Reason.com - Free Minds and Free Markets
Reason logo Reason logo
  • Latest
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Archives
    • Subscribe
    • Crossword
  • Video
  • Podcasts
    • All Shows
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie
    • The Soho Forum Debates
    • Just Asking Questions
    • The Best of Reason Magazine
    • Why We Can't Have Nice Things
  • Volokh
  • Newsletters
  • Donate
    • Donate Online
    • Donate Crypto
    • Ways To Give To Reason Foundation
    • Torchbearer Society
    • Planned Giving
  • Subscribe
    • Reason Plus Subscription
    • Print Subscription
    • Gift Subscriptions
    • Subscriber Support

Login Form

Create new account
Forgot password

Politics

You Again, Eh? Open Thread for the 15th GOP Presidential Debate Starts Now!

Matt Welch | 1.8.2012 8:45 AM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Miss the fun last night? Re-live our Lou Reed-enlivened liveblogging, re-read our 679 fabulous comments, or review the debate transcript for a discussion in which contraception and talking to your gay friends on the couch outnumbered the euro-zone crisis by a factor of about 30 to 0. Sadly, that performance will not ruin the careers of ABC News' Diane Sawyer and George Stephanopoulos, and even more sadly, the candidates are back for more at a 9 AM NBC News/Facebook debate. Before subjecting yourself to that, here is your 18-minute highlight reel for Ron Paul:

No liveblogging this morning; it's all up to you. As per usual, here is our GOP candidate quiz, and here are our candidate profiles of Ron Paul, Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum, Rick Perry, and Jon Huntsman. At least two of these cats, one suspects, will be out of the picture before the Super Bowl. Happy Sunday!

Start your day with Reason. Get a daily brief of the most important stories and trends every weekday morning when you subscribe to Reason Roundup.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

NEXT: "If They Cross Us, They Should Fear Us": Santorum Said It, Not Sure Who Believes It, That Settles It!

Matt Welch is an editor at large at Reason.

PoliticsRon PaulMitt RomneyNewt GingrichElection 2012Jon HuntsmanRick SantorumRick Perry
Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Hide Comments (659)

Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.

  1. Mitt Romney   13 years ago

    First! (Get it?)

  2. unknown   13 years ago

    http://www.nationalreview.com/.....-p-jeffrey

    Kids have a god given right to straight parents. Did I read this right?

    1. wylie   13 years ago

      let's not stop there. Kids should have a right to parents who can buy them everything they want, who can spend all the time with them they need, who can discipline without ever yelling, etc etc etc

      Silly me, thinking kids were stuck with the people who bred them.

    2. wareagle   13 years ago

      the god-given part came from the writer, not from the candidates. Believing that kids are better off stuck in the foster system instead of a home that happens to be headed by a gay couple is why Repubs often scare the hell out of normal people.

      1. Mr. FIFY   13 years ago

        Usually, it's Team Blue going on about how kids have rights... like the right to food stamps, which kids do not get, but that's another Team Blueism.

        1. chris   13 years ago

          Take the most expensive and restrictive elements of Team Red and the most expensive and restrictive elements of Team Blue, and you have National Review, Team Lieberman/Bloomberg.

    3. Mr Whipple   13 years ago

      "Marriage is not a right," Santorum said. "It's a privilege that is given to society by society for a reason ? We want to encourage what is the best for children."

      http://www.lgbtqnation.com/201.....-hecklers/

      1. Mr Whipple   13 years ago

        And in case you missed it:

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2glKJXkMBOA

  3. Jerry   13 years ago

    Lot of catfighting early on.

  4. flacid tuna   13 years ago

    Romney never got the State Police to enforce immigration laws. That was a lie!

  5. Bomb Everyone   13 years ago

    The god damned video won't load. Thank you NBC.

    1. flacid tuna   13 years ago

      There doesn't seem to be a live stream as far as I could see.

      1. Bomb Everyone   13 years ago

        http://video.msnbc.msn.com/nbc.....91865#null

      2. Jerry   13 years ago

        http://www.rentadrone.tv

        1. Eduard van Haalen   13 years ago

          http://republicansofcoffeecoun.....Stream.php

          1. Bob Onnit   13 years ago

            Are you from Coffee Cty Eduard? I just moved from Manchester last year.

            1. Eduard van Haalen   13 years ago

              Wish I could drive over, but I'm from another state, just got this link from some other site which I forgot. 🙁

    2. Ted S.   13 years ago

      I'm having enough of a problem getting H&R to run properly.

      I've been finding that more and more, H&R is an extreme memory hog. This page took three tries to load, and every time, it brought the rest of the browser to a screeching halt -- even though I've got satellite internet, other pages were onluy loading at 1KB/sec. This has been going on for months, and happens 100% of the time I visit H&R. It got worse since they aded the Google Plus antisocial networking shit.

      Please, please, please reasonoids, fix your site's severe memory problems. Note that I visit with images turned off and plug-ins set not to load to try to cut down on the memory usage, and still have problems every single time I visit H&R, problems that I don't have on most other sites.

      1. Pain   13 years ago

        This. I know my phone absolutely hates this site. It somehow doubles the phone's battery consumption while surfing this site. It seems to be constantly loading something as well. No other site I go to does this.

        I would love to see Reason address this.

        1. protefeed   13 years ago

          Do you guys have slow broadband connections? This site loads within a couple of seconds for me.

          1. Robert   13 years ago

            Of course the more resources you have, the better...but why should Hit & Run be such a resource hog no matter what? Is it all in the ads?

            H&R routinely crashes my less advanced setup, and now even with my more powerful one it's problematic.

            1. Tulpa   13 years ago

              Reason is against top-down design in its web development, too. Having hundreds of bits of code demanding resources and operating at cross-purposes seems more appropriate for free market supporters.

              1. Robert   13 years ago

                Yeah, well I'm tempted to look for a Unix shell I can telnet into to browse H&R with lynx. It's like with tax money: You make more resources available, they just suck them up and ask for more.

                1. Tulpa   13 years ago

                  I've done that with Terminal on my Mac, but the non-chronological comments make the threads a mess in Lynx, unfortunately. The indentation doesn't show up.

                2. Tulpa   13 years ago

                  I've actually been working on a plugin to chronologize comments but hadn't thought of doing it in Lynx. Are there even Lynx plugins?

                3. Amakudari   13 years ago

                  It's all the Facebook/Twitter/etc. buttons. It has nothing to do with text or image content (that loads almost instantly no matter where you go) and everything to do with the hundreds of separate requests those fucking buttons are making to external servers. Those are all mini-webpages with their own stylesheets, scripts, content, etc.

                  In reasonable, you can turn on an option to block those buttons, which reduces external requests and data by about a third. Honestly, your best bet is something like Adblock or that before you resort to text-only browsers.

                  Also, the newer versions of WebKit-based browsers like Chrome and Safari handle all those iframes a billion times better than Opera by only loading them when they come within the visible area of the screen.

            2. Ted S.   13 years ago

              As I said above, I don't see the ads as I've got images and plug-ins turned off when I visit here, and I still have the problems.

              The one good thing about not having images set to load is that I automatically see the alt-text. [And when I don't see any alt-text, I wonder how many comments it's going to take before somebody bitches about the lack of alt-text. ;-)]

              1. Amakudari   13 years ago

                FWIW, images and Flash have very little to do with H&R memory-hogging. It's all the iframes.

                1. Amakudari   13 years ago

                  For reference, in Opera try going to Preferences... > Content > Uncheck Enable Javascript. The Twitter/Facebook/Google Plus APIs use JavaScript to identify specific tags on the web page, then load in the content from their respective external sites (all of which have their own JS, of course).

                  1. Ted S.   13 years ago

                    If I turn off JS for reason.com in the site preferences, how will that screw up the comment threads?

                    1. Amakudari   13 years ago

                      Oh, it will screw up the "reply to this" button/link, unfortunately.

                      Methinks you'll have to rely on something to block those buttons specifically, and IIRC Opera has the built-in ability to do that, but I can't help you beyond that. I can just tell you the problem is within the proliferation of Like/Recommend buttons and YouTube videos. I use Chrome, which does a better job of handling those, plus I block those Like buttons with an extension.

        2. NAL   13 years ago

          I don't know if this helps, but if you're the type that leaves his computer on all the time, it's worth a try to reboot it. I was noticing the same behavior you describe, then after being forced to reboot (for another reason entirely), the website is much faster.

          1. Ted S.   13 years ago

            I'm not the type to leave my computer on all the time. Closing Opera and reopening it helps, although that's usually because I'm doing a hard kill. Eek.

      2. Fatty Bolger   13 years ago

        Switching to Chrome helped a lot with that. It's generally much better at handling memory hogs and poorly behaving sites without locking up every single page you have open in a browser window.

        1. rsi   13 years ago

          I agree.

          But lately I've been getting complaints from AVG about chrome hogging memory.

      3. db   13 years ago

        Yeah, just having one Hit and Run page open on my phone takes up between 120 and 230 MB. Yes, that's right. This is insane.

  6. robc   13 years ago

    9:44: Let it be recorded that Newt Gingrich is talking, in a presidential debate, about how the "sacrament of marriage" needs to "be protected." Jesus Christ.

    9:51: Katrina vanden Heuvel: "Newt is on a newt-rant about bigotry and anti-Christian bigotry and claims none of it covered by news media. Lost me/But GOP applause/"

    From last night's transcript.

    Newt better hope that every Baptist minister in SC doesnt do a sermon on why marriage isnt a sacrament next Sunday.

    [In the SBC, there are ordinances, not sacraments, and marriage isnt one of them. There are two...baptism and communion.]

    Anyway, I found his reference to protecting the sacrament of marriage to be a form of anti-christian* bigotry.

    *well, protestant.

    1. flacid tuna   13 years ago

      He was doing his Catholic signaling.

      1. robc   13 years ago

        And that seems really stupid with SC coming up.

    2. robc   13 years ago

      My overall point being, pushing a very PRO-catholic message may not play well in South Carolina.

      1. Eduard van Haalen   13 years ago

        Not in normal circumstances. But today the split isn't RC versus protestant.

      2. Tulpa   13 years ago

        Yep, those SC voters are going to flock to Santorum rather than that papist Gingrich.

    3. Mr. FIFY   13 years ago

      Fuck vanden Heuvel.

  7. flacid tuna   13 years ago

    He said, "Mitt, never join the army. You might get your ass shot off."

  8. flacid tuna   13 years ago

    OMG! RP said we are worse than the Soviets! Newsletters!

  9. Troy   13 years ago

    I worked last night. I am too lazy to read any of the 679 comments from the schleppiest commentariat on the planet. How did it go for Paul?

    1. Bee Tagger   13 years ago

      My take away is that he either did awesome or horrible. He spoke a lot and said a lot of memorable things. I thought he did well. The standard-bearing Republicans in my life may not have.

      1. flacid tuna   13 years ago

        Hugh Hewitt said everyone did good except for Paul who was awful. I think that means he won.

  10. Jerry   13 years ago

    Paul again refuses to attack Romney directly.

    1. Matt Tanous   13 years ago

      He doesn't need to, yet. If he gets rid of these conservative pretenders and becomes the "anti-Romney", the vote will coalesce around him as he attacks Romney. Right now, it is just as like that Romney's support of 25-30% will be just as likely to go to Santorum or someone else instead of Paul.

      1. protefeed   13 years ago

        He needs Romney siphoning off 25% of the vote, so none of the faux conservatives can run up the numbers. And, I suspect he is hoping to become VP under Romney, or Romney VP under him, depending.

        I mean, who else in this field of arseholes could RP pick as VP?

        1. Dempy   13 years ago

          I'd like to see him pick a little-known genius. Someone like Tom Woods.

        2. Tulpa   13 years ago

          I really don't see either of them accepting the VP slot under the other. Romney's invested too much time and money to play second fiddle to someone else, and Paul is too old to use it as a stepping stone to the presidency.

          1. Paul   13 years ago

            I believe romney will choose biden as his running mate. And more focus on gay marriage next time, moderators!

        3. cold666pack   13 years ago

          I'm hoping he picks Rubio to lock up the Mesican vote.

      2. Cytotoxic   13 years ago

        But to knock off those pretenders, RP needs to attack Romney. If he does it well, it will impress.

  11. Bee Tagger   13 years ago

    Rick Perry is 2 seconds away from launching into a Billy Joel song

  12. Res Publica Americana   13 years ago

    Did anybody else go red in the face when that shithead moderator in last night's debate called Paul a liar?

    1. flacid tuna   13 years ago

      I missed that. What was it in reference to?

    2. Bee Tagger   13 years ago

      I'm pretty sure it was Santorum. He looked pretty pleased with himself as he cackled on camera a second after the "not telling the truth" line was uttered.

      1. Res Publica Americana   13 years ago

        I'll rewatch the video after my neighbor and his posse leave, but I thought it was the moderator throwing that in right after he asked the question.

        And Tuna, it was a question about Ron Paul's new South Carolina anti-Santorum ad and whether Paul was willing to stand right then and there and defend those charges.

        1. flacid tuna   13 years ago

          That was Santorum who called Paul a liar after ABC mistakenly dinged the "time's up" bell. (Maybe it was just my ears, but through Ron Paul's whole answer I kept hearing something dinging). ABC SUCKS.

          1. Matt Tanous   13 years ago

            It wasn't the ding - it was feedback on the mic.

            1. flacid tuna   13 years ago

              It sucked.

