The only thing "well oiled" about the GOP are the men who service their conservative masters. GOP job creation: blowjobs, handjobs, and rimjobs.

Kevin72: stoli n coke: And right as the voters of South Carolina commit to Newt, he announces he is leaving for a younger, more attractive primary. Typical.

Florida? Younger? More attractive? Florida?

Florida became a state long after SC, and they do have Miami.

GaryPDX: FlashHarry: GaryPDX: RON PAUL

an 76 year old racist homophobe? i doubt it.

He's not racist. And you could marry your boyfriend in your State if you want to.

I live in Pennsylvania. The hell I can. We're gonna be behind Alabama in legalizing that sort of thing.

trotsky: orclover: This whole "Newt has no chance" mentality scares the crap outa me. Newt doesnt have to beat Obama, he just has to be whoever Obama is replaced with. Newt could beat Clinton or Biden, it might be close but he could beat them. It would be up to somebody else to make sure Obama cant run. And if you think thats impossible then you are a fool. This is a nation of heavily armed maniacs, surrounded by a world of suicidal maniacs who want thier names in the history books. The Secret Service must be full of farking Jedi for Obama to have lived this farking long.

Orcs aren't trolls. According to Tolkien they were descended from Elves. Next time you create a trolling account you may want to research it a bit before just putting "anything that sounds good".

Today i'm called a troll. Next year I might be called a prophet. The pay is the same and I will give just as much of a fark. I honestly dont have the energy or inclination to run alts for trolling or what have you. I may be increadibly pessimistic and a horrible downer at parties but what I am almost never is lying, and every so often I am right on the farking money with my "trolling" predictions. If they were bets I could probably make a living at them. I give Obama 50/50 to make it to the election. If he breathes on that day then he will be president, no matter who he runs against. If he doesnt make it that far then one of these silly windbags will be who we seeth and froth at for another 4 to 8 years.

If i'm wrong then i'm happy for a bit. If i'm right do I change my profile to "lucky guessing asshole, please ignore" or what?

A Newt Gingrich candidacy might just be the most clever thing the GOP has ever done. Lulled by a false sense of security, Democrat voters will think "Hah! Newt Gingrich will NEVER get elected President. I'll just sleep in on election day and let everybody else go vote. The boss will never know, and they sure as heck don't need MY vote when Newt is on the ballot!"

sendtodave: GAT_00: GaryPDX: NewportBarGuy: GaryPDX: And you could marry your boyfriend in your State if you want to.

How very 18th century of you.

The States are the laboratories. You prefer one big giant tyranny telling everyone what to do? I don't.

Which is why the states passed civil rights and fought Germany.

Not everyone agreed with civil rights or disagreed with the Nazis. You're saying they should be forced to go against their beliefs because some far away central government says so?

How progressive.

Yes, just like I think they should be forced to go against their beliefs if they believe in murder, rape, or skipping their taxes. Its called a social contract. Here are some wikipedia links that might help.

Link (new window)
Link (new window)
Link (new window)

Hmm...Sounds like allegations of voter fraud are popping up from SC now too. This is getting very interesting...

tillerman35: A Newt Gingrich candidacy might just be the most clever thing the GOP has ever done. Lulled by a false sense of security, Democrat voters will think "Hah! Newt Gingrich will NEVER get elected President. I'll just sleep in on election day and let everybody else go vote. The boss will never know, and they sure as heck don't need MY vote when Newt is on the ballot!"

I disagree. I honestly think that a Gingrich candidacy will mobilize both Democrats and Independents to cast their "Oh HELL no" votes. If you're not already a supporter of his, he doesn't inspire apathy. In my opinion, he inspires disdain, even revulsion. Romney has a better chance of profiting from the 'eh, they don't need ME to win' factor.

coeyagi: Thigvald the Big-Balled: Before Iowa, I was convinced that [Lithgow] Gingrich [/Lithgow] was running only to sell some books and force Romney into a harder-right position, and that he would sabotage his own campaign (with some really stupid platform planks like "bringing back child labor") to prevent himself from actually having to be the nominee. I guess that was wrong; he may actually want to win this thing.

I am sure he would rather make money off more books, DVDs and speaking engagements, but then his ego kicked in once he saw a shot (once retards showed their maximum amnesia for the 90s) and decided to give it a run afterall.

I SO hope he wins Florida, because his ego will grow, he will start to spew really insane shiat again, and then the pendulum will continue to swing.

Pendulum / Derp 2012.

I don't think Gingrich was in it for the money; Cain/etc probably, but I think Gingrich legitimately observed that ANY GOP candidate in 2012 has a non-zero chance of beating Obama (with that chance heavily determined by the state of the economy and not the candidate themselves), and that the slate of GOP candidates as of Iowa was a shiatshow that he stood a legitimate chance of competing in.

He knows he's not that popular, and he knows that he has nearly zero chance of having another chance as good as this one to seriously compete for significant national office (4 years from now it'll either be vs an incumbent GOP or vs a Dem with a strengthening economy and without Obama's baggage, and by 2020 he's far too old)... so why not go for it? The Bain video really convinced me that this is his play - he recognizes this is his last gasp at glory, and he doesn't care whether he has to burn bridges in the GOP to take the shot. Which is what makes him so dangerous to the party establishment, there's very little they can offer him that will keep him civil (much less push him out of the race) vs Romney.

What I learned from this vote;

Republicans hate capitalism.

struct: Yes, just like I think they should be forced to go against their beliefs if they believe in murder, rape, or skipping their taxes. Its called a social contract. Here are some wikipedia links that might help.

Link (new window)
Link (new window)
Link (new window)

The key to a well functioning social contract is to have a society where most people more or less agree on things. Works better on a smaller level, really, not so much a national or supranational one, unless you want to impose rules in a broad, top down fashion.

Which, really, is what the concept of a social contract was trying to argue against.

Governments should do what people want (consent of the governed), people shouldn't have to do what the government wants. Even if you think what the people want is morally objectionable.

Newt's epic crushing of Mitt Romney, the Republican establishment's anointed candidate, has thrown the normally well-oiled GOP into a full-blown, pant-shiatting panic

Good job, subby, subtly working Santorum into the headline.

GaryPDX: After Newt and Mittens eat each other, RON PAUL will be the last man standing. He'll have the young voters, the Independents and the rest of the GOP will for a cocker spaniel as long as it ain't Obama.

/RON PAUL
//What? It's plausible.

Look, I'll tell you the same thing I tell my brother, the Paulite infected with college libertarianism.

I don't care if he shiats gold and his very tears cure cancer. I am not voting for someone old enough to be my grandfather. It's a hard, high stress job and the dude is geriatric.

struct: Colorado (Romney?)

Seems likely to me, but then again I'm astounded anyone with the sentience to fill out a ballot voted for Newt.

There's a good amount of Mormon spillover from Utah into Colorado, and since we do caucuses, where anyone in a precinct is invited to speak for or against candidates before and during voting, having convincing supporters in lots of precincts willing to stand up and make a case for you is huge. Especially if they're organized ahead of time, like, say, through church groups.

\For instance, the two people in my precinct who volunteered to speak for Hillary were a strident little twerp (who had valid points underneath his annoying delivery) and a woman who simply argued that it was time for a woman candidate. Obama's supporters clearly outperformed them, as the majority of voters who'd initially put themselves with the undecideds went to him.

orclover: trotsky: orclover: This whole "Newt has no chance" mentality scares the crap outa me. Newt doesnt have to beat Obama, he just has to be whoever Obama is replaced with. Newt could beat Clinton or Biden, it might be close but he could beat them. It would be up to somebody else to make sure Obama cant run. And if you think thats impossible then you are a fool. This is a nation of heavily armed maniacs, surrounded by a world of suicidal maniacs who want thier names in the history books. The Secret Service must be full of farking Jedi for Obama to have lived this farking long.

Orcs aren't trolls. According to Tolkien they were descended from Elves. Next time you create a trolling account you may want to research it a bit before just putting "anything that sounds good".

Today i'm called a troll. Next year I might be called a prophet. The pay is the same and I will give just as much of a fark. I honestly dont have the energy or inclination to run alts for trolling or what have you. I may be increadibly pessimistic and a horrible downer at parties but what I am almost never is lying, and every so often I am right on the farking money with my "trolling" predictions. If they were bets I could probably make a living at them. I give Obama 50/50 to make it to the election. If he breathes on that day then he will be president, no matter who he runs against. If he doesnt make it that far then one of these silly windbags will be who we seeth and froth at for another 4 to 8 years.

If i'm wrong then i'm happy for a bit. If i'm right do I change my profile to "lucky guessing asshole, please ignore" or what?

On your next alt I suggest a better, more troll based name. Try reading Lord of the Rings, I mean, go to the classic for a good troll name.

Newt = Greg Stillson

Awesome....Let the GOP burn!!!

/Libertarians 2012!1

sendtodave: struct: Yes, just like I think they should be forced to go against their beliefs if they believe in murder, rape, or skipping their taxes. Its called a social contract. Here are some wikipedia links that might help.

Link (new window)
Link (new window)
Link (new window)

The key to a well functioning social contract is to have a society where most people more or less agree on things. Works better on a smaller level, really, not so much a national or supranational one, unless you want to impose rules in a broad, top down fashion.

Which, really, is what the concept of a social contract was trying to argue against.

Governments should do what people want (consent of the governed), people shouldn't have to do what the government wants. Even if you think what the people want is morally objectionable.

Well actually ... you make a pretty good point, not one I necessarily agree with, but the argument about the correct size to think about social contract is an interesting one. My take is that its probably mostly an academic argument (and one used when a libertarian candidate gets a lot of press) since our deal with the state usually means the United States government under the Constitution - that doesn't mean I don't think it has merit.

spongeboob: DarKrow: GaryPDX: FlashHarry: GaryPDX: RON PAUL

an 76 year old racist homophobe? i doubt it.

He's not racist. And you could marry your boyfriend in your State if you want to.

I live in Pennsylvania. The hell I can. We're gonna be behind Alabama in legalizing that sort of thing.

I am not sure where you are getting that idea.

You ever live in this state? You've got Philadelphia on one side, Pittsburgh on the other, and in between some of the most horrible, redneck, gun-toting, queer-bashing, right wing, christian nutballs the planet's ever seen. Everyone thinks it's only below the Mason-Dixon line, but buddy, rural PA is chock-full of them, and they hate the blacks, the queers, the Mexicans, and the Catholics. The day this state legalizes Gay Marriage on its own is the day the sun turns into a lump of charcoal the size of your forehead, which means that any wedding will require flashlights and sweaters.

TL;DR: Pennsylvania elected Rick Santorum to the Senate.

coeyagi: mr lawson: Awesome....Let the GOP burn!!!

/Libertarians 2012!1

Libertarians = 21st century communists. But instead, let's not give your utopia a chance to fail. Let's just quietly rationalize out how farking stupid Paul's ideas are (some, not all) on paper and skip the whole Hindenberg, shall we?

South Dakota is about as close to Libertopia as you can get.

-Worst safety net in the 50 states.
-Underpaid, miserable Public Employees.
-No money for snowplows but plenty for stupid lawsuits.
-Basically zero gun regulations. They're trying to do away with the perfunctory CCW right now, as a matter of fact.
-Low business taxes, very pro-business, actually.
-Laws that intrude into your bedroom.
-Cheap labor in the form of poors and Indians.


On the downside:

-No culture. Any business that's not a chain fails in about a year.
-Prices are higher: I'm looking for a car and it seems everything I want is around 3-5k more than back home.
-Wages are lower
-Cost of living is not low and wages certainly do not keep up.
-No jobs outside of call centers and seasonal tourist jobs.
-Want to leave? That'll be a six hour drive, please.
-No real activities outside of drinking and drinking harder.

The ultimate irony is that this place farking thrives on Federal money. From the Airforce Base to Pine Ridge, Federal money keeps this little slice of hell working. They all hate the farking government but without that sweet, sweet Fed money, their Ag subsidies would go away, their services would cease and a huge inflow of cash would stop.

ROM PAUL and his dipshiat acolytes can kiss my ass. This place is a dump.

DarKrow: You ever live in this state? You've got Philadelphia on one side, Pittsburgh on the other, and in between some of the most horrible, redneck, gun-toting, queer-bashing, right wing, christian nutballs the planet's ever seen. Everyone thinks it's only below the Mason-Dixon line, but buddy, rural PA is chock-full of them, and they hate the blacks, the queers, the Mexicans, and the Catholics. The day this state legalizes Gay Marriage on its own is the day the sun turns into a lump of charcoal the size of your forehead, which means that any wedding will require flashlights and sweaters.
TL;DR: Pennsylvania elected Rick Santorum to the Senate.

I know someone from there and she says the same thing. They all have the fundie fever.

"Epic crushing"?

Guess how I know Subby is a douchenozzle teet sucking coont?

http://polltracker.talkingpointsmemo.com/poll/4f1ce16aed4f676e44030bf7 ?ref=fpblg

They're reaping the consequences of a generation of faux-intellectualism and and flat-out anti-intellectualism. They made their electorate stupid, ignorant, and angry, but they neglected to keep them unified and uniformly misinformed. This is what happens.

Do you see what happens, Republicans? Do you see what happens when you F*CK EDUCATION in the ASS?

THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS.

Nothing changes, dude. F*cking Republicans. F*cking whigs.

I thought you said they were teabaggers, dude.

We're threatening government shutdown and defaulting on loans. You wanna split hairs?

coco ebert: The main difference between the two candidates to me is this:

Newt has nothing to lose.
Mitt has everything to lose.

Net Worth:
Newt ~8 million
Mitt ~200-300 million

You suck at math.

DarKrow: You ever live in this state? You've got Philadelphia on one side, Pittsburgh on the other, and in between some of the most horrible, redneck, gun-toting, queer-bashing, right wing, christian nutballs the planet's ever seen. Everyone thinks it's only below the Mason-Dixon line, but buddy, rural PA is chock-full of them, and they hate the blacks, the queers, the Mexicans, and the Catholics. The day this state legalizes Gay Marriage on its own is the day the sun turns into a lump of charcoal the size of your forehead, which means that any wedding will require flashlights and sweaters.

That's where I grew up and lived for the first 30 years of my life. CSB: in 1992, our elementary school had a mock election on the same day as Clinton v Bush. My neighborhood friend and I were two of about a dozen votes for Clinton, out of 500 students in the school. That's how conservative rural PA is.

All according to plan, as handed down from GOP HQ.

"Everybody else, make Mitt look normal by going completely batshiat. The media will cover us on this, they'll play along like you belong there somehow. Except for that Ron Paul guy, he's just crazy."

You do what you're told even when you think you're rebelling.

coco ebert:
Um, I wasn't referring to their war chest. I'm talking more about attitude and expectations.

Either fail and they have speaking engagements and Fox News stints for the foreseeable future...only one of them would potentially need the income though.

Love your analysis.

seventypercent: Captain_Ballbeard: "Everybody else, make Mitt look normal by going completely batshiat. The media will cover us on this, they'll play along like you belong there somehow. Except for that Ron Paul guy, he's just crazy."

Basically this. 2012 Mitt Romney is 2000 George W. Bush. In other words, he is the anointed candidate of the GOP orthodoxy, who have graciously consented to allowing the primaries and caucuses to proceed on schedule, but those who participate in those exercises should not do so under the illusion that they will alter the eventual outcome.

but i thought Obama was the Anointed One? Or is that just because I saw Hannity's show once?

struct: Well actually ... you make a pretty good point, not one I necessarily agree with, but the argument about the correct size to think about social contract is an interesting one. My take is that its probably mostly an academic argument (and one used when a libertarian candidate gets a lot of press) since our deal with the state usually means the United States government under the Constitution - that doesn't mean I don't think it has merit.

Not sure what you mean by "our deal with the state means the United States government."

