Article

2012-01-29 -Election 2012

Why many Republicans fear a Gingrich win

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Fred 2012-01-29 00:00|| || Front Page|| [11129 views ] Top

#1 Bill Clinton said the POTUS elections from Bush 1 + Dole were stolen from same, hence Dole's fellow Congresscritters decided that Clinton's presidential/electoral legitimacy + credibility of the US Nation's Laws + Processes would stand or fall on whether POTUS Bill had sex wid a "portly pepperpot" femme Intern in what used to be a nice clean blue dress.

* "A REVOLUTION EVERY NOW + THEN CAN BE A GOOD THING", correct?

The above political adage may ultimately be the best reason of all for Americans to vote for Newt.

Posted by JosephMendiola 2012-01-29 00:11|| 2012-01-29 00:11|| Front Page Top

#2 is this all that's on the menu? :(

Posted by Fat Bob Unotch3711 2012-01-29 00:41|| 2012-01-29 00:41|| Front Page Top

#3 Gingrich is a hand grenade - useful but you don't want to be near him when he goes off. His attacks on capitalism (the Bain stuff) and his moral, ethical and philosophical "flexibility" are well demonstrated by his being on the Global Warming couch with Pelosi, opposing Bush on the surge, agreeing with Obama on the Individual Mandate... the guy seems to have no guidance on his intellect at all to determine good from bad. Moon colony? Even Ron Paul laughed at that one. And Gingrich fails miserably head-to-head against Obama due to very high negatives - even rural females favor Obama over him, which is really bad since that's a core group that the GOP carries. Plus he loses the independent voters badly to Obama compared to Romney. The establishment is afraid for all the wrong reasons - yes he'd shake up DC, but the problem is he'd never get elected. Bashing the press sells well to GOP grass roots, but it comes off as arrogant to uninformed and the great unwashed middle. Gingirch would demolish the GOP. His role should be as an attack dog speaker, a think tank kind of guy, a talking head on TV, not a serious candidate. The best thing I can say about him is that he is forcing Romney to get over to the conservative side more strongly, and is toughening up Romney. getting him to actually learn to throw sharp elbows (which he will need with Obama's Chicago gangsters). The other thing is that as long as the combination of Santorum, Gingrich and Paul continue to keep Romney below 50% in delegate count, it keeps open the possibility of late entries to take a brokered convention (which could be good, or could be bad).

Posted by OldSpook 2012-01-29 01:22|| 2012-01-29 01:22|| Front Page Top

#4 Moon colony?

Cost a lot less than "nation building".

Posted by g(r)omgoru 2012-01-29 06:24|| 2012-01-29 06:24|| Front Page Top

#5 comments inside the article have factual problem

The Republican win of the House of Representatives was in the 1994 elections. In the 1996 elections, the Democrats picked up 9 seats (net) but the Republicans retained the majority.

Posted by Lord Garth 2012-01-29 07:01|| 2012-01-29 07:01|| Front Page Top

#6 Fine summation, Old Spook. Given this group of candidates, I think I'd like to take my chances with an open convention. It is an interesting group - combine Romney's business acumen, Gingrich's fearlessness, Santorum's character and Paul's 'differentness' and you'd have a great candidate (but then there's Gingrich's character, Romney's inconsistency, Santorum's non-charisma, and Paul's 'differentness' and you'd get the normal political candidate.)

Posted by Glenmore 2012-01-29 08:45|| 2012-01-29 08:45|| Front Page Top

#7 Tactically, Gingrich wins, because his supporters can block the onerous Romney, and even if Gingrich can't win the nomination, conservatives win with a brokered convention.

Posted by Anonymoose 2012-01-29 10:28|| 2012-01-29 10:28|| Front Page Top

#8 I didn't see Gingrich offering US funds to pay for a moon colony. Rather he said it would be a good goal and NASA should provide prizes that stimulated private enterprise to take steps that way... and followed with the statement that if they got a colony up to 13,000 people he would put forward a bill to grant them statehood.

Oh and he wanted it to be an American colony under US law.

Nothing about funding it. Same for Mars. He said Bush proposed a 480 billion dollar mission to Mars. He would propose offering 10 Billion tax free prize to the first private operation to get there and back. Said it would save $470 billion over the Bush plan.

The media is rather unfairly bashing him on his space proposals. They are based on the 30's prizes to folks like Lindberg.

Posted by Water Modem 2012-01-29 10:56|| 2012-01-29 10:56|| Front Page Top

#9 Romney's proposals would be the death of US Space. Just look in the NASA forums what they had to say about him. His "experts" are the same crew of dildos that were run out of NASA after wrecking it.

Posted by Water Modem 2012-01-29 10:59|| 2012-01-29 10:59|| Front Page Top

#10 Oh, and a lot of us understand that a vote for Romney is a vote for Goldman Sucks.

Posted by Water Modem 2012-01-29 11:00|| 2012-01-29 11:00|| Front Page Top

#11 "The media is ~~rather~~ unfairly bashing him ~~on his space proposals~~."

Shorter version, WM.

Even shorter: "Duh."

Posted by Barbara 2012-01-29 11:02|| 2012-01-29 11:02|| Front Page Top

#12 I always get the feeling from him that I'm hearing...

"Those are my principles, If you don't like them I have others..."

Don't elect a comedian.

Posted by Bright Pebbles 2012-01-29 11:05|| 2012-01-29 11:05|| Front Page Top

#13 Gingrich is a hand grenade ....

