When the bluster fades, this is Newt Gingrich
I didn’t watch last night’s umpteenth Republican presidential debate. I had a prior commitment with some poker-playing friends, although given the night’s outcome, watching the debate would have been a smarter financial option on my part.
By all accounts, Mitt Romney again took on the role of aggressor against Newt Gingrich, and Gingrich again shrank from the confrontation.
As Politico describes it, Gingrich “simply seemed worn out and off point. Gone was the brawler who could whip up the crowd. And it’s not quite clear where he went… he did not seem to be enjoying the heat of battle as in past debates.”
At one point, Gingrich reportedly tried to rebut a Romney attack by complaining to Mitt that “you’re very quick to draw the widest possible exaggeration,” which is truly priceless considering the source. I’m sorry I missed that moment.
The Washington Post was no more kind in its after-action report, concluding that “Gingrich was just plain off his game … looked less prepared and never really recovered.“
None of that surprises me. A strong showing in this last Florida debate was crucial to Gingrich, whose post-South Carolina momentum has faded in recent days. He needed another strong, aggressive showing and did not produce it, but that is consistent with his history.
At heart, Gingrich is a bully who backs down when confronted. He likes to challenge members of the media in public, safe in the knowledge that their profession does not allow them to return fire. He is well-skilled at creating and then dismantling strawmen. And he is supremely confident when he senses that he has succeeded in intimidating his target.
But when the critical moment comes, he deflates. As speaker, he shrunk from Bill Clinton, to the point that his aides and lieutenants didn’t want to have them in the same room lest a passive Gingrich agree to too much. In these debates, once Romney decided to fight back aggressively, Newt has repeatedly retreated. In the previous debate, he was left speechless and flustered by a pressing Romney, and apparently he still hasn’t recovered his bluster.
When asked last night to discuss his campaign-trail attacks on Romney’s bank accounts in Switzerland and the Caymans, Newt pulled a Pawlenty, explaining that “I’m perfectly happy to say that in an interview on some TV show, but this is a national debate where you have a chance to get the four of us to talk about a whole range of issues.”
To which Romney responded:
“Wouldn’t it be nice if people didn’t make accusations somewhere else that they weren’t willing to defend here?”
If and when the time came, Gingrich would have done the same when pitted against Barack Obama. In baseball, they say that a player is what his numbers say he is.
This is who Gingrich is.
– Jay Bookman
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
674 comments Add your comment
Quagmire
January 27th, 2012
11:34 am
The applesauce gang(birthers) were getting a little disorganized yesterday in the courtroom. I told them to “STAY THE COURSE”
Then I gave them a break and we played bingo
Redneck Convert (R--and proud of it)
January 27th, 2012
11:34 am
Well howdy Bookmaniacs. I’m out here hauling and lugging and humping to get you ready for FNM tonight.
But I got a question right now. Last night at Billy Bob’s we got to talking and after 8 or 9 PBRs somebody asked, Does England have rednecks? Well, Joe Bill said they couldn’t have because the sun don’t hardly shine over there, at least not enough to turn a neck red. But Jim Earl says there’s got to be rednecks in England, seeing as how there’s so many of Those People that have moved in there and seeing Those People without rednecks is sorta like seeing a pepper shaker without a salt shaker in a restaurant.
Anyhow, I just thought I’d throw the question out there to see if USinUK or somebody that has traveled to England could answer it. See you tonight everybody. Well, not see you. I guess I mean I’ll read you tonight.
Jm
January 27th, 2012
11:34 am
Road scholar 9:56
No she’s not. The quality of commentary on here is generally pathetic.
You (RS) are the exception rather than the rule here.
getalife
January 27th, 2012
11:34 am
frog,
Well, it use to be in New York City so we can move it again.
I am thinking Kansas because they live in Alice in Wonderland, or la la land if you will..
(ir)Rational
January 27th, 2012
11:36 am
Adam – Yeah, I saw that. But that has nothing (in my opinion) to do with being upside down on your mortgage. I had that amount saved up, or nearly that, and my wife got laid off (it may not have been the smartest idea to have both members of the family working in the construction industry) and we were able to survive until she got a new job. I understand the idea, and it does make smart financial sense to have a safety net. That way you don’t have to worry (as much) about losing your job.
Jm
January 27th, 2012
11:36 am
Mitt still heading upwards
Yeah
O is toast
Butch Cassidy
January 27th, 2012
11:36 am
Stevie Ray – “Did anyone see the last question relative to who’s wife would make best first lady?”
