George Romney, the man who saved AMC, but was Govern by the time Gremlin, Pacer and Hornet.

If you're a sincere social conservative, you can point to your years of political engagement (since about the mid 70s) and see nothing but defeat. Porn is more pervasive than the smutmeisters of the 70s could even imagine. The nation is probably within a decade of legalizing marijuana. More children are born out of wedlock than ever, mostly because abortion remains legal, though access has gotten more difficult. You haven't got prayer back in schools. And while divorce nationally has stabilized, in the places that have high numbers of social conservatives, it remains high. The idea that women should stay home and bake cookies is a quaint bit of nostalgia at best. Santorum speaks to people who are concerned about such things.

But Santorum hasn't a clue. Indeed, what the left really needs in my opinion is someone who can convincingly speak to such concerns. Who can make a convincing case that decent jobs and a secure safety net are the core of strong families, and strong families are much less likely to suffer from the social ills above. Strong, economically secure families attend church, get married before they have children, avoid drugs and divorce. There are plenty of people on the left who can talk persuasively about social capital and how neighborhoods should look and function who can speak to this people. Alas, the leaders of the left by and large speak to such people, with barely disguised contempt.

is it that hard to reform what you can use your EBT card for? feel like that would make millions of lefties and righties happy

TenuredVulture wrote:If you're a sincere social conservative, you can point to your years of political engagement (since about the mid 70s) and see nothing but defeat. Porn is more pervasive than the smutmeisters of the 70s could even imagine. The nation is probably within a decade of legalizing marijuana. More children are born out of wedlock than ever, mostly because abortion remains legal, though access has gotten more difficult. You haven't got prayer back in schools. And while divorce nationally has stabilized, in the places that have high numbers of social conservatives, it remains high. The idea that women should stay home and bake cookies is a quaint bit of nostalgia at best. Santorum speaks to people who are concerned about such things.

But Santorum hasn't a clue. Indeed, what the left really needs in my opinion is someone who can convincingly speak to such concerns. Who can make a convincing case that decent jobs and a secure safety net are the core of strong families, and strong families are much less likely to suffer from the social ills above. Strong, economically secure families attend church, get married before they have children, avoid drugs and divorce. There are plenty of people on the left who can talk persuasively about social capital and how neighborhoods should look and function who can speak to this people. Alas, the leaders of the left by and large speak to such people, with barely disguised contempt.

1) i don't know where this is going - are you going somewhere with it?
2) "More children are born out of wedlock than ever, mostly because abortion remains legal".... Hmmm.....
3) Alas, the leaders of the left by and large speak to such people, with barely disguised contempt....Hmmm....who shows them more contempt-those who speak about real discontinuities between the way things are and the delusions people harbor about the way things are, or those who spin weird sexual/subjugational crypto-authoritarian conspiracy theories about the way things are and the 'certainty' of leading them back to the good old days that never were?

Houshphandzadeh wrote:is it that hard to reform what you can use your EBT card for? feel like that would make millions of lefties and righties happy

Not me. It's a freedom of choice issue. Not sure why their choices are limited if it's legal for anyone else to buy.

mozartpc27 wrote:I guess I am alone in thnking that Santorum gives the Republicans a better shot at winning than Romney.

My thinking is that Santorum is more likely to do better in more of the states that count (Ohio, PA, Virginia, NC, MO, MI, WI, IA)

Not in VA. You're talking about a state that currently has an extraordinarily high percentage of its female citizens literally frothing at the mouth in anger at its social conservative state politicians over several controversial bills this session (as I've documented in this thread). The backlash against Santorum here in VA would be extraordinary.

And I think you're generally underestimating the number of people who would show up to vote against a nut like Santorum. It would go a long way towards negating the GOP's one clear advantage this cycle--the conservative backlash against Obama.

It's outrageous that GMO does not have to be labeled clearly.

It's outrageous that Organic farmers are on the defensive from Monsanto lawsuits - when Monsanto is poisoning their clean farms. Rather, we live in a land where courts and legislators support the big Aggra and support litigation against joe-farmer for patent infringement. Round Up toxins are found world-wide in everyone's pee now. Engineering seeds for one cycle - is against Nature and God.

Judge dismissed organic farmer pre-emptive suit against Monsanto... bad times....

money votes

drsmooth wrote:

TenuredVulture wrote:If you're a sincere social conservative, you can point to your years of political engagement (since about the mid 70s) and see nothing but defeat. Porn is more pervasive than the smutmeisters of the 70s could even imagine. The nation is probably within a decade of legalizing marijuana. More children are born out of wedlock than ever, mostly because abortion remains legal, though access has gotten more difficult. You haven't got prayer back in schools. And while divorce nationally has stabilized, in the places that have high numbers of social conservatives, it remains high. The idea that women should stay home and bake cookies is a quaint bit of nostalgia at best. Santorum speaks to people who are concerned about such things.

But Santorum hasn't a clue. Indeed, what the left really needs in my opinion is someone who can convincingly speak to such concerns. Who can make a convincing case that decent jobs and a secure safety net are the core of strong families, and strong families are much less likely to suffer from the social ills above. Strong, economically secure families attend church, get married before they have children, avoid drugs and divorce. There are plenty of people on the left who can talk persuasively about social capital and how neighborhoods should look and function who can speak to this people. Alas, the leaders of the left by and large speak to such people, with barely disguised contempt.

