesting perspective on this when married to a Buddhist (first wife).

Bottom line for me: both parties have things I disagree with. I would say I am a fiscal conservative and social moderate.

[gixxerboy1]

There are other issues also. But the utter fear mongering and bs attacks make them loose any creditably.

God was added to the pledge of allegience in the 50's. It wasnt in the original pledge to begin with

Christmas displays were taken down at government buildings. First of there is a separation of church and state. So why should federal or local governments push 1 religion? There are alot of people who are jewish or muslim, hindu what ever where are the statues and celebrations for their holidays? And some places do allow it but you have to celebrate all religions and they choose not to so do nothing instead. But honestly doesnt really bother me. I could care less about it. But more bothers me that people make up a phony war on christmas.

I agree we should have a strong military. We already have the strongest in the world and spend more money on it then most countries combined. There is no reason we cant make some cuts and still be the strongest. We were supposed to make cuts after the cold war ended in the 80's and didnt. All we do is keep increasing spending. Its ridiculous.

I dont agree with everything with Obama care. But i do agree with a mandate. And that was a republican idea until Obama went for it. So now its bad. Again republicans loose credibility.

Like JV said they are against alot of things in science. I'm sorry if you are that naive you deserve no leadership role.

Both parties have people that say and do stupid shit. Where i live Alan West in the Representative. The shit he says is crazy. And the utter disrespect for other people in the house and senate is nuts. What other job can you have besides the government where you can make up lies, make accusations up about coworkers and be aloud to keep your job?

[zaggahamma]

good points fellas

i dont think obama wants as strong a military...agree there?

iran and nuke ok?

[gixxerboy1]

good points fellas

i dont think obama wants as strong a military...agree there?

iran and nuke ok?

disagree. Because he doesnt want to bankrupt us on more spending we dont need, doesnt mean he doesnt want us to be strong.
There have been things the pentagon says we dont need. Like certain tanks because we dont find those kind of wars anymore, yet congress wants to spend the money on them. I think we can make smart cuts and cut waste and still be strong.
Iran is tricky. Everyone claims he is weak but what are the other suggestions? Another war? I honestly dont think he will let them have a bomb but if we can end it peacefully why wouldnt we?
Whats Romney's idea on Iran. He has put forth no solution.
And this time last year people were saying Iran was only months away from having the enriched uranium to make it. Now its a year later and they still dont. This is why i believe very little.
Also Ahmadinejad is out of office in 2013. Iran's elections are next year and he cant run again. So who knows maybe someone else comes in that will cooperate more.

[zaggahamma]

solyndra, tesla, should there be no requirements for food stamps/welfare?

[gixxerboy1]

solyndra, tesla, should there be no requirements for food stamps/welfare?

As far as the welfare thats BS. Has been proven many times. Romney's campaign response to the truth was "we arent going to let fact checkers dictate our campaign. So they no they are lying and making it up.

Obama gave the states the right to apply for a waiver. You know states rights that the republicans push for. In order to get a waiver they had to present a plan that would be more effective to move people off of welfare but a certain percentage amount. I dont remember the number. And if the waiver was granted and the state didnt move more people off of welfare they would loose the waiver.
So tell me how that is removing the work requirement from welfare?

[JohnnyVegas]

As a car guy I was annoyed that he gave money to Tesla and Fisker. Sonyndra obviously didn't go well and a few other solar companies have gone BK after receiving lots of government money. That is disappointing. I am looking forward to battery technology improving and the government has been investing in that.

Food stamp and welfare are complicated and I don't know enough to argue either side other than to say I would like to see the fraud gone.

As an Iran sidenote...did you see that their currency lost half its value in the past week? Holy crap!

[Hoggage_54]

Mitt Romney's dad had no problem collecting welfare. Where would Mitt Romney be if his family didn't receive welfare?

As for Iran... didn't we all hear this about 10 years ago with Iraq? How many American lives were lost because of that? How many trillions wasted?

