DVD Talk
The Republican Field and Primary Thread (Part 3) [Archive] - Page 4 - DVD Talk Forum
 
Best Sellers
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
The Longest Day
Buy: $54.99 $24.99
9.
10.
DVD Blowouts
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Alien [Blu-ray]
Buy: $19.99 $9.99
8.
9.
10.

PDA
DVD Reviews

View Full Version : The Republican Field and Primary Thread (Part 3)


Pages : 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9

CRM114
01-13-12, 02:26 PM
Indeed they did. But he was raked over the coals trying to get elected as a Republican governor in a highly liberal state. He was Satan himself! I used to go sit on the outdoor patios of restaurants and bars on Central an watch the protest marches against him and his evil ways while I was getting my drink on. His policies were so good for the state, he handily won re-election in 4 years after people saw the results of his policies beginning to take effect.

Gary is the reason so many movies are made in NM now, and TV shows like 'Breaking Bad' and the like, that's all him. He was so good for this state.

Did he manage to get weed decriminalized in his state?

Dr Mabuse
01-13-12, 02:29 PM
New Mexico is a highly liberal state?

Hmm! I didn't know that.
Well... there's more to it than that. That's why presidential candidates always clog traffic here visiting so many times. It's functionally a swing state due to the rural conservative demographic and the metropolitan liberal demographic.

You'd kind of have to get to know the state to see how it all works. But yeah, for the most part it is a liberal state in ideology. All the hippies and artists started communes here and never left.

classicman2
01-13-12, 02:31 PM
Y'all right cman? :)

Parts of NM are somewhat liberal - Alb. & Sante Fe for example. The eastern part of NM is like the Texas Panhandle - hardly liberal - about as conservative as you can get.

eXcentris
01-13-12, 05:50 PM
Quelle horreur! Republican presidential front-runner Mitt Romney has been skewered in a new political attack ad released by Newt Gingrich for... speaking French.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-16549624


I swear this is better than any sitcom or soap on tv. :lol:

Th0r S1mpson
01-13-12, 06:04 PM
Amesome. :lol:

Ky-Fi
01-13-12, 06:07 PM
That is a classic! Dukakis driving the tank, Kerry windsurfing, and Mitt speaking French with accordian music playing. :lol:

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/tyFaWhygzjQ" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Jason
01-14-12, 10:05 AM
That ad was done by The Onion, right?

Bandoman
01-14-12, 10:25 AM
Newt is a psychopath, but he's a fun psychopath. :lol:

MoviePage
01-14-12, 09:51 PM
That ad was done by The Onion, right?

I used to read The Onion, but then real life became it so I don't see the need anymore.

dork
01-15-12, 08:36 PM
Huntsman is out. Now begins an all-out battle to woo both of his supporters.

Pharoh
01-15-12, 08:41 PM
Huntsman is out. Now begins an all-out battle to woo both of his supporters.

I think there are at least three; they all post here in fact.

Mr.Briggs
01-15-12, 08:42 PM
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/15/jon-huntsman-concedes_n_1207994.html

Yep, I guess losing to Stephen Colbert in a poll was just too much for him.

dork
01-15-12, 08:45 PM
I think there are at least three; they all post here in fact.
Are you talking about his daughters? :drool:

grundle
01-15-12, 09:02 PM
Wow - Mitt Romney is such an evil scumbag - even Fox News doesn't want him to be President!


http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/01/13/romneys-dog-on-car-roof-story-makes-him-unfit-to-be-president/

Why Romney's 'dog on car roof' story makes him unfit to be president

By Lanny Davis

January 13, 2012

It might be unseemly to bring this up just as Mitt Romney celebrates his win in New Hampshire on Tuesday night and seems to be a strong front-runner for the GOP nomination. But the story of his putting his dog in a carrier on his car roof for a 12-hour family trip is spreading again on the Internet and disturbs me the more I learn about it.

And I am betting the more it gets out, the more votes Romney loses — red, blue and purple.

When, in a campaign debate, Romney opposed allowing a non-documented worker who has lived here for 25 years to stay and earn his way to citizenship, he struck me as heartless.

But when I read the story recently in greater detail about what Romney did to his Irish Setter, Seamus, that struck me as more than heartless — it struck me as downright cruel.

In brief, as the Boston Globe first reported in 2007, in 1983, Mitt Romney, then 36 years old, drove his station wagon packed with five sons and his wife on a 12-hour trip from Boston to Ontario, where his parents had a cottage on Lake Huron.

He took a dog carrier and attached it to the station wagon’s roof rack, built a special windshield, and put his dog Seamus into the carrier, where the dog remained for the 12-hour trip.

Was the dog distressed? Was it illegal under Massachusetts law as cruelty? There is some evidence that both are true.

During the trip, the Boston Globe reported, Romney’s oldest son, Tagg, looked around through the rear window and yelled, “Dad — gross!” A brown liquid was dripping down the back window — diarrhea from an animal that just might have been caused by the stress of being inside a cage for 12 hours on top of a car going 60 mph.

And what did Romney do, even after knowing of the dog's diarrhea? Did he realize that perhaps Seamus should be shown some mercy, cleaned up and allowed in the car, to sleep on someone’s lap?

No.

Here’s how the Globe described what Romney then did:

“As the rest of the boys joined in the howls of disgust, Romney coolly pulled off the highway and into a service station. There he borrowed a hose, washed down Seamus and the car, then hopped back onto the highway. It was a tiny preview of a trait he would grow famous for in business: emotion-free crisis management.”

Emotion-free crisis management??!

I love animals, especially dogs. I don’t like people who are cruel to animals. I am told it is illegal in Massachusetts to put an animal on a car roof while driving. Had I been the local sheriff, I would have arrested him.

But I am a forgiving person. If today Romney, looking back, were to say, “You know, in retrospect, that was a cruel thing to do to our dog — I was young, it was a long time ago, I am sorry” — if he said that today, I’d forgive him.

But instead — Romney being Romney — he defaults into saying something utterly implausible. He recently told Fox's dog-loving Chris Wallace that Seamus actually loved it up there!

He then told Wallace that the dog was in an "air-tight container," not mentioning the diarrhea.

Air-tight container??!

This is the ultimate Purple Issue — it cuts across Republicans, Democrats, blue states, red states, liberals and conservatives.

There are more than 78 million Americans who own one or more dogs — about two out of every five households. A Google search of "Romney Dog on Car Roof" brought me 1,080,000 results.

I don’t know how many of these 78 million dog owners (and thus, dog lovers) have yet heard or read about Romney doing this horrible thing, much less making his disingenuous claim that Seamus loved the experience on top of a speeding car for 12 hours, while his bowels turned to water.

But I’m thinking if this story gets out and stays out, there will be tens of millions of Google hits by next October. And I am also thinking that Romney is going to lose a lot of dog-lover votes on this issue alone, regardless of party or ideology.

Here’s one dog lover’s opinion — mine:

I think anyone who puts his dog in a cage on top of a car for a 12-hour drive and then deludes himself or tries to delude others that the dog really enjoyed it — to me, with all due respect, I feel such a man shouldn’t be president of the United States.

mosquitobite
01-15-12, 09:06 PM
In most states the Republicans are in a 3 way mess: establishment, evangelical, and tea party/libertarian.

No one wants Romney, but people can't seem to get solidly behind any other candidate to stop him.

I've said from the beginning, all the others are there to stop Dr Paul, not Mitt Romney. One by one they'll all drop out and endorse him. And once again the GOP will shoot themselves in the foot by nominating another McCain... :rolleyes:

Pharoh
01-15-12, 09:14 PM
In most states the Republicans are in a 3 way mess: establishment, evangelical, and tea party/libertarian.

No one wants Romney, but people can't seem to get solidly behind any other candidate to stop him.

I've said from the beginning, all the others are there to stop Dr Paul, not Mitt Romney. One by one they'll all drop out and endorse him. And once again the GOP will shoot themselves in the foot by nominating another McCain... :rolleyes:

Nobody wants him, yet he leads in all polls, now up to about 35%, has raised the most money by a healthy amount, can't find a primary state he can lose, and is favoured by many Americans to be more capable than the current President.
:shrug:


I suppose though nominating a candidate who might garner 20% of the vote in November, and who has been rejected time and time again, is the smarter thing to do.
:up:

Sean O'Hara
01-15-12, 09:22 PM
Wow - Mitt Romney is such an evil scumbag - even Fox News doesn't want him to be President!


http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/01/13/romneys-dog-on-car-roof-story-makes-him-unfit-to-be-president/

Why Romney's 'dog on car roof' story makes him unfit to be president

By Lanny Davis


I suspect Lanny Davis does not represent the views of Fox.

The dog thing, though, is blatant pandering to me and kvrdave, but it won't work. The dog lived, Mitt, the dog lived. You're going to have to do better if you want our vote.

JasonF
01-15-12, 09:46 PM
Nobody wants him, yet he leads in all polls, now up to about 35%, has raised the most money by a healthy amount, can't find a primary state he can lose, and is favoured by many Americans to be more capable than the current President.
:shrug:


I suppose though nominating a candidate who might garner 20% of the vote in November, and who has been rejected time and time again, is the smarter thing to do.
:up:

I agree that Rep. Paul is a loser, but the rush to annoint Gov. Romney after two small-state primaries, one of which he won by a mere 8 votes (and which is non-binding), and the other in which he only had the support of roughly a third of the Republican electorate, seems premature.

Meanwhile, it looks like Governor Huntsman will be ending his campaign tomorrow, and likely will endorse Governor Romney. Given the relatively low amount of support that Governor Huntsman had, I don't see that as a game changer.

Also of interest, a group of prominent social conservatives met in Texas this weekend and decided to throw their support behind Senator Santorum. The bg question, of course, is whether they can persuade the electorate to abandon Governor Perry and Speaker Gingrich for Senator Santorum. If so, i can see Governor Romney and Senator Santorum battling things out until the convention, with Rep. Paul as a potential kingmaker.

mosquitobite
01-15-12, 10:20 PM
Nobody wants him, yet he leads in all polls, now up to about 35%, has raised the most money by a healthy amount, can't find a primary state he can lose, and is favoured by many Americans to be more capable than the current President.
:shrug:


I suppose though nominating a candidate who might garner 20% of the vote in November, and who has been rejected time and time again, is the smarter thing to do.
:up:

Yes, let's talk about who funds Romney! That would be lovely! :D

Open Secrets (http://www.opensecrets.org/pres12/contrib.php?cycle=2012&id=N00000286)

:up: Awesome candidate you have their Pharoah. He sure is one of us! I'm sure he'll be ooooooh so different than Obama :rolleyes:

mosquitobite
01-15-12, 10:24 PM
Each primary he's won so far he's won by less than 40%. What a landslide!

The GOP sure is in a pickle. Can't win with Ron Paul supporters, and can't win without them (for SURE)

Th0r S1mpson
01-15-12, 10:27 PM
What's notable to me is that Huntsman will endorse Romney, not Paul.

chowderhead
01-15-12, 10:32 PM
I agree that Rep. Paul is a loser, but the rush to annoint Gov. Romney after two small-state primaries, one of which he won by a mere 8 votes (and which is non-binding), and the other in which he only had the support of roughly a third of the Republican electorate, seems premature.

Meanwhile, it looks like Governor Huntsman will be ending his campaign tomorrow, and likely will endorse Governor Romney. Given the relatively low amount of support that Governor Huntsman had, I don't see that as a game changer.

Also of interest, a group of prominent social conservatives met in Texas this weekend and decided to throw their support behind Senator Santorum. The bg question, of course, is whether they can persuade the electorate to abandon Governor Perry and Speaker Gingrich for Senator Santorum. If so, i can see Governor Romney and Senator Santorum battling things out until the convention, with Rep. Paul as a potential kingmaker.

These other clowns cannot even get their act together. I mean only Paul and Romney made it on the March 6 Super Tuesday Virginia primaries. Newt Gingrich has no excuse as he actually LIVES in Virginia. These 10th Amendment worshipers like Perry and Gingrich are going to federal court to force their way onto the ballot. Morans. They spent the last year doing nothing. Two people (Cain/Gingrich) were on book tours. Nobody laid a hand on Romney until it was too late. Are you kidding me? Romney is the best the Republicans can come up with ... he is the next in line but come on.

Psi
01-15-12, 10:49 PM
Nobody wants (Romney), yet he leads in all polls, now up to about 35%, has raised the most money by a healthy amount, can't find a primary state he can lose, and is favoured by many Americans to be more capable than the current President.
:shrug:

I suppose though nominating a candidate who might garner 20% of the vote in November, and who has been rejected time and time again, is the smarter thing to do.
:up:

Gingrich said in an interview on CNN that the GOP shouldn't pick Romney because Romney has failed to get even 40% of the votes in Iowa and NH. And they should choose him instead. He conveniently forgot how many votes he got himself. Short memory historian :lol:

X
01-15-12, 11:18 PM
Damn, now who do Democrats have left to vote for president?

PopcornTreeCt
01-15-12, 11:44 PM
Knocking a guy for speaking French. Wow, how ignorant this country has become.

TheMovieman
01-15-12, 11:48 PM
Knocking a guy for speaking French. Wow, how ignorant this country has become.

Especially given Gingrich apparently speaks French as well (he spent his younger years in France).

SuprVgeta
01-15-12, 11:57 PM
As a Romney supporter I will vote for any of our other candidates if Mitt somehow fails to get the nomination. Oh wait did I say any of them? I would rather chew both of my own hands off before casting a vote for Newt Gingrich.

Jaymole
01-16-12, 07:55 AM
Knocking a guy for speaking French. Wow, how ignorant this country has become.

I actually believe this country is regressing...in a few years candidates will be grunting and writing on cave walls to communicate their ideas.

CRM114
01-16-12, 08:03 AM
Nobody wants him, yet he leads in all polls, now up to about 35%, has raised the most money by a healthy amount, can't find a primary state he can lose, and is favoured by many Americans to be more capable than the current President.
:shrug:


I suppose though nominating a candidate who might garner 20% of the vote in November, and who has been rejected time and time again, is the smarter thing to do.
:up:

What's even smarter is nominating Mitt Romney when Jon Huntsman had all the same qualities without the flip-flopping or the position ambiguity or liberal background. Way to go Repubs!

CRM114
01-16-12, 08:05 AM
I agree that Rep. Paul is a loser, but the rush to annoint Gov. Romney after two small-state primaries, one of which he won by a mere 8 votes (and which is non-binding), and the other in which he only had the support of roughly a third of the Republican electorate, seems premature.

Meanwhile, it looks like Governor Huntsman will be ending his campaign tomorrow, and likely will endorse Governor Romney. Given the relatively low amount of support that Governor Huntsman had, I don't see that as a game changer.

Also of interest, a group of prominent social conservatives met in Texas this weekend and decided to throw their support behind Senator Santorum. The bg question, of course, is whether they can persuade the electorate to abandon Governor Perry and Speaker Gingrich for Senator Santorum. If so, i can see Governor Romney and Senator Santorum battling things out until the convention, with Rep. Paul as a potential kingmaker.

Romney won by 8 votes over Rick Santorum - a man who is completely unelectable and a man who ignominiously lost his Senate seat by 17%.

orangecrush
01-16-12, 09:33 AM
I actually believe this country is regressing...in a few years candidates will be grunting and writing on cave walls to communicate their ideas.What makes you think that we are regressing exactly? I don't think the presidential nominees have gotten progressively stupider over timeat all.

sracer
01-16-12, 09:42 AM
What makes you think that we are regressing exactly? I don't think the presidential nominees have gotten progressively stupider over timeat all.
I haven't determined yet whether the candidates are getting stupider or that they have tested the political waters and have concluded that the voters have gotten stupider and don't need to cover up and spin as much as they had to in the past.

CRM114
01-16-12, 10:04 AM
@davidaxelrod
With '16 in mind, Huntsman backs the man he's called "a perfectly lubricated weather vane," who has "been on 3 sides of every major issue."

Sean O'Hara
01-16-12, 10:30 AM
Knocking a guy for speaking French. Wow, how ignorant this country has become.

You'd have to be pretty stupid to opt for a useless language like French over Spanish, Cantonese, Mandarin or Japanese.

Especially given Gingrich apparently speaks French as well (he spent his younger years in France).

See.

TheMovieman
01-16-12, 10:44 AM
@davidaxelrod
With '16 in mind, Huntsman backs the man he's called "a perfectly lubricated weather vane," who has "been on 3 sides of every major issue."



So Huntsman backing Obama? Wow.

arminius
01-16-12, 10:50 AM
You'd have to be pretty stupid to opt for a useless language like French over Spanish, Cantonese, Mandarin or Japanese.



See.

I agree with the other three but Spanish?

wishbone
01-16-12, 10:54 AM
What, no love for Esperanto? :sad:

Pharoh
01-16-12, 10:57 AM
What makes you think that we are regressing exactly? I don't think the presidential nominees have gotten progressively stupider over timeat all.

They haven't. It is simply the "in the moment" phenomenon.

Michael T Hudson
01-16-12, 11:00 AM
I agree with the other three but Spanish?

:lol: I take it you don't live in the south

CRM114
01-16-12, 11:08 AM
South? Hell, Spanish is a nice thing to have in just about any business where you interact with people anymore.

Pharoh
01-16-12, 11:13 AM
What's even smarter is nominating Mitt Romney when Jon Huntsman had all the same qualities without the flip-flopping or the position ambiguity or liberal background. Way to go Repubs!

I don't agree with your premise, but don't feel like arguing the point. So assuming what you said is correct, you still are forgetting the most important aspect; acceptance. Mr. Huntsman never registered with any voters, Republican or otherwise, never had the name recognition or buzz necessary to be successful. Nothing else matters if the voters don't know you or like you.

CRM114
01-16-12, 11:17 AM
Because he was discounted prematurely by the GOP media machine because of his ties to Obama's state department.

:shrug:

DeputyDave
01-16-12, 11:23 AM
So Huntsman backing Obama? Wow.Not surprising, the only way Obama is going to be beat is by a candidate with consolidated support.

CRM114
01-16-12, 11:25 AM
No, despite what you believe about Jon Huntsman, he is not backing Obama. That's the GOP media machine talking in the back of your head.

Pharoh
01-16-12, 11:28 AM
Because he was discounted prematurely by the GOP media machine because of his ties to Obama's state department.

:shrug:

Yep, of course that is all it was. (I expected that response, by the way).

How then do you explain his virtually living in New Hampshire for the past year, spending a nice chunk of money, and still performing woefully enough that he has dropped out of the race? At some point, even you, that ardent advocate of what is the most beneficial for the Republican party, have to admit that the voters simply didn't like or want Gov. Huntsman.

Keep in mind I am not intelligent or clairvoyant enough to know why the voters acted the way they did regarding Gov. Huntsman.

CRM114
01-16-12, 11:39 AM
Since you discount my appraisal of the situation so much, I'm very glad you put your faith in the mindless electorate of your party to choose such stoic figures like Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum above a conservative, rational, and qualified Huntsman. But I'm not arguing...

Along with Huntsman being painted as an Obamaton by the Limbaugh and Fox News vast listening audience, Huntsman also spoke of things like believing in science. So he was doomed on two fronts.

Pharoh
01-16-12, 11:49 AM
Since you discount my appraisal of the situation so much, I'm very glad you put your faith in the mindless electorate of your party to choose such stoic figures like Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum above a conservative, rational, and qualified Huntsman. But I'm not arguing...

Along with Huntsman being painted as an Obamaton by the Limbaugh and Fox News vast listening audience, Huntsman also spoke of things like believing in science. So he was doomed on two fronts.

Except that neither Gingrich or Sen. Santorum have a shot at the nomination, despite what JasonF might state in this thread.
:shrug:




And for what it's worth, I didn't use "argue" in a pejorative sense.

CRM114
01-16-12, 11:54 AM
But both received much more GOP love than Huntsman. That clearly paints the picture that Huntsman was tainted. And the taint wasn't from his policy opinions. It was because he was an Obama state dept official, called the other candidates insane when it came to science, and wore fancy elitist ties. ;)

Venusian
01-16-12, 12:04 PM
What's the "GOP media machine"? I get almost all my political news from NPR and barely hear anything about Huntsman on there. Is that the GOP media machine?

Dr Mabuse
01-16-12, 12:15 PM
NPR is known to be on the extreme right of the conservative spectrum.

Pharoh
01-16-12, 12:16 PM
But both received much more GOP love than Huntsman. That clearly paints the picture that Huntsman was tainted. And the taint wasn't from his policy opinions. It was because he was an Obama state dept official, called the other candidates insane when it came to science, and wore fancy elitist ties. ;)

The only point I will bring up is that Mr. Huntsman only campaigned in New Hampshire, where he did perform better than the other two. And I certainly wouldn't disagree if you said that the reason he didn't go to Iowa or South Carolina was because his policy and personal views wouldn't play that will with many of the Republican primary voters in those states, particularly Iowa. That wasn't the case in New Hampshire though, at least not entirely. Perhaps those voters thought he was a milquetoast lacking charisma? Or they didn't care for his trade policies? I don't know why he never resonated. I do know that it wasn't as simple as saying he worked for President Obama or believed in science.

Venusian
01-16-12, 12:28 PM
and based on the response he got at the debates, the audience didn't mind at all that he worked as an Ambassador under Obama.

DeputyDave
01-16-12, 12:46 PM
No, despite what you believe about Jon Huntsman, he is not backing Obama. That's the GOP media machine talking in the back of your head.

I never said he supported Obama, I merely said I was unsurprised he is supporting Mitt. All of them will eventually. A unified front is the only way to beat Obama. I kind of think Mitt should pick Rand Paul as his VP. It will draw a lot of Ron's supporters and will insure Ron Paul doesn't run as a 3rd party.

CRM114
01-16-12, 01:07 PM
The only point I will bring up is that Mr. Huntsman only campaigned in New Hampshire, where he did perform better than the other two. And I certainly wouldn't disagree if you said that the reason he didn't go to Iowa or South Carolina was because his policy and personal views wouldn't play that will with many of the Republican primary voters in those states, particularly Iowa. That wasn't the case in New Hampshire though, at least not entirely. Perhaps those voters thought he was a milquetoast lacking charisma? Or they didn't care for his trade policies? I don't know why he never resonated. I do know that it wasn't as simple as saying he worked for President Obama or believed in science.

I like my theory better since New Hampshire DID elect a milquetoast with no charisma. Huntsman had credentials and charisma. He just rolled his eyes at Romney's ever changing policy stances and the rest of the field's general insanity. Romney spent 6 years in NH, he should have won. I recall back before Huntsman got in the race, the establishment Repubs were clamoring for him to throw his hat in and then the rank and file dismissed him. Why? Because he wasn't vehemently anti-Obama enough for those clamoring for red meat.

CRM114
01-16-12, 01:09 PM
I never said he supported Obama, I merely said I was unsurprised he is supporting Mitt. All of them will eventually. A unified front is the only way to beat Obama. I kind of think Mitt should pick Rand Paul as his VP. It will draw a lot of Ron's supporters and will insure Ron Paul doesn't run as a 3rd party.

You said "not surprising" in reply to a post that said Huntsman is backing Obama. Sorry, I only comprehend English.

