Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Political/War Lounge > Newton Leroy Gingrich, Ph.D. : An Appreciation

Newton Leroy Gingrich, Ph.D. : An Appreciation (Page 8)
Thread Tools
ironknee
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 1999
Location: New York City
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 4, 2012, 11:07 PM
 
would Newt want a VP slot under Mitt?
     
Dork.  (op)
Professional Poster
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Rochester, NY
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 5, 2012, 07:25 AM
 
Are you kidding? The consolation prize is not good enough for Newt.

Gettting picked for VP is like kissing your second wife (after you're married to your third one...)
     
ironknee
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 1999
Location: New York City
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 5, 2012, 05:51 PM
 
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 12, 2012, 02:53 PM
 
Looks like ole Newt is really flaming out. First his campaign's $500 check to get on the Utah primary ballot bounced. And now he's complaining about Fox News being in the tank for Romney.

During a meeting with 18 Delaware Tea Party leaders here on Wednesday, Newt Gingrich lambasted FOX News Channel, accusing the cable network of having been in the tank for Mitt Romney from the beginning of the Republican presidential fight. An employee himself of the news outlet as recently as last year, he also cited former colleagues for attacking him out of what he characterized as personal jealousy.

“I think FOX has been for Romney all the way through,” Gingrich said during the private meeting -- to which RealClearPolitics was granted access -- at Wesley College. “In our experience, Callista and I both believe CNN is less biased than FOX this year. We are more likely to get neutral coverage out of CNN than we are of FOX, and we’re more likely to get distortion out of FOX. That’s just a fact.”
RealClearPolitics - Gingrich Unloads on FOX News in Private Meeting

CNN is less biased than Fox News? Coming out of Newt's mouth? Oh the irony!

OAW
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 12, 2012, 03:00 PM
 
This is all a part of the Newt 2012 Republican Revolution!
     
Dork.  (op)
Professional Poster
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Rochester, NY
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 12, 2012, 03:28 PM
 
Remember: it's not paranoia if they really are out to get you!
     
ebuddy
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 12, 2012, 07:56 PM
 
He's losing his noodle.

Let me guess; a play for CNN. The irony here is that whatever it is Fox News would have to downplay or sell for Romney to remain biased would likely be a cover for Newt's own idiosyncrasies. And he's got a much longer career to choose from.

Gingrich got out of this pretty much exactly what his sloppy-assed campaign put in and there's no one to blame, but himself.

**Edited to include: pretty much exactly what OAW said... as it were.
ebuddy
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 12, 2012, 08:30 PM
 
^^^
Indeed. Newt, Inc. is filing for bankruptcy. And then there's Callista's fondness for Tiffany's jewelry to consider. A CNN gig would be nice little financial lifeline for Newt right about now.

OAW
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 16, 2012, 02:53 PM
 
And to add injury to insult ....

Penguin nipped Newt at St. Louis zoo

OAW
     
OldManMac
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: I don't know anymore!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 16, 2012, 11:46 PM
 
A flash in the pan, and he's still being talked about?
Why is there always money for war, but none for education?
     
lpkmckenna
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Toronto
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 25, 2012, 10:15 PM
 
Newt Gingrich Will Suspend His Presidential Campaign Next Tuesday, Aides Say - Newt Gingrich - Fox Nation

But he's not so much suspending his campaign as leaving it for a younger one.

(Ok, I stole that from reddit. Sue me.)
     
Dork.  (op)
Professional Poster
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Rochester, NY
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 26, 2012, 07:24 AM
 
I am not yet suspending this thread, however. We should leave it open for posterity, so that when Newt gets named Mayor of the Moon, we can reflect back on how far he's come. By that time, he should be on his fifth wife....
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 4, 2012, 01:22 AM
 
Did anyone listen to his suspension speech?

Good lord, man. Put a ****ing sock in it already.
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 4, 2012, 01:36 AM
 
I guess this puts an end to the Republican Revolution 2012?
     
