Skip to main content

Cross Posted at The Progressive Zionist

Last nights Republican Arizona debate was truly a Wacktastic event. The candidates covered a gamut of subjects in what might be the Wackiest event I think I have ever heard.

First - if you want some real laughs... Here is the transcript of the debate. Read it and laugh or weep (I am still trying to figure out what to do). Either way - here are some of the gems....

First we have Former Governor Mitt Romney suggesting we use the Saudi Arabians and Turks to arm the Syrian Rebels to help overthrow the Government of Bashir Assad.

We need to work with — with Saudi Arabia and with Turkey to say, you guys provide the kind of weaponry that’s needed to help the rebels inside Syria. This is a critical time for us.
So let's see... we want to give the Wahabite Government of Saudi Arabia money or weapons to influence the overthrow of the Damascus Regime. The same Wahabite Sect that spawned Al-Qaeda, the same Wahabite Sect that runs one of the most backward regimes in the world - we want to have them surrounding our friends in Israel and Jordan? Yeah.... that makes sense. How in G-d's name does that make the situation any better than it is now.

OR... we want Turkey, a country that openly trades with Iran and has become increasingly hostile to both Israel and the U.S. to be sponsoring this change. Okie dokie, that too makes sense (well not really unless you live in the bizarro world that the Republicans seem to be inhabiting).

Of course the biggest FAIL line of the night.... goes to Newt Gingrich who said this:

And I agree with — with Senator Santorum’s point. This is an administration which, as long as you’re America’s enemy, you’re safe.
Perhaps we should ask Osama Bin Laden and a large former portion of the Al-Qaeda leadership about that... Oh wait, we can't - they're dead. Whoops.

But lets not forget "the Mad Elf" and noted racist Ron Paul with this pearl of wisdom:

The Iranians can’t possibly attack anybody. And we’re worrying about the possibility of one nuclear weapon.
Okay, why worry about just one bomb, I mean what can just one little nuke do?... And hey Iran can't attack anyone anyway because we have them surrounded. I guess Mr. Paul has never heard of using proxies in war or using these modern things called Missiles. Someone might want to let him in on this.

But there was much, much more and on different subjects. Here, we once again have Mr. Paul on immigration:

Why is it if an illegal comes across the border and they go on private property, why isn’t that trespassing? And why don’t you have the right to stop it?
Gee, I wonder what Congressman Paul is really saying.... No, actually I don't wonder at all. We all see the "No Trespassing signs" that are posted (usually with pictures of a Gun) - so what does he mean "why don't you have a right to stop it"? Individuals do have a right to stop trespassing particularly if they see someone sneaking over the border. They can call the Border Patrol, or Police - THAT is what they can do.

Ok, so outside of advocating "stopping trespassing" another pearl of wisdom from the Congressman:

But once again, the question is, if you voted for Planned Parenthood like the senator has, you voted for birth control pills. And you literally, because funds are fungible, you literally vote for abortions because Planned Parenthood gets the money — “Oh, I’ll buy birth control pills,” but then they have the money left over to do the abortion.
Thus, in Congressman Paul's world if you support Planned Parenthood and you buy birth control pills then really you are funding and supporting abortion. Of course, for Congressman Paul and his associates, this exercise in illogic escapes them. Here is Rick Santorum on the same issue:
"Over 40 percent of children born in America are born out of wedlock. How can a country survive if children are being raised in homes where it’s so much harder to succeed economically? "
And Mitt Romney:
"Because these kids are raised in poverty in many cases, they’re in abusive settings. The likelihood of them being able to finish high school or college drops dramatically in single-family homes. And we haven’t been willing to talk about this."
And this lack of sensibility in a nutshell is where the Republicans and their candidates COMPLETELY FAIL.... They oppose Birth Control and education about Birth Control as well as groups that promote Birth Control and yet they whine about how there are so many unwanted pregnancies and abortions - THE VERY THING THAT BIRTH CONTROL PREVENTS!!!!

Do they think by teaching morality in schools they are really going to cut down on sex? Apparently they do.

