Pelosi: I know something about Gingrich that ensures he’ll never be president

posted at 10:40 pm on January 24, 2012 by Allahpundit

Via Greg Hengler. You make the call: An ominous warning that John Sununu was right to fear an “October surprise” if Newt is the nominee or a brilliant bit of bluffing aimed at spooking conservatives into nominating a cold fish like Romney instead of Gingrich? If you’re a Mitt fan, the answer is clear — she knows something from having served on the ethics committee when Newt was reprimanded and it’s only a matter of time before it comes out. If you’re a Newt fan, the answer is also clear — this is a classic case of the left telling you who it really fears by trying to sink him before he can gain any more electoral momentum. And if you’re a febrile political junkie who loves to obsess over political mind games, the answer is equally clear — Pelosi does know something, and she also knows that attacking Gingrich publicly this way will rally conservatives behind him, so she’s happy to do it precisely because it’ll help Newt win, which is just what Democrats want. Hmmmmm.

Is this one of the reasons why so many of the Republicans who served with Gingrich in Congress seem lukewarm about him? According to CNN, if Newt wins Florida, veteran Republican strategists expect Boehner, McConnell, and other GOP leaders to start calling around to top donors and asking them not to donate to Newt. Exit quotation from Gingrich last month: “I want to thank Speaker Pelosi for what I regard an early Christmas gift… If she is suggesting that she is going to use material that she developed while she was on the ethics committee, then that is a fundamental violation of the rules of the House and I hope that members would immediately file charges against her the second she does it.”


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 8 9 10 11

MNHawk on January 25, 2012 at 10:03 AM

You can’t admit that your noodles won’t support your argument.

Aside from Pelosi being a rival for biggest liar, she’s leaving Washington. That she plans on preventing Newt’s return via the Oval Office is her point. That you call that blackmail is your point. And that Newt lacks “honor” to defend is another point.

Try this one; it doesn’t matter what Pelosi has or hasn’t so far as altering my opinion about Newt. I am roughly his generation, leaving none of this “news”.

maverick muse on January 25, 2012 at 10:33 AM

I suppose it could be bad enough to hurt Newt, but in general, the best thing that could happen to him would be an attack from Nancy Pelosi.

After having shot a global-warming commercial with her, it would help distance him from the worst Speaker in history.

hawksruleva on January 25, 2012 at 10:34 AM

I never had more of the specifics about what Newt did but went on the fact that he was cleared of all charges and now after reading York about the whole thing it is clear that the whole thing was a big super sized nothing burger with fries and drink. I think also that someone that played a guy named cooter should have never been taken seriously in the first place.

jistincase on January 25, 2012 at 10:34 AM

No, I mean the sure thing as in the sure Constitutionalist; the one candidate who upholds the Constitution: Ron Paul.

Dante on January 25, 2012 at 10:27 AM

Oh gosh, I don’t want to derail this thread with a Ron Paul debate. The Mitt/Newt poo-flinging is bad enough.

I’m sure my conservatism has plenty of libertarian leanings mixed in. My story it the same with many other conservative Republicans, when it comes to RP. I just can’t abide with the military/national defense ideas of Ron Paul’s candidacy, no matter how much I agree with him on the idea of smaller government and a host of other issues.

TitularHead on January 25, 2012 at 10:35 AM

right2bright

I see you’re as sick of the misapplication of that Biblical quote as much as I am? Good. Usually from people who haven’t read it.

The context and quote was that Christ said, “Let he among you (referring to the discrete group around the woman taken in adultery) who has always kept the Law (referring to the Law of Moses) cast the first stone.

The quote is one condemning hypocrisy, not that “all have sinned.”
There could have been one who said, “I have” and thrown a fastrock.

Right up there with “Do not judge,” another misapplication of a quote.

Oh, and in the mooslim Qu’ran, I believe it reads, “Let you who has a stone, cast it.”

Horace on January 25, 2012 at 10:35 AM

She must have something- the media can’t that brazen- Can they?

FlaMurph on January 25, 2012 at 10:32 AM

heh. Oh, you’re serious?

DHChron on January 25, 2012 at 10:37 AM

a great and honorable man, but not the drunkard, over weight, obnoxious, arrogant, cigar smoking, loud mouthed Churchill…after all it’s England and they have to have a gentleman leading them…and that is the situation we are faced.
In another time, another election Mitt would be great…but in 2012, we need a pitbull not a poodle…

right2bright on January 25, 2012 at 10:19 AM

.
The Good Ol USA saved the Brits butts from defeat- period- It didn’t matter whether the PM was a drinker or not. Military men fight wars- politicians can only take the credit or the blame.

FlaMurph on January 25, 2012 at 10:40 AM

From the Washington Times:

Mr. Gingrich appeared on The Washington Times affiliated radio program “America’s Morning News” and forcefully responded to Rep. Pelosi.

“There’s almost a level of hysteria about the prospect of somebody who really wants to change Washington,” said Mr. Gingrich to host John McCaslin.

“I have a simple challenge for Speaker Pelosi…you know, put up or shut up. I mean, I have no idea what she’s talking about. I don’t think she has any idea what she’s talking about, but bring it on,” he said.

“My life has been looked at by lots of people and I’ve been around a long time. And I just think that when you are a left-wing Democrat, the prospect of a Gingrich presidency is really sort of like a nightmare,” Mr. Gingrich added.

Ooooweee! Let the games begin!

jersey taxpayer on January 25, 2012 at 10:41 AM

You keep describing politicians in general – self aggrandizement? Ya think?

DHChron on January 25, 2012 at 10:20 AM

You are right. But, at some point, we have to make a choice to support someone, to support no one, or to throw in the towel.

I’ll disagree with you that Gingrich is the guy to support, and I’ll voice my concern that his road to the nomination seems to require him to destroy Romney as a viable candidate.

Unfortunately, I agree that, at this point, I could switch their names and there would be very little difference in the situation.

Priscilla on January 25, 2012 at 10:41 AM

Right up there with “Do not judge,” another misapplication of a quote.

