Taliban bombers attacked a heavily fortified guesthouse used by Westerners in Kabul on Wednesday, announcing the start of their annual “spring offensive” in defiance of calls from visiting US President Barack Obama that the war was ending.

Seven people were killed after attackers in burqas detonated a suicide car bomb and clashed with guards at the “Green Village” complex of guesthouses used by the European Union, the United Nations and aid groups, officials said.

The assault raises fresh concern about the resilience of the insurgency on the anniversary of Osama bin Laden’s death as NATOwinds down its combat presence in the next two years and hands over responsibility for security to Afghan forces.

The Taliban said the assault was a riposte to Obama, who just hours earlier signed a new partnership pact in Kabul to govern Afghan-US relations after 2014 — a deal the insurgents dismissed as “illegitimate”.

In an election-year address, Obama presented himself as a commander-in-chief capable of ending two long wars, following the US withdrawal from Iraq, and crushing Al-Qaeda, and tried to conjure up a new dawn for a US public exhausted by conflict and recession.

CONTINUED at Yahoo News.

A federal judge has turned aside calls to publicly release video and photographs of the U.S. military raid and aftermath that left al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden dead.

Judicial Watch, a conservative legal group, had asked the Department of Defense to comply with a Freedom of Information request for the material, especially photos of the September 11 mastermind lying dead on the third floor of his Pakistan hideout.

The group argued it was being “irreparably harmed” by the Obama administration’s “unlawful withholding of requested records.”

But Judge James Boasberg ruled Thursday there were legitimate national security interests to deny disclosure.

CONTINUED at CNN.

The paratroopers had their assignment: Check out reports that Afghan police had recovered the mangled remains of an insurgent suicide bomber. Try to get iris scans and fingerprints for identification.

The 82nd Airborne Division soldiers arrived at the police station in Afghanistan’s Zabol province in February 2010. They inspected the body parts. Then the mission turned macabre: The paratroopers posed for photos next to Afghan police, grinning while some held — and others squatted beside — the corpse’s severed legs.

A few months later, the same platoon was dispatched to investigate the remains of three insurgents who Afghan police said had accidentally blown themselves up. After obtaining a few fingerprints, they posed next to the remains, again grinning and mugging for photographs.

CONTINUED at the LA Times.

This video purportedly from Sharana, Afghanistan shows a pilot in an Apache AH-64 helicopter flying close enough to the ground to cause soldiers witnessing the incident to scream “Oh my God” before the helicopter hits the surface, nearly cutting into numerous soldiers before it spins wildly out of control. Supposedly, everyone survived. UPDATE.

There are conflicting reports as to whether or not this was negligent showboating or an accident caused by doing a return to target maneuver during high altitude practice.

But, all reports seem to agree that everyone somehow survived.

UPDATE: If this is Forward Operating Base Sharana in the Paktika Province of Afghanistan (compare to photos of the base) then this pilot was likely from the 1st Battalion 227th Aviation Regiment. We’re trying to confirm the condition and unit.

UPDATE 2: Danger Room places the crash at an outpost in Marzak also in the Paktika region.

UPDATE 3: A military spokesperson confirms the incident happened on February 8th, tellingABC News no one was killed and that the issue was under investigation.

Source: Jalopnik.

A suspected car bomb attack has taken place at Camp Bastion in Afghanistan, Sky Sources have revealed.

The explosion came as US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta flew into the British base on Wednesday.

It is believed that Mr Panetta was still landing or had landed at the time of the explosion, but it is not clear if he was a target.

Sky’s Stuart Ramsay said the blast was caused when a vehicle drove on to the runway either during or after the landing.vs

CONTINUED at Sky News.

In a development that could chill the dedication of every soldier in the field, the U.S. government has refused to deny reports by the government of Afghanistan that NATO has agreed to have the soldiers who burned copies of the Quran face trial.

Last week, Afghan president Hamid Karzai demanded NATO turn over the U.S. troops to be tried in Afghanistan. President Obama subsequently sent a letter to Karzai reassuring him that the troops involved would be punished for their actions.

Part of the three-page letter to Karzai said, “I extend to you and the Afghan people my sincere apologies. We will take the appropriate steps to avoid any recurrence, to include holding accountable those responsible.”

