During the 2008 and 2012 elections, the candidates mostly slid by topics of foreign policy since, generally, it’s a hard topic. It appears that some lessons are being taught right now with Russia flexing some international might which will require a pop quiz for the next presidential contenders in a few short months.

Report from The Washington Post:

Russia effectively absorbed Crimea Tuesday afternoon, moments after President Vladimir Putin declared that Russia has no designs on any other parts of Ukraine.

In a speech to a joint session of parliament, which he used to call for the “reunification” of Crimea with Russia, he said that the region has a special role in Russian history that makes it unique.

Ecstatic members of the Russian parliament watched while Putin and Crimean leaders signed a treaty of accession as soon as Putin was done speaking, and the Kremlin said afterwards it considers the treaty to be in force even before parliament has ratified it.

Sevastopol, the city where Russia’s Black Sea fleet is based, also entered the Russian Federation, as a separate entity.

Even while declaring that Moscow will not seek to expand its holdings in Ukraine, Putin also promised that Russia will do what it must to protect the rights of Russians living abroad — which suggests that he intends to play a role in restive eastern Ukraine, with its large Russian population.

He said Moscow will always protect the rights of Russians using “political, diplomatic and legal means.”

But he stressed: “Don’t believe those who say Russia will take other regions after Crimea. We don’t need that.”

This incident has already created the environment for deeper foreign policy discussions between GOP candidates like Ted Cruz and Rand Paul. Considering that many Americans feel foreign policy discussions put them into a coma, who wins this topic in 2016?


  1. He who has the gold rules. The US owes Putin better than 160 billion dollars & Putin controls the Oil for a good part of the world. Both Obama & Putin would like the price of oil to spike

  2. Dictators never win. Right wins. The US is now a leader in oil and natural gas. It would be more so if Obama would be the leader he should be and approve the pipeline. His lack of commitment is a drag on the economy.

    • A world leader in debt. Hey that pipe line is from Canada to the USA. Canada collects from the USA. They don’t pay us for taking their oil.

      • Billy: Yeah. In fact, the pipeline doesn’t go “from Canada to the USA,” it goes “from Canada THROUGH the USA.” ALL the way through, to the gulf, to be shipped elsewhere.

    • Billy and Goethe are on track – actually Canada is selling the stuff to China and when the pipeline is done, then outta of the Gulf to S.America and US. We should be doing Alaska and shale + fracking to become the biggest of all.

      Crimea is down the tubes and Watch => Putin will break Ukraine in half and East go to Putin and West goes to Euro

      For next 2-1/2 yrs US is worthless!!!!!!!

        • Billy – I think Uncle Sam has more total raw resources than Uncle Vladie and definitely has more technical resources + investment $$ – but – the little dick-tator won’t let go so we can move forward. His intentions are to make Uncle Sam smaller and less important or capable.

      • Sam: Crimea is a tough one. On the one hand, if we believe in self-determination (as does Ron Paul), we should be happy for them to be what they want, and stop interfering. In fact, he even thinks WE are wrong to put up sanctions:


        On the other hand, we did sign the agreement that Ukraine’s boundaries should be respected, when they gave up their nukes.


        This is not like Saddam invading Kuwait. It’s more like Israel taking over East Jerusalem. That was not accepted by the international community, either–and is supposed to be the capital of the Palestinian State, according to the 1988 agreement. But, there you go.


        Actually, Putin seems to be saying this is payback for the West’s action in Kosavo/Bosnia, which he considered illegal.


        None of this is simple.

        Crimea was part of Russia until Kruschev gave it to Ukraine in 1954. Since it was all inside the Soviet Union, it didn’t seem to matter. Now, Putin is saying they’re just “correcting” that action.


        If you look at it from his perspective, it’s as if the U.S. gave the Oklahoma panhandle to Texas. Then, if Texas DID secede, the people in the panhandle might want to go back to being part of Oklahoma, and the U.S. Should that be allowed?

        If the Crimeans didn’t want to be part of Russia, that would be a different matter. There is going to be no easy way out of this.

        • Goethe – Crimera goes to the Big Bear – period. right / wrong and probably right. Evidently Crimean people are and want to be Russian and Russia has and have had military bases there. However Putin’s reference to anything else is bull. And it ain’t over, services to Crimea must go thru Ukraine or by water. I honestly don’t think that the Ukrainian Republic is long for this world. as i said before E Ukraine goes to Russia and W Ukraine becomes westernized.

