Most entertaining television I've seen in awhile. It's still on. Finally got to hear abit from Ron Paul. I can see why he's somewhat popular here. What a moron. I can also see why democrats boycotted holding their debate on Fox News. I don't think there is anyway they could have handled so direct and challenging questions.

Trying to catch some fish with that bait?

Fixed.

It's a sarcastic, humorous jab. I actually don't think too many people support him relatively speaking. But he is a flake, that's for sure.

Yea, Dems boycotting Fox wouldn't have ANYTHING to do with how partisan Fox is.

Generally I like Romney. I like Rudy too. I'm disappointed that Thompson wasn't there. Huckabee went into a great mini-speach about honor where he mentioned McCain and ***** slapped Paul and ate his lunch. I think that was my favorite part of the debate. I haven't been a big McCain fan before. He's done a lot to irritate me. Said a lot anyway. I could definitely see myself voting for him now.

Exactly. Funny how they all preach about how we need to engage all of our enemies in dialogue but they won't appear on the one major news network that doesn't have a partisan, pro-democrat agenda.

Oh, I see. So, all the other networks are pro-Dems? That would explain Republican Lou Dobbs on CNN and the conservative stance he's espoused on immigration daily for the past 3+ years. That would also explain Republicans Tucker Carlson & Joe Scarborough, and conservative Chris Matthews on MSNBC. Yea, because nothing screams pro-Dem agenda like a bunch of right-wing blowhards with bowties and lopsided mouth spittle seething about liberals.

They have their token Republicans but you lose some credibility (to me) in this area when you call Matthews a conservative. Please tell me you are mistaking him with somebody else.

Commentators are one thing. You have to look at the actual news reporting. Politically, Fox News has the absolute best and fair coverage. When it comes to Anna Nicole, Paris Hilton, LA freeway chases, "Fox News Alerts" I think Fox is terrible. I don't watch enough of the other networks to say that it's worse than them but I believe they are.

Also, I learned that Hackabee supports the Fair Tax Act in which I am a single issue voter. I would vote for a Democrat or Republican over the other based soley on that issue.

I think Ron Paul is the only candidate with a little sense on the Republican side of the pre-primaries, ideologically speaking. However, he is still a moron. He's just a more appealing one than the others.

Ok, well you let me know when CNN or any other network gets a personal invite to the White House to discuss what they're reporting and how they report it with the President's staff and then we'll talk about what networks have an actual partisan agenda. If you think Fox news is the best at reporting news then you're not really paying attention, are you?

If I need a laugh I'll turn on Fox news to listen to Neil Cavuto talk about how the Abu Ghraib incident was good for investors, but if I want news that doesn't actually make me feel like I've spent the day slaughtering sheep in an abattoir then I'll watch ANY other news station.

Which acted the most fundie?

Whoever's posting as Diogenes should fess up and use their real name... a lot of us read Ender's game -_-

I said the best at reporting political news. Much of their other reporting is just as bad if not worse than the rest.



Everything is on YouTube so if you can cite the video of Abu Ghraib being good for investors I would be interested in seeing it in context. Economic shows aren't a good reference for bias though since virtually all of them support conservative values since they are good for the economy. It's much more of a money issue over partisanship.

I think that liberal types would say that.

Another thing I noticed is the greater number of qualified Republicans over qualified Democrats. Giulianni says it when he points out the top three Democrats have never ran a city, state, or business. That type of experience is vital. That's why I generally don't like candidates that haven't done any of those things. McCain, Giulianni, Romney, Huckabee (off the top of my head) all meet that requirement. Only Democrat I can think of is Richardson.

Democrats boycotted fox because it was partisan. Your logic fails.

Dems were simply pandering to thier moveon.org type base. Not that any of that stuff is partisan.

I like Romney (a flip-flopper from Massachusetts) and Giulianni too. Mostly because I don't think they could win the general election.

I know what you mean. I have similar feelings toward certain democrats. Specifically, all of them. Seriously, I don't think any of the democrats are all that electable. I'm really not saying that because I vote republican. I think there are no great choices for the democrats this time. Which is sad. Hillary will probably be the nominee. Maybe she can pull it off.

Romney I think is qualified but there is that elitist New England air about him. Giuliani will get torn up by the media and he sounds like a broken record pointing out all of his accomplishments. I could still vote for either one. McCain and Huckabee earned quite a few points with me. I'm interested to hear Thompson. He's going to be on Leno to announce tonight. Wish he was at the demate.

