CNN Mesa, Arizona GOP pres. primary debate **live commentary thread**

[Vosem]

If I ever meet Santorum, I want to punch him with my boney, weak, pathetic hands in his face. He wants to take away food stamps from the poor (which, by the way, should be reformed or left to the states) but will not cut defense spending at all??

Yes, Santorum does have an annoying way of winning me over during debates. I think I would be able to swing around to support him by the time fall and endgame come along (though I might have to compensate by voting for Sherrod or something).

[Vosem]

Has George Bush been mentioned by name in any of these debates?

Now he has.

[Vosem]

Rick throw in the "let Detroit go backrupt" line! Do it, do it now!

Because, in Santorumland (or a certain part of Andy Dick), auto workers are lazy and don't deserve a bailout, but the Banks and Israel does.

Israel sells us military equipment nowadays, dude.

[Vosem]

Rick throw in the "let Detroit go backrupt" line! Do it, do it now!

Because, in Santorumland (or a certain part of Andy Dick), auto workers are lazy and don't deserve a bailout, but the Banks and Israel does.

Israel sells us military equipment nowadays, dude.

Yes, they do. We buy their equipment that we could (and should) build in order to fund them. T

But my point is that we aren't 'bailing Israel out'. Israel is a developed, secular First World nation with close historic ties to the US, whose economy is doing way better and whose military is much more efficient. What point are you trying to make by saying 'we shouldn't bail Israel out?' If you're saying we shouldn't engage in commerce with them, then a) that's absurd and b) you just contradicted yourself. If you're saying we shouldn't support them diplomatically, then I'd like to remind you the alternative (Hamas) is much worse.

[Vosem]

Rick throw in the "let Detroit go backrupt" line! Do it, do it now!

Because, in Santorumland (or a certain part of Andy Dick), auto workers are lazy and don't deserve a bailout, but the Banks and Israel does.

Israel sells us military equipment nowadays, dude.

Yes, they do. We buy their equipment that we could (and should) build in order to fund them. T

But my point is that we aren't 'bailing Israel out'. Israel is a developed, secular First World nation with close historic ties to the US, whose economy is doing way better and whose military is much more efficient. What point are you trying to make by saying 'we shouldn't bail Israel out?' If you're saying we shouldn't engage in commerce with them, then a) that's absurd and b) you just contradicted yourself. If you're saying we shouldn't support them diplomatically, then I'd like to remind you the alternative (Hamas) is much worse.

Israel is one of the biggest recipients of foreign aid.

Exactly. 9/11 happened because of our overkill regarding Israel. Im not saying they are bad; they are just controversial. If we over support them, then we end up alienating everyone else in the region.

9/11 happened because of the Gulf War; because we decided to save our ally Kuwait, during which time we put troops in Saudi Arabia, leading Islamic extremists to believe we were about to occupy the Two Holy Cities, a belief which didn't let up because we maintained force in the Persian Gulf (where our energy comes from). Israel had very little to do with it, except that it bombed Saddam's nuclear program in '81, so that Iraq did not nuclear weapons in '91.

I just want to note, on another topic, that the entire conversation about modern society disgusted me. I think our society of sexuality and contraception is a good thing, and would fight to defend it.

[Vosem]

Remember, everybody: it's ok when Libertarian Ron Paul brings up Christian beliefs. Rick Santorum? FASCIST!

I don't think it's OK when either of them does it

[Vosem]

Paul is about to showcase his insanity again when it comes to his time to talk about Iran. Good luck, Paul - you're going to need it.

Because invading a country over another false nuclear program is "insane".

How is it insane? Our energy comes from the Persian Gulf, and we need to maintain a level of control (or of our allies' control) there. That was the real reason we went to war in Iraq, and why I support a war in Iran. And why I supported the war in Iraq.

[Vosem]

Ron Paul's foreign policy stance is insane and is the number one issue (amongst many others) why he would NEVER be the GOP nominee. Never.

HOW is it insane? Stop repeating talking points and tell me what is "insane" about his position.

It's insane that he does not want to maintain American control of the Persian Gulf.

[Vosem]

Ron Paul's foreign policy stance is insane and is the number one issue (amongst many others) why he would NEVER be the GOP nominee. Never.

HOW is it insane? Stop repeating talking points and tell me what is "insane" about his position.

It's insane that he does not want to maintain American control of the Persian Gulf.

My quote is wrong, I said it IS insane to invade Iran. I said it was not. Why should America control the Persian Gulf? We have no territory there. Its none of our business.

Our oil comes from there and our economy depends on it. Therefore, it would be good not to lose it.

Or not?

That insane Ron Paul saying we need intelligence, declarations, and preparations to go to war.  

No. The insane Ron Paul saying we need to pull out of existing wars. Those things he's saying are fine.

I disagree with one thing Ron Paul says =/ I disagree with all of Ron Paul's positions

[Vosem]

Ron Paul's foreign policy stance is insane and is the number one issue (amongst many others) why he would NEVER be the GOP nominee. Never.

