Republican hopefuls bicker over America's role in world

“The other Republicans will criticize the president and Hillary Clinton for their foreign policy, but they would just have done the same thing — just 10 times over,” Paul said . . . he said, and “just may want war instead of negotiations.”

We have met the enemy and he is the GOP-Tea. The world has seen the AWOL President Bush lead the world into a global crisis with the GOP-Tea religious wars of private profit. Americans may have one chance left, the chance that the GOP-Tea would squander in endless wars to profit their corporate masters. Will Americans again be led into the raging maelstrom of a GOP-Tea Presidency?

“The other Republicans will criticize the president and Hillary Clinton for their foreign policy, but they would just have done the same thing — just 10 times over,” Paul said . . . he said, and “just may want war instead of negotiations.”

Where was it that Paul said, he wanted war?? We are talking about Rand Paul now.

We have met the enemy and he is the GOP-Tea. The world has seen the AWOL President Bush lead the world into a global crisis with the GOP-Tea religious wars of private profit.

For religious reasons? What proof do you of this?

Americans may have one chance left,

Actually, and to be blunt, if Americans really want change, they won't vote for a Hilary or Bush and a Washington establishment candidate, that's if there is a candidate that puts America first, but to continue and have a 3rd Obama term would be disastrous for the country.

the chance that the GOP-Tea would squander in endless wars to profit their corporate masters.

Question, what is it with you and war? No one is talking about war and sadly, if you think Hilary wouldn't use a military option, she is definitely NOT an Obama, so on that part, I think she would, if it is necessary.

Will Americans again be led into the raging maelstrom of a GOP-Tea Presidency?

Or will they be lead by lying constitutional law breaking Democrats?

Every Republican "leading!" screech brings to mind Charlie Sheen's pathetic "Winning!" stage. Pathological, really.

Once again Rand Paul says a bunch of stuff I agree with. If a Republican ends up winning the White House, at the moment I'm hoping it's him.

"Where was it that Paul said, he wanted war?? We are talking about Rand Paul now." - comments

Some may be unable to read this article carefully.

In an effort to help please note: the markings used in a comment that look like "this" are called quotation marks; they indicate specific information presented by the author, The Associated Press. Hopefully some commenters are helped by this important convention used in punctuation. In fact war is mentioned in ten of the twenty paragraphs in this article by The Associated Press.

"Where was it that Paul said, he wanted war??

In a budget amendment he submitted to increase Defense Spending by about 15% over the next 2 years ?

Carly Fiorina speaks at the Republican Leadership Summit Saturday in Nashua, New Hampshire.

Good god -- they had to oust Carly from HP, because her strategy was a disaster, especially the acquisition of Compaq, which she forced through against strong opposition. So now she is qualified to determine America's foreign policy? The Republicans truly are their own worst enemy.

Why? None of 'em will be POTUS.

“There’s a group of folks in our party who would have troops in six countries right now, maybe more,” Paul said. - article

Here again the reader sees those punctuation marks called "quotation marks", hopefully this helps to understand what is being conveyed.

Paul is bluntly stating the GOP-Tea is comprised of war mongers and profiteers. Similarly, Ms. Fiorina is making the same appeal calling for war at all costs with no sense of responsibility for the consequences. Perhaps this is why the GOP-Tea finds these appeals so exciting. Blood-Treasure-Blame, repeat ad nauseam.

"The libertarian-minded Paul, who favors a smaller U.S. footprint in the world, said that some of his Republican colleagues would do more harm in international affairs than would leading Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton."

Hillary Clinton would do harm in international affairs?

“There’s a group of folks in our party who would have troops in six countries right now, maybe more,” Paul said."

Um, the U.S. has had troops in way more than six countries for a long time, Paul. Get with the program already.

"I think the Russians and the Chinese have great potential to help make the world a better place,” he said. “I don’t say that naively that they’re going to, but they have the potential to.”

Cripes, the Russians have given the world vodka and a bunch of other stuff according to Pavel Chekov, and the Chinese have given, OK, sold us a bunch of cheap stuff that has made it possible for many retailers to survive. Haven't they made the world a better place?

The libertarian-minded Paul, who favors a smaller U.S. footprint in the world, said that some of his Republican colleagues would do more harm in international affairs than would leading Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Clinton will be DEM candidate but she will have tough time if Paul becomes GOP candidate. People are sick and tired of middle east wars.

"The Republican presidential class regularly rails against President Barack Obama’s leadership on the world stage, yet some would-be contenders have yet to articulate their own positions, while others offered sharply different visions."

It's always easy to criticize when you've never been president and the decisions you make have real world consequences. Sorry to say most of these possible candidates speak utter nonsense to appease people who have no basis in the real world.

