Paul Ryan just blew me away.
We have the opportunity to replace the America hating fraudsters at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue with first rate Americans. This is the most important election of my lifetime.
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- Mission Accomplished
- Both High And Low Sea Ice Extent Caused By Global Warming
- Record Sea Ice Caused By Global Warming
- “Rapid Antarctic sea ice loss is causing severe storms”
- “pushing nature past its limits”
- Compassion For Terrorists
- Fifteen Days To Slow The Spread
- Maldives Underwater By 2050
- Woke Grok
- Grok Explains Gender
- Humans Like Warmer Climates
- Homophobic Greenhouse Gases
- Grok Explains The Effects Of CO2
- Ice-Free Arctic By 2027
- Red Hot Australia
- EPA : 17.5 Degrees Warming By 2050
- “Winter temperatures colder than last ice age
- Big Oil Saved The Whales
- Guardian 100% Inheritance Tax
- Kerry, Blinken, Hillary And Jefferson
- “Climate Change Indicators: Heat Waves”
- Combating Bad Weather With Green Energy
- Flooding Mar-a-Lago
- Ice-Free Arctic By 2020
- Colorless, Odorless CO2
Recent Comments
- Disillusioned on Mission Accomplished
- Bob G on Mission Accomplished
- James Snook on Both High And Low Sea Ice Extent Caused By Global Warming
- czechlist on Mission Accomplished
- arn on Record Sea Ice Caused By Global Warming
- Disillusioned on Record Sea Ice Caused By Global Warming
- Gamecock on “Rapid Antarctic sea ice loss is causing severe storms”
- Disillusioned on “pushing nature past its limits”
- Disillusioned on “pushing nature past its limits”
- czechlist on “Rapid Antarctic sea ice loss is causing severe storms”
For those who are interested, a transcript can be found at: http://www.npr.org/2012/08/29/160282031/transcript-rep-paul-ryans-convention-speech
Agreed. Ryan was awesome. The faded Obama poster moment was priceless.
I can’t wait for the Ryan-Biden debate. Big popcorn night.
Entire speech
Part 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bcE1v_Y2hvA
Entire speech
Part 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vRPltzYoPE0
Entire speech
Part 3
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NO3eABN5y8g
It is the most important election in my lifetime as well. Ryan knocked it out of the park!
Nice speeches by Ryan, Condi Rice & Susana Martinez.
Susanna Martinez was ignored by the networks (ABC, NBC, & CBS). I guess it was too much for them to reveal to the public there is a Hispanic, female, Republican in a position of power. I did see her on CNN though.
Professionals with integrity is a great and welcomed change.
Look out for the coming activities produced by desperation…
Can we switch Presidential and VP candidates now?
I’ll take the businessman for now. Ryan can be president in 2020
Exactly. And it says a lot about Romney that he chose Ryan. When you see what is happening with the platform and where Romney has moved stance, I’ve become very excited about this combination.
Now, can they survive the treachery of Obama’s henchmen?
It could have moved a little faster.
Words are words, lets see them walk the walk. Our conservative government in the UK said same when not in power and now THEY are failing to balance the books too. Hmm.
Will be an interesting race to watch, could be close. From the UK I am happy if either candidate wins.
Andy
Cameron always sounded like a moron to me.
and proved himself to be one when he didn’t have the gonads to go it alone w/o the halfwitted clegg.
Exactly! The Left Vs Right political fight is an illusion, a Punch n Judy show for the masses. The real fight is vertical, not horizontal; Top Vs Bottom
Are you an Obama supporter?
Pitcher vs. catcher?
Bear vs. twink?
(reply to Steve as there was no reply link on below post)
Steve, how on earth do you reach that question/conclusion from my post replying to Andy?
I’m not even a political supporter, I’m also from the UK, I think they all piss in the same elitist pot, regardless of which side of the pond they reside, or which colours they wear.
During the last US elections frenzy I was asked by a US friend if I thought Obama would make any difference with his “hope & change” bullshit. I replied it didn’t matter who got in, an elitist would win and carry on the banksers agenda.
This piece is more telling than anything any of the candidates say IMO
http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=32385
“corporate yelling match” just about sums it all up!
Comments like your benefit Obama
How on earth does my comment benefit Obama?
Obama benefits from apathy
The realization that there is a ‘ruling class’ always seems to do lefties in (along with other essentially dramaturgical thinkers). Yes, there is (and always will be), but it makes a hell of a difference who’s pulling the levers. We’re a lot less likely to end up with some form of Nanny State despotism – and the attendant loss of freedom (especially for the ‘productive class’) – with Romney and especially Ryan.
