Subscribe
RSS
Mobile
There's been plenty of analysis about Monday night's GOP presidential debate. For me, there was not much new said regarding most of the issues of the day. It was the same old, same old. But, when Fox News moderator Juan Williams kept trying to interject race into the discussion, then the debate got my attention. What followed next was some welcomed straight talk on race and getting a job.
The exchange occurred primarily between Juan Williams and Newt Gingrich. Williams asked Gingrich "whether his previous remarks about food stamps and allowing children to work janitor jobs to instill a work ethic were 'insulting,' particularly to African Americans." Personally, I find the question insulting... particularly to people of all races! Why should African Americans be more insulted than anyone else regarding the benefits of getting a job at an early age? By doing so, teenagers can learn discipline and responsibility -- following a schedule, listening to a boss, dressing appropriately, and on and on. Teens can also see that their hard work leads to a paycheck. They work... they get paid. Then, they can make purchases.
If someone is just sitting around collecting food stamps and doing nothing else, then THAT is insulting to me. Do something! So much of our tax dollars are wasted. We have become a society that sits around and expects the government to take care of us. Well, the "government" is my wallet! And it's the wallet of every other taxpayer in America. That last thing anyone who actually earns their own money wants to see is that money being wasted.
Gingrich was right on! There's nothing wrong with work. It's a good thing! I just really don't know what Williams was trying to get at. If people feel bad about being called lazy, then do something about it!
But Williams wasn't done with his efforts to try to make people feel bad about race. In a question to Rick Perry, Williams asked, "Now, Governor Perry, are you suggesting on this Martin Luther King, Jr. Day, that the federal government has no business scrutinizing the voting laws of states where minorities were once denied the right to vote?"
When I heard that, my eyes bugged out! What difference does it make what day it is? Is Perry supposed to have a different view on MLK Day than on other days? The fact is that requiring an ID in order to vote will greatly reduce voter fraud. That's the whole idea! The simple question is, "Do we want voter fraud or don't we?" If we don't, then let's do something about it. Requiring an ID is a good step, but Williams tries to make it about race.
And there's more!
Williams tries the exact same tactic when asking Mitt Romney about immigration. Williams said, "Governor Romney, your father was born in Mexico. You still have family there, yet you have taken the hardest line of anyone on this stage on immigration reform, including opposition to key parts of the DREAM Act, which is supported by 80 percent of Latinos in this country. Are you alienating Latino voters that Republicans will need to win the general election?"
Here's a quiz for you. What's the key word in the first two sentences? Give up? It's the word "yet." It's key because Williams is trying to make a point while also asking a question. Romney still has family in Mexico, YET he's taking a so-called "hard line" on immigration. What does his family have to do with it?
I'm half Hispanic. Does that mean that I think immigration laws should only be enforced half the time? No! (Actually, half enforcement is better than no enforcement, so I may have to change my opinion on that one.)
These questions are so loaded. They are designed to make the candidate apologize, even before he answers the question. It's really quite pathetic.
We can only move beyond race, when we stop focusing on race as a way to score points or take shots. What happened to hoping for a colorblind society? If anything should have been remembered on Monday's MLK day, it should have been that.
January 17, 2012 @ 2:01 pm
Even though I don’t always agree with Newt, he sure hit a bases loaded Home Run with this one. Only the elites could find fault with what he said, I’m now over eighty years old and have worked all my life as long as I wished, I never drew a cent of unemployment, welfare or anything else. I started out at 12 years old as a janitor at my school, and sexton at my church. I have done many unpleasant tasks willinly to put beans on the table and I sure never had to back up to the pay table to collect my pay because I was too lazy to earn it. So I guess the main point I am making is it sure didn’t do me too much harm learning to be responsible for myself and those I care for and of course my Nation.
January 18, 2012 @ 8:44 am
Liberal Democrats believe it is the secular “Doctor” King who is to be edified and totally ignore the Christian based “Reverand” King which is the essence of what made him great. What is it about “Thou Shalt Not Steal they neighbor’s wealth in Socialist tax wealth redistribution” nor covet they neighbors wife, ox or A$$,,,or thou shalt not steal and election that is antithetical to Dr. King’s Christian ideology? Wake up Juan WIlliams, you have already been mugged by your liberal theives on the road to public tlelevision and would be out of a job were it not for the good conservative Samaritans and Fox news.
January 18, 2012 @ 9:12 am
inluminatuo,
MLK is NOT Reverend. Only God is Reverend!
January 18, 2012 @ 9:24 am
MLK is no longer Reverend as per Webster’s definition of the honorary epithet associated with distinguished members of the clergy, MLK is dead, while God still lives.
” Sic Transit Gloria Mundi”
January 17, 2012 @ 2:17 pm
I agree, oldcuz – work never bothered anyone but does an awful lot to enhance self esteem and personal well being. When I was a kid I collected bottles and newspapers and took them to the local junk shop in exchange for some coins which is all they would give us kids no matter how much we gave them. At the age of 9, I use to clean my Aunt’s apartment while she and my Uncle worked in their candy store, only this time I got a lot more than just a few coins.
It was movie money, popcorn money, and anything else I wanted to buy at our local 5 & 10 cent store. At that young age I learned the value of work and the rewards of having my own money. It’s an experience that all kids should partake in if they are able and if Juan Williams finds it all “insulting,” that’s just too bad.
January 17, 2012 @ 2:55 pm
I think that most people are SICK AND TIRED of all the whining about things that happened so long ago. Get over it and get on with life! I don’t have anything against blacks but I DO hate the WHINING!
January 17, 2012 @ 3:18 pm
I was very pleased to hear Newt answer Juan’s question directly rather than try and turn it back on Juan and apparently the audience did also. I have a great deal of respect for Juan but continually harping on race is akin to racism itself. As for Newt, I sincerely hope he continues to do as well in answering the tough questions as I believe he would be a far superior candidate for president than the others currently on stage. I will certainly vote for Mitt if it comes down to him or Obama but he comes across as just a little to “slippery” for me. If, somehow Newt obtains the nomination, don’t expect Obama to debate as I believe Obama incapable of standing in the same debate ring with Newt. He(Obama) gets lost without his teleprompter.
Have a gentle day–Tom
January 17, 2012 @ 3:51 pm
“. . .the voting laws of states where minorities were once denied the right to vote”
Blacks such as Juan Williams and other well-known people such as Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Maxine Waters, Cynthia McKinney, etc. just can’t let this go. NONE of them were ever a slave, and no one alive today ever owned a slave, so the only thing they can whine about is they were “ONCE denied the right to vote”. Hell, women were once denied the right to vote, but they don’t go around complaining about it every day. The blacks are trying to tie photo ID’s to taking the right to vote away from “minorities”, but they don’t really understand how ridiculous their argument sounds. Blacks own cars, they have drivers licenses, they have birth certificates, they use photo ID’s to board planes, open bank accounts, apply for welfare, apply for a job, and many other daily events. Liberals need to admit they are using blacks to further the agenda of allowing ILLEGALS to vote in our national elections, simply because the illegals will vote for Democrats based on promises of amnesty and support.
January 17, 2012 @ 5:39 pm
You forgot about all of those whites who did not own land/property. They were originally part of the not allowed to vote group. What about those under twenty-one that were not allowed to vote before 1971?
IMPEACH OBAMA NOW! ! ! ! ! !
January 17, 2012 @ 4:02 pm
IT’S imperative that Congress passes the “Legal Workforce Act and Birthright Citizenship Act,” before Present Obama and the Liberal extremist Czars uses any more special directives to negatively modify current immigration enforcement.
Former Sen. Rick Santorum zoomed from the back of the GOP pack on immigration issues to way out FRONT at a C-SPAN televised event in South Carolina last Friday. For the first time in many years, we have a top-contender Presidential candidate who says LEGAL immigration numbers are too high! Congratulations to all of you Santorum supporters who have been pushing him to greatly improve his immigration platform. You succeeded beyond most of our wildest dreams.
Now, the rest of you who are supporting other GOP and Democratic candidates need to increase your pressure on them to catch up to Santorum.
READ ALL THE DETAILS, ANALYSIS AT NUMBERSUSA ABOUT HOW SANTORUM WENT FROM D-minus TO A-minus
IN A RELATIVELY SHORT RESPONSE AT A CANDIDATE FORUM—HE SAID, “(Immigrants) should come to this country based on a whole bunch of different criteria and one of them should not be chain immigration where relatives come into the country because somebody is here. Immediate family is one thing, but extended family is a very different thing.”
If the United States is expected to sustaining its living standards, we must start to conserve our environment and address the use of oil, water and energy. In these current decades we have all observed the deterioration of our highways, infrastructure with clogged traffic lanes that never seem to abate? The continuous requisition for land to build homes, and stretching, concrete pavement that once was farmland. Border states where water supplies are being rationed, because of years of drought. The desperate need for refineries, because of constant production, cannot keep up with demand. Our antiquated national electrical grid that is unable to keep up with requirements, owing to the millions of illegal people who slip across our uneasy border and needing services must be modernized. America, just outside in suburban regions are growing smaller each day, just like the Amazon rain forests. We are daily encroaching on the wild creatures of our lands, who we now find foraging for food in community suburbs–that was once a wilderness. Our President should not be contemplating Amnesty for an unknown number of illegal immigrants or like other administrations keep welcoming over a million legal immigrants annually. Such is the forthcoming harbinger of Overpopulation for future generations. According to the Census Bureau with the current immigration level our population will touch close to a half a billion by 2050.
More than 65 percent of that growth can be attributed to our current immigration rate and irrational polices. Without changing the direction of our current immigration policies, our population by the year 2100 and 2120 will attain the one billion mark. Is this what we want for our own grandchildren? Then Canadian immigration for years have welcomed without prejudice millions of Asylum seekers, but that is about to change? With Obama in charge altering the direction of our immigration laws by decree, we could become the next target for these people. A large majority of these immigrants come from countries, where there are no real functioning police records, so this country could easily become their destination for un-vetted immigrant’s future years. Obama has switched dramatically to halt the ICE effort of mass deportation and unless you have some serious criminal charges against them, there is likelihood; they could be allowed to walk.
If the Obama presidency is recycled this country could be heading for trouble with lax incompetence of easy access of foreign nationals into through the border and by overstay visitors by aircraft. With no means of tracking aliens as other Industrial nations have accomplished and where even Mexico can track these illegal alien fugitives. But then unlike the Mexican authorities, entering illegally into our sovereign nation our government doesn’t prosecute as a FELONY. As I have said many times before, I believe this was an intended action, so millions of illegal aliens remained unafraid if confronting no real criminal measure if they could bypass the border agents. Both sides of Congress have had the perfect opportunity to trick the General audience that they were enforcing immigration laws, but really just playing lip service to this massive predicament?
If President Obama introduces a new Immigration policy, this would be a disaster for the new generations of our children? We already settle over 1.5 million new legal immigrants each year in this nation. This is more people than any other country in the world? What we need is an amendment to the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA). This would allow specialized people, with highly skilled abilities in Engineering, Computer and Science technologies to enter the US workforce, contributing to this countries success in the global marketplace?
We already have millions of low skilled, many uneducated American workers who remain jobless in this economic morass. Lama Smiths E-Verify “the Legal Workforce Act.” At the very least, it is a surefire step in the right direction to obstruct illegal labor from taking American jobs. Even though E-Verify has some flaws and some illegal aliens can obtain employment, it won’t last very long before new upgraded version of E-Verify will be able to detect criminal alien workers. ICE has already gained the implementation of Mississippi’s Drivers Licensing Bureau, so as citizens WE SHOULD DEMAND THAT EVERY STATE VEHICLE DEPARTMENT GIVE ICE THE DIRECTIVE TO ACCESS THEIR PHOTO ID DATABASES, TO CROSS REFERENCE WITH ALL HIRED WORKERS BEING CONFIRMED USING E-VERIFY.
Those hired illegally will be caught eventually when irregularities are corrected as ICE auditors return to a previous company. It’s better to have something as a deterrent, than to have nothing at all. As illegal immigrants start their movement from our nation, wages, benefits should slowly start to rise, as employers will have no choice but to hire American workers, instead of cheap labor from foreign lands. Steve King’s (R-IA) Birthright Citizenship Act of 2011 (H.R.140) would amend the law so the unborn babies of illegal aliens smuggled calculatedly through borders or by international flight are ineligible for citizenship. The cost to hospitals and an array of welfare payments and entitlements is the most costly for US taxpayers totaling billions of more dollars. This is another demand, you should make of the politicians who represent your state.
Join the TEA PARTY and fight back, before there is no way back? The TEA PARTY does not discriminate any nationality, if you arrived in this nation by—LEGAL MEANS? We can all stand with our fellow jobless countryman by Calling House and Senate Leadership NOW at 202-224-3121, which is the Capitol Switchboard.
Be very aware that illegal aliens do vote and will in gubernatorial, county and municipal races. This has been proved beyond doubt, as ACORN and other fraudulent canvassing groups will be looking for signatures. These entities were prosecuted in eleven states and although they were dismantled, they have risen to the surface under an assumed name in other states. One thing’s for sure that without unbiased referees overlooking current and future elections, there will be forged absentee ballots and even irregularities within the confines of the voting precincts. Also I have investigated the major instigators, that are in summary been the Liberals and Democrats. Department of Justice Eric Holder, one of Obama’s Leftist hard core Czars, not only dropped the ‘Black Panther” intimidation of voters in Pennsylvania—but has been harassing sovereign states and using the judiciary undermine policing policies. This originating with Arizona that was suffering terribly from unfunded mandates, forced upon them by the courts? Public assistance programs to support illegal aliens with welfare payments, food stamps and federal low income housing.
Currently in New York supervisors with the party affiliation have intentionally assisted in passing non-citizens as verified voters and are being prosecuted. Although voter fraud has been around for generations, all aspects of it have been ignored by the federal government as limited. However, large numbers of none citizens can have negative repercussions in close races. This will be adamantly opposed by the usual suspects, namely the open border zealots. These radical groups as La Raza, can take advantage and overturn honest elections The Tea Party leadership and members should be vigilant of irregular voting tactics as illegal aliens are a very large majority in Arizona and will commit perjury to claim a Democratic successful win.
January 17, 2012 @ 4:44 pm
African-American is divisive and should never be used by anyone who was born in America. If you were born in America, then you are American. My family represents three ethnic groups and three different skin tones and we are all American. No more hyphens.
January 18, 2012 @ 3:30 pm
Indeed. My genetic background is half Irish, quarter Swiss and quarter Native.
I don’t call myself “Irish-American”, nor “Swiss-American” or even “Native-American”.
I am an American. Period.
January 17, 2012 @ 5:40 pm
I’m sick of these moderators injecting their liberal views into debate questions. Juan Williams is a racist jerk and his questions were inane.
January 17, 2012 @ 11:23 pm
Juan was working for NPR and was fired because he made a comment on Fox about how he felt ‘nervous’ whenever he saw a Muslim board a plane. So O’Reilly arranged to get him hired onto Fox. But yes, he showed himself to be the racist we suspected last night. I have not had a chance to watch O-Reilly tonight, and am wondering if Bill comments.
January 17, 2012 @ 5:48 pm
Short and sweet. In this country there is one ‘race’, the American race. The sooner we get to that the better off this country will be. If one is an American citizen or a legal immigrant, and one is more concerned about one’s ethnicity than becoming, or being, ‘American’, then perhaps one should return from where one arrived.
January 17, 2012 @ 10:53 pm
“We have room for but one flag, the American flag …we have room for but one language here, and that is the English language …and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people.” –Teddy Roosevelt
Gotammo, I agree with you and Roosevelt. That is the reason I do not refer to “illegal immigrants”. They are NOT immigrants–they are aliens who came here as criminals and they have never had any allegiance to the U.S., our flag, our language, or our culture. Why do people come here from all over the world and then demand that we change to suit them? If they don’t like the way it is here, they shouldn’t come here or they should leave.
January 17, 2012 @ 11:14 pm
It is hard to get ‘beyond’ race when the blacks themselves can’t decide what they want to be called. They once were called colored, with some N word thrown in by slavers and to this day by blacks themselves. Then they wanted to be called negros, and that was their title by choice for years. Then they decided that black is beautiful and wanted to be called black, although every ‘black’ person I see is colored shades of brown. (?) Now they prefer African-American though very very few of them are from Africa, even several generations back. And they prove daily how prejudiced they are by their voting patterns, constantly re-electing black leaders even after those particular politicians have been proven to be crooked or cracked. Now I will make the usual expected dis-claimer and say that I don’t infer this to mean ALL blacks, or…negros, or African-Americans…or….I am so confused.
January 18, 2012 @ 1:20 am
Old Writer,
Now the “African-Americans” want to be called “People of Color”. How’s that for coming back around to what-ever-ville. I’d say give it 2 years and we’ll be back to calling them “The Negro” again.
January 21, 2012 @ 6:09 pm
Point well made, Oldwriter. Their identities change with the social climate and political agenda at any given time. Blacks today cannot rationally point to social circumstances that existed hundreds of years ago as a legitimate argument for promoting racism today. Trying to draw correlations between society then as opposed to now is equally irresponsible and irrational—but the militant segment sees it as advantageous to indoctrinate the whole race with prejudice and inaccurate history and pass it down from one generation to the next—it perpetuates bigotry, it avoids recognition of the facts, and it shows an exaggerated interest in wanting to further the very thing that they so vehemently claim they are against.
January 17, 2012 @ 6:08 pm
Oh God, it’s never going to END it’s never going to END, it’s never going to END.
As long as their is currency attached to being a victim, the endless portrayal of the evil white man oppressing the poor black man is going to go on and on.
I don’t care if I ever lay eyes on Juan Williams again. Ever.
I don’t understand why liberals are always the moderators. Why!
Newt hit more than a homerun. I think that was a defining moment, and I remember now why I always liked Newt, alot. He is the only one with the experience and intelligence, to confront these liberals and answer their stupid questions in a manner that finally shuts them up. Go NEWT! You have my vote.
January 18, 2012 @ 8:41 am
Sorry to hear you’re voting for Newt. I’m certain that Mr. ‘The era of Reagan is over’ Gingrich, you know, the re’al politique Wilsonian, who supported Rockefeller over Goldwater, and who co-sponsored over 400 pieces of legislation with Nancy Pelosi, who took $1.6 million from Freddie Mac, who supports amnesty, etc. etc. has no chance in the general election. Coming soon to a TV commerical near you: ‘This man cheated on two wives. They trusted him. Can you?’
http://www.Newtfacts.com
http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2011-12-21.html
January 21, 2012 @ 5:42 pm
His marital history does not diminish his intelligence and capability as a historian, a thinker, and a leader. He is the opponent that Obama fears most because Obama is no match for him.
I’m not looking to marry Newt—I’m looking for the best candidate to dethrone Obama and turn Washington upside down—that happens to be Mr Gingrich.
January 21, 2012 @ 6:48 pm
His serial infidelity and leaving two wives who were battling serious health problems is just icing on a $1.6 million Freddie Mac, Toffler-Third-Wave-rewrite-the-constitution, $300k ethics fine in a republican house with only 28 voting against, FBI investigation for shady finances, amnesty, ad nauseum, virtually guarantee a win for Obama, cake. All national head-to-head match ups between Gingrich and Obama show Obama winning by at least a comfortable margin, before the DNC and Obama start the ads with their opposition research against Mr. Gingrich.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/president_obama_vs_republican_candidates.html
January 17, 2012 @ 7:22 pm
Mr Williams should read Mexican Immigration laws. If we followed their laws we’d have absolutely no illegal immigration and I uderstand Mexican jails make no effort to pamper prisoners and as is true in much of central America foriegners can’t own property and must pay to live there. We can no longer afford the “come here and work off the books even as you receive welfare” attitude.
January 17, 2012 @ 7:48 pm
I want newt to explain how the 2 Janitor’s with perhap’s children in that school. Will feed there children by loosing there Job’s..If that’s a indication of his Economic Plan..let children replace there parent’s at work..Imagine the unemployment and welfare rate with that plan…Santorum played the race card big time with the felon Voting question..This is a issue democrats have tried to push forever..To have more voter’s..What world is Santorum in..maybe he got a few black votes from that..but we American’s want votes from qualified lagal Amercan’s…last night was a farce..Glad Mitt stayed on Task..
January 17, 2012 @ 3:33 pm
I read your comment a few times, Mr. Triplett. I wanted to be sure I understood what you meant to get across. If I DO understand you correctly, it’s plain that I won’t spend as much time winnowing your remarks in the future.
January 17, 2012 @ 3:59 pm
Triplett, I also read your remarks several times as well as reading the article several times, and I have to agree with “vietnamvet”. Nowhere in that article did Newt talk about letting children take over their parents’ jobs as janitors. As a matter of fact Newt didn’t even mention “janitor” jobs, he only said youth would learn a lot by taking A JOB at an early age. He didn’t say anything about putting the parents on unemployment and welfare. What exactly was the point you were trying to introduce?
January 17, 2012 @ 7:37 pm
Why don’t you learn to spell, use proper punctuation and capitalization and use good grammar? Your arguments would be far more convincing if your writing didn’t sound like you are illiterate.
January 18, 2012 @ 2:09 am
Mr. Triplett, Normally I do not make a point of debating another poster in this forum, however, I believe you completely missed the mark in your interpretation of the comment made by Newt. First of all, there is not a single state in our Union which would allow children to perform duties such as janitors. The comment needs to be taken at the actual heart of the comment, which merely and simply means that children should experience a work ethic in their lives. Both to understand the value of labor, and the fruits of labor. Although children cannot do jobs such as Janitorial, there are many ways they can get the results which Newt was trying to get across. They can ask a local store owner if they can sweep the floors, or help in some menial way to make some spare money. They can take a paper route, shovel snow in hard winter areas, rake leaves for neighbors in fall, do some yard work, sweep out gutters, or many other types of work which children CAN do. This teaches them the ethics they need, while helping them learn that when they have their own money, they can be more independent and buy some of the things they would like to have without having to ask their parents to buy them for them. Good hard work builds strong character, teaches them that labor has it’s rewards, and gives them self esteem. I am sorry you did not take the statement to mean EXACTLY what it meant, without reading something into it which did not in fact exist in the statement, other than simple misinterpretation. It was merely a example, although he could have used a better word, it is most obvious what he meant. He made a very good point, and stood up to some questioning which he should not have been subjected to. GO NEWT.
January 18, 2012 @ 8:55 am
I watched the debate. Newt did say get rid of some of the janitors and for the pay of one janitor, hire several children. That was Newt’s example. While I agree that children should be taught a work ethic and think the general principle is a good one, I understand the criticism of how it was framed by the candidate. I don’t think we should plan on laying off janitors and using children as young as ‘eight or nine years old’ as put forth by the candidate at one time, in their place. As it was reframed in the debate, to include service in the library, cafeteria, office, and light janitorial work, I think is a good idea for older children, not so much eight year olds, speaking as the parent of nine years old twins. That’s my opinion. If you want to put your eight year old to work, that’s your business. And possibly the state’s.
P.S. The average welfare recipient probably wouldn’t allow their eight year old to work because it would interfere with their benefits. Just sayin’…
January 18, 2012 @ 9:27 am
Freedomfighter, I wanted to point out Nute was talking about older students doing janitorial work not children. To point I started cutting grass at the ripe old age of 10. At thirteen I swept floors sorted screws and nuts along with cleaning bathrooms at a machine shop in L.A. Basically janitorial work. By the way it was no real difference in doing your chores at home. It however pay better and I always had money to do what I wanted.
By the time I was sophomore in HS all my friends had some kind of part time job. In fact two friends went to work at Carl’s Jr. and now they are Millionaires. That shows what hard will reward you with. BTW they were given those Carl’s by the corp in appreciation for there many years of service. Those jobs for the most part have gone to illegal’s now. Why? you may ask, the simple answer these jobs were demonized as Mcjobs leading to a dead end.
This was an effort in my opinion was to just get more people on the government dole. Also it prevents/retards the development of a good work ethic.
IMPEACH OBAMA NOW! ! ! ! ! !
January 21, 2012 @ 10:51 pm
OneWildMan,
I understood that the conversation was about older kids. I merely wanted to point out that the work ethic begiins at a young age in those with a built preference towards ambition. If children are willing to show ambition in the pre-teen time in their lives, this usually follows them into their teen years and into adulthood. That was the point I was trying to make. Possibly I just did not express myself well.
My Apologies.
January 17, 2012 @ 8:15 pm
I want to make a comment about our multiple citizenship and self-assumed illegal alien rights. In Colonial times all public officials and all citizens had to swear allegiance to King George III. So when the rebels joined in the revolt against Britain, they were committing treason and if captured could face a death penalty or total loss of their property and/or businesses, perhaps even be transported to a penal colony as had the Scottish rebels who supported Prince Charles Stuart only 30 years earlier? Many of our rebels who were captured died in prison hulks and were harshly treated as traitors were during that time. There was no dual citizenship for any of the Colonists from either France or Britain and when Jefferson brilliantly bought from an equally brilliant Napoleon what he could no longer defend after he lost his fleet, these former French colonists who were now Americans joined Andrew Jackson in defeating the invading British trying to capture what Napoleon had sold to America. In a similar manner most of Spain’s colonists joined America because those who had wealth felt they were being exploited in a similar manner to how Britain, France, Russia and Holland had exploited those in their colonies. Even when my mother’s Irish grandfather came to America in the late 19th century he had numerous documents to sign and former allegiances to denounce and new ones to swear to uphold.
Sometime during and after the Second World War, we or rather Congress decided to abandon some of our restrictive immigration policies, but no one could have imagined that we’d suddenly have a wave of illegal immigrants who abused our “birthright” citizenship laws and created a wave of anchor babies and who politicians awarded by giving America a second language and a foreign culture under an umbrella we’d call Multi-culturalism”.
January 17, 2012 @ 10:41 pm
The Golden Rule
An Analysis of the Republican Presidential Debate of 1/16/2012
The “Golden Rule” of Ron Paul’s foreign policy, is that he who has the gold, makes the rules.
