Aaaand this one is over.
Mitt Romney announced Friday he will not run for president in 2016, after briefly flirting with a third White House run — a decision that only slightly narrows the crowded field of potential Republican candidates.
And Stephen Kruiser summed up what most people outside of the radical left feel about Romney:
The Romney 2012 story has been rewritten with help from Barack Obama. The Idiot King has proven Romney to have been correct about many things during the campaign, which has led everyone to almost forget how awful he is at connecting with voters. With the campaign riding high after the president phoned in his performance during the first debate, Romney let Candy Crowley defeat him in the second one.
I still think Romney’s 2012 campaign was an amazingly blown opportunity to put someone in office who could have made a real, positive difference in Washington. Some of you may even recall that I suggested that had President Obama been smart, after Kathleen Sebelius’ resignation he should have asked Romney to take over as head of HHS, with Howard Dean as Romney’s deputy – yes, really!
Obviously, all of these opportunities have passed. But Kruiser goes on to bring up what would have been a potentially positive side effect of Romney running:
I haven’t determined if this is a relief yet. Yes, the Mittster is most definitely in need of a reality check. However, if he keeps sniffing around for the nomination it divides what I like to call the octogenarian GOP establishment harumph money between him and Jeb Bush. Add Chris Christie into the mix and it’s a full-on family brawl for the addled elders of the party.
Those of us who didn’t think Romney was the right guy in 2012 certainly don’t want him to be the nominee in 2016.
We might just want him to hang around long enough to make Jeb Bush’s life miserable, however.
Unfortunately, that’s where Kruiser stops, and I think that this point needs to be taken a bit further. In the last three Republican primaries I saw the candidates who I supported get squashed by the GOP establishment. In 2000 it was McCain, in 2008 I was behind Fred Thompson, and in 2012 I watched Herman Cain go down in flames.1 A big factor in the GOP establishment getting their candidates nominated was the fact that they were united behind their guys and could put all of their energy into defeating their primary competitors. If only they could have put the same energy into winning the general election…
But what happens if they’re not united early enough? What if Romney, and to some degree, Christie, were to hang around long enough to prevent the establishment from having a candidate to rally around? Maybe this presents the opportunity for something amazing to happen – maybe the nominee is actually the candidate preferred by the Republican base as opposed to the one selected for us by the establishment? Maybe we end up with a solid nominee, like Bobby Jindal, Ted Cruz, or best of all, Scott Walker.
Let’s face it, in 2016 the presidency is there for the GOP’s taking. The Democrats have no bench depth and will give us a primary where Hilary and Fauxcahontis will see who can out-stupid the other with Marxist tirades.
Even worse, they won’t get the same tailwind support that Obama had and be forced to run on his record. The mainstream press will still be there for them of course, but nowhere to the degree that Obama has enjoyed. Now the Republicans just have to avoid messing up by nominating some lukewarm conservative – like Jeb.
Of course, this could all be avoided if the GOP establishment and its base would simply get behind the one person who would make a truly great president. Longtime readers know that there’s only one man worthy of Brother Bob’s endorsement…. Stannis Baratheon in 2016!
Cross posted from Brother Bob’s Blog
Follow Brother Bob on Twitter and Facebook
You think I’m depressing? RT @emzanotti: Romney isn’t running because GOP donors think Jeb Bush has more appeal. Let that sink in, America.
— Drew McCoy (@DrewMTips) January 30, 2015
Dear Jeb: See what Mitt did there? See?
— Stephen Green (@VodkaPundit) January 30, 2015
1. I don’t know if it mattered at all who the Republicans ran against Obama in 2008, but I’m still annoyed at what a lazy campaign Thompson ran. And sadly Herman Cain was never a serious candidate, as “999” can’t be the answer to every question. But I also have zero doubt that either one would have been a better president than what we have now.
@Rich+Wheeler: 20
Rich, have you got a ‘thing’ for Webb? geez, enough idolatry already.
@Ditto: #21, excellent summation.
@Rich+Wheeler:
But true.
@George Wells: You’d feel much different about Palin if she were a lesbian.
@Ditto: #32
Consider where he was educated. Some schools teach voodoo math.
@Bill: #42
Bill, George doesn’t like anything about women, especially their sexual equipment.
And just consider all that criticism of Palin from someone that admits to having voted for Obama.
