By The Right Scoop


Rush pretty much lays the blame on Romney for all these scorched-earth ad campaigns now, but even so he says that Newt using the language of the left in beating up Romney over his company Bain Capital makes him uncomfortable because it’s exactly what the left will do should Romney become the nominee:

About 

Blogger extraordinaire since 2009 and the owner and Chief Blogging Officer of the most wonderful and super fantastic blog in the known and unknown universe: The Right Scoop


Comment Policy: Please read our new comment policy before making a comment. In short, please be respectful of others and do not engage in personal attacks. Otherwise we will revoke your comment privileges.


NOTE: If the comments don't load properly or they are difficult to read because they are on the blue background, please use the button below to RELOAD DISQUS.

  • http://punditpawn.wordpress.com PunditPawn

    It should have happened way before he had these huge leads. Maybe when Michele Botchmann was over-the-top beating Perry in his first debate about Gardasil, which had a parental opt-out.

    • Anonymous

      I was a big Bachmann supporter until that debate. Over the top describes it perfectly.

    • Anonymous

      Perry had no business using his authority to mandate ANY medication for children. That is up to the parents…NOT the government. It did, however, shine a bright light on Perry’s Big Government mentality!

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_Z6TLVYNMCWPDAJKYSSHZNT7PHY Lance

        Good point. The government shouldn’t mandate vaccination against childhood contagious diseases. We’d all be much better off because in that case we’d be in Rick Santorum’s Heaven.

        • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_WQYJLH37DFYFG2XIXZBAVRFJSA Jason

          If the vaccines work so great, why would you even worry about your child catching a disease that he/she is vaccinated against? Half of the vaccines today are a scam. Especially the flu shot! Perry was out to profit just like every other career politician.

          • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_DZJEUYV53HZX3LF7NLFLQWW5EI JohnB

            Could you cite the study done showing flu shots are a “scam”?

            • Anonymous

              Would that be a “scientific study”? Because those are, oh, so dependable and unbiased….. It’s called common sense to anyone doing their homework.

              • http://www.facebook.com/people/Peter-L-Sutphen/866040556 Peter L. Sutphen

                “Common sense” is anecdotal experience which is not scientific.

                • Anonymous

                  Science usually calls ‘common sense’ ‘observation’. Science is based on ‘common sense’.

                  ‘Science’ has enshrined itself in our minds, and it is very interesting to me to see people touting science while discounting logic. Science is a child of philosophy and logic, not the progenitor, and it is not inherently superior. “Science” limits itself in ways that logic and philosophy do not. Such limits, like ‘quantifiable evidence’ make science useful as a tool in ways and applications where other traditional logical studies fail miserably, however, science IS still limited by the same fallacies and structures that also limit it’s parents: logic, philosophy. Yes, science is a sub-set of philosophy, and not the other way around.

                  Beware of ‘science’ that is self-supporting, (circular logic), is a self-fulfilling prophecy, or is simply untestable. All logical fallacies are present in science, (some even have names or phrases, ‘correlation is not causation’) because scientists now no longer study logical fallacies as a rule of thumb and many fall prey to those traps in their quest for prestige and fame. (Example – Association fallacy: I paid good money for this shot, and the government is making sure bad things don’t get sold to us, so the shot must work, never mind the cough and rash I now have.)

                  If you want to be sickened and surprised, ask an engineer how much of our world and their work is based on ‘assumptions’. Does that sound like ‘quantifiable’ science to you? Yet it ‘works’. We are still guessing and watching our world, and honestly have no clue what is really happening.

                • http://www.facebook.com/people/Cka-Redstate-America/100003211888505 Cka Redstate America

                  We do have a clue about what is really happening, but not as much as some people think.

                  But, yes, we do still watch and try to gather information to make educated guesses, in many cases.

                  You’re spot-on about the assumptions made in technology. But if you dig deeper into everything — government economic forecasts and stance on so-called catastrophic anthropogenic climate change, for example — you see how politicized scientists and engineers have extrapolated spurious conclusions from some very weakly grounded data.

                  What’s dangerous in that is that the once-mainstream news media has so few so-called journalists, including those who even know how to spell science or technology, that understand that conclusions have caveats attached to them.

                  Thus, they do not report them — nor does a 10-second sound bite permit — and the conclusion gains legs. And after a few iterations of presenting those conclusions, the conclusions become so detached from those caveats that the conclusions become scientific/technological gospel that politicians and policy makers preach and employ.

                  The so-called “green movement” is one prime example where non-reporting of the fine print has created an essentially non-productive, government — taxpayer — scam.

                  As for asking an engineer about the assumptions made in his or her work, speaking from 30+ years experience, I have continually been surprised and down right outraged about some of the assumptions I have seen in environmental science, technology and policy.

                  That outrage comes from knowing how some pointy-headed bureaucrat in EPA or even state regulatory agencies manipulate data without little, if any, attention paid to what data represent or the credibility of such data. Thus, the Obama’s EPA’s position on so-called catastrophic manmade global warming.

                  By the way, while you do need common sense and the ability to think outside the proverbial box in science and engineering, just as you need both attributes in any other endeavor, scientists and engineers need a healthy dose of skepticism and an even larger dose of professional ethics and commitment to finding the truth.

                  Again, an example of the lack of common sense, professional ethics and commitment to finding the truth — not manipulating data to give a predetermined result — is the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s assessments and the Obama EPA’s zealous willingness to parrot things they never truth tested.

                • Anonymous

                  Point. Good post.

                  My point was simply that ‘common sense’ IS science and that science is far from being perfect or concrete.

                • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_V43JAPWQJGD2NY3LKG43OSC7W4 Lee

                  Why dose Newt not want to release his contract details with Freddy Mac.

              • Anonymous

                Doing your homework looking up what? Scientific studies? You’re out of your mind if you don’t have your kids get the dTap, pertussis, tetanus, polio, smallpox, AND influenza vaccinations at their scheduled dates. Are you really going to gamble and not get them vaccinated because of your “common sense?”

                • Anonymous

                  I should add that I believe the government should most definitely NOT mandate any vaccination/medication for private citizens unless that citizen is getting some kind of subsidy or government employment.

                • Anonymous

                  If you don’t like vaccinations, you can opt out.

                  See page 3 of the letter to parents for instructions on how to get an exemption.
                  http://www.dshs.state.tx.us/immunize/docs/school/Parent_ltr_K-12_imm_requirements.pdf

                • Anonymous

                  I use this as I have explained in other posts, due to adverse reactions to shots.

                  I liked the stance against ‘opt-out’ in favor of ‘opt-in’. I literally have had to beat back nurses, sign mountains of paperwork, and explain my families entire medical history to not only opt-out of shots, but to get it to the point where I could take my new baby out of the hospital, and the nurses still looked like they were going to call DHFS on me for negligence.

                  No parent should go through that. The Government doesn’t know what is best for everyone: they create statistical models and make everyone fit their mold.

                  Don’t forget that vaccines DO have a fatality rate. Ask about them. You might be shocked that you’re shocked that shoving needles and synthesized fluids into newborns might result in some deaths. It is reality, and it does happen. You roll the dice living, breathing, and getting out of bed every day, but the government isn’t rolling dice, they know, statistically, that their policies will result in a good number of deaths. They just make laws for the ‘greater good’, the majority.

                  Opt-in, not opt-out.

                • Anonymous

                  As you can see, in Texas, it’s not difficult to opt out.

                • Anonymous

                  Time to get Perry to opt-out of the race … he has made a fool of himself.

                • Anonymous

                  I’ve learned from this thread that if you have a choice, then it’s mandatory. It’s mandatory for Perry to stay in.

                • Anonymous

                  Yes its much better to allow your child to contract polio or some other debilitating disease than take that miniscule chance that they might have an adverse reaction. I almost look forward to the polio outbreak that irresponsible people like you are are going to bring forth as it will eliminate all of you in one fell swoop. And no im not left but this right here is one thing i DO believe in because im painfully aware of how bad polio was. My dads friend had polio and was in a brace and used a cane his entire life because of it. My grandparents told me how bad it was before the innoculations and how awful it was to watch people be crippled and/or die from it. But YOU..YOU are smarter than all those useless doctors and scientists. YOU know better than them because they are just out to put god knows what in your body for no other reason than to say they can eh? Cause im sure they have nothing better to do than give people unnecessary shots.

                • Anonymous

                  You ARE thick-headed. My family has a history of bad reactions to vaccines, as I stated. Doctors themselves advise you to NOT get them if you have adverse reactions. Why? They don’t want my children to die any more than I do.

                  You do know that scientific medical application is based on statistics, right? A general ‘mold’? Talk to the doctors you venerate, they’ll tell you the same thing. BTW, I never said anything about ‘doctors’ or that the vaccines didn’t do any good at all. You’ve setup a straw man and burned it.

                  Thanks for wishing the worst for my family and my children, and everyone who doesn’t fit the statistical bell curve, in fact. You’re a peach, abounding in peace and love. Wow. Is it really irresponsible to consider your family medical history before getting treatment for your children?

                  Vaccines kill around 1 to 5 in every 100-250K, with an additional larger number of other effects differing on the vaccine. That’s known, read the paperwork and warnings the doctor’s offices carry on the vaccines. My kids, due to our adverse reactions on both my wife and my side, have a much, much higher chance of being harmed than someone who doesn’t have adverse reactions. I chose not to take that gamble.

                  Given that stat, a general requirement to be immunized with just one immunization will mean at least the deaths of 1,224 children. (1:250K for 312Mill. – not counting illegals) And that’s ONE vaccine. I’m sure their parents feel ‘responsible’.

                  God bless you, and have a wonderful day. I honestly mean that.

                • Anonymous

                  Actually, from reading the “Opt-out”, it looks like it is still mandatory for them to provide information. This information includes: a written note from a DOCTOR explaining that it is not good for a person’s health or reasons of conscience on the part of the parent; reasons of conscience do NOT include examples such as having incomplete information or other items that could be considered “reasons” of conscience but have been defined by the state as extra-reasonable to conscience. Not only that, but the schools, etc. are supposed to have a list of the students who opted out and why in case the school comes down with an entire epidemic of… HPV.

                  So you understand, the AMISH have a right to opt-out; many do not receive even Polio vaccinations and are not required by the state when they opt-out to provide personal medical information as the reasoning behind the opt-out. They are not required to provide any information about themselves, whatsoever, when they do not get the “required” vaccinations. That is a true opt-out.

                  However, here, it looks like they are still mandated to make an option, and they are mandated to provide proof of action for that option. If you opt-out, you still have to provide information about your children, even if it is a conscience objection to do so.

                  As a woman who was sexually active as a teenager, my morality didn’t go as far as I had promised myself as a little girl (to wait until marriage). However, I DID make sure to choose my partners as best as I could given the judgement of a teenager, was absolutely not promiscuous (I was active with long-term- and I do mean long-term- boyfriends only) and protected myself. It’s amazing that now I am married and have had normal screens since I became active. That means no transmission of infection whatsoever, ever. Yet at my last appt. it was highly recommended, and I felt pressured, that I should have the HPV Vaccine because “the infection may not have been caught”. Way to play into a person’s fears!!! I responded that I have a medical condition that has required blood testing every month and sometimes multiple times and month and if I had HPV it would have been caught. And if it was caught, I would be more concerned about the discussion I was going to have with my husband than getting a vaccine for something I ALREADY HAVE. That quieted the fear-mongering down. I’ve also been dealing with “those that know best” when it comes to birth control and the ridiculous, body-altering, health-detioriating side effects I have been blessed with. They wanted to put me on Lupron, when I was 23; Lupron is NOT birth control in the normal sense as in it does not make your body feel it is pregnant: it makes your body go menopausal. They were trying to make me menopausal at 23! What was that to prevent?

                  An opt-out is still mandatory action, there is no argument around this.

                • Anonymous

                  You are misreading the instructions. It clearly says in BOLD a parent/guardian signature is required on an exemption form if opting out based on conscience protection.

                  You may say that means they are still required to provide information. Well, they are required to provide information no matter the case. You have to either provide a) proof of vaccinations or b) an exemption form. As is the case in all states, your kid isn’t getting into school without the right paperwork. It comes with the turf.

                • Anonymous

                  Good luck being admitted to a university

                • bieler

                  I have never had a flu shot. Notice how my typing indicates both my lack of death and your exceeding hypochondria-style gullibility.

                • Anonymous

                  Just be careful of that oncoming Bus when you’re crossing the street!

                • Anonymous

                  People have lived with socialism for too long and are not understanding the way Capitalism is supposed to work. I wouldn’t like to see a company looted to achieve a big paycheck, but if you are not productive, things have to change or be closed down. The other candidates made a big mistake. I am a big supporter of Gingrich, but I think he needs to rethink his class warfare comments and offer some sort or a retraction.

                • Anonymous

                  Me too and you made me laugh. But perhaps the elderly would benefit from a flu shot as so man die from pneumonia after contracting the flu.

              • George Shalhoub

                BSabounds:

                You sir have no idea what you’re talking about.

            • Anonymous

              You’re dealing with an idiot here. Save your energy. Perhaps you can catch him when he takes of his Tin Foil Hat.

            • Steve Andrews

              I doubt they’re a scam but the last number that I heard was that 59% of those innoculated actually benefited from the shot. Some’s better’n none and it shouldn’t be mandatory.

            • Anonymous

              “Yet a new study published Oct. 6 in the Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine suggests otherwise — that the flu shot in children doesn’t necessarily protect them from illness. Led by Dr. Peter Szilagyi, researchers at University of Rochester studied 414 children aged 5 and younger, who came down with the flu during the 2003-2004 or 2004-2005 flu seasons. These children were compared with over 5,000 controls who did not have influenza during the same seasons. Turns out that flu shots seemed not to make much difference: Kids who got immunized did not get the flu at lower rates than unvaccinated kids. In fact, the immunized youngsters were just as likely to be hospitalized or to visit the doctor as kids who never received the vaccine.”

              http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1847794,00.html

              “The 44 per cent effectiveness figure comes from a CDC study whose findings are published in this week’s issue of the federal agency’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR), dated 17th April 2008.

              The 44 per cent figure is the overall vaccine effectiveness for influenza type A (H3N2), and influenza type B. Type A H3N2 constitutes the majority of the strains circulating so far this year. ”

              http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/104491.php

              So, does scholarly journals, the CDC, and common sense work as ‘studies’ for you? I don’t get immunized, and neither do my children, because my family has a strong history of bad reactions to shots. Personally I have had several. I don’t want my kid to become the 1 or 2 in 200K statistic who dies from the shot. EVERY time I get a shot, I get quite ill. Other significant side effects are evident on my wife’s side as well. In my position, you would have to be insane to get immunized.

              Babies don’t start to develop an immune system until 6 months, until which time they rely on the antibodies produced by the mother and delivered through nursing. Why in the world, even from a medical/scientific point of view, would you want to give a baby an immunization, in fact, several, just moments after birth, if they don’t even have an immune system developing for another 6 months?

              The entire drug industry is dirty, and simple stats, observation, and honest science exposes it.

            • Richard Rodenhiser

              The majority of vaccines are not tested properly – no double-blind studies. Some over-the-counter meds adhere to better testing methodologies.

            • http://www.facebook.com/wendy.selvig Wendy Daves Selvig

              http://www.naturalnews.com/033816_swine_flu_vaccines_neurological_disorders.html

              Here’s one for starters. How many more would you like?

            • Anonymous

              Ask any health professional if the flu shot will keep you from getting the flu. The answer is no. It will protect from the few types that are covered by that version of the vaccine. They are a scam designed to ensure the ready flow of money from the government to vaccine creators in an attempt to protect a small portion of the populace from a small portion of the risks.

              While the money ensures these industries continue to exist and develop vaccines, they also promote inefficiency since they are rewarded for not finding a cure but in continuing the flow of money and process.

            • Anonymous

              How about this, every year the military forces me to get a flu shot in one form or another, and every year I get sick anyway. Do I catch full-blown influenza and lie near death for three weeks? No. Did I ever have that problem the 20+ years prior to the advent of the flu vaccine? no

              Another example of business/corporate collusion with government to capture a hostage consumer base.

          • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_HUAXCKUXTPLQJMQVGNGL2L7CJ4 Frank B

            If you lived through the era when polio was a common disease you would shut up before you made the ridiculous statement that “half of the vaccines today are a scam.”

            • Anonymous

              It is a ridiculous statement. I think any rational person believes that the “classic” vaccines; MMR, polio, smallpox, etc, are in place and institutionalized for good reason.

              The flu shot on the other hand, like so many “inventions” of this and the prior generation, is a total sham.

          • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_ZQ3M6TCWWUCT3JSRZD46SGFOBY Larry

            And you have proof of his profit motivate?

            Leaders have to make the best call they can with the information they have available. Until we become all knowing or have a functional crystal ball there will be decision that we ALL may not agree with and only time will tell if the decision was the correct one or not.

        • http://twitter.com/elvisofdallas Elvis Dallas

          yeah, it makes sense to do a $600 vaccine for 9 year olds to protect against a virus that is only transmitted sexually and that long term effectiveness is completely unknown.

          LuLz – it should be noted that this sweetheart deal was provided after the manufacturer lost big on that vioxx judgment in texas…

          • Fred Fredsky

            Why would you not want to prevent sexually transmitted diseases? Just curious.

            • Anonymous

              Because vacines do NOT protect 100% of the people that get them and they DO result in injury to some. I happen to be a person who is a GBS survivor. 16 years ago I fell on the floor and stopped breathing. Fortunatly I was in the doctor’s office and he gave me mouth to mouth. 10 days in ICU, 5 bloodsucker/filter treatments, 3 months off work, 3 months 1/2 time, then back to work at 90%. I have pain 24/7 for the last 16 years and I’m one of the lucky ones. Main cause of GBS is the flu shot.

          • Anonymous

            Page 3 of the letter to parents says states you can get an exemption and how.
            http://www.dshs.state.tx.us/immunize/docs/school/Parent_ltr_K-12_imm_requirements.pdf

        • Anonymous

          Gardasil is for a sexually transmitted disease, it’s not “contagious” there’s a big difference

        • Anonymous

          This wasn’t the “government” mandating a vaccine…it was the Governor who was in bed with the company MAKING the vaccine who had been lobbying Perry and our legislature for four years trying to get THEM to mandate it at the TAXPAYER’s expense…that would have been a cool 50-60 million a YEAR to MERCK. Now this lobbyist is head of one of Perry’s SUPERPACS…so maybe if he becomes prez he can try to mandate meds for the entire nation…ready to stand in line for YOURS?

      • Anonymous

        Government mandates several vaccines because diseases are communicable, and this is the way it has been long before Perry.

        How is something mandatory when you have a choice to not participate?

        • Anonymous

          Correction: he didn’t retreat. He only says he should have gone through the legislature instead of executive ordering.

          • Anonymous

            Did he end up going through the legislature? No, so so much for the ogre Perry trying to ram mandates down the citizens’ throats.

            If we can’t agree on “retreat,” let’s at least say he retracted the order.

            • Anonymous

              My point is that he still stands by having government mandate Gardisil. That’s what many people here are complaining about.

              His “listening and retreating” was not on that issue at all, only the means he used to execute on it. (I already offered his explanation of why he had government mandate it in the first place.)

              • Anonymous

                Maybe so, but the issue is dead in Texas, and Perry has not obstructed resistance to the order nor further pursued the issue. I think that says something.

                • Anonymous

                  Defending Perry on his willingness to back down on something he still defends, because the people wouldn’t stand for it, isn’t redeeming on Perry’s character.

                  I demand my elected leaders listen to the people, that’s not something I celebrate, it is a base qualification. Defending his position only shows that he has not ‘retreated’ at all, only that it hasn’t happened is due to the fact that it is not politically feasible in TX. He rips Romney, (I am NOT defending Romney btw), for ‘RomneyCare’ and liberal policies and practices in Mass., when Perry would have had ‘GuardaPerry’ if he had been in a more liberal state. (Perrysil? Guardasilly?)

                  I’d love to have him state, full out, that not only was the way he implemented it wrong, but the idea that the Government can implement policies for meds and products which have unknown long-term effects is also completely wrong.

                • Anonymous

                  I think he defends his intention, where his heart was. He rebukes the way he went about it.

                  “When a voter in New Hampshire confronted Perry on the Gardasil issue, here’s what he said, “I signed an executive order that allowed for an opt-out, but the fact of the matter is I didn’t do my research well enough to understand that we needed to have a substantial conversation with our citizenry,” he said. “I hate cancer. Let me tell you, as a son who has a mother and father who are both cancer survivors.”

                  Perry said he’d invested government resources in cancer cures, adding, “I hate cancer. And this HPV, we were seeing young ladies die at the early age. What we should have done was a program that frankly should have allowed them to opt in, or some type of program like that, but here’s what I learned — when you get too far out in front of the parade they will let you know. And that’s exactly what our legislature did.””
                  http://peskytruth.wordpress.com/2011/07/19/rick-perrys-negatives/

                  He got too out in front. Heard the voice of the people and withdrew. Sounds good.

                  It’s funny. We are arguing about bad policy which was never implemented. Yet, several of the GOP candidates have actually implemented bad policy and get a pass!

                • Anonymous

                  I do not give a pass to anyone for bad policy and I have no darling in this race; I find them all with serious problems and I am not decided who to vote for in the least. Claiming that one is better because they bungled a bad policy instead of succeeded in getting bad policy through isn’t an endorsement. I still don’t see how this is vindicating in any way.

                • Anonymous

                  Giving parents a choice whether to receive a vaccination or not sounds like good policy to me. Including it in the standard set of vaccinations so parents have to pay only the co-pay seems pretty clever.

                • Anonymous

                  The ONLY reason the policy wasn’t implemented is that Perry got SLAPPED DOWN by our legislature. His BEST JUDGEMENT took him in the wrong direction…over and over and over. Just IMAGINE what he would do with EXECUTIVE ORDERS!!! He would make Obama look like a PIKER in comparison.

        • Anonymous

          Perry MANDATED the meds and parents had to DISCOVER their “opt out” right after the fact. Perry was financially LINKED to the Pharm company which would make hundreds of millions off Texas school children shots….you don’t have a problem with THAT? The GOVERNOR of Texas does NOT have the right to establish medication policies for Texas citizens…period! He got what he deserved on this boondoggle…just like his land-grabbing Trans Texas Corridor! He is a BIG GOVERNMENT DEMOCRAT who switched parties to become Lt Gov of Texas…period!

          • Anonymous

            How is it they would need to discover the opt out when it was plastered all over the news when the gardasil controversy was raised? In addition, parents are given a vaccine list before the school years begins with any additional notes.

            Perry knew someone associated with the pharma company. Correlation does not mean causation. Perry was not going to receive kick backs on this order. In addition, Merk donated a whopping $6,000 for Perry’s entire political career up till 2006. You really believe Perry was bought for $6k? He receives millions in campaigns.

            Isn’t it possible Perry was just following the advice of those in the medical field, to use an FDA approved, CDC-recommend drug to prevent HPV?

            Without evidence of a crime, it is wrong to assume there is something nefarious going on.

            The reason the governor issued an executive order on this is, as teri_b correctly pointed out, because insurance companies would cover the cost less co-pay. The opt out remained for those objected.

            You are incorrect. The Texas governor has the right to order required vaccinations for those entering public schools. The debate is whether it’s right.

            TTAC was a bold, very forward thinking plan to deal with the rapidly rising transportation needs. If you actually live in Texas, you would have an idea. If you do, travel I-35 between Dallas and Austin. The problem is the plan was very large and required lots of land usage. It was too big and Perry listened and backed off.

            Let’s assume your two criticisms are valid on face value. 11 years and 3 elections, and that’s your “proof” he’s a big government democrat? He has issued numerous orders, signed hundreds (thousands?) of pieces of legislation, and worked several budgets. Your list is tame compared to other candidates.

            • Anonymous

              I do live in Texas and was part of the contingent of landowners who were NOT willing to have our land stolen for a SIXTEEN LANE TOLLWAY fro Mexico to Oklahoma. It was coming right through my area. He tried to STEAL over 500,000 acres of land to GIVE to a company in Spain to build this boondoggle which would have cost the taxpayers billion of dollars…don’t lecture me on something you have no personal experience with…it wasn’t YOUR land. He backed off the TTC because the state was in an uproar and, once again, the legislature had to back him down. They even went as far as to FORBID him or any of his agents from discussing the TTC in the legislative off year….Now go back to licking stamps for Perry!

              • Anonymous

                The fact is he commissioned a plan to deal with Texas’ growing pains. He put the plan forward for discussion. No one’s land was stolen. No pavement laid. He heard the arguments for and against and backed off. This is a good thing!

                People can read a summary of the real story here…
                http://peskytruth.wordpress.com/2011/07/19/rick-perrys-negatives/

                • Anonymous

                  You are a liar sir…he ONLY “backed off” when the legislature backed him off and forced him to STOP PLANNING this boondogle. If a RAPIST is thwarted before he completes his malevolent act he STILL INTENDED to RAPE. Perry gets ZERO credit for the Trans Texas Corridor NOT going through…and YOU know it…just like he gets ZERO CREDIT for the Gardisil boondoggle being thwarted by our legislature.

                  You can keep trying to put lipstick on this pig but NO ONE is going to take it to the dance!

        • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_TUDGMH234XEKN4SAIYGSXVO6DM RT

          When you’re Michelle Bachman, the illiterate hysteric.

      • Anonymous

        Exactly, all Perry was trying to do was to socialize the sexual behavior of the homosexual/bisexual population to children. If you’re not a skank, it is extremely unlikely that one would contract a virus transmitted only through sexual contact.

        • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_TUDGMH234XEKN4SAIYGSXVO6DM RT

          Oh, and only straight, married people are safe? Ask all the cheating spouses–in the GOP, about that?

          • Anonymous

            A bit cynical, aren’t we?

            The statement was clear and did not indict any certain political party or group. You’re projecting.

        • Anonymous

          You do know you can get HPV outside intercourse?

          While the partner may think they do not have HPV, the partner’s ex-partner may have had it.

        • Fred Fredsky

          That is Bachmanesquely stupid. You won’t contract a sexually transmitted virus only if you are not sexually active. Ok, enjoy your life counting seashells on the seashore. But my question is this: What does TRANSMITTED mean in sexually transmitted? It means that it can be contracted via sex. So you’re saying: a sexually transmitted virus is unlikely to be transmitted.

          • Anonymous

            your confusing use of double negative makes me wonder if I understood your point or not. I assume that you are making fun of the idea that you will not get a STD if abstinent – with the statement that you will be lonely all your life.

            I will never understand when people instantly dismiss the viability of abstinence and fidelity. The poster did not say it was impossible to get an STD, just that it was extremely unlikely unless you or your partner had multiple partners.

            Guys, that’s common sense. Instead of rushing to protect our children from the consequences, the symptoms of the problems, why don’t we deal with the problems? The solution to teenage pregnancies and STD’s is not more condoms, birth control pills, and injections… it is morality. You want to effectively end AIDS and other STD’s in one full generation? Simple answer, but no one will ever hear it: Just have one partner.

            Social life is not defined by sexual activity, and if it is for you, you need new friends. I actually enjoy counting seashells with my wife, abstinence before marriage for both of us, and complete fidelity. Guess what? We still had plenty of fun and friends before marriage, and still have many of those friends.

      • Anonymous

        Still on the fence about Perry, but I did hear that his intent was to get a vaccine out there against cervical cancer and have the government provide it for free to girls. The only way to do that was to make it a mandatory vaccine in the school system.

        Can’t offer a defense of him here, but I think it had to do with his heart-strings being pulled because of cancer in his own family. At least, that’s what he’s said. He still says so and only regrets the end-run around the legislature that he used.

        (My real gripe with him is saying you’re heartless for not giving a college education to illegal immigrants.)

        • Anonymous

          I don’t think Texas pays for vaccines, except maybe to offer assistance to low income. Can’t say for sure.

          Texas does require vaccinations for children attending schools. Here’s the latest list with notes stating what is required and optional. Gardasil would have appeared on the list.
          http://www.dshs.state.tx.us/immunize/docs/school/Parent_ltr_K-12_imm_requirements.pdf

          • Anonymous

            I think if a vaccine is required, insurance companies will cover it. Otherwise, it is on your dime. I may not have this right, but I do know there was a financial advantage to having it mandated.

            • Anonymous

              Yeah, it was something like that. Close enough.

              Between that and the issue on tuition for illegals, my concern is that he’ll do things that no one will like, but “his heart will be in the right place.” Cold comfort, that.

              [In the interest of full disclosure: I’m not against Perry. These 2 issues have made me turn from him to look at other candidates. He’s on my list of people I’d be willing to vote for, but that’s not enthusiastic support.]

        • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_TUDGMH234XEKN4SAIYGSXVO6DM RT

          Get off the fence. I’m a Texan and here we know he has a history of corrupt practices when it comes to governance. (He never met a donor who didn’t get a spot on a board somewhere–once the check cleared of course.) Coupled with being a drooling ass, he really shouldn’t be on your short list.

      • Anonymous

        I think this topic is onerous. I don’t see how it is a mandate for children to receive a vaccine if there is an opt out provision. I am a staunch believer in parental rights and would be the first to call foul over government mandates that undermine parental authority. But, there was an opt out provision, and in fact, the legislature voted against the idea. Governor Perry respected their decision. He could have over ruled with a veto. This hardly reflects a big government mentality.

        For those who doubt Governor Perry’s commitment to limited government I suggest they read his book “Fed Up”. He wrote the book before he decided to enter the race for the presidency and it is clear that he is as conservative as we are. I think the establishment wants to keep us divided to split the vote. Governor Perry is the authentic conservative and I believe he would be a wonderful president. Not since Ronald Reagan have I encountered a candidate with such potential for greatness as I see in Governor Perry.

        • Anonymous

          “Mike Toomey was Rick Perry’s chief of staff from November 2002 to September 2004. Upon leaving this position, Mr Toomey became a partner for the Texas Lobby Group. He was Merck’s sole lobbyist in Texas and one of his chief functions was to achieve a state mandate for Merck vaccines. Between 2005 and 2010, Merck paid Toomey between $260,000 and $535,000 and is now the head of his Super Pac for his 2012 Presidential campaign.”

          NOW you know why Rick Perry was SO CONCERNED about our school children’s health! At 50-60 million bucks a year going to Merck Perry couldcount on a HUGE war chest….what a GREAT GUY!!

          • Anonymous

            Your case would have merit with documentation. If the function of the lobbyist was a state mandate for Merk’s vaccines it appears to have failed. If that was the only criteria then it strikes me as ironic that the same man heads the Super Pac. Accusations that are subjective should not be accepted as fact. We all have our opinions. In fairness to you, there could be connections since Texas law isn’t overly strict on this sort of activity. But, Governor Perry did not impose a mandate, there was an opt out and then he withdrew the idea entirely. The vaccine by goverment decree was never administered to any girl in Texas. So, according to your theory Merck didn’t get any pay back at all. I really don’t think that sounds too bad for Governor Perry.

            The vaccine in question is for the prevention of cervical cancer. Some may recall the story of the young woman who died from the disease. Governor Perry was at her bedside when she was dying. Her family released a number of pictures of their daughter with Governor Perry. The young woman hoped that the vaccine would save other girls from this terrible disease. We can discuss the topic of vaccines which is a controversial subject but there are those who believe they are life saving. This young woman’s family spoke of Governor Perry’s kindness and compassion. The headline to the story spoke of Governor Perry’s genuine concern for a constituent. So, you may not care for Governor Perry but there are many who believe in him. You can read the many testimonies and endorsements from military heroes who consider him a great man.

            • Anonymous

              The fact he got CAUGHT and his scam went PUBLIC and the legislature PUSHED BACK is certainly no CREDIT to Gov Perry. Had he been successful ALL the schoolgirls of age in Texas whose parents did NOT opt out would have created a windfall profit for MERCK. If you are incapable of drawing a line from point A to point B I guess I am wasting my time. It WAS a mandate in that the girls had NO CHOICE unless their parents opted out. THAT is a mandate as far as the potential VICTIMS of Perry’s little scheme is concerned.

              • Anonymous

                Perry’s public executive order was caught? That’s funny.

                “It WAS a mandate in that the girls had NO CHOICE unless their parents opted out.”

                A mandate unless they opt out. LOL What part of OPTional do you not understand?

                • Anonymous

                  Are you just totally stupid or having a bad brain day? It was MANDATORY for the little girls whose parents didn’t opt our or KNOW they could opt out. THEY were the ones who would be forced to take the drug by the state…get it? THEY couldn’t OPT OUT! He did an end run around the legislature because he knew they would not approve this MANDATE…

                  BTW have you noticed the 500,000 union members who have been able to OPT OUT of Obama’s Healthcare program that is MANDATORY for ALL AMERICANS????

                  Wake up before you post this drivel.

                • Anonymous

                  What did page 3 of the letter to parents from the Texas government say about exemptions?

                • Anonymous

                  You are a Perry troll and fooling no one. He got CAUGHT doing a large for his buddies at MERCK and the legislature stepped on his neck to save the taxpayers just like they had to do with the Trans Texas Corridor.

                  He MANDATED these kids be force fed MERCK’s drug unless their parents intervened…MERCK would have made 50-60 MILLION DOLLARS from the Texas Taxpayers each year if Perry had his way.

                  This is NO DIFFERENT than Obama’s Healthcare MANDATE…he gave WAIVERS TOO!

                • Anonymous

                  The Texas government has mandated several vaccines. You’ve seen the doc. It’s not a Perry thing. And if you don’t like, opt out. People are more intelligent than you think they are.

                  Oh yea, Perry bought with $6,000. LOL!

          • Anonymous

            And Perry got a whopping $6,000 from Merk, a company that donated $2,460,000 between 2000 and 2006 to politicians in 40 states.

            Correlation does mean causation.

            The drug was FDA approved and recommended by the CDC just like many other vaccines. Nothing nefarious here.

            • Anonymous

              There are thousands of FDA approved drugs which end up causing health problems when taken over time. Surely you aren’t that naive! But hey if you want the government to tell YOU what you have to take then don’t complain about OBAMACARE!

        • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=502565447 Matt Powell

          Onerous because it doesn’t support your choice? Don’t take your eyes off the prize. Lance, genital warts is not a communicable disease, lol. It’s not polio, or measles or mumps. HPV is not rubella. It’s genital warts and the idea was to vaccinate people early because they’d end up with HPV anyway, and it causes cancer, so why not, right? What if my daughter never got it?
          How many children died as a result of this Gardisil experimentation? And, we also learned his former chief of staff was Merck (the maker’s) key lobbyist in Texas. Children died from this experiment. I’m so disgusted by you ‘conservatives’ who won’t see the error in your choice for office because you’re so afraid of a label. I’m not going to read a book about Perry to see if he’s conservative…his record shows he’s 50/50. I’m a Ron Paul supporter and I know he has weaknesses on foreign policy but that’s ok. The sooner we admit our candidates are flawed and work with their strength, instead of defending them, they better we’ll be.

          • http://twitter.com/113KriEger 13Krieger

            Foreign policy is not Ron Pauls only weaknesses. His domestic policies once you get past the hype about wanting to eliminate the FED and eliminate 5 departments……Ron Paul’s domestic policy agenda just dissapears. He then just makes abunch of broad swipes about how the USA should have a Gold standard and be more Liberterian. WEAK!!!

            He offers no plan on what to do with the work load distribution on the 5 eliminated departments, what impacts that will have on citizen services and which department will pick up the authority and workload in fullfilling remaining services from eliminated departments. Ron Paul wants to elimination of the income tax and the Internal Revenue Service. Fine….exactly how does he plan on paying off the 15 plus trillion in national debt if there is no more tax revenue coming into the Government. How does he expect a declining and heavy recession shakled economy to just magically jump to the other end of the spectrum and provide sufficient revenues to not only run the Federal Government but pay off the 15 trillion in debt. Answer: HE HAS NO PLAN it is all a mind game to get votes.

            There has to be some transission mechanism and Ron Paul offers none.

            Matt Powell you need to go back to sitting on the couch eat cheetos and watch television reality shows for the brain dead. Ron Paul is not a Conservative and bearly a Republican…..His views are Liberterian and he is a isolationistic appeaser that will just embolden the USA’s enemies and cause the next world war!

            • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=775953507 Berend Lienemann

              The President has no business with the “work load distribution” from removing departments. If they can’t find a job in a similar department with a state, then they need to find a way to become more marketable in the free market. Are we so used to a centrally commanded economy, that we fear the consequences of its removal? I would prefer a President who prefers not to meddle in every single aspect of its citizens, including job seeking/holding/creating.

              • http://twitter.com/113KriEger 13Krieger

                ”No business with work load distribution” exactly what do you think is the job of the executive branch and why do you think they call it the administration???

                Because that is the job of the executive branch which is to administrate policy and run the government with the direction and funding mandates from or provided by the legislative branch….. I think you need to go back and read your government 101 book buddy.

                It is not a question of removal it is a question of transission that Ron Paul does not even consider in his domestic plan. Also, what do you think will happen to the remaining departments left…..They will just grow into the positons of the elminiated departments that is what and it will be just like before they were eliminated that is what. I think you have your priorities backwards…..first you economizes, streamline, staff reduction and cut waste. Then you look to eliminate…unless the current departments are duplicious or non impacting visa the department of education when can most definitley be eliminated.

                Again, Ron Paul really has no domestic plan in totallity it is all a mind game to get votes.

            • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=775953507 Berend Lienemann

              The President has no business with the “work load distribution” from removing departments. If they can’t find a job in a similar department with a state, then they need to find a way to become more marketable in the free market. Are we so used to a centrally commanded economy, that we fear the consequences of its removal? I would prefer a President who prefers not to meddle in every single aspect of its citizens, including job seeking/holding/creating.

      • http://www.facebook.com/people/Jim-Sherer/100000598030657 Jim Sherer

        Hell yeah, no more vaccination. Without those pesky vaccinations for polio, mumps, small pox, etc etc. we would all be better off.

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_TUDGMH234XEKN4SAIYGSXVO6DM RT

        More like his greed. One of his money supporters worked at the company.

        • Anonymous

          If you think $6,000 donation is a scandal, then you will be terribly surprised by what politicians are receiving and from who.

      • Anonymous

        I agree but it did allow parental opt out. And Bachmans ” Mental Retardation” comment basically destroyed her campaign

        • BSabounds

          Do you folks understand what “opt out” means? Let me tell you, as a parent who chose to stop vaccinating. You are told you “must” vaccinate. The educated parent comes back with “No, I can opt out.” (Most parents don’t realize that.) You are NOT TOLD you can opt out. You are told you “must” vaccinate or your kids can’t be in school. So unless you’ve really done some research, you don’t realize there is an option. It varies from state to state what you have to do to opt out. One state I needed notarized documents, another I had to say it was against my religious beliefs…. Keep in mind, this takes lengthy research on the part of the parent to figure it all out. But the worst is how I am treated by the doctor, by the schools… I was basically made to feel i was endangering the life of my children, I was practically a murderer…. No, no intimidation whatsoever….. *sarcasm* You people are very naive when you say “Well, they could opt out….” The pressure to “opt in” is immense – and UGLY. And certainly not simple. Parents should not be put in the position, by the government, to feel like they are terrible parents. Stand firm and grow a thicker skin parents. Their ability to initimidate us is part of the problem. We must start standing up for our rights and saying “NO”!

      • Anonymous

        Hate to spurn your mark levin moment here, but there are already many valuable state-imposed medications and immunizations given to children and new-born babies now and in the past. In fact, the chances are in favor that you were immunized under regulatory law. Even immigrants immunize before entering the country and becoming a U.S. citizen. Well,… legal immigrants, I mean.

        And if you ever got ejacated (sic) porch, then your state college probably required additional immunizations in order for you to live in their college dorms. Most in CA are not only required to immunize their cats and dogs, but they also must get a kennelcough shot prior to boarding them.

        The TX immunization law in question is for HPV, and I think parents have the freedom to opt out of it. So the crux of the debate is that these vaccines are being paid for by taxpayers– not the parents who need them. The likely candidates for this vaccine are the illegal immigrant and lower class public where the parents would not apply for such a vaccine depsite tolerating their teens’ overdeveloped sexuality. But since they have voting power in certain districts, the people get swindled…

        Welcome to two-party politics!

        Yes, Perry had every right in his state to create such a mandate, certainly if HPV is a growing epidemic (which it is). He just didn’t have a right to make the taxpayers foot the bill for it. Perry would have been right and virtuous if he had passed the law thorugh the people’s vote, which I think he did not do.

        Thus we have his firm statements on Amnesty.

        • Anonymous

          Well Joe the crux of the problem here is that this presidential candidate tried to sell his mandate (it WAS mandated for girls whose parents did not opt put) as a heartfelt move on his part when, in fact, his former chief of staff was working as a highly paid lobbyist for Merck with the main goal of making Gardisil MANDATED for schoolgirls in Texas. NOW this same man is over one of Perry’s SUPERPACS! He even lied about the woman who was dying of cervical cancer being his reason for the mandate. He didn’t even MEET her or have contact with her until AFTER his decision. He is a LIAR and a CROOK using his political influence to the benefit of himself and his contributors…sounds alot like the guy in there right now!

      • Giovanni Hager

        Incorrect, I am a Texas resident and understand the Gardasil debate completely as it was covered heavily here well before it was ever a topic in the debates. It had an opt out close, therefore no female teenager was mandated (forced) to take Gardasil. It was a mistake, Perry was upfront in admitting that mistake and stated he would do it differently, last time I check we are human being and making mistakes come with being human.

        • Anonymous

          I am a Texas resident and it WAS a MANDATE for the kids who had to put the drug in their bodies if their parents didn’t opt out or KNOW they COULD opt out. Perry was IN BED with MERCK and he knew the legislature would NOT go along with passing a law requiring this medication be paid for by the taxpayers so he went ahead and did it on his own…now wouldn’t HE be a great president? Of course it was all a MISTAKE!! Get REAL it was intentional and MERCK stood to make a cool 50-60 MILLION per year off Texas taxpayers if the legislature had not backed him down…now the MERCK lobbyist (Perry’s former Chief of Staff) is working to head up one of Perry’s SUPERPACS…WHAT a SURPRISE!!!…….you still convinced it was a MISTAKE???

          • Anonymous

            Page 3 of the letter to parents sent by Texas government says how to opt out of vaccines. In other words, parents are informed.

            See my other posts for the “Letter to Parents” link.

            • Anonymous

              You can post all the OPT OUT garbage you want but it still MANDATED the girls to take the drugs UNLESS their parents opted out. There was NO opt out for the kids taking the meds.

              What you cannot do is cover for Perry’s slimy relationship with MERCK Pharmaceuticals and the fact that he tried to do an END RUN around our representatives in the legislature and STICK IT to the taxpayers all to benefit his big money financiers at MERCK. Now the old Merck lobbyist is working for Perry as head of his huge SUPERPAC!…a REAL COINCIDENCE!

              Perry is toast on the presidential stage with his big government, illegal amnesty, land grabbing history…..

              • Anonymous

                Proven: Gardasil was optional.
                Proven: Merk did not buy Perry with a paltry $6,000 over 6+ years in donations.
                Proven: There was no land grab with TTC since TTC was never implemented.

      • Daniel Feerst

        The State of Texas is not what is mean by “Big Government”. Perfectly appropriate decision, which he in the end agreed not to do. He is a reasonable person.

        • Anonymous

          Are you off your meds? Big GOVERNMENT is ANY government that is over reaching and going beyond its intended scope. Big Government is attempting to build a SIXTEEN LANE ELEVATED TOLLROAD from Mexico to Oklahoma and stealing over one half MILLION acres of private property to do it (Trans Texas Corridor..anothe PERRY BOONDOGGLE)…it is also MANDATING a medication for the ENTIRE FEMALE POPULATION OF SCHOOL SYSTEM of a state WITHOUT the approval of citizen representatives….why don’t you take a community college course on government before you put your gross ignorance on display for the entire world to see?

      • Anonymous

        They did NOT mandate the vaccination!!! ANY PARENT COULD OPT OUT!

        • Anonymous

          Yeah just like OBAMA did NOT mandate OBAMACARE because he is issuing WAIVERS to hundreds of thousands of people! Great LOGIC you have going there! He did an END RUN around our elected representatives and got a boot on his throat as a result…now he REGRETS the end run…just like he REGRETS saying Americans who disagree with his in-state tuition for illegals don’t have a heart and he REGRETS trying to steal over 1/2 MILLION ACRES of private property from the citizens of Texas for his boondoggle Trans Texas Corridor!

          WOW so many REGRETS and so little time to win the nomination!!!

          • Anonymous

            Huge difference between Obama waiver and vaccine waiver:
            You have to petition Obama for an Obamacare waiver. You don’t with Texas’. Just needs your “John Hancock” on a form.

            Number of acres seized by TTC: 0

            “Thus, conservatives who criticize Gov. Perry over the proposed use of eminent domain to build a road aren’t just wrong – they’re actually advocating a position that is unconstitutional it its core. A further irony: such populist-minded conservatives are actually using one of the same arguments that the Sierra Club and other environmental left, anti-growth groups, have used against Perry.”
            http://biggovernment.com/cdevore/2011/08/17/governor-perry-the-trans-texas-corridor-eminent-domain-do-limited-government-conservatives-need-to-worry-no/

            • Anonymous

              Number of acres Perry TRIED to seize: over 1/2 MILLION
              Not having your land seized by a big government globalist fanatic is not POPULIST it is an AMERICAN TRADITION!

              Serial posting of what Perry was STOPPED from doing isn’t helping his cause but by all means carry on!!!

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Huuf-Arted/100000868400175 Huuf Arted

      The PUKES on Wall Street and the Vultures who broke up companies in the 80s and 90s are NOT what made America great! Companies making things the rest of the world wants are what made us great and PUKES like Romney made a fortune selling American Patents and Technology to the highest bidder overseas. Screw that bastard! I lived in Michigan when his dorky father was Governor and can tell you the apple didnt fall far from the tree.

      In case my point was lost, being a Financier is a WHOLE LOT DIFFERENT than being an ENTRPANEUR and ole Mitt has ZERO knowledge of how to fix our economy unless we need him to FIRESALE the USA to the Chinese to pay our Debts!

      Mitt aint da sh1t!

      Just say NO to Willard (Mitt) Romney

    • http://profiles.yahoo.com/u/DS5QLSDLBNSCPYTZ5ZQBBCLDBA John

      Bachmann was right on that issue. Opt out means you are forced by government, without your consent, to jump through hoops. There’s no room for a government that say *do this or else*, believing itself to be vested in making mandates upon the people. Perry should know that just like any other person in government right down to the dog catcher. Either you have rights or you don’t and having a clear understanding of what constitutes a right is imperative of all of us, not just elected representatives.

    • Max Honeycutt

      Picture this: B-rock OSama and Mitt Romney saide by side together in a debate.

      B-rock’s voice is deep, slow, deliberate and authoritative, even thoughtful.

      Romney’s speaks in his characteristic breathy middle pitch, quickly, nervously, as if he’s desperate to sell himself, begging to please, or relentlessly on the con.
      He presentation is so nervous, jerky and disjointed that his body moves like R2-D2.

      Folks, these are the telltale signs of falseness that we all know and see and which have always made people feel that Romney is a phony.

      Thus far, no one has articulated these fatal flaws in Mr. Romney’s presentation, even though the sense of phoniness pervades everything his every spoken word.

      Thus far, no one on the right has provided the contrast that would clarify what we are all seeing and hearing in Mitt Romney.

      But B-Rock Osama will.

      Next to B-rock Osama, Mitt Romney will appears to be a either a bumbling fool or a con artist desperate to sell us the phoniness that he has become.

      Americans may never realize why they don’t trust Romney, but the Romney-phoniness will be set into high relief by the contrast all will see when he goes up against B-rock Osama.

      Mark my words.

      Conservatives are about to nominate a man who looks and sounds as phony as B-rock Osama actually is.

      God help us all.

    • Max Honeycutt

      Picture this: B-rock OSama and Mitt Romney saide by side together in a debate.

      B-rock’s voice is deep, slow, deliberate and authoritative, even thoughtful.

      Romney’s speaks in his characteristic breathy middle pitch, quickly, nervously, as if he’s desperate to sell himself, begging to please, or relentlessly on the con.
      He presentation is so nervous, jerky and disjointed that his body moves like R2-D2.

      Folks, these are the telltale signs of falseness that we all know and see and which have always made people feel that Romney is a phony.

      Thus far, no one has articulated these fatal flaws in Mr. Romney’s presentation, even though the sense of phoniness pervades everything his every spoken word.

      Thus far, no one on the right has provided the contrast that would clarify what we are all seeing and hearing in Mitt Romney.

      But B-Rock Osama will.

      Next to B-rock Osama, Mitt Romney will appears to be a either a bumbling fool or a con artist desperate to sell us the phoniness that he has become.

      Americans may never realize why they don’t trust Romney, but the Romney-phoniness will be set into high relief by the contrast all will see when he goes up against B-rock Osama.

      Mark my words.

      Conservatives are about to nominate a man who looks and sounds as phony as B-rock Osama actually is.

      God help us all.

    • Anonymous

      If any of these candidates, Bachmann, Perry, Paul, Santorum, Huntsman, Cain AND Gingrich, were chosen to lead the Republican Party, the Obama landslide would have been assured.

      Any Romney ‘baggage’ pales in comparison to the inadequacies these others offer.

      We need to replace Obama with a competent leader – it is just that basic.

  • Anonymous

    Rush is right of course and scorched earth politicks burns us all. This election is turning into a swear word not fit for polite company but a fitting acronym would be along the lines of DUBAR.

  • http://twitter.com/nicktjacob Nick Jacob

    “Uncomfortable” is a perfect word for how I feel about the Bain attacks on Romney. A lot of attack lines sound like OWS rhetoric.

    And I’m a Newt supporter.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Bill-Redder/100000544267578 Bill Redder

      i’m waiting to see that half hour piece his super pac is releasing before judging gingrich too harshly. i suspect there might be something to romney’s time with bain beyond innocent venture capitalism.

      romney, who has not been vetted sufficiently, is a fraud and has got skeletons in his closet. count on it.

      • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=502565447 Matt Powell

        Hey Bill – are you going to quote a statistic? Where are the skeletons?
        Like Perry’s skeletons of apparently liking tranassexuals?
        See, that’s innuendo – and if you’re going to make your decision on voting based off of then you shouldn’t vote because you are no better than old black women who are voting for Obama because white people are racist.
        Put up or shut up a- posting like that makes you look dumb. You have a problem with him – post it, hash it out without the mud.
        He’s run, what, twice now, and been through the vetting.
        Make decisions based on fact and not what you suspect…

      • Anonymous

        Bill, how in heaven’s name can you suggest that Romney hasn’t been vetted sufficiently????? He went through a full campaign four years ago, four years of bludgeoning by the MSM and now some portion (pick your fraction) of this campaign.

        Not vetted sufficiently?!?! That’s a pretty sad commentary on our country if it’s true. But, of course, it’s not.

        • http://www.facebook.com/people/Yankee-Doodle-Retrocon/100002221609911 Yankee Doodle Retrocon

          Actually, i agree that Mitt hasn’t been vetted well. For a conservative or conservative moderate, vetting would be detail around his record in MA. While i’ve seen some of that, the MSM (for the moderates, in particular), don’t consider being strong on gun control, or raising taxes, as a bad thing, so they don’t “dwell” on it, as they do Perry, for example (strong AGAINST gun control, and lower taxes).

          So, a lot of people really don’t know that Mitt is a social liberal (as far as history seems to indicate). Or worse, someone who concedes their values to their opponents because “it’s a liberal state, after all.”

          No, Mitt has not been well vetted, IMHO, and Obama will have dirt that we cannot yet imagine, especially dirt that can contribute to the class warfare.

      • BSabounds

        As a Newt supporter, this is what I’m thinking too. The attacks on capitalism comments seem to be coming from MSM. I’m thinking there is much more to it – esp. since the media seems to be getting nervous and talking about it now. Somethings up……

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Steven-Valdez/1806887704 Steven Valdez

    Have you seen this report from ABCnews? Mitt Romney avoids U.S tax by using Offshore bank accounts http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ayint66IUs

    • Trust1TG

      FBI Investigation underway: ” “there is a pending or prospective law enforcement proceeding relevant to these responsive records; and that release of the information contained in these responsive records could reasonably be expected to interfere with the enforcement proceedings.”

      • http://www.facebook.com/people/Bill-Redder/100000544267578 Bill Redder

        romney’s main argument that he’s got the business experience needed to right the country is based on his tenure with bain. if something smells fishy at bain it may (should?) undercut mitten’s legitimacy as a competent businessman.

        not to mention his honesty and ethics.

    • http://fishygov.wordpress.com FishyGov

      Good for Romeny!

      If I had his kind of money I wouldn’t want to toss it down the Federal wishing well either.

      • http://www.facebook.com/people/Steven-Valdez/1806887704 Steven Valdez

        Here’s the point. In the political climate we are in, Mitt Romney fits Obama’s campaign strategy of the Rich don’t pay their fair share and that contrast could make Romney be the proof of that. Is this the reason Mitt Romney won’t release his tax returns? He doesn’t pay taxes?

      • Anonymous

        The problem here is the general. How many will like this? Romney is not electable.

    • Anonymous

      He says it after-tax money. If I had his kind of money I would do the same thing

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Christopher-Winkler/1351121288 Christopher Winkler

      If I had that kind of money, I would move it offshore too. Why waste it on all the nanny state programs? Its our money, we want to keep it, not toss it on the BBQ.

  • Anonymous

    I’m on the fence on this one. But, if Rush says it is a misstep, it will most assuredly cease.

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1252130808 Paige Cohen

      Newt will not listen to Rush at this point. Newt tastes blood.

      • Anonymous

        lol Newt was backed down by Big Bird in 1995 when he went after NPR funding. Don’t think too many people need to worry about Newt the draft dodger maintaining a prolonged attack. I agree with Ron Paul. Newt could have chosen to go into the military. I went enlisted for six years in the Marines in 1968 and I had a pregnant wife. That was a guaranteed deferment!

        • Anonymous

          My sister was pregnant when her husband was drafted – no deferrment for him…..

        • Anonymous

          Serving in the military in the 1960s is hardly a qualification to be President today. There are many men and women who served in the 1960s and almost all of them are NOT qualified to be President. Some of them are just crazy old men. Some of those crazy old men who served in the 1960s went on to be congressmen and then crazy old men seeking the Presidency.

          • http://www.facebook.com/people/David-Knight/100000088685384 David Knight

            Serving in the military is not a qualification for president, but evading service and then pushing for the US to enter every conflict in the globe IS a disqualification and is the very definition of chickenhawk – chicken when your butt’s on the line but always choosing war when it comes to sending others.

            • Anonymous

              I disagree David. A person’s decisions and draft status when they are in their teens and 20s is hardly relevant to their thinking and ability to be President and Commander in Chief in their 60s. People aren’t static they grow and evolve. Some evolve into persons with a deep understanding of our history, the dangers to our way of life from foreign adversaries, and the need to protect our economic interests, way of life, and ultimately our individual liberty by being strong abroad. Others evolve into crazy obsessed old men whose ideas are not only bat shit crazy when it comes to defense and foreign policy but will clearly result in more wars and deaths and trouble for the USA and the rest of the world than the alternatives.

              Being president is a very serious matter and childish labels are not a serious way to evaluate the merits or lack thereof of various candidates for the job.

              • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_F3JVD6IALHWE762EIQAEA2D2W4 William

                JYLD … stop making sense … it’s going to confuse people :)

            • Anonymous

              “Evading” the draft (e.g., fleeing to Canada, faking a medical condition, etc.) is an unlawful act and should disqualify the offender. Obtaining a draft deferment according to law, however, is not “evading” service. A majority of American men never serve in the military; during World War II only 10 million men were inducted. Unless a candidate actually “evaded” military service, this should be a non-issue.

          • Anonymous

            So it sounds like you were one of the draft-dodging pot smoking hippies who hid out in Canada…clearly you have zero respect for Vietnam Vets so that is the ONLY reason I can think of….by the way where DO you draft dodging war protesters have YOUR reunions?

            • Anonymous

              Clearly porchhound you have serious reading comprehension problems. There is nothing in what I wrote that is anti-vet or anti-vietnam vet. There are many millions of vets and many millions of non-vets. Almost all of both categories are NOT qualified to be President. That’s just a fact. If the facts offend you, then stop reading posts online.

              • Anonymous

                My comprehension skills are fine. YOU used the “crazy old men” comment to intentionally inflame anyone from that era who served their country. BUT…if you don’t have the stones to admit where you were going then you probably DID run away when your nation called….kind of like NEWT ran away from TWO sick ex wives…you guys are a match made in heaven!

                • Anonymous

                  No porchhound you have to read ALL the words. I said “SOME” of them are crazy old men. “SOME” does not equal ALL. SOME does not equal MOST. “SOME” is “SOME”. Get a dictionary. Some of those 1960s vets ARE crazy old men. Some of them may even have reading comprehension problems, and SOME of them are bat shit crazy obsessed old men running for President. Again there is NOTHING anti-vet or anti-vietnam vet in what I wrote.

          • http://doorwaybuck.com CM Sackett

            KY-JYLD… (and ‘brian jones and 1 more, and anyone else ‘tough’ enough to badmouth VETS)

            You like fights (the knock down teeth out kind)?

            You ever say anything like that within my earshot… you’ll damn sure find one.

            And no ma’am, that is NOT a threat. It’s a FACT.

            CM Sackett

            • Anonymous

              And CM Sackett your post clearly proves my point that service in the military in the 1960s does not qualify one to be president. Clearly it doesn’t even qualify some to be able to read and understand the english language.

              • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_N47BKIQ74F5DGX4BXJMKBF37LI Mike

                JYLD = communist

            • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_F3JVD6IALHWE762EIQAEA2D2W4 William

              CM Sackett … I’m an Army Vet … support Vet causes big-time … trust me I’m pro-vet. Unless I haven’t read back far enough in this thread I don’t understand the venom towards JYLD, who I kow nothing about other than these posts. And threatening harm to someone over the internet at the very least is a cyber crime, no?

        • Anonymous

          There is a difference between being drafted and not volunteering to join the military. I did not join the army but I wasn’t drafted either – am I a chicken-hawk?

          • Anonymous

            I guess it depends on WHY you didn’t choose to serve your country and IF you are all gung-ho about sending OTHERS into battle while you sit in your recliner.

            • Anonymous

              Oh Ok so now it not whether Newt went or not it was what he thought about not joining? So you are telling me that no president should ever send anyone else to battle unless he himself did? Really?

              • Anonymous

                My comment was referring to why YOU may or may not have decided to join. NEWT is a coward and THAT is why he took a handful of deferments while others served at a time we lost over 50,000 American lives.

                To your second point..think about this: Everyone is SO worried about the president having foreign policy experience yet it is the WARS we end up in that cost lives and billions of dollars. Why aren’t we MORE concerned about a potential president having the honed leadership skills of a military commander? He will be the Commander in Chief of the largest military force in the world.

                But what do we normally end up with? A POLITICIAN who understands how to slime his way around Washington and scab some cash from K Street…and THAT is why we are in this mess right now.

                • Anonymous

                  Gingrich said he did not get deferments, you are calling him a liar, prove it.

                  And who is your honed skills of military commander? Name who you are supporting.

                • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_F3JVD6IALHWE762EIQAEA2D2W4 William

                  Porchhound … first off, thanks for your service to your country. Unless I’m mistaken there are two GOP people left who served in the Military … Ron Paul (Flight Surgeon – Medical Doctor) and Rick Perry (C130 Pilot). Kudos to them for their service!!! Having said this their service does NOT by itself qualify them to be Commander-in-Chief. CinC requires military competencies and geopolitical expertise that is not garnered in med school or even flight school. To flip the argument, you would think a Naval Academy grad (trained for years in leadership skills) and submariner would make a great CinC … but then Jimmy Carter seems to be an argument against that route, wouldn’t you agree? Finally take a survey of all the Wars the U.S has been in from the Civil War onwards … which POTUS were CinCs and chances are they did NOT serve in the military (Lincoln, Wilson, Roosevelt, Taft, Clinton) … I’ll leave it to you to decide whether each was a good CinC.

                • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_F3JVD6IALHWE762EIQAEA2D2W4 William

                  I guess I’m a “Newtie” to use a term here … here’s the Military Competencies and Geopolitical expertise that better qualifies Newt to be CinC … at least the senior military leadership thinks so … the following are facts, not any opinion:

                  Newt served on the Defense Policy Board under President George W. Bush, which provided strategic counsel to the Pentagon and Secretary of Defense on how to better address threats facing the United States. He is also the longest-serving teacher of the Joint War Fighting course for Major Generals at Air University and taught officers from all five services as an honorary Distinguished Visiting Scholar and Professor at the National Defense University. In 1999, Gingrich was appointed to the United States Commission on National Security/21st Century, the Hart/Rudman Commission to examine our national security challenges as far out as 2025. The Commission’s report is the most profound rethinking of defense strategy since 1947.

                • Anonymous

                  I think you make my point. The problem is we have not had COMPETENT military leaders even APPLY for the job of POTUS because the political system does not encourage it. I wasn’t referring to ANY military person and you are correct that a junior officer may not have the experience required. I flew KC 130’s and A4’s for the USMC during Vietnam…got my combat experience and left for the civilian world after six years. I don’t consider myself a top tier candidate for POTUS by any means but I HAVE also run my own businesses and had hundreds of employees working for me…I know ENOUGH about the use (and misuse) of the military to be a pretty good critic of failed military-political actions like Iraq and Afghanistan. I also can critique poor financial decisions based on having brought several businesses back from the brink of failure.

                  I would welcome a STRONG military POTUS instead of this gaggle of politicos who have spent their lives scheming and lying their way to the top. It is just MY preference and I wonder why it bothers YOU so much?

                • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_F3JVD6IALHWE762EIQAEA2D2W4 William

                  Doesn’t bother me at all … I thought blogs were a sounding board for discussing ideas and opinions, and in this case trying to shape the national discourse on who would make the best POTUS.

                  Sounds like you have quite a resume … congrats.

                  Define STRONG Military POTUS? There’s not a single rational person who would call Newt anything other than pro-military, which is different than discussing his lack of service during the war you proudly and capably served in.

                  Bottom line is we have the candidates who we have. We need to choose one. Who do you think besides Newt would make a better CinC? In the larger context who do you think will make the best POTUS?

                • Anonymous

                  William I am in a quandary here. Clearly Obama is NOT a choice, nor would Hillary be…I feel like I’m trying to choose between the least ugly girl at the dance! I can barely tolerate Romney but so far he is all that is left and that ain’t much! I just got BURNED by NEWT and no longer trust him…it would be like going back and dating a philandering ex wife…no reference to HIS affairs intended.

                  I am longingly watching the horizon for some last-minute candidate to pop up and force a brokered convention…now how is THAT for desperation?

                • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_F3JVD6IALHWE762EIQAEA2D2W4 William

                  ACK … that’s fair … if that someone does pop up perhaps my choice might be different. And then again perhaps not :)

            • http://www.facebook.com/people/Terry-Purvis/100001414759304 Terry Purvis

              It sounds like you’re a little too high on yourself Porch. I served proudly also, 6 years in the US Navy in the Middle Eastern theater during the 80s. It’s not for some people, but that doesn’t mean their opinion is any less warranted. I mean, that’s one of the very things we fight for, right?

              • Anonymous

                If by “high on myself” you mean I am proud of my service then you are correct. You served in the mid eighties when NOTHING was going on…no war…no combat deaths..etc….but I imagine you would have served in the sixties or the nineties, or even now if that was something you believed in. I have very little use for people like Gingrich who slithered away when people WERE dying in combat…hey even Al Gore SERVED! If someone chooses to take another path in peace time then that is fine by me…..just NOT when blood is being spilled so THEY can take a free ride…thanks for YOUR service!

                • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_F3JVD6IALHWE762EIQAEA2D2W4 William

                  Porchhound … again thanks for serving, especially in a time of war.

                  You wrote: ” … You served in the mid eighties when NOTHING was going on…no war…no combat deaths..etc.” First Google October 23, 1983. Then check the CRS report that concluded that there were more Military Deaths (4,700) in ’80’s Peacetime than during Portions of the War on Terror. I served in the 80s … VOLUNTEERED … never served in combat and I often wondered how I would have responded. I’d like to say I would have made my fellow soldiers proud, will never know. Denigrating fellow vets makes you sound like a cranky dude. We SERVED our country and war could have broken out at any time. Assuming your criteria for a CinC is having served during war time I guess you’re either a Perry guy or a Paul guy, no.

                • Anonymous

                  Interesting you left out “.but I imagine you would have served in the sixties or the nineties, or even now if that was something you believed in”…read the ENTIRE post and you would see I was juxtaposing YOUR service with Gingrich NOT serving in a time of war….before you get your feelings hurt and start calling someone CRAZY you might actually READ what they have written and try to hold it in context! I also thanked you for your service…which you ALSO left out of your post…makes me wonder what your motivation is here!!!

                • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_F3JVD6IALHWE762EIQAEA2D2W4 William

                  Porchhound … I have no problems distinguishing your war time service from his and my peace time service … Why do I need to call attention to myself by thanking you for thanking me? As service vets I believe we respect each other.

                  My feelings are fine sir … and I have read your posts. With all due respect, your comment on the gentlemen’s service in the 80s did not come across as complimentary, even with your aside which I did not include. Of course his “high on yourself” comment probably started your comment :)

                  My motivation for responding to you and others here are clear, at least I think it is … you and others are calling out Newt for his lack of service and have made that the basis (or one of the reasons) why he wouldn’t be a good CinC … did I get that right? I have simply retorted with why I think Newt would make a fine CinC and POTUS and then have asked you who you think would be a better candidate?

                  Don’t want this to be personal … if you care to respond with your candidate of preference, then we can hopefully add to this discussion with something concrete of hopefully of value, comparing and contrasting Newt with your choice … otherwise we’re cyber dancing around.

                • Anonymous

                  William it seems we have become pen pals! My issues with Gingrich goes beyond his deferments…way beyond. If you do some historical research on Newt the person you find someone who does NOT work well in a team (think Joint Chiefs of Staff)…who is prone to mood swings (caught crying at his desk, multiple tantrums when disagreed with)..can be compromised sexually (hmmm…do I need to go there?) does not control his appetites (in ANY sense) and is conflict avoidant (used a telephone to tell his two ex-wives he was leaving)! Not the type of person you would want leading the largest military the world has ever know at a time when the globe is in chaos. He appears to be a “reactive” person when his emotions get the best of him…He is also a political opportunist. When viewing him through the lens of my military experience I see someone NOT to be trusted or respected….

                  I have already responded to you regarding my choices for 2012 so just read those posts please.

                • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_F3JVD6IALHWE762EIQAEA2D2W4 William

                  Fair enough … buddy :)

          • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=502565447 Matt Powell

            Google ‘chicken hawk’ and get a definition before wasting my precious time reading blogs with your worthless posts.

            • Anonymous

              Sorry for wasting your precious time – I on the other hand don’t have precious time I just waste it for the fun of it? If you hadn’t heard Ron Paul is who used the term against Gingrich, I was just using his term. You might not want to respond if it will be wasting your time, just a thought.

        • http://www.facebook.com/people/Terry-Purvis/100001414759304 Terry Purvis

          Typical of a Ron Paul supporter, can’t compete based solely on their own merit so they resort to negative attacks, most of which are lies. Yep, just like Paul and Flip Romney!
          Newt is by far the most qualified person to be our next president. He is highly intelligent, an excellent debater, knows economics and is very well versed in foreign policy, and definately has the moxie and resolve to do whatever is necessary to protect our great nation. He knows how to negotiate while standing firm on his principles and has the record to prove it. He has the most feasible, well thought-out plans of all the candidates.
          But don’t take my word for it. Go to http://www.Newt.org, see for yourself, do more research, then make your decision.

          Newt 2012, leading our great nation to recovery, prosperity, security, and back to our roots as intended by our founding fathers!

          • Anonymous

            A NEWTIE!!! Posting Newt’s talking points and then linking to his website…WOW that is novel!

            • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_F3JVD6IALHWE762EIQAEA2D2W4 William

              Porchhound …
              Ad Hominem Argument – any kind of argument that criticizes an idea by pointing something out about the people who hold the idea rather than directly addressing the merits of the idea. You’re basically admitting you’re losing the argument here with your “Newtie” comment.

              We’re looking to elect someone who can defeat the current POTUS, get the economy going, create jobs, lessen our foreign dependence on oil, mitigate the current gridlock in DC … in addition to being the CinC.

              State who you think would make a better POTUS than Newt and explain why, rather than express your displeasure for Newt’s lack on military service during wartime. I’d be happy to state why I think Newt’s experience in Miltary Competencies and Geopolitical expertise would make him the better CinC in addition to why I think his Economic, Energy, Healthcare, and Education ideas and experience getting results in DC make him a better POTUS … of course I could be wrong but nobody has convinced me otherwise yet :)

              • Anonymous

                William I have already answered this question when you brought up. I find it hard to believe you were politically active in the mid nineties when NEWT was making great conservative promises then backtracking at the last minute. I will leave it up to you to do your historical research in this area but the freshman class of 1995 had to hold his toes to the fire to get him to follow through on ANY of his promises and, in return, he went to the RNC to have them defund their reelection campaigns in 1996. There is plenty of evidence that Gingrich is an IDEA man but has no appetite or stamina for follow-through…very similar to our current POTUS.

                Now lets get to the center of this problem. As voters we are faced, every four years, with a pseudo-conservative who promises to be the anti-liberal running in the other party. Once elected we get more of the same. If I choose NOT to support this sham then people like YOU accuse me of CONTRIBUTING to the political woes of the nation….think about it! There is a REASON that nothing really CHANGES no matter who is in the WH. We desperately need a third party or even a fourth to divide up this fake two-party system which produces singularly similar results. The answer is at the congressional level and in our state houses. We mere mortals cannot affect change at the presidential level or with career politicos in place for decades.

                • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_F3JVD6IALHWE762EIQAEA2D2W4 William

                  ” … William I have already answered this question when you brought up” not sure which question you referring to … still don’t know who you are for, but maybe I missed it somewhere. Based on your answers I will assume you’re a Ron Paul guy, at least in this race.

                  I have done my research … and was working in DC in the 90s. I’m familiar with Newt and the political climate back then. It’s discussions like these where I can hopefully argue in the court of blogosphere opinion and see how my beliefs stack up … either someone points me in a better direction or my beliefs are hardered.

                  ” … If I choose NOT to support this sham then people like YOU accuse me of CONTRIBUTING to the political woes of the nation” … What I have said is anyone who doesn’t support one of the GOP candidate has basically made a choice for the current POTUS. I have not accused you of anything, so either I’m an exception wrt the people you associate me with or I shouldn’t be associated with those people :)

                  I have no issues with a MEANINGFUL 3rd or 4th party … I do have an issue with a ineffective “never going to win” 3rd party that only siphons off supporters from either the GOP or DEM side for the sake of getting their positions into their party plank, in effect handing the nomination to one particular side … see 1968, 1992 etc.

                  I’m also in favor of term limits for Congress … not so much for a low-paid part-time Congress … we do need to attract the best and the brightest for public service, not life-time public service.

                  I am indeed a mere mortal :)

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_37V4NGVXB5AZYUJWLZ6GLEZPYY the_iowa_haw…

        Yes, his own blood. He is in a complete frenzy. He merrily proclaimed himself the nominee just a few weeks ago. Then the American people remembered who Newt is. Once he lost his lead he became frenzied with greed and jealousy.

        Newt will always be Newt. Which is why he will never be elected to anything.

  • Anonymous

    Newt G is a mercenary. He lacks a moral/ethical compass. He is doing OBAMA’S hits as St Valentine’s Day approches.

    PETTY BASTARDI with his gold digger on his arm.

    • Trust1TG

      Newt’s ads state facts. The FBI was already looking into Bain Capital’s off-shore accounts and other dealings.

      Romney’s ads were shown to be lies – not by Newt’s campaign – but by the Washington Post.

      • Anonymous

        Lets ALL support the Global WArming, Pelosi hugging, Cap and Tax Gingrich!!! And lets give welfare recipients CASH instead of food coupons because we KNOW they won’t go out ad buy crack or anything!! Newt is 1/2 too smart for his own good.

        • Trust1TG

          PC propaganda, whether it is global warming or LGBTQ, is based on agenda goals, not reality, facts and real scientific research evidence and statistics.

          Since Newt began his campaign, he’s attacked every PC propaganda concept from Palestinians being a separate national identity and victimhood (that goes for the LBGT ) as well as recanting the myth of global warming/climate change after investigations proved Gore’s paid scientists fudged the data.

          Anyone can be fooled when the science given to them is false (again, same with LBGT and the APA in 1973 – those studies were agenda biased and have been discredited). CDC statistics, police reports and real science has a preponderance of evidence to contradict their claims.

        • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1396855720 Brian Jones

          Newt never said we should give welfare recipients CASH. He said we should BARTER with them instead. Ie: No McDonalds, no cell-phones, etc. You must go to the Government Depot and tell them what you need, and then you get what you get.

        • http://www.facebook.com/people/Terry-Purvis/100001414759304 Terry Purvis

          Like Newt is the only one of the bunch who ever made mistakes. At least he’s willing to admit them and try to explain them. Most of the others just hide behind their negative, misleading attack ads instead of standing tall solely on their own merit. Why? Answer this instead of just attacking others. After you remember Newt said appearing with Nancy Pelosi was the stupidest thing he ever did, think you might could come up with some truthful facts, actually do some research and make a factual intelligent argument instead of just appearing to be a talking-points minion?!

          Gingrich/Santorum 2012.

          • Anonymous

            Terry Newt didn’t make MISTAKES. He supported Pelosi’s crazy Cap and Tax scheme and he made a VIDEO for public consumption…that wasn’t a mistake, it was a calculated move to ingratiate himself with the left just like he tried to do in the mid nineties. He didn’t even have the stones to pull funding for NPR because Big Bird came out against him…it was a really pathetic show of weakness. He is pro-amnesty just like Perry but wants to call it something else. He is the real-time personification of the snake oil salesman!

            • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_F3JVD6IALHWE762EIQAEA2D2W4 William

              Porchhound … probably missed it earlier … who do you support?
              As Geddy Lee from Rush sings … “If you choose not to decide you still have made a choice”.

              If we don’t pick a GOP candidate Obama wins … IMO disaster 2.0. There is no perfect GOP candidate. So If you are committed to helping defeat Obama who is your GOP choice? Once that is out in the open you can defend why you chose that candidate and his policies vs why others like myself choose Newt and his policies. Or if you’d rather go negative, you can point out the negatives you feel disqualify Newt vs the negatives of your candidate … although I prefer to stay in the positive “ideas” side of the discussion. Simple, right?

              • Anonymous

                A reasonable question William. It is difficult to pick the State Fair Queen out of a herd of pigs! I do not SEE a candidate I would want to vote for…but that shouldn’t DISQUALIFY me from commenting on the ones who are presenting themselves as the next leader of the free world.

                This is like walking through a used car lot. You must be honest with yourself about the costs and benefits of each vehicle. I did a test drive in Gingrich in the mid nineties and the wheels fell off when we hit a few bumps!

                It is very distressing to NOT be able to select from a better field. We have near 300 million people in this nation and look at what the political system offers up for leadership!!!

                I shudder to name a candidate at this point yet I will be forced to hold my nose in November anyway and pull the lever. The ANSWER to this dilemma is at the local level and we MUST pick carefully for our senators and representatives to counter this current system of serial ineptness!

                • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_F3JVD6IALHWE762EIQAEA2D2W4 William

                  Never said anything about your views disqualifying you from commenting … your comments are helpful in this discourse, as are others, as long as there are no Ad Hominem attacks. Of course I or other may or not agree with you :)

                  You’re still test driving … fair enough … you wish their were better candidates … so do I. Why I think Newt is the right candidate is based on a compare and contrast with the other candidates. I might be wrong. And at the end of the day, GOP Nominee > POTUS.

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_37V4NGVXB5AZYUJWLZ6GLEZPYY the_iowa_haw…

        Yes, the Washington Post – that fine pillar of unbiased journalism.

        • Trust1TG

          Well – the WaPo is not known for friendliness to conservatives or GOP. If it were the WTimes, that would be different.

      • Anonymous

        You do realize that the Washington Post (you really want to use that liberal rag as your source?) didn’t exactly call them lies. They equivocated quite a bit when awarding those Pinnochios.

    • Trust1TG

      Newt’s compass seems to have been radically changed with conversion to Christianity. It happens.

      The author of Amazing Grace became a minister after being a slave ship captain. Moses and the apostle Paul were murderers before God confronted them with their sins and their calling.

      Newt seems to have a new master – not serving the flesh, world and devil. He seems dedicated to challenging and defeating PC tyranny and bigotry against Christians and reality and helping to free the US from our would-be captors – muslim supremacist totalitarians – who are trying to expand the OIC states (now 57, as Obama slipped up and called the US in one of his speeches) to South and North America in the same old world conquest plot that Hitler and Russia once tried.

      They all forget Psalm 2 (that Cal Thomas appropriately quoted on Nov. 5, 2008)

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_WEFKR6GCPA5G5WDR77MW5X56FQ Reed

      So can I safely assume you were upset about the $3million+ that was spent on Romney’s behalf to attack Newt?

  • Anonymous

    I look forward to the GOP establishing one nominee. This way we can get rid of this circular firing squad and put our true target up against the wall.

  • http://www.facebook.com/rick.rsh Rick4Burke

    Santorum & Perry need to law down the law in these debates or Romney will probably end up taking it.

  • Anonymous

    I support Newt at this time, and I wish he wouldn’t be using this rhetoric either. But Rush is right, this is the exact type of crap you’ll hear the Dems use.

    • Anonymous

      Maybe that’s the point. Newt knows that’s EXACTLY how Obama will take Romney down – and lose in the long run. Isn’t it better to get it out now? It is important all these candidates are vetted now so the BEST one is left to take down Obama. Trust me, they’ve had four years to stock up ammo on Romney. They are locked and loaded and anything coming out now is not new to Hussein. Newt is a lot of things, but stupid is not one of them.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=594162904 Cheryl Pryor

    So Romney can dish it out but he can’t take it? I believe he started this whole narrative with Super Pacs and hyper negative ads. The ads against Newt were mostly lies too, but does anyone have any doubt Team Obama is above the same thing? Newt and Romney need to quit their whining about all the ads. They all need to put on their big boy pants and get used to it since this is nothing compared to what Obama and his Chicago style campaign is going to do to our nominee. If Romney is the nominee (speaking as someone who hopes not) its best to get all this Bain stuff out now to take away some of the damage it can and will cause by Team Obama. We just need to learn how to fight back effectively, nothing wrong with Newt going after Romney, about damn time someone did.

    • http://repofinder.com/ MikeDudical

      Romney can take it. The question is; can Newt take it when his attack on capitalism backfires?

      • Anonymous

        Can Romney take it when Conservatives stay home for him?

        • http://repofinder.com/ MikeDudical

          I don’t know MJS. Can conservatives stay home and take another 4 years of Obama. Romney will win. The sooner you learn that what you want as a right winger and what’s electable, the sooner we get Obama out. So, shut your mouth and get in line for Mitt.

          • Anonymous

            Kiss my butt you little twerp. It is wimps like you that have destroyed the party into the spineless pile goo it is today.

            You want to vote for Romney, go for it. The electoral numbers aren’t adding up. Romney WILL lose the election. Better luck getting a solid Senate and House to stop and likely impeach and convict barry.

            Douche.

            • http://repofinder.com/ MikeDudical

              How could I kiss it when your head is clearly buried shoulder deep in it? Numbers don’t lie. Romney is the only candidate that out polls Obama in a national campaign. I would love to get your email do I can rub it in your face when Romney gets the nomination. I’d even bet you 10k he wins it. You in?

              • Anonymous

                LOL..you are such a moron. I’ll compare my credentials with yours any day of the week. I’ll bet you $1,000,000 he loses

                OBAMA: West Coast/NV + Great Lakes States + the Northeast minus NH + OH

                ROMNEY: The rest of the country including FL

                The count is: 272 obama to 266 romney electoral votes

          • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_F3JVD6IALHWE762EIQAEA2D2W4 William

            Newt > Mitt > Obama …

            If Mitt gets the nomination I’ll support him 100% over POTUS. But with SC & FL coming up, with the Conservative field finally returning fire, and with SUPER PACs getting the message out why should I bend at this point?

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_F3JVD6IALHWE762EIQAEA2D2W4 William

        I think we’re confusing Capitalism – a system where government has limited control over markets and on property rights – vs the Asset Management and Investment policies/results of Bain Capital when led by Mitt.

        IF Newt is saying I want more Government control/regulations in order to affect Bain’s entrepreneurial decisions then the “attack on Capitalism” argument may be made and the debate can ensue. What Newt is saying is that Mitt can’t spout his “I’m pro job growth” when part of Mitt’s record is being CEO of Bain, and then makes the “Gordon Gekko predator capitalism” argument. According to Newt, Bain’s decisions destroyed companies or restructured them for shareholder utility vs creating new jobs. You might disagree on Newt’s Bain argument and that’s fine … show us where Newt is wrong. But to suggest Newt is attacking Capitlism is, well silly, IMO.

        • http://repofinder.com/ MikeDudical

          Are you suggesting that venture capitalism be eliminated and/or regulated by government? Had Bain not stepped in how many of these companies would have fizzled away with mounting job losses. Bain was able to find nuggets of value in the companies, some worked, some did not…welcome to a free market. Ultimately it was the consumers that dictated what happened to the companies. Supply and demand. Newt is going into territory that is democratic at it’s core. He’s using the identical attack an OWS is using. Republicans had better check their spines before they start letting Newt get away with this garbage. What really need to be examined is Newt taking 1.6 million in taxpayer money as a “historian” for Fannie and Freddie.

          Mitt will win. Get used to it, and get in line.

          • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_F3JVD6IALHWE762EIQAEA2D2W4 William

            Huh? You are the one that said Newt was attacking Capitalism … I stated that Newt was attacking Mitt’s assertion that Mitt was pro job growth based on his record as CEO at Bain Capital. You sound intelligent so I can assume you understand the following difference …

            Bain served a purpose … to its shareholders, using undervalued companies as investments and hoping it’s Asset Management policies would return a positive ROI on the investment. As a result some companies were saved, some companies were scrapped/sold off. I’m OK with this … free markets … supply and demand … just don’t spout this as the policy that demonstrates why you’re the guy for JOB GROWTH

            ” … Republicans had better check their spines before they start letting Newt get away with this garbage” … Why is this garbage?

            “He’s using the identical attack OWS is using.” … yes … and this doesn’t change the facts any more then when Newt makes the case … Obama and his war chest will come after the GOP nominee. If its Mitt this will not go away … it will only be 100x worse since Obama’s base will be 100% behind the Mitt record … facts are a stubborn thing.

            ” … Are you suggesting that venture capitalism be eliminated and/or regulated by government?” –> NO … I am for as little regulation as possible, if we are to generalize here.

            ” … Mitt will win. Get used to it, and get in line.” … we shall see … and easy to type now. At the end of the day IMO Newt > Mitt > POTUS.

    • Anonymous

      Romney is not the one complaining. Rush is.

      I think it is a good idea to go ahead and try the democrat’s arguments on Romney. If he is going to sink, now is the time for it to happen.

      • Anonymous

        To an extent, but pissed off Conservatives cannot be replicated in the primaries.

        Romney is going down.

        • Anonymous

          Romney and Newt both will probably go down after this. Leaves us Perry, Santorum or Huntsman? Hmmmmm. Perry or Santorum.

          • Anonymous

            Perry

            • Anonymous

              Ditto.

              • Anonymous

                ANYBODY but omaba!

            • Anonymous

              [waits 53 seconds]

              No

      • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=594162904 Cheryl Pryor

        That was my point that you know this is coming from Obama if Romney is the one, and Romney doesn’t have to complain all his many surrogates are doing it for him. Its really is ridiculous, like the other candidates are traitors or something. Take a look at NR lately they are having seizures. But we need to vett him now not in November. And I find it interesting the one who made the Bain film is an old Romney staffer.

        • Anonymous

          …old Romney staffer.

          Is that like a disgruntled employee?

    • Anonymous

      exactly right — don’t THINK for a moment that the Obombunistas weren’t ready to throw this out and have the lamestream press hammer on about Bain 24/7….all the while giving Zero NO attention to Fast and Furious and 15 trillion and one other things they could wail on Zero for but won’t.

  • Anonymous

    Yeah. Newt’s been doing that a lot lately. That interview he had with Chris Matthews really pissed me off when he doubled down on the whole Swift Boat thing by equating the Swiftie attack on Kerry as a personal attack. It was not a personal attack and everything they said was true.

    I’m not at all happy with Newt. I’ll vote for him if he gets to Florida but after the last week of hearing things he’s said a part of me hopes he doesn’t make it this far.

    • Anonymous

      He’s letting his pride and emotions carry him away from the goal. Romney was using conservative talking points against Newt in Iowa and Newt wants to use lefty talking points against Romney in NH and SC? Good luck with that.

      Methinks the brass ring will be harder to grasp with that mode of attack. Newt might not even be able to see it, much less grab it. For him, it’s shrinking, unless he shifts into another gear or a completely different vehicle. He’s mimicking the lefty attacks with his own mouth too. Not smart in my little opinion.

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1252130808 Paige Cohen

      In case we all forgot – Dr. Paul’s “Serial Hypocrisy” (viewed over a million times on You Tube alone) and Michael Savage’s one million dollar offer to Newt to drop detailing all of his negative points is what set Newt on his way down.

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_37V4NGVXB5AZYUJWLZ6GLEZPYY the_iowa_haw…

        You are very correct sir. However, to the anti-Romney (anti-Mormon) crowd it is still all Romney’s fault.

      • Anonymous

        Oh you mean the Michael Savage that said he wanted Romney in the worst way to win and now says he wouldn’t vote for him no matter what, that Savage? Maybe instead he should offer the million to Newt if he would take out Romney before Florida, now that would be doing something good with his million.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_WEFKR6GCPA5G5WDR77MW5X56FQ Reed

      In case you care, what actually happened is that a reported asked him if he was being “Swiftboated”, and he replied that he was being “Romneyboated”. just being witty, and no he didn’t call the Swiftboat guys liars.

  • Anonymous

    I want a President that likes to fire people. Especially unproductive people. And unecessary people. As I think about it, Romney gets a gold star for being the president most likely to ruthlessly eliminate jobs in government.

    • Anonymous

      The problem is not the people he fired but those who were laid off.

      • Anonymous

        Not following your comment. A president can only fire federal govt employees. Since we know Romney is glad to lay off employees to stream line a private enterprise, I am thinking he will be a ruthless terminator as President. Isn’t that what we want?

        • Anonymous

          This is a whole different dynamic. Everyone wants to see incompetents fired but nobody wants to see people who work hard lose their job because some fat cats came in, bought the company, got their profit and closed the doors. In this economy it will not play well.

    • Mark Urbo

      Right on !!! Fire Fed. Gov. employees until we cut the gov. size in half…

      • http://www.facebook.com/people/Kevin-Kelley/100002304808413 Kevin Kelley

        As a long time Republican and Christian I can’t wait to get to vote for Ron Paul.

        • http://profiles.google.com/sixelk Larry Miller

          After you study his foreign policy, you won’t be so enamored. Remember, he has been in congress for twenty something years. If he isn’t a political insider, they don’t make one.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_WEFKR6GCPA5G5WDR77MW5X56FQ Reed

    He’s pretty much right, but then again I don’t really care. I hope Newt takes Romney out.

    If Romney is my party’s nominee, then it’s not my party anymore. I’ll be looking for a conservative party after 2012. Republicans hate my kind almost as much as Democrats do, or so it seems.

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1252130808 Paige Cohen

      Well, I really hope Mitt pleasantly surprises you and you are satisfied with his Presidency. He really is a good man – a conservative man –

      • Anonymous

        Where did you get the idea Mitt is a conservative? Even Mitt doesn’t call himself a conservative.

        • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_37V4NGVXB5AZYUJWLZ6GLEZPYY the_iowa_haw…

          Yes, actually he does call himself a conservative. Try reading his 140 page jobs plan and you will see who the real conservative is in this race.

          • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=594162904 Cheryl Pryor

            His jobs plan is the weakest out of anyone who is running and is actually Obama light. I do not think it is bold or strong enough to reverse the damage that has been done.

          • Anonymous

            I live in Mass. Mitt is pathetic and couldn’t have cared less about this state. Why would I think he’d care any more about this country? Mitt is all about MITT.

          • http://twitter.com/113KriEger 13Krieger

            Face it….Romney is a progressive. Who says so….why Mitt Romney himself.

            Mitt Romney is no Conservative. He is a liberal progressive Republican!!!!!!!!!!

      • Anonymous

        Romney is conservative and has the record to show it… oh yea.

      • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=594162904 Cheryl Pryor

        Mitt is not a Conservative, name one thing in his record that is Conservative?

      • Anonymous

        Conservative? ha. That is funny. This is the guy who pushed to have homosexual “marriage” when he didn’t have to! The guy who personally signed 150 homosexual licenses when he didn’t have to! The guy who pushed to have ObamneyCare with $50 abortions (three years after he flipped to “pro-life”) The guy who says he didn’t raise taxes (no, he called them fees instead – someone explain the difference) The guy who wants to force the Boys Scouts into having homosexual Scout Masters. No Romney is no conservative, he is a wolf in sheep’s clothing.

        • Anonymous

          My License to Carry – which I never felt I needed until Obama got into office – cost me $100 instead of $25. Thanks Mr. Conservative Romney!

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_WEFKR6GCPA5G5WDR77MW5X56FQ Reed

        TY Paige, that’s the nicest response I’ve ever gotten on this type of post. I bet you’re a nice person, and I hope you are right.

      • Anonymous

        Oh crap…. just snorted wine out my nose. Damn that buuuurrrns!

      • http://twitter.com/113KriEger 13Krieger

        Face it….Romney is a progressive. Who says so….why Mitt Romney himself.

        Mitt Romney is no Conservative. He is a liberal progressive Republican!!!!!!!!!!

    • Shawn Mueller

      Really, so you want a second term for Obama? None of the canidates can come close to Romney as to ability. So what if he isn’t conservative enough for you, he will be a good president.

      • ItsJo

        ABO – “Anybody But Obama”, who would continue to bring about America’s Demise as he is doing Deliberately. Remember, he thinks America is an ‘arrogant nation'(his words) as he desparaged us worldwide. He wants us to become a third world nation, and get in line with the “One World Order” he/Soros and the rest of the Anti-America crowd envision.

        At least Newt has the tenacity to ‘get back into the Lapdog Media’s face and I for one think it’s good. The Leftie bias of Stephanopolus(Obama’s Pal) and Dianne was laughable as they jointly compared notes for the next “Gotcha”

      • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=594162904 Cheryl Pryor

        There is actually no record or proof that he will be a good President that is why I have such a hard time supporting him. I don’t doubt he is a good and decent man but not who we need in this moment in time.

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_WEFKR6GCPA5G5WDR77MW5X56FQ Reed

        Your question presumes that 1)Romney can beat Obama. and 2) Romney would be a good president if he gets elected.

        Forget the “electability” thing, as that all boils down to opinion, and I reckon my opinion will differ from yours.

        What in his history gives you the impression that Romney will be a good president? For most of the last 17 years, he’s been running for political office. And the one office he won, governor of Massachusetts, what exactly were his achievements there? Romneycare, if you care to call that an achievement. And that’s it. Nothing at all that you could conceivably argue advanced a conservative or republican agenda.

        I know all about Romney. He was my governor. Before that he ran for senate against Ted Kennedy, and both times I voted for Mitt. When running for senate, he made it a point to say that he DID NOT SUPPORT Ronald Reagan, he did not support George Bush, that he was unabashedly pro-abortion and pro gay rights and he said he hoped to bring the republican party to the left on these issues. Now he’s pretending to be a conservative? Please…

        Like I said, if Romney is the preferred candidate of the Republican party, then I need a new party.

        http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2011/12/mitt-romney-called-himself-progressive-in-2002.html
        http://www.wnd.com/2012/01/94104/

        • Anonymous

          From Massachusetts: He did NOTHING to give the impression he’d be a good president. He couldn’t be bothered to be in the state to GOVERN. Too busy moving on to take care of business here…. well, except for signing off on gay marriage and tax increases when he could swing through. He was ABSENT for the most part. More interested in being Prez. The liberals liked him though. Even elected him.

    • Anonymous

      Sorry Reed. I think Newt has become a pathetic embarrassment to the conservative movement. But if he pulls it off and wins the nomination, I will show up and pull the lever. And if it is Romney, you will be there on voting day to cast your ballot as well.

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_WEFKR6GCPA5G5WDR77MW5X56FQ Reed

        Of course I’d vote for Romney versus Obama. I’ll probably get drunk afterwards, to try to forget about it, as with McCain. I will not be happy about it, even if Romney wins, as I’ll see it as a lost opportunity to advance conservatism and save this country from the insipid left.

        And if Romney gets the nomination, then it will be the last cycle where I am a member of and a donor to the Republican party of which I’ve been a registered member since I was old enough to vote.

    • Anonymous

      If Romney is the nominee, there’ll be no point in paying attention anymore. The country will be “fundamentally transformed” to the point of no return. Elections Nov. 2012. End of Mayan calendar Dec. 2012. Col-inkydink?

  • http://www.fatboy.cc Teddy Kennedy’s SEARCH+RESCUE

    Newt also uses the climate change couch provided by the left.
    http://www.FATBOY.cc

  • http://twitter.com/buckleyplanet Christian Buckley

    Can someone tell me why laying off people to save the overall business is a negative? The only “business” that continues to grow in employees while losing money hand-over-fist is the federal (and most state) government. If I had to layoff 25% of my workforce to save the other 75%, I would take that deal every day.

    • Anonymous

      It isn’t that laying people off to save the business is wrong, it is that that venture firms leverage all the funds out of a company to increase investor income, and then leave the company without the needed assets to continue normal business which then results in them laying off and perhaps going bankrupt. But the investors walk away with their investment plus! Venture capital isn’t about building a business from the ground up, finding a marketing strategy and growing a company, it is about making money for investors.

      I a huge fan of capitalism, but not venture capital or corporate raiders! I have had this concern about Romney since I worked for his cousin in the late 90’s.

      • Anonymous

        EXACTLY! Speculators are out for the bucks.

        • Anonymous

          So are capitalists in general, AND THERE’S NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT, you hack. Investment is how new business and fixing failed business WORK, as well as how new ventures and such works. You’re not a conservative so stop pretending you are.

      • Anonymous

        “it is about making money for investors [which is BAAAAD or something]. I [am] huge fan of capitalism”

        Your statements are contradictory. You’re no capitalist. You’re a Progressive a la Teddy Roosevelt: (paraphrasing him) “We don’t begrudge people getting rich, so long as they do so in a way we APPROVE of.” (And don’t muddy the water with some stupid claim about me being the same way when I “disapprove” of certain practices because they’re immoral or illegal; making money for investors is neither.)

        The fact is, Bain SAVED companies. If those companies didn’t need saving, they wouldn’t have ever been managed by Bain in the first place.

        • Anonymous

          You didn’t read his reply. Capitalism is about building things, not tearing down perfectly functional businesses for the gain of a few corporate raiders.

          • Bill Dalasio

            That’s simply not true. In a free market some businesses fail. Some never realize their full potential. A PE firm will never be attracted to a firm that is already building long-term shareholder value. Its stock will already be fully valued and the dividends that could be pulled out would not be sufficient to justify the investment. Part of generating long-term shareholder value is taking risks. Sometimes those risks pan out. Other times they don’t. When they don’t or when the company isn’t generating long-term shareholder value, the right thing, the moral thing, to do is to take those resources and put them to work somewhere else. Shutting down a badly run company that is taking up productive resources is what markets are supposed to do.

        • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_7UEARTV7NQ2DL7P5FCSZOROHBA EllenK

          People can make money in anyway that is legal as far as I am concerned. But the businessman who I would vote for as president I would want to be a builder, the creator of business, and and not a predator and a raider. Romney is simply not a builder. The businessman (or woman) who I would want for president is the one who has built up a business, has sweated blood, sweat, and tears to keep it viable, who understands what it takes to keep a business running, who realizes hat many people, not just the investors, depend on his business for their livlihood, and for the goods and/or services his business produces, and takes that responsibility to heart; indeed he wants the people of his city, his country, to thrive. I want a businessman president who does not like to fire people, and finds the fact that he occasionally must fire someone the most difficult part of being a businessman.

          Indeed, the businessman presidential candidate does not have to be that sort of person, and may indeed make a lot of money for the investors, and his only care is to make money for himself and his investors — that is not necessarily immoral, that is what he was hired to do. But this businessman is not a hero and that is just not the sort of businessman I want in the White House. He is not good for business.

          And by the way, that corporate-raiding predatory “businessman” who make a lot of money for the investor and himself by finding and destroying a profitable business does so by sucking out a company’s retained earnings (undistributed profits) that it needs to stay viable during an economic downtown, and that is not the business model that is going to save the American economy. (Indeed the one thing every viable profitable corporation fears is the raider, the raider destroys the business. Once upon a time not so long ago, business 101 taught you they were not heroes, business 101 taught you that retained earnings (undistributed profits) were important, and one of the most important reasons was so that the business did not have to lay off its highly trained reliable work force during an economic downturn; business 101 also taught you that there is an unavoidable cyclical nature to the economy, and there will be recessions, the important thing for the business is to position itself to weather those downturns. corporate raiding makes that impossible to do so; a successful business that has been raided most likely will fail.

          One of the problems that a profitable thriving business must deal with is to find the right balance, to not distribute so much income to the stockholder that it threatens the viabibility of the business making it unattractive to raiders, but also to make sure it has enough liquidity to keep the doors open when the economy is not so good (which also protects the investors.) Corporate raiding has always been a threat to profitable businesses, but it has never been a good thing for anyone except the guy who has plundered the business.

          Again, perhaps there is not too much that can be done about it, legally, but the smart CEO who cares about staying in business, cares about his employees, his customers, his stockholders, is aware of it, and tries to prevent that from happening. Again let me reiterate this, so you get it, the raiders are not heroes, they are not saviors of economies; they are wolves and they are pirates. And that is who Mitt Romney really is. He is not going to turn the economy around, he does not know how.

          It is the Main Street businessman we need, not Wall Street, and Romney is most definitely not Main Street! (Cain on the other hand really is Main Street, the guy who saved a business and made it a profitable going concern that employs lots of people, I’m sorry that Cain was pushed out, he does understand.)

          Sometimes the best way to address an issue just might be leftist rhetoric! And in this case, it is. Romney’s way of making money, the crony capitalist, the Wall Street wonderboy, the corporate raider, is not good for the economic viability of this country and, by golly, whatever language takes to make peple take notice and realize this is okay. Old Rush shouldn’t be bothered by this.

      • Ryan Petty

        Well, us being the tax payer (the investor), I wouldn’t mind a President coming in and doing a little venture capitalism to federal employees!

      • Anonymous

        This might be a dumb question, but did Romney actually leverage firms into bankruptcy or help them reorganize into continued operations?

        I’m not familiar with his specific projects but know he helped Staples get up and running and it is still a going concern.

        I know nothing about any other corporations he worked with, but know firsthand that some venture capitalists do indeed take more than they help.

        I’m not a Romney fan per se, but I definitely support the free market. Where it is failing is in enforcement/repeal of securities laws that previously protected the market from profiteering. (IMHO)

        • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_I3Q44KCLOVKY4NOSNCDJRW4Q6Q Monica says hi
          • Anonymous

            You have to remember that National Review is very pro-Romney just as the rest of the Republican establishment is – and you will not necessarily get an honest report from them.

            The Republican elite (RNC and DC insiders in politics and the media) are trying to choose our candidate. It is “Romney’s turn” and they have pushed for him since day one… saying he is the only one who can beat Obama – etc.

            Don’t be manipulated by their assertions. Their record isn’t very good. They told us that Dole and McCain were the only ones who could get elected too.
            They are too-often wrong!!! If they force Romney down our throats and he loses, they will have a lot to answer for because Obama will destroy this country!

            Do your own research – check the facts.. and vote your conscience. Don’t allow the politicians and pundits to make the choice for you.

          • Anonymous

            Oh sure I am going to believe in an article from a guy who worked for Bain Capitol. Right.

            • Anonymous

              lol… well, that’s part of the homework. I wouldn’t trust someone who worked for their competitors either.

              So, who do you trust? A guy who worked IN it, or a guy who worked against it, or the guy who didn’t bother to do anything with it?

              You have to read them all I guess.

              • Anonymous

                I’ll tell you who I won’t trust and that is Romney. Nor will I ever vote for him. His record in Mass is enough to let people know he is NOT a conservative no matter what he SAYS now.

                • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_YOQJV2QXW7GGSD4V6ZPNUMQ7OM Moving to AZ…legally

                  I will vote for an empty orange juice can over Obama. Stating you won’t “ever vote for Romney” is saying you will prefer Obama to finish destroying us over having Romney be malleable in the way Clinton was ….to lead where we tell him to lead by voting in good House and Senate folks

                  Don’t stay home, vote for ABO

                • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_47MAASWZQSYUOGK2ZN7WO36C5M Mike

                  I will vote for a full septic tank over Obamanure.

                • Anonymous

                  This is exactly how we got McCain last time. Everyone is so stinkin worried about beating Obama that they are not using, well anyway, we have to stop this thing about voting for someone because the MEDIA gets you to believe they can beat Obama. The first clue – DON’T PAY ATTENTION TO THE MEDIA. It’s all bogus, look 75% of the people who voted in Iowa voted AGAINST Romney. What does that tell you? So how does the Media get away with telling everyone this nomination is pretty much over??? Come on people stop being sheeple. Don’t fall for it AGAIN.

                • Anonymous

                  Sure. So if you are all about the record, let’s look at the records:

                  Now, here is the real problem: Romeny has a bad record in Mass, Perry used to be a democrat and used executive order to push mandates on individuals, Santorum has spending issues as well as issues on whether he is for or against big government, Ron Paul is hypocritical on pork spending, is unable to get the rest of Congress to work with him, and has dismal, isolationist foreign policy. Huntsman has an unabashed political climbing history and takes credit for other’s accomplishments. And finally Newt has a record a mile long with serious issues on ideology, GSE’s, progressive liberal worship, and campaign finance fraud. (MOST of that was proven false, but some wasn’t.)

                  So, who do you vote for? At this point it is an establishment ‘win’ no matter what happens.

                • Anonymous

                  If they all have flaws then pick the one who has the best, most intelligent most wide ranging, most comprehensive ideas and one who can turn the questions around on the media elite and bash them over their heads with a question of his own as he did in New Hampshire deates. One who can debate anyone and come out on top. Newt. Just remember don’t trust what you read about his record.

      • Anonymous

        Ever notice that it is hard to make money for investors, and not have a successful business? It is also hard to have successful businesses without good employees, and successful businesses tend to grow. I’ve just noticed that, have you?

        It is all about perspective, and it depends on the one you take. Not every company works out this way, and some are pumped for cash, it is true. But usually, successful businesses grow, and others tend to die. Whether they die slowly or not is up for debate. Greed is always bad.

  • http://fishygov.wordpress.com FishyGov

    Good for Romeny!

    If I had his kind of money I wouldn’t want to toss it down the Federal wishing well either.

  • Anonymous

    I’d expect this line of attack against Capitalism and the free market from the left but not from other republicans. Let me get this straight: The candidates who claim Romney is not conservative enough are attacking Romney from the left? Huh?

    • Anonymous

      Bingo.

      By their works ye shall know them.

  • Cherylyn Nielson

    Wow…it makes me cringe to think that a supposed conservative Republican is going after Romney for trying to make businesses more profitable and efficient. What does Newt want? Businesses never to be able to fire people? No businesses can fail because people might actually lose their jobs? Maybe we should just let the government control everything so we don’t have to worry about our job security….and we all know how that turns out. Yikes.

    • Anonymous

      Mitt’s problem is at least two of them are in SC.

    • Anonymous

      You’re missing the point. obama will be using this argument.

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_WEFKR6GCPA5G5WDR77MW5X56FQ Reed

        Yup. So lets watch him handle it…

    • Anonymous

      Newt really likes GSE’s, (Government sponsored entities/enterprises), like Freddie and Fanny. You can find heaps of comments from him on this in the 90’s and while he was speaker, and some as recent as Dec. (http://www.nashuatelegraph.com/news/944210-196/gingrichs-pants-on-fire-on-blanket-government-sponsored.html) He would create more of them if he had the chance, because he sees them as a tool for ‘good’.

      Why else do you think Freddy and Fanny turned to HIM, when they have all sorts of Democrat friends in the House and Senate with very serious power at the time? Ever asked that question? The Media did ask Newt, and he brushed it off without answering the question ‘Why did they come to you?’. His statement. A: Consulting. Q: To do what? A: Precisely what they didn’t do.

      He never answered.

    • Anonymous

      Newt really likes GSE’s, (Government sponsored entities/enterprises), like Freddie and Fanny. You can find heaps of comments from him on this in the 90’s and while he was speaker, and some as recent as Dec. (http://www.nashuatelegraph.com/news/944210-196/gingrichs-pants-on-fire-on-blanket-government-sponsored.html) He would create more of them if he had the chance, because he sees them as a tool for ‘good’.

      Why else do you think Freddy and Fanny turned to HIM, when they have all sorts of Democrat friends in the House and Senate with very serious power at the time? Ever asked that question? The Media did ask Newt, and he brushed it off without answering the question ‘Why did they come to you?’. His statement. A: Consulting. Q: To do what? A: Precisely what they didn’t do.

      He never answered.

  • Anonymous

    Good. What kind of language do you think barry will use in the general if McRomney is the nominee??

    • Anonymous

      Sounds like Barry and Newt have the same problems with Romney. Is Newt really a conservative?

      • Anonymous

        Well, we know Romney is a RINO and must be stopped. That is all that matters.

        • Anonymous

          this purism is exactly what’s wrong with politics today, odd that a lot of so called Reagan Conservatives forget one of his best quotes

          “The person who agrees with you 80 percent of the time is a friend and an ally — not a 20 percent traitor.”

          • Anonymous

            It’s not purism, they are called PRINCIPALS.

            Romney shares nearly none of my principals, and I will not support him.

      • Anonymous

        Newt, conservative? Under my definition: NO.

        Progressive conservative? Yes.

        So, depending on your definition…?

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1252130808 Paige Cohen

    Rush – just doesn’t get it. Everyone hates Newt – period. Romney will prove to the country that he is better than Obama – Newt can’t do that.

    • Anonymous

      Being able to govern better than Obama is not a very high bar to get over.

      Romney is a big government guy, so what we will see with a President Romney are some changes at the edges, but big government will remain. As Perry says, we’re just choosing between different lever pullers, all faithful to the government machine.
      http://www.redstate.com/governorperry/2012/01/09/the-choice/

    • Anonymous

      A little harsh; not everyone hates Newt and though I am not supporting him I would add since 75% are not Romney he has yet to prove to anyone he is better than Obama. The only reason he is winning NH is because he lives there which IMHO is not a national referendum for his nomination.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_WEFKR6GCPA5G5WDR77MW5X56FQ Reed

      I don’t hate him. I’ll be the first to admit, he’s kind of a *ick, but I’m looking for a leader not a BFF.

    • Anonymous

      When you make enemies, it means you are doing something to shake up the status quo. Ever heard of Dale Carnegie? Whenever people are passionate in their hate for someone, I always look at that person with a little more respect. Ask yourself just why the Dems, GOP Establishment and media all hate Newt? Are you one of those people who wants to do whatever it takes to be liked? Cause if you are, you’ll never make a difference. Newt is the one who can turn things around, because he doesn’t CARE if these jerks like him or not. It’s a freedom that not many people know. (One I value because I learned it the hard way – standing by my principals and speaking up. I have great respect for Newt. It is not an easy thing he is doing.)

  • Anonymous

    I see your point, but the mudslinging ads started with Mitt. Newt has simply verbalized reported findings, not fabrications. Go Newt!!

  • Anonymous

    I was listening to Hannity w/ newt and simply couldn’t take any more of humpty dumpty.

    newtie reminds me of a kid who lived in my neighborhood years ago. If something didn’t go his way he started whining and calling everyone names.

    this guy (newtie) would be i) completely unelectable and ii) an unmitigated disaster if he was elected. as evidence, I hear that todd palin has endorsed him. Geeze. It’s getting harder by the day to deal w/ repub candidate airheads. Romney has to get the nod.

    • Anonymous

      Spoken like a true liberal – making the point that Newt is the conservative we need.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Paul-Haugh/1132590520 Paul Haugh

    I’m a big fan of both Rush and Newt, and I will say this. Think what you will, but Romney lost me in this election season. I was thinking at one point “Well, he’s not my candidate of choice, but I’ll vote for him if he gets the nod.” But with the negative attack ad BS that has gone on, and his outright DENIAL of having anything to do with it…

    Mitt Romney, YOU SIR, ARE A COWARD. You got something to say, say to the politicians face. Don’t hide behind your little PACs and then claim innocence. We see behind your facade. While I don’t like attack ads period, at least Ron Paul and Newt Gingrich had the stones to come out and say that they knew about these ads.

    I will continue to say it. Mitt Romney, YOU ARE A COWARD. Period. And I will never vote for a coward for president.

    • Anonymous

      Yeah, did you notice how he “hadn’t seen the ad” but happened to know every detail of it? Even the bit about abortion, even though Newt didn’t mention that part. Amazing.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Steven-Valdez/1806887704 Steven Valdez

    Poll: Romney drops for fifth straight day in NH http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/polls/203089-poll-romney-drops-for-fifth-straight-day-in-new-hampshire

    Santorum has gone up 8 points since being at 3% on New Years

  • http://twitter.com/113KriEger 13Krieger

    It may make Rush feel alittle ”uncomfortable” but as Rush said Romney started it and after that ”Katie bar the door” because the gloves come off. It must not really bother him too much because Rush was laughing about it at the end. So, I dont think Rush is as uncomfortable as the headling of this thread makes it appear. I think he is just making a point that Romney has taken the Republican political process to a new low. Remember Romney and Paul were the ones that started with the negative mud slinging not the others in the Republican field. The other Republicans ”Huntsman included” played pretty much positive ads advocating their positions on the issues. It was Romney / Paul that started with the smears and mud slinging.

    I say good…..Romney needs to be taught a lesson that if you are going to play dirty politics the knife cuts both ways!

    Go Newt Go!

  • http://twitter.com/doorsxp Doors Xp

    The fact remains that Romney has not been clear about what he did in the private sector. Romney wants to take CREDIT for a career in the private sector, thus he needs to explain what it is he actually did in the private sector. He obviously didn’t work his way up from fry-cook to CEO like Herman Cain. What exactly did he do? How did he operate? What was his business philosophy? These things matter and Romney has NEVER answered any of it in any real detail. Why do we know more about Herman Cain’s business career than Romney’s? Tell us about the business career you’re so proud of Mitt. What’s there to hide?

    • Anonymous

      But hey, he looks good!

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_WEFKR6GCPA5G5WDR77MW5X56FQ Reed

        His hair is impeccable.

      • Anonymous

        Not really. Not anymore.

  • Anonymous

    Watch out folks! Moo-shell O’Bama says she fears white Irish Catholics….oh wait, there are none in the GOP race. Whew! close Call!

    • Anonymous

      That’s probably why she doesn’t like talk radio.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Sheldon-Ort/100000233780349 Sheldon Ort

    Are these the best candidates the Republicans can offer? What a sad group to vote for.
    Hope a new candidate will come out from the convention. Someone who has not held elective office.

    • Anonymous

      Agreed. Out of 300 million people and this is the best? Something is wrong with the nominating process then. Quality people won’t, or are not allowed to run it appears.

      • Anonymous

        The media and the two parties pick them. They all seem to work together.

  • Anonymous

    NEWT is ll about newtie boy…always HAS been. He puts everyone (ask his ex wives) behind his political ambitions…including the voters. He ripped us in 1995-96 and he would do it again because his FIRST THOUGHT after getting elected would be how to WIN REELECTION! He will slither over to the left so fast it will make us dizzy!

    • http://twitter.com/doorsxp Doors Xp

      Therefore…the nominee should be???

      • Anonymous

        Well, with Michelle Bachman out of the race, the only one left that really believes what he is saying, and says what he believes, is Ron Paul. Maybe it’s time to get crazy!

      • Anonymous

        Doors that is the question of the year…I just know who it shouldn’t be based on past performance…obviously MY opinion only. NO PERRY, NO NEWT, NO HUNTSMAN…still waiting to sort out the rest of the miserable field.

    • Anonymous

      If Mitt had done to you what he did to Newt, what would you have done?

      • Anonymous

        PS I am not supporting Newt.

        • Anonymous

          PS: I’m not voting for Romney

          • Anonymous

            PS I am not supporting Romney either.

      • Anonymous

        I would have regretted giving him the ammunition in the first place!

  • Phocus Please

    I love Rush…have for 20 years. But right now, with his slams on Romney, he’s not saying what I’m thinking as he has in the past. Very uncomfortable…very. I listened to Romney Sat. night…and I saw passion and a guy I trust.

    • http://twitter.com/doorsxp Doors Xp

      You trust Romney? Wow. I got some property in AZ I’d like to sell you; great ocean views, you’d love it.

      • Phocus Please

        Yo Doors…if you have ocean view property here in AZ to sell, that means you had to purchase it sometime…right? You might not be the right guy to be questioning anyone’s trust. Good luck moving that property.

    • Anonymous

      I suppose you trusted Geaorge W. Bush too, and Barrack Obama. “Trust but verify?”

      • Anonymous

        Mistrust of government is the foundation of our republic.

    • Anonymous

      You saw passion in Romney? Were you drunk?

  • RedinDenver

    I NEVER thought I’d see supposedly conservative Republicans attacking capitalism/free markets. I think it’s a really BAD strategy.

    AND — everyone keeps saying Newt’s downfall was due to the ads run by Super PACs supporting Mitt Romney. But, the majority of the negative ads (2/3) were run by Rick Perry or Ron Paul. Ron Paul’s were particularly damaging (nasty).

    I personally think Newt’s downfall was in part because there was TRUTH to the stuff in the ads. THAT, coupled with his over-the-top reaction to the ads is what turned people off of him.

    When he first started in this campaign, I thought the ‘elder statesman’ Newt was pretty impressive. But now, he just seems a bit unbalanced — like a suicide bomber — more interested in killing off his rival than in ensuring the survival of his own candidacy.

    I don’t know — it may be way too late — but Newt needs to CHILL a bit. He looks a whole lot more like Mr. Hyde than he does Dr. Jekyll the past several weeks.

    • Anonymous

      I don’t think the problem is conservatives attacking capitalism, but about a company buying out another, taking 300 million or billion profit (can’t remember which) and then laying off everyone. The bad news for Mitt is two of these companies are in SC. P

      PS my husband has owned more than one business so I understand how things work but this looks bad.

      • Anonymous

        So you may understand how hard it can be to fire someone when you really want to, due to fear of legal backlash. I don’t support Romney, but a free society should not have this happening.

        • Anonymous

          I agree, but there are many who will not and there is no way Mitt can win the general after this; that is if he can survive SC and the rest of the primary. We are a capitalist society; however, there are more employees than employers and they will have their say. I only wonder how many other companies and what other states are involved.

          After Iowa when I heard Newt had decided to take the gloves off I wrote he and Romney would eventually destroy each other. You know how these things go; nobody wins and everybody loses.

          I am glad I am not supporting either.

          • Anonymous

            I don’t know how people can say that the socialist mentality has not infiltrated the republican party. How many things have they supported, “for the good of society” that has nothing to do with direct harm to a person or their property?

            We are near the bottom of the slippery slope.

            I agree that we are a capitalist society, but what kind? I say, crony capitalist, not free market. You?

            • Anonymous

              Both parties are big government; the agenda is different. Because of conservatives the GOP hasn’t reached socialism yet but the Dems have passed socialism into Marxism under Obama.

              There is too much crony capitalism and this is why the Tea Party came about. We really do need to change our ways and rid ourselves of much in DC and our state capitals.

              I also agree we are on a slippery slope but as a Christian I also believe God is still on His Throne and so feel confident our nation will once again be great if only we seek Him. Prayer changes things. Look at Tebow; he is a good lesson for every American.

              • Anonymous

                I belileve God is in control too. The scary thing is, the bible is proving to be more true than anyone could ever believe. Prayer can change things, but for how long? I continue to pray for our nation and hope Revelation is not ready to come true yet. But now, I CAN see how easily it can happen.

                • Anonymous

                  Jesus told us in Luke 8:50 “fear not, believe only” so do not be afraid because God cares for His people; the Lord is not finished with us yet. Besides, look at what happened with Tim Tebow yesterday; that was the glory of God and I believe we will see more of it this year. Keep the faith!

            • Anonymous

              Good point. Too many have learned how to “play the game” to get rich, at the expense of the “sheep”. That’s why the salaries and bennies need to go to be a representative. They are supposed to be servants of the public. Their positions were not intended to be life long and make them rich.

              • Anonymous

                Yep. I say we go back a couple hundred years and have them meet for a few months every two years. After we wipe out 150 years of bad governance.

      • Anonymous

        Lets put is simply: It’s sort of like the insider trading congress is involved in. Completely legal, but unethical. Look like you are trying to save a company…. work it so the investors profit, then let the normal joes lose their jobs while you walk away with millions. Wonder what Mitt’s stock purchases and sales were at the time…… that will be interesting to see.

        • Anonymous

          The whole system is messed up. Government favors corporations in regulation and legislation. The bankers print money and lend it at no interest to them. They use that money to inflate stocks. When their bad investment goes down, the company is either bailed out or fails, depending on the roll that the company serves in the system. Meanwhile government regulated pensions and retirement accounts are based on inflated stock values and an inflated currency. Therefor everyone else goes down when the stocks or currency fails.

          In the mean time, the smart people are investing in commodities because the inflation is hiking commodity futures, and the suckers with 401ks can’t get in on it, or invest in gold in their “retirements”.

    • Anonymous

      “I think it’s a really BAD strategy” (RedinDenver)

      Of course it is! It makes Romney look like he’s more conservative than they.

      Aaaahahahaha!

      *shakes head* I wonder if Mitt’s a very good chess player.

    • Anonymous

      newt is NOT attacking capitalism. You obviously are only wathing the clips and pundits. Try watching a full interview with Newt explaining exactly what he has a problem with. God I hate it when people listen to the MSM quotes and then repeat them.

      • Anonymous

        People will be learning and liking Newt a lot more in the coming weeks as he gains momentum. Money is starting to come his way and for good reason. Newt has real solutions for real problems and ready to serve, not rule.If you think not, his work on the grassroots level say different.

      • RedinDenver

        Maybe you should address this to Rush, since he seems to feel the same way I do. I will say again: an attack against free market capitalism is not something I would expect to hear from people who supposedly believe in that system.

  • ItsJo

    With all due respect Rush, Gingrich is “telling it like it is, and telling the Lapdog media
    to back off with their total disregard to Republican candidates. I am glad he is telling off this Leftist media who are merely ‘Obama Bootlickers’ and are “Dan Rathering for Obama to win another term”. Newt is showing he will not take the their blatent bias and is calling them out. This IS a good thing, especially watching that Leftie Stephanopolus making statements for his buddy Obama, and pretending they are legitimate questions. He is in the tank, and it showed. Especially when he and Dianne Sawyer were ‘conferring with their notes to each other while one of the candidates was speaking–looked like they jointly were looking for a “good gotcha”

  • http://twitter.com/cnctNow Ben Anderson

    I’d like to be able to fire Obama. So I’m with Romney when he says “I like being able to fire people”

  • Anonymous

    I support a lot of Newt’s ideas but he’s now coming across as an angry, petty, bitter old man who most likely would lose to Obama by 20 points or more. Romney’s PAC cut him to shreds but let’s face it — Newt’s nomination would be a disaster for conservatives simply because his loss in the general would permanently install ObamaCare and embolden Obama to accelerate his program to turn the U.S. into Europe. Newt needs to buck up, quit crying in his milk, and take one for the country.

  • CQ50

    Newt sounds like he has joined the ranks of Occupy Wall Street. Sounds like an anti-capitalist to me. I think this will come back to bite him.

  • Roman Mironenko

    Newt Romney – that’s the stuff.

    Ron Paul 2012.

  • Edward Drews

    Yup just like Google beating up on Mitt by ranking the android app: Flip-Flop Mitt Romney so high in the Android Market. The left has already begun to attack Romney. Just stay tuned.

  • http://assetprotection365.com/ rush said what?

    seriously? newt is a liberal? where’s the proof, rush?

  • Anonymous

    I support a lot of Newt’s ideas but he’s now coming across as an angry, petty, bitter old man who most likely would lose to Obama by 20 points or more. Romney’s PAC cut him to shreds but let’s face it — Newt’s nomination would be a disaster for conservatives simply because his loss in the general would permanently install ObamaCare and embolden Obama to accelerate his program to turn the U.S. into Europe. Newt needs to buck up, quit crying in his milk, and take one for the country.

  • Anonymous

    I have to agree with Rush somewhat. The angle of this Bain thing is more towards the ‘OWS’ angle (Corporate deals / Venture Capitalists), and not the ‘Crony Capitalist’ angle (special treatment, inside crony deals with politicians, etc..).

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_GNFOTCDBLUCFYYPPCKAGJYF4PQ WhiteE

    Hey Ron Paul, how about passing some legislation sometime in your career so you can change the things you want to change, if you cannot write, propose, or introduce your thoughts, policies, and proposals, how can you lead as President?

    Presidential Candidate Ricky Santorum = Eddie” Haskell!

    Ricky looks like Eddie Haskell the smart-mouthed best friend of Wally Cleaver.

    Ward Cleaver once remarked that “Eddie is so polite, it’s almost Un-American and one has to question his motives”.

    Ricky like Eddie Haskell was known for his neat grooming — hiding his shallow and sneaky character.

    Typically, Eddie would greet his friends’ parents with overdone good manners and often a compliment such as, “That’s a lovely dress you’re wearing, Mrs. Cleaver” or “Hi, Mrs. Weber.”

    Just like Ricky does with voters.

    However, when no parents were around, Eddie was always up to no good — either conniving with his friends, or picking on Wally’s younger brother Beaver.

    Eddie’s two-faced style was also typified by his efforts to curry favor by trying to talk to adults at the level he thought they would respect, such as referring to their children as Theodore (Beaver’s much-disliked given name) and Wallace, even though the parents called them Beaver and Wally.

    A weaselly wise guy, Eddie like Ricky could be relied upon to connive and instigate schemes with his friends, contributors, and political friends — schemes for which they would be in the position of blame, if (and usually when) caught!

    Mitty Romney looks like a Model, great looking, but not much upstairs?

  • Anonymous

    that bothers me about newt to. you know, newt should have ran against clinton back then. i think his time has passed him by. to bad, he would make a good president.

  • Romeo POV

    NEWT IS CLEARLY ATTACKING CAPITALISM!!

    Why doesn’t Newt mention Staples, Dominos Pizza or the Sports Authority? Billion dollar companies that Romney has worked with.

    When these companies came to Romney they were failing and some close to bankruptcy. They asked Romney for help turning things around and Romney couldn’t take on the risk without leveraging the position of his investors. He couldn’t say, here’s a million bucks and I hope the company turns around.

    • Anonymous

      Billion dollar companies with minimum wage jobs and no benefits.
      And then there is that $10 million bailout Bain Capital took on the Bank of New England. 0bama can hardly wait to run against Romney and brand him a crony capitalist and corporate raider.
      The liberal media knows it, too, but won’t let on… yet.

      • BigBoa

        And you support Ron Paul? Would that be correct? Because if YOU are going to whine about people attacking capitalism, why in the F-IN WORLD would you whine about jobs being minimum wage??

        You sir, make NO sense. Hopefully you can see that yourself.

        • Anonymous

          I like Ron Paul better than I like Romney. But he is not my first choice.
          Who says I’m “whining” about anything. I’m just pointing out the way it is.

  • Anonymous

    You know… listening to Rush, as I do everyday, this was a 1o second thought. MOST of the show was talking about how WEAK Romney is!
    Drudge, the right scoop the gop elite….. we get it already.
    A lot of us LOVE NEWT!
    I could not give a bleep about New Hampshire of Iowa when it comes to their votes!
    We all know, its okay….. I know you guys know too, that its the Carolina’s, and Florida where it all begins.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_IVKH65EY73YVOWTBXJ4DGVYUOU Ken

    Newt is desperate. He can’t run on his big-govvamint record.

    “Let’s agree to not attack each other” is just another flip-flop.

  • Anonymous

    Rush is right in one respect; with each new attack they become more vicious. However, it was Mitt and his allies who opened this can of worms. IMO this will hurt Romney, especially in SC where some have been those laid off by Bain.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_LKNWVWC5LESWDV4Y5OMOESS7OY Dave

    I have no problem with a Republican candidate vetting another. It’s only poetic justice that it is Newt’s PAC that is doing to Romey. Sauce for the Goose so to speak.
    Newt should be our parties nominee and Romney the VP. But leave to the GOP voters to cut off our nose to spite out face.

  • Romeo POV

    This is a clear attack on capitalism by Newt Gingrich!!!

    If you have 10 stores and 7 are doing well but 3 are doing very bad, you might have to close the 3 stores to save your business. You can’t keep sinking money into stores that are not producing to save jobs and be “humane” like Newt and Obama want you to be.

    The 7 stores could boom and you could end up opening 4 more stores in different locations and now you have created even more jobs. This is Newt and Obamas big government mentality. Even if the government program is useless keep spending money because it’s the “compassionate” thing to do.

    • Anonymous

      Even if one of those closed stores is called MF Global?

  • Romeo POV

    Independents are not going to vote for Newt Gingrich. Women are not going to vote for Newt Gingrich. If you think the Democrats would not highlight Gingrich divorces, you’re crazy. I hope it gets personal.

    Let’s talk about Newt leaving one wife with cancer and another with MS.

    • Anonymous

      He didn’t leave his wife with cancer, cut the crap.

      You could say all the above for Romney. Romney is going to lose against obama, even with Rubio.

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_37V4NGVXB5AZYUJWLZ6GLEZPYY the_iowa_haw…

        Yes, actually Newt most certainly DID leave his wife while she had cancer. He did not leave her on her deathbed. That is the myth. But he DID leave her while she had cancer. And no, you cannot say the same thing about Romney. In fact, it was quite the opposite. Romney’s wife, Ann, has had both cancer AND MS (she still has MS, but has it “under control”) and he has stood by her through the whole thing.

        Newt ran.

        • Anonymous

          So, what’s your point? Romney is unelectable.

          Next question?

          • Anonymous

            “So, what’s your point? Romney is (the most) electable.”

            There, fixed it for you…

    • Anonymous

      Hello. Woman here. Been married to the same man for 30 years. I will be voting for Newt. In fact, I think he is the EXACT candidate we need right now. Do I believe in cheating on your spouse? NO. But I also do not believe anyone should think they know what happens in a marriage. A lot goes on. We don’t know what happened. Actually, I credit Newt because he keeps his mouth shut. His daughter has spoken out about how what was being published about his divorce was a lie. You “hope it gets personal.” I’m not surprised. You sound very judgemental, but are apparently without sin. BTW, could you list the illnesses that disqualify marriages from breaking up? It sounds like it must all be so simple.

  • Anonymous

    Romney the snake oil salesman, who owns 14 homes and is the proud CEO merger who likes to take over said: Companies down on their luck, ( cherry pic’s the keeper’s and tosses the rest into a heap pile for the losers. ) Has the attitude of…….. oh’ we’ll your dumb and I’m the King maker. Goal after goal, more money for mitten’s. This is Romney’s MO and he does not give “a rats rear” about the middle class. VIA: ~Bain Capital~

    Believe me on this, Romney is who the left “does” want for the GOP ticket and “Yes” they will tear him to shreds and honestly, Romney deserves-it back in spades. Mittins has hurt many family’s, has put thousands upon thousands more out of work. He shrewd and is only out for himself.

    The GOP Establishment has the same mentality, just like Mitt, only cares about their political career’s and the power it gives them= Romney.

    Newt has his baggage no doubt, but the man has the back bone and the knowledge to lead this country back from the corruption “both parties” who are leading this nation off a steep cliff.

    This is why we cannot not allow Romney be our nominee, because the Obama machine will take Mitt to the woodshed. Thus another landslide victory for Obama. The GOP establishment is delusional if they believe Romney can win, much less bring the change America needs to save our great nation. Because for the GOP Establishment, it’s Government as usual, the RINO club.

    Rush is spot-on with his comment’s:

    and BTW: forget about-it, “if Romney Win’s”? …. Obama-care “will not” be repealed:

    • Anonymous

      You sound like you are jealous, you don’t like him because he made money on companies that were going broke. I have never heard of him doing anything illegal, he is not for amnesty like Newt was, and he has been married to the same woman for more than 40 years. What is it you don’t like about Mitt?

      • Anonymous

        With all due respect to your comment– I know folks who have dealt with Romney and he is all that I have stated. Jealous of what? Please don’t make such a ridiculous statement. I’m very fortunate that I’m self made woman. But Romney, Gees he’s not what America needs. He’s not strong enough to take on Obama and he’s not an honest person. I will say this much, he’s very good at covering his arse and telling folks what they want to hear.

        Never heard of him doing anything illegal, pffft– of coarse not, not when you have billion’s to make them go away. Please just remember, there are good CEO Merger’s and bad CEO Merger’s and then there are one’s who only care about their bank account’s. Thanks for your reply” CG :)

        • BigBoa

          Interesting. The mighty Boa submits the thought that you have multiple personalities.

          You start out by praising yourself as “self-made woman”. By the end you soumd like an occupier, ripping on someone for having “billions”…….

          AH HAHAHA!

          • Anonymous

            Don’t flatter yourself BIGBOA: there is more to slick mittin’s then many know!

            Like I have stated, they’re are good CEO merger’s, then their are the types who only care about the bank account. Yes, I’m very comfortable in what I have achieved, but I won’t “stab” people in the back to get what I want.

            Multiple personalities: interesting, and with a name like BIG BOA I’m sure you have very high opinion of yourself, and no one can have an opinion different then yours or even to agree to disagree.


            as for you suggesting I side with an OWS occupier, because I disagree with how Mittin’s conducts his business– is B.S……….! and since you have no problem calling someone out BOA, you come across as a blow-hard.

            AH HAHAHA! back at’cha *wink*

            • BigBoa

              AH HAHAHA!!! YES!! Very good!

              The mighty Boa suggested you may be an occupier because of your criticism of “people with billions”, not your opinion of Romney. If you aren’t an occupier, then that’s great. Don’t sound so envious.

              Many write the mighty Boa, expressing the fact the the wisdom of the mighty Boa borders on something they consider God-like. While the mighty Boa does derive all wisdom through the Lord, he is not the Lord. Do not make the mistake of confusing the two.

              How was that for awesome?

              The mighty Boa says it was….
              SWEEEEEET!!

      • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1257875268 Carter Walker
    • Trust1TG

      Did you know the founder of Mormonism, Joseph Smith, (despite opposition from Christian pastors because of his strange spiritual beliefs, strange business history, banks that failed, and being run out of town twice for his scams) announced a run for President of the US in early 1844? In June of that year a posse of vigilantes broke into the jail where he was being held and killed him.

      Romney’s father also tried to run for President and now Mitt is trying it a second time. Huntsman is also a Mormon.

      Is being the US President a Mormon religious goal?

      The Mormon religion uses some of the same religious symbols as Masonry and satanic cults. There are secret rites. There is a wide contrast between Mormonism and Christianity.

      See this chart: http://irr.org/mit/is-mormonism-christian.html

      Dr. Al Mohler’s website always has clear teaching on this and the other issues before us:
      http://www.albertmohler.com/category/topics/mormonism-topics/

      • Anonymous

        I know all about Mormons, and I’m not against Romney because of his faith.

        Thank’s for your reply Trust1TG, CG :)

      • kgarner

        BIGOT BIGOT BIGOT. Just wondering how many Christians ran for President? Is this a Christian goal LMFAO

      • K-Bob

        Don’t start spamming this site with a bunch of anti-Mormon stuff. You can find all of that you want at free republic.

        From Article VI of The Constitution:

        The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.

  • Romeo POV

    Some people are just stupid. Newt or Santorum don’t have a chance to win. This means we could lose the House and Obama could appoint 1 or 2 Supreme Court justices. But some idiots will say,”We still stopped Romney.”

    It would be like the Democrats supporting Charlie Rangel or Kucinich for President.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_WEFKR6GCPA5G5WDR77MW5X56FQ Reed

      It’s ROMNEY who doesn’t have a chance to win!

      On just about every plank of the Republican party platform, Mitt has arguably on the opposite side of every one of them, at least for part of his life. Abortion. taxes. Gay marriage. Reaganism. Health care. take your pick. And the entire Occupy wall street nonsense was tailor-made as a vehicle to attack Mitt and his time at Bain capital, equating capitalists with corporate raiders. Get used to the comparison, as we’re going to be seeing it all year long.

      http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2012/01/09/donna_brazile_lets_the_cat_out_of_the_bag_dems_want_to_run_against_romney

  • Romeo POV

    Newt has no respect for Marriage!!

    Is this Republican values? A man that cheats on one wife with cancer and another with MS? Who has an affair while criticizing Clinton?

    • Trust1TG

      Again, one’s past can be forgiven after repentance. Newt has seen the light, made amends. That’s what Christ died for. That’s what God does – change hearts – redeem lives – sets people free from sin and death – make all things new – unlike the false muslim god.

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_37V4NGVXB5AZYUJWLZ6GLEZPYY the_iowa_haw…

        Sure he did. At least he “saw the light” as soon as it was time to run for office again. How much longer before he cheats on his fourth wife? Or is it just his third? I’ve lost count.

      • http://profiles.google.com/dpullen.allied David Pullen

        We can forgive…but it goes to the man’s character. That and being the only Speaker ever reprimanded by the House with an ethics violation…oopsy!

    • Anonymous

      The country is in a mess and you’ve joined the Elite Republican Guard looking for Mother Theresa to fix it.

  • Romeo POV

    Newt Gingrich makes Obama look like Ward Cleaver when it comes to family values.

    • Trust1TG

      UNLESS you factor in the truth about Obama’s sexuality.

    • Anonymous

      Yeah… he also makes B.O. look like Hitler, Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot rolled into one.

  • Anonymous

    An adulterer beating up on a finance shill while a racist and religious nut watch from the sidelines …. priceless

    • Trust1TG

      Obama is ALL OF THE ABOVE.

      • Anonymous

        Only in the eyes of clowns like yourself.

        • http://www.facebook.com/people/Huuf-Arted/100000868400175 Huuf Arted

          lmao@OozingPeter666 kill urself cuz ya cant fix stupid !!!

          • K-Bob

            That would be more appropriate at Ace’s site or thehostages. Let’s keep it a little cleaner and more civil.

  • Anonymous

    The complaint from Newt and others is not with capitalism, but how capitalism was used (or misused).

    Was Bain predatory? I don’t know. I need to study the details closer.

  • Romeo POV

    Romney had a 70% success rate at Bain. 22% failed and 8% lost money.

    WHAT NEWT AND OBAMA FAIL TO UNDERSTAND IS THAT BUSINESS FAILS IN THE FREE MARKET BECAUSE OF COMPETITION!!

  • Romeo POV

    Romney had a 70% success rate at Bain. 22% failed and 8% lost money.

    WHAT NEWT AND OBAMA FAIL TO UNDERSTAND IS THAT BUSINESS FAILS IN THE FREE MARKET BECAUSE OF COMPETITION!!

  • Anonymous

    This is what 0bama has been planning to attack Romney with for 3 years. You’d better listen to what Newt has to say and determine if you still think Romney can win a general election fight in this political climate.

    By the time 0bama is done with branding Romney a white collar criminal, the public will be demanding his perp walk. This is how it will go down if Romney is the nominee. Don’t attack Newt for being the messenger.

    • Anonymous

      So MadRon, do you suggest we give up on capitalism because the fight from the left will be too scary?

      • http://www.facebook.com/people/Steven-Valdez/1806887704 Steven Valdez

        No, there are better candidates than Romney

        • Anonymous

          No, there aren’t.

      • Anonymous

        Give up on capitalism?
        That is quite a leap you’re making from my suggestion people ought to look at Romney realistically and ask themselves just how “electable” he really is.

    • http://twitter.com/omar_silio omar silio

      And lets not forget it’s Romneys folks who started the mud slinging so get over it.

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_37V4NGVXB5AZYUJWLZ6GLEZPYY the_iowa_haw…

        Actually, it was Ron Paul.

    • Anonymous

      Thank god they don’t have any dirt on newty.

  • agatematt

    One of the driving forces among Republicans and conservatives of high and low degree in this election cycle is to downsize government including the elimination or combining of whole federal departments and agencies. Well, that means a lot of people will end up getting fired, laid off or otherwise end up on the unemployment line. Such an action can only be achieved by a president who is willing to actually fire people and suffer the flak shot their way by leftist politicians and union bosses through their allies in the liberal media. The one thing that voters know about Romney is that he has fired people in the past when necessary and, therefore, is most likely to do it in the future — which is something of a question with many of the other candidates.

  • Anonymous

    All these rightwing nutbags frighten me. Rush is entitled to his opinion. However, people who take it as fact are a genuine threat to our country.

    • Anonymous

      That’s fantastic! That is exactly what we think of the left. You want to come in our homes, regulate our lives, redistribute weath you did not earn, spend other people’s money on pet projects, or yourselves. And you use the words “threat to the country?”

      • Anonymous

        Thanks for reinforcing my point! I am a long way from the left. Nobody is coming into my house. I’ll shoot them. Fixing bridges and highways are not exactly pet projects. Just exactly what do you mean by “redistribute wealth I didn’t earn?” Your ignorance is the biggest threat. Give me some facts or just save your breath. A lot of your Republican ideas can only be enforced by going into peoples homes. I realize research is not one of your strong suites. It’s OK you are not going to gain anything in this election anyway! Idiot Subject: [trscoop] Re: Rush: Newt using language of the left targeting Bain makes me uncomfortable

        • http://www.facebook.com/people/Todd-Clemmer/1506137119 Todd Clemmer

          Bluedog people like you are a “genuine threat to our country”. You union dogs are a primary reason, along side politicians, that we are in the toilet.

          • Anonymous

            Assumptions don’t make you look any smarter. Don’t any of you ever use facts when you respond? I don’t have time to explain my anti union history. Again, your ignorance speaks volumns. Please try to keep up.
            I like a challenge. Can’t anyone offer a logical argument? The left is not the problem. It is the intelligent and conservative that will save you.

            • K-Bob

              You seem to be trolling for a fight. We don’t do that here. Jumping in with your first comment at therightscoop.com, to insult the site owner and the regulars is not a very good beginning. I suspect you won’t last long.

    • Anonymous

      Stooooooopid.

    • Anonymous

      I’m have listened to Rush the terrorist since 1997! See also ditto head. :o)

    • K-Bob

      Liberty and self-reliance can be a frightening thing. Perhaps you need someone to take care of you.

  • Anonymous

    I’ve been watching Gingrich with interest for the past minth.He always needs to be the center of attention and his diss on capitalism shows this.Personally,he strikes me as an angry,old amn,whose glory days are over-I also think he’s a few fries short of a happy meal.

    • Anonymous

      Get a keyboard with a space bar and a built in spell-check.

      • Anonymous

        Were you a hall monitor in high school?

        • Anonymous

          Nope. Were you anything anywhere?

        • Anonymous

          Thanks -he reminds me of the kid the teacher would pick to “watch” the class while she leaves the room for a moment.That kid was always the class snitch!

      • Anonymous

        Walking down busy city street- usind my blackberry.Sorry!

        • Anonymous

          I think I saw your video. Were you the one that fell into the fountain?

        • Anonymous

          I’m sorry too. That was uncalled for :-)

  • http://profiles.yahoo.com/u/YJ5G3N25JBSWDNFKBTXEVLR4NU Walt

    This has been a sampling of what the nominee will face in the summer. If they can’t take these shots from each other, they are not going to survive the Dem/media attacks.

    Although I’m not a Romney fan, his work a Bain is not the problem. That’s capitalism at it’s best. I have a problem with his government mandated health care. He took the Salt Lake Olympics from a financial disaster to a money maker. I figure he could pull a Bain on the federal government and cut the departments that are no longer performing the original task and save us some money. Sure some federal bureaucrats will get laid off, but they can find a real job like the rest of us.

    • Anonymous

      He has a problem with federally mandated healthcare, so at least you agree with him on that.

  • Anonymous

    gingrich is using the language of the left because he is of the left. Bain Capital is a Venture Capital firm with the same business model as Silicon Valley. Does newt, who never had a job in the private sector) want to shut down Silicon Valley?

  • Anonymous

    Middle america – I have the answer for you. Instead of “anyone but Obama”, which will only serve to elect another banker-backed president and lead to more of the same.

    Try this:

    ANYONE BUT A BANKER-BACKED CANDIDATE. or…

    Anyone But Goldman-Sachs.

    Using that as your barometer – America will re-embrace its Constitution and in time, regain its exceptionalism.

  • Anonymous

    It sounds like Rush has already conceded that Romney will get the nomination.

  • Anonymous

    Rush is secretly rooting for Romney to win, he’s acting anti- Romney because it’s what his market demands but notice he hasn’t backed any of the not-Romney’s, he talks semi positively about each one of them on any given day because he knows they’ll splinter the conservative vote and Romney will win the nomination. He’s giving his rabidly anti-Romney audience what they want and preserving his ratings while at the same time not burning any bridges with a future Romney administration. Ole’ Rushy is a slick dude.

    • http://profiles.google.com/dpullen.allied David Pullen

      I actually agree with you, but what do you expect him to do? He wants Obama defeated, as we all do, but the nomination process is messy, and in the meantime, he has a show to put on… Let’s see what he does AFTER Romeny is nominated.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Jane-Fulmer/1183960647 Jane Fulmer

    Maybe Republicans should take another look at Governor Perry. We say we want a smaller government footprint, fairer taxes and regulations that are favorable to business growth, no subsidies,Obamacare repeal and more power returned to the states. That is Governor Perry. His state leads in job creation. It is jobs and the economy that we say are most important. Is it because he is a Texan that he has been overlooked? We don’t blame dismiss NJ because of Corzine’s big government waste. Is it because he had 2 OOPS moment early on? I would say that anyone who has had back surgery takes pain killers. He has not had anymore OOPS moments, so I would say he is not on the pain killers anymore.
    That said, I will vote for Herman Cain anytime he wants to hop back in. Who cares who he has sex with, Most of the worlds greatest leaders were womanizers and they all left this world a better place. Mr. Cain is someone that would have made our nation run as a successful business and his 9-9-9 pan would have demoted the power of the special interests and crony capitalism into the dustbin of incompetent corrupt government. He would have got this nation back on track as the most exceptional nation the world has seen.

  • http://www.facebook.com/GenRachel Rachel Wells

    thanks for that Rush.. again the obvious, we know, we know.. we KNOW.

  • Anonymous

    Hey people. Sure, Romney will compromise and pander to the left somewhat once he’s elected. But so what? Don’t they all do that? If Romney’s ship is sailing faster, then climb aboard.

  • Anonymous

    Gingrich is still the only adult in the room.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_TUDGMH234XEKN4SAIYGSXVO6DM RT

    LOL. If attacking a greedhead businessman is “language of the left” I suspect ol’ Rush is worried an ad resource may dry up. Limbaugh sees no problem attacking Big Guvmint so why should Big Bidness be allowed a pass? Corrupt practices are corrupt practices no matter what institution is doing it.

    • Anonymous

      Big difference. Business does not take our tax dollars, government does. Government makes the rules, laws, regulations that control our lives, business does not.

      Don’t like a business, don’t buy their products or use their services. Don’t like government, you have no recourse except for the ballot box, and the two parties have a biopoly on the power. Third party candidates don’t stand a chance. They may win an election here or there but it’s the dems and pubs who wield the power.

      Politicians/government is supposed to represent us. Businesses do not have the mission of representing us. They represent the shareholders, and answer to them, not anyone else.

      • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1257875268 Carter Walker

        There is no product or service to not buy or support from a company that specializes in leveraged buyouts. I am sure you can agree that business can be unscrupulous, unethical, immoral and even criminal….was Bain Capital? I do not know. Need alot of research to determine such a thing but to make an argument that “big business” does not or cannot do us harm is extremely short sighted given the events of the last few years, don’t you think?

    • K-Bob

      Translation: Please stop looking into things like ACORN, Pigford, and all the money the left pours into unions.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Lor-Mazz/1060895688 Lor Mazz

    Yeah our own party is giving Obama a ton of ammo shoud mitt be the nominee which i pretty much think he will be. lets hope he picks chrisite for his running mate. love his in your face style. romney needs that.

    • Trader Jack

      I prefer Romney pick someone with good conservative principles. Romney needs that.

  • Anonymous

    That’s ok. Hilary threw lots of bombs at Obama and it didn’t hurt him. Hilary started the rumor that Obama wasn’t born in the US and that he couldn’t be trusted with a 3am emergency phone call.

  • http://twitter.com/jgbennet JG Bennet

    Hmmm sounds to me like Rush supports the same economic policies Karl Marx did. Marx loved guys like Romney & Rush. BS you say?

    There’s a nice academic paper by an MIT economist and his friends that gives some hard data to back up everyone’s suspicion that the U.S. is losing jobs to China.
    http://econ-www.mit.edu/files/6613

    One key discovery of this study is hard data to back up the idea that free trade is not a small-government policy. In reality, free trade tends to expand government, by increasing the demand for social services and transfer payments (unemployment, welfare etc.) needed to mitigate its social costs. As the authors put it:

    “Growing import exposure spurs a substantial increase in transfer payments to individuals and households in the form of unemployment insurance benefits, disability benefits, income support payments, and in-kind medical benefits.”

    WHY MARX SUPPORTED THE FREE MARKET

    “Generally speaking, the Protective system in these days is conservati­ve, while the Free Trade system works destructiv­ely. It breaks up old nationalit­ies and carries antagonism of proletaria­t and bourgeoisi­e to the uttermost point. In a word, the Free Trade system hastens the Social Revolution­. In this revolution­ary sense alone, gentlemen, I am in favor of Free Trade.”
    Karl Marx JANUARY 9, 1848

    Karl Marx advocated Free Trade, i.e. Capitalism­, because (a) whereas Protection builds up the nation-sta­te, Free Trade breaks it down, as a prelude to the creation of a world-stat­e by the Capitalist­s (b) Free Trade breaks down traditiona­l culture, as a prelude to the creation of a world culture (c) Free Trade exacerbate­s class warfare, and through this the Capitalist­s will lose control of the world-stat­e – they will be defeated by the impoverish­ed classes, with the help of their backers in the higher classes.

