So Newt pulling ahead means the Tea Party nonsense is over?

[Annie]

Newt was one of the insiders of GOP that was quick to try and co-opt the tea party. Problem then and now, there is no 'tea party.' It's an adherence to basic political philosophy that small government is best. He's got the right talking points, but his past doesn't bode well in living it.

However, if it were between Obama and Gingrich, those that want smaller will vote for Newt, he's better than the alternative.

 

[CaughtInTheMid]

Newt was one of the insiders of GOP that was quick to try and co-opt the tea party. Problem then and now, there is no 'tea party.' It's an adherence to basic political philosophy that small government is best. He's got the right talking points, but his past doesn't bode well in living it.

However, if it were between Obama and Gingrich, those that want smaller will vote for Newt, he's better than the alternative.

i think that's been a huge part of our problem for going on 50 some years (at least with respect to our national debt). we've picked the lesser of two evils and we're 15T in debt. and whomever you (and i mean everyone here) vote for will increase our national debt even more (unless you vote third party or maybe paul). people won't even admit to themselves that they're voting FOR more debt. voters are in denial.

 

[Full-Auto]

if the tea party's objective was to reduce the size of government or reduce our national debt, then it's been dead since it started.

Let's see, it began while the democrats had control of both chambers and the white house, the Democrats have lost the house but still control the senate and the white house. SO exactly what power has the tea party ever had to meet it's objectives? Or do you not understand how politics work and just want to blow more smoke out of your ass?

do you believe, when republicans regain power, that the size of government will be reduced or the national debt will decrease?

Ummm No thanks for asking.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Stopping wasteful spending is nonsense?

It's a shame you're allowed a voice in the process.

 

[CaughtInTheMid]

Let's see, it began while the democrats had control of both chambers and the white house, the Democrats have lost the house but still control the senate and the white house. SO exactly what power has the tea party ever had to meet it's objectives? Or do you not understand how politics work and just want to blow more smoke out of your ass?

do you believe, when republicans regain power, that the size of government will be reduced or the national debt will decrease?

Ummm No thanks for asking.

is that not part of the tea party platform?

 

[Oddball]

Newt was one of the insiders of GOP that was quick to try and co-opt the tea party. Problem then and now, there is no 'tea party.' It's an adherence to basic political philosophy that small government is best. He's got the right talking points, but his past doesn't bode well in living it.

However, if it were between Obama and Gingrich, those that want smaller will vote for Newt, he's better than the alternative.

That's a choice between death by firing squad and death by lethal injection.

Of the remaining four, he's the biggest phony....Trying to portray himself as the outsider anti-establishment candidate, when he's an insider an establishmentarian as you can get and not currently hold office.

 

[rdean]

I think it may be possible that, in a weird way, Newt's win may spark a resurgence in the Tea Party. I just wrote this in another thread, but what the hell - GOP insiders are going to be knocking on the doors of Ryan, Daniels, Christie, Huckabee and Bush in sheer desperation now. And maybe someone like Ryan, a Tea Party darling, could say yes.

The GOP has to be in a tizzy right now. This field is a disaster, and they know it.

And let's not forget a brilliant Tea Party slogan:

.

When Right Wingers see that poster, they don't understand why it's being mocked.

These guys didn't understand English either. They paid an American to write their signs.

 

[Full-Auto]

do you believe, when republicans regain power, that the size of government will be reduced or the national debt will decrease?

Ummm No thanks for asking.

is that not part of the tea party platform?

Tea party yes, repubs......not yet.

 

[Annie]

Newt was one of the insiders of GOP that was quick to try and co-opt the tea party. Problem then and now, there is no 'tea party.' It's an adherence to basic political philosophy that small government is best. He's got the right talking points, but his past doesn't bode well in living it.

However, if it were between Obama and Gingrich, those that want smaller will vote for Newt, he's better than the alternative.

That's a choice between death by firing squad and death by lethal injection.

Of the remaining four, he's the biggest phony....Trying to portray himself as the outsider anti-establishment candidate, when he's an insider an establishmentarian as you can get and not currently hold office.

I understand what you're saying, I'm just not one to waste my vote. I don't believe in scorched earth policies in war or politics.

 

[JoeB131]

Marrianne making what up? He cheated on her, we all KNOW he cheated on her and she certainly knows that she cheated WITH him on Newt's first wife. All this stuff was brought up in her original interview with Esquire, many years ago. (not the open marriage part, but that's really just frosting on the already laden cake)

Poo pooing with a "they weren't that sick" isn't going to cut it either. This shit WILL NOT play well on a national stage, especially when you compare him with our President, who is still married to his first wife.

You really think that Michelle "I've never been proud of America until now" Obama is an asset, you are deluding yourself.

To the point. If this open marriage stuff was true, then why wasn't it in her divorce filing? It sounds like she's just making stuff up because he's moved on and she hasn't.

Boy oh boy, you have NOT been paying attention. That tide has turned and now even a majority of Americans support allowing legal recognition of our relationships. In California that number is even greater than on a national scale and yet all three of the GOP candidates for President want to amend the Constitution. Americans don't support that, why do they?

Do you know who won legal marriage for gays in New York? Republican donors. The Republicans have written off the black vote, the Latino vote, the gay vote and a lot of the female vote. Who they got left?

I think there is a big gulf between "domestic partnerships" and "Marriage" in the minds of people. You all could have had domestic partnerships years ago.

And New York is such a cesspool, I don't honestly care what they do.

 

[CaughtInTheMid]

Newt was one of the insiders of GOP that was quick to try and co-opt the tea party. Problem then and now, there is no 'tea party.' It's an adherence to basic political philosophy that small government is best. He's got the right talking points, but his past doesn't bode well in living it.