        2. Mrs. Cooper   13 years ago

          Chatting in a chat room with guests in the house. Maybe it's time to step away from the blog.

          1. Ken Shultz   13 years ago

            Depends on the guests.

            When your host starts chatting on a blog, maybe that's a great sign it's time for them to go home.

      2. wareagle   13 years ago

        Santorum didn't like it when Paul referred to him as a big spender and someone who loved earmarks.

    3. Jerry   13 years ago

      Wasn't that Santorum?

    4. The Angry RPh   13 years ago

      If it was the incident I'm remembering, RP was getting some feedback or audio breakup and said, "There it goes again." Santorum then made some crack about "them" catching him lying.

  13. flacid tuna   13 years ago

    Huntsman, "Voters are confused."

    1. wylie   13 years ago

      with shitbag candidates like these, who can blame a voter for being confused.

      1. BigT   13 years ago

        All infinitely better than Obama. Just trying to figure who is least worst.

        1. Brian E   13 years ago

          Why, because they're not black? I don't see the difference otherwise. If Obama was running as a Republican, he'd be a shoo-in for the nominee.

          1. Matt Tanous   13 years ago

            Yeah, I'm pretty sure that had McCain won, and then enacted a stimulus bill that spent a lot, Obama's criticism would mirror Romney's that it was "poorly managed".

  14. Bee Tagger   13 years ago

    Why on earth is Romney spending his time attacking Huntsman? He has absolutely nothing to gain and Huntsman is destroying him, routinely.

    1. Kolohe   13 years ago

      Because the rest of the field is good enough at shooting themselves in the foot. (Though speaking Chinese and forced U.S. Navy shoutouts weren't a good idea either) And since there's no pro-Hunstman faction there's no down side (also he was prodded specifically by Gregory's question).

      1. flacid tuna   13 years ago

        No pro-Huntsman faction? I believe you are forgetting that one guy from Manchester.

      2. Mike M.   13 years ago

        Seriously, was speaking Chinese supposed to impress the few people who were actually watching this debate with his brilliance?

        How clueless and out of touch with America can a guy possibly be? Go Huntsman, just go. And don't come back.

  15. *   13 years ago

    Welch: "As per usual"

    Oh. I see. You went there. That's unfortunate.

    WHAT THE FUCK DOES THAT EVEN MEAN?

    1. Matt Tanous   13 years ago

      Roughly, "as expected".

  16. Bee Tagger   13 years ago

    At this point, Huntsman has to be the 2nd least objectionable person on stage... until he starts lamenting the lack of trust these darn kids have in our glorious governmental institutions.

    1. Matt Tanous   13 years ago

      No, I agree that there is a lack of trust. I don't agree that this either a bad thing, or that it stems from some notion of hyper-partisanship, because government is often worst when it screws us over in a "bipartisan" manner, like with the NDAA.

  17. The Angry RPh   13 years ago

    DAMMIT!! Apparently my local NBC affiliate airs a weekend morning edition of their worthless news coverage @ 0900 and broadcasts a tape delayed Meet The Depressed @ 1000.

    1. Bee Tagger   13 years ago

      I'm watching on MSNBC.

    2. Kolohe   13 years ago

      It's on MSNBC and online http://www.mediaite.com/tv/wat.....live-here/

      1. The Angry RPh   13 years ago

        Thanks guys.

  18. Bee Tagger   13 years ago

    Heh, Newt just said duty. What's awkward is that Santorum is standing like 10 feet away.

  19. flacid tuna   13 years ago

    Newt, "Warshington."

    1. Fatty Bolger   13 years ago

      That's really how they say it in Washington (DC). My parents grew up in and around Washington. Took me years to break the habit. "I warshed the car." ugh.

      1. JeremyR   13 years ago

        That's how they say it in Missouri, too.

        1. EDG reppin' LBC   13 years ago

          East Central Indiana, too.

          1. NAL   13 years ago

            Rural Ohio too.

            1. Mike Laursen   13 years ago

              Nebraska, too.

      2. juris imprudent   13 years ago

        Not everyone from there has that speech impediment.

  20. Kolohe   13 years ago

    Well, at least you can say Gregory has been more successful at trolling this debate that last night guy's were and is really getting them to go after Mitt.

  21. rather   13 years ago

    Instead of watching the debate, I ran to Taco Bell, loaded up on methane and farted in 7 jars.

    1. flacid tuna   13 years ago

      With food stamps, yes?

    2. Bee Tagger   13 years ago

      loaded up on methane and farted in 7 jars.

      You posted a new entry on your blog?

      1. rather   13 years ago

        Yes - its titled Past Gas.

    3. wylie   13 years ago

      be fair people, it does sound more productive than watching the debate.

    4. Tulpa   13 years ago

      Taco bell isn't open this early, you harpy.

      1. shamalamadingdong   13 years ago

        For some reason that, "you harpy" thing just gets my funny bone.

        1. rather   13 years ago

          I love that I wouldn't be caught dead in a fast food joint but libertarians have to eat somewhere -NTTIAWWT

  22. flacid tuna   13 years ago

    Seniors can make choices because they are always of sound mind and body.

  23. Bee Tagger   13 years ago

    I shouldn't be shocked when Santorum has the gall to pretend to care about people making decisions for themselves instead of government making decisions for them, yet I still am each time.

  24. flacid tuna   13 years ago

    For Heaven's sake!

  25. Bee Tagger   13 years ago

    Rich people are assholes who are out for themselves and every comment they make is about exploiting the economy.. unless it's Warren Buffet, then he's a genius on macroeconomics.

    1. Matt Tanous   13 years ago

      And any "isolationist" Republican is a traitor and a danger, except for good ol' Howard Buffet - he's just a foreign policy expert. And it's quite unfortunate that his son did not follow his father as a member of the Old Right...

  26. flacid tuna   13 years ago

    Why is Huntsman getting time like he's running #2 instead of 8th?

    1. Kolohe   13 years ago

      This is co-coded as the first debate of the 2016, as well.

      1. juris imprudent   13 years ago

        My gawd, you almost made me shoot myself in the head.

    2. Res Publica Americana   13 years ago

      Because he sounds like he's giving a lecture on the beauty of ornate Chinese vases into a shitty camera on some cheap Sell Our Shit at Auction-type TV show. It makes me cringe, but this is NBC, dude.

  27. Res Publica Americana   13 years ago

    I know it's the wrong debate, but seriously, Ron Paul's reply to Gingrich's "I was married and had a kid, so I didn't go to serve" was made of win. The flinch on Newt's face was very noticeable, and I bet all the Paul supporters watching the debate pissed themselves laughing, and justifiably so. What an asshole.

    1. Bee Tagger   13 years ago

      Yes, up until that moment, I thought Paul was going to regret going to the chickenhawk well. But that was great, especially with Gingrich mumbling nonsense into the microphone as they went on to the next topic.

      1. WarrenT   13 years ago

        I HAD A CONDITION!

    2. flacid tuna   13 years ago

      I've seen the exchange reported in the media and the last bit about "I was married and I had a kid" was left out. The media sucks.

      1. robc   13 years ago

        Did Paul point out that he was married with multiple kids when he served?

        1. Res Publica Americana   13 years ago

          Yeah, he said:

          "A just need a quick follow-up to that: When I was drafting, I was married with two kids, and I WENT."

          Pretty badass.

        2. flacid tuna   13 years ago

          Yes, it was the last line. A coup de grace.

        3. Tulpa   13 years ago

          Yes. Unfortunately he didn't mention that Newt bailed on the marriage and kid that supposedly prevented him from going to Nam, a few years later when his wife got cancer.

          I guess he cares more about fucking young, healthy chicks than serving his country.

          1. Cytotoxic   13 years ago

            Nah that would have wrecked it Tulpa. Too heavy-handed. The light touch made RP's response perfect I'm going to YouTube just to watch.

            1. Matt Tanous   13 years ago

              Yeah, everyone knows of Gingrich's multiple infidelities. His reference to his wife alone had many people thinking "didn't you leave that wife and kid just a few years later?". Paul's statement just hammered home the fact that Gingrich was just making excuses.

  28. anon   13 years ago

    Why is Huntsman even there? Didn't he get like 1% in Iowa?

    1. flacid tuna   13 years ago

      No, not 1%. Just 1.

    2. Ted S.   13 years ago

      Because he's a Serious Candidate. Unlike the other Governor From a Rocky Mountain State, whom the establishment media and politicians decided was a whackjob.

  29. anon   13 years ago

    Wow. Romney basically saying "Give me unilateral power to do what I want."

    That's not progressive. Really.

    1. Res Publica Americana   13 years ago

      Sieg heil, mother-fuckers -- it's okay when Anti-Black Dreamboat White Dreamboat says it.

  30. flacid tuna   13 years ago

    If only fewer laws were ever passed.

    1. Res Publica Americana   13 years ago

      I wish.

  31. flacid tuna   13 years ago

    Polarized! Race war!

  32. Bomb Everyone   13 years ago

    Audit the fed not important. Okay Rick.

  33. Zoe   13 years ago

    This is like the worst chat room ever.

  34. anon   13 years ago

    Oh man, The problem with Paul is he'll ... get our nose out of other people's shit. Oh noes.

    1. Res Publica Americana   13 years ago

      WAT ABOUT THA CHILDURNS?

  35. flacid tuna   13 years ago

    But removing federal military support from foreign countries is the end of civilization, eh Santorum?

  36. anon   13 years ago

    Fuck. Rick Santorum *IS* Tony.

  37. *   13 years ago

    Holy shit Santorum is getting tons of camera time.

    1. anon   13 years ago

      He's fumbling around with his answers like a 13 year old boy fumbling with his dick trying to get laid for the first time.

    2. The Angry RPh   13 years ago

      Not sure that's a bad thing. He's pretty loathsome.

  38. Bee Tagger   13 years ago

    Why is Obama using a garbage can as a desk?

    1. Bee Tagger   13 years ago

      More importantly, why is he using the open side as the desktop?

      1. wylie   13 years ago

        Improvised Furniture, how do they work?!

  39. flacid tuna   13 years ago

    Why doesn't Huntsman get the "you aren't a serious candidate" questions that Paul was asked all the time in 2008?

    1. Bomb Everyone   13 years ago

      Or the one last night about 3rd party and endorsements?

  40. Cowboy   13 years ago

    wait. so there was a debate last night AND this morning?

    Why does the GOP hate people who go to church?

  41. *   13 years ago

    Mittney wants to roam the country. If he were to gambol, he might be on to something...

  42. Bee Tagger   13 years ago

    They love taking breaks to avoid Ron Paul's intended time to respond to attacks on him.

  43. Jerry   13 years ago

    Paul is not getting a lot of airtime, only 2 or 3 questions asked.

    1. flacid tuna   13 years ago

      He's being treated as if he were Huntsman.

      1. anon   13 years ago

        It is MSNBC. They know Paul would draw a disproportionate amount of independent voters compared to any other candidate up there.

  44. Kolohe   13 years ago

    Yeah, Gov, they'll get jobs like the Speaker and the Senator did.

  45. anon   13 years ago

    I think Perry actually has had the best performance so far. He made a clear and concise point which nobody's managed to do yet.

  46. flacid tuna   13 years ago

    Huntsman again!?!?!

    1. anon   13 years ago

      Fucking hell, HUNTSMAN AGAIN!?

  47. Kolohe   13 years ago

    Decent answer from Huntsman given the premises of the question

  48. anon   13 years ago

    Of fucking course. Ask Paul about subsidies then tie it in with an appeal to emotion.

  49. *   13 years ago

    Ru Paul heading to NH:
    http://www.mediaite.com/tv/wat.....-ron-paul/

  50. Koan   13 years ago

    Is Santorum the most arrogant pol you've ever seen? I think he is. Even more than Barry, and that's saying something. Why anyone, especially in 2012 when everyone is supposed to hate politicians, would latch onto this genuine, real-McCoy asshole is a mystery to me. He is sooooo full of himself.

    1. Bee Tagger   13 years ago

      I'm waiting for the inevitable Santorum/Gingrich or Gingrich/Santorum ticket.

      1. anon   13 years ago

        I *will* commit suicide.

        1. Mr. FIFY   13 years ago

          Gingrich/Santorum vs Obama = ultimate Shit Sandwich vs Giant Douchebag.

    2. Tulpa   13 years ago

      This is the guy who brags about homeschooling his kids, when he only did that because the PA cyber charter school booted his kids when they realized he was living in VA year-round.

    3. NAL   13 years ago

      I really think it was because he was the only social conservative left. The timing of his rise (i.e. Newt's decline) was impeccable for Iowa. It could not have been timed better if he'd have had God Himself (if He existed) turning knobs and flipping the election's switches for him. I predict as he gets more recognition, his numbers will start to plummet. As you say, he really is quite an asshole, and it comes through the more he talks.

  51. flacid tuna   13 years ago

    We are in an age of austerity?

    1. anon   13 years ago

      Yeah, didn't you hear? They cut like 3 billion over the next 10 years of projected increases. Huge cuts.

  52. flacid tuna   13 years ago

    In Massachusetts, Hugo Chavez subsidizes out oil which is giving out to low income people by a Kennedy.

  53. Jerry   13 years ago

    Winter energy costs...whatever happened to global warming MSNBC.

  54. anon   13 years ago

    Nobody cares about teh gays. Quit making this election about gay rights.

    1. flacid tuna   13 years ago

      There do seem to be an overabundance of questions on it.

