[OldManMac]

I'm surprised no one's brought this up. Looks like, sad as it is, Obama will be the President again.

Did Newt Gingrich Play a Part in Freddie Mac's Fundraising Scandal? - Conor Friedersdorf - Politics - The Atlantic

Newt Gingrich, Freddie Mac and the latest pseudo-conservative fraud - The Hill's Pundits Blog

[Dork.]

Well, if one prominent former House speaker and Republican Presidential candidate has his way, we ought to be investigating all politicians with ties to Freddie and Fannie:

Originally Posted by Some Guy with a big stomach during the last election

Well, I was going to say, let’s start with putting under oath some of the members of Congress. Senator Dodd, who will presumably be helping write this bill, was the largest single recipient of money from both Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Senator Obama was second. Senator Clinton was the largest recipient for Lehman Brothers. Senator Obama was second. I think Congress ought to also be under investigation. If we’re looking at agreed [sic], let’s look at the politicians as well as the people who gave to them.

Newton Leroy better hope this guy doesn't get elected, or else he might get investigated.

[lpkmckenna]

Newt Gingrich just destroyed his own campaign: Child Labor Laws are Truly Stupid.

Just from a strategic dimension: does this guy have a functioning brain? Does he not see what a moronic blunder this could be before opening his big cake-socket?

Does he not see that the American public will vomit at the thought of children cleaning toilets and mopping floors, handling commercial-grade industrial solvents and operating garbage-bailing machinery, when they should be doing math and playing ball?

And he's not saying all students should do this, just the kids at the poor schools. This is simply the most elitist, arrogant, Dickensonian nightmare to yet come out of this presidential race of retarded rejects.

Most conservatives admire the 1950s, which is still apparently 100 years too modern for Newt.

[Dork.]

I've got to side with Newt on this one, and not just because of my man-crush on him. The words that come out of his mouth are absurd and condescending, of course, (but no more so than Biden when he's off his rocker).

His point is that many successful entrepreneurs throughout history started to spend their time finding ways to make money when they were very young (as young as 9 or 10), and our current structure of laws discourage (even prohibit) that. If a fourth-grader wants to spend his spare time getting paid doing an age-appropriate job, and not just spazzing in front of the X-Box, shouldn't he/she be able to that?

Now, he could have just said that instead of invoking the poor kids, but that wouldn't be as entertaining. Besides, Republicans like to prattle on about the fact that the poors are only poor because they're lazy, so the notion of the government sapping all the work ethos out of the nations' pre-teens (and starting the vicious poorness cycle) may actually sell well to red-staters.

In any case, I don't think it will harm his candidacy, because the story is not on Fox News yet, so nobody voting in the Republican primaries will see it.

[OldManMac]

Originally Posted by Dork. 

His point is that many successful entrepreneurs throughout history started to spend their time finding ways to make money when they were very young (as young as 9 or 10), and our current structure of laws discourage (even prohibit) that.

As they should. We need to allocate more resources to educating our children to keep up in a world that is much different than when I was a child.

If a fourth-grader wants to spend his spare time getting paid doing an age-appropriate job, and not just spazzing in front of the X-Box, shouldn't he/she be able to that?

Yes, but taking a job away from an adult is not the answer. I started working when I was 12, delivering newspapers, back when our economy was still on a major upswing. There were jobs to be had, for all. Today, we have the highest actual levels of unemployment/underemployment since the Great Depression.

[quote]Now, he could have just said that instead of invoking the poor kids, but that wouldn't be as entertaining.[/qoute]

We don't need entertainment right now. We need to get adults back to work.

Besides, Republicans like to prattle on about the fact that the poors are only poor because they're lazy,

Which very well illustrates their disdain for the people who helped make them wealthy.

so the notion of the government sapping all the work ethos out of the nations' pre-teens (and starting the vicious poorness cycle) may actually sell well to red-staters.

I hope and pray daily that Americans aren't that stupid yet, but sometimes I wonder.

In any case, I don't think it will harm his candidacy, because the story is not on Fox News yet, so nobody voting in the Republican primaries will see it.

He's not a viable candidate, whether this hurts him or not.

[Dork.]

Gingrich gets an endorsement from an actual "Union Leader":

RealClearPolitics - Union Leader May Give Gingrich a Boost on Immigration

(I took a double take when I first read the headline. I found it shocking that any leader of a union would endorse a conservative. Hah! Now I get it. Funny.)

Don't look now, he may end up in the lead going into the actual voting.
Unless he says something really stupid between now and then. What are the odds of that?

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by Dork. 

Gingrich gets an endorsement from an actual "Union Leader":

RealClearPolitics - Union Leader May Give Gingrich a Boost on Immigration

(I took a double take when I first read the headline. I found it shocking that any leader of a union would endorse a conservative. Hah! Now I get it. Funny.)

