PDA

View Full Version : I am a pissed off American!!!!



Uncle Bill
12-05-2011, 03:15 PM
WTF is happening to the so-called Republican intellectuals? George Will??? What the hell have you become. You are purely a statist Washington insider, no longer worthy of my reading what you believe any longer. What a loser you've become. I can only hope more like me will begin your demise in the Washington arena of supposed Republican thought. Obama must be proud of your views. Has to encourage his re-election. With 'friends' like you, we don't need any enemies.

You are indeed the epitome of the "East-Coast-RINO" crowd, bent on shoving your candidate down the nations conservatives throats once again. Understand, we have been there and went along with you bastards before, and it's not happening again. I couldn't give a damn less how you expect us TEA Party folks to "go-along-to-get-along" with you inside-the-beltway-know-it-alls. You are as corrupt as the oligarchy currently ruining this country. Why should we believe you are in favor of this nation overturning it's ruination, with your type of thinking?

Get out of my life Mr. Will. Your arrogance is beyond the pale! It only rivals your ignorance about thinking you can be a leader pushing conservatives into following your pathetic elitist views. Rather than embarrassing yourself with your RINO writings, you'd be better served wallowing around with the OWS crowd...which you appear more aligned with than real Americans.

UB

Colt Farrington
12-05-2011, 03:23 PM
Just remember, until you are willing to let them know that they cannot necessarily count on your vote, they will continue to take it for granted. You have to be willing to withhold your vote for the people they tell you to vote and overlook the fear mongering that happens against the other guy. Stand for your own principles, not the lesser of two evils.

Franco
12-05-2011, 03:48 PM
If this is about Gingrich being a paid lobbyist for Fannie and the Ethanol Industry, then I would have to agree with Mr Will.

I don't think that Newt "Show Me The Money" Gingrich with his lavish lifestyle will survive the vetting process.

His month at the top is almost up. Besides, he is not denying that Nancy has the pictures, only that she would be in deep doo doo if she were to reveal them.

Uncle Bill
12-05-2011, 04:30 PM
If this is about Gingrich being a paid lobbyist for Fannie and the Ethanol Industry, then I would have to agree with Mr Will.

I don't think that Newt "Show Me The Money" Gingrich with his lavish lifestyle will survive the vetting process.

His month at the top is almost up. Besides, he is not denying that Nancy has the pictures, only that she would be in deep doo doo if she were to reveal them.


How revealing. Any chance you have to lambast the conservatives and jump on the liberal bandwagon, you leap. Your coddling up to the wicked witch of the West, regardless the reason, should be below you! But you continue to guppy-up to any opportunity to join ranks with whatever you perceive to further your myopic agenda.

As you continue yopur ill-fated views, Franco, I'm becoming more convinced than ever, it will be believers like you that will be the cause for another four years of apocolypse now. Unfortunately I doubt I'll be around to witness what your 'friends' on RTF will be vigorously applauding you for what you will have accomplished, but I suspect you'll be quite proud of that achievement. I'm just not sure how that will get your oil fields producing again. But then, I'm sure there will be more than you willing to chop off their nose to spite their face.

UB

Buzz
12-05-2011, 04:32 PM
I was going to post that article earlier today but decided that there is no use in me getting involved & making myself an RTF target.

road kill
12-05-2011, 04:43 PM
I was going to post that article earlier today but decided that there is no use in me getting involved & making myself an RTF target.

Buzz........never stopped you before!!!:D


RK

Franco
12-05-2011, 05:04 PM
How revealing. Any chance you have to lambast the conservatives and jump on the liberal bandwagon, you leap. Your coddling up to the wicked witch of the West, regardless the reason, should be below you! But you continue to guppy-up to any opportunity to join ranks with whatever you perceive to further your myopic agenda.

As you continue yopur ill-fated views, Franco, I'm becoming more convinced than ever, it will be believers like you that will be the cause for another four years of apocolypse now. Unfortunately I doubt I'll be around to witness what your 'friends' on RTF will be vigorously applauding you for what you will have accomplished, but I suspect you'll be quite proud of that achievement. I'm just not sure how that will get your oil fields producing again. But then, I'm sure there will be more than you willing to chop off their nose to spite their face.

