Thursday, May 27, 2010

Gingrich .... You think he's right?


Please watch this...........and if you think Newt's wrong, tell us why. If you think he's right, what point or sentiment stood out to you the most as you watched? thanks.

and thanks, Pris, for emailing it to me. Z

72 comments:

Tom said...

Wow, that was a powerful clip - thanks for showing it! Here's a worry too - of whether our leadership would yield to the decision of an international tribunal over a state's right to enforce its laws: http://volokh.com/2010/05/27/bringing-a-case-against-arizona-before-the-interamerican-commission-on-human-rights/

Tom said...

Of the latest posting here: http://www.theospark.net/
can we really put that language on our cars?

Greywolfe said...

As to the CONTENT of the speech, I can't argue with it at all. My only place of contention is with the person that is giving it. I can't trust him. He was too quick to jump onto the global warming bandwagon, back during the last election cycle.

Always On Watch said...

An excellent video and spot on for the most part but not completely.

Until more Americans understand that America needs to be saved from the menace of socialism, begun in earnest by FDR decades ago, Americans will just go on as they are, hoping that somehow things will turn around.

So many Americans today, even many conservatives, have been conditioned to believe that big government has a moral obligation to solve citizen's problems, particularly economic problems on the personal level (Hence, taxation which is oppressive already). In other words, Americans today have an entitlement mentality. This kind of mentality is very difficult to undo. Just talking about Washington crossing the Delaware will do nothing to change that entitlement mentality, IMO. We need activism beyond patriotism such as that cited in the video.

Always On Watch said...

PS: I also agree with Greywolfe's comment.

Ducky's here said...

The pure stinky cheese.

Lots of ill defined emotional terms like "original values", "freedom", "secular values". He talks as if he wants to establish a theocracy and I have no doubt that the far right wants a theocracy.

When he calls Obama "socialist" it's a clear indicator that he thinks his audience is dumb and if you believe him, you are.

Just because you're comfortable doesn't mean you're free. The far right would sell any greatness we have left for a bowl of pottage just like Esau. Also, to believe that the left had nothing to do with positive change in this country is asinine.

So repeat the myths and aphorisms and take us down.

Obama a socialist. That's when you know you are dealing with the uneducated.

Ducky's here said...

The techniques may be new or old, but the management of a country in the name of greed is an old story, and it always leads to collapse and rebirth of civic values (save for the times when it leads to total destruction by violence). This chapter is very near its close.

Now whether we chose to try to go back to the folly of Saint Ronnie Raygun which started the current cycle, well I have no faith in our ability to learn and even less faith in our courage to change.

And with "spokespeople" like the despicable Gingrich we are nothing but road kill.

Chuck said...

I'm with Greywolfe. I think it is a good message but I have developed the opinion that Gingrich will sell his soul for the White House. I don't trust him.

It looks like the Duck is off his meds again.

beamish said...

The conservative voice and the libertarian voice in me only draw consensus on the need to defeat and reverse the "progress" the left has made in America, exemplified by the unaccountable Obama thugocracy.

I disagree with the "we need a generation of Americans dedicated to restoring the core valuesthat have made us the most sucessful country of the world for the last 400 years" statement. Where is this "generation" going to come from if its is not already here? Our government-run schools? I don't think so. If you're sending your kids to school (or even church!) to restore "core values" instead of instilling them yourself, you likely have no "core values" to restore or instill in the first place.

And core values? The libertarian in me says we'd not have political dilemmas over what is taught or emphasized in public schools if there were no public schools. The abolition of the Department of Education at the federal level was a major item of the "Contract with America" that Newt's Congress NEVER fulfilled. This is a failure more critical than not enacting term limits.

The law of threes apply here. One third of the population supports you, one third of the population opposes you, and the remaining third is wondering why cottage cheese has an expiration date.

We need smaller government. The problem is the left believes government size is measured in bullets and troops and firepower and the right believes government size is measured in its powers of regulatory intrusion into the marketplace.

The goverment should _______.

"@#$@ off" is the most conservative / libetarian consensus answer I can come up with. Reagan won two landslide elections tapping into that sentiment.

Greywolfe said...

Ducky, once again, you show your propensity for talking out of your lower sphincter.

I'll take the last first, Barry IS a socialist. He believes that the only way to make life better is to take from those that have and give to those that don't. He may believe in the form of socialism called Marxism but its still of a kind.

One of the tenets of Marxist philosophy is "from each according to his ability, to each according to their need." This is the one philosophy that the current administration has been using with regularity.

What evidence can you show that he ISN'T a radical socialist? The attacks on the Banking and Finance sector? Maybe it's the roughshod way he took over two auto makers? The spending bill that was supposed to keep unemployment under 8%? I believe it's 9.9% right now.

