October 15, 2011
— Dave in Texas It's not "shovel-ready" (yes, actually, it is).
It doesn't provide long-term job growth (well actually, it does).
It's, it's, it's just dumb and also he's from Texas.
The Real Differences Between PerryÂ’s and ObamaÂ’s Plans:1. PerryÂ’s plan doesnÂ’t require increased government spending;
2. PerryÂ’s plan doesnÂ’t require expansion of government oversight;
3. PerryÂ’s plan is based on current technology, so it doesnÂ’t rely on future technological advancements;
4. PerryÂ’s plan creates cheap energy, further stimulating the economy (ObamaÂ’s approach is to increase energy prices to make Green energy options more attractive); and
5. PerryÂ’s plan uses a very dependable means of expanding the economy, rather than wishful projections based on Keynesian stimuli.
The bottom line is that PerryÂ’s taxpayer-cost-per-job-created is zero, while ObamaÂ’s is running around $250K. That comparison alone would sure make for an interesting article. CNN? Anybody?
The beauty of this thing is it sweeps away the oppressive Obama regime restrictions on domestic energy production, it's proven energy as opposed to pie in the sky half-billion dollar Solyndra crony-fairy-farts, and it stomps the EPA right in their global-warmenin-commie-bullshit faces.
Other than that it's awful, and Perry stutters in debates.
Posted by: Dave in Texas at
11:52 AM
| Comments (509)
Post contains 206 words, total size 2 kb.
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at October 15, 2011 11:55 AM (UlUS4)
Posted by: sohistahick at October 15, 2011 11:56 AM (dnbpw)
Posted by: Jack at October 15, 2011 11:57 AM (zKFOT)
Make a moron commercial Dave, cause that's great.
Posted by: DaveA at October 15, 2011 11:57 AM (AhU8T)
Posted by: USA at October 15, 2011 11:58 AM (6Cjut)
Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at October 15, 2011 11:59 AM (tUTpw)
F&F Weekend has to be the most liberal Fox news show, even beating out the awful asshole Sheppard Smith. And on that show is a libtard just as bad as any on NBC; Clayton Morris. Just watched him go on a rampage against PerryÂ’s economic plan. Oh, its all about TexasÂ’s benefit in the oil industry. And that old standard libtard refrain; it will not produce anything soon, it has to go through all kinds of exploration, permits, drilling etc before anything comes out of it.
Never mind that the exploration is already done, never mind that the largest impediment right now is Obama thugs denying permits despite court order, and never mind that the largest sources of oil and oil industry ARE NO LONGER IN TX.
Also never mind that a large piece of his program is rolling back the EPA which has run amuck. Yes. PerryÂ’s program will work immediately. The immediate part comes first from confidence in the administration, opening the permits, and rolling back stifling regulation. Then all the other stuff will start to come about.
But all of this is nothing
more than Fox and the MFM trying to name our candidate for us.
Posted by: Vic at October 15, 2011 12:00 PM (M9Ie6)
Posted by: jeanne! with two N's and an E at October 15, 2011 12:00 PM (Elxkw)
Posted by: USA at October 15, 2011 12:01 PM (6Cjut)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at October 15, 2011 12:01 PM (UlUS4)
Sorry, I just can't take Perry seriously. He could release the most awesome economic plan known to man and I'd still remember him as the guy who:
A) Can't form sentences during debates
2) Called conservatives heartless
III) Sends his wife out to play the victim card
Perry reminds me of a Democrat in a lot of ways. The whole victim thing. The heartless thing. The Gore campaign manager thing. I really think that Perry is one of those creatures of the South who is, in his heart, a conservative Democrat, but who switched to Republican because conservative Democrats don't exist anymore. As such, he still has the instincts of a Democrat.
And even if you think this entire post is nonsense, he still can't speak during the debates. Obama would wipe the floor with him.
Romney 2012: Because there's no one else.
Posted by: The Other Dave at October 15, 2011 12:02 PM (hnoTN)
Posted by: willow at October 15, 2011 12:02 PM (h+qn8)
Two drawbacks with Perry's plan:
1) It won't raise gas to $5 a gallon.
2) It won't bankrupt any coal companies or utilities.
Furthermore, he's from Texas (but you already mentioned that).
Posted by: FireHorse at October 15, 2011 12:02 PM (acNQ2)
Posted by: cherry pi, terrorist hostage taking SOB at October 15, 2011 12:04 PM (OhYCU)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at October 15, 2011 12:05 PM (UlUS4)
Romney 2012: Because there's no one else.
Posted by: The Other Dave at October 15, 2011 04:02 PM (hnoTN)
Because Perry reminds you of a Democrat you want to vote for the guy...
Consulted by an Obama czar
Scaremongers on social security
Is not Pro-Second Amendment
Put government in charge of healthcare
Used the bullshit "For the children" argument to justify government run healthcare in the last debate.
But its Perry that reminds you of a Democrat.
Posted by: buzzion at October 15, 2011 12:05 PM (GULKT)
Posted by: sohistahick at October 15, 2011 12:05 PM (dnbpw)
A better question would be "Will Romney kill the Republican party"?
Posted by: Vic at October 15, 2011 12:05 PM (M9Ie6)
Posted by: USA at October 15, 2011 12:05 PM (6Cjut)
Posted by: willow at October 15, 2011 12:07 PM (h+qn8)
Solar is about 40 years old. The breakthrough hasn't happened. It's not reliable enough to even be called 'alternative energy'. It's a lab exercise for EE students.
Posted by: fluffy, petroleum consumer at October 15, 2011 12:07 PM (4Kl5M)
Posted by: Dick Nixon at October 15, 2011 12:07 PM (QoT7R)
Perry reminds me of a Democrat in a lot of ways. The whole victim thing.
Everybody does that. They've been doing it for quite a while.
Posted by: FireHorse at October 15, 2011 12:07 PM (acNQ2)
Posted by: USA at October 15, 2011 12:07 PM (6Cjut)
Why would you prefer Romney then? Romney whined victim over the mormon bashing thing that Perry didn't even have anything to do with.
Perry had a great interview about his wife's comments, and he's not crying victim. He simply notes that the family can take this stuff too personally.
The 'heartless' comment was stupid. No defending Perry from that. He said he was sorry, and that's about all he can do.
But Romney? Romney splits the GOP.
Posted by: Dustin at October 15, 2011 12:08 PM (fF625)
3. PerryÂ’s plan is based on current technology, so it doesnÂ’t rely on future technological advancements magic wishful thinking.
that's moar bettah
Posted by: soothsayer at October 15, 2011 12:08 PM (sqkOB)
Posted by: willow channeleing cnn networks at October 15, 2011 12:09 PM (h+qn8)
>> The Gore campaign manager thing. I really think that Perry is one of those creatures of the South who is, in his heart, a conservative Democrat, but who switched to Republican because conservative Democrats don't exist anymore. As such, he still has the instincts of a Democrat.
Oh ninja please.
Tiresome, tiresome shit.
Posted by: Dave in Texas at October 15, 2011 12:09 PM (PjVdx)
Posted by: sohistahick at October 15, 2011 12:09 PM (dnbpw)
I would say about 75% of the base hate Romney now based on polls here and at HA.
Nominating a liberal that 70%-75% of the base hates two elections in a row will kill the Republican party.
Perhaps that is the strategy of the MFM and the Dems.
Posted by: Vic at October 15, 2011 12:10 PM (M9Ie6)
But its Perry that reminds you of a Democrat.
Okay, let me rephrase that.
Perry reminds me of a Democrat.
Romney reminds me of an old line, liberal Northern Republican.
That's a pretty piss poor choice.
But that's the only choice.
I'll choose the one that can speak coherently, given that swing voters only remember there's an election when the presidential debates are broadcast in about 12 months from now. Whoever we nominate has to be able to out-debate Obama.
Some would argue that this choice is piss poor enough that we should give O a second term and nominate someone good next time. Sorry, but as bad as Romney would be, he'd definitely be better than Obama.
Posted by: The Other Dave at October 15, 2011 12:10 PM (hnoTN)
Here's the difference between Perry's and Obama's plans.
1. Perry's plan lacks "hope"
2. Obama's plan is all-inclusive, i.e., it screws everyone.
Posted by: soothsayer at October 15, 2011 12:11 PM (sqkOB)
But its Perry that reminds you of a Democrat.
Posted by: buzzion at October 15, 2011 04:05 PM (GULKT)
No shit.
Posted by: Peaches at October 15, 2011 12:11 PM (/ybwc)
Romney initially had this meme where Perry is way too extreme to the right. Now the meme is that Perry is just a RINO like Romney.
There's no sincerity in politics anymore. Especially with the flip flopper.
Romney has had half a decade of running for president to come up with plans. Perry has had a few weeks. Is it even two months yet? He's got some plans coming out with specifics, and they are great plans. They are realistic, and show experience in government. They aren't dead on arrival slogans like 9-9-9 (a tax increase on 48% of americans isn't a bad idea, but it's very unrealistic).
Perry's outlined his first 100 days in office. These are things he can actually accomplish that will actually turn the economy around.
Perry's only real problem is that in the debates he comes across poorly. In interviews he sounds smart. I don't know what the hell the problem is, but it's a legit reason to bash him.
As a president, though, I think Perry would be the best of the ones running.
Posted by: Dustin at October 15, 2011 12:12 PM (fF625)
Posted by: USA at October 15, 2011 12:12 PM (6Cjut)
Hell, liberal Democrats don't exist anymore. They are a rainbow spectrum of socialism.
Posted by: fluffy at October 15, 2011 12:12 PM (4Kl5M)
1. Perry's plan is about energy
2. Obama's plan is about graft and cronies
Posted by: cherry pi, terrorist hostage taking SOB at October 15, 2011 12:12 PM (OhYCU)
Romney reminds me of an old line liberal NE Democrat.
Posted by: Vic at October 15, 2011 12:12 PM (M9Ie6)
Posted by: cherry pi, terrorist hostage taking SOB at October 15, 2011 12:14 PM (OhYCU)
Posted by: The Other Dave at October 15, 2011 04:10 PM (hnoTN)
In other words. You wanted to take a slam at Perry but don't want us criticizing your guy even though he is an even better fit for your chosen slam on Perry.
Posted by: buzzion at October 15, 2011 12:14 PM (GULKT)
Posted by: James at October 15, 2011 12:14 PM (1kwr2)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at October 15, 2011 12:15 PM (UlUS4)
Yes, because we've heard dozens of Democrats tell us to push domestic oil and gas production.
Seriously, there's "pulling for my guy" and there's "I shall ignore things that make sense that all conservatives should favor except 'my guy' didn't think of em first"
Posted by: Dave in Texas at October 15, 2011 12:15 PM (PjVdx)
Obama's plan envisions windmill technicians and solar panel installers.
And tiny cars filled with clowns speeding to the voting booth to vote for him.
Wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!
Posted by: soothsayer at October 15, 2011 12:16 PM (sqkOB)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at October 15, 2011 12:16 PM (UlUS4)
12 years of balanced budgets. Respect for the second amendment. Loud opposition to Obamacare when it's being debated, at TEA rallies, suggesting it's so unconstitutional that it will destabilize the union. Rated Excellent on Securing the Border. When Texas is headed for a deficit (due largely to a hurricane with major damage) unless taxes go up or spending goes down, Perry cuts spending all across the board and manages to keep service levels good. Even education gets cut, a sacred cow leading to fury from the NEA.
"Romney reminds me of an old line, liberal Northern Republican."
Decades of support for Abortion rights. Quote "I do not line up with the NRA" and loud support for "strong gun control". MIA when Obamacare is being debated, and his Romneycare advisers actually helped architect it. Increases the gun tax dramatically. Bans other guns. Increases spending. With a tax level 50% higher than Texas's, Romney increases taxes.
Sure, I actually think you're right that this is basically a liberal northern Republican.
But Perry doesn't remind me of a democrat. in the 1980s, many Texans were democrats, but they were very conservative. Perry has never been liberal.
Posted by: Dustin at October 15, 2011 12:17 PM (fF625)
Hey, California Republicans... want a WINNING issue?Tell Californians you have a choice... a Bankrupt State where we are firing teachers and cops.... or drilling off the F'n Coast....Those of us who do NOT live on the beach, wayyyy outnumber those who do....But Repubs here are afraid...
Posted by: Romeo13///
Uhhhhh, no. There are so few Republicans in the CA Legislature and the powers that be are all Dems from the coast, so, yeah, no, Bachmann has a better chance of winning the presidency.
Posted by: SFGoth at October 15, 2011 12:18 PM (dZ756)
In Obama's Future World everyone is a lawyer and a doctor and a community organizer and a teacher.
wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!
Posted by: soothsayer at October 15, 2011 12:19 PM (sqkOB)
Posted by: Dave in Texas at October 15, 2011 04:15 PM (PjVdx)"
It's getting old.
I don't think it can work in a Tea Party environment where RINOs get booed. Even Perry will be challenged to get the GOP unified. Romney has absolutely no chance.
Both of them should beat Obama, given his 40% ratings in swing states, but the only way Obama wins is if the GOP fractures like it did in 1992, which I think it actually a serious possibility.
Posted by: Dustin at October 15, 2011 12:19 PM (fF625)
I am starting to smell another McCain on that. The other 5%'ers will hang around until the bitter end splitting the vote so that Romney can win the primaries with a plurality of 30%.
The a significant percentage of the base stays at home in key States that are already close. Result, not only another Obama term, but we don't take the Senate either and the Republican Party collapses and goes the way of the Whigs.
That results in 50 years of Democrat dominance again, except that we will have become a communist dictatorship long before the 50 years are up.
So Romney will result in the collapse of the U.S. into a 50s era Soviet Union.
Posted by: Vic at October 15, 2011 12:19 PM (M9Ie6)
Posted by: nobamain12 at October 15, 2011 12:20 PM (1CcaY)
<<Perry Job/Energy plan reads like it was taken from a Palin missive....and we know how crazy she is.>>
Oh, here we go.