Oh, and in the mooslim Qu’ran, I believe it reads, “Let you who has a stone, cast it.”

Horace on January 25, 2012 at 10:35 AM

Let you who has a stone, cast it…at a stupid woman.

DHChron on January 25, 2012 at 10:42 AM

After having shot a global-warming commercial with her, it would help distance him from the worst Speaker in history.

If GWBush could get away with having looked into the man’s heart to determine that Putin is “good”, no surprise.

Nonetheless, both examples illustrate poor judgement.

maverick muse on January 25, 2012 at 10:43 AM

I’ll disagree with you that Gingrich is the guy to support, and I’ll voice my concern that his road to the nomination seems to require him to destroy Romney as a viable candidate.

Unfortunately, I agree that, at this point, I could switch their names and there would be very little difference in the situation.

Priscilla on January 25, 2012 at 10:41 AM

Hey! Don’t call me a Gingrich supporter :) I’m an ABO guy.

DHChron on January 25, 2012 at 10:43 AM

Of course if you don’t support Mitt, you just have to be a bigot…you won’t find any posting’s the last 6 years that show I am a bigot…contrary to you and your anti-Christian rhetoric.

…but maybe, sometime in the future, you may be his celestial bride, is that what you are hoping for? To be one of his many, to serve him as a God? You would like that wouldn’t you?

right2bright on January 25, 2012 at 9:19 AM

haha this made me laugh as this was in the same post…

g2825m on January 25, 2012 at 10:44 AM

I don’t think I could stomach any revelations about Nancy and Newt having sex.

Pork-Chop on January 25, 2012 at 10:44 AM

Piglosi isn’t engaged in “blackmail” or “extortion.”

What she is doing is plain, old-fashioned smearing by unsupported accusation, i.e. ruining a reputation, making someone look “bad” to others, etc.

Quite a bit like, “Oh, the things I could tell you about Nancy! But, I can’t. Like that party at her house with all the half-clad people and those whips and….Oops! Said too much already. But, the things I could tell you!

Horace on January 25, 2012 at 10:44 AM

DHChron on January 25, 2012 at 10:43 AM

My apologies. Hard to keep track in these threads ;)

Priscilla on January 25, 2012 at 10:45 AM

After having shot a global-warming commercial with her, it would help distance him from the worst Speaker in history.

hawksruleva on January 25, 2012 at 10:34 AM

.
The Birds of a feather stuff is gonna be tough to walk back. He knew she was the dishonest enemy back then – that was no secret- What was ambitious Newton’s motivation for the hook up? Maybe she does have something on him and he was trying to be “just friends” to keep in her good graces??

FlaMurph on January 25, 2012 at 10:45 AM

the whole thing was a big super sized nothing burger with fries and drink. I think also that someone that played a guy named cooter should have never been taken seriously in the first place.

jistincase on January 25, 2012 at 10:34 AM

hmmmmmmmmmmmm…nothing burger – Homer Simpson

DHChron on January 25, 2012 at 10:46 AM

heh. Oh, you’re serious?

DHChron

“Don’t take the World Serious.” – Abner Doubleday

Horace on January 25, 2012 at 10:46 AM

Newt to stretch pelosi: PUT UP OR SHUT UP. BRING IT ON!

BOOM! GO NEWT!!!

GhoulAid on January 25, 2012 at 10:47 AM

TitularHead on January 25, 2012 at 10:35 AM

Which of his books have you read? As if you’ve actually researched the original source v. opponents’ revisionist soundbites.

maverick muse on January 25, 2012 at 10:47 AM

The Good Ol USA saved the Brits butts from defeat- period- It didn’t matter whether the PM was a drinker or not. Military men fight wars- politicians can only take the credit or the blame.

FlaMurph on January 25, 2012 at 10:40 AM

Pal, you need to read a little history…America was not going to war, they wanted to stay out of it.
Churchill came to America, met with a joint congress and gave one of the most stirring speeches ever in the halls of our congress…he turned the tide and we entered the war because our leaders found that Churchill was a world leader and his people followed him with dedication…Churchill’s power, his ability to lead the free world, can never be diminished, except by those who don’t read history.
You are one of the few in the world who would not give credit to Churchill, and his fight against Germany…amazing how little history is taught in school, how how little history is known outside of school…what a shame that you don’t understand who Churchill was.
I would suggest you read the books, “The Last Lion” William Manchester/Paul Reid), but I am afraid it would be useless..

right2bright on January 25, 2012 at 10:48 AM

Let’s get all this rhetoric and mud slinging back to reality:

IA: Santorum Win
NH: Romney Win
SC: Gingrich Win

Now how is it that Gingrich is NOW the next POTUS when I know personally I have been saying it will be a LONG process this election because of the way the Party has changed the way delegates are acquired.

So many on here are saying it is over and Gingrich is on his way to 1600 Penn. He actually will face a tougher climb as he did not qualify for the ballot in VA and is still struggling to get on in other upcoming States…cause we all know HE is going to OUTDEBATE Obama and be our savior! Right.

Going forward this race is still up for grabs for ANY of the 4 candidates.

g2825m on January 25, 2012 at 10:49 AM

My apologies. Hard to keep track in these threads ;)

Priscilla on January 25, 2012 at 10:45 AM

heh. no probs…gimme a G, gimme a O, gimme a P!

DHChron on January 25, 2012 at 10:49 AM

I don’t think I could stomach any revelations about Nancy and Newt having sex.

Pork-Chop

I hope my Gastro-Intestinal intern has an appointment open today and I’m sending the bill to YOU.

Horace on January 25, 2012 at 10:49 AM

Say what you want about Newtie, but the guy seems able to take and deliver a punch.

The Mittbots might want to rethink hitching their wagons to this Pelosi mule.

TitularHead on January 25, 2012 at 10:49 AM

“Don’t take the World Serious.” – Abner Doubleday

Horace on January 25, 2012 at 10:46 AM

hell yeah…Doubleday is my new favorite Abner

DHChron on January 25, 2012 at 10:51 AM

The crutch of it is we have to nominate him to find out what it is.

