Newt Gingrich

[Selene]

Newt would humiliate Obama in a debate. Bring on the spanking.

Let's play the racial card and say that Mr. Newt from Georgia witll give him a good whipping in the debates!

[Selene]

Newest Gallop that is finally sampling registered Republican voters nationwide, but not, apparently, prime voters, has Mr. Newt at 37% and Romney at 22%:

http://www.gallup.com/poll/151355/Gingrich-Romney-Among-GOP-Voters-Nationwide.aspx

Sadly, Dr. Paul is still at the 8-9% range which basically reflects the hard libertarian Republican elements.

The absolutely fascinating numbers are the abscence of any growth in the Romney numbers. He has stayed in the 20% range since about a year ago amongst Republicans. The remaining 80% of the Republican Party are the anyone, but Mitt numbers.

The other number, Limbaugh referred during today's broadcast is rather deep in the internals of the poll. The fact is that only about 8% of the self identifying Tea Party voters support Dr. Paul.

Fascinating.

Adam

[Mark]

Tell U.S. News & World Report who you want the GOP to nominate:

http://www.usnews.com/polls/who-is-your-pick-for-the-gop-2012-nomination

[Selene]

Tell U.S. News & World Report who you want the GOP to nominate:

http://www.usnews.co...2012-nomination

Mark:

Can you show me the internals of this survey?

Wow, I guess it is all over now, I guess we should all get on the bandwagon! I mean 58.7%, it will be a landslide now.

This is a brilliant piece of evidence that you submitted. I am completely convinced now.

Moreover, it truly shows the high quality of probative evidence that some of Dr. Paul's supporters bring to the table.

You know, the ones he can live without because they alienate the rest of us with this type of evidence.

Adam

[Mark]

The result of a poll depends on the sample of people interviewed. Ideally the sample is representative, but in this poll certain people are favored by self-selection: they have Internet, they’re concerned about politics, they took the trouble to find the poll and vote, etc. The sample is a poor reflection on people who vote in GOP primaries, it’s biased towards the affluent, the intelligent, the aware.

You can conclude what you want from the poll. I think it shows that Ron Paul is not the total political loss that some people make him out to be.

The claim that the poll fails to show Ron Paul is a shoo-in, therefore the poll is worthless, is a straw-man argument.

By the way, in my list of Gingrich’s past fascist acts – see my previous posts – I neglected to mention that he advocates yet more gun control.

The man no longer supports those ideas? — oh please.

Regarding Gingrich’s domestic dishonesties: If a man is accused of killing two men and a dog, producing the dog alive doesn’t help him much.

[Selene]

By the way, in my list of Gingrich’s past fascist acts – see my previous posts – I neglected to mention that he advocates yet more gun control.

Mark:

Now you have completely convinced me! My heavens...the 2nd amendment is critical to me...I am officially announcing that I am withdrawing my support for Mr. Newt because as Mark just proved to me Gingrich is for further gun control.

Here is the proof:

The Second Amendment: Individual or Collective Right?

Gingrich is a firm advocate of a citizen's right to bear arms.

"The right to bear arms is not about hunting. It's not about target practice ... The right to bear arms is a political right designed to safeguard freedom so that no government can take away from you the rights that God has given you, and it was written by people who had spent their lifetime fighting the greatest empire in the world and they knew that if they had not had the right to bear arms, they would have been enslaved. And they did not want us to be enslaved. And that is why they guaranteed us the right to protect ourselves. It is a political right of the deepest importance to the survival of freedom in America."

April 29, 2011, speaking at the National Rifle Association's annual convention staged in Pittsburg, Pennsylvania.

Legislations

Newt accuses the Obama administration of undermining the Second Amendment through a less than open strategy of legislative amendments.

"In every possible way, the Obama administration is the most consistently anti-gun administration and anti-Second Amendment administration that we have ever seen ... They're now developing a stealth strategy in which they combine anti-gun judges with anti-gun treaties ... They will then try to strip us of our rights by judicial fiat."

April 29, 2011, speaking at the National Rifle Association's annual convention staged in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

And you can see the fascist bastard say it in his own words in the video! Here:

http://2012.republican-candidates.org/Gingrich/Gun-Control.php

Mark thank you for saving me from supporting an por gun control fascist!

