*Written by Rob Rimes.

I had a long weekend but it is now over. My time in Gainesville with my cousin and friends was a blast, as I haven’t actually been partying too hard over the last month. This trip was a good way for me to drown in bourbon, Irish whiskey, tequila, Long Islands, Guinness, ginger beer and Pabst. I’ve been trying to be healthier in an attempt to lose weight and potentially live a somewhat longer life but even with my more health conscious attitude, my inner party monster still needs to be entertained and unleashed every now and again. What better time than with other party monsters that I genuinely cherish in a wild college town during graduation weekend? There was no point in taking any prisoners, as we ran roughshod over downtown Gainesville leaving no bottle unturned. A few days later, my stomach still hurts and my head is still swimming in a sea of 86 proof delirium – a special shout out goes to 1.75 liters of Old Crow Reserve.

To those who might find my more health conscious behavior a bit unsettling, there is no need to worry. It’s not called selling out when you do it because your liver hurts and you’ve been pissing blood. The blood part was not related to the booze but it was still a wake up call to straighten my shit out some what. Have no fear though, I will not go soft and become a shell of my former self like so many writers and artists who went clean only for their work to suffer and lose its appeal. Trent Reznor immediately comes to mind, although his Academy Award for a very boring and minimalist film score probably proves me wrong but only if you take the Academy seriously and turn a blind eye to their petty politics.

Anyway, my first night in Gainesville on this latest trip was intense. It started almost immediately with two Guinness Draughts and four Long Island iced teas while I watched my friends play pool. I didn’t participate in the contest because I was enjoying my own game of drown the writer in the dark and dingy corner of smoke and neon light. It is a one-player game but the odds are always steep and the challenge is never dull. Needless to say, I won the bout and went on to fight in other bouts in other venues for the remainder of the 48 hour tournament.

The weekend wasn’t all about completely succumbing to vices however. I mean, I never came across any other substances to entertain myself with and that’s fine, the booze was enough. I did get to spend a lot of the time talking politics and economics with the college kids, some of them a part of the Occupy Gainesville movement. Now while we didn’t see eye-to-eye on solutions, we did agree on the vast majority of the problems. My job, from my standpoint, was to try and get them to understand that you can’t just blame the banks for the madness. The government is just as responsible as is the Federal Reserve. Truth is, they were really receptive to a lot of the things I was saying. Now I had half a dozen conversations with a dozen or more people but for the most part, other than two or three close-minded joiners, they got what I was saying and left the conversations with the intent to look into their new perspective on these matters themselves. One of them even promised to pick up some of the books I wrote down for him on a napkin (titles by Ron Paul, Murray Rothbard, Ludwig von Mises, F.A. Hayek, Henry Hazlitt, Milton Friedman and more modern authors Jeffrey Tucker and Stefan Molyneux – who has a ton of free e-books).

One interesting thing I discovered among talking to multiple college kids, is that their only real beef with Ron Paul is his pro-life stance. I told them that it is an issue I also disagree with Dr. Paul on. However, I told them that if you look at the rest of his platform and like it, writing him off over one issue is a bit careless. Especially since Dr. Paul thinks that it should be an issue left up to states and not the federal government regardless of his personal opinion on it. Most of these kids understood that but had a hard time envisioning a country were states’ rights were protected, at least on this issue. I explained that you cannot pick and choose issues and that the rule had to apply with everything. If you make one exception, you will make plenty more. They got and respected it but still had a bug in their ass about it and I get that. I then spoke to them about Gary Johnson who is basically a clone of Ron Paul policy-wise but is pro-choice instead of pro-life. Most of the people I talked to had not heard of Johnson and were actually pretty excited upon finding out his stance on the abortion issue. They also liked that Gary Johnson was not a Democrat or a Republican. I didn’t bring up all the issues they said they had with Obama however, as there were a lot more than what they had with Paul. Regardless of this, they will probably vote for Obama again even though they claim they are opposed to war, Gitmo and a plethora of other issues he has failed them on.

Now don’t get me wrong, not everyone was cordial. There were those few dumb bastards in the mix and fucking with them and sending them off in a self-conlficted rage was quite amusing. One kid was calling for anarchy and at the same time was calling for government to step in and regulate the banks more. Point is, this kid’s whole world-view was completely hypocritical. On one hand, this kid (and those like him) want to scream “Fuck the man!” and “Fuck the police!” while on the other hand want the government (the man and the police) to step in and regulate everything even more than they do now. I don’t understand how so many young people can’t seem to make a correlation between these two things? You want the government who is bought and paid for by the banks to regulate the banks? You can’t see how this is completely asinine, let alone how this is what has caused all these problems to begin with? Your solution to the problem is more of the problem itself? Does the meth addict break the cycle by taking more meth? No, the meth addict dies! Common sense is like a disease in the hipster socialist-anarchist psyche.

The ones who are so passionate in their ignorance don’t even care about the real crux of the problem. They want to continue to buy into their conflicted and hypocritical indoctrination and smash anyone who doesn’t swim in their sea of shit. On top of that, they don’t want to better themselves, they want to stay at the bottom so they can continue to bitch as they wallow in dirt and filth because if they were to try and actually get out of it, they’d be outed as a “sell out” or even worse a “hard-working capitalist pig consumer”. Yep, keep pointing your Djarum-clutching fingers as you slur your PBR-soaked words kiddies.

Not all is lost on the generation after mine however. Amongst the sea of those I dealt with, only a few were bad apples and completely hopeless. I remember myself at that age, as I had a similar view of the world. It was someone challenging me on my preconceived notions that got me to pay attention and learn how this whole game really works. If at least one of those kids breaks free from the mold and is affected by our encounter, my debt is repaid. I enjoyed the friendly and civil debates and even had fun with the assholes. In the end, it is about standing your ground and living by your own code not the code of some undefined group whose ideology is lesser than the sum of its parts.

I got home, feeling pretty good about how most of the weekend went down. I also felt great for ignoring my responsibilities for a few days while not even paying attention to what was going on in the news. I didn’t really miss anything, other than Rick Santorum finally wiping away his bitch tears to endorse Mitt Romney, which just gave me flashbacks to 2008 when he was riding that Romney train hard. Something tells me that if I had the same debates with Santorum supporters that I had with the college youth of Gainesville, it wouldn’t have been as civil. I hope that all of those sweater-vests the Santorumites bought up like quaaludes at a disco are constructed of Iranian dog hair and Chinese asbestos. It would be the perfect ending to such a vile group of people.

Philip Zelikow, top adviser to Condoleezza Rice, talks to the Guardian about his top secret 2006 memo on interrogation

A senior Bush administration official and former head of the 9/11 Commission has described CIA interrogation techniques used on alleged terrorists as torture and said he warned in a secret memo at the height of the “war on terror” that they breached the US’s own war crimes laws.

Philip Zelikow, who was the US secretary of state Condoleezza Rice’s most senior official, told the Guardian that he now regards what officials euphemistically called “enhanced interrogation”, such as sleep deprivation and waterboarding, as torture – although he did not use that word at the time and is reluctant to use it now.

Zelikow, whose official position was counsellor to Rice, said he had her support on the issue. As the state department’s representative on the National Security Council committee considering legal issues around violent interrogations, he expressed his concerns at the time in a top secret 2006 memorandum.

The memo, to other members of the committee who represented the justice and defence departments and intelligence services, warned that the CIA’s use of waterboarding and other abuses were almost certainly in breach of US and international law. But the memo so alarmed the administration that it was immediately rejected and all copies were ordered destroyed.

A draft version of the memo, found at the state department, wasreleased this week following a freedom of information request by the National Security Archive in Washington.

Zelikow told the Guardian in an email exchange that while he did not use the word torture in the memo, he believes that is what the CIA was using. “I do regard the interrogation practices and conditions of confinement, taken together, as torture – in the ordinary layman’s use of this term. But … ‘torture’ is also a term with a carefully worded legal meaning and definition. So I tend to avoid talking about ‘torture’ because it would appear I’m accusing officials of criminal activity, which I’m not sure was the case,” he said.

“I have sometimes just referred to ‘physical torment’ instead, which seems expressive and is accurate.”

Zelikow said he is uncertain whether individuals in the CIA or other services are guilty of war crimes or have other criminal liability over the use of torture because they were told by the office of legal counsel, which provides legal advice to the president, that techniques such waterboarding, which causes the sensation of drowning, sleep deprivation and stress positions, were legal.

“For better or worse, but mainly better, to be a crime one must violate the law. To be an intentional crime … So the attorney general’s legal position telling officials their conduct is legal really did matter,” he said. “Had I been in the attorney general’s or OLC’s position in 2002, I would not have interpreted either the war crimes statute (as written then) or the torture statute in the way those officials interpreted them. But they made their choices and had the authority to make them.”

But he said he has little doubt that the methods were unacceptable. “I think what they did was wrong,” he said.

CONTINUEd at The Guardian.

It’s a seemingly absurd idea on the surface: Why would democrats and liberals want to vote for Ron Paul (a Republican) over President Obama? Maybe because they want freedom instead of tyranny, it turns out. Because if you’re a total slave to the police state, it doesn’t really matter whether you’re on the left or the right, does it?

Here, I give you ten solid reasons why even liberals and progressives are supporting Ron Paul. And by the way, I don’t worship Ron Paul or any individual. What I honor isthe principlesthat Ron Paul stands for — the very same principles President Obama has outright abandoned in his broken promises and disturbing reversals against the American people. Out of all the candidates, only Ron Paul has the ethical and moral strength to carry out his office from a place of principle rather than betrayal.

#1) Ron Paul supports decriminalizing marijuana and ending the War on Drugs. Obama does not.

Remember when Obamapromisedhe would decriminalize marijuana, but now his own administration continues to raid legal drug dispensaries in California? That’s a classic Obama lie: Say one thing to get elected, then turn around and do the exact opposite.

Ron Paul, on the other hand, openly supports decriminalizing marijuana and ending the failed War on Drugs. Although he doesn’tpromoterecreational drug use (and neither do I), he understands that treating weed smokers as hard-core criminals is ethical, morally and economically wrong. See my related article on Snoop Dogg and his recent drug bust in Texas:http://www.naturalnews.com/034612_S…

#2) Ron Paul supports the freedom to choose what you eat and drink, including raw milk, but the Obama administration continues to run armed raids on raw milk farmers

Under Ron Paul, the FDA would be forced to end its vicious armed raids on Amish farmers and raw dairy producers. Obama has openly allowed such armed raids to continue under his watch, refusing to even take a stand for food freedom in America.

Ron Paul understands thatliberty is the most important component of abundance. If you are not free to choose what you want to eat, smoke what you want to smoke, and choose your own type of medicine and health care, then you are a slave, not a citizen. Ron Paul seeks toget Big Government out of your life, away from your kitchen, out of your medicine cabinet and away from your children.

#3) Ron Paul would seek to eliminate FDA censorship of the scientifically-validated health claims for herbs, nutritional supplements and natural remedies

Under Bush and Obama, the FDA’s continued censorship of truthful statements about medicinal herbs, homeopathy and nutritional supplements has been fully supported by the White House. Obama is just a corporate puppet, of course, and that means he does whatever the powerful corporations tell him to do — especially the Wall Street and Big Pharma corporations. So it’s no surprise he hasn’t taken a stand to support health freedom for foods and supplements.

But Ron Paul has pushed theHealth Freedom Protection Actyear after year (http://www.naturalnews.com/019382_H…), tirelessly working tolegalize nutrition in Americaand restore Free Speech for Chinese Medicine herbs, Western medicine herbs and dietary supplements. Where Obama wants people to remain ignorant and malnourished, Ron Paul wants to restore your right to know the truth about supplements and natural medicine. As Ron Paul said in late 2005:

“The Health Freedom Protection Act will force the FDA to at last comply with the commands of Congress, the First Amendment, and the American people by codifying the First Amendment standards adopted by the federal courts. Specifically, the Health Freedom Protection Act stops the FDA from censoring truthful claims about the curative, mitigative, or preventative effects of dietary supplements, and adopts the federal court’s suggested use of disclaimers as an alternative to censorship. The Health Freedom Protection Act also stops the FDA from prohibiting the distribution of scientific articles and publications regarding the role of nutrients in protecting against disease.”

#4) Ron Paul would shut down secret military prisons like Gitmo, but Obama wants to expand those prisons and fill them with Americans!

It is now common knowledge that Obama lied when he said he would shut down Guantanamo Bay. As it turns out, Obama actually signed the NDAA (National Defense Authorization Act) on New Year’s Eve (when no one would notice). The NDAA grants the U.S. government the claimed “legal” right to “indefinitely detain” U.S. citizens, throw them in secret military prisons, interrogate them and even kill them withno due process. All this can now take place without a person even beingchargedwith a crime, much less given their day in court. (http://www.naturalnews.com/034537_N…)

Obama quietly signed this bill on New Year’s Eve, hoping no one would notice. This is how low his morals have stooped, by the way — to signing traitorous bills in the dark of night, on the evening before a major holiday where half the nation is hung over from alcohol. Why no signing ceremony with full coverage by CNN, huh? Maybe it’s because nationaltraitorsdon’t want their crimes against the United States Constitution to be filmed on camera.

In signing this, Obama violated his own oath of office, nullified the U.S. Bill of Rights, and essentially committed an act of mass civil rights violations against the People of America. Rep. Ron Paul, on the other hand, is one of the very few people who has openly and sternly opposed this unlawful NDAA which blatantly and arrogantly violates the U.S. Constitution and its Bill of Rights.

This single point alone outweighs everything else you might think about Ron Paul. Even if you disagree with Ron Paul on other issues, none of that really matters if you’re rotting away in a secret military prison for daring to protest in a public park, for example.Without the Bill of Rights, nothing else really mattersbecause tyranny takes over. The Bill of Rights must be defended first and at all costs. It is the only thing limiting the power of government and protecting the People from tyranny. Without it, we are all little more than slaves to a military dictatorship.

#5) Ron Paul is anti-war, Obama is pro-war.

Remember when Bush was the President, and everybody on the left was screaming about getting us out of all those wars in the Middle East? Funny how they suddenly fell silent when Obama took over the reins from Bush and continued running those same wars, isn’t it?

Ron Paul is solidly anti-war. Although he agrees with the need to “defend our shores,” he also believes that the United States has no moral authority (nor financial stability) from which to engage in running around the world as some sort of global police force, intervening in the business of nations,especially in the Middle East.

He is solidly against a war with Iran even as all the other candidates seem to be almost desperate to throwother people’s sons and daughtersonto the front lines of violent conflict. Only Ron Paul truly honors the troops bybringing them home. All the other war-mongers who say “support our troops” are really screaming, “Let our troops get killed overseas!” And unlike Gingrich, Ron Paul actually served his country as a military man, even with a child to care for:
http://www.prisonplanet.com/ron-pau…

#6) Ron Paul’s wants to end the Fed and stop bailing out wealthy banksters, while Obama is a Wall Street sellout

Don’t you find it astonishing that, under the Obama administration, wall street crooks like Jon Corzine have been involved in thetheft of billions of dollarsfrom American farmers and investors, yetno one has been indicted, prosecuted or criminally chargedfor those crimes?

Under the Obama administration, white-collar crime gets a wink and a nod. That’s because people like Vice President Joe Biden actually worship Jon Corzine (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xm3V…). Wall Street crooks were some of the largest contributors to the Obama election campaign, and they continue to promote both Obama and Mitt Romney.

Ron Paul, on the other hand, gets no support from the criminal banksters. That’s because he pledges to reign in the Fed, end the disastrous trillion-dollar bailouts and halt the theft of money from U.S. taxpayers by the wealthy elite.

Once again, this reason alone is enough of a reason to vote for Ron Paul.He’s the only candidate who doesn’t support the financial criminals on Wall Street. Maybe that’s why the crooked corporate media keeps smearing him in the news… they’re all tied in with the same crooks who run Wall Street.

#7) Ron Paul does not need a teleprompter to tell you what he believes, and his message has remained consistent for over 25 years

Obama needs a teleprompter to figure out what to say. That’s because he’s mainly a puppet who says what he’s told to say and signs what he’s told to sign (like the NDAA, which he of course promised he wouldn’t sign but did anyway).

Ron Paul needs no teleprompter. He doesn’t have to keep track of which lies he told in which speech to which group. That’s because Ron Paul tells the truth every time, and his message is the same whether he’s in Iowa, New Hampshire or Texas.

Ron Paul isn’t sexy, trendy or hip. Instead, he’s honest, reliable and ethical. Gee, those might be good qualities for leaders to possess, ya think?

#8) Ron Paul is not really a Republican loyalist

This should come as quite a relief to the Democrats out there. Ron Paul is really aLibertarianwho is running on the Republican ticket thanks to the necessary mechanisms of our two-party system. Most of today’s Republicans are just as corrupt as status quo democrats. They start wars, stage false flag terror events and hand out trillions of dollars in bailouts and government contracts to their corrupt buddies.

Ron Paul is none of that. He’s a humble, highly intelligent and principled individual who often votesagainsthis fellow Republicans on bills that run counter to the United States Constitution.

If Ron Paul wins as a Republican, that would of course give Republicans some additional power in Congress, but Ron Paul answers to no one other than God and the People. As all the corrupt corporate lobbyists realized long ago,Ron Paul thinks for himselfand cannot be bought off, no matter how high the offer. He sticks to principles, he honors the Constitution, and he is dedicated to improving the future of our nation, period!

#9) Ron Paul wants to legalize Free Speech (again)

Isn’t it interesting how many of the OWS protesters are now being forced to pay daily fees for the “privilege” of protesting? Gee, I thought America was a free country, and I thought you could peaceably assemble anytime you wanted and shout your grievances to your government. Guess not:http://naturalnews.tv/v.asp?v=FF2F1…

Now the police state pepper spraying has begun, all under Obama of course, who now wants to send Americans into secret military prisons and deprive them of their due process rights. If you believe in the First Amendment and freedom of speech, youcan’tbelieve in Obama! He is the polar opposite of freedom (plus, he flat out lies a lot).

Ron Paul has fought for the Bill of Rights and the U.S. Constitution fordecades, and he has a PERFECT voting record in defending it. He does not waver. He does not bend. He fights for your freedoms in a way that no other Democrat or Republican has ever done.

If you want Free Speech to be legal again in America, vote for Ron Paul.

#10) Ron Paul wants to criminally investigate the crooks in Washington

Most Democrats and Republicans are all crooks who just cover each other’s backs. Yeah, you raped a little kid, but I stole a billion dollars from the taxpayers, and we’ll just agree to both remain silent. Sound familiar? That’s what happens in Washington D.C. almost daily.

Ron Paul thinkselected officials should follow the law. Shock! What a concept! Along with that, he also believes that Attorney General Eric Holder should not run guns into Mexico as part of a staged scam to blame the Second Amendment. Gasp!

Who else dares to say the bureaucrats in Washington are crooks who should becriminally investigatedfor their crimes against the People? You won’t find status quo officials pursuing any of this, of course, becausethey’re all corrupt!

Only Ron Paul stands out above the lawless corruption and criminal-mindedness of the status quo in Washington D.C. He is the “anti-insider,” the one man who actually threatens the entire corrupt system (which is why the press smears him every single day). This is why the recent voting in Iowa was falsified and rigged to make sure Ron Paul wouldn’t win (this was openly admitted by the Republican leaders on local radio). The crooks in Washington absolutely do not want Ron Paul to become President, and that alone should be sufficient reason to put Ron Paul into office!

You want real hope? Real change? Support Ron Paul

If you love the way things are today — unemployment on the rise, a government drowning in debt, soldiers coming home in body bags, your friends and neighbors rotting in prison after getting caught with a little weed — then vote for Obama! He’s happy to carry on the insane policies that have led us to this point in history.

But if you wantreal changein America, support Ron Paul.Make a donation today, so that he can raise the necessary funds to clobber “Mittens” Romney and win the Republican nomination. Then we’ll have a faceoff between Barack Obama and Ron Paul, and there’s no question Paul would win that contest if the voters still have a couple of brain cells functioning when they go to vote.

Make your donations at:
www.RonPaul2012.com

Or support theSouth Carolina money bombby donating here:
http://ronpaul-2012.org/mbpledge_sc…

Source: Natural News.

*Written by Rob Rimes.