The dumbest comment is by Graham:

“You go over there and you fight them so they don’t come here.”

The opposite is infinitely more likely. Americans in another war in the ME will only encourage attacks on Americans everywhere. Note that no one is chanting "Death to Switzerland".

Paul is the only one of the GOP candidates who dares articulate the obvious, on this issue at least.

'Actually, and to be blunt, if Americans really want change, they won't vote for a Hilary or Bush and a Washington establishment candidate, that's if there is a candidate that puts America first'

Both parties are now a waste of time. Any Republican or Democratic candidate with an earthly will have to bow at the feet of big business. The majority are screwed whatever happens. The gaudy, big budget, overlong soap opera of the US election very conveniently convinces some that there is actually a real choice to be made here.

Let's hope they all come to the conclusion that the USA is NOT the policeman of the world. It is also NOT the protector of all the world which includes Japan and South Korea. It is time for those countries to protect themselves and for the troops to come home.

@noriyosan73 I hope you are in favor of Japan doing the "protecting themselves" bit before the US leaves. You still won't get Okinawa back most likely, as it is the mainland's favorite whipping boy.

Clinton will be DEM candidate but she will have tough time if Paul becomes GOP candidate. People are sick and tired of middle east wars.

Both Rand Paul and Ted Cruz were elected with strong Tea Party backing, the difference is going to come down to support for Israel and how for the US has a responsibility to defend our values abroad more than troop deployments at this juncture. And Clinton's experience I think will work in her favor but she is going to have questions over foreign donations to the Clinton Foundation no matter who the GOP nominee.

Good god -- they had to oust Carly from HP, because her strategy was a disaster, especially the acquisition of Compaq, which she forced through against strong opposition. So now she is qualified to determine America's foreign policy? The Republicans truly are their own worst enemy.

Hmmm, so what makes Hilary a better candidate? Because she's a woman or better yet. A Clinton?? She's not qualified because she was ousted from HP. Under Hilary our Ambassador and 3 others die, still under suspicious circumstances and that is ok and makes her qualified? Lol Libs are hilarious!

@jim

Geez, for once I finally agree with. Now you're really making sense! Right on point!

'@jim

Geez, for once I finally agree with. Now you're really making sense! Right on point!'

You're not making any sense though. You say you agree that whoever is in charge after the next election, nothing major will change. Why then do you constantly post partisan rants against Obama, remind us of how many days he has left and tell us how you can't wait for the madness to be over? As you agreed, the next leader will do pretty much the same. I don't get why you're so excited at the prospect of a new leader.

Jimizo: "I don't get why you're so excited at the prospect of a new leader."

Like most Republicans, he's just excited to be irrationally angry and and to rail against the next Democrat in charge. Doesn't matter who it is, or why, just need to be angry at someone else instead of working for change in your own party.

bass4funk: "Question, what is it with you and war? No one is talking about war and sadly"

Nah, not John Bolton at all, nor John McCain (maybe it's a 'John' thing?), and not the "I always look like I just cried in the closet" Tom Cotton, or any of the others who commit treason against your own nation. And certainly not Louie Gohmert, who says, "I think it's time to bomb Iran. I'm hoping and praying the president will realize that... and that maybe he’ll start being more helpful to Israel instead of slapping them around as an unwelcomed visitor and start treating them like a friend. And maybe once he starts doing that he’ll realize we do need to bomb Iran’s nuclear facilities that we know of and anything that they move to fix, we bomb that as well.”

And those are just DIRECT admissions of wanting war, bass. Forget the fact that you and many Republicans have directly stated you want to derail peace deals but will stop Iran by any means -- which means war.

But yeah, bass... you guys don't want war at all.

Funny thing, this concept of a "deep" Republican field. Rumor has it that Bush may skip the race entirely, and even if he does enter, if he loses the second primary in New Hampshire (he's certain to lose the first in nutcase Iowa), there will be a movement to draft Romney.

Clinton leads among Democrats for various reasons, but at least she does lead. For the Republicans? - I would not lay down any money at this point.

Using the terms "bicker" reveals your prejudices. Anyway; I prefer Senator Rand Paul. (I worked for Reagan.)

Laguna,

there will be a movement to draft Romney.

Seriously? Sounds like madness but hey, that's what insane people do best.

I kinda miss the last election cycle. Gingrich, Santorum and or even Herman Cain. I realize imploding heads like the Canadian Ted Cruz will provide quality entertainment in that scary way that mentally deranged people do, but they don't have the "wheeled out of the asylum LIVE" credentials like the last primaries, where the Repubs knew they were going to lose to Obama in advance and where it seemed like a convenient ploy in their part to get rid of the unelectable candidates that wouldn't go away - Mitt Rmoney being at the top of that list.....

