Re-Evaluating Newt..

[SAT]

I was watching a clip of a Gingrich interview early this morning in which he was asked for his reaction to Perry's debate gaffe when Perry couldn't remember the Dept. of Energy that he would dismantle if elected President.

Newt replied that it was one of his greatest fears that he would have a brain freeze like that at a critical moment, and it could happen to anybody. It was really unfortunate that it happened to Perry at that precise moment because of how the media would play it over and over and over and how opposition to Perry would use it for their advantage. But who among us has not had that happen--inability to recall a name or a date or a phone number that we normally know as well as our own name?

And I was watching a man absolutely speaking from the heart and being honest and genuinely gracious to an opponent. I am coming to expect that from Newt and that, plus his exemplary grasp of the necessary subject matter, is I think why he is beginning to substantially rise in the polls.

Lord, what a more pleasant world it would be if all politicians, the media, and the punditry would follow his example. If those of us on USMB would follow his example for that matter.

So how did Newt explain this?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=21z30aNO3cA]Rick Perry - Full, uncut "drunk" Cornerstone New Hampshire speech - Friday, 28 October, 2011 - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Cecilie1200]

Likability does matter-especially against a candidate like Newt. The guy who cheated on his wife for the good of the nation. The general public has seen the behavior of the Congress, and they know it's not Obama blocking progress.

The Paul Ryan plan is moronic. Please, run a Republican on that plan.

By all means, the party of Bill Clinton should DEFINITELY start excoriating Newt Gingrich for immorality. Yeah, that'll work.

I swear, liberals are such closet prudes.

That shoe would fit on your foot. The party that attacked Clinton for 8 years over The Adventures of Bill's Dick can't honestly ignore Newt's behavior.

And here in the real world, no one "excoriated Newt". What we did is laugh at him. For his explanation for his infidelity-that he was just so worn out working for the good of the nation that he cheated on his wife.

Sorry, Sparky, but only immature leftist voyeurs ever thought the problem with Bill Clinton was about sex. Oh, granted, we viewed him with a lot of contempt for his painfully obvious lack of discretion and good taste, but it was never a newsflash or even a particularly big deal to anyone that he was a horndog. It's not like we didn't have much more important reasons to dislike the guy. The fact that he was an indiscriminate slut-puppy just added on to that.

No, the real problem with his "adventures" - my, how incredibly puerile a choice of words from you - was when they started including illegal activities, something an amazingly adolescent left just couldn't wrap its collective brain around, so hung up on the titillation of discussing sex acts were they.

By contrast, no one has ever accused Newt Gingrich of violating any laws or professional ethics in the conduct of his sex life. Nor, for that matter, has anyone ever accused him of being an indiscreet, indiscriminate horndog and slut-puppy. I would imagine most Republicans, myself included, have a certain amount of contempt for his unadmirable behavior in regards to his affair. But, as with Bill Clinton, there are more important issues to discuss about him . . . until such time, if it ever arrives, that his unadmirable behavior starts to include violating the law.

There's nothing inconsistent here at all . . . unless you're a juvenile who's fixated on the salacious sexual details and missing the actual point. The left, on the other hand, is incredibly hypocritical if it wants to condemn Gingrich for "immoral behavior", after it spent years stubbornly excusing much worse - and more prolific - behavior in Bill Clinton.

 

[Foxfyre]

I was watching a clip of a Gingrich interview early this morning in which he was asked for his reaction to Perry's debate gaffe when Perry couldn't remember the Dept. of Energy that he would dismantle if elected President.

Newt replied that it was one of his greatest fears that he would have a brain freeze like that at a critical moment, and it could happen to anybody. It was really unfortunate that it happened to Perry at that precise moment because of how the media would play it over and over and over and how opposition to Perry would use it for their advantage. But who among us has not had that happen--inability to recall a name or a date or a phone number that we normally know as well as our own name?

And I was watching a man absolutely speaking from the heart and being honest and genuinely gracious to an opponent. I am coming to expect that from Newt and that, plus his exemplary grasp of the necessary subject matter, is I think why he is beginning to substantially rise in the polls.

Lord, what a more pleasant world it would be if all politicians, the media, and the punditry would follow his example. If those of us on USMB would follow his example for that matter.

So how did Newt explain this?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=21z30aNO3cA]Rick Perry - Full, uncut "drunk" Cornerstone New Hampshire speech - Friday, 28 October, 2011 - YouTube[/ame]

I don't recall that Newt was ever asked about that. But what's wrong with it? A guy in front of a friendly audience having fun? You really object to that.

And I've seen drunk. No way did Rick Perry have even a little buzz there, let alone be drunk. Too much caffeine maybe? But I doubt that. I think that was just Perry being Perry and a rather lovable one at that.

 

[SAT]

[Sorry, Sparky, but only immature leftist voyeurs ever thought the problem with Bill Clinton was about sex. Oh, granted, we viewed him with a lot of contempt for his painfully obvious lack of discretion and good taste, but it was never a newsflash or even a particularly big deal to anyone that he was a horndog. It's not like we didn't have much more important reasons to dislike the guy. The fact that he was an indiscriminate slut-puppy just added on to that.

No, the real problem with his "adventures" - my, how incredibly puerile a choice of words from you - was when they started including illegal activities, something an amazingly adolescent left just couldn't wrap its collective brain around, so hung up on the titillation of discussing sex acts were they.

Well, bullshit. Yes, the right had a huge problem with Bill Clinton's sex life. It was the subject of endless attacks on Clinton, during the election, and during his Presidency.

As for my word choice, it was mocking the right's obsession with Clinton's dick. Lighten up.

By contrast, no one has ever accused Newt Gingrich of violating any laws or professional ethics in the conduct of his sex life. Nor, for that matter, has anyone ever accused him of being an indiscreet, indiscriminate horndog and slut-puppy. I would imagine most Republicans, myself included, have a certain amount of contempt for his unadmirable behavior in regards to his affair. But, as with Bill Clinton, there are more important issues to discuss about him . . . until such time, if it ever arrives, that his unadmirable behavior starts to include violating the law.

Actually, Newt has often been accused of being an indiscriminate horndog. There are many other accusations of affairs. He only admits to two.

There's nothing inconsistent here at all . . . unless you're a juvenile who's fixated on the salacious sexual details and missing the actual point. The left, on the other hand, is incredibly hypocritical if it wants to condemn Gingrich for "immoral behavior", after it spent years stubbornly excusing much worse - and more prolific - behavior in Bill Clinton.

You cannot be serious. Yes, it's inconsistent of you to fixate on Bill and ignore Newt. And again, no one is attacking Newt. I'm laughing at him.

 

[Cecilie1200]

This is interesting.

Gingrich Moves Past Cain and Romney to Become Tea Party's Top Choice, Says CBS Poll

(CNSNews.com) - Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R.-Ga.) has moved past former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and former Godfathers Pizza CEO Herman Cain to become the top choice for president among Republican primary voters who describe themselves as Tea Party supporters, according to a CBS News poll released today.

In the new poll, conducted Nov. 6-10, 21 percent of Republican primary voters who say they are Tea Party supporters said Gingrich was their choice. 19 percent said their choice was Cain, and 11 percent said their choice was Romney.

Gingrich Moves Past Cain and Romney to Become Tea Party's Top Choice, Says CBS Poll | CNSnews.com

I remember hearing an interview Sean Hannity did with Newt Gingrich right after he announced his candidacy. Hannity pointed out all the problems and obstacles that stood between Gingrich and the GOP nomination (and Presidency), and Gingrich said something to the effect of, "You know me, Sean. You've seen how I handle campaigns for anything I want. You should know by now that I have a plan to deal with all of this." It has been fascinating, seeing his plan revealed as it unfolds . . . and actually works. I don't doubt for a second that this slow, steady increase of his, while the other candidates rise and fall in waves, keeping him below the radar of the media (who are only too happy to ignore him and dismiss his candidacy as unviable) until the last possible moment, is EXACTLY what he intended all along.

The idea is not to go off like a firecracker, shooting into the lead and eclipsing everyone else right off the bat, but to gradually become the last man standing, with solid, gradually-built support behind him.