It is unclear exactly what Obama meant by that statement as the White House has not released the full text of the letter. However, the Afghan government may have provided insight into its contents.

Over the weekend, the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan government media and information center website posted a joint statement by the delegations assigned to probe the Quran burning incident.

The statement says that two delegations were created to “investigate the circumstances and causes that have led to the inhumane incident.”

CONTINUED at WND.

Two Nato officers have been killed in the interior ministry in the Afghan capital Kabul, coalition officials say.

Nato said an “individual” had turned his gun on the officers but denied earlier reports he was a Westerner.

Afghan security officials said those killed were an American colonel and major. Local media reports suggest the incident followed a “verbal clash”.

Nato commander Gen John Allen said all Nato personnel were being recalled from Afghan ministries on security grounds.

A UK embassy spokesperson had earlier said all British civilians were being withdrawn from the ministries in what was hoped would be a temporary measure.

The shootings come amid five days of deadly protests over the burning of copies of the Koran by US soldiers.

Taliban statement

The interior ministry was put in lock-down after the shootings, officials said.

The BBC’s Orla Guerin in Kabul says eight shots were reported inside the building, which should be one of the safest in the capital, and that any Afghan who carried out the attack would have had the highest clearance.

Local media reports said the gunman was an Afghan policeman but this has not been confirmed.

CONTINUED at BBC News.

*Written by Rob Rimes.

I’m finally back home and have enough time to actually sit down and write. The drive back from Orlando last night, immediately after the debate was insane! Drivers on Interstate 4 are beyond awful and they have no regard for the written and unwritten rules of the road. I nearly died a few times and by the time I got home, I just needed to chill out with some rum and watch ‘Firefly’ on Netflix. I intended to write this immediately after the debate but it just wasn’t possible. Between the lack of sleep the night before, the traveling and the two days of heavy discussions and debate, I was a vegetable. Thank God for my own bed and a bottle of Cruzan Black Strap rum as I feel much more alive this morning.

To start the day, I rolled out of bed at 7:30, which was pretty hard considering I was up late writing and drinking the night before and I just couldn’t get to sleep in a strange bed. I’ve always had trouble sleeping on the road. In fact, the only hotel that I’m comfortable in is the Hampton Inn across the street from the New Orleans Convention Center. Hell, I even have a hard time sleeping in Vegas without a ton of alcohol as a sedative, which is still partially ineffective, as that oxygen they pump through the vents has me wide awake pretty quickly.

So I woke up, got ready and suited up for my day, packed my suitcase and took a few minutes to watch part of the first half of the Liverpool v. Manchester United game before I had to check out. I went downstairs about twenty minutes into the game and ate breakfast with my friends from the Libertarian Party of Collier County. Shortly after this, we headed into the banquet room for the Libertarian Party of Florida’s business meeting. I’m not going to discuss the details but the meeting was informative and entertaining. Like one would expect, peering behind the scenes of politics at any level, the meeting had it’s fair share of heated debates between different factions all vying for control of the Party. Don’t take this the wrong way, this isn’t a bad thing, it is a very healthy way of addressing issues and concerns. All in all, it was a cool experience to see how the Libertarian Party operates in Florida.

At around 11:30, we split for lunch and I took that time to go upstairs and meet with Gary Johnson one last time before the debate. It was your typical meet and greet but there were more people present at this one than the two that I went to on the previous day. I listened in for awhile but I didn’t really interject myself this round. I asked a lot of questions the day before and I felt it was only fair for those who missed out on the earlier meet and greets to have their chance at asking Governor Johnson whatever it was they wanted to know.

I left after about a half hour, as the subjects being covered were already addressed at the previous meetings. Plus, my claustrophobia was kicking in as ten to fifteen people in a small hotel room is too many. I went downstairs, had some killer buffalo wings and spoke to congressional candidate Calen Fretts. If you live in the Florida panhandle, you should vote for Mr. Fretts. He’s got a good head on his shoulders and is a true representative of liberty. I think that may have been an endorsement. Anyway, we all headed back into the banquet hall at 1:00 for the second part of the business meeting. At 3:00 the debate officially started.