    ARAB SPRING, OWS, GREECE etc….

    • Trader Jack

      What a load of BS!!!

      • http://twitter.com/jgbennet JG Bennet

        Tell that to MIT, the founders of The London School of economics and Karl Marx not me. Those are the facts & here is a bit more.

        We’ve been bamboozled by Fabian socialists!! Fabian’s founded The London School of Economics by the way.

        The Fabian Society was created in 1884. Fabian socialism was created to promote international communism and free trade with a friendlier face.
        http://www.silverbearcafe.com/private/05.09/revisionism.html

        The WTO is a perfect example of Marx’s points in how open markets can lead to socialism aka world government control. Look who benefits the most from our free market capitalism…. A communist/socialist country called China and many of the wealthy Arab countries.

        Below is a perfect example of how Marx called it on free trade.

        Opec set for one trillion dollars in export revenues

        Many of Opec’s biggest producers are using the price gains to increase public spending, partly to guard against popular unrest. Saudi Arabia announced a multiyear spending package of $129bn and is expected to spend about $35bn in 2011. Starve the rich countries and feed the worlds poor. Fabian Socialism 101.
        http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/7fa28b96-5a2f-11e0-86d3-00144feab49a.html#axzz1j0TuxrWa

        • K-Bob

          Do you also carry coals to Newcastle?

          This might come as a surprise to you, but TRS readers know about Fabianism, socialism, the Progressives, and Marxism. They are generally well-read, and could teach you whatever you need to know about economics.

          Your bizarre distortions about Free Trade are not playing well.

    • K-Bob

      Why Marx Never Supported The Free Market:

      It totally conflicted with his entire philosophy of economics.

      • http://twitter.com/jgbennet JG Bennet

        Marx was for free trade because it ultimately weakens a strong capitalist country. Look where we are today. Look at his quote and read it with an open critical mind. Free Trade is working toward Marx’s prediction.

        The U.S. intelligence community has become concerned. Richard McCormack reported in Manufacturing & Technology News on February 3 2011 that the Director of National Intelligence has initiated preparation of a National Intelligence Estimate to assess the security implications of waning manufacturing activity in America. National Intelligence Estimates are the most authoritative analyses prepared by the intelligence community, definitive interagency products typically reserved for the most serious threats.

        http://blogs.forbes.com/beltway/2011/02/14/intelligence-community-fears-u-s-manufacturing-decline/

        • http://twitter.com/jgbennet JG Bennet

          Ronald Reagan was a protectionist anti free trader by the way….. No BS

          May 30, 1988
          The Reagan Record On Trade:
          Rhetoric Vs. Reality THE CATO INSTITUTE

          If President Reagan has a devotion to free trade, it surely must be blind, because he has been off the mark most of the time. Only short memories and a refusal to believe one’s own eyes would account for the view that President Reagan is a free trader. Calling oneself a free trader is not the same thing as being a free trader. Nor does a free- trade position mean that the president, but not Congress, should have the power to impose trade sanctions. Instead, a president deserves the title of free trader only if his efforts demonstrate an attempt to remove trade barriers at home and prevent the imposition of new ones.

          By this standard, the Reagan administration has failed to promote free trade. Ronald Reagan by his actions has become the most protectionist president since Herbert Hoover, the heavyweight champion of protectionists.

          THE ENTIRE ARTICLE IS HERE http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa107.html

          • Trader Jack

            You are truely a stupid individual.

        • Anonymous

          To say we have “free trade” in the US IS A JOKE. We have the highest business tax in the world 35%+ and with the EPA and OSHA and the many other state and federal regulations, the cost of doing business here is rediculously high. Contrast that with China’s $2hr labor force with little reguation and a currency that is held at a 50% undervaluation and subsidies for exported products, NO there is no “free trade” in the world, only “free” for us to buy subsidized foreign products because they are cheaper to buy. So if you want to stop hamstringing our local businesses tell the government to get out of the way and tell the foreign country we trade with that unless they play fair we can’t trade with them, and zero out “capital gains” taxes then American business will start to compete with the foreign business. When the playing fields are leveled we do just fine.

          • http://twitter.com/jgbennet JG Bennet

            Spoken like a true Republican!!

            Did you know it was a Republican who really moved us into big government not a Dem?

            MILTON FRIEDMAN: “Nixon was the most socialist of the presidents of the United States in the 20th century.”

            “If you look at what happened during his administration, first of all, the number of pages in the Federal Register, which is full of regulations about business, doubled during his regime. During his regime the EPA, the Environmental Protection Agency, was established and the OSHA, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, the OECA [the EPA’s Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance] — about a dozen, a half dozen alphabetic agencies were established, so that you had the biggest increase in government regulation and control of industry during the Nixon administration that you had in the whole postwar period.”…….

            Nixon was also a Free Trade socials.

            Nixon embraced economic neoliberalism. In 1973 Nixon cut U.S. tariffs to all time lows and moved the United States further in the free market direction, and away from its American School economic system.

            • K-Bob

              Nixon believed in market controls, which was foolish, but to call him socialist is to debase the term completely. And deciding he started up Big Government is to assume history began when he took office, and therefore does not include the Roosevelts, Wilson, and Johnson.

        • K-Bob

          Give it up. Marx was not for free anything. Specifically “trade.”

  • Trader Jack

    I hope everybody posting here forgets to vote on election day. This country is full of ignorant people.

    • K-Bob

      Some of whom will occasionally stop by to illustrate the problem.

  • Anonymous

    Rush, as usual, hits the nail on the head. I can’t imagine how frustrated Newt is with Romney, but there does have to be some intellectual honesty. In Newt’s defense, however, I do say that you could go in with a different attitude and save the company and the employees, with the right plan. What Romney and company do is go in with “a” plan and, if it doesn’t work, they revert to plan “b ” and bail out.

  • kgarner

    Finally Rush is coming around to what the hell is going on out there and taking his Mormon hating blinders off.Blame Romney for scorched Earth, everything he said about Newt was TRUE! Freddie and Fannie and you want to vote for him? WOW

    • K-Bob

      Nice smear. You will have a great deal of trouble finding a link to prove Rush somehow “hates Mormons.” Or anyone else, for that matter.

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1257875268 Carter Walker

      Not everything he said about Newt was true just like not everything being said about Romney is or will be true.

  • Dashark

    POLL: Americans, 2-1, fear Obama re-election…

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Matthew-Wusinich/1633255240 Matthew Wusinich

    Let’s walk down memory lane ditto heads. ‘Twas the day before Thanksgiving, 2003, when El Rush-bo declared behind the golden microphone that in 2012 there would be a new story written in American politics. I don’t want to ruin the ending for you but it’s gonna be a great year.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_L2DNDYFTZW3BHLVHHDZRVJGO54 Ling

    He has been bought by the Jewman Rush, just like you have.

    • K-Bob

      He’s gone, folks. Just another warning: Antisemitic language not acceptable.

  • Trader Jack

    The economic theory described by Marx known as Marxism focuses on the control of capital. Capital being the means of production (land, buildings, tools, materials, workers and currency). Marx saw capitalism as being socially unjust because it naturally creates an unequal distribution of wealth. Hence, the core principal behind his theory which states “from each according to his ability to each according to his need.” In modern terms, this is commonly referred to as wealth redistribution. It’s the mechanism in Marx’s theory he believed would promote social justice.

    In order to facilitate this principal, Marx realized a strong centralized government was needed in order to control capital and it’s distribution in society. There are four main economic systems under the umbrella of Marx’s theory. They are Fascism, Nazism, Socialism and Communism. What are their differences? All of them follow Marx’s concept of capital being controlled by the state. The differences are defined by ownership.

    In a Fascist system, private ownership of capital is allowed however the government controls all aspects of use. Under Communism, the government controls capital through direct ownership of all of it. Nazism and Socialism are both hybrids in regard to ownership. Under Nazism, the government owns some corporations. The rest are controlled by heavy regulation and taxation. Socialism seeks to control capital by government ownership of major industry components such as healthcare, transportation, communication, and/or utilities. Ownership of these major industries allows government to leverage control over the rest of the economy. In order for these economic systems to exist they require a compatible political system that normally comes in the form of an oligarchy, which means ruled by a few.

    These are quite different from a capitalist system where capital is both owned and controlled by the private sector. A capitalist system requires a compatible political system of limited government. A limited government allows citizens to make decisions over the use of capital. This promotes competition, which in turn promotes innovation. In a Marxist system innovation is suppressed for citizens are not rewarded for their efforts.

    When government is allowed to expand and become a larger and larger portion of GDP then capitalism will eventually be replaced by one of the Marxist systems as control of capital is transferred from the private to the public sector. This is what we are currently seeing occur in our country. The question is which system do we allow to win this battle- a capitalist system which allows citizens to retain their inalienable rights or a Marxist system where these rights would no longer exist for government would control capital and therefore the lives of citizens.

    • http://twitter.com/jgbennet JG Bennet

      Marx’s support of free trade is no different than us using Bin Laden against the Soviet Empire. We knew he was bad but he & his jihadis, like the free traders for Marx, helped topple the Empire.

      In America our Free Trade policy started with a damn socialist.

      Woodrow Wilson was the first American president to publicly proclaim himself in favor of a Socialist New World Order inside a Socialist One World Government. His remarkable acceptance of the New World Order is found in his book The New Freedom.

      The Fabian socialists realized long ago that socialism and communism are completly impossible without some form of FREE TRADE capitalism getting there first.

      Wilson’s book was actually written by Socialist William B. Hayle. Wilson denounced capitalism. “It is contrary to the common man and it has brought stagnation to our economy,” Wilson wrote.

      The ultimate goal of communism and socialism was to control world trade.

      Wilson had spent almost a year tearing down the protective trade tariffs that had defended the American domestic markets from being overwhelmed by “Free Trade,” essentially the practice of allowing cheap British goods made with cheap labor in India to flood the American market.

      On October 12, 1913 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revenue_Act_of_1913 Wilson signed the bill that was the beginning of the end of the unique American middle class, long the target of the Fabian Socialists. The bill was described as a measure to “adjust tariffs,” but it would have been accurate to describe it as a bill to “destroy tariffs.”

      ARE YOU STILL FOR FREE TRADE?

    • Anonymous

      GREAT EXPLANATION, first time I have heard something like this. Very helpful!

  • TXAggie

    Newt – A few points:
    Romney did exactly what any businessman would do to make a business profitable.

    What you have done on the other hand is ACT UNETHICALLY WHILE PLEDGING TO WORK FOR AMERICA!!!!!! BIG DIFFERENCE

    A vote for you will be a vote for corruption!!!! NEVER NEVER NEVER!!!!!

    Go Romney!!!!!!

  • Anonymous

    I think we found a new Obama campaign strategist. As an added bonus, he comes chock-full of rage and butt-hurt. He should fit in just fine…

  • Anonymous

    I think Newt just submitted his application to the Obama campaign as chief strategist. As an added bonus, he comes chock-full of rage and butt-hurt. He should fit in just fine there…

  • Anonymous

    Angry Newt is a small-minded liberal at heart.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Rich-Wojcik/1252071956 Rich Wojcik

      he and Ted the Swimmer had worked on amnesty for …………….breaking the law criminals and with Pelosi, he tried to feed us the “global warming” fraud.
      Why nobody asks him about those comments? “Yeah, Newt, tell us about you,Ted, and Nancy………….

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_V6LH2CWY4TTLZYAEQJKXSTHFII Scott

    I have a problem with conservatives embracing the theory that coporate raiding is capitalism. No on likes Corporate raiders! Especially not entrapreneurs. Corporate raiders use government cronies and inside info to help them gain advantages and destroy companies. They have always been feared by capitalists. If Republicans choose to claim that the only true capitalists are corporate raiders we will lose bad in this election and in the future!

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Stephen-Bozich/100000502269141 Stephen Bozich

      Your use of the term “corporate raiders” implies a pejorative improperly. If a company’s market capatilzation is less than its book value, it SHOULD be cut up and sold off. That is creative destruction and it is an important function of free markets.

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_V6LH2CWY4TTLZYAEQJKXSTHFII Scott

        LOL, No if a company’s market value is less than its book value it is either cheap or bankrupt more than likely bankrupt and chances are the pieces are now worth less than book. Most corporate raiders take over companies with value against ownerships will, using any means neccessary. That in no way epitimizes capitalism. I’m not saying it should be illegal I’m just sayin it’s not something I would promote as the essence of Capitalism.

      • K-Bob

        The oceans would suffer greatly if the sharks were to disappear.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_JDSIDMEKS7U472MVBH5BL3MAZU Dooki Fried

    Well, we all have lowered ourselves to the methods of our opponents. So Newt has dropped down to Romney’s level and actually calling out the blue-dog democrat. Well, ….so the eFF what. Its par for the course these days.
    We all remembered Newt who was the leader in saying that he would NOT denigrate his opponents b/c each of them were more qualified than the vegetable-lasagna currently occupying the seat.
    Too bad they all don’t take a little time off the personal attacks and remember who the real target it.
    I’m still a Newt voter.
    Newt would mop the floor w/ Obamster, LITERALLLY MOP THE FLOOR WITH THAT FOOL!
    ….and the demotards KNOW IT!

  • Anonymous

    I’ve said it before. Romney is only half a degree off of being a white Obama. Newt is another big government neo conservative, neither gives a wit about balancing the budget or protecting civil liberties. I’m not wild about Ron Paul’s foreign policy but his views on what needs done here at home are right on the mark.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Stephen-Bozich/100000502269141 Stephen Bozich

      I understand your apprehension in regards to Paul’s foreign policy but consider this: there is nothing sane about keeping an all-volunteer military at war in perpetuity, nor is there anything wise about giving China a de facto veto on our budget (since they are the ones that fund it).

      • Anonymous

        My concerns about his foreign policy largely hinge on his proposed timeline; it’s taken over a century to build our forces overseas to their current levels, hastily and wastefully withdrawing them would have a huge destabilizing effect in the world. Creating a power vacuum, as it were. Also, having them in place creates a layered defensive barrier, specifically for missile defense, where each layer has only a 25-30% chance at successful interdiction. Having multiple layers for a defense-in-depth provides the best chance at stopping an attack. I’m not sure that sacrificing what it’s taken so long to build up is necessarily a good thing. The flip side to that coin is that if we can’t afford it ourselves, our financiers (read: China) will end up calling the shots, rendering any benefits moot.

        The moral is that right now Dr. Paul is the only candidate I see that I could vote for, even if I disagree with him on some points. To date his foreign policy intentions and his desire to return to the gold standard are the only sticking points I have with him.

        • Dave Powell

          @nov_28 – Thank you for stating your reasonable issues with Paul’s foreign policy instead of name calling! You have a good point, and it might even be the best strategy if we hadn’t blown out the Treasury on military adventurism.

          Unfortunately, we’re broke – actually, we need $15T just to BE broke.

          Adm. Mike Mullen stated recently that the fiscal picture of the country is *the* biggest threat facing the military – not Al Qaeda, not Iran, not China (not yet).

          here’s a link from the DoD’s own site (no lefty MSM here):
          http://www.defense.gov/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=65432

          I hope everyone will think about it that worries about Paul’s foreign policy – how the hell can we run a military effectively when 40% of all .gov expenditures are borrowed from a prospective (and rising) enemy?

          We need our troops at home to DEFEND us – not bomb rocks back and forth on the other side of the globe for the benefit of the military-industrial complex.

          Ron Paul 2012.

          • Anonymous

            Likewise, my friend, likewise. I get tired of people devolving into infantile name calling when they disagree, which they always seem to do in online forums. I think it’s important to disagree without being disagreeable.

            Fiscal sanity needs to be our number one priority. After that, and most likely in the process of that, the other priorities will find their place, I think.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_V6LH2CWY4TTLZYAEQJKXSTHFII Scott

    I’m glad Newts fighting back. When he said nothing everybody nocked him for that too. Obama has been setting up attacking Romney for three years. If Romney gets the nomination obama will tear him up. Coporate Raiding is not Capitalism! Its better this stuff comes out now so we can choose the right nominee! Newt will eat Obama for lunch, he’s the toughest one running.

    • Anonymous

      Right on! Mitt’s a sitting duck. I just wish more people (including the Rep. leadership) could figure that out.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Rich-Wojcik/1252071956 Rich Wojcik

    whoever says: “I’ll close southern border and will drill wherever possible” will get 99% of white electorate (without pandering to “possible future voters”), which is more than enough to win.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_UPNYCGODZYCWR7KBJAKGR4NWNA marybeth

    Romney is a nice guy, but he’s a socialist. The Repubs ran a socialist (McCain) against the Marxist in the WH last election. Why do it again? I guess they haven’t got the message yet…
    Lenin said in 1921 that he knew communism wouldn’t work… so here we are trying it almost 100 years later …

    • http://twitter.com/jgbennet JG Bennet

      You said it, both parties are basically socialists & the whole free trade thing proves it.

      Here is a quote from Boehner, he supports socialism and does not even know it.

      May 16, 2011
      Pending U.S. free-trade accords with South Korea, Colombia and Panama won’t be submitted to Congress until lawmakers ***agree to renew trade-adjustment assistance for workers,**** an Obama administration official said.

      Bills implementing the accords, reached under President George W. Bush, are being drafted and ***will be withheld unless Congress agrees to extend benefits for workers who lose their jobs to overseas competition.***…….

      Below is the perfect FABIAN/WILSONIAN SOCIALISM 101 quote and it is from the Republican Speaker of The House.

      October 13th 2011
      House Speaker John Boehner applauded the successful votes on the trade deals, thanking both President Obama and President Bush for working “in good faith to ensure they become law,” but he said their passage was long overdue.

      “With passage in the House and Senate today, a key component of the Republican jobs plan will be sent to the president for his signature,” Boehner said. “These significant trade pacts will provide new opportunities for American small businesses, farmers and manufacturers to expand and hire more workers. And frankly, it shouldn’t have taken this long for it to happen”.

      BOEHNER LEFT OUT THAT IT IS ACTUALLY THE GOVERNMENT PAYROLL THAT WILL ADD NEW “EMPLOYEES”

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_DM2MGDNTTNBIXXVAPR3UZW2T5M Ron C

    Do something about it… http://www.raiseyourstandards2012.com

  • redwolf04

    Romney…..a 1% and a Mormon……no chance against Obama if he runs.

  • PCR1

    Romney is a robbber baron, an unprincipled charlaton, and a political scoundrel.

    But he is our scoundrel.

    And in November, it has to be anyone but Obama the America hater and would be

    destroyer.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_4YSZWIU3O3LXEXU3EYFVE7IYEU Avocado

      You are 100% right. It’s ANYONE, but Obama.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Huuf-Arted/100000868400175 Huuf Arted

    The PUKES on Wall Street and the Vultures who broke up companies in the 80s and 90s are NOT what made America great! Companies making things the rest of the world wants are what made us great and PUKES like Romney made a fortune selling American Patents and Technology to the highest bidder overseas. Screw that bastard! I lived in Michigan when his dorky father was Governor and can tell you the apple didnt fall far from the tree…

    Mitt aint da sh1t!

    Just say NO to Willard (Mitt) Romney

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Huuf-Arted/100000868400175 Huuf Arted

    In case my point was lost, being a Financier is a WHOLE LOT DIFFERENT than being an ENTRPANEUR and ole Mitt has ZERO knowledge of how to fix our economy unless we need him to FIRESALE the USA to the Chinese to pay our Debts!

  • Anonymous

    Newt will be adding Sarah Palin as his VP if he’s still in the race Feb 15. 2012

    • http://twitter.com/StandProudNow StandProudNow

      Will be “adding” Sarah? Like she can just be “added”?

      Doubt she would accept to be anyone’s VP.

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100003341528048 Dinero Muchismo

      When Ron Paul adds Napolitano or Powell as his Veep – things will get hella interesting!

      • BigBoa

        POWELL???

        You HAVE to be kidding! You guys whine about “globalists” and can even UTTER the name “POWELL” for vice president???

        AH HAHAHA!!!

        • K-Bob

          Maybe he means Boog Powell, the great Orioles slugger.

          Kinda looks like Ed Schulz.

  • Anonymous

    Could it be that Limbaugh finally understands what’s going on?

    • Anonymous

      until he support dr paul, the answer is no.

  • Anonymous

    October 12, 2011

    Dear Mr. Obama, Al Gore and Newt Gingrich,

    I read this morning that you are going to go on the “America would have been worse without me” tour to boost your parties poll numbers, with 391 days to go until election day. Being a natural born and bred capitalist I find this fascinating. Think of it this way; if I invented a new car with square wheels and then did a tour around the country trying to convince people, that those round wheels are just to darn efficient and useful – how many people could I convince? Not many. Unless they are attendees of the “Nut Roots” convention, you could probably sell a whole bunch of my square wheeled cars to those people!

    See, Mr Obama, in my world I’ve got to do or create something that others find enough value in to part with their money, that they could use for an infinite number of purposes. To illustrate this; take Al Gore for instance. Does Al buy another massage at the happy ending saloon, or, does he buy more earth polluting energy efficient light bulbs? Tough call. If he was real careful he could have as much fun with the light bulb I guess, but even Mr. Gore would have to realize it was not worth the risk. In your world, Mr. Obama, you have to create words on a page that will either use force or coercion to get my fellow citizens to do the federal governments bidding. Do you see the difference? One is based on a voluntary association the other being foisted upon a citizen through threat of death or financial coercion.

    So you, and other liberals, must go on tour and tell us how we can be best managed by those of your ilk rather then on our own. Now, Mr. Obama, it would be one thing if liberal progressive democrats had a record worth aspiring to. But no sane citizen can make that claim, every program that you and those of your ilk have pushed has placed this nation in bankruptcy – morally as well as fiscally. In essence the United States of America has had its perfectly round wheels converted into square ones and now you, Mr. Obama, must explain to us why we must abandon the round ones and drive our lives on the square ones.

    To borrow a phrase from you, “Make no mistake,” if there is one person that can convince America to commit suicide your election is proof that you have that ability. Maybe while you are touring you can link up with Dr. Kevorkian and discuss the death panels? After all you always claim that you are seeking the most experienced minds on any given topic – until you decide only to use them as cover all the while spouting the liberal line, and ignoring their advice anyway. Senator Judd Greg is darn near clairvoyant on this reality. Have a good week Mr. President and please remember that every dollar you will be spending on your travel and entertainment my kids are paying for, so take it easy on the Jet A and the Kobe Beef. Maybe you should figure out which President bought his own postage stamps, and tear a page out of his code of conduct and follow it?

    Respectfully,

    Joe Doakes

    • BigBoa

      Consider the word: condense.

      • Anonymous

        I will endeavor to improve . . .

  • norminirvine

    Newt can never win, and now he is lying about the accomplishments he did. He is a big poor support who will help Obama get re-elected.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_V6LH2CWY4TTLZYAEQJKXSTHFII Scott

      Do you really think Obama won’t hit Mitt twice as hard as this on this issue! He created OWS just to run against Mitt. Mitt is who they are talking about and he plays right into there hands. They have not attacked mitt at all they want him to get the nomination then he’ll be destroyed. Newt has the courage to do what it takes to win. He’s the only one that can beat Obama.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_HQXYW3PBVUD4O7DW36OM4RWDVE Steve

    Sometimes a man has to do what he has to do. Go Newt. Some lessons are best learned the hard way. Romney seems to understand the hard lessons better than the easy ones. Newt is a good teacher.

  • Anonymous

    Gingrich sat on the board of Forstmann Little and Co-a private equity firm.Pot calling the kettle black?

  • Anonymous

    Venture capitalists take companies that need money and give them money but also take control of the company.(See GM) Which means the owners are kinda dealing with the devil. The company stays in business, maybe, but they no longer control it. The venture capital firm can then literally decide whether the company stays in business or whether it would be more profitable to liquidate it. Obviously, if it is liquidated the venture capitalist gets his money first and any profits he can make. Everyone else gets well, like I said, it is like dealing with the devil. If Romney, as governor treated government like that we might do well, but I don’t see anything in his background as governor that says he did anything but become a good fund raiser for his state from the federal government. Kinda like his Olympics deal. I wonder as president if he would be averse to taking over private companies if he wanted to, like he did as a venture capitalist. Too big too fail. Venture capitalists are not necessarily about capitalism and creating businesses, although companies staying in business and expanding may be a by-product of their business.

  • rfrapal

    Rush, as usual, is spot on. I like Newt but he is FACTUALLY wrong regarding his attacks on Romney and his role with Bain!

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_LPE43QG4PMFCFSMM6TO5U4L3IA Allan

    Does Limbaugh ever mention that Bain Capital was one of two firms that bought out Clear Channel Communications in 2008? Clear Channel is of course the largest owner of AM and FM radio stations in the USA.

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100003341528048 Dinero Muchismo

      Of course not. That might shine a light on the not-so-free press we have in this country!

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_LPE43QG4PMFCFSMM6TO5U4L3IA Allan

        When I was a kid I remember making fun of the old Soviet media, particularly Pravda which meant “Truth” and was anything but, being just a propaganda arm for the government. Now the US has CNN, Fox News, and many more “choices”, but they’re all just the same thing with swirling logos and slick graphics. Brand new packaging for the same old lies.

    • Anonymous

      and Clear Channel owns PREMIERE…the company that distributes THE RUSH LIMBAUGH SHOW

  • Anonymous

    It is the ugly side of capitalism, profiting from the failure of the investments of others, but necessary nonetheless. I’ll watch the movie and see how much glee Romney might have obtained that businesses failed, like lawyers happy at birth injuries, accidents, and adverse product outcomes.

  • Anonymous

    My vote will be for Newt,

  • Anonymous

    Hey I don’t care who’s “language” Newt uses just bring down RINO ROMNEY! It’s no different than Newt all along saying and trying to play nice with the other Republicans and they STAB HIM IN THE BACK with their dirty underhanded attack ads,and now after he’s taken a pounding he decides to fight back, I say good, go for it,give’m heck!

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_GGHV4B7E5XE3X5FAZGNRGZZMWE steven

    How is it negative to point out that fat fraud’s true record and his work for Fanny & Freddy while Bush was trying to have them both investigated before the disaster that almost crippled the country? Who’s side is Newt on anyway? Like this wasn’t going to come out if that fat fraud got the nomination (GOD forbid). And who’s side are you talking heads on siting on your fat azzes in a radio studio? Do you really want to see another guaranteed loser hand the general election to Obama again? Romney by every credible poll is the only candidate on he Republican side to beat Obama, Stop attacking him you fools! This is no time to fracture the party by trying to drag it to the far right wacko zone. Americans are center right, not to the right of Attila the Hun. You’ve given a bad name to the word “Conservative”. The media and most Americans take it to mean right wing wacko’s. There are only two buttons to push in the voting booth, Republican or Democrat, not Conservative. Who the hell says that the Republican nominee has to be your idea of a conservative? Screw you Rush Limbaugh!

    • Anonymous

      actually, ron paul polls just as well, and even better than romney among independents. the differences between paul and romney are night and day. are you for personal freedom or big government? are you for true free market capitalism or crony capitalism? are you for nationalism or globalism? are you for main street or wall street?

  • Anonymous

    Um, that’s why it’s better to do it now, and use the information to select the best GOP candidate (HINT: NOT Romney) because it’s just foolish to assume that Obama won’t do it if Romney gets the nomination. Full disclosure: I am a Perry fan all the way, so I hope Newt and Mitt take each other out in a flaming blaze of Pac-wars and Perry’s the only guy left standing. Huntsman can be his VP and Ron Paul can be Treasury secretary. They can create an Ambassador to the Olympics Committee post for Mittens. How ’bout that? :-D Perry 2012!

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100003341528048 Dinero Muchismo

      Libertarian? Perry? Libertarians want to re-invade Iraq and start on Iran when we are already bankrupt? Please give me more info as to why you support a party flip flopper, bible thumping, war monger? I really would like to know what you like about him. At one time I did like him, I saw him speaking to a large crowd, he was passionate, he was inspiring, he didn’t know it was being filmed and televised at the time. For some reason when he is on TV I don’t see that confident, awesome public speaker I saw when he didn’t know the cameras were rolling. He should quit the race now and save face, gets some grooming on debating and he can and will be a serious contender in the future. He can’t win, so the more he says now when there is nothing to gain, will only hurt him in the future when it can come back to haunt him. His campaign aides need to learn how to play the game. It’s not one battle, it’s a war (politics).

  • midsouthmusic

    It’s pretty obvious that Mitt Gingrich and Newt Romney are both moderate-progressive turds, yet “Republicans” (even Rush) cannot bravely reach out and shake hands with liberty…and when I say the word “liberty”, I don’t even have to say the name of the candidate, do I?

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100003341528048 Dinero Muchismo

      If the GOP powers that be would swallow their pride and give RP a chance and get behind him, he would be the next president of the USA.

      • J Jones

        THe GOP will not win without RP as their nominee… it must pain them to be finally figuring that out.

  • http://profiles.google.com/timothy.bendel Timothy Bendel

    From a CBS poll today:

    “Romney posts a two-point lead over Obama, 47 percent to 45 percent, within the poll’s margin of error of plus or minus 2.8 percentage points. He leads Obama, 45 percent to 39 percent, among independent voters.

    Obama’s lead over Paul is just one point, 46 percent to 45 percent, as Paul leads among independents by 7 points.”

    …which means that Ron Paul is more “electable” than Romney: exactly the OPPOSITE of what so many Republicans have been saying.

    The GOP is the only thing standing between Ron Paul and the Presidency. Think about that, all of you saying “anyone but Obama”.

