but your analogy still works

I don't know what made me think they were amphibians. When I looked at a pic, the chameleon's reptilian nature was obvious.

very Republican

which is maybe what made me mis-classify them as amphibians.

(Actually, this exchange brought to light a gaping hole in my fund of knowledge--I was imagining chameleons to be more salamander-like, since I'm familiar with salamanders that also change color to match their surroundings.)

they don't start selling car insurance,

then all bets are off

in school administration. hmmmm,

"Straighten out or I'm gonna Principal you."

reading it my way makes my message make more sense

And that's what is scary.

Because if he were to win, Republicans would almost certainly have also taken the Senate.

He will be deathly afraid of a damaging primary challenge in 2016, and will sign whatever the most extreme elements of his party force through Congress.

The reality is that neither Newt nor Mitt is going to veto the lunatic insanity that comes out of a Teabagger-controlled House. THAT is where the agenda will come from.

He is from the Wall Street branch of the Republican party.

IMO, makes him worse than all of the pot bangers combined.

Neo-con on steroids, anything for a profit. Darth Cheney only wishes he could have less of a soul.

knuckledraggers, and those who can't.

Or to put it more simply, Baby Bush and Papa Bush.

Newt is closer to Baby, and Mitt is closer to Papa.

But the difference is only in style not substance.

On target.

those who can't even conceive of being held accountable for their actions, so consequences would catch them by surprise, like Hitler in his bunker (Baby Bush).

To give the right some credit, they are correct in their suspicions of Romney. He wants to be President...period. It looks like he will say and do whatever it takes to achieve that end. What he really thinks is a mystery.

or his desire to "check mate" his enemies. No damned filter whatsoever. That is damned dangerous.

Mitt is all over the map, but I do thin consequences DO matter to him. i don't think he acts irrationally, though his positions are subject to current "winds". I surely don't want Mitt in the WH, but he is more "sane" than Newt.

I understand wanting to "use" Newt to neutralize Mitt's threat as an Obama Opponent in the Fall, But, be careful. If Newt somehow comes back again and enough low info voters were at play, this would be catastrophic. Newt doesn't give a damn, what happens at his hand.

i think Gingrich does it more as a cover for all the bad stuff he has done personally with the wives. but Romney gives a lot of money to his church.

the country is more moderate than right wing so i guess since Romney goes which way the wind blows it can keep him in check. but you never know.

but yeah, with gingrich we know what we are getting.

He and Callista are devout Catholics nowadays.

And there are a lot of rich Mormons who would like to see one of their own in power. In this case, based purely on the behavior involved, it is impossible to distinguish religious or altruistic motives from purely mercenary ones.

I see a couple of possibilities.

One is that Romney is a conscienceless bastard who does whatever is necessary to advance his own self-aggrandizement.

The other is that he is genuinely committed to being the prophesied Mormon leader:

That Mormons consider themselves to be the Chosen People gives another indication of what they think of the rest of us. I hope Mitt's run for POTUS exposes more and more about these people and their real beliefs.

Matter of fact Mitt might be a horrible dictator once in office...hard to say really. I personally don't think either men have a chance in hell and Obama will walk into his second term.

Romney is a Northern Corporate Supremacist, Gingrich is a Southern Corporate Supremacist, Santorum is a Religious Corporate Supremacist, Paul is an Avowed Corporate Supremacist.

If I was forced to choose one then I would take Paul because A. His argument for corporate supermacy is above board, the others have the same goals but are more stealthy about it and thus with Paul the issue of corporate supremacy can finally be addressed and debated front and center in the political arena and B. Cannabis is more likely to be legalized under Paul and as the nation would be headed to Hell in a Handbasket, I want to be medicated with the drug of my choice.

Thanks for the thread, dsc.

he seemed to be more moderate than newt while he was governor. not that i liked him at all. is he anti-gay, immigration? probably not. he is pro-voteforme.