So for those who support Republicans or those who suffer ODS and refuse to support President Obama in 2012.... You own this. This is your future. This is what you are voting for or advocating for when you argue against the President's re-election. Now, dissenters will say "Oh no.. I am just sending the President a message" or "Oh no, I don't support any of this". Well.. newsflash... These are the guys that WILL get elected if you vote against the President OR simply don't vote.

One may disagree with President Obama on issues - I certainly have complaints on a number of things (mostly related to the economy and the lack of focus on economic justice), but, I have no illusions regarding what would be happening if the President had not been elected and I have no illusions about what will happen if he is not re-elected. So, is he the perfect candidate... no but, he is a darn good candidate AND he is a whole lot better than those running against him.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  I have yet to see a Republican... (16+ / 0-)

    who has a real reply to this statement:

    Osama bin Laden is still dead and GM is still alive
    Oh, and I wonder how any of the Republicans expect to win women's votes when they support the right of the states to criminalize behavior in which 99% of women have engaged.

    Preserve sanity in our government. Re-elect and strengthen and recapture. Proud to be a Democrat!

    by Mets102 on Fri Feb 24, 2012 at 10:36:42 AM PST

  •  It's very simple (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    millwood, volleyboy1, Lujane, leftynyc, googie

    If there was anything that could reliably get humans to stop having sex, we wouldn't exist as a species. Same reason we find it so hard to diet. Critters that can just choose to stop eating food tend not to survive.

  •  Oh gosh, thanks for telling me (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    420 forever, chipmo

    What an asshole I am for not falling on my knees and thanking god every day that my president is only sending drones out to kill people only suspected of terrorism.. And anyone standing in the vicinity. Gee, I better fix that right away!

    •  This helps nt (0+ / 0-)

      “In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.” Terry Pratchett

      by 420 forever on Fri Feb 24, 2012 at 11:46:38 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  BTW -The "this helps" was meant as a reply (0+ / 0-)

        to the diary, not to conniptionfit's comment (which I rec'd)

        “In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.” Terry Pratchett

        by 420 forever on Fri Feb 24, 2012 at 12:25:56 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Ah ok so then I get to pull my rec. of your (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Mets102, isabelle hayes

          comment. And I will say the same thing to you that I said to conniptionfit below... If you are cool with a complete rape of the environment, a complete withdrawal of support for women's rights and health, Total war in the Middle East, the complete destruction of the American Social safety, and a host of other things then by all frakking means vote Republican or don't vote because that is what you are going to get. That's the bottom line in this election. Because if you think that President Obama and the Republicans are the same you are seriously delusional.

          •  Unless Republicans gain a majority on both (0+ / 0-)

            the House and the Senate, and elect a President (which is highly unlikely), I don't know how any of these apocalyptic predictions could possibly become reality.

            If anything, Democrats would be more effective acting as an opposition party. At least they would go back to catering to the left.

            As for the safety net issue, let's not forget Obama's role in shifting the argument further to the right , through his wonderful Catfood Comission.

            “In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.” Terry Pratchett

            by 420 forever on Fri Feb 24, 2012 at 01:39:32 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Which they have in the house (0+ / 0-)

              and are predicted to have in the Senate.

              PLUS.... some Democrats will cave in a lot of instances to a Republican majority OR strong minority (49 seats).

              You might not know how those predictions can become reality but then again perhaps you don't remember the Bush Years. Two undeclared wars, a gutting of environmental regulation, a gutting of education, a conservative Supreme Court...

              SO while you want to play "up against the wall" there are millions of people in America that don't. I don't want my kids to continue to watch their schools lose funding. I don't want my kids to grow up in an environmentally destroyed world, but, hey... no problem so you and your buddies can sit around bitching about how we are so oppressed.

              Oh and on those Safety net issues... I personally don't agree with what President Obama has done. I was and am still very pissed about that. But compared to what the Republicans would do.... Jeebus. I would take the Presidents handling of that over the Republicans blowing it up any day of the week.

              Oh yeah... and I too would be all in favor of a left leaning opposition party, that isn't happening this time around with any efffectiveness no matter how many times you click your heels and wish for it. And if you think the country's rightward spin is going to make it easier for your revolution  you are tripping.

    •  Yeah... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      livosh1, Mets102

      I guess you are cool then with "Bombs Away" and Full on committment to Regional War in the Middle East not too mention a domestic agenda that would strip a woman's right to choose, the environment, civil rights etc. all because you are pissed at our war in Afghanistan?

      You own this if you are going this way.

      Oh and no one is telling you that you should fall on your knees for anything or anyone - but, you own this clusterfuck if you have a chance to do something about it and don't, just as I own my vote and ultimately what occurs because of it.

      •  As opposed to partial support (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        420 forever

        to each and every one of those things representing the new acceptable "left" position?

        You get to own that.

        The bourgeoisie had better watch out for me, all throughout this so called nation. We don't want your filthy money, we don't need your innocent bloodshed, we just want to end your world. ~H.R.

        by chipmo on Fri Feb 24, 2012 at 12:51:06 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  actually, I never said that I was cool (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        chipmo

        With any of that, and in fact, I am very much NOT cool with that.  I also never said that I wasn't voting for Obama, as in fact I intend to do so.  My point is simply that you won't change hearts and minds with this sort of belligerent accusation.  It's obnoxious.  You will always draw more votes with honey than with vinegar.  When people express disappointment, or even rage at one or the other Obama policy, you will do much better offering them the opportunity to discuss their point calmly, rather than dismissing their concern out of hand and calling them names.  That is, if your goal is to bring more votes to the president, rather than just to make yourself superior.

        •  Calling "Bullshit" here... (0+ / 0-)

          No one said you have to "fall to your knees" (your hyperbole) and thank g-d for how amazing President Obama is. No one.

          What I am saying very clearly in this diary is that if you choose NOT to vote for the President or do vote for the Republicans, you "own" what comes next. That is your choice.

          Now, since you say you are voting for the President, then hey, you shouldn't have a problem with this because, tell me - where am I not telling the truth in this diary? I mean I used the candidates OWN words and provided the whole transcript.

          I understand why people are pissed off at the President on the Left, but, I also understand that they need to be clear on exactly what they are doing if they pull support from the President.

          As I said in the diary - I am plenty pissed off about certain issues but, on all those things I am mad about, if the Republicans get power those things will be far worse. And that is why, if the President loses a close election - those who didn't turn out get to "own" what happens.

  •  To be fair to RP's argument (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    chipmo, conniptionfit

    (not to the man, who is racist, repellent, and retrograde), I don't believe he is completely offbase in saying:

    The Iranians can’t possibly attack anybody. And we’re worrying about the possibility of one nuclear weapon.
    It is almost the only thing on which I find myself agreeing with him, but contrary to the derangement on the US right, Iran is not actually run by madmen unalive to their own self-interest. Sure, Ahmadinejad is flaky, but he isn't really in charge, either. They know as well as anyone what would happen to them if they actually used a nuke. There is no tactical advantage in having one for them aside from deterrence (our own stated rationale for having them). Further, unlike us, they actually have a nearby nuclear-armed enemy. If they ever do develop a homegrown nuclear weapon, it would almost certainly be to deter the much better armed Israelis from attacking them.

    The above notwithstanding, it is always undesirable to see the nuclear club expanded, no matter who the new member might be. So using military means to attempt to discourage Iran would be incredibly counterproductive. Even if these means do not actually spur Iran to try to attain the same "untouchable" status now held by North Korea, even if they work in preventing Iran from ever gaining such a weapon, they are counterproductive. First, they make us even more unpopular in the region and, second, other countries around the world may well start or speed up their own attempts to gain an arsenal that would prevent them from being treated in the same fashion.

    My country, right or wrong; if right, to be kept right; and if wrong, to be set right.
    --Carl Schurz, remarks in the Senate, February 29, 1872

    by leftist vegetarian patriot on Fri Feb 24, 2012 at 12:40:20 PM PST

    •  Oh really... (0+ / 0-)

      Ok.... a couple of things.

      First off RP is dead wrong on this. The Iranians have multiple ways of attacking without crossing their borders. They have missles that can hit mid-range targets. They have proxies in Hizbollah that can attack across the Northern border, they have a whole range of options.

      But this is the interesting thing:

      If they ever do develop a homegrown nuclear weapon, it would almost certainly be to deter the much better armed Israelis from attacking them.
      What do you think made the Israelis talk about attacking them in the first place? It was because they wanted to develop Nukes. Had they not done that - the Israelis wouldn't say shit about them. So that is 1000% wrong.