I did, I was expecting Gingrich to reply with ” Well, it depends on who I’m married when I’m elected President.
(ir)Rational
January 27th, 2012
11:37 am
Stevie Ray – So you look down on someone who felt their marriage wasn’t working and got out? Or is it just that you look down on women that have done that?
pat
January 27th, 2012
11:39 am
I don’t think ol’ Newt’s gonna win. He’s got the brains and he’s got the bravado, but he’s to polarizing. Mitt is going to win the nomintion and will lose in November. That’s my prediction.
Americans have the shortest memory in all of history so unless something comes undone in the next 9 months I see obama for 4 more years of misery.
pat
January 27th, 2012
11:39 am
I don’t think ol’ Newt’s gonna win. He’s got the brains and he’s got the bravado, but he’s to polarizing. Mitt is going to win the nomintion and will lose in November. That’s my prediction.
Americans have the shortest memory in all of history so unless something comes undone in the next 9 months I see obama for 4 more years of misery.
Quagmire
January 27th, 2012
11:39 am
Butch Cassidy – you’re right, the Moon Project from Newt. I remember something similar to that in the 80’s when I was a kid. President Reagan and the Star Wars project.
The first company to open a store on the moon would be Tiffany’s so they can say, we have out of this world diamonds at universe prices
Butch Cassidy
January 27th, 2012
11:40 am
(ir)Rational – ” So you look down on someone who felt their marriage wasn’t working and got out?”
Only when said person rails against a former President for infidelity while engaging in the practice himself. Oh, and the fact that said person was also part of the party that vomits “family values” like Jeff Goldblum in the The Fly is just an added bonus.
TBone
January 27th, 2012
11:40 am
You know if we can keep our eye on the republican primaries say through the summer maybe Americans won’t know that our teleprompter in chief is screwing the pooch and our economy is actually worsening despite all of the faulty data we use to prop his sorry a$$ up. NOBAMA 2012!
Welcome to the Occupation
January 27th, 2012
11:40 am
Adam: “We know why that is. It’s because they use slave labor. ”
And we’re headed in that direction too, you know.
“The fact that they get paid means little if they live in a walled city just to work their whole lives. We CAN compete with that without stooping to that same level. We just need some good old fashioned American innovation to figure it out.”
Did you read the much-discussed NY Times story from last Sunday about how Apple moved most of its production operations to China? I posted the link yesterday.
How exactly can American innovation save the working class here from plunging into serfdom, with the complete destruction of the way of life we knew in the post war period?
Innovation and ingenuity has been in plentiful supply and all that has done is gone into making supply chains and production line technology even more lean and efficient — which means, human-free.
How does innovation, understood technologically, help create well-paying jobs and living conditions for Americans?
Jm
January 27th, 2012
11:40 am
Butch 11:36
Halftrack
January 27th, 2012
11:40 am
All the candidates will have a good or bad debate. One has to look at who is asking the questions and why? As we saw in SC questioners try to assassinate a candidate. There should be a disclaimer at the start of each show telling how they arrived at the questions and should have a random scheme for asking individual questions vs. to all candidates. If one just views one debate to base his vote on; they are poorly informed. It is still early to arrive at a candidate. Crossover voters in Primaries help and hinder who the final candidate will be. There is still a lot of issues that needs to be discussed. On with the game of Politics. Remember Obummer has not been real vetted yet !!!
Adam
January 27th, 2012
11:41 am
Stevie: Perhaps I misunderstood. Are you suggesting that BO and democrats in particular have less culpability taking advantage of the corrupt system to their benefit?
No, what I am saying is the right wants to make the system more corrupt, and the left wants to remove that corruption. Both do what is legal, one side wants it to not be legal and one side wants MORE of that kind of thing to be legal.
Why do you suppose your pal hasn’t delivered on say…for example an encompassing immigration policy as promised?
He has delivered on that, but not in the way I find comofrtable. Record deportations. At least he stopped deporting otherwise law-abiding people. Any other non-executive efforts require a congressional bill. And I don’t need to go into why Obama, the Chief Executive, has not delivered on passing a legislative bill.
As for your other arguments, you seem to be suggesting I should not support Obama for his attachments to business and banks and so on, and yet that attachment is at THE HIP for anyone on the right. So why should it matter if, in that particular case, both parties are culpable? I am looking at who is better at advancing the country PAST that crap, or paving the way for the next person to do so. The right will take us backwards in that regard.
