First They Attack Him for Opposing Tax Increases. Now They Attack Him For This?

http://thecorruptworld.blogspot.com/ wayneinnh

.

jrussell

Because he is desperate and flailing. He is throwing everything to see if it sticks. But it is so transperent how desperate Romney is being. No one will watch that ad and think “Wow, Newt is so scary I can’t vote for him!”. All they will see is “Wow, Romney is so desperate for votes he will attack his opponet for once holding a position he holds. How shameless.”

Newt’s response of turning the other cheek saying none of these desperate attacks will work is genius. He comes across as the grown-up and Romney as the spoiled child having a temper-tantrum for not getting the nomination handed to him like he thinks he is entitled to.

jrussell

Because he is desperate and flailing. He is throwing everything to see if it sticks. But it is so transperent how desperate Romney is being. No one will watch that ad and think “Wow, Newt is so scary I can’t vote for him!”. All they will see is “Wow, Romney is so desperate for votes he will attack his opponet for once holding a position he holds. How shameless.”

Newt’s response of turning the other cheek saying none of these desperate attacks will work is genius. He comes across as the grown-up and Romney as the spoiled child having a temper-tantrum for not getting the nomination handed to him like he thinks he is entitled to.

medicineman

…and I’m not looking back

medicineman

…and I’m not looking back

Common_Cents

What a gift to Gingrich. LOL.

bzip

Look it should be clear to everyone by now that Newt and Romney are really the same, there isn’t much difference and they are the two worst conservative candidates.

Both are flip-flopper both support global warming, TARP and the mandate.

Good Grief, you would think the conservatives could do better then these two.

Good article in the LA Times today talking about the very same thing – Newt = Romney.

Gingrich’s record belies his conservative image?..
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-1209-gingrich-conservative-20111209,0,2003907.story
..? Newt Gingrich ? who is no more conservative than Romney.

theone3434

You know Romney’s camp is going to say that they support the individual mandate for Mass. but not for the entire nation (even though he wrote it in his book!!). He is going to state that Gingrich has always been for a form of the individual mandate for the entire nation…which is true. Point being, Romney’s spin won’t work regardless of what he tries portray.

theone3434

the ad also calls Gingrich a flip flopper and states that he has been on both sides of the issue…hahahaha…oh, the irony!!

mndasher

“So is the Romney team admitting the individual mandate is bad? And if so, why is Romney still supporting it?”

I am not a Romney supporter, but his position has been and continues to be that the Massachusetts RomneyCare individual mandate is constitutional because it was done by a state, and the Obamacare mandate is unconstitutional because it was done by the federal government which has no such power.

He has said many times that the what they did in Massachusetts was right for them, but not right for the country, and that each state should decide for itself what to do about health care.

texabama

And with Newt being around longer his are more finely honed. Plus he has the gift of gab. My hope is that they manage to take each other out and we can then choose between the real conservatives. My choice will be for the one with actual executive experience—Rick Perry.

concrusade

Why do we continue to prop Newt up?

And to Romney’s credit, I don’t think any of the facts are misrepresented in this ad. So let them have at it.

andystone

He may do the wrong thing every once in a while, but he will sure make up for it by rebuking others who had thought about it!

texabama

regardless of where it’s made. Instead of using that line of defense, Romney needs to come to terms with the idea that some things (while maybe great in theory) really don’t work well once implemented.

http://www.changeforrickperry.org louisianapatriette

Namely, they’re pretty much the same. They’ve supported the same big-government policies and they’re both flip-floppers who will say anything to get elected.

Let them claw each others eyes out and be Dick Gephardt/Howard Dean 2.0. I’m betting my money on Secretariat Perry.

http://www.plumbbobblog.com Plumb_Bob

…but the persistent amorality of Mitt Romney’s campaign strategy has completely convinced me that he should have no role in government — not now, not ever, not as Vice President, not as cabinet secretary. We have enough amoral clowns in government. We need people who find intellectual integrity compelling.

texabama

n/t

http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

…regarding how The Newt could soon crash.

*

This is from Charlie Cook:

“THE COOK REPORT: Not Sold on Newt”

Campaign fundamentals still matter. And, at least so far, Newt Gingrich hasn?t mastered them.

http://www.nationaljournal.com/columns/cook-report/the-cook-report-not-sold-on-newt-20111208#.TuIJOJ-0Pn8.email

*

This is from the Washington Post’s Chris Cillizza [a lib]:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix?wpisrc=nl_fix

Gingrich assault now in full swing: The gloves are off, and Newt Gingrich is weathering the first sustained series of attacks of his campaign.

It started early Thursday with a conference call featuring top Romney lieutenants hitting his ?off-the-cuff? remarks and his qualifications to be commander in chief.

Then came an ad from Perry that hit both Gingrich and Romney for supporting an individual mandate to carry health insurance.

And a pro-Romney super PAC bought $3.1 million worth of ad time in Iowa, most of which will presumably be spent on ads against Gingrich rather than anti-Obama ads (though the first one hit Obama).

A series of CNN/Time polls from Wednesday showed Gingrich leading by double digits on three of the four earliest states, and his opponents have clearly taken notice.

Anti-Gingrich ad leaked by pro-Romney super PAC: Speaking of which, we noted on Thursday that pro-Romney super PAC Restore Our Future launched its first ad against Obama rather than Gingrich.

Well it appeared for a spell Thursday night that a Gingrich attack ad wasn?t far behind. That?s because the group posted a damning 60-second ad attacking Gingrich for his ?tons of baggage? to its YouTube page.

Alas, it appears someone got ahead of themselves, and the ad was taken down.

The good news: Nothing every really disappears from the internet. So here it is.

Fixbits:

Gingrich grows a 13 percent lead on Romney in a new Fox News poll.

Santorum will make a major announcement in Johnston, Iowa, at 7 p.m. eastern time today ? apparently the endorsement of Secretary of State Matt Schultz, who as it happens is a Mormon.

Santorum affirms he will participate in the Donald Trump-moderated debate and criticizes those who are skipping it. ?Many of my opponents jockeyed to be the first to fly up to New York and use Donald Trump for a photo op and no doubt try and secure an endorsement,? he said. ?But when Donald wants to moderate a debate, they refuse to attend. That?s what?s so wrong with politics today: hypocrisy.? Bachmann is skipping the debate, so right now it?s just Gingrich and Santorum.

The Huffington Post?s Sam Stein notes not everyone on Perry?s team was on-board with an ad criticizing Obama?s repeal of ?Don?t Ask Don?t Tell.? Meanwhile, the gay Republican group GOProud hits Perry.

Is Gingrich the GOP?s Kim Kardashian ?

Paul says of Gingrich: ?I have to expose him for what he?s been doing all these years.? And with that, Romney?s people smile.

Gingrich is far from perfect, but can anyone doubt how he would flat out destoy Obama in debate after debate?

*

Can The Newt find a pathway to AVOID sinking?

jrussell

He onced called his Romneycare in MA a “model for the nation”. In his book no less.

He then edited the line out of the book when he ran for President.

jrussell

He onced called his Romneycare in MA a “model for the nation”. In his book no less.

He then edited the line out of the book when he ran for President.

http://www.plumbbobblog.com Plumb_Bob

Gingrich produced the most profound progress for conservative principles in national government in my lifetime. He did more for conservatism in his first 100 days as House Speaker than any other living human being has accomplished in the last 20 years. He is responsible for the balanced budgets of the Clinton years. He is responsible for welfare reform.

Gingrich has lots of ideas, and he talks about them. Some are good, some are bad. Some involve odd alliances with hated figures from the left, because alliances are how politics works. But his actions have been the actions of a conservative.

rickdeckard

Nominating Gingrich gives us the chance to watch him make TelePrompTer-free mush out of Obama’s brain in front of God and everybody. That alone is worth the price of admission. Especially since the RNC appears once again to be nervous about attacking Obama from the front. Or maybe that isn’t what they said this time.

http://www.plumbbobblog.com Plumb_Bob

I do not oppose the mandate in ObamaCare simply because it is unconstitutional. That’s what makes it illegal, not what makes it wrong. I oppose the mandate for the same reason that I oppose the entire program — because it’s ridiculous policy, and will demolish health care in America.

So Romney is right about the mandate being legal for a state, but that does not satisfy me. I want to know why a supposed conservative favors taking liberty away from honest citizens and giving their power to government bureaucrats. RomneyCare is anti-conservative, anti-liberty, anti-American, and anti-good-sense. Romney = disaster.

sethellis

As a Romney supporter, I was surprised myself when I saw this in the ad yesterday. I’m not sure what they were thinking. However, I feel this article is a little disingenuous. It is pinning it on Romney, but it is a super pac responsible for the ad. By law the Romney campaign can’t have anything to do with it.

That said you can’t hate them for telling the truth. Newt did push the mandate at a national level.

I find it ironic. Earlier this week Erick said part of why he can’t support Romney is because he’s not a fighter. I laughed this off because I remember a very different story from 2008. Romey will throw in everything he has, and the haters will hate him all the more for it.

bzip

Oh right. Watch the DNC hit Newt for cheating on his wives: Character, Honesty, Trust will go at the heart of Newt in addition to his flip-flopping much like Romney.

Newt will have an issue with women voters and trust issues. That is very clear and Newt is most likely the most damaged out of all them. His ethic violation which will only play into the trust issue.

I can hardly wait. You really must want Obama re-elected.

Marcus_Traianus

Ever notice Romney never attacks other candidates ideas with plausible facts, position contrasts or reasoning as to why his policies (whatever they are) are better?

No matter who gets close to Romney, suddenly the ad hominems, rumors, innuendo and salacious tales suddenly appear. The liberal press and party acolytes go full dribble.

Here we are in the midst of a great struggle for survival in our country. The current President has done nothing but fling divisive rhetoric like monkey poo at our country’s citizens. Mr. Obama has shown he is totally incapable of new ideas or anything resembling leadership.

And Romney is supposed to be an alternative? I am missing the real difference between what we have now and what we would get with Romney?

andystone

N/T

bzip

Whether you want to face it or not: Newt is big gov’t with big gov’t ideas and solutions. From his support of the mandate, global warming, TARP it is all there.

If you think that I am the only one who pushes this then you better re-look at what the moderates of the last debat where concerned with:

Ken Cuccinelli Is Not Satisfied with GOP Candidates’ Answers!
http://youtu.be/B8Jzd-c_ZjU

andystone

The big news yesterday was that Newt was killing Mitt with kindness instead.

mrmises

Mr. Hunstman, Mr. Perry and Mr. Romney all have actual executive experience.

dave2131

I think it’s funny how the “conservatives” are so in love with one of them, but hate the other, when in reality they are nothing more than big Government Republicans.

