The Gingrich Rope-a-Dope: Speaker Attacks Romney as Moderate
Gingrich continued, “This is the other difference between Mitt Romney and I. I love people power and not money power. And I need people power to win.”
As Newt and his entourage arrived at the plane hangar, a small press gaggle formed around the Gingrich asking him to respond to Romney’s attacks. Gingrich made brief remarks that were barely audible to most of the press corps before walking away — his campaign canceled a press availability that was scheduled to take place before the event.
Newt finished his closing argument with voters by stating, “Re-electing Barack Obama will be disaster of the first order and we have to defeat him. The question is who is best to defeat him? We nominated a moderate in 1996 and 2008 and we lost. He [Romney] is more liberal than both those candidates.”
Gingrich will visit polling places on Tuesday in the Orlando area while Romney will make one stop in Tampa before holding his primary night rally at the Tampa Convention Center.
(Watch Alexis Garcia reporting from Tampa at PJTV.)
Of the tens of thousands of words written about the contest between Romney and Gingrich on PJM, are there any that express support for Romney’s policies, plans, governing record or conservatism? Seems like the race is 99% about attacking Newt.
Maybe PJM should hire somebody to collate those positive comments into a blurb or short paragraph so we could have a talking point in case somebody ever asks whether Romney is someone the country might want to be president.
I understand that nobody wants to go back to the gloomy days before the Ruling Class’s media started the anti-Newt-all-the-time campaign, the days when Gingrich was ahead of Mitt by 15% in the polls because the people were focused on plans and policies, but at some point, surely, some pundit must be able to find something good to say about Romney.
I would even be happy to see an exciting discussion of Mitt’s 54 point plan to return to the halcyon days of Bush I. I read most of that plan before I fell asleep a couple of months ago, and I can guarantee there is noting in it that will piss obama off, so we won’t have to worry about being called racists.
Mitt Romneys, so called, moderate views are actually the least of my worries. It is his religion, yes I said it, his religion. No one wants to bring it up or talk about it. In most cases I would say we shouldn’t and it is inappropriate, but the Mormon Church has some views that are as out there as anything.
Evangelicals, or any other Christian, can only vote for Romney if they don’t learn about what Mormons really believe, which is why Romney is so tight lipped about his beliefs. Most Christians think they are simply another Protestant off shoot. By everything a Bible Belt Christian says is “Christian” they are not. What is more important is Mormon’s don’t believe Catholics and Protestants are Christian.
A core belief is in the Great Apostasy where Christians (read everyone but Mormons) got Christianity wrong and Joseph Smith is the only one to get it right. http://mormon.org/restoration/ says God told Joseph Smith all other Christians do not “have the fullness of truth or the authority to baptize and perform other saving ordinances”.
Now all you non believers read this and hear “one religion says its right and the other one wrong” so what? The point is, the Catholics and the Protestants warred for centuries over disagreements far more minute and far more nuanced in scripture. Mormon beliefs are as far from Protestant beliefs as Jewish beliefs are from Christian.
All that being said, if you believe that you can only vote for a Christian you are lying if you vote Romney over Obama.
For a less hysterical view of Romney’s religion, the writer may wish to consider Stephen H. Webb’s article, “Mormonism Obsessed with Christ” in the February 2011 issue of First Things. Webb suggests “Mormon metaphysics is Christian metaphysics minus Origen and Augustine–in other words, Christianity divorced from Plato.”
I think we can settle whether or not my view is “hysterical” by asking Mr. Romney a simple question. Are the other Christian faiths really Christian according to the Mormon view? Their own published literature says no. That would be a quick yes or no answer for Romney.
We could just as easily be asking all of the other Christian groups if they believe that Mormonism is really a Christian faith. If the man doesn’t press his religious beliefs so as to harm other religions, and if he doesn’t claim other religious beliefs are the works of infidel, and if the man is a natural born citizen of the United States, and if he is at least 35 years old, he can run for President and his religion is no concern of mine. However, if we ask him to pass a litmus test of Christian authenticity, we are not acting in the spirit of religious freedom, says I.
From the very good article you mentioned: “Mormons are so materialistic that they insist that the same unchanging laws govern both the natural and the supernatural. They also deny the virgin birth, since their materialism leads them to speculate that Jesus is literally begotten by the immortal Father rather than conceived by the Holy Spirit.
By treating the spiritual as a dimension of the material, Smith overcomes every trace of dualism between this world and the next. Matter is perfectible because it is one of the perfections of the divine.”
When Webb uses the word “materialistic” he isn’t using it in the way, say, Madonna would (I’m a material girl), he is talking metaphysics, of course. Taking these views (especially the above quote from the article) into view, and my own background in religious studies I would conclude that the Mormon metaphysical view is closer to Buddhism than it is to Christianity. In Buddhism we find two aspects of reality, the conditioned (what we would call the material world or Samsara) and the unchanging principle, what Buddhists call “sunyata” or emptiness. Things are empty because they are dependently originated (pratityasamutpada). The conditioned aspect of reality is not unreal (as a Hindu would say as in maya or illusion) it is merely a glimpse or unique moment (svalakshana). In other words, Nirvana (awakening) is found in Samsara (the world we live in). Indeed, Nirvana IS Samsara, it just depends on your perspective. I think the Mormons would have a problem with the notion of emptiness (sunyata) from a scriptural perspective, but from a scientific perspective it is not easily refutable (can you find any phenomena that isn’t dependently originated?). However, the Mormon fusion of the material and immaterial is very similar to what it means for a Buddhist to be “awakened” and see things in their true nature or “tathata” (suchness).
I could go on and on about this, but suffice to say, Mormon metaphysics are as divorced from Christian metaphysics as they could possibly be and in a very unusual way. I give them credit for creativity! However, I don’t think the general electorate will.
I don’t agree with Cynicals views about the Mormon religion, but there is no question that he reflects a measurable percentage of the electorate.
