-
When Terrorists Deny Each Other
May 7, 2013 | 166 comments
-
Barack Obama, Gun Enthusiast
February 4, 2013 | 130 comments
-
Principled Compromise
June 22, 2012 | 56 comments
-
Obamacare’s Preemptive Regulatory Strike
March 29, 2012 | 69 comments
-
Santorum’s College Lesson
February 29, 2012 | 102 comments
Campaign Crawlers
Mitt Misfires
His attacks on Gingrich for being a politician amounts to an admission of how unsuccessful he’s been as one.
Mitt Romney has taken his first shots at Newt Gingrich. At what does he aim? Newt’s career choice, of all things.
Romney has spent some time in the past few days attempting to beat back the rising Gingrich by pointing out to Republican primary voters that the former Speaker of the House has spent the bulk of his professional life in politics. One wonders: Does he think so little of the Republican electorate as to assume they don’t already know that?
Romney’s attack on Gingrich for being a “career politician” is the kind of thing novice candidates say when they don’t have the knowledge to attack incumbents on the issues. But Romney has policy knowledge. He’s studied the issues diligently. There’s something else he doesn’t have, which he desperately seeks: conservative street cred. Gingrich has it, despite straying from the flock from time to time. Since Romney cannot out-conservative Gingrich, he is trying to out-outsider him, just as he did with Rick Perry.
In his interview with Brett Baier last Tuesday night, Romney dealt Gingrich the blow. “He’s spent his last 30 or 40 years in Washington,” Romney said. He even upped the ante vs. Gingrich. Perry, in Romney campaign press releases, is merely a “career politician.” Gingrich, Romney says, is a “lifelong politician.”
Gingrich, who is 68, spent 20 years in Congress (1979-1999). That’s 12 fewer years than “Mr. Republican” Robert Taft spent in elected office and only four more years than Ronald Reagan did. Does Romney think being a “lifelong politician” is a universal negative, or only a negative when the politician is running against Romney?
Sure, Gingrich spent his out-years engaged in politics by writing and giving speeches. So did Reagan and Churchill. Gingrich also made a lot of money from his various businesses, including at least $1.6 million from Freddie Mac. Romney, though, isn’t attacking Gingrich for taking money from the disgraced, government-sponsored mortgage giant or from motivating Republican crowds in Topeka and Tampa. He’s attacking him for having a long political career — the kind Romney tried, but failed, to have.
Romney first ran for U.S. Senate in 1994. Had he won, and continued to win, he’d be in his third term — and 16th year in office — right now. That’s just four fewer years in office than “lifelong politician” Newt Gingrich.
As it happens, Romney spent only four years in office (as governor of Massachusetts), but it wasn’t for a lack of trying. He’s run three races and lost two of them. If Romney is going to tout political tenure as the demarcation between himself and Gingrich, then the difference is better phrased this way: In politics, Romney has been far less successful than Romney.
For a campaign that markets its candidate as the one best able to win the general election, bashing Gingrich’s 20-year track record of winning elections seems an odd attack. Not only was Gingrich personally successful, but even his biggest critics credit him with orchestrating the 1994 Republican Revolution, which brought Republicans control of Congress for the first time in 40 years. Drawing attention to Gingrich’s time in office actually serves to remind Republican primary voters that Gingrich led Republicans to victory on a national level, which undercuts Romney’s claim to be the only candidate capable of doing that again.
While Romney tries to pin the Outsider label on his lapel, primary voters are surely noticing that the party establishment has coalesced around him, not Gingrich. The Washington establishment doesn’t much care for Gingrich, while the base is rather fond of him. Romney hopes to eat into that support by making primary voters think of Gingrich as the establishment candidate and Romney as the rebellious outsider who will upend the status quo. That’s unlikely to happen for one, simple reason. It’s absurd.
About the Author
Andrew Cline is editorial page editor of the New Hampshire Union Leader. His Twitter ID is @Drewhampshire.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (169) | Leave a comment
More Articles by Andrew Cline
More Articles From Campaign Crawlers
http://spectator.org/archives/2011/12/06/mitt-misfires
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Jack in Wi| 12.6.11 @ 6:29AM
Gingrich was an ineffective House Speaker, who was driven from office by his own Republican colleagues for being a windbag, and being blackmailed and rolled by Clinton on many occasions. He also had a mountain of ethics violations. His record since then, as a shill for the most disgracefull lobbies in Washington, only confirms the fact that Newt is unelectable and unexceptable
Damian| 12.6.11 @ 8:18AM
It's not too late for a new candidate. Jim DeMint,
Steve King, or there are about 40 House members and 10 Senators who would be great.
CrackerHound| 12.6.11 @ 8:59AM
Paul Ryan would be excellent....but it is too late realistically.
Dan| 12.6.11 @ 10:54AM
No, Ryan would not be "excellent," for Ryan, outside of his narrow budgetary expertise, has about as much command of the various subjects as did Cain.
Which means, NONE at all.
Ever hear Ryan expound on foreign affairs?
Save yourself the time and the effort, for it's nothing but platitudes and the same-old, same-old from inside the Beltway.
Many who jump to cheer Paul Ryan know little about him save hearing him speak about the budget on various talk shows.
Conserdude| 12.6.11 @ 9:45AM
What must Rep. Mike Pence (Ind.) and former Gov. Tim Pawlenty (Minn.) be thinking now. The former should have run, and the latter should have stayed in. One of them would be leading by now against this sorry bunch.
Dan| 12.6.11 @ 10:52AM
Pawlenty went nowhere then.
As he would now.
He'd have as much "success" right about now as has Rick Santorum.
Jack in Wi| 12.6.11 @ 10:55AM
The winning ticket is Ron and Rand for Peace, Properity and Liberty. Accept nothing less.
Jack in Wi| 12.6.11 @ 1:41PM
Newt is hated by all Democrats and will be a huge incentive to get out the vote that was indifferent to Obama. He also will get zero votes from independents and women with his mountian of baggage and big mouth. He won't get at least 1/3 of the Republican vote. There will a third party that would poll more then the Republicans and would be the final death of the party. He is ugly as sin and married to Lady Macbeth.
On top of that Mr Bag Lady for Fannie Mae, the Israeli lobby, the Insurance cartels and the New World Order is a chickenhawk, who wants endless wars around the world, even though the voters in huge polling numbers want out of these wars now.
Linda| 12.6.11 @ 5:53PM
Jack you are obviously a supporter of Ron Paul and, as a Libertarian I voted for him when he ran for President. A lot of what he says makes a lot of sense to me - particularly as regards economics. But the truth is that there are a lot of crazy people in the Middle East who would like nothing more than to kill us. I feel that Ron Paul is in total denial about that. Yes, if he had won way back when and we had followed Libertarian principles for all these years then maybe we wouldn't be where we are now. But we ARE here and the problems MUST be dealt with in reality rather than the way we wish it would be. As for Rand Paul, I must admit I LOVE listening to him in Congressional Hearings "I've been waiting for 20 years to talk to you about these toilets!" Just classic. But he is still young and while I will be a supporter in the future, for now we all need to find someone who can meet the challenges immediately. Whoever ends up in office is gonna have a heckuva mess to clean up after four years of Obama (with Reid and Pelosi mucking things up in the background). At this point, I don't get to vote in the primaries and I don't know who I support (except that it isn't Romney)
Ryan| 12.6.11 @ 8:46AM
If you're going to criticize, use facts. Newt was cleared of practically all the ethics violations.
It's the left who only uses half the story. Use the whole one.
BcdErick| 12.6.11 @ 1:53PM
Hello, hello? The Newt paid a $300,00 fine for his misdeeds.Do you have an extra $300k. It's the arrogance and the chutzpah that irritates me. I'm smarter than he is I just don't have an ego the size of the planet. That's all he's got. Plus I've liked politics. Only writing about it I definately don' twamt o ppla y
RCV| 12.6.11 @ 10:16PM
Newt's a very bright guy, but he's always been ethically and morally challenged. As a Democrat, he's our dream opponent.
Dan| 12.6.11 @ 10:58AM
An "infeffective" Speaker who just happened, just happened mind you, to have successfully balanced the budget for four years.
Just happened to have passed through the House all aspects of the Contract with America.
Speaker Gingrich worked to advance the platform of the GOP, and advanced welfare reform, GENUINE, non-gimmickry welfare reform through, despite being repeatedly checked by a Democrat President.
As for those ethics accusations, they were brought by DEMOCRATS for the SOLE purpose of creating a cloud of corruption about him.
So that people like you, people wholly unaware of how they were contrived, how they were ginned up, would fall prey to suspicions about Gingrich, and about the supposed "baggage" which supposedly, allegedly attends him.
Ignorance isn't a pretty thing.
