POTUS PERRY!

[heironymouspasparagus]

Other than Reagan's second election, I really can't think of a GOP candidate who has really gotten the entire party pretty fired up in my life-time.  We've got a habit of nominating somewhat less charismatic, even boring candidates.  Bush I was fortunate because we were on a pretty good roll in the economy and he was seen as a component of that success.  Basically, we voted for Reagan's third term.  I didn't care for Bush I as he was a rolling gaffe machine himself when he was the VP.

Ford in '76.  Yawn.  There's a reason he was our first un-elected president.
Reagan was nominated with a fair amount of skepticism in 1980.
Dole in '96. Are you kidding?
Bush in 2000?  Another Bush?
Bush in 2004? No one to oppose him in the primary, things were rolling along well economically by then and the war had not really become an issue in his own party.
McCain in 2008?  What a pathetic pick.  Most GOP's I know blame open primaries for this happening.  He doesn't have a charismatic bone in his body.  Plus he was in his mid-70's.

Ford was arguably the best President in the last 40 years.  He vetoed more spending bills in the history of the Presidency at that time.  He created no controversy, was a stable influence on the running of the country (he knew where all the skeletons were in Congress and knew how to twist arms behind the scenes - most effective at it since Lyndon Johnson).  He was unelected because the American electorate has so much stupid - as can be noted by electing George W Bush to office once.

Bush 2004 - economy was in reality just a tiny bit better than it is now.  With just a small increase in population - 10% from 2000 to 2010 - we have had about 40% increase in GDP (that's the measure of economic activity in the country for all the Fox News viewers).  With what amounts to a pretty small dip in the recession from about 14.5 trillion to 13.7 trillion.  So how is it with all that is supposedly happening in the economy, we still have 9% unemployed??  Oh, yeah...I remember...ship all the jobs to China.  Give all the money to the top 1% of the population.

http://ycharts.com/indicators/gdp?gclid=CJ74i6-Au6sCFSwEQAodXQzQfw#zoom=10?utm_source=google&utm_medium=cpc&utm_term=US%20GDP%20history

We should be in an amazing boom time right now.  If it weren't all 'monopoly money' in the banks, oil, and big insurance companies.

McCain was the best chance the Republicontins had to actually regain some sanity.  Palin was the stupid 'sellout' choice.  He should have picked Fred Thompson or Joe Lieberman.  Either would have helped win it.

[Gaspar]

Ford was arguably the best President in the last 40 years.  He vetoed more spending bills in the history of the Presidency at that time.  He created no controversy, was a stable influence on the running of the country (he knew where all the skeletons were in Congress and knew how to twist arms behind the scenes - most effective at it since Lyndon Johnson).  He was unelected because the American electorate has so much stupid - as can be noted by electing George W Bush to office once.

Bush 2004 - economy was in reality just a tiny bit better than it is now.  With just a small increase in population - 10% from 2000 to 2010 - we have had about 40% increase in GDP (that's the measure of economic activity in the country for all the Fox News viewers).  With what amounts to a pretty small dip in the recession from about 14.5 trillion to 13.7 trillion.  So how is it with all that is supposedly happening in the economy, we still have 9% unemployed??  Oh, yeah...I remember...ship all the jobs to China.  Give all the money to the top 1% of the population.

http://ycharts.com/indicators/gdp?gclid=CJ74i6-Au6sCFSwEQAodXQzQfw#zoom=10?utm_source=google&utm_medium=cpc&utm_term=US%20GDP%20history

We should be in an amazing boom time right now.  If it weren't all 'monopoly money' in the banks, oil, and big insurance companies.

McCain was the best chance the Republicontins had to actually regain some sanity.  Palin was the stupid 'sellout' choice.  He should have picked Fred Thompson or Joe Lieberman.  Either would have helped win it.

[Conan71]

Damn Obama's uppity DoJ: http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/09/doj_rick_perrys_texas_redistricting_plan_purposefully_discriminated_against_minorities.php

So why aren't they interested in going after the other few hundred or so gerrymandered districts or districts or specifically a few where white, successful people may have had their vote choice diminished?

[we vs us]

So why aren't they interested in going after the other few hundred or so gerrymandered districts or districts or specifically a few where white, successful people may have had their vote choice diminished?

Do you know of any?  

[Conan71]

Do you know of any?  

That's a rhetorical, right?

That's the point of gerrymandering: marginalize the opposing parties base by re-drawing district lines.  The president is using the DOJ to look at this as being racially-motivated instead of what it really is: marginalizing Democrat votes in a couple of districts.  We all know Republicans are racist, therefore when district lines are re-drawn it's purely to take votes away from the brown people and black people.  I bet they do that to the yellow people and teh gheys as well.

It would be laughable if it weren't for the president using public resources so freely to help his chances of re-election by trying to portray an opponent with good showing in the polls as a racist.  That's greaseball Chicago politics at it's worst.

[we vs us]

That's a rhetorical, right?

