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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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
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.
Perhaps you should familiarize yourself with the consequence of Barry's new way. Animal Farm is a good place to start. Another course of study I would recommend is reading a little about the last days of Communism in Romania or the difference in comfort between CP officials and everyone else in the last days of the Soviet Union. The utopian vision of liberals always ends in real suffering, real poverty and real murder not just the lunatic rantings of true believers.
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.
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.
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.
But go where? I have looked at Singapore and Belize. The productive people will leave if there is a place to go to.
Point Taken...Was thinkling Dominica, (Not Dominican Republic) and some other places, but again....your point is heard.
"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.
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?
"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.
Total Receipts as percentage of GDP has been between 16% and 20% since 1940 regardless of top marginal rate
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
No it isn't, it's gospel truth. They made a movie about it and everything...
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.
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
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.
Perhaps the immigrant membership of certain organizations is more a function of the disciplines and professions to which those immigrants are attracted. Though it may sound like a stereotype, I would suspect that the membership of certain hospitality associations have a large Indian representation.
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. . .
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..... 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.
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.
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.
Mitt Romney seems to me to be the most viable candidate if he can get past the Tea Party in the primaries.
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.
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.
I just made a fresh pot'a coffee...wish I could invite ya over for a cup or 2.. :
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.
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.
Ok, you don't like Romney. So,which horse are you betting on?
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.
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.
He's egotistical, arrogant and a "crook."
I hope not!
Egotistical and arrogant - sounds like Barry. The "crook" part is funny. Thanks for the laugh.
Maybe you are too young to remember this:
http://newsgroups.derkeiler.com/Archive … 00791.html
The man is a crook!
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
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
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.
ooooeeeee! thanks! :
You just made my day!
"...having a Muslim for president..." tells me exactly what to judge you as.
End of chat!
Sarcasm reveals the reader rather well. Too easy to dismiss others? I think the Muslim thing is funny, especially when an Obamaphile reads it.
I pay absolutely no attention to racist "conspiracy" nuts.
Really, if you were here and called me racist you would get a punch in the nose. You have no sense of irony, sarcasm or humor. The "Muslim" was to get that exact over reaction. Nice to see liberals are so predictably flustered.
It's not flustered, it's outraged at your insensitivity and cold-heartedness.
Are you an American?
Don't you know your own history?
You think it's funny to debase people because of race and religion, do you?
Calling him muslim for the sake of debasing him--since he has said time and time again that he is a christian, is calling the man a liar and his personal life a charade.
How is calling him a Muslim debasing him at all? This reflects your mindset not mine. It also was a tweak and you respond so predictable to those. It was as much a poke at Mormons since for some being a Mormon is as much a disqualification as being a Muslim.
No flexibility or imagination is reflected in your humorlessness and the blackness of your thought balloon. Just like so many liberals you see skin color, sex, religion when normal people see an American President. It entertains me no end to keep your guts churning in disgust or what ever over reactionary extreme you jump into when some one says "Barrack Hussein Obama, isn't that a Muslim name?"
Go ahead and shriek. I really wish I was there to hear it. I don't care if he is a Kenyan Animist. His policies are disastrous and that is all the reason necessary to not want his re-election.
1. Calling Obama a Muslim is innacurate.
2. Muslims aren't exactly the most popular group among American voters.
3. So the intent to smear the President is pretty clear.
Calling Obama a Muslim is funny since he clearly is not yet liberal shriek "BIGOT" and crazy bigots shout "SEE I TOLD YOU". How does it get funnier than that?
And how is your second point at all possible since Obama was elected? Since we are believed by some to be a center-left country? Since we still refuse to call it a war on radical Islam? Since most Americans are far more tolerant than liberals, who depend on their votes, give them credit - unless of course they are voting for Barrack Hussein Obama or is that Shining Handsome Obama.
Intent to smear - really, how is being or not being a Muslim a smear? Is it a smear if I notice he has big ears, is thin, is of mixed racial heritage? There are silly people who would hold his (or Michelle's) musical tastes or that he couldn't throw a baseball sixty feet six inches to save his life against him.
Also--that cross-dressing gay man Hoover (no hate--just truth),
used the term Communist to refer to MLK and Malcolm X.....it was a slur on their race as sure as muslim is today.
It's really quite obvious to anybody but the ones using it.
Hoover was not a cross dresser and the constant repetition of the lie is eagerly gobbled up by those incapable of reading, researching or imagining that white men aren't as hateful as they believe.
http://www.straightdope.com/columns/rea … ss-dresser
http://www.chacha.com/question/was-herb … ss-dresser
(but I did hear that if you stand in front of a mirror and say bloody gingrich three times in a row....)
There is that awesome charge of racism again. When I hear someone charge racism, I am clear on two things.
I know who the actual racist is.
And I know who the liberal in the conversation is. Awesome.
SN53Anon? Where are you?
I don't recall responding to anything you've offered.
I'd be happy to do that.
Pls clarify this comment you made to me (if you can.)
"There is that awesome charge of racism again. When I hear someone charge racism, I am clear on two things.
I know who the actual racist is.
And I know who the liberal in the conversation is. Awesome."
Curiosity got the best of me.
