Althouse: The death penalty for individuals who bring 2 ounces of marijuana into the country?

January 23, 2012

The death penalty for individuals who bring 2 ounces of marijuana into the country?

Newt Gingrich, as Speaker of the House, had that in his "Drug Importer Death Penalty Act of 1996."

128 comments:

Nathan said...: I had totally forgotten that!

Of a piece with his freewheeling, half-baked, theoretical, intellectually stimulating, practically unworkable and often offensive style.

That Newt says the darnedest things.; 1/23/12, 10:14 AM
Triangle Man said...: I'm sure he didn't really mean it though, that rapscallion.; 1/23/12, 10:16 AM
Nathan said...: From the article, this idea is labelled a "pure play to resentment and fear," but it also seems a "flight of fancy," and a "small, specific idea." A resentful, fantastical idea from small, specific mind.; 1/23/12, 10:18 AM
Anonymous said...: More of Gingrich's half-baked protectionism. I want a president who believes in free trade. If domestic companies and workers get displaced because foreign products are better, that's fine.

Certainly, we shouldn't imprison foreign trade competitors. Ridiculous!; 1/23/12, 10:18 AM
Nathan said...: Good point. I'm sure this runs afoul of NAFTA. And what of the Canadian weed importers?; 1/23/12, 10:19 AM
Tank said...: What effect such a law?

It would drive up the price of weed, and, therefore, be a Godsend to ... gangs and organized crime.

Yay.

Another BIG idea.

Probably work though, remember how well it worked with alcohol? I mean, that did give us the Kennedys as a national power.; 1/23/12, 10:20 AM
BarryD said...: "Of a piece with his freewheeling, half-baked, theoretical, intellectually stimulating, practically unworkable and often offensive style."

That sums it up well -- except that this was intended to be written into law. It wasn't just silly rhetoric.

The reason Prohibition failed was not because there weren't enough dead people.; 1/23/12, 10:24 AM
edutcher said...: And your problem is...?; 1/23/12, 10:24 AM
Wince said...: Just because Newt's head is big, doesn't mean his ideas are big.

Douthat (via Klein) confronts the reality that needs to be Romney's opposition message.

I am at a loss to identify the “big ideas” and “big solutions” that [Gingrich] is supposedly campaigning on. Yes, he has an implausible supply-side tax plan, but you never hear him talk about it. He has technically signed on to some form of entitlement reform, but you never hear him talk about that, either. Instead, so far as I can tell, his “idea-oriented” campaign consists almost entirely of promising to hold Lincoln-Douglas-style debates with President Obama, grandstanding about media bias and moderator stupidity, defending his history of ideological flexibility much more smoothly than Mitt Romney, and then occasionally throwing out a wonky-sounding notion (like, say, outsourcing E-Verify to American Express) that’s more glib than genuinely significant. His last-minute momentum in South Carolina, which last night’s debate did nothing to derail, has been generated almost exclusively by the politics of ressentiment: If he wins the Palmetto State primary, it will be because conservative voters don’t much like the mainstream press, and Gingrich has mastered the art of taking tough questions and turning them into dudgeon-rich denunciations of the liberal media and all its works...

And if the Iowa results spoke well of that state’s electorate, a victory for Gingrich this weekend will say something less kind about South Carolinians: They’ll be elevating, as Mitt Romney’s final adversary, a man whose “idea-based” campaign has been anything but, and who won last night’s debate (or at least won its biggest ovation) by turning the topic of his own serial adulteries into an exercise in self-righteousness so shameless that Bill Clinton would have blushed to deliver it.; 1/23/12, 10:33 AM
Levi Starks said...: Interesting, I just read the article linked on Drudge about the sharp increase in burn victims from the switch to The "shake n bake" meth production method.
The new method allows all the chemicals to be mixed in a single container (a plastic soda bottle) and requires less pseudo ephedra. the long and the short of it is that new laws which try to restrict meth mfg. and use have now filled burn units with up to 1/3 uninsured meth burn victims. Looks like it's time for another law. You want to know why Ron Paul is so popular among his supporters? It's not because he wants to legalize drugs, it because he recognizes the impossibility of preventing people in a free society from doing things that may not be in their self interest. Looks like its time to pile more laws on top of new laws. eventually we'll legislate our way into a perfect utopian world.; 1/23/12, 10:33 AM
Original Mike said...: Oy vey.; 1/23/12, 10:33 AM
Henry said...: That would have meant the death of Willie Nelson in 2010. If only we had a really tough law, we could have saved the man from the demon weed. One way or another.

At least Johnny Cash, in 1965, was only transporting narcotics in his luggage.; 1/23/12, 10:34 AM
Rusty said...: Obviously a republican ploy to protect domestic production.; 1/23/12, 10:38 AM
I'm Full of Soup said...: Heh. I always confuse manly Ezra'a Wonkblog with Ann Marie's Wonkette. Does that make me a bad person?; 1/23/12, 10:41 AM
Sprezzatura said...: Well, I guess we know what will cause tonight's standing ovation.; 1/23/12, 10:41 AM
chickelit said...: That was 1996. Lots of things flew in the face of credulity back then.

