blackhorse

Rick Santorum looks REALLY good right now.

I like Hitchens a lot. He knew his facts and history when he was speaking to a particular subject and didn't give a rats ass about political correctness. Although I disagree with him on spirituality, he is spot on 8 times out of 10 on his subject matter

How embarrassing it will/would be if Romney got the GOP nom. and he had to somehow (god know's how) repudiate Obama for Obamacare when Romney himself is the original architect of the individual mandate? yikes. Newt will not have that problem and it is a, if not THE, major issue as the GOP candidate precisely because it ties in so many other area's of government control vs. personal liberty.

Obama is a communist.

Obama flubs places and people all the time because Obama is only about Obama and his relentless crusade for communism. Plus, he is a collectivist, and all that matters are the ends.-why bother with people, places, or things?

Smart does not always equal intelligent.

There are legit. concerns about Newt. and Tracinski makes very good points, either way whomever the GOP nominee is will get my vote. The Problem with Romney is Romneycare; how can he lambast Obama for Obamacare when he is guilty of the very same thing at the State level. Obama knows this and will point to the effectiveness (which is BS) of Romneycare thus destroying any argument that Mitt may try to put out there. When the rubber hits the road it appears more likely that Gingrich will stand on principle whereas Romney will put his finger in the wind to see which way it is blowing.

"Now, he shows his readiness for massive, 'disproportionate' response, too. As warning and deterrent." That's an irrelevant argument when a nuke that Paul would have allowed Iran to acquire, or whichever tyrant nation, has already killed millions of Americans because he chose not to preempt, but decided to wait until an actual attack has occured. Sometimes defending means taking the offense by stopping a catastrophe before it happens. Iran, being a tyrannical theocratic nation, as such has no right to exist. Just because the nation claims sovereignty and has written laws does not grant it a moral or lawful right to exist (see above A.R. quote)

The old adage "you can catch more flies with honey than vinegar" is true to a point. The point being it must be a two way street. LIberals such as Lamont are on a one way street. And, no, there are not intellectuals on both sides. It is not an amiguous term, but a distinction that has standards. An intellectual, by its correct definition, is one who incorporates reason into their learning and logic, otherwise anyone could claim to be an intellectual. An academic is one who has gained much information from their schooling, nevermind the fact the the education may be faulty and erroneous, whereas as an intellectual understands what he is being taught and whether it is consonant with reality or not.

"Today, racism is regarded as a crime if practiced by a majority—but as an inalienable right if practiced by a minority. The notion that one’s culture is superior to all others solely because it represents the traditions of one’s ancestors, is regarded as chauvinism if claimed by a majority—but as “ethnic” pride if claimed by a minority. Resistance to change and progress is regarded as reactionary if demonstrated by a majority—but retrogression to a Balkan village, to an Indian tepee or to the jungle is hailed if demonstrated by a minority."-Ayn Rand "A genius is a genius, regardless of the number of morons who belong to the same race—and a moron is a moron, regardless of the number of geniuses who share his racial origin."-A.R.

Lamont Hill is guilty of what Ayn Rand said was intellectual bankruptcy http://www.aynrand.org/site/PageServer?pagename=reg_ar_bankruptcy Lamont is confusing the term intellectual with the term academic. Not surprising seeing as Orwellian Newspeak has perverted the English language. Hill is an academic, but he is by no means an intellectual in the real sense of the word. His type espouse all sorts of grand idea's and false premises dressed in big jargon, but their whole philosophy is dead and without merit. Reason is not a beacon for these parasites, but they gladly cling to self delusion and grandiosity.

Gulch8, Please explain to me how Iran, or any tyrant nation, getting a nuke is sound foreign policy? "A right cannot be violated except by physical force. One man cannot deprive another of his life, nor enslavehim, nor forbid him to pursue his happiness, except by using force against him. Whenever a man is made to act without his own free, personal, individual, voluntary consent—his right has been violated."-Ayn Rand Ayn Rand knew this about Soviet Russia and would doubtless say the same of North Korea and Iran. There is no rational justification for Ron Paul's foreign policy of total pacifistic non-interventionism. Even Thomas Jefferson knew the muslim threat and sent Marines to Barbary.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/marc-lamont-hill-to-oreilly-poor-white-janitors-are-the-only-republicans-at-columbia/ I am literally speechless over this dolt's brazen racist attacks. Wow.....just, wow. Unf. this is the type of irrational thinking that has infected the black culture at large.

