www.byzcath.org Forums General Discussions Town Hall According to FOX viewer poll Romney Won Another Debate

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,272493,00.html

GO MITT!

Yes, but he is being bashed for his Mormonism and for his past shaky stance on morality.

I think he explains "his past shaky stance on morality" rather well.

As for His Mormonism, He should not even have to defend Himself.

As far as I am concerned a Mormon is no more heretical than a Evangelical.

Same level for me.

Borislav,

Even though Mormons are Tritheists and deny that God created the universe out of nothing? I also don't care that much about his religion, just his politics. I'm still supporting Ron Paul.

Joe

I do not share Mitt Romney's religious beliefs, but neither do I share the religious beliefs and practices of the Evangelical Christians, or many other denominations of Protestants.

Running around a Church like a chicken with my head cut off and rolling around on the ground in seizures in a pseudo enlightened state, denying the validity of Orthodox teachings of the Saints, denying deification, I could go on and on.

Further I don't hear anybody questioning the so called Unitarian Church. Are they in any way less heretical than the Mormons?

I think Evangelicals, Mormons and Unitarians all have aspects of faith that Orthodox and Catholic Christians can qualify as heretical.

And while that is true, in no way does it disqualify Mitt Romney or any other member of the above mentioned jurisdictions from making a great president.

Ron Paul does not have the slightest idea of the challenges of Global Jihad.

He is preaching the doctrine of none-involvement. IE sitting back and watching people get slaughtered. Much the same position the US took in the beginning of WWII when the Nazi's committed Genocide against the Jews, Gypsies and many other minorities.

Ron Paul's despicable claim last night that 9/11 was our own fault convinced me of His complete and utter incompetence

But Ron Paul won the last one, and came in second, within 4 points of Mitt Romney. And this is from a neocon biased audience (I am conservative, but not a neoconservative Republican like many of the Fox News guys are) this time. I think Mitt is definitely better than Giulliani, but I agree that I would be very weary of ever voting for a cult member, especially a cult that is so obviously a sham started by a notorious con artist. The decision to be a Mormon speaks volumes of Mitt's "complete and utter incompetence", to coin a phrase.

Here are the results from MSNBC [msnbc.msn.com], which I generally do not watch except at election time, because year after year they consistently have the best and probably least biased coverage IMO.

Who stood out from the pack?
1. Ron Paul
2. Rudy Giuliani
3. Mitt Romney

Who showed the most leadership qualities?
1. Ron Paul
2. Rudy Giuliani
3. Mitt Romney

Who was the most convincing candidate?
1. Ron Paul
2. Mitt Romney
3. Rudy Giuliani

Who had the most rehearsed answers?
1. Rudy Giuliani
2. John McCain
3. Mitt Romney

Who avoided the questions?
1. Rudy Giuliani
2. John McCain
3. Mitt Romney

Who had the best one-liner?
1. Ron Paul
2. Rudy Giuliani
3. Mike Huckabee

DISCLAIMER: The numbers may change as the day goes on because unlike the Fox News 3.5 hour poll, this one is still going on today.

Yes, Mitt is completely and utterly incompetent when it comes to meters of God, Faith, Religion. Althought He does stand for 100% Orthodox values. Anti abortion, anti gay marriage, pro life, anti euthanasia etc...

Ron Paul is completely and utterly incompetent when it comes to running the country in a time of war.

Now, which one would you rather have as your president as we face Global Jihad?

And as of the MSNBC poll.

Yes the MSNBC's Left Wing audience wants Ron Paul to win the Republican nomination so that He can get crushed by Hillary Clinton. And yes the MSNBC crowd thinks that 9/11 was our fault, just like Ron Paul. Thankfully they won't be deciding the Republican nomination. Like it or not it is going to be the FOX crowd.

Ron Paul best leadership qualities?
The man got thrashed like a Dog by Rudy last night.
He looked nervous and fidgety.

Ron Paul had the best one liner?
Is that the one about it being our fault that 9/11 happend?
Or maybe it was when He suggested America practice none involvement? Sean Hannity asked Him if He would walk by while some one was being raped in front of His face. I believe that He would.

Year after year MSNBC has been getting increasingly pro-left and socialist.

Just watch the MSNBC coverage of the first GOP debate. Compared to FOX's coverage MSNBC did a horrible job.

They would not let candidates speak. The questions they asked were dreadful. All around Fox is better.

And yes I am a Neo-Con.

