# Rick Santorum is out of the race!!!



## poopyalligator (Apr 10, 2012)

Saw this on yahoo a second ago. Let us all rejoice that he wont even have the potential to be our president.

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/rick-santorum-calls-mitt-romney-concede-180027008.html


----------



## Razzy (Apr 10, 2012)

I just saw this too. I'm glad.


----------



## Konfyouzd (Apr 10, 2012)

I'm relieved but somehow not entirely surprised.


----------



## Adam Of Angels (Apr 10, 2012)

I don't think Mitt Romney has an actual fair shot at getting into office, so, I think we'll President Obama in office for another term.


----------



## poopyalligator (Apr 10, 2012)

Konfyouzd said:


> I'm relieved but somehow not entirely surprised.


'
Same here, but still it is nice to see that the potential is not even there lol.


----------



## Gothic Headhunter (Apr 10, 2012)

Somewhere, Dave Mustaine is loosing his mind.


----------



## Ill-Gotten James (Apr 10, 2012)

I was just about to post this as well. I'm so happy he is gone. I bet Dave Mustaine is sad though.

Santorum to Suspend Presidential Campaign - NYTimes.com


----------



## Konfyouzd (Apr 10, 2012)

Gothic Headhunter said:


> Somewhere, Dave Mustaine is loosing his mind.





I had to hold back actual laughter; I'm at work.


----------



## TRENCHLORD (Apr 10, 2012)

It's only been a matter of time considering the tremendous support Romney has gained among the leading republican establishment as well as many Reagan demecrats.

Santorum's daughter's health has taken another turn for the worst this week forcing her to once again be admitted to hospital care.

Honestly I'm not sure how they could have handled the upcoming general election stresses while undergoing such a heartbreaking family situation.

Looks like I'm a Romney man now lol.


----------



## Konfyouzd (Apr 10, 2012)

Who did you support before...?


----------



## Adam Of Angels (Apr 10, 2012)

TRENCHLORD said:


> Looks like I'm a Romney man now lol.



I'm not trying to single you out, but this is problematic logic. Not that you are of this particular strain of Americans, but many just give their party's candidate their full support no matter what. It's an old way.


----------



## Prydogga (Apr 10, 2012)

Konfyouzd said:


> Who did you support before...?



THIS.


----------



## VBCheeseGrater (Apr 10, 2012)

Romney seems like a tool too. I can't stand all the bashing of the other candidates, especially when it's a load of horsesh*t. Tell me what YOU can do to help, not what the other guy can't or what your party wants you to say. Politics is straight triflin'


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Apr 10, 2012)




----------



## TRENCHLORD (Apr 10, 2012)

Konfyouzd said:


> Who did you support before...?


 
Oh I'm still pulling (it) for Palin.


----------



## Konfyouzd (Apr 10, 2012)

She could totally get the business... But hopefully not the presidency.


----------



## TRENCHLORD (Apr 10, 2012)

Adam Of Angels said:


> I'm not trying to single you out, but this is problematic logic. Not that you are of this particular strain of Americans, but many just give their party's candidate their full support no matter what. It's an old way.


 
Hey I'm for anyone who is an improvement over Osama Obama.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GSf4RVbiPRQ
Being from Illinios I've been hating that Chicago croony phony since long before he ran for national office.
Despite Romney's obvious lack of personal charisma, he has a much more favorable work history that would apply to the job of being leader of the free world.


----------



## TRENCHLORD (Apr 10, 2012)

vbshredder said:


> Romney seems like a tool too. I can't stand all the bashing of the other candidates, especially when it's a load of horsesh*t. Tell me what YOU can do to help, not what the other guy can't or what your party wants you to say. Politics is straight triflin'


 
They should really leave the bashing to all of us , we have the time.
Negative campaining is so annoying and misleading.
It's like a brainwashing tool. I try my best to not be effected by it.


----------



## Church2224 (Apr 10, 2012)

And just when I wanted to stop watching porn...


----------



## BucketheadRules (Apr 10, 2012)

Thank fuck for that.


----------



## TRENCHLORD (Apr 10, 2012)

Church2224 said:


> And just when I wanted to stop watching porn...


 
Damned our HARD luck .