    2. Bomb Everyone   13 years ago

      It is incredible the attention it's getting, considering the actual problems we're facing.

  55. flacid tuna   13 years ago

    Did Romney just out someone he appointed to the bench? Cause I don't recall him appointing any gays.

  56. Bee Tagger   13 years ago

    Ha, good answer from Romney to a really dick question about the last time you spoke out for gay rights

  57. flacid tuna   13 years ago

    ...treated with respect and dignity and charged with sodomy.

  58. Bomb Everyone   13 years ago

    Heard.. and then hung for their sexual deviance.

  59. Bee Tagger   13 years ago

    Local affiliate moderators are even worse than network moderators.

  60. Bomb Everyone   13 years ago

    By sending him to camp.

    1. Jerry   13 years ago

      Or sleepovers with Marcus Bachmann.

  61. Bee Tagger   13 years ago

    Wow, that was seriously a question? List the good that unions do?

  62. Rick Santorum   13 years ago

    I wanted a national right to work law, but I was too much of a pussy to actually vote for it.

    1. Bee Tagger   13 years ago

      Yeah, that shows what he actually cares about since he's completely unbending on the Defense of Marriage Act regardless of public opposition.

  63. flacid tuna   13 years ago

    So does this end at 10am?

  64. Koan   13 years ago

    The gay questions = Santorum's finishing a close 2nd in Iowa. If he had finished 4th or below = no gay questions.

  65. Rick Santorum   13 years ago

    Any bets on how many more questions Huntsman gets?

    Also, Tuna, I'm pretty sure it ends at 1030 or 11, didn't start til 9.

    1. flacid tuna   13 years ago

      The Huntsman hour is next.

  66. anon   13 years ago

    MSNBC's live feed really eats up my memory for some reason. Shitty ass network.

    1. flacid tuna   13 years ago

      It is Microsoft after all.

  67. flacid tuna   13 years ago

    Does anyone really have a discussion on Facebook?

    1. Bee Tagger   13 years ago

      Yes, provided its with a girl you thought was hot in high school.

  68. Jerry   13 years ago

    You talking about attacking Iran, that's what is pushing up oil prices Gingrich.

    1. flacid tuna   13 years ago

      Why do you hate America?

  69. rac   13 years ago

    Great vision? Jesus fucking H. Christ! How about a small vision? Leave me the fuck alone you mother fuckers!

  70. anon   13 years ago

    The only good thing about this debate has been that nobody's really watching it.

  71. Res Publica Americana   13 years ago

    I wonder whether Gingrich is going to explode at some point. He looks really bloated.

    1. anon   13 years ago

      He kinda reminds me of those carrion worms from diablo 2.

  72. Ken Shultz   13 years ago

    I can't bring myself to watch any of these debates.

    If I'm not already on board with Ron Paul, then it's not like I'm about to get on board with any of the rest of them. WWE is more interesting--plus, the WWE's got hot chicks.

  73. anon   13 years ago

    Mitt Romney's -full- of natural gas.

  74. Bee Tagger   13 years ago

    I can't say I understand why since this isn't Fox, but NBC has officially entered the ignore Ron Paul portion of the debate.

    1. anon   13 years ago

      He's had 3 questions so far I think? And they were all filled with false premises and logical fallacies.

      1. Bee Tagger   13 years ago

        Surely this is offensive to the people in New Hampshire who have him at #2 in the polls.

  75. flacid tuna   13 years ago

    So is Paul done getting questions?

  76. Kolohe   13 years ago

    http://i.imgur.com/GFVJT.png

  77. Jerry   13 years ago

    WTH Perry, socialism wasn't around at founding time.

  78. Rick Santorum   13 years ago

    I couldn't vote for a national right-to-work law, but I can vote for socialized medicine any day.

  79. flacid tuna   13 years ago

    Dammit. He blew this question.

  80. Bomb Everyone   13 years ago

    People in groups? He doesn't like that? Quick- newsletters again.

  81. hazeeran   13 years ago

    Good answer on Paul about "X rights."

    1. flacid tuna   13 years ago

      I dunno. It was meandering. I thought the question was about health care entitled spending. Which Paul didn't answer.

      1. BigT   13 years ago

        Yeah, he should have said that if someone has a right to my time, then I am a little bit of a slave.

      2. hazeeran   13 years ago

        I didn't actually pay attention to the question, I just liked his answer, so maybe you're right.

  82. anon   13 years ago

    JESUS FUCKING CHRIST HUNTSMAN AGAIN

  83. flacid tuna   13 years ago

    Soft ball to Huntsman. WTF.

    1. Res Publica Americana   13 years ago

      Romney's the Dreamboat-in-Chief, and Huntsman's the Vice-Dreamboat of the United States, his second, so he MUST be given softballs and excuses to smile. What the hell are you, a libertard???

  84. John Huntsman   13 years ago

    I know our country's pretty much fucked, but I want to build trust with the american people...

    before I slip it in each and every one of your asses.

  85. flacid tuna   13 years ago

    Don't Christians also venerate martyrs?

  86. Kolohe   13 years ago

    DPRK and USSR? They believed in nothing!

    1. Cowboy   13 years ago

      I mean, say what you like about the tenets of National Socialism, Dude, at least it's an ethos.

  87. Jerry   13 years ago

    What is the Catholic take on the afterlife again, Rick Santorum?

  88. flacid tuna   13 years ago

    Santorum will have a strong hand with Waziristan.

    1. db   13 years ago

      You gotta keep your Wazirishand strong.

      1. flacid tuna   13 years ago

        +1

  89. Bomb Everyone   13 years ago

    So only non-christian theocracies pose risks?

  90. anon   13 years ago

    wow, this debate is worthless.

    "Mr Gingrich, how does this campaign's tone make you -feel-?"

    1. flacid tuna   13 years ago

      4 pinochios thought? That was obscene!

      1. anon   13 years ago

        Oh shit! Dick measuring contest inc.

    2. Jerry   13 years ago

      Is even more worthless when you consider how many times Gregory wanted this to be a debate on substance.

      1. anon   13 years ago

        You really could not prove that based on what I just saw. This debate was all "Ok, your talking points in 30 second intervals. 50% of time goes to Huntsman. Go!"

        1. flacid tuna   13 years ago

          Anyone watching this debate could be forgiven for thinking Romney and Huntsman are running neck and neck.

  91. flacid tuna   13 years ago

    Ron Paul is on Mitt's mind.

  92. flacid tuna   13 years ago

    Newt is butt hurt.

  93. Bee Tagger   13 years ago

    Nicely done, NBC. This isn't a total waste of time or anything.

  94. anon   13 years ago

    I like how they agree to limit these questions to 30 seconds, then proceed to waste 5 minutes on shit nobody cares about.

  95. flacid tuna   13 years ago

    Let's just spend the rest of the debate on this worthless topic.

  96. Kolohe   13 years ago

    So the 'lame stream media' is now 'Establishment Newspapers'?

  97. anon   13 years ago

    This just in! Rick Santorum confuses cause and effect yet again.

  98. flacid tuna   13 years ago

    We need a President/Pope.

    1. Kolohe   13 years ago

      A Popsident.

      1. Ted S.   13 years ago

        You'll wonder where the yellow went,
        When you brush your teeth with Popesident.

  99. flacid tuna   13 years ago

    Quickly Dr. Paul! Quickly! We have no time!!!!

  100. flacid tuna   13 years ago

    I suggest that CSPAN runs a debate. Make it as boring and substantive as possible.

  101. anon   13 years ago

    To all future potential viewers of this debate:

    Do not watch it. It is a complete waste of your time. Go play Skyrim instead.

    1. flacid tuna   13 years ago

      Quickly Dr. Paul! Quickly! We have no time!!!!

    2. robc   13 years ago

      I have yet to watch any debate this year.

      In fact, the last debate I watched may have been in 1992.

  102. Res Publica Americana   13 years ago

    Paul should ask them what the hell they're doing:

    "Why is that the second-place holder in this state, in a debate IN THIS STATE, has been asked only three questions during the entire debate, all loathsomely worthless and irrelevant, while everybody else gets a speech each?"

    And see their heads explode

    1. flacid tuna   13 years ago

      As Bea Tagger said above, "Surely this is offensive to the people in New Hampshire who have him at #2 in the polls."

      I hope so.

  103. Jerry   13 years ago

    Man, I would be better off shooting heroin than watching this MSNBC post-debate show.

    1. Kolohe   13 years ago

      You'd be better off shooting your TV.

  104. unknown   13 years ago

    the kochs are so evil they even tell Matt Yglesias what to write.

    http://www.economicpolicyjourn.....es-to.html

    1. Old Mexican   13 years ago

      Did you read Yglesia's article?

      1. unknown   13 years ago

        yeah. He distorts imo. But how are the Kochs to blame for his idiocy?

      2. unknown   13 years ago

        Caplan(why i'm not an austrian) might well be wrong but I don't see how that creates a conspiracy of KOCH.

  105. jdb79   13 years ago

    Why is Timothy Hutton moderating this debate?

    1. unknown   13 years ago

      turk 182?

  106. JEP   13 years ago

    Just a general comment after watching Stephanopoulos this morning:

    All his guests talked about what was needed to beat Obama: a candidate with passion, a candidate that can pull independent and democrat votes, and a candidate that can bring new people into the political process to vote.

    No one mentioned the name Ron Paul.

    As far as the debate goes last night, Paul did really well on the issues, but whenever Santorum speaks about family values, etc. he needs to make sure everyone knows that Paul believes the same thing, but he doesn't think government should be involved in doing it.

    1. robc   13 years ago

      a candidate that can pull independent and democrat votes

      And the amazing thing is he can do this while being the biggest champion of small government running.

    2. jacob   13 years ago

      LOL

      Santorum made a point to say that there should be no "classes" in America and a bunch of other stuff about class warfare, but his website states he wants to strengthen the middle class.

    3. JEP   13 years ago

      Chris Wallace just hammered Paul about his criticism of the Civil Rights Act.

      Paul's answers to tricky questions always seem to side stepping the issue.

      Would it really be that hard to say "Yes, not serving black people would be morally wrong, but the government shouldn't have the right to tell you what to think."

      Would it be that hard to say "The fundamental power of government is the ability to threaten people and use violence against them. So, if you legislate Christianity, Islam, or any particular world view, you are using violence to impose your world view on others."

      Would it be that hard to counter Santorum by saying "Rick Santorum wants the government involved in the bedroom and at your dinner table. You may agree with Rick Santorum about his family values, but will you agree with the next president, or the next, or the next?"

      1. Robert   13 years ago

        But they love having and keeping those stakes on the table. People tune into political debates like this mostly because they groove to the contest nature of it. Having a lot riding on who's president and who else is in gov't just makes it even more interesting to them.

        1. JEP   13 years ago

          But the media is bottlenecking the voters into thinking that Romney is the default nominee, and the only one that can beat Obama.

          If they want stakes on the table, they'd be promoting as many options as possible.

          1. Robert   13 years ago

            By "they" I didn't mean the media, I meant the viewers. They want gov't in the bedroom so they can tussle over it.

        2. Robert   13 years ago

          It was like argument I heard or read over the Canadian charter of rights. There were those who openly stated they didn't want too many or broad rights guarantees, for that would reduce the scope for politics to operate in -- and political concern & involvement is such a civic virtue!

      2. Old Mexican   13 years ago

        Re: JEP,

        hris Wallace just hammered Paul about his criticism of the Civil Rights Act.

        Paul's answers to tricky questions always seem to side stepping the issue.

        You must've seen a different interview, because Paul nailed Chris's ass to the wall with his answer. In fact, Wallace became very annoyed at the little effect his question had on startling the congressman.

        Paul pointed out the racial divisiveness created by the government and how segregation was imposed by law (Paul here has a slip of the tongue and says "integration", corrected by Wallace - to his credit, meaning he is listening for a change.) When asked if he would simply let people discriminate racially, Paul says that times have changed and that such things are ill-advised, and still says people discriminate lawfully by setting up exclusive clubs - ahhh, didn't you know about these, Chris?

        1. JEP   13 years ago

          "hammered" might have been the wrong term.

          I've been reading Ron Paul's books one by one, and the arguments he presents in the books are quite eloquent compared to how he answers things in person.

          I'm just not sure that the average person is going to understand the direction that Paul is coming from, and he might need to preface his answers a little bit more.

          If you've been watching Fox/CNN your whole life; never really been interested in how economy/government/natural rights work, then you might have trouble connecting the dots.

          1. Old Mexican   13 years ago

            Re: JEP,

            If you've been watching Fox/CNN your whole life; never really been interested in how economy/government/natural rights work, then you might have trouble connecting the dots.

            Maybe some difficulty, but the important issue is if his argument is cogent. Some people may believe that government is there to right wrongs even if that means violating people's property. But there are also those that may have suspected this imposition of a moral value is not ethical in itself, and Paul may have given them the philosophical ground work on which to dwell. I believe that is what's important of Paul's consistent defense of individual rights in the form of a basic philosophical framework, because it gets people interested in what are rights and the role of government.

          2. Tulpa   13 years ago

            Natural law doesn't work, it's just made up as its adherents go along. Utilitarianism has its flaws but at least its adherents are honest about where its assumptions come from.

            1. jj   13 years ago

              If natural law is bunk then force is the natural ruler

    4. Tulpa   13 years ago

      Ron Paul is not going to pull in Democrat votes. They care more about govt goodies than war/torture/indefinite detention/SOPA/etc.

