Interesting that you call our semantics discussion "simpleton" , when the meaning of the words used was relevant to the discussion. Again, you present data - and I simply put it in proper context.

As for the article - if you want to treat this as a serious discussion bound by all the fine rules of formal logic -

First - your post title " How the World sees the GOP"
One article from a leftist German magazine is not "The World"

Second - It attacked Mitt Romney for being frequently inconsistent. However, it did not provide any evidence or examples. This would be because it was a bald-faced lie. Unless you find switching a governmental stance on abortion a decade ago, cause to make such an accusation. Of course the article played it off like it was a common occurrence.

Third - It called Paul crazy. Interesting observation. Surely, they would attack Pauls less-war, less-bureaucracy position with some facts or reasons why it was crazy. Um... no.

So we have a magazine launching ad hominim attacks at candidates, yet providing absolutely zero reasons, even anecdotal ones as to why something is crazy.

The article frequently takes lines from the worst of the candidates, then attempts to use those lines to paint broad generalizations on their competitors in the race. What horseshit.

Article: "The current crop of candidates have shown such a basic lack of knowledge that they make George W. Bush look like Einstein."

So Paul and Mitt make George W look like Einstein, simply because Cain and Perry were clueless?

Your article got dismissed because it is drivel written in a very insulting, misleading, and plain dishonest style - apparently for the purpose of misleading people into agreeing with their point of view.

You want an article to get some respect, post a respectable article.

Posting a Perry Youtube means nothing, because I actually agreed with the article regarding Perry. The problem with the article, is it tried to use Perry and others to paint a picture of the people who are running against him.

For who could be free when every other man's humour might domineer over him? - John Locke (2nd Treatise, sect 57)