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100003341528048 Dinero Muchismo

      They can’t ignore him forever, even their lies are being exposed. RON PAUL IS ELECTABLE AND IS THE ONLY CHANCE THE GOP HAS AT BEATING OBAMA! Wake up sheeple! The mainstream media, rush included, have an agenda!

      • BigBoa

        Perhaps if he doesn’t want to be ignored, he should stop declining debates and running from reporters……

        Just a thought…..

        • J Jones

          Why? To keep taking questions from them that they wont ask anyone else, like “Are you going to run 3rd party?”

          • BigBoa

            AH HAHAHAHA!!

            You can’t decline debates and run from reporters and then claim you’re ignored by the media. At least not if you want to be perceived as being sane……

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/David-Jones/1583440206 David Jones

    You Rush babies are being played like a fiddle…all these so called scandals have been trumpeted up to whip you up to a hillbilly furor. This fast and furious had been around for some time called operation Gun Runner. The Czar craze was Ronnie’s invention one of his favorite mgt. tools. He also RAISED taxes 11 times to compromise for spending cuts. Cheney’s the one who said deficits don’t matter. The space program had many expensive failures millions of dollars no one even thought of accusing anyone of mismanagement cause they new that’s how you have breakthroughs, most of them fail. If you took all the debt from every previous President and added it all up BUSH’s debt was greater. Weapons of mass destruction excuse for Wars everywhere and forever, no money left to help our Country. Fact checked Bush and Reagan took more vacation and had bigger traveling entourages and Bush used Air Force One more than Barack in his first 3 years. I could go on and on whip up whitey to get our way that’s the Southern Strategy that Nixon fine tuned. Wake up be an American why listen to a no degree, drug addict, four time loser, and pig rich causing strife.

    • Hannah Rebekah

      I get so tired of those (Michelle included) who keep bringing up the taxes that Romney raised while Governor. These taxes are really fees and here let me give an example of just one of those fees (taxes?) that he raised.
      http://aboutmittromney.com/taxes.htm
      (excerpt)
      But Governor Romney did raise some fees. Some critics have overstated the impact this had on the taxpayer, most of whom were not directly effected if effected at all, with one exception, as raising broad-based fees were avoided. Fees were raised on some business or individual services in an effort to cover the cost of services the fees were charged for, as in this case:

      “Governor Mitt Romney is raising fees on the use of state golf courses … it’s fair to ask golfers to pay for the cost of maintaining these facilities rather than expecting taxpayers to subsidize them.”

      Citizens for Limited Taxation – Fees or Taxes – March 7, 2003

      However, until he was able to implement his healthcare reform, he also raised a fee to health insurers which upset the Citizens for Limited Taxation. [10] When all was said and done, Barbara Anderson, Executive Director of Citizens for Limited Taxation concluded, ”I’ve never liked most corporate loopholes anyhow — especially when the corporations oppose “people tax cuts.” And while I don’t like fees on top of all our taxes, I don’t equate them [taxes] with user fees.” [11] As National Review reported,

      “He [Gov. Romney] says, “we stayed away from broad-based fee increases such as driver’s-license registrations.” He says that balancing the budget without a tax hike has been his most significant accomplishment as governor. “We couldn’t be happier with him,” says Barbara Anderson of Citizens for Limited Taxation, the state’s leading taxpayer group. Steve Adams of Boston’s Pioneer Institute, a think tank, concurs: “Without Romney, we would have been slapped with a lot of new taxes.” ”

      National Review – Matinee Mitt – Dec 14, 2005

      Under the governor’s leadership, the people in the state benefited not only by increased employment through the creation of tens of thousands of new jobs [12] and not having their taxes raised, but they also saw several more tax cuts by the governor, as the following article pointed out:

      “He cut capital gains taxes, benefiting well over 150,000 residents. Thousands more are currently benefiting from new jobs in the biotech field because of Romney’s manufacturing tax relief and because he made the investment tax credit permanent. Thousands of Massachusetts families saved their hard-earned dollars when Romney enacted sales tax holidays. Seniors are benefiting from property tax relief proposed and signed into law by Romney. Our honorable veterans and National Guard members have several new tax breaks because of Romney’s belief that they should be taxed less. Commuters can now deduct expenses for travel because Romney believes they shouldn’t be penalized for helping increase commerce.”

      Boston Globe – Romney is the kind of leader we need – Dec 14, 2007
      (end of excerpt)

      For more information on the other issues that many (even Michelle) wrongfully attribute to Romney check out the links on the upper left side of the page.
      http://aboutmittromney.com/taxes.htm

    • K-Bob

      When you do “go on and on,” leave out the racist crap.

  • Anonymous

    Whatever happened to the 11th Commandment?

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_V6LH2CWY4TTLZYAEQJKXSTHFII Scott

      Romney screwed that on up a few weeks ago! This is also a different time. Obummer will hit our candidate with a ton of bricks we need someone that is tough enough to take and dish it out. It has to be Newt no other Republican running is tough enough.

      • Anonymous

        Really So Romney called another candidate a Liar? Romney dishonestly called on another candidate to end attack ads he had no control over? Oops that was someone else…

  • Anonymous

    Rush is wrong to ever tie Romney to what the PAC does…it’s just a cheap shot, and Romney doesn’t get giddy and happy over anything in those ads. Gingrich is wrong for ever attacking free market enterprise and for getting involved in what some PAC supporting him does. He walks around openly spewing his happiness in their destructive behavior toward free enterprise and sounding like he joined Occupy Wall Street. It was bad enough that he did so well in Saturday’s debate, and woke up Sunday and ruined it all by being a snot on stage. I can’t vote for someone who is going to stand up at a news conference with congressional and world leaders and act like a surly petulant snot!

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100003341528048 Dinero Muchismo

    Rush carries water for the establishment he has no credibility. He sometimes makes interesting points, but him and his pack of ditto heads hopefully will blindly follow rush off a cliff saying “major dittos” go pop some pills rush, you more entertaining when you were high!

    • K-Bob

      Credibility is earned. I’m pretty sure Rush has earned his share.

      Keep at it. You might get there.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100003341528048 Dinero Muchismo

    Private sector he cuts jobs, in the public sector he’s a big government, big spender. He acts differently when it’s his money vs public money. If his record in the private sector matched his public record, he would have my vote. It doesn’t, all I see is Obama in a mormon suit, I really don’t see the difference between a big government democrat and a big government republican. Either way we will have more government, more spending, more debt, and more war! Depending on who wins the GOP nomination this may be the year the GOP collapses, a third party like the libertarians pick up a lot of support maybe 1/5 ? and Obama wins another term. The GOP needs to look to appease limited government constitution supporting members of the party or this will be the last straw and they will lose them forever. There is a lot at stake this election, the future of the country, and the survival of the GOP. I suggest the GOP play their cards accordingly. – signing off as a potential former republican and a potential future libertarian!

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_XNMJJ3OF4LOZ3NWLCPILEY2M4M JoyB

      If he is a big spender (ask his kids how untrue that is) then why did he take a 3 billion dollar deficit in MA and balance the budget? Do your homework and stop listening to the haters. His record is public, check for yourself.

  • Anonymous

    The moment Rush trashed Ron Paul I stopped taking him seriously (I know, don’t make fun of me for giving him any credibility before)

  • Anonymous

    Parents are sent a letter by the Texas government. Here is the current year’s.
    http://www.dshs.state.tx.us/immunize/docs/school/Parent_ltr_K-12_imm_requirements.pdf

    Page 3 clearly outlines exemptions and how to get them.

    Some people realize citizens are not helpless people incapable of reading.

    • Anonymous

      Ignore kamiller..he is a little dizzy from all the glue on his tongue from licking stamps for Perry mailouts.

      • Anonymous

        Did you read page 3? What did it say?

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Richard-Jones/100001374595021 Richard Jones

    I think NEWT has the courage to use whatever it takes now. He can’t control everything, but some see him as a monster even before he did anything based on some history pretty much defined by the MSM media (and tiffany account) and his opponents, and those pesky PUNDITS, who I think are the scourage of the earth now.

    I admit I have watched NEWT on FOX for years (and liked points) AND watched his speeches recently, which I find quite inspiring, and I know people who HATE him won’t watch these and hear what he says he will, NOT WHAT BECKSTER SAYS HE WILL DO, which I find to be pure smears of the worst kind).

    I have known a lot of his history, and listened to his baggage reports, and was shocked as he EVERYONE went after him like he was JASON from Halloween.

    INCLUDING Huckster Glenn Beck (and his Bevis and Butthead duo) who is obcessed with tagging NEWT as a PROGRESSIVE based on his video clips of him saying he like Teddy R, Wilson and FDR, sat with Nancy Peloci and was paid 1.6 million from FHA as a consultant.

    THEY won’t mention NEWT served UNDER Ronald Reagan and led the 94 revolution where he (and REPUBS) took back over the house. 4 years where he balanced the budget with Clinton and had a unemplyment of 4.4. YEAH GLENN, sounds real PROGRESSIVE to me !!!!!

    That was 12 years ago for NEWT! Beckster makes it sounds like NEWT has the PROG CANCER and has spent trillions recently and grown government like OBAME. See GLENN decides now who is telling the truth and who is not. His EGO has gone out of control just as BREITBART said about him stealing employees, taking credit for others hard work (videos) for his own, and edits files and emails to make his self look good or to prove his theories and conspirocies. I watched him 4 years, and now I wonder how much of it was total BS.

    NEWT has gotten older, asked for GRACE, made some money and asked for grace. Beck thinks he can get grace from GOD but old Granpa NEWT is a Monster and does not deserve to be trusted.

    Well, I think NEWT is the only one who can actually handle this cleanup project, and you can throw in anyone you want. I don’t like him the best, he is just the most prepared, and can take the heat.

    Too bad even conservatives have trashed NEWT, and now the knives are out for Romney. Don’t think OBAME and the lefty devils and demons are not managing this food fight.

    This is spiritual folks, and the CULT leaders (Beck), TV Presidents, Billionares, etc. are all playing a part.

    Romney just choked his big GAFF I was waiting for, and it was because the boys put the screws to him on Meet the Depressed debate.

    See, MITT can’t take the S-H-I-T (PRESSURE), but we know NEWT can. IF he has to go NINJA PROGRESSIVE on people like he did last 2 days, Hey, play fight fire with fire I say.

    JUST DON’T SMEAR PEOPLE WITH LIES. AND the GBTV folks have joined MSNBC with nutty as hell tactics. And I know, they did it to me, and I was just a fan, who needed to be stepped on to make a point for the Huckster, so he could sell his crapola.

  • Anonymous

    WTF! Please elaborate.

  • crkonehd

    Newt Who? Rush who?

    Two stuck in the 90’s has bins – nothing to see here folks, move along…

  • Anonymous

    The following resources may be of interest regarding vaccinations:

    Stephanie Cave, M.D,. F.A.A.F.P., and Deborah Mitchell. What Your Doctor May Not Tell You About Children’s Vaccinations. New York: Warner Books, 2001. ISBN 0-446-67707-8.

    Catherine J.M. Diodati, M.A. IMMUNIZATION History, Ethics, Law And Health. Windsor, Ontario: Integral Aspects Incorporated, 1999. ISBN 0-9685080-0-6.

    Randall Neustaedter, OMD. The VACCINE GUIDE Risks and Benefits for Children and Adults. Berkeley, California: North Atlantic Books, 2002.

    Neil Z. Miller. VACCINES: Are They Really Safe And Effective? Santa Fe, New Mexico: New Atlantean Press, 2004. ISBN 1-881217-30-2.

    Harris L. Coulter. Vaccination, Social Violence, and Criminality: The Medical Assault on the American Brain. Berkeley, California: North Atlantic Books, 1990. ISBN 1-55643-084-1.

    Barbara L. Fisher & Harris L. Coulter. A Shot in the Dark. Garden City, New York: Avery Publishing Group, Inc., 1991.

    Viera Scheibner, Ph.D. VACCINATION 100 Years of Orthodox Research shows that Vaccines Represent a Medical Assault on the Immune System.
    Maryborough, Victoria, Australia: Australian Print Group, 1993. ISBN 0-646-15124-X.

    National Vaccine Information Center – http://www.nvic.org

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Don-Kent/1663877073 Don Kent

    the end justifies the means just say no to romney/oboma

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OEEDRKFYTRW6P7TCOLFCV74CNQ Alan LaGreen

    Rush PLAYS Conservative, but when the chips are down, he always comes out on the side of Wall Street-Big Business. Romney has never been a BUSINESSMAN, he’s just a FINANCIER. The Dems used this tactic successfully against Carly Fiorina in the 2010 election here in California. (“I’m John Doe and I used to work for Hewlett-Packard until Carly Fiorina laid me off…Vote for Barbra Boxer.”) So why is anybody surprised that this issue isn’t biting Romney on the butt too. I’m surprised it took this long! Yeah, Romney was a successful businessman — so was Al Capone! Let’s find a Republican who is #1, a real Conservative, and #2 is a decent human being. Laying people off is kind of like going to war — sometimes it has to be done, but if you actually LIKE firing and killing, you have no soul!

  • Steve Andrews

    Quite a long time ago economist Joseph Schumpeter described the capitalist principle of “creative destruction.” Because we are imperfect and sometimes make bad decisions, it is sometimes necessary to liquidate or attenuate bad investments and employ the proceeds elsewhere in the hope of making a more successful investment. Sometimes it is just a matter of laying-off part of a company’s workforce, and / or a remix of equipment and facilities and employees — and in some instances it is not possible to save a company, resulting in the layoff of the entire workforce and the liquidation of assets in favor of the highest bidder, freeing the remaining capital for investment elsewhere. In the dynamic free-market economy — the greatest wealth engine in history — we are free to succeed or fail. No other system has raised the standard of living of human beings, by the billions of people, in the shortest time in all of human history. Today, however, we are not “capitalist,” and that anti-capitalistic mentality in the White House hopes to destroy capitalism, even while lying that this is not his goal. As with Bush Jr, OhBummer argued for taxpayer bailouts of companies which tried to “privatize” [keep] their profits while “socializing” [sharing] their losses. This is not “capitalism,” however. This is fascism, and those who accuse OhBummer of being a “socialist” forget that both of these tyrannies are “statism” — and that all statists are brothers in the war to hijack your wallet, take up residence inside it — and shut you up and silence your complaints. Oh, and to forbid private ownership of weapons and ammo for self-defense — a confiscatory measure DOUBTLESS unrelated to their dictatorship.

  • h0nestabe

    Ron Paul 2012!!! The rest are nothing but establishment puppets. That’s why the establishment claims Ron Paul is unelectable. If the media would kiss Ron Paul’s ass the way they have been Romney Ron Paul would be leading in a landslide. Americans are sick of the deficits and out of control spending and Ron Paul is offering a trillion in cuts in the first year. What more do you want from the man? Oh, let me guess, his non-interventionist foreign policy which has the troops full support is dangerous? GTFOOH!

    Wake up America!

    • jas

      If this were 1776 I’d be right there with you!

      But like you said, it’s 2012 and Ronnie Baby’s century has come and gone.

  • Anonymous

    I see the Paul Nuts tweeted each other to flood this topic.

    Anyway, yeah Rush warned to be careful with the ‘language of the left’, he also smiled big about Romney stepping in it and Romney starting it and Romney asking for it. Mitt is *finally* feeling the heat and he is making gaffes, thanks to Newt.

    I was thinking, notice how Newt, Perry, Santorum, bachmann and Cain ALL came from humble roots, blue collar families? And they are the real Conservatives. It’s the born-super-rich and elite Romney and Huntsman that are the RINO’s and moderates.

    The only reason we all still see Romney is his money, his money keeps him alive as a candidate for 20 years, his record is a pure loser, he won 1 office in his life and governed LEFT and was deeply unpopular at the end.

    • Anonymous

      I see the brainwashed sheep are out in full force. Yeah, Big government loving Mitt Romney is going to turn things around. Romneycare is the model for Obamacare. Romney supported the bankster bailouts. Should I go on? You don’t win the seat in New Hampshire being a true Conservative. Here’s where you call me a nut again. Let’s see what fox news talking points you come back with.

      When you say the only reason we still see Romney is because of his money you couldn’t be more full of shyt. Romney has received all his money from the same too big to fails Obama received his money from.

      Perry came from humble blue collar roots? Perry used to be a Democrat who supported Gore and NAFTA.

      Get informed moron…

      • Anonymous

        please disregard the like I was trying to hit the reply button.

        As for Mitt you are the ill informed one he ran as a moderate yes but he governed as a conservative…

        here’s his record

        http://www.issues2000.org/Mitt_Romney.htm

  • fake name

    Paul-bots are as annoying as Alec Baldwin and mindlessly repeat dogma like Jeaneane Garofalo.

    • Anonymous

      Never thought I’d see the day that Republicans would debate like Commies. Paul-bots? Is that what you Neo-Cons have come up with? Right out of the Saul Alinsky playbook. If you can’t debate it then smear it?

      You Neo-Cons better jump aboard the Ron Paul express or you will have 4 more of Obummer. I refuse to vote for a RINO. Please pull your heads from your collective asses.

      Ron Paul 2012!

      • Anonymous

        Ron Paul for Secretary of the Treasury!

        • Anonymous

          I hope that this happens if Romney or anybody else wins

      • Anonymous

        Who’s Ron Paul?

        • K-Bob

          The secret identity of Luap Nor, the superhero of spliff splitters, conspiracy fans, gold bugs, and the isolationists.

          (I’m just tweaking the Ron Paul fans. Lighten up.)

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100002391851650 Ron Nordan

    Language of the left? What, English?

    • K-Bob

      No, Entitlement-ese.

  • Anonymous

    I agree with Rush, bad move Newt.

  • Anonymous

    I agree with Rush, bad move Newt.

  • Anonymous

    Romney is like a unicorn- one of the last “Jack Armstrong, All-American boy”-type men. He’s married to his high school sweetheart, and total family man. 5 grown sons, and not a failure or troublemaker among them. He was the valedictorian of his graduating class at BYU. He earned a JD (law) degree and an MBA degree from HARVARD at the SAME time. (top honors in BOTH, btw) Was hired by his college internship firm after graduation and was VP in 4 years. He’s a true gentleman. Oh, and btw, he helped start Domino’s, Sports Authority, Staples, Brookstone, and Sealy’s!! Turned around a floundering and scandal-ridden Salt Lake City Olympics into the most profitable Olympics ever. As a Mormon, he doesn’t smoke, drink, swear, cheat, lie, dance,etc…. Why WOULDN”T voters want this type of guy?? America will be lucky to have him……….

    • Anonymous

      And he is the biggest flip flopper on issues that has ever been pulled from the politica sea.Mittens wakes up everyday asking himself.What side of the issues will I sit on today?

      • Anonymous

        Name one flipflop as opposed to a flip please?

        • Anonymous

          LOL, that is a great argument, LOL

          • Anonymous

            Yes it is. Imagine if Obama flipped on his economic policy, imagine if he flipped on immigration, the drug war, etc.

            We’d be a lot better off if every moderate and liberal followed Mitts lead and flipped without flopping.

            • Anonymous

              Not sure I follow you, are you saying Obama’s policy on drugs would be different than Romneys?

              • Anonymous

                Yes while he certainly wouldn’t be libertarian on the issue by any stretch he would also not pull a “fast and a furious” While I think the “War on Drugs” needs to end, it’s a losing issue to the majority of Americans, as they have been brainwashed to believe that just because something is legal people will engage in it more (despite evidence to the opposite).

                • Anonymous

                  Fast and furious, what was that again? Oh, some Mexicans got some guns from agents and one of those guns was used to kill an agent, right?

                  Wrong, guns dont klill people, remember. Try to stay consistent.

                  FYI, Fast and furious type ops started long before Obama, but whatever, if that is what you got, good luck.

                  and BTW, I did not vote for Obama, and I never will.

                • Anonymous

                  I never thought you did I think you may be confused as to what I was saying. My original point was that Romney flipping on social issues was a good thing and that if Obama would turn the car around rather then driving full speed in the wrong direction we would be better off. I was NOT promoting Obama or insinuating you would or had supported him I was using the most extreme left idealouge to point out that if he would flip (become conservative) he would be a good president.

                • Anonymous

                  Oh yeah, I was clear as to your meaning. The insane part is that we actually believe what we say, or at least one of us does. You actually believe that Obama is some sort of liberal, and maybe from a contemporary American perspective you are able to rationalize that view, but of course, every other countrymen around the developed world looks at American politics as the most conservative of any nation. Your labels might make sense in the circles you exist in but they are hopelessly out of touch with modern reality. I know, the rest of the world is full of idiots and the only smart people are conservative Americans, got it, no need to affirm that. Thing that bothered me from childhood was hawks inability of people to realize that they people they fear, are hawks. The people they are saving us from, hawks. As hawks, they don’t realize they empower the hawks they fear. Hawks fear hawks, it is a perpetual exercise in mindlessness. If we did not fear, we would not have hawks, and nobody would fear us. How do you people function? How do you get through life as self respecting intelligent peole but fail to understand the basic human nature that drives your ideology (insecurity)? Idid not get it. I do now, military industrial complex, you all live in a bubble of propaganda that serves you well but cannot exist on it’s own forever. Unfortunately the inevitable destination is insolvency, we will not be defeated, we will fade away with guns drawn, and that is what the hawks have left for us. We will argue about stupid things like school lunches but the real issue is off the table and will be until there is revolution. The real issue for the richest country in the world is not welfare SSN or unemployment insurance, healthcare or any of the things we argue about. For 40 years the progressives have predicted that our reliance on oil would cause enormous damage to our nation, and you still don’t get it, and never will. Despite the facts that stare you right in the face, you will still believe that Mitt is conservative and Obama is liberal. It is cognitive dissonance.
                  Serious digression, so anyway, what is with you people claiming guns don’t kill people, do they, or don’t they? and if they don’t, why say they do? Political experience maybe? You brought up fast and furious, so tell me, do guns kill people or not? Cheers :-)
                  Sent from ChocoCat’s iPad

  • http://www.facebook.com/SandyatWVTEA.ORG Sandra L Staats

    Rush, we have to play their games to win. Never bash anyone but Obama.

  • http://www.facebook.com/SandyatWVTEA.ORG Sandra L Staats

    or Paul

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_6X2QXCRRC36352OKJROOPADS2Q Richard

    How the hell are Republicans supposed to win when they’re wasting millions in campaign money and cannibalizing each another instead of concentrating on the defeat of America’s Main Enemy, Barack Hussein Obama?

    I happen personally to favor Newt Gingrich, but I almost don’t care who wins the Republican Presidential nomination, so long as they trounce this Mau Mau Kenyan terrorist progeny currently occupying the White House.

    • Anonymous

      Obama killed Osama bin Laden, and there is nothing you will ever be able to do to change it, you might as well get used to it.

      • Anonymous

        actually the navy seals killed bin laden, while obuma was sitting in a room on the other side of the world.

        • Anonymous

          ah, i see. OK, you are right, lets give credit where credit is due. The worlds most powerful military force took TEN YEARS to kill one guy, and you want to give them credit. AWESOME!! Ten Years to kill one guy, and while we are wondering what the excuse is, you are offering them credit as if it was an accomplishment, LOL, you folks are way too easy.

  • Anonymous

    I’d like to see someone, anyone, wipe that silly smile off Romney’s face. At least Newt jumped on his back. Not some hidden bunch of PAC addicts.

    It’s an accusation Romney. Just handle it. That’s where character is.

  • James A Glasscock

    The GOP flying circus ought to read Barry Goldwater’s “Without Apology.” The book cover his life in politics, but he outlines what lead to his defeat. The GOP cut him to
    ribbons before the Democrats.
    Once again, the circus is in town. The focus of strong critique ought to be on Obama and his policies.

    • Anonymous

      Actually that book is quite prescient, by blaming everyone else it was instrumental in creating the conservative MO

  • Daniel Feerst

    We all know that last June, Gingrich was purposely sabotaged so he could not raise money now, and be in a better position. He is the only one in the race with a track record that includes everything this country needs more of — and the media won’t cover these achievements–so Romney is buying the election. And Nickki Haley is a payback to Romney for his support, and we aren’t hearing a thing about that either. She KNOWS Newt is the better candidate.

    • Anonymous

      Couldn’t agree more. The Republicans have taken Nikki to the shed and she has seen the Republican light. The Tea Party must be dissolved. Check out a picture where she appears behind Romney. The smiles are identical.

      She’s not the first person who sold her soul to the Republican party for a career in politics. Hopefully, she’ll be the last.

    • Anonymous

      Yep people always believe in payback above principle it couldn’t possibly be that a lot of people agree with Mitts views and disagree with yours…

  • Anonymous

    Newt was for Obamacare before he was against it. Romney too is in bed with Obamacare. That being said….these candidates KNOW the wants of most of the Conservatives and getting re-elected will hinge on their performance if they fail. So whoever we get…we have to push them through to the finish line and make sure they produce or the loser(s) of the primary will get the job four years later. BTW: The Dem Party is finished for awhile….Obama has seen to that.

  • Anonymous

    IN IOWA, Willard “I’ll Bet My $10,000.00 in Pocket Change, But I Won’t Release My [Ponzi Scheme-filled] Tax Returns” RomneyRINO was asked to disclose his tax returns because we wanted to see what went on during his corporate days, BUT HE REFUSED! Does he really think he can get away with that? People just think he is hiding something. It’s like 2008 Iowa caucus winner Huckleberry Huckabee said, “Mitt doesn’t remind you of the guys you used to work with, he reminds you of the guy who laid you off.” Refusal to release tax returns will alienate middle class voters, which the Republican Party cannot afford to lose.

  • Anonymous

    Ron Paul trollers are awesome. You pass around talking points memos to each other and when someone disagrees with your rhetoric, you send out spinned facts? and call the person a name. Your tantrums, frankly, are pretty funny. Your spin is transparent. Your candidate won’t win.

    • J Jones

      Of course you fail to refute anything but spew the talking points of the RINOs… The GOP will not and can not win without RP at the top of the ticket… get used to that fact.

    • http://3eyedjohnny.blogspot.com/ 3eyedjohnny

      …and neither will any republican without the Ron Paul Trollers support. Better start playing nice because they will write in a name or vote straight libertarian come November. Enjoy 4 more years of BO.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Jon-Lewis/100001412235230 Jon Lewis

    When half of these comments are about Homos and Vaccines, the rest about infighting between the commenters, I am a little concerned that we are going to coalesce into a unified block of voters to remove Obama and Reid from power. Folks, we need to keep our eyes on the ball.

    • Anonymous

      Obama killed Osama bin Laden. Republicans would have us go back in to Iraq. And your argument is that this country cant take 4 more years of Obama, LOL.

      • Anonymous

        With Bushes policy

        • Anonymous

          OK, it took Bush and the US military ten years to kill one guy, and you want to give them the credit? LOL, fine, you get it, they took ten years to kill one guy and that is your version of an accomplishment. TEN YEARS, one guy, with the greatest military force ever created (allegedly). Good grief you people are easy.

  • Anonymous

    New CBS poll out last night – “Obama’s lead over Paul is just one point, 46 percent to 45 percent, as Paul leads among independents by 7 points.” I know Rush and his sheeple will try to spin this and say CBS has no credibility and all that. Ignoring all of their past rhetoric about having to win independents to beat Obama. Rush and his sheeple will continue to criticize Paul’s foreign policy but it’s looking more and more like maybe it’s what the American people want.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_VKTGGV4DIFIX5L742NFTEW5LRM Dan

      You love the word “sheeple,” don’t you.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_3YGGJ7DQQM6ZBKXCLV3IZX2CPY Plubius

    While Rush beats up on Ron Paul. I really get tired of the conservatives who are more conserned with winning than principals.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_CXF23VSW2NVU6JFQXZ4D6IHGZM Biff Watterson

      And I’m tired of people who comment on Rush but rarely listen to him. If you ever bothered to listen to Rush, you’d know he pretty much calls it as he sees it, unlike alot of liberal political hacks that never speak out against anyone in their party. Now go back to watching Sponge bob in your Mom’s basement.

      • Anonymous

        Yeah Plubius, Biff is tired of defending Rush against people who dont have time to sit around and listen to him. Do Biff a favor and go back to watching spongebob in your moms basement, lol, Biff is tired of this!!

      • J Jones

        your full of it.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Teddy-Novak/100003330681466 Teddy Novak

    We have to take the fight to the Left and stop fighting on ground of their choosing.

    http://www.zazzle.com/FirstPrinciples?rf=238518351914519699

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_VKTGGV4DIFIX5L742NFTEW5LRM Dan

    Rush is right, of course. Newt’s scorched-earth policy, especially as it applies to Romney and Bain Capital will only add fodder to the ultimate fray if Romney is the nominee.

    As to Ron Paul, if it was possible to remove the foreign policy part of his brain, he might stand a shot. As it is, even if one has arrived at the truly scurrilous notion America somehow “deserved” 911, a candidate for President should keep it to himself. A traitor always feels it necessary to justify himself with radical theories on the nature of “why,” Dr. Paul is no different. He spouts a populist, libertarian line that, while it warms the cockles of conservative hearts, also involves the proviso that if you want the conservative in him, you have to take the nut-case too.

  • Anonymous

    Democrats LOVE Newt.

  • Florin S.

