Blogs

Has Newt Gingrich gone to the Dark Side?

Back in the 1990's there was a young political Jedi Knight, battling for conservative principles against the entrenched forces of the Washington establishment. Brimming with ideas, never a loss for energy, he toppled 40 years of Democrat dominance in 1994.

That man was Newt Gingrich. 

Fast forward 17 years. Newt is old. The welfare state is burgeoning and threatens something far worse than it did a generation ago--it threatens national insolvency.  And some young courageous Republicans challenge the conventional wisdom and suggest a new direction.

And this year's Gingrich decides to cut him off at the knees.  

 Gingrich also distanced himself from the plan proposed by Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) to turn Medicare into a voucher system: "I think that that is too big a jump." He called the plan "right-wing social engineering," which he considers not "any more desirable than left-wing social engineering."

I cannot count how many ways this is an utter unmitigated disaster for Gingrich.  For one thing, some might accuse him of inventing "right wing social engineering" as a result of the multitude of policy proposals he's advanced since the 1980's. (indeed, Gingrich himself once was a fierce advocate of turning bureaucratic programs into vouchers)  Running against yourself is rarely a very effective strategy. 

This is particularly true when after you take a hacksaw to a fellow Republican the press finds out you previously endorsed the same plan

“But would you have voted for Ryan’s plan?” I pressed.

“Sure,” Gingrich replied

Can we get John Kerry back from Pakistan to enter the GOP race? 

Now I'm not into the delegate and endorsement hunt but I hardly see how trashing a policy agenda item virtually the entire Republican House caucus  voted for is going to do Gingrich any good building a network in primary states.  But I'm sure Steve Israel and the DCCC went out for mimosas after hearing this sort of friendly fire against our tenuous House majority.  See the DKos reaction. 11th Commandment; much?  

It also appears that spending all his time on self-promotion has blinded Gingrich to the rather obvious fact that the 2012 GOP is far more libertarian and frugal than the 2008 version, and offers little traction for those running as a "big government conservative". Which appears to be Gingrich's strategy--after all he's also full bore for ethanol subsidies and fighting global warming.  Mike Huckabee was no fool and realized he was a nonstarter going down this path. Not Newt.

Gingrich fancies himself a historian. Back in the 1980's Gingrich was often  linked to Jack Kemp, another  visionary conservative. Kemp made a ill-fated run for the White House in 1988. Kemp, too, ran as the pro-entitlement candidate in the race.  He was a forgotten man in the Bush v. Dole battle royale, hardly making a ripple.  Why is running as the pro-spending candidate going to work better in an era of trillion dollar deficits than it did when a mere $200 Billion of red ink caused shock?

Once Newt Gingrich had ideas. And energy. And fought alongside economic conservatives. But now Newt wants to be President and he has polls and consultants.  Evidently bashing mosques polls well and trying to fix the entitlement state, not as well. Even if its a matter of national economic survival. If it's going to be a battle of who can offer controversial sound bites on calling the President vaguely foreign, well, let's just give the nomination to Donald Trump.  

The more I think about it, Paul Ryan is today's Jedi Knight of conservatism--a Luke Skywalker willing to challenge the Debt Star.  Once Gingrich was the same sort of Jedi Knight; but much like Anakin Skywalker, he has succumbed to the Dark Side in his lust for power.

Newt is supposedly greatly moved by the legacy of Winston Churchill  . A question then, for Mr. Gingrich.  Don't you think it was just as politically expedient for Neville Chamberlain to reject "right wing foreign policy" and try and manage the rise of the Nazis as it is to attack leaders trying to stop our appeasement of deficit spending?  Stop invoking Churchill's name and start applying his courage.

 

The Republican Squeeze: “The Debt Ceiling, Can We Fool Them Again?”

I sincerely hope that’s not what’s going on, but hope is a thin thread on which to hang the survival of our representative republican form of government. Uh, to those brain-lesioned ‘progressives’ out there… we do not, as the Lame Stream Press is so fond of stating, live in a democracy. True democracies are nut houses… a little like the current administration. But then, the DeMarxist party has been a squirrel cage for a long time.

It took a national malaise, coupled by an almost historical disregard of facts by adults in this nation who should have known better, to bring us to this pass in which our nation at present finds itself.

