And the Winner of Tonight’s Foreign Policy Debate is … Ron Paul

Because both the candidates are interventionist clowns. Although it is telling that Romney toned down the usual chest thumping rhetoric that he normally feeds to his “conservative” audiences. I think Romney and his advisers know that that crap doesn’t sell to undecided voters. This is every so slightly hopeful.

Post your thoughts on the debate below.

delicious | digg | reddit | facebook | technorati | stumbleupon | chatintamil

24 thoughts on “And the Winner of Tonight’s Foreign Policy Debate is … Ron Paul

  1. Azz Blaster

    I thought Mitt Romney looked sexy as hell, but I think he sounded weak at times and didn’t seem as committed to keeping us free and safe as conservative standard bearers Lindsey Graham and Rick Perry would have. Still, I thought Romney sounded tough on our enemies in comparison to pinkos like Barrack Obama and Ron Paul who is actually to the left of Obama on foreign affairs. I think in the end Mitt Romney has earned my vote due to his chiseled physique and movie star good looks. The man has the buttocks of prized young stallion and on occasion I have even mistaken him for delicious Hollywood hotties George Clooney and Pierce Brosnan. He just looks presidential and the way he carries himself resonates with voters not to mention the young sorority girls and the gay men who will vote for him just because the man is a hunk.

  2. Kyle Kopelovich

    I thought Mitt Romneyite won the debate although he appeared to back down from many of his conservative pro-war moral stances and even said some weak liberal sissy crap about peace. I hope when Mitt Romneyite gets elected he will quickly do a 360 and revert into a full blown war hawk and prosecute the war on terror to the best of his ability. Barack Obama got it completely backwards when he started babbling about “nation building at home” he even sounded like the racist theocratic protectionazi Patrick J. Buchanan at times. But what Obama doesn’t understand is that you can’t do any nation building here in America if the country is completely destroyed and non-functioning because of massive terrorist attacks happening on a daily basis due to the cessation of nation building overseas. Thus is the dichotomy: if we don’t nation build overseas then they will destroy our nation over here and nothing will get built and only will be destroyed. Overall I would say that most Americans will sleep peacefully knowing that we have two candidates who will continue drone bombing, sanctions, war and the NDAA in order to thwart the existentialist threat of Iranian-Venezuelan-North Korean-Russian terror axis.

  3. Azz Blaster

    Kyle Kopelovich,

    That was a little over the top, I disagree with you that Romney said something liberal and sissy about peace. First of all the word “sissy” is offensive to the gay community and considered by many to be a slur as vile as the “n word”. Secondly, I think we all want peace. Those of us on the right just understand that to have peace you need to unleash hell in the form of a preemptive tactical nuclear strike on the major cities of terrorist nations such as Iran. Then you send in the ground forces who take out the rest of the insurgents and teach the people about freedom and democracy. Using our troops in this manner is called nation building and will lead to a world full of conservative democracies which will give us the end result of world peace.

  4. Kyle Kopelovich

    Also, I was disappointed that neither of the two pro-war pro-american candidates are willing to wage total 100% terrorist ass kicking foreign policy. What do I mean by that? I’m talking showing the terrorists that we are deadly serious about preserving our freedoms. I’m talking about the use of pre-emptive nuclear tactical strikes against designated terrorist hot spots and terrorist weapons caches overseas. Nuclear weapons are an ancient and old technology nowadays and we need to use them while they can still have a relevant battlefield effect. If you read history like i do and are an historical scholar and expert in foreign policy like I am then you are familiar with how the medieval arquebus squadrons supplanted the archers and crossbows of the age with their new technological innovations. Back then little sissy ass antiwar liberals complained about the use of firearms in combat but now we take them for granted in society and in war and no serious scholar would advocate the banning of guns from combat. So what is with all of these people and weaklings saying we shouldn’t use an old technology like nuclear bombs? This is retarded and we use new technologies in war all of the time and nuclear bombs are already antiquated being 70 year old world war two technology. It’s time to get serious about prosecuting the war on terror and upgrade to Def Con 1 “Cocked pistol” and start detonating these old weapons on the terrorist hotspots around the world before they become obsolete and we lose tons of invested money.

  5. Azz Blaster


    I agree with most of what you just said, but your usage of the word “sissy” is hurtful. It is akin to calling someone a “queer” or “fag” and has no place in conservative circles.

  6. Kyle Kopelovich


    I am sorry about my inappropriate use of homophobic language and I didn’t mean to insult our brave homosexual soldiers who are busy fighting the war on terror to spread gay rights. I am a strong strong conservative supporter of gay rights and advocated ending the don’t ask don’t tell homophobic policy of liberal democrat Bill Clinton. I am an even bigger supporter of gay rights then Mitt Romney. Once again i am very sorry for any misunderstanding or slur I may have used.

  7. Kyle Kopelovich

    I know that homophobia has no place in conservative circles and pandering to hate has to stop and we need to correct the language. I have been leading the crusade for LGBT rights in America and overseas since I became politically active on 9/11/2000. I actually worked hand in hand with the state department and Lutheran Charities to bring in over 1,000 gay iraqi immigrants to America back in 2003 to protect them from the homophobic Chaldean Christians who attempted to engage in pogroms against Iraq’s large gay muslim community. I work hard to stop hate and am working to defeat gender segregated marriages all over the country and spread a pro-war message that any republican can support. GAY RIGHTS! PRO WAR! ANTI-TERRORIST! ANTI-RACIST! MITT ROMNEY 2012!

  8. Kyle Kopelovich


    I spent a good chunk of last year working ceaselessly to defeat Ron Paul in the primaries and make sure his anti-war lunatic leftism 9/11/2000 denial-ism had no place at our Republican Convention or in our party. I suffered a mental and physical breakdown and now after much rest and rejuvenation, just in time for the election, am back to defend, preserve, and protect America with moral conservatism.