      1. JEP   13 years ago

        I think I read that he was pulling 10%, and it's amazing that any Repub. would be pulling Dems.

        1. Tulpa   13 years ago

          That's just Dems venting their frustration against BO when they know it won't matter. Come election time they'll return to their lanky master.

          1. Cytotoxic   13 years ago

            ^THIS and THIS

        2. Matt Tanous   13 years ago

          It's irrelevant, as the Independents will vote for Paul over Obama, I think. Plus, I know a few Democrats that - once I told them - were absolutely outraged over the NDAA being signed by Obama. I don't expect a huge Democratic turnout for Paul, but to assume that none of them are more concerned about civil liberties is a bit of a stretch as well, IMO.

      2. NAL   13 years ago

        Agreed. Democrats are 80% about wealth redistribution, the rest of the issues are just so they can feel "culturally diverse".

        To be fair, though, Republicans are 60% about militarism and preserving our ability to "project power".

        So, on and on both sides spend...

  107. Lost_in_translation   13 years ago

    9am Sunday debate is pretty much guaranteed to be watched by pundits, insomniacs and no one else. Paul could have slept in and won the debate.

    1. Old Mexican   13 years ago

      Re: Lost_In_Translation,

      Paul could have slept in and won the debate.

      He didn't and he did.

      http://youtu.be/guulx68Wj64

  108. Chris   13 years ago

    You have to admit, Newt would slay Obama in a debate. I would love to see Newt and Obama square off, he would fillet him and serve his socialist policies up nicely for us to eat.

    1. jacob   13 years ago

      Newt did extremely well last night. I hate the fucking guy, but he is very smart and I agree that he would stomp Obama.

      1. Id   13 years ago

        Newt may be clever, but he's far from smart.

        1. Ice Nine   13 years ago

          I suppose there is intended to be some sort of fourth-definition-down-the-list "cleverness" in that statement but it is otherwise bullshit.

          1. Id   13 years ago

            Ok, how about crafty?

            1. Ice Nine   13 years ago

              He's "far from" crafty? I don't know how crafty he is. I only know that he's quite clever and quite smart.

              1. Id   13 years ago

                Ok, well I generally expect "smart" people to know things and be able think critically, not just make shit up that sounds good.

                1. Ice Nine   13 years ago

                  I think only really smart people are capable of the latter.

      2. Matt Tanous   13 years ago

        He would stomp Obama, up until Obama states "didn't you use to be FOR the policies I've enacted?" Given Gingrich's initial support of individual healthcare mandates, intervention in Libya, etc. his strong debating won't really matter anymore.

        Plus, he's not even that smart. He's a dumb person's idea of a smart person - an "ideas guy". A truly smart individual doesn't have a lot of ideas - but the ones he has are well thought through (not just flung out there whenever initially though up) and analyzed to be sure they are GOOD ideas.

  109. jacob   13 years ago

    I'm a Ron Paul guy 10000%, but from what I saw of him yesterday (was flipping back and forth between the Saints game) he did poorly.

    I didn't care for his insistence on attacking Gingrich with his "I served in the military you didn't na-na-na-na-na." On top of that, he seemed to trip up over his words and was visibly emotional. Did not look impressive.

    When asked about the newsletters, his answer not only dodged the question, but was longwinded and seemed "all over the place." Asking "Have you ever seen a rich white guy get the electric chair" was simply a silly sentence and seemed like something Al Sharpton would say.

    His more toned down responses - like how he explained why the Patriot Act violates the 4th amendment, were much better.

    1. Atanarjuat   13 years ago

      His answer at the end about economics, probably the area Paul has most expertise in, was good too.

    2. Tulpa   13 years ago

      I didn't care for his insistence on attacking Gingrich with his "I served in the military you didn't na-na-na-na-na."

      Uh, Stephanopoulos brought that up, not Paul.

      I agree on the overall performance....more than anything else he looked tired to me.

      1. jacob   13 years ago

        YES - now that you say it, I'd say he was tired, too.

        1. Tulpa   13 years ago

          I'd imagine the usual campaign routine is rough on 76-year-olds...

          1. NAL   13 years ago

            Hell, it's probably rough on a 46-year-old.

      2. jacob   13 years ago

        Uh, Stephanopoulos brought that up, not Paul.

        No shit, but Ron Paul kept the answer going much longer than he had to. I honestly believe that he just wanted to kick Newt in the face with his answers.

        I hate NG as much as anyone, but I don't think this is the way to debate him.

    3. Ice Nine   13 years ago

      Did not look impressive.

      Unfortunately, he never looks impressive.

      1. Old Mexican   13 years ago

        Re: IceNine,

        Unfortunately, he never looks impressive.

        That's probably his best asset - he doesn't look like a big phony.

        1. Ice Nine   13 years ago

          Yeah, I like the way he looks just fine. Historically however having a less than impressive countenance costs one votes.

          1. jacob   13 years ago

            Apparently you're not allowed to express the slightest negative about Ron Paul on this thread, Ice Nine.

            He's perfect, don't ya know?

            1. Ice Nine   13 years ago

              I'm a Paul fan myself but must say that your observation rings pretty true according to my observations here. That said, I read OM's comment as essentially neutral.

            2. NAL   13 years ago

              OM's heart is in the right place, but he can be a bit crotchety at times. He's the Colonel Potter of H&R.

              1. jacob   13 years ago

                Crotchety is right. See below.

            3. jt   13 years ago

              double edge sword.. if everyone were as "neutral" and "impartial" and "passive" as you were to lay back and criticize your guy when we're in midst of a battle where you have an actual and real opposition, paul wouldn't be having his grassroots energy, and this whole talk is moot in the first place anyway.

              you are like some guy complaining medicine tastes too chemical-like. well that's the whole point. and get this--you're still taking it. we're still relying on 'paulbots' to raise awareness against the two-party system, all the while criticizing their passion without which it becomes curious why they even do this, being obviously of no benefit to their immediate personal gain. slap the hand that feeds you. talk about hypocrisy.

              1. Tulpa   13 years ago

                You sound like an Obamabot telling Democratic bloggers to shut up about indefinite detention.

                1. Matt Tanous   13 years ago

                  Tulpa, I disagree. I think there is some room for disagreement on Paul, but if you have decided that he is the best candidate in this race - and I doubt most Reasonites are preferring anyone like Santorum or Romney - then it becomes counterproductive to criticize him while trying to get him elected. Certainly, the supporters of the other candidates aren't going to go out of their way to point out how they disagree with "their guy".

    4. Old Mexican   13 years ago

      Re: Jacob,

      When asked about the newsletters, his answer not only dodged the question, but was longwinded and seemed "all over the place."

      You've got to be kidding me. First, he didn't "dodge" the question as he has given the answer many times over. Second, how is pointing out the racism behind the pursuit of the drug wars and the inherent bias against minorities in judicial outcomes be construed as being "all over the place"? Do you at least know the meaning of the phrase?

      Asking "Have you ever seen a rich white guy get the electric chair" was simply a silly sentence and seemed like something Al Sharpton would say.

      And yet Paul is the racist who wrote racist things that were racist, right?

      I thought he handled that question masterfully, even making Stephanopoulos wishing he hadn't asked it. That answer put the final nail in the coffin for the newsletter smear-o-fest.

      1. jacob   13 years ago

        I suspect you and I were not watching the same debate, or you were heavily intoxicated when you watched it.

        When the moderator asked Paul to explain why he's not responsible for the newsletters, he said that he can't be a racist because MLK is his hero, and that he has voted against the drug war, leading into his diatribe about minorities being dispoportionately affected by it and war. None of these points have anything to do with why he's not responsible for the content of his newsletters.

        And yet Paul is the racist who wrote racist things that were racist, right?

        This is a non sequiter. Nowhere in my post did I claim RP is a racist. Or, are you saying that I think Ron Paul is a racist because I don't like Al Sharpton? Just because I think he answered the question in a shitty manner does not mean I think he wrote the letters himself nor do I consider him a racist.

        I think you're passion for supporting your Paul is blinding your (normally) rational thinking.

        1. Old Mexican   13 years ago

          Re: jacob,

          When the moderator asked Paul to explain why he's not responsible for the newsletters,

          He did take moral responsibility for them many times, jacob. The question has been asked and answered many times before. Paul called the question, correctly, a distraction.

          None of these points have anything to do with why he's not responsible for the content of his newsletters.

          He did answer the question, jacob - he said he did not write those comments. Go back to the video and tell me to my face that he did not say that. Besides, this is a debate format and the question had a clear intention of startling and smearing the congressman with an irrelevant question.

          This is a non sequiter. Nowhere in my post did I claim RP is a racist.

          You brought up the newsletter issue, jacob. Do I have to assume that the reason was an entirely innocent one, that you're really that interest in a reply that satisfies your phony righteousness?

          1. jacob   13 years ago

            I did not bring up the newsletter issue OM, I said that Paul did poorly last night, and the newsletter question was an example of it.

            He did take moral responsibility for them many times

            Yes, but I think that what he's said in the past has no bearing on last night's debate.

            the question had a clear intention of startling and smearing the congressman with an irrelevant question.

            OK - I'm with you, no argument from me.

            satisfies your phony righteousness?

            Quit being a whiner.

            Look, you and I are on the same page about Ron Paul. I fully intend to vote for him. As an ardent supporter, I don't see anything wrong with a little critique. He's not God. Reading your posts, I wonder if you don't get that.

            1. Old Mexican   13 years ago

              Re: jacob,

              I did not bring up the newsletter issue OM, I said that Paul did poorly last night, and the newsletter question was an example of it.

              You brought them up as an example of how poorly he did on the debate. YOU did. I did not see this failing you keep pointing out except when asked about his vision for America which he answered with a diatribe on Austrian economics. I believe he could've been more inspiring right there, but he is what he is.

              Yes, but I think that what he's said in the past has no bearing on last night's debate.

              Now you're simply being an ass, jacob. Again, it's a debate, not a court.

              1. jacob   13 years ago

                Wow.

                Just fucking wow. I've never seen you this off.

        2. Neu Mejican   13 years ago

          I think you're passion for supporting your Paul is blinding your (normally) rational thinking.

          That one made me laugh out loud.

    5. JeremyR   13 years ago

      It's true though...

      Drug laws and gun control were basically part of the Jim Crow laws, they were racistly inspired. And certainly are enforced that way.

      1. jacob   13 years ago

        Fine. But please explain to me what that has to do with Ron Paul's newsletters?

        1. Francisco d Anconia   13 years ago

          "Fine. But please explain to me what that has to do with Ron Paul's newsletters?"

          Candidates are given miniscule amounts of time to support their agendas in a debate. The newsletter question has been asked and answered REPEATEDLY. So, should I as a candidate:

          A. Rehash it again?

          OR

          B. Take the time to express my philosophy?

          1. jacob   13 years ago

            C. Answer the question that was asked.

            The question was something about why he's not responsible for the newsletters. Saying "I already answered that, next" is a direct answer. Reciting your philosophy to "prove" you're not a racist is not the way to go IMO because
            1) that doesn't prove you didn't write the letters
            2) It is not what was asked.

            I get what you're saying, about getting the word out there about your philosophy and what not. I just think RP could have answered the question better. I'd even prefer if he outright said "I've answered this question a thousand times and I'm wondering why you guys keep bringing this up instead of asking me about the real issues and that makes me a good candidate."

            1. jacob   13 years ago

              that = what

            2. Old Mexican   13 years ago

              Re: jacob,

              1) that doesn't prove you didn't write the letters

              That was a debate, jacob, not a court. He doesn't need to prove a negative. He pointed out correctly

              Again, you're asking for something that goes beyond the scope of the format, and I have to question why.

            3. juris imprudent   13 years ago

              Why should any politician answer a question from an idiot?

              1. jacob   13 years ago

                Why show up to the debate in the first place, then?

  110. Chris   13 years ago

    yep I think I've come around to be a Newt supporter even though I'm libertarian leaning. What Newt says makes perfect sense, and he would destroy Obama in a debate. I can overlook his other problems if he will push forward a smaller govt message and get things done.

    1. JEP   13 years ago

      So what if Newt could destroy Obama in a debate?

      His policies will help destroy the country by traveling down the same roads that created all the problems in the first place. He'll start more wars, ignore the Fed manipulating our currency, and he'll for sale to the highest bidder.

      1. capitol l   13 years ago

        Newt supports TARP, that's all you need to know.

      2. Chris   13 years ago

        I think you haven't been listening to Newt in the debates then, because thats not what he said he will do. He was talking about re-assessing our foreign policy which is the best you can hope for in a Repub candidate. The rest of your comment is gibberish.

        1. Tulpa   13 years ago

          You're either a troll or mind-bendingly stupid. Your spelling is good so I'm leaning toward the former.

          1. Chris   13 years ago

            not a troll, just a lurker on this board for many years. I know all you guys by name and I know where you are coming from. I'm a libertarian who believes that the pressing issue right now is the economy, not foreign policy or anything else. I'm unemployed looking for a job and I think Newt if you guys will listen to him, can get the job done (real cuts to govt, re-assessing foreign policy, making changes in the entitlement programs that make them sustenable long term and allow you to opt out if you are younger. That's what Newt has been talking about.

            1. Cytotoxic   13 years ago

              That's what Newt has been talking about.

              ?

            2. mad libertarian guy   13 years ago

              If you don't get that that our foreign policy is a big contributing factor to our woeful economy, there isn'y much that anyone can say that will help you.