Who penned this latest smear, BTW?; 1/23/12, 10:42 AM
I'm Full of Soup said...: Romney could say he has a big idea too...that mostly bad ideas and bad laws come out of Washington and so we need fewer laws not more.; 1/23/12, 10:44 AM
Godot said...: Sounds like a strong, pro-American weed stance to me. Roar!
_; 1/23/12, 10:46 AM
Dan in Philly said...: On the other hand, that would certainly solve the drug smuggling problem we have...; 1/23/12, 10:46 AM
sakredkow said...: Who penned this latest smear, BTW?

That would be Gingrich, right?; 1/23/12, 10:48 AM
MayBee said...: . Looks like its time to pile more laws on top of new laws. eventually we'll legislate our way into a perfect utopian world.

That's what I think when I hear about the endless string of laws making marijuana illegal, followed by all the marijuana like substances

marijuana --> spice --> incense -->bath salts -->flower food

I'm sure they'll find a way to ban this high.; 1/23/12, 10:48 AM
Anonymous said...: that would certainly solve the drug smuggling problem we have

Yeah. Just like the threat of the death penalty for murder solved the murder problem. Gingrich and his Grandiose Ideas will perfect us yet. Liberté, égalité, fraternité!; 1/23/12, 10:48 AM
Nathan said...: Thank goodness the death penalty has solved all of the other problems for which it is an available punishment, like murder and terrorism.; 1/23/12, 10:48 AM
shiloh said...: Indeed as there's a fine line between an "idea man" and a frickin' train wreck. A straight line to be sure :D but very fine ...

Sort of like putting every woman who has an abortion in jail, using the "idea man's" logic, they should get the death penalty!

Oh hell, "they" used to hang horse thieves in TX.

>

It's truly frickin' amazing that mittens is getting soooo much help from everywhere, but still can't close the deal lol.

ok, teabaggers/evangelicals just prefer thrice married, religiously converted, blowhard hypocrites.

Again, slim pickins' in the Rep party.; 1/23/12, 10:50 AM
Tank said...: chickenlittle said...
That was 1996. Lots of things flew in the face of credulity back then.

Who penned this latest smear, BTW?

Ezra Klein, who would be happy to smear Newt. But this is no smear. It's mostly just reminding us of one of Newt's BIG ideas - and what an idiot he can be. He (Newt) "smears" hinmself.; 1/23/12, 10:51 AM
traditionalguy said...: Oops, said the New Newt.

The old Newt had to run for reelection in a district that included rural Georgia areas.

And he had to win re-election over a targeted Dem effort to unseat him every 2 years. So all is fair in Newt love and in Newt war.

We want a fighter, don't we?

Besides he changed his mind and only wants to cut off their hands now.; 1/23/12, 10:56 AM
bagoh20 said...: "It's truly frickin' amazing that mittens is getting soooo much help from everywhere, but still can't close the deal lol."

It takes longer to make decisions when you are serious about it. We don't have the quick option of voting for someone based on skin color, or just buying their bullshit promises. We have to actually evaluate people, ask about their background and evaluate the facts.

Obama was the most liberal pants crease in congress. Image if conservatives just voted for the most conservative member of congress and a majority of independents did too.

That's how stupid a vote for Obama was, and will be again.; 1/23/12, 10:57 AM
Dust Bunny Queen said...: I'm for legalizing all drugs. Go ahead use what you want.

However, I am also for the policy that if you ARE using drugs and are expecting that the TaxPayer subsidize your lifestyle by giving you an unending subsidy of money and food stamps so you can lay about getting high.....forget it.

If you are on welfare and you are using drugs.... you are cut off.

Get a job and buy your own drugs like the rest of us!!! Damn it.

Also, the upside would be that those hard core drug addicted criminals who perpetrate much of the crime now, would most likely overdose and die and we would all be better off.

The downside would be that while they were slowly committing suicide, their children would be suffering. Question to those pure Libertarians: What should we do about that?

Harsh? Maybe. However, I think our society needs a harsh dose of reality and some Darwinian weeding.; 1/23/12, 11:00 AM
shiloh said...: bagoh20's but, but, but Obama inane argument er pathetic deflection was actually kinda endearing in a sore lore, grasping at straws way.

And please let the but, but, but Obama whining continue ...; 1/23/12, 11:03 AM
Bayoneteer said...: The federal government doesn't execute anyone. The last one was Timothy McVeigh back in '01 and that's only because he ordered his legal team to stop all appeals otherwise he'd likely be alive today. Since 1963 the feds have pulled the plug on exactly four people.

More hyperbole from the Newtster. IIRC he recommended that these drug dealers be beheaded as well. Nice for milking popular outrage for headlines but can you see that getting approved? Or carried out? Gingrich is a loud mouthed bozo.; 1/23/12, 11:04 AM
shiloh said...: sore loser, btw Althouse sore losers unite! ok, you already have, my bad!; 1/23/12, 11:05 AM
Richard Dolan said...: Nothing surprising here. This (among many other crazy Newt-isms) is why most elected Reps, and pretty much all of them in swing districts, are not supporting Newt.

Newt's value in the primaries will be to show the eventual Rep nominee (whoever it is) how to use certain themes in running for president -- frontal attack on the lefty assumptions of the media, a no-apologies defense of the values of work, flat rejection of the idea that conservative values are just code for racism, etc. Romney needs to take notice of what works and what doesn't. We'll see in the next few weeks whether Romney can step up his game and deliver. Romney would never do it with the Newtonian snarl, but the question is whether he can do it at all.

