Iraqi veterans running for Congress

[1bad65]

"Two Iraq veterans who left the military after surviving charges of crimes against detainees are running for Congress. Benjamin Sarlin on the renegade soldiers.

Two Iraq veterans who left the military after surviving charges of crimes against detainees are running credible campaigns for Congress. And far from minimizing the incidents, both candidates have put the accusations front and center in their campaigns, attracting rock-star adulation from conservatives nationwide in the process. But critics, including human-rights activists, veterans, and now even defeated primary opponents, warn that their records should disqualify them from office.

Last week, Ilario Pantano won the Republican nomination in North Carolina’s 7th District, setting up a challenge to incumbent Democrat Rep. Mike McIntyre in November. In 2001, immediately following the 9/11 terror attacks, Pantano, a veteran who had previously fought in the Gulf War, left his career as a successful producer and media consultant in his native Manhattan to rejoin the Marines and was eventually deployed to Iraq. In April 2004, Pantano killed two unarmed Iraqi detainees, twice unloading his gun into their bodies and firing between 50 and 60 shots in total. Afterward, he placed a sign over the corpses featuring the Marines' slogan “No Better Friend, No Worse Enemy” as a message to the local population.

“For someone who lived through what I lived through, that was very personal to me,” Pantano said. “The idea of people being prosecuted for doing their jobs in what is in fact a war—it struck me that members of Congress were being disingenuous. What our men and women were doing in enhanced interrogations was not torture and the prospect of investigations smacked of politics.”

Pantano is not the only veteran to highlight the moral ambiguities of war on the campaign trail. Retired Lt. Col. Allen West, running in Florida’s 22nd District to replace Democratic Rep. Ron Klein, seems to revel in them.

West was forced to retire from the Army and fined $5,000 after he admitted to apprehending an Iraqi policeman he suspected of planning an ambush, watching as his troops beat him, and then firing a gunshot by the Iraqi’s head in order to scare him into divulging information. West said the decision saved lives by preventing an ambush. But no plot was ever discovered and the policeman in question later told The New York Times that he had no knowledge of any attacks."

Full story at:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2010-05-13/renegade-soldiers-for-congress/

[Drake]

We know the rules of engagement, and we DEFINITELY know about the law of war (try sitting through a few dozen briefs) before deploying. If they fail to uphold these laws, they deserve what they get. You don't beat detainees, and you don't shoot at their heads. That's been illegal for decades. It's suddenly ok now?

I also don't think there should be too many vets in office, but that's a philosophical view on my part. Shouldn't be ex-military deciding between hostile and non-hostile COAs. Just my view.

[1bad65]

I really wanted to see your opinion on this one Drake. Glad you posted.

[mawali]

A good thing in one sense but it is a political game!

It makes no sense to me that their backers want to spend the next 50-100 years in Afghanistan while denying the same monetary benefit to US citizens. That is unpatriotic and downright nasty!

[SnowDog]

So, from hsi quotes unloading 50 to 60 rounds into 2 unarmed detained prisioners is now "enhanced interrogations" :confused: WTF????

Not only are these guys total jacka$$es for waht they did, but what scares me is they are now getting "rock-star adulation" from the people who support them.

Seriously what the hell is wrong with people in this country. :mad:

[1bad65]

Not only are these guys total jacka$$es for waht they did, but what scares me is they are now getting "rock-star adulation" from the people who support them.

Seriously what the hell is wrong with people in this country. :mad:

I'd rather Iraqi veterans running the country than a community agitator.

[Drake]

I'd rather Iraqi veterans running the country than a community agitator.

Why do you want Iraqis running our country? :confused:

[1bad65]

Why do you want Iraqis running our country? :confused:

I mistyped.

I'd rather have American servicemen who served in Iraq or Afghanistan running the country than a community agitator running it.

[David Jamieson]

I mistyped.

I'd rather have American servicemen who served in Iraq or Afghanistan running the country than a community agitator running it.

why?

why do you think ex soldiers make good politicians?

or are you saying you would support a junta over a democratically elected president?

[Drake]

why?

why do you think ex soldiers make good politicians?

or are you saying you would support a junta over a democratically elected president?

He never said a junta. He simply prefers that veterans be in office. Not by force, but elected. Another key difference would be that they wouldn't be military any longer, and many of those running are National Guard or Reserves, which isn't nearly as militaristic a culture as straight up active duty. A vet in office is not exclusive from a democratic election.

My disagreements with it lie more in what it could become than what it is.

[1bad65]

He never said a junta. He simply prefers that veterans be in office. Not by force, but elected. Another key difference would be that they wouldn't be military any longer, and many of those running are National Guard or Reserves, which isn't nearly as militaristic a culture as straight up active duty. A vet in office is not exclusive from a democratic election.

My disagreements with it lie more in what it could become than what it is.

Thank you Drake.

Notice again the liberals are adding words to my posts...:rolleyes:

[sanjuro_ronin]

I'd rather Iraqi veterans running the country than a community agitator.

Any particular reason you feel that you only have the two extreme options to choose from?
If that is truly the case, your country is in a deeper hole than I thought.

[David Jamieson]

Thank you Drake.

Notice again the liberals are adding words to my posts...:rolleyes:

Notice again how the neo-con ditto head is :

a)letting someone else answer for him carte blanch

b) inferring that he knows the political leanings one way or another of other members of the forum despite his monumental ignorance of them.

Just answer the question 1bad

[1bad65]

Any particular reason you feel that you only have the two extreme options to choose from?
If that is truly the case, your country is in a deeper hole than I thought.

Who says the veterans are extremists? The article didn't say that.

[1bad65]

Just answer the question 1bad

First off, quit being a jerk.

You added words to my posts AGAIN, and when Drake addressed you doing it, I agreed with him.

I'd prefer the veterans to the community agitator. That means if I were in the districts in question, I would VOTE for the veterans. I do not advocate a junta, of course I didn't even use the word in the first place.

[1bad65]

Notice again how the neo-con ditto head is :

a)letting someone else answer for him carte blanch

Drake actually just clarified my initial post, since you obviously weren't able to see it just as it was. Maybe Drake is also getting sick of you adding words to my posts. You know you're being ridiculous when others have to call you on it.

[David Jamieson]

Drake actually just clarified my initial post, since you obviously weren't able to see it just as it was. Maybe Drake is also getting sick of you adding words to my posts. You know you're being ridiculous when others have to call you on it.

attempting to rally others to your side? You know, that side you created and perceive but doesn't actually exist despite all your intentions to have it manifest?

:p

anyway, so, what's your answer?

[1bad65]

attempting to rally others to your side? You know, that side you created and perceive but doesn't actually exist despite all your intentions to have it manifest?

The man corrected you. And he did it on his own. I don't need to "rally" anyone to see what you are doing by making up words I never typed.


anyway, so, what's your answer?

I believe I answered it already in Post #15. Do I need to point you to it, or answer it yet again, or will you just make up an answer for me?

[Drake]

Who's rallying? I'd say I disagree with 1Bad more than I agree with him. HOWEVER, I won't disagree with him simply because he is who he is.

[David Jamieson]

The man corrected you. And he did it on his own. I don't need to "rally" anyone to see what you are doing by making up words I never typed.



I believe I answered it already in Post #15. Do I need to point you to it, or answer it yet again, or will you just make up an answer for me?

idiot.

blah blah blah

[1bad65]

idiot.

You're the one who didn't have the intelligence to find my answer. ;)

[mawali]

I'd rather have American servicemen who served in Iraq or Afghanistan running the country than a community agitator running it.

Smedley Butler, the decorated Marine stated
I spent 33 years and four months in active military service and during that period I spent most of my time as a high class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism. I helped make Mexico and especially Tampico safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefit of Wall Street. I helped purify Nicaragua for the International Banking House of Brown Brothers in 1902-1912. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for the American sugar interests in 1916. I helped make Honduras right for the American fruit companies in 1903. In China in 1927 I helped see to it that Standard Oil went on its way unmolested. Looking back on it, I might have given Al Capone a few hints. The best he could do was to operate his racket in three districts. I operated on three continents. but in the present scenario, this gives the false impression that because one has served, one may be thought of as having the attributes of running a country based on the agenda schedule!

Even Blumenthal of NY imagines that all he has to do is say he served, and he will get popular points! Fact checking is a great tool

[Drake]

And let's not forget, someone can spend three years as a JMO, get out, and work seven to ten years in government or the private sector, and still be a GWOT vet when everything is said and done. For a lot of people, their military service, while honorable, isn't the majority of their qualifications. They did their time and got out.

