The end of Herman Cain's campaign

[Gaspar]

Uh oh.  With all of this talk of Fair Taxes and allowing the states to make their own decisions, one might think Herman a free-thinker, or even, banish the idea, a Libertarian.  Don't let the Republicans know. Shhhhh!

[heironymouspasparagus]

Uh oh.  With all of this talk of Fair Taxes and allowing the states to make their own decisions, one might think Herman a free-thinker, or even, banish the idea, a Libertarian.  Don't let the Republicans know. Shhhhh!

Even a broken clock is right twice a day.

[Conan71]

Let Herman roll you a fattee...

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/herman-cain-loosen-federal-marijuana-restrictions-160520011.html

At a campaign stop in Urbandale, Iowa, Tuesday, Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain said he supports letting states establish their own laws regarding medical marijuana.

"If states want to legalize medical marijuana, I think that's a state's right," Cain said, according to NBC News. "Because one of my overriding approaches to looking at all of these issue --most of them belong at the state, because when you do something federally . . .  you try to force one-size-fits-all."

The federal government restricts consumption of marijuana under current law, but 16 states and the District of Columbia have passed measures to allow use of the drug in some form, causing friction between federal and state authorities. Despite  support in years past from President Obama for reforming federal marijuana laws, the Drug Enforcement Agency continues to raid  dispensaries that operate where marijuana use is legal on the state level.

A Gallup Poll conducted in October found that half of the population supports legalizing the drug. Cain's fellow GOP presidential candidates Texas Rep. Ron Paul and Texas Gov. Rick Perry have also voiced support for allowing state and local discretion on the issue.

Oh dude!  That's cool!

Wait, what was he going to do again?

[Conan71]

Uh oh.  With all of this talk of Fair Taxes and allowing the states to make their own decisions, one might think Herman a free-thinker, or even, banish the idea, a Libertarian.  Don't let the Republicans know. Shhhhh!

Time to send another couple of Benjamins?

[Red Arrow]

Even a broken clock is right twice a day.

That's two times more than most democrats clocks.

[heironymouspasparagus]

That's two times more than most democrats clocks.

Ah, grasshopper...  no.

[Red Arrow]

Ah, grasshopper...  no.

So tell me how often a clock that is consistently 2 seconds fast is correct in a day.  I say zero.

[Townsend]

So tell me how often a clock that is consistently 2 seconds fast is correct in a day.  I say zero.

The time is always correct as long as you get enough people to agree to it.

If you're on an island with 14 people and get them to agree it's 15 o'clock then it's 15 o'clock.

If you're in a county in Indiana and get that county to agree it's one hour different to the rest of the nation, then it's one hour different to the rest of the nation.

If you come up on a Sunday morning in Autumn and get enough people to agree to push their clocks back an hour then guess what happens.

[heironymouspasparagus]

Or if you are off in space somewhere like Cain is most of the time, then you will be running on a relativistic shift.

[Red Arrow]

The time is always correct as long as you get enough people to agree to it.

I am talking about the instruments we use to indicate the time, not time itself.

Back to being contrary just to be contrary?

[Townsend]

I am talking about the instruments we use to indicate the time, not time itself.

Back to being contrary just to be contrary?

So tell me how often a clock that is consistently 2 seconds fast is correct in a day.  I say zero.

Your post wasn't? 

[Red Arrow]

Your post wasn't? 

Nope, not just being contrary (this time).

OK, I will spell it out for you.

A clock that is consistently 2 seconds (or any amount) faster or slower than the agreed time standard will always indicate the incorrect time when compared to that standard.

A clock that runs fast will either never be correct or correct once depending on whether it was set ahead or behind the accepted time standard.  Let me know if you don't understand why, I'll explain this too.

Same with a clock that runs slow.

[Townsend]

Nope, not just being contrary (this time).

OK, I will spell it out for you.

A clock that is consistently 2 seconds (or any amount) faster or slower than the agreed time standard will always indicate the incorrect time when compared to that standard.

A clock that runs fast will either never be correct or correct once depending on whether it was set ahead or behind the accepted time standard.  Let me know if you don't understand why, I'll explain this too.

Same with a clock that runs slow.

You've missed the point and this is way off topic anyway.  I call this conversation moot.

Turning to the left and "Moot".  Turning to the right and "Moot".

[Conan71]

Oh, and back on topic.  It appears Herman's campaign is going just fine and Gropegate is dissipating like a fart in the wind.

[Gaspar]

Oh, and back on topic.  It appears Herman's campaign is going just fine and Gropegate is dissipating like a fart in the wind.

Damn!  I'm gonna miss. . .