Dork.  (op)
Professional Poster
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Rochester, NY
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 4, 2012, 07:08 AM
 
Mitt will try to bring it with him (on the roof of.... )

You know, even that joke is getting old and predictable. I already miss Newt. He was never boring!
     
OldManMac
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: I don't know anymore!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 4, 2012, 02:32 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
I guess this puts an end to the Republican Revolution 2012?
You mean the scared, old, rich, white men's last gasp?
Why is there always money for war, but none for education?
     
ebuddy
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 4, 2012, 07:17 PM
 
Originally Posted by OldManMac View Post
You mean the scared, old, rich, white men's last gasp?
How are the financiers of the Occupy movement relevant here?
ebuddy
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 4, 2012, 07:24 PM
 
It's interesting to me that you guys seemed to dislike the OWS movement even before you really seemed to understand why.

Face it, you dislike them because you associate them with left wing hippies.

After all, several of the things they protest are in your wheel house
     
Dork.  (op)
Professional Poster
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Rochester, NY
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 4, 2012, 07:42 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
It's interesting to me that you guys seemed to dislike the OWS movement even before you really seemed to understand why.

Face it, you dislike them because you associate them with left wing hippies.

After all, several of the things they protest are in your wheel house
That's rich, coming from you. We all know you're just a mouthpiece for the hippies, trumpeting their views all over MacNN....
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 4, 2012, 11:21 PM
 
Originally Posted by Dork. View Post
That's rich, coming from you. We all know you're just a mouthpiece for the hippies, trumpeting their views all over MacNN....
besson3c is to a hippy as Obama is to a Muslim
     
ebuddy
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 5, 2012, 08:50 AM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
It's interesting to me that you guys seemed to dislike the OWS movement even before you really seemed to understand why.

Face it, you dislike them because you associate them with left wing hippies.

After all, several of the things they protest are in your wheel house
I suppose you could say they're similar to hippies in that OWS is just a repeating cycle of youthful angst and lack of awareness trying its idle hand at politics. They will grow, as the hippies before them; into insurance salesmen, used car dealers, doctors, lawyers, and rich, old white businessmen. The whole Occupy narrative as disconnected as it is, did not start here and it is not a message most of the tent-dwellers truly understand. This becomes more apparent as you read their placards and listen to their grievances.

For example, am I against greed? Yes. I am also against jealousy and anger, but these are emotions and protesting them is as sensible a use of time as protesting clouds on a rainy day. It is a misdirected focus on symptoms over root cause. They are not out to challenge what is arguably the most crony capitalist Administration to date or the ongoing development of a larger establishment.
  • They want free health care. I get that, but... health care isn't free.
  • They want free higher education. I get that, but professors, books, heating and cooling aren't free.
  • They want higher wages. Believe me I get this too, but higher wages are most often tied to gainful employment and achievement or calculated risks, focus, passion, a great deal of exposure, responsibility, and engagement. Higher wages come at a cost to business and must be tempered with mathematical sensibility otherwise known as ROI. While some have been born into wealth and haven't lifted a finger to move the ball forward, you cannot protest this inequality any more than you can protest that some are thin and some are fat or that some are tall and some are short.
  • As opposed to wealth as these people appear to be, they're really defining themselves by it failing to realize that the poorest among them are among the world's richest people.

This intellectual disconnectedness ends up in the most bizarre advocacies such as a Warren Buffet whose secretary pays more in taxes because she can't find the wiggle room for a little venture capital in an income that exceeds $200,000.00. Or a crony capitalist boss that not only fails to pay his fair share of the more than one billion in back taxes from 2001, but apparently hasn't floated any BH stock her way? After all, she's what we're calling rich too.

Life is tough, particularly for young folks who are scared of facing the prospect of entering the rat-race and competing against their peers for what they secretly know is a "better life". They are understandably, looking for a way out. They don't want the exposure or to have to participate in the corporate politick. Who does? After all, this is why positions that require exposure to these things generally pay more. They feel ill-equipped and are struggling with low self-esteem and uncertainty which are all perfectly natural emotions at this age. They are ultimately protesting the discomfort of their own youth.