Whether I or you like it or not, the game is played with money. The person with the most money wins. And to borrow a phrase, you don’t bring a knife to a gun fight. Pioneers for women’s suffrage catered to racists to get more votes. This type of game is played all the time to advance society.
Thulsa Doom
January 27th, 2012
11:42 am
Adam,
I don’t think I would call it slave labor in China. They simply have lower labor costs.
And sooner or later someone else will have even lower labor costs as the cost of labor rises in China. As it stands now some even lower labor cost nations such as Vietnam are undercutting Chinese manufacturers and textile makers to a small degree. That is a trend that I expect to grow as China becomes more prosperous and wages rise. People feard the Japanese menace in the 80s and it subsided. Same will happen with China. As they become more prosperous and wages rise they will in turn lose their mfg base to countries with a greater absolute advantage. We’re seeing it to a small degree now.
Chinese workers are starting to strike for higher pay. Its kinda funny to watch that happen now whether you’re a con or a lib. Get the popcorn ready. We both could enjoy watching more of this in the years to come.
Stevie Ray
January 27th, 2012
11:42 am
IIRATIONAL,
Not whatsoever…just I think the question was very difficult for NEWT since his past in this arena is subject to extreme rightwingnut (that’s where the big money is) scrutiny and the fact that I think he would be the first to bring a 3rd wife into the whitehouse. Not a good selling point if you know what I mean. Wouldn’t bother me but the same can’t be said for those who provide the big money.
stands for decibels
January 27th, 2012
11:43 am
I was under water on a mortgage once, but that was so long ago they didn’t call it “being under water,” they called it “you stupid loser, why’d you buy that POS, what were you thinking?”
Only it wasn’t “they” saying that, but me, to myself. Usually while lying awake at night. Good times.
Joe Hussein Mama
January 27th, 2012
11:43 am
(ir)Rational — “Stevie Ray – So you look down on someone who felt their marriage wasn’t working and got out?”
Newt didn’t do that. In fact, he didn’t do that TWICE.
He cheated on his spouses while still *in* the marriages in question. If he had had the character to GTFO of those marriages BEFORE cheating on his spouses, that would make all the difference. But he didn’t. So he’s a hypocrite, and no better than Bill Clinton when he wagged his finger at the cameras.
If you can’t be faithful to your spouse, then man up and get a divorce.
FIRST.
BEFORE you go out looking for strange.
jewcowboy
January 27th, 2012
11:43 am
“The quality of commentary on here is generally pathetic.”
The irony is in the source.
sam
January 27th, 2012
11:44 am
Thulsa, its slave labor. they just keep prices on everything artificially low (including currency) that noone knows or cares…everything except american goods that is.. the chinese government sucks!
(ir)Rational
January 27th, 2012
11:44 am
Butch – That wasn’t really the question I was asking. I was asking because of this:
I’m glad I wasn’t that dope Newt at that particular time….I’m scratching my head over whether any first lady had been soiled by prior husbands ???
Exactly what does she have to do with her husbands positions, and why would she be a poor First Lady simply because she may have been married before as Stevie Ray suggested. Although, I can’t find anything that suggests that any of their wives were, so I’m not exactly sure what the point of his comment was.
Jm
January 27th, 2012
11:45 am
“All the candidates will have a good or bad debate”
Valid point when you have 30+ debates
Still. Perry failed big time and newt is withering.
Mighty Righty
January 27th, 2012
11:46 am
The Obama regime policies have forced over a million jobs to move from the United States to China. Many of these jobs are green related and most of those were by Obama’s friends, some with the help of “stimulous” money confiscated from the american tax payer. You lefties need to wake up to what this regime is doing to this country and why there are more than two million jobs less than when the regime took over. The head of our “jobs programs” Jeff Immelt has personaly moved tens of thousands of jobs over seas and is still doing it.
mm
January 27th, 2012
11:46 am
“. Or Apple could make the entire I-phone here instead of overseas and the cost would only be something crazy like $1600.”
I call BS. These companies are not using cheap labor to make their products cheaper. They are using it to increase their profits.
Maybe if you wingnuts weren’t trying to make salaries in the US the same as they are in China, people could probably afford a phone made in the US. The market drives the price.
“this guy above lives in the Democrat fantasy world where everything is just find and dandy!! LOL”
And you live in the Repug fantasy world where everything is falling apart.
