E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
Updated 10:04 p.m. ET
Newt Gingrich has won the South Carolina Republican primary, capping off a remarkable comeback for his presidential bid that reshapes the trajectory of the battle for the GOP nomination as the race now heads to Florida and beyond.
The results mark the end of a tumultuous week in politics that saw Gingrich erase and then overcome the lead former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney had in the Palmetto State following his victory in the Jan. 10 New Hampshire primary. Gingrich came on strong in the closing days of the campaign, looking to rally under his banner the many conservatives unwilling to get behind Romney, who had sought to posture himself as the eventual nominee.
"We don't have the kind of money at least one of the candidates has," Gingrich said in his victory remarks. "But we do have ideas and we do have people. And we proved here in South Carolina that people power with the right ideas beats big money."
VIEW full South Carolina primary results
Gingrich spent most of his speech Saturday night lashing out at "media elites" in New York and Washington, D.C., while castigating President Obama. He leaned on wonky explanations of policy to draw contrasts with the president, whom Gingrich accused of representing values antithetical to "classical" America.
"It's not that I am a good debater. It's that I articulate the deepest-felt values of the American people," said Gingrich, who admitted at a Thursday debate to sometimes thinking in grandiose terms.
Amidst cheers of "Newt can win," Newt Gingrich calls the S.C. race "humbling" and "sobering" to see so many supporters rally behind his political message.
The evening's second-place finisher, Romney, drew on elements of his stump speech, but also started to preview rhetoric that will become part of his pitched case versus Gingrich in Florida's primary on Jan. 31.
"We're now three contests into a long primary season ... We've still got a long way to go, and a lot of work to do," Romney said in his remarks Saturday night.
Gingrich, Romney said, had joined Obama in launching a "frontal assault on free enterprise," referencing the ex-speaker's attack on Romney's record at Bain Capital.
"Those who pick up the weapons of the left today will find them turned against us tomorrow," Romney said. "If Republican leaders want to join this president in demonizing success...then they're not going to be fit to be our nominee."
After finishing second in the South Carolina primary, Mitt Romney says the race is "getting even more interesting," and tells the crowd, "there is so much worth fighting."
The results in South Carolina only raise the stakes for the battle in Florida, a traditionally expensive contest where voting is closed to only registered Republicans, and the winner is awarded all of the delegates.
The Romney campaign is hoping that contest will be its firewall. They appeared poised to make their argument versus Gingrich even more sharply in the state. They circulated a “flashback” video on Saturday reminding voters of the ethics investigation Gingrich had faced during his speakership.
The former speaker made reference to the next primary several times in his victory speech Satuday.
"With your help, we are now moving onto Florida and beyond," he said, later asking for supporters' help in reaching out to Floridians.
Gingrich, who will appear on NBC's "Meet the Press" on Sunday morning, hopes to capitalize there on his finish in South Carolina, which was driven in part by late deciders, who broke decisively in his direction in the last few days of the campaign. That stretch saw two debate performances by Gingrich, on Monday and Thursday nights. Almost two-thirds of voters said the debates were an important factor in their decision, and Gingrich won about half of them.
More broadly, core elements of the GOP base in South Carolina – conservatives, Tea Party supporters and evangelical Christians – broke for Gingrich. And the former speaker even edged Romney in two important constituencies for the former Massachusetts governor: voters who said electability in November was their most important concern in a nominee, and voters who said the economy was their top issue.
The South Carolina results underscore Romney’s lingering inability to overcome skepticism from conservatives about electing him as their standard-bearer against Obama this fall.
RELATED: Conservatives, evangelical Christians rebuff Romney in South Carolina
Gingrich had erased Romney’s lead by abandoning his previous pledge to wage a “relentlessly positive” campaign. The former speaker eventually embraced a strategy of drawing strong contrasts with Romney and benefited from the negative advertising run on his behalf by a super PAC – a practice Gingrich loudly denounced in Iowa, where he saw his poll numbers collapse amid attacks by a pro-Romney super PAC.
His victory provides, if nothing else, a symbolic imprimatur; the winner of the South Carolina primary has gone on to win the nomination in each Republican primary since the contest’s inception in 1980.
The South Carolina results capped one of the most unpredictable weeks in the presidential campaign thus far, a week that saw two candidates leave the race and the veneer of inevitability the Romney campaign had built for itself erode by the end.
Watch Newt Gingrich's appearance on NBC's "Meet the Press" on Sunday
Recertified results in the Iowa caucuses found that he had actually lost the contest by a handful of votes to former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum. And Romney has fought to withstand some of the most intense scrutiny he’s faced during the campaign; critics have assailed his private equity career and demanded Romney release his tax returns – demands which only reached a fever pitch after Romney estimated he pays an effective rate of 15 percent of his income in taxes.
Moreover, Romney’s performance in South Carolina will speak volumes about his fractious relationship with movement conservatives. He’s struggled at times to break through a ceiling on his support from those voters, who are skeptical of Romney’s past conversion on abortion rights and his embrace of authorship of a health care law as governor that closely resembles Obama’s 2010 reform law.
Nonetheless, the fact that Gingrich has arrived at the precipice of political resurrection – again – this cycle is itself remarkable.
Political observers had questioned when, not if, he would drop out after suffering missteps at the outset of his campaign that led to the defection of virtually all of his top staff last June. But Gingrich stuck with it and climbed to the top of the polls in Iowa, only to see his numbers implode again after weathering attacks from super PACs and Texas Rep. Ron Paul’s campaign.
In South Carolina, the former speaker has been aided by a variety of factors contributing to his potential comeback. He’s scored major points with voters with a couple of strong debate performances this week, particularly by way of launching acerbic attacks on the media. His angry refusal to answer allegations made by an ex-wife topped headlines coming out of a debate on Thursday – the same day that saw Texas Gov. Rick Perry drop his own campaign and endorse Gingrich.
GOP candidate Rick Santorum talks about the state of the race and reaffirms that he wants to be the voice for those people in America that don't have one in government
The winnowed field (Jon Huntsman also ended his campaign and endorsed Romney), only reduced the number of candidates threatening to divide the anti-Romney vote in South Carolina.
Santorum, crowned the winner of the Iowa caucuses upon further review of the vote totals, had doggedly criticized both Romney and Gingrich in hopes of rallying conservatives behind his unflashy, if consistent, record.
"Three states, three winners -- what a great country," he said in remarks Saturday evening, vowing to continue his campaign through Florida and subsequent nominating contests.
NBC’s Jamie Novogrod, Garrett Haake, Alex Moe and Andrew Rafferty contributed.
The ABR = Anyone but Romney vote is hard at work today in SC! lol
It really doesn't matter - President Obama will win re-election handily, compliments of the Republican Party not being able to find a viable candidate!
The House will also flip back to Democratic control - you heard it here first! ;o)
No, you've made this statement several times before. However, I agree. Democrats only need to gain 25 seats to get control over the House, and only another 25 to have an equal majority to what the Republicans have now.
Mr. Anon,
If I had the choice between a majority in the House or the Senate...
I'll take the House any day.
In my district here in IL, the deadbeat daddy Joe Walsh, doesn't stand a chance running up against Tammy Duckworth.
Obama will win re-election handily? With 8.5% unemployment and a record 15 trillion in debt, the highest from all President's administrations combined, handed down to our grandchildren?? Ok. live in your fantasy world that Obama is doing a great job and is getting jobs back to the American people while fundraising, travelling to Disney, playing rounds of golf and whatever else. Obama will have a lot to answer for! Whether it is from Gingrich or Romney, Obama has better be prepared for answers to his dismal record! As I wrote in the previous post, If Gingrich is the nominee, he will clobber Obama in the debates, even by allowing him to have a teleprompter. If the nominee is Romney, Obama has better have answers for him on how to create jobs because apparently Obama does not have a clue about what it takes to get jobs. Either of these candidates can do a better jobs than Obama. The people do not want to give Obama 4 more years of nothing! He will be voted out of office.
I suppose you have a crystal ball and can predict this to happen. Whatever. Time will tell what will happen.
You are so right Feisty - you need you some more democrats. They are just doing wonders there in Illinois.
So what now Feisty - Quinn raised taxes by a whopping 2/3, and yet your state is in worse shape.
And as far as Obama goes - you are right again - total lock.
I mean he is riding the wave - 1/09 approval rating at 69%. a year later 57%. 1/11 47%. Now 44%.
Plus he's passed the wildly popular Obamacare and the Stimulus totally kept unemployment below 8%.
Why he's Parker Lewis - dude canot possibly lose.
Good golly - who has the worst fiscal policy - Obama or Quinn?
The greedy battling it out with the greedy ... and the sheep going ... bah bah bah in delight ............
And Bush being forgotten in the rear view mirror ... Obama's problem now ..............
And yet Obama has turned Bush's job losses completely around. We now have job gains every month, and the DOW is just as high as it was before the recession. Naturally, unemployment lowers some time after the economy is stabilized.
Misleading statement. The debt was 120% of the GDP after WWII. In addition, the deficit for 2009 was predicted to be $1.2 Trillion anyways due to the recession. Yes, Obama added to it, but during a recession you increase spending and cut taxes. Obama has proposed to make up for this through ending the Bush Tax cuts for higher income people, but his proposals were rejected.
All Gingrich can do is claim standards for his party (like that Bold Reagan Conservative nonsense) and have to reverse his previous positions. Also where does this "teleprompter" nonsense originate? I will be checking into this.
Obama has created millions of jobs through the stimulus. Romney's record on jobs, however, is dubious. All Obama needs to ask is "why are my taxe rates higher than yours, even though you have a far higher income?".
Yet Obama does far better in polls than Gingrich or Romney.
As I said, the Democrats need a mere 25 seats to return the House to Democratic control. And considering that the approval this congress is even worse than that of the last congress...
UH...sorry Fiesty, but I've been saying this for the past seven months. Romney will be the nominee and Obama will be re-elected in a landslide which will have a significant coat-tail effect and enable the Democrats to take back the house.
YOU HEARD IT HERE FIRST! :-)
Obama/Biden 2012
Spankey, I've wished to engage you for a while. However, rather than discussing the President, I want you to defend Newt Gingrich's statements that "America is becoming a Secular Socialist Nation" and that "America Should be a Christian Nation". Obama has acknowledged that this country is not just a Christian nation, but one of many faiths. This alone makes him superior to Gingrich.
Stop saying this. I predicted these things long before you made this statement.
@Dee patriot --- you really are a republibot --- you get all of your talking points directly from Rusha dn Shawn and are repeateded ad naseum by EVERY Rubublipuke on the internet. Do you have ANY original thoughts?????
This is all such total BS! Nobody is even close to a majority. The Evangelicals have split off on their own. It will take either a miracle or a real candidate to win in November.
Mr. Anon - it makes him superior on that issue.
But as you well know the primary issue this time around is the economy.
On the economy Obama is not superior. In fact he is a failure, according to non other than Obama. He made so great proclamations and promises on the economy and unemployment. He was flat wrong.
Time for a new direction.
Mr. Anon - what do you suggest Illinois does now?
Spanky, You think Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich are sorry they failed to get on the Virgina ballot?
So you admit this to be the case? In that case, people who care about social issues (atheists, gay rights advocates, non-bigots) have every reason to vote for Obama.
Now, Newt Gingrich boasts "Reaganomics". If Reaganomics works, then why didn't it work, for all people, Reagan? Why did Reagan turn around 35 years of reducing the debt with this new strategy?
Also, Obama never promised unemployment below 8%. (http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2012/jan/06/amid-good-jobs-report-and-old-promise-resurfaces/). I don't want to see this claim coming from your mouth ever again on this forum.
It should not be up to ignorant bigots in South Carolina who will represent the next Republican Nominee..However, they really do not have a choice.: They have a Bigot that speaks the same language as they do.
Then, they have a millionaire that is arrogant, and many people of South Carolina are pretty much living in poverty. Mitt Romney saying that he knows what it is like to get "a pink slip" does not sit well among these people that have no hope for a job.
The third choice: Santorum...He is all for birth control and sanctimonious BS...Not even in South Carolina people are that sanctimonious.
Ron Paul is talking about the golden rule. WRONG CROWD. These crowd are all happy triggers...can't wait to go out and use those brand new guns that they got for Christmas....
Not many choices....I guess, like they say in South Carolina: "THEY ARE STICKING WITH THE PIG"
THey have a reason Anon. They also have plenty of reason not to vote for Obama, you know, like the fact that he has failed.
Take your comment that Obama created millions of jobs with the stimulus. Uh, yeah, almost magical - you take a trillion and toss it around and stuff happens. Well at least until the money runs out, which it has. So what now?
Anon Obama's people {Roemer] made the promises. Politifact? Nope, plain and simple Agency law. He's the boss applesauce.
Fiscal issues trump. Social issues are, thank god, irrelevant.
The article is about the GOP race, why do you people always post your politically biased positions on a story that has nothing to do with your biased opinions? Save it for when someone might care..probably never.
Spanky- You are so right about a new direction ... the tea party blockade needs to be removed so we can move forward .... and that's what the country will accomplish this next election ....
And for those who want to let Bush off the hook ... not yet ... not yet ...............
Spanky, Looks like Mr. Anon doesn't think you have the right to free speech.
Spanky, once again, you failed to respond to my statement about the Bush Tax Cuts as a means to pay for the stimulus (half of which, by the way, was additional tax cuts).
In addition, 2009's deficit is from Bush's budget. From there, you can see that Obama's deficits are actually lower than Bush's last one. And I don't think you've responded to my point about Obama turning Bush's job losses to job gains.
Funny thing about those rights Anon talks about.
Obama is clearly anti-gay marraige. In fact is seems to be a racial thing. Prop 8 here in Cali won largely because of Obama - huge black turnout, huge break in favor of the prop by black voters.
So it would seem that Obama himself and a huge part of his base do not support social issues.
Interesting, no?
Anon?
I all in on Bush's tax cuts. I like to keep as much of my coin as possible.
Obama's deficits are lower?
Let's see - which year in Bush's term had a deficit equal to 2011 or the projected 2012?
It is so funny to hear the left say Obama will Win! He has the worst record of any President in History! He makes Jimmy Cater look Great. And as far as the House and Senate The tea party and the American People spoke and took the house back and will take the senate and the white house back! soon America will begain to rebuild what Obama has destroyed!
I love how you choose to avoid the matter of the economy. Obama dropped his defense of DOMA, a move that many Republicans claimed an abuse of power. Would a man against gay rights do that? Would a man against gay rights repeal DADT? Or make attacks against people for their sexual orientation a hate crime? And yet you ignore the fact that Newt Gingrich claims that the United States is a Christian nation, which is outright false.
Spankey, 2009 ran on Bush's budget. The deficit for that year was $1.5 trillion. All of Obama's deficits have been smaller than that. (http://www.usgovernmentdebt.us/federal_deficit_chart.html).
Obama extended Bush Tax cuts for lower income. He wanted to end them for people making $1 million a year or more, but for some reason the Republican minority refused to let an extension that didn't have tax breaks for that bracket as well. In other words, they would rather the tax breaks end for everyone then have them end for the 1%.
Spank ... you wrote ...
"Fiscal issues trump. Social issues are, thank god, irrelevant"
And then ...
"So it would seem that Obama himself and a huge part of his base do not support social issues"
So what is your problem Spank??? Chasing your tail to win an augment????
Now, spanky little rascal;
"There you go again!" (Do you like that?)
You continue to spew the same, tired non-sense, "...he has failed." when the entire world sees truth.
President Obama stands on numerous SUCCESSES, spanky, and YOU know it too. Yet you can't keep yourself from endlessly repeating the TEA-GOP talking point sales pitches of half-truths and Lies.
Shame on you spank... I was hoping you were better than that. Are you going to disappoint all of your fans from the tea/gop party spanky? Certainly looks like it.
And, while you are at it, if you are going to spout nonsense like that, add some cites of authority and/or facts to back it up. Would any judge or justice allow you the lattitude to present such statements for the record without proof? Why don't you attempt to use similar criteria on here as is required at the bar, if that is not beyond your capabilities.
Come on spanky... don't disappoint. Aspire to the reputation - think you can do that?
Guess we will see (again) won't we. [statement, not a question!]
Mr.Anon,
In response to your rebuttal, here are some facts:
1) More Americans lost jobs under Obama than any other President. Even though there have been some jobs gains these past months, there is still a net loss of 1.6 million jobs under Obama
2)Sugar coat the debt as much as you like, facts are facts. Obama has incurred the most debt than all Presidents combined. Ending Bush tax cuts, especially for job creators is not the answer in a recession where jobs are being lost.
3)Gingrich would Clobber Barack Obama in a debate and you know it. Say what you want about this, it is true. How do you think he caught up to Romney in the polls and might win South Carolina all of a sudden.
4) The stimulus did not work, it just added to the record deficit and unemployment is still way about 8%. If Obama has an issue with tax rates being higher for the middle class than the lower class, how is he leading on this issue to change it?? Oh yes, he's using it to further divide the middle and upper class. Great leadership! As far as Romney is concerned, facts are Romney has created many jobs in the private sector, you can dispute how many, I don't care. Fact is, he knows how to create jobs in the Private Sector. Obama has never held a job before he went into public office. What does he know about creating jobs. His inexperience shows with his dismal jobs record.
5) Obama is tied with Romney in the national polls and he is not even the nominee yet to campaign against Obama. What does that tell you?
6) Congress disapproval is for both House Republicans and Senate Democrats. Both parties are blamed equally. How do you assume that just the Democrats will gain seats? They might even lose seats.
Feisty Redhead Roselle, IL "The House will also flip back to Democratic control - you heard it here first! ;o)"
Being first to be wrong is no great accomplishment.
In the 2008 elections, the most reliable pollster (Rasmussen) had the Democrats leading in the Generic Congressional poll by 6%, and they picked up dozens of seats (even though Congress' Approval Rating was only 9%).
In the 2010 elections, the Republicans led by 8% and they picked up about 65 seats.
Right now, the Republicans lead by 6%, so the chance of the Democrats taking over control are somewhere between 'slim and none'.
You should worry more about the Democrats losing control of the Senate. In the 2010 elections, of the 19 Democratic seats up for grabs, the Republicans picked up 7 (37%), while losing none. In 2012, the Democrats (and their Indy allies) have 23 seats up for grabs (vs only 10 for Republicans), and if they lose 4, they will lose control of the Senate as well.
And things don't get much better for the Democrats in 2014, where they have to defend 20 Senate seats vs only 13 for the Republicans.
Obama wasted his 'once in a lifetime' control of Congress (including a filibuster proof Senate) after the 2008 elections. The liberals must be very discouraged.
the fact that gingrich is even so much as a blip in the republican radar is more telling of the republican party than it is about gingrich.
there are very few politicians in america more despicable than gingrich. for him to get on tv and talk about being a social conservative is a tribute to freedom of speech and freedom of press, a telling account of the intellect of his supporters, and an insult to the rest of us.
Hope you yank's like Carbon taxes!
I need a shot of Whiskey.
I for one cant wait to see what obama will run on, since he surely cant run on his record. I just hope this is the last time we vote in a guy that never had a job, has a wife who had a 300000 dollar a year job created for her when her husband got in the senate, is a muslim, a marxist, and has effectively spent more money in his first term than all the other presidents combined, support and keeps his people in the ghettos in exchange for their votes, hangs around with known communists and terrorists, entertains hollywood stars non stop in the White House, constantly is on one vacation after another all the while telling us we have to cut back....... yeah, this half breed is just a lock for the next four years is he not?
DEE, Obama has the far left wing, i.e. marxist vote locked up. I am not too sure of any other group he has locked up. As Bill Clinton said,"its the economy, stupid", and Obama is bottoms up on that issue. I never thought we would have an affirmative action President, qualifications be damned, but we have one, it seems.
Come on now Anon - say it with me - Obama's tax cuts for the wealthy.
See, Bush's expired by operation of law on 12/10. Obama signed the current rates into law - his hand, his pen.
Ignore the economy? Nope - let's see gas - sucks. Housing - sucks. Interest rates - suck. Unemployment - absolutely silly AND there are at least a million fewer workers now.
But I know, I know Recovery Summer. '09? '010? Now? Nope.
Man, how impotent is he? He wanted, but, but the minority would not let him.
Leadership. It actually means leading.
I got reputation? Awesome!
Now hurry up - I got about 10 minutes until MONSTER truck jam. Aw nevermind - looks like Dee Pat has got you nailed.
That is because Obama inherited a recession, and Stimulus money didn't kick in until a couple of months into his term. If you ignore the first 6 months, he has a net job gain.
That's also false (http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2011/dec/16/mitt-romney/mitt-romney-says-obama-has-racked-much-debt-almost/).
How would a man whose only campaign platform is "Bold Reagan Conservative" and who calls Obama a "secular socialist" win a debate?
Romney's job record is dubious (http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2012/jan/09/mitt-romneys-job-creator-claim-falters-bain-capita/). Obama's stimulus has been proven to create jobs. And your claim that Obama has never worked in the private sector is also false (http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2011/oct/18/mitt-romney/romney-says-barack-obama-has-no-private-sector-exp/).
Nope, Obama is winning (http://www.gallup.com/poll/152114/Six-Voters-Obama-Romney-Matchup.aspx).
Because people specifically have a problem with congressional Republicans (http://www.pollingreport.com/cong_dem.htm, compare to http://www.pollingreport.com/cong_rep.htm).
If Newt has won S. Carolina, it proves to me that the people of S. Carolina should not be allowed to vote, but I suppose it's okay for Newt to win something, since he isn't likely to win anything else and will not be the candidate that opposes Obama.
Are you saying you disagree with them? Because I do.
Obama only signed that because he valued the state of the middle class.
DOW - up. US reliance on foreign oil - down. Unemployment (discounting first year in office) - down. Jobs - job gains instead of losses.
That is Harry Reid's fault, not Obama's Harry Reid controlled the Senate, and I blame him for not using Nuclear Option.
Roy Wilson
Stopped reading right there. Even Politifact agrees that Rasmussen is much more conservative than other polls.
oh please! I cant wait to see Obama packing and moving out of the white house
Bold prediction - Grave Digger will win the Monster Jam.
Spanky OUT!
YAY for Gingrich!
YIPEEE
Now the repub process will take much longer, cost millions and millions more, they will tear each other to shreds doing the democrats work for us on the republican dine. Let them destroy each other so Obama and the rest of the democrats can walk through the charred and burned remnants of your carcasses. RantRon Paul, Screech Gingrich,Pontificate InSantorum and be hated by the extreme of your own party Mitt, leaving a divided party, the rise of a Right Wing THird Party candidate (*And they will, and they will be on the ballot as they take over that internet party that is already on the ballot is many states on the way to every state.
DIVIDE AND CONQUER OBAMA!
We win
Watch it happen
Spanky, I see that now that our economy is getting better the republicans in congress will try and sabotage our economy. The first way I see is they will try and raise taxes on the working poor while claiming it is too detrimental to raise taxes on the rich. That way they can immediately take billions out of our economy and then the republicans can get back to the business of blaming President Obama for the failing economy.
Think of where we would be if republican also wanted our economy to get better. Every one of the candidates wants to increase the deficit by more tax cuts especially for the rich. Greedy, just like Romney who has enough money for several lifetimes but wants to raise taxes on the working poor so he can pay half the taxes he does now.
It seems that bankrupting the country, starving the poor children, getting our people back to work are all not important. Only the rich are important. All the republicans including Newt want to take from the poor and the old so they can have more tax cuts. Poor, poor Newt had to live on a paltry 2 million last year. Now he wants to take from you so he can have more tax cuts.
These republican guys are real true patriots and love their country until you ask them to put their money where their mouth is.
Feisty, Look at your symbol Dumb Fux? Your a great example of why our country is in this bad situation. Its people like you and Obama who is ruining our country. Im so thankful this country has a system to weed people like you and Obama out. I love this country because it represents freedom and the pursuit of happiness. You should move to Europe. You would be happier there.
Spanky, why does Gingrich want to raise taxes on the poor and lower taxes on the rich? If there's anything that will hurt the economy and supersize the deficits, it is that (http://www.lcurve.org/).
Gingrich beats Romney in South Carolina.
You can always count on the South to move this country as backwards as possible.
Hopefully the 95% of pundits who have been trying to crown Mitt Romney with the GOP nomination for the past 3 weeks will hold their heads in shame and provide balanced coverage now.
25 Walker please note that it will be the redneck upstate in SC that will give it to him, the poorer less educated areas.
Charleston and the Coast as well as Columbia will go to Romney
Charleston doesn't have a lot in common with the Pick em Up Truck driven' Idiots in Greenville/Spartanburg/Anderson and those illrelavent backwater areas where the Cows are nervous and the Pabst Blue Ribbon flows freely.
Charelson is and has been an International City, Due to the ports. And we know it, and those rednecks hate us for it. THats why we go to USC and they go to Clemson
I guess this just points out what sort of Party the GOP is if they can side with someone that has questionable ethics like Newt has, I guess it don't matter how religious they try say they are their ethics are the only truth there is, they will always turn a blind eye to the truth ....
Feisty, Look at your symbol Dumb Fux? Your a great example of why our country is in this bad situation. Its people like you and Obama who is ruining our country. Im so thankful this country has a system to weed people like you and Obama out.
Oh WOW! Calling FOX News dumb is the reason why we are in bad situation? Let's go ahead and blame the cartoon network too. They constantly show Tom and Jerry fighting with each other.
Also, the cartoon network is a better channel if you are going to talk about weed. ha ha ha
Mr.Anon,
1) Blaming Bush is getting old. No one is buying that anymore, its Obama's economy now, his record and it is a bad one
2)facts are facts. Numbers do not lie.
3)Gingrich will have a lot more to say if he debates Obama. Obama will have to answer to his dismal record. I would personally pay to see the debates between Gingrich and Obama.
4) Sure, you throw a trillion dollars in stimulus money and it is bound to create some jobs, where are the shovel ready projects?? Still, with the stimulus there is a net loss of 1.6 mill jobs. Facts do not lie.
5) We'll see what happens if Romney becomes the nominee and really starts campaigning. He has plenty of ammunition for Obama to answer for and he will go strong against Obama's dismal record.
6)People are fed up with everyone in congress as much as you want to believe it is mainly the House Republicans.
.....................Rednecks vote for lowlife ?????????????
I gotta say Newt is really good at helping Democratic presidents get re-elected.
I agree with you 100%
Obama and Dems 2012!!!!!!!!!!!!!
If you want an obvious example of the fact that both Newt and Romney are control freaks who don't respect the majority of Americans, consider this. Pretty much two thirds of our population support the legal use of cannabis in medicine, but both of these candidates are completely against it.
If two thirds of our country called for any other change, it would be common sense for a politician to support it, but Romney and Newt take their mandates from their churches and from financial backers. Supporting any law that is in opposition to such an overwhelming majority of Americans should not be tolerated, especially when it comes to the presidency.
These men do not respect you unless you agree with them. A lot like Feisty. It is one thing to have your own beliefs. It is quite another to force them on others in a most rude manner.
IRESPOND-2315268
LOL! Its fine to call Fox news dumb or anything you want but Dumb Fux? Uh real appropriate.
Mr.Anon,
1) Blaming Bush is getting old. No one is buying that anymore, its Obama's economy now, his record and it is a bad one
2)facts are facts. Numbers do not lie.
3)Gingrich will have a lot more to say if he debates Obama. Obama will have to answer to his dismal record. I would personally pay to see the debates between Gingrich and Obama.
4) Sure, you throw a trillion dollars in stimulus money and it is bound to create some jobs, where are the shovel ready projects?? Still, with the stimulus there is a net loss of 1.6 mill jobs. Facts do not lie.
5) We'll see what happens if Romney becomes the nominee and really starts campaigning. He has plenty of ammunition for Obama to answer for and he will go strong against Obama's dismal record.
6)People are fed up with everyone in congress as much as you want to believe it is mainly the House Republicans.
This has to be the best news to democrats ever! They can actually see the GOP's Big Tent shrink to a napkin.
Romney hording the 1% votes and Gingrich hording the Male chauvinist's and racist's votes!
Gee, who does that leave to vote for Obama? Oh, that's right... the rest of America.
Mr.Anon,
1) Blaming Bush is getting old. No one is buying that anymore, its Obama's economy now, his record and it is a bad one
2)facts are facts. Numbers do not lie.
3)Gingrich will have a lot more to say if he debates Obama. Obama will have to answer to his dismal record. I would personally pay to see the debates between Gingrich and Obama.
4) Sure, you throw a trillion dollars in stimulus money and it is bound to create some jobs, where are the shovel ready projects?? Still, with the stimulus there is a net loss of 1.6 mill jobs. Facts do not lie.
5) We'll see what happens if Romney becomes the nominee and really starts campaigning. He has plenty of ammunition for Obama to answer for and he will go strong against Obama's dismal record.
6)People are fed up with everyone in congress as much as you want to believe it is mainly the House Republicans.
South Carolina Republicans prove that they really DON'T care about marriage, so long as it isn't a gay one.
How sad.
That's because you don't understand why I'm blaming it on Bush. Ignoring the first 6 months of Obama's presidency, when Stimulus money had hardly even been spent, Obama has had a net jobs gain. Compare to the net jobs lost throughout Bush's entire second term (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jobs_created_during_U.S._presidential_terms).
I see you completely ignored the link I cited.
You didn't address my point.
There was not a net loss of 1.6 mill jobs, as I showed. The stimulus was estimated to create or save over 2.5 million jobs. Other things the stimulus did was turn the DOW up back to where it was before the recession, and invest billions of dollars in green energy.
I see you ignored the link I provided.
I see you ignored the link I provided.
To quote you, facts are facts. Numbers to not lie.
How can you righties say government doesnt create jobs outta one side of your mouth and then with the other say obama hasnt created jobs and romney has and can as pres. ? If gov doesnt create jobs how can you expect Obama to and how can you say Romney will but Obama didnt? O thats right you guys live in a critical bubble and create your own reality like Jersey Shore to fit your lies and hate...........
Guess you missed Obama shutting down the pot stores in CA then. No Obama supporter has made mention of his signing NDAA into law. Now, what does that say about ignorance? Guess that right to trial by jury, not being detained indefinitely and right to legal counsel aren't important to Obama supporters.
Answers Please social closet dwellers.........See Above query.
Dee Patriot= repeater of drivel.......Close your mouth and breathe through your nose...Try it sometime it works....
Why would you be proud to be on the side of bigotry? This isn't 1860 you know ?
Mr. Anon
I think I have a man crush on you.
Way to hand those teabaggers there ass on a plate
@Dee
You're right, facts don't lie, that's why you distort them, like the rest of the tea-morons. Blaming Bush isn't getting old because his terrible decisions are still affecting our economy.
You think after the last 2 years of Republican gridlock Obama won't have more to talk about than Gingrich? Maybe so since Obama only has had one wife and has yet to be lobbyst for the financial industry.
I need only remind you of the floor wiping Obama did with McCain, a solid republican with a pretty good record and a war hero I might add. You think Newt's going to beat Obama with his ideas of getting kids to be janitors, Spanish being the language of the Ghetto and his big government approach to peoples personal lives? Maybe you need to get back to serving the people in line their coffee.
The world is round and has been here for billions of years and you can't fit two of every animal on earth on any size Ark that would float anyway it would have to be the size of Australia..Breathe through your nose..
Dem in Tejas-- She atleast needs to breathe through her mouth like the rest of the evolved..Coffee is secondary..
Fiesty-
Actually what is at work in SC and the rest of the country is the 'anyone but a liberal scumbag' crowd and that includes both Romney and your messiah, Barak.
So now Gingrich is on the upswing, and I have to admit he shows a great deal more resilience in the debates than I expected.
I never see such a bleeder as Romney. Every attack draws blood, even the ones which seem way off target:
By contrast Gingrich turns attacks on his record, his flip-flops, his unofficial lobbying for Freddie Mac and his serial polygamy, back upon his accusers. He does it with lies and ad hominen attacks. But it is effective.
Well, Florida and other big primary states lie ahead. I'm through predicting the results. Romney's campaign will either implode are find some way to turn it around. Gingrich will either maximize his victory, or let his personal foibles once again derail his progress. Ron Paul & Rick Santorum will... I really don't know.
I agree that Obama will get re-elected. In fact going forward, I think the democrats will have control of this country for some time. The reason being is that there is no group they won't promise the moon to knowing they won't be able to deliver. But delivering doesn't matter - yet.
The math doesn't lie. Obama courts the 1 percent to get him elected, while intending to tax them more, and promising all groups more handouts. The republicans are trying to tell the voters there is simply not enough money to make everything free, but who wants to hear that noise. Everybody wants what was promised to them.
What I do know for sure is that the boomers will be retiring and will stop being the job creators and also stop being the major tax contributors. So the burden falls flat on the X and Y generation which wants everything free.
This socialist project will have a very ugly ending.
Dee (1.26),
#1. Most intelligent people realize that if you count Bush's "90 day warranty" on the economy, Obama has a net positive in job creation already. You can't honestly blame him for what was going on the day he walked into the White House.
#2. Just absolutely false. It is you that doesn't understand facts. On the day Obama took office it was $10.7 trillion. It is not at at $22 trillion today as your statement suggests. Additionally, the 2009 numbers are counted as Bush debt by virtually every economist. It was his budget. By all reasonable accounts where you can draw a line is at $12.3 Trillion. Also you can not discount the interest accumulated on that debt, (about $400 billion annually), or the unfunded commitments like the wars and the prescription drug plan that Obama could not escape from. The gifts that kept on giving. When Bush took office the debt was $5.7 trillion and he was handed a budget surplus that was twice as much as the debt service. (Interest on the national debt). Just because you heard some pundit say that Obama created more debt than all Presidents combined, don't believe it. Do some research from factual sources.
#3. I dare Newt Gingrich to throw his slurs against President Obama to his face. It might make you radical extremist vote for Gingrich, but then you'd vote for Mickey Mouse rather than Obama. (admit it, that is absolutely true.) However, the majority of people in this country respect the office of the President and would not stand for Gingrich's use of his loosely disguised racial slurs in the national race. Gingrich gets away with it with the radical Obama haters in the Republican primaries occurring in States that don't even come close to national demographics. Has Gingrich done well in the Republican debates? Yes, but he is debating candidates about as competent as 10 year old kids. The youth vote in this country want no part of Gingrich and the older voters in this country know full well what a snake he is.
#4. Every real economist in this country, including right leaning ones, will tell you that the Stimulus was indeed pretty successful. Quit listening to pundits. And get real. Romney claims 100,000 jobs created at 4 companies. (Long after Baine got out of them I might add) But by his own accounts Romney made deals buying out or working with about 120 companies. 4 out of 120 is a good track record? Would you bet on those odds? If so, you're not too bright.
#5. Depends on what polls you quote, most recent ones I've seen show Obama winning over any of the Republican candidates. Close, but on top. You can't look at things like a Newsmax or other highly biased polls and seriously think they truly represent the country.
#6 Really? Look a bit closer at those polls. Every one that breaks it down by party has the Democrats looking better than Republicans. Particularly in the House where Republicans have an overwhelming majority and have demonstrated their radical tactics.
Keep listening to Fox news and you'll be surprised come November. Even the real Republican party chiefs know that they don't have a candidate who can win. The question is if they will try to create a martyr to fire up its base for the 2014 Congressional elections. In that regard, Gingrich makes the perfect martyr because even his own party wants no part of him, but let him go down in flames and they at least get something positive out of him.
It's OK that you hate Obama. You have every right to be a racist and/or bigot if you so choose, it's a free country. The only one who can really speak to your reasoning is you. But that aside, take just a little bit of common sense into consideration before you start supporting the likes of Gingrich or Romney. Then do us all a favor and write in Mickey Mouse come November.
Newday---Thanks for letting them know it is alright for them to be bigots if they choose...I wish they would stop trying to hide it and let themselves be known publicly again..It was easier times when they didn't hide and we knew what we were dealing with..I can't stand the curtain they hide behind...
Ah, what short memories the right wingers have! Um, unemployment is down. Didn't Dubya do any fundraising? Bush 41? Reagan? Disney...Nixon spoke there -- that's where he made his infamous "I'm not a crook" speech -- Bush 41, ditto, and Your Hero, Ronald Reagan, spoke there twice. You listen to Newt too much...you know, Newt the philanderer, who was fined $300,000 by the House for ethics violations, who resigned from the House in disgrace just four years after his "Contract With America" nonsense, and who took $1.6 million from Freddie Mac as a "consultant". As far as golf, as of August 17 of 2011 Obama had spent all or part of 38 days on vacation away from the White House. He has also made 14 visits to Camp David spanning all or part of 32 days, for a total of 70 days. Dubya, meanwhile, made 14 visits to his Texas ranch spanning all or part of 102 days; he also made 40 visits to Camp David spanning all or part of 123 days. His vacation total at this point in his presidency was all or part of 225 days away. And Your Hero, Ronald Reagan, spent almost one year of his eight years in office in California!
"What's good for the goose is good for the gander"? Not, evidently, in the tiny minds of the right wing...
Yeah, like that's a major policy issue.
What else could he have done? He threatened to veto, and only dropped after the bill was passed by a veto-proof majority. In any case, Obama's signing statement makes it clear that he has no intention of using his powers on American citizens. Does that excuse the bill? No. But the fault is not Obama's, the fault is Congress's.
Very nice factual comment, New Day (among others). The only comment that is running through my mind would be a bewildered WTF? to the people of South Carolina. But, I live in a red enclave of a blue state and know that many of my neighbors and maybe even a few of my co-workers would vote for him too. Newt is personally disgusting and ethically handicapped but, he knows the game well. I know that common wisdom holds that he is very intelligent but Bill Clinton cleaned his clock so, either he is less intelligent than he would like us to believe, or he is just a bully and chokes in the clutch. We'll see...
Surprise! Surprise! Surprise!
It was obvious to me, when Newt played to the audience in South Carolina, he was going to win the state. When the audience applauded Newt's insults, to the moderators, one could almost palpate the intelligence of his followers. True "Christians" are loving people who accept others of all religions, races and backgrounds. How do you think Jesus would react to Newts obnoxious and elitist behavior? And the reaction of his followers, during the debates, just to be a confirmed, to me, of their lack of knowledge and sensibility. Do not get me wrong, I don't care who wins the Republican primaries. Not one of the candidates are viable. This election is just one more insult, to the intelligence of Americans in general. Wave a carrot in front of their faces and they will follow. I know South Carolina has educated, smart people, who reside there because many of them vote Democratic. These debates have only exposed the illiteracy of some voters and then use of Christianity, to be a racist. Decent people look at all the facts and decide which person is best for all man. Remember, be careful what you ask for, you might get it.
OBAMA/BIDEN 2012
"Also where does this "teleprompter" nonsense originate? I will be checking into this."
That was the theme song from the bots every since Obama was elected. Goes to the black people are stupid and need an aid cause they can't think on their feet crap the right wing beilieves. They want to get rid of Obama because they are having a difficult time now that a black man made it all the way to the top in America. Actually he is half black and half white so they are hating their own race also. Say a prayer for these idiots.
Gingrich wins South Carolina .... now there will be a "run" on Pepto Bismol by the libtards ! The attempts to corner Newt with a new assault from an ex-wife backfired BIG TIME ! Strength of his reponse and his composure told S.C. voters he was the man !
Europe is projecting negative growth. The Euro zone is in trouble due to debt overload.
China has seen its meteoric growth slow to single digits and exports have fallen sharply.
Please tell me how Obama's weak economic "recovery" will survive those two unfortunate facts.
And now Obama is so weak in the eyes of the Iranians that they feel comfortable threatening 1/6th of the worlds oil supply. Obama strikes down the pipeline from the evil Canadians. Gas prices will soar.
Thank you in advance Democrats for the fascinating economics lesson as you explain how Obama turns that into a smoking hot economy.
Fisty you be the first to make a bold prediction on the state of the US economy with these twists that the evil Republicans have absolutely nothing to do with.
The theme song is not that all of any race, color or creed is stupid, just Obama.
You, breadex, are the racist.
Mr. Anon "Roy Wilson In the 2008 elections, the most reliable pollster (Rasmussen)...Stopped reading right there. Even Politifact agrees that Rasmussen is much more conservative than other polls."
I don't care if he calls himself Rumpelstiltskin, as long as his polls are the most accurate - which they are. Just look at the record.
All I can think of is her hair...Is it real or plastic? How does she do that? What does she look like in the morning? After a shower? What is it's original color? Her husband is a loser, a serial adulterer, and really engenders less curiosity than that bizarre hairdo.
You must be smoking jimson weed. Atheists and homosexual perverts who demand special privileges are the most bigoted people in human history. It won't be long before they return to their traditions and begin murdering those who find them repulsive.
And find them repulsive for good reason. I have never heard anyone on these forums refer to a left-wing radical as a Demopuke, but it is routine to hear the infantile and mean-spirited evil mouths of the left use such insulting and abusive language when referring to anyone who doesn't share their views. Christians routinely speak the truth that homosexuals are addicted to a behavior that is morally wrong, but they don't routinely use the kinds of abusive, demeaning, and evil language that is altogether typical of those on the left.
For we have a guidebook that teaches us that even the angel who rebuked the devil who was fighting over the body of Moses did not use railing words, but said only "The Lord rebuke you, Satan."
But the atheists and those that are addicted to perverting human sexuality in homosexual behavior routinely use railing words, condescending vitriol, vulgarities, profanities, and all manner of infantile potty language to express their intolerance, which rages like a wild beast looking for a victim to tear apart.
The phrase "atheists, gay-rights advocates, [that is], non-bigots" is transparently a self-contradicting lie.
Moreover, Christians teach that atheists and homosexuals should change their ways for their own good, that they might escape from the eternal damnation that will be the collective judgment of all the souls that have ever lived, including those so fated, concerning those who reject God and His righteousness.
On the other hand, and quite for altogether another reason, the atheist and the homosexual (typically one and the same person) rail against Christians our of pure animosity, wishing us evil in the process. Soon, it will not be sufficient for them to merely WISH us evil (as I said already). The Cains will be slaves to their irresistible urge to murder the Abels just as they are slaves to their self-gratification in other matters. And again, quite by contrast, the Christian does not condemn anyone to hell. At the Last Judgment everyone will be in agreement that the wicked DESERVE hell. But no one goes to hell that is not SELF-condemned for refusing to believe in the existence of any possible alternative. This is the same thing as saying what I just said, that EVERYONE, even the wicked, will be in agreement that the wicked DESERVE hell.
That's the truth.
We don't condemn the atheist and the homosexual to hell and wish them to the place.
We warn them that they are on the path toward being lost if they don't change their ways.
For telling them the truth, they hate us and condemn us to suffering, cause us to suffer, and then pat themselves on the back and claim that they are not bigoted.
But then, the first offense of which the wicked man is guilty is that of speaking lies, which come naturally to him and find no inhibition within him--nor will he accept any inhibition from a voice of wisdom outside of him.
The bigotry of atheist homosexuals is legendary, extreme in the extreme, and unexceeded by any other kind of creature.
I refer you to the tortures inflicted by the communists and the feeding of Christians to the lions in Rome.
History proves you a liar.
John--Dude, you are so @!$%#ed up!!! Are you on meth? Coke? Crank? What?
Politifact doesn't even take its statements into account when talking about polls. Rasmussen is considered right-leaning by Time, 538, and other sources. Generally, if blatantly right-wing media like Fox News or Wall Street Journal call it a "fair and credible source", then chances are it is biased. However, if a source (like Politifact) is considered to "socialist" by the right at the same time as being considered "corporatist" by the left, chances are it is balanced.
Should any South Carolinian ever declare that they are part of a state dedicated to the moral, ethical and religious tenets of our Constitution, I'll be happy to remind them of their vote today to award their delegates to a serial adulterer, Congressional ethics violator and one of the most divisive Speaker's in our history.
Just remember when he pulled your heart strings at the last debate and in a tone designed to make you feel guilty for his behavior, when he said, "all of us have suffered pain", just remember, he didn't suffer the pain, he inflicted it when he announced to his wife he had a mistress. He may be saying all the right things and pushing your emotional buttons, but this guy is a narcissistic jerk with a severe sociopathic bent. Good luck GOP.
South Carolina, the Palmetto state.... for those of you who don't know what a Palmetto is, it is an oversized flying big cockroach! They are plentiful in the lowlands of South Carolina. It only seems fitting that at bunch of roaches will vote for an even bigger roach!
palmetto bugs are the roach like creatures...Palmetto trees is what the state is nicknamed for...But I like your analogy.
I've gotta say, Mr. Anon is a bad a** who knows what he's talking about and can back it up. So proud to be reading comments for the first time in my life.
bluelake, your question about what she looks like in the morning brings back that old description: Coyote Ugly. Not enough alcohol in the country for that!
We shouldn't get all excited about this primary after all this is South Carolina. Lets wait to see what happens when the next Republcan primary is held in Florida, unlike South Carolina, Florida is actually part of the United States.
I do have comment on NEWT. Newt Gingrich is one of the most slimy and divisive politicians of our time and he is so ethically challenged that he makes even the most crooked politicians look like Mother Teresa.
@Spike Lee: Uh, no. What you want doesn't make it true.
Gingrich sure is screwing things up, but this will either be the candidacy that South Carolina got wrong or an auto loss for the Republicans.
I'd ALWAYS rather have the Senate than the house, by the way. If for nothing more than the longer term for candidates. Let's not forget they tend to not be as radicalized as the fringe morons of the house. But given the psychotics I see posting on First Read, I am not surprised they'd prefer the house. The house always looks like a bunch of babies compared to the Senate and that's because, well, they are.
Wow! I thought SC was a state where they had cleansed bigotry and hatred. Guess not.
I am scared that Newt will get the nomination and somehow get the presidency. His ideas sound good, but I am tired of the anti-Obama bashing from the right. I am tired of it. Sick of it. The guy took us out of a recession, tried to compromise with the GOP to help our economy: he's done a lot for us, and all he's getting is BS from the right.
OBAMA BIDEN 2012
It's a pretty sad state of affairs when even Fiesty Redhead states " President Obama will win re-election handily, compliments of the Republican Party not being able to find a viable candidate!"
So what she's really saying is that he doesn't deserve to win reelection and the only reason he will win reelection will be due to a lack of competition. Sorta like a JV team beating a little league team. Pathetic excuse to reelect someone.
Obama HAS NOT FAILED as a president. Obama got this economy out of a rut with his stimulus package and created millions of jobs. Plus the Dow has been up to 12700 and jobs have been created for the past 22 months.
Obama offered a compromise on the debt deal with a $4 trillion plan to cut spending, reform entitlements, and just a few tax increases. But Boehner and the House said no, and then S&P downgraded us.
Obama has deported hundreds of thousands of illegal aliens (to all you neocons calling him soft on immigration).
Obama offered a plan to create 2 million jobs and rebuild our infrastructure, but it was turned down just because it was funded with a tax on millionaires.
Obama has killed bin Laden and 22 al-Qaeda leaders (to all those calling him soft on foreign policy).
Obama passed a bill to reform healthcare and help millions of people to get insurance while decreasing the deficit.
Obama has invested billions in clean energy and has set to work improving our tourist industry and our exports.
Obama repealed the unconstitutional DADT and allowed all people to serve in our military openly.
Frankly, Obama has done a lot over the past 3 years. Imagine what he could do without the GOP obstructing his every move....
OBAMA BIDEN 2012
And here is a plan to fix our economy and our debt crisis THAT IS BALANCED.
1. Deficit Reduction Package over 12 years:
2. Economic Plan (paid for by a 4% surtax on people who make over $1 million).
3. Reform Government.
Yall are so effeing stupid that it makes me have to get off here and go puke! Really none of You have a clue, You want to go with the class warfare shiat, STUBID !
And here I thought that the numb-nuts from Texas were a bunch of inbreed bozo idiots, Congrats South Carolina, you may have just taken the cake. WOW!!!! But, I guess when you have a Newt, a Mitt, and a Santorum to chose from, what ever huh.
And to Freshiee, you seriously do not have to raise the millionaires tax rate up to an absurd 45.4%, but you do have to keep them from paying an only a measly 15% (Romney, anybody?). In fact, you actually drop their tax rates down to about 30-32%, and do away with loopholes and right offs, but what would be even better, abolish the irs, and impose a flat tax of about 15% straight across the board, with no tax loopholes for the wealthiest of the bunch, as we all know, there aren't any loopholes for the dying Middle Class . It is very plain, that Ron Paul has no chance at all, so for all of you staunch repubo's out there, suck it up, and deal with FOUR MORE YEARS OF OBAMA AND BIDEN!!!!!!
Gingrich wins in South Carolina...
oh boy...
So who is the bigger hypocrite here, Gingrich with his transparently phony "the devil made me do it/ the lord has forgiven me" schtick?
...or the people who have been blind enough to buy it?
Dee Patriot ..... sorry can't help myself this is what I love most about Republicans ..... the understanding of the meaning of the word "fact". Your Post 1.26 indicates that you are going to provide "facts"..."Gingrich would clobber Obama in a debate" is not a fact! Go look fact up in the dictionary prior to using the word again it just makes you and all Repubs look illiterate. A fact would be something like the City of Memphis is located on the banks of the Mississippi River....you know something real, verifiable, concrete. Since Gingrich and Obama have never been in a debate the statement you made is not a fact. Get it?
In response to your rebuttal, here are some facts:
3)Gingrich would Clobber Barack Obama in a debate and you know it. Say what you want about this, it is true. How do you think he caught up to Romney in the polls and might win South Carolina all of a sudden.
I can only say this about South Carolina....where is General Sherman when you need him? and Newt Gingrich is the best that the Democrats could hope for .... more baggage than Fed-X.
I can see the debate now:
Mr. President, I'd like you to answer the following question. In January 2009 the average retail price of a gallon of gas in the U.S was $1.83 and is now over $3.50. That's about a 100% increase. During that same month the price of crude oil was $43.48 and is now over $98 per barrel. Gold was at $853.25 and is now over $1,500. Corn $38.74 now over $6, a 78% increase. Soybeans $9.66 to now $13. Sugar $13.37 to $35. Unemployment 7.6% to 8.5%. 35% increase in food stamp recipients. 150% increase in the number of long-term unemployed. The US money supply, both M1 AND M2 have increase by almost $1 Trillion which, based on the foregoing, is inflationary.
Mr. President, we are better off now than we were $4 trillion dollars ago.
Obama: Uh, why am I running for re-election?
Newt just revealed the playbook for getting the nomination and defeating Obama.
That is, when faced with an idiotic question fron an Obama lover like John King, rather than wilting into some PC BS spineless Moderate type response, come back with both barrels blazing and put the hypocritical Demogoguerycrat right on his arse.
Did you hear that crowd roar. We love a little Howard Cosell ish 'telling it like it is.'
BTW Onefungi,
Q2 to Obama: 'Mr. President, under your Administration, not George Bush's, the number of people on food stamps is at an all time high, the number of people in poverty is at an all time high, the number of people on government assistance is at an all time high, the number of long-term unemployed is at an all time high, the number of foreclosures is at an all time high, the period of gasoline remaining over $3 per gallon is at an all time high, the cost of food is at an all time high, annual deficits are at an all time high, the national debt is at an all time high; and Joe Biden said "the Stimulus was a failure," you said "there were no shovel-ready jobs," Health Insurance and Health Care Costs have both increased even more after the passage of Obamacare because of its costs to businesses while not one extra person has been insured, you didn't close GITMO, You were wrong about unemployment staying under 8%, Iran is building nuclear weapons while you have allienated our primary Middle East ally Israel, You have blocked Gulf drilling as the Chinese now drill off of Cuba, and now you have nixed the Keystone Pipeline. Sir how can you expect to be re-elected?
A: Uh, you are obviously a racist who clings to your guns and Bible. Next question.
ya'll are so funny when bush was in office he was destroying the country and now that obama is in office he is destroying the country. If all the lies spewed from the far left and far right were true we would be a third world country by now. Give the hate a rest for a minute and actully read some facts.
What a bunch of hypocritical morons bashing South Carolina, while the gem in your liberal crown is California. Now THAT'S a cesspool. You talk about the pick em up trucks and rednecks while CA is full of lazy, parasitical system suckers and freaks. CA has elected the likes of Pelousy, Maxine Waters, Barbara Boxer, Jerry Brown, etc., and you critcize SC for their choices? Pot meet kettle.
You are a hypocrite!
No! You are!
This is the argument that the
fascistsfans of each party provide with their extremist behavior. Brilliant.The GOP presidential primary voters are like a little baby that refuses to eat his Gerber strained peas(Romney). Each time the spoon touches his lips, he spits it out. He wants to subsist on applesauce(Santorum) or vanilla pudding(Gingrich). Anything but peas. The poor little guy doesn't know that the adults(the Republican leadership)will put up with his tantrums for a short while until he is forced to finally eat his peas.
His next doctor visit is in November. The doctor(President Obama) will settle this issue by ordering a well balanced diet. The little guy will finally get his dessert, but only after he eats a healthy balanced meal(that does not have to include peas).
By the results of the GOP Primary in Sth. Car. it confirms my belief that the general opposition to the current President by many of the commentors here, the GOP generally, the moneyed masters of the GOP, and within the community as a whole is based on racial hatred......what else could it be??? No person who calls themselves a god-fearing christian, a supporter of family values, a person to whom lying and cheating is abhorrent, a person who believes that graft and corruption in government is evil.....could in fact vote for Newt who is the poster boy for all of the above....unless they believe that.... worse than all of those evils is having a N — — — — — in the White House telling them what to do.
That's just the way I see it you can trot out all the complaints, falsehoods, rumors, innuendos, GOP talking points, Roveisms, Reganisms, Thacherisms you want against Obama to hide behind....but if you claim you would vote for Newt over Obama ..... don't bother hiding it just come right out and own it, you got a problem with race.
The REPUBES will TROT (and I do mean TROT) out Fat Fatty, ah er I mean Chris Christy to excite their base, which really have NOTHING IN COMMON with UBER RICH Mitt. However, the majority of REPUBES are OBESE, OBNOXIOUS LOUD MOUTHS, just like Christy...ahhhhhh....A MAN OF THEIR OWN KIND, GENIUS!!!
Frankly True,
Irrespective of how you dissect the South Carolina GOP "presidential" contest, Gingrich dragged in 40% of the vote for a count of approximately 243,000 voters. If there are any "liberal" areas in South Carolina, those electoral regions did not overwhelm the "yahoos" to give Romney a "win."
Importantly, that 242,000 people in any state would vote for Gingrich says that the voter electorate in this country is politically stunted, masochistic and loves self-punishment.
Mr Anus
Run your crap by the OWS, lefty progressive crowd, maybe they'll salute.
The rest of us are a little smarter.
Please keep the country's best interest at heart instead of your strange Obama worship rantings.
I believe that the S.C. rep.vote was a vote that was racial in every way,because no-one can justify letting an immoral person like newt win ,their excuse that he is the best at wining an argument against the President is ridiculous .They mean that someone of that caliber is a good alternative ? I would assume that the rest of the country would rather have a Negro/white than someone of that debased charactor. Yes I know that the new word is Black, but that only replaced the ignorant and racial @!$%#, which was used as a pronunciation by the uneducated.
I can see the debate right now: Obama asking Newt: Can you as a Republican defend going into Iraq & Afganistan for 9+ years costing this nation 2+ trillion AND having Bush tax cuts at the same time with lost revenue almost 2 trillion, leaving office after 8 years with a 11 trillion debt, and then letting the Paul Ryans of congress have the audacity to blame my administration for the 15 trillion dollar debt?? Please explain that to me. Also why was I and John McCain were summoned to the White House when the Auto Industry was about to collapse and I wasn't even elect yet, and sat in the oval office, with the Bush look of that starry glare, WHAT DO I DO? I have no domestic policy!!!! I don't believe in Government!!! Or back in 2006 when the treasury sent Americans a check for $1425 with instructions to go out and spend it on "consumables". Because Republican George Bush knew then the economy was taking a fast nose dive!! I ask you NEWT, are we really better off with a Republican in the White House, ARE WE??? I DON'T THINK SO!!!
For all those GOP voters, I hope Newt does win just for this reason: 3 small states should not decide who your candidate is. All of you should get your chance to weigh in.
PS The bar is now open. Cosmos are the house speciality.
I'll take a nice single malt please.
All yours, Chucky!! LOL
Oh noooo phinep - it's been pouring all day. THe bar opened long ago.
Good news, clouds just broke. Monster Truck Jam is a go!
30 minutes until the polls close. Is everyone just giddy with excitement?
I'm about to bust a gut. This will be the longest 30 minutes EEEEEEVER!
Chucky,
We may need another drink! :)
30 minutes until the polls close. Is everyone just giddy with excitement?
Yeah! The Democrats of South Carolina can't wait until the circus leaves town. It is starting to stink pretty bad, for what I heard......By the way...take all your garbage with you -Calista-
But Floridians wish you would stay in SC. :)
(I hate political ads and junk mail)
Newton-40%
Romney-35%
Paul-15%
Santorum-10%
Already been declared the winner!!!!
Wow! Polls close and they called it for Newt!!! Let the fallout begin!
No Fallout Girl,
Those damn exit polls again!!!
Exactly what we wanted!
Egilman,
I bet Romney is feeling a little "testy" right about now :)
I'm sure he is girl,
It's not "HIS" to take into november anymore!!!! YEA TEAM!!!
This crushing of Romney will have massive repercussions in this race band this election....
Romney being crushed despite the favorable coverage from both the left and right wing media.
If you would like to read for yourself the "House Ethics Committee Final Report On The Gingrich Matter", here is the link:
http://ethics.house.gov/committee-report/matter-representative-newt-gingrich
dangerfield,
You called this one earlier. Maybe a good omen for your Giants!!!
What happened was the crappy way the media attacked Newt, We The People are sick of the "low blow" attacks on the character of the possible candidates. Newt put them in their place and "The People" liked it.
Got any good Tokay sitting around...I'd do a glass of that if you have some. Hmmm never mind forget the glass...I'll drink straight from the bottle to toast Ol Newt and his nomination. Of course I will switch to champaigne when Obama wins the real election.
stubby,
Bottom left corner of the bar!
If you want an obvious example of the fact that both Newt and Romney are control freaks who don't respect the majority of Americans, consider this. Pretty much two thirds of our population support the legal use of cannabis in medicine, but both of these candidates are completely against it.
If two thirds of our country called for any other change, it would be common sense for a politician to support it, but Romney and Newt take their mandates from their churches and from financial backers. Supporting any law that is in opposition to such an overwhelming majority of Americans should not be tolerated, especially when it comes to the presidency.
These men do not respect you unless you agree with them. A lot like Feisty. It is one thing to have your own beliefs. It is quite another to force them on others in a most rude manner.
If I yell at debate moderators and blame everything on the press, can I then too win a GOP primary state?
How did the rednecks in SC get past the smell of Newt to vote for him, What a waste.
Newt scores high with Evangelicals, married couples and even women in S.C. Amazing. He asks his wife for a open marriage and wins the S.C. debate in the first 2 minutes.
Nothing says family values like being married 3 times, being a serial adulterer and getting a blow job from a mistress in your car while your kids are feet away in the yard.
I was actually trying to post a prediction when they called the thing for Newton. No Phine, this was an easy call, let's just hope that Eli makes the right ones all afternoon long....
another republican to scew up the nation like bush did !!!!!!
dangerfield,
I am thinking good thoughts for you!!
Patriotic American U.S.A.,
If you have a political sense of smell, you don't live in SC, where the politicians have REEKED ever since the War of Independence.
How many votes did Herman Cain get? LOL
OBAMA 2012
WOW does all the crooks live in SC or what? never would I thought a liar and a theif would ever win. man god help us
Lot a moonshine going around S.C. today.
Somewhere Obama is smiling.
I've never been prouder of the fact I moved out of SC.
Stand with fist in unmentionable place--- The media did not make up the story his former wife reported it so you and him are blaming the wrong person...Are you righties not for freedom of the press ? Should it be censored as not to upset Newtie and the blowfish with facts about his character ? You peeps would fit in nice in Germany in 1933...They made up a charchter profile for their leader there in case you didn't hear..
Tickles me! Love it!
Dem in Texas,
"somewhere Obama is smiling" That would probably another vacation in ???
Well up until now, whoever won SC ended up as the one that got the green light for Nov. Lol, I guess if this holds true, then it looks like the repubes want Newt to go up against Obama. Wow, this is going to be good. He's as bad as Dubya, (maybe worse). It seems to me like a lot of republican history from the 80's til now, will be brought back out and put on the table before Nov. Beautiful, and poor Mitt, he losses again. Yeah, my figuring right from the start was, if he wasn't good enough to run back when McCain got the nod, then why would he be now? Awe too bad for him, then again he probably made a lot of money doing this. Who knows maybe the country is more for threesomes now. Newt's going to get butchered up pretty good, but like a true repube, he's shameless.
standswithfist in unbelief
You are very correct. That debate put him ahead when he ripped that stupid CNN king a new one. It's time we had someone in Washington who has some gonads. The married women in SC (part of the bible belt) went for Newt. We don't want some P whipped liar in our Whitehouse, we want someone who can tell it like it is good or bad. The truth is so refreshing no matter what it is about. Something we haven't seen coming out of this PC administration.
For instance Obama just turned down the Keystone pipeline to Texas to make his environmental extremeists happy but he forgot to tell them about the other Keystone pipeline that started pumping oil to refineries in Illinois last year and also crosses several states. Didn't hear him bitching about that one did we and we certainly didn't hear about it in his kiss butt main stream media even though there was an AP story about the brief shut down of that line for mechanical reasons and NO there was no leak involved. Good enough to pass several states to get to Illinois but not good enough to get to TEXAS. Hmmmm can anyone say political BS.
The good ole southern hypocrite may play well in the south and some of the west, I can't wait to see what happens in the midwest and far west. Florida is full of snowbirds too, bot they may vote in their northern states. Still, Florida is less a part of the south than you might expect.
Joe-1072601
Why is it you "volunteer" posters for Obama can't help but use 4th grade school yard name calling? Oh, that's right, the averagee IQ age of the main stream media audience.
Shaking my head, where did I use 4th grade name calling in my comment? If your referring to "Dubya", then ok, I can almost see what your saying, but I call him "Dubya=W" because thats his middle initial and well with his power of speaking abilities that he had, I just believe if he was to stop by and read my comment, he'd know that I was referring to him. Is that wrong?
What does this say about the Republican Party that they select a thrice married, admitted adulterer, who was kicked out of his position in the House because of ethics violations (by his own party) and proudly holds a $1 million dollar credit line at Tiffany's.
Hypocrites comes to mind.
Hey, Maxwashere, I really don't think that the country could be more screwed up than with what Obama and his cronies are pulling off! A "jobs" president who torpedoes a possible 20,000 high-paying jobs to massage his enviro-nazi buddies! I guess we had better "hope" we have "change"! Don't worry, Obama and his cronies will throw a few food stamps to the people who will lose their high paying jobs building pipe lines from our horrible, oil-producing friends to the north. I am sure that we will all be driving cars powered by solar panels with wind mills on the hood helping to power the air conditioner. (I had better shut up or some company will get a few billion to try to make this work!)
Newt may be a philandering, swelled-headed politician, but, at least he believes that the American people do better when we don't have some liberal bureaucrat dictating how many sheets of toilet paper we can use for each movement! (Obama will give Sheryl Crow a recess appointment to be TP czar!) Isn't it amazing how Obama has had more recess appointments in his first three years than any president had done in two full terms! I guess he just wants to circumvent petty issues like the constitution. Newt will be a president, if elected, who will do what is best for his country, not what is best for his cronies and deep-pocketed libs!
So is this what Newt means by there being a "decent" person as a candidate? Since when did asking your spouse to engage in an open marriage make someone "decent"? Funny stuff, Newt.
The good news is that we can now pencil Obama in as our president for the next four years.
Thanks Newt.
God help America if Newt get to be president.
Hope you yank's like Carbon taxes!
I need a shot of Whiskey.
All I can say is that Florida has the elderly vote in large numbers; and those people were around to remember the 90s. I can only hope that FL sets to right, the mess SC made in nominating Newt the sleeze Gingrinch. His time in power once in our lifetimes was enough to give good reason to vote for just about anyone but Newt.
shaking, conservative IQ is much lower. BTW, about the pipeline: Did you know that Illinois borders Canada across Lake Michigan? Did you know that to get to Texas, the pipeline would have to go about 2,000 miles, across the main mid-West aquifer that supplies fresh water to several states and the REPUBLICAN governor of Nebraska is against it? Did you know that Texas refineries are near the Gulf, which has tankers waiting to take that oil away from the US? Did you know that the oil industry has over-approximated the number of jobs that the pipeline would supposedly bring? Did you know that having Newt as the gop nominee would be an even easier win for Obama? Guess not. There's your low IQ again.
Dan M.did you know that Bush had twice as many recess appointments as Obama? Of course not, otherwise you'd be lieing,right? Did you know the GOP has filibustered Obama appointments or bills more than any time in US history? Of course not or you would be lieing again. As for TP czar, you probably need one to clean up the mess you made with your incorrect statements. BTW, see Bush, George, W. for worst president in history. 4400 Americans dead because of a lie.
Dude you need to check your spelling before you comment on someone else IQ (average) makes you look bad.
Shaking my head; Going back and reading your comment I found it to be more offensive towards the main stream media audience and myself, my comment was just trying to make it easier for G. Dubya, if he was to stop by and read some of the comments on this article. Isn't it funny that repubes can go and insult everyone and to be honest with you, your comment is even offensive towads your own, repubes and teasters because, they also can be part of the audience you mentioned. Then to be even more honest about this, I'm sure these politicians have even heard more than what I wrote. Wasn't Rich Perry calling Hermie the "N" word? wait, he was calling all of the black race the "N" word. Hmm no main stream media audience offend by that, huh?
Newt's cry is the same as the scum bags in prison. "I've changed, I found God". I believe him just as much as I believe them.
Looks like GOP brains want to abandon that whole restoring integrity to the white house thing. Course Dubya was anything but a man of integrity. In his defense though he didn't cheat on his wife... With other women that is. I smell a collapse! F you in advance...
Good, I think it's about time to have a serious discussion about The 80's. I think it will be important for Newt to show why Reagan economics are working now. He has to prove to me that his large tax breaks for the upper income corporation make sense in 2012. He also has to explain why the were 12 tax increases when confronted with surging debts. Please explain, We all need to know Newt.
Nuadormrac; FLA. correcting the SC voting mistake? They hold the worst voting mistake ever recorded in history, yesiree I wouldn't hold my breath on them doing something right when it comes to counting votes in that state. I have come to some sort of conclusion on this run for president from the repubes, I think. If all the best points, from all the repube candidates were taken and put into one candidate, just maybe, they'd of had one that could run. If one of the candidates wants to forfit their best quality then the candidate with the most good qualities would be able to use two of theirs. I think its only fair, if theres not one real good one from all of them, then clone one.
Shaking your head. I guess that you might as well do that as using the brain inside of it. We are considering a suitable person for the highest elected office in this country. You consider that a member of the C o t U S. is acceptable when he has been fined,censored and put out of office?For the PotUS I would hope that the holder of that office would be of unimpeachable character.
None of these people are worthy to be President of this USA. I do not know why anyone would consider any of them . All they are concerned about is their political positiuon they want, Power, greed and money and the Republican Party. When Gingrich stood by and smiled happily when he let a man come up and on World TV say " We need a Jesus Candadite," and then they all claim to be Christians and do that, well, that speaks volums alone. The Romney who does not want the pweople to know NOW about his finances and how he got them. Whats he got to hide? Its very plain to see if one only opens their eyes and can face the truth, that We The People are well on the way to having another regiem like Germany and the Nazi Party headed by the Republican s and The Tea Partys. We have far too many bigots, liars, decievers, raciests,. discrimination in our government now not to mention Traitors even in the Supreme Court of the US. Also, its full of Million Aires and very few if any, regular everyday All American Citizens who made this country and them who and what it is today, with our Blood Sweat Tears Agony suffering pain and even our lives, yet they would take that all away from us and destroy us and whats left of our country. As it is there is no such thing as Democracy, Justice for ALL, Equality, Freedom etc. etc. left here any more. More and more each day we are bocoming more and more like, if not worse than the Nazis. More and more countrys around the world are wanting less and less to do with the USA, as they see how our government treats its people and what it does to them and how the peop-le here do nothing to stop or change it, as Germany did and some other countrys on this planet are doing, and all the while we do the same if not worse than they and only set one horrible example for the world to see.. What can we expect next from this Congressw? Ovens and Gas chambers in the desert some place and concentration camps where the poor, handi capped, sickly and old are sent? People better start checking out history and then compare what was then and whats going on now in this country and the government [ Congress AND Senate] . Do not be shocked at what you see. I lived through those times and the resemblance is so much alike its frightning. Say what you like about these protesters but at least they have this country and its citizens at the top of their list of concerns, not like this Congress that spends more time in recess than they do where they belong and are paid by us tax payers for doing nothing but take from us and destroy what we have. Just like they pilfered over 3 and one half TRILLION DOLLARS from our Social Security Fund and now want to take more from us to replace what they squandered and stole. Our National Debt is their fault not that of the people. Check it out yourself and then think before you vote.They and others like to blame Obama for all thias but people fail to remember the Boehner!s, Cantors and Oconnel!s , the Tea Party and the Republican Party and yes, even some Democrats who walked out and said they refuse to deal with this president and balked at anything and everythingObama tried to do to get this economy back in forward gear and I must say Has, even if progress is slow aas he has always said it would be because of the horrible shape it was in when he took office and worse than he had expected..My God people, open your eyes and your brain,
Feisty Redhead Roselle, IL "The House will also flip back to Democratic control - you heard it here first! ;o)"
Being first to be wrong is no great accomplishment.
In the 2008 elections, the most reliable pollster (Rasmussen) had the Democrats leading in the Generic Congressional poll by 6%, and they picked up dozens of seats (even though Congress' Approval Rating was only 9%).
In the 2010 elections, the Republicans led by 8% and they picked up about 65 seats.
Right now, the Republicans lead by 6%, so the chance of the Democrats taking over control are somewhere between 'slim and none'.
You should worry more about the Democrats losing control of the Senate. In the 2010 elections, of the 19 Democratic seats up for grabs, the Republicans picked up 7 (37%), while losing none. In 2012, the Democrats (and their Indy allies) have 23 seats up for grabs (vs only 10 for Republicans), and if they lose 4, they will lose control of the Senate as well.
And things don't get much better for the Democrats in 2014, where they have to defend 20 Senate seats vs only 13 for the Republicans.
Obama wasted his 'once in a lifetime' control of Congress (including a filibuster proof Senate) after the 2008 elections. The liberals must be very discouraged.
The Republican primaries show that, at least the population in the lower 50% of IQ, that negative campaigning works. Each primary was won by the most negative candidate.
Between Newt Gingrich and former SC Governor Mark Sanford the new "Swinging Conservatives" movement will soon be sweeping the nation. Newt will waltz into the White House with the 'Who's your Daddy' campaign.
The GOP surrendered the title of "the moral party" and the title of "the defense party" and the title of "the economy party". Let's see what they have left. "The obstructionist party" "The christian fundamentalist party" and the "We're really pissed party". Oh yeah, also the "we have our heads so far up our Arses that we don't need a colonoscopy party". Go pres Obama. The more blowhard Gingrich trashes you the more work I will do to support you.
A proud american taxpayer.
Spanky - where in Minnesota are you??? Waiting on my Monster Jammers to get home!!
But this freakin race, seriously. I've never voted Democrat. Never wanted to or needed to because the Repubs were always able to keep their poop in a group (that would be keeping your sh#t together for those who don't have kids)... This year is an absolute disaster! I can't stand anyone in the running and the fact that there have been 3 different winners in 3 different states tells me they can't unite anyone anywhere for any single candidate. There should be 2, not 5 and the splitting is annoying. Hope I don't have to vote for Obama but honestly, at this point, with him I know what to expect - I may not like it or agree with anything he does, but whatever he does is predictable and doesn't surprise me. Can't say that about the conservatives...that's too bad!! They better stop dividing their party supporters and get the field narrowed down quickly.. Bring back Perry and Pawlenty, that would have been the ideal setup.
sandy-1851937: How many votes did Herman Cain get? LOL
You mean the guy who realized he had no chance and withdrew ages ago?
Tell us exactly how your comment is so LOL :|
@Eugene Saxe, Because Herman Cain was still on the ballot of the South Carolina Primaries. And Colbert, since he missed the validation period, was running as Herman Cain.
http://communities.washingtontimes.com/neighborhood/tygrrrr-express/2012/jan/21/steve-colbert-and-herman-cain-campaigns-college-st/
He was pretty much saying vote for Herman Cain if you actually want Stephen Colbert.
Yawn. It's all pretty meaningless at this point. If the repubs were smart, they'd be hoping for another as yet to be announced candidate to appear. None of these folks are worthy of the office, except maybe Steven Colbert!
Newt is still a proven crook. More power to the Democrates!
Killerdrgn:
Yeah, I know, except Cain took it more seriously and told people not to waste their votes like that.
The folks in Florida could select that nice young man Dr Ron Paul.
Eugene Saxe:
Because he was still on the ballot and Stephen Colbert campaigned for him since he himself (Colbert) can't get into the ballot.
It was over the news for the last few days......
What I find interesting even extremely laughable; is the South Carolina "Bible Thumpers" double standard. South Carolina "Christian" GOP Voters would rather see Gingrich, an Adulterer in the White House with his Mistress/now wife; rather than a "Mormon" who has been married to the same woman for what 25 years.
Secondly, Gingrich creating all that fuss about Romney not releasing his 2011 Tax return (which hasn't even been completed and filed yet with the IRS), mocking Romney's income... Now that Gingrich has released his tax return it shows Gingrich is one of the Wealthiest Men in America (much wealthier than Romney). I guess this a Gingrich case of " do as I demand, just don't look to closely at me." Now Gingrich is worried about the "dirt" Nancy Pelosi has on him and if she will turn the info over to Obama as a political weapon. (In one word yes, Nancy Pelosi is Obama's right hand). So, how are you feeling now South Carolina....
Someone should ask those South Carolina voters, if Gingrich wins the GOP nomination because of this bigotry and by some miracle wins the Presidency; will we have to call Gingrich's wife "The First Lady" or "The First Mistress"... LOL .. This is just too funny for me!....
I get a real kick out of reading all the looney liberal attempts to criticize Newt. All these "witty" little comments from a bunch of idiots, most who can't spell. Newt will give your community organizer the boot and we will get back to creating jobs and improving the economy. obumbo is a failure and we all know it. Makes Jimmy Carter look good and that is hard to do. So, go ahead libs, start flaming me but mark my words, your guy is GONE!!!!
Been reading about the demographics in South Carolina.... I wish I could stop thinking, WTF, you people? Also, we need to give President Obama a better Congress. The one he has has gone all stinky and rotten and they hate him more than they ever loved their country (if they ever did). I wonder what kind of crap they will try to pull to make sure there is as little recovery as possible in the next several months.
hernan33189:
TY. As I said:
Killerdrgn:
Yeah, I know, except Cain took it more seriously and told people not to waste their votes like that.
The Dems couldn't wish for a better candidate to run against in the GE than the Newtster, one of the most unethical, immoral Congressional has-beens, as in has been booted from Congress for ethics violations, has been a womanizing serial cheater, has been one of the many righties who routinely makes up sh*t to suit his latest flip or flop, and has been and continues to be a racist, calling our first black President the "food stamp president", which he would never label a white president. And to call Obama weak on defense is a good example of making up sh*t, in that Obama has ordered something like 8 times more drone strikes than chimpy did in both terms, and more Americans have died in Afganistan in the few years of Obama' s tenure than all of chimpie's time in Afganistan. After all, that is how righties measure a president's success or weakness on defense, the number of DEATHS in overseas conflicts during his administration, right? Based on that measure, chimpy was wimpy in Afganistan, whereas Obama went on the offensive big time, despite the "collateral damage" that often results from the use of drone strikes. Where am I coming from, you ask? I guess I'm trying to point out the indiscriminate use of force so often advocated by the righties, yet when Obama continues to implement this philosophy, putting tens of thousands more troops in Afganistan, and boldly go where chimpy never went, into Pakistan to take out targeted Taliban and Al Quida bad guys, usually one the many 2nd in command we've taken out with drones from the comfort of some far away place, positioned in front of the latest video game. So Newt is way off base calling Obama weak on defense....the Newtster would have to invade Iran to surpass Obama's kill count in Afganistan and Pakistan.
I am very ready to begin hearing the debate about foreign policy between President Obama and whichever one is the eventual nominee. Try as they might (and it will be terribly difficult if they continue to swear off using the word "Bush") none of them stack up. While Newt has called himself, "The longest running teacher of the craft of war to one and two star generals", that is just a bunch more out of control hubris, ego and grandiosity from him. President Obama has a record I am proud of and I look forward to hearing it defended.
Idiots! The belief that the founding fathers were all prophets and had the vision to know how our society, technology, world, and environmental factors would evolve so that everything they said would be true throughout time is so absurd. The fact they believe that God anoits them to know what is right at all times is scarey. The most dangerous countries ever are those with leaders that believe they are anoited or somehow have the belief that their country had the right to consider themsleves superior to all others. (Iran, Germany, etc....) The hypcroacy of indicating that all should have individual rights except a womans right to choose because they cannot have a right that our belief system will not let you have. Newt expousing that he knows better than all judges and would just kick their asses if they gave a ruling he did not like. All of this is just shows they are idiots. The fact that people are so afraid of losing what they have and actually having the courage to tackle the future makes them cowards and idiots.
A dead man walking will beat obummer.
OK. Go Socialist Party of America!
Karen C.-1567472 You are proud that Obummer issued a kill order for bin Laden instead of a capture order?
You are proud that he ordered the body dumped in the ocean before the DNA evidence was in?
You are proud that Obummer didn't work in setting up a democratic secular government in Iraq that would be pro America?
You are proud that Obummer has drawn out the Afghan war so long and daily American soldiers are killed?
You are proud that Obummer issued an executive order not to release his high school, Columbia College and Harvard Transcript Records?
You are proud that Obummer claims to be the author of his Ghost Written Books and used his office to make himself a millionaire?
You are proud that Obummer used taxpayer money to give his anti American Pastor a specially manufactured white house job and refuses to divulge the salary and duties or if Wright ever showed up for one day's work?
You are proud that Obummer and Biden sent $500,000,000 to Finland to establish an electric car company to compete with General Motors?
You are proud that Obummer put in the Federal Budget $3 billion in appropriations for unions?
You are proud that Obummer has lost the American public over $3.9 billion dollars in failed renewable energy investments.
You are proud that Obummer ordered a 90% reduction into the investment for using Hydrogen as a renewable energy source and that England, Japan, China and Norway are miles ahead of the U.S. in the use of hydrogen in existing cars? Norway has built vehicles that use hydrogen, has filling stations to refill cars with hydrogen and even has a special highway that was built so that cars can use it and the hydrogen filling stations.
Hydrogen is easily obtained from water and when it burns the only emission is water. No pollutants. Existing cars and vehicles can easily be adapted to use Hydrogen.
Department of Energy Secretary Steven Chu said that hydrogen vehicles are still 10 to 20 years away from practicality and that millions in federal government funding for hydrogen programs will be cut from the 2010 federal budget. Chusaid, "We asked ourselves, 'Is it likely in the next 10 or 15, 20 years that we will covert to a hydrogen car economy?' The answer, we felt, was 'no'" (well, duh).
Did we mention this is a big reversal? Just a few weeks ago, Chu announced $41.9 million for hydrogen projects. A major switch, but not totally surprising. During the presidential campaign last fall, Obama did call for a million PHEVs by 2015.
Obummer is an incompetent chair warmer.
Just turned on MSNBC. Wow! Are they thrilled! They are contemplating the republican establishment's response to this tidbit of info. Apparently, they like their republicans split. I never thought I'd see the liberal opinion media cheering for Newt! Even Sharpton was slobbering over the news. They think Newt will have a hard time in Florida but was hoping someone's PAC would help him out there. Apparently, they want these debates and fight to go on as long as possible.
Oddly, I hop on here and see a boat load supporting Newt. They must be liberals hoping Obama gets elected again.
Ahhh.. South Carolina? They are the idiots that believed that John McCain had a black "love child" after the Bush team put out the false (lie) info in SC during the 1999 primary which locked in George W. for the nominee. As long as this state with the highest public school dropout rate in the United States gets to decide the republican nominee, you can basically guarantee it will be the bottom of the barrel. Unbelievable. Now we can look forward to another 4 years of Obama. Add to that 4 republican candidates (you could probably say 3 since Ron Paul is not owned by corporate interests) spent 13 million campaigning in SC to get a job that pays $400,000 annually, I really think the republicans could stop taking money from public schools and educate our young people if it was not against their interests. No wonder they like to dumb down Americans and call anyone with a brain an "elitist", its the only way they can get elected.
My comment was narrowly about foreign policy and yes, I am proud of him. I wish that Afghanistan was completely over and also know that the reasons it is not has much to do with Republicans. How easy to criticize his actions on bin Laden from your easy chair. The script from the right after the fact was nothing if not predictable. "He should have captured him" (and made him more of a martyr than he is and created a fiasco of a trial never before seen), "Picture should have been made public" (again with the martyr issue and the burning in the streets), "He should get no credit, it was the Seals" (never mind that he made the call, he would have been burned at the stake if it had gone wrong and there was not one American life lost and not one leak). This word is dumb but it so fits here, Whatever, mr.wilson
I hate Gish Gallops, but I'll go through this anyways, even though there's better things I could be doing.
No, he made it clear that a surrender would be accepted under certain circumstances.
We were certain beforehand that he was Bin Laden.
We still have people left there assisting the government. Don't be thick. Are you proud that George W. Bush wasted hundreds of billions there in the first place under false pretenses?
And yet Obama has made a timetable that ends the war in 2014. Are you proud that Newt Gingrich would have us there much, much longer?
Executive order? I want a source. Besides, school records are irrelevent. Are you proud that Romney pays a lower tax rate than Obama, despite making much more income?
I'm not sure what we are supposed to be "ashamed of". Yes, the Presidential salary is pretty big but that's never been a surprise.
Cite your source for this.
Cite your sources.
I call either misleading or outright false on this.
Failed? There's half a million jobs fueled by that money, and US dependancy on foreign oil is below 50%.
Hyrdogen is not an efficient fuel carrier. In any case Obama has supported electric cars, which are far superior (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_policy_of_the_Obama_administration).
phinephancy-4252115
It is not that the bar is open, the bar has been lowered right into the gutter. I cannot believe that Republicans want to be represented next November by a lyingcheatingfartfacedadulterer such as Gingrich.
The only big thing Newt has going for him is people remember while in Congress he pulled the GOP together to help pass the very LAST "balanced budget"...Of course, remember too, that was under a Democratic President, Bill Clinton
Newt has to be the biggest megalomaniac in history. He and Trump both take the cake. Are there really people who want this country represented by a conniving , cheating adulterer who was an unadmitted lobbyist for anyone who would pay him money ? All I can say is, to quote Gomer Pyle , "Shame, shame shame."
