-
Artur Davis Says Scandals Are Real
May 19, 2013 | 3 comments
-
Good New Book: ‘Precipice’
May 19, 2013 | 1 comment
-
A Long Record of Obamite Thuggery
May 16, 2013 | 4 comments
-
DeMint Supports Defense
May 14, 2013 | 5 comments
-
Update on Tom Perez
May 14, 2013 | 0 comments
The Spectacle Blog
Jennifer Rubin is busting Newt Gingrich’s chops again and again. But she’s not the only one. Steve Chapman weighs in here. So does Ann Coulter. So does NetRight Daily. Michelle Malkin long has been a critic. And while Gingrich’s whoring out to Freddie Mac (and concomitant flacking for Fannie Mae) are now getting lots of deserved attention, I’ve always been furious at him for his egregious ethanol pandering (described by NRO’s Jim Geraghty as “industrial-strength demagoguery”) even though I didn’t know this is another example of him just selling out to the highest bidder.
Well, in the opening segment of my radio show tonight, “Hillyer Time,” from 8:05 to 8:15 CENTRAL time, I’ll be analyzing Gingrich’s chances should he somehow get into a general election battle with The One Obama. Hint: It isn’t pretty. From a purely neutral analytical standpoint, I think just about every reasonable observer would conclude that Gingrich looks like one of the weakest general-election candidates Republicans could possibly choose.
But there is a better reason than that to listen to Hillyer Time tonight. My guest for the middle two segments (approx 8:15 to 8:45 CENTRAL time) will be none other than the esteemed founder and editor of The American Spectator, R. Emmett Tyrrell. We’ll be cutting through the Kultursmog to look at the overall American political scene. I’m rather down on GOP presidential candidates right now, but Tyrrell is likely to remind us why conservatives have reason for optimism about politics as a whole.
Please listen in; the web site gets superb reception nationwide. It’s 106.5 FM in Mobile, WAVH. Again, the time for the whole show is 8-9 CENTRAL. Listener call-ins are welcome in the second half-hour.
Jack in Wi| 11.17.11 @ 11:58AM
Stick the fork in him and take him out of the oven he is done. That is what I have been predicting for weeks. Another great triumph for Jack from Wi. Quin you have actually done some respectable reporting, as well.
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 11.17.11 @ 3:29PM
Gingrich has more dirty underwear than a crack whore.
Jack in Wi| 11.17.11 @ 3:37PM
More great news from Iowa, for Ron Paul. The Iowa State University poll has Ron Paul at 20% and buffoon business man Herman Cain at at 24%. The also rans are Romney and Gingrich. More good news on the idiocy of the neocons. Court pollster Rassmussen has Gingrich at 35%. he has romney and Cain folowing. Of course he has Ron Paul in fourth place like always. Rassmussen and his puff poll didn'tget the memmo that Newt blew himself up in a suicide bomb yesterday when his bailouts by Fanny Mae and the ethanol industry came out. Rassmussen has been cooking the books for the neocons the whole election. Now he and the Limbaugh gang get caught with egg all over their faces.
florin| 11.17.11 @ 3:51PM
Why are gingrich's poll numbers so high in Iowa??? What the heck is happening here???
Jack in Wi| 11.17.11 @ 7:49PM
Rasmussen has been cooking his polls for months to do what his corporate masters want. There has been a concerted effort to push Gingrich forward, by his neocon masters and the usual suspects in the media. That includes Talk radio and the Neoconservative intellectual media. Rasmussen has been caught with his pants down by Gingrich's unexpected suicide bomb which exploded yesterday, showing all the corrupt millions Gingrich got from Fannie Mae and the ethanol industry. Frankly how did he think he could get away with it, and all his other baggage? Well Limbaugh and all the rest have huge egg all over their faces. They have been played as fools by a master con man. They never would have puffed the guy if they had known about all the millions Gingrich got from Fannie Mae and the ethanol industry.
2 polls [ Bloomberg and Iowa State ] were released in the last 2 days which show Ron Paul in second place rising and Romney not doing so well. in Iowa. Rasmussen and his cooked polls have been a farce for a long time. Any pollster can cook the numbers anyway he likes. But is reality time now and the truth is coming out.
Well I have been saying for weeks that was down to Romney and Paul. They are the only ones with the staying power for the long haul. Gingrich, Cain and Perry have imploded.
Mimi| 11.18.11 @ 11:44AM
why don't you check out his web-site....Look at his PLAN and you will know why his support has increased. Most people see the NEW NEWT, and don't have the luxury of dwelling on the mans past that was long ago forgiven and see the decent changed man he has become. For Gods sake we have a COUNTRY TO SAVE....this is no "USUAL" election or time to be uninformed! Have faith in the New Newt...WE desparately need his talent, intellect, historical framework and YES his decency!!!!@
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 11.18.11 @ 1:37PM
You can't clean a crack whore's underwear.
Rogue Elephant| 11.17.11 @ 12:05PM
Romney = Obama's second term. This is why the media protects him, for now.
I'll hold my nose and vote for Newt.
Wayne| 11.17.11 @ 12:10PM
So you guys do your best to knock out Cain, and now you go after Gingrich. The lot of you make me sick.
X. Actley| 11.17.11 @ 2:08PM
Yeah, guys, you need to apologize RIGHT NOW for not wanting to end up with a weak candidate!
Simon Templar| 11.17.11 @ 2:24PM
You need to apologize for being a useful idiot incapable of seeing the forest from the trees.
Another establishment Romney supporter?
I always thought that this useful idiot concept was just limited to the left. I stand corrected.
X. Actley| 11.17.11 @ 2:39PM
So your plan is to avoid having Romney as a candidate by getting Republicans to look the other way for candidates who crumple under pressure ... because if we can just get Republicans to play nice in the primary season the Democrats will play nice in the general election!
Romney's not the only candidate who can take the heat. I don't think Gingrich is as weak as some are trying to make him out to be, but the proof of that is in how he takes the heat not in trying to give him a free pass. If he can't take the heat then he shouldn't be the nominee.
I think Ron Paul has a shot at it, too, in spite of Clint's best efforts.
Cain ditched an interview today because it was going to be videotaped. Perry's got a fan posting below who is hoping that Perry could avoid having to go face-to-face with Obama. These are not good signs of an ability to take the heat.
Simon Templar| 11.17.11 @ 3:22PM
You do not have a clue has to what my plan is nor what I think, nor do you care to know. Neither do you have a clue as to what is happening politically in this primary season. You make the ridiculous assertion that Ken wants Perry to avoid a debate with Obama because that is what you want to read and believe.
My god, Ron Paul has a shot, please. Ok, he gets the nomination in your world. He would lose in a landslide..shit I may vote for Obama, I would at least like to stay alive under socialism. That was a joke to make a point.
The conclusions you draw about these candidates are not only ridiculous but immature and sophmoric.
Yeah, the guy ditched one interview out of hundreds to make a video and he can not take the heat. The guy is accused of sexual harrasment and gives a nationally televised speech and Q and A with the press and does a spectacular job at it and he can not take the heat. Yeah, that is logical.
I wish I had the power to put you in that spot. You would piss your pants like a little girl.
See, you, and many here, are little twerps that sit in your basement feeling so great about yourself and attempting to boost your self esteem with your sophmoric diatribes.
Now, you will assume I am a Cain supporter, ignore everything I said, tell me what I think, and dismiss me as just a Caniac that can not take any criticism of their choice. My lord, this is getting old.
You are like many on these blogs incapable of having a coherent argument or discussion because you have no listening skills, no reasoning skills, nor the ability to consider anyone's point of view or perspective other than your own.
W| 11.17.11 @ 3:46PM
Simon,
Who do you like and why?
Simon Templar| 11.17.11 @ 4:09PM
Why do you want to know this?
