Newt Gingrich

Inexplicably, some Republican primary voters have refused to see through the piles and piles of bullshit being shoveled around by one of the biggest pieces of lying, manipulative garbage to have ever graced the Republican party (and that's saying something) - Newt Gingrich.

As I have explained more than once previously, Newt Gingrich is a big government Progressive.  He may sound like he is intelligently espousing some sort of grandiose conservative reasoning, but his record speaks for itself.  Newt Gingrich loves FDR, Teddy Roosevelt, and Woodrow Wilson [1] - the trifecta of the Progressive disease.

News has broken today that after railing against Mitt Romney over private equity partnerships and their involvement in the business sector, it turns out Gingrich himself has taken $60,000 to speak in support of private equity partnerships, continuing his long extra-logical affair with two-faced baloney [2].  In the Gingrich hit piece against Romney [2a], he accuses Romney's Bain Capital of 'vulture capitalism' for sometimes liquidating companies, putting them through bankruptcy, and laying off employees.  The modern patient zero for the Progressive disease, the Center for American Progress (CrAP), has echoed the Gingrich claims of 'vulture capitalism' almost word for word.

There are only a few slight problems with the claims made by Gingrich's video (which was technically run by a SuperPAC) and CrAP:  Bain Capital almost exclusively bought into failing companies.  In other words, companies which were already about to go under.  CrAP does, of course, completely ignore this (as does Gingrich) in their criticism of Romney [3]:

In fact, 22 percent of the companies in which Bain invested wound up either in bankruptcy or shutting their doors entirely, while Bain itself has made billions of dollars for its investors.

CrAP is complaining that of the failing companies Bain Capital purchased, 22% wound up in bankruptcy or were otherwise destroyed.  To anyone not completely infected with the Progressive disease, this should actually mean that 78% of the failing companies Bain Capital purchased were not driven into bankruptcy.  They may have had layoffs, restructuring, outsourcing of labor, etc., but they were kept alive.  Romney gets no credit whatsoever for an apparent 78% success rate, however.

The Progressive answer to these failing companies, of course, would have been to bail them out with taxpayer funds [4], get them to "retool" [5] and produce a product the market doesn't want [6], wildly under perform in sales of the unwanted product by selling only 7,000 in an annual market of 17,000,000 [6] (even though you have hyped its performance by claiming it gets 230 mpg [7] when it actually only gets 36 mpg [8]), have the taxpayer further subsidize the product by up to $250,000 per unit [9] (approximately 780% of the product's sale price [10]), not be able to repay all of the taxpayer loans and wind up losing $23.5 billion of the $60 billion [11] from the taxpayer 'investment,' then have to recall every product sold because it spontaneously catches on fire [12], and finally consider moving production of this great 'American product' to China [13].

Of course, the evil Romney/Bain Capital plan would have been to put the failing company through an organized bankruptcy.  Sure, workers would have been laid off, but the company would have emerged from bankruptcy either restructured or owned by someone else - either way, those workers would again be needed.  Progressives consistently fall victim (of their own doing) to the false belief that capital equipment simply vanishes from the face of the Earth when a company goes bankrupt.  It doesn't.  Somebody else is usually there to purchase the bankrupt assets and rebuild from the ground up.  Incidentally, that's similar to how General Motors began [14].

As if all of these problems weren't enough to bring down Newt Gingrich for the lying, hypocritical, two-faced piece of garbage that he is, his second ex-wife (the woman he was cheating on his first wife with and who he divorced after cheating on her with his current wife who is 23 years younger) has apparently recorded a two hour interview with ABC News [15] which she noted could "end his career."

I bet it could.

The question is, after all of the lying, hypocrisy, cheating, scheming, and abject stupidity coming from Newt Gingrich, why would what one of his ex-wives says have the slightest impact?

Because this time it will be personal and it will be from a woman [15].

Look out, Newt.  Even I don't think you'll be able to stop that disaster from sinking your fledgling candidacy.