Dreeves,
The billybobs and knuckledragers have done convinced themselves that Nasty Newt has been forgiven by nonother than the Lord hisself!!!
I really believe Newt could have committed any crime and if he somehow managed to get into the debates these hillbilly hypocrites would rationalize a way to vote for him.
Whatever, I'll never support Newt the JackA$$. Hopefully more enlightened voters will prevail in the smarter states for the nomination and general election.... (but I'd like to keep Blingrich as far away from the presidency as possible....)
What can you expect from a State that thinks the civil war is still alive and well, and are hypocrits as well. I see ads on TV where they want you to visit some of their resorts, but the ads caution you must be married or engaged to gain entry. A proven adulterer or an "open" marrige arrangement is apparently perfectly acceptable by the conservative evangelistic crowd. Then again I have never understood what an evangel was. I always thought that it had to be preached under a tent as opposed to in a building. The same sermon in a Church was not evangelistic, it was baptist, or something else like family values, or moral turpitude. Maybe a tent is used because some propective converts feared entering a Church. You might be Inquisitized in a Church but you had a chance to get away under a tent. My logic may be faltered but this kind of religious flip flop is what keeps me out of the Church and from under a tent and leary of anyone who has heard from God about my conduct.
So that's the name of the new single big government big spending party we have been suffering under!
QueenVictoria "The Republican primaries show that, at least the population in the lower 50% of IQ, that negative campaigning works."
Exit polls in the 2008 elections show that one of Obama's key constituencies in his win were voters who dropped out of high school, where he won their vote by a 63% advantage vs only 35% for McCain.
I suspect that Obama will use his $1 BILLION campaign war chest to wage the most negative campaign in history, since he certainly can't run on his economic record.
Gingrich went Gingrich on everyone and it worked.
The symbolism of "chasing" Romney out of that restaurant was lucky timing but he capitalized on it nicely... "where's Romney?", he says, "thought we might have a debate"... while Romney waffles on his tax returns, sees his "rate of the rich" as normal, tries to defend big money and corporations, and appears to flee the establishment. Wow.
And what's with THAT? A Republican specifically running against big money? Striking a populous pose and not just surviving, but winning? Unreal. Never before this.
What that says is that Gingrich may ride that populous wave to the nomination, but the message easily becomes Obama's in the general election. In other words, a Gingrich win here with the message he had means that the evil big money message is resonating and will be hard to beat in November...
And you can take that to the House... so to speak.
This whole election has turn into a giant "eff you" for the people. I'm going to research some third party candidates and vote for them. I refuse to vote for Obama due to that indefinite detention bill he signed, Newt is a slimeball, and Romney is completely out of touch with average Americans. I'm fed up with all of them!
Tyler -
Why was this post 'collapsed'? It did not violate any of the conduct code. There should be a penalty for people who collapse posts merely on the basis of philosophical disagreements.
Feisty Redhead Roselle, IL "The House will also flip back to Democratic control - you heard it here first! ;o)"
Being first to be wrong is no great accomplishment.
In the 2008 elections, the most reliable pollster (Rasmussen) had the Democrats leading in the Generic Congressional poll by 6%, and they picked up dozens of seats (even though Congress' Approval Rating was only 9%).
In the 2010 elections, the Republicans led by 8% and they picked up about 65 seats.
Right now, the Republicans lead by 6%, so the chance of the Democrats taking over control are somewhere between 'slim and none'.
You should worry more about the Democrats losing control of the Senate. In the 2010 elections, of the 19 Democratic seats up for grabs, the Republicans picked up 7 (37%), while losing none. In 2012, the Democrats (and their Indy allies) have 23 seats up for grabs (vs only 10 for Republicans), and if they lose 4, they will lose control of the Senate as well.
And things don't get much better for the Democrats in 2014, where they have to defend 20 Senate seats vs only 13 for the Republicans.
Obama wasted his 'once in a lifetime' control of Congress (including a filibuster proof Senate) after the 2008 elections. The liberals must be very discouraged.
dan m here is a thought how about you use actual facts instead of just making up stuff to make obama look bad. the truth is far more damaging than lies.
See my other posts regarding this nonsense claim.
You can call us dumb hillbillies for giving Newt the vote, so how about we also talk about the dumb blacks that 95% voted for Obama and i can tell you this by the interviews, probably 90 had not a clue to what Obama stood for except for an increase in welfare. And if this is considered racist, then i consider calling us "stupid hillbillies" racist too. I just hope the country wakes up and rejects this Marxist and throws both him and his wife out of office and out of the limelight so they can go back to Chicago and be community agitators once again. Despicable they both are.
Let's see if I have this right - according to Gingrich "I articulate the deepest felt values of the American people." So he clearly things all of us are trashy, lying, cheating wh**es???? Amazing how far the far right has sunk to embrace this piece of gutter trash. But, I guess that really says it all, doesn't it? The far right has no real values - just want to control what Americans do and say and destroy the middle class. Amazing.
Killerteam - I don't think you're dumb hillbillies - that would be an insult to hillbillies. When anyone throws out the "Marxist" claim it is clear they aren't very intelligent. No more needs to be said.
obama is a marxist..... i suppose you think he is a Christian because he sat in Rev Wrights Marxist anti American White hating church for 20 yrs, so that makes him born again? I beg to differ... if it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, its a duck.
Killerteam but this article wasn't about what blacks were doing. It was about supposedly thinking and reasoning people voting for this @!$%# who not only had a mistress while he was screaming and bellowing about what Clinton was doing but was getting ready to divorce his second ill wife for that mistress, who, by the way, looks like something from the Addams family. I would object to staring at Gingrich for four years but his wife could stop time for all eternity. Obviously evangelicals are hillbillies or they wouldn't be evangelicals, I don't know where they got that married couples were more likely to vote for Newt and I can't talk about the women too much because I am one but suffice it to say I know some women who voted for Clinton purely because they thought he was sexy. Both parties are horrid. All politicians are lying asswipes, no matter who becomes president next we'll still have a snake-oil salesman.
Why is this racist not banned yet? I hope Obama is an atheist, just to prove that we are not a Christian nation.
Hey killerteam, are "hillybillies" a race? Last time I checked, they are not.
O.S.M.R. ducks.....C.M. Wangs. Obama is a marxist, read his books.
Its always funny to watch someone who thinks so much of themselves. Like my grandfather used to say. "its like 5 lbs of shyt in a 2lbs bag!"
Dasvet, please read http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Obama#Marxism.
Anybody who would consider voting for any of the GOP candidates should read the SC debate fact check:
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/01/16/south-carolina-debate-fact-check/
Pretty funny the justifications they come up with when they're asked about their "nonfactual" soundbites.
The GOP presidential primary voters are like a little baby that refuses to eat his Gerber strained peas(Romney). Each time the spoon touches his lips, he spits it out. He wants to subsist on applesauce(Santorum) or vanilla pudding(Gingrich). Anything but peas. The poor little guy doesn't know that the adults(the Republican leadership)will put up with his tantrums for a short while until he is forced to finally eat his peas.
His next doctor visit is in November. The doctor(President Obama) will settle this issue by ordering a well balanced diet. The little guy will finally get his dessert, but only after he eats a healthy balanced meal(that does not have to include peas).
Mr Anon.. The Black Panthers, Crips, Bloods, El Rukns, are all not races, but have one thing in common, they are all black thugs... same thing goes for hillbillies, they are considered dumb white people by you racists, and it seems its being thrown around quite a bit on here. You dont see people on here calling blacks a bunch of dumb coons, but we are supposed to sit back and let people call us dumb hillbillies, and i do take offense.
I just love how you liberal democrats are getting all moral since Newt is ahead... Where were you when Ted Kennedy killed that gal he was screwing? How about Ted Kennedy and his other democrat pals getting drunk and humping the waitresses when out to lunch? How about Clintons raping Jenifer Flowers and other chicks and getting BJ's in the White House while the republican congress was running the show and making him look good? How about your Barney Frank running a male whore house in his home share by his male lover? How about John Edwards and his shanigans? Now you want to get all moral or something???? LOL, you people crack me up, and your nothing but a bunch of athiests and baby killers as far as im concerned, and that is not a lie either.
Mr Anon, i can make quotes too... http://obamaism.blogspot.com/
Real proof that obama is a marxist communist socialist progressive
JUst the stupid retard hillbillies in SC that voted for Blingrich... didn't mean to belittle all hillbillies...
More like three LOSERS.
But the real loser is the United States of America if this is the best the modern Republican Party has to offer.
There was a time when the GOP stood for personal integrity; fiscal sanity; and equal treatment regardless of race, creed, color, or national origin.
Not any more.
Glad that the Leftwing radical mainstream media hasn't been able to choose the GOP candidate.
Dasvet? You have no doubt heard the quote from some flimsy document that some old guys wrote that goes something like this "All men are created equal" and you do understand what Marxism is since you seem to bandie that around alot.....therefore you would understand that the quote and much of the document that it came from is "marxist" in its direction.
You should gain a much better understanding of the "isms" before you start generalising folks in to those catagories.....you may find yourself in one that you don't want to be in, now won't that be a pickle.
Mr.killer team,There are many comments that I consider rather of no value, but not many as valueless as yours.They are merely vitriolic. not interesting nor informative. I suggest that before you post it you reconsider what you are trying to say.also mixing up the left the right the socialists and liberalists is unusual to say the least.
Yes Willing.Sniper and we are very happy as well.
Just like last time the Repubs and their splinter groups the Haters, the Tea Party (a living embarrassment to our Founding Fathers), the Military Industrial Complex, the Holier Than Thou Evangelicals, the Right to Lifers (we want to have our babies so we can sacrifice them later), the 1%ers, the anti-regulation environment rapers, Big Oil, Big Bank, Bain Inc, the Rovettes, Faux News and the rest WILL HAVE NO ONE BUT THEMSELVES TO BLAME FOR THE PITIFUL SHAPE THE GOP IS IN!
THANKS MATE!
The democrat party has a lot to be proud of... here is a list of obamas accomplishments since in office
An impressive list of accomplishments!
· First President to apply for college aid as a foreign student, then deny he was a foreigner.
· First President to have a social security number from a state he has never lived in.
· First President to preside over a cut to the credit-rating of the United States
· First President to violate the War Powers Act. .
· First President to be held in contempt of court for illegally obstructing oil drilling in the Gulf of Mexico .
· First President to defy a Federal Judge’s court order to cease implementing the Health Care Reform Law.
· First President to require all Americans to purchase a product from a third party.
· First President to spend a trillion dollars on ‘shovel-ready’ jobs when there was no such thing as ‘shovel-ready’ jobs.
· First President to abrogate bankruptcy law to turn over control of companies to his union supporters.
· First President to by-pass Congress and implement the Dream Act through executive fiat. .
· First President to order a secret amnesty program that stopped the deportation of illegal immigrants across the U.S. , including those with criminal convictions.
· First President to demand a company hand-over $20 billion to one of his political appointees.
· First President to terminate America ’s ability to put a man in space.
· First President to have a law signed by an auto-pen without being present.
· First President to arbitrarily declare an existing law unconstitutional and refuse to enforce it.
· First President to threaten insurance companies if they publicly spoke-out on the reasons for their rate increases.
· First President to tell a major manufacturing company in which state it is allowed to locate a factory.
· First President to file lawsuits against the states he swore an oath to protect (AZ, WI, OH, IN).
· First President to withdraw an existing coal permit that had been properly issued years ago.
· First President to fire an inspector general of Ameri-corps for catching one of his friends in a corruption case.
· First President to appoint 45 czars to replace elected officials in his office. .
· First President to golf 73 separate times in his first two and a half years in office, 90 to date.
· First President to hide his medical, educational and travel records.
· First President to win a Nobel Peace Prize for doing NOTHING to earn it.
· First President to go on multiple global ‘apology tours’.
· First President to go on 17 lavish vacations, including date nights and Wednesday evening White House parties for his friends; paid for by the taxpayer.
· First President to have 22 personal servants (taxpayer funded) for his wife.
· First President to keep a dog trainer on retainer for $102,000 a year at taxpayer expense.
· First President to repeat the Holy Qur’an tells us the early morning call of the Azan (Islamic call to worship) is the most beautiful sound on earth.
· First President to take a 17 day vacation.
WALK FOR LIFE IN SAN FRANCISCO TODAY!50,000+ in attendance
WALK FOR LIFE IN SAN FRANCISCO TODAY!50,000+ in attendance
Thanks for contributing to the Extreme right conservative cause. You just helped them one step more to realize their dream of having women going back to the dark ages, where thy had abortions in back alleys, and died by the hundreds.
What do you people think? That just because a bunch of you want to stop abortion is really going to stop? In Mexico, where abortion is illegal, there are thousands of abortions done every day. Many of those women never make it alive.
Put your welcome mat outside your home for the Christian Taliban
I have to agree with IRESPOND. The extreme religious American Taliban hates women. They are over obsessed with sex and can not (or will not) mind their own business but, just like the extremists in the middle east, must stick their noses into every ones bedroom. They should focus on themselves.
You'll notice that the most extreme anti-abortion activists all share one thing - they're all men. This tells you that the "sanctity of human life" has nothing to do with it. It's all about men wanting to control women, and being threatened when they think they're losing that control.
another repubican to screw up the nation like bush did!!!!!
If a bunch of abortion queens would keep their knees togeather they would not have to worry about being butchared in Mexico - the world would be better off with out a bunch of sluts -- By the way why don't you visit Iran they love sluts there
Here's a thought don't have sex before you can afford to have one.
or have your partner wear a condom hummmm
get your tubes tied before the 5th time you get knocked up before age 21
or better yet use personal responsibilty but seem some people in this world lack that.
Early out i'm not a man and I am definitly anti-abortion pro life.
Who isn't pro-life? I'm certainly pro-life. But that doesn't mean I want the government in the doctors office. I'd rather have kids get proper sex education and learn that while abstinence might be nice in the republicans wet dreams, its not the only way to prevent unwanted pregnancies. To tie this all to the topic of Newt, I pray he runs on a solid anti-abortion campaign. He's already said women shouldn't serve in combat because they have periods, let him throw away the female vote completely.
Well, I'm pro-choice. The irony here is how the liberals want to have the government into everyting EXCEPT reproductive rights while the conservative christians decry government in anything EXCEPT women's reproductive rights. Now, while the national debt spirals out of control, jobless rates remain stubbornly fixed, the EU looks to collapse, and the economy continues to sputter, the abortion issue rears it's head, again. Fretting over abortion is like arguing about who's going to call the fire dept. while the house goes up in flames.
Don't want an abortion???? Have gay sex! :D
I am pro choice, it is the woman's body and her choice, NOT EVERYONE ELSES CHOICE!! All you pro lifers, mind your own body and your own business!! The pro lifers are like the government who wants to tell everyone what is good or bad for each of us.
Who cares.
Hey, I am a conservative who believes in a woman's right to chose! And saying that Newt is a philanderer compared to Clinton, Kennedy, and Edwards is like saying that a bic lighter is over heating the sun! Why is it that when a democrat screws some little piece of poli-groupie its just good clean fun, but, when a Republican has a roll in the hay it is some kind of "scandal"! I am sure that our current president has had a few sexual experiences in the past (He wasn't a virgin when he married Michelle!) and he has never given out his college transcript or Master's thesis. I am sure that if any Republican refused to allow a rectal exam on national TV the libs in the press would scream "cover up"! (If the Republican allowed this, I would scream "cover up").
Not every conservative believes that abortion should be outlawed, just that it is a state, not federal, responsibility. I have two daughters and would fight hard for their right to control their bodies, but, the liberals are trying to outlaw everything else that they believe "hurts" our bodies. First, It was tobacco, now it is transfats, sugar, etc. (If you outlaw Big Macs, then only outlaws have them!) We cannot speak our minds because this might upset some "victim" group, and we cannot have that! I am a firm believer that the best way to get rid of gay marriage is to let them try it! lol!
I just hope that this country is not so broken by the socialists running the country that we will have to start over.
@ Dem in Texas: How about instead of teaching abstinence, teach morals at home? Also teach some family values...maybe that will let kids make up their own mind and actually choose to wait before they have sex. Abstinence is just like saying no...but where is the positive part? No on sex when you are a teen, but yes to sex after being married or being an adult. Simple as that. By the way, morals or family values don't have to come from religion...they do for me though. I know plenty who have morals but don't practice religion. Worked for them.
you know we have the power to stop this...that is VOTE! blaming governments, libs, the media isn't going to resolved anything...But it's the America's new pastime...Whining and pointing finger at everybody except themselves...are you a participant of this America pastime?
Dan M 1100664; Now I wouldn't say cover up to Sarah getting a Rectal eggahamination on national tv. Matter of fact I wouldn't mind being the one giving it to her. You betcha.
Anyahoo, as far as aborion goes, I'm pro life all the way but I vote pro choice, no.1, I'm a guy, no.2, if a women ends up with child and not by her own choice then she should have the final say on what she wants to do with her own body. Women should have the final say over their bodies. Thats just the way it is.
This is good news for progressives. It's a mess though, for the republican hierarchy. Will It allow these illegitimates to continue on, and secure a terrible beating in Nov., or will it attempt to push a Jeb Bush onto their quickly diminishing dirt road, headed to nowhere before it arrives there, if it hasn't already?
So Dan, are you saying it was fine and dandy for Gingrich to scorch Clinton for his affair, while having one of his own at the same time? You want to speak your mind to a rape victim wanting an abortion because of being raped, or don't you consider them a victim? If one State passes laws to ban abortion, are you going to stand guard at the State borders to make sure a pregnant woman doesn't go to another State that allows abortion, just in case she is even remotely thinking about it? Seems to me that THAT sounds socialist. THAT is why it is a Federal law, and not a State law. Get rid of gay marriage? You saying straight marriage is alive and well in the U.S.? Oh wait, as long as it is a man and a woman, you don't care how many times they are married, or have affairs WHILE they are married, do you? Oh, and don't forget Santorum's mantra, NO abortions of ANY type, doesn't matter if it costs a woman her life, and he wants the Government in your bedroom. They are nothing short of a group of 'Family Values' candidates stuck in the 1800's. You talk about socialists running the country, but you won't speak against the Ryan Plan, which in itself was socialist, or that Bush started TWO unfunded wars over lies and tanked the economy the last year of office? And Dan, if you didn't know, President Bush's standards are STILL alive and well in the 2012 Republican race, since several of his motley crew are with at least one candidate running now. I see how it is with Republicans, as long as they get what they want, it's all good, praise the Lord and all that jazz, but if anything has a Democratic conotation/label on it, it HAS to be bad, and the Devil's handiwork, shame on them for wanting to help the American PEOPLE as a whole.
fantomdog-The issue was not Monica's stained blue dress it was President Clinton,a lawyer deliberately lied under oath. anabana-well I'm not surprised that a Democrat would vote again for inexperience just because the current POTUS can warble a few lyrics since a unknown with the same name as the singer Rev Al Green was a Democratic Party losing senate candidate. ByeBye and good riddance to Obama on Election Day 2012!
Republicans only give a @!$%# about life while in utero. After that they malnourish, under educate and demonize the children for being born to poor or ill-equipped parent(s). Without poor kids who would the right wing feed to the war machine?
mary kirk - but you'll vote for a piece of trash like Newt? How telling! I'm not surprised that a Republican would vote for a lying cheat who was fined $300,000 for ethics violations - just because he's a Republican. Pathetic that's all your party has!
Obama 2012
Seeking sanity still? I suppose you voted for Obama because he was black, read a teleprompter well. It surely couldn't be because he had a lick of usable experience for the job he ran for. NNewt has your p--- in a wad it seems.
All you have to do is look at these welfare mamas with 15 kids by 15 different fathers to know something has to be done. I firmly believe that if people like this have a baby and no father, fine, you had your one and then steralize them. I dont want to support these people all my life like i have already and if they cant keep their legs closed, by golly steralize them after they deliver.
I am a liberal who leads a conservative lifestyle and therefore I am surrounded by friends who are Republicans. For the first time this week they have all come to a very solemn realization that four more years of President Obama would be better than Romney or Gingrich. Anyone who can tackle an Al Green song has my vote. I prefer soul to stone cold(Romney) or mean (Gingrich).
Ana,
Great special on VH1 classics about old rock and roll, R & B, Motown and more. Have it recording now.
AnaBanana,
I agree with you.
Although I'm a left-leaning centrist and secularist, I too, have some Republican friends, but they're about ten to thirty years older than me, Baby Boomers close to retirement or have already retired and are collecting Social Security. Half of them are in their middle age, and they come from the Ronald Reagan of the Cold War and the Richard Nixon Era of the Vietnam Conflict.
They privately admit to me that they cannot on good conscience vote for any one of the Republican candidates because they're much too far to the right with their radical views, and they added that the lineup of GOP candidates running for President are the biggest political, moral and religious hypocrites that they've ever come across in a long time in the national arena.
Two of them have already told me that as a more sensible alternative, they intend to vote for Obama, because he's more a of a moderate that came from humble beginnings ...something that hardly exists in the GOP any more, and is a definitely unwanted presence in the current political environment of the GOP Tea Party.
A liberal leading a conservative life.
WTF?
Is that not walking the talk, of just a state of confusion.
Be true to thy self, or something.
I am also basically a liberal that leads a conservative life. I believe in many things that the Republican Party believes in, but I also believe in a lot of what the Democratic Party has to say.
I am a fiscal conservative, but I believe that people have rights that, as long as they do not interfere with me, should be protected.
I am a retired (disability) Vietnam Veteran, 67 years old, and a college graduate. What demographic does that put me in?
I live in Massachusetts -- have been subjected to Massachusetts' mandatory health care -- which I have no problem with. Gays and lesbians are allowed to marry here and it has not affected my marriage, nor that of any of my family members or friends -- so I have no problem with that.
What I do have a problem with is the religious right telling me how I need to live my life. My religion is between me and my God, and I do not need some sanctimonious ass telling me that I need to do this or that.
I also have a problem with someone who has more money than the Pope (Romney, Cantor, and others) telling me that they "understand" what I am going through having to live on Social Security and a disability check from the VA, when their houses cost more than I have earned during my life.
Well then you liberals leading a conservative life must be loving Obama's decision to re-up the patriot act, and I know you love the whole indefinite detention stuff.
Civil liberties are apparently not Obama's friend.
WTF?
I'm a conservative living a conservative lifestyle and I think Obama has an amazingly good voice. I was impressed. I'd buy his CD. However, to base the future of the country and your vote on a man because he sings well is rather shallow.
Oh come on Phil - dude won a Nobel prize, AND has cause the tides to recede and temp. to decrease.
Good news gang - the glaciers on Kilamanjaroo and in at the North Pole are rocking. Obama has beaten global warming.
Dude has skills.
Lew,
There are a lot of fiscal conservatives out there who lean liberal on social issues. I'm one of them. There is never a candidate that represents my views. I've been pushing hard for third parties to run but they tend to be more extreme than the major parties. Ron Paul is the closest thing we have to a candidate who is fiscally conservative and socially liberal. But he is a libertarian, which does not describe me.
Newt is the man to take down Obama. I can't wait for the election to clean the WhiteHouse of this phony. He was a do nothing senator from Illinois and he followed suit to the WhiteHouse. Anabanana I hope you and your friends decide differently come this election. Hope and Change baloney. You want some more of this do nothing administration vote for him. Be careful what you wish for you may regret it.
As a person I don't care for Newt but as a political figurehead to run the gov't I would vote for him long before Obama. Newt help lead the USA to being for a short time debt free and pushed CLinton to do whats right. He is a great debater and would be a tuff POTUS.
Obama has great speak writers and no thats not a typo, the telepromters are read verbatim. Obama cares for nothing but his agenda and doesn't care how high our debt gets to accomplish HIS goals.
Newt IMO sucks compared to what this country needs but that person hasn't stepped up to the plate and Obama has failed and needs replacing.
Next the DEMs needs to replace the liberals with true blue bloods ie kick out Maxine Waters , Barney Franks , Nancy Pelosi , Gregory Meeks , Arthur Davis , Lacy Clay and Harry Reid.
We need to can anyone with more than 12 years in Congress or Senate. Lets start fresh
A mistress will not be first lady. Stop fantasizing.
I wonder how many women agree with what Newt said about his first wife, the one he left when she had cancer:
"She's not young enough or pretty enough to be a president's wife"
Like a woman in SC who voted for Newt, it's neither here nor there. Tacky story from Newt's first wife and it happened so long ago! Most Presidents did their share.
Phil---That is the viewpoint of bigots since our founding...They can be entertained by people of color but not led...Thanks for letting us know where you stand...It is a service to the populus...Don't hide bigotry is not illegal it is just morally wrong...Stick to your guns..God will counsel you in the afterlife we don't care its your life and soul..
I believe that Romney's big problem will be his refusal to admit his tax history and the Gingrich is womanizing ,financial hocus-pocus and his total lack of ethics. Surely the Reps. can put a more moral nominee than these up for PotUS although I must admit that I consider that the far right are an immoral bunch of looters of the national economy . As far as the complaining that they do,I remember when R Reagan was the gov. of Cal. and the media published the facts that he had payed no taxes his answer was not an explanation but the remark that that was dirty pool. Gingrich is not the only one that says ,do as I say but not as I do.
So ironic that the Repubs who are quick to forgive Gingrich for his philandering are the first to jump on Pres Clinton for his.
With this parade of clowns, American has no choice but to elect Obama for another four years.
Ana
I am surrounded by friends who are Republicans. For the first time this week they have all come to a very solemn realization that four more years of President Obama would be better than Romney or Gingrich.
I don't buy it. I know a lot of Democrats and Republicans. Most democrats are pretty mum about the matter. The Republicans are quitely saying who do you think and what are their chances.
Polls are low-balling Gingrich and Santorum by an apparently consistent 4 - 10 points lower than they are scoring in the actual primaries. You should be able to add Gingrich, Santorum and half of Paul's numbers and get about 56%. The conservative contingent of the repblican party is polled to be in the range of 55 - 65% of the Party.
If you are hearing republicans conceding the election now, they must be succumbing to the hype of the 79% registered democrat media.
@Bart
I do have choice and it won't be Obummer, he would not care about popularity, he would do whatever "he" felt and wanted to do, he will destroy what is left of America.
NO OBAMA IN 2012, no more president whos wife is finally proud of this country because now her husband is president. NO MORE CHANGE FROM OBAMA, THE ONLY CHANGE IS OBAMA OUT IN 2012.
Difference is Clinton was having sex with an employee and at his oral office also.
Newt was probly screwing some chick at a hotel. Both are wrong but Clinton should have like the old saying "go get a room" also you don't shiit where you sleep or eat.
I just wish a real man could run the white house for once this century.
my sentiments exacually, obama out in 2012. and as far as pro choice, most of you had a choice not to get pregnant in the first place. what gives you the right to murder a child in the womb. let someone adopt and raise that child, if it is so un-wanted.
So Bohnercs, since there are close to 500,000 children in the Foster Care system as late as 2009, where is the money OR parents going to come from to care for/adopt even more 'unwanted' children? Oh, wait, that's not YOUR problem, is it, that's YOUR choice. How convenient.
fantomdog,I have always been against US citizens buying fresh new infants from Third World countries to adopt. Of course the adoptive parents aren't pleased when the infant buying business is questioned as they are sanctimonious since they SAVE 3rd World babies! I firmly believe the international baby buying industry should be outlawed. Infertile couples might then recognize that to become a parent does not require buying other peoples infants. 500,000+ US citizen children from infancy thru age 17 are warehoused in fostercare and need parents.I was a fosterchild,raised 2 of our own and have taken (without any form of payment) children into our home.
Randy, I really do have to disagree with you about the "toughness" of Newt. He is contentious, blustering and publicly confrontational but I remember that behind closed doors, Bill Clinton cleaned his clock and Bill didn't even market himself as a hard nose. I tend to think that "real men" don't need to act tough and swagger.
How can the people that were shocked and horrified that Bill Clinton comitted adultry and lowered our childrens moral standards actually come up with a half-baked theory that it is then ok to vote for a man for President of the United States that cheated on a wife with cancer and then left her and then did the same to two more wives? At least the Democrats did not vote for a known adultress. At times like this I wonder who would Jesus vote for? Ron Paul the guy that came in last with 13 percent; a righteous number of righteous men Jesus and 12 disciples in the end. If Jesus were alive today and knew more than the scholars like he did in his own time he would be called an "elitist" by the GOP.
I think it is so funny that Gingrich won in SC. But then again the repubs have no one worthy. Someone posted that Gingrich was going to create jobs. That is laughable. Romney is a supporter of big business and Gingrich is their lobbyist. Corporations own our government, not "we the people". These guys will do anything their corporate partners want, jobs be damned. The only repub not taking corporate money isn't even invited to the debates, Roehmer (sp?) from La. He takes no donations greater than $100, and none from busness, and he has no PAC or superPAC. It is really sickening and we need to change the laws to get our government back!
I like Gingrich, if the Washington establishment doesn't like that he won maybe it's a GOOD thing. He doesn't play nice with the Big Boys. Obama has made a disaster of this Country so it's time for a Real Change this time around. They'll have to fumigate the Capitol and the White House first to get rid of all the Chicago Rats they brought in and gave jobs to.
Obama will easily beat Newt or Mitt. Conservatives winning these primaries are the best thing that Obama could hope for because conservatives are rather stupid people and don't seem to understand that they are at most 15% of the voters, and that the vast majority support freedom of choice for women not the women hating backward so-called Christian beliefs.
On Feb. 20 2012, the US Military veteran's, as well as active duty men and women from every branch of the US Military are going to march on the white house for Ron Paul in order to communicate to the world who they have clearly chose. He will win. He cant lose. If you don't love him you have not listened. We should ask the troops what they think about all this.
If one of those veterans who served gets outof the military and has a motorcycle accident, without hving insurance, Dr. Paul would let him die. I have listened. I don't love him. How can you possible love a man with those views?
Elizabeth - you sound more like a cult member than a voter.
To Those liberals who consider that they are living a conservative life. It is not necessary to live in poverty to be a liberal. Most liberals have a decent education which means that they have probably always had good jobs and so have usually had a decent standard of living . They also know that the unfairness of the power structure is morally wrong.All national structures that favour one economic end of the spectrum above all the others always ends up with civil dissatisfaction,without exception. To Janie / Gingrich is going to fight the big boys? You do not seem to realise that he is their shill.
none of these guys stand a chance against obama. it is pretty entertaining tho.
To the contrary, Obama doesn't stand a chance against Mitt Romney. The campaign will be very entertaining for sure, especially as the dems lose more seats in the House and lose control of the Senate and the White House. Very satisfying it will be. Good luck to the communist liberals. You're going to need it.
Most Americans are smart enough to realize that running a country is a completely different animal than running a vulture capitalist company. Government's role is not to earn dividends for its investors. In fact, government doesn't owe one iota of favorable treatment to corporations. Governments role is to work 100% for its citizens, of which corporations are not included. Romney's proclamation that corporations are people shows just how delusional the man is, and the majority of Americans understand that.
It's not the Presidents job to run the country. What runs the country are the Laws, Mandates, Codes,
and enactments that are law, or better know as the invisible hand. It is not the Presidents job to work for the peaple, It is his job to get re-elected and become wealthier. The President of the U.S iS really President of
the house, He has very little direct power. His power lies in influence. The president position is a lighting Rod proof position, He is not accountable for nothing.
Why are corporations not people? Do real people not work for corporations? If my company does poorly, do I not lose my job? Of course real people are affected by how companies do. If you tax companies heavily, real people lose jobs. What is delusional, is to think that you can do whatever you want to do to a corporation without hurting real people. That is what the majority of Americans understand, most of which work for a company. A company that will no longer employ them, if they aren't making money.
Well John Roth I would appreciate it if you would get your laws and mandates to mandate an election map for my state before I'm disenfranchised in the presidential election. Nobody in my current state has a valid voters card thanks to federal interference and inability of the federal court system to agree.
Actually, saying that corporations DO NOT have 'personhood' is delusional, and just shows how many people do not understand economics. If you bothered to spend even a few minutes, you would quickly find that corporations have lawfully protected 'rights'. Look up the Supreme Court's: Citizens United v. Federal Elections Commission from last year, a good example of corporations being treated as 'people'. Right, wrong, whatever it is, corporations definately have a form of 'personhood' when it comes to actual laws. Romney might have been referring to this, or maybe, as he CLEARLY stated in his speech last year, corporate money ends up in actual people's pockets. 'Corporate Greed', what a phrase. Are inanimate, emotionless entities capable of being 'greedy'? Of course not, because real people are pulling the strings. That is what was being referred to, and many people understand this, including liberals. I find it amusing so many deride FOX, implying that it supplies false arguments to droves of dribbling morons, yet these same people immediately turn around and use an equally weak, canned argument. Read an article entitled "Mitt Romney and People, Inc" by Jonah Goldberg. An interesting, and fairly unbaised article (it is coming from a pro-union site). Here is an interesting bit-
"All corporate personhood means is that corporations are legal entities that have certain rights or “standing” under the law. The law does this for several reasons, but first among them is the simple fact that people don’t lose their rights when they associate in groups, whether it’s a corporation, a labor union, a nonprofit organization or even a newspaper.
As legal scholar Ilya Shapiro writes, “It cannot be any other way; in a world where corporations are not entitled to constitutional protections, the police would be free to storm office buildings and seize computers or documents. The mayor of New York City could exercise eminent domain over Rockefeller Center by fiat and without compensation if he decides he’d like to move his office there. ... (R)ights-bearing individuals do not forfeit those rights when they associate in groups.”
BTW- Saying Romney is unfit for president because he was a 'capitalist vulture' sounds like a pretty thin argument considering our current president was a 'community organizer'.
le-752345, you really cant be that naive? When people say corporations aren't people... they aren't refering to the people who work for companies... they are refering to the fact that the supreme court recogizes corporations themselves (not the people who work for them) as actual citizens. Thats what upsets people.
basically by corporations being people themselves... people who work for corporations and are incharge, can do things in the name of the corporation, and then not have any reprucussions of that corporations actions unless its extremely illegal. (even then, you have to be able to successfully place the blame which is pretty hard) After that the corporation can just change its name, and become a new person.
Yo, Community organizer and civil rights lawyer, author of two autobiographies (before he had accomplished much except going to school and being a community organizer, and civil rights lawyer) Seems Obama's resume is rather...thin.
Stubby g and the rest of you "volunteer" posters for Obama, must suck to have to work on Saturday night cause your man wants you to get shots in as early as possible about the SC primary. Hahahahahah You suckers sit and post while he goes to Disneyworld and that makes you smart????
Can't wait until Newt (a history professor remember) rips Obama a new one in a debate. No PC with the guy who has done nothing since elected except try to destroy our way of life and our economy.
Pittsburgh and the Fiesty deadhead are going to be so shocked and disappointed in November.
"Laws, Mandates & Codes" run the Country and the RUIN of this Country is the "TAX CODE" with its $1.1TRILLION in "breaks" & "loopholes; Plus allowing 45% to pay NOTHING! And The GOP / TEA PARTY just refuse to even look at it. WHY?? Won't their RICH & CORPORATIONS "masters" allow "change": after all: "THERE IS YOUR DEFICIT". "Tea Party"people, follow your "namesakes", grab your "axes" and "AX THE TAX CODE" Bingo! NO DEFICIT!
hmmmm, mygirl1, now let me see...community organizer, successful author, attorney, professor of Constitutional Law, United States Senator, 44Th President of the United States of America. I believe that that's a resume that every single republican politician envies and would love to emulate.
EddieIsFiction - No I am not naive when I talked about why 'corporations are people'. I took the time to read the original quote by Romney, which is what I was commenting on. Maybe everyone should read the quote so they know what he was talking about. He was being urged to raise taxes on corporations by the crowd, and he said that corporations are people, therefore taxes should not be raised on corporations because it effects people. When challenged on it, he said that what corporations make goes to the people. He was trying to explain to everyone that when taxes are raised on corporations, that it effects real people.
Here is a quote from a story where he said this:
Romney explained that one way to fulfill promises on entitlement programs is to “raise taxes on people,” but before he could articulate his position on not raising taxes, someone interrupted.
“Corporations!” a protester shouted, apparently urging Romney to raise taxes on corporations that have benefited from loopholes in the tax code. “Corporations!”
“Corporations are people, my friend,” Romney said.
Some people in the front of the audience shouted, “No, they’re not!”
“Of course they are,” Romney said. “Everything corporations earn ultimately goes to people. Where do you think it goes?”
Throughout history the conservative/right ,have always been the rich and powerful.They have always been contemptuous of the general population.Now, with a form of limited democracy, they have to spend more time and money to convince us that they have our welfare at heart. Get real!
Pittsburgh, stop embarrasing your state and start rooting for your home team. Newt was born and raised in Pennsyvania
Santorum was born in Virginia, where his primary residence is, but was raised in West Virginia, and then Butler County Pennsylvania where he was elected to congress and then the Senate.
I wouldn't be in Ohio if you would elect less legally steal from business democrats.
It is truly a sad day for mankind when one of its own suggests a piece of paper shares the same quality as a human. Please show me the lungs on the piece of paper that allows it to breath, the heart that pumps blood, the nervous system that allows it to feel, the eyes that allow it to see, and finally the brain that allows it to reason and speak. No matter what Romney or SCOTUS implies, that piece of paper has NONE of those attributes that make us human.
If corporations are people, then by extension, a school is a person, a church is a person, and so is a bridge club, a sewing group, a football team, and the patrons of Cheers. Organizing people into groups does not make the collective a person.
If corporations are truly people, then you could easily reason that if I murdered an employee of the corporation, I cannot be held accountable for murder, because the corporation did not die.
The danger of corporations is that the people who run them have managed to argue ways to wrest control of the constitution away from people, and have rights granted to corporations that belong only to citizens. Unfortunately, they have apparently managed to also twist the minds of people like Romney and anyone supporting his frightening beliefs. Talk about a dangerous man. If only I could physically gouge the eyes and rip out the heart of the corporation - but you can't kill something that isn't living.
Citizens United was about the ability of big business to spend virtually unlimited amounts of enabling them to pervert our system of government to benefit their own best interests. To try and pretend that defending the decision is akin to wanting to help corporations prosper is ridiculous unless you admit that what they need to prosper is for their needs and those of their stock holders to come before the needs and democratic rights of the people. Please just come out and say that is what you believe.
You may not want to call corporations people, but if you get your way and tax them at a much higher rate who pays the taxes? People pay the taxes. Customers. The corporation just raises it's pricing to cover the higher tax. Who gets hurt? The little guy struggling to make ends meet gets hurt. There seems to be a lot of joy when a corporation is seemingly punished by having to pay more through tax, regulations, higher costs and such but the public is the one who pays in the end. The only way you are going to hurt a corporation is to just not buy their product or service, not to cry that you deserve it for free. Not use their product and hope to hell our government doesn't come along to bail them out.
Reddev, you completely missed my point- corporations are not HUMAN. That is obvious. But legally, they do have a kind of PERSONHOOD. I am not suggesting this, I am stating it. Like it or not, it is in the law. No one is suggesting they are living beings. I don't think politician are out to create Mcdonalds androids. Treating large businesses as a single entity makes regulation and taxation much easier, and getting rid of corporate personhood would create a big economic mess.
Your analogy of killing a corporate employee doesn't make sense- that employee is not property of the corporation, he has individual rights. Even if they didn't have individual rights and the corporation was a 'person', you would be charged with assault. You can't cut off someones arm and just get away with it.
One of the reasons people defend corporate personhood is that they do not believe it is fair that a group of people acting together can have less rights than a single individual. This isn't just businesses by the way, unions are all for corporate personhood. That Citizens United decision was just great as far as they were concerned. The implementation of corporate personhood is old, nearly 200 years old. The idea itself isn't going to destroy our country like you seem to think. Overstepping those bounds on the other hand, is a problem.
@karen, What made you think I was defending the Citizens United decision? I used it as a recent example of corporations being treated as 'people'. I am not a fan of the decision, and I agree it just makes it easier to sway politics in the direction of the highest bidder.
@tiny- exactly. Well said. I don't know why people think businesses can be punished and taxed to high heaven- and that it WONT affect the little guys working for it.
When you tax corporations at a higher rate, the only one paying for the increase are the people purchasing the products made by that corporation. You can always choose to not pay for a corporations taxes by not buying the products they sell. The alternative is to tax corporations at 0%, and transfer the loss across the population. Would you like to see an automatic tax increase of 20 to 40% just to give the corporations a 0 tax rate? If I choose not to drive an automobile, why should I have to pay additional taxes to support the loss of revenues from automobile companies, the oil industry, the repair industry, etc.?
reddev - What is really sad is that the politicians in trying to be re-elected won't tell the voters who they are wooing what the programs they are selling will really cost over time. This is particularly true in recessionary times.
If corporations are people, and Mitt kills corporations, then Mitt is a murderer. from Colbert
I'm really looking foward to the President's State of the Union speech Tuesday. It's about time he got some equal time. The country needs a break fom right wing rhetoric.
Yeah, so true Amy.
Obama just hasn't made enough speeches.
A budget, some attempt to fix the housing crises, some attempt to address the fact that the price of gas is 'too damn high' would just be a waste of his 'special' talents.
By all means - more leading through speeches.
Amy, Please tell us why you are so enthused to listen to more lies and promisers about change. We've had all this failures change we need. What he really meant was change was all we would have left in our pockets when he got done.
Hey Spanky, you must be on OT working this late at night. (oh, I forgot, OT is a Union thing)
We would have had a lot more "Hope and Change" if it weren't for the racist scum Rethuglican congress and their "making Obama a one term president is the only thing we will do for the next four years" crap. No, anti- American treasonous scum sucking Rethugs are the ONLY reason nothing has been done for the American people in the last four years. The left, middle, and right see this clearly. Only the delusional far, far whacko right (see Spanky) ignore this reality, and will be left crying at the alter come november.
I hope Obama can actually tell it how it is, that he cannot get things accomplished without a Congress that is willing to work with him (Congress passes bills and the President signs it into law). Congress is so split that nothing will be able to get done and our country will be wishy-washy for the next decade or so (if Gingrich gets to be pres. then the next pres. will definitely be more liberal and then vice-versa). I would rather vote for Obama rather than Gingrich; he helped us get where we were. Remember the 1990s? Apparently people have short memories...I was a CHILD and remember that it ticked me off back then. If Romney or Santorum do not get the republican vote, I would rather vote for Obama (and I voted for McCain in 2008!). Unfortunately, the true person who I would support is no longer running...John Huntsman did a great job running Utah when I lived there for the past 4 1/2 years. He kept the state in the black and did what was needed. It was hard choices for all, but it kept the state afloat. THAT is what is needed to be done with this country...hard choices. Nobody will come out of the top...companies/corperations and upper middle-class/rich people need to pay. Also, those who have little income need to help too...a flat tax rate is needed. No bickering. No sales tax for the poor (I am talking DIRT poor; like $16,000 for a family of four per year-like me in 2010). No more loop holes...no more rich getting so wealthy that they can control the middle class by shrinking their companies and eliminating jobs. This all has to go. But we need to be careful...communism for our country is right around the corner. Soon the elect will rule us and everyone who is not in the 'network' will be dirt poor and will be common. Hope we don't turn out like Cuba or even China before they started to be more capitalist.
Oh really? Well duh, just keep "shaking your head" if you cannot figure it out.
Its because we Americans like good news. We like to hear about success, winning, growing, building and accomplishing our goals. I am tired of hearing all this false information about Obama's not accomplishing anything. He has accomplished a lot. Period. Republicans cannot continue to attempt to spread the false information that he has ruined the country when jobs are actually increasing, the stocks are climbing, and GM is once again Number One in the World in cars. Perhaps you did not see Ed's report today: "Economy improving, Republicans scrambling?"
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032072
Yes, President Obama has reason to be happy these days. Jobs are up and he is busy with the opportunities in the hosting and tourist industry. Today we have a four year low in jobless claims which have been sinking ever since Obama's stimulus went into effect. After three years, GM is once again the number one car maker in the world. Whereas he took the risk and made the loan Romney wrote the article "Let Detroit Go Bankrupt". Sorry but the proof is here and the results are in, they are good, very very good. You all may say to The People, the citizens of this country, "go eat cake", we say, "hey, you do not fool us because our proof is in the pudding". The pudding can be seen in the Dow Jones Industrial Average. In January of 2009 it stood at 8,228; today it sits at 12,623, up 50%!!!
Gingrich is NOT credible material for the job of America's POTUS and THE PEOPLE are not seeing a Republican candidate who is. With things improving, and many successes in spite of Republican obstacles, it would be folly to change horses again midstream and put back the team members who served with Dubya to mess up the economy in the first place, or if you want to count back to Nixon and Reagan, the third place!
Now if most Americans, after losing so much, are dumb enough to screw themselves over after the third time by voting against their own best interests (unless they are part of the 1%), as anyone in Wisconsin can tell you, its beyond strike three, its ball four and the other team walks. What works, works and the other team is winning for the majority of American citizens, that team this year is proving itself to be quite clearly... the Dems.. Otherwise, you get this nonsense by Newt...
http://thinkprogress.org/security/2006/07/16/6314/newt-world-war/?mobile=nc
Obama 2012
Re: link, so sorry. Here is a better link to the Ed Show on video: "Economy improving, Republicans Scrambling?"
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/46078361#46064688
To see the right wing religious extremists put their support behind such an ungodly hippocrate isn't surprising. To say that Gingrich falls more in line with their very own religious beliefs isn't surprising neither. He's just like all the rest of them.
Just reread the headline and focused on the word cement. First thing that popped into my mind was the old "cement shoes" thing. Wonder which candidate wants the other to wear the "cement shoes"?
Well now there is a difference between cement and concrete.
gingrich and the right wing evangelical, so called christian, right are all jokes and should be banned from all politics. First gingrich goes against Clinton for having an extramarital affair, while he is also having one, he tells his wife, I don't know which one, that he wants an open marriage (cause he is doing calista), his wife says no, so he divorces her and marries calista. Now this wouln't be such a big deal if he wasn't always on his soap box talking about family values and condemning same-sex marriage. Now the evangelicals they don't care how many wives gingrich had all they care about is his pro far right wing social issues, after all three wives isn't too many and its all heterosexual marriages, but had it beeen one gay relationship (with gingrich ugh) they wound have thrown him to the curb. How do you spell, H-Y-P-O-C-R-I-T-E.
I looked up the following words in the Dictionary:
garbage, filth, slime, gunk, scum, sewage, hypocrisy, excrement, dishonesty, dirt, muck, smut, trash, vomit, puke, barf, immorality, debris, manure, pretense, corruption, debauchery and depravity
Each one of them had picture of Newt Gingrich included in the definition.
Spoken like a true communist liberal, conservatives "should be banned from all politics". Wouldn't that serve you right? With no right wing, you'd be stuck with unfettered liberal democratic politics which = socialism = communism = destruction of society. Good luck with that. The Left has made amazing inroads to this end already. If your wish were granted and all conservatives were stripped of their rights and killed, like the Nazi's did to the Jews, you'd be happy, right? Liberals are only happy when conservatives are dead, or at least silenced, or at least "banned from all politics". Only liberals should have any voice in this democracy. Oh wait, a democracy is NOT what liberals want at all. They want a leftist communist/socialist/nazi-esque regime where there is no opposing view allowed. Only their own false idea of what it means to be "free".
Phil, Phil, Phil, cut the crap dude. Liberals, Comminists and Socialists seldom get along. Heck, even the anarcho-socialists hate the state socialists. Take a political science class for cryin' out loud!
Isn't it weird how the evangelicals prattle on about forgiveness when one guy is screwing around on his .... (however many wives); John McCain did it, Newt's done it, on and on....but when Bill Clinton was doing it they were "gasp, how wicked"??? I guess it's o.k. that a repub. does it 'cause he can be forgiven, but let a dem. do it and the whole country's going to hell. Me, I'm glad to be an EX-evangelical, thank you god! Oh, I forgot, I don't believe anymore.
Chucky. I like how you attempted condescencion by saying my name thrice. From your tone and nod to academia, I'm guessing you're a young man in his 20's. Incidentally, political science was my minor for my undergrad work, which is why I know and you should understand that all of the groups that I lumped together ultimately end up in the same place with the same result. Perhaps Chucky could benefit from expanding his understanding of what it means to be a democrat, liberal, socialist, communist, or nazi. (And no, fascism is NOT a right-wing ideology - another reason you might benefit from furthering your education about political science.) Once every few months I'll get on one of these sites for entertainment purposes and engage with a liberal soul or two. Thanks for engaging me with your mindlessness. I'm good for another few months.
Sorry to disappoint, but I'm not a liberal, just someone who has no patience with political ignorance. Just because you have a minor in political science doesn't mean you're good at it. I'm an ordained minister with the Church of the Subgenius, but I doubt anyone would want me to perform their wedding. Creds only matter when they are understood.
It's not who is running - it's the choice the voters make. If people want to choose a President based on who is most corrupt, who lies, who wants to start more wars and who doesn't seem all that stable, then we all have to suffer.
It's the ignorance of the voter and a lack of will to make the choice based on what's best for everyone not just their own selfish concerns.
As for Christians - they have proven repeatedly they are hypocrites who judge everyone else but do not look at their own behavior. If you are pro war you are not a Christian - just another frightened child who thinks TERRORISM is worth losing liberty over.
More people die in auto accidents in one year than all the victims of 911 and the soldiers offered up as fodder, but we don't outlaw driving or make people go through a groping session before they can get in the car.
Frightened little children throwing away the Constitution
RON PAUL - or MORE OF THE SAME.
Chucky, ANYONE who expresses views like you do is a liberal. And you're right, you're not good at talking politics. You're too self-important and dismissive. You lack reason and the ability to discuss. Good bye my young liberal friend.
Socialism = communism.
Yeah, sounds like you learned a lot in your political science classes. Must have been political science fiction.
socialism = communism? wait - one of those is an economic system, the other one a political system...
Gingrich is a cheat, a liar, and completely intolerant, so he should make a fantastic President for our forward thinking 21st century. With him at the helm, we can expect 4 more years of polarization for the sake of "I'm right-is" (a curiously arrogant affliction), where the American people suffer at the hands of egotistical, self-important "religous" conservatives. Ugh. This guy is slimy. Makes Bill Clinton look like a Sunday School teacher. And what does he know about anything but political machinery???
jon-3869720 , yeah sounds about right. Don't bother to point out to these lunatics that words like communist and socialist have definitions, and that they're intentionally misusing those words to smear their opponents.
I know it's the truth but the fools will just keep calling their opponents "communists". Minor in Political Science my ***. More like a minor in lying and spreading talking points.
.communism;
a theory or system of social organization based on the holding of all property in common, actual ownership being ascribed to the community as a whole or to the state.
( often initial capital letter ) a system of social organization in which all economic and social activity is controlled by a totalitarian state dominated by a single and self-perpetuating political party.
Far right-wing christens make me sick. They take hypocrisy to a new level. ABC poll - Newt’s moral values 8%, is he a true conservative 14%, can he beat Obama 45%. It seems a lot of republicans would vote for a convicted pedophile if they thought it would win the Whitehouse!
It only takes a few seconds to look up the definition of fascism to prove this statement completely false.
Well, at the rate Obama spends money perhaps four more years of Obama will finish the job of bancrupting America. If that's the goal....
fascism is how you take control of a government with one party using violent and belligerent means, often keeping the same political and economic system in place and just replacing the people who were in charge.
thats the definition of fascism.
Using that definition you could be describing our election cycles.
farwest - True Christians recognize when someone is truely repentant. Gingrich is well known to be totally faithful to hiw 3rd wife, and well known to be a practicing Catholic convert. "Christians aren't perfect, just forgiven"
Now, why do you suppose that they have some issues with Obama?
Compare him to Gov. Haley os South Carolina. She converted from either Hinduism or Buddism to Christianty. She became a leader in her church. There are no slips to practices of her former religion or previous scholastic teachings. The same thing for Gov Jindal.
Obama is either very confused, or not very serious about his christian faith because of all the slip ups and miss steps. Christianity is unikely to kick him out, but they will certainly have a lot of concerns and hope he really comes around the whole way.
It's not your actions that make you a Christian, it is the indwelling of the Holy Spirit.
DB Akron; I don't know what Bible you read and don't really care. However, you thoroughly need to understand one thing succinctly stated in the Bible; 'there is none that is holy, for all h ave come short'. It goes on to say, 'at our very best, we are as filthy rags in the sight of God'. So get over your holier than thou agenda - for no one is a true Christian in the sight of God. Why do I say that? He had to come to earth Himself in the form of a baby because no earthly human was found to be worthy to save him/herself. Salvation required a blood sacrifice and no human blood could ever be found worthy. And, you have the propensity to denigrate Mr. Obama? Remove that plank from your own eye first.
DB Akron-
So on the third wife, after dumping two previous wives who committed the crimes of getting older and getting sick, Reptile Gingrich is "totally faithful"???
I know you moronic right wing Christians like to be in everyone's bedroom- but I had no idea you hang out in the Reptile's bedroom- you must, because how else would you know doodly about who he has sex with?
So Obama has committed "slip ups and miss (sic) steps" becasue he doesn't support your narrow minded, hateful INTERPRETATION of Christianity- but as long as a fat rich pervert like Reptile hollers "I buhleeeve", you think he should run the country...your blazing stupidity is amazing.
Something dwells in you alright- the work of the devil.
Phil, the only despots right now are the extreme Christian right wing totalitarianists. Their utter disdain for the democratic process is appalling, and you abet them by lumping together democrats (and maybe centrist republicans) with communists. You might have a minor in political science but even one philosophy class would have instructed you on what the 'slippery slope' fallacy is. Unfortunately for you, the empirical data is not on your side; democrat or republican, the central fact of the day is that the American Dream is increasingly unavailable to everyone but the scions of the wealthy (oh, and working class Europeans, ironically enough). This should be the issue that drives the 2012 election - but wait, fulfilling America's promise at the widest possible scale would be 'socialist.' Better to systematically make it available only to a few and distract everyone else by making noise about red-herring social issues. That's the way the country's headed - you don't need to be a tea partyist or have a minor in political science to recognize this, and you certainly don't need to be a socialist to be enraged by it.
Go ahead, call me a thieving lib, etc etc. That'll save you from the introspection.
As a South Carolinian, I can tell you 2 things about the results from yesterday, based on talks with all sorts of folks:
1. Many of them voted for the LEAST likely candidate to beat President Obama in a general election. One friend voted for Gingrich, her husband voted for Santorum.. I believe both were spitting up the whole time.
2. One retired MD state policeman who lives here was not at all an Obama fan for quite a long time. He said it terrifies him the lack of depth of the Republican candidates, and like #1 voted for the least likely to beat President Obama. He voted for Gingrich.
I am not saying this is state-wide, but I found it interesting that the lack of any sort of decent candidate has made folks see President Obama in a different light. I've said it before and will again, this economic crap started with Reagan, truly a scary man, and down through to Bush II (CLinton included) and President Obama got the job of cleanup before he could take off his jacket in the Oval Office.
.
Obama 2012
In San Quentin for treason for signing NDAA.
Why is it that everyone is so up in arms against internet regulation, but don't seem to care that the President holds your rights to due process at his whim?
its something that gets signed every year. also the provision you are complaining about is part of another bill enacted by republicans after 9/11. so dont blame obama and if you are then plz list everyone involved in passing both bills.