DeputyDave
01-16-12, 01:15 PM
You said "not surprising" in reply to a post that said Huntsman is backing Obama. Sorry, I only comprehend English.

Yes, I said: "Not surprising, the only way Obama is going to be beat is by a candidate with consolidated support."

I think that was pretty clear.

CRM114
01-16-12, 01:17 PM
You said "not surprising" to a post that falsely said Huntsman is backing Obama. He's not.

DeputyDave
01-16-12, 01:19 PM
You said "not surprising" to a post that falsely said Huntsman is backing Obama. He's not.

He's not? When did that come out? I just saw the news a few minutes ago and they're rporting it too.

EDIT to add: I did it again... I read "Romney" both times. So... never mind, carry on.

Jason
01-16-12, 02:16 PM
I kind of think Mitt should pick Rand Paul as his VP. It will draw a lot of Ron's supporters and will insure Ron Paul doesn't run as a 3rd party.

I do to, if only to warn the rest of the country what a soulless prick he is.

TheMovieman
01-16-12, 02:18 PM
My apologies. It was a joke referring to David Axelrod's tweet (or w/e)...

CRM114
01-16-12, 02:33 PM
Where's that weird pic of Rand Paul? :lol: Ah yes...

https://p.twimg.com/AiP9oJkCAAA0KDU.jpg

He just exudes confidence and leadership, doesn't he?

Navinabob
01-16-12, 02:35 PM
Fantastic. Ron Paul does not believe in evolution. Is he really that stupid, that gullible that he eat up creationist propaganda, or is he just pandering?

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/6JyvkjSKMLw" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Th0r S1mpson
01-16-12, 02:52 PM
Where's that weird pic of Rand Paul? :lol: Ah yes...

He just exudes confidence and leadership, doesn't he?
Also some of the candidates are really, really fat! Vote for Obama!

CRM114
01-16-12, 03:08 PM
I don't know of any candidates that are fat but Santorum is rather rotund. He must wear like a 42 pant.

JasonF
01-16-12, 03:43 PM
He just exudes confidence and leadership, doesn't he?

:shrug: He got the ring all the way to Mount Doom, so that's impressive.

kvrdave
01-16-12, 03:46 PM
I do to, if only to warn the rest of the country what a soulless prick he is.

A soulless prick sound preferable to what we currently have.

Sean O'Hara
01-16-12, 04:08 PM
Where's that weird pic of Rand Paul? :lol: Ah yes...

https://p.twimg.com/AiP9oJkCAAA0KDU.jpg

He just exudes confidence and leadership, doesn't he?

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3624/3484819402_ce939bc65f.jpg

I'm sorry, are politicians supposed to exude confidence and leadership in candid photos taken of them in leisure activities?

dork
01-16-12, 05:06 PM
That looks like the premiere of Tyler Perry's Madea of Mars 3D.

crazychris88
01-16-12, 06:00 PM
Fantastic. Ron Paul does not believe in evolution. Is he really that stupid, that gullible that he eat up creationist propaganda, or is he just pandering?

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/6JyvkjSKMLw" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Well, there just about all of my respect for that man. Not a bad guy but there is no room for that kinda ignorance in today's world.
Firmly now completely decided. Going with Obama. 4 More years!

Th0r S1mpson
01-16-12, 06:05 PM
If evolution were true, Ron Paul is old enough that he would have witnessed it first hand. So I'm going with Ron Paul over you snooty youngsters.

PopcornTreeCt
01-16-12, 08:36 PM
Watching the Republican debate and have a few thoughts...

1. Don't know if I should be laughing or crying
2. Rick Perry sounds like batshit successionist.
3. I finally see Mitt Romney's phoniness.

Th0r S1mpson
01-16-12, 09:08 PM
3. I finally see Mitt Romney's phoniness.

:up:

Although I have no idea how it has eluded you until now.

CRM114
01-16-12, 09:42 PM
Rick Santorum. I can't get over that the Repubs are taking this clown seriously. The guy was thrown out of office 6 years ago and he's GOP Presidential material? I guess all that coal lobbying prepared him for office.

A soulless prick sound preferable to what we currently have.


:lol: The world you live in sounds horrible.

CRM114
01-16-12, 09:46 PM
Wow. Newt crying about negative ads again. What a pussy! Quit yer crying, Newt.

sracer
01-16-12, 10:19 PM
Rick Santorum. I can't get over that the Repubs are taking this clown seriously. The guy was thrown out of office 6 years ago and he's GOP Presidential material? I guess all that coal lobbying prepared him for office.


Wow, your hatred of Santorum seems excessive. What did he do to you that any other politician hasn't?

JasonF
01-16-12, 10:27 PM
Wow, your hatred of Santorum seems excessive. What did he do to you that any other politician hasn't?

CRM is from Pennsylvania, so he had to deal with Senator Santorum as his own Senator, not simply one of a hundred bozos you see on the news from time to time. It's the same reason why I hate Rep. Joe Walsh so much more than any of the other idiot Tea Party Congressmen.

TheBigDave
01-17-12, 01:33 AM
I'm not a Gingrich fan, but I liked seeing him go Honey Badger on Juan Williams:

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/ka0LMt5ciRc" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Superboy
01-17-12, 02:08 AM
Wow, your hatred of Santorum seems excessive. What did he do to you that any other politician hasn't?

He left some pretty bad stains on the sheets, for one.

RoyalTea
01-17-12, 05:02 AM
Ironic how Dan Savage created the internet's most popular anti-bullying campaign, but has no problem using the internet to bully Santorum by "redefining" his last name to something disgusting and has threatened to further bully Santorum by "redefining" his first name unless he drops out of the race.


Lesson learned: it's horrible that people are being bullied because they're "different" and the problem needs to be addressed and fixed, unless the victim of the bullying doesn't share *my* views, then it's perfectly okay.

wendersfan
01-17-12, 05:34 AM
Ironic how Dan Savage created the internet's most popular anti-bullying campaign, but has no problem using the internet to bully Santorum by "redefining" his last name to something disgusting and has threatened to further bully Santorum by "redefining" his first name unless he drops out of the race.


Lesson learned: it's horrible that people are being bullied because they're "different" and the problem needs to be addressed and fixed, unless the victim of the bullying doesn't share *my* views, then it's perfectly okay.

You're not even close.

RoyalTea
01-17-12, 06:00 AM
You're not even close.

why not? there's nothing at all hypocritical about detesting bullying, and starting the "spreadingsantorum" website and using google's algorithms to make sure it's the top hit?

explain to me why both of those projects can coexist in a world without hypocrisy.

Artman
01-17-12, 06:38 AM
Ironic how Dan Savage created the internet's most popular anti-bullying campaign, but has no problem using the internet to bully Santorum

He does sound like a pretty disgusting human being (i've heard him on the radio a few times). It's more beneficial to feel sorry for people like that rather than hate them. I may not care for Santorum the politician but he wins the race of life hands down. His family name will live on, while Savages dies with him.

Jaymole
01-17-12, 07:23 AM
What makes you think that we are regressing exactly? I don't think the presidential nominees have gotten progressively stupider over timeat all.

I wasn't talking about the candidates regressing.

JasonF
01-17-12, 07:30 AM
Ironic how Dan Savage created the internet's most popular anti-bullying campaign, but has no problem using the internet to bully Santorum by "redefining" his last name to something disgusting and has threatened to further bully Santorum by "redefining" his first name unless he drops out of the race.


Lesson learned: it's horrible that people are being bullied because they're "different" and the problem needs to be addressed and fixed, unless the victim of the bullying doesn't share *my* views, then it's perfectly okay.

I've been a loyal reader for half my life. Today, a friend and I got into a debate about you. My friend says your campaign to redefine "santorum" flies in the face of your anti-bullying "It Gets Better" campaign. Would you please address this issue?

Google Problems

First, GP, the campaign is over: Santorum has been redefined.

Second, taking the piss out of a middle-aged bigot who has repeatedly and viciously attacked a tiny minority for personal and political gain—a man surrounded by people who support him personally, politically, and financially—is not the moral equivalent of beating the shit out of a vulnerable and isolated 13-year-old queer kid in rural Texas who is a member of the tiny minority that this powerful bigot has repeatedly and viciously attacked.

Third, circling back to Elizabeth Santorum's blowjob on HuffPo: "[Elizabeth] is aware of her father's so-called 'Google problem,' part of a campaign by columnist Dan Savage... 'That just makes me sad. It's disappointing that people can be that mean,' she said."

I'm sorry for giving you a sad, Elizabeth. You know what gave me a sad? Reading about Janice Langbehn and Lisa Pond. The women, together 18 years, were vacationing in Florida in 2007 with three of their four children when Pond suffered an aneurysm. Langbehn and the children were barred from Pond's room when they arrived at the hospital. A social worker informed Langbehn—who was distraught—that she wouldn't be able to see her wife because they were in an "anti-gay city and state."

Lisa Pond was not a "policy thing," Elizabeth. She was a human being. And her wife and children were prevented from saying good-bye to her because people who agree with you and your father—people who doubtless felt empowered to act on their bigotry thanks to high-profile bigots like you and your father—persecuted them as Pond lay dying.

By being so mean as to oppose legal protections for gay and lesbian families, Elizabeth, you and your father are trying to make sure that other families headed by same-sex couples will suffer as Langbehn, Pond, and their children were made to suffer.

It is disappointing how mean some people can be, Elizabeth, it really is.

http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/SavageLove?oid=11589595

CRM114
01-17-12, 07:59 AM
Wow, your hatred of Santorum seems excessive. What did he do to you that any other politician hasn't?

JasonF already pointed out the obvious. Santorum was soundly defeated in PA six years ago because we were embarrassed by him. Even the middle and some on the right voted against him. It's interesting that Repubs think is slate has been cleaned - or perhaps they are clamoring for an ultra right-wing bigot to lead this country.

I can't even think of a comparable Democrat - someone who was defeated by 17% and came back to run for the Presidency.

orangecrush
01-17-12, 08:07 AM
CRM is from Pennsylvania, so he had to deal with Senator Santorum as his own Senator, not simply one of a hundred bozos you see on the news from time to time. It's the same reason why I hate Rep. Joe Walsh so much more than any of the other idiot Tea Party Congressmen.At least your guy was on a pretty good TV show (for the time).

CRM114
01-17-12, 08:22 AM
Wasn't he in The James Gang?

Groucho
01-17-12, 08:29 AM
It's the same reason why I hate Rep. Joe Walsh so much more than any of the other idiot Tea Party Congressmen.You say he's crazy but he has a good time.

DeputyDave
01-17-12, 08:49 AM
He's cool!

JasonF
01-17-12, 09:18 AM
At least your guy was on a pretty good TV show (for the time).

OK, I've heard all the Eagles/James Gang/Funk 49 jokes, but I just can't figure this one out.

No, my Joe Walsh is unrelated to the musician. My Joe Walsh is a douchebag who owes his kids more than $100,000 in child support, lost his license multiple times due to unpaid tickets and insurance bills, and has lost multiple lawsuits related to his inability to live up to his financial commitments. And this asshole wants to lecture the rest of us on financial responsibility?

CRM114
01-17-12, 09:20 AM
John Walsh - the America's Most Wanted guy?

dork
01-17-12, 09:26 AM
I'm glad there is finally some awareness of the persecution Santorums are routinely subjected to in our country. It gets better, Rick. :sad:

Superboy
01-17-12, 09:57 AM
http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/SavageLove?oid=11589595

Dan Savage is just way too passive-aggressive and self-aggrandizing for my tastes. You'd also be surprised how much of the LGBT community dislike him.

Tracer Bullet
01-17-12, 10:24 AM
He does sound like a pretty disgusting human being (i've heard him on the radio a few times). It's more beneficial to feel sorry for people like that rather than hate them. I may not care for Santorum the politician but he wins the race of life hands down. His family name will live on, while Savages dies with him.

