Re-Evaluating Newt..

[SAT2]

Nonsense. Obama has a number of accomplishments. That's what bugs you about him, he's accomplished a lot of things that you don't like.

Unions are entitled to support candidates. Isn't that great?

No doubt about that.. I reject socialism as any true American would..Hell. even the Europeans are rejecting socialism now..think austerity comrade..

I don't mind Unions supporting anyone they believe in, as long as the private sector isn't getting screwed over in the process..

mmm did you notice all those union waivers from Obamacare???... after they supported it before it passed, don't you feel like you've been lied to or do you enjoy being made a fool of..? (I'll just wait for the excuses)

No, the Europeans are not rejecting social democracy.

I don't mind corporations supporting candidates, as long as the public isn't screwed over in the process.

Your comment on the waivers are too vague to address. Try harder.

 

[Lumpy 1]

Nonsense. Obama has a number of accomplishments. That's what bugs you about him, he's accomplished a lot of things that you don't like.

Unions are entitled to support candidates. Isn't that great?

No doubt about that.. I reject socialism as any true American would..Hell. even the Europeans are rejecting socialism now..think austerity comrade..

I don't mind Unions supporting anyone they believe in, as long as the private sector isn't getting screwed over in the process..

mmm did you notice all those union waivers from Obamacare???... after they supported it before it passed, don't you feel like you've been lied to or do you enjoy being made a fool of..? (I'll just wait for the excuses)

And all the Union waivers getting in before Obama stopped the process?

Fishy.. I think so..

...but the limp wristed response will be... that's politics everybody does it ...

 

[The T]

No doubt about that.. I reject socialism as any true American would..Hell. even the Europeans are rejecting socialism now..think austerity comrade..

I don't mind Unions supporting anyone they believe in, as long as the private sector isn't getting screwed over in the process..

mmm did you notice all those union waivers from Obamacare???... after they supported it before it passed, don't you feel like you've been lied to or do you enjoy being made a fool of..? (I'll just wait for the excuses)

And all the Union waivers getting in before Obama stopped the process?

Fishy.. I think so..

...but the limp wristed response will be... that's politics everybody does it ...

And no excuse at all. It showed favouritism to a particuliar group over others...and that isn't America.

 

[SAT2]

No doubt about that.. I reject socialism as any true American would..Hell. even the Europeans are rejecting socialism now..think austerity comrade..

I don't mind Unions supporting anyone they believe in, as long as the private sector isn't getting screwed over in the process..

mmm did you notice all those union waivers from Obamacare???... after they supported it before it passed, don't you feel like you've been lied to or do you enjoy being made a fool of..? (I'll just wait for the excuses)

And all the Union waivers getting in before Obama stopped the process?

Fishy.. I think so..

...but the limp wristed response will be... that's politics everybody does it ...

Still vague. I'm not sure even you know what you're complaining about.

 

[The T]

Nonsense. Obama has a number of accomplishments. That's what bugs you about him, he's accomplished a lot of things that you don't like.

Unions are entitled to support candidates. Isn't that great?

No doubt about that.. I reject socialism as any true American would..Hell. even the Europeans are rejecting socialism now..think austerity comrade..

I don't mind Unions supporting anyone they believe in, as long as the private sector isn't getting screwed over in the process..

mmm did you notice all those union waivers from Obamacare???... after they supported it before it passed, don't you feel like you've been lied to or do you enjoy being made a fool of..? (I'll just wait for the excuses)

No, the Europeans are not rejecting social democracy.

I don't mind corporations supporting candidates, as long as the public isn't screwed over in the process.

Your comment on the waivers are too vague to address. Try harder.

Do you hold the same candle to UNIONS that are corporations unto themselves that Obama favours?

And it's a YES or NO Question.

 

[Lumpy 1]

Nonsense. Obama has a number of accomplishments. That's what bugs you about him, he's accomplished a lot of things that you don't like.

Unions are entitled to support candidates. Isn't that great?

No doubt about that.. I reject socialism as any true American would..Hell. even the Europeans are rejecting socialism now..think austerity comrade..

I don't mind Unions supporting anyone they believe in, as long as the private sector isn't getting screwed over in the process..

mmm did you notice all those union waivers from Obamacare???... after they supported it before it passed, don't you feel like you've been lied to or do you enjoy being made a fool of..? (I'll just wait for the excuses)

No, the Europeans are not rejecting social democracy.

I don't mind corporations supporting candidates, as long as the public isn't screwed over in the process.

Your comment on the waivers are too vague to address. Try harder.

Oh, a change of subject... ..

No balls to face the reality... no problem, I'm kinda used to it..

 

[SAT2]

No doubt about that.. I reject socialism as any true American would..Hell. even the Europeans are rejecting socialism now..think austerity comrade..

I don't mind Unions supporting anyone they believe in, as long as the private sector isn't getting screwed over in the process..

mmm did you notice all those union waivers from Obamacare???... after they supported it before it passed, don't you feel like you've been lied to or do you enjoy being made a fool of..? (I'll just wait for the excuses)

No, the Europeans are not rejecting social democracy.

I don't mind corporations supporting candidates, as long as the public isn't screwed over in the process.

Your comment on the waivers are too vague to address. Try harder.

Do you hold the same candle to UNIONS that are corporations unto themselves that Obama favours?

And it's a YES or NO Question.

Yes. And I only brought it up to counter Lumpy's statement.

No doubt about that.. I reject socialism as any true American would..Hell. even the Europeans are rejecting socialism now..think austerity comrade..

I don't mind Unions supporting anyone they believe in, as long as the private sector isn't getting screwed over in the process..

mmm did you notice all those union waivers from Obamacare???... after they supported it before it passed, don't you feel like you've been lied to or do you enjoy being made a fool of..? (I'll just wait for the excuses)

No, the Europeans are not rejecting social democracy.

I don't mind corporations supporting candidates, as long as the public isn't screwed over in the process.

Your comment on the waivers are too vague to address. Try harder.

Oh, a change of subject... ..

No balls to face the reality... no problem, I'm kinda used to it..

What a bizarre response. Since when is asking you to explain what you mean "a change of subject"?

For the third or fourth time, what is your complaint about the waivers. This is your chance to show that you aren't just reciting a talking point.

 

[The T]

No, the Europeans are not rejecting social democracy.

I don't mind corporations supporting candidates, as long as the public isn't screwed over in the process.

Your comment on the waivers are too vague to address. Try harder.

Do you hold the same candle to UNIONS that are corporations unto themselves that Obama favours?

And it's a YES or NO Question.

Yes. And I only brought it up to counter Lumpy's statement.

No, the Europeans are not rejecting social democracy.

I don't mind corporations supporting candidates, as long as the public isn't screwed over in the process.

Your comment on the waivers are too vague to address. Try harder.

Oh, a change of subject... ..

No balls to face the reality... no problem, I'm kinda used to it..

What a bizarre response. Since when is asking you to explain what you mean "a change of subject"?

For the third or fourth time, what is your complaint about the waivers. This is your chance to show that you aren't just reciting a talking point.

Funny. The Lumpster's response was really no different than mine.

So? Are you willing to admit that Unions are a socialist enterprise?

 

[SAT2]

Do you hold the same candle to UNIONS that are corporations unto themselves that Obama favours?

And it's a YES or NO Question.

Yes. And I only brought it up to counter Lumpy's statement.

Oh, a change of subject... ..

No balls to face the reality... no problem, I'm kinda used to it..

What a bizarre response. Since when is asking you to explain what you mean "a change of subject"?

For the third or fourth time, what is your complaint about the waivers. This is your chance to show that you aren't just reciting a talking point.

Funny. The Lumpster's response was really no different than mine.

So? Are you willing to admit that Unions are a socialist enterprise?

Yes, it is funny. Neither of you can elaborate on your objections to the waivers.

 

[Lumpy 1]

No, the Europeans are not rejecting social democracy.

I don't mind corporations supporting candidates, as long as the public isn't screwed over in the process.

Your comment on the waivers are too vague to address. Try harder.

Do you hold the same candle to UNIONS that are corporations unto themselves that Obama favours?

And it's a YES or NO Question.

Yes. And I only brought it up to counter Lumpy's statement.

No, the Europeans are not rejecting social democracy.

I don't mind corporations supporting candidates, as long as the public isn't screwed over in the process.

Your comment on the waivers are too vague to address. Try harder.

Oh, a change of subject... ..

No balls to face the reality... no problem, I'm kinda used to it..

What a bizarre response. Since when is asking you to explain what you mean "a change of subject"?

For the third or fourth time, what is your complaint about the waivers. This is your chance to show that you aren't just reciting a talking point.

I find no value in debating with you... You either change the subject or come up with asinine questions away from the established subject... You just waste my time..
So moving on..

 

[The T]

Yes. And I only brought it up to counter Lumpy's statement.



What a bizarre response. Since when is asking you to explain what you mean "a change of subject"?

For the third or fourth time, what is your complaint about the waivers. This is your chance to show that you aren't just reciting a talking point.

Funny. The Lumpster's response was really no different than mine.

So? Are you willing to admit that Unions are a socialist enterprise?

Yes, it is funny. Neither of you can elaborate on your objections to the waivers.

We have. YOU refuse to see the trees in the forest...

 

[SAT2]

I find no value in debating with you... You either change the subject or come up with asinine questions away from the established subject... You just waste my time..
So moving on..

We have. YOU refuse to see the trees in the forest...

No, you haven't. Neither of you have explained what your objections are. If you'll elaborate, I'll do some research and see if I can reply to your concerns. But as long as it's just nod, nod, wink, wink, know-what-I-mean, nobody can debate with you.

 

[JoeB131]

Yes, we will see. We'll see if Newt can survive a harem of women coming out of the woodworks like those who came out accusing Cain. Cain couldn't survive it ... I doubt Newt will either.

Actually, it's only really a problem for him if they come out during the time he's been married to the current one. He's already acknowledged his previous two wives were problem marriages.

All of Gingrich's sins are old news.

Ironically, he'll get a pass for the same reason Clinton did.

I LOVE Irony.

 

[Cecilie1200]

The thing about Newt's well-known "baggage" is that it also spikes the left's guns. It's not like they can come up with it all fresh and shocking, like all this crap about Herman Cain. It's all old news, and the more they drone on about it, the more old and boring it seems. Anyone who's voting for him knows it and is voting for him anyway, so it doesn't leave much to talk about except the actual issues by the time the real campaign rolls around.

 

[Lumpy 1]

The thing about Newt's well-known "baggage" is that it also spikes the left's guns. It's not like they can come up with it all fresh and shocking, like all this crap about Herman Cain. It's all old news, and the more they drone on about it, the more old and boring it seems. Anyone who's voting for him knows it and is voting for him anyway, so it doesn't leave much to talk about except the actual issues by the time the real campaign rolls around.

I believe they would like Republicans to feel guilty...okay sure, that's obvious...

They don't have a problem with Obama screwing up the country, that, they can't deny..sooo why talk about it...(the dig hole, place head in it.... scenario)

Winning is all that matters to them, screw the country in the process, no problem..

 

[Cecilie1200]

The thing about Newt's well-known "baggage" is that it also spikes the left's guns. It's not like they can come up with it all fresh and shocking, like all this crap about Herman Cain. It's all old news, and the more they drone on about it, the more old and boring it seems. Anyone who's voting for him knows it and is voting for him anyway, so it doesn't leave much to talk about except the actual issues by the time the real campaign rolls around.

I believe they would like Republicans to feel guilty...okay sure, that's obvious...

They don't have a problem with Obama screwing up the country, that, they can't deny..sooo why talk about it...(the dig hole, place head in it.... scenario)

Winning is all that matters to them, screw the country in the process, no problem..

I'm sure they'd love for Republicans to feel guilty, but that would require us to concede them any sort of moral standing from which to deliver a guilt trip. Don't hold your breath waiting on THAT.

 

[Lumpy 1]

The thing about Newt's well-known "baggage" is that it also spikes the left's guns. It's not like they can come up with it all fresh and shocking, like all this crap about Herman Cain. It's all old news, and the more they drone on about it, the more old and boring it seems. Anyone who's voting for him knows it and is voting for him anyway, so it doesn't leave much to talk about except the actual issues by the time the real campaign rolls around.

I believe they would like Republicans to feel guilty...okay sure, that's obvious...

They don't have a problem with Obama screwing up the country, that, they can't deny..sooo why talk about it...(the dig hole, place head in it.... scenario)

Winning is all that matters to them, screw the country in the process, no problem..

I'm sure they'd love for Republicans to feel guilty, but that would require us to concede them any sort of moral standing from which to deliver a guilt trip. Don't hold your breath waiting on THAT.

Well said...

I'd rep you but I know you don't like it...

 

[Cecilie1200]

I believe they would like Republicans to feel guilty...okay sure, that's obvious...

They don't have a problem with Obama screwing up the country, that, they can't deny..sooo why talk about it...(the dig hole, place head in it.... scenario)

Winning is all that matters to them, screw the country in the process, no problem..

I'm sure they'd love for Republicans to feel guilty, but that would require us to concede them any sort of moral standing from which to deliver a guilt trip. Don't hold your breath waiting on THAT.

Well said...

I'd rep you but I know you don't like it...

::blink:: When'd I ever say that?

 

[Foxfyre]

No need to vote-- Newt states he is the nominee, so I guess he is. What arrogance.

Gingrich Tells ABC News: ‘I’m Going to Be The Nominee’ - ABC News

Yeah well Maple. When you've taken it upon yourself to personally disrespect, demean, belittle, condemn, and if possibly destroy another human being you have decided not to like, I guess that is as good a reason as any. So carry on. . . .

I like Newt personally, but he can't and won't beat Obama. Obama has a boatload of money and a boatload of ammunition that Newt has provided to torpeodo the Newt boat.

And you think Newt doesn't have plenty of ammo to use against Fearless Leader who has been behind a microphone and on camera more than ANYBODY I know of in my lifetime? And okay, I probably came down harder than I should in your evaluation of Newt, but I do get really tired of people posting the nonsense and never focusing on what Newt has to offer as POTUS.

You know what? We're NEVER going to find a saint to run for public office. Everybody who runs is going to have an issue or two to deal with and something the opposition can use against them. They all put on their pants one leg at a time, not one is capable of walking on water, and from time to time they will all have feet of clay. We all do.

The time is short before primary season begins. I would like for us to choose the best possible candidate who can win and who will do the best job of leading the country. That person may or may not be Newt but we aren't going to find out focusing on his marital problems.

 

[JoeB131]

Yeah well Maple. When you've taken it upon yourself to personally disrespect, demean, belittle, condemn, and if possibly destroy another human being you have decided not to like, I guess that is as good a reason as any. So carry on. . . .

I like Newt personally, but he can't and won't beat Obama. Obama has a boatload of money and a boatload of ammunition that Newt has provided to torpeodo the Newt boat.

And you think Newt doesn't have plenty of ammo to use against Fearless Leader who has been behind a microphone and on camera more than ANYBODY I know of in my lifetime? And okay, I probably came down harder than I should in your evaluation of Newt, but I do get really tired of people posting the nonsense and never focusing on what Newt has to offer as POTUS.

You know what? We're NEVER going to find a saint to run for public office. Everybody who runs is going to have an issue or two to deal with and something the opposition can use against them. They all put on their pants one leg at a time, not one is capable of walking on water, and from time to time they will all have feet of clay. We all do.

The time is short before primary season begins. I would like for us to choose the best possible candidate who can win and who will do the best job of leading the country. That person may or may not be Newt but we aren't going to find out focusing on his marital problems.

Well said, and I'll go one further.

If you take Maple's argument seriously, that Obama has too much money for Newt to beat him, and Newt has given the other side "too much ammunition", the same can be said about Reversable Mittens.

I mean, Obama runs one commercial about the guy being a flip-flopper and the guy comes totally unglued....

He also got totally unglued when that pastor called Mormonism a cult. (Sorry, a lot of us think it is.)

This is going to be a dirty campaign. It's the only way Obama can win. And if that's the case, we need a guy with thicker skin.