As long as the American economy is backed by worthless paper, the international bankers make all the rules and steer our ship of state onto the reef of one world government and one world currency, ruled by oligarchy.
Such a master plan by the banksters, sounds the death knell of the nation-state concept, to deliver this nation unto vassalage and client state status under the United Nations boot.
When Ron Paul talks of “America endlessly bombing other countries,” he is really talking about a nation which is seen as a social pariah by the world, insofar as it comports itself as a neighborhood bully—and we all know what happens to schoolyard bullies in the end; they find themselves prey to an alliance of the many.
What ails America, cannot be solved by an individual, nor can it be ameliorated by a presidential election. It must be addressed by the United States military prosecution of regime change on Capitol Hill.
Immediate banking reform is the prerequisite for survival of the United States of America.
Shall we wait until the last old monarch of the Redwood forest is felled and America the Beautiful becomes a “clear-cut?”
“I am firmly of the opinion that there never was a paper pound; a paper dollar, or a paper promise of any kind, that ever yet obtained a general currency but by force or fraud—generally by both.”
John Adams
“If ever again our nation stumbles upon unfunded paper; it shall surely be like death to our body politic. This country will crash.”
George Washington
Patrick J. Buchanan should serve as president during the military interregnum, while terms of Mexican surrender—in this Second Mexican War– are being ironed- out and banking reform is initiated, which outlaws usury.
Mr. Buchanan deserves this high honor, for being a Guardian Spirit of the United States of America.
Only then can the concession of a guest worker program be granted to Mexico, which is strictly confined to the agricultural sector.
Mexico will be responsible for housing its citizens, while they are guests here and that nation will also pay healthcare costs and social security benefits for its citizens as part of a “comprehensive immigration reform.”
The Mexican government will pay for the welfare of its own citizens with Mexican oil monies. Mexico is fantastically wealthy in natural resources.
There is NO SUCH THING, as a “dual-citizen.”
The days of Mexican children bathing in pesticide-laden run-off from the fields will come to an end. So too, the squatting of itinerant, poverty-stricken Mexican people in canyons below million dollar homes in America, where they build their campfires.
Better bilateral relations between our two nations, will then be established with Mexico’s clear understanding that it has no claim here.
The host/parasite arrangement between our two nations has come to an end.
The Mexican occupation army will self-deport back to from whence it came– just like it did when faced with the firm resolve of citizens from the great state of Oklahoma.
This will winnow-out the foreign “Latinos” in our midst, who subvert the American electoral process and it will also serve to distinguish them from Americans of Hispanic heritage.
All discussions of alleged “racism” will end with the buck, which stops in the Oval Office.
It is Mexico, which has prosecuted a race war against the United States of America, utilizing the “anchor baby” strategy of stealth warfare.
The Mexican nationals who break into our country to claim “La Reconquista,” are hardly “illegal immigrants,” as they were referred to by one presidential candidate.
The nation cannot afford such naivete, nor can it confuse the meaning of words.
Once the illegal alien invaders self-deport; the people’s purse is reclaimed by the military and the rigged voting machines are thrown into the scrap pile; we can then have an honest presidential election, based on paper ballots.
The discussion among the presidential candidates last night, vividly illustrates the lack of a true grasp of “comprehensive reform” (save for Ron Paul) among those who vie for the most prestigious job on the planet.
It has nothing to do with solving Mexico’s social problems, nor adopting the fiction whereby Mexico imagines it is self-entitled to American territory and concessions, such as surrender to a scarecrow/ peasant army.
There can be NO “civil rights” for a hostile foreign power—bent on conquest of American territory.
There was talk during the presidential debate, of “borrowing more money from China” and “leaving no space between the United States and Israel”—as if this nation were a Siamese twin to that sovereign nation.
Israel is NOT America’s Child, nor does it serve our national interest to support such a fantastic notion.
The survival of this nation will pivot on who wins the contest between the people and the central molesting bank, which has been in control of our national destiny since 1913.
This nation cannot prosper, by continuing to dine on its own liver, nor can it depend on a poor “steward” of its economy.
Free men of the “Free World,” are NOT debt slaves. There is no such thing as paying one’s “fair share” of slavery.
America has been dreaming nightmares of poverty, when it is rich beyond any Croesus– or “credit,” produced out of thin air.
It is time to remove the Ghost of Christmas Want from the stage and restore this nation to that “Shining City on the Hill.”
Wake up America, to the Second American Revolution in 2012!
Even the Mayans will bow!
January 17, 2012 @ 11:03 pm
Newt received a STANDING OVATION from the crowd over his remarks on race and teens (blacks) getting jobs. Newt looked like the best candidate there, but let’s not ignore Perry, who was on the ball last night. Santorum is no dummy either. Paul rambled on, making a fool of himself at times, but his immature base kept applauding and tweeting for him. Romney? He looked like the proverbial deer in the headlights at times last night. And Romney avoided saying when he would release his tax records, and he hemmed and hawed over other issues. Can the American conservative public see what I saw? Why is Romney in the lead? Is it the money he spends? I don’t get it. I am hoping that after this debate, the people of S.Carolina can vote a little wiser than did Iowa.
January 18, 2012 @ 9:04 am
Iowa still hasn’t certified – Santorum may have actually won there. He also came in 4th in NH, not 5th, as projected.
January 17, 2012 @ 11:55 pm
“Calling whites racist is part of the manipulative lying Communist agenda to subjugate whites. Whites are called racist for telling the unflattering truth about any minority or situation involving minorities.” Politicians and the rest of society need to address this issue when they are accused of racism. They cannot win against this type of criticism. In my opinion, they need to call it like it is. The harsh reality is that MLK was recruited by Communists to spearhead the Civil Rights Movement. When a politician gets a pained response from the accuser, he needs to laugh, and say, “If you don’t want a truthful response, stop targeting me and others with racist questions and implied or concrete accusations. Truth telling is not racism.” The communist agenda is all about re-0distribution of wealth and social leveling. Whites should not be agreeing to live that way.
Pingback: Let’s stop using race and ethnicity to divide people. Gingrich takes black debate moderator to the woodshed.
January 18, 2012 @ 1:16 am
Put your opponent on the defensive by labeling him or his statements racist, sexist or some other highly charged term. If he is a black male like Herman Cain with an impressive record of accomplishment, hire some women to say that he lusted after them with a look and hint that as a black male they were afraid to be alone with him. If he is a white male, he must somehow harbor racist or sexist opinions that he conveys by looking at a scantily clad female. Remember the OJ Simpson trial where 9 blacks and 3 whites found him innocent of murder, but it didn’t come out until much later that Simpson’s lawyer Cochran was guarded by Nation of Islam bodyguards, a fact undoubtedly known to all 9 blacks. To me this would have been like a prosecutor bringing Klan bodyguards into court in 1910 Mississippi when the accused was a black. This Cochran action was blatant jury intimidation and should have resulted in the immediate dismissal of Cochran and a mistrial with a change in the venue. That trial was viewed worldwide and whether blacks realize it or not, it presented an image of American blacks as murders and thugs to TV audiences in every corner of this planet and showed the American justice system as a carnival with a prosecutor who knew so little of human nature that she bored a jury with eight hours of technical DNA evidence and let her assistant be tricked by a showy wet-glove scam.
January 18, 2012 @ 3:25 pm
I was a Herman Cain supporter and at first I was pretty angry about the attacks but I am now glad that they happened when they did. It showed me that Cain was NOT willing to stand up and fight. If he made it to the White House, he would have had to face worse every single day in office.
Pingback: » If you say ‘Juan,’ you just might be a racist! Alabama Voting Record
January 18, 2012 @ 10:41 am
I like Juan Williams, but was surprised by his questions Monday night. I think he was enlisted in Fox News’ obvious campaign to appeal to liberals and build audience.
Fortunately, Newt and the two Ricks did not play along and Juan got hurt by the grenades that exploded in his hand as he tried to hurl them. He will recover, but I’m not sure Fox News will because many of us have had enough of Baier and company.
As for Newt, his standing “O” was proof that the audience had had enough too, and appreciated him giving Fox News what they so richly deserved for making a mockery of the presidential election process. We have come to expect that from ABCCBSNBCCNN, but not from Fox, and their cheers for Newt spoke for a much larger national audience.
January 22, 2012 @ 1:24 pm
I don not think that Juan Williams was speaking for Fox when he asked his racially motivated question. And Fox hired him to spite NPR and also to prove that they are ‘Fair and balanced.’ I am sure that most of the audience did not feel that this was an attempt by Fox to make a mockery of the election process. Why would they do that, and why do you think that? The question from CNN, motivated by the ‘interview’ or Newt’s ex-wife, now that was an attempt to make a mockery of Newt, and it backfired to the tune of 14 or more percentage points in SC.
January 18, 2012 @ 6:57 pm
I do believe Juan Williams is a racist and why Foxnews hired him is beyond me.
January 18, 2012 @ 8:55 pm
In my opinion, the left uses the race card to squash all honest debate on an issue. Hasn’t anyone noticed that this is the effect when the race card is played? Once the card is played, all discussion moves to whether or not X is racist, rather than the original line of discussion.
January 19, 2012 @ 11:50 pm
Geo. You have noticed how easy it is for someone to TAKE CONTROL of a webpage. Congratulations. I have noticed that almost every where I go online, no matter the subject matter, that someone comes on, some nut, and says something good about Ron Paul, and then all of a sudden for the next six or seven entries, the discussion is about Paul and not whatever the original subject. Now, think of pink elephants…having sex. Did you visualize that?
January 19, 2012 @ 11:22 am
Have you heard FOX is firing Juan?
No didn’t think so because they are NOT NPR
January 21, 2012 @ 10:30 pm
Well ‘Lin’ who has made a couple of comments about Newt’s ‘infidelity.’ What say thee after tonight? Newt created a LANDSLIDE tonight. Wiped out Mitt. I watched it all on FOX, but switched over to CNN at one point around 9. CNN was running some exit polling figures. Married women voted for Gingrich 41%, Romney 29%. Apparently ABC and CNN’s attempts at scuttling him with the ex-wife did not work, nor did your comments. What say thee now, Lin? Oh, by the way, this blog has probably run it’s course. It is a few days old now. Guys, gals, it’s been fun. Catch you on the next one. Old Writer conservative, retired military, Republican, who know that the REAL issue is not the economy, because it goes up and down every time, every year, the wind changes. The real issue, unspoken unfortunately most of the time by the candidates, is our national security. Lose that once, and we never get it back.
January 22, 2012 @ 8:08 am
I say what I’ve been saying: All national polling shows Gingrich losing to Obama. And all of those polls were taken before the Obama team and the DNC start airing his dirty laundry. I guess you missed the comment about my fear of Gingrich securing the nomination only to lose the general and cost us any chance of taking the senate and losing seats in the house as well. I didn’t make his history; Newt did. I didn’t tell Newt that the constitution should be re-written and he should link up with the Tofflers. I didn’t tell Tom Coburn to accuse him of draining the lifeblood from the republican revolution. How bad did those ethics violations have to be to warrant a $300k fine from a nearly unanimous vote in a Republican house? Guess we’ll see when the DNC starts on him because he’s already said he’s not releasing those records.
In the last debate, it was nice to see the other candidates finally calling him on his oft repeated LIE about being an integral part of supply-side economics and how he was mentioned only once in Reagan’s diary. It was also nice to see Santorum, who was there and knows, finally call him out on his history, including not supporting social issues.
We’d all love to see Newt wipe the floor with Obama in a debate. Democratic pollster Pat Caddell has already opined that won’t happen. That was the mistake Carter made and Obama will claim pressing affairs of state to just not do it.
John Ziegler is betting $10k that if nominated, Gingrich will lose to Obama. In December he wrote, “This web site is dedicated to warning conservatives that if Newt Gingrich is the Republican presidential nominee, that President Obama is virtually guaranteed to be reelected. It will serve as a warehouse for the vast amount of evidence which backs up this stark reality as well as a means of spreading this message to like-minded conservatives.” The rest is here:
http://www.newtcantwin.com/
January 22, 2012 @ 8:24 am
P.S. – Just so you know, I believe this is the most important election of my lifetime. Therefore, I spent a great deal of time thoroughly researching all of the candidates, including emailing campaigns to seek specific answers. I first supported Bachman until she dropped out. I currently support Santorum but if it gets down to Romney and Gingrich, will support Romney. In the general, I’ll do all I can to get ABO elected, whichever of the four candidates is our nominee, but it will be with great trepidation if our nominee is Gingrich.
To me, this isn’t like a sporting-match where conservatives and republicans have their favorites ‘teams’ and intramural rivalry. There’s no trophy at the end of this race. Our very way of life is at stake.