----------



## MikeH (Apr 10, 2012)




----------



## BlindingLight7 (Apr 10, 2012)

TRENCHLORD said:


> Hey I'm for anyone who is an improvement over Osama Obama.
> Being from Illinios I've been hating that Chicago croony phony since long before he ran for national office.
> Despite Romney's obvious lack of personal charisma, he has a much more favorable work history that would apply to the job of being leader of the free world.


inb4 liberals tear you a new asshole.


----------



## Rev2010 (Apr 10, 2012)

I bet 'Ol Rick is going to go home, lock himself in his shed, and masturbate to the most vile porn he can find on the net. Fucking hypocrites. Good riddance.


Rev.


----------



## makeitreign (Apr 10, 2012)

TRENCHLORD said:


> Oh I'm still pulling (it) for Palin.


----------



## synrgy (Apr 10, 2012)

TRENCHLORD said:


> Osama Obama



Quoted for posterity.

I'm not going to touch that bait, but I'm sure somebody will.


----------



## flint757 (Apr 10, 2012)

synrgy said:


> Quoted for posterity.
> 
> I'm not going to touch that bait, but I'm sure somebody will.



Ya that title is just a little racist and has no relevance to his success and/or lack of success. I'm slightly disappointed. 

Having said that I don't take peoples political perspectives seriously when they bandwagon on to the next best choice of party candidate when one dethrones and that's on either side. It shows a lack of actual effort politically, but that is just my opinion so grain of salt kind of thing, but I hear that all the time...

I personally hate all the candidates including Obama and am waiting to find out who the official 3rd party choices are. Everyone says they'd vote 3rd, but they will never garner enough support. The funny thing is I hear a LOT of people say that which means the support is there, but people are just under the mindset that it is impossible (it isn't we have been brainwashed/convinced that it is). At one point the republican part was a "3rd party" it is the mentality of too big to fail. Media plays a part in that for sure like rarely commenting on Ron Paul (whether you like him or not, I don't) to make him seem like an impossibility as well.

Politics is nothing, but a big circle jerk that corporate america pays to watch.

[EDIT]
He may manage companies, but he himself tries to avoid paying taxes. He pays less taxes than most middle class citizens and he gets some of it back since he is paying his own paycheck. That dude (Romney) is a rich asshole who flip flops more than a fish on a deck. Newt I think is clinically insane and Obama has no backbone (and makes way too big of promises that no one could possible keep). Out of the Rep candidates and Obama if I had zero choice out of the bunch I'd vote Paul, but I'd rather not since his states right mentality has too many negative effects and promotes a lot of racism (possibly accidental). Honestly, it'd probably make the financial situation across America worse as well, but that is more of a wait and see thing since I have no way of really knowing.


----------



## synrgy (Apr 10, 2012)

I'm sorry to play Devil's Advocate here again, but I have a _really_ difficult time listening to people talk about how "the media" "ignores" Ron Paul. Dude was at almost all of the debates, had his name listed in almost all of the polls, was on most of the ballots (in the States for which his campaign complied with local campaign registration requirements), etc. He had just as much exposure as the other candidates, and he had just as much a chance to win the party nod as anyone else. What he _didn't_ have, was the backing of his peers within his own party.

Claims otherwise kinda look like sour grapes, to me.


----------



## tacotiklah (Apr 10, 2012)

synrgy said:


> Quoted for posterity.
> 
> I'm not going to touch that bait, but I'm sure somebody will.



I saw that too. 
Because anyone with the name of Barack is a muslim extremist that orders people to fly planes into crowded buildings. Way to cheapen the deaths of 9/11 victims in the same vein that people cheapen the deaths of holocaust victims by invoking Hitler's name for every lame, trivial thing that irritates you. 

I do find it interesting that I'm seeing some "well my candidate choice failed miserably, so I'm just gonna throw my support to the guy that seems most likely to win" mentality here. Kinda like "hey my favorite NFL team is out of the playoffs this season, so my new favorite team is gonna be whoever wins the division championship and heads to the super bowl". 
At least Ron Paul supporters support the man regardless of him never winning a nomination no matter how many times he tries. I'll give 'em that much....
(kinda like and my support for the Raiders despite the fact they do very little to wow anybody anymore.  )


As for the OP:
I'm kinda sad actually. With Santorum getting the nomination, Obama was pretty much guaranteed a landslide victory. With Mittens around, Obama might actually have to work a little. Not much, but some.
I suppose the silver lining is that there is now a snowball's chance in hell of Santorum becoming prez this election. That thought does make me a little giddy inside. 

