Newt obviously gets it. He is absolutely correct about the secret crap.The whole notion of a super committe is ant-constitutional.
Tenth, That Super-Committee has 9 days - and then we're screwed. Newt's right, really stupid idea. These "Grand Deals" and huge bills are part of the problem. They should scrap the committee and focus on feeding small bills that all fix the problem to Obama. These huge bills are crafted that way to hide poison pills that couldn't pass on their own merits. So stop hiding them.
Am I noting a subtle shift from Cain to Gingrich as the 'new' anti-Romney?Let's see....Trump, Bachmann, Perry, Cain, Gingrich.Who's left after Gingrich sticks his foot in his mouth??ROMNEY! Go Romney!!
We know you like Romney, Mud. He has no character, just like you. Romney will not get my vote, so if he gets the nomination, you will probably get Obama for four more years. Or, if Romney wins, you get Obama white.
Exactly TGP, Romney is just Obama in a lighter shade running as a republican who will do all the same ignorant crap we've been seeing.Newt would make a great Secretary of state or, the head of some other cabinet post but, I don't like the idea of President Newt.I do appreciate that he's running and, willing to point out the obvious on TV that the press has been whitewashing and soft soaping about the Obama administration.The super committee is exactly what he's calling it...another Democrat smoke and mirrors sham that is posing as a problem solving entity who's only goal is to find a nicer word for "tax increase" for Obama to use in his campaign.For being so f'ing transparent, it sure seems that nothing this administration or, the democraps do anymore is ever done in the light of day.
Of course the super committee is stupid, they got libtards on it! That AUTOMATICALLY drops the collective IQ 200 points.
I used to dislike Mr. Gingrich's position on most things, but I've been watching him during this campaign and he's making more sense to me. And I think he's correct with his assessment of the secrecy as crap. Just today I read about some tax increases being proposed along with spending cuts, but no details. Both were taken off the table by some person or persons unknown to the public. I'm blaming 435 Congressmen and 100 Senators for the mess.I might point out that having a government committee of only one group of politicians is called something besides democracy.
This is a lose-lose proposition for the Republicans. If they come out with a moronic compromise of some sort they will lose support of their base and if they come out with nothing they will be roasted as obstructionist. Really dumb idea! And anyone with half a brain has to know BO wants this committee to fail.
NW Ohio, You sound absolutely sane in this thread. You need to find who that whack-job is that is running around using your name calling everyone a liar.
What do YOU think of President Obama's Libya policy?
Obama has a Libya policy? I thought his Libya policy was to act as air support for islamic rebels until they were able to seize 20,000 man portable anti-aircraft missiles and, the stockpiles of leftovers from his halted weapons programs.Mission accomplished!
Wow - Libya is going really well: Libyan war over, but fighting continues among regional militias: http://www.cnn.com/2011/11/02/world/africa/libya-infighting/index.html?hpt=hp_t2Arms control in Libya;New regime under pressure to secure weapons caches, disarm freedom fighters:http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/nov/8/arms-control-in-libya/?page=allGreat job Obama - or is this just another plan to "redistribute" weapons to those that are more needy like Hammas, the PLO, and the Taliban? Obama better hurry - he only has 14 more months to destabilize another region or abandon an American ally. But then, I guess that's why he's in the Asia-Pacific area now - he hasn't screwed it up yet. He must be planning to ditch the Taiwanese, Japanese, or the South Koreans. Or maybe he's planning to make nice with North Korea. With a few more "successes" like Libya the entire world might be in chaos Mud_PILE. Is that your goal?
WEll, Sepp and CS, you fell into the trap I set, but at least the two of you know a hell of a lot more than Herman Cain did!!Too funny! Pathetic, but funny.http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/2011/11/herman-cains-libya-brain-freeze.htmlenjoy!
Mud_PILE, Great trap - he gave the same answer after 11 seconds - or did you listen that long? We know a lot more about Libya than you or Obama do too. As President, if Cain follows the Obama model he'll get more rest than he is getting now - he'll get in more golf too.
Of course, CS, of course. You are right, always right.Which horse are you mow betting on, CS? Newt?Those of us on the other side' find it all quite amusing. It's been a great show of ignorance. Too bad it has to come to an end, eh?
This comment has been removed by the author.
Mud_PILE,I'm still betting on Governor Rick Perry. He knows more about Libya than Obama does too. The truth is that any of them would make a better President than Obama. Hell, it would be hard to find a person that would make a worse President than Obama.Remember how amused you were today when you and the rest of the democrats (progressives, liberals, socialists, whatever) are trying to figure out what the hell happened on the morning of November 7th, 2012.Liberals generally don't learn anything from history. You all played the same cards against Bush and Reagan - look how well that worked for you.Yeah - we're all pathetic and stupid - keep thinking that.
Reagan never raised the national debt:http://www.politifact.com/virginia/statements/2011/nov/12/jim-webb/sen-jim-webb-says-ronald-reagan-raised-debt-ceilin/
NW Ohio - Do you have a point?
In my humble opinion, if you are going to throw words around, like pathetic. You should have to give an explanation as to why a commentor is wrong, regarding a topic.
Johnny, As you have seen - Mud_PILE (thank you for "PILE" by the way - it's so perfect) doesn't work that way. On your own blog he set a trap for himself when he tried to engage in a serious discussion. He posed all the questions, never countered with any facts, and ultimately just walked away. His only effort at discussion was providing a graph that wasn't relevant to the subject. I suppose he provided a fact - but it was like trying to decide how many miles of railroad tracks we need by counting the number of suburban car garages. They don't understand logical discourse - that's probably why they are liberals (democrats, progressives, socialists, whatever) in the first place.
Well Muddy, since you're such a good trap setter upper, why don't you school us on all the merits of Obama's Libyan adventure.I'm bursting at the seams to hear your logic as to how placing thousands of stinger type missiles into the hands of multiple unknown factions is a "good" thing.And since you're such a good liberal who stands up for women's and gay rights, enlighten us all as to why it's a "good" thing that Obama handed a country that allowed women to hold public office, military jobs and civil service jobs and didn't have state sanctioned fatwas calling for the execution of gays, over to islamic zealots?Then again, I forgot that islamic zealots and liberals are on the same side now.