Mitt is a known flip-flopper in MA on almost all the issues you named. I lived in New England, and although he seemed solid for a Northeastern Politician, he just cannot seem to stick to his principals when the heat is turned up.


MSNBC hosted the first debate, Fox hosted the second, I agree that Fox did a better job at asking questions, but I think that overall MSNBC does a better job at covering the election, especially on election night. I was shocked that I preferred it myself 7 years ago and it stayed that strong every year afterwards. And I HATE MS! Also I think their poll is better.




Well that explains things, except I thought the neocons were supposed to be for pro-abortion, pro-civil unions, pro-gun control, pro-big government Giuliani? All the neocon talking heads like Sean Hannity on so-called "conservative" radio seem to be!

And as a matter of disclosure, I am a Conservative (Maybe a paleoconservative at that) and a Strict Constitutionalist and for smaller government unlike POTUS George Bush who has the biggest government ever in the history of the USA. That is why I am no longer a Republican Party member. I am not a war hawk and I do not believe we are in a "Global Jihad". However, we have created the Axis of Evil where one never existed before. We united those we vilified and if there comes to be a "Global Jihad" we are indeed partly to blame for it.

Rudy Giuliani v. Ron Paul, and Reality[/b] [news.yahoo.com]
Wed May 16, 12:29 AM ET

The Nation � [b]Rudy Giuliani made clear in Tuesday night's Republican presidential debate that he is not ready to let the facts get in the way of his approach to foreign policy.

The most heated moment in the debate, which aired live on the conservative Fox News network, came when the former New York mayor and current GOP front-runner angrily refused to entertain a serious discussion about the role that actions taken by the United States prior to the September 11, 2OO1, terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon may have played in inspiring or encouraging those attacks.

Giuliani led the crowd of contenders on attacking Texas Congressman Ron Paul after the anti-war Republican restated facts that are outlined in the report of the The National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States.

Asked about his opposition to the invasion and occupation of Iraq, Paul repeated his oft-expressed concern that instead of making the U.S. safer, U.S. interventions in the Middle East over the years have stirred up anti-American sentiment. As he did in the previous Republican debate, the Texan suggested that former President Ronald Reagan's decisions to withdraw U.S. troops from the region in the 198Os were wiser than the moves by successive Republican and Democratic presidents to increase U.S. military involvement there.

Speaking of extremists who target the U.S, Paul said, "They attack us because we've been over there. We've been bombing Iraq for 10 years. We've been in the Middle East [for years]. I think (Ronald) Reagan was right. We don't understand the irrationality of Middle Eastern politics. Right now, we're building an embassy in Iraq that is bigger than the Vatican. We're building 14 permanent bases. What would we say here if China was doing this in our country or in the Gulf of Mexico? We would be objecting."

Paul argued that Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda are "delighted that we're over there" in Iraq, pointing out that, "They have already... killed 3,400 of our men and I don't think it was necessary."

Giuliani, going for an applause line with a conservative South Carolina audience that was not exactly sympathetic with his support for abortion rights and other socially liberal positions, leapt on Paul's remarks. Interrupting the flow of the debate, Giuliani declared, "That's really an extraordinary statement. That's really an extraordinary statement, as someone who lived through the attack of Sept. 11, that we invited the attack because we were attacking Iraq. I don't think I have ever heard that before and I have heard some pretty absurd explanations for Sept. 11. I would ask the congressman withdraw that comment and tell us that he didn't really mean that."

The mayor, who is making his response to the 9-11 attacks on New York a central feature of his presidential campaign, was joined in the assault on Paul by many of the other candidates.

But congressman did not back down, and for good reason. Unlike Giuliani, the Texan has actually read the record.

The 9-11 Commission report detailed how bin Laden had, in 1996, issued "his self-styled fatwa calling on Muslims to drive American soldiers out of Saudi Arabia" and identified that declaration and another in 1998 as part of "a long series" of statements objecting to U.S. military interventions in his native Saudi Arabia in particular and the Middle East in general. Statements from bin Laden and those associated with him prior to 9-11 consistently expressed anger with the U.S. military presence on the Arabian Peninsula, U.S. aggression against the Iraqi people and U.S. support of Israel.

The 9-11 Commission based its assessments on testimony from experts on terrorism and the Middle East. Asked about the motivations of the terrorists, FBI Special Agent James Fitzgerald told the commission: "I believe they feel a sense of outrage against the United States. They identify with the Palestinian problem, they identify with people who oppose repressive regimes, and I believe they tend to focus their anger on the United States."

Fitzgerald's was not a lonely voice in the intelligence community.