I am get the feeling that you are not hearing me nor understand what I am trying to get across here.
What I want is the best candidate picked through the best process that represents the will and desires of the majority of the electorate. I want someone who is real, sincere, and willing to do what is needed to save this Republic.
I want conservatives to stop defeating themselves, stop being played by liberals, start taking control of the narrative. I want them to start acting smart and show some respect for each other and some respect for truth.
I you can not control your own narrative, participate in upholding the double standards created by liberals, and can not defend your own candidates from the lies and smears of the opposition's media, you will never win. This is not the sole responsibility of the candidates to deal with or prove they can deal with MSM lie campaigns to be fit to run, represent us, or be qualified to be our President. If this is your sole criteria, you are not only an idiot but a loser and I mean that literally.
It is like playing a footbal game where your opposition sets the rules of the game, changes them at their whim, has a cheerleading section in the media covering the game, and have the umpires in their back pocket. You have idiots actually going along with this and supporting this sham. You have Klavan from PJ media telling us it is good for us..we should not demand anything else or change it.
W| 11.17.11 @ 7:21PM
Simon
The reason for the question is that since you seem passionate and well informed about politcs, I wanted to hear your reasons for your favorite candidate or candidates. Not really interested in debating my favorite against yours. They all have good and bad points.
It seems easier to list the negatives of each candidate than the positives.
It is fine to say what you are against and criticize the media and the Republican circular firing squad, but we still have to make the case for our candidate.
The Dems and media will certainly not make the case for any Republican.
If you don't want to answer, no problem.
X. Actley| 11.17.11 @ 3:50PM
Taking the heat means winning support in spite of the heat. Look, if Cain can not just survive in spite of everything, but hold onto and increase his support among voters, good for him. Maybe there are enough voters out there who want a leader not a reader, who don't care what's twirling around in his head or not so long as he will pick advisors to fill him in as he goes, etc., and he'll do great. Good for him if he does. I wouldn't bet on it, but if it happens it will be significant because it will show he can survive the pressure and thrive under it. It will mean he just might have a chance in the general election, when the pressure will be even greater.
My objection is to his supporters, and those of Perry, who whine that he shouldn't be pu through this kind of pressure in the primaries. Mostly they say that because they see he can't handle it, but what do they think would happen in the general election? The Democrats would go easy on him?
Would Paul lose in a landslide? Maybe. But he polls better than other GOP candidates except Romney in the head-to-head polls against Obama. If you don't understand why that is maybe you are wrong about his prospects in the general election.
Simon Templar| 11.17.11 @ 5:30PM
What heat? The heat of a lying, gigantic smear machine? The heat of allegation, inuendo, baseless charges, lies, and slander from the opposition and those that should be defending him under these circumstances rather than betraying them? Pressures? These are useless opposition distractions. Gee, Martha, did that Perry's father paint over that rock or did martians? Well, that is good enough for me, he's a racist! You are too stupid to see this?
I don't give rats ass what the democrats think! That is the point you can not grasp. They thought Reagan was a complete idiot. George Washington could run on our ticket and he would be a moron.
McCain was ahead in the polls. Many before him were ahead as well. Polls are rather meaningless. Bachmann won Iowa 3 months ago and was at the top. You do not seem to understand or grasp that Dems play for keeps and will do anything to advance their cause. They are not intimidated by these polls.
Romney has many weaknesses that they are just loving to exploit. They want him to get the nomination. You actually think that is all the "vetting" Romney is going to face. The Dems will continue "vetting" him and they will make it up as they go. Expect some sexual allegations. They seem to work well...you morons are always accomodating and willing to believe them.
I got a little homework assignment for you to think about. Just what in the hell is Romney going to say when the supreme court debates and decides on Obamacare next year right in the middle of the campaign?
