http://www.romeosrestaurants.com/?p=28…

In fact, Newt made a great point in that interview, that there is no central control of the 40+ tea party organizations. They are all independent. I think that’s important, just as a distributed economy outperforms a centralized one every time.

People like Too-Much-Candy Crowley can’t figure out the tea party movement because it doesn’t involve blowing up bridges and defecating in public. It can’t be serious. Not attending town hall meetings en masse to her means the tea party has “lost power.” For her, if Oren Hatch succeeds, it’ll mean much more against the tea party than Richard Mourdock’s possible success means for it. Even that success will be trivialized, excused because Lugar is 80 and voters just thought he would be too old.

My only request now for both Newt and Rick and the other former candidates is that they swallow their pride and enthusiastically support Mitt Romney. I think they probably did that for W, and Mitt should be a far better President than W was.

Newt has himself in a position where he can really pound Obama. He hasn’t taken back anything he has said about Romney, all he’s said is Obama is even worse than that.

MSM will try to use Santorum’s words against him when he tries to say things that support Romney now, this won’t work on Gingrich because he’s been consistent.

He hasn’t changed his tune, all he’s saying is that as bad as Romney is, Obama’s even worse than that.

Newt isn’t behaving like a politcian, he’s being honest, and that is why I support him in the primary.

Glad I re-heard that interview via your link-thx.

http://newtgingrich360.com/video/cnn-sotu-interview-power-of-the-tea-party?xg_source=activity

Now the CNN Shill was taking swipes at the tea party.

If you look at the context, he wasn’t bashing the Tea Party. The CNN Shill was trying to get Gingrich to bash the Tea Party, he didn’t take the bait. The part where he brought up the passion issue, he was taking a swipe at the Republican Establishment.

checkmate, I’m not questioning your honesty, sorry but I’ve had a long day. However, I do think you didn’t do enough digging.

Could this be used to make it look like Newt was bashing the Tea Party, sure. However, when you look at what he actually said, the swipe was directed towards the Establishment, not the Tea Party.

It is you who is trying to get Obama four more years.
You don’t miss any chance to rip into the Republican nominee.
That is why I think you must be paid by team Obama.

Like I said before, you have posted more anti Romney crap than I evan came close to posting.

You haven’t presented enough information for us to see what the context was. A similar attack was just launched on Santorum a few days ago by mbecker, so I think there is a good reason to be suspicious of this.

I looked into some of the other pages there, and calculated that there are 1,390,000 fewer people working today than there were at the end of 2008 (one month before the Obamanation) — 134,379,000-132,989,000.

Other sources say there are 30,000 new workers added to the job force every month, so in the 40 months that Obama has been in office there are now 1,200,000 additional workers who aren’t employed (net). Add that to 1,390,000 workers who left work, and we get 2,590,000 people unemployed now who were not unemployed when Bush celebrated his final New Year’s Day in office.

In a “running in place” economy, those people would all be working and the unemployed left over from Bush would still be unemployed, but just the additional workers added to the working pool would drive down the unemployment rate left behind by Bush. Ironic. Had Obama been able to accomplish simple stagnation we’d be better off than we are now.

So the President-who-won, who promised us that we could hope for some change, hasn’t even been holding things steady–they are worse now than when he took office, and above all else, a newly-elected President is expected to make changes for the better, not stumble along going deeper and deeper into the unemployment morass.

BTW, his claim that “the rates are improving” may be true in some ways, but there is some level of “base employment.” When that number is approached, the rate of falling further is going to slow down. People exiting the work force is both a symptom and a cause of this phenomenon. The totals of new workers losing jobs are going to be smaller, and the rise of the unemployment rate is going to be slowed or even occasionally reduced.

The fact is, that Obama has been using the “terrible economy I inherited” as an excuse, not as a reason. He has done exactly NOTHING about the millions of workers who had already lost their jobs before he took office, which would not be true if he had done ANYTHING successful to attack our economic problems. A successful Obama Administration would already have made a significant dent in the problems he “inherited;” instead, he has allowed them to grow worse. It’s likely that the “progress” we’ve made in recent months has been in spite of his policies, not because of them.

We keep our powder dry for a time, in the not to distant future, when we will be forced to Remind the Fools in DC that their authority comes from us. We will NEVER give up or give in. American Patriots will always stand tall !

BUT…THAT IS NOT THE TIME BOMB…I bet the labor statistics do not reflect all those baby boomers going on SS…our GIGANTIC UNFUNDED LIABILITY. Less people working…less money going into the general fund…SS going bankrupt…

Can anyone tell if that is computed into the percentage, i.e., new SS retirees?

Paycheck President vs. Foodstamp President

Romney’s campaign would do well to take a page from Newt’s playbook in this regard.

K.I.S.S.

With a whole lotta folks, you’re not gonna have any fun with that….
I’ve no doubt of your sincerity, but we Are Talking about American public school participants here.

There was always something good to say about Readers Digest Condensed Versions…they were condensed.

“1,152,000 jobs (in seasonally adjusted numbers) were LOST from the time Obama took office until now, January 2012.”
http://mollysmiddleamerica.blogspot.com/2012/02/private-govt-jobs-gained-lost-obama.html