    Newt is a despicable, petty, mean spirited man…unable or unwilling to be faithful to his wives or to his constituents…he is faithful only to himself. However, Rush is spewing forth so much hatred lately that it’s nauseating…he screams and rants with rage whenever a Republican says he will try to work with some Dems…Republicans and Democrats are Americans…and Limbaugh seems to want to start another civil war…does he really believe that the country will get better with him trying to force American Dems and Repubs apart..?! What is the matter with him??? There are many honorable men and women in both parties and the NEED TO WORK TOGETHER or our country will be ruined…Limbaugh is becoming worse than Obama in his divisiveness…man up Limbaugh and stop the hate speech…I know you say you are a god but I never thought you believed it…I guess you do!!!

    • Anonymous

      The problem is that there is no “working together” with Democrats. They only use that as a ruse, then slip the knife out from behind their back when you turn around.

      You cannot negotiate with people whose goal is to destroy your society and remake it in a Euro-socialist image. You can only completely destroy and defeat them.

      • Florin S.

        You sound as hate filled as Limbaugh…dangerous. You want to completely destroy and defeat ‘them’…so you are not going after ideas or agendas, you want to destroy fellow Americans…people like you are destroying this country with a lot of help from Obama and his thugs…you sound like Obama and his comrades…sorry, I will never help to destroy ‘them’ although I will fight their liberal agenda. However, not all Dems are liberal…there are socially conservative Dems and we meet them every year at the March for Life in Washington…hatred generates hatred…no one, no one, can have everything their way all the time…and hatred destroys…absolutely.

        • Anonymous

          Okay. If Democrats stop trying to undermine America and American culture, everything that made America what it was, I’ll stop saying they need to be politically destroyed.

          You’re being a fool. It’s why they keep besting you.

  • http://twitter.com/deanzna dina bales

    rush needs to support return to true constitutional government! we are in this mess because we have left the founding fathers plan for this nation! Ron Paul is the ONLY choice! Until then we will continue to fail. this nation was only meant to be run on the constitution!

    • http://twitter.com/JimRaynor_ Joshua

      Wanna know what the founding fathers intended but never made because they thought politicians would be too bored? Term limits. Ron Paul and his billions of earmarks is no better than any other politician. If we’re going to go back to the founding, Paul isn’t the answer, either. I’ll say it again just so you understand: Ron Paul is NOT the only choice!

    • Anonymous

      Listen to Rush before you comment, He supports no one at this point

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_NXON22FQSDCCSA2WHZIRTHQWTU Greig

    I like being able to fire people who provide services to me. What’s wrong with that? That’s one way consumers shop with their feet. If someone provides me with bad services, I stop using that service, and find someone who can do it better.

  • dob3ro

    Newt is the candidate I have chosen since he first announced. I will vote for him in the primary if he is still around when it gets to my state. If not I will vote for my second choice, my first second choice is already gone. My second second choice is floundering. My third second choice is crazy and my fourth second choice is the likely winner. My fifth second choice still beats what we have in office now and I will campaign very hard for him. My original fourth second choice dropped out a couple weeks ago and I would have campaigned very hard for her.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_O2RTALNRQFL3TAK7ILKPXJSJ6U screwtape

    As long as a candidate states that they will bomb Iran unprovoked, Rush is happy. He can’t stand Ron Paul even though he’s the only trust worthy fiscal conservative running. Rush would rather see your taxes go up then there be no new war.
    Thank you Rush for essentially building up Romney and Gingrich, men much more liberal then Ron Paul.
    The country has survived this long against attack with Obama at the helm..Does anyone believe it’d be any different under Ron Paul? (save the tin foil hat wearing Rush Limbaugh?

    • http://twitter.com/JimRaynor_ Joshua

      Were you capable of making a worse lie? First, Rush supports disarming Iran from being dangerous. Second, Rush does not want to see taxes go up. Third, Rush is tearing down Romney and Gingrich, right now! Fourth, Paul has made BILLIONS in earmarks for his district, then votes against them and pretends he’s not part of the system!!! If you want to be seen as even remotely credible, stop being ignorant and stop lying. WAKE UP!

      PS the mere fact you put Obama and Paul on the same page makes Paul look pretty freaking liberal.

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_LPE43QG4PMFCFSMM6TO5U4L3IA Allan

        Funny how following the Constitution is considered “liberal” these days. And as far as disarming Iran goes, does Rush ever bother to mention that Russia and China have promised to defend Iran even to the point of going to war with the USA? Is World War 3 an outcome you are willing to accept?

    • Anonymous

      I assume that you listen to Rush on a regular basis. I do and I have not heard him support anyone at this time. He has come down on all candidates and has not played any favorites. I know for sure that Ron Paul is not on my list as commander in chief. I will support, Rush said this also, who ever we nominate to run against the bamster. Paul and the rest need to stop tearing each other up and concentrate on Obama.

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_LPE43QG4PMFCFSMM6TO5U4L3IA Allan

        People can talk all they want about not “tearing each other up”, but the thing is that Ron Paul is actually different than the other candidates, and it is important for him to highlight those differences. Ron Paul is someone who sticks to principles, even when those principles are unpopular. Quite frankly Romney, Gingrich, cannot say the same thing. I know that there are many people here for whom beating Obama is the only thing that matters, but if it just means putting Romney in his spot then I don’t see the point. I’m quite familiar with Obama’s record, but Romney would just be more of the same, just like Obama was more of the same for most of Bush’s policies. It’s easy to see coming because they’re all sold out to Goldman Sachs.

  • Anonymous

    Newt, the other day, when asked about the Second Amendment, mentioned “proper training”.

    S’cuse me? Who decides that? Big Government?

    Used to be that kids were taught marksmanship and safety by their fathers. And there were no “school shootings”.

  • Anonymous

    First time in a few months that Rush has acted like an actual Conservative.

  • Anonymous

    ron paul is the ONLY choice to deal the the true issues that our country faces. those are a bloated federal government, the erosion of civil liberties and freedom, fail monetary policies, failed foreign policies.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_THUGRD6ENMFW7RQFKUO7BN2QWU A Yahoo! user

      The true voice of a loon!

      • Anonymous

        spoken like a sheep headed to the slaughter house. i hope you awake from your slumber soon.

    • Anonymous

      Oh really, then who is your second choice, Obama?

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_LPE43QG4PMFCFSMM6TO5U4L3IA Allan

        There isn’t a whole lot of point in having a second choice given the rest of the field, including Obama, all intends to take the US to war with Russia and China over Iran.

      • Anonymous

        there is no second choice. newt = mitt = gwb = obuma. they all dance to the globalist puppet masters. if ron paul isn’t elected, it really doesn’t matter who is. the policies will not change that much. all the candidate except ron paul support the bailouts, ndaa, sopa, patriot act, crony capitalism, failed monetary policies, failed foreign policies. they are also funded by much of the same lobbyists, bankers and international conglomerates. just look at the top donors of every candidates campaign.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_3XCPJMKVTQIWMTFZHANRX5IIHQ Allen

    Rush and the far-right need to stop attacking this smart clean Fiscal Conservative, Mitt Romney…..

    If the far-right mucks this election up for the GOP there is going to be hell…….!

    • J Jones

      Mitt cant beat Obama

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_THUGRD6ENMFW7RQFKUO7BN2QWU A Yahoo! user

        a LAME DOG COULD BEAT NOBAMA!

        • http://twitter.com/JimRaynor_ Joshua

          A dead dog could beat obama… doesn’t mean Mitt can.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_3XCPJMKVTQIWMTFZHANRX5IIHQ Allen

    Breaking new Gallp Poll

    Romney leads all other Republican candidates with CONSERVATIVES.

    You can check out the link on Drudge right now…….Go Mitt…..the Conservatives No.#1 Choice.

    Support and vote for Mitt so he can FIRE Barack Obama in November.

  • landofaahs

    Aren’t we all trying to tell obama, “YOUR FIRED”? Wow Mitt, it really does feel good. And isn’t everyone vying for the nomination trying to say the same thing to obama;”YOUR FIRED”? Man, I could get used to that.

  • Anonymous

    When the dust settles Romney will be the nominee and Newt will be his running mate. You will see Newt go against Hillary, I still think Biden will bow out and make the case for Hillary. This whole health care mess is bull. I live in Mass and when I was out of work I was told to get healthcare and I did. I purchased what I could afford and after I paid for it. I submitted forms to the state and they reimbursed me 80%. I thought this part of Romney care was fine. If I had no way to pay for it, I’d get subsidized care where I would at least get preventative care and not a whole lot of everything else. I didn’t mind but I have a son with special needs and care. I have out of pocket expenses that reach 2200 when Oba care was enacted to 5150 this year. So much for cost control. What worked in Mass will not work will not work for the country. Mass like most states can control “public access” to certain things offered by the state. In the federal arena anyone who is here can get federal bennies without regard to race, creed status etc etc. When Oba says he’ll see to it illegals for instance won’t get access to healthcare is wrong, because the constitution says they can, as well as the supreme court. (And this guy was a constitutional scholar?) They say Bush was stupid? What a crock. As for Bain Capitol Newt is being disingenuous what Mitt did was not anything bad, it’s business. I’ve worked for firms Bain took over and scrapped and I worked for some companies that were successful and still are Staples for example. One has to take responsibility for ones life and get off sinking ships. I still think Newt would be better against Obama baggage and all. Any politician who has been around will have baggage. I think the media being in the tank for Obama knows Newt would clean Obama’s clock so they trump up Romney in hopes he would really be the weaker candidate.

  • Anonymous

    Newt’s vindictive streak is showing. He complains that Romney has been responsible for his falling poll numbers because of incessant negative ads in Iowa. That, however, doesn’t explain Newt’s national numbers freefall. The fact is that Newt began suffering from self-inflicted wounds beginning with his reckless call for subpoenaing judges before congress. Newt’s attitude now seems to be if he can’t win, nobody will.

  • Constitution First

    Can we focus on defeating Øbama, people?

    For one freakin’ minute, can we stop being our own worst enemy?

    • Anonymous

      newt = mitt = gwb = obuma. they all dance to the globalist puppet masters. if ron paul isn’t elected, it really doesn’t matter who is. the policies will not change that much.

  • Anonymous

    Listen to the entire audio of that event with Mitt. Poor choice of words but blown way out of proportion.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_THUGRD6ENMFW7RQFKUO7BN2QWU A Yahoo! user

    newt is very hard to support now. he has forgotten the objective is to win, not destroy. he is not a fit representative of American candidacy and I don’t see how anyone can seriously support him now. he has gone beyond the true objective and sought to WIN AT ALL COSTS”. THE TRUE OBJECTIVE IS TO OVERTHROW NOBAMA. NOBAMA IS THE REAL DANGER TO THE UNITED STATES..

  • Anonymous

    Lets see, Mitt is the man that can beat Obama. And he is also the man that lost to the man that didn’t beat Obama. Makes perfectly good since to me. Newt has too much baggage. I’m not gonna vote for Newt because he divorced his wife and he stepped on a few toes while he was one of the most effective speakers of the house we have ever had? Whatever you say, I guess. Let’s just let the democrats and the media tell us who we want to elect as our candidate. We are on our second primary in two states that have no impact on how the remainder of the nation will vote. If the next two primaries were New York and California that would just about finish it. Iowa, who cares. New Hampshire? Who cares. Let’s get to some impact states and see what they think. We may be surprised, unless no one is still in the race.

    • Anonymous

      Stupid argument. Obama now has a marxist record that is 3 years long. This ain’t 2008 Dorthy.

      • Anonymous

        And he has a marxist following that is longer than that. If the unemployment records start improving and they are. If the stock market goes up, and it is, then the same bunch that voted for him last election will do the same, not marxist, just liberal. To ignore that is “stupid”. It may not be 2008 there wizard but is just might be the twilight zone.

        • Anonymous

          Deflection. I said because something happened in 2008 to McCain has nothing to do with this election and is a poor yard stick. Many things are different including Obamas negatives. Apples and oranges. Look what happened to the invicible LSU team last night. The Tide lost the first time too. See how easy it is to make foolish comparisons?

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_THUGRD6ENMFW7RQFKUO7BN2QWU A Yahoo! user

    SO CHOOSE ALREADY! CAN YOU NOT SEE A BETTER CANDIDATE THAN NOBAMA?

    • Anonymous

      I believe I said Newt first. And they are all better that Obama.

  • Anonymous

    Ron Paul is the only candidate who isn’t “owned” by anyone. They who cannot “see” this are, in effect, traitors.

    • Anonymous

      I am a traitor then. Here is your tin foil hat back.

    • http://twitter.com/JimRaynor_ Joshua

      This traitor just wants you to know, you’re no better than the Obama drones.

    • Anonymous

      House Representative Paul has authored over 800 pieces of legislation, eight HUNDRED, and only 1 (one) has been enacted, so the other 434 Representatives do not “see” what he is trying to accomplish either. And another thing, Ron Paul is all for “term limits (lol), except when it comes to him of course, (lol) I mean shouldn’t he have resigned after 2 terms? What he is doing hanging on and coming up with nutty ideas (like making the U.S. an isolationist nation (lol)?

  • Anonymous

    What Romney and Bain did was create viable enterprises out of dying enterprises…
    most of the sour grapes comes from those who lost jobs – which they would have lost anyway if Bain, or someother venture capitalist hadn’t stepped in ….

    What the naysayers fail to comprehend is that whenever the government shuts down a military base, thousands of people lose their jobs or livelihood. And when a defense project is shut down (as Clinton era showed) thousands of people lose their jobs or livelihood.

  • Nick X

    I voted for Perry in my absentee Florida ballot.

    • Anonymous

      lol. you shouldn’t admit to being a fool.

  • bobemakk

    First of all and most important, the candidates have to focus on Obamas failures, and not criticize each other. It is BAD for the party, this has to stop. Attack Obama, not each other. There is just too damn much dissension in the republican party.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Aslan-T-Lion/100001448432225 Aslan T. Lion

    I CAN’T STAND Romney! I much prefer Gingrich or Santorum, but with so many things to be able to go after Romney on, why do Gingrich and Perry want to capitulate to this anti-capitalism demagoguery?

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_FQLGNBAJNVFTBPR5EQXSVWP5XI JosephD

    Language of the Left? You mean airing dirty laundry in public.

  • Anonymous

    If Obama killed Osama is the main point of his re-election he is in seroius trouble. That was the biggest “no brainer” decision any president would have to make. I bet it was real tough for Obama though. It was probably his cousin.

  • Anonymous

    Yes and is that not the reason we want Mitt to go to Washington and “FIRE” people the EPA the Department of ED and so on- I love that he loves to fire people alot of Goverment workers and Departments we don’t need FIRE AWAY MITT—

    • Anonymous

      mitt is a big government guy. there is no way he would dismantle any department in the executive branch.

  • http://twitter.com/clockRVA clockRVA

    RON PAUL 2012.

  • Anonymous

    RON PAUL 2012.

  • Anonymous

    Methinks Rush still has a crush on Perry….

  • Anonymous

    Run Sarah Run……Romney and his Crony Capitalists are killing the Country.

  • Anonymous

    Sarah Palin…….”Im not for sale”! September 5th 2011 Indianola, Iowa speech.

  • brincar

    why does anyone care what a talk show host thinks..cant people think for themselves?

  • http://twitter.com/DunceBiden Dunce Biden

    Newt sounds like Oblamer.

    I just voted for Mitt in NH!

    Go Mitt — bring us some more CAPITALISM!! Long live CAPITALISM!

    • Anonymous

      mitt’s only solution would be to dismantle US assets and sell to the highest bidder. That is what he did at Bain. I would prefer some one, such as dr paul, who understands the root economic reasons of the financial collapse.

  • Anonymous

    Newt, Romney and Santorum are all globalist, and Federalist. Rush understands the language of the left since he was a member of the Council on Foreign Relations, a globalist elitists anti-capitalism group whose members include both Democrats and Republicans, the riches corporations in the world, the Bush, Cheney, Powell, Janet Napolitano, Clintons, Charles Karauthammer, Candoleezza Rice, Fox News Murdock, John McCain, George Soros, the Rockefellers, Bilderberg’s etc. etc. In as much as I would never vote for anyone that the media supports, I caution folks not to take what Rush says as the gospel truth either. These globalists and elitists all share the same agenda.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_GL4ZNKUZXVSSCB7CHKJHRSPUBM Al

    I suppose Newt would have wanted Romney to have kept inefficient and or redundant and idle employees on the dole. Sounds like some government employees.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_F3JVD6IALHWE762EIQAEA2D2W4 William

      You suppose incorrectly …

  • Anonymous

    All you people wishing for Romney better watch for you wish for. You may, God forbid, get it. He is not the conservative he portrays. Neither is Newt. I wish Rick Santorum would get more press, but I believe them (libs & msm) to be afraid of him. If he does earn the press with a strong showing, he’ll get the kind reserved for Sarah Palin and the like. I’m getting behind Santorum. He’s not a savior, but I believe he’ll be better than Romney, Gingrich, or Paul.

  • Anonymous

    Sorry Rush … this precisely where you fail.

    Romney is Bain … Bain is Wall Street … Wall Street is the root cause of our financial crisis.

    Romney, Bain, and Wall Street don’t build … they manipulate, leverage, and loot.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_BZBZRKHWBUKJUGLBQEKZH2B6SE Nick

    Don’t listen to the media…Ron Paul is the ONLY chance America has from becoming a future extra terrestrial type, cyborg ruling, communist dictatorship!
    * If you vote for anyone other than Paul the government will show up to your house demand your first, third, and sixth child, turn them into zombies and then have them take over the world.
    * Vote for Ron Paul because he is the only one on the trail that speaks the truth!!! Ancient aliens that once inhabited South America once prophesied about the “Truth Prophet” who would come, he would be an old man spewing out truths no one in their right mind believed. He would save us from the inevitable inhabitation of the Zoldiphiotes from the far planet Zoltron who planned an attack on the country’s Constitution….Ron Paul is that MAN!!!
    *If you value your children from being eaten by government bureaucrats, if you want to save this country from being overtaken by aliens from a far away planet, if you believe the prophecies from ancient South American aliens you have better vote Ron Paul 2012 or Die!!!!

  • Anonymous

    One thing I can honestly say about Rush, I have never, ever, ever, caught him in a lie, EVER!!! One thing I can honestly say about President OVOMIT, I have never, ever, ever, found him to tell the truth, EVER!!! You choose. Can’t wait until November 2012.

  • Anonymous

    ABO!!!!

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_7UEARTV7NQ2DL7P5FCSZOROHBA EllenK

    Good, let the voters hear now what the left will say about Romney, just as they have heard the smears Romney used against Gingrich. I am certain that Romney is not electable for many reasons, many of which have not been gone into at all, but should be.

  • Anonymous

    Rush has been shameless in his pandering to tea party demos. He really made his Faustian bargain by going easy on Newt, the new Chuckie. Lie down with Newt and you get fleas. I’d get as far away, Rush, lest you make a bigger fool of yourself.
    At least Rush doesn’t bore us even more by telling us how smart he is like Newt.

  • Anonymous

    Rush is correct, the vetting process used in primaries is downright scary but it is also a hardening process for the winner. We all know this political maschism is a contact sport made for those who flagellate themselves and others for fun and profit, whatever happens the remaining standee is going to be a tough SOB and anyone of these “R” candidates is ten times better than the uncredentialed fraud in the WH who needs to asked in public onstage, “Where is your BC and when do you plan to make it public?”…..end of the Mysery Man’s campaign.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_I6NOAISTD7KIEJ3HWHLYTPEBHI Anonymous

    If Newt is talking to the left he probably realizes that the nominee in NH will have to appeal to the large number of crossover democrats that tend to be liberal although they may claim to be independent voters.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_I6NOAISTD7KIEJ3HWHLYTPEBHI Anonymous

    If Newt is talking to the left he probably realizes that the nominee in NH will have to appeal to the large number of crossover democrats that tend to be liberal although they may claim to be independent voters.

  • Anonymous

    Rush’s pandering to Tea Party demos has been shameless, when you consider his views 4 years ago. When you lie down with Newt you get fleas so I’d be more impressed if Rush used half the derision he’s had for Romney against the new Chuckie, Newt. What a big fat baby and downright nasty old taxpayer leech.
    Newt’s delusional if he thought he had a chance and Rush is not too bright if he thought the same.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_KRAVVGUS6MR6V6OTUSR4JXLIEM Gary

    Newt is a crybaby. As we know him here in Georgia, he couldn’t win the governship.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_KRAVVGUS6MR6V6OTUSR4JXLIEM Gary

    Newt is a big crybaby. He’s out to destroy whomever the Republican nominee might be, even, inadvertently, himself. He’s a disgrace and we here in Georgia know he couldn’t even win the governorship if he ran. There’s a reason why he doesn’t have one Republican in Congress or the Senante supporting him. Romney is the only decent chance to beat Obama.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_F3JVD6IALHWE762EIQAEA2D2W4 William

      Gary

      ” … There’s a reason why he doesn’t have one Republican in Congress or the Senante supporting him” … Not true …

      http://innovation.cq.com/pub/table/index.php?id=69&ref=rc

      Mitt Romney – 61
      Rick Perry – 14
      Newt Gingrich – 8
      Ron Paul – 3
      Rick Santorum – 0

      With Congressional approval rating almost as low as LSU’s offensive output last night I wonder what to make of these numbers.

  • Anonymous

    Newt is an old man from the old school who can’t believe his past scares many voters.
    The GOP has a real problem if they don’t get behind a slightly more moderate & appealing candidate. The GOP has to understand that the world is changing & that their view of the world is a minority view when compared to the broader political spectrum. If they want to win an election they need to nominate a candidate that the majority can relate to and support. It doesn’t matter how well Newt debates, etc., he still is perceived as having an unlikable edge to his personality & the Republicans alone don’t have enough votes to win the election & unless they present a candidate with wider appeal to a broader cross section of the voting public they’re doomed. Look what happened to McCain! No matter how many horror stories & predictions were made about the awful Obama he soundly defeated McCain. It did not even seem possible or even logical at the time. The GOP is in obvious disaray & will lose even more ground in the public perception if they lose this election. The GOP just can’t seem to rally around one sane electable candidate. The extreme conservative wing of the GOP are convinced that the rest of the world is crazy & that just won’t sell or influence non-conservatives.

  • Anonymous

    HomeNewsVaccine Makers are protected against Certain Lawsuits
    Vaccine Makers are protected against Certain Lawsuits
    ShareVaccine manufacturers are protected from certain lawsuits due to a law that involves a no-fault compensation system for injuries associated with childhood vaccinations; the law was passed in 1986. In a recent decision, the US Supreme Court cited this law in its Bruesewitz v. Wyeth LLC ruling.

    The Bruesewitz family alleged that their daughter received diphtheria, tetanus, and pertussis (DTP) after getting vaccinations (with the substance being produced by a company under Wyeth). She became disabled due to the injuries. The Supreme Court reached a 6-2 decision favoring Wyeth. It cited the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Plan for its ruling. The court upheld the decisions of two federal courts that states vaccine manufacturers are protected against personal injury claim due to design defect. This essentially means that lawsuits that seek compensation due to harm caused to a patient cannot be entertained if it is based on the theory that the vaccine could be made safer.

    This 1986 law was put in place for several reasons. One is that lawsuits over childhood vaccination injuries became a deterrent that discouraged companies from developing new medications. Two, the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Plan was created to discourage families from pursuing expensive lawsuits which take a lot of time, effort, and is stressful. Instead, awards for injuries are paid out from a fund from exice tax duty on each dosage.

    For the families of personal injury and wrongful death victims, then, the question remains, “Should they pursue a case in an attempt to seek justice?” or “should they recognize that not everything in life can be controlled?” This is a tough decision to make. At the end of the day, it all comes down to what they believe in. For victims that decide to go to court, it is important to find a good personal injury attorney.

    An experienced lawyer can help you establish whether you have a high chance of winning a case in court. If financing the lawsuit is a problem, Solid Funding can provide financial assistance. Our firm provides lawsuit cash advance for plaintiffs who want to file a case or who has a pending lawsuit in court.

  • Anonymous

    The link below describes a fund allocated for paying out “awards” to victims of vaccinations. It basically protects drug companies from liability so that they can continue to market their drugs. Why would they need this fund & protection if there was no risk from vaccines? I’ve spoken to many doctors who are admittedly pro-vaccine for the masses, but have chosen not to vaccinate their own children due to the risks. I’m mid-40’s and have never been vaccinated for anything other than tetanus, and I have not vaccinated my kids. Personally, I think vaccinations are tied to the skyrocketing autism rates. I also think the huge increase in ADD/ADHD children is related to vaccines. A double cash cow for the drug companies – one product contributes to the onset of ADD/ADHD while the other product “treats” ADD/ADHD. Something to think about…

    http://solidfunding.com/news/lawsuit-funding/vaccine-makers-protected-lawsuits/

  • Anonymous

    El Fatso is irrelevant to the mainstream population. The only people that listen to El Fatso are 67 year old geriatric republican kooks. Those are the only people he can still manipulate with his whole right-left paradigm talk and liberal-conservative junk.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_BZBZRKHWBUKJUGLBQEKZH2B6SE Nick

    I have noticed that in many RP supporters, like me, posts, they tend to use many facts and numbers, so I’d better do the same. Did you know in our savior Dr. Ron Paul’s last speech there were 2,634 words in the speech. Of those 2, 634 words the Left wing conservative media machine used all but 46 of them! And of those 46, the most common word they took from his holiness’s speech was the word “the” they chose the word “The” to clearly demonize him and an out of touch racist who used the “the” word several times in his speeches!! And you thought us Ron Paulites were just conspiracy nut jobs!! I think not. The proof is right there. You can even find it on YouTube (we like to post a ton of YouTube video’s too).

  • Anonymous

    The Bain Capital issue was about looting the company for 6 times the investment rather than trying to make the company a success. It is not about venture capital or ones right to fail. It’s about deliberately allowing a company to fail because you removed any chance for success by removing the capital needed to fund the operations while lining your own pockets with obscene profit, leaving everyone else to struggle.

  • Anonymous

    When if ever is anyone going to wake up and see how crazy the far right has
    become?

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_F3JVD6IALHWE762EIQAEA2D2W4 William

    Mr. El Rushbo

    Newt is NOT attacking Capitalism, Free Markets, limited Entrepreneurial Regulation etc … Newt IS attacking Mitt’s assertion that Mitt is the pro job growth candidate based on his record as CEO at Bain Capital.

    Bain served a purpose … to its shareholders … using undervalued companies as investments and hoping its Asset Management policies would return a positive ROI on the investment. As a result some companies were saved; some companies were scrapped/sold off. I think Conservatives, Newt included, are all for letting companies, in almost all instances, decide how they want to pursue revenue and shareholder ROI.

    Just because the Left/OWS makes a Mitt/Bain anti job growth argument doesn’t change the facts any more then when Newt makes the same case … facts are a stubborn thing!!!

    When the well funded Obama machine comes after the GOP nominee, if its Mitt you can be sure he will be attacked over and over again … but in that instance there won’t be Conservative flag-bearer like yourself who is simply uncomfortable with the message and henceforth splitting the GOP base … the MSNBC crew will paint a “Gordon Gekko predatory capitalism” picture that won’t be pretty and their base will be 100% behind the message.

    If you can’t win the pro job growth argument in 2012 how will the GOP nominee supplant POTUS?

    At the end of the day …
    –> Newt > Mitt IMO and most importantly
    –> GOP Nominee > POTUS

    v/r

    Bill T

  • Anonymous

    RP’s Tea Party support is close to ZERO. That should tell you something. Vote RP

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_F3JVD6IALHWE762EIQAEA2D2W4 William

    Mitt supporters … here’s an example of the Mitt/Bain attacks he will see from the Left … in these cases Think Progress:

    http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/12/04/381512/romney-partner-no-jobs/

    ” … Bain managers said their mission was clear. “I never thought of what I do for a living as job creation,” said Marc B. Walpow, a former managing partner at Bain who worked closely with Romney for nine years before forming his own firm. “The primary goal of private equity is to create wealth for your investors … ”

    http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/04/12/173892/romney-job-killer/

    ” … 22 percent of the money Bain Capital raised from 1987 to 1995 was invested in five businesses — Stage Stores, American Pad & Paper, GS Indusries, Dade, and Details. These five made Bain $578 million in profit, even as all five eventually went bankrupt. As the New York Post’s Josh Koshman wrote, “there’s little question [Romney] made a fortune from businesses he helped destroy.” Travis Waldron noted today that Romney’s company also boosted its profits — and thus enriched Romney — by abusing offshore tax havens.”

    I understand the source … no friends of the GOP … but are the facts true? In the business world sandbox that Bain played in there’s a certain degree of transparency, the facts should be easy to refute … or not.

    If perception is reality, can Romney survive this Job Killer onslaught from a well funded Obama machine?

    If the GOP can’t win the Job Creation battle, THE CRITICAL ISSUE IN 2012, how can the GOP supplant POTUS?

  • Anonymous

    Not exactly looking for a fight. Just wanting to get people to stop and think about what they are doing. Other than the fact that you all hate Obama, does any one have a real reason? Exactly how has he failed? The financial buyout was there before he was. Two major US automakers are still up and running. Not to mention gaining market share and making profit. A difference of opinion is one thing. Making important decisions based on rumors and assumptions is insane. Insanity is dangerous for America. Please step back, do a little research. Make an informed decision. Don’t be intimidated because research sounds a little like science.

  • Anonymous

    Hate to admit it, but Rush is correct. Sounds like class warfare rhetoric of Obama and his thugs. Newt you fell into a trap, now get yourself out. I think you need to apologize for that one. Go after him on his liberalism not his Capitalism. Bad mistake for all the contenders to attack him on this.

  • Anonymous

    The main stream media will spin what Romney said again and again to look like something he said but way out of context when the media gets a hold on the story.Think about it.How they can twist something that does not mean what they print.Political Correctness rises its ugly head again.