Contrary to what I wrote before, Roger Gary was not a part of the debate. Also, Leroy Saunders, a candidate from the State of New York joined the debate. I don’t know much about Mr. Saunders but his involvement added some energy to the event. Unfortunately, he doesn’t have a Facebook page or anything else on the social networking level and that can only hurt his campaign, in my opinion. He does have a decent website however. The other candidates were mentioned in an earlier article, they are Gary Johnson, R.J. Harris, R. Lee Wrights, Bill Still and Carl Persons.

Before the debate, those of us who are members of the Libertarian Party of Florida were asked to write down any questions they had for the candidates. Two of my three questions were used in the debate and in fact, they were the first two questions used after the moderators were done asking theirs. The first question, which I asked in an effort to give a boost to Bill Still, went directly to Mr. Still first – how’s that for luck? The question was “What’s your plan to bring about economic recovery? Is it as simple as abolishing the Federal Reserve, returning to a gold standard and significantly cutting spending?” The reason I wanted this question to go to Still is that he takes the stance that a gold standard isn’t the answer. I wanted to give him the opportunity to explain his position, which he did by stating that the majority of the gold is held by the elite, so it isn’t a good way to give control of money back to the people and that throughout history, the gold standard hasn’t been as great as many economists claim.

The second question I asked that was used was “Is there ever a time when U.S. military intervention is necessary?” Most of the candidates said “no”. Gary Johnson however pointed to the Afghan War and said that he was for us going over there and wiping out Al-Qaeda but that we should have come back six months after going to war, as we sent the “evildoers” running for the hills. Leroy Saunders pretty much agreed with Johnson and added that if we are attacked, we have the right to go after the attacker and seek justice but other than that, we need to stay out of the business of all these other countries, except for trade – which should be free.

My third question “How would you curb the Supreme Court from making unconstitutional decisions?”, wasn’t asked. In fact, there was nothing asked about how they would work with the judicial branch, which was unfortunate. This is a subject I don’t hear libertarians discuss very often.

While watching the debate, I noticed that there weren’t a lot of philosophical differences between the candidates. They had different ways to achieve certain goals but for the most part, everything they said, I found to be correct and pretty on point. It’s hard to do a proper critique of the content, as these men know their stuff and were all pretty damn effective at expressing it and hammering their points. It’s really different when you have a debate where the candidates aren’t idiots and they don’t have to constantly explain their stance to an idiot crowd. Libertarians are cut from a different cloth and they typically educate themselves on a variety of topics. They are a group that is constantly in the know and on top of things. I’m not trying to toot my own libertarian horn here but those who truly represent our beliefs, don’t need to have everything explained to them. They are the self-educated minority and have reached a higher plane in their political philosophy that one can’t get to by blindly following mainstream ideas and not questioning what they’ve always been taught.

In the end, I felt that Gary Johnson did a solid job and articulated himself well. Bill Still did really good when the questions were economic based but needed to say more on some of the other subjects. R. Lee Wrights was great and really won me over. Even though I hope Johnson gets the nomination, I’d love Mr. Wrights as VP. R.J. Harris did alright but I was expecting a little more thunder, especially after hearing all the positive things my friends and colleagues have said about him. I wasn’t disappointed by my expectations of him but I wasn’t really impressed either. Leroy Saunders did a pretty good job but often times went on some tangents. He needs to get his talking points down and sharpen his skills. He’s a young guy though and he has a lot of time to get it right, just not in this race. Carl Persons had some sharp insight but he just didn’t bring the fire. I honestly can’t see him as a leader, which is unfortunate, as I did like the things he had to say. Truth be told though, I would take anyone of these guys over Barack Obama or the GOP contenders minus Ron Paul.

After the debate, I immediately left and drove home. I wish I could’ve mingled some more and gone to the Libertarian Party dinner but I really needed to get back. All in all it was a great weekend, I got to spend a lot of time picking Gary Johnson’s brain and I met a lot of like minded people from all over the country. It’s not everyday that an average joe can sit down with a presidential candidate and ask them questions face-to-face. I got to do it twice in one day.

*Written by Rob Rimes.

Continued from: The Mitt Romney Problem, Part I: Smaller Government.