Ukiah on January 25, 2012 at 10:52 AM

Horace on January 25, 2012 at 10:49 AM

Ah, come on!!! It would be fun. It would put to bed, so to speak, those rumors that Newt and Nancy are hyper partisans.

Cindy Munford on January 25, 2012 at 10:53 AM

NEWT LIED TO THE ETHICS COMMITTEE.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/govt/leadership/stories/011897.htm

Ethics Panel Supports Reprimand of Gingrich
By John E. Yang and Helen Dewar
Washington Post Staff Writers
Saturday, January 18 1997; Page A01

The House ethics committee recommended last night that House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) face an unprecedented reprimand from his colleagues and pay $300,000 in additional sanctions after concluding that his use of tax-deductible money for political purposes and inaccurate information supplied to investigators represented “intentional or . . . reckless” disregard of House rules.

The committee’s 7 to 1 vote came after 5 1/2 hours of televised hearings and the release of a toughly worded report on the investigation by special counsel James M. Cole. The recommendation, which followed a week of partisan conflict that has split the House into warring camps, sets the stage for a resolution of this investigation into Gingrich’s actions.

Gingrich earlier admitted he had violated House rules and was prepared to accept the committee’s recommendation for punishment. If the full House votes as expected on Tuesday, Gingrich would become the first speaker to be reprimanded for his conduct and would begin his second term politically weakened and personally diminished.

“This is a tough penalty,” Rep. Nancy L. Johnson (R-Conn.), chairman of the ethics panel, said after the vote. “I believe it is an appropriate penalty. It demonstrates that nobody is above the rules.”

Cole said he had concluded that Gingrich had violated federal tax law and had lied to the ethics panel in an effort to force the committee to dismiss the complaint against him. He said the committee members were reluctant to go that far in their conclusions, but said they agreed Gingrich was either “reckless” or “intentional” in the way he conducted himself.

“Neither choice reflects creditably on the House of Representatives,” he said.

mountainaires on January 25, 2012 at 8:36 AM
Talk about vague! “reckless” or “intentional” in the way he
conducted himself. Probably because he knew it was a political
witchhunt. And then the IRS clears him.

We conservatives should be getting tired of the media and the whacko liberal left savaging our candidates.

Hey by the way, where are those Caine women who came forth with
their tales of affairs? Did we ever see proof or facts of any sort?

Amjean on January 25, 2012 at 10:53 AM

haha this made me laugh as this was in the same post…

g2825m on January 25, 2012 at 10:44 AM

You dishonor Mormon’s theology of Celestial Brides? That they can be God’s of their own world?
I find that a pretty accurate description of one part of the LDS beliefs, and many women long to be celestial brides of famous Mormon men. Joseph Smith took many brides, and had many celestial marriages, along with Brigham Young…interesting you find that being offensive.
I find it as one of their core beliefs…it defines them.
Go ahead a laugh at their beliefs…they accept them and embrace them as their faith, as well they should.

right2bright on January 25, 2012 at 10:53 AM

Someone may have posted this earlier but if not read the whole article. It blows out of the water BY SOMEONE WHO WAS THERE AND KNOWS Gingrich’s claim he was such a stalwart supporter of Reagan and his policies. What these snippets again point out is that Gingrich is all about Gingrich and wanting the spotlight for himself and no others.

“There are two things to be said about these remarks. The first is that as a visionary, Gingrich does not have a very impressive record. The Soviet Union was beginning to collapse, just as Reagan had believed it must. The expansion of its empire had been thwarted. The policies Gingrich thought so weak and indeed “pathetic” worked, and Ronald Reagan turned out to be a far better student of history and politics than Gingrich.

The second point to make is that Gingrich made these assaults on the Reagan administration just as Democratic attacks were heating up unmercifully. Far from becoming a reliable voice for Reagan policy and the struggle against the Soviets, Gingrich took on Reagan and his administration. It appears to be a habit: He did the same to George W. Bush when Bush was making the toughest and most controversial decision of his presidency — the surge in Iraq. Bush was opposed by many of the top generals, by some Republican leaders who feared the surge would hurt in the 2008 elections, and of course by a slew of Democrats and media commentators. Here again Gingrich provided no support for his party’s embattled president, testifying as a private citizen in 2007 that the strategy was “inadequate,” contained “breathtaking” gaps, lacked “synergism” (whatever that means), and was “very disappointing.” What did Gingrich propose? Among other things, a 50 percent increase in the budget of the State Department.”

— Elliott Abrams, a senior fellow for Middle Eastern Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations, was an assistant secretary of state in the Reagan Administration and deputy national security adviser in the George W. Bush Administration. http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/289159/gingrich-and-reagan-elliott-abrams?pg=2

g2825m on January 25, 2012 at 10:53 AM

Ukiah on January 25, 2012 at 10:52 AM

LOL! It is a variation on a theme isn’t it?

Cindy Munford on January 25, 2012 at 10:53 AM

The Newt hate runs strong in this one. We don’t have anyone who’s electable! You’re asking too much if you’re asking for that.

DHChron on January 25, 2012 at 10:32 AM

You’re right: I loathe the guy but if Newt wins the GOP nomination, I’ll vote for him on election day in November. I’m not the type to take my toys and go home in a huff because I didn’t get my way.

troyriser_gopftw on January 25, 2012 at 10:54 AM

The crutch of it is we have to nominate him to find out what it is.

Ukiah on January 25, 2012 at 10:52 AM

I see what you did there! Clever…very clever :)

DHChron on January 25, 2012 at 10:55 AM

right2bright

Your “history” lesson is a bit tilted.

Churchill gave his speech to a joint session of Congress in late December 1941, AFTER the attack on Pearl Harbor and AFTER the U.S. had already entered the War against both Japan and Germany.

And Manchester never wrote about Churchill and WWII. “The Last Lion” went up to the early thirties. “Wilderness Years” went up to 1940. The third volume was never completed due to Manchester’s late life medical problems.

Facts, son, facts!

