Panties For Men

I didn't watch the debate because I know what each of the candidates stand for and I already know who I am voting for. I'm not thrilled with either candidiate. I'll give you a hint as to whom I am not voting for. See if you can guess who it is.I am not voting for thr Marxist-Socilaist and Muslim loving candidate.

Iv'e read in the searching of the internet that some of the Liberal pundits are saying Romney won the deabte onall points and tha Obama may have lost the election after this debate. The next two debates are on foreign policy which Obama is weak.

Please remember one thing November Sixth, a vote for third party candidates is a vote for Obama.  

The clear concensus is that Romney won the debate.  But latter analysis may reverse that when Romney's lies are better known.

Romney lied:

• When he claimed that "pre-existing conditions are covered under my plan." They're not.
• When he said that President Obama had "cut Medicare by $716 billion to pay for Obamacare." Obama didn't.
• When he denied proposing a $5 trillion tax cut. He did.
• When he said President Obama had "added almost as much to the federal debt as all the prior presidents combined." Not even close.
• When he resurrected "death panels." That was called "one of the biggest whoppers of the night."
• When he stated that half the green energy companies given stimulus funds had failed. Only if three out of nearly three dozen is half.

I don't care much for either candidate.  As I live in a state where it is clear where the electoral votes will go, I can vote for a third party candidate I appreciate more without affecting the election results.

jimmie wrote:

---

The clear concensus is that Romney won the debate.  But latter analysis may reverse that when Romney's lies are better known.

Romney lied:

• When he claimed that "pre-existing conditions are covered under my plan." They're not.
• When he said that President Obama had "cut Medicare by $716 billion to pay for Obamacare." Obama didn't.
• When he denied proposing a $5 trillion tax cut. He did.
• When he said President Obama had "added almost as much to the federal debt as all the prior presidents combined." Not even close.
• When he resurrected "death panels." That was called "one of the biggest whoppers of the night."
• When he stated that half the green energy companies given stimulus funds had failed. Only if three out of nearly three dozen is half.

I don't care much for either candidate.  As I live in a state where it is clear where the electoral votes will go, I can vote for a third party candidate I appreciate more without affecting the election results.

---

 Hmm . . . I wonder if . . . is Lyndon LaRouche still a player??

Ryan VS. Biden: Quite interesting, as Martha Radditz'es questions had a surprisingly challenging context, when directed more at Biden. "What's going on?", I asked myself, "Isn't she ought to be tossing Joe softballs, and conversely tossing Paul, all the trick knuckle/curve/fast/spit balls?" She did not seem to be walking in the popularly accepted paradigm of a media fiercely loyal to Barry--strange!

Biden: He bordered on being disrespectful to Paul as a person, in a somewhat buffoonish manner, and, perhaps his timing was off, with the intervals that he'd interrupt Martha and Paul, quite a stark contrast to the strategy and tactics used by Mitt in the First POTUS Debate, where Mitt did put Jim Lehrer in his place, and that did effectively rattle Barry, however indirectly.

Ryan: He did keep his cool, perhaps a little too much. I suppose he was using the strategy of giving Joe more than enough rope to hang himself, and Barry, with. This subtlety may work with me, but not with the denser, uncommitted voters out there. Perhaps Paul was aiming for the aftereffect? I dunno.

Result: Based upon my understanding, of the current socio-cultural paradigm, I figure that this episode will yield a 0.7-1.3% jump in the "polls", for Romney-Ryan, lasting for Three days at the most, and then a little more tip afterwards, for Sotoro-Biden, with all other factors being equal/static, until Mitt can then be a mite bit more forceful in the Second POTUS Debate.

I'd always thought that a Veep's unofficial role, was to be more of an "attack dog" for the POTUS, such as Nixon was for Eisenhower; Johnson was for Kennedy; and, Agnew was for Nixon. Perhaps Mitt and Paul are mixing up the roles as to who will play "nice cop" and "tough cop".

No one won this election. Romney was "fronted" by the nincompoop RNC so-called "leadership", only to take a fall. His own sons said that Dad protested with every fibre of his being, at being fronted. At this stage, who knows(?), Mike Huckabee might have been better.

I do know this; had McCain/Palin "accidentally" won, in '08, in, say, Six Months time of that "Administration", those two would have "allowed"--actually been forced/coerced by the combined "leaderships" of the RNC &DNC--impeachment proceedings (based upon phony, ginned-up evidence) to go forth, whereupon eventually Nancy Pelosi (Third in line, in the Presidential Succession.) would have taken the reins as a "Temporary"(??) POTUS, until such time that the DNC would have re-jiggered The Constitutional Process, so that Obama/Biden, or an even worse team would have "reassumed" command.

Any and all, of these politician skunks, will surely break your hearts, no matter what your politcial persuasion may be. I haven't the foggiest notion of what I'm going to support, come 2016, if, we are all still around, then.

I do hope that Mitt & Anne get their well-deserved and peaceful deep obscurity in La Jolla (a San Diego suburb), California. I do not want to hear nor see them, again. It could be interesting for them, though, being almost direct neighbors with Vampire Author Anne Rice!

pusspuss wrote:

---

I don't know who won but I definitely know who lost. The legal citizens of the United States of America.

---

 In my definition of Illegal Citizens, I'd include those who encouraged, and participated in the widespread voting fraud, most notably folks in Marin County, California, and certain retirees in Florida, who may have at one time lived in Brooklyn and Manhattan. They spent the whole day, voting as much as Ten times, driving from polling place to polling place, or, in the case of the transplanted Floridians, filling out as many as Twenty absentee ballots from various New York State precincts/jurisdictions. If we had a John Mitchell-/Ed Meese-style AG, you could be sure that they then would suffer. They are just the same as those who cross The Border illegally, only worse, and they should pay more dearly, as they know better than some poor duped peasant, from, say, Oxacha or Sonora.

In the sage words of a wonderful political philosopher, Mark Levin, . . . "the libs will suffer greatly, along with the rest of us, as they realize just exactly what hit them." We can take a tiny bit of comfort in that, Puss.