“If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy.” – James Madison

Foreign Entanglements:

Mitt Romney is like the world’s dumbest used car salesman for war. While that might sound like an unfair and unjust observation, let’s look at this guy’s ideas on what our foreign policy should be. To be frank, his actions either call for immediate war or create and perpetuate the environment for war. If Mr. Romney were to have his way, we’d be locked in wars with Iran and China not to mention all the other ones we’re involved in at the moment. Also, who’s to say that this guy wouldn’t pile on even more wars with his careless actions due to his inability to understand why other nations hate the American Empire.

Let’s first look at Iraq, an issue that Romney has either been confused by or has flip-flopped on, the latter is more likely as that is his modus operandi. On whether or not he has supported the war, Mitt’s stance has been cloudy to say the least. The main reason is that there isn’t any consistency between the different times he’s been asked the question. Recently in December of 2011, Romney said that if he had intel that said that there weren’t nuclear weapons in Iraq, then we shouldn’t have invaded that country. In fact, here is how that interview with NBC’s Chuck Todd went down:

Romney: ”If we knew at the time of our entry into Iraq that there were no weapons of mass destruction, if somehow we had been given that information, obviously we would not have gone in.”

Todd: ”You don’t think we would have gone in?”

Romney: ”Well of course not. The president went in based upon intelligence that they had weapons of mass destruction. Had he known that that was not the case, the U.N. would not have put forward resolutions authorizing this type of action. The president would not have been pursuing that course. But we did not know that. Based upon what we knew at the time, we were very much under the impression as a nation, our president was under the impression, that they had weapons of mass destruction, that Saddam Hussein was intent on potentially using those weapons, and so he took action based upon what he knew. But to go back and say, well knowing what we know now would we have gone in. Well, knowing what we know now, they did not have weapons of mass destruction, there would have been no effort on the part of our president or others to take military action.”

Odd, considering what he has said before this interview. During a 2008 presidential debate, Mitt Romney said the Iraq War was “a good idea worth the cost in blood and treasure we have spent. It was the right decision to go into Iraq. I supported it at the time; I support it now.” For the record, it was well-known in 2008 that Iraq didn’t have any weapons of mass destruction. You see, Mitt Romney’s stance in the Iraq situation is all over the place. Like most answers he gives, the words he speaks are dependent upon who he is talking to or what the political climate is at the time. Romney, like the professional politician he is – yet claims he isn’t, will say anything to win the hearts of the voter. The reason I have started with this example is to show you how soulless the man is and how his stance on the other foreign entanglements, which I’m about to get into, could be nothing but pandering bullshit and probably is.

On the ongoing war in Afghanistan, Romney has given us a giant spoonful of his bullshit rhetoric. He’s said that he will refuse to talk to the Taliban. Well okay asshole, how do you expect to get anything done or solve the problems over there if you aren’t willing to talk to the other side of the conflict? Romney is either a complete fucking idiot on this issue, a total coward or just pandering to the GOP voters in order to get cheap pops at the debates.

So with the moronic stance that Mitt Romney has, what can we expect for the future of the United States-Afghanistan relationship? Well, contrary to the sort of hype and bullshit that these politicians and pundits try to feed you, we cannot conquer Afghanistan and force our ways on them. The country doesn’t have the structure of a typical nation. It is made up of feuding tribes that fight for dominance and supremacy; there isn’t one organized enemy to point your guns at. Sure, the Taliban takes the blame for everything but the issue of Afghanistan certainly isn’t as black and white as that.

Besides, who gave the Taliban their power to begin with? Well, the United States did. Why? Because we were scared shitless of the Soviets during the Cold War and we training and gave arms to these men that we now call terrorists. If Mitt even listened to what the people in countries like Afghanistan said about us, he’d understand their hatred towards America. However, guys like Mitt (and Santorum and Gingrich for that matter) have all the answers and have apparently never heard of a little something called “cause and effect”. If he had, he’d know that these people are sick of us being in their country swinging our dicks around and telling them what to do. Common sense is just too fucking much for some people to muster!

