Video: Watch the full Iowa Thanksgiving Family Forum

Saturday afternoon, six GOP candidates participated in the Thanksgiving Family Forum which focused primarily on social issues surrounding the 2012 election. The forum was sponsored by The Family Leader and took place at the First Federated Church in Des Moines, Iowa. Mitt Romney and Jon Huntsman were also invited, however, both declined to attend.

Original Event Date: Saturday, November 19, 2011

Participants: Bachmann, Cain, Gingrich, Paul, Perry, Santorum

Here is the entire video of the forum, moderated by pollster Frank Luntz. The actual candidate forum begins at about 30 minutes in if you jump ahead.

Report from the Des Moines Register:

Six Republicans vying to be their party’s nominee for president in 2012 met across a Thanksgiving dinner table on Saturday night for an unconventional discussion of their views and policy proposals.

The Thanksgiving Family Forum, held in a Des Moines church in front of some 2,500 social and religious conservatives, was an unusually freewheeling and philosophical discussion, touching on issues of morality, liberty and personal responsibility as well as hot-button issues like abortion and same-sex marriage.

Forum moderator Frank Luntz, the famed Republican message guru, challenged candidates Michele Bachmann, Herman Cain, Newt Gingrich, Ron Paul, Rick Perry and Rick Santorum with mostly open-ended questions, and didn’t hesitate to press them on particulars.

In a question about the 10th Amendment — a GOP favorite that leaves to the states powers not specifically given to the federal government — Luntz asked whether states could “tell the federal government no” on issues of morality. He directed the question initially to Cain, who is black, and referred to state segregation laws that were dismantled only through federal action.

Was the federal government justified in imposing a morally just law — ending segregation — on the states, even if it perhaps exceeded the 10th Amendment?

For Cain, the answer was something of a qualified yes: “The states can’t say no to the federal government if they’re wrong,” he said.

But Paul, the most libertarian-leaning of the Republicans in the field, immediately jumped in to disagree.

“The states definitely have a right to be wrong,” he said. “The states are supposed to correct it. But there are limits. That’s why we have a Constitution.”

The discussion was lively at times. Overall, Luntz did a decent job moderating the discussion and posed some provocative questions.

423 comments to Video: Watch the full Iowa Thanksgiving Family Forum

  • No welfare

    Frank Luntz needs to look for another job. The candidates don’t have to bear their souls & ask forgiveness in order for Frank to fulfill his fantasy of being Dr. Phil. This was a public event assembling in a sanctuary, which is quite different from having a regular WORSHIP service.(And having the ‘internet cafe mom sitting behing you with her low cleavage costume was in poor taste.) And the candidates should not have to hear your public rebuke of them for enthusiastically DISAGREEING with their opponents, especially when it was intended only for Perry. Pressing the candidates to talk of their failures is what I would expect from a goon – but then again IF you had started with your failures I wouldn’t have minded.

  • Charlie

    This debate was wonderful! We got to see hearts of these candidates. We saw who has personal depth (Cain, Bachmen, Santorum, and Paul), who’s too cowardly to show (Romney and Huntsman), and who’s shallow (Perry). Ron Paul has the best grasp of the constitution and why it works, but the worst communication skills. It will be interesting to see how this affects the polls in Iowa.

    • Barn

      You left out Newt…..what about Newt?

      • Noah Rosenblatt

        That’s because Newt is a whack job. Well, they all are, but he is the biggest asshole of them all. I would say he is actually comparable to Stalin. Bachmann is also a whack job, but that I think is because she is so unintelligent. Santorum is a pussy, Perry is a legal retard, Cain sounds like the rent is too damn high guy, Ron Paul is the intellectual godfather of my butthole, Romney is not terrible, but not great, and huntsman i don’t mind because he’s a moderate, but he can’t speak at all.

  • Just Me

    I am not a religious person and find it really offensive for people to make comments or insinuate that you can not be a good person unless you are religious. I live my life with high standards and do not feel I need a set of lore to instruct me what is right and wrong.

    As far as religion in Gov., it is a public official’s job to not be religious in matters of public office (note: This does not mean they can not personally be religious). When you approach a problem in Gov you are supposed to come with a clear, open mind and calculate the best answer to the situation for the people you represent as a whole. This means your opinion is only one in a mass of the people you represent. So if you try to make your judgment based on bible or any other religion, including atheism, you will then misrepresent and discriminate.

    On Newt’s comment about an Atheist president, you don’t lead on your own. You have a cabinet, family, advisors, and all the people you represent to help you make the best judgment! Maybe your issue is you try to do it alone and you don’t listen to the people I listed above.

    Someplace the concept of “representative” has been lost in politics.

    • reality

      then you are offended by the teachings of Jesus… There is none righteous no not one. We are born sinners by nature because of Adam so we need a change of nature which is the only thing that makes us acceptable and good enough in Gods eyes.

      • Just Me

        This comes with me “not being religious”. The teaching of many religions I find are offensive in many ways but as long as people don’t harm others and don’t bother me with it I could care less what they believe.

  • J Manis

    This debate seemed to carry an energy within the crowd that is pushing for a sort of theocracy. They want things to return to a time in this country when people seemed to be living according to Christian beliefs and had a sense of “common good” as was the comment. This is definitely NOT the way to win an election in 2012. Half of the country is already deciding against voting republican because they fear this imposition of values. “A house divided against itself shall not stand,” and “If they do not receive you in that city, wipe the dust from your feet.” The bible never says that people MUST conform. Salvation is a take it or leave it offer. A theocracy does not work for the good of humanity in modern societies because it is oppressive to those who don’t share the same view. Let the people decide, and simply be forgiving of those who choose to live differently than you do.

    • 12AngryMen

      Values are not oppressive. Lack of values is what leads to enslavement.