          • Sam: I agree that Russia will probably regret its actions. While Crimeans are really “Russians,” they do get everything from and through Ukraine. Russia is planning to build a bridge, and I don’t see why they can’t get stuff via the sea. But it’s going to be an albatross around Russia’s neck, and the action has alienated the rest of the world. And, of course, he has thrown Ukraine into the arms of the west.

            I’m not sure about East Ukraine. If you believe in self-determination, maybe they SHOULD split. But if we accept the “self-determination” concept, Turkey and Iraq may have to accept a Kurdish nation, Texas and Quebec may become independent, and the world would really HAVE to demand an independent Palestinian State.

            And, of course, several Russian areas could rightly split off–according to the Putin Doctrine. He doesn’t want that, so my guess is that he’ll leave East Ukraine as just a thorn and threat for the West to ponder and fear.

            • I think because the Big Bear has his huge seaport in Sevastopol, Crimea ( not unlike San Diego & Norfolk) and the lease would have to have renegotiated in ’17 – Putin decided to make Crimea a non issue.

              If the Republic of the United States ever broke apart then there would be similarities to discuss but not now. Unless of course we can convince the Federal Gov to move to Nebraska and let DC become a separate little entity. 🙂 🙂 🙂

      • Sam: Would be interested in your take.

        I was thinking about Crimea today, and I had a thought. IF Crimea were really supposed to be part of Ukraine, and IF the people of Crimea wanted to continue to be part of Ukraine, there would have been a logical response to Russian control:

        A Cuban Missile Crisis style embargo.

        Crimea gets all its goods from Ukraine. It is already going to be a serious problem for Russia to supply the peninsula. We could have sent ships to surround the landmass. The only real problem would have been time. We would have had to begin the process in December to get the right ships there.

        It would have been a wonderful doppelganger of Kennedy times–IF the people of Crimea wanted to be part of Ukraine. Obama would have become WILDLY popular, as Kennedy did, and as Putin now is in Russia.

        BUT, although Russia did not handle it “properly,” the fact is that most of the people of Crimea like the new arrangement.

        Here’s Ron Paul’s take:
        Russia Invades Crimea–so what?


        • Goethe – I’m partially in agreement with Ron Paul. With respect to Crimea, although there was tilted press, a great majority wanted to go back to the Soviet Union, good or bad. As I read, I guess there have been wars over Crimea for centuries. A good majority are Russian, so it’s like going home. I have mixed emotions if the U.S. should have said anything and just kept our nose out of it. If we would have tried a blockade in the Black Sea, it would have been for naught because Russia has land opportunity. It will be a problem getting in and out Crimea by land but there is a huge Russian seaport there.

          The Key is: will Russia leave the rest of Ukraine alone for Ukraine to figure out if they want to stay united or split into a E. & W. Ukraine. But I believe Russia will force their influence on the situation. Obama’s long winded filibuster this pm in Brussels, said nothing new, and bullshitted history. he basically said we will do nothing, do some economics and NATO go get ’em. We will not invade or interfere.

          I’m on Obama’s side about staying out of this one – even if we ship aid to Kiev it will be a lost cause and Putin will say “thanks!”

          Because we are considered chickenshits and we no longer have any power – Putin (and the rest of the world) could care less what we say or do.

          If we don’t start re-building our military – and keep spinning down, then it is just a matter of time (within BHO’s office time) before someone who thinks they have big nads will drop multiple nukes or EMPs all over us. Then Obama will have the distinction of not only making the U.S. a SECOND rate nation but the destruction of the U.S. and maybe the world.

          We have done nothing but back-up and back-down since this Administration took office and the world thinks we lost our nads and power.

          I’m not going to review the Iraq situation – we been there, done that.

          • Sam: Yeah. I agree. It’s really too bad that world leaders couldn’t have gotten together and made a deal that let Ukraine partner with the European Union in exchange for breaking off Crimea. Seems like that would have been a reasonable process.

            This site discusses what the loss of Crimea really means to Ukraine:


            It notes that 80% of Crimea’s electricity comes from Ukraine, as well as most of its food, and almost all of its fresh water. It’s surprising that Ukraine didn’t just shut all of that off at once–at least as a reminder of the connection. Crimea PLUS Sevastopol contribute only 3.7% of Ukraine’s GNP. And 69% of tourists are from Ukraine.

            Only 9.5% of Crimea’s population is Ukrainian, compared with 78.8% Russian.

            Anyway, if that were NOT the case, and Crimea wanted to be part of Ukraine, there is no land route between Russia and Crimea. Russia would have go to THROUGH Ukraine to get there. So a blockade/embargo would have been possible-except that it would have been really in-their-face,since the gap between Russia and Crimea is planned to be fixed with a five-mile bridge (quite a bit smaller than our Mackinaw Bridge).

            • Goethe – I thought the bridge was already in place instead of just a proposal – that will make Putin’s life a little more miserable. Too fk’g bad. All the more reason to further encroach on eastern Ukraine. And he won’t have the money to build the bridge, unless he starts taking Crimea’s gas away from them.

            • Sam:

              No, there are four proposed locations for the Russia-Crimea bridge, for vehicles and rail. But it has not begun.

              I’m thinking that may be why the west has been moving so gingerly about this. Crimea is now sort of an “island.” And if the west were to threaten Crimea, Russia would take eastern Ukraine as a supply route–of course, justifying it because eastern Ukraine likes Russia more than Ukraine (sort of like the northern American states feel more akin to Canada than the rest of the USA).

          • samreusser — food for thought:



            Consider this clip: “It is worth revisiting Clinton’s statements from July 2012. She said as follows: “I don’t think Russia and China believe they are paying any price at all — nothing at all — for standing up on behalf of the Assad regime. The only way that will change is if every nation represented here [at the conference] directly and urgently makes it clear that Russia and China will pay a price because they are holding up progress — blockading it — that is no longer tolerable!” Clinton’s definition of progress in Syria, it should be mentioned, means regime change in Damascus and a military bombing campaign against the Syrians. She was expressing Washington’s rage, because she made the statement after Moscow and Beijing refused to allow the US, Britain, and France to get the United Nations Security Council to authorize a war against Syria.”

            The two articles make for an interesting long read, worthy of contemplation.

  3. Main Stream Media has advertized NON STOP the dictates of our Police State Gov to the point that Low-Information Voters (the Politically Correct term for Idiot Americans, ie, the brainwashed ignorant masses) have accepted as a “fact” that the few crazy Muslim terrorists that attacked US are REASON enough to give up most of our Liberties as A Nation of 312,000,000 for the sake of our Government’s protection from this dirty dozen!

    It will be interesting, and very entertaining, to watch how MSM responds to what “the brainwashed ignorant masses” first question will be: When will these crazy Crimearians attack us, so we can give up the rest of our Liberties…?!

    “Well… the never will, nor can, attack the USA…” is about where all interest will be lost (another false flag deflated). Back on topic will be: Why am I getting screwed by Obamacare…?!


    Reality Check:

    Russia is on an economic upswing (finally after decades of austerity), while we, the USA, are on an economic downswing (the exorbitant expenditures from our foreign military adventures, gifts to nearly all nations as Foreign Aid, sanctions we impose…which are a two-way street (since when we ban something to a foreign nation, we also do not get what they had to offer us), Obamacare which is on path of destroying our economy for years to come, more taxation of the Middle Class…meaning further downturn in spending power, and, many, many more economic idiocies under Obama & Co.

    Putin, aware of this, feels confident that he will win this first move, which will start a strategy that he estimates will win him the ultimate game (the ascension of Russia and the economic destruction of USA).

    Annexing Crimea, which by now should be a fact, Putin has made his first decisive move on the Chessboard (and as all Russians believe they are great chess players, expects to win).

    Putin knows how the CCCP went bankrupt after many years of spending their money in trying to conquer Afghanistan militarily — one of the major factors of their total economic collapse that ended the USSR!

    Putin also considers Obama to be nothing but a negro mulatto (thus inferior in thinking ability, according to Putin, on par with inferior gays (his take, not mine)). So, estimates that he, Putin, has 2+ years of inferior Obama’s rule to take advantage of and create a Strong Russia (that will be untouchable by any foreign power) while he outplays Obama until the USA becomes economically bankrupt, thus impotent for a long time (long enough for Russia to take over most Europe in its sphere of influence and End the European Union permanently)!