Disclaimer: I am a Ron Paul supporter, aka Paulbot, crazy, kook, moron, idiot, pot head, or whatever the current slur. I am as conservative (if not more) as anyone else, but I believe in many of the libertarian principles because I want a limited Gov’t

If RP can’t win, I’m hoping Perry can come back because Newt & Romney will just damage the GOP brand further.

byebyebama

This is coming from EE who has been trashing Romney for months. Now that it has been directed to Newt, all of a suddent he wants to abide by Reagans Rule. This is why people hate politics.

andystone

about actually balancing the budget and achieving entitlement reform, then it’s hard to see a distinction between Newt and Mitt, or between an elephant and a donkey for that matter (they both have four legs and big ears, don’t they?).

andystone

it helps a lot to have a certain amoral disregard for first principles.

Common_Cents

Hastert
Pelosi
Boehner
DeLay
McConnell
Gangs of 7,14,12,9,8,5 routinely selling out America

Congress since Gingrich? A steady decline of America, uncontrolled growth of the federal government/spending.

Brilliant!

byebyebama

Can you give me the exact quote where he said that he agreed with the mandate on a national level. From what I understand, he has never actually said that he thought a mandate was a good idea for the nation. I could be wrong.

http://www.changeforrickperry.org louisianapatriette

See also this article:

“Newt Hit Buzz Saw in Meeting with Right Leaders”
http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/newt-hit-buzz-saw-meeting-right-leaders/244926

“That wasn’t a standing ovation, we were all getting up to leave.”

“Cuccinelli had five followup questions and it was like a prosecutor cross-examining a defendant. Newt kept trying to change the subject, but Cuccinelli wouldn’t back down.”

“Newt later said that he is a Federalist more in the mold of Alexander Hamilton, and even indicated by a nod of the head that Cuccinelli and others in the room may have views more like the Anti-Federalists such as Thomas Jefferson . . . Given Speaker Gingrich?s expertise in American history, his choice of Hamilton is no mere throwaway clue to how he would govern. In fact, the modern day split within the Republican Party in some ways resembles the difference between the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists, except that America is much closer to socialism than the Federalists? vision. The difference between big-government Republicans and small government conservatives is that big-government Republicans tolerate — even abet — socialism.”

This was very interesting especially for me. I am very sympathetic towards the anti-Federalists, though of course I believe the Federalists got it right on some things. But Alexander Hamilton would have definitely been a “big-government conservative” in those days, and was despised by men like Thomas Jefferson and Patrick Henry, who were undoubtedly two of the most freedom-loving, small-government men in America’s history.

http://www.plumbbobblog.com Plumb_Bob

Newt, support the mandate? Nonsense. He may have said he did not think the mandate was unconstitutional; he also said the entire program was brainless, and that he would repeal, not only the whole of ObamaCare, but everything that Obama has done by Executive Order.

Newt, support Global Warming? Nonsense. He simply acknowledged — correctly — the claims of scientists on the science of the matter.

Newt, support TARP? Possibly, but everybody did when it first appeared. I repeat, Gingrich’s actions have been the actions of a small-government conservative.

I don’t give a damn who disagrees; I simply observe that their objections are factually incorrect.

http://www.plumbbobblog.com Plumb_Bob

Barack Obama is weak as a candidate because his administration has instituted draconian, top-heavy policies that are draining the national coffers. The campaign that will successfully overthrow him is the one that emphasizes smaller, less intrusive, less costly government.

Mitt Romney, however, cannot run that campaign. He instituted the same draconian, top-heavy policies that are now draining the Massachusetts government.

Barack Obama’s strongest campaign strategy will be to polarize the nation against the rich 1%, blame the 2008 crash on Wall Street capitalists, and paint the Republicans as the defenders of the rich capitalists.

Mitt Romney made his money and reputation as one of those Wall Street capitalists. He is the perfect target for Barack Obama’s re-election campaign.

So Mitt Romney is the worst possible candidate to unseat Barack Obama, and the best possible candidate for Obama to run against.

Now do we all see why the press has been calling Romney the inevitable Republican nominee, and has been avoiding any negative stories about him? The notion that Romney is the only Republican who can beat Obama is pure nonsense. The notion that Romney can beat Obama at all is nonsense. Romney is Obama’s choice for opponent.

We should nominate ANYBODY other than Mitt Romney.

http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

…resembling arbitrage, perhaps.

The Goal is to help the reader focus on key underlying forces, even as the contemporary snapshot of the horse-race is provided concomitantly.

Don’t shoot the messenger for having “trashed” Mitt…and for having raised the red-flag regarding The Newt…for the reasonable alternative is increasingly popping-out from the “wings.”

I might add that I saw elsewhere corroboration of the potential split among Perry’s closest advisers; it was manifest with regard to whether issuing the faith-themed ad was wise.

That’s OK, for remember Lincoln’s “Team of Rivals” approach to government.

Now that the release has occurred and the issue predictably has “legs,” let’s see if it “works” with regard to its true “audience ” [the Evangelical leaders]….

{I might add, again, that I’m not approaching this analysis via the desire to advocate for a pro-life posture [overtly or covertly]; rather, this constitutes a pragmatic assessment of what needs to be done, ultimately, to ensure the correct person is nominated to displace BHO.}

*

And all of these points supra are c/w what I composed elsewhere, overnight:

http://www.redstate.com/neil_stevens/2011/12/08/gingrich-is-his-rise-sustainable/#comment-19412

*

Common_Cents

but went out of his way to blast Gingrich for his tea party support.

What is going on here?

Rand was just on Fox w/ Hemmer.

ericksontales

No one is surprised by the flip flop EE. Here is a man that can’t even make up his own mind on who to support, he just knows its not Romney. EE cannot stand to see Romney defend himself and be effective in doing so. It burns him that Romney is actually going to be the nominee. He had hoped and prayed so fervently that this would not happen but to no avail.

You are right EE is a hypocrit for attacking Romney for going after Newt. If you don’t like what Romney did in Mass that is fine. Don’t do it in your state. Good grief people. How many times has he said it wouldn’t be good for our nation? How many? What do you people want him to say? Honestly this shows how childish some people are (no need to mention names) that if they don’t get their way then they are going to spoil the election. I didn’t get my way so I may just sit home. I didn’t get my way so I’m going to push for a brokered convention. Do you people hear yourselves? Grow up! Seriously its embarrassing for those of us in the Republican party that want to take back the White House.

Remember when Newt challenged Romeny in the debate over the mandate? Newt back peddled like a little coward and couldn’t put together a coherent argument to defend himself.

Romney “We got the idea of a mandate from you Newt”
Newt “That is not true”
Romney “Didn’t you support the Heritage Foundation and the personal mandate”
Newt “Well… ummm… (crickets)

That is very telling. Newt underestimated Romney and his vast knowledge. Newt is a full of hot air and big ideas. I don’t know why people think he sounds so scholarly. Newt cannot stand toe to toe with Romney and he knows it. The one and only time that he tried he failed and made himself look like a liar.

I love how Newt complained about the media in all those debates and now is courting them and pandering to them. I love how he is claiming to stay above the fray but still gets his little diggs in on Romney. Newt is not that smart although perhaps he is to his supporters I suppose.

Poor EE… Everyone has failed him. Deep down he had hoped that someone would have had the ability to bring him down.

http://www.plumbbobblog.com Plumb_Bob

…pay attention to what happened to Herman Cain. If your favorite does not have baggage now, he will have it a week after becoming the nominee. Remember how John McCain was supposed to have had an affair with a lobbyist? Remember how Clarence Thomas is supposed to have sexually harassed Anita Hill? Character assassination is what Democrats do; it is the only thing they do well.

I simply cannot believe that anybody seriously opposes Newt Gingrich because of what the Democrats are going to say about him. Democrats are going to say those things about anybody who is not a Democrat. Get a clue.

bzip

Are we going to have to go through this again? When are you going to accept the overwhelming evidence about Newt being big gov’t, mandates, global warming, etc.

Mandate:
Is Newt Gingrich a Conservative? You decide
http://www.westernjournalism.com/is-newt-gingrich-a-conservative-you-decide/
Gingrich Backs Obamacare’s Individual Mandate Requiring Health Insurance
http://www.newsmax.com/Headline/gingrich-health-care-insurance/2011/05/15/id/396426
Newt Gingrich Was For The Individual Mandate Before He Was Against It
http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/newt-gingrich-was-for-the-individual-mandate-before-he-was-against-it/
Gingrich (in 2007): Congress Must Impose an Individual Mandate
http://motherjones.com/mojo/2011/11/gingrich-individual-mandate-health-care-Congress-2007
Gingrich Supports ‘Variation’ on Obamacare-Type Health Insurance Mandate
http://youtu.be/ThwVp0cwOMA

Global warming:
Interview with: Newt Gingrich
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/hotpolitics/interviews/gingrich.html
?I think if you have mandatory carbon caps combined with a trading system, much like we did with sulfur, and if you have a tax-incentive program for investing in the solutions, that there?s a package there that?s very, very good.? ? Newt Gingrich

Gingrich was for cap-and-trade and lots of other things
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/post/gingrich-was-for-cap-and-trade-and-lots-of-other-things/2011/12/04/gIQAjCpuTO_blog.html

Newt Gingrich talks Climate Change in 2007
http://youtu.be/IYv9yd3_3HA

Death Panels:
Newt’s Health Problems
http://spectator.org/archives/2011/11/28/newts-health-problems
Across The Country, Some Systems Are Getting It Right (by Newt)
http://views.washingtonpost.com/healthcarerx/panelists/2009/07/right-gingrich.html

Lobbying:
Gingrich Gave Push to Clients, Not Just Ideas
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/30/us/politics/gingrich-gave-push-to-clients-not-just-ideas.html?_r=2&partner=rss&emc=rss&pagewanted=all
Newt Gingrich was a lobbyist, plain and simple
http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/article/newt-gingrich-was-lobbyist-plain-and-simple
Newt Gingrich Had Lucrative Health Industry Ties
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/11/newt-gingrich-hit-on-health-care-flip-flops-think-tank/
Gingrich Said to Be Paid at Least $1.6 Million by Freddie Mac
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/print/2011-11-16/gingrich-said-to-be-paid-at-least-1-6-million-by-freddie-mac.html
Gingrich made big bucks pushing corporate welfare
http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/article/gingrich-made-big-bucks-pushing-corporate-welfare

Why Newt Gingrich Will Never Be President
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/11/why-neevberwt-gingrich-will-never-be-president/248456/
?The House ultimately voted 395-28 to reprimand Gingrich and order him to pay a $300,000 penalty for ethics violations involving contributions and political activity. It was the first and only time in the history of the House that a sitting Speaker had been disciplined for ethical violations.?

Marcus_Traianus

Mr. “Flipper the Dolphin”, Flavor of the week, human chameleon, presto change-o, what is my position this week?

I must have missed any “conservative” accomplishment Romney has.

Really?