Too funny, as if an Englishman gets to adult age without being aware there is a ruling class, or suddenly comes to that realisation only when politically aware, and further gets “done in” about it so must be a “lefty”. We get “normalised” to support a ruling class in preschool singing the national anthem.
How does Obama benefit from my “apathy” expressed on this blog? You either have a delusion of grandeur regarding this blogs political clout, or have a low opinion of your audience, if you think my throwaway comment here effects anyone’s political opinion one way or the other.
Unless there is a candidate willing to change the way money works at a fundamental, sovereign level, it will make no difference who appears to be pulling the levers, because in reality it will remain an illusion.
The concept of class, although demigogued to death by politicians, is a fairly new concept for America. We have never really had them until the 20th Century when the Ruling Class (the only real class in America) was created by the institutionalization of the 2 party system.
So most do not see it – they do see a choice between freedom and an oppressive government. To most Europeans, there is not a tinkers damn worth of difference between the 2 candidates, yet to Americans it is a stark choice.
So yes, an apathetic voter is a vote for Obama – inertia favors the incumbent. And no, most Americans are not going to jump on the Bilderberg bandwagon that the paulites are very familiar with.
John Galt isn’t nor ever will be Mormon, or prodistanian.
Change a teleprompter reader for a teleprompter reader , big change.
Voted YES on making the PATRIOT Act permanent. (Dec 2005)
It depends on who is in charge… Obama administration took it to a whole another level…
You know there’s a saying… The road to hell is paved with good intentions…
I thought Congress was in power. They have to approve the bills or did they approve them self out of power ? You think King Romney and Prince Ryan will give back that power to the people (Congress) ? Don’t think so.
Obama NEVER had good intentions and now the road to serfdom is paved.
This one is close. I see the greatest election in my life time as 1980. But while Reagan was definitely better than Romney, Obama is also worse than Carter. So I rate them as toss ups. That could change.
Really? Obama hates America? Anyone care that the “theme” of the republican national convention is a complete lie? Any five yer old with half a brain who heard the entire speech Obama gave could figure out that he was talking about roads and bridges. I guess the half a brain part is why republicans can’t figure that out.
Don’t worry. The America hater will be out soon.
Boy! The truthers are out in force.
And for the 5 years olds, if he was referring to the bridges and roads, he would have said “you did not build THOSE”, not that. After all, he is the smartest man in the world, and would never make such a simple grammatical mistake.
Sorry, spin zone is over on the left.
Before you fall too hard for Romney, it might pay to read this:
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/greed-and-debt-the-true-story-of-mitt-romney-and-bain-capital-20120829#ixzz24xf09y6s
I think Rolling Stone would be better off covering the latest Insane Clown Posse album. I hear it has “some good hooks” & “3.5/5”.
You must be an Obama guy. We are sick of your divide and conquer
I thought you truthers were supposed to stick to correcting true statements about Obama (with spin), not creating new lies about Romney.
Same as 2008: The few oligarchs who control the 2 parties and pick our candidates for us picked two candidates who have a potential constitutional conflict. Granted if the supreme court would hear a case or two these issues may be settled, but they won’t here it.
In 2008, both Obama and McCain had potential natural born citizen issues (recall McCain got a “statement” from the senate that his situation was not an issue).
Funny that in 2012 it comes around again (Mitt’s father may not have been a citizen when Mitt was born, making natural born citizen status questionable).
It could be a case of the oligarchs wanting both potential dictators to have a weakness that can be manipulated if required to “convince” them of their position on any given issue.
@johnQ – You clowns are so predictable. The citizenship of McCain was never in question because Title 8, section 1401 of the US Code specifically states “under the legal jurisdiction of the US”, which means territories and bases. McCain was born in the Panama Canal zone, at the time, a US Territory. Mitt is not in question because his father was always a citizen (born to 2 US citizens). In addition, there are only 2 types of citizens. Natural Born and naturalized. Neither McCain or Romney are naturalized, ergo they are Natural born. And yes, that means that Rubio and Jindal are both Natural born, regardless of the citizenship status of their parents because they were born in the US. Period. So yes, Anchor babies are natural born as well.
The Constitution does not define Natural born. SCOTUS has never ruled on it (and do not give me Wong Kim Ark v. US or Minor v. Happersett as neither ruled on the definition of Natural born, merely who was a citizen at birth). Since there is nothing in the Constitution to define “Natural Born”, nor any law that was passed to define it, the US code stands as the law of the land. And it clearly states that both Romney and McCain are without question Natural born.
As to Obama, the thrust of Hillary Clinton (the initiator of the whole brouhaha) and the birthers is not that Obama did not have 2 American Citizens as parents (his father never was, and no one ever claimed he was), but the location of his birth. If he had been born in Kenya, then he would not be by virtue of the citizenship of this father. However, since he was born in Hawaii (as far as all controlling legal authorities are concerned) he is a citizen of the US, and Natural born.
So please! Take your truther platform and go home. I am so tired of the ignorance of the idiots who do not care to research the issue of Natural born and instead merely parrot what the birthers are saying. I am voting for Mitt. I voted for Paul in the primaries. He lost. So it is time to move on. If you were a true libertarian, you would be voting for Johnson. The only ones crowing about Paul now that the convention is over are the Obamabots trying to break support away from, Romney so that Obama can finish his destruction of this country.
Romney is no Reagan. But he is also no Obama. Republicans may be Democrat lites – but right now they are the only choice we have between freedom and socialistic slavery.
I choose freedom.
IF McCain had no issues, why did he have to ask the Senate to cover for him?
@JohnQ says: September 4, 2012 at 12:42 pm
I do not recall him asking. Perhaps you can produce the letter where he did?
Here is an announcement:
http://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/the-introduction-of-a-senate-resolution
Here is a review of the issue:
http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/2009/09/16/john-mccain-citizen-of-panama-at-birth/
@JohnQ says: September 4, 2012 at 3:47 pm
I did not ask for copies of the resolution or the ruling of the senate. Nor is that what you claimed. I asked for McCain’s letter requesting the senate to take up the matter. You claimed he did. Now produce the evidence.
Or is this just another attempt at abfuscation?
I never said there was a letter. That was your language.
@JohnQ says: September 5, 2012 at 12:43 pm
You said “he have to ask the Senate to cover for him?”. I said letter because if he verbally asked the senate to do it, there are no witnesses, and ergo no proof. So you are just spouting nonsense. Since you say he did indeed “ask” them, and virtually everything in Washington is done by letter, I wanted to see the letter.
Now if you have another form of “proof”, that is fine. Produce the proof that McCain asked the senate to cover for him. I do not care if it is a tweet or a twat. Just produce it.
Or retract your opinion.
Regardless, of whether he asked or not, and if there is proof, the senate did produce the opinion; ergo someone saw an issue. This is not a court of law. Last time I checked it was a discussion.
Regardless, of whether he asked or not, and if there is proof that he did, the senate did produce the opinion; ergo someone saw an issue. This is not a court of law. Last time I checked it was a discussion.
@JohnQ says: September 5, 2012 at 3:31 pm
LOL! As if the senate needs an issue to waste time! That is an excuse, that is not proof. And you claimed McCain saw an issue, now you are equivocating and saying “someone”. I would say some 60 million someones saw an issue. The ones that voted for Obama. But that does not make it an issue. You still have clowns running around that want to impeach Bush for War Crimes. Should we consider that an issue?
Regardless of what some idiot who cannot read the legislation they pass “thought”, the fact remains. Title 8, Section 1401 clearly states that McCain is a natural Born Citizen. And if Obama was born in Hawaii, then he too is a Natural born citizen.
No additional laws are needed – unless you want to change the definition. Then you are going to need a constitutional amendment.
Romney is a facist that stole the nomination. The entire convention was scripted, even to the point that the teleprompter scrolled “the ayes have it” before Boehner responded, etc. Look how the state conventions were handled, and the convenient last minute rules changes. They were so scared of Ron Paul, that they exposed their corruption for all to see. Are you blind? Use the same skepticism you use for climate change and apply it to politics.
Obama supporter.
Not at all. Paul supporter.
I do understand your argument by the way (reject Mitty, support Obama by default). But you know what?
Obama =~ Mitt
In terms of the important things (like are we supporting America or Israel, the Fed, NDAA and police staste, etc.), there is not real difference.
Paul supporter == Obama supporter
Paul is not running. So you are either an Obama supporter trying to peel votes away, or a Johnson supporter that is clueless.
Understood. Paul is out now, unless he does something else. I am not sure what I will do, but find it hard to vote for someone who basically stole the nomination. It was the party that did it, and points to the real problem- the parties.
Governor Romney is not a fascist nor did he “steal” the nomination. He received both the largest number of votes during the campaign and the largest number of delegates. As for Ron Paul, he lost because he was unable to build support beyond the his narrow but passionate base. One needs broad support to have a chance to win the nomination. Republican voters were looking for a candidate whom they believed offered the combination of ideas, practical experience, leadership, and integrity to make an effective President. In 2012, Gov. Romney was able to make a successful case on those attributes to enough Republican voters to gain the nomination. When one’s preferred candidate loses, one need not automatically assume that somehow the race was “stolen.” Even President Reagan, who enjoys enormous affection among Republicans and Conservatives, did not win all his elections (e.g., 1976 primary). Reagan’s supporters did not claim that the election was “stolen.” They celebrated the competitive finish to the race and built a foundation for electoral success in 1980.
