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.
Sadly, as the sound reproduction systems get better, my ears just get worse. :-)
“slowly I turn, step by step, inch by inch, mile by mile”...
Where in the world have I read/seen that?! You opened up a dusty vault in my head... now I am trying to find it >.<
Warning, Marcella, this is OT (for what it's worth). I look back at the census from 1860s, 1870s, etc. and find that my ancestor's lived into their 70s, 80s, and 90s (pre-food nazi's, pre-pharmacueticals). Their existence was meager (Claiborne and Hancock Counties in TN) so they would eat almost the entire hog or cow, lard, salt, etc., and their lifespans were just as long as our's except we take 5 pills a day and are told to avoid this fat, that fat, nuts, eggs, sunshine. No wait! We were wrong. Nuts are okay. Eggs are okay. Sunshine is okay (but they have to grimace when saying that). We're reaping the repercussions of a lack of Vit D from their advice. Some doctors grudgingly say take Vit D supplements, but still use sunscreen when outdoors. It can be confusing. Life's too short. I'm not convinced we're lengthening our livespan. What about a quality of life? I read a book last year by a M.D. whose premise was about how the sales of diabetes meds, cholesterol meds, and blood pressure meds have skyrocketed after they moved the threshold #s. Who lowered them? The research is funded by pharmaceutical companies. By lowering the target numbers, BAM! You now have 10,000,000 new patients requiring your meds. If I can remember the author's name, I'll freepmail you.
Also, this much downplayed article from earlier this week which has been re-written by the health police over here, to emphasize the olive oil/sunflower oil aspects, but read carefully:
"People who ate the most fried food daily (250 grams, on average) were no more likely to develop heart disease during the study than those who ate the least amount (47 grams, on average). The researchers also found no link between how much fried food people ate and their chances of dying during the study, of any cause. These results remained the same after researchers accounted for several factors that can affect a persons risk of heart disease, including their age, how much they exercised, whether they smoked, and whether they had high blood pressure.
More than 6 in 10 people in the study used olive oil for frying, with the rest using sunflower oil or another type of vegetable oil. The researchers found no difference between the oils in peoples risk of developing heart disease or dying.
This was a large and well-conducted study (following 40,000+ men and women aged 29-69 for 12 years), (WebMD then goes on to editorialize the article:) but we need to be cautious about its findings for a few reasons.
First, the researchers used questionnaires to assess peoples diets. This isnt the most reliable approach, as some people may have misrepresented what they ate - particularly if they thought fried food would be viewed as unhealthy. Also, the researchers asked people about their diets only at the start of the study, so they didnt take into account any changes to eating habits that happened over time. Most importantly, we cant be certain that these findings apply to people outside of Spain, where a Mediterranean-style diet is common. This features plenty of fruit and vegetables, not too much red or processed meat, and olive oil instead of fats such as butter, margarine, and lard. So the fried food people ate in the study - for example, lots of fish - was different to the fried food consumed in many other countries. And even if the oils used were similar, the types of frying (for example, deep frying versus pan frying) might have produced different results." http://www.webmd.boots.com/heart-disease/news/20120126/no-link-between-heart-disease-and-foods-fried-in-olive-oil
Long story short IMO, they really aren't sure why the folks in this study aren't all dying at early ages from fried foods. They hypothesize this and that, but they really distrust they're own #s. Sort of like the global warming (or lack of) facts. The results aren't what was expected.
“Slowly I turn” Reminds me of the old Abbott & Costello movie, Lost in a Haram. The looney guy would trip out when someone said, “Pocomoco.” Then he’d go into the routine and wind up strangling Costello. It was the funniest thing I ever watched. They don’t make comedy like that anymore.
Is it possible to ardently dislike Mitt Romney anymore than I do now? I’m attempting to be a Christian here, but it’s getting awfully hard. The man is dispicable.
I predict when the blood letting is all over, Romney will win the nomination and then kiss Obama’s butt all throughout the election. I predict our best hope is making sure the Senate goes Conservative and that we keep the house the same and work on getting shed of Boehner. It’s going to take decades of hard work on our parts.
That’s exactly what came to mind as Santorum was extolling the virtues of his saintly wife.
“Mommy, why’d you shack up with an abortion doctor 40 years older than you?”
Latest poll now shows Romney ahead (this poll had Gingrich ahead earlier).
There does appear to be a trend of Gingrich fading in FL, and I hope it reverses.
It is a university poll, but again, it had Gingrich leading earlier.
“With four days to go before the Sunshine State’s primary, a new poll indicates Mitt Romney has opened up a nine point lead over Newt Gingrich.
According to a Quinnipiac University survey released Friday morning, 38% of likely Florida Republican primary voters say they are backing the former Massachusetts governor for their party’s presidential nomination, with 29% supporting the former House speaker.
Follow the Ticker on Twitter: @politicalticker
The poll indicates 14% are backing Rep. Ron Paul of Texas, with 12% supporting former Sen. Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania.”
No, that was the number of votes he received in the SC, which I was revering to. :) (a STRONG Christian Conservative State.)
But his numbers haven’t been to good even in the polls after.
To make the statement that Newt Gingrich should drop out in comparison is really weak logic at best.
I also think Newt looked a bit tired...this stuff is grueling work for all our candidates under "alynski/obama/Romney/media" fire...and they're all going after him now.
If Romney gets the Primary there is no recovery from the trajectory we’re on nor will Republican Party survive the next four years as it continues to take on Democratic “likes”. We don’t have decades to clean up this mess....
Romney’s got the media and he’s got the money, we’ll be seeing exactly the same pairing up we just saw in the debate with the media, in this case CNN, hand delivering to Romney all he needs to come out smelling like a rose.
