mav

Yep, he was having one of cringe-worthy moments that I have talked about in the past. I believe he lost some voters (fence-sitters) this evening on his lack of being able to coherently explain his position. I will admit that if I didn't know what his foreign policy views were beforehand I would have been very confused this evening. Some points were made clear, but others came across as weak and/or rambling. Nonetheless, I will still be voting for him on Super Tuesday primarily for his economic/domestic views, which he does a much better job explaining. In regards to the Robert's initial question as to why Paul didn't attend Huckabee's, who AR correctly pointed out isn't a conservative, debate the other evening, I have no idea why he didn't attend. Personally, I don't really care, but there again, I was never one complaining that Paul wasn't getting adequate attention from the media.

Nope, don't care. I am done with the debates. If anybody doesn't know what the candidate's views are by now then they will never know.

This thread is rather old so I figured it needed updated. I just got through watching a really good movie, Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy, which is an adaptation of John le Carre's novel. Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy (2011) - IMDb This is was a really good movie. For those that may consider watching it, be warned. This is not the stereotypical James Bond spy movie. There is very little action in it.

For $25, I think you got a deal. I have seen sheaths like those cost a lot more than $25.

I work as a chemist for a medium sized chemical company. One of my responsibilities is developing products for a myriad of industries, or copying what someone else has done and try to take their business by lowering the price and/or providing better service. Additional responsibilities are MSDS authoring, overseeing quality control, dealing with all of the regulatory crap, a little selling, a little purchasing/sourcing, overseeing the plant manager, production staff, shipping staff, etc... to ensure that we doing things correctly and efficiently, and explaining to some of our salesmen that just because I have a degree in chemistry and have almost 15 years of experience I do not know everything. Ultimately, I'm a catch all. The owner seems to want me involved in every little aspect of what we do. It is highly stressful, and I would have quit long ago ( I did twice, but only for an hour) , but he pays me well so I endure all the crap I have to put up with.

This is the only gun forum that I go to. There are plenty of people here who know a lot more about guns and shooting than I do. If I ever have a question, I don't have to worry about getting a correct answer. Additionally, I have gotten use to all the disagreeable asses on this forum, I couldn't imagine joining another one having to deal with all new disagreeable asses. The only other forum I participate in is BladeForums.com. I use that forum primarily for buying knives.

This is the site I used when I first started tinkering with my Mark III. It has some nice detailed pictures. Real Guns - Trigger Tweaking Ruger's Mark III Target Pistol

I now have two really big CR one-piece knives. I picked this one up the other day. This is a Shadow I. Uploaded with ImageShack.us This knife is 11 years old, but looks to be unused. There is a small amount of finish that has been removed due to the sheath, but other than that it is in almost in new condition. It was a really good find. I now have to find a Shadow II to complete the Shadow series.

The bigger problem was that it was not only VA. There were several other states in which some of the candidates failed to get on the ballot. My question to the candidates would be, how do you expect us to take you seriously as a presidential candidate when you can't even get organized enough to make sure you are on the ballot in all of the states?

At least you didn't say you weren't going to vote for a guy whose name rhymes with .

I forgot to mention one thing. If you don't want to spend a lot of money on knives stay off of BladeForums.

Nice one. Congrats.

oops.

There's no help available, so enjoy it. If and when you getting into the higher end knives is when you start to see the money fly and fly fast. The other week I totaled up how much I had spent on knives the last couple of months and I was shocked that I had spent that much money. I'm not going to tell any of you how much it is was. But, it was a lot.

I've done it. It isn't all that bad.

Yes, it does loosen up. I wouldn't bother with the Speed Strip.

I agree 99% and that is what I am banking on. However, I can't say he won't get the nomination because nothing is certain in this life. I won't elaborate on that statement because I don't want people to think I am morbid or wishing ill of any candidate, which I most certainly do not.

To those who are trying to post their image and are having trouble, look for the link right after the "scr=". If you hit the insert image button on the post tab and enter only that link, the image will post. For example I will use StreetWK05's results, the link is http://gotoquiz.com/politics/grid/25x32.gif . When I enter the link in the insert image tab, voila.