I don't know if Obama or Hillary can beat any of those guys. Republicans will probably continue to lose ground in congress at the next election so it will be very interesting to see if the democrats can sweep the legislative and executive branch.

Nope, that's Romney.

I'm sorry I missed the debate. I always enjoy watching Rudy Giuliani try to out-jackass himself.

Anyway, McCain, Huckabee and Paul are the only decent people on the Republican side, and Huckabee's unfortunately got that whole "I don't believe in science" thing going on.

I disagree, depending on what you mean by "decent people". Romney is probably one of the best people you'll meet, especially in politics. I actually knew his sons, who were both raised with a lot of money (a lot) and yet are great, hardworking, caring people.

No.

Ron Paul is the MAN. It's awesome because there's posters popping up all over the freakin' place where I live for Ron Paul and I haven't seen any for the others.

By the way, that makes no sense whatsoever. Paul is far right of all the other Republican candidates. Truth be told, he probably shouldn't even be running on the Republican ticket.

a psycho with bad grammar to boot!

Republican Debate:

"I think women have too many rights these days. Like, childbirth, that's totally dangerous. We should give it to men."
"You're gay."
"WHAT'S THAT? YOU'RE THE GIRLIEST GIRL OF ALL GIRLVERSE? HAVE YOU CHECKED YOUR VAGINA LATELY?"
"MY DAD IS BIGGER THAN YOURS!"
"YOU WILL BURN IN HELL FOR ALL YOUR HAPPY HOLIDAYS, ASSFACE."
"I GUESS THAT'S WHAT THEY TEACH YOU TO SAY AT THE COMMUNIST PARTY CONVENTION"
(multiply that with 3000)

Democratic Debate:
"America is a democracy."
"It is?"
"Well, no."
"Are we hypocrites?"
"Yes."
"Will we ever admit it?"
"Nope."
"...Ever?"
"Never ever."
(multiply that by 5000)

Hm.

It makes sense in that he is extremely critical of the current Republican Party and a liberal that just happens to hear much of his rhetoric might just latch on to that. Plus, he basically wants to shut down federal law enforcement and intelligence agencies which certainly isn't right wing.

Um, yes it is.

By what definition? Actually, I don't really care. My point is just that a liberal that hears his rhetoric would probably say he's the best Republican candidate even though they would obviously never vote for him.

And again, that makes no sense whatsoever because Rob Paul is much further removed from liberalism than the other Republican candidates are.

Not really.

It's very simple. If you come out and rip republicans it doesn't matter what your views are. Liberals like him because he rips Bush and the current crop of republicans. That still doesn't mean they would ever vote for him or support him. However, should we still disagree that's fine. I'll accept you not rebutting me on this as an agreement to disagree which is what my future silence on this sub-topic will be.

I disagree with regards to political coverage. I think they are more diverse than their competition. But that's okay. These things are all matter of personal preference anyway. The whole reason I brought it up to begin with was the fact that Republicans were asked very challenging questions tonight.

To be honest I don't even watch these channels as I'm not American, so I can't really make that judgement except by what I've read on the internet.

I think as Fox News continues to grow and splits into more channels that will alleviate some of this. The "problem" that Fox News saw a market for conservative views so many of the commentator shows are headlined by conservatives. Of course they always have liberals on as guests so I don't see that as a problem. But the stigma is that their news is all conservative. To me their political coverage is great but I hate some of their other coverage. It will be nice if they ever split their routine news coverage off like CNN Headline News. But, like I said, it's all personal preferance. It used to be that I couldn't tolerate the other networks because they were so blatantly left wing biased. I think that has changed over the last few years because they have changed to better compete with Fox. I don't really care what news network people like. It's just like it used to be with the evening news. You'ge going to watch which ever one you prefer.

I really like Glen Beck so I am forced to watch Fox news for that small segment.

I'm voting Ron Paul unless it boils down to Clinton as pres. for the dems, then I'll vote for whoever has the best chance against her.

(G.B.A...)

Um, it took a debate where I could hear what he had to say in his own words for me hear "a bit" from him. And I don't know which final sentence you're referring to nor do I feel like trudging through your poorly written post. And I don't really care. Please just go start another pro-Ron Paul thread.