@Redteam: Idolotry? That would be the love you show for your Messiah R.R. aka The Gipper.
@George Wells: 50
Oh my, WON? So now no gays will remain in the closet, right? Now they can be proud that they have forced 98% of the country to ‘admit’ that they really do like gays and that perverted sex is ‘OK” right? Now Gay people will really be ‘accepted’, right? No, now gays will play the card, as blacks are still doing after they ‘WON” seems as if winning is not enough, now they want to be compensated for being a minority. If you’re still around in 10 years, you’ll still be wondering where your victory went. Why didn’t straight people start loving gay people?
Yep, you’re winning.
@Rich Wheeler:
So I’ve mention RR maybe once ever on this blog and every other comment you write extols Webbs virtues. LOL
@Redteam: Actually, if you recall, “voodoo economics” was coined by HW in describing Reagan’s economic policies.
@Rich Wheeler:
Actually, if I recall, I don’t recall mentioning ‘voodoo economics’.
@Redteam #58:
“Oh my, WON? So now no gays will remain in the closet, right? Now they can be proud that they have forced 98% of the country to ‘admit’ that they really do like gays and that perverted sex is ‘OK” right? Now Gay people will really be ‘accepted’, right? No, now gays will play the card, as blacks are still doing after they ‘WON” seems as if winning is not enough, now they want to be compensated for being a minority. If you’re still around in 10 years, you’ll still wondering where your victory went. Why didn’t straight people start loving gay people?
Yep, you’re winning.”
No, Red, I’m not “winning,” I WON.
I won exactly what I was fighting for. I got the legal rights and protections I needed, rights that WAY more than adequately compensate for the fact that we now pay the so-called “marriage penalty” on our income tax returns.
It was never a matter of winning anyone’s heart or mind – certainly not yours. The fact that Southern Whites are still deeply invested in racial hatred (the principle cause of Black’s hatred of Whites) and are consequently still fighting the American Civil War in THEIR hearts is more than enough to convince me that I will never see a significant change in the hearts of Southern bigots in MY lifetime. That would be expecting a miracle, and I don’t believe in miracles, remember?
And what other gays do with their victories is their own business, not mine. To each his own.
@George Wells:
really, then want to venture a thought on why all our racial strife seems to be in the North? Missouri, New York?
Is there an implication that the civil war had something to do with race?
Oh, so now all those that think gays are perverts will no longer think that? You already had a right to make any type of contract on personal belongings that you desired to make. I’m not sure how getting that right one more time is a win. But then, I don’t think like a gay person (thankfully) so I’m sure I’ll never understand.
@George Wells:
Geez, so this victory you won was in the South? You defeated the Southern bigots? So gays always had rights in the North? There are, and never have been, any anti-gay bigotry in the North? Why do you live in the South if it’s where all the bigots are? Is enjoying being persecuted a trait of gays?
@Redteam #63:
No Red, Missouri isn’t in the “North,” unless YOU think it is because it’s North of where YOU live.
“Is there an implication that the civil war had something to do with race?”
I’m not going into your History lessons again to teach you what part the emancipation of slaves played in the Civil War. You’re an idiot. If you haven’t figured it out by now, you never will.
“You already had a right to make any type of contract on personal belongings that you desired to make. I’m not sure how getting that right one more time is a win. But then, I don’t think like a gay person (thankfully) so I’m sure I’ll never understand.”
Again, we’ve been over this. You are oblivious to the provisions of the federally unconstitutional Virginia Constitutional Amendment that voided contracts between gays. What I won was the federal overturning of that piece of legalistic dung. You are right that you’ll never understand. Not because you’re straight. Because you’re an idiot.
@Redteam #64:
We BOTH know that bigotry exists everywhere. And we BOTH know that the greatest concentration of resistance to gay rights, just like the greatest concentration of resistance to integration, lies in that charming stretch from Texas, through Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama often fondly referred to as the heart of the Bible belt. It is these states that fought against interracial marriage the longest, and in these states that the resistance to gay marriage is also the strongest. I don’t care to speculate why. But for some reason, Virginia isn’t nearly so backward, and MY neighbors are wonderful – them and all their children. Kills you that I’m happy, doesn’t it?
@Rich+Wheeler:
Webb is a lefty, Rich.
He favors more stimulus (gov’t) spending to help the economy ….. and even Dems like Obama laughed at that!