JimP| 12.6.11 @ 12:04PM
Over the top, Jack. You sound like Carl Rove. Also, the word is unacceptable, not "unexceptable". Just trying to be helpful, buddy.
wodiej| 12.6.11 @ 2:20PM
why don't you try exercise what brain cells you might have and bone up on facts. Gingrich led on Welfare reform and balancing the budget for 4 years. He tried to roll back gov't spending and a gov't shutdown ensued. The ethics violation were all dismissed but one. Talk about being a windbag-pot meet kettle.
idalily| 12.6.11 @ 3:12PM
Yeah, Jack, and Ron Paul will do WAY better with the women and the Indies than Gingrich. LOL.
Alan Brooks| 12.6.11 @ 4:01PM
Romney is honest; Newt is not.
Alan Brooks| 12.6.11 @ 4:08PM
... conservative futurisnm is a crock of hog drippings left in the barn too long.
Ken (Old Texican)| 12.6.11 @ 6:47AM
If Ron Paul gets elected, we will have plenty of shovel ready jobs to do....digging fall-out shelters in our back yards and machine-gun nests on our beaches.
Clint| 12.6.11 @ 7:10AM
Ronald Reagan,
"Ron Paul is one of the outstanding leaders fighting for a stronger national defense. As a former Air Force officer, he knows well the needs of our armed forces, and he always puts them first. We need to keep him fighting for our country."
The Tea Party Rebellion Is Here And In Iowa.
Dan| 12.6.11 @ 10:59AM
Paul is going nowhere, except at some point in the not too distant future, the insides of Texas' version of Bedlam.
Alan Brooks| 12.6.11 @ 4:02PM
"Paul is going nowhere, except at some point in the not too distant future, the insides of Texas' version of Bedlam."
Low-end assisted living.
Alan Brooks| 12.6.11 @ 4:05PM
...or a high-end nursing home-- his own room.
Why do Clint and Jack waste their time with a conspiracvy-nut such as Paul? Paul is La Rouche with a license to practice medicine.
Clint| 12.6.11 @ 4:45PM
American Spectator's Resident ObamaBoy Israel Firster Brooks Is Scared Of The Tea Party And Our Co-Favorite Presidential Candidate, Dr.Ron Paul.
The Tea Party Rebellion Is Here And In Iowa.
Alan Brooks| 12.6.11 @ 9:55PM
No, I'm scared the GOP will keep running ersatz Reagans in futilely attempting to relive the past.
chuck| 12.6.11 @ 11:45AM
Ken,
Well ,if worse comes to worst, and Paul is elected, I guess my new business will be construction of fall-out shelters and home machine gun nests!
Know a good marketing guy?
JimP| 12.6.11 @ 2:53PM
Yep. If Paul gets elected my neighbors won't be calling me paranoid anymore. LOL My place makes the tunnels of Cu Chi look like childs' play.
But seriously, good point, Ken.
Alan Brooks| 12.6.11 @ 8:22PM
Better to be an honest Mormon than an opportunistic 'conservative' futurist such as Newton Gingrich.
Ken (Old Texican)| 12.6.11 @ 6:50AM
You know, Andrew,
I've been listening to Romney for five years.... and all I know about him is that he wants to get elected... to something.
CrackerHound| 12.6.11 @ 9:04AM
I think Ron Paul's biggest hurdle is that he does not have leadership qualities. He comes across as meek...sort of like Jimmy Carter.
canuckistani| 12.6.11 @ 9:54AM
I think the challenge will be to formulate a domestic policy that recognizes the damage done to the trust within the finanacial and credit markets. After three years of crisis, bankers are still reluctant to share capital like they used to and the flushing out of bad mortgages will continue for another 2 to 3 years.
Paul or anyone else will have to account for this when selecting sacred cows in the budget process.
Romney has not demonstrated a plan to stimulate trust in the credit market as any plan in this era must include government participation to succeed. No banker is dumb enough to take a flyer on their own.
Paul's quixotic hunting for the fed and the gold standard are interesting but are a decade in their development if we started now. It does not address the current state of affairs. BHO has had three years and only now are there signs the market is adjusting to the new normal - but the electorate's attention span is clearly shorter than that. We proceed with blue sky approaches at our peril. We need a hybrid platform that addresses long term needs and short-term voter convulsions.
My gut tells me neither Willard or Paul can win without addressing both issues at once.
Alan Brooks| 12.6.11 @ 4:07PM
"After three years of crisis, bankers are still reluctant to share capital like they used to and the flushing out of bad mortgages will continue for another 2 to 3 years."
Five years, Canuckistani, not 2 or 3.
Dan| 12.6.11 @ 11:01AM
Meanwhile, the rest of this thing known popularly as --------------------- AMERICA, thinks Ron Paul's biggest hurdle is that he is a nutjob.
Clint| 12.6.11 @ 4:48PM
Ronald Reagan,
"Ron Paul is one of the outstanding leaders fighting for a stronger national defense. As a former Air Force officer, he knows well the needs of our armed forces, and he always puts them first. We need to keep him fighting for our country."
Milton Friedman,
"I strongly support Ron Paul. We very badly need to have more Representatives who understand in a principled way the importance of property rights and religious freedom."
The Tea Party Rebellion Is Here And In Iowa.
Dick Nome | 12.6.11 @ 1:07PM
Ron Paul comes across like and old, been around a long time, back bencher. That's because he is. He's 77 yrs old and been around about 35 years and has nothing remarkable to show for it.
Clint| 12.6.11 @ 4:56PM
Dr. Ron Paul,
"I’ve offered to ride a bicycle for 20 miles in Houston when the temperature is 100° and the humidity is 100% and I will go 20 miles with them and then we’ll decide who’s the youngest."
" Committee assignments
Rep. Paul serves on the following committee and subcommittees.
Committee on Financial Services
Subcommittee on Domestic Monetary Policy and Technology (Chairman)
Subcommittee on International Monetary Policy and Trade
Committee on Foreign Affairs
Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations
With the election of the 112th Congress, and a resulting GOP majority in the House, Ron Paul became the chairman of the Subcommittee on Domestic Monetary Policy and Technology starting in January 2011."
Timothy L. Pennell| 12.6.11 @ 10:01AM
THANK YOU, Kenny. I thought I was the only one. This guy will SAY and DO Anything he has to. (Hey. Who to buy my Mother)
I have always had a problem with the Single Minded seekers of Power. Elliot Spitzer and Anthony Weiner come to mind. Bill Clinton and Jerry Brown. Ted Kennedy, Chris Dodd, and Barney Frank. All of them, terribly Flawed. All of them, For Sale, to the Highest Bidder. All of them living Hollow Lives, built on Lies and Dirty Dealings. Corruption, and Deceit, and Illegal Acts. For most of them, they have Shattered Families, because of their Lust for Power. Years of Personal Unhappiness, and Misery, that can never be re-lived.
"For, what does it profit a man, to gain the whole world, and lose his Immortal Soul?"
Or, his Wife's Trust. Or, his Children's Love.
I Pray that we will end up with a better person, than Mitt Romney. Someone who hasn't WASTED so much of their Life.
MikeG| 12.6.11 @ 10:58AM
Tim
You are praying for a better person than Mitt Romeny that he has wasted his life? You are one pompous child. What have you accomplished writing your daily paranoid comments? You can disagree with Romney but to say he has wasted his life or he is not a decent person is something not even his opponents would say. Get a life.
Dan| 12.6.11 @ 11:05AM
Is it "decent" to serially, serially mind you, misrepresent yourself and your beliefs?
Is it "decent" to say one thing to one crowd and quite another to some crowd different than the first?
Is it "decent" to try to use the Republican Party, the Grand Old Party, the party of Lincoln, as a platform for your own personal aggrandizement?
Is it "decent" to try to warp and manipulate the platform positions of that party so as to somehow jive with your own personal and twisted positions?
Creatures who try to foist themselves on a party, and use deceit as their primary instrument, are many things, but "decent" isn't the adjective that comes quite to mind.
At least my mind.
But then again I'm a common-sense, well-read Conservative; and I'm not trying to disguise my real thoughts and beliefs from tens of millions of people.
MikeG| 12.6.11 @ 11:39AM
Dan,
Congratulations. You are morally superior and should run for president.
Dan| 12.6.11 @ 12:16PM
I've had it in mind for quite some time.
And I might be running for Congress this November.
Jack Davis| 12.6.11 @ 3:40PM
"If anyone can, Dan can!"
Eh?
Dan| 12.7.11 @ 7:31PM
Might need some tinkering that.
But if I choose to run, you'll be hearing from me, for I'll be the one lobbing grenades the Democrats way, and I'm not some little Bush, all abashed and embarrassed to be running as a Republican.
Kitty| 12.6.11 @ 7:02AM
According to Reuters yesterday: "Mitt Romney spent nearly $100,000 in state funds to replace computers in his office at the end of his term as governor of Massachusetts in 2007 as part of an unprecedented effort to keep his records secret."
http://www.reuters.com/article.....0X20111206
chuck| 12.6.11 @ 7:36AM
Gingrich did something no other Republican managed to do, and that was lead the Republican to take both the House and Senate, then maintain that majority until 2006. Does anyone really think Bob Michel could have pulled that off? Newt's Contract with America was a stroke of genius, allowing the Republicans to "nationalize" the off year 1994 election.
