First, let me state an obvious point: Ron Paul won’t be the GOP nominee.
Next, let me say that I suspect Rick Santorum will have a similar fate as Mike Huckabee, and will be peter out soon enough. With Rick Perry limping along, I see this still being a race between Mitt and Newt. If Rick Perry manages to revitalize his campaign in South Carolina, it may be a three-man race, but with speculation last night being that Perry would drop out, right or wrong, his campaign took a blow last night. I don’t think the Iowa Caucuses should mean so much–and in many ways they don’t–but the impact on the race already is clear.
Rick Santorum, in my opinion, has never been a viable candidate for the nomination. I like him. I’ve met him. But, he’s not the one to go head to head with Obama. Not by a long shot. Ron Paul is just insane, only outdone by his hardcore followers who argue like Occupy Wall Street protesters.
With debates resuming, I think Newt Gingrich will reemerge strong as the anti-Romney candidate, and siphon support away from Perry as his campaign sputters. Santorum, if the pattern continues, may get some increased scrutiny, and that probably means that Newt will benefit the most.
What do you think?
Blogs For Victory 
Eighty-four ethics charges were filed against Gingrich during his term as speaker. After extensive investigation and negotiation by the House Ethics Committee, Gingrich was sanctioned $300,000 by a 395–28 House vote. It was the first time in history a speaker was disciplined for ethical wrongdoing
We investigated a public official for wrongdoing and found that he really didn’t commit a wrongdoing but because he put us into the position of having to investigate we negotiated a penalty to pay for the investigation. I think Newt’s case was similar. Tell me how many of those 84 ethics charges was he guilty of? You shouldn’t mention any of them that he wasn’t guilty of, that would be like the cops charging you with a hundred counts of murder, for no reason, then everytime you tried to get a job they tell your prospective employer that you were charged for 100 murders.
As a caveat, many of the charges were dropped after Mr. Gingrich agreed to a plea bargin after he was discovered using tax-exempt groups to finance and support his political agenda. He also lied to the ethics committee during the investigation.
Imagine your outrage if he were a Democrat. Instead what do we have? Funny how this works.
But it really doesn’t matter. He won’t be the nominee.
love the leftards telling us who OUR nominee should and will be to beat THEIR “guy”
hilarious.
Romney will be the nominee and he will loose in the general.
Mitch, which do you think will be more important in most voters minds; unemployment down to 8% or gas at $4.50 or $5.00/gal.?
Just make $hit up when you don’t have facts?
ONE PERSON, David Bonior brought all 75 ethics charges against Newt, 74 which were found to have no merit whatsoever. The last charge, whether Newt funded his college class “Renewing American Civilization” properly, was too complicated a tax issue for the committee to investigate on its own, so they brought in an outside tax expert to investigate. Two charges arose out of this investigation.
The first ‘charge’ from the ethics committee is that he “may have” violated tax law by using tax-deductible contributions from nonprofit organizations to teach an allegedly partisan college course.
The second ‘charge’ from the committee is that, in the course of the investigation, Newt provided false information to the committee. And what was this “false information?” Newt testified that the above contributions were in fact made by those organizations to “Renewing American Civilization.” He filed papers that stated the very same thing. This is never a fact that anyone was trying to hide. But one paper filed with the committee stated that those groups did not make the contributions. For this, there was an uproar about Newt’s ethics, and he was fined.
Well, after a 3.5 year probe, after Newt paid the $300,000 fine, the IRS announced on February 3, 1999, that it found NO IMPROPRIETIES IN THE TAX FILINGS of Gingrich and the sponsoring Progress and Freedom Foundation. The IRS said the principles taught in the course were not of use only in political campaigns. “The … course taught principles from American civilization that could be used by each American in everyday life whether the person is a welfare recipient, the head of a large corporation, or a politician.”
Then reinstate him as speaker. Give back what was stolen from him. Poor misunderstood Newt. Maybe Tiffanys has a diamond encrusted gavel complete with a Piaget chronometer water resistant to 3 earths, a Cuisinart blender for those healthy veggie shakes and an H.G. Wells time machine so he can manipulate the present to conform to his grandiose proclamations and thus beguile the public mind with far less effort.
