jump to last post 1-8 of 8 discussions (106 posts)

Is Gingrich's Political Career Done For?

  1. Ralph Deeds profile image71
    Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago

    Newt seems to me to have slit his own throat with his criticism of the Ryan Medicare privatization proposal which was adopted nearly unanimously by the House last month. Moreover, the House vote may have cost the GOP seats in in several elections coming up soon and next year. As Eric Alterman said, by making support for the Ryan plan a litmus test has turned the Big Reagan GOP tent into a pup tent.

    1. dutchman1951 profile image60
      dutchman1951posted 6 years ago in reply to this

      What you ask her I think is possible. I keep woundering what Newt was attempting to do. I doubt his statement; saying that he made a mistake.

      I keep thinking He is,  underneath,  wanting the Tea Partiers out of the G.O.P. and on their own, but powers to be viewed it as herisy. Becuase of Ryan's golden boy status.

      I think you are correct here, very. But I wounder what is really underneath here, his true motive.

      1. Ralph Deeds profile image71
        Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        I think Newt was speaking out of recognition that the Ryan plan for Medicare isn't going over very well with many voters, especially with people like me who are eligible for Medicare and find that it works quite well. (Except for the fact that there is abuse and fraud and doesn't do enough to curb skyrocketing health care costs.) Gingrich was correct in pointing out that the Ryan voucher proposal is "too radical." He was searching for a middle ground, but he miscalculated the reaction of his fellow Repbulicans, especially the members of the House nearly all of whom voted for the Ryan budget plan.

        1. uncorrectedvision profile image60
          uncorrectedvisionposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Ryan's plan is hardly radical it is far too tame.  The demographic disaster of Medicare is only now building.  By the time the last of the Baby Boom retires it will no longer be sustainable.  Any action that does not drastically reform it now dooms it.

          It will be fun to hear how much retirees love medicare when they are denied access to the pacemaker when granny can just take a pill(remember Barry's chilling words.)

          Barry's death panel of one.
          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U-dQfb8WQvo

          1. Ralph Deeds profile image71
            Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Agreed. Rising Medicare costs and health care costs generally are unsustainable. What's your solution. My understanding is that the health reform passed last year has a number of cost control features albeit insufficient to do the job that's needed.

            Your comment about death panels is misleading. Everybody knows that there's a whole lotta needless testing and ineffective treatment going on. Obama's plan doesn't provide for denial of effective care for anyone.

            1. uncorrectedvision profile image60
              uncorrectedvisionposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              When decisions about treatment are taken away from the doctor and the patient and placed in the hands of a government bureaucracy as medicare policy what would you call it.  When one is empaneled to make life and death decisions how can it not be  a death panel?

              1. Ralph Deeds profile image71
                Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                I repeat, what's your solution to curb the unsustainable rate of increase in health care costs? We know that a huge percentage of health care cost is incurred in futile treatment and care during the final month or two of life--heart surgery for 87 year-olds who are in poor health. One of our neighbors is a heart surgeon. You should hear his tales.

                1. uncorrectedvision profile image60
                  uncorrectedvisionposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  I don't offer a solution for the reason I have stated in other posting on this thread.  We are done as a free people it is only a matter of time before we are all standing in line for food and medicine.  This is as it should be.  When a man decides it is right for the government to plunder the property of another and award it to him merely because he has failed to manage his own life well it is the end of freedom.

                  The solution is coming.  Health care costs will plummet when no health care is available except to those connected to government.  History repeats.

                  The solution - eat the rich

                  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Sp-VFBbjpE

                  1. lovemychris profile image80
                    lovemychrisposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    The rich won't be around.
                    I hear they already have plans to head for S. America and Dubai.

                    They will leave after they get done with their pillaging and murder.

                    Off to the safe-haven that money can buy.....stolen booty from the working people of America....just as they've done elsewhere.

                    That's why your crop of Cult-members are trying to squeeze the last out of us they can.....the time is near for their prophecied disaster...

                    Only the rich will survive.....so they think.
                    Luckily, they do not hold the master plan.

                    I see a big tornado, with all their money flying away and landing on an ancient island....untouched by so-called civilization...the Natives will burn the money for fire.

                2. Mister Veritis profile image60
                  Mister Veritisposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  I suggest the free market. We should prohibit the government from having any role whatever in health care. Taking the taxpayer off the hook for every individual's bad decisions and placing the individual directly on the hook for his or her bad decisions would bring the price down instantly.

    2. Mister Veritis profile image60
      Mister Veritisposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      He made a boo-boo. Maybe he will recover. And maybe he won't. I happen to really like the guy. But I love my country more. We cannot allow the One-Term-President Obama to stay.

      1. dutchman1951 profile image60
        dutchman1951posted 6 years ago in reply to this

        I think Obama will go, he has to many errors and the health Care issue will hurt him dearly, as for Newt, I do not know. I know we need very strong representation now, with answers and debate power and we seem to be spliting apart over silly issues, like birth certificates, college grades etc... really stupid issues, when we need facts and strength.

        I do not want Obama again ever. he is not right for America. But no one seems strong right now. I think we are in as much election trouble as Obama is in truth, and if its a toss up, He, Obama, will get through it. and that I do not wish to see. XPat status is really looking better al the time now!

        The country I fought for, I do not know any more.

        1. Mister Veritis profile image60
          Mister Veritisposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          But go where? I have looked at Singapore and Belize. The productive people will leave if there is a place to go to.

          1. dutchman1951 profile image60
            dutchman1951posted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Point Taken...Was thinkling Dominica, (Not Dominican Republic) and some other places, but again....your point is heard.

          2. Jeff Berndt profile image92
            Jeff Berndtposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            "The productive people will leave if there is a place to go to."
            Malarchy. Taxes were higher in the 40s-70s and we didn't have a mass exodus of 'productive people.' In fact, we had an era of economic expansion after WWII in spite of the high taxes.

            The whole "tax too much and the best and brightest will leave" philosophy is a mug's game.

            1. uncorrectedvision profile image60
              uncorrectedvisionposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              This is an often repeated myth.  Tax rates may have been higher but the actual effective tax rate was lower.  The tax reforms in 1986 that followed the reduction in rates under Reagan closed up some very large tax deductions.  Those seeking to shelter large portions of their income had more options prior to 1986.  The tax rate paid by the "middle class" tax payer was much lower than it is now. 

              This oft repeated myth confuses the facts regarding a complex history of the income tax code.

              As to fleeing, it is far more likely today that people can flee.  Income is less dependent on being tied to an industrial base than ever before.  More nations around the world are experiencing standards of living, heretofore, realized only in the most sophisticated countries.

              Places like Costa Rica and Ecuador are often mentioned in best foreign retirement destinations.  People have been fleeing high tax states within the United States it seems counter intuitive that this trend would not translate to a national level.  There are ample examples available of British, Irish, Scottish, Canadian businesses, artists, athletes who came to the States when the tax situation at home became unbearable.  Why would we think that the reverse could not be true?

              1. Jeff Berndt profile image92
                Jeff Berndtposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                "The tax reforms in 1986 that followed the reduction in rates under Reagan closed up some very large tax deductions.  Those seeking to shelter large portions of their income had more options prior to 1986."
                And those high-earners' incomes shifted to stock options &c; things that didn't get taxed at the earned income rate (the highest rate).

                "The tax rate paid by the "middle class" tax payer was much lower than it is now."
                That's right, because they've had their taxes go up while their incomes have stagnated, while the top earners have had their incomes skyrocket and their tax rates drop.

                "Places like Costa Rica and Ecuador are often mentioned in best foreign retirement destinations."
                So what? When people retire, they're done being earners, producers, movers, shakers. If someone wants to retire overseas, why shouldn't they? It's no drain on domestic productivity; retirees are by definition done being in the workforce. When high-income entrepreneurs in their prime start leaving, then maybe I'll reconsider the high-taxes=exodus-of-excellence nonsense. Until then, it remains nonsense.