Welcome to the moterfucking Terrordome kids! We have hit 2012 and the country as we know it is changing. In fact, there are over 40,000 new laws that take affect on January 1st. Yes, Forty-fucking-thousand! The nanny/police state is out of control and we’ve never been faced with so much legislative garbage and restraint. The fact that we can’t do anything without the government checking our assholes is pretty twisted. We are definitely stuck in the world that the Founding Fathers warned us about a few hundred years ago. They fought hard for true freedom and entrusted us with carrying the ball but we have all squandered our fortune and have devolved into a country that follows the same blueprint of all the countries we aspired to never be. We have gone from the greatest nation on Earth to one of the all-too-typical government controlled statist states in bloom. And that was just the beginning! On New Year’s Eve, while the citizens of the world were distracted staring into the bottoms of champagne glasses, President Barack Hussein Obama signed something into law that takes this whole thing to another level. Essentially, we’re all fucked.

While on his holiday vacation in Hawaii, Barack Obama signed the NDAA (National Defense Authorization Act) into law. Despite claiming that he had “serious reservations” about the bill, that didn’t stop him from wiping his ass with the Bill of Rights. Just like the 93 out of 100 senators that voted for this law, our president also championed in an endless era of police state tyranny. If you don’t know what this law is, you deserve to be sent up shit’s creek without a paddle. If you do know about this law, even though it has passed, it is damn time that you better stand up and get ready to fight this shit until it is overturned and wiped from the books. Otherwise you have no right to complain about it when the proverbial shit hits the proverbial fan.

To even begin to explain this law is really complicated. Just like every other monstrous law that is passed these days, this one is so massive and full of so much random crap that the full effect of it won’t be known for years. All I can really do is break down the basics of it, which are enough to piss off any true American. If you thought the PATRIOT Act was bad, this law just magnifies it and makes the whole police state we are living in much more powerful while making us, the people, more powerless to stop it.

In a nutshell, the NDAA allows the government to detain American citizens on American soil without due process. Essentially, if you are deemed a “threat” to national security, you can now be treated in the same manner as a terrorist. You can be detained indefinitely and sent to God knows where to be interrogated and locked up without any rights whatsoever. Who knows, maybe they’ll waterboard you for good measure. On the positive side, if you go to Gitmo, at least you’ll be treated to ice cream and a library full of Harry Potter and Twilight books.

Now you may be thinking, “Well heck, I’m not a terrorist!” and you may be right but that doesn’t matter. If you have ever read the criteria used by groups like the FBI, CIA and the Department of Homeland Security for what constitutes what is a potential threat, you’d understand that the description is so broad that it encompasses nearly every person in America. Read about the MIAC Report and how the criteria used in that report has gone on to essentially be the blueprint that all these agencies use to determine who might be a threat.

Also, when you have presidential candidates like Newt Gingrich freely throwing around the term “enemy combatant”, it makes you wonder how someone like that would use this new power if given the opportunity. Barack Obama who promised not to sign this into law but did said, “I have the power to detain Americans… but I won’t.” Okay, well considering that he just killed an American citizen, Anwar al-Awlaki, and his 16-year-old son because the father was a terror suspect, makes one have to question if this guy should be able to even make these sort of calls. Yes, al-Awlaki was an al-Qaeda dickbag but he was still an American citizen and our president killed him and his teenage American son. If you don’t see something incredibly wrong with this, you are lower than shit. If the president can assassinate an American without due process and without the law allowing him to do so, just imagine what he could do with the law now making such insane actions legal!

The NDAA eliminates our constitutional rights and gives the president the power of a dictator over his subjects. This fundamentally goes against everything the Founding Fathers wanted for us! Congress should be outraged, right? Nope, except for Rand Paul, Justin Amash and a few others, everyone almost unanimously voted for this thing! Hell, every single GOP candidate for president, except Ron Paul, supports this monstrous step towards tyranny. What the fuck kind of world do we live in when these assholes that claim to be pro-Constitution are so quick to shred the sacred document because of some hypothetical boogeyman?! Our leaders are nutless fucking pussies that should be wiggling around in the dirt because they don’t have spines! If your elected officials claim to be constitutional conservatives and they support this, guess what? They are fucking liars and you need to throw them on the fire and not just their feet!

I hope that Ron Paul starts bringing this issue up in debates because so far, this issue has gone pretty much unmentioned in the GOP debates. As with anything real, the mainstream media turns a blind fucking eye. You can best believe that if it was George W. Bush that signed this into law and not progressive pissant Barack Obama, the mainstream media would be outraged. However, since it was signed into law by their hero, the tyranny goes unchecked. Why doesn’t Fox News mention it then? Well, they are all in support of it too! Everyone is fucking insane!

If Ron Paul were to change the discussion and pound this issue into the debates, the GOP contenders would be forced to have to discuss it. Hell, this could be the tipping point that pushes Dr. Paul into the top spot, as it truly sets him apart from not only the rest of the GOP but with Barack Obama. Most people, once educated, would most likely be vehemently opposed to this tyranny. At least I hope so; I don’t think that the people are as far gone as our leaders.. not yet anyway.

The point is, this is the biggest move towards tyranny in a very long time. Hell, this is basically the nail in the coffin. If you don’t stand up and fight the NDAA, you have no right to fight for anything else. To not hold your elected officials accountable is to turn a blind eye to this. You are surrendering your freedom to these dictators who have proven once again, that they will not stop until we are all ruled over by an iron fist. Truth be told, if you vote for anyone else but Ron Paul, you are throwing it all away. This isn’t some bullshit scare tactic to garner votes for Paul, this insane power grab has already happened! Now start fighting back or get out of the way and shut the fuck up.

Welcome to 1984.

*Written by Rob Rimes.

1. Introduction:

It has been a long fucking journey but here we are! This is the last debate of the year as well as the last one before the first voting starts. This Fox News hosted debate was probably the most notable one for those of us who are supporters of Ron Paul. Not only did it happen at a pivotal moment during the primary presidential race but it was also Dr. Paul’s best performance yet, as far as I am concerned. Considering that some polls have Paul in second place to Newt Gingrich by only a point, there wasn’t a better time for Ron Paul to turn up the heat and make an impact: an impact so hard and solid that the Fox News fear turtles had to ignore him for the last half hour because anymore time given to Dr. Paul would have most assuredly provided him with a win over their two current golden boys: Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney. God forbid someone that doesn’t suck pulls out in front, right?

It’s okay though, Fox News pundits and neocon radio hosts like Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity spent the days leading up to and the day after this debate bashing Ron Paul. The fact that they are dedicating so much time to demonizing the guy is a very very good thing. Considering there is nothing you can throw at the guy, as he is probably the most consistent candidate in at least half a century, these attempts at discrediting Ron Paul just makes these lying bastards look like idiotic assholes blinding themselves to the reality that Dr. Paul’s message is spilling over and spreading out beyond his “crazy” followers. Oh how the establishment hates not getting their way. It’s time for the brats to go to bed so mom and dad can get busy.

2. Hour 1:

At the start of the debate, I find it amusing that Bret Baier tells us that this debate is being sponsored by Fox News as I am watching it on Fox News. Um, no shit buddy. He then goes around and introduces all the candidates to the Iowa crowd. Newt Gingrich got the loudest pop but Ron Paul’s was almost as loud. Unlike other debates, everyone here got some cheers from the crowd, showing us that Iowans are pretty respectful even to the idiots. I’m not a Chris Wallace fan and Baier is okay but I am glad that Megyn Kelly, who is excruciatingly gorgeous on this night, and Neil Cavuto are on the panel of moderators. I really wish Fox News would let Judge Napolitano and John Stossel sit in with the moderators on one of these eight dozen debates. Shouldn’t the libertarian pro-constitution people be represented and allowed to ask real questions? Apparently Fox News doesn’t think so, which is why, even though they allow these guys to have shows, they keep them over on the “B” network.

The first question is already a shot at Ron Paul because they bring up the issue of electability and who could actually defeat Obama one-on-one. The thing is, contrary to what Fox News and Rush want you to believe, there have been several polls taken of GOP candidates going head-to-head with Obama and according to these various polls, Ron Paul is the only one who can convincingly beat the current president. But whatever, truth isn’t news apparently.

Anyway, after the issue of electability is brought up, Newt is basically asked to dispel concerns that people have about him not being conservative enough and not being able to topple Barry O. Newt talks about how Reagan was way behind Carter in 1980 but through debate and his message, he was able to defeat the peanut prince. Gingrich said that Reagan won on truth and honesty and that he will as well. Gingrich claims to be able to destroy Obama in debates and says that there is no way that Obama can defend his horrible record. But wait.. isn’t Newt’s record pretty fucking horrible too? He goes on to brag about balancing the budget and tells us that he gave us the largest capital gains tax cut in history back when he was running Congress. Gingrich closes it out by explaining that his record may confuse people because he changes when conditions change. Sounds like a guy that doesn’t have a real set of principles to me. It also sounds like a crock of shit so he can just brush off all the questionable non-conservative stances he’s taken over the years. I don’t know what type of car insurance Newt owns but his policies are definitely “progressive”.

Megyn Kelly asks Ron Paul to convince the crowd that he is electable and also asks him if he will support the winner of the GOP primary. So Megyn assumes Paul won’t win and she wants to basically make sure he doesn’t run as an independent. Also, as far as electability, she is obviously unaware or ignoring the polls that have said that Paul can beat Obama and she must also be ignoring the fact that this guy has been elected to political office more times than any other candidate on that stage.

Ron Paul replies by saying anyone on the stage can beat Obama. He points out that Obama is beating himself and is essentially making the race to the White House much easier for whomever ends up challenging the liberal king. Paul says that compared to the other candidates, he has something different to offer. He cites his policy positions that vastly contrast those of the Republican establishment. He mentions his stance on monetary policy, which has influenced most of the candidates on stage, and he says that he addresses the major issues that the other candidates don’t talk about.He also states that he is the one candidate that is truly pro-Constitution and pro-liberty. He finishes by reminding us that he plans to cut a trillion dollars in spending his first year in office.