And I think that Obama is being smart as hell about all of this by hanging back and letting the repubs kill each other off. People like Bill Clinton would've felt the need to chime in on it every five seconds, but Obama is just keeping busy with matters that actually matter and leaving the political fighting to the crazies. Kudos for that!


----------



## flint757 (Apr 10, 2012)

synrgy said:


> I'm sorry to play Devil's Advocate here again, but I have a _really_ difficult time listening to people talk about how "the media" "ignores" Ron Paul. Dude was at almost all of the debates, had his name listed in almost all of the polls, was on most of the ballots (in the States for which his campaign complied with local campaign registration requirements), etc. He had just as much exposure as the other candidates, and he had just as much a chance to win the party nod as anyone else. What he _didn't_ have, was the backing of his peers within his own party.
> 
> Claims otherwise kinda look like sour grapes, to me.



I'm not mad 

I'm not a part of the Paul fan club so your good, but whenever I watch TV news I rarely see him mentioned and on yahoo there are a lot of articles on the other candidates so that is merely my perception. I don't watch Republican primary debates because I don't agree with any of their rhetoric's. 

I wish Santorum was in just to continue the bloodbath.

They have done a good enough job at making each other completely unelectable for more neutral voters IMO. They spent more time these last few months tearing each other new assholes repeatedly than actually campaigning for why they deserve the honor of being our president.



ghstofperdition said:


> I saw that too.
> Because anyone with the name of Barack is a muslim extremist that orders people to fly planes into crowded buildings. Way to cheapen the deaths of 9/11 victims in the same vein that people cheapen the deaths of holocaust victims by invoking Hitler's name for every lame, trivial thing that irritates you.
> 
> I do find it interesting that I'm seeing some "well my candidate choice failed miserably, so I'm just gonna throw my support to the guy that seems most likely to win" mentality here. Kinda like "hey my favorite NFL team is out of the playoffs this season, so my new favorite team is gonna be whoever wins the division championship and heads to the super bowl".
> ...



Yeah he's letting themselves churn blood in the water. They were all so worried about winning the Republican ticket they didn't consider the damage they were doing towards their future chances. Most of the things they have againt Obama (and I by no means find him perfect) are ludicrous assumptions about the "future" of america. Because America was so much better under our last republican presidency. 

All I ever hear Romney say is under Obama you won't have a job after college, under me you will. That is so explanatory it nearly blows my mind.

The funniest thing about politics to me is everyone is under this false assumption that they have the winning answers.


----------



## Konfyouzd (Apr 10, 2012)

I have nothing to say ab anyones politics since my life feels pretty the same no matter who our figure head is and no matter how much ppl try to scare me into thinking otherwise. That said, I like Obama; on a personal level Obama seems like the coolest person and his wife is a down ass bitch. A lot of the republican candidates seem either less than genuine (not to say them dems are saints) or overly concerned w legislating morality.


----------



## CapinCripes (Apr 10, 2012)

Gothic Headhunter said:


> Somewhere, Dave Mustaine is loosing his mind.


wait he hasn't already?


----------



## flint757 (Apr 10, 2012)

Konfyouzd said:


> I have nothing to say ab anyones politics since my life feels pretty the same no matter who our figure head is and no matter how much ppl try to scare me into thinking otherwise. That said, I like Obama; on a personal level Obama seems like the coolest person and his wife is a down ass bitch. A lot of the republican candidates seem either less than genuine (not to say them dems are saints) or overly concerned w legislating morality.



I can agree with that Obama seems like a cool dude to just go out and have a drink with whereas our current candidates all seem like they are squeezing prune juice out their asses. 

Yeah as long as I have a job, can get my education, can have affordable living and do what I want I'm happy and under the last 4 presidents (my entire existence) I have been able to do all those things with no problem.


----------



## Konfyouzd (Apr 10, 2012)

@Cripes - I see what you did there.


----------



## MFB (Apr 10, 2012)




----------



## Gothic Headhunter (Apr 10, 2012)

CapinCripes said:


> wait he hasn't already?


 If he doesn't give Broderick atleast one solo on each song, then he's crazier than Jack Nicholson in "The Shining"


----------



## tacotiklah (Apr 10, 2012)

flint757 said:


> I can agree with that Obama seems like a cool dude to just go out and have a drink with whereas our current candidates all seem like they are squeezing prune juice out their asses.
> 
> Yeah as long as I have a job, can get my education, can have affordable living and do what I want I'm happy and under the last 4 presidents (my entire existence) I have been able to do all those things with no problem.