    • too long of a post above — so in few words:

      Putin expects to garner most of Central, and all of Eastern Europe (as before under the CCCP) under a Most Powerful Russian Umbrella — by using the 2.5 years left under Obama’s rule to destroy US economically by embroiling us in more wars that we can pay for, and expecting Obama to keep on pushing his Destructive Obamacare till the very end of Obama’s administration !

      • Oblivious: Spoken like a true NeoCon.

        Now that your “hero” is Rand, are you willing to go against EVERYTHING Ron Paul stands for, or are you going to just do it one point at a time?

        One great thing about Ron Paul was that he said what he thought and believed–he was consistent and honest. BUT now, you are saying a candidate should lie, because the American people are not smart enough for self-rule. That attitude could not be farther from the Ron Paul ideal.

        And now, you’re rattling sabres over Crimea, which Ron Paul says was a good and right move by Russia–and that WE are breaking the law by trying to “punish” Russia.

        It is so strange, after hearing years of your saying Ron Paul is GOD, now having you turn against him so abruptly. Et tu Brute?

        • A lot cheaper to destroy your enemy’s economy than engage in war and when you opponent is 17 trillion in debt it should be a cake walk.

          • Billy: I’m not sure how that relates to Surfisher/Gulag/Oblivious turning against his hero, and now sounding like a NeoCon.

        • kooky geothe — what a dangerously stupid man you are…to come away with such erroneous conclusions .

          • Oblivious: I noted your own words.

            The great thing about Ron Paul was that you could believe him and trust him.

            My own view is that if you want to change things, you speak the truth and try to convince people. That’s what Ron always did. If you really do have good ideas, others will agree, and the ideas will win.

            Now, you’re saying it’s better to lie to people, get them to elect Rand, and then watch him do whatever he wants. That’s what Doug Wead said, too–in the link YOU provided several weeks ago.

            • Geothe Bore — are you brain-dead to politics, or just pretend to be…by posting such nonsense?!

              The Ron Paul TRUTH Experiment in 2012 showed that while all Real Americans wanted him to win, THOSE that control The Party did not — so TO STOP Ron Paul, the RNC had his supporters fingers broken (Louisiana), the AC turned off in Arizona (whereby his delegates cooked in the heat, stoically waiting, to no avail to have a final vote counted), the lights turned off in several other venues, when Ron Paul supporters stood firm, delegates from many States he won overturned, and a multitude of CRIMINAL Actions that the RNC perpetrated against Ron Paul — BECAUSE HE SPOKE THE TRUTH!

              more to follow….

  4. It appears to me that Putin chose to use the same footprints as David Cameron in the recent Falkland Islands referendum. Argentina still believes the Falkland Islands (“Islas Malvinas”) is part of their national territory. They were taken from Argentina by the British about 180 years ago. The Falkland Islanders voted to stay under the English Crown. Crimea voted to go under Russian Control. One didn’t get much press. The other became a crisis.

      • kooky geothe — what an idiotic post, again, as usual by you.

        now learn something (if you can comprehend it):

        “The Obama State Department rejects the vote in the Crimea to rejoin Russia on the grounds that it violates the Ukrainian Constitution. But according to the Ukrainian Constitution, the pro Russian president Victor Yanukovych should never have been driven from power in the first place. Our feckless national media tells us that he was overthrown in a “popular uprising.” Would that work here? In the United States? Obama’s support is now below 42%. Can we demonstrate and force him out? Is that okay with the national media? Don’t hold your breath.

        Our hypocritical foreign policy calls for supporting democracy when it does what we want it to do, or what our national media wants it to do, but we easily dismiss it when it does what we don’t. Like Iraq and Afghanistan where we re-wrote the constitution the way we wanted it to be written. Or in Egypt where they voted in the wrong man and so now we support the military.

        I’m not against what we want. Nor am I always against what the national media wants. I like the women’s rights, for example, that we insist our newly created “democracies” enact. But I am against sending our sons to die to try to force other people to do what we want. Only to have it come undone later. If we truly cherish freedom, let’s let other people have it and mind our own business….

