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
Thulsa Doom
January 27th, 2012
1:47 pm
Mick,
Example?
Boris Badnoff
January 27th, 2012
1:49 pm
Those of you who snickered when Newt warned us of the perils of Gay Marriage need to realize that it leads to this
http://www.komonews.com/news/local/138158504.html
Next someone will try to marry the Downtown Connector.
Butch Cassidy
January 27th, 2012
1:50 pm
Thulsa Doom – “I’ve never seen you take a conservative position. Not once”
So you missed the times when I advocated the repeal of the Bush tax cuts for everyone, or the the elimination of the EITC, or that I didn’t vote for Obama or particularly like him.
Thulsa Doom
January 27th, 2012
1:50 pm
Butch,
Nope. We can give those jobs to Americans at $17 an hour and pay $1600 for our I-phones. And of course no one is going to buy them and apple goes out of business and in addition to laying off those newly hired American workers it would have to lay off the 43,000 American workers they already have in the U.S. Back to square 1.
Peadawg
January 27th, 2012
1:50 pm
“I’m all for putting those Chinese workers out of work to where they don’t even make a dime that day. ”
Why are you worried about Chinese workers and not AMERICAN workers?
Jim Pierce
January 27th, 2012
1:51 pm
Let me guess, Bookman. You are another liberal right?
Adam
January 27th, 2012
1:51 pm
md: Your excuses argument is just as fallacious as your choices argument. Except that you’re only using the excuses thing to make yourself feel like you have a point on the choices thing.
You don’t.
People can’t create an emergency fund without leftover money. Some people don’t have that and won’t have that. Some people who are making a good salary don’t have that and won’t have that (unless their entire family dies horribly). No amount of choices available to people like that will get them out of it without violating one of your many rules about what a good choice is. Most of the ones that have a good chance of working historically, such as student loans, both no longer work and also carry the extra burden of people judging that person for even trying – people like you.
Your answer is to not even try unless you can already afford it. THAT is an excuse. An excuse to stay in your situation.
It’s certainly safer and smarter, after all, to never get a loan of any kind until you can somehow afford to sock away 6 months of salary, and even then you better hope you never have to use it… again with the risk. And yet your hypocritical response is to not take these risks to try to make your life better because you should have known it had a chance of failure. You shouldn’t take out a loan to get a house to make you and your family’s life better unless you already have saved up enough to weather any possible outcome that is beyond your control – like a global economic collapse. You say people should EXPECT that, and make sure they do not make choices that will be certain to be deemed bad ones by people who judge – you – if they are met with circumstances beyond their control.
I understand that you made your own life better with similar risks. Had the global economic collapse come around at the wrong time for you, you would not be singing this same tune. And it takes a special kind of intellectual dishonesty to think this way just because you are ok now.
(ir)Rational
January 27th, 2012
1:52 pm
Butch – Since when did repealing the tax cuts become a conservative position? And by conservative position, I mean one held by those calling themselves conservatives?
Peadawg
January 27th, 2012
1:53 pm
“Let me guess, Bookman. You are another liberal right?”
You must be new here….
YOUR party SUCKS! But MINE is GRRRRRREAT! (formerly That Black Guy)
January 27th, 2012
1:53 pm
Mick
January 27th, 2012
10:48 am
Rubio has some other problems like his house mortgage is underwater by about 100k and he has an equity line of 130k.
Mick, have you checked that Rueters story for all the retractions they had to issue relating to this story?
Butch Cassidy
January 27th, 2012
1:53 pm
Thulsa Doom – “We can give those jobs to Americans at $17 an hour and pay $1600 for our I-phones. And of course no one is going to buy them and apple goes out of business”
Apple has been making products since the late 70’s. My family had one of the first Macs in 1985. I don’t recall hearing of Apple teetering on the brink of diaster prior to them engaging the Chinese.
Thulsa Doom
January 27th, 2012
1:54 pm
Butch
I didn’t know repealing the W tax cuts was a con position. I didn’t say that you’ve never had a con position. Just that I’ve never seen it. I now stand corrected that you do in fact have 2 con positions the EITC credit and perhaps no pro Obama preference.
jewcowboy
January 27th, 2012
1:54 pm
md,
“it seems that average consumer unit also has about 20% of expenditures that are not necessities…….meaning choices?”
Apologies…I was in a meeting. Please breakdown the 20% you do not consider “necessities”.
Thulsa Doom
January 27th, 2012
1:54 pm
Butch
I didn’t know repealing the W tax cuts was a con position. I didn’t say that you’ve never had a con position. Just that I’ve never seen it. I now stand corrected that you do in fact have 2 con positions the EITC credit and perhaps no pro Obama preference.
barking frog
January 27th, 2012
1:55 pm
Your party sucks, 1:23, if you prefer could have given to give, have at it.
Paul
January 27th, 2012
1:55 pm
Sucks 1:35
“Since the withdrawl date was settled BEFORE Obama took office, how could they STILL be getting killed and blown up in Iraq?”
Jack’s comment was Pres Obama hadn’t produced “anything other than confusion.”
My answer was directed at that.
BTW – so now the Right is saying that Pres Obama was bound by a withdrawal date settled before he took the oath of office?
Just a couple months ago the line was we had to leave because he blew the negotiations.
Rule of Thumb: invent whatever history is necessary to make the Pres look bad.
Adam
January 27th, 2012
1:55 pm
md: Yes it is…….as I said before, it can be done in small increments……but a choice none the less. (Had you said “some” people, you might have a point, but you chose to use “most”)
I already illustrated how stupid this is using your Mars bars and pennies argument. In the context of your argument – which you seem to forget – is how one should anticipate that their whole world could be turned upside down TOMORROW, and therefore they should save 6 months of salary TODAY. Even if the next collapse happens two years from now, 6 months of salary in two years is 1/4 of that person’s paycheck. No one can do that unless they are already spending 1/4 of their paycheck frivolously, which, contrary to popular belief, is not what is happening with most families.
Welcome to the Occupation
January 27th, 2012
1:56 pm
Thulsa Doom: “We can give those jobs to Americans at $17 an hour and pay $1600 for our I-phones. And of course no one is going to buy them and apple goes out of business …”
That’s incorrect. According to the story we’re discussing, it was determined that were the phones being made in the US with appropriate wages it would translate into a price increase per unit of $65 for an iPhone. Hardly a dealbraker and would still allow for lavish profits to be realized.
But in the end, it’s a moot point because we’re not yet at a point where Americans are willing to live in barracks in faraway cities with no family connections and work 12 hr shifts for no benefits.
THOSE are the conditions that are the face of your new global capitalism.
Workers hurling themselves off the top of Foxconn’s buildings in desperation at their life conditions.
Are you on board with that? Does that kind of world get your thumbs up?
Adam
January 27th, 2012
1:56 pm
md: I also see you felt the need to respond to me three different times so far that I have read, in three separate posts. Getting under your skin, am I?
You are wrong about your excuses argument.
jewcowboy
January 27th, 2012
1:57 pm
Steve – USA,
“The guy does seem pretty thin skinned.”
Really? With all the lies and vitriol pouring from the right for years, he seems incredibly thick skinned to me.
Mick
January 27th, 2012
1:58 pm
doomy
My good man, I said half, do you really think I need to cite your eloquent waxations? No, the other half you can be a real hoot! So, don’t go spineless jellyfish on me and man up…
Adam
January 27th, 2012
1:59 pm
Butch: Get what, that you would prefer the Unioted States go back to the good old days of sweat shops, no safety regulations, company store, 7 day work weeks and 5 year olds shoveling coal into boilers?
After all, that would surely fix the problem of “people not showing up for work” because they are “satisfied” with food stamps.
Peadawg
January 27th, 2012
1:59 pm
“The guy does seem pretty thin skinned.”
You mean Newt? Yes, we saw that last night.
williebkind
January 27th, 2012
2:01 pm
I hope you liberals get what you want. Romney will be the next president. There will be a conservative senate and a conservative house. Next, is to appoint conservative judges and school teachers.
Mick
January 27th, 2012
2:01 pm
willie
You be trippin…
stands for decibels
January 27th, 2012
2:02 pm
Romney said he will repeal Obamacare if he is elected
President. This is the first flat lie I have heard him expound.
I’ve got another one for you (emphasis mine).
“[A]s president, I will support efforts to prohibit federal funding for any organization like Planned Parenthood, which primarily performs abortions or offers abortion-related services.“
Adam
January 27th, 2012
2:02 pm
Doom: Let’s just outlaw corporations and we can all go work for the govt.
Straw man extreme response. No one is suggesting that as an answer to the argument of eliminating laws.
Hint: Some candidates actually are proposing eliminating nearly all laws and regulations for businesses, claiming they hamper business.
Not a single rational human being buys that. And no one is suggesting “oh yeah, well how about you don’t get CORPORATIONS anymore. NYYYYAAAAAHHHH!” That would be just as childish and foolish as trying to turn this society into a libertarian utopia.
Steve - USA (I support "None Of The Above")
January 27th, 2012
2:02 pm
“Really?” Yes, extremely so.
BTW – that reminds me, good to see “Really” is no longer around. Woo Hoo
jewcowboy
January 27th, 2012
2:02 pm
Thulsa Doom,
“Apple executives say that going overseas, at this point, is their only option.”
Left unsaid is it is their only option in order to maintain a 71-75% profit margin on the iPhone 4.
$1,000,000,000 in cash.
Adam
January 27th, 2012
2:03 pm
RB: Nope, just with people would get up in the morning, go to work, achieve what they’re able and willing to work for, and be happy about it.
“You TAKE me being a d*ck to you when you work for me. You TAKE it and you LIKE it!”
Pizza
January 27th, 2012
2:04 pm
This Obama supporter will vote Newt on Super Tuesday. Haw – Haw – Haw !
Steve - USA (I support "None Of The Above")
January 27th, 2012
2:05 pm
“$1,000,000,000 in cash.”
They have more than $1 Billion.
Thulsa Doom
January 27th, 2012
2:06 pm
Mick,
I just asked for one example. Clearly I make facetious exagerations that are meant as a joke but when I see exaggerations such as mentioning going back to 5 year old labor in the mines it looks to me like that person actually believes that. Maybe Butch was being facetious but it just didn’t appear that way.
Adam
January 27th, 2012
2:06 pm
Doom: Liberals do loves themselves those knee jerk, extreme examples they do.
Pot.
Kettle.
Black.
Adam
January 27th, 2012
2:08 pm
jewcowboy: Really? With all the lies and vitriol pouring from the right for years, he seems incredibly thick skinned to me.
Word
Thulsa Doom
January 27th, 2012
2:08 pm
“According to the story we’re discussing, it was determined that were the phones being made in the US with appropriate wages it would translate into a price increase per unit of $65 for an iPhone.”
Occupation,
Yes. I mentioned that. But it doesn’t say that we are or can do that. And for that matter that was the opinion of several experts who think it can be done. Not that it has been done. Furthermore what you miss is the speed and ramp up of putting an assembly into immediately into operation in China. It can’t be done that quickly or easily here in the U.S. which adds enormously to cost. You’re not factoring ease of doing business, nor scale or ramp up time into cost.
Kamchak
January 27th, 2012
2:08 pm
Oooh, the overplayed, “I was just joking” card.
Show of hands who didn’t see that one coming.
williebkind
January 27th, 2012
2:09 pm
Welcome to the Occupation
January 27th, 2012
1:56 pm
It’s the OWS group that destroys property and kills people not capitalism. You know you dont have to work for that corporation. You can get a liberal education and teach college somewhere and indoctrinate the students to become more like Europe. Then you will have your live in barracks in faraway cities with no family connections and work for everybodies benefits.
Dr. Pangloss
January 27th, 2012
2:09 pm
We’d like to set the record straight by singing of the newt
For newts are open-minded; they are flexible and cute
A newt can breathe in water and a newt can breathe on land
And if you are a different critter newts will understand
Newts are not mean-spirited; they never are unfair
Newts are not underhanded and are not afraid to share
Newts do not have bad haircuts because newts are lacking hair
But the newt called Gingrich drives all true newts to despair
Gingrich the Newt’s a disgrace to the name
When true newts see him they feel so ashamed
He’s the black sheep of the newt family
The one rotten fruit on the newt family tree
Newts don’t prey on other newts; in that they don’t believe
And you will never catch a newt with something up his sleeve
[ From: http://www.elyrics.net/read/a/austin-lounge-lizards-lyrics/gingrich-the-newt-lyrics.html ]
They’re tolerant to different environments and so
They don’t sen little newties to the orphanage to grow
What kind of newt wears a suit and a tie
And frightens small children as he rushes by?
But we admit that his suit suits him good
Much more discreet than a sheet and a hood
A newt may be cold-blooded but he won’t go to extremes
And you can trust a newt to be exactly what he seems
Newts are sorry if you’re sad; they’re happy if you’re gay
But Gingrich is perverse, and worse
He’s proud to be that way
Gingrich the Newt is puffed up like a toad
So full of himself that he’s bound to explode
And then we’ll raise up our tails in salute
A fitting tribute
To that horse’s patoot
Gingrich the Newt
— The Austin Lounge Lizards
Thulsa Doom
January 27th, 2012
2:10 pm
Typical lib. Wouldn’t know facetiousness or dry humor from their own butt. Speaking of that gotta go feed the 2 goats- Karl and Kurt.
philosopher
January 27th, 2012
2:11 pm
I am always amazed and amused at the myriad ways folks unashamedly present “facts” to suit whatever it is they want to sell people they think are too stupid to question them. Would someone- OK-Bruno-you’re it-tell us where the facts are that support your assertion that PRESIDENT Obama initiated that childish rant by the governor of Arizona?
What I saw and read said nothing of the sort. What I saw was a childish, immature, finger-shaking attack that in many places (God bless America) would have gotten her shot.
Thulsa Doom
January 27th, 2012
2:13 pm
Adam,
You may need some help along with Kam in understanding tone, the difference between when someone is being serious or facetious. Facetiousness and dry humor is usually reserved for people of higher IQ. That may explain a lot as to why you, kam, and keep never seem to grasp it.
jewcowboy
January 27th, 2012
2:13 pm
Steve – USA,
“They have more than $1 Billion”
Opps!
Meant $100,000,000,000
http://business.time.com/2012/01/26/100-billion-question-what-should-apple-do-with-its-cash/
Finn McCool (Class Warfare = Stopping Rich People from TAKING MORE of OUR MONEY)
January 27th, 2012
2:13 pm
The entire Star Wars: New Hope movie shot by amateurs.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=7ezeYJUz-84#!
Adam
January 27th, 2012
2:14 pm
Doom: You may need some help along with Kam in understanding tone, the difference between when someone is being serious or facetious.
Oh come on man….
Adam
January 27th, 2012
2:15 pm
Attacker: (Insert insult here)
Attackee: “WTF dude, you do the same thing.”
Attacker: “Lighten up, I was ONLY JOKING.”
Stop gaslighting.
RB from Gwinnett
January 27th, 2012
2:16 pm
“I’ve never seen you take a conservative position. Not once. ”
Nailed it. You’ll be known by what you post here, Butch, and by what you post, you’re the definition of a liberal.
Steve - USA (I support "None Of The Above")
January 27th, 2012
2:16 pm
“Opps” – I figured that, easy mistake with all those 0’s.
I am the King of typo’s here. I have to learn to proof read.
md
January 27th, 2012
2:17 pm
“So you prefer that Americans are put out of work to where they don’t even make a dime that day instead?”