Adam
January 27th, 2012
11:47 am
(ir)Rational: I think we are of the same mind on the mortgage and 6 months saved thing. My opinion is it’’s ridiculous to make the assertion that one should already have saved up 6 months of salary prior to making a 30 year commitment for two reasons: 1) 6 months is 1/60th of 30 years, meaning that if that 6 months is exhausted while looking for a job, the person is still going to get foreclosed on and 2) in order to save up that much, the person making the commitment would have to save up over the course of several years if he or she also wants to continue to take care of their family and themselves at the same time as saving, meaning that in order to buy the house that person must spend 5-10 years saving money just to get 6 months of breathing room if their job is lost… which is absurd considering how quickly one can lose their job. One is more likely to lose a job in that time frame and be looking for work for longer than the salary they saved up within that time frame, wiping out the savings and starting from square one. The logistics don’t match up. Only those who make WELL OVER what they need to take care of themselves and their families could hope to accomplish this.
Adam
January 27th, 2012
11:48 am
Doom: I don’t think I would call it slave labor in China. They simply have lower labor costs
They have and use the ability to force their people to work. That is why they feel the only way out is to jump off the roof. They can’t just quit.
DawgDad
January 27th, 2012
11:48 am
I came away assured we’ll be FAR better off with ANY of these candidates in the White House. They have some policy differences, but at the core they each embrace the values we are looking to reassert in government. It’s also clear we need all four engaged in the campaign to win back the White House. They need to bury the negative attacks and one-upsmanship, stay on message, and let the voters decide. The Gingrich-Romney spats at this point are propping up Santorum and Paul.
Adam
January 27th, 2012
11:48 am
mm: I call BS. These companies are not using cheap labor to make their products cheaper. They are using it to increase their profits
EXACTLY
Kamchak
January 27th, 2012
11:48 am
I would rather have every hair on my body plucked by Jocelyn Wildenstein who was wearing nothing but pasties and a thong while listening to Chumbawamba’s “Tub Thumping” than watch a Republican primary debate…
Adam
January 27th, 2012
11:49 am
WTTO: I meant innovation as in creative solutions to problems, not strictly technological breakthroughs.
jewcowboy
January 27th, 2012
11:50 am
(ir)Rational,
“So you look down on someone who felt their marriage wasn’t working and got out?”
I look down on people who bloviate about how “gays” would ruin “traditional” marriage and then conveniently ignore their own 2 divorces and 3 marriages. It would seem to me if you wanted to “save” traditional marriage you would outlaw divorce first. And punish those who break their vows.
But I guess you aren’t going to get a sanctimonious charlatan like Newt to back something like that.
Adam
January 27th, 2012
11:50 am
(ir)Rational: Exactly what does she have to do with her husbands positions
Well she COULD encourage him to get more fit and lose some weight so that more positions are possible for him to perform….
Quagmire
January 27th, 2012
11:51 am
Pretty soon, Newt will get back in his white cadillac and go back to hazzard county
Stevie Ray
January 27th, 2012
11:51 am
ADAM,
I’m not sure BO is the one to push the campaign reform ball forward…in fact, what incentive do any of our smarmy electorate have to do the same. Cantor held up a bill that was rushed into play by a DEM Bachus I think, who was rushing to get his name on this item since he was singled out by 60 minutes as well as in a couple books at one of those benefiting in this arena.
Joe Hussein Mama
January 27th, 2012
11:52 am
M Righty — “The Obama regime policies have forced over a million jobs to move from the United States to China.”
Catch up with the rest of the class, pal. Your idols have been doing the same thing for *decades.*
Butch Cassidy
January 27th, 2012
11:52 am
Quagmire – “Pretty soon, Newt will get back in his white cadillac and go back to hazzard county”
I have an image of Rick Perry dressed in Roscoes uniform at the wheel.
barking frog
January 27th, 2012
11:52 am
Quagmire, If he had a cigar he would be Boss Hog, excellent.
(ir)Rational
January 27th, 2012
11:53 am
Stevie Ray – So it was just a stupidly worded comment then.
JHM – See my 11:44. The comment wasn’t made about Newt’s character, but about the wife’s. Implying she wouldn’t make a good First Lady because she had been “spoiled by past husbands.” Can’t find any evidence of that, so I guess Stevie Ray just has a problem with women who have been married more than once, or the English language and facts.
Adam
January 27th, 2012
11:53 am
jewcowboy: One of my favorite lines of logic is about how in trying to save marriage (and divorce) conservatives don’t want gay people to have the same opportunity to have a sham marriage that ends in divorce. Which is a bit odd since I would think they would love it if gay people became more miserable in other ways and contributed to the legal occupations.