              1. Chris   13 years ago

                I do get that its a small part of our woeful economy, its not the major driver of our debt however.

                1. asdf   13 years ago

                  Are you retarded? We spend trillions on war and it has little effect on our economy? Really? Don't think private citizens could spend that money any better?

                  1. Chris   13 years ago

                    wars are being wound down as we speak, and I agree that we need to spend much less on our defense budget (different from war spending). Not sure we're that far apart here.

                2. JEP   13 years ago

                  It's certainly a damn significant portion of our debt.

                  I don't remember where I heard, but I think the last estimate was that the wars were costing us 2 billion dollars a day.

                  Add that to the 1.4 billion we spend per day just "paying" off the interest to the debt we already have.

        2. JEP   13 years ago

          What worries me about every political candidate is whether or not they can be bought by special interest. Both Santorum and Gingrich seem like they can be bought. Just like Obama, they campaign on one platform, and then they don't deliver once in office because they're being paid off.

          Newt is willing to continue propping up the American Empire, he's not concerned about the role of the Federal Reserve and regaining control of our currency, and he has a history of changing his views whenever he was paid enough. I'm not sure what's so unclear about that.

          Also, your face is gibberish.

        3. wareagle   13 years ago

          you answered your own question about why Newt raises questions here: "if he will push a small govt message..." Little in Newt's history speaks to a will to do that. Newt sees govt as a benevolent force that can do good and great things to help folks; Obama's vision is malevolent.

        4. Spoonman.   13 years ago

          Concern troll is concerned, guys.

    2. barfman   13 years ago

      *barf*

    3. Old Mexican   13 years ago

      Re: Chris,

      I can overlook his other problems if he will push forward a smaller govt message and get things done.

      Overlook those smaller problems like never meaning what he says about pushing forward smaller government and getting things done?

      1. Chris   13 years ago

        Ole Mexican: look I'm willing to give him a chance, thats all. I'm not some kind of huge Newt supporter, he's just what I have decided is the best of the crop. I don't know what you are talking about precisely, I do know that he is responsible for welfare reform. They now make welfare recipients prove they are looking for work and kick them off it if they are not. That's a small step forward in wrenching back the government largesse over the years that I think Newt should be proud of. You can't build Rome in a day, its gonna take a lot of little reforms to wrestle the size and scope of government back down to a reasonable level.

      2. asdf   13 years ago

        lol

  111. Res Publica Americana   13 years ago

    Holy shit, dudes: my strongly Bushite neighbor just ranted for 20 minutes about how sick of all that "riciluous, unbelievable shit" the government's been doing, so he and most of his immediate family are now going to vote for Paul. SUCCESS.

    1. JEP   13 years ago

      I'm trying to convince my parents. One of my sisters has already committed.

      My parents are strict evangelical Christians who rabidly watch Fox News. I have them convinced about economic issues, but I'm fighting against the media warmongering on foreign policy.

      1. Maxxx   13 years ago

        Nothing says Christian love like bombing furren brown kids.

        1. JEP   13 years ago

          It was a tense Christmas when I got my Dad to admit that the authority of government was rooted in it's ability to use legalized violence, and then proceeded to equate using government power to enforce Christian values with the radical Islamic mandate to conquer the world and convert or kill the conquered.

        2. juris imprudent   13 years ago

          We have to protect our white children!

      2. NAL   13 years ago

        I got my sister, who is a public school teacher, BTW, to be a Paul-ite too. She used to be a raging liberal (before she had a job and a house, that is), then she went over to Bush/McCain style conservative and now she's for Paul.

        My Dad, on the other hand is a lost cause. He's a price-control freak. Every time the subject of the economy comes up (whether good or bad), his "solution" is, "The government needs to force the price of to be lower. I don't know why the hell people can't see that."

        He's a nice guy and all, and he was a good dad, but sometimes I really envy you folks that have two sets of smart genes.

        1. NAL   13 years ago

          Edit:

          "...force the price of [insert good or service] to be lower..."

  112. Dekedin   13 years ago

    There's a small chance I might vote for Romney, as he won't be any better than Obama but probably won't be any worse. The best thing is to delay collapse/WWIII/whatever for 4 years until Rand Paul/Paul Ryan/Gary Johnson get enough support to make a run. However, there is no chance of me voting for Gingrich. Gingrich (and Santorum, to an extent, but I doubt he can win) is main candidate I'm actually scared of. His answer on civil liberties (that presidential power hasn't been expanded enough) and his obsession with controlling the economy seem to be worse than Barry. I hate to be that guy to use the F word, but Newt might be the closest thing to a fascist I've seen in my lifetime.

    1. jacob   13 years ago

      Same here. I really hope Ron Paul gets the nomination. If Romney gets the GOP nod, then I'll vote for him. Otherwise, I'll be voting for Gary Johnson.

      1. Francisco d Anconia   13 years ago

        I'll hold my nose and vote for Romney. If it's Gingrich, I'll write-in Paul. If it's Santorum, I'll vote for Obama because if the Republicans are stupid enough to nominate him, they deserve four more years of this. Might just as well accelerate the collapse so we can hit the bottom and start over.

      2. Francisco d Anconia   13 years ago

        I'll hold my nose and vote for Romney. If it's Gingrich, I'll write-in Paul. If it's Santorum, I'll vote for Obama because if the Republicans are stupid enough to nominate him, they deserve four more years of this. Might just as well accelerate the collapse so we can hit the bottom and start over.

    2. wareagle   13 years ago

      as he won't be any better than Obama
      ---------------------------
      please explain this as it does not stand up the intellectual smell test. It's not about liking Romney but equating him to Obama is ludicrous.

      Romney came into office with a deficit and left surplus; not Obama. Romney put forth his own money in taking over struggling companies and made many of them prosperous; Obama put your money into failing enterprises that still show no sign of life. Romney is not attempting to dictate what you eat, drive, or use for household energy. If you don't like him, at least have a more valid reason than you think he's Obama in whiteface. Obama is hellbent on the destruction of the America you were born into; I doubt Romney is that guy.

      1. JEP   13 years ago

        This is what I really don't like about Romney:

        He's a windmill, changing his stance on key issues. I wouldn't know exactly what I'm voting for...he may change his position once in office.

        It scares me whenever he's asked a question and he passes the buck. Such as, "Well, I'd have to ask my team of lawyers what we're allowed to do." Or when he was asked about contraception and he differed the answer to Ron Paul. Paul should have taken a jab at him and said something like "Well, you may be taking an oath to the defend the Constitution next year, so you might want to know what's in it."

        And just like with Newt and Santorum, I think Romney will just be a pawn once in office.

        1. Fatty Bolger   13 years ago

          You're right, but on the other hand, he's not going to see his job as "fundamentally transforming the United States of America." He'll be a steward, rather than some Dear Leader with a Vision for the Future. That's definitely an improvement over Obama (or Gingrich or Santorum, IMO).

          1. Maxxx   13 years ago

            He'll be a steward, rather than some Dear Leader with a Vision for the Future.

            And that is the problem.
            This country is heading towards a cliff, and Mitt's solution is to grip the steering wheel and hold steady. We might as well have O in office when we crash over the guard rail so that he will take the blame.

            1. Fatty Bolger   13 years ago

              Well, to further your analogy, Obama will have the accelerator on the floor, while Romney will keep the car at a reasonable speed. There still might be time to stop; but each year with Obama in the driver's seat makes that more unlikely.

        2. Tulpa   13 years ago

          He's a windmill, changing his stance on key issues. I wouldn't know exactly what I'm voting for...he may change his position once in office.

          But if you disagree with his positions, that should be a good thing.

    3. Fatty Bolger   13 years ago

      I doubt Newt would be effective enough to put his fascist tendencies into actual practice. He's pretty easy to back down, too. Not that I'm a fan. He & Santorum are the worst case candidates, IMO.

      1. Maxxx   13 years ago

        Santorum is much worse. He's a true believer in fascism and that he's the top man to implement it.

        Newt's a gadfly that has an ability to piss everyone off and get little done.

        1. juris imprudent   13 years ago

          the top man

          What is it with Santorum and the gay allusions?

  113. P Brooks   13 years ago

    David Axelrod is still an odious sleazy little shitbag.

    That is all.

    1. Ted S.   13 years ago

      Not that you shouldn't have known this already.

      But what did he do this to make you comment thus?

  114. P Brooks   13 years ago

    What Newt says makes perfect sense

    PAGING BARFMAN!

    1. Res Publica Americana   13 years ago

      HAY DUDES IM NEWT GANGRENE I HIDE BEHIND MY WIFE N KIDS WHEN ANSWERING QUESTIONS ABOUT MILITARY SERVICE ROFLOL LMAO LOL TROLOLOLOLOLOL

  115. Tulpa   13 years ago

    Rep. Arthur Davis: Huntsman is the thinking man's Ron Paul.

    1. Res Publica Americana   13 years ago

      I LOL'd.

  116. P Brooks   13 years ago

    Huntsman is looking a lot like the thinking man's legacy media's choice (by acclamation) for Veep.

    I eagerly await the coverage of Saint Obama striding Presidentially through the still-smoking rubble of the Romney/Huntsman campaign next November.

    1. Fatty Bolger   13 years ago

      I don't know. Huntsman is very appealing to moderate Democrats who are not happy with Obama. He could probably peel off some normally Democratic voters as VP. If he ran 3rd party, I think he would do serious damage to Obama. Not that I think he will.

      1. Spoonman.   13 years ago

        My incredibly mean-spirited and hateful grandmother likes Huntsman a lot because that seems like the right thing to do.

        That's all I really need to know.

        And yes, she's like 88 and still has it in her to be a mean and awful person.

    2. Mike M.   13 years ago

      Romney's VP going to be either Rubio or Christie, Romney is leading Obama in almost every battleground state in the country, and Romney is going to beat him.

      1. Fatty Bolger   13 years ago

        Seems to be the most likely outcome, at this point. Though ten months is a long time in politics, of course.

  117. Almanian   13 years ago

    I slept till noon.

    All football - no politics!

    Almanian - 2012

    1. Homer S   13 years ago

      I approve of your football watching policy.
      Sleeping til noon? I approve of your church skipping policy.
      Where do you stand on killing Flanders?

    2. Anacreon   13 years ago

      I am intrigued by your point of view and would like to subscribe to your newsletter.

  118. P Brooks   13 years ago

    I am really quite grateful to the powers what be at ABC who finally heaved that obnoxious mooing agony aunt C Amanpour overboard, but I cannot help wondering what possessed them to add a laugh track to the show.

  119. Old Mexican   13 years ago

    Sadly, that performance will not ruin the careers of ABC News' Diane Sawyer and George Stephanopoulos

    Nothing will hurt the career of Diane Sawywer as long as she keeps doing what has worked to keep her job: Give great "helmet."

    I don't know about George, though... I am pretty sure he saw My Own Private Idaho yet can't say if he got the hint.

  120. Lefty McGee   13 years ago

    Ron Paul is a racist homophobic anti-abortion loon. How can I vote for him?

    1. Old Mexican   13 years ago

      Ron Paul is a racist homophobic anti-abortion loon. How can I vote for him?

      By pressing on the button to the right of his name, come voting day.

      ->>>> o Ronald Ernest Paul

      1. Mr. FIFY   13 years ago

        Okay... who's spoofing as Lefty McGee? Because you're not adding enough hate to it. Step it up, yo.

        1. shrike   13 years ago

          Needs more "Christ-fag".

          1. Max   13 years ago

            ARFARFARFARFARFARFARFARFARFARF!!!

            1. Tony   13 years ago

              If Obama doesn't get re-elected, starving black children will be feasting on our grandmothers.

              1. MNG   13 years ago

                I tend to agree, in the most pretentious way possible.

      2. Lefty McGee   13 years ago

        How does a nation operate with the government NOT being allowed to tell merchants/corporations that they have to respect civil rights laws, and NOT discriminate?

        1. AuH20   13 years ago

          Seriously, dude, try harder. Develop a unique persona, and preferably a few catchphrases.

          When you aren't on screen, the rest of us should be asking, "Where's Lefty McGee?"

          1. sloopyinca   13 years ago

            He's certainly no Slapdick!

          2. Spoonman.   13 years ago

            "I want you to notice when trolls aren't around"

          3. Anacreon   13 years ago

            I caught your Poochy reference

        2. Old Mexican   13 years ago

          Re: Lefty MgGee,

          How does a nation operate with the government NOT being allowed to tell merchants/corporations that they have to respect civil rights laws, and NOT discriminate?

          Nations do not operate, they're not machines. Or people.

          And merchants discriminate all the time: If you don't have money, they won't sell you something.

        3. Mr. FIFY   13 years ago

          *yawn*

          Still woefully inadequate, "Lefty".

          1. Lefty McGee   13 years ago

            RON PAUL is a bunch of truly insane ideas that would devastate this country's economy and lead to a ton of Americans living in abject, crushing poverty. The big picture doesn't paint him as anyone who should be NEAR the Oval Office.

            1. Mr. FIFY   13 years ago

              Okay, Nostradamus. Whatever.

            2. sloopyinca   13 years ago

              Listen, asshole. I will not sit idly by and watch you besmirch the highly respect troll-name of McGee. Your inability to engage regulars on here to the point that they become enraged is pathetic.

              Please, either change your name or step up your game, because this unacceptable level of trolling is making me sick.