On the issue of Libya, Mitt has also pandered and always found himself on the side of the issue that best fits his situation at the time. In March of 2011, around the time the conflict started, Romney immediately came out in a radio interview and said that Obama waited too long and should have acted earlier. He said that the president’s handling of the situation made him look “weak” and that we should have led the charge instead of following NATO. Jesus, where do I even start on how ridiculous his statements are? The truth is, we shouldn’t have been involved.. AT ALL! Once again, America intervenes and oversees a regime change. Throughout history, this action has always proved to be disastrous. Also, Romney apparently, at that time, didn’t care about the Constitution as the invasion of Libya wasn’t properly brought before Congress. None of this matters though, as Romney flip-flopped again and again on this – like every other issue.

Less than a month later, Ol’ Mittens was in Las Vegas to speak to the Republican Jewish Coalition. When asked about his stance on Libya, Mitt Romney ignored the concerns and refused to provide an answer. In fact, it was reported by Las Vegas Review-Journal that:

Romney was silent on Libya, the newest and stickiest military and U.S. policy problem as the United States and its NATO allies enforce a no-fly zone to help rebels oust Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi. After his speech, Romney refused to take questions from reporters about his position on Libya. Instead, he and his wife, Ann, fled down a hallway and escaped up an escalator at The Venetian, where the event was held. ‘I’ve got a lot of positions on a lot of topics, but walking down the hall probably isn’t the best place to describe all those,’ Romney said, deflecting a Libya query as he walked quickly with half a dozen journalists trailing him.

Writing about this situation, Daniel Larison of American Conservative said:

Romney seems unable to stake out a foreign policy position until after the Republican consensus has formed, and he then adapts himself to whatever that consensus happens to be…This does save him from the acrobatics required to maintain an anti-Obama position when Obama switches from restraint to starting a war, but it is just another reminder that Romney doesn’t hold foreign policy positions so much as he mimics those who do….For someone who is so fond of mocking Obama’s leadership or lack thereof, it is revealing that when Romney has to stake out a position one way or the other on a controversial question he is unable to show any leadership at all.

So while Romney went from bashing Obama for acting too late and then went mute on the situation, he then flip-flopped completely and took the position that Obama was acting too aggressively! Mitt wrote an op-ed for National Review where he stated that Obama should have just enforced a no fly zone, this way Libya couldn’t bomb their own citizens. Right, the Libyans bombing the Libyans is what we need to worry about? Has Mitt seen the pictures of Tripoli before and after the NATO strikes? I think NATO shouldn’t have been flying over Libya because they treated the damn place like a litter box in the house of a cat hoarder!

Romney then decided that maybe he did like the Constitution and that the way this war started, being that it wasn’t approved by Congress, suddenly had Mitt’s panties in a bunch. He wrote:

Military action cannot be under-deliberated and ad hoc. The president owes it to the American people and Congress to immediately explain his new Libya mission and its strategic rationale.

Well shit man, you were all for it only a few months earlier, what-the-fuck-ever. Shortly after that he was quoted as saying:

Now the president is saying we have to remove Gaddafi. Who’s going to own Libya if we get rid of the government there?

Funny he should say that since Gaddafi was killed shortly after that. After Gaddafi’s death Romney said:

I have seen those reports and if accurate I think the response is it’s about time. This was a tyrant who has been killing his own people and of course is responsible for the lives of American citizens lost in the Lockerbie attack….I think people across the world recognize that the world is a better place without Moammar Gaddafi.

Apparently he wasn’t too concerned with who would take over for Gaddafi, as he was worried about it a few weeks prior. The truth is, the “freedom fighters” that the United States and NATO helped and have propped up as the new dictators are comprised of Taliban members – you know, those people Romney refuses to talk to. Point is, Mitt is all over the place on this shit and the term he is often times associated with, “flip-flopper”, is a massive understatement!

On Iran, Mitt Romney is already geared up to go to war if he is elected president. He feels that if they are developing a nuclear missile, then it is America’s job to go over there and bomb the bejesus out of them. The truth doesn’t matter to guys like Romney, even with Defense Secretary Leon Panetta recently admitting that Iran has no immediate plans for a nuclear warhead. Nope, who cares about the truth, lets just keep selling lies to the American people and push the nation towards war with Iran. But what’s the real issue here? If it is known that Iran is not making a nuclear bomb, then why is Romney (and also Gingrich and Santorum) so quick to go to war with them? Could it be because they just don’t want Iran working on getting any sort of nuclear capabilities or is it something more sinister?