They're all making excuses not to attend the debate because most all of them are cowards and fear the direct questions that the Donald will ask.....*cough*Romney.....if you are a candidate with character, integrity, and you stand by what you believe there should be no ambivalence in deciding to attend Mr. Trump's debate.

I have withdrawn my support for Gary Johnson because of his support of gay marriage. My reason; it opens up the virtual Pandora's box such as marriage between humans and animals or humans and machines ad nauseum. That is anarchic morality. I am an Objectivist because I believe in biological identity and morality qua reason.

As much as I can appreciate most of Paul's domestic agenda, his foreign policy is dangerously irrational. He quotes and defends the US Constitution verbatim, but he misses the original intent and spirit of the US C. He is obsessed with the letter of the US Constitution, but fails to realize that even such a great document as it is it does have its problem area's, what's more there is no way that the Founding Fathers could forsee all of the new dynamics, problems, and technology etc of the future. Hell, even Thomas Jefferson sent the Marines to Barbary to deal with unruly muslims.

Newt would humiliate Obama in a debate. Bring on the spanking.

Thanks for posting the link Selene. That was a great interview by Glenn Beck. Beck did a good job asking direct questgions regarding Newt's shady politics from his past. My impression is that Newt is coming to understand that being a RINO does not resonate with the base electorate. I believe that he is re-thinking most of his RINO stances, which is good. He has come out and admitted he was wrong on several issues, whereas Romney just obfuscates everything. What's more, how can Romney call out Obama on Obamacare when he is resp. for Romneycare, it would look foolish! Las Vegas, you are correct, the level of where the oppression is is irrelevant . My ideal candidate is Paul's domestic policy with Perry's foreign policy. I still think that Bachmann will pull out a hat trick.....and I am ok with that, because I like her. If it comes down Newt and Romney I choose Newt for sure.

With Romney gifting MA residents with Romneycare how om earth can Mitt possibly blast Obama for Obamacare? Newt got into dangerous water when he supported the option of an individual mandate, but he has luckily been 100% opposed to it. He LISTENED. Romney still tries to justify compulsion by siting the 10th amendment.

As always, a candidate like Newt may say some things that sound great, but ends up just being lip service once elected. Always must we keep the fire of reason and liberty at their feet. There is no perfect candidate, though some are perfecter than others. Apparently Senator Coburn, whom I admire, does not care for Gingrich's leadership style. The bottom line ultimately is to replace Obama ASAP and try to undu the countless damage he has done (and Bush II and Clinton). The Republic can be saved, we just need to be vocal stalwarts for her.

"Two hours after I’m sworn in as President, and by the time Obama lands in Chicago, I will have forty percent of Obama’s government dismantled. - Newt Gingrich" Amen. Goodbye Czars, Obamacare, and more deomcr-----I mean socialists. Even though I think the GOP will retake the Presidency, keep the House, and take the Senate or tie the Senate, a lot of work needs to be done in terms of Americans educating themselves and rediscovering reason, if you will, in order for these changes to return to the way America used to be to have any long term effectiveness. Things are looking up. Sidenote; It looks as though Putin and Medvedev are despised enough that they may lose the election ***cross fingers***

Mark, I believe that Newt no longer supports those idea's. Romney is the quintessential RINO ------ he and his ilk are the reason why the GOP had their asses handed to them in '06. I hope HOPE that Romney is not the pick. He is Bush III.

Newt sounds (and looks) better and better everyday. I can see him winning the GOP nom. Romney is too RINO, the Tea Party folk remembered all too well what Bush II and the RINO's did to our nation, and that is what will seal Romney's fate as second place yet again.

If rights are merely designated for those with reason (nevermind how on earth would that be measured) than any human not under the eugenic perview of middle aged would be under threat of death.

Great vid! I've always thought that the O'ist position on abortion was irrational; the mere location of the developing child in relation to the womb is the deciding factor on whether it is a human with rights or not. Absurd! Abortion Is def. one stance that I will never be in agreement with in O'ism. If humans cannot be counted on to protect the most innocent form of life then how can we be counted on to defend any life or rights? I think that O'ism would attract a much much larger audience and support if they re-evualated and changed their stance on abortion.