This will be exploited by obama, without conscience.
A parallel attack will be made on Romney’s business career, conservative hand-wringing to no avail.
Romney simply isn’t electable. If conditions are such that he can win, then Micky Mouse can win.
The republican ruling class know this as well. But their objective isn’t to win the presidency. Their objective is to not lose the House.
As long as I am a free man living in the United States, I am part of the ruling class. Obama is entitled to use whatever collectivist claptrap he wants to use to win an election and we are entitled to call him on all of it. It is up to us to throw him out of office. And we won’t get there by allowing him to control the dialog where the so called ruling class is concerned.
I certainly don’t doubt your desire to see Obama replaced, but you have to wonder what the GOP was thinking with the current slate of serious flawed candidates? Mitt Romney, in many ways, is like Al Gore without the charm and an ugly resume of corporate slash-burn. He’s stiff, clueless, has zero principles and basically comes across as an entitled Gilded Age douchebag.
Unless the economy tanks Mitt is screwed. He’s only slightly more electable than New Gingrich, which is like saying that a stripper is less skanky than a prostitute.
My feeling is the GOP establishment knows they’re going to lose to Obama, so they will put all their energy into keeping the house and flipping the senate, which actually isn’t a bad strategy. One of my favorite words is “gridlock.” I’ve come to believe that regardless of party the less they all do the better.
I guess it depends on who’s eyes one is looking through and who’s ears are actually listening. It is certain no one is listening to what Newt is say and the fact that it was he who began this battle of the candidates. Strange thing is we don’t anything about the lies that come off the lips of Newt Gingrich.
Gingrich who is an adulterer which is nothing more nor less than a liar has got the art down pat. If anyone was watching and listening to the debates a week ago they could sure see through Newt in his most awkward moments when he was caught in a lie and in accusing Mitt Romney of something that he himself was involved in. To attempt to smear a person for his blind trust holdings, not stock but bonds in Freddie Mac and Fanny May when Newt has the same kinds of holdings reveals a liar.
I do doubt this will be posted for obvious reasons although I hope that si not the case.
Obama’s presidency won’t destroy USA. I’m in favor of Gingrich v Obama because Romney is bland fare.
I would hardly call Romney bland. One paleoconservative has labeled him as a “neocon.” That is tantamount to calling Romney “Jew.” I wrote about this discourse here http://clarespark.com/2012/01/25/the-state-of-the-union-stinks/ and am catching hell for it, though most of the critics appear to be writing from the left of center.
I suspect Romney’s supposed “moderation” is also seen by some as feminization. I wrote about that here: http://yankeedoodlesoc.wordpress.com/2012/01/31/the-numbers-game/. Short and bound to be controversial.
I’m real impressed that Gingrich cites Soros. Maybe he’ll make him a financial advisor.
They always do exacty what I say they do. They’re like trained monkeys.
It’s never pro-Romney. It’s always anti-Newt. They don’t even know what Romney stands for, if he does in fact stand for something other than the status quo.
Always
will not repeal obamacare, he’ll keep it
You know what mittens stands for: Anything you want him too
I’m still waiting for someone to explain to me the myth of the Checked Shirt Man’s alleged “electability.”
The Checked Shirt Man… I like this very much.
Romney as a moderate? My A$$.
“That plant kills people!”, gun control, romneycare…..give me a break. The smarmy jellyfish is a damn leftist. He makes me gag whereas obama makes me puke.
If that is the case, then Gingrich is being soundly beaten by a moderate. How does that qualify him to run against Obama?
This is only the fourth primary; there are fifty states. And the last primary—South Carolina—was the one that everybody was saying was the determinative, oracular primary because “nobody (since 1980) has ever gotten the Republican nomination unless they win South Carolina.”
Romney, you may recall, lost that primary. He’s got more money than Newt, has been running for about six years, which Newt has not, he’s got a very large herd of rhinos running interference for him—and he’s hoping to not get his ass kicked. Whom did you say was being “beaten?”
Best of luck to you brother. Don’t lose your sense of humor, you’re surely gonna need it before this show is over.
Being outspent by 4-1 in a media driven state means what? The conservatives are still splitting up their vote with Santorum still in it. Let’s see if the Mittster gets over 50%. If he does then both should leave because the conservatives are toast in their own party. The establishment has spoken and they better fall in line.
15 to 1.
In the event Mitt goes down, how will we know you’ve kept your sense of humor?
They both sucked a month ago, they both suck now.
They are both abject liars about their past.
They both suck equally about the future.
Watching “B” teamers have a spitball fight is like watching a Paulie Shor movie.
Splitting hairs between these two losers is a waste of time. I suppose Romney hasn’t sat on a love seat and engaged in heavy petting with Nancy Pelosi on Global warming and hasn’t tried to throw Paul Ryan and the whole free market under the bus, as an egotistical “ruler” of the mindless class.
Romney is a mummy, incapable of an original thought.
What a complete waste of an opportunity. Michelle Malkin, Ann Coulter, NRO, ACE, Powerline, Wall Street Journal, Charles Krauthammer, Rush, Chris Christie, John Bolton, Bob McDonnell, …all say Gingrich sucks.
MOST everybody says Romney sucks.
They are all right. They both suck.
Trying to defend the indefensible is an exercise in futility. Gingrich is a bombastic buffoon. Romney is a snake in the grass robot.
Heaven help us all. We need to get rid of the small c communists and we get even smaller men, lacking integrity and a will to serve the people.
never heard john bolton say newt sucks
nor heard rush say it either
coulter ‘n krauthammer are not always wise
better a bombastic buffoon than some snake in the grass
nothing’s perfect you know as well as I
go with what you got
“They both sucked a month ago, they both suck now.”
And they do not suck to equal degrees, Newt if far preferable to Romney. That would be true if the only distinction between is who is sucking up to who to get elected. Newt is sucking up to the people, and Romney is sucking up to the people who most directly caused the economic mess we’re in, and who want business as usual to continue.
