Mitt or Newt? Pick your poison.
[Posted by Karl]
It’s a niche sub-genre of political slapfight:
Former House speaker Newt Gingrich said Monday morning he would “consider” returning the money he earned as a consultant to mortgage giant Freddie Mac if Republican rival Mitt Romney returned his earnings from “bankrupting companies and laying off employees.”
Gingrich was responding to Romney’s call, on Fox and Friends earlier Monday, for Gingrich to return his Freddie Mac earnings, for which he has come under attack.
…and Newt tacked on the obligatory ironic denouncement of Mitt’s negativity for good measure. Two points about the exchange leap to mind.
First, Newt seems perfectly willing to attack from the left when challenged. I have no sympathy on that score for Mitt Romney, who attacked Rick Perry from the left on entitlements. However, Newt’s convenient disdain for the creative destruction necessary to a healthy market system ought to give more pause to those treating Gingrich as the True Conservative alternative to Romney. Indeed, the attack only underscores that Gingrich sees nothing fundamentally wrong with having taken money to promote (or “not lobby” for) Freddie Mac as it — and other government distortions of the housing market — were about to be revealed as the bubble collapsed.
Second, it’s a fair bet Team Obama will roll out either of those attacks if either Mitt or Newt is the nominee. If it’s Mitt, we’ll hear a lot about Mitt being a one-percenter who got rich firing the proletartiat — and healthcare reform will be largely off the table. If it’s Newt, we’ll hear a lot about the unpleasant, longtime Beltway insider and not-lobbyist — and the government’s role in precipitating our current economic malaise will be largely off the table. The phrase “pick your poison” comes to mind.
–Karl
Neither is conservative, it is frankly offensive for a wonk to characterize either as such.
Today I find Newt more honest, faint praise. But more importantly, I expect more empty desks in DC with the arrival of Newt vs Mitt.
Oh, and Mitt doesn’t quite simulate an earth dweller.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 12/12/2011 @ 12:22 pmIt seems of a piece with his admiration for both Roosevelts. Can we now please reconsider Huntsman? I’m still waiting for someone to remind me why I rejected him in the first place, because the only reason I can think of is his support for the warmenist hoax, which Gingrich shares.
Milhouse (d7842d) — 12/12/2011 @ 12:25 pmBill Clinton used to have this amazing ability to decry an attack while making an attack. He pulled it off without looking like a hypocrite on the civility BS.
I’ve never seen anyone else effectively pull it off.
I’m with Gary. Newt is better than Romney, and that is faint praise.
Newt stretches my ability to compromise, but we could do worse and should be mindful that we will do worse if we aren’t careful.
Rick Perry has walked the walk as a conservative in many roles for many years, and maybe if he weren’t running Newt wouldn’t seem so apparently lacking.
It’s a very bad primary. Something is fundamentally wrong with this political party.
Dustin (cb3719) — 12/12/2011 @ 12:26 pmHe supported in state tuition for illegals!
Oh wait. Never mind never mind.
Huntsman’s real problem is that he’s perceived as someone who liked Obama too much. His record is pretty good, in my opinion. I do not understand why moderates who champion Romney don’t support Huntsman instead.
Some will say ‘but Romney had to be that liberal in MA!!!’ well… just save yourself the headache and support a moderate who didn’t have that problem.
We could do a lot worse than Huntsman.
Dustin (cb3719) — 12/12/2011 @ 12:30 pmNewt Romney…Mitt Gingrich… what’s the difference?
i’ll take President Perry for 2012, thankyouverymuch.
redc1c4 (fb8750) — 12/12/2011 @ 12:41 pmIf, in a general campaign, Obama attacks Newt’s work for Freddie, it would seem that the logical defense would be to release all communication between principals at Freddie and Newt, and let the chips lie where they fall.
AD-RtR/OS! (5bf382) — 12/12/2011 @ 12:51 pmNewt.
By the way AD-RtR didn’t Fannie give to Obama?
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 12/12/2011 @ 12:53 pmConservatives supporting Newt after that statement should have their heads examined. It’s exactly like the things Obama says. Romney did not bankrupt anyone. He bought companies that were already in bankruptcy. Now all Newt has to do is blame Romney for causing the subprime housing mess and join Occupy Wall Street.
Gerald A (9d78e8) — 12/12/2011 @ 12:57 pmObama, in his four-years in the Senate, was the 2nd largest recipient of Fannie/Freddie campaign contributions of anyone on The Hill, only exceeded by Chris Dodd.
AD-RtR/OS! (5bf382) — 12/12/2011 @ 1:05 pmWhat do the left mean with corrupt gun dealers?
and the left want to close the loopholes and want a registry to attack law-abiding citizens.
Sorry for the Off Topic.
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 12/12/2011 @ 1:05 pmYou can argue that the creative destruction is not bad, in the long run, anyway – that all it is is the same thing that happened in Poland after the end of Communism (and didn’t happen so much in other place) — what they called “shock therapy” – the elimination of jobs that weren’t strictly necessary – in other words an improvement in productivity, and that the economy gets better in the long run the more this happens, the better the economy will be as people will find themselves doing things that are worth more, and that the economy as a whole will produce more of what people want, and that the opposite is being like Greece, or being a Luddite, or talking like Obama about ATMs vs tellers, and airline reservations people vs automated airline reservations, but, first of all, Romney has made a whole big talking point of being in the private sector and creating jobs, but what he actually did was eliminate > jobs, so it’s perfectly all right for Gingrich to point out, or implicitly point out, that according to Romney this is a bad thing, and challenge him to give up his bad money if he thinks Gingrich made bad money ; and secondly, while this creative destruction may sort of be good in the long run, it’s bad for the people in those jobs, as most people have jobs that are not the most efficient and it’s very hard for people to get themselves in such a poisition again – it takes years – and the next job will not pay nearly as much – and normally this destruction happens slowly with much forewarning, and it is speeded up by someone making an acquisition, like Romney and his partners did, and furthermore, there are elements of culture involved – companies sometimes donate to charities or host events etc., and this is stopped by the creative destruction, and it’s almost a violation of a contract when that happens, and besides that, this also eliminates competition, and varriety, and when there are not too many different companies in a business, or doing iconoclastic things in a business, things do not happen, like the way I just read over the weekend in the New York Times Magazine
[http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/11/magazine/everyone-speaks-text-message.html?_r=1&sq=traore&st=cse&scp=1&pagewanted=all] how someone who came up with a way to map an alphabet for some African languages into Unicode, was not able to get cellphone companies to produce a cellphone that used that.
Does this hold the record for the longest non-run on sentence to appear on Patterico?
Sammy Finkelman (d3daeb) — 12/12/2011 @ 1:05 pmGerald, that statement by Newt had as much relevance as Mitt’s $10K bet – all rhetoric, and all parties recognize it as such.
AD-RtR/OS! (5bf382) — 12/12/2011 @ 1:06 pmWell said AD-RtR
Like I said the left use gun registrys to attack law-abiding citizens with guns. Sorry for the O/T.
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 12/12/2011 @ 1:07 pmI’m not talking about moderates, I’m talking about me. You know me, I’m no moderate! And Huntsman’s looking good to me, at least from what I can see of him. Especially now that he appears to be backing away from the warmenist hoax.
What else was there? Cozying up to Obama? Gingrich did that with Pelosi. And maybe he’s just a nice guy who likes to think the best of people. So long as he doesn’t do that to Ahmedinajad, Putin, or Hu, or to whichever Islamists emerge in Egypt, Libya, Syria, etc., why should this be a minus for him?
Of course for those who are convinced that the only reason anyone could possibly oppose Romney is his religion, the question answers itself. But I don’t play that game.
Milhouse (d7842d) — 12/12/2011 @ 1:08 pmI’d love that too, but I’m not so keen on candidate Perry for 2012.
Milhouse (d7842d) — 12/12/2011 @ 1:09 pmOWS want to arrest people for the crime of greed.
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 12/12/2011 @ 1:13 pmEliminating useless jobs is how you create useful jobs. Keeping useless jobs around just because someone is earning his living at them is pointless. Remember, the point of having jobs in the first place is as a means to creating wealth, not just to give someone something to do and a pay cheque for doing it.
Again, the only purpose of having competition and variety is to better serve the consumer; having more suppliers who each charge too much for too little defeats the point.
Milhouse (d7842d) — 12/12/2011 @ 1:17 pmGerald, that statement by Newt had as much relevance as Mitt’s $10K bet – all rhetoric, and all parties recognize it as such.
Comment by AD-RtR/OS! — 12/12/2011 @ 1:06 pm
Now lying is just “rhetoric”. Okay. And no it’s not like Romney’s $10k bet.
Gerald A (9d78e8) — 12/12/2011 @ 1:18 pmNewt/West
sickofrinos (44de53) — 12/12/2011 @ 1:27 pmWest is conservative.
In order to run for President, you need government experience. Government corrupts. Therefore, there will never be a perfect Presidential candidate. It’s no good whining about it.
“Pick your poison” does not apply here to describe having to select between Mitt and Newt. These two are the ones that have lasted, and also the ones with the most governing experience. It is especially inapt to describe this as a choice between Poison A and Poison B given the acknowledgment that the left will shmear any Republican nominee somehow. (Suspect they’ve already knocked a couple out of the race.)
AMartel (88c646) — 12/12/2011 @ 1:33 pmIt’s not our poison and we don’t have to drink it.
Just focus on picking the best possible candidate and not be all stunned and amazed, surprised and outraged if the candidate is not totally perfect.
Pretty much. I guess there’s personality stuff too… I don’t really think about that.
I think I’m pretty conservative and it seems that Huntsman would be a better president than most of the people who are ahead of him in the polls. I think Newt probably has more cunning and Perry is more conservative.
Dustin (cb3719) — 12/12/2011 @ 1:36 pmNewt/Scott
sickofrinos (44de53) — 12/12/2011 @ 1:41 pmScott is conservative.
I guess I’ll be voting for the v.p. again!!
I watch the deabte other night. It is a worse debate between Rick Perry and Mitt Romney. I saw Romney on Fox and Friend on Fox News Network this morning. Romney is so negative and he keep continue to attacked other candidates’ names all the time. It look like Romney doesn’t have any issues to discuss about. It is just like he did in 2008. I am not a Romney supporter.
m (0f62c3) — 12/12/2011 @ 1:50 pmI’d be willing to consider Huntsman at this point. He seems to at least be able to restrain himself from making idiotic statements and his backing away from his AGW stance makes him more palatable although I don’t completely trust him there but that seems to be the only major policy hangup with him. The other hangup has to do with style, i.e. he made that fairly idiotic statement about how he was going to be real careful not to sound negative about our Prez but conservatives are supposed to think substance trumps style right?
Gerald A (9d78e8) — 12/12/2011 @ 1:58 pmAnother issue with POTUS is the kind of offal he will bring to DC. Note Urkel’s unerring taste for offal: Geitner, Richardson, Dashle, Sebelius, Holder, on and on.
So who does Mitty spur to undercut Newt’s conservative bona fides? John Sununu, fmr. NH Governor, fmr. WH Chief of Staff.
Sununu raises the hue and cry over Newt stabbing him in the back in failing to support the tax raise he engineered for H.W.
The one following “Read my lips”. The initiative that hole the Bush ship below decks. The same genius that gave us Souter, the rock solid conservative jurist.
WTF is he thinking? He should have offed Sununu quietly years ago.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 12/12/2011 @ 1:58 pmI swear the left will use the virginia tech tragedy to force our guns off of us.
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 12/12/2011 @ 2:03 pmHey, it’s Dec 12. IA is Jan. 3, FL Jan. 31.
If your candidate isn’t moving up, today, there is no time. Seriously Perry needs someone ahead of him to get cancer or get outed by farm animals with the goods.
Huntsman? Are ye daft? Seriously, not saying they have a chance, but only Paul and Bachmann are in position to be helped by a miracle.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 12/12/2011 @ 2:07 pmIs Sununu th emain antagonist on star trek?
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 12/12/2011 @ 2:08 pmthe main*
Anyway OWS making a citizen arrest on Goldman Sachs and not it’s benefactor Obama proves how much they are stupid dupes.
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 12/12/2011 @ 2:10 pmKarl,
I’m not sure your second point amounts to anything more than stating the obvious. Team Obama will most certainly recycle any and all criticisms leveled against the GOP’s nominee by his or her Republican competitors regardless of whom that nominee may be or whether the criticism comes from the right or left. If you are concerned about this potential, then shouldn’t you praise Gingrich for his restraint in criticizing his Republican competitors over the past months?
Yours truly,
ThOR
ThOR (94646f) — 12/12/2011 @ 2:17 pmIf Newt is the 1988-1995 Newt then America has a good choice, if its the 2010 Newt then its a problematic choice
EricPWJohnson (2a58f7) — 12/12/2011 @ 2:22 pmWe also need to remember the Far Side cartoon with a couple of Generals emerging from the hardened bunker(think Turgidson, G.C.Scott):
Looking out over the nuclear winter the ranking soldier says “It’s a whole new ball game!”
Eleven months is a very long time on entering a depression. What ever else he is Newt will arrive as quickly at this recognition as any.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 12/12/2011 @ 2:23 pm“Mitt or Newt?”
Who cares?
They both suck.
Dave Surls (46b08c) — 12/12/2011 @ 2:32 pmnewt overly fond
Colonel Haiku (db6c74) — 12/12/2011 @ 2:38 pmof his own voice and visage
Cartman of party
I agree; so if you’ve given up on Perry why not give Huntsman a try before falling back on Not-Quite-Romney? I haven’t quite jumped off Perry’s bandwagon yet, but I’m looking for a place to jump to if I do, and I’m looking for reasons why it should not be Huntsman.
Milhouse (d7842d) — 12/12/2011 @ 2:42 pmWe could do a lot worse than Huntsman.
Yes… Rick Perry, anyone?
Colonel Haiku (db6c74) — 12/12/2011 @ 2:46 pmDave
Good to see you back. You have been in prayers
EricPWJohnson (2a58f7) — 12/12/2011 @ 2:47 pmThOR,
Given that Obama will launch whichever attacks might stick, I should criticize Gingrich for trying to have everyone play pattycake during the primaries. It’s not like Team Obama doesn’t have all of these attacks in its library. We might as well see how the GOP candidates address them before one gets nominated. That’s why I say “pick your poison.” You need to know what you give up with a candidate as much as what you get from him or her.
Karl (f07e38) — 12/12/2011 @ 2:49 pmSecond, it’s a fair bet Team Obama will roll out either of those attacks if either Mitt or Newt is the nominee.
Yes, Obama is operating from such a strong position, he’ll be cowing any challenger.
Take it right back to him in spades. The sorry sumb*tch hasn’t a leg – or record of success – to stand on.
Colonel Haiku (db6c74) — 12/12/2011 @ 2:50 pmFight fire with fire, hit ’em where it hurts and don’t fret about being called raaaaaacists, because you know the shameless leftwing hucksters will be pulling out all the stops.
Tooth and claw and kick ’em in the nads!
Colonel Haiku (db6c74) — 12/12/2011 @ 2:53 pmNewt or Mitt easy
elissa (9d9d19) — 12/12/2011 @ 2:56 pmto see in White House need to
move Obama out
Specifically what policy of Perry’s makes you think he would be a worse president than Huntsman?
