New Gingrich Ad Asks, "What Kind Of Man Would Deceive?"

And the answer is "this man".

Wow. They're using stuff from last night's debate. Talk about rapid response...

UPDATE: Mike Huckabee responds to the use of his clip in the above ad:

Any use of an out of context quote from the Republican Presidential primary 4 years ago in a political ad to advocate for the election or defeat of another candidate is not authorized, approved, or known in advance by me. I have made it clear that I have not and do not anticipate making an endorsement in the GOP primary, but will support the nominee. My hope is to defeat Barack Obama and win majorities in both the House and Senate, not to attack any of the Presidential candidates who might be our nominee.

Well, the boat sailed on that one Huck because Newt TOTALLY used you to smear Mitt Romney.

Just sayin'.

Read More

Sh*t Samuel L. Jackson Says (NSFW)

WARNING: Totally and completely NSFW.

I am so utterly tired of the "sh*t [insert group of people here] says" meme. But, I thought this one was good, because the dude's impression of Samuel L. Jackson is spot-on.

Some humor for your Friday afternoon. Just make sure you turn down your speakers and that there are no children nearby...

Read More

Ron Paul "Signed Off" On Controversial Newsletters

It appears that the kindly Congressman from Texas hasn't been telling the truth:

Ron Paul, well known as a physician, congressman and libertarian , has also been a businessman who pursued a marketing strategy that included publishing provocative, racially charged newsletters to make money and spread his ideas, according to three people with direct knowledge of Paul’s businesses.

The Republican presidential candidate has denied writing inflammatory passages in the pamphlets from the 1990s and said recently that he did not read them at the time or for years afterward. Numerous colleagues said he does not hold racist views.

But people close to Paul’s operations said he was deeply involved in the company that produced the newsletters, Ron Paul & Associates, and closely monitored its operations, signing off on articles and speaking to staff members virtually every day.

“It was his newsletter, and it was under his name, so he always got to see the final product. . . . He would proof it,’’ said Renae Hathway, a former secretary in Paul’s company and a supporter of the Texas congressman.

Heretofore, Ron Paul has maintained that he didn't have editorial control of the newsletters in question (for the long backstory, check out James Kirchick's 2008 article at The New Republic), and that the controversial material had been written by a 'ghost-writer'.

Over at OTB, Doug responds to the newest chapter in this saga:

One of the reasons that Paul gets a break on some of this stuff, is simply because of his steadfastness on issues of principles. I can certainly understand that, but at some point one has to stand up and denounce something that’s wrong, and Paul not only didn’t do that in the 1990s, he apparently consciously decided to appeal to it in order to make his business more profitable. Far be it from me to deny someone the right to make a profit, but when you do it by pandering to base racial hatreds you’ve got some questions to answer for it. Whether one believes in those ideas or not, providing voice to them is a tacit endorsement, especially if one if a former Congressman and Presidential candidate.

My emphasis.

This latest revelation will likely have very little, if any affect on his most ardent supporters. They are the 'true believers' who think that the political establishment is trying to silence their candidate-of-choice.

BUT, I think that cumulative effect of this story has single-handedly ruined Ron Paul's chances of higher office. He could still act as something of a kingmaker if the GOP primary goes to a brokered convention (which it won't), but any thoughts of a cabinet position -- much less a VP consideration -- are long gone.

------
Photo: A. Nelles/ZUMA Press/Newscom

Read More

Nomination For The Craziest Campaign Ad This Year

Wow.

Note to candidates for public office: comparing anything to slavery is a bad idea. Whether it's in a speech or in a campaign ad, people will not react well.

In fact, I would argue that it's up there with comparing your political opponent(s) with Adolf Hitler on the list of "things that you probably shouldn't do".

Read More

The Tide Turns For Newt Gingrich (Again)

Dude. What happened Newt?

Seriously. One week ago, you were the darling of the Republican party. You stood up for yourself and swatted every attack that came your direction. By most accounts you won the debates in South Carolina, which (undoubtedly) carried you to a primary victory in the Palmetto State.

But last night, that candidate all-but disappeared.

I watched the 1,208,317th debate last night on CNN and I have to say Newt, you got clobbered by Mitt Romney. None of your attacks stuck. All of his rhetorical punches landed with a resounding 'thud'. Bruised and battered was your political appearance by the conclusion.

