January 22, 2012

Coming to terms with The Newt.

I told you I went to a classical music concert last night. I'm not very good at listening to music, in the sense that I don't focus and notice all the details the right way or whatever real music connoisseurs do. I don't even respond emotionally most of the time. I do behave. I never cough. I don't get out my iPhone and read. If you were sitting next to me, you wouldn't notice that I'm a bad concertgoer, but I am.

So what I feel I have to do — and I know I should just stop it — is think about all sorts of things. For example, I contemplated various structures for tomorrow's first day of class in Federal Jurisdiction. Debussy was trying to tell me something about Spain, and I was thinking about something that happened "on a dark night" in Hughestown, Pennsylvania.

Inevitably, my thoughts drifted to Newt. Before going out on that dark night last night, I'd seen that he'd won the South Carolina primary. At intermission, I said to Meade: "I've come to terms with Newt." I didn't mean that I was prepared to vote for him. I still regard the idea of President Gingrich as bizarre. But I live in the moment. I embrace the now. It's fine the way things are. Newt has his role to play, and right now, I'm going to say it's a good one.

First, I especially adore the spectacular failure of The Attack of the Ex-Wife. ABC News somehow lured this uncomfortable little woman out of the shadows and into the spotlight. They interviewed her for God knows how long and extracted one seemingly lurid remark — her interpretation of what Newt said to her as a request for an "open marriage." The values-voters of The South were supposed to collapse in horror. He's unclean! But that's not the way they reacted. ABC didn't have that analyzed properly. I like this new culture of religious conservatism — if that's what it is — in which people who care about character don't recoil but reflect. They're not simpletons. They can get their mind around complexity. You can't just push their buttons. Or... at least... you can't push their buttons with big clumsy ABC fingers.

Second, it's good that the Tea Party and other sorts of conservative factions contribute to the political mix in America. Newt — along with Santorum — has established that the Establishment can't dictate who the candidate will be. Whoever ultimately becomes the candidate — and I assume it will be Mitt — he won't achieve his place through the nods of insiders bypassing the people who have imperatives of their own. It's strange that Gingrich embodies their wants, but that's the way this strange campaign has evolved, which leads me to....

Third, Gingrich has achieved his position through the sheer force of putting ideas into words, words that people heard. There's something quite beautiful about that, quite American. And it's beautiful without the man being beautiful. Back in 2008, many of us fell for Barack Obama, who — as Joe Biden put it so memorably was "the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy... that's a storybook, man." Today, we question how articulate Obama really is and, with the distance of time, it's easy to see that the whole "storybook" gave us the impression that the speech was wonderful. That was an impressive effect in its time. But with Newt, there's no storybook. There's no newness, only Newtness, which isn't nice-looking or even clean. It's just words. Words! That's a storybook political treatise. A political treatise, man, and we're reading it. You'd think we'd be more influenced by the image of The Newt...



... but we're not. We're hearing the words, the speech, the ideas. I hear democracy maturing! Over The Newt! I think that's pretty cool.

There, now. There must be more that's going on. I'm still absorbing the Newtessence of it all. But that's all I'm going to say at the moment.

I read this out loud to proofread, and Meade said: "That's good. Just don't become a Newtist. In a Newtist colony."

231 comments:

1 – 200 of 231   Newer›   Newest»
Mike and Sue said...

I got a bad feeling about this...

edutcher said...

Have to disagree on point 3.

Newt is where he is because the other candidates, with varying degrees of Conservative mojo were rejected.

Herman was slimed.

Perry and Bachmann were found wanting.

Santorum was a one off.

Newt was rejected for guest worker, endorsing Scuzzyfavor, and Pelosi on the sofa, but was revived because some people - including several here - could only think of what he'd do to GodZero in the debates (if there are any*).

As James Carville noted, all the reasons why he was initially rejected will be resuscitated.

* Don't forget, there were no debates in '64, '68' and '72.

PS Don't listen to Meade.

Go Newt.

We'd love to see you in the Newt.

Jay Retread said...

Newt is a rightwing nutjob. Romney is the only reasonable candidate. Newt is a right wing extremist but only a moderate candidate like Romney can compete with Obama. Though both would lose.

Sorun said...

I think Newt's popularity isn't really about his ideas, or how he expresses his ideas, but his interactions with the media.

If he was to walk up to one of those pretentious newsreaders who moderate the debates and pummel the shit of him, I'd be for Newt. For awhile. To send a message. But I don't really want him to be the GOP candidate for president.

Robert Cook said...

Newt will not be President, and I very much doubt he will be the Republican nominee.

The nominee will be Romney.

David said...

" The values-voters of The South were supposed to collapse in horror. He's unclean! But that's not the way they reacted. ABC didn't have that analyzed properly. I like this new culture of religious conservatism — if that's what it is — in which people who care about character don't recoil but reflect. They're not simpletons."

I've now lived in South Carolina for 7 years, having moved from Chicago. I am alternatively annoyed and amused by the media assumptions about South Carolina in general, and racial and religious issues particularly. The South Carolina they imagine has disappeared. There are artifacts of the old culture, and some holdouts for the old ways. But the holdouts are exceptions with a power to excite but not to prevail.

The new bigots in America will not let go of the old stereotype, because they need it to feel superior.

Does that look familiar?

Andy R. said...

Newt has his role to play, and right now, I'm going to say it's a good one.

Yeah, what the country really needs right now is more race baiting.

The values-voters of The South were supposed to collapse in horror. He's unclean! But that's not the way they reacted.

The close-minded bigots in South Carolina who were expected not to vote for Mittens because they don't think he is a Christian did exactly that.

Second, it's good that the Tea Party and other sorts of conservative factions contribute to the political mix in America.

Yeah, the adults in the Republican party are humoring the Tea Party kids until they get told they are just rubes who are being used for their vote and Newt isn't going to be allowed to be the nominee. Good!

cubanbob said...

Ann I love you blog but if you are at a concert and your mind is on Newt either you really didn't like the music or you have been blogging to long.

The network's are now essentially house organs of the Democratic Party. The NYT is now a parody of itself. They have long since jumped the shark.

David said...

And as Exhibit A for the New Bigots, I give you Andy.

LarsPorsena said...

One of your best AA but I detect a soupcon of Noonan in the tone.

Hagar said...

The Republican Party is doing all it can to loose the coming election, but will it be enough?

Dane County Taxpayer said...

I will vote third party before Romney. Why as a conservative would I vote for him? He is a big government Republican. He is Obamalite.
Give me Newt or Santorum. Not perfect, but at least they are a choice.

chickenlittle said...

We'd love to see you in the Newt.

Nawt!

chickenlittle said...

And as Exhibit A for the New Bigots, I give you Andy.

The Newt Bigots. Newt and bigger bigots.

pm317 said...

Very well written. Really. Though like Meade said don't bumble your way to wanting Newt in your 'living in the present' future moment.

I had similar analysis in my head. The SC phenomenon is largely a retaliation to the lefty media, Obama and his cronies and the voters are HEARING the right words from Newt but NOT SEEING Newt. Same thing happened with Palin. When they focus on the character and the rest of it, it becomes less impressive. But what a snub to the establishment and the media!! 18 millions of us did that exact thing in 2008 primary against Obama but we did not win.

wv: 'sonew' not really..

David said...

The country is engaged in a process of coming to terms with the excesses of its own government. This election, no matter how it come out, will be part of that process. The inevitable conclusion of this process will be a drastic cutback of government spending, and therefore of government intrusion. This could happen via the political process before a major financial crisis. More likely we will retain our habit of avoidance and deal with it during and after the crisis.

The events of 2008 were not the crisis. The crisis, when it comes, will make everyone forget 2008. It will not be pretty.

Writ Small said...

Impressive what Ann can conjure upon some dedicated reflection. More live cough-certs.

I've often thought and sometimes said that Newt is the right's Obama. The professorial smarty pants who can nevertheless eloquently give voice to the hopes his supporters.

Eight years of GWB left the base hungry for a spokesman. Rush and Prager and Ingraham are great but speak only to the base. Newt gives the Right the opportunity, however brief, to force everyone else to listen.

Pastafarian said...

Andy R, I congratulate you on your humility. It takes a big person to admit that you were wrong in those dozens of comments where you called other commenters stupid for considering Newt a "serious candidate."

And the day after his double-digit win in the biggest state yet to vote, you've been proven so spectacularly, obnoxiously, embarrassingly wrong...I'm really impressed with the amount of character that it takes for you to even show up here in your crooked hat, looking like a giant douche. Kudos.

edutcher said...

Hagar said...

The Republican Party is doing all it can to loose the coming election, but will it be enough?

No, the Demos are trying much harder to lose, because they're running GodZero.

Dane County Taxpayer said...

I will vote third party before Romney. Why as a conservative would I vote for him? He is a big government Republican. He is Obamalite.
Give me Newt or Santorum. Not perfect, but at least they are a choice.


Anybody voting for Santorum is no Conservative. He's the worst statist around, after Zero.

As I say, this guy is more to blame for Zero than people like Ann.

If, in fact, he isn't just another FUD merchant.

Tyrone Slothrop said...

I was cheering on the sidelines when Newt went up against Clinton on the budget. I was shocked and dismayed when he lost that particular fight in the court of public opinion. The ideas weren't wrong, but Newt played the political game poorly, and he eventually paid the price for it. I fear a President Gingrich perpetually at odds with a House and Senate composed of a majority of his own party.

cubanbob said...

When the Marxist Twins Andy R and J The Retard are grudgingly for Mitt as the Republican nominee it seals the deal, Newt for me. At the end of the month we have primary in FL and thanks to the boys they have clarified my choice. Thanks guys.

I ♥ Willard said...