Let’s see if there’s anything more than mere trolling to your comments.
Dustin (cb3719) — 12/12/2011 @ 2:56 pm26- they will not be getting my wifes or mine.
sickofrinos (44de53) — 12/12/2011 @ 3:03 pmthat was a stupid thing for Newt to say but Romney’s relentless negativity is getting old
he’s bitchy all the time now
happyfeet (a55ba0) — 12/12/2011 @ 3:10 pm‘Mitt or Newt? Pick your poison.’
“…suicide is painless;
DCSCA (9d1bb3) — 12/12/2011 @ 3:22 pmit brings on many changes…” -source, ‘Suicide Is Painless’/M*A*S*H Theme by M. Altman, J. Mandel- 1970
Look both guys are good guys Romney has a big heart, is a warm and generous person who really deeply cares about his fellow man
Newt has huge personal flaws but has been focused on defeating liberalism but falls short, way short in the 100% purity test
Perry just wants less regulation, less taxes, more jobs and has done it
EricPWJohnson (2a58f7) — 12/12/2011 @ 3:28 pmPoison is for losers. I am the antidote.
Donald Trump (9d1bb3) — 12/12/2011 @ 3:36 pmRick Perry has sold access for the last decade (one of the reasons why he has ordered the destruction of he and his family’s travel records), is a proponent of providing services that act as magnets in drawing unskilled labor from Mexico, can’t think on his feet and – judging by his recent ads – is a poor example of a Christian.
Look… Perry is arguably the least qualified of any of the people that have participated in the Republican debates. Just my opinion.
Colonel Haiku (db6c74) — 12/12/2011 @ 4:07 pmArsenic?
DanH (be94da) — 12/12/2011 @ 4:13 pmElissa!
it’s Job Number One
Colonel Haiku (db6c74) — 12/12/2011 @ 4:17 pmsend this leftwing imposter
back to Illinois!
http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/poll-gingrich-falls-perry-strengthens-iowa/251811
EricPWJohnson (2a58f7) — 12/12/2011 @ 4:20 pmI still think Romney will be the nominee. One small test is to see what former associates say about each. Romney is well liked by people who worked with him. Gingrich…?
Mike K (9ebddd) — 12/12/2011 @ 4:30 pmActually, in the other thread, we’re talking about one Romney adviser who is harshly critical of Romney.
Dustin (cb3719) — 12/12/2011 @ 4:35 pmIllinois better
elissa (9d9d19) — 12/12/2011 @ 4:39 pmoff if Barry retires
to far Hawaii
Dustin… trolling for H8ters.
In other news…
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/285577/gingrich-pyscho-historian-mark-krikorian
Colonel Haiku (db6c74) — 12/12/2011 @ 4:46 pmHaiku, I asked you such an easy question. Why are you afraid of a debate with me? I’m not going to bite.
What policy position do you think makes Perry worse than Huntsman.
So far, your answer is _____
If you have no argument against Perry on policy, admit it.
Dustin (cb3719) — 12/12/2011 @ 4:55 pmYou have no basis for that allegation.
Milhouse (d7842d) — 12/12/2011 @ 4:56 pmHey, Johnny-One-Note, your reading comprehension is somewhat limited.
Colonel Haiku (db6c74) — 12/12/2011 @ 4:58 pmThere’s nothing wrong with my comprehension. I can comprehend a smear when I see one.
Milhouse (d7842d) — 12/12/2011 @ 4:58 pmOh, but I do, Milhouse. The info is out there. Do your homework, if you have an interest.
Colonel Haiku (db6c74) — 12/12/2011 @ 5:01 pmHe is successfully trolling the conversation away from Romney’s decision to tax and spend for ‘free’ healthcare.
And yes, he’s smearing a good conservative governor with baseless crap. Unfortunately, all our ‘objective’ defenders of ‘honesty’ do not seem interested in anything but defending Romney, even though they totally aren’t biased in his favor or anything.
🙂
Dustin (cb3719) — 12/12/2011 @ 5:02 pmI can comprehend a smear when I see one.
Comment by Milhouse
That wasn’t addressed to you, milhouse. And you can sling the smear crap with the best of ’em… props. You’re a god in this world or on any of a million planets.
Colonel Haiku (db6c74) — 12/12/2011 @ 5:03 pmOnly so much of the “brave Sir Robin Perry” mewling one can stomach, Dustin.
Colonel Haiku (db6c74) — 12/12/2011 @ 5:05 pmMilhouse,
I honestly think Haiku was insulting Dustin, not you. That’s not much of a defense, is it?
DRJ (a83b8b) — 12/12/2011 @ 5:06 pmI can just picture you with the clop-clop coconuts as you trail behind…
Colonel Haiku (db6c74) — 12/12/2011 @ 5:07 pmKarl,
Newt is a smart cookie. Looking at his “attack from the left” on Romney in combination with his one-on-one debate with Huntsman suggests a decidedly savvy tactic. Splitting the moderates between Huntsman and Romney in the New Hampshire primary clears the path for Gingrich without roiling the conservative vote. Democrats aren’t the only ones who have been reading Saul Alinsky – this, I believe, is rule #4.
Why would this masterful demonstration of political finesse give any True Conservative pause?
Yours truly,
ThOR
ThOR (94646f) — 12/12/2011 @ 5:15 pmI can’t even interpret this. What language is this?
I asked you such an easy question. You asserted Perry would be a worse president than Huntsman, and I asked if you had some policy positions of Perry’s that are worse than Huntsman’s.
If you do not think Perry is wrong on policy in this comparison, just admit it. Why launch into childish insults? It’s apparent to me that you don’t actually think Perry is worse on policy, at least.
And yes, Milhouse, Haiku is insulting me. Not that I really care that much. I guess something about my comments is infuriating this fella, and that’s not my intention at all. I just happen to be conservative, so naturally I am biased in favor of supporting ideological conservatives.
Why does this need to be personal to Haiku? Let’s have some perspective.
Dustin (cb3719) — 12/12/2011 @ 5:19 pm67. “Let’s have some perspective.”
It’s the prions, bovine spongiform encephalopathy, a zoonotic leap bequeathed by his sire and dam.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 12/12/2011 @ 5:45 pmYou rang,
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/lunacy-u-s-agrees-to-enter-into-treaty-to-begin-cutting-emissions-by-2020/
narciso (87e966) — 12/12/2011 @ 5:53 pmDon’t we have all next year to be stuck between the lesser of two evils? I’m pretty sure there hasn’t been a primary yet, and there’s still the lesser of eight evils right now.
Neither of these assclowns get my vote.
Ghost (6f9de7) — 12/12/2011 @ 5:54 pmSUMMATION- Mitt Romney
Because of his long tenure in public life, especially his presidential run in 2008, Mitt Romney is considered a well-vetted candidate by now. Perhaps to his consternation, he has developed an unshakeable reputation as a flip-flopper. He has changed his position on several economic issues, including taxes, education, political free speech, and climate change. And yet the one issue that he doesn’t flip on – RomneyCare – is the one that is causing him the most problems with conservative voters. Nevertheless, he labels himself as a pro-growth fiscal conservative, and we have no doubt that Romney would move the country in a pro-growth direction. He would promote the unwinding of Obama’s bad economic policies, but we also think that Romney is somewhat of a technocrat. After a career in business, quickly finding a “solution” seems to be his goal, even if it means more government intrusion as a means to an end. To this day, Romney supports big government solutions to health care and opposes pro-growth tax code reform – positions that are simply opposite to those supported by true economic conservatives. How much Romney’s philosophy of governance will affect his policy goals if elected, we leave for the voters to decide. – source, clubforgrowth.org
SUMMATION- Newt Gingrich
As a historical figure, it is undeniable that Newt Gingrich has played leading roles in some of the most important battles on behalf of economic growth and limited government in the last quarter century.
His opposition and momentary defeat of the 1990 Bush tax increase, his leadership of the 1994 Republican Revolution, and his spearheading of the provisions of the Contract With America are major league achievements. His consistent support for pro-growth tax reform, free trade, Social Security reform, tort reform, and political free speech also evidence a clear and impressive understanding of the fundamentals that underlie the free enterprise system that has made America prosperous.
Unfortunately, the problems in Speaker Gingrich’s record are frequent enough and serious enough to give pause. On two of the most important recent issues that confronted limited government conservatives (creating the new budget busting Medicare drug entitlement, and the Wall Street bailout), Gingrich was on the wrong side. His advocacy of an individual health care mandate is problematic. His penchant for tinkering with rewards for favored industries and outcomes shows a troubling willingness to use federal power to coerce taxpayers into his preferred direction. And his occasional hostility toward conservatives who do not share his desire to support liberal Republicans or to compromise on matters of principle is worrisome.
The totality leads one to be rather unsure what kind of president Newt Gingrich would be. Past is often prologue, and in Gingrich’s case there is an enormous volume of past on which to base a judgment. One could reasonably expect a President Gingrich to lead America in a pro-growth and limited government direction generally, possibly with flashes of real brilliance and accomplishment, but also likely with some serious disappointments and unevenness. – source, clubforgrowth.org
Arsenic And Old Lace to be sure. Guess which one is played by Cary Grant and which one thinks he’s TR. Charge!!!!!!!
DCSCA (9d1bb3) — 12/12/2011 @ 6:01 pmIf I have to choose between just those 2 I choose Newt….
freedomcosts (c4171d) — 12/12/2011 @ 6:08 pmas to why the field this year is so “just ok” is that all know that this election is going to be so nasty and most don’t want their families to have to deal with it…
a lot of the reason it’s so nasty is cause Romney knows no bounds of decency… he’s so desperate desperate desperate to be president he’d throw his own mother under a large heavy object to where she got all squooshed up
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 12/12/2011 @ 6:23 pmHard-money donations to Rick Perry’s three gubernatorial campaigns totaled $102 million and half of that, a little over $51 million, came from 204 donors.
The WCS nuclear waste landfill “so perfectly fits the business model of his [Perry’s] key donors. The company leases the land for the dump, meaning that WCS keeps the lion’s share of the profits, while the liability mostly stays with the state. There’s no real regulation to speak of, and many of the state’s decisions appear to have been greased by massive campaign contributions or other favors: The executive director of the state’s environmental commission, for instance, received a job as a lobbyist for WCS not long after helping the firm get its license.
What’s more, the company even got the government to pay for the landfill, lobbying the town of Andrews to float a $75 million bond issue to finance the construction of two new dump sites on the property. And in a final insult, WCS managed to negotiate a loophole exempting it from having to pay school taxes in Andrews. Instead, it offers a few small scholarships a year.
“When I was a kid, our high school was the first one in Texas to have carpets,” says Melodye Pryor, a local resident and longtime opponent of the dump. “Now, our schools are falling apart.”
“Texas has no limit on individual donations to political candidates, which means the governor’s best friends don’t have to hide behind soft money and other back-door channels. In Texas, you can pay your tribute right out in the open.”
“It’s the worst possible hybridization,” says Debrah Medina, the Tea Party candidate who ran against Perry. “A private entity keeps the receipts. The state and the taxpayer own all the liability.”
You can get a fairly decent summary of Perry’s track record as governor just by going down the list of political favors that were granted to the 204 “Central Committee” members who collectively contributed half of his campaign money. Start at the top: Perry’s biggest single donor, the homebuilder Bob Perry, was rewarded with his very own regulatory agency.
Back in the Nineties, Bob Perry made a fortune building cheap homes, and he had enormous success in circumventing regulation, taking advantage of arbitration clauses that prevented homeowners from suing in the event of leaks or faulty construction or other problems. But after he lost a high-profile arbitration case, he and other builders decided to go straight to the top. In 2003, his company’s general counsel, John Krugh, served on a task force established to craft new legislation. The result was a bill creating the Texas Residential Construction Commission, which Gov. Perry signed into law that year. Not long after getting a $100,000 check from Bob Perry, the governor appointed Krugh to serve on the new nine-member commission.
The commission, which initially included four builders and not a single consumer advocate, was a masterpiece of deregulation – actually a kind of deregulation from within, in which builders created and ran a toothless regulatory agency to non-police themselves. The body forced homeowners to pay, at minimum, hundreds of dollars for an inspection fee before making any complaint against a builder. And though the commission frequently ruled in favor of ripped-off homeowners, it had no enforcement power at all – meaning homeowners rarely got their homes fixed.
Perry’s entire career as governor is marked by a history of similar handouts to his top donors. In 2005, he signed an executive order to speed approval for 17 new coal-fired power plants that would drive the state’s carbon footprint past that of Florida, California and New York combined. Eleven of the plants were slated to be built by TXU, a million-dollar donor. Then there was the chicken-farming king Lonnie Pilgrim, who once handed out $10,000 checks on the floor of the Texas legislature in advance of a bill; he gave more than $600,000 to the governor and his causes, and Perry repaid the favor by petitioning the EPA for a waiver of federal ethanol mandates, which had jacked up the price of corn feed for Pilgrim’s business.
Perhaps the single most interesting favor that Perry doled out is one that directly violated his supposedly “conservative” Tea Party principles. One of his first big moves as governor was to back the Trans-Texas Corridor, a $175 billion project to privatize the state’s highways. This was to be the mother of all public-works projects, a 4,000-mile highway network, at some points four football fields wide, that would also include commuter rails, freight rails and telecom pipelines. The TTC, in essence, was the ultimate Tea Party nightmare, a massive public boondoggle that would have created a huge network of new tolls and required a nearly unprecedented use of eminent domain to help the state seize nearly 500,000 acres of land from ranchers and farmers.
Though most of the project was shot down by the state legislature, Perry did manage to push through several parts of it, most notably a few stretches of new highway construction around Houston and Dallas. Some of the beneficiaries of those projects were American firms that had donated lots of money to Perry and the governors association, like Williams Brothers Construction ($621,000), Parsons Corporation ($410,000) and JP Morgan Chase ($191,000). But another beneficiary was a Spanish firm called Cintra, part of a consortium that won the development rights for the original TTC project.”
Read more… Taibbi’s a leftwinger, but that doesn’t mean this isn’t true: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/rick-perry-the-best-little-whore-in-texas-20111026#ixzz1gNTWRwTD
Colonel Haiku (db6c74) — 12/12/2011 @ 6:26 pmPerry’s not smart enough to be corrupt I don’t think
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 12/12/2011 @ 6:30 pmOthers can attack Gingrich on how he earned a living, but George Romney’s heir, born into millions and never having to work himself, should tread carefully there.
Kevin M (563f77) — 12/12/2011 @ 6:32 pmIn short, Newt’s answer should have been: “Mitt, some of us have to WORK for a living.”
Kevin M (563f77) — 12/12/2011 @ 6:34 pmIf you say, Colonel
http://what-is-is.blogspot.com/2007/11/taibbi-on-romney.html
narciso (87e966) — 12/12/2011 @ 6:36 pmNewt does his
Colonel Haiku (db6c74) — 12/12/2011 @ 6:36 pmbestmost lucrative work when he’s lining his pockets steering people to the right contacts in the federal government, Kevin.Compare those two Taibbi articles, Narciso, and then tell me who appears to be the honest man of the two.
