GOP Establishment will have Melt Down if Newt wins Florida!

[The T]

Debate and discuss the latest political issues in real-time on politweeps.com - let your voice be heard!

 

[candycorn]

I could see a brokered convention. That could be a real possibility.

Question:

1). When was the last time we had a brokered political convention (major party) in the US?

2). Do you think the rank and file of 2012 will stand for an appointed candidate or will it be an entree to a 3rd party insurgency by whomever is not selected? I think there are alternatives to a brokered convention. It will be expensive and it will be unprecedented but the Party can do something besides having the "wisemen" appoint a nominee.

2a). As for #2, are there bylaws that you are aware of that allow for such a brokerage or on the opposite end of the coin, allow for a more creative solution? Remember, this isn't a constitutional thing; these are political parties so they make the rules to nominate their own candidates.

3). Does a brokered convention automatically translate into a weakened nominee?

 

[idb]

I could see a brokered convention. That could be a real possibility.

Question:

1). When was the last time we had a brokered political convention (major party) in the US?

2). Do you think the rank and file of 2012 will stand for an appointed candidate or will it be an entree to a 3rd party insurgency by whomever is not selected? I think there are alternatives to a brokered convention. It will be expensive and it will be unprecedented but the Party can do something besides having the "wisemen" appoint a nominee.

2a). As for #2, are there bylaws that you are aware of that allow for such a brokerage or on the opposite end of the coin, allow for a more creative solution? Remember, this isn't a constitutional thing; these are political parties so they make the rules to nominate their own candidates.

3). Does a brokered convention automatically translate into a weakened nominee?

4). Would Newt quietly accept being passed over for nomination if he thought he deserved it?

 

[paulitician]

No, if Ron Paul won Florida they would have a melt down. But not Gingrich. The GOP Establishment doesn't have a problem with him. So your post is assinine. Go figure though. You're a Democrat Dummy.

 

[IndependntLogic]

No, if Ron Paul won Florida they would have a melt down. But not Gingrich. The GOP Establishment doesn't have a problem with him. So your post is assinine. Go figure though. You're a Democrat Dummy.

That's true. The GOP would shlt their pants if Paul won Florida! It would be great to see. But they would ALSO freak if Newt won it because he will drive votes directly to Obama by the millions.
I would definitely vote for Ron Paul before I'd vote for Gingrich.

 

[ABikerSailor]

No, if Ron Paul won Florida they would have a melt down. But not Gingrich. The GOP Establishment doesn't have a problem with him. So your post is assinine. Go figure though. You're a Democrat Dummy.

They might not have a meltdown, but electing Gingrich as the GOP candidate makes it better for Obama.

Very few people actually like Newt, they're just hoping for an attack dog to take Obama down, but it won't work.

Newt has WAAAAAY more skeletons in his closet than Obama.

 

[CaughtInTheMid]

I expected a republican party civil war but I never thought it would be over two neo-cons. The weirdness factor in the republican primary is incredible in the fact that the tea party has been made a non-entity and no one seems to care.

yep

but it's always about regaining power. everything else is just conversation.

 

[Liability]

No, if Ron Paul won Florida they would have a melt down. But not Gingrich. The GOP Establishment doesn't have a problem with him. So your post is assinine. Go figure though. You're a Democrat Dummy.

They might not have a meltdown, but electing Gingrich as the GOP candidate makes it better for Obama.

Very few people actually like Newt, they're just hoping for an attack dog to take Obama down, but it won't work.

Newt has WAAAAAY more skeletons in his closet than Obama.

LOL.

The President very much prefers to be going up against Romney.

This is why the Democrat Parody handmaidens and house organ (affectionately known as the main stream media) have been doing their level best to take out all of his competition.

They are now perplexed. They have orchestrated and orchestrated, but the pesky people are simply not following their lead.

The lame stream media will never know about the skeletons in the President's closet, since they refuse to do their job and even attempt to look.

The left wing partisan media has failed to do their actual job. And it's not an accident. But they now have less and less credibility as the reality of what tools they are is exposed more and more.

Meanwhile, yes. Gingrich DOES have issues. And that is certainly going to be ever more "reported" (breathlessly at that) by the lame stream media. This is new?

 

[idb]

No, if Ron Paul won Florida they would have a melt down. But not Gingrich. The GOP Establishment doesn't have a problem with him. So your post is assinine. Go figure though. You're a Democrat Dummy.

They might not have a meltdown, but electing Gingrich as the GOP candidate makes it better for Obama.

Very few people actually like Newt, they're just hoping for an attack dog to take Obama down, but it won't work.

Newt has WAAAAAY more skeletons in his closet than Obama.

LOL.

The President very much prefers to be going up against Romney.

This is why the Democrat Parody handmaidens and house organ (affectionately known as the main stream media) have been doing their level best to take out all of his competition.

They are now perplexed. They have orchestrated and orchestrated, but the pesky people are simply not following their lead.

The lame stream media will never know about the skeletons in the President's closet, since they refuse to do their job and even attempt to look.

The left wing partisan media has failed to do their actual job. And it's not an accident. But they now have less and less credibility as the reality of what tools they are is exposed more and more.

Meanwhile, yes. Gingrich DOES have issues. And that is certainly going to be ever more "reported" (breathlessly at that) by the lame stream media. This is new?

Please stop with the 'lame stream media'...it's driving me insane!
Please.....

 

[candycorn]

No, if Ron Paul won Florida they would have a melt down. But not Gingrich. The GOP Establishment doesn't have a problem with him. So your post is assinine. Go figure though. You're a Democrat Dummy.

They might not have a meltdown, but electing Gingrich as the GOP candidate makes it better for Obama.

Very few people actually like Newt, they're just hoping for an attack dog to take Obama down, but it won't work.

Newt has WAAAAAY more skeletons in his closet than Obama.

LOL.

The President very much prefers to be going up against Romney.

This is why the Democrat Parody handmaidens and house organ (affectionately known as the main stream media) have been doing their level best to take out all of his competition.

They are now perplexed. They have orchestrated and orchestrated, but the pesky people are simply not following their lead.

The lame stream media will never know about the skeletons in the President's closet, since they refuse to do their job and even attempt to look.

The left wing partisan media has failed to do their actual job. And it's not an accident. But they now have less and less credibility as the reality of what tools they are is exposed more and more.

Meanwhile, yes. Gingrich DOES have issues. And that is certainly going to be ever more "reported" (breathlessly at that) by the lame stream media. This is new?

I'm curious.

If Mitt Romney had divorced two wives under the circumstances that Newt had, one of the wives--for whatever reason--is now talking about the details of the divorce, and the details were that salacious (open marriage), are you saying that the press would be ignoring it?

As a side-bar...has Newt denied asking for an open marriage?

 

[JimH52]

Schmidt: GOP Establishment Will Have A Meltdown If Gingrich Wins Florida | RealClearPolitics

This is hilarious!

Probably true.

If Newt wins Florida, it becomes a real horse race.

That is an understatement...

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

The ‘GOP Establishment’ is looking forward to 2016, and going through the motions this year.

 

[Amelia]

They might not have a meltdown, but electing Gingrich as the GOP candidate makes it better for Obama.

Very few people actually like Newt, they're just hoping for an attack dog to take Obama down, but it won't work.

Newt has WAAAAAY more skeletons in his closet than Obama.

LOL.

The President very much prefers to be going up against Romney.

This is why the Democrat Parody handmaidens and house organ (affectionately known as the main stream media) have been doing their level best to take out all of his competition.

They are now perplexed. They have orchestrated and orchestrated, but the pesky people are simply not following their lead.

The lame stream media will never know about the skeletons in the President's closet, since they refuse to do their job and even attempt to look.

The left wing partisan media has failed to do their actual job. And it's not an accident. But they now have less and less credibility as the reality of what tools they are is exposed more and more.

Meanwhile, yes. Gingrich DOES have issues. And that is certainly going to be ever more "reported" (breathlessly at that) by the lame stream media. This is new?

I'm curious.

If Mitt Romney had divorced two wives under the circumstances that Newt had, one of the wives--for whatever reason--is now talking about the details of the divorce, and the details were that salacious (open marriage), are you saying that the press would be ignoring it?

As a side-bar...has Newt denied asking for an open marriage?

