April 2014

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
    1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30      

Send Money

to BtB

Tip Jar
Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 09/2004

« Oy a broch, Obama-Clinton?! | Main | Eyes on Iran »

Thursday, 29 December 2011


First off Gingrich is no Reagan (I laughed so hard I was almost in tears last night when Bachmann compared herself to Reagan and Thatcher). Second he is a big government, compassionate conservative, politician with a penchant for saying God awful stupid things before thinking. As for accomplishments, he fled congress after 1998. Also even though I despise the hard core single issue social cons and yahoos with their litmus tests who have hijacked the party, if we nominate Gingrich I do not want to hear any more garbage about "family values" - recall in 2008 how the yahoos were against Giuliani because he was on his third marriage. As Rich Lowry wrote the other week, "We are not going into battle with our 'A-team'" If Obama wins a second term (which right now I say is slightly better then a 50/50 chance) we will not recognize the country in 2016. I am sick of "moral victories".
Ditto Joel. It's quite upsetting to read this Sowell piece, as he is generally quite admirable. Sorry, but character DOES matter, and Gingrich flunks badly on this count.
Michael Gingrich is a D.C. insider through and through.
Mannie Sherberg
What Dr. Sowell is telling us is something we all know but frequently prefer to ignore: that making serious choices always requires separating the wheat from the chaff. And he's further telling us that all of Newt's much-heralded shortcomings and foibles and idiosyncracies and quirks and deficiencies and blind spots and kinks and peculiarities are -- in the final analysis -- chaff. The hard kernel of wheat is that he can "get the job done" -- because, as his record shows, he has gotten the job done in the past. In the present instance, the job to be done is monumental in scope and magnitude. Only Newt has shown a true appreciation of the size of the job and a true ability to tackle the job. I'm with Thomas Sowell on this one.
Michael, if character is the overriding issue, then we're back to Rick Perry, as it doesn't speak well of Romney's character that instead of serving in the military, he opted to hang out in the south of France for three years(ostensibly working as a Mormon missionary). And if that alone doesn't do it for you, when asked why none of his FIVE sons ever served, Romney is said to have responded that his sons choose to express their patriotism by trying to get him elected (over and over again).
Rick Perry's governing record in Texas is one that all the candidates could only wish they had.
yeshiva son
Yes, Perry would probably be a good president. Whether he could be elected is another story. Perhaps he could. But the truth is that when you are consistently forgetting major points during debates or speeches, running strange ads, and coming off as just plain goofy, it could be a big problem.
Good points. However it is not as if nobody has ever lost their train of thought before. His (Perry's) recent pandering to the yahoos disturbs me. As soon as he announced they all jumped on him and neglected Romney - Bachmann being the worst of them.
boulder divorce
It’s in fact very complicated in this active life to listen news on Television, thus I only use web for that purpose, and obtain the most recent news.

The comments to this entry are closed.