AceInTX

The Romney camp is attacking Newt for agreeing with Mitt that the individual mandate is good

The Romney Camp is attacking newt for Flip Flopping which just reminds everyone what a flip flopper Romney is

Every negative attack Team Romney makes they remind everyone what it is about Romney they don’t like. It’s not a smart way to endear yourself to primary voters and it shows a stupidity and a total lack of strategic thinking that is simply breath taking.

Which brings me to the biggest point…It show’s the arrogance of team Romney…the fact that they think we’re so stupid they can actually carry this off without being laughed out of Washington…

AceInTX

nt

benko

Newt has lots of faults but what you see is what you get. You cannot say that of Romney. Thay is why Romney is not likely to win again Obama.

Sure Newt has plenty of faults but if he was as arrogant as abrasive as everyone says (and I have no reason to doubt it) he sure has managed to keep it under control lately.

Analysis of Newt’s faults from another perspective here:
http://jerrypournelle.com/chaosmanor/?p=3962

In any case, we want and need someone to confront Obama, who can win a debate with him, and who can get things done. Newt is far from perfect, but by far best this time around.

bzip

Oh, I never said that Romney ad was great though it shows Newt for what he is but “YES” is backfires on Romney as well. So yes, you are correct it points back to Romney

It isn’t a good ad for Romney since it only highlights Romney’s faults but it isn’t good for Newt as well.

If the attacks were (and they are) from Paul/Perry/Bachmann on either Romney or Newt then it makes a great deal of sense.

So perhaps we both agree?

http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

…for your two postings appear to mesh.

Am I missing a key-concept, here?

AceInTX

You miss to point entirely, see my reply to bzip above as do most people who profess to hate politics…these are people who refuse to educate themselves about issues, refuse to take a stand for anything in their collosal ignorance and then descend to lecture those of us who know what the stakes are for this nation and our children to stop fighting as if there were nothing worth fighting for.

–>sitting on the ground

bahh

Romney is attacking someone for the same issues we all have with Romney…it’s as if Mitt were standing around naked demanding to know what Republican A, B or C thinks it is OK to stand around naked….it’s so juvenile and idiotic!

And what frosts my britches is why people who profess to hate politics can’t, or won’t, see the obvious problem here

http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

…is a reasonable reaction to your posting.

But it is not justified to trash EE for truth-telling, much as you may not enjoy the taste of the “medicine.”

Mitt supports the Individual Mandate, and this entails statism/elitism comparable to that evinced by The Newt.

This is antithetical to fundamental Conservative free-market values, and you should be the first to condemn it.

http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

…we all both see the obvious problem and feel that your input resonates within.

AceInTX

That would be

<–SPITTING on the ground

AND…

Romney is attacking someone for the same issues we all have with Romney?it?s as if Mitt were standing around naked demanding to know WHY Republican A, B or C thinks it is OK to stand around naked?.it?s so juvenile and idiotic!

http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

…because he views Mitt as less of a threat, there, than The Newt portends to be.

texas214

nt

AceInTX

Is it crowded in that universe you inhabit inside your head?

Again…Erick is laughing at the incompetence of attacking someone in a way that draws attention to what it is everyone else hates about your preferred candidate…

if you can’t see that…I predict a short run at Red State for you silly behind…this is the second post in as many days I’ve seen you take EE to task…not in a very compitent manner I might add.

I call Troll on you because you’ve taken on a name like “EricksonTales” and set out to attack the site’s owner on his own site!

ericksontales

EE speaks in half truths when he talks about Romney. He picks and chooses what to say and when to say it in an effort to hurt Romney.

If Romney didn’t go after Newt on these issues then he is weak and not a fighter. If he does go after Newt then he is desperate.

The FULL TRUTH is that EE wants ANYBODY but Romney to win. He will apparently stop at nothing to rile up his loyal followers on redstate.

Romney going after Newt for an individual mandate at the federal level is a completely legitimate argument. Saying that he is going after Newt for some of the same reasons you dislike Romney is disingenuous. What Romney did was at a state level and he has denounced it at a federal level many many times. They are not the same thing.

AceInTX

nt.

http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

…and any site that does, please so-inform.

BTW, the delayed-meeting with The Newt occurs in 10 minutes:

Newt is Calling:

Friday Morning, December 9th @ 11:30AM, Republican Presidential candidate and former Speaker of the House of Representatives Newt Gingrich will be holding a conference call for discussion and Q&A on America’s relationship with Israel.

When: Friday December 9th, 11:30AM- 12:00PM
Call-in: 712.432.0900
Passcode #: xxxxxx

will advise

mndasher

My comment was on the legality of the legislation, not whether was wise to do so. I do not like any mandates either, but maybe the people of MA were okay with them. Regardless it is much easier to change a bad law in a state then by Congress.

avagreen

nt

clowngirl

I read elsewhere that the Romney camp is now also attacking Gingrich as a “faux conservative”.

From Romney, is there any dumber attack?

thosjefferson

Romneycare is far more than the individual mandate, which he has never said was a model for the country. The exchange that allows individuals to buy private insurance at group rates is one example.

You drones are either unable or unwilling to think critically and analytically. No wonder you keep repeating the mantra over and over without even knowing what you’re saying.

BTW, the line was edited out of the book because the facts had changed. It’s called updating. Every author does it.

Maybe you drones should try updating your own thinking…

http://theconservativehand.com Brookhaven

Newt will vocally (and articulatly) defend conservative ideas and attack the Democrats and Obama.

Mitt will be a repeat of 2008 McCain and 1996 Dole. You’re seeing it in his campaign strategy now: keep your head low, avoid confrontation (and interviews), and hope the other guy implodes.

The non-confrontational campaign strategy didn’t work for Dole or McCain, and it won’t work for Mitt vs Obama. Romney, imho, is the most likely to lose to Obama, because of the campaign strategy he would use.

I’m not thrilled about Newt, but I find him acceptable (as I would several others in the race not named Romney, Paul, or Bachmann). But, the fact is–at this point in the race–should Newt trip up and fall back into the pack, another candidate won’t emerge as the concensus anti-Romney candidate. Instead you’ll have Romney vs. a conservative vote split among Paul, Perry, Bachmann, Santorum, Gingrich, and even Huntsman. The only scenario that gives Romney the nomiantion, and the one he’s trying to restore.

Timing is everything, and the timing now (mid-December, voting starting in early January, compressed primary schedule) has narrowed our practical choices. It will either be Mitt vs Newt (which will result in a Gingrich nomination) or Mitt vs a split conservative field (which will result in a Romney nomination).

That’s not how I (or most conservatives) wanted things to work out. But, you’ve got to make decisions based on how things actually exist in the real world, not based on how wish things existed. And, in reality as it exists, it has come down to a Mitt vs Newt race.

clowngirl

Aside from being speaker of the House, he’s run several businesses.

http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

…because, whether Big Government rules over the individual, it matters not whether that power-center is in D.C. or in a state-capital.

omegamale

Newt Interview

So he’s actually to the Left of Romney on this issue, Mitt has NEVER advocated for a federal insurance mandate for all 50 states.

So why again is the “Not Romney” crowd swooning for Newt?

http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

…with this comment also applicable to The Newt.

texas214

the inconsistancies of his detractors are forcing me to defend him. There are some, especially here at RS, who are so anti-Romney they will support any non-Romney candidate even if that candidate held positions to the left of Romney on the issues they claim are their reason not to support Romney.

thosjefferson

Erick is getting more and more irrational in his animosity toward Romney. The ad makes a clear distinction between the Obama/Gingrich national mandate and the Romney state mandate. Surely Erick knows this by now, which leaves no alternative but to conclude that Erick is flat out anti-Romney, so much so that he’s trying to confuse, if not mislead, his readers.

Come on, Erick.

BTW, have you ever explained why you oppose the states’ rights to adopt their own health care policy? And have you ever discussed the business-friendly aspects of Romneycare? The elements that enhance individual liberty, such as the exchange?

thosjefferson

I don’t agree with Romney on every issue, but the way Erick is leading RedState into an irrational anti-Romney page is sad.

To get to the point of supporting the lobbyist-in-chief Gingrich as a conservative? I never thought I’d see the day. Gingrich, the consummate D.C. insider who has made millions by selling access, is the epitome of what’s wrong with the federal government.

rickdeckard

If you had to choose, who would you trust more, a man who cheated on his wife, or a man who cheated on his taxes?

Typically, people were more trusting of the man who cheated on his wife. Nothing against wives. This is just a gut level reaction that the guy who cheats on his taxes is better equipped to do damage to my interests. I’ll put Gingrich’s transgressions up against the agenda driven corruption of this administration any day.

And the RNC better miss no opportunity to bring the current culture of corruption story to the voters this next year. I’m sure Newt won’t.

Also, sorry, but I’m not convinced we see any of the solid conservatives getting back into this race. Arguing over how Gingrich stacks up against any of the three candidates I would have preferred is a bit dated. Unless somebody here can show me how we get to a conservative nominee for 2012.

clowngirl

“The difference between Gingrich and Romney is that Romney’s signature legislative achievement was RomneyCare, while Newt Gingrich’s was welfare reform”

(I put that in quotes but I might actually be paraphrasing )

I think that puts it into words pretty well.

You keep harping on how Newt supported the individual mandate — when he supported it as part of the Heritage Foundation’s plan as an alternative to HillaryCare. * It was the conservative position at the time.* He and other conservatives have thought better of it since and Newt has admitted he was wrong.

What you claim is him supporting an individual mandate recently is not — because he does allow for other options so long as people are willing to accept responsibility for paying their own medical bills.

Romney supported the individual mandate as part of a liberal piece of legislation that he himself initiated. It was not the conservative position at the time and the monstrosity he created served as the blueprint for perhaps the worst legislation in the history of our country.

Another similarity between Romney and Gingrich is that they’ve both lost 2 elections — but then Gingrich has won 11 elections compared to Romney’s 1.

So, you can see that similar facts taken out of context do not create a sameness.

ericksontales

I guess you would be against a state mandate requiring kids to go to school. What about a state mandate to have your automobile inspected. You live in a world of mandates.

It DOES matter whether its at a state level or a fed level. Any argument otherwise falls completely flat with anyone who understands state vs. fed laws.

clowngirl

Looking at only selected facts does not present a true picture.

texas214

but couldn’t get his legislation passed, yet romney is faulted because his did? The non-Romney crowd has twisted themselves into a pretzel to support Newt.

joffen1981

The mandate was a horrible idea and support for it shows a total lack of good judgement.

Perry 2012!

rememberthealamo

At a time when most Republicans can’t stand Washington insiders and the so-called Republican establishment ( who “established” them?), Romney trots out a bevy of insider establishment “beauties” to tell me who to support and how to vote.

Amuse me for a minute and play devil’s advocate. Why in the h-e-double hockey sticks would conservative Repubs listen to those people? Kind of like Satan telling me what church to go to. Oh, yes, I forgot. They are so much smarter than we vassals in fly over land. We can’t think rationally without their help. Reminds me of the attitude Dems have. Hmmm…….

What we see from Willard is panic at the thought he will lose another election. How many is that now? 4? 5? Ok, the choose-not-to -run again isn’t technically a defeat. And stop telling me how many years you’ve been married. Longevity isn’t proof of a wonderful marriage.

jrfromdallas

That’s not the executive experience I’m looking for and one of his business dealings was accepting money from Freddie Mac for being an “Historian”..Does that sound believable to you? He was make 30k a meeting with them and WHAT does Newt know about housing? He was setting up meetings with Congress people for favorable legislation. Perry has been running a state for the last 10 years and is a true conservative.

http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

…because the anti-Mitt postures articulated @ RS are quite “rational.”

ericksontales

“this is the second post in as many days I?ve seen you take EE to task?not in a very compitent manner I might add.”

You bet I’m going to take EE to task if he can’t support the Republican party and be fair and balanced in his journalism. When was the last time you saw EE praise something that Romney has done? Don’t tell me that you think EVERYTHING about Romney is bad.

EE has a deep personal disdain for Romney. As a patriot and an American citizen I refuse to stand by and watch EE continue to attack Romney at every corner. I refuse to watch as people like EE try to spoil the election process by manipulating voters into thinking the same way that he does.

I’m not out to attack EE. I’m out to defend Romney. Don’t blame me for calling a spade a spade. If I’m a troll then your an EE minion.

texas214

I know he doesn’t support Romney, but he is more than clear in his dislike for Newt.

http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

…because I oppose any governor of any state who would sign-off on a statist/elitist posture that would create an Individual Mandate that people be required to purchase a private-product/service [healthcare insurance].

AceInTX

convenient how that always gets left by the pro Romney crowd around here.

ericksontales

The last time I called EE out he walked back his original comments. Maybe he should change the name of this site from redstate to anybodybutromneystate.

Why is it that you support EE for his constant taking Romney to task but when someone takes EE to task you get defensive? I smell hypocrisy in the air…

texas214

is beyond me. If you don’t like Mitt’s healthcare law, fine, if you don’t like his past comments on AGW, fine, however if you claim those as disqualifying then how do you defend Newt on those subjects?

avagreen

I guess it would be “None of the Above” per EE.
None of the above

For the first time I am giving serious though to none of the above. I am moving beyond wishful thinking to actually thinking we might need a brokered convention. The candidates in this race are good people, but none of them are proving to be of a caliber of conservative leader we should be putting on the field to take on the socialist in the White House.

The odds of a brokered convention are slim to none now. But I think we might need to have a conversation about it. The soft support so many primary voters have for their candidates and the number of undecided voters out there suggests there is room for a better person.
http://www.redstate.com/erick/2011/12/08/the-horserace-for-december-8-2011/

Ya got something against being neutral?

ericksontales

Firstly, he said that it was a “model for the nation”. This doesn’t mean a Nationally run mandate. Our nation is made up of states last time I checked. It’s a model for states to decide if it will work for them. If he wanted a federal mandate he would have pushed officials and worked to get a federal mandate.

Secondly, books are amended all the time. He amended this remark because it was clear that the remark was going to be taken out of context by people such as yourself. It was completely logical for him to remove the remark to avoid confusion.

Thirdly, lets say in your pretend world that he did mean for it to be at a national level. Well, he has denounced the federal mandate and has done so on many occasions. What would you have him do?

Your attacks are baseless….

andystone

You can be a conservative, and admit that Newt never met a fancy idea he didn’t like, but when push came to shove the things he implemented were quite conservative.

westcoastpatriette

Why don’t you run along now…you are stinking up the place by justifying the very non-conservative mandates the rest of us hate.

And your username is disgusting. You don’t belong here and I predict you won’t last long here.

gekster

Why are you here.
What is your purpose on this site.

andystone

It doesn’t matter who he supported things with, as long as the right things passed. If he got Pelosi to support the balanced budget and welfare reform, more kudos to him!

ericksontales

A brokered convention only means that we will nominate someone who is “thought” to be a good candidate. This means we “could” end up with someone who is completely unqualified to be president. It means we “could” end up with someone that may not be vetted. There is a reason we have this process in place. We need to get to know our candidates and make a decision.

Since most Republicans agree that any of them would be better than Barrack there is no reason to push for a brokered convention. We have plenty of reasonable choices before us now. To sit on the sidelines and not take a stand in my view is anti-American plain and simple.

Pick the person you feel will best represent our party and vote for them. There will never be a perfect candidate. We have a strong filed of choices to choose from. I would be completely embarrassed as a republican if this came to a brokered convention.

clowngirl

which was defeated. And after that he successfully led the GOP to winning its first House majority in 40 years and passed legislation like welfare reform.

So yeah, I’m ok with his record.

Romney is faulted because:

1. His signature “achievement” is a truly terrible piece of legislation that is not remotely conservative.

2. He has not seen his error in doing so.

3. His flip flops come across as extremely expedient and not sincere.

http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

…regarding anything!

I must report that The Newt was VERY persuasive during Middle East politics; he would cut-off UNRWA-$ to teach anti-Semitism.

In response to my query regarding Iran, he would support imposition of an immediate blockade on Iran as part of a larger effort to achieve regime-change.

Regarding domestic issues, he supports a safety-net.

texas214

we already have one of those and don’t need another.

gekster

A model for the nation is a national model, a model for the states is a state model.
He was quite clear.

He changed the wording in the book because people would take it in it’s true context. Hence the change.

avagreen

to not approving of the “neutral” stance of EE, either, as evidenced by EE’s comment I just cut&pasted, which disproves your rant about his being “against” a candidate (yours in particular).

Which point are you trying to make?

Your thinking is more than a little muddled at this point. What do you want readers to come away with? In a paragraph or two. Because at this point, I’m not sure and not sure you are, either.

ericksontales

I am here to give Romney and his supporters a voice on this site. I am here to be a defender of truth. I am here because I believe that my fellow Republicans matter. I am here because there are people who have reservations about Romney and I want to show them that there are many of us who support him.. To name just a few… although there are many more reasons.

Do you really only want people on this site that agree with Erick and dislike Romney? How bad would it look if I got booted for giving a voice of opposition?

Why are you here on this site?

Common_Cents

bzip

The fact is is has a spoken out in support of the mandate well after Hillarycare, well after Clinton left office and even in recent years.

But okay if you want to ignore that, fine. How do you start explaining (not excuses, not spinning):

Why a Newt Gingrich Candidacy Would Doom the Tea Party
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/12/why-a-newt-gingrich-candidacy-would-doom-the-tea-party/249534/

?And Gingrich supported almost all the most controversial Bush-Rove policies!

He favored No Child Left Behind, an unprecedented federal intervention in education. He supported Medicare Part D, a brand new, budget-busting drug entitlement. He supported “comprehensive immigration reform,” perhaps the most divisive-among-conservatives policy initiative of the aughts. He urged the passage of TARP. And he even spoke favorably about the infamous Harriet Miers nomination, a George W. Bush misstep that caused many of his most loyal supporters to rebel.

Tea Partiers pledged that if they had their way the GOP would never again have as its champion a federal government enlarging, entitlement expanding, amnesty urging, Bush-style Republican.?

Newt is just another big gov’t progressive. I don’t know what it will take to open the minds of some but the evidence is overwhelming.

clowngirl

Newt can. Romney can’t.

ericksontales

Not sure why you are confused. Erick clearly does not want Romney to get the nomination. Is there any question about that? Erick just doesn’t know which anti-Romney candidate he can support.

It’s not too complicated… sorry you are so lost… try and keep up.

ericksontales

avagreen

“No one is surprised by the flip flop EE. Here is a man that can?t even make up his own mind on who to support, he just knows its not Romney. “

carolynr

http://c-spanvideo.org/program/PerryRema?utm_source=The+Perry+Almanac&utm_campaign=9ec382580a-Email_19_15_2011&utm_medium=email

texas214

from the reasons to disqualify Mitt, to some unrelated subject on Middle East politics.

Your misdirection is confirmation of my comment.

PS. Mitt has the same positions on those subjects.

avagreen

nt.

ericksontales

He is Neutral when it comes to any candidate BUT Romney. He will only vote for Romney if he gets the nomination. He has made that clear.

AceInTX

As for the rest of your pablum,

As a long time Red State reader/Diarist, I’ve seen EE on more than one occasion praise Romney when Romney has taken on Obama for instance, praised his organizational skills as a candidate and praise him for his handling of the Utah Olympics…He’s said over and over again he expects Romney to be the Nominee…much to my chagrin I might add!!!

And I’m not an EE Minion…I’ve disagreed with EE on numerous issues and have never shied away from telling him or any other moderator on this site when I thought they were wrong…but I’ve always done so in a respectful manner and backed up what I’ve said with facts and well reasoned counter arguments not taunted in the childish manner you have…for instance…in the post above I called you out on.

As to whether I think “EVERYTHING” about Romney is bad? No I don’t, and I don’t think Erick would say so either…but I’ll let him answer that himself….Mitt’s a devoted Family Man, he’s committed to his faith, he’s obviously done well for himself and has done well in business…he just sucks as a candidate…..preriod!!!

As for having a deep disdain for Romney?…I can’t or won’t speak for Erick in this…but as for me…

Guilty as charged…

I think Romney is a loathsome creature…He is a craven power hungry self worshiping slug who stands for nothing but obtaining power and achieving the prize his daddy failed so miserably to achieve.

In Mitt Romney I see a man who will say anything, do anything, take any political position and sell his own children down the river to be president.

I see someone who will attack fellow Republicans for holding the same positions he held just days before…(which is what EEs post is about)…

The man has been on a failed quest to achieve political high office for the better part of 18 years and his only success has been to run the State of Massachusetts like a Democrat and decline to run for reelection because he knew he’d lose to the Democrat the next go around because the voters of Mass decided when “given the choice between two Democrats…they’d vote Democrat”…(attribution to Ronaldus Magnus)

I see a cretin who will say one thing today and if the political winds change I see him taking the exact opposite position tomorrow.

To me, he’s one and the same with Windsock Charlie Crist. I don’t doubt for a second that if someone could convince Mitt Romney that the only way he’d ever win the White House would be to model himself after the late George McGovern, he’d change parties tomorrow and run as the left wing alternative to Barrack Obama!

You’re not gonna stand for it?

Bring it on champ…I’ve got more where that came from….but if you bring it…bring some facts and stop taunting EE and the rest of the posters here like a school yard sissy!!!

carolynr

Are we Conservatives and believe in Conservative ideology…or do we follow the MSM, like sheeples only to find that we have voted in another version of Obama with a R behind his name. So…for this Conservative…No Romney…No Gingrich.

gekster

To promote the Constitution, and the conservative beliefs of the Founders of this nation.

You are here to shill for a lame candidate, who’s only redeeming stance is that he is a perfectly oiled wether vane.

If you’re for a position, Willard is for it.
If you’re against a position, Willard is against it.

Just depends on the audience he is talking to, and the votes he is trying to get.

Tell me, asides from being with the same woman, what core principle has Willard held for over three years.

Common_Cents

Even if gingrich pursued an indiv mandate, it would never happen.

Keep pushing all that stuff as it is innoculates Gingrich even more.

Post more about all his faults. More and more people’s eyes are glossing over.

Secondly, you are hurting Perry. Because Perry’s only shot is if Newt continues to take down Romney.

clowngirl

I respect the fact that you continue to passionately support Rick Perry, I really do, but how do you even have a rational conversation with someone who starts out with ” Newt is a big government progressive, period.” ?

Yeah, welfare reform was just another step towards socialism.. (?) Presumably that’s what you think. I’m waiting for the posts where you start saying Newt’s way to the left of Obama.

bzip – your view on Newt is extremely warped and what’s more you routinely ignore it when people take the trouble to respond to you if what they say doesn’t support your point. You completely ignored the content of my prior post and went on to other subjects. JSobieski and I had a long exchange with you the other day pointing out important distinctions with regard to this supposed recent support for the individual mandate ( In which Newt gave the OPTIONS of posting a bond or in some other way indicating a willingness to pay their own bills) JSobieski spoke especially eloquently about it but you keep repeating your own oversimplified interpretation over and over and over and over again – without even really even dealing with anything we said.

Responding to you is a waste of time.

gekster

Conservative in the primary,
Republican in the general.

That being said, Romney is the last one anybody who calls themselves a conservative would vote for in a primary.
If he happens to get the nomination, then conservatives will vote for him.

Since it is our and this sites aim to get the most conservative in the primary,
it is anyone but Willard at this time.

AceInTX

what a crock…I’ve watched the man vacillate on the issue of MassObamneycare for the last 5 years…

He spent most of 2008 flopping around first apologizing for inflicting his pet program on the people of Mass only to come out a day or two later and brag about what a “Market based” Approach it was…

He flopped around for two years on it until someone got to him and told him if he were ever to be president he was going to have to find a consistent way of dealing with the issue…so he borrowed from Fred Thompson and declared himself for States Rights and decided he’d sell MassCare as a good solution for his state but not the country .

I’ve witness the development of his messaging on this because he’s done it in a very public way…and it wasn’t pretty.

ericksontales

“but I?ve always done so in a respectful manner and backed up what I?ve said with facts and well reasoned counter arguments not taunted in the childish manner you have?for instance?in the post above I called you out on.”

You have got to be kidding right? Where do I even start to point out your hypocrisy? I have to look no further than your past few posts… Here are a few of the so called disrespectful and childish remarks you have made.

“Maybe it escaped you pinhead”
“I think Romney is a loathsome creature?”
“He is a craven power hungry self worshiping slug”
“achieving the prize his daddy failed…”
“I see a cretin”
“stop taunting EE and the rest of the posters here like a school yard sissy!!!”
” I call TROLL on you!!!”
“Is it crowded in that universe you inhabit inside your head?”
“I predict a short run at Red State for you silly behind”
“this is the second post in as many days I?ve seen you take EE to task?not in a very compitent manner I might add.”

I’m sorry what were you saying about making arguments in a respectful manor? What was that about taunting other posters in a childish manor?

You have fallen off your rocker so far you can’t even see the HYPOCRISY in your comments.

At first I had a hard time taking you seriously with the tribute to Fred Thompson. Now I know I can’t take any of your posts seriously.

How is that Fred Thompson thing workin for ya?

AceInTX

.

clowngirl

Rush doesn’t defend big government progressives.

acat

Ron Paul is still in the race.

This cat is of the “Anyone but Ron Paul” camp….

While tempting, I won’t write in Becker’s dead white cat if Ron Paul is the GOP nominee… and will instead vote green party. In the general.

Mew

AceInTX

/

jrfromdallas

The sitting on the couch commercial with Nancy or that fact that Newt supports the Ethanol subsidies or the green energy initiative. He wanted to go further than the liberals on green energy and basically said that anyone that didn’t agree with him was uninformed. I am not ok with that. I believe he’s a smart guy, but I also think that is his downfall. His former colleagues have said that he would give them marching orders in the morning and then change his mind in the afternoon. He was censured by his colleagues and has more ethic violations that any speaker in history. That’s a problem for me.

texas214

Newt is exactly what he accused Ryan of being – a Right Wing Social Engineer.

gekster

But unlike Romney, RP has held his principles over time.
Allbeit they are wrong, he has still held them and has been true to them.
Romney, not so much.

AceInTX

because that’s all I’m hearing from you…that you don’t like it that you’re golden boy isn’t being pushed to the front of the line and anointed the way he thinks he should be!

ericksontales

He raised 5 young law abiding men
He believes a strong family builds a strong nation
He believes in serving his country (he took ZERO pay as Governor and ZERO pay to turn around the Olympic games) (BTW I realize he didn’t serve in the military but he served in other capacities)
He firmly believes in the free market system.
He has always believed in a strong military.

AceInTX

avagreen

He’s attacking because his candidate isn’t being praised, as well.

(I ran into a guy like this who used to support/defend Obama which obviously is a dark hole now. He just doesn’t like conservatives, and has his own site that he can’t get anyone to post on.

The “try to keep up” is a signature statement of his, as well as the twisted logic.

AceInTX

I don’t think Erick has ever shied away from saying he’s an anyone but Mitt Guy…In fact…I’ve seen him state it,,,he’s never tried to pass himself off as objective, he has said he’d like to stay neutral in critiquing the candidates but that doesn’t mean he doesn’t have an opinion or a write to express it…

My problem with you…isn’t that you are defending Mitt…or attacking Erick per say…it’s they way you are going about it…you are, taunting Erick while making incoherent statements to the point where noone can make sense of where you are….and yet you continue with the taunting

bzip

You still can’t address all the issues brought up in that article can you? You can’t explain but only lash out at the messenger.

If anyone is ignoring anything – it clearly is you. You haven’t and don’t seem interested in addressing Newt’s proven past record of big gov’t solutions from anything that has been brought up by me, others or what is factual written evidence in articles like the one below :

Why a Newt Gingrich Candidacy Would Doom the Tea Party
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/12/why-a-newt-gingrich-candidacy-would-doom-the-tea-party/249534/

?And Gingrich supported almost all the most controversial Bush-Rove policies!

He favored No Child Left Behind, an unprecedented federal intervention in education. He supported Medicare Part D, a brand new, budget-busting drug entitlement. He supported ?comprehensive immigration reform,? perhaps the most divisive-among-conservatives policy initiative of the aughts. He urged the passage of TARP. And he even spoke favorably about the infamous Harriet Miers nomination, a George W. Bush misstep that caused many of his most loyal supporters to rebel.

Tea Partiers pledged that if they had their way the GOP would never again have as its champion a federal government enlarging, entitlement expanding, amnesty urging, Bush-style Republican.?

ericksontales

Erick’s arguments are increasingly becoming more and more irrational when it comes to his anti-Romney sediments. Only time will tell if Erick is going to continue to help Obama bring down the only candidate that can beat him in the general election. I guess we will see what next summer brings when its Romney vs. Obama and see if Erick will soften his blows on Romney.

AceInTX

I know I don’t want to have to vote for Mitt…but I don’t have another dog in this hunt…and can’t settle for one…

You’ll be interested to know…I nearly settled for Romney in 2008 and hoped he’d stop McCain then because I was in the same boat last time knowing I wanted anyone by McCain….but then…he backed out at CPAC and handed the nomination to McCain in some backroom deal….

The man disgusts me….and I want anyone else but him as the nominee…I just don’t know which one…just “Not Mitt”

AceInTX

so again I ask you…what is the problem here….and please…do try to focus…and make a consistent argument would ya?

AceInTX

z

AceInTX

m

acat

I won’t be voting for either in the primary.

(and, for a change, Illinois is early enough that we might get a say…)

Mew

acat

Because he is mine…

Mew

APA Guy

HE brings up the issue of the individual HC mandate? That’s like Obama slamming someone for his/her choice of pastor over the past several decades.

I’m really questioning Romney’s competency to be president at this point. Say what you will about Newt, but I don’t think conservatives will hold their breath when he is elected like they would had Romney been elected. I just don’t trust a word he says or a thing he does at this point.

APA Guy

HE brings up the issue of the individual HC mandate? That’s like Obama slamming someone for his/her choice of pastor over the past several decades.

I’m really questioning Romney’s competency to be president at this point. Say what you will about Newt, but I don’t think conservatives will hold their breath when he is elected like they would had Romney been elected. I just don’t trust a word he says or a thing he does at this point.

acat

If not, I’ll suggest you look him up. You seem to be kindred spirits.

Mew

gekster

Being true to his family and raising kids right is admirable, but are not political beliefs.
It goes more to his faith.

He avoided the military by going to France to be a missionary.
Romney avoids draft
excerpt:
Before joining college, Romney had received a deferment from the draft as a Mormon ‘minister of religion’ for the duration of his missionary work in France, which lasted two and a half years. At the time, there was an agreement of sorts between the church and the Selective Service allowing exemptions from the draft for missionaries. Before and after his missionary deferment,

I am not knocking the missionary bit, but it was better than going to Canada. And it kept him out of the military.

You don’t need core conservative principles to run a business, or Olympics.
There are several successfull lefties running businesses.
George Soros, Warren Buffet come to mind.

He believes in serving himself.
Taking $1 for working as Governor is nothing when you are worth millions.
A couple hundred thousand is nothing to him.
As for serving himself, he ran left of Kennedy when trying for his seat.
He ran left of center to get the Govenorship, and was so bad a Governor
he didn’t run to get re-elected.
And now he want’s us to believe he is right of center because that is what he thinks he has to do to get elected President.

Free trade?
He wants to put tarrifs on China.

Strong on military, that’s easy, as anyone can give that lip service.

clowngirl

I have no problem with telling you I don’t appreciate the way you post ( and I’m far from the first to do so)

I may address this Bush years post of yours in a few days. Now, I’m leaving for work, won’t be home till 11pm. Then off at 8am tommorow, won’t be home till 11pm, then Sunday I have church, work and my small group.

I’m sure you’ll still be posting the same attacks on Monday. Perhaps I’ll have time to deal with them then.

In the meantime maybe someone else will.

westcoastpatriette

;

andystone

But nobody perfect is running. Heck, if Reagan himself was running, he’d also be in a lot of hot water right now. Gingrich’s leadership may have been demanding, but it was practically very successful in passing very important conservative legislation. The people who overthrew him couldn’t achieve half as much in twice as much time with a Republican President.

acat

Under the impression Obama (or at least the Dems) took a shot or two at Romney over the Mormon issue….

Mew

acat

(grin)

AceInTX

I show little respect where non is earned as a general rule…and I haven’t seen you make a well reasoned and thoughtful reply backed up with facts or evidence in this entire thread.

does that make me a hypocrite?

Maybe—>shrugging shoulders

Earn my respect and you’ll get respect from me…so far I’ve got nothing to hang my hat on from you.

BTW…I love the list…rather pithy put downs were they not…

HAH…I amuze myself to no end some times…

AceInTX

x

avagreen

??

AceInTX

I agree with you much more than not….but that’s never stopped me from arguing the finer points…and I hope you never stop either

izoneguy

http://www.redstate.com/izoneguy/2011/10/19/so-why-did-perry-go-after-romney-with-the-old-you-hired-illegals-claim/

acat

Pat Quinn is my governor, not by choice!

Quinn is a Democrat gadfly, he’d spent years in minor party positions, never had a shot at the big chair until Blagojevich (who just went away for 14 years) tapped him to be Lt. Gov. … and then got burned.

He reminds me a bit of a less effective Josef Stalin .. both cultivated a public personae of the compassionate grandfather, but behind the scenes were quite the opposite. In Quinn’s case, his lack of brainpower seems to limit his ability for advancing the Dem agenda.

I could say more, but ..

Mew

acat

Ryan Larsen on Red State.

Mew

AceInTX

he gained nothing for putting in all that work as governor did he…

http://www.changeforrickperry.org louisianapatriette

Noooo text

ericksontales

Your question was…

“Tell me, asides from being with the same woman, what core principle has Willard held for over three years.”

The list I gave you are indeed core principles. Furthermore the example you gave was other than being married to the same woman which implies tell us more of his core beliefs except for that one which is exactly what I provided.

As far as the military deferment…Yep he got one… It has less to do with the military and more to do with his faith. Going on a mission when you turn 19 is a standard ongoing practice in the Mormon church. It wasn’t unique during Vietnam. In fact, there were far fewer Mormon missionaries during Vietnam as a percentage of members than there are today (around 60,000 per year today). I really see this as a non issue. He wasn’t avoiding the war.

Romney holds several core conservative principles. Some of them he has held longer than others. Let’s talk about some of the more recent ones as I’m sure you will bring them up.

How about being Pro-Life? He changed this position while serving as governor of Mass. He changed this position about 6 years ago. How many years is acceptable to you to hold this core belief? I didn’t realize there was a limit you had to reach. I guess voters who turn 18 cannot legitimately take a pro-life stance until they reach a certain threshold of years?

I’m not sure I follow the logic behind this. Romney is running for president right now. He has made clear all of his positions. Which particular position that he holds do you disagree with? Has he flipped on a few issues? Yep, he indeed has just as many previous American Presidents.

Romney is the right guy for our times. We need a president that has executive business experience. No one brings that to the table better than Romney.

AceInTX

please tell me where I’m wrong…point by point…Romney’s life is on full display and it paints the picture of a self serving egotist using the family fortune to grab the prize daddy failed to grab and he’s proven he’ll say anything, do anything, and take any position that will get him to his goal….he Reminds me of Al Gore…they are both the incredible plastic man Mr. Fantastic

Xasteius

4 eggs
1/2 cup water
1 cup oil
1 cup cooked and mashed pumpkin (substitute canned pumpkin)
1 1/4 cup molasses
1 cup brown sugar
3 cups flour
1 1/2 t salt
1 1/2 t cinnamon
2 t baking soda
1 t nutmeg
1/2 t cloves
1 cup raisins / nuts (optional)

Beat eggs till fluffy. Beat in water, oil, pumpkin, molasses, sugar, Stir in flour, salt, cinnamon, nutmeg, and cloves. Mix until smooth.
Put in muffins tins or two loaf pans (greased). Bake at 350 for 45-60 minutes.

Xasteius

I’d suggest a nursing home. Or a santorium. Or solitary confinement. Or a one-way ticket to the next galaxy.

thosjefferson

Dr. Sklaroff, if you can’t tell the difference between a state and federal mandate, you’re the statist.

Under the Constitution, you’re free to move to any state you want while remaining American, and you’re free to avoid a state mandate in so doing. You’re not free to avoid a federal mandate, however. That’s the difference.

You ought to choose a state that doesn’t have a mandate. Choose Texas, for example, if you like having large percentages of the population uninsured. But if I live in Massachusetts and I support the mandate and it’s allowed by my state’s constitution, don’t tell me and my fellow citizens we can’t do it if most of us want to.

Besides, some of us are tired of the freeloaders who don’t buy health insurance and then expect the rest of society to take care of them when they have an accident. We’re not about to watch people lie in the streets and die as you apparently would, so we’re making sure everyone is insured.

acat

to you and yours.

Mew

gekster

not whats best for the rest of us.

Keep them blinders on, they fit you well.

I would rather have someone who has held thier beliefs for the majority of thier life,
not one who will change them to fit the nartive, or to pander for votes they think they need.

And now Romney is slamming Gingrich for the individual mandate.
He thinks that’s what he needs to say to get ahead in the polls.
Can you say ‘hypocrite’?
No, I didn’t think so.

Common_Cents

That was a nice endorsement

http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

.

westcoastpatriette

series of Open Letters to RedState? You must have been fighting other bots on other threads. You didn’t miss anything except one of the most adoring Romney fans who was unable to see even one wart on Romney’s beehind. He insisted that those of us who challenged him were being unfair and defended Romney ad nauseum.

Anyway. ericksontales sounds a lot like him.

avagreen

And yes, I guess I did miss him.

Spending too much time promoting my guy.

ericksontales

“I would rather have someone who has held thier beliefs for the majority of thier life,”

Really? Even if they were wrong in their belief? Romney was wrong not to be Pro-life and I’m glad that he changed. I guess you would have respected him more if he hadn’t changed?

Sound argument.

AceInTX

v

acat

Yep.. see #10-12 It’s a “Don’t do that”.

Mew

westcoastpatriette

Maybe they just open multiple email addresses and create an account for each one.

acat

Wouldn’t want to give the trolls ideas.

Mew

avagreen

1lb hamburger
1 6-oz can tomato sauce
handful of crackers crushed
1-2 eggs
1 large onion chopped (the more the merrier)
salt and pepper to taste

Bake in 350degree oven until done…..about 1 hr.

Simple, but delicious.

goodgovernance

Remember, these are the shenanigans Mitt engaged in during the last cycle, that caused all the other GOP candidates to rise against him.

I have such little respect for this candidate. And for the life of me, after witnessing the way some of the most fervent Romney supporters in 2008 continued to speak out against McCain AFTER he was the nominee, AFTER the convention, I have to say they have some nerve to now ask us all to stop speaking out against Mitt because it would hurt his chances in the general against Obama. When we’re still weeks away from any primary or caucus votes from being cast!

Some of the Romney crowd even boasted of voting for Obama in 2008. Isn’t it obvious why? Because that was the course of action that would give Romney another shot in 2012!

gekster

RP has more credability than Romney.
Even though his beliefs are, by my view, wrong, he has been man enough to hold them and be true to them.
Romney holds beliefs that he ‘thinks’ he needs to hold.

And Romney just now comes out against the individual mandate, not because that is what he believes, but because he thinks it will give him a rise in the polls against Gingrich.
LIke I said, blinders.

thosjefferson

brilliant analysis, Neil. So you agree Gingrich is also a liberty-hating statist?

That’s pretty much what his opponents called Thomas Jefferson when he borrowed money for the Louisiana Purchase. Ultimately, real leaders have to ignore those who can’t think clearly.

septembergurl

Levin and Ingraham,, to name but a few. Coulter as well. They were all screaming that romney was the real conservative, etc. None of them are asking us to stop speaking out against Romney. Perhaps I missed it.

My point is that the Romney crowd then is not the Romney crowd now. Of course they assume you will forget how very wrong they were in 2008. And how right they are.

byebyebama

I understand that you are a very passionate person and I respect that. However, I never said that I didn’t participate in the political process. I have a very strong sense of duty when it comes to seeking out the best candidate and voting for that candidate. I don’t “sit on the ground” as you say. I am sorry that you decided to judge me and my character with so little information.

Sometimes I feel like people idolize politics as if it were a religion. Once they choose their side, they are no longer capable of rational thought, their only goal is to defend their position at any cost. Politics is alot like religion. They have their preachers (cons – talk radio; libs – main streem media) and the majority of them follow those preachers as if everything that they said was scripture without ever even trying to search for the truth themselves.

Based on your posts, you seem to call alot of people out for not using facts to back up their statements. Tell me AcelnTX, what facts do you have to back up your statement that “…most people who profess to hate politics?these are people who refuse to educate themselves about issues, refuse to take a stand for anything in their collosal ignorance…”

Personally, I hate politics specifically because people don’t educate themselves on issues and simply believe and do whatever their “preacher” tells them to.

gekster

In 2008, they wern’t saying Romney was a ‘true’ conservative, but rarher the ‘most’ consevative, as compared to McCain and the rest who were still in.
Huckabee had already dropped out at the time.
McCain won I believe because it was more ‘his turn’ as opposed to anything else,
and that’s why he got more support and the nomination.

ericksontales

“RP has more credability than Romney.
Even though his beliefs are, by my view, wrong, he has been man enough to hold them and be true to them.”

So then you would wold vote for Nancy Pelosi or Harry Reid over Romney just because they have always held the same beliefs even if they are wrong?

Very noble of you… Stupid but noble…

http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

..

acat

Seriously, gekster didn’t say he supported Ron Paul, merely that – unlike Romney – Paul has been consistent.

If you’re here to defend Romney, you need to start actually doing so.

Mew

gekster

RP, Pelosi, and Reed have more credability than Romney.
They hold true to what they believe in, and don’t change who they are
so as to look favorable to garener votes.
I may not belive in what they believe, but I can respect them as to being true to thier beliefs.
You can’t do that with Romney.
You can’t tell what Romney believes in, because it will change tomorrow if the need arises. (individual mandate being the latest)

And I will not vote for a lib for obvious reasons.

I do have more respect for a liberal who holds to thier beliefs than a so called conservative who will change thier beliefs.

And respect does not equal voting for.

ericksontales

acat(Diary) – This is hat gekster said.

“I would rather have someone who has held thier beliefs for the majority of thier life,
not one who will change them to fit the nartive, or to pander for votes they think they need.”

He then followed it up with his post on Ron Paul…I’m not sure what your definition is of support. But it sure sounds like he would support “have” Ron Paul because of his consistency over Romney.

ericksontales

Unfortunately “respect” was not the words you initially chose and now your backing away from your comment below…

?I would rather have someone who has held thier beliefs for the majority of thier life,
not one who will change them to fit the nartive, or to pander for votes they think they need.?