        …The American television executives, who liked the idea of war with Iraq, may not support a sustained war against Russia. The war in Iraq, however personal it was for George W. Bush, had the additional value of forcing America to jump into the frying pan with Israel and become a still bigger target of Islamic extremists. Now Israel was not alone in the world. It was Israel and us. But will those same television executives be ready to send hundreds of thousands to die for the people of western Ukraine?…”

        By Doug Wead — here is the full text:


  5. Why Rand Paul can beat Hillary Clinton (especially on Foreign Policy…remember Benghazi)!

    By Doug Wead:

    Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky may be the only Republican who can beat Hillary Clinton for president in 2016.
    Paul decisively won last Saturday’s CPAC straw poll with 31%, his neo-Libertarian sidekick, Senator Ted Cruz, was second at 11%. Jeb Bush and the Karl Rove faction of the party registered 1%. According to a recent column in The Washington Post, Rand Paul is now leading the Republican field. This is showing up in some recent presidential preference polls. It is puzzling to many political pundits.
    Polls don’t usually mean much this early in an election cycle. It’s usually all about name recognition. Former Secretary of State and former First Lady, Hillary Clinton obviously leads among Democrats, with Vice President Joe Biden trailing far behind. In the GOP contest, former Governor and FOX television star, Mike Huckabee polls well, so does former governor Jeb Bush and so does former vice presidential candidate, Sarah Palin. All the other candidates who ran for president last time register small numbers too. But why Rand Paul?
    Yes, his father, former congressman, Ron Paul, ran for president three times but in a career that spanned a whole generation he never led the GOP in a national poll.

    Part of the reason lies in the fact that, if he wins the nomination, Senator Rand Paul will be the first nominee since Ronald Reagan to lead a political Movement. In this case, the “Constitutional Movement”, which includes conservatives, libertarians and others across the whole left to right spectrum. In fact, it represents more than a movement it represents a new political re-alignment, the first of its kind in several generations.
    During most of our lifetime the debate was about the role of government in the lives of the people. Liberals wanted a “liberal” use of government involvement, conservatives wanted a “conservative” use of government, relying more on free markets. But the point of reference was always the role of government in meeting peoples needs, it was in relation to that point that one was liberal or conservative.
    The U.S. Constitution was a factor, but mostly over the issue of the Second Amendment and in understanding the politics of the Cold War where conservatives were actually more liberal about spending for defense and liberals more conservative. Conservatives said providing a common national defense is Constitutional. Liberals said all of this military spending was robbing the poor of this country and hurting our own people.
    Liberals accused conservatives about not caring for the poor. Conservatives accused liberals about being soft on communism and flirting with national destruction.
    In the past, candidates were touted as liberal or conservative but only Reagan and Goldwater were considered to be actual leaders of an ideological Movement. Liberal Movement leaders? FDR? Later, Adlai Stevenson? Hubert Humphrey? Maybe? But not really. All were successful politicians and thus too involved in the process to have the ideological purity of a movement leader.
    Today the old liberal – conservative argument is almost obsolete. The end of the Cold War has been a big factor. There is no life and death struggle about left and right. We have settled on a range of responsibilities that government should be able to assume and are now quibbling over details. “You said I could keep my own doctor, you’re a liar.”
    Foreign observers can hardly tell a difference between Republicans and Democrats. It is the Red team versus the Blue team, not really much of contest over ideas. Just a contest over power between two societies. Oh, it is passionate, like all internecine conflicts. And the public is emotionally invested, like they are with their favorite college football team. They may shed real tears or not eat for days if their side loses.
    A good illustration of how irrelevant the philosophical argument has become was the recent presidency of George W. Bush. In his last year in office, facing a worldwide depression, this Republican president nationalized American banks. It took Socialist President Francois Mitterrand to do that in France. And yet we call George W. Bush a “conservative Republican.” Meanwhile, liberal Democrats build no statues to him and conservatives still defend him. It’s two teams with bitter past histories. Liberals never applaud conservatives when they do something liberal, such as George H.W. Bush extending the first White House invitations to Gay activists. And conservatives never applaud a liberal, like John Kennedy or Bill Clinton, for doing something conservative, like balancing the budget
    The Constitutional Movement represents a new realignment of the political landscape. It includes a variety of voters from the left to the right and everything in between.
    The argument is less about liberal and conservative and more about getting back to the Constitution. It is about ending corruption. The special deals. It is less about left and right or even, up and down, the rich and the poor, and more about in and out. Insiders are seen to be gaming the system, taxes, Wall Street, the regulatory agencies, banking. There is great cynicism about this and even despair. It’s as if only suckers depend on a free marketplace. The American dream is over.
    It is not lost on many that the rich got richer and the poor got poorer on a massive scale under Barack Obama.
    While many poor people and certainly all people of color celebrate the rise of Obama, now that he is passing, some on the left are wanting to get serious about doing what they thought a person of such humble origins would do, namely, reform the system. Stop the looting. End the cycle of corruption.
    Hillary – as a woman – represents a dynamic cultural moment and that will be hard to resist. The media will be transfixed by the idea of a woman following an African American into the White House. But no one seriously believes that this woman, who in 1979 miraculously turned a $1,000 commodities investment into $100,000 within ten months, is going to do anything about reversing the corrupt system that has clogged our economic arteries. She can only win a Red-Blue contest. It will only be an argument about who gets the power and which insiders get the taxpayers’ money.
    If 2016 become a contest of significant ideas on how to end the corruption Rand Paul will win. He is the only candidate who has any.