I don't think Paul is qualified to be President - he wasn't a "community leader."

Fortunately, any President is limited to 10 yrs of total time in office or 2 elections. Ref 22nd Amendment. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twenty-second_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution#Text

You're not making any sense though. You say you agree that whoever is in charge after the next election, nothing major will change.

Meaning if it is and established Washington candidate, meaning: deeply rooted.

Why then do you constantly post partisan rants against Obama,

I am not a partisan for the record, I just despise it when liberals can't own up to their mistakes or admit when their party is wrong, I have very serious fundamental problem with that.

remind us of how many days he has left and tell us how you can't wait for the madness to be over?

Because I can't this president and his policies have been bad for this country and abroad and I can't wait until the day he is out of office. That has nothing to do with being partisan, that's just dealing with reality.

As you agreed, the next leader will do pretty much the same. I don't get why you're so excited at the prospect of a new leader.

As I said, I just don't want another Washington elite, I want someone that will think about the people and put the country first and not partisan politics.

Like most Republicans,

I'm not a Republican for the record.

he's just excited to be irrationally angry and and to rail against the next Democrat in charge.

Actually, no. As I said, the Democrats are exactly where the Republicans were in 2007, sorry, but if ANY Democrat would get elected to anything in the next election cycle it would be miracle and at this point, that luck is running out very, very fast. Could Hilary win, there is always that chance, but it is just a chance.

Doesn't matter who it is, or why, just need to be angry at someone else instead of working for change in your own party.

If you believe for one moment that the Dems are a sound party, you have been sold a basket of worms. Obama and Hilary can't stand each other, but they are trying their best to be civil in front of the cameras, when Obama was asked the other day if he would support Hilary, there was a lot of dodging coming out of Obama's mouth. There is still a bit of bitterness from 2008 and also the Obama admin. is scared that if Hilary were to get the presidency, she would probably govern more to the middle and not enough to the left and might undo some of the radical policies that Obama implemented, thereby, threatening his so called legacy, if you want to call it that. And remember, Hilary has a very steep uphill battle and a lot of questions to answer that are coming up and she WILL NOT BE ABLE TO DODGE ANY OF THEM and that seriously has her campaign staff worried. Right now she is in a very closed off and controlled environment. Having staged lunches, not answering any questions from the media, she can get away with that now, but these questions will NOT go away and she will have to confront them all.

Nah, not John Bolton at all, nor John McCain (maybe it's a 'John' thing?), and not the "I always look like I just cried in the closet" Tom Cotton, or any of the others who commit treason against your own nation.

Treason??? Seriously? You meant, Obama, but please continue....

And certainly not Louie Gohmert, who says, "I think it's time to bomb Iran.

You libs crack me up. So to use the analogy when parents say to their kids, "I'm going to kill you," do they follow through on that threat always? You guys try, try so hard. No Republican, Libertarian or independent wants to go to war IF there is NO REASON for one, again, there are other ways around it. Keep trying, Smith. Lol

I'm hoping and praying the president will realize that... and that maybe he’ll start being more helpful to Israel instead of slapping them around as an unwelcomed visitor and start treating them like a friend.

As he should, without a doubt, the same goes for the Saudis, Jordan and the Egyptians.

And maybe once he starts doing that he’ll realize we do need to bomb Iran’s nuclear facilities that we know of and anything that they move to fix, we bomb that as well.”

If it HAS to come to that and if it reaches critical mass, all options were exhausted and the Mullahs really would go through with that, YES, of course!

And those are just DIRECT admissions of wanting war, bass.

This is why libs and Dems are not taken seriously and as the party of jokers. You guys just make stuff up and run with it, from racism to abortion to whatever suits your narrative and can help you guys further your destructive ideology on the country. And even John Bolton didn't ask nor demanded or suggested to go to war, I met the man 15 years ago in NY and even then, the guy never advocated any aggression or suggested hostile action should be taken towards Iran. He has repeatedly stated there are other ways to bring Iran to its knees without military action first.

Forget the fact that you and many Republicans have directly stated you want to derail peace deals but will stop Iran by any means -- which means war.

I feel like you guys are just upset that the Republicans are not screaming for a war. Guess what, everyone is tired, even Republicans, you just hope they long for a war, stirring up the pot so that, they will never be elected to anything, that's exactly what the Dems want and the funny thing is, the GOP is NOT taking that bait. War is the absolute finally option and I mean, FINAL. So all you libs need to stop shouting that the GOP wants a war, it's not going to happen.

But yeah, bass... you guys don't want war at all.

Exactly.

Really, she won't.

You never know, but I doubt it, but then again, I was wrong when I thought the GOP couldn't get the House back as well....