You are mistaken. It was a defense funding bill that specifically addressed detention of American citizens, at the whim of the President. Forgive me , but I don't think he should have the right.
I don't care whether it was Pug or Dumb, but the original Patriot Act did not allow for detention of Americans without due process, this one does.
Pitt, while its true NDAA gets signed every year, NDAA 2012 did have a nice little surprise embedded deep within. US citizens can now be held indefinitely without due process. Hard to spin that in anything other than a bad way.
Spin?
Obama's new slogan is: "Change is."
Which of course means change is indefinite detention without due process. That is an law approved by and sign by Obama.
Spin that my liberal friends. Hurt, right?
Obama not only ran with the Bush/Cheney playbook on Homeland Paranoia, he's added several chapters.
And lets not forget that bestiality is now OK in the military - that part of the NDAA doesn't get a lot of attention. Check it out. I guess for the hard right adultery is not OK unless it's Newt or a donkey.
As for "Change" Obama wasn't lying. He's changed the Constitution, the Bill of Rights and made it a crime to be a US citizen.
Ah Pittsburgh,
You really want the names of each and every one, I will post them.
Another, don't ask for what you really don't want...
If you think we just sit here and rant at each other there are some of us that will give you the proof...
There's me and a few others out there that know how to use this computer for more than just spewing crap....Just ask around they WILL counsel you...
So you think Obama will go to a STATE prison for committing treason, a FEDERAL crime? Treason is defined in the US Constitution as giving aid and/or comfort to the foreign enemies of the US. Just who has he done that for? Your profound ignorance on the subject is remarkable.
Sorry if I was in error. Leavenworth.
He violated the Constitutional rights of 300 million Americans by violating his oath of office. In that act, I see him as an enemy to America and everything we used to stand for.
And what is really pathetic is that you think it is justified for him to do so, because there just maybe terrorists in the US. So hold 300 million Americans hostage for a few that might want to do us harm.
Too bad the part of NDAA that you all get riled up about wasn't put in the bill by Obama. The part that takes away due process was inserted by none other than McCain, and a democrat, Levin.
Spin that fact around, Tea heads. Any time I see one of you throwing that NDAA thing out and blaming Obama for it I'm going to clarify it for you. The part you hate is McCain's fault more than Obama. He and Levin authored it.
I am not spinning anything. They all belong in prison for this. Why are Americans so blind to see them taking our rights away.
Next it will be free speech because our comments are terroristic. Does anyone even realize that last summer, the US government also attained the ability to shut the entire internet down in the entire country, saying it was for national security?
The House and Senate both passed the bill. Are you going to put them in jail too?
mike430
With an approval rating in the single digits, I don't know that they would be missed much.
Dangerous Mind, thank you for clarification. So, it was McCain's idea? That is really crazy coming from a POW!!! Are they doing anything to correct this or change it? Our basic individual rights and due process of the law as American Citizens really needs to stay in place. What the heck is with this Levin allowing this, it is so very undemocratic. I have visions of Robert Byrd rolling in his grave over this one. I don't think even Obama would like it. Was it packaged in with other more important measures being passed? That's how they sneak a lot of wrong things through. Too bad. I suppose now they would have to make a motion to repeal it? How screwed. Well, the silver lining is that such things can be corrected through proper legislation over time if they are found to be contradictory and not in the interests of The People.
Well I don't know if anyone still wants this or not but here it is....
Voting Record on NDAA, House and Senate.
House Vote on Conference Report: H.R. 1540: National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012
House Of Representatives- 283/136/14
Ayes:
Democrats:
Ackerman NY-5 (D), Altmire PA-4 (D), Andrews NJ-1 (D), Baca CA-43 (D), Barrow GA-12 (D), Berkley NV-1 (D), Berman CA-28 (D), Bishop GA-2 (D), Bishop NY-1 (D), Boren OK-2 (D), Boswell IA-3 (D), Brady PA-1 (D), Brown FL-3 (D), Butterfield NC-1 (D), Capps CA-23 (D), Cardoza CA-18 (D), Carnahan MO-3 (D), Carney DE-0 (D), Castor FL-11 (D), Chandler KY-6 (D), Cicilline RI-1 (D), Connolly VA-11 (D), Cooper TN-5 (D), Costa CA-20 (D), Courtney CT-2 (D), Critz PA-12 (D), Crowley NY-7 (D), Cuellar TX-28 (D), Davis CA-53 (D), Deutch FL-19 (D), Dicks WA-6 (D), Dingell MI-15 (D), Doggett TX-25 (D), Donnelly IN-2 (D), Engel NY-17 (D), Garamendi CA-10 (D), Gonzalez TX-20 (D), Green TX-9 (D), Green TX-29 (D), Hanabusa HI-1 (D), Higgins NY-27 (D), Himes CT-4 (D), Hirono HI-2 (D), Hochul NY-26 (D), Holden PA-17 (D), Hoyer MD-5 (D), Inslee WA-1 (D), Israel NY-2 (D), Jackson Lee TX-18 (D), Keating MA-10 (D), Kildee MI-5 (D), Kind WI-3 (D), Kissell NC-8 (D), Langevin RI-2 (D), Larsen WA-2 (D), Larson CT-1 (D), Levin MI-12 (D), Lipinski IL-3 (D), Loebsack IA-2 (D), Lowey NY-18 (D), Lungren CA-3 (D), Matheson UT-2 (D), McCarthy NY-4 (D), McIntyre NC-7 (D), McNerney CA-11 (D), Owens NY-23 (D), Pascrell NJ-8 (D), Pastor AZ-4 (AZ), (D), Pelosi CA-8 (D), Perlmutter CO-7 (D), Peterson MN-7 (D), Rahall WV-3 (D), Reyes TX-16 (D), Richardson CA-37 (D), Ross AR-4 (D), Rothman NJ-9 (NJ), (D), Ruppersberger MD-2 (D), Sánchez CA-39 (D), Schiff CA-29 (D), Schrader OR-5 (D), Schwartz PA-13 (D), Scott GA-13 (D), Sewell AL-7 (D), Sherman CA-27 (D), Shuler NC-11 (D), Sires NJ-13 (D), Smith WA-9 (D), Sutton OH-13 (D), Tsongas MA-5 (D), Visclosky IN-1 (D), Walz MN-1 (D), Wasserman Schultz FL-20 (D), Waxman CA-30 (D), Wilson FL-17 (D),
Republicans:
Adams FL-24 (R), Aderholt AL-4 (R), Akin MO-2 (R), Alexander LA-5 (R), Amodei NV-2 (R), Austria OH-7 (R), Bachus AL-6 (R), Barletta PA-11 (R), Bartlett MD-6 (R), Barton TX-6 (R), Bass NH-2 (R), Benishek MI-1 (R), Berg ND-0 (R), Biggert IL-13 (R), Bilbray CA-50 (R), Bilirakis FL-9 (R), Bishop UT-1 (R), Black TN-6 (R), Blackburn TN-7 (R), Bonner AL-1 (R), Bono Mack CA-45 (R), Boustany LA-7 (R), Brady TX-8 (R), Brooks AL-5 (R), Broun GA-10 (R), Buchanan FL-13 (R), Buerkle NY-25 (R), Calvert CA-44 (R), Camp MI-4 (R), Canseco TX-23 (R), Cantor VA-7 (R), Capito WV-2 (R), Carter TX-31 (R), Cassidy LA-6 (R), Chabot OH-1 (R), Cole OK-4 (R), Conaway TX-11 (R), Cravaack MN-8 (R), Crawford AR-1 (R), Crenshaw FL-4 (R), Culberson TX-7 (R), Davis KY-4 (R), Denham CA-19 (R), Dent PA-1 (R), Dold IL-10 (R), Dreier CA-26 (R), Duffy WI-7 (R), Ellmers NC-2 (R), Emerson MO-8 (R), Farenthold TX-27 (R), Fincher TN-8 (R), Fitzpatrick PA-8 (R), Fleischmann TN-3 (R), Fleming LA-4 (R), Flores TX-17 (R), Fortenberry NE-1 (R), Foxx NC-5 (R), Franks AZ-2 (AZ), (R), Frelinghuysen NJ-11 (R), Gallegly CA-24 (R), Gardner CO-4 (R), Gerlach PA-6 (R), Gibbs OH-18 (R), Gibson NY-20 (R), Gingrey GA-11 (R), Gohmert TX-1 (R), Granger TX-12 (R), Graves MO-6 (R), Griffin AR-2 (R), Grimm NY-13 (R), Guinta NH-1 (R), Guthrie KY-2 (R), Hall TX-4 (R), Hanna NY-24 (R), Harper MS-3 (R), Hartzler MO-4 (R), Hastings WA-4 (R), Hayworth NY-19 (R), Heck NV-3 (R), Hensarling TX-5 (R), Herger CA-2 (R), Herrera Beutler WA-3 (R), Hultgren IL-14 (R), Hunter CA-52 (R), Issa CA-49 (R), Jenkins KS-2 (R), Johnson OH-6 (R), Johnson TX-3 (R), Jordan OH-4 (R), Kelly PA-3 (R), King IA-5 (R), King NY-3 (R), Kingston GA-1 (R), Kinzinger IL-11 (R), Kline MN-2 (R), Lamborn CO-5 (R), Lance NJ-7 (R), Landry LA-3 (R), Lankford OK-5 (R), Latham IA-4 (R), Latta OH-5 (R), Lewis CA-41 (R), LoBiondo NJ-2 (R), Long MO-7 (R), Lucas OK-3 (R), Luetkemeyer MO-9 (R), Daniel E. (R), Manzullo IL-16 (R), Marchant TX-24 (R), Marino PA-10 (R), McCarthy CA-22 (R), McCaul TX-10 (R), McCotter MI-11 (R), McHenry NC-10 (R), McKeon CA-25 (R), McKinley WV-1 (R), McMorris Rodgers WA-5 (R), Meehan PA-7 (R), Mica FL-7 (R), Miller FL-1 (R), Miller MI-10 (R), Miller CA-42 (R), Murphy PA-18 (R), Neugebauer TX-19 (R), Noem SD-0 (R), Nugent FL-5 (R), Nunes CA-21 (R), Nunnelee MS-1 (R), Olson TX-22 (R), Palazzo MS-4 (R), Paulsen MN-3 (R), Pearce NM-2 (R), Petri WI-6 (R), Platts PA-19 (R), Poe TX-2 (R), Pompeo KS-4 (R), Price GA-6 (R), Quayle AZ-3 (R), Reed NY-29 (R), Rehberg MT-0 (R), Reichert WA-8 (R), Renacci OH-16 (R), Rigell VA-2 (R), Rivera FL-25 (R), Roby AL-2 (R), Rogers KY-5 (R), Rogers AL-3 (R), Rogers MI-8 (R), Rooney FL-16 (R), Roskam IL-6 (R), Ros-Lehtinen FL-18 (R), Ross FL-12 (R), Runyan NJ-3 (R), Ryan WI-1 (R), Scalise LA-1 (R), Schilling IL-17 (R), Schmidt OH-2 (R), Schock IL-18 (R), Scott GA-8 (R), Scott SC-1 (R), Sensenbrenner WI-5 (R), Sessions TX-32 (R), Shimkus IL-19 (R), Shuster PA-9 (R), Smith NE-3 (R), Smith NJ-4 (R), Smith TX-21 (R), Southerland FL-2 (R), Stearns FL-6 (R), Stivers OH-15 (R), Sullivan OK-1 (R), Terry NE-2 (R), Thompson PA-5 (R), Thornberry TX-13 (R), Tiberi OH-12 (R), Turner NY-9 (R), Turner OH-3 (R), Upton MI-6 (R), Walden OR-2 (R), Webster FL-8 (R), West FL-22 (R), Westmoreland GA-3 (R), Whitfield KY-1 (R), Wilson SC-2 (R), Wittman VA-1 (R), Wolf VA-10 (R), Womack AR-3 (R), Yoder KS-3 (R), Young AK-0 (R), Young IN-9 (R),
Nays:
Democrats:
Baldwin WI-2 (D), Bass CA-33 (D), Becerra CA-31 (D), Blumenauer OR-3 (D), Braley IA-1 (D), Capuano MA-8 (D), Carson IN-7 (D), Chu CA-32 (D), Clarke MI-13 (D), Clarke NY-11 (D), Clay MO-1 (D), Cleaver MO-5 (D), Clyburn SC-6 (D), Cohen TN-9 (D), Conyers MI-14 (D), Costello IL-12 (D), Cummings MD-7 (D), Davis IL-7 (D), DeFazio OR-4 (D), DeGette CO-1 (D), DeLauro CT-3 (D), Doyle PA-14 (D), Edwards MD-4 (D), Ellison MN-5 (D), Eshoo CA-14 (D), Farr CA-17 (D), Fattah PA-2 (D), Frank MA-4 (MA), (D), Fudge OH-11 (D), Grijalva AZ-7 (D), Hahn CA-36 (D), Hastings FL-23 (D), Heinrich NM-1 (D), Hinchey NY-22 (D), Hinojosa TX-15 (D), Holt NJ-12 (D), Honda CA-15 (D), Jackson IL-2 (D), Johnson GA-4 (D), Kaptur OH-9 (D), Kucinich OH-10 (D), Lee CA-9 (D), Lewis GA-5 (D), Lofgren CA-16 (D), Luján NM-3 (D), Maloney NY-14 (D), Markey MA-7 (D), Matsui CA-5 (D), McCollum MN-4 (D), McDermott WA-7 (D), McGovern MA-3 (D), Meeks NY-6 (D), Michaud ME-2 (D), Miller NC-13 (D), Miller CA-7 (D), Moore WI-4 (D), Moran VA-8 (D), Murphy CT-5 (D), Nadler NY-8 (D), Napolitano CA-38 (D), Neal MA-2 (D), Olver MA-1 (D), Pallone NJ-6 (D), Payne NJ-10 (D), Peters MI-9 (D), Pingree ME-1 (D), Polis CO-2 (D), Price NC-4 (D), Quigley IL-5 (D), Rangel NY-15 (D), Richmond LA-2 (D), Roybal-Allard CA-34 (D), Rush IL-1 (D), Ryan OH-17 (D), Sarbanes MD-3 (D), Schakowsky IL-9 (D), Scott VA-3 (D), Serrano NY-16 (D), Slaughter NY-28 (D), Speier CA-12 (D), Stark CA-13 (D), Thompson MS-2 (D), Thompson CA-1 (D), Tierney MA-6 (D), Tonko NY-21 (D), Towns NY-10 (D), Van Hollen MD-8 (D), Velázquez NY-12 (D), Waters CA-35 (D), Watt NC-12 (D), Welch VT-0 (D), Woolsey CA-6 (D), Yarmuth KY-3 (D),
Republicans:
Amash MI-3 (R), Bucshon IN-8 (R), Burgess TX-26 (R), Burton IN-5 (IN), (R), Campbell CA-48 (R), Chaffetz UT-3 (R), Coffman CO-6 (R), DesJarlais TN-4 (R), Duncan SC-3 (R), Duncan TN-2 (R), Flake AZ-6 (R), Forbes VA-4 (R), Garrett NJ-5 (R), Goodlatte VA-6 (R), Gosar AZ-1 (R), Gowdy SC-4 (R), Graves GA-9 (R), Griffith VA-9 (R), Harris MD-1 (R), Huelskamp KS-1 (R), Huizenga MI-2 (MI), (R), Hurt VA-5 (R), Johnson IL-15 (R), Jones NC-3 (R), Labrador ID-1 (R), Lummis WY-0 (R), Mack FL-14 (R), McClintock CA-4 (R), Mulvaney SC-5 (R), Pence IN-6 (R), Posey FL-15 (R), Ribble WI-8 (R), Roe TN-1 (R), Rohrabacher CA-46 (R), Rokita IN-4 (R), Royce CA-40 (R), Schweikert AZ-5 (R), Simpson ID-2 (R), Stutzman IN-3 (R), Tipton CO-3 (R), Walberg MI-7 (R), Walsh IL-8 (R), Woodall GA-7 (R),
Not voting:
Democrats:
Filner CA-51 (D), Giffords AZ-8 (D), Gutierrez IL-4 (D), Johnson TX-30 (D), Lynch MA-9 (D), Sanchez CA-47 (D),
Republicans:
Bachmann MN-6 (R), Coble NC-6 (R), Diaz-Balart FL-21 (R), LaTourette OH-14 (R), Myrick NC-9 (R), Paul TX-14 (R), Pitts PA-16 (R), Young, FL-10 (R),
Senate Vote On Passage: S. 1867: National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012
Senate- 93/7 passed
Yea
Democrats:
Akaka, Daniel, HI (D), Baucus, Max, MT (D), Begich, Mark, AK (D), Bennet, Michael, CO (D), Bingaman, Jeff, NM (D), Blumenthal, Richard, CT (D), Boxer, Barbara, CA (D), Brown, Sherrod, OH (D), Cantwell, Maria, WA (D), Cardin, Benjamin, MD (D), Carper, Thomas, DE (D), Casey, Robert, PA (D), Conrad, Kent, ND (D), Coons, Chris, DE (D), Durbin, Richard, IL (D), Feinstein, Dianne, CA (D), Franken, Al, MN (D), Gillibrand, Kirsten, NY (D), Hagan, Kay, NC (D), Inouye, Daniel, HI (D), Johnson, Tim, SD (D), Kerry, John, MA (D), Klobuchar, Amy, MN (D), Kohl, Herbert, WI (D), Landrieu, Mary, LA (D), Lautenberg, Frank, NJ (D), Leahy, Patrick, VT (D), Levin, Carl, MI (D), Lieberman, Joseph, CT (I), Manchin, Joe, WV (D), McCaskill, Claire, MO (D), Menendez, Robert, NJ (D), Mikulski, Barbara, MD (D), Murray, Patty, WA (D), Nelson, Ben, NE (D), Nelson, Bill, FL (D), Pryor, Mark (D), Reed, John (D), Reid, Harry (D), Rockefeller, John (D), Schumer, Charles, NY (D), Shaheen, Jeanne, NH (D), Stabenow, Debbie Ann, MI (D), Tester, Jon, MT (D), Udall, Mark, CO (D), Udall, Tom, NM (D), Warner, Mark, VA (D), Webb, Jim, VA (D), Whitehouse, Sheldon, RI (D), Cantwell, Maria (D), Cardin, Benjamin (D), Carper, Thomas (D), Casey, Robert (D),
Republicans:
Alexander, Lamar, TN (R), Ayotte, Kelly, NH (R), Barrasso, John, WY (R), Blunt, Roy, MO (R), Boozman, John, AR (R), Brown, Scott, MA (R), Burr, Richard, NC (R), Chambliss, Saxby, GA (R), Coats, Daniel, IN (R), Cochran, Thad, MS (R), Collins, Susan, ME (R), Corker, Bob, TN (R), Cornyn, John, TX (R), Crapo, Michael, ID (R), DeMint, Jim, SC (R), Enzi, Michael, WY (R), Graham, Lindsey, SC (R), Grassley, Charles, IA (R), Hatch, Orrin, UT (R), Heller, Dean, NV (R), Hoeven, John, ND (R), Hutchison, Kay, TX (R), Inhofe, James, OK (R), Isakson, John, GA (R), Johanns, Mike, NE (R), Johnson, Ron, WI (R), Kirk, Mark, IL (R), Kyl, Jon, AZ (R), Lugar, Richard, IN (R), McCain, John, AZ (R), McConnell, Mitch, KY (R), Moran, Jerry, KS (R), Murkowski, Lisa, AK (R), Portman, Robert, OH (R), Risch, James, ID (R), Roberts, Pat (R), Rubio, Marco (R), Sessions, Jefferson, AL (R), Shelby, Richard, AL (R), Snowe, Olympia, ME (R), Thune, John, SD (R), Toomey, Patrick, PA (R), Vitter, David, LA (R), Wicker, Roger, MS (R),
Nay
Democrats:
Harkin, Thomas, IA (D), Merkley, Jeff, OR (D), Sanders, Bernard (I), Wyden, Ron, OR (D),
Republicans:
Coburn, Thomas, OK (R), Lee, Mike, UT (R), Paul, Rand, KY (R),
Senate Vote on Conference Report: H.R. 1540: National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012- 86/13/1 Passed
Six Senators switched their votes from yes to no out of conference.
Cardin, Benjamin, MD (D), Crapo, Michael, ID (R), DeMint, Jim, SC (R), Durbin, Richard, IL (D), Franken, Al, MN (D), Risch, James, ID (R),
So out of Conference the vote was 86/13/1 (Moran, Jerry, KS (R) did not vote out of conference)
Simply put: Did they violate their oath of office (to uphold and defend the Constitution, including our Bill of rights)? YES.
Is that treason? NO.
Should they go to prison? NO.
Should they be removed from office? YES. Anyone who voted for it should be removed immediately for violating their oath.
Impeachment is what would need to be done for the President, and it'd be the best reason to impeach our country ever used.
Should we impeach him for this? If we impeached over a BJ, YES. (BTW, I was against impeachment over the BJ).
There is no excuse for this NDAA, and it could of been vetoed by the President, but was not. Our country is pretty well dead...between neoconservatives Bush/Cheney and Obama/Biden it's been basically destroyed completely.
So, we should quit calling things "treason" that are not legally treason, and should start setting up an Article V Constituional Convention. The first Amendment we should pass is to have any Congressman removed who voted for the Bill, and then we can have grand debates about further changes, like the Founders did. We can select all new delegates and representatives or whatever we want.
I'm libertarian, I would push for the end of corporate personhood, end of corporate money being allowed in campaigns. I would push for term limits (although I'm not for 2 and you're out...I'm for 2 in, 1 out, 2 in, one out, and a total lifetime limit of 24 years - two terms of Senate 6 each, two terms of Representative in the House 2 years each, and 2 terms as President 4 years each). I'm for every 24 years, through the already staggered elections we have now, saying no incumbent may run for one term, and thereby replacing them all over a series of consecutive cycles so every generation can have their own government (race, age, socio-economics, etc., are all under-represented because incumbents win too often and this fixes that problem every 24 years, an approximate generation by the definition of the Founders and according to term limits already explained).
I'd be for many other Amendments as well, but these are most important ones to start with.
Egilman, Thank you for the list.
Subversion — "A destructive, aggressive activity aimed to destroy the country, nation, or geographical area of your enemy... [by demoralizing the cultural values and changing the population's perception of reality].
I believe it could be argued that the subversion that has taken place is treasonous.
Re: John's issue/NDAA vote.
"Pitt, while its true NDAA gets signed every year, NDAA 2012 did have a nice little surprise embedded deep within. US citizens can now be held indefinitely without due process." Chucky Stuart
Okay, from that list provided by Egilman, there appears to be a lot of division on the votes, ie. nearly half and half from both parties on the first set there. Interesting to see who voted what on it. Now to figure out why each one decided what they did or knew what they did. What was it that made so many accept it and go ahead to vote for it? Are there other reasons or measures in this that seemed to be necessary or urgently important for it to pass even with and overriding such a flaw? Could this also be a case of rushing to the vote and not reading up on the details closely enough beforehand? Did some just miss that nasty little surprise embedded deep within? Can there be a re-vote on this for some reason, perhaps too short a time deadline, confusion in the wording, etc??
The other point Chucky makes here is...that it gets re-signed every year, would this mean that the flaw could only be in existence for one year, and that by not signing or accepting in 12 months, it could be revised or voted out? Can there be a single line veto to eliminate it out, now or before 12 months or can it be petitioned out by The People like a recall? And how likely would it be abused in this 12 month period?
Pro Individual... a constitutional convention sounds interesting for informing voters and legislators, but I think this firing all who voted yes on it is too extreme, certainly not treasonous as you have said. I tend to think there was some confusion or a non awareness of this little detail that was a huge infringement on individual rights. It is more like some did not read closely enough or realize this at the time and that it needs to be re-voted now that attention has been brought to this flaw regarding American citizens rights.
What would be the conditions of putting a domestic terrorist or so defined away? clear and present danger? evidence? How would that evidence be proved if not in a court of law? How would length of term served be determined? By who? Would this be an act of war or defined as wartime?
There is no consistency of biased voters on either side either, from mavericks to moderates to those more firmly entrenched in a leftist or right wing position. All kinds of voters here in this one and some you would think would have voted the other way. It is certainly perplexing.
It is nice to be able to inquire and inform with some sincere intelligent discussion for the benefit of other citizens who are concerned over individual rights of American citizens in congressional decision making. As anyone who has taken a basic civics class in high school should know, there are some basic rights that are inalienable in our Bill of Rights, individual rights is the primary one all else is built on and due process is a part of that. It is one of those protective and sensitive rights that is like the issue of censorship and free speech, and as such, is a structural issue that concerns basic freedom in that it goes before and beyond partisan bickering in content and should show as a red flag to ALL American members of Congress equally on either side of the isle. It should also be very transparent and defined clearly to all American citizens whose lives are affected by it.
Thanks to all for the information and any further suggestions, news, dialog or ideas and considerations regarding the NDAA vote will very respectfully and fairly welcomed and appreciated by many who understand the necessity of an informed voting public.
Are you done, Egilman,.....have you totally and sexually satisfied yourself with the never-ending sound of your voice/opinion?? For cryin out loud, people, keep it to 3 or 4 lines!!!
Feisty Red,
I tend to agree that President Obama will win reelection, but it may be closer than some would like (no one ever went broke underestimating the taste of the American public) I would say that the GOP electorate has found a few candidates they feel are viable, but the real issue is the change in the Republican party over the last 30 plus years. From TR "trust busting" to a party that only intervenes in the market to prolong subsidies for large corporations; a party that once believed in individual freedom to a party that intervenes in to the bedroom of its homosexual citizens and tries to legislate away a woman's right to reproductive freedom. We absolutely need argument/compromise between conservatives and progressives for our democratic process to thrive, but first conservatives must find and nominate conservatives that seek to further the development of our country through conservative principles, and be willing to compromise, rather than nominating candidates with too rigid ideology and those that aren't conservative at all but have stolen conservatism under the banner of gay bashing and reproductive rights restriction.
@clinical,
The GOP seems to be unable to find any mainstream candidates. What the GOP has to do to win is simple. They have to campaign just to the right of moderate and then goven just to the left of that. But to do that they have to find candidates who are acceptable to moderated (of both parties) and independents. The hard right and the hard left really don't count because they essentially cancel each other out (with only about a 2-3% edge to the left.)
All the candidates still standing have been forced to sign pledges far to the right of any voting precinct in the country. The "personhood" pledge alone is a good indicator of how far right they have all allowed themselved to be dragged by less than 15% of the electorate.
1) Romney simply cannot win. It is starting to look more and more like he won't get a clear shot. The deciding factor will be the thousands of ministers and priests who will find a way to say, from the pulpit, "In seminary I was taught that Mormons are not Christians because they do not accept the Nicene Creed.) The evangelicals gave a clear sign of this when they threw their support to Santorum, a right wing Roman Catholic who wants condoms outlawed as murder. The essentially said, "We will vote for a Catholic before a Mormon." That isn't the whole story, but it will deny enough votes to Romney that he cannot win, even with the rest of the GOP coalition.
2) Gingrich cannot win because he simply has too much baggage. And a part of that baggage is that baggage is that so many party loyalists hate him personally that they will not, under any circumstances help him. Newt already lacks a national organization and not getting the help of this group would doom him to a McCain-like campaign.
3) Santorum can't win. His only advantage is that most people don't know all that much about him. And when they look closely at him that find a number of things they like, but several poison pills as well. Things like his stance on condoms --- he's a Mel Gibson-type fundamentalist Roman Catholic with all the anti-feminism that it entails. Just the personhood thing can be used to squash hyim like a bug. Plus he has no money and no organization.
4) Ron Paul. In short, too old and too crazy. Anyone who thinks that support Paul should read the Libertarian Party platform (at www.lp.org/platform .) But I figure that he will withdraw shortly or just drop back to a Buddy Rohmer-like campaign. There are serious rumors starting to circulate that even Paul's "relaxed" schedule is too stressful and he is having "periods of mental disorientation" that are worrying his immediate staff.