[1bad65]

Smedley Butler, the decorated Marine stated..

Is Mr Butler even alive now?!?! Why are you even bringing him up, is he running for office this year?


Even Blumenthal of NY imagines that all he has to do is say he served, and he will get popular points! Fact checking is a great tool

Of course Blumenthal didn't count on the press digging too deep, he's a Democrat. They are used to being able to lie, cheat, and steal and not have to worry about the press. FoxNews changed all that.

[Reality_Check]

FoxNews changed all that.

What? By allowing Republicans to lie, cheat and steal?

[1bad65]

What? By allowing Republicans to lie, cheat and steal?

No, by levelling the playing field.

If you bothered to watch them before commenting, you would see they are rough on Republicans as well. McCain and Bush, for example, are not universally loved over there.

[1bad65]

What? By allowing Republicans to lie, cheat and steal?

Do you have an example of them not reporting or of them ignoring misdeeds by a Republican?

[brianlkennedy]

While avoiding work just now I happened to cyber-cruise by this thread. It reminded me that I really should sit down some day and write a nice long essay along the lines of "Having Lived in Taiwan for 15 Years, What America Has Become...And It Ain't Good".

I realize now why ex-pats are so distrusted by governments, once you see America (or any country for that matter) from an objective distance....the picture is not so pretty.

Part of my essay would discuss "Democracy: Emotions v. Reason".

Well, if I ever fall idle I will get on it. Maybe hard to find a place to publish it because it will, if I write it up right, kick the **** out of both the left and right sides of US politics.

Okay, better get back to work. The company I own does Homeland Security work (really, no fooling).

take care,
Brian

[Reality_Check]

Do you have an example of them not reporting or of them ignoring misdeeds by a Republican?

I must have missed the backup for your assertion.

[1bad65]

I must have missed the backup for your assertion.

So you don't have any examples then, right?

I figured you wouldn't. ;)

[Reality_Check]

So you don't have any examples then, right?

I figured you wouldn't. ;)

Hardly. I didn't look. You made the claim...


Of course Blumenthal didn't count on the press digging too deep, he's a Democrat. They are used to being able to lie, cheat, and steal and not have to worry about the press. FoxNews changed all that.

...without a shred of evidence. Since your claim precedes mine, I would have expected some sort of proof. Though I've learned by now not to expect any for your more "inventive" claims.

[1bad65]

...without a shred of evidence. Since your claim precedes mine, I would have expected some sort of proof. Though I've learned by now not to expect any for your more "inventive" claims.

Ok, fine.

The mainstream press (ABS, CBS, NBC) has covered for Democrats before. I can think of two huge examples. 1) Who broke the Lewinsky scandal? It wasn't the mainstream press... 2) Who broke the John Edwards affair and love child scandal? Again, it was not the mainstream press...

And in both examples, the mainstream press knew of the stories and sat on them.

And we also had Dan Rather and CBS accepting Kinko's copies as proof that G.W. Bush lied about his military service.

[1bad65]

Now it's your turn to cite examples to back up your assertions. :D

[Reality_Check]

Ok, fine.

The mainstream press (ABS, CBS, NBC) has covered for Democrats before. I can think of two huge examples. 1) Who broke the Lewinsky scandal? It wasn't the mainstream press... 2) Who broke the John Edwards affair and love child scandal? Again, it was not the mainstream press...

And in both examples, the mainstream press knew of the stories and sat on them.

And we also had Dan Rather and CBS accepting Kinko's copies as proof that G.W. Bush lied about his military service.

So you're equating Fox News with the National Enquirer...interesting.

[Reality_Check]

Now it's your turn to cite examples to back up your assertions. :D

Dana Perino on Fox News: "We did not have a terrorist attack on our country during President Bush's term."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4kpfhGxJbLc

And not corrected by Sean Hannity.

Neil Cavuto:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ihdb2HV_ceI&feature=player_embedded

"We covered the follow-up marches to that Million Man March..."

"We do not pick and choose these rallies and protests. We were there for the Million Man March, even though, as I pointed out, it turned out to be well shy of a million men."

"You seem to pick and choose what events and protests were worthy. Million Man March, worthy, even though it wasn’t a million men, it was half a million. We covered that because we thought it had a worthy message too. "

"But a Million March March that turns out to be well shy of a million men — even half a million men — does count for them. We covered the follow-up marches to that Million Man March, because no matter the number, it was a big deal."

