The Republican presidential hopefuls finally found common ground they could all agree on in their last presidential debate;

Cut whatever you want from the budget, but do not cut the defense budget. Really, should I be surprised. Give me a couple of minutes to act surprised………

Ok, I’m not surprised. Who benefits from having a military, and wars? Manufacturing companies, big business. Who benefits from fat campaign contributions from these corporations; Republicans!

Think; armored vehicles, trucks, tires, fuel, clothing, tents, food, private contractors who work for the military, ammo, and the list goes on.

Mitt Romney showed his feelings for the American public when he  favored saving the $1 trillion in cuts over the next decade noting it was the same amount as costs for the nation’s new health care law.

Translated; screw you and your health issues, we need more guns.

Ron Paul was the only one with the knowledge and guts to stand up to Romney said that despite the talk of the candidates, lawmakers are considering only reductions in future military growth, not actual cuts.

I still haven’t heard one candidate come up with a plan to give us better health care, make new jobs, or how to cut the deficit, just be critical of what’s being done.

The American people are studying this election closer than any before; Republicans need to come up with a program Americans can buy into if they want the White House.

As it stands now it’s Obama by default in 2012.



  1. If we are supposedly taking our troops out of Iraq (or was that Aphganistan)
    by the end of this year, than why can’t the defense budget be cut?

  2. I can’t find the middle ground here. Diplomacy doesn’t work, sanctions are a joke, and anything that comes from the U.N. is a farce. Washington didn’t try to reason with the British…he shot them!

    • Bryan, a man was stuck in traffic in D.C when a man comes up to his window and says, Terrorists have kidnapped Congress and there are asking $100 million dollars ranson or they will douse them with gasoline and set them all on fire. We are going car to car asking for donations.
      “How much is everyone giving on an average?” the driver asks.
      The man replies, “Roughly a gallon.”

      • Believe me, I have no love for this congressional body, either party. It’s long past due for a total house cleaning. Anyone over two terms has/needs to go and monitor the second termers closely. As long as we feel we need to continue to be the police force for the world we need to keep our defenses strong. If we are to cut spending through better management of government contracts, bids etc. etc, that would be acceptable, and should be an ongoing process anyway.

      • Brian I would have to say their is more abuse in the military budget than most agencies; too many Generals retire and get consulting jobs with he military contractors they worked with because they authorized contracts way over priced.

  3. I would not be so fast to put your man Obama in for 4 more. Lets see what happens when the debates are over. Right now republicans are too busy fighting each other trying to see who will win the nomination. Can’t wait for that to be over. Need to pick a candidate and then get organized.

    • Your party’s problem is they can’t find a candidate even your own party feels comfortable with. They can see right (no pun intended) through them; hollow, no substance, change their positions like the 4 seasons. The Tea Party, religious right can’t seem to embrace any of them. I find it down right entertaining. .
      Guess you’re not helping your bride with dinner since you’ve been busy writing. Shame on you!

  4. Let’s not forget that Obama’s foreign policy has been virtually identical to Bush’s. He prolonged the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and even managed to get involved in a new one in Libya — without the approval of Congress, which he criticized Bush for as a senator and candidate. I certainly agree that most of the Republicans are wrong when it comes to foreign policy, but so are the Democrats. Clinton was an interventionist. Bush was an interventionist. Obama is an interventionist. The next president will almost certainly be an interventionist.

    Unless the Republican nominee is Ron Paul, voters will be presented with a false choice next year: War, or war. That’s democracy in action.

  5. Chris keep pushing for Ron Paul, nice guy but he’s not going anywhere. Probably has more common sense than the others, but sometimes a little far out even for me.
    Don’t know how you can compare Obama and Bush to the two wars; Obama inherited them, Bush started them. Obama interceeded in Lybia, we won, no U.S. casualiaties. Obama bringing troops home. My score card says Obama 2-1, Bush, 0-2.

  6. A friend of mine and I were discussing Ron Paul the other day. He said that while he agrees a lot with Ron Paul’s stance there are some points he seems to be out in left field on. I understand that point but I told him all the candidates seem to be out in left field on some issues. You just have to pick the candidate that you share the most beliefs in and can deal with whatever left field issues they have. Personally, I’m voting for Ron Paul again just as I did in the last election. Wasted vote? I don’t think so. I sleep well at night.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s