Pretty much. The holy roller attitude makes me sick to my stomach because you know it's so goddamn fake. Be real and be yourself and I will respect you more. Candidates especially. I need to know what kind of personality my vote is gonna put into office. The last thing I wanna do is give someone with a crazy, fanatical, and bigoted viewpoint of the world access to nuclear launch codes/executive power over nuclear arsenals. 

(I can just imagine Santorum calling up Iranian leaders and scream into the secure phone "SKYNET AIN'T GOT SHIT. ON. ME!!!" all Denzel Washington-like before ordering the launch.  )

And pretty much I want the same things dude. Though my needs differ because mine would include the right to use the women's restroom without discrimination, find a job without discrimination, and basically do most anything relatively free of discrimination. Oh and marry whoever I want.
Would be nice if ganja was legal too, but it's not a major requirement for me.


@Ben
I wanna give you rep for that, but it won't let me until I rep somebody else first. 
Just shared that pic with American Progressive Politics on fb and they wanna post it. Nice work dude....


----------



## MFB (Apr 10, 2012)

IT's fine chica, you've given me FAR more rep than I deserve at the moment  All credit goes to Tumblr, specifically ihopericksantorum.tumblr.com


----------



## tacotiklah (Apr 10, 2012)

MFB said:


> IT's fine chica, you've given me FAR more rep than I deserve at the moment  All credit goes to Tumblr, specifically ihopericksantorum.tumblr.com




Yeah, I thought it was cool that a big liberal page like A.P.P. digs your pic so much. They were about dying from laughter in the response I got back from them.


----------



## Levi79 (Apr 10, 2012)

It's ironic because usually its the pulling out that causes santorum.


----------



## tacotiklah (Apr 10, 2012)

Levi79 said:


> It's ironic because usually its the pulling out that causes santorum.




I like the way this guy thinks.


----------



## Jakke (Apr 10, 2012)

Well, I can't see how he had any shot at the nomination anyway, he suffered the same problem as all rep candidates this time (possibly with the exception of John Huntsman); too much crazy. It's a shame how the moderates get drowned out by all the insane militia-types, some of them also seems to be determined to bring about judgement day by means of nuclear winter.

Nah, Obama is going to win. Not because he earned it, but because of the alternative.


----------



## TRENCHLORD (Apr 10, 2012)

BlindingLight7 said:


> inb4 liberals tear you a new asshole.


 
They don't have time for me. They stay busy tearing each others .

Besides, I'm wearing my chastity butt-belt lol.


----------



## tacotiklah (Apr 11, 2012)

TRENCHLORD said:


> They don't have time for me. They stay busy tearing each others .
> 
> Besides, I'm wearing my chastity butt-belt lol.



Trololololololol!!!!!



Make all the gay jokes you want, at least my support didn't go to a man whose very name has the following definition



> "that frothy mixture of lube and fecal matter that is sometimes the byproduct of anal sex."




(Pro Tip: Gay men aren't usually attracted to homophobic right-wingers, so you're still forever alone. Tough break man... )


----------



## poopyalligator (Apr 11, 2012)

MFB said:


>



Hahaha Genius!!


----------



## TRENCHLORD (Apr 11, 2012)

ghstofperdition said:


> Trololololololol!!!!!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 

That was a reference to democratic party infighting .
It was used in the exact same context as the Quote to which I was replying.

Ghost, I think your mind is in the gutter today .


----------



## tacotiklah (Apr 11, 2012)

Right......






Ambiguous post was kinda ambiguous.

(I will give you props for it though since it does have the potential to make me look like a jackass.  )


----------



## areyna21 (Apr 11, 2012)

Glad that this guy is out of the race but i don't think that makes Romney the automatic winner. All the delegates are estimates from the AP and the numbers don't paint an honest picture. With some states being win all and some being proportional only a certain amount of votes are for sure the first round of voting. If a candidate fails to receive the 1,144 votes than another vote is taken. At this time the people who were forced to vote because of the winner take all process now get to vote for who they want not who they are forced to. I am a Ron Paul supporter for many reasons of my own but i do not need to push that on anyone. Just want everyone to realize that it really is far from over and the more Ron Paul stays in the race the more he splits and changes the republican party. No matter if he wins his campaign and theology will have imprinted itself on our history and politics of the future.