              1. Mr. FIFY   13 years ago

                It's like they just tap into Kos or whatever source is handy, and don't put any thought into it.

                Then again, one can find similar anti-Paul shit on, say, Freeperville...

            3. Old Mexican   13 years ago

              Re: Lefty McGee,

              RON PAUL is a bunch of truly insane ideas

              A person cannot be a bunch or even one idea. A person is a being.

              that would devastate this country's economy and lead to a ton of Americans living in abject, crushing poverty.

              That would be a great improvement, as a ton of Americans is not really that many Americans, even if those chosen have the weight of Kate Moss.

            4. juris imprudent   13 years ago

              Ah, someone who trolls about how I fly fish. Thwack, thwack, thwack.... dammit!

    2. Mr Whipple   13 years ago

      Ron Paul is a racist homophobic anti-abortion loon. How can I vote for him?

      Bring a prostitute in the voting booth with you and remember:

      Bitches and Blow, bitchez!

      But first, take your head out of your ass.

  121. Old Mexican   13 years ago

    NBC Meet The Depressed Debate 1-08-2011 Highlights (of those moments that matter, of course!

  122. AuH20   13 years ago

    For those who read Feminist (just me, guys? You people are dicks), it appears that they are super pissed that some of their progressive co-travellers are shilling for Ron Paul. In their week reader, they had promoted an article on how crazy progressives are for liking him, and also a doom and gloom about what would happen if the Republican field wins (dogs and cats living together, mass hysteria).

    Last week in their reader, they had another anti-Paul screed. I have some good articles for this week, let me tell ya, including one where Feministing tries to explain how Obama HAD to pass the indefinite detention guys, he only hits us because he loves us, our principles fell into a doorknob!

    1. Mr. FIFY   13 years ago

      The same feminists who overlooked Bill C's penchant for having sex with chubby chicks from the steno pool?

      1. AuH20   13 years ago

        Honestly, I think that the Jezebel and Feministing types just wave their hands and make up some bullshit about how those were ignorant "second wave" feminists, whereas they are enlightened "third wave" (or we may be on the fourth wave, I lost track of this shit ages ago) feminists.

        1. Mr. FIFY   13 years ago

          "Fifth Column" feminists?

        2. sloopyinca   13 years ago

          They're leftists because they're expected to be. Hell, they look at France and Italy wistfully, ignoring the fact that they are both misogynistic hellholes for women. They look up to Bubba and Algor, even though they are both scumbags toward women. They still hold a torch for John Edwards.

          IOW, they are a bunch of sheep.

          1. Mr. FIFY   13 years ago

            Temporarily forgot about Edwards. He makes Newt look like a piker, in the "I'm gonna fuck around on my sick wife" department, because Newt's wife at the time *didn't* die of cancer.

  123. AuH20   13 years ago

    Holy Shit, the Washington Monthly has a doom and gloom about the Republians beating Obama, featuring our beloved Dave Wiegel.

    Apparently, the EPA will be no more, the Conservative takeover of the Courts will be complete, Obamacare is toast, and we are back to 2008 financial regs.

    Apparently, this all a bad thing somehow.

  124. Mr. FIFY   13 years ago

    Barack Obama is a bunch of truly insane ideas that would devastate this country's economy and lead to a ton of Americans living in abject, crushing poverty. The big picture doesn't paint him as anyone who should be NEAR the Oval Office.

    FIFY'd. No charge.

    1. Lefty McGee   13 years ago

      But Obama's not a homophobic misogynist.

      1. sloopyinca   13 years ago

        See, you need to say: But Obama's not a homophobic misogynist like Ron Pual.

        Jesus, man. This is Trolling 101.

        1. Mr. FIFY   13 years ago

          Prove the homophobia and misogyny.

          While you're at it, how do you overlook the proven, disgusting traits of your fellow leftists?

          1. sloopyinca   13 years ago

            I think you misunderstood my post, FIFY. I'm just trying to enhance our Sundays by giving sagelike advice to our trolls.

            1. Mr. FIFY   13 years ago

              I was posting to Lefty. But I am a bit fuzzy this afternoon...

              1. calm mentor   13 years ago

                I notice no one has cursed threaded comments yet. Just sayin'

      2. F Hart   13 years ago

        But Obama's not a homophobic misogynist.

        No, but I bet your Mom is.

  125. P Brooks   13 years ago

    the EPA will be no more, the Conservative takeover of the Courts will be complete, Obamacare is toast, and we are back to 2008 financial regs.

    Truly, the End Times are upon us.

    So, anyway..... There I was, innocently checking the Indycar news at Speedvision, just to see how they're coming along on that whole slow motion suicide business, and there's an article about Randy Bernard's latest new brainstorm to further Disneyfy the sport of open wheel racing. I'll spare you the nuts and bolts (suffice it to say, my reaction may be summarized as "WTF SRSL????"), but in the comments, I shit you not, some guy is lecturing the troglodytes about how we NEED regulation (and plenty of it), and Teddy Roooooosevelt was the greatest president ever.

    They're everywhere.

  126. np   13 years ago

    RP when asked about Romney, about his opinion on "who's the true conservative":

    You know, I think this whole discussion so far has been very superficial and I think the question in the way that you asked is superficial, and that you're talking about character--which is very important--but I think we should deal with the issues as well.

    [... mentions list of issues to challenge Obama...]
    but if we want to change things, this is what we have to talk about. Character is important and motivation is important and our history (i.e. candidate's personal history) is important, but I really consider that in the debate format to be less significant than what we really believe in.

  127. P Brooks   13 years ago

    It's a mystery.

    Since the Jan. 8, 2011, shooting spree at one of her Congress on Your Corner constituent events, Giffords has been largely absent from Capitol Hill, although she did return with great fanfare to cast a surprise Aug. 1 vote for a compromise to raise the nation's debt ceiling. She received a warm bipartisan welcome from her colleagues on the House floor.

    Overall, her Arizona constituents have given her wide leeway in her recovery and there has been no serious push for her to step down.

    But one political expert said a Giffords decision to seek another two-year term would invite more scrutiny of her condition and ability to serve. While Giffords' congressional staff has been praised for the job it has done in her office since the shooting, her constituents largely have been without a vote in Congress.

    "When is she going to be able to show up on a day-to-day basis and serve in Congress, and does she owe that information to her constituents before she decides to seek re-election?" asked Paul Sracic, chairman of the political-science department at Youngstown State University in Ohio. "This is where things, I know, get a little bit touchy, but is she willing, for example, to have her doctor talk about her condition so that her constituents know exactly what the prognosis is before they make the decision about whether to send her back to Congress?"

    1. A Serious Man   13 years ago

      Well her job is to represent the people of her district, and as such she has an obligation to speak to her constituents in person and provide proof that she is fit to do her job.

      She should probably take the next two years off to recover. I'm sure there are plenty of ways she can remain active in politics.

    2. Tulpa   13 years ago

      This country needs more Congresspersons who don't show up for work, not less.

      1. Mr. FIFY   13 years ago

        I didn't read the link. Was there a rehash of "Loughner shot Giffords because he was influenced by Rush Limbaugh"?

        1. Barack Obama, to H&R   13 years ago

          "Loughner shot Giffords because the Constitution is for neo-Confederates and white people suck."

          1. Mr. FIFY   13 years ago

            Sounds familiar...

            1. MSNBC   13 years ago

              That's pretty much our entire evening lineup script.

  128. Brandybuck   13 years ago

    I'm going to vote for Ron Paul in the primary. That said... I am getting fed up with the conspiracy mindset of many Ron Paul supporters. I'm not talking about the Troofers. I'm not talking about the Chemtrailertrash. I'm not talking about those crypto-anti-semites who rant on about Jewish Bankers.

    Instead I'm talking about those paranoids who think everything is being run by insiders who've brainwashed the public. They talk about breaking the matrix, as if we're all drugged and unable to recognize the reality around us. They talk about the media blackout when Ron Paul has been getting huge amounts media attention. They talk about how the GOP establishment won't let Ron Paul win (and they say this to the faces of Gary Johnson supporters).

    Ten years ago we would never have imagined this. Ron Paul placed a close third in the Iowa caucuses, and he might very well get the nomination. Yet there are all these supporters that instead of dancing are ranting that the ubiquitous they are keeping their candidate down.

    1. Mr. FIFY   13 years ago

      To be fair, a lot of people do fit into the brainwashed category, Brandy... they're called Republicans and Democrats.

      1. F Hart   13 years ago

        Yeah, just check out this page:

        http://www.facebook.com/Obamasupporters

        1. Mr. FIFY   13 years ago

          Ewww.

          1. Yes, we can? How about....   13 years ago

            ...oh, no, we di'nt!

    2. JEP   13 years ago

      I don't think it's a conspiracy, but just a certain mindset that needs to be broken. Ron Paul's campaign isn't traditional in the since that he's not trying to get people to like him, or to get votes by promising kickbacks like other politicians.

      Because RP is the alternative to the establishment, he has to win people over with fundamental ideas - meaning that people have to realize that something about the establishment is wrong.

      So, I don't believe there's a conspiracy, but I do believe that RP is going against the establishment of both Repubs. and Dems. The establishment doesn't like it, and RP has an uphill battle because to win voters, he has to open their eyes to a knew way of thinking.

      1. Brandybuck   13 years ago

        No it's not a conspiracy. But when a sizable chunk of Ron Paul supporters cry foul everytime Ron Paul faces a hurdle that every other presidential candidate in history has had to face, it's time they woke up and smelled the coffee.

    3. Mr Whipple   13 years ago

      It does seem that Ron Paul has picked up some ex-Lyndon LaRouche supporters. As long as they know where their polling place is, and where to send the money, who cares?

  129. Lefty McGee   13 years ago

    Oh yeah, well so what if Obama has the power to indefinitely detain US citizens and has a penchant for killing Muslim people with predator drones, at least he believes women can have an abortion and that the Federal government should actively prosecute thoughtcrime via hate crime and anti-discrimination laws.

    And who knows, maybe his position on gay rights and drug laws will "evolve" to supporting them.

    1. F Hart   13 years ago

      And who knows, maybe his position on gay rights and drug laws will "evolve" to supporting them.

      You are an excellent example of why abortion should be legal. Keep up the good work!

  130. Republican Candidates   13 years ago

    summary:
    herp derp

  131. Republicans   13 years ago

    well, I believe herp and then more derp.

  132. P Brooks   13 years ago

    Tedious spooftroll is tedious.

  133. Tulpa   13 years ago

    Mike Smith is a fucking moron.

    The Falcons would be ahead now if he didn't insist on going for it on 4th down all the time.

    1. sloopyinca   13 years ago

      Not to mention his shitty clock management at the end of the first half.

  134. Tulpa   13 years ago

    And the Falcons defense responds by laying an egg. wtf

    Is it me or does Smith always look like he's holding back tears?

  135. Tulpa   13 years ago

    Has there ever been a playoff game where the losing team scored 2 points?

  136. A Serious Man   13 years ago

    Although I would have preferred to play the Falcons only because the Packers would slaugther them, I will find it more satisfying to see Green Bay beat Eli Manning and the Giants.

    1. AuH20   13 years ago

      It's not as satisfying as seeing Eli losing at home. I grew up in Connecticut. The only team worth rooting for from New York is the Mets, and that's only because I find being a Mets fan than a professional dominatrix.

      1. El Commentariosa   13 years ago

        Plus Manning face

  137. Barack Obama, to his wife   13 years ago

    DA WAY U SHAKE IT

    I CANT BELIEVE IT, I AINT NEVA SEEN AN ASS LIE KTHAT

    THE WAY U MOV IT U MAKE MY PEEPEE GO DOING DOING DOING

    1. Barack Obama, to H&R   13 years ago

      Who the fuck am I kidding, guys? Bitch looks like a solar system. I gotta get the fuck out of this marriage, and right now. There's babes to knock up, pot to smoke, and wiggers to put down in spontaneous rap competitions. Fuck this politics shit, I'M DONE!

  138. Res Publica Americana   13 years ago

    OT: http://static.fjcdn.com/pictur.....140729.jpg

    Nostalgia!

  139. Res Publica Americana   13 years ago

    http://bbsimg.ngfiles.com/1/22.....ec48ba.jpg

    Lol?

    1. sloopyinca   13 years ago

      But cops are all about fairness and due process. Right? RIGHT?

  140. El Commentariosa   13 years ago

    Buckle up, it's TEBOW TIME

  141. sloopyinca   13 years ago

    Let's go Stil-lers! (da-da-da-da----da-duh)
    Let's go Stil-lers! (da-da-da-da----da-duh)

    1. sloopyinca   13 years ago

      Steelers 3-0 Tebows

      That might just be enough to win.

      1. jacob   13 years ago

        Fuck that. GO BRONCOS

        (Genuflects, places forehead on fist)

        1. sloopyinca   13 years ago

          Pittsburgh's D is just too good against the run.

    2. sloopyinca   13 years ago

      Jesus Christ. Tebow missed his receiver by 5 yards on a simple hitch.

      1. jacob   13 years ago

        Yeah, that was a horrible throw.

        1. sloopyinca   13 years ago

          Aw, come on!!!!!! No defensive holding there? Incidental tripping? If you trip a receiver, you trip him. Period.

          Steelers 6-0 Tebows. This game is a blowout.

          1. Almanian   13 years ago

            I should have known it - you're fokin' Yinzer.

            Yinzer [more execrable than] Tebow

            1. sloopyinca   13 years ago

              You know me better than that. Hell, I grew up with Ben-gals season tickets. I just hate them. Been a Steelers fan my whole life.