FLIP FLOP FLIP FLOP…. wow… you just did a full flip flop in two posts…

It sure sounds like you would rather “have” somebody that has held to their beliefs for the majority of their life than one who has not. You then claim that Ron Paul has stayed true to his believes. I don’t see how you can flip on this and say that is not what you meant.

So let me ask you this then Mr. Flip Flop… It sounds like you clearly “respect” Ron Paul more. But who would you vote for in a race between Ron Paul and Mitt Romney?

acat

Wafflin’ Willard keeps trying to straddle barbed wire fences.

While I don’t think he should be in charge of anything more complex than a Sunday brunch, Ron Paul is at least smart enough to pick one side or the other. Even if he misleads about which side that is.

Instead of dancing around gekster, try defending Romney’s apparent loathing for his wedding tackle.

Nice, by the way, is not an adjective that should be used to describe me.

Mew

gekster

who ever the Republican nominee is.

As for the rest, a liberal who has held thier beliefs is more trustworthy than a conservative who won’t.
A liberal like that you can depend on as to what they will do.
A flopping conservative you can’t depend on.
(go ahead and play mittens and spin it anyway you want)

I stand firm, and am not flipping anything past pancakes.
You talk alot like a lib, trying to see hidden meanings in things that were plainly said.
You probably believe the Constitution is a living breathing document.
I bet I can safely say that you think because of Perrys recent ad about Christians that he is anti-gay.
Go ahead and play Willard the Rat and try to spin what I said.
Just don’t get to dizzy and fall off your chair.

acat

He’s got some moves … but it’s more Chicken Ranch than Rocky Horror.

Mew

bzip

Mandate defined: An official order or commission to do something: “a federal mandate”.

Mandates and Newt Gringrich:
01/30/2011 ? He suggested that flex-fuel vehicles be mandated for Americans.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704698004576104682930044012.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

?So along comes Mr. Gingrich to offer his support for Mr. Obama’s brand of green-energy welfare, undermining House Republicans in the process. In his Iowa speak-power-to-truth lecture, he even suggested that the government should mandate that all new cars in the U.S. be flex-fuel vehicles?meaning those that can run on an ethanol-gas mix as high as 85%?as if King Corn were in any danger of being deposed.?

05/12/2011 ? He was more supportive of individual health-care mandates than Mitt Romney.

Gingrich suggests insurance mandate for those who can afford
http://www.healthinsuranceplansinfo.com/healthinsurance-health-news/pivot/entry.php?id=846&w=my_weblog

05/15/2011 ? He backed Obama?s individual mandate; ?All of us have a responsibility to help pay for health care.?

05/15/11 – Newt Shocks Conservatives:
http://nation.foxnews.com/newt-gingrich/2011/05/15/newt-shocks-conservatives

?Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich said Sunday that he strongly supports a federal mandate requiring citizens to buy health insurance ? a position that has been rejected by many Republicans, including several who likely will be running against him for the Republican presidential nomination.

Appearing on NBC?s ?Meet the Press,? Gingrich told host David Gregory that he continues to advocate for a plan he first called for in the early 1990s as a Congressman, which requires every uninsured citizen to purchase or acquire health insurance. Read more at newsmax.com.?

5/15/11 – Gingrich Backs Obamacare’s Individual Mandate Requiring Health Insurance
http://www.newsmax.com/Headline/gingrich-health-care-insurance/2011/05/15/id/396426

Appearing on NBC?s ?Meet the Press,? Gingrich told host David Gregory that he continues to advocate for a plan he first called for in the early 1990s as a Congressman, which requires every uninsured citizen to purchase or acquire health insurance.

Gregory played a clip of Gingrich speaking during an appearance on Meet the Press in October 1993:

?I am for people, individuals — exactly like automobile insurance — individuals having health insurance and being required to have health insurance. And I am prepared to vote for a voucher system which will give individuals, on a sliding scale, a government subsidy so we insure that everyone as individuals have health insurance.?

05/16/2011 ? He also endorsed individual mandates in 1993 when Clinton pushed Universal Health Care.
Gingrich: Focus On My 1993 Mandate Support Is ?Political Amnesia? (VIDEO)

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/05/gingrich-focus-on-my-1993-mandate-support-is-political-amnesia-video.php

12/06/11 – Glenn Beck interview with Newt Gringrich:
http://www.glennbeck.com/2011/12/06/transcript-of-newt-gingrich-interview/

GLENN: Okay. That?s 1993. Here is May 2011.

GINGRICH: All of a sudden responsibility to help pay for healthcare. And I think that there are ways to do it that make most libertarians relatively happy. I?ve said consistently we ought to have some requirement to either have health insurance or you post a bond or in some way you indicate you are going to be held accountable.

VOICE: That is the individual mandate, is it not?

GINGRICH: It?s a variation on it.
———————————————-
I call that a ?mandate?. Maybe a variation on it (in Newt?s own words) BUT it is a mandate, period!

That is Big gov?t telling me what to do and I don?t want gov?t telling me what to do, period. That is part of the entire problem with Obama ? gov?t telling me what to do.

center77

I think that I canonly vote for somebody I feel good about. Its not enought o just beat Obama, We have to show the country we are better than liberals, that we do need to show the country we are not going to send the same thing to Washington as the Democrats. Thats why I cannot support Newt, because I feel he is part of the problem, not part of the solutions.

bzip

On CNN right now Rand Paul – slams Newt: Newt is NO Conservative, No Tea Party Person!

romansdaughter

nt

Common_Cents

Did you also catch Rand giving Romney a pass for being a NE moderate?

gekster

But he ‘is’ off his game.
He came here to trash Erick and promote Willard, and his past few posts are not doing that.
He can’t seam to keep focused.
At least Ryan could keep on message.

romansdaughter

No Romney, no Gingrich neither are acceptable to me in the primaries,

avagreen

At this site:
http://www.sunherald.com/2011/12/08/3621350_p3/rick-perry-son-of-west-texas-usually.html?

To combat the hatred. Suspect some are Paul bots.

avagreen

no text

paladin1

of the commentary that runs along the vein of, “Reagan was divorced”, “Reagan was a Democrat”, “Reagan acted in B movies”, “Reagan would be in hot water with today’s conservatives”. What a bunch of palaver! Ronald Reagan had almost none of the baggage that Romney and Gingrich have and certainly not to the same degree. He was open to speaking about it and acknowledging his errors and faults. Continuing with this type of ignorant propaganda is to be expected for those who do not accept true conservatism and who have sold out to the notion that one of the big government boys, Romney or Gingrich, is inevitable. It is obvious they twist the facts of Reagan’s history to support their flawed decision-making processes by seeking to demean a true conservative icon like Ronald Reagan.

I

bzip

In spite of the fact that Rand Paul is Ron Paul’s son Rand Paul is extremely highly regarded in the Tea Party and very conservative base and he didn’t hold back any words about Newt. It is shocking he supports his father and might have a few unkind words for any front runner BUT this was a slam, a big slam from a highly regarded person within the Tea Party groups.

Rand Paul: Newt Gingrich “Unworthy” of Tea Party Support
http://politics.blogs.foxnews.com/2011/12/09/rand-paul-newt-gingrich-unworthy-tea-party-support?test=latestnews

Rand Paul: Gingrich no friend of tea party
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/12/09/rand-paul-gingrich-no-friend-of-tea-party/

bzip

On CNN right now, Rand Paul even suggest that Romney would be better than Newt.

Rand Paul when cornered into either a Romney or Newt choice: Romney a moderate pro-business and Newt parading around as a conservative who is far from it.

In spite of Rand Paul’s support of his father, even Rand Paul see’s Newt for what he is and Romney for what he is and would take Romney over Newt.

trevorb

I have problems with Gingrich, but I much prefer him to Mitt Romney. He actually managed a balanced budget that Slick Willie took credit for. What can still do him in is his personal life and his arrogance.

acat

Good summation of what makes Perry tick.

Mew

ericksontales

You might be surprised to know that I actually like Perry. While I am a loyal Romney supporter I honestly believe that Perry will surge again. Why? Newt will fall in the polls as fast as he has risen. Newt is not a credible Republican candidate in my view. You want to talk about flip flops and inconsistencies Romney cannot even compare to Newt. I don’t really see Newt’s surge as a direct threat to Romney. I think what Newt’s surge does is actually strengthen Perry. People moved away from Perry when they found out he couldn’t debate and that he had a few inconsistent conservative views. They will flock back to him in droves once all of Newt’s skeletons are exposed over the next month. Perry will be ready and waiting to pick up the pieces when Newt falls. Once everyone gets a few good reminders about who Newt really is then Perry will look much more credible once again.

This race has always been about Romney vs. Perry from the day that Perry decided to run. It will be about Romney vs. Perry in the end. Voters are not going to vote in the mistress courting dirty politician Newt. Can you image our next first lady Callista former mistress during Newts second marriage? It’s never going to happen.

Romney has to hit Newt but not too hard. He needs to hurt Newt enough to lose support but he cannot decimate him or Newts followers will all flock back to Perry and open the door for a Perry win.

acat

is in full-on freak-out mode over Gingrich’s rise.

They seem to have counted on (having bought and run through KBH’s oppo research) Perry and perhaps Cain … but not Newt.

Mew

AceInTX

but even a sycophant can’t make golden thread from straw.

OK…let’s say I take his pro-life conversion as legitimate…

Please name some more issues where is has become and remains conservative and has stayed so for more than the last 4 years…

forgive me if I don’t hold my breath

avagreen

http://www.sunherald.com/2011/11/17/3582041/is-rick-perrys-rough-ride-embarrassing.html

Same site with a different article. Need some support for Perry here. Sticking to one site doesn’t help when we are talking to ourselves only.

ericksontales

The media is portraying the full on freak out mode over Newts rise. True its an unexpected bump in the road but a relatively easy one to overcome. Newt is going to get hammered from all sides at the next debate.

Romney will need to slap him around a bit (just not take heavy fist swings).
Paul will make a few hard hitting jabs to Newts double chin
Perry will take a few rib shots hoping that Paul will land some hard hits
Bachman is a little bit of a wild card on what she will do but has the potential of some hard swings at Newt.

Everyone gains by Newts downfall right now. We will see how Newt deals under the pressure and if he can keep up his so called above the fray positive campaign.

Isn’t it ironic that one of the dirtiest politicians of the past century (Newt) wants to play fair and keep it positive? Of course he does because he is hoping that no one will go after his record or pull out all t hose skeletons that have been collecting dust in his closet.

Romney camp is likely concerned over the unusual rise of Newt but I doubt they are very worried about Newt long term. The only candidate long term that has the potential to knock off Romney is still Perry.

AceInTX

Mitt does…and he’s not very convincing about it when he does.

AceInTX

Paul may be wrong…but I would trust him to stick by what he said and not cave at the first sign of opposition or the first time the political winds turned on an earlier pronouncement from him.

If you’re to simple to understand the difference here…you really are pathetic and not a good representative for you preferred candidate because all you are accomplishing here is be clowning yourself….you keep arguing yourself in circles

center77

will make a come back, and as people understand Newt a little better they will understand he is the very thing we all hate about Washington. Newt will find it hard to beat Obama, and if Republican nominate him they will soon see the error of their ways when Obama landslides us, and we come of looking like we never ared about conservatism in the first place.

AceInTX

Romney stays above the fray smiling that bleached smile with his well coiffed hair do while his minions go out and undercut, undermine and destroy any fellow republican who poses even a passing threat to his coronation.

It’s all negative on everyone else…all the time…and when you challenge them to say why they support him…all they can do is spout off about his inevitability, He’s the only one who can beat Obama and anyone who doesn’t love him and wet themselves in joyous exultation at the thought of a President Romney is just filled with anti Mormon hate and bigotry.

acat

but I’m disturbed that they both like barbed wire so much.

Mew

AceInTX

after dealing with you’re support for Romney…I might just have to flip a coin now that I think about it

You are doing Romney NO favors ericksontales, you and the approach of Romney sycophants like you are helping drive opposition to your boy.

I say this from experience…I’ve told the story here often how I started out supporting Huckabee but figured I would eventually switch to Romney in 2007…because while I was more comfortable with Huckabee, I was only slightly less comfortable with Romney…so I started 2007 as a potential….nay…likely Romney supporter….until I ran head on into some of his supporters here…

In arguing pros and cons with sMittheads here…no matter the objection…the canned answer was anti Mormon bigotry….

One thing you’ll learn about me is, I’m willing to be persuaded…and will respect a debating opponent if said opponent is able to make a reasoned argument based on fact…

so, in trying to make myself comfortable with the thought of supporting Romney, I would pick around the edges….I state my objections, I will listen to the answers to my objections…maybe expand on my argument and so on till I fill in all the holes…

I was never able to do this with Romney’s fans….eventually I got so fed up at being called a bigot for not supporting him that I put him in the not just no b ut hell no in terms of my EVER supporting him.

If he becomes the nominee…I’ll vote for him.,..but my money will stay in my wallet and I will NEVER sing his praises….I did that in 2008 for McCain but I will NEVER again whore myself out like that….it made me sick

tomatin

Prove while in office how their records were the same.

Newt drastically cut the size of government and the deficit, got rid of the worst part of the welfare state, cut capital gains taxes and got rid of onerous banking regulations.

Romney passed Romneycare, protected abortions and was 47th in creating jobs.

How are those two records when it matters the same.

AceInTX

and I move we anti Romney’s adopt that as his official title because the way Romney conducts himself he fits the discription of a rat to a tee

AceInTX

Bravo….I can almost get on board with much of what you say here…I encourage you to stay in that mode in debate…you’ll get much further here.

AceInTX

My issue and problem with the…that’s why people hate politics meme is that it attempts to put the fight on the back burner because people get upset at seeing a fight…but having the fight is necessary….if we are ever to get to the truth of things…

tomatin

Of course you need to know when an idea cannot be implemented in a conservative way too.

1bunny

saw this link on twitter. So I checked it out. It is based on the “right wing social engineering” line Newt used.

http://www.damndirtyrino.com/2011/12/09/romneys-had-it-up-to-here/

AceInTX

Based on your posts, you seem to call alot of people out for not using facts to back up their statements. Tell me AcelnTX, what facts do you have to back up your statement that ??most people who profess to hate politics?these are people who refuse to educate themselves about issues, refuse to take a stand for anything in their collosal ignorance?

Picture if you will, sitting in a doctors office, or a bar…and you are listening to some loud mouthed liberal spouting off about Ronald George Reaganbushitler and how mean and nasty Republicans are….

You know the scene…how many times have you lived it?…

said Commie lib goes on and on in a loud voice so EVRYONE around him can hear him…and the rest of the people in the room sit there with their teeth clenched, biting their tongues…Wanting to be polite

Finally Mr. Commie Lib says something so asinine and demonstrably false that you can’t take it any more…and you speak up and correct him using facts and evidence to prove where he is wrong…

Again…how many times have you lived this?…I have over and over again….

back to my scene…

So you get about half your sentence out and Mr Holierthanthou independent pipes up and says…”this is why OI hate politics…all the fighting and bickering”….”I’m an independent and I make up my mind about the issues….I don’t care what party someone belongs to…I vote for the better man…or woman as it may be”

Of course this is all said by Mr. Holierthanthou with immense pride in himself at how fair minded he is and how he never has to soil himself with the petty details about what might be true or not.

He’s better than us you see….

But somehow Mr. Holierthanthou never catches onto the fact that he hasn’t hear both sides of the issue…never mind the truth…because he’s to good to listen to the argument so he can make an informed decision. He’s just listened to a 30 minute diatribe from Mr. Commielib…but he won’t abide an argument in his presence because the whole exorcize of listening to both sides of an issue makes him queasy and nauseous.

This is the kind of crap that the left has played on for years…they spout off in public in loud ways and make sure EVERYONE around them get’s a good dose of their snake oil…but as soon as a Conservative speaks up….the discussion is shut down…

Ditto Frank Luntz and his motley crew of Hollierthanthous. I’m sick to death of being preached to by this uninformed and unthinking zombies who keep beating their chests about what paragons of virtue they are because they don’t belong to a party or participate in the arguments…

That is what I’m referring to…That’s what I think of when I hear someone say That’s why people hate politics…to me it’s the equivalent of my 6 year old sticking his finger in his ears and yelling “lalalalalalalal I can’t hear you” when his 4 year old brother has something important to tell him!

If that’s not where you were going with that comment, I’ll take your word for it and bow out of it from here….it’s just one of those buttons that set my ears to ringing every time I hear someone utter that phrase.

as if you’re a little child who just can’t mind your manners…

never mind Mr Commielib just went through an hour long filth laden diatribe full of falsehood after falsehood…

AceInTX

a

tomatin

Mitt Romney told ABC News Friday ?with no question in my mind,? Newt Gingrich would be the easier candidate for President Obama to defeat in 2012.

tomatin

with me. That’s all it does.

You realize knocking down Newt will only get Romney nominated.

You are not helping Perry at all.

Common_Cents

Yet, Perry supporters are focusing on Newt.

tomatin

I remember it that way as well. The only difference is Romney is going negative earlier.

Look Romney has been running for president for six years. Why doesn’t he get the obvious that conservatives just don’t like him.

tomatin

in healthcare without an unconstitutional mandate.

You can do exchanges without harsh government regulations but still allow insurance companies to set up exchanges, even interstate exchanges.

You don’t need a mandate to incentivize people getting coverage by forcing them to either get coverage if they get sick or actually pay their medical bills instead of being able to write them off in bankruptcy.

bzip

I happen to totally agree with Rand Paul. If there were only two choices; Newt or Romney I would vote Romney.

I can’t support someone who has cheated on his wives and who is a fraud.

So keep it up tomatin, we might just end up with Romney. You sure aren’t helping Newt.

carolynr

they are politically advantageous to him…not because he believes in them…there is a big difference. I am assuming that you are answering my post..I liked Perry Better. Reason…he was more sincere, spoke from the heart. Since Doc Bob brought up the subject…I had just finished listening to Perry on Israel…and the last time I looked…Israel is in the MIDDLE EAST.

Mitt…a/k/a WILLARD may say how he feels about Israel….Perry demonstrates it.

Look…Texas214…Willard is like a Rubic’s Cube…turn it…and there is a WHOLE DIFFERENT PUZZLE.

tomatin

Again you can’t attack Gingrich’s record in office.

Romney has zero conservative credibility. I would never vote for a candidate who has a liberal record in office.

bzip

You must have had your blinders on. Newt the liberal progressive who supports:

a) Mandates
b) TARP
c) Global Warming
d) Crony capitalism- Lobbying
e) Supported Medicare Part D
f) He favored No Child Left Behind
g) Spoke favorably about the infamous Harriet Miers nomination
h) Ethic violations, his own peers voted him out.
I) Supports a form of Amensty

That is what I call a long standing progressive liberal.

tomatin

I just accept that the choice is between Newt and Romney now.

I just don’t see any movement towards Perry no matter what I read on RS.

Sure I would reconsider Perry if he were in contention and I never told people the shouldn’t vote for Perry or anyone else for that matter. Frankly I would vote for Perry if he were the nominee.

No Gingrich’s past relationships are not a disqualifier for me.

I have a much tougher time forgiving Romney who acted like a Dumbocrat in office.

Sue me for being reasonable.

tomatin

Please the most he is guilty of is being a loyal Republican when Bush was in office. Don’t tell me most Republicans did not hold Bush’s water.

The ethics complaints were from RINOs that did not like Newt pushing the conservative agenda.

Go ahead and vote for Romney so he can pass the same liberal agenda he did in MA.

acat

Ace of Spades has a decent roundup on the whole Romney-camp-unprepared-for-Newt thing .. and I don’t think it’s just media.

I agree with Ace that the only effective way for Wafflin’ Willard to defeat Mr. Nice Newt – who, so far, has only gone after the moderators – is to agree with him. Unfortunately, this opens Willard up to lots of questions about when his promise of agreement expires.

Perry, I think, can ignore Newt and hit Romney. He can play a longer game. He has money in the bank and only needs to finish strong in the first four, he doesn’t have to win until the non-proportional part. Keeping the powder dry until February may be a better strategy…

Newt, though .. has only to keep being himself to lose, and only to keep being this new Mr. Nice Newt to win. The old Newt wouldn’t have gone up in an explosion of his own making like Cain or Bachmann – he would have chiseled away at his support base with half-baked ideas and lousy sound bites. Mr. Nice Newt has been avoiding that quite effectively…. and seems dead set on destroying Romney.

Mew

clowngirl

* according to bzip’s definition:

“Mandate defined: An official order or commission to do something”

I just checked and Texas does indeed require that drivers be able to pay for any accidents they cause: up to $60,000 for injuries and $25,000 for damage to the vehicle. Since you make no distinction between requiring people to carry insurance and requiring them to be responsible (in this case, to cover the bills in the event of an accident which they’ve caused) this is a mandate to carry car insurance.

Has Rick Perry been working to repeal this? Is he working to ensure that uninsured motorists can get away with not paying for any accidents they cause? No? Then Governor Perry supports a mandate.

Now, is this very different from supporting Obamacare and the particular individual mandate that is part of it? YES.

That’s my point.

Newt’s support of a VARIATION on an individual mandate (that provides two different opt out options) is VERY different from supporting the individual mandate that is part of Obamacare.

RS

EDITOR OF REDSTATE

First They Attack Him for Opposing Tax Increases. Now They Attack Him For This?

COMMENTS

ALL

COMMENTS

POPULAR

#RSRH

PICK YOUR STATE & GET LOCAL