As Speaker, he made some needed reforms in the House, and most importantly, pulled Clinton from the left, back to the right of center, or at least the center. The budget was balanced, and remained balanced for 4 years. Clinton was finally forced to sign Welfare Reform. Who else in the GOP could have done these things? Ron Paul? Romney?
Gingrich comes with all the baggage, that's for sure, but he has a proven track record. Don't listen to these revisionists trying to tell you that Gingrich failed as Speaker. The record is clear, he was wildly successful. It was only after gutless Republicans forced him out the the spending orgy began under Hastert. Do you really think Gingrich would have allowed that?
Ken (Old Texican)| 12.6.11 @ 7:46AM
Chuck,
well spoken...... best remembered.
Jack in Wi| 12.6.11 @ 7:57AM
He was so wildly sucessful that he was booted out by his colleagues with a swift kick in the rear end. He was a huge windbag who got rolled and blackmailed by Clinton numerous times. He had his chance and blew by not being able to keep his pants up with the help, and being a disgusting windbag. Clinton used him a s a punching bag and poster boy for all that was wrong with the Republicans. Besides that he had a mountain of ethics violations. which he has continued to this day.
Jim| 12.6.11 @ 8:27AM
Okay, throw all the negatives out there about any candidate. None of them are perfect. Bottom line is, will you vote? and will you vote against obama regardless of who gets the nod?
CrackerHound| 12.6.11 @ 9:10AM
I don't look at Newt's "baggage" the same as Clinton or even Cain's shenanigans. Newt has had bad marriages and showed poor judgement in taking up with other women while still married.
Cain (if allegations are true) and Clinton were sexual harrassers with an almost pathological zeal. Newt's problems kind of make you feel sorry for him.
benny havens| 12.6.11 @ 9:56AM
“Besides that he had a mountain of ethics violations. which he has continued to this day.”
From the Washington Post:
IRS Clears Foundation That Aided Gingrich Course
February 4, 1999
The Internal Revenue Service cleared an organization of charges that it violated its tax-exempt status when it helped fund a college course taught by former House speaker Newt Gingrich.
Gingrich Pays Off Ethics Penalty
December 31, 1998
Speaker Newt Gingrich completed payment of a $300,000 penalty imposed for violations of House rules.
Ethics Committee Drops Last of 84 Charges Against Gingrich
October 11, 1998
The House ethics committee dropped the three remaining ethics charges against Gingrich.
Gingrich to Pay Penalty With His Own Money
Case closed. Let’s discuss the issues;
1. 20 million illegal nationals.
2. $15 trillion debt.
3. Secure the borders.
4. An alternative to Obamacare.
5. Smaller government.
6. Lower taxes.
7. Less regulation.
Just to mention a few.
chuck| 12.6.11 @ 11:27AM
......................................................................
......................................................................
......................................................................
The shunning of Jack continues.
W| 12.6.11 @ 11:43AM
Jack,
Why don't you just admit you like Obama and will vote for him. You know Ron Paul will not be nominated and will never be president, and you attempt to destroy every candidate except Paul. So your motive must be to help Obama.
Reagan Loyalist| 12.6.11 @ 11:15AM
Spot on Chuck. This WI guy, trying to spin Newt's history to accommodate his lust for Ron Paul, just establishes WI as epically epic in his self delusion. What Newt accomplished is fact - winning both houses of congress helped shift the Nation back toward a free market economy, helped create millions of jobs and launched a 20 year period of economic GROWTH! We saw balanced budgets (we have yet to see ANY budget from these commy clowns), lowered taxes, a striking down of federal regulations and - ready for this? consumer confidence!!
Does sound like something we need today? Huh? I think so.
chuck| 12.6.11 @ 11:39AM
Reagan,
It is so pathetic when these revisionists have to resort to lies about what are known facts. Newt had the winning ticket in 1994, and does again in 2012. As your namesake used to say to Carter, "there you go again", and everyone instantly knew that Carter had spewed forth some more lies.
As for "This WI guy", I am officially shunning him. He is an incredible pompous ass. Not worth the time and effort to respond to. Much more fun to just ignore him.
Dan| 12.6.11 @ 11:10AM
Now why would a "conservative" do that?
Now why would a man who knows that he's about to attempt to gain the Republican nomination need to hide emails and internal memos from outside review?
I'll say one thing about Mitt, the forethought and the extremes that he's gone through to veil and hide who he really is, what he really thinks, demonstrates a level of meticulous preparation, a detailed and organized thoroughness that is the ONE thing, the absolute ONE thing about him that might, MIGHT be characterized as Conservative.
He's willing to go through whatever checklist he needs to gain what he wants. And that willingness and thoroughness demonstrates a Conservative mindset.
Of course Clinton did the same thing, ---------- so there is that...........
Worried For the Country| 12.6.11 @ 2:34PM
This is a non-story created by Obama's re-election campaign arm in MA. Deval Patrick leaked this non-story and the Boston Globe played it up. Another attempt by the left stream media and Obama campaign to destroy the candidate they fear most; Mitt.
btw -Clinton's crony didn't legally purchase office equipment. They destroyed government property like stealing the "W" keys off keyboards.
Mike Rogers | 12.6.11 @ 7:59AM
Well put, Drew, and although it's fairly evident on the ground here in NH that "we aren't that into Mitt", I was a bit surprised at how tepid the UL endorsement of Newt was.
Newt isn't the perfect conservative, but he'll take the fight to both Obama and the liberal media, and that may be enough to win him a plurality in the primaries.
POST American| 12.6.11 @ 8:22AM
"----And notice, once again, as the election
campaign apporaches, the REAL issues
disappear."
SOME of those issues:
The unfolding, FULL-spectrum surveillance
police state
----the 11th hour of Globalist-RED China
sellout and TREASON
----the Globalist 'Shadow Goverment'
-----Socially engineered 'A---BORE--SHUN'
cult-your
-----the PRIVATE world banking and
EUGENICS borg UN
---The ILLEGAL, PRIVATE,
fractional reserve, psychopathic 'FED'
-----the 1.4 QUADRILLION in FAKE
USURY derivatives
------NAFTA and GATT
-------the ANT--icks of the 'benny violent',
EUGENICS driving, 'chair--IT--Abel' foundations
-------the John Wheeler cover up
----------the FUKISHIMA cover up
------------the CHEM-trail cover up
---------------the GMO cover up
-----------------EUGENIST weaponization of vaccines
PLUS -------------------a full century of bloody,
culture annihilating, genocidal
and utterly 'counter-FIT' ---HIS--story
---------------HUAC/ Nuremberg 2012----------------
CrackerHound| 12.6.11 @ 9:12AM
Alex Jones...is that you?
Jabber3| 12.6.11 @ 9:15AM
A closer inspection of Newt reveals that he has been at the "feeding trough" using his insider connections to take more than a million of taxpayer money from Freddie because they valued his "historian" credentials. Laughable. But not as laughable as appearing on a couch no less with Nancy endorsing liberal positions. Now Nancy threatens to write a "tell all book" using her background as member of the investigating panel that investigated Newt’s ethical violations and for which the House voted guilty 395 to 28. Newt the “pompous braggart” needs to repress his “superiority complex” and stop running his mouth in order to solidify his front runner position.
CrackerHound| 12.6.11 @ 9:38AM
Newt is a typical politician. Unfortunately we do not have the breath of fresh air we would all like as a candidate. What Newt DOES have is skill and desire to go in the direction we all want...fiscal discipline and economic growth. We want the constitution restored. I don't see anyone on the scene who can hit the ground running and accomplish this, except perhaps Gingrich.
It would take any of our other choices a full term just to figure out how things work, who's who, and who do we team up with to get the ball rolling.
It comes down to this...Romney is more like John McCain than Gingrich is. Newt has fire, Romney doesn't even have a spark.
Conserdude| 12.6.11 @ 9:41AM
Newt flat-out lied about his work for Freddie Mac, which hired him as an influence-peddler with Republicans on Capitol Hill. It's not complicated. His character flaws remain, with his recent attack on Washington politicians profiting off the housing collapse as though he wasn't one of them. If GOP voters are foolish enough to give Newt the nomination, say hello to a 2nd Obama term and a lost Supreme Court for at least a generation.
Peppermint Tea| 12.6.11 @ 9:38AM
What kind of President would Newt make? My guess is a year of dismantling Obamacare, etc., after which he starts his own maniac ideas to rule the world and take over the economy. He will also remind the Tea Party budget-cutters that he is the President. My thinking is that Mitt might be a little more of a listener than Newt.
CrackerHound| 12.6.11 @ 9:48AM
Yea, Romney will listen alright...to Republicans AND Democrats.
It's a sad state of affairs, but the left is our enemy and we are at war. You don't work with your enemies, you defeat them. Newt is more suited for that task.
The crisis that began in 2008 is the pretext under which our Constitutional Republic will end and Marxist-Socialism will begin. Crony Capitalism is leading to red-facism, or left wing facism.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-wing_fascism
Serious times ahead.