    3. PantsFan   13 years ago

      I hate the Stillers. Including Ben.

      1. Fatty Bolger   13 years ago

        Come on, his dad invented Festivus. That's awesome.

      2. juris imprudent   13 years ago

        Pittsburgh could win this game with Ben Stiller at QB.

        1. juris imprudent   13 years ago

          HFS - I strayed away from the game only to find that the Steelers appear to have Jerry Stiller at QB.

  142. Parker L   13 years ago

    FUCK FOOTBALL? Our nation is at a crossroads, OBAMA'S RELECtION is inDOUBT and you are talkin bout hand-egg?

    /Stop Sprawl

    1. Mr. FIFY   13 years ago

      "Obama's reelection is in doubt"

      You say that as if it's a bad thing.

    2. sloopyinca   13 years ago

      Take note: ^^This^^ is the way to troll. Random ALL CAPS, poor grammar, Obama, misuse of shift key, misspellings and insulting football.

      Jesus, this is a work of art.

      1. PantsFan   13 years ago

        thank you.

        1. Mr. FIFY   13 years ago

          That was you, Pants?

          Damn.

          1. Mr. FIFY   13 years ago

            The question mark after "fuck football" should've been a giveaway...

            1. PantsFan   13 years ago

              I thought there were some other subtle clues?
              Oh well.

              1. Mr. FIFY   13 years ago

                I am not on my game today. And I'm out of Jagermeister.

                1. Almanian   13 years ago

                  FIFY - I have an almost-full bottle and two shot glasses. C'mon over - games on, man.

                  1. Mr. FIFY   13 years ago

                    Thanks for the invite, but I'd imagine quite the road trip would be ahead of me...

                    1. Almanian   13 years ago

                      Hello - TRANSPORTER ROOM!

                      Mr. Scott!

                      /Trek dork

                    2. Mr. FIFY   13 years ago

                      We'd probably have transporters by now if not for liberals, social conservatives, and Paulie Krugnuts.

                    3. sloopyinca   13 years ago

                      Question: if you could be transported right this minute, where would you go?

                    4. Mr. FIFY   13 years ago

                      New Zealand.

      2. Tulpa   13 years ago

        Nah. That shit makes people scroll past you. You have to lure people into taking you seriously to be an elite troll.

        1. sloopyinca   13 years ago

          On a weekday, I would agree. But on the weekend? During playoff football? I think it's more about persistently posting low-hanging fruit.

      3. Ted S.   13 years ago

        Parker L can't lose.

    3. Master of Magicka AuH20   13 years ago

      Fuck football? Well, Pantsfan, I can see you don't want cheering up. C'mon H&R, let's get us a lane.

  143. Almanian   13 years ago

    HOW CAN YOU PEOPLE TALK ABOUT TEAM RED BULLSHIT WHEN THE LIONS ARE IN THEIR FIRST PLAYOFF GAME SINCE 1999????!!!! PRIORITIES, PEOPLE!!!

    Oh, wait - that was last-night's tweet. They lost.

    As you were.

    1. sloopyinca   13 years ago

      We all found out a law of physics from that game: what happens when an immovable object meets an irresistable force very little resistance.

      1. Almanian   13 years ago

        That which is foreseeable is....probably going to happen.

        Or something.

        /modified RC Dean Iron Law

        1. juris imprudent   13 years ago

          /modified RC Dean Iron Law

          If it is modifiable it is more like a Bronze Law than an Iron one.

          1. Almanian   13 years ago

            Juros - RC Dean's laws are Iron. The fact that I modified it - yeah, that took some brass....OH! I'll be here all week! Try the chicken fingers!

            1. Announcer   13 years ago

              And now, the comedic stylings of... Paul Krugman! Give it up for Paul!

              1. Audience   13 years ago

                *crickets*

          2. Mr. FIFY   13 years ago

            Aluminum Law?

            1. sloopyinca   13 years ago

              Aluminum Law?

              [golf clap]

            2. Almanian   13 years ago

              AL Law > LA Law

              1. Mr. FIFY   13 years ago

                Law & Order Law.

              2. El Commentariosa   13 years ago

                Law & Order: LA > LA Law

        2. sloopyinca   13 years ago

          You got that right. The Saints are just unbelievable right now. I feel bad for the Lions. That's a tough way to end one hell of a season.

          1. Mr. FIFY   13 years ago

            Always been a Saints fan, even when they sucked.

            But being a lifelong Chiefs fan, I have a soft spot for teams that suck.

          2. Ted S.   13 years ago

            I thought Payton and Brees were being pricks throwing the ball up 17 with about 3 minutes left.

            Of course, they kept throwing up big in week 16 to get the yardage record then, and kept throwing in week 17 to get the 46th TD and pass Aaron Rodgers, who threw his 45 TDs in only 15 games.

  144. sloopyinca   13 years ago

    Those of you in the Bowl Pick-em (why aren't you in there, Pants Fan?) take note: The lovely Banjos is about to win the whole damn thing.

    Three people still have the chance to overtake her and three more can tie her.

    1. PantsFan   13 years ago

      I am in there. I'm The Art History Majors.
      At least I'm not last.

      1. sloopyinca   13 years ago

        I should have notice your manager's name.

      2. Mr. FIFY   13 years ago

        "three more can tie her"

        That triggered my dirty ol' man reflex...

        1. sloopyinca   13 years ago

          I should have said "I can tie her." The other two don't matter.

    2. Almanian   13 years ago

      Lovely Banjos, "Beloved Commenter...whomever", Everyone Loves Lucy (Steigerwald)....the chicks get all the love at H&R.

      Rightfully so.

      1. Tulpa   13 years ago

        Wait, Banjos is female?

        That makes the "Tulpy Poo" business a bit less creepy at least.

  145. PantsFan   13 years ago

    TD Tebows!

    1. Almanian   13 years ago

      *Tebows*

    2. sloopyinca   13 years ago

      Aw, fuck. That was a nice pass. The one before it was just garbage.

  146. Almanian   13 years ago

    Even Santa Tebows.

    https://twitter.com/#!/joelkimball/status/148187496939921408/photo/1

  147. sloopyinca   13 years ago

    Aw, what the fuck? No way can they overturn that call. Pittsburgh is getting fucked.

    1. Almanian   13 years ago

      ^^this^^

      God, why do you hate The Yinzers?

      GOD IS IN THE POCKET OF BIG TEBOW!

  148. Almanian   13 years ago

    CONTROL OF THE BALL?! CONTROL OF THE BALL?! THIS WHOLE GAME IS OUT OF CONTROL!

    /paraphrase of whatever that movie was

    1. sloopyinca   13 years ago

      /paraphrase of whatever that movie was

      "Victory"?

  149. Almanian   13 years ago

    That chick in the Sprint commercial? I want to think she's cute, but right at the end?

    Joker-from-Batman smile. Ruins is every time...

  150. F Hart   13 years ago

    RuPaul not Ron Paul

    How do you feel about the printing of fiat money?

    "Fiat? I do love that new J-LO car! I do love that."

    Where do you stand on the merits of lowering the marginal tax rate to boost growth?

    "I usually stand on six-inch platforms. It's actually not as tall as it looks."

    Who is more fabulous? The economist John Maynard Keynes or Frederich Hayek?

    "You better work!"

    What does that mean?

    "That's drag for no comment," a camera guy said.

    Any predictions for the New Hampshire primaries or the general election?

    "I'm not really a psychic...I'm more of a psycho, really."

    We talked about the possibility of him endorsing a candidate.

    "Well I do have a line of shoes coming out if that's what you mean," he says. "They're called Iron Fist shoes and the platform is amazing."

    I also listed the names of candidates and asked RuPaul to say what first popped into his head.

    Ron Paul

    "Hotness!"

    Rick Perry

    "Feeeeeverrrrr!"

    Newt Gingrich

    "Uh-huh! That's right!"

    http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ti.....41848.html

  151. jacob   13 years ago

    7-6, what!? And the Broncos are driving.

    Nice challenge there Pittsburgh coach. Changed a 20 yard pass to a 50 yard pass.

    1. jacob   13 years ago

      58-yrd pass, Tebow's longest ever.....

  152. sloopyinca   13 years ago

    Jesus, is Ike Taylor high or something? That's twice he got burned for a huge play.

    I'm officially getting nervous.

  153. jacob   13 years ago

    BOOM!

    Tebow just lost his virginity

    1. sloopyinca   13 years ago

      Tebow just lost his virginity

      Fuck.

  154. sloopyinca   13 years ago

    Pittsburgh better score here. The Tebows get the ball to start the 3rd.

  155. sloopyinca   13 years ago

    Oh, no. No, nononononono.

    1. PantsFan   13 years ago

      Uh oh indeed.

      1. sloopyinca   13 years ago

        That's roughing the passer? That?

        Come the fuck on!

        1. db   13 years ago

          Yah, after whatshisname cranked on Ben's ankle after he was down?

    2. Xenocles   13 years ago

      w00t

  156. Tulpa   13 years ago

    Uh yeah, Simms, if life ran at slow-mo speed then Harrison would have had time to pull up before hitting TT. What a terrible call.

    1. sloopyinca   13 years ago

      The pussification of the NFL continues apace.

      1. Almanian   13 years ago

        PUT A SKIRT ON 'EM!

        1. Tulpa   13 years ago

          Or in Tebow's case, crocs.

          1. Almanian   13 years ago

            Wow

    2. Almanian   13 years ago

      lulz

    3. sloopyinca   13 years ago

      On Roethlisberger's INT, the guy launched himself at him after the pass and 3 Tebows hit him after release. I didn't bitch when they didn't throw a flag on that. That's football. But the one on Harrison was just total fucking bullshit.

  157. sloopyinca   13 years ago

    Nice play by Gay to save a TD there.

    1. Tulpa   13 years ago

      Gay jumps Tebow again!

      1. Xenocles   13 years ago

        I knew Tebow was a homophobe!

        1. Mr. FIFY   13 years ago

          Was Santorum on the field after?

  158. Tulpa   13 years ago

    They need to put Charlie Batch in. I know Big Ben has his tough guy image to uphold, but he's hurting the team now.

    1. Almanian   13 years ago

      I like that Batch got a second life in Picksssboog after being forced to endure bad teams in Detroit. Good man - glad to see him have success.

      I'm w/Tulpa - put 'im in...

    2. sloopyinca   13 years ago

      ^^This.^^ He's a statue back there. His mechanics are all fucked up. No way they can win with him like this.

      1. Brady Quinn   13 years ago

        Put the backups in!

      2. juris imprudent   13 years ago

        Damn this is where I shoulda dumped the Jerry Stiller comment.

  159. Almanian   13 years ago

    "Roethlisberger's taking a pounding..."

    Yeah - IN HIS SANTORUM, VIA TEBOW.

    #Ow

    1. Episiarch   13 years ago

      The only thing worse than finding myself rooting for the Steelers is HAVING THEM FUCKING GETTING THEIR ASSES KICKED.

  160. PantsFan   13 years ago

    Another pick!

    1. PantsFan   13 years ago

      Called back

  161. PantsFan   13 years ago

    Why are they letting Rob Schneider back on TV?

    1. Almanian   13 years ago

      Roooooooooooooooooob.

      The Robinator?
      Robalong Cassidy.

      Roooooooooooooooooooob....

  162. Almanian   13 years ago

    Why do I keep thinking Big Ben went to Findlay U?

    Miami, Miami, Miami, Miami....

  163. sloopyinca   13 years ago

    Jesus Christ! Roughing the passer by Harrison, but a helmet-to-helmet hit where the d-back leaves his feet is ok? Then no block in the back on that return?

    I don't want to start bitching, but I'm not gonna be able to hold out much longer.

    1. Xenocles   13 years ago

      You've been bitching for most of the quarter now, guy.

      1. Almanian   13 years ago

        Don't call him Guy, Pal!

        1. Mr. FIFY   13 years ago

          Don't call him Pal, Chum!

          New meme in the making? /ponder

      2. sloopyinca   13 years ago

        I don't hear anybody disagreeing with the points I'm making.

    2. Episiarch   13 years ago

      Stop bitching. All I can say is that at least if Denver gets through this game, the Patriots will eat them alive next weekend.

      1. Tulpa   13 years ago

        Tebow would pick apart the Pats defense like a plastic rosary.

        1. El Commentariosa   13 years ago

          See the game a few weeks ago.

          1. Episiarch   13 years ago

            Ahem.

          2. Tulpa   13 years ago

            Elway has since taught him how to pull the trigger on Gay.

  164. Almanian   13 years ago

    Jesus. Fucking. Christ.

    Seriously? SERIOUSLY?

    I HAVE MONEY ON THIS GAME GODDAMNIT!!!

  165. Tulpa   13 years ago

    Quit picking on Gay, Tebow!

    1. Almanian   13 years ago

      Homophobic AND RAAAAAAAAAAAACIST!

      Deplorable.

  166. jacob   13 years ago

    McGahee for a first down.

    When did the Broncos become the Green Bay Packers?

  167. Almanian   13 years ago

    CHARLIE BATCH!

    CHARLIE BATCH!

    CHARLIE BATCH!

    CHARLIE BATCH!

    *repeats*

  168. Almanian   13 years ago

    In Calvin Johnson's nightmares from hell, Tebow is his QB

  169. Almanian   13 years ago

    NICE HANDS, ALICE!