HOW is it insane? Stop repeating talking points and tell me what is "insane" about his position.

It's insane that he does not want to maintain American control of the Persian Gulf.

My quote is wrong, I said it IS insane to invade Iran. I said it was not. Why should America control the Persian Gulf? We have no territory there. Its none of our business.

Our oil comes from there and our economy depends on it. Therefore, it would be good not to lose it.

Or not?

That insane Ron Paul saying we need intelligence, declarations, and preparations to go to war.  

No. The insane Ron Paul saying we need to pull out of existing wars. Those things he's saying are fine.

I disagree with one thing Ron Paul says =/ I disagree with all of Ron Paul's positions

Yes, because oil is more important then human life. War for oil is disgusting.

Unfortunately, we need oil to keep our economy going. Without oil, we would enter a Depression and the lives that exist would be horribly miserable. War for oil is quite justified.

[Vosem]

Ron Paul's foreign policy stance is insane and is the number one issue (amongst many others) why he would NEVER be the GOP nominee. Never.

HOW is it insane? Stop repeating talking points and tell me what is "insane" about his position.

It's insane that he does not want to maintain American control of the Persian Gulf.

My quote is wrong, I said it IS insane to invade Iran. I said it was not. Why should America control the Persian Gulf? We have no territory there. Its none of our business.

Our oil comes from there and our economy depends on it. Therefore, it would be good not to lose it.

Or not?

That insane Ron Paul saying we need intelligence, declarations, and preparations to go to war.  

No. The insane Ron Paul saying we need to pull out of existing wars. Those things he's saying are fine.

I disagree with one thing Ron Paul says =/ I disagree with all of Ron Paul's positions

Yes, because oil is more important then human life. War for oil is disgusting.

Unfortunately, we need oil to keep our economy going. Without oil, we would enter a Depression and the lives that exist would be horribly miserable. War for oil is quite justified.

There is plenty of oil reserves in the US, and have less dependence on foreign oil.

It would be great if we did not depend on oil -- and we have the local reserves to do so -- but, unfortunately, politics says we are not drilling our own oil, and this is the sort of thing that takes years of development and cannot happen overnight.

In reply to sbane, of course you don't. But you do need to ensure that the countries that control our oil supply cannot hold us hostage, particularly dictatorships like Iran and what Iraq was before the '03 campaign.

[Vosem]

Ron Paul's foreign policy stance is insane and is the number one issue (amongst many others) why he would NEVER be the GOP nominee. Never.

HOW is it insane? Stop repeating talking points and tell me what is "insane" about his position.

It's insane that he does not want to maintain American control of the Persian Gulf.

My quote is wrong, I said it IS insane to invade Iran. I said it was not. Why should America control the Persian Gulf? We have no territory there. Its none of our business.

Our oil comes from there and our economy depends on it. Therefore, it would be good not to lose it.

Or not?

That insane Ron Paul saying we need intelligence, declarations, and preparations to go to war.  

No. The insane Ron Paul saying we need to pull out of existing wars. Those things he's saying are fine.

I disagree with one thing Ron Paul says =/ I disagree with all of Ron Paul's positions

Yes, because oil is more important then human life. War for oil is disgusting.

Unfortunately, we need oil to keep our economy going. Without oil, we would enter a Depression and the lives that exist would be horribly miserable. War for oil is quite justified.

We have MASSIVE amounts of Oil here in the US. Why cant we get it from Venezuala and Brazil? Why does it have to come from the Middle East.

Come to think of it, getting oil from the Middle East doesn't make sense when Brazil is closer and there's not much of terrorist activity there.

Of course, but we get it from the Middle East and you can't just switch overnight. It takes time. We should start shifting tomorrow, but it would still take quite some time.

[Vosem]

Vosem, in the 50's in order to help American and British oil companies we got rid of democracy in Iran. We are the ones supporting dictatorships out there. It is their oil and they get to sell it to us at market prices, not due to force.

I never said we supported democracy. Gaddafi supported us in Afghanistan (and stayed quiet about Iraq), I think we should've put a no-fly zone over Syria and left Gaddafi in power (where he would've stayed if not for NATO). I said we should maintain our presence in the Middle East to maintain our source of oil, and to ensure regimes hostile to us, in what unfortunately is a critical strategic area, cannot survive for very long -- and, if necessary, that means using military force, as we did in Iraq in '91 and '03.

[Vosem]

And that leads to terrorism and hate against us. Not due to our wealth or whatever crap the Republicans/neocons throw at us. If you can at least admit that, then fine we can agree to disagree.

Of course that's true, I never disputed that.

[Vosem]

Vosem, in the 50's in order to help American and British oil companies we got rid of democracy in Iran. We are the ones supporting dictatorships out there. It is their oil and they get to sell it to us at market prices, not due to force.