IMO, the merits of their message should be weighed in light of the temporary nature of their plights. It'll get better only by ignoring their paper-ideology, they just don't know it yet.
( Last edited by ebuddy; May 5, 2012 at 08:57 AM. )
ebuddy
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 5, 2012, 09:02 AM
 
I think those are your emotional projections ebuddy. Their core message is not about obtaining free health care and education, but about financial reform, too big to fail, bailouts, fraud and abuse, and stuff like that.
     
turtle777
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 5, 2012, 09:14 AM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
besson3c is to a hippy as Obama is to a Muslim
A brother in Allah ?

-t
     
ebuddy
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 5, 2012, 09:15 AM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
I think those are your emotional projections ebuddy. Their core message is not about obtaining free health care and education, but about financial reform, too big to fail, bailouts, fraud and abuse, and stuff like that.
They are not emotional projections, they are observations and historical precedent. I challenge you to go among them and ask them if the auto-bailouts were worth it in "saving" the jobs of the line-workers. I can assure you the cigar-chomping Union leadership giving thrust to this movement certainly weren't. Reform is too broad a word. Does this mean ending the long-standing government interference that devalues money and drives up costs or putting an end to oppressive regulations that distort the free market? After all, this would be reformation and are all symptoms of a growing establishment are they not? I'm not hearing of it from this movement. The most egregious abuses of the public trust come from government by definition and yet, I hear no grievances that would challenge this aspect of the status quo. In fact, they are unwittingly defending it.
ebuddy
     
lpkmckenna
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Toronto
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 5, 2012, 09:17 AM
 
Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
For example, am I against greed? Yes. I am also against jealousy and anger, but these are emotions and protesting them is as sensible a use of time as protesting clouds on a rainy day.
Riiiight, they're protesting "emotions."

This intellectual disconnectedness ends up in the most bizarre advocacies such as a Warren Buffet whose secretary pays more in taxes because she can't find the wiggle room for a little venture capital in an income that exceeds $200,000.00.
Let me explain it to you in sufficiently small words so you can understand: the larger the percentage of your income that comes from capital gains, the lower your overall income tax rate will be. A person whose total income is 50% salary, 50% capital gains will pay a higher rate than someone with total income from 5% salary, 95% capital gains. So unless you think his secretary is capable of a higher rate of capital gains income than Warren Buffett, she will always pay a higher rate of income tax. It's not rocket surgery, so you have no excuse for not understanding it.
     
Dork.  (op)
Professional Poster
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Rochester, NY
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 5, 2012, 09:41 AM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
besson3c is to a hippy as Obama is to a Muslim
Exactly, you hippy.
I'm disappointed that you didn't realize I called you a mouthpiece, besson3c....
     
ebuddy
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 5, 2012, 10:14 AM
 
Originally Posted by lpkmckenna View Post
Riiiight, they're protesting "emotions."

Let me explain it to you in sufficiently small words so you can understand: the larger the percentage of your income that comes from capital gains, the lower your overall income tax rate will be. A person whose total income is 50% salary, 50% capital gains will pay a higher rate than someone with total income from 5% salary, 95% capital gains. So unless you think his secretary is capable of a higher rate of capital gains income than Warren Buffett, she will always pay a higher rate of income tax. It's not rocket surgery, so you have no excuse for not understanding it.
I love it. An indictment of stupidity from one who apparently doesn't have the attention span to comprehend two paragraphs of text.

Warren Buffet was not born an investment tycoon paying a 15% tax rate from 5% salary, 95% capital gains. He made a conscious decision to engage the market and accept the risks inherent from that choice, but he didn't become who he is overnight. Some prefer the stability of a growing, predictable, salaried income and others prefer a higher risk-reward outlet for attaining wealth. Some prefer to hang out in their garages trying to build a computer and others prefer to hang out in the gym to be the star quarterback of their college football team. Does this mean the system was somehow unfair to a kid who went on to earn several million dollars playing professional football because he didn't make as much as Steve Jobs? Yes, you can become stinking, filthy rich or you can land yourself in abject poverty. If they're protesting the implications of choice, they are defining themselves by material wealth. They have only greed to protest.