In love of liberty (and marital fidelity),

The Bulletproof Patriot

<>

  • blogger Blog this!
  • digg Digg this post
  • facebook Recommend on Facebook
  • google_buzz Buzz it up
  • linkedin Share on Linkedin
  • stumble Share with Stumblers
  • twitter Tweet about it
  • rss Subscribe to the comments on this post
  • print Print for later

As the Republican presidential primary race draws closer, the same old broken records are back at it:  'if Newt Gingrich is the Republican nominee, we all have to pull in the wagons around him because anything is better than a second Obama term.'  This expected party establishment nonsense seems to come up every year and has most recently cropped up at The Right Scoop in a criticism of Glenn Beck for considering supporting a third party candidate over Gingrich [1]:

This is suicide and it doesn’t get any simpler this: voting third party on our side for whomever guarantees Obama a victory [sic]. That’s it. And if Newt’s the nominee and Beck wants to go that road, then I tell him what I tell others: enjoy the hell that will be a second Obama term.

I’ve made my position clear about Newt. He’s not my guy, but if he’s the nominee, I’ll run to the polls to vote for him and I’d encourage all of you to do the same.

Not voting for whatever Progressive Republican party establishment candidate the media and primary voters cook up to run as the token 'conservative' is "suicide?"  Excuse me, but since when does bailing out the country with yet another Progressive solve anyone's problems?

Anyone who is willing to "run to the polls" to vote for a Progressive-lite candidate simply because he's better than the current Progressive in office is an idiot.  The point is not to support the lesser Progressive - it's to support no Progressive, and until we figure that out we're doomed to wallow in our current filth.

This country was born out of rebellion, principle, and honor.  It's high time we strap on a pair and give that whole "principle" thing another shot.

In love of liberty,

The Bulletproof Patriot

<>

P.S.  I guess we can't expect much from a source that has also pulled the Progressive trick of seeing racism behind every corner - The Right Scoop is now accusing Glenn Beck of calling the TEA Party racists because they're supporting Gingrich over Obama [a].  Beck has clearly and consistently defended the TEA Party against charges of racism before and it's clear that the point Beck is making is that if the TEA Party chooses Newt Gingrich, there must be something else going on - Gingrich and Obama are both different forms of the Progressive disease.  Choosing either is suicide.

But, it looks as if a third party will eventually have to arise out of pure necessity.  The Democratic party has been completely overtaken by Progressives (their only concern now is when to break out the Karl Marx beards).  The Republican party is filled with intellectual degenerates such as The Right Scoop, willing to discard principles for power, and is all but sunk.  The Progressive disease has almost entirely destroyed the patient.

Oh well.  I guess The Right Scoop is just another in a long line of principle-free Republican party rags I can completely write off.

  • blogger Blog this!
  • digg Digg this post
  • facebook Recommend on Facebook
  • google_buzz Buzz it up
  • linkedin Share on Linkedin
  • stumble Share with Stumblers
  • twitter Tweet about it
  • rss Subscribe to the comments on this post
  • print Print for later

Proving further that stupidity is in no threat of shortage in America, "conservative" dipshit radio host Michael Savage today offered Newt Gingrich a bribe of $1 million to drop out of the Republican nomination race [1].  The language of this offer from Savage’s own website reads as follows (caution, Savage has discovered the CAPS LOCK KEY):

THE REPUBLICAN PRESIDENTIAL FIELD HAS COME DOWN TO TWO CANDIDATES WHO HAVE A REAL CHANCE OF GETTING THE NOMINATION: NEWT GINGRICH AND MITT ROMNEY. WHILE IT’S TRUE THAT ROMNEY IS NOT AS STRONG A CONSERVATIVE AS MANY WOULD LIKE HIM TO BE, THE MOST PRESSING ISSUE BEFORE AMERICA TODAY IS DEFEATING BARACK OBAMA. AND THAT IS SOMETHING NEWT GINGRICH CANNOT DO. FOR WEEKS ON MY SHOW, I HAVE ENUMERATED THE REASONS WHY GINGRICH CANNOT SUCCEED IN AN ELECTION AGAINST OBAMA:

  • WHEN HE WAS SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE, GINGRICH FAILED TO DELIVER ON HIS SO-CALLED CONTRACT WITH AMERICA.
  • HE MADE ADS WITH NANCY PELOSI PROMOTING THE FALSE THEORY OF GLOBAL WARMING.
  • HE’S IN FAVOR OF AMNESTY FOR ILLEGAL ALIENS.
  • HE’S TAKEN HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS FROM FANNIE MAE AND FREDDIE MAC, TWO OF THE MOST CORRUPT FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS IN HISTORY.
  • HE’S CHEATED ON TWO WIVES AND LEFT BOTH OF THEM WHILE THEY WERE BOTH SERIOUSLY ILL, WHICH WILL DESTROY HIS CHANCES AMONG FEMALE VOTERS.
  • HE CALLED THE REPUBLICAN PLAN TO REFORM MEDICARE “RIGHT WING SOCIAL ENGINEERING.”
  • IN A PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE AGAINST OBAMA, REGARDLESS OF HOW WELL HE DOES, ON TELEVISION, HE WILL COME OFF BADLY COMPARED TO OBAMA AND LOOK LIKE NOTHING MORE THAN WHAT HE IS: A FAT, OLD, WHITE MAN.

NEWT GINRICH IS UNELECTABLE. MITT ROMNEY IS THE ONLY CANDIDATE WITH A CHANCE OF DEFEATING BARACK OBAMA, AND THERE IS NOTHING MORE IMPORTANT THAN THAT FOR FUTURE HEALTH, SAFETY, AND SECURITY OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. THEREFORE, I AM OFFERING NEWT GINGRICH ONE MILLION DOLLARS TO DROP OUT OF THE PRESIDENTIAL RACE FOR THE SAKE OF THE NATION.

IF NEWT GINGRICH REALLY LOVES THIS COUNTRY AS MUCH AS HE SAYS HE DOES, IF HE REALLY WANTS WHAT IS BEST FOR AMERICA, HE WILL SET HIS EGO ASIDE, CALL ME, AND ACCEPT MY OFFER. HIS CONTINUED CANDIDACY SPELLS NOTHING BUT RUIN FOR CONSERVATIVES, REPUBLICANS, AND ALL TRUE AMERICAN PATRIOTS. ONE MILLION DOLLARS IN EXCHANGE FOR PRESERVING THE NATION, NEWT. I SAY TAKE THE MONEY… AND DON’T RUN.

I find this not only dangerous, but ironic as well.  Savage, who routinely rants against the “degenerates” and “sheeple” being led to their own slaughter, doesn’t trust his own listeners or the American public at large to make the correct decision regarding Newt Gingrich.  In order to ‘nudge’ Americans to make what Savage has ordained as the ‘correct’ decision in the Republican presidential primary race, Savage is attempting to buy out a candidate to remove him from the list of options.  In essence, Savage has brazenly committed the felonious act he might otherwise accuse of Progressives with shockingly obvious hypocrisy – he has decided that Michael Savage knows what’s best for you, that you’re too stupid to properly see through the Gingrich veil, and wants his candidate (Mitt Romney) to be the only one left standing.  (But you're too stupid to figure all that out, you dumbass.)

In addition to being immoral, I’m not even sure what Savage is doing is legal.  Can a private citizen bribe a candidate for federal public office to drop out of an election?  I would assume that if Mr. Savage is capable of offering $1 million to Gingrich to drop out of the race, he can also afford an attorney to advise whether or not his actions are lawful, but the question certainly remains.  It is possible that this sort of action is now legal under the recent and hotly contested Citizens United decision – I honestly don’t know.  Regardless, the People (and Savage’s listeners, especially) have every reason to condemn this sort of political "I know better than you" bullshit.

In his reasoning for removing Newt Gingrich from your list of Republican candidate options for you, Savage lists Gingrich's comment regarding the Republican Medicare plan being "RIGHT WING SOCIAL ENGINEERING."  Excuse me, Mr. Savage, but how is what you're doing ANY DIFFERENT AT ALL?  Oh, that's right - it's simply "right wing social engineering" that you have ordained - perhaps it would be better called "right wing electoral engineering."  Maybe it's just me, but that seems far worse than the good old social engineering we've all come to know and hate love from Progressive elites such as Newt Gingrich.

THE MOST PRESSING ISSUE BEFORE AMERICA TODAY IS DEFEATING BARACK OBAMA

No it isn't, you idiot - if it were, we should simply put up whatever candidate can beat Barack Obama, regardless of his or her beliefs/intentions/convictions/record - oh wait - that's what Michael Savage is suggesting we do!

MITT ROMNEY IS THE ONLY CANDIDATE WITH A CHANCE OF DEFEATING BARACK OBAMA, AND THERE IS NOTHING MORE IMPORTANT THAN THAT FOR FUTURE HEALTH, SAFETY, AND SECURITY OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

Then, he himself admits that Mitt Romney is not a tried and true conservative, but he has the best chance to beat Barack Obama... which it is, Michael?

WHILE IT’S TRUE THAT ROMNEY IS NOT AS STRONG A CONSERVATIVE AS MANY WOULD LIKE HIM TO BE...

Should we just elect any Progressive who wanders along simply because he can beat President Obama?  Apparently so!  (This comes as no surprise, however, as it seems clear by now that Michael Savage has absolutely no actual convictions whatsoever other than "winning.")

Shame on you, Michael Savage, you degenerate, "pick whoever can win" convictionless political sheep.  If you can’t trust the People to eventually make the correct decision, perhaps you’d do better in a beautiful South American country that doesn’t burden its people with having to choose their own leadership – Venezuela, anyone?

Such totalitarian bullshit has no place in a free republic and Michael Savage should be ashamed of himself.

In love of liberty,

The Bulletproof Patriot

<>

  • blogger Blog this!
  • digg Digg this post
  • facebook Recommend on Facebook
  • google_buzz Buzz it up
  • linkedin Share on Linkedin
  • stumble Share with Stumblers
  • twitter Tweet about it
  • rss Subscribe to the comments on this post
  • print Print for later

Prior to embarking upon what will likely become a rather ambitious Sunday evening diatribe regarding some of the important events occurring in the world that actually matter, I'd like to comment on the 'Cain train' derailment [1] [2], which can be sufficiently summed up in one sentence:

What a loser.

I noted quite a while ago that I didn't care whether Cain wound up being another self-serving, egotistical wannabe or not - the truth would eventually come out and all of us would be wise to take it for what it is [3].  As if it weren't bad enough that Cain apparently did not have as good a handle on even the simplest of foreign policy details as the little boy in big boy pants we call President Obama, illustrated most vividly by Cain's disastrous lack of any intelligent comment whatsoever when asked about Obama's response to the Libya situation by the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel [4], he has apparently also been canoodling with random women he supposedly 'impresses' at speeches, pays them (which technically makes them prostitutes), and then lies to his wife about them claiming they were 'friends' and needed the money as some form of personal welfare [5].

For the record, had Cain's wife known about Ginger White, she should have come forward and made the announcement herself that yes, she and Herman had been routinely sending her money to help support her as a friend.  That should have put the nail in the press's 'Cain coffin.'  However, Cain's admission that his wife did not know about the payments to White [5a] signal that Cain simply cannot be trusted and has no business serving in the Office of the President.  If he cannot be trusted by his own wife, how can he possibly be trusted to operate the home of 300 million Americans?

Even worse, the statement Cain's attorney released after the Ginger White story broke not only says all you need to know about Herman Cain, but reads as if it were an early draft of a statement written to defend Bill Clinton in 1996:

Mr. Cain has been informed today that your television station plans to broadcast a story this evening in which a female will make an accusation that she engaged in a 13-year long physical relationship with Mr. Cain. This is not an accusation of harassment in the workplace – this is not an accusation of an assault – which are subject matters of legitimate inquiry to a political candidate.

Rather, this appears to be an accusation of private, alleged consensual conduct between adults – a subject matter which is not a proper subject of inquiry by the media or the public. No individual, whether a private citizen, a candidate for public office or a public official, should be questioned about his or her private sexual life. The public’s right to know and the media’s right to report has boundaries and most certainly those boundaries end outside of one’s bedroom door.

Mr. Cain has alerted his wife to this new accusation and discussed it with her. He has no obligation to discuss these types of accusations publicly with the media and he will not do so even if his principled position is viewed unfavorably by members of the media.  [Emphasis mine.]

Apparently, Herman Cain does not believe that it is "proper" to inquire whether or not a Presidential candidate is cheating on his wife, either physically, or by lying to her about where that $500 a month was going and, perhaps, why "Ginger" prices have skyrocketed so much over the past 13 years while the price of cinnamon has stayed relatively flat...

Are you kidding me?  If your own wife can't trust you, I'm sure as hell not going to, and anyone else who does is a fool.  If Cain does not believe that he has an obligation to discuss these issues publicly, he shouldn't be running for President.

Cain is now claiming that he's not quite done yet and is expecting to endorse a candidate in the near future [6] - one who I might suggest duck and cover when that endorsement is released.  (Oh, and early reports indicate it will go to Newt Gingrich [7] - how appropriate.  One dirtbag endorsing another lying, cheating dirtbag [8].)

Newt's Boneyard

The Republican primary voters seem to be widely moving towards Newt Gingrich as the next Presidential nominee [9], and Gingrich has more or less already declared himself President - no primary or election will be necessary [10].  Yep - that just screams "I'm trustworthy and I value the American public."

<gag>

Apparently, the conservative tidal wave that pushed several Progressives from the House in 2010 has forgotten all of the bodies in Gingrich's past, not the least of which is that if you're an American female over the age of 18, Newt Gingrich is probably currently cheating on you.

Quite honestly, while most Presidential candidates will have a skeleton or two in the closet, Newt Gingrich has an entire boneyard to his name.

Let's recap Gingrich's solidly pro-family record from my previous article on the subject [8]:

  1. Gingrich met his first wife (of three) while he was a minor in high school - his teacher.  They were married for eighteen wonderful years.  He served her with divorce papers while she was in the hospital recovering from uterine cancer.  He had apparently been very active in the extramarital-affairs department during that marriage.
  2. He began dating his second wife before his first divorce was finalized (in other words he was still married).  Surprisingly, she agreed to marry him anyway.  Not surprisingly, he had been having at least one affair at the same time and he divorced her in 1999 after she was diagnosed with Multiple Sclerosis.
  3. During his divorce proceedings from his second wife, Calista Bisek admitted to having had a multi-year affair with him throughout the 1990's, including during President Clinton's affair and subsequent impeachment over the Monica Lewinsky scandal, of which Gingrich was a staunch critic.  So, he of course married her (and asked her to marry him before he asked his second wife for a divorce).
  4. It has since been 10+ years and I think it's safe to say two things:  1) Newt Gingrich isn't gay, and 2) he is more than likely cheating on his current wife (after all, she was the product of an affair and his solid record of cheating is stained with only a few years of fidelity).

As if this weren't bad enough, I am now reading that Gingrich also was cheating on his first wife with yet another woman during the 1976 campaign (he didn't marry that one) - Anne Manning [11].

Gingrich was not only a serial adulterer, however - he was also a serial draft dodger [12] [13].  Pretty great for somebody who supposedly holds the military in high regard.

We can't stop there, however, as Gingrich has an even longer history of corruption, big government support, ethical problems, and outright lies which have been well documented at The Western Center for Journalism [14]:

Newt Gingrich is a political chameleon that has inexplicably managed to fool conservatives for 30 years. He is a globalist to the bone and supports every opportunity to erode American sovereignty and the constitution. He disguises his statist positions with an abundance of flip-flopping and pandering as needed. He has a long history of expanding the Federal Government and deficit spending. He is the very definition of an Establishment Insider:

- Card-Carrying member of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), a globalist think tank
- “Distinguished member” of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (neocon, pro-interventionism group)
Member of Bohemian Grove
- Member of the World Future Society
- Voted for NAFTA, a blatant circumvention of Congress’ exclusive power to regulate commerce with foreign nations. Took power from American people and put it into the hands of unelected Binational panels, made mostly of foreigners.
- Supported GATT
- Supported WTO
- Continually supported increased federal spending.
- Supported the National Endowment for the Arts;
- Voted for the creation of the Federal Dept. of Education in 1979 under Jimmy Carter.
- Big supporter of Foreign Aid — even to Soviets through the Export-Import Bank.
- In one year (1994-1995) Gingrich voted for nearly $45 billion in foreign aid.
- He helped push through Federally-funded loan guarantees to Communist China.
- Urged the House to repeal the War Powers Act and give the Presidency more power.
- Urged Clinton to expand military presence in Bosnia.
- Supports Afghan War
- Supports Iraq War
- Calls for Iran War
- Supported Clinton’s welfare programs, education programs, labor programs, and environmental programs, as well as most of his foreign affairs programs.
- Supported spending $30B for the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 that shackled gun owners with new restrictions, federalized a number of crimes, and handed the feds police powers that the Constitution reserves to the states.
- Voted to give billions of dollars to United Nations “peacekeeping” operations;
- Pushed for a School Prayer Amendment
Mentored by Henry Kissinger
- Bailed out savings and loan institutions in 1991. $40B Bank bailout
- He was a draft-dodger during the Vietnam War, yet pushed aggressive foreign interventionism his entire political career, and did say that Vietnam was the “right battlefield at the right time.
- He cheated on one of his wives while she was suffering from cancer, delivered divorce papers to her in the hospital.
- Worked on the Rockefeller presidential campaign in 1968.

04/02/1987 – He cosponsored the 1987 Fairness Doctrine (anti 1st Amendment legislation)
10/22/1991 – He voted for an amendment that would create a National Police Corps.
03/–/1993 – He was “passionately in favor” of sending $1.6 Billion in foreign aid to Russia.
11/19/1993 – He voted for the NAFTA Implementation Act.
11/27/1994 – He supported the GATT Treaty giving sovereignty to the U.N.
08/27/1995 – He suggests that drug smuggling should carry a death sentence.
01/06/1996 – He himself conceived a secret CIA mission to topple the Iranian leadership.
04/25/1996 – Voted for the single largest increase on Federal education spending ($3.5 Billion)
04/10/1995 – He supported Federal taxdollars being spent on abortions.
06/–/1995 – He wrote the foreword to a book about tearing down the U.S. Constitution and implementing a Fascist World Government.
06/01/1996 – He helped a Democrat switch parties in an attempt to defeat constitutionalist Ron Paul in the 1996 election.
09/25/1996 – Introduced H.R. 4170, demanded life-sentence or execution for someone bringing 2 ounces of marijuana across the border.
01/22/1997 – Congress gave him a record-setting $300,000 fine for ethical wrongdoing.
11/29/2006 – He said that free speech should be curtailed in order to fight terrorism. Wants to stop terrorists from using the internet. Called for a “serious debate about the 1st Amendment.”
11/29/2006 – He called for a “Geneva Convention for terrorists” so it would be clear who the Constitution need not apply to.
02/15/2007 – He supported Bush’s proposal for mandatory carbon caps.
04/04/2007 – He says that there should be a clear distinction about what weapons should be reserved for only for the military.
04/17/2008 – Made a commercial with Nancy Pelosi on Climate Change.
09/28/2008 – Says if he were in office, he would have reluctantly voted for the $700B TARP bailout.
10/01/2008 – Says in an article that TARP was a “workout, not a bailout.”
12/08/2008 – He was paid $300,000 by Freddie Mac to halt Congress from bringing necessary reform.
03/31/2009 – Says we should have Singapore-style drug tests for Americans.
10/16/2009 – He angered conservatives by endorsing super liberal Dede Scozzafava.
07/30/2010 – Says that Iraq was just step one in defeating the “Axis of Evil”.
08/03/2010 – Advocates attacks on Iran & North Korea.
08/16/2010 – Opposes property rights of the mosque owner in NYC.
08/16/2010 – Compares mosque supporters to Nazis
11/15/2010 – He defended Romneycare; blamed liberals
12/02/2010 – He advocates a pathway to citizenship for illegal aliens.
12/05/2010 – He said that a website owner should be considered an enemy combatant, hunted down and executed, for publishing leaked government memos.
01/30/2011 – He lobbied for ethanol subsidies.
01/30/2011 – He suggested that flex-fuel vehicles be mandated for Americans.
02/02/2011 – He says we are “losing the War on Terror”; the conflict will be as long as the Cold War
02/10/2011 – He wants to replace the EPA instead of abolishing it.
02/13/2011 – He criticized Obama for sending less U.S. taxdollars to Egypt.
02/15/2011 – His book said that he believes man-made climate-change and advocated creating “a new endowment for conservation and the environment.”
03/09/2011 – He blames his infidelity to multiple wives on his passion for the country.
03/15/2011 – Says that NAFTA worked because it created jobs in Mexico.
03/19/2011 – He has no regrets about supporting Medicare drug coverage. (Now $7.2T unfunded liability)
03/23/2011 – He completely flip-flopped on Libyan intervention in 16 days.
03/25/2011 – He plans to sign as many as 200 executive orders on his first day as president.
03/27/2011 – He says that America is under attack by atheist Islamists.
04/25/2011 – He’s a paid lobbyist for Federal ethanol subsidies.
05/11/2011 – His campaign video said that he wants to “find solutions together, and insist on imposing those solutions on those who do not want to change.”
05/12/2011 – He was more supportive of individual health-care mandates than Mitt Romney.
05/15/2011 – Said GOP’s plan to cut back Medicare was “too big a jump.”
05/15/2011 – He backed Obama’s individual mandate; “All of us have a responsibility to help pay for health care.”
05/16/2011 – He also endorsed individual mandates in 1993 when Clinton pushed Universal Health Care.
05/17/2011 – He has an outstanding debt to Tiffany’s Jewelry of between $250K – $500K.
06/09/2011 – His own campaign staff resigned en masse.
07/15/2011 – His poorly managed campaign is over $1 Million in debt.
08/01/2011 – He hired a company to create fake Twitter to appear as if he had a following.
08/11/2011 – His recent criticism of the United Nations is United Nations by a long, long history of supporting it.
09/27/2011 – He says that he “helped develop the model for Homeland Security
10/07/2011 – He said he’d ignore the Supreme Court if need be.
11/12/2011 – He advocates assassinating Iranian scientists and covert war with Iran.

So, if it's not clear yet, here's what you're getting with a vote for Newt Gingrich:

  • You're getting a man who was once  willingly on the minor side of pedophilia, routinely cheated on his first two wives (while castigating Bill Clinton for essentially the same act in the 1990's), served both with divorce papers while they were recovering from life-altering diseases, is now married to a woman 23 years younger than him, who herself was a product of his affairs, and is (based solely on his stellar track record) probably cheating on her, another family member, you, and/or another American this very second.  Seriously, though, he's trustworthy and deserves your vote <gag>.
  • You're getting a man who dodged the Vietnam draft, backed the individual mandate (which will unleash Congress entirely if upheld by the Court and largely put an end to the original dream of limited, Constitutional governance), sponsored the Fairness Doctrine in 1987 (a massive affront to the 1st Amendment and the limits on Congressional authority), and ran his own campaign into the ground with over $1 million of debt, while claiming to be a fiscal conservative.
  • You're getting a man who voted to create the Department of Education - if there were a larger scourge on limited governance and the American educational system, I have thus far been unable to find it.
  • You're getting a man who has supported massive government at every turn in his career as a nearly lifelong politician, Washington insider, and Republican party shill.

Let me make myself perfectly clear on Newt Gingrich:

Newt Gingrich is a big government, Progressive, Republican-party hack with a long history of ethical problems, cheating on his wives, and general (but widespread) dirtbaggery.

A Warning on QE3

While the markets are rallying in the purple hazed afterglow of a Fed-sponsored European debt binge [15], the Fed seems to be quietly preparing to release the details on a third round of Quantitative Easing (QE3), expected to be announced at the January 24-25, 2012 meeting [16] [17].  The amount is expected to be approximately $600 billion, which will push the U.S. monetary base up from $2.7 trillion to a staggering $3.3 trillion.  Without a massive increase in holdings of actual value, the Fed's leverage ratio will increase from the current 53:1 to a recordbreaking 64:1 by mid-2012 (Lehman brothers were extended at approximately 30:1 at the time of their collapse).

Given that every time the Fed expands the monetary base the U.S. edges closer and closer to the potential for massive inflation, who are you prepared to elect as President in 2012?  The same President who has increased American debt to $16.7 trillion during his first term in office?  The same type of President before him who increased it to $10 trillion in eight years?

