It’s been a long time since I’ve agreed with anything the DNC has put out…if ever. But I can’t find much fault with these new ads they put out:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CUOM9QvhG5I[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K9njHHyRI7g[/youtube]
The Obama flip-flops are legendary, as is Romney’s which just goes to show you, Romney is Obama-lite and no choice at all if given the nomination.
As for the candidate who is giving OLite a run for his money, Newt Gingrich, he picked up a few endorsements today. First up is Maryland Congressman Andy Harris and according to the Gingrich camp there are more to come today.
So with Newt surging in the polls you knew it wouldn’t be long until the MSM brought out the daggers.
You have the WaPo asking for dirt on the man, and Politico has a slew of articles like this one ready to go I’m sure.
To be honest, it’s hard for me to believe that Gingrich is more conservative then Romney. He did approve of the individual health care mandate, believes that man is causing global warming, and wants an immigration strategy that pretty much is amnesty.
So why support him? Tina Korbe puts it well:
In the first place, Gingrich has owned up to at least a few of the mistakes of his past, both personal and professional. As he has taken responsibility, he has demonstrated a rare humility that qualifies him for power in a way arrogance never does. Shaped strongly by his study of history (as is impossible not to notice), he approaches policy from a perspective that does — as he claims — seem to combine consideration for the international, economic and social implications of any given decision. Gingrich would make mincemeat of Obama in the debates as not even the polished Romney could — and, if any independents are unfamiliar with him from his tenure as Speaker, they’ll be impressed with his broad policy grasp, just as Republicans have been newly impressed during the primaries. He hasn’t made his career by tricking liberals into voting for him nor by telling liberals they need a guy like him in office. When he reaches across the aisle to achieve reform, it’s to achieve conservative reform. The difference between Romney and Gingrich can, perhaps, best be summarized with a single statement: Mitt Romney’s signature legislative achievement was Romneycare, while Newt Ginrich’s was welfare reform.
But if he does get the nomination his past WILL haunt him during the primary. This may not be a great way to beat Obama.
So in the end it’s Newt or Romney and the GOP screws itself over again.
See author page
@anticsrocks:
Hey, Richard Cranium, I took you up on your challenge and you disappear like a fart in the wind. Get your ass back in here and debate.
@Ivan: Well Ivan, unlike you I have a life that exists offline. I guess I kinda figured that putting up our Christmas tree, and our Christmas lights just to see the sparkle, wonder and awe in my nearly 3 year old daughter’s eyes rated a tad more important than answering you in a timely fashion.
Okay, you asked:
I am for it.
Next question?
.
.
@anticsrocks:
You’re the one who wanted a debate, Mr. “daddy” (btw, I have four girls, not just one).
Debate away, or get off the can.
@Ivan: Well Ivan I have you beat…my daughter I mentioned is actually my eighth child. Three daughters and five sons.
You picked the topic, and asked what I thought of Free Trade. I said I was in favor of it.
I’m sorry, didn’t you understand that?
Until you get a tad more specific, that’s really all you’re gonna get.
@Smorgasbord:
That seems to be what is going on with this race; and it has given candidates with low funds and limited momentum (like Cain and Gingrich) the boost that they needed.
The main thing I would like to see is, who is supporting this or that candidate; and what organizations are supporting these candidates (and who is behind the organizations). As you said, all these other limitations do not really seem to work.
@Ivan:
Again, and this seems to have eluded your normally perceptive mind, when you have a congress of a different party, that has to be taken into consideration.
So, Obama’s first two years rest solidly upon Obama’s shoulders bc the Congress was his party.
Bush’s 6 years of government expansion sit solidly on his shoulders bc the Congress was his party.
Reagan, however, worked with a contrary Congress; therefore, we cannot put all government expansion on his shoulders alone.
Clinton worked with a contrary Congress for most of his years, so we cannot give him all the credit for balancing the budget and welfare reform, platforms that he certainly did not run on.
Do you grasp the concept? Divided government?
@Gary Kukis: #57
Wasn’t Obama’s administration supposed to do most of those things? I guess he didn’t give a timeline for them, so, I guess he is still working on them.
Is Rommey a Flipper? Of course.And that is exactly why the GOP and establishment want him so damn bad! Birds of a feather flock together. They were scared witless that someone might actually get in there and do things different, and or what the people want, and whats good for the country, not what career politicians want. Perrys idea of sending congress home for half the year with a pay cut is great, but unfortunately many people including myself think that he is just capitalizing on the general mood of the people. Kinda like the Newt is right now since Cain crashed and burned. When in office i doubt seriously that he would try any such action. Kinda like how he refused to take a stand on marriage, by stating that it was up to the states which is an extremely safe answer, and will appease those who are destroying the institution of marriage. And now all of a sudden he has a commercial out about religion and Gays in the military after he took a beating of the marriage issue. Someone Pull my finger!! Just another flipper like Romney. We call him the GOP Fall Back Man. Just in case Romney trips or falls, the GOP can then embrace Perry.