I guess it's academic. It's just that one of the main arguments for "states rights" has always been the ability of the (more) local populace (the state) to do things that people in other states might not like. Like discriminate against people. Or support Nazis. Whatever.

We can try to force them to be more enlightened,but, well, isn't as much legislating morality as the guys that want to tell you what you can do in your bedroom, or what marriage is allowed?

No, I think it's better to just let bigots be bigoted. Over there. In their own state.

Actually, I think even states are too large, really. We need burbclaves, where everyone can self segregate as they choose.

seventypercent: CapnBlues: but i thought Obama was the Anointed One? Or is that just because I saw Hannity's show once?

The funny thing is that the only time I've ever heard Obama referred to as "the Messiah" is on far-right talk radio. Limbaugh, in particular, likes to push the idea that liberals and progressives worship Obama as a minor (or major) deity who can do no wrong, which is something that most liberals and progressives would probably find rather amusing.

The funnier part is that Limbaugh will invariably launch into a lecture about how things were so much better under Ronaldus Magnus. (That's not an exaggeration; he actually uses the moniker "Ronaldus Magnus" to refer to Reagan.) And the funniest part is that he and his listeners are incapable of seeing the irony / hypocrisy.

i think it's a working memory capacity and/or management problem. they simply can't hold more than one or two abstract notions in their heads at the same time, and that capability is a necessity for understanding irony and higher forms of humor. it's also a necessity for most other higher forms of thought. sadly, i don't think it's the sort of thing you can teach, either. education can't fix it.

CapnBlues: they simply can't hold more than one or two abstract notions in their heads at the same time

Doublethink, a word coined by George Orwell in the novel 1984, describes the act of simultaneously accepting two mutually contradictory beliefs as correct, often in distinct social contexts.

sendtodave: CapnBlues: they simply can't hold more than one or two abstract notions in their heads at the same time

Doublethink, a word coined by George Orwell in the novel 1984, describes the act of simultaneously accepting two mutually contradictory beliefs as correct, often in distinct social contexts.

It's different from the cognitive psychological construct of working memory -- think of it like the memory that you're working with at any given moment. According to some theories it is its own discrete storage mechanism (like RAM), but more likely it's the portion of storage that is currently being used (like if the whole brain were flash-memory based). The capacity and management of working memory has been found to correlate fairly well with standardized measures of intelligence as well as other independent measures (grades, achievement, etc). Doublethink is a different thing, and it's not science. It's literature -- damn good literature, and insightful, but unrelated to what I was describing.

I think it was also Dostoyevsky who said that true wisdom is being able to hold two antipodal beliefs in mind at the same time. I paraphrase, but you get the idea.

Notabunny: CapnBlues: (That's not an exaggeration; he actually uses the moniker "Ronaldus Magnus" to refer to Reagan.)

I've never understood the beatification of Reagan. My impression at the time was that most people saw him as a crappy-to-fair President. Hardly praiseworthy. Did I miss something?

don't ask me. i was 0-7 years old when he was president.

CapnBlues: don't ask me. i was 0-7 years old when he was president.

That is absolutely not an acceptable excuse for not taking personal responsibility.

Notabunny: CapnBlues: Notabunny: CapnBlues: (That's not an exaggeration; he actually uses the moniker "Ronaldus Magnus" to refer to Reagan.)

I've never understood the beatification of Reagan. My impression at the time was that most people saw him as a crappy-to-fair President. Hardly praiseworthy. Did I miss something?

don't ask me. i was 0-7 years old when he was president.

As a member of the generation who may not have been politically aware until a decade or more after he left office, I'm curious what your and your friends' impressions of Reagan are.

eh, it's colored by my dad always saying "reagan was an idiot, but he looked presidential and could act like a president." And my one girlfriend whose parents lost a total of five jobs between them during reagan's presidency, each one paying less than the last. I've always seen him as a corrupt idiot, who busted unions and would turn one good-paying benefits-laden job into two shiatty paying benefits-free jobs. And there's also his whole approach to crime and the "crack epidemic" and militarizing of the police. But I'm a bit more politically aware than many in my generation. Also there's the education thing -- too much of it. gotta crash -- g'night, hoss. take care.