Paul won the Iowa caucus. We heard Mitt did, then suddenly Santorum. Well the truth is Paul did. Variations of this weer repeated in other states. Plus, the rule was that if teh candidate carried 5 states, he would be up for nomination. This is the rule the delegates and caucus/primary voters voted under. Just before the convention, the Republican [fascist] party changed the rule to 8 states. They tried for 10 states, but this was defeated.
The truth is it is the parties that are the issue. A very few individuals get to decide for the only two viable parties (republicrat and demipublican) who we all get to vote for, and it is very clear how devious, corrupt, and fascist they are. This story will be told in the coming weeks and many (who put the good of the country over their narrow self interests, and have the open mind to see the evidence) will see this as a fact.
The truth is that we are an oligarchy, and their power has been exposed thanks to Paul.
Mitt Supporter == facism supporter
You obviously want to see Obama reelected. What a moron.
We could go at this ad infinitum, but it would be counter-productive. I appreciate your work on climate science, but we need to agree to disagree on this, unless you want to come over to my forum to discuss it (we have a few threads going).
And frankly, I don’t care, nor do I expect any substantive difference whether Obama or Romney are elected. Election after election, the few people with strings to the two parties give us crap candidates to vote for who represent not us, but the oligarchs. If it makes you sleep better at night, go ahead and vote for Mitt.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=IrYdBL7BFwE#!
If you want to come over, join the forum, and maybe start here:
http://gold-silver.us/forum/showthread.php?63319-Ron-Paul-Dumps-Republican-Party&p=569593&viewfull=1#post569593
hmmm…so those who claim to be conservatives…does that also apply to the earth’s resources? In that regards, I’m a conservative. 😉
I worked as a wilderness ranger for two summers and testified at my first Congressional wilderness hearing when I was 15. Does that make me a conservative?
I am also a raw foods vegetarian. Does that make me a conservative?
I’d agree that everyone should be conservative with resources. Waste not, want not.
IMO, the current schemes proposed to implement cap and trade or a carbon tax, aren’t meant for conservation, but rather are a wealth redistribution scheme that will enrich bureaucrats, financial speculators and “green energy” firms.
The environmental side of these taxes are window dressing.
I wouldn’t consider myself strictly “conservative” either. Those are labels used by the two party system to keep their flocks together.
I was against the Iraq war and would say that the decision to invade Iraq again was a predetermined outcome from the Bush/Cheney administration for the purpose of making money (tail wagging the dog).
I’m against the idea of the federal government imposing a ban on abortion, but states should be able to. Women and the religious can vote with their feet. Best of both worlds IMO.
I voted mostly Democrat until the Global warming is going to kill us all scam. I refuse to vote Democrat now until some sanity comes back to the party. Voting Republican is the lesser of two evils. So, not really conservative and not really anti-environment. Just against the idea of being forced to pay for other peoples neurosis/financial scam/etc.
Cap and tax is a ponzi scheme, money for nothing.
Also, if there is not issue with McCain, why these law review articles?
http://www.michiganlawreview.org/first-impressions/volume/107
Don’t oversimplify the issues.
The Michigan law review is not SCOTUS. And they are free to review anything they want! Title 8, Section 1401 of the US Code still stands. And why lawyers like to get paid is their business. I really do not care. I am sure if you dig you can find tons of articles on why Obama is a Muslim. Again, I do not care, as it is not relevant to your claim, or the facts on the ground.
This site (Noonan for president) outlines some of the issues with Romney. I am less clear about Romney issues, then with potential issues with Obama and McCain. I just find it interesting that we keep getting paired candidates that have these issues.
http://noonan4president.blogspot.com/2012/01/mitt-romney-is-not-natural-born-citizen.html
We do not get “paired”, people naturally resort to the child’s game of “Oh YEA? So’s yours” in any campaign. That there is no basis in law or reality for such claims is immaterial to the children playing the game.
No one equestioned whether he was a “citizen”. They questioned whether he was a “natural born citizen” which words do not appear in “Title 8, Section 1401 “. It is a known fact that there was a legal grey area for Panama during the year McCain was born. May not be “fair”, but still it is an issue. It possibly could have been cleared up through the courts, but no one bothered.
Who cares? The problem is Obama’s loyalty.
INdeed the qualifications of the president ARE spelled out in Title 8, Section 1401. The Constitution uses the term “Natural Born”. Ergo that is what Title 8, Section 1401 is all about.
And there is no legal gray area. His father was under US legal Jurisdiction at the time. Period. Just because Carter gave away the Canal Zone 50 years later does not negate the fact that he was born during the US ownership of it.
The courts do not have to rule that the sky is blue. Nor should they have to.