Rick Santorum is asked why he isn’t surging with all the time he has spent in Iowa. He responds by saying that he is counting on Iowa to catch fire for him. Yeah bro, I’m waiting for this chick’s pussy to get wet for me but it ain’t working. You gotta make it happen man or don’t bother trying. Three hundred dollar dinners and Russell Stover samplers aren’t going to get you laid, you’ve got to play the game homie. Santorum who feels he has played the game well says that he has done 250 town hall meetings and visited all 99 counties in Iowa. Ricky Boy sounds like my old roommate who always spent money on chicks, completely missed the point and ended up marrying the first diabolical succubus that saw an opportunity to exploit his idiocy. Santorum, stealing a talking point from Ron Paul, says that he is a clear contrast to everyone else. Yeah, he’s a religiously intolerant dickbag that wants to make our country a fascist Jesus-loving dictatorship ruled over by his soft bitch fists. Racquetball Rick says that he fought for conservatism whether it was popular or unpopular, I respect his drive and his fortitude but he is wrong in almost every way and in the end, he is a clueless dolt that knows he has done everything right, even though he hasn’t, and can’t figure out why he is still sitting at the kids’ table without the respect of his peers. After all those town hall meetings in Iowa alone, the people aren’t receptive to his message. It’s time to hang it up bro.

Ron Paul-hater, Chris Wallace asks Mitt Romney what he thinks about people saying that Newt is a stronger candidate than Mitt. Romney describes people’s struggles and says that they want a president that can get America right again. He says that he understands what will and what won’t work when it comes to job creation and the economy because he has been in the private sector and ran so many successful companies for so long. He then cites the time that he passed on investing in JetBlue and calls it a mistake. He says that he has learned from his mistakes however and he knows how to apply the lessons learned from his successes and failures.

Michele Bachmann is asked how she would counter the Obama campaign if she won the nomination, as they would paint her as “too conservative”. She goes on an all-too-typical rant about how great she is and how she continually wins elections in Minnesota which is a strong liberal state. She says that even though people don’t agree with her all the time (you don’t say?) that they at least respect her sincerity and the fact that she works to serve and she is always taking action. She then says that she spent her first 50 years as a real person. Wait.. huh? Is she admitting she is not human? A reptilian, a terminator, an alien hologram or a wind-up toy maybe?

Neil “Keep it Real” Cavuto flat out asks Rick Perry how he can expect to beat Obama, when he is such a bad debater. That shit was harsh but it is a damn good question and Perry impresses me as he doesn’t get too flustered by it. Perry admits that he isn’t the best but that he has gotten to where he likes the debates and has now gotten more comfortable with them, where he was just so awkward and strange in the beginning. He then goes on some weird tangent about Tim Tebow and how they are similar because Tebow is the comeback kid and he’s a former two-time national champion, where as Rick Perry considers himself to be the “national champion of job creation”. Yes, this really happened!

Watch the video:

Jon Huntsman is asked about his record. Huntsman says that he is a consistent conservative and that he will not pander to anyone or sign silly pledges. He also says that he won’t show up at a Trump debate. He uses that to make his point that the nation has been toyed around with this entertainment politics bullshit. The office of the president isn’t something to just throw around in a silly reality show arena. He then talks about how America has been downgraded and is on the cusp of its third government shutdown. Huntsman says that we have an economic deficit and a trust deficit. He goes on to tell us that people do not trust their elected officials and therefore we need to establish term limits for Congress. He points out that Wall Street has also lost the trust of the people and says that there are too many banks that are too big to fail.

All are asked for a quick answer on how they would lead. Rick Santorum jumps back in and says that he would do what great leaders do and would solve our economic woes. He calls for free markets and free people, yet this tyrannical PATRIOT Act pimping bastard has no idea what any of that shit means. Santorum’s first executive order as president, backed by the PATRIOT Act and the new evil NDAA law, would be to label gays as terrorists and ship them off to Gitmo for the rest of their lives. Rick Perry says that after 3 years the president should have learned how to do the job. He says that we need someone with executive experience. Citing the Super Committee, Perry adds that Obama has walked away from responsibilities and dumped them on others. Mitt says that he learned how to get the respect of Democrats in Massachusetts by learning how to find common ground during a crisis. Mitt says that we need a leader that can actually lead. Newt reinforces Mitt’s points and calls Obama a “Saul Alinsky radical”. He goes on to cite his work with Reagan again. I feel like Newt is taking credit for Reagan’s leadership, which is pretty shitty. Ron Paul says that government is too big, the debt is too big and we have to cut spending NOW! He also says that there are two factions in charge of the economy: warfare and welfare. He talks about how they argue over the money and who gets it and that now it is time to end it and kill the leviathan. Michele Bachmann says that she would’ve made Congress come in and talk to her about the debt crisis. Does she think that Congress is made up of her foster kids? Is she going to ground them? Maybe she wouldn’t be able to hear them as her ears might be too far away (that is a problem for her). She says that she would put her foot down on increasing taxes. She also promises to cut spending and to support the Constitution. Well, except for those bits she doesn’t think are important like the 10th Amendment. Jon Huntsman says that leadership is action, not words. Huntsman pushes for a flat tax and talks about how it created a great business state in Utah. He says that after implementing the flat tax he got 80% of the vote in his second run for Governor because he delivered on what he promised to do.

Chris Wallace starts a segment about DC culture. He goes to Mitt and tells him that Newt believes that Romney should return the money that he took from people or something like that. The question was hard to follow but it is funny that Newt wants Mitt to return money when Newt was getting fat checks funded by American tax dollars when he was rolling with Freddie Mac. Mitt responds saying that Obama will use the same attack on him as Newt. He adds that not every business that he invested in worked out but the ones that did succeed created hundreds of thousands of jobs. Romney talks about his success with Staples and the steel company he built up. Mitt takes a shot at Obama when he says that he will ask him how well he ran General Motors after the government takeover of their business.

Newt is asked about the pro-Freddie Mac comments he made a few years back. He is also asked about how he could say that Barney Frank should go to jail when he too was involved with the same people that caused the housing bubble to burst. Gingrich says that Frank was holding elected office at the time, where he (Newt) wasn’t. Newt tries to make it clear that he was a private citizen engaged in the housing business like any other business. Newt just can’t dig himself out of this hole without sounding stupid. He claims that he always said that Freddie needed more regulations.. that’s not helping your case dude! It also doesn’t sound very conservative. Newt said that we should have a goal of helping as many Americans as possible buy homes. Jesus, Gingrich sounds like a fucking welfare state pushing progressive liberal! When it walks like a duck and talks like a duck it is probably an asshole.

The moderators ask Ron Paul about his negative campaign ads against Newt. He is also asked what his thoughts are on the comments Newt just made. Paul points out that Freddie Mac was a GSE (government sponsored enterprise), which is different than a regular business or a private enterprise. Paul says that Newt was deep in a mixture of big business and big government. He needs to be held accountable for that and own up to it, it is what it is. Frankly, super debater Newt just got got. Ron Paul states that government sponsored enterprise is NOT free enterprise.

Newt poorly defends himself by saying that GSEs do a lot of good. ROFLMFAO! Gingrich cites Medicare and Medicaid as good examples. Damn, that’s hilarious Newt! I didn’t know you were doing standup at the Bijou this weekend! He also says that he doesn’t lobby for anything. Shit, the jokes keep on coming!

Michele Bachmann is asked if she has any evidence to support her recent Newt bashing. She says that her evidence is simply that she knows he cashed Freddie checks. Okay, just because you say it doesn’t make it real. Where’s the solid proof, shit I know it exists but I want to see it! Bachmann says that there is a big difference between Freddie Mac and banks, adding that Newt took $1.6 million to influence senior Republicans in Congress to keep the madness going. Haha, and Newt says he wasn’t lobbying; what do you call aggressively pushing your influence on politicians then? Bachman says that Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae need to be “shut down not built up!”

Responding to the crazy woman’s attacks, Newt says that her claims are not true and that he never lobbied in any way. He tells Bachmann to have facts straight and to not throw around allegations. Bachmann snaps back saying that PolitiFact backs up her claims and she says that you don’t have to be a “lobbyist” to “peddle influence”. Newt says that his policy is to break up Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. He also claims that he has never once changed his positions over a payoff. Newt says that he has only worked with people who share the same values he has. Okay, so you work with snakes? Doesn’t Honey Badger eat snakes? I guess this one rolls with them.

Newt is getting a lot of time but that doesn’t stop Neil Cavuto from asking him about his negative comments regarding Paul Ryan’s plan and how he now apparently likes the plan he was critical about. Cavuto is digging into Newt’s all-too-common inconsistency on the issue. Newt says that he never referenced Ryan when he made the comments that were perceived as negative. He says that a free society needs the support of the people and he feels that when there is a potential major change on the horizon, like the Ryan Plan, that the people need to be consulted. I can’t disagree with that point.

Romney says that the spending crisis is extraordinary. He then goes on an anti-Obama rant. Closing out the rant, he says that we need to stop giving away funds when we don’t have any left to give. He continues by saying that there are 62 trillion dollars in promises that need to be quashed.

Neil Cavuto tries to “gotcha” Ron Paul when he asks him how he can be a vocal opponent of earmarks when he fights to bring money to his district. It is a good question and out of everything asked the congressman out of all of these debates, this was the best researched and thought out. Cavuto is attempting to put him on the spot and show that maybe he isn’t so consistent and might even be just a little hypocritical. However, Paul then responds and says that he has never voted for an earmark but if the government forcibly takes money away from his district (as they do all districts), then they have a right to apply for it to come back. Touché Dr. Paul, touché! Ron Paul continues by pointing out that earmarks are out of control and that the government earmarks every penny. Paul adds again that he NEVER voted for an earmark but he will fight to get back his constituents’ money back from the tyrants whenever possible.

Cavuto, apparently not getting it, presses on the issue again. Paul says that he doesn’t complain about earmarks and says that if everyone followed the Constitution like he does, then there would be no earmarks. Ron Paul says that as president he wouldn’t look for more power. He doesn’t want to police the world or the economy and says that too many people want a super powerful president and that that mentality is just wrong.

Moving on, Cavuto basically asks Perry if he’s a hypocrite. I don’t really get Cavuto’s point and neither does Perry as he just praises himself. He says that his programs have worked and that he didn’t bail them out. He then says that we need to talk about overhauling DC and cut Congress’ time back so that they can go home and live within the same walls that the American people do. When asked about how many days Congress should work Perry says, “140 days every two years like they do in Texas.”

Jon Huntsman is asked how he would respond to childish moves by China on trade rules. The former ambassador to China says that he would work towards building relationships and respect. He says that he already did a great job with it as ambassador. Huntsman says that we need shared values infused in our relationship with China based in democracy and human rights. He then calls for a greater tolerance of other religions on our part.

On foreign business affairs, Santorum is asked if he would give companies a tax holiday for staying in the United States. Santorum says that if outside companies bring money back and invest it in America, he’d charge them zero tax. He adds that we are no longer competitive. He blames corporate tax saying that there is a big differential between us and our top 9 economic competitors. Santorum says he would use his executive power to repeal anything he sees as anti-business. Yep, he’s still a power-hungry douchenugget.

Trying to tap into his business knowledge, Mitt is asked what industry will create the most jobs in next ten years. Mitt says that the free market will decide that. Sure, if we stay out of it. He goes on to talk about the fact that when the government picks the winners, we all lose. “Let the markets decide!” I don’t know if Mitt is capable of a hands off approach however. Mitt believes that manufacturing in the U.S. will come back again. He also says that our energy capabilities are extraordinary and tells us that Obama prevents that industry’s growth with his idiocy over the BP oil spill issue issue as well as the recent pipeline controversy.

Megyn Kelly asks Newt about his plan to subpoena judges who make decisions he doesn’t like. She asks if it removes checks and balances. She tells him that his critics consider such a proposal to be “dangerous” and “ridiculous”. Newt says that that sort of talk is arrogant and ignorant, uh.. okay buddy. He also says that judges against “One Nation under God” should not work in the courts. He calls that motto “the core base of American exceptionalism”. Newt adds that we do not have a judicial dictatorship and points to Thomas Jefferson and Abraham Lincoln to give examples as to why his stance is okay.

Newt-hater Bachmann is asked if the 9th circuit should be abolished and if it was, what would happen if a Democrat came into power after a Republican president. Bachmann replies by saying that the judges have to follow the Constitution. She says that the president and Congress need to take their authority back from the courts. Bachmann says that the Founding Fathers wanted the courts to be the least powerful governing body in the system. She then gives props to Iowa for attacking gay marriage. She loves how Iowans got rid of pro-gay rights judges. What a bitch.

Ron Paul is asked if Newt is right in his stance regarding judges. Paul says that if a judge is unethical, the proper procedure is impeachment not subpoenaing judges in front of Congress. He also says that it is frustrating but we can’t just get rid of courts because we don’t like how they rule on something. He believes that Newt’s viewpoint on the issue is like opening a can or worms. Ron Paul reminds us that the Founding Fathers wanted a seperation of powers.

The moderators move to Mitt, who is asked about why he nominated Democrat judges in Massachusetts and because of that, how can Republicans trust him to make the right decisions on nominating Supreme Court justices. He clarifies that he didn’t appoint the Democratic judges but that he nominated them. Since the board that appointed the judges was made up of only Democrats, he says that they selected the Democratic choices over the Republican ones.

To close out the first hour of the two hour debate, Megyn Kelly asks each candidate to name their favorite current Supreme Court justice. Santorum rambles about some bullshit abortion mumbo jumbo and doesn’t really answer. When pressed to answer, after making what should’ve been a short answer into a long rant, he said, “Thomas”. Rick Perry also rambles but his rant is about ending lifetime terms for the robes. He says that his favorites are Alito, Roberts and Thomas. Mitt says a bunch of names, he may have named them all. Gingrich says that Scalia is the most intellectual of the supreme justices. Ron Paul says that they are all good and all bad in different ways. Bachmann, like Romney, names a bunch. Jon Huntsman selects Roberts and Alito as his favorites.

3. Hour 2:

Starting hour number two, Bret Baier asks Ron Paul that if he had hypothetical intel that was certain that Iran had nuclear missiles, would he invade them. He also adds that Ron Paul’s stance on foreign policy is “left of Obama”. Wow, Fox News is really trying to influence their malleable viewers. Paul unfazed says that he’s running with the people, who feel as he does. He points to the fact that there is no UN evidence that supports the idea that Iran has or is building a nuclear bomb. Ron Paul tells us that this Iran talk is just war propaganda similar to the bullshit that led us into war with Iraq a decade ago. Paul says that his greatest fear is that we have a president that will overreact (like the majority of the GOPers on stage). He says that a former Israeli statesman said that it would be incredibly stupid to attack Iran over this sort of unfounded paranoia. Paul reminds us that we survived the Cold War without jumping the gun and going to war.

Baier cuts in saying that the question specifically asked what he would do if there was solid hypothetical intelligence that showed that Iran did have a bomb being built. Ron Paul says that all we are doing with our careless paranoid actions is promoting their desire for building a nuke. He clues Baier and the other candidates in on the fact that Iran is surrounded by bombs, so why wouldn’t they want one for themselves to eliminate their vulnerability? Ron Paul also points out that we respect those with bombs better than those without them. He brings us back to when we convinced Libya to get rid of their bombs and once that was done, there was nothing to stop us from invading them, which we did.

Bret Baier, getting flustered, asks Dr. Paul his thoughts on Iran threatening to close the Strait of Hormuz. Paul says that all we talk about is “When are we (the West) going to bomb Iran”. He continues by essentially asking why wouldn’t they close the strait to screw us on oil if we just keep threatening an attack against them. What Paul is saying is that they have a right to defend themselves however they see fit and if we are going to keep bullying them and threatening them from afar, why shouldn’t they take action and prepare for the possibility of our threats becoming promises. Speaking to his sanction-happy colleagues and the moderators, he calls their proposed sanctions an act of war. Ron Paul finishes up with his Iran points by saying that it is time for us to use diplomacy for once.

Still aggravated by Ron Paul, Bret Baier goes to establishment “bomb’m all!” cockpuppet Rick Santorum. Ricky Boy goes on and on about “Damn mooozlums! Damn Eeeranians! Radical theocracy! Al-Qaedaists! Destruction! Anti-Jesusers! Martyrdom! Bleh!!!” That’s basically all I heard.

Mitt is asked about his comments on Obama where he said that the president was weak in his handling of Iran capturing one of our drones. Romney explains that weakness invites aggression. He says a strong America is the greatest ally of peace. Mitt also adds that Obama believes we are entering a post-American century, where Mitt believes that America is going to continue to lead and shape the world.

Michele Bachmann is asked if she would ever send troops back to Iraq if Iran moved in. She says that Obama pulling troops out shows that he has given up on peace and is allowing Iran an open door to exploit. Bachmann then disses Ron Paul on his Iran stance. She tries to scare the shit out of our asses by saying that Iran WILL KILL Israel and us! OMG! Michele Bachmann is genuinely freaked out by everything except herself apparently. Then again, I bet whenever she sees her own shadow, she does a double take because she is paranoid that it is the ghost of Osama bin Laden trying to go somewhere her husband has never been (because he is gay if you didn’t know). She also talks about how the terrorists want to kill us because we are free. I’m so tired of that damn argument. Oh wait!

Defending himself and slamming Bachmann’s idiocy, Paul says that the terrorists don’t want to kill us because we are free. He asks why they don’t attack Switzerland and other free countries. He points out that they even explain that they want to harm us because we are bombing them. I mean, why are these conservative fucktards unable to understand this? Paul asks why are we flying drones and bombing these countries. He says that we need to stop overreacting and that we need to stay out of all these countries’ problems.

Harpie-ass Bachmann yelps like a kicked puppy and calls Paul’s stance an “underreaction!” Bleh! Ron Paul then owns Bachmann for buying into the establishment propaganda when she paints herself as a TeaParty small government conservative. Bachmann interrupts because her skin is so thin it is really just tissue paper smeared with Oil of Olay. Paul gets back on it and says that he lived through the Cuban Missile Crisis and tells us how it was ended with diplomacy between John F. Kennedy and Nikita Khrushchev. Paul keeps slamming all the people slamming him and he keeps throwing out facts and examples that these people can’t combat! Ron Paul killed it on this night! Paul actually killed it so decisively that it must have scared the living shit out of Fox News because the moderators went on to ignore him for the remainder of the debate until the closing statements. No matter how hard they try, the mainstream media can’t beat Dr. Paul because you can only pile shit on top of truth for so long before it stands up and tosses that shit back at you. On this night, Ron Paul was chucking shit back at the lying bastards who were out to destroy him.

To stack the deck against Ron Paul, Newt is brought in by the moderators to back up the wound-licking Bachmann and the bullshit Fox News agenda. Even the great debater Newt Gingrich knows that he can’t combat Paul on this so he goes on a rant about diplomacy and communication problems and attempts to make a lame joke. The assholes in the crowd laugh.

The only other sane man in the room, Jon Huntsman says that we need to get out of this paranoid Cold War mindset. He says that we are now weak and suggests that we need to fix our shit at home. He goes on a long explanation of his point and Baier gets all pissy when the buzzer goes off. Huntsman, who isn’t going to stop talking because Baier was lenient on the time rule with the establishment candidates, continues to speak. He says that we need to adopt a foreign policy that focuses on economics, as none of these other people (excluding Paul) understands the bigger picture. The buzzer goes off again and Baier starts getting more prickish. Huntsman finishes his points.

Rick Perry is asked when he thinks America should intervene in Syria. God, Fox News is so pro-war! The whole phrasing of the question basically implies that we have to go in no matter what. Idiot Perry says that we have a muddled foreign policy and Syria needs to be knocked out of the way as they spend so much time stroking Iran’s cock.

The saving grace, Neil Cavuto moves this debate on to energy, thus freeing those of us with brain cells from hearing anymore idiocy on foreign policy. Newt is the first to get in on the energy portion of the debate. He bitches about Obama blocking the pipeline. He then shows his true dictator colors when he says that he will not back down from acheiving his objectives when they are right and the people are wrong. M’kay, so he just told of us “fuck you”.

Jon Huntsman is asked if protecting land is more important than creating jobs. He says that there has to be a balance. He also adds that we need to have a good energy relationship with Canada and that we need to disrupt the oil monopoly or else we cant have enrgy independence. Huntsman points out that we have more natural gas than the Saudi’s have oil. He promises to bring forth an aggressive energy plan that will benefit us and our allies while pushing us towards being more self-sufficient.

Bachmann is asked to explain her vocal criticism against Obama’s BP shutdown. She is also asked what would have been an acceptable period of time for drilling to cease for her to have solved the problem. That’s a dumb question that no one could answer without being in the situation and even if this happened again, the situation would be different. Bachmann says that Obama’s moratorium hurt the economy more than the disaster did. She then rants about Obama’s handling of the recent pipeline issue.

Rick Perry looking drunk or high and acting weird, talks about “laboratories of innovation”. He’s always got some great combination of words when the drugs kick in. Perry says that he helped all alternative energy industries in Texas by not picking winners and losers. He says that we need 50 states competing with each other on energy solutions as opposed to government intervention.

On the issue of the border, Perry says that if he was president, he would force his attorney general to resign immediately if he pulled some shit like Eric Holder did with Operation Fast & Furious. Perry says that Obama claims that the U.S.-Mexican border is safer than it has ever been. Perry says that his words are bullshit. Perry, based off of his personal experience, hammers down on the fact that the borders aren’t secure. He also calls for a modern version of the Monroe Doctrine. On a side note, Perry says “Hezbollah” really funny.

Santorum agrees with Perry on firing Eric Holder. He then says that we need to pay more attention to our own hemisphere. What? Really?! This warmongering bag of dicks that wants to bomb every country that has “mooozlums” and “damn gays” is saying that we need to pay more attention to our own hemisphere? Santorum needs to pay more attention to life after this race because he sure as shit ain’t going nowhere.

The moderators then pounce on Mitt and want him to explain his stance on illegals aliens, who he has said he would not hunt down and round up. Mitt says that he would create a special ID card. He says that employers would have to verify these cards before hiring. C’mon idiot, you aren’t that dense, are you? This guy thinks that businesses that hire illegals already will suddenly comply with these new laws? Hahahaha! Ever heard of paying people under the table? I’ve never met a big private sector guy that hasn’t hired illegal immigrants to move their shit to a bigger office.

Newt is asked if Mitt’s stance is realistic. Newt says that Rep. Steve King introduced something similar and then goes on to talk about using E-Verify. Newt rants about his stance and not rounding up Mexicans. He also adds that he would drop all of the federal government lawsuits against the states who are fighting immigration how they see fit. Gingrich says that he would cut off federal aid to sanctuary cities violating federal law.

Jon Huntsman says that we need to stop pandering on immigration and just do what needs to be done. He says that we have to secure the border but to not lose sight of legal immigration being an engine of economic growth. Huntsman points out that many of the Fortune 500 companies were started by former immigrants.

Chris Wallace asks Mitt Romney about his flip-flopping. He specifically points to abortion and asks Mitt why he has changed his opinion on it. Mitt says that a stem cell bill came over his desk and it made him change his stance after really studying it. He says that he was wrong and he has since tried to correct himself. Wallace tries to stump Romney like a dick by asking the original question again but this time mixing it up somewhat. It doesn’t work and really, Wallace just looks like the dumb dick that he is. Mitt is then attacked on his questionable gun rights stance for banning assault weapons. Mitt assures everyone that he is very much pro-gun. Wallace then pushes the gay rights issue on Mitt trying to “gotcha” him a fourth time. Mitt says that he doesn’t discriminate against gays. He claims that he had a gay dude in his administration when he was governor. Mitt says that he opposes same sex marriage but says that he is not against gays. That damn Orwellian doublespeak!

Ricky Santorum is asked if he believes Mitt Romney. Jesus Christ in a frying pan, Wallace is really trying to start a fight tonight! This little weasel is fucking scum. Santorum, like the bitch he is, takes the bait and says that Mitt issued gay marriage licenses as governor. Rick would know because he once inquired about it for himself. Santorum than has the goddamned balls to say that he doesn’t discriminate! Well, I guess you can say that when you don’t look at “mooozlums” and “damn gays” as human beings. To counter Rick’s argument, Mitt says that he tried to create an amendment in the Massachusetts state constitution to define marriage.

Michele Bachmann is asked about her comments on Newt being inconsistent on “life”. She says that the GOP can’t get the issue of “life” wrong in this election. Yeah, because out of everything, that is the big issue here. Bachmann doesn’t know though because she still lives in the stone age. I’m not knocking pro-life or pro-choice people but this issue has been beaten to death for decades and it needs to go on the back burner until we sort out the economy. I know that will piss off “true conservatives” and I don’t care. Just like with the immigration issue, most voters just aren’t worried about it. Glory hound whack job Bachmann finishes by saying that Newt could’ve once defunded Planned Parenthood but he didn’t. He could have also said “no” to that Filet-O-Fish he ate last week but he didn’t. Bachmann’s presence in these debates is pointless unless she is just trying to push her opponents up in the poll numbers. I don’t know how she even has 4 percent. That in and of itself is fucking scary!

Newt, after Bachmann’s crazy attack, just looks at her like she’s nuts. Newt, once again, says that her facts aren’t accurate. He explains his stance and says that he believes that life begins at conception. He adds that he was just proposing a commission to look at embryo research back in the day, which wasn’t in anyway an attempt to be pro-abortion. It was actually just an attempt to understand stem cell research and other things. Bachmann steals more time to incoherently Newt bash. Bachmann says that Newt is “outrageous” for saying her facts aren’t right. She demands to be taken seriously because she claims she is a serious candidate. Lulz.. My gin just came out of my nose. Thanks for telling us that but you’re not a serious candidate lady. Newt responds to this twit with, “Honey Badger don’t care!”

To close out the debate, the candidates are asked how they are going to try to win the nomination without weakening the other nominees. Really? Another dumb question here because these debates have been going on for over seven months! This is the last time these people will meet before the first voting begins and they are asking them this? Have they not been paying attention? These candidates have been doing their damnedest to undermine each other while pretending they are all really on the same page and just out to stomp Obama. I guess some people want you to think this is some sort of united front against Barack but it is no such thing by any stretch of the imagination.

Answering the dumb question, Santorum says, “Lets find out who has the best record and can stand up.” Um, not you dude. The guy you are referencing is Ron Paul. Rick Perry says, “Your tail needs to get kicked sometimes.” Uh, okay? Mitt says, “We can handle it” when referring to the attacks they are all giving and receiving. Newt says that he has “solutions” and everyone up there is his “friend” and would be “better” than Obama who is the real opponent. Ron Paul says that the media has a responsibility and that they are messing up this year. Bachmann talks about Reagan Vs. Carter. Ugh, whatever bitch. She says that she will be the best as she gives no props to the others. Thanks asshole. Jon Huntsman, who is the last to speak, says, “We need heightened trust and this type of debate is elevating us all.”

4. Conclusion:

The worst offense of all, to me, about this debate and the few before this is that the issue of the NDAA (National Defense Authorization Act) hasn’t even come up. This is the most tyrannical piece of legislation to rise since the PATRIOT Act. For those that don’t know, in a nutshell, this new law allows for the detainment of American citizens without a trial. Essentially, any American the government deems a threat, under their extremely broad criteria, can be arrested and sent away to some place like Gitmo, where they will never be heard from again. 93 out of 100 senators passed this fucking monster bill yet no one is talking about it. This is much worse than ObamaCare! Conservatives don’t care though because they want us all to be jailed and chained to Bibles. Well, that is except for guys like Ron Paul who is the ONLY candidate to speak out against this evil law.

Fox News fails in their not mentioning it and in their general lack of coverage of it on their regular programming. Apart from that, my biggest complaint about the debate itself is that the moderators continually asked really long questions, as they had to give a backstory as to why they were asking each question. This wasted time and in comparison to the answer time the candidates were allowed, it seemed like the moderators were talking just as much if not more than the people running for office. I don’t remember the other Fox News debates being chock full of long-winded multilayered questions.

In the end, Paul owned this debate like a fucking gangsta and everyone else either sucked or just remained the same. Even with Fox News ignoring Dr. Paul for the last quarter, I don’t feel that it really hurt his performance. In fact, the polls right now have Ron Paul leading. Unfortunately, the shitcock establishment zombies are already out there saying that if Ron Paul wins Iowa, it will discredit Iowa. Right! So, this pivotal stop on the campaign trail that has been pounded into our heads for months and months as the biggest possible win a candidate could get on the road to the White House is now considered insignificant if the one who wins it isn’t who the establishment wants? Are you fucking kidding me? Fuck these people. In addition to that, fuck anyone buying into their bullshit! For as much as Fox News and other conservative media giants bitch about liberal bias in the media, they sure as shit are guilty of it themselves even within their own party! At least the liberals stick together like glue. Just like the old adage, if you point your fat bastard finger at someone else, you’ve got three more fat bastard fingers pointing back at you.

The establishment has never been this scared.

Grading Scale:
Grade A+: Ron Paul
Grade B: Jon Huntsman
Grade D+: Newt Gingrich
Grade D: Rick Perry
Grade D: Mitt Romney
Grade F: Rick Santorum
Grade F-: Michele Bachmann
Grade I: Gary Johnson

My Two Cents: People need to PAY ATTENTION to what is going on with this new piece of legislation the NDAA or National Defense Authorization Act. All these constitutional conservatives are rejecting the Constitution and promoting fear and bullshit for this massive power grab to take away our constitutional rights. End Two Cents.

*Written by Rob Rimes.

I almost don’t want to write about this debate because it was utter fucking shit! But then I thought about it and since I’ve written about every other debate, except the first one back in May, I felt it necessary to continue chronicling my thoughts and analysis and to use my disgust over this shit debate to my advantage. It amazes me that the top network in the world was able to produce such garbage but CBS pulled it off brilliantly!

To start, the set looked morbid, not to mention small. It’s like CBS threw this thing together last minute and were lucky enough to find the only National Guard Armory in America that wasn’t running a local wrestling show that night. Not to say that the entertainment provided wasn’t similar to a small town wrestling show, it was. Granted the heated rivalries weren’t turned up to maximum but the show did feel like it was scripted. Oddly enough, there is some leaked info that came out to support this wild theory. More on that at the end.

The moderators were hot garbage and the format was weak. The worst part about this whole thing is that it was a 90 minute debate and not 120 minutes like all the others. Not only that, but the last half hour was cut off in favor of running an episode of NCIS. I guess a shit forensics show is more important than listening to potential presidents having a much needed discussion on foreign policy. So, I, like many others who are more interested in our future than a cookie cutter crime show had to watch the last 30 minutes on the Internet. I don’t know if it was just me or if other people had the same problem, but the live feed cut out a few times and at the end, I lost 6 out of the final 10 minutes. Whatever, it’s not like CBS was taking any of this seriously anyway.

CBS does the standard introductions and everyone gets a pop, it is worth noting that Ron Paul got the loudest ovation from the South Carolina crowd. Being that this debate was primarily focused on foreign policy, it should’ve been expected that Ron Paul’s answers would upset the conservative establishment. Shit, Bachmann was ready to swing on Ron Paul a few times. I’ll get to that shortly.

Kicking things off, Herman Cain gets the first question, which is basically about his strategy for dealing with Iran, whom many conservatives feel is a crazy enemy that is on the brink of developing nuclear weapons just so they can terrorize Israel as well as us. Cain, subscribing to standard GOP theory on Iran says that he would place warships all over the Middle East strategically. Theoretically, he believes that this will deter Iran from using weapons on us. Yep, let’s build our military up in their backyard and point our guns at them so they don’t point their guns at us. We will force peace!

When the issue of Iran moves over to Mitt Romney, he says that if Obama is re-elected, Iran will become weaponized. Mitt says that if he is president, he will wave his magic wand which will make Iran’s nuclear progress disappear. Romney says that Iran having weapons is unacceptable but it is okay for the United States and its allies to be armed to the teeth. Only we can have the guns. Sounds like something a bully would want. Mitt Romney reminds me of the kid that would only play Nintendo with a Game Genie.

Unfortunately for those of us who have an appreciation for Newt “Honey Badger” Gingrich, our love was thwarted a bit when Mr. Badger admitted that he liked Romney’s answer on the Iran situation. Things like this are why I cannot get behind Newt Gingrich. Where he has won me over on several points, to support Romney’s misguided logic here, is just careless and dangerous. Essentially, guys like Romney, Gingrich and Cain are the ones changing the oil in the American imperialist machine.

Ron Paul steps in with an astute observation and likens the talk in the debate thus far over Iran to the war propaganda pimped out by the media and the fear-mongers leading up to the invasion of Iraq. If you remember, we went there to stop Saddam Hussein from using his cache of nuclear weapons against us. We quickly discovered that no such weapons existed. Although we are still there a decade later, which means that the threats sold to the American people weren’t the real catalyst for war. So what is the real catalyst for war with Iran? That is what we are building towards isn’t it?

Rick Perry ads to the war propaganda by saying that we need to use our power and influence to collapse the Iranian banking system. Yes idiot, let’s send the whole country completely into the dark ages to make our point. Let’s cripple them all so that they starve, shoot and kill each other. Let’s start our mission of peace through war by completely disrupting their lives and forcing them to suffer. One’s gotta love these humanitarian conservatives.

Dork Dick Santorum gets pissy like the little bitch he is because he wasn’t asked the Iran question. Santorum espouses some nonsense and then says vthat he defines victory as “no longer a security threat”. Hmm.. well, what if they aren’t a threat to begin with? These conservatives are always chasing phantoms and boogeymen.

Bachmann looks somewhat normal this round, I can’t really knock her fashion choice for this debate even though she looks like a woman at a funeral in a western film. Shit, I just knocked her, ah well. She talks a bunch of gibberish I can’t really hear over the sound of my urine hitting the side of the toilet bowl. “Bachmann” has become Minnesotan for “piss break” as far as I’m concerned.

When Huntsman is brought into this foreign policy debate, he says that we need to stop nation building oversees and focus on rebuilding our own nation, as it is suffering. His observation brings light to the fact that our problems at home need to be addressed before we can even really think about expanding military action in other regions. Talk like this is why conservatives claim that Huntsman is running in the wrong party. Talk like this is why I sometimes like what Huntsman has to say because at least it differs from the large helping of bullshit served up by most of the candidates in this race, excluding Ron Paul and Gary Johnson.

Truth is, where I do not like Huntsman on most things, he does understand foreign policy better than most of the people on the stage and should have some sort of cabinet position, even if it is being the ambassador to China once again. Although, that might not work since the Chinese government associates Huntsman with the Jasmine Revolution, which saw young Chinese taking to the streets protesting the need for democracy in Red China. The Chinese government also went as far as to censor Jon Huntsman from search results on the Internet.

When Mitt Romney is asked if he would talk directly to the Taliban in order to bring forth peace in Afghanistan, he proudly proclaimed that he “..will NOT negotiate with terrorists!” Of course this got a loud pop. What he really meant to say was that the world better do things his way or they were going to be licking the shit off of his Salvatore Ferragamo python loafers.

Newt comes into the debate next and is asked how we can bring about peace in Afghanistan without negotiating with the Taliban. Newt points out that the Taliban has a sanctuary in Pakistan and informs us that it is Iran and Pakistan, two countries that border Afghanistan that are the ones we need to be focusing on.

Herman Cain says that it isn’t clear whether or not Pakistan is a friend or an enemy. He says that clarity is missing. Um.. dude, just pay attention. Didn’t Mark Block put down his cigarette long enough before the debate to hand you some notes? You’ve got to be prepared for these things and stop getting caught with your pants down, pun intended.

When the issue of foreign aid comes up, Rick Perry says that every country needs to be sent a clear message. Perry’s clear message is to make everybody start at zero dollars. Perry says that it is real clear that Pakistan is sending us a message that they don’t deserve our aid.

Bachmann vehemently disagrees with Perry, which I stayed to listen to as I didn’t have to pee at that moment. Michele, instilling fear, points out that Pakistan has a nuke and that the Al-Qaeda is close by. Bachmann, instilling even more fear, says that the table is set for nuclear war between Israel and its enemies.

Okay, so by this logic, Bachmann would rather give foreign fucking aid to a bunch of anti-American fucksacks in order to keep them at bay. Really lady? Are you shitting me? So you’re like one of those business owners that pays the mafia’s “protection fee” once a month to keep them from vandalizing your store. You’re too much of a goddamned fear turtle to run the show.

Newt agrees with Rick Perry and adds that countries receiving foreign aid should have to explain to us why they need it. He also warns that the Arab Spring is becoming the Anti-Christian Spring, which shows that we do need to go through the list of countries that we give foreign aid to, so that we can stop wasting it on those that aren’t even our friends.

Santorum jumps back into the debate and says that we must make sure that Pakistan is our friend because they have nukes. Okay, so with this idiot’s dumb ass logic we should be besties with North Korea since they hate us and are estimated to have 6 to 8 WMDs. Shit, maybe we should stop bashing Iran and send them some gift baskets full of love and Reese’s peanut butter cups before they point their superweapons back at us. Conservatives are confusing.

The debate shifts back to Newt who bitchslaps a gotcha question like the pro he is. He talks about Iran and North Korea and says that he would manage those situations with the same strategy Ronald Reagan and Pope John Paul II used against communism. Newt says that we need to build up the Navy. He also says that he would reevaluate our relationship with the United Nations.

Rick Perry is asked how he would manage America’s nuclear weapons if he were to eliminate the Department of Energy. Perry says that he would surround himself with the best advisors and he would consult them on it. Homie is sounding a lot like Herman Cain.

We move on to the torture part of the debate where the only two sane people in the room are Ron Paul and Jon Huntsman. Cain kicks it off by saying that he is against torture but would trust the military to make the right decisions. Once again, Cain puts his trust in others to lead. Is this really who you want to waste a fucking vote on? Maybe Godfather’s Pizza was successful because of Cain’s advisors not because of Cain. Then again, they are only the 9th biggest pizza chain in America. Cain also says that waterboarding is not torture, that it is just “enhanced interrogation”. Yep, so is a testicle in a vice dude.

The moderators turn to Bachmann. She thinks that waterboarding is super fun.

Ron Paul points out that waterboarding is bullshit and that it is torture. He says that it is impractical, ineffective and that it has never been proven to work. He also states that it is un-American on principle alone. Crazy Eyes Bachmann starts shouting out of her shit pipe for the moderators to allow her to battle it out with Ron Paul but they ignore her. Jon Huntsman cuts in and says that waterboarding is indeed torture and warns us against using it.

The subject of presidents using their executive power to assassinate American citizens, without arrest or a trial, comes up and Mitt Romney chimes in. Romney says that it is okay if the citizen is deemed a terrorist. Okay, well shitpickle, any American can be deemed a terrorist if one goes by the guidelines laid out for what constitutes a potential terrorist in the MIAC Report. Mitt Romney is a tyrant without power, hopefully he doesn’t get power.

Newt makes a point to say that if you engage in war against the United States, that that makes you an enemy combatant and the rules change because war is war. This is a seemingly solid point but the word “war” isn’t as clearly defined as some might think. Once again, refer to the MIAC Report and see what constitutes a potential threat to national security.

The debate moves towards our relationship with China where the optimistic Rick Perry says that he believes that China will have the same fate as the Soviet Union because China doesn’t have the virtues that America has. The virtues that Perry is referring to are those same virtues that made him try to force needles into the arms of young girls in Texas. Perry also says that we must fight the cyberwar and we must win it.

Mitt is asked how he would prevent a second Cold War, this time with China. Mitt goes through his spiel about how China is a currency manipulator and how they don’t play by the rules, etcetera, etcetera, et-fucking-cetera. Mitt says that China has to be forced to play by the rules and that he would bring an action against them to the World Trade Organization. Romney says that contrary to his critics fears, he will not start a trade war because we are already in a trade war.

Huntsman is asked to give his two cents on Romney’s stance. Huntsman says that you cannot bring an action against China to the WTO. He also says that the key to reaching out to China is the young people. Remember earlier when I mentioned that China felt that Huntsman was somehow associated with the Jasmine Revolution? Well, Huntsman points out that the young people of China are fighting against the older generation and those in power who are stuck in their tyrannical communist ways. Huntsman lets us know that the future in China could be drastically different than what we know now. Where I stand, I can only hope that what will probably be a hard-fought and hopefully non-violent revolution ends up a success. The young people of China are hungry and they are tired of being subservient pawns to an overbearing state. Huntsman assures us that China’s Internet generation will bring down the tyranny in their country.

