Seriously, GOP? Really?

[Imran Siddiqui]

Well, can the Dept. of Labor intervene in a union dispute at a Catholic hospital? Can religious hospitals even have unions? I'm not trolling (yet), but i'm curious. As you have expertise in this area, I'd like to learn.

That's another Agency (Office of Labor Management Standards). I can speak for what they do.

[MrFun]

[giblets]

Ron Paul was so close to winning in Maine

[MrFun]

Thankfully, that white supremacist does not have strong enough support for the long haul.

[MrFun]

Another profound thought from good ol' Paul.

[Hauldren Collider]

Well, I see where you're coming from, MrFun. After all, it's totally inconceivable that someone could have reversed an opinion on a modern issue like gay rights within a time period of 17 to 18 years.

[MrFun]

Ron Paul is just your typical, one-dimensional libertarian.

[Dinner]

I like Paul on a personal level, he seems like a nice guy and he's ideologically consistent even admiting areas where his ideology is weak (which is hard to find in a politician) plus he's willing to go on any show (yeah, try to get other Republicans to go on any network but the ones which are friendly and won't ask hard questions) but I have to admit the libertarian policies would be a disaster for the country. Go back to the gold standard and end fractional banking? Yeah, that would mean 3/4ths + of the money supply disappearing over night; even in the Great Depression we only had about a 40% contraction of the money supply so a new Great Depression is assured where no one can get credit nor could businesses even finance their regular day to day operations. We're talking near total economic collapse of any person or business who uses credit. I like how he's now not anti-gay marriage (he wants the government to simply stop recognizing all marriages which seems like throwing the baby out with the bath water) but completely disagree with his stance that businesses should be able to force blacks or minorities out if they want to do so.

Libertarianism is one of those things which sounds interesting in theory but which simply wouldn't survive contact with the real world. Worse Paul throws in a bunch of economically illiterate nonsense (like the gold standard or ending banking) which are simply incompatable with a modern capitalist economy. That said, he's honest and straight forward and that appeals to lots of people who haven't taken the time to really think about Paul's policies and understand what a complete and total disaster they'd be. No more public health programs? Yeah, that would last about as long as it takes to have a major outbreak and then normal people would start demanding the government do something to stop people dying.

[Hauldren Collider]

plus he's willing to go on any show (yeah, try to get other Republicans to go on any network but the ones which are friendly and won't ask hard questions)

Republicans go on unfriendly networks all the time. Most congressmen would be willing to appear on CNN and MSNBC and so forth.

[Dinner]

Not as often as you'd think. And when they do usually their press secretary requires that only softball questions be asked, that certain topics be off limits, or that the host not be too "mean" to them by asking questions they'd prefer not to address. Sure, Democrats do the same thing (a pox on both their houses) but Republicans do it much more since they have access to obvious propaganda sites like Fox while the "liberal media" is in fact not that liberal and still follows basic journalistic standards while Fox doesn't. It's sad but news networks know Candidates can withhold their partisipation unless shows cave to their wishes so really the politicians hold all the cards and they know who the softball folks are (hell, Larry King was very well known for being an easy host who would put any topic off limits if the politician made it a condition of getting an interview). We simply do not have as active a press because of this nor are the politicians legally required to stand up and answer the hard questions as happens in the UK during answer time.

We'd have been a lot better off in inummerable ways if there was a legally required instance of where politicians had to actually directly answer the charges of their critics instead of just read a prepared statement going over partisan talking points. Regular people be able to see the bull**** sorted out from the facts and I doubt Bush would have been able to continue to claim Saddam had nukes or that he was behind 9/11 if this was true. He'd have been ***** slapped all over the place for the whole world to see.

[DaShi]

plus he's willing to go on any show (yeah, try to get other Republicans to go on any network but the ones which are friendly and won't ask hard questions)

Republicans go on unfriendly networks all the time. Most congressmen would be willing to appear on CNN and MSNBC and so forth.

How are CNN and MSNBC unfriendly?

[Dinner]

I can only guess he means they don't say "YES! YES! DEAR GOD YES!" to everything Republicans say and occassionally dare to ask a question.

[DaShi]

No, I just think that HC is grossly ill-informed.

[Boris Godunov]

Hmm, looks like Romney is developing his own Google problem:

http://spreadingromney.com/

#4 on Google search.

I do have to wonder if he's currently Romneying himself over the Santorum Surge.

[Guynemer]

PHRASING



The fact that Romney is losing in Michigan--MICHIGAN, HIS ****ING HOME STATE--to Rick "Santorum" Santorum is just... I...

My mastery of the English language is not sufficient to the task of describing the complete and utter cluster**** that is the 2012 GOP primary season.


My lovely wife, an avowed Obama hater, has said that even she will vote for Obama should Santorum or Gingrich secure the Republican nomination.