The rumor I hear is that Log Cabin Republicans are lining up behind Romney. I hope he's receptive!

Go, Willard, Go!

Andy R. said...

Andy R, I congratulate you on your humility. It takes a big person to admit that you were wrong in those dozens of comments where you called other commenters stupid for considering Newt a "serious candidate."

He's still not a serious candidate. Have you read what people here say about him? He won't win the nomination, and we will look back with a combination of horror and humor at the idea that the Republican party took him seriously. What a joke.

I was right about Bachmann.
I was right about Perry.
I was right about Cain.
And I will be right about Newt.

A bunch of backward nutjobs in South Carolina voting for someone doesn't make him a serious candidate for Presidet of the United States of America.

AJ Lynch said...

Romney could just point at Newt and Santorum and say "they are sorry examples of the Beltway geniuses who got us into this huge fiscal mess. If you want more of that, then please vote for Newt or Rick. Unlike them, I will reduce the size & scope of the fed govt in your lives".

LarsPorsena said...

"...I'm really impressed with the amount of character that it takes for you to even show up here in your crooked hat, looking like a giant douche. Kudos..."

Any invertebrate could do the same.

Andy R. said...

And as Exhibit A for the New Bigots, I give you Andy.

Wait, am I a bigot for being opposed to racist dog whistle politics or because I noticed that close-minded Christians don't want to vote for a Mormon?

EDH said...

I don't even respond emotionally most of the time. I do behave. I never cough. I don't get out my iPhone and read. If you were sitting next to me, you wouldn't notice that I'm a bad concertgoer, but I am.

When in doubt, climb on Meade's shoulders and flash your boobs at the stage.


That said, Ira Stoll has a great piece on the soft underbelly of Newt's popular deconstruction of liberal elites, Gingrich South Carolina Victory Speech (via Instapundit).

Freder Frederson said...

I like this new culture of religious conservatism — if that's what it is — in which people who care about character don't recoil but reflect. They're not simpletons. They can get their mind around complexity.

I hope you realize, that considering your disdain of President Clinton and his apologists, that this comment is the height of hypocrisy. How can you be so unforgiving of Clinton apologists yet seem unconcerned about Newt's past? And these events were happening at the same time as Newt was heaping criticism (and led an impeachment effort) on President Clinton for doing exactly the same thing Newt was doing.

You have truly jumped the shark.

chickenlittle said...

Andy R wrote: I was right about Bachmann.
I was right about Perry.
I was right about Cain.
And I will be right about Newt.


I only care that you're wrong about Obama. Like America's Politico was wrong about the 2010 midterms. I can feel it. You're wrong, Andy.

I just read today that BHO was endorsed by the American Communist Party. Let's trumpet that one, shall we?

I ♥ Willard said...

And the day after his double-digit win in the biggest state yet to vote

Iowa covers 56,276 square miles, making it the 26th largest of the 50 states.

South Carolina covers 32,007 square miles, making it the 40th largest of the 50 states.

Maguro said...

And these events were happening at the same time as Newt was heaping criticism (and led an impeachment effort) on President Clinton for doing exactly the same thing Newt was doing.

Newt perjured himself under oath? First time I've heard that one. Do tell us more, Freder.

Pastafarian said...

Andy R: "A bunch of backward nutjobs..."

Rednecks and hillbillies, were they?

Hilarious self-deprecating parody of the stereotypical smug hipster doofus, Andy. I've had you all wrong, you're ok.

Andy R. said...

I'm really impressed with the amount of character that it takes for you to even show up here in your crooked hat

Um, NOTICE ANYTHING DIFFERENT?

Hint.

chickenlittle said...

FF wrote: And these events were happening at the same time as Newt was heaping criticism (and led an impeachment effort) on President Clinton for doing exactly the same thing Newt was doing.

Like your colleague fiend, you seem fixated on non existent semen splatters on a Gingrich pages's dress.

Put up or shut up. Stop relying on innuendo. Also stop preaching about morality in a time of fiscal crisis.

LarsPorsena said...

"........How can you be so unforgiving of Clinton apologists yet seem unconcerned about Newt's past? ............"

The Clinton apologists were right i.e. 'it's only sex' viz James Carville. We learned and have moved on. Secondly, Newt had the good grace to resign. Clinton..well

John Smith said...

Romney has electability problems he is a Mormon, he is rich and he led Bain.

dreams said...

I fear four more years of Obama, obamacare becoming permanent and the continued socialization of our country.
I agree that the way he takes on the media is what the Republican voters like about Newt.

Freder Frederson said...

And the day after his double-digit win in the biggest state yet to vote

I think he meant in terms of population. SC 24th, IA 30th, NH 42nd.

pm317 said...

Freder Frederson said...
--------------

Yes!

I ♥ Willard said...

Unlike them, I will reduce the size & scope of the fed govt in your lives.

Exactly! Plus Willard is a lot smarter than Obama. For example, Willard invented ObamaCare long before Obama did.

And Willard is modest too. You don't ever hear him trying to take credit for inventing ObamaCare. He consistently and generously gives full credit to Obama.

Willard's definitely the man. Go, Willard, go!

Dust Bunny Queen said...

The values-voters of The South were supposed to collapse in horror. He's unclean! But that's not the way they reacted.


This goes to the heart of the matter, that the media elites AND the Republican elites just do not understand the mindset of the ordinary bitter gun clinging voter and especially they do not understand the mind of the Values Evangelical voters.

I fall into the first category but know many people in the second. I'm just bitterly clinging to my guns :-D

The Evangelicals are 'born again' and understand the concepts of sin AND redemption. Everyone sins. Everyone makes mistakes. The reason that Newt surprised the media is because the Evangelicals understand that you CAN sin and you CAN repent. Go forth and sin no more!

Sinning and repenting and being forgiven is one of the foundations of the Catholic Church.

So...when the media tried to destroy Newt with an old sin from which he has publicly repented, the people saw through that ploy.

Plus...the ex wife was a bitch who had part in breaking up his first marriage and has no moral legs to stand on.

Also Andy doesn't get it either. Christianity doesn't hate homosexuals. The person is viewed as a sinner who needs to be helped loved and 'saved'. The sinner is loved.....the sin, the actions are not.

Those aren't my religious views, (so Andy can just fuck off and not try to argue back with ME about it) They are an encapsulation of what I have heard from some friends who are religious.

William said...

Newt can insult Obama and the media with more brio and effectiveness than any of the other candidates. If I were looking for a candidate to voice my displeasure with ABC, then he would be my first choice. In the celestial ecosystem, Jabba the Hut serves a useful purpose but that's not to say that Jabbo should be on top of the food chain.

Rialby said...

"uncomfortable little woman"

Strange that a feminist would use the word "little" to describe this woman.

Pastafarian said...

Shit, Andy, I didn't even notice. I blame the iPad's wee screen.

Now you just need a hair cut. As another commenter once pointed out, you look like the Andy from WKRP in Cincinnati. And that is not a good look.

Andy R. said...

Romney has electability problems he is a Mormon, he is rich and he led Bain.

I used to think that the Republicans would be forced to nominate Romneybot because he was their only serious candidate, but I agree with Althouse that I think Obama is going to win the election.

I realize that this is the weakest field of either party in at least a generation, but how do the Republicans not have a single candidate that would be competitive with Obama?

Rialby said...

Newt will have to continue to work on perfectly timing his implosions so that they fall far enough ahead of a a primary so that he can bounce back. He's as manic as they come.

Freder Frederson said...

The Clinton apologists were right i.e. 'it's only sex' viz James Carville. We learned and have moved on. Secondly, Newt had the good grace to resign.

Ann hasn't moved on, she still grabs every opportunity to bash Clinton apologists.

Furthermore, Newt didn't resign because of his marital infidelities, but because he was an incompetent speaker and corrupt. He was fined $300,000, lied to House Ethics committee, and only avoided a full investigation (and possible criminal indictment) by agreeing to resign from the House.

Spread Eagle said...

* Don't forget, there were no debates in '64, '68' and '72.

Those were unique. First, '68 and '72 involved Nixon, who always considered the '60 debate with JFK to be his big mistake and wasn't about to repeat it. In '64 LBJ wanted to paint Goldwater as a dangerous nutjob, so he wasn't about to give him a stage to dispel the notion. Carter, by the way, should've used the same playbook against Reagan in '80 --he might've won if he had. The debate is where Carter really lost ground.

Nowadays, in the 2012 election, it won't work. If Newt is the nominee, and if 0bama refuses to debate, Newt would use it as a cudgel, because 0bama needs to defend his record. I don't think 0bama could get away with refusing.

Fen said...

How can you be so unforgiving of Clinton apologists yet seem unconcerned about Newt's past?

The Clinton apologists were defending the sexual discrimination, sexual harassment and sexual assault of subordinate (democrat) employees.

As well as the perjury, subornation of perjury and obstruction of justice to cover all that up.

When Newt starts giving preferential treatment to interns willing to trade blowjobs for jobs at Revlon and the UN, I'll be unforgiving.

Andy R. said...

Now you just need a hair cut.

You realize that it's a picture and not how I look right this instance? For one, I don't actually wear hats, as many of you will be relieved to hear. Second, that picture is about five years old, I think.

Some of you act like I'm literally sitting at my computer with my hat askew while I write each of my comments. Are people actually that dumb?

I ♥ Willard said...

"I think he meant in terms of population. SC 24th, IA 30th, NH 42nd."

Oh! He meant to say that SC is the most populous state so far, not the biggest. I hope he learns from his mistake.

write_effort said...

The unknown in this campaign is whether this is Newt's "moment." Somewhat similar to Obama. Obvious weaknesses, but a way with words -- the bar is low in politics. People, for all kinds of reasons, responded to the grandiose, cloying baloney he was selling. Unlike Obama, though, Gingrich can't sell as many different kinds of people in as large numbers. He has a ceiling. Where and when will he hit it?

LarsPorsena said...

"..but I agree with Althouse that I think Obama is going to win the election.."

All the cool kids from The Hamptons to Hollywood are saying this. All the folks in the SuperZips are of the same opinion.

Fen said...

And Freder, you're an idiot for even playing that "just about sex" card. A decade on and you still don't understand the basic concepts behind the Clinton sex scandals.

Tank said...

The problem with Newt and Mitt is, if one wins, he would be President. Oy. Then we small gov't types can spend 4 years apologizing for all their crap.

Not me.

I'm out.

Three big gov't guys who are already part of the problem - Newt, Mitt and Barack.

I ♥ Willard said...

When Newt starts giving preferential treatment to interns willing to trade blowjobs for jobs at Revlon and the UN, I'll be unforgiving.

This is a perfect example of clear and definitive moral standards. Thank you!

Cedarford said...

Pastafarian said...
Andy R: "A bunch of backward nutjobs..."


==============
There is a little truth to that. Amongst the backward nutjob Fundies of the North Country - the people that reject evolution and consider Mormons as heretical as Muzzies - Newt got 63% of their vote.
Same sort of people that adore Rush and Palin as secular prophets. Newt is right in that same zone.
It is entirely possible that if Newt somehow got the nomination, SC and 3-4 other states would vote for him over Obama.

William said...

It begs the question if you wish to defend Newt by attacking his ex-wife. If she is as troubled and bitter as some defenders claim, then what was Newt doing choosing her as his wife. I would certainly hope that he chooses Cabinet officers with more care than he has chosen those wives and campaign advisers who were so tone deaf to the music of his spheres.

Freder Frederson said...

Strange that a feminist would use the word "little" to describe this woman.

Even stranger that Ann apparently believes that poor Mary Ann was somehow forced by eeeeevil ABC to tell her side of the story. They must have drugged her and dragged her into the studio, threatening to kill her puppy if she didn't say bad things about Newt.

Ritmo Re-Animated said...

Lol. This post is laugh-out-loud funny. Starting with the part about how your thoughts "inevitably" drift toward Newt, even during a concert. Talk about some major kulturkampf! As well as a need to reassess your mind's priorities...

Anyway, the way you over-interpret and glamorize the amphibian's ordinariness, ugliness, rawness and defiance shows that you're more personally enamored by partisan upsurgency for its own sake than you are interested in understanding its implications nationally. Which is both good for the opposition and the rest of America (not that your political opinions had much to offer anyway), and directly follows the precedent of your purely emotional attraction to Obama four short years ago.

But it's nice to know that certain people enjoy getting carried away like this. Thank Rama for misplaced priorities! And may you be reincarnated as something more noble than a salamander.

Ritmo Re-Animated said...

Are people actually that dumb?

;-)

Freder Frederson said...

The Clinton apologists were defending the sexual discrimination, sexual harassment and sexual assault of subordinate (democrat) employees.

So I guess since Callista is a Republican, that is the difference that makes it okay for Newt to have sex with an employee while married.

Paddy O said...

Instapundit said this morning, "What primary voters like about Newt is that he fights, and that he doesn’t concede moral legitimacy to the left or to the media."

I think this is exactly it. For a long time the Left had an assumption of moral superiority, with the right alternately conceding or distracted with it's own alternative causes.

But the fact is that there should be pushback, and Newt is good about not legitimizing even the questions that are framed according to the old model. Bush was terrible about responding to such attacks, and Romney is slow to. Newt, like a confident academic, pushes back right away at the foundations of the assumptions, reframing the debate, and putting the questioners on the defensive. That's good and welcomed stuff.

Because the assumptions of moral superiority are wrong, even on the core issues of race, poverty and freedom.

As the SOPA issue shows most recently, it's the D's that are most beholden to bureaucracy and most beholden to lobbyists. They have claimed the moral center, and that allows them to almost entirely dismiss the actual interests of those who are being oppressed.

In a bureaucracy, the top managers get wealthy, the lower managers get power, and the status quo stays the same because there's no real impetus to change. The poor and suffering become rhetorical subjects, with their suffering a tool to maintain power.

That's precisely why pushing back against that narrative is absolutely necessary. The poor suffer when the corrupt have moral legitimacy, and right now there are few more corrupt centers of power than the media and the politicians.

Sadly, I think Newt's pushback is itself a ploy. I think he'd sell out in a second. I think he's an artifact from the complete betrayal of the Republican party towards their mission our country gave them in the 90s. They made a contract with America, but then handed that contract over to lobbyists.

Newt is one of the chief betrayers. And I doubt he has changed.

Unfortunately, there's not another really good option. And, an even bigger betrayer, Obama, needs to be pushed out of office by someone. I like Romney for that more than Newt. Because Romney, at least, can show he's faithful. We know where he stands. While with Newt, we can only wait for the knife to go into our backs.

Sorun said...

Some of you act like I'm literally sitting at my computer with my hat askew while I write each of my comments. Are people actually that dumb?

Not me, Andy. This is how I picture you.

Ritmo Re-Animated said...

Can this sort of upsurgency "movement" become commemorated in future years, and - dare I ask - ritualized?

Can there be rings of fire into which to march, hot coals over which to walk, sword swallowing and burnt offerings?

Last election's fertility cult thing really didn't go the full nine yards. I'd like to see some major tribalism from now on, replete with live flogging of the defeated/establishment choice.

Fen said...

Freder, Calista was working for Congressman Steve Gunderson when they met.

Try to be less of an idiot while you pretzel your "hypocrisy" logic

master cylinder said...

Yes, yes please let it be Newt! Newt was fined for his lies and replaced by the more competent Tom DeLay.
Yet he rises from the ashes because he can really dish it out. Go Newt go.

AJ Lynch said...

Paddy O:
Very Excellent analysis!

AJ Lynch said...

OT- this morning, Andrea Mitchell, claimed Mitt's descendents may have come here illegally from Mexico.

Mel said...

As much as I'd rather not say so, Newt is very easy to listen to. He makes perfect sense. He knows things and explains them very well. I always find myself nodding and agreeing with him. I really am more comfortable with him than Romney.

edutcher said...

chickenlittle said...

We'd love to see you in the Newt.

Nawt!


Still haven't completely gotten away from that other place, chick? :O

Andy R. said...

I was right about Bachmann.
I was right about Perry.
I was right about Cain.
And I will be right about Newt.


I'm right,
I'm right,
I'm right,
and if you don't stop saying I'm wrong, I'll hold my breath until I turn blue.

Because they dropped out doesn't mean they were jokes.

Only that you are.

John Smith said...

Romney has electability problems he is a Mormon, he is rich and he led Bain.

GodZero's rich and Bain, as I read about his work there, qualifies him more than most to try to fix the mess in DC.

As for Mormon, Zero spent 20 years in the Church of Race Hatred.

I ♥ Willard said...

Exactly! Plus Willard is a lot smarter than Obama. For example, Willard invented ObamaCare long before Obama did.

If we're going for accuracy, it was the Legislature in the People's Republic that did the inventing and Milton had to work with that.

Milton has always said to tried to get the best deal he could from the apparatchiks.

Jay said...

I noticed that close-minded Christians

I love the fact you think "close-minded" is an adjective.

Idiot.

Ritmo Re-Animated said...

Instapundit said this morning, "What primary voters like about Newt is that he fights, and that he doesn’t concede moral legitimacy to the left or to the media."

I think this is exactly it. For a long time the Left had an assumption of moral superiority, with the right alternately conceding or distracted with it's own alternative causes.


Oh yeah! That's exactly what I read into the Newtonian (grandiosely named after a bigshot phsyicist 'cause he likes it that way) upsurgency: His MORAL superiority!

Lol.

Good to see Paddy O. shake himself awake back into reality by the end of his long comment-essay. I guess no rings of fire for him.

edutcher said...

master cylinder said...

Yes, yes please let it be Newt! Newt was fined for his lies

And vindicated by the IRS.

I'll bet he'd love to go back and do a John King on the Democrats in Congress.

Andy R. said...

For a long time the Left had an assumption of moral superiority, with the right alternately conceding or distracted with it's own alternative causes.

But the fact is that there should be pushback, and Newt is good about not legitimizing even the questions that are framed according to the old model.


Yeah, what America needs is someone proud and unashamed of his race baiting. Show those liberals! Be courageous! Use coded racist dog whistles!

Ritmo Re-Animated said...

Can we brand Mr Newt with a phoenix-tattoo? As Master Cylinder indicates, this is the perfect symbol for our new chieftain, and a suit and tie is just too "establishmentarian" and mainstream for our tribal upstart.

Dust Bunny Queen said...

It begs the question if you wish to defend Newt by attacking his ex-wife.

I'm not attacking her. I'm attacking the IDEA of her having some sort of moral standing to criticize Newt and whine about being a victim, when she was party to the same actions that harmed another woman.

If she is as troubled and bitter as some defenders claim, then what was Newt doing choosing her as his wife

Really? Should we have to explain the dynamics of sexual attraction....style over substance... to you men? :-)

Regarding the unforgiving attitude of the Christian Community towards Clinton versus what seems to be acceptance of Gingrich: It all boils down to repentance.

Newt has evidenced that he is repentant of his previous actions. Whether he is or not is moot. We have to take him at his word or until he slip slides again.

Clinton never EVER showed one iota of repentance or being sorry. Instead he swiveled, weaseled and parsed words (what is is) in order to avoid taking any responsibility for his despicable actions.

Meanwhile the media ignored the complaints about Clinton and covered up for him for YEARS. Gingrich and Cain and other Republicans get raked over the coals and eviscerated by the media for every real or unreal allegation.

Repentance and hypocrisy. Evangelicals believe in the first and hate the second.

Jay said...

Romney has electability problems he is a Mormon, he is rich and he led Bain.

Obama is rich.

Obama sat in "Reverend" Wright's church for 20 years.

Obama's new OMB director worked at Bain.

mccullough said...

Romney needs to go after Newt himself. No more surrogate attacks.

Ritmo Re-Animated said...

I offer all my children in homage to Newt.

The rest of you should, too.

Jay said...

Andy R. said...

Yeah, what America needs is someone proud and unashamed of his race baiting.


The term "race baiting" doesn't mean what you think it means.

Mr. Close-minded.

Bart DePalma said...

Gingrich's rebound after being swept under with unresponded negative ads in Iowa is hardly limited to slapping down an arrogant Dem media. Gingrich had been doing that over several previous debates.

Rather, the video clips circulating around the Tea Party social networks were his various conservative arguments from the first SC debate. Gingrich is offering his 1994 conservative rebel persona and he GOP base is eating it up.

Any Dems who underestimate a genuine conservative presidential campaign are making a serious mistake. Conservatives in general (GOP and Indi) and the Tea party in particular are the most enthusiastic voters in the electorate right now.

If the GOP candidate gets a fired up conservative base to the polls, they start with about 45% of the likely 2012 vote and needs very few moderates to win.

Obama has far more of a Hobson's choice - if he plays the post partisan moderate again, his left base will stay home. If he campaigns as left as he has been governing,the Indis will go en masse to the GOP as they did in 2010.

Obama's only chance is to get a GOP establishment candidate who will alienate the conservative base without bringing in many Indis.

ricpic said...

Frankly the TEA Party wanted Palin but twas not to be. Maybe (we'll never know) because the establishment media had made life so uncomfortable for her that she decided enough is enough. As to Newt: TEA Party conservatives don't want him but they'll settle for him given the alternative: Mitt the RINO.

JohnJ said...

“…some people - including several here - could only think of what he'd (Gingrich) do to GodZero in the debates...”

Ah, yes, the all-purpose “debate” argument, as in Gingrich would mop the floor with the President in a debate.

If, by some bizarre alignment of the planets, Gingrich were to become the nominee, watch for the feigned “frustration” of the Obama campaign at trying to work out the details for debates, only to see their heroic efforts collapse due to the "unreasonable" demands of the Gingrich campaign. All of this dutifully reported (with probing analysis) by the waterboys of the media.

Ritmo Re-Animated said...

The Newtonian Candidacy in a nutshell:

My ego is SOOO bigger than Obama's and Romney's. It is!

Newt brings me-tooism to heightened levels of grandiosity.

Dust Bunny Queen said...

Some of you act like I'm literally sitting at my computer with my hat askew while I write each of my comments. Are people actually that dumb?


NONONO....I picture you like this!

Paddy O said...

"what America needs is someone proud and unashamed of his race baiting"

This is exactly my point. Using moral language to attack, thus legitimizing your own hatred, racism, despising of the poor.

Using terms like "dog whistle," suggesting those who are in need are just dogs, beneath contempt.

These are serious issues, with real people, and all you have are language games and your own coded language to dismiss calls for actual change that would allow real people to find real freedom.

The Left doesn't have a dream anymore, they want to trap people in nightmares, because nightmares is where they can be controlled.

It's disgusting. And it should be pushed against, precisely because the poor, the oppressed, the needy, the suffering need actual advocates.

Old Dad said...

Rat,

You're just as boring as ever, a quasi intellectual pompous asshole.

It's pathetic to brag about it. Commemorate and ritualize your own douchebaggery--set an altar up to yourself. Genuflect after each of your brilliant observations. But do it in private--that's only good manners.

Ritmo Re-Animated said...

Newt should dress up for his next debate wearing nothing but a loincloth and a spear.

Sorun said...

Use coded racist dog whistles!

They're coded AND outside the frequency range of normal hearing. Devious!

When you look out your window, Andy, do you see a racist standing behind every tree?

rcocean said...

The new (or rather old restarted) liberal meme is that Gingrich is a "hater" (see Bob Wright's new screed) and a "racist" (see any Liberal).

That's all they got. Say Hello to President Newt.

Jay said...

When you look out your window, Andy, do you see a racist standing behind every tree?

Yes, because nobody knows racism like a white, gay, uber-liberal college boy.

write_effort said...

One of Gingrich's few seemingly genuine aspects is empathy for people who want to do better. He doesn't demonize people who cross the border seeking opportunity. It's not only appealing, it's smart. Romney completely panders on the subject of immigration and doesn't seem to have any feel for other people's struggles. But, in honesty, that's not how he bills himself.

AJ Lynch said...

I thought the best way to beat Obama was to run against the catastrophic fiscal failures of longtime Beltway insiders like Obama, Newt and Santorum. That is why Perry excited people until he opened his mouth in debates.

I am therefore confused Palin endorsed Newt- it indicates she is inconsistent IMO.

Ritmo Re-Animated said...

Lol!

This douchebag doesn't see the irony of his comment in reference to a post about the grandiosity of all that is Newt Gingrich!

Newt will save the world!

His historical-genius is ready to take on liberalism, communism and evil itself!

wv: sitisonn. All the citizens shall declare themselves to be sons of Newt, or banished!

Andy R. said...

Catholics warn Gingrich, Santorum on race baiting
More than 40 Catholic leaders and theologians have issued an open letter to Catholic candidates Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum, warning them “to stop perpetuating ugly racial stereotypes on the campaign trail.”

The signers of the open letter, which was released Friday (Jan. 20), cited Gingrich’s repeated criticisms of Barack Obama as a “food stamp president” who encourages government dependency for the poor, especially for African-Americans.


Any questions?

Dust Bunny Queen said...

I am therefore confused Palin endorsed Newt- it indicates she is inconsistent IMO.

She did not endorse Newt.

Her husband did.

Andy R. said...

Using terms like "dog whistle," suggesting those who are in need are just dogs, beneath contempt.

What?

AJ Lynch said...

She kinda endorsed imo.

Monkeyboy said...

I lived in Charleston for four years and still have family there I visit regularly. I found it as iintegrated black/white as Seattle is Asian/White and much much less racist than Boston.

So be careful, the more you know about actual southerners, the less likely you are to retain your bigotry.

My dad, the former Marine with a grandson going for a USMC commission said he voted for Newt for one reason, out of all his choices he was the one he wanted in command when the Straits of Hurmuz blow up in a year or so.

(My mom voted for Romney, they have been cancelling each other out for 50 years.)

I ♥ Willard said...

If we're going for accuracy, it was the Legislature in the People's Republic that did the inventing and Milton had to work with that.

Milton has always said to tried to get the best deal he could from the apparatchiks.


Oh, don't be silly! Of course Willard deserves full credit for RomneyCare! Just look what his point man on the issue had to say about it:

"It’s actually old news that Mitt Romney’s health-care experts helped design Obamacare. Jonathan Gruber, the MIT economist who was the architect of both laws, received nearly $400,000 as a consultant to the Obama administration for 'technical assistance in evaluating options for national healthcare reform.'

Gruber, for his part, has said all along that Romneycare and Obamacare are 'basically…the same thing.' Gruber told the Boston Globe in March 2010 that Obamacare would never have passed had Romney not made 'the decision in 2005 to go for it. He is in many ways the intellectual father of national health reform.'”

Jay said...

Andy R. said...

Any questions?


Yes.

How can you be so ignorant and hypocritical?

See, you despise organized religion, except when you cite it to make a silly political point.

PaulV said...

My niece told me her fellow students had a problem with the proper term for a native of Africa. Their choice was African African American.

wv-unter A German German American would say that would be unter them.

AJ Lynch said...

Andy , the religion hater, digs up a group of Astroturfed far left, alleged Catholics to make his case.

Monkeyboy said...

by the by I love the term "coded racist dog whistles!"

You see the people that you just know are recist don't actually say anything racist, so you twist the meaning of what they say into some secret racist code.

When in reality they are the only racists hearing the whistle.

Ritmo Re-Animated said...

Let us rejoice in honor of Newt. There will be festivals and athletic competitions. Wrestling matches with lions, gladiatorial combat, javelin throwing, jousting, and huge drumsticks to feast upon!

Sword swallowing and fire-breathing! Dragons for the kiddies! Obama, the usurper, in effigy!

And fire! Much fire! Fire, fire, fire!!!

AJ Lynch said...

Jonathan Gruber is a far left librul & Obama supporter. Did you expect him to say otherwise?

Jay said...

cited Gingrich’s repeated criticisms of Barack Obama as a “food stamp president” who encourages government dependency for the poor, especially for African-Americans.

You do realize that you and your ignorant ilk are trying to stop all discussion of this issue because you can't defend the policies you support, right?

Andy R. said...

Wait, are you people claiming that the Republican party doesn't have a wide-ranging, crucial, historical use of racist dog whistles to motivate their base or that in this specific case Gingrich hasn't done any of this?

Because I get the impression some of you are disputing the very idea that the Republican party relies on racism as one of the foundations for its electoral success.

I thought we were just arguing about whether Gingrich is part of this pattern, but maybe I'm wrong.

Ritmo Re-Animated said...

Lol. Andy's still trying to argue and reason with the tribalists.

Use fire, Andy! FIRE!!! Join with them and dance into the fire!

Ritmo Re-Animated said...

Go NEWT!

William said...

I have read the biographies of Churchill, Truman, and Teddy Roosevelt. They were all absurdly monogamous. There's this much to be said about monogamy: it gives you so much more energy to devote to other areas of life. I don't know exactly what valence to put on a stable domestic history, but I would definitely give Romney (and for that matter Obama) some credit for being able to negotiate a successful marriage. I don't know how many demerits you want to give Gingrich for his chaotic personal life, but certainly it should be held against him.

Jay said...

Andy R. said...

Wait, are you people claiming that the Republican party doesn't have a wide-ranging, crucial, historical use of racist dog whistles to motivate their base or that in this specific case Gingrich hasn't done any of this?


Gingrich hasn't "done any of this"

Are you denying the Democrats are the party of segregation and don't have a history of Jim Crow and elected a former KKK Grand Wizard to the Senate for over 40 years?

Pretending that you have some credibility on "racism" is a silly joke.

PS, Bill Clinton gave J. William Fulbright, noted segregationist, the Presidential Medal of Freedom in 1993.

Old Dad said...

Andy,

I'll see your "Southern Strategy," and raise you the Emancipation Proclamation and the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

Before you post again, you might take a quick look at Woodrow Wilson's views on race. Did you know he was President of Princeton. It's a big word, but you might google "eugenics" and the "Tuskegee Project." Oh, and find out which President desegregated the armed services.

mccullough said...

What is Newt's policy on food stamps? Does he want to get rid of them or put them on a 5 year lifetime limit like TANF?

What's Newt's ideas on how the government can facilitate job creation? Is Newt planning on banning private equity funds to help job creation?

For a man of ideas and words, Newt doesnt have any specific proposals.

If Romney can't take Newt down, then Romney deserves to lose. Romney needs to put Newt on the defensive. There are plenty of places to do this, starting with where Newt makes his money.

MayBee said...

My fear about Newt is, as much as we (I include myself) love hearing him rail against the media, that isn't going to play to the overall electorate.

There is nothing stupider, in my opinion, than Obama when he rails against the media. I remember when he kept trying to score points by complaining about Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Fox News, etc. The left ate that up, but I thought it was incredibly lame.
I fear that's how most people who aren't already friendlies will see Newt.

Jay said...

Because I get the impression some of you are disputing the very idea that the Republican party relies on racism as one of the foundations for its electoral success.

Hysterical.

Yes, that epic 2010 electoral landslide was all "racism"!

It must be fun to be so stupid.

Writ Small said...

Re: the Mormon question.

Romney was up big in SC a little over a week ago. I think arguing religious bigotry is cheap, hate-filled and utterly unsupported.

If Newt had lost, we'd be hearing how the holier-than-thou's prudes wouldn't elect an aldulterer. No matter the outcome, lefties could justify their own ugly prejudices.

grackle said...

That said, Ira Stoll has a great piece on the soft underbelly of Newt's popular deconstruction of liberal elites.

Read the article. It made some good points. Gingrich’s message has to be more than a series of media/Liberal-bashings, even though they may be well deserved. While I think he needs to continue to challenge certain liberal assumptions when they occur he also needs to put forth a positive message of his own that is not tied to those assumptions.

Monkeyboy said...

Andy:

I can't speak for anyone else, but I would say that I have no doubt that when you hear someone say "people on welfare" you automatically think they are all black, and the hillbilly redneck stereotypes that live rent-free in your head hear the same thing, I just doubt that that was what was intended by millions of actual speakers and listeners.

tw: Asmeti, which sounds like 'Ashanti" and is obviously a code word for sending blacks back to Africa.

Ritmo Re-Animated said...

Ok Writ, whatever you say.

That first one's from FOX, BTW.

Thanks for playing the no-evidence-for-you game! But it doesn't matter. Newt's on top. Ride that pyromaniacal salamander all the way into the fire!!!

Paddy O said...

Andy wants oppressed people and the poor to stay in their kennels, to take whatever slops and leftovers Democratic politicians want to hand out.

"Because I get the impression some of you are disputing the very idea that the Republican party relies on racism as one of the foundations for its electoral success."

Are you disputing that Democrats were the historic party supporting slavery, opposing the Civil War, enacting highly racist policies throughout the South in a decades long rejection of Republican interests in Freedom?

Republicans, like all people, have used racism. Democrats have as well. Unfortunately, while Republicans are no longer the party of racism, the Democrats still like their people to stay enslaved, kept poor, raising calls of racism against those who would have all people, yes all people, rise above and embrace the possibilities of freedom.

It's disgusting when significant moral issues like racism become tools to support the implicit racism that is at the heart of government bureaucratic control over economic policies that ensure poor people stay poor.

Using terms like "dog whistles" is a way of being racist while sounding moral. You hate poor people and you want to brand any attempts as racist that call for the kinds of policies and responsibility that allows for people to get past the class barriers that hold them back. Precisely what Newt is right to push back against.

Just as communism led to all people being in need, with bureaucrats alone finding wealth, so too does the modern charges of "dog whistles" seeks to use rhetoric of racism to promote the very racism it voices against. It's only by keeping the diverse races down that such people hold onto power, that's the whole methodology of so much of the Democratic approach.

It's at the heart of corruption the world over: abusing the poor in the name of the poor, and it's disgusting, and it's precisely what Andy is doing here.

edutcher said...

Andy R. said...

Wait, are you people claiming that the Republican party doesn't have a wide-ranging, crucial, historical use of racist dog whistles to motivate their base or that in this specific case Gingrich hasn't done any of this?

Poor little maroon, he never heard of Edmund Ruffin or Bull Connor or Orval Faubus.

He also never heard of Abraham Lincoln or Thaddeus Stevens.

garage mahal said...

You do realize that you and your ignorant ilk are trying to stop all discussion of this issue because you can't defend the policies you support, right?

Who are you addressing? The WaPo, which you pasted here, or the open letter written by 40 Catholic leaders? Or even more likely, you didn't even really know what you were pasting.

Andy R. said...

raise you the Emancipation Proclamation

It's so embarrassing when Republicans bring up Abraham Lincoln as if he is some totem they can wave to excuse their modern racism.

I know you're opposed to the idea of change, but do you really not realize the difference between the party of Lincoln and today's Republicans?

mccullough said...

Old Dad,

Truman desegregated the military, and the 1964 Act was passed with the help of Northern Republicans over the opposition from Southern Democrats. The Southern Strategy refers to Republicans trying to turn Southern Dems into Republicans after 1964.

I don't think the Repubs or Newt are racists these days. But your examples don't support this.

The Crack Emcee said...

Ann,

My latest theory:

The closer someone is to a college, the easier it is for them to delude themselves.

I'm not very good at listening to music, in the sense that I don't focus and notice all the details the right way or whatever real music connoisseurs do. I don't even respond emotionally most of the time. I do behave.

Well - there's a welcome admission.

So what I feel I have to do — and I know I should just stop it — is think about all sorts of things.

Nothing wrong with that - it's part of what music's for. I make all kinds of connections by listening to music. For instance, I was listening to Billy Idol's White Wedding last night and it got me to thinking about what a total fucking nightmare no-fault divorce has turned marriage in to:

There is nothing fair in this world, baby
There is nothing safe in this world
And there's nothing sure in this world
And there's nothing pure in this world
Look for something left in this world - start again!


Shameful. You and I were on the same page:

Inevitably, my thoughts drifted to Newt. Before going out on that dark night last night, I'd seen that he'd won the South Carolina primary. At intermission, I said to Meade: "I've come to terms with Newt." I didn't mean that I was prepared to vote for him. I still regard the idea of President Gingrich as bizarre. But I live in the moment. I embrace the now. It's fine the way things are. Newt has his role to play, and right now, I'm going to say it's a good one.

Now that's total NewAge garbage - you even spout the lingo - "I live in the moment. I embrace the now." (Meade does, too, with his nonsense talk of "fear.") This, when you claim not to be one, is proof you're in denial about it. And the fact you've turned Newt's worst moment, when he's perpetrating a total fraud, into a plus is further evidence you embrace the upside-down logic of NewAge.

Cont'd:

The Crack Emcee said...

Get this:

First, I especially adore the spectacular failure of The Attack of the Ex-Wife.

Ah, yes - the trampling of the trampled - does it feel good to join in that, Ann? No-fault means no matter what Newt did to her - and we know he cheated on her with Callista for 6 years - she has no rights and no standing, and you applaud her getting it one more time. Some law professor you are. Where's the justice, Ann? And the diversion of attacking ABC News - my goodness, you're gullible. Does Newt hiding behind his daughters - from his first marriage - to defend his actions, as he destroyed his second to have a third, not give you pause? That's the most "despicable" (to use his words) thing I've seen in a long time. Yet you see worth in it? I guess, being on your own "second marriage," you'll have to employ such pretzel logic, but, man, it must be a lot of work to juggle all those hatchets in the air at the same time.

Second, it's good that the Tea Party and other sorts of conservative factions contribute to the political mix in America. Newt — along with Santorum — has established that the Establishment can't dictate who the candidate will be. Whoever ultimately becomes the candidate — and I assume it will be Mitt — he won't achieve his place through the nods of insiders bypassing the people who have imperatives of their own. It's strange that Gingrich embodies their wants, but that's the way this strange campaign has evolved, which leads me to....

The Tea Party has as many confused Boomers in it as any other political party in this nation. Is it a good? Sure, but I've come to see it as flawed. I attended a Tea party gathering on New Years day and there was talk from the stage of "creating a Heaven on Earth," so let's not fool ourselves about what's going on there.

Third, Gingrich has achieved his position through the sheer force of putting ideas into words, words that people heard. There's something quite beautiful about that, quite American. And it's beautiful without the man being beautiful. Back in 2008, many of us fell for Barack Obama, who — as Joe Biden put it so memorably was "the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy... that's a storybook, man." Today, we question how articulate Obama really is and, with the distance of time, it's easy to see that the whole "storybook" gave us the impression that the speech was wonderful. That was an impressive effect in its time.

Another admission - you were/are a rube. You follow narratives laid down by men - not reality - and, instead of bravely owning up to that, you let it dribble out, years later, when you think nobody will hold your feet to the fire. Sorry, Kiddo, but you did us all a disservice in 2008, just as you're doing us one now. I've said it before, and I'll say it again:

You're 60 years old, but when are you going to choose to grow up?

rcocean said...

So another thread turns into a liberal wank fest about "racism".

grackle said...

That said, Ira Stoll has a great piece on the soft underbelly of Newt's popular deconstruction of liberal elites.

Read the article. It made some good points. Gingrich’s message has to be more than a series of media/Liberal-bashings, even though they may be well deserved. While I think he needs to continue to challenge certain liberal assumptions when they occur he also needs to put forth a positive message of his own that is not tied to those assumptions.


Catholics warn Gingrich, Santorum on race baiting …

I read the article. Here’s the part I found interesting:

In their open letter, the Catholic leaders — many of them associated with progressive and Democratic causes — say that raising “racist caricatures is irresponsible, immoral and unworthy of political leaders.”

AJ Lynch said...

McCullough:
It's interesting that Newt released his tax return showing his income was over $3 Million yet not a peep from any in the news media as to where that $3 Million came from. They will give Newt a free pass on that because they want him to get the Repub nomination. And you are right- Romney has to hit back at Newt.

machine said...

Newt Gingrich?!?!?!?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!


Thank you repubs....you have made my day...

Jason said...

So another thread turns into a liberal wank fest about "racism".

Mark my words - "racism" will be the cornerstone of the campaign for Obama this summer. Its all he has left. He certainly cant run on record, and since most of his words and promises from 2008 have rung hollow, nobody will believe the rhetoric. All he can do is play the race card.

Jason said...

Newt Gingrich?!?!?!?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!


Thank you repubs....you have made my day...


I would pretty much guarantee the Obama administration would disagree with that statement. Newt would debate circles around Obama and make him look like a bigger fool than he already is.

Jay said...

garage mahal said...

Who are you addressing? The WaPo, which you pasted here, or the open letter written by 40 Catholic leaders?


I'm addressing the poster, bozo.

The good news is you're part of his ignorant ilk.

Jay said...

Andy R. said...

It's so embarrassing when Republicans bring up Abraham Lincoln as if he is some totem they can wave to excuse their modern racism.


Its so embarrassing that after electing a former KKK member to the Senate for over 40 years Democrats feel they have the standing to criticize anyone on racism.

Ritmo Re-Animated said...

You guys just don't understand. Asking whether a candidate's religion figures prominently into your voting decisions is a racist thing to do. So sayeth the fire-breathers.

machine said...

Jason, if you really believe that then please do everything in your power to get Newt the nomination.

Please do this...

write_effort said...

1. the GOP is far more the party of people who fear what it means to have a steadily growing Hispanic population
2. Gingrich tends to lump African-Americans together when he speaks of work ethic, etc. His crudeness is essentially insulting families like the Robinsons and what it took generations of them to have a daughter as First Lady. His ham-handedness on this is suspicious.

The Crack Emcee said...

Casual observations on the comments - including reality:

Herman was slimed.

And no one came to his defense - against the women, the media, or anyone else. He was abandoned, and now everyone's standing with a man we KNOW is a slimeball against those very forces. It's fucked up and totally illogical.

Newt is a rightwing nutjob. Romney is the only reasonable candidate.

Romney will be as soon as he explains following Joseph Smith after Smith was busted for fraud, the Angel Moroni, that whole "golden plates" thing, and why this country should bow to his cult's unhidden political ambitions - would we feel the same way if he was a Scientologist or a Black Muslim? Once he can give me a coherent story for all that, then I will consider him "reasonable" and not until.

I've now lived in South Carolina for 7 years, having moved from Chicago. I am alternatively annoyed and amused by the media assumptions about South Carolina in general, and racial and religious issues particularly. The South Carolina they imagine has disappeared,...The new bigots in America will not let go of the old stereotype, because they need it to feel superior.

I've been saying we live in a world of delusion for some time, but the denial factor in this country is STRONG. These fools love to feel like they're on top of things when, in truth, they're just conventional thinkers utilizing the ideas passed down to them by fakes and frauds. How this occurs in 2012 is puzzling, but so is mental psychosis and mass delusion, so,...

Jay said...

In their open letter, the Catholic leaders — many of them associated with progressive and Democratic causes — say that raising “racist caricatures is irresponsible, immoral and unworthy of political leaders.”

I find it funny that the poster who said this about religion:

Andy R. said...

Sounds better than someone who is dumb enough to be a sincere Christian in the 21st century.



Would reference "Catholic leaders"

Then again, hypocrisy is a virtue for these idiots.

Old Dad said...

mccullough,

I was using poker, lingo, so Andy's bet on the Southern Strategy was accepted as valid, but I raised him the EP and the 64 Civil Rights act which was viciously opposed by the Dixiecrats.

As for desegregation of the military, Pres. Truman issued an executive order, but Ike got the job done.

While the argument on its face is silly (I know you know that but Andy doesn't), no objective historian questions that politicians with a D after their names have been more racist (against African Americans) than those with Rs.

Then again, I'd say that JFK was more rebublican than GWB. Again, you see the silliness of Andy's argument.

edutcher said...

Andy R. said...

raise you the Emancipation Proclamation

It's so embarrassing when Republicans bring up Abraham Lincoln as if he is some totem they can wave to excuse their modern racism.


Should I tell Hatman how the original scandal in AR was not that Willie was boinking Gennifer Flowers, but that he gave her a state job held by a fully-qualified black woman?

Or maybe we should raise the specter of those two paragons of racial tolerance Al "Crown Heights" "Freddy's Fashion Mart" "Yankel Rosenbloom" "Kill the Jews" Sharpton and Jesse "Hymietown" Jackson?

Then, of course, there are the lovely images of "house slaves" Condi Rice and Colin Powell.

And who can forget Sen Robert "white niggers" Byrd?

Beth said...

"I like this new culture of religious conservatism — if that's what it is — in which people who care about character don't recoil but reflect. They're not simpletons. They can get their mind around complexity. You can't just push their buttons."

Sure you can. You just have to push their Them button. The Us button has built-in complexity. Oh, it's one of Us? Then we don't care.

"Or... at least... you can't push their buttons with big clumsy ABC fingers."

Exactly. ABC focused on the immorality. That only matters if it's about Them. ABC was stupid.

The Crack Emcee said...

Casual observations on the comments - including reality:

And as Exhibit A for the New Bigots, I give you Andy.

I thought the same thing, looking at his post.

One of your best AA but I detect a soupcon of Noonan in the tone.

Ann Althouse IS Peggy Noonan

The Republican Party is doing all it can to loose the coming election, but will it be enough?

It's not limited to the Republican Party - AMERICA is determined to go down the tubes, and it's the decades of NewAge training that drives it. This country can no longer think straight. Just as Ann has taken wrong and turned it into right, on this post, this country is just as confused. The elites try to hard to be "sophisticated," like the occultist French, when we're not - we're Americans. This is The New World, which is why we need to beat down the elitists as soon as possible.

Andy R. said...

A word of advice to the Republicans: you really don't want an argument about which party is more racist to be an important part of this election. You will lose that argument.

Bringing up Lincoln and Woodrow Wilson won't matter when people look at what Gingrich and Santorum are saying right now.

It's better to avoid letting this discussion get out of control. Just a piece of friendly advice.

garage mahal said...

I'm addressing the poster, bozo.

Then why did you paste a section from the WaPo article? But it all looks the same if it's a criticism of a Republican. MUST.DEFEND.AT.ALL.TIMES.

Monkeyboy said...

It's so embarrassing when Republicans bring up Abraham Lincoln as if he is some totem they can wave to excuse their modern racism.

Proponents of slavery often argued that republicans hated "the colored race" because everyone knew that they were incabable of of taking care of themselves and would starve without the kind, guiding hand of decent white folks.

- the more things change.

Writ Small said...

@ Ritmo - That data is compelling and a bit depressing. I take the point.

However, my point stands. Libs would be arguing the reverse if the election had gone the other way. That's how they roll.

Ritmo Re-Animated said...

I was using poker, lingo, so Andy's bet on the Southern Strategy was accepted as valid, but I raised him the EP and the 64 Civil Rights act which was viciously opposed by the Dixiecrats.

Twenty bucks says Old Dud can't name the party that the Dixiecrats migrated to after 1964.

Ritmo Re-Animated said...

Well, would-be's are all fine and good, Writ. But no country can solve its problems without looking at the what-ises.

Carnifex said...

@ Andy R

Channeling our inner Sheila Jackson Lee, are we? Way to spout talking points and do absolutely no thinking.

@ AJ Lynch

And isn't Newt's response to point at Romney, and say "Romneycare"? And the Romney from Mexico has been reported before.

@ Freder Frederson

You haven't grown as a person and in wisdom in a decade?

@ William

While you are right about ABC, You are wrong about being top of the food chain. If the choice is Obama or Anybody But O', I'm voting ABO.

And I don't remember who said it, but it had to do with Romney having to take what was given him by the Mass, legislature, That's his problem. He took it. He didn't fight it, he didn't veto it, he didn't even not sign it, HE TOOK IT!

Being a surrender monkey is not a quality I want in my president.

The Crack Emcee said...

Casual observations on the comments - including reality:

Eight years of GWB left the base hungry for a spokesman.

The base betrayed GWB. It was an unforgivable error in wartime, giving the Left an opening for mischief, and we'll be paying for it for decades to come.

Anybody voting for Santorum is no Conservative. He's the worst statist around, after Zero.

You misread what it means to be a conservative. It's not a list of political positions but how you approach those positions.

When the Marxist Twins Andy R and J The Retard are grudgingly for Mitt as the Republican nominee it seals the deal, Newt for me.

That would be a clue, wouldn't it?

When in doubt, climb on Meade's shoulders and flash your boobs at the stage.

Now THAT I'd like to see!

I hope you realize, that considering your disdain of President Clinton and his apologists, that this comment is the height of hypocrisy.

Nope - Ann and Meade are NewAgers - they see what they want to see and reality be damned. Hypocrisy is no impediment.

Stop preaching about morality in a time of fiscal crisis.

Stop being an unthinking idiot parrot - no matter what's occurring at any given time, the presidency is ALWAYS about more than balancing the budget.

Ritmo Re-Animated said...

BTW, the Southern Strategy was implemented after 1964.

Why is the historical timeline redeemed by Old Dud according to what happened in reverse? That's not the way it works. Who says that it's ok if things are bad now, if only they were better before? What a nonsensical approach to looking at life.

No wonder that party can't get anything done.

traditionalguy said...

That was beautiful, Professor. You sure do know how to use words.

I have come around the same way to overlook that Newt is an aggressive asshole.

I had long had a problem with him for years until I realized the old "we don't like people who are so much like us that we hate their faults in us that are in them."

The Newt that is a Catholic with a good supportive woman is a new man. His sharp elbows seem under control.

He always has always had a great mind and he can express our History so well that we feel he is one of us even if he is a politician's politician.

Plus Newt the ability to relate well to lower middleclass white workers, who are the voters that Obama wrote off this election.

Romney cannot relate to those voters. That's what Newt's Bain attacks showed. Romney cannot escape Obama's two year in the development "hate the rich" meme. He is one. But Newt is just a college professor with governing skills.

Mitt despises a man like Gingrich because Mitt is in his heart an arrogant tycoon who believes that he owns the cheap politicians the way he owns the Lawyers he uses to get rich.

Newt has a window in time for his skills to be very useful, like the Third Army's commander had from August 1, 1944 until that paper hanging SOB Hitler beat Patton to it and shot himself on April, 30 1945.

For a time we need to get the best out of an asshole who fights and quit fainting over his aggressive use of blunt words in front of women of both genders. They need his victory more than old Newt needs the trouble, and last night's vote and this post both show that the women get it.

Old Dad said...

Andy said (unfortunately),

"I know you're opposed to the idea of change, but do you really not realize the difference between the party of Lincoln and today's Republicans?"

Actually, you don't know shit about me "boy." (Watch Andy's secret racist decoder ring explode.) President Obama has often identified with FDR, under whose watch the government secretly injected poor black men in Alabama with syphilis bacteria. I'm not sure who has more difficulty with historical analogy--you or the President.

Actually, I do. The President is a mediocrity, but you're far dumber.

Andy R. said...

"The head of the Republican National Committee issued a sweeping apology to the NAACP yesterday for a decades-old practice of writing off the black vote and using racial polarization to win elections."

Recognizing the problem is the first step toward fixing it.

Ritmo Re-Animated said...

Old Dud seems to be saying that it's ok to pander to racists after 1964, because implementing Civil Rights first gave the Republicans a pass that they could use later.

Interesting way of looking at it. Entirely immoral. But interesting.

Old Dad said...

Rat said:

"Twenty bucks says Old Dud can't name the party that the Dixiecrats migrated to after 1964."

Why, away from the racists to the party of Lincoln.

Keep your $20. You're boring, dumb, and cheap.

Ritmo Re-Animated said...

Old Dud is saying, "Hey, just be grateful that we're not secretly injecting blacks with syphilis! But anything short of that is ok with me!"

MayBee said...

Romney cannot relate to those voters. That's what Newt's Bain attacks showed. Romney cannot escape Obama's two year in the development "hate the rich" meme. He is one. But Newt is just a college professor with governing skills.

The idea of "relating" to voters is overrated.
Obama thinks he relates to the working class guy. His wife grew up in a working class family. His grandpa was kinda working class. Obama thinks he is actually governing on his behalf. That "bitter clinger" comment? That was Obama relating.

The problem is, he has terrible policy ideas for the people to whom he believes himself to understand completely.

We need a president who has the competence to look at a screwed up budget and overly aggressive government and cut it back. That's what will benefit everyone. The president does not have to be in everyone's heads.

Ritmo Re-Animated said...

Keep your $20. You're boring, dumb, and cheap.

But not afraid to admit the truth, which grates on you to no end.

Jay said...

garage mahal said...

Then why did you paste a section from the WaPo article?


Because the poster posted it?

DUH.

pbAndjFellowRepublican said...

""Or... at least... you can't push their buttons with big clumsy ABC fingers."

Exactly. ABC focused on the immorality. That only matters if it's about Them. ABC was stupid."


This episode actually demonstrates how extremely simple it is to push the buttons of these cons.

Newt seems to have easily pushed the They (media) were out to get Us (perpetual victims, aka cons) buttons. The only reason this worked so magnificently is precisely because the cons are such suckers for the Them v Us button pushing. The professional conservatives have created victim junkies who are looking for their next fix.

Sad.

Jay said...

Andy R. said...
A word of advice to the Republicans: you really don't want an argument about which party is more racist to be an important part of this election. You will lose that argument.


Yes!

The Republicans should take electoral advice from a silly, ignorant, gay, college kid on the Internet!

OCCUPY!

The Crack Emcee said...

Casual observations on the comments - including reality:

The Clinton apologists were right i.e. 'it's only sex' viz James Carville. We learned and have moved on.

More NewAge lingo ("move on") you guys have got it bad.

Romney has electability problems he is a Mormon,...

Let him explain how Jesus is going to return to Earth - landing in Salt Lake City - and then you tell me if he has electability problems. He's electable as long as cowards keep demanding nobody get to the crux of his cult's "beliefs" and ambitions.

I fear four more years of Obama, obamacare becoming permanent and the continued socialization of our country.

Thank Ann.

The Evangelicals are 'born again' and understand the concepts of sin AND redemption. Everyone sins. Everyone makes mistakes

It's a great mind game that lets you off the hook. Sin on Saturday night, but be in church on Sunday. What a scam.

Strange that a feminist would use the word "little" to describe this woman.

Ann's feminism is a pose - one she used to get that huge paycheck. Affirmative Action for women, is what it is/was. A way to cow those willing to be cowed by it. All fake.

Newt didn't resign because of his marital infidelities, but because he was an incompetent speaker and corrupt. He was fined $300,000, lied to House Ethics committee, and only avoided a full investigation (and possible criminal indictment) by agreeing to resign from the House.

Newt was busted on one count - using his classroom for political purposes, which is hardly the major crime most of you are trying to use it as. He was the victim of a witch hunt because he was effective. (He was re-elected in his state the same day he resigned the Speakership.) I kn ow you guys don't like him - I don't either - but can we stick to reality?

Old Dad said...

Rat said,

"But not afraid to admit the truth, which grates on you to no end."

I'm skeptical of boring dumb asses who claim to have a fix on the truth.

Andy R. said...

Remember when the leader of the RNC said that his party was using racism to win elections?

I wonder if that has any bearing on the discussion we are having now.

Lincoln!

Titus said...

beautifully written.

Jay said...

Andy R. said...
Remember when the leader of the RNC said that his party was using racism to win elections?


Actually, he said no such thing.

But you go on believing and saying that being a "sincere Christian" is stupid while quoting Catholic church leaders.

Occupy!

Paddy O said...

"It's so embarrassing when Republicans bring up Abraham Lincoln as if he is some totem they can wave to excuse their modern racism."

Not as embarrassing as when Democrats bring up Civil Rights legislation from 40 years ago to excuse their postmodern racism.

Racists want poor people to stay poor, minorities to have no opportunities, to maintain the status quo, so that some overseer, some higher intellect can run their lives. Look around, who is instituting such policies now. Racist authoritarian democrats.

It you who want to keep people from experiencing real freedom, all while using almost half a century year old rhetoric to support. You want to prevent real progress by using rhetoric of hidden messages, which itself is a hidden message to all rich white Democrats that their positions of privilege are being threatened.

Jay said...

Andy R. said...
Remember when the leader of the RNC said that his party was using racism to win elections?


I love how all of a sudden "some Republicans" because the entire party and "racial polarization" is now racism.

Why, it is almost as if you're a silly, dishonest hack or something.

Ritmo Re-Animated said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Ritmo Re-Animated said...

I'm skeptical of boring dumb asses who claim to have a fix on the truth.

I have no time for sanctimonious and petulant blowhards who take offense to the idea that they might be wrong.

Which describes your self-admittedly grandiose LEADER!

America thinks it's ugly, though. Have fun losing ugly, loser.

The Crack Emcee said...

Casual observations on the comments - including reality:

It begs the question if you wish to defend Newt by attacking his ex-wife. If she is as troubled and bitter as some defenders claim, then what was Newt doing choosing her as his wife.

This is flawed logic - he cheated on her for 6 years - what is she supposed to be now? Happy go lucky? You guys are abusing the abused.

Even stranger that Ann apparently believes that poor Mary Ann was somehow forced by eeeeevil ABC to tell her side of the story. They must have drugged her and dragged her into the studio, threatening to kill her puppy if she didn't say bad things about Newt.

Exactly. Ann is siding with the bad guys because, as someone on her own "second marriage," she can see Newt's position. The abused mean nothing to her. As a matter of fact, she's happy to join in as an abuser.

Instapundit said this morning, "What primary voters like about Newt is that he fights, and that he doesn’t concede moral legitimacy to the left or to the media."