I’ve grown weary of the tales of the valiant Perry’s struggles against the forces of Big Government as told by his faithful, fawning sycophant Dustin. That RS piece was a breath of fresh air.
Colonel Haiku (db6c74) — 12/12/2011 @ 6:43 pmtabbicat
Kaopectate (9d1bb3) — 12/12/2011 @ 6:44 pmscratchs
colon
in colonel
haiku
gesundheit
the coolest thing Mr. Newt did was being in charge of the House and passing stuff what brought America to the closest thing it’s had to a balanced budget in our lifetimes
I think that’s what makes him better than that Romney person…. Newt has a high bar what he set for himself… and it concerns the mostest important issue facing our pitiful little country… the spendings
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 12/12/2011 @ 6:44 pmCol., isn’t that what “advisors” do, advise you how best to complete whatever project you’r involved in?
AD-RtR/OS! (5bf382) — 12/12/2011 @ 6:48 pmAnd since when has such a service been illegal as long as no laws have been violated?
Don’t you engage the services of a lawyer to advise you on the legal aspects of a contract you may be entering into?
I find such a line of argument non-serious, and petty.
He bought into the gorebull warming losers eco fear mongering which believes man made gorebull warming is causing the death of the panda bear population.
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 12/12/2011 @ 6:53 pmyes that was stupid someone should key his car
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 12/12/2011 @ 6:54 pmFrom what little I heard after the fact, Mr. Newt has gone and asked to be cast into oblivion according to Britt Hume, Charles Krauthammer, Glenn Beck (who said that he would “now rather vote for Paul than Gingrich”),and I think Hewitt.
Apparently equating taking money from Freddie and Fanny as a consultant while they were being driven into the ground and trying to destroy the US economy with Mr. Romney’s making money at and for Bain was barking up a tree with hornets, not honey bees.
Romney was doing what capitalists do.
Gingrich was doing… well, what people were doing while trying to break the US economy.
Yes, Gingrich is a formidable debater, thinks fast on his feet, etc., but at times being fast is at the expense of being wise.
I was just thinking how it had seemed that Newt’s campaign seemed virtually over before it got started when he misfired over the Ryan budget, and now he was fighting for the lead. That was earlier today.
Whatever one wants to say about Dubya’s malapropisms, what he intended was usually reasonable and you knew where he stood. When Gingrich says something off the wall, you’re left feeling like you don’t know who he really is or what he really believes.
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 12/12/2011 @ 6:55 pmsomeone should key his car
Only if it’s a Pinto, or Gremlin.
AD-RtR/OS! (5bf382) — 12/12/2011 @ 6:55 pmDoc, as someone much wiser than I has noted, Newt has that “Prof” gene that compels him to throw-out sometimes quite outlandish concepts onto the floor for discussion.
AD-RtR/OS! (5bf382) — 12/12/2011 @ 7:00 pmSometimes it works, sometimes not.
Even the best of “Idea Men” rarely exceed 20%.
What was it that Tom Edison said about inventing:
It’s 1% inspiration, and 99% perspiration!
Newt is someone who works with ideas and isn’t afraid of talking about them before a team of thousands has vetted everything. Yes, he has half-baked notions and stupid ideas. But he has notions and ideas.
So, if you want someone who doesn’t take a step until the focus groups have spoken and the pollsters have polled, go with that Romney guy.
If you want someone who is capable of adapting to the incredible sh*t-storm coming our way, and who can actually think through things on his own, then maybe you want to reconsider Newt.
—
And if you think that golfing while the country burns is a good strategy, go with DSPCA and Obama.
Kevin M (563f77) — 12/12/2011 @ 7:03 pmShorter test: which candidate would you rather drink with?
Romney doesn’t drink, so that’s boring.
Paul is bad enough sober.
Bachmann might get a sense of humor if she drank, but she also might take her clothes off.
Perry might get articulate, so that’s a maybe. Probably would be best if there was football.
Santorum would probably spend the whole time scolding you.
Newt would be Newt, but more so. Might not be good, but would be interesting.
Kevin M (563f77) — 12/12/2011 @ 7:10 pmI get the idea of being willing to throw out ideas for consideration, and making comments that can be shown to be a bad idea with further exploration I don’t mind.
But those things do reveal a person’s instincts, so when he throws out something really counter to a conservative philosophy I wonder where his true foundation lies.
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 12/12/2011 @ 7:19 pmpeople are reading too much into Mr. Newt’s off the cuff remark in response to Romney’s tacky and unrelenting hostility I think
Romney mostly just looks pissy that he might not get the nomination
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 12/12/2011 @ 7:27 pmcoffee
Kaopectate (db6c74) — 12/12/2011 @ 7:30 pmenema
self-administered
gargled
cheers
Don’t you engage the services of a lawyer to advise you on the legal aspects of a contract you may be entering into?
I find such a line of argument non-serious, and petty.
Newt’s just scratching that itch, AD. He’s The Fixer… lining his pockets one deal at a time.
Colonel Haiku (db6c74) — 12/12/2011 @ 7:38 pmcolon
kaopectate (9d1bb3) — 12/12/2011 @ 7:38 pmin colonel
pained
kao’d
cured
haiku
gesundheit
Fat Boy
kaopectate (db6c74) — 12/12/2011 @ 7:51 pmmarsh glade
court
jester
gator eyes
mama!
Newt would be Newt, but more so. Might not be good, but would be interesting.
There’s a Newt perched on the end bar stool of every bar in America, hoisting cold ones between blasts of hot air, lecturing other drunks on power from midnight to closing time. By day, you can find same in the faculty lounge of most community colleges hoisting doughnuts by the coffeemaker. He takes his with cream.
DCSCA (9d1bb3) — 12/12/2011 @ 8:00 pmThere’s a Newt perched on the end bar stool of every bar in America, hoisting cold ones between blasts of hot air, lecturing other drunks on power from midnight to closing time. By day, you can find same in the faculty lounge of most community colleges hoisting doughnuts by the coffeemaker. He takes his with cream.
Comment by DCSCA — 12/12/2011 @ 8:00 pm
— Spare us your life’s story, Disco Stu.
Icy (8e81e4) — 12/12/2011 @ 8:09 pmcolon
kaopectate (9d1bb3) — 12/12/2011 @ 8:14 pmin colonel
inflamed
boils
lanced
haiku
gesundheit
To all the Romney naysayers:
Don’t forget that elections are won by appealing to the moderates and independents. Romney and Huntsman can win the center more easily than Newt.
norcal (5e34b6) — 12/12/2011 @ 8:15 pmAny poster that relies on a sleazy hit piece by that Commie atheist piece of crap, Matt Taibbi, to make ANY serious point about ANY candidate — especially a GOP candidate — needs to spend some serious alone time, contemplating reality . . . what a concept.
Icy (8e81e4) — 12/12/2011 @ 8:16 pmI think Newt can win the center better than Romney. I think Huntsman is a non-factor, but as an intellectual exercise, you’re probably right that he could do this well.
Romney favored a lot of candidates in 2007 in state level races in MA, and every single one of them lost. Why? Romney lost all his credibility because he went from promoting a very left position to promoting a superficially conservative one.
Yes, this averages out to moderate, but I don’t think that’s how it really works. It really averages out to ‘shameless’, and I don’t think Romney could sell a ham sandwich, let alone a political platform.
I think MD’s point that Newt sometimes comes out of left field is fair, and he’s clearly not coming from my POV all the time. He’s not a ‘true conservative’, so to speak. But he comes across as sincere for the most part. A technocrat who seems to at least understand many of the problems with big government… but not someone who will be truly reliable as a conservative.
Can this person, with his baggage, win over the center? I have no idea. Newt has many advantages and many disadvantages, and I don’t know how he’d play out. I think every one of our guys will be susceptible to highly unfair demonization.
