Red State Update: Ranking Republicans

Back



Jackie and Dunlap on the Iowa Straw Poll results, rock climbing walls, and Sol Rosenberg. http://www.redstateupdate.com

Channel: News & Politics
Uploaded: August 16, 2007 at 12:39 pm
Author: travisandjonathan

Length: 0:05:07
Rating: 4.74
Views: 21,628

Tags: iowa straw poll romney huckabee brownback tancredo ron paul john cox mccain giuliani red state update republicans hunter

Video Thumbnail #1:




Video Thumbnail #2:




Video Thumbnail #3:




Video Url:


Embed Code:


Video Comments:
hahayouarefunny (Saturday 23rd of August 2008 08:41:19 PM)
Wow, isn't it amazing that McCain placed behind people who weren't even running? Iowans, vote Obama!
typeinbolivianbug (Wednesday 6th of August 2008 03:58:59 PM)
republicans side with the argument that is easier to convince to the average rednecked idiot.
sfgiantsballin (Sunday 20th of January 2008 10:22:13 AM)
Sour cream and beer do not mix
blondtrumpet1 (Wednesday 12th of December 2007 04:21:46 PM)
Go Huckabee!!! 1st place in Iowa with only 3 weeks until the caucus!!
pawtrammell (Wednesday 12th of December 2007 02:28:53 PM)
Lincoln said "I would rather have a united America in which slavery was legal throughout than a divided set of American states in which slavery was abolished in each." The Civil War was primarily about stopping the South from seceding, not slavery. The government could have bought and freed every slave with the amount spent on the war: this is how slavery was ended in many of the world's other previously-slave-owning nations. You may disagree with this viewpoint, but it is no "bald-faced lie."
lee2575 (Sunday 30th of December 2007 11:57:42 AM)
It could have freed the slaves but could not have stopped the South from seceding. Lincoln based his arguements on the United States of American constitution running supreme.
pawtrammell (Sunday 30th of December 2007 04:36:19 PM)
That's the point: if they only wanted to free the slaves, they could have bought+freed them; the civil war was NOT about slavery, but secession. Nothing in the Constitution prohibits secession.Nothing allows it, but states may do anything not on a certain list (Article 2, I think). Also, the states were independent just after the Revolution and only united for defense, etc (Article 1, Sec. 8), so why can't they RETURN to independence? Lincoln didn't base his arguments on the Constitution.
calculeen (Friday 4th of January 2008 10:32:57 AM)
What??? you guys are crazy...im from argentina, i cant believe that!!! "i rather have united..blas bla, where slavery was legal"??? men...
pawtrammell (Friday 4th of January 2008 12:22:17 PM)
I don't agree with what Lincoln said at all. But are you denying that Lincoln said it?
blondtrumpet1 (Sunday 9th of December 2007 10:01:50 PM)
Huckabee 2008!!!