      Also, RP's comment about worrying about only 1 nuke is disturbing. Israel is a tiny nation. A bomb on Tel-Aviv would devastate the nation so yeah, worrying about only 1 nuke is very understandable.

      RP would be a freakin' disaster for this country and even the Republicans are not crazy enough to nominate him.

      •  Paul WOULD be a disaster for any country crazy (0+ / 0-)

        enough to put him in charge. I have never argued otherwise. Just about my ONLY point of intersection with his political beliefs is my disinclination to get involved in needless foreign wars.

        Regarding the fact that Iran could successfully attack using nuclear weapons, I believe that Paul's position is not that it was impossible for technical reasons but that it is impossible for political ones. Even aside from Israel's significant retaliatory capability, the US and other nuclear powers would not let such a strike go unpunished (Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has said as much). Nuclear-armed terrorists might bomb Israel--nuclear armed neighbors wouldn't dare.

        Getting into a war with Iran would make our President, who has had a fairly deft hand at foreign policy thus far, our generation's LBJ. I sincerely hope it never comes to that.

        My country, right or wrong; if right, to be kept right; and if wrong, to be set right.
        --Carl Schurz, remarks in the Senate, February 29, 1872

        by leftist vegetarian patriot on Fri Feb 24, 2012 at 02:47:29 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  you win both the logic and reason award! (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      leftist vegetarian patriot

      I wish we could get some of the hawks to calm down and see the sense in your argument.  How hard is it to understand that when you drive people into a corner, they're going to fight you tooth and nail?

  •  I can't believe I wasted time reading this (0+ / 0-)

    trying to figure out what 'purists' were being blamed for now.  It used to be they were only being blamed if by some miracle of Satan the Republican won the election.  Now, apparently, they 'own' the Republican nonsense no matter what, even when the centrists hold opinions far closer to the Republicans than the 'purists' do.  Talk about twisted logic.

    •  Well let's see how wrong you are... (0+ / 0-)

      First off - I am not a Centrist. I would say I am Center-Left. Additionally,  I stated that I had issues with the President in significant ways. Really Erich.. Reading is Fun-da-mental

      Second, the reason they "own" the Republican nonsense is because through their inaction or constant bashing they facilitate the implementation of the Republican agenda. This is not just off election year discussions. This is a Presidential election and the Republicans are offering up nothing but sheer lunacy.

      So, sorry you "wasted your time" but your not having a clue is not my fault. Perhaps if you actually read the diary you would see the point. You know, actually paid attention to paragraphs like these:

      So for those who support Republicans or those who suffer ODS and refuse to support President Obama in 2012.... You own this. This is your future. This is what you are voting for or advocating for when you argue against the President's re-election. Now, dissenters will say "Oh no.. I am just sending the President a message" or "Oh no, I don't support any of this". Well.. newsflash... These are the guys that WILL get elected if you vote against the President OR simply don't vote.

      One may disagree with President Obama on issues - I certainly have complaints on a number of things (mostly related to the economy and the lack of focus on economic justice), but, I have no illusions regarding what would be happening if the President had not been elected and I have no illusions about what will happen if he is not re-elected. So, is he the perfect candidate... no but, he is a darn good candidate AND he is a whole lot better than those running against him.

      •  First off, learn to read yourself. (0+ / 0-)

        Nowhere in my comment did I say you were a centrist.  Second, since I think you're simply wrong about things like your boxquoted 'you own this' crap, I won't bother to be replying again, and adding to my wasted time.

        •  Let me ask you.... given your approach (0+ / 0-)

          here... Do you think for one second whether I care if you think I am right or wrong? Newsflash: I don't.

          Thank goodness you won't be replying again because frankly who needs "dickish" comments in their diary. I don't.

          And, yes you did imply that I was a Centrist in your first asinine comment.

          You could have come in here and politely said: "Hey VB, I disagree with you and here is why". Instead you decided to come in with a seriously "dickish" comment. Why you had to do this? I don't know. Do you normally act like this much of an ass in person? If so, how do people usually react you? Does it make you proud?

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site