The Million Man March took place in 1995 (http://www.cnn.com/US/9510/megamarch/10-16/clinton/index.html).

Fox News didn't come into exitence until 1996 (http://www.newscorp.com/management/foxnewschannel.html)

Newt Gingrich:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2010/jan/12/newt-gingrich/gingrich-claims-interpol-will-investigate-american/

"Gingrich claims Obama's order will let Interpol investigate American officials...

...'So you're saying that if there was any abuse by the CIA or something like that, that Interpol now has more authority to come into the United States and investigate it?' O'Reilly asked.

'Yes,' the Georgia Republican replied...

...The key problem with this notion is that Interpol couldn't investigate CIA or American officials, because Interpol doesn't do investigations. Although Interpol is often portrayed in movies as an international police force, solving crimes and arresting bad guys, its actual purposes are modest: It helps police organizations in different countries communicate and coordinate actions, provides databases of crime information (fingerprints, stolen artwork, names of suspected terrorists), training and other support services. It doesn't arrest anyone, and doesn't even have its own officers. Instead, police forces from around the world loan their officers to the organization...

...That's exactly what Gingrich's claims are: conspiracy theories, based on wild conjecture, not reality. For fanning the flames of paranoia, Gringrich's claims earn a Pants on Fire."

Bill O'Reilly:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2010/apr/27/bill-oreilly/oreilly-says-no-one-fox-raised-issue-jail-time-not/

"O'Reilly says no one on Fox raised issue of jail time for not paying health coverage penalties...

...It turns out that several Fox shows did mention the possibility of jail time. Here are some examples:

• Paul Gigot, host of the Journal Editorial Reports, Oct. 3, 2009

'Democrats want to require you to buy health insurance or pay a penalty. But they don't want you to call it a tax. Under the Baucus bill, the so-called individual mandate would require everyone to buy health insurance or pay as much as a $1,900 fee. If you don't pay up, the IRS could punish you with a $25,000 fine or a year in jail...'

...• Andrew Napolitano, guest-hosting the Glenn Beck Program, Nov. 10, 2009

'For the first time in American history, if this bill becomes law, the feds will force you to buy insurance you might not want or may not need or cannot afford. If you don't purchase what the government tells you to buy, if you don't do so when they tell you to do it, if you don't buy just what they say is right for you, the government may fine you, prosecute you, and even put you in jail.'

• Glenn Beck, on his Fox show, Nov. 12, 2009

'But if you don't play by their new rules on health care -- oh, here's a new little twist. Have you heard this? You're going to be looking at a fun little stint in jail...'

...We rate his claim Pants on Fire!"

Sarah Palin:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2009/jun/11/sarah-palin/palin-veto-stimulus-energy-efficiency-building-cod/

"In a Fox News interview with Sean Hannity on June 8, 2009, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin criticized the stimulus package as a 'dizzying debt that we're handing to our kids.'

She said, 'I vetoed a bucket of the money, not a whole lot, we did accept education dollars and infrastructure dollars, but dollars that were tied to universal energy building codes for Alaska, kind of a one-size-fits-all building code that isn't going to work up there in Alaska and really prohibits opportunity to build and to develop, and just wasn't going to work up there in Alaska, so I vetoed a bucket of that money...

...But the experience of Missouri and the explicit letter from the Department of Energy to Palin's office made clear the feds are not imposing a 'one-size-fits-all' building code. Palin sounds like someone looking for a fight when there isn't one. We find her statement to be False."

Eric Cantor:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2009/jan/26/eric-cantor/does-stimulus-package-really-include-300000-sculpt/

"In an interview with Fox News on Jan. 23, 2009, Virginia Rep. Eric Cantor, the House Republican whip, said that in a meeting with President Obama, Cantor asked if he 'could use his influence on this process to try and get the pork barrel spending out of the bill. I mean, there's $300,000 for a sculpture garden in Miami....'

...The bottom line here is that Cantor specifically identified the sculpture garden as part of the stimulus package when it just isn't — which his staff acknowledges. And he has made that false claim repeatedly. He was quoted saying something similar in a Richmond newspaper.

That's not just sculpting the facts. That's Pants on Fire wrong."

[1bad65]

So you're equating Fox News with the National Enquirer...interesting.