January 22, 2012 @ 1:38 pm
OK Lin. I thought this blog had run its course, but I see that you and I, at least, are still mired here. Just thought I would tell you, I gave your 8:08 comment a 1, and then your PS comment a 5. (I usually don’t ‘vote’ in these) Your PS comments are valid, and I pretty much go along. Not about the trepidation over Gingrich, but about this being the most important election in ‘your’ lifetime. I don’t know how old you are, but I felt the same way back in 1980 when I was supporting Reagan over the first Obama, named Carter. I was active duty military then, and Carter literally destroyed our military, and the morale of the troops was way down. We had watched Carter wave limp wrists at the Russians and the Iranians and it was a miserable time to be an American. I very much remember seeing footage of the students in front of the US Embassy in Tehran, and one was holding up a big sign that read: THE US CAN DO NOTHING. That was a low spot in my life, and to this day, we still have done nothing (To Iran) Then came Reagan, and OH BOY! It took two years for Reagan to fix Carter’s economy, and in the meantime the liberal press was calling it “Reaganomics’ and saying how Reaganomics was not working. I distinctly remember the liberal TV press interviewing an old black man, whom you could readily tell was not all that educated, and they asked him why he did not have a job. The black man replied, “It’s them Reaganomics.” I am sure he really knew nothing about it. They probably put the word in his mouth in advance. But I also remember, either two or three years into Reagan’s first term, HOW EXCITED the people on Wall Street were when the DOW hit 2,000 for the first time. What a change. And we in the military could once again hold our heads high with what Ronnie was doing to build our defenses.
January 22, 2012 @ 4:18 pm
Thank you for your reply, oldwriter. I truly appreciate being able to discuss this day with you.
I agree this particular article has likely run its course. I usually, not always, check the box to notify me of follow up comments. There are several people who comment regularly that I particularly look forward to reading, sometimes more so than the original article. While I don’t always agree with them, their comments always add to the discussion, giving one something to think about. If a comment is written to me, as was yours, if I can reply within a fairly short time, I do.
I don’t use the ratings thing either, unless someone posts something that I believe is exceptional. It seems to be used as a way to vote whether one agrees/disagrees with the opinion of the person commenting. Unlike liberals, most people commenting here seem to base their opinions on facts rather than emotion or partisanship, which is why I try to include links to back up my statements. It’s my hope, and with some who comment here my expectation, they’ll follow the link to get more information. Of course, we can all look at the exact same data and come to dozens of different conclusions from it. Doesn’t mean one is ‘more right’ than another.
Like you, I supported President Reagan and until now, felt that was THE most important election of my lifetime. Carter was not Obama in many, many ways. Although they have similar goals, Carter was not as able to get his accomplished, nor was he as willing to circumvent the constitution to achieve them, at least in his first term. He was truly in over his head and basically admitted it later, saying it takes four years to learn the job. (Newly elected Gingrich voted for the Department of Education, by the way.) Obama has shown us while running for re-election he will ignore the constitution. I cannot imagine what he will do during his second term, when there isn’t the modicum (or is that emoticon? haha) of restraint engendered by concerns over an upcoming election.
Since you’ve been following politics so closely for so long, you know that Gingrich did not help develop supply-side economics, as he regularly claims. He was a freshman when President Reagan was elected! You should also remember the ethical violations and all the headlines of that time that we’ll be seeing nightly, should Newt get the nomination. Not someone I watch, but easily available on youtube, Rachel Maddow has already started. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfjr2Od3otI (I hope you check out some of the other videos there, particularly “Rachel Maddow Gets To The Root Of Newt’s Scammed Loot!” If I post multiple links, the post ends up in moderation purgatory.) Expect much more on the nightly news, should he be nominated. And he gives them plenty with which to work. Like demanding anyone who got money from Freddie Mac pay it back right before it came out that he got $1.6 million. Oh, not him, his corporation; and not for lobbying, for being a “historian.”
Go ahead and discount Rachel Maddow if you like; I don’t value her opinion either. But facts are stubborn things and she’s not making up the $300k fine in a vote of 395-28 in a Republican controlled house. How bad does it have to be to have 196 Republicans to vote against their own speaker? While Nancy Pelosi will not likely openly follow through on her threat to disclose more about the investigation, make no mistake, the details are certain to be reported and featured in DNC or PAC ads. ”The only speaker in history to be fined for ethics violations left the house in disgrace.” is a headline/sound-byte that will resonate. You may forgive him, but what will that do to his chances in the general election?
All head-to-head polls show Romney being the only one who has a chance of beating Obama. Despite that, I’m seriously hoping Santorum can pull it off when his name and message are known more widely. He doesn’t have Gingrich’s awful history and current baggage; nor has Tom Coburn accused Santorum of ‘draining the lifeblood out of the conservative movement’ like he did Gingrich. Santorum won Iowa, which wasn’t his backyard, as New Hampshire was for Romney and South Carolina was for Gingrich. Santorum ended up placing ahead of Gingrich in New Hampshire, too, even though his name recognition was much lower than either Romney or Gingrich when this race started. You know, “they” said President Reagan couldn’t win, until he won in a landslide; so there really is hope for Santorum.
January 22, 2012 @ 5:37 pm
Yeah, Obama is not Carter, or vice-versa. But you are aware, I am certain, that Carter is still out there, using US tax dollars to drag secret service men around the world while he goes to places like Palestine and talks against Israel, (and the USA). This man is not to be believed he is so far off base. It is hard to believe that he once served in the military and that a navy ship is named after him. I wonder what it is like to be in the Navy and have to tell people on shore that you serve on the USS Jimmy Carter. Gingrich has baggage, but as I have said, Obama is filling his suitcases full every day. So baggage vs baggage, whose weighs the most? The experience baggage, or the creating it every day baggage? The media has many believing that Obama will attack Newt’s history and win the election, but I feel the people of SC showed the other night that they are no longer following along in step with their propaganda. I hope Newt continues to attack the media, and I hope that the other candidates HAVE THE GUTS to follow suit. They may be so afraid of the media that they don’t want to make further enemies of them. How do you create further enemies? That is like saying that because we have 4 marines pee on some dead bodies, that now the Taliban are going to kill more US soldiers. They are ALREADY doing all they can to kill us, some video is not going to raise the numbers. Since you and I both receive this GOPUSA mail, I guess we will be talking again. I am in Alabama. Have a nice day, and don’t talk too much against Newt since he might end up being our candidate. There used to be a rule, no longer observed, unfortunately, that Republicans do not speak bad of fellow Republicans. Newt was observing that until Romney’s money in anti-Newt ads killed Newt’s ratings in Iowa. Then Newt had no choice but to hit back. Michelle Bachmann broke that rule badly in her last televised debate, constantly going after Newt and not Romney. I dropped any support I had for her after that. And then she dropped out. Did I do that…LOL?
January 22, 2012 @ 6:28 pm
lol, Maybe Iowa was following your comments here! As far as speaking bad about Newt, I’m just rehashing his record. We know the other side will and will spin it to look even worse than it really is. Family duties call, so I’ll leave you with this from February 2009:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MJaImGbEclI&feature=related
and one more below.