Stevie Ray
January 27th, 2012
11:53 am
ADAM,
Agreed on NEWT. He’s like Ron Paul…not purdy enough to get elected. He had his 15 minutes by shouting down CNN in SC…he was really evading the question…time is up
barking frog
January 27th, 2012
11:54 am
Butch, shooting the gun in the air is also brought to mind..
jewcowboy
January 27th, 2012
11:54 am
mm,
” I call BS. These companies are not using cheap labor to make their products cheaper. They are using it to increase their profits.”
BINGO!
“iSuppli has taken apart a 16 GB iPhone 4 and concluded that the bill of materials of the phone, that is generally believed to cost AT&T $600 a piece, is $187.51.”
http://www.conceivablytech.com/1570/business/apple-maintains-huge-profit-margin-with-iphone-4
“But perhaps the most exciting feature for Apple is the 71 percent to 73 percent profit margin on each handset sold – and there should be millions, one analyst said.”
http://www.cultofmac.com/122497/apple-iphone-4s-best-feature-nearly-75-percent-profit-margin/
Adam
January 27th, 2012
11:54 am
Joe: M Righty — “The Obama regime policies have forced over a million jobs to move from the United States to China.”
Catch up with the rest of the class, pal. Your idols have been doing the same thing for *decades.*
It’s also not true that Obama’s policies have anything to do with that.
Welcome to the Occupation
January 27th, 2012
11:54 am
Adam: “I meant innovation as in creative solutions to problems, not strictly technological breakthroughs.”
I know, but what if innovation doesn’t move naturally in that direction, towards solutions of that type? What if the highest paid innovations are the ones that allow the capitalists (whether in China or here) to shave off even more labor from the production and supply process?
For that innovation to exist, there has to be an incentive, probably through some kind of government policy. And that’s no where in sight here.
jewcowboy
January 27th, 2012
11:55 am
Kamchak,
I like to produce vivid mental imagery.
Adam
January 27th, 2012
11:55 am
Stevie: He had his 15 minutes by shouting down CNN in SC…he was really evading the question…
It did seem like he took 15 minutes to do that
Stevie Ray
January 27th, 2012
11:56 am
IRATIONAL,
“Stupid” really…that’s classy debate style…guess you concede. Putz is not just another four-letter word wouldn’t you agree? Not judging you to be clear, just your debate ineptness…
barking frog
January 27th, 2012
11:56 am
Apple currently has nearly 100 billion dollars in CASH.
md
January 27th, 2012
11:56 am
“ir)Rational: It was a few days ago I think. He said stuff about how people need to have 6 months of salary saved up before making a commitment to get a loan of any kind, including a 30 year mortgage. Something about how choices determine everything….”
Geez Adam…..if you are going to quote me, at least get it right……he(me) said financial advisers recommend a 6 month emergency fund…………..just smart planning.
As for the commitment part…….associated with the risk, I’ll see if I can explain it to someone that seems to be quite dense……
Renting a home = the least amount of risk
5-10k house = a bit more risk
10-20k house = even more risk
50-100k = even more risk
100k and up = a lot more risk
And guess what Adam……..each of the above is a CHOICE………………….
Now go out and play the game and quit making excuses………you would do well righting your own book……..I don’t think the best book of excuses has has many as you seem to have.
Welcome to the Occupation
January 27th, 2012
11:57 am
Adam: “It’s also not true that Obama’s policies have anything to do with that.”
Actually that’s not strictly speaking true. The trade policies that have greatly accelerated that were originally pushed through by the Clinton administration and Obama is most definitely a “Clintonite” in this regard (see his recent NAFTA-style trade policies in S America and Asia for ex.).
(ir)Rational
January 27th, 2012
11:57 am
jewcowboy – Your position is as ridiculous as the one you ridicule. Congrats. See my other comments explaining what I was referring to. I think Newt is just as big a slimeball as the rest of you do.
Adam – Trying to save up 6 months salary before buying a house may not be practical, but I do think more people need to save up a decent down payment. Having said that, yeah, I think we pretty much agree. Oh, and I’m not a big fan of yours for putting the image of Newt in “positions” in my head. I shouldn’t have set you up, but you didn’t HAVE to take that bait.
jewcowboy
January 27th, 2012
11:57 am
Adam,
“Well she COULD encourage him to get more fit and lose some weight so that more positions are possible for him to perform…”
Callista would be yanking out Michelle’s garden and installing a peroxide distillery.