Dan Savage has a son.

Tracer Bullet
01-17-12, 10:25 AM
why not? there's nothing at all hypocritical about detesting bullying, and starting the "spreadingsantorum" website and using google's algorithms to make sure it's the top hit?

explain to me why both of those projects can coexist in a world without hypocrisy.

Bullying a bully isn't bullying. It's self-defense.

kvrdave
01-17-12, 10:46 AM
Bullying a bully isn't bullying. It's self-defense.

Hmmmmm. I'd say bullying is bullying. And self defense is self defense. I know that sounds to simple, but if a black guy calls me a honkey, and I respond in kind with an N-bomb, it isn't self defense. It is still racist, and on both sides.

What probably matters is whether the "self defender" actually was bullying or not.

Tracer Bullet
01-17-12, 11:32 AM
Hmmmmm. I'd say bullying is bullying. And self defense is self defense. I know that sounds to simple, but if a black guy calls me a honkey, and I respond in kind with an N-bomb, it isn't self defense. It is still racist, and on both sides.

What probably matters is whether the "self defender" actually was bullying or not.

That makes sense, you son of a bitch.

orangecrush
01-17-12, 11:34 AM
OK, I've heard all the Eagles/James Gang/Funk 49 jokes, but I just can't figure this one out.

No, my Joe Walsh is unrelated to the musician. My Joe Walsh is a douchebag who owes his kids more than $100,000 in child support, lost his license multiple times due to unpaid tickets and insurance bills, and has lost multiple lawsuits related to his inability to live up to his financial commitments. And this asshole wants to lecture the rest of us on financial responsibility?It was a bad joke that he was actually John Walsh.

Superboy
01-17-12, 11:38 AM
That makes sense, you son of a bitch.

Sure it is! goddamn, we've been backed into a corner by our own hypocrisy.... fucking hell....

I guess i'm voting for Santorum instead of Dan Savage.

Artman
01-17-12, 11:41 AM
Dan Savage has a son.

Wasn't sure if it was his or his boyfriends. Poor kid.

Tracer Bullet
01-17-12, 11:45 AM
Wasn't sure if it was his or his boyfriends. Poor kid.

:rolleyes:

It's both of theirs, and they're married.

PopcornTreeCt
01-17-12, 02:42 PM
This thread turned quite disgusting pretty fast.

Dr Mabuse
01-17-12, 02:48 PM
I'm wondering how Romney is gonna break it to America that he pays 15% taxes.

This should be entertaining stuff.

Venusian
01-17-12, 02:50 PM
I'm wondering how Romney is gonna break it to America that he pays 15% taxes.

This should be entertaining stuff.

Does he have a job?

Tracer Bullet
01-17-12, 03:01 PM
Does he have a job?

Yes, saving America.

Venusian
01-17-12, 03:13 PM
Yes, saving America.

:lol:

We're screwed :(

X
01-17-12, 03:17 PM
I'm wondering how Romney is gonna break it to America that he pays 15% taxes.

This should be entertaining stuff.Did America care much about John Kerry (well, his wife) paying that much?

Tracer Bullet
01-17-12, 03:26 PM
Did America care much about John Kerry (well, his wife) paying that much?

John Kerry? Didn't he run for president in like the '60s?

Superboy
01-17-12, 03:29 PM
It's nice to see that this thread has just devolved into this:

http://i3.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/original/000/000/266/no_u_for_knowyourmeme.jpg

Tracer Bullet
01-17-12, 03:35 PM
I think you wanted this thread: http://forum.dvdtalk.com/other-talk/598150-chicago-7-kids-vs-1-asian-kid.html

Th0r S1mpson
01-17-12, 03:37 PM
Is the 15% his "effective" tax rate?

If so, that should be higher than average. Not that such data would quench the necessary outrage.

Tracer Bullet
01-17-12, 03:39 PM
Is the 15% his "effective" tax rate?

Well, something about Romney has to be effective.

Th0r S1mpson
01-17-12, 03:46 PM
I think you wanted this thread: http://forum.dvdtalk.com/other-talk/598150-chicago-7-kids-vs-1-asian-kid.html

That's the thread where I learned that bullying a bully isn't bullying. It's self-defense.

Tracer Bullet
01-17-12, 03:57 PM
That's the thread where I learned that bullying a bully isn't bullying. It's self-defense.

What kind of jackass would say something that stupid?

brayzie
01-17-12, 04:22 PM
That's the thread where I learned that bullying a bully isn't bullying. It's self-defense.

Bullying someone else, regardless of whether or not they are a bully, does not change the act to "self-defense."


bul·ly/ˈbo͝olē/

1.A person who uses strength or power to harm or intimidate those who are weaker.

Use superior strength or influence to intimidate (someone), typically to force him or her to do what one wants.

So if you resort to bullying to combat a bully, you're only getting them to change their ways (temporarily). However, you're also perpetuating the idea that bullying to get your way works, instead of using reason, logic, or empathy.

Jason
01-17-12, 05:40 PM
JasonF already pointed out the obvious. Santorum was soundly defeated in PA six years ago because we were embarrassed by him. Even the middle and some on the right voted against him. It's interesting that Repubs think is slate has been cleaned - or perhaps they are clamoring for an ultra right-wing bigot to lead this country.

I can't even think of a comparable Democrat - someone who was defeated by 17% and came back to run for the Presidency.

One of the major things that upset a lot of people in Pennsylvania was the fact santorum didn't live there anymore. He maintained a ramshackle house for a mailing address while his kids went to an expensive cyber school (courtesy of the taxpayers of pennsylvania) while living in the families McMansion in Virginia. And when it all came out, Santorum bumbled and stumbled like every other politician with his hand caught in the cookie jar.

wmansir
01-17-12, 05:56 PM
I saw a Reuters article today with the headline: Romney may not release tax records until April (http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/01/17/us-usa-campaign-romney-tax-idUSTRE80G1RE20120117)

I found it odd for two reasons.

First, the article implies Romney agreed to release his tax information, but may not do so until April. In fact, he did no such thing. He said Paraphrasing: I will consider releasing his tax records in April, which appears to be the tradition even though it is not required by law. He didn't say he definitely would.

Second the headline makes it sound unusual but, as Romney said, April is traditionally the time when candidates release their tax information. Obama, Hilary, McCain, Kerry, Bush (2000) all released their tax information in late March or April. Except....

Did America care much about John Kerry (well, his wife) paying that much?

Kerry released his tax information in April 2004. Mrs Kerry filed separately and never released her full tax records. She did a partial release in late October of '04 that showed she paid about a 12% effective tax rate on $5M in income. Those records did not reveal the tax status of her trust fund income, which was estimated to include up to $1B in assets.

Superboy
01-18-12, 01:38 AM
Did America care much about John Kerry (well, his wife) paying that much?

I know. We should have totally ripped John Kerry a new one for running on the platform in 2004 that Republicans are running on in the 2012 election.

Superboy
01-18-12, 01:39 AM
Is the 15% his "effective" tax rate?

If so, that should be higher than average. Not that such data would quench the necessary outrage.

No, his effective tax rate would be much lower, probably in the range of 6-8% at most.

Superboy
01-18-12, 02:00 AM
Hmmmmm. I'd say bullying is bullying. And self defense is self defense. I know that sounds to simple, but if a black guy calls me a honkey, and I respond in kind with an N-bomb, it isn't self defense. It is still racist, and on both sides.

What probably matters is whether the "self defender" actually was bullying or not.

Okay, so the next time a politician is pushing for discriminatory legislation against you, you can call him all the names you want and it'll be fair.

JasonF
01-18-12, 07:53 AM
Did America care much about John Kerry (well, his wife) paying that much?

Is that a trick question? We heard about TeRAAAYsa constantly from the Republicans. The right couldn't stop talking about the fact that Kerry was a fancy lad who used his wife's money to go windsurfing.

CRM114
01-18-12, 08:00 AM
John Kerry also wasn't going around saying that the rich were being persecuted. What a lame comparison.

Venusian
01-18-12, 08:05 AM
John Kerry also wasn't going around saying that the rich were being persecuted. What a lame comparison.

Romney said the rich are being persectued? link?

CRM114
01-18-12, 08:14 AM
You seriously need to pay attention to the world around you. The entire campaign so far has been based upon the premise of squashing labor and promoting the "job creators."

“This country already has a leader who divides us with the bitter politics of envy. We must offer an alternative vision.” Link (http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-victorious-romney-warns-against-bitter-politics-of-envy-20120110,0,5706450.story)

Envy? Really Mitt?

“I think it’s dangerous, this class warfare.” Link (http://www.nationaljournal.com/2012-presidential-campaign/romney-wall-street-protests-class-warfare--20111004)

No shit it's "dangerous."

RoyalTea
01-18-12, 08:19 AM
Since when did envy and persecution become synonyms?

CRM114
01-18-12, 08:19 AM
:lol: Here we go.

RoyalTea
01-18-12, 08:23 AM
No, seriously, when did envy and persecution become synonyms? I bought a new thesaurus in 2009 and I need to know if it's obsolete.

Venusian
01-18-12, 08:25 AM
You seriously need to pay attention to the world around you. The entire campaign so far has been based upon the premise of squashing labor and promoting the "job creators."



Envy? Really Mitt?



No shit it's "dangerous."
So basically, he didn't say it?

CRM114
01-18-12, 08:35 AM
Declaring "war" on the "job creators" based on envy would qualify as persecuting them. But go on with your deflections using semantics. It's always fun.

I really wonder if they actually teach critical thinking any longer in the school systems.

Th0r S1mpson
01-18-12, 08:48 AM
No, his effective tax rate would be much lower, probably in the range of 6-8% at most.

You sure about that?

JasonF
01-18-12, 08:49 AM
Since when did envy and persecution become synonyms?

Wouldn't it be more productive to focus on the substance of CRM's post (that Governor Romney and Senator Kerry have different perspectives on the way society looks at the wealthy, and those different perspectives in turn makes it appropriately to treat their wealth differently) rather than simply nitpick CRM's choice of the word "persecute" instead of "envy"? Does engaging in that kind of sophistry really accomplish anything worthwhile? This is a thread to discuss the Republican presidential candidates, not to discuss how precise CRM's is in his use of language.

RoyalTea
01-18-12, 08:59 AM
Wouldn't it be more productive to focus on the substance of CRM's post (that Governor Romney and Senator Kerry have different perspectives on the way society looks at the wealthy, and those different perspectives in turn makes it appropriately to treat their wealth differently) rather than simply nitpick CRM's choice of the word "persecute" instead of "envy"? Does engaging in that kind of sophistry really accomplish anything worthwhile? This is a thread to discuss the Republican presidential candidates, not to discuss how precise CRM's is in his use of language.

Maybe if the meanings of the two words were remotely similar.

cpgator
01-18-12, 08:59 AM
Wouldn't it be more productive to focus on the substance of CRM's post (that Governor Romney and Senator Kerry have different perspectives on the way society looks at the wealthy, and those different perspectives in turn makes it appropriately to treat their wealth differently) rather than simply nitpick CRM's choice of the word "persecute" instead of "envy"?

If i remember correctly, one of the issues with Kerry was him wanting to raise the tax rate on the wealthy, and that the rich should pay more than they were currently paying. While at the same time they were doing everything possible to reduce their personal taxes.

RoyalTea
01-18-12, 09:07 AM
If i remember correctly, one of the issues with Kerry was him wanting to raise the tax rate on the wealthy, and that the rich should pay more than they were currently paying. While at the same time they were doing everything possible to reduce their personal taxes.
Didn't he keep his yacht docked in Rhode Island because he'd have to pay less in taxes than if he docked his yacht in Massachusetts?

wishbone
01-18-12, 09:07 AM
If i remember correctly, one of the issues with Kerry was him wanting to raise the tax rate on the wealthy, and that the rich should pay more than they were currently paying. While at the same time they were doing everything possible to reduce their personal taxes.http://i40.tinypic.com/2q158jb.jpg

That yacht has already sailed... to Rhode Island.