Adam

[Mark]

Gingrich’s interview with Glenn Beck – mealy-mouthed, hemming and hawing, it depends on – is in the same key as his 2nd Amendment position.

From "Georgia Gun Owners Take Aim At Gingrich":

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In a statement Monday, the group stated "Georgia Gun Owners know Newt’s history of gun control. He represented parts of our state for 20 years. He’s been playing both sides of the gun issue as long as we can remember."

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You can read specific examples (such as voting for the Criminal Safezones Act) at

ronpaul2012.com.

Another item I should have mentioned is that Gingrich supported the Patriot Act(s). And I have no doubt you can dig up some statement he made denouncing the Patriot Act.

Yes, on the single issue of gun control Obama appears worse than Gingrich. (But then Gingrich is not yet president.) This doesn’t turn Gingrich into the better candidate.

　

[Selene]

Gingrich’s interview with Glenn Beck – mealy-mouthed, hemming and hawing, it depends on – is in the same key as his 2nd Amendment position.

From "Georgia Gun Owners Take Aim At Gingrich":

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In a statement Monday, the group stated "Georgia Gun Owners know Newt’s history of gun control. He represented parts of our state for 20 years. He’s been playing both sides of the gun issue as long as we can remember."

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You can read specific examples (such as voting for the Criminal Safezones Act) at

ronpaul2012.com.

Another item I should have mentioned is that Gingrich supported the Patriot Act(s). And I have no doubt you can dig up some statement he made denouncing the Patriot Act.

Yes, on the single issue of gun control Obama appears worse than Gingrich. (But then Gingrich is not yet president.) This doesn’t turn Gingrich into the better candidate.

　

Gingrich the better candidate than O'bama? My dead Irish Setter is a better candidate and leader than O'bama.

Mr. Newt the better candidate of the field? That is debatable. Dr. Paul is certainly a quality candidate. He is honest. So are Santorum and Bachman.

Perry is interesting to me and I could live with him. I will vote for any of them over O'bama.

Hell Mark, I would write your name in over O'Bamas!

Adam

[Mark]

I guess it doesn’t get any lower than that does it.

Its seems like a great many people – anyone possessing a tincture of residual Americanism, and that includes many liberals – think "anyone but Obama." In effect the GOP nomination is almost the presidential race, the actual presidential race a foregone conclusion.

It’s a little like Obama vs. John McCain in 2008. McCain was associated with Bush and the "anyone but Bush" attitude was so strong it trumped Obama’s anti-American baggage. We got "Change."

Gingrich resembles Bush II (superficial religion, talk conservative act liberal, neoconservative, etc.) and I can’t get too enthused over another Bush.

Or too worried over another four years of Obama. We can probably survive four more years of Obama because we’ve survived the first four years of him. Gingrich has a reputation for telling people what they want to hear in order to get elected, then giving them the same old creeping despotism. How much he’ll creep when given the power of the presidency is an unknown quantity. Less than Obama? Maybe, but I wouldn’t bet on it.

Anyway, the GOP fight is only beginning and it would be better to promote Ron Paul than defend a political hack like Newt Gingrich.

[Peter]

Mark wrote:

Anyway, the GOP fight is only beginning and it would be better to promote Ron Paul than defend a political hack like Newt Gingrich.

End quote

The exchanges between Mark and Adam were fun reading. Thanks for the links to the Glenn Beck Newt Gingrich radio interview! Here are a few of my observations.

Newt nearly always starts with false premises, per Glenn Beck. Speaker Gingrich starts with big government programs AS THEY ARE and does not propose that we end them.

For example, since we have Medicare shouldn’t we have drug subsidies? The drug Lipitor is cheap and will make open heart surgery less needed so shouldn’t the cheapest solution be used? If kidney dialysis costs 27 billion dollars per year, which it does, isn’t it better to pay for the “cheaper” medicine to make expensive kidney dialysis unnecessary? Speaker Gingrich is of the opinion that Medicare and other government programs are good. And more importantly, the American people will NEVER, NEVER, NEVER DO AWAY WITH THEM. so he proposes we sustain them in an intelligent, cost affective manner.

In the opposite direction, Newt favors MORE expensive oil exploration subsidies over cheaper ethanol subsidies, in the form of tax credits. His stance has geo-political underpinnings. He wants us off our dependence on Saudi, Venezuelan, and Iraqi oil. As regards to foreign policy, Newt reminds me of Henry Kissinger.

Newt is FOR tax credits to “help” the environment, such as subsidies to stick smoke stacks into the ground to stop carbon pollution. His example was for the listeners to look at West Texas as a polluted environment in need of government subsidies to clean it up.

Newt is anxious to improve big government solutions. He is anxious to propose right-wing social engineering to fix the health care crisis in spite of his admonitions to Paul Ryan earlier this year to desist in the right-wing social enginerring.

Newt may be the best, most elect-able Republican but he is not of the Tea Party. He only wants to “fix” big government programs. So can the Tea Party and a Free Market Congress keep him in check? I think it can. At this point in the primary process the alternative is Mitt Romney.

Mark, I will support either Mitt, Newt, or whoever is nominated. Neither of them is as flawed as our last nominee, John McCain. As Adam says, anyone is better than Obama. We could do better, but we need to work with who we get.

Peter Taylor

[Selene]

Mark wrote:

Anyway, the GOP fight is only beginning and it would be better to promote Ron Paul than defend a political hack like Newt Gingrich.

End quote

The exchanges between Mark and Adam were fun reading. Thanks for the links to the Glenn Beck Newt Gingrich radio interview! Here are a few of my observations.

Newt nearly always starts with false premises, per Glenn Beck. Speaker Gingrich starts with big government programs AS THEY ARE and does not propose that we end them.

For example, since we have Medicare shouldn’t we have drug subsidies? The drug Lipitor is cheap and will make open heart surgery less needed so shouldn’t the cheapest solution be used? If kidney dialysis costs 27 billion dollars per year, which it does, isn’t it better to pay for the “cheaper” medicine to make expensive kidney dialysis unnecessary? Speaker Gingrich is of the opinion that Medicare and other government programs are good. And more importantly, the American people will NEVER, NEVER, NEVER DO AWAY WITH THEM. so he proposes we sustain them in an intelligent, cost affective manner.

In the opposite direction, Newt favors MORE expensive oil exploration subsidies over cheaper ethanol subsidies, in the form of tax credits. His stance has geo-political underpinnings. He wants us off our dependence on Saudi, Venezuelan, and Iraqi oil. As regards to foreign policy, Newt reminds me of Henry Kissinger.

Newt is FOR tax credits to “help” the environment, such as subsidies to stick smoke stacks into the ground to stop carbon pollution. His example was for the listeners to look at West Texas as a polluted environment in need of government subsidies to clean it up.

Newt is anxious to improve big government solutions. He is anxious to propose right-wing social engineering to fix the health care crisis in spite of his admonitions to Paul Ryan earlier this year to desist in the right-wing social enginerring.

Newt may be the best, most elect-able Republican but he is not of the Tea Party. He only wants to “fix” big government programs. So can the Tea Party and a Free Market Congress keep him in check? I think it can. At this point in the primary process the alternative is Mitt Romney.

Mark, I will support either Mitt, Newt, or whoever is nominated. Neither of them is as flawed as our last nominee, John McCain. As Adam says, anyone is better than Obama. We could do better, but we need to work with who we get.

Peter Taylor

Peter:

Just a suggestion, but you should change the font size down to "14," then it would not be bolded.

Speaker Gingrich is of the opinion that Medicare and other government programs are good. And more importantly, the American people will NEVER, NEVER, NEVER DO AWAY WITH THEM. so he proposes we sustain them in an intelligent, cost affective manner.

I think you may be misreading Mr. Newt on this issue. He is of the opinion that the US should, as a national policy, develop a workable program to allow the delivery of health care to each and every citizen.

I have no problem with this as a national purpose.

Mr. Newt does not believe that Medicare/Medicaid are "good," he states that they exist as law in the US. He believes, as far as I understand his position, that they are failures and not voluntarist models that 1) can deliver the desired goal; and 2) efficient cost wise.

In terms of energy policy, Mr. Newt will use government to achieve energy security from Middle Eastern oil which should be a national policy choice.

Additionally, his comment on Paul Ryan's plan had to do with the immorality and ineffectiveness, from a policy perspective, for any central government to attempt to impose any social engineering poliecies without broad based popular support.

In other words, it would be impolitc to ram a program down the "peoples" throats, for example, Hilary Care from the 1990's.

Finally, as to Mr. Newt being the nominee, as you point out, we are a long way from the convention. Moreover, not one public vote has been cast.

What I like about Mr. Newt, and what I have always liked about him, is his mind. He is a futurist. He thinks creatively. A would rather have a relatively pro freedom, pro capitalist innovative thinker as President than an ignorant marxist idealougue.

Granted he is not quite "...a choice, not an ech," but he is a voice that thinks and can be checked and balanced by an tea party congress and senate.

Adam

[Selene]

I am not a person who puts much weight into Gallup polls of the past, but it appears that they are tightning up their methodology. At least they are sampling purely registered voters finally. Still no indication that these are "prime voters," which are the only voters that truly count.

This very recent poll shows an astounding jump by Mr. Newt. In the last thirty (30) days, he has gained thirty-one (31) points, while Romney has lost eight (8) points.

This is a net swing of thirty-nine (39) points points in thirty (30) days. I know the Mitt was Governor of Massachusetts, but even the Red Sox did not collapse this quickly this year!

See the chart in the link:

http://www.gallup.com/poll/151382/Gingrich-Gains-Romney-GOP-Nominee-Predictions.aspx?utm_source=alert&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=syndication&utm_content=morelink&utm_term=Politics%20-%20USA

[Peter]

Robert Tracinski wrote in TIA Daily:

The only problem is that Gingrich is the not-Romney who is not not-Romney . . . Romney is disliked by three quarters of Republican voters because they understand that he is the guy who will smoothly tell them what they want to hear in order to get the nomination, but who has a long history of supporting big government and the welfare state . . . . Well, ditto for Newt. Where do we start? There is his stunningly overpaid stint as a "historian" consulting for Freddie Mac. Fannie and Freddie, the government-sponsored entities who touched off the mortgage meltdown, have a long history of enriching Washington insiders as a way of buying political influence. Then there is his recent backing for an "individual mandate" for health-insurance, the keystone of the constitutional case against ObamaCare. And don't forget his infamous sit-down with Nancy Pelosi in an Al Gore-sponsored ad to promote the global warming hysteria.

end quote

Rand Paul on Fox News a few minutes ago said that he is not supporting Newt in the primary elections. Nor is Mitt a conservative champion. Of course Rand’s Dad is also running for President. Rand Paul says that the bank bailouts were supported by Newt. Newt is on both sides of cap and trade, and the individual health mandate. Newt supported the moderate Republican candidate in upper New York State when everyone else including Rush on talk radio supported the conservative candidate. That tells you a lot about the NEW Newt. If we nominated Mitt or Newt it could destroy the Tea Party movement.

Thank you Senator Rand Paul for your “unbiased” assessment. I don’t think the destruction of the Tea Party will happen if Mitt or Newt is selected. And I hope we don’t have a mud fight like Hillary and Barack did. Is Newt the most elect-able, quasi conservative candidate?

Karl Rove was looking at the current, national “elect-ability” polls and Barack beats Mitt who beats Newt. And per Rove, Newt lacks the money and boots on the ground to run a successful national campaign. Yet he is winning the republican primary, likely voting polls with his unconventional campaign.

The Glenn Beck interview with Newt Gingrich is the most incisive that I have seen, from the perspective of the Tea Party and Objectivists. I will need to hold my nose if Newt wins every primary except New Hampshire’s, but at least I won’t need to wear a John McCain model, heavy duty, gas mask.

Peter

[blackhorse]

There are legit. concerns about Newt. and Tracinski makes very good points, either way whomever the GOP nominee is will get my vote. The Problem with Romney is Romneycare; how can he lambast Obama for Obamacare when he is guilty of the very same thing at the State level. Obama knows this and will point to the effectiveness (which is BS) of Romneycare thus destroying any argument that Mitt may try to put out there. When the rubber hits the road it appears more likely that Gingrich will stand on principle whereas Romney will put his finger in the wind to see which way it is blowing.