The only sentence in your entire argument that I can agree with is when you state "Just because you're comfortable doesn't mean you're free." That is so true. True freedom would mean that we were able to use the fruits of our labors without the governement siezing it under threat of force to use as IT sees fit instead of "we the people".

Name: Soapboxgod said...

One word summary: Opportunistic.

Under what Republican leadership you have, you will not witness a return to anything that will truly stand in opposition to collectivism.

How do I know this? Exhibit A is Scott Brown and his voting record up to this point.

Exhibit B-Z:

The majority of the Republican leadership at present believes in the imposition of smoking bans on private property, agricultural subsidies, subsidies for professional sports team stadiums, IMF loans to 3rd world countries, an elastic money supply, coverage of pre-existing conditions in health insurance, continuing to send National Guard troops overseas for foreign entanglements....

You can go right down the list. I mean just look how many Republicans have spoken out in opposition to the Arizona immigration law alone.

I can guarantee you that at best Republicans at the Federal level may slow the progression down but only until the American people become complacent and passified again. At that point they will grow it and morph it into the centralized beast that it is trampling upon the states all the while.

If you want real opposition then it begins and ends at the local and state level.

Elmers Brother said...

divorce. Norway and Sweden did it.

Ducky's here said...

What evidence can you show that he ISN'T a radical socialist?

-------------------

Because he hasn't instituted any socialist policies unless you believe that simple Keynesianism is socialist, in your case highly probable.

Attacks on the banking sector? Are you insane? One tenth of the banks in America have failed and you don't believe there should be any intervention? Just let it go down after the laissez-faire days of Saint Ronnie Raygun trashed the place.

Look, that war thrill you felt down your leg when you first read "Atlas Shrugged", it wasn't the thrill of great new ideas.

Now the question is whether we turn the country over to the same Libertrian incompetents who have come close to destroying it.

You nanny state lovers expect government to raise employment? How can it do that without direct hiring or stimulus to increase demand? More tinkle down economics, that sure worked over the last three decades, right?

Why don't you join soapbox man and try to get us back on the gold standard.

Of course you think tat as an individual your short term wants and appetites are a good guide to long term national needs. Well in fact, you're over there with soap box man in the Libertarian camp. You talk og nation and culture yet you believe only in short term satiation of your wants. You don't believe in nation or culture or much of anything.

Tht's what bugs me most about the fringe right, no values.

Ducky's here said...

Remember folks, under soapbox man's unregulated finance, 1 IN 10 banks in America have now failed.

And you blame it on Obama. Sheer lunacy (although I can think of a nastier more accurate word).

FrogBurger said...

Maybe we're uneducated but Ducky, you're a dumbass. Don't know which one is better.

Because he hasn't fully implemented socialist policies doesn't mean he is not a socialist. As far as I'm concerned we still have a political process in place and Obama can't just decide to do things on his own.

It's like saying Ducky is intelligent yet he hasn't said anything smart yet.

FrogBurger said...

How about this link

I know, nothing new for some.

LASunsett said...

Pay no attention to the Duck droppings, I am sure Z will sweep them up at some point.

I know that I am not always to be taken seriously. I cannot help it that Mustang's sarcasm has rubbed off on me. But let me be serious for a moment, if I might:

To everyone on this blog who calls themselves common sense conservatives, this man is the best choice to restore this nation. After the reckless destruction that is being brought upon all of our children and grandchildren by the current government, it will not be an easy fix.

Listen to Newt's voice as he speaks these days. It's tone is not angry, it is one of quiet resolve.

It is pessimistic. Yet at the same time, it it is still optimistic. It is upbeat only in the fact that he still believes (like I believe)...that we can take back this nation and supply common sense solutions to the problems we face.

This man remains genuinely concerned about the course of this nation, as we all do. I hear much about wishing for the good old days, when Reagan was in office. I have fond memories of them too. But he is gone now.

I know some do not like him, mainly because of his past personal decisions. Let God be his judge, because right now we need someone who can/will reform the damage this Marxist machine has wrought.

You have time to think about it. You do not have to choose now. Just watch him. He's as close to Reagan as you'll ever get. We are not hiring a pastor, we need a President.

Joe said...

Ducky: "...I have no doubt that the far right wants a theocracy."

You are wrong...we do not. We never have and we never will. This is figment of your imagination, period.

Your open mindedness and tolerance are underwhelming.

I agree with the substance of Gingrich's thesis, but it is understated.

Greywolfe said...

Name:Soapboxgod....

If you were a woman I'd be in love with you for your comment. Hit the nail squarely and soundly.

Take the states and then starve the beast. Otherwise, we accomplish nothing.

Elmers Brother said...

duhkkky anyone who reads farther than the Sermon on the Mount knows that this world has little to offer as far as politics.

