Santorum: "I'm hopeful America is killing Iranian scientists" - General

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n8uNcIEvGdo&feature=context&context=G2262804YTAAAAAAAHAA[/media] more words from santorum's endless fountain of wisdom

I've never seen anyone so keen to start a war before. Seriously this guys a dickbag.

follow rick santorum on twitter @cuntofficial

I just heard the sound of hundreds of spin doctors, publicists and intelligence agents smacking their head against a wall in union.

Holy shit this is cartoonish supervillainy right here "We did it to an American citizen, we can certainly do it to Iran's scientists"

What the fuck is "He just admitted that the U.S. has a program to covertly kill Iranian scientists." That's not what he said at all you fuckwit. He's not even in any position of higher power where he'd be privy to that information. He's "hopeful" that the US is doing it. In all likelyhood it's Israeli Special Forces, or the Mossad or whatever. But he never "admitted" and even if he went on TV and said "The U.S. killed them." he has no proof and no one with a reasonable mind would believe him because he's not someone who would even have access to such information.

Wow, uuuh. Ron Paul 2012.

the thought that people will vote for this guy in america disturbs me

I rather Obama get reelected and I'm a Republican.

[QUOTE=Laferio;34197112]Wow, uuuh. Ron Paul 2012.[/QUOTE] It's funny. Because four good points don't outweight hundreds of bad ones.

Santorum is psychotic.

[QUOTE=Nikota;34197624]It's funny. Because four good points don't outweight hundreds of bad ones.[/QUOTE] At least Ron Paul actually believes in what he is doing and saying. Rather have someone that does what they say.

[QUOTE=Nikota;34197624]It's funny. Because four good points don't outweight hundreds of bad ones.[/QUOTE] I'd rather put up with his bad ideas than go to war and kill innocent people for these disgusting assholes.

[QUOTE=MR-X;34200187]At least Ron Paul actually believes in what he is doing and saying. Rather have someone that does what they say.[/QUOTE] "At least Ron Paul believes in a bunch of bad crap and a few good things" I could strongly believe that black people are bad people, and by your logic I'd be a good candidate. Sure it's nice to have someone that actually backs up what they believe, but bad beliefs aren't justified by it. [QUOTE=teslacoil;34200252]I'd rather put up with his bad ideas than go to war and kill innocent people for these disgusting assholes.[/QUOTE] Lesser of two evils are still evil. Infringing upon personal liberties with his anti-abortion sentiments, and potentially crushing state governments by putting the entire weight of education on them is just as bad, in my view, as starting another war. Both will drain the nation's resources.

[QUOTE=Mr. Bleak;34200278] Lesser of two evils are still evil. [/QUOTE] So, what are we supposed to do, not vote for anyone? [QUOTE=Mr. Bleak]Infringing upon personal liberties with his anti-abortion sentiments, and potentially crushing state governments by putting the entire weight of education on them is just as bad, in my view, as starting another war. Both will drain the nation's resources.[/QUOTE] Are you saying that the way the federal government handles these now is acceptable? If you'd rather go to war than protest for your rights, then go right on ahead and vote for someone else.

The blatant idiocy and infringement of human rights. It hurts the brain.

[QUOTE=teslacoil;34200417]So, what are we supposed to do, not vote for anyone? Are you saying that the way the federal government handles these now is acceptable? If you'd rather go to war than protest for your rights, then go right on ahead and vote for someone else.[/QUOTE] It's a tricky situation, sure. I'm not saying don't vote for anyone, I'm just saying I wish we had a candidate that'd fit both sides of the bill. The issue with Paul supporting choice is he supports it too much in the way of state rights. He does not view education, abortion, or homosexuality as things that need to be governed by the federal government, but giving them to the states promotes a bias. It almost ensure that no one in the south will have rights to common civil liberties. Coming from someone that promotes the supposed "rights of the people", this is pretty backwards. And no. I'm aware the federal government is highly inefficient, especially with regards to education. But lopping off the head and leaving the body to die won't help. People seem to assume giving responsibility to the states will lessen the issue of "money going to Washington never to be seen spent on education", but it will also potentially cause a collapse of the education system in the states. I've seen it first hand. There were huge budget cuts to state funded education in my state. My highschool was cut 30% on an already paltry budget. Needless to say, we ran out of supplies halfway through the year. Heck, we didn't even have paper to write on for a while. I'm just saying if someone's going to promote liberties, don't use "state rights" as a fix-all, and actually focus on where the federal government has gone wrong. Not to mention his view that education isn't a right. Knowledge is the most basic supply any individual needs to posses. Without it, governance will become chaotic, lines between poor and rich will expand, and the US will fall even further behind.