If not, the 'draft someone who can win' thing (Billy Kristol has been flogging it for a while, with an eye on Mitch Daniels) may actually gain some traction. The most interesting stat from S Carolina was that so many Rep voters were motivated by a desire to find a candidate who can beat Obama. Newt could certainly articulate the conservative case against Obama. His problem is that, in order to hear the message, you first have to be willing to listen to the messenger. Jim Geraghty cites the stats on how the various candidates are viewed, and Newt's numbers are radioactively negative with the groups that any Rep nominee will need to have a chance of winning.

I still think the Rep nominee is still to be Romney, and very unlikely to be Newt. But Romney has to earn the nomination; it won't fall in his lap by divine right of succession.; 1/23/12, 11:06 AM
Anonymous said...: Poor Shiloh. Has there ever been a duller wit here?

Keep trying, big guy. You'll eventually come up with that zinger.; 1/23/12, 11:06 AM
Simon said...: Someone should ask him how he has reevaluated his views on the death penalty following his conversion to the Catholic Church.; 1/23/12, 11:07 AM
shiloh said...: "We'll see in the next few weeks whether Romney can step up his game and deliver."

Has mittens' past history given any indication that he actually can. Rhetorical.; 1/23/12, 11:08 AM
KCFleming said...: The death penalty for marijuana, in 1996?

Man, I'll bet that that Barry Soetoro dude was shitting his pants when he heard about that!; 1/23/12, 11:09 AM
traditionalguy said...: It is said to be a true story that when a first time candidate for election to the House held his first meeting for supporters he carefully outlined his positions on domestic issues, foreign policy and the war on drugs.

Then he closed his speech by saying, "... and if you want me to change any of positions, just tell me."

That is a smart politician. He is also representing his District well.

So Newt flips and flops as his constituency changes. Oh, woo woo.

Meantime back at reality, Romney has flamed out and is in a death spiral after his fighter pilot skills ran into the irreverent Pappy Gingrich of the Conservative Black Sheep squadron.

Mitt could not react fast enough, and Newt stiched the Bastard From Bain.; 1/23/12, 11:10 AM
test said...: "You want to know why Ron Paul is so popular among his supporters? It's not because he wants to legalize drugs, it because he recognizes the impossibility of preventing people in a free society from doing things that may not be in their self interest."

It's too bad he's convinced himself nations (including unfree ones) intereact the same as people within a free nation. Then there would be hope his policies wouldn't be disastrous.; 1/23/12, 11:12 AM
shiloh said...: "Meantime back at reality, Romney has flamed out and is in a death spiral after his fighter pilot skills ran into the irreverent Pappy Gingrich of the Conservative Black Sheep squadron."

Indeed, as it's always somewhat amusing when Reps eat their own!; 1/23/12, 11:12 AM
shiloh said...: It is interesting that Althouse Gingrich threads are usually a lot longer than mittens' threads ~ go figure!; 1/23/12, 11:14 AM
Dust Bunny Queen said...: It is interesting that Althouse Gingrich threads are usually a lot longer than mittens' threads ~ go figure!

Gee could it have something to do with the number of posts that YOU make and then the addition of Ritmo: Mr. Logorrhea himself?; 1/23/12, 11:18 AM
Sprezzatura said...: Rush re a protracted process that goes to the convention: "bring it on."; 1/23/12, 11:19 AM
Henry said...: Next three Republican primary/caucuses are Florida/Nevada/Maine. Then, on Feb 7, Colorado/Minnesota/Missouri. Washington on March 3, then Super Tuesday on March 6.

Interestingly, Super Tuesday includes both Massachusetts and Georgia. But the real deal is Ohio.

Romney will win handily. Newt is just filling the Southern Social Conservative role voided by Huckabee, albeit with a lot more entertainment.; 1/23/12, 11:22 AM
chickelit said...: DBQ said: Ritmo: Mr. Logorrhea himself?

I thought Titus was Mr. Logorrhea. I guess there's no such logos as loaf-o-rhea.; 1/23/12, 11:26 AM
traditionalguy said...: Shiloh...The day the Bastard from Bain quits saying Gingrich was forced to quit as Speaker because of ethics violations, then he will become a good friend again.

That was BS from start to finish created by the Dems as revenge for what Newt did tom expose Jim Wright's phony Book Sale sham.

Newt was charged with teaching a phony college course and being paid by a 501c3 he set up. The college course was not phony, and no findings against Newt were made by the House or by the IRS investigators.

Newt wanted to close that long delayed investigation, and did so by offering to pay the 'costs of the investigation."

For a GOP man to try and use that against Newt is like the USMC revoking Sgt John Basilone's Congressional medal of honor and Navy Cross 15 years after the War on the charge that Basilone "wasted machine gun bullets on Guadalcanal."; 1/23/12, 11:27 AM
garage mahal said...: bagoh20's but, but, but Obama inane argument er pathetic deflection was actually kinda endearing in a sore lore, grasping at straws way.

Maybe should go to a numbering system of excuses to make it easier.

1. What about Obama
2. What about Bill Clinton
3. What about Robert Byrd
4. What about Barney Frank/Chris Dodd
5. What about Kennedys/Chappaquiddick
6. Where were you when abc did xyz
7. Democrats never get punished

That just about covers any topics that might come up? Feel free to add!

Just thought of one more:

What about Sarah Palin's vagina/blatant media bias against her; 1/23/12, 11:29 AM
Cedarford said...: KenK said...
The federal government doesn't execute anyone.
==================
True, so technically Newt's proud brilliant "Great Big Idea" from his cosmically vast demagoguing mind would only land a smuggler of 2 ounces of pot on death row for 8 or so years until it was converted to life without parole.
Not that that particular Great Big Idea had a chance of passing.
Like most Newt ideas, it was crafted only to please his particular audience at the time.

Sort of like a Lefty demagogue promising an ignorant audience of poor blacks that the government would give each a million dollars a year. To much cheers. Then when called on it, the Lefty adroitly backs away, caling the million dollar paycheck aspirational, and of course based on a trillion dollar moon program to mine the gold and helium 3 there to get the money to make poor Negroes millionaires.

Newt is little different than Jesse Jackson, his backers just as stupid.

Boy oh boy, imagine Jesse being able to get on stage and tear HW Bush apart with his moral superiority from being a preacher and African American! Jesse would win the debate! He'd give everyone except wealthy white folk lots more stuff! Jesse for President!!"; 1/23/12, 11:29 AM
Dust Bunny Queen said...: Like most Newt ideas, it was crafted only to please his particular audience at the time

Like most Politician's ideas, it was crafted only to please any particular audience at the time.

There....fixed.

Big surprise. Politicians pander to their audience.; 1/23/12, 11:33 AM
shiloh said...: DBQ and my little buddy Seven, thanx for the shout out(s) as "we" try our best to keep this rag afloat. :D

Reality is setting in re: the current laughable Rep field and this blog may be sufferin' :-P from conservative depression.

btw, in the "Coming to terms with The Newt" (231) post thread I had one contribution:

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

carry on; 1/23/12, 11:34 AM
Anonymous said...: Shiloh has 1/7 of the posts about Gingrich. And wonders why there are so many posts in threads about Gingrich.

The moron doesn't even understand basic math.; 1/23/12, 11:37 AM
Cedarford said...: Trad Guy - Newt wanted to close that long delayed investigation, and did so by offering to pay the 'costs of the investigation."

For a GOP man to try and use that against Newt is like the USMC revoking Sgt John Basilone's Congressional medal of honor and Navy Cross 15 years after the War on the charge that Basilone "wasted machine gun bullets on Guadalcanal."

Really, Trad guy??
Sort of like 15-25 years after the fact accusing Mitt Romney of costing Hero Workers their lifetime jobs through practice of capitalism??

Tell you what, like with the facts leading to Basilone's medal, ample records exist of the whole Gingrich ethics investigation that Republicans as well as Democrats on the panel unanimously said showed Newt was dirty and corrupt.

So release the whole ethics investigation in the name of transparancy and let the publiuc decide. I know the records were sealed by Newt's lawyer after he agreed to plead to one charge and pay for the investigation's cost...

But if the vituperative little demagogue has nothing to hide, why not show the public what it was all about, behind closed doors, Inside the Beltway??; 1/23/12, 11:37 AM
shiloh said...: "5. What about Kennedys/Chappaquiddick"

One of my favs. :) Indeed garage, the incessant whining and pathetic deflections at conservative blogs is endless.

And yes, "We" feel their pain! :D; 1/23/12, 11:39 AM
Brian Brown said...: Maybe should go to a numbering system of excuses to make it easier.

Who is making excuses for anything?; 1/23/12, 11:41 AM
Brian Brown said...: shiloh said...

One of my favs. :) Indeed garage, the incessant whining and pathetic deflections at conservative blogs is endless.

I'd love for you to provide just 2 examples of this.

Just 2.; 1/23/12, 11:42 AM
shiloh said...: And if the conservative posting in this thread totally stops because of me.

You're welcome! :); 1/23/12, 11:42 AM
shiloh said...: Oh the irony as Jay's whining is legendary at Althouse.; 1/23/12, 11:44 AM
traditionalguy said...: C-4... Newt can be a vituperative little demagogue, but that is one skill of a fighter and we cannot afford to let his skills go to waste.

I understand your reaction C-4. About 90% of Gingrich's support this month came from a super right wing Jewish guy who also funds Bibi Netanyahu's elections.

You just need to vote for Obama who also wants Netanyahu destroyed so bad that he can taste it.; 1/23/12, 11:51 AM
Brian Brown said...: shiloh said...
Oh the irony as Jay's whining is legendary at Althouse.

Except you can provide no examples of this.; 1/23/12, 11:53 AM
Known Unknown said...: teabaggers

Lovely pejorative you have there, Shiloh.; 1/23/12, 11:54 AM
chuck b. said...: I found this yesterday. I'm just going to leave it right here. http://imgur.com/YtPMm; 1/23/12, 11:54 AM
garage mahal said...: Except you can provide no examples of this.

That list is you dude. Take that list away and you don't have much to work with.; 1/23/12, 12:20 PM
Brian Brown said...: garage mahal said...

That list is you dude. Take that list away and you don't have much to work with

Um, no it isn't.

You can provide no examples of me "whining" about anything.

Ever.; 1/23/12, 12:27 PM
Tarkwell Robotico said...: Typical media BS trying to smear a Republican by quoting that Republican. It is so unfair that a Big Man with Big Thoughts, like Newt, must suffer this kind of scrutiny. Everyone knows Newt's group (at Newt.org) did a six-sigma, 360 eval on this idea and reduced the punishment to a mere chemical castration. The pot smuggler lives, but his dynastic line ends with him.; 1/23/12, 12:27 PM
Brian Brown said...: garage mahal said...

That list is you dude.

What is even funnier about you posting this is that there are people here criticizing Newt.

You have never, ever brought yourself to criticize one of your leftist hobbyhorses when they are topics here. Including Obama, OWS, and especially high speed rail.; 1/23/12, 12:30 PM
garage mahal said...: You can provide no examples of me "whining" about anything.

Ever.

You're whining right now getting called out on your incessant "What about ________ !!!???; 1/23/12, 12:31 PM
shiloh said...: "there are people here criticizing Newt."

Shocking lol and Althouse is leading the charge 'cause she's smitten w/mittens and there is no cure! :-P; 1/23/12, 12:34 PM
Henry said...: @Jay and @Garage -- You are creating a discussion that is eminently deletable. This comment can go with it.; 1/23/12, 12:35 PM
Cedarford said...: traditionalguy said...
C-4... Newt can be a vituperative little demagogue, but that is one skill of a fighter and we cannot afford to let his skills go to waste.

================
I don't think you understand. Next to your last beloved "fighter" - the right-wing Goddess Palin...Newt has the worst, even absolutely radioactive numbers of any Republican. (or Democrat)
No one in the race comes close to Newt in net negative perception in the general population.

The man is loathed by a significant majority of Americans.
Let it sink in --- the public has slightly positive feelings about Romney, Hillary, Obama, Herman Cain, Perry, Trump.
While they give Santorum a slight negative overall of 2-3%, mainly because many see him as too theocratic.
But Gingrich has an overall negative of 24%, obtained by subtracting those that loathe him from those that have positives about him. Meaning out of every hundred people, if you walk out the people with positives taking one negative person with them, along with the undecided, you still have a balance of 24 people left with strong negatives towards Newtie.

You might be right that the country cannot afford to be without the Fighter and Great Visionary - though in the 14 years since the guy was tossed from his disastrous Speakership the nation was hardly perched on his doorstep begging for Gingrich to gift us with his Leadership and His latest and greatest Cosmically Profound, Transformational Ideas.

Paying customers only!

So after he loses the nomination or loses in a landslide to Obama...why yes..you can bathe in the portentious words of "Fighting Newt!" - at he and Callista's speeches and book signings.; 1/23/12, 12:36 PM
Brian Brown said...: garage mahal said...

You're whining right now getting called out on your incessant "What about ________ !!!???

Yes, because asking you to back up your claim is now "whining"

You continue to beclown yourself to a level that is staggering.; 1/23/12, 12:37 PM
garage mahal said...: You have never, ever brought yourself to criticize one of your leftist hobbyhorses when they are topics here.

Just today I said fuck Chris Dodd told him to get bent.; 1/23/12, 12:38 PM
Henry said...: @Chuck B. Remember the Jack Nicholson Joker? Looks like Newt got hit by Smilex.; 1/23/12, 12:39 PM
Brian Brown said...: garage mahal said...

Just today I said fuck Chris Dodd told him to get bent

Which has no credibility as if he were running against Scott Walker, you would vote for Dodd.; 1/23/12, 12:40 PM
shiloh said...: "Which has no credibility as if he were running against Scott Walker, you would vote for Dodd."

Another Jay deflection ...; 1/23/12, 12:43 PM
garage mahal said...: Which has no credibility as if he were running against Scott Walker, you would vote for Dodd.

Add this to the list!

You're something else man.; 1/23/12, 12:46 PM
Cedarford said...: Tarkwell - "It is so unfair that a Big Man with Big Thoughts, like Newt, must suffer this kind of scrutiny. Everyone knows Newt's group (at Newt.org) did a six-sigma, 360 eval on this idea and reduced the punishment to a mere chemical castration."

It is a shame that a transformational leader - one of the 5 Greatest Leaders in history in fact along with Lincoln and Pericles along with two others according to the megalomaniac Newt Himself - should be questioned by people that don't GET!! that it is all a Dang Librul Media Elites Plot to tear a Planet-Changing Visionary down!
If not by questioning his Great Ideas, his leading Reagan to the heights and helping Reagan defeat the Soviets..by tawdry things about ethics and infidelites all Great Transformational Men do!!

Besides, he is sorry and he talked to Jaysus and Christ forgives him!!

In other news, Obama announced that after praying to Jesus, he is in forgiven grace now about the economy and Solyndra - so they cannot be campaign issues; 1/23/12, 12:54 PM
Brian Brown said...: shiloh said...

Another Jay deflection ...

Deflection of what, exactly?; 1/23/12, 12:56 PM
Brian Brown said...: garage mahal said...

Add this to the list!

List of what?

You have no credibility.
None.

You've demonstrated time and time again you have none. You would ethusiastically vote for Dodd if he were running against Scott Walker. That is a fact.

You know this. Which is why your response was to name call.; 1/23/12, 12:58 PM
Levi Starks said...: How is it that someone who counts himself among the 5 greatest leaders of all time thinks he could beat the incumbent who counts himself as one of the 3 greatest presidents of all time?; 1/23/12, 1:00 PM
shiloh said...: Speaking of whining and Newt Gingrich.

But I repeat myself.

Apologies to Mark Twain, who surely would fall short of the greatness of Newt in every way.

Had a classmate in computer school who was a BS'er. He knew he was a BS'er. We knew he was a BS'er. He knew that we knew he was a BS'er. And yes, he kept on BS'ing. :D

Apologies to bullshitters ...; 1/23/12, 1:02 PM
garage mahal said...: Jay: You would never never ever ever criticize a Democrat!

Me: I just did. Today!

Jay: Bu bu but that doesn't count!

It's like debating a 9 yr old kid.; 1/23/12, 1:07 PM
test said...: Jay,

Quit feeding the trolls.; 1/23/12, 1:09 PM
Brian Brown said...: garage mahal said...
Jay: You would never never ever ever criticize a Democrat!

Except I never said that.

It's like debating a 9 yr old kid.

See above, you silly projector.

PS, the number of times you criticized Dodd while he was in office remains at zero.; 1/23/12, 1:14 PM
chickelit said...: Cedarford wrote: The man is loathed by a significant majority of Americans.

Cedarford just pinched another loathe.; 1/23/12, 1:21 PM
shiloh said...: Jay, your continuing nonsense/trolling aside ...

Little buddy should have been at DailyKos in 2008 when the Obama/Hillary battle was in full swing as again, nobody likes to argue amongst themselves like liberals.

And yes, it's true as many times "we" have grasped victory from the jaws of defeat, much like the cons are doing this year lol.

Indeed, the discussion got soooo heated there was a plethora of spin-off er "pissed off" PUMA sites which sprang into existence from all the "liberal" arguing at kos.

Fond memories! :) as liberals love to argue w/each other.

take care; 1/23/12, 1:21 PM
shiloh said...: grasped defeat from the jaws of victory.

carry on; 1/23/12, 1:23 PM
garage mahal said...: Except I never said that.

Good God man, just stop. Or at least delete the comment you made in this thread of you saying that.

You have never, ever brought yourself to criticize one of your leftist hobbyhorses when they are topics here. Including Obama, OWS, and especially high speed rail.

I made the comment criticizing Chris Dodd....in a thread that related directly to Chris Dodd.

I have to ask this now: Are you mentally retarded, or have some sort of brain injury we should know about? You can't seem to remember things you said 15 minutes earlier.; 1/23/12, 1:25 PM
Anonymous said...: Hey... works for Singapore!; 1/23/12, 1:28 PM
Brian Brown said...: garage mahal said...

Good God man, just stop

Bozo:
You claimed I said that you never criticize Democrats

You go on to post what I said, which is not what you claimed.

Again, you have no credibility. So your silly "criticism" of Dodd is rather lacking.

And of course something you would never do if he were in office.; 1/23/12, 1:28 PM
Chip Ahoy said...: Oh fuck me!

I accidentally read one of shiloh's sputterings so I'm out.; 1/23/12, 1:33 PM
Brian Brown said...: shiloh said...
nobody likes to argue amongst themselves like liberals.

You keep telling yourself that.

I think you should try questioning the party line at thinkprogress, Firedoglake, or the DU and let me know how that goes.; 1/23/12, 1:34 PM
victoria said...: Don't forget the orphanages he wanted to reopen or establish.

I guess this was the only way he could stop single people and same-sex couples from adopting. Oh the horror of it. Having a child placed in a loving home and being able to be nurtured by loving and committed people. Oh the horror of it all.

This is the man you want as your candidate? Bring it on!!!

Vicki from Pasadena; 1/23/12, 1:37 PM
shiloh said...: As the "personal" shout outs continue.

Thanx Chip Ahoy! :)

Repeating ...

Your eyes are full of hate, Forty-One. That's good. Hate keeps a man alive. It gives him strength.; 1/23/12, 1:37 PM
chuck b. said...: Henry said, "Newt is just filling the Southern Social Conservative role voided by Huckabee, albeit with a lot more entertainment."

The entertainment value of Newt Gingrich cannot be understated.

Of the remaining four candidates, he is the best match for Obama in the general because he is most nearly orthogonal. It will be an easy choice for most people.

Whatever wackiness he may have proposed in the past, I have not heard him propose much recently that is wacky.

It will be hard to press "traditional family values" arguments with Newt sitting in the White House. He will be a whetstone for SSM.; 1/23/12, 1:37 PM
garage mahal said...: I think you should try questioning the party line at thinkprogress, Firedoglake, or the DU and let me know how that goes.

And when evidence of just that smacks you right in the fucking face, you will have another excuse handy to deflect. "Bu bu but but....!"; 1/23/12, 1:39 PM
shiloh said...: John Kerry's past buried him, much like Dukakis.

hmm, mittens is another liberal from MA.

Indeed as the actual presidential general campaign starts after Labor Day.

As always, stay tuned ...; 1/23/12, 1:42 PM
Brian Brown said...: garage mahal said...

And when evidence of just that smacks you right in the fucking face

I eagerly anticipate this evidence.

Can't wait to see it.; 1/23/12, 1:43 PM
chuck b. said...: I think I mean overstated.; 1/23/12, 1:44 PM
veni vidi vici said...: Gingrich and Santorum are, in large part, the Martin Sheen character in the film "The Dead Zone". This will only become more apparent under increased scrutiny, and hopefully before the nomination is wrapped up by either or both of them.; 1/23/12, 1:51 PM
veni vidi vici said...: Gingrich and Santorum are, in large part, the Martin Sheen character in the film "The Dead Zone". This will only become more apparent under increased scrutiny, and hopefully before the nomination is wrapped up by either or both of them.; 1/23/12, 1:53 PM
Rusty said...: garage mahal said...
bagoh20's but, but, but Obama inane argument er pathetic deflection was actually kinda endearing in a sore lore, grasping at straws way.

Maybe should go to a numbering system of excuses to make it easier.

1. What about Obama
2. What about Bill Clinton
3. What about Robert Byrd
4. What about Barney Frank/Chris Dodd
5. What about Kennedys/Chappaquiddick
6. Where were you when abc did xyz
7. Democrats never get punished

That just about covers any topics that might come up? Feel free to add!

Just thought of one more:

What about Sarah Palin's vagina/blatant media bias against her

Ya know what they about cleche's don't you?

They're cleches because they happen to be true.; 1/23/12, 1:54 PM
chickelit said...: He will be a whetstone for SSM.

Hopefully, he won't be making laws at all. Unlike the current resident, who is remaking healthcare laws, for example.; 1/23/12, 1:57 PM
shiloh said...: "Ya know what they about cleche's don't you?"

No, but I know what they say about ad nauseam, Althouse conservative cliché's ...; 1/23/12, 2:05 PM
Tarkwell Robotico said...: Cedarford,

I think we can all agree Newt is not bigger than Jesus. But, I think we can also all agree that he's a lot smarter.

Imagine if Newt could have a Lincoln-Douglas style debate against the Son of God?

I'm pretty sure we'd all be practicing Gingrichists right now.

Of course, its a shame, because Jesus would never agree to Lincoln-Douglas style debates against Newt (who in their right mind would?) If we did, then maybe more than just Calista would be enjoying the spiritual salvation of the Body of Newt.; 1/23/12, 2:07 PM
Dust Bunny Queen said...: Don't forget the orphanages he wanted to reopen or establish.

Some children WOULD be better off in orphanages instead of with their crack addicted abusive parents.

At least they would be safe and eligible for adoption.

In my world......If you are on drugs.....no welfare benefits. And no access to their children.

Being a parent is a privlege. Welfare isn't a lifestyle.; 1/23/12, 2:09 PM
Steve Koch said...: I want a new drug
One that won't make me sick
One that won't make me crash my car
Or make me feel three feet thick

I want a new drug
One that won't hurt my head
One that won't make my mouth too dry
Or make my eyes too red

I want a new drug
One that won't spill
One that don't cost too much
Or come in a pill

I want a new drug
One that won't go away
One that won't keep me up all night
One that won't make me sleep all day

I want a new drug
One that does what it should
One that won't make me feel too bad
One that won't make me feel too good

I want a new drug
One with no doubt
One that won't make me talk too much
Or make my face break out

h/t Huey Lewis

The death penalty for individuals who bring 2 ounces of marijuana into the country is an insane proposal.

Presidents have enormous power so you want to avoid picking a president with enormous ego and little self discipline who is impetuous and has a history of proposing insane ideas.; 1/23/12, 2:47 PM
Joe said...: At least Gingrich didn't insist on "The Comfy Chair."; 1/23/12, 2:51 PM
Tarkwell Robotico said...: "The death penalty for individuals who bring 2 ounces of marijuana into the country is an insane proposal."

I disagree. I challenge you to a Lincoln-Douglas style debate. No, wait, I challenge you to 7 Lincoln-Douglas style debates. By the end of it, I am convinced the option to capitally punish pot smokers will triumph!; 1/23/12, 3:00 PM
shiloh said...: C'mon people, you know you want to spew about Newt as he's ever so much more interesting than mittens. :-P

ok, I've killed this thread. May it RIP, much like mittens' original campaign plan or lack thereof.; 1/23/12, 3:06 PM
Revenant said...: That was 1996. Lots of things flew in the face of credulity back then. Who penned this latest smear, BTW?

"Smear" implies the accusation isn't true. Mentioning unpleasant truths about a politician is just called "muckracking".; 1/23/12, 3:08 PM
purplepenquin said...: So for President we'll get to choose between a Democrat that has already increased the War on Drugs to unprecedented levels or a Republican that wants to increase it even more than it already is.

It is pretty obvious that we'll have no actual changes in our national drug policy until more folks start voting outside the TwoPartySystem.; 1/23/12, 3:28 PM
bagoh20 said...: It's not me who is in need of deflection or excuses - I didn't vote for this disaster in chief, but you are right, Shiloh - there is a lot of deflection going on, but we still know what you did.; 1/23/12, 3:43 PM
Revenant said...: If you are on welfare and you are using drugs.... you are cut off.

Does that include alcohol and tobacco? What about caffeine?; 1/23/12, 3:47 PM
shiloh said...: Let's recap, shall we:

At 10:50 I make a post on topic.

At 10:57 bagoh20 deflects to Obama.

At 11:03 I comment on bagoh's deflection/whining.

At 11:07 Troll Seven get's personal, as per usual.

At 11:08 I reply to a poster on topic.

At 11:12 I reply to another poster on topic.

At 11:14 I accurately say Gingrich provides more discussion than mittens, at least at Althouse.

DBQ immediately "accuses" me and Ritmo as the reason for Newt mania. :D

At 11:34 I point out DBQ's inaccurate misconception er generality and I can't speak for Ritmo.

At 11:37 Seven gets personal again, shocking.

At 11:39 I reply to garage on topic.

At 11:41 Jay starts his childish trolling attacking me and garage :zzzz:

And the rest as they say is history ...

Conservative trolls/deflections/whining = a typical day at Althouse.

Many here don't like me, fine. But don't turn into pretzels trying to blame me for all the inadequacies of "your" current Rep wannabes.; 1/23/12, 4:09 PM
chickelit said...: @Revenant: Tank gave me the answer I was looking for upthread at 10:51 AM. But thanks for parsing muckraker, mudslinging, and smear. :)

I think that DBQ was pretty clear what she meant at 11:00 AM upthread. In case you missed it:

DBQ wrote: I'm for legalizing all drugs. Go ahead use what you want.

However, I am also for the policy that if you ARE using drugs and are expecting that the TaxPayer subsidize your lifestyle by giving you an unending subsidy of money and food stamps so you can lay about getting high.....forget it.

It seems reasonable that anyone expecting an endless subsidy of money and food stamps so that they can lay about and smoke and drink coffee should eventually be cut-off too. I'll go her one further and apply it to tea totalers. :); 1/23/12, 4:20 PM
garage mahal said...: Many here don't like me, fine. But don't turn into pretzels trying to blame me for all the inadequacies of "your" current Rep wannabes.

What about Obama!; 1/23/12, 4:20 PM
shiloh said...: "What about Obama!"

Indeed lol; 1/23/12, 4:21 PM
purplepenquin said...: Does that include alcohol and tobacco? What about caffeine?

I'm also curious to know if other slothful behaviors that don't involve "drugs"...like watching too much TV (assuming that anyone who receives gov't assistance should even be allowed to own a TV!), or playing WoW all the time (again, assuming that anyone who receives gov't assistance should be allowed a computer and/or internet access), or spending the day reading cheap romance novels (assuming, of course, that anyone who receives gov't assistance should be allowed to own and read books)...should also result in a citizen being banned from receiving gov't assistance.; 1/23/12, 4:22 PM
chickelit said...: Many here don't like me, fine. But don't turn into pretzels trying to blame me for all the inadequacies of "your" current Rep wannabes.

I like you just fine shilho--I just don't see all the inadequacies in all the candidates. That's what I object to--your telling "us" what to think. Nobody likes being told what to think. It's totalitarian. I would feel the same if you were shilling for Obama--it's still telling me what to think.; 1/23/12, 4:25 PM
shiloh said...: chickenlittle, I don't tell anyone what to think, I just give my opinion like everyone else here. If you don't agree w/me fine as I'd be shocked if any of Althouse's conservatives did.

Again, the yin and yang of political blogging.

btw, Newt, mittens, Santorum and Paul appear to be attacking each other much better than I could and there on tv, whereas I'm just posting at an inconsequential political blog.

The truth is out there ...; 1/23/12, 4:29 PM
shiloh said...: they're on tv; 1/23/12, 4:30 PM
Blue@9 said...: The only problem with this is the blatant protectionism.; 1/23/12, 4:36 PM
Rusty said...: shiloh

Dude! You keep track?

Life, a get one.; 1/23/12, 5:25 PM
Anonymous said...: Ha - a post about some ancient political rhetoric on stronger drug laws gets all the lefties bug-eyed. So funny, these pathetic man-children.; 1/23/12, 6:30 PM
Amartel said...: Yeah, it's almost like he's saying this stuff on purpose, just to send them into orbit. Or, rather, into an even higher orbit.; 1/23/12, 6:45 PM
Anonymous said...: This is the Singapore Solution.

From Wiki (yeah, I know):

"Narcotics laws established by the Misuse of Drugs Act are very strict. Anyone caught with more than 15 grams (0.53 oz) of heroin (diamorphine), 30 grams (1.1 oz) of cocaine or morphine, 250 grams (8.8 oz) of methamphetamine, or 500 grams (18 oz) of cannabis faces mandatory capital punishment, as they are deemed to be trafficking in these substances.[20] The stated quantities are the net weight of the substances after they have been isolated by laboratory analysis. Between 1991 and 2004, 400 people were hanged in Singapore, mostly for drug trafficking, one of the highest per-capita execution rates in the world.[13]"; 1/23/12, 6:56 PM
shiloh said...: Sailors enjoy beautiful Turkey; 1/23/12, 7:33 PM
Cedarford said...: IggyRules said...
Ha - a post about some ancient political rhetoric on stronger drug laws gets all the lefties bug-eyed. So funny, these pathetic man-children.

=================
Actually, it is stupid Big Government ideas like death penalty for minor pot smugglers that hopefully will wake people up on what sn excretable little demagogue Newt is.

Mention giving the death penalty to any politician that gains 5 million or more corrupting the US political process to see the likes of Newt, Tom Daschle, Billy Tausin, Diane Feinstein, Chris Dodd, Jack Abramoff, Corzine, Robert Rubin, and Barney Franks to get the whole bunch exceptionally nervous.

And that whole bunch of corruptors has done immeasurably more harm to the nation than some doper bring 2 ounces of BC buds back in his backpack.

THough I would execute Chris Dodd and Newt's buddy Billy Tausin before Newt.
And am open to arguments that the damage Robert Rubin, Jack Abramoff, and Corzine did was huge and they might even deserve to be hanged before Tausin or Chris Dodd.
I'd favor Newt and Barney being hanged together - both are fat and the rope could be measured for the same drop time.; 1/23/12, 7:56 PM
Craig said...: We need a poster child for Food Stamp Mamas. I nominate J.K. Rowling. Her net worth is the same as Mitt's x 4. Without food stamps Harry Potter would have been an aborted fetus.; 1/24/12, 4:11 AM