UB

Bill, Gingrich is no honorable Conservative. The pre-primary season is when the vetting gets done and he won't pass muster. Better now than if he wasn't vetted and then all the info on him comes out!

If you want Obama out, then I suggest supporting someone that will pass muster and not a fake.

Franco
12-05-2011, 05:06 PM
I was going to post that article earlier today but decided that there is no use in me getting involved & making myself an RTF target.

Better to be brave than live like sheep!

Don't be intimidated if you have something to share.

Uncle Bill
12-05-2011, 05:21 PM
As I stated in a previous post...

"How revealing. Any chance you have to lambast the conservatives and jump on the liberal bandwagon, you leap. Your coddling up to the wicked witch of the West, regardless the reason, should be below you! But you continue to guppy-up to any opportunity to join ranks with whatever you perceive to further your myopic agenda."

Now you brazenly utilize that pathetic stuffed suit as an avatar for furthering your hapless agenda. You are indeed shameless.

With friends like you, Franco, why do we need any enemies? You might as well be a RINO member, or one of the elitists in the blue-blooded county club crowd. The efforts you are involved in will yield the same outcome. It won't matter if your precious candidate runs his own 3rd party or not; You and your ilk will have achieved the demise of the nation regardless.

UB

duk4me
12-05-2011, 06:09 PM
As I stated in a previous post...

"How revealing. Any chance you have to lambast the conservatives and jump on the liberal bandwagon, you leap. Your coddling up to the wicked witch of the West, regardless the reason, should be below you! But you continue to guppy-up to any opportunity to join ranks with whatever you perceive to further your myopic agenda."

Now you brazenly utilize that pathetic stuffed suit as an avatar for furthering your hapless agenda. You are indeed shameless.

With friends like you, Franco, why do we need any enemies? You might as well be a RINO member, or one of the elitists in the blue-blooded county club crowd. The efforts you are involved in will yield the same outcome. It won't matter if your precious candidate runs his own 3rd party or not; You and your ilk will have achieved the demise of the nation regardless.

UB

Uncle Bill in one thread you lambast atheist in another thread you spew cuss words. No wonder the dog in your avatar is looking at you seemingly saying er Uncle Bill was that back or mark.:p

Franco
12-06-2011, 09:05 AM
As I stated in a previous post...

"How revealing. Any chance you have to lambast the conservatives and jump on the liberal bandwagon, you leap. Your coddling up to the wicked witch of the West, regardless the reason, should be below you! But you continue to guppy-up to any opportunity to join ranks with whatever you perceive to further your myopic agenda."

Now you brazenly utilize that pathetic stuffed suit as an avatar for furthering your hapless agenda. You are indeed shameless.

With friends like you, Franco, why do we need any enemies? You might as well be a RINO member, or one of the elitists in the blue-blooded county club crowd. The efforts you are involved in will yield the same outcome. It won't matter if your precious candidate runs his own 3rd party or not; You and your ilk will have achieved the demise of the nation regardless.

UB

No Bill, I just think the GOP candidate must pocess that rare quality known as integrity!

Nor_Cal_Angler
12-06-2011, 09:27 AM
Bill, Gingrich is no honorable Conservative. The pre-primary season is when the vetting gets done and he won't pass muster. Better now than if he wasn't vetted and then all the info on him comes out!

If you want Obama out, then I suggest supporting someone that will pass muster and not a fake.

Right like Pork Belly Paul!!!!!!!!!!!

At least we can understand Newt, Pork Belly is a bit harder to grasp...I can't even understand his more basic idea because he can not put together a string of 3 or more sentences in one coherent thought to explain them.

It is a good thing you didn't get to see that Huckabee debate, because Paul couldn't hear the questions from the panel from 10 feet away...many times he had to ask what they were saying, he had to enlist Mike Huckabee for help and then he just stared off into space after a question from the AG on the left side (forgot what state)....

You know when he gets asked if he wants to do a Lincoln-Douglas debate, and he gets alll excited, it's because the last time he attended one IT WAS THE LINCOLN-DOUGLAS debates.