“They are both abject liars about their past.”
Not more than other politicians, and Romney’s biggest drawbacks are what he hasn’t lied about still believing. He’s still a liberal who admits he believes in gun control, AGW, continuing bailouts, and Romneycare.
“They both suck equally about the future.”
No they don’t. Romney wants the future to look like the past, that’s what got us here.
“Watching “B” teamers have a spitball fight is like watching a Paulie Shor movie.”
Grow up, get over it, and work the best angle you can.
“Splitting hairs between these two losers is a waste of time. I suppose Romney hasn’t sat on a love seat and engaged in heavy petting with Nancy Pelosi on Global warming and hasn’t tried to throw Paul Ryan and the whole free market under the bus, as an egotistical “ruler” of the mindless class.”
Romney still believes in AGW, and Newt has apologized for his error in attempting to show concern for environment on that couch. Can cfbleachers admit the huge difference here between the two?
“Romney is a mummy, incapable of an original thought.”
He is a liberal, liberal enough for Massachusetts to take a chance in him–but he’s such a loser he didn’t run for re-election, because he new it was hopeless.
“What a complete waste of an opportunity. Michelle Malkin, Ann Coulter, NRO, ACE, Powerline, Wall Street Journal, Charles Krauthammer, Rush, Chris Christie, John Bolton, Bob McDonnell, …all say Gingrich sucks.”
And they can make no persuasive case as to why Romney doesn’t suck far worse, and is not an even bigger waste of an opportunity.
“MOST everybody says Romney sucks.”
The majority of GOP voters who feel that way are not wrong.
“They are all right. They both suck.”
But no to the same degree, Romney is far worse.
“Trying to defend the indefensible is an exercise in futility. Gingrich is a bombastic buffoon. Romney is a snake in the grass robot.”
And Reagan was an affable buffoon. He cleaned Carter’s clock and even though it was Gingrich and not Reagan who shrunk the government, Reagan was the better bet in 1980, wasn’t he? How much better might Gingrich be?
How much worse will Romney certainly be?
“Heaven help us all. We need to get rid of the small c communists and we get even smaller men, lacking integrity and a will to serve the people.”
And yet you’re the small man morosely damning Newt with faint praise, not acknowledging his considerable advantages over Romney, and not acknowledging that much of what you criticize Gingrich for are areas where Romney is far, far worse.
I think Newt and Mitt are both very good candidates who are locked in a tough fight. I think Obama, who can’t even condemn the riots he started in Oakland, is the candidate who really sucks. I can’t wait until we have our candidate and we can turn our vitriol toward the Communist in our White House and his comrades on the streets of Oakland.
In other words, out of judgement or integrity, there’s one at least you are missing.
Your style of argument is weak, lame and not constructive.
The OVERWHELMING majority of voters think BOTH candidates are extremely flawed, weak and make horrible choices for representing their views.
You can hurl your 97 lb weakling arguments from behind the safety of your keyboard, but that doesn’t intimidate most people these days. Certainly not me.
Here’s the rub….more and more and more people look at these two and are disgusted by this display. You can foam, and froth and slobber for Gingrich all you want, but he is JUST AS culpable, and just as weak as a candidate. If not moreso.
The Newtonian Implosion has now become just as erratic, irrational and bombastic as its hero, turning off Florida voters with the extremism, the petty insults, the raging fury. Rush said to quit whining. I don’t think it’s possible. It is no longer influencing people that Gingrich is the “better’ choice…it’s convincing them that he and his followers lack self control, dignity and honor.
They are then left with the choice of Romney…some simply won’t default to Romney…others are…reluctantly…BECAUSE of spokespersons just like you. Congratulations. You qualify as the prime reason Romney will win this nomination…not some mythical “cabal” of Republicans you want to hate and call names.
Me? I would prefer an adult. Write back when you reach that stage.
“Your style of argument is weak, lame and not constructive.”
IOW, your lack of counterargument is showing.
“The OVERWHELMING majority of voters think BOTH candidates are extremely flawed, weak and make horrible choices for representing their views.”
That doesn’t change the truth of the facts I am relating, or they’re relevance to distinguishing between Newt or Mitt.
“You can hurl your 97 lb weakling arguments from behind the safety of your keyboard, but that doesn’t intimidate most people these days. Certainly not me.
I don’t expect to intimidate you or have any benefit from anonymity. I expect to show you have no counterargument. And suprise, you haven’t made one yet.
“Here’s the rub….more and more and more people look at these two and are disgusted by this display. You can foam, and froth and slobber for Gingrich all you want, but he is JUST AS culpable, and just as weak as a candidate. If not moreso.”
Show whether you have the honesty, judgement, and integrity to declare this a true or false statement.
–No, he is not as culpable. Newt shrank the federal government more than any person now alive. Romney made Obamacare’s protoytype, and still champions it.–
A (yes) or (no) is all you have to type to show you have a shred of either honesty, judgement, or integrity. Put up or shut up.
What is cfbleachers really about?
It’s a yes or no question.
“The Newtonian Implosion has now become just as erratic, irrational and bombastic as its hero, turning off Florida voters with the extremism, the petty insults, the raging fury. Rush said to quit whining. I don’t think it’s possible. It is no longer influencing people that Gingrich is the “better’ choice…it’s convincing them that he and his followers lack self control, dignity and honor.”
Unless you can answer that yes or no question, you don’t have any. And it shows.
“They are then left with the choice of Romney…some simply won’t default to Romney…others are…reluctantly…BECAUSE of spokespersons just like you. Congratulations. You qualify as the prime reason Romney will win this nomination…not some mythical “cabal” of Republicans you want to hate and call names.”
I’m no spokesperson, only for myself. But others can see you have no counterargument.
“Me? I would prefer an adult. Write back when you reach that stage.”
I’m a perfectly honest man here. Gingrich is far better than Romeny for the reasons I’ve given, reasons you’ve made no on-point reply to.
Where is your yes or no answer?
This “it’s a yes or no” question is what first year attorneys try…and get their heads handed to them by veterans…when the answer is “no, it’s not”.
Gingrich trying to take credit for Reagan’s accomplishments is laughable. Nobody is buying that.
And, I find it somewhat hysterical and more than a little bit disingenuous, (if not completely revealing) that those PRETENDING to be “raging against the machine” and this supersecret, double probation, “Republican establishment” has been giving voters NO ability to “choose” THEIR candidates, being forced…forced, mind you…to vote for weak candidates…yet, they wish to roll over and accept probably the weakest candidate field in history…without a peep of protest.
Gingrich is polling as a loser IN EVERY SINGLE CATEGORY.
I vote …not to lose…the most important election of our lifetimes.
How hard is that to understand?
Apparently impossible for people in full foam at the moment.
SOME people are willing at this moment in time, to NOT ignore the clear, unmistakeable evidence that Gingrich is polling at a SEVERE loss level….and to default…with open reservations and an obvious lack of enthusiasm for Romney.
I’m not. I’m still fighting to find someone OTHER THAN ROMNEY….who can win the general election.
The Imploders are willing to blow up the free market, sit on Nancy Pelosi’s couch and rub her thigh on global warming, force the individual mandate down the throats of the people and blow the general election…in order to personally trash Romney. Great. Who does that help?
Defeating Obama is job one…not trashing Romney. Getting rid of the small c communists is the goal.
Here’s a yes or no question for you. If you knew Gingrich would lose to Obama and Romney would beat him, would you get behind Romney now?
Gingrich is going to lose. Book it, bank it, put it in your pocket. I want someone other than Romney. Do you?
Then, I am going to DEMAND BETTER, until the other options are not available. Right now…more and more and more people are joining me…and where I have been for months now.
I want a NOT Romney/Not Gingrich candidate. But, I would vote for either over Obama.
Paul is completely out of the equation.
You can like it or lump it.
And some little internet punk telling me to shut up, isn’t going to intimidate me. Ever.
“This “it’s a yes or no” question is what first year attorneys try…and get their heads handed to them by veterans…when the answer is “no, it’s not”.”
So hand it to me then.
“Gingrich trying to take credit for Reagan’s accomplishments is laughable. Nobody is buying that.”
No’s saying that. Reagan wasn’t even President when Gingrich shrunk the budget, Clinton was. Are you really so clueless you don’t know what happened in 1994?
“And, I find it somewhat hysterical and more than a little bit disingenuous…and accept probably the weakest candidate field in history…without a peep of protest.”
I find it revealing you’re supposedly stronger candidate can’t break over 50% yet, and disingenuous you’re claiming a yes no question isn’t just that.
Which you still haven’t answered.
“Gingrich is polling as a loser IN EVERY SINGLE CATEGORY.”
So tell me why he doesn’t beat Obama as bad as Reagan beat Carter?
“I vote …not to lose…the most important election of our lifetimes.
How hard is that to understand?
So now you know we know you’re a Romniac shill.
“Apparently impossible for people in full foam at the moment.”
You’re the one foaming about how I’m supposedly ttrying to intimidate you with a yes/no question?
“SOME people are willing at this moment in time, to NOT ignore the clear, unmistakeable evidence that Gingrich is polling at a SEVERE loss level….and to default…with open reservations and an obvious lack of enthusiasm for Romney.”
Some people are willing to ignore how Romney’s winning Is a loss. People who are unwilling to try to win.
“I’m not. I’m still fighting to find someone OTHER THAN ROMNEY….who can win the general election.”
Good luck making us believe that when you won’t answer that simple question.
“The Imploders are willing to blow up the free market, sit on Nancy Pelosi’s couch and rub her thigh on global warming, force the individual mandate down the throats of the people and blow the general election…in order to personally trash Romney. Great. Who does that help?”
Romney’s the one who will put the free market in peril. He’ll keep healthcare nationalized just like he says is a wonderful thing, he’ll “fix” Obamacare just like his closest advisers say they want to.
“Defeating Obama is job one…not trashing Romney. Getting rid of the small c communists is the goal.”
Romney is a small c communist, ask anyone going to the doctor in Massachusetts.
“Here’s a yes or no question for you. If you knew Gingrich would lose to Obama and Romney would beat him, would you get behind Romney now?”
No. Obama if re-elected will be able to hurt the country as much as Romney will, because Romney will pull Boehner to the left. Going off a cliff at 5mph is no better than doing it at 95.
“Gingrich is going to lose. Book it, bank it, put it in your pocket. I want someone other than Romney. Do you?”
If you really wanted someone other than Romney at any cost, you’d honestly answer the question.
“Then, I am going to DEMAND BETTER, until the other options are not available. Right now…more and more and more people are joining me…and where I have been for months now.”
You aren’t demanding better now, you’re trying to make Romney seem to be as good as Gingrich.
“I want a NOT Romney/Not Gingrich candidate. But, I would vote for either over Obama.”
Prove it, answer the question honestly.
“Paul is completely out of the equation.
You can like it or lump it.”
Why would I like or lump it, it’s fact like gravity. Why are you offering distractions instead of answering the simple yes/no question?
“And some little internet punk telling me to shut up, isn’t going to intimidate me. Ever.”
I’m not a punk, I’m not telling you to shut up. I think you’re intimidated by the question you won’t answer.
You said Gingrich was as culpable as anyone for the mess we’re in. I said you were wrong. I claimed:
“–No, he is not as culpable. Newt shrank the federal government more than any person now alive. Romney made Obamacare’s protoytype, and still champions it.–”
Is that statement about Newt’s accomplishments and Romney’s idiocy true or false? Yes? or no?
cf, that sums it up nicely.
The question is, where are the A teamers?
Knew enough to sit this one out as even the idiot Romney tell Laura Ingraham last week on her show that the economy is getting better. She tells him isn’t that going to be a tough case for you to say you would have made it better? He responds well it’s the truth the economy is getting better – (now sit down and don’t laugh at his next comment) do you want me to lie? (wait we should ask Newt if he lies)
Any incumbent POTUS is very difficult to beat when the economy is starting to improve. The A teamers are waiting for 2016 when the seat will be open and we have a 2008 all over again. I even think the B team waited.
is the economy improving because of Obama or in spite of him? That is NOT a difficult case to make. Correlation does not equal causation and any improvement is no more the result of Barry than is Bin Laden’s killing. He just happened to be in office at the time.
Repubs, especially the hard-core right, seems intent on guaranteeing POTUS another four years with its never-ending search for the white knight candidate. Rick Perry showed how foolish that was almost instantly, and neither Newt nor Santorum is whom the establishment Repubs or cons have been looking for mostly because no such candidate exists. Neither establishment likes Romney, either, mostly because he’s a Mormon but they can’t say that out loud so they manufacture other reasons.
“The question is, where are the A teamers?”
They are sitting on the sidelines like good little boys & girls, cottoning to the principles of affirmative action: Allowing Obama to have his second term, thereby deftly avoiding any fallout from accusations of being “racist” for daring to forge an astute campaign against Obama. They no more dare to really run against O than anyone on the Dems’ side of the aisle.
Hopefully, O will be the last AA POTUS we ever elect; what a bitter lesson to be learned but only time will tell if that is a fact.
Nothing would stop any one of us from running for President. I guess these “B team” folks have us beat all to hell. This is just a bunch of whining and it doesn’t make our candidates look any weaker. It makes us look weaker. We have to fight for our future and we whine because we don’t think our leaders can carry the sword? Who among us is bringing anything to this battle. I am tired of finding this incessant hand wringing every time I pop open PJM. I will go to my caucus next week and I will come out of there 100% behind the candidate my precinct favors. And when the whole shebang is completed at the national convention, I will campaign right along side of all of our candidates and work as hard as I can against Obama and his totalitarian cadre. That is how we still do it in this country. We don’t have no stinking establishment holding us back. We are still free people and freedom still isn’t free.
Since they aren’t running it doesn’t matter, and if there’s a brokered convention and they still don’t show, it still doesn’t matter.
There aren’t any A-teamers.
There are only people who McRomney hasn’t viewed as a threat yet.
On the day of the Florida primary, it’s not so much that I will vote for Newt… there is absolutely no way that I could pull the lever for Mitt. You know, the guy who so completely represents the supposedly non-existent GOP establishment… the let’s-not-rock-the-boat, go-along to get-along, tone-deaf and business-as-usual big government types and their leadership with their hangers-on who have repeatedly squandered their smaller government mandates and buckled to the opposition and the big nasty media who supposedly buys their ink by the barrel when, in fact, they now buy it by the pint.
Having said that, I would still vote for Mitt and strongly support him in the general. But like Gov. Palin, I also want this to go on for a while. Not just to fully vet the remaining candidates, but to give the voters a few more opportunities to pound into them how crucial this election is. And in the end, to sharpen them and get them ready for what absolutely must happen… the defeat of Barack Hussein Obama.
But to claim that a bunch of polls done in January are the defining indicators of something that will only happen nine months from now in November is not just silly but absurd. It simply reflects, and understandably so, the deep fear of Obama winning and America loosing. But as we all know, nine months in politics can be a lifetime. Besides when the primaries are over, I firmly believe that you will see this country circle the wagons around the nominee like never before. It’s starting to sink in. People increasingly realize what’s at stake.
And that is why America will not just need and articulate fighter – yes, even one with warts and all – who will inform and educate the electorate to defeat Obama. We will also need one who will sucessfully battle for the reforms that America so desperately needs. And finally, we will need one who will stand firm against the opposing onslaught that will most certainly come, as surely as night follows day. To quote Thomas Sowell, “When the Super Bowl is on the line, you don’t go with the quarterback who is least likely to throw an interception. You go with the one most likely to throw a touchdown pass.”
Well, scott, those are great-sounding words. Unfortunately though, Gingrich is the only one who comes close to the one who would, as you say above, “inform and educate the electorate to defeat Obama….one who will sucessfully battle for the reforms that America so desperately needs. And finally,…one who will stand firm against the opposing onslaught that will most certainly come, as surely as night follows day. To quote Thomas Sowell, “When the Super Bowl is on the line, you don’t go with the quarterback who is least likely to throw an interception. You go with the one most likely to throw a touchdown pass.”
Since Gingrich is very likely to be eliminated before the primary process is complete, none of these things is likely to happen. Romney will very likely be another McCain with his approach to Obama. He will soft-peddle it to the end. The economy will likely continue on its present course towards improvement, leaving the odds in Obama’s favor to win this fall’s election. Apparently, there just isn’t really enough at stake.
Respectfully, Bobbcat… and for both our families sake, they better be more than how you put it “great-sounding words”.
Let me put it to you, un-varnished. If either Obama gets another four years or if any new president doesn’t enact the necessary reforms, we’re headed for unsustainable and a fiscal train-wreck. And America as we know it will be no more. And if Obamacare is not repealed, socialized medicine will (like in England) become entrenched and irreversible and his goons will make sure that any “crisis will not be wasted”.
My only hope, if either Obama wins or we get a weak president, is that the House and the Senate will be able to forestall for a few years what then will become inevitable.
In short – if the necessary reforms aren’t enacted, and soon…
If Obama is elected instead of Romney, it won’t matter squat except the Republicans will act enough like they theoretically should to keep the O from doing anything.
If Romney is elected he will pull Boehner left and get some of what he wants.
When Romney was asked about the “improving economy” by a shill reporter for the Left his reply was that “Of course an economy begins to improve at the end of a recession.” Is that what we want in a president at this moment of extreme economic peril? Romney AGREED with the so-called reporter that the economy is improving! Number 1 it’s NOT improving; number2 what kind of an opponent to our marxist president will Romney be in the 2012 campaign? And if by some miracle Romney is elected what can you expect from someone who doesn’t see us as in the DEPRESSION we are in fact in and therefore won’t apply the kind of medicine needed to cure the illness?!
That was not a left leaning reporter that asked mitt that question but it was last week on the Laura Ingraham show. She asked Mitt if he thought is was wise to keep saying that the economy was getting better. He said: It was. She said is that a good strategy and he said: Do you want me to lie?
Good luck trying to win in November with that strategy – economy getting better and let’s not talk about healthcare
McMitt’s a one-bullet candidate.
Unless the economy is on the verge of another Depression in November, McMitt will be lucky to get 40%. The economy is all he’s got.
But at least we know that if he buys the election, he will be very polite to the president.
I’m hoping (almost betting ) of a sudden Israel’s attack on Iran so that oil prices will make us suffer but then Obama will be in flames too… but maybe I’m too optimistic, it’d be too sweet a revenge for Netanyahu
Depending on what happens in Florida, our Republican precinct caucuses in a week here in Colorado may or not be meaningful. The choices aren’t much:
Gingrich: a pompous blowhard & Washington insider who changes his tune depending on which state he’s in.
Paul: some common sense when it comes to cutting spending (everybody takes a haircut), but off on some loony fringe when it comes to foreign policy.
Santorum: anti-abortion (get rid of Roe v. Wade); anti-birth control (get rid of Griswold v. Connecticut); anti-sex (believes even married couples should have sex only to reproduce). Of course, he’s opposed to civil unions for gays; a concept that would benefit even heterosexuals. The country needs jobs & this religious socialist’s main focus is on citizens’ bedrooms.
Romney: the only reasonable choice among four “B” listers.
Paul and Santorum are both electoral non-entities at this point. Mentioning them, you either are distracted or are trying to distract.
The Former Speaker for the House who was turned out by actual establishment on the lie of manufactured, utterly bogus “ethics” charges–he is not the insider.
The gun controller, global warming-believing, bailout fanatic, would-be-and-did-when-he-was-governor healthcare nationalizer Romney. The one who is sucking up to the business as usual establishment, he is the insider.
And propping him up is not reasonable.
Tom: Paul & Santorum are still in the race and will poll some significant numbers in Florida even tho no where near either Mitt or Newt. It’s funny to me how you would consider that Gingrich is not an insider. He was during his career in office and since.
In my mind, Romney is preferable to Newt. In the 1980s, Reagan could gently joke that “we’ll start bombing in 5 minutes,” into an open microphone. Problem with Newt, he’s serious with stuff like that and thus, not a credible candidate.
Romney Explains Why He Can’t Beat Obama By DAVID CATRON on 1.30.12
http://spectator.org/archives/2012/01/30/romney-explains-why-he-cant-be
“Speaking to an enthusiastic crowd of dozens of people, Gingrich exclaimed, “This is a guy who has spent $17.5 million on falsehoods. He voted for Paul Tsongas. He donated money to the Democrats. And he’s questioning my credentials? That just shows you how out of touch with reality Romney is. The establishment is terrified of a Gingrich nomination.”
An enthusiastic crowd of “dozens of people?” Newt is going to have to do a lot better than that if he’s going to win Florida. If you said “thousands” of people, I would be impressed. But a small gathering here or there isn’t going to win Newt this primary. I may be wrong, but the state was just too big, there wasn’t enough time, and Newt just didn’t have enough money to win. And, without any knockout dabate performances on TV to help him, I think Newt is done in Florida.
That’s it. When a former college professor doesn’t understand his pronouns, there’s no way I can support him. “Between Mitt Romney and *I*?” Honestly, Newt, you sound like Obama.
If I had any inclination to vote for Newt, it would have vanished after the past 48 hours. I’m sick of the calls! They have not made me more inclined to vote for him. They have only told me that Newt has nothing positive to say about himself. I’m not crazy about Mitt either, but at least when I came home from the funeral of a wonderful man yesterday afternoon, I was not subjected to four calls on my answering machine. Maybe this works on some people, but I want to know about a candidate’s own agenda. As far as I can tell Newt’s agenda is only about trashing everybody else.
I believe Mitt is outspending Romney 15 to 1. Some of that will be for robocalls.
How many Mitt calls have you gotten?
I have received more Mitt mailers than from Newt. Those went right into the trash, so easier to ignore – not so annoying. I don’t watch much TV so can’t compare those ads. No Mitt calls at all. In the time that it took me to write that last comment I received yet another robo call from Newt.
May I ask what your zip code is?
Sorry about your loss. Somebody forgot to tell him. I am sure if he knew he wouldn’t have bothered you. I agree, attacking “everybody else” is not good.
Now there, have some warm milk and honey and go to bed. Tomorrow you will feel better. Maybe Newt will lose. Then you will be happy. It will serve him right for calling you ( and everyone else ).
Some posters have made cogent points on …what is Mitt’s long range policies either domestically or in foreign policy?? Pubs have to blend all wings of the Party and not allow the DC Estab. to mandate choices or agendas or our platform. So,Mitt, where are your easily understood points.? Now I know Newt’s and I have read Newt.org. I have a fair idea of Rick S’s view. I even know Ron’s eco. demands and can take them without his loony self on foreign policy and some domestic nonsense. So, Can Mitt or Newt unite these wings: Indies, Reagan Dems, Libertarians, Teas and Pubs??? If so, the voters can defeat the horrors of Obama , Reid and San Fran Nan. I am going with Newt now, but I will gladly support Mitt, if he makes peace and unites the above groups to defeat the real enemy of America, Obama and the Dem Congressional reps.
Everybody should take a spin though McMitt’s 54 point program.
Seriously, see if you think it’s what the country needs to counter four years of radical leftism.
Because that platform is the absolute end-point of what McMitt will be willing to do.
Newt Gingrich? Really?
http://www.newswithviews.com/baldwin/baldwin685.htm
Newt Gingrich: Serial Hypocrisy?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=CWKTOCP45zY
Gingrich’s Absurd Outsider Pose: http://www.theamericanconservative.com/larison/2012/01/29/gingrichs-absurd-outsider-pose/
http://politicalvelcraft.org/2011/11/13/newt-gingrich-will-newt-renounce-the-council-on-foreign-relations-aka-new-world-order/
Gingrich would be worse than Obama on Foreign Policy: http://dailycaller.com/2011/12/28/gingrich-would-…
National Debt Grew by $1 Trillion When Gingrich was Speaker of the House: From Treasury Direct.gov:
· In 1994, the year before Gingrich become Speaker the National Debt was $4, 693 trillion
· In 1995, the year he become speaker the debt was $4,974 trillion
· In 1996 the debt was $ 5,225 trillion
· In 1997 the debt was $5,413 trillion
· In 1998– the last year of his speakership– the debt was $5,526 trillion
Gingrich Supported Goldwater? Newt Helped Reagan End the Cold War? Said Newt Gingrich in the Tampa Debate: “I went to a Goldwater organizing session in 1964. I met with Ronald Reagan for the first time in 1974. I worked with Jack Kemp, and Art Laffer and others to develop supply side economics in the late ’70s. I helped Governor Reagan become President Reagan. I helped pass the Reagan economic program and worked with the National Security Council on issues including the collapse of the Soviet Empire…” Said Gingrich before: On Reagan’s decision to meet with Mikhail Gorbachev, Salon’s Glenn Greenwald notes: “Newt Gingrich… denounced President Reagan’s rapprochement with Gorbachev in 1985 as potentially “the most dangerous summit for the West since Adolf Hitler met with Chamberlain in 1938 at Munich.”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=hJQsLFhuyOY
Shockingly Massive Proof That Newt Gingrich is Far From Being A Conservative!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=eyeB36ctO5I
http://www.nationalreview.com/campaign-spot/289249/when-gingrich-tried-and-failed-intimidate-tom-coburn
http://web.archive.org/web/20060822061158/http:/www.healthtransformation.net/News/E_newsletters/index.cfm?newsletterid=20
http://www.ronpaul2012.com/2012/01/22/newt-gingrich-is-not-a-conservative-recap-parts-1-14/
http://www.ronpaul2012.com/2012/01/22/newt-gingrich-is-not-a-conservative-pt-15/
http://www.ronpaul2012.com/2012/01/24/newt-gingrich-is-not-a-conservative-pt-16/
http://www.ronpaul2012.com/2012/01/29/newt-gingrich-is-not-a-conservative-pt-20/
http://dailycaller.com/2012/01/28/pat-buchanan-reagan-white-house-saw-newt-as-something-of-a-political-opportunist/
Gingrich Condemned How Reagan Ended the Cold War: Newt says he helped Reagan defeat the Soviet Union. Was that before or after he said this? Reports BBC: In 1985… Mr. Gingrich referred to a meeting between Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev as “the most dangerous summit for the West since Adolf Hitler met with Chamberlain in 1938 at Munich”.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-13366727
Mittens created Romneycare that he still supports.
Romney care is the basis of Obamacare, which Mittens supports and praises (only wanting to ‘improve a few things’
Anyone who supports a candidate that thinks that having some unelected drone in DC have complete control over your life (and death) deserves what they will get from their support of Romney, the grandfather of Obamacare.
Santorum, Gingrich and Romney will all lead us to default and bankruptcy. Unless we deliver a 55+ seat advantage in the senate. But even if that happens it would likely lead to a wholesale rejection of the GOP. Leaving the GOP looking like the dems in 2010. I don’t trust any of them and they wont inspire.
If we cut spending the economy is gonna collapse just like it did in 81-82. We really need someone who believe in free markets. Someone who can withstand the onslaught of criticism. I do not see this man in the race except maybe Paul. But he cannot win the GOP race. 1.08 trillion deficit and its all aboard the crazy train.
How Gingrich, Romney, & Obama All Promote Big Government:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=XCgVTEMzh0g
Mitt Romney Keeps Defending the Individual Mandate:
http://spectator.org/blog/2011/12/28/mitt-romney-…
The Romney Con Exposed:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=4vS9SF3vc-A
http://inflation.us/videos.html
Rush Limbaugh: Romney Is Not Mr. Conservative!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=bqNvB9p9cdc
Why Did A Former Romney Campaigner Defect to Another Candidate?
http://www.revolutionpac.com/2012/01/former-romney-campaigner-defects-to-ron-paul/
Study: On Spending Cuts, Most GOP Candidates Light On Details; Who Isn’t?: http://dailycaller.com/2011/12/30/study-on-spendi…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jSVi45vfA6o
Another great place for information on the candidates is The Conservative Scorecard, which is an easy-to-read description on the strength of the candidates on key conservative positions. The ratings are based on their prior statements and positions over their political careers. It can be found here:
http://www.conservativescorecard.com/
Which Candidates Are Saying: “I Like George Washington Except on Foreign Policy”?
http://www.ronpaul2012.com/2012/01/29/i-like-george-washington-except-on-foreign-policy/
Who Is Totally Unelectable & Who Is Super Electable & Seriously “In It To Win It”?
http://communities.washingtontimes.com/neighborhood/political-pro-con/2012/jan/29/ron-paul-it-win-it/
Romney is the perfectly coifed agent of the Ruling Class. Calling him a Massachusettes moderate is being kind. Romney’s called himself a moderate…..actually a progressive!! And his records as governor says so. Never could I vote for this man. Heck I’d vote for Ron Paul before him. But, for me I’ll take the Newtons with that TEA. As imperfect as Newt is, he will vigorously debate Obama and take him on over his record.
Ace catches Gingrich lying through his teeth about Romney depriving elderly Jews kosher food.
“Yeah, it was never the plan they’d eat non-kosher, just that the kosher meals would be prepared in a central kitchen.
Eh, it’s politics, I guess. But I suppose that must be the end of all the whining about negative attacks (as Rush Limbaugh terms it) from Newt.
I mean, honestly. Surely we won’t be hearing any more about maliciously false claims after that.
And then uncorks this beauty:
“I think in the end neither Newt nor Mitt is offering much except themselves; there is no Gingrism, like there was a Reaganism, and no Romneyism either. (And there was no McCainism.)
There is no central idea animating either campaign, just the man himself, and since we’re really not discussing ideas, but rather men, the negative attack on the opposing man himself is the only game in town.
For both candidates.”
Amen.
Ace catches Gingrich lying through his teeth about Romney depriving elderly Jews kosher food.
“Yeah, it was never the plan they’d eat non-kosher, just that the kosher meals would be prepared in a central kitchen.
Eh, it’s politics, I guess. But I suppose that must be the end of all the whining about negative attacks (as Rush Limbaugh terms it) from Newt.
I mean, honestly. Surely we won’t be hearing any more about maliciously false claims after that.
And then uncorks this beauty:
“I think in the end neither Newt nor Mitt is offering much except themselves; there is no Gingrism, like there was a Reaganism, and no Romneyism either. (And there was no McCainism.)
There is no central idea animating either campaign, just the man himself, and since we’re really not discussing ideas, but rather men, the negative attack on the opposing man himself is the only game in town.
For both candidates.”
Amen.
Link it.
cfbleachers, Am I disappointed yes? But it boils down to this! Either the ruling class GOP Anointed one or the rouge battle veteran with a very strong conservative resume. It tells me a lot when Romney is defended by the leftist MSM and Newt catches fire from both the leftist and Elite GOP! Think of this ! If Romney gets the nomination and loses? Tell me what furry will be unleashed against the GOP! I think as much to be the Death of these tone deaf Bastards who crapped on the people that brought the GOP their greatest victory in years! Nov.2010.. Newt is a devil granted! But it takes a Devil to fight one! And may God bless Santorum`s family and ill little one! He is a good man too the cause also!
And another thing that has not been exposed ! That Romney lies about Newts record! His boot out of Congress? He resigned and was exonerated BY the IRS!! And as far as disrespecting Regan! Thats a LIE also! Hell when you start out on a strait road and those that draw you deeper to finaly wake up in an un immaginable nightmare and realize and revolt against the machine?? I think this man has done wrong …but put yourself in his shoes. And the women probllems? Ye who has not sinned cast the first stone!
http://minx.cc/?post=326291
Here’s the link
So Romney did try to kill that line item in the budget, and there’s no link to where he supposedly was going to put in another line item that restored the meals?
Advantage Newt.
Maybe Mitt never got around to it. He was too busy taking over healthcare in his state like the progressive liberal he is.
Pinning the CINO Tail on the Newt
http://predicthistunpredictpast.blogspot.com/2012/01/pinning-cino-tail-on-newt.html
Newt: If You Don’t Know Me By Now… (Mo Will Tell You Everything That I Don’t Want You To Know)
http://predicthistunpredictpast.blogspot.com/2012/01/newt-if-you-dont-know-me-by-now-mo-will.html
Can ANYONE cite ANY evidence whatsoever that Romney is remotely conservative or even a Republican for that matter? Simply registering as one doesn’t count in my book anymore as the ‘tent’ has gotten so big that any riff-raff can sneak in. We have let plenty of democrats sneak into the party here in Arizona – take John McCain for example (seriously, please take him).
At least Obama is honest enough to have a ‘D’ beside his name on the ballot – Romney isn’t.
The establishment tells us we must nominate someone who will attract moderates so we can beat Obama. Well then let’s nominate Hillary Clinton – she’d attract millions of moderates and independents and beat Obama like a bongo! All she has to do is put an ‘R’ by her name on the ballot.
The establishment tells us we must nominate someone with business experience so we can beat Obama. Well then let’s nominate George Soros – he’s vastly more wealthy and therefore must know vastly more about the economy and creating jobs. He’d certainly beat Obama and restore the economy! All he has to do is put an ‘R’ by his name on the ballot.
However, if we want to take Obamacare, Global Warming and social concerns completely off the table as issues in the fall campaign, then let’s nominate Mitt Romney – and then watch Obama obliterate him.
But, if by chance Romney does beat Obama, his administration will do nothing to disturb the party going on inside the big tent that is Washington; and as the country continues its precipitous decline, it will be the conservatives – “led” by Romney – who will ultimately be blamed.
WSell, you have got your wish. Romney won in Florida and today’s New York Post tells us that his nomination is assured. John Podhoretz, with more slaps at Newt thinks that Romney has indicated to Republicans, from his Florida debates, “that he has the mettle to do the same with President Obama in the fall.” People on the political scale — from moderate to left, tend, I think, to come down harder against friendsa than against opponents.
And so, if it is to be Romney, we shall have another limousine conservative anointed by the Republican establishment that shrinks in horror at the prospect that a courageous conservative [CC] should be president. Limousine conservatives tend not to win presidential elections. The hope of us courageous conservatives is the election of CC majorities in House and Senate. And in the next presidential election, may the nominee be the choice of the people, in convention assembled — not the choice of limousine conservatives in media-driven primaries. I pray, of course, that it is not too late for courageous conservatives to stand up and demand that the 2012 Republican National Convention nominate a courageous conservative, whose courage allows for fidelity to our founding legacy and whose election will restore government of, by and for the people and, thereby, proclaim liberty throughout the land..