Well, Romney wants to put serious sanctions on Iran, which will just harm the innocent people there and in turn, create another group of people who would have a reason to hate us. Romney also wants to focus these sanctions on the CBI (Central Bank of Iran). Why does Romney want to try and cripple the Iranian financial system? Maybe it’s just a way to thank all of his top ten contributors, each of which is a major banking firm. Now I am not trying to play conspiracy theorist here but when you destroy a country’s financial infrastructure, it isn’t hard to move your banks in and start trading off of the resources of that toppled country. When that main resource is oil, it isn’t hard to see where this is going. Hell, former economic hitman John Perkins has made a career out of writing about this stuff, which is a lot more common than people think.

What Romney should be doing is trying to tap into the growing liberty movement in Iran. The youngsters there want to be free and generation after generation, regardless of what their monstrous Iranian government tries to do to stop it, the people become more and more Americanized. Our influence on the younger culture of Iran is paramount and for a so-called leader to bomb them instead of reaching out to them, as the guard will change eventually, is completely careless, reckless and vile! It’s obvious that Romney doesn’t care abut the people of Iran or he just chooses to be ignorant of what is actually going on over there.

This brings me to China, a country that has more in common with Iran than most people know. This is because China also has a younger generation who are sick and tired of the archaic ways of their leaders and want nothing more than a freer society that resembles something along the lines of the American Dream as opposed to the stifling grip of communism and tyrannical control. Instead of recognizing this and working towards a better situation with China through free trade and friendship, Mitt Romney wants to get stricter and punish China, who we do a lot of business with.

Mitt Romney wants tariffs and sanctions and all types of stupid crap, which will just hurt China and hurt us in the long run. Romney believes the fairytale that if we make business difficult for those we don’t like then somehow they’ll bow down to the great and powerful America and thus jobs and prosperity will magically return to the United States. I guess Romney can’t wrap his head around the fact that a tariff is a tax that will just be pushed on to the end consumer, that being the American people. Essentially, we will have to pay for this form of punishment from China, as they will just pass the buck to us. Doesn’t Romney the self-procliamed King of Business understand how this stuff works?

He talks about how China needs to be slapped around because they manipulate our currency. I guess Mitt fails to understand something else. The truth is, we manipulate our own currency by allowing the Federal Reserve the power to print money and manipulate the markets! Romney wants to punish China over an issue where we are the real criminals! I hear him talking all this trash about being strict and not rolling over for the Chinese but I don’t hear anything about shutting down the Federal Reserve. Oh yes, I almost forgot, Mitt has all those big banks in his pocket and he wouldn’t want that!

Mitt Romney’s stance with China can only lead us down one path and that is a trade war with the biggest manufacturer in the world. We will lose more American jobs, people will buy less from us and our currency will continue to be devalued because this puppet of the corrupt financial system either can’t see for the forest for the trees or he has to obey the masters who own his campaign.

On foreign policy, Mitt Romney is a joke and a whole slew of disasters just waiting to happen. For someone who claims to be so business savvy, you’d expect him to bring some actual knowledge to the table. His understanding of foreign affairs and economics is about as on par as that moronic blowhard Bill O’Reilly. Chances are Mitt, like O’Reilly, has probably never heard of Keynesian economics. He certainly doesn’t know how to take this great country of ours and pull it out of the depths in an attempt to set it back on the right track. Mitt Romney’s foreign policy will cost us so much money that our economy will become a sinkhole. The damage is already damn near irreparable and Romney will only make it worse. This shuckster should either open a used car lot or a pawn shop because if he has his way, we’ll be in a few more expensive wars and in a trade battle with China. Mitt Romney wants America to wear cement shoes to the pool party.

“Domestic policy can only defeat us; foreign policy can kill us.” – John F. Kennedy

Continued shortly in Part III..

*Written by Rob Rimes.