      “Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters.”
      — Benjamin Franklin

    • reality

      in one way you are right. but the facts are without God and us following His direction we will just have more of the same… and this country is in big trouble as it the entire earth… of course we are not going to get better but worse and this earth is going to be destroyed … read the bible for this info and the book of revelation about the end times… horrible…

  • Chris

    I tried to watch this, but Michelle was talking when I was able to tune in and it immediately turned me off to the whole thing.

    I do not care for that woman’s way to speaking.

    What I do care for – – for articles on interesting political happenings. For instance, there is an article on the build up of China’s navy that is quite interesting and they even include a 30 minute video of two experts of world politics and armaments discussing the topic for those that are truly interested in knowing what is happening in the world. It is truly fascinating stuff.

    • 12AngryMen

      Please explain to me what it is about Bachmann that is offensive. I have yet to hear any valid criticism.

      If it is her Minnesota accent, that happens to be endearing to me. She seems well-spoken to me.

      • Noah Rosenblatt

        She does not know how to answer questions. All she ever says is “Look, I’m a mom. Obamacare is bad. It’s because of President Obama’s failed policies that I want to get the gas prices below two dollars a gallon because I don’t care about the environment. Oh, and I don’t believe in evolution. Don’t vote for me, vote against Obama.”

        Crazy whack job, she is. Gas prices should be raised to force people to conserve, as well as increase the demand for energy efficient cars, like all-electric cars.

  • This was scary, and not in a good way.

    Did I actually watch 3000 people transition from crying about soldiers dying in reckless wars to a standing ovation for invading Iran within the span of 5 minutes?

    Ron Paul is the only dude who isn’t completely nuts – yet he’s the one the other Republicans think is crazy. The peace candidate is the “crazy” one.

    Good grief.

    • reality

      we dont need to invade Iran anymore than we were justified in going into Iraq and afghanistan but the ignorant American public is listening to the lies or exaggerations of the threat of Iran… if Iran were the threat it is said to be, Israel would let them know in no uncertain terms… please Our biggest threat is the ignorance and gullibility of the American people who arent doing some research and using their minds to see the implications of evidence… how the heck did pearl harbor happen? FDR let and possibly planned the attack killing our military in order to justify to the unknowing American people that we had to get involved in the conflict in europe. Why not be truthful and let congress declare war… lies lies and more lies is what is being exposed yet we still have ignorant Americans…

  • Patricia

    Well Iwas unable to tune in last night and thought I would read the comments to see If I could geln wht happened.


    these comments tell me nothing but a bunch of people fighting over the Bible.

    The whole Bible is the Word of God. sometimes it seeems contrdictory, but that is us, not the Bible.

    the idea of Farnk Luntz being a poor moderator is ludicrous. I have seen him at work.

    Now does any one have anything to say about the forum (btw, not a debate, maybe that is the problem with Mr. Luntz.) that could give me a clue?

    • Just Me

      so you criticize others that spent time to watch the debate because they didn’t repeat the debate in the comments?!?!
      Also you argue with people about topics you have no idea about like if he is/is not a good moderator before even watching….

      Anyone have a black kettle for this pot.

  • John-Luc

    This has been the best debate- or should I say discussion- between the candidates that has been orchestrated. It is a shame Mitt Romney was not present, however that left more time for articulation of every candidate’s answer. I’m surprised to say this but Rick Santorum presented his best to this forum. I would have appreciated it if Herman Cain elaborated more on one or two of the answers he provided and that Michele Bachmann stayed on topic. Ron Paul and Rick Perry did well and Newt Gingrich classically, as he usually does, ended the show with an intelligent and significant response to viewers.

    I am so glad to be a witness to this electoral process at this point in time. The stakes are high and the U.S stands on the precipice of transforming dramatically for the worse should the voters dismiss this election’s importance.

  • Jenjen

    Why didn’t Mitt Romney show up? Certainly he’s a Mormon and may not agree on the finer aspects of God and religion, but most certainly, he would have an opinion on abortion, homosexuality, church and state, morality, and just about any other issue that would be discussed in this forum.

    If I were Romney, I would have boldly showed up and my strategy would have been the typical, to demonstrate how much we agree on. I mean other than Christ, the Bible, Joseph Smith, polygamy, and the Native Americans, I’m sure Christians would find they have much common ground with Mormons, especially as far as morality is concerned. And in a nation like this one where no religion, not even Atheism, is supposed to be given any legislated advantage or hindrance, despite the fact that Atheism is given every advantage in complete violation of the First Amendment every single time we favor the clause “separation of church and state” over the actual words of the first amendment, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof . . .”

    Atheists love to quote the first part of the First Amendment while omitting that key second part. Then they say that their faith is not a religion so that it’s not obvious that every time you rule against all theistic religions, you are ruling in favor of the Atheistic religions. (At least Dawkins, who lives in England and doesn’t have to worry about the wording of the First Amendment will admit the truth. Dawkins himself claims to be a “religious nonbeliever.”)

    And I say “Atheistic religions,” as in plural, because not every Atheistic group believes the same thing. Communist Russia thought it was okay to kill theists to accomplish their goals of national Atheism. U.S. Atheists don’t usually hold that extreme a view. Some Atheists actually do believe that there is inherent rights and wrongs while others, like Nietzsche, believe that right and wrong is only in the conscience of the beholder. Although, with the way many of them speak, I wouldn’t be surprised if they did secretly hold such extreme views about Theism as the Communist nations demonstrated.

    • 12AngryMen

      I am unsure of the reasons, but I did hear one report that he had a family event? Anyway- it probably has more to do with:

      1)He has been ON FIRE in all of the debates, so why risk messing up a winning streak?
      2)He has been trying to limit his exposure to avoid voter apathy during the long election year ahead.
      3)He may have thought that this debate would give the left too much ammunition in the general election, which it probably has for many of these candidates. (Not that he doesn’t agree, but I already know that his tactic is to keep things super-professional until he is IN the White House. Maybe not as satisfying for the conservatives, but I really do trust him to be bold once he gets there, if he gets there.)