Posted by: katya, the designated driver at October 15, 2011 12:20 PM (7qKVv)
Hey remember criticizing Perry for taking so long since he announced his run to come out with a Plan?
Mitt Romney announces Presidential Run: June 2
Rick Perry announces Presidential Run: August 13
Mitt Romney announces 59 Point Plan: September 6
Rick Perry announces Plan: October 14
Who is it that's taking so long again?
Posted by: buzzion at October 15, 2011 12:20 PM (GULKT)
I bet he knows jack about ice cream too.
Obama knows a lot about ice cream, that's why he is such an effective President!
Posted by: Rev Dr E Buzz at October 15, 2011 12:21 PM (LWXG/)
Posted by: cherry pi, terrorist hostage taking SOB at October 15, 2011 12:21 PM (OhYCU)
In Obama's World losing billions of dollars each quarter means you're a successful enterprise, e.g., General Motors.
wheeeeeeeeeeeeeee!
Posted by: soothsayer at October 15, 2011 12:21 PM (sqkOB)
<<until he improves his debate performances he won't dispel the notion that he isn't ready>>
Texas usually wins the national beauty contests because they can afford the best training, gowns, swimsuits, etc. Why can't they do the same for a Presidential candidate.
Posted by: katya, the designated driver at October 15, 2011 12:22 PM (7qKVv)
Posted by: Guy Fawkes at October 15, 2011 12:22 PM (GdNiA)
Posted by: moki at October 15, 2011 12:22 PM (dZmFh)
Posted by: Vic at October 15, 2011 04:19 PM (M9Ie6)"
As a proud Perry supporter, I will vote Cain before I let Romney be the nominee.
My real hang up with Cain is that he's practically endorsed Romney, and I think he just wants to be Romney's VP. That's smart politics for a guy with zero elected office experience, but it's also a bit disturbing in such serious times, when we need a conservative government to get us off the track we're on today.
I think Perry's recent few interviews were extremely strong, and his policy agenda is out now and it's the strongest of the three top guys because it's effective and realistic instead of ineffective like Romney's or unrealistic like Cain's. I hope to hell conservatives keep their mind open on Perry, because most of us would prefer him to Romney despite him not being perfect.
Posted by: Dustin at October 15, 2011 12:23 PM (fF625)
Concurred.
Perry's not perfect, but I think he's better for the job than Romney. Does this mean that if Romney is our nominee that I won't vote for him? No, I'll still campaign for him, help his campaign as much as I can, and ultimately vote for him.
Mark Steyn's "After America" is a depressing yarn - I read through about half of it. While much of its content won't be a surprise to many here, I love how Mark's analogies and word play. I never thought the tale about the last Babylonian King (Belshazzer) and "mene, mene, tekel, upharsin" would ever make it into such a book.
Posted by: Kratos (Ghost of Sparta) at October 15, 2011 12:23 PM (KBdSF)
I wish. Problem is have to upgrade to "highest tier" to get FBN. What I really want to do is downgrade to the minimum. I am already paying too much for satellite.
Posted by: Vic at October 15, 2011 12:24 PM (M9Ie6)
Posted by: Dustin at October 15, 2011 12:24 PM (fF625)
I can retire from this high paying commenting gig now.
Posted by: Guy Fawkes at October 15, 2011 12:24 PM (GdNiA)
That's what I've been wondering, katya. There has to be someone they could hire to come in and blitz the guy into shape for these debates. It's a head-scratcher.
Posted by: Peaches at October 15, 2011 12:24 PM (/ybwc)
>> doesn't really distinguish him that much from the other GOP candidates
Please provide quotes for Romney, Cain, Paul, Bachmann, Huntsman, et. al.
I'm intrigued. They have proposed the same thing?
Show me this.
Posted by: Dave in Texas at October 15, 2011 12:25 PM (PjVdx)
Posted by: cherry pi, terrorist hostage taking SOB at October 15, 2011 12:26 PM (OhYCU)
Go ahead. I just looked it up today because this week I was wondering about the time between Romney's "announcement" and when that 59 point plan showed up. It actually surprised me that it was that long between his announcement and that.
Especially when you consider that his announcement was a joke since everyone knew he was going to be running years ago.
Posted by: buzzion at October 15, 2011 12:27 PM (GULKT)
Posted by: moki at October 15, 2011 12:27 PM (dZmFh)
I'm guessing that's since Jews already assimilated culturally doing better economically, much to the Norwegian's chagrin; whereas Muslims don't welcome cultural assimilation -- they really do not want to be counted as if just like Norwegians?
Posted by: didn't take long at October 15, 2011 12:29 PM (lpWVn)
#30 - it takes 2 to create a split. You could easily turn it around and say Perry is causing the split.
#36 - AOS, HA are self-selecting conservative sites that appear to be fully anti-Romney. If you would move out of your Paulina Kael world the opposition to Romney is much less than you claim.
#60 - over the top much? we get that you don't like Romney but these claims that the entire South will stay home and that the GOP will lose the House and not take the Senate have no basis in fact, they are merely you're anti-Romney projections. Let's say Perry gets the nominations and puts out 3 debate performances like his current ones and gets painted by O as the dumber, more bible toting, more crony capitalist version of W and then loses to O - what are you going to say then?
Posted by: nobamain12 at October 15, 2011 12:29 PM (1CcaY)
General Motors, Solyndra, food stamps, Guns-for-gangs program in Mexico, Golf, Lying, Regulations, ...
This is who we lost to in 2008.
Posted by: soothsayer at October 15, 2011 12:30 PM (sqkOB)
Posted by: CNN at October 15, 2011 12:30 PM (MWBn8)
You have a problem counting. And news polls are shit to begin with, especially that NBC poll that counted 81 primary voters.
Posted by: Vic at October 15, 2011 12:30 PM (M9Ie6)
I fear he won't because I don't think voter fraud is exclusive to the dems/libs.
Posted by: katya, the designated driver at October 15, 2011 12:31 PM (7qKVv)
Posted by: Vic at October 15, 2011 12:31 PM (M9Ie6)
Posted by: Barbarian at October 15, 2011 12:31 PM (EL+OC)
Posted by: CNN at October 15, 2011 12:32 PM (MWBn8)
The Left is gearing up to push to close all nuclear power plants in the U.S.
Obama, if reelected, will do this by executive order or simply regulate them out of business. Believe it.
Posted by: soothsayer at October 15, 2011 12:32 PM (sqkOB)
True . . . I had an encounter with someone the other day who identified as a "liberal Democrat" and said he liked Romney. Not too surprising. I've got another one who's all worked up about Cain, though. We're in uncharted waters here.
Posted by: Peaches at October 15, 2011 12:32 PM (/ybwc)
Posted by: soothsayer at October 15, 2011 04:30 PM (sqkOB)
My friend, I had complete faith in the man too.
Posted by: John McCain at October 15, 2011 12:32 PM (EL+OC)
Believe it, hell, he has already started it. He says he supports Nuclear Power at the same time he nominated a man from the most rabid anti-nuke congressman on the hill's office to head the NRC.
Ed Markey's henchman now heads the NRC, think about it.
Posted by: Vic at October 15, 2011 12:34 PM (M9Ie6)
Posted by: CNN at October 15, 2011 12:34 PM (MWBn8)
>> what are you going to say then?
Fuck Romney he's no conservative.
That's what I'll say.
Even if he's the eventual nominee, when I vote for him in the general.
Posted by: Dave in Texas at October 15, 2011 12:34 PM (PjVdx)
But the real economic benefit to Perry's plan would be flooding the market with cheaper domestic oil and getting energy costs down for everybody. Oil industry jobs are only a small part of it--it's the ripples that will drive an economic boom.
Posted by: nickless at October 15, 2011 12:36 PM (MMC8r)
Even if he's the eventual nominee, when I vote for him in the general.
Posted by: Dave in Texas at October 15, 2011 04:34 PM (PjVdx)
While holding my nose.
Posted by: ErikW at October 15, 2011 12:36 PM (sSEMX)
Posted by: CNN at October 15, 2011 12:36 PM (MWBn8)
If you don't like Perry, find someone else.
Posted by: Vic at October 15, 2011 12:37 PM (M9Ie6)
Obama is out there praising himself for GM's success.
GM is a money pit. If this is his idea of success, we're boned.
Posted by: soothsayer at October 15, 2011 12:38 PM (sqkOB)
Obama is out there praising himself for GM's success.
Those 700 Volts didn't sell themselves, you know.
Posted by: nickless at October 15, 2011 12:38 PM (MMC8r)
Even if he's the eventual nominee, when I vote for him in the general.
Posted by: Dave in Texas at October 15, 2011 04:34 PM (PjVdx)
While holding my nose.
///////////////////////////////
And a puke bucket.
Posted by: katya, the designated driver at October 15, 2011 12:40 PM (7qKVv)
The capitol Babylon was an impressive sight for its time. Surrounded on all four sides by massive, thick walls and supplied with continuous water from the Euphrates river (the entry points of the Euphrates into Babylon were blocked with criss-crossed bronze bars), Babylon was very person's version of a fortress. The troops of Medes/Persian confederation had started to assemble outside Babylon a while before Belshazzer's infamous feast (see a parallel to modern times?).
However, while Belshazzer and the Babylonian upper crust were partying away, the Medes and Persians had figured out a way to temporarily divert the Euphrates away from the city, which allowed small teams to breach these bronze bars and get inside the capital. Once inside, these teams overpowered the guards and the teams opened up the gates from the inside, allowing the bulk of the Medes/Persian army to enter the capital. Once the army was in, the weakened Babylonians put up little resistance and Belshazzer was slain. Almost overnight Babylon changed hands to be ruled by King Cyrus of Persia.
Forgive me if I'm wrong, but that's my recollection of the Fall of Babylon. I really hope that's not how we go.
Posted by: Kratos (Ghost of Sparta) at October 15, 2011 12:40 PM (KBdSF)
I prefer to sentence them to a lifetime of living outdoors.
Posted by: fluffy at October 15, 2011 12:41 PM (4Kl5M)
Perry's plan looks pretty good and should stop the downward free fall in his ratings. But it isn't enough to get his rating moving back up again because a) more drilling, blocking epa regs, etc doesn't really distinguish him that much from the other GOP candidates (drill drill drill has been a slogan for at least 2 yrs), b) a drill energy policy from the TX governor is not a shocker, and c) until he improves his debate performances he won't dispel the notion that he isn't ready
This argument that other GOP candidates would do the same doesn't hold water: (1) Why didn't other candidates propose this plan?, (2) Romney is a true believer in man-caused global warming. That 's why he didn't propose this in the first place.
I am dead set against Romney in the primary because of the following reasons again:
(1) Romneycare (basically is Obamacare) according to Romney 's advisor
(2) The court
(3) Global warming crap
(4) Immigration is a wash between Romney and Perry.
Using the logic of the Perry supporters against Palin, Romney is damaged good already. He is from Wall Street and Obama is gearing up the attack already. According to their logic, Romney is damaged and we should worry about the all the attack against Romney (just as we should wrt Palin). We shouldn't nominate Palin, so we shouldn't nomintate Romney now!
Another issue is the attack that Palin was stringing people along while taking potshots at the candidates. Using that standard, Christie (a big Romney supporter) is pathetic and far worse. He emphatically said no, then told big donors to hold their support until he made up his mind. Then he went to Reagan library to take pot shot at the Republicans for not compromising. His "establishment" supporter like Mona CHaren at NRO even praised him for his honesy. This is pathetic from Romney supporters. His inner circle is too comfortable with leftists demagoguery.
In 2008, the left went for a maximalist in Obama, who had zero experience for the presidency. What he had was dazzle/sleekness to fool the electorate. And that 's the selling point of Romney now! He is dazzling. I respect his preparation and sleek campaign. Unfortunately, he is using that preparation to distract people from the fact that he is not a conservative.
The fundamental problem is this. The dem establishment is socialist or radical communists. That is why they went all in for Obama over Hillary. He didn't expect to win in 2008. But they went with him and helped him build an organization. On the other hand, the Rep establishment is liberal or moderate (with the possible exception on fiscal issues). So they always tried to shoot down conservatives. And they always go for the minimalist wrt conservatism. CONSERVATISM is the solution. Bush 1, Dole, McCain, and even Bush 2 have been bad for conservative. The establishment is entrenched and has more experience than the conservative upstarts. So they will try to use ELECTABILITY as their main justification to sell their candidates. In the mean time, they don't mind aiding the leftist media to take down conservative candidates.
These are the reasons why I am done with Romney and the Rep establishment. They are more a problem than a solution. They could have asked people like McDonnel (gov of VA), Rubio, or Jindal to run. But they would go for the moderate like Christie. They had the brain-dead debate arrangement for a reason, but not good towards conservative candidates. I would go for maximalist candidates this time, PERRY/CAIN.
Posted by: LAI at October 15, 2011 12:41 PM (eRpKn)
Posted by: Queequeg the Harpooner at October 15, 2011 12:42 PM (NLQse)
"Americans already have a Debater-in-Chief"
(vid 1)
Posted by: lu at October 15, 2011 12:42 PM (5QeRe)
Posted by: nickless at October 15, 2011 04:38 PM (MMC8r)
There's one sitting outside the local dealership that has a pretty cool paint job. The grass is dying from the shade it continually provides.
Posted by: ErikW at October 15, 2011 12:42 PM (sSEMX)
can someone tell me why the stupid Republicans in the Senate didn't vote present on the vote for cloture for Obama's stupid Pass This Bill bill?
Posted by: soothsayer at October 15, 2011 12:42 PM (sqkOB)
Posted by: I am Barack Obama and I paid for this message at October 15, 2011 12:43 PM (NLQse)
That's the future.
Don't invest in this primitive earth technology.
It's not logical.
Posted by: Clutch Cargo at October 15, 2011 12:44 PM (Qxdfp)
I haven't got time to read all the comments. So, I assume that someone has pointed out that everybody here called Perry's "plan" bullshit when it was Gov. Palin's POLICY.
--------
I was a Palin supporter before. It is time to support Perry now. He is the only one left with a great record. No matter how you spin it, if you can do better than Texas economy, then we can talk about it.