Hmmmm| 12.6.11 @ 5:39PM
You've GOT to be kidding! You say Mitt will listen to both republicans and democrats and think that Newt won't???? Did you not read the post you responded too? Newt has a massive history of trying to cram liberal ideas through (besides the Pelosi couch session)...all in the vein of his own ego building (his constant desire to be considered a historical figure). What he does after one or two good things is solely to lay the foundation for his own agenda, not a general conservative agenda. DO NOT TRUST NEWT WITH MORE POWER THAN HE ALREADY HAS (whether real or perceived).
Conserdude| 12.6.11 @ 9:38AM
Excuse me, but Romney's attack on Gingrich as a career politician is legit, but it should not be the only line against him. Romney indeed sought elective office previously in a very blue state and was mostly unsuccessful, but at least he tried against the odds to bring a two-party system to a state that hasn't had one in 50 years. Republican voters should understand, while I'm no enthusiast for Romney, the biggest charge against him--flip-flopping--is more applicable to Gingrich. More ominously, Gingrich is a sure loser in November against Obama with his high negatives, erractic and immature behavior, self-grandiosity, and strong dislikeability.
ncatty| 12.6.11 @ 10:25AM
Agreed.
Dave | 12.6.11 @ 9:41AM
Glancing over the landscape at The Big Picture, my ongoing concern for Republicans is their next shot. Will it hit the desired target, or end-up hitting them in the foot (again)?
If the Insider Old Boys are so damn wise, how do they account for gifting us with electables like "Mumbles" McCain and Bob "Help, I've Fallen Off The Stage and Can't Get Up" Dole?
Instead of snappy campaign slogans, just post a few signs around the D.C. forest that read:
RINO SEASON OPENING 2012. ENTER AT YOUR OWN RISK.
I got MY license. Anyone else?
Jane| 12.6.11 @ 9:47AM
Huntsman is the best candidate, yes he is very attractive and he sticks to his message unlike Romney who contradicts everything he says in a short period of time. I get a headache every time I listen to him. Gingrich is too old and fat, completely unattractive.
bill| 12.6.11 @ 10:07AM
Huntsman was Obama;s Ambassador in China, it's a SHAME.
Huntsman is a RINO and CLOWN...................
Dick Nome | 12.6.11 @ 11:12AM
If ever there was a spineless RINO, Huntsweenie is it. He is 'not a chance' candidate.
Dan| 12.6.11 @ 11:15AM
So Newtie is an oldster and a chubbster, is that it?
Are we selecting the chief executive of the United States, the Commander in Chief of the United States Armed Forces, or are we selecting some replacement for a member of some boy band.
We went with the "elegant" and "intelligent," slim, black man, and we got a devotee of the down low club, with a miserable wife, {we all know one of the prime reasons for her desperate misery...}, a guy hostile to just about everything Americana, and a guy without a clue, except that is a clue about ruining our economy and country.
I say we go with the aging chubbster.
chuck| 12.6.11 @ 12:29PM
Clint,
Now, that IS you, isn't it!
Ron Paul is going to get jealous!
Lt.Tragg| 12.7.11 @ 12:09AM
Jane, I will indulge the assumption that your comment is intended as a joke. Otherwise, it supports the view that women should not be allowed to vote.
bill| 12.6.11 @ 9:48AM
Newt vs Mitt: Fact Checks
Newt :
Pros: architect of the 1994 GOP revolution, mastermind behind series of legislation (BBA, Welfare Reform) backed by the conservatives, remained an established GOP icon
Cons: being too cozy with Bill Clinton on several key issues and responsible for GOP loss in 1998 mid-term, successfully ousted by the conservative wing of the GOP caucus, supported TARP, climate change, Dream Act............
Romney:
Pros: business executive and ran the Salt Lake Olympic, became GOP governor in the bluest state of MA, helped balance the state budget
Cons: helped enact Romneycare, supported TARP, abortion, gun-control, gay marriage, auto bailout, cap and trade....................
Verdict: Newt & Romney, they both are RINOs, DISQUALIFIED to be the GOP candidate, Guilty as Charge!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
CrackerHound| 12.6.11 @ 10:19AM
OK Bill...disqualifed.
What do we do now?
Do we accept four more years of Obama?
Rick Perry and Herman Cain...George Bush is a genius in comparison.
Ron Paul...insane
Bachmann...only Sarah Pailn is more villified and hated (I like her but not electable AT ALL)
These are our choices period. It's too late to run an insurgent campaign for someone else.
I welcome your ideas and rubuttal.
bill| 12.6.11 @ 10:34AM
You don't know nothing about Rick Perry.............
Rick Perry is as conservative as Ronald Regan.........
Dan| 12.6.11 @ 11:18AM
Perry isn't remotely ready to handle the challenges of being the standard-bearer, let alone the office that he's seeking.
Perry wasn't ready for prime time. He's like one of those highly rated college quarterbacks who flounders endlessly at the next level.
Perry needs to leave the race, and pronto so that we can focus on Romney, Gingrich, Bachmann and Santorum.
Bill| 12.6.11 @ 11:49AM
Rick Perry is the victim by the Obama's re-election Team, the liberal media, CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, and Rick perry was never given enough time to express his view on issues like taxation, regulations, immigration, and foreign policy. Nevertheless, he was articulate and honest about his records and stance on issues, unlike Mitt or Newt.
BUT FOR RICK PERRY
~TX IS A RIGHT TO WORK STATE
~TX LED AMERICA IN JOB CREATION
~TX BECAME THE FOREFRONT IN SECURING THE NATION'S BORDER
~TX ENACTED THE VOTER ID LAWS
~TX HAS THE STRICT ANTI-ABORTION LAW
~TX BECAME THE LARGEST OIL PRODUCING STATE IN AMERICA
~TX HAS THE LOWEST UNEMPLOYMENT RATE IN AMERICA
~TX RESPECTS THE SECOND AMENDMENT RIGHTS OF FELLOW TEXANS
~TX IS THE LEADING STATE BATTLING AGAINST THE EPA, THE OBAMACARE, THE OVERBURDENED REGULATIONS
RICK PERRY IS THE MOST ELECTABLE CANDIDATE IN THE GOP FIELD, WHO WILL DEFEAT OBAMA IN A LANDSLIDE.
I SALUTE RICK PERRY FOR HIS ACCOMPLISHMENT.
I HOPE AND PRAY FOR RICK PERRY.
chuck| 12.6.11 @ 12:34PM
Don't get me wrong, I like Perry. I have family in Texas, and they all think highly of him. But Perry is a victim of his own inability to articulate. Out of the gate, huge numbers, but with each debate, he continued to drop.
If he wants the nomination, he needs to find a way to better articulate the fine job he has done in Texas. Otherwise, he will be headed back to Austin.
Bill| 12.6.11 @ 1:03PM
With all due respect, you do not like Rick Perry, you support Newt or Mitt, and then they both lose and Obama gets another four years........................... UNACCEPTABLE.
chuck| 12.6.11 @ 1:31PM
How the hell do you know I don't like Perry? I was for Cain, right to the bitter end, but the bitter end was Saturday. My natural inclination is Newt, he was my former Congressman, but I am giving Perry a second look. Now is the time for Perry to step up to the plate, and knock it out of the park. All of Cain's supporters are looking for a new home. Is Perry the candidate? If so, he needs to prove it.
And your demeanor, Sir, is very much like a Paul-bot........demeaning, snide, and not very conducive to people taking a good look at your candidate.
Bill| 12.6.11 @ 2:08PM
Rick Perry is articulate and authentic and has a proven records on fiscal and social issues. He did step up to the plate. Unfortunately, he was smeared and was called out strike (if you like the baseball term), and was never given enough time to communicate with the American people eye to eye, by those liberal media, CNN & MSNBC.
If you supported Cain, that's a SHAME.
chuck| 12.6.11 @ 2:18PM
Newt was at 2% at the beginning of the debates, completely written off by everyone, myself included. But he manged to make the most with the time he was given. Perry needs to do the same. The failing is his, not the MSM who is against every Republican.
Bill| 12.6.11 @ 2:33PM
Every time Rick Perry spoke, he was censored and handcuffed by the MSM, because they scared of Rick Perry, and they liked Cain, Newt, Romney...........
chuck| 12.6.11 @ 2:45PM
Let me get this straight. The MSM liked Cain and Newt!!
LOL,ROFL,LMAO
I think I may have peed himself just a little bit.
idalily| 12.6.11 @ 3:20PM
Rick Perry articulate? Did you SEE his debate performances?
I was in the Perry camp when he first declared, but after two debates, I was done. You can't convince people of the rightness of your ideas and the strength of your principles by repeatedly staring, dumbstruck, at debate moderators who asks you questions. If Perry wants the nom, he'd better recover those poll points fast. Personally, I don't think he can.
Ryan| 12.6.11 @ 1:08PM
TEXAS LIKES ALL CAPS
TX Jim| 12.6.11 @ 4:29PM
As someone who doesn't approve of Obama, but wont vote for any of the current GOP clowns, I was enjoying the comments supporting one clown over another. Until..