2) "More children are born out of wedlock than ever, mostly because abortion remains legal".... Hmmm.....

Yeah, I wasn't sure if that was an example of specious logic or deliberate satire.

RichmondPhilsFan wrote:

drsmooth wrote:

TenuredVulture wrote:If you're a sincere social conservative, you can point to your years of political engagement (since about the mid 70s) and see nothing but defeat. Porn is more pervasive than the smutmeisters of the 70s could even imagine. The nation is probably within a decade of legalizing marijuana. More children are born out of wedlock than ever, mostly because abortion remains legal, though access has gotten more difficult. You haven't got prayer back in schools. And while divorce nationally has stabilized, in the places that have high numbers of social conservatives, it remains high. The idea that women should stay home and bake cookies is a quaint bit of nostalgia at best. Santorum speaks to people who are concerned about such things.

But Santorum hasn't a clue. Indeed, what the left really needs in my opinion is someone who can convincingly speak to such concerns. Who can make a convincing case that decent jobs and a secure safety net are the core of strong families, and strong families are much less likely to suffer from the social ills above. Strong, economically secure families attend church, get married before they have children, avoid drugs and divorce. There are plenty of people on the left who can talk persuasively about social capital and how neighborhoods should look and function who can speak to this people. Alas, the leaders of the left by and large speak to such people, with barely disguised contempt.

2) "More children are born out of wedlock than ever, mostly because abortion remains legal".... Hmmm.....

Yeah, I wasn't sure if that was an example of specious logic or deliberate satire.

I'd assume the logic is that people are fucking with reckless abandon because they can abort if they want to? I'm not sure how much water that holds though (probably more than theses sluts at 9 months though, amirite?)

Philly the Kid wrote:It's outrageous that GMO does not have to be labeled clearly.

It's outrageous that Organic farmers are on the defensive from Monsanto lawsuits - when Monsanto is poisoning their clean farms. Rather, we live in a land where courts and legislators support the big Aggra and support litigation against joe-farmer for patent infringement. Round Up toxins are found world-wide in everyone's pee now. Engineering seeds for one cycle - is against Nature and God.

Judge dismissed organic farmer pre-emptive suit against Monsanto... bad times....

Case was probably not ripe... Courts typically frown upon preemptive suits.

slugsrbad wrote:Case was probably not ripe

Drizzle some DDT on it

What's the big deal?

I agree with the kid

FUCK MONSANTO

slugsrbad wrote:

RichmondPhilsFan wrote:

drsmooth wrote:

TenuredVulture wrote:If you're a sincere social conservative, you can point to your years of political engagement (since about the mid 70s) and see nothing but defeat. Porn is more pervasive than the smutmeisters of the 70s could even imagine. The nation is probably within a decade of legalizing marijuana. More children are born out of wedlock than ever, mostly because abortion remains legal, though access has gotten more difficult. You haven't got prayer back in schools. And while divorce nationally has stabilized, in the places that have high numbers of social conservatives, it remains high. The idea that women should stay home and bake cookies is a quaint bit of nostalgia at best. Santorum speaks to people who are concerned about such things.

But Santorum hasn't a clue. Indeed, what the left really needs in my opinion is someone who can convincingly speak to such concerns. Who can make a convincing case that decent jobs and a secure safety net are the core of strong families, and strong families are much less likely to suffer from the social ills above. Strong, economically secure families attend church, get married before they have children, avoid drugs and divorce. There are plenty of people on the left who can talk persuasively about social capital and how neighborhoods should look and function who can speak to this people. Alas, the leaders of the left by and large speak to such people, with barely disguised contempt.

2) "More children are born out of wedlock than ever, mostly because abortion remains legal".... Hmmm.....

Yeah, I wasn't sure if that was an example of specious logic or deliberate satire.

I'd assume the logic is that people are fucking with reckless abandon because they can abort if they want to? I'm not sure how much water that holds though (probably more than theses sluts at 9 months though, amirite?)

It was an example of bad typing. Family planning services, though legal, are difficult to access. Left off that important clause.

Where I'm going with this is that progressives should take some of the grievances and concerns (and resentments) of people in the heartland seriously, rather than dismissing them with contempt and insults.

we could start with just not making awful, "Indianapolis! Who'd ever want to live there?" jokes at every opportunity. that stuff is the worst

idk i always thought ron santo was alright dude

my cousin mose wrote:idk i always thought ron santo was alright dude

no but really, monsanto can get fucked. their wiki page reads like a rap sheet

TenuredVulture wrote:
Where I'm going with this is that progressives should take some of the grievances and concerns (and resentments) of people in the heartland seriously, rather than dismissing them with contempt and insults.

people of all political persuasions treat them with contempt and insults.

1) Americans love winners, and neglect losers
2) the tactics of those who would persuade these heartlanders to vote against their own economic interests is less contemptible; less insulting?

In what is perhaps the least surprising news of 2012 so far, the 1% tip story was made up.