My purpose is to judge you (just for fun) as, possibly, one who fits into the same category, as a conspiracy nut, that I've judged "correctedvision" to be. :
That is the nice thing about a forum. The conversations are not private. When you say someone is racist it is very likely that is because you are the racist. And the racists are mostly on the left. That is why we have seen such a substantial increase in the number of times the charge is used.
Could be. I'll let my g/f speak for me. Her name is "Shorty."
Hello Veritas. I'm Shorty.
I am 5'1"s and 103 lbs. I am 26 yrs old and both my parents are African American. What does that make me?
I'm cooking supper for my man, soooo, nice talking to ya..:
Veritis...and she's gorgeous! :
Let's see. You are about 70 and she is 26? Awesome!
Nice talking to you too Shorty. Are you calling people racist? If so, it is probably you.
I am almost 68. Yep
I met "Shorty at the gym about 2 yrs ago.
I am a powerlifter and personal trainer.
I've owned 2 gyms and have competed for many yrs as both a bodybuilder and a power lifter.
I still train people.
I look younger than my 67 yrs.
Yep. She's almost 27 ( and doesn't like to admit it) :
She's a bodybuilder. If you saw her, male or female, I think ya'd be very impressed. I'm very proud of her.
Really makes me laugh when liberals get all bunched up and judgmental especially when they get it wrong...wait they always get it wrong.
I would gladly vote for President Dr. Zuhdi Jasser a Muslim, Navy Veteran and Patriot. I reject the foolishness of your contention that calling someone a Muslim is degrading them and that any criticism of Obama is racist.
If you see racism in every criticism of a black man than the racism you practice is the insidious and subtle infantilization of blacks as if they aren't equally capable of success and failure and their consequences. The subtle liberal racism is to relegate blacks to pet like status. They need to be coddled and guided by their liberal "superiors."
It is the inability of liberals to actually accept minorities as full equals rather than incompetent infants that require their constant attention, protection and control that really makes me sick. Liberals love to make others live by their decisions. Liberals are control freaks and what better group to control than one you convince are ready prey for big, bad Republicans and are incapable of accomplishment without loving, kindhearted, giving Democrats.
It is this world of ideological over simplification by liberals that will end our freedom.
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
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.
How typical of you to replace the word you don't want with one you do. I wrote "biggest" not only. Nixon's crimes were obvious. Your editing is also.
Ok--so what? You're still saying his biggest crime was being Republican and not Kennedy.
Did Kennedy accept bribes for his campaign slush-find? Edwin Meese resigned for it...was that only because he was Repub too?
Poor poooooor Republicans! Always chastised JUST because of their relig....errrr/ party affiliation. waaaaaaaaaaa
Whose AG was Ed Meese? And you really have room to talk about religious beliefs and politics as you recite the Goresprayer. "Selected Not Elected." despite every newspaper of note having settled that issue long ago with their own recounts in Florida.
You should do a little more reading, especially about St. John.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2000/10/ … 8980.shtml
http://www.thechicagosyndicate.com/2008 … mafia.html
Politics is and always has been a dirty game being played under-the-table by greedy, megalomaniacal, power hungry, egotistical players, out of the "sunshine" in the shade.
"Gray" is their color of choice!...if ya get my drift. :
His biggest crime was wearing black knee length socks and garters with Bermuda shorts when walking on the beach.
"He's egotistical, arrogant and a "crook."" Add hypocrite and we are in agreement.
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.
Gingrich is political poison for the GOP. They have enough messes to clean up, no need dragging garbage back from the curb.
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.....
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?
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.
He'll get re-elected no matter which pygmy the GOP picks to run against him.
So, how is borrowing money so Rush can have more going to help the economy?
Helps HIM....not the economy.
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.
Dude, seriously, you can't see the sheer entertainment value?
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.
It is so fun to poke her while she gnaws at her trapped leg. It must be the sadist in me.
I recognize it from the 8 years of Bushco.
Sadistic...yes, very much so.
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.
Takes one to know one...or do you imagine you abide in lightness and love?
ahahahaha---not by half.
Hey! I only have 90 posts. You have a thousand. Give me some time.
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.
In the instances you raise, both are last names.
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
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
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?
by steveamy 7 years ago
is Mitt done ......?
by lady_love158 7 years ago
http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/ … increases/Really, and people think this guy is a genius? Why does he insist on making ideological proposals that even his own party wont support? This president is beyond inept and incompetent, he's moronic!
by Holle Abee 7 years ago
I've always said that I didn't think Mitt would win in SC, and now Newt is ahead in the state in several polls. The GOP has gone so far to the right that they don't want a moderate. It just boggles my mind that any reasonable person could back Newt. If you think we have gridlock in Washington now,...
by Chris Price 7 years ago
What does Newt Gingrich's win in SC say about evangelical voters?
by Readmikenow 10 days ago
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is setting a high bar for impeachment of President Donald Trump, saying he is “just not worth it” even as some on her left flank clamor to start proceedings. Pelosi said in an interview with The Washington Post that “I’m not for impeachment” of...
by Michele Travis 7 years ago
I am just wondering, why they are fighting so hard. As soon as someone gets to the top, not only do they attack someone during the debates, but so does the media. Why don't they just work on helping they people who will vote for them. I don't think they are doing enough of that. ...
Copyright © 2019 HubPages Inc. and respective owners. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc. HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|