In the sense that they both report news faster, and more truthfully than the mainstream press, yes.

It's telling when the National Enquirer is more honest than the mainstream press.

[1bad65]

Not one of those examples is FoxNews covering for lying, cheating, or stealing as you said. So try again.

In those examples they had on guests who said stuff that was incorrect. How is that FoxNews covering for lying, cheating, and stealing done by Republicans, as you asserted?

[David Jamieson]

Dana Perino on Fox News: "We did not have a terrorist attack on our country during President Bush's term."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4kpfhGxJbLc

And not corrected by Sean Hannity.

Neil Cavuto:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ihdb2HV_ceI&feature=player_embedded

"We covered the follow-up marches to that Million Man March..."

"We do not pick and choose these rallies and protests. We were there for the Million Man March, even though, as I pointed out, it turned out to be well shy of a million men."

"You seem to pick and choose what events and protests were worthy. Million Man March, worthy, even though it wasn’t a million men, it was half a million. We covered that because we thought it had a worthy message too. "

"But a Million March March that turns out to be well shy of a million men — even half a million men — does count for them. We covered the follow-up marches to that Million Man March, because no matter the number, it was a big deal."

The Million Man March took place in 1995 (http://www.cnn.com/US/9510/megamarch/10-16/clinton/index.html).

Fox News didn't come into exitence until 1996 (http://www.newscorp.com/management/foxnewschannel.html)

Newt Gingrich:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2010/jan/12/newt-gingrich/gingrich-claims-interpol-will-investigate-american/

"Gingrich claims Obama's order will let Interpol investigate American officials...

...'So you're saying that if there was any abuse by the CIA or something like that, that Interpol now has more authority to come into the United States and investigate it?' O'Reilly asked.

'Yes,' the Georgia Republican replied...

...The key problem with this notion is that Interpol couldn't investigate CIA or American officials, because Interpol doesn't do investigations. Although Interpol is often portrayed in movies as an international police force, solving crimes and arresting bad guys, its actual purposes are modest: It helps police organizations in different countries communicate and coordinate actions, provides databases of crime information (fingerprints, stolen artwork, names of suspected terrorists), training and other support services. It doesn't arrest anyone, and doesn't even have its own officers. Instead, police forces from around the world loan their officers to the organization...

...That's exactly what Gingrich's claims are: conspiracy theories, based on wild conjecture, not reality. For fanning the flames of paranoia, Gringrich's claims earn a Pants on Fire."

Bill O'Reilly:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2010/apr/27/bill-oreilly/oreilly-says-no-one-fox-raised-issue-jail-time-not/

"O'Reilly says no one on Fox raised issue of jail time for not paying health coverage penalties...

...It turns out that several Fox shows did mention the possibility of jail time. Here are some examples:

• Paul Gigot, host of the Journal Editorial Reports, Oct. 3, 2009

'Democrats want to require you to buy health insurance or pay a penalty. But they don't want you to call it a tax. Under the Baucus bill, the so-called individual mandate would require everyone to buy health insurance or pay as much as a $1,900 fee. If you don't pay up, the IRS could punish you with a $25,000 fine or a year in jail...'

...• Andrew Napolitano, guest-hosting the Glenn Beck Program, Nov. 10, 2009

'For the first time in American history, if this bill becomes law, the feds will force you to buy insurance you might not want or may not need or cannot afford. If you don't purchase what the government tells you to buy, if you don't do so when they tell you to do it, if you don't buy just what they say is right for you, the government may fine you, prosecute you, and even put you in jail.'

• Glenn Beck, on his Fox show, Nov. 12, 2009

'But if you don't play by their new rules on health care -- oh, here's a new little twist. Have you heard this? You're going to be looking at a fun little stint in jail...'

...We rate his claim Pants on Fire!"

Sarah Palin:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2009/jun/11/sarah-palin/palin-veto-stimulus-energy-efficiency-building-cod/

"In a Fox News interview with Sean Hannity on June 8, 2009, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin criticized the stimulus package as a 'dizzying debt that we're handing to our kids.'

She said, 'I vetoed a bucket of the money, not a whole lot, we did accept education dollars and infrastructure dollars, but dollars that were tied to universal energy building codes for Alaska, kind of a one-size-fits-all building code that isn't going to work up there in Alaska and really prohibits opportunity to build and to develop, and just wasn't going to work up there in Alaska, so I vetoed a bucket of that money...