CRM114
01-18-12, 09:20 AM
Maybe if the meanings of the two words were remotely similar.

Romney and the rest of the Repub lot are opposed to raising taxes on the wealthy. Taxing them more is persecuting them and they don't want to be persecuted because of the envy of the peasant class.

Are you really that unable to make the mental leap required to put two and two together? Is this Romper Room where I must spell out the most basic and fundamental concepts and how they fit together? It's like training a four year old to put the colored rings on the post in order.

RoyalTea
01-18-12, 09:27 AM
:lol:

a tax hike is "persecution?"

:lol: :lol: :lol:

CRM114
01-18-12, 09:36 AM
Tell me about it. Those fools are pretty funny with their hyperbole. Glad you can laugh at yourself.

Superboy
01-18-12, 09:51 AM
You sure about that?

No, but that's about average.

sracer
01-18-12, 10:02 AM
Romney and the rest of the Repub lot are opposed to raising taxes on the wealthy. Taxing them more is persecuting them and they don't want to be persecuted because of the envy of the peasant class.

Are you really that unable to make the mental leap required to put two and two together? Is this Romper Room where I must spell out the most basic and fundamental concepts and how they fit together? It's like training a four year old to put the colored rings on the post in order.
Perhaps if you were intellectually consistent that wouldn't be necessary.

CRM114
01-18-12, 10:06 AM
Judging by the judges of my consistency, I won't put much weight into that comment.

wmansir
01-18-12, 10:15 AM
Didn't he keep his yacht docked in Rhode Island because he'd have to pay less in taxes than if he docked his yacht in Massachusetts?
To be fair it wasn't his yacht, it was his wife's..or actually it belonged to an LLC trust of hers based in PA. In fact, almost the entire Heinz-Kerry fortune is incorporated in PA, which has about half the income tax and a quarter the estate tax of MA.

CaptainMarvel
01-18-12, 10:19 AM
Judging by the judges of my consistency, I won't put much weight into that comment.

That's the spirit. Keep it up. The mental gymnastics you have to perform to rationalize your opinions is one of the most entertaining aspects of this forum.

clappj
01-18-12, 10:19 AM
Judging by the judges of my consistency, I won't put much weight into that comment.


http://onemansblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/11/chris-langan.jpg

CRM114 is revealed to be Chris Langan, the "Smartest Man In America."

CRM114
01-18-12, 10:30 AM
Let's continue to deflect from the original preposterous claims that Senator Kerry and Governor Romney's positions are synonymous. :lol:

X
01-18-12, 11:03 AM
Is that a trick question? We heard about TeRAAAYsa constantly from the Republicans. The right couldn't stop talking about the fact that Kerry was a fancy lad who used his wife's money to go windsurfing.The comparison would be that Kerry believes that the rich should pay more taxes, yet the person closest to him does every thing he can to avoid paying taxes (sailboat docked out of state) and the person second closest to him fully takes advantage of paying the lowest taxes possible on her income.

Romney, at least in this campaign, hasn't expressed a wish that the rich pay more taxes. So what's the problem with his behaving the way he wants others to behave?

brayzie
01-18-12, 11:14 AM
Okay, so the next time a politician is pushing for discriminatory legislation against you, you can call him all the names you want and it'll be fair.

Or you can point out the flaws and idiocy in his arguments, and vote against him.

Th0r S1mpson
01-18-12, 11:19 AM
No, but that's about average.

Except all the articles I've found say the 15% is, in fact, a reference to his effective tax rate.

Do you have something that says otherwise?

wmansir
01-18-12, 11:58 AM
The comparison would be that Kerry believes that the rich should pay more taxes, yet the person closest to him does every thing he can to avoid paying taxes (sailboat docked out of state) and the person second closest to him fully takes advantage of paying the lowest taxes possible on her income.

Romney, at least in this campaign, hasn't expressed a wish that the rich pay more taxes. So what's the problem with his behaving the way he wants others to behave?
Romney has said he believes investment manager's fees and income should be taxed as income and not capitol gains, a position that presumably would hurt his personal finances depending on how his Bain assets are structured.

X
01-18-12, 12:02 PM
Romney has said he believes investment manager's fees and income should be taxed as income and not capitol gains, a position that presumably would hurt his personal finances depending on how his Bain assets are structured.I don't think he's an investment manager anymore.

JasonF
01-18-12, 12:11 PM
The comparison would be that Kerry believes that the rich should pay more taxes, yet the person closest to him does every thing he can to avoid paying taxes (sailboat docked out of state) and the person second closest to him fully takes advantage of paying the lowest taxes possible on her income.

Romney, at least in this campaign, hasn't expressed a wish that the rich pay more taxes. So what's the problem with his behaving the way he wants others to behave?

OK, but now we've gone from "Did America care about Kerry's money," with the implication of "therefore they shouldn't care about Romney's money" to "Yes, America did care about Kerry's money, but that was OK because of Kerry's political positions, while it's not OK to care about Romney's money because of his very different positions."

I would submit that it's always fair to ask "cui bono" about a politician's positions.

X
01-18-12, 12:13 PM
OK, but now we've gone from "Did America care about Kerry's money," with the implication of "therefore they shouldn't care about Romney's money" to "Yes, America did care about Kerry's money, but that was OK because of Kerry's political positions, while it's not OK to care about Romney's money because of his very different positions."

I would submit that it's always fair to ask "cui bono" about a politician's positions.No, I didn't ask if we cared about Kerry's money. I asked whether America cared about what tax rate Kerry/wife paid.

wmansir
01-18-12, 12:33 PM
I don't think he's an investment manager anymore.
He isn't but, AFAIK, he still receives profit shares from Bain Capitol as a retired/silent partner.

wendersfan
01-18-12, 02:26 PM
In most states the Republicans are in a 3 way mess: establishment, evangelical, and tea party/libertarian.This seems to be a common misconception about the Tea Party group - that they are small government conservatives. In reality they are simply a more committed subset of the Republican Party in general, meaning that they are more conservative across the board, including social issues. In a January 7-10 YouGov poll, those who identified as members of the Tea Party favored Santorum above all the other GOP candidates, with Paul running behind Gingrich, Romney, and Perry.

RoyalTea
01-18-12, 03:40 PM
Not really sure I'd call Huntsman a libertarian.

classicman2
01-18-12, 06:22 PM
Not really sure I'd call Huntsman a libertarian.

Maybe wendersfan will explain why he believes he is.

SuprVgeta
01-18-12, 09:52 PM
According to Democrats it seems like the nominee of the Republican party should be the poorest man in America. This way he knows exactly what they are going through. Therefore I nominate:

http://snl.jt.org/caps/characters/TrMo-Woodrow.jpg

JasonF
01-18-12, 09:58 PM
Marianne Gingrich has said she could end her ex-husband’s career with a single interview.
Earlier this week, she sat before ABCNEWS cameras, the DRUDGE REPORT has learned.

She spoke to ABCNEWS reporter Brian Ross for two hours, and her explosive revelations are set to rock the trail.

But now a “civil war” has erupted inside of the network, an insider claims, on exactly when the confession will air!

ABCNEWS suits determined it would be “unethical” to run the Marianne Gingrich interview so close to the South Carolina Primary, a curious decision, one insider argued, since the network has aggressively been reporting on other candidates.

A decision was tentatively made to air the interview next Monday, after all votes have been counted.

http://www.drudgereport.com/flash2.htm

It's unethical to report on a candidate before an election!? WTF?

Anyway, Drudge is now saying the interview will air Thursday on Nightline, so I guess ABC figured out that if there's news about a candidate, it's not unethical to report on that.

X
01-18-12, 10:05 PM
http://www.drudgereport.com/flash2.htm

It's unethical to report on a candidate before an election!? WTF?Yes, before he can possibly do damage to the Republican frontrunner. If you're in the tank for Obama you want to do it after.

PopcornTreeCt
01-19-12, 12:12 AM
Inform the people afterwards, so they can all regret giving him their vote. Good thinking.

mosquitobite
01-19-12, 07:52 AM
This seems to be a common misconception about the Tea Party group - that they are small government conservatives. In reality they are simply a more committed subset of the Republican Party in general, meaning that they are more conservative across the board, including social issues. In a January 7-10 YouGov poll, those who identified as members of the Tea Party favored Santorum above all the other GOP candidates, with Paul and Huntsmen (the two libertarians of the bunch) both running behind Gingrich, Romney, and Perry.

Yes, I'm not talking about the actual group of everyone who calls themselves tea partiers. I belong to a tea party group on facebook and it's about half for Paul, half for Santorum.

The ones for Santorum?? Well, they're not really tea party but they jumped on the bandwagon. ;) Many on the tea party groups see their only goal is beating Obama - Hell - if that were the only purpose stay in the Republican party FFS. In the split I mentioned, I would call them the evangelicals - not tea partiers.

Then there are some of us who say: Romney is *NO* better than Obama and I'd rather Obama win re-election than have Romney discredit Republicans worse than Bush already has. THAT's the real tea party stance.

mosquitobite
01-19-12, 07:53 AM
Not really sure I'd call Huntsman a libertarian.

I don't, and neither do most of the people who support Paul.

Johnson? Sure. But Huntsman? Nope.

CRM114
01-19-12, 07:59 AM
According to Democrats it seems like the nominee of the Republican party should be the poorest man in America. This way he knows exactly what they are going through. Therefore I nominate:

http://snl.jt.org/caps/characters/TrMo-Woodrow.jpg

All the candidates are rich. They are all millionaires. There is one douchebag running around talking about envy.

CRM114
01-19-12, 08:01 AM
Yes, before he can possibly do damage to the Republican frontrunner. If you're in the tank for Obama you want to do it after.

:lol:

You guys take this liberal media a weeee bit too far. rotfl

CRM114
01-19-12, 08:03 AM
Yes, I'm not talking about the actual group of everyone who calls themselves tea partiers. I belong to a tea party group on facebook and it's about half for Paul, half for Santorum.

The ones for Santorum?? Well, they're not really tea party but they jumped on the bandwagon. ;) Many on the tea party groups see their only goal is beating Obama - Hell - if that were the only purpose stay in the Republican party FFS. In the split I mentioned, I would call them the evangelicals - not tea partiers.

Then there are some of us who say: Romney is *NO* better than Obama and I'd rather Obama win re-election than have Romney discredit Republicans worse than Bush already has. THAT's the real tea party stance.

So the tea partiers support a Senator who stole Pennsylvania taxpayer monies to enroll his kids in cyber school while living full time in Washington?

JasonF
01-19-12, 08:13 AM
So the tea partiers support a Senator who stole Pennsylvania taxpayer monies to enroll his kids in cyber school while living full time in Washington?

Those don't count, because they are not Real Tea Partiers. You can tell because the people who are Real Tea Partiers say so.

Venusian
01-19-12, 08:23 AM
Perry is out

clappj
01-19-12, 08:26 AM
Newt Gingrich creeping up on Mitt Romney in a creepy way

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-gingrich-creeping-up-20120118,0,4265395.story

sracer
01-19-12, 08:30 AM
Yes, I'm not talking about the actual group of everyone who calls themselves tea partiers. I belong to a tea party group on facebook and it's about half for Paul, half for Santorum.

The ones for Santorum?? Well, they're not really tea party but they jumped on the bandwagon. ;) Many on the tea party groups see their only goal is beating Obama - Hell - if that were the only purpose stay in the Republican party FFS. In the split I mentioned, I would call them the evangelicals - not tea partiers.

