Ron Paul, Innit, to Win It? (No)

Tis the season when local TV channels traditionally replay the adventures of an angry, mean-spirited little cartoon gremlin — but this year, Dr. Seuss’s Grinch risks being eclipsed by Dr. Paul’s “Ronvolutionaries”. Jonathan Chait, at NYMag‘s Daily Intel, hilariously smacks down Andrew Sullivan’s happy fantasy of an Iowa-led RonPaul ReLOVution:

It would be nearly impossible to imagine the Republican Party nominating a candidate who spent years and years publishing a racist newsletter and has deep associations with the fringe far right. (Here he is speaking to the John Birch Society on the occasion of its 50th anniversary.) It would be even more impossible to imagine the Party nominating a candidate who favors total withdrawal from world affairs and takes a Chomsky-ite line on American power. The notion that the Party might nominate a candidate who does both these things is totally preposterous.
__
Now, Andrew is framing his argument as an argument against a zero chance. Well, sure. It’s not zero. Paul could win the nomination. It’s also possible that Democrats will follow the Schoen–Caddell plan of nominating Hillary Clinton over President Obama, and Obama will flip to the GOP, and Republicans will nominate Obama, and the general election will be Clinton-Obama II: This Time It’s for All the Marbles. It’s possible Newt Gingrich will announce the result of a secret experiment he undertook to resurrect Ronald Reagan through saved brain DNA, implanted in the body of a dinosaur created through similar methods, and that Reaganosaurus will rampage through the Republican field, capture the nomination and, in a climactic debate with Obama, devour him in a single bite. But reporters have good reason to ignore possibilities such as those or a Ron Paul nomination.
__
Paul’s supporters seem to believe that the media ignoring him is the only thing keeping him from challenging for the Party nomination. More likely, it’s the only thing that’s allowed his candidacy to progress to this point. If more people actually understood the full scope of Paul’s fringe-right views, a huge portion of his support would peel off.

However, according to Politico (take that as you will), GOP insiders are terrified by even the possibility that Dr. Paul might succeed in Iowa and “kill the caucuses“:

In spin rooms, bar rooms and online forums, the what-to-do-about-Paul conversation has become pervasive as polls show him at or near the top here just weeks before the January 3rd vote.
__
Paul poses an existential threat to the state’s cherished kick-off status, say these Republicans, because he has little chance to win the GOP nomination and would offer the best evidence yet that the caucuses reward candidates who are unrepresentative of the broader party.
__
“It would make the caucuses mostly irrelevant if not entirely irrelevant,” said Becky Beach, a longtime Iowa Republican who helped Presidents Bush 41 and Bush 43 here. “It would have a very damaging effect because I don’t think he could be elected president and both Iowa and national Republicans wouldn’t think he represents the will of voters.”
__
What especially worries Iowa Republican regulars is the possibility that Paul could win here on January 3rd with the help of Democrats and independents who change their registration to support the libertarian-leaning Texas congressman but then don’t support the GOP nominee next November….
__
The most troubling eventuality that Iowa Republicans are bracing for is that Paul wins the caucuses only to lose the nomination and run as a third-party candidate in November — all but ensuring President Obama is re-elected.

Y’know, I think anyone who brags they”helped Presidents Bush 41 and Bush 43” get elected has already had “a very damaging effect” on the nation’s well-being. If Dr. Ron’s fanboys finally convince the Permanent Governing Party (what’s left of it) to order its Media Village courtiers to start ignoring the much-massaged Heartland Voters(tm) of Des Moines, how much of a blow will it be to the rest of us?






76 replies
  1. 1
    Ian says:

    It will be a serious blow. So SERIOUS, that village heads will explode.

    I, for one, welcome our exploded village overlords

  2. 2
    Joey Maloney says:

    The Iowa caucuses are already irrelevant. Rachel Maddow has made this point repeatedly in recent weeks. The caucus winner historically has no bearing on the party’s eventual nominee, and with the complete Teabillicizing of the caucus attendees there is only the slimmest chance that the winner could ever prevail in the general.

    Reaganosaurus will rampage through the Republican field, capture the nomination and, in a climactic debate with Obama, devour him in a single bite.

    Sure, Michelle and Sasha and Malia would be upset, but by golly I’d pay to watch that. It’d be something to tell the grandkids some day.

  3. 3
    AnotherBruce says:

    Who knew that Becky Beach from Iowa could wield such political power? I for one, welcome our new Beach Overlord, and would like to remind her that I could help round up the hippies who want to occupy Iowa beaches and put them to work detasseling corn in the fertile hog fields of Iowa.

  4. 4
    AnotherBruce says:

    @Joey Maloney: Hey, didn’t Iowa pick Obama? Jes sayin’

  5. 5

    @AnotherBruce:

    Why yes, Iowa did pick Obama. Even before Chris Matthews’ leg starting tingling.

  6. 6

    @AnotherBruce:

    I could help round up the hippies who want to occupy Iowa beaches and put them to work detasseling corn in the fertile hog fields of Iowa.

    As an old country girl, I find this amusing. Probably all of our community knows about Iowa beaches but do they know that if you remove the tassels the corn won’t develop?

    Of course, anyone that I rounded up to work in the corn fields of Iowa probably would destroy the plants.

    I like the picture, though. :-)

  7. 7
    El Cid says:

    I fear that Reaganosaurus might be sluggish in the colder states.

  8. 8
    amk says:

    LOL @

    with the help of Democrats and independents who change their registration to support the libertarian-leaning Texas congressman

    Those lazy bums ? fuhgeddaboudit

  9. 9
    Comrade Baron Elmo says:

    A huge portion of Paul’s hype (and a big reason he drives the GOP power structure ab-so-lute-ly NUTS) is the ability of Paultards to show up at a moment’s notice (online and off) to stuff ballot boxes, get in bystanders’ faces and shout down everyone around them.

    Take a glimpse at the always delightful Roy Edroso in his latest Village Voice column, where he regularly takes the pulse of the right-wing blogosphere for our amusement. This time ’round, he addresses the current all-our war on Paul from the right, with conservative troops trying to take out this crazy old man who doesn’t believe in handouts to the rich by any means necessary. (When conservatives attack other conservatives for racism, you know desperation is in the air!)

    Anyhow, I first read this column about two hours after Roy posted it. By that time his comment section had already topped 120, about ninety percent from Ron Paul cheerleaders spouting on behalf of their messiah, calling down hellfire and brimstone on the unbelievers. Seriously, it was like stumbling into a remake of Invasion on the Body Snatchers. Most unsettling.

  10. 10
    Joey Maloney says:

    @AnotherBruce:

    Wikipedia tells us: On the Democratic side, Iowa has picked the party’s nominee 6 out of 10 times, and the eventual President twice. On the Republican side, the nominee was also picked six of ten times, and the President three times.

    Even for picking the nominee that’s barely above chance.

  11. 11

    It’s still dark here and wet and cold outside. But I have a dreaming dog under my desk, next to my feet.

    Yip-yip-wiggle-wiggle.

    I guess that life is okay. :-)

  12. 12
    Xenos says:

    Iowa Democrats are a pretty sane and decent bunch. Iowa Republicans are mostly lunatics, authoritarians, and the worst sort of god-botherers.

  13. 13
    NobodySpecial says:

    @Xenos:

    Iowa Democrats are a pretty sane and decent bunch. Iowa Republicans are mostly lunatics, authoritarians, and the worst sort of god-botherers.

    Fixt for accuracy

  14. 14
    Raven says:

    @Linda Featheringill: Lil Bit has nightmares all the time. She seems to run in place a does the yip yip too.

  15. 15
    Keith G says:

    Oh my. You mean Sully is believing and preaching something insanely stupid?

    Whooda thunkit?

  16. 16
    Soonergrunt says:

    @Linda Featheringill: @Raven: Melody sleeps on her back stretched out. If that dog has a care in the world, you wouldn’t know it.
    On another note, and because I don’t have the time to post a full article, the US Army swore in its first female Surgeon General and first non-physician Surgeon General this week with the promotion of Patricia Horoho, former Chief, Army Nurse Corps and Deputy Surgeon General to the rank of Lieutenant General.
    A little bit about the Army’s top medical officer:

    New role: 43rd surgeon general and commanding general of Army Medical Command

    Previous assignments include:

    • Deputy surgeon general, Office of the Surgeon General, Falls Church, Va., 2010-2011
    • 23rd chief of Army Nurse Corps, 2008-2011
    • Commander, Western Regional Medical Command, Fort Lewis, Wash., 2008-2010
    • Commander, Madigan Army Medical Center, Tacoma, Wash., 2008-2009
    • Commander, Walter Reed Health Care System, Washington, D.C., 2007-2008
    • Commander, DeWitt Health Care Network, Fort Belvoir, Va., 2004-2006
    Other military assignments include:
    • Staff nurse on a multiservice specialty ward, staff and head nurse of a Level III emergency department, Evans Army Community Hospital, Fort Carson, Colo.
    • Nurse counselor, 1st Recruiting Brigade (Northeast)
    • Head nurse of a 22-bed emergency department, Womack Army Medical Center, Fort Bragg, N.C.
    • Chief nurse and hospital commander of a 500-bed field hospital, 249th General Hospital, Fort Gordon, Ga.
    • Assistant branch chief, Army Nurse Corps Branch, Total Army Personnel Command, Alexandria, Va.
    • Assistant deputy for Healthcare Management Policy in the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army (Manpower and Reserve Affairs), Pentagon, Washington, D.C.
    • Deputy commander for nursing and commander of the DeWitt Health Care Network, Fort Belvoir
    • Deputy commander for nursing, Walter Reed Army Medical Center and North Atlantic Regional Medical Command, Washington, D.C.
    • In 2011, deployed with I Corps as special assistant to the commander, International Security Assistance Force Joint Command, Kabul, Afghanistan
    Education:
    • Bachelor of Science, University of North Carolina
    • Master of Science as a clinical trauma nurse specialist, University of Pittsburgh
    • Master of Science in National Resource Strategy, Industrial College of the Armed Forces
    • Command and General Staff College graduate
    Missions and achievements:
    • Deployed to Haiti with the Army’s first health facility assessment team
    • Honored in December 2001 by Time Life Publications for her actions at the Pentagon on Sept. 11, 2001
    • Among 15 nurses selected by the American Red Cross and Nursing Spectrum to receive recognition as a “Nurse Hero” in 2002
    • Selected as the USO’s Woman of the Year in April 2009
    • Affiliate faculty with Pacific Lutheran University School of Nursing, Tacoma, Wash., starting in May 2009
    • Appointed distinguished professor in the Graduate School of Nursing at the Uniformed Services University of Health Sciences in May 2010
    Awards and decorations include:
    • Distinguished Service Medal
    • Legion of Merit with two oak leaf clusters
    • Bronze Star Medal
    • Meritorious Service Medal with six oak leaf clusters
    • Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal
    • Afghanistan Campaign Medal

    I think this is great for the Army and great for the country.

  17. 17
    middlewest says:

    No fair, this is way too early in the morning for the Paul trolls.

  18. 18
    Cheryl from Maryland says:

    @Comrade Baron Elmo: After I read a commenter there asking for proof that the John Birch Society was racist, I took a slug of coffee and left the site. Too early for Scotch.

  19. 19
    Soonergrunt says:

    And just because I can’t get enough of this and I think everyone should see it– Iowan calls Newt Gingrich a fucking asshole on national television.

  20. 20
    Xenos says:

    @Soonergrunt: I sense a new version of the Santorum treatment. Googling ‘newt gingrich fucking asshole’ only gets 248,000 links, so there is much work to be done.

  21. 21
    Calouste says:

    It would be nearly impossible to imagine the Republican Party nominating a candidate who spent years and years publishing a racist newsletter and has deep associations with the fringe far right.

    Someone should tell Jonathan Chaid that that is unlikely to be seen as a negative by the Tea Party, who are the racist fringe far right.

  22. 22
    JPL says:

    @Cheryl from Maryland: Some folks still don’t know how to use “the google”. Just because some folks believe in white supremacy, it doesn’t mean they don’t know a black person.

  23. 23
    JPL says:

    @Raven: How’s Bohdi?

  24. 24
    JGabriel says:

    Anne Laurie:

    If Dr. Ron’s fanboys finally convince the Permanent Governing Party (what’s left of it) to order its Media Village courtiers to start ignoring the much-massaged Heartland Voters™ of Des Moines, how much of a blow will it be to the rest of us?

    It won’t happen. There’s nothing else going on at the time for the the national media to report on, so they’re going to hype the Iowa caucus no matter what.

    The only way to change that dynamic is to introduce competing caucuses at the same time, but New Hampshire won’t let that happen.

    .

  25. 25
    Lojasmo says:

    @Joey Maloney:

    I looked it up, though. The Iowa caucuse was predictive of a republican president only twice in the last forty years (or so, I forget. Might have been only once)

  26. 26
    Happily Anonymous says:

    It would be nearly impossible to imagine the Republican Party nominating a candidate who spent years and years publishing a racist newsletter

    And yet the guy who owns a haunting lodge called “Niggerhead” was considered a viable candidate in a Republican primary (until he opened his idiotic mouth and said idiotic things).

    Since when does a little racism hurt Republicans in a primary?

  27. 27
    Happily Anonymous says:

    @Happily Anonymous: *hunting

  28. 28

    @AnotherBruce: yep, but that’s not why he won the primary. He won the nomination because he, Plouffle and Axlerod sat down with a Congressional District map of the United States and plotted just which districts they thought they could win delegates in and then set up a ground game well, well in advance. That and Hillary Clinton had hired Mark Penn who thought, even days before the primary began, that the Democratic Primaries were winner take all. People can say what they feel they must about Obama as president, but there really is no denying that his handling of the 2008 Primary was a work of pure political genius. Not sure that Ron Paul has that in him. But I sure would love to see him win Iowa. That will be a laugh.

  29. 29
    Raven says:

    @JPL: He’s totally fine! Knucklehead.

    thanks

  30. 30
    DanielX says:

    “It would make the caucuses mostly irrelevant if not entirely irrelevant,” said Becky Beach, a longtime Iowa Republican who helped Presidents Bush 41 and Bush 43 here. “It would have a very damaging effect because I don’t think he could be elected president and both Iowa and national Republicans wouldn’t think he represents the will of voters.”

    Um….yeah. Don’t know if Iowa Republicans have noticed or not, but based on various polls on policy issues that I’ve seen, none of the rest of these douche waffles exactly represent the will of voters either.

  31. 31
    JGabriel says:

    @Soonergrunt:

    And just because I can’t get enough of this and I think everyone should see it—Iowan calls Newt Gingrich a fucking asshole on national television.

    What, exactly, is a “Fucking Asshole”? Newt Gingrich obviously, but what does it mean literally?

    Sure, I’ve used the phrase often enough, particularly when someone steals a cab I waved down.

    But is a “Fucking Asshole” even physically possible? A hole of any variety — given the proper diameter and elasticity, ass or otherwise — can be pumped with an inserted penis until ejaculation is achieved (witness the sales success of Fleshlight), but it can’t fuck in and of itself. It just seems like, now that we’re using it on national tv, we should be discussing the supra-physical limitations and incongruities of the term.

    Of course, it’s quite possible that said incongruities and limitations are precisely what makes “Fucking Asshole” such an apt description of Newt Gingrich: an aggressively thrusting hollow shit egress, i.e., what the GOP calls “a man of ideas.”

    .

  32. 32
    Cheryl from Maryland says:

    @Xenos: I’m not at the office, so I’m ready to assist with this important work. But which link do you prefer? There are about 20 of them via the Google. Also, the Google commentariat seems divided between Fucking Asshole and Piece of Shit. How can we achieve unity?

  33. 33
    Joey Maloney says:

    @JGabriel:

    A hole of any variety—given the proper diameter and elasticity, ass or otherwise—can be fucked, but it can’t fuck in and of itself.

    Shapeist!

  34. 34
    JGabriel says:

    @Soonergrunt:

    And just because I can’t get enough of this and I think everyone should see it—Iowan calls Newt Gingrich a fucking asshole on national television.

    What, exactly, is a “Fucking Asshole”? Newt Gingrich obviously, but what does it mean literally?

    Sure, I’ve used the phrase often enough, particularly when someone steals a cab I waved down.

    But is a “Fucking Asshole” even physically possible? A hole of any variety — given the proper diameter and elasticity, ass or otherwise — can be pumped with an inserted p3nis until ejaculation is achieved (witness the sales success of Fleshlight), but it can’t fuck in and of itself. It just seems like, now that we’re using it on national tv, we should be discussing the supra-physical limitations and incongruities of the term.

    Of course, it’s quite possible that said incongruities and limitations are precisely what makes “Fucking Asshole” such an apt description of Newt Gingrich: an aggressively thrusting hollow shit egress, i.e., what the GOP calls “a man of ideas.”

    .

  35. 35
    JGabriel says:

    @Joey Maloney: Sorry, I reposted the comment after editing and getting moderated, leaving your comment semi-stranded. I take full responsibility. My bad.

    .

  36. 36
    WereBear says:

    @JGabriel: It is used as an adjective, not a verb.

  37. 37
    peach flavored shampoo says:

    Thread needs more TEBOW.

  38. 38
    r€nato says:

    @Joey Maloney: well, I have to say that if we were talking about the results of a coin flip – two possibilities – then yes, Iowans are not much better at picking presidents than chance.

    But there are usually several candidates in play in Iowa. So actually, I’d say that they’re doing significantly better than chance.

  39. 39

    @JGabriel:

    an aggressively thrusting hollow shit egress

    That sounds about right. :-)

  40. 40
    DanielX says:

    OT but on a tangent…

    Also, too – speaking of fucking assholes, here’s a quote from Tom Friedman, aka the Moustache of Understanding, from his column in today’s NY Times:

    Iraq was always a war of choice. As I never bought the argument that Saddam had nukes that had to be taken out, the decision to go to war stemmed, for me, from a different choice: Could we collaborate with the people of Iraq to change the political trajectory of this pivotal state in the heart of the Arab world and help tilt it and the region onto a democratizing track?

    My word, that does present a more nuanced view than “Well, suck-on-this”, doesn’t it? I’m trying to think of a fitting fate for Mr. Friedman, and I’m sort of vacillating between making him spend the rest of his life at a Barry Manilow concert or having him dropped off in Fallujah while bound, naked and with “American warmonger” written on his forehead in Arabic.

  41. 41
    Mudge says:

    This is hilarious:

    What especially worries Iowa Republican regulars is the possibility that Paul could win here on January 3rd with the help of Democrats and independents who change their registration to support the libertarian-leaning Texas congressman but then don’t support the GOP nominee next November..”

    This is Republican conspiracy transference. Another example of attributing the sort of behavior Republicans would pursue to Democrats. It’s a way to blame insidious liberals for Republican craziness (see Herman Cain). It is akin to voter fraud!! Ron Paul is Crazy du Jour because so many dislike Romney, Mormon du Jour. Republicans can handle all of this without implicating the Democrats.

  42. 42
    JGabriel says:

    @Linda Featheringill:

    That sounds about right.

    Sometimes when you’re writing, you don’t really know where you’re going with it until a phrase like “aggressively thrusting hollow shit egress” pops out (no pun intended), and you look at it in wonderment, saying to yourself, “My god, it’s a perfect metaphor.”

    And then you know your blog comment is finished, your work is done, and you can count yourself blest.

    .

  43. 43
    Face says:

    But is a “Fucking Asshole” even physically possible?

    “F#cking” is the adjective, not verb. Ergo, your answer.

    Edit: Dammit, WereBear beat me to it

  44. 44
    JGabriel says:

    WereBear:

    It is used as an adjective, not a verb.

    Face:

    “F#cking” is the adjective, not verb. Ergo, your answer.

    Even as an adjective, it implies an asshole with the purpose of performing the verb. So I’m still failing to see how this answers the question regarding the physical mechanics of the operation.

    .

  45. 45
    rathskeller says:

    @magurakurin: exactly! It was the classic example of someone keeping their eyes on the prize, and not wavering until victory.

  46. 46
    Punchy says:

    OT:

    Too funny. The WSJ had the temerity to blast the House Repubs for their dumbassness w/r/t the payroll cut vote.

    Here’s where it gets funny….read the comments. Suddenly the WSJ is a liberal rag. Suddenly the WSJ fellates Dems. One critical article and the rubes are fuming. Hilarity has ensued.

  47. 47
    Shalimar says:

    @Xenos: Because “Newt Gingrich blowjob-loving hypocritical asshole” is too long and awkward?

  48. 48
    Ben Cisco says:

    @Cheryl from Maryland: Easy.
    __
    Fucking Piece of Shit Asshole!

  49. 49
    OzoneR says:

    @Punchy:

    Suddenly the WSJ is a liberal rag. Suddenly the WSJ fellates Dems.

    The irony is the article flat out says “You’re risking handing over the government to liberals! Don’t let them win!”

  50. 50
    Joey Maloney says:

    @r€nato:

    But there are usually several candidates in play in Iowa. So actually, I’d say that they’re doing significantly better than chance.

    Good point. Joey=statistics FAIL.

  51. 51
    tomvox1 says:

    Shorter Sully, ED Kain and other Paul “iconoclasts”:

    My desire to smoke pot in the open and not pay my share of taxes trumps the future of the Republic.

  52. 52
    JGabriel says:

    @Punchy:

    Here’s where it gets funny….read the comments. Suddenly the WSJ is a liberal rag. Suddenly the WSJ fellates Dems. One critical article and the rubes are fuming.

    No tolerance! Any step outside of Conservofascist ideology must be attacked and stamped out before it spreads like disease and vermin! Jah voll!

    .

  53. 53
    cintibud says:

    @Punchy: They must be right. On Good Morning America today I was told the House wants to extend the tax cut for a year but the Senate refuses to compromise!

  54. 54
    tomvox1 says:

    @DanielX:

    Friedman:

    Could we collaborate with the people of Iraq to change the political trajectory of this pivotal state in the heart of the Arab world and help tilt it and the region onto a democratizing track?

    By, you know, completely destroying their infrastructure and killing tens of thousands of non-combatants. Hmmm, let me ponder how that’ll work out… Yup, fine I think. Great for democracy, I’m sure! Suck on this, y’all.

  55. 55
    gluon1 says:

    I don’t grok how to link to previous comments, but in reply to JGabriel’s of 08:48 (http://www.balloon-juice.com/2.....nt-2945588):

    I read it as an adjective describing the orifice’s purpose, rather than its activity. Thus, it is the equivalent of a Fleshlight rather than a similarly shaped device whose purpose is, e.g., demonstrating the various parts of the vulva for gynecological study.

    Alternately, you may view it as the object of the verb, rather than the subject, much as a “drop box” does not, in point of fact, drop anything.

  56. 56
    Jerzy Russian says:

    @peach flavored shampoo:

    Thread needs more TEBOW

    How about if we pit the Reaganosaurus against Tebow? Who would win?

  57. 57
    rb says:

    @Joey Maloney: I would agree that the caucases are not determinative of the eventual nominee; however they do keep in the public’s mind (and the candidates’ mouths) issues that are of outsize importance to caucus-goers (e.g. ethanol). I would like to see primary order mixed up every few years for this reason.

  58. 58
    Ian says:

    @Face:
    I am F*cking your sister.
    Verb

  59. 59
    Jerzy Russian says:

    @Face:

    Can any word be used as more parts of speech than “fuck”? Noun (what a dumb fuck); verb (don’t fuck with me), adjective (what a fucking asshole); adverb (that is really fucking stupid), and pronoun (what the fuck?). I am not quite sure about that last one. Perhaps any Professors of English who are reading this can clarify.

  60. 60
    Morbo says:

    If more people actually understood the full scope of Paul’s fringe-right views, a huge portion of his support would peel off.

    Like these? Come on, Sully, defend the newsletters. I am all ears.

  61. 61
    Bill Murray says:

    @Linda Featheringill: Lake Okoboji had nice beaches, It probably still does but I haven’t been there in many many years

  62. 62
    Bill Murray says:

    @JPL: he has left for the east. there is a whole movie about why

  63. 63
    Ken says:

    I like the phrase “offer the best evidence yet”. It makes me see this as another case where reality is inconvenient for the preferred narrative. That is, will the unignorable reality of “Ron Paul wins Iowa” trump the received wisdom that the Iowa caucuses matter.

  64. 64
    Paul in KY says:

    @Jerzy Russian: I think they would instead merge or mate to form an unstoppable Reagatebowadon.

    We must stop that from ever happening!

  65. 65
    batgirl says:

    I haven’t read all the comments so excuse me if someone has already pointed this out but for Sullivan, Paul’s racism isn’t a bug, it’s a feature.

  66. 66
    drkrick says:

    @Jerzy Russian:

    How about if we pit the Reaganosaurus against Tebow? Who would win?

    We know the Reaganosaurus would do well early.

  67. 67
    Judas Escargot says:

    @Paul in KY:

    I think they would instead merge or mate to form an unstoppable Reagatebowadon.

    What would that thing pray to every 20 fucking minutes, I wonder…

  68. 68

    It would be nearly impossible to imagine the Republican Party nominating a candidate who spent years and years publishing a racist newsletter and has deep associations with the fringe far right.

    Really? It would be hard — “nearly impossible” — to imagine the party that nominated Barry Goldwater embracing a fringe far-right candidate? What’s so hard about this?

    It would be even more impossible to imagine the Party nominating a candidate who favors total withdrawal from world affairs and takes a Chomsky-ite line on American power.

    Now that one I’ll grant.

  69. 69
    Villago Delenda Est says:

    @Jerzy Russian:

    Doesn’t matter. Chuck Norris would kick both their asses.

  70. 70
    Sentient Puddle says:

    @JGabriel:

    Even as an adjective, it implies an asshole with the purpose of performing the verb. So I’m still failing to see how this answers the question regarding the physical mechanics of the operation.

    The way that I parse it, labeling an asshole as either “fucking” (adj) or as “one that can fuck” (v) doesn’t so much mean that said asshole has attained sentience and wants to go forth and multiply, but rather that it can reasonably used as a tool in fucking (v). Given the characteristics of an asshole, this, of course, typically means that the asshole should be able to accommodate a phallic-like object and/or bodily organ, and as we’ve already established that this is indeed possible, it can be semantically correct to label an asshole as “fucking”. QED

  71. 71
    chopper says:

    @JGabriel:

    not at all. it’s like a throwing star. it’s a star for throwing. hence, a fucking asshole is an asshole for fuckin’.

  72. 72
    Jerzy Russian says:

    @Villago Delenda Est:

    Doesn’t matter. Chuck Norris would kick both their asses.

    Normally, this would be true. However, if John Elway coaches Tebow, then I am not so sure.

  73. 73
    Liz says:

    @Jerzy Russian

    George Carlin had a great skit on that. :-)

  74. 74
    AxelFoley says:

    @JGabriel:

    See, now you’ve got me thinking on whether something or someone with a hole can do the fucking.

    I was always under the impression that in the Cowgirl or Reverse Cowgirl position, the woman was, in effect, doing the fucking. There’s even instances in the Doggystyle position where the woman is backing up into her partner, meaning she’s doing the pushing.

    I’ve also heard reference to women fucking men, i.e., “You fucked my boyfriend, bitch!”.

    Just something to ponder.

  75. 75
    TTT says:

    It’s impossible to imagine the GOP nominating someone who isn’t some flavor of vicious gutter-dumb racist psychopath. What does Chait think is worse about Paul than any other of them? They might not all be simultaneously dumb, psycho, or racist, but every single one possesses enough of at least one of those traits to instantly disqualify themselves. This year’s candidates are proof of the urgent social and patriotic need to ban and purge their entire Republican Party.

  76. 76
    Paul in KY says:

    @Judas Escargot: Jesus & Nancy (not necessarily in that order).

Comments are closed.