Someone stepped up to the plate to defend Gov. Goodhair.. or Gov. Oops .. whatever you want to call him..
Here we go..
~TX IS A RIGHT TO WORK STATE
-- so I guess he influenced this back in 1947 when it occurred, even though he was born in 1950
~TX LED AMERICA IN JOB CREATION
-- yes thats awesome if a job at Wal Mart or McDonalds is your career goal.. or you can work on a military base at the PX
~TX BECAME THE FOREFRONT IN SECURING THE NATION'S BORDER
--uhhh no.. the sanctuary cities bill died.. all he did was beg Pres. Obama for more troops.. he did however support a DREAM Act bill in Texas.. I wouldn't call that securing the border..
~TX ENACTED THE VOTER ID LAWS
--wrong... passed the law and signed it.. he also left it up to the Feds to enforce it.. and the DOJ wont do it because its discriminatory.. he signed a toothless law.. Yay!
~TX HAS THE STRICT ANTI-ABORTION LAW
--another toothless law struck down by a GOP appointed judge.. really bad written law.. like it was written by a C or D student.. Do you know any in office?
~TX BECAME THE LARGEST OIL PRODUCING STATE IN AMERICA
--Ok I will give you this one.. I mean Rick shot and killed all those dinosaurs with his .45 and made them die in Texas so we could pump the oil thousands of centuries later..
~TX HAS THE LOWEST UNEMPLOYMENT RATE IN AMERICA
-- Just all kinds of wrong.. They are 5% points higher than the lowest state.. 28th.. you pulled this one out from where the good Lord split ya.
~TX RESPECTS THE SECOND AMENDMENT RIGHTS OF FELLOW TEXANS
--2nd amendment was passed in 1791.. Texas became a state in 1836.. been respecting it since then.. (relevance?)
~TX IS THE LEADING STATE BATTLING AGAINST THE EPA, THE OBAMACARE, THE OVERBURDENED REGULATIONS
--Really? Texas is:
The EPA lawsuit is pending.. (you got one right)
#1 beneficiary from NAFTA
#1 state getting Federal funds from Obamacare
RICK PERRY IS THE MOST ELECTABLE CANDIDATE IN THE GOP FIELD, WHO WILL DEFEAT OBAMA IN A LANDSLIDE.
--Yes this applied back in August.. the world has moved on since then.. you and the other 3% who support him may want to move on too..
ImissBuckley31| 12.6.11 @ 7:29PM
Thank You, TX Jim.
This had me cracking up, "Ok I will give you this one.. I mean Rick shot and killed all those dinosaurs with his .45 and made them die in Texas so we could pump the oil thousands of centuries later.."
I'd rather swim in the Hudson River, before I vote for any of these candidates.
CrackerHound| 12.6.11 @ 11:33AM
I have lived in Texas my whole life. I know plenty about Perry and I stick with my belief that he is not knowledgable enough or capable to run against Obama.
Hey, I like Rick. He was my first choice until I witnessed how he would perform. He has essentially been palinized, which is unfair but it is what it is.
Besides being unelectable, my honest belief NOW is that he does not have the grasp of facts or any kind of winning strategy.
Dan| 12.6.11 @ 11:44AM
You're overlooking something.
After George Herbert Walker Bush, after George Walker Bush, after Kay Bailey Hutchinson, after that idiot speechwriter for Bush who drafted his speech the evening of 9/11, after "Brownie," after LBJ, after all of that, --------------------------------- the rest of the party doesn't trust the judgement of Texas, nor Texans.
And that's a flat-out fact.
Perry's performance CONFIRMED suspicions for the rest of us about Texas, and about what's been going on in Texas.
Most of us haven't overlooked the fact that the lunatic Paul is from Texas, and representing Texas.
Bill| 12.6.11 @ 11:47AM
Rick Perry is the victim by the Obama's re-election Team, the liberal media, CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, and Rick perry was never given enough time to express his view on issues like taxation, regulations, immigration, and foreign policy. Nevertheless, he was articulate and honest about his records and stance on issues, unlike Mitt or Newt.
BUT FOR RICK PERRY
~TX IS A RIGHT TO WORK STATE
~TX LED AMERICA IN JOB CREATION
~TX BECAME THE FOREFRONT IN SECURING THE NATION'S BORDER
~TX ENACTED THE VOTER ID LAWS
~TX HAS THE STRICT ANTI-ABORTION LAW
~TX BECAME THE LARGEST OIL PRODUCING STATE IN AMERICA
~TX HAS THE LOWEST UNEMPLOYMENT RATE IN AMERICA
~TX RESPECTS THE SECOND AMENDMENT RIGHTS OF FELLOW TEXANS
~TX IS THE LEADING STATE BATTLING AGAINST THE EPA, THE OBAMACARE, THE OVERBURDENED REGULATIONS
RICK PERRY IS THE MOST ELECTABLE CANDIDATE IN THE GOP FIELD, WHO WILL DEFEAT OBAMA IN A LANDSLIDE.
I SALUTE RICK PERRY FOR HIS ACCOMPLISHMENT.
I HOPE AND PRAY FOR RICK PERRY.
Bill| 12.6.11 @ 11:48AM
Rick Perry is the victim by the Obama's re-election Team, the liberal media, CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, and Rick perry was never given enough time to express his view on issues like taxation, regulations, immigration, and foreign policy. Nevertheless, he was articulate and honest about his records and stance on issues, unlike Mitt or Newt.
BUT FOR RICK PERRY
~TX IS A RIGHT TO WORK STATE
~TX LED AMERICA IN JOB CREATION
~TX BECAME THE FOREFRONT IN SECURING THE NATION'S BORDER
~TX ENACTED THE VOTER ID LAWS
~TX HAS THE STRICT ANTI-ABORTION LAW
~TX BECAME THE LARGEST OIL PRODUCING STATE IN AMERICA
~TX HAS THE LOWEST UNEMPLOYMENT RATE IN AMERICA
~TX RESPECTS THE SECOND AMENDMENT RIGHTS OF FELLOW TEXANS
~TX IS THE LEADING STATE BATTLING AGAINST THE EPA, THE OBAMACARE, THE OVERBURDENED REGULATIONS
RICK PERRY IS THE MOST ELECTABLE CANDIDATE IN THE GOP FIELD, WHO WILL DEFEAT OBAMA IN A LANDSLIDE.
I SALUTE RICK PERRY FOR HIS ACCOMPLISHMENT.
I HOPE AND PRAY FOR RICK PERRY.
Al Adab| 12.6.11 @ 2:30PM
Totally off the subject but since we are talking TEXAS and tomorrow is Dec. 7th I want to include a post I saw elsewhere.
From: Officer commanding Alamo Palisade
TO: Signal Bridge USS Arizona
San Antonio Remembers.
Relevance is some things are worth fighting for. This is, I fear, our time and the hill gentlemen.
chuck| 12.6.11 @ 2:48PM
May God Bless all those who were injured or lost their lives during Pearl Harbor, and the ensuing war. We all owe them a debt of gratitude.
Worried For the Country| 12.6.11 @ 10:09AM
No, the Union Leader misfired.
Worried For the Country| 12.6.11 @ 10:14AM
Notice how the national media is now giving the Union Leader tons of air time to bash Mitt. They were on "This Week" on Sunday. Why? Because they see Mitt as the biggest threat to Obama. The Union Leader is a dupe for the left.
Dan| 12.6.11 @ 11:20AM
Mitt is as big a threat to the GOP as he ever would be to down low lover Obama.
Every issue that came before him were he in the Oval Office, would see a mad scramble to be the last voice advising him on the issue. There wouldn't be any sane consistency in his policies, for there's no consistency in the man himself.
Stop listening to Hugh Hewitt, who has been bought and paid for.
Worried For the Country| 12.6.11 @ 11:39AM
"No consistency in the man himself."
Mitt is not a perfect candidate. Granted. Most of his FFs came from run against Ted Kennedy in '94. He broke zero campaign promises as governor in MA. The conventional wisdom was new taxes would be required to solve the severe budget crisis. He instituted 8 of 10 government reforms he campaigned on. He vetoed 800 bills from the liberal legislature. I look at his actions and they've been honest.
Newt has been on both sides of many more issues just this year. For me his lobbying history (with ethanol and FreddieMAC and health care) in very troubling. I do like his feistiness taking on Obama. btw - Obama has more flip flops than Newt or Mitt.
Mitts has proven skills a turn around artist. He did this in business. He did this in MA and it did it for the olympics. He is best equipped to lead the effort to shrink government and balance the budget.
Dan| 12.6.11 @ 11:52AM
I have no trouble with Newt making a living using his influence that he gained while in office. That comes with the territory.
What Romney did with the Olympics, in which the whole thing was ridden with vast corruption, to be sure, is to his credit. He served the country well when he turned that around, and prevented an enormous American embarrassment.
But in your well crafted defense of Romney you're overlooking several things.
His inability to aggressively go after his political opposition. This is no time for some Bush clone out there praising the political opposition, which many of us believe Romney would be prone to do.