----------



## TRENCHLORD (Apr 11, 2012)

He needs (RP) to spearhead his own 3rd party movement I think.
I know it wouldn't have a good effect for the GOP this genaral election, which is why he should wait until just after the inaguratiuon to start mass fund raising.
He really needs to find a good figure head who can finish their sentences, lol.

edit; maybe his son Rand? lololol


----------



## Stealthdjentstic (Apr 11, 2012)

Although I think Romney's social policies would be fucked, he is a pretty smart guy, I really have trouble figuring out his proposed cap gains tax cut though. Makes 0 sense.

Also..  @ RP. Really? I know he would never be able to pull off his gold standard bullshit but anyone who believes in that should not be in a position of power. Island scenario ftw


----------



## areyna21 (Apr 11, 2012)

Gresham's law is and always has been right as fiat currency will always return to it's original value of nothing. That is the system that we have been on and it simply will not continue to work. We've changed back and forth many times from a gold standard to fiat currency with this being the longest time fiat currency has sustained itself. You may not believe in a gold standard but printing fake money will not work forever. Many economies have collapsed using similar systems but to think we are above it is a bit arrogant. To think we finally found the secret to keeping fiat currency circulating indefinitely is wrong imo. We all have our opinions though and if the majority of the general population wants to keep a central bank and a fiat currency system then that's democracy.


----------



## flint757 (Apr 11, 2012)

areyna21 said:


> Gresham's law is and always has been right as fiat currency will always return to it's original value of nothing. That is the system that we have been on and it simply will not continue to work. We've changed back and forth many times from a gold standard to fiat currency with this being the longest time fiat currency has sustained itself. You may not believe in a gold standard but printing fake money will not work forever. Many economies have collapsed using similar systems but to think we are above it is a bit arrogant. To think we finally found the secret to keeping fiat currency circulating indefinitely is wrong imo. We all have our opinions though and if the majority of the general population wants to keep a central bank and a fiat currency system then that's democracy.



I see nothing wrong with fiat currency for what we use today especially since money is literally just an exchange process. Money is basically credit, the fact that something needs to back it is only relevant if other countries felt it did which obviously our money works fine elsewhere making that irrelevant. The gold standard is antiquated especially since gold is a very limited resource on our planet to begin with and would only further push a global capitalist system that separates even more rich from the poor. IMO of course....


----------



## SenorDingDong (Apr 11, 2012)




----------



## areyna21 (Apr 11, 2012)

flint757 said:


> I see nothing wrong with fiat currency for what we use today especially since money is literally just an exchange process. Money is basically credit, the fact that something needs to back it is only relevant if other countries felt it did which obviously our money works fine elsewhere making that irrelevant. The gold standard is antiquated especially since gold is a very limited resource on our planet to begin with and would only further push a global capitalist system that separates even more rich from the poor. IMO of course....



I can see that if being used short term fiat currency can benefit and bring a country up from depression. But fake money being used to buy real goods simply because people believe in it won't last. We have yet to be able to succesfully sustain ourselves on either a gold standard or fiat curreny as we are hitting major bumps with this last stint. What we need is some major dicussions, audits, and reassessing of our foriegn policy. The rate we are going right now is not very good so we need to take a very hard look at everything.


----------



## Axayacatl (Apr 11, 2012)

Santorum is obviously a closet homosexual who hates himself for it. 
He'd save himself and this country so much grief if he would just accepted it.


----------



## ghostred7 (Apr 11, 2012)

I'm glad to hear he's out of it....I never liked that douche. Dunno who I will vote for....but whoever it is will be the one that talked the most about leaving my 2A rights alone.


----------



## Varcolac (Apr 11, 2012)

MFB said:


>



Not entirely accurate.

If he wanted to be really true to his principles, he would've carried this dead presidential campaign-baby to term. In his womb. 

I take no credit for the above quote, read it on facebook and thought it peculiarly apt. The pull-out one's still good though.


----------



## Blake1970 (Apr 11, 2012)

^
lol that pick had me falling out of my chair. Thanks!


----------



## flint757 (Apr 11, 2012)

areyna21 said:


> I can see that if being used short term fiat currency can benefit and bring a country up from depression. But fake money being used to buy real goods simply because people believe in it won't last. We have yet to be able to succesfully sustain ourselves on either a gold standard or fiat curreny as we are hitting major bumps with this last stint. What we need is some major dicussions, audits, and reassessing of our foriegn policy. The rate we are going right now is not very good so we need to take a very hard look at everything.



Ya I by no means think the fiat system is perfect, but gold doesn't work either. At the moment the only difference between the two is something is backing the money up. In my econ classes and business classes they did a descent job of explaining the system. The only real folly of any system is the need for inflation. I mean what stops all prices from just going down instead of going up. The ratio wouldn't necessarily change.

I get why people think the fiat system will blow up eventually, but it really won't. Most countries take and/or use US currency because there own currency isn't stable. After Saddam was dethroned their money for instance was completely unreliable. It's worth declined consistently, there are places in Africa where as you're walking with the money in your pocket its value changes. So that being said I don't think our currency is really that bad off IMO. The Euro and Canadian money has more worth, but even they had some hiccups.

The only confusing part about fiat money is where the original money comes from. I assume it was from the gold standard era and then they just removed the gold from the equation and people just kept doing what they were doing. In either case if I did $40 worth of work and get $40 and then spend $40 the money exists it just isn't backed by anything on a technical level. Could shit hit the fan? Maybe, but I doubt it. Our economy failing would be just as devastating for the rest of the world as China or Europe's economy failing to us. Hell the tsunami that happened a few months back made computer parts skyrocket, I couldn't afford a new hard drive for the longest time because of it. That need alone gives the money stability. If we have a central medium like money it is just easier for us to use things. We technically went back to a bartering system, we just minimized the way we trade.

To put it most simply, what gives gold any value? Or diamonds or anything else? Paper is just as worthless as rocks IMO. It is simply the acceptance of its use that gives it value no more no less.


----------



## TRENCHLORD (Apr 12, 2012)

Axayacatl said:


> Santorum is obviously a closet homosexual who hates himself for it.
> He'd save himself and this country so much grief if he would just accepted it.


 
Sounds like this might well be YOUR fantasy .


----------



## areyna21 (Apr 12, 2012)

flint757 said:


> Ya I by no means think the fiat system is perfect, but gold doesn't work either. At the moment the only difference between the two is something is backing the money up. In my econ classes and business classes they did a descent job of explaining the system. The only real folly of any system is the need for inflation. I mean what stops all prices from just going down instead of going up. The ratio wouldn't necessarily change.
> 
> I get why people think the fiat system will blow up eventually, but it really won't. Most countries take and/or use US currency because there own currency isn't stable. After Saddam was dethroned their money for instance was completely unreliable. It's worth declined consistently, there are places in Africa where as you're walking with the money in your pocket its value changes. So that being said I don't think our currency is really that bad off IMO. The Euro and Canadian money has more worth, but even they had some hiccups.
> 
> ...



Rocks and Metals are given value because of how we value them for their physical uses but i don't agree just because we value fiat currency that it will remain valuable. Yes it is valuable because we make it so and the world economies using it to trade with helps keep it in circulation. We can do many things with fake money but it can be devalued which has happened before. With gold you could run into the problem of like you said running out and it being stretched so thin it just might create bigger gaps in social classes. Lincoln started a monster when he brought greenbacks and this engraving and printing strategy to the table. Without it we could have been a whole different country from now though. So liberty and free choice came in exchange for control of printing your currency and having a third party decide how much your labor is worth. This is the ultimate step in imperialism and we are the cogs driving it's global machine. Our backs are breaking so that some rich investors can use us to create large reserves of money to influence world trade. Every since then we have stumbled back and forth from the two in some kind of dance to stay on top of the worlds economy.


----------



## Stealthdjentstic (Apr 12, 2012)

I think the problem is moreso with fractional reserve banking and crazy leveraging in the US than fiat currency. Look at Canada, even though our economy is very closely tied to the American economy we didnt have that bad a reccession because we regulate more.


----------



## AnarchyDivine88 (Apr 12, 2012)

I'm happy that he's out of the race, but I'm gonna miss his hilarious gaffes


----------



## tacotiklah (Apr 12, 2012)

TRENCHLORD said:


> Sounds like this might well be YOUR fantasy .



Not entirely. It's pretty common knowledge that those that repress homosexuality are usually closet cases themselves and use their homophobia as a shield and front. He has gay sex on the brain far more than even gay men do.

Plus the repub track record for hypocrisy in this subject speaks for itself. (Im of course referring to the 3225535555889 scandals of repubs being caught fucking other guys) So yeah, Im among others that are positive Mr. Frothy will be coming out of that closet soon. And I'm pretty sure that none of the gay community will want anything to do with him when he does.


----------



## TRENCHLORD (Apr 12, 2012)

ghstofperdition said:


> Not entirely. It's pretty common knowledge that those that repress homosexuality are usually closet cases themselves and use their homophobia as a shield and front. He has gay sex on the brain far more than even gay men do.
> 
> Plus the repub track record for hypocrisy in this subject speaks for itself. (Im of course referring to the 3225535555889 scandals of repubs being caught fucking other guys) So yeah, Im among others that are positive Mr. Frothy will be coming out of that closet soon. And I'm pretty sure that none of the gay community will want anything to do with him when he does.


 
Well then start wanking, because you'll have quite the wait for these dreams to cum true .

With Rick's track record on sexuality (seeing though he does have a wife and kids, and No sex scandals) and all, I doubt he'll be frequenting the bath houses any time soon.


----------



## Axayacatl (Apr 12, 2012)

TRENCHLORD said:


> Sounds like this might well be YOUR fantasy .




guilty as charged. 

Rick Butt Froth, are you reading this? I'm the man to set you and our country free 

btw, wife + kids does not equal straight (it is correlated, but not sure evidence)

and along those same lines, the absence of sex scandals does not directly imply an absence of scandalous sexual behavior.


----------



## flint757 (Apr 12, 2012)

areyna21 said:


> Rocks and Metals are given value because of how we value them for their physical uses but i don't agree just because we value fiat currency that it will remain valuable. Yes it is valuable because we make it so and the world economies using it to trade with helps keep it in circulation. We can do many things with fake money but it can be devalued which has happened before. With gold you could run into the problem of like you said running out and it being stretched so thin it just might create bigger gaps in social classes. Lincoln started a monster when he brought greenbacks and this engraving and printing strategy to the table. Without it we could have been a whole different country from now though. So liberty and free choice came in exchange for control of printing your currency and having a third party decide how much your labor is worth. This is the ultimate step in imperialism and we are the cogs driving it's global machine. Our backs are breaking so that some rich investors can use us to create large reserves of money to influence world trade. Every since then we have stumbled back and forth from the two in some kind of dance to stay on top of the worlds economy.



I don't know if I entirely agree with you because part of your theory can't even be proven since it isn't how things played out, but you could certainly be correct.

What I do agree with is how ridiculous it is that there are companies and people out there who get paid just to push money from one corner of the room to another, but I could rant about how that is such a waste of time for days. 

Now, our financial system though won't "necessarily" (I suppose it could anything is possible) go to shit only because the federal reserve runs a pretty tight ship. When other countries who also use the fiat system crash and burn is when they just start printing money in crazy amounts (either to increase circulation or just give themselves, the "rulers", more money). We actually have a very steady rate of inflation that correlates with the world economy and peoples expectations. The only people who get screwed by inflation is people who work for minimum wage since that doesn't change anymore. Inflation though is a loaded term anyways because not everything's price increases/decreases. They use CPI's and baskets to determine what inflation is at the moment and groceries are a big determinant on inflation (as well as gas). Which when you think about it is funny because the US pays its farmers to NOT grow things. 

Also it seemed like you got my point, but then back tracked a bit. My point was gold is for all intents and purposes worthless just like paper, copper, nickel, etc. So there isn't really any grand difference between us using one versus the other except that prices wouldn't fluxuate as much because we can't print more gold.  That is not a fiat problem though that is a public expectation problem. We want the stuff we sell to be more expensive, but at the same time we want to buy it cheap.

So I guess the question I should be asking is what do you find to be a good alternative because it doesn't sound like you think gold is much better either.

[EDIT]
Also, the last time removed the gold standard was during the great depression wasn't it because everyone wanted to take there money (gold) out of the banks if I'm not mistaken. (could be history is a rusty subject for me) Which is funny because in either system banks never have everyone's money at hand at all times. They invest it and without those investments we go into recession and/or a deeper recession. Like now people should in fact invest their money, it would help push us out of this slump faster. Keeping your money in your pockets just increases inflation and then eventually your money has a little less value.


----------



## MFB (Apr 12, 2012)

ghstofperdition said:


> Not entirely. It's pretty common knowledge that those that repress homosexuality are usually closet cases themselves and use their homophobia as a shield and front. He has gay sex on the brain far more than even gay men do.



Please see point #1 - 6 Bullshit Facts About Psychology That Everyone Believes | Cracked.com

There's obviously more studies that show stuff like that, but at this point in time the idea that those who repress gay tendencies so much are themselves gay is basically a giant parody of itself and rather...silly for lack of better word


----------



## TRENCHLORD (Apr 12, 2012)

I just find it so hypocritacal for homosexuals and transgenders who are always whining about acceptance for who they are, to be so quick to denounce some one else's clear preference.

We fellow humans are supposed to accept you at face value and for who you claim to be, yet you won't accept some body else's proclaimation of hetrosexuality without calling them a liar.

That's not just hypocracy, that's a downright lack of common respect and basic human decency.

It shouldn't matter whether or not it's a family member, friend, fellow forumite, or a politician a million miles away. 
If a person claims to be hetro, you should leave it at that, if a person claims to be gay or trans-gender, you should leave it at that.
Where I come from that's just common respect.


----------



## flint757 (Apr 12, 2012)

MFB said:


> Please see point #1 - 6 Bullshit Facts About Psychology That Everyone Believes | Cracked.com
> 
> There's obviously more studies that show stuff like that, but at this point in time the idea that those who repress gay tendencies so much are themselves gay is basically a giant parody of itself and rather...silly for lack of better word



damn you and your link to cracked.com I've spent the last 50 minutes reading articles.


----------



## Axayacatl (Apr 12, 2012)

TRENCHLORD said:


> I just find it so hypocritacal for homosexuals and transgenders who are always whining about acceptance for who they are, to be so quick to denounce some one else's clear preference.
> 
> We fellow humans are supposed to accept you at face value and for who you claim to be, yet you won't accept some body else's proclaimation of hetrosexuality without calling them a liar.
> 
> ...



I cannot disagree with any of this since it is in the same spirit of the basic argument running along this entire thread (other than the monetary policy bit). And obviously nobody here gives a rat's ass as to whether Prick is actually straight or not. That is a private issue between him, his wife, his kids, and his gay lovers. 

The basic point is that nobody would bring his sexuality up if it weren't for his active hatred and activism against others with a different preference. He reminds many of that one preacher who used to spew hatred about gays and drugs from the pulpit. This went on until finally his gay prostitute saw him on TV while at the gym and denounced to the press that they would take meth and have sex together. Does anybody here remember that incident?

Is this going to happen with Santorum? Humor aside, most likely it won't. But to my mind there is a tremendous difference between idle (and sometimes humorous) conjectures about someone's sexual orientation on the one hand, and equating homosexuality to adultery, bestiality and incest on the other. 

The bottom line: his sexual orientation is NOT A FACT and cannot be verified from the historical record. His active hatred of gays etc IS A FACT and to my mind, unacceptable in our society based around 'common respect and basic human decency' as you put it.


----------



## r3tr0sp3ct1v3 (Apr 13, 2012)

My pr0nz is finally safe 





Now who will Dave Mustaine vote for? Himself?


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Apr 13, 2012)

r3tr0sp3ct1v3 said:


> Now who will Dave Mustaine vote for? Himself?



Dave Mustaine 2012. Will make sure every African woman has a plug!


----------



## Waelstrum (Apr 13, 2012)

I don't think that he's gay. I'd like him to be,* because then he'd be completely discredited like Ted Haggard. Also, it would be a little bit like that episode of The Twilight Zone when the racist turned black and was sent into the Jim Crow deep south, then turned into a jew in Nazi Germany.


*Not for personal reasons.


----------



## troyguitar (Apr 13, 2012)

Too bad, he made for some fun news stories. Romney is rather boring in comparison.


----------



## flint757 (Apr 13, 2012)

troyguitar said:


> Too bad, he made for some fun news stories. Romney is rather boring in comparison.



I can't help but feel like this is all staged. You got 2 radicals and a compulsive liar. The 2 radicals almost feel like the distraction so that when they finally both drop out it seems so obvious to vote for the compulsive liar because in comparison he seems less crazy.


----------



## TRENCHLORD (Apr 13, 2012)

Most of the $funding for politics is filtered down from these huge corperation conglomerates who have such a broad field of company ownwerships 
that their best interest is divided through both sided of the isle.

They have these assesment groups who attempt to factor everything in and then run the numbers so they can decide which canidate or party to support on each issue.
Astronomical amount of flip floppin.


----------



## tacotiklah (Apr 13, 2012)

^Finally something we agree on!


----------