              2. uncorrectedvision profile image60
                uncorrectedvisionposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                Marginal rates

                http://www.truthandpolitics.org/top-rates.php

                Total Receipts as percentage of GDP has been between 16% and 20% since 1940 regardless of top marginal rate

                http://www.econdataus.com/recsrc05.html

                There was once a cap on maximum taxes, deduction for sales tax, state income tax, etc...
                The alternative minimum tax is not indexed to inflation.
                Note the standard deduction table.

                http://staff.jccc.net/swilson/businessm … es/fit.htm

                Given the foolish complexity of tax policy one factor alone is insufficient to explain why the economy grew or did not grow during any given period.  However, it does seem obvious that the acceleration in legislation in recent decades has had a profound impact on the economy as the interference by the government in the economy has increased.

                (this is too long to read - I included it as an illustration of how crazy our government has become in the last 40 years)
                http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts … iption.pdf

                1. Jeff Berndt profile image92
                  Jeff Berndtposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  Lots of reading; I'll have to take a look at this when I have more time. I appreciate the links!

            2. Ron Montgomery profile image60
              Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago in reply to this



              No it isn't, it's gospel truth.  They made a movie about it and everything...tongue

              1. Ralph Deeds profile image71
                Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                The "best and brightest" scientists and individuals with other advanced academic and professional degrees are immigrating to the U.S. from all over the world. They come here to study at our universities and staying. The same cannot be said for China, India or even Japan. People go there for temporary assignments and then leave.

                1. uncorrectedvision profile image60
                  uncorrectedvisionposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  You can assert what you wish but reality is usually far more complex than you would think.

                  http://www.kauffman.org/newsroom/foreig … tries.aspx

                  1. Ralph Deeds profile image71
                    Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    Interesting. James Fallows, after spending a year or two in China said in an Atlantic article pretty much the opposite; The US attracts a lot of highly educated immigrants and China practically none. The point in the article above is slightly different--that more students are returning to their home countries. Fallows cited the high percentage of immigrant members of the National Science Foundation or some similar organization.

            3. Mister Veritis profile image60
              Mister Veritisposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              If you were right California would not be failing. Nor would New Your City. People vote with their feet. I left California and came to Alabama. My taxes went way down!


              Maybe. The truth is always more complicated.


              Hence California. And New York City. And. . .

    3. KFlippin profile image60
      KFlippinposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      I suspect you dearly hope so, otherwise you would not have posted the forum topic.  That said, Newt has never been the bullseye candidate of the Republican party needed to defeat a Democrat for POTUS today or next year . . .in my small Southern town opinion.

      Maybe his hat toss in to the ring is a ploy, a distraction . . . even worse(or better) a goad of the first order, now that I would find hopeful..... smile  And what Republican said the Ryan plan was a litmus test?  I must watch the news again with regularity so I don't miss such critical posturings...or facts as the case may be.

      1. uncorrectedvision profile image60
        uncorrectedvisionposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        I agree with you regarding the Ryan Plan Litmus Test.  I don't care much for the Ryan plan.  I think it is, like most things Republicans will put their names on, insufficiently aggressive or effective.  Our economy teeters on the brink of a monetary disaster that guarantees our national insolvency and the Republicans play with addressing it within the next 26 years as opposed to the Democrats addressing it, ostensibly, within the next 36 years.  Hooray, ten years sooner when the dollar is imperiled now.

        I have come to the conclusion that we are done as a free people precisely because Republicans, even those who call themselves conservative, believe the same things that Democrats the difference being only a matter of degree.  They believe that a political elite possesses better judgement of all things than the aggregate judgement of the mass of individuals.