And what can the left really do about it? There are no sudden, sandbagging surprises they can dredge up and hit him with, because everything about him that could possibly be negative has already been made public information and chewed over long since. All he really has to do is offer an occasional clarifying statement, and then rightfully say, "That's old news. We covered that a long time ago", and move on.

 

[SAT]

Just making a point, Foxfyre. If the only thing Perry had done since his WH run was that gaffe the other night, it wouldn't be a problem for him. KWIM?

 

[Intense]

I was watching a clip of a Gingrich interview early this morning in which he was asked for his reaction to Perry's debate gaffe when Perry couldn't remember the Dept. of Energy that he would dismantle if elected President.

Newt replied that it was one of his greatest fears that he would have a brain freeze like that at a critical moment, and it could happen to anybody. It was really unfortunate that it happened to Perry at that precise moment because of how the media would play it over and over and over and how opposition to Perry would use it for their advantage. But who among us has not had that happen--inability to recall a name or a date or a phone number that we normally know as well as our own name?

And I was watching a man absolutely speaking from the heart and being honest and genuinely gracious to an opponent. I am coming to expect that from Newt and that, plus his exemplary grasp of the necessary subject matter, is I think why he is beginning to substantially rise in the polls.

Lord, what a more pleasant world it would be if all politicians, the media, and the punditry would follow his example. If those of us on USMB would follow his example for that matter.

So how did Newt explain this?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=21z30aNO3cA]Rick Perry - Full, uncut "drunk" Cornerstone New Hampshire speech - Friday, 28 October, 2011 - YouTube[/ame]

I don't recall that Newt was ever asked about that. But what's wrong with it? A guy in front of a friendly audience having fun? You really object to that.

And I've seen drunk. No way did Rick Perry have even a little buzz there, let alone be drunk. Too much caffeine maybe? But I doubt that. I think that was just Perry being Perry and a rather lovable one at that.

Maybe a few drinks , but passable. Drunk? No. Good Speech.

 

[SAT]

What did you especially like about it?

 

[Foxfyre]

Just making a point, Foxfyre. If the only thing Perry had done since his WH run was that gaffe the other night, it wouldn't be a problem for him. KWIM?

Of course it would. They've been trying to take him down on the strength that he isn't a good debater. Well he freely admits he isn't the best debater. But they've made a MUCH bigger deal of that gaffe purely because he has been a front runner and it is a way to take him out.

God forbid somebody is honest about these things and the media actually did its job and focused on the proposals these guys are laying out there and giving them a fair hearing. But nope, the politics of personal destruction is in full operational mode right now, any fair hearing of anybody's proposals won't be given a fair and impartial hearing, and the people have a far less fair chance to actually know what they are getting in any candidate.

 

[SAT]

Just making a point, Foxfyre. If the only thing Perry had done since his WH run was that gaffe the other night, it wouldn't be a problem for him. KWIM?

Of course it would. They've been trying to take him down on the strength that he isn't a good debater. Well he freely admits he isn't the best debater. But they've made a MUCH bigger deal of that gaffe purely because he has been a front runner and it is a way to take him out.

"They" have done all this?

His fundraising and polling are down. How did "they" make people stop supporting Perry?

 

[Cecilie1200]

[Sorry, Sparky, but only immature leftist voyeurs ever thought the problem with Bill Clinton was about sex. Oh, granted, we viewed him with a lot of contempt for his painfully obvious lack of discretion and good taste, but it was never a newsflash or even a particularly big deal to anyone that he was a horndog. It's not like we didn't have much more important reasons to dislike the guy. The fact that he was an indiscriminate slut-puppy just added on to that.

No, the real problem with his "adventures" - my, how incredibly puerile a choice of words from you - was when they started including illegal activities, something an amazingly adolescent left just couldn't wrap its collective brain around, so hung up on the titillation of discussing sex acts were they.

Well, bullshit. Yes, the right had a huge problem with Bill Clinton's sex life. It was the subject of endless attacks on Clinton, during the election, and during his Presidency.

While I appreciate your eager willingness to tell me what I and others on my side of the political fence were thinking and feeling - especially given the "value" of such an opinion, coming from someone who isn't even a member of that group - I think I'm going to have to favor myself as the expert over you concerning what the right thought and felt.

Thanks for you generous, if meaningless, offer, though.

As for my word choice, it was mocking the right's obsession with Clinton's dick. Lighten up.

Don't blame me if your words reveal your childishness despite your intent. Freudian slips are a bitch like that.

By contrast, no one has ever accused Newt Gingrich of violating any laws or professional ethics in the conduct of his sex life. Nor, for that matter, has anyone ever accused him of being an indiscreet, indiscriminate horndog and slut-puppy. I would imagine most Republicans, myself included, have a certain amount of contempt for his unadmirable behavior in regards to his affair. But, as with Bill Clinton, there are more important issues to discuss about him . . . until such time, if it ever arrives, that his unadmirable behavior starts to include violating the law.

Actually, Newt has often been accused of being an indiscriminate horndog. There are many other accusations of affairs. He only admits to two.

Are you suggesting that the Gingrich campaign has an entire mechanism set up just to handle "bimbo eruptions"? I don't think so.

Feel free to link us all to these supposedly voluminous accusations of indiscriminate horndoggery. For myself, having an affair with a woman he later married doesn't exactly meet that criteria.

There's nothing inconsistent here at all . . . unless you're a juvenile who's fixated on the salacious sexual details and missing the actual point. The left, on the other hand, is incredibly hypocritical if it wants to condemn Gingrich for "immoral behavior", after it spent years stubbornly excusing much worse - and more prolific - behavior in Bill Clinton.

You cannot be serious. Yes, it's inconsistent of you to fixate on Bill and ignore Newt. And again, no one is attacking Newt. I'm laughing at him.

No, it's not inconsistent at all for me to have a problem with lawbreaking. It would be inconsistent if I were having a problem with fucking, but as I said, that fixation is YOUR schtick, not mine. I never respected Bill Clinton, but despite your need to tell me what I was thinking in the '90s, Miss Cleo, I never gave a damn who he was schtupping.

See, you're so damned juvenile, you STILL can't wrap your brain around the simple, and oft-repeated fact, that it was NOT THE SEX. To you, there was fucking involved, ergo that had to be the only thing anyone was thinking about. What are you, 13?

Keep laughing, Captain Puberty. It'll keep you occupied between now and when Obama loses the election.

 

[Intense]

What did you especially like about it?

I find him more relaxed and grounded in the Speech, than in the debates. He's more at peace, less adrenaline. I'm not into hard sell.

 

[Foxfyre]

Just making a point, Foxfyre. If the only thing Perry had done since his WH run was that gaffe the other night, it wouldn't be a problem for him. KWIM?

Of course it would. They've been trying to take him down on the strength that he isn't a good debater. Well he freely admits he isn't the best debater. But they've made a MUCH bigger deal of that gaffe purely because he has been a front runner and it is a way to take him out.

"They" have done all this?

His fundraising and polling are down. How did "they" make people stop supporting Perry?

By intentionally withholding anything he says or does that would make him look good and by emphasizing and playing again and again and again and again and again and/or making sure somebody is constantly commenting on anything that makes him look foolish or less than at the top of his game. The leftist, pro-Obama media are MASTERS at that tactic and are aided and abetted by the Democratic talking heads and leftist message boarders.

Perry has the best tax plan out there that I can see. Do you see the media elite focused on that or doing anything to show it as a possibility? No? I didn't think so.

 

[SAT]

While I appreciate your eager willingness to tell me what I and others on my side of the political fence were thinking and feeling - especially given the "value" of such an opinion, coming from someone who isn't even a member of that group - I think I'm going to have to favor myself as the expert over you concerning what the right thought and felt.

Thanks for you generous, if meaningless, offer, though.

Cecille, I'm not reading your mind, I'm describing what we all lived through. From the beginning of Clinton's campaign, there were endless attacks on Clinton for screwing around. Those attacks continued throughout the Presidency.

Don't blame me if your words reveal your childishness despite your intent. Freudian slips are a bitch like that.

You really need to rethink that avatar if you're going to try to play analyst.

Are you suggesting that the Gingrich campaign has an entire mechanism set up just to handle "bimbo eruptions"? I don't think so.

You do realize you're making my point, right? We're not going after him. We're laughing at him.

Feel free to link us all to these supposedly voluminous accusations of indiscriminate horndoggery. For myself, having an affair with a woman he later married doesn't exactly meet that criteria.

You cannot bring yourself to be honest about Newt. He did that twice, and yes, there were plenty of other rumors about him.

No, it's not inconsistent at all for me to have a problem with lawbreaking. It would be inconsistent if I were having a problem with fucking, but as I said, that fixation is YOUR schtick, not mine. I never respected Bill Clinton, but despite your need to tell me what I was thinking in the '90s, Miss Cleo, I never gave a damn who he was schtupping.

See, you're so damned juvenile, you STILL can't wrap your brain around the simple, and oft-repeated fact, that it was NOT THE SEX. To you, there was fucking involved, ergo that had to be the only thing anyone was thinking about. What are you, 13?

Keep laughing, Captain . It'll keep you occupied between now and when Obama loses the election.

I'm sorry, but that's pathetic. Yes, it was the sex. The deposition was an excuse.

What did you especially like about it?

I find him more relaxed and grounded in the Speech, than in the debates. He's more at peace, less adrenaline. I'm not into hard sell.

I found him to be anything but grounded.

Of course it would. They've been trying to take him down on the strength that he isn't a good debater. Well he freely admits he isn't the best debater. But they've made a MUCH bigger deal of that gaffe purely because he has been a front runner and it is a way to take him out.

"They" have done all this?

His fundraising and polling are down. How did "they" make people stop supporting Perry?

By intentionally withholding anything he says or does that would make him look good and by emphasizing and playing again and again and again and again and again and/or making sure somebody is constantly commenting on anything that makes him look foolish or less than at the top of his game. The leftist, pro-Obama media are MASTERS at that tactic and are aided and abetted by the Democratic talking heads and leftist message boarders.

Perry has the best tax plan out there that I can see. Do you see the media elite focused on that or doing anything to show it as a possibility? No? I didn't think so.

Yes, it's possible for the media to do that, but this was a major gaffe, unlike anything I've seen in a Presidential debate before, and it comes on top of a series of gaffes.

 

[Intense]

If anything needed Hope and Change, it's our convoluted Tax Structure. It's an embarrassment. Instead we got short changed. My concern with All of the Candidates is who is behind the concept of Health Care Mandates, and who will fight to Repeal and shut the door to the concept on General Principle. It is foolish to thing the Courts or Congress will fight injustice when they are a part of it. Everyone is arguing over who has access to the $100.00 Band-aid, while No One questions why it is priced so high in the first place. Government supporting big business, running cover for it, while complaining all the way to the Bank, which it also has by the throat.

Yeah, we need more Government.

What we need is better Government.

 

[SAT]

We need a public option.

 

[Intense]

We need a public option.

We need a Safety Net.

 

[francoHFW]

We need to protect and improve Obamacare or we'll wait forever for affordable, guaranteed care.
70% have been brainwashed by Pub talking points. Death panels, huge costs, loss of freedom, gov't takeover...all BS.

Newt's a talking points hack, with no character. The whole Pub field are a bunch of bought off charlatans. I only fear a Jeb Bush deal at the convention. The dupes will believe anything again and again. They aren't told anything like the truth. Rev. Moon seems to be running them.

 

[Foxfyre]

We need a public option.

We need a Safety Net.

Why? But assuming that we do, does it have to be at the federal level? Is there no room to allow the people at the state and local level to form their own social contracts to take care of those who have no place to turn?

 

[Maple]

By far the best debater and most informed candidate and could easily kick Obama's ass in a debate...

Turned Clinton from a deficit spending President in a fortunate economy to a budget surplus and Democrat pro-sexual harassment hero..

Soo.. what's your beef with this Guy...?

I will tell you this, personally I am backing Romney, but would be just fine with Newt winning and if Newt wins, Obama better be making a fast track for the exit as Newt would literally mop the floor with him during a debate. It would be fun just to watch that. Get out the popcorn and beer for that one.