    • This is the concise, and most accurate, dissection of our current politics!

      Pay attention — or lose our Nation!

      Save our Free Republic, by returning us back to the US Constitution, as Rand Paul strives — or end it forever as Hitlery Clinton wants!


  6. Since this is a “foreign policy” page, I wondered if anyone had any ideas about the lost plane from Maylasia. I haven’t followed it, because they really have had nothing to report.

    Apparently, it went down in the Indian Ocean, but nobody has claimed responsibility–even though someone intentionally shut off equipment and had to do all those maneuvers intentionally.

    The plane was filled with Chinese, so it wasn’t an attack against the west.

    I wondered if they were seeing how they could move without being seen–preparing for a “big one.” OR is someone testing equipment that would confuse a plane to destroy itself without losing personnel, like a huge drone?

    Anybody have any thoughts on this?

  7. Doug Wead needs a history lesson. This was a lot of glibberish gossip. Never thought I would be defending George W. but he did not nationalize the banks. There hasn’t been a nationalized bank in the US since the early 1800’s. Our Forefathers set one up at the birth of the United States of America, commonly known as the First Bank of the United States, It was a National Bank, chartered for a term of twenty years, by the United States Congress on February 25, 1791 and signed by President George Washington. The bank requested and received a congressional recharter in 1832. President Andrew Jackson vetoed the bill and removed federal government funds that were on deposit and distributed them to loyal state banks. End of nationalized banking.

    If you are educated and as astute as Hillary Clinton, what is so questionable about turning $ 1,000.00 into $100,000,00 in ten months? Just take a look at George H W Bush’s Texas portfolio for some real astuteness. There never was any official governmental investigation into, or findings about, or charges brought regarding Hillary Rodham’s cattle futures trading. What president since 1945 has actually mentioned or taken any action “about reversing the corrupt system that has clogged our economic arteries”, so why does Hillary Clinton get this tag?

    I have respect for many of Rand Paul’s proposals. But I have missed his significant ideas on how to end corruption.

    • Tess: There’s no real arguing with Surfisher/Gulag/Oblivious. He is a hero-worshipper who sells his loyalty without thinking. He claims that Ron, Rand, and Doug are ALWAYS right, yet they often disagree. For instance, Ron Paul says Russia is RIGHT about Crimea, Wead is non-commital, saying “calm down,” and Rand is jumping up and down about it.

      In this case, Wead claims that Rand is leading a movement. What crap. He’s a politician, and while I think he’s a “good” politician. Rand’s whole effort now is to AVOID seeming to be leading a movement. That’s why he’s going to speak at the NAACP and such. He wants to appear to be the leader of ALL the people, and he’s doing a pretty good job of it.

      But by doing so, he will have to back away from the pure philosophy of his father. And the question will be whether he will turn on the people who elected him, as SurfGuOb thinks, or will he continue to compromise his ideals?

      As for “nationalizing the banks,” Wead is apparently referring to W using the Fed to keep banks from failing, as they did in the Great Depression.

      • Geothe Bore — are you brain-dead to politics, or just pretend to be…by posting such nonsense?!

        The Ron Paul TRUTH Experiment in 2012 showed that while all Real Americans wanted him to win, THOSE that control The Party did not — so TO STOP Ron Paul, the RNC had his supporters fingers broken (Louisiana), the AC turned off in Arizona (whereby his delegates cooked in the heat, stoically waiting, to no avail to have a final vote counted), the lights turned off in several other venues, when Ron Paul supporters stood firm, delegates from many States he won overturned, and a multitude of CRIMINAL Actions that the RNC perpetrated against Ron Paul — BECAUSE HE SPOKE THE TRUTH!

        All these reprehensible, and in many cases criminal actions, have been recorded for posterity. And I hope Doug Wead, or someone else, would write a book detailing how the 2012 Election exposed US as nothing but another Banana Republic — where party corruption is the rule!

        AND YOU WANT Rand Paul to follow this SHAMEFUL AMERICAN DISASTER…so Hitlery Clinton can win…?!

        What a nasty, little American-hating sciolist you are…to suggest it!
        Rand Paul is doing what is politically needed — covering all bases — so once he gets elected as US President, he’ll do WHAT’S RIGHT for The Real Americans!

        • SurfGulOb–So, again, you are saying that you believe Rand is lying to the people so that he can get in there and do something completely different. Isn’t that what the whole Ron Paul campaign was against?

          You want Rand to “etch-a-sketch” just like Romney.

          I agree that Ron Paul got screwed in 2012. And I’d love to see a book documenting that. But I don’t believe the solution is to act exactly like the “winners” you hate.

          • kooky geothe — so you admit you have no clue about politics…which makes you an idiot…as many here have observed before….

            • SurfGulOb:

              First, isn’t cheap “politics” what the Ron Paul movement was all about? I understand it, I just don’t think the answer is to “be as bad as they are.”

              Second, no one has ever called me an idiot on here, even during heated debate, except you. And who cares what you say??

        • ObGulSurf:

          I would say Sam is he only person on here who is universally admired and respected. And while he gets frustrated by Tess, they do have mutual respect.

          I disagree with everyone–even Nate–but I respect everybody on here, except you. You never “discuss,” you only rant, berate, and pat people on the head. But it’s probably good to keep you around, so that the rest of us can feel that we’re normal.

    • Tess Liehard — all here know you are a clueless troll…but this one gets the cake: “If you are educated and as astute as Hillary Clinton, what is so questionable about turning $ 1,000.00 into $100,000,00 in ten months?”


      • SurfGulOb–I think if you were to actually ASK people here, they would say YOU are the troll.

        While nobody seems to agree with Tess, everybody respects that she knows her stuff and gives links to support her ideas.

        You have no ideas of your own. You regurgitate ideas you get from others. And that’s the point. You criticize Tess for googling facts, but you almost never give facts. You only rant and provide links to opinions.

        You really are delusional.

    • LOL — just saw that one: *The only “man” in that photo is Whoopi Goldberg (left)*


    • GulObSurf:

      So. . .now you’re agreeing with the guy who said the goal of the United States should be to “CRUSH both Russia and China.”

      Yeah, I’m SURE I heard Ron Paul say that, too. . ..NOT.

        • Surfglob: You’re just showing disingenuous you are.

          Hatred is not intelligent. A lot of people hate Obama, for a variety of reasons. But most people have some reason.

          Look at what you are praising–Putin. You hate, so you criticize Obama for being a “dictator,” then you criticize him for being weak, and suggest that you’d rather have Putin. Does that not strike you as hypocritical, if not insane?

          • kooky Geothe/Bob:

            this site was provided for laughter, AS titled: *Funny stuff*….

            when you had your lobotomy done, did they also remove your sense of humor…?

          • kooky Geothe/Bob — so by replying to me, when it was addressed to you as Geothe/Bob, you admitted that you were also posting here as Bob (thanks for the final proof)!

            What a sad little man you must be — to create a fictitious character, “Bob” so you can argue with yourself…until you finally agree with yourself…! LOL

            You also invented another Character, to agree with your “erudite” posts on the Virginia election situation…a few months back!

            Seek psychiatric help, little one.

            • Smurf: Nice to hear from you. The fact that you’re obnoxious and dangerous is apparently the only thing Bob and I agree on, and it’s nice to agree once in awhile.

              What ridiculous “logic” to speak to two people and if one replies, you think that one person is really two people.

              Bob has already said that it was a waste of time to answer you. Sam said the same thing. Apparently, I’m the only one who thinks it makes any sense to reply to you.

  8. “tomatobubble” is not funny stuff. It is a travesty of coarseness, vulgarity, and buffoonery. Anyone who has read the invective writings of Webster Griffin Tarpley (unauthorized Autobiography of George Bush, unauthorized Autobiography of Barack Obama) know he is a historian only unto himself.