Horace on January 25, 2012 at 10:55 AM

Which of his books have you read? As if you’ve actually researched the original source v. opponents’ revisionist soundbites.

maverick muse on January 25, 2012 at 10:47 AM

Who? Ron Paul? You’re asking me which books I’ve read written by Ron Paul?

If that’s what you’re asking, I haven’t read any. Nor do I plan to.

TitularHead on January 25, 2012 at 10:55 AM

g2825m on January 25, 2012 at 10:53 AM

Darlin’, no one agrees with anyone 100% of the time and the answer to this is to just play the video of Gov. Romney disavowing Reagan/Bush and proudly proclaiming he’s a moderate independent. I’m sure Reagan/Bush did plenty of things that Gov. Romney agreed with. People say things for expediency and using it as a club is a two way street.

Cindy Munford on January 25, 2012 at 10:57 AM

Ah, come on!!! It would be fun. It would put to bed, so to speak, those rumors that Newt and Nancy are hyper partisans.

Cindy Munford

And YOU get the bill for the Pepto-Bismal!

Horace on January 25, 2012 at 10:57 AM

Dante on January 25, 2012 at 10:12 AM

Is that a pitch for Paul? America is not going to elect someone with his foreign policy ideas period.

jistincase on January 25, 2012 at 10:57 AM

You’re right: I loathe the guy but if Newt wins the GOP nomination, I’ll vote for him on election day in November. I’m not the type to take my toys and go home in a huff because I didn’t get my way.

troyriser_gopftw on January 25, 2012 at 10:54 AM

Nice. Good to know you’re not a Wisconsin Democrat.

DHChron on January 25, 2012 at 10:58 AM

If the secret has anything to do with the phrases “bent over” and “couch” being in near proximity to each other, I don’t want to know anything about it.

DRayRaven on January 25, 2012 at 10:58 AM

Facts, son, facts!

Horace on January 25, 2012 at 10:55 AM

wikipedia overload! wikipedia overload! :)

DHChron on January 25, 2012 at 11:00 AM

You dishonor Mormon’s theology of Celestial Brides? That they can be God’s of their own world?
I find that a pretty accurate description of one part of the LDS beliefs, and many women long to be celestial brides of famous Mormon men. Joseph Smith took many brides, and had many celestial marriages, along with Brigham Young…interesting you find that being offensive.
I find it as one of their core beliefs…it defines them.
Go ahead a laugh at their beliefs…they accept them and embrace them as their faith, as well they should.

right2bright on January 25, 2012 at 10:53 AM

Hey Chippiechawa, I am LDS so you do not need to “attempt” to explain to me what I know is true and what is mudslinging. Did you also know that Abraham, David, and many OT prophets were also commanded to marry other wives? This is a Biblical concept BUT it is only when God commands. David got into trouble as he lusted after other women that were not commanded by him to take as his spouse.

I could explain many other things about doctrine as well but this thread is a POLITICAL thread and religion has NOTHING to do with it.

I just thought it was amusing that you said you were not a bigot and then went on to make a derogatory comment about Romney’s religion. EVERYONE on here could tell what you were doing.

g2825m on January 25, 2012 at 11:00 AM

If there’s really nothing there, Newt should just ask for the documents to be released. Simple, right?

At the end of the day, whether or not Pelosi is lying, does anyone doubt for even a minute that it’s not a question of IF there will be an October surprise, but how many?

One commercial from a shady liberal 527 group factually describing how Newt left his 1st sick wife with cancer for a mistress (leaving the family destitute) then married the second wife, then he found an intern around 30 years his junior to screw WHILE he was blasting Clinton for the Lewinsky affair, and married her AFTER asking wife #2 for an open marriage. Now he likes to spend about a million bucks on Tiffany jewelry for her.

Yea, this guy can beat Obama.

BradTank on January 25, 2012 at 11:00 AM

May I resurrect my “Rabid Dog” comment?

franksalterego on January 25, 2012 at 11:00 AM

The NewtBots here at HA are loving this as it plays into their persona of Newt – the fighter. The rest of us don’t care about what the Queen has to say but more about those who served with Newt.

Remember he was kicked out of the leadership position by a revolt from the most conservative Republicans.

Tater Salad on January 25, 2012 at 11:01 AM

If the secret has anything to do with the phrases “bent over” and “couch” being in near proximity to each other, I don’t want to know anything about it.

DRayRaven on January 25, 2012 at 10:58 AM

proximity is by definition near, get ready for some serious couch bending

DHChron on January 25, 2012 at 11:02 AM

Vyce on January 25, 2012 at 9:39 AM

Being hard to work with is not a dis-qualifier but wasn’t it nice of Mr. Blankley to pen this at the end of his life.

http://www.creators.com/conservative/tony-blankley.html

Cindy Munford on January 25, 2012 at 11:02 AM

— Elliott Abrams, a senior fellow for Middle Eastern Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations, was an assistant secretary of state in the Reagan Administration and deputy national security adviser in the George W. Bush Administration. http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/289159/gingrich-and-reagan-elliott-abrams?pg=2

g2825m on January 25, 2012 at 10:53 AM

If just 10% of your posts was to tell us how Mitt is better than Newt, people would read your posts…instead, you are gossiping about something decades ago…are you a girl in high school?

right2bright on January 25, 2012 at 11:02 AM

You’re right: I loathe the guy but if Newt wins the GOP nomination, I’ll vote for him on election day in November. I’m not the type to take my toys and go home in a huff because I didn’t get my way.

troyriser_gopftw on January 25, 2012 at 10:54 AM

Agreed. as well as 99% Romney supporters will however, I see more I WILL NOT from other posters who are anti-Romney if Romney is the nominee. I wonder why?

g2825m on January 25, 2012 at 11:02 AM

DHChron

No. One o’ them litterat persons who done reed books reeded them Manchewster books t’ me.

Hated that they dint have no pitchers in ‘em.

Horace on January 25, 2012 at 11:03 AM

Horace on January 25, 2012 at 10:57 AM

I get a discount at WalGreens, I have connections.

Cindy Munford on January 25, 2012 at 11:03 AM

Darlin’, no one agrees with anyone 100% of the time and the answer to this is to just play the video of Gov. Romney disavowing Reagan/Bush and proudly proclaiming he’s a moderate independent. I’m sure Reagan/Bush did plenty of things that Gov. Romney agreed with. People say things for expediency and using it as a club is a two way street.

Cindy Munford on January 25, 2012 at 10:57 AM

Very true! Now if we can just get some ardent Gingrich supporters to accept that he also did MANY things for political expediency. :o)

Good to “see” you.

g2825m on January 25, 2012 at 11:04 AM

“Now he likes to spend about a million bucks on Tiffany jewelry for her.”

Yea, this guy can beat Obama.

BradTank on January 25, 2012 at 11:00 AM

It was only a half million dollars. ;-)

Tater Salad on January 25, 2012 at 11:05 AM

Yea, this guy can beat Obama.

BradTank on January 25, 2012 at 11:00 AM

My ham sandwich could beat Obama.

Ham Sandwich, Rubio – 2012

DHChron on January 25, 2012 at 11:06 AM

I see more I WILL NOT from other posters who are anti-Romney if Romney is the nominee. I wonder why?

g2825m on January 25, 2012 at 11:02 AM

Because you are looking or them…it’s the same on both sides…you are obsessed with anything negative about Mitt, so you focus on that.

That’s what people who spread gossip do, they focus on just a few things…normally negatives.

right2bright on January 25, 2012 at 11:06 AM

No. One o’ them litterat persons who done reed books reeded them Manchewster books t’ me.

Hated that they dint have no pitchers in ‘em.

Horace on January 25, 2012 at 11:03 AM

Oh, I know all ’bout them litteratis…Dan Brown told me.

DHChron on January 25, 2012 at 11:08 AM

Americans’ public view favors short(est) term memory that too quickly exudes ignorance as bliss, failing to even trace history through our most recent century.

The Ugly American book made a cultural impact that did not take long to discard after the Vietnam experience. And yet today, The Air Force Magazine’s latest issue vaunts official US Policy that Vietnam is our “ally” against China. Of course, that took nearly half a century to flip.

And of domino theory enemies that become ally via mutually acknowledged economic benefit, Cuba remains a bipartisan taboo, though Cuba most certainly is NOT nuclear except in the sense that our official and enforced boycott handed Cuba to China (as if the Cuban people hate America so much, that would explain why they attempt to navigate the ocean in rafts in order reach America, and why impoverished Cuban-Americans include some conservative voters and politicians).

But lets stick to this year, to see how well American memory serves. Al-Qaeda was the Bush 9/11 declared enemy, but this year’s US/NATO ally committing acts of war against Gaddafi in order for IMF to confiscate the Libyan Central Bank gold and wealth, destroy the most advanced African nation that coincidentally provided gender neutral free education and sustenance to its citizens including equal educational and career rights for women, and handed that all over to al-Qaeda, and advanced Wahhabi Islam’s global caliphate aspirations. To say the least, that exemplifies the very negative impact of current US Foreign Policy.

maverick muse on January 25, 2012 at 11:09 AM

What does she have on Newt? Probably nothing… Byron York does a great job of explaining what was going on at the time. I just wonder if she’s upset about him calling off the global warming on the couch love affair.
BTW Pelosi and her family have thier own ethical issues. I’m not going to get too worked up over anything coming from her. Why doesn’t anything on her face work? It’s creapy!

buckeyerich on January 25, 2012 at 11:09 AM

One commercial from a shady liberal 527 group factually describing how Newt left his 1st sick wife with cancer for a mistress (leaving the family destitute) then married the second wife, then he found an intern around 30 years his junior to screw WHILE he was blasting Clinton for the Lewinsky affair, and married her AFTER asking wife #2 for an open marriage. Now he likes to spend about a million bucks on Tiffany jewelry for her.

Yea, this guy can beat Obama.

BradTank on January 25, 2012 at 11:00 AM

No stone would be left unturned. We would do the same thing. It’s the presidency.

rubberneck on January 25, 2012 at 11:11 AM

I suppose it could be bad enough to hurt Newt, but in general, the best thing that could happen to him would be an attack from Nancy Pelosi.

hawksruleva on January 25, 2012 at 10:34 AM

Wherein lies the strategery. Make Gingrich the nominee because he has the baggage that plays to Obama’s strengths.

csdeven on January 25, 2012 at 11:12 AM

— Elliott Abrams, a senior fellow for Middle Eastern Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations, was an assistant secretary of state in the Reagan Administration and deputy national security adviser in the George W. Bush Administration. http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/289159/gingrich-and-reagan-elliott-abrams?pg=2

g2825m on January 25, 2012 at 10:53 AM

If just 10% of your posts was to tell us how Mitt is better than Newt, people would read your posts…instead, you are gossiping about something decades ago…are you a girl in high school?

right2bright on January 25, 2012 at 11:02 AM

haha You make many demeaning comments. YOU. are the one that needs to grow up. When I or others post comments on here about Romney you belittle EVERYTHING they state.

I agree Gingrich was the one that HELPED bring about the Contract with America (though this was actually not HIS idea), he did balance two of four budgets, helped with welfare reform, he did many great things for conservatives! See I can praise him.

On the opposite side he has been on the wrong side of issues MANY times if it benefited Gingrich and that is what is upsetting to many of us and those in CONGRESS that KNOW him. Gingrich is all about Gingrich.

Also his opposing the surge as I am sitting over in Iraq at that time was NOT decades ago. Him going further than even Sen Kerry wanted on GW also in 2007 was just 4-5 years ago. Him praising Pelosi and other GW initiatives back in 2009 again, is NOT decades ago. Gingrich has MANY ideas that are just not plausible.

Romney has turned around a failed Olympics and made it the only WINTER Olympics to make a profit. He turned MA 3Billion deficit around and left it with a 2Billion surplus. He has helped create thousands of jobs and turned around businesses such as Staples, Domino’s, Sports Authority, ClearChannel, etc THIS. is why I support Romney. Nothing in Gingrich’s background tells me he will know what to do on day one to turn an economy around. Romney has lived in it and done it both privately and publicly.

There, you are always asking why Romney should receive support.

g2825m on January 25, 2012 at 11:14 AM

No stone would be left unturned. We would do the same thing. It’s the presidency.

rubberneck on January 25, 2012 at 11:11 AM

Unless you’re half black, in which case no stone will be turned period.

DHChron on January 25, 2012 at 11:16 AM

g2825m on January 25, 2012 at 11:04 AM

It’s excellent to “see” you as well. The funny thing is that about 90% of the fights between the supporters of both candidates is about things said for expediency. The other 10% are the serious things that are the real determining factors and all of that is based on individual beliefs and experiences, hard to get around and less fun to argue about.

Cindy Munford on January 25, 2012 at 11:16 AM

I haven’t read any. Nor do I plan to.

TitularHead on January 25, 2012 at 10:55 AM

As if ignorance is bliss. You illustrate how much you don’t know, and your contempt for research. Don’t stay stuck on stupid and call it smart.

maverick muse on January 25, 2012 at 11:17 AM

That’s what people who spread gossip do, they focus on just a few things…normally negatives.

right2bright on January 25, 2012 at 11:06 AM

You are hilarious! Someone posts an actual article of fact of THEIR experience in dealing with someone and you call it “gossip.”

g2825m on January 25, 2012 at 11:17 AM

There, you are always asking why Romney should receive support.

g2825m on January 25, 2012 at 11:14 AM

Romney blows

DHChron on January 25, 2012 at 11:18 AM

As if ignorance is bliss. You illustrate how much you don’t know, and your contempt for research. Don’t stay stuck on stupid and call it smart.

maverick muse on January 25, 2012 at 11:17 AM

I had no idea Paul was such an accomplished writer…makes me wonder why he didn’t bother to read his racist newsletter before publishing it.

DHChron on January 25, 2012 at 11:20 AM

g2825m on January 25, 2012 at 11:04 AM

It’s excellent to “see” you as well. The funny thing is that about 90% of the fights between the supporters of both candidates is about things said for expediency. The other 10% are the serious things that are the real determining factors and all of that is based on individual beliefs and experiences, hard to get around and less fun to argue about.

Cindy Munford on January 25, 2012 at 11:16 AM

Agreed. I have NO ISSUES with anyone supporting Gingrich, Santorum, Paul, WHEN they make reasoned arguments and do not denigrate the other poster. However, as you know there are too many on here that want to call people Mittbots, and other names that do not ADD to an adult conversation based on records and ideas. THIS. is what is frustrating to me.

I enjoy “bantering” with you because you are level headed even though currently we both support separate candidates.

Thanks!

g2825m on January 25, 2012 at 11:22 AM

Agreed. as well as 99% Romney supporters will however, I see more I WILL NOT from other posters who are anti-Romney if Romney is the nominee. I wonder why?

g2825m on January 25, 2012 at 11:02 AM

With all due respect, this Rasmussen report doesn’t support that assertion.

The conventional wisdom suggests that tea party supporters have a “my way or the highway” attitude and Establishment Republicans just want a winner, but the data shows that the opposite is true.

Looking ahead to the Florida primary, 94 percent of tea party Republicans say they will vote for whomever wins the GOP nomination. Only 77 percent of non-tea party Republicans are willing to make the same pledge. This commitment to party loyalty comes even though tea party activists are less convinced than others that Romney is the strongest general election candidate. Similar results have been found in survey after survey in the 2012 primary season.

Flora Duh on January 25, 2012 at 11:22 AM

There, you are always asking why Romney should receive support.

g2825m on January 25, 2012 at 11:14 AM

Romney blows

DHChron on January 25, 2012 at 11:18 AM

haha Nice! I still think he is better than the current occupant?

You?

g2825m on January 25, 2012 at 11:23 AM

However, as you know there are too many on here that want to call people Mittbots, and other names that do not ADD to an adult conversation based on records and ideas. THIS. is what is frustrating to me.

I enjoy “bantering” with you because you are level headed even though currently we both support separate candidates.

Thanks!

g2825m on January 25, 2012 at 11:22 AM

They’re smitten with Mittens. Balls to the wall for Paul. Scary in love with Perry. In-witch with the Gingrich?

DHChron on January 25, 2012 at 11:27 AM

haha Nice! I still think he is better than the current occupant?

You?

g2825m on January 25, 2012 at 11:23 AM

darn tootin’!

DHChron on January 25, 2012 at 11:28 AM

g2825m on January 25, 2012 at 11:22 AM

I started to say that if more of Gov. Romney’s supporters were like you then there would be less name calling but on thinking it over that probably isn’t true. I think for the most part, the ardent are arguing with the ardent. Name calling and questioning the intelligence of one another just adds to the entrainment value and doesn’t change minds.

Cindy Munford on January 25, 2012 at 11:28 AM

I think poor Dante is really Paul Pelosi masquerading as a PaulBot, or is it a PaulBot masquerading as Paul Pelosi?

Either way…my BS detector is going apenuts!

Oh, and as far as Paul goes, I have 3x’s as much dirt on him that I do on Willard, Paul will never be President!

Bwuuuhaahaaaaaa!!!

insidiator on January 25, 2012 at 11:29 AM

The conventional wisdom suggests that tea party supporters have a “my way or the highway” attitude and Establishment Republicans just want a winner, but the data shows that the opposite is true.

Looking ahead to the Florida primary, 94 percent of tea party Republicans say they will vote for whomever wins the GOP nomination. Only 77 percent of non-tea party Republicans are willing to make the same pledge. This commitment to party loyalty comes even though tea party activists are less convinced than others that Romney is the strongest general election candidate. Similar results have been found in survey after survey in the 2012 primary season.

Flora Duh on January 25, 2012 at 11:22 AM

Flora…you and the poll are making the MISTAKE that Romney supporters are NOT Tea Party supporters/members. I have been saying this for quite awhile on here that I am a TPer and MANY Romney supporters are. We are all for Taxed Enough Already and have the same goals.

What has happened over the last 6-9 months is that the ORIGINAL INTENT of the Tea Party has been hijacked by many of the social conservatives in the party (which I support that part of the party) BUT was NOT what the TEA Party was originally about.

The movement has turned into a “if you are not the right type of conservative then you do not belong and you are a RINO or establishment person”

Even Rubio praised Romney (as those that follow Romney knew) he was likely the BIGGEST Backer of almost ALL TP candidates during their runup to 2010. Those that didn’t know that continue to slam him without knowing what he did for them financially and making appearances.

g2825m on January 25, 2012 at 11:30 AM

maverick muse on January 25, 2012 at 11:17 AM

Not sure what to tell you, muse. I don’t consider Ron Paul a viable candidate. He’s never even piqued my curiosity much.

I also find many of his followers to be a little off-putting. That’s about as nicely as I can say it.

TitularHead on January 25, 2012 at 11:30 AM

They’re smitten with Mittens. Balls to the wall for Paul. Scary in love with Perry. In-witch with the Gingrich?

DHChron on January 25, 2012 at 11:27 AM

haha

DHChron…I think Hallmark is looking for a new writer…

g2825m on January 25, 2012 at 11:31 AM

g2825m on January 25, 2012 at 11:22 AM

I started to say that if more of Gov. Romney’s supporters were like you then there would be less name calling but on thinking it over that probably isn’t true. I think for the most part, the ardent are arguing with the ardent. Name calling and questioning the intelligence of one another just adds to the entrainment value and doesn’t change minds.

Cindy Munford on January 25, 2012 at 11:28 AM

true! maybe we could set up a new Hot Gas site where sanity rules and name calling is left behind. :o)

g2825m on January 25, 2012 at 11:32 AM

Either way…my BS detector is going apenuts!

insidiator on January 25, 2012 at 11:29 AM

hmmmmmmmmm…apenuts – Homer Simpson

DHChron on January 25, 2012 at 11:34 AM

Right up there with “Do not judge,” another misapplication of a quote.

Oh, and in the mooslim Qu’ran, I believe it reads, “Let you who has a stone, cast it.”

Horace on January 25, 2012 at 10:35 AM

And “turn the other cheek”…
The ones that say do not judge…I use the analogy of hiring a babysitter for your daughter, and a 20 year old guy, all tatted up, smoking with a six pack in his hand knocks on the door…”do not judge”, so you let him in and babysit your 12 year old daughter…yeah sure.

right2bright on January 25, 2012 at 11:34 AM

You are hilarious! Someone posts an actual article of fact of THEIR experience in dealing with someone and you call it “gossip.”

g2825m on January 25, 2012 at 11:17 AM

US weekly is full of actual “experiences”…look at the people who write the article, and balance it with others. A lot of people read both sides…and not just one side.

right2bright on January 25, 2012 at 11:35 AM

That’s it – I want to see his birth certificate. And not a photoshopped digital of a blurry photocopy either.

Freakin’ wine-swilling San Fran extremist liberal freakshow feminazi.

AttaBoyLuther on January 25, 2012 at 11:36 AM

“He stuck his tongue in my ear.”

Akzed on January 25, 2012 at 11:36 AM

haha

DHChron…I think Hallmark is looking for a new writer…

g2825m on January 25, 2012 at 11:31 AM

yep…that’s about the level of my attention span. Greeting card length.

DHChron on January 25, 2012 at 11:36 AM

No stone would be left unturned. We would do the same thing. It’s the presidency.

rubberneck on January 25, 2012 at 11:11 AM

Unless you’re half black, in which case no stone will be turned period.

DHChron on January 25, 2012 at 11:16 AM

LIAR! The no investigation “pass” only applies if you are a black or half black or somewhat black liberal Democrat.

P. S. Why does the media treat this noise from former speaker Pelosi like a responsible, professional comment from a high elected official?

But beware NEWT!

She can know things far, far beyond the information of normal people. I think it has to do with looking into her bubbling cauldron at midnight.

IlikedAUH2O on January 25, 2012 at 11:37 AM

And I just think that when you are a left-wing Democrat, the prospect of a Gingrich presidency is really sort of like a nightmare,” Mr. Gingrich added.

I think this is true and it’s also a very annoying thought for CAIR and all Muslim Brotherhood derived Islamic groups – which I find with Robert Spencer, very refreshing and encouraging.

Chessplayer on January 25, 2012 at 11:37 AM

According to CNN, if Newt wins Florida, veteran Republican strategists expect Boehner, McConnell, and other GOP leaders to start calling around to top donors and asking them not to donate to Newt.

Ah…Neither Boehner nor McConnell inspire much confidence with their so-called leadership. I certainly won’t give either the time of day.

zoyclem on January 25, 2012 at 11:39 AM

Holier than thou?’ ‘Trig Trutherism’? And then you play the Mormon card?

Look, lady, going ad hominem gets you nowhere–and certainly doesn’t make your guy more electable. I’m not throwing stones from some moral high ground. I’m looking at it from a purely political, pragmatic perspective. For one thing, the seedier aspects of Gingrich’s personal life are not rumors or gossip;

No, Troy. YOU produced some sleazy scenerio of Newt the Nerd slavering after cheerleaders. That wasn’t a personal attack, just an erudite–as defined by Romney–observation? And while your imagination is running wild and attributing it to someone else, your Mitt has some pretty salacious ambitions as defined by his own system of beliefs.

You threw the first stone here and if you are going to stand in judgment about something that is between any man and woman and their conscience and their God, then you’d best be prepared for a close examination of your own standard of judgment.

Portia46 on January 25, 2012 at 11:40 AM

The ones that say do not judge…I use the analogy of hiring a babysitter for your daughter, and a 20 year old guy, all tatted up, smoking with a six pack in his hand knocks on the door…”do not judge”, so you let him in and babysit your 12 year old daughter…yeah sure.

right2bright on January 25, 2012 at 11:34 AM

He’s gotta be at least twenty one, and I will judge him awesome if he shares the beer. Luckily I don’t have a daughter.

