I declare this the official meal of the wonderful state of Texas. Ron Paul can suck my hairy asshole.

Chili cook-off with barbecue ribs that slide off the bone or gtfo

only I am real.

When asked what differences there were between him and George W. Bush, if any, Rick Perry replied that Bush went to Yale and he didn't.

So anyone who found Bush to be too much of an intellectual to keep up with, Rick Perry is your herp a derp a durrp.

Stay on topic, pinko commie godless librel!

Rick Perry, a few years ago when he was a Democrat (which he still is, despite having changed parties), was one of the top people in Al Gore's run for the presidency. 'Nuff said.

The election is going to be between Obama, a socialist, and either Perry or Romney, both of whom are Democrats running as Republicans. Your choice has already been made for you, once again. Herp.

I think anyone who parrots that Republican politician/right wing radio talking point is appropriately named Derp.

It's really easy. Both parties spend, for better or worse. Since only taxes pay for that spending, taxes are going to equal some number no matter what the fuck anybody does, right, so the REAL question is who pays the bigger share of that number, the rich, or other 98% of us? Right now the richest pay the lowest share of existing taxes and the other 98% us consequently pays the highest percentage share of existing taxes going all the way back to the twenties, the last time the economy was shit because the rich wouldn't pay their share, consumers consequently had no money to spend, and without consumer spending the recovery of the market was incredibly slow.

The fact is that both parties spend plenty, but one spends with an eye towards benefitting the middle as much as the rich, the other only with an eye towards benefitting the rich only - so if you're not rich, don't be the mule for some boardroom of conservative think tank suits literally writing memos on how to manipulate people like you into parroting their talking points, because they're laughing at you as you help them steal your lunch, and getting paid for it with a salary big enough to live a nicer life than you or I ever will. Open your eyes.

Political Bottom Line: Neither Democrats nor Republicans care about making this country better. All they care about is proving the other side wrong while protecting the special interest groups that finance their campaigns.

The system is shit.

[/Rusty'sPoliticalRant]

A political argument in a thread titled "Falcon Taints in Chipotle Mayonnaise" on a metal message board...

...ONLY IN AMERICA!

I voted third party in 2000 and 2004 because of this, the only time I've ever voted for a major party candidate for President in my life was in 2008.

I only like anti-establishment candidates who got off the ground with small donations instead of being some corporate pick from the cradle. It's why I was pulling for Obama to win the Democratic Primary in 2008 and for Ron Paul to win the Republican Primary in 2008, and why I hope Paul wins the Republican primary this time. I think two non-establishment candidates running for President in 2012 would be the best thing to happen to this country's political system in decades, because honestly I bet that 2016 and 2020 and so on for the rest of our lives will probably otherwise as crappy as 2000 and 2004, where we're screwed with a choice of two shitty unappealing candidates bought and sold by their party establishment.

Hard as it is to believe now, in twenty or thirty years people will be wondering where the Obamas and Pauls of the world went, and what happened to the days when politics wasn't as bad "as it is now". Obama and Paul are notable but very rare exceptions right now in a system where virtually all Presidential candidates in both parties get off the ground with corporate donations, and then end up inconsistently going around to different groups pandering with different messages trying to score more cash and votes. The only silver lining we really have is equal access to information we all get from the Internet, which was the only reason either Obama or Paul ever broke out in the first place as small-donation based candidates; this was because average people could now go back and read transcripts/watch videos and catch politicians who change their tune in the act, so those who were consistent from day to day stood out. That's about the only silver lining we have in the system we have now, which should really be fixed to cap donations per person at $100 a year instead of $2500 or whatever it is now, including those contributions to outside front groups that really work for the candidates covertly; if there's going to be a cap per year anyway, why not allow the free speech of all voters to be on a level playing field?

What a coincidence - corn dogs are made of actual falcon taints.

ha ha ha