He favors ”green energy jobs,” even though they cost over $2 million a year each and will NEVER pay for themselves.
He favors wiretapping (FISA) without warrant.
He favors more and higher taxes on Americans who pay taxes.
He favors something called the ”Second Chance” program that gets felons out of prison.
He opposes school choice and any voucher programs.
He favors regulating tobacco as a dangerous drug but refuses to take a stand on pot!
He favors US taxpayer money to fund abortions both here and abroad!
What fence do you think Republican sit on that they might even consider voting for this man???
@Nanny: Sure as hell he’s not a Conservative. Do you think I’d support him if he was? He’s a mainline Dem, who beat Conserv. George Allen in Va.
That’s what he’ll stay. He won’t be running on a 3rd Party ticket.
He’s a highly decorated Marine Corps Officer–Navy Cross-Silver Star two Bronze Stars and two Purple Hearts. Acclaimed author
Former SecNav. under RR and a supporter of 2nd Amendment Rights.
He doesn’t need Repubs to get elected. He needs High Dem. turnout and Indies. As with BHO it will be harder to get nom. than win the general election.
@Nanny: and Rich
http://www.ontheissues.org/Senate/James_Webb.htm
@George Wells:
There were 11 southern states in the Confederacy and Missouri ain’t one of them.
@George Wells: 65
You’ve clearly never studied any history of the Civil War. It had absolutely zero to do with emancipation of slaves. Not one single slave was freed by the Emancipation Proclamation, that was only a political, feel good action.
which clearly would have been declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court, just as they are doing with gay unions.
At least I haven’t had to resort to ‘name calling’. But then I don’t have a wiring defect in my brain.
Really chaps your ass (redundant) that there are a lot of Christians in that area, doesn’t it? I think you resent Christ about as much as Obama does.
Let me correct you, the metropolitan area of Washington, that is located within Virginia is the area you are referring to. The remainder (about 95% of the state) is southern. I’ve lived there, I know. Seems as if they have you fooled.
Lol, you’ve fought against society as it exists for your whole life because you live a miserable existence in a closet that you’re still trying to get out of, and you’re happy. I recall you also said you don’t live in an area with any other gays there, must be hell trying to avoid ‘those people’.
@Rich Wheeler: Must be a victim of PTSD, sure as hell has lost his mind for some reason.
@Redteam #70:
“There were 11 southern states in the Confederacy and Missouri ain’t one of them.”
That’s your problem, Red, not mine. The states that WERE in the confederacy don’t constitute the definition of what is and what isn’t “South.” Like so many of your other delusional neighbors, you need to stop living in the confederate past. THE WAR IS OVER. YOU LOST!
@Redteam #71:
“Virginia Constitutional Amendment that voided contracts between gays.”
“which clearly would have been declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court, just as they are doing with gay unions.”
Yes and no, Red. Yes, the Virginia Constitutional Amendment was clearly unconstitutional, but it stood unchallenged for many years, a backward blight on the Commonwealth’s soul, until 2014, when Judge Arenda Wright overturned the thing and allowed gay marriages in Virginia, the singular goal I have had all along. Her ruling was upheld by the Fourth Circuit Appellate Court in Richmond, and the SCOTUS let their ruling stand. No, the Supreme DIDN’T declare “Gay Unions” unconstitutional. They WILL declare state bans on gay marriage unconstitutional, but that won’t happen until June.
Virginia anti-gay? Hardly. Virginia went for Obama, both times. When the anti-gay constitutional amendment was tossed out in federal court, there were NO clerks-of-the-court who refused to issue licensed, NO justices-of-peace who refused to marry gay couples. Virginia didn’t have any state supreme court justices sending out letters to probate judges telling them to disobey federal court orders on gay marriage, like Alabama had. Virginia Beach, where I live, was happy to conduct our wedding at the court house. And the fact that my nearest gay friend lives in Richmond means that I am selective in who my friends are, and that sexual orientation isn’t a criterion for their selection. Unlike some people I know, sexual orientation isn’t a qualification for friendship.
@George Wells: I guess Alec Baldwin is one of them good ol’ Southern boys, right? I’ll bet Farrakhan has a Stars and Bars flag in his pickup rear window, don’t you? Probably all those liberals that were accusing Marcus Bachmann of being gay (as if they thought that would be some sort of ultimate insult) are all Sons of the Confederacy.
Check out some of the racism and bigotry in New York City, Detroit, Chicago or Boston. Oh, THEY’LL go off with an n-word Gatling gun if they feel THEY are being imposed upon.
@Bill #75:
Bigotry can be found everywhere, in all political parties, in all races, in both sexual orientations. It’s inexcusable wherever it occurs. You want to play the “blame game” and try to weigh which faction has committed the MOST mischief? I’d have to ask why.
As I’ve made abundantly clear already, I have chosen to apply my limited energy and resources fighting the bigotry that threatens me PERSONALLY the most. It is my right to do that, and it is also logical. You won’t find me fighting against YOUR efforts to eliminate Democratic corruption, but that isn’t my fight. I’ve got bigger fish to fry.
@George Wells:
Really. Well, I didn’t notice you making that very clear in your repeated posts which pointed strictly to Southern zones which are, as you insist, bigoted and prejudiced. Such bigotry and prejudice as you displayed appears to cloud your ability to differentiate between what is and is not an infringement upon your own personal, local, self-defined “rights”.
@Bill #77:
I’m baffled by your (and others here) assumption that ANYONE (not just me) might have enough time and resources to identify – much less fight – every last crime that is committed simply because I (or “we) chose to argue against a particular injustice. When one of you go off foaming at the mouth over something stupid that Obama has just done, YOU don’t bother to catalog or bibliograph all of the similar missteps that Republican presidents have committed, and I wouldn’t expect you to. Bush abused executive order privileges much like Obama has done, but one does not justify or excuse the other, and both do not need to be included in a complaint over Obama’s actions. Similarly, I don’t need to acknowledge or catalog Hillary’s flaws whenever I comment of Palin’s lack of rational thought, and I don’t need to acknowledge a compendium of bigoted actions by Democratic politicians every time I call out a Republican for attacking gays.
The essence of good writing is the avoidance of extraneous conversation. A logical argument does not stray to include unnecessary or irrelevant material, no matter how related to the subject at hand. I strive to achieve this degree of focus, and will not be drawn into unproductive wild goose chases. If you want to play that game, play with yourself.
@George Wells:
Lost? I wasn’t around back then. If you were on the winning side, you must be a helluva lot older than you claim to be.
Sure they do. Missouri ‘chose’ to be in the North. Geographical area has never been defined by where a state is located. If so, tell me how Illinois/Ohio got to be in the Midwest.
There are only 11 southern states and you choose to live there. That tell you something about yourself? You choose by your actions, not your words.
not a valid argument. You can say the same about gay unions. And anything else that is still not challenged.
you misread my statement, as you are prone to do. I was referring to the gay union ‘situations’ where they were/are ruling bans are unconstitutional. You just left out the context of the statement.
again, actions speak louder than words. Face it, you don’t like to be around gays. Maybe you find their ‘in your face’ actions as offensive as most people do.
As if you didn’t just go off foaming at the mouth over racism and bigotry in the south, as if it doesn’t exist in Chicago, New York, Missouri, etc. Your obvious choice of avoiding living in an area frequented by gays says much.
@George Wells:
You have stated, numerous times, that while you do not agree with Obama’s execution of his job as President, you got out of these 8 years of national misery precisely what you wanted. If one were to address the tip of the spear, which allows the national condition to deteriorate to this point, one would not have so many individual issues to address. You got what you wanted, but everything else has gotten screwed up, due mainly to the type of mentality that would give you what you wanted. That’s pretty simple.
Really. Bush issued executive orders enacting laws that Congress had voted down? Bush issued memos to grant violate laws on the books and grant amnesty to illegal immigrants? What were these abuses? And, what is the point?
The problem with your ” comment of Palin’s lack of rational thought” is that you provide no examples and do not specify what point or points you disagree with. I suspect she has committed the unforgivable crime of believing marriage is between one man and one woman, but I cannot be sure exactly of the source of your insurmountable displeasure with her. Again, simply calling her a “clown”, “idiot” or whatever does not provide much insight.
No, you do not need parallel examples when you call out “Republicans attacking gays”; but some examples of actual attacks would be helpful. Oh, and disagreement and lack of concurrence does not constitute an “attack”.
@George Wells: George, My nephew and his wife had a child yesterday. When it was born, they immediately concluded it was a boy. They didn’t do any tests to see if it was ‘actually’ a girl, and they also didn’t do any tests to determine if it might be an ‘other gender’. I think you should make the Supreme Court rule that it’s discriminatory to decide that babies are not ‘other gender’ without even a test.
@Bill #80:
I have no reason to believe that Romney would have done a better job than Obama. I have no reason to believe that McCain would have done a better job than Obama, but I was actually for McCain until he picked Palin as his running mate. I didn’t have a crystal ball, and I didn’t know how long McCain was going to live, and I sure didn’t want him to die and leave bats-in-the-belfry in charge.
In 2012, I knew what a mess Obama was, but the gay marriage dam hadn’t broken yet, and I didn’t buy Obama’s claim (2008) that he was against it. Expecting exactly what DID happen, I had to bide my time with O, and as I said, Romney gave ME no indication that he would – or could – do any better. Evidently, he didn’t convince enough other voters of the same thing, or he would have won.
@Redteam:
You’re still living the Confederate War. I have no time for you.
@Redteam:
Ranked by IQ of their respective populations:
Alabama: 45
Louisiana: 49
Mississippi: 50 (lowest)
Ranked by their strong opposition to gay marriage:
Alabama: 1
Mississippi: 2
Louisiana: close to the top
Begs the question of exactly what makes stupid people oppose gay marriage.
@George Wells:
I would say that to discuss that, you would have to be more specific, but I still have to say, “REALLY?”
Would McCain have instituted the Abysmal Care Act? I sincerely doubt it and that alone would have been a tremendous boost to the economy. McCain might have intervened in Libya, but he would not have “led from behind” and allowed the situation there to deteriorate to the point where our consulate was sacked. Certainly, the IRS targeting of conservative groups (or any, for that matter) would have occurred.
Would Romney have over-regulated the economy to a virtual stand-still? Would Romney have place more emphasis on imaginary global warming than on the threat of radical Islamic terrorism? Would Romney have bent over backwards to placate the Iranians in their nuclear weapon quest while repeatedly insulting and distancing from Israel? Would Romney granted amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants while Americans were out of work? Would Romney have lured hundreds of thousands of illegals, carrying diseases long eliminated in the US, into our country, then distributed them, without screening, throughout the nation?
Since both as President would have certainly chosen different cabinet members, the possibilities for improvement are practically infinite. To have fallen for the “Hope and Change” mind candy once I can understand and forgive, under certain, dim-witted circumstances. Twice? Again, I have to say, “REALLY?”.
What was the IQ ranking of California? If I remember correctly, they resoundedly defeated gay marriage in referendum, only to have judges make it all for naught. Stupid people?
@George Wells:
It wasn’t a ‘claim’, it was a lie. But now I’m not so sure that anything Obama said was a lie. By definition a lie is to intentionally say something that you know not to be true. I claim Obama only reads the messages off his teleprompter and doesn’t know the difference.
You say in 83 and then the very next comment 84 is by you to me. Man(or other gender) of his word.
I would bet that the majority of the population has never had an IQ test.
So you posted this to demonstrate that the IQ measurement was total BS? Or are you saying a person doesn’t have to be very smart to know that gays are ‘f*cked up people? I select option B.
@George Wells:
This is the ranking you listed:
“Ranked by IQ of their respective populations:
Alabama: 45
Louisiana: 49
Mississippi: 50 (lowest)”
These are the listing from the internet:
46. New Mexico: 95.7
47. Hawaii: 95.6
48. California: 95.5
49. Louisiana: 95.3
50. Mississippi: 94.2
Perhaps a little dishonesty to ‘prove’ a point? California, home of the gays is 48, hmmmmm
George, you planning to visit Africa anytime soon?
Lowest 5 Countries by IQ
1. Equatorial Guinea: 59
2. Ethiopia: 63
3. Sierra Leone: 64
4. Democratic Republic of the Congo: 65
5. Zimbabwe: 66
@Bill #85:
“What was the IQ ranking of California? If I remember correctly, they resoundedly defeated gay marriage in referendum, only to have judges make it all for naught. Stupid people?”
Yes, actually, and thanks so much for pointing out how right I am! California’s average IQ was the third lowest in the nation, just ahead of Louisiana. But don’t trust me, look it up yourself! Or note Redteam’s figures making the same point in his #87. Only he thinks that somehow I’ve been dishonest, though I can’t imagine why. I just reported the numbers.
@Redteam #87:
“California, home of the gays”
Another idiotic mistake from the perpetually confused.
