Pajiba

I'll just cut and paste my status:

Sorry, but all this "Perry's done" talk is crap. They've already shown how easy it is for them to turn a blind eye to idiocy and ineptitude. Bush was president twice, remember? He failed harder than that in the debates. He had that same dumb deer in the headlights look as well. It won't make any damn difference to a single person who might have voted for him.

I'm still shocked that the real story isn't "Perry Wants to Eliminate the Depts of Education, Commerce and Energy."

Drawing a blank on national TV ends a candidacy for the Republican ticket, but enacting Romneycare and flip-flopping on every major issue does not.

Okay.

Fox is only going with their constituency, which isn't thrilled with Perry. I'm sure they're going to ramp up their push for Gingrich. In fact, that's already started. He's had so many cherry interviews there he should be getting a salary. I lost count at 9 glowing interviews and reports on him in the last 4 days.

As for Global Warming, you mean this one?

http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/10/31/climate-scientist-accused-by-colleague-for-hiding-truth/

Or this one?

http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/11/02/un-hired-grad-students-to-author-major-climate-reports/

Or this one?

http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/09/23/how-many-people-watched-al-goresclimate-cast/

Or this one?

http://www.foxbusiness.com/2011/09/29/global-warming-to-cost-canada-billions-year/

I wasn't able to find a single story that wasn't attempting to make Global Warming a joke and its proponents addled boobs.

The bubble remains unburst when the needle is just more lies and spin. Fox may report on this stuff, but I worked there for 5 years, they spin it the way they want to spin it and always to the right, like my pecker.

Oh, and I saw at least five different versions of that disgusting lie of a story about Obama taxing our Christmas trees. Good job on screwing American companies out of business and Americans out of jobs.

1. If Proto is going to bring up his dick so abruptly, I'm going to have to insist that he post pictures to prove it.
2. I'm a little torn, because if Perry doesn't get the nomination, he's going to have to come back to Texas and try being governor again, which is bad, but not as bad (for Texas, anyway) if he gets the nomination and has to resign as governor of Texas, ceding his office to David Dewhurst. I just can't figure out which is worse. I mean, if Perry gets the nomination, it all but assures that Obama gets re-elected (which I am also torn about), but we're still stuck with Dewhurst here.

To chime in with an outsider's perspective: I've been loving the run-up to the Republican nomination so far. It's easier to consider the whole thing as entertainment when you have no stake in it. I'll admit it's a little scary to imagine ANY of those lunatics actually having the finger on the button of the Superpower beyond the sea but we got through the Bush years without joining in the insanity and I hope my current Government will keep us out of any new adventures. It is just so inconceivabe to me that the likes of Michelle Bachmann, Cain and Perry are being taken serious as actual contenders to lead a nation as powerful as the US. Especially after what happened the last time a guy with that kind of attitude ran things. But then again, I guess I don't have to look too far to find examples for this kind stupidity in Europe. Why a disgrace like Berlusconi gets to sit a table with world leaders is just as beyond me.

@Phedre:

"It is just so inconceivabe to me that the likes of Michelle Bachmann, Cain and Perry are being taken serious as actual contenders to lead a nation as powerful as the US."

Not that any of the above are in the least bit qualified for the Presidency (they aren't), but do be a dear and provide that lengthy list of all of Obama's achievements and qualifications for said office when he was campaigning. Besides reading a Teleprompter, I mean.

It's ok, I'll wait.

Qualifications are important, but their importance is a bit lessened when the candidate can show themselves to be competent during the campaign process. These candidates though? They keep proving themselves to be less competent the more the process goes on. The only one who I'd attach that word to, Huntsman, has been mostly ignored.

Politics in America (and to be wholly truthful in the Western world) has slowly become (or perhaps it always was) a joke, a farce, a game...
The only problem is that fooling everyone into stupidity really doesn't make for a working country. A game is only a game as long as it doesn't actually matter.

@Phedre:

This isn't a Democrat vs. Republican issue.

I wouldn't vote for any of the current candidates in any party because every last one of them is a power-hungry sociopath. Every. Single. One. But then again we get the candidates we ask for (and deserve), and until we figure that out we're doomed to repeat the same political cycles over and over again. Which would be ok except that as the cycles continue our problems become more intractable, and social unrest grows. Times are indeed getting interesting...