So where does the GOP go from here? I have absolutely no idea. Last time the went with a traitor who sold out his fellow aviators in Vietnam but who "talked the talk" and the McCain campaign led for exactly four days of the entire campaign --- the four days after Palin was added to the ticket but before anyone knew she was crazy. (Just the McCain butt-watching Palin video on youtube was supposed to have cost him 5% of the vote.)
Thanks Chris- had almost forgotten how astonished I was when McCain added "Shoot 'em up Sally" to the ticket.
I wasn't insulted until I realized that the Repubs actually thought that adding a maniac with ovaries, who obviously detests other women, would convince more women to vote Republican-WTF kinda thinking was THAT?
I suppose this time they will run a Gingrich Santorum ticket- just to show how much love and respect they have for us little fillies?
@clinical,
Great analysis contrasting TR and true freedom-loving Republicans of yore to today's corporate-evangelical fanatics.
Interesting that in TR's world, "conservative" referred to conserving America's natural treasures and the clean air and water that go with it. "Freedom" was freedom from the abuses of trusts and combinations.
Today's "conservatives" seem to be frightened xenophobes circling their wagons, out to conserve their often privileged way of life and their belief systems that our more pluralistic society often questions. They want freedom to dictate many aspects of our personal lives, yet are often willing to grant corporations freedom to dominate our collective economy and international relations.
Allow me to summarize Chris-749391 in one word for each candidate:
1) Romney - Mormon
2) Gingrich - baggage
3) Santorum - fundamentalist
4) Ron Paul - crazy
And yes TR, a Republican, would now be labeled as a tree-hugging, far-left, liberal.
If Romney being a Mormon is his only problem....He's our man!!!
Are the teatards actually stupid enough to nominate Gingrich and give Preaident Obama a landslide?
Actually I can not see ANY connection between the Tea Party (not teatards - have respect for those willing to challenge the corruption rather than denegrate them.) - and Gingrich.
He doesn't offer anything but more corruption, lobbying, bail-outs and the status quo. It's not a love of his country - it's a love of himself, and he power trip ego to BE the president - not to offer any solutions. He just wants to gut any social safety net the elderly still have - that they paid into, while increasing military spending and war.
If the people are dumb enough to elect him then yes, we will get more Obama - but does it matter? One set of problems or the other. They all work for Wall Street. Gingrich doesn't care about the "little" people any more than he can use them for his personal gain.
True enough. The "demonic rats".....sorry, "democrats lead by the world's greatest con-man, Obama, have had their way with America for 3 years.....thanks for nothing!
"This is the greatest country in the world!....Join with me as we change it!" -Barrack H. Obama
Perhaps.
Today's Republican party has careened into some scary and radical terrain. For the past few months, I have compiled a list of positions from Republican politicians and right-wing leaders. The following positions come straight from their speeches and documents, not third-hand sources. Anyone considering voting for ANY Republican candidate in November needs to understand that, by voting for a Republican, they are voting for this agenda:
Pretty scary list.
Yikes, but relax. John Corzine showed us all that there is no need to repeal Dodd-Frank or Sarbanes Oxley.
Just no there, there. What, you lost $60 billion in leveraged investment? Dodd-Frank? Nope.
You just have no idea where $1.6 billion in investment accounts went? Sarbanes Oxley? Nope.
Say, what is Obama's man on Wall Street up to these days?
Maine's Teapublican governor has governed by the national right wing playbook since he was "elected." (61% voted for someone else.) Currently, he is trying to cut 65,000 elderly, sick low income people from Medicare, to pay for the tax cut he gave the wealthiest Mainers.
Amy,
Our governor (the guy with the lowest approval rate in the country), cut education way back, got so much heat, he is now trying to put money back into education by cutting medicade payments to hospitals! No wonder he is so popular here! NOT
You can cover all these with this democrat list:
Have someone else pay me so I don't have to work.
Hey Amy - congratulation your state has not been downgraded. Nor has Fla.
Say, post down grade, what of the fine public employees in Ill, Conn?
You all do know that Jerry Brown is about to gut education in Cali., right?
Say it with me: Being broke sucks. You all are lucky.
my dear friend;
most of those ideas make sense, if, only people had children when they can afford, you would not need medicaid and welfare.
if people were to save enought, there would be no need for social security; incidentally, the ones who have the most money, (richest), get the most social security and the poorest, the ones who need the most, get the least amount of social security.
union are the main reason most bussines in the USA have failed, the also make the USA highly uncompetitive, that along with the lawyers and politicians.
there is a ton to be said, but, it may be useless.
Forgot, take free speech via the Internet. SOPA
Basically, at this point they are a cult, with elderly voters pulling the R lever for old time's sake. Either they will change or moderate conservatives will form a new party.
I'd prefer this list than "Audacity of Hope" and "Dreams of My Father". Along with all his socialistic, Shariah Law agenda, Chicago cronie dudes put in high places, etc.
Thank you SC! Helping keep Obama in the White House! There is no way Gingrich can win an election. He is a pathalogical liar, a philanderer, and was kicked out as speaker of the house.
Putnum
I 'm going to use your list if you dont mind. Spread the news.
I will give you credit for it, it 's great
Yes...if a republican is voted in that list is the beginning of what we get.
Ishack, you are wrong as to the relationships between the causes and effects and you leave out many variables that bring these things to people, but go ahead and say it all you want...won't change facts though.:)
Putnam,
You might want to add "Make Personhood the law of the land." since all current GOP candidates have signed personhood pledges.
Spanky please respond to Putnam1
Patriot-----How can he be a secular socialist and advocate sharia at the same time? you can't habe it both ways one is against all religion and the other is fundementalist law...You people amaze me with your devoted cult (FOX NEWS) following of brainwashed talking points...
Alot of times when a candidate talks about what he wants to take to Washington, is just what people want to hear. It is what gets then elected in the primaries. However any vote for a Republican in the fall will be better voting for Obama. Do you actually want Obamacare to stay around when it is actually killing off those jobs that employers have? Or do you like how Obama just last week killed the million job Trans-Continental Pipeline at no cost to to the US Government? Do you think that was fair to the American public? Face it, everything Obama has done in his Presidency has been negative for the American People. He can be impeached, or we can choose not to elect Obama, the worse of worse President these states have ever had. I also think that most of everyone on this site would agree with me.
Putnam: Albeit it is YOUR list; but how can any intelligent person not agree with almost everything on the list, if you actually put something factual and not just YOUR understanding of various complicated issues. You may want to eduate yourself just a bit more as this is actually kind of stupid. Not to mention you put your typical liberal spin on each item and makes you one of the more ignorant posters on here.
What's comical is 99% of your b.s. list is not close to accurate. You are the prototypical liberal hypocrite.
1. is not in the 18 enumertaed powers (I'll refer to this answer from now on as "same as 1"), and is therefore only Constitutional, regardless of what the same Court that held up Dred Scott says, if you pass an Amendment allowing it, which you are welcome to do.
2. Legislation can't fix the problem, so you begged the question, an informal logical fallacy. The central bank caused the artifical boom that led to the inevitable bust, and so the only thing that stop or relieve crises like this in economics is opening up currency competition and slowly phasing out the Federal Reserve and it's monopoly hold on interest rates and money supply.
3. I'm against both liberals and neoconservatives getting into our Courts...block them both, please! We need some libertarians who actually understand the original intent of the Constitution as it's written and simultaneously understand the Enlightenment idea that the state does grant nor shall it regulate individual rights. Until then, block all appointments, as they are harmful to our rights and the country. The Constitution was written to regulate the federal government, not individual rights...any Bill that regulates individual rights is against original intent and unConstitutional. Anything not specifically authorized in the 18 enumerates powers or the finite Amendments is also unConstitutional.
4. You do realize that corporations don't pay taxes, right? The cost of tax is simply added into the price at sale of the service or product the corporation provides. I'm against corporate personhood (only individuals have rights by original intent), but you do realize all corporate tax is just paid by consumers, logically, right? You want to make consumers (us) all poorer to support corporate tax. It's simple a non-sense way to gain political favor while simultaneously taxing you and I more. As far as tax cuts for the rich...we all should get tax cuts, not just the rich. The process whereby an economy grows, and therefore standards of living (even for the poorest of us) rise is as follows: capital is accumulated, some percentage of that capital is re-invested into efficient sectors of technology and other labor or cost saving things (like low cost labor from teens or immigrants for example), as things like technology increase so does productivity per worker, as productivity rises so does total real (accounted for inflation) compensation (wages plus benefits) per worker and manhour, this rise in compensation is directly caused by productivity and the only gap between the two is because machinery is increasingly filling labor positions (but this leads to safer working conditions and cheaper products which makes up the difference as workers consume goods; of course printing money aka inflation impeeds this process), this rise in compensation leads to lower marginal utility in capital to workers who also function as consumers, this lower marginal utility in capital spurs on consumption, the increased consumption leads to more profits and higher amounts than previous of accumulated capital, and this process then starts all over again in a totally sustainable and mutually beneficial process of economic pie expansion (in terms of a pie chart). There is no finite pie in economics...it grows as long as we follow this process. Anything that impedes this process slows or degrades it. Anything that slows it or degrades it leads to slower rises in standards of living that beat inflation, thereby causing the poorest people to suffer the most and first, followed by the lower middle class, the middle class, and lastly but least severly, the rich. What impedes or degrades capital accumulation? Taxes, regulations, and mandates on how money must be spent. It's counter intuitive i know, but provable and deductively logical.
5. As in number 4, you don't help the poor by taxing (extorting) money from one source on the threat of kidnapping (prison), and giving it to them. This taxing slows the process of capital accumulation that helps them FASTEST. You're stepping over dollars to pick up pennies, essentially. They benefit most from allowing the process to occur, and thereby providing more employment and higher compensation levels accounted for inflation. (I can hear the criticisms I've heard a hundred times already coming..."but that doesn't happen", or "if da Boosh tax cuts worked, then where iz da jobz?", etc. The problem is if you increase one thing (regulation), and decrease taxes (Bush tax cuts), but the increased thing costs more than the decreased thing you have a net loss, not a net gain. The myth of deregulated markets are just that; a myth. We've steadily increased NET regulation since the founding of the republic, end of story. 15,000 pages passed under Bush's last year alone. There NEVER was any overall NET deregulation...we deregulated the wrong things (like anti-free market things, such as allowing harm and fraud) and upped regulation on everything else.)
6. Same as #1 and #4
7. Same as #1, plus you are supporting dictators in most of those countries despite your good intentions of feeding people or sending them medicine. Look up the facts of where your "aid" goes when it gets to these 3rd world nations. Why are they in need of aid...because they don't use market economics. Look at a satellite map of the owrld at night...the countries with the least market economies are the darkest (least widespread electricity, among other technologies), and the brightest (richest) are those using capital accumulation in the ilk of market economics. It's really that simple.
8. Actually deregulating harm and fraud is what allowed the environment to be destroyed to begin with. Strict enforcement of property rights (public or private) would have deemed all pollution (land, sea, or air) illegal. Severe penalties would of been enforced. As far as labor...as unions have decreased as a percentage of the economy the standard of living has increased...they simply aren't related. Child labor? it's more prevelant in agrarian socieities than industrial, whether regulation exists or not. Higher and grwoing standards of living mean not every person needs their children to work just to eat and meet basic needs of the family. Markets destroyed child labor, not laws...the laws were after they became popular and again were just a political ploy to get votes. OSHA? Charts show OSHAS had ZERO effect on worker fatalities...in fact the worker fatalities decreased steadily with NO CHANGE when OSHA was passed and enforced. What causes the steady rate of drops in worker fatalities then? the capital accumulated invested in technology means tech takes human jobs that used to be dangerous, thereby decreasing risks to humans in industrial settings. You can't lose an arm on an assembly line if a robot now does that job, logically. The uptick in tech is directly causal to the decrease in worker fatalities. OSHA has not changed that trajectory one iota. In fact, when the internet got widespread in the late 80s and early 90s, the decrease happened even faster. Before OSHA, the fatalities were already falling at the exact same rate as before OSHA...the rate of tech growth. End of story on OSHA. Financial rules on harm and fraud need to be re-instated, that much we agree on. That's not what we refer to as "regulations" when speaking of markets...so it doesn't mean I'm for what you call "regulations". Health regulations, like the FDA, have killed more people by delaying working drugs and allowing through cronies with dangerous drugs than they ever saved, and this is well quantifiable. As far as fines and penalties...you pro-regulation geniuses are the ones setting fines as set numbers and not based on percentages of profits up to and including complete seizure of all company assets and auctioning them off to the highest bidding competitiors in a dismantling process. That's what fre market (REAL free market) advocates want. Fines and penalties now are set by laws that are written by the lobbysist who work for the very corporations you hate in an attempt to limit competition by setting fines not based on percentage of profits (that would affect them), but by basing fines on numbers large enough for them to easily pay but for smaller competitiors to go bankrupt to face. This is how monopolies occur. There has NEVER been un-aided monopoly in a market...they always occur with state help or intervention (like bailouts and regulations) before hand.
9. Same as #1 and number #4. The idea the government is smarter than the market on energy is just ignorant. It will always be cronie-ism by political handout. If you want less pollution and more conservation, increase property rights by enforcing ruthlessly harm and fraud laws.
10. I agree this one is wrong. You can't open ANWR to drilling for private companies. They should sell the land or not drill it, one or the other. The cronie-ism and corruption, not to mention the environmental problems, will be rampant. This is not to say, however, I'm against all domestic oil and resource explortaion. We should be going after resources here IF and ONLY IF it's a cheaper alternative to foriegn sources, and If and ONLY IF it's done by private companies on PRIVATE land...not wildlife reserves. If we want to sell of land, especially the crap-ton of desert land in the Western United States, that's another issue (I'm for selling most of that desert land in the West).
11. You say "unlimited" which ignores harm and fraud that should be illegal under property rights...so logically there is a limit to those things. And btw, why were there deep wells offshore? I've researched this and it turns out there were fines put in place that encouraged drilling to occur farther offshore (by accident, was not the intention of the regulation), and there were refusals by BP and other companies to drill too deep until the government gave them caps on liability and loan guarantees to do these things (as they also did with nuclear power PLUS they subsidize it). In fre markets, no such deep srilling or nuclear plants exist, because with out govt regulations making it more advantageous than drilling onshore or closer to shore, subsidies to support it (in the case of nuclear power), loan guarantees, and caps on liability the companies who tried it would of bankrupted themselves (hence their early refusals).
12. Same as #1, plus I already talked about OSHA. SEC, they failed to stop or even identify anything but sure played the cronie game a lot. BATF? There are 13,000 gun murders a year in the USA (last year I think it was 11,000)...the flu kills 30,000 Americans a year. Unless you fear some dude coughing twice as much as guns, you're being irrational about risk versus reward ratios. It's just like the fear of illegal drugs...they ALL kill 20,000 Americans a year COMBINED, meanwhile the flu kills more than 30,000. To be more afraid of illegal drugs being legalized than the flu is non-sense and simply irrational. Another good example is terrorism. In the last ten years 300 Americana year on average dies of terrorism...the same exact amount as dided in bathtubs. That's right, bathtubs are as dangerous as terrorists to Americans. See, you fear the irrational HOW you might die (a gunshot), not the rational chance of it happening. Most people don't even realize how ineffectual these regulations are. First of all, no criminal follows them, by definition criminals break laws. Secondly, of the 13,000 gun murders only about 2,600 were lawful gun owners at the time of the crime. Also, inner cities today have the same apporximate murder rates as cities in the Old West did (so there goes the myth and excuse of "we'd return to the Old West, oh no!"). Out of 300,000 million people and 100 million gun owners who own 200 milion guns, only 2,600 people mess up and kill someone in cold blood with their lawful gun. The rest are criminals that would of done so anyways, and less than 1,000 accidents (swimming pools drown more people than guns accidentally kill). Do the odds on that...and you would ban perfectly good citizens from their rights for that? Why not ban bathtubs then? It's just fear based irrationality. NOT TO MENTION, it's hard to quantified but easy to statistically deduce that more people's lives are saved by guns than taken by them via murder (suicides by gun are not preventable, see Psych 101 and self inflicted headshots and bridge jumps versus cutting wrists and jumping 30 or less feet). If they are a NET GAIN of life, then you'd increase deaths to ban or overly regulate them. Lastly...game theory mathematics (which I make a living using) show mathematically beyond a doubt that guns make society safer as opposed to making it less safe. It's due to the effect deterents have when increased levels of technology are introduced to hostile situations. This why no two nuclear nations go to war for prolonged periods of "hot war"...mutually assured destruction is the ultimate deterent to violence, ironically. This applies to guns as well on the micro level.
13. See #1. Also, it's shown in chart after chart that we've spent MORE money accounted for inflation on this Department and the achievement levels have been relatively flat...you're throwing good money after bad in proven failed system. The more local this money is controlled the less corruption and waste occurs. Logically, this would bring rises in achievement levels. Also, there are not market forces...so we would expect higher costs for a diminished quality product (markets create competition which raise quality of products and lower costs). To solve this quit saying over and over the talking point non-sense "school choice doesn't work" and allow parents to choose where their kids go to school regardless of district. Districts are also racist, as regardless of their intention, have resulted in re-segregation of schools according to racial and socio-economic lines PERIOD.
14. Same as #1, and all they do is hand out corporate welfare! What self respecting liberal is defending coproate welfare's cash cow?!?!
15. Again, see #1 and #4. This is intuitive, but deductive logic shows it's self defeating economically and socially as well as just political pandering. There is no better consumer advocacy then to enforce STRICTLY harm and fraud laws.
16. See #1, this is clearly a State's issue, as all States already handle penalties for harm like murder. Some State's allow "crime of passion" laws that say you can be justified to kill your spouse if you catch them in bed with another person if you do so at that moment. Most say this is wrong. California paroles 1st degree murderes sometimes in just 7 years, most states go 15-30 years. It's always been up to the State's to designate penalties (or LACK THEREOF) for any homocide. If abortion is a killing, which I think it is, then State's can decide whether or not to assign a penalty or if is justified or not. I personally am not against allowing abortion up until the moment a baby is viable outside the womb via technology. This will eventually end abortion as eventually tech will make it possible to take a zygote and remove it from a mother and keep it alive and allow it to grow viably from then to "full term" growth stages. Problem solved for everyone when that happens.
17. See #1. As with all answers starting with "see #1" or "same as #1", you can feel free at anytime to Amend the Constitution to allow these things. Without an Amendment or seeing it in the 18 enumerated powers, the federal government has no lawful business doing it...no matter what Courts say that uphold non-sense decisions like corporate personhood (Peoples United) and Dred Scott (Fugitive Slave Act) say.
18. Banning birth control would be wrong because it's regulating individual rights to take what drugs they want, and doesn't fall under the pervue of regulating the federal government (what the Constitution was meant to do along with create a strong Executive and central military and Congress...along unfortunately with several monopolies that government could only hold, which we need to AMEND out...but you notice I say Amend, right?).
19. Child labor laws are broken everyday, and again...child labor wasn't ended via law, it ended via technological advances that increased standards of living fast enough that families didn't require kids to wrk to feed the families as they HAD TO DO un the previous non-market oriented agrarian society that had little capital accumulation and thereby little technology. Than industrialization for ending child labor and massive widespread need for it to feed families, don't act like laws did it. It's just not factually true. And again, child labor happens everyday. For instance...it's legal for my neighbors' kids to mow my law for free...but if I pay them a penny it's technically child labor and illegal. Now, should I call the cops the next time they ask to shovel my driveway after a big snow? No, I should break the idiotic law and pay them to shovel it because it's MUTUALLY BENEFICIAL exchange. Think this through please.
20. I'm never for weakening laws against harm and fraud like rape or assualt or murder, etc. I'm for strengthing those laws. As far as sexual harrassment, I'm for strengthing those laws USUALLY. The overhearing of sexually explicit joke that you weren't intended to hear to me is not qualified as harrassment. I've seen that qualify as sexual harrassment and end up costing people not only jobs, but careers...plus the company laid off additional workers to pay for the 6 figure stellement it had to pay...over a joke the person wasn't even supposed to hear! (And no, the joke wasn't about them, it was just a normal construction site joke.) That type of thing is silly, and wastes time in the already overexhausted courts, not to mention affects way too many lives and jobs extemperaneously.
21. See #1, and also I thought union fought public greed? Why then are MOST union members now public secotr? Isn't this extorting taxpayers, not greedy corporations? And since as I stated earluer unions as percentage of the USA workforce declined while real total standards of living rose, we can eliminate them as the cause for standards of living rising. They went from 32% of the economy to less than 12%, and yet standards of living rose as fast as these unions declined. I can explain their decline, but it takes a longwinded explanation and this is already long enough...suffice to say it involves them fighting tech (like belt sanders and penumatic hammers vs hand sanding and regular hammers in carpentry) which leads to slower and lower returns on compensation which shrinks the gap between their premium wages minus dues and the non-union counterparts that don't fight tech and have faster growing compensation rates...the gap between the two shrinks and the unions lose members. It's more detailed than that, but that's the short of it. BTW, I was in several different unions until my career changed to one where unions don't exist (poker playing). My new job was de facto banned by govt regulation in case you haven't heard, hence why I'm leaving the country and going to fund a govt in another country who more appreciated my tax dollars and rights. The arguments to rpotect public sectors unions just aren't there in terms of safety increases or standard of living increases. Sorry.
22. See #21...they're eliminating themselves through cromagnon ideas like fighting technology because they ignorantly believe they are "working themselves out of job"...and if you never heard a union worker say that, you've never worked union. I have, I heard "slow down, you're gonna work us out of a job" on every job I was ever on in any line of work I was ever in (where they had it unionized). NEXT!!!
23. I'm against all institutional claims to rights, and thereby think unions, churches, corporations, etc. have no place in political campaigns. So here, we mostly agree.
24. See #1, this is not a State's right or federal thing to control; the right to keep and bear arms is an individual right. This means if you can take trial rights, speech rights, property rights, search and seizure rights with you across State lines with you, then so should you be able to take your permit to carry a weapon across State's lines...it is an individual right, not to be infringed by government at any level. Keep means own, bear means carry (openly). Concealed carry is legal in my State and is actually better in terms of game theory mathematics in detering crime (open carry means everyone can see your weapon meaning the criminal can simply choose to exploit those without weapons, whereas concealed carry means onbly half the population need to carry guns concealed for the entire population to be unexploitable to criminals). Concealed carry permits should be issued by the State, and if not that's up to the State. They do not have to be honored by other States like open carry does. Personally I think all carrying should be legal without permit, but I'm speaking in terms of Constitutionality and "bear"ing arms. This again goes back to the irrational fear of firearms discussed earlier.
25. I don't see in the Constitution where quotas on immigration are legal. The Founders were free market fans and wanted the market to regulate immigration. All I can find in original intent is that immigrants need to be allowed in if they pass a normal background check and medical exam. Other than that let them in...immigration is CONDUSIVE to economic growth anyhow, so it's counter productive to slow or stop it. So, we agree, no immigrants or majorities or minorities should be forced to carry IDs to prove citizenship...in fact this violates search and seizure rights, as well as the original intent regarding immigration in the Constitution. We should let in anyone who wants in provided they pass a background check and medical check.
26. I'm not sure what you're refering to, but I'd like more information so I can decide on my own. I'm against rigging election and we do enough of that already (see Bush vs Gore, Bush vs Kerry, JFK vs Nixon in Illinois, the Iowa Primary this year, etc.,etc.,etc.).
27. See #1. Pass an Amendment or stop acting like it's allowed. This can be done at the State level or through donations from individuals/groups.
28. This is in the Constitution, but I'm against it. Extorting someone (tax) on the threat of kidnapping (prison) is not justifiable to fund painters and poets...period. Ethics/morality should matter at some point. But, I concede you have a legal argument through the Constitution and my side needs to AMEND this out not simply end it unConstitutionally.
29. Again, this is Constituional you have a point and will concede...but Ron Paul wants to up spending on infrastructure by spending 50% of all cut overseas spending on infrastructure. So you're painting them all with a broadbrush sterotype which isn't true necessarily. Where i live toll roads are cheaper than gasoline tax and the roads are nicer...I'd gladly work on an Amendment to the Constitution to end the road monopolies and cronie-ism that determines their cintracts if we could trade gas tax for tolls and road privatization. Because you already pay MORE at the pump per mile than in tolls at toll roads, it wouldn't limit anyone not already in the market (drivers) from accessing any roads. In other words, the poor that have access now pay at the pump already, so paying less at the toll booth is not a barrier to entry.
30. I'm actually for same-sex marriage and adoption...so I'm with you here. It's not in the Constituoon (see #1) therefore it's State's right. Since marriage is an individual right, I'd never support an Amendment to the Constitution to ban these things EVEN IF I was against them. Again, The Constitutions intent was to regulate and limit the federal government, not individual rights.
31. Ron Paul voted to repeal DADT, and I'm with him on that. The individual right of sexuality (barring harm or fraud of course) among adults is not to be banned in our military, and should never of been an issue. Again you act as if all Republicans support this because most of them do...you're stereotyping. I and people like me are against this banning of gays in the military.
32. I'm a constructional Deist and against theocracy completely. So again you sterotype and say all Republicans are for theocracy and some race based Christian fundamentalist theorcracy. Ron Paul isn't, I'm not, and I'd venture to say most Republicans are not either (although I'm sure some are). I'm against all religious and racial bigotry. End the drug war if you want to help minoroties right away, I'll be with you.
33. I do not want a litmus test religiously for President...this again is a sterotype. Where did you get this list, a chain letter?
34. I'm against banning muslims from entering the U.S. or becoming citizens...again another stereotype libertarian Republicans don't fall under (and I admit religious and racial hatred toward arabs and muslims is problem). I'm all for muslims coming to this country and becoming citizens provided they pass a background check and a medical exam.
35. This is another thing, yet again, you sterotype and I don't agree with. Ron Paul stood up for the Ground Zero mosque/recreation center. I also agreed with it being allowed. Property rights matter. It's not in the Constitution to do any of thse things you're mentioning at the end of his list. Stop sterotyping all Republicansa like they doi Democrats...this is why I call you guys RepubliBloods and Democrips (those who think in false paradigms and hate anyone not in your "gang"; ingroup/outgroup delusional zombies incapable of finding fault with your own Party).
36. Dood Frank are not going to stop anything...this goes to the idea we needed more regulations when in fact fraud and harm needed to be enforced and none the stuff Dodd Frank obstensibly prvents would of happened. Besides, it doesn't prevent what it thinks it does to begin with...so yes repeal it. ALSO, see #1..it's not in the Constitution.
37. Sarbanes Oxley didn't govern corporate accountability...are you serious? Again, ineefctive and all you needed to do was enforce fraud and harm laws. See #1 as well, unConstitutional. It's fraud to allow legal fractional banking, it's also fraud to federally insure it to perpetuate it. If no such central banking criminal enterprise existed to legaklize fraud and harm, no Sarbanes Oxley would be required. End legalized fraud and harm, problem solved. Instead you want to perpetuate failed economic policies, continue to keep legal things like fraud and harm, and swear that regulating legal harm and fraud correctly can somehow stop harm and fraud....no, it can't, logically. Check your premises on this issue.
38. See #1. I'm all for diplomacy...i'm not for allowing our sovereignty to be violated on the whims of foreign nations. Keep the Union IF we have complete autonomy (and this goes for all nations) to only be joined via a voluntary assocation. They can stay in the USA geographically, but we need to stop funding it...see #1. In now way is the UN to be compulsory or to overrule the Constitution and our sovereignty.
So we have addressed quickly the entie list. Here's suggestion for debate...don't spout HUGE lists of things as facts without understanding that most of what you said violates our Constitution, are stereotypes with little or no reason to be generalized, and are just flawed premises based on informa logical fallacies like "begging the question".
Try backing up each argument one at a time instead of listing them exhaustively in order to overwhelm opposition with no ability to debate and explain each and every point one by one. Simply listing them authoritatively isnot a logical way to debate issues. If all you want to do is grandtsand with chain letters, then have it at. If you want to solve problems or exchange ideas, try not being so...illogical.
Thanks for playing.
For hell sakes!! Who "ordained" YOU the "blog historian"??? MSNBC oughta charge you for publication rights! NO---I didn't even read you $#!T.....I learned long ago that those enamorated with the sound of their own voice/opinion, rarely had anything of worth to say....
Pretty much like you!
Who the hell appointed you the Blog Owner/Moderator here????
Dead file for you boy......(that's what you get called when you act like one.)
If you don't want to read it don't come around. Take a hike....
Well, we have the Final Four of the Republicans in South Carolina.........and to varying degrees: Flip-Floppers, Fakes, Freaks, and Fanatics.
Wadachoice......
I'm pretty sure they were paid to not give Republican voters any viable choices. And if this is the best that the GOP has to offer, I think it's time to bring back the Whig party.
There needs to be a conservative party-- a sensible one. Not this Republican train wreck.
GOP does not in any way relate to the Whigs. Never has.
CS...If you study British History, the Whigs were down from the Magna Carta OF THE People's rights where our values of liberty stemmed from, not of the 1% elitist Cavaliers. This philosophically would equate to, in later times...Whigs = Clinton and Blair Cavaliers = Reagan and Thatcher
Now, Siara....Can we see what equates to the social theoretical definition of fascism which is the marriage of wealthy industrialist corporate elites into the government rulers which also has adopted some state religion of fundamentalist pseudo-Xtian empire thing owned and commercially operated by the World's richest most cavalier 1% and monopolized and bribing legally all of its players in it's web of corruption with its voter machine fraud and Coingate, redistricting attempts and behind bars criminals of Enron (Lay), Abramoff, and DeLay guys being just ever so slightly biased and not conserving anything for anyone but themselves? That closer resembles this train wreck.
Meanwhile, the suburban village life of the rest of the lowly little working barely middle class citizens goes on struggling to survive through this cold winter while the poor are in danger of exposure to cold, starvation, addiction and hypothermia as funding is taken away from social assistance programs and threatening even the disabled and elderly or filtering down to the local paramedics, fire and law enforcement jobs. We are not fooled who remember past struggles and revolutions for our freedoms to protect our survival and sustenance, and who was who, what they believed and stood for. Yeah, it really is Wadachoice when the voters are not even educated enough to know who is who.
If you are of the People of the UNITED States since its revolution and believe in and uphold the Bill of Rights, STAND with who Thomas Paine, Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson most likely would vote for...this would not be just for the Kings and Queens, but for ALL of The People, including yourself.
Obama 2012
why is it sarah palin's looking better all the time!!!
Why is it that Pelosi and Hilary have Palin beat 100xs in actually having what it takes to be a POTUS, and definitely way past all current republican male candidates???
answer: They actually did their homework.
While I will vote for anyone but Obama (I go by what his record as President is, not party affiliation or "hot" item of the week); I'm still disappointed in all selections remaining for Republican candidates. Wash DC is so far out of touch and pandering to special interests that it has crushed this country. The media is so out of control (and Newt's statement was dead on) that they start a Presidential Debate which a question about "gossip" instead of Platforms?
Where we the voters should be demanding more; it's obvious that neither party cares - they have effectively "divided and conquered" because we the voters don't demand our politicians to be held to their promises (Obama) nor represent the needs of the American people bilaterally (Senate / House). Instead we constantly pick a side (Dem / Rep) and then villify the other party by "spin" on facts and downright posting lies (nice list above for an example of twisting words without understanding platforms) and for a country complaining about the process, seems almost no one is actually watching, listening, and really taking a moment to understand what each candidate represents nor their record when they were elected.
Right now-doesn't matter who gets elected; we'll have 4 more years of the same but we the people don't see this, we'd rather fight to be in the "winner" camp that do what is right.
Will South Carolina actually allow this Boston New England, Hedge Fund manager, OUTSOURCER to communists in China come in even 2nd????
Outsourcer to China and off shore accounts?
Apple Computer.
You would not happen to own a shiny Apple product now, would ya?
Nope. Never bought an Apple product, and never will.
I Love My Apple Computer, iPods (4), Ipad, iTV, iTunes.
TFB if you don't.
And I love all my electronics/PCs that aren't Apple.
TFB if you buy Apple's overpriced products.
Explain it again Romney, why is it an "attack on capitalism" when someone asks you why you have $100 million dollars hidden away in an offshore tax have in the Cayman Islands?
I may have missed something here. Is he breaking any laws?
Jack, what you are missing is the concept that republicans believe that people paying in the 15% tax bracket don't need to sacrifice while they believe that middle and lower income do need to sacrifice in order to balance our budget.
Yo Steeler Fan - care to drop some wisdom on our friend Tea4Me?
Man, it is so nice to have a tax attorney around.
Romney's political life for the next couple of weeks will be centered around not disclosing his tax returns. The media will counter with his dad making a big deal out of how important it was to release this information. Mitt obviously is hiding something here because he's already taken too much heat over it. Most likely it will be the use of offshore pass-thrus in the Caymans to avoid taxes. I say this because this was a whole division at Bain, just steeing these accounts up so that they didn't have to pay US taxes. Whatever comes out is likely to be nuclear for Romney. And it could be bad enough to damage the whole party.
And he has to worry about this while Gingrich, Santorum, and Paul will be throwing every body blow they can come up with because this their last shot -- Florida will probably see Santorum drop out and Paul slide back to a token campaign.
I can't figure out why so many people are so anxious to take money from some people and give it to others. Do you like it when you have to pay taxes? Do you want to have more of your money taken away from you and given to someone else the government thinks needs it more? That is where we are headed with Obama. All Romney did was be a successful businessman, without breaking any laws, or doing anything else that is wrong. Isn't that what we all try to do; be successful? Why are we condeming someone for being a success. Is the American dream truly gone? So now whenever anyone makes something of themselves, then we simply say thank you and take all of the money that THEY made and give it to someone else? That is not the country that I want to live in. Maybe everyone should be more focused on doing what they can to better themselves instead of worrying about taking money from those that have done just that.
I want to know now before my state has a primary ( if big brother gets off his butt and gives us an election map) what Romney has in his taxes he is afraid the Dems will use against him,
He is doing everything legally. Jealousy maybe a little here. If this is all The Grinch can use against him, Callista may be cut loose for someone who more resembles Ann Romney or basically a pretty blonde.
If Romney pays that much of taxes, is because investments are not taxed as high. HE IS NOT BREAKING ANY LAWS, in fact, he has helped companies creat jobs! If you do an excellent job like he did, he should be rewarded!
What's wrong with being successful?? What's wrong with making it in this world?? If you believe that everybody should be at the same level, move to Russia, North Korea or China... There, you will find that great opportunity to be like everybody else even if you are better than many!
I believe Romney or Santorum, would be 100% better than Obama.
Obama has shamed our country and has made it weak and broke. He has also broke the law and doesn't follow the Constitution. Perhaps he thinks it doesn't apply to him because he is not an American, he also has had illegal relatives in the country. That is why he has pushed the Amnesty law, if you break the law by being here for many years, it is okay to let you stay. If you break the law by coming illegally, you are a criminal! Why reward them? Oh, I know why! Because he knows that he has illegal relatives in the USA!! Double standard!!!
He blames every disaster on President Bush or Republicans, he had the chance to show he could do better when the House full of Democrats and didn't do a thing to make things better, when is he going to take responsibility for his ineptitude???? Obama should be a ONE TERM PRESIDENT!!!
lc- American taxes are much lower than most other countries, check out the difference between how much tax one pays in Britain or Europe to here. It has always been known that the safest deterrent to a revolution between the haves and have nots is a broad based middle class. Yes, there will always be a pyramid, but the shorter and broader, the better, healthier and safer. There has never been such polarization of wealth in this country as now. It is not a good thing. Ex pats and off shores should have a tariff put on their products coming back into this country just like anyone else out there. Other countries tariff our products so fair is fair.
Lonereb...didn't Mr. DeLay have something to do with all that redistricting mess they are trying to straighten out now? Is he still doing time?
..."he had the chance to show he could do better when the House full of Democrats and didn't do a thing to make things better, when is he going to take responsibility for his ineptitude"... nice try Estrella but you are so wrong on this. You clearly do not understand how Congress works. A two thirds majority is required and even in the first two years we had a problem with a few rogue Purple Dogs. Go figure.
Jack 112---Is it hard for you to understand that the majority of us are complaining that it is because these right wing 1% ers are making their crooked preferences legal.
Amazing, not? All these "family values evangelicals" climbing behind a serial liar, philandering, money grubbing hypocrite. I guess morals and integrity have no place in the bible belt.
MSN proves, once again, it is OWNED...LIES, LIES, LIES...RON PAUL IS THE CLEAR WINNER IN SOUTH CAROLINA! RON PAUL 2012! <3
#!/southcarolinalowcountry
#!/WYFF4
RON PAUL can not be allowed to win. It goes against the entire corrupt government-protected bankster run paradigm. What would happen to all that war profiteering? How can we brainwash kids into a version of history that isn't accurate without the Dept of "Education"? Who would the TSA agents be allowed to legally fondle?
But seriously, the powers that be are in a tenuous situation. The entire western economic fiat based system is imploding from greed and corruption. That is why the NDAA was signed into law - to put the FEAR of the government into ANYONE who protests it's actions. NO DISSENT OR ELSE!
Do you think that maybe Ron Paul wants to bring the troops home for another - never considered reason? The MIAC report states that returning veterans are among the "threats" to the goverment's grip over the people. What if we had a bunch of returning vets here who would resist the police state that is now becoming the new face of fascism in the USA?
Better to keep them all somewhere else so they can't save their own country as it slides into Marshall law and any dissenters are hauled off to Guantanamo.
America is toast. And everyone is arguing over which Globalist gets to be President.
If Ron Paul doesn't make it through (and he won't without an act of God) - it's four more years of war and the resulting loss of liberties that the past 11 years have given us.
We will have to change from the USA to the USSA. So much for pledging allegiance, the Star Spangled Banner, the flag and all the other nationalistic symbolism. So much for taking an oath of office, or placing your hand on the bible. Its all meaningless when a president can use signing statements and strong-arm the pathetic passive CONgress to do the bidding of the elite.
I feel the same way. We are pretty much screwed if Ron Paul doesnt will nomination
Amazing. Not one word about Ron Paul. Great reporting, biased newspeople!
I wonder how Ron Paul is going to keep running since he like everybody in his state doesn't have a current voters registration card and he can't even vote for himself at this point.
he plans to run until the convention no matter what.... he went alot further than south carolina last time with less support.
For one, Dr. Paul does not come across as a racist like some try to portray. It was proven he never wrote those papers. "They" used his signature as a forgery, either to discredit him or as an endorsement to further their racist cause.
There is a very good video showing Dr. Paul's compassion. He helped a lot of black families for little to no pay in his years as a pediatrician. Google: The Compassion of Dr. Ron Paul. It will move your heart!
I'm convinced that Ron Paul is supplying his followers with free drugs and tips for avoiding the draft.
Valley Girl, you are out of it.. Ron Paul who???
The last time I saw such "blind allegiance" to a man---as Ron Paul followers have shown---400 people ended up dead in British Guiana at the hands of one Jim Jones.... There will be a lot more than 400 casualties if Ron Paul gets the nomination......not that any reasonable person is worried.....
I don't know but it sure seems like the South Carolina "Christian conservative" is appearing about as hypocritical as you can get - not only in what they choose to ignore and who they favor, but also in what they say just doesn't matter. I'm sure Cain is now kicking himself for getting out.
It's sad that both of these people are being taken seriously. Mitt wont release his tax returns.... which is a clear sign to anybody with a brain that he has something to hide, and he doesn't want us to see it until after he wraps up the nom. Newt is one of the most morally bankrupt politicians i can think of. After being virtually thrown out of his own party he left public service to make $$ as an "advisor" to freddie mac. Not mention his hypocrisy regarding Clinton's affair (or letting the gov shutdown). Anyway though, not to belabor the point: RON PAUL 2012 IS THE ONLY CHANCE FOR REAL CHANGE! OPEN YOUR EYES!
have you read his racist rants in his newsletters yet? I think not.
Puck Faul 2012
SuperNovascotia,
Are you really from Nova Scotia? Are you an American or Canadian? Inquiring minds would love to know!!!
American, never even been to NS lol. About the newsletter though, they have been following him for years and i %100 believe that they are false. RP is no liar, thats why the things he says ring true to so many.
Chris Harris... John Powell wrote those newsletters while Paul was practicing OBGYN.
Can you be anymore ignorant?
Ron Paul is like Barney Fife. He is waaay too radical and just plain creepy
Ron Paul and Rick Santorum will not release their tax returns either and no one is hassling them. It's only Romney because he has more money then the others. It's that simple. He worked his ass off to make it and now people who are jealous of his wealth want to push the issue. I am sure he has some excellent tax attorneys to handle his business affairs.
Ron Paul said he hadn't considered it because no one asked him but perhaps if it came to that he would. He noted that he, unlike Romney, has no conflict of interest and doesn't even TALK to lobbyists.
Ron Paul WHO?????
didn't mean to post this
The Christian conservative values are equal to those that the Nazi's used. It is them and only them.
I'll make it short and simple.
RUCK FOMNEY AND GUCK FINGRICH 2012!
Your class is showing.
It's just what either Mr 1% or Mr Mean spirited will do to all of us if elected.
HMMMM Must be a tongue tied liberal Obama jock strap!
It appears Mitt will actually have to work to win the republican nomination.
the so called evangelicals have forgotten or just failed to read (the bible) that Jesus was apolitical. The pharisees tried to trap him with the should we pay tribute to Ceasar question. It's kind of ironic that when you really want to be President that suddenly God has told you to run, but if you don't win (see Bachmann and Perry ) then there is no mention of God informing you your services are no longer needed.
I'm STILL waiting for the godders to admit that Tom Brady and the Patriots are more powerful than god!
They've also forgotten the admonition to the prostitute to "go and sin no more." How many times now has Gingrich repeated the same "failing" that caused him to "reconcile with God." Gingrich won SC for one reason and one reason only and since no one else wants to say it, especially on TV, I will: EVANGELICAL BIGOTS! Once we get out of the Bible belt and away from these bigots let's see how the vote turns out. SC will not successfully pick the Republican nominee this time and they are going to look foolish when the stuff hits the fan in the next week about Gingrich. Get ready for major disappointment you bigots!
Ironic isn't it, "Get over yourself!", that your own intolerant stereotyping comment is in itself bigoted hate speech (as in "clinging to their guns and bibles"). But then, irony is so damned ironic.
Now he'll pick Sarah Palin as VP and the country goes into anaphylactic shock. These many self promoting crazies on one ticket! Why do they want to put us through this again!
evangelicals will not vote for romney in the primaries. pre vote polls in states with large evangelical numbers are worthless. evangelicals will not admit they are voting against the mormon to pollsters, but in the secret of the booth they pull the stick for anyone they think will beat the mormon. romney knew this going in, he has had strategy from the beginning that he would likely lose iowa and sc. the idea that he could win those states were recent musings by the media. (i predicted santorum to win iowa two weeks out) there is a huge anti-mormon sentiment in the evangelical culture. romney's campaign is designed to lose those type states. he will pick up steam in the non bible belt states and secure the nominee in april.
now once the choice is between romney and obama the evangelicals will stay home or vote against obama. the result of the election will hinge on if evagelicals will vote their political interests (AGAINST OBAMA) or if they will allow their religious bigotry to keep them home.
You hear it here first
Sorry Brian, I'd say nice try but it isn't even that. Pointing out bigotry is not bigotry.
First of all let me say this, we are sitting here arguing GOP vs DEM, but we forget that we are all Americans. Both parties are the same anyway, both like spending and big government. The Dems like entitlements and the GOP like wars! The bottom line is if we dont get the debt under control and stop so much spending there will be no money to support any of it. Bush raised the debt and Obama is doing the same. There is no difference between Obama, Santorum, Romney, or Gingrich. They are all for big government and taking more of our freedom little by little. They are all puppets of the establishment and are all more of the same in different packages. All of them, including Obama are globalist!
I am a black man and I didn't vote for Obama or Mr. NDAA John Mccain! In fact I have not voted in years because I feel that they are all the same anyway, they are going to put in office who they want and do whatever they want when they want as long as the American people dont stand up for themselves. The media is supposed to report the news but they tell us who to vote for. You got MSNBC, NBC, CNN for the liberals and dems. You got FOX news, Limbaugh, Hannity, and the other guys for the right. Before I move on, Ask yourself why do both sides attack Ron Paul, because he won't play ball! So they try to marginalize him and his supporters or they flat out ignore him or call him crazy when he is making the most sense in the room most of the time.
Let me make a few points and questions for you to ponder. Someone said Obama killed Osama, what proof do you have of that? There are more holes in that story than swiss cheese but because they say they did and the media says it we swallow it up as fact! Kind of funny that happened right around the time when the whole Birther thing was going on! I am not a conspiracy nut or anything but I am also smart enough to not swallow up everything the media feeds me. 2. Why are we so afraid of Iran? We are the strongest nation in the world but we are so scared of Iran. Israel has said they can handle it themselves just as Ron Paul said, but most of us are too lazy to look that up and believe that he is a nut on foreign policy because thats what we have been fed by the media! What about this notion that they attack us because we are free and prosperous? Stupid as hell!!! Thats like someone saying I am jealous of Canada cause they have free health care, lets attack them. Ridiculous!!! Thats how they sell these endless wars to you and justify taking away our freedom. If we dont do this the boogie man will get you!!! Its all bull@!$%#! We say we support the troops but do we listen to what they say, nope!! There supposed to be fighting for our freedom, not the whole world's. We get attacked because we are in other peoples business that has nothing to do with our national security!! They do this stuff to create more enemies because without enemies, how do they justify war! Lastly, we went to Iraq on false pretenses, lies, and for no reason, and what the government just say, My bad!! And we are okay with that!! All the lives lost for what? The bottom line is they all have an agenda and the more we vote these people in, then we deserve what we get! What business do we have in Libya, Syria, Pakistan? None!!!
I had gave up all hope until I learned about Ron Paul! The man is honest and whether I agree with him or not on everything, I believe that he believes in what he says and he must because he has been saying it the whole time. He doesnt change his message for the crowd he is in like these other politicians. Look at him in the debate, he is in front of a bloodthirsty war crowd, but he stuck to his guns! I agree with him on just about everything he says!! Even when I dont agree, what he is saying makes 100% sense. Even if he does not win hopefully he can wake up enough people along the way as he has me!!! The sad fact is that most of us are fast asleep!! Ron Paul 2012
Having read these post and knowing that I personally gave up on the donkey party a long time ago, I will say this. I remember, Kennedy, Johnson, Carter, Clinton & Obama. I also remember, Nixon, Ford, Reagan, Bush & Bush. I remember legislation passed and failed, the state of the world during their time and their reactions to the people of the US and the world. So now I am faced with the choice of a jackass or an elephant. When I consider the big picture, the do not call them donkeys without reason, I'm going with the elephant. Big Brother government socialism just doesn't appeal to me. The left act like little nazis with their name calling, claims on the "truth"(everybody lies but them or they are stupid).
I haven't voted democrat for 40 years and am not about to start now. Why? I cannot stand the lies, double talk and weak/socialist policies of the left.
Now before you go on a binge of name calling, claiming of intellectual superiority, and bigotry remember this. The Constitution that so many of you wish to throw away guarantees me the right to free speech and freedom of expression, like it or not. Perhaps that is the reason so many on the left view it as "outdated" and needing to be "revised."
The right is called the "Right" for a good reason.
Rainman, you nailed it! The cener of gravity in the Republican Party is in the evangelic south and they are not about to vote for a Mormon. And they are not going to have a candidate who is not from the south, or from the small state west ( Arizona, Colorada, Utah, Idaho, Wyoming, etc.). Somebody from these areas will the the GOP nominee. The Northern Republicans will be better off becoming Democrats if they want to have any political influence. One should not forget that the Southern Republicans, who control the Republican Party are the old Southern, redneck, segregationists who controlled the Democratic Party until 1948. Obama is going to kill whomever they select , assuming this candidate field will produce the GOP nominee. Finally, even if the GOP wins the presidency, they are not going to have a sufficient majority to overcome the blocking efforts of the Democrat, as we now have with the Republicans.
Gee Charles your version of history is different than the one I learned in public schools.
The Republican party ended slavery in the 1860s and then up to the sixties it was the sourthern democrats the tried to keep that final strangle hold on oppression. Perhaps you need to look at the history of the democrat party before posting?
um...2/3 of the vote were evengilicals? and they want this “Christian” man as their guy? How hypocritical to choose this adulterating sleaze ball Newt, whose own party cited him
for ethics violations, over the true valued family man, Romney, who professes to
be from a Church of Jesus Christ.
Evangelicals are becoming a religion of hating Mormophobes. The groups that voted for Mitt?....those college/post grad...those with some sense. South Carolina...get educated!
Jim,
I would venture a guess that you actually read the story in the bible instead of depending on your "pastor" to tell you about it. I am a person who reads many things for himself... the bible included. And I take no offense in what you said. Actually, I don't care what my pastor says that was just out right correct and funny! You sir spoke the truth about Jesus being apolitical and still is to this day. You just brought hope to this reader. President Lincoln stated it best when asked if God was on his side. His reply was (Lincoln) I am more concerned with whether I am on God's side. Somewhere around that time Lincoln by executive order abolished slavery in this country on the belief that God could not bless this nation as long as slavery was continued. Of interest in this discussion it was the Southern Democrats attempt to force slavery on the Northern states that actually lead to Lincoln's election as the first Republican president. It is amazing how a few years and people forget the roles each party played in the issue of slavery. Even in the 1960's it was southern democrats that continued the racial practices in the south...not the Republicans as some would like you to believe. I must make the Southern Democrats turn over in their graves with President Obama in office. And how could a party change its history enough to attract Mr. Obama as a member?
I agree with PaulBot33 and am sadly disillusioned with the whole political process. This country has been led into a morass from which it may not recover and those who think this country is somehow preordained to lead the world are in for a rude awakening. We did to to ouselves folks!
Stormrider you need to read his post he very clearly mentions the racists running the southern dem party...but I guess he used to big words like segragationist and stuff for you to understand...He did get the year wrong because he typed 1948 but it wasn't fully lost to the bigots until Johnson signed the civil rights act in the early 60's....But I guess you are one of those people that already knows everything so you can learn anything else from anybody including reading for yourself...Hell you probably won't even read this...
Yes, the change over of the Dixiecrats to the Republican camp seems to be a confusing historical transition to many who have not studied it in college or high school. It did revolve around this senator, Strom Thurmond, which may help to clarify the exodus of Dixiecrats from the Democrat Party during the Civil Rights Movement. There is much more on the subject but this is a start.
"Thurmond later represented South Carolina in the United States Senate from 1954 until 2003, at first as a Democrat and after 1964 as a Republican. He switched out of support for the conservatism of Republican presidential candidate and Arizona Senator Barry Goldwater, who shared his opposition to the 1964 Civil Rights Act.[ "
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strom_Thurmond
Stormrider54 you are one who has such a warped knowledge of history. In the 1860's the Republican party were the liberals. Even Nixon and Ford would be considered to be liberals now. And by way the "nazis" were on the far right as was the Big Brother government in the novel 1984 and go look it up for a change.
Ever since Reagan the Republican party has got more and capitalistic. Can you stand the lies, double talk and greedy policies of the far right ? Perhaps you just are ignoring the parts of the Constitution you do not like too.
Okay....so here are the options: Ronny Paul who may be a bit to on in years to handle the next 4 years - nice guy but let's not send him to an early grave! Mr. "Meet my next Ex-wife" Gingrich who we may need to stock the secretarial pool for, or Mr. "Let me tell you this" Romney or Mr. "Hmmmm...their bombing our borders - let me sleep on it" too passive San...what's his name. I'm glad Gringrich won S.C. as I don't think I could stomach the lack of humility on Romney's face quite frankly. And it just goes to show how mixed the country is with regard to thinking any one of them is suitable to step up to the place as President. They all seem to be bashing at each other including our President, yet at the other side of their mouth they are professing to be the ultimate god believing individuals! Somewhat hypocritical. I wonder how the Lord would critique them. I do know one thing - Jackie O Kennedy, Hilary Clinton and our precious Michelle were every bit deserving of being referred to as the First Ladies of our country. Fine, highly educated, poised, classic women of substance, integrity, and great role models for our young women. Can you really see Mrs. Gringrich III as stepping into that role? I frankly can not fathom explaining to our young ladies - "Its okay to be deceptive behind another woman's back with her husband for 6 years! God will forgive you baby. Go ahead....this is the First Lady of our country - If they can be devote to their religious beliefs, go against the commandments, forget about principles, integrity, trust and vows made in the eyes of God...well its okay...you can too! Hello....I wonder how some conservative Leader's wives will take knowing that when they come to town. It is not something you can sweep under the carpet. People may not say it but they sure will think it. Everyone will know and perception is everything. Further, President Obama has done his best to jump over hoops and hurdles that were thrown at him. It was like he was setup to fail at the hands of many including the goofball with the tan from Ohio! Perhaps if some let him do his work and stop playing the school yard bullies - he may have been able to turn this country around faster. But alas its easy for anyone to call the shots from the wings...I'm just glad I don't have to sit in his chair everyday and do his job. And I give him credit for his patience, pursuing even with the jerks in his way at every word, turn...and I can't wait to see how perfect the next one is who thinks it a piece of cake. The old saying " Don't be quick to speak until you have walked in the same shoes on that same road" ....Yet again, their excuse will be that President Obama left it that way..its his fault! Have at it boys...its all yours! Were behind you President Obama..150%. Any President that can hold a few lines of Al's tunes...gets my vote! You and Michelle already had my heart long before you choose to run 4 years ago!
Most of you are so in left field...
Get ready... We the Tea Party are still here and here we stay...you watch what we do.
If you would crack a few books and try to learn what this country is all about you would
understand.. It might take a bit but do try...
Newt Gingrich to his ex-wife, Marianne: if you could only see the way Callista loves me...
www.youtube.com/watch?v=O_YsN8AlfEU
Jean Darlin' - Thank you ever so much for validating my whole point. It is not about being left or right or up or down...it's about looking at the whole picture beyond the end of our noses, their noses, everyone's noses!
This country, in fact this world, was not built on just the right or the left point of views. It was built on all views. Every party has taken a turn at the bat - some have gotten home runs and some have struck out. But not one has had consistent wins each and every time!
If you think I am standing in left field, think again. I'm not even in right field either. I stand as far back as I can so that I can take the whole game in - process it and make my conclusions. The left has their point, so does the right. But being pigeon toed into this or that has never been a win for me.
What you may need to do is go beyond the books you talk about and open your thinking up to a whole field or global understanding of us, our placement in the world as it is now and what it will look like 30 years down the road! It, unfortunately is not just about you or me, or them or us but moreso the full gammit. It is not just about what our country is about but what each and every country is about. There you will find the wisdom, understanding and open your perspective beyond your own front door.
Perhaps try not to limit yourself to right, left, up or down. Open your mind fully. Meet the experience.
Consider our political parties or our country as a house on a street. And each has a house on that street. Do you take the time to understand your neighbors before you bolt out your front door and do as you please? Or do you sit back and see what's happening first so that your decisions, behaviours and choices mesh with the community? And if your views or beliefs do not - are you open to sitting over a pot of coffee and a sweet roll to discuss with your neighbors your differences? And attempt to agree to disagree without walking away in a huff?
Some of us think we are not in a position to be