Any who cannot see this IS A WAR is totally out of the loop of reality...it is NOT a normal primary nor will the election be. I have no problem stating it’s a war between good and evil. The only nation stopping WW3 has been our nations willingness to step into those outbreaks and prevent or end them.....right now the world leaders are going along swiftly with no fear of our country whatsoever, nor respect.
If we do not get on top of things very soon all hell will surely break loose....if Obama or Romney win....we’re done as far as resisting the global push for world governance. So I’ll be hanging it up politically then if either wins this election and focus on self preservation and my families, for what is to come.
Does make wonder who had the other seats...hummmm.
I have on several other threads (but not this thread) indicated that Santorum's problem on this might just be semantic, that he may understand and agree with the correct concept, but that he may use the incorrect terminology.
You could even say the argument is circular on both sides - if there truly were no such thing as an absolute right, there would be no point in having the term absolute right. Why have a name for something that cant exist?
I was going to point that out to you about absolute rights. You've apparently given it more thought since our last conversation. And no, my side of the argument isn't circular. Something can be described as absolute, given a condition. For example, if the variable "x" is equal to "2", then the value of "2x" will always equal "4", given that value of "x".
But obviously that was not what Rick was talking about. He was correctly noting that NONE of our rights as expressed in the constitution are truly absolute, they all have boundaries.
We'll have to agree to disagree. Saying that there are "no absolute rights" in the Constitution or even outside the Consititution is at the very least, a miscommunication of some very fundamental concepts about liberty, freedom and our Constitution.
Your right to freely move your fist ends where my face begins.
Your example does best boil it down to the simple concept. One doesn't have the right to begin with, to move one's fist through another's face. It's one's right to move one's fist without impinging on somebodyelse's right, that is a right that is unalienable and "absolute".
You make me really miss President Reagan—more than should be normal or psychologically healthy. :(
I'm not so sure if we can get back the moral compass any time soon...
What I do know is that we NEED someone who will take hold of the wheel in Washington, can do that, wants to do that, and is willing to fight.....Newt is the only candidate remotely capable of carrying the flag for the true, original, historic America in this fundamental, existential "battle for national survival".
Newt stated...."The centerpiece of this campaign, I believe, is ...."American exceptionalism versus the radicalism of Saul Alinsky
.".....What we are going to argue is that American exceptionalism,.... the American Declaration of Independence,.... the American Constitution,... the American Federalist papers,.... the Founding Fathers of America,.... are the source from which we draw our understanding of America. .....Obama draws his from Saul Alinsky, radical left-wingers, and people who don't like the classical America."
If Romney wins the nomination and wins the Presidency, the US Republican Party will become just like Canadian Conservative Party. It will shove aside virtually all social conservative positions, it will embrace high taxation as a means to tackle the deficit, it will endorse “stimulus” spending and full-scale public/socialist health care. It may still be pro-Israel and pro-military, but it will otherwise be indistinguishable from the Dems in terms of issues like abortion, homosexual “marriage”, corporate subsidies. illegal immigration, entitlements and the general growth of government. Our Conservative Party is about a 5.5 on the liberal-conservative continuum, with the Liberal Party a 4.0 and the NDP a 3.0. Right now, your GOP House Caucus is about an 7.5 and the GOP Senate Caucus about a 6.5. The choice of your Presidential nominee will determine whether those numbers continue to slide toward liberalism or whether the GOP will become a conservative party.
It’s pretty sad that we’ve come to the moment when talking about sacred principles translates to the viewer as the speaker having a pious view of himself. I do think that talking about rape abortions, maybe .01% of abortions, was a mistake. Too bad I think that the other candidates are awful. Bob
Thank you for your service, Vet, but your view of Rick as trigger-happy is 180 degrees out of phase. It’s called “Peace through strength”. Bob
Right. There is no one out there ever who stands for principle. Well, let me tell you, all you can do is poke fun at the sweaters worn by a man whose solid principles wouldn’t register to you if they reached through the screen and grabbed you. Why? Because you have YOUR candidate, and you’re not listening. Bob
I’m not ready to fold my cards and surrender. I’m sorry but Newt’s moon colony plan has made him the object of ridicule on my local Scranton talk show for two days now. Rick didn’t put those words in his mouth. Bob
Interesting stats L.Harbour....thanks...and interesting post...If romeny gets it the social issues will simply slide into the liberal mode ..I believe that...it's not a big step toward that now.
Think it is a bold idea but then again people back in the 60’s had a vision and putting a man on the moon is when people laughed.
As was stated on here earlier, if people think that is a stupid idea then it shows how pathetic people have become in this country when they can’t envision a great feat.
Sadly the establishment, the MSM and some of talk radio who are looking at their own power, money etc are out to get Newt and as Jim R and nearly all have said.
It is is obvious the establishment want Romney and are out to get Newt .
Only a stupid person today can fall for the talking heads propaganda and the lefts attack of making fun of people.
Not saying you but obviously there are some right stupid people still going with the establishment and the MSM.
Look, even if I thought that Newt’s idea was great, which I don’t, I am disgusted by the fact that the derision of Newt is helping Romney. If Newt had talked about the value of continued space exploration, WITHOUT specifically talking about moon colonization, it could have been a plus. But he has left himself wide open. Cordially, Bob
Then that simply proves they have zip-zero understanding about it in the first place. They need to listen to those who know about NASA and as much why "space" remains a frontier. Russia, China and other nations have not lost sight by any means...and they continue to go forward with their programs to "arm" space. As for Moon colonies....it would be to "mine" the resources there for the most part...which all interested nations are investigating
You too Manc!
But do you miss Sandra Day O’Connor sitting up there and voting down the Reagan program time after time? He was warned about her too.
Still going? Long debate.
Got a point there!!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.