DHChron on January 25, 2012 at 11:40 AM

There, you are always asking why Romney should receive support.

g2825m on January 25, 2012 at 11:14 AM

Finally some meat…finally after weeks and weeks you came up with a list.
You say I disparage Mitt, more I disparage the Mitt-wits who see no faults in Mitt…and it tweaks them that others do see faults.
We see his record, a liberal record, a record of great business exploits, one that was duplicated many thousands of times during those great years of expansion…we also see his RomneyCare, a huge albatross that he is proud of…we saw the vids of his support of abortion laws and his absolute denial that he would attempt to change even one line of those provisions, indeed he even promoted a Planned Parenthood advocate to speak for him.
He has never led any movement, any conservative movement, and that is a problem with me…he is not a leader, at least a type of leader we need to come into Washington and kick some @ss.
Gentleman, during war, is not what we need…it’s what you may need, but I and now the majority do not.

right2bright on January 25, 2012 at 11:42 AM


right2bright

Your “history” lesson is a bit tilted.

Churchill gave his speech to a joint session of Congress in late December 1941, AFTER the attack on Pearl Harbor and AFTER the U.S. had already entered the War against both Japan and Germany.

And Manchester never wrote about Churchill and WWII. “The Last Lion” went up to the early thirties. “Wilderness Years” went up to 1940. The third volume was never completed due to Manchester’s late life medical problems.

Facts, son, facts!

Horace on January 25, 2012 at 10:55 AM

You are correct sir. Also, Japan had already attacked Pearl Harbor requiring US to go to war with them and Germany made a difficult situation less difficult by declaring war on us.

Natebo on January 25, 2012 at 11:42 AM

IlikedAUH2O on January 25, 2012 at 11:37 AM

caught me :)

DHChron on January 25, 2012 at 11:42 AM

That’s it – I want to see his birth certificate. And not a photoshopped digital of a blurry photocopy either.

Freakin’ wine-swilling San Fran extremist liberal freakshow feminazi.

AttaBoyLuther on January 25, 2012 at 11:36 AM

I think I love you. If you’re a man it’s a very gay thing.

DHChron on January 25, 2012 at 11:45 AM

g2825m on January 25, 2012 at 11:32 AM

This is going to sound crazy but that’s what I come here for, I don’t want it to change. I can’t say that I don’t get angry or annoyed and that there is a person I just flat out ignore but for the most part I like HotAir just the way it is. A real window into the human nature cloaked in anonymity with minimal restraints. Considering the number of people who can comment, I think the people here do a good job.

Cindy Munford on January 25, 2012 at 11:47 AM

Even Rubio praised Romney (as those that follow Romney knew) he was likely the BIGGEST Backer of almost ALL TP candidates during their runup to 2010. Those that didn’t know that continue to slam him without knowing what he did for them financially and making appearances.

g2825m on January 25, 2012 at 11:30 AM

Yes, I know, Rubio is one of my Senators. I also know that Governor Romney has former aides of Charlie “RINO” Crist working for him. Crist is loathed among Republicans in Florida and is now resorted to doing cheesy TV commericals for a cheesy law firm. That Romney would hire them doesn’t instill much confidence in his “conservative” cred imho.

Flora Duh on January 25, 2012 at 11:50 AM

I just thought it was amusing that you said you were not a bigot and then went on to make a derogatory comment about Romney’s religion. EVERYONE on here could tell what you were doing.

g2825m on January 25, 2012 at 11:00 AM

If you think pointing out the truth of your faith is derogatory, that is not my problem…you are too sensitive.
Not believing in another faith is not bigotry…unless you are Mormon I guess.
And it was a dig at someone who embarrassed herself at posting one of the meanest and most derogatory comments regarding Christian’s that has ever been posted…far beyond anything an atheist has ever stated.
And you take umbrage at the counter attack, which was mild compared to what she had stated?
I find your faux outrage amusing…but typical.

right2bright on January 25, 2012 at 11:51 AM

There, you are always asking why Romney should receive support.

g2825m on January 25, 2012 at 11:14 AM

Finally some meat…finally after weeks and weeks you came up with a list.
You say I disparage Mitt, more I disparage the Mitt-wits who see no faults in Mitt…and it tweaks them that others do see faults.
We see his record, a liberal record, a record of great business exploits, one that was duplicated many thousands of times during those great years of expansion…

right2bright on January 25, 2012 at 11:42 AM

Right…Anyone reading my posts knows I have been posting reasons WHY I support Romney…so much so that others were accusing me if I worked for the campaign (I don’t). Your talk also of his “great business exploits” and the way you say that makes it sound almost illegal or something you do not approve of and also it was ALL because of the “times” of the eighties/nineties. How about that he was just a GREAT business leader and HELPED other businesses to be successful.

You see the difference in Romney and Gingrich is that Romney can point to Staples, Domino’s, Sports Authority, etc and say you see those people employed…I helped that business survive so that today those employees can receive a check and also benefit from 401k’s, health benefits, vacations, etc. He also accomplished what the MA citizens asked him to do which was return to the State and help them eliminate the 3 billion dollar deficit. He also saved the Olympics which was on the fast track to disaster and also recall it was held about 5 months after 9/11 and the economy was in the toilet and Romney MADE IT SUCCESSFUL. So when you ask what can you point to about Romney that speaks conservatism and accomplishments. That is what I can bring up fairly quickly. :o)

I’ll give you a nugget here: Do I wish he implemented MA Healthcare? No, not in the way he did it. However, his state wanted it and voted it in and also had a mandate in their Constitution to be able to require it. Heritage and MANY conservatives at the time praised it as well as taking personal responsibility. I believe why everyone gets upset today is that they have 20/20 vision because they are looking back and we see what a monstrosity Obamacare will be. These two plans are VASTLY different though…they are and you need to look at MA Healthcare’s site and then read what Obamacare will and can do by fiat.

g2825m on January 25, 2012 at 11:58 AM

Comment pages: 1 8 9 10 11