Listen, I didn't enjoy watching Romney be treated like a pinata about Bain and his taxes--and the fact that the "tone" of the criticisms were reminiscent of liberal garbage was noteworthy--but the mere fact that he was forced to respond to these charges has made him a better candidate. Let's face it folks, Newt Gingrich has been a divisive figure, even within the Republican Party. To suggest otherwise is simply revisionist history. Yes--he led Republicans out of a forty-year desert, and it was one of the most amazing political lifts in US history. But he was also forced out of the Speakership because of his temperament and his ability to lead. These things are fair game, as are his activities in selling his estimable Washington influence after leaving office. If Newt is going to be our nominee--than he HAS to answer for these things.
The continuing reference to Reagan and the "11th Commandment" is just downright silly. Ronald Reagan could issue the 11th Commandment because he was, well.....Ronald Reagan. None of these guys are he, and we ought to stop waiting for Him to return like a bunch of "end of the worlders".
It's time to hunker down, to recognize that THIS race, with THESE men, will settle our candidate question. Let them do what needs to be done, and we'll have a stronger candidate at the end.
If they think it's bad now...
ReplyDeleteWe'll have a stronger candidate at the end? Really? Who do you think will be entering the race that we don't already know about?
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWeenie #2, Tom Sowell.
ReplyDeletehttp://townhall.com/columnists/thomassowell/2012/01/31/the_florida_smear_campaign
Yes, in this instance, Sowell is being a weenie. Even if he is a great man.
ReplyDeleteHey--I like Hannity and Palin too. But they are acting like weenies who need to spend some time on the divan taking their smelling salts.
I used to defend this woman, but I can't even bear to listen to her anymore. She's just reliving her bottomless pit of grievances with everything she says.
ReplyDeleteAnd please, no more posts with weenie in the title.
Grievances? I've got a list of grievances against government and politicians as long as your arm. And so do you. In part that's what politics is all about.
ReplyDeleteWith all due respect I think we're getting off track here. Nobody is against a good hard fought campaign. But I think we can all agree there has been some unfair and illegitimate criticism on both sides. For instance, Newt going after Bain Capital was total bullshit. And Mitt claiming Newt was run out of town on a rail likewise is bullshit. Newt was "Borked" in part for the takedown of Jim Wright.
All I'm saying is be hard but fair. We ain't Democrats.
No Hammer, I don't accept your logic--not for a second. There ARE legitimate questions about Romney's activities at Bain. Private equity DOES sometimes throw people out of work--that is indisputable. But if that's ALL it did, there wouldn't be much a market for it, would there. I was up to Romney to explain the rest of the story to the voters, and he did so, albeit late. I don't think it was a great argument to hear FROM a Republican, but the line of operation was legitimate. Same with Speaker Gingrich's fall from grace. You're being a bit of a revisionist, sir, if you don't recognize that the ethics business and his losing the Speakership were two different processes. He was kicked out of the Speakership FROM WITHIN the party. It was guys like Largent, and Scarborough who had had enough of Newt as a leader. They mutinied, and they eventually prevailed. That story SHOULD be told. Lots and lots of voters DON'T remember Newt in power--and they should be reminded that there was SERIOUS BAGGAGE. That's what a campaign does--it gets that stuff out.
ReplyDeleteFull contact gang. We're looking for the leader of the free world, not a cotillion master.
52% as of 7:13.
ReplyDeleteGo Mitt!
Hold on a second Bucko, eh CW. What exactly are you saying? Are you saying that because folks lost their jobs as a result of Bain's activities that that is a legitimate area for criticism? If so, why? As I understand it Bain Capital was in the business of taking over distressed companies, turning them around and reselling them at a profit. They risked money to make money, you know, capitalism. They weren't some altruistic non-profit just providing employment they were in business to make money. That's it. If one or a hundred thousand lost their gig so as to make the company healthy, well thems the breaks. If you start running a company for any other reason than profit then next thing you know you're GM. So any criticism along these lines is a Democratic talking point for leftists or morons.
ReplyDeleteNow as for Newt, he lost his Speaker job. So what? He orchestrated a Democratic defeat in the House with a sitting Democratic president. Not too God-damned shabby. So some of the backbenchers didn't like him? Again, so what? Vote his ass out and move on. As to the ethics stuff, it was bullshit. As I said before it was payback for Jim Wright, payback for taking over the House, payback for being a Republican. How many times have the Democrats loaded up a Republican with false ethics charges for political gain? Ray Donovan, Casper Weinburger immediately come to mind.
Look, all I'm saying is this. Calling Bain "vulture capitalism" is a Democrat line. Romney isn't George Soros and a Republican shouldn't say it. And hitting Newt with all that stuff that happened back in the 90's, that was a result of the whole blessed liberal establishment coming at the guy as hard as they could in every way they could for the sole purpose of ruining the guy because he had the audacity to kick their asses. That's all it was, payback for Newt and intimidation of the rest. Let the Dems bring that up in the general (if Newt makes it). Make them justify what they did.
Yes Hammer, I'm saying that because people lost jobs it is a legitimate matter for criticism. Is it logical? Is it well informed? Does it take account the "creative destruction" of capitalism? No. But if there are people who believe it, it is a legitimate matter for criticism. Again--I wish a fellow Republican had based his criticism on capitalist grounds, but Gingrich and Perry chose otherwise. That they chose to do so MADE ROMNEY ANSWER--and after fumbling quite a bit, he began to get his feet up under him. That is why I don't have a problem with their criticism as a political matter. As an ideological matter, they were just plain dumb.
ReplyDeleteI don't care about the ethics charges against Gingrich. What I care about is that the very people he led threw him out. He did all of those wonderful things that you cited, and we should all be grateful for them. But he over-reached, and he alienated enough of his own people--CONSERVATIVE PEOPLE--for them to throw him out. A number of voters don't remember this, or didn't pay attention. It is absolutely legitimate to bring it up. Gingrich's job--if he wished to be President (as he would surely face these same criticisms in the general election) would be to RESPOND EFFECTIVELY. He did not.
I simply don't accept that we should wait until the general election to differentiate candidates based on policy, character, integrity, and past performance. That we put these men through the ringer now MAKES THESE THINGS OLD NEWS when the Dems bring it up, and the voters are potentially more likely to yawn and move on.
Personally and ideologically--I'm completely with you on some of the attacks as being odd from folks who claim to represent conservatism. But politically, I encourage those arguments to be raised now, rather than in September/October.
Bucko.
We agree for the most part, but I just don't like giving these sort of anti-capitalist political attacks any credence. And I hate to see it coming from one of our own. As to your point that it gets the stuff out there and makes it old news, rehashing the past etc., I couldn't agree more...sonny.
ReplyDeleteI cannot believe that you have stooped to the use of unflattering photos of people as a means of buttressing your negative view of that person. SHAME
ReplyDeleteAre you addressing me Anon? If you are you obviously don't know me that well.
ReplyDeleteNo Hammer, your pic is spot on. I was addressing CW's pic of Sarah Palin.
ReplyDeleteLooks like Anon is a weenie too. I try to make most of the photos I use at least a little humorous.
ReplyDelete