Thanks, Nancy, for showing your hand. Now any ethics leaks will be tied to her. Talk about a Kinsley gaffe…
Rule of law was broken and gone from the shinanigans around the nationalization of auto, and its even more egregious with Corzine (Which now includes clinton), and so this form of attack and game, is just par for the course in a political system in which one side needs not answer to law.
what is for me is not for thee..
but previous incarnations and examples will have to wait for someone else…
I find it interesting that people who were so concerned about Obama’s checkered past are not concerned about Newt’s. I’m going to vote for the Republican nominee even if it is Newt, but I do know he is a sleazy guy and a hustler.
Vicious partisanship is going to kill this nation.
Instead of being on one team, us against the bad guys, it is now about hating each other. Killing off each other in every way except a bloody coup.
Nancy Pelosi is the worst of the worst kind of legislator. Witness her ramming through a bill that no one had time to read, forcing “her team” to do things they knew were wrong. And “Deem and pass.”
Compare that to the Contract with America.
AND – much as I hate partisanship, It’s easy to see that ANYONE who works with the Dems at this point is crazy. And it’s quite clear what they mean by “reaching across the aisle” and “compromise.” It’s do it our way, or else.
Speaker and serial husband, converted to Catholicism, sexually harassed the conscienceless Catholic Speaker? Please let it be so – I want to laugh.
Here’s hoping they both snitch on the other. I should like to know just how whip smart you have to be to amass a small fortune as a member of Congress.
Rose –
Ultimately, you may be right. In political science, the field is of two minds about polarization, having once been for it before it was against it.
I wrote a bit about this in a comment a few weeks ago, but to re-iterate: What came along with the progressive usurpation of the towering heights of American culture and its institutions was, of course, the progressive vision. The key to the progressive vision, from the perspective of the American polity, is that it is (or used to be) openly and fervently anti-constitutional. Not merely “unconstitutional,” but actually opposed to the Constitution, to the idea of it, and the ideas in it.
To make a long story short, once such a view gains a sort of hegemony, then the polarization resulting is not going to be “within” the bounds of the constitutional regime but ABOUT it: one side for it, the other side, fundamentally, against it.
So there is a predicate for what you say – this nation being “killed,” or torn apart irreparably. It happened once before, as we know, and it required a bloodbath to even begin putting the nation back together. I’m not at the point of believing it will eventually come to that (yet), but the fact remains that in terms of our basic allegiances we are not one nation.
That is the elephant in the room in all of the bickering among pundits and academics about “polarization.” Lord knows how it’s going to play out. It probably won’t be pretty.
So, it is now Progressivism against…what exactly? On political front, against US Constitution. On more wide cultural and ideological front, it is neo-Paganism against Judeo-Christian moral and religious worldview as a whole. Such conflicts defy compromisses, the chasm is too wide. Russia experienced this 150 years ago, and it did not end well. A lot of soul-searching is needed to put an end to this schizophrenia and splitting of national identity.
Historically this conflict is not new. The same splitting occured many centures ago in Jewish nation, when some significant part of it was lured to Hellenistic paganism. This led to bloody civil war in which Judaism eventually won. This victory is celebrated now as Hanuka.
Threats, intimidation, questionable allegations of naughty behavior, and innuendo; aren’t those about the extent of the Democrat’s Playbook?
Okay, folks,
Nancy Pelosi has reminded us that she has access to where an awful ot of skeletons are lingering in the closet. She doesn’t have to leak anything herself; she can easily dispatch someone else to do the job. Whether the substance of the leaked material is in any way correlated with facts, is irrelevant. Like, whatever works.
The Democrats have a billion dollars to throw at Romney/Gingrich/whomever. They ain’t shy. And the mainstream media are carrying their water. It’s not so much lies as it is what gets aired and what gets buried — for which side.
Oh yes. If any state election is close, some of those mega dollars will hire mega lawyers to turn a Norm Coleman-style victory into an Al Franken-style romp [see Minnesota 2009]. There’s plenty of phony ballots in them thar hills, and plenty of time to grind through recounts until the desired result is attained. ( . . . after which, for some reason, the recounts magically stop.)
It don’t look real good . . .
“”It don’t look real good . . .””
M J R
Stop all the frettin. There’s no way the 47% who voted against Obama in 08 hasn’t grown to 57% or more. And remember, Secretariat rarely looked good in the first 3/4ths of a race either.
SteveH,
I want you to be right. But . . . . . . . . .
Does Pelosi have any followers except washed-up feminists from the 70s and women who majored in gender studies? I bet that even Steny Hoyer can’t stand her. I know working class traditional Democrats who are far from being political junkies, yet know of Pelosi and think she is a fool.
BTW, how ethical is it to push through major legislation without knowing what’s in it? How ethical is it to lie about classified briefings and pretend you weren’t informed about interrogations etc?
While Newt can be over the top, I’d love to see him demolish her. I wonder how many Dems who lost seats and still bear marks from her arm twisting might not also be rooting for Newt. Watch out, Botox Brain.
expat,
I think, although I have no way whatsoever of absolutely knowing, that Ms. Pelosi knew very well what was in that legislation (Obamacare). At least I certainly think she knew about the various provisions that would make anti-statists puke — and the socialists slash statists slash collectivists have that tingle up their legs.
She’s a scoundrel, but she’s no dumb scoundrel.
kolnai,
I frame it as the politicization of everything, and the fetishization of democracy.
When government expands to control essentially all activity and the air we breathe, there is no neutral space for interaction. Everything is a power struggle.
Those who find it acceptable to submit to “the common good” have to determine what that good is. Giving everyone a vote adds a veneer of fairness to the tyranny.
Some stuff we don’t get to vote on, and some stuff we just have to put up with. Or at least that’s how it would work if I were in charge…
So, PeeLousy says she has dirt on Gingrich (revealed as testimony during some prior ethics investigation). Newt says if she divulges that testimony, she herself will be engaging in ethical misconduct.
#1 — Well, you’ve seen how much respect the Dimminycratz have for the concept of “ethics” over these last few years. I don’t think that being charged with anything short of rape-and-murder would faze the old bat.
#2 — *IF* Newt knows that “whatever-it-is” isn’t soooo bad, he can smile genially and say, “Slime away, my dear”. Using PRECISELY those words. (But he’ll have to have prepared a good spin-story on whatever “it” was and why “it” seemed the proper thing to do at the time.)
I hate that American politics has become so thuggish; and I REALLY hate that BOTH parties have decades of history showing that they’re all willing to use whatever “dirty tricks” they can come up with to gain the upper hand. It seems to me that the desire to run for office should immediately disqualify a person from becoming a candidate…. but then, where would we get our representatives???? Sigh.
Great point, Sergey.
The roots of the word “Jew” come from the name of the fourth son of Leah, who was Judah, which can be translated as “one who thanks God.”
All you need to do to establish which side a group is on in the eternal war is look at their thanksgiving. If they have none, if they whine and complain and demand and blame and accuse . . . kind of a clue.
Thanksgiving is the true spirit, mode, and power of the American past.
And one need not even believe in the spiritual side to appreciate the difference between those who thank and those who demand. It’s an existential difference.
A Nonny Mouse wrote: “I hate that American politics has become so thuggish . . . .”
I don’t really think politics has changed. If you read some of the things published about Lincoln, and even earlier about John Adams you find that there is nothing new under the sun here.
What is different is the media’s ability to put this in our face instantly and on a 24/7 news cycle. Politics isn’t local anymore, it’s all national, at least when its a juicy gossipy story.
I think Newt is already working to defuse this. He thanked the speaker for an “early Chirstman gift” clearly announcing that she has telegraphed her opunch and even prior to that he let everyone know that he expects a character asassination by the media. I saw a suggestion in another blog (don’t remember which) which suggested that Newt, himself, now call for all the information to be released. If it isn’t, then when Pelosi does divulge (either directly or indirectly) it could undercut her intent by masking her machinations look even more partisan.
If the Dems want to play a game of slimy hardball, IMO ther is no better candidate than Newt to drop this right back into their own lap. Does anyone really think that Romney has either the cohones, the presence of mind or the scrappy temperament to do that? I think that the reason that Cain was marginalized with accusations that STILL remain unverified was his inability to effectively and coherently respond; Newt is, I think, another story altogether.