Mighty Righty
January 27th, 2012
11:57 am
Joe Hussein Mama
January 27th, 2012
11:52 am
So anything the Republicans did is okay with you? I thought the whole attraction of Obama was that he was diferent and was going to change things for the better. I guess you gave up on that. Can’t blame you. Every single economic category is worse under Obama which is why he became the first president to give a state of the union speech without mentioning any accomplisments.
Stevie Ray
January 27th, 2012
11:59 am
IIRATIONAL,
BTW, your assumptions and put down relative to what you think you know about me and my personal life and feelings toward divorce would be interesting for you to know. Seems like you twisted my words so to defend whatever vein I happen to have invaded.
They BOTH suck
January 27th, 2012
11:59 am
MightyRighty
Turn off Fox and the radio pundits and check out the Dow and S&P
(ir)Rational
January 27th, 2012
12:00 pm
Stevie Ray – I concede nothing. Also, I didn’t say you were stupid – just that your comment was stupidly worded. And that if you were trying to say something other than what you said, you had a problem with the English language and facts. Also, calling me Putz doesn’t do anything but make you sound old, doesn’t bother me a bit.
Kamchak
January 27th, 2012
12:00 pm
I like to produce vivid mental imagery.
If you were conscientious, you would also produce the corresponding requisite brain-bleach. But that’s OK. You provided me with the Thomas Jefferson quote for downstairs.
jewcowboy
January 27th, 2012
12:01 pm
Adam,
“Which is a bit odd since I would think they would love it if gay people became more miserable in other ways and contributed to the legal occupations.”
They are too busy being supercilious and thinking marriage right’s only belong to people like themselves to actually use any logic.
(ir)Rational
January 27th, 2012
12:01 pm
Stevie Ray – I twisted nothing. I simply read your comment, quoted you, and responded to what you said. Or did you not say “I’m scratching my head over whether any first lady had been soiled by prior husbands ???”
Adam
January 27th, 2012
12:02 pm
(ir)Rational: I shouldn’t have set you up, but you didn’t HAVE to take that bait.
I really shouldn’t laugh, but I do. Sorry.
It’s not a pleasant image, I admit.
barking frog
January 27th, 2012
12:02 pm
The Republican Right theory that ’steel sharpens steel’ meaning
a long hard fought primary will develop a better nominee is sure
getting tested in this primary.
Steve - USA (I support "None Of The Above")
January 27th, 2012
12:02 pm
Welcome,
I honestly don’t follow where you want this country to go? I am a lot more interested to hear in what you DO want instead of what you DON’T want to do. If you a plan my mind is open.
mystified
January 27th, 2012
12:02 pm
Newt had a bad night. But Jay is wrong about one thing. It’s the journalists who are cowards. Easily spouting derogatory remarks and hiding behind “unnamed sources” or “reported by someone else”. It just so happened that Blitzer isn’t a pansy. He did well.
The worst damage came from Paul who explained the “balanced budget” claims by Newt. I have to admit, that caught me off guard. I hadn’t heard that before and we will probably hear much more about it.
The second worst was the introduction of the wives. Three noble ladies and then Newt’s third wife who was the other woman in an affair with an older man.. Of all the pols in DC, she picked Newt. Really?
Probably a death nail for the speaker.
SAntorum looked great. But it was probably too little too late.
Jm
January 27th, 2012
12:03 pm
The 321 on newt
3 marriages
2 mistresses
1 self absorbed megalomaniac who will say anything and do nothing
(ir)Rational
January 27th, 2012
12:04 pm
Adam – You owe me some brain bleach. Probably anyone else here that read that too. That is quite possibly worse than the image presented by jewcowboy (I think, sorry if I’m wrong) about Newt getting it on with Nancy Pelosi.
barking frog
January 27th, 2012
12:04 pm
Andrew Jackson’s wife had a prior marriage and
there were accusations that she had not been divorced.
John Birch
January 27th, 2012
12:04 pm
Newt stock deflating is bad for Dems. Pretty soon the Reps will unite behind Romney and he looks to be almost Reaganesque in his potential to steal back the center from the socialist.
jewcowboy
January 27th, 2012
12:04 pm
(ir)Rational,
“Your position is as ridiculous as the one you ridicule.”
That was the point.