San Francisco COULD be called something like that, although the proportion of gays in that city isn’t terribly higher than the national average. California is a very big state, with a huge population, and on the whole, it’s population reflects very closely the national average incidence of homosexuality, which is variously reported at between 1.8 and 3.6 %, depending upon your preferred source. As y’all have pointed out quite a few times, bigotry is everywhere, and for this reason, gays haven’t all flocked to one state or another, instead staying where they have family and employment, and working quietly to improve their civil rights status. In that endeavor they are succeeding.
@Redteam #88:
“Lowest 5 Countries by IQ
1. Equatorial Guinea: 59
2. Ethiopia: 63
3. Sierra Leone: 64
4. Democratic Republic of the Congo: 65
5. Zimbabwe: 66 ”
And this is why hateful Christian groups are exporting their homophobia to places like Uganda.
Go there?
No.
I went to Africa once on a job assignment, and I got my company to cancel another job in Nigeria because of the risks, which are much greater than simply homophobia. We couldn’t afford the kidnapping insurance.
@George Wells: No doubt, San Francisco drags the entire state’s IQ down 20 points or so.
I wonder why you did not mention California in your original pointless diatribe? Oh, that’s right; Redteam revealed your dishonesty.
@Bill #92:
Notice that I didn’t even bother to point out the states where the IQs are the highest? Notice that those states are also states that support gay marriage? Was the omission of THOSE facts also “dishonesty”?
Didn’t I explain before the value of keeping points simple and not including a grocery cart full of unnecessary and extraneous details?
Like I said, I won. I got my estate protected from the same tax robbery that Edith Windsor had to go to the Supreme Court to fight – AND WIN – against. I am supremely happy to share that fact with you, as you evidently intended to rob me all along. No “war on gays.” Right!
@George Wells:
THINKS? you were dishonest. When you omit states that are not in the south just to make a point that the states that don’t like gays are in the South, is blatantly dishonest. Only 2 of the 5 are southern states. Your point WAS NOT made and the point that you WERE dishonest is hereby established..
Well, actually you didn’t. You omitted 3 of the 5 lowest. Dishonesty at it’s peak.
@George Wells:
So here is a gay advocator that doesn’t know where the ‘home of the gays’ in the US is located and he(or other gender) thinks I am confused? Answer this question honestly (if you can) if you are asked to list which two states in the US are most often listed as where gays congregate, which two states would they be?
@George Wells:
as in ‘staying in the closet’.
@George Wells:
I thought your hypothesis was that where there are lower IQ there are more gays. As if there may be a relationship. The incidences of homosexuality are certainly higher in those African countries.
@George Wells:
So now you’re saying you don’t understand how the legal system works. Once that case had been decided, it became a precedent and therefore no other legal action was necessary. So when you say you won, you are again being dishonest. The battle had been won. Brian Williams just lost his job for claiming ‘stories’ that were not his. Now you are doing the same thing. according to you, Edith Windsor was the winner. Quit claiming her victory as your own.
@Redteam #94:
So the idiot who can’t see what the House Republican leadership can see: That the fight against gay marriage is over – that neither the congress nor the president nor the supreme court is going to do anything to stop it – THINKS that he has succeeded in proving that I am dishonest. Me, the one who was honest enough to tell you guys last year that gay marriage was coming exactly as it HAS played out. And you, the person who doesn’t even understand that we are consuming ALL fossil fuels faster than they are being replaced, who denies climate change, and who presumes to understand homosexuality that he has no education or experience with other than the fact that he was propositioned when he was a teenager, think that YOU have the right to play an honesty card? You, who make a daily ritual of burying your head in the sand and denying everything that is going on above ground, have the temerity to label ME dishonest? In-breeding has left your mind addled. Maybe if you had been born gay, the challenge of surviving obnoxiously bad treatment at the hands of your peer rug-rats might have given you the incentive to strengthen that amazingly defective lump of protoplasm perched precariously between your shoulders, but I doubt it. Irretrievably dumb as dirt, and unrepentant to boot – classic Southern mentality.
@Redteam #97:
“I thought your hypothesis was that where there are lower IQ there are more gays”
You “thought” wrong. The hypothesis is that where IQ’s are the lowest, there is more homophobia. This hypothesis is confirmed by the US IQ figures by state, and also by the African IQ figures you quoted. See a link?Smart people know better.