Jake

Franco
12-06-2011, 03:49 PM
Right like Pork Belly Paul!!!!!!!!!!!

At least we can understand Newt, Pork Belly is a bit harder to grasp...I can't even understand his more basic idea because he can not put together a string of 3 or more sentences in one coherent thought to explain them.

It is a good thing you didn't get to see that Huckabee debate, because Paul couldn't hear the questions from the panel from 10 feet away...many times he had to ask what they were saying, he had to enlist Mike Huckabee for help and then he just stared off into space after a question from the AG on the left side (forgot what state)....

You know when he gets asked if he wants to do a Lincoln-Douglas debate, and he gets alll excited, it's because the last time he attended one IT WAS THE LINCOLN-DOUGLAS debates.

Jake

You're critical of Dr Paul for accepting pork when handed out or for not understanding a poorly worded question (I just saw a part of the debate online) yet you condone the following? Sad!

At least my candidate has integrity!



Newt Gingrich is no stranger to hypocrisies. It’s just that his own self-righteousness often gets in the way of admitting to them: “There’s no question at times of my life, partially driven by how passionately I felt about this country, that I worked far too hard and things happened in my life that were not appropriate,” the family-values candidate once famouly saidabout his multiple extra-marital affairs. So in the service of airing out other yawning gaps between Newt’s words and deeds that may have emerged when the candidate was too busy loving America.
On Christian moralizing: Gingrich’s litany of infidelities has been widely reported (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/newt/vanityfair4.html), as has his habit of leaving wives for mistresses. Of the affair that he carried on with a volunteer during his first campaign in 1974, one of his aides said (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/newt/vanityfair4.html), “We’d have won in 1974 if we could have kept him out of the office, screwing her on the desk.” But that hasn’t stopped him from claiming positions of moral loftiness, decrying the impending downfall of our society, and penning books arguing, “There is no attack on American culture more deadly and more historically dishonest than the secular effort to drive God out of America’s public life.” His second wife, in a 2010 interview withEsquire (http://www.esquire.com/print-this/newt-gingrich-0910?page=all), claimed, “He believes that what he says in public and how he lives don’t have to be connected. … If you believe that, then yeah, you can run for president.”
On shady book deals: In the late 1980s, Gingrich launched avicious attack (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/newt/boyernewt1.html) on Democratic Speaker Jim Wright, arguing that bulk sales of his book had been crafted to avoid laws limiting outside income for members of Congress. By the mid-90s, however, Gingrich found himself in a strikingly similar position (http://articles.latimes.com/1995-01-27/news/mn-25070_1_book-deal), as it came to light that he had received a $4.5 million advance from HarperCollins in a two-book deal. Then, in the spirit of one doing one better, it later came out (http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/newt-gingrich-charity-paid-cash-gingrich-profit-business/story?id=13804431) that one of Gingrich’s charities had bought the books en masse.