As T said, American politics has always been rough and dirty.
As far as who elected Pelosi, you could add several other groups to the list but it’s not politically correct to mention them.
She’s the worst kind of junk yard b*tch.
M J R,
I agree that Pelosi knew that Obamacare fulfilled most of greatest wishes, but the “we have to pass it to know what’s in it” line was still highly unethical. She wouldn’t give us the time or information to challenge her. She also probably believed that the public would ultimately love Obamacare and forgive her if a few minor problems in the law came to light later. Why go on record defending specifics? She is always so damned sure she is right.
It still makes me furious that she thought her becoming Speaker should be considered a victory for me. I hate self-appointed spokeswomen, especially when they are shrewd but not wise.
In a country where 50% of marriages end in divorce I don’t really think Newt’s marital history is much of an issue. Specially now that both Newt’s daughter and his ex have debunked the “divorce while his wife was in the hospital with cancer” story.
As to his “ethics problems” they were dreamed up, not one was really something he’d ever be convicted of.
There are several private Conservative intelligence gathering agencies out there that have most likely been working overtime for the last few years to get the goods on Soros, Pelosi and the Libs and how they caused the collapse of the housing market. Some of this information is already leaking out to the public in the form of books. One such book is “Reckless Endangerment”. This book is the tip of the iceberg. Just from Newts’ attitude I believe he’s been fed a lot of ammo to use and will challange the left to “Bring it on!” They may all be headed into a trap.
expat,
Well-said. I agree with you as to both substance and temperament.
(That and a subway token will get you a ride on the subway. [ -smile- ])
M J R
As I and Trebuchet noted above (about Newt’s scrappy disposition) see todays article in the WSJ by James Taranto which posits precisely the same reason for Newts attraction to conservatives, i.e. that he refuses to be bullied by sanctimonious liberals:
“As to his “ethics problems” they were dreamed up, not one was really something he’d ever be convicted of.” –Peter
If it weren’t so pitiful it’d be funny: the Dems digging up the close-to-ancient (in political time) ethics scandals of Newt when they have so many ethics challenges themselves. Firstly, don’t want to forget what they did since Obama was elected & with their majorities, but always more significant to me is HOW they’ve done it! By changing rules, using unrelated obscure rules to pass ObamaCare via a budget rule, calling midnight votes, AFTER writing 2,,000 pg. bills literally behind locked doors and before a single legislator has had time to read the legislationm etc…. And the “work-arounds” that have been used by this Administration to carry out their ideological agenda when they can’t get things thru Congress have been scandalous (or would be if the MSM didn’t control what news reaches whose ears) from Obama’s recess appointments of people with extreme beliefs even the Democrats won’t approve to loading the commissions and boards with far Left Believers (like the 2 on the NLRB who are at this very moment trying to make compulsory the speedy union vote requirement for all companies) or using the EPA to pass environmental “rules” that Congress won’t vote into legislation.
And then there are all those tax cheats in the Obama’s administration, and the ethics violations. Charles Rangel is still happily working in his office with his handslap long forgotten and what ever happened to the Maxine Waters investigation? What are the chances that won’t be resolved before 2012?
And all that is over and above the outright lies this President regularly tells (no wonder he holds such disdain for the gullible people who swallow his Kool-Aid!)
And then there are all those Dems who were outraged by Clinton’s impeachment with emphatic and impassioned declarations that they don’t care about who HE has sex with (even if it was in the Oval Office and was a 20-yr. old intern, and even if he lied to every American on live TV)…
But they cared enough to dig up (or orchestrate — I’m not sure which) so many SEX-capades of Herman Cain, with still not a whit of corroboration.
And now Newt’s sins. I’m not sure yet how I feel about Gingrich but I’m cynical enough now to believe he doesn’t much deviate from the norm (in Congress) in that department. In my mind he has a lot of baggage (beyond the intimate kind) and I’m not sure how much a leopard can change his spots. Or how extreme he might be. The last thing we need is the reverse of what we have now; we need to right this ship of a country, but if conservatives abuse power like the Dems have, it will nor be progress but an extreme swing of a pendulum which will ultimately swing back in the opposite direction.
