which one is Newt? All look similar.

Tovarichi wrote:which one is Newt? All look similar.

Yanno, that confuses me a little. Herman Cain gets the Good Old Number 9 character assassination, and now NEWT steps up to the plate?

NEWT?? WTH?? As if there's no skeletons in his closet.

At the same time it seems "They" (whoever "They" are) have been "nudging" RINO Romney as THE CHOICE ever since this started.

Seems to this old phart Scratchanitch that "They" (whoever "They" are) might be working up another one of those "Choose the Lesser of the Two Evils" elections again.

Sort of like a Soviet election.

The sheep will like Newt Romney now
Like him, pick him, golly! wow!
Hey Newt Romney - take a bow

Sheep like voting, like to choose
Like Newt Romney in the news!
Baa-baa-baaa, like little Whos

Leader Dear has got it made
Got it, got it - in the shade!
Repub Good Cop, bought and paid

So when a third grader guesses there are 57 states, he does not get a pass the way Dear Leader did.

R.O.C.K. in the USSA wrote:The sheep will like Newt Romney now
Like him, pick him, golly! wow!
Hey Newt Romney - take a bow

Sheep like voting, like to choose
Like Newt Romney in the news!
Baa-baa-baaa, like little Whos

Leader Dear has got it made
Got it, got it - in the shade!
Repub Good Cop, bought and paid

Get with the The Party™, they are not sheep, they are RACIST!. Even the Reich-wing monster Glenn Beck is on board.

Newt demonstrating his powers- elevating glass globes mysteriously over his head.

Newt - A Good Debater??? ROFLMAO.....
He doesn't even know "how".....

I never realized that weasels were cannibalistic.

The only real issue here is which weasel was the first to bite, it could have been Noot with huge appetite and waistline to match. A formal complaint should have been filed with PETA, the UN, Arab League, Boys Town, and anyone else who wanted a copy.

Comrade Krasnodar, I am much for liking this 2012 campaign poster!

I, myself, will be voting for Newt Romney (after I vote for Dear Leader a dozen or so times).

Newt a Rino??? I remember the days of the glorious Clinton revolution. Newt was the conservative's champion and mucked up our progressive world, leading Billie by the nose to welfare reform and balanced budgets. Or has the past current truth been re-written? If so, I didn't get the memo.

I think I understand why some comrades have a skewed view of Newt's conservative credentials. Perhaps their signals are no longer coming from Laika, but from another strong force...

[img]images/clipart/Prog_Off.gif[/img]

Maksim.... do a quick survey for yourself regarding the last few years of Newt's voting records and public positions concerning illegall immigration,single-payer obamacare, bank bailouts, global warming cap & trade, etc. You be the judge.

[img]images/clipart/Prog_On.gif[/img]

As a devout Obama supporter, the GOP nomination of Gingrich would be welcome news!

Politics explained as simply as possible-

Looks like Debbie Wasserman-Schultz. And it looks like she hasn't lost any of her charm !

Krasnodar wrote:Looks like Debbie Wasserman-Schultz. And it looks like she hasn't lost any of her charm !

They grow up so fast.

Krasnodar wrote:Maksim.... do a quick survey for yourself regarding the last few years of Newt's voting records and public positions concerning illegall immigration,single-payer obamacare, bank bailouts, global warming cap & trade, etc. You be the judge.

Other than Obama, the perfect canidate does not exist. However my point is, labeling Gingrich a RINO is ALMOST as absurd as George Will calling him a Marxist, or Glenn Beck calling him a Progressive. It's lunacy. Newt is and will be our sworn enemy for all of eternity. Because he is and always has been a Conservative.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=p ... 8zz5myJ_hs#!

Maksim, Prog Off and all that, but Newt *IS* the very definition of a RINO.

As Krasnodar suggested, don't go by his rep from the heady days of 1994 - look at his voting record and associations ever since then.

Sigh...

Prog back on, for what it's worth...

Newt resigned in 99 so he hasn't had a voting record since. Prior to that it is impressive if you are a rabid Reich-wing conservative.

Voted YES on the Reagan tax cut of 1981
Voted YES on the Reagan tax reform bill of 1986
Voted NO on the George H.W. Bush "Read My Lips" tax hike in 1990.
Voted NO on the Clinton tax hike in 1993.
Voted YES on the capital gains tax cut in 1997.
Voted NO on the Chrysler bailout in 1979
Voted YES on the Gramm-Rudman balanced budget bill in 1985
Voted YES on a balanced budget amendment (as part of the "Contract for America" effort that he led) in 1995
Led the effort and voted YES to cut $16.4 billion from the budget in 1995.
Voted YES on welfare reform in 1996


100% - Gingrich: Annual 1998 ACU Rating (90% Lifetime Rating as of 1998)
88% -Ron Paul: Annual 1998 ACU Rating (88% Lifetime Rating as of 1998)
84% - Santorum: Annual 1998 ACU Rating (83% Lifetime Rating as of 1998)

[img]images/clipart/Prog_Off.gif[/img]


The latest of these accomplishments was 13 yrs. ago.
That's an eternity in D.C. Politics.

I'm more concerned about , say, the last three years.

He has had no voting record in the last three years!!!

Club for growth has a fair run down on Newt, the good and bad. If you can read that and still call him a RINO, then you would also have to call Reagan one.

Rather than type a bunch of stuff that will no doubt be ignored, here's a link that sums it up:

https://www.theamericanconservative.com/blog/2011/05/19/newt-gingrich-is-not-a-conservative/

Newt is a Washington insider, big-government RINO.

If he's the best the Repubs can come up with, they might as well let Dear Leader take the country the rest of the way down during his second term; the recovery from that, if there is one, might be faster when the sheep lose it ALL in a hurry, rather than in a continuing boiling frog scenario.

Superkommissar Maksim wrote:He has had no voting record in the last three years!!!

No, but he did make a delightful little video with Nanski in the last three years.

Of course, now he says it was a huge mistake. Mmm hmmm.

But of course, that's only because it's going to cost him.

Would YOU have made such a video with The Peloski, for ANY reason?

R.O.C.K. in the USSA wrote:Rather than type a bunch of stuff that will no doubt be ignored, here's a link that sums it up:

As if Jack Hunter at theamericanconservative.com is the final authority on who and who is not a conservative. pfft.

From another article on the same site - "Unfortunately the word “conservative” has now been emptied of any meaning, except for getting Republicans elected. For the media and many voters, Republican and conservative are synonymous, and therefore if Gingrich beats up on Obama while brandishing the terms “Republican” and “conservative,” he must be what he says he is."

Which is why, in a nutshell, someone claiming to be "conservative" hasn't impressed me in over 15 years. And why I haven't been a Republican in about as long.

WOOPS!! PROG on AND off!! ;)

And I see your Pfft and raise you a PTOOOEY!!

R.O.C.K. in the USSA wrote:If he's the best the Repubs can come up with, they might as well let Dear Leader take the country the rest of the way down during his second term; the recovery from that, if there is one, might be faster when the sheep lose it ALL in a hurry, rather than in a continuing boiling frog scenario.

With all due respect, when I hear defeatist talk like this I stop taking that persons opinions seriously.

R.O.C.K. in the USSA wrote:From another article on the same site - "Unfortunately the word “conservative” has now been emptied of any meaning, except for getting Republicans elected. For the media and many voters, Republican and conservative are synonymous, and therefore if Gingrich beats up on Obama while brandishing the terms “Republican” and “conservative,” he must be what he says he is."

More of the same negative defeatist B.S. I pity anyone that holds such dark and gloomy opinions. Quite sad.

Maksim, it's not "defeatist" to be a realist; rather, seeing reality as it is, rather than seeing it through Kool-Aid tinted glasses, enables one to plan more appropriately for the years to come. It also aids in developing realistic strategies, since strategies developed while wearing tinted glasses will only bear fruit in a Kool-Aid colored world, not in the real one.

Your mileage may vary, and I love ya anyway ;)

Oh dear. That arch-conservative wacko, Ann Coulter, just denigrated our Newt, with great fervor and aplomb! How are we going to get Our Man to run against Dear leader when real conservatives keep saying things like this?!?

https://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=379837

Comrades, this cannot stand. We must arrange to Occupy Ann Coulter! IMMEDIATELY!!

We ? All at once ?

R.O.C.K., you are most certainly open-minded.

Since we're mostly Kommenting Out Of Karacter, I'll throw in my two-cents' worth. Few, if any, of us will get to vote for the candidate we would have preferred. Neither of two lions that I would have preferred to hear ROAR in 2012 decided to seek the nomination.

What about Newt? If the choice were between him and Obama it obviously wouldn't even require as much as a nanosecond to select Newt.

I once was a great admirer of Newt (for the same reasons for which Maksim still remains an admirer) but have not been an admirer since he turned against Bush when Bush's opponents were trashing him on Iraq. (I don't remember the precise thing he said, but I heard him say it during one of his appearances on Fox sometime after 2004, and I remember having to resist the desire to throw my shoe at the television screen.)

Next, he appeared in that propagandistic Al-Gore-Inspired video with Nancy Pelosi to peddle Gore's Anthropogenic Global Warming religion.

Next, he utterly trashed Paul Ryan and then wholly disingenuously tried to claim he wasn't specifically referring to Ryan's plan-- utter B.S. in my opinion.

Next, he contradicted himself every other day on Libya while Dear Leader was leading (the Muslim Brotherhood) from behind.

I still greatly admire his encylopedic knowledge of history and American government. I still greatly admire the fact that he still clearly and unequivocally understands why the United States Constiution is the greatest document in human history and that it's why America is "exceptional."

Although I understand the constitutional balance-of-power argument on which he bases his most recent argument on how to reign in judicial tyranny, I think his cure would be worse than the disease, and his having made such proposal would make him too toxic to be elected. "Conservatives" alone cannot elect a new President.

He has an irresistible compulsion to think out loud, and that tendency would lead him to say things as a candidate that would destroy his chances of being elected. I think he is more infatuated with his own cleverness than with the actual substance and/or practicality of his ideas of the moment.

He's a man who once did great things but not the best candidate for today. Nevertheless, almost none of us will have a chance to elect the person we consider to be the best candidate. So we will always be (I paraphrase someone else, but I don't remember whom) confronted with the evil of the two lessers and thus forced to choose the lesser of the two evils.

I had been greatly impressed with Cain until it became apparent that he knew far, far, far less about foreign policy than I know.

The only candidate I would perceive as being more dangerous than Obama would be Ron Paul. We can recover from catastrophic domestic policies but we could not recover from the catasgrophic results of the kind of foreign policy Ron Paul would run. Furthermore, I cannot forget, forgive or ignore Ron Paul's past pandering to the 9-11 Truthers. He should go back to practicing medicine, but I'd never select a doctor with such a slim grasp on reality as Paul exhibits regarding the rest of the world.

--KOOK

Kook.... how dare you speak the truth !

It is readily apparent that you prefer to do your own homework instead of plugging in to the media's " circus of analysis."

Most disappointing.

Still Kommenting Out Of Karacter. Thanks. But despite not being a supporter of Newt, if he were to get the nomination, I'd stand shoulder to shoulder with Maksim to extoll the many virtues Newt has despite his vices. If Newt could manage to suppress his shoot-from-the-lip-while-thinking-out-loud impulses, he would utterly destroy Obama in Presidential debates. His encyclopedic knowledge of history would easily expose Obama's ignorance and/or leftist views on the subject.

What we really need is a Red-Square/Maksim (or Maksim/Red-Square) ticket. I think I'll start working on t-shirts, mugs, bumper-stickers, etc. We need to be ready to step into the breach if the Republicans step off the cliff. We'd also need to find a way to have a constiutional amendment adopted really quickly.

The slogan could be, "We'll Re-Rubicize the All-Red Cube into which Obama has tried to transform America -- i.e., from exceptionalism into acceptionalism."

Of course, we'd first need to persuade Ford to design much larger vehicles to have bumpers wide enough for our slogan on a bumper-sticker. Remember those great wide-track cars from the early 1960's?

Oleg could write a new campaign book to be titled, "Shake-Out CapitAlism from Obama's Shakedown CapitOlism."

I'm just doing what Newt does so well-- engage speech mechanism first, engage brain later.

--KOOK

Kook: 1965 Pontiac Bonneville.

Aaaahhhh! The Good Old Days when GM was a private company and back seats were wide enough. I once had a Firebird in which I could sustain a whiplash merely by pressing hard on the accelerator.

--KOOK

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=p ... 2uoSAOC_ZQ