Posted by: LAI at October 15, 2011 12:44 PM (eRpKn)
Those 700 Volts didn't sell themselves, you know.
I dunno, I think they did.
I'm not sure, but didn't the govt buy some of them?
Posted by: soothsayer at October 15, 2011 12:44 PM (sqkOB)
Perry reminds me of a Democrat in a lot of ways. The whole victim thing.
Helllllooo? Repudiate the minister who introduced you to speak to his group on account of comments made later during an interview? Poor widdle mormon getting beat up on cuz of his minority religious views?
Fucking Romney fans man.
Posted by: Entropy at October 15, 2011 12:44 PM (dn7cw)
Posted by: nerdygirl at October 15, 2011 12:45 PM (MWBn8)
Posted by: Queequeg the Harpooner at October 15, 2011 04:42 PM (NLQse)
Prove it shit for brains.
Posted by: buzzion at October 15, 2011 12:46 PM (GULKT)
Posted by: Vic at October 15, 2011 12:46 PM (M9Ie6)
I haven't got time to read all the comments. So, I assume that someone has pointed out that everybody here called Perry's "plan" bullshit when it was Gov. Palin's POLICY.
No they didn't.
Half of everyone here is a butthurt Palinista so seriously, cop to the blatant and gross hyperbole.
Posted by: Entropy at October 15, 2011 12:47 PM (dn7cw)
Then again, were Perry to win the GOP ticket, he could take Vic's advice and NOT debate Obama.
Do his own stumping and speech delivery, and share the podium with his cadre and VP. Do the Bandwagon Party gig. Whoever Perry plans to appoint as Sec./State and UN Ambassador should be featured on the campaign trail.
WE'VE ALL HEARD MORE FROM OBAMA THAN EVER WANTED.
Obama has exhausted his welcome in Republican voters' homes. It was Nada Obama '08. Now it's NO MAS OBAMA. It isn't as if not sharing the stage with Obama will get him to stfu, either. But at least Perry won't be torturing voters having to listen to Obama's voice AGAIN and AGAIN. And perhaps the only way to divert the "racist" taunt would to feature Perry's Hispanic, Asian and Black cadre at the big fundraising enthusiastic Republican campaign events.
(?)
Posted by: didn't take long at October 15, 2011 12:47 PM (lpWVn)
Posted by: Yip in Texas at October 15, 2011 12:47 PM (Sh+fu)
Posted by: SFGoth at October 15, 2011 04:18 PM (dZ756)
We are a dying breed.
Also many of us have just upped and moved to other states.
California becoming less R and Texas becoming more R. Gee, where did all the Rs go?
Posted by: CAC at October 15, 2011 12:48 PM (4cL5c)
I have NEVER said he should not debate Obama. I said these debates that are going on now are shit. But, I haven't said that he should drop out of them either.
Posted by: Vic at October 15, 2011 12:49 PM (M9Ie6)
So, I assume that someone has pointed out that everybody here called Perry's "plan" bullshit when it was Gov. Palin's POLICY.
Was she a candidate for the office of President?
No, wait. She was a Governor, then she quit.
Posted by: garrett at October 15, 2011 12:49 PM (Gq0t1)
R's are just D's with legs.
You just have to wait and see if they walk to the right or to the left.
Posted by: Clutch Cargo at October 15, 2011 12:50 PM (Qxdfp)
Posted by: Michele Bachmann at October 15, 2011 12:50 PM (Sh42X)
a) more drilling, blocking epa regs, etc doesn't really distinguish him that much from the other GOP candidates (drill drill drill has been a slogan for at least 2 yrs
Mitt Romney believes in Global Warming. Perry wants to gut the EPA and does not.
You have to be retarded to believe there's no difference between them on this issue.
Posted by: Entropy at October 15, 2011 12:50 PM (dn7cw)
Posted by: Vic at October 15, 2011 12:51 PM (M9Ie6)
I knew it sounded familiar. I thought this is what Perry's been saying here from Texas. Palin didn't invent the plan, nor own monopoly rights on it. Did Reagan's administration work from this plan's basis?
Basically, repeal EPA to it's "original intent" or just scrap it.
Posted by: didn't take long at October 15, 2011 12:52 PM (lpWVn)
And just how is this going to happen?
To keep up with the population growth, we have to add 150,000 jobs per month. We did that barely in the last five months.
Posted by: lu at October 15, 2011 12:52 PM (5QeRe)
Romney endorses ethanol subsidies.
Perry wants to remove all subsidies and tax credits from the entire energy sector, while simultaneously removing all the regulatory roadblocks and opening vast new areas to exploration.
Posted by: Entropy at October 15, 2011 12:52 PM (dn7cw)
No, wait. She was a Governor, then she quit.
The left wouldn't go for this line of attack against Obama or any other socialist candidates of theirs. This is pathetic from our side. It could have been easily turned against the left, but we would rather eat our own. Now time to support Perry. At least he embraced one of Palin 's big initiatives. It is good enough for me. This is a great plan. We should run with it and let the left defend their Solyndra craps.
Posted by: LAI at October 15, 2011 12:52 PM (eRpKn)
Posted by: Palerider at October 15, 2011 12:52 PM (BNJid)
115 I haven't got time to read all the comments. So, I assume that someone has pointed out that everybody here called Perry's "plan" bullshit when it was Gov. Palin's POLICY.
Thing is.....Perry has been saying this longer....before Palin was ever a governor.
Posted by: ConservativeMenAreJustHotter at October 15, 2011 12:53 PM (D5636)
Romney is a true believer in man-caused global warming. I am afraid that he will take a minimalist wrt EPA.
Posted by: LAI at October 15, 2011 12:53 PM (eRpKn)
Posted by: LTC Graham at October 15, 2011 12:54 PM (2tjWo)
Posted by: Palerider at October 15, 2011 12:54 PM (BNJid)
IMO the only way the country stops surging for the cliff under Romney is if we get majorities in both Senate and House and a 1993 Newt (or two) at top leadership posts in congress that can talk around the media traps and explain to the public why they should want freedom and job growth.
2008 was a bad env for the Republicans and the dems went for a maximalist socialist with zero experience. 2012 is a bad env for the Dems, and the Rep is going for a minimalist moderate who would need a lot of pressure to do the right thing? This is sad and pathetic.
Posted by: LAI at October 15, 2011 12:56 PM (eRpKn)
He needs to explain this. This guy is a freak. To call Romney a RINO after reading about this is an insult to those Maine twits.
Posted by: lu at October 15, 2011 12:59 PM (5QeRe)
Though much of the easily recovered oil has been tapped, CA is 4th or 5th biggest state in oil production. However, I've been told much of the product is low grade, high salt content oil.
Posted by: weft cut-loop at October 15, 2011 12:59 PM (kt1UQ)
This is pathetic from our side.
No. Pathetic is ignoring the facts.
Sarah is a personality, not a candidate.
Posted by: garrett at October 15, 2011 01:00 PM (Gq0t1)
1 -Resolve to forego internecine squabbles.
2 -Diligently research candidates. (POTUS to dogcatcher)
3 -Become involved in local party activities.
4 -Vote your preference in the primary.
5 -Invest heavily in brass, copper and lead. (Potentially valuable from election night through ?)
6 -For the first time, I'm advocating voting straight Republican ticket on election day. Again, POTUS to dogcatcher. Sheer numbers should result in a hopefully useful cadre of conservatives.
7 -Immediately upon inauguration/installation to office, begin daily campaign of reminders to each elected offical of who they work for and what we expect of them.
Posted by: Burnt Swamp Catawampus at October 15, 2011 01:00 PM (BKfzm)
it takes 2 to create a split. You could easily turn it around and say Perry is causing the split.
But then you'd also have to say it was Cain causing it, Gingrich causing it, and Bachmann causing it.
It's pretty much Romney dude.
Anyone but Romney. If Perry is unacceptable to too many people, then the hell with him. But Romney is a non-starter.
Who are the Libertarians running next year anyway...
Posted by: Entropy at October 15, 2011 01:02 PM (dn7cw)
Obama's the incumbent and the press will eat Perry alive for calling Obama's bluffs the lies that they are. McCain will bluster, "Apologize!" and the Republicans will start infighting over what Perry should have said, yada yada...Perry might simply choke.
I don't want to hear Obama, period. Been there too many times doing that. There's nothing "new" Obama can hatch that isn't absolutely revolting. For that reason, I'd rather hear from the "new" guy about what's up his sleeve.
Posted by: didn't take long at October 15, 2011 01:02 PM (lpWVn)
Posted by: Palerider at October 15, 2011 01:03 PM (BNJid)
156.....daily campaign of reminders to each elected offical of who they work for and what we expect of them.
You should send me instead.
Posted by: Cattle Prod at October 15, 2011 01:05 PM (D5636)
Posted by: I am Governor Jerry Brown, my aura smiles and never frowns at October 15, 2011 01:05 PM (2jQGY)
You just have to wait and see if they walk to the right or to the left.
--
I've read here there's no such thing as an Independent. Tell that to Michael Savage.
Posted by: didn't take long at October 15, 2011 01:05 PM (lpWVn)
Posted by: didn't take long at October 15, 2011 01:06 PM (lpWVn)
Posted by: BurtTC at October 15, 2011 01:07 PM (Gc/Qi)
Posted by: Queequeg the Harpooner at October 15, 2011 04:42 PM (NLQse)
What bizarre bullshit. Where did you hear that, through your fillings? We were all chanting "drill baby drill" with her in 2008.
She's not running though, and Perry is.
Posted by: stace at October 15, 2011 01:08 PM (lYlx9)
?
Posted by: willow channeleing cnn networks at October 15, 2011 01:09 PM (h+qn8)
Investment in new technology is smart. Oil company profits ride the technology wagon every damn day. Bad mouthing new technology investments, in solar and oil and every other thing that one can convince the venture boys to back, is just plain counter-productive and a sure path to getting our asses handed to us by countries that do invest in new tech. So, on point #3 of the perry plan, I'd have to say Oh Yes It Does Too if you scrape away the grit and take a gander at any hunk of gear on the rig or back at the lab, and good! Hate the messenger, not the F*ing message! Smart companies, and countries, invest heavily in future technologies while leveraging the present set of capabilities that they possess.
Posted by: Errol at October 15, 2011 01:09 PM (vewos)
Posted by: Andrea Mitchell at October 15, 2011 01:09 PM (le5qc)
Posted by: macintx at October 15, 2011 01:10 PM (ucs8Y)
Guess what, it's Gov. Perry's POLICY too. We drill everywhere, including offshore.
Posted by: stace at October 15, 2011 01:11 PM (lYlx9)
Posted by: LTC Graham at October 15, 2011 01:11 PM (2tjWo)
I agree but the establishment GOP want to maintain the status quo and if they are in charge of it they have no problem with over-sized government.
John Boehner and Mitch McConnell will be in charge of the house and senate again, if they get majorities.
Congress will not push for reform, they will push to maintain the status quo. We need a president who will push them.
Posted by: Entropy at October 15, 2011 01:14 PM (dn7cw)
Posted by: Errol at October 15, 2011 05:09 PM (vewos)
We already did invest heavily in solar, we invented it. The chinese sent us a thank you note.
Posted by: robtr at October 15, 2011 01:15 PM (MtwBb)
Posted by: BurtTC at October 15, 2011 01:16 PM (Gc/Qi)
Yes, Limbaugh knows the pulse of his VOTING audience. And we're not buying into Mitt's potus fantasy just because the bipartisan Leadership establishment elitists confine the "choice" to "electable" Mitt.
Yes, Mitt's the only candidate the anti-conservative Rockefeller-Republicans will elect, if that's "electable".
Posted by: didn't take long at October 15, 2011 01:17 PM (lpWVn)
173, I bet that you will see more passion when Perry goes against Obama. In the primary so far, Perry seems to go after Romney more and not much other candidates.
Posted by: LAI at October 15, 2011 01:17 PM (eRpKn)
Technically anyone who is not registered with either party is an "independent". In States like mine that have open primaries most people are not registered with either party. Nationwide so-called experts put the number at roughly 30% split between R-D-I.
All that being said just about everyone votes for one party or the other consistently. It is only in wave elections like RR (rare) where some switch over.
What most people really mean when they talk about attracting the flip-floppers that they call independents is really the "undecided". Now these are the truly clueless dumb shits who shouldn't be allowed to vote to begin with because they are too stupid to exist. But luckily there really are not very many of these.
What really decides elections is energizing the people that normally vote for your party and getting them to the polls vote.
Posted by: Vic at October 15, 2011 01:18 PM (M9Ie6)
Posted by: macintx at October 15, 2011 01:18 PM (ucs8Y)
Nothing wrong with new technology investments, but the US taxpayer shouldn't be on the hook for massive epic fails like Solydra and the countless other "alternative energy" start-ups that didn't work.
BTW, I assume you mean by "countries that do invest in new tech", I think you mean "China". Let their state-run financing system invest in crappy panels that disintegrate daily. Except we're probably paying for that a bit too with our debt, but that might still be going into the People's Liberation Army funds.
Posted by: Kratos (Ghost of Sparta) at October 15, 2011 01:19 PM (KBdSF)
Perry is still my choice now. I am glad he came out with this energy plan. If Cain continues to hold up well, I would rather have him as VP instead of an "establishment" candidate. Let 's go for our maximalists in this env. People intuitively understand Texas economy. For all the noise about how bad or average Texas is, most people are still moving to Texas to find a decent job.
Posted by: LAI at October 15, 2011 01:20 PM (eRpKn)
I wish. Too many truly clueless dumb shits too stupid to exist voted for Obama/Biden '08 rather than McCain/Palin.
Posted by: didn't take long at October 15, 2011 01:21 PM (lpWVn)
Posted by: Count de Monet at October 15, 2011 01:23 PM (4q5tP)
Posted by: BurtTC at October 15, 2011 01:23 PM (Gc/Qi)
Posted by: OPEC at October 15, 2011 01:24 PM (D5636)
Posted by: macintx at October 15, 2011 01:24 PM (ucs8Y)
If you go to the States that switched from red to blue and look at the vote totals you will find that the Obama votes did not go up that much from the previous election. What happened was the McCain votes dropped drastically from the Bush totals.
The Obama votes going up were most likely due to a huge turnout by black voters compared to the past, particularly in States like NC that have a significant black population.
Posted by: Vic at October 15, 2011 01:24 PM (M9Ie6)
Sarah said "drill drill drill baby"
That was so fuckin cute.
Perry said "here's how we create 1.2 million jobs"
A plan, for every bitchface who cried "where's his plan?"
Well here it is. Denounce the plan, conservatives. Tell us why it's such a baaaad plan.
Posted by: Dave in Texas at October 15, 2011 01:24 PM (PjVdx)
Actually, Cain would represent the establishment, odd though that may seem. His 9-9-9 would fund the establishment without adding to debt, spreading the pain/tax base.
If Cain continues to hold up well, I would rather have him as VP instead of an "establishment" candidate.
Were Cain to become VP, the POTUS would need to sign onto 999 and Cain would see himself functioning as CEO of Congress. Hm.
Posted by: didn't take long at October 15, 2011 01:26 PM (lpWVn)
Well here it is. Denounce the plan, conservatives. Tell us why it's such a baaaad plan.
And again, let 's stop this non-sense that all Rep candidates would do this. Romney is a true-believer in man-caused global warming.
Posted by: LAI at October 15, 2011 01:27 PM (eRpKn)
This year above all else it is necessary to vote straight ticket regardless of who the nominee is. We must have an unassailable majority in the House and Senate, irregardless of the eventual contender.
If we do win the Presidency, a strong conservative base will keep Romney bound to conservatism. In Perry's case, it will strengthen his ability to implement his agenda.
Failure to achieve that will wind up an exercise in futility.
Posted by: irongrampa at October 15, 2011 01:28 PM (SAMxH)
Posted by: macintx at October 15, 2011 01:29 PM (ucs8Y)
A plan, for every bitchface who cried "where's his plan?"
Well here it is. Denounce the plan, conservatives. Tell us why it's such a baaaad plan.
Posted by: Dave in Texas at October 15, 2011 05:24 PM (PjVdx)
I got here late, we're against drilling for oil now? Cool, I guess we're for Big Corn then. WTF
Posted by: robtr at October 15, 2011 01:30 PM (MtwBb)
I haven't heard conservatives demand a halt to drilling and refining oil.
However, I have read how NAFTA is bad for American small business and entrepreneurs, and bad for border security given open freeways for trucking without inspections, etc. And Perry is gung-ho pro-NAFTA.
Posted by: didn't take long at October 15, 2011 01:30 PM (lpWVn)
Well here it is. Denounce the plan, conservatives. Tell us why it's such a baaaad plan.
For starters, it doesn't have a catchy label.
Now 9-9-9 is something I can subscribe to. Sure, Cain is talking about taxes, but they're single digit tax rates. He could call it the 9-9-9-9-9-9-9 plan and it's still something that I, as a conservative, could support.
The main reason Perry's plan won't work, however, is that he won't be elected president. The Florida Straw Poll already determined that.
Posted by: FireHorse at October 15, 2011 01:31 PM (acNQ2)
Were Cain to become VP, the POTUS would need to sign onto 999 and Cain would see himself functioning as CEO of Congress. Hm.
If he is an establishment candidate, I will have to eat my crow. No problem if Perry is the president. That 's why I though it was dumb for Cain to say that he couldn't work with Perry. Anyway, if he is the VP, he will have to sign on with the boss and not vice versa. BTW, his 999 plan is a reasonable starting point. You have Club for growth and Lafler vouch for it. Ryan was at least warming to it also. That 's why I don't understand the vicious attack against Cain over this plan from our side.
Posted by: LAI at October 15, 2011 01:31 PM (eRpKn)
Sorry, but never again. Just what corruption needs, a blank check.
Posted by: didn't take long at October 15, 2011 01:32 PM (lpWVn)
Posted by: Recluse Spider at October 15, 2011 01:33 PM (eScuN)
Gov. Susana Martinez of New Mexico didn't necome a Republican until 1996. She was born in El Paso, TX. She's great.
I think Texan Republicans should run everything,
I'm not kidding.
Posted by: mghorning at October 15, 2011 01:34 PM (UgxEV)
Posted by: SFGoth at October 15, 2011 01:35 PM (dZ756)
>> I haven't heard conservatives demand a halt to drilling and refining oil.
I haven't heard another Republican candidate suggest it.
And I've been listening. Also the Florida straw poll can suck my dick.
Posted by: Dave in Texas at October 15, 2011 01:35 PM (PjVdx)
BTW, this is great in terms of ideas from our side: Ryan 's entitlement reform plan, Cain 's 999 tax plan, and Perry/Palin 's energy plan for job creation. These are complimentary, not exclusive. Let 's run with them.
Posted by: LAI at October 15, 2011 01:35 PM (eRpKn)
I think Texan Republicans should run everything,
I'm not kidding.
Posted by: mghorningYou saying we don't?
Posted by: Dr Spank at October 15, 2011 01:37 PM (Sh42X)
Yes, he was primaried in 2008 and did not even get 50%. That is unheard of for an incumbent Senator in SC.
I will bet that he will not even run in 2014 because he has already lost control of the State Republican party. He is wangling for a VP slot now, probably with Romney.
Posted by: Vic at October 15, 2011 01:37 PM (M9Ie6)
Gov. Susana Martinez of New Mexico didn't necome a Republican until 1996. She was born in El Paso, TX. She's great.
I think Texan Republicans should run everything,
Hey, if Perry is our nominee. I don't mind a little pandering with Martinez either, even though Nikki Haley may be better on the merits. I like to have Cain play the race card with the left though.
Posted by: LAI at October 15, 2011 01:38 PM (eRpKn)
My context, "establishment" enables and strengthens the establishment to function.
No, Cain wasn't born a Senator's son.
Cain is hogtied to 999 as his claim to fame. Were he to drop it like a hot potato in order to play someone else's VP, he'd be a seat warmer in Congress if ever he showed up for work.
So we agree that it isn't as if the POTUS must sign onto a VP's platform in the campaign; except that it happens more often than not at least once in office. GHWB made the Reagan administration as clearly neoconservative as Bush Sr. ever intended his own administration to be, for instance.
Posted by: didn't take long at October 15, 2011 01:38 PM (lpWVn)
Cain should not be putting all his cards in his 999 plan.
The left will tear him to pieces with it......because it "Taxes the Poor" and gives "Tax Cuts for the Rich".
Posted by: ConservativeMenAreJustHotter at October 15, 2011 01:39 PM (D5636)
Posted by: Dave in Texas at October 15, 2011 01:39 PM (PjVdx)
If there were any doubt, no longer. Romney/Graham, God spare us!
Regarding Constitutional Governance, "Well, I'd leave it up to the lawyers to decide."--MittRomney
Posted by: didn't take long at October 15, 2011 01:42 PM (lpWVn)
Posted by: macintx at October 15, 2011 01:42 PM (ucs8Y)
What might have been....
When Santa Fe County, Texas was created in March 1948 by the state legislature, how far north did it extend?
Present day Wyoming. (42nd parallel).
Posted by: Count "Way to proud of Texas guy" de Monet at October 15, 2011 01:44 PM (4q5tP)
And so 999 does.
And he knew it when he endorsed it's formulation.
And he wouldn't bat an eyelash when he tells the middle class to stfu and pay their (new) taxes.
Which independent agency formulated Cain's 999 --- banking on Cain's run?
Posted by: didn't take long at October 15, 2011 01:44 PM (lpWVn)
anyway, despite my commentary, it's a decent plan.
What do you mean, "despite" you commentary? I especially liked your use of the term "crony-fairy-farts".
Posted by: FireHorse at October 15, 2011 01:44 PM (acNQ2)
Well here it is. Denounce the plan, conservatives. Tell us why it's such a baaaad plan.
It's not his turn! You can't offer plans out of turn or else we'll become a nation of queue jumpers and society will collapse and we'll all kill each other at the DMV.
Posted by: The Republican Party at October 15, 2011 01:45 PM (dn7cw)
But that will never happen. If it did pass based on what we have in the current congress it would probably wind up being some huge sales tax and income tax complete with "pre-bates" to the looter segment of the population. And then it would go downhill from there with future congresses.
So wait, I will not support 9-9-9, perhaps Bachmann is right, it is truly 6-6-6.,
Posted by: Vic at October 15, 2011 01:45 PM (M9Ie6)
Posted by: Mitt Romney at October 15, 2011 01:47 PM (Sh42X)
Martinez is the best governor New Mexico has had since...Gary Johnson. Of course, we had (shudder) Bill Richardson for eight years. I think it is a very bad idea to bring a governor of less than two years experience into the race this time. Not Haley, not Martinez.
Posted by: huerfano at October 15, 2011 01:47 PM (fecOD)
Posted by: osoloco at October 15, 2011 01:47 PM (e7za5)
Did a hand write "mene, mene, tekel, upharsin" on the wall in blood while you were watching?
Posted by: Kratos (Ghost of Sparta) at October 15, 2011 01:48 PM (KBdSF)
Posted by: jmflynny at October 15, 2011 01:48 PM (piMMO)
Posted by: Chilling the most for perry at October 15, 2011 01:49 PM (6IV8T)
#106 - Romney is a moderate GOP/conservative. Comments like these that he will usher in a communist dicatorship are so overboard that they eliminate any value your comment had.
#139 - According to this site I am retarded becuase I recognize and understand that Romney is positioning himself for the general and trying to bring in moderates and independents that will be needed to win while Perry is still playing the swaggering cowboy to get the base but is not pulling in any moderates or independents. On AGW Romney said that he believed the earth was warming (which is what most people agree with), said that it should be studied (which is what most people agree with) but didn't then propose a massive regulatory scheme to address it. Perry's kill the EPA plays very well with the GOP Base but doesn't play well with the general public. Romneycare is only an issue if you don't believe him when he says he will repeal Ocare.
Posted by: nobamain12 at October 15, 2011 01:49 PM (1CcaY)
Posted by: macintx at October 15, 2011 01:50 PM (ucs8Y)
Everything you said there sure sounds reasonable, too bad it is all total bull shit.
Posted by: Vic at October 15, 2011 01:50 PM (M9Ie6)
Posted by: Mallamutt, RINO President for Life at October 15, 2011 05:45 PM (OWjjx)
Really? I don't think I ever did that. How do you do it, what's it called?
Posted by: robtr at October 15, 2011 01:51 PM (MtwBb)
Posted by: Doctor Fish at October 15, 2011 05:49 PM
Totally, except for not being drafted at all. Dollar Bill was much like his pal, Bubba Clinton, a complete lying sack of shit.
Posted by: huerfano at October 15, 2011 01:51 PM (fecOD)
Posted by: polynikes - Texan for Romney at October 15, 2011 01:52 PM (i9cTu)
I don't agree with a lot of his immigration nonsense, but that's peanuts compared to the idea that Romney actually sought John Holdren's opinion on anything. That's pure evil.
At this point as far as I"m concerned I'm not even convinced I'd support Romney against Obama unless he commits to firing James Hansen and shuttering GISS.
Unless we can seal the environuts in a 55-gallon drum and dump them in the ocean none of the rest matters.
Posted by: JEM at October 15, 2011 01:54 PM (o+SC1)
239.....Romneycare is only an issue if you don't believe him when he says he will repeal Ocare.
Romney supporters need to put forth a guidebook for us on "When we can believe what Mitt Romney is saying".
Posted by: ConservativeMenAreJustHotter at October 15, 2011 01:54 PM (D5636)
Posted by: osoloco at October 15, 2011 01:56 PM (e7za5)
#157 - the point here is that on this site, HA etc you see Romey/Cain voters saying they want these candidates but will support Perry if he is the nominee. On the other hand Perry supports scream that they will stay home even if that means O is reelected.
Look I actually would actively support Perry. I think a Perry/Romney or Romney/Perry ticket would work. But I recognize that Perry has had a very poor campaign so far which his supporters here can't accept. So they instead they repeatedly scream Romney is a RINO and say they are going to sit out the election if Romney is the nominee.
Posted by: nobamain12 at October 15, 2011 01:56 PM (1CcaY)
He passed such a scheme in Massachusetts, oh wait, I'm sorry, Romney's record is irrelevant.
Posted by: Dr Spank at October 15, 2011 01:57 PM (Sh42X)
Were it a choice between Obama and Perry?
Perry: GWBush had Tom Delay The Hammer along with Newt twisting arms for votes while touting "political capital". Who is going to be Perry's Hammer? Bush had familial ties to the nation's power elite. Perry's riding in literally from Texas, not from the Eastern Ivy League clique. I expect Congress would tralala along the lines it did under GWBush, "compassionate" neoconservatism, keep on spending but perhaps either temporarily lower a tax or go through the antics of a "rebate" that requires repayment by the taxpayer, growing the DEBT sinking the Dollar. What in Perry's "fiscal conservative" record implies that he'd thwart and veto a Congressional bail-out like TARP or a Dollar alignment as if part of the Euro. Washington DC is not Texas.
Obama: more taxes more spending more debt more Marxism MUCH MORE VIOLENCE up in your face at home and abroad ...no more "Dollar" but whatever the UN coins.
Posted by: didn't take long at October 15, 2011 01:57 PM (lpWVn)
Posted by: Havedash at October 15, 2011 01:58 PM (JfvbF)
Besides if you think about it, it's really not fair to Obama against anyone except last time's loser, like we did last time with the loser before.
We cannot be a racist party and must embrace affirmative action, by nominating the guy who couldn't beat McCain.
McCain being the guy who lost Indiana, Iowa, Ohio, Florida, and Virginia.
But Barrack Obama is much weaker now than last time, so we need to run the guy who lost to the guy who lost to the guy we elected 12 years ago, that ended up going squishy on us worse than any president since Lyndon Johnson.
Don't you want a fair and competitive election?!?
Posted by: The Republican Party at October 15, 2011 01:58 PM (dn7cw)
Posted by: macintx at October 15, 2011 01:59 PM (ucs8Y)
Posted by: macintx at October 15, 2011 02:01 PM (ucs8Y)
Posted by: polynikes - Texan for Romney at October 15, 2011 02:01 PM (i9cTu)
U.S. Navy Admiral Chester A. Nimitz, Dwight D. Eisenhower, Audie Murphy, and Chuck Norris.
All from Texas.
Fear us.
Posted by: Count "Way Too Proud of Texas Guy" de Monet at October 15, 2011 02:01 PM (4q5tP)
>> It's a good plan but Perry hasn't a clue why. He won't be able to explain it except with platitudes. Any detail explanation required from him and he will step all over his dick.
Critique the actual plan, if you would. Let us know why Romney's energy plan is so much better.
I actually don't care who comprehends it. I care who will implement it.
Romney, it ain't even on his radar.
Posted by: Dave in Texas at October 15, 2011 02:02 PM (PjVdx)
And that bastard Curt Schilling!
Posted by: Marcia Coakley at October 15, 2011 02:02 PM (fecOD)
Posted by: carolauren at October 15, 2011 02:02 PM (vAIM/)
Posted by: Mallamutt, RINO President for Life at October 15, 2011 05:45 PM (OWjjx)
Really? I don't think I ever did that. How do you do it, what's it called?
-----------
Line 27 on this year's standard 1040. Attach a Schedule SE and Schedule C. They're easy to fill out.
Posted by: ConservativeMenAreJustHotter at October 15, 2011 02:02 PM (D5636)
There it is: Campaign vs. PLATFORM.
Accepting. Rather, strategists go figure what to do about it given support for his platform.
"Romney IS a RINO" has been conventional wisdom since he was elected Gov./Mass. Being a RINO gets the "establishment electability" backing. Whining otherwise doesn't make Romney "conservative".
Posted by: didn't take long at October 15, 2011 02:03 PM (lpWVn)
Posted by: nobamain12 at October 15, 2011 02:05 PM (1CcaY)
I read in the last week that he had. Hey, here's a link. And fuck you.
Posted by: Dr Spank at October 15, 2011 02:05 PM (Sh42X)
nah, he didn't "pass" it. He pushed it, supported it, and got it almost all the way to approval until it neared the end of his term and he decided to run for President. He then backed out of it knowing that it would go through anyway.
It was the same kind of shit Scott Brown and the ME sisters did with Dodd-Frank, vote for cloture and then vote against it later on the floor.
Posted by: Vic at October 15, 2011 02:06 PM (M9Ie6)
Eisenhower was asked by the Democrat Party to run on their ticket for potus. He turned down the offer and switched parties to run for his Republican administration.
btw, Isn't Chuck Norris a Libertarian?
Posted by: didn't take long at October 15, 2011 02:06 PM (lpWVn)
Posted by: huerfano at October 15, 2011 05:47 PM (fecOD)
I am not promoting a Martinez candidacy here. We need her to change NM. My point was that she has not always been a Rep. and she is doing well, very well!
She is prolife. pro energy and conservative. She is also a Texan by birth. Sound like someone we talking about?
Posted by: mghorning at October 15, 2011 02:07 PM (UgxEV)
Posted by: carolauren at October 15, 2011 06:02 PM (vAIM/)
Deals with Romney perhaps? It's been very telling in how the other candidates have been reacting towards Romney. Do you remember in the 2nd to last debate that Bachman kissed Romney when she greeted him on stage? I thought that was way, way inappropriate in that forum. Cain announced before the last debate that he was going to go after Romney. I didn't see it if he did.
Posted by: Havedash at October 15, 2011 02:07 PM (JfvbF)
I'll ask him next time we hang out.
Posted by: Mike Huckabee at October 15, 2011 02:08 PM (fecOD)
Posted by: Trust Fund 99%r at October 15, 2011 02:09 PM (WkdU9)
So long, America. It was nice knowing ya.
Posted by: jmflynny at October 15, 2011 02:09 PM (piMMO)
You obviously just showed up on this site if you think that. Who is paying you to troll for Romney?
Posted by: Vic at October 15, 2011 02:09 PM (M9Ie6)
She is prolife. pro energy and conservative. She is also a Texan by birth. Sound like someone we talking about? Posted by: mghorning at October 15, 2011 06:07 PM
Me? I'm really not that well known...oh, what the hell. I'm unemployed.
Posted by: huerfano at October 15, 2011 02:10 PM (fecOD)
"Then again, were Perry to win the GOP ticket, he could take Vic's advice and NOT debate Obama."
Funny you should say that.In Perry's last gubernatorial race he refused to debate democrat Bill White unless White released his tax returns from the Clinton years (White Energy/Dept. for Clinton and started an energy company after leaving the administration) White refused to do so and Perry trounced him. It was a hoot.
Perry's plan is a good one and it isn't a Palin plan it has Perry's approach and thinking all over it. It's put in terms easy for voters to digest which is a Perry hallmark when he's pitchin an issue. It's how he speaks and how he campaigns. The tort reform is a variation on Loser Pays Law and will stifle the enviromoonbats and stop Cailifornia's enviro-standards tyranny on the rest of the nation.
Posted by: workingclass artist at October 15, 2011 02:10 PM (tBMfq)
You're a very strong Perry supporter and cannot find anything wrong with him or anything right with the other candidates
The supporters I see here that appear to be the ones thinking their candidate can do no wrong are not Perry supporters. Many ditched him after the "heartless" comment. Others did not like the statement and acknowledge it hurt him. And I doubt any Perry supporter will claim he's done well in the debates. No the supporters I see that seem to think their candidate can do no wrong are the Romney supporters. It just doesn't show up that often because usually they're whining about how they are such a minority on the site.
Posted by: buzzion at October 15, 2011 02:10 PM (GULKT)
A Breitbart.tv investigation has uncovered that the man whose epic meltdown video at the “Occupy Wall Street” protests went viral is really Edward T. Hall III. Mr. Hall is a Columbia graduate student who has a trust fund set up by his grandfather. He recently made headlines for trying to board a flight at JFK airport by hopping the ticket counter and diving onto the baggage carousel.
He was charged with trespassing and is free on “conditional release.”
I bet grandpa is reeeeal proud. Can you revoke a trust fund?
Posted by: Tami-Cardinals! at October 15, 2011 02:10 PM (X6akg)
#253 - #260 beat me to it. He did not. But of couse since this doesn't fit with the Romney is a RINO meme it will be ignored.
#259 - Romney's 59 point, 160 plan included energy independence and reducing regulations, including the EPA. But again since it doesn't fit with your Romney meme it is ignored.
Posted by: nobamain12 at October 15, 2011 02:10 PM (1CcaY)
Romney 2012: Because there's no one else.
Posted by: The Other Dave at October 15, 2011 04:02 PM (hnoTN)
If I could set your comment on fire somehow, I would. Then piss on the ashes.
Posted by: Unclefacts Out Of Commenting Retirement Just For This One Thing at October 15, 2011 02:11 PM (6IReR)
Posted by: nobamain12 at October 15, 2011 05:49 PM (1CcaY)
So. its your positioin that its OK to change your stated Platform, to get elected? From what you really think and believe?
That somehow, in WASHINGTON, Romney will suddenly vear RIGHT? once elected? When his past shows he is more likely to vear LEFT?
/shakes head in wonder...
Posted by: Romeo13 at October 15, 2011 02:12 PM (NtXW4)
I'm with Cain. The guy is out there and speaking his mind and he's not scared to do it.
Hell, he showed up at Ohio Christian University two days ago.
Would Romney do that? Nope.
Would Perry do that? Nope.
Would Bachmann do that? Nope.
Content of character. Cain has it, the rest of the field doesn't.
Posted by: ErikW at October 15, 2011 02:12 PM (sSEMX)
Posted by: carolauren at October 15, 2011 02:13 PM (vAIM/)
Posted by: FlaviusJulius at October 15, 2011 02:13 PM (ieDPL)
Posted by: Entropy at October 15, 2011 02:14 PM (dn7cw)
Posted by: carolauren at October 15, 2011 02:14 PM (vAIM/)
Posted by: Dr Spank at October 15, 2011 02:15 PM (Sh42X)
Hell, he showed up at Ohio Christian University two days ago.
Would Romney do that? Nope.
Would Perry do that? Nope.
Would Bachmann do that? Nope.
Why wouldn't Perry or Bachmann?
They both would.
Posted by: Entropy at October 15, 2011 02:16 PM (dn7cw)
Posted by: FlaviusJulius at October 15, 2011 06:13 PM (ieDPL)
Its not importan who has the vote, just who counts the votes...
Posted by: Some Dead Russian at October 15, 2011 02:16 PM (NtXW4)
And he said that when? All I've ever heard from Romney is he'd issue waivers to the states. That's not a repeal.
Posted by: Trust Fund 99%r at October 15, 2011 06:09 PM (WkdU9)
Oh no, he says he'd repeal it. Only after being heavily questioned though. It seems like he doesn't want that sound bit out there. At the last debate he said he would do "repeal and replace." And he even claimed that he has it out there on what he would Replace it with. Of course, he didn't give any indication on what it is during the debate, just that he has a plan. But remember, you can only criticize Perry for not talking more in depth on his plan. Not Romney.
Of course I think his repeal and replace claim is bull shit and he'll do a "waivers and now we have more time to make it work properly" plan.
Posted by: buzzion at October 15, 2011 02:16 PM (GULKT)
#266 - so you're saying campaigns don't matter? As for platform one of the reasons Perry fell behind is because he didn't one except "look at Texas". This energy plan is a good start on the platform issue
#275 - he says it repeatedly. He said it very clearly at the last debate for example.
#278 - not a Romneybot. Just because I don't think Perry is flawless doesn't make me a Romneybot
Posted by: nobamain12 at October 15, 2011 02:17 PM (1CcaY)
Choice now Perry, if not him then
Cain, if not him then
Santorum if not him then
Bachmann, if not her then
Ron Paul
In the general I will vote for any of the above. If Romney gets it, it becomes debatable.
That subject to change based on new people maybe entering (doubtful at this stage) or the USA collapses before the election.
And anyone who has read my eval knows that I did not consider Perry a "purity" candidate. I don't think anyone does.
Posted by: Vic at October 15, 2011 02:17 PM (M9Ie6)
Posted by: carolauren at October 15, 2011 02:18 PM (vAIM/)
Why wouldn't Perry or Bachmann?
They both would.
Posted by: Entropy at October 15, 2011 06:16 PM (dn7cw)
They didn't.
Posted by: ErikW at October 15, 2011 02:18 PM (sSEMX)
" What in Perry's "fiscal conservative" record implies that he'd thwart and veto a Congressional bail-out like TARP or a Dollar alignment as if part of the Euro. Washington DC is not Texas."
He did it during the last session. The Legislature wanted to dip again into the rainy day fund to balance the budget and Perry said We don't have the money so cut. He kept them from depleting the fund, pissed off teachers but sales tax revenues are back to 2008 levels and the rainy day fund will back up to $7 Billion by 2013.
Posted by: workingclass artist at October 15, 2011 02:19 PM (tBMfq)
Posted by: lorien1973 at October 15, 2011 02:20 PM (usXZy)
Posted by: carolauren at October 15, 2011 06:18 PM (vAIM/)
Awesome. Roast the fuckers.
Posted by: Unclefacts Out Of Commenting Retirement Just For This One Thing at October 15, 2011 02:20 PM (6IReR)
Posted by: polynikes - Texan for Romney at October 15, 2011 02:20 PM (i9cTu)
Honestly I like Cain, but I don't much like his 9-9-9 plan at all. I'm opposed to a 9% national sales tax in addition to an income tax.
Is that it? Or is it the numbers?
The way I cipher it, a 9% sales tax (when combined with a 9% personal income tax and everything else equal) hurts people currently in the 10% or lower brackets, helps people currently in the 25% or higher brackets, and is pretty much a wash for people now in the 15% bracket. But the 9% corporate income tax benefits everybody.
Posted by: FireHorse at October 15, 2011 02:20 PM (acNQ2)
Posted by: President Chet Roosevelt at October 15, 2011 02:20 PM (ETopO)
Rep. Michele Bachmann will be headlining a fundraiser in November for controversial ministry You Can Run But You Cannot Hide (YCRBYCH).
Based in Annandale, Minn., the group has made a name for itself as an anti-drug Christian punk rock band that organizes motivational student assemblies to bring Christ to public schools.
-----
A federal judge dismissed a lawsuit that sought to stop Gov. Rick Perry from sponsoring a national day of Christian prayer and fasting, ruling Thursday that the group of atheists and agnostics did not have legal standing to sue.
U.S. District Judge Gray H. Miller said the Freedom From Religion Foundation argued against Perry's involvement based merely on feelings of exclusion, but did not show sufficient harm to merit the injunction they sought.
"The governor has done nothing more than invite others who are willing to do so to pray," Miller said.
Posted by: Entropy at October 15, 2011 02:21 PM (dn7cw)
Posted by: polynikes - Texan for Romney at October 15, 2011 06:20 PM (i9cTu)
Did I say you would do that? No. Fuck you.
Quit acting like a democrat like your candidate and creating strawmen.
Posted by: buzzion at October 15, 2011 02:22 PM (GULKT)
At the bloomberg debate, Romney said he'd issue waivers on day 1. Repeal on day 2. Then went on to say that since it passed via reconciliation, it can be repealed via reconciliation.
Not that I believe he would. But hey; there it is.
Posted by: lorien1973 at October 15, 2011 02:22 PM (usXZy)
Posted by: macintx at October 15, 2011 02:22 PM (ucs8Y)
Posted by: Rex the Wonder God at October 15, 2011 02:23 PM (vahvH)
Posted by: carolauren at October 15, 2011 02:23 PM (vAIM/)
Our only hope of getting rid of it is SCOTUS.
Posted by: Vic at October 15, 2011 02:24 PM (M9Ie6)
Posted by: Rex the Wonder God at October 15, 2011 02:25 PM (vahvH)
Hell, he showed up at Ohio Christian University two days ago.
Perry already did something similar a month ago, when he was at Liberty University in Lynchburg, VA. ....He gave a speech -- not on politics -- but on 'Christian Values'.
Perry:
“America is going to be guided by some set of values. The question is going go to be: Whose values?”
Posted by: ConservativeMenAreJustHotter at October 15, 2011 02:26 PM (D5636)
Posted by: Trust Fund 99%r at October 15, 2011 02:27 PM (WkdU9)
No what Perry said is the damn thing is phony, there is no science. He has actually sued the EPA.
Posted by: Vic at October 15, 2011 02:28 PM (M9Ie6)
Cain, if not him then
Santorum if not him then
Bachmann, if not her then
Ron Paul
In the general I will vote for any of the above. If Romney gets it, it becomes debatable.
Posted by: Vic
..............
Huh?
WTF does that even mean, Vic? You will only get the chance to vote for one in the primary.
Perry will still be in by the time the primaries roll around.
So, fine. Vote for Perry. I still might as well.. and since Illois has moved to March they will be forced to apportion delegates proportionally.. might do Perry some good.
But I still don't get that whole list of candidates of yours.. is that the order of your votes if they all start getting assassinated from top down?
And if Romney does get the nomination and you don't vote.. then fuck you.. and shut the fuck up from that point on, ok?
Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at October 15, 2011 02:28 PM (UTq/I)
Posted by: lorien1973 at October 15, 2011 02:29 PM (usXZy)
Haven't you heard of candidates dropping out before the primary in your State? I know a lot of these candidate will hang around and let Romney win on plurality but some may actually do the right thing and drop.
Posted by: Vic at October 15, 2011 02:30 PM (M9Ie6)
Posted by: FlaviusJulius at October 15, 2011 02:32 PM (ieDPL)
Dave was 'against' Rick Perry before he was 'for' Rick Perry. Or something like that.Im totally confused right now. Beuller?
Post 320 is sponsored by; "Who the hell reads this far down INC."
Posted by: Rcih K at October 15, 2011 02:32 PM (X4l3T)
Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at October 15, 2011 06:28 PM (UTq/I)
Chi-town - respectfully kiss my ass. We all know you love taxes and liberals, you have posted such here many times.
Posted by: Vic at October 15, 2011 02:32 PM (M9Ie6)
If I might barge in here, I like the plan, but I do think that pointing out what the Democrats will do to that 9% tax rate when they get their hands on it is a legitimate criticism. It will only stay there with elected officials who realize that government spending really doesn't need to be anywhere near the level it's at now.
As for the income tax, Cain's plan is supposed to be an interim plan to transition from the current tax system to the Fair Tax, which is only a national sales tax.
Posted by: blue star at October 15, 2011 02:32 PM (s4xp1)
Posted by: Rex the Wonder God at October 15, 2011 02:33 PM (vahvH)
The way I cipher it, a 9% sales tax (when combined with a 9% personal income tax and everything else equal) hurts people currently in the 10% or lower brackets, helps people currently in the 25% or higher brackets, and is pretty much a wash for people now in the 15% bracket. But the 9% corporate income tax benefits everybody.
I don't have any terrible problem with the numbers.
I don't like the federal government operating both an income tax and a sales tax at the same time. I worry very much that all the games they play with income taxes will continue, and we'll all learn what kind of games they can play with a sales tax, and what we'll find out what unforseen, terrible synergies they discover they can do with both at once.
For one thing, have you been following at all the increasing attempts to regulate the internet, and that mainly the motive is to get tax revenue out of it? Are you familiar with the Amazon affiliate issues that have risen in some states? And the Federal online poker ban?
How does a 9% federal sales tax impact that debate, and impact online retailers who will have to collect federal sales tax? Will Amazon's small affiliates, selling used books out of their garage or trading coin collections, have to start collecting federal sales tax? And if they're doing that, I imagine those records make them liable for state taxes as well. Quite probably, multi-state sales taxes.
Imagine 9% federal, 8% state of origin, 9% state of destination.
Now, what about ebay puchases from individual sellers?
And what about cash services? What about services in general?
This, expanding government revenue collection in a whole new area, is most certainly NOT a simple affair expressed in 1 digit.
And the devil is in the details.
Posted by: Entropy at October 15, 2011 02:33 PM (dn7cw)
Posted by: carolauren at October 15, 2011 02:33 PM (vAIM/)
Posted by: Rich K at October 15, 2011 02:34 PM (X4l3T)
Well, the fair tax is a POS too.
Posted by: Vic at October 15, 2011 02:34 PM (M9Ie6)
Posted by: Vic at October 15, 2011 06:34 PM (M9Ie6)
Yeah, it may be that. But the IRS is a bigger piece of shit.
Posted by: Unclefacts Out Of Commenting Retirement Just For This One Thing at October 15, 2011 02:35 PM (6IReR)
Actually, the current system is not as bad as the so-called fair tax.
The ONLY fair tax would be a flat tax on all income no deductions and no exceptions.
Posted by: Vic at October 15, 2011 02:36 PM (M9Ie6)
Posted by: rdbrewer at October 15, 2011 02:36 PM (8cQy5)
Posted by: Havedash at October 15, 2011 02:36 PM (JfvbF)
Posted by: Trust Fund 99%r at October 15, 2011 02:38 PM (WkdU9)
Here's what you will have caused if Obama wins a second term:
First off, he will no longer give a fuck about upsetting moderate voters. Everything he does will be aimed toward socializing this country as much as he can.
But, you say, if we win the House and Senate he won't be able to do anything.
Au contraire.. In the lame duck session before being sworn in he will choose not to address the expiring Bush tax cuts that they extended. Taxes will automatically go up for nearly every paying taxpayer in the country.. without him or the Dems doing anything.. nothing.
My taxes will go up $2 - $4 grand a year.. and I will blame every one of you sons of bitches who didn't want to vote for Romney for the sake of purity.
Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at October 15, 2011 02:40 PM (UTq/I)
Posted by: Chilling the most for perry at October 15, 2011 02:40 PM (6IV8T)
Posted by: Master Debater at October 15, 2011 02:42 PM (8cQy5)
I mean it. I will vote for ANYONE but Obama.
Posted by: As If! at October 15, 2011 02:44 PM (piMMO)
Posted by: Herman Cain at October 15, 2011 02:44 PM (usXZy)
But then again, you will not have time to blame anyone. If you truly live in Chicago the great collapse will occur shortly after the election and you will be long pig buffet on one of Obama's constituent's plate.
Posted by: Vic at October 15, 2011 02:44 PM (M9Ie6)
Posted by: Havedash at October 15, 2011 02:47 PM (JfvbF)
Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at October 15, 2011 06:40 PM (UTq/I)
I highly doubt that the morons are going to sit on their hands. Yes, there is a lot of frustration but it's still a year away from the general election.
Posted by: ErikW at October 15, 2011 02:49 PM (sSEMX)
Posted by: Trust Fund 99%r at October 15, 2011 02:50 PM (WkdU9)
Posted by: Vic at October 15, 2011 06:36 PM (M9Ie6)
IRS is still a piece of shit.
Posted by: Unclefacts Out Of Commenting Retirement Just For This One Thing at October 15, 2011 02:51 PM (6IReR)
Foisted upon us? If Perry or Cain can't win the nomination it's because of them.
Posted by: lowandslow at October 15, 2011 02:51 PM (GZitp)
Posted by: steevy at October 15, 2011 02:52 PM (fyOgS)
Posted by: Rex the Wonder God at October 15, 2011 02:52 PM (vahvH)
Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at October 15, 2011 06:40 PM (UTq/I)
Perry is a long ways from pure, but he isn't a 2 dollar vote whore either.
Posted by: Havedash at October 15, 2011 02:52 PM (JfvbF)
I mean it. I will vote for ANYONE but Obama.
Posted by: As If! at October 15, 2011 06:44 PM
Me too. I held my nose and voted for the dirty jock...uh, McCain. But, I don't want to vote for just anyone this time.
Posted by: huerfano at October 15, 2011 02:52 PM (fecOD)
I agree with that. Perhaps we can get Romney to say he will repeal the 16th Amendment on the 3rd day and we can go back to tariffs and excise taxes with the States kicking in the remainder of the money.
Posted by: Vic at October 15, 2011 02:53 PM (M9Ie6)
Posted by: Chilling the most for perry at October 15, 2011 02:53 PM (6IV8T)
Posted by: Texan Economist at October 15, 2011 02:54 PM (TC/9F)
Posted by: steevy at October 15, 2011 02:55 PM (fyOgS)
Posted by: lowandslow at October 15, 2011 06:51 PM (GZitp)
The "Romney is the only electable candidate meme" and the media bias towards Romney won't factor in?
Posted by: Havedash at October 15, 2011 02:57 PM (JfvbF)
Posted by: macintx at October 15, 2011 02:58 PM (ucs8Y)
Posted by: Chilling the most for perry at October 15, 2011 06:53 PM (6IV8T)
No kidding? I don't get to listen to Rush because it's blocked at work. Nice to know that I can take off my tin foil hat :-)
Posted by: Havedash at October 15, 2011 02:59 PM (JfvbF)
Posted by: rdbrewer at October 15, 2011 02:59 PM (8cQy5)
Posted by: lowandslow at October 15, 2011 06:51 PM (GZitp)
Yeah we had nothin to do with it!
Posted by: The MFM at October 15, 2011 03:00 PM (6IReR)
Posted by: CoolCzech at October 15, 2011 03:00 PM (niZvt)
Posted by: Vic at October 15, 2011 06:36 PM (M9Ie6)
Absolutely.
Posted by: blue star at October 15, 2011 03:01 PM (s4xp1)
Posted by: rdbrewer at October 15, 2011 06:59 PM (8cQy5)
If Romney gets the nod then loses, I'd almost guarantee you that happens.
Posted by: Unclefacts Out Of Commenting Retirement Just For This One Thing at October 15, 2011 03:01 PM (6IReR)
Posted by: CoolCzech at October 15, 2011 03:02 PM (niZvt)
The "Romney is the only electable candidate meme" and the media bias towards Romney won't factor in?
Posted by: Havedash at October 15, 2011 06:57 PM (JfvbF)
I see, people are so malleable that the media can easily shape what they think but at the same time so rigid Perry and Cain can't change their minds.
Posted by: lowandslow at October 15, 2011 03:07 PM (GZitp)
Posted by: Recluse Spider at October 15, 2011 03:09 PM (eScuN)
Posted by: ErikW at October 15, 2011 03:10 PM (sSEMX)
I see, people are so malleable
that the media can easily shape what they think but at the same time so
rigid Perry and Cain can't change their minds.
Posted by: lowandslow at October 15, 2011 07:07 PM (GZitp)
You say malleable, I say stupid.
Posted by: Unclefacts Out Of Commenting Retirement Just For This One Thing at October 15, 2011 03:10 PM (6IReR)
However, I have been looking hard at Herman Cain recently. There is a lot of hate for Cain and his 999 plan around here (yes Malor, I am looking at you). Wild claims of "it's a VAT!!! KILL IT!!!" and ominous allusions to secret plans of the Illuminati masters to use this as a foot in the door to allow for the funding of secret robot armies to take over the world. However, if Paul Ryan, Arthur Laffer and the Club for Growth can get behind 9-9-9, I really don't see how, in good faith, others can say that it is not a serious plan for dealing with our budget issues.
I think I am becoming a Cainiac: http://tinyurl.com/Cain4me
Posted by: David, infamous sockpuppet at October 15, 2011 03:12 PM (UtoLw)
Posted by: Chilling the most for perry at October 15, 2011 03:12 PM (6IV8T)
Posted by: CoolCzech at October 15, 2011 03:13 PM (niZvt)
They're in a catch-22. They like Romney better than the conservatives, but Romney has a better chance of beating Obama. They'd like Obama to win, but if he's going to lose, they want Romney... who has a better chance of beating Obama.
So, tear down the conservatives or tear down Romney?
Posted by: rdbrewer at October 15, 2011 03:13 PM (8cQy5)
Posted by: steevy at October 15, 2011 03:14 PM (fyOgS)
Whoever wins the Republican nomination will be our next president. People will turn out in droves to get rid of the SCoaMF and his ghetto wife and socialist czars. So when the conversation by the GOP/elite commentariat focuses on the who's the most electable against Obama, that's just bullshit.
And, personally, I think Perry would wipe his ass with Obama in a debate - he's called a stuttering clusteruck for a reason, ya know. And if Perry just stood there and smiled all the way through, that'd be good enough for me.
And whoever does not vote for the Republican nominee causing Obama to get reelected, do not ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever open your pie hole to complain about how bad it is (and it will be bad) for the rest of your life - what little there will be that's left of it. And that includes all the Tea Party retards. It's one thing to vote for a congressman or senator with no governing experience, but the CIC? Experience is key.
Posted by: The Ghost of Kim Novak at October 15, 2011 03:16 PM (8DdAv)
Posted by: lowandslow at October 15, 2011 03:18 PM (GZitp)
Cain proposed an electric fence along the southern border? Does that stupid shit intend to install it himself right down the middle of the Rio Grand river?
Quick, someone tell Herman Cain water and electricity are not friendly to each other.
Posted by: zane at October 15, 2011 03:18 PM (bMCXb)
I see, people are so malleable that the media can easily shape what they think but at the same time so rigid Perry and Cain can't change their minds.
Posted by: lowandslow at October 15, 2011 07:07 PM (GZitp)
Hasn't the media bragged that they are good for 15 points? Yes, some people are very pliable. There's a large segment of the population who do not follow politics as closely as we do here. Their opinions are very much formed by sound bites and news clips. These are the people the media are going for. Also, the bandwagon effect is also a jedi mind trick that can be very powerful.
Posted by: Havedash at October 15, 2011 03:18 PM (JfvbF)
Posted by: poljunkie at October 15, 2011 03:19 PM (XuiJf)
Jobs, Jobs, Jobs
Rick Perry 2012
Well I guess that's five words and some numbers
Posted by: lu - Perrywinkle at October 15, 2011 03:21 PM (AtIrT)
Posted by: Electrified Fence at October 15, 2011 03:23 PM (AtIrT)
I hear you, entropy.
>> Now, what about ebay puchases from individual sellers?
Cain's plan wouldn't include a sales tax on used goods.
>> And what about cash services? What about services in general?
This is what's been giving me shivers for years. Do you know how many transactions are not taxed right now? Most unprepared food, of course, at least in my state. Fuel oil has a special (lower) sales tax, too. But then there's stuff like rent. An interest payment is also a fee-for-service transaction. Imagine if people had to pay a sales tax on the interest portions of their credit card bills or their mortgages. There's really nothing stopping the government from making it so they can tax those right now.
My worry is that every dollar I'm spending becomes a buck-nine, with or without Herman Cain.
Posted by: FireHorse at October 15, 2011 03:23 PM (acNQ2)
Logical thinking is not the strong suit of liberals. Neither is consistency.
Posted by: Retread at October 15, 2011 03:24 PM (HtFr6)
Sorry, I don't get the Cain love. He's in the race to help Romney (and sell his book). I don't trust him.
More analysis of Cain's 9-9-9 plan. For a family of four with an income of just under $50,000 the Cain plan...
"...amounts to a total 9-9-9 tax bill for the family of $11,000: $4,500 in income tax and $6,500 in consumption taxes. ThatÂ’s an increase of $2,660 over todayÂ’s tax code, or a relative increase of 32 percent."
ABC also ran a story saying the family would pay more, but they came up with different specific numbers.
That's one thing that really contributes to me not being excited by these tax schemes: no one ever seems to agree on the numbers.
I just want a candidate to reduce the size and reach of the federal government. Rick Perry is clearly the best candidate to achieve that goal.
Posted by: Y-not at October 15, 2011 03:25 PM (5H6zj)
Their opinions are very much formed by sound bites and news clips.
Wow, are they ever. A relative told me about how Warren Buffett pays a lower tax rate than his secretary, who's in the 30% tax bracket. I mean, poor Warren Buffett's secretary, right?
This relative never stopped to consider that Warren Buffett's secretary is in the 30% tax bracket!
Posted by: FireHorse at October 15, 2011 03:27 PM (acNQ2)
Posted by: Muslim Not Hired for Being Muslim at October 15, 2011 03:27 PM (niZvt)
Posted by: Flapjackmaka at October 15, 2011 03:27 PM (It3/o)
Posted by: lowandslow at October 15, 2011 07:18 PM (GZitp)
ain't all that hard to figure out who it is.
Posted by: Unclefacts Out Of Commenting Retirement Just For This One Thing at October 15, 2011 03:28 PM (6IReR)
"...amounts to a total 9-9-9 tax bill for the family of $11,000: $4,500 in income tax and $6,500 in consumption taxes. ThatÂ’s an increase of $2,660 over todayÂ’s tax code, or a relative increase of 32 percent."
Posted by: Y-not at October 15, 2011 07:25 PM (5H6zj)
And why is this touted as a good thing again? I thought higher taxes in this economy would be a death blow
Posted by: Red Shirt at October 15, 2011 03:29 PM (FIDMq)
Whose fault is that?
Posted by: Miss'80s at October 15, 2011 03:29 PM (d6QMz)
Posted by: FlaviusJulius at October 15, 2011 03:29 PM (ieDPL)
Posted by: CoolCzech at October 15, 2011 03:29 PM (niZvt)
Posted by: poljunkie at October 15, 2011 03:30 PM (XuiJf)
Posted by: poljunkie at October 15, 2011 07:30 PM (XuiJf)
I hate it when that happens
Posted by: The electric fence at October 15, 2011 03:32 PM (FIDMq)
It's not being touted as a good thing by everyone, including the author of that analysis.
Cain's camp seems to be unwilling to address specifics about tax burdens. What I've read is that when these sorts of scenarios are presented, they wave their hands about "assumptions" and refuse to answer.
Most of the analyses I've read suggest that middle class will shoulder the biggest burden under his plan.
Moreover, I'm with a moron from these parts who a week or so ago pointed out that all Cain is doing is finding a new way to feed the beast. I don't want to feed the beast. I want someone to start cutting, which is clearly something Perry would do.
Posted by: Y-not at October 15, 2011 03:32 PM (5H6zj)
Sorry, but I have to quibble with that assessment. 3/4 of Rush's show is a commercial of some sort.............
Just like most of radio.
Posted by: Ronster at October 15, 2011 03:32 PM (/ej8I)
Posted by: CoolCzech at October 15, 2011 03:32 PM (niZvt)
Posted by: poljunkie at October 15, 2011 03:33 PM (XuiJf)
There is nothing Mitt Romney can say or do that will convince me to vote for him.
Only Barack Obama can convince me to vote for Mitt Romney.
Posted by: logprof at October 15, 2011 03:34 PM (QaKuj)
Yes, although my impression is that the bulk of the net revenue is coming from the middle income folks, even if the lower income people wind up experiencing a big increase in tax payments percentage-wise.
I also don't think this is the time to be pushing the "skin in the game" argument. To say during the economic nightmare we're in right now that it's vital that low income people pay more taxes while presenting a plan that reducing taxes for the wealthy seems like a bone-headed move. I would not be eager to have that be the GOP message for 2012.
Posted by: Y-not at October 15, 2011 03:36 PM (5H6zj)
Which is why it is dull....................
Then, just turn it off. TV is no different, by the way.
Posted by: Ronster at October 15, 2011 03:36 PM (/ej8I)
And I'm not a liberal. How many times to I have to tell you?
Posted by: proud honkey at October 15, 2011 03:36 PM (QaKuj)
Posted by: FlaviusJulius at October 15, 2011 03:38 PM (ieDPL)
Posted by: Y-not at October 15, 2011 03:39 PM (5H6zj)
Posted by: FlaviusJulius at October 15, 2011 07:38 PM (ieDPL)
Hope must qualify for plan...right? RIGHT?!!
Posted by: Red Shirt at October 15, 2011 03:40 PM (FIDMq)
Already have. But please......don't let my slight critique interfer with your unending man crush on Rush Limbaugh.
Don't have a man crush on him. Just trying to help you with your perceived problem. You're welcome.
Posted by: Ronster at October 15, 2011 03:40 PM (/ej8I)
That's one thing that really contributes to me not being excited by these tax schemes: no one ever seems to agree on the numbers.
That's why I take out a calculator. Say something is priced at $100. A consumer has to come up with $108 because of 8% sales tax (assuming here for the sake of the example). What do people have to earn before taxes to get that after-tax $108?
0% tax bracket: $108
10%: $120.00
15%: $127.06
25%: $144.00
If a federal sales tax of 9% is added alongside the state's 8% tax, you'll need $117 to buy the same $100 item. If everyone's in the 9% tax bracket, anyone would need to earn $128.57 to pay for it.
That's enough to put the kabosh on his plan, I think.
Of course, these calculations don't consider the increased speding patterns of richer people and decreased spending from poorer people, or that the sharply reduced corporate tax will ebnefit everybody. That's all what's behind Cain's plan, I assume, but the numbers will scare too many people away from it.
(I'm a non-practicing journalism graduate, and I figured this out easily enough. For a practicing journalist to discover this, he'd have to sift through 400-plus comments on a blog.)
Posted by: FireHorse at October 15, 2011 03:41 PM (acNQ2)
Posted by: CoolCzech at October 15, 2011 03:42 PM (niZvt)
383 If Perry or Cain lose (especially Perry) it's not just because of them. It's because a wide assortment of pundits, establishment types, MSM people and various hacks will have done absolutely everything under the sun to discredit, shut out and discredit them.
Hannity said on his radio show the other day that his choice was Cain first, Romney second, Bachmann third, and Newt fourth (or Newt third and Bachmann fourth). This was after a caller said she knew who Hannity was voting for. She said he was voting for Romney, then Hannity rattled off his choices.
Not that I'm surprised. Hannity has had a hard on for Cain for a long, long time. He's had Mitt on quite a bit and just drools over him like they're best buds. Yesterday he was obligated to talk about Perry's new energy/jobs policy and who did he have on to discuss it? Some Romney backer and Kirsten Powers. After the obligatory two second discussion of the plan, Sean slipped in (as he always does) Perry's stance on illegal immigrant/tuition and his polling numbers and what this means to Perry's campaign and let the Romney backer slam Perry for a few minutes, then he quickly turned the conversation to HERMAN CAIN'S 999 PLAN!! and how the left wingers are being really, really racisit towards Cain, yak, yak, yak. I did send him an email telling him that he should just put up his ROMNEY/CAIN banner and be done with it. No more toturing himself to try to appear "fair and balanced" and all that rot.
Even Mark Levine is starting to bug me. After the debate where Rick Santorum went after Perry on the fence issue, Levine praised Bachmann and Santorum on their outstanding performances. True conservatives he called them. Pathetic.
Don't even get me started on Ann Coulter. So it's dwindled down to Rush, the only real conservative left, IMO. And Greta. She hasn't done anything yet ... but it could happen.
Posted by: The Ghost of Kim Novak at October 15, 2011 03:42 PM (8DdAv)
Posted by: lu - proud perrywinkle at October 15, 2011 03:42 PM (AtIrT)
(I'm a non-practicing journalism graduate, and I figured this out easily enough. For a practicing journalist to discover this, he'd have to sift through 400-plus comments on a blog.)
Posted by: FireHorse at October 15, 2011 07:41 PM (acNQ2)
I learned somethin from it!
Posted by: Timmah 'Turbo Tax' G at October 15, 2011 03:43 PM (FIDMq)
*make my memorized talking point ---> check my finger off*
*make my memorized talking point ---> check my finger off*
*make my memorized talking point ---> check my finger off*
Posted by: lu - proud perrywinkle at October 15, 2011 03:45 PM (AtIrT)
>> Last point is that Dave seems to lump in the Obama-Chu costs of the first two bones, finding alternatives & 'addressing' AGW
When I want your opinion I'll write it on my cock and shove it up your ass.
AGW... sheesh.
Posted by: Dave in Texas at October 15, 2011 03:45 PM (PjVdx)
And it's incredibly naive to believe that the income tax would ever be abolished, and that 9,9,9 wouldn't become 20, 20, 20.
Yeah... instead of a transitory period where they have both an income tax and a sales tax, how about a transitory period where they have neither?
Posted by: Entropy at October 15, 2011 03:45 PM (dn7cw)
Posted by: Taxpayer at October 15, 2011 03:46 PM (NpmCe)
Posted by: lu - proud perrywinkle at October 15, 2011 03:48 PM (AtIrT)
I take your point but I wouldn't trust SCOAMF not to go after Cain's advisors, or atleast threaten them.
Posted by: Retread at October 15, 2011 03:49 PM (HtFr6)
Posted by: FlaviusJulius at October 15, 2011 03:49 PM (ieDPL)
What is next on the come back list.......fuck you?
Rough crowd in here today.
Oh, and right back at you, chickenshit mother fucker dipshit.
Posted by: Ronster at October 15, 2011 03:50 PM (/ej8I)
Posted by: macintx at October 15, 2011 03:50 PM (ucs8Y)
I won't! I just think the rest of them are so much less impressive, but I go by record more than anything else.
Posted by: Y-not at October 15, 2011 03:51 PM (5H6zj)
Governor Mitt Romney today announced that Massachusetts will take another major step in meeting its commitment to protecting air quality when strict state limitations on carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from power plants take effect on January 1, 2006. Â…
Massachusetts is the first and only state to set CO2 emissions limits on power plants.
---
GOP, time to decide what you are.
Posted by: Entropy at October 15, 2011 03:52 PM (dn7cw)
Posted by: FlaviusJulius at October 15, 2011 03:53 PM (ieDPL)
However, if Paul Ryan, Arthur Laffer and the Club for Growth can get behind 9-9-9, I really don't see how, in good faith, others can say that it is not a serious plan for dealing with our budget issues.
Why don't you go and read what they actually said instead of just taking the media's convenient interpretation as support for Cain? They offered their opinion on the plan, they didn't jack-off on it and scream CAIN when they came, for God's sake. Paul Ryan said he liked that it was a bold plan and that it started a conversation about changing the current system. Just because people you like and respect like something, don't bet the whole hog on their opinion. Check it out for yourself. Oh, and it's okay to disagree with these people, too. They aren't any better than you are, remember that.
Posted by: The Ghost of Kim Novak at October 15, 2011 03:54 PM (8DdAv)
That's what public life is all about, like it or not. Cain (and apparently his circle) thinks like a private sector guy. He puts his interests first. At some point you have to take the plunge and open yourself to the scrutiny that comes with public service.
Posted by: Y-not at October 15, 2011 03:54 PM (5H6zj)
Posted by: Wex the Wonderdog at October 15, 2011 03:55 PM (dIHHd)
Posted by: rightlysouthern at October 15, 2011 03:55 PM (3qZxU)
Posted by: FlaviusJulius at October 15, 2011 03:56 PM (ieDPL)
Posted by: CoolCzech at October 15, 2011 03:58 PM (niZvt)
Whenever I have that "not so fresh feeling," I vote for Mitt Romney.
Posted by: creepy campaign ad at October 15, 2011 03:58 PM (5H6zj)
Posted by: FlaviusJulius at October 15, 2011 03:59 PM (ieDPL)
She looks good in those army shoes!
I'll bet!
(But you know, with the advent of the Internet and readily available pictures of IDF babes, this one doesn't cut it as an insult any more: http://tinyurl.com/3wyzo9x)
Posted by: FireHorse, playing the oldies at October 15, 2011 04:00 PM (acNQ2)
You haven't even heard the worst of it....
This creeps me out with every fiber of my being.
Posted by: lu - proud perrywinkle at October 15, 2011 04:01 PM (AtIrT)
Yep. It will be really hard to vote for him if it comes down to that. And I know I'll have to physically drag my husband to the polls if Romney is the nominee. He's never thought Romney was electable.
I've decided that I'm voting for the person I want in the primary. If there were two very good candidates, I'd pick the one with the best shot at defeating Romney, but there just aren't any other candidates that come close to Perry in my book. So I'm going with Rick to the bitter end.
The only thing that would change my mind is if Ryan jumped into the race, but I don't think there's any chance of that happening.
Posted by: creepy campaign ad at October 15, 2011 04:01 PM (5H6zj)
Posted by: Floral Bumhole at October 15, 2011 04:04 PM (1fZKn)
Posted by: Random Self-Important Food TV Host at October 15, 2011 04:04 PM (WkdU9)
Things we have in common:
A distaste of disgust with:
Michael Moore
Rosie O'Donnell
Sean Penn
"Occupy" anything/anywhere
Freeloaders
the entitlement mentality
AGW and those who perpetrate the lies
Al Gore
The Obamas
"new and improved" George Lucas films
See? We are on the same side here folks.
Posted by: As If! at October 15, 2011 04:08 PM (piMMO)
There is nothing wrong with disagreeing strongly 13 months before the general election or even 5 months before the election. If Romney, Cain, and Bachmann had stuck with substantive criticisms of Perry, I would not have written them off. But each one succumbed to the temptation to smear him in ways that either damage the conservative movement (Cain, Romney) or damage Perry as governor of Texas (Bachmann). That's going to be hard to forgive.
I don't think Cain is qualified to be president. Moreover, I don't think he has the temperament to be president. Neither does Bachmann.
I think Romney is qualified, but he has a Nixonian streak in him a mile wide. And I do not think he's any more electable than Perry is going into the general.
Posted by: Y-not at October 15, 2011 04:13 PM (5H6zj)
...........
I really really understand the frustration.. I share it. But, I am pragmatic first. To me, there is nothing more important than O's defeat. His winning another 4 years would be disastrous to this country.
I don't understand the fatalistic attitude you have.. nothing is settled yet. Romney has 29% steady in polls. If we want Perry, let's work for him. Have you volunteered for GOTV efforts for Perry? Phone banks?
It ain't over til it's over..
But whoever is the GOP candidate, I will vote for. no matter what.
Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at October 15, 2011 04:14 PM (UTq/I)
Here's a bit of fun - tell your story to the world.
Hehehhehe.
"I am an unemployed barrista who got fired from starbucks because I refused to serve cow milk to customers (I am a vegan). They fired me despite being my filing for concientious observer/refugee status. My dog Pickles got bit by a squirrel and he got rabies but I couldn't afford to pay the vet, so I took him home but he bit me and now I have rabies, but I don't have health insurance and my grandma says she can't afford to help me because Rick Parry is going to steal her social security! HALP ME BARRAK OBAMAH!"
Posted by: Entropy at October 15, 2011 04:14 PM (dn7cw)
Posted by: macintx at October 15, 2011 04:19 PM (ucs8Y)
See? We are on the same side here folks.
That would imply there are only 2 sides.
That would make you of a mind with:
Lindsay Graham.
Trent Lott.
Olympia Snow.
Georgie Voinovitch.
The Alaskan mafia.
Jon Huntsman.
Posted by: Entropy at October 15, 2011 04:20 PM (dn7cw)
I started buying ramen from the Asian foods section and never ever looked back at the stuff in the soup aisle again. It costs only pennies more but the taste is worth so much more, especially if you like spicy noodles.
Two of the best are Shin Ramyun from Korea and MaMa from Thailand. The MaMa are even good dry because they are flavored with chicken.
Posted by: As If! at October 15, 2011 04:21 PM (piMMO)
Why don't they just aim a heat-seeker at her ass -- they can't miss.
Posted by: Jim Sonweed at October 15, 2011 04:23 PM (bnG0d)
If any Republican stays home because they don't like the nominee, twenty years from now when you have some of Obama's atrocious SCOTUS picks still on the bench laying waste to the Constituion.......
You might just start to rethink think that decision you made.
Posted by: Reggie1971 at October 15, 2011 04:23 PM (0DGtF)
Case in point:
Things we have in common:
A distaste of disgust with:
AGW and those who perpetrate the lies
I do not have that in common with Mitt Romney.
Unless by 'in common', you mean he's one of the disgusting perpetrators.
Although at this point, I do darkly think republicans are going to nominate him.
It's his turn dude.
Posted by: Entropy at October 15, 2011 04:25 PM (dn7cw)
Posted by: Random Self-Important Food TV Host at October 15, 2011 04:27 PM (WkdU9)
Hannity was on freakin' fire back in 2004.
Lately, not so much.
I wish he'd give the "read off a check list" style of debate a rest.
Posted by: Reggie1971 at October 15, 2011 04:27 PM (0DGtF)
its alot faster to build a windmill than to get oil from the sea
boy ur stupid!
is that taco salad i smell?
Posted by: Meghan McCheese at October 15, 2011 04:28 PM (QaKuj)
Let's just hope Mittens doesn't implement Holdren's notions on population control.
Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at October 15, 2011 04:28 PM (uhAkr)
Posted by: SurferDoc at October 15, 2011 04:32 PM (STdkO)
Since when did I become a ghost?
Posted by: Kim Novak at October 15, 2011 04:34 PM (bnG0d)
Posted by: TrueNorthist at October 15, 2011 04:35 PM (RQtDB)
Posted by: TrueNorthist at October 15, 2011 08:35 PM (RQtDB)
You will vote for me and take your sterility pills, dammit!
Posted by: Mitt Romney at October 15, 2011 04:36 PM (uhAkr)
Posted by: rdbrewer at October 15, 2011 04:37 PM (8cQy5)
G20 tells euro zone to fix debt crisis in eight days
Posted by: Kratos (Ghost of Sparta) at October 15, 2011 04:38 PM (KBdSF)
So the assumption here is that Romney would select a bunch of David Souter's to the court, right?
Why do you think Robert Bork has endorsed Romney for President twice? Why do you think Bork is on Romney's legal advisory team for this campaign.
Is Robert Bork naive? Or I guess maybe he's just a RINO.
Posted by: Reggie1971 at October 15, 2011 04:41 PM (0DGtF)
Posted by: Random Self-Important Food TV Host at October 15, 2011 08:04 PM (WkdU9)
Does that mean you're happy?
Posted by: Osama bin Truck Monkey, TEArrorist Son of a Bitch at October 15, 2011 04:45 PM (jucos)
That's why the guy everyone wants never gets the nomination.
There is no guy in the primaries who everybody does or does not want. They are all flawed.
I'm looking for someone who has a conservative platform, is articulate, has a firm grasp of domestic and foreign policy, and last but not least.....is electible.
Not to mention what is key here is that the Congress (knock on wood) will likely be Republican at the start of the next Presidential term. I don't really see anything to suggest that Romney will fight the Congress tooth and nail to implement a liberal agenda.
Posted by: Reggie1971 at October 15, 2011 04:49 PM (0DGtF)
Posted by: USA at October 15, 2011 04:49 PM (6Cjut)
Is Robert Bork naive? Or I guess maybe he's just a RINO.
Posted by: Reggie1971 at October 15, 2011 08:41 PM (0DGtF)I guess Robert Bork is cool with the notion of sterilizing poor people.
Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at October 15, 2011 04:50 PM (uhAkr)
Posted by: Dr Spank at October 15, 2011 04:50 PM (Sh42X)
Posted by: Osama bin Truck Monkey, TEArrorist Son of a Bitch at October 15, 2011 04:52 PM (jucos)
Posted by: Dr Spank at October 15, 2011 08:50 PM (Sh42X)
Nothing wrong with our QBs (other than Bray being out). Its our running game and defense that needs work.
Posted by: Holger at October 15, 2011 04:53 PM (zaVyn)
Posted by: CoolCzech at October 15, 2011 04:53 PM (niZvt)
Posted by: CoolCzech at October 15, 2011 04:55 PM (niZvt)
Posted by: CoolCzech at October 15, 2011 04:57 PM (niZvt)
Posted by: macintx at October 15, 2011 04:57 PM (ucs8Y)
Posted by: Herman Cain at October 15, 2011 04:58 PM (niZvt)
Hannity said on his radio show the other day that his choice was Cain first
the same Sean Hannity who in February 2008 was pimping Mitt Romney?
that Sean Hannity?
Posted by: Mallamutt, RINO President for Life at October 15, 2011 07:43 PM (OWjjx)
Absofuckinlutely. One foot in each camp. And he's surprised that he can't get Perry on his TV show?
Posted by: The Ghost of Kim Novak at October 15, 2011 05:01 PM (8DdAv)
Posted by: richard mcenroe at October 15, 2011 05:02 PM (gkj/E)
Posted by: CoolCzech at October 15, 2011 05:03 PM (niZvt)
It's the same congress. Romney will work with the leadership, not the tea party freshmen.
These are half of the jackasses who have gotten us into this problem.
You're mileage may vary, but as I am not a republican, that shit is not good enough. The goobers who ran the goverment 2002-2008 are exceeded in their unprecedented ruinous spending only by the democrats that followed them.
Romney will not fight Congress and that is the problem. He will lead it down the path of Big Government Conservatism hand in hand with democrats. He will save government programs, not eliminate them.
Posted by: Entropy at October 15, 2011 05:03 PM (dn7cw)
Aside from his record as Governor of Massachusetts, you mean??
I certainly don't see anything that convinces me he'd spend one thin dime of political capital to undo Obama's liberal agenda.
Romney vetoed about 1,000 bills passed by the Mass legislature in four years. I don't understand why he would persistently oppose them like that if he is supposed to be so beholden to a liberal philosophy.
Posted by: Reggie1971 at October 15, 2011 05:04 PM (0DGtF)
Posted by: CoolCzech at October 15, 2011 05:06 PM (niZvt)
Again, looking at Romney's record, he gives me pause. But I see nothing that suggests that he will be a GOP version of Obama....... And if the Tea Party can't get a solid conservative President, then they need to focus on electing some more conservatives to Congress. It would be much harder for Romney to go rogue if Congress gives him conservative legislation to sign. Wishcasting, I'm sure......but we simply cannot afford 4 more years of....of....this.
Posted by: Wex the Wonderdog at October 15, 2011 05:10 PM (dIHHd)
http://tinyurl.com/3k3whwc
Posted by: CoolCzech at October 15, 2011 09:06 PM (niZvt)
Link doesn't work.
Posted by: buzzion at October 15, 2011 05:10 PM (GULKT)
Posted by: CoolCzech at October 15, 2011 05:12 PM (niZvt)
Posted by: CoolCzech at October 15, 2011 05:14 PM (niZvt)
Posted by: CoolCzech at October 15, 2011 05:15 PM (niZvt)
Posted by: Girls Don’t Fly ePub at October 15, 2011 05:17 PM (iDrIq)
Posted by: The Ghost of Kim Novak at October 15, 2011 05:18 PM (8DdAv)
Perry thinks your 12 year old daughter is a cheap date that needs a STD innoculation. Another Big Government nanny state RINO.
Fuck him and the horse he rode in on. That said, he's a damn sight better choice than The Kenyan.
Posted by: torabora at October 15, 2011 05:18 PM (wkk41)
Posted by: Time of My Life iBooks at October 15, 2011 05:21 PM (foqm9)
Posted by: Shift Happens AudioBook at October 15, 2011 05:25 PM (C5Ex8)
Posted by: lowandslow at October 15, 2011 05:26 PM (GZitp)
Posted by: moki at October 15, 2011 05:26 PM (dZmFh)
Posted by: model_1066 at October 15, 2011 05:38 PM (CMYJa)
Posted by: lowandslow at October 15, 2011 09:26 PM (GZitp)
Very tragic news. Where were you when you heard about the cancellation?
Next up: Chuckies Demons
Posted by: Breaker19 at October 15, 2011 05:43 PM (ze29X)
Posted by: Suicide of a Superpower ePub at October 15, 2011 06:36 PM (GtlxT)
Posted by: runneraway at October 15, 2011 09:19 PM (rZZA3)
Posted by: The Ghost of Kim Novak at October 15, 2011 09:18 PM (8DdAv)
It's Perry' video "Carbon Copies" and it's not Holdren behind Mittens but another enviro looney name Foy. Perry should have questioned Mitty on this at the debate. Found it on foxnews.com.
Posted by: The Ghost of Kim Novak at October 16, 2011 06:48 AM (8DdAv)
Posted by: richard mcenroe at October 16, 2011 12:17 PM (qvify)
Political bigotry is even sold to blacks, who ought to know better, as an acceptable form of bigotry to get back at the conservative whitey. Which also explains why blacks who follow this creed are so upset with the rise of black conservatives who might expose this bigoted charade for what it is -- repackaged racial bigotry.
Posted by: drfredc at October 16, 2011 03:53 PM (iNKlO)
PerryÂ’s energy plan will expand energy exploration and production on federal lands in areas such as Alaska and the Mountain West, along with permitting more offshore drilling in the Gulf and AtlanticÂ…Â…Â…Â…..this is all the Perry big Oil company friends wants, they want to drill for more profit, once they get what they want jobs will be no where found.
Yet you idiots want to falsely claim that the stimulus was a failure yet is created jobs in various states!
SCOAMF - an acronym for President Obama popularized by child molesters and racist liars who don't want a black president to succeed in fixing the country they messed up!
Posted by: Questionman at October 16, 2011 05:43 PM (ojWG1)
Surface treatment
Polishing
zinc plating
nickel plating
chrome plating
powder coating
e-coating
dip coating
phosphate coating
anodize
PVC powder coating
dichromate plating
decrement plating
Posted by: bsdbsn at October 16, 2011 06:25 PM (YQzU7)
Hide Comments | Add Comment | Refresh | Top
64 queries taking 0.2827 seconds, 637 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.








Hey, California Republicans... want a WINNING issue?
Tell Californians you have a choice... a Bankrupt State where we are firing teachers and cops.... or drilling off the F'n Coast....
Those of us who do NOT live on the beach, wayyyy outnumber those who do....
But Repubs here are afraid...
Posted by: Romeo13 at October 15, 2011 11:55 AM (NtXW4)