    • Just Me

      OK, I think this is a common misconception of non-religious people vs Atheism. I am not religious but I also do not agree with the majority of Atheist views just the same as I do not agree with a bunch of other religions. Make no mistake Atheism is a religion in itself and should not effect government just the same as any other religion.

  • Separation has already been seriously crossed in the last decade, and is largely unknown. Contracted through FEMA/DHS, it is estimated around 5000 pastors and spiritual leaders, in the time of a declared state of emergency, are required to be the voice of the government where the government will tell the leaders what to tell their followers, to even include giving up guns and encouraging people to be passive and do what the government says.

  • Gingrich just completely lost any shred of respect left of me. In reference to OWS, he spoke like a Fox drone, and presented the extremely marginalized view presented solely by Fox News/NY Post. I managed a McD a few years back. The store I worked in got an average of 2 applications a month before the economy fell of the cliff at the end of 2008. Starting Jan 1, 2009, my store received and average of 40 applications a week. About half were laid off construction workers who once worked for $24 to $30 and hour, who came in literally begging for a minimum wage job.

    So, to simply just say, “Go get a job,” is a fallacy that hold no water. Simply looking for work does not create jobs. The jobs are not there.

  • I will tell you my number reason I do not support Bachmann. She was a lawyer for the IRS. Number 2, she believes, as most the candidates do, to continue the expansion of the US empire where we already have 900+ bases in over 130 countries.

  • I tend to believe Mitt has issue with stepping foot into a non-mormon church.

    • Just Me

      I use to date a Mormon years ago and they are separationist for most part. Not allowed much interaction with other religions so this may have some conflict with their belief system to be here. This is one of my problems with religion, intolerance.

      • 12AngryMen

        Romney and Huntsman’s lack of attendance has nothing to do with it being held in a non-mormon church. Mormons are not separatists.

        Mormons study and even attend other religions and churches. The LDS church has published a great book called “Religions of the World: A Latter-Day Saint View” which is extremely respectful of all religions.

        The eleventh article of faith: We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may.

        In my community (in California), the Catholics and LDS team up for service projects and community choirs all the time. The same with the Baptists and the LDS members.

        • reality

          they should have attended as this was not a service but a building to hold a discussion so if they are serious to run for president they should have attended. come on grow the heck up candidates, romney and huntsman

        • Just Me

          the Mormon I use to date a long long time ago.
          1. Had to tell her father I was Morman unless he would have immediately dismissed me
          2. She was not able to tell her friends I was not Mormon
          3. She was in constant fear of people finding out I was not religious

          She was a great girl but this is what ended up ending us. This does not look to me as “respectful of all religions”

          • ok

            basing one experience with an old girlfriend isn’t really grounds for judging what a whole religion teaches, my fiance and I are Mormon and after church today we went with her family to their non-Mormon christian church and it wasn’t a big deal. Sorry that someone made a big deal out of it in your past but the church never speaks out against other churches.

      • Bob Jones

        You need to really think about what you are saying before you start throwing around words like “intolerance”. What exactly do you mean by that? Because most atheists that I know are extremely intolerant of religion. To the point that they would try to ban it from anywhere in public, they would require that the tax money of a majority of people who disagree with them go towards brainwashing their children with atheist pre-suppositions, and they would make sure that in the public media )including scientific publications) only their own views are heard and any dissenting views are not only squashed, but the people holding them are removed from any position to have influence.

        Moreover, if you think about it, intolerance in itself is not necessarily a bad thing. For example, if you said that you are intolerant of child molesters, would it be a bad thing? For Christians, intolerance of sin is not an intolerance of people- it is an intolerance for anything that which is profane. In fact, our society requires a certain degree of intolerance to function properly. Almost every job and position of influence and importance has requirements that could be considered intolerant.

        You might even consider Christians to be more tolerant than others because they love the sinner and hate the sin. They are willing to overlook someone’s sin and see the soul that God created beautifully that has been shipwrecked by the sin that came into the world. Christians, more than anyone in this world, have to kneel before God and acknowledge their own personal sin, and the fact that without God’s redemption, we would all be guilty before a God who will not tolerate anything but perfect justice. But God is also merciful, and the grace of His salvation is so great that it is enough to overcome anything that we could have done in our life. In a sense, that is the ultimate tolerance-to love unconditionally and offer us a chance for reconciliation with Him. Yes, that is what Christ holds out- a chance for reconciliation of rebel sinners with a perfectly just God. He does not put any conditions on it except that you must repent of sin and accept Jesus as your Lord and savior. For the serial killer or rapist, or simply the thief on the cross next to Jesus, I don’t know what could be more sweet, and more tolerant, than a God willing to pardon a piece of dust who he formed, breathed life into, gave the freedom to make moral choices, and who had rebelled against Him as God. But don’t be mistaken, this tolerance is only for a time. Justice must be done because God’s attribute are immutable. For Him to be perfectly Holy He has to demand perfect justice. If He didn’t, he wouldn’t be consistent, and He wouldn’t be God. Give your life to Him today while you have the opportunity, before it is too late. I promise you that you will have a new reason for living, a God who is glorious and worthy of our worship, a new hope and a joy that surpasses all understanding.

  • Big papa

    Greed what is it. Is greed a family who works 10 to 14 hour days 7 days a week save and invest ther money end up with a few million to retire on. Is that greed or is it greed for a teacher or government worker who spends all there money demand pay and retirment higher than the people paying the taxes. Lets look at a master teacher making $90,000.00 a year when they retire at 90% of base pay now with intrest at 1% we have to have at least $81,000,000 to cover their retirment. Talk about greed. Some of the cheapest people I know are democrats. They cheat on their taxes they expect others to drive and spend their gas money on them. They don’t want to spend money on the fire department yet they demand fire protection. Envey is a sin.