I never said we supported democracy. Gaddafi supported us in Afghanistan (and stayed quiet about Iraq), I think we should've put a no-fly zone over Syria and left Gaddafi in power (where he would've stayed if not for NATO). I said we should maintain our presence in the Middle East to maintain our source of oil, and to ensure regimes hostile to us, in what unfortunately is a critical strategic area, cannot survive for very long -- and, if necessary, that means using military force, as we did in Iraq in '91 and '03.

And that leads to terrorism and hate against us. Not due to our wealth or whatever crap the Republicans/neocons throw at us. If you can at least admit that, then fine we can agree to disagree.

You do know that the majority of terrorists come from the middle class, right? Just saying.....

Economic class has little to nothing to do with the reasons terrorists attack the United States.

[Vosem]

Vosem, in the 50's in order to help American and British oil companies we got rid of democracy in Iran. We are the ones supporting dictatorships out there. It is their oil and they get to sell it to us at market prices, not due to force.

I never said we supported democracy. Gaddafi supported us in Afghanistan (and stayed quiet about Iraq), I think we should've put a no-fly zone over Syria and left Gaddafi in power (where he would've stayed if not for NATO). I said we should maintain our presence in the Middle East to maintain our source of oil, and to ensure regimes hostile to us, in what unfortunately is a critical strategic area, cannot survive for very long -- and, if necessary, that means using military force, as we did in Iraq in '91 and '03.

And that leads to terrorism and hate against us. Not due to our wealth or whatever crap the Republicans/neocons throw at us. If you can at least admit that, then fine we can agree to disagree.

You do know that the majority of terrorists come from the middle class, right? Just saying.....

Yes, because they are pissed off that we think we get to control them....I never said people become terrorists because they are poor.

I can think of hundreds of things that I don't like about society. Should I kill those people and expect them to change their ways? Please.

I'm not saying the terrorists are doing the best thing to advance their cause. It's a problem with the desert culture....just look at Palestine. Obviously they are in the right, but then a bus blows up in Israel and the whole world thinks there's two sides to the story. They need a Gandhi, MLK or a Mandela, but their culture won't allow it.

Because obviously there's not two sides, and every West Bank settler is a mindless robotic Palestinian-killing monster. Who eats Palestinian babies for breakfast. With ketchup.

[Vosem]

I'm still amazed that you people continue to care about these endless carnivals of tedium.

The reason why we do is because you never know when there's going to be a twenty-point swing because of one.

Speaking of which, CNN has unanimously called Mitt Romney the winner. Let's see what the polls will do now.....

I expect John King to be leading in the polls by Friday.

[Vosem]

Logging out for the night, will gladly continue confrontation over Israel with ChairmanSanchez and sbane tomorrow morning.

[Vosem]

Vosem, in the 50's in order to help American and British oil companies we got rid of democracy in Iran. We are the ones supporting dictatorships out there. It is their oil and they get to sell it to us at market prices, not due to force.

I never said we supported democracy. Gaddafi supported us in Afghanistan (and stayed quiet about Iraq), I think we should've put a no-fly zone over Syria and left Gaddafi in power (where he would've stayed if not for NATO). I said we should maintain our presence in the Middle East to maintain our source of oil, and to ensure regimes hostile to us, in what unfortunately is a critical strategic area, cannot survive for very long -- and, if necessary, that means using military force, as we did in Iraq in '91 and '03.

And that leads to terrorism and hate against us. Not due to our wealth or whatever crap the Republicans/neocons throw at us. If you can at least admit that, then fine we can agree to disagree.

You do know that the majority of terrorists come from the middle class, right? Just saying.....

Yes, because they are pissed off that we think we get to control them....I never said people become terrorists because they are poor.

I can think of hundreds of things that I don't like about society. Should I kill those people and expect them to change their ways? Please.

I'm not saying the terrorists are doing the best thing to advance their cause. It's a problem with the desert culture....just look at Palestine. Obviously they are in the right, but then a bus blows up in Israel and the whole world thinks there's two sides to the story. They need a Gandhi, MLK or a Mandela, but their culture won't allow it.

Because obviously there's not two sides, and every West Bank settler is a mindless robotic Palestinian-killing monster. Who eats Palestinian babies for breakfast. With ketchup.

Any West Bank settler is a thief and that land should be given back to their rightful owner.

The West Bank settlers are the rightful owners. In the vast majority of cases, the land they're sitting on was, before the settling, vacant, government land, or bought fairly from Palestinians. Obviously, there are exceptions (Wikipedia says Ofra, Elon Moreh, and Beit El were exceptions). I think it's racist to call a population of hundreds of thousands of people 'thieves', and even if they weren't the rightful owners, demanding all West Bank settlers (Israel estimated 327,750 people in 2010) leave and give the land to the Palestinians would be like telling everybody in Tampa to leave so they can give the area back to the Seminoles.

Tangentially, I think the eviction of the Gaza settlers was illegal under international law, but that's a whole different matter.