  9. Azz Blaster

    I know Kyle, some of these liberal Republicans and their ant-gay views are truly disheartening. I sometimes wonder if those so called conservatives who are against things such as teaching our school children that homosexuality is normal and something that ought to be celebrated are really just deep cover liberals trying to silence our movement.

  10. Kyle Kopelovich

    Yes Azz Blazter,

    That is why I send my illegitimate children to a 100 percent diverse school that treats everyone equally and actually fosters a culture of acceptance towards everyone. Just last week we had a letter sent out informing us that a few so called “christians” were praying outside a flagpole before school in an attempt to harass non-christian gay students. They were promptly suspended and no acts of hatred are tolerated at my children’s new school. Now if they were praying for more peace thru more war or praying for our troops or praying for Israel…I wouldn’t have minded it. But the thing is, Christians should never pray in public unless it is lead by a non-christian and not to Jesus and in a spirit of ecumenism!

  11. Azz Blaster


    I know. One thing my partner and I will look for when we look for a high school to send our children to is the composition of their high school football team. If the team has a starting white runningback or cornerback we will instantly know the school has intolerant racist faculty who cater to white privilege because in reality white people are not physically capable of playing those positions at a level higher than Pop Warner. Just look at the best conference in all of college football the SEC or the NFL for proof. So if they do play whites at those positions the school is either racist or it has a winless football team, both things my partner and I don’t want our children to endure.

  12. Kyle Kopelovich

    Azz Bluster,

    I hope you don’t send your children to a suburban mostly white high school. In addition to having racist faculty members, a racist student body, and probably whites starting on the football team in any capacity besides offensive lineman, punter, kicker, and male cheerleader, the suburban white kids are all on drugs and most of these schools are drug infested hellholes reminiscent of Watts during the crack epidemic. I have never meet a white suburban high school student who wasn’t addicted and they have the missing and corroded teeth and track marks on the arms to prove it. That is why I moved back into the inner city with my family, to escape the white supremacist, anti-gay, drug addict culture that flourishes with all the ancillary violence, shooting, and death that ravages the youth in those areas. Also in the 100 percent diverse school I send my children too, it was very easy to get them into a gifted and talented program.

  13. Azz Blaster


    That is true. I have a friend who used to live in a quiet suburban mostly white neighborhood who told me the true story about the suburbs. They are actually full of powerful drug dealers making runs up and down every cul-de-sac getting all of the kids high on heroin and PCP and are usually violent hoodlums who terrorize old people for fun. He teaches school in the inner city though and has seen the potential that those diverse vibrant schools have. That is why he moved his family back into the inner city in order to keep his children safe and drug free.

  14. Kyle Kopelovich

    WOW! I’m glad your friend moved out of that hellish lifestyle and into the real America. In major cities they have anti-drug outreach programs and the drug rate is very low because the rich white supremacists in the suburbs like to pay more for it then the inner cities.

  15. Nate Weinstein


    Good to see you my old friend. I too have devoted much of my time over the last year to crushing the racist Marxist Ron Paul “Revolution”. I actually headed my local Republican committee to ensure these anti-American halfwits didn’t take over our state caucus. Even though they outnumbered us we fought them with all our might and in the end we succeeded in railroading those Paultarded nuts right out of the Republican party. I think it is to be considered a great success and we built up a lot of momentum going into the RNC. Now we have the presidential Mitt Romney as nominee and he is someone who can actually win a general election unlike that old dinosaur Ron Paul. Imitially I supported Santorum and had some doubts about Romney at first, but I have seen the light and now will back him 100% even though he isn’t as tough on terror or as pro-war as I would like. I think we really missed the boat on Guiliani in 2008 but what can you do? Romney 2012 you Ron Paul surrenderist poopfaced bitches!

  16. Nate Weinstein

    Red Phillips,

    You state:

    “And the Winner of Tonight’s Foreign Policy Debate is … Ron Paul”


    You must be off your medication. Seriously, Ron Paul didn’t even participate in this debate so how on earth could he have won it? Maybe you just think he has super powers and was participating in the debate as an invisible mute? Are you Ron Paul supporters really that delusional? Or high? Or maybe it is just all those years of illegal drug use that has completely fried your brains?

  17. RedPhillips Post author

    Well, at least no one can accuse my debate comment thread of languishing with no comments.

  18. SoCalPatriot

    Romney can “tone down the usual chest thumping rhetoric” all he wants,but he cannot change what he truly is:a Preppy Chickenhawk!

  19. Matt Weber

    I was surprised at the reaction. Obama didn’t have a bad night or anything, but it didn’t seem like a blowout to me. Romney was much more moderate than I was expecting. Not only that, but they kept agreeing on everything so what exactly was the debate for? I think a debate just for foreign policy is a mistake anyway, as it is just too boring to the majority of Americans. Even the candidates got bored with it and moved on to the real issues like the economy.

    Obama’s zinger about horses and muskets or whatever it was made people laugh, but he seems to be guilty himself of not knowing anything about the navy. “We have these things called aircraft carriers…” yeah, and they are what generate most of the demand for surface ships. If Obama wants to say that surface ships are obsolete in tutto then he should just do it. I can’t imagine it will help him in Virginia.

  20. Weaver


    Paul doesn’t want to mass murder Muslims, so you figure he must hate Jews and Arabs? Kill Muslims and Christian Serbians or you’re with Hitler! Yahhhh. Make sense :F

    I hear he hates Eskimos too, because he won’t take a stand against Global Warming. What’d they do to him?!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>