John 2:15-17 (New International Version)

Do Not Love the World
15Do not love the world or anything in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him. 16For everything in the world—the cravings of sinful man, the lust of his eyes and the boasting of what he has and does—comes not from the Father but from the world. 17The world and its desires pass away, but the man who does the will of God lives forever.

Elmers Brother said...

you'd think if the far right wanted to set up a theocracy they'd know it.

anyone here want to set up a theocracy?

duhkkky your tin foil hat...why don't you go shine it some more.

LASunsett said...

//1 IN 10 banks in America have now failed.//

That means 9 out of 10 didn't. There is no perfection, stop looking for it.

90% gets an A in most academic settings and a B under the more stringent ones.

Name: Soapboxgod said...

"Take the states and then starve the beast. Otherwise, we accomplish nothing."

Precisely. But instead the majority among us continue the wash, rince, repeat cycle.

Statism is statism. Collectivism is collectivism. The both of them know no party.

But I digress...now grab your pom poms and cheer like the good comrade you are!

Name: Soapboxgod said...

"Just let it go down after the laissez-faire days of Saint Ronnie Raygun trashed the place."

Laissez Faire??

I missed that? When exactly were we engaged in pure unregulated Laissez Faire capitalism in America?

The fact is never. To be certain what we have had and continue to have is what is more appriately defined as a "mixed economy".

"How can it do that without direct hiring or stimulus to increase demand?"

Demand for what? Presumably a product or service of some kind. But however can you expect to ever acquire what it is you demand if it hasn't yet been produced?

As for your commentary regarding the gold standard. Let me propose that you promptly order two boxes of checks from your bank and proceed immediately to begin writing checks for whatever your heart desires. Worry not your pretty little head because you see you demand it and thus you shall have it and afterall you cannot progress without a little stimulus now can you.

Then report back to us your findings.

Values...you're kidding right?

Mustang said...

I only disagree with Newt's claim of secularism. The socialists are only secular with regard to Christianity; they welcome the moon god and animism. In this way, they become the useful idiots to Islam which ultimately will remove the heads of most communist queers and leftists demanding greater tolerance. I'm sure there is poetic justic in there somewhere.

And for the record, I was never sarcastic until I met Sunset.

JINGOIST said...

Newt is absolutely right. Everything he said in that clip--and others--is right on the mark. Newt is a BRILLIANT stategist and ideas guy.

BUT!

I don't trust him 100%. He suffers from SEVERE lapses in judgement, to put it mildly. His recent backing of Dee Dee Scazafava (sp?) in NY over the conservative Hoffman was nothing more than a suck up to northern NY machine Republicans, regardless of Scazzie's leftist views. Many of us are conservatives even when it's not convenient or easy.

Newt also jumped on the global warming bandwagon BECAUSE it was polling well. I heard an interview with Neal Boortz a few years back and he was peddling a book, and Neal got Newt to admit that it was the "popularity of the idea" that made him go along. I was disgusted. He even used the term "carbon loading of the atmosphere"!

Yeppers. At 3.75 parts per 10,000 we sure are loading up CO2 into the atmosphere...

christian soldier said...

you mean the couch sitter w/ nancy P.-----that gingrich!?!
he's a self promoter-notice his books neatly lined on the shelf behind--that is no accident!

what he says is true - for the most part--
note to newt-this Republic was founded on Christian principles---
HELLO---
C-CS

Z said...

I can't shine much light on any of the comments, but I thank LA Sunsett for his confidence in me :-)

For me to tell Ducky again that America is exceptional (which he argues with but can't come up with a better country) or to expect him to understand what socialism is (perhaps what O's doing is what he considers NOT SOCIALIST ENOUGH but most of us think it's plenty socialist enough) is a waste of time.

I think Beamish is right when he suggests we don't HAVE a generation of kids who are unindoctrinated enough to take over as WE would have them take over this country....following the constitution (understanding it, READING it in school might be a start, but..alas..), etc....I know plenty who are good kids but they're not driven to succeed, to be heroes because we don't let them have heroes anymore...but, that's not our subject here.

Newt is Newt...I'm not crazy about him and I hated that Pelosi/bench ad, as you all did, but there IS no Republican saint, folks...NONE...and, lately?...I'd just be happy with someone who loves this country and who stands up to threats from without and within. he's a suck-up and an egotist, what politician isn't? It actually hurts me to stand up for the guy this much (!) but who ELSE? Paul Ryan? Is he ready for prime time? I SURE DO LIKE HIM.

Tom...sounds like that commission hasn't much teeth to me...if our leadership does yield, the Republicans will win HANDILY every election for the next 20 years, and the WH knows that...that's my opinion, anyway!?

AlwaysOnWatch, it's a START. When some of you pick a better guy, let me know. As I said, I'm NOT A FAN OF NEWT's, really, but loved to hear someone talking like this again...

Elbro: "Divorce" Secession????

Z said...

FrogBurger, BRING ON THE NP! Let that do to far left Dems what Perot did to the Republicans!

Deborah on the Bayside said...

Great clip. Looks like a sales video for his book - and a tame one at that.

"Obama is a socialist." Well, er, yes, sort of. "Fascist" is more accurate - taking over control of the means of production rather than outright ownership. As in when he engineered the theft from GM's creditors (they stole a year's income from me) to give it to his union hacks.

"Original values", "freedom", "secular values" - not ill defined to the educated. Not at all. I can stand and deliver 5 minutes of clear, concise understanding of these terms that will have any constitutional originalist nodding their head in agreement. A lot of people understand what he means. Obviously, not all.

The left and right are not on the same track. We're not just looking at the same goals from different perspectives. We value freedom and understand it as a gift from God and in its context of risk and opportunity. The left values equality as a fetish - even if we're all equally in the same poor house. (That's why the UN rated the US on par with Cuba for health care - Cuba scored high on having less disparity of service levels where they all have miserable care, excluding the elite, natch).

Biggest point: the image of a steamroller machine crushing the life out of us. It's not all Obama. He could walk into the sunset today and nothing would change. He's only a symptom of the problem.

And don't get me started on "nanny state lovers" demanding employment improve and the nanny-in-chief as the only solution. You don't even need a course in Econ 101 to see how exactly backwards that is.

Z said...

Hi, Deborah "Great clip. Looks like a sales video for his book - and a tame one at that." ya THINK? :-) Ya, it sure is.
I think you're right about Obama only being a symptom, but he's also such a huge cheerleader that he helps the steam roller roll even faster than we all thought the day of his nightmarish election.

Some of you mention the Global Warming Bandwagon and that is problematic. It's one thing to say you support the environment and want to be careful, which we'd all agree with, it's another to be silly enough not to listen to the scientists who've got such a plethora of facts pretty much negating the human-caused problems which Gore started this whole nonsense with. Is Gingrich stupid enough to believe GORE? PELOSI? WHY? $$$$

It's a mess, this country's heading toward disaster and we have to stand behind someone, as I said, who at least wants what our forefathers had.....at least reads the constitution as they intended.....
But, do we have a next generation ready to take over? Not sure.

Ducky's here said...

For me to tell Ducky again that America is exceptional (which he argues with but can't come up with a better country) or to expect him to understand what socialism is (perhaps what O's doing is what he considers NOT SOCIALIST ENOUGH but most of us think it's plenty socialist enough) is a waste of time.

------------------

That's right, because you don't have the knowledge, just some emotions.

Exceptional? In what way and can you even start to demonstrate that the "exceptionalism" is the result of right wing policies. In fact you probably can't even start without invoking a "chosen people" argument and that is nonsense.

Although you may have some room to crow on Iraq. I have begun to wonder if the events there have not raised the possibility of a stronger democratic movement in Iran a they feel less external threats and can't pump up the nationalism. Time will tell.

Anyway, we'll be recovering from the economic mess started by Saint Ronnie Raygun for some time. The worst part of these threads is the right's absolute inability to take any responsibility for this failure.

Ducky's here said...

I have an idea why you do hold your beliefs,z, see what you think.

I divide the extreme right into two groups.

1. The doctrinaire Libertarians. This is a selfish little group of clowns who never progressed beyond fighting over the toys in the sand box. Seriously stunted.

2. The right wing religious. This is a different issue.

My take on a lot of that group is that they are indeed sincere and their motives may in fact be laudable. However, they can't understand why it hasn't worked out. Since they are operating under a theory of revealed truth it can't be their dogma so it must be some external enemy.
They start to blame the poor for their poverty and outsiders who are in conflict become enemies. It's a very dangerous idea and their ideal world can only be realized by military force. They are i a real trap. Calvinism does that ad this group is fr more dangerous than the childish Libertarians.

So no, luckily you are a distinct minority and you failed so miserably over the last 30 years that your day is over.

Anonymous said...

"However, they can't understand why it hasn't worked out."

Oh we understand perfectly. It hasn't worked out because of communist scum like yourself who would rather tear down a great country than move to Russia or China where the government controls everyone and everything.

Sam

Name: Soapboxgod said...

"1. The doctrinaire Libertarians. This is a selfish little group of clowns who never progressed beyond fighting over the toys in the sand box. Seriously stunted."

Those weren't the libertarians. The libertarians were content with their toys and their sandcastles all the while mindful of the right of the other kiddies to theirs.

It was the collectivists who ran around stomping on the sandcastles asserting that there exists no such thing as private property all the while staking a claim to each and everyone's toys.

Z said...

Ducky, I'm not ignoring you, I'll be gone nearly all day long...and might respond later. Also, I'd be more apt to respond if you'd stop with the egomaniacal tone of telling me what I THINK AND WHY and all your other unkindnesses.

Soapbox, GOOD ONE. and well said.

Sam...good point. WE are "not exceptional", per Ducky, but he still won't come up with the country that IS.

Anonymous said...

It never ceases to amaze me how DUCKY almost invariably becomes the center of attention, while the TOPIC at HAND -- in this case the generally-excellent-but-admittedly-imperfect NEWT GINGRICH -- gets MARGINALIZED.

How easily we are led astray! And here I am doing it too, by even MENTIONING this bizarre phenomenon.

If you want a PERFECT candidate, you will never be able to support ANYONE, because the only perfect person who ever lived was Jesus Christ, and HE ain't RUNINN.'

Try to look at it this way:

Would you rather have GINGRICH in the White House -- or Gore/Kerry/Obama?

If there's any doubt in your mind as to how to answer that question, you don't deserve to express an opinion.

~ FreeThinke

Elmers Brother said...

They start to blame the poor for their poverty and outsiders who are in conflict become enemies. It's a very dangerous idea and their ideal world can only be realized by military force. They are i a real trap. Calvinism does that ad this group is fr more dangerous than the childish Libertarians.

What Calvanist blames the poor?

Well we could go your route and blame everyone that actually produces something.

It's the stupid that's to blame.

duhkkky,

Z is not a Calvinist, unless of course you're so stupid as to lump every Protestant into the Calvinist camp.

Elmers Brother said...

Elbro: "Divorce" Secession????

It's an idea and it could be bloodless, like Norway and Sweden.

Elmers Brother said...

duhkkky please point out where these hordes of Calvinist extremists who want to take over the government are?

The Hutari? Registered democrats and independents.


I dare say all of us here would consider any such group just like the Taliban, terrorists. As long as you're going to marginalize those who believe extreme Islamism and its bent toward violence is a danger you might as well join the margins every time you spout this weird claptrap about giant Calvinist gangs roaming the country looking to overthrow the gubmint. Keep tuning that hat.

Name: Soapboxgod said...

I don't know that secession is even an option. Some of the research some of us with MN for Liberty have been working on suggests that such action would be even worse as doing so would resort us back to some sort of territorial status. Thus embedding us that much deeper into the tread of the Fed's boot.

Research is still ongoing....

Elmers Brother said...

divorce can be difficult and it's no picnic...

Elmers Brother said...

minority view

Elmers Brother said...

So no, luckily you are a distinct minority and you failed so miserably over the last 30 years that your day is over.

and your brand of social democracy has been successful where?

as long as you're talking about violence duhkkky why don't you come clean about how equating government social programs amount to legalized privaterring? it too can be at the point of a gun.

Debra's Diary said...

This puts it all into perspective...

If George W. Bush had been the first President to need a teleprompter installed to be able to get through a press conference, would you have laughed and said this is more proof of how inept he is on his own and is really controlled by smarter men behind the scenes?

If George W. Bush had spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to take Laura Bush to a play in NYC, would you have approved?

If George W. Bush had reduced your retirement plan's holdings of GM stock by 90% and given the unions a majority stake in GM, would you have approved?

If George W. Bush had made a joke at the expense of the Special Olympics, would you have approved?

If George W. Bush had given Gordon Brown a set of inexpensive and incorrectly formatted DVDs, when Gordon Brown had given him a thoughtful and historically significant gift, would you have approved?

If George W. Bush had given the Queen of England an iPod containing videos of his speeches, would you have thought this embarrassingly narcissistic and tacky?

If George W. Bush had bowed to the King of Saudi Arabia , would you have approved?

If George W. Bush had visited Austria and made reference to the non-existent "Austrian language," would you have brushed it off as a minor slip?

If George W.. Bush had filled his cabinet and circle of advisers with people who cannot seem to keep current in their income taxes, would you have approved?

If George W. Bush had stated that there were 57 states in the United States , would you have said that he is clueless?

If George W. Bush would have flown all the way toDenmark to make a five minute speech about how the Olympics would benefit him walking out his front door inTexas , would you have thought he was a self important, conceded, egotistical idiot ?

If George W. Bush had been so Spanish illiterate as to refer to "Cinco de Cuatro" in front of the Mexican ambassador when it was the 5th of May (Cinco de Mayo), and continued to flub it when he tried again, would you have winced in embarrassment?

If George W. Bush had mis-spelled the word "advice" would you have hammered him for it for years like Dan Quayle and potatoe as proof of what a dunce he is?

If George W. Bush had burned 9,000 gallons of jet fuel to go plant a single tree on Earth Day, would you have concluded he's a hypocrite?

If George W. Bush's administration had okayed Air Force One flying low over millions of people followed by a jet fighter in downtown Manhattan causing widespread panic, would you have wondered whether they actually get what happened on 9-11?