They are doing a darn good job of doing that themselves……who exactly do you think is buying all the stuff made with cheap labor??
it’s a simple concept…….don’t buy the cheap crap and it won’t be shipped in……….good ole supply and demand………or in this case, demand and supply.
Adam
January 27th, 2012
2:17 pm
RB: you’re the definition of a liberal.
liberal – what a conservative calls anyone who says anything that is in disagreement with the drudge report talking points.
Mick
January 27th, 2012
2:20 pm
doom
It’s friday, rb is as cantankerous and miserable as usual, the eagle is flying, and I’m going to live some great life this weekend! Till later, roger out…
Adam
January 27th, 2012
2:21 pm
rb is as cantankerous and miserable as usual,
nailed it
md
January 27th, 2012
2:22 pm
“Apologies…I was in a meeting. Please breakdown the 20% you do not consider “necessities”.”
Well, look at each category, 100% of entertainment is a want, 10+% is “all other”…..not sure how that one breaks down…..and the jump to transportation which states all households with 2 cars……then factor in housing as a choice vs a need and what percentage is necessities? I get roughly 20%.
(ir)Rational
January 27th, 2012
2:23 pm
jewcowboy – Why are people so obsessed with what others/companies make? I really don’t understand the obsession.
Kamchak
January 27th, 2012
2:25 pm
“You don’t understand I could’ve had class, I coulda been a contender, I could’ve been somebody… instead of a bum which is what I am.”
–Thomas Jefferson
Butch Cassidy
January 27th, 2012
2:25 pm
RB From Gwinnett – “Nailed it. You’ll be known by what you post here, Butch, and by what you post, you’re the definition of a liberal.”
Really, wanting to repeal the Bush tax cuts across the board, eliminating the EITC, bringing jobs back to America so that we can reduce the unemployment rate even if it costs the company a couple of bucks, and wanting clean air and water makes me a liberal? I’m almost afraid to ask what defines a “con”.
jewcowboy
January 27th, 2012
2:25 pm
“Facetiousness and dry humor is usually reserved for people of higher IQ.”
And so easily translated into written word, without vocal tone and pitch.
md
January 27th, 2012
2:27 pm
Adam……..geez guy, even more excuses. I’ve seen my share of excuse makers in my day, but you get the crown.
That 6 months number is a goal……a recommendation by smart money people……and yes, some will never be able to achieve that number…….but don’t discount the others than can do it if they so choose based on what “some” may not be able to do…….
The point is, the smart money people recommend folks save money…….ANYTHING saved towards that 6 month supply is better than NOTHING saved……..but you are more than welcome to live under the assumption that it’s a stupid idea…….should serve you well in the future, along with the other xxx number of people that will come up with some excuse to NOT save……….
stands for decibels
January 27th, 2012
2:28 pm
the OWS group that destroys property and kills people
not intended as a factual statement
(ir)Rational
January 27th, 2012
2:28 pm
sfd – Maybe not the killing people part (I quit paying close enough attention that I don’t know if anyone died or not), but the destruction of property part is most definitely a factual statement.
TomJeff
January 27th, 2012
2:29 pm
RB from Gwinnett@2:16 pm
‘You’ll be known by what you post here’
—————————–
And you RB will be known the same way. An A$$hat
Adam
January 27th, 2012
2:29 pm
md: Adam……..geez guy, even more excuses.
You’re only proving you don’t know what that word means. I hope you feel real good about making the accusation, because that’s about all you’re getting out of it. Everyone else is scratching their heads wondering why you’re screwing with the English language.
(ir)Rational
January 27th, 2012
2:29 pm
jewcowboy @ 2:25 – That is something I struggle with daily. There needs to be a sarcastic font we can use on here.
Butch Cassidy
January 27th, 2012
2:31 pm
I was thinking, if President Newt did get the approval for the moon base project, he could combine two programs into one. Afterall, since things are weightless in zero grav, he could send the 9 year olds to the moon for the construction of the new station. Brilliant!
Welcome to the Occupation
January 27th, 2012
2:32 pm
williebkind: “It’s the OWS group that destroys property and kills people not capitalism. You know you dont have to work for that corporation. You can get a liberal education and teach college somewhere and indoctrinate the students to become more like Europe. Then you will have your live in barracks in faraway cities with no family connections and work for everybodies benefits”
Lol. That’s actually a pretty funny parody of the actual conditions of academia currently.
But, seriously, you simply sidestepped my challenge. Do you or do you not accept the brutality of the face of global capitalism.
Mr. Jobs gets his no-scratch glass panes for his phones turned around in just 6 weeks time. But meanwhile employees are hurling themselves from the rooftops at his affiliate Foxconn over desperate living conditions.
Is that a good trade off in your view? To live in a world like that?
Common Sense isn't very Common
January 27th, 2012
2:32 pm
This is the way Newt looked at the end of the debate.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UejelYnVI3U
Steve - USA (I support "None Of The Above")
January 27th, 2012
2:33 pm
A house requires money for repairs not just job loss. If you can’t have some cash reserves you shouldn’t own a house.
(ir)Rational
January 27th, 2012
2:33 pm
Adam – To some people, any reason that you’re not doing what they claim they’re doing, or say you should be doing is nothing more than an excuse. Like, when I was growing up, and got in trouble so I was told to paint the window frames (exterior) on my grandparent’s house. It was raining so hard you could barely see outside, and my dad told me that was just an “excuse” as to why I wasn’t painting the windows. I thought it was a pretty good reason, but hey, according to md, maybe I should have planned ahead and had the entire house encapsulated in a bubble or tent or something so I could paint in the rain.
md
January 27th, 2012
2:34 pm
No Adam……everyone else is scratching their heads as to why you must think it isn’t a choice to save money………
361 more days
January 27th, 2012
2:34 pm
Adam
January 27th, 2012
2:17 pm
Spoken just like the DNC paid representative that you are
Kamchak
January 27th, 2012
2:35 pm
A house requires money for repairs not just job loss. If you can’t have some cash reserves you shouldn’t own a house.
Buy new, as they have warranties.
Erwin's cat
January 27th, 2012
2:35 pm
ir – “ewcowboy @ 2:25 – That is something I struggle with daily. There needs to be a sarcastic font we can use on here.”
Agreed
Kamchak
January 27th, 2012
2:36 pm
…everyone else is…
Who exactly, granted you the authority to speak for, “everyone else”?
(ir)Rational
January 27th, 2012
2:36 pm
Steve – What if you don’t have to hire people to fix those things for you? What if the house was inherited? What if rent in the area you’re buying the house is 3 times what the mortgage is? What if you have a house, and had a reserve but spent it? There are a lot of ‘what ifs’ in life, not all situations are the same. Having said that, yeah, I definitely think you should have reserves built up in case of emergencies. Saying you shouldn’t own a house if you don’t have any reserves is a little extreme though.
md
January 27th, 2012
2:36 pm
“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”
Those are your words Adam………so what exactly are you saying there? That a person can make the CHOICE to make the commitment to save??
Or does that commitment just come out of the blue riding on a pink unicorn??
stands for decibels
January 27th, 2012
2:37 pm
but the destruction of property part is most definitely a factual statement.
when you consider the massive mobilizations of hundreds of thousands of people across the country who’ve been afffiliated with the OWS movement, and you compare the piddling little reports hither and yon of some vandalizing—and remember, these have been encampments that have been open to literally anyone who wants to join them, self-policed, and there have been reports of police rousting homeless people and telling them to go crash at the OWS encampments?
And you compare this to the calculated terror campaigns launched by the likes of Operation Rescue, targeting clinic workers and their families?
It’s not even close.
(ir)Rational
January 27th, 2012
2:37 pm
Kam – Better yet, come to me, I’ll design you exactly what you want/need, and then you can have it built!
Steve - USA (I support "None Of The Above")
January 27th, 2012
2:38 pm
“Buy new, as they have warranties.”
*facepalm*
Thulsa Doom
January 27th, 2012
2:38 pm
“Left unsaid is it is their only option in order to maintain a 71-75% profit margin on the iPhone 4.’
Good thing nobody puts a gun to our heads and makes us buy one a them 71% profit margin I-phones.
71% profit margin. I just can’t get over that. Makes you wonder why they don’t demonize Apple the way they do insurance companies with average profit margins of 3-5% or oil companies with average profit margins of 7-9%. Anyone know what google’s profit margin is?
RB from Gwinnett
January 27th, 2012
2:39 pm
Hey TomJeff. What moniker do you normally post under that you’re hiding behind for that post?
Geez.. Are you 12 or what?
Erwin's cat
January 27th, 2012
2:39 pm
md – agree on the 6 mo stash….don’t understand why more don’t
as to Adam’s point that some don’t make enough to save is pure bologna…one can always squeeze out a buck here and there…my parents and grandparents did it and believe me they didn’t come from money
AmVet
January 27th, 2012
2:41 pm
It would seem that a certain blogger here hates “liberal” education to the point that he swore it off at a very early age.
Steve - USA (I support "None Of The Above")
January 27th, 2012
2:41 pm
Erwin,
Exactly.
(ir)Rational
January 27th, 2012
2:43 pm
sfd – Whether they compare to something else or not doesn’t make it factually incorrect. Also, not saying it isn’t out there, but I haven’t found any incidences of Operation Rescue (I’m assuming your referring to the Pro-Life/Anti-Choice group) being violent. Definitely not saying they don’t exist, don’t know much of anything about the group other than what my 2 min Google search taught me. But the fact that they have destroyed property (did you see what happened in Oakland?) makes the destruction of property a factual statement. You don’t have to like it or agree with it, but you can’t refute it with facts.
RB from Gwinnett
January 27th, 2012
2:44 pm
Adam – How’s that survey of business owners coming along? Looking forward to hearing your report.
(ir)Rational
January 27th, 2012
2:44 pm
Steve @ 2:38 – Flag on the play, only Bro does the facepalm.
YOUR party SUCKS! But MINE is GRRRRRREAT! (formerly That Black Guy)
January 27th, 2012
2:44 pm
Adam
January 27th, 2012
10:56 am
WOODSTOCK: You won’t hear a Democrat say a word about this
From the SOTU:
Our experience with shale gas, our experience with natural gas, shows us that the payoffs on these public investments don’t always come right away (except for my donors who I put ahead of the taxpayers). Some technologies don’t pan out; some companies fail (but we will still invest taxpayer money into them, even if they have a CCC rating). But I will not walk away from the promise of clean energy (that my bundlers are invested in). I will not walk away from workers like Bryan (who is not a bundler and may lose him job like thousands of others in this industry AFTER we sink taxpayer $$$ into it without verifying that their business model will ACTUALLY work.) . (Applause.) I will not cede the wind or solar or battery industry to China or Germany because we refuse to make the same commitment here (because these bundlers have given my campaign hundreds of MILLIONS of dollars and they must get a return on their investment, no risk involved).
There, fixed that for ya Obama.
Thulsa Doom
January 27th, 2012
2:44 pm
“And so easily translated into written word, without vocal tone and pitch.’
That’s some good sarcasm. And it didn’t need the spoken word. A great example of what I’m talking about. Thanks jewcowboy.
Adam
January 27th, 2012
2:45 pm
(ir)Rational: I thought it was a pretty good reason, but hey, according to md, maybe I should have planned ahead and had the entire house encapsulated in a bubble or tent or something so I could paint in the rain.
It is a little hard not to make fun of someone’s argument like this if all realities are ignored in order to perpetuate this idea that everyone has the same opportunity to make a choice of… whatever it is they are judging should be done by OTHER PEOPLE…. The unfortunate thing being a lack of empathy or sympathy that it would be unreasonable to expect whatever amount being saved to amount to 6 months in anything less than a good portion of that person’s lifetime before they are “allowed” to make other risky choices to better their situation.
Saving $10 a week is what you tell a CHILD to do, because they don’t have to take care of the entire family. Even if one follows that advice, it won’t amount to anything worthwhile. You’ll blow through it and still have to borrow the very moment you have to do any unexpected maintenance on the family car FFS. It’s not reasonable to expect a 6 month salary savings result from most families in anything less than the amount of time it takes for another economic bubble to burst.
Steve - USA (I support "None Of The Above")
January 27th, 2012
2:46 pm
“(ir)Rational”,
If you can buy a house and rent it out for 3 times the rent I suggest you buy as many of those homes as you can.
Maybe just charge twice the amount, I wouldn’t want anyone calling you an evil profiteer.
Adam
January 27th, 2012
2:47 pm
RB: Adam – How’s that survey of business owners coming along?
Slowly. Still trying to get a representative sample. At least I was wrong that NO ONE would answer my questions. But it’s still hard to get a good number of managers to even agree to talk.
Steve - USA (I support "None Of The Above")
January 27th, 2012
2:47 pm
Adam – “It’s not reasonable to expect a 6 month salary savings result from most families in anything less than the amount of time it takes for another economic bubble to burst.”
LMAO
They BOTH suck
January 27th, 2012
2:48 pm
RB
“Geez.. Are you 12 or what?”
Good afternoon. If you reread some of your own post where you come out the gate calling people names, etc.
You could be asking yourself the same question
Besides that. Hope all is well with you and yours
(ir)Rational
January 27th, 2012
2:48 pm
Adam – I find it weird, you and I have been agreeing more and more recently. Is it just that you’re getting smarter
or that the people here are getting crazier?
Adam
January 27th, 2012
2:49 pm
Erwin: How long would it take if you saved $20 out of every paycheck for you to have 6 months worth of salary.
You guys are missing the point. It’s not that it’s not possible, it’s that it will take so long that to expect anyone who isn’t already more than comfortable financially to be able to sock away that much money BEFORE getting a mortgage or student loan is absurd. One must wait 10 years to go back to school? In the meantime, hope the economy doesn’t blow up!
Adam
January 27th, 2012
2:50 pm
(ir)Rational: I am not sure much has changed for anyone here, you and I included. We’re not talking about the same stuff today as we did when we were disagreeing, I think.
md
January 27th, 2012
2:50 pm
“but hey, according to md, maybe I should have planned ahead and had the entire house encapsulated in a bubble or tent or something so I could paint in the rain.”
Now you are being just as silly as Adam…….makes you look silly, not me. Care to expand on your claim?
Do you also claim that most people how no control over the choice to save money?
jewcowboy
January 27th, 2012
2:52 pm
(ir)Rational,
“Why are people so obsessed with what others/companies make? I really don’t understand the obsession.”
In this case, I think it may be from Mitch Daniels rebuttal to the SOTU: “The late Steve Jobs — what a fitting name he had — created more of them than all those stimulus dollars the president borrowed and blew.”
If an American corporation is going to shown as a bastion of virtue, then shouldn’t they have some allegiance to America? The are sitting on $100B in profits, make an absolutely stunning 75% profit margin on one of their biggest selling products and achieve that by giving 700k jobs to China and 43k jobs to the US.
(ir)Rational
January 27th, 2012
2:52 pm
Steve – That was meant as an exaggeration, but it is interesting that that is the only part of my comment you have a response to. In reality, when I bought my house, I was saving about $200 a month over rent. The other costs were comparable (utilities). I thought, at the time, it was a good idea. I didn’t have much saved up at the time, and I don’t have anything right now. Between then and now, I managed to save about 4 months salary and then spend it all when my wife lost her job a couple of years back. Guess by your reasoning though, I shouldn’t own a house.
jewcowboy
January 27th, 2012
2:54 pm
(ir)Rational,
“That is something I struggle with daily. There needs to be a sarcastic font we can use on here.”
I tend to be more overt in my snark to make sure it gets through. ;