And don’t forget to buy his books! Visa, Mastercard and American Express accepted.
You guys are pathetic. Anarchists, but pathetic.
“anarchists”.
Yep, this is the new mantra of the mindless regurgitation of Lefty talking points that is the Pseudo-Liberal noise machine.
A rule of law providing for the establishment and functioning of a government can only be classified as “anarchy” by someone who is either profoundly stupid or indifferent to the truth.
In mitch’s case, the two are clearly not mutually exclusive.
Then reinstate him as speaker.
Too funny—the flapping mouth of a true anarchist at work. Sure, just toss out the rule of law, the mechanism for electing Representatives, the process for selecting the Speaker of the House from those elected representatives, and bring back someone who had not been in the House for decades—and then call those who believe in orderly government based on the rule of law “anarchists”.
mitch is the gift that keeps on giving. The RRL ought to shut him up, as his spewings only illustrate, all too vividly, the lack of intellect and knowledge that increasingly define the PL.
mitch is the gift that keeps on giving. The RRL ought to shut him up, as his spewings only illustrate, all too vividly, the lack of intellect and knowledge that increasingly define the PL.
Mitch really does epitomize the old adage, “better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.”
As a caveat, many of the charges were dropped
As a matter of fact; 83 of the 84 were dropped. And, BTW, I’m not sticking up for Newt, just don’t like people who distort the facts.
mitch’s spin on history is, simply, a litany of lies.
Answers to bardof:
1. What does his eating habits have to do with fixing the economy.
2. What does, how he spends his money, have anything to do with him wanting to reduce the size and scope of government.
3. What does his personal life have anything to do with creating jobs.
4. No, he was not guilty of the ethics violation charges, all but the $300,000 fine was dismissed. The fine was dismissed by the IRS in 1999.
5.Did Ronald Reagan run a business? Reagan knew governments role in assisting the private sector, as does Gingrich. Have you even looked at his 2012 Contract with America?
Where does it say in the Constitution that military service is a requirement for the Office of President?
6. Where does it say in the Constitution that military service is a requirement for the Office of President?
7. Yes he does have a temper, but I’d rather have someone with emotion than Romney the Zombie.
8. Payments to him personally for consulting ( not lobbying as accused) was $35,000 annually. The rest went to staff and other expenses for his consulting business.
9. Gingrich believes in the ideals of instilling work ethics at a young age. Those that do work early, prove to be a less burden on society and they strive to improve their position in life consistently.
10. Before 1998, as I said before through his Contract with America, Republicans became the majority in the House for the first time in 40 years. His determination to prove that conservatism can win elections, is why the House has the majority now and conservative ideas not moderate dominate the chamber today. The impeachment of Clinton is what hurt Republicans politically in 1998 but as I said before, it was the right thing to do. Just as G.W. Bush going into Iraq was.
This nomination process isn’t a sprint but a marathon, it is a long process. The media plays out each day making a week look like an eternity in politics but Gingrich knows the process. When Gingrich said, “I don’t think right-wing social engineering is any more desirable than left-wing social engineering,” his campaign was written off. Debates showed his strengths and he moved up, attack ads during a break between debates and he moved down. More debates and …? We’ll have to wait and see.
Russ
When somebody makes a promise to you, you not only evaluate what they are promising but whether they themselves can be trusted. Even if Keith Olberman had the wisest advice in the world, I wouldn’t pay it any attention because I don’t trust him.
Before Newt opens his mouth to dispense his job creation ideas a large majority of people will already distrust him for reasons 1-10.
If somebody dodged the draft AND is for an aggressive military that seems to be hypocritical enough for most people.
You might buy the $35,000 explanation, I’ll keep with the $1.6 million explanation.
As for the fine maybe you can point to source better than politifact:
On Jan. 17, 1997, the full committee held nearly six hours of televised hearings, then voted 7 to 1 to accept the subcommittee’s recommendation. The full House went on to pass the ethics report 395 to 28, with 196 Republicans voting for it and 26 voting against it.
Gingrich paid off the fine in installments, according to contemporaneous news accounts. At one point he was even going to borrow money from former Sen. Bob Dole, R-Kan. But by the end of 1998 Gingrich had finished paying the fine without Dole’s help.
Not everyone remembers headlines from 1998. In the case of Gingrich’s ethics fine, the Super PAC Restore Our Future has its history correct. Gingrich was fined $300,000 for ethics violations, and we rate the statement True.
The one charge (against Gingrich) not dropped was a charge of claiming tax-exempt status for a college course run for political purposes.
Special Counsel James M. Cole concluded that Gingrich violated federal tax law and had lied to the ethics panel in an effort to force the committee to dismiss the complaint against him. The full committee panel did not agree whether tax law had been violated and left that issue up to the IRS. In 1999, the IRS cleared the organizations connected with the “Renewing American Civilization” courses under investigation for possible tax violations.
There is a huge difference between “dodging the draft” and making use of legal exemptions and deferments, and the effort to conflate the two reeks of either willful ignorance or purposeful deceit.
JR:
Looks like the posting order got screwed up. To answer your question, I think it is unemployment rates. One has to have a job first before they can bitch about the price of gas necessary to get there.
But I don’t think that either of those issues are what voters are focused on this time. Granted, each of us projects our own subjective experiences and opinions onto the rest of the country but I travel allot and meet allot of people and many that I talk to, both conservative and liberal, educated and not, are dismayed at the corpocracy that is taking over the attitude of elected officials.
The Koch Brothers come to mind, as do Scott Walker, Rick Scott and Kasich (sp) of Ohio. The result of the Citizens United decision. The effort to undermine unions and make the middle class (as hackykneed a phrase as it is) both the enemy and the source of unfair taxation while corporations and the wealthy are immune because they can afford to buy the power necessary to keep them in power while they exploit the rest of us to their benefit.
Voter disenfranchisement efforts. Income disparity. The abject refusal of the Republicans in congress to do anything to help the middle class because as we know, they are not of the middle class once they get to Washington because they can parlay their offices into a vehicle that increases their personal wealth. And then, to add insult to injury, these folks spread fear by bating words like “socialism” around to people who can even spell it, let alone understand it’s meaning.
The promotion of the idea that somehow taxes are at an all time high, other people are stealing something from you and the President is selling the White House china. Scoffing at emperical science exemplified by claiming that global warming is a hoax and evolution an unfounded myth. But that magic and superstition can be validated by mindless, unquestioning undoubting faith.
Then you have the ignorance and cynicism of someone like Neo to add to the mix. People who essentially are no different than the Klansmen of the late ’50’s. And just for good measure we have the religious right who in my estimation are no different than the Taliban. It is these elected people who are going to be blamed, not the price of gas or unemployment rates because most sane, reasonable people view these officials as thwarting solutions because of extremist ideology. Ayn Rand was an atheist novelist; not an economist and what she advocated was anarchy and the privatization of everything. She’d have privatized air if it was possible. So when people like Eric Cantor or Paul Ryan claim that they are for free enterprise what they are really advocating is the elimination of all regulations and the privatization of every service. They’d have the military be a profit center if they could. (Although than argument can be made that in a tangential way it already is.)
All you have to do is to be objective and dispassionate when evaluating the candidates.
Rick Perry is a religious wack-job who defunded fire depts so when the state caught on fire a few months ago, his solution was to pray.
Bachman got god’s message and took a powder.
Cain? He was on a book tour and saved himself allot of shame by being the first to quit.
Santorum won’t last. Too extreme and hypocritical.
Newt? I’m betting he makes a fool of himself tomorrow night pontificating about how he is the savior of civilization and please buy his books.
And Romney is a robot. And a Mormon. Not that that bothers me, I was a huge fan of HBO’s Big Love series. Great acting. Just like Romney.
Populist, movement conservativism is, in my opinion, the dying gasp of a maladaptive world view brought on by a (natural) fear of change and fear of the future.
The problem movement conservatives have is that nature always wins and culture always progresses. Kinda explains why the term “progressive” is used as a pejorative, doesn’t it?
Youth hates old age, fire hates water and stasis hates change.
After 10k yrs of recorded civilizational history, you’d think that we as a whole would finally accept that to govern effectively and successfully, it must be done from the middle. You can’t navigate a boat or an airplane if the center of gravity is to one extreme or another. They same law of physics applies to politics.