If George W. Bush had failed to send relief aid to flood victims throughout the Midwest with more people killed or made homeless than in New Orleans , would you want it made into a major ongoing political issue with claims of racism and incompetence?

If George W. Bush had created the position of 32 Czars who report directly to him, bypassing the House and Senate on much of what is happening in America , would you have approved?

If George W. Bush had ordered the firing of the CEO of a major corporation, even though he had no constitutional authority to do so, would you have approved?

If George W. Bush had proposed to double the national debt, which had taken more than two centuries to accumulate, in one year, would you have approved?

If George W. Bush had then proposed to double the debt again within 10 years, would you have approved?

So, tell me again, what is it about Obama that makes him so brilliant and impressive? Can't think of anything? Don't worry. He's done all this in 10 months -- so you'll have three years and two months to come up with an answ

Bloviating Zeppelin said...

I concur with Greywolfe. I can't buy the anthropogenic "Global Warming" hype. I admit we might be going through a cycle but it isn't necessarily warming and it isn't necessarily a crisis, omigod, the sky is falling.

I like the message; the messenger, since his AGW bandwagon-jumping, leaves me predominantly tepid.

BZ

Z said...

Elbro, you did better with Ducky than I could....just got home and was pleased to read all the comments, thanks, everybody. No, Ducky knows I'm no Calvinist and he knows I don't listen to RUSH but he persists; I guess those are the two biggest evils he can come up with and he enjoys labeling me as he wishes.

FT, Ducky gets discussed the most because he has the differing viewpoint...makes sense to me. And, I think it is important (if tiresome :-)

Debra's Diary...actually, Ducky isn't an obama fan; "he's not leftist ENOUGH". But, he doesn't insult him with quite the vigor that he uses on Republicans.
Good list...very appropriate..the hypocrisy is AMAZING, isn't it? :-)

Soapbox, it is a very interesting subject, secession, etc...none I ever thought we'd have to discuss only 10 years ago, did you? Maybe so...

BZ..cyclical is right and MANY excellent scientists say so (remember the scandal in Britain? WHERE DID THAT GO? It practically proved that the Gore side's scientists are lying, obfuscating, hiding truth, but we don't have an operating media anymore and it died away...leaving our idiot kids without any balance at all, they're learning nothing but that NYC will be under 20' of water in four years or something!)

Ducky...you say this "1. The doctrinaire Libertarians. This is a selfish little group of clowns who never progressed beyond fighting over the toys in the sand box. Seriously stunted.

2. The right wing religious. This is a different issue."

your biggest mistake is thinking I'm extreme right. Sorry. No, there are many in the middle and so you start at a silly and untrue premise and continue blindly.

"outsiders who are in conflict become enemies." The Right didn't make enemies of islamists, THEY DID, Ducky. Who the hell cared about how many muslims were in America until 9/11? DID YOU? I never gave them a second thought.

That's enough for me...Some of your comment wasn't far off the beam and I have things I could say but you wear me out with the nastiness and presumptions... why bother? Think what you like.

Anonymous said...

"Would you rather have GINGRICH in the White House -- or Gore/Kerry/Obama?

If there's any doubt in your mind as to how to answer that question, you don't deserve to express an opinion."

FT, you pretty much sum it up. I agree. I'm late coming on here, and I'll not go to great lengths to repeat what you've said.

You are right. No one is perfect. Newt has given dozens of speeches, and has been consistent in his belief in the Constitution, and in America as she was meant to be.

I know this much, Newt could debate Obama under the table. He may not even run, but if he does, perhaps a wiser, older statesman who loves this country, would appeal to an electorate weary and in need of a positive, unapologetic message about America!

Pris

Anonymous said...

Thanks, Pris.

Z, said "... Who the hell cared about how many Muslims were in America until 9/11? DID YOU? I never gave them a second thought...."

And THAT sure hit at least one important nail right on the head, Z.

What's so weird is that no one cared much one way or the other about a Muslim Presence here, but after we were viciously ATTACKED, we've suddenly acted as though the ONLY DECENT THINGS to DO would be to APPEASE and KOWTOW to MUSLIMS.

HUH?

~ FreeThinke

FrogBurger said...

"I have an idea why you do hold your beliefs,z, see what you think."

Like you don't hold yours?

Don't you think you're in your little sandbox as well or should I say your pond?

Except your vision of society hasn't led to anything. Proven by history, stats and facts, including new ones like Greece. And I'm not counting the millions of people killed by communists, marxist fascists (Laval, Mussolini, Hitler), Mao, etc...

So don't come lecture us. We may be holding to our beliefs but your holding to your insanity.

So go give lectures to the asylum.

Leticia said...

I agreed with all of it. My two favorite parts that stood out was Washington's march across the Delaware and the password, "victory or death." That should be the Tea Party war cry.