...But the experience of Missouri and the explicit letter from the Department of Energy to Palin's office made clear the feds are not imposing a 'one-size-fits-all' building code. Palin sounds like someone looking for a fight when there isn't one. We find her statement to be False."

Eric Cantor:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2009/jan/26/eric-cantor/does-stimulus-package-really-include-300000-sculpt/

"In an interview with Fox News on Jan. 23, 2009, Virginia Rep. Eric Cantor, the House Republican whip, said that in a meeting with President Obama, Cantor asked if he 'could use his influence on this process to try and get the pork barrel spending out of the bill. I mean, there's $300,000 for a sculpture garden in Miami....'

...The bottom line here is that Cantor specifically identified the sculpture garden as part of the stimulus package when it just isn't — which his staff acknowledges. And he has made that false claim repeatedly. He was quoted saying something similar in a Richmond newspaper.

That's not just sculpting the facts. That's Pants on Fire wrong."

It bears repeating. Some people need to have it hammered into their head that they are on the wrong track. It's remarkable how tightly some people cling to their BS.

[1bad65]

It's remarkable how tightly some people cling to their BS.

Like Dan Rather?

[Drake]

Funny part is, the Tea Party is being played like a fiddle. These are just politicians telling you what you want to hear. It's like a millionaire complaining about the wealthy.

[Reality_Check]

Not one of those examples is FoxNews covering for lying, cheating, or stealing as you said. So try again.

In those examples they had on guests who said stuff that was incorrect. How is that FoxNews covering for lying, cheating, and stealing done by Republicans, as you asserted?

No, you claimed:


They are used to being able to lie, cheat, and steal and not have to worry about the press. FoxNews changed all that.

Well, I just listed numerous examples of Fox News allowing Republicans to lie and not calling them on it. They didn't misspeak, they lied.

[1bad65]

Funny part is, the Tea Party is being played like a fiddle. These are just politicians telling you what you want to hear. It's like a millionaire complaining about the wealthy.

How so?

The Tea Party candidate in Kentucky (Rand Paul) won the Republican primary. And now the Republican Party has said they are fully backing his campaign.

And how do you know they are just telling people what they want to hear? They haven't been elected yey. So how can you say they won't keep their word if they are elected?

[1bad65]

Well, I just listed numerous examples of Fox News allowing Republicans to lie and not calling them on it. They didn't misspeak, they lied.

No, that's a cop out.

I want an example of them sitting on news that would hurt a Republican. I gave two examples of the mainstream press sitting on stories, and now it's your turn to show Fox doing the same thing. :D

[1bad65]

They didn't misspeak, they lied.

How do you know that? Did they tell you?

Everyone on this board has made errors or misstyped. It happens, and it's totally different than lying.

[Drake]

How so?

The Tea Party candidate in Kentucky (Rand Paul) won the Republican primary. And now the Republican Party has said they are fully backing his campaign.

And how do you know they are just telling people what they want to hear? They haven't been elected yey. So how can you say they won't keep their word if they are elected?

If you can't figure that one out, then you don't really belong in a political discussion.

[1bad65]

If you can't figure that one out, then you don't really belong in a political discussion.

Please inform me then.

I feel the Republicans are not turning their backs on Tea Party-type candidates. So if you feel I'm wrong, please elaborate.

[Drake]

Please inform me then.

I feel the Republicans are not turning their backs on Tea Party-type candidates. So if you feel I'm wrong, please elaborate.

They aren't turning their backs on them. They are feeding them everything they want to hear. It's politics as usual.

[1bad65]

They aren't turning their backs on them. They are feeding them everything they want to hear. It's politics as usual.

We shall see. You MAY be right, but we wont know until these people start actually voting once elected (assuming they win the elections of course). Maybe they will be honest and vote like they said they would, like Ron Paul does. Of course they be telling people what they want to hear in order to get elected, like Obama did. But I don't see how you can predict that now.

[Drake]

We shall see. You MAY be right, but we wont know until these people start actually voting once elected (assuming they win the elections of course). Maybe they will be honest and vote like they said they would, like Ron Paul does. Of course they be telling people what they want to hear in order to get elected, like Obama did. But I don't see how you can predict that now.

Based on about 200+ years of observed behaviors.