And mitch continues to spew his pseudo-intellectual spin on his pseudo-intellectual politics.
” Voter disenfranchisement efforts” Really? Where and how?
Hint: It is the Left which is trying to disenfranchise voters. If I, as a legal and legitimate voter, a citizen of the United States, a duly and legally registered voter, have my vote cancelled out by a non-citizen or other person not legally qualified to vote, I am the one “disenfranchised”.
“Income disparity.”
So? What is this new and already hackneyed (not “hackNEED!!) phrase supposed to mean? This is the kind of mindless pap that has so much appeal to the mindless who can’t process anything BUT pap. What? Everyone should make the same amount of money? Why? Not only is this a ridiculous goal, it is utterly unattainable even if the loons take over and try to somehow make it real.
What about the “income disparity” of a guy like you, who “travels ‘allot’ “(sic)–do you make more money than the motel maid who brings you clean towels? Than the stoner who has chosen to wallow in self-indulgence rather than work? What makes YOUR work worth more than that of the dishwasher at Ruby Tuesday?
Do you think it is the role of government (especially those mean old Republicans!) to “help” the middle class by handing out OPM, or by working to reestablish an economy in which they can help themselves?
I suggest that a much more accurate version of one of your rants would be “the
wealthy are( Dems want to be) immune because they canafford to(use OPM) to buy thepower(votes) necessary to keep them in power while they exploit therest of us(productive) to their benefit.”The effort to undermine unions … is—what? Bad? Wrong? Do you have a coherent position on, for example, keeping the secret ballot in union voting? On using union money to lobby and pay for electioneering?
the President is selling the White House china…
Who is saying this? Hint: a good straw man does something other than make you look insane.
Scoffing at emperical (sic) science exemplified by claiming that global warming is a hoax and evolution an unfounded myth. A typical muddling of fact based on either the inability to understand what is said or a blatant disregard for truth—again, in your case the two are not mutually exclusive.
1. The “scoffing” at the AGW hoax is not based on the established fact that the globe has warmed a little over the past century, but on the unproven, often hysterical, and politically based claims that not only is this miniscule (and evidently temporary) warming due to human activity, that redistribution of OPM will somehow reverse it. It is also based on the recent proofs that the so-called “science” upon which these claims are based is really quite unrelated to established scientific methodology, which often contradicts the alleged findings.
2. Few dispute the reality of evolution of species, WITHIN SPECIES. The dispute lies in the difference between intelligent design of the original creature and the fond wish for a universe free of any possibility of a Higher Power, in which all is random and therefore meaningless.
And so on. This is a massive hysterical rant packed to the gills with shrill accusations which have no basis in fact, and reeking of hyper-emotional bigotry against people, religion and a political system which are all so totally misunderstood that nothing intelligible can be said about any of them—as the screed proves, word after word after word.
#2 Ama. Your sentence means that you take intelligent design to be a fact. It is not. You have no idea what I wish for or my ideas about god, if there is one but the most laughable comment is when you equate randomness with meaninglessness. Ever heard of Chaos Theory? If you have, you probably reject that as the stoned musings of a liberal physicist. Must be nice to be so sure of everything. Doubt is the enemy of faith dear one.
You attack me because you are scared that what I say might just be true and that would undermine your entire world view.
What’s the average age of the posters on this blog? 60? 70?
Flexibility and an open mind is a highlight of youth. In the words of Pete Townsend, hope I die before I get old..
And don’t forget mitch’s obligatory racist accusation—that people who believe in the Constitutional model of governance for the United States are “…… essentially are no different than the Klansmen of the late ’50′s. ” (By this he may mean “no different than Democrats” but that is equally stupid.)
Practice your reading comprehension skills.I was referring to Neo. Read what he posts and if you are proud to have his ideas be representative of the state of conservatives today, if you identify with his resentment and mentality then you are far worse a person than I can imagine.
As far as voter disenfranchisement, there are two ways to increase your chances of winning an election, get more voters to cast their ballots for you, or get fewer voters to cast their ballots for your opponent. The GOP had decided to pursue the latter option.
There is nothing more sacred in a democracy that the right to vote, so an attack on voting rights is an attack on democracy. That is exactly what is happening in many states across our land. Republican governors and legislatures are passing laws making it extremely difficult for certain Americans to vote.
The Republicans use the illusion of voter fraud to mask their contempt of the Constitution. A report from the Brennan Center for Justice found the incidence of voter fraud at rates such as 0.0003 percent in Missouri and 0.000009 percent in New York. Michael Waldman, executive director of the Brennan Center said ”Voter impersonation is an illusion.” The Brennan report also states:
We are not aware of any documented cases in which individual noncitizens have either intentionally registered to vote or voted while knowing that they were ineligible.
Kris Kobach, the secretary of state of Kansas and longtime conservative activist, has led the voter ID drive in his state. Kobach explained that between 1997 and 2010, Kansas has experienced “221 cases of reported voter fraud.” A dubious claim since not a single criminal conviction has resulted. Over the same period of time, Kansans cast 10 million votes. Even if everyone of the claimed cases of voter fraud were accurate, the rate of fraud would be miniscule.
Numerous surveys show that blacks, Hispanics, the elderly, and the young are less likely like to possess a form of government-issued identification. Except for the elderly, the other demographics are more likely to vote Democratic. The elderly are more likely to vote Republican. In a shameless display of the falsity of their voter fraud motivations, Republicans in Texas simply exempted the elderly from the new voter ID law.
Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, after signing a voter ID law requiring voters to have a photo ID, then closed DMV offices in Democratic areas and expanded DMV operating hours in Republican areas. South Carolina governor Nikki Haley said she “will go take them to the DMV myself and help them get that picture ID.” Even with carpooling, it would take 7 years, 4 months, 3 weeks and 5 days to take the 178,000 voters to the DMV. That assumes good traffic conditions.
As far as the rest of your diatribe, another example of a long tedious series of smug,condescending and imagined superiority, posted on an obscure website that has at best a bakers dozen of followers. Posit your angst on a forum that isn’t as impressed with you as you are. Assert your claims to a wider group of minds. I’ll bet you won’t because you’re nothing more than a bully with a sharp mind and an expansive vocabulary. Next to Neo, you’re the most miserable person on this blog. I hate to clue you in, but this isn’t 1776 anymore. Time is liberal. It progresses.
AS IF mitch’s uncontrolled spewing of his mishmash of various hatreds, hostilities, and acceptance of lies is not proof of the wholly emotional foundation of however he might try to define his political beliefs—if he ever even tries—-there is this gem to prove, absolutely, his utter ignorance of the political system he seems to have adopted.
The problem movement conservatives have is that nature always wins and culture always progresses. Kinda explains why the term “progressive” is used as a pejorative, doesn’t it?
The term “Progressive” was adopted by the Left because it sounded so nice, and so optimistic, and it could appeal to the egos of those who need to believe that their regressive political beliefs are really forward-thinking.
“Liberal” had become too toxic, as people started to notice that in political terms it was diametrically opposite of its true, original, definition. Using it as a label to identify a deeply illiberal, rigid, intolerant and oppressive political system had started to fail, so they needed a new word to suck in the suckers.
And they hit upon “Progressive”. And it has sucked in some suckers, evidently including mitch, though he does essentially admit in his temper tantrum post that he thinks the objection to the word is related to an objection to actual progress and not the political system which uses the label “Progressive”. Which, given the breadth and depth of his ignorance, is not a surprise.
But claiming all the misappropriated, misused, improperly defined words in the world cannot hide or overcome the simple fact that Leftism is an archaic, and thoroughly REgressive, political model—one which has never, once, in its long and sordid history, resulted in anything but economic misery, loss of personal liberty, and too often in the deaths of millions killed by their own leaders in efforts to maintain power.
The Left wants to move backward to a primitive, always-failed, scientifically disproved system of government, one which is a belief system to as great a degree as any vested in a divinity, one “…based on a false theory of the perfectibility of man and the pseudo-science of economic determinism.” The fact that some are gullible enough to focus on the term “Progressive” and not on the reality of the system just proves their stupidity, not the validity of the word.
Amazona,
Progressives also have a difficult time describing what it is that they’re progressing toward. Is it more individual liberty? Nope. Is it more economic opportunity? Nope. Even on such topics as climate change, you can’t get a Progressive to tell you what it is they wish to progress toward.