However, if it were between Obama and Gingrich, those that want smaller will vote for Newt, he's better than the alternative.

That's a choice between death by firing squad and death by lethal injection.

Of the remaining four, he's the biggest phony....Trying to portray himself as the outsider anti-establishment candidate, when he's an insider an establishmentarian as you can get and not currently hold office.

I understand what you're saying, I'm just not one to waste my vote. I don't believe in scorched earth policies in war or politics.

that is the type of thinking that the two parties rely on. it's what keep 'em in business (and adding to our debt). at some point the voters who put fiscally irresponsible people in power have to take personal responsibility. then again, i doubt they ever will.

 

[Oddball]

Newt was one of the insiders of GOP that was quick to try and co-opt the tea party. Problem then and now, there is no 'tea party.' It's an adherence to basic political philosophy that small government is best. He's got the right talking points, but his past doesn't bode well in living it.

However, if it were between Obama and Gingrich, those that want smaller will vote for Newt, he's better than the alternative.

That's a choice between death by firing squad and death by lethal injection.

Of the remaining four, he's the biggest phony....Trying to portray himself as the outsider anti-establishment candidate, when he's an insider an establishmentarian as you can get and not currently hold office.

I understand what you're saying, I'm just not one to waste my vote. I don't believe in scorched earth policies in war or politics.

Nobody's going to win the election by a margin of your one vote.....The only "wasted vote" is the one cast counter to your conscience.

 

[Annie]

That's a choice between death by firing squad and death by lethal injection.

Of the remaining four, he's the biggest phony....Trying to portray himself as the outsider anti-establishment candidate, when he's an insider an establishmentarian as you can get and not currently hold office.

I understand what you're saying, I'm just not one to waste my vote. I don't believe in scorched earth policies in war or politics.

that is the type of thinking that the two parties rely on. it's what keep 'em in business (and adding to our debt). at some point the voters who put fiscally irresponsible people in power have to take personal responsibility. then again, i doubt they ever will.

I understand that. On the other hand, your Paulist type of thinking is more likely than not what would lead to a real fail, quickly. One slow, one quick. I prefer slow, with time to reverse.

 

[CaughtInTheMid]

I understand what you're saying, I'm just not one to waste my vote. I don't believe in scorched earth policies in war or politics.

that is the type of thinking that the two parties rely on. it's what keep 'em in business (and adding to our debt). at some point the voters who put fiscally irresponsible people in power have to take personal responsibility. then again, i doubt they ever will.

I understand that. On the other hand, your Paulist type of thinking is more likely than not what would lead to a real fail, quickly. One slow, one quick. I prefer slow, with time to reverse.

just as long as you know that you're voting for more debt and are part of our fiscal problems.

 

[Oddball]

I understand what you're saying, I'm just not one to waste my vote. I don't believe in scorched earth policies in war or politics.

that is the type of thinking that the two parties rely on. it's what keep 'em in business (and adding to our debt). at some point the voters who put fiscally irresponsible people in power have to take personal responsibility. then again, i doubt they ever will.

I understand that. On the other hand, your Paulist type of thinking is more likely than not what would lead to a real fail, quickly. One slow, one quick. I prefer slow, with time to reverse.

Living within your means and not creating enemies around the world will lead to a quick fail?....On what planet?

 

[chikenwing]

Do you know who won legal marriage for gays in New York? Republican donors. The Republicans have written off the black vote, the Latino vote, the gay vote and a lot of the female vote. Who they got left?

They have the right!

No, they have the far right...and the 1% who $upport them.

If thats the case ,then how did we get the results in the last mid terms??Offhanded dismissal of relevance doesn't make it so. Lots can happen,its certainly been busy so far,before we get to Nov.

 

[Annie]

that is the type of thinking that the two parties rely on. it's what keep 'em in business (and adding to our debt). at some point the voters who put fiscally irresponsible people in power have to take personal responsibility. then again, i doubt they ever will.

I understand that. On the other hand, your Paulist type of thinking is more likely than not what would lead to a real fail, quickly. One slow, one quick. I prefer slow, with time to reverse.

Living within your means and not creating enemies around the world will lead to a quick fail?....On what planet?

Earth. The alternative presented isn't what you are projecting and you know it.

 

[Oddball]

I understand that. On the other hand, your Paulist type of thinking is more likely than not what would lead to a real fail, quickly. One slow, one quick. I prefer slow, with time to reverse.

Living within your means and not creating enemies around the world will lead to a quick fail?....On what planet?

Earth. The alternative presented isn't what you are projecting and you know it.

What in blue blazes are you talking about?

 

[California Girl]

that is the type of thinking that the two parties rely on. it's what keep 'em in business (and adding to our debt). at some point the voters who put fiscally irresponsible people in power have to take personal responsibility. then again, i doubt they ever will.

I understand that. On the other hand, your Paulist type of thinking is more likely than not what would lead to a real fail, quickly. One slow, one quick. I prefer slow, with time to reverse.

Living within your means and not creating enemies around the world will lead to a quick fail?....On what planet?

On planet earth. The real world, not the one that Paul inhabits. He's isolationist.... and last time we tried that, the whole world paid a very high price.

 

[Annie]

Living within your means and not creating enemies around the world will lead to a quick fail?....On what planet?

Earth. The alternative presented isn't what you are projecting and you know it.

What in blue blazes are you talking about?

Paul isn't for living within our means, his pork shows that. What his 'principles' are for are stuck in the 19th Century, favoring white rule. That's not progress.