The OWS narrative is predicated on a We have nots / They haves mentality when in reality people move in and out of the upper-quintile income every day. The secretary of an extremely wealthy investment tycoon, earning more than $200,000/yr has plenty of capital to begin building a portfolio that with due diligence could put her in the exact same, lower tax liability as Buffet. She's obviously chosen not to do so and maybe someone who has worked this world from her tenured perspective has some very good reasons why not to. Risk-reward. This is how you get into a position of skirting the kinds of tax numbers Buffet does while ardently supporting the status quo of an Administration that will ensure oil is transported the way he needs it to be as an all-in investor in Burlington Northern railroad. But are these the focus of the noble OWS ire? No. They are the champions of it. Why? Because that's not really what they are protesting.

They're protesting what cannot be modified by human kind; their own emotions.
ebuddy
     
Wiskedjak
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Calgary
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 5, 2012, 10:53 AM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
I think those are your emotional projections ebuddy. Their core message is not about obtaining free health care and education, but about financial reform, too big to fail, bailouts, fraud and abuse, and stuff like that.
The problem with OWS is that *some* are protesting financial reform, too big to fail, bailouts, fraud and abuse, and stuff like that, while most are simply protesting, giving people like ebuddy the ability to find the people protesting for free health care and education and claim *that's* the OWS core message.
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 5, 2012, 03:15 PM
 
Originally Posted by Wiskedjak View Post
The problem with OWS is that *some* are protesting financial reform, too big to fail, bailouts, fraud and abuse, and stuff like that, while most are simply protesting, giving people like ebuddy the ability to find the people protesting for free health care and education and claim *that's* the OWS core message.

Exactly, and in some cases, for some strange reason, not expend the same sort of energy with rants pertaining to the Tea Party.
     
ebuddy
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 6, 2012, 09:28 AM
 
Originally Posted by Wiskedjak View Post
The problem with OWS is that *some* are...
  • protesting financial reform; reform is too broad a word. It's not enough to simply say "I want financial reform". What sort of reform are they advocating? This is a problem.
  • too big to fail; Who? Their preferred corporations or all TBTFs? This is a problem.
  • bailouts; again, this appears to be a problem for them. They have no qualms bailing out this TBTF or that contingent upon whichever ones they feel best help meet their needs du jour.
  • fraud and abuse, and stuff like that; I think the lack of a specific, attainable goal leads to the disconnectedness we see in the movement. Railing on capitalism isn't going to do. It's way too broad and most can't buy into that broad an ideal. What is their solution? This essentially leaves them with, stuff like that which unfortunately isn't specific enough to really sink your teeth into or stand behind.


... while most are simply protesting, giving people like ebuddy the ability to find the people protesting for free health care and education and claim *that's* the OWS core message.
Your assessment was fair, but I'm not suggesting these are their core messages as much as these are their only clear messages even if entirely incoherent.

Originally Posted by besson3C
Exactly, and in some cases, for some strange reason, not expend the same sort of energy with rants pertaining to the Tea Party.
The Tea Party movement was decidedly anti-establishment. The Tea Party message was simple. It was about a Constitutionally limited government and all that entails. They believe government and its politicians are the source of the problems OWS and others are complaining about. There are a smattering of social conservatives in the lot of course that support socially conservative policies that may impose on what a minority of people believe are rights, but the movement itself has done exponentially more to shake the establishment to the core in the recent elections and turned its eye to those on its own side that weren't living up to their platforms. That isn't what is happening with OWS. The most egregious abuses are being perpetrated by an Administration whose champions are giving this movement the few talking points it has. OWS will not shake its own core, but will unwittingly support it and the very wastes, fraudulence, and abuses the movement decries. Worse, it conducts itself in such a way as to make it nearly impossible to defend as evidenced here.
ebuddy
     
Wiskedjak
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Calgary
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 6, 2012, 10:20 AM
 
Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
Your assessment was fair, but I'm not suggesting these are their core messages as much as these are their only clear messages even if entirely incoherent.
Fair enough. I have very little respect for the OWS movement. It's either completely disorganized, creating a venue for people to protest anything they want and diluting any semblance of a core message, or it's intentionally loosely structured so as to attract career protestors in an effort to generate numbers.
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 6, 2012, 02:18 PM
 
My point about the tea party was that you find the same disorganization and lack of focus there, which I think is virtually undenialable, as you do with probably any protest group that has ever existed. Let's not pretend that the tea party or OWS is special.
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 6, 2012, 03:20 PM
 
The Tea Party has gotten its people elected to legislature. All the OWS has accomplished is getting their asses kicked by the man.
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 6, 2012, 03:34 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
The Tea Party has gotten its people elected to legislature. All the OWS has accomplished is getting their asses kicked by the man.

That could be correct, although I gotta say, I've always wondered exactly where the line is drawn between a Tea Party sympathizer or somebody the Tea Party supports because of the right amount of pandering vs. somebody who actually has been involved with Tea Party evangelism in a genuine way.

Also OWS hasn't been around through an election, have they?
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 6, 2012, 03:39 PM
 
I don't see them working towards getting anyone elected. If you're not on this now, it's too late.

But let's be honest. OWS is way the hell too unfocused to be able to accomplish anything on that front. This is simply not the case with the Tea Party.

As for where the line should be drawn, it should be at those people who aren't willing to play ball with the Republicans.
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 6, 2012, 03:44 PM
 
Just think about what's denoted by their titles.

OWS is there to occupy. It's defined itself as a protest working outside the system.

The TP is there to be a political party. It's defined itself as grouping of people to whom you elect to government.
     
Dork.  (op)
Professional Poster
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Rochester, NY
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 29, 2012, 12:16 PM
 
I am resurrecting this thread to remind all you Republicans just how much nicer things could have been. (and also, because I can.)

Do you really think that Newton Leroy would have let himself get into the position that Mitt has gotten himself into? A Newton Leroy / Barack Hussein election would have been 50/50 right now, maybe perhaps even tilting toward the GOP. Newton Leroy probably would have said just as many stupid things as Mitt, but he would have known how to get out of the mess smelling like roses.
     
ebuddy
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 30, 2012, 03:59 AM
 
Originally Posted by Dork. View Post
I am resurrecting this thread to remind all you Republicans just how much nicer things could have been. (and also, because I can.)
Do you really think that Newton Leroy would have let himself get into the position that Mitt has gotten himself into? A Newton Leroy / Barack Hussein election would have been 50/50 right now, maybe perhaps even tilting toward the GOP. Newton Leroy probably would have said just as many stupid things as Mitt, but he would have known how to get out of the mess smelling like roses.
I think you and I were the only ones who ever had an appreciation for Newton Leroy Gingrich, Dork... like in all of the US.

One thing's for sure, the debates would've been worth their weight in gold. If anyone could've gotten a gaffe out of this President, it would've been Gingrich. Obama has a temper the Republicans are going to want the public to see and I'm not sure Romney is clever enough to exploit the snark and sarcasm of a desperate incumbent like Gingrich could have while lambasting the media at every opportunity.
ebuddy
     
Dork.  (op)
Professional Poster
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Rochester, NY
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 17, 2012, 05:44 AM
 
Newton Leroy Gets It. He understands that the GOP needs to do some things differently. Not necessarily come up with different ideas -- they will always be the Conservative party after all -- but present their ideas without alienating half the country by telling them they're moochers.

From here:

"I think we need to be inclusive, and I emphasize the difference between inclusive and outreach," Gingrich said Monday morning in an appearance on ABC's "The View." "Outreach is when five white guys have a meeting and call you. Inclusive is when you're in the meeting. And I think we have to understand to be inclusive."

...

"We need to stop, take a deep breath, and learn," Gingrich said on a separate appearance on NBC's "Today." "The president won an extraordinary victory. And the fact is we owe him the respect of trying to understand what they did and how they did it."