[Vettester]

Mitt Romney's dad had no problem collecting welfare. Where would Mitt Romney be if his family didn't receive welfare?

As for Iran... didn't we all hear this about 10 years ago with Iraq? How many American lives were lost because of that? How many trillions wasted?

This is the kind of stuff that drives me bonkers. NOBODY says that Mitt wants to get rid of welfare. We have an obvious problem with the increase of welfare going on, and it seems when someone identifies it, like Romney, then "oh my, he wants to starve the poor and throw granny off the cliff". This isn't the case. It's just fiscal responsibility to look for solutions with getting people back to work, or to get them the tools so they can work.

And you're right, we wasted a lot 10 years ago. So, with that, don't vote for Bush. Oh wait, that's right, Bush isn't running any longer. Ok then, let's focus on the current administration and determine if they're worth keeping or not. Obama called Bush unpatriotic for the debt. Maybe he was right. But, what about his 5 trillion?

In my eyes, a president has 4 years to get it figured out. Don't tell us you're going to cut unemployment, the debt, and do all this wonderful stuff for us, but then 4 years later you say, "well, it's Bush's fault." That's just panzy leadership!! If Romney ends up getting the job, then I hold him to the same standard. If he's limping around in 4 years saying, "well that damn Obama left me with a mess", then guess what, out you go pal!! I still say Hillary would have done a better job, just because I feel she would have used Bill's tactics to reach across the aisle. Make no mistake about it, if you like Obama or not, regardless, we are going to be a massively divided nation for four more years! Mr. Obama, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi make it really cut and clear that they don't give a rat's a$$ if you agree with them or not. And does anyone think this David Axelrod clown does the president any good. And for Al Gore, MAN UP you wimp!!! It's those pathetic excuses he makes that keeps giving the left a continuous black eye. His guy lost, fair and square, it is what it is, so take it on the chin and live for another day.

And with that, I presume everyone is having a great day

[Metalject]

The issues surrounding abortion many tend to have a problem with, the problem and disagreement surounds the misguided argument itself. The two sides are not arguing different sides of a coin but two completely different coins. The pro-choice side says it's a matter of choice, but the pro-life argument has nothing to do with choice. I don't want to get into a long abortion argument but here's the long and short. The baby growing in the womb is either a life or it's not. If it's a life then abortion is no different than killing it when it's a day old or 5yrs old. If it's not a life then do whatever you want. The pro-life side is not saying you do not have the right to make your own choices, it's saying you don't have the right to commit murder. But the argument continues to revolve around choice when it has nothing to do with choice, it has nothing to do with a woman's body, that's the dumbest argument of all time. The argument is about the body inside her...it's a living human being or it's not.

Welfare...Romney isn't against welfare, no one on the right is. People on the right, conservative or libertarian are simply against the abuse of the system and feel most would be better off fending for themselves. However, people tend to become a little lazier when they're given something for free. All people? No, there's nothing wrong with a safety net for when it's actually needed.

All in all, these sub issues are not the important issues currently. The economy is a mess and showing no signs of improvement. This is all that matters right now.

[JD250]

Cmon now Gixx, you need to pay attention and stop drinking the Liberal kool aid........fear mongering was invented and perfected by Libs and you guys get all pissy because a Conservative uses your own poison against you......."Repubs want to abuse women and kick old people out of nursing homes" "they also want the poor to be poorer and live in cardboard boxes while they live the high life" " Romney wants people on welfare to starve because they don't deserve food" These are all ideas that have been put forth in the last week by libs....including you.....for fvcks sake man!!!! Nobody is buying this shit anymore.....not even you.....talk about loosing credibility......you sound a little like Biden. "Fact checkers" Riiiiiight?? Libs checking facts for Romney is like letting a child molester run a daycare center......seriously. Pay atten to what obama has actually DONE not what oozes out of his mouth......same with Romney.......this isn't rocket science, we must choose between a community organizer who has doubled the debt of this country and a man who has some successes in polotics and a lot of successes in business..........the main issue right now in this country is the fvcking ECONOMY!!!!!! Tell me one more time jsut so I am clear on this..........WHAT EXACTLY has obama done to help this country and improve the economy????

[Rwy]

......

[gixxerboy1]

Cmon now Gixx, you need to pay attention and stop drinking the Liberal kool aid........fear mongering was invented and perfected by Libs and you guys get all pissy because a Conservative uses your own poison against you......."Repubs want to abuse women and kick old people out of nursing homes" "they also want the poor to be poorer and live in cardboard boxes while they live the high life" " Romney wants people on welfare to starve because they don't deserve food" These are all ideas that have been put forth in the last week by libs....including you.....for fvcks sake man!!!! Nobody is buying this shit anymore.....not even you.....talk about loosing credibility......you sound a little like Biden. "Fact checkers" Riiiiiight?? Libs checking facts for Romney is like letting a child molester run a daycare center......seriously. Pay atten to what obama has actually DONE not what oozes out of his mouth......same with Romney.......this isn't rocket science, we must choose between a community organizer who has doubled the debt of this country and a man who has some successes in polotics and a lot of successes in business..........the main issue right now in this country is the fvcking ECONOMY!!!!!! Tell me one more time jsut so I am clear on this..........WHAT EXACTLY has obama done to help this country and improve the economy????

I dont believe anything in the bold. And i def agree with both sides fear monger.I honestly believe on the right is more of the actual politicians doing it, as where on the left its more pundits. Not saying left politicians dont do it.
I agree welfare needs to be reformed. I think there is a ton of abuse in the system.
We both know Romney isnt letting molesters run day cares. That's the church
The debt doubled for lots of reasons. Yes part of it was Obama but not solely.

Why doesnt Romney get more specific on his plans?
To be honest i would have rather ed Hilary 4 years ago.
I would rather Chris Christy this year.

[JD250]

And YES Vettester, I am having a good day, too much caffiene maybe but still having a good day, Thanks for asking.

[Vettester]

And YES Vettester, I am having a good day, too much caffiene maybe but still having a good day, Thanks for asking.

We care about you JD!! No running any dems over in your Jeep! I see mid grade gas in your avi is $3.12 gallon. Man, the good ole days!!

[thegodfather]

Man......politics are definitely not some members strong suits here...Glad to see some of you have well informed opinions though.

1) Pushing for a more secular society and religious neutral terms in government is not, in any way shape or form, advancing the Muslim faith. For one to make such an illogical jump honestly makes me question everything else that leaves that persons mouth hence forth. It simply means, that we are a country of many faiths, religions, and ideological beliefs, and to include statements about God in our official texts, songs, and on government buildings and print, in some ways ignores the diversity that is America. We are not a Christian nation, we are a representative Republic (likened to Democracy), with a strong capitolist model. I am a Christian, but I do not believe in legislating morality, that is a personal decision, whether or not someone wants to be 'moral'. People must follow the laws of the land, they must respect the rights of others and not cause harm, but other then that, people are free to be as immoral as they wish.

2) Yes, we would like to eliminate most government funded entitlements and welfare programs if possible. The reason? Charities are much better at providing those services than government, it is the idea of giving a hand up, rather then a hand out. Teaching people how to catch fish, not giving the the fish. There is a small minority of people in our country who are disabled in some shape or form, and a small safety net may be necessary, but the vast majority of those on entitlements are simply abusing the system. We want to end this abuse.

3) We have no choice but to shrink the size of the FEDERAL government. It has grown wildly out of control. Do you want to stimulate the economy? The best way to stimulate the economy, is to eliminate the Federal income tax completely, 0%. It is a FACT that if we could bring spending down to year 2000 levels, we would not need an income tax. This is a very achievable goal, but we have to put things on the table for cuts which would not ordinarily be. The Dept of Education must go, it has done nothing to better education in our country. The military budget does NOT need to be increased, in fact, we need to shutdown nearly half of the bases around the world, we simply cannot afford to have a military empire and maintain it, it is too costly, it leads to resentment around the world, it galvanizes the forces against us. I assure you, closing bases in obscure countries will not detract from our status as the most powerful military in the entire world.

I am a conservative Republican (a Ron Paul Republican), Im fiscally conservative and socially liberal. We need to spend less, tax less, and regulate less. We need to end the war on drugs, get the government out of peoples bedrooms, and leave the institution of marriage up to religious organizations, not the state. Right wing Christian fundamentalism hurts our cause more then any other single issue in the entire conservative Republican platform. We can still be staunch conservatives, without trying to legislate the minutiae of peoples personal lives and legislate personal responsibility.

The Federal government was designed under the 'framework' model. The Federal governments role is to provide for a strong national defense, to enforce contracts, and develop infrastructue. Aside from those three functions, all other powers should be reserved for the States respectively.

[Rwy]

Man......politics are definitely not some members strong suits here...Glad to see some of you have well informed opinions though.

1) Pushing for a more secular society and religious neutral terms in government is not, in any way shape or form, advancing the Muslim faith. For one to make such an illogical jump honestly makes me question everything else that leaves that persons mouth hence forth. It simply means, that we are a country of many faiths, religions, and ideological beliefs, and to include statements about God in our official texts, songs, and on government buildings and print, in some ways ignores the diversity that is America. We are not a Christian nation, we are a representative Republic (likened to Democracy), with a strong capitolist model. I am a Christian, but I do not believe in legislating morality, that is a personal decision, whether or not someone wants to be 'moral'. People must follow the laws of the land, they must respect the rights of others and not cause harm, but other then that, people are free to be as immoral as they wish.

2) Yes, we would like to eliminate most government funded entitlements and welfare programs if possible. The reason? Charities are much better at providing those services than government, it is the idea of giving a hand up, rather then a hand out. Teaching people how to catch fish, not giving the the fish. There is a small minority of people in our country who are disabled in some shape or form, and a small safety net may be necessary, but the vast majority of those on entitlements are simply abusing the system. We want to end this abuse.

3) We have no choice but to shrink the size of the FEDERAL government. It has grown wildly out of control. Do you want to stimulate the economy? The best way to stimulate the economy, is to eliminate the Federal income tax completely, 0%. It is a FACT that if we could bring spending down to year 2000 levels, we would not need an income tax. This is a very achievable goal, but we have to put things on the table for cuts which would not ordinarily be. The Dept of Education must go, it has done nothing to better education in our country. The military budget does NOT need to be increased, in fact, we need to shutdown nearly half of the bases around the world, we simply cannot afford to have a military empire and maintain it, it is too costly, it leads to resentment around the world, it galvanizes the forces against us. I assure you, closing bases in obscure countries will not detract from our status as the most powerful military in the entire world.

I am a conservative Republican (a Ron Paul Republican), Im fiscally conservative and socially liberal. We need to spend less, tax less, and regulate less. We need to end the war on drugs, get the government out of peoples bedrooms, and leave the institution of marriage up to religious organizations, not the state. Right wing Christian fundamentalism hurts our cause more then any other single issue in the entire conservative Republican platform. We can still be staunch conservatives, without trying to legislate the minutiae of peoples personal lives and legislate personal responsibility.

The Federal government was designed under the 'framework' model. The Federal governments role is to provide for a strong national defense, to enforce contracts, and develop infrastructue. Aside from those three functions, all other powers should be reserved for the States respectively.

Great post

[Metalject]

Man......politics are definitely not some members strong suits here...Glad to see some of you have well informed opinions though.

1) Pushing for a more secular society and religious neutral terms in government is not, in any way shape or form, advancing the Muslim faith. For one to make such an illogical jump honestly makes me question everything else that leaves that persons mouth hence forth. It simply means, that we are a country of many faiths, religions, and ideological beliefs, and to include statements about God in our official texts, songs, and on government buildings and print, in some ways ignores the diversity that is America. We are not a Christian nation, we are a representative Republic (likened to Democracy), with a strong capitolist model. I am a Christian, but I do not believe in legislating morality, that is a personal decision, whether or not someone wants to be 'moral'. People must follow the laws of the land, they must respect the rights of others and not cause harm, but other then that, people are free to be as immoral as they wish.

I agree on the basis that we shouldn't legislate morality. My view is if liberty is to be maintained we are all free to exercise the actions we desire so as long as they do not infringe on the liberty of others. However, this does not mean we are required to sanction immorality...there is a difference.

Also, more importantly, on the basis of religion every man basis his decisions and actions on how he perceives all things in the world. Religious beliefs as well as the absence of religious beliefs shape how we see things and how we will react in most situations. The idea behind our government in regards to religion was simply to ensure no religions belief was deemed as the national religion, that no one was forced to participate in any religious activity they do not desire. It was not designed to force government officials to take their religious beliefs or the lack thereof and lay them aside as this is impossible based on what was mentioned above.

Last note, congress opens each session with a prayer and has since the first congress took office. To say this isn't part of our nations natural action is a bit off base.

2) Yes, we would like to eliminate most government funded entitlements and welfare programs if possible. The reason? Charities are much better at providing those services than government, it is the idea of giving a hand up, rather then a hand out. Teaching people how to catch fish, not giving the the fish. There is a small minority of people in our country who are disabled in some shape or form, and a small safety net may be necessary, but the vast majority of those on entitlements are simply abusing the system. We want to end this abuse.

Exactly, well said. One of my favorite examples of limiting entitlements is President Cleveland's veto of the TX Seed Bill that would have granted federal aid to a town in TX. They were in a drought and all the crops were ruined. People who opposed the president on this said it would ruin the TX farm town, people would die and starve. Cleveland stated that the people of TX should take care of TX, let them take care of each other. The proposed bill would have granted the state $10k of relief, a large amount at that time...the people of that town after the veto would then raise an enormous amount of money on their own far surpassing what the legislation asked for.

"I find no warrant for such an appropriation in the Constitution, and I do not believe that the power and the duty of the General Government ought to be extended to the relief of individual suffering which is in no manner properly related to the public service or benefit." Grover Cleveland

3) We have no choice but to shrink the size of the FEDERAL government. It has grown wildly out of control. Do you want to stimulate the economy? The best way to stimulate the economy, is to eliminate the Federal income tax completely, 0%. It is a FACT that if we could bring spending down to year 2000 levels, we would not need an income tax. This is a very achievable goal, but we have to put things on the table for cuts which would not ordinarily be. The Dept of Education must go, it has done nothing to better education in our country. The military budget does NOT need to be increased, in fact, we need to shutdown nearly half of the bases around the world, we simply cannot afford to have a military empire and maintain it, it is too costly, it leads to resentment around the world, it galvanizes the forces against us. I assure you, closing bases in obscure countries will not detract from our status as the most powerful military in the entire world.

I don't really care if our military presence or size causes resentment any more than I care if people resent me for my own personal actions or statements. Do we need a powerful military? Absolutely...I'd rather have that and people hate us than the alternative. How much we need to actually spend on that I don't know. I do agree though the the Dept. of EDU needs to go....education should be taken care of at the state level. As for taxes, I'd love to see a flat tax rate across the board but we're still aways away from that happening.

I am a conservative Republican (a Ron Paul Republican), Im fiscally conservative and socially liberal. We need to spend less, tax less, and regulate less. We need to end the war on drugs, get the government out of peoples bedrooms, and leave the institution of marriage up to religious organizations, not the state. Right wing Christian fundamentalism hurts our cause more then any other single issue in the entire conservative Republican platform. We can still be staunch conservatives, without trying to legislate the minutiae of peoples personal lives and legislate personal responsibility.

The Federal government was designed under the 'framework' model. The Federal governments role is to provide for a strong national defense, to enforce contracts, and develop infrastructue. Aside from those three functions, all other powers should be reserved for the States respectively.

Can't disagree with any of this.