  • Barbara

    This was a wonderful debate. It is too bad all debates are not lead by Dr. Luntz. Extra time for answers from candidates is so important.
    After watching tonight’s debate I only wish they all could be members of the next Republican cabinet with one of the 6 here tonight as president of the USA in 2012. I would however, exclude two of 7 candidates from the cabinet or as President. Those two would be Perry and Romney.
    I would exclude Romney because I believe he flip-flops. He tells each of his audiences what THEY want to hear. He is not consistent like Ron Paul.
    I would not consider Perry because of his connection and background to the drug companies. He wants all teen girls to have the Gardisil immunizations. This is disastrous protection for our teens. I can’t imagine what his motive would be for his actions. This country cannot live on drugs. Drugs do not cure, only the body cures.

    One other point I want to make about these debates. I have never heard any questions asked about our chemtrails in the sky. You know the stream of “smoke” that leaves an endless stream across the entire sky? Do your research. I have. It is not pretty.


    Does anyone know what was happening at the 2:57:32 mark, just before the video ended??? (You may have to turn up the volume to hear)

  • Aram

    Cain is clueless,romney is a obama copy, gingrich just needs more money from the lobby.ONLY RON PAUL has the integrity, competence (he has a degree in economics) and honesty to save this country.As a physician, Paul routinely lowered fees or worked for free .

  • Penny

    I am curious as to why the two Mormons running, Romney and Huntsman, declined this debate. Curious as to if their religion allowed them to participate in such a forum and if not, how would they proceed to tackle these topics if nominated?

    • Just Me

      Do you think the rest of the candidates would have gone if it where in a … This about that when you ask this question as well.

      • reality

        if we have a muslim running for president of the us something is wrong…

        • Just Me

          Why is it an issue for a Muslim to run for president. The hatred for Muslims from Christians throughout history is an issue that has caused so much death and suffering maybe it would be good for a Muslim to become President to try to get everyone to stop hating each other for a belief that is so close in it’s base they would probably be best friends.

  • Noah Rosenblatt

    These people absolutely cannot be president. The first amendment to the Constitution says “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.” This explicitly indicates the separation of church and state. The United States is a secularist country only. These people actually think that everyone in this country is a christian. I personally am a jew with no faith in a god. I am friends with christians, hindus, sikhs, muslims, agnostics, and atheists. We all get along because we understand that religion should not conflict with politics.

    • reality

      separation of church and state was only in a letter and is not a part of any founding document of the usa… get an education. dont believe in God if you choose but this country was founded on biblical principles, it does not require every citizen to be a Christian but to obey the laws such as: not to murder, steal, commit adultery… if you have a problem obeying laws like this then you got a problem

      • Noah Rosenblatt

        Are you saying that my quote directly from the first amendment is not actually part of the constitution? Do you actually think that most of our founding fathers believed in a religion? George Washington would go to church just for show and leave early because he didn’t care about that pointless stuff. Get it through your head. Christianity is not the only religion with those “biblical principles” you talk about. You do not need any religion to believe in good morals.

    • B Anderson

      You need to read the constitution’s sentence carefully. It says that the government may not start it own religion. It says nothing about seperation of church and state. Seperation of church and state was a Baptist doctrine. (By the way, the Baptist founded Rhode Island.) The media has re-written history to try to say the founding fathers were not Christian. This is not true. In fact most of the signers of the constitution were pastors and church leaders. God is given credit in our constitution. That should indicate that the founding fathers wanted us to be a Godly nation.

      • Noah Rosenblatt

        The first amendment indicates that the government is forbidden to recognize any religion. If you actually think that most of the founding fathers would be religious today, then you are certainly mistaken. People like Benjamin Franklin and George Washington could not care less about their religions. They went to church for show. If they were around today, they would understand that culture has to adapt to modern times. Just because the founding fathers wrote something with a religious twist back then does mean that it stands for today. In today’s world, the majority of well-educated people understand that modern science is the explanation for any phenomenon observed. In the past, they did not have the science that we have today to explain many things, so they had to invent a god to answer everything. Get with today’s America! The most advanced and progressive states, such as California and New York, happen to be the most Democratic states.

        • B Anderson

          You need to read my 2 am post that is above yours. You are wrong in your opinion that science disproves God created the universe. In fact todays science has proven that every other theory is not true. As the saying goes; I don’t have enought faith to be an atheist.

          • Noah Rosenblatt

            I am absolutely not an atheist. That is the religious belief that their is no god. I believe that society should adapt to modern times. Science is the new religion. Humans and other animals are no different. We all evolved from a common ancestor. Whether you believe in evolution or not, it happens. No god created humans as special beings. Our ancestors were just naturally selected to eventually become as intelligent over other animals as we are today.

          • B Anderson

            Noah, You say you are not an atheist, then deny that God made us special. That is an oxymoron statement. Mankind trusting itself (science) is not a new religion. It has been around almost from the beginning of time. God is in modern times as well as from the beginning. He will be in the future… Thinking that all life evolved from a common ancestor still leaves the question…where did the original ancestor come from??? Evolution would require changes to take place gradually to make different types of animals. If that were true there would not be just dogs and cats, but there would be “dats” as well. Science has proved that there has been no such transition. There goes your theory. God made man, and breathed the breath of life into him. Making us special. For you to deny your heritage does not change the facts. Weather you believe in God or not, does not change that He Is. It only keeps you from His gift of eternal life with him.

          • Bob Jones

            Noah, you have been drinking the Kool-aid pretty heavily buddy.
            Let us look at a few of your statements and see where you have been brainwashed by a postmodern educational system.
            1. “You do not need any religion to believe in good morals.” If man evolved by a process of random chance, why do you even mention the word morality? Without God, who has the authority to claim morality? You? Me? the government? Hitler? I don’t think you realize that your sense of morality comes from inside. You were created in God’s image. God is a moral being. He made you to have a conscience and gave you reason and emotion to be able to obey His law and revel in His glory. Without God, we would not even have the concept of morality. In a truly evolutionary world with no creator, everything would already be determined by probabalistic mechanisms and morality would not have any meaning or purpose. Scientists know this fact and try really hard to prove that our sense of morality somehow came about by survival of the fittest in communities. But if a trained and objective scientists looks at the original manuscripts with a fine toothed comb, there is no solid proof for their conjecture.
            2. “Society should adapt to modern times”. I think you mean to say that religion should adapt to modern times here, right? What you are talking about is called a pre-supposition. In the current times, much of culture has been affected by an idea called postmodernism. The media, art, politics, schooling, science and everything else outside of the Bible has been affected by postmodernism and humanism. This worldly philosophical view makes certain pre-suppositions that are not pre-suppositions in the Bile. For example, they presuppose that the material world is all that exists. They also put man at the center of everything in the universe rather than God. Now, it makes no sense for Christians to adopt this worldview, even though many churches have adopted it and have corrupted their theology. My friend, philosophies change from century to century and age to age. There have been some weirder ones and some better ones throughout history. But the Word of God remains the same. And God Himself is unchangeable. So there is no need for Christianity to change the pre-suppositions that it is based on to match those of the world. If it did so, it would deny the truth that God and Christ have taught us about the world and its creation and the purpose behind all things (to bring Glory to God). That is precisely what makes Jesus such a powerful and radical leader- he is the ultimate rebel for all times against satan’s worldly system and He stands for what is pure and true and good. Don’t let a cheap Kool-aid philosophy system substitute for the real thing.
            3. “We get along because we understand that religion should not conflict with politics”. Noah, this is a common fallacy put forth by the Kool-aid Co. to keep Christians and other religious people from being able to play an active role in the leadership of this country. It is essentially equivalent to me saying that “atheism should not be part of politics”. Think about it-atheism is the belief that there is no God. Why should that have any more favor at the political table than the belief in a God? It sounds like establishment of an official government religion (atheism) to me. You see, by taking the stand against religion, the government is getting involved in religion, even if it is only to say that they do not believe in religion. And that did not work for the founding fathers and does not work for the majority of Americans today except a select few who think they are better than others because they got an “education” at a liberal school in a liberal city such as New York or San Francisco. Here is the reason why: because politics involves everything about our lives- it involves where tax money goes, it involves whether abortion is legal, it involves whether marriage is by definition between a man and a woman, it involves how much brainwashing the government gets to do to our kids in school with sex education and rainbow propaganda. To say that religion should not conflict with politics is to be ignorant of how democracy works. But I am not surprised Noah, because if you have been drinking the Kool-aid, I know that you have been taught by arrogant self-interested liberals that they know best how to run other peoples’ lives and that a bunch of country bumpkin uneducated conservatives should not be allowed to vote or have influence in politics because their beliefs are all wrong. That is called disenfranchisement and it was done by whites to blacks with impunity for many centuries.
            in this country

            Noah, I have a PhD in chemistry and I have lived in California, Florida, Maryland, and North Carolina. I have been with wealthy, poor, black, white, went to school with immigrants and raised by parents who came from New York to the deep south to make a living. I have lived in other countries and speak several languages. I find your commentary about Christians to be disturbing because you show an extreme ignorance of the Bible (have you actually sat down and read it with an open mind?), of history, and of government; and you fail to understand the very basic premise of the good news that Jesus brings, which is that we people are sinners and not Gods. If anyone knows that, it should be those with a Jewish background like yourself. The Torah predicts and points to Christ continously and shows the problem of man’s sin and the need for God’s redemption. It is really a pity that you don’t have a more open mind. Perhaps you should be a little more “tolerant” of other beliefs than your own? Your attitude and that of your buddies at Kool-aid Co. is profane and vile, and if left unchecked, when your generation become those leaders of great importance and influence with age, it will bring this great country down to a smoldering dust heap. We reap what we sow. If you sow the seeds of rebellion against God, you will pay the price. I say this not in jest but to warn you that you will regret your behavior, and if there is any chance that you might turn from your folly, do it now. I can tell you from personal experience as a repented sinner that there is great hope and joy in knowing God!

          • B Anderson

            Bob Jones. WOW! I wish I had said that!! God Bless.

  • Roy

    ABO!!!!! Anybody But Obama!!!!! Great presentation! So much more revealing than the other boring stupid debates.

    Note to you conservatives out there: Stop beating each other up over petty details and focus on why our vision is good and essential and Obamas socialist agenda is fatal to prosperity, freedoms and the very lives of Americans.

  • Corbin

    Here’s my thing. You watch this debate and all you see are six politicians who clearly are not strong Christians, if they are christians at all. Herman Cain doesn’t respect women (there is plenty of evidence to support this); Newt Gingrich made millions of dollars lobbying against peoples interests for large corporations and on top of that is clearly an unlikeable jerk, as every comment he makes has a condescending tone; Michele Bachman believes we should be torturing people so how does that fit into christianity among many other things she says; Rick perry, is corrupt I can say this with confidence as he has been my governor in Texas for a long time now, and Rick Santorum is not electable so might as well not even go there; That leaves us with Ron Paul who comes across as the only one on the stage who isn’t completely corrupt

    • Just Me

      Rick Santorum is not electable so might as well not even go there, This is not a valid argument. I agree he is not electable but I think he deserves the same respect as others to explain why in your own words.

      “Ron Paul who comes across as the only one on the stage who isn’t completely corrupt”, so he is only partially corrupt?

  • George Stickney

    This debate was a little extreme, I agree in faith but not to this point. I needed more solid issues to be debated. I agree with the user about boredom in the 1st 37 minutes that had nothing to do with our government. You can be an atheist and still be an honest, knowledgeable, strong, Constitutional driven president to get us out of this mess we are in.

    Ginrich is smart but he is a lobbyist–getting paid hundreds of thousands, think that one was $300,000 to advice Fannie Mae and Fannie Mac. He got paid to keep Congress hush hush to what was really going on. I think there were other account of him lobbying also. For that alone this man can not be trusted.

    Obama is weak, I didn’t like Bush or agree with him that much, but a least when he had an agenda he went for it. Obama is passive accept for this ridiculous Obama care he keeps trying to push. Nice political move to get our troops out of Iraq by January, what a liar. Obama said his first agenda would be to get the troops out 4 years ago, Ron Paul said this 4 years ago; that Obama would not be able to get the troops out for at least 16 months. Once again Ron Paul said our Fed would keep increasing our deficit and sure enough. Obama also accepted money from one of those big medical companies before he became president to look the other way. Interesting, another lobbyist.

    Romney, a strong candidate would of should up tonight, regardless of his religious Mormon background. What does he have to hide, he’s out in my opinion. He is a coward, how could we possibly trust this man. He has changed his views on abortion 3 times to cater to the American people.

    Perry is another head case, he is a bully. He will make more enemies in more countries than few like Bush. Perry is ignorant, all about me me me. We should be a team, what the hell is he doing in Texas? Giving company deals to move into his state? That doesn’t do anything for the country. Be careful of this man, it’s all about what’s in it for me. This guy get detracted and confused too easy. I don’t trust this man, he seems sneaky.

    Cain’s inexperience in politics shows in the debates. He will continue to waste money. He is highly behind torturing enemies, Water boarding is light drowning. Hello? Bottom line-it is torture! Did some marines get in major trouble for taking pics of enemy troops. He’ll keep wasting money fighting nonsense wars. Fighting terrorists is a while goose chase, a dog chasing his tail. I saw an interview with him, he kept going back and forth that he was for abortion, then he said he was against. The interview even confused the host, I needed an aspirin after that. 999 glad not to hear this nonsense plan again. 999 would hurt the middle class who don’t save alot and large families-NO credits and deductibles-YIKES!! He just recently changed some of his plan to assisted low income families since sales tax would increase on everything including food.

    Bachman? We know, we know you are going to appeal Obama care. Hello?, Bachman all the candidates up here will appeal Obama care.

    Santorum is wack, he just follows others. He would not be a strong leader. He wanted to increase the debt ceiling? Good-bye USA! Oh this guy gonna get us in a whole world of trouble. He got confused and said that Obama’s Stimulus package failed. The increase in jobs was a little less than actually estimated so he thought it was a loss in jobs when it was just lower that what was originally estimated. Okay, you can run our country, what a wack job. He is clueless about how to get us out of the hole. I would trust this guy even with a calculator.

    Then there’s up an behold Ron Paul, Mr. Consistency. He schooled Bernanke on the value of a coin vs paper money. How can a wack job like Bernanke make more money, more debt. Paul said we’d be more into debt 4 years ago. He said Obama would not be able to get the troops out 4 years if Obama would become president. He has a foundation the Constitution, no other candidate possess this strong values as Paul. We don’t need a bunch of bible thumping candidates, we need a candidate to have faith yet have strong Constitutional values. Paul says shrink the government like a few other have said, but I trust him more. Eliminate income tax and paid the govt through Excise, tariff taxes. He said eliminate The dept of Education which isn’t doing a damn thing. Interesting that the average Congress member is a millionaire and Senate is a multimillionaire. Paul refuses medicare and buying into a pension plan that we would pay for him to use, he believes it is hypocritical. I agree with him we fight Nonsense wars, the last real war was World War II, Duh! He would save us lots of money and slowly get us out of debt.

    I challenge everybody out there to do your research, don’t just rely on these debates. I’m not a Democrat, A Republican, Libertarian, or another party, I’m the 1% that is party-less. I’m just in search of a candidate that has a strong knowledge of all the issues and most importantly someone we can trust. I’ve done extensive research on all the candidates and Ron Paul out shines the rest. I don’t agree with all his issues, but this man never changes his thoughts and ideas. He appears to be solid, strong, knowledgeable and trustworthy. I hardly every see him get shut down in any debate or interview. And I was trying to figure out why is this, because he tells us the truth. Don’t take my word for it–DO YOUR HOMEWORK PEOPLE!! I pray we as Americans will take our time and really study and research the candidates and the current president to see which individual will get us out of this hole we have dug ourselves into.

    • Just Me

      I agree with the majority of your comments.

      correction: Newt’s up to 1.6million disclosed last I checked from Fannie Mae and Fannie Mac.

      Santorum wanting to increase debt ceiling was a smart move. We do need to get our funds under control today but volunteering to go bankrupt is not a smart thing to do. This would hurt everyone in the economy. I think now that we have a buffer make some process and amendments that make raising the debt ceiling more of an automated process that immediately in acts cuts when it is applied. Make the first cut congresses paycheck and bet they find a plan tomorrow to fix it.

      • reality

        any candidate who wants to increase the debt ceiling is completely ignorant of the facts of the tax code and the reality of the unconstitutionality of the federal reserve. go to thats d e v v y you will be shocked to find out facts that will enlighten the darkness we think is true… boy have we been hoodwinked, robbed blind, screwed, blued and tattooed.

        • Just Me

          If we did not increase the debt ceiling as it has been done many many many times in past the last time we would have defaulted in a short time or had to cut so drastic so fast we would have collapsed into another recession. That is fact by numbers not belief.

          I do not like raising the debt ceiling overall but that is something that comes with time to get us back on track to reduce our deficit.

      • George Stickney

        Increasing the debt ceiling? Really? Let’s give these deranged lunatics more of our hard darn money to spend. Don’t let these baffling idiot fool you as to the reasons why they increase the debt ceiling, they like to spend then overspend. I’d be curious to know if they add raises and/or bonuses to those figures. I disagree with the debt ceiling increases when there are a lot of bogus programs that could be cut and government can shrink in size. What about all the Dumb wars, the last real war WWII and of course we should have went after Bin La din, but that’s where I would have drawn the line. The Government should not be this big, the bigger the more corruption, and boy is this government corrupt. Man why should government tell me I need a new low-flow flush system for my toilet? Are we that stupid that government has to interfere with our lives this much? Man, I have to flush 3 – 5 times somedays, is that saving me money? One flush with the old system did the trick. Like I said too many people with too much times on their hands trying to make and regulate BULLshizel nonsense laws! You all can say what you like, but these are some of the reasons I support Ron Paul. I hope everyone does there Homework and don’t really on the lying media who’s all part of this big corrupt game they are playing with us. I challenge everyone to go outside this comfort zone and really research all of these candidates, we don’t want anymore;lobbyists, cheats, liars or corruption. We need Change big time.

    • B Anderson

      A lobbyist and an advisior is not the same thing. A Lobbyist talks to Congress to change laws. Newt did not do that while he was not in office. He advised private companies, not Congress. Are you trying to say Newt was wrong in getting a job when he was not in office? Do you think he should have camped out on Wallstreet and demand people support him? Come on, get a life.

      • George Stickney

        Let’s get something straight, I do have a life. Do you understand what’s even happening here? Newt got a lot of money to be an advisor??? Please, let me take out my violin as he tries to deny this. He got lots of money $300,000 now I hear it’s up to $1.6 million or so. He DID NOT get this money to advise but to turn the other cheek from the frauds and corruption within the housing industry. Newt being a man of power influenced and persuaded lots of individuals in Congress to also look the other way. That my friend is a lobbyist!! Dag, please DO NOT show your ignorance on this matter and do your homework. Do you remember Newt and his fraudulent checking and bank schemes 20 years ago while in the House? Please don’t forget that! This man is intelligent, but not that intelligent. He resigned then 20 years ago, now he shows back here to run for President and everybody forgets all of what he committed while in the House. The bottom line is Newt is a thief and in no way can can ever should be trusted!!! If people vote this joke in the White House then they are the ones that should get a life, not me. These Democrats and Republicans are playing games with us, they make us believe they are having a cat and dog fight for our benefit, Please it’s a BIG game. This is why all parties fear Ron Paul, because his goal is different, he’s here to break up these little games. Why do you think the media will not televise Ron Paul that much? I’m gonna leave this open for your to think about that. Don’t just talk to talk, really think about that question. So, next time you try to insult me you better bring facts about a candidate and not that crook.

        • B Anderson

          Please, it seems you are basing your opinion on liberal news. Did you ever think that they may have twisted the story? Newt advising private companies via his private company is not the same as going to Congress and trying to get laws changed (loby). Can’t you understand the difference? It is vastly different. Newt did not receive the money. His company did. I understand he had several other advisors in his company. So you caliming Newt got the money is jus not true. Newt has had many years for main stream media to nit pick everything he has done. You divide how many items he has done and balance them to the years of his service, you will understand he has a great record. A person who does nothing will do do wrong. Newt is not perfect, but he has a very good record of getting thing done. He has been able to work in Congress and get bills passed. Now compare that to Obama’s record. He has had just a few years in office. But look at the damage he has done to this country.

  • Tamra

    I am amazed and stunned at the amount of “opinions, and words of pure hate”. It amused me to see persons referred to as “morons or stupid” all the while the person slinging the insult couldn’t spell as well as a 5th grader. Debate is good, and I am with Cain all the way, I just hope the establishment doesn’t have their way and take out the only real reformer that is currently in the race. I am neither Repub. or Dem., I vote the best option available to me. Americans are hurting that is clear, and 4 more years of Obama will be the death of this great nation. God Bless you all, and God Bless America

    • George Stickney

      Cain’s 999 plan will hurt the Middle Class, working families who can’t really save and large families. Keep in mind he’s talking about no credits and no more deductions. No more breaks for having children or owning a home. Food will be taxed along with regular merchandise. Cain recently had to adjust this plan after heavy criticism to cater to lower income families. Wouldn’t he have thought of that? That shows me he forgot where he came from and he has his own separate agenda that differs from the majority of Americans. Cain does not have enough political background to become president. I hear a lot of talk from him, but no real solutions. A while back Cain was just replying his 999 plan for everything, just like Bachman replying that’s why she is going to get rid of Obama care. Cain doesn’t have enough understanding of foreign policies. Bush made many enemies we have to create peace on the other hand keep our military strong to stand against bullies interfering with our well being or the world’s well being. We are broke and wasting so much money on bogus wars and keeping our troops stationed in various locations around the world. Paul is talking about eliminate income tax, shrinking government, decreasing bogus programs and seizing all this excessive spending. Think about that, that would be like a raise for everyone to spend in stores, boosting the economy. He speaks to pay for a small government by excise, tariff taxes, and similar taxes of the like. What does spelling have to do with anything? Really? Who here is some type of english major? If everyone here was infront of a podium, you wouldn’t know who could spell or couldn’t spell, therefore that is irrelevant. My goal on these forums is to educate get educated so we can figure out who is really the best candidate for presidency. I like to talk and read facts on these forums. As long as I gets me pointt acrost who reeally caress. I does’nt have timee to goi back two proofe reed :P

      • B Anderson

        George, I agree with some of your opinions. However on the 9-9-9 plan increasing how much a person rich or poor pays… Not so. What you do not realize is there are hidden taxes on our everyday products (food for example) that you do not see. Removing the hidden tax, and adding the 9% would be less that what is paid today.

        Cain nor Ryan would not be a good choice for president, in my opinion, because I do not think they could get bills through congress. Fearing any canadate’s tax change would be baseless, as they could never get them through congress.


  • Chris (CA)

    Does everyone watch the debate or listen to the news with one primary objective? Namely — “I need to name one or two things I dislike about the candidate or I need to find a contradiction in their statements or record.”

    If that is your approach to electing someone, you may as well not vote at all. No person on the planet is perfect. Ironically, when someone is very firm in their convictions people label it “extreme”.

    Forget the media. Forget your fear. Vote for who you think will both annihilate Obama in the debates and who will start a dialogue nationwide that gets people focusing on the right things.

    • Just Me

      I do not look for things I disagree with but the issue is I agree with very little from most of the candidates.

      “extreme” is going above and beyond even your parties values to an area that even their highest respected party members have said would be ludicrous.

      I am not looking for someone to take over Obama, I am looking for the best candidate and I include Obama in the mix.

      • George Stickney

        Totally agree, Just Me! Several people are good at debating, but talk can be cheap. We are looking for a president with excellent morals and honesty. We should not be looking for a president just for talk. I know a lot of people good at talking, but in reality they are full of…u know what;) Our country is in deep distress, we need an intelligent, knowledgeable, honest individual that has a solid foundation to help us overcome this mess.

        • Just Me

          Really wish we would get rid of the party system and have every man for himself. That way people wouldn’t blindly follow someone just because they are part of the same party.

          This would also make people think for them self and not have to side on issues in fear of being abandoned from their party.

          Think this would encourage people to be better because they don’t have followers by default.

          • George Stickney

            U hit the nail on the head with this statement. I dislike this entire party system and the game the Republicans and Democrats play at our expense!

  • Chris (CA)

    Although Ron Paul is my 3rd or 4th choice, he scores major points with me when he points out the flaws in the Department of Education.

    The curriculum in public schools and 4 year colleges prepare most graduates for little more than entry-level, “no skills required” customer service positions or logistics.

  • Samuel

    These people are crazy. God didn’t give us this land. We stole it by killing millions of Natives. Also the “Christian Founding Fathers” theme is a MYTH. Such a view of American history is completely contrary to known facts. The primary leaders of the so-called founding fathers of our nation were not Bible-believing Christians; they were deists. Deism was a philosophical belief that was widely accepted by the colonial intelligentsia at the time of the American Revolution. Its major tenets included belief in human reason as a reliable means of solving social and political problems and belief in a supreme deity who created the universe to operate solely by natural laws. The supreme God of the Deists removed himself entirely from the universe after creating it. They believed that he assumed no control over it, exerted no influence on natural phenomena, and gave no supernatural revelation to man. A necessary consequence of these beliefs was a rejection of many doctrines central to the Christian religion. Deists did not believe in the virgin birth, divinity, or resurrection of Jesus, the efficacy of prayer, the miracles of the Bible, or even the divine inspiration of the Bible.

    • 12AngryMen

      Nice try on the deism theory.

      If you REALLY want to know the truth:

      John Adams- “The Holy Ghost carries on the whole Christian system in this earth. Not a baptism, not a marriage, not a sacrament can be administered but by the Holy Ghost. . . . There is no authority, civil or religious – there can be no legitimate government but what is administered by this Holy Ghost. There can be no salvation without it. All without it is rebellion and perdition, or in more orthodox words damnation.”

      John Quincy Adams- “The hope of a Christian is inseparable from his faith. Whoever believes in the Divine inspiration of the Holy Scriptures must hope that the religion of Jesus shall prevail throughout the earth.”

      Samuel Adams- “I conceive we cannot better express ourselves than by humbly supplicating the Supreme Ruler of the world . . . that the confusions that are and have been among the nations may be overruled by the promoting and speedily bringing in the holy and happy period when the kingdoms of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ may be everywhere established, and the people willingly bow to the scepter of Him who is the Prince of Peace.”

      The list goes on and on. Just WHICH founding fathers were you referring to? Hmmm?

      • Samuel

        The 1796 Treaty with Tripoli states that the United States was “not in any sense founded on the Christian religion” . This was not an idle statement meant to satisfy muslims– they believed it and meant it. This treaty was written under the presidency of George Washington and signed under the presidency of John Adams.

        • 12AngryMen

          Dear Samuel,

          How about a little thing we like to call “historical fact.”

          “What is the origin of the phrase “America is in no sense founded on the Christian religion”? What does it mean?
          This quote comes from a line in the Treaty of Tripoli from 1797. While this line is regularly invoked by critics in a futile attempt to prove that America never was a Christian nation, this line is only a small incomplete portion of the full quote. It is taken from a 1797 treaty approved by America in the midst of our first War on Terror against Islamic terrorism. In it, the Muslims acknowledged that America was a Christian nation, and America reminded the Muslims that we were not a European Christian nation with an inherent hostility against Muslims – that is, that we were not a European, Middle-Ages type of Christian nation.

          Those who attribute the Treaty of Tripoli quote to George Washington make two mistakes. The first is that no statement in it can be attributed to Washington (the treaty did not arrive in America until months after he left office); Washington never saw the treaty; it was not his work; no statement in it can be ascribed to him. The second mistake is to divorce a single clause of the treaty from the remainder which provides its context. It would also be absurd to suggest that President Adams (under whom the treaty was ratified in 1797) would have endorsed or assented to any provision which repudiated Christianity. In fact, while discussing the Barbary conflict with Jefferson, Adams declared:
          The policy of Christendom has made cowards of all their sailors before the standard of Mahomet. It would be heroical and glorious in us to restore courage to ours. 25
          Furthermore, it was Adams who declared:
          The general principles on which the fathers achieved independence were. . . . the general principles of Christianity. . . . I will avow that I then believed, and now believe, that those general principles of Christianity are as eternal and immutable as the existence and attributes of God; and that those principles of liberty are as unalterable as human nature. 26
          Adams’ own words confirm that he rejected any notion that America was less than a Christian nation.”

    • Just Me

      It’s religions, they make it up as they go no matter how much they have to stomp on facts or history.

      Will do some searching but do you know of any reliable resources about founding fathers and Deism?

  • Heard this morning…

    JESUS plus nothing equals Everything!

  • Dan(KC)

    This is just amazing that all of them are trying to make themselves holier than the others. What a bunch of lip service while they line their pockets with money. Each of them achieved millions while being the lackey of corporations and banks. Cain made his in business with a salary in excess of 400 times that of the lowest employee, and he calls himself a Christian.

  • Scott

    A great reference to Jesus’ stance on politics (if any) is Tim Keller’s sermon “Arguing About Politics”.

    It really is an awesome sermon about where Jesus stands on these issues, I invite anyone to listen to it.

    It’s located here at this url: