URL: http://community.realitytvworld.com/cgi-sys/cgiwrap/rtvw2/community/dcboard.cgi
Forum: DCForumID6
Thread Number: 38597
[ Go back to previous page ]
Original Message
"GOP candidate declaration & pre-primary tracker: The Quest To Take Back Something."
Posted by Estee on 03-27-15 at 07:30 PM
LAST EDITED ON 03-27-15 AT 07:35 PM (EST)

Just to keep from having fifty one-per-candidate threads as each one declares. If we stop at fifty people running. The touring car is rapidly looking like more of a bus, and I won't be surprised if we get to convoy. With nearly every vehicle in it competing to see which can drive further to the right.

So far, we have:

Confirmed:

Cruz

"Investigating their prospects": have committees or keep dropping hints

Bachmann
Carson
Huckabee
Graham
Jindal
Paul
Palin
Perry
Santorum
Walker

Faked or faking out

Gohmert (suggested, but backed off afterwards)
Trump (he'll really do it this time! seriously! say, isn't that a wolf?)

Wanted by some of the base, but currently uninvolved

Kasich

Doesn't wanna

Romney

(And yes, I know I've probably left some people out. There's just so many...)

We can probably cross some people off immediately. Donald will back out the instant anyone goes for his financial papers: all he ever wants is attention and any possible side dose of grift. Ben is demonstrating a talent for self-burial normally only found in trap-door spiders. Sarah will say anything to keep the money coming, but I doubt she'll commit. Lindsay may be sincere, but I think most of the GOP base is equally devoted to not voting for him.

Next tier up... Ted has no interest in getting the moderate Republican vote: his percentage should stay consistent, and that means no moving through the ranks. (There's an argument to be made that he's running for VP. I don't think he sees it that way.) He and Santorum will battle to the death over the extremist segment, and neither can win.

Michele will toss a few thunderbolts and then blow over.

Bobby's out. It may take a while and I can see him hanging on until Super Tuesday. He may even get a VP nod. But in the current GOP... he's in trouble.

Mike couldn't do it before and he won't do it again.

This takes us to what I see as the more serious contenders.

Scott... the scandals will probably be turned into 'See? No one can take me down!' Perry has probably learned how to count agencies by now. And Rand... is desperately swerving into the right lane at top speed, trying not to sideswipe himself along the way. In the longshot scenario, all three could potentially reach the convention without a definitive majority, and then... well, we haven't had vote-brokering in a while, have we? Fun!

And then we have John. I think we can call John the elephant in the room. No one wants to talk about him, but look at all that space they're making...

---------------------------------------------

The big voting issue as I see it:

They need a few Democrats and most of the independents. Or they need to keep them from showing up at all.

The old Big Tent is a lot smaller than it used to be, and there's barbed wire wrapped around the edges. No surprise, and it's the same way on the other side of the aisle. Most of government has turned into a feather-fluffing match of 'I must be the more patriotic person here, because I'll never work with anyone who isn't just like me'. With the 'like me' definition getting narrower by the minute. The aisle is the line of death: even try to cross it and goodbye. In such a scenario, it comes down to how many of each party's voters show up at all, because no one's going to change their minds. Ever.

So... are there more national voters on the left, or the right?

It's probably left. Slightly. Taken overall. But the electoral college does what it does, and you can't gerrymander states.

So what the GOP may need is someone who can take the barbed wire off. A candidate who can welcome disillusioned Democrats (who do exist) and tell the independents that moderates will not be shut out. There are social liberals who would love some fiscal conservatism -- but the instant you declare yourself as a social liberal to the GOP, you're gone. And it's hard to feel included with those who keep shouting you down.

Charisma, a friendly smile, and a sincere 'we'll find a place for you. Somewhere which isn't a locked basement'. Make people switch.

I thought Rand Paul might have been the best shot at that. Not great odds -- but a chance.

Of course, then he started to run.


Table of contents
Messages in this discussion
"RE: GOP candidate declaration & pre-primary tracker: The Quest To Take Back Something."
Posted by kingfish on 03-27-15 at 09:29 PM
So, you have your Gov. as completely out of it?

He's a moderate, so he should have a chance of beating Clinton.

With a year and a half to convince everyone that those dam New Yorkers need to slow down coming over to NJ, that what he didn't do (honest, he knew nothing, but if he did...) was a good thing for them as well as those helpless NJ pedestrians that would otherwise become hit and run victims. Victims who were only guilty of fighting global warming by riding their bikes and walking to work instead of using rare earth consuming electric cars or carbon emitting machines, only to be hit by speeding New Yorkers bent on dumping bodies on the NJ side of the river?

Heck, he's a hero, don't you see?

"RE: GOP candidate declaration & pre-primary tracker: The Quest To Take Back Something."
Posted by Estee on 03-27-15 at 09:38 PM
I don't think he's going to declare. My impression is that he knows he can't win -- national image isn't strong, committed ultimate betrayal by working with the President on something -- and doesn't want to waste his time in trying. But I could easily be wrong there. He does have something of an Ego -- but also a Practical Streak. It's a question of which one wins out.
"RE: GOP candidate declaration & pre-primary tracker: The Quest To Take Back Something."
Posted by kingfish on 03-28-15 at 11:01 AM
A view from a mountain top puts the serious candidates to be limited to;

Bush
Walker

I'd like to see Christie get serious about running. It appears that the Geo. Wash. Bridge thing isn't sticking to him. Only MSNBC talks about that anymore.

Hopefully Lindsey has legs.

"RE: GOP candidate declaration & pre-primary tracker: The Quest To Take Back Something."
Posted by Estee on 03-28-15 at 11:48 AM
Hopefully Lindsey has legs.

She do declare!

(Do not Google 'Lindsey Graham Gay')

"RE: GOP candidate declaration & pre-primary tracker: The Quest To Take Back Something."
Posted by kingfish on 03-29-15 at 08:29 AM
Ouch. Well, you did issue a warning.

Oh well, she has great legs. And a great tattoo.

"Carly Fiorina?"
Posted by kidflash212 on 03-30-15 at 08:32 AM
Heard she was running.
"RE: Carly Fiorina?"
Posted by kingfish on 03-30-15 at 10:44 AM
She has great legs too.

I like politics at this level.

"RE: Carly Fiorina?"
Posted by kidflash212 on 05-04-15 at 10:16 AM
I didn't see her legs at her announcement this morning but I did keep thinking how much she resembles a female Alan Rickman.
"RE: Carly Fiorina?"
Posted by Agman2 on 06-09-15 at 10:53 AM
*snort
"Let's talk about Rand Paul."
Posted by Estee on 04-12-15 at 03:16 PM
Someone had better talk about him, since we just found out Romney didn't even know he was running...
"And Then He Said"
Posted by dabo on 04-12-15 at 09:16 PM
He said in an interview this morning about Madame Secretary Hillary Clinton that:
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/apr/12/rand-paul-women-interviews
“I would treat her with the same respect I would a man, but I wouldn’t lay down and say, ‘I’m not going to respond … ’ That would be a sexist response, to say: ‘Oh, my goodness, she deserves to be treated less aggressively because she’s only a woman.’ I would never say that about anybody.”

Let the "respecting" begin!

"RE: And Then He Said"
Posted by kingfish on 04-13-15 at 08:04 AM
Unless he makes her cry.
"RE: And Then He Said"
Posted by newsomewayne on 04-13-15 at 10:12 AM
Is this supposed to be a criticism of Paul? Where's the "non-respecting"? Is he supposed to treat women differently? Go easy on them because they're the weaker sex? That seems to be the point made by making this an issue.

Is the media criticism of Paul here because of who interviewed him or is it because he's not wanting to be a lapdog to the media's pre-established narratives?

"RE: And Then He Said"
Posted by Estee on 04-13-15 at 11:56 AM
You mean like Faux's pre-established narrative? Because I've been getting the distinct impression that they hate his guts.

Meanwhile, just minutes ago -- Rubio!

"RE: And Then He Said"
Posted by kidflash212 on 04-13-15 at 03:58 PM
Should make the Florida republican primary interesting.
"RE: And Then He Said"
Posted by Estee on 04-13-15 at 05:04 PM
Rather.

There's also this twist: due to Florida law, he can't run for President and his Senate seat. It's one or the other. He's made his choice, so we'll have a new occupant in 2017.

"RE: And Then He Said"
Posted by kidflash212 on 04-14-15 at 12:00 PM
It's an all or nothing gamble for him. If Jeb gets the nom, he can't even be considered for VP.
"RE: And Then He Said"
Posted by kingfish on 04-15-15 at 09:37 AM
LAST EDITED ON 04-15-15 AT 12:37 PM (EST)

Yeah, if Jeb gets the nom. Marco's pretty well screwed. Unless by the time the handwriting is on the wall for Jeb it's not to late for Rubio to officially declare for his Senate seat. Which I imagine it would be.

There's a difference between talking about running for the president, and officially declaring for it, isn't there?

But he would be in a pretty good position to be the VP candidate if someone other than Jeb gets the nom., presumably he would be likely to carry Fla. for the Republicans, and Jeb might not want to settle for being the VP candidate.

So far, sports fans, the series stands at Clinton Razorbacks 1 and the Bush Aggies 2 as we prepare for the fourth game of this matchup between these old Southwest Conference rivals.

This time the Razorbacks are heavily favored over the Aggies with the woman voting bloc seemingly united behind their quarterback, Hillary. But there are cracks in the Hog's defensive front line, and no one knows yet if their offensive line has the stamina to go the distance.

Will the Razorbacks even the score this year, or will those lovable and irrepressible Aggies pull a Manziel out of their back pocket and get to kiss their sweethearts once again?

Stay tuned for the next 18 months <groan><sigh><re-groan> while they settle the issue on the field of battle, and afterward, at the Supreme Court if those cute little Aggies can manage to overcome the odds and sink the 20 footer as the buzzer goes off? Catch the hail Mary in the end zone to wild jubilation? Bank the puck off the goalie's stick for the final score? (That last example was included just to demonstrate that I do know a little about Hockey. I know that there is a goalie involved, and that he has a stick of some kind).

.

"RE: And Then He Said"
Posted by dabo on 04-13-15 at 05:19 PM
LAST EDITED ON 04-13-15 AT 05:21 PM (EST)

Well (A), it is true that I care not a bit for the politics of Rand Paul, but (B) he gave me a big laugh with that one.

Reread the quote above and let's call it "reverse respect." As in: Here, have this negative image of Hillary (she's only a woman) Clinton stuck in your head.

(By the way, I am critical of people on the left who say that it is a good thing that, a positive point in Secretary Clinton's favor, that her presidency would have the an advantage of having Bill Clinton around. They just don't hear how sexist it is that the wife has the husband to fall back on.)

"RE: And Then He Said"
Posted by newsomewayne on 04-14-15 at 08:44 AM
"reverse respect." As in: Here, have this negative image of Hillary

Okay, I may be totally off-base with what you mean, but are you saying this was a so-called "dog whistle" statement?

"RE: And Then He Said"
Posted by dabo on 04-14-15 at 03:51 PM
I guess you could say it was a dog whistle. I viewed more as putting the dig in the form of saying he wouldn't do that.

And why was he even asked about her?

"Fiorina Enters The Race...."
Posted by kidflash212 on 05-04-15 at 09:20 AM
...and no one notices.
"In the Race..."
Posted by kidflash212 on 05-04-15 at 11:07 AM
LAST EDITED ON 05-04-15 AT 11:11 AM (EST)

Skip Andrews
Kerry Bowers
Ben Carson
Dale Christensen
Ted Cruz
John Dummet, Jr.
Mark Everson
Carly Fiorina
Chris Hill
Michael Kinlaw
Rand Paul
Michael Petyo
Marco Rubio
Brian Russell

So Far, mostly fringe candidates. No one really expects a President Dummet.

Maybe Santorum will jump in when he finishes his ice cream:

"RE: In the Race..."
Posted by Estee on 05-05-15 at 07:23 AM
Did anyone notice Dr. Ben All Hip-Hop Destroys Men's Souls Carson launching his campaign with a little gospel version of Eminem?

It doesn't take a brain surgeon to see the problem. Or rather, apparently if you happen to be a brain surgeon, you can't see the problem.

"RE: In the Race..."
Posted by AyaK on 05-06-15 at 10:05 PM
Without fooling around waiting for announcements or anything else, it looks like the GOP nomination is between Bush, Cruz, Paul (unlikely), Perry, Rubio and Walker. Everyone else (declared or not) can be safely dismissed. Fiorina is really running for VP, because she doesn't have the organization to win the top spot, but she has to be taken seriously in that race. Everyone else has delusions of grandeur. Yes, that includes you, Chris Christie.

On the Democrat side, the Bernie Sanders candidacy has brought back memories of 1968, when Bobby Kennedy used Eugene McCarthy as a stalking horse to take on the heavy favorites Johnson and Humphrey. Sanders is extreme enough that, if people express a desire for an "anti-Hillary", as they expressed a desire for an "anti-Johnson" in 1968, then Elizabeth Warren can jump in (like RFK did).

"Huckabee in."
Posted by Estee on 05-05-15 at 03:53 PM
One nation under God.

His God.

Or it won't be your nation.

"RE: Huckabee in."
Posted by PepeLePew13 on 06-02-15 at 03:15 PM
I wonder if anyone is still planning on voting for Huckabee?

Mike Huckabee says there's a time he wishes he could've been transgender: When it was time to hit the high school showers.

If he "could have felt like a woman," the Republican former Arkansas governor said earlier this year, then he could have seen his female classmates without their clothes on.

"Now I wish that someone told me that when I was in high school that I could have felt like a woman when it came time to take showers in PE," Huckabee said.

"I'm pretty sure that I would have found my feminine side and said, 'Coach, I think I'd rather shower with the girls today.' You're laughing because it sounds so ridiculous doesn't it?"


http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/02/politics/mike-huckabee-transgender-caitlyn-jenner/index.html

"RE: Huckabee in."
Posted by kingfish on 06-03-15 at 09:19 AM
So, he destroys his chances of holding on to his sole remaining support, the Evangelicals.

Well, maybe there are a few Doomsday Prepper holdouts in the Ouachita area.

How do nuts like Huckabee and Jindal get elected state Governor?

"RE: Huckabee in."
Posted by kidflash212 on 06-03-15 at 10:16 AM
He may have picked up the pervy peeping tom vote.
"RE: Huckabee in."
Posted by Estee on 06-03-15 at 06:56 PM
And since it's an established fact that red states buy the majority of adult entertainment products...
"RE: Huckabee in."
Posted by kingfish on 06-03-15 at 11:09 PM
Pervy peeping Tom, Doomsday prepper,

Tomato, potato.

"RE: Huckabee in."
Posted by AyaK on 06-03-15 at 10:44 PM
Well, I can answer the question about Huckabee.

Huckabee first became governor because he'd been lieutenant governor under Jim Guy Tucker (Bill Clinton's lieutenant governor, who took over after Bill's resignation and was then re-elected), who went to prison for his role in Whitewater. Huckabee advanced to the top job after Tucker's conviction and forced resignation. He was then elected to two terms as governor -- with his lieutenant governor being one of the most popular politicians in the state, Winthrop P. Rockefeller (yes, a descendant of "John D."), who was in line to become governor (like his father) until he was diagnosed in 2005 with aggressive leukemia. which soon therafter cost him his life.

But I don't know enough about Bobby Jindal (really, I know next to nothing except that he went to Oxford and was a consultant at McKinsey) to know whether to put him in the "looney" category with Huckabee. What do you know about him?

"RE: Huckabee in."
Posted by kingfish on 06-04-15 at 09:43 AM
LAST EDITED ON 06-04-15 AT 01:13 PM (EST)

Jindal actually has a pretty remarkable resume. And he is intelligent. For a nut.

Graduate of Brown, post graduate degree as Rhodes scholar, head of the health insurance dept of La in his early twenties (youngest ever at that level of La. Gov't, I believe), an immensely powerful position in Louisiana, achieved due to the mentorship of Mike Foster, a wealthy South Louisiana Dem turned Republican with ties to David Duke and who had been elected La gov. in the wake of the Edwin Edwards scandal. Foster changed parties to run against Edwards, and was elected with a big margin as a Republican. With help from Duke.

Jindal served in the admin of GW Bush, (achieving another "youngest ever" accomplishment, I believe). Another in a string of firsts for him is that he is the first La. Governor of Indian heritage.

He has had some notable positive accomplishments while serving in his various elected and non-elected positions.

But has given speeches advocating extreme anti abortion, anti gay, and anti same sex marriage views. He has tried to get some of his anti gay legislation passed but been stymied by a unusually uncooperative La legislature, and in response issued "Executive orders" (ala Obama) to get done what he couldn't get the La Leg. to pass. He managed to get restrictive anti abortion laws passed, but the courts are proving to be an impediment.

I don't knows his views on foreign policy, or foreign intervention.

He is very religious, and IMO too willing to enact laws to enforce his church beliefs on those he governs. An automatic disqualification for my vote.

Finally, he doesn't believe in evolution. IMO, the fundamental basis for my view that he's a nut. He buys into the absurd theories that creationists and the like attempt to use to persuade the gullible that the earth was created 6000 years ago, etc. He's smart enough to dance around the subject to some degree in public, but at heart he's a religious fundamentalist and a creationist.

I think term limits are at hand for him, and he's been so successful and is so comfortable with his support in Louisiana (hey, it's Louisiana) that I can understand why he thinks he has a chance at US Pres. Frankly, I am surprised that he meets the minimum age to be elected Pres.

I don't know if he has a chance, but I fervently hope he isn't the Republican Nominee, I'd hate to have to consider voting for Hillary.

.

"RE: Huckabee in."
Posted by AyaK on 06-04-15 at 02:55 PM
Thanks. I completely agree; anyone who doesn't believe in evolution (e.g., Huckabee, the Duggers, and now Jindal) must be a nut.

And I just read your story about the flood. I'm glad you came out relatively OK from the potentially life-threatening disaster.

I was once caught in a flash flood like that, but unlike you I was able to get on one of the two main roads that were still open and unflooded, and I got almost home -- my car stalled out while trying to navigate the parking lot of the apartment complex I lived in -- but it stalled out in a section that was about 5-10 feet below the level of my apartment, which I was able to walk to and didn't flood (and my car was generally undamaged by the water; the replacement of the floor coverings and the anti-mildew treatments were covered by my insurance).

I'm just glad your situation wasn't worse.

"RE: Huckabee in."
Posted by newsomewayne on 06-04-15 at 03:58 PM
I am a nut.

I know the following:

1. There is a God.
2. He created the world.
3. He did it in six days.
4. He did it about 6,000 to 10,000 years ago.
5. He gave us explicit descriptions of how He did it (among other things).


I say that not just as a statement of faith, but to ask a question. Knowing this about me, does any peep's opinion change about me in regards to my intelligence or reasonability? Or about what type of person believes that way? Anyone surprised to see I believe that way?

"RE: Huckabee in."
Posted by kingfish on 06-04-15 at 05:32 PM
LAST EDITED ON 06-08-15 AT 08:41 AM (EST)

(In response to Newsome)

Unlike Jindal et.al., I don't think I ought to tell you what to believe or not to believe, or how to live your life based on my faith.

However, since you asked, I do think it's all nutso superstition, much like the belief of some native Americans of the Great Spirit, for example, or idol based belief in Baal.

I wouldn't call you a nut. You are intelligent, you can reason, and frankly, I've always enjoyed your posts. And you have your belief. But I would term blind adherence to dogma in the face of reason just plain unreasonable. Nutso.

By responding to the question in regard to Jindal, I wasn't trying to pick a fight with you or anyone else, And I certainly didn't have you in mind with my response.

I do think Creationists are either trying to con their audience or are deluded. That's an expression of an opinion, not an attack. Maybe I'm wrong, maybe God did just put geologic strata and oil and fossils in the ground to fool us into thinking the earth is older than it really is. Maybe. If so, he certainly couldn't fool those canny monks, could he.

But 6000-10,000 years? Really? You realize that those estimates were made by early Christian monks based on their interpretations of the Torah. It's not in the bible, it's not a central article of faith, so what's with adherence to this dating? Believing in that isn't an expression in the belief in God or Moses or Abraham or the bible, it just an expression of faith in a the calculating ability of early Christian Monks who didn't even agree with each other as to the exact date. Human beings. Flawed human beings. Somehow that guy (those guys) could calculate the earth's age without any tools better than modern scientists using tools and procedures that can be documented and demonstrated to be accurate? That particular item is just not reasonable. IMO.

.

"RE: Huckabee in."
Posted by AyaK on 06-08-15 at 09:19 PM
I prompted this line of discussion, so I might as well chime in too. I apologize for writing at length.

It's funny; there isn't much that I'm an absolutist about. I'm certainly not an anti-religion absolutist; one of my daughters went through confirmation in the Catholic church. But I'm an absolutist on evolution. I don't believe that there is any reasonable basis to ignore the physical evidence of the Earth that the world has been around for far too long to have been created in the ways taught by creationists, and so belief in creationism is simply belief in Christian superstition.

I'm willing to believe that the world could have been created by a supreme being, even though I'm an atheist. I'm just not willing to believe that that supreme being would deliberately place clues within the world to attempt to mislead us, and that this being would expect us to reject these clues based on a writing that was both completely inconsistent with those clues and, in fact, actually contradictory to them. In other words, I refuse to believe in a purposefully deceptive supreme being -- and I think of those who wholeheartedly embrace such a position as incompetent to lead the United States.

On the other hand, I think of Judeo-Christian philosophy as a reasonably consistent system of ethics that people (whether or not led by a supreme being) have developed over an undetermined period, and this system provides a sound basis to guide lives and decisions. I just reject the belief in the Christian origin myths.

I understand the challenge that this evidence presents to the Christian believer, which in contemporary times (well, within the past century) was best expressed by William Jennings Bryan at the Scopes trial. Bryan struggled with Clarence Darrow's stunt of placing him on the witness stand and then questioning him about evolution because Bryan, who was a true believer, was trying to fit both the current state of scientific knowledge and the existing Bible together and was left with "six days" that were actually millions of years in length. Since then, our knowledge of the historic record of the Earth has only increased, making reconciling science and the Biblical story of creation even more impossible. And yet believers come up with fantasies such as humans and dinosaurs walking the Earth at the same time (at the Creation Museum in Kentucky, dinosaurs are placed on Noah's Ark) -- http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2014/10/the-genesis-code/379341/ -- or intelligent design. But these are mere attempts to deny the science of the historical record, and they require a level of disbelief of science that I neither accept nor am willing to accept in a president.

The funny part about this is that the pervasive claims of other cretins such as Al Gore that "the science is settled" with regard to man-made global warming strikes me as a similar antiscientific belief in religion, a religion that I might be inclined to dub "scientology" if that name hadn't already been appropriated by the sci-fi author L. Ron Hubbard for his own set of looney beliefs. I don't accept evolution because of anything other than its superior performance in explaining the facts that we know, which is the only true measure of a scientific theory. Accordingly, I believe that refusal to accept scientific theory makes one susceptible to "appeals to authority" (such as the Oscar-winning but nonsensical "An Inconvenient Truth") and other types of illogical behavior.

My apologies if this comes across as insensitive to others' beliefs, but there was a reason we always discouraged posts about religion!

"I'm a nut."
Posted by kingfish on 06-11-15 at 09:10 AM
I'm a nut. And yes, Wayne, you are too.

I'm not a dangerous nut (IMO), I resist dangerous nuts, and vote against them when I can. I am a sweet and cuddly nut. A nut who lives in a world that can be perceived perfectly satisfactorily as rational.

You aren't someone who (I'm assuming?) would if he could ignore established human rights and rule of law in favor of any interpretation of religious dicta, so I would consider you too to be a sweet and cuddly nut.

Bobby Jindal is a dangerous nut, and he's not the only one.

I'm not all that smart of a nut, hence my posting here once again against the advice of those smarter than me. But what the heck, they're a bunch of nuts too. And if a fire starts, there will be no further gasoline from me. Hopefully, this is a fire resistant post.

I am a unbeliever in any deity. If there is one, he created me, so he created an unbeliever, and it's his fault that I am what I am. Some call that atheism, and I'm comfortable with that, but really, if one doesn't believe in any supreme being or consider him/herself as part of any religion, he doesn't require a label, he just isn't a Baptist, isn't a Creationist, isn't a Mormon, he just doesn't belong to one of the religious clubs. He's just undeclared. Presumably, a skeptic in general.

To me, to declare "I believe" in the religious sense is an absolute statement, a commitment, and not a fad, or a way to meet chicks, or a way to fit in with my community. If I don't really believe in my deepest heart of hearts, then I can't say with honesty that "I believe". And I prefer to be honest with myself.

The only "I believe" statement that I can in say with honesty is "What I perceive, and what I can deduce logically from what I perceive is what I believe is real."

Finally; It takes all kinds, right? You, me, others. Only the most dangerous of us, the James Jones types, the 1984 Big Brother types, the Hitler types, would have us all conform to the same standard. Better to live and let live, and learn to live with us nuts. We are sweet and cuddly.

.



"RE: I'm a nut."
Posted by AyaK on 06-11-15 at 11:09 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger_Williams#Settlement_at_Providence

In August 1637, a new town agreement again restricted the government to "civil things". In 1640, thirty-nine "freemen" (men who had full citizenship and voting rights) signed another agreement that declared their determination "...still to hold forth liberty of conscience". Thus, Williams founded the first place in modern history where citizenship and religion were separate—that provided religious liberty and separation of church and state. This was combined with the principle of majoritarian democracy.

Soylent Green: recycling America, one person at a time.

"A view of Bobby Jindal"
Posted by kingfish on 06-24-15 at 09:17 AM
One guy's view. I don't know who he is or what axe he has to grind. But this article seems to be in depth and pretty well researched. And the views resonate with my own.

https://www.yahoo.com/politics/bobby-jindal-was-supposed-to-be-the-next-ronald-122285669721.html

Particularly;

A survey released last week showed that if the 2016 presidential election were held today, Jindal’s fellow Louisianans, who aren’t known for their liberalism, would choose Democrat Hillary Clinton over their current governor."


A dangerous nut? You judge:

"In 2002, Louisiana voters approved a fairly progressive state constitutional amendment, known as the Stelly Plan, that lowered sales taxes on groceries and utility bills and raised state income taxes instead. Under pressure from the Legislature, Jindal was reluctant at first to reverse the Stelly Plan’s income-tax hikes because he was worried that the loss of revenue would force the state to balance its budget by cutting services, raiding trust funds, and making unsustainable one-time patches.

"We need to maintain that fiscal discipline," Jindal said at the time.

But at the last minute, Jindal caved, and when I saw him in Breaux Bridge, he was proudly claiming the resulting $300 million income-tax cut as his own.

That he would force his religious views on Louisiana citizens?

A devout convert to Catholicism, he had already passed a bill allowing public schools to teach intelligent design alongside evolution, and he’d been clear about his “100 percent” opposition to abortion “without exceptions” for rape, incest, or the mother’s health.

Disclaimer: Although I now reside in Alabama, I grew up in Louisiana, and self-identify (thanks for that, Rachel) as Louisianan. Also, similarly, as Texan, Mississippian, Alabamian, Cuban, Southern (although I am grateful that the South did not prevail) and maybe some others that I haven't thought of yet. Oh Yeah, and as 'Merican!' (thank you, Survivor, for that).



"RE: Huckabee in."
Posted by kingfish on 06-04-15 at 08:16 PM
(This may not line up, I think, but in response to AYAK).

It's eye opening how quickly flooding can envelop you. I mean, unless you know you're about to be hit with a hurricane, you just don't know it's happening until you are in it.

I was lucky.

"Must-watch of the day."
Posted by Estee on 05-06-15 at 02:02 PM
Conan O'Brien cast the future TBS movie of the campaign. You are waiting for Carly Fiorina.

http://www.govexec.com/oversight/2015/05/play-day-casting-2016-movie/112018/

You can't unsee it.

"RE: Must-watch of the day."
Posted by kingfish on 05-06-15 at 04:44 PM
That was a great 15 minute time killer.

3 1/2 minute to watch the video, 11 1/2 minutes to stop laughing.

Miamicat would be impressed or enraged , or something, I don't know what exactly. Probably holding her belly laughing.

But actually I thought Christy's casting was the most hilarious.

O'Brien has just the best writing staff, and Stewart's is great too, but how have Letterman and Fallon stayed in business? (Snore-fests).

"Graham, Santorum, and the Fox Top Ten."
Posted by Estee on 06-02-15 at 07:13 AM
With so many candidates, Fox News, which is hosting the first GOP debate because it's the only way to guarantee a fully neural site which will not subject the field to the evils of the liberal media, made an announcement: only the top ten candidates by poll numbers will be allowed to participate.

Unless Rand Paul is one of those ten. They've been forgetting to include him a lot.

"Trump In"
Posted by kidflash212 on 06-16-15 at 12:20 PM
Should make the debates interesting.
"RE: Trump In"
Posted by Estee on 06-16-15 at 04:22 PM
This is the second-greatest day of my life.

Did you see the press conference? Tell me you saw the press conference. And while I'm dreaming, tell me Landru drew the summary.

"RE: Trump In"
Posted by kidflash212 on 06-16-15 at 06:20 PM
Tried to watch it, but I couldn't get through his daughter's over the top introduction.
"RE: Trump In"
Posted by kingfish on 06-16-15 at 07:39 PM
LAST EDITED ON 06-16-15 AT 07:39 PM (EST)

And...the first greatest was?

(In this one case, a non-PG answer is permissible).

"RE: Trump In"
Posted by AyaK on 06-18-15 at 07:30 PM
LAST EDITED ON 06-18-15 AT 07:30 PM (EST)

Wouldn't that be 100X better than suffering through The Celebrity Apprentice?

"RE: Trump In"
Posted by cahaya on 10-13-15 at 10:21 PM
LAST EDITED ON 10-13-15 AT 10:29 PM (EST)

That or his tweets about who's winning the Dem debate.


Pepe's summer 2013 sig blast

Donald: Sorry, there is no STAR on the stage tonight!

"RE: The Quest To Take Back Something."
Posted by AyaK on 06-16-15 at 01:59 PM
A certain ex-member of the Democratic administration asked her (obviously low-information) supporters to “Be part of our effort to take back our country.”

http://tinyurl.com/naohdzl (links to Washington Post article)

I guess she means the following: The people who have been running our country have done a lousy job. I have been one of them. So let's take the country back from them by . . . electing me?

"It's all a formality."
Posted by Max_Headroom on 06-28-15 at 09:37 PM
Regardless of how many Republican candidates decide to run for president, it won't matter because none of them can beat Hillbillary. In order to succeed in the primaries, candidates will slide to the right to kowtow to the religious zealots, Tea Party wackos, right-to-lifers, etc., yet none of those beliefs are mainstream enough for a candidates with those positions to win a general election. That's the paradox-- the only Republican with a chance to beat Hillbillary would have to be a moderate, yet no moderate will make it through the primaries.

And let's be honest, I'm not that impressed with any of the Republican candidates thus far.

The only hopes for anyone to beat Hillbillary are a) she screws something up royally in her campaign, b) something ugly turns up when the Benghazi investigators dig into hillaryclinton@gmail.com, or c) she has health issues and has to withdraw.

I'm already bored with it all. The outcome is preordained.


If I came here more often, I'd ask agman to update this siggie

"RE: It's all a formality."
Posted by kingfish on 06-29-15 at 02:13 PM
Cankles isn't a health issue?

And that Benghazi thing does manage to not go away.

"RE: It's all a formality."
Posted by AyaK on 07-03-15 at 03:10 PM
LAST EDITED ON 07-05-15 AT 02:28 AM (EST)

This discussion scares me, even more than the Big Zero (aka Barry O) who has been screwing up the world for the last two terms -- and I speak as someone who voted for Hillary's husband for president twice.

Simply put, Bill Clinton had a well-deserved nickname of "Slick Willie", but he always managed to balance his mendacity with good policies. Hillary is more of the reverse-Midas-touch candidate; everything she touches goes to sh--.

The bribe that was disguised as a stock investment when she was back in Arkansas. Whitewater. In more recent times, Benghazi. Libya. E-mail server. The results alternate between only two outcomes: incompetent and crooked. And this isn't an unknown like Obama: there shouldn't be any sentient person in the U.S. who doesn't already know that she's a lost cause.

I'm sorry, but I'm not prepared to concede America to its premier incompetent kleptocrat (or at least its second biggest after Donald Trump). Heck, I might even vote for the excretable Jeb Bush (in the unfortunate event that he became the Republican candidate) to keep Hillary away from so many funds fit for plundering. (Though I wouldn't go as far as Ted Cruz; if he were the candidate, I guess America deserves to be plundered by a determined thief.)

"Lies, Dam<>n Lies, Statistics, and Everything Hillary Says"
Posted by AyaK on 07-08-15 at 06:12 PM
In addition to the incompetence and the theft:

I hate to link to HotAir, but just for those of you that doubted that Hillary is Nixonesque in her quantity of lies:

http://hotair.com/archives/2015/07/08/hillary-to-cnn-i-was-never-subpoenaed-gowdy-um-heres-the-subpeona/

I always had some limited sympathy for Bill Clinton lying about "oral sex", even though he was convicted of perjury for doing so, but Hillary lies about everything, and all the time. I'm not sure she can help herself.

"RE: Lies, Dam<>n Lies, Statistics, and Everything Hillary Says"
Posted by kingfish on 07-09-15 at 01:58 PM
LAST EDITED ON 07-09-15 AT 02:00 PM (EST)

My god!

just...My god!

Do we really want another LBJ, the guy who stole every election he ever won (as documented in Cano's The Path to Power)? Or an other Nixon, whose knee jerk lying became his legacy? Is she really going to be elected just because she's a woman?

My god, 4 years. Even 8 years!. Oh my God.

(Sorry, God).

Am reading Cano's books on LBJ. And his dishonesty is epic, he actually stole every election he ever won, and existed only to achieve a position of ultimate political power and protect the million/billionaires that bought him his elections, or who might be a means of power in the future. Even the positive achievements that he is associated with (New Deal agencies, Civil Rights) were not motivated by a desire to do good or any kind of a moral compass, but venal and greedy grasping for personal power and personal wealth. As a draft age Viet Nam War eligible kid I hated him for that (another bunch of truly appalling lies), and as a south Texas youth I had heard some of the stories indicating that his 1948 (Box 13) first US senate election was shady, but even then I had no idea of the depth of his immorality.

"RE: Lies, Dam<>n Lies, Statistics, and Everything Hillary Says"
Posted by AyaK on 07-09-15 at 06:07 PM
I tried to read Cano's first book of the trilogy, but it still mocks me, unfinished, from its shelf. But I did read Russell Baker's description of Johnson in the second volume of his autobiography, The Good Years. Baker described Johnson as unexpectedly brilliant, nakedly ambitious, basely corrupt, and incredibly thin-skinned . . . but, unexpectedly, sometimes willing to make jokes about things that, at other times, would earn you a permanent place on his enemies' list (such as the "Landslide Lyndon" nickname, which he was given after stealing the election that first put him in the U.S. House).

Baker wrote (years before Cano started his series) that most politicians could be adequately summed up by a lengthy "thought piece" in the NYT Sunday magazine, but that Johnson was a far more complex character, much like Raskolnikov from "Crime and Punishment": you'd need three long volumes to tell his full story, and you'd get to the end and realize that you'd missed the connection that tied it all together.

"RE: Lies, Dam<>n Lies, Statistics, and Everything Hillary Says"
Posted by kingfish on 07-09-15 at 07:54 PM
LAST EDITED ON 07-10-15 AT 08:06 AM (EST)

My mistake, the author is Robert Caro, not Cano. My mistake.

I've started Volume 3. I put it down for a bit, and now I'm being mocked a bit too.

Am into the unbelievably deceptive subterfuge he carried out in the Korean War in order to circumvent the long established seniority system of the senate. "Too slow, too slow" he was quoted as saying as he paced and plotted.

Oh, and I'm past his WWII actions, in which he turned one bombing run in the Pacific in which he was an observer, and on which he was actually shot at,(B24's were called the flying coffin, ref. Unbroken, so there was actual danger, but the plane returned undamaged) in future retellings into multiple epic runs that resulted in a medal that he wore as a lapel button for the rest of his career. Emellishing the tale with every telling. Of course, the airmen that he rode with, who actually did go repeatedly into battle, and many of whom were killed or wounded didn't get that medal).

(The medal was probably an offhand McArthur's attempt to curry favor with a Congressman).

Brilliant, with a talent for politics that is unequaled except by his willingness to sacrifice anything to get what he wanted, which was power. Russell Baker was mentioned Caro's book. Those are apt descriptions.

.

"RE: It's all a formality."
Posted by Max_Headroom on 07-09-15 at 07:37 PM
Hillary scares the heck out of me. Though it'll be difficult for anyone to be a worse president than our current one, Hillary appears to be up to the task. While I lean more to the incompetent side of your ledger, in any case she'd make an awful president.

Thus my frustration at her apparent invincibility and the lack of appealing, mainstream Republican candidates to oppose her.

"Rick Perry explains it all to you."
Posted by Estee on 07-01-15 at 08:20 PM
https://youtu.be/gvyoFSFB94s
"GOP cheat sheet"
Posted by PepeLePew13 on 07-23-15 at 09:13 AM
LAST EDITED ON 07-23-15 AT 09:15 AM (EST)

Been having a bit of a hard time keeping up with who's who in the race, so here's Jezebel to the rescue!

http://jezebel.com/how-to-tell-the-difference-between-all-the-dudes-runnin-1718320470

(note: salty language here and there)

Now that 7,000 American men and several drunk farm animals have officially declared their candidacies for President, keeping track of them has never been more confusing or difficult. Luckily, we’ve put together a “cheat sheet” with “quick trivia” to help the political layperson discuss with confidence the nuances of each male candidate’s views and legitimacy. Feel free to use any and all of these in kicky water cooler conversations about politics this summer, and impress your friends!


Jeb Bush

Who? Former Florida governor
Strength: Bilingual, centri$t
Weakness: Once listed himself as “Hispanic” on a voter registration form, which is very silly because he’s a Bush, which is like double the white of the average white. It is an almost-lethal dose of toxic levels of white. He’s Write An Entire Feature Length Screenplay in 12 Hours-levels of white, if you catch my drift.


Scott Walker

Who? Union-busting hot ham enthusiast
Strength: Is married to woman named “Tonette,” which makes him and his wife the couple with the most Wisconsin names in US History.
Weakness: His record as governor of Wisconsin; he is also physically unable to move the top half of his face while speaking which makes him come across like a lying potato.


Rick Perry

Who? Rubber-faced Texan Dick Tracy villain
Strength: New glasses.
Weakness: Pills, numbers.


Donald Trump

Who? Serious candidate with good and viable ideas.
Strength: Possesses neither shame nor self-awareness, the two most important traits of highly successful people in 2015.
Weakness: None; he’s perfect and America needs him in the race for as long as possible. We deserve this. We’ve earned this.


Bernie Sanders

Who? An unkempt self-identified socialist from Vermont
Strength: Good ideas, adorable.
Weakness: The Rand Paul of the Left.


Ted Cruz

Who? Oh he’s that guy whose face is melting, right? Like, the smug debate team captain? That one right?
Strength: Can talk for a long long long long long long long time.
Weakness: Polling so low in a crowded field that he might not even make the first GOP debate.


Rick Santorum

Who? A frothy mixture of lube and fecal matter, frequently found on the wrong side of history.
Strength: Unprecedented chickenfucking stamina.
Weakness: Muscular thighs ;)


Lindsey Graham

Who? Definitely not a lesbian. I know that for sure.
Strength: Literally doesn’t know how to do anything else but grandstand about politics. If society ended and it was every man for himself, the strong would definitely eat the bloggers and Lindsey Grahams first.
Weakness: About as inspiring as a half-licked yogurt lid.


Mike Huckabee

Who? Jolly sociopath from Arkansas. The one Megyn Kelly always rhetorically spanks on her show.
Strength: Real affable.
Weakness: Famous for aligning self closely with people who abuse animals and children.


Martin O’Malley

Who? Former Maryland Governor
Strength: Is hot, can play guitar.
Weakness: Is Tommy Carcetti from The Wire.


Chris Christie

Who? Oh, you know. That guy. That dick guy from New Jersey. The Springsteen fanboy who had his feelings hurt when Bruce was like, ugh, not you. The one who yells. You know the one.
Strength: Loud.
Weakness: A dick.


Marco Rubio

Who? Oh, man. Uh, he’s a Senator right? From Florida? And he’s Cuban.
Strength: Inspiring to the base, young enough to seem fresh.
Weakness: Balding, a natural byproduct of aging for many men. But, in our denial of the finite nature of our lives, voters want a President who they can imagine living forever. It’s not fair, Marco. It’s not fair. Why do we pretend? Why do we fear the beautiful inevitability of silence?


Rand Paul

Who? That guy those ultimate frisbee players were talking about on the bus.
Strength: Free pot for everybody, even fetuses.
Weakness: Is made of mostly water, susceptible to infections resulting from ever-evolving microbes.


Lincoln Chaffee

Who? ????
Strength: Sounds like he might be good at ??? baseball??? In the 40’s maybe?!?
Weakness: Like every human being who has ever existed, like every human civilization that ever existed, he will one day die.


Bobby Jindal

Who? Some nerd from Louisiana
Strength: Excellent security system.
Weakness: Everything made by people must come to an end. Paint peels off, books are forgotten, buildings collapse and are buried beneath hundreds of years of soil. Rome ended whimpering. The Aztecs were all slaughtered. What difference does it make who is in office when a Cortez or Pizarro lands ashore?


Jim Webb

Who? zzz
Strength: zzz
Weakness: The other week I was cleaning out my room and I came across a box of keepsakes—ticket stubs, maps, newspaper clippings—that I’d been saving. Who are these for? I said aloud. I’m not going to have a child. They’ll just be another thing for somebody to throw away.


Ben Carson

Who? The doctor. The actual doctor. Isn’t it funny that Scott Walker, a college dropout, thinks he’s as qualified to run America as a literal brain surgeon? That’s some white man confidence.
Strength: Brain surgeon.
Weakness: How could the pitiful finiteness of our individual consciousness be worth preemptively mourning, if nobody has any knowledge of what the alternative is?


John Kasich

Who? A clump of cells, conceived out of sheer luck, nurtured from zygote into fetus into baby into man that gradually aged without succumbing to innumerable indifferent deadly hazards at every step of life.
Strength: Is made from the same material that existed at the moment of the creation of the universe.
Weakness: Every day, every atom in his body loses an infinitesimal amount of energy. Just as your body does. Just as my body does. We are skidding to a stop over billions of years, slowing until there’s nothing left.


George Pataki

Who? Water, air, electricity, bile.
Strength: I remembered his name for this list.
Weakness: What happens after this? We swim forward like sharks, gulping it all down, washing experiences over our gills so that we can breathe, and for what? At the end we sink and dissolve. Our consciousness is the product of a vulnerable biological shell, instantaneously breakable, endlessly fragile. The limited life spans of our living matter doom us to make the same mistakes over and over as a species, never passing on the full accumulated wisdom of those who died before us. Eventually, we all fade back into the biological sludge from whence we came, our secrets, our hopes, our dreams dissolved to their atomic fragments.


Robert David Steele

Who? All of you and none of you.
Strength: Is.
Weakness: If a big enough meteor strikes us before next November, we won’t have to worry about any of this.

"Rick Perry is out!"
Posted by HobbsofMI on 09-11-15 at 09:56 PM
Perry out


sig Syren, bouncy by IceCat, bobble head by Tribephyl, and snoglobe by agman

"RE: Rick Perry is out!"
Posted by kidflash212 on 09-13-15 at 10:20 AM
There were not that many people who noticed he was in.
"RE: Rick Perry is out!"
Posted by kingfish on 09-13-15 at 11:35 AM
LAST EDITED ON 09-13-15 AT 11:35 AM (EST)

Too bad. I liked him, especially when he was with the Cars.

Or was he the guitarist with Aerosmith? He's good too.