I realize that there's no way in hell Americans are going to elect the people necessary to get a grip on things (because normal, capable individuals cannot exist in the current political class), but at the very least we should be able to admit to ourselves that the vultures we DO elect have neither the desire, incentive, or competence to serve our interests.

@Todd:

Of course you do, because you aren't paying attention in the first place.

@ Barry:

Well that comment actually came across more thoughtful and polite than your previous one. So thank you for that.And I agree with your asessment of politicians in general. You have to be a very certain kind of personality to pursue office and we DO get what we ask for to a certain extent.

So I guess I'm just happy that the politicians in my government haven't gone quite as off the rails yet and keep watching the show in your part of the world.

It's going to be a long day.

JByrd--Barry was talking about Obama's qualifications when he was campaigning in 2008, not what he has (or hasn't) accomplished as President. It's a reasonable point whether you agree with it or not; equating it with the cynical efforts you mention doesn't exactly elevate political discourse.

I don't know about the whole taxing Christmas trees thing, but socialist, Muslim, and birth certificate are all words/phrases that I remember being thrown around during the previous presidential election.

And I don't even get how the teleprompter thing is a reasonable point. You know what might have saved Perry from his gaffe last night? If he had all of the departments he wanted to eliminate written down on a piece of paper in front of him. This isn't some closed notes test that they're taking for a college course. I want the President to be as coherent as possible and have all the necessary information in front of him to be so. If he needs notes or a teleprompter to keep all of that organized and to make sure he doesn't say something stupid or flub a phrase, why the hell should I care?

I realize the rules of the debate may have prevented him from having pre-written notes, but I never completely understood why such rules would be in place. Is it to prevent candidates from just going off into pre-written stump speeches? If so it certainly doesn't work.

Sorry, the "teleprompter" line is right up there with "socialist", "birth certificate", "taxing Christmas trees", "Muslim" and the other various and sundry lies one can spew that immediately make anything you subsequently say completely invalid.

It's just... stupid.

Exactly.By using the teleprompter argument you've outed yourself as someone who listens only to rhetoric.

And the vast majority of people who voted for Obama did so not because of his rhetoric (Hope! Change! Yes We Can! Bush's Fault!), but because of an in-depth analysis of his voting record and policy positions, right?

"Teleprompter" critiques aren't exactly substantive, but neither are they baseless - Obama has shown a tendency to stray from The Message and look less than Presidential when not reading The Message from multiple video screens.

I would also say that "Socialist" critques - while too often thrown around as a casual dismissal - are valid as well. When someone has a voting record (however limited a sample) to the left of Bernie Sanders, a Socialist, what would be an appropriate descriptor?

Dismissing the entirety of your political opposition as "stupid," which seems to be the prevailing Democratic tactic, is stupid.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAH! This guy is a bigger fucking joke than Bachmann and Cain, if that is even possible. But what scares me is that GWB was a similar fool and he got elected. Who is to say this one won't?
Romney, flip-flopper he maybe seems like a 'better' option.
Every election GOP candidates get scarier. What the hell is happening to the country? There are only two parties in this country: The Right (Democrats) and the BATSHIT CRAZY (Republicans).
Still shocked by the Mississippi decision though. Maybe there is hope after all....

Posted by: Rest In Peace at November 10, 2011 11:08 AM

OK, the "to the left of Bernie Sanders" bit was based on one analysis of voting records in 2007 by National Journal (an allegedly non-partisan outfit) - and those results have certainly been contested. But his voting record is definitely on the far left side of the scale, and if "Socialist" didn't have such an pejorative connotation in the American political vocabulary, I imagine Obama himself would embrace the term.

Being "to the left of Bernie Sanders" is preferable to the spot to the right of Genghis Khan the Tea Party candidates occupy.

There is a whole other level of absurdity in this year's candidates that is beyond anything I ever dreamed possible. Romney and Gingrich and Huntsman are real candidates who I might disagree with but who are certainly not jokes. But it is absolutely ridiculous that Herman Cain and Michelle Bachmann, to take two examples, are being given a single second of consideration in this race. Bachmann repeatedly claimed that America's credit rating was downgraded because the debt ceiling was raised, which is literally the exact opposite of what the credit agency said was the reason for the downgrade. She also claimed that Canada's lower unemployment was attributable to the fact it had never had an economic stimulus package -- when it in fact passed a "massive deficit-spending stimulus" package (that's a quote from the (Conservative) Prime Minister). She is either outright lying to the American people or is actually too stupid to understand basic fiscal policy issues.

Meanwhile, Herman Cain had a whole riff about China being a military danger to the U.S. because it was trying to become a nuclear power -- when it has had nuclear capability since the 1960s. When he was asked about his views on a right of return for Palestinians, he first had to ask someone to explain what that meant and then said that he didn't think Israel had a problem with people returning. It is fucking MIND-BOGGLING to me that that kind of ignorance of the most basic and important facts about America's biggest rival and its closest ally don't disqualify someone from being President.

These are not disagreements about policy choices or arguments over who has a better vision for the country. These are graphic demonstrations that these individuals are wholly unable to handle the job of being president. This is not about a lack of experience -- Bachmann has tons of political experience, and I frankly don't care whether a candidate has ever held office before. But if the President of the United States said that he didn't think that Israel had a problem with the right of return, it is likely that an actual war would be triggered. You can't just SAY SHIT LIKE THAT if you are or want to be President.

(And I hope the people who throw the teleprompter line out there realize that Obama -- unlike most other major candidates -- writes a significant number of his own speeches. The irony of the teleprompter criticism is that tons of politicians use teleprompters but Obama is one of the few who actually write the words that appear on it.)

My dad is a member of his local school board. From hearing about his dealings with many of the board members, I'm pretty sure that "borderline sociopath" concept extends even lower than county commissioner. There are exceptions. Obviously, I think my dad is one of the exceptions. However, they are pretty rare.

I want Dolly Parton to be president. No lie. That woman has excellent diplomatic skills, a positive national and international reputation, supports gay rights and environmental reform, and has an incredibly savvy business sense.

It might sound preposterous, but how much crazier an option is she than some of the other folks we've been subjected to?

Parton for President 2012. Think about it.

Obviously the solution to all this is essay exams. The old 5 paragraph essay taught in English 101. No more talking. No more "debating", which isn't even really a debate, just talking points. Get the nominees in one room, on camera, bluebooks and three sharpened pencils, and give them a couple hours to do the work. If they can't create persuasive essays on any topic given to them, they don't qualify and must shut their faces until the final election. *dusts palms* Problem SOLVED.

Thank you, but if socialism is not having people die of treatable conditions simply because they did not have money for private health care, then I'm a socialist. Anything else I consider thoroughly cruel and subhuman.

Posted by: astounhaded at November 10, 2011 12:30 PM

This, times infinity.

The world "Socialist" has become this bizarre, spooky boogeyword in American politics. It's simply become accepted that socialism is a bad thing, despite mass ignorance of what it means, and now when anybody brings up something they don't like, and it's even slightly involves the gov't, they call it socialism. End of conversation, no need to explain why they disagree with the policy, why it's bad for country, or why socialism is so horrible in the first place. Calling something socialist is not an explanation for why it is bad.

Our current employer based Healthcare is pretty much the worst thing ever. It combines the worst of both worlds, it has all the callousness of the free market yet it is massively inefficiency, and tethers people to jobs at big corporations. State run healthcare is a legitimate alternative and, here's a little secret, works pretty well for a lot of countries. We can't even consider that alternative because it's, god forbid, socialist.

So much grist for the tit-for-tat mill, so little desire to beat my head against a wall. I actually agree with Dustin - Rick Perry is done. I hope. I'm now looking forward to the post ridiculing Joe Biden.

For all those who think they're right and I'm wrong:

Nanana boo boo
Stick your head in doo doo
While you're there
brush your hair
and don't forget your underwear.

I want to know who this incredibly charismatic Newt Gingrich person is that Fox News is pushing. The only Newt Gingrich I know looks like Quentin Tarantino's angry grandmother.

It's truly a shame that Pajiba, which is normally a very enjoyable site, must from time to time be marred by such extreme, uninformed politics. Pajiba would be so much better if such devisive and often hateful rhetoric were left to others out there who simply do it better.