Updates from January, 2012 Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • Redbaiter 20:44 on January 8, 2012 Permalink  

    Newt Gingrich Criticises Liberal Bigotry Against Christians 

    The latest debate among candidates seeking the Republican nomination was held in New Hampshire today, and the “moderators” were the notoriously far left media personalities Diane Sawyer and George Stephanopoulos of ABC.

    Of course these repellent frauds grilled the Republicans about the past and present with a degree of intensity that would be 100 times greater than what they have ever applied to their hero Barack Obama.

    I have to keep saying this- Why do the Republicans put themselves up for interrogation by these left wing jerks posing as journalists and reporters? Sawyer and her little friend are not objective participants, they are Democrat Party agents, and they deserve nothing but contempt and derision. The Republicans should just flat refuse to go on air with these odious fakes. (More …)

     
    • B2 21:01 on January 8, 2012 Permalink | Reply

      That’s my boy.

      The tragic state of Rep politics is that many Repubs still crave that circus act, Ron Paul, whom I agree with on about 80% of what he says….pity I wouldn’t trust him with a can opener.

    • Lucia Maria 23:59 on January 8, 2012 Permalink | Reply

      I’d never heard of Newt Gingrich until now. Doing a search, I find he and his wife are responsible for the following film:

      Personally I think it’s better to speak rather than walk out. And in this case, it’s getting him a lot more air time over the internet because he did just that.

    • KG 08:33 on January 9, 2012 Permalink | Reply

      Thomas Sowell has an interesting column on the Newt Vs Romney question here:

      http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20120108/OPINION03/201080305/1008/OPINION01/America-needs-man-action

    • KG 09:21 on January 9, 2012 Permalink | Reply

      “All of the Republican candidates should have just said, “this is BS” and walked out”
      The reason they don’t is that all of them are looking for the tacit endorsement of the lefty media, because like it or not the media controls the political battlefield. No candidate is willing to give up the advantage media approval (or lack of explicit disapproval) confers, and because of that they’ve conceded the field to the left before the battle even begins.

    • B2 09:37 on January 9, 2012 Permalink | Reply

      The best of Newt……it’s getting easier to forgive him the Pelosi ad.

    • ZenTiger 11:50 on January 9, 2012 Permalink | Reply

    • The Gantt Guy 14:30 on January 9, 2012 Permalink | Reply

      One of the fascinating things about this contest so far is the extent to which the pundits disagree. It seems they can only agree on 2 things:
      (1) B. Hussein Osama MUST be defeated, and
      (2) Uncle Doofus is nuts.

      Apart from that it appears open slather. Coulter reckons it has to be Romney (although her reasoning is, at best, a little tortured). Barnhardt says it’s anyone BUT Romney. Sowell is suggesting Newt. Perhaps Joe Hicks from PJTV got it right when he said (to the effect that) this is the worst Republican field ever assembled. And maybe that’s the commentators’ problem – they’re all so bad they’re trying to figure which is the least-worst option?

    • Andrew Berwick 19:35 on January 9, 2012 Permalink | Reply

      Newt has said he’ll appoint John Boulton as Secretary of State.

      Boulton will ensure a strategic solution to the middle east “problem”

      on those grounds alone, voting against Newt is close to treason.

    • Andrew Berwick 20:40 on January 9, 2012 Permalink | Reply

      they are Democrat Party agents, and they deserve nothing but contempt and derision

      I think the old line goes “but names will never hurt me”

      DemocRAT party agents deserve much, much more than just “contempt and derision”.

      One day soon, the law will ensure that they, their friends, fellow-travellers, facilitators, operatives, proxies – get everything that they deserve: a great, great day!

    • B2 10:02 on January 10, 2012 Permalink | Reply

      “One day soon, the law will ensure that….”

      Let’s hope not. That would mean a police state, sort of a mirror of East Germany run by Stasi enforcers who used the ‘law’ against their opponents.

      You loon.

    • ZenTiger 11:06 on January 11, 2012 Permalink | Reply

      When you read that “it’s the worst line-up ever” it is usually the left saying this, and hoping the GOP voters pick up on this. It’s just another standard progressive tactic for making you question making any kind of choice.

      Typically, the one the liberals loathe and hate the most is the one worth promoting, if only to see just how hypocritical the left are when it comes to preaching polite discourse.