Which also drags in the fact that the Bush clan is staunchly behind Romney, and for many of us, that IS THE kiss of death. If a Bush is for you, after that second Bush term, then I'm against.
You didn't mention Romney's careful evasions four years ago on whether he was for or against "the surge" in Iraq, which McCain properly and thoroughly hammered him on.
I could go on, but there's really no purpose.
If Romney is the nominee I suppose I would have to hold my nose, --------------------- but I don't remotely think that Romney has the raw manhood, like a Rudy Giuliani for instance, for ripping and tearing into the vast regulatory overlay that presently strangles the American economy.
Worried For the Country| 12.6.11 @ 12:12PM
Dan, you are making news here? I guess I missed the Bush endorsement.
Mitt has vastly improved his political skills going against opponents. He was weak on this against Kennedy but he has be consistently strong against Obama. He's left the GOP opponents alone.
I am very worried about Newt's electability in the general. My survey of women (many of whom are right leaning) is troubling for Newt in the general.
Dan| 12.6.11 @ 12:29PM
He hasn't an aggressive mentality.
It's not in his nature to take his elbow and try to fire it through some guy's head. I haven't any doubt when Obama's team hits him on his Mormonism, and on the past misdeeds of Mormonism, he's going to whine in public and respond like a wounded fawn. We saw what Gingrich's initial response is like when Pelosi threatened him just yesterday.
I wonder if Romney ever played football when he was a kid, {but that's an aside}.
As for the Bush endorsement, you've forgotten how the women of that came out for him. And the women of that clan are NOT pro-life. And the women of that irritating clan would not have spoken out of turn. Jeb has made it clear who he is for, and I've no doubt that if Romney thought it helpful that Bush should endorse, then that endorsement would already have been tendered.
I don't see any evidence of "vastly improved ... political skills." For if there were such skills why then are his numbers EXACTLY the same as they were four years ago. Why can't he point to numbers of people who didn't support him four years ago but are now persuaded of the viability and the prudence of his candidacy.
"[C]onsistently strong" against Obama? What does that really consist of? Romney is tainted big time with his Romney care, and his misguided fondness for green gimmickry which has now been completely detonated by revelations of how it all has been contrived, {which he STILL backs, despite the avalanche of new evidence about the whole thing}.
I would prefer we selected Gingrich, Santorum or Bachmann to Romney.
AND I'm not persuaded that Romney is any more electable than Gingrich or the others. When the media and the left and Obama gets done with the Mormon, America is going to know more about Mormonism than they ever wanted to learn.
And Romney isn't remotely ready for that onslaught.
Worried For the Country| 12.6.11 @ 12:47PM
Are you saying America will never elect a Mormon President? Just like they would never elect a black President?
You complain about Mitt's fondness for 'green gimmickry' and you support Newt? Newt was prominently on the couch with Nancy Pelosi. He recently said "but I've never been for cap and trade". Now it came out and he signed a letter pushing Bush for cap and trade. Mitt simply said the science shows there has been warming and he doesn't know how much is caused by man. He is vigorously against cap and trade. He is against spending trillions on a folly. Newt has come out recently echoing Mitt's position almost word for word.
Dan| 12.6.11 @ 2:30PM
I'm not sure I can support Romney.
I don't like the deception, a deception that had it's origin in Mass, when he was Governor, when he started destroying emails and internal memos, when he destroyed hard drives.
I don't like six long years of deception.
How can anybody?
I don't mind the occasional movement on positions, such as Gingrich tilting towards global warming before tacking sharply away from it. Such movement reflected growing knowledge about the origins of AGW.
But Romney, ------------ right now he's so frightened of moving off a position that he can't bring himself to reflect the wider shift on AGW, because if he did, he's be blasted for yet one more flip.
Romney has locked himself into a corner.
And I don't have some benevolent gaze when I peruse Mormonism.
Understand this, and understand it well. Error has no rights. A religious creed is a mental proposition like any other, and subject to objective scrutiny like any other.
And if that creed can't pass a reasonable test.............
Worried For the Country| 12.6.11 @ 2:43PM
Dan it sounds like you are a member of a cult.
The anti-Romney cult. Very sad.
Are you a dupe for the left wing media and Obama campaign. The non-story on destroyed emails, etc. was leaked by Deval Patrick's staff (on the taxpayers dime) to the Boston Globe. It turns out Romney did nothing illegal or unusual.
Worried For the Country| 12.6.11 @ 12:38PM
"or ripping and tearing into the vast regulatory overlay that presently strangles the American economy"
I have to disagree. That is what he did in MA. He did 8 of 10 promised reforms. He tried the other 2 but they were strong patronage havens for the democrat legislature and he was blocked because the dems controllled 90% of the votes. He did this in companies he took over (granted when you own the company you have complete control). He also did this at the olympics. I've been dying for a businessman to get in there and reform and shrink government since Perot. We desperately need this kind of reform.
Newt is great on ideas. He is clearly very smart. (as is Romney). Unfortunately. at least half of Newt's ideas call for big government solutions. Did you Sen. Tom Coburn's scathing critique of Newt's leadership when they worked together in the house?
bill| 12.6.11 @ 10:20AM
Playoff : Newt vs Mitt (Both are hurt and bleeding)
Winner: Rick Perry (America's Got Talent!)
Dan| 12.6.11 @ 11:21AM
Then add one more bullet point:
Loser: the American people!
Bill| 12.6.11 @ 11:50AM
HERE IS WHY I'M FOR RICK PERRY:
BUT FOR RICK PERRY
~TX IS A RIGHT TO WORK STATE
~TX LED AMERICA IN JOB CREATION
~TX BECAME THE FOREFRONT IN SECURING THE NATION'S BORDER
~TX ENACTED THE VOTER ID LAWS
~TX HAS THE STRICT ANTI-ABORTION LAW
~TX BECAME THE LARGEST OIL PRODUCING STATE IN AMERICA
~TX HAS THE LOWEST UNEMPLOYMENT RATE IN AMERICA
~TX RESPECTS THE SECOND AMENDMENT RIGHTS OF FELLOW TEXANS
~TX IS THE LEADING STATE BATTLING AGAINST THE EPA, THE OBAMACARE, THE OVERBURDENED REGULATIONS
RICK PERRY IS THE MOST ELECTABLE CANDIDATE IN THE GOP FIELD, WHO WILL DEFEAT OBAMA IN A LANDSLIDE.
I SALUTE RICK PERRY FOR HIS ACCOMPLISHMENT.
I HOPE AND PRAY FOR RICK PERRY.
Al Adab| 12.6.11 @ 10:24AM
We are doing a wonderful job for the Democrats. Every week it seems we kill off another of our own potential candidates and reinforce the Obama machine.
Why are we actually debating the pros and cons of the various GOP contenders to our own detriment? What we need is the one of principle, constancy, and courage who can replace the disgrace currently in the White House.
However, the election of an accomodationist republican serves no good purpose and gains little in defense of freedom and Constitutional government. The Conservative movement must regain its ascendancy in the GOP if this nation is to survive. The issue is that serious.
Dan| 12.6.11 @ 11:24AM
10% plus real unemployment, over 20% plus real underemployment.
For black men aged 18 to 25, unemployment exceeds 50%.
Yea, that Obama "machine," or Wehrmacht, {War Machine} just keeps rolling along.
W| 12.6.11 @ 11:27AM
Al Adab
I respect your oinions on all issues here, but I must disagree with you on Romney. I agree he is not a movement conservative, but aside from Goldwater and Reagan who was/is?
Reagan was a great president, but as governor of California he raised taxes and signed an abortion bill. Governors tend to be pragmatic managers because they have to balance the state budgets and most state legislatures are not as ideological as Congress. Reagan's great legacy is that he cut taxes, after first raising taxes, and then presided over the defeat of the Soviets with the help of the brave Solidarity/Lech Walessa, Pople John Paul, and Margaret Thatcher.
I am not comparing Romney to Reagan for conservative beliefs, but either Romney or Newt are much better than Obama. Defeating Obama has to be the number one goal. Second is to elect more conservatives to Congress to keep either Romney or Newt true to conservative principles. We do not need another compassionate conservative or big government conservative.
I agree with you that now the MSM and many here are ready to pounce on Newt and Romney such as "Romney changed his views" or Newt was divorced twice. So what? Reagan was divorced and had some goofy children. As long as Romney is changing his views to conservative views such as against abortion and cutting taxes, what is the problem? Do we want to destroy Newt and Romney like Cain?
Hopefully, Romney, if elected, will not be an accomodationist and raise taxes, like Bush 1, because he knows he will be a one term president like Bush 1 and Obama.
Let us keep our focus on defeating Obam and not destroying all our candidates in search of the perfect candidate.
Worried For the Country| 12.6.11 @ 12:16PM
I don't think Romney will raise taxes. I also believe him when he says he'll nominate conservative judges. Why? He didn't break campaign promises to the voters when he was governor and he is now strongly against raising taxes and conservative judges. He is also strongly for shrinking government.