Not to dismiss your electability concern, but I think Newt would be a much better president than Romney because Newt is a leader, and Mitt is a bit of a windsock follower.
Dustin (cb3719) — 12/12/2011 @ 8:34 pmRomney loves himself.
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 12/12/2011 @ 8:40 pmAnyone that links to that commie lefty POS Matt Taibbi needs to have their head examined.
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 12/12/2011 @ 8:44 pmCan’t we have Luis Fortuno he pissed off the teachers unions by forcing them to pay for their own pensions.
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 12/12/2011 @ 8:54 pmDustin,
I also think Newt would be a good president, but more than anything I want Obama to lose next year, and I’m worried about Newt’s electability. There are a lot of people, not just liberals, but independents as well, who remember and dislike Newt. In the nineties Newt was just as despised as Palin, and was seen as an extremist.
My buddy is one of those despisers of Gingrich. He voted for Obama, but is not satisfied with him. However, he said the only Republicans he could vote for are Romney and Huntsman.
norcal (5e34b6) — 12/12/2011 @ 8:54 pmBut why do we have to pander to him? As feets asked a while ago, when is it our turn to be pandered to?
Milhouse (ea66e3) — 12/12/2011 @ 8:57 pmBecause elections are won in the center.
norcal (5e34b6) — 12/12/2011 @ 9:00 pmWhy am I not surprised at your friend norcal?
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 12/12/2011 @ 9:02 pmYeah, I do understand the concern.
Milhouse has a point. At some point we need to actually save this country from some policies that are a true threat to the republic’s very existence. Maybe we don’t need to freak out about it, but we do need to try to elect someone who will fight for entitlement reform.
If you really think only Romney and Huntsman are electable, well… only one of those two men would plausibly reform entitlement spending, and that’s Huntsman.
This ‘we need to win the center’ seems in conflict with what I am wanting us to win. Not that you even disagree with me.
I’ve got no good answers. Personally, I’m probably going to vote Perry and hope the pollsters are way off.
Dustin (cb3719) — 12/12/2011 @ 9:05 pmOn the other hand, if Huntsman can appeal to the likes of norcal’s friend and to us, how much better would that be? On the gripping hand, the R nominee, whoever he turns out to be, is going to get the Palin treatment, and at that time anyone like norcal’s friend, who’s scared of Gingrich for being, of all things, too right-wing, is going to run screaming back into 0bama’s safe hands. We are not going to get those votes no matter what we do. So why pander to them?
Milhouse (ea66e3) — 12/12/2011 @ 9:16 pmCommie atheist piece of crap…
IceMan… same could be said at times about Hitchens, but that does not mean there’s no truth to be found.
Colonel Haiku (db6c74) — 12/12/2011 @ 9:18 pmAt least Hitchens goes after the fakeistinians.
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 12/12/2011 @ 9:34 pmSo how long into the GOP debate did Sawyer sound drunk?
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 12/12/2011 @ 9:35 pm_______________________________________________
First, Newt seems perfectly willing to attack from the left when challenged.
It seems that almost every time any of the candidates have stumbled or fumbled, it’s when they’ve allowed their inner liberalism to come forth. The epitome of that among Republicans in general — at least from a symbolic standpoint — is when Ronald Reagan did a Jimmy-Carter routine, went against his publicly stated (and sensible) position, and secretly negotiated with hostage-taking Iran.
The idiocy of left-leaning sentiment is the key concept here, and yet I’m not sure if a good portion of the American electorate truly understands that. IOW, if it did, current opinion polls would show an ultra-liberal like Obama trailing any and every Republican by a wide margin.
As for those Americans along the lines of Romney, Gingrich, Perry, Huntsman, etc, if they honestly looked in the mirror, and then looked at everyone around them, they’d have to say “mea culpa!” They’d have to admit and publicly state that the left-leaning biases embedded in the corners of their own mind, and in the minds of just about every human out there, are really, really, foolish or stupid.
Based on the foibles of human nature, and it being occasionally corrupted by liberal sentiment (ie, feelings over common sense, touchy-feeliness over basic logic), perhaps every human in existence needs to proclaim “mea culpa.”
Mark (411533) — 12/12/2011 @ 9:56 pmThe difference being that while Hitchens is an atheist he’s far less partisan than the non sequitur ad hom spewing man-of-the-left Taibbi. His “facts” are so coated in bile it becomes patently impossible to discern the unvarnished truth behind the unadulterated level of personal hate he displays for the subjects of his “reports”.
Icy (8e81e4) — 12/12/2011 @ 10:11 pmHuntsman is the smartest of the bunch on foreign relations and appears quite stable compared to the rest of the candidates.
Newt is, as I’ve noted before, morally bankrupt … and conservatives are slamming him. Ann Coulter, Peggy Noonan, Michael Savage, George Will, Yuval Levin (The National Review), and Charles Krauthammer have all taken issue with his problem issues like infidelity, having taken $1.6 million from Freddie Mac, being erratic and undisciplined, and, of course, conceited.
Anita Busch (a025dd) — 12/12/2011 @ 11:06 pmicy hot
kaopectate (9d1bb3) — 12/12/2011 @ 11:09 pmsnewtfull
tabbicat
kewlie
purrs
haiku
gesundheit
@117 Remember what Newt was all about: family value$, Anita, family value$… which runs about $60,000 a speech– and about $35/book. ;-).
DCSCA (9d1bb3) — 12/12/2011 @ 11:14 pmI can only imagine how frustrated Huntsman would be to read this thread, noting that it’s really quite too late.
BTW, if you’re truly motivated to do something, make a last stand for Perry in Iowa (unless you disagree with his campaign, of course).
Dustin (cb3719) — 12/12/2011 @ 11:34 pmDisco Stu’s golden oldies are turning moldy!
Icy (8e81e4) — 12/13/2011 @ 12:56 amYou know I’d actually enjoy putting you in moderation for breaking the rules, right? Keep the sockpuppets in the sockpuppet threads.
(No, not going to say who it is. Just giving a warning.)
Stashiu3 (601b7d) — 12/13/2011 @ 1:52 amAnita
I like you but being conceited and having infidelity problems were hallmarks of some of the great liberal leaders like Franks, Clinton, FDR, JFK, LBJ, Dodd, Teddy K etc.
EricPWJohnson (2a58f7) — 12/13/2011 @ 1:58 amWhen will the roveaholics understand their time is up? When they get done with this election the gop will be the 3rd party. You people are nothing but tools for the collapse. sad.
sickofrinos (44de53) — 12/13/2011 @ 2:24 ami hate to say it but i am beginning to think it will be mitt for me. its not an enthusiastic thing but…
first, i want someone with administrative experience. that was why i was initially excited by perry entering because 1) he had executive experience and 2) was not Romney.
no, i don’t entirely trust the genuineness of his conversion to more conservative positions. i will go as far as to say that he might grow the Fed Gov a little.
but i have no evidence that newt is ready to be president, and i don’t think he is humble enough to recognize he wasn’t qualified if that is the case.
we need a reagan right now, but apparently he hasn’t show up. so we have to make the best of a bad situation. i think mitt is it.
but that is tentative, so i can be persuaded.
Besides, my vote in the primaries almost never matters. its in the general election that it matters the most. and i am pretty much ready to vote for almost any candidate besides obama.
Aaron Worthing (e7d72e) — 12/13/2011 @ 5:47 amAnita, I’m sorry you are so disappointed in the Team R presidential candidates. But honestly, you weren’t ever going to vote for any of them (including Huntsman) instead of President Obama, anyway, were you?
elissa (9d9d19) — 12/13/2011 @ 5:51 amWe shouldn’t be payign for public transit with our taxpayers money why not get congress to pay with their salary?
