Rick Santorum, a man after my own heart.

Because Obama's open-hand attitude to Iran has made the world a much safer place...

[video="youtube;yn-eejMcmuA"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=yn-eejMcmuA[/video]

I have no words. How does he even keep a straight face when spewing out such absolute BS? And worst of all, you can just HEAR the crowd gasp in terror as they eat it up.
Worst part is, he's jumped in the polls since this little extravaganza.

I don't think economists' viewpoints are very reliable in such a debate. There are democrat economists and libertarian economists and plenty of libertarian ones agree with Ron Paul.

Also, its fine to be optimistic, but not in light of strong evidence to the contrary. The US was in a huge debt when Bush left. Since he was such a terrible president, Obama had quite a great opportunity to turn things around. However, he wasted that chance and instead preferred to just continue where Bush had left off.

There is a reason why Obama's approval ratings are dipping, why even his own military is defecting against their own commander in chief and siding with his rival. Things like corporate bailouts, obamacare and unnecessary international combat are things that have contributed greatly the US economic downturn.

Also, I disagree wholeheartedly with your statement that because the US is a superpower, that it has the job of contemplating war. Not only is that a pretty ridiculous statement, but it assumes a responsibility that is not defined nor accepted. There is no definition of a superpower, nor is there a list of responsibilities that superpowers have to abide by. The term and its supposed tenets are purely a creation of the mind and it is foolish to assume that just because the US has the ability to spend trillions on wars, that it somehow has the right (and responsibility) to.

The responsibility it does have however, is to care for its citizens. But of late, it has found it very difficult to do so because as Ron Paul said...the US is a lot more worried about international issues rather than its own.

How aren't they reliable considering we're dealing with an economic matter? Libertarian economist are like socialist economist they're rare. You've heard of alternative medicine and alternative doctors that agree with alternative medicine? Doesn't mean we're going to respect their opinions as much as established mainstream doctors.

Yes Obama did **** up economically and reading some blog post by Greg Mankiw, he made the wrong decision. But, that still doesn't mean he isn't the best man for the job in comparison to others. There's no wrong with Obamacare much, although I disagree with the corporate bailout.

Sorry I didn't mean actual contemplating war rather making it seem like they're contemplating war to keep countries in line with their self-interest. We live in a world of bullies and if the US steps down as the bully of the world another comes up. Every large country wants power and we live in a neocolonalist age. You have to think about the bully that will come up when the US steps down and whether they're more favorable than the US. What if China steps up as a superpower? How do you think it's going to secure it's self-interest? It's probably going to do what the US used to do decades ago and prop up it's own puppet governments etc etc and they aren't going to attempt to prop up a semi-democracy, they'd just probably support a dictatorship considering China isn't exactly seen a beacon of freedom or democracy.

Can I ask you what you personally think is the issue with RP's policies? It has been pretty clear from the debates that the other 3 candidates would continue on with the sanctions against Iran are are even prepared to go to war if they see fit. What exactly is it about Ron's policies however, that you feel will be detrimental to America?

Also, I think it is pretty safe to say that China won't really become a bully of the world. China's economy is predominantly based on its trade agreements with the rest of the world. This is why we see "Made in China" written on practically everything. If China does threaten the world, or the US for that matter, the trade sanctions that the world would bring against it would threaten to entirely destroy its economy. Considering a many major US companies have strong trade agreements with China, it would be an all-round economic fiasco. Something tells me China is not stupid enough to do something like that.

Also, the US (and the Western world) relies heavily on China to outsource its business and keep its costs low. Stopping trade with China would also force American companies to bring their business back on their soil (which would certainly create millions of jobs for Americans) but would kill their profit margins, and have a significant effect on their stocks and the market as a whole. It just wouldn't be a wise decision for China to dictate on the global level.

The only reason the US has actually been able to do so is because under the table, it cuts deals with the countries it engages with. This allows large scale corruption to go unnoticed. You yourself pointed out that the US war hasn't been very economically viable because the oil rewards have not been good. That in itself is wrong...why was the US making such deals with other countries and then using war as a means to obtain oil? Does that sound like good policy to you? The US is also not a beacon of democracy.