On Obamacare and death panels: In July 2009, Newt Gingrich was director of a health care think tank and a staunch advocate of so-called “death panels,” writing (http://views.washingtonpost.com/healthcarerx/panelists/2009/07/right-gingrich.html), “If [end-of-life-counseling] was used to care for the approximately 4.5 million Medicare beneficiaries who die every year, Medicare could save more than $33 billion a year.” But a year later, as he weighed his presidential aspirations, Gingrich took a different tack (http://www.tnr.com/blog/the-stump/96388/newts-personal-hypocrisy-death-panels) on Obama’s plan to reimburse doctors for such consultations: “You’re asking us to trust turning power over to the government, when there clearly are people in America who believe in establishing euthanasia.”
On the housing crisis: In the Bloomberg-Washington Post debate, Newt called (http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/10/11/gingrich-says-chris-dodd-and-barney-frank-should-be-jailed/), with a straight face, for the jailing of Chris Dodd and Barney Frank: “In Barney Frank’s case,” he advised, “go back and look at the lobbyists he was close to at—at Freddie Mac. … Everybody in the media who wants to go after the business community ought to start by going after the politicians who have been at the heart of the sickness which is weakening this country.” All that rage at lobbyists for the housing agencies … from a man whom Freddie Mac paid (http://www.tnr.com/blog/the-stump/97524/newt-and-the-lucrative-field-housing-history) between $1.6 and $1.8 million for his “advice as a historian.” Which definitely isn’t lobbying, and would never qualify as the sort of relationship that he just suggested was worthy of being jailed for.
On drug policy: As a good child of the ’60s, Newt smoked pot (http://books.google.com/books?id=kuMCAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA42&lpg=PA42&dq=That+was+a+sign+we+were+alive+and+in+graduate+s chool+in+that+era+new+york+magazine&source=bl&ots=vSvhQAaLoJ&sig=dgdgaNcVyW6GVM4R0QMpLoAuMls&hl=en&ei=MYzaTrWVK-Xe0QHx_ZH0DQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=9&ved=0CFAQ6AEwCA#v=onepage&q&f=false), and as a young congressman in 1981, he authored a bill (http://www.examiner.com/independent-in-national/gingrich-explains-drug-policy-flip-flop) to legalize the use of marijuana for medical purposes. But Gingrich’s more recent stated methods for dealing with drug offenders might have placed his younger self in a tight spot. Just last week, he argued (http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/newt-gingrich-drug-laws-entitlements-campaigning-yahoo-news-152936251.html) that when it comes to dealing with illegal drugs, “Places like Singapore have been the most successful at doing that,” ostensibly endorsing the idea that anyone caught with 18 ounces of cannabis face mandatory death by hanging.
On corruption: Newt led Republicans to power in 1994 in part by blasting (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/newt/boyernewt1.html) Democrats as being hopelessly corrupt. But soon after, Gingrich engaged in his own congressional corruption, getting slammed (http://www.esquire.com/features/newt-gingrich-0910-7)by the House Ethics Committee on a multitude of charges: of laundering donations through charities, of using a charity called “Learning for Earning” to pay the salary of a staffer writing a Newt Gingrich biography, and of lying to the ethics committee. Gingrich eventually had to pay a $300,000 fine for his transgressions.
On the Clinton impeachment: While leading impeachment proceedings against President Bill Clinton for lying about an extra-marital affair, Newt was … having an extra-marital affair (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/e/a/1999/11/22/EDITORIAL8151.dtl). When he was later asked (http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20047821-503544.html) whether he considered himself to be inhabiting a “glass house” during the proceedings, he reluctantly agreed, but defended himself by saying, “I think you have to look at whether or not people have to be perfect in order to be leaders. I don’t think I’m perfect. I admitted I had problems. I admitted that I sought forgiveness.”