Then there are some of us who say: Romney is *NO* better than Obama and I'd rather Obama win re-election than have Romney discredit Republicans worse than Bush already has. THAT's the real tea party stance.
You are free to continue to believe that, but the fact is that the Tea Party was founded on and subsists on a desire to see President Obama (and all other Democrats) out of office.

They can take the American flag and wrap themselves in it like some home-made snuggie, parade around with a purple velvet litter with a copy of the constitution gently placed on it, protected by a glass dome, and carried by 4 guys dressed like minutemen, but that doesn't change the fact that when President Bush was in office (making decisions and pushing laws that eroded consitutional freedoms) these "concerned patriots" were too busy cheering, "Go America!" to care about the Constitution then.

mosquitobite
01-19-12, 08:35 AM
You are free to continue to believe that, but the fact is that the Tea Party was founded on and subsists on a desire to see President Obama (and all other Democrats) out of office.

They can take the American flag and wrap themselves in it like some home-made snuggie, parade around with a purple velvet litter with a copy of the constitution gently placed on it, protected by a glass dome, and carried by 4 guys dressed like minutemen, but that doesn't change the fact that when President Bush was in office (making decisions and pushing laws that eroded consitutional freedoms) these "concerned patriots" were too busy cheering, "Go America!" to care about the Constitution then.

I'm not disagreeing with you.

I've tried to explain that the REAL tea party started in 2007 (yes when Bush was in office). The real tea party started with support of Ron Paul (the only Republican candidate with an anti-Bush philosophy, no?)

So, yes - I agree the tea party was co-opted by the idiots whose only goal is to get rid of Obama. But since that's also the goal of the Republicans - well - as I point out to them all the time in my group - there's already a group for that and they're called GOP. I'm not tea party to get rid of Obama. I'm tea party to hold our out of control government accountable. And that includes numbnuts like Santorum!

so when I say tea party - I mean the ones that actually fricken MEAN it.

JasonF
01-19-12, 08:37 AM
I think it's fair to characterize Governor Huntsman as a libertarian. On economic issues, he's as far right as anyone in the GOP (for example, he supports Rep. Ryan's plan to dismantle Medicare). On social issues, unlike most Republican politicians, he seems to think maybe the government shouldn't be peeking in my bedroom window.

As for Rep. Paul, everyone calls him a libertarian, but the more I think about it, the less I think that label applies. Ron Paul doesn't really care about liberty. He cares about limiting the power of the federal government, but I think Ron Paul would be perfectly fine with jackbooted thugs breaking down your door in the middle of the night and dragging you off to a secret prison as long as they are the state's jackbooted thugs and not federal jackbooted thugs.

Groucho
01-19-12, 08:39 AM
No true Scotsman...

mosquitobite
01-19-12, 08:42 AM
I think it's fair to characterize Governor Huntsman as a libertarian. On economic issues, he's as far right as anyone in the GOP (for example, he supports Rep. Ryan's plan to dismantle Medicare). On social issues, unlike most Republican politicians, he seems to think maybe the government shouldn't be peeking in my bedroom window.

As for Rep. Paul, everyone calls him a libertarian, but the more I think about it, the less I think that label applies. Ron Paul doesn't really care about liberty. He cares about limiting the power of the federal government, but I think Ron Paul would be perfectly fine with jackbooted thugs breaking down your door in the middle of the night and dragging you off to a secret prison as long as they are the state's jackbooted thugs and not federal jackbooted thugs.

Nice way to change the wording of the Constitution!

JasonF
01-19-12, 08:43 AM
Nice way to change the wording of the Constitution!

I don't know what you mean. Can you clarify?

mosquitobite
01-19-12, 08:49 AM
:rolleyes: Ron Paul doesn't really care about liberty. He cares about limiting the power of the federal government, you know... that damn 10th amendment and all....

dvdjunkie32
01-19-12, 08:53 AM
I know I'm in the minority, but I always liked Rick Perry and his no nonsense approach. Sad that he is dropping out and a few gaffees killed his run.

clappj
01-19-12, 09:08 AM
Funny how some people fear that Ron Paul would bring some actual CHANGE to D.C., if he were elected.

classicman2
01-19-12, 09:12 AM
I think it's fair to characterize Governor Huntsman as a libertarian. On economic issues, he's as far right as anyone in the GOP (for example, he supports Rep. Ryan's plan to dismantle Medicare). On social issues, unlike most Republican politicians, he seems to think maybe the government shouldn't be peeking in my bedroom window.

As for Rep. Paul, everyone calls him a libertarian, but the more I think about it, the less I think that label applies. Ron Paul doesn't really care about liberty. He cares about limiting the power of the federal government, but I think Ron Paul would be perfectly fine with jackbooted thugs breaking down your door in the middle of the night and dragging you off to a secret prison as long as they are the state's jackbooted thugs and not federal jackbooted thugs.

Hmm! I suppose everyone has a different definition of a libertarian. Huntsman doesn't fit the libertarian label IMO. Paul does comes signficantly closer to being a libertarian IMO.

RoyalTea
01-19-12, 09:32 AM
Libertarian and moderate are not synonyms. Huntsman supported NDAA. I don't think that anyone who thinks the government should be able to accuse an American citizen of terrorism and lock them up in Gitmo without due process is a good libertarian.

wendersfan
01-19-12, 09:50 AM
Maybe wendersfan will explain why he believes he is.
Probably the nice press he got from Cato (the institute, not the Roman senator.)

I'll edit my post.

classicman2
01-19-12, 10:08 AM
Libertarian and moderate are not synonyms. Huntsman supported NDAA. I don't think that anyone who thinks the government should be able to accuse an American citizen of terrorism and lock them up in Gitmo without due process is a good libertarian.

I ask you - what is your definition of a moderate?

Groucho
01-19-12, 10:10 AM
I ask you - what is your definition of a moderate?Somebody to the left of kvrdave, but to the right of JasonF.

orangecrush
01-19-12, 10:18 AM
As for Rep. Paul, everyone calls him a libertarian, but the more I think about it, the less I think that label applies. Ron Paul doesn't really care about liberty. He cares about limiting the power of the federal government, but I think Ron Paul would be perfectly fine with jackbooted thugs breaking down your door in the middle of the night and dragging you off to a secret prison as long as they are the state's jackbooted thugs and not federal jackbooted thugs.How did you get that impression? Every time I have seen him interviewed, he spoke quite a lot about individual liberties. I am not super familiar with his voting record though (a much better measure than interviews to be sure). I know he is pretty anti-abortion. Though I have heard him couch his view in terms of the baby having rights.

RoyalTea
01-19-12, 10:19 AM
I ask you - what is your definition of a moderate?

I look at the two axis grid that has liberal/conservative on one axis and libertarian/authoritarian on the other. A moderate would be plotted near where the two axes intersect.

CRM114
01-19-12, 10:27 AM
Sigh. The NDAA is more than a bill trampling civil rights. Saying you are "for" NDAA is saying you are for funding the United States military. That Huntsman, how can he be FOR funding the military? Pfft. Moderate.

Wait, I'm still amused that Repubs have no idea they eliminated the best hope they had for beating Obama AND probably the most conservative (excluding Paul of course)

orangecrush
01-19-12, 10:36 AM
The libertarians will have the better Republican for their presidential candidate this year.

CRM114
01-19-12, 10:42 AM
In the "new" definition of what a Republican is perhaps.

JasonF
01-19-12, 10:53 AM
:rolleyes: Ron Paul doesn't really care about liberty. He cares about limiting the power of the federal government, you know... that damn 10th amendment and all....

I didn't say anything about the Constitution, or whether Rep. Paul is right or wrong. I simply said that his focus is not on maximizing liberty, it's on minimizing the power of the federal government. That may well be absolutely consistent with the Constitution and the Tenth Amendment, but I have a hard time describing somebody who doesn't care about authoritarianism at the state level as a libertarian.

JasonF
01-19-12, 11:00 AM
How did you get that impression? Every time I have seen him interviewed, he spoke quite a lot about individual liberties. I am not super familiar with his voting record though (a much better measure than interviews to be sure). I know he is pretty anti-abortion. Though I have heard him couch his view in terms of the baby having rights.

If you listen carefully, his arguments tend to be framed in terms of what the federal government should not be allowed to do. But he has no objection to the states, for example, requiring prayer in school. Or the fact that he gets a lot of press because he wants to "end the drug war." But he actually only wants to end the federal drug war -- he is perfectly happy to see states continue to prosecute drug users.

wendersfan
01-19-12, 11:01 AM
I didn't say anything about the Constitution, or whether Rep. Paul is right or wrong. I simply said that his focus is not on maximizing liberty, it's on minimizing the power of the federal government. That may well be absolutely consistent with the Constitution and the Tenth Amendment, but I have a hard time describing somebody who doesn't care about authoritarianism at the state level as a libertarian.
Is it the case that Dr. Paul "doesn't care about authoritarianism at the state level," or that, as an office-holder at the federal level, he's not in a position to do much about state politics?

Th0r S1mpson
01-19-12, 11:31 AM
So Perry is backing Gingrich.

Mr.Briggs
01-19-12, 11:33 AM
Let's see. Stephen Colbert announces & 2 candidates (both of whom he potentially could've finished ahead of) drop out of SC. GO HERMAN CAIN!!! The power of the Colbert & his SuperPac.

Navinabob
01-19-12, 12:30 PM
I was just reading about how they do the Iowa voting and it is insane. I had no idea that it wasn't run or moderated by the state. They pass around a box and toss in tiny slips if paper that you hand-write any name you want on it. Someone then puts all the names in piles on a table for counting; if they can't read the writing on it they then vote on what they think it said! Basically, they do the same voting method my 3rd grade class did when we decided who would be in charge of feeding the class rabbit each month.

<embed src="http://c.brightcove.com/services/viewer/federated_f8/823619053" bgcolor="#ffffff" flashVars="videoId=1363784190001&playerId=823619053&viewerSecureGatewayURL=https://console.brightcove.com/services/amfgateway&servicesURL=http://services.brightcove.com/services&cdnURL=http://admin.brightcove.com&domain=embed&autoStart=false&" base="http://admin.brightcove.com" name="flashObj" width="486" height="412" seamlesstabbing="false" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" swLiveConnect="true" pluginspage="http://www.macromedia.com/shockwave/download/index.cgi?P1_Prod_Version=ShockwaveFlash"></embed>

JasonF
01-19-12, 12:33 PM
Is it the case that Dr. Paul "doesn't care about authoritarianism at the state level," or that, as an office-holder at the federal level, he's not in a position to do much about state politics?

No, he's been pretty explicit about saying he wants states to be able to engage in activities that would violate the Establishment Clause, ban abortion, ban drugs, etc. Now, he may or may not think it's a good idea for states to do these things (though I believe he thinks it would be a good idea for the state to do the three things I describe above), but in Ron Paul's world, there is no problem with the state of Illinois throwing me in jail for 10 years for possession of a joint, or with the state of Illinois begining each school day with compulsory recitation of the Lord's Prayer. To me, that's not a libertarian -- that's an anti-federalist.

Sean O'Hara
01-19-12, 12:51 PM
I was just reading about how they do the Iowa voting and it is insane. I had no idea that it wasn't run or moderated by the state.

Frankly, I've never understood why states are involved with primary elections.

TheMovieman
01-19-12, 12:59 PM
So Perry is backing Gingrich.

That endorsement only cinches I won't vote for angry Newt. :lol:

X
01-19-12, 01:00 PM
No, he's been pretty explicit about saying he wants states to be able to engage in activities that would violate the Establishment Clause, ban abortion, ban drugs, etc. Now, he may or may not think it's a good idea for states to do these things (though I believe he thinks it would be a good idea for the state to do the three things I describe above), but in Ron Paul's world, there is no problem with the state of Illinois throwing me in jail for 10 years for possession of a joint, or with the state of Illinois begining each school day with compulsory recitation of the Lord's Prayer. To me, that's not a libertarian -- that's an anti-federalist.He probably wouldn't have a problem with your moving to a state that has laws more favorable to your behavior either.

JasonF
01-19-12, 01:05 PM
He probably wouldn't have a problem with your moving to a state that has laws more favorable to your behavior either.

I'm sure he wouldn't. Likewise, I'm sure he wouldn't have a problem with me moving to another country that has laws more favorable to my behavior -- yet he would like to change the laws in this country. Nothing wrong with that -- we all have laws we'd like to see changed -- but I think his primary motivator is not "increase liberty," but rather "reduce the role of the federal government." And those two things can overlap sometimes, but they don't always overlap and sometimes they point in opposite directions.

Tracer Bullet
01-19-12, 01:06 PM
Frankly, I've never understood why states are involved with primary elections.

Yes, this.

CRM114
01-19-12, 01:10 PM
Is it the case that Dr. Paul "doesn't care about authoritarianism at the state level," or that, as an office-holder at the federal level, he's not in a position to do much about state politics?

Thats why we need federal law so that certain issues don't become a potpourri of laws throughout the UNITED States.

CRM114
01-19-12, 01:14 PM
So to recap this glorious day in Republican politics:

- Rick Santorum has won Iowa
- Rick Fucking Perry drops out. What a pussy. ;)
- Perry backs Gingrich
- Newt Gingrich is now said to be leading in most of the polls in SC which finished last night
- Newt Gingrich's ex-wife says Newt asked her for an open marriage while simultaneously going after Bill Clinton's transgressions

Cue the circus juggling music. Three primaries with three possible winners.

RoyalTea
01-19-12, 01:16 PM
Thats why we need federal law so that certain issues don't become a potpourri of laws throughout the UNITED States.

I like that the united STATES can offer different things to different populations. If I want to live in a state with lots of regulations that prevent my neighbors from doing things I don't want them to do, I have my options. If I want to live in a state where I'm free to make my own mistakes, I have other options.

CRM114
01-19-12, 01:20 PM
Thats quite the thinking for 1776. But fortunately, it's 2012.

I don't feel I should have to move from the state of my birth because a bunch of of people mobilized to pass some dumb law that no other state has. What a ludicrous concept.

orangecrush
01-19-12, 01:36 PM
Thats quite the thinking for 1776. But fortunately, it's 2012.

I don't feel I should have to move from the state of my birth because a bunch of of people mobilized to pass some dumb law that no other state has. What a ludicrous concept.:lol: Not wanting to move from your state of birth is defiantly more 2012 thinking than 1776.

RoyalTea
01-19-12, 01:36 PM
Thats quite the thinking for 1776. But fortunately, it's 2012.

I don't feel I should have to move from the state of my birth because a bunch of of people mobilized to pass some dumb law that no other state has. What a ludicrous concept.

In 1776, it could take weeks or months to get from one state to another. In 2012, it takes a matter of hours.

In 1776, it could take days or weeks to relay a message from one person to another. In 2012, Skype is instantaneous.

Today, geographic movement is much easier than it was 200 years ago.


You prefer to live in a cradle to grave nanny state. Maybe your neighbor wants the government to leave him alone. Why is it preferable for one of you to force your view on the other instead of one of you moving to an area of the country that would make you happy?

CRM114
01-19-12, 01:40 PM
Because we are a single country, not a collection of separate countries like Europe.

CRM114
01-19-12, 01:42 PM
:lol: Not wanting to move from your state of birth is defiantly more 2012 thinking than 1776.

I think it fits either century.

RoyalTea
01-19-12, 01:45 PM
Because we are a single country, not a collection of separate countries like Europe.
Why do we have state governments?

CRM114
01-19-12, 01:54 PM
To fill potholes.

RoyalTea
01-19-12, 01:55 PM
In rural states, like north Dakota and Wyoming, a child can get a learners permit at 14. In densely populated states, like New Jersey and Connecticut, it's 16.

Since we're one country and all laws need to be exactly the same, who wins? Do we keep a 14 year old from driving on empty roads in the middle of nowhere because some states are more densely populated than others? Or do we put 14 year old on the Garden State Parkway because some teenager on a farm in bumfuck Dakota needs to drive on an empty road to go to the market?

CRM114
01-19-12, 02:02 PM
Personally, I'd raise the driving age to 18 everywhere. But you are straying off the topic JasonF put forward about state rights not trumping federal law in major issues like civil rights and abortion.

wendersfan
01-19-12, 02:03 PM
Why do we have state governments?
To fund the "amateur" football teams you guys love to bitch about so much.

RoyalTea
01-19-12, 02:05 PM
Personally, I'd raise the driving age to 18 everywhere. But you are straying off the topic JasonF put forward about state rights not trumping federal law in major issues like civil rights and abortion.

You're the one who said we're one country and that laws should be the same everywhere for all Americans.

CRM114
01-19-12, 02:11 PM
Yes, like we have now. I could give a rat's ass if Kentucky's driving age is 16 but I sure as hell don't want Kentucky to throw out abortion laws, civil rights laws, or define Christianity as the only true religion.

Navinabob
01-19-12, 02:36 PM
Wait, when did we learn "Newt Gingrich's ex-wife says Newt asked her for an open marriage while simultaneously going after Bill Clinton's transgressions"? Cuz I missed that post.

mosquitobite
01-19-12, 02:36 PM
Yes, like we have now. I could give a rat's ass if Kentucky's driving age is 16 but I sure as hell don't want Kentucky to throw out abortion laws, civil rights laws, or define Christianity as the only true religion.

LOL! :lol:

So you don't want Kentucky's laws...but Kentuckians must have your laws because...well you just know what's best for them dumb Kentuckians!

orangecrush
01-19-12, 02:40 PM
To fund the "amateur" football teams you guys love to bitch about so much.rotfl I love where this thread has gone. :up:

Pharoh
01-19-12, 02:47 PM
To fund the "amateur" football teams you guys love to bitch about so much.

:up:

Something worthwhile at last.
;)



Have you seen the new ODOT budget proposal, for example?

RoyalTea
01-19-12, 02:56 PM
Wait, when did we learn "Newt Gingrich's ex-wife says Newt asked her for an open marriage while simultaneously going after Bill Clinton's transgressions"? Cuz I missed that post.

Two people (of the same gender) who love each other unconditionally and want to do the same thing straight couples can do will destroy the sanctity of marriage. But Newt only wanted to cheat on his wife and not end his marriage, so that's okay.

movielib
01-19-12, 03:05 PM
I'm sure he wouldn't. Likewise, I'm sure he wouldn't have a problem with me moving to another country that has laws more favorable to my behavior -- yet he would like to change the laws in this country. Nothing wrong with that -- we all have laws we'd like to see changed -- but I think his primary motivator is not "increase liberty," but rather "reduce the role of the federal government." And those two things can overlap sometimes, but they don't always overlap and sometimes they point in opposite directions.
If your opinion of Paul is accurate then I would say he's not a libertarian (I'm not sure you're right about that, though). If something is anti-freedom for the federal government to do then it's also anti-freedom for the states to do it.

For a variety of reasons, my opinion of Paul has gone down quite a bit over the last few years (although he's still the best of the remaining Republicans, but only by default).

Unfortunately, I have to conclude that Romney, as flawed as he is, is the best of the nonPaul bunch that is left (too bad Gary Johnson was never able to gain even a foothold). I detest Newt and Santorum. Nevertheless, I will pull the lever for Mitt with little regret to get Obama out of there. For me, it's come down to that.

Tracer Bullet
01-19-12, 03:20 PM
Unfortunately, I have to conclude that Romney, as flawed as he is, is the best of the nonPaul bunch that is left (too bad Gary Johnson was never able to gain even a foothold). I detest Newt and Santorum. Nevertheless, I will pull the lever for Mitt with little regret to get Obama out of there. For me, it's come down to that.

:lol:

kvrdave
01-19-12, 03:26 PM
I'm sure he wouldn't. Likewise, I'm sure he wouldn't have a problem with me moving to another country that has laws more favorable to my behavior -- yet he would like to change the laws in this country. Nothing wrong with that -- we all have laws we'd like to see changed -- but I think his primary motivator is not "increase liberty," but rather "reduce the role of the federal government." And those two things can overlap sometimes, but they don't always overlap and sometimes they point in opposite directions.

I think they overlap enough that the differences may not be very noticable.

PopcornTreeCt
01-19-12, 03:31 PM
Does anyone actually move to another state based on their laws? I would say people move 90% of the time because of job opportunities and the rest is a mix of being closer to family, sick of being in the same place etc.

Tracer Bullet
01-19-12, 03:33 PM
Does anyone actually move to another state based on their laws? I would say people move 90% of the time because of job opportunities and the rest is a mix of being closer to family, sick of being in the same place etc.

My boyfriend and I are looking to move out of New York sometime in the next few years, and I'd have to think long and hard before moving to a state that didn't recognize same-sex marriage. So there's one.

I doubt it's all that common, however.

Superboy
01-19-12, 03:44 PM
Unfortunately, I have to conclude that Romney, as flawed as he is, is the best of the nonPaul bunch that is left (too bad Gary Johnson was never able to gain even a foothold). I detest Newt and Santorum. Nevertheless, I will pull the lever for Mitt with little regret to get Obama out of there. For me, it's come down to that.

Gary Johnson hasn't been tremendously bought out by special interests, that's why. When he was in office he worked for the people, that much was obvious.

Groucho
01-19-12, 03:49 PM
Does anyone actually move to another state based on their laws?My doctor told me to give up drinking, so I moved to Utah.

Navinabob
01-19-12, 03:52 PM
It is starting to sound like many Republican's are picking who to vote for much like someone would pick between turd-sandwiches based on their condiments. "Well, if all I'm given to pick from is shitwiches, I guess I'll go for the one with pickles and extra mayo."

X
01-19-12, 03:54 PM
It is starting to sound like many Republican's are picking who to vote for much like someone would pick between turd-sandwiches based on their condiments. "Well, if all I'm given to pick from is shitwiches, I guess I'll go for the one with pickles and extra mayo."Which is especially bad since they still prefer the taste of that shitwich to the one that's currently in office.

JasonF
01-19-12, 03:55 PM
It is starting to sound like many Republican's are picking who to vote for much like someone would pick between turd-sandwiches based on their condiments. "Well, if all I'm given to pick from is shitwiches, I guess I'll go for the one with pickles and extra mayo."

Sshh, dear, don't cause a fuss. I'll have your shit. I love it. I'm having shit shit shit shit shit shit shit beaked beans spam shit shit and shit!

movielib
01-19-12, 03:59 PM
It is starting to sound like many Republican's are picking who to vote for much like someone would pick between turd-sandwiches based on their condiments. "Well, if all I'm given to pick from is shitwiches, I guess I'll go for the one with pickles and extra mayo."
I'm not a Republican but I will not deny that that is exactly what I'm doing.

RoyalTea
01-19-12, 04:10 PM
Does anyone actually move to another state based on their laws? I would say people move 90% of the time because of job opportunities and the rest is a mix of being closer to family, sick of being in the same place etc.

Not exactly the same thing, but I would love to live close to family on the west coast, but the state government of California is a large enough barrier for me to not consider a move.

If California split into two states, and one was not a nanny state, I'd start applying for jobs in new California the same day the split was announced.

Also, I got my college degree in MA. I left that state the day I graduated because it was too liberal for me.

I once worked in DC. Which gave me a choice of living in MD, DC, or VA. I choose to live in VA.