I'm not sure if he's addressed it directly.

But his DAUGHTERS say it wasn't so.

As if they would know.

 

[IndependntLogic]

No, if Ron Paul won Florida they would have a melt down. But not Gingrich. The GOP Establishment doesn't have a problem with him. So your post is assinine. Go figure though. You're a Democrat Dummy.

They might not have a meltdown, but electing Gingrich as the GOP candidate makes it better for Obama.

Very few people actually like Newt, they're just hoping for an attack dog to take Obama down, but it won't work.

Newt has WAAAAAY more skeletons in his closet than Obama.

LOL.

The President very much prefers to be going up against Romney.

This is why the Democrat Parody handmaidens and house organ (affectionately known as the main stream media) have been doing their level best to take out all of his competition.

They are now perplexed. They have orchestrated and orchestrated, but the pesky people are simply not following their lead.

The lame stream media will never know about the skeletons in the President's closet, since they refuse to do their job and even attempt to look.

The left wing partisan media has failed to do their actual job. And it's not an accident. But they now have less and less credibility as the reality of what tools they are is exposed more and more.

Meanwhile, yes. Gingrich DOES have issues. And that is certainly going to be ever more "reported" (breathlessly at that) by the lame stream media. This is new?

Okay I think your post is funny. So the media is so "Left-Wing" that no one knows who William Ayers is / was! No one ever watched CNN broadcast Jeremiah Wright sayi g"God Danm America" 24 friggin hours a day. Although those darn Republicans keep getting caught in their indiscretions, no one ever heard of "WeinerGate" 5 billion times. No one ever heard of Rod Blagojevich. And of course, no one ever knew Bill Clinton got a blow job...

I used to date a broadcast journalist. Let me share something with you. She was a diehard Dem but if there was a nasty story about a Demthat could make her famous, guess what? As she put it "Reporters are like sharks in the water, waiting for a baby to fall out of a boat". They're just waiting for that big break and they don't care who it's about.
The problem with the Republicans isn't that they have more sexual indiscretions than Dems, it's that they base their campaigns on being "Holier" than the Dems. How many gay Republican Congressmen are there? How many openly gay reporters on FOX?
If Newt hadn't paraded around discussing "family values", it wouldn't be AS interesting but he's still a dick.

 

[Liability]

They might not have a meltdown, but electing Gingrich as the GOP candidate makes it better for Obama.

Very few people actually like Newt, they're just hoping for an attack dog to take Obama down, but it won't work.

Newt has WAAAAAY more skeletons in his closet than Obama.

LOL.

The President very much prefers to be going up against Romney.

This is why the Democrat Parody handmaidens and house organ (affectionately known as the main stream media) have been doing their level best to take out all of his competition.

They are now perplexed. They have orchestrated and orchestrated, but the pesky people are simply not following their lead.

The lame stream media will never know about the skeletons in the President's closet, since they refuse to do their job and even attempt to look.

The left wing partisan media has failed to do their actual job. And it's not an accident. But they now have less and less credibility as the reality of what tools they are is exposed more and more.

Meanwhile, yes. Gingrich DOES have issues. And that is certainly going to be ever more "reported" (breathlessly at that) by the lame stream media. This is new?

Okay I think your post is funny. So the media is so "Left-Wing" that no one knows who William Ayers is / was! No one ever watched CNN broadcast Jeremiah Wright sayi g"God Danm America" 24 friggin hours a day. Although those darn Republicans keep getting caught in their indiscretions, no one ever heard of "WeinerGate" 5 billion times. No one ever heard of Rod Blagojevich. And of course, no one ever knew Bill Clinton got a blow job...

I used to date a broadcast journalist. Let me share something with you. She was a diehard Dem but if there was a nasty story about a Demthat could make her famous, guess what? As she put it "Reporters are like sharks in the water, waiting for a baby to fall out of a boat". They're just waiting for that big break and they don't care who it's about.
The problem with the Republicans isn't that they have more sexual indiscretions than Dems, it's that they base their campaigns on being "Holier" than the Dems. How many gay Republican Congressmen are there? How many openly gay reporters on FOX?
If Newt hadn't paraded around discussing "family values", it wouldn't be AS interesting but he's still a dick.