Now, that is my last response. I can not justify wasting any more time.
florin| 11.17.11 @ 3:49PM
Gingrich is far weaker than Romney...Romney is far less of a RINO than Gingrich and the biggest difference between them, therefore, is character...Newt has none and Romney, after having been thoroughly vetted for years, has not even a hint of scandal attached to his name ... Gingrich therefore has no chance against Obama while Romney has a good chance of beating him. But, if Repubs. want to promote an elderly man who treats women shabbily and trades them in for newer models when he's finished with them, who stands more strongly with Pelosi and Gore and Scozzafava than he does with conservatives like Ryan - then choose gingrich and expect 4 more years of Obama destroying our country...
Derek Leaberry| 11.17.11 @ 12:36PM
The Gingrich controversy has exposed the two-headed, two-partied corrupt shakedown for the criminal gang that it is. And Gingrich is part of the sewer. So we should nominate a man who is part of the cesspool?
Bob| 11.17.11 @ 12:48PM
Pending, the wrath of Callista when the former Speaker of The Blouse starts hocking his wife's jewels. No White House for power mad Callista I wonder if a catholic divorce is also pending.
Ken (Old Texican)| 11.17.11 @ 1:07PM
Facinating,
Rick Perry invited Nancy Pelosi to a one on one debate. She declined.
Prophecy: There WILL be no debate between the Republican candidate and Obama. Nope.
X. Actley| 11.17.11 @ 2:07PM
No debates? I'd take that bet. Perry is the only one who would want to dodge debates, and he can't even wrangle his way out of the absurd number of Republican debates still looming ahead of him.
Simon Templar| 11.17.11 @ 2:48PM
Ken,
They will get their establishment candidate, Romney and the elite will assert their power and control over the electorate and most of the morons that post here will inadvertently help them particularly the progressive establishment republican types like Quin, his other media pals, and all the rest of the progressive libertarians robots.
The WH and the MSM will get what they want.
Phrophecy: He will be reelected. Republicans will lose a few seats in both houses of Congress.
Prophecy: There will be great nashing of teeth, moaning, complaining, and a blame game like you have never seen before. The Paulbots will scream, I told you so, Paul or ruin, and ignore the FACT that they helped usher in the ruin. They will see it as another opportunity to destroy conservativism and open the way for another Paul libertarian run, Rand this time. The GOP elite will be happy as clams as the minority party as they usually are and proceed to grow government for their benefit. The GOP will blame it on the Tea Party and finally get that off their back. Everyone from the Krauth man to George Will will chime in with the usual.
Ann Coulter will write some more books and by then have more material to write about. She will get richer. All the rest will continue claiming their conservatives and writing articles about how horrible things are and lamenting about where is Ronald Reagan when you need him.
Bumr50| 11.17.11 @ 1:31PM
Attention Conservatives:
There Is No Political Messiah.
Dai Alanye | 11.17.11 @ 1:37PM
Sarah is looking better by the day. Anyone up for a draft?
martin j smith| 11.17.11 @ 1:41PM
Cool it. Gingrich will have to be vetted as will every candidate. I WILL TELL YOU WHAT IF ROMNEY IS THE CANDIDATE AND IS NOT VETTED AND LOSES THE REPUBLICAN PARTY IS FINISHED--CAPUT --OK ?/ HILLYER ?
Bay Stater| 11.17.11 @ 1:52PM
Gingrich has been vetted for decades and what we have today is a rusty old nail coated with tetanus and bad penny for a wife.
X. Actley| 11.17.11 @ 2:01PM
What do you think "vetted" means?
Simon Templar| 11.17.11 @ 2:58PM
I would say perhaps a detailed, accurate, assessment of their voting records, accomplishments, previous political promises, work history, positions they have taken, political associations, ideas they promote in their books, and any criminal records. Certainly not the slop you offer, your comments, your allegations, your accusations, and your name calling.
Mal_Content| 11.17.11 @ 3:04PM
Everything you list is public domain for Newt, who has been a public figure since the 70's.
What extra vetting should Newt have?
Simon Templar| 11.17.11 @ 3:47PM
Well, none if that is the case, then make it publicly available on sites like this so as to make it a bit easier for the electorate to get an accurate summation. This is what journalist used to do.