    • Tess Liehard — food for thought, not that you’ll be able to understand it…but a least giving you a chance to try to:



      Consider this clip: “It is worth revisiting Clinton’s statements from July 2012. She said as follows: “I don’t think Russia and China believe they are paying any price at all — nothing at all — for standing up on behalf of the Assad regime. The only way that will change is if every nation represented here [at the conference] directly and urgently makes it clear that Russia and China will pay a price because they are holding up progress — blockading it — that is no longer tolerable!” Clinton’s definition of progress in Syria, it should be mentioned, means regime change in Damascus and a military bombing campaign against the Syrians. She was expressing Washington’s rage, because she made the statement after Moscow and Beijing refused to allow the US, Britain, and France to get the United Nations Security Council to authorize a war against Syria.”

      The two articles make for an interesting long read, worthy of contemplation.

  9. Obama should bomb Russia over this! Like Clinton did to Serbia!
    After all, when a Demo President is personally in trouble, BOMBS AWAY is their best answer — it makes their DOMESTIC WOES go away!

    Clinton was the only world leader to bomb an European Capitol (Belgrade, in 1999) since Hitler did in WW2. Why did he bomb European Christians — on their Eastern Orthodox EASTER SUNDAY (Easter being their most sacred religious holiday) when the first bombs dropped on Serbia’s Capitol… in order to save Muslims (who are our sworn enemies, but we are not allowed to attack them on their Muslim Religious Holidays…)?

    The answer is simple — the fellatios Slick Willy received by Monica Lewinsky no longer registered in the news AFTER Bill Clinton ATTACKED THE TINY NATION of SERBIA, so Clinton’s cheating on his wife news disappeared from MSM, and was replaced by WAR NEWS! What is more compelling than watching our bombs exploding and destroying buildings and bridges and the ENEMY that the FEW Christian Serbs represented as a “threat” to Our Nation…?!

    Now Obama, can take the same page from Clinton’s Book Of Saving Your Own Skin, and BOMB Russia — to distract The American People (like Slick Willie did) from his personal problems and failures! Obama’s ORIGINAL BIRTH CERTIFICATE has never been provided (so he may not even be American born, but an USURPER PRETENDER…that belongs in JAIL FOR THIS, not in the White House); his Obamacare is economically destructive, unconstitutional…and all good representatives are going to do their best to ABOLISH IT!

    Obama, being a megalomaniac wannabe Dictator of USA, might just do this; and with nearly 3 more years of RULE LEFT, expect the worst to come from him!

    And that’s TRULY SCARY…for Russia is not a tiny nation you can bomb into submission!

    How to save America now…? — IMPEACH Obama TODAY!

    • Surfantasize:

      You really don’t make sense. First you ridicule Obama, suggesting he’s not a real man like Putin. Now you’re suggesting that Obama will act like Putin, but you don’t like that, either.

      The point is that you just hate, and you don’t care what you have to say to try to drum up more hatred.

      Personally, I think Ron Paul’s right that Crimea is over 78% ethnic Russian, and the great majority there like the idea of being n Russia. But it does deserve consideration about the way Russia went about it.

      I was surprised to see the General Assembly of the United Nations condemn the Russian action. And the vote was 100-11. When has the UN ever voted 100-11 in our favor?

    • Surf:

      Oh, wait, I forgot your immortal words from August 26, 2013 at 5:18pm:

      “Obama will attack Syria in a few days or weeks (mark my words)”

  10. Not sure it fits here, but…

    Did anyone see the Mother Jones story that Hobby Lobby has invested $73,000,000 in an abortion pill manufacturer?

    Regardless of your view of the Supreme Court case, you gotta love the irony in that.

    • At the time Hobby Lobby filed its case against the Affordable Care Act’s contraception mandate, its retirement plan had more than $73 million invested funds with contraception makers, Documents filed with the Department of Labor show that the Hobby Lobby 401(k) employee retirement plan held more than $73 million in mutual funds investments in companies that produce contraceptive pills, morning after pill, intrauterine devices, and drugs commonly used in abortions. Hobby Lobby stated “that it’s employees were allowed to use it only that they would not pay for it. It is a personal thing for the family.” As I see it the family and the corporation are separate entities. The mandate only applies to the employer, Hobby Lobby, Inc. The birth control mandate would reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies and the number of abortions! Can’t wait to read the opinions of Ruth Ginsburg and Antonin Scalia .

Comments are closed.