If one is a casual everyday working stiff American who tends to be too busy trying to keep body and soul together, pay the taxes, pay the bills, provide for the kids and their education, etc., etc., etc. to follow the daily fluff that passes for news, yes. Such people have probably never heard in the main stream media anything about God Damn America from the President's pastor. They likely never did hear about Ayers.

To pretend otherwise is just plain disingenuous.

Those fuckers in the left wing press couldn't WAIT to dig as deep as they could (and we're talking the shallows, in actual fact, but it was more than enough to kick up the mud) when it came to mere claims that Mr. Cain was a philanderer.

But they did no in depth reporting about the EXTENSIVE connections in the Obama background with far left wing/socialists and Marxists. The majority of their coverage was to pooh pooh the right wing alternative media coverage. You know it and so do the rest of us.

Newt didn't parade around discussing family values. But even if he had, there's a difference between noting the social value in such things and the claim that one is as pure as the driven snow. I happen not to be a so-called "social conservative" in that department, but I don't think most of the stuff the social conservatives HAVE said has been along the lines of "we're holier than thou." That's just a crock of convenient bullshit from the lefties who don't care to discuss the impact of the huge change in social mores.

Meanwhile, hearing about Weinergate is one thing. That fucking loudmouth made himself a centerpiece of liberal Democrat Parody sanctimony and then compounded his odious camera whoring dishonesty with an abiding fascination with his own penis. It is simply NOT on the same plain as the liberal Democrat propaganda machine actively seeking to alter the public perception about the GOP contenders.

 

[Liability]

They might not have a meltdown, but electing Gingrich as the GOP candidate makes it better for Obama.

Very few people actually like Newt, they're just hoping for an attack dog to take Obama down, but it won't work.

Newt has WAAAAAY more skeletons in his closet than Obama.

LOL.

The President very much prefers to be going up against Romney.

This is why the Democrat Parody handmaidens and house organ (affectionately known as the main stream media) have been doing their level best to take out all of his competition.

They are now perplexed. They have orchestrated and orchestrated, but the pesky people are simply not following their lead.

The lame stream media will never know about the skeletons in the President's closet, since they refuse to do their job and even attempt to look.

The left wing partisan media has failed to do their actual job. And it's not an accident. But they now have less and less credibility as the reality of what tools they are is exposed more and more.

Meanwhile, yes. Gingrich DOES have issues. And that is certainly going to be ever more "reported" (breathlessly at that) by the lame stream media. This is new?

I'm curious.

If Mitt Romney had divorced two wives under the circumstances that Newt had, one of the wives--for whatever reason--is now talking about the details of the divorce, and the details were that salacious (open marriage), are you saying that the press would be ignoring it?

As a side-bar...has Newt denied asking for an open marriage?

If Mitt had done things akin to the behavior of Newt, sure the press would have mentioned it. Just as soon as the GOP had made Romney the nominee.

Bill Clinton screwed a young intern (is means is, by the way; it's never been anything akin to unclear) and the leftwing media tried to claim that the right wingers were being Puritanical in even taking note of it. Of course, the reality is that the REAL objection to Bubba wasn't his sexually predatory ways. It was lying about it under oath. But we can all pretend otherwise. After all, that was the left wing media meme.

 

[IndependntLogic]

LOL.

The President very much prefers to be going up against Romney.

This is why the Democrat Parody handmaidens and house organ (affectionately known as the main stream media) have been doing their level best to take out all of his competition.

They are now perplexed. They have orchestrated and orchestrated, but the pesky people are simply not following their lead.

The lame stream media will never know about the skeletons in the President's closet, since they refuse to do their job and even attempt to look.

The left wing partisan media has failed to do their actual job. And it's not an accident. But they now have less and less credibility as the reality of what tools they are is exposed more and more.

Meanwhile, yes. Gingrich DOES have issues. And that is certainly going to be ever more "reported" (breathlessly at that) by the lame stream media. This is new?

Okay I think your post is funny. So the media is so "Left-Wing" that no one knows who William Ayers is / was! No one ever watched CNN broadcast Jeremiah Wright sayi g"God Danm America" 24 friggin hours a day. Although those darn Republicans keep getting caught in their indiscretions, no one ever heard of "WeinerGate" 5 billion times. No one ever heard of Rod Blagojevich. And of course, no one ever knew Bill Clinton got a blow job...

