Summations Only

Moderately intelligent people don;t even need to know Ron Paul's whackaloon idiocy on Creationism to know he's a whackaloon idiot. His policy statements alone are far more than sufficient.The best I can say about Ron Paul is that he's very consistent in his insanity.But the man honestly thinks the federal government does not have the Constitutional authority to force the desegregation of schools, just for a start. He named his son after Ayn Rand for the love of all that's rational - and you can see in my sig what I think of that.He's very good for scary comedy, though, of the "did a Presidential candidate really say that?!" sort. Slightly less funny and slightly more scary than Bachman/Caribou Barbie, but only because for some reason he has this amazing talent for attracting both liberal and conservative folks alike with the couple of things that he says that aren't outright insane, presumably because his difference from "mainstream" candidates overcomes their apathy (and apparently their intellect). And then they "defend" his crazier statements by saying, and I shit you not, "As President he wouldn't have the authority to actually do that," as if we should vote for insane candidates simply because the office to which we would appoint them is not granted the authority to follow through on all of the insanity!Ron Paul is perhaps the most dangerous Republican candidate. Because while he may strive to free us from the military-industrial complex, and while he has some very good policies in regard to foreign nations (ie, stop assassinating people, treat other nations the way we want them to treat us, etc), his Presidency would be the most likely to finish what the Great Recession started. There are few candidates I have ever believed could actually pose a true existential threat to the existence of the United States, but Ron Paul is one.

It's nice to see Ron Paul standing up for Christian morality.I guess we will have to tune into tonight's interview with Gingrich's ex-wife, to find out more about this Christian morality.

Well Newt has converted to Catholicism so he wont be able to put away his current wife.

Why? He could get his marriage anulled, then marry whoever his current mistress (I presume he has one, if history is any indicator) happens to be.

Don't forget that he is pro-legalization of the mary-jane, which panders the liberal pot-head-hippies (I'm talkin to you ONIFRE )

I support that too. But I'm not about to let the fact that Ron Paul agrees with me on a few items (for completely different reasons, I might add) that most politicians do not trick me into supporting a man who thinks that returning to the gold standard is actually a good idea, or that a woman's right to choose or a gay person's right to exist or a black person's right to attend the same school as a white person should be determined on a state-by-state level.

So do I. I was just pointing out another huge reason he has the liberal fanbase that he does.

Have you ever noticed how quick and effective Newt's responses have been in the debates, particularly the last one?Newt has two factors in his record which will draw votes, not only from both the liberals and moderates, but the conservatives as well.
He has his record of some immorality and moderate policies coupled with his conversion, enlightenment and purported more conservative stance.The above, coupled with his highly intelligent off the cuff articulate, informative and inspiring responses would leave our puny little big eared, elfish looking, anti-Christian/Pro-Muslim/black supremest/racist/ultra-socialist/stealthy/ignorant (i.e. 57 states of America) excuse for a commander in chief of the armed forces and and presiding officer of the government of the once good ole US of A, mumbling and bumbling.As to the closeted skeletons, LoL. None of Newt's holds a candle to that of President Kennedy and our pal, ultra-horny President Slick Willy Clinton who, alas, was elected to a 2nd term.Of course, back in Kennedy's day there was no fair and balanced Fox News by which president Kennedy's immorality could have been aired. The lame-stream liberal media who coddled all things liberal and exposed all things conservative (i.e. Nixon) is all the sheeple had to listen to in those days. Edited by Buzsaw, : Render clarity in wording

Aw, c'mon, Buz! Tell us your real opinion of the prez!

And yet the very least any recent poll shows Obama beating Gingrich by is seven points. Perhaps Newt's immorality is not such a draw as you hope. It's won him no plaudits from liberals and moderates, and there may even be a few members of the Religious Right who actually disapprove of adultery. When I see how much stuff you have to make up in order to attack Obama, I think he must be nearly perfect. Otherwise surely you'd attack him by saying stuff that was true. But Gingrich would have to run against Obama, who so far as we know is not a gigantic bag of sleaze. (As for "Slick Willy Clinton", Gingrich makes him look like a choir-boy, but that's by-the-by.)However, the point may well be moot, as rather surprisingly Republicans seem to prefer the Mormon to the hypocrite scumbag serial adulterer. Perhaps he should try breaking a few more of the Ten Commandments and see if they like him any better. He's done "thou shalt not commit adultery", "thou shalt not steal", and "thou shalt not bear false witness", but has he tried worshiping graven images yet?Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

OK, if you insist. My real opinion is that he's a very cool deceiving and corrupt community radical organizing anti-Christ/anti-Christian, pro Islamic enemy of nationalism, particularly the US of A and Israel, consistently aspiring for the position of the UN Secretary General.He has been, from the git-go, essentially campaigning globally for that position, as per the Biblical prophesied global New World Order, i.e. beast of Revelations 13.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

But what if you can't read minds? What then, Buz, what then? I judge people by their actions, but then I'm not psychotic.

Have you ever noticed that as soon as someone appears to be polling better than Romney, you're all up on their nuts?Wasn't it last month you were telling us how we should be afraid - very afraid - of a Cain candidacy? Boy, that guy folded like a card table. Perry's out, too; that's the most brains he's shown in the entire race. (Presumably he only stayed in as long as he did because it's taken him this long to be able to spell "withdraw.") At some point you're going to have to stop blaming the media for your party's failures in governance and candidate selection.

Are your only news sources World Nut Daily, The Drudge Report and Fox "news"? Are they the only place you read anything (besides your bible)? The world must be a scary place for people like you.{abe}
Shit! I shouldn't have replied to him. Now that makes 4 of us (for now) that Buz is fending off. 4v1 for ole Buz, what a champ he is. Great intelligent debater fending off 4 science folks. Give 'em hell Buz! Can we do it?? Can we take buz? I don't think we can match his intellect or wit.... He's too much for us to handle!!Edited by hooah212002, : No reason given.Edited by hooah212002, : No reason given.

Buz, do you know as little about the UN as you seem to know about the Bible?Do you have any idea how totally powerless the UN Secretary General is? Chapter and Verse Buz, Chapter and Verse?