He's that but primarily he's always struck me as a generally right of center and rather extraordinarily self-aggrandizing political opportunist who is most interested in attaching himself to the big political idea du jour in an effort to further inflate what he sees as the glory that is Newt.

Whether seizing the then still relevant mantle of the Reagan legacy in '94 in response to a groundwell of public opposition to Billary's attempts to socilize US health care or more recently sharing a couch with Nancy Pelosi in support of the then-roaring climate change agenda, you can often understand Newt by putting a finger in the wind to see which way it is presently blowing.

When that fails recall that Newt is the father of the modern earmark and that his 90s Congresses led a vast expansion of the practice. A permanent moon base might well be technologically achievable but politically impossible but a promise to expend funds in furtherance of the idea will buy him a few votes on the space coast.

Newt may or may not truly hold conservative ideas at heart but it's certain that given the layers of opportunism and vote-buying one would have to unravel to learn the truth said truth will remain forever masked.

Posted by AzCat 2012-01-29 11:22|| 2012-01-29 11:22|| Front Page Top

#14 On the other hand, he writes, with Forstchen(spelling?), some first-rate alternative history civil war stories. I'd say the best of both worlds would be to make sure he has the time to continue writing.

Posted by Mercutio 2012-01-29 13:12|| 2012-01-29 13:12|| Front Page Top

#15 An open convention would be interesting but then the movers and shakers in control could well be the Country Club types who just don't get it.

We see that a lot in Illinois... the reason the state is blue has more to do with the state's pub leadership cadre than a huge desire outside of Chicago's wards for Dems.

Posted by Water Modem 2012-01-29 13:22|| 2012-01-29 13:22|| Front Page Top

#16 Since when are balanced budgets toxic?

Posted by Abu Uluque 2012-01-29 19:01|| 2012-01-29 19:01|| Front Page Top

#17 I mean, IIRC, the only reason the Clinton years were not every bit as bad as the Obama years is because a Republican House kept the spending down and balanced the budget. Clinton took credit for it but all he really did was to recognize that he didn't have the votes. Seems to me there was something about a Contract with America. The House also checked Hillary's push for socialized medicine which in all likelihood would've looked a lot like Obamacare. So this is toxic?

Posted by Abu Uluque 2012-01-29 19:06|| 2012-01-29 19:06|| Front Page Top

#18 absolutely not. That 2 yr period 15 yrs ago was great. Since?......

Posted by Frank G 2012-01-29 20:23|| 2012-01-29 20:23|| Front Page Top

#19 I watch with enormous sadness the Republican party prepare to lose to the most defeatable President in AMerican history, producing a placid, well mannered, constructed candidate in the mold of Bob Dole and John McCain. The passion Newt engenders is because of the quality and genuine conservative nature of some of the things he says, interspersed with his egomaniacal posturing, superb debating skills, and 40% ill-considered ideas. Newt is a font of thought, and should be taken as a valued source, culled of the ego and foolishness of his moments, and used as a basis for rational policy.
But the worst of all, is that the Republican Party lets Obama frame the debate, cannot get traction to make the great unwashed aware of his disasterous policies and falsehoods, and most of all
allowed a debate format that let the candidates essentially abegin to destroy each other over a year before the election. I'm a life long conservative with passionate feelings and I'm bored beyond mention by now. Imagine how turned off the sheeple are.
The elction is in doubt now, and the Dems haven't even started cheating yet. We need to bring a nuke to the gun fight, not good manners and artfully crafted mediocrity and watered down policy ideas. The nation is in grave peril, Obumble sings at the Apollo in a revealing display of Neronic narcissism, and we get bupkis aside from Fox coverage. Lord Help the Republic.

Posted by NoMoreBS 2012-01-29 20:50|| 2012-01-29 20:50|| Front Page Top

#20 The moon stuff is all about the space industry workers in FL. It's not "zany"; it's good old fashioned pandering.

Newt has got his problems, but the best candidates we had are long gone. This is what is left, and I'll take Newt over 1,000 Romneys.

And I'll tell you all one good thing about Newt. He is willing to say what needs to be said. Call it "bomb throwing" if you like, but running Newt as the nominee guarantees we'll hear about Fast & Furious and all the rest. Newt will talk about it. Mitt won't.

Posted by Iblis 2012-01-29 21:35|| 2012-01-29 21:35|| Front Page Top

#21 The thing that bothers me most about Romney (other than Romneycare) it that the media - who are in the tank for Bambi - have already annointed him.

That means they think Romney running is the best chance of Bambi getting a second term. >:-(

Posted by Barbara 2012-01-29 22:35|| 2012-01-29 22:35|| Front Page Top

00:13 Bugs Glomoque3110
23:34 Bugs Glomoque3110
22:35 Barbara
22:23 JosephMendiola
22:18 JosephMendiola
22:05 Richard Aubrey
22:02 JosephMendiola
22:00 Richard Aubrey
21:43 JosephMendiola
21:35 Iblis
21:26 JosephMendiola
20:50 NoMoreBS
20:23 Frank G
20:23 Zhang Fei
20:19 Pappy
19:28 Procopius2k
19:27 Frank G
19:26 manversgwtw
19:25 Procopius2k
19:21 Procopius2k
19:20 Procopius2k
19:07 JosephMendiola
19:06 Abu Uluque
19:01 Abu Uluque