What I am looking for is honesty and real and useful information in the media, particularly the conservative media. I can get propaganda and a hidden agenda from the MSM.
I will try once again. What is attempting to pass for vetting these days is NOT vetting, it is slander, allegations, distractions, smears, misinformation, exaggeration, propaganda, and hyperbole. It is the willing cooperation of conservatives to destroy their own candidates with the crap that liberals and their media drums up. It is also the incapability and unwillingness to defend either and set the naratives to our benefit.
Idiots like the one above think this kind of vetting is useful, needed, and actually helps the conservative cause. He thinks this is how you prepare a candidate for the liberal smear machine that awaits him in the general election.
Look, I will try to make this as simple as possible.
Take Perry as an example. Quin and the boys were throwing their hands up in defeat, the first moment that the N-rock story was fabricated and released. Bowing down again and again to the bullshit thrown us by the MSM and supporting the idea that conservatives are racist. Now, the guy gets into the debates and does rather poorly and makes some big gaffes. Ok, fine, you have an opinion and doubts about an aspect of him that you think may be an issue. OK, cool, reasonable. Let us take note of that and keep watching him. Did that happen. No. The guy is finished, he is a dummy, he is stupid, unelectable..and on and on. Guess what? This is not just the MSM..it is the conservative media.
Please believe me, the dems and liberals are laughing their asses off and saying this is just too easy...we even get these republican dummies to go along wth us!
Do you get my point or do I have to go on?
X. Actley| 11.17.11 @ 4:03PM
So you think that Perry's low numbers in the polls are because people like Quinn said mean things? Perhaps Perry's low poll numbers are because the people who will be voting in the primary were turned off by what they saw in the debates, and by the prospect of having the same thing happen to Perry in debates against Obama.
For pete's sake there's a Perry supporter right here on this page wistfully hoping that Perry might be able to avoid having to share a stage with Obama. And Obama isn't even all that good a debater! You know why he's wishing Perry could avoid going head-to-head with Obama. You also know Perry wouldn't be able to avoid it. So is it any surprise that polls show that voters are leaning away from putting Perry up on that stage?
Simon Templar| 11.17.11 @ 5:06PM
Once again. you know nothing about what I think and do not apparently have the intellect to determine what I think or might think. I was addressing Mal_Content not you. Perry's low numbers are not the point. Quin is not that important or influential in lowering those numbers by himself despite what he might think.
If you still do not get it, it is a waste of my time to explain it once again. Try to address my points, and provide a significant and worthwhile refutation or another perspective. You keep repeating the same stupid shit.
The point Ken is making is he thinks Obama would get his clock cleaned by Perry and that they are afraid to debate anyone as they have nothing to stand on. Now, he may be right or wrong about that but at least have the intellectual honesty to get his point of view correct.
Quin| 11.17.11 @ 5:54PM
Simon, please don't lie. I believe I never once wrote a word about the N-rock controversy. Not here, not anywhere. If I did (and I truly don't remember doing so), it would have been to DEFEND Perry, because my immediate reaction was that if HE had it painted over, then he was the GOOD guy. But I thought the whole thing was a non-issue, and so I think I ignored it altogether.
X. Actley| 11.17.11 @ 3:53PM
Well, Simon, in that sense Romney has been thoroughly vetted. His flaws are well known and the chance of anything surprising popping up is about as low as it gets. Vetting is about whether there will be surprises, not about whether he's a good candidate.
florin| 11.17.11 @ 3:54PM
Romney HAS been vetted...for years, and even the liberal media has found no scandal attached to him. They find policies they don't like but nothing like what anyone who researches gingrich finds...so I believe Romney has the best chance to beat Obama expecially if he would choose someone like Paul Ryan or Marco Rubio for VP...