Al Adab| 12.6.11 @ 12:23PM
W:
Of course we agree much more than disagree. I do fear that the election of Romney, who I adjudge to be to the left of McCain even, would only involve the slower implementation of the Obama/statist agenda. The ongoing compromise by the republicans (as opposed to the Conservatives) with the centralizing "progressive" agenda would, I fear, continue under a Romney administration. That wing of the GOP, the Rockefeller/Romney (George) wing has opposed the Conservative Movement all along. As to the possibility that Romney is actually moving his principles rightward for something more than expediency remains to be seen, but seems a bad bet to me
Again though my original premise is that we in fact are doing the democrats a great service by our "killing our wounded" as it were. Thanks as always for your thoughtful analysis.
RCV| 12.6.11 @ 10:23PM
Al Adab, your analysis is spot-on. As a Democrat, I've been amazed how Republicans have run this primary campaign, throwing away a great shot at the White House by systematically highlighting each other's flaws instead of going after their opponent. At this point, it may be difficult to recover with any viable candidate left standing. Perplexing strategy.
W| 12.7.11 @ 8:44AM
Republicans are more critical of their candidates than Dems. Bubba would have been forced out of the campaign after ther draft dodger and Jennifer Flowers issues. Obama would never have been our candidate with his association with the racist, anti semitic, anti american Wright, and Ayers.
Republicans abandoned Nixon and advised him to resign. Democrats surrounded the wagons to defend Bubba.
It is not strategy. It is just the way it is. But it does benefit the Dems who play only to win.
bill| 12.6.11 @ 10:35AM
Playoff : Newt & Mitt
Wildcard : Rick perry
Winner: Rick Perry (MIRACLE)
Mary Beth| 12.6.11 @ 11:29AM
I'm an Irish Catholic girl from Philly and I support Rick Santorum for President.
Dan| 12.6.11 @ 11:46AM
Congratulations.
You seem to be the only one............
W| 12.6.11 @ 12:01PM
I voted for Santorum three times for senator. He is well qualified but he just has not caught on. Maybe he will do better in the primaries.
Bill| 12.6.11 @ 12:06PM
With all due respect, Rick Santroum lost his senate re-election bid in 2006.....................
W| 12.6.11 @ 12:20PM
I know he lost. The " pure conservatives" abandoned Santorum in 2006 because Santorum supported Specter against Toomey in 2004. So we got an empty suit liberal Bob Casey. Santorum supported Specter at the request of Bush who wanted Specter on the judiciary committee for his nominees, such as Alito. Also, 2006 was a disaster for Republicans due to the Iraq War, supported by Santorum, and Bush's unpopularity.
Bill| 12.6.11 @ 12:29PM
I like Rick Santorum, but where is his plan on fiscal issue like taxation, regulation, the federal bureaucracy, deficit and job creation?
I think Rick Santorum is running out of time being a viable GOP contender for 2012.
Dan| 12.6.11 @ 12:30PM
Yea, due to that idiot Bush, and all things Bush, who oversaw the eradication of vast numbers of decent, strong Conservatives.
Bill| 12.6.11 @ 12:45PM
Rick Santorum, voted for the Medicare Part D, fumbled and fumed in the debate (with Bob Casey), and that contributed to his downfall in the election day.
Same year, Gov Rick Perry elected for the second time in TX.
My plea is that:
PLEASE DO NOT WASTE YOUR VOTE
HELP ELECT RICK PERRY
W| 12.6.11 @ 1:04PM
Bill
Bob Casey Jr.'s father Bob Casey was a very popular governor of Pa. He was strongly pro life and was barred by Bubba from speaking at the 1992 Dem Convention.
During the 2006 senate campaign Casey Jr pretended he was his Dad, and that took away the abortion issue from Santorum. That left loser issues like Iraq and support of George Bush.
Bill| 12.6.11 @ 2:14PM
I'm still considering Rick Santorum as Rick Perry's VP, only to the point of electoral gain , that will make PA be a battleground state and force Obama to campaign in PA, diverting resources and time, and that will help defeat Obama in a landslide.
wodiej| 12.6.11 @ 2:27PM
This country is not far right and Santorum does not appeal to the majority of the electorate. Most people don't care if someone else goes to church or has a gay family member. They care if they have a job and a roof over their head. All Santorum does is talk about kids and family.
Bill| 12.6.11 @ 11:53AM
MY DREAM GOP TEAM FOR 2012:
PRESIDENT: RICK PERRY
VP: MITCH DANIEL
AG: MICHELLE BACHMANN
TREASURY: PAUL RYAN
SECRETARY OF STATE: RICK SANTORUM
ANY ONE AGREE WITH ME?
Bill| 12.6.11 @ 12:07PM
With all due respect, didn't Rick Santorum lose his senate bid in 2006?
Bill| 12.6.11 @ 12:08PM
With all due respect, didn't Rick Santorum lose his senate bid in 2006?
By the way, I'm a Catholic..............
Ken (Old Texican)| 12.6.11 @ 12:48PM
Bill,
I honestly believe Governor Perry is our guy...OUR guy.
He is not good at one liners in MSM "debates" however.
If anyone here is a serious American patriot, he or she will drop in on youtube and hear Governor Perry express HIS plans for the country....in more than one sentence.
Unlike the other candidates, Governor Perry has DONE IT!
Any of you idiots that are judging a good man on four sentences in the so-called debates deserve whatever idiot you vote for.
Please get smarter.
PS: If you don't like Texans...you must not like success.
Al Adab| 12.6.11 @ 1:02PM
I think its the accent Ken. To them Texans sound like NY or NJ to us.
Bill| 12.6.11 @ 1:05PM
Ken, I love you............You're my good Christian friend.
CrackerHound| 12.6.11 @ 1:34PM
"Any of you idiots that are judging a good man on four sentences in the so-called debates deserve whatever idiot you vote for."
Ken,
As a fellow Texan and former cheerleader of Perry for president, did you see his "drunk speech" in NH? Did you see him imply that the voting age was 21 and then get the election date wrong?
It wasn't just the four sentences in the debate. He had no command of facts or the issues. He just gave a very strong impression that he would fold under pressure.
I know he is way smarter than he looked but then so was Bush. Hell, they're both smarter than Obama by miles.
I'm open for a comeback on his part but as of now I am forced to go with Newt who was almost everyone's second choice (My third choice) as the others just completely fell apart.
Bill| 12.6.11 @ 2:39PM
CH, Gov. Rick Perry was NOT drunk in NH. How about the fact that Rick Perry created one million jobs in TX, helped enact legislation cracking down on abortion and illegal immigrants, allocated $400 million state money in securing the border and sent the TX National Guard in the border. He fought EPA and the unions.
If you don't like Rick Perry, then you get Obama.
wodiej| 12.6.11 @ 2:24PM
That's a way to get people on your side-call them idiots.
Ken (Old Texican)| 12.6.11 @ 6:27PM
OK, Idiot............be on my side or die of stupid.
(Smile)
David| 12.6.11 @ 12:57PM
Rather have Mitt than Newt any day.
Bill| 12.6.11 @ 1:06PM
Rather have Rick Perry than Newt or Mitt any Tuesday.
Worried For the Country| 12.6.11 @ 2:38PM
I'm sorry for what has happened to Rick Perry. He's a better man than the way he's been characterized.
However, many of his problems are self inflicted. I believe he jumped into the race before he was really ready on issues outside of Texas.
Bill| 12.6.11 @ 2:44PM
Rick Perry governed, a state that has a population over 25 millions, based on conservative principle-freedom, free-enterprise, and limited government. He supported gun rights, banning abortion, and same-sex marriage. He is articulate, authentic, and a good christian. He is the REAL DEAL.
bluecollarbytes| 12.6.11 @ 3:25PM
At least we 'know' who our candidates are, unlike the immaculately-conceived Obama.
I like Newt now, out of the top 2. He has his cringe-worthy moments. And he's certain to tick off conservatives at times, like Romney. But Newt can connect with everyday voters who pay minimal attention to politics. Newt has the potential to be a conservative president. Mitt? If Romney prevails in the primaries, so be it.
Obama must be defeated.
Bill| 12.6.11 @ 3:41PM
That's my plan B.
deerjerkydave| 12.6.11 @ 4:14PM
Andrew,
Mitt also praised Newt in that interview. In fact, all of Mitt's attacks on his fellow candidates have been pretty mild. I just read an article over on Politico complaining that Mitt has been too soft, playing it too safe with the other candidates. So far this strategy has worked as nearly every other campaign has imploded. The last man standing now is Newt who also has a very good chance of imploding. Perhaps we'll see Romney take the gloves off in the final stretch here in Iowa. But maybe not.
martin j smith| 12.6.11 @ 4:35PM
Romney has joined NO list--meaning I would not vote for him and Paul and Huntsman.
Eric D.| 12.6.11 @ 11:45PM
Interesting....those were the 3 I like the most. lol
Mildred R Bean| 12.6.11 @ 5:07PM
Can somebody explain Gingrich's flip flop on when human life begins?