Nor_Cal_Angler
12-06-2011, 04:47 PM
You're critical of Dr Paul for accepting pork when handed out or for not understanding a poorly worded question (I just saw a part of the debate online) yet you condone the following? Sad!

At least my candidate has integrity!



Newt Gingrich is no stranger to hypocrisies. It’s just that his own self-righteousness often gets in the way of admitting to them: “There’s no question at times of my life, partially driven by how passionately I felt about this country, that I worked far too hard and things happened in my life that were not appropriate,” the family-values candidate once famouly saidabout his multiple extra-marital affairs. So in the service of airing out other yawning gaps between Newt’s words and deeds that may have emerged when the candidate was too busy loving America.
On Christian moralizing: Gingrich’s litany of infidelities has been widely reported (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/newt/vanityfair4.html), as has his habit of leaving wives for mistresses. Of the affair that he carried on with a volunteer during his first campaign in 1974, one of his aides said (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/newt/vanityfair4.html), “We’d have won in 1974 if we could have kept him out of the office, screwing her on the desk.” But that hasn’t stopped him from claiming positions of moral loftiness, decrying the impending downfall of our society, and penning books arguing, “There is no attack on American culture more deadly and more historically dishonest than the secular effort to drive God out of America’s public life.” His second wife, in a 2010 interview withEsquire (http://www.esquire.com/print-this/newt-gingrich-0910?page=all), claimed, “He believes that what he says in public and how he lives don’t have to be connected. … If you believe that, then yeah, you can run for president.”
On shady book deals: In the late 1980s, Gingrich launched avicious attack (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/newt/boyernewt1.html) on Democratic Speaker Jim Wright, arguing that bulk sales of his book had been crafted to avoid laws limiting outside income for members of Congress. By the mid-90s, however, Gingrich found himself in a strikingly similar position (http://articles.latimes.com/1995-01-27/news/mn-25070_1_book-deal), as it came to light that he had received a $4.5 million advance from HarperCollins in a two-book deal. Then, in the spirit of one doing one better, it later came out (http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/newt-gingrich-charity-paid-cash-gingrich-profit-business/story?id=13804431) that one of Gingrich’s charities had bought the books en masse.
On Obamacare and death panels: In July 2009, Newt Gingrich was director of a health care think tank and a staunch advocate of so-called “death panels,” writing (http://views.washingtonpost.com/healthcarerx/panelists/2009/07/right-gingrich.html), “If [end-of-life-counseling] was used to care for the approximately 4.5 million Medicare beneficiaries who die every year, Medicare could save more than $33 billion a year.” But a year later, as he weighed his presidential aspirations, Gingrich took a different tack (http://www.tnr.com/blog/the-stump/96388/newts-personal-hypocrisy-death-panels) on Obama’s plan to reimburse doctors for such consultations: “You’re asking us to trust turning power over to the government, when there clearly are people in America who believe in establishing euthanasia.”I see nothing wrong with this...his arguement isn't about death panels it is about allowing GOVERNMENT to decide end of life counseling.
On the housing crisis: In the Bloomberg-Washington Post debate, Newt called (http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/10/11/gingrich-says-chris-dodd-and-barney-frank-should-be-jailed/), with a straight face, for the jailing of Chris Dodd and Barney Frank: “In Barney Frank’s case,” he advised, “go back and look at the lobbyists he was close to at—at Freddie Mac. … Everybody in the media who wants to go after the business community ought to start by going after the politicians who have been at the heart of the sickness which is weakening this country.” All that rage at lobbyists for the housing agencies … from a man whom Freddie Mac paid (http://www.tnr.com/blog/the-stump/97524/newt-and-the-lucrative-field-housing-history) between $1.6 and $1.8 million for his “advice as a historian.” Which definitely isn’t lobbying, and would never qualify as the sort of relationship that he just suggested was worthy of being jailed for.Again nothing wrong here...he was paid to offer advice as a PRIVATE CITIZEN...not as a current active politician who could influence policy and law.
On drug policy: As a good child of the ’60s, Newt smoked pot (http://books.google.com/books?id=kuMCAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA42&lpg=PA42&dq=That+was+a+sign+we+were+alive+and+in+graduate+s chool+in+that+era+new+york+magazine&source=bl&ots=vSvhQAaLoJ&sig=dgdgaNcVyW6GVM4R0QMpLoAuMls&hl=en&ei=MYzaTrWVK-Xe0QHx_ZH0DQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=9&ved=0CFAQ6AEwCA#v=onepage&q&f=false), and as a young congressman in 1981, he authored a bill (http://www.examiner.com/independent-in-national/gingrich-explains-drug-policy-flip-flop) to legalize the use of marijuana for medical purposes. But Gingrich’s more recent stated methods for dealing with drug offenders might have placed his younger self in a tight spot. Just last week, he argued (http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/newt-gingrich-drug-laws-entitlements-campaigning-yahoo-news-152936251.html) that when it comes to dealing with illegal drugs, “Places like Singapore have been the most successful at doing that,” ostensibly endorsing the idea that anyone caught with 18 ounces of cannabis face mandatory death by hanging. So he changed his mind about drug use...most do after seeing its affects
On corruption: Newt led Republicans to power in 1994 in part by blasting (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/newt/boyernewt1.html) Democrats as being hopelessly corrupt. But soon after, Gingrich engaged in his own congressional corruption, getting slammed (http://www.esquire.com/features/newt-gingrich-0910-7)by the House Ethics Committee on a multitude of charges: of laundering donations through charities, of using a charity called “Learning for Earning” to pay the salary of a staffer writing a Newt Gingrich biography, and of lying to the ethics committee. Gingrich eventually had to pay a $300,000 fine for his transgressions.
On the Clinton impeachment: While leading impeachment proceedings against President Bill Clinton for lying about an extra-marital affair,This was NOT the reason for Impeachment...Purgery was Newt was … having an extra-marital affair (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/e/a/1999/11/22/EDITORIAL8151.dtl). When he was later asked (http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20047821-503544.html) whether he considered himself to be inhabiting a “glass house” during the proceedings, he reluctantly agreed, but defended himself by saying, “I think you have to look at whether or not people have to be perfect in order to be leaders. I don’t think I’m perfect. I admitted I had problems. I admitted that I sought forgiveness.”

All of that can be summed up in my opinion by the statement,

There has only been one perfect person to walk this earth....and neither Ron Paul or New Gingrich is that person....

The past is the past, I can only judge him on what he has learned from and what he plans on doing with the mistakes he has made...

To many times we hold over the head of someone the sin of our fathers and the sins of the past....

I guess I just can not see past the FACT!!!!!!! that while Speaker of the House he accomplished SOOOOOO much more than Mr. Paul has as a sitting Congressmen.

1. Comprehensive Welfare Reform
2. Congressionally passed balanced budget
3. Debt was paid down, by a combo of balancing the budget and lowering taxes
4. The house was taken back and HELD by Republicans while he was speaker

Those things are of paramount improtance to me...it will affect me MUCH longer then it will most of the members of this board...therefore I need to be focused on them NOW and Newt for me gives the best chance to get our mess in order.

Jake

Franco
12-06-2011, 05:52 PM
I am all for giving a person a second chance but, the opposition and media aren't.

Plus, there is likely to be more dirt coming out on Newt.

I also don't see where he has a broad enough appeal to beat Obama, maybe why he is pandering to illegals.

The GOP has done a great job of painting themselves as the party of the rich and Newt reinforces that image. He may try and take credit for the economy in the 90's but there was bipartisan support for paying off the debt and balancing the budget.

Nor_Cal_Angler
12-06-2011, 05:57 PM
I am all for giving a person a second chance but, the opposition and media aren't.

Plus, there is likely to be more dirt coming out on Newt.

I also don't see where he has a broad enough appeal to beat Obama, maybe why he is pandering to illegals.

The GOP has done a great job of being painted as the party of the rich and Newt reinforces that image. He may try and take credit for the economy in the 90's but there was bipartisan support for paying off the debt and balancing the budget.

Your right, the media and left leaning fanatic's won't

More dirt...don't see how, he has never really left the lime light. He left politics but the camera's for all intents and purposes never left him.

Broad enough appeal??? You are kidding right....and RP has more??? Have you been watching the polls...99.9 percent have him as much as a 50% leader now.

Thank You for pointing out that he got BI-PARTISAN support, isn't that exactly what it will take!!!!!!!!! (I know a single person can not get it all done, and I did not mean to suggest that he did in the 1990's)

Jake

Franco
12-06-2011, 06:19 PM
Your right, the media and left leaning fanatic's won't

More dirt...don't see how, he has never really left the lime light. He left politics but the camera's for all intents and purposes never left him.

Broad enough appeal??? You are kidding right....and RP has more??? Have you been watching the polls...99.9 percent have him as much as a 50% leader now.

Thank You for pointing out that he got BI-PARTISAN support, isn't that exactly what it will take!!!!!!!!! (I know a single person can not get it all done, and I did not mean to suggest that he did in the 1990's)

Jake

WE can all speculate on who has the appeal. I don't see RP finishing any worse than second in Iowa and New Hampshire. Newt appeals to only the far right. RP has support from Conservatives, Libertarians, moderates and even some Democrats that love his Libertarian background!

RP's campaign has been dogged by the media and Faux News. Lets see what happens when the people vote.

road kill
12-06-2011, 07:02 PM
WE can all speculate on who has the appeal. I don't see RP finishing any worse than second in Iowa and New Hampshire. Newt appeals to only the far right. RP has support from Conservatives, Libertarians, moderates and even some Democrats that love his Libertarian background!