He added: "But if you had said to me three weeks ago, 'Mitt Romney would get fewer votes than John McCain and it looks like he'll be 2 million fewer,' I would have been dumbfounded."
And from here: directly addressing the notion that Obama won because of "gifts":
“I’m very disappointed with Governor Romney’s analysis, which I believe is insulting and profoundly wrong. First of all, we didn’t lose Asian-Americans because they got any gifts. He did worse with Asian-Americans than he did with Latinos. This is the hardest-working and most successful ethnic group in America. They ain’t into gifts. Second, it’s an insult to all Americans. It reduces us to economic entities. You have no passion, no idealism, no dreams, no philosophy. If it had been that simple, my question would be, why didn’t you outbid him?
In an odd twist, Louie Gohmert (R-Batshit Crazy Land) nominated Newton Leroy to be Speaker in the next Congress. Apparently there's no requirement that the speaker be a member of Congress. But there is a requirement that these nominations be seconded, and Louie couldn't bring any of his colleagues along on the crazy train.

But I think what we are seeing is that Republicans who have been in government for a while, and have actually experienced how to work across the aisle with Democrats, are starting to step up and tell these newer Tea Party politicians that you can't build a national party on what they are selling. Newton Leroy is no stranger to partisan hissy-fits -- after all, he did shut down the government when he didn't get his way. But something tells me that Newton Leroy wouldn't have dismissed half the electorate quite so easily.
     
Shaddim
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 46 & 2
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 17, 2012, 05:54 AM
 
The Tea Party works well on a local/state level, but not nationally. Their fundamentals are sound, and they want what's best for society, I feel. It simply isn't compelling on a large scale, due to so many of their leaders being, umm, well... batshit crazy.
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
- Thomas Paine
     
Wiskedjak
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Calgary
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 17, 2012, 06:26 AM
 
Originally Posted by Shaddim View Post
... they want what's best for society, I feel. It simply isn't compelling on a large scale, due to so many of their leaders being, umm, well... batshit crazy.
They want what they *believe* is best for society. Unfortunately, many of those beliefs no longer align with the directions that society is progressing. The reason why the Tea Party doesn't work at a national level is that the Tea Party wants to force their beliefs onto everyone else, and they get more rabid at this as they observe that society is progressing in a different direction.

If they work locally, it's probably easier to represent unique beliefs with smaller populations.
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 17, 2012, 07:10 AM
 
Originally Posted by Newt Gingrich
I’m very disappointed with Governor Romney’s analysis, which I believe is insulting and profoundly wrong.
So says the man who repeatedly called Obama the "best food stamp president" and then feigned utter befuddlement as to why that was viewed as "insulting and profoundly wrong".

OAW
     
raleur
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Oct 2012
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 19, 2012, 08:11 AM
 
Originally Posted by Dork. View Post
Not necessarily come up with different ideas -- they will always be the Conservative party after all -- but present their ideas without alienating half the country by telling them they're moochers.
The problem is that conservatism doesn't have to be what it is today, and Newt is one of those guys who are directly responsible for conservatism's current dead-end. In other words, while Newt might recognize the need for new ideas, the best new idea conservatives could have would be to stop listening to Newt and his pals.

Originally Posted by Shaddim View Post
The Tea Party works well on a local/state level, but not nationally. Their fundamentals are sound, and they want what's best for society, I feel. It simply isn't compelling on a large scale, due to so many of their leaders being, umm, well... batshit crazy.
Yes, the Tea Parties are very strong at local levels- they have taken several pages from other astroturf movements, especially the evangelicals. While they remain a dwindling minority at the national level, they can mobilize a lot of people in certain areas- there are districts here in Texas where they control school boards and city councils, and I'm sure it's the same in other districts.

Also, I think it isn't compelling for many more reasons than batshit crazy leadership. While I agree that most members of the Tea Parties "want what's best" for society, their notion of "best" is the real problem- if you don't buy into their key beliefs, it amounts to nothing more than ladder-kicking in many cases, outright hypocrisy in others, and, in a handful of extreme cases, simple hatred.
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:01 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,