Everybody knows that entitlements are the primary concern. However, to suggest that stopping all foreign aid, which I didn't suggest (yes, I know Paul does) will have "absolutely zero impact" just doesn't make any sense. Of course our foreign aid is very small, around 1 - 1.5% of yearly federal spending, but when you are broke every little bit matters. The problem I have here is that I have heard that the same excuse every election cycle since 2004, and nothing is ever done. Seriously, has "Drill here. Drill Now." becoming nothing more than a populist political bromide to be used by a Republican politician seeking (re)election only to have them say once they win, "Well, we could develop our own resources, but it would take 15-20 years."? I just can't accept that argument. I'm a 100% with Newt on this one. If the political will was present and it was made a national priority, the time frame could be shortened significantly. While I do not think the results would be devastating, it would certainly cause an irrational spike in oil prices. Nonetheless, I think this is more sabre rattling on the part of Iran. Iran is economically dependent on its export of oil through the Persian Gulf so a blockade by means of mining or sabotage (which is really the only way they could do it) really wouldn't be in their best interest. They would be crippling themselves even further, financially speaking. Iran would also have to worry about the punishing effects towards its number one trading partner, China. Iran knows that if they tried this, they would have the entire world down on them really quick. For argument's sake, we will assume Paul is the President and Iran did close the Strait of Hormuz. This is one area in which I am somewhat in disagreement with Paul. Paul has stated that he will not use the military against Iran if they close the Strait of Hormuz because it is not an attack on the US. Yes, and no. No, it is not a direct attack on the US, but it is defintely an indirect attack IMHO. Paul did say however that he would refer the matter to Congress. This is where Congress will have to declare war. If war is declared, Paul, being the strict constitutionalist he is, will go to war against Iran. We interfere a lot more with Israel than what a lot of people might think. When they went into Lebanon, we defended them at first only to tell them that they need to keep their response proportional and to pull out a week or two later. Our government often criticizes Israel for their disproportionate retaliation against the Palestinians (I hate to use that word) and Hamas. Our government criticized Israel for settlement building and told them they have to stop. Our government tries to force a two-state solution upon Israel whether they want it or not (this was one of Bush's pet peeves). Under BHO, our government tells Israel they have to go back to the 68 borders, which is nuts considering it would really dampen Israel's defense capabilities. As far as protecting our allies and such, I can respect that. A lot of people in this country feel the very same way. I somewhat feel that way, but I also think our founders had it right in believing that forming political alliances is too costly. This is a total mischaracterization of Paul's foreign policy views. Paul does suggest non-interventionism as a foreign policy that is in our best interest, not isolationism. Paul is not an appeaser, he is not sticking his head in the sand, and he is not snuggling up to Ahmadinejad. If you did say that Paul's rigid adherence to the constitution is dangerous because Paul does not take into consideration that the world has changed, that is a totally legitimate, although debatable, charge. Aside from all of that, the only reason I originally posted in this thread was the "gnashing of teeth" of Paul supporters comment. I know you don't like Paul, which is totally fine. He certainly doesn't appeal to a lot of people, and is a longshot to win the nomination. However, as I have said time and again in various threads, not all people who support Paul are Ronulans, Paulbots, or whatever they are called. There are some people on this forum who I consider to be very intelligent, and they have stated they will be voting (i.e. supporters) for Paul in the primary. I am one of those, minus the intelligence. If he wins, that is great. If not, I will be very (x10) reluctantly voting for the GOP nominee. Just to reiterate, Paul is a longshot to win the nomination, and even if people hate his foreign policy, they should be at least supporting Paul's domestic agenda (assuming they are conservative). His domestic agenda really is second to none. If Paul doesn't get the nomination, I hope he stays in the race up till the convention. I want the other candidates, especially the nominee, to realize how pissed the country is over the egregious federal spending and nanny-statism.

I can't believe this thread has lasted this long. One thing I am scratching my head over is the repeitition of arguments that were made 10 pages ago.

I keeping hearing this phrase, "We have to protect our national interests abroad." What exactly are these national interests? Is it oil? Even though I don't really like Newt, he was correct when saying that we have enough resources in this country that we could literally crash the oil market if we started developing those resources. Is it Israel? I think allowing Israel to make its own decisions without our interference would be much better for Israel. Is it nation building and establishing democracies? Well... we have meddled in middle eastern affairs for decades and given away billions of dollars proping up foreign governments. In the end, what have we got to show for it? Not much, they still aren't our allies. Recently Afghanistan said they would side with Pakistan if war broke out between them and the USA. Gee, thanks Karzai. Just look at the countries that receive the most foreign aid from us and look at their UN voting record. 14 out of the 15 countries that received greater than $300 million (which they can't or won't pay back) vote less than 40% of the time in our favor during UN votes. Israel is the only exception. Lets face it, we are broke, and our debt is increasing by a trillion a year. We cannot continue to be the world's police force, unless they want to pay us. Our only concerns at this time should be within our own borders. Our number one priority should be getting our own house in order. Just to point out, I am not suggesting isolationism. I am suggesting non-interventionism, and there is a difference.

I wouldn't let NYC gun laws deter you from ever visiting the city. Everybody should go at least once. It is a very neat place, although sort of dirty. I have been several times and I was never worried about my safety. Heck, the last time I went I took my older sister and mother and they went all around Harlem (walking and taking the train). My brother lives on Long Island and he tells me that you can own a handgun, but you have to get a permit for one (just to own it), which he tells me is a pain in the butt.

How did you fair on the foreign policy? I figured you would be a little more hawkish than me.

I resurrected the political compass thread the other day. I didn't care for the quiz all that much. Here is one I ran across that I thought was better and more reflected of your views. Political Spectrum Quiz - Your Political Label Here is how I did. My foreign policy views My cultural views I think it was pretty accurate. Enjoy.

Great video. Thanks for posting. It is amazing how close they get to each other.