I was late watching this debate, as I had to check the replay. Unfortunately, I wasn’t home and I was unable to take serious notes on it. I was at my boss’ house due to it being the annual national sales meeting for my real job and between the alcohol and festivities, this thing was hard to watch in any serious sort of manner. I regret not being able to give it my full attention but the whiskey and wine were flowing, the girls were distracting to say the least and the copious amounts of food transplanted from several of the world’s most exotic regions somehow took precedence over watching the most recent episode of ‘Three Tyrants and a Wizard’. I do apologize as I have been trying to chronicle every damn one of these things but there are just so many, seven this month alone, and turning down a chance to literally spend the night at a party thrown at the mansion of the Indian version of Caligula is incredibly hard to pass up. Bourbon soaked tits are better to stare at than three dudes arguing over their dicks and the fourth shaking his head because America’s fallen so far that we’re literally having a debate about three dicks.

Now I did go back and read the transcripts from the debate and I did watch Ron Paul’s highlights – the only important parts, as the other three’s highlights would’ve put me to sleep in my hungover stupor. If it wasn’t for my boss’ brother handing me a Bloody Mary when I walked through the office door this morning, I’d probably be curled up in a ball under my desk hiding from the flickering power-draining headache-inducing fluorescent lights over my head. Needless to say, I am not a Bloody Mary fan by any stretch of the word, as it just conjures up the thought of drinking vodka with some ketchup spilled in it, but that fucking cocktail hit the spot today and I’m about 70 percent recovered from guest-starring in the Bollywood version of ‘Eyes Wide Shut’.

I know I’m rambling about my drunken escapades and that might disinterest you, as you came to this article to experience my certain style of critique on these things, so for that I’m sorry. I will do my best to give you the rundown of the debate, as I saw it between nude champagne showers and Chilean sea bass dodgeball.

So I’m just going to go down the line and analyze the candidates one-by-one starting with Rick Santorum. He started by talking about illegal immigration, border fences and telling the story about his immigrant family for the umpteenth time. He got into it with Ron Paul on foreign policy and failed miserably as he tried to cover up the fact that he’s a goddamned idiot on the affairs of Central and South America. I’ll write more on this when I get to Ron Paul, who owned Santorum like a twenty dollar prostitute. Santorum goes on to bitch about Fannie and Freddie and in turn blasts Newt and Mitt for playing personal politics and distracting everyone from discussing the real issues. On the subject of space, Santorum said that America is a frontier country and space is the next frontier to conquer. He calls for the private sector to be more involved with NASA but doesn’t fully support government being out of it. On health care he goes on and on about how awesome he is for trying to create health savings accounts. If you were so awesome, you would’ve got it done pal! He then gets into a health care argument with Romney that is neither interesting or worth writing about but what the hell, I’ll give you the nutshell version. Basically it went something like this:

Rick Santorum: “Fuck Romneycare”
Mitt Romney: “But it was only at the state level Ricky Baby!”
Rick Santorum: “I don’t care Mitt! You’re a bitch and you gave Obama the blueprints to evil!”
Mitt Romney: “Ricky Baby, you’re so silly!”
Rick Santorum: “Jesus Bible! No health care for the gays!”

Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich spent most of their time arguing about who was a bigger bastard while both looked like big bastards. Mittens talked about “self-deportation” again. If these guys believe in such a thing as an effective way of handling a situation, can we get them to believe in “self-governance”? If they trust those illegal immigrants to leave on their own accord after sneaking in here in an effort just to come back in a way that is much more difficult, they’ve got to believe that we’re all capable of managing every other aspect of our lives? I mean, they are putting blind faith into something so farfetched that they’ve got to be down with just saying “fuck it” and letting us run our own shit, right?

On the immigration subject, Newt says that Romney is the most anti-immigrant candidate out of the four. Romney gets all pissy and pulls his two Latino cards. The first he pulls is Marco Rubio, the Cuban American senator that came to his defense on immigration. The second card Mitt pulled was Mexico, as his father was born there. I was born in a hospital bro, that doesn’t make me a doctor!