[Selene]

Folks, up to now, Mr. Newt has obeyed Reagan's 11th commandment,

THOU SHALT NOT SPEAK ILL OF OTHER REPUBLICANS’

"When the chips are down and the decisions are made as to who the candidates will be, then the 11th commandment prevails and everybody goes to work, and that is: Thou shalt not speak ill of another Republican. — Ronald Reagan"

Mr. Newt has said that he will not respond and he will "stay focused" and concentrate on my opponent "President O'bama."

Here is an interview that Mr. Newt gave this Tuesday with Larry Kudlow, it is the full video and the transcript..

All right. Joining me now for a first-on-CNBC interview is the aforementioned GOP frontrunner, Newt Gingrich.

Mr. Speaker, welcome. We appreciate it very much.

GINGRICH: Thanks. It’s great to be here, Larry.

KUDLOW: I want to ask you about Barack Obama on the campaign trail today, or whatever trail he’s on. He’s pushing his temporary payroll tax cut in order to have a permanent increase on millionaires and billionaires. And he says Republicans who oppose this are discredited, “you’re-on-your-own style of economics.” “You’re-on-your-own style of economics.” What is your response to that?

GINGRICH: I think we all have to recognize that the president is a student of Saul Alinsky. He represents a hard-left radicalism. He is opposed to free enterprise. He is opposed to capitalism. He’s opposed to virtually everything which made America great, and he keeps using wild rhetoric that is simply false. I happen to favor keeping the tax cut because I like tax cuts.

http://www.nationalreview.com/kudlows-money-politics/285135/one-one-newt-gingrich.

Does anyone think that they will ever hear Romney address O'biwan in this semantic?

Adam

Post Script:

Maybe I spoke too soon...

CEDAR RAPIDS, Iowa – Newt Gingrich is ready to hit back at Mitt Romney.

Gingrich's campaign is holding a phone call Friday to have Iowa supporters attack Romney, the former Massachusetts governor. Romney's campaign started it Thursday, assailing Gingrich as irrational and unfit to lead, and Romney allies started airing a TV attack ad against Gingrich in Iowa. It's part of a $3.1 million campaign by Romney supporters.

Gingrich, the former House speaker, insisted Thursday he would stay positive.

But now his campaign goes on the offensive, using former Iowa Rep. Greg Ganske and Iowa state Rep. Linda Upmeyer to criticize Romney.

http://old.news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20111209/ap_on_re_us/us_gingrich?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

If this is true, it is a mistake. Mr. Newt should stay focused on his affirmative plans and attack O'biwn, attack O'biwan and by the way did I mention that he should attack O'biwan.

[Selene]

Mr. Newt addressed the GOP Jewish Republican Coalition. He just quoted Albert Camus and George Orwell 1) properly and 2) in a connected paragraph that linked to a clear conclusion about statism.

That is one majour reason why I love the man.

[caroljane]

Mr. Newt addressed the GOP Jewish Republican Coalition. He just quoted Albert Camus and George Orwell 1) properly and 2) in a connected paragraph that linked to a clear conclusion about statism.

That is one majour reason why I love the man.

But Adam-- his grandiosity is frightening. He explained his serial adultery as a byproduct of his devotion to America!While being adulterous he was smugly trying to impeach Clinton for having "not-sex" or whatever with Monica. He felt entitled to collect megabucks from Freddie Mac and then thunderously denounce it. He clearly feels that the ordinary ethical rules do not apply to him.

[Selene]

Carol:

I could care less about what he does or does not do for sexual pleasure.

The reason for impeaching Clinton was that he committed perjury which he was convicted of by a Federal Female Judge. It was the lying under oath.

Moreover, if we excluded all Presidents who committed adultery while in office, I believe that since FDR, we would have only Truman, Ford, Reagan, G.W, Bush and possibly O'biwan that might make the cut.

Going back to the beginning might add another five (5) or ten (10) possible names to the list.

He denounced Fannie and Freddie almost fifteen (15) years before the contract. Additionally, while he was out of office, he negotiated a contract for the company he lead which netted over 1.5 millon in payment as an advisor. Typical contract.

He also attempted while in office to eliminate both Freddie Mac and Fannie Mac.

His one ethics violation that he was nailed on was relatively minor. Lots of smoke, but no fire. I am completely comfortable with Mr. Newt and have been since the Reagan years. He is brilliant and plays the game hard.

He is the last person to balance a Federal Budget during his tenure as Speaker. He handed Clinton a large surplus. Unemployment was about 4.2 % before the dot com boomlet under his leadership.

Additioinally, and most importantly, he successfully engineered Welfare reform which made a significant change in the system at the time.

Adam

[caroljane]

Carol:

I could care less about what he does or does not do for sexual pleasure.

The reason for impeaching Clinton was that he committed perjury which he was convicted of by a Federal Female Judge. It was the lying under oath.

Moreover, if we excluded all Presidents who committed adultery while in office, I believe that since FDR, we would have only Truman, Ford, Reagan, G.W, Bush and possibly O'biwan that might make the cut.

Going back to the beginning might add another five (5) or ten (10) possible names to the list.

He denounced Fannie and Freddie almost fifteen (15) years before the contract. Additionally, while he was out of office, he negotiated a contract for the company he lead which netted over 1.5 millon in payment as an advisor. Typical contract.

He also attempted while in office to eliminate both Freddie Mac and Fannie Mac.

His one ethics violation that he was nailed on was relatively minor. Lots of smoke, but no fire. I am completely comfortable with Mr. Newt and have been since the Reagan years. He is brilliant and plays the game hard.

He is the last person to balance a Federal Budget during his tenure as Speaker. He handed Clinton a large surplus. Unemployment was about 4.2 % before the dot com boomlet under his leadership.

Additioinally, and most importantly, he successfully engineered Welfare reform which made a significant change in the system at the time.

Adam

I don't care either about his sexual morals -- but the American electorate seem to.

Do you really think that if he got the nomination he could beat Obama?

[Selene]

I don't care either about his sexual morals -- but the American electorate seem to.

Do you really think that if he got the nomination he could beat Obama?

Carol:

Actually, and remember, we are going on polls alone right now, not a single vote has been cast, but apparently, no one seems to care about it in this environment and economy.

In the post Clinton/Lewinsky environment, sex is not an issue.

We all know about Mr. Newt and there is very little that can be thrown against him that we do not know.

The interesting strategy that Mr. Newt announced at the Republican Jewish Coalition this week is the Lincoln Douglas debate format. It is, frankly brilliant because as Mr. Newt explained, if he does not accept the debate format, then the President witll become his scheduler.

Mr. Newt will appear within four (4) hours of each of O'biwan's appearances and rebut and lay out his programs.

O'bama is extremely vulnerable to an electoral college defeat.

Frankly, Romney can beat him also. I even think that Dr. Paul would have a shot because he is really gaining ground.

Dr. Paul performance in tonight's debate was excellent. He has a decent chance at either winning Iowa outright or finishing a close second to Mr. Newt.

Remember, the Republicans changed their format this cycle to proportionate allocation of delegates which means Dr. Paul, Mr. Newt and Mitt will definitely be at the convention with large blocks of delegates.

We could still see a brokered convention.

Adam

[Dennis Hardin]

There were two young people in front of me in the check-out line at the supermarket tonight. Both were wearing Ron Paul t-shirts. They noticed each other and struck up a conversation. I have to admit that I found that very encouraging somehow.

As much as I dislike Paul's near-sighted isolationism--his foreign policy ideas are foolish, sophomoric and dangerous--there is something pretty fantastic about having a top presidential candidate who believes in laissez-faire.

One amazing comment he made in tonight's debate: "That's all government is--force. We have to stop using force. Once government uses force to mold behavior or mold the economy, they have overstepped their bounds and they have violated the whole concept of our revolution and our constitution. . ."

To hear a top presidential contender say such things is almost astonishing.

But please--let's keep it real, folks. He is not going to win the Republican nomination. To suggest that he has a realistic chance of getting the nomination is truly naive.

[caroljane]

I don't care either about his sexual morals -- but the American electorate seem to.

Do you really think that if he got the nomination he could beat Obama?

Carol:

Actually, and remember, we are going on polls alone right now, not a single vote has been cast, but apparently, no one seems to care about it in this environment and economy.

In the post Clinton/Lewinsky environment, sex is not an issue.

We all know about Mr. Newt and there is very little that can be thrown against him that we do not know.

The interesting strategy that Mr. Newt announced at the Republican Jewish Coalition this week is the Lincoln Douglas debate format. It is, frankly brilliant because as Mr. Newt explained, if he does not accept the debate format, then the President witll become his scheduler.

