I think these two posts illustrate why I'm having such a hard time giving a shit about the Republican primary.
Never mind that Presidents don’t sign constitutional amendments, let’s just remember that Herman is no longer squishy on this issue. Herman also came out for an amendment defending marriage from the gays, and he swore to use the bully pulpit on social issues.
Willard Romney doesn’t seem to have Darth Cheney’s delight in other peoples’ suffering, if only because he doesn’t pay that much attention to other people. But true north on Romney’s moral compass is “What’s best for Mitt Romney, at this point in time?”, and since the Neocons can promise the best short-term gains on the foreign policy market (while blithely ignoring any horizon beyond the Friedman Unit), their arguments interlock nicely with his MBA vulture capitalist training.
None of them seem to have anything sticky enough to even argue about. Why bother getting in a fuss about Romney's or Cain's positions on anything, given that they're likely to change in an hour? Why get into an argument over something that's not going to be operable tomorrow? Overall, they are going to run as the same anti-gay, anti-immigrant, pro-tax-cut, blow-the-Arabs'-shit-up, fuck-the-poor jackasses Republican candidates have been for the past 40 years at least, so what exactly is the point of bickering over policy distinctions right now?
If I'm interested in Cain at all, it's only because I hope his candidacy makes the teawads' racist heads explode. And with Romney, it just seems like it's his turn. Like 2008 was McCain's turn, so that the next time around they could all say, "Buddy, we let you try and you biffed it. Sit down like you supposed to," and move on to some younger, shinier thing.
It's not that there's nothing to to talk about, policy-wise. There are plenty of things going on that need fixing up. But nobody on the Republican side is arguing about anything that won't be resolved into the usual Zombie Reagan Voltron by the end of the second primary.