Thank you for visiting Ohio.com. We noticed you are using an outdated browser that may not give you the best user experience. We recommend current browser versions of Google’s Chrome, Microsoft’s Edge, Mozilla’s Firefox. For more specific information on how to update your browser --Click Here or visit your browser’s website.
The Village media....always working to inform it's readers about what they really need to know....are spinning Romney's $10,000 bet offer to Rick Perry over something Mitt said or did not say in his book, as something of great profundity that came out of Saturday night's debate. I find little-to-no significance in that exchange....but I did find some other interesting tidbits.
Michele Bachmann, first on Gingrich...then on both Romney and Gingrich...
Well, when you're talking about taking over $100 million, and when your office is on the Rodeo Drive of Washington D.C., which is K Street, and you're taking money to influence the outcome of legislation in Washington, that's the epitome of the establishment, that's the epitome of a consummate insider.
If you look at-- at-- at Newt/Romney, they were for ObamaCare principles. If you look at Newt/Romney, they were for cap and trade. If you look at Newt/Romney, they were for the illegal immigration problem. And if you look at (LAUGH) Newt/Romney, they were for the $700 billion bailout. And you just heard Newt/Romney is also with Obama on the issue of the payroll extension.
The GOP frontruner, Newt Gingrich, is the ultimate Washington insider, "the epitome of the establishment." Never has a truer statement been made by any politician. Small government TEA Party crusaders claim that they do not want a Washington establishment insider as their candidate. Yet, Newt leads in most polls with under a month to the first primary in Iowa. Either Newt's lead contains no TEA Party support and his lead is based entirely on establishment type conservative voters.....an unlikely scenario....or TEA Party claims opposing establishment types are suspect.
Secondly, Bachmann spoke correctly when she said that both Romney and Gingrich have agreed on principle with several policy points which the dreaded President Obama has supported, or made into law. Bachmann was trying to highlight the flip-flop factor (new band name?) which has been painfully obvious in the careers of both Newt and Mitt. While saying one thing and doing another is standard operating procedure for most politicians....Bachmann reminded viewers, and particularly TEA viewers, that both Romney and Gingrich have stood diametrically opposed to conservative movement principles. On immigration, climate change, the individual health insurance mandate and even on the payroll tax cut......Romney and Gingrich once agreed, or agree now, with the Dark Kenyan Socialist President...the one who has taken our country away from us.
Gingrich's WTF moment....
I've said up-front openly I've made mistakes at times. I've had to go to God for forgiveness. I've had to seek reconciliation. But I'm also a 68-year-old grandfather. And I think people have to measure who I am now...
I'm sorry Newt, that's a crock. Gingrich has had three wives. His first two marriages ended because of Newt's penchant to cheat. Newt calls cheating on two wives while still being married...."mistakes." I wonder if Newt would tell his odd-looking wife, Callista, that what he was doing with her while he was still married was a "mistake." I wonder. Further, god is invisible and doesn't communicate with humanity....so it's always an automatic cop-out when self-absorbed megalomaniacs "go to God for forgiveness." Basically, such a statement is sanctimonious and meaningless. Newt didn't offend any invisible god...he offended his first two wives. Any talk of reconciliation which leaves out the actual offended parties is....well....warmed over bunk.
But that's only the half of it. Newt seems to claim that either his age, 68, or his family status, grandfather, negates his tendency in the past to make, you know, "mistakes". It was a pathetic response to accusations that Gingrich has little integrity. It was a call by Newt to conservative voters, basically stating that, 'yes, my past is filled with many ugly "mistakes" leading folks to doubt my integrity...but that's not who I am now." It was one of Newt's weakest moments.
Finally, there was Ron Paul's spanking of Newt Gingrich. If you've been paying attention, you know that Newt came out a few days ago with this statement.....
"Remember, there was no Palestine as a state. It was part of the Ottoman Empire," Gingrich told the Jewish Channel,..."And I think that we've have invented the Palestinian people, who are in fact Arabs and are historically part of the Arab community, and they had the chance to go many places."
Naturally, Gingrich's purpose in setting off that IED was to bait conservative Jewish donors as well as bait evangelical conservatives who await the Rapture after Israel "reclaims" all it's god-given land and rebuilds their Temple in Jerusalem. Devious men, like Gingrich, know what they are doing when they do it.
But the notion that the Palestinians are an "invented people" presented as some kind of defense for unwaveringly supporting Israel is so preposterous and so inaccurate that it only took Ron Paul a couple lines to shatter Newt's nastiness.....
But to go out of our way and say that so-and-so is not a real people? Technically and historically, yes-- you know, under the Ottoman Empire, the Palestinians didn't have a state,
but neither did Israel have a state then too.
One postcript from the debate which I thought captured the essence of a Mitt Romney-for-president bid