Don't look now, he may end up in the lead going into the actual voting.
Unless he says something really stupid between now and then. What are the odds of that?

Man I thought I was a Gingrich fan, but this is shameless, Dork.

[Dork.]

just trying to keep the thread alive. Besides, so many people proclaimed Newton Leroy as done on Page 2 of the thread, and I like pointing out when people are wrong on the Internet.

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by Dork. 

just trying to keep the thread alive. Besides, so many people proclaimed Newton Leroy as done on Page 2 of the thread, and I like pointing out when people are wrong on the Internet.

Granted, I should've given ol' Newt more time. You'll recall however that I've been consistently citing him as head and shoulders above his rivals in debate and that to know Newt is to love Newt. He's got baggage and loose lips no doubt, but he is running a different campaign this time around and I'm with you in support of him. At least, his voice needs to continue to be heard.

[Dork.]

Now, if you were to step into the WayBack machine to 1998 and tell me back then that not only would Newt be running for President in 2012, but that I would think he's the best choice in the Republican field, I would think you were crazy.
Well, there's the whole claiming that you come from 13 years in the future thing, too. I'm honestly not sure what 1998 Dork. would have found more improbable.

[besson3c]

Did 1998 Dork. have a nice looking ass? Was he handsome? Could he do backflips? I'd like to learn more about 1998 Dork...

[olePigeon]

I heard 1998 Dork. partied like it was 1999.

[besson3c]

I'm sure 1998 Dork. rocked out with his sock out. Those were the days of reebok pumps.

What was your hair like in 1998, Dork.?

[Dork.]

1998 Dork. was mainly concerned with finishing Grad School, and whether it was worth trading Preston Wilson away for that Piazza guy.

[The Final Dakar]

So... Newt is more palatable than the blue-state Mormon? I'll be curious to see if the GOP can chew on him long enough to swallow. They already spit out Bachman, Perry, and Cain.

[Dork.]

At least you know Newt thinks about stuff. I don't think Bachmann, Perry, and Cain have two brain cells among them to rub together. I don't want the President wondering whether China has nukes.

Romney is a candidate everyone on the GOP side thinks is qualified, but no one likes. He's the GOP Safety School. (A Conservative one, please. No GOP voter would ever apply to a liberal State safety school, funded by Communism....)

He would make an excellent VP candidate, but I'm not sure if his personality meshes enough with Newt's for Newt to pick him, though. It's a shame -- Romney would make a great straight man for Newt.

[besson3c]

You seem very infatuated with Newt, Dork... Nostalgia, maybe? Maybe those golden days of 1998 penis pumping sort of have given you a skewed impression of him?

[The Final Dakar]

I'd really like him to say something sensible and moderate again, if only to throw Republican Primary voters into a nice little panic.

[andi*pandi]

Mitt doesn't want VP. He's been planning this since 1994. Although I'm sure he thought he'd be a shoo-in last election...

[BadKosh]

Since Owe-bama will lose the election, start thinking of WHO can get us out of this mess. Not the Liberals who caused the mess. Who has the intelligence, guts and support to deal with all the issues? Mitt is gutless. Perry isn't the guy. Cain is gone. Bachmann isn't the one. Newt just may be what we need. Entitlements and the unions need to be dealt with first. Next, close or reduce the size of all the federal agencies. The democrats couldn't bring themselves to cut NPR, so obviously they aren't up to the adult tasks ahead.

[The Final Dakar]

What mess did the libs-dems cause?

[Dork.]

Originally Posted by BadKosh 

Entitlements and the unions need to be dealt with first. Next, close or reduce the size of all the federal agencies. The democrats couldn't bring themselves to cut NPR, so obviously they aren't up to the adult tasks ahead.

Dude, you should start a Ron Paul thread. He's the guy you want.

[BadKosh]

Ron Paul is a nutjob.

[The Final Dakar]

It's amazing how much the simple ironies escape me. Like those turned off by Cain's philandering ways will now probably move on to Gingrich.

[Dork.]

It's like I've observed before: at least Newton Leroy has the class to get divorced form his wives and marry his mistresses.

It's kind of like trading in your used car for a new model every few years. You should test-drive before you buy, after all. (Only in this analogy, you end up paying for both cars in the end anyway.) What could be more American than that?

I wonder if he's really been leasing wives all this time, and just hasn't told anyone?

[ebuddy]

As I understand, Cain did the same thing for a young man, unbeknownst to his wife and yet no accusations of a torrid homosexual affair. I've noticed this at work. You're not allowed to have lunch or enjoy a break with someone of the opposite sex without assumptions flying about the place. Cubicle mentalities with too much time on their hands I'm thinking.