January 22, 2012 @ 6:30 pm
I haven’t had a chance to watch much of this yet, a friend sent it last week:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Y5tAU949o4&feature=related
Have a great day and enjoy your week!
January 22, 2012 @ 11:55 pm
Sorry, but I watched the shorter video, (The other was over 14 minutes and momma wants me to get off, getting late here) and the short video does not convict Newt. He was merely picking out one or two items in the healthcare bill that are good, and said that many other areas had problems. At the time this video was made, Obamacare had not passed yet, and Newt was trying to reach out for some form of compromise. To me, what he was saying sounded very intuitive, and of course, since it’s Newt, intelligent.
January 23, 2012 @ 6:44 pm
Busy, busy day here, my friend. Sorry so slow to reply. I do appreciate you taking the time to discuss with me.
So, I’ve been very vocal in why I am scared of Gingrich. How about you tell me why you support him? Surely it can’t be just his debating skills…
This site has been updated since I read it last, lots of videos:
http://newtcantwin.com/
That’s the one by John Ziegler who bet $10k that if nominated, Newt would lose in the general.
January 23, 2012 @ 6:52 pm
At the link above is video of Gingrich in, I believe, 2007, still supporting the individual mandate, talking about transferring wealth and how necessary it is to do. John Ziegler believes Romney is the only candidate with a chance of beating Obama, but I, of course, remain hopeful that Santorum will be able to pull it out. Please try to watch the debate tonight with an open mind about him. He is the closest to being conservative; at least Santorum doesn’t think Mr. New-Deal-FDR is our greatest president ever. As I’ve mentioned, I think his poor (not as poor as Gingrich) polling in the head-to-head with Obama match ups is mostly because of low name recognition. Anyway, also at the link above, in case you don’t get down that far, is this commericial which John Ziegler highly recommends as being required viewing:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CWKTOCP45zY&feature=player_embedded
Don’t let the last 3 seconds cause you to discount the prior 2 minutes. Facts are stubborn things…
Have a terrific night! I’m looking forward to your comments on the debate tonight too. I’m sure Gingrich will hit at least one grand slam that you will be totally justified in gloating about.
January 23, 2012 @ 11:58 pm
Heavens to Betsie Lin, and anyone else, I missed the FL debate tonight. It was almost 70 degrees here even after the sun went down. I took advantage of the opportunity to ride my B-King since early this morning we had tornadoes passing pretty close. I even stopped during my ride and visited a couple of gun shops. You know, the kind Obama and Holder want to close. So I missed the debate, but did turn on Hannity in time to see Senator Thompson give his endorsement to Newt. Senator Thompson worked with Newt in Washington and his opinion is important, I feel. If you watched O’Reilly tonight, I think Bill expressed some pretty positive points about Newt over Romney, without picking a favorite. And then they had lezzie Ann Coulter on, whom once upon a time I thought might be conservative, but now I have to wonder. She ranted against Newt in favor of Romney, and Bill had to calm her down. I just wrote a letter to Bill and said anytime he wanted to eliminate her appearances from his show would be fine with me. I understand Bill’s ‘Fair-and-balanced’ bit, but you would never see someone going on CNN, ABC, CBS or especially MSNBC and being allowed to rant about Obama like that. I told Bill it was OK to be fair and balanced, but let’s not kill the Republican party in the process. I also took note that Juan Williams SPOKE POSITIVELY about Newt tonight. Perhaps the spanking Newt gave him last week knocked some sense into his….into his head.
January 24, 2012 @ 1:11 pm
Your day was much more fun than mine!
But you should see the debate:
http://www.2012presidentialelectionnews.com/2012/01/video-watch-the-full-nbc-newsnational-journal-gop-debate/
Caution: Don’t get me started on Holder…
Hannity has mentioned Ann Coulter’s boyfriend several times so she’s not likely a lesbian, even though she despises Gingrich. 
She is very conservative and has been for years ‘taking it to the liberals’ which is what most, including me, like about Gingrich. She does it with great skill and accuracy, with copious footnotes in all of her books to back up every word she writes. And she has the guts to call them what many of them are: Demonic. As for Fred Thompson, I used to like him as an actor and when he was in congress. His run in 2008 cost him all of my respect. I don’t take anything serious from anything he says these days. Tom Coburn, however, has vilified Gingrich.
You seem to be a reasonable sort of Gingrich supporter, which is become less and less frequent lately, with many of his ‘fans’ becoming more akin to Paul-bots than the normal thoughtful conservative. I am truly interested in learning why you give him your staunch support. I’ve been very clear on why I don’t support him.
January 24, 2012 @ 5:23 pm
Please leave the name-calling to the left where it belongs. All of Ann’s public relationships have been with men. She is also well known for a quote where she basically agreed with Jerry Falwell, that Muslims hate us so much in part because of our acceptance of gays/lesbians.
Ann is also guilty of name-calling, John Edwards comes to mind, so you really do reap what you sow.
January 24, 2012 @ 11:28 pm
OK, so maybe Ann is not a lez, but I know that one Christian site came down hard on her and gave specific details of how she made a big supportive speech at some Gay/Lesbian event. I forget the details now, but I do believe what I read. Perhaps she is like so many, tailors her talk to reach the audience in front of her at that time. But the way she ranted and raved about Newt the other night with O’Reilly, I could not believe it.
January 25, 2012 @ 9:48 pm
Ann Coulter has spoken several times at a GOP gay group event. I forget the name of the group. She believes in traditional marriage, is anti-gay marriage and tells them so. One thing about Ann Coulter, she speaks her mind wherever and whenever. She does NOT tailor anything to suit anyone but herself. That’s why they call her a ‘bomb thrower.’
January 24, 2012 @ 11:37 pm
If you read that about Ann, you will see that she admits to taking money to make speeches, and even though she said she does not support gay causes, you can bet that her speech was not designed to antagonize, since she was being paid. AND THEN SHE JOINED THE BOARD OF THE GAY ORGANIZATION. She also talks very arrogantly. So it would appear that her fame has gone to her head and now she thinks she can do no wrong.
January 25, 2012 @ 12:29 am
Liberals have shown that the only way they can hold on is to play the race card. They seek to change history by distorting it. Most young people do not know that Martin Luther King was a conservative. But the liberals do not want everyone to know that. So much for the education system. If Obama is re-elected they will learn the hard way. Unfortunately so will everyone else.
January 25, 2012 @ 9:50 pm
I agree and am glad his niece tries to set the record straight.
January 25, 2012 @ 9:51 pm
Thanks for the comments, oldwriter and all. See you in another comment section. I’m unsubscribing from this one.