RP's campaign has been dogged by the media and Faux News. Lets see what happens when the people vote.

In my eyes, Gingrich is NOT a conservative.
In fact Romney may well be moreso than Gingrich.

FWIW, I do not care for Gingrich at all.
He is a phony.
Today, I would vote for Cain before Gingrich.

BEWARE!!!!!

JMO.....


RK

duk4me
12-06-2011, 07:19 PM
In my eyes, Gingrich is NOT a conservative.
In fact Romney may well e moreso than Gingrich.

FWIW, I do not care for Gingrich at all.
He is a phony.
Today, I would vote for Cain before Gingrich.

BEWARE!!!!!

JMO.....


RK

Gonna have to be a write in ballot.:p

Even at this late date I still don't feel the Republicans have found a candidate. I hope they do or I"ll be sitting on the sidelines like the last election. Yeah I know no vote no b!tch.

road kill
12-06-2011, 07:23 PM
Gonna have to be a write in ballot.:p

Even at this late date I still don't feel the Republicans have found a candidate. I hope they do or I"ll be sitting on the sidelines like the last election. Yeah I know no vote no b!tch.
If I have a choice between Romney and Gigrich, I'll join Anne C and take Romney.

He was my choice last time and he got jobbed by the progressive McCain.
I also believe Gingrich is a progressive.

You may have noticed I don't care for their philosophies!!!


RK

HPL
12-06-2011, 07:24 PM
WE can all speculate on who has the appeal. I don't see RP finishing any worse than second in Iowa and New Hampshire. Newt appeals to only the far right. RP has support from Conservatives, Libertarians, moderates and even some Democrats that love his Libertarian background!

RP's campaign has been dogged by the media and Faux News. Lets see what happens when the people vote.
You are wrong saying that Newt only appeals to the far right. I like him and voted RP last time. I believe in reproductive rights. I believe that one's sexual orientation is none of the govt's business and that people of the same sex involved in a committed, long standing, mutually fidelitous (sp?) relationship should have the same rights under the law as the newlyweds who are both on their 3rd, 4th, 5th, etc marriages. Don't like everything he says, but would be glad to vote for him based on issues that are actually IMPORTANT.

Franco
12-06-2011, 07:25 PM
In my eyes, Gingrich is NOT a conservative.
In fact Romney may well be moreso than Gingrich.

FWIW, I do not care for Gingrich at all.
He is a phony.
Today, I would vote for Cain before Gingrich.

BEWARE!!!!!

JMO.....


RK

I would too;-)

That is if Cain had a very astute VP that had depth in Foreign Policy.

I had no problem with Cain in regards to liking da women. I was concerned with his lack of Foreign Policy and 999 Plan.

Franco
12-06-2011, 07:27 PM
Your right, the media and left leaning fanatic's won't

More dirt...don't see how, he has never really left the lime light. He left politics but the camera's for all intents and purposes never left him.

Broad enough appeal??? You are kidding right....and RP has more??? Have you been watching the polls...99.9 percent have him as much as a 50% leader now.

Thank You for pointing out that he got BI-PARTISAN support, isn't that exactly what it will take!!!!!!!!! (I know a single person can not get it all done, and I did not mean to suggest that he did in the 1990's)

Jake

Don't forget that in 1992, Clinton ran on balancing the budget, reducing the deficit and healthcare reform.

road kill
12-06-2011, 07:27 PM
I would too;-)

That is if Cain had a very astute VP that had depth in Foreign Policy.

I had no problem with Cain in regards to liking da women. I was concerned with his lack of Foreign Policy and 999 Plan.

Everything about Gingrich concerns me.

I had one "Manchurian Candidate," I don't want another!!!!


RK

Nor_Cal_Angler
12-06-2011, 07:39 PM
Don't forget that in 1992, Clinton ran on balancing the budget, reducing the deficit and healthcare reform.

Actually 1992 Clinton ran on..."IT"S THE JOBS STUPID" which is the best motto todate, he with that single line CRUSHED GHWB...a page could be taken from his playbook...

Jake