        It is this confidence in a ruling elite that has been a hall mark of Democrat, including the little guys who vote Democrat, political "thought."  It has slowly become the dominant idea across all kinds of government offices.  The faith the Founders placed in individual judgment regarding individual affairs is long gone.

        You have a tiny toilet reservoir and will be unable to purchase incandescent bulbs because the rulers, Republican and Democrat, have decided that your judgment, as a lowly subject, is insufficiently intelligent or enlightened. 

        I doubt I will ever vote again in any election.  We are done as a free people.

    4. uncorrectedvision profile image60
      uncorrectedvisionposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Your assertions regarding the consequences of Ryan's proposal are off target, however, as far as I am concerned, Newt was finished before he got started.  Newt is a media whore.  An historian and writer of some talent but his judgement about what political causes to publicly support is questionable.

      His palling around with Hillary and Pelosi and his endorsement of Scozzafava put me off Newt perminently years ago.  Besides, the Presidency is now a race for the pretty otherwise Steve Forbes would have been a credible candidate when he ran back in the 90s.

      1. Ralph Deeds profile image71
        Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Mitt Romney seems to me to be the most viable candidate if he can get past the Tea Party in the primaries.

        1. qwark profile image59
          qwarkposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Ralph:

          He may or may not be a viable candidate.

          Why would anyone with no political affiliation (NPA) vote for a Mormon?

          Anyone who has studied mormonism, if they have half-a-brain, "knows" that something is amiss in the "believers" ability to understand the "real world!" The difference twixt reality and fiction!

          Romney is a good businessman but his sense of reality is terribly warped!

          But knowing the "scary" voting public, Romney is certrainly a possibility.

          Qwark

          1. Ralph Deeds profile image71
            Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Romney seems to me more presidential than the other potential GOP candidates. I doubt that his religion would play much of a role in his public policy decisions. If I were a Republican he would be my first choice. I would hate to see Michelle Bachman or Newt Gingrich get the nomination. I don't have strong opinions about the others, except that most of them seem to have become instant social conservatives kissing up to the Tea Party--e.g., Mitch Daniels who previously stayed away from hot button evangelical issues. Our governor in Michigan, Rick Snyder, would be preferable, in my opinion, to most of the GOP candidates including Romney.

            1. qwark profile image59
              qwarkposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              G'mornin' Ralph:

              I just made a fresh pot'a coffee...wish I could invite ya over for a cup or 2.. smile:

              Your comment: "Romney seems to me more presidential than the other potential GOP candidates. I doubt that his religion would play much of a role in his public policy decisions." is questionable.

              That's the way the "scary" American voter thinks. They don't do their homework. They vote filled with hope and emotion rather than with studied thought and introspection. But when ya come right down to it, they are not given great choices.

              I'm not sure what'cha mean by "more presidential."

              A great president named "Truman" was a haberdasher and they said, if ya met him, he was not a "presidential" guy.

              I quit voting last year. I voted libertarian as a protest to the 2 candidates who were running.

              Gingerich? ya gotta be kidding!

              I was around when he left as speaker of the house for his alledged, sub-rosa criminal activities. He's just another crooked politician with a massive ego.

              Qwark

        2. uncorrectedvision profile image60
          uncorrectedvisionposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Romney drags around behind him the most poisonous issue of the day.  Romney care as a prototype for Obamacare fairly dooms his chances of nomination.  Pawlenty has attempted to distance himself from his liberal mistakes as Minnesota governor a course that would serve Romney well. 

          Besides having a Muslim for president certainly clears the way for a Mormon.

          As for the TEA party, liberals and Republicans better get used to the idea that their influence will continue for several more election cycles.  The energy of the Reform Party waned precisely because they were a political party wedded to a single candidate - Ross Perot. 

          The TEA party is a political movement and is made up of several, decentralized, dispersed groups - despite the often repeated misinformation campaign spread by Democrat and Republican elitists who resent and fear anything that is outside their control.

          1. Ralph Deeds profile image71
            Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Ok, you don't like Romney. So,which horse are you betting on?

            1. uncorrectedvision profile image60
              uncorrectedvisionposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              It doesn't matter who gets elected next.  Democrats will keep pushing the disastrous practices that have taken us to this point and Republicans will help.  We long ago abandoned the ideas that started and sustained the Republic through it first 150 years.  I do not tell my sons this, but we are finished as a free people.  Democrats would speed that process,  Republicans would retard it but neither would reverse it.

    5. tony0724 profile image60
      tony0724posted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Wishful thinking Ralph. I suppose you got that perspective from the National Enquirer of journalism the NY Times. No one believes in mainstream media anymore. Journolist showed their lack of integrity. And Newt is a retread no one is interested in anyway. Trump stood a better chance.

    6. qwark profile image59
      qwarkposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      He's egotistical, arrogant and a "crook."

      I hope not!

      Qwark

      1. uncorrectedvision profile image60
        uncorrectedvisionposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Egotistical and arrogant - sounds like Barry.  The "crook" part is funny.  Thanks for the laugh.

        1. qwark profile image59
          qwarkposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Uncorrectedvision:

          Maybe you are too young to remember this:

          http://newsgroups.derkeiler.com/Archive … 00791.html

          The man is a crook!

          Qwark

          1. uncorrectedvision profile image60
            uncorrectedvisionposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Not too young - too unconcerned about book deals and politicians.  Examining the actions of politicians results in little valuable information after all Kennedy didn't really write Profiles in Courage but was praised as intellectually gifted.  If you asked around the right places he may have been praised as gifted by the DC call girls union.

            http://www.straightdope.com/columns/rea … in-courage

            Scandal surrounding Gingrich's authoring of a book, how much he was paid for it, etc...yawn.  At least he was writing before and after his time in Congress unlike James Wright.  Scandal is nothing new and a more aggressive press would find plenty in Barry's administration also if they weren't so vested in his success.

            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fe … ted_States

            1. qwark profile image59
              qwarkposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              You are quite right!
              I have never yet in my almost 70 yrs met an honest politician.
              Gingrich reached a level of power and respect that few in life do.
              Ya'd kinda expect that he'd earn that power and respect by being the American he should have been.

              He, Gingrich, is a "crook" who is as devious and power hungry as was ..."I'm not a crook!" Nixon

              Qwark

              1. uncorrectedvision profile image60
                uncorrectedvisionposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                Wow, comparing Gingrich to Nixon is a stretch.  The only one who compares to Nixon in recent history is Clinton.  Gingrich didn't use the Justice Department and FBI to run interference for him.  Nixon's crimes were indirect - obstruction of justice and the like that too is unlike Clinton or, in your perception, Gingrich - who were directly responsible for their illegalities.  Nixon was guilty of the coverup, not the initial crime.

                Nixon's biggest crime was being a Republican and not a Kennedy.  The Democrats were on their knees every night thanking God for Nixon.  His scandal allowed them and the press to continue ignoring the Abe Fortas scandal.

                http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abe_Fortas#Resignation

                1. qwark profile image59
                  qwarkposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  ooooeeeee!   lol  thanks!  smile:
                  You just made my day!
                  "...having a Muslim for president..." tells me exactly what to judge you as. roll
                  End of chat!  lol
                  Whew!!!!

                  Qwark

                  1. uncorrectedvision profile image60
                    uncorrectedvisionposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    Sarcasm reveals the reader rather well.  Too easy to dismiss others?  I think the Muslim thing is funny, especially when an Obamaphile reads it.

                  2. lovemychris profile image80
                    lovemychrisposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    No kidding. Talk about Russhhhhh-like. Beckian logic. Fox Brains.

                    Only crime Nixon committed was being Republican.......riiiiight.

                    And I did not have sex with that woman either wink

                    Unless you are taking the attitude that all pres's are crooks, Nixon just got caught.

                    But then we have Bush, who got caught and nothing happened...so there goes that theory right out the door.