Calista G| 11.17.11 @ 2:00PM
I am very beautiful and deserving of all of my jewels because of my status as consort to one of the most brilliant men of His Age. And it is very important to me to be well-dressed for church because Newt and I do some important networking at church. Frankly, I have brought Newt closer to God than the two hags who were married to him before. So the adultery was done in a good cause.
Calista G| 11.17.11 @ 2:51PM
I am also a troll that think she is clever and funny but actually I am neither.
Mimi| 11.18.11 @ 8:28AM
SO .....SO.....SAD & UNFAIR!
martin j smith| 11.17.11 @ 2:51PM
Oh yes I forgot one little point--is it not interesting when a Candidate becomes competitive all of a sudden we get hit pieces. Why do you suppose that is and who benefits ? Take a wild guess.
martin j smith| 11.17.11 @ 2:51PM
Oh yes I forgot one little point--is it not interesting when a Candidate becomes competitive all of a sudden we get hit pieces. Why do you suppose that is and who benefits ? Take a wild guess.
Dan| 11.17.11 @ 2:52PM
Is a political race a search for political perfection?
If so, since when?
In a fallen world, reasonable men know that to go a questing for political perfection is a surefire way to pursue a political mirage.
The question is, and must always be, is this candidate conservative on ESSENTIAL issues, and is he RELIABLY conservative under pressure. Now were a race to possess several such candidates, then you might be able to reach for a candidate more IDEAL than you might otherwise ordinarily get.
But right now, in this Republican primary, ----------- Coulter, Hewitt, Rubin, and a bevy of others, have gone off and jumped on the bandwagon of the Mormon. For various reasons by the way, ------------ electability, financial resources, organization, organizational skill, a calm demeanor, an unlikeliness of committing a blunder during a debate, overall a perceived steadiness, and then again the Mormon has gone about the business of campaigning in the right way, he's prepared on the issues. To be sure, he's adopted various positions on various issues, but unlike that blockhead Cain, Romney actually KNOWS both sides of the issue, {which must be a help to him when he feels a sudden hankering to flip positions...}. For those reasons the aforementioned believe that Romney is the ONLY viable candidate.
I completely disagree.
I'm confident that Santorum, Bachmann and Gingrich could trounce the blockhead in chief.
Note that I left out Paul, Huntsman and the guy who keeps exposing himself as wholly unequal to the nomination or the office, that would be Cain.
W| 11.17.11 @ 3:48PM
"The Mormon??" Why do you refer to Romney as the "Mormon"
Are we now to refer to candidates by their religion?
Dan| 11.18.11 @ 2:02PM
When the "religion" in question is Mormonism, then the answer is: Yes!
The ONE issue upon which he should have flipped decades ago, happens to be the one issue he seizes upon to use as counterweight to accusations of flip-flopping.
A grown man, attempting to be President of the United States, doesn't get a pass on why he happens to be a Mormon. Nor is it seemly for a grown and mature man to say he's a Mormon because he happened to be born into Mormonism.
Do we give rabid jihadists passes on their beliefs by rationalizing their behavior as saying they were born into it. EVERY SINGLE ADULT has the OBLIGATION to make sure that his religious beliefs accord with right reason.
And nobody gets a pass on that.
Nobody.
So he stays the Mormon.
florin| 11.17.11 @ 3:59PM
I'd rather jump on the bandwagon of a Mormon than on the bandwagon of a Christian who is a notorious womanizer, had sexual affairs while being married to wife number one and wife number two, and was attacking Clinton for doing same...not just Clinton lying under oath but for Clinton daring to break his marriage vows and have sex with an intern which newt himself was doing; and newt is not a conservative...newt is whatever his audience needs/wants him to be...newt himself thinks he is the most brilliant man in the room and that people don't care what he does, only what he says and therefore, he feels he can do what he wants. No one expects a perfect candidate - we are all flawed - but gingrich is a seriously disturbed man, with a massive ego and a nasty temper - usually against conservatives who don't bow to his 'brilliant' ideas...Romney is the only one who has a chance against Obama...
Dan| 11.18.11 @ 2:09PM
Womanizing is simply evidence that Gingrich happens to be a member of the human race. That's minor league anymore.
To extend the nomination to the Mormon is to mainstream that nonchristian denomination, {nonchristian because they deny the Christ as the second person of the Trinity, and equalize the relative positions of Lucifer and Christ}. Such mainstreaming only accelerates the overall process of the widespread growth of relativism. When men like Bill Bennett say we don't know whether or not someone is a Christian even though that someone proclaims himself a member of an entity with rather decided positions on various issues, -------------- what we're seeing isn't simply political desperation but mental collapse.
It's like saying we don't know whether Tony Romo is really a Cowboy even though he goes to the practices and shows up in the games!
We have a reliable Conservative to go with ----------- Santorum.
Or we can go with Bachmann or Gingrich.
I'll support either one of those three.
But right now the Mormon is a SIGNIFICANT problem, and not just politically.
Paglia guy| 11.17.11 @ 3:15PM
The biggest complainers against Gingrich are the beltway boys who make their living off the pols. (As well as the Ron Paul jokers and the Sarah dreamers.) The man can speak, the man has a record of success, and the man can defend himself. Let the process roll on, instead of knifing our own. Sorry, Quincy Hillyer, I'm not convinced Newt isn't the best of the lot and would send Obama to the U.N where he belongs (and Calista has nothing on Moochelle!!).
florin| 11.17.11 @ 4:00PM
Sorry, the 'man' has a record of extremely dishonorable behavior, cheating not only on his wives but also using his power to cheat in other ways...he would be worse than Obama and I want Obama out but I don't want gingrich in...the man's ego would make him even more corrupt than before...
Mimi| 11.18.11 @ 8:38AM
Get over his PAST.... it is PAST ! Lets look to the future for the COUNTRY...Newt's PLAN is fantastic.....Changes lie before us, we have been on the wrong path....Newt may just be the one best to HELP THE NATION....Forget BEATING the "ONE".....Lets move forward for the good of ALL the people in the right direction, toward LIBERTY, and PROSPERITY for all!!!
Kingofthenet| 11.17.11 @ 3:43PM
Come on he's DONE with that, PROMISE! IF (LOL) Newt becomes President he WILL not steal any more money from taxpayers.Give me a break,
BTW: Nixon may have been smarter but he looked terrible debating Kennedy, and Newt is no Nixon.
The Knife| 11.17.11 @ 4:24PM
Maybe it is time to give Ron Paul his due.
PhilTheCapitalistPig| 11.17.11 @ 4:49PM
I heard Glenn Beck talking today about how there are pictures out there with Mitt Romney and some Wall Street investors holding money in their mouth.
There is a reason why the Lame Stream Media doesn't go after Romney.. yet. They are saving their bullets..
They are prepared to paint him as Mr. Wall Street.
Now does Occupy Wall Street make sense?
They WANT Romney.
somnolence| 11.17.11 @ 6:24PM
I'm not for Paul, but I'm going to throw a positive factor toward the Paulbots. I'll bet anyone that 90% of the population will not be voting on the future of Libya or any of the Mideast as their highest priority next year. Add all this Fannie and Freddie inside junk against Newt(which is justified), and it won't take much to spark more anger and flocking to either Cain or Paul. Wait and see.
Bumr50| 11.17.11 @ 6:42PM
Oh, and for all of you intellectual geniuses, Cain's "leader not a reader" comment was a shot at Obungler and his teleprompter.
Morons.
John| 11.17.11 @ 8:58PM
Please join the Rick Perry Team, the winner of the GOP Primary, and help us defeat Obama in 2012. Gov. Perry has a solid conservative record and is capable to solve the current fiscal crisis. He laid out a plan to reform the tax code, to balance the Federal Budget, to overhaul the Legislative, Judicial and Executive Branch, and secure the border. He is a true patriot and doer who will accomplish and deliver to the people of America unlike nobody. He is the most electable, competent, and trustworthy candidate, who can defeat Obama in a landslide.
bluecollarbytes| 11.17.11 @ 10:55PM
Gingrich's 'fees' for being some kind of philosopher-historian to f mac only highlights just how inside he is, and how comfortable he's been living off the fringes of wasteful govt.