Most importantly and I couldn't get all of the quote but this really stood out for me. He said, "We need to reach and not only defeat the Left but insist upon a principled conservatism."

Amen!

beamish said...

Gingrich is Secretary of State material. I don't see him as of presidential caliber, but that's a nitpick concern not really all that illuminating in this environment where even non-qualified staple gun loaders of questionable citizenship status can become President. But Newt as SecState, hell yeah.

On another note, to understand Ducky one must acknowledge that he hails from the marginal but noisy 5% of the electorate that calls itself "far leftist" on purpose. Leftism being the magnet of imbecility that it is, Ducky's stuck on the pole seeing "right-wing" in every direction.

Karen Howes said...

I agree with what he says, but as was said here already, I don't trust Gingrich.

Actually, there are damn few politicians that I DO trust.

rosewood59 said...

I will not support Newt. I'm white, old, conservative, and even more politically cautious than ever since Bush (whom it took me almost 8 years to want to be rid of him... then to Obama, who is, in my opinion, a traitor to America.

Newt is old news. HE should go away and let young men and women with more scruples deal with our national political adgenda.

He didn't fight the right fight at the right time.

Anonymous said...

Newt has a good face. No one his age could look so benign if he didn't have good character and a clear conscience.

If he weren't pragmatic, he would never have survived this long. Idealists die fast in politics.

~ FT

Mona said...

Is Ducky a real person, or does Geeez just post whatever the most idiotic leftist would say? Maybe it is a HuffPo column writer?

Greywolfe said...

Unfortunately Mona, Ducky is the real deal. He graces several of the blogs I frequent with his drive by drivel.

I will say, however, that I've pretty much weaned him from posting his extreme stupidity. I just flat refuse to post it. So, he doesn't try at the Oklahoma Patriot too often anymore.

Z said...

Greywolfe and Mona, this isn't anything I can't prevent, I want people to read Ducky.
I've had bloggers email me about him, I've had one here say she doesn't visit GeeeeZ much because she can't stand to read Ducky....
I think it's important and I think we all learn from others who argue so eloquently with him...
I do NOT want all Conservatives here, either, I really don't...I love you guys but I want to hear differing viewpoints; it's the only way we can learn...to ARGUE WELL, at least :-)

Z said...

PRISCILLA! OH, YES...I WOULD ABSOLUTELY LOVE TO SEE NEWT DEBATE OBAMA!!

I couldn't watch much of Obama's 'press conference' today tho I try to stay up to date....he's so halting and so unsure and has to think everything out so awkwardly I'm fairly certain he's just not very up on what's going on...man, he was DIGGING for what to say. No wonder he's not done a press conference in MONTHS.

Elmers Brother said...

Newsflash Arizona:

I've alerted the Border Patrol to be on the look out for armed Calvinists. I gave them this description:

They're carrying KJ Bibles, armed, smoking cigars, looking for poor people to shoot and they have a portable baptistry in the back of their truck.

Anonymous said...

Ducky,
Libertarians are selfish kids who say "I'm gonna take my toys and go home." Leftists are selfish kids who say "I'm going to take your toys and go home."

We need a stimulus to create demand? What creates demand? Answer: Supply. See Say's Law.

Why do you always assume the individuals making their own economic decisions will be so much more myopic than government? Comparing my 401k savings to how government has done with social security suggests they are the myopic ones.

Economic mess started by Saint Ronnie....blah, blah, blah. Oh, for the Carter years.

It's only right wing nuts who think Obama is a socialist...and the Huffington Post, which can't figure out why Obama isn't embracing the title.

Banks are failing so we need more government regulation. Except it is regulated, thus ensuring that the banks can loan out more money than they have. If you're advocating the govt enforcing full reserve banking, you may have a point. Otherwise you're suggesting that the cause of all the missing hens is that there aren't enough foxes guarding them.

--tio

Anonymous said...

I agree with the secularist statement. I think Obama is happy to push such an agenda while too many people are distracted by claims of muslimism.

tio

Z said...

tio, I think Obama's the king of diversion......I think he's happy to have people nagging about WHERE IS THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE?, too...bills are being signed and we're not hearing about them .. the conservatives are too busy complaining about him and the mainstream media's too busy obfuscating his actions and covering up for him.

happy happy happy..what does HE care as long as his puppet master is happy as he pulls O's strings?

beamish said...

Greywolfe, heh! I lowered the minimal IQ prerequisite for commenters at my blog to 84 so leftist like Ducky could participate. This after the 86 IQ prerequsite was shutting all leftists out.

Elmers Brother said...

and in related news the FBI just arrested a group of Calvinists living here illegally, apparently they were living in Boston (sanctuary city) had applied for jobs as taxi drivers. The police were well aware of who they were but were powerless to do anything, but they crossed the line when they decided to fund a potluck.