The Republicans don't support Paul's stance toward the Middle East, so he won't get the support he needs from them.

I like Paul's ideas, but as a person and his stance on foreign policy, Sorry. The man is dry as a bowl of beef jerky, he has problem with smiling, has a temper problem and has a thin skin, Obama and Hilary are already thin-skinned people, really don't want to go through that again.

As for the Democrats, some of them might prefer his stance on the MIddle East, but he's too much of a nutcase on almost every other issue to get much support there either.

Don't worry, He'll never get the nomination.

Still want to see what Hilary stands for.

The Tea Party will mostly serve to splinter the Republicans, which in recent years has mostly been defined by not supporting whatever Obama supports. Republicans can't and won't come together to find what they are actually in favor of, at least not soon enough to win the presidential race.

Oh, I am sure they will.

Clinton will get in, not because she is great, but because she is good enough, and all her dirty secrets are already known.

Really, so why didn't she turn over her servers? Why did she defy a Federal court order subpoena to hand everything over? Why did she hand over her emails that she wanted only and why when she turned over some of the Benghazi files, why were a bunch of files missing? Why no answers about her campaign contributions? Why won't she give reporters, ALL reporters an interview and answer many of their questions?

Interesting for someone who has nothing to hide. ROFL.

I'm not entirely convinced that any of these candidates truly loves America. I also have questions about their supposed "devotion" to Christianity. One of them wasnt even born in the US. Just sayin.

Oh they're all losers anyway according to Harry Reid. Though in reality they need to be listened to and let the citizens decide on the validaty of content. As for Harry Reid, the comment was not very professional or mature of him. The democrats stoop to the bottom of the barrel with respect of opposition. Easily read on JT comments all day long.

"The world is a more dangerous and more tragic place when America is not leading"

Do they really believe in it ?

I'm not entirely convinced that any of these candidates truly loves America.

I think it would be safe to say they love America enough to protect it from its enemies foreign or domestic and not just sit on their a** and wait and hope that nothing happens when our enemies are hoping for just that nativity.

I also have questions about their supposed "devotion" to Christianity. One of them wasnt even born in the US. Just sayin.

If you have "a" parent that is a born US citizen, you are still American, just sayin' Also, what's wrong if they have a deep devotion to God? Everyone has a right to believe or worship as they please, now if they sit in the oval office and govern solely based on the Good book then you have a problem.

"The world is a more dangerous and more tragic place when America is not leading"

It's a fact, like it or not.

Reading the comments on this and other posts about the upcoming US elections, I see two sets of people.

1) The non-US people who want to harp and complain about US politics and have swallwed the media hype that all things Republican are bad, and that the US is just a big bully. To those people I say you can post your opinions since you can't vote in the US elections anyway. If a "war monger" gets elected as you think, it will not make any difference. When there is a strong us military presence in trouble spots, most likely your home countries will send token forces, and once things get really bad your people will pull out, and leave the US to do the heavy lifting. At least with a GOP led country, the US will probably commit instead of like it is doing now leading from behind. And since we are in so many places, how many of your countries have stepped up?

2) The US citizens who will not vote for any GOP candidate. To those I say that's your choice and if you don't like any of the potential candidates and the people who follow, then that is your choice. But the real question these people should be asking themselves is where are the Democratic runners? I am sure that not every Dem elected offical has the same mind set, and some may think that they can bring a different viewpoint and ideas to the table to help out their party and the nation. Yet they are pushed aside in order for the coronation of Hillary. Does that sound like a free and open policital process? These same Dems will villify people like the Koch brothers and their donations, and yet team Hillary has a such a strong donor base and connections and will get plenty of money from the DNC that any other person who would be a viable candidate will not be able to raise the money needed.

The problem for any potential Dem candidates is not having the money to make it to the general election, the DNC will be able to support that, but making it to the nomination convention since Hillary has sewed up key political support and has her campaign machine going full speed.

If you posters (US citizens) have no issues with just giving the nomination to Hillary,without at least hearing what other potential candidates have to say and are fine with her being coronated as the Dem nominee, then I think you need to go back and review your civics lessons and the American political process.

At least with the field of GOP runners, we get a chance to get a good look at them and see where they stand, and then can decide if they are too looney to elect, but with the Dems, to borrow a phrase from the movie "Caddyshack"" "You'll get nothing...and like it!"

ba: I think it would be safe to say they love America enough to protect it from its enemies foreign or domestic and not just sit on their a and wait and hope that nothing happens when our enemies are hoping for just that nativity.

You see that in these men? I'm VERY concerned that electing a GOP candidate will weaken our ties with our allies and will embolden our enemies. Terrorists could potentially be waiting 575 days to carry out major strikes. The Republicans already have a very bad imagine problem with most of the rest of the world as it is. The American people know that which is exactly the reason why Obama got reelected.