                    In fact, No president can get caught now....since Bushco was let off the hook. We let him go...what can be worse or more criminal?

                    This is now the "new normal".
                    Presidents can do whatever the H they like.....courtesy of the George W Bush administration.

                2. Ralph Deeds profile image71
                  Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  His biggest crime was wearing black knee length socks and garters with Bermuda shorts when walking on the beach.

      2. Ralph Deeds profile image71
        Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        "He's egotistical, arrogant and a "crook."" Add hypocrite and we are in agreement.

        1. qwark profile image59
          qwarkposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Ralph:
          "hypocrite!" Yes!
          Total agreement!  smile:
          Qwark

    7. Daniel Carter profile image91
      Daniel Carterposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      One could only hope. Either that, or hope it's a disease that's contagious to others of his ilk, that is also generally terminal in nature. Trump and a few others come to mind, easily.

  2. profile image60
    C.J. Wrightposted 6 years ago

    Gingrich is political poison for the GOP. They have enough messes to clean up, no need dragging garbage back from the curb.

  3. Jeff Berndt profile image92
    Jeff Berndtposted 6 years ago

    His comment was refreshingly honest, and no doubt it was political poison to the noisy radical right. He probably won't get the GOP's nomination.

    But who will? The field is looking mighty slim.....

  4. Kathleen Cochran profile image84
    Kathleen Cochranposted 6 years ago

    As someone from Newt's hometown, I can tell you he has his eye on a vice presidency as his ultimate retirement plan.

    Pro or con, Obama got health care reform passed, has us retreating from Iraq and Afghanistan after a decade - a decade - of war, and got Bin Laden.  What's a guy got to do to get re-elected in this country?

    1. Jeff Berndt profile image92
      Jeff Berndtposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Who knows?

    2. lovemychris profile image80
      lovemychrisposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Rig the voting machines.
      Have your brother as Gv of state.
      Have friends on the SC of state.

      We now have tea-partyers on the USSC.....how does anyone stand a chance? We don't. Unless you're made of money.



      They never met a corporation they didn't like.

    3. Ralph Deeds profile image71
      Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      He'll get re-elected no matter which pygmy the GOP picks to run against him.

    4. Mister Veritis profile image60
      Mister Veritisposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      "It is the economy, stupid!"

      1. lovemychris profile image80
        lovemychrisposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        So, how is borrowing money so Rush can have more going to help the economy?

        Helps HIM....not the economy.

        Big Phonies!

        1. Mister Veritis profile image60
          Mister Veritisposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Lovemychris, I have observed your posts for several weeks now and find you wanting. I can see no value whatever in responding to your posts. This will be my last response to you.

          1. uncorrectedvision profile image60
            uncorrectedvisionposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Dude, seriously, you can't see the sheer entertainment value?

            1. Mister Veritis profile image60
              Mister Veritisposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              LOL. It is enough to watch her flail about, slobbering, frothing and hating. I see no reason to wallow with her. But it is interesting to watch.

              1. uncorrectedvision profile image60
                uncorrectedvisionposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                It is so fun to poke her while she gnaws at her trapped leg.  It must be the sadist in me.

                1. lovemychris profile image80
                  lovemychrisposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  I recognize it from the 8 years of Bushco.
                  Sadistic...yes, very much so.

                  1. uncorrectedvision profile image60
                    uncorrectedvisionposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    Here let me help.  I feel so sorry for you.  You are so right to wallow in self pity and bitterness.  Your life and its direction are all George Bush's fault.  If it wasn't for all the stupid white men who run to Republicans when ever a person of color looks cross eyed at them America would be a workers paradise of communist plenty.

                    Does that make you feel better?  Oh, I forgot, it is all a conspiracy to keep LMC from being truly happy.  That day will only come when all the rich are dead, cooked, in jars on the grocer's shelf.

                    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fCFibtD3H_k

              2. lovemychris profile image80
                lovemychrisposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                Takes one to know one...or do you imagine you abide in lightness and love?


                ahahahaha---not by half.