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 12/13/2011 @ 6:10 amRight-wing talkers turn against Newton…
http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2011/12/13/right-wing-talkers-turn-against-gingrich/
Colonel Haiku (db6c74) — 12/13/2011 @ 6:32 ampaying*
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 12/13/2011 @ 6:38 amI wonder why you think Romney is the go-to guy?
Is it because of the commerce clause?
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 12/13/2011 @ 6:38 amBeck is really losing the respect I had for him in the last two years.
narciso (87e966) — 12/13/2011 @ 6:39 amIf the goal is to defeat Obama, The Rs cannot nominate Newt. The visual would kill him. A fat, jowly, aging man with crooked graying teeth standing on the debate platform next to the youthful, tall, slender big smile inclumbent president. 60% of the viewers make up their mind before one word is said. The great debate skills will mean little. And if you add on the first family issue (delightful normal Obama family with two daughters he loves) versus thrice-married adulterer Newt, Obama wins in a landslide. Sorry if that seems superficial but that is how the country evaluates things in this media-driven age.
bio mom (a1e126) — 12/13/2011 @ 7:12 amNewt’s answer to any non-personal attack is “I balanced the budget in hard economic times.”
cedarhill (292d15) — 12/13/2011 @ 7:18 amTo the degree that people are looking to change direction from the Obama mistake, not to a status quo ante, but to a free-market “new deal”, Newt is the change agent they are looking for.
If, OTOH, they want to go back to a Bush I/Clinton “golden era” with maybe a nip and a tuck, then Romney’s the status quo Republican they want.
Me, I think people wanted “hope and change” when they went with Obama, and largely got neither. What they got was LBJ’s third term without the competence. They still want change, and we have to offer them some. More now than ever.
Kevin M (563f77) — 12/13/2011 @ 8:03 am_________________________________________________
Sorry if that seems superficial but that is how the country evaluates things in this media-driven age.
And greatly influenced by a belief that liberalism and liberals are somehow so humane, generous, kind, sophisticated, beautiful and tolerant.
Keep in mind the voting records of nations like Argentina, Venezuela or Greece, or, closer to home, urban America. No matter how screwed up, foolish and corrupt a place becomes, a good percentage of the populace fits the following description:
Mark (411533) — 12/13/2011 @ 8:26 amHe started at the Village Voice, where the stupidity is quite nearly bottomless, Nat Hentoff
narciso (87e966) — 12/13/2011 @ 8:37 amis possibly the only sane person there, Bastone (th future head of the Smoking Gun) and Barrett, Guilianis’ Javert, did as much as possible to obstruct any sensible reform, in a generation.
“Newt’s answer to any non-personal attack is “I balanced the budget in hard economic times.””
cedarhill – That’s Perry’s answer to any question. He stole Newt’s line!
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 12/13/2011 @ 8:52 amThe Rs cannot nominate Newt. The visual would kill him. A fat, jowly, aging man with crooked graying teeth standing on the debate platform next to the youthful, tall, slender big smile inclumbent president.
I must admit that in the Lincoln-Douglas Debate scenario Gingrich would seem better cast as Douglas from a visual standpoint, never mind the politics.
Seen politically, however, Obama is the status quo Democrat and Gingrich the Radical Republican.
I would like to think that the vast majority of Americas who vote (as opposed to those that simply mouth opinions) take their vote more seriously than who looks better. If not, we are doomed as a nation anyway.
Kevin M (563f77) — 12/13/2011 @ 9:22 amI guess this pretty much settles the argument I’ve been having with Romney’s fans over whether he’s conservative or progressive.
The guy is a fraud to pose as conservative. He wants more government, and is a tax and spend liberal. Mocking conservative budgets as a stupid thing to run on is indeed what I would expect from Romney’s fans, but to me, this is a very important qualification.
Romney, proud to distance himself from the GOP by calling himself “progressive” is a big spender and a big government progressive, and he would lose to Obama, who is also a big spending progressive. All the guy has is myths about his electability, disproven by his own record as a 17 year politician with only a single election win and a huge number of endorsed losing candidates.
Dustin (cb3719) — 12/13/2011 @ 9:37 am“If you do not think Perry is wrong on policy in this comparison, just admit it. Why launch into childish insults?”
Who said this?
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 12/13/2011 @ 10:32 amStill looking for a split and brokered convention.
Patterico is at least 35, right?
Of course it would be mean to his family to put them through it.
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 12/13/2011 @ 10:43 amThat was me. What’s the relevance?
I was asking Haiku a specific and easy question. Instead of wallowing in this insult and scandal crap that seems to be the order of the day (and to be clear: I’m guilty too), I asked him if there was a policy issue where he thought Perry was worse than Huntsman.
He refused to name any, of course. I don’t think he has any interest in a political debate.
BTW, Daleyrocks, and I say this with no sarcasm: I do not know when you’re joking and when you’re serious anymore. Sometimes it seems like you’re 100% earnest and passionate, and other times I just don’t see how it’s possible.
Is this ‘Perry was associated with someone who then bought property’ part of the effort to lampoon hysterical accusations without evidence, much like your accusation that Perry is a pervert, is homosexual, his supporters are homos too, and he used Gardasil as the “needle of sex”? Or are you seriously saying that Perry presided over some kind of corruption when someone in his administration (or formerly? … it in the future would be?) bought some land?
Anyway, I’m kinda tired of this kind of back and forth anyway. If you have some hard evidence, let’s see it. If you’re kidding, I’d appreciate it if you let me know.
Meanwhile, I seen to have produced proof that I was correct to accuse Romney of being a big government progressive.
Dustin (cb3719) — 12/13/2011 @ 10:54 amFm Instapundit…
ROGER SIMON: Explaining Newt. “Sure Gingrich has an idea a minute, many of which are bad, but at least he has ideas. At least he is thinking. And — guess what — he says what he thinks. Politicians aren’t supposed to do that. But Gingrich reminds me more of a Steve Jobs or a Richard Branson than he does of a politician, and that is a good thing because politicians these days are the kind of people that make me want to bang my forehead against the desk.”
AD-RtR/OS! (21429a) — 12/13/2011 @ 10:55 amPosted at 8:13 am by Glenn Reynolds
Yeah, AD, I have to admit, I don’t need someone who is obsessed with being so ready for prime time that everything you hear is some insincere poll tested garbage they don’t even really believe.
Newt is a bit random, and I don’t think those who are annoyed with his departures are being unreasonable, but I appreciate that he’s saying what he’s thinking.
Ironically, this inability to know exactly what we’re getting with Newt is far more honest and accurate than what we’re getting from most other politicians.
Dustin (cb3719) — 12/13/2011 @ 11:01 amSeems the choice is between a Republican version of President Clinton and a Republican version of President Bartlett. A manager of solutions versus a creator of solutions.
Kevin M (563f77) — 12/13/2011 @ 11:20 amRoger has that unique ability to “cut to the quick”, which he does with this simple clause:
AD-RtR/OS! (21429a) — 12/13/2011 @ 11:21 am“…but at least he has ideas…”.
This cannot be said of so many of our politicians; particularly since the passing of Moynihan, who was another academic seduced into the role of a pol.
…Both running against a Democrat version of President Baltar.
Kevin M (563f77) — 12/13/2011 @ 11:22 amKevin, the world is full of managers; creators are another matter.
AD-RtR/OS! (21429a) — 12/13/2011 @ 11:24 amCurrently, we are being led by someone who has a dearth of good ideas (if any at all),
surrounded by a group of sychophants who could only charitably be called “Yes Men”.
“Yes we can” men
Icy (1a73e7) — 12/13/2011 @ 11:38 amI have to admit, I don’t need someone who is obsessed with being so ready for prime time that everything you hear is some insincere poll tested garbage they don’t even really believe.
