What is your response if you watched the CNN Sept 12, 2011 debate?

My thoughts? I laughed at Perry's quick change of heart on Social Security. In the debate last week he was gung-ho for getting rid of it. Now he just wants to reform it. I really really hate Perry to begin with so my opinion of him is always going to be colored. It was a "pile on Perry" night, though, and I loved every second of it. Romney jumped on Perry's flip-flop as quick as he could - he gets a +1 for that. We really just need to get those two some boxing gloves and let them duke it out. I know they're just dying to, and it might keep Perry from trying to physically intimidate elderly congressmen. Any respect I had for Santorum was lost as soon as he opened his mouth and spouted that idealistic American exceptionalist nonsense that is essentially "they hate us for our freedoms". I swear he was channeling Giulianni. More disgusting than that, he appealed emotionally to the crowd and they ATE IT UP. I could rant about this for days, but in short, we've had information for almost a decade as to Bin Laden's reasons for attacking us, and they involve U.S. involvement in middle eastern or muslim affairs. There's no good reason why Santorum - or anyone - doesn't know this by now. Bachman was more assertive tonight, and I admired her nads when she ripped into Perry on the Gardisil issue. I wish she wouldn't have prefaced her argument with "as a mom", though. For some reason it just annoyed me. Those were the people stood out to me tonight, beyond my own candidate, who I won't add in this because I'm obviously biased in favor of him. I probably forgot something, but I'm still reeling from that "two minutes hate" feeling I get when seeing Perry. I think I'm still foaming at the mouth.

I'll be honest about it, I don't like any of them. I do not think any of these people deserve to be the POTUS. Bachmann's religion really does bother me. I don't hate on her for it. I don't think any less of her as a person. But when it comes to president, her comments about submissiveness and the gay community really irk me. Huntsman and Perry seem like get-in-where-you-fit-in career politicians. If the atmosphere was better suited for a D on their ticket instead of an R, they'd both gladly have one. Santorum outright confuses me. He doesn't seem really passionate about anything unless he's supposed to be passionate. Newt Gingrich is obviously pandering to a different sect of the nation as he works hard to manufacturer outrage and direct it toward media. I respect it when it's due, but it seems very contrived. Mitt Romney and Herman Cain are probably my two "favorites." And considering I'm not thrilled with the competition, that's not saying a lot. I know a lot of people come down on Mitt for his state-run healthcare, but he went about it the right way I believe. If it doesn't work well, it doesn't work well. But private insurance doesn't work out that well either. At least on a state level it is in a more controlled environment and isn't passed down on all people with a magic dictator wand. Cain's experience in business is a big plus, but his lack of experience outside of business does bother me. I understand presidents appoint appropriate people to appropriate positions, but it's hard to tell who Cain would appoint and for what reasons. The entire "business" of the United States cannot be operated like a business. There are some areas in which we cannot afford to handle ourselves like that. Last but not least, the man I'm most afraid of, Dr. Ron Paul! I know his supporters are around here and might begin to make matersfish voodoo dolls and poke and prod my naughty bits for slamming the good doctor, but he acts sometimes like he's got an air nozzle in the back of his scalp. Yeah, stick to the old document and only the old document. Do only what it says. It can't change with the times, because while America was born from the fires of freedom, the antithesis of a monarchy or religion, we're to kneel and worship at our forefathers' feet and treat the Constitution as the one solid universal truth - like it's our king lord savior. Hella ironic! Just because one god or king will let me smoke pot while the other won't, I still don't feel free if my entire life has to be led within the confides of a document created when "myLot" was what you called your plantation! Follow it and only it. Well, by whose interpretation? Paul's? Now we're trading in paper money for coins and switching out semi-automatic weapons for percussion caps? Now we'll shut ourselves off from the outside world and pray that evil spreads to everyone else but us? I like a lot of the libertarian message, but Paul seems to be kinda loopy. The fact he isn't like everyone else isn't necessary an endearing quality to me. Ah, I'm still waiting for Chris Christie or maybe Marco Rubio.

I did not watch the debate but I am more inclined to go with either Mitt Romney because of his experience and with Rick Perry because when the disaster happened in Texas he went back to help. That shows that he cares. I do not know much about Ron Paul except that some people seem to love him and as for Herman Cain, he is a business man but only in a local manner. What Mitt Romney has against him is there was that health plan program for his state that Obama used to justify his own Obamacare agenda. And Perry is a good speaker. That trouble is no matter how good these candidates are, there are things that Obama can use so that he can lie and say he is like them.

Honestly, out of all the candidates I respect and like Cain the best. One he does not seem to change his stance from one debate to the next, and for a second reason....he is not a career politician. Most of the candidates on the ticket are in it for their wallet and not the improvement of our nation. Just take Romney for example, he is quick to change his stance on the issues based on the voters that are present when he is speaking. How will this benefit our country? I mean, come on, we have had enough politicians get elected into office on their campaign promises and big talk, only to have them get into office and begin to follow their own (often times destructive) agendas. Wouldn't it be nice to actually have an HONEST politician in the race....Is there even such a thing as an honest politician, LOL?

Lots of pretty much what I expected form who I expected it from. We still have establishment republicans and we have posers claiming to be libertarian (aka the "tea party" candidates). I still have not changed my mind, the only stand out in this debate is Ron Paul. Had Gary Johnson been there, he would have been in almost the same class as Dr. Paul. The thing with Dr. Paul is, he may say a lot of things that sound painful, but they are all things we need to hear. We are trained to interpret these things as fringe", "extreme" and "anti-american". But the man is right on virtually 95% of what he says, many orders of magnitude more right than just about anyone else in the race...or in congress and the rest of the government for that matter. I would like to clarify something though. Contrary to how the question was framed, he did NOT say 9/11 was our fault, he was saying we need to start to better understand the motivations of our enemies. And it is a stark fact that we were attacked on our own soil for very specific motivations. Al Quieda themselves have stated on several occasions it was a direct result of our military in the Islamic holy lands. We can argue whether or not we should have troops there, but if we decide it is right to do, then we must be ready to deal with the consequences, and we have been told in no uncertain terms what those consequences are time and time again.

Well I think Mitt is out of this he just seems to be not in the game anymore. The focus seems to be one Paul and Perry the two texans and well if you compare the two Paul is by far the better choice. Personally I think Huntsman was a close third in this he is staying consistent something that Perry could learn. Paul and Huntsman are the two so far who haven't changed up their tune. I personally want to see some outrage from the fact that there is still another choice who since Bachman jumped he he as been completely forgotten and that would be Gary Johnson who gave his State a Billion dollar surplus in the Budget. I mean you cant beat that when you want to compare Perry and Mitt Gary Johnson who is by far more libertarian than even Ron Paul is.

I was surprise to find that I agreed with many of the issues that Ron Paul spoke about. I did find the following link, "Desperately seeking a Statesman" http://www.personalliberty.com/conservative-politics/government/desperately-seeking-a-statesman/?eiid=&rmid=2011_09_12_PLA_[P11696395]&rrid=347526677 to be extremely helpful in learning about the Presidential Hopefuls. Although I agreed with many of Ron Paul's issues I find his age (75) could be detrimental to performing as a President. Now I can capitalize the "P" in President which I refuse to do when using the word in connection with Obama..

I do not like debates so I did not watch it. I also would not watch one between Democrats. But, I live in Austin, Texas so I am familiar with RicK Perry. He is very popular in Texas and I would not be at all surprised if he wins The Republican nomination and even The Presidency. His Presidency would be very interesting. He has a lot of unusual viewpoints and has said many things that are popular in Texas but might seem a little crazy in another state. He has talked about seceding from The Union and has described social security as a Ponzi Scheme. He is a true blue Texan. Like many Texans, he believes in "the right to bear arms", and States Rights. Texas has very poor and limited social services. Texas is low in the funding of schools, libraries, museums etc. The small person has few rights when compared to the powerful. There are limitted consumer rights, tenant rights and employee rights. But the economy is better than in most other states. There is no state tax. And there is a strong and healthy business climate. If you are well to do in Texas, you can have a very good life. But if you are low income, working class or someone who needs help such as a disabled person, this is not the best place. One of the reasons that Texas is doing well economically is that there is such poor social services. Keep that in mind.