Hopefully, the American people will be looking elsewhere.

TBP Endorses...

I have grappled with the decision of whether or not to publicly endorse a candidate for the 2012 Republican primary and I've finally decided that I might as well go ahead - this election is important because it may determine the future of the country in a much more dramatic fashion than ever before.

For this reason, I am happy to announce a formal endorsement of Michele Bachmann.

I believe that Michele is the only candidate who truly understands the plight of the typical American and who has the fortitude to push through the political game unscathed to roll back government to its rightful realm - that of a Constitutional republic that derives its power from the consent of the governed.

In love of liberty,

The Bulletproof Patriot

<>

  • blogger Blog this!
  • digg Digg this post
  • facebook Recommend on Facebook
  • google_buzz Buzz it up
  • linkedin Share on Linkedin
  • stumble Share with Stumblers
  • twitter Tweet about it
  • rss Subscribe to the comments on this post
  • print Print for later

Newt Gingrich has announced his candidacy for President of the United States on his website, newt.org [1], not to be confused with salamander.net.  This is a great relief for America because Newt Gingrich brings something brand new to the table:

Huge glasses.

America has been crying out for a Presidential candidate who will boldly refuse to go where many have gone before:  in front of a mirror.  Newt's website seeks to amend his 1994 Contract with America with several notable and commendable points:

1.  "Together we will squint into the future [2]."

2.  "Newt:  80/20 focus on job creation [3]."

3.  "Newt:  I'm pretty sure I checked the 'Run for President' box and not just the 'Donate $3 to the Federal Election Campaign Fund box on my tax return."

4.  Gingrich also stood in front of a huge chart — crammed with tiny print (while wearing huge glasses) — outlining what he said are 1,968 new ‘grants of powers to bureaucrats’ under the law, according to the January 21, 2011 edition of the Atlanta Urinal-Constipation [4].

If this weren't bad enough, it has come to light that Gingrich was previously a huge supporter of an individual mandate for health insurance [5] (although he is now absolutely against ObamaCare [6]).

Why are the huge glasses so darn important?  Because Newt Gingrich has nothing to offer other than last century, worn out, "kinda smells a little like Aspercreme" pseudo-conservatism (read: Republican Party-ism).  He also has a much less than stellar performance in the 'personal life' category:

1.  Gingrich met his first wife (of three) while he was a minor in high school - his teacher.  They were married for eighteen wonderful years.  He served her with divorce papers while she was in the hospital recovering from uterine cancer.  He had apparently been very active in the extramarital-affairs department during that marriage.

2. He began dating his second wife before his first divorce was finalized (in other words he was still married).  Surprisingly, she agreed to marry him anyway.  Not surprisingly, he had been having at least one affair at the same time and he divorced her in 1999 after she was diagnosed with Multiple Sclerosis.

3.  During his divorce proceedings from his second wife, Calista Bisek admitted to having had a multi-year affair with him throughout the 1990's, including during President Clinton's affair and subsequent impeachment over the Monica Lewinsky scandal, of which Gingrich was a staunch critic.  So, he of course married her (and asked her to marry him before he asked his second wife for a divorce).

4.  It has since been 10+ years and I think it's safe to say two things:  1) Newt Gingrich isn't gay, and 2) he is more than likely cheating on his current wife (after all, she was the product of an affair and his solid record of cheating is stained with only a few years of fidelity).

Newt - I'd strongly suggest, as a matter of personal responsibility, that you exchange your huge glasses for a huge pair of suspenders.  Maybe they'll help you keep your pants on.

I think it's safe to say that we can push Gingrich off the train at the next stop without a second thought.

In love of liberty,

The Bulletproof Patriot

<>

  • blogger Blog this!
  • digg Digg this post
  • facebook Recommend on Facebook
  • google_buzz Buzz it up
  • linkedin Share on Linkedin
  • stumble Share with Stumblers
  • twitter Tweet about it
  • rss Subscribe to the comments on this post
  • print Print for later
Site News

TBP supports the Convention of States project to call an Article V convention for the purpose of amending the Constitution to limit the powers of the federal government.

412789 visitors
Subscribe to updates!


Archives
Categories