I used to date a broadcast journalist. Let me share something with you. She was a diehard Dem but if there was a nasty story about a Demthat could make her famous, guess what? As she put it "Reporters are like sharks in the water, waiting for a baby to fall out of a boat". They're just waiting for that big break and they don't care who it's about.
The problem with the Republicans isn't that they have more sexual indiscretions than Dems, it's that they base their campaigns on being "Holier" than the Dems. How many gay Republican Congressmen are there? How many openly gay reporters on FOX?
If Newt hadn't paraded around discussing "family values", it wouldn't be AS interesting but he's still a dick.

If one is a casual everyday working stiff American who tends to be too busy trying to keep body and soul together, pay the taxes, pay the bills, provide for the kids and their education, etc., etc., etc. to follow the daily fluff that passes for news, yes. Such people have probably never heard in the main stream media anything about God Damn America from the President's pastor. They likely never did hear about Ayers.
To pretend otherwise is just plain disingenuous.


Seriously???? Oh dude thou drinketh deeply of the kool-aid. NO ONE missed Ayers or Wright!
Those fuckers in the left wing press couldn't WAIT to dig as deep as they could (and we're talking the shallows, in actual fact, but it was more than enough to kick up the mud) when it came to mere claims that Mr. Cain was a philanderer.

And Clinton???? Kool-aid.

But they did no in depth reporting about the EXTENSIVE connections in the Obama background with far left wing/socialists and Marxists. The majority of their coverage was to pooh pooh the right wing alternative media coverage. You know it and so do the rest of us.

So Sorry oh subscriber of Drudge but the rest of us know better...

Newt didn't parade around discussing family values.

WHAT?!?!?! OMG dude! Just Google "Newt Family Values" for videos. While he was evicerating Clinton for the blowjob, he was giving speech after speech on why his supposed "family values" defined the difference between Clinton and a "good Christian" like himself! Of course he was banging some broad on te side at the time...


But even if he had, there's a difference between noting the social value in such things and the claim that one is as pure as the driven snow. I happen not to be a so-called "social conservative" in that department, but I don't think most of the stuff the social conservatives HAVE said has been along the lines of "we're holier than thou." That's just a crock of convenient bullshit from the lefties who don't care to discuss the impact of the huge change in social mores.

Bullsh*t. it's part of their political campaign. Newt is now selling the "I'm all better because God has forgiven me" bs as an excuse - or haven't you noticed?

Meanwhile, hearing about Weinergate is one thing. That fucking loudmouth made himself a centerpiece of liberal Democrat Parody sanctimony and then compounded his odious camera whoring dishonesty with an abiding fascination with his own penis. It is simply NOT on the same plain as the liberal Democrat propaganda machine actively seeking to alter the public perception about the GOP contenders.

Oh please. Try not to be SO obviously "party hypocritical". BOTH parties have their garbage - you just try to excuse the on The Right as if it's somehow better than the bs on The Left. It's not. BOTH sides are full of sh*t. The only diofference is that the LibDems don't try to say they're more vote-worthy because of sex or religion.

 

[Liability]

Okay I think your post is funny. So the media is so "Left-Wing" that no one knows who William Ayers is / was! No one ever watched CNN broadcast Jeremiah Wright sayi g"God Danm America" 24 friggin hours a day. Although those darn Republicans keep getting caught in their indiscretions, no one ever heard of "WeinerGate" 5 billion times. No one ever heard of Rod Blagojevich. And of course, no one ever knew Bill Clinton got a blow job...

I used to date a broadcast journalist. Let me share something with you. She was a diehard Dem but if there was a nasty story about a Demthat could make her famous, guess what? As she put it "Reporters are like sharks in the water, waiting for a baby to fall out of a boat". They're just waiting for that big break and they don't care who it's about.
The problem with the Republicans isn't that they have more sexual indiscretions than Dems, it's that they base their campaigns on being "Holier" than the Dems. How many gay Republican Congressmen are there? How many openly gay reporters on FOX?
If Newt hadn't paraded around discussing "family values", it wouldn't be AS interesting but he's still a dick.

