Skip to comments.Live Thread: Republican Presidential Debate in Jacksonville, FL on CNN 8 P.M. EST
Posted on 01/26/2012 3:56:03 PM PST by kristinn
Hosted by Wolf Blitzer at the University of North Florida in Jacksonville. Candidates: Newt Gingrich, Mitt Romney, Rick Santorum and Ron Paul.
Word is the audience will be "allowed" to participate.
Didn’t the Florida Tea Party endorse Newt??
“If Sarah endorsed Santorum, it could put him over the top.”
So you think Palin could pull the lower conservative (Sant.) vote getter across the line, but not the higher conservative vote getter. I(Gingrich)
That political math doesn’t make sense.
Disagree with you. My husband had laser surgery and it saved his life. Thank you NASA. If you want to sit home and take herbs and vitimans that is fine but for others that feel it is a life or death matter to have the cancer removed..I would prefer the laser surgery. You do know that many people have also had cataracts removed by laser? it is a marvelous medical advancement. End of topic
Am watching the re-run.
I don’t feel Romney has had THAT great of a night. He’s had a few good moments, and also some very prickish moments that were quite offensive. Santorum also really roughed him up on healthcare and he was unable to respond in any convincing way.
However, Newt has once again stayed calm and focused, with eloquent answers. He knows himself. At times it almost seemed as if Wolf Blitzer was “feeding” the questions into Mitt who had his rehearsed answers at the ready.
Santorum — just looks simply loud mouthed and far too lawyerlike. His constant attacking gave me a headache listening to him. He seems to have one volume, one monotonous level. He’s right about a lot ...but he almost kind of scares me.
The space and moon idea, although it seems a little nutty, shows me how Romney thinks and what he’s all about. He’s a money guy. He thinks in one dimension. Yes, our country has money problems ...but it also has a problem of the soul — of a lack of creativity, of innovation, of proper and hopeful goals. I remember our country at the time we went to the moon — I was only 5 years old ..but it allowed me to grow up fiercely proud of being an American. To hear Romney tromp all over it and say he’d fire any employee who would propose it almost makes me want to cry.
Lots of Americans had “silly” ideas ...but all incredible American innovations started out as dreams in one way or another ...I’ll stop now, but I feel Romney just has no soul.
These are the voyages of the Starship Gingrich. It’s mission to boldly go where no man has gone before ....
Romney's like .......
-the last stale donut
-a white crayon
-a sock with a hole
-the heel at the bottom of the loaf
-a fine pocketknife with a broken blade
-a wrench when you need a hammer
Santorum is not evil, but he is completely establishment and has never been anything but in all his history. The only reason he did well tonight was that he and Paul were actually the only ones allowed by the moderator to concentrate on issues.
The mod was too busy trying to feed Gingrich to Romney on a personal level to even let Newt speak about the issues for almost the entire first half of the debate, even though Gingrich did at one point say that he wanted to talk about the things that mattered and not about these personal “gotcha” points.
“Santorum just looks simply loud mouthed and far too lawyerlike. His constant attacking gave me a headache listening to him. He seems to have one volume, one monotonous level. Hes right about a lot ...but he almost kind of scares me...
...Lots of Americans had silly ideas ...but all incredible American innovations started out as dreams in one way or another ...Ill stop now, but I feel Romney just has no soul.”
Right on both counts.
Santorum has a political career still ahead of him...he's not going to take the risks Newt will to get things done in Washington....this is Newt's final opportunity so he can give it his all. Santorum will not do so without predetermining how it will affect his career. And he's a big government guy ta boot!
So you think you have an inalienable right to own any arm including a nuclear arm?
Do you think the Declaration of Indepence is part of Sacred Scripture?
It is the Declaration of Independence written by men who says we have the rights. But where in Sacred Scripture are these rights found?
Name me an “absolute right”.
You might want to define what YOU think “absolute” means, while you are at it.
“Oh dont kid yourself the Rep-E get it. They dont wont to lead they want to suckle at the trough of $$$ fed by their Dem Masters.”
Interesting that they didn’t seem to have a problem with McCain over Romney, even though McCain was a bit unhinged and had a reputation for going after all the pork, including Mitt’s Winter Olympics $$$. So I’m not sure if it’s about the money.
But establishment means established and McCain had lots of connections after serving in the Senate for eons and that’s probably why he made it though.
You are correct that Romney simply doesn’t connect. He is spending a tremendous amount of money to try to force people to support hims (forget liking him) and the entire Republican establishment is pulling out all the stops to kill Newt.
Being in S. Florida I can only tell you it soon gets transparent. People catch on to the prickish stuff. I thought he stepped into a heaping pile when he started talking about how proud he is of his Swiss bank accounts and now we know his blind trust claim is bogus. He is a rich, self-absorbed guy who is throwing a lot of money around and I think it could well backfire.
My gut tells me that we haven’t seen Newt’s best yet. He is gathering huge crowds and getting good local press. He is saving his money for the end. Judging by last week, he can take down the Massachusetts Moderate fast. He just needs to pour it on and counter this junk. I just don’t see Romney pulling 40% of the vote. We will see...
I guess that means that Santorum knows that Thomas Jefferson is also a subject to God.
We went to the moon already. I’m not sure it’s really the job of government to make moon colonies.
But you know, if you are going to suddenly decide that we should spend money we borrow from China on a space program, the best place to say that politically is in Florida, right before the Florida primary.
“I just dont see Romney pulling 40% of the vote. We will see...”
He doesn’t have to if Santorum takes a bite out of Newt.
There’s mega people who will not vote for Romney if he gets the Primary. I won’t either..never.
I get a kick out of people thinking not voting for Romeny would be a vote for obama....which is nonsense. I’d prefer Obama over Romney as at least we know the cards he’s playing...Romney is so full of decpetion even he doesn’t know more than what he’s been programmed to say and do...and that by those who pull his strings....and they have a diobolical agenda you’ll never see.
Newt’s answer on Palestinians ...a HOME RUN!!!
(sorry, watching the re-run).
Sometimes I do have to appreciate Paul’s answers. They’re quick and to the point ...a huge relief after some of Santorum’s and/or Romney’s rants.
You are saying that an “absolute right” is an absolute right, and defining an “absoute right” as a right that you have stripped down to the point where it is absolute.
So for example you say “if you have a right to own a gun, it’s an absolute right”. But a felon can’t own a gun. “Oh, well then the non-felon has the absolute right”. But you can’t own a gun if you are crazy, or if you have a restraining order on you. “Well yes, but they just didn’t have the absolute right to own a gun that the other people who DO have an absolute right has”.
So I guess you win. If you have an absolute right, it is absolute. So there are “absolute rights”, in the sense that until you reach the circumstance where your right to something ends, it appears to you at least to be “absolute”, by a bizarre definition of absolute that has no value.
Because if I, as a non-felon, non-crazy person, have an “absolute right” to own a gun, and then I do something stupid with the gun, I could lose the “absolute right” to own that gun. And if the right can be taken away from ANYBODY due to a change in circumstance, then that right is not “absolute” by the rational definition of that term.
You should also look up the word “inalienable”. It doesn’t mean what you seem to think it means.
I am glad I have a witness. And from TEXAS no less! ;-)