At the same time, I have to admit that Newt’s brilliant mind and seemingly strong grasp of the issues across the board does appeal to me, as does the vision of him bulldozing Obama in a debate. (but I’m superstitious so maybe I shouldn’t say that out loud for fear of bringing on a jinx) .
Pelosi really does not have to expose Newt. There, is after-all, the undeniable fact that Newt’s big mouth made him the the most unpopular politician in America (of course he has long been outshone by Pelosi in that field). Second, the next election is about getting rid of Obama. Any candidate besides Ron Paul would be acceptable. The Dems are in denial if they it makes that much of a difference who he runs against.
The nice thing about Newt is that his big mouth, pugnaciousness and knowledge of history would allow him to express MY feeling towards Obama in any debate. One can see him starting out by calling Obama the worst president in US history to his face, a disgrace to his office and country, a narcissistic anti-American charlatan with no understanding of the American political religion, etc, and then give examples. In all honesty, I have qualms about him as President, but none about his moral compass.
Obama is going to win the election…
those looking at the larger picture are crowing pretty much the same thing, because newt is not liked among the swing voters who actually decide who wins.
and with third party candidates that do nothing but dilute the right…
and the big push to avoid id in voting (including by Chinese organizations which claim the Chinese are the largest group that naturalizes, and in another breath claim that they would have a problem… how so?)
the tunnels under mexico have been supplying more than marijuana..
in a way fast and furious was also helping to create a situation to suspend things…
as are many protests.
and a huge wave of oppressed on oppressor violence… from colleges, to the street… the protected classes of certain race and religion groups are playing games like “knock out”, and attacking people en masse
by the time elections come, if they pull a few plugs, they can EASILY create the excuse to use the statements they put in and created not just under Obama, but over the past 40 years…
the more they lie, and the wider the spread of those lies, the more violent the believers will be against others…
after all, its their worldview at stake, not just an election and economy…
the more their world crumbles, the more violent they will attack those who they think are making it crumble… they cant see beyond step 1, and so cant see what taking that step does down the line, and back to them
Leave a Reply
HTML tags allowed in your
comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>
Thanks, Nancy, for showing your hand. Now any ethics leaks will be tied to her. Talk about a Kinsley gaffe…
Rule of law was broken and gone from the shinanigans around the nationalization of auto, and its even more egregious with Corzine (Which now includes clinton), and so this form of attack and game, is just par for the course in a political system in which one side needs not answer to law.
what is for me is not for thee..
but previous incarnations and examples will have to wait for someone else…
I find it interesting that people who were so concerned about Obama’s checkered past are not concerned about Newt’s. I’m going to vote for the Republican nominee even if it is Newt, but I do know he is a sleazy guy and a hustler.
Vicious partisanship is going to kill this nation.
Instead of being on one team, us against the bad guys, it is now about hating each other. Killing off each other in every way except a bloody coup.
Nancy Pelosi is the worst of the worst kind of legislator. Witness her ramming through a bill that no one had time to read, forcing “her team” to do things they knew were wrong. And “Deem and pass.”
Compare that to the Contract with America.
AND – much as I hate partisanship, It’s easy to see that ANYONE who works with the Dems at this point is crazy. And it’s quite clear what they mean by “reaching across the aisle” and “compromise.” It’s do it our way, or else.
Speaker and serial husband, converted to Catholicism, sexually harassed the conscienceless Catholic Speaker? Please let it be so – I want to laugh.
Here’s hoping they both snitch on the other. I should like to know just how whip smart you have to be to amass a small fortune as a member of Congress.
Rose –
Ultimately, you may be right. In political science, the field is of two minds about polarization, having once been for it before it was against it.
I wrote a bit about this in a comment a few weeks ago, but to re-iterate: What came along with the progressive usurpation of the towering heights of American culture and its institutions was, of course, the progressive vision. The key to the progressive vision, from the perspective of the American polity, is that it is (or used to be) openly and fervently anti-constitutional. Not merely “unconstitutional,” but actually opposed to the Constitution, to the idea of it, and the ideas in it.
To make a long story short, once such a view gains a sort of hegemony, then the polarization resulting is not going to be “within” the bounds of the constitutional regime but ABOUT it: one side for it, the other side, fundamentally, against it.
So there is a predicate for what you say – this nation being “killed,” or torn apart irreparably. It happened once before, as we know, and it required a bloodbath to even begin putting the nation back together. I’m not at the point of believing it will eventually come to that (yet), but the fact remains that in terms of our basic allegiances we are not one nation.
That is the elephant in the room in all of the bickering among pundits and academics about “polarization.” Lord knows how it’s going to play out. It probably won’t be pretty.
So, it is now Progressivism against…what exactly? On political front, against US Constitution. On more wide cultural and ideological front, it is neo-Paganism against Judeo-Christian moral and religious worldview as a whole. Such conflicts defy compromisses, the chasm is too wide. Russia experienced this 150 years ago, and it did not end well. A lot of soul-searching is needed to put an end to this schizophrenia and splitting of national identity.
Historically this conflict is not new. The same splitting occured many centures ago in Jewish nation, when some significant part of it was lured to Hellenistic paganism. This led to bloody civil war in which Judaism eventually won. This victory is celebrated now as Hanuka.
Threats, intimidation, questionable allegations of naughty behavior, and innuendo; aren’t those about the extent of the Democrat’s Playbook?
Okay, folks,
Nancy Pelosi has reminded us that she has access to where an awful ot of skeletons are lingering in the closet. She doesn’t have to leak anything herself; she can easily dispatch someone else to do the job. Whether the substance of the leaked material is in any way correlated with facts, is irrelevant. Like, whatever works.
The Democrats have a billion dollars to throw at Romney/Gingrich/whomever. They ain’t shy. And the mainstream media are carrying their water. It’s not so much lies as it is what gets aired and what gets buried — for which side.
Oh yes. If any state election is close, some of those mega dollars will hire mega lawyers to turn a Norm Coleman-style victory into an Al Franken-style romp [see Minnesota 2009]. There’s plenty of phony ballots in them thar hills, and plenty of time to grind through recounts until the desired result is attained. ( . . . after which, for some reason, the recounts magically stop.)
It don’t look real good . . .
“”It don’t look real good . . .””
M J R
Stop all the frettin. There’s no way the 47% who voted against Obama in 08 hasn’t grown to 57% or more. And remember, Secretariat rarely looked good in the first 3/4ths of a race either.
SteveH,
I want you to be right. But . . . . . . . . .
Does Pelosi have any followers except washed-up feminists from the 70s and women who majored in gender studies? I bet that even Steny Hoyer can’t stand her. I know working class traditional Democrats who are far from being political junkies, yet know of Pelosi and think she is a fool.
BTW, how ethical is it to push through major legislation without knowing what’s in it? How ethical is it to lie about classified briefings and pretend you weren’t informed about interrogations etc?
While Newt can be over the top, I’d love to see him demolish her. I wonder how many Dems who lost seats and still bear marks from her arm twisting might not also be rooting for Newt. Watch out, Botox Brain.
expat,
I think, although I have no way whatsoever of absolutely knowing, that Ms. Pelosi knew very well what was in that legislation (Obamacare). At least I certainly think she knew about the various provisions that would make anti-statists puke — and the socialists slash statists slash collectivists have that tingle up their legs.
She’s a scoundrel, but she’s no dumb scoundrel.
kolnai,
I frame it as the politicization of everything, and the fetishization of democracy.
When government expands to control essentially all activity and the air we breathe, there is no neutral space for interaction. Everything is a power struggle.
Those who find it acceptable to submit to “the common good” have to determine what that good is. Giving everyone a vote adds a veneer of fairness to the tyranny.
Some stuff we don’t get to vote on, and some stuff we just have to put up with. Or at least that’s how it would work if I were in charge…
So, PeeLousy says she has dirt on Gingrich (revealed as testimony during some prior ethics investigation). Newt says if she divulges that testimony, she herself will be engaging in ethical misconduct.
#1 — Well, you’ve seen how much respect the Dimminycratz have for the concept of “ethics” over these last few years. I don’t think that being charged with anything short of rape-and-murder would faze the old bat.
#2 — *IF* Newt knows that “whatever-it-is” isn’t soooo bad, he can smile genially and say, “Slime away, my dear”. Using PRECISELY those words. (But he’ll have to have prepared a good spin-story on whatever “it” was and why “it” seemed the proper thing to do at the time.)
I hate that American politics has become so thuggish; and I REALLY hate that BOTH parties have decades of history showing that they’re all willing to use whatever “dirty tricks” they can come up with to gain the upper hand. It seems to me that the desire to run for office should immediately disqualify a person from becoming a candidate…. but then, where would we get our representatives???? Sigh.
Great point, Sergey.
The roots of the word “Jew” come from the name of the fourth son of Leah, who was Judah, which can be translated as “one who thanks God.”
All you need to do to establish which side a group is on in the eternal war is look at their thanksgiving. If they have none, if they whine and complain and demand and blame and accuse . . . kind of a clue.
Thanksgiving is the true spirit, mode, and power of the American past.
And one need not even believe in the spiritual side to appreciate the difference between those who thank and those who demand. It’s an existential difference.
A Nonny Mouse wrote: “I hate that American politics has become so thuggish . . . .”
I don’t really think politics has changed. If you read some of the things published about Lincoln, and even earlier about John Adams you find that there is nothing new under the sun here.
What is different is the media’s ability to put this in our face instantly and on a 24/7 news cycle. Politics isn’t local anymore, it’s all national, at least when its a juicy gossipy story.
I think Newt is already working to defuse this. He thanked the speaker for an “early Chirstman gift” clearly announcing that she has telegraphed her opunch and even prior to that he let everyone know that he expects a character asassination by the media. I saw a suggestion in another blog (don’t remember which) which suggested that Newt, himself, now call for all the information to be released. If it isn’t, then when Pelosi does divulge (either directly or indirectly) it could undercut her intent by masking her machinations look even more partisan.
If the Dems want to play a game of slimy hardball, IMO ther is no better candidate than Newt to drop this right back into their own lap. Does anyone really think that Romney has either the cohones, the presence of mind or the scrappy temperament to do that? I think that the reason that Cain was marginalized with accusations that STILL remain unverified was his inability to effectively and coherently respond; Newt is, I think, another story altogether.
As T said, American politics has always been rough and dirty.
As far as who elected Pelosi, you could add several other groups to the list but it’s not politically correct to mention them.
She’s the worst kind of junk yard b*tch.
M J R,
I agree that Pelosi knew that Obamacare fulfilled most of greatest wishes, but the “we have to pass it to know what’s in it” line was still highly unethical. She wouldn’t give us the time or information to challenge her. She also probably believed that the public would ultimately love Obamacare and forgive her if a few minor problems in the law came to light later. Why go on record defending specifics? She is always so damned sure she is right.
It still makes me furious that she thought her becoming Speaker should be considered a victory for me. I hate self-appointed spokeswomen, especially when they are shrewd but not wise.
In a country where 50% of marriages end in divorce I don’t really think Newt’s marital history is much of an issue. Specially now that both Newt’s daughter and his ex have debunked the “divorce while his wife was in the hospital with cancer” story.
As to his “ethics problems” they were dreamed up, not one was really something he’d ever be convicted of.
There are several private Conservative intelligence gathering agencies out there that have most likely been working overtime for the last few years to get the goods on Soros, Pelosi and the Libs and how they caused the collapse of the housing market. Some of this information is already leaking out to the public in the form of books. One such book is “Reckless Endangerment”. This book is the tip of the iceberg. Just from Newts’ attitude I believe he’s been fed a lot of ammo to use and will challange the left to “Bring it on!” They may all be headed into a trap.
expat,
Well-said. I agree with you as to both substance and temperament.
(That and a subway token will get you a ride on the subway. [ -smile- ])
M J R
As I and Trebuchet noted above (about Newt’s scrappy disposition) see todays article in the WSJ by James Taranto which posits precisely the same reason for Newts attraction to conservatives, i.e. that he refuses to be bullied by sanctimonious liberals:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204903804577080402058750264.html?mod=rss_opinion_main
“As to his “ethics problems” they were dreamed up, not one was really something he’d ever be convicted of.” –Peter
If it weren’t so pitiful it’d be funny: the Dems digging up the close-to-ancient (in political time) ethics scandals of Newt when they have so many ethics challenges themselves. Firstly, don’t want to forget what they did since Obama was elected & with their majorities, but always more significant to me is HOW they’ve done it! By changing rules, using unrelated obscure rules to pass ObamaCare via a budget rule, calling midnight votes, AFTER writing 2,,000 pg. bills literally behind locked doors and before a single legislator has had time to read the legislationm etc…. And the “work-arounds” that have been used by this Administration to carry out their ideological agenda when they can’t get things thru Congress have been scandalous (or would be if the MSM didn’t control what news reaches whose ears) from Obama’s recess appointments of people with extreme beliefs even the Democrats won’t approve to loading the commissions and boards with far Left Believers (like the 2 on the NLRB who are at this very moment trying to make compulsory the speedy union vote requirement for all companies) or using the EPA to pass environmental “rules” that Congress won’t vote into legislation.
And then there are all those tax cheats in the Obama’s administration, and the ethics violations. Charles Rangel is still happily working in his office with his handslap long forgotten and what ever happened to the Maxine Waters investigation? What are the chances that won’t be resolved before 2012?
And all that is over and above the outright lies this President regularly tells (no wonder he holds such disdain for the gullible people who swallow his Kool-Aid!)
And then there are all those Dems who were outraged by Clinton’s impeachment with emphatic and impassioned declarations that they don’t care about who HE has sex with (even if it was in the Oval Office and was a 20-yr. old intern, and even if he lied to every American on live TV)…
But they cared enough to dig up (or orchestrate — I’m not sure which) so many SEX-capades of Herman Cain, with still not a whit of corroboration.
And now Newt’s sins. I’m not sure yet how I feel about Gingrich but I’m cynical enough now to believe he doesn’t much deviate from the norm (in Congress) in that department. In my mind he has a lot of baggage (beyond the intimate kind) and I’m not sure how much a leopard can change his spots. Or how extreme he might be. The last thing we need is the reverse of what we have now; we need to right this ship of a country, but if conservatives abuse power like the Dems have, it will nor be progress but an extreme swing of a pendulum which will ultimately swing back in the opposite direction.
At the same time, I have to admit that Newt’s brilliant mind and seemingly strong grasp of the issues across the board does appeal to me, as does the vision of him bulldozing Obama in a debate. (but I’m superstitious so maybe I shouldn’t say that out loud for fear of bringing on a jinx) .
Pelosi really does not have to expose Newt. There, is after-all, the undeniable fact that Newt’s big mouth made him the the most unpopular politician in America (of course he has long been outshone by Pelosi in that field). Second, the next election is about getting rid of Obama. Any candidate besides Ron Paul would be acceptable. The Dems are in denial if they it makes that much of a difference who he runs against.
The nice thing about Newt is that his big mouth, pugnaciousness and knowledge of history would allow him to express MY feeling towards Obama in any debate. One can see him starting out by calling Obama the worst president in US history to his face, a disgrace to his office and country, a narcissistic anti-American charlatan with no understanding of the American political religion, etc, and then give examples. In all honesty, I have qualms about him as President, but none about his moral compass.
Obama is going to win the election…
those looking at the larger picture are crowing pretty much the same thing, because newt is not liked among the swing voters who actually decide who wins.
and with third party candidates that do nothing but dilute the right…
and the big push to avoid id in voting (including by Chinese organizations which claim the Chinese are the largest group that naturalizes, and in another breath claim that they would have a problem… how so?)
the tunnels under mexico have been supplying more than marijuana..
in a way fast and furious was also helping to create a situation to suspend things…
as are many protests.
and a huge wave of oppressed on oppressor violence… from colleges, to the street… the protected classes of certain race and religion groups are playing games like “knock out”, and attacking people en masse
by the time elections come, if they pull a few plugs, they can EASILY create the excuse to use the statements they put in and created not just under Obama, but over the past 40 years…
the more they lie, and the wider the spread of those lies, the more violent the believers will be against others…
after all, its their worldview at stake, not just an election and economy…
the more their world crumbles, the more violent they will attack those who they think are making it crumble… they cant see beyond step 1, and so cant see what taking that step does down the line, and back to them