Rick Perry is then asked if his zero dollar foreign aid policy would apply to Israel. Perry says that Israel would also be reset to zero. Perry is then cut off as he starts to explain how he would handle Israel. Why is Perry cut off? Well, CBS tells us that the televised portion of the debate is over because NCIS is coming on. The audience at home is told to tune in on CBS.com to watch the last half hour of the debate.

The Internet only portion of the debate kicks off with Michele Bachmann painting a birdhouse.. just kidding. Actually, Bachmann says that we need a fixed cost system for the military. She says she will modernize military spending.

Herman Cain is asked about the Obama administration’s handling of the Middle East. Cain says that the Obama administration has mishandled all of the recent Arab uprisings but doesn’t really explain why.

Ron Paul is asked about Syria and he states that it is wrong for the United States to get involved in the problems of all these other countries. He says that it is wrong of us to go in and prop up dictators, which has been our history with similar situations. Paul points out that every time we do this sort of thing, it creates worse problems. Ron Paul gets cheers but the moderators cut him off before he can finish his quick rundown. Funny, because they let almost everyone else go over on their time.

Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich both agree that they would use covert activity to take out Assad. Chances are, he would be dragged around in the street, shot like a dog and then be sodomized to death with a knife just like Gaddafi was. Or they would just assassinate him like Osama bin Laden. Mitt Romney says that it is very important that we help Syria get rid of Assad and give them a new leader. Jesus people, do any of you listen to the common sense being dropped on you by Ron Paul? Have any of you ever picked up a fucking history book?

Herman Cain and Rick Santorum both admit that they would leave Gitmo open. They also say that they would continue to allow “enhanced interrogation” tactics.

Ron Paul attempts to educate the other conservatives again. He states that we have a bad foreign policy and we pretend we are at war with everyone. He points out that we have gone as far as assassinating American citizens, even a 16-year-old kid, the son of Anwar al-Awlaki, who’s death has been widely ignored and unmentioned by the mainstream media. Ron Paul says that in regards to torture and assassination, even our leaders have to live within the constraints of the law. Ron Paul is owning these cockpuppets and then Bachmann starts yelping like a fucking Yorkshire Terrier in an effort to respond to Ron Paul. Once again, the moderators ignore Bachmann’s pleas and tell her that there are rules to follow.

Rick Perry, who is up next, disagrees with Ron Paul. Perry declares that “THIS IS WAR!” and goes on to tell us about how we have to do certain things when we are at war. Jesus, it’s like these people are just locked in this war mode and completely oblivious to their own insanity. It’s like our leaders are programmed to perpetuate this aimless blind madness forever!

Bachmann finally gets her moment and actually compares the death of Osama bin Laden and Anwar al-Awlaki. She treats them as if they are one in the same, even though one was a citizen and one was not. Granted both were enemies of the state but there is something fundamentally wrong with our country when its leaders kill its own citizens without a trial, regardless of the situation. If you can’t see why, fuck you.

The only way a citizen, even one aligned with terrorists, should be murdered without a trial is if he happens to be caught in a crossfire or a battle and is slain. If this citizen turned terrorist was found by intelligence and then targeted for death by an unmanned drone, there is something incredibly wrong with that. If he tries to evade capture and is shot, that is understandable but to send a robot to terminate him like a T-1000 hunting down John Connor is something that evil machines do, not human beings. Then again, we are dealing with imperialistic bastards here.

Jon Huntsman gets the conch again and tells us that our debt is our biggest national security problem. He pimps out the Paul Ryan Plan and also mentions that he believes that education should be handled at a state level.

They bring in “Tutti Frutti” Bachmann again, a name given to her by Herman Cain (see here). She goes on some weird tirade about how she hates LBJ and how great China is for not having LBJ’s “Great Society”. Huh? What she is saying is that the United States should be more like China because China doesn’t have a welfare system. Yes, she wants us to be less socialist like communist China.

Herman Cain is then asked a military question and he can’t answer it! C’mon man! Well, he does technically answer it, he just says that he would put his trust in his advisors to make the right decisions. Alright dude, are we voting for you or a team of advisors? Do we even need you? Can we just have the advisors then? What the fuck is this guy doing up there? It’s time to leave the big kids table and stop making an ass out of yourself. Rachel Maddow was right when she called your campaign “performance art” and god I hate saying Maddow was right about anything. Thanks a lot Mr. Cain! Now could you conservatives stop giving this guy an endless supply of mulligans? It’s like he’s using the Konami Code and has 30 lives!

With 10 minutes left my Internet dropped the feed. I got it back 6 minutes later with only 4 minutes left in the debate. I probably didn’t miss much.

Huntsman talks about how he has worked with Pakistan in the past and how most of the other candidates don’t get it. He tells us that they are incredibly hard to work with. Throwing money at them isn’t the answer.

Rick Perry is asked about the euro versus the dollar. He starts by saying that the euro was created to compete with the dollar but, just like 30 minutes earlier, he is cut off by the moderators who say we’re all out of time. These asshole moderators are shitty fucking timekeepers and horrible at managing debates. Fuck Major Garrett and his butt buddy.

God, this debate was fucking crap! It was painful to watch and it was just a big ass joke. It was obvious that the debate was structured in such a way that the most time was given to Romney, Cain and Gingrich. Ron Paul only had a total of 89 seconds in the one hour televised portion! He was cut off again and again and so were the other candidates that aren’t the mainstream media’s darlings. Hell, even Rick Perry, who was once their darling, was shitted on pretty hard.

Now I know that seems like conspiratorial nonsense but there was an e-mail sent to Michele Bachmann’s campaign staff from CBS that leaked out (I posted a story on it here). The e-mail basically admits that the decision to limit the time of certain candidates was deliberate on the part of CBS.

Here’s a piece of the story I posted earlier, which is written by Prison Planet’s Paul Joseph Watson:

As Marc Fortier points out, an email inadvertently sent to Michelle Bachmann’s campaign clearly indicates that certain candidates were given less air time as a result of a deliberate CBS policy.

When a CBS staffer referenced how Bachmann’s campaign had made representatives available for an after-debate webshow, CBS News political analyst John Dickerson responded by saying, “Okay let’s keep it loose though since she’s not going to get many questions and she’s nearly off the charts in the hopes that we can get someone else.”

Dickerson’s admission that CBS had deliberately ensured Bachmann was “not going to get many questions” during the debate indicated “a planned effort to limit questions to Michele Bachmann at tonight’s CBS/National Journal Debate,” the Bachmann campaign said in a statement.

Obviously, that policy of limiting air time to certain candidates was also applied to Congressman Ron Paul, despite the fact that he has consistently won straw polls and proven himself as a top tier candidate in national polls.

As we have documented, despite his popularity the establishment media has deliberately downplayed and sidelined Paul’s campaign.

After Ron Paul finished a close second to Bachmann in the highly regarded Ames straw poll, and was subsequently blacklisted by the corporate press, Politico’s Roger Simon said the reason for him being ignored was that “the media doesn’t believe he has a hoot in hells chance of winning the Iowa caucuses, the Republican nomination or winning the presidency, so we’re gonna ignore him.”

“We are in the business of kicking candidates out of the race,” CNN host Howard Kurtz responded.

It’s a fucked up crazy race people and the media is doing everything it can to try and shape the results. It’s up to us to make our own decisions and to speak up when they try and pull these kind of bullshit stunts.

Grading Scale:
Grade B-: Ron Paul
Grade C: Jon Huntsman
Grade C-: Newt Gingrich
Grade D+: Mitt Romney
Grade D: Rick Perry
Grade D: Herman Cain
Grade F: Michele Bachmann
Grade F: Rick Santorum
Grade I: Gary Johnson

My Two Cents: While the now non-existent “Anti-War” Movement says that waterboarding is torture and makes us no better than our enemy, would you rather this or would you rather we commit the same horrible atrocities that those imposing Sharia Law commit against their own citizens (not even their enemy)? We’re not torturing people like the enemy did to us in Vietnam or any other war in the last 100 years. While I don’t necessary agree with torture (which this could or couldn’t be depending upon who you talk to), I have to say that this is much more humane than the alternative. But is this a case for choosing the lesser of two evils? That’s for you to decide. End Two Cents.

*Taken from FleeceMe.

Checkout this video to see how evil America is. We actually pour water on someone’s face!!!! Despite the kool-aid drinkers who think we are evil torturers, this is a very humane method of information extraction. Why? Because it causes no permanent damage and it works even though the “victim” knows we aren’t trying to kill them. Think about that a sec. Most forms of torture are predicated on the idea that “its only gonna get worse”, so you better spill the beans to save yourself some pain. This method works because your brain can not overcome its instincts – you can’t rationalize away what your brain is telling you, which is, “Holy crap, this ain’t good!” Even though you know your “torturer” is not gonna hurt you, it still freaking works.

[brightcove vid=20047560001&exp=1579920046&w=486&h=412]

*Taken from News 4 Jax. Video at link.

Elisha Dawkins graduated in August from nursing school in Jacksonville.

He put on hold his plans for taking the board exams because the Navy called him into action as a photographer.

Dawkins photographed happenings at Guantanamo Bay, an act that’s evidence he’s a trusted member of the military with top secret clearance.

Now, Dawkins, a Navy reservist and decorated Army combat photographer who served in Iraq, is in jail, charged with passport fraud. He’s facing 10 years in prison for what could be a simple misunderstanding.

“Suddenly, he’s picked up and thrown in jail? Then it’s time for this senator to start asking questions,” U.S. Sen. Bill Nelson., D-Fla., said.

Nelson has questions echoed by Dawkins’ friends, including Dianne Rinehardt.

CONTINUED..

*Taken from McClatchey.

When a fiddle player and her band toured the prison camps at Guantánamo recently, guards told of a new devious and disturbing tactic confronting them.

A captive on a hunger strike had been jamming something foul up his nose to contaminate the pathway for medical staff who feed him a nutritional shake twice a day.

Political protest or mental illness?

The captive was jamming his own excrement up his nose. On the topic of bodily waste abuse, prison camp management “will not speculate on the motivations for this behavior,” said Navy Cmdr Tamsen Reese, who confirmed the account of country artist Natalie Stovall.

CONTINUED..