    /almanian's dad when he dropped a pass in his yute

    1. El Commentariosa   13 years ago

      If you can touch it, you can catch it.

      1. Almanian   13 years ago

        My dad subscribed to that philosophy.

        I use it on my son now - always good for a sheepish grin 🙂

  170. El Commentariosa   13 years ago

    Which 2 days do you pick?
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/hea.....y-MPs.html

    1. Almanian   13 years ago

      So "dry" gin two days of the week, my usual Tanqueray the rest of the time.

      Got it!

    2. sloopyinca   13 years ago

      Drinkers should have two 'dry' days a week, say MPs

      What is this I don't even

      1. Mr. FIFY   13 years ago

        Gin tastes like Lectric-Shave, minus the menthol. Pass.

  171. Almanian   13 years ago

    Seeing how the Tebows "backed into" the playoffs, maybe that's where their beef with Teh Gay comes from?

    Just a thought...

  172. sloopyinca   13 years ago

    Steelers need a TD here.

    1. PantsFan   13 years ago

      That's a shame.

  173. jacob   13 years ago

    Hee hee

    1. sloopyinca   13 years ago

      You're really enjoying this, aren't you?

      I would be too.

      1. Xenocles   13 years ago

        I hate to pile on, but I certainly am.

      2. jacob   13 years ago

        Well, full disclosure

        I'm from Ohio, and I'm a Bengals fan, so the Steelers are a sworn enemy. But, I do like Tebow too.

        Nothing personal

        1. sloopyinca   13 years ago

          Where are you from, jacob?

          1. jacob   13 years ago

            Born in Cincy, grew up in Dayton

            1. sloopyinca   13 years ago

              Where, dude, where?

              1. jacob   13 years ago

                Where in Cincy? Don't know, was 3 when we left

                I grew up in Butler township, near Vandalia.

                You know the area?

            2. sloopyinca   13 years ago

              Springboro and Carlisle representin'!

              1. jacob   13 years ago

                Oh hell no! I know exactly where Springboro is.

                The first house I ever bought was in Oakwood. I've since moved to St Louis

  174. Snowbee   13 years ago

    I lol'd at the Chevy Volt with the Ron Paul stickers.

  175. Almanian   13 years ago

    So The Twitterz is saying that the officials names in the Tebow/Yinzers game are: [wait for it]

    Matthew

    Mark

    Luke

    John

    Srsly? SRSLY!??!

    1. Tulpa   13 years ago

      Here's the list of officials. They're lying.

  176. Res Publica Americana   13 years ago

    Sweet baby Jesus, Mary, and Joseph, God Almighty, Yahweh, Lord of Heaven and Earth. I just watched 'The Ides of March' and I want to kill myself with a dull razor. Such a cacophony of horseshit. I should go back to football.

    1. jacob   13 years ago

      So, it's not worth seeing? Looked kind of cool, or so I thought....

      1. Res Publica Americana   13 years ago

        When I'm in my sociopolitically enraged mode, advocacy of retarded shit in movies puts me off, and I can't enjoy myself, like in Oliver Stone's movies, or 'The Ides of March'. So much political dumbfuckery in one movie HAS to be a feat in cinema history.

        1. Mr. FIFY   13 years ago

          Bet Team Blue will love it, then...

  177. Tulpa   13 years ago

    If you told me this morning that the most enjoyable TV I'd watch today would be the GOP debate, I would have dumped santorum on your face.

    1. sloopyinca   13 years ago

      God knows you've got enough stored up to spray the whole blog.
      [scurries back into hole]

    2. Res Publica Americana   13 years ago

      Dud, I puked.

      1. Res Publica Americana   13 years ago

        And by "dud", I meant "dude", but you get the picture.

    3. Amakudari   13 years ago

      Where did you get santorum?

      I admit, if pressed to find it, I'm not sure where I'd look.

  178. sloopyinca   13 years ago

    CBS just made the claim "most watched television network in the world."

    That can't be right, can it? Is there not a state-run network in China? Or the BBC, which is all over the world?

    I call bullshit.

    1. Res Publica Americana   13 years ago

      It might well be. It's not like quality genuinely determines viewership when it comes to news and reportage. The BBC blows pretty badly, and it's very widespread.

    2. PantsFan   13 years ago

      Their programs go out all around the world, and are somehow Top 10 shows in any country they air.
      So if you define viewing their network as watching shows their network produces, then it's likely to be true.

      1. sloopyinca   13 years ago

        If the play was whistled dead, the play can't be challenged.

        1. sloopyinca   13 years ago

          Is Simms retarded? The whistle blew well before the guy recovered the ball.

          If this gets overturned, I'm gonna have to call "fix."

          1. Tulpa   13 years ago

            Dumervil was sitting on the ball when the whistle blew... it's not like the Steelers would have recovered if not for the whistle.

            1. sloopyinca   13 years ago

              When the whistle blows for incomplete, the ball is dead. Period. Why Simms and Nantz keep running their pieholes is beyond me.

              1. Tulpa   13 years ago

                Not if it's immediately recovered by the defense.

              2. Tulpa   13 years ago

                They've reversed incomplete pass calls to catch + fumble before, even when the whistle blew.

          2. Tulpa   13 years ago

            Philip Rivers, thou art avenged.

  179. sloopyinca   13 years ago

    Nantz needs to go sit in Butler Cabin until April.

    And Simms needs to eat a bullet.

    1. El Commentariosa   13 years ago

      Isn't the Australian Open coming up first?
      He butchers that too, right?

      1. sloopyinca   13 years ago

        Jesus, does he? well, it's only on network on tape delay. I'll have watched it on the internet by then.

        1. El Commentariosa   13 years ago

          Sorry, It's Dick Enberg for Tennis.

          1. Ted S.   13 years ago

            I think Enberg has actually retired from doing tennis.

            Unfortunately, ESPN gives us Pat McEnroe, who is incredibly biased. For years when he was the captain of the Davis Cup team he had to suck up to the American players, and would never say anything bad about Roddick no matter how much of a prick Roddick was being on court. (Roddick has been almost as bad as Serena Williams at times.)

            That, and they seem to have a bias against Federer for some reason. (I'd guess it's because the all expected Roddick to be the Next Big Thing after Sampras, and from 2004 on, Federer crushed Roddick over and over.)

    2. Tulpa   13 years ago

      Nah, too good for Simms. He needs to be locked in Big Ben's VIP room on the South Side.

      1. jacob   13 years ago

        Hate Simms

  180. jacob   13 years ago

    OK Steelers backers - no fuckining whining about the officiating. Denver totally got screwed by the incorrect call on that lateral pass.

    1. Tulpa   13 years ago

      It's payback for the Hochuli incident.

      1. jacob   13 years ago

        ?

        1. juris imprudent   13 years ago

          Hochuli v. - to blow a call in spectacular, game-costing fashion. ex. Ed hochuli'ed the Chargers.

  181. Tulpa   13 years ago

    If I had a mini-Ditka yelling at me 24/7 my life would be a lot better.

    1. Master of Magicka AuH20   13 years ago

      Who would win in a fight Ditka, or a hurricane?

      1. sloopyinca   13 years ago

        Chuck Norris would.

        1. Last Son of Krypton AuH20   13 years ago

          WRONG! Trick question!

          The Hurricane's name is Ditka!

      2. CE   13 years ago

        What if the hurricane hit Denver in the 4th quarter though?

  182. sloopyinca   13 years ago

    Oh. My. God. How many times is he gonna get burned today?

  183. Tulpa   13 years ago

    Tebow thought if he squatted at the line of scrimmage long enough, no one would notice he had the ball.

  184. sloopyinca   13 years ago

    What are these people booing? are they retarded?

  185. sloopyinca   13 years ago

    Ike Taylor needs to just retire already. When you get picked apart like this by Tim Fucking Tebow, maybe it's time to hang em up.

    1. PantsFan   13 years ago

      That's a key turnover

  186. sloopyinca   13 years ago

    Fumble! Staalers ball! Steelers ball!

    1. PantsFan   13 years ago

      I'm shocked if that gets overturned

  187. sloopyinca   13 years ago

    Huuuuge 2nd down yardage.

    1. Episiarch   13 years ago

      TOUCHDOWN STEELERS ALL TIED UP

      1. sloopyinca   13 years ago

        Yesssssssssss!

      2. Tulpa   13 years ago

        They're only setting up another miraculous Tebow comeback.

        1. sloopyinca   13 years ago

          I don't think so.

          1. Episiarch   13 years ago

            Fucking. Overtime. Steelers blew it.

            1. Tulpa   13 years ago

              The likelihood of the Broncos returning a missed FG for a touchdown is much less than the likelihood of their recovering Ben's fumble for a TD on that last play.

              They shoulda kicked the FG.

  188. PantsFan   13 years ago

    Overtime!

  189. juris imprudent   13 years ago

    I don't like the Broncos, but that was good defense at the end.

  190. Tulpa   13 years ago

    The Broncos do everything else like it's a college game, and then they elect to receive? Someone's screwed up in the head.

    1. CE   13 years ago

      Looks like it worked out for them.

      1. Tulpa   13 years ago

        Yeah, well, they're all going to die someday anyway.

        1. rather   13 years ago

          Holy shit, libertarians are vanpires?

  191. sloopyinca   13 years ago

    Oh, no.

  192. Xenocles   13 years ago

    Tebow!

  193. Tulpa   13 years ago

    Well that didn't take long.

  194. jacob   13 years ago

    BOOM!

    1. jacob   13 years ago

      Folks are cheering in Foxboro (sp) right about now

      1. John 3:16   13 years ago

        They shouldn't taunt the Almighty like that. Didn't that 80-yard pass give Tebow 3:16 for the game?

  195. Tulpa   13 years ago

    Worst. Overtime. Ever.

  196. PantsFan   13 years ago

    TEBOW MAGIC

    1. Arthur C Clarke   13 years ago

      Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.

  197. Episiarch   13 years ago

    FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCCCCCCKKKKKKKKK

  198. sloopyinca   13 years ago

    Fuck. Ike Taylor burned again. He cost the Steelers that game.

    1. Tebow on a Triscuit   13 years ago

      GO DONCS!!!!!!!!!!11!!!!1ONE

  199. SIV   13 years ago

    Where's your Darwin now Pittsburgh?

  200. Tulpa   13 years ago

    Wow. How long has it been since every Wild Card team lost in the first round?

    1. juris imprudent   13 years ago

      I sure didn't figure Denver had a win in 'em, Giants either.

  201. El Commentariosa   13 years ago

    That's how God feels when he throws a winning TD in OT.

  202. AA   13 years ago

    TEBOW/PAUL 2012

    1. Amakudari   13 years ago

      http://www.imagecpr.com/imagec...../Tebow.jpg

      1. AA   13 years ago

        +1 TEBOW OT TD for you.

  203. db   13 years ago

    Watching the Steelers lose to the Broncos in the Cleveland airport is, shall we say, a suboptimal experience.

  204. Ted S.   13 years ago

    What the hell are you doing at the Cleveland airport? Doesn't everybody want to get the hell out of Cleveland?

    1. db   13 years ago

      On y way to green bay of all places. And delated by amosy 3 hours now. Need more beer but all the bars are closed.

      1. Ted S.   13 years ago

        Ah, so you're going to God's country. 🙂

        1. db   13 years ago

          God loves cheese...

          1. Ted S.   13 years ago

            So does Santa Claus

  205. CE   13 years ago

    You sure this is only the 15th debate? I heard that Gary Johnson was excluded from 12 of the 14 debates, and that was about 4 debates ago.

  206. Joe M   13 years ago

    The tone of coverage for Ron Paul is changing: Romney Is the Main Target in a Caustic G.O.P. Debate

    ...the possibility that an anti-Romney candidate could emerge supreme to split the delegate field with Ron Paul, who is viewed as having a distinct but sizable following.

    It's sizable now.

Please log in to post comments

Mute this user?

  • Mute User
  • Cancel

Ban this user?

  • Ban User
  • Cancel

Un-ban this user?

  • Un-ban User
  • Cancel

Nuke this user?

  • Nuke User
  • Cancel

Un-nuke this user?

  • Un-nuke User
  • Cancel

Flag this comment?

  • Flag Comment
  • Cancel

Un-flag this comment?

  • Un-flag Comment
  • Cancel

Latest

Brickbat: Parking Violation

Charles Oliver | 5.23.2025 4:00 AM

Is Donald Trump To Blame for a COVID Lab Leak?

Christian Britschgi | 5.22.2025 5:00 PM

A Top Antitrust Enforcer Is Open To Prosecuting People Who Disagree With Him

Jack Nicastro | 5.22.2025 4:45 PM

Republicans Just Killed California's E.V. Mandate. Will They Regret It?

Jeff Luse | 5.22.2025 4:00 PM

Trump's Prescription Price Controls Would Lead to Fewer New Drugs

Joe Lancaster | 5.22.2025 12:55 PM

Recommended

  • About
  • Browse Topics
  • Events
  • Staff
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Media
  • Shop
  • Amazon
Reason Facebook@reason on XReason InstagramReason TikTokReason YoutubeApple PodcastsReason on FlipboardReason RSS

© 2024 Reason Foundation | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

r

Do you care about free minds and free markets? Sign up to get the biggest stories from Reason in your inbox every afternoon.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

This modal will close in 10

Reason Plus

Special Offer!

  • Full digital edition access
  • No ads
  • Commenting privileges

Just $25 per year

Join Today!