I give up. Resistance is futile. Honorable people ran for the nomination, and opinion polls sorted through one after the other. Of course there is the remaining technicality of primaries. Gov Romney it is then.
bluecollarbytes| 11.17.11 @ 11:09PM
It would be foolish to be so completely anti-Romney that another is picked regardless of revelations that seriously endanger a win against Obama. If we want better candidates it starts with local and state elections leading up to congress. It would mean staying on top of what your politician is doing, and kicking them out one after the other till you/they get it right. Eventually then there might be 'better candidates' running for the national office.
________
It remains to be seen whether certain factions of evangelicals get behind or even vote for Romney.
Larry| 11.18.11 @ 12:06AM
Sigh. He who is without sin may cast the first stone. Fannie and Freddie may have corrupted the entirety of Washington, D.C. before the bottom fell out of the housing market. Is it likely that Newt is going to be able to get away, if he becomes President, with the kind of stuff he is being accused of having done before? It isn't exactly news that he was a paid lobbyist after he left the Speaker's position. Nor is it news that he supported ethanol subsidies. That made me crazy, too.
Until people realize that the WHOLE lot of the politicians who reside in Washington now are replaced, and the size of government so downgraded that this kind of corruption becomes irrelevant, no one, absolutely no one who becomes President can make any difference.
The only reason I support Newt for President right now is that like Winston Churchill, I believe he will rise to the occasion as the existential crisis that this country has become will escalate. NO ONE man is going to overcome this existential crisis by himself. What Newt knows, though, about the history of this country and how things work in Washington is as important as anything to a solution or solutions. Anyone who has not been to Washington (as much as I like Herman Cain, he does not know enough about how to deal with this existential crisis) can affect changes in the system properly without sufficient experience and the necessary courage. As imperfect as Newt is, he is the least imperfect of a bad lot.
Conservatives will not succeed in this presidential endeavor if they do not appreciate the nature of the existential crisis in this country.
Larry| 11.18.11 @ 12:09AM
One more point: I want EVERYONE here to stop reacting to every hatchet job that is coming out of the MSM. Everyone is vulnerable to that; our goal is to expose Obama as the fraud that he is, and let the primary process take its necessary course. In the Texas primary, I've made up my mind to vote for Gingrich, for the reasons I discuss above.
Greta| 11.18.11 @ 12:37AM
Note sure who is better. I will never support flipper pro abort Romney, Cain is toast and weak on foreign policy, Ron Paul is useless, and others cannot get to 5%. If the so called conservatives keep bashing our own candidates, we will put Obama in for another 4 years and he will go in never having to worry about being elected again.
Mimi| 11.18.11 @ 8:43AM
That would be a DISASTER....I don't trust him to be on AMERICA'S side....so far he has harmed the people not helped...with the confidence of winning a second term ( with lies) God knows what he will do... our complete dismantling and destruction!
Dan| 11.18.11 @ 2:15PM
Greta, Cain isn't "weak;" -------- Cain is a flat-out, sick joke.
Dan| 11.18.11 @ 2:13PM
The one thing that's a real joke right now is the prospect of Jennifer Rubin, former Kerry supporter, who is now out there trying to attack the mental firepower of Gingrich.
I mean is she for real?
How many books has the guy written, and on how many subjects.
Sure, the guy has probs, but he is STILL the guy who got into BILL CLINTON'S FACE on Air Force One, and dressed him down right to his face, while establishment Bobby Dole looked on in shock.
Now trying to say a guy who blistered Clinton up one side and down the other, right to his face, is not a Conservative, is really beyond the pale of settlement even for Rubin.
And Rubin now has gone wholly off the reservation, or the Pale of political settlement, ------- you take your pick.