With regard to the issue of the debt ceiling. I’m of the firm belief that this is where we have to make our stand. Either this leadership, this Republican Congress, recognizes that we simply cannot do it, we can’t spend more!, or else…

Boehner’s bold statement saying that we won’t allow one dollar in spending without a dollar in spending cuts… What!? Uh, John. Don’t you think that’s a little ‘harsh’? After all, we’re only in the hole by 14 or 15 trillion dollars. Good gravy! What the hell does it take to get through to these knotheads?

And now… wait until you hear this… Mitch McConnell, arch RINO, is calling for la grande accorde. “Why, it’s time for both sides to come together in the ‘great deal’.” Why do I sense McCain in this too… Or maybe he’s too busy pushing illegal alien amnesty.

I don’t know about you, but somehow I don’t see such a liaison as a happy ending for us… the American patriot, citizen and taxpayer. I, for one, am sick to death of their stupid games. One can only assume they haven’t gotten the message.

We get a wide variety of comments here, some from quite surprising sources. I’m not in the poll or prediction business, but we do get a pretty good feel for the mood of the country on issues. I’m here to tell you that nothing has changed. The anger is still boiling just below the surface… and the undeniable truth is in front of each and every citizen’s nose every time they have to buy gas or go to the grocery store. Every time I see a one dollar and sixty cent item selling for close to four dollars, I think of who and what is responsible… and I’m not alone.

This 2012 election is ours to lose. What really scares me is that the Republicans are plenty stupid enough to lose it for us.

Semper Vigilans, Semper Fidelis

© Skip MacLure 2011

More Tweets Regarding The Demise Of Bin Ladin

Kind of tells you what a person is made of if they hold a pity party in regards to how Bin Ladin was mistreated during his elimination. The person raising these concerns is the very same extreme Reconstructionist that any other time thinks Glenn Beck should be executed as a "false prophet" along with Sabbath violators.

Borrowing from the advocates of infantacide, if you don't want to see Bin Ladin's death photos, DON'T LOOK AT THEM!

Bin Laden was given 40 minute funeral ceremony. That's more of a warning than the victims of 9/11 got.

If Bin Ladin was worthy of an Islamic funeral at the expense of the U.S. Navy, why weren't his minions slain at the compound also worthy of such and left to rot in the Third World sun?

If Bin Laden's death pictures might not be released because it might be inflammatory, should we forbid women from walking about in anything other than a trash bag over their heads since Muslims find that inflammatory as well?

Actually, unless Pakistan wants to be considered a terrorist nation, we did them a favor by removing Osama Bin Ladin from their territory. They were obviously unable to do so themselves.

Terrorism is not averted by catering to the enemy as much as possible. It is averted by creating the impression that, should the enemy try something, you will kill far more of their people than they will of your people.

Even if the video of the Bin Ladin funeral is released, how do we know it is Bin Laden being lowered into the water? It could just as easily be Jimmy Hoffa, Amelia Earhart, or even the Lindberg baby.

The victims on 9/11 weren't armed either.

If Bin Ladin was so innocent in regards to the 9/11 tragedy, why didn't he use his media outreach over all these years to convince the world that he was in no way connected to these events?

Guess those thinking Bin Ladin should have been brought to trial instead would also send his brats Prison Fellowship angel tree gift packages as well.

Most of those all in a moral jumble over the Bin Ladin elimination often don't have a grasp on terrorism's true nature. Most can't expand there imaginations enough to perceive of Bin Ladin as anything different than the cab driver down the street.

If Bin Ladin had to be quickly buried to avoid upheaval, then we don't need to hear added details as to whether he was armed or not. All we need to hear is that the SOB is now in Hell. That's all the details we need if everything else is to be so hushed over.

Jay Carney is no Tony Snow. He certainly doesn't typify his last name which brings to mind at least an enthusiastic and charismatic brand of hucksterism.

As in regards to the way a number of molecular biologists met mysterious ends around the time of the anthrax attacks, wonder how long until those onboard the vessel from which Bin Laden was supposedly disposed of start dropping in bizarre accidents or unexpected diseases.

Trashpile nations and groups don't care a flip about Americans. It is about time Americans stopped giving a flip about the trashpile foreigners. Bin Ladin got far more humane treatment than he ever deserved or ever extended to his victims.

Contrary to Rush Limbaugh, just because elite military special operations commandos don't demand pensions and retirements it in no way follows the rest of us shouldn't. Perhaps he should point out how he himself makes far more that those enlisted in elite special forces. Is this going to become a new version of how parents use to hold it over