Romney and Gingrich argue about immigration for awhile and then they argue about Fannie and Freddie and who is the biggest crook. Newt, once he gets away from the lame feud for a minute, goes on some tangent about making a moon base. Newt later said that Jacksonville was going to get big pimpin’ because the Panama Canal was widening and would bring them more boat traffic. Shortly after that we were treated to a Santorum-Gingrich-Romney three-way which was like stumbling upon a middle-aged homosexual version of Cinemax at three in the morning. It was a bitch and rant fuck fest that no one in their right mind needed to see, unless of course you’re into middle-aged gay men. If you are, I mean absolutely no disrespect. Do ya thang homegirl!

Fuck all these queens, let’s get to Ron Paul, the only adult in the room. On immigration, he says that if we had a working healthy economy we wouldn’t be so worried about the immigration issue as we’d be looking for workers to fill jobs. He adds that the way we are handling our borders is actually harming our economy. He points out that we don’t have the right amount of resources on the border and that we should pay more attention to our border instead of the border between Pakistan and Afghanistan.

On the Latin America issue, Ron Paul says, “Free trade is the answer.” He throws in the fact that we’d be a lot better off if we practiced free trade with Cuba. He adds that he doesn’t like the idea that America thinks that they can go down to Central and South America and try to dictate which kind of leaders they need down there, as it is none of our business. He says that the best way to influence other nations isn’t by telling them what to do, it is by practicing friendship and free trade. Paul then references Santorum who said that we have to stand up for these nations. Paul explains that standing up for nations often times comes with us imposing ourselves on the people of these countries while picking their dictators, undermining their government and sending them a lot of money. He warns that this sort of tactic always backfires and the people we are “supporting” end up hating us. Ron Paul calls Rick Santorum’s ideas on foreign policy the “bully way”. Paul adds that he knows a better to way to work with people other than using force. Santorum shakes his head, mumbles some stupid crap and then changes his tampon while wiping his bitch tears. Checkmate Paul!

Ron Paul is asked if Mitt and Newt should return the money they’ve made off of Fannie and Freddie and he responds to thunderous applause when he says, “That subject doesn’t interest me a lot.” Paul says that Fannie and Freddie should have been auctioned off right after the crash came. He said that if it was sold, the problem would’ve been “cleansed” by now. Ron Paul says that he’s been trying to prevent this stuff which is why we need to end the Federal Reserve.

CNN’s Wolf Blitzer asks says that Ron Paul, if elected, would be the oldest president ever. He asks Paul if he would make his medical records public to show the people that he is healthy. Blitzer basically wants to paint Ron Paul as a geezer who could croak tomorrow and I find the question to be repugnant, just as I found it distasteful when the same issue was brought up with Ronald Reagan years ago. Paul said that he’ll prove how healthy he is by delivering an open challenge to all the other candidates to face him in a 25 mile bike ride in the heat of Texas. Ron Paul face-palmed the shit out of Wolf Blitzer and the other candidates with that answer. He also took a shot at Wolf himself when he jokingly pointed out that there are laws against age discrimination and that Blitzer should be careful. Wolf, after getting bitchslapped, tries to cover up the stupid question by asking the other candidates if they’d release theirs. What a tool.

On space spending, Ron Paul says that he would only approve funding on stuff that fits under defense. He says that going to the Moon and Mars is fantastic but that it could be done better by the private sector if their hands weren’t tied. Ron Paul then takes a shot at Newt, saying that he has stretched the truth with all his “balanced budget” claims from the days when he was Speaker of the House. Ron Paul is taking solid shots backed by facts and there is nothing that can be done about it when he brings these guys a dose of the truth. Strangely, Newt Gingrich was very polite and gracious to Ron Paul all night and gave him props for his ideas in several areas.

In the end, the debate was lightyears better than the NBC debate a few days prior. CNN does the best job, in my opinion, and I’ve watched every single one of these debates. Kudos to Wolf for rocking the house, even with a few prickish questions. Ron Paul owned the motherfucker, Santorum did decent if you are into his religio-fascist bullshit while Newt and Mitt looked like a few bickering Tinas arguing over the last pack of Lee Press-On Nails at K-Mart.

And that’s all I got because I immediately returned to my whiskey-scented orgy on the south lawn.

Grading Scale:
Grade A+: Ron Paul
Grade C-: Rick Santorum
Grade D+: Newt Gingrich
Grade D: Mitt Romney

*Best debate moment in recent memory: