I was going to post pretty much the same thing. You beat me to it. I would vote for Fidel Castro before I vote for the likes of Gingrich. At least you know where Castro is coming from. "The Newt" is like Romney, he says whatever it takes to fit the moment for him.

Don't wake the dead newday. I used to watch his show on PBS and the man was no slouch as a Conservative thinker. The last of his kind.

Oh dear, Drew Cline is claiming late night messages from Buckley ... something about picking the candidate with the least negatives. Great, start at the bottom and work your way down.

Hi Pat ... I came across a lost decimal point three years ago. Do you think it might belong to Tightwad's IQ?

Whew! After reading the posts in here I'm glad to see that the headline is all hype. I can't imagine why anyone would vote for the man. Just as a reminder for those who weren't around for his earlier years, here's a synopsis of the man:

Though he relentlessly pushes military spending and talks like a bigtime hawk, Gingrich avoided the Vietnam War through a combination of student and family deferments.

Newt pressed his first wife to sign divorce papers while she was still in the hospital recovering from cancer surgery. He also graciously said "She isn't young enough or pretty enough to be the President's wife." But his second marriage hasn't been that smooth either. Newt and Marianne have been separated - "frankly", she told the Washington Post in June 1989, "it's been on and off for some time."

The hospital visit wasn't the end of it, either. Jackie had to take Newt to court to get him to contribute for bills, as utilities were about to be cut off.

Remember the House Banking scandal, where so many congressmen wrote rubber checks on government money? Newt hopes you don't, because he bounced 22 himself, which almost cost him reelection in 1992. His vote for the secret House pay raise, and the chauffeur who drove him around Washington in a Lincoln Town Car, didn't help.

Newt in his poltical career was the king of using tax-payer subsidized donations for his personal and political purposes. He stooped so low as to hijack not one but two charities for poor inner city kids and use their donations for his personal goals.

GOPAC, Newt's longtime political action committee, was the centerpiece of a complex network of non-profit, and mostly tax exempt organizations that Newt has used to support himself and other conservative candidates. In an act of incredible hypocrisy, this crusader against taxes obtained taxpayer subsidies for his personal and political goals, by misusuing these tax-exempt groups.

Of course, using tax-exempt educational or charitable donations for partisan purposes is illegal, and several ethics complaints were filed against Gingrich. He agreed to pay a $300,000 fine for misleading the committee during the investigation, and in the process dodged conviction on the actual charges through a combination of finessing some legal definitions, sheer self-confidence and raw political power (as Speaker of the House at the time of the complaints, he appointed the ethics committee. Furthermore, GOPAC had one ethics committee member on its roster last session, and gave money to another.)

According to the Wall Street Journal, a company hired Marianne Gingrich (Newt's wife) for $2,500 a month plus commissions in September 1994 after he announced support for a free trade zone in Israel that they are trying to build. Her "job" for Israel Export Development Co. is to find tenants for the trade zone. Gingrich's spokesman said that since her job did not involve working with the US government, there was no conflict of interest

Who Owns Him?

- Rupert Murdoch (see book deal above) (the book deal(s) are lengthy so I left them out but you can search them)

- Georgia's Richards family, owners of Southwire Corporate ($1.3 billion/year)
The Richards lent and donated money and office space to Gingrich from his earliest days in politics. They have given over $100,000, and Gingrich was the first recipient of donations from Southwire's PAC. By coincidence, Gingrich has changed from an environmentalist critic of Southwire to a staunch anti-environmentalist during that time. People with ties to Southwire were instrumental in two earlier lucrative book deals of Gingrich's in 1977 and 1984; the latter was investigated for ethical violations.

Copyright 1999 Real People For Real Change

And you know that the Koch brothers own a piece of him also.

Newt may have some personal baggage, but one important trait he has is that he LOVES America, and that's what we need. Not someone who disses us everywhere he travels. He also seems to be a straight talker, doesn't worry about pleasing everyone or saying what he thinks people want to hear. He says what people NEED to hear. Like it or not.

George Will on Newt Gingrich:

He embodies almost everything disagreeable about modern Washington. He’s the classic rental politician, he continued, suggesting that Gingrich’s political positions are for sale to the highest bidder. George Will said Gingrich should hope people focus on his philandering and infidelity, instead of his pay-for-play influence peddling. Gingrich is reeling from revelations that he was paid over a million dollars to peddle influence for failed mortgage giant Freddie Mac. Even disgraced former Republican lobbyist Jack Abramoff has called Gingrich “corrupt.”

Aggie-345886

Newt may have some personal baggage.......

SOME Aggie???? You call that SOME????? I call it morally and ethically bankrupt!

LOL you Republican/TPers are a funny lot.

The IRS investigated- and found no wrongdoing. Zip. Zilch. Nada.

Ken Starr found no wrongdoing in the Whitewater investigation either, No Jo. So by your own "logic", you're saying Clinton was innocent,.......right?

Thanks.

Thought so.

Newt has taken flip flopping to an art, aggie above says he doesn't just say what people want to hear. Well if you listen or watch fixed news, you may believe that, but if you actually watch a few of the debates you would realize the facts. Newt would lie to his mother, and if she didn't believe that lie he would make another one up just for her vote. He's a fox alright, the fox in the hen house about to devour us all. If he becomes president this country will be bancrupt in record time and in war in every corner of the earth.

I don't understand why they say Newt has some baggage. He doesn't have baggage, he a land fill full of garbage. The guy is pure evil. Newt had oral with his friend's wife while his own kids stood outside the cardoor and he had the gaul to do it with a smile.

Oh Aggie. You must have watched the interview with the Newt on the right-wing, religious touting station.

He used the same words you just used. The reason he cheated on his wives was because he loves his country and worked too hard.

Arrogant, insane Newt hates the middle class so look out. Liar, hypocrite and insane. And that's being kind.

A whole lotta facts NoJo that you don't want to deal with.

On January 21, 1997, the House of Representatives voted to discipline him for ethical wrongdoing. He was accused of using tax-deductible charitable donations to fund a non-charitable college course that he taught, and of giving false information about this to the House Ethics Committee.

In a 395-28 vote, the House ordered Gingrich to pay an unprecedented $300,000 penalty as part of a settlement to avoid a full hearing.

Gingrich himself was among the 450 members of the House who had engaged in check kiting; he had overdrafts on twenty-two checks, including a $9,463 check to the Internal Revenue Service in 1990.^[37]

Let's face it. It's been 60 years since the Republican Party nominated a non-establishment candidate for their elections, when Eisenhower beat Robert Taft. Romney has a lot in common with Nixon, Reagan and George H.W. Bush in that he has run for the presidency before, holds up the party line and very rarely, if ever, makes gaffes.

The Republican Party chose Romney a year ago. Now it's just theatre.

I guess the 395 peers of his were just wrong huh NoJo? Now what other Facts do you disagree with in that post NoJo?

And no tkapo I'm not paid to post. I just don't understand as an semi-informed voter how the Republican/TP can ignore the only candidate I would vote for if I were Republican.

I grew up Democrat and over the years have probably become a TRUE independent in that I don't think ALL of the Republican ideas stink. There is a chance I would vote Republican if the right candidate were presented. What amazes me though is whyvthat party seems to bring the trash to the forefront? I'm just trying to figure out .....WHY?

Even if the right republican candidate were introduced, they would be anhihilated within their same party in the same exact manner they do the democrats. Their candidate will either hold the very same regressive beliefs or lose support even if they proceed and win at the polls.

Here's another good one from good ol Newt:

We shouldn’t bother reforming education for poor kids, Newt Gingrich says. Forget graduation rates — what these kids need is to spend more time scrubbing bathrooms.

Yes, since thousands of children are stuck in failing schools, we might as well put them to work there as janitors, the presidential candidate says.

"The kids would actually do work, they would have cash, they’d have pride in the schools, they’d begin the process of rising," Gingrich said recently.

Because it’s not failing schools that trap kids in a cycle of poverty — it’s child labor laws, he maintained, which are "truly stupid."

If he were president, Gingrich told an audience at Harvard University last week, he’d do away with such laws. They’re the real reason for income inequality in this country — if poor kids weren’t "trapped in child laws," they’d be able to earn money. (Just think of the riches they’d earn as school janitors).

OMG you just can't make this stuff up! And HE is the Republican forerunner .......sighhhhhhhhhhh

Were you talking about Gingrich, or Clinton on the moral issue?

Hey ROY,

Just to get you a little more current,.....Clinton isn't running for President.

I know you Regressives like to live in the past,........ but Jeez!!

Poor Union leader. When Newt goes down, hopefully this Union leader will go down as well.

I have not been had a job since zobama took office...I am a welder since 1970's...It seems that the ONLY people pushing for amnesty are the people whose livlihood are not threatened by the illegals...

Maybe no one's hiring you because a lot of illegals speak English better than you do...?

is this the same newt that was speaker of the house and universally hated by both parties?looks like him.how is he still in politics.oh wait hes a lieing, womanizing{not a bad thing}backstabbing sack of crap.so he fits right in in washington

We dont need another "establishment" candidate to represent conservatism. Get ready for the same old crap. I could care less who wins the Presidency at this point...

art-2065319

If you are a citizen I want you to think back to what George H W, Clinton and George W did about immigration. That's right....NOTHING! That's 20 years worth of nothing. This is NOT just an Obama problem but I'm not happy either that he isn't dealing with it in a more aggressive way.

Imagine. President NEWT! LOL! Its so funny it makes me puke! LOL!

If the people of this nation actually elect Newt, the US will deserve whatever bastardization back to a cast system/merchantilism we have coming to us. LOL!

Okay- so I am reading is a whole lot of accusations- with no substance. Tell me please- just what has Gingrich actually DONE that is so bad (beside the whole "couch" scene with Pelosi)?? And by that - I mean the things that have stuck (not proved wrong). Tell me please- because all of the things I have read above have ALL been proved FALSE- so you are hanging your collective hats on innuendo, false accusations and conjecture.

Please provide the proof and I will happily acknowledge the source- because so far I have found nothing that sticks. I disagree with some of his ideas- but that's not the same as the cries of ethics violations and illegal maneuvering.

I just have this feeling that most people are scared of him because he (& Romney) CAN and WILL beat the pants off Obama!

geekfish

Newt, in so many words, showed his stance on illegal immigration. Us tea partiers dont take kindly to that. That little squat on the couch with Pelosi lets us know how he feels about man-caused global warming, which leads us to suspect that he will not fight to change our energy policy to encourage viable energy sources (like oil maybe) and self sufficiency. I could care less about his morality.

"I would vote for Fidel Castro before I vote for the likes of Gingrich."

Uncle Bruce

Comments from the left are way too radical , I guess the Cuban revolutionary, anti capitalist , pro redistribution of wealth and killer of his own relatives is a hero for you all, maintaining his country in the ostracism of a post WWII way of live where the basic human right are denied. Bravo you and your pals are a good example what the left is for.. You are free to go to Cuba , Castro will welcome you all and the American brasher Michael Moore.

Kornfed- Thanks- I understand- but I was talking about actual wrong-doing, not just policy issues. I totally agree with you on the immigration and global warming thing- though Newt said the Pelosi thing was one of the dumbest things he's ever done. There's more I don't agree with on policy with Newt.

People want to hang him for all these wrong-doings, but every one of them have been found to be not true- even the ethics charge from the Senate. He resigned because of the same reason Nixon did- it was best for the country- but both were proven innocentin the end. The only thing that actually sticks is the affair he had with Calista- but even his ex-wife admits the marriage was over years before the affair started, though the ring was still on the finger. not right- but it is what it is.

oskar- but that what the left is filled with (not all- but a lot!). Listen to the OWS protesters- they are LOUDLY advocating for Socialism! none of these kids even know what that is and what it will do- level the playing field? Yep- but not in a good way.

Look at the policies of the left- it's a Robin Hood syndrome- Take form the rich and give to the poor. Now the poor won't work because the know more is coming- and they keep voting the Dems in because it's a gravy train that never ends! To take from someone else to give to another is in itself- socialistic.

Republicans see it differently- though they are painted badly for it. It's the fish analogy- give a man a fish- he eats for a day- teach a man to fish- he eats for the rest of his life. The Dems want to give out fish. The Repubs want to teach how to fish. Help those that truly need it, but get those that can work- back out there to work!

I hope when obama goes down the liberals will go down with him!

RUT ROH, the thick-browed, knuckle-dragging, vitriol spewing Libbies are scrambling the hate and fear-mongering troops out.

LOL, it's always amusing to listen to the Lefties try to spin anyone in a negative frame except for our incompetent, inexperienced Campaigner-In-Chief.

Three years of stumbling, bumbling, dithering, apologizing incompetence and they still believe Obama has a clue. The only thing we can be satisfied with is his only trying to screw up our great Republic for 2 1/2 years as he mounted his campaign horse over 6 months ago. At least this spares us 1 1/2 more years of Progressive failure.

The Leftists know that Newt has forgotten more domestic and foreign policy than the current POTUS will ever hope to learn. I'd pay to see a debate between Obama and Newt, the true inexperience and anti-Americanism of Obama will overwhelm the nation. Newt's cool and calm demeanor will be in stark contrast to Obama's narcissistic glare as he schools him. We all saw the fear and weakness in Obama's eyes when Benjamin Netanyahu dressed him down about what true friends and allies are all about.

The veiled attempts here by the Libs to chastigate his morals are the same ones that sat on their thumbs as Clinton embarrassed us around the world with his flagrant disregard for morals and common decency. I do give Clinton some credit for not interfering in the Dot-Com era except for allowing Grrenspan to artificially manipulate interest rates and monetary policy which added to the bubbles collapse.

As Obama blames Bush, Tsunami's, ATM's, the TEA Party, he further insults our nation by calling us lazy and soft. From a man who has NEVER held a responsible job. Never created any commerce. Never praised the American people for anything. As the world turns and giggles at our Nobel Peace Prize fraud we have to endure further melancholy due to his ineptness.

ABO(Anybody But Obama) 2012

"Any Ad Which Quotes What I Said On Sunday Is A Falsehood!"

ROFLMAO! Run, Newt! Run!

Why Are “Freedom’s Warriors” Using Vile Tactics?

01 Nov

Question: How can it be that a candidate for the GOP nomination for President in 2012 leads in the polls in 8 out of 10 early primary states, leads or at least ties for the lead in polls nationwide, and scores a 70% probability of winning the nomination at InTrade, yet when you talk to the average conservative on the street, they’ll tell you that they don’t know anyone who supports Romney, and have never seen anything in the media defending Romney?

The Simple Answer: Those conservative are being fed a steady stream of highly censored propaganda. They’re being played. Many of them are just now discovering what Romney supporters nationwide have know all along. The conservative media has been suppressing, deleting or censoring any opinions in the defense of Governor Mitt Romney, and propagating smears and lies about him without any regard for the truth. Conservatives who are vilifying Politico.com today for their treatment of Herman Cain need to take a hard look at Free Republic, Red State, and other blogs on the right which have been doing exactly the same thing to Romney all along.

Author at 912FTW March

Let’s get one thing straight. I am a conservative. I have marched in support of Tea Party groups, and donated money to the cause on many occasions. I have written about my Tea Party support in previous columns. I believe the income tax, in any form, is unconstitutional. I believe abortion should be illegal. I believe anthropogenic global warming is a hoax. I believe the federal government has no constitutional right to play international philanthropist with our tax dollars. I think the United Nations is a sham, and we’re better off out of it. I believe Obamacare is an abomination, and needs to be repealed immediately. I think the federal government needs to get the hell out of our lives. Must I go on? If you are one of the morons out there who think that just because I support Gov. Romney for President, that I am no conservative, you’re wrong. What it means is, I am just better informed than you are. What it means is, I did my homework on what Mitt Romney really believes, while you were lapping up the propaganda being served by the likes of Red State, Free Republic, and other enemies of free speech. What it means is, you and I agree on the problem, we just disagree on who is best qualified to fix those problems. When you accuse me of “not being a conservative,” you are simply revealing your own profound ignorance and bias.

I know a little something about those enemies of free speech. I used to be a blogger at Red State and a few other conservative web sites. I discovered early on that the editors of those web sites had no interest in allowing anyone to make the case for a Romney presidency. This wasn’t just a matter of discouraging freedom of opinion. It was a often a matter of suppressing the facts. When someone would post a selectively edited video of Romney supposedly saying something stupid, I would post the unedited video, and *poof* – it would disappear into limbo. When someone would post an outrageous lie, it would always stand, but the rebuttals always somehow got “lost.” Again and again, these so-called “warriors for freedom” and staunch “constitutionalists” used tactics that would have been right at home in the Third Reich or the Soviet Union. I closed my accounts at those web sites, and started America Needs Mitt, Mitt Romney Radio, Mitt Wiki, and MittFitts! – Toons for Romney. I didn’t realize it at the time, but in the end, being shut down by those web sites was the best thing that could have happened for our cause.

Fox News is (finally) reporting that Romney supporters are banned from Free Republic. (Dear Fox News – Tell us something we haven’t known for months! ) The fact is, that is effectively the case on most of the conservative blogs and web sites out there. Despite the censorship, smears, lies, and propaganda, supporters of Gov. Mitt Romney have quietly continued to support Romney with word-of-mouth, monetary donations, volunteer work, and grass-roots organizing. We know better than anyone that it isn’t just the mainstream media that is corrupt.

I still support the principles of the Tea Party, but I can no longer in good conscience support the mob mentality that has so thoroughly infested its ranks. It’s no accident that Tea Party support among Americans nationwide has dropped from 33% a year ago to less than 20% now. Even some of our most ardent supporters have begun to realize that they’re being manipulated and lied to by the very people in which they had placed their hopes for a better America, and this makes me profoundly sad. The Tea Party movement is committing suicide, and like television zombies, they don’t even know they’re dead yet, and continue to eat their own.

Click to Order

Newt wants to get rid of child labor laws. Why should kids in Indonesia get all the good jobs?

Although Newt is far from the ideal candidate, I agree he has a good political record to run on. It is Congress who passes the budget and Newt balanced the budget before. Clinton gets the credit, but it was Newt and his Contract with America that balanced the budget.

Forrest- proof please. While I have heard that one- I still can't find where he said it.

geekfish I was going to tell you where to find out about gingrich and child labor but you know what....it's easy to find. Put some effort into it instead of wanting to be spoon fed everything. This aint faux news after all.

proof please. While I have heard that one- I still can't find where he said it.

Put some effort into it instead of wanting to be spoon fed everything.

They truly are a lazy bunch... aren't they? lol

Here you go....

Promising "extraordinarily radical proposals to fundamentally change the culture of poverty in America," Newt Gingrich said Friday that he would fire school janitors and pay students to clean schools instead.

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=newt%20gingrich%20child%20labor&source=web&cd=8&ved=0CFkQtwIwBw&url=http%3A%2F%2Farticles.latimes.com%2F2011%2Fnov%2F21%2Fnews%2Fla-pn-gingrich-child-labor-20111121&ei=TpXSToPSIKiA2QXtzsWkDw&usg=AFQjCNES5AkFs6BDvZviQaoCKQRnU875Mw

From Newter's lips to the slave masters ears...

Nice eh?

Should make for some awesome campaign commericals... ;o)

So rico (& FRH- pay attention)- you're telling me- you can't find it or can't admit what it was REALLY about...

What I have read is he was referring to minors (14 and up) not being able to crack the union ranks in poor neighborhoods for menial task jobs to help provide for their own families. Not exactly the same as repealing laws that protect 6 year olds from working the salt mines...

you can do better than that

geekfish I posted the friggin article about newt and child labor hours ago. NOW put some effort into it!

It is not hard at all to see why tea bagging republican extremist have no moral responsibility for there leaders and there support that sent this country into a nose dive. Because they forget so easily. Not long ago they were finished with Mr. Gingrich due to his credit account at the jeweler. Then his serial cheating and pyramid scams and etc. Etc.. Lobbyist for Freddi comes to mind to the tune of over a million but by all means. By all means, show us your true colors.

Now they MUST find one to vote for that is NOT Mr. Romney. Nothing to do with substance character or morals. Just not Mr. Romney . ;]

Tea bagging republican extremist... Show us your true colors. ; ]

Cheers

If you are in 5th grade and you are poor blame yourself, get a job, or start a business, quit waiting for somebody else to give you a handout, pull yourself up by those little Velcro straps on your Nike's, that were produced in Indonesia by some kid who had a little pride in himself.

For all their money. All the people they could hire to advise them. What are the republicans thinking. Did they really want to throw the election? I couldn't have come up with a worse set of bozos given that they had to be ok to someone. Who are they ok with? What are they thinking? (scratches head)

They are thinking that republicans in Congress have made it near impossible for a republican candidate to win. The viable republicans if there is such a thing anymore have decided to sit this one out, it's pretty much a forfeit on their part.

Which is rico, exactly what I summed up for you. You guys seem to make mountains out of a mole hills- like this little non-story.

We're talking about a teenager- not a child- pushing a broom to help out the family- not working a fusion chamber or performing underwater welding! We're naot talking about going back to 1890 here.

When you say things like "child" labor laws- I assume (a grand assumption on my part) that you have something of more substance- which you don't seem to have...

There are no laws that prevent teenagers of 16 years and older from working, and in some cases younger people can work in the restaurant industry, so he must be talking about younger people than that.

What Newt was talking about was letting 14 & up teens work at menial task jobs to help out the families in poverty areas.

Really how do you know that I did not recall him saying that, and that is already possible under existing laws. It matters not because Newt was already run out of Congress by his own party when he was Speaker of the House, do you really think enough republicans will lose their self respect to elect him. He is damaged goods, plain and simple, he don't give a hoot about the republican party, he just makes a very good living off of them.

I like Newt as a GOP presidential candidate. A lot. The only thing that could get Obama re-elected faster is if Bachmann got the nod.

rico-3714896

Whew! After reading the posts in here I'm glad to see that the headline is all hype. I can't imagine why anyone would vote for the man. Just as a reminder for those who weren't around for his earlier years, here's a synopsis of the man:

rico,

Thanks for the recap on this hideous scumbag. I couldn't keep all his sleazy actions in my memory. They were rejected like a virus.

The really bad thing is that republicans will vote for the most amoral, hypocrites and liars imaginable without even the slightest qualms.

Like George W. Bush

geekfish, go eat some worms, "Nixon resigned because it was best for the country" go back to school, the reason Nixon resigned is because he knew he got caught in the Watergate scandal, did not listen to any of those tapes. Newt resigned because his party forced him into it because of his infidelity, with his 3rd wife, while his 2nd wife was going through Chemo. To top it all off he shot his big mouth off about Clinton and Monica, while he was having affair with his current wife, talk about a hypocrite.

rico...Newt has no more personal baggage than Clinton, JFK, brothers Bobby and Ted, Barney Frank. Let's not forget Edwards, and Obama has "baggage" his pastor and mentors such as Ayers, Soros. LBJ had some personal failings too, as I recall. Al Gore? Read he had his little dalliances too. No one is squeaky clean. At least some of us acknowledge that about a person. Libs gave Clinton a pass saying it had nothing to do with his job. So, NOW because it's Newt, it should? That's hypocrisy.

LAURA: Newt's wife was never going through chemo. She did not have Cancer. Still doesn't, is alive and well to this day. Newt's daughter has written and stated more than once that her mother did NOT have Cancer. Their divorce was long in the works, nearly final when his wife had a benign tumor removed. He brought their girls up to visit their mother is why he was at the hospital. Not to serve her with divorce papers. So there was NO Cancer, NO chemo, NO blindsided divorce demand, NO deathbed.

Clinton was impeached for PERJURY, not for his tryst with Monica, or any of his other "lady friends and conquests".

Republicans seem to love to run "dead people" based on traditions of other dead republicans who served upon the traditions of other dead people, whom they claimed were republicans. It would be well if the republicans could just bury their dead, leave them alone, and learn something new.

Aggie boy do you have your shorts in a wade??? Get over it. The whole country (those with any logic) can see what a pathetic group of wanna-Be's the GOP have dug up for 2112. Who cares ....take a deep breath.LOL

You can work at 14 years of age and POOT was definetly talking about slave labor...That's what it is when you force someone to work especialy a child.....And it is forcing them when a poor kid's family needs the money which would just get taken out of their food stamp benifits anyway and it is a way to take a paying job from an adult in the hood and then give it to a kid at half-price....Slavery....Slavery....Slavery.....Slavery.......>Slavery there did I type it enough times to get it through your head...That's what Fox News does to you and it works...HAHAHAHHAHAHHA

Praysalot...I have my shorts in a...WHAT?

You say the Republican candidates are a bunch of wannabe's, but I think your man's gonna be a has-been.

The libbies are grabbing at straws Aggie do not entertain they thrive on gossip and innuendo not facts!!!

Like Fox News facts ? You must be kidding....Oh no you aren't you are brainwashed!

Fisty Redhead and her Vagminions actually are pleading for Gingrich to be the Republican - is that out of fear of the Romney?

Fisty always spews bravado and claims Obama can beat anyone including himself but the truth is Newt will mop the floor with Obama in a debate. Count on it.

NH's Union Leader is owned by a liberal now and hasn't been the Conservative paper it once was for many years. New ownership will do that folks... doh!

The endorsement of Gingrich is nothing more than another liberal subterfuge! The paper is really endorsing Obama, yes the very same LMAObama!

Nice try carrot top, lol!

miked - LMAObama! That's a new one, nice!

I love to see the libbies get their panties in a wad! Makes me start out the day with a smile, no matter what the weather is like!

Romney 2012.... the O must go!

There is no reason to fear Romney, republicans will never elect a president who does not profess Jesus Christ as his lord and saviour, they have imposed that requirement on their candidates.

No doubt Forrest,after all they think this is an all inclusive white male christian resort of a nation...By them, for them...But there is a diversified movement in this country that soon they will want to be a part of..But by then they will have firmly stuck their heads up Rupert Murdoch's nether regions..How can people have so much hate inside them ?

It sure would help us all out if we could outlaw suits for politicians . I suggest NASCAR style firesuits . For every lobbiest dollar that a campaign fund accepts then the underwriting corporation must be represented by logo on the firesuit . Since the days of electing human beings to office are not only dead but buried and long ago rotted , we should be able to look a possible electee over and choose the corporations we feel most closely align with our values .

That should thin the herd a bit . Can I get OWS behind this ?

EastRowanDad: you are OWS...You are the 99%... And I would go on to say yes most except for right wing nuts would agree with you...I wish there was a pure candidate to vote for...Since there isn't I will vote for Obama because he atleast tries to throw us a bone every now and then unlike the right who don't even try to sugarcoat it ... They are for tax cuts for the rich period..

Newt ("The Lizard") Gingrich? President of The United States of America?

Come on, Republicans! I'm beginning to think you are not taking this seriously. You do realize, don't you, the importance of the office, not only for our country but for the entire planet?

Maybe not. After Sarah Palin, it's kind of obvious that conservatives just don't get it.

(I think EastRowanDad was kidding, sw philly.)

I cannot believe that this man has the audacity to attempt to run for the Presidency and that there are those who actually support him. He is a disgraced,corrupt politician who had to step-down as speaker due to his own ethics violations and then resigned his seat in the House right after winning reelection. All of that and he's a philanderer too. I guess the party that has become the flag bearers of the religious right (wrong) only cares about morals and ethics for everyone except their leaders.

People, read between the lines.

By saying they support Newt, they are more loudly saying that they don't support Romney, who is the person most people believe will win the nomination. They are throwing a wrench into the Romney campaign's machine to see how Romney responds and whether he has the mettle to win.

Gingrich won't win the nomination, but if he does, Obama will surely win a second term.

Newt does love America! several lobbyists at a time. (oh and wives too)

Right. Especially one that apparently doesn't have much influence.

For those who can not read there is FOX.

ctviking: That's what I was thinking. Does ANYONE vote based on an endorsement?

New Hampshire has intelligent, well-read, hard working people living there. Unfortunately, Joe the Union guy, isn't one of them.

He makes a statement regarding Newt, making Washington "all better." ( Yes, I am too lazy to go back and re read the article.) and now, seems to believe Newt can do it again.

Joe, the union guy, sounds similar to Joe the plumber, our fifteen minute of fame, we have to admit lives here in Ohio.

Newt will soon flame out, like Palin, Bachmann, Perry, Cain and the rest of the smorgasbord, the GOP has rendered, as candidates.

What will result is, Mitt and some unknown candidate, like Palin, against President Obama and Joe Biden. The election will be theirs to win or lose. The GOP must make Mitt more desirable to the voter.

Here is my idea and I am willing to go out on a limb, to bet a couple of bucks on it. The Republicans need to hire two good looking hookers, who can read. Then stand then in front of teleprompters. Have Karl Rove write out the standard script and viola, the Tea Party led Republicans win the presidency. David, Charles, Grover, Rush and Bill and the rest of the 1%, will be having cotillions, in the White House and 99%, will be genuflecting, as the 1% pass by in chauffeured limousines.

Sounds ridiculous does it not? But it is no more inane, than the group of misfits, the Neocons are trying to sell as, presidential material.

Obama/ Biden 2012

The Republicans need to hire two good looking hookers, who can read. Then stand then in front of teleprompters. Have Karl Rove write out the standard script and viola, the Tea Party led Republicans win the presidency.

The GOP already tried the T&A routine. I doubt they'll make the "pitbull with lipstick" mistake again.

Seriously. I'm glad it's down to 2 serious candidates (Romney, Gingrich) and the "nutjobs" have been ruled out - Cain, Perry, Bachman. The debates and the media work to weed out the best candidates apparently. (I mean just imagine if Perry played the same game he did in Texas by refusing to debate at all, just running on the perry Conservative "ideal". It would probably be a different story right now, and not for the better by any stretch...lol)

For those who can not read there is FOX.

FOX "News" exists for those who are too lazy, too ignorant, or too frightened to think for themselves.

God help America.

Any of that matters-how, exactly?

Look, I get that newspaper endorsements matter very little- always have, in fact- but, four years ago, they were touted as "proof" of Obama's impending presidency as a time of peace and plenty.

How'd that turn put?

Well, we have a civilian labor force down to 1983 levels. Were those people- millions who dropped completely out of the labor force in less than three years- counted, the unemployment rate would be 20%.

As it is, unemployment is 9%- and 16 million are counted as unemployed or underemployed.

We have a staggering recover- and a BEA that seems to have lost its ability to do the GDP calculation. In the history of the agency, revisions have never exceeded three tenths of a percent- during the Obama years, the revisions have fluctuated between five tenths and one and a half percentage points. The next revision to third quarter will probably being us down to one and a half percent growth- not bloody likely to have any impact on unemployment.

The first stimulus plan put plenty of money into Obama donors' pockets. Since he has a campaign to fund, Obama is out there stumping for a slush fund to stimulate a new Dollars to Donors program. Fortunately for the taxpayers, he isn't going to get it.

Obama has managed to add five trillion dollars to the debt in less than three years, by the way. He seems have trouble understanding why he would be denied a measly half a trillion more.

His foreign policy is a wonder to behold. His charm offensive with Iran worked so well that they probably have a nuclear weapon. Ditto North Korea- but the media just ignores that "success story". Obama's START Treaty was a flawed document that he insisted be ratified- and he waved away the objection to the Russians' insistence that we dismantle our anti-ballistic missile defenses as baseless attacks. Well, sure seems like the Russians saw those objections as having some credence- they are threatening to pull out of the treaty if we do NOT dismantle our defenses- seems the critics were right, and Obama, as usual, was wrong.

Leaving aside the disaster of his first term, what I, and many others, would like to know is- what are his plans for a second term? The question was first raised by Chris Matthews- and is a very good one.

While I find it hard to believe that anyone in his or her right mind could vote for more of Obama's ineptitude, it seems that his campaign strategy is based on simply holding on to the office for which he is totally unsuited by attacking his opposition. I don't think it will work- when even the most ardently besotted of the liberal press demands details of some kind of a plan, he's going to have to come up with something.

He sure can't run on his record.

GO NEWT GO , you know you're making them nervous by the bluster in their opposition. Don't think he can't beat OBAMA the country is looking to get itself on the right track #1 fiscally # 2 morally , marriages not included but hey, we all have some skeletons !!!!!!

Interesting, "no jo", but you have the facts confused with GOP rhetoric.

The rate of unemployment growth under Bush was higher than at any time since the Great Depression. That rate has slowed dramatically under Obama.

The first stimulus plan was put together under Bush. A hugh chunk of the "new debt" came from simply putting Bush's wars on the books. Iran and North Korea have been working on nuclear capacity long before you ever heard of Obama, the START treaty was supported by every former President.

After overlaying your statements with those facts, you've said nothing.

Nojo, If you have watched any of the republican debates you know Obama doesn't have to run on anything but that he isn't one of them.

I notice you never have anything much good to say about the nominees and what their great plans for our nation are. We all know you will go to any means to twist any fact to make it President Obama's fault because of that I rarely read your post, it just was the last line.

Perhaps Newt will run on his record. Do we really want a president who has been kicked out of the senate on ethics charges and for lying once already?

I'm here in NH as well Steve. Union Leader is intensely bias. Hell, Buchanan even has his own column.

I made a comment to a story in the Union Leader. I guess I've been banned for life, won't let me comment any more. Freedom of Speech?

Uh, Rick- you are the one using campaign spin, not I.

We were at full employment levels during the Bush years until the very end. Obama took office with an unemployment rate of about seven and a half percent- and millions more in the civilian labor force than today's numbers.

The wars were not funded in the Bridget's- but, rather, by continuing resolutions- the same way most wars are funded, as you cannot budget for every contingency. That DOES NOT mean that they were not included in the deficits- they most certainly were.

Speaking of budgets- ever before hear of a president of either party entering his fourth year without ever having a single budget? He started with the Omnibus Spending Bill of 2009- loaded with over nine thousand earmarks- because the Democratic majority in the House wanted to wait until AFTER the election to propose a budget- and it has continued since then. No Budget for 2010- because, after all, it was an election year. No budget for 2011- for the same reason. The Republican led House DID pass a budget for fiscal 2012- but it got voted down in the Democratic led Senate- which also voted down Obama's proposed budget 97 to 0- but never proposed one of their own.

The ARRA was an Obama notion, passed by a democratic house and senate. Convenient re-writing of history does not alter the facts. You may be referring to TARP- which I opposed- but the FACT remains that all TARP funds extended to banks have been repaid- with interest. The TARP funds still outstanding, which will never be repaid? Obama, in contravention of the limits placed on the use of those funds, gave to GM and Chrysler- and were wiped out in their bankruptcy proceedings.

I guess I get it, now. You cannot possibly vote for the things Obama has done to this country- so you tell yourself that none of it is his fault.

That's fine- but why would you support someone so inept that he inherited a disaster, and made it worse?

Obviously, by telling yourself the lie that everything is sunny and fine in the country.

The skies are plaid in Obamaland.

No Jo when the Republicans can come up with a candidate that passes the sniff test then maybe we (all non Republicans/TP) will quit ridiculing the dismal lot you parade before us.

The ONLY candidate I see as passing the sniff test that your group is (isn't) parading is Jon Huntsman. The man doesn't seem to have a checkered past like ALL of your other candidates and yet your party seems to ignore him. That leads me to believe that you can't handle a person of high ethics and integrity. Why is that?

None of your war mongers ever served a day in the service. Well wait I think Paul may have. Not only have none of the other war mongering candidates not served a day but neither have their children or grandchildren. Huntsman is the only exception with two sons in the Navy. I guess the others feel the great unwashed can do their dirty work.

ALL but one of your candidates stink and you won't even recognize the only one that doesn't. I think your party is going to have a VERY hard time getting Obama out of office. I KNOW I'm voting for him.

No joe, you know full well that your statement of this country being at 7 1/2 % unemployment when President Obama took office is blatantly wrong, wrong, wrong. Bush left office knowing the economy was in free fall. It was just starting. Over the next year, the economy crashed, unemployment skyrocketed, real estate took a nose dive, the deficit was enormous due to the lack of revenue and the cost of 2 wars that were never put on the books.

Please don't continue to be one of the group that runs from facts because you don't like the true picture. Like Romney, if you can't tell the truth and try to legitimatize blatant lies, you are showing total disrespect to the intelligence of the majority of Americans.

Just stop.

So, Rick Perry's air force service does not count?

I, personally, think he has the best ideas on the economy and the border- but I admit his debating skills have him sunk before he even gets started.

I am uninterested in anyone's private life, save my own.

I voted for Clinton in 1996 because I thought he was doing a good job. I know a lot of people who did the same- and more than a few who did not, because they objected to him on personal grounds.

Pretty foolish way to cast a vote, in my opinion.

I also know many people who voted for Obama, because they thought they knew what he stood for- and are now very angry at having been lied to. My own father has never voted for a republican in his life- and is planning to do so next year.

Obama is an unmitigated disaster. Those are the facts. Either Romney or Gingrich will be a vast improvement.

While I think Gingrich would make the debates with Obama a highly entertaining spectacle, Romeny can also hold his own.

And watching Gingrich debate Biden will be pure comedy gold.

Oh you know what I forgot about Perry's pilot service. What I can't understand about THAT though is how someone who had a 2.5 GPA like Perry did can be a pilot! How DOES that happen.

Gingrich and Romney are of the same ilk. Both have been around D.C. wayyy too long. Romney has 5...count them...5 sons who have never had the need to serve in the wars Romney promotes. Like I said...there's those who have and then there's the great unwashed. And buddy you and I are the great unwashed.

You never did address Huntsman. Too ethical for you?

AND buddy you better be interested in their personal lives because what you've seen is what you're gonna get and in the republican parade it aint pretty.

On the stump this fine pack<sarcasm>, have promised to eat more of the nation's dwindling revenues by "stepping it up against Iran" and confronting China. Our troops are battle weary after the 10 year failed experiment in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The Koch Bros and Haliburton do business with Iran and are linked with the GOP pretenders.

If you want perpetual wars, further cuts to domestic programs, and outright lies----vote GOP. Warning to the GOP-- Moderates can read.

AF

Newt wasn't kicked out of the senate...or anything else.

You're right Doug, he just decided on his own to resign as Speaker of the House of Representatives because he knew in his heart it was the right thing to do - and also to avoid an embarrassing floor vote to remove him.

If you want perpetual wars, further cuts to domestic programs, and outright lies----vote GOP. Warning to the GOP-- Moderates can read.

The good news being that the republicans actually believe they can take on Iran and China, beat them within months and make this country as safe as they have made the streets of Iraq and Afghanistan. They should be able to do all this for just a tad more than the 10.6trillion they burned through during the 2000-2008 years they held the country and world hostage.

They probably would make unemployment a little lower after they have finally wiped out minimum wages and made serving the military overseas in Iran and China mandatory in order to receive their unemployment benefits.

Libs never tire of the Koch brothers ahaha

Chill, Rubin

Are you calling me a Jew sandtrich?

Not at all, Rubin. That is your name when you click on your usename. Why would I care if you were Jewish?

No it isnt sandtrich...I would be very careful if I were you haha.

http://rubin1234.newsvine.com/

Be careful? Are you threatening me?

Be careful? Are you threatening me?

Yes

Stephan

Rubin,

It's Stephen, not Stephan.

Thank you for the clarification.

Let me ask you something Stephen...are you one of those Jewish banker haters? Just curious as to why you like to bring out the name "Rubin", as if the Cheshire cat has caught a prize haha.

You dont want to play anymore or what?

I'm an active part of OWS but don't subscribe to the notion that bankers are Jewish. Are you presenting a stereotype as such?

I've just never hid behind a username.

I am presenting a stereotype that OWS has been quoted many times as saying. I was just wondering if you were part of the flock.

I've just never hid behind a username

Who is hiding?

Now, as an OWS activist, what are you protesting?

That's a legitimate question. 1) The middle class has all but disappeared in the US--largely due to the squeeze from the right to export jobs. 2) Tuition is not affordable for this generation as it was for my generation. 3) Defense related spending takes all the money while domestic programs get the ax.

I'm just a retired guy that owns a small organic avocado farm but I do have a voice. My goal is to give back more to society than I ever took. Simple. I believe in the America that we were handed before the whorish politicians turned the treasury into their personal piggy banks.

1) The middle class has all but disappeared in the US--largely due to the squeeze from the right to export jobs.

Do you agree with importing labor?

2) Tuition is not affordable for this generation as it was for my generation.

Isnt that a beef with the learning institutions instead of taxpayer liability?

3) Defense related spending takes all the money while domestic programs get the ax.

While there is too much being spent on defense, it certainly isnt to the detriment of domestic programs!!!

Do you type with one finger at a time Sandtrich?

Oh yes it is Kornfed.

While there is too much being spent on defense, it certainly isnt to the detriment of domestic programs!!!

rico, name the domestic programs that have been cut.

Im arguing with a sloth and a snail apparently

Ya know what Kornfed go find it yourself. Until you learn to research you will remain ignorant. I'm going to post things on here once and if you can't read it go back to faux news. They'll spoon feed you all the lies you seem to thrive on.

Oh and by the way...I'm not on YOUR timeline tyvm.

Ya know what Kornfed go find it yourself. Until you learn to research you will remain ignorant

Brilliant, dude

When liberals are bested or lose a "point", they always resort to bringing up the "Faux" News. Is that supposed to be clever, ya know, the play on the spelling? It's old. It's been done to death.

Do you like apples? Fox lies.....How do you like them apples?

See I win because that is the truth and it has been proved to many times to me...But if you believe them you are a sad person.............

Sometimes they use spelling corrections, or the racist card. This is usually how it ends if you have a conversation with these people. Im used to it.

sw philly

Where do you get your news sw philly? MSN? haha. Everybody has an angle. To deny that is to remain ignorant.

I watch every network,read local,national and international papers and use the internet to watch Podcasts and such from sites like Democracynow.org and I read history books...I like to see every viewpoint then form my own unbiased opinion...Most on the right only watch Fox News and that is why they don't know what is real...I have seen too many of their lies be de-bunked and they continue reporting the lies even after a large percentage of people know they are lying because they know the GOP base takes them as the word of God and that is why I refer to them as a cult............

Is this the 3rd grade? ARe you people adults? Name calling ignorant garbage games all you all know how to play?? NOT ALL liberals or REpublicans are bad, stupid, wrong, and any and every crappy comment you can think of. CAN ANY OF YOU IDIOTS SEE WHAT THE FREAKING PROBLEM IN THIS COUNTRY IS.????? THIS CONSTANT BICKERING AND BACKSTABBING FROM PEOPLE ON THIS SITE ON UP TO DC. Everybody needs to quit the crap and find a freakin' way to get along!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! THis country will bnelong to Mexico if we all don't freaking straighten up and put things right. COMPROMISE, EVERYTHING RIGHT DOWN THE MIDDLE AND FAIR FOR ALL CAUSE THIS TWO PARTY BACKSTABBIN' BICKERIN' DAMN NEAR HATFIELD AND McCOY @!$%# DOESN'T WORK. None of the candidates on either side are worth a @!$%#. Their all lying worthless idiots. Some real change in the rules of any political office need to be brought about before any of them will realize they freakin' work for us and NO MORE BLANK CHECKS, NO FREE RIDES, NO FANCY VACATIONS, EQUAL HEALTH INSURANCE AS COMPARED TO GENERAL PUBLIC, PAY INTO SOCIAL SECURITY, NO LIFETIME BENNIES, WHEN YOUR DONE IN OFFICE YOUR DONE JUST LIKE THE REST OF US, NO MORE VOTING FOR YOUR OWN PAY RAISES THIS SHOULD BE DONE BY PUBLIC VOTE EITHER BY STATE OR NATIONALLY. The list of changes goes on and on. GEt over your freakin' selves, and get fighting together before its too late!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Perry IS, WAS and REMAINS the perfect example of the PETER PRINCIPLE - he has risen to his acme of INCOMPETENCE (and shows it every time he opens his MOUTH...if he can remember the topic...OOPS!!)

Politicians ONLY know "infighting" - there is NO COOPERATION (none, whatsoever)

Here's something just for fun:

TPMDC

Poll: Fox News Viewers Less Informed Than Those Who Read No News

David Taintor November 21, 2011, 5:00 PM 43081437

Get this: Fox News is — gasp! — not all that informative, according to Fairleigh Dickinson University’s latest PublicMind poll.

The poll — which asked New Jerseyans where they find news and information about current events — found that Sunday morning news shows are the most informative, while Fox News actually leads people to be less informed than those who consume no news at all.

“The (poll’s) results show us that there is something about watching Fox News that leads people to do worse on these questions than those who don’t watch any news at all,” said Dan Cassino, a political science professor at Fairleigh Dickinson and an analyst for the poll.

The results probably won’t come as much of a shock. In December, TPM reported that a University of Maryland study showed that daily Fox News viewers were the most misinformed, regardless of political party.

There's been something like 5(?), 7(?) polls done that conclude the exact same thing. :) This is gonna drive 'em NUTZ or nuttier.

Fox News is nothing more than the propaganda arm of the right wing. Walter Cronkite must be rolling over in his grave.

Does anyone, anywhere seriously believe that Newt Gingrich would make a good president? Please get real here! Why not just put a mannequin in a dark suit at the desk in the oval office? Every bit as effective, and not beholden to anyone.

I guess Romney is going to sell his house in NH since it didn't help him get the Union Leader endorsement.

Bye, bye, mittens

not in this market...he will turn it into a bunkhouse for a landscaping companies labor force.

Steve, you are absolutely right. They supported our current Failure in Chief obamy. He is such a losing failure.

Pat G - as the article points out (to those who can and do read), in 2008, the Union Leader endorsed McCain, not Obama.

The idea that this highly conservative newspaper would endorse a liberal democratic candidate is beyond ludicrous.

Thanks for a Facts Optional post from the right.

A LOT better than the sex crazed "my color will get me votes" ex-head of the Fed Cain, I

Bo - I was highly skeptical of the 'Fed(eral) Reserve Chairmanship you alluded to as a past position served by Herman Cain ...and I looked it up and found out it was true.

As you no doubt already know, from 1992 thru 1994 he served as the Deputy Director of the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, and from 1995 thru 1996 as the Chairman of that branch. While this is not the same as being head of the Federal Reserve, as in Greenspan's former position, it is far beyond what I expected.

I also read that before his business career, he worked as a mathematician in ballistics, in the civilian employ of the Navy.

What follows is not a political comment.

I cannot reconcile this rather impressive resume with the stumbling, inept person I watched trying to answer almost any question not related to his 9-9-9 tax plan, or other talking point. It makes me wonder if what the public may be seeing is a man suffering from early stages of Alzheimer's Disease.

I could certainly be wrong. But how else can one reconcile the public ineptitude of Cain with a man who was a Federal Reserve branch Chairman, a ballistics mathematician, and a successful CEO of a major restaurant chain?

Thanks for a though-provoking post.

Even given the sorry group of alternatives to President Obama, I am still fearful that some out there will be as crazy as the group who voted the Republicans to Congress in 2010, sending this country spirialing out of control.

The Teapublicans should consider themselves lucky that they have President Obama to trash for their incompetence.

dman this is the story Cain doesn't want to get out:

So now that Cain has proven his candidacy as one to be take notice of (but can you blame us for brushing him off at first? Most of president Obama’s would-be contenders were just laughable.), it is only natural that the serious smears of campaign season would arise against him. First up: A business scandal that so closely mirrors the travesty at Enron, it warranted this headline from Mother Jones Magazine: “Herman Cain’s Enron-esque Disaster: The Story the GOP presidential candidate won’t tell you about his years in corporate America.” If our skepticism of him before was baseless, it certainly isn’t now.

“Cain clearly believes that his pro-business message is what GOP voters want to hear. So much so, in fact, that on Saturday he officially unveiled his candidacy for the 2012 GOP nomination. But scrubbed from Cain’s official story is his long tenure as a director at a Midwest energy corporation named Aquila that, like the infamous Enron Corporation, recklessly drove into the wild west of energy trading and speculation – and ultimately screwed its employees out of tens of millions of dollars,” Mother Jones reports.

According to a massive class action lawsuit against Aquila’s board of directors – including Cain – he allegedly steered employees into heavily investing their retirement savings in company stock, while at the same time shifting their business model from straightforward energy generation to risky energy trading – the kind of corporate greed that infamously brought down Enron, Mother Jones reports. In the suit, it claims that Cain and other top officials violated a 37-year-old federal law that requires employers to responsibly manage the retirement programs for their employees. Their pensions and life savings were lost.

clearly, rico, you are a professional paid poster.

clearly, rico, you are a professional paid poster.

Why, because he strung two or more sentences together and cited actual facts, which could be either refuted or validated by you, tkapo?

Just for laughs, why don't you actually try countering somebody's assertions by citing logical or factual errors, as opposed to making unsubstantiated charges?

LOL...I think that's a compliment in that I know and find the things they try to hide. It takes up a lot of my time tkapa but I want to know the facts. The major news media is owned by something like 3 companies and we get very little actual news. What I'm noticing in my internet searches for the "truth" is that a whole lot of that has been taken off. You have to use other search engines than the ones we are all familar with. I have quit using the phrase "google it" because of this.

I think all Americans should be aware and frightened about what's happening and I think being informed as much as possible is our duty. I swear to you I am NOT a paid poster.

rico: Anyone who spouts this vast conglomerate media conspiracy (3 companies, REALLY??) obviously doesn't know much about the actual media or how to weigh what they read either through search engines or anywhere else. Exactly which one of the three mega companies you cite owns the New Hampshire Union Leader? Data is not wisdom and repeating what you hear regardless of source is and always has been a very, very long way from discerning "facts".

AP-1414066 which part of

The major news media is owned by something like 3 companies and we get very little actual news.

did you not understand?

The art of debate is to debunk what's said....not what you think was said or would like to have been said.

You having a "problem" with me this morning? Why don't YOU tell me the "facts" regarding the ownership of NBC, ABC and CBS?

And AP after rereading your post...it really doesn't make ANY sense at all! TKapo was commenting on the Cain post....I was answering regarding the Cain post.

Sighhhhh these damn Republicans. I can see why they like faux...every lie is spelled out to them.

Well said, Best.

There are a group on here that like to blame everything from the death of Christ to cancer to the failure of our congress on our President. I find it interesting that from the moment he took office, it became all his failures even those that happened before he was elected.

BO, sad but, true. This liberal democrat for 40 years will NOT vote for Obama nor will I vote for Gingrich. Republicans, wake up! Mitt is your only viable choice, if you are not going to support him. BO is correct; Obama can sit back and relax and he will win a second term.

I'll vote for Mitt and so, will a lot of other (Obama discontents). Perhaps, you should ask yourselves do we want Obama for a second term or do you want to be rid of him? Mitt can win if the Republicans can back away from the crazy Tea Party conservatives. They just scare the hell out of most Americans; they are the anti everything group. Look what happened when McCain got saddled with Palin... if you folks don't get it correct this time ...you have only yourselves to blame.

Want Obama out, vote Mitt in.

N from MA When was it that Mitt served in the war? Which of his 5 sons have served? I'm sure all of them would rise to the occasion since Mitt is such a war monger and feels it's so important to this country.

...since Mitt is such a war monger and feels it's so important to this country.

Rico, since Romney has never held national office, and Massachusetts has no separate and distinct foreign policy, except, perhaps with New Hampshire, how can you honestly conclude that Romney is "such a war monger"?

I've looked at his past and present positions on foreign involvement by the U.S. and I'm not seeing a particularly hawkish stance.

I'm all in favor of holding leaders responsible for their words (and actions), but in Romney's case I see no reason to cite his or his children's lack of military service.

So what, exactly, are the factual underpinnings of your remarks?

dman I understand that Mitt is being very careful on what he's saying at this point of the election process. How is his stance on cutting the DOD budget? He said something just recently (last debate he was in?) that made me prick up my ears and dang I can't remember just now. But I did find this with very little searching:

A key element of Romney's case on Iran is that Obama doesn't have the guts to attack Iran, but he does. Romney all but came out and said so at a GOP primary debate focused on foreign policy in Spartanburg, S.C. on Nov. 12.

"If we reelect Barack Obama, Iran will have a nuclear weapon. And if we elect Mitt Romney, if you'd like me as the next president, they will not have a nuclear weapon," Romney said.

"Our current president has made it very clear that he's not willing to do those things necessary to get Iran to be dissuaded from their nuclear folly. I will take a different course," Romney said.

"Mitt Romney will make clear to the Iranian regime through actions -- not just words -- that a military option to deal with its nuclear program remains on the table," the campaign said in a recent release detailing the steps Romney would take to put additional pressure on Iran. "Only if Iran understands that the United States is determined that a nuclear-armed Iran is unacceptable will there be any possibility that Iran will give up its nuclear aspirations peacefully."

Romney's most hawkish comments toward Iran are in his 2010 book, No Apology.

"Iran's rulers and its people must be made to understand that developing nuclear technology carries with it a very real risk: If its fissile material gets into the hands of a group that uses it, Iran itself will suffer devastating retaliation," Romney wrote. "Now is the time to state this plainly, as a deterrent and as a warning -- not following an attack when voices are crying for restraint and a 'proportionate' response."

Romney also said in the book that Iran is "at war" with the U.S.

"The Iranian regime is not simply a threat to us. Any force that finances and orchestrates attacks and provides the bombs and bullets that actually kill American soldiers is our enemy," Romney wrote. "We should not pretend for a moment that Iranian Khomeinists are not at war with the United States."

AND Dman this is what REALLY scares me about him:

Mitt Romney said he believes the world is getting “more dangerous” and is opposed to cutting military spending.

“It is like holding a gun to your own head,” he said during his visit to BAE Systems in Nashua today.

The Republican candidate zoned in on military defense and foreign policy issues as he addressed employees of the defense and security company.

He blamed President Obama for the failure of the "super committee" to come to an agreement, citing his proposed reduction of $600 billion in defense spending.

“The idea that we are going to devastate our military is completely unacceptable,” said Romney.

The solution to preventing this would be to take money from programs like Medicaid and return the money to the states, which according to Romney would “more than compensate” for any possible defense cuts.

He added that the president has “weakened” America and is worried about his popularity over everything else.

“We don’t make the world safer by trying to be popular, we make the world safer by demanding respect,” said Romney.

Now tell me...he served when? How many of HIS children have been on the frontlines?

Keep in mind that Romney also said "If all else fails...". In other words- he will do everything except war to get Iran to comply- but if ALL ELSE FAILS- he will look at a first strike option.

A good leader keeps ALL options on the table. Obama wants to have Iran leave us alone so we can leave them alone. nice thought, but I ran sees it differently. They have two strikes in mind- 1st: Israel, 2nd the U.S.

Romney's not a warmonger- but a realist that looks at all options.

and Rico- when did BHO serve in the military?

Republicans will never elect Mitt Romney, he is a Mormon and that disqualifies him, they have tied religion into their politics to such an extent that something that should not matter actually matters most, they just can't admit it. They can deal with his flip flops, they can deal with his health care plan, they can deal with almost any flaws as evidenced by all the things they can deal with about all their other candidates. The only thing they can't deal with is Romney's and Huntsmann's religion, they deserve that, they have brought that on themselves, they tied their politics and religion into a tight little knot that can't be untied by 2012. Whats the expression "if you live by the sword you will die by the sword". The two best candidates they have to pull independents and flip some democrats have been sidelined by the republican party constantly mixing religion and politics for well over a decade.

"If we reelect Barack Obama, Iran will have a nuclear weapon. And if we elect Mitt Romney, if you'd like me as the next president, they will not have a nuclear weapon," Romney said.

Sorry, Rico. While I can understand your mistrust of Romney, the above quote is what I term pre-election spin. I seem to recall Obama saying some similar things, and one could (I do not) even point at his raising U.S. troop levels in Afghanistan as evidence that he is a war monger.

Obama on Iran's nuclear program in September of 2004:

"He added, '[L]aunching some missile strikes into Iran is not the optimal position for us to be in' given the ongoing war in Iraq. 'On the other hand, having a radical Muslim theocracy in possession of nuclear weapons is worse.' Obama went on to argue that military strikes on Pakistan should not be ruled out if 'violent Islamic extremists' were to 'take over'," Joshua Frank wrote January 22, 2005, for Antiwar.com.

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Barack_Obama:_U.S._presidential_election,_2008/On_war_with_Iran

Romney, more than anything else, is a man that deeply wants to be president. He is not as bad as Gingrich, who would f*ck a dog with scarlet fever to win next year's election. But he is bad enough.

As to what policies he would pursue once in office, I would be somwhat guided by his single term as governor of my home state, [The Peoples Republic of] Massachusetts. He did not seek to roll back all social programs. He even instituted the beta-version of Obama-care, and he left the state in reasonably good order when his term was actually finished [are you listening, Sarah Palin?].

So among the probable GOP candidates Romney is, in my estimation, the best option. It doesn't mean I'd favor him in next year's election. But I'd much rather he were running against Obama than any other of his GOP rivals.

Personally I'd like to see Huntsman who I believe is the only ethical republican candidate.

Romney, more than anything else, is a man that deeply wants to be president. He is not as bad as Gingrich, who would f*ck a dog with scarlet fever to win next year's election. But he is bad enough.

I laughed out loud on that one....it's so true!

I too liked that Mitt DID do something at least about health care in his state. I just don't want another republican war monger. Just sick of war. United States has become known as a warring nation. Not something I believe in.

Mitt Romney said he believes the world is getting “more dangerous” and is opposed to cutting military spending.

This quote does not scare me as much as it does you. I actually agree with him that the world is becoming more dangerous. I do not necessarily believe that a bigger pentagon budget is the only, or even the best path to greater safety.

Safety, to my mind, lies in making better choices of where, when and why we commit our military forces, and yes, George W., if you are reading this, I am thinking of your half-assed and dishonestly promoted invasion of Iraq.

On that front, I don't see in Romney a man who is ready to charge into unnecessary foreign entanglements, just one who is embracing the primary-time, republican litmus test of ideological correctness: that all military spending is good.

Like I said. He ain't perfect. But neither is he a George W Bush doppelganger.

Now tell me...he served when? How many of HIS children have been on the frontlines?

Rico, I honestly do not care. First off, he is not such a hawk in my estimation and second, his lack of military service is a red herring in debates regarding the validity and worth of his [probable] military policies.

Would you feel differently about the Iraq war if Bush had served as an actual fighter pilot in Vietnam, and if Dick Cheney had been a Green Beret instead of a clever draft-dodger? Conversely, was our nation's involvement in WWII a mistake because FDR had never served in combat?

If Romney begins advocating wasteful and bloody intervention in new conflicts, or [again like Bush] indulges in second-hand slandering of the military service of his rivals [McCain & Kerry], then I'll take a second look at his military service [or lack thereof]. But until then, I really do not care.

dman-353357

Well said; all your posts.

dman I do care. It matters to me that the "leaders" of our country benefit from these wars without personally sacrificing anything. Bush with oil, Cheney with Halliburton/oil and all their buddies with stock mingled in both. Just for grins I'd like to know the wealth of these robber barons prior and post. Maybe, just maybe if they had some risk or had seen the horrors of war up close and personal they wouldn't be so cavalier about involving other peoples children. In this "volunteer" service climate the volunteers are the inner city kids trying to escape poverty not Mitts sons. There is something very wrong with that.

War sucks....and what sucks more is that people get wealthy from it hence promote it. IMHO

Well, like I said, our involvement in Iraq would have been just as ill-advised and rash even if Bush had served in an active combat role in Vietnam, or if Cheney had been a decorated, special forces operative.

Conversely, I supported his initial foray into Afghanistan as both necessary and (initially) well-executed. If he had been a former combat pilot it would not have made this war more or less justifiable.

War may suck, but it is not always avoidable, and the dividing line between which wars we must fight and which we rightly avoid has little of nothing to do with the former military experience of the sitting President.

Kennedy was a decorated naval officer in WWII, which did not stop him from initiating our involvement in Vietnam. Johnson who also served in the Navy during WWII, escalated our involvement. Obama, our current President has never served in the Military, yet has escalated our involvement in Afghanistan and involved us, if indirectly, in the Libyan uprising.

Some of these military ventures may have been right, others wrong. But I fail to see any correlation between past military service of the President making the decision to commit U.S. forces and validity of the war.

So, no, I do not care about Romney's, Obama's, Gingrich's or any other candidate's military experience. It just does not seem important or relevant.

clearly, rico, you are a professional paid poster.

Hmmm...is there really such a thing as a professional paid poster? HaHa! If so, that's what I want to be. It would go a long way toward solving the national unemployment problem if we got paid to post here. But who would pay us??

I hear Newt hasn't raised any money... not that he'd be paying me.

I can relate with almost feeling physically sick. I have been feeling that way for the past few years with Obama. He has done a few good things but for the most part, he is an utter failure, no credibility, not trustworthy, and doesn't even know "who he is" politically, ethically, spiritually or the direction he is going.

The idea there are more or less half the people in this country willing to vote for them is enough to make you sick about our country.

ZB - Or it might make you consider the possibility that they are not totally wrong (and that you are not totally right).

I voted for Obama in 2008, and I may do so again in 2012. I am certainly no fan of Gingrich, or even Romney, whom I view as rational, if overly flexible, in his views. But I cannot ignore some of the failures of the Obama Administration, most notably his health care reform, which fixed very little about which the public was concerned and basically gutted the political power of the Democrats, making them unable to stand up to the ideological rigidity of the Republicans.

Yes, most of the probable Republicans are frightening, either due to their obvious incompetence, or in their blind adherence to ideology (take a bow, Ms. Bachmann).

But while I do not blame Obama for this recession, I do feel is wavering leadership has not aided the recovery. So, if he is faced with a moderate Republican candidate next November, I may pull the lever for a Republican candidate, something I have not done very often.

dman if you pull the lever for any of the GOP circus clowns you will get exactly what you asked for, and you will deserve it. If you believe that Obama's leadership is wavering, it is still keeping our heads above water. Any of the GOPTP candidates will lead us straight to hell-in-a-handbasket starting with WWIII.

dman if you pull the lever for any of the GOP circus clowns you will get exactly what you asked for, and you will deserve it.

terriels, sorry, I'm not buying your assessment of either the entire slate of Republican candidates, or of Obama. Not every possible GOP candidate is an adherent to Tea-Party ideology, or likely to lead our nation into WWIII, and Obama has not been a particularly good leader.

I agree that he did not create our current predicament. But his ridiculous and maddening attempt at health care "reform" was a mistake in of itself, as well as both a fatal expenditure of political capital and a misapplication of our nation's energies at a time when the economy should have been our primary concern.

Moreover, as several liberal commentators have remarked, Obama has done a poor job of establishing connections to both his political friends and and his political enemies. This was a task well understood by both Clinton and Reagan. While the S[t]upor Committee has been vacillating between opposing ideologies, where has Obama been?

After 3 years, Obama impresses me as being very similar to Jimmy Carter: an intelligent, good and decent man, with absolutely no idea how to get things done in Washington.

So... I see no clear and obvious choice in next year's election, and I suspect it will still be ambiguous next year. Chances are, Obama's fate will be sealed by the state of the economy in 2012. If it is improving he will win. If it is still stagnant, or deteriorating, he will lose, unless he's running against Perry, Cain or Bachmann. This nation is just not collectively stupid enough to vote of any of these 3 [loser] candidates.

dman, just who is the moderate? I don't call wanting to overturn Roe v Wade as a moderate stand. Nor is person-hood from conception that Romney also endorsed. That is so radical that even conservative Mississippi rejected the person-hood amendment.

I don't call removing child labor laws as moderate, do you? Newt also wants to privatize social security and that is a hardly a moderate ideal.

Except for Huntsman all the rest are all so far right that can't separate their radical beliefs from truth and history. Like Bachman with her going to default the country but it wouldn't be a default because she would call it by another name so she could claim to be against defaulting the country. But a default by any other name is still a default.

Now that I think about it you were funning me, there is no moderate republican running.

Women need to remember that we didn't even get the right to vote until 1918. Do we really want somebody in office who'll send us backward almost a 100 years? Wether you believe in abortion or not really isn't the point, some of these candidates want to take away your right to chose in almost everything. Mississippi not only "rejected" the whole person-hood amendment they said "hell No" to it. Newt sure would love to privatize Social Security and he'll ddddamn well find a way to profit from it to boot!! Seniors and those with disabilities are barely making it now. Let Newt have his way with this and widows and single mothers with disabilites and/or dependents with disabilities will suffer the most. WAKE UP. IF we have to all us need to vote "NONE OF THE ABOVE".

Too bad you don't know an "idiot" when you see one...We have the IDIOT'S idiot in the W.H. right now.

ABO

Aggie

I have a feeling you are a Rush listener or even worse a follower of FOX. Just the other day, there was an independent study. It noted viewers of FOX are dumber than the average American. Where ever you get your information, your post proves, you do not know fact from fiction.

Let me get you up to date.

Bush lied about WMD. Cost our nation thousands of lives and trillions of dollarsw.

Newt told his wife he wwas going to divorce her while she was in the hospital, recovering from cancer surgery.

Rick is not capable of debating a corpse, let alone representing our country, in a spelling bee.

Michelle cannot look in the correct camera let alone read off a telepromter. (YES Republicans use teleprompters all the time.) Too bad Bush couldn't read.

Herman will attempt to get votes by propositioning every female in the Tea Party.

And finally Aggie there is no Santa Claus.

Old Paul,

Salamanders (Newts) are not naturally "slimy." Another name for a newt is an eft. Newts are amphibians, which are cold blooded creatures, living in and out of the water. They are slimy because they wallow in mud. So, if one would describe Newt, he is an efting muck-er!

Hey if you don't believe me, look it up! Sometimes the truth hurts.

Take it back-Mud is slimey(ish), Newt(s) Gingrich are/is slimey because, you are right he is mucky(slimey). The truth is Gingrich is slimey, plain and simple-doesn't hurt me-probably never will.

Agree totally with the last line of phillossifer. More people in America need to think like that instead of trying to get as much from the government as possible.

I guess asking for fair laws is too much to ask from our government.

When the republicans privatize social security, I wonder just who will get rich from that, I bet it won't be the people. Then those companies will donate to the politicians that got them such a gravy deals while trying to get as much from the government as possible and give back as little as possible to the people.

We sure do expect a lot, we the people.

with that attitude you'll get exactly what your willing to stand up and fight for, absolutely nothing but screwed!

Exactly why "we the people" need to stand up and be heard. DO SOMETHING, call, write, stop by, picket, whatever it takes to get the attention of your Congressmen and Senators!! This is America, not the united states of MEXICO!

No Habla Espanol, This is America! THats' what my new bumper sticker says. My kids think I'm gonna get shot or beat up for it. Does'nt that say it all??

I will vote for Newt if he is the Republican nominee. That's the only endorsement he deserves.

Shouldn't it be about the issues? Would you rather vote for someone who you don't agree with and don't think will make a good President? Unfortunately, politics often comes down to the lesser of two evils...

@wilman

I totally agree! It's the issues we need to be looking at.

All the newsvine posters who are bashing the Republicans, I seriously doubt that if the Republicans had a nominee like Obama, (interpet that anyway you will)they still would vote along party lines. Thats whats wrong with this country. I' too voted for Clinton in '96. Thought for the most part he was doing a good job. And Im about right as center as you can get without going to the extreme.

Hindsight being 20/20, wonder if Obama was vetted back when he was campaigning for office, if he would have been voted in. But the Liberal media, downplayed everything about Obama. Their goal was to put in a black president no matter what.

I personally like what Newt has to say, except for the immigration.

He who is without fault, caste the first stone.

Newt Gingrich is a perfect example of all that is wrong with politicians and our government. He is a perfect example of all that needs to be changed in politics.

He accepted millions of dollars from Freddie mac and from health insurance companies to represent their interests in washington.

He has been involved in scandes and unethical practices while holding office. He has lyed, cheated, and pandered to special interests. He is also a very unfriendly nasty man who will say whatever to gain votes. Why anyone would we ever want him as our president is beyond me.

lol...

Tom, I think you overstated your case against Newt, and you really confuse me with your rant against privatizing SS and Medicare. I do agree with you on Bachman, however. She has long been my first choice: She is of sound character, a capable executive, and is right on each and every issue. She would make an outstanding President, just too bad she cannot seem to get much "traction".

Tom (and Unit), you are so right about Michelle. Plus she is a fantastic student of American history, who'd surely leave Newt reeling in amazement at her grasp of the Founding Fathers' solid agreement as to the nature of the nation that they brought forth on this continent.

The Unit Toad, I have been misreading your post. They are much funnier when read as the sacarsism they were meant to be.

I totally agree, Bachman for president. Marcus would be in heaven being first lady.

Tom that was funny

and gee, she has a law degree from rectal roberts university were she to be the RETHUG nominee, she would defeat herself with her BIG MOUTH of MISTAKE ASSERTIONS

Bachmann acts like she's on an unusually high dose of thorazine. Just what we need, a president who can stare down other nation's leaders because she never blinks.

She'd be great in a remake of The Stepford Wives.

His name is Ron Paul and he has been preaching the teachings of the constitution his entire time in office. He wants to cut 5 departments of the federal government and restore those responsibilities to the states. He will pull our troops out of every conflict, end the war on drugs (allow the states to ban/allow/tax whatever they want). He doesn't believe in foreign aid because: "it is taking money from poor people here and giving it to rich leaders in a poor country." RON PAUL = PERSONAL FREEDOM.

Ron Pauls voting record don't quite jibe with the Ron Paul Fantasy. Check his voting record out, he votes for the 1%. The last two opportunties to vote to end the war in Iraq. The first vote Ron didn't bother and the second vote he voted with the republicans to continue the war with no end in sight. Hardly the vote of someone who claims to be so against all the wars.

For the people he voted against raising minimum wage.

Seems to me Paul talks one story and then does another.

or moe, larry or curly???

"He (Ron Paul) wants to cut 5 departments of the federal government and restore those responsibilities to the states." That's good, and what's even better, is that he can actually remember which five.

It's not good Toad. The federal government demands basic minimum standards. Take medical for instance. After a woman has her breasts removed because of cancer federal law states that the insurance company has to provide reconstruction. If insurance is left up to the states they can set their minimum care down to none.

It's the same across the board on any program moved to the states rather than being held by the federal government.

You have to convince republicans to go with Ron Paul first then worry about the rest.

funny isn't it - for supposedly running for the RETHUG nomination for PRESIDENT, he can't even convince his own PARTY to NOMINATE him.

He doesn't believe in foreign aid because: "it is taking money from poor people here and giving it to rich leaders in a poor country."

Ron Paul might be shocked to learn that most of the foreign aid money spent by the U.S. government actually goes to pay the salaries and benefits of Americans who work in the diplomatic field or professionals who work for USAID or other foreign aid projects. Cutting foreign aid would result in cutting jobs for Americans who work in the field of foreign service. Our national unemployment rate is already too high.

His presidental dreams were destroyed the day his parents named him, "Newt".

Gringrinch the LIZARD...

It's n wonder why Newt is so mean and EVIL look what he had to go through...Can you imaginethe bullying? the angst...this guy reminds me of pinky and the brain cartoon, Newt is out for revenge.The Brain looks just like Newt OMG !!!!

You make an interesting comparison. Castro and Obama. Nice!

LOL LOL LOL

HAY! That's SKOOLED - don'cha NO NUTHING???

lol lol lol

Hmmmm, not a lot of difference. Communist vs socialist w/Muslim/Sharia Law agenda, crook (Fast & Furious,Solyndra,etc.). Anyone but Obama!

hello, how stupid, newts a racist, a man who cheat on his wife constantly, the Republican only have one choice in this election and that is to vote Democratic

get the fu$#K real, there are no real Republican candidates running in this election, don't get fu@!#$ked like the tea party people did in 2010, electing a bunch of greedy, Racist, puppets

Prove Newt is a racist? Being from Detroit, you know some racism eh? How's Detroit doing since Colman Young was your Mayor? Detroit has been under Democrat leadership for almost 40 years is one of the most f-ed up cities in America.

Paul-Florida.....

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2011/05/12/alter_gingrich_using_thinly-veiled_racism_against_obama.html

Newt is far worse than merely racist. He is anti-democracy. Really, Newt is an equal opportunity elitist adulterous arrogant megalomania-cal xenophobic hater.

But not on the same level as Clinton ....right?

Have you or do you think you'll ever need to make use of the family medical leave act that Clinton was directly responsible for? Did Newt support this? Does'nt Bill only have one wife? For Gods' sake at least he has more class than Newt and has musical talent too!

You think Clinton and his cigar had class??? That is really a reach...

J.A-522495.....

Quote......But not on the same level as Clinton ....right?.....EndQuote

Is Bill Clinton running for POTUS ? Why not drag up Huey Long ? Huey's not running either......but Newt is.

Ian, then why do you and your socialist friends keep attacking Bush...and even Reagan? And why do you keep bragging about Clinton??? I can understand that you dont want to talk about it....but you cant make rules for only the other side.....

J.A-522495......

Did anyone (other than you) mention Bush, or Reagan in this thread?

It's not only socialists that attack Bush. It seems many in the Tea Party pretended never to have known the man once the full impact of the Bush/Cheney debacle became known. Thus, (they created) the (new) "Tea Party" so as to fully distance themselves from their (publicly) former (secretly current) hero.

But, it seems you and your fascist friends keep attacking Clinton and now Obama. At least Clinton's sexual escapades were between consenting adults of opposite sex. That is certainly more than some in your current crop of candidates can say.

Now, back to (the topic) Newt Gingrich. Once you folks fully embrace Newt (like you have any real choice), your hollow assertions of "morality" will finally implode. Mr. Gingrich is mostly amoral with frequent forays into outright and premeditated immorality.

Don't believe us. Consult those in his wake of human collateral damage. Start with his former high school geometry teacher (aka his first wife, Jackie Battey).

Move on to review the experience of Marianne Ginther with whom he had an adulterous affair leading to his second "marriage". Don't forget L.H. Carter who recalls Gingrich commenting that Battey (his first wife) was "not young enough or pretty enough to be the wife of the president. And besides, she has cancer."

Please don't forget the current Mrs. Gingrich (23 years his junior), Callista. She has first-hand knowledge of Newt's willingness (really eagerness) to engage in dishonest, adulterous, extra-marital affairs all while hypocritically pointing his pudgy finger at others.

But, we hear you folks have forgiven Newt since he "found Jesus". Isn't that right? How convenient is that? Why don't you start a petition to have Charlie Manson released from prison. It seems he has, from time to time (when it suits his purpose), also "found Jesus".

It is one thing to advise to "go and sin no more". It is quite another to solicit the serial adulterer and pathological liar to be your candidate for the highest office in our land.

Surely, you folks are close to bottom. Don't you wonder? Who knows what (or who) else in Mr. Gingrich's reprehensibly sordid past will slither into the public domain (or when)? Of course, we (democrats) have faith that Newt will not disappoint (us). Certainly, we hope it happens at the most inopportune (for you) time. We can only thank you for your apparent willingness to flirt with Mr. Gingrich who is nothing other than a walking political time-bomb.

Ian...Yea, yea. You think all dems were good and all republicans bad....really smart....I thought that Manson was a democrat leftist protestor. Like you and your buddies...still think so....