[QUOTE=Mr. Bleak;34200775]It's a tricky situation, sure. I'm not saying don't vote for anyone, I'm just saying I wish we had a candidate that'd fit both sides of the bill. The issue with Paul supporting choice is he supports it too much in the way of state rights. He does not view education, abortion, or homosexuality as things that need to be governed by the federal government, but giving them to the states promotes a bias. It almost ensure that no one in the south will have rights to common civil liberties. Coming from someone that promotes the supposed "rights of the people", this is pretty backwards. And no. I'm aware the federal government is highly inefficient, especially with regards to education. But lopping off the head and leaving the body to die won't help. People seem to assume giving responsibility to the states will lessen the issue of "money going to Washington never to be seen spent on education", but it will also potentially cause a collapse of the education system in the states. I've seen it first hand. There were huge budget cuts to state funded education in my state. My highschool was cut 30% on an already paltry budget. Needless to say, we ran out of supplies halfway through the year. Heck, we didn't even have paper to write on for a while. I'm just saying if someone's going to promote liberties, don't use "state rights" as a fix-all, and actually focus on where the federal government has gone wrong. Not to mention his view that education isn't a right. Knowledge is the most basic supply any individual needs to posses. Without it, governance will become chaotic, lines between poor and rich will expand, and the US will fall even further behind.[/QUOTE] The thing is though, our government will always be changing end evolving, if we lay education completely on the states, the states will then do what they can and if what they're doing isn't getting satisfactory result, the system can be changed for the states to receive help from other states or from the federal government depending on the situation. States can and have been helped by the federal government, but letting the federal government control it isn't the best idea. With the Constitution come Amendments.

lol dropping a nuclear bomb on Israel Iran might not like Israel but they're not going to nuke all those Palestinian's just because they got in the way.

[QUOTE=teslacoil;34200979]The thing is though, our government will always be changing end evolving, if we lay education completely on the states, the states will then do what they can and if what they're doing isn't getting satisfactory result, the system can be changed for the states to receive help from other states or from the federal government depending on the situation. States can and have been helped by the federal government, but letting the federal government control it isn't the best idea. With the Constitution come Amendments.[/QUOTE] As a strict constitutionalist, he wants to stick to the constitution as it was written though. And if he gets rid of the Board of Education, how exactly can we expect the Federal Government to assist if there's nothing in place outside of state regulation? I don't see why we don't just cut out the middleman, so to speak, and just fix it now rather than try the state idea and have to rely again on other states or the fed to bail them out when things go wrong. As it is, states primarily control education. Each state gets to choose what to teach and most basic policies. The board of education just oversees each state and creates a bare national standard. As it is now, though, the standards are inefficient and horrible pieces of legislation such as No Child Left Behind are disillusioning most people with the federal standards of education. They really just need to let go of old policies that don't work and set in a new, more progressive education policy nationally that each individual state can modify (to some extent, anyway) as they see fit. I'm aware that the government is always changing, but that includes both state and federal levels so it's a bit of a moot point. The only other way I can seem to interpret that is that some states have different needs to teach their children, which is why states pick most of their own curriculum. However, I greatly appreciate your argument. You are the only person I've ever debated the issue on that didn't succumb to "NO YOU'RE WRONG STOP TALKING".

I see it that any infrastructure we have that can be used as a standard nationwide, we could have the Constitution amended to include it. I'll admit that I don't know the specifics of our education system, but I do know that it isn't all it should be and very under-funded.

[QUOTE=teslacoil;34203595]I see it that any infrastructure we have that can be used as a standard nationwide, we could have the Constitution amended to include it. I'll admit that I don't know the specifics of our education system, but I do know that it isn't all it should be and very under-funded.[/QUOTE] I can agree to both points, and I believe this should conclude the argument mainly because it's derailing the thread to a pretty big extent :v

How the fuck has Santorum gotten this far?