I think this is exactly it.

No - NewAgers don't concede moral legitimacy to ANYONE but themselves. The attack on ABC was a diversion and not even a good one - but it worked.

Freder, Calista was working for Congressman Steve Gunderson when they met.

And she and Newt knew he was married. Wonderful people, both. Let's reward them.

Yes, yes please let it be Newt! Newt was fined for his lies and replaced by the more competent Tom DeLay.

Another reframing of the truth - amazing how you guys will lie

As much as I'd rather not say so, Newt is very easy to listen to. He makes perfect sense. He knows things and explains them very well. I always find myself nodding and agreeing with him. I really am more comfortable with him than Romney.

I agree - until I catch him lying. His ex-wife was accusing him of going through pain, or experiencing it, but BEING THE SOURCE OF IT.

Major, major difference.

MayBee said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Old Dad said...

Rat said,

"I have no time for sanctimonious and petulant blowhards who take offense to the idea that they might be wrong."

Apparently you do. You keep posting, and you voted for Obama.

QED

shu said...

Newt is not a 'small government' guy. Of the currently remaining four only Ron Paul understands that every act of government - every decision by some little bureaucrat in some little office somewhere - robs ALL other citizens of some measure of liberty.

Of the remaining three Newt is far and away the most likely to make a serious and successful attempt to reduce the gap between government revenue and expense.

Ritmo Re-Animated said...

So when was the last time you were wrong, Old Dud? Seeing as how you're not only exciting, smart, and not an ass, but have no claim to a fix on the truth?

It's nice to see you fail at living up to the example you claim to uphold.

Ritmo Re-Animated said...

And fail miserably, at that.

Anything to take the discussion away from what you failed to learn from your history courses, I take it.

Ritmo Re-Animated said...

It must be tough showing us the many ways in which you lack any claim to a "fix on the truth", eh?

Writ Small said...

I think this thread is a sign of things to come. If it's Romney, the left will attempt to divide by wealth and envy. If it's Newt, it will be a race and hate line of attack. Obama has been such an abject failure, there is no record to run on, so it's the ugly, ugly politics of division and resentment.

The depressing thing is that Newt and Perry have given their stamp of approval on the first line of attack. Romney could join the left and start talking about dog whistles and such - he's entitled - but he's a smarter man than that.

It is becoming harder to see a scenario where Obama is defeated.

cokaygne said...

It is good for Romney to have someone questioning his wealth and how he got it. Fer sure the Dems and their MSM megaphones are going to make that the only issue of the election, as if the last four years never happened.

It is good also to have a national politician calling out the sheer idiocy of MSM election coverage. It is also good that the establishment actually has to engage with the voters. The failure of the EU is that it is unaccountable to ordinary people.

Having said that, president Gingrich would be disaster.

Roger J. said...

A small point of order--the US public health service did not inject anyone with syphillis--what they did was let the disease run its course in those already infected when, in fact, the disease could have been treated--That was, of course, a terrible and unconscionable choice. But to assert the tuskegee males were injected is not true.

The Crack Emcee said...

Casual observations on the comments - including reality:

I'm not attacking her. I'm attacking the IDEA of her having some sort of moral standing to criticize Newt and whine about being a victim, when she was party to the same actions that harmed another woman.

Which is as much Newt's fault as hers, so he should not be winning anyone's favor for this. I blame the Boomers for this clusterfuck - they did it. We won't be free of it until we're free of them.

Newt has evidenced that he is repentant of his previous actions.

Bullshit - he was calling her a liar as he claimed not to trash her. He's a scumbag.

Frankly the TEA Party wanted Palin but twas not to be. Maybe (we'll never know) because the establishment media had made life so uncomfortable for her that she decided enough is enough.

Another public raping by the media (Herman Cain was the second) where no one stood up to applaud as they did the guy we KNOW is guilty. Shameful.

These are serious issues, with real people, and all you have are language games and your own coded language to dismiss calls for actual change that would allow real people to find real freedom.

And Paddy O defines NewAge "thinking" - welcome to the fold, buddy! (Can we "move on" now?)

I am therefore confused Palin endorsed Newt- it indicates she is inconsistent IMO.

I endorsed him before Marianne showed up - and still think he's the best choice - but not if the rest of us don't force some ethics into the debate. That's the missing element here - that's how we're drifting from reality. Everything is not O.K., kids.

My niece told me her fellow students had a problem with the proper term for a native of Africa. Their choice was African African American.

It's very NewAge to think such things are your choice. The proper term is African.

Old Dad said...

Rat's apparently been cured of his aversion to petulant, sanctimonious blowhards.

I must have become more scintillating.

edutcher said...

Andy R. said...

"The head of the Republican National Committee issued a sweeping apology to the NAACP yesterday for a decades-old practice of writing off the black vote and using racial polarization to win elections."

Recognizing the problem is the first step toward fixing it.


Aside from the fact that Mehlman was a PC RINO, writing off the black vote was the only response to the racist fear-mongering and creation of a permanent black underclass, which has been the Democrat strategy from LBJ on.

And, if Hatman would take his brains out his hat, he'd look up a few statistics and find out most of the people on food stamps, etc., particularly the new ones, are white.

But Hatman never questions, never does his own research.

That requires intellect.

michaele said...

I usually read all the comments before I even think about posting (don't want to be repetitious). However, this time I just want to jump in and say thanks. I needed a pep talk about why Newt winning SC wasn't totally troubling.
I shall get in touch with my inner dog and, for the time being, live in the now.

edutcher said...

Roger J. said...

A small point of order--the US public health service did not inject anyone with syphillis--what they did was let the disease run its course in those already infected when, in fact, the disease could have been treated--That was, of course, a terrible and unconscionable choice. But to assert the tuskegee males were injected is not true.

Roger, if you dig through the Green Books (I think you know what I mean), you'll find the biggest health problem for black inductees during that period was, in fact, VD (the biggest for whites was vision and dental problems), so there's plenty of corroboration.

WV "rotulfu" Not sure what it translates to, but I feel like it every time Hatman wants to set all us adults straight.

Jay Retread said...

To be honest I support Romney because if he won he would be the most liberal Republican president since Ford and in some ways he will be the easiest for Obama to beat. He is for a liberal like me a "heads I win, tails you lose" proposition. Romney both as nominee and more so as president would decimate the conservative movement in a way no Democrat ever could.

The Crack Emcee said...

michaele,

I shall get in touch with my inner dog and, for the time being, live in the now.

Exactly. "Thinking" on the same level as a dog is supposed to be intelligent? Ann should be ashamed of ever accepting such nonsense for herself.

And she, a law professor!!!!!

Chip S. said...

I usually read all the comments before I even think about posting (don't want to be repetitious).

Don't worry, michaele. If you've read any previous Althouse thread about the Republican primaries, you've already read everything in this one.

chickenlittle said...

Why can't at least one big TV network just implode--like a car company or Air America going belly up? This sort of Schumpeterian event would go quite a distance in assuaging some people's rage towards the liberal media. The number of New Meadia outlets more than makes up for any diminished diversity.

Roger J. said...

Edutcher--you are correct; VD was rampant among southern black males and regretably their female associates. I only took issue with the assertion that the tuskegee victims had been infected by the public health service--The USPHS to their shame chose not to treat the diseases but monitored the progress of the diseases which led to needless deaths--I am a big supporter of the USPHS, but they did not cover themselves in glory with the Tuskeege "experiment."

kcom said...

lose, lose, lose, lose, lose, lose, lose, lose, lose ...and, even after the thirty-third time, still lose.

William said...

Gingrich is an overweight man in his late sixties. He has not overcome his libidinal sins so much as he has outlived them. I'm willing to give Cain and Trump and some others a pass for their sins. I think they fool around because it's fun and a new women is exciting to be with. Guys like Edwards, Gingrich, and Clinton seem compulsive and needy in the way they connect with women.....I give the highest marks, though, to guys like Romney and Obama who seem steadfastly monogamous. Beyond ethics, it's just a smarter way to live your life. I don't think Romney could have made all those millions at Bain Capital ir he was entertaining interns under the desk during business hours....Many here are critical of Obama, but it must be admitted that he would not be able to indulge in so much golf if his concentration were in any way diluted by the pursuit of nookie. As Tiger Woods has shown, nookie and a focussed golf game do not mix. I'm sure that if Obama were given another term of office he will be able to get his handicap under ten.

edutcher said...

Jay Retread said...

To be honest I support Romney because if he won he would be the most liberal Republican president since Ford and in some ways he will be the easiest for Obama to beat. He is for a liberal like me a "heads I win, tails you lose" proposition. Romney both as nominee and more so as president would decimate the conservative movement in a way no Democrat ever could.

The way Dubya did?

Actually, there are those who say Milton is a lot more Conservative than many think because of what he had to do to get elected and get things done in the People's Republic of Taxachusetts.

So any gloating may be premature.

His work at Bain was very Conservative.

Possibly his inner Saint may be coming out again.

BAS said...

In 2000 I had friends tell me that McCain was the more moderate and more appropriate candidate than W.

I don't know who's going to win, but Romney is stiff as Gore and doesn't interact well with people.

Newt has a real crack at Florida so it will be very exciting to see what happens.

shiloh said...

America has already come to terms w/Gingrich as he's an open book ...

carry on

Kirk Parker said...

Sorun,

"If he was to walk up to one of those pretentious newsreaders who moderate the debates and pummel the shit of him,"

For some reason, this made me think of the turning point in Peralandra. But no, delicious though the image may be, we really don't want it to happen, as it would be Yet Another Waypoint on the way to Civil War II.


Tyrone,

Divided government with the R's holding all three places? I could live with that.

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 231   Newer› Newest»