People are so sick of the venal and one sided media. Newt really hit a home run here. They will do anything to tear down a Republican but did nothing against Obama’s many lies, distortions and efforts to hide his history. They continue to prop up and defend Obama against the worst record in history. But they will do whatever they can to make these Republicans look terrible when in many cases they’re just human beings with all the foibles you’d expect.

I’m not a Newt fan but you have to admire the guy. He really knows how to punch back hard. Newt’s a street fighting man.

Right now people are impressed by his ability to take on the press and nail whats so bad about Obama. Most politicians won’t say what needs to be said. The problem is, Gingrinch talks a good talk but he has a habit of being Mr. Beltway when in office. Regardless, anyone but Obama/Biden is a good choice.

Loading Facebook Comments ...


  1. I am not of the ‘Anybody but Obama’ camp. To me I see no real difference between Romney and Obama. Nor do I see all that much between Newt and Obama. I am not basing this upon what they say (all 3 of them), but rather what they do. In that respect Santorum, probably the best of the 3 establishment R’s left, has some issues as well. Why vote for ‘Anybody but Obama’ when we could restore America with Ron Paul? Oh, I forgot, because the NWO Republican party won’t let Ron Paul win. That’s why in Iowa after the votes in the precincts where Ron Paul had a serious advantage (college towns etc.), the votes were driven off in someones truck and Karl Rove conspired in a back room with Republican insiders, Romney and Santorum to declare the Iowa caucus a virtual tie between those two. Because our apathetic mind controlled nation is already so far gone not too many people were up in arms about this much less even aware of it.

    P.S. I think it was great that Drudge (a real journalist) broke the ABC Newt story before the S.C. debate and vote. It was great to see Newt (Bohemian Grove) Gingrich get all puffed up trying defend the indefensible. LOL!

  2. Ron Paul has his issues, too, Cross.

    I’m sorry but his foreign policy and analysis of the world is criminally naive.

    Do I think our aid dollars should be propping up dictatorships any more than keeping a bunch of out-of-the-way Cold War era bases with no necessary function?  Of course not!  A lot of our allies should step up and take care of their own shit for a change.  We SHOULDN’T back dictators unless the alternatives are far worse.  (Ugly but that’s politics and we have to look after OUR interests regardless of what the Extreme Left believes.)  We have to reduce our military commitments and deal with some serious domestic infrastructure and budget issues, too.  It’s not a matter of when anymore.  We have to deal with the domestic situations NOW or we will be done in as a country.

    However, we’re never going to get rid of all the welfare programs and bureaucracy in one day.  It would be a disaster to rip everything apart in one day let alone one presidential term.  We have to proceed cautiously because it’s harder to bring useful things back into existence than it is to tear them down.

    One thing that does have to be done is getting rid of redundant departments.  There’s no reason to have 3 or more agencies which basically do the same things unless they each cover areas that don’t overlap much.  We can get rid of Homeland Security because there were other existing agencies before that one that were supposed to take care of domestic security.  On the other hand, there’s still a need to maintain separate naval and land-based air forces because the operational requirements of the armed forces are so different from each other.  (IE, you can’t force a land-based machine to work on a carrier because the naval environment is far harsher and adaptations of land- to sea-based aircraft have rarely worked out well in the end.  Watch the debacle of the F-35 JSF program continue to explode because the people who designed that system were pure political wonks and not a single combat-experienced, degreed aerospace engineer amongst the decision-making hierarchy!)

    There is a part of me that believes — and I believe this because of life experience — that pure libertarians and greens will never work as heads of government.  Most just don’t have the basic deal-making skills and understanding of the existing bureaucracy.  Hard-line ideologues have problems building coalitions and getting anything constructive done.  I’m sorry but our system is supposed to keep things in check so that NOBODY becomes a dictator. 

    It’s debatable how well that works sometimes because unfortunately human beings get caught up in cults of personality and a lot of stupid things happen with that mentality.  As bad as things are with Obama, this problem has been even worse in Third World countries like India and Argentina.  Even the Kennedys have nothing on the Ghandis and Perons in the rest of the world…  Unless the descendants of these regimes degenerate into total pervs and megalomaniacs that even the MSMS can’t completely cover — that’s what ultimately cost Ted Kennedy his presidential ambitions and brought down his nephews –, there’s a tendency for people to re-elect familiar names… and in a sense give them a blessing to do as they will with governmental power because too many people believe that those born from dynasties are better human beings and worthier to wield power!

    Societies still get caught up with where elites get their degrees from and how many and what kind of letters follow behind people’s names.  More of us should be asking questions about the sensibility of candidates’ beliefs and whether their ideas are practical and benefit our societies.

    That doesn’t happen, though.  We still elect people too often on public speaking ability and looks!  It’s the same shit since grade school.

    • I don’t think Ron Paul ever said the things that he’s campaigning on could be done overnight because that would be to great a shock to the current system, but has said hopefully gradually and that being only if the rest of government would even play ball. But at least what he proposes is a step in the right direction and he can be trusted based on his record to at least try and do what he says. Anyway, while I can’t agree with all of what you said, I can appreciate some of it, especially the last part.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *