I’m not super thrilled about Newt, but he has admitted the Pelosi couch was a mistake, that the Scozzafava incident was a mistake and said that he was taken out of context on the Ryan budget.  I think he can be kept honest by a grassroots effort whenever he goes of the conservative rails. He realizes when he makes a mistake.

If there are a number of debates between Obama and the GOP candidate is anyone more equipped than Newt to argue circles around an Obama without a teleprompter?  To say Newt can’t beat Obama is like saying Romney (who the Dems are seemingly single-mindedly gearing up to face) can.

To say conservatives won’t back him is to imply that they’d back someone else more fervently.  That’s a stretch.  Obama is so disliked by the Tea Party they’d back Newt as much as they’d back Perry, Cain, Bachmann or anyone else.

Newt may have problems winning.  I’ve said from the beginning he wasn’t going to get past the baggage.

But Romney is a guaranteed Obama win. Fayt A Comp-LEE.

We have to look at other candidates. Cain isn’t out (no?  then point to the election result proving it).  Neither are any of the others, so sukk it up, people.  The long slog is still a-sloggin’.

That is like embracing the suck?

Gingrich is more of a French Bulldog. 

Killing GoDaffy was it’s own virtue and I’m not too particular how that happened. Going to the UN instead of Congress was unacceptable. Getting involved using humanitarianism as a cover was OK I suppose but I think our leaders fell for their own gambit!

I have a hot tip for all of you here.  All the navel-gazing, gnashing of teeth and promoting of favorites that we do matters not one whit.  The Rep nominee will not be decided by Reps but by Dems who, released of the need to cast primary votes for Teh Messiah, will cheerfully cross over to nominate the candidate they think most easy to defeat.

It’s just that simple.  We are screwed.

The difference between Churchill and Newt is that Churchill always hewed to his convictions even in the Wilderness Years.  What conviction exactly has Newt clung to?

http://hotair.com/archives/2011/11/15/limbaugh-comes-to-cains-defense/

Rush defends Cain today…Newt not so much. 

Spiro Agnew with a thesaurus.

Dunno. Newt’s the guy who believed Dede Scorfezza was a republican, because “she told him so”.

http://nldfrenchbulldogs.com/images_dorsey/100_0225.jpg

Newt is fierce!  Look at how he savaged Pelosi and Gore.  With a tongue bath. 

Kinda.

See, this is the best batch of candidates for President I’ve seen in my lifetime.  I believe that all of them are qualified to BE President.

I also believe that any one of them is at least “marginally” better than Obama.

However, based on past history, at least two of them are not significantly better than Obama (Romney, Huntsman). Paul is a non-factor. So to me, it means which of the group composed of Cain, Gingrich, Perry, Bachmann, and Santorum sucks the least.

I still think Cain, Bachmann, and Santorum suck the least as potential Candidates, and also as potential President.

(I wish Perry was better.  I really wish he hadn’t said what he said at the 2001 Border Summit.)

Well played sir.
You do realize I’m just barely joking, right?

Santorum has all the backbone, has stood on his principles and fought for them.  I do think we have a great field to choose from, all qualified, each one better than obama…then again my pup would make a better WH resident.  All kidding aside, we have 2 left leaning repubs, Huntsmen..nice man…but teeters between R/L , just barely a Republican.  Romney, again nice man, but not a strong Conservative, and not sure he can beat O.  Republicans loose when they run “Dem light” candidates.  We have a platform, a beautiful platform, run on it, and live it, that is how we turn this around:  Not by capitulation, not by playing to the “vanilla ice cream crowd”. We need to stand on values and principles, rember what is engraved on the top of our Washington Monument:  Laus Deo, Praise Be To God.

Easy on the Churchill worship.  Churchill was even more flawed than Gingrich. 

The mythical “Wartime Leader” spent the most terrible months of World War II outside Britain, at summit conferences or vacationing comfortably between them.   His biographers keep that very quiet with fancy, even dishonest, sleight of hand lest truth tarnish legend.

Your Gingrich-hate is very strange.  Gingrich has done some very stupid stuff.  But he has also done some very good stuff.  Then his own party ran him off on trumped-up charges, the “Ruling Class” on full and obscene display.

Gingrich would be superior to Romney.  Romney can be counted on to sell out constantly, just like Bush, in the name of “bipartisanship.”  Gingrich at least delivers sometimes.

Your nickname says it all.

If you think we’re doomed, pack your bags and leave the country.  We don’t need your kind of negativity here.  Keep fighting, and maybe you’ll win.

Or was 2010 a big, fat fluke?

I knew it!  Smitty’s bad to the bone!

…and his hair was perfect…ahh ooo, Romney of Boston…

He’s in love with the sound of his own ideas.

“To support Newt is tantamount to advocating the re-election of Barack Obama.”

To support ANY of the candidates they people have been doing is advocating the re-election of Barack Obama.

You really think the party is going to come back together after this slash-and-burn pre-primary season?

Leaving oil is not just about global warming.  OIL FUNDS TERROR and our enemies in the War on Terror.  Oil crashes our economy.  And yes oil harms the environment, including in ways totally irrelevant to global warming like smog (which kills 40,000 Americans a year according to Bush’s EPA).   That’s why Bush said “we must break our addiction to oil” – if even a Texas oilman could wake the heck up, what’s you excuse for clinging to that filthy jihad juice barrel?

There are plenty of Republicans who support ethanol and other ways of
getting off oil, who are not doing so for mercenary reasons.  Read
“Energy Victory: Winning the War on Terror by Breaking Free from Oil” by
aerospace and nuclear engineer Dr. Robert Zubrin, who was written on
this topic often for the Washington Times and National Review and at EnergyVictory dot net.  

Ronald
Reagan’s former National Security Advisor Adm. Bud McFarlane, Center for Security Policy head Frank Gaffney, and many other staunch conservatives back Zubrin’s basic idea of making sure cars can run on something other than jihad juice (only a $130 per new car modification for the automakers).  See OpenFuelStandard dot org

And domestic drilling is a fairy tale.  According to the CIA we have less than 2% of world oil reserves while OPEC has more than 78%. When economic non-intervention clashes with protection our national security, national security should win.  Right?

Romney is not “left leaning”.  He strode into the skeleton littered dragon’s cave to take on Ted Kennedy, running on a balanced budget amendment, cracking down on illegal immigration, and welfare reform (before it was enacted and while it was still hugely controversial with libs screaming about starving kids).  Yes he has become more socially conservative in his political stances since then – that’s a GOOD thing.

Google “Reagan Truman” for a broadcast a younger Reagan did for the Dems, trashing the GOP with class warfare rhetoric.  At his least conservative Romney was never a Dem, never did class warfare.

As governor, Reagan signed a sweeping abortion legalization and a divorce liberalization into law in CA.  Romney vetoed every bill the MA legislature sent him to expand abortion, and fought gay marriage against uphill odds.

As for “capitulation”, when the entire political, media, business, educational, and religious establishment of his state across the spectrum was intensely pressuring him to sign in-state tuition for illegals into law, Romney vetoed it.

Finally, the most conservative imaginable candidate CANNOT WIN.  Instead we have to pick the most conservative candidate who CAN win.   You have to be able to win the middle of the road voters.  Barry Goldwater couldn’t – didn’t even try.  Reagan could and did.