Does a sane catholic office-seeker tell the Pope he's wrong on a basic critical issue, and then change his mind two days later?
Or was it a nefarious plot by his enemies (Romney, Palin, or the Iranians) to make him look like a total fool?
POST American| 12.6.11 @ 5:33PM
ASIDE from being Globalists and, thereby,
TRAITORS, Perry, Cain and, most certainly,
Gingrich, are PSYCHOPATHS. They chill
to the bone one and all.
Romney is also a Globalist and, as a warm
proponent of 'a--bore-shun' culture, a
confirmed and unrepentant EUGENIST.
He might not be a psychopath, but he
is the cardboard of a psychopathic,
USURY driven implosion.
RON PAUL, though we don't quite agree
on all points, remains the ONLY recognizably
American figure on the POST American scene.
--------------HUAC/ Nuremberg 2012---------------
Who Knows?| 12.6.11 @ 6:11PM
Does the author of this piece not know that Gingrich is NO conservative?
Ah, the CW kultur smog permeates so many minds.
I used to be a huge fan of Newt. Being almost 70 years of age, I've followed his career since when he was a rabble rouser in the House.
Well, since I haven't lost my mind or my memories, YET, and since there are so many other pundits who've made a living paying attention to the words AND actions of people like Gingrich, maybe the grownups will get the word out to the youngsters and/or others who haven't been paying attention.
Gingrich has a BAD history, and his ability to use his slick talking to UNBELIEVABLY seem to be the frontrunner for the GOP presidential nominee will predictably come around to bite him in his fat ass.
Imagine if the other slickster, wee willie clinton, were allowed to run for prez again. What a gold mine of BAD HISTORY his opponents could use to take him down.
Nature abhors a vacuum. Political contests, especially the one we're now "enjoying", offer a wide field for eager contestants to fill with their best shots.
Talk about a ripe AND rotten bad apple!
It won't take much to bring Newt back down to where he was before he assumed the not-Romney position---IMHO.
Either way---it looks like America is in for one of the most amusing and entertaining, but most vitally, edifying, primaries in my lifetime!
ENJOY IT---and, become as aware of all the tricks the slimy bastards use, as possible.
Finally---as for taking Romney down for having lost so many previous elections goes: remember, he was always competing, and apparently learning from his experiences.
Writing as someone who early on wrote him off due to Romneycare, because of the limited cast of contestants willing to seek the GOP mantle, I've reluctantly come to the conclusion that he may be okay---certainly better than GWB turned out to be!
We'll soon enough see.
james lewis| 12.6.11 @ 6:51PM
I would love to hear Newt say, "No offense Mitt, but you are a career politician too, just not a very successful one".
deerjerkydave| 12.6.11 @ 9:52PM
I would love to see Newt run for governor in the state of Massachusetts and win.
Eric Simpson| 12.6.11 @ 6:56PM
Romney... it's like he's politically autistic.
He can't FEEL the electorate, as if conservatives are some sort of statistic, to which formulaic or mechanistic actions should be applied. In theory conservatives could respond to the "career politician" argument, but it simply does not apply right now as an effective line of attack against Gingrich. Hard to explain why. It could be explained, with a couple of paragraphs perhaps. For most of us, though, no explanation is needed. We simply know that it's not an attack that will work in this case.
More effective lines of attack vs Newt are obvious to most of us. LIKE: If Newt isn't too old, his hoary & plump appearance makes him seem like the admitted Grandpa he is. We're not concerned with his alleged moral transgressions. It's the issues. And about the issues, we all see it: Newt THINKS TOO MUCH. While he is typically conservative, you never know when his "untidy mind" is going to become the victim of its own overthinking, and lead him to side with the extreme left on some critical issue. The depth of his overthinking leaves him less trustworthy to conservatives than even Romney. His record of taking liberal stands is consistent with this idea.
While in contrast to Cain who stood in a straight & uncomplicated way for conservative principles, Newt has to think things through his "layers of enlightenment." As it is, why is he ALWAYS cozying up (in person) with uber-liberals. And he's too much of a neocon.
PolitcalWorldChampion| 12.6.11 @ 10:39PM
Sorry, if I missed it above or if already coined, but has anyone delved into the complex matter of Newt simply being a dough boy?? I think empty suit is actually filled with some flour and yeast perhaps a few nuts and raisins. But for damn sure no chocolate or anything for us. Well hell no! A greedy face like that doesn't part with goodies.
Jaime Hardisty| 12.6.11 @ 10:55PM
Romney has great hair and lots of money. He would have the Republican nomination sewn up except:
1. He isn't a Republican; and
2. He is a weasel.
Shouldn't he be running for the Dem Party nomination? He has a record of accomplishing liberal objectives.
The Bruce| 12.7.11 @ 3:02AM
Ah, but Jaime, how can you ignore the hair? The hair, I tell you!!!!
(kidding)
Robert| 12.6.11 @ 11:40PM
Hello everyone. I am an undeclared voter that is up on political news. I have not decided on who to vote for yet, but the idea that anyone would reelect Obama is, in my mind, crazy. My and others' quality of life has gone down dramatically during his time in office. I will definitely not support his reelection. To reelect the person that has not addressed years of economic struggle would be like reelecting Hitler during a Holocaust.
SaavyBlogReader| 12.6.11 @ 11:50PM
Yeah, if you look at it one way, we know that the Obama years haven't worked and won't work economically. If we get somebody else in there, at least there's a CHANCE they will fix something with regards to our national prosperity. 3 strikes (3 yrs of Obama) and you're out. Time for a new batter to be up.
The Bruce| 12.7.11 @ 2:52AM
"To reelect the person that has not addressed years of economic struggle..."
So, are you channeling Karl Marx intentionally and directly, or was it an afterthought planted into your brain by our government-run (socialist) school system???
Do tell.
Robert| 12.8.11 @ 6:39AM
Hi Bruce. So, I'm not quite sure what you're getting at. It sounds like I'm coming off to you as somewhat communist? Not sure though. If that's what you mean, I'd like to say that I'm not looking for any handouts. I'm not looking for government welfare, but I am looking for leaders that can provide the conditions for a strong free market where people can provide for themselves. And there have been around 30 million unemployed people in the U.S. that probably value that as well. My only point I was trying to make is this: why continue supporting someone who is not solving the biggest problem facing America? The definition of insanity is trying the same thing over and over again while expecting different results.
The Bruce| 12.7.11 @ 3:00AM
Robert, if you wish to be reimbursed as the paid equivalent of a talk-radio "seminar-caller," I suggest you upgrade your rhetoric. You don't even sound convincing on paper-- more like a Mandarin trying to hide his dialect.
The Bruce| 12.7.11 @ 2:48AM
One hundred and thirty seven posts on this forum and God didn't command Margie what to post in "His" name, as if she's the voice of God? Wow, I'm shocked. With all of her rhetoric, one would think she believes she's a communication cable plugged directly into God.
Thank God some heavenly cable guy temporarily disconnected her service by mistake.
Note to Margie: Looking forward to tea-bagging you @ the Lake of Hell
MikeG| 12.7.11 @ 7:31AM
check out Lord's article on demonizing of conservatives. She is in full mode.
wedding dresses | 12.7.11 @ 4:15AM
Thank you for posting this article. I also plugged the show on Face book, with mixed results from my friends. All I ask of people, whether they are familiar with homeopathy or not, is to watch the story.
It is useful for me,thanks for your sharing.
POST American| 12.8.11 @ 3:05AM
----------------------FINAL WORD-----------------------
----ONE and all, CHECK OUT
'GOV'T Activating FEMA CAMPS
Across the Nation'
-Kurt Nimmo
INFOWARS article
(hours ago)
"Understand, working in the camps
is to be the 'new' E-CON-omy. And
I mean not just manning the camps
--but you yourself IN the camps are
to be working too ---at slave wages."
-ALEX JONES
We've warned you tirelessly of the
unfolding Globalist RED China sellout
and TREASON OP for some time.
----YOU FAILED TO HEED THE WARNINGS----
Rectum worship, relentless, self basting
programming, tainted food, water and air
and '--the knee-dull' have taken their toll.
NOW, that op is not simply CON--solidating
--but, the RED China 'model' ---IS HERE.
"George Washington turned on the ILLUMINATI.
They were thriown out of America back in 1800.
They snuck back in, over time, thru the
China opium family funded Yale secret
societies."
WE are now about to pay the awesome
compound interest on THEIR unacknowledged,
and infintely dark, spiritual kharma.
Time to STOP obediently adapting to each,
and every lower level of functioning and corruption.
CLEAN OUT your churches or form your own.
HURL your TVs and surveillance device PCs.
Pull the plug on the 'POP' culture and franchise
slums in any and every way you possibly can.
Close with your family, the generations, your
locality, your genuine culture.
Time to drop the slop ------AND MOVE.
---------------HUAC/ Nuremberg 2012----------------
Accept NO substitutes ---or stalling.
-------------------THIS IS SERIOUS---------------------