Mr. Newt will appear within four (4) hours of each of O'biwan's appearances and rebut and lay out his programs.

O'bama is extremely vulnerable to an electoral college defeat.

Frankly, Romney can beat him also. I even think that Dr. Paul would have a shot because he is really gaining ground.

Dr. Paul performance in tonight's debate was excellent. He has a decent chance at either winning Iowa outright or finishing a close second to Mr. Newt.

Remember, the Republicans changed their format this cycle to proportionate allocation of delegates which means Dr. Paul, Mr. Newt and Mitt will definitely be at the convention with large blocks of delegates.

We could still see a brokered convention.

Adam

Well, you know the US political process and I am merely a gaping outsider.

In the interests of gravitas however, if you persist in referriing to the prez as Obiwan (which is kind of cute, I found myself calling him that recently to the amusement of my hearers (I gave you credit), I think you should refer to Mr Newt as Mr Toad.

[Peter]

Carol wrote . . . you know the US political process and I am merely a gaping outsider. In the interests of gravitas however, if you persist in referring to the prez as Obiwan (which is kind of cute, I found myself calling him that recently to the amusement of my hearers (I gave you credit), I think you should refer to Mr Newt as Mr Toad.

End quote

I still like Komodo Gingrich or Crocodile Gingrich but Mr Toad is cute. My wife mentioned that he is never seen in a full body shot, only shoulders up. Newt has quite a gut on him and he is 68, perhaps too old to survive the Presidency.

Pliny the Elder, Pewter Taylor

[caroljane]

Carol wrote . . . you know the US political process and I am merely a gaping outsider. In the interests of gravitas however, if you persist in referring to the prez as Obiwan (which is kind of cute, I found myself calling him that recently to the amusement of my hearers (I gave you credit), I think you should refer to Mr Newt as Mr Toad.

End quote

I still like Komodo Gingrich or Crocodile Gingrich but Mr Toad is cute. My wife mentioned that he is never seen in a full body shot, only shoulders up. Newt has quite a gut on him and he is 68, perhaps too old to survive the Presidency.

Pliny the Elder, Pewter Taylor

I like all the amphibian permutations - also the association with Hercules, a 1980's cartoon my son used to watch. It was one of those ancient ones where the mouths of the barely animated characters just stayed open while the dialogue was said, hilarious. Anyway Hercules had a sidekick inexplicably called Newton, whose main function was to be endangered and shout 'HERC! Herc!" at crucial moments. I can envision President Gingrich addressing an unruly Congress, casting his eyes to heaven and squeaking "Herc! Herc!"as the problems of the nation overwhelm him.

Kyrilla

Pewter Tankard Owner

[Selene]

Dennis:

One amazing comment he made in tonight's debate: "That's all government is--force. We have to stop using force. Once government uses force to mold behavior or mold the economy, they have overstepped their bounds and they have violated the whole concept of our revolution and our constitution. . ."

It was much more than refreshing, it stated a core "sense" that about 70-75% of our population "feels" is true.

It is true.

The difficulty for the opposition to O'biwan's savage statist growth of strangling regulation is to provide folks with a simple and clear alternative that they can believe in.

Somewhere between Dr. Paul's clarity and Mr. Newt's craftiness in ideas and the ability to state them intelligently is the message.

I would caution you about writing off Dr. Paul as the nominee. The selection process for the Republican primary would allow Dr. Paul to stay in the hunt until the convention.

This first test in Iowa is going to be quite a precipitating political event.

I will remind you of where O'biwan was pre-Iowa a mere four (4) years ago.

I made a call in my network on that first primary four years ago which was within 1% of each persons total. I picked O'biwan because I understood the caucus process. The Clinton campaign did not. i knew some key folks in her effort and they were arrogant and did not understand the caucus and the fact that a small organized group can be disproportionately impactful in that paradigm.

In fact, the Romney campaign is following that same mistaken path. Additionally, Mitt is disliked on the same level, but for different reasons, by the Republican base voters, as Hillary was by the base voters in the Democratic Party.

This Republican race has the same trajectory as the Goldwater Republican run to the nomination at San Francisco's Cow Palace in 1964 and the Reagan Republican run to the nomination Detroit Michigan in 1980.

Adam