The Republican jobs plan is apparently telling people without jobs to get one.
Newt’s latest argument: people who criticize his lobbying deals have “a socialist bias that you shouldn’t earn money”.
No, Newt. It’s a socialist bias that you shouldn’t earn money by subverting democracy. It’s only when you turn good and evil into empty electoral slogans that you start believing that getting rich is the greatest possible good and should be completely inviolable, by word or deed.
That reminds me of a bit of dialogue from A Night at the Opera:
[QUOTE=A Night at the Opera]
Mrs. Claypool (Margaret Dumont): Mr. Driftwood, three months ago, you promised to put me into society. In all that time, you’ve done nothing but draw a very handsome salary.
Otis B. Driftwood (Groucho): You think that’s nothing? How many men do you think draw a handsome salary?
[/QUOTE]
And that’s really Newt’s story in a nutshell: he drew a handsome salary by trading on the connections he earned by being elected to represent his fellow citizens.
In tonight’s Republican debate, Newt reiterated his desire to create a path to legal residency for illegal aliens who have been here for decades and have children who are US citizens. Pretty enlightened for a Republican, but he cannot get the nomination if he refuses to hew to the right wing orthodoxy that demands that all illegals must be thrown out, no matter what the circumstances. Looks like Rick Santorum will get his chance after all.
I think Gingrich had a very good night today. He’s on quite a roll.
Really? You think the Tea Party wants to give illegal aliens a path to legal residency?
You’re an optimist. This was the death knell of his candidacy. Insufficient hatred of brown people…illegal aliens are people, too? What is he, a Commie?!
Yep, I just went and looked and the Freepers are starting to lose there shit about Newt’s immigration comments tonight.
Weird. Usually, when somebody posts a link, it’s blue, but that one is brown.
Reported as probable spam (links wouldn’t open, but it smells funny).
Back near the beginning of the thread, I gave Newt no chance of winning the nomination. I don’t know if he’ll win it or not, but he definitely has a real chance right now, because a lot of GOPers want someone who’s not Romney, and he’s the last semi-credible not-Romney standing.
Back then, my logic was that Gingrich had always been one of these characters who Beltway pundits swoon over, but only trivial numbers of actual human beings ever seem to get behind. And there seemed to be plenty of candidates for GOPers of any stripe to prefer over Gingrich.
But now that the Teahadists’s support has left Palin for Bachmann, and Bachmann for Perry, and Perry for Cain, and Cain for…Gingrich (head explodes here), all those alternatives have pretty much hit the wastebasket. Newt could actually wind up getting real votes. Who’d’a thunk?
Not me.
No matter what happens with any of the sociopaths masquerading as viable candidates for the Republican party nomination between now and next November, Romney will still take it.
Pistol lodged in my ear canal, I guess I’d rather have a President Romney than a President Gingrich. Newty has always struck me as the type of amoral, vindictive son-of-a-bitch that should never be allowed within a flaming poo-bag’s distance of the power of the Presidency. And Jesus, there’s not enough Rushmore left to accommodate that fat fucking head.
Before you start slapping your own dandruffy shoulders, Mitt, understand that my enthusiasm can be measured roughly as follows:
Satay skewers in my testicles > Romney Presidency > Gingrich Presidency
FYI, here is a link to the editorial from the New Hampshire Union-Leader, which endorsed Newt Gingrich in today’s paper. It’s the most prominent newspaper in New Hampshire and is generally conservative. Previously, they’ve endorsed Steve Forbes (in 2000) and Pat Buchanan (in 1992 and 1996).
You think that’s bad, check out these morons on Twitter who got all upset that the Manchester (NH) Union Leader endorsed Gingrich. Simply brilliant.
That was hilarious!!! Thanks.
:smack:
Good grief. These people have the cultural literacy of a cheese sandwich.
The cheese sandwiches of the world feel you’ve unfairly insulted them.
I still want to know: what does Gingrich has that Romney doesn’t? I could see Romney voters abandoning him to vote for Gingrich, but Bachmann/Perry/Cain voters lining up for Gingrich? The hell kind of sense does that make?
I know that I’ve asked this before, but goddammit I want to know. It doesn’t make any goddamn sense. I can’t think of any advantage that Gingrich has that Romney doesn’t except for shoring up Georgia.