— In that case, you are definitely backing the right horse.
Icy (1a73e7) — 12/13/2011 @ 11:40 amI don’t honestly know a lot about Newt but in general when I think of Georgia politicians, he strikes me as the opposite of Jimmy Carter. So he’s got that going for him.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 12/13/2011 @ 11:43 amSomebody said that a wise woman lived in the Wilds of West Texas;
AD-RtR/OS! (21429a) — 12/13/2011 @ 12:27 pmI think we’ve stumbled upon her.
I was asking Haiku a specific and easy question. Instead of wallowing in this insult and scandal crap that seems to be the order of the day (and to be clear: I’m guilty too), I asked him if there was a policy issue where he thought Perry was worse than Huntsman.
He refused to name any, of course. I don’t think he has any interest in a political debate.
Total bullscat and untrue. I responded that I found Perry’s policy of selling access to the state of Texas’s business and the governor’s office (I provided a list of/link to several well-documented examples), along with Perry’s policy of offering state services/ subsidies to Mexico’s unskilled labor force to be outrageous in the case of the former and fraught with troubling implications in the latter.
BTW… Romney says in 2002 that he likes to think he is progressive in his thinking and look how Dustin runs with it.
Colonel Haiku (db6c74) — 12/13/2011 @ 12:36 pmI like to think that Republicans are “progressive” in that they recognize problems when they see them and are best able to develop solutions to resolve them. That’s a sign of a true “progressive”, not just a renaming of failed liberalism.
Colonel Haiku (db6c74) — 12/13/2011 @ 12:40 pmNewt is a good man, he has softened quit a bit since his 90’s posture but I wouldnt underestimate his ability to affect change – as much as he is a talker he is a doer
Perry is a doer more bluntly the difference between Perry and Newt is the same as the difference between Romney and Perry
Perry believes simple govt is less govt and that is controlled by limiting regulation and spending
Romney and Newt think a combination of SMART government, selective regulation and selective spending is the answer – in other words
Perry – minimal govt = minimal spending = more jobs
NEWTROMNEY – smaller govt = selective(smart) spending = more jobs
its an interesting choice
EricPWJohnson (2a58f7) — 12/13/2011 @ 12:42 pmThe erratic, unreliable meme wielded by Team Romney will receive more blowback on the Kennedy challenge in ’94.
In the last year preceding 2010 in which the GOP was granted a stunning reversal in the House and Statehouses nationwide, Romney lost by 17 points.
And he ran against the “Contract with America”, loyal Republican that he is. I know Elites will regard winning with Newt more to be fought than losing to Urkel, but seriously, we do not need them. Indeed, ridding ourselves of them is in every sense as important as defeating the antiChrist.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 12/13/2011 @ 1:02 pmand a stench was smelled throughout the land…
Colonel Haiku (db6c74) — 12/13/2011 @ 1:04 pmCars causing Gorebull Warming is a myth.
Gorebull Warming is a myth.
Just like you having brains is a myth.
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 12/13/2011 @ 1:06 pmThe well has been poisoned by those wild-eyed, fanatical ideologues who have come a-cropping.
Colonel Haiku (db6c74) — 12/13/2011 @ 1:07 pm157. Perhaps you should wash your cattle prod.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 12/13/2011 @ 1:08 pm138. Newt isn’t attractive but then the Jug-eared Fool, anorexic, chomping on his Nicorette, pitched forward, is hard to look on as well.
But then, I’m racist.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 12/13/2011 @ 1:16 pm“That was me. What’s the relevance?”
Dustin – The relevance was watching the thread move in the direction of childish insults of supporters of different candidates rather than just discussing the candidates.
Some people can’t seem to help themselves.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 12/13/2011 @ 1:18 pmThis morning.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 12/13/2011 @ 1:22 pmBut Gingrich reminds me more of a Steve Jobs or a Richard Branson than he does of a politician, and that is a good thing
This is right, but he is still a little bit too superficial. (although that may be hard for some people to see, since he alludes to so much)
Sammy Finkelman (d3daeb) — 12/13/2011 @ 1:24 pmHowever – I don’t know if any body else is even in the ball game.
Newt Gingrich hopes he is Winston Chruchill – and bteh Winston Churchill of 1951, not 1945, thinks he is Theodore Roosevelt but he may not be too much more than Gary Hart pretended to be in 1984.
REAL BEEF.
Sammy Finkelman (d3daeb) — 12/13/2011 @ 1:26 pm“Hard economic times”?! He did (almost, not quite) balance the budget, but times don’t come much easier than those!
Milhouse (ea66e3) — 12/13/2011 @ 1:34 pmTrue. As Daley notes, it was Perry who balanced a budget in hard times. It took a lot of cutting, even cuts to sacred cow agencies like education, and there were temptations along the way, such as wasting the rainy day savings instead of cutting the size of the government to what was sustainable, long term.
Have any of these other guys governed successfully in tough times? Has Huntsman? At least Huntsman ran his government pretty well.
Dustin (cb3719) — 12/13/2011 @ 1:51 pmHuntman…I’ll bet he looks just spiffy in the blue uni of a bus-driver (is he a Virgo?).
AD-RtR/OS! (21429a) — 12/13/2011 @ 2:13 pmDamn….”Huntsman”
AD-RtR/OS! (21429a) — 12/13/2011 @ 2:14 pm@126 Elissa, I am independent and have voted for Republicans and Democrats in the past. For me, it is a matter of character and intelligence. How ’bout you?
Anita Busch (a025dd) — 12/13/2011 @ 8:49 pmUm, maybe I’m misunderstanding this.
I repeatedly tried to get a substantive question answered.
You quote it, and then explain that the relevance is how ‘someone’ can’t help themselves from childish insults?
I don’t get it.
But Perry’s a homo pervert, right?
Dustin (cb3719) — 12/16/2011 @ 4:45 amFor me, it is a matter of character and intelligence. How ’bout you?
That does not track with your support for Teh Won.
JD (4b216c) — 12/16/2011 @ 5:52 amOT, was Luke Ford raised by wolves, or was he merely adopted.
narciso (87e966) — 12/16/2011 @ 6:27 am“Um, maybe I’m misunderstanding this.”
Dustin – That is clear. My comment immendiately followed one of yours which began with the following:
“I guess this pretty much settles the argument I’ve been having with Romney’s fans over whether he’s conservative or progressive.”
Quoting your caution against childish insults was entirely appropriate.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 12/16/2011 @ 6:42 amThis may be my fault.
I will have more than one conversation at the same time.
I was trying to get Haiku to explain the policy views he holds that rank Perry below Huntsman. Frankly, I don’t think he cares enough to know their different policy views. I have a very low opinion of that commenter.
But I kept hacking at it. Happy to see him prove me wrong.
He doesn’t seem to have one.
Anyway, that day a lot of people were noting a video of Romney had surfaced. I know I’ve had a lot of arguments with people over whether Romney is a progressive or a conservative, and Romney describing himself as progressive was an amusing and powerful point against him.
He would be such a good democrat nominee.
Anyway, I don’t think quoting Romney’s own description of himself is a childish insult. I think Romney calling himself progressive was meaningful. He wanted MA voters, progressive democrats, to know that Mitt was one of them.
You noted yesterday whether Perry was conservative, noting he supported Al Gore in 1988 (when Al Gore was far more conservative than Romney was in 2002, btw), and I don’t think you were being childish to talk about ideology in that way. I think that’s a pretty legit label to worry about (even if I disagree with your conclusion).
Anyway, this probably isn’t your fault. I can be discursive, I’m told.
Dustin (cb3719) — 12/16/2011 @ 6:48 am