      And in a general sense, all politicians tend to be failures – either victims of the bureaucratic systems they inherit or hamstrung by internal division and lack of clarity. Parties campaign on a couple of issues, rather than well thought out manifestos that will guide action, and this only makes things worse once they get in.

      Obama was going to end GITMO and any form of interrogation of terrorists, and has had to do the usual about face once confronted with the complexity of the situation (you mean to say some of these guys are terrorists and they do kill people?) and in the end, his high ideas got swallowed up by the system. Voting in one party or another is usually just a matter of small adjustments to the general course, no-one has the will, power or resolve to make the major changes required to get us back on a safer course.

    • The Gantt Guy 14:46 on January 11, 2012 Permalink | Reply

      “…had to do the usual about face once confronted with the complexity of the situation reality…”

      And, it was Joe Hicks who said it, on PJTV. Not exactly MSNBC.

  • Redbaiter 13:23 on January 8, 2012 Permalink  

    Update on Disputed Iowa Vote Count 

    A blog run by the Des Moines Register (Iowa’s biggest newspaper) is reporting that Appanoose County GOP chairman Lyle Brinegar has confirmed that the vote for Romney was overstated by 20 in the Moulton Precinct where Edward True worked as a vote counter. (see post below)

    Moulton resident Edward True has signed an affidavit saying that he helped count the vote at the Garrett Memorial Library in Moulton and that the precinct had two votes for Romney, not 22, as reported online by the state GOP.

    Brinegar says True is correct. “I’m not disputing what Ed True said,” Brinegar said.

    Unless this discrepancy is recovered through similar counting errors in some other precinct, it means that Romney’s total is reduced by 20 and Santorum wins Iowa. However-

    Matt Strawn, chairman of the Republican Party of Iowa, continued to express confidence Friday that the order of finish will not change. He said the party would make no further comment until its two-week vote certification process is complete.

    Funny that. How does Mr Matt Strawn know this very important outcome without all the facts being made public? I guess a bit of openness would be too much to hope for.

    UPDATED: Mitt Romney got 20 fewer votes in Moulton precinct, Appanoose County GOP chairman says

     
    • B2 14:09 on January 8, 2012 Permalink | Reply

      Santo is a social conservative, big govt, welfare statist…….. parallels with Tony Abbott are obvious.

      That means Romney is better than someone. Amazing.

    • Andrew Berwick 20:02 on January 8, 2012 Permalink | Reply

      Romney is a Liberal. By definition: his vote counts will never, ever be an accurate count of what people voted for.

      By now, that should be axiomatic.

      That means Romney is better than someone. Amazing.

      Romney is of course better than Osama bin Kenya. He has out-fundraised ObK, and on all recently polls, has a 3-5% margin over ObK in the general election.

      Of course: ObK is more liberal than Romney – which means Romney cannot expect to win even if he led 90%-10% in every poll.

    • B2 20:51 on January 8, 2012 Permalink | Reply

      Agree generally Andy…..but Santo is a religious dill and big government lover.

      Romney is only better because he’s a corporate statist rather than a welfare statist when push comes to shove….a distinction with bugger all difference.

      As if anyone gives a rat’s arse about abortion except the economically illiterate base, it’s gonna be there and available forever, it happens mostly to the underclasses, what’s not to like? Better the base gets agitated about the sun rising in the east.

      The only way the Reps get up is via, say, an economic crisis….a derivative collapse of the back of Money Centre banks exposure to under water CDS’s when, say, Italy defaults.
      A long bow.

      Newt has 50 IQ points on any of them, I give an operator like that a President job on basic principles.

    • mort 10:54 on January 13, 2012 Permalink | Reply

      interesting indeed… the lefts least unfriendly GOP candidate gets a double keyed 2 inserted into the count, and is now in front. On the actual polling day itself the committee managed to find another 8 votes to put him in front of Santorum.
      Is this the big govt insiders rigging the Election to put an unelectable Mormon as the contender against the incumbent?

c
Compose new post
j
Next post/Next comment
k
Previous post/Previous comment
r
Reply
e
Edit
o
Show/Hide comments
t
Go to top
l
Go to login
h
Show/Hide help
shift + esc
Cancel