People aren't turning away from Cain because of these allegations near as much as they are his remarkable inability to discuss policy-differences. People want someone who can spar with Obama which is why Newt has skyrocketed in spite of his prior shenanigans while Perry has none of these shenanigans against him and plummeted faster and farther down than anyone. I don't think there's any irony at all for those paying attention.

[OldManMac]

Here's some more appreciation of Gingrich. He tries very hard, and often succeeds, to make sure people only remember what he wants them to. The fact that he's made as much of a comeback as he has shows how gullible some are.

Newt Gingrich’s revisionist history - The Washington Post

[ebuddy]

From your article toward the bottom "In defense of Mr. Gingrich": The ethics committee ultimately concluded that Gingrich was, at the very least, reckless in not seeking tax advice. Neither of the organizations lost their charitable tax status.

A sitting legislator in Illinois does not allow you to collect fees for speaking engagements; ethics violation. Michelle's income of $121k as a community organizer at an Illinois hospital nearly tripled when Obama became a US Senator, after which he granted a million dollar earmark to the hospital that employed her. Having become the First Lady, no longer needing the income, apparently the hospital no longer required her vital role and the position was eliminated; ethics violations.

Gingrich has problems to be sure, but you see we already know when we hit the polling place that we're voting for whomever we consider the lesser of two evils. If you choose to ignore the numerous ethics violations behind our current Administration and the subsequent croneyism rampant among them just because we've got a media that couldn't be more friendly to them, so be it. I won't.

[The Final Dakar]

Don't want to start a new thread for this, but this can't be real:

[OAW]

Surely we aren't surprised by yet another Fox News graphic with glaring mistakes?

OAW

[ebuddy]

Friggin' politicians and their flip-flopping.

[Dork.]

Originally Posted by OldManMac 

Here's some more appreciation of Gingrich. He tries very hard, and often succeeds, to make sure people only remember what he wants them to.

I think you mean he has charisma. That, or chutzpah, maybe. (In either case, two qualities that Mittens doesn't have, which is why he realized he's in trouble.)

I'm starting to think that if a politician doesn't have a scandal or two in their background, it means they aren't trying hard enough.

[Big Mac]

After this week, I'm a Gingrich man now!

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

Don't want to start a new thread for this, but this can't be real:

If Obama is doing that well in the GOP race, I think it's virtually guaranteed that he'll win the next election. Though, it's a pretty glaring mistake for Fox News to have put Romney's name under Obama's photo.

[Dork.]

Mistake? I think it's a surprisingly astute piece of political commentary.

Oh, I see what you did there, now. I should read more closely next time.

[The Final Dakar]

Oh it's apt, but I'm not used to finding commentary in graphics.

[Dork.]

That just shows you how awesome Fox News is.
We report (our inherent biases subliminally), you decide!

[Big Mac]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

Oh it's apt, but I'm not used to finding commentary in graphics.

That's funny, but in all seriousness FNC is majorly behind Romney and very anti-Gingrich right now.

[The Final Dakar]

They still seem lukewarm on him. I imagine it's not the most fun place to be in. Do you side with the guy with huge character flaws or the guy with huge policy flaws? I suppose that comes down to principle vs electability.

[Dork.]

Of course they seem lukewarm on him. Everyone does. Romney is the Safety School of the Republican party, he's the rebound date, he's a younger Bob Dole with better hair.
He's only still around because no one's agreed on a better choice.

[The Final Dakar]

It feels like 2004 in reverse. Though I'd cite Obama as being in a more precarious position than Bush.

[Big Mac]

It astounds me that 40% of the country appears poised to vote him back into office. Despicably ignorant.

[Big Mac]

Yeah, I'm probably over thinking it. OTOH, he hasn't paid yet so maybe I won't even get to the point of shipping it to him.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

It astounds me that 40% of the country appears poised to vote him back into office. Despicably ignorant.

I'm sure I've said this before, but you're easily astounded. If Obama had pulled off a miracle you know the reverse would be true.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

Yeah, I'm probably over thinking it. OTOH, he hasn't paid yet so maybe I won't even get to the point of shipping it to him.

Wrong thread, WOOOOOOOOO
I am joshing

[Big Mac]

Oops. Don't know how that happened. Sorry.

[The Final Dakar]

I imagine you got tabs confused. Not that hard to do.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

Don't want to start a new thread for this, but this can't be real:

Part II

[OreoCookie]

Yes, it can!™
The conservative media have it in for Paul, they just don't like him and give him very little opportunity to get his share of screen time.

[The Final Dakar]

To be fair, all media doesn't give a shit about Paul.