Ha! Newt says he is “not rich”

Man, this is bad.

AllahPundit calls it “laying it on with a trowel”. I was thinking more of a 12 horse motor pump into a 10 inch hose fitting myself. I’m talking about a cement pump.

What am I talking about?

This:

CONCORD, N.H. — Less than 12 hours after finishing in fourth place in the Iowa caucuses, Newt Gingrich opened a new, more aggressive chapter in his campaign, taking pointed shots at rivals Mitt Romney and Ron Paul, who both finished ahead of Gingrich. At one point, Gingrich hinted he would make Romney’s personal wealth an issue, telling a reporter “I’m not rich.”
Speaking to reporters shortly after arriving in New Hampshire, Gingrich dismissed Romney’s razor-thin victory—the former Massachusetts governor ended the night with 25 percent of the vote and only eight more votes than Rick Santorum. “The fact is, three out of four Republicans rejected him,” Gingrich said.
When asked why he chose to congratulate Santorum and not Romney on his caucus success, the former House speaker said, “I find it amazing the news media continues to say [Romney’s] the most electable Republican when he can’t even break out of his own party.… The fact is, Gov. Romney in the end has a very limited appeal in conservative party.”
Later, in a campaign stop in Laconia, Gingrich’s kept up his attack – and it got personal. Asked by a local reporter if he would buy a home in the Lakes Region of New Hampshire, where Romney has a summer home, Gingrich replied, “No, I can’t afford things like that, I’m not rich.” His wife, Callista, added a jab at Romney as well. “We have one home,” she demurred. The Romneys own two summer homes, including one in California.

This coming from a dude who made 1.6 million from Freddie Mac . 🙄

Over to you AllahPundit:

Surely a man eligible for a six-figure line of credit at Tiffany’s has the means to buy himself a cottage in the sticks. Or maybe more: I’ll bet $1.6 million from Freddie Mac would get you something nice and airy in Hanover. This is the second time that Gingrich has taken a dig at Romney’s wealth, do note, but the first time came with caveats: Romney had already taken a dig at his Freddie earnings in that case, and Gingrich wasn’t sniffing then at the fact that Romney’s rich but rather what he did to become that way. Tonight’s little aside is more of a pure class pander, which is yet more evidence of just how bitter Newt is about that beating he took on the air in Iowa.

Indeed.

My question is simply this — if Newt is poor, what the heck am I?!? 😯

Oh and also; pandering?!? That doesn’t even begin to describe it. The dude is flinging poo at Romney desperately hoping something — anything will stick.

Thus another reason why I am not very big on Newt. Him, the heir to the Reagan mantle — yeah right! 🙄

Honestly why does anyone care what this stupid woman thinks?

No, No… I don’t mean Tina Korbe.

I mean this woman, Megan McCain…:

Ugh, it’s like listening to a valley girl talk about politics. Like gag me with a spoon man. 🙄

This is why I am not that big on Newt

Because of silly stuff like this right here:

Newt Gingrich still won’t congratulate Mitt Romney for winning the Iowa caucuses.
At a news conference in Concord, N.H., Gingrich was asked by CBS correspondent Dean Reynolds why he congratulated Rick Santorum but not Romney.
Gingrich stared at the reporter and raised his eyebrows in silence, eventually drawing laughter from some of the reporters.
“Because I know you would be a man of great professionalism, I know that’s a rhetorical question. And a good one,” Gingrich said.
During his speech in Des Moines last night, Gingrich visibly seethed at mention of Romney, who along with his supporters ran a barrage of attack ads against the former speaker.
Romney said he’d spoken with every GOP rival last night except Gingrich.

Because when you do stuff like this; you come off as an old bitter curmudgeon. Last night, while watching Newt’s speech, I was not impressed at all. Because instead of being gracious, he came off as angry. Newt starting punching up, and attacking Romney and attacking Ron Paul. Whatever happened to just thanking your supporters and the others who also competed with you in the caucases?

Either way, this will not go over well for those in New Hampshire. Because it makes him sound ungratful, not to mention the fact that Newt is a bomb thrower, who is not good at thinking on his feet. All of this will flush itself out during the caucas process — hopefully.

Is Rick Santorum a “Big Government” Conservative?

My answer? Aren’t they all? 😀

This guy seems to think so: (H/T HotAir.com)

Rick Santorum, like most Republican candidates, fashions himself the one true conservative running in 2012. If the thought of big, intrusive liberal government offends you, he might just be your man. And if you favor a big, intrusive Republican government, he’s unquestionably your candidate.
People are taking a look at Santorum. Important people. People in Iowa. Even New York Times columnist David Brooks recently celebrated his working-class appeal, newfound viability and economic populism, noting that the former Pennsylvania senator’s book “It Takes a Family“ was a ”broadside against Barry Goldwater-style conservatism” — or, in other words, a rejection of that Neanderthal fealty for liberty and free markets that has yet to be put down. Santorum’s book is crammed with an array of ideas for technocratic meddling; even the author acknowledges that some people “will reject” what he has to say “as a kind of ‘Big Government’ conservatism.”
Santorum grumbles about too many conservatives believing in unbridled “personal autonomy” and subscribing to the “idea that people should be left alone, be able to do whatever they want to do … that we shouldn’t get involved in the bedroom (and) we shouldn’t get involved in cultural issues.” — Via Santorum: Conservative Technocrat | TheBlaze.com

Go read all of that, it’s quite interesting.

Nate Silver explains it.

This pretty much sums it up…:

I don’t care if you call it a win or a tie. In Iowa on Tuesday, Mitt Romney had a performance that looks ugly on the stat sheet , but which accomplished quite a bit when you consider it in its broader context.
The two most important things that Mr. Romney accomplished are as follows:
First, Mr. Romney eliminated Rick Perry from the nomination contest. Of course, Mr. Romney got a lot of help from Mr. Perry himself. Maybe we should use the passive voice — Mr. Perry was eliminated from the nomination contest. The conclusion is the same: the man who once looked like Mr. Romney’s most formidable rival has suspended his campaign.
The result was not unexpected based on late-stage polling — in fact, the polling average nailed Mr. Perry’s share of the vote almost to the decimal point.
But it was not long ago that Mr. Perry looked like he might finish in a solid third place, at a bare minimum, in Iowa; a poll conducted as recently as Dec. 12 actually had Mr. Perry ahead of Mr. Romney. And there was some chance that Mr. Perry might have done quite a bit better than third place. I’m not convinced that there was anything that happened to Rick Santorum that couldn’t have happened to Mr. Perry, if only Mr. Perry had received the right injection of momentum — say, an endorsement from the Family Leader, a conservative group — at the right time. — via Winning Ugly, but Winning – NYTimes.com

I think is pretty mcu spot on, read the rest, it is very interesting. A little wonkish, but very interesting.

This is a mememorandum thread.

Let’s not get carried away please

Listen, I stand for Israel as much as the next Conservative. But this article here, is borderline idiotic:

So Paul Krugman phoned in his periodic “Keynes Was Right” column today, arguing that the Obama Porkulus failed only because, like “true” Communism, it wasn’t tried vigorously or faithfully enough.
I wonder if Krugman also credits Keynes’s views on Jews, which British blogger Damian Thompson of The Telegraph brings to our attention.
via Keynes Was Right–About the Jews? | Power Line.

I mean, to make this sort of a comment to a man, who happens to be a liberal and Jewish, coming from another Jewish person is about the worst backhanded insult ever.

Now this point here, I will not contest:

Anti-Semitism used to be a property of the Right, yet it’s worth pointing out that today many of the intellectual heroes of the right are Jews, such as Milton Friedman, Leo Strauss, Irving Kristol, etc., or that anti-Semitism has become almost wholly the province of the Left today.

I got news for Mr. Hayward; it is still a property of the right. Ron Paul is a perfect example. Although it is far to point out that Ron Paul’s faction of the Republican Party is a very small one. One that believes in “Limited Freedom” for those who are White and Christian only. Although, to be fair, Rick Santorum basically feels the same way; the whole extremist Christian bigot.

My overall point here is this; we should be very careful about dropping the Anti-Semite flag during a political football game. It hurts those who are innocent of said charges. Just ask me.

Others: Wizbang, Ed Driscoll

The folly of Erick Erickson

I have read some stupid stuff that this joker has written before, including his idiot smearing of me in the past, by some of his sock puppets at that joke of a site of his; but this right here takes the cake.

Here is ol’ Erick Erickson going full on anti-Christian bigot:

No Surprise, Iowa Social Conservatives Are About To Shoot Us All in the Foot Again
Posted by Erick Erickson
Wednesday, December 28th at 4:02PM EST
I’m hearing several campaigns and external pollsters have a surge for Rick Santorum. With the National Review folks fawning over him again, it probably means a surge is real and any surge by Rick Santorum is another factor ensuring Mitt Romney wins the nomination. (To be fair, this doesn’t look like real momentum)
Santorum has no money or organization outside of Iowa and cannot win the nomination, but Iowans love a guy who sucks up to them and makes sure they know he loves the babies.
As a pro-lifer myself, I have to throw up a bit in my mouth that Iowa conservatives are seriously considering Rick Santorum, which will only help Mitt Romney, a guy who even after his supposedly heartfelt conversion to life put some seriously pro-abortion judges on the Massachusetts bench hiding behind the “Well it was Massachusetts for Pete’s sake” defense.
Let’s remember Rick Santorum could not even win re-election in his home state of Pennsylvania.
Rick Santorum also supported Arlen Specter over Pat Toomey in the U.S. Senate back in 2004.
But most damning to me is Rick Santorum’s actual record in the Senate and House of Representatives. I keep hearing him say he was such a paragon of fiscal conservative virtue, when he was anything but that. He was as go along to get along as all the other Republicans who led to our downfall.

Okay, let me explain something to this simple-minded idiotic buffoon. There are three legs of Conservatism — as explained and used very well by President Ronald Reagan. Those legs are social conservatives, foreign policy conservatives and economic conservatives. The late President Reagan built an alliance of these three groups of conservatives that changed the political landscape of the Nation.

The point I am trying to make here is this; try winning the Nomination of the Republican Party, much less the election for President of the United States without any one of these legs of the stool. If the evangelical base does not like a Republican candidate, he can forget about being elected, that is why John McCain lost. Not because of Sarah Palin, in fact she boosted his support! It was because most rib-rocked Conservatives saw John McCain is a petty phony and too much of a moderate. Furthermore, the evangelical Christian base was not impressed with McCain second trophy wife and little slut dressing daughter.

That is why McCain lost and Obama won, because the Republicans stayed home and did not vote, because the candidate did not appeal to the base. That base is made up; again, of social conservatives, foreign policy conservatives and economic conservatives; if you try to win an election or even a primary without one of these groups, you are spinning your wheels. This is why Ron Paul and others are trying to win their votes.

This, again, proves to me, that Mr. Erickson should not be taken seriously, at all.

Others: Washington Monthly, Campaign 2012, Balloon Juice, The Daily Caller and The Atlantic Online

Over as quick as it started

I offer to help someone, and what happens? All hell breaks loose.

Yeah, I offered to help The Lonely Conservative, after she broke her arm. I guess I am not enough of a far right winger for some of her commenters and they unleashed on me in the comments section and when I tried to defend myself; I get told to not to call her “regulars” names.

Anyhow, I basically decided that If I could not go back at the idiots who were essentially calling me a phony, because I was not slobbering Ron Paul fanatic; that I no longer wanted to write there. So, I am not writing at Lonely Conservative anymore.

This is why I never allowed any co-bloggers on my site; because it creates an Blog that seems bi-polar in nature. One person saying this and another person saying that. I admit it, I felt a little odd writing over on someone else’s blog and most likely, I will not be doing that again, ever. I am someone who believes in pragmatism, and I have never been an extreme ideologue either way. Heck, even as a “Left of center,” half-assed as that was, I found myself in big-time disagreement with the extreme left’s ideology; especially when it came to abortion and gay rights.

I also am not your “typical” Conservative. I am essentially an “inner city transplant,” I moved out of the city of Detroit in 1989. I guess my heart never really left the city. Because when I saw what was in those Ron Paul newsletters, in 2008 and again here in 2011; I really got angry over it. I have nothing against the suburbs or the white people who live in them; but I have zero use for the extreme racial bigotry that exists in some of them.

So, while I am grateful for “Mrs. B” for allowing me over there; I just do not think it was in my best interest to continue writing there. Especially, when you have racist bigots in the comment section berating you constantly. I just do not need that, at all. Hopefully she finds someone who’s more of a match to her site. Quite obviously, I was not it.

Ah well. It was fun while it lasted.

Video: From the ‘WTF?!?!?!?!?” Dept..

I…..Um, I….am…. wow… speechless. Holy sh—- wait, How?

Oh, never mind.

This comes via Richard McEnroe. (H/T OTM)

I hope nobody lets Pamela Geller or Debbie Schlussel see this; otherwise there’s going to be a massive clean up needed on aisle 5. Surprise

Politics and Common Sense

There seems to be a disturbing affliction in politics in this modern age and in the no-so-modern age as well. It seems to afflict a good number of people, who dare to make their careers in what has commonly become known as the “beltway.” This affliction only seems to be found among those who are of the ruling class, or at least among those who have chosen to live their lives as public servants. I am referring, of course, to something that is usually found more commonly among the working class and everyday families and individual people all across this Country —- Good old-fashioned common sense.

There is, sadly, in this modern day age a real honest shortage of common sense; those who have any semblance of common sense and actually use it are truly blessed. However, in my older years, I am finding that education level to common sense ratio to be lower among those who are of the higher level of education class — classic example; Ron Paul.

I am of course referring to the issue of the newsletters that were published with Ron Paul’s name attached to them back in the 1990’s. It appears that again the liberal left and of course, the Wilsonian Neo-Conservative right are again bringing these newsletters to light — and rightly so. I have seen the contents of these newsletters for myself, as someone who did not grow up in what I like to call the “White Tidy” suburbs; but rather on the Southwest Side of Detroit, Michigan or as it is now commonly called the “inner city” or as I sometimes call it “The Ghetto.”

I was very appalled by what I read in those newsletters. I detest Multiculturalism; because Multiculturalism is liberal socialist code-speak for “Be ashamed that you are white.” However, my disdain of this liberal practice does not equate my hatred of any other race. This is why when I read those newsletters and saw what sort of bigoted filth was in them against blacks, Latinas and yes Jews. The little boy who grew up around many different sorts of ethnic backgrounds, in the City of Detroit, was quite angry that a man, much less a public elected official would allow such tripe in something attributed to him by name.

Whether or not the Newsletters were penned by Ron Paul or not is a non-issue to me. What is an issue to me is that Ron Paul never took the time to look at these newsletters to see what was in them. Again, this simply goes back to the thing I spoke of above — common sense. Ron Paul seems to have a lack of common sense. I believe that speaks of his character and judgment. Furthermore, the fact that he does fellowship with those of a bigoted mindset is telling of his personality. A perfect example, receiving donations from Don Black and David Duke who are the founders of the Neo-Nazi website Stormfront.org and former Klansmen — and not bothering to return said donations.

Again, this all goes back to the very thing that is lack amongst the political ruling class in this Country — Common Sense — and it is seriously lacking on Ron Paul’s part.