Adam
January 27th, 2012
12:05 pm
md: Your insistence that I only make excuses is what is actually a choice. Saving up a 6 month emergency fund is not a choice for most people, especially considering how long that would take to accomplish and still remain in budget, and that’s ALL assuming one can keep their same wage or greater for the period of time it would require. This is why I say it is nonsense to say “if only” and use that.
Sure, different housing prices are a choice, as is the choice to sign a lease or a loan agreement. I am not defending people who overborrow KNOWING they can’t afford it or would have a really hard time affording it. What I AM saying is that people who make the choice to get a mortgage on a house that they are MORE than capable of paying every month do not deserve to be judged as making the wrong choice when the entire economy collapses and their job gets caught in the meltdown.
(ir)Rational
January 27th, 2012
12:05 pm
jewcowboy – I assumed as much.
midtownguy
January 27th, 2012
12:05 pm
I was, and remain, a strong supporter of Hillary. I entered the primary season with a somewhat open mind hoping the GOP would give me a rational moderate that I could support. Hasn’t happened. All I have seen so far is the GOP candidates writing President Obama’s campaign ads for him. I guess we get four more years of Obama then it will be Hillary’s turn.
They BOTH suck
January 27th, 2012
12:06 pm
barking frog
That was Andrew Jackson. We are talking about Newt and he will not be the POTUS…………..
Mighty Righty
January 27th, 2012
12:06 pm
They BOTH suck
January 27th, 2012
11:59 am
The Dow and the S and P are functions of speculation much of which is based on inflation and earnings. Earnings are for the most part good because of the very management that you on the left so hate. Good management has nothing to do with with our shirker in chief.
barking frog
January 27th, 2012
12:07 pm
My only admiration for Ronald Reagan was when he
said government was like a baby, one long alimentary
canal with no control at either end.
Adam
January 27th, 2012
12:07 pm
bbl
jewcowboy
January 27th, 2012
12:07 pm
John Birch,
“Pretty soon the Reps will unite behind Romney”
And Newt has provided Obama with all the fodder he needs to defeat Romney.
“almost Reaganesque”
Except Reagan would barely recognize the GOP today.
Kamchak
January 27th, 2012
12:07 pm
I guess we get four more years of Obama then it will be Hillary’s turn.
I understand that she just announced her intentions to retire from politics.
Joe Hussein Mama
January 27th, 2012
12:08 pm
(ir)Rational — “The comment wasn’t made about Newt’s character, but about the wife’s. Implying she wouldn’t make a good First Lady because she had been “spoiled by past husbands.” Can’t find any evidence of that, so I guess Stevie Ray just has a problem with women who have been married more than once, or the English language and facts.”
Or maybe he has a problem with the crapweasel she’s married to, as I do.
md
January 27th, 2012
12:09 pm
“My opinion is it’’s ridiculous to make the assertion that one should already have saved up 6 months of salary prior to making a 30 year commitment for two reasons: 1) 6 months is 1/60th of 30 years, meaning that if that 6 months is exhausted while looking for a job, the person is still going to get foreclosed on and 2) in order to save up that much, the person making the commitment would have to save up over the course of several years if he or she also wants to continue to take care of their family and themselves at the same time as saving, meaning that in order to buy the house that person must spend 5-10 years saving money just to get 6 months of breathing room if their job is lost… which is absurd considering how quickly one can lose their job. One is more likely to lose a job in that time frame and be looking for work for longer than the salary they saved up within that time frame, wiping out the savings and starting from square one. The logistics don’t match up. Only those who make WELL OVER what they need to take care of themselves and their families could hope to accomplish this.”
Gee Adam……now THAT is a whopper of an excuse……might want to make that one chapter 1 in your book of excuses.
And not having an emergency fund is just stupid………….shows poor planning.
They BOTH suck
January 27th, 2012
12:09 pm
MightyRighty
It was YOU, not me, that stated “ALL economic categories”…….
You were either lying, ignorant or just being grandiose. However your last post doesn’t clarify or justify the post I responded too. If it was a Repub in office, most on the right would be pointing directly to the numbers I mentioned, sort of like they did from around 2002 to early 2007.
Thanks for trying and have a great Friday.
barking frog
January 27th, 2012
12:09 pm
They Both Suck, keep up, i was answering Stevie Ray’s
query, had any first lady been soiled by a former husband..
jewcowboy
January 27th, 2012
12:10 pm
(ir)Rational,
I assumed as much.”
http://rescuemarriage.org/
“You said ’till death did us part. You’re not dead yet.”