That's not to say that you didn't give it your best.

For example, this exchange with newsman and moderator Wolf Blitzer was priceless:

WOLF BLITZER: We're continuing the debate here in Jacksonville, Florida.

Let's get to the issue of transparency, because voters out there, they want to know as much about you four gentlemen as possible before they vote.

Tax returns - let me bring this to Speaker Gingrich.

Earlier this week, you said Governor Romney, after he released his taxes, you said that you were satisfied with the level of transparency of his personal finances when it comes to this. And I just want to reiterate and ask you, are you satisfied right now with the level of transparency as far as his personal finances?

NEWT GINGRICH: Wolf, you and I have a great relationship, it goes back a long way. I'm with [Rick Santorum]. This is a nonsense question. [APPLAUSE, CHEERS FROM CROWD] Look, how about if the four of us agree for the rest of the evening, we'll actually talk about issues that relate to governing America?

BLITZER: But, Mr. Speaker, you made an issue of this, this week, when you said that, "He lives in a world of Swiss bank and Cayman Island bank accounts." I didn't say that. You did.

GINGRICH: I did. And I'm perfectly happy to say that on an interview on some TV show. But this is a national debate, where you have a chance to get the four of us to talk about a whole range of issues.

BLITZER: But if you make a serious accusation against Governor Romney like that, you need to explain that. [BOOS AND JEERS FROM CROWD]

Newt, you have the Republican audience eating conservative fruit right out of your hand! Fantastic! Now, bring it on home with a slam on the liberal media, and you'll have this thing all wrapped up, with a pretty bow on top!

Then, just when I thought that your fellow Republican candidates would help you pile-on Wolf Blitzer for asking "nonsense questions", Mitt Romney jumps in:

Wouldn't it be nice if people didn't make accusations somewhere else that they weren't willing to defend here?

Damn.

That's where I think that the tide turned for you Newt.

There are lots of folks saying that last night's debate was your 'last chance' to make a stand Newt -- and I have to say that I am starting to agree. You surged upward in the polls last fall, then fell off. Last week, after some great debate performances and a strong finish in South Carolina's primary, you got another bounce in the polls, but have fallen off once again.

Unless there is some kind of game-changer (like, winning the Florida primary on Tuesday, for example), I really don't see how you come back again.

Time and time again, I have heard from those who support Newt Gingrich -- as well as from the former Speaker of the House himself -- that a chief reason for backing his candidacy in the Republican primary is his superior debating skill. Many a supporter has argued that Gingrich will be able to defeat Barack Obama in a series of Lincoln-Douglas style debates (over which, you seem to be obsessed Newt). After your performance last night, I would LOVE to hear from Gingrich supporters regarding this theory. It seems to me that Mitt Romney debated circles around you Newt. And that is being generous.

On Wednesday, GOP12's Christian Heinze outlined the reasons that the 'Newt-As-A-Superior-Debater' argument simply doesn't work. And there are three very good reasons...

Look Newt, I'm not telling you how to run your show. Clearly, you are a far-more experienced politician than I. However, I would argue that your continued candidacy in the 2012 primary for the Republican nomination will not help the eventual nominee.

Whomever that may be (*cough* ROMNEY *cough*).

Read More

Mitt Romney: We Can't Afford To Take A Risk On Newt

Wow. And this one is from the Mitt Romney campaign, not some shadowy surrogate SuperPAC.

Read More

How Will Newt Gingrich Survive In Florida?

...if he has to sustain political advertisements like these:





Both of these ads are from Restore America's Future, Mitt Romney's SuperPAC. And man, they are effective.

As an independent, I cannot vote in the primary election in Pennsylvania. But if I could vote, and I had been subjected to a major ad-buy of this nature -- as I'm sure that the folks in Florida have -- there's no way that I would vote for Newt Gingrich.

Read More

Mitt Romney Tells The Truth

Mitt Romney concedes to radio host Laura Ingraham that it will be a tough argument to get people to vote for a Republican if the economy continues to get stronger.

Here is the much talked-about back-and-forth:

LAURA INGRAHAM: You’ve also noted that there are signs of improvement on the horizon in the economy. How do you answer the president’s argument that the economy is getting better in a general election campaign if you yourself are saying it’s getting better?

MITT ROMNEY: Well, of course it’s getting better. The economy always gets better after a recession, there is always a recovery. There's never been a time anywhere in the world where an economy has never recovered. The question is, has it recovered by virtue of something the President's done or has he delayed the recovery and made it more painful?

The latter is, of course, the truth. The President's policies have made it, have made this recession deeper, and have made the recovery more tepid, more difficult on the American people. This is the worst recovery we've seen from a recession since Hoover. And President Obama wants to take credit for things getting better, he in fact has made things worse. He's made this recovery take much longer.

But will our economy get better someday? Of course it will, and it will not be thanks to the President Obama. It will be in spite of President Obama, and that's of course the message we have to give. If people think the right course for improving an economy is to massively expand debt and grow the government, well they can vote for Barack Obama. But, we know better.

INGRAHAM: Isn’t it a hard argument to make if you’re saying, like, OK, he inherited this recession, he took a bunch of steps to try to turn the economy around, and now, we’re seeing more jobs, but vote against him anyway? Isn’t that a hard argument to make? Is that a stark enough contrast?

ROMNEY: Have you got a better one, Laura? (laughs) It just happens to be the truth. We're going to see the numbers, in terms of how the economy does. It's very possible, by the way, that the economy will go into a decline again. I can't tell you that I can predict that's it going to get better. But I think at some point it's going to get better.

I have to say, it's probably the most surreal thing that I've heard any of the GOP candidates say thus far in the 2012 primary campaign -- and Gingrich has suggested an American moon-base by 2020.

I think that I can hear Newt Gingrich's opposition research team drooling....

Read More

Quote Of The Day: Tom DeLay Dumps On Newt Gringrich

"What has been said about Newt is pretty much true. He had to step down because Republicans, conservative Republicans, wouldn't vote for him again as Speaker. Because he's not really a conservative. I mean, he'll tell you what you want to hear. He has an uncanny ability, sort of like Clinton, to feel your pain and know his audience and speak to his audience and fire them up. But when he was speaker, he was erratic, undisciplined." -former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-TX), in a radio interview with KTRH-AM in Houston, Texas.

Head nod: Taegan Goddard

Read More

Bob Dole UNLOADS On Newt Gingrich

Daaaaaaaaaaaang:

I have not been critical of Newt Gingrich but it is now time to take a stand before it is too late. If Gingrich is the nominee it will have an adverse impact on Republican candidates running for county, state, and federal offices. Hardly anyone who served with Newt in Congress has endorsed him and that fact speaks for itself. He was a one-man-band who rarely took advice. It was his way or the highway.

Gingrich served as Speaker from 1995 to 1999 and had trouble within his own party. By 1997 a number of House Republican members wanted to throw him out as Speaker. But he hung on until after the 1998 elections when Newt could read the writing on the wall. His mounting ethics problems caused him to resign in early 1999. I know whereof I speak as I helped establish a line of credit of $150,000 to help Newt pay off the fine for his ethics violations. In the end, he paid the fine with money from other sources.

Gingrich had a new idea every minute and most of them were off the wall. He loved picking a fight with President Clinton because he knew this would get the attention of the press. This and a myriad of other specifics like shutting down the government helped to topple Gingrich in 1998.

In my run for the presidency in 1996 the Democrats greeted me with a number of negative TV ads and in every one of them Newt was in the ad. He was very unpopular and I am not only certain that this did not help me, but that it also cost House seats that year. Newt would show up at the campaign headquarters with an empty bucket in his hand — that was a symbol of some sort for him — and I never did know what he was doing or why he was doing it, and I’m not certain he knew either.

The Democrats are spending millions of dollars running negative ads against Romney as they are hoping that Gingrich will be the nominee which could result in a landslide victory for Obama and a crushing defeat for Republicans from the courthouse to the White House. Democrats are not running ads against Gingrich which is further proof they want to derail Governor Romney.

In my opinion if we want to avoid a sweeping victory by Obama in November, Republicans should nominate Governor Romney as our standard bearer. He could win because he has the requisite experience in the public and private sectors. He would be a president in whom we could have confidence and he would make us proud.

I wonder if anyone will mention this in the debate tonight...

Read More

The Wealth Of Statesmen (Infographic)

An interesting (and timely infographic regarding Mitt Romney's wealth -- and taxation.


Created by: Online MBA Programs

Read More

Hard Wuerk

-M.Wuerker, Wuerking Drawings

Read More