Sorry, Conservatives, but I still don’t think Newt has either the ability to get elected, or the ability to do the job of President given his history of ego-neediness. He has the right knowledge and the right values, just not the personal stamina or charisma necessary to lead.

Davo said:
Sorry, Conservatives, but I still don’t think Newt has either the ability to get elected, or the ability to do the job of President given his history of ego-neediness. He has the right knowledge and the right values, just not the personal stamina or charisma necessary to lead.

I think you’re right, on all points, and there is so much baggage there. But, I will confess, I couldn’t be more conservative when it comes to such matters. One (1) divorce is a failure in life, one which can be overcome, of course, and a sin, which can be forgiven, of course, but multiple divorces, particularly divorces of the Newt sort, are an utter obscenity. I realize, of course, most Republicans see these things differently, as to many Democrats. I am in a distinct minority here.

What really troubles me is Greta O’Van Susteren. If Murdoch and NewsCorp play this by the letter, Newt is out on his touche. Who will Greta get in his place? Maybe more John Bolton? He always seems to be ready for a “Greta Exclusive”.

I guess money making out of pretending to run for the office has finally ran its course.

skyfet said:
I guess money making out of pretending to run for the office has finally ran its course.

Yup.

The Real Royal King said:
I think you’re right, on all points, and there is so much baggage there. But, I will confess, I couldn’t be more conservative when it comes to such matters. One (1) divorce is a failure in life…………..

I don’t think we are seeing the same things, RRJ. You are focusing on Newt’s personal “baggage” and I see his weakness in having to feed a weak ego by his history of trying to gain the admiration of the “beautiful people”: in the media, over exercising the values he knows are the root of America’s foundation in Conservatism.

Gingrich is one of many old-line Republicans who haven’t figured out that the media is the DCMPN (Democrat Campaign Media Posing as News) and is the nothing but the ‘Seduction and Assassination” department for the DNC.

How fascinating. Serial philander and individual who was fined 400K for ethics violation runs for President. The GOP race is going to be hilarious. Keep ‘em the jokes coming!

@Real Royal King, Greta loves Newt. Greta is a also a third wife, much like Calista Gingrich. They share photography interests and the love men who are easily distracted and scoundrels. But Bolton is also her “go to” guy!

Davo said:
Sorry, Conservatives, but I still don’t think Newt has either the ability to get elected, or the ability to do the job of President given his history of ego-neediness.

I agree…I am not a Newt Fan.

He is great at “strategery,” which is where he should stay.

And America will respond “Who in the hell cares?”

Hey, Dan Abrams, you can’t afford an “edit” button? What’s with this site?

If he is right on the issues is all I care about. I agree with him everytime I hear him speak and and I love his knowledge and ability to articulate the connection between God and our founding fathers. I dont give a damn of any sorts about his divorces or his ego. These are desperate times and if our saviour turns out to have these short comings then so be it.

Besides, the left and the clueless just recently elected the most unqualified inexperienced no body no nothing barely American disingenuous lying scumbag. So if that can happen, ANYONE, can be elected.

Davo said:
Sorry, Conservatives, but I still don’t think Newt has either the ability to get elected, or the ability to do the job of President given his history of ego-neediness. He has the right knowledge and the right values, just not the personal stamina or charisma necessary to lead.

enough charisma already. we have that in d.c. now. and where has that gotten anybody????

From this Democrat, I say “Run Newt Run!”

Emma said:
Hey, Dan Abrams, you can’t afford an “edit” button? What’s with this site?

They think people come here for the “stories.”

Newt was fined over 400K in ethical violations, yet you folks believe he’s a viable candidate? Plus, he has issues with religion and serial philandering. Are the cons so desperate that they see Newt as a potential GOP selection? If so, rock on.

Newt/Palin 2012. I’m in!

Emma said:

Besides, the left and the clueless just recently elected the most unqualified inexperienced no body no nothing barely American disingenuous lying scumbag. So if that can happen, ANYONE, can be elected.

amen!

Obama’s re-election isn’t a sure thing…but I don’t see who the Republicans have that can go all the way.

Like the Dems in 2004, there are lots of folks who are qualified on paper, but I just don’t see a winner in the current bunch.

My prediction is that it will be like 2004: A vulnerable incumbent pulls out the win after a hard fought campaign.

Emma said:
Newt was fined over 400K in ethical violations, yet you folks believe he’s a viable candidate?

LOL

Who said that, son?

Stop partying with Charlie Sheen!

notsofast said:
And America will respond “Who in the hell cares?”

Yep. Nobody really cares. Plus, Newt is just doing this to try to remain relevant and probably sell another book.

notsofast said:
LOL

Who said that, son?

Stop partying with Charlie Sheen!

I bet you wished you were partying with CS.

Davo said:
I don’t think we are seeing the same things, RRJ. You are focusing on Newt’s personal “baggage” and I see his weakness in having to feed a weak ego by his history of trying to gain the admiration of the “beautiful people”: in the media, over exercising the values he knows are the root of America’s foundation in Conservatism.

Gingrich is one of many old-line Republicans who haven’t figured out that the media is the DCMPN (Democrat Campaign Media Posing as News) and is the nothing but the ‘Seduction and Assassination” department for the DNC.

No, I agreed with everything you said in your original post. In fact, I thought the analysis was excellent. I just added an additional thought. I don’t expect most to agree with me on that point, but I’m not alone on it.

Newt Gingrich has as much chance to be President as the rest of the SEVEN DAWRFS running from the Republican side. After Two years of Republican Rule in the Congress and the Governorship in this Country, the American people will not be fooled once again, AT LEAST ON CAN HOPE NOT!!!!! Newt Gingrich, Really, HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAhAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

Awesome. One more nutjob to pull the party even further to the right.

Davo said:
right values,

YOU’RE KIDDING RIGHT? ALL YOU BIBLE THUMPER, FAKE FAMILY VALUES PEOPLE ARE A JOKE!

Emma said:
Newt/Palin 2012. I’m in!

THIS WOULD BE FUN TO WATCH!

If we could have Newt, Sarah & Michelle all run for the GOP nomination, we could have an all out circus on the right. LOL.

Clifford E.Elisary said:
Newt Gingrich has as much chance to be President as the rest of the SEVEN DAWRFS running from the Republican side. After Two years of Republican Rule in the Congress and the Governorship in this Country, the American people will not be fooled once again, AT LEAST ON CAN HOPE NOT!!!!! Newt Gingrich, Really, HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAhAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

Not that the Democrats are all that much better, but the American relationship with the Republican party for the last sixty (60) years has largely been of the fraternity “Thank Your, Sir, May I Have Another?” sort.

Wingnut Tormentor said:
Awesome. One more nutjob to pull the party even further to the right.

Do you really think that? I’ve never viewed Newt has all that conservative. To be sure, he’s not the “Man For All Seasons” sort Romney is, but Newt has always had a certain “flexibility” about his principles.

“She turned me into a newt!”

The Real Royal King said:
Newt has always had a certain “flexibility” about his principles.

Now, that’s a concise way of saying what I was trying to say. Maybe we DO agree here.

The Real Royal King said:
Do you really think that? I’ve never viewed Newt has all that conservative. To be sure, he’s not the “Man For All Seasons” sort Romney is, but Newt has always had a certain “flexibility” about his principles.

He may not really BE a true conservative in his behavior….but he plays one on TV.

writer said:

““She turned me into a newt!””

Heh. Except that this newt won’t get better. This guy is wasting his time, my time, and everyone else’s time who is looking for new faces and new leadership. I won’t vote for another poltical chameleon. Er….newt.

Go away newt, before I taunt you a second time.

Harry Flashman said:

This guy is wasting his time, my time, and everyone else’s time who is looking for new faces and new leadership. I won’t vote for another poltical chameleon.

Yep. I even go so far as to say I won’t vote for ANY old-line Republican. They’ve made the bathwater so foul that it’s time to throw the baby out with…………..

I think by “flexible” the phony king means like being against gay marriage one day and for it the next like her obama. ;)

Thank you for this gift, God — Signed, your loyal two term President Barack Obama.

Davo said:

“Yep. I even go so far as to say I won’t vote for ANY old-line Republican. They’ve made the bathwater so foul that it’s time to throw the baby out with”

Ditto. They’ve all had an opportunity to get a grip on this spiraling country and have failed miserably. The need to shut up and move over, especially people like Newt and that idiot Karl Rove.

So many Republican politicians these days are pretenders.

I think most of them are center-right at heart, but they pretend to be TeaBaggers because that’s the flavor of the month right now.

Most of them don’t believe half the stuff they say, especially on social issues.

writer said:
“She turned me into a newt!”

and he never got better.

Wow, Newt is running for president? That’s pretty excitin…ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

I don’t know the fund raising laws. Is running itself a money making opportunity?

writer said:
“She turned me into a newt!”

Does anyone else smell Elder..berries?

CosmosDan said:
Does anyone else smell Elder..berries?

i fart in your general direction

The politically correct term is ‘senior’ berries.

Wingnut Tormentor says

sock puppet troll alert!

Newt is a non-starter.

Emma said:
How fascinating. Serial philander and individual who was fined 400K for ethics violation runs for President. The GOP race is going to be hilarious. Keep ‘em the jokes coming! @Real Royal King, Greta loves Newt. Greta is a also a third wife, much like Calista Gingrich. They share photography interests and the love men who are easily distracted and scoundrels. But Bolton is also her “go to” guy!

I’m sure John Edwards is just as shocked as you are.

Newt will get one vote and that is from hannity.

Davo said:
Yep. I even go so far as to say I won’t vote for ANY old-line Republican. They’ve made the bathwater so foul that it’s time to throw the baby out with…………..

If Rove supports the candidate, I will work against electing that politician. :)

Olby Sucks said:
Newt will get one vote and that is from hannity.

Don’t forget Dick Morris!

cjd ohio 1 said:
i fart in your general direction

Your mother was a hamster!!,

Hey, maybe Newt wants just a little bit of peril.

Isn’t it funny that a silly film made for just a few hundred thousand dollars, became so iconic and quoted. I have the specials edition DVD which includes a few cast members going to the film sites and explaining how the film was made. All the different castle scenes were done in different rooms and camera angles of the same small castle.

WCinWI said:
Newt is a non-starter.

I’ve long thought that Sarah Palin is the Republican most able to beat President Obama, and I endorse her.

CosmosDan said:
Your mother was a hamster!!, Hey, maybe Newt wants just a little bit of peril. Isn’t it funny that a silly film made for just a few hundred thousand dollars, became so iconic and quoted. I have the specials edition DVD which includes a few cast members going to the film sites and explaining how the film was made. All the different castle scenes were done in different rooms and camera angles of the same small castle.

it was a great movie lol

The Real Royal King said:
I’ve long thought that Sarah Palin is the Republican most able to beat President Obama, and I endorse her.

A Republican shoe will beat Obama. Just let the shoe sit in the President’s chair and that would be more effective.

So what is the conservative ticket all you people are looking for? Just curious. Mitch Daniels, maybe?

im_lovin_it said:
So what is the conservative ticket all you people are looking for? Just curious. Mitch Daniels, maybe?

Good question. Hopefully, people will answer it.

WCinWI said:
A Republican shoe will beat Obama. Just let the shoe sit in the President’s chair and that would be more effective.

I thought most Republican men wore Italian loafers and most Republican women wore Italian sling back pumps. Are you sure you want an Italian in the White House? That’s not even legal, of course, unless some so kid born in Palermo falsified a Certificate of Live Birth and his parents ran a birth announcement in a Rhode Island newspaper the day after he was born.

WCinWI said:
A Republican shoe will beat Obama. Just let the shoe sit in the President’s chair and that would be more effective.

As absurd as your comment is, you can’t run a shoe and we can’t have two presidents. You’ve got to choose among the 1/2Gov., the three-timer, the man for all reasons (Romney), Puhlenty, the new Elmer Gantry and a whole raft of Gilligans from desert islands. You still can’t beat something with nothing. This is politics, not poker.

Who is Salacious Crumb said:
Good question. Hopefully, people will answer it.

We don’t need a candidate at this point. The nation is self-imploding. I want to wait a few months before candidates start to name themselves.

Joseph Glackin said:
As absurd as your comment is, you can’t run a shoe and we can’t have two presidents. You’ve got to choose among the 1/2Gov., the three-timer, the man for all reasons (Romney), Puhlenty, the new Elmer Gantry and a whole raft of Gilligans from desert islands. You still can’t beat something with nothing. This is politics, not poker.

I don’t talk to people that make fun of other people but can’t spell themselves. Get educated. :)

RichS .. Silly us, we forgot your world of up is down! It’s the Democrats (yes them) that are out to moralize America in the name of God. How could we forget? And apparently God ONLY embraces the members of God’s Own Party … That would include: Diaper Dave Vitter (caught … in … a …diaper!!) – John Ensign – Chris (Craig’s List) Lee – And speaking of Craig’s … Toe Tappin Larry Craig – Congresswoman Helen Chenoweth (gotta love those God fearin GOP women) – Neal Horsley (with a mule!!) – Johnny McMaverick McCain – “Someone Get Me a Tissue, Sanford – Mark Foley (the younger the better) – Preacher and ex-meth using bisexual Ted Haggert – Oops and let’s not forget the most famous of them all, King Ronnie of the “Hollywood Types.” And that’s the the tip of the iceberg of over 123 of “God’s Own” that have fallen. After the tears and begging for forgiveness, these GOP religious frauds have been feverishly working to moralize America. YES YES … By all means … RUN – NEWT – RUN!!

WCinWI said:
We don’t need a candidate at this point. The nation is self-imploding. I want to wait a few months before candidates start to name themselves.

What candidate would you most support (in a few months)?

WCinWI said:
We don’t need a candidate at this point. The nation is self-imploding. I want to wait a few months before candidates start to name themselves.

I’m wondering though, of all the people you can think of, who do you personally want to see make a run. Don’t worry about all the media hype and speculation. Of all the conservative types you know, who do you want to see run?

Who is Salacious Crumb said:
What candidate would you most support (in a few months)?

There are several that I’m interested in – all for different reasons. However, why would I share that with the opposition? :)

I will say that I’m an awesome demographic – young, female, midwestern, advanced college-educated.

im_lovin_it said:
I’m wondering though, of all the people you can think of, who do you personally want to see make a run. Don’t worry about all the media hype and speculation. Of all the conservative types you know, who do you want to see run?

I want them all to run – except Newt and Huntsman. Nor am I a Ron Paul fan. Or people like Alan Keyes. Anyone else can have at it. I just don’t think I need to reveal my top choices as I’m still figuring it out. Like I said, I want to wait a few months because it’s going to matter on statistical numbers, figures and international relationships.

Joseph Glackin said:
You still can’t beat something with nothing. This is politics, not poker.

No. But you CAN beat nothing with nothing…………..it happened in 2008.

Actually, you are hitting on the single problem Republicans have. The November election clearly shows the majority of Americans are fed up with Liberalism and the accompanying international weakness, CommieCare, and the insanity of destroying the economy to “improve” it. But there is no clear candidate standing to complete the Tea Party movement into a restoration of American greatness.

Will Republicans snatch defeat from the jaws of victory? If the old-guard Reps have their way………….YES!

Well, the Left wing hate machines will be in overdrive – coordinated hate from multiple sources (news media, morning shows, NY Times, Newsweak, TV shows/movies, etc.)

WCinWI said:
A Republican shoe will beat Obama. Just let the shoe sit in the President’s chair and that would be more effective.

But seriously. do you really think any of the current GOP crop can win?

Obviously, you think any of them would be better….but can they win is perhaps a more important question.

WCinWI said:
There are several that I’m interested in – all for different reasons. However, why would I share that with the opposition? :)

I consider myself independent so =p

WCinWI said:I will say that I’m an awesome demographic – young, female, midwestern, advanced college-educated.

That’s an important demo, no doubt.

Alz said:
Well, the Left wing hate machines will be in overdrive – coordinated hate from multiple sources (news media, morning shows, NY Times, Newsweak, TV shows/movies, etc.)

You’re right….just the same as the right-wing hate machine has been in overdrive about Obama for the last 2 years.

“Ich bin ein Republican!!!”

Alz said:
Well, the Left wing hate machines will be in overdrive – coordinated hate from multiple sources (news media, morning shows, NY Times, Newsweak, TV shows/movies, etc.)

You guys have talk radio, Fox News, corporate interest groups (Americans for Prosp., Chamber), churches, pharmaceuticals/insurance companies, etc etc.

The reason I think Obama will win again is because Republicans’ default setting is complaining and talking about how we need to go back to some mythical better time.

Complaining about Obama is not a recipe for winning. At some point, people expect you to talk about about what you hope to do….not just what you hope to undo.

As a Dem, the only GOP candidate this year that I think could potentially do it would be Huckabee.

He’s the only one who can take a conservative message and put it in positive, hopeful terms. That’s worth alot….especially to swing voters.

The others come off as too dour/negative.

Huckabee may not be a “perfect” conservative in the eyes of the GOP base, but he’s conservative on most of the issues that count for them.

Swing voters don’t go for ideologues anyway.

Joseph Glackin said:
you can’t run a shoe

WE HAD “W” FOR EIGHT YEARS ! SO THE CHEESE HEAD THINKS THEY CAN GO WITH IT!

Problem with Gingrich is that he is simply a Progressive Republican. They all yammer on about a ‘smaller’ gov’t and have only recently uttered the words ‘limited gov’t’ just to appease TRUE LIBERALS http://wp.me/pB8xR-6T

I get Newt’s periodic email and he is constantly talking about the conservative plans to the replace the liberal (misnomer) plans when all they are is another set of Central Plans by the other half of our Aristocracy.

Our Two Party system is simply facing Darwinism. It does not follow Natural Law and we’re going to witness its last breath.

LOLOLOLOLOl…….. the pubics have no one to run…….all the gop potential candidates are has beens. The economy is in the tank and Obamas approval reating is still 53%…..can you imagine if the economy improves even a little bit. Newt had his heyday -it didnt work. He had to resign in shame.

Who is Salacious Crumb said:
I consider myself independent so =p

That’s an important demo, no doubt.

John Avlon considers himself an independent too and he’s a Lefty. Just saying. :)

WCinWI said:
John Avlon considers himself an independent too and he’s a Lefty. Just saying. :)

I generally vote democrat but don’t dismiss republicans just because they’re republican. Paul Ryan, for instance, seems like a decent chap.

theendisfar said:
Problem with Gingrich is that he is simply a Progressive Republican. They all yammer on about a ’smaller’ gov’t and have only recently uttered the words ‘limited gov’t’ just to appease TRUE LIBERALS http://wp.me/pB8xR-6T

Apparently, Conservatives are now awake to the reality that Liberalism is no solution to Liberalism. The Tea Party Conservatives are the best chance America has to avoid the coming storm.

As a side note, what about “the Donald?” Have you heard him lately? He sounds like a breath of fresh air as a voice from outside the “bubble.”

Who is Salacious Crumb said:
I generally vote democrat but don’t dismiss republicans just because they’re republican. Paul Ryan, for instance, seems like a decent chap.

Sure – but Paul Ryan is one of the leaders of the Tea Party movement. :)

Who is Salacious Crumb said:
I generally vote democrat but don’t dismiss republicans just because they’re republican. Paul Ryan, for instance, seems like a decent chap.

Also, I wouldn’t consider someone an Independent if they primarily vote as a Democrat. That’s a conundrum to me. Voting for the Democratic Party is voting for abortion and unions. You might call that crazy, but if I’m gonna judge the crazies of the Parties, Dems have far more. I also couldn’t vote for a Party that isn’t interested in cutting programs. That is the Democratic Party – spend, spend, spend.

skyfet said:
I bet you wished you were partying with CS.

CS is your mother, son!

Oh, and that was projection on your part, son.

Davo said:
Conservatives are now awake to the reality that Liberalism is no solution to Liberalism.

Not sure what your definition of ‘liberalism’ is, but Classic Liberalism is certainly a remedy. I can’t say that I’m very interested in how a ‘conservative’ can run my life any better than a socialist. I refuse to call Democrats ‘liberals’ because they are nothing of the sort. They are socialists and if you’ve read Hayek, then you know that they are also Fascists.

I prefer that my Local Representatives have far more influence over my life than someone in Atlanta or even worse Washington DC. That is what liberalism is to me, having as little coercion over my life as possible. If I don’t like how my County Commission or Mayor is wasting money, then I can pay them a visit. Liberalism/Localism vs. Socialism/Globalism.

Davo said:
As a side note, what about “the Donald?” Have you heard him lately? He sounds like a breath of fresh air as a voice from outside the “bubble.”

Unsure what to think of The Donald. I think he is probably better than most of the rest, but what I really want to see is someone step up and proclaim they are far a VERY LIMITED Federal Gov’t as described in Article 1 Section 8.

Without such limitations, there is no amount of money that Congress can’t ‘help’ out of my pocket in order to ‘help’ those that they help to helplessness. Human Domestication and the Gov’t that encourages it should be abolished.

notsofast said:
CS is your mother, son!

Oh, and that was projection on your part, son.

When you resort to Mother insult, it means you’ve lost the debate before it began.

WCinWI said:
Also, I wouldn’t consider someone an Independent if they primarily vote as a Democrat. That’s a conundrum to me. Voting for the Democratic Party is voting for abortion and unions. You might call that crazy, but if I’m gonna judge the crazies of the Parties, Dems have far more. I also couldn’t vote for a Party that isn’t interested in cutting programs. That is the Democratic Party – spend, spend, spend.

I have issues with both parties. The Republicans spent the last decade spending as well. Personally, I’m pro-life, but I don’t believe in the government playing god with other people’s lives. I think the liberal and conservative mindset cris-cross themselves when it comes to individual liberties like abortion, marriage and health-care. I try not to judge the parties by their fringe wing.

theendisfar said:
Not sure what your definition of ‘liberalism’ is, but Classic Liberalism is certainly a remedy. I can’t say that I’m very interested in how a ‘conservative’ can run my life any better than a socialist. I refuse to call Democrats ‘liberals’ because they are nothing of the sort. They are socialists and if you’ve read Hayek, then you know that they are also Fascists.

Well, you’re quite right, and yes……….I HAVE read Hayek and can find no fault……………………history has proven him accurate. However, the time for fighting over ownership of the term “liberalism” was back in the mid 1940′s when Socialists initially hijacked the term due to Hitler and Stalin showing the world the end-game of Socialism. Today, I think we must use the terms as we know most Americans to recognize them, and focus our efforts on shining light into the darkness of the anti-American Left. Otherwise, the discussion will be moot.

The term “Conservatism” has also been a victim of the Leftist agenda of misinformation. Perhaps we need some official definition to point to in order to avoid having (modern) Liberals getting their definitions of Conservativism from other modern Liberals. Until then, I identify Conservative ideals as those espoused in the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. Those documents underscore the vitality of individual determination, private property, and liberty within the bounds of a civilized society. The framers recognized that a strong nation can only exist when it consists of a strong society, and a strong society can only exist when consisting of strong individuals. This is why liberty and personal responsibility are the main obstacles to modern Liberalism…………………Liberals thrive on creating a weak and dependent voter base.

Now, if you have a better term to describe the above ideology, I’m game. Unfortunately, the term “libertarianism” has been wounded by the formation of a party with proper ideals, but unwilling to do the work necessary to achieve credibility in the eyes of the voter.

Who is Salacious Crumb said:
I have issues with both parties. The Republicans spent the last decade spending as well. Personally, I’m pro-life, but I don’t believe in the government playing god with other people’s lives. I think the liberal and conservative mindset cris-cross themselves when it comes to individual liberties like abortion, marriage and health-care. I try not to judge the parties by their fringe wing.

Ok but why would you vote for democrats when they are not interested in cutting or reforming SS or entitlement programs? Where’s the commonsense in that at least? We will differ on the fringe members as I think fringe on the Left are their “main” members. And I also think that the democratic party is the party of choice so that is antithetical to your libertarian view on the matter.

WCinWI said:
Ok but why would you vote for democrats when they are not interested in cutting or reforming SS or entitlement programs? Where’s the commonsense in that at least?

I can only vote in one (blue dog) state, and the democrats I have voted for aren’t exactly Nancy Pelosi Jr.

WCinWI said: We will differ on the fringe members as I think fringe on the Left are their “main” members. And I also think that the democratic party is the party of choice so that is antithetical to your libertarian view on the matter.

Personally, I am pro-life. Politically, I am pro-choice. A part of the republican party wants to outlaw abortion, and that goes against their limited government ideology.

skyfet said:
kyfet says:
March 1, 2011 at 2:30 pm skyfet(Quote)

Son, you lose before you start!

LOL

Who is Salacious Crumb said:
I can only vote in one (blue dog) state, and the democrats I have voted for aren’t exactly Nancy Pelosi Jr.

Personally, I am pro-life. Politically, I am pro-choice. A part of the republican party wants to outlaw abortion, and that goes against their limited government ideology.

Then you must work out your own false choice since you don’t vote your personal gut. I vote the way that I feel personally. I don’t think that money should be granted from taxpayer money to causes like abortion and I’d even highlight to causes on the Right. To me, when it comes to life, you can’t be in the gray. I think more funding should be provided for those “rare” situations that occur, but to me, life is life.

As I said, how can you support a Party that is not addressing and has not even attempted to address entitlements. People on the R side tried, and have failed, in years past and now with the Tea Party folks, it’s becoming popular again. How can you defend a President that didn’t address entitlements? That’s beyond insane.

Save his time – - AND our frustration of having to mute/change channels!

Newt will be to 2012 what Rudy was to 2008.

WCinWI said:
Then you must work out your own false choice since you don’t vote your personal gut. I vote the way that I feel personally. I don’t think that money should be granted from taxpayer money to causes like abortion and I’d even highlight to causes on the Right. To me, when it comes to life, you can’t be in the gray. I think more funding should be provided for those “rare” situations that occur, but to me, life is life.

My gut tells me government shouldn’t control people’s lives at that level. If someone wants to end a pregnancy it should be between her and her god and/or conscious.

WCinWI said:As I said, how can you support a Party that is not addressing and has not even attempted to address entitlements. How can you defend a President that didn’t address entitlements? That’s beyond insane.

Neither political party gets support from me in the form of donations or volunteer labor. I vote for candidates who I feel will do the best job regardless of party affiliation. I have neither defended or reproached the President in my conversation with you.

Who is Salacious Crumb said:
My gut tells me government shouldn’t control people’s lives at that level. If someone wants to end a pregnancy it should be between her and her god and/or conscious.

Neither political party gets support from me in the form of donations or volunteer labor. I vote for candidates who I feel will do the best job regardless of party affiliation. I have neither defended or reproached the President in my conversation with you.

Sure – as long as there aren’t programs supporting this idea, I’m ok with that. I will personally vote my own conviction but I can understand that people will have different thoughts on that issue. I just do not wish to support a Party that promotes that type of lifestyle. Maybe this is an issue that Michelle should address since African Americans seem to be a large percentage of those involved in abortion. I understand that it touches on all races, but you can’t argue with statistics with single mother households in the African American community.

Davo said:
However, the time for fighting over ownership of the term “liberalism” was back in the mid 1940’s

No need to fight with a fellow man of Liberty, but I’m picking the fight back up. These charlatans, posers , and fakes have bastardized the word for too long. It like a Coward calling themselves a Hero. It renders the badge of Hero moot if allowed.

Davo said:
Those documents underscore the vitality of individual determination, private property, and liberty within the bounds of a civilized society. The framers recognized that a strong nation can only exist when it consists of a strong society, and a strong society can only exist when consisting of strong individuals. This is why liberty and personal responsibility are the main obstacles to modern Liberalism

No better definition than ‘Liberal’, from Liberty, from Libre; Free. I know you get it, and I’m not going to make this a white whale, but it is easy enough to call these socialist bastards out when the opportunity presents itself.

Libertarians are not as egregious to me, at least they are on the right path. Liberals outright stole a term that means exactly opposite of what the stand for. Anyway, its a dead horse when talking to another True Liberal :)

I personally think that the Tea Party will force the D’s and R’s to unite in order to survive similar to the National Socialists and Communists in Pre-WWII Germany. The R’s are for Central Planning as well, just ‘not as much’. Still too much for me.

notsofast said:
CS is your mother, son!

Oh, and that was projection on your part, son.

Love how notsofast tries to sound mean and authoritative by calling everyone “son”. What a loser.

Davo said:
Sorry, Conservatives, but I still don’t think Newt has either the ability to get elected, or the ability to do the job of President given his history of ego-neediness. He has the right knowledge and the right values, just not the personal stamina or charisma necessary to lead.

Please Newt. Run baby. I can’t wait to tear you a new one. Show us your moral fortitude and superior wisdom oh 3x Divorcee and cheat! Remind us of how many of your “Contract” on America points you actually fulfilled (spoiler alert: None).

Wingnut Tormentor said:
Love how notsofast tries to sound mean and authoritative by calling everyone “son”. What a loser.

Big-time loser. It’s what you do when you got nothing. He has a whole lotta that!

Emma said:
How fascinating. Serial philander and individual who was fined 400K for ethics violation runs for President.

About as fascinating as an admitted cocaine user running for president.

That said, while I believe “Newt the Astute” is a brilliant man, he is (like Dole and McCain) not “the President.” The highest and best mission for Newt is to influence the platform–I think that may be his gambit, anyway–and if he can keep the RINO element out of the platform so the Republicans can win, the US just might–”MIGHT,” I say–survive the debacle of the 0bama regime.

Newt can’t possibly win, I view his candidacy as a stimulus package for TV stations and campaign workers.

pppplllleeeezzze run for president – i will finance your campagin

signed ………………….Barrack Obama

===== http://www.chic-goods.com/ =====

===== http://www.chic-goods.com/ =====

Davo said:
Well, you’re quite right, and yes……….I HAVE read Hayek and can find no fault……………………history has proven him accurate. However, the time for fighting over ownership of the term “liberalism” was back in the mid 1940’s when Socialists initially hijacked the term due to Hitler and Stalin showing the world the end-game of Socialism. Today, I think we must use the terms as we know most Americans to recognize them, and focus our efforts on shining light into the darkness of the anti-American Left. Otherwise, the discussion will be moot.

The term “Conservatism” has also been a victim of the Leftist agenda of misinformation. Perhaps we need some official definition to point to in order to avoid having (modern) Liberals getting their definitions of Conservativism from other modern Liberals. Until then, I identify Conservative ideals as those espoused in the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. Those documents underscore the vitality of individual determination, private property, and liberty within the bounds of a civilized society. The framers recognized that a strong nation can only exist when it consists of a strong society, and a strong society can only exist when consisting of strong individuals. This is why liberty and personal responsibility are the main obstacles to modern Liberalism…………………Liberals thrive on creating a weak and dependent voter base.

Now, if you have a better term to describe the above ideology, I’m game. Unfortunately, the term “libertarianism” has been wounded by the formation of a party with proper ideals, but unwilling to do the work necessary to achieve credibility in the eyes of the voter.

VERY TRUE.

The other thing these leftists did was to realize that they could gain power by switching from Eugenics to adopting minorities. So all of a sudden, the Left became the owners of the minorities in the 60′s. Just think how the massive turmoil of the 60′s was triggered by liberal policies and programs designed to create dependency. It wasn’t out of the goodness of the leftist heart because what we see are the results: 50+ years of hopelessness, despair and death.