(ir)Rational
January 27th, 2012
12:10 pm
JHM – I do also, but that isn’t what he said. You seem to be missing the critical part where I quoted him. “…spoiled by past husbands” doesn’t imply a problem with the husband, it implies a problem with the wife.
(ir)Rational
January 27th, 2012
12:12 pm
jewcowboy – If that was my wife it would be written “you’re not dead…yet.” Then her dad would find out and I would be WISHING I was dead.
They BOTH suck
January 27th, 2012
12:12 pm
barking frog
My apologies
Joe Hussein Mama
January 27th, 2012
12:12 pm
M. Righty — “So anything the Republicans did is okay with you?”
Did I say that? Or are you just making crap up again and trying to attribute it to me?
“I thought the whole attraction of Obama was that he was diferent and was going to change things for the better.”
When have I ever told you why I voted for Obama?
“I guess you gave up on that.”
Once again, when have I ever told you why I voted for Obama?
“Can’t blame you.”
No, not at all, especially when I didn’t say or think that at all. You certainly can’t blame me for not hewing to your fantabulist construction that bears no resemblance to what I actually think. :eyeroll:
“Every single economic category is worse under Obama which is why he became the first president to give a state of the union speech without mentioning any accomplisments.”
Cry, Debbie, cry. (laughing)
Welcome to the Occupation
January 27th, 2012
12:13 pm
Steve USA: “I honestly don’t follow where you want this country to go? I am a lot more interested to hear in what you DO want instead of what you DON’T want to do.”
I can try to reformulate everything I’ve said as positive assertions rather than negative, but it will still remain somewhat vague until we have a political awakening and a reorientation of our entire political dialog away from the sham alternatives represented by the Republican and Democratic parties. The Occupy movement perhaps represents the very first signs of such an awakening.
I want a world in which the risks are not socialized while the profits are increasingly funneled to a tiny elite. I want a world in which practices such as health care, which should have nothing to do with the profit motive, are not strangled by profiteering. I want a world in which people are not forced to live in dormitories, working 12 hr shifts for peanuts and without labor regulation or benefits, just to allow western capitalists to pocket even mightier profits.
Notice I said ‘world’, not country here. The solutions we’re looking for will have to be world-wide in scope. Globalization is an irreversible process.
midtownguy
January 27th, 2012
12:14 pm
Kamchak: I read that as well. But Hillary is a Clinton. If the polls show she has a god shot, I think she will run. But that is for another day.
jewcowboy
January 27th, 2012
12:14 pm
midtownguy,
“I guess we get four more years of Obama then it will be Hillary’s turn.”
I’m all for Hillary too, but it seems we are destined for disappointment.
“I have made it clear that I will certainly stay on until the president nominates someone and that transition can occur” if Obama wins re-election, she told a town hall meeting. “But I think after 20 years, and it will be 20 years, of being on the high wire of American politics and all of the challenges that come with that, it would be probably a good idea to just find out how tired I am.”
Though: “But, she appeared to leave the door open for a possible eventual return, adding to laughter from the crowd that “everyone always says that when they leave these jobs.”"
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=145909698
getalife
January 27th, 2012
12:14 pm
I told you facts don’t matter this cycle.
Just look at all the lies willard spews.
Fact check his facts to see he is lying.
He has a truthiness problem.
They BOTH suck
January 27th, 2012
12:14 pm
MightyRighty (Birther Lite)
From the last article
Keep pondering on that birther issue. It is getting as much traction as it did before the last election….. yeah that was just what you need to get over the hump
Joe Hussein Mama
January 27th, 2012
12:15 pm
(ir)Rational — I hear what you’re saying, but frankly, I think you two are just talking past each other. May I suggest a break for lunch, and then a truce and restart of the conversation afterwards?
Steve - USA (I support "None Of The Above")
January 27th, 2012
12:15 pm
“I understand that she just announced her intentions to retire from politics.”
I guess that means we will miss out on all those clever appearance jokes like they make about NG.
midtownguy
January 27th, 2012
12:15 pm
I do believe Haley Barbour of Mississippi when he said he was leaving politics. He pardoned hundreds of criminals, some dangerous ones, most of whom are white. He is never running for anything again.
barking frog
January 27th, 2012
12:15 pm
TBS, accepted.
jewcowboy
January 27th, 2012
12:15 pm
(ir)Rational,
“Then her dad would find out and I would be WISHING I was dead.”
getalife
January 27th, 2012
12:16 pm
Hillary is done with politics.
She did not lie like willard.