Navinabob
01-19-12, 04:12 PM
Which is especially bad since they still prefer the taste of that shitwich to the one that's currently in office.

I know!!!

My endorsement for Obama has significantly dropped over the last 2 years because of the feeling that he's just treading water, but the Republican nominees seem to be battling over who is the most extreme Republican.

It's like they watch the Colbert Report to emulate political views without getting the fact that he's a giant joke. His cartoon Republican "character" no longer sits apart from them. It is insanity.

I miss the comparatively moderate McCain :sad:

kvrdave
01-19-12, 04:32 PM
It is starting to sound like many Republican's are picking who to vote for much like someone would pick between turd-sandwiches based on their condiments. "Well, if all I'm given to pick from is shitwiches, I guess I'll go for the one with pickles and extra mayo."

Pretty much. If Obama can't beat whoever the Republican nominee is, I would hope his supporters can finally recognize what a turd of a president he has been.

wendersfan
01-19-12, 04:33 PM
I think they overlap enough that the differences may not be very noticable.You live in WA, so YMMV. This morning I was reading about Loving v. Virginia, and its consequence, which was that in 1967 the 16 states that still had anti-miscegenation laws had them struck down. 1967. That might seem like ancient history to some of you, but not to me. How recently were anti-sodomy laws struck down? Less than a decade ago.

Not to be blunt, Dave, but you and I are straight, white, property-owning men.* We've never had much problem with freedom or liberty in this country.



* The convenient lack of scalp hair is just a bonus.

kvrdave
01-19-12, 04:39 PM
Nor do I want to begin to have one.

Superboy
01-19-12, 05:03 PM
Nor do I want to begin to have one.

Then when some jerkwad senator shows up campaigning for restricting your liberty, you can always just hurl insults at him, or turn his name into a euphemism for that frothy mix of fecal matter and lube that is sometimes the by product of anal sex.

Superboy
01-19-12, 05:06 PM
Oh, but seriously, I absolutely could not stand taking women's studies and liberal sociology classes. I love the methodology and the basic subject matter, but I can't tolerate the people. At the end of a long discussion about gender inequality, I asked my prof and the class (who were all girls, mind you) "I don't see any difference whatsoever between the society we currently live in and the one you propose other than that the corrupt people in power are women instead of men". They apparently didn't have a problem with that.

Th0r S1mpson
01-19-12, 05:06 PM
If California split into two states, and one was not a nanny state, I'd start applying for jobs in new California the same day the split was announced.

Except if California were to split it would be divided into "Nice California" and "Sucky California Desert" which might as well be Mexico.

Superboy
01-19-12, 05:17 PM
Except if California were to split it would be divided into "Nice California" and "Sucky California Desert" which might as well be Mexico.

I know you were joking and all, but Mexico is actually really nice.

Th0r S1mpson
01-19-12, 05:22 PM
I know you were joking and all, but Mexico is actually really nice.

There are nice parts of Mexico. I'll leave it at that.

I've been to Mexico many times (7 or 8). I've been to the California desert many times.

Josh-da-man
01-19-12, 05:36 PM
It is starting to sound like many Republican's are picking who to vote for much like someone would pick between turd-sandwiches based on their condiments. "Well, if all I'm given to pick from is shitwiches, I guess I'll go for the one with pickles and extra mayo."

If you have to eat a shit sandwich, you might as well take the one with the least corn in it.

sracer
01-19-12, 05:36 PM
I'm not disagreeing with you.

I've tried to explain that the REAL tea party started in 2007 (yes when Bush was in office). The real tea party started with support of Ron Paul (the only Republican candidate with an anti-Bush philosophy, no?)

...

so when I say tea party - I mean the ones that actually fricken MEAN it.
That sounds like your own personal view of history. The Tea Party was formed no earlier than 2009. You can claim that the "tea party spirit" started before or that Ron Paul has embodied the Tea Party beliefs before 2009, but there were no organizations referred to as the "Tea Party" in 2007.

To believe your claim that the Tea Party started in 2007 one would have to believe that the Tea Party was silent during the whole TARP bailouts and auto industry bailouts. Either that, or I completely missed all mention of Tea Party rallies occurring during that period.

classicman2
01-19-12, 05:54 PM
Personally, I'd raise the driving age to 18 everywhere. But you are straying off the topic JasonF put forward about state rights not trumping federal law in major issues like civil rights and abortion.

I have no problem with raising the driving age.

I would much rather see the voting age raised to at least 25.

Th0r S1mpson
01-19-12, 05:58 PM
I have no problem with raising the driving age.

Would you have a problem with capping it? ;)

Superboy
01-19-12, 06:03 PM
I have no problem with raising the driving age.

I would much rather see the voting age raised to at least 25.

Then no one under 25 should be able to join the military. And that'll kill enlistment.

Superboy
01-19-12, 06:06 PM
Would you have a problem with capping it? ;)

:lol:

RoyalTea
01-19-12, 06:08 PM
That sounds like your own personal view of history. The Tea Party was formed no earlier than 2009. You can claim that the "tea party spirit" started before or that Ron Paul has embodied the Tea Party beliefs before 2009, but there were no organizations referred to as the "Tea Party" in 2007.

ChicagoTeaParty.com was created on August 3, 2008. (http://www.networksolutions.com/whois-search/chicagoteaparty.com)

I don't know if that was the earliest Tea Party website created, but it was definitely created before the 2008 presidential election.

Also, I registered in November 2000, but I have never been affiliated with any Tea Party group.

Navinabob
01-19-12, 06:32 PM
Great summary of all the recent drama.

http://www.newsday.com/news/nation/gop-campaign-turns-bizarre-in-sc-debate-is-next-1.3464810

NORTH CHARLESTON, S.C. - (AP) -- The race for the Republican presidential nomination is veering toward South Carolina surreal.

Mitt Romney was stripped of his Iowa caucus victory Thursday, then was stung by Texas Gov. Rick Perry's withdrawal and endorsement of Newt Gingrich, the former House speaker who was stunningly accused in turn by an ex-wife of seeking an open marriage so he could keep his mistress.

"Newt's not perfect, but who among us is," said Perry, abruptly quitting the race shortly before an evening debate and less than 48 hours before the polls open in Saturday's first-in-the-South primary.

His decision to end a once-promising candidacy left Romney, Gingrich, former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum and Texas Rep. Ron Paul the remaining contenders in the race to pick a Republican to challenge Democratic President Barack Obama this fall.

Recent polls, coupled with Perry's endorsement, suggested Gingrich was the candidate with the momentum and Romney the one struggling to validate his standing as front-runner. Whatever else the impact, the day's events reduced the number of contenders vying to emerge as Romney's principal conservative alternative.

The former Massachusetts governor had other challenges in a state where unemployment approaches 10 percent. He adamantly refused to explain why some of his millions were invested in the Cayman Islands, how much was there or whether any other funds were held offshore.

Under pressure from his rivals to release his income tax returns before the weekend -- a demand first made by Perry in a debate on Monday -- he told reporters it wouldn't happen. "You'll hear more about that. April," he said.

Gingrich grappled with problems of a different, possibly even more crippling sort in a state where more than half the Republican electorate is evangelical.

In an interview scheduled to air on ABC News, Marianne Gingrich said her ex-husband had wanted an "open marriage" so he could have both a wife and a mistress. She said Gingrich conducted an affair with Callista Bistek -- his current wife -- "in my bedroom in our apartment in Washington" while she was elsewhere.

"He was asking to have an open marriage and I refused. That is not a marriage," she said in excerpts released by the network in advance of the program.

Gingrich declined to respond to his ex-wife's comments, telling reporters his two daughters from the first of his three marriages had sent a letter to ABC "complaining about this as tawdry and inappropriate."

In fact, the letter made no such accusations. Instead, Kathy Lubbers and Jackie Cushman wrote ABC that anyone who has endured a failed marriage "understands it is a personal tragedy filled with regrets, and sometimes differing memories of events."

A short while later, R.C. Hammond, a spokesman for the former speaker, said of Gingrich's ex-wife's account: "It couldn't be any more opposite of the truth."

The interview with the second of Gingrich's two ex-wives and the evening debate weren't the only political events in the run-up to the Saturday primary. Television commercials for the remaining candidates and their allies ran virtually without letup, generally designed to diminish each other's support.

According to information made available to The Associated Press, targeted viewers in most regions of the state were watching an average of about six commercials a day paid for by Romney's campaign and Restore Our Future, a group supporting him. Gingrich, Paul, Santorum and their backers raised the total higher.

Santorum ran commercials likening Romney to Obama; Gingrich's cast the former speaker as the only candidate who could defeat the president this fall. In a sign of the shifting campaign, Restore Our Future stopped attacking Santorum so it could concentrate its fire on Gingrich.

Santorum, whose fortunes have ebbed since what appeared to be a narrow loss in Iowa, pronounced himself the winner there after all when state party officials in Des Moines announced he had finished 34 votes ahead of Romney instead of eight behind.

"There have been two contests. We won one," he said, and he proceeded to ridicule Romney and Gingrich as weak challengers to Obama. "How can you differentiate ourselves on the major issues of the day if we nominate tweedledum and tweedledee instead of someone who stood up and said, 'No'?" he said to one audience, referring to his opposition to a requirement to purchase health care coverage.

Iowa Republican chairman Matt Strawn said the party would not name an official winner because the results were so close and some votes couldn't be counted. Results from eight of the state's 1,774 precincts were not certified to the state party by Wednesday's 5 p.m. deadline.

It was Strawn who had stepped before a microphone shortly before 2 a.m. in Des Moines on Jan. 4 to declare Romney the victor.

That announcement propelled the former Massachusetts governor into New Hampshire, where he breezed to victory in the opening primary of the campaign a week later.

He arrived in South Carolina the following day, front-runner then for sure, now more shakily so.

Perry's withdrawal mimicked one earlier in the week by former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman in that they both quit a few hours before a debate.

The similarities ended there, though. Huntsman endorsed Romney.

Perry had other thoughts, calling Gingrich a "conservative visionary who can transform our country."

Echoing words Huntsman said of Romney, Perry said he and Gingrich had their differences.

And in saying the former speaker was not perfect, he sought to provide political cover of a type that might reassure South Carolina voters for whom religious values are important.

"The fact is, there is forgiveness for those who seek God and I believe in the power of redemption, for it is a central tenet of my own Christian faith," Perry said.

His decision to withdraw set off a scramble among the remaining contenders for the allegiance of his supporters and donors, both in the state and nationally.

State Rep. Chip Limehouse of Charleston said he was expecting to speak by phone with both Romney and Gingrich later in the day before making up his mind.

"I'm looking and I really do think tonight's debate will determine the next president of the United States. That's how important it is," Peeler said.

Perry's exit marked the end of a campaign that began with soaring expectations but quickly faded. He shot to the head of the public opinion polls when he announced his candidacy last summer, but a string of poor debate performances soon led to a decline in support.

His defining moment came at one debate when he unaccountably could not recall the third of three federal agencies he has promised to abolish. He joked about it afterward but never recovered from the fumble.

In his farewell appearance as a candidate, he said he was bowing out of the 2012 campaign, seemingly a hint he would run again in four years if Republicans fail to win the White House this time.

An aide, Ray Sullivan was more explicit, telling reporters Perry hasn't ruled out running for governor again or for the White House in 2016 if Obama is re-elected.

shadowhawk2020
01-19-12, 07:12 PM
Great summary of all the recent drama.

http://www.newsday.com/news/nation/gop-campaign-turns-bizarre-in-sc-debate-is-next-1.3464810

And they still leave out Paul. Unless someone wants to believe they did it because he caused no drama.

classicman2
01-19-12, 07:27 PM
Then no one under 25 should be able to join the military. And that'll kill enlistment.

I favor the return of the draft.

I'm realistic enough to know it won't happen.