Essentially, it's been said that citing religion to support/deny slavery, human rights, etc is wrong, but you (Edwards) cite religious beliefs as a reason why you do not support gay marriage. ?!?
Hey, he got caught on an issue, best way around it is to say "That's what I would say, personally, but not what I would do as president." At least, I think that was his answer.
Essentially, it's been said that citing religion to support/deny slavery, human rights, etc is wrong, but you (Edwards) cite religious beliefs as a reason why you do not support gay marriage. ?!?
I think I got that right.
Ah, ouch. That's one thing I'm liking about these questions so far - they seem to be a lot harder for the candidates to answer than the ones they've been asked before.
Hey, he got caught on an issue, best way around it is to say "That's what I would say, personally, but not what I would do as president." At least, I think that was his answer.
Yea I am a little confused by his answer as well. Is he saying he would support measures to allow gay marriage if elected or is he saying he wouldn't support such measures but not because of his religious views?
Hey, he got caught on an issue, best way around it is to say "That's what I would say, personally, but not what I would do as president." At least, I think that was his answer.
To paraphrase "My religon wouldn't dictact my domestic policy."
Cooper: Do you support American ground troops in Darfur?
Hillary: I support logistical support by the US for the no fly zone.
Cooper: Do you support American ground troops in Darfur?
Hillary: No.
Cooper: Do you support American ground troops in Darfur?
Hillary: I support logistical support by the US for the no fly zone.
Cooper: Do you support American ground troops in Darfur?
Hillary: I don't believe US troops belong in Darfur, then blah blah.
At least that's what I heard. My respect for any of the candidates would shoot up tremendously if they just said 'Yes' or "no' to a question.
Cooper: Do you support American ground troops in Darfur?
Hillary: I support logistical support by the US for the no fly zone.
Cooper: Do you support American ground troops in Darfur?
Hillary: I don't believe US troops belong in Darfur, then blah blah.
At least that's what I heard. My respect for any of the candidates would shoot up tremendously if they just said 'Yes' or "no' to a question.
Yeah, I just try to cut away as much bullshit as I can.
Hillary Clinton passed a bill to have federal loans deferred if students do public service?
That sounds awesome.
Picardathon on
0
Options
GoslingLooking Up Soccer In Mongolia Right Now, ProbablyWatertown, WIRegistered Userregular
edited July 2007
You know, I've floated an idea for these debates recently, got some good feedback.
Never mind this time limit per question thing. Never mind trying manually to give everyone equal time; no matter your intentions, the front-runners are going to wind up grabbing more spotlight. Instead, here's what you do:
*Everyone can give an answer of any length on any question.
*However, everyone has their microphone connected to a clock, visible to all. Displayed on the front of their podium and everything. When the candidate talks, the clock counts down. When they stop talking, the clock stops.
*All candidates are given the same time limit.
*When a particular candidate's clock hits zero, the INSTANT it hits zero, the candidate's mike is cut for the rest of the debate. You spend the rest of the night standing there in silence while everyone else is free to take pot shots at you without you being able to respond. Long story short, budget your time wisely or else.
Gosling on
I have a new soccer blog The Minnow Tank. Reading it psychically kicks Sepp Blatter in the bean bag.
You know, I've floated an idea for these debates recently, got some good feedback.
Never mind this time limit per question thing. Never mind trying manually to give everyone equal time; no matter your intentions, the front-runners are going to wind up grabbing more spotlight. Instead, here's what you do:
*Everyone can give an answer of any length on any question.
*However, everyone has their microphone connected to a clock, visible to all. Displayed on the front of their podium and everything. When the candidate talks, the clock counts down. When they stop talking, the clock stops.
*All candidates are given the same time limit.
*When a particular candidate's clock hits zero, the INSTANT it hits zero, the candidate's mike is cut for the rest of the debate. You spend the rest of the night standing there in silence while everyone else is free to take pot shots at you without you being able to respond. Long story short, budget your time wisely or else.
I like that idea.
kaz67 on
0
Options
GoslingLooking Up Soccer In Mongolia Right Now, ProbablyWatertown, WIRegistered Userregular
edited July 2007
Oh, OUCH. "Hillary, Arab nations don't take women seriously. Why would you be any different?" It is a valid question; look how much Condi's gotten done.
Gosling on
I have a new soccer blog The Minnow Tank. Reading it psychically kicks Sepp Blatter in the bean bag.
You know, I've floated an idea for these debates recently, got some good feedback.
Never mind this time limit per question thing. Never mind trying manually to give everyone equal time; no matter your intentions, the front-runners are going to wind up grabbing more spotlight. Instead, here's what you do:
*Everyone can give an answer of any length on any question.
*However, everyone has their microphone connected to a clock, visible to all. Displayed on the front of their podium and everything. When the candidate talks, the clock counts down. When they stop talking, the clock stops.
*All candidates are given the same time limit.
*When a particular candidate's clock hits zero, the INSTANT it hits zero, the candidate's mike is cut for the rest of the debate. You spend the rest of the night standing there in silence while everyone else is free to take pot shots at you without you being able to respond. Long story short, budget your time wisely or else.
I like that idea.
yeah that's pretty legit. i think the candidates would need to know how many questions there were gonna be, and there's the risk they could go off course and just pontificate for 15 minutes, but i like it
Pants Man on
"okay byron, my grandma has a right to be happy, so i give you my blessing. just... don't get her pregnant. i don't need another mom."
Posts
Essentially, it's been said that citing religion to support/deny slavery, human rights, etc is wrong, but you (Edwards) cite religious beliefs as a reason why you do not support gay marriage. ?!?
I think I got that right.
Hey, he got caught on an issue, best way around it is to say "That's what I would say, personally, but not what I would do as president." At least, I think that was his answer.
Ah, ouch. That's one thing I'm liking about these questions so far - they seem to be a lot harder for the candidates to answer than the ones they've been asked before.
Yea I am a little confused by his answer as well. Is he saying he would support measures to allow gay marriage if elected or is he saying he wouldn't support such measures but not because of his religious views?
To paraphrase "My religon wouldn't dictact my domestic policy."
The audio of the youtube questions is out of sync.
Hillary: I support logistical support by the US for the no fly zone.
Cooper: Do you support American ground troops in Darfur?
Hillary: No.
At least that's what I heard. My respect for any of the candidates would shoot up tremendously if they just said 'Yes' or "no' to a question.
The harder the rain, honey, the sweeter the sun.
Yeah, I just try to cut away as much bullshit as I can.
Same here, really impressed by some of his answers.
Exactly.
You would think the First Youtube debate would be on fucking Youtube.
The harder the rain, honey, the sweeter the sun.
Seriously, WTF?
No, HUGE BALLS.
Obama, by contrast, sounds retarded.
You won't like me when I'm angry.
This is awkward.
That sounds awesome.
Never mind this time limit per question thing. Never mind trying manually to give everyone equal time; no matter your intentions, the front-runners are going to wind up grabbing more spotlight. Instead, here's what you do:
*Everyone can give an answer of any length on any question.
*However, everyone has their microphone connected to a clock, visible to all. Displayed on the front of their podium and everything. When the candidate talks, the clock counts down. When they stop talking, the clock stops.
*All candidates are given the same time limit.
*When a particular candidate's clock hits zero, the INSTANT it hits zero, the candidate's mike is cut for the rest of the debate. You spend the rest of the night standing there in silence while everyone else is free to take pot shots at you without you being able to respond. Long story short, budget your time wisely or else.
i've said it before and i'll say it again: Biden is the angriest man alive and that is hilarious.
also Dodd is doing a pretty bang up job. actually, everybody but obama seems to be on their A game tonight
I like that idea.
No really, I was so awesome.
yeah that's pretty legit. i think the candidates would need to know how many questions there were gonna be, and there's the risk they could go off course and just pontificate for 15 minutes, but i like it