(01-19-2012 09:00 PM)aTxTIGER Wrote:  

(01-19-2012 08:58 PM)Ninerfan1 Wrote:  

(01-19-2012 08:53 PM)aTxTIGER Wrote:  Watching this debate just makes me sad. None of these jokers(Ron Paul excluded) have the depth of knowledge and emotional stability to stand toe to toe with Obama the October debates. He will rhetorically crush them. SMH. goddammit.

Newt would absolutely obliterate Obama in a debate. Of any of the candidates Newt has by far the most depth of knowledge. Newt's personal baggage is what kills him. But let's not kid ourselves. Newt would destroy Obama in a debate. It would be a massacre.

Mmmmm. Newt is the one person that could make Obama look Presidential.

Only if it was President of the Harvard Law Review. He'd make Obama look silly. He really would. Obama would have absolutely no chance.

Hopefully the fact check will kill Newt tonight even though the average voter will never seen it.

(01-19-2012 09:01 PM)aTxTIGER Wrote:  Why was Clinton impeached? For lying about boning a broad.

Lying under oath is a serious deal, especially when you're the president. Two ways for Clinton to deal with it: don't (your phrase) "bone the broad", or don't lie about it. But Clinton did both, and was rightly impeached for it.

Mitt did well there with the tax question but the follow up hurt him.

(01-19-2012 09:07 PM)Native Georgian Wrote:  

(01-19-2012 09:01 PM)aTxTIGER Wrote:  Why was Clinton impeached? For lying about boning a broad.

Lying under oath is a serious deal, especially when you're the president. Two ways for Clinton to deal with it: don't (your phrase) "bone the broad", or don't lie about it. But Clinton did both, and was rightly impeached for it.

I personally don't think perjury in a sexual harassment case rises to the level of high crimes and misdemeanors.

Haslam had no trouble getting elected in Tennessee and he refused to release. I fail to see this as a major issue.

I just noticed that on the important issue, neither Mitt nor Ron is wearing a flag pin.

Newt is wearing a pin but cannot tell what it is, maybe a tiffany’s pin.

I have no clue why people make such a big deal about tax returns for these guys. Why does it matter?

(01-19-2012 09:13 PM)Ninerfan1 Wrote:  I have no clue why people make such a big deal about tax returns for these guys. Why does it matter?

Yup.

Apple plants aren't in Japan and China because of the tax rate or regulations. They are in Japan and China because their suppliers are Chinese, South Korean, and Japanese.

(01-19-2012 09:09 PM)aTxTIGER Wrote:  I personally don't think perjury in a sexual harassment case rises to the level of high crimes and misdemeanors.

I respect your candor, but I personally think perjury about *Anything* should be an impeachable offense.

(01-19-2012 09:14 PM)Native Georgian Wrote:  

(01-19-2012 09:09 PM)aTxTIGER Wrote:  I personally don't think perjury in a sexual harassment case rises to the level of high crimes and misdemeanors.

I respect your candor, but I personally think perjury about *Anything* should be an impeachable offense.

It's illegal no doubt and we have a judicial system to deal with it. I just have a higher standard as to what meets high crimes and misdemeanors. Perjury in a civil case just doesn't meet that in my eyes.

SOPA question. How will Romney play both sides of this?

Finally SOPA. Ask Paul so he can make up for last 1/2 of last question.

yup, played both sides

(01-19-2012 09:16 PM)aTxTIGER Wrote:  SOPA question. How will Romney play both sides of this?

He's doing it.

(01-19-2012 09:16 PM)aTxTIGER Wrote:  

(01-19-2012 09:14 PM)Native Georgian Wrote:  I respect your candor, but I personally think perjury about *Anything* should be an impeachable offense.

It's illegal no doubt and we have a judicial system to deal with it. I just have a higher standard as to what meets high crimes and misdemeanors. Perjury in a civil case just doesn't meet that in my eyes.

The judicial system cannot be (and should not be) the proper forum to resolve disputes about presidential conduct, most especially so while that particular president is still in office.

Can't believe ole Frothy had the balls to backhandedly support SOPA.

Santorum goes idiot. I want to hear boo's. He just came out in support of SOPA, wants to restrict Internet.

Scumbag Frothy, Gingrich, and Romney:

Claim to support freedom when talking about SOPA.

All support the NDAA indefinite detention without trial or the right to a lawyer.