Z said...

Elbro, you've got me scared now....I saw a bunch of Calvinist Moms the other day with their preschool kids and I'm PRETTY sure they had rounds of ammo under their sunsuits and were telling them how to go kill Buddhists.

Z said...

Ducky, I 've been thinking about a couple of your comments..first this one:

"Exceptional? In what way and can you even start to demonstrate that the "exceptionalism" is the result of right wing policies."

In earlier days, the right AND left cared about our exceptionalism and did things for other countries (like saving their populations in WWII and putting an end to that war so we could save even more people)....Mr. Z could never believe how much charity we do, saying that European countries NEVER do anything like that on the macro OR micro (like Americans take food to neighbors in times of trouble, or send Teddy Bears to kids in Katrina, etc..that NEVER happens in Europe)...I could go on and on.. America built the best products for years, they were there when other countries needed them, etc etc...freedom of religion for anybody, freedom to be as successful as anybody wanted...
I've never suggested that nothing the left's done is good..never.

Another thing you said was this:

"My take on a lot of that group is that they are indeed sincere and their motives may in fact be laudable. However, they can't understand why it hasn't worked out. Since they are operating under a theory of revealed truth it can't be their dogma so it must be some external enemy.
They start to blame the poor for their poverty and outsiders who are in conflict become enemies. It's a very dangerous idea and their ideal world can only be realized by military force. They are i a real trap. Calvinism does that ad this group is fr more dangerous than the childish Libertarians.

So no, luckily you are a distinct minority and you failed so miserably over the last 30 years that your day is over."

Don't look now, but that DISTINCT MINORITY thing you keep bringing up is just plain wrong and you know that.

Elbro covered the ridiculous Calvinism claims so I'll let his words speak for themselves.
As for blaming the poor..yes, America's given SO MUCH to the poor and now we're demanded to give give give when our fortunes are sinking because of them, and I'm referring, of course, to illegal poor. that's pretty obvious...ya, darned if Americans aren't justifiably a little ticked off!???
Outsiders who are in conflict maybe ought to just stay on the outside...why come here and complain?
Why is it that my 'revealed truth' isn't okay, but you'll stand by any muslim mosque in a heartbeat?
My revealed truth tells me to give to the poor out of my own compassion, not force, my revealed truth shows me that this country has had the hand of God on it and that secularism is causing bigger problems than this country's founders ever dreamed of.

I could go on but what's the point?

Anonymous said...

"I will not support Newt. I'm white, old, conservative, and even more politically cautious than ever since Bush (whom it took me almost 8 years to want to be rid of him... then to Obama, who is, in my opinion, a traitor to America."

Rosewood59, Did you vote for McCain or stay home? We cannot afford to risk the far-left being in power for two more years, let alone eight years.

On his worst day, McCain wouldn't have done the damage Obama's already done. If you're waiting for the perfect candidate, you'll have a very long wait.

When it comes to Newt, I find it hard to believe any conservative would risk Obama being re-elected.

Besides, it's too early to discuss 2012. November 2010 is more urgent and will be upon us in no time.

We have to keep our eye on the prize, and right now, the prize is Congress!

Pris

Anonymous said...

An aside to Tom:

I seriously believe that INDIVIDUAL rights should trump HUMAN rights every single time.

We are a collection of distinct, unique INDIVIDUALS with definite characteristics in common that define us as a species, BUT our INDIVIDUALITY is what makes us HUMAN. Each of us has a SOUL, and each of us is responsible -- as an INDIVIDUAL -- for working out our OWN salvation.

There is no such thing as COLLECTIVE Salvation. We are judged purely as INDIVIDUALS.

~ FreeThinke

Anonymous said...

"I think Obama's the king of diversion......I think he's happy to have people nagging about WHERE IS THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE?, too...bills are being signed and we're not hearing about them .. the conservatives are too busy complaining about him and the mainstream media's too busy obfuscating his actions and covering up for him.

Happy happy happy..what does HE care as long as his puppet master is happy as he pulls O's strings?"


A perfect summation of what the Obama presidency is REALLY all about -- or so it seems to me.

Thank you for putting it so succinctly, Z.

Yes, indeed, WE rage, while THEY stage.


~ FT

Z said...

FT..I just left the TV to do something but FORGET Cavuto was going to cover this very fact..
Apparently, people are starting to notice this pattern of o's people creating bigger stories than needed so the REAL big stories don't come up on the Conservative media (they wouldn't in the loving mainstream, anyway)...yup, and look at the holidays...Isn't it just ODD that they FINALLY REMEMBERED it's CLINTON who talked to Sestak (GASP!) just before MEMORIAL DAY?, which a friend reminded me of via email early this morning before ANY paid talking pundits were waking up?

Elmers Brother said...

Z,

those were the deacons in the back of that truck.