Michael Scheuer, the former Central Intelligence Agency specialist on bin Laden and al-Qaeda, has objected to simplistic suggestions by President Bush and others that terrorists are motivated by an ill-defined irrational hatred of the United States. "The politicians really are at great fault for not squaring with the American people," Scheuer said in a CNN interview. "We're being attacked for what we do in the Islamic world, not for who we are or what we believe in or how we live. And there's a huge burden of guilt to be laid at Mr. Bush, Mr. Clinton, both parties for simply lying to the American people."

It is true that reasonable people might disagree about the legitimacy of Muslim and Arab objections to U.S. military policies. And, certainly, the vast majority of Americans would object to any attempt to justify the attacks on this country, its citizen and its soldiers.

But that was not what Paul was doing. He was trying to make a case, based on what we know from past experience, for bringing U.S. troops home from Iraq.

Giuliani's reaction to Paul's comments, especially the suggestion that they should be withdrawn, marked him as the candidate peddling "absurd explanations."

Viewers of the debate appear to have agreed. An unscientific survey by Fox News asked its viewers to send text messages identifying the winner. Tens of thousands were received and Paul ranked along with Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney as having made the best showing.

No wonder then that, when asked about his dust-up with Giuliani, Paul said he'd be "delighted" to debate the front-runner on foreign policy.

Father Deacon, if you do not think we are facing a Global Jihad, you are sadly mistaken.

Was the first bombing of the World Trade Center our fault?

Was the bombing of the USS COLE our fault?

Was the recent bombing of the American embassy our fault?

Was September 11th our fault?

Maybe it is our fault that that several militants planned to kill our soldiers on US soil just a few weeks ago?
Is constant threat of suicide bombings the Israelites fault?

Is it their fault that Iran wants to wipe Israel and every one in it of the map?

Are the bombings in Madrid and London our fault?

Are the brutal murders of Christians by Islamists our fault to?

Maybe it was the Jews fault when Mohamed sacked Yathrab, beheaded every single man older than 15 years of age and proceeded to rape the women in front of the corpses?

If America doesn't realize that we are in a war against Global Jihad we just may be next.

Ron Paul is WRONG, and the left wing media that supports Him is as dispicable as He is.

Now coming back to Mitt.

I to live in MA Father. Boston, MA to be exact and Mitt ran a very conservative government in a very Liberal state. On top of that He would NOT take a Salary.

I really don't understand what is there NOT TO LOVE about Romney.

The fact that He is a Mormon?

Also, a FLIP FLOP is when one changes a position - FLIP and than goes back to the original position he held - FLOP.

I see the FLIP, but there is no FLOP.

I would suggest watching the MSNBC a little less and not reading the disgusting socialist publication that calls itself the Boston Globe.

Quote:
"Father Deacon, if you do not think we are facing a Global Jihad, you are sadly mistaken.

Was the first bombing of the World Trade Center our fault?

Was the bombing of the USS COLE our fault?

Was the recent bombing of the American embassy our fault?

Was September 11th our fault?

Maybe it is our fault that that several militants planned to kill our soldiers on US soil just a few weeks ago?
Is constant threat of suicide bombings the Israelites fault?

Is it their fault that Iran wants to wipe Israel and every one in it of the map?

Are the bombings in Madrid and London our fault?

Are the brutal murders of Christians by Islamists our fault to?"


I might just be really stupid but even after all this time I still can't buy into this "Global Jihad" business.

Just as stupid might be the thought a number of wealthy Saudi's, among others, were behind the above mentioned attacks.

Does anybody remember the Irish Republican Army and their tactics? Same type of deal I think, albeit on a lesser scale.

Puzzled without answers and perhaps plain stupid,
Bill

The difference between the IRA and Islamic Jihadists is the fact that the first don't have a "perfect book dictated by God" that tells them to Kill, main, torture and rape the unbelievers.

Actually, they do.

All except the raping part.

Read Exodus, Deuteronomy, Joshua, and Judges.

Yes Yes....

But fortunately that argument is rather flawed.

Please do not compare the Lord's order to attack a certain people in a certain period of time(arguably in self defense) to an open ended command and permission to kill all 'infidels'.

The key to the Quran is the following quote

Every Surah in the Quran begins with , accept for one. Interestingly enough it is the LAST CHRONOLOGICALLY HANDED DOWN SURAH. It is the Surah OF THE SOWRD and it does not start with Allah the Merciful because that Surah HAS NO MERCY.

Figure it out.