            2. Mister Veritis profile image60
              Mister Veritisposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Hey! I only have 90 posts. You have a thousand. Give me some time.

              1. uncorrectedvision profile image60
                uncorrectedvisionposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                Pace your self it is kind of pointless and a waste of time.

                1. Mister Veritis profile image60
                  Mister Veritisposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  This is so much fun I stopped playing World of Warcraft.

          2. lovemychris profile image80
            lovemychrisposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            fingers in ears....LALALALALALA

            did you say something?


            errr--I notice you didn't answer the question. Par for the Course. Hole in One. Game, set and Match.

            got anything to say? Nope. Just smears and insults.
            lalalalalala

  5. Greek One profile image80
    Greek Oneposted 6 years ago

    why would one name their child Newt?
    http://www.shortcourses.com/naturelog/newt02.jpg

    1. uncorrectedvision profile image60
      uncorrectedvisionposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      http://fineartamerica.com/images-simple-print/images-medium/sir-isaac-newton-granger.jpg

      http://www.stockphotopro.com/photo-thumbs-2/stockphotopro_4024135EXJ_no_title.jpg

      1. Greek One profile image80
        Greek Oneposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        In the instances you raise, both are last names.

        1. uncorrectedvision profile image60
          uncorrectedvisionposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          And the first shall be last.  Many first names have been last names.  Not defending the choice just pointing out the other names.  Maybe they should have named him fig.

  6. hottopics profile image60
    hottopicsposted 6 years ago

    Newt was done a long time ago. He never should have run. He should have stayed an an alist. Now they will drag up all his bad points and that will make Repubs look bad

    1. Ralph Deeds profile image71
      Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Gingrich is an untrustworthy character.

      1. Doug Hughes profile image59
        Doug Hughesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Ralph, the interesting thing about Newt's implosion is how it's the unspoken position of all the GOP candidates. None of the announced GOP candidates has endorsed the Ryan plan. After Newt's meltdown, none will dare reject the Ryan plan while they still can't endorse it. (Read the polls.)

        The GOP has painted themselves into a corner.

        1. KFlippin profile image60
          KFlippinposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          You've quite done a jam up job of encapsulating the liberal left's hopes and dreams in regard to any conservative candidates for POTUS, and of course establishing, or rather providing enlightenment of, the angle of the lamestream media's coverage of the politics of the moment. Kudos to libs, I suppose, but as well it might be risky to be so up front about the plan of attack on conservatives. Just my thoughts...those painted corners can be toxic. smile

        2. uncorrectedvision profile image60
          uncorrectedvisionposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Not as tight a corner as you might believe.  Not that it makes a difference we are finished as a free people.  Not that you will notice.  As a government employee you will be the last ones to go hungry in the great worker's paradise that awaits the rest of us.

          http://hotlineoncall.nationaljournal.co … eniors.php

  7. lovemychris profile image80
    lovemychrisposted 6 years ago

    WRONG!

    I believe the Rolling Stone and Robert Kennedy Jr. on that one.

    Far as I know--Gore never threw his religion or lack of it back on anyone.
    Unlike every single gd thuglican...

    Who have the GALL to TELL President Obama what he is and is not!

    EGO's the size of India.

    1. Druid Dude profile image60
      Druid Dudeposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      WHO? Gingrich? With a name like NEWT, and a last name that vaguely sounds like GRINCH I'm surprised he got as far as he did. Has he won an election lately? I thought they banished him from OZ long ago.

      1. lovemychris profile image80
        lovemychrisposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        All of them.
        All of them with their superiority complex.

        Can't try a new way, can't respect and election,can't give an inch.

        Because they think they OWN America. EGO.

  8. Moderndayslave profile image60
    Moderndayslaveposted 6 years ago

    His career was done for a long time ago and when I make a mistake I hope it goes away and stays away. What happened?

 
working