The American people know that which is exactly the reason why Obama got reelected.

Don't forget the willingness to remain on the Democratic Party plantation (government handouts, free Obama phones), white guilt, basement-level low information voters, etc., etc., etc.........

....and as you know Texas Aggie, unsustainable! The democrats have a limited timeline unless reinvented. Handouts have a limit. What will happen when realization takes place and the Fed reduces them?

@AlphaapeAPR. 20, 2015 - 12:21AM JST Reading the comments on this and other posts about the upcoming US elections, I see two sets of peope

You are stereotyping all comment writerswho formulate their ideas and comment here !

He's not stereotyping. What's the matter with you??

He's simply expressing an educated observation-

Don't forget the willingness to remain on the Democratic Party plantation (government handouts, free Obama phones), white guilt, basement-level low information voters, etc., etc., etc.........

Well you just showed where you get your talking points from.

The ironic thing is that the poorest hick states, that benefit the most from handouts, are states that vote Republican.

After all, people of lower intelligence and education get sucked into the fear sold by the Republicans easier than those with intelligence.

"Don't forget the willingness to remain on the Democratic Party plantation" - comments

As others have noted, it is clear the racist component of the GOP-Tea is proud enough of their prejudice to share this degenerate philosophy in comments.

For those who read "plantation", and are unfamiliar with the reference, the writer is referring to the plantations of America's pre-civil war period. The translation is too obvious to indulge.

Comments seem to provide a clearer picture of the racism the GOP-Tea welcomes and encourages in it's most rabid supporters. Everyone has to find their comfort level in a nation's election process.

For those readers who are testing the personality of the GOP-Tea, have faith, little has changed. Racism is still welcome and, as The Associated Press notes of the bickering tenor: "Republican hawks were well represented at the event, led by Florida Sen. Marco Rubio".

Internationally, the combination of racism and war mongers confirms the GOP-Tea as regressive and sullen in their myopia. A poor choice in an increasingly complex and interdependent world.

Comments seem to provide a clearer picture of the racism the GOP-Tea welcomes and encourages in it's most rabid supporters. Everyone has to find their comfort level in a nation's election process.

@ kcjapan: Where has the GOP ever said that all people who are non-white and Christian should be kicked out of the country? Again people are just throwing out the racist word without any justification just because you don't like their approach to matters.

There have been numerous Black politicians and pundits who have brought out the "plantation mentality" of the Dems and it is not just a GOP thing. Why do you think that the Dems want to open the flood gates to illegal aliens into the USA? Because these people will become political "sheeple" to the party that is going to give them more free stuff. Think I am wrong, look at a country like Mexico, and see how long the dominate political party has been in power there, and the condition the country is in and how the opposition party has fared over the years. I beleive that Vicnete Fox the former Mexican president elected in the 2000 was the first president from the opposition (National Action Party or PAN) since 1910. So of course the Dems want that type of person who will follow what the government will tell them as long as the goodies keep coming to them.

If you don't agree with the GOP then fine. But don't just throw out the word racist without providing proof, or for that matter being able to discuss why you oppose their position and what you have to offer.

There is always a comment that reveals the horror of reality for some.

As if for the first time these few are forced to hold up a mirror and see the disfigurement of their disorder.

The GOP-Tea has many of this sort. New Hampshire is only the welcome mat to the bizarre world these creatures inhabit. The world should fear them.

Worst, any true American should look very carefully at the attitudes of pompous certainty in all of the most vile prejudices they bring to every political event and childish scrawl. The mirror is there, look if you dare, these grotesque renditions, the Dorian Gray of the GOP-Tea for all to see.

@ kcjapan: You are not making much sense. Once again, I have asked provide proof of any GOP/Tea Party (and for the record, there is a huge rift between the GOP and Tea Party, but don't let facts get in your way), have made blatant racist remarks.

Wanting to secure the border to keep illegals from entering the USA, how is that racist? I guess according to your logic, I should just be able to land at Narita and come into Japan and demand that I am given rights of citizenship because I "feel" that I should. Making sure that voters have ID to vote, you need an ID to cash a check, use a credit card, buy alcohol and cigarettes so how is it racist to ask to show proof of state residency (I as a resident of my home state can't go and vote in another state's elections unless I show proof of residency)? They have not said that people of color or women or gays not be allowed to vote based on their origins or background.

If anyone is being pompous, again it is the Dems and the "heir apparent" in nominating Hillary. Sure there have been some who are trying to upset the status quo, but they get marganilized and looked over since the big and powerful machine of Hillary holds sway not only over the donor base, but the media. Name for me one news show that would have someone like Webb from VA who is a potential Dem candidate on, when they get a call that says Bill Clinton would like to come on and discuss why Hillary should be the nominee. Guess which one would get the air time. Or you can look at how the Hillary campaign has given the press the do's and don'ts as to what they can ask of her. So the arrogance would appear to be more on the Dems side rather than the GOP.

You see that in these men? I'm VERY concerned that electing a GOP candidate will weaken our ties with our allies and will embolden our enemies.

Obama already just did exactly that.

Terrorists could potentially be waiting 575 days to carry out major strikes.

No, they don't have to wait, Obama already gave them the keys. Now it is on them when they make their first move.

The Republicans already have a very bad imagine problem with most of the rest of the world as it is.

As if that's important what the world thinks. This is why Obama is such a terrible president and a horrible screwup.

The American people know that which is exactly the reason why Obama got reelected.

And they have now buyers remorse, that's why they got rid of the Democrats in the House and especially the Senate as a clear message to Washington that they are tired of failed liberal policies.

The ironic thing is that the poorest hick states, that benefit the most from handouts, are states that vote Republican.

And look at California cities like Modesto and Riverside filed for bankruptcy.

After all, people of lower intelligence and education get sucked into the fear sold by the Republicans easier than those with intelligence.

So then why are so many educated college Ivy-league graduates about 46% of them either not finding a job in their field or moving back in with their parents or winding up changing their major altogether? Why is it, you less entrepreneurs coming from the college educated world as opposed to many in the South that are self-employed and do fine. Obama is college educated and look at the disaster he created for the country, but then again, all the states with college educated Republican governors seem to be doing mostly well, so that should account for something.

Worst, any true American should look very carefully at the attitudes of pompous certainty in all of the most vile prejudices they bring to every political event and childish scrawl. The mirror is there, look if you dare, these grotesque renditions, the Dorian Gray of the GOP-Tea for all to see.

I think you meant the Democratic Party, generally speaking.

South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham: “You go over there and you fight them so they don’t come here.” - article

There's another example of the GOP-Tea, just not paying any attention to the consequences of their private wars of profit and selling the same punch-line as their twisted version of wisdom.

More proof these deluded war profiteers will say anything to make a buck on blood. Anyone's but their own. Graham is like the serial killer who blames the voices in his head for the destruction of so many lives.

"Until this moment, Senator, I think I never really gauged your cruelty or your recklessness. . . . Senator. You have done enough. Have you no sense of decency?"

reference: http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/minute/Have_you_no_sense_of_decency.htm

bass4funk: "If it HAS to come to that and if it reaches critical mass, all options were exhausted and the Mullahs really would go through with that, YES, of course!"

The guy isn't saying, "if it HAS to come to that" -- he is LITERALLY saying he wants to bomb Iran, NOW, and that the president needs to realize the US should. You asked for proof of people calling for war, you were given it, and then all you can do is backtrack and say, "Well, jeez... you think when a kid says he'll kill his parents he's serious?"

Sorry, bud. Your boys want war, and so do you if you do not support peace. Defying Obama's plan to REDUCE any threat Iran poses, but still demanding Iran stop it's nuclear program or face war means you want war. That's all there is to it. You say, "IF it comes to that", but the thing is, that's what you and yours are pushing for.

"Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, whose brother, President George W. Bush, authorized the 2003 invasion of Iraq, declined to say whether he would have done anything different." - article

"The best argument against Democracy is a five-minute conversation with a Republican" - Winston Churchill

South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham: “You go over there and you fight them so they don’t come here.” - article

When it comes to ISIS and radical Islamists, Yes! I completely agree or like most libs, you guys just want to wait it out to the point where the problem unmanageable.

There's another example of the GOP-Tea, just not paying any attention to the consequences of their private wars of profit and selling the same punch-line as their twisted version of wisdom.

Obama didn't pay attention to his military advisors when he was being advised to take action against ISIS and also was incognito when ISIS was growing in numbers and now we are all paying for the consequences because of lack of wisdom and caring except when it comes to the presidents personal legacy.

More proof these deluded war profiteers will say anything to make a buck on blood.

Obama did the same thing, by throwing our allies under the bus, thousands of people died and for what? His and Clinton's legacy? We don't even want to talk about Hilary's deal when it comes to making a buck.

Anyone's but their own. Graham is like the serial killer who blames the voices in his head for the destruction of so many lives.

At this point, both parties are slowly destroying America in their own ways, the thing is, the Dems are speeding up that process.

"Until this moment, Senator, I think I never really gauged your cruelty or your recklessness. . . . Senator. You have done enough. Have you no sense of decency?"

You should say that to the man in the oval office.

"Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, whose brother, President George W. Bush, authorized the 2003 invasion of Iraq, declined to say whether he would have done anything different." - article "The best argument against Democracy is a five-minute conversation with a Republican" - Winston Churchill

And it should be an option if all else fails, good on him.

The guy isn't saying, "if it HAS to come to that" -- he is LITERALLY saying he wants to bomb Iran, NOW, and that the president needs to realize the US should.

So my question is WHERE DID HE SPECIFICALLY SAY he wants to bomb Iran under any cost.

You asked for proof of people calling for war, you were given it, and then all you can do is backtrack and say, "Well, jeez... you think when a kid says he'll kill his parents he's serious?"

What proof? Where? Again, who specifically?

Sorry, bud. Your boys want war, and so do you if you do not support peace.

So now you personally know me and what's in my head? Because I'm a Conservative, I am for war by default and there is absolutely NO WAY I want peace...... ROFL, keep telling yourself that.

Defying Obama's plan to REDUCE any threat Iran poses, but still demanding Iran stop it's nuclear program or face war means you want war.

No, it means, I think we should impose harsher sanctions and bring them to their knees, which is what they are designed to do, punish and once they are willing to give up their nuclear program unconditionally, then you proceed with talks and negotiations.

That's all there is to it. You say, "IF it comes to that", but the thing is, that's what you and yours are pushing for.

As a final option. You do understand the word Final?

"It is said that power corrupts, but actually it's more true that power attracts the corruptible. The sane are usually attracted by other things than power." ― David Brin

The kooky GOP-Tea is attracted only to wealth and power.

The American public can see all too clearly how many yo-yos are grabbing for the wheel to drive the GOP-Tea off another cliff taking everyone with them.

"It is said that power corrupts, but actually it's more true that power attracts the corruptible. The sane are usually attracted by other things than power." ― David Brin

This is why I have very little love for most politicians.

The kooky GOP-Tea is attracted only to wealth and power.

As equally the Democrats are attracted to power, socialism and dependency.

The American public can see all too clearly how many yo-yos are grabbing for the wheel to drive the GOP-Tea off another cliff taking everyone with them.

For the last 6 years, this country has been painfully trying to get out of that ditch since flying over that cliff the president took us over.

"For the last 6 years, this country has been painfully trying to get out of that ditch since flying over that cliff the president took us over." - comments

That was President AWOL Bush and the GOP-Tea. Well noted.

Look at the "New Hampshire Republican conference that brought about 20 presidential prospects to the first-in-the-nation primary state". Woe betide the America, and the rest of the world, that goes over the cliff with that crowd.

"For the last 6 years, this country has been painfully trying to get out of that ditch since flying over that cliff the president took us over." - comments

You'll notice Bass always says stuff like this, but when asked for clarification, he'll reply with a question along the line of 'why are blacks facing tougher times than ever then?' - a completely unquantifiable reply, without any links or anything whatsoever to support his claim.

Read all his posts - they all give opinions, but he never gives anything with any numbers, anything with actual figures to support his claims. Just a bunch of Faux speaking points.

That was President AWOL Bush and the GOP-Tea. Well noted.

@ kcjapan: The teaparty wasn't around when Bush was president. As far as you hoping the world will not have to deal with a GOP president, how's it going so far with the Dem in office. The Arab Spring, the rise of ISIS and the other issues were started before the GOP held both the House and Senate, and compared to say the ruling "juntas" in places like Zimbabwae, Venzuela, and other places where the "populist" liberal leaders have taken over and assumed lifetime employment, how are they doing so far? Makes the GOP not look that bad.

No one is actually foggy on the history of the GOP-Tea, except those who rely on a Fox Lobotomy.

The GOP-Tea isn't new or old, it's always the same. Look at the cluster fest at New Hampshire reported here and all of 2012. Death March to 2016 is mislabeled, it should read Brain Dead March to 2016.

The resume of the GOP-Tea is a matter of record. Poor America, the legacy of AWOL Bush. (Bush lost his authorization to be a pilot for failing to meet attendance and physical examination requirements.)

That was President AWOL Bush and the GOP-Tea. Well noted.

I meant, from 2008 until the present. There I fixed it for you.

Look at the "New Hampshire Republican conference that brought about 20 presidential prospects to the first-in-the-nation primary state". Woe betide the America, and the rest of the world, that goes over the cliff with that crowd.

So again, how will we get out of this ditch that the Dems and Obama drove us in???

You'll notice Bass always says stuff like this, but when asked for clarification, he'll reply with a question along the line of 'why are blacks facing tougher times than ever then?'

Because I never get an answer from you libs, that's why. Or you didn't notice that?!

a completely unquantifiable reply, without any links or anything whatsoever to support his claim.

I always provide links and besides, if you live in the US, all you have to do is see the country around you to know that everything is mucked up. For that you don't need a link, but you do need to be able to deal with reality and not being a partisan.

Read all his posts - they all give opinions,

As we all do on certain topics.

but he never gives anything with any numbers, anything with actual figures to support his claims. Just a bunch of Faux speaking points.

I think you are reading the wrong threads then.

No one is actually foggy on the history of the GOP-Tea, except those who rely on a Fox Lobotomy.

So now the truth hurts all of a sudden?

The GOP-Tea isn't new or old, it's always the same. Look at the cluster fest at New Hampshire reported here and all of 2012. Death March to 2016 is mislabeled, it should read Brain Dead March to 2016.

So what do the Dems have to offer besides an old 67 year old with a credibility deficiency problem?

The resume of the GOP-Tea is a matter of record. Poor America, the legacy of AWOL Bush. (Bush lost his authorization to be a pilot for failing to meet attendance and physical examination requirements.)

Funny, Obama did about a year or two in the Senate, voted present on issues, never served his country, is confused about our allies, can't even under the difference between "Corp. and corpse" the man is a constitutional lawyer, but knows absolutely nothing about, except how to manipulate it. That's what we got from hope and change. Chicago ghetto style politics?

bass: And look at California cities like Modesto and Riverside filed for bankruptcy.

I'd like to get your thoughts on the Tea Party experiment in Kansas. The governor slashed taxes saying growth, jobs, and revenue would come, but none of that has happened. The state is now facing hundreds of millions of dollars in revenue shortfalls. The governor is even talking about delaying some of his tax cuts to keep the government solvent.

In your estimation, what went wrong? If news about Kansas hasn't reached your part of the bubble you can do a Google search and learn about it.

bass: No, it means, I think we should impose harsher sanctions and bring them to their knees, which is what they are designed to do, punish and once they are willing to give up their nuclear program unconditionally, then you proceed with talks and negotiations.

Bass' plan is to walk from the negotiations and then give Europe, Russia, and China a list of US-led sanctions that they will be required to adhere to. If that doesn't happen then it's because Obama isn't strong, not because it's a crazy plan.

"ghetto style politics?" - comments

"It is better to keep your mouth closed and let people think you are a fool than to open it and remove all doubt."

Mark Twain, US humorist, novelist, short story author, & wit (1835 - 1910)

Isn't this the core failing of the GOP-Tea?

“Our enemies need to fear us, a little bit, just enough for them to deter the actions that create insecurity,” Bush said - article

The GOP-Tea has been define by paranoids and hypocrites. The problem is there their fans are happy to supply the proofs. For those looking to laugh through their tears read on.

"Rep. Michele Bachmann actually thinks the Rapture is nigh thanks to President Barack Obama’s policies — a hilariously minor stain on humanity’s otherwise filthy reputation."

source: http://www.salon.com/2015/04/20/michele_bachmann_barack_obama_is_ushering_in_a_baby_called_the_rapture/

Rage on you crazy diamonds.

KC,

You have to hear it to believe it. Bachmann is one of the most deranged inmates. The full 5 Chainsaw rating for nutcase of the week.

The GOP-Tea has been defined by paranoids and hypocrites. Their problem here, and at New Hampshire, is their fans are happy to supply the proofs with demagogues like Bachmann. - revised from above

The Grand Old Party has been dragged beneath the waves of reality. Bachmann happily drowns her racism in a bath of religious clarity purifying her hate as 'god's will'. Her end times certainty and birth pangs analogy carries her fan base out into the light of justified rage.

Like most of the GOP-Tea mouth foaming paranoids, Bachmann's fans will listen for hours to her vivid hellscape descriptions. No wonder they have become the public face of the GOP-Tea. It's very hard to ignore the shrieking emanating from the GOP-Tea madhouse.

For those still considering the role of America in the world, Paul's quote at leaste says clearly what the GOP-Tea has to offer. "The people who already are very skeptical, very doubtful, may not like the president for partisan reasons," . . . and . . . "just may want war instead of negotiations." America already went down that rabbit hole.

American is not the solution but the cause of many of the worlds problems. They really need to bring their troops home.

Senator Paul: "his Republican colleagues would do more harm in international affairs than would leading Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton." - article

Obviously. President AWOL Bush and Profiteer VP Cheney defined the GOP-Tea.

Sick freaks destroying the world for profit. New Hampshire is the tailor's rough cut. Follow closely, Americans are ready to embrace another global disaster.

The GOP-Tea makes the most money off those. Sickening Filth, the breakfast of the GOP-Tea they spew on the global community.

YuriOtani: "American is not the solution but the cause of many of the worlds problems. They really need to bring their troops home."

Why are you bringing your anti-base garbage to a thread about Republican presidential candidates bickering amongst themselves?