Has anyone in America noticed all the problems in America? All one need do is to look at the daily news to see the problems for the people: unemployment, foreclosures, medicine with side effects worse than the original problem, price of food, gas, and everything else, etc., etc..

Has anyone noticed that these problems increased with an increase in Government size and spending, with an increase in the war movement, with an increase in taxes, with an increase in Government sticking its nose and fingers into the daily lives of its citizens, with Government attempting to control the economy, WITH BIG GOVERNMENT?

So, if problems have come about with Government getting bigger and meddling more, why does anyone think that even bigger Government, and even more Government meddling will solve anything? Why do people think that Government is their salvation when it is Government that has made, and then increased, the problems in the first place?

The only reason Ron Paul is allowed into the debates is, he has a substantial following who are supporting him in his run for the Presidency, The rest of the guys are ALL bought and paid for by Big Business and Big Media, the same ones who support Big Government, which is attempting to make slaves of us all.

So the debates are really not debates. They are simply a discussion of the best ways to keep on destroying America.

Ron Paul is the only answer that can save us... by moving the nation away from the things that have been destroying us. The other candidates seem to want to keep us in the self-destruction mode by continuing and expanding all the things that are destroying us.

Ron Paul was a wallflower in this debate. He was not taken by and has not taken any candidate in the discussions of hot issues the Republicans would engage Obama with in the coming presidential election. When the Congressman from Texas occasionally interfered, he was discordant if not irrelevant.

For example, when candidates were asked of their plan how to raise money to fund the deficit and balance the budget, the three candidates have brilliant plans, especially Gingrich’s natural energy development program that would rake billions of dollars in revenue, solve the unemployment problem and make U.S. no longer oil-dependent on the Middle East. Ron Paul’s? Cut, cut, cut down the budget, stop overspending, stop the war, stop violation of the Constitution [irrelevant] – in short, he seems unaware that what he was saying means contraction of the economy that could lead to further recession and depression. He always claims that he was the only "Constitutionalist" in the panel of candidates. How did a doctor of medicine become a "Constitutionalist" raised a lot of wrinkled eyebrows.

But anyway, what kind of economics does Ron Paul know? The answer is obvious. While listening to Ron Paul on this important subject, the other candidates were just looking at each other, and rolling their eyes.

If President, how to deal with Iran … to stop Iran from producing a nuclear bomb? The three candidates were unanimous in their position not to allow Iran to develop nuclear weapons or else in addition to more severe economic sanctions, more drastic actions short of war, should be taken against Iran. As if he was defending the President of Iran who wanted to wipe Israel off the map, Ron Paul strangely argued there was no evidence that Iran intend to arm itself with nuclear bombs! He was booed.

Those who want a war with Iran, must get a declaration of war from Congress according to him. He was miles off the discussion because the debate was not whether or not the U.S. Congress should make a declaration of war against Iran.

Ron Paul’s participation in this debate – as it was in previous GOP debates – was agonizingly tedious and boring. He was a participant from outside just standing there … this time just sitting there, looking inside. It was torture to watch. This latest lackluster performance could lead to his much-awaited announcement to drop out from the race. JV’s repor, re: GOP presidential debate in Mesa, Arizona, February 23, 2012. 

Doug Stanhope would put it more funny than I:

http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/106173.html

but you can't get into arguments if they don't call on you.