It's Newt's World, We're Just Living In It, Politics Thread

by **CalvinBall** » Mon Feb 13, 2012 17:41:00

link?

by **Phan In Phlorida** » Mon Feb 13, 2012 17:46:28

CalvinBall wrote:link?

go to google.com
type in santorum
click the i'm feeling lucky button

by **pacino** » Mon Feb 13, 2012 17:48:40

omg, i have the thread title already, we need 6 more pages

by **jerseyhoya** » Mon Feb 13, 2012 17:51:38

Is it "The Republicans really might nominate Rick Santorum, huh"

by **pacino** » Mon Feb 13, 2012 17:52:54

they really love spreading santorum around this fair country of ours

by **td11** » Mon Feb 13, 2012 17:53:47

jerseyhoya wrote:We really might nominate Rick Santorum, huh

by **Phan In Phlorida** » Mon Feb 13, 2012 17:54:59

Does it contain the word "frothy"?

by **jerseyhoya** » Mon Feb 13, 2012 17:56:58

I don't think he has as good of a shot of beating Obama, and I think Romney would be a better president

But you couldn't put a pricetag on how much I'd enjoy November 6th and 7th here if Santorum beat Obama

It would be like watching the Giants win the Super Bowl while getting a blowjob and eating Chipotle and drinking top shelf bourbon all at the same time

by **Phan In Phlorida** » Mon Feb 13, 2012 17:57:12

"Frothy the snowman"

by **pacino** » Mon Feb 13, 2012 17:57:56

jerseyhoya wrote:I don't think he has as good of a shot of beating Obama, and I think Romney would be a better president

But you couldn't put a pricetag on how much I'd enjoy November 6th and 7th here if Santorum beat Obama

It would be like watching the Giants win the Super Bowl while getting a blowjob and eating Chipotle and drinking top shelf bourbon all at the same time

are you serious? you would vote for santorum over obama?

by **CalvinBall** » Mon Feb 13, 2012 18:01:06

yeah not really sure how a incompetent bigot being elected president would be like those things.

by **Bucky** » Mon Feb 13, 2012 18:11:42

lethal wrote:
slugsrbad wrote:

Also kind of interesting reading related to that topic.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/12/us/ev ... wanted=all

These things all have a modicum of truth within. However, I have a problem when some specific programs are positioned as "taking money from the government". These are the specific-purpose plans set up by the government which we pay into- as an individual line item- throughout our working careers:

-Social Security
-Medicare
-Unemployment

These are retirement/insurance plans that we are obligated by law to pay into. So utilizing the benefits of said plans should not be- IMO- construed as "taking money from the government". Heck, I defend even the former head of the Philly school district who tried to collect unemployment- she has every right to. If a rich person has car insurance, and the crash their Lamborghinni, should they not file a claim because they can afford to replace it on their own? Nope, they paid into the insurance- they should use it for its purpose. If people don't like the rules they way they've been written, then push to change the rules.

by **jerseyhoya** » Mon Feb 13, 2012 18:17:52

pacino wrote:
jerseyhoya wrote:I don't think he has as good of a shot of beating Obama, and I think Romney would be a better president

But you couldn't put a pricetag on how much I'd enjoy November 6th and 7th here if Santorum beat Obama

It would be like watching the Giants win the Super Bowl while getting a blowjob and eating Chipotle and drinking top shelf bourbon all at the same time

are you serious? you would vote for santorum over obama?

Yes, perhaps you've noticed in my first 62kish posts that I'm a Republican and we disagree on almost everything politically?

by **Bucky** » Mon Feb 13, 2012 18:58:45

I'm actually a little surprised by that. Santorum isn't just a garden variety conservative; he's a certifiable right-wing nutso. Are you basing this hypothetical choice on the person or the uniform??

by **The Nightman Cometh** » Mon Feb 13, 2012 19:12:34

Jersey cares more about his team winning than the damage having a zealot who is unqualified for president would cause.

by **dajafi** » Mon Feb 13, 2012 19:15:18

jh, we all understand the spite thing. But presumably you love the country more than you hate all of us, and I know you're smart enough to understand that Frothy's starting new wars with Muslim freaks while trying to implement the Christianist version of their madness wouldn't work out real well.

by **lethal** » Mon Feb 13, 2012 19:27:58

dajafi wrote:jh, we all understand the spite thing. But presumably you love the country more than you hate all of us, and I know you're smart enough to understand that Frothy's starting new wars with Muslim freaks while trying to implement the Christianist version of their madness wouldn't work out real well.

In 2004, would you have voted for George Bush or Al Sharpton?

by **jerseyhoya** » Mon Feb 13, 2012 19:40:31

I remember a time long ago, way back in the first decade of the 21st century, when Democrats used to make fun of people voting Republican on wedge issues, while ignoring how they felt about economic and foreign policy issues.

I think Santorum's foreign policy answers in the debates have been pretty measured, more so than Romney. I have more problems with his economic stuff, but that's from the right. He's not an ideal nominee both for electability and governing reasons, but I think he'd be a lot better than the guy currently in there.

by **drsmooth** » Mon Feb 13, 2012 19:56:24

jerseyhoya wrote:I remember a time long ago, way back in the first decade of the 21st century, when Democrats used to make fun of people voting Republican on wedge issues, while ignoring how they felt about economic and foreign policy issues.

I think Santorum's foreign policy answers in the debates have been pretty measured, more so than Romney. I have more problems with his economic stuff, but that's from the right. He's not an ideal nominee both for electability and governing reasons, but I think he'd be a lot better than the guy currently in there.

On economics, nobody'd be a lot better than the guy currently in there. Or a lot worse.

On foreign policy, my feeling is we've entered a troubling period, where everyone's wrong, and nobody's doing anything much sensible about it.

On culture, from what evidence is available, few would likely be worse than Santorum.

by **TenuredVulture** » Mon Feb 13, 2012 22:30:17

Foreign policy differences between candidates are usually a question of style and posturing more than anything else. Every once in awhile a President makes a real shift in foreign policy--Bush's invasions would be an example. But generally, continuity is more common. This echoes what Doc Smooth said.

Archived

It's Newt's World, We're Just Living In It, Politics Thread

Re: It's Newt's World, We're Just Living In It, Politics Thr

Re: It's Newt's World, We're Just Living In It, Politics Thr

Re: It's Newt's World, We're Just Living In It, Politics Thr

Re: It's Newt's World, We're Just Living In It, Politics Thr

Re: It's Newt's World, We're Just Living In It, Politics Thr

Re: It's Newt's World, We're Just Living In It, Politics Thr

Re: It's Newt's World, We're Just Living In It, Politics Thr

Re: It's Newt's World, We're Just Living In It, Politics Thr

Re: It's Newt's World, We're Just Living In It, Politics Thr

Re: It's Newt's World, We're Just Living In It, Politics Thr

Re: It's Newt's World, We're Just Living In It, Politics Thr

Re: It's Newt's World, We're Just Living In It, Politics Thr

Re: It's Newt's World, We're Just Living In It, Politics Thr

Re: It's Newt's World, We're Just Living In It, Politics Thr

Re: It's Newt's World, We're Just Living In It, Politics Thr

Re: It's Newt's World, We're Just Living In It, Politics Thr

Re: It's Newt's World, We're Just Living In It, Politics Thr

Re: It's Newt's World, We're Just Living In It, Politics Thr

Re: It's Newt's World, We're Just Living In It, Politics Thr

Re: It's Newt's World, We're Just Living In It, Politics Thr