If one is a casual everyday working stiff American who tends to be too busy trying to keep body and soul together, pay the taxes, pay the bills, provide for the kids and their education, etc., etc., etc. to follow the daily fluff that passes for news, yes. Such people have probably never heard in the main stream media anything about God Damn America from the President's pastor. They likely never did hear about Ayers.
To pretend otherwise is just plain disingenuous.


Seriously???? Oh dude thou drinketh deeply of the kool-aid. NO ONE missed Ayers or Wright!
Those fuckers in the left wing press couldn't WAIT to dig as deep as they could (and we're talking the shallows, in actual fact, but it was more than enough to kick up the mud) when it came to mere claims that Mr. Cain was a philanderer.

And Clinton???? Kool-aid.

But they did no in depth reporting about the EXTENSIVE connections in the Obama background with far left wing/socialists and Marxists. The majority of their coverage was to pooh pooh the right wing alternative media coverage. You know it and so do the rest of us.

So Sorry oh subscriber of Drudge but the rest of us know better...

Newt didn't parade around discussing family values.

WHAT?!?!?! OMG dude! Just Google "Newt Family Values" for videos. While he was evicerating Clinton for the blowjob, he was giving speech after speech on why his supposed "family values" defined the difference between Clinton and a "good Christian" like himself! Of course he was banging some broad on te side at the time...


But even if he had, there's a difference between noting the social value in such things and the claim that one is as pure as the driven snow. I happen not to be a so-called "social conservative" in that department, but I don't think most of the stuff the social conservatives HAVE said has been along the lines of "we're holier than thou." That's just a crock of convenient bullshit from the lefties who don't care to discuss the impact of the huge change in social mores.

Bullsh*t. it's part of their political campaign. Newt is now selling the "I'm all better because God has forgiven me" bs as an excuse - or haven't you noticed?

Meanwhile, hearing about Weinergate is one thing. That fucking loudmouth made himself a centerpiece of liberal Democrat Parody sanctimony and then compounded his odious camera whoring dishonesty with an abiding fascination with his own penis. It is simply NOT on the same plain as the liberal Democrat propaganda machine actively seeking to alter the public perception about the GOP contenders.

Oh please. Try not to be SO obviously "party hypocritical". BOTH parties have their garbage - you just try to excuse the on The Right as if it's somehow better than the bs on The Left. It's not. BOTH sides are full of sh*t. The only diofference is that the LibDems don't try to say they're more vote-worthy because of sex or religion.

Try not to alter quotes, you dope.

And learn a little tiny bit about spell check.

You dolt.

And try not to be such a flaming hypocrite and so woefully and pitiably dishonest when you post. I did nothing to excuse the right. If you had the ability to be honest and to pay attention even a dork like YOU would have noted that I did not spare Newt. He has his baggage and his pronounced and undeniable lack of fidelity in marriage is quite obvious.

So don't waste your time accusing me of sins I have not committed, you dildo.

 

[IndependntLogic]

If one is a casual everyday working stiff American who tends to be too busy trying to keep body and soul together, pay the taxes, pay the bills, provide for the kids and their education, etc., etc., etc. to follow the daily fluff that passes for news, yes. Such people have probably never heard in the main stream media anything about God Damn America from the President's pastor. They likely never did hear about Ayers.
To pretend otherwise is just plain disingenuous.


Seriously???? Oh dude thou drinketh deeply of the kool-aid. NO ONE missed Ayers or Wright!
Those fuckers in the left wing press couldn't WAIT to dig as deep as they could (and we're talking the shallows, in actual fact, but it was more than enough to kick up the mud) when it came to mere claims that Mr. Cain was a philanderer.

And Clinton???? Kool-aid.

But they did no in depth reporting about the EXTENSIVE connections in the Obama background with far left wing/socialists and Marxists. The majority of their coverage was to pooh pooh the right wing alternative media coverage. You know it and so do the rest of us.

So Sorry oh subscriber of Drudge but the rest of us know better...

Newt didn't parade around discussing family values.

WHAT?!?!?! OMG dude! Just Google "Newt Family Values" for videos. While he was evicerating Clinton for the blowjob, he was giving speech after speech on why his supposed "family values" defined the difference between Clinton and a "good Christian" like himself! Of course he was banging some broad on te side at the time...


