Even if you accept the idea that the president has that sort of control over gas prices, you’d think he’d be looking to lower them during an election year, wouldn’t you? Unless Newt is expecting an October surprise, where Obama suddenly drops prices to a $1.00 or so just before the election.
I think it would be smarter for them to ease up on the criteria for being a Republican candidate - this kind of thing is what gets them in trouble when they get caught soliciting gay sex in the men’s room and posting naked pictures of themselves on Craigslist.
I came to this thread to post the exact same link. You know, I’m not sure if I’d put this as “stupid” per se. It’s pretty much non-binding and it only affects Republicans so I guess they can do whatever it is they want within the confines of their own party.
Maybe we can start another thread titled “Hilarious Republican idea of the day”
It’s hardly non-binding if it’s the basis for the party executive committee to determine whether a candidate should be on the ballot. I suppose it’s non-binding in the sense that candidates can drink, smoke, fuck, watch porn and marry their same-sex partners all they want once they’re actually on the ballot.
For what it’s worth, I think the Republican Party should adopt this pledge for all primaries.
I think it’s binding in that the “official” Republican party will only support those who take the pledge; however, I don’t think there’s anything that can stop someone who is registered as a Republican but refuses to take the pledge from filing with the SOS and becoming a candidate in an election.
While the criteria they are using is unquestionably stupid, I actually like the idea of parties more carefully vetting candidates to weed out the wackjobs. Perhaps the Republicans could have avoided such candidates as Sharon Angle and Christone O’Donnell if something like this was in place.
OTOH, with the state of the party right now, they would probably use a vetting process like this county seem to – to weed out the sane and rational.
With all these pledges and the anti-government stance of the Republican party, can we get Republican candidates to sign a pledge to never become part of the government? I would support that.
Why would anyone expect republicans to keep a pledge when they can’t keep a wedding vow?
I have a better idea and it’s Biblical! Jesus Himself said it in Matthew 18:8-9:
So if a body part (and you know which one I mean) causes them to sin, they should agree to cut it off. I’m not saying the republican party should cut it off, the passage does not say that. But that they should cut their own part off. And if they refuse, they’re obviously a member of the ol’ Pick-and-Choose Christian Church and not to be trusted. It’d definitely separate the wheat from the chaff, so to speak.
Boyo Jim: While the criteria they are using is unquestionably stupid, I actually like the idea of parties more carefully vetting candidates to weed out the wackjobs. Perhaps the Republicans could have avoided such candidates as Sharon Angle and Christone O’Donnell if something like this was in place.
Yeah, except their criteria ‘weeds in’ the whackjobs:rolleyes:
Well, for years Republicans have been electing people who promised to reduce the deficit by cutting taxes, to ensure peace by sending in the troops, and to shrink government by controlling our private lives. Strangely though, not everyone is rich, safe, and pure, yet. How to explain this curious turn of events?
I know, we’re not promising hard enough! Pledges, everybody, we must sign pledges.
Maybe they should grow topknots like Yul Brynner had in Taras Bulba, and then cut them off (as he did), pledging not to regrow then until their aims are achieved…
I think they should all get a tattoo of the dark mark on their forearms. It could be useful too - when it’s time for a vote on the chamber floor, the tattoos will all start glowing.
Something tattooed on the forehead, for visibility, something that is close to “sex sex sex”. Perhaps something easily remembered, like a number? Call it the number of the beast with two backs?
There is precedent. The guy who shot John Wilkes Booth, a sergeant in a New York cavalry outfit, is reputed to have castrated himself to atone for making whoopie with a D.C. prostitute.