the video should be mandatory listening/watching.
And once again on a legitimate question for discussion the usual barbs and jabs instead of ANY constructive discussion. It is understandable that some cannot handle thirteen minutes of focus on a given subject.

It is fairly obvious why the opposition would not want to have some one like Rubio as the VP candidate.

Romney will pick some one that compliments his skills and has no need to fear being over shadowed by talent diversity.

btk

Originally Posted by eweissenbach

Mostly good choices, however Palin would assure an Obama victory.

Hi eweissenbach: You are probably right. Palin does not have a chance because the elitist liberals will continue to try and burn her at the stake. It is telling when HBO (GE owned) has a separate listing on their HBO Demand menu for the movie Game Changer.

I for one am sick of the vile attacks on people. We are a better nation than that.

Ciao

Placing Marco Rubio as VP Would Not Bring the GOP enough Latino Votes | RedState

Originally Posted by janmcn

I would LOVE to see Ryan and Biden debate what should be done in Afghanistan, Iran, Syria, the middle east, Darfur and the rest of Africa. THAT certainly would be worth any price of admission.

Unfortunately, the Catholic Bishops say the Romney/Ryan Budget fails the moral test and probably would lose Romney the Catholic vote.


Catholic Bishops Say Ryan Budget Fails Moral Test

And you are right about the debate......would love to hear someone from the administration explain our policy.

You guys are so hung up on the Catholic vote,the black vote, the women vote, the hispanic vote.......THAT IS WHY I LEFT THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY......they do not talk about AMERICANS.....they talk about blocs of voters....and the media plays into it.

Sorry..off subject, but yeah would be great to hear the administration talk about all those issues you mentioned although we know about the new Afghan agreement just made...out in 2014 and stay and spend for many years afterward.

Originally Posted by Bucco

And you are right about the debate......would love to hear someone from the administration explain our policy.

You guys are so hung up on the Catholic vote,the black vote, the women vote, the hispanic vote.......THAT IS WHY I LEFT THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY......they do not talk about AMERICANS.....they talk about blocs of voters....and the media plays into it.

Sorry..off subject, but yeah would be great to hear the administration talk about all those issues you mentioned although we know about the new Afghan agreement just made...out in 2014 and stay and spend for many years afterward.

So what are Ryan's positions on Afghanistan, Iran, Syria, the middle east, Darfur, and the rest of Africa? Having trouble finding his stated opinions.


VP Joe Biden: elected to the senate seven times starting at age 29
Chairman of the Judiciary Committee
Chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee
Vice President

Congressman Paul Ryan: Congressman

Originally Posted by Bucco

Your premise being that NO BUDGET FOR THE COUNTRY is better ? LOL

And I would pay TWICE to see them go on foreign affairs...I KNOW Joe Biden !!!

The Catholic Bishops said the Ryan Budget fails moral tests, not me.

Originally Posted by janmcn

snipped

VP Joe Biden: elected to the senate seven times starting at age 29
Chairman of the Judiciary Committee
Chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee
Vice President

snip

so those are joe biden's elected offices...but it doesn't mean he was/is good at performing the duties of same!

matter of fact, might be said that he was so bad in the senate that he had to be elected vice-president where he could only vote to break a tie !

Originally Posted by janmcn

The Catholic Bishops said the Ryan Budget fails moral tests, not me.

You posted it and therefore I assume you READ it all and have an opinion as to WHY it is better than NO budget !! I mean, why would you post something like that without reading and saying WHY you do not like the Ryan budget....which by the way I do not like a lot but at least it is an attempt and a great starting point.

My assumption is that it is because he cut many entitlements

This thread is titled "Possible Republican VP Picks" not budgets or lack of budgets.

Originally Posted by janmcn

This thread is titled "Possible Republican VP Picks" not budgets or lack of budgets.

Just responding to your posts

...it'll be Portman or someone else from Florida. I think Jeb Bush has a far better chance of being tapped than Marco Rubio. He's popular in a swing state, far more experienced and competent than Rubio as a campaigner and possible presidential successor, and his involvement in the 2012 campaign wouldn't hurt him at all if he chooses to run in 2016.

I kind of like the idea of Jeb Bush as a VP choice...if he would ever agree to accept the invitation. So far, he hasn't said no, like some of the others currently being touted.

The drawback for Jeb is his last name is Bush. IMHO, most Americans are not ready for another Bush anytime soon. Too bad for Jeb.

Originally Posted by janmcn

The drawback for Jeb is his last name is Bush. IMHO, most Americans are not ready for another Bush anytime soon. Too bad for Jeb.

I agree. 2 Bushs are enough. I'm Bushed

Read the constitution, Rubio is not eligble to be VP or Pres. He was born in 1971 and his parents did not become citizens until 1975. Sorry folks, but he does not meet the requirements of a "natural born citizen." He is a native citizen and one violation of the constitution by the current resident of the WH is enough and should have never been allowed in the first place. Either follow the United States Constitution or forget it all together. Your choice.

Figmo, since you seem to be the one who most often mentions this, do you have any references to any court decisions that have defined "natural born citizen" as meaning that both parents had to be citizens? As I'm admittedly not a lawyer, "natural born citizen" sounds, to me, like someone born in this country. Every reference I've found refers to the United States (and a few other countries, like Brazil and Canada) automatically conferring citizenship to anyone born inside their borders.

I'm not being sarcastic - I'm genuinely interested in seeing how far up the "judicial food chain" the definition you talk about has gotten.