But even if he had, there's a difference between noting the social value in such things and the claim that one is as pure as the driven snow. I happen not to be a so-called "social conservative" in that department, but I don't think most of the stuff the social conservatives HAVE said has been along the lines of "we're holier than thou." That's just a crock of convenient bullshit from the lefties who don't care to discuss the impact of the huge change in social mores.

Bullsh*t. it's part of their political campaign. Newt is now selling the "I'm all better because God has forgiven me" bs as an excuse - or haven't you noticed?

Meanwhile, hearing about Weinergate is one thing. That fucking loudmouth made himself a centerpiece of liberal Democrat Parody sanctimony and then compounded his odious camera whoring dishonesty with an abiding fascination with his own penis. It is simply NOT on the same plain as the liberal Democrat propaganda machine actively seeking to alter the public perception about the GOP contenders.

Oh please. Try not to be SO obviously "party hypocritical". BOTH parties have their garbage - you just try to excuse the on The Right as if it's somehow better than the bs on The Left. It's not. BOTH sides are full of sh*t. The only diofference is that the LibDems don't try to say they're more vote-worthy because of sex or religion.

Try not to alter quotes, you dope.

And learn a little tiny bit about spell check.

You dolt.

And try not to be such a flaming hypocrite and so woefully and pitiably dishonest when you post. I did nothing to excuse the right. If you had the ability to be honest and to pay attention even a dork like YOU would have noted that I did not spare Newt. He has his baggage and his pronounced and undeniable lack of fidelity in marriage is quite obvious.

So don't waste your time accusing me of sins I have not committed, you dildo.

So in other words, you have ZERO to refute any of the points I made? As in the party of ZERO? Yeah okay. Weak. We knew that.
here's what you already did and what you need to keep doing:
Dodge (in this case, amke it about me and not the points I brought up. Spellcheck??? Really? That's the best you got? What a weak little puss!), change the subject (again you did this with me). Avoid the subject, bring up moral comparatives and eventually Cut & Run. ConsrevaRepubLitarian, right? Yeah. thought so. What a weak bltch.

No one heard of Ayers, Wright, Weinergate or Clinton? yeah, that MSM thing.... The GOP candidates not running on "Moral Superiority"? The rest of your points? Owned by me, Cut & run by you.
Weak. Very, very weak.

 

[Liability]

Oh please. Try not to be SO obviously "party hypocritical". BOTH parties have their garbage - you just try to excuse the on The Right as if it's somehow better than the bs on The Left. It's not. BOTH sides are full of sh*t. The only diofference is that the LibDems don't try to say they're more vote-worthy because of sex or religion.

Try not to alter quotes, you dope.

And learn a little tiny bit about spell check.

You dolt.

And try not to be such a flaming hypocrite and so woefully and pitiably dishonest when you post. I did nothing to excuse the right. If you had the ability to be honest and to pay attention even a dork like YOU would have noted that I did not spare Newt. He has his baggage and his pronounced and undeniable lack of fidelity in marriage is quite obvious.

So don't waste your time accusing me of sins I have not committed, you dildo.

So in other words, you have ZERO to refute any of the points I made? As in the party of ZERO? Yeah okay. Weak. We knew that.
here's what you already did and what you need to keep doing:
Dodge (in this case, amke it about me and not the points I brought up. Spellcheck??? Really? That's the best you got? What a weak little puss!), change the subject (again you did this with me). Avoid the subject, bring up moral comparatives and eventually Cut & Run. ConsrevaRepubLitarian, right? Yeah. thought so. What a weak bltch.

No one heard of Ayers, Wright, Weinergate or Clinton? yeah, that MSM thing.... The GOP candidates not running on "Moral Superiority"? The rest of your points? Owned by me, Cut & run by you.
Weak. Very, very weak.

You made no points and you altered my quote, stupid.

The question is not whether "no one heard of Ayers" et al. The question is whether or not the lame main stream left wing media propagandists who toil on behalf of the leftist Democrat Parody did their jobs in vetting the One.

And it's not really a question.

They didn't.

They didn't even try.