That's the point of gerrymandering: marginalize the opposing parties base by re-drawing district lines.  The president is using the DOJ to look at this as being racially-motivated instead of what it really is: marginalizing Democrat votes in a couple of districts.  We all know Republicans are racist, therefore when district lines are re-drawn it's purely to take votes away from the brown people and black people.  I bet they do that to the yellow people and teh gheys as well.

It would be laughable if it weren't for the president using public resources so freely to help his chances of re-election by trying to portray an opponent with good showing in the polls as a racist.  That's greaseball Chicago politics at it's worst.

Not rhetorical; a serious question. Do you know of any credible allegations about a wealthy white district being broken up to keep the colored poor folks represented by Democrats?  Forgive my skepticism but the absence of prosecutions doesn't amount to corruption or reverse racism.  It might actually point to an absence of crime.

It might also be that the gerrymandering in TX actually amounts to something prosecutable.  I know that seems like an outside possibility what with all Chicago-style pizza corruption that this administration is known for ordering up, but I'd urge you to keep an open mind until they bring or don't bring charges.

And re: greaseball politics . . . we Democrats would love - LOVE -- to have a President who'd read up on some of Lyndon Johnson's  more subtle and/or effective arm-twisting tactics but alas, to date, it seems he's taken a page out of the Jimmy Carter's Kumbayah, Vol 1.   I actually think the GOP would have a level of respect for a Democrat who chose to play politics in the grayer areas of laws/ethics/morals, and would at least grudgingly offer more compromise (read: choose to govern) if they knew there were below-the-belt consequences to their actions.  But sadly, that's not how Obama's chosen to govern.  He really does believe all of that stuff he spoke about in his 2004 DNC address, that we can be unified and are really one big purple nation, etc.  Which is just the kind of rhetoric he'll ride into the dustbin of history if he doesn't straighten up and fly right. 

[heironymouspasparagus]

Been eatin' too much barbeque??

I understand.  Several of those booths elicited just that reaction!

[heironymouspasparagus]

That's a rhetorical, right?

That's the point of gerrymandering: marginalize the opposing parties base by re-drawing district lines.  The president is using the DOJ to look at this as being racially-motivated instead of what it really is: marginalizing Democrat votes in a couple of districts.  We all know Republicans are racist, therefore when district lines are re-drawn it's purely to take votes away from the brown people and black people.  I bet they do that to the yellow people and teh gheys as well.

It would be laughable if it weren't for the president using public resources so freely to help his chances of re-election by trying to portray an opponent with good showing in the polls as a racist.  That's greaseball Chicago politics at it's worst.

Same as every ten years no matter who is in office.

[Conan71]

Same as every ten years no matter who is in office.

Are you aware of any other DOJ investigation into this at any previous time though?  I'm sure not.

[Gaspar]

Been eatin' too much barbeque??

I understand.  Several of those booths elicited just that reaction!

There was some bad Q out there.  I usually don't comment on others junk, but we had several people bring ribs over from one of the booths a few spots to the north of us and it tasted like the ribs were baked in ketchup.

Directly to the north of us Kick-Ash BBQ had some awesome ribs.  Almost as good as ours (but apparently better in the judges eyes)!

[nathanm]

Are you aware of any other DOJ investigation into this at any previous time though?  I'm sure not.

Into districts redrawn for the purpose (or with the effect of) of discrimination against minorities? The Voting Rights Act has been used literally hundreds of times since it was passed in the 60s. It would be a much larger number, but for the jurisdictions where preclearance is required.

If you really want to be pissed off about a federal investigation, how about the 100% political prosecution of former Mississippi Supreme Court Justice Oliver Diaz?

[heironymouspasparagus]

There was some bad Q out there.  I usually don't comment on others junk, but we had several people bring ribs over from one of the booths a few spots to the north of us and it tasted like the ribs were baked in ketchup.

Directly to the north of us Kick-Ash BBQ had some awesome ribs.  Almost as good as ours (but apparently better in the judges eyes)!

I tasted your Q and it was good.  Razz sauce is interesting, but I still prefer the more savory sauces - too much sweetness for my pancreas, I guess...  And you guys looked awfully casual sitting back there letting the two up front do all the work!  (LOL...I'm kidding.  I'm sure you were all pretty worn down by the time I came by.)

Didn't do the Kick Ash ribs, but the pork (and brisket I think, if memory still working) was just ok to me.

I tried the pork at #46 (United Smokers of America is what they called themselves) and I just can't stop talking about it.  It was incredible.  Don't know if they do anything else - pork was all they had when I went buy.

[Townsend]

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20120542-503544.html

Republican presidential candidate Rick Perry on Friday defended his wife Anita after she publicly charged that he had been "brutalized" on the campaign trail for his Christian faith by his political opponents and the press.

=



No problems with his supporters tearing into other forms of Christianity either.

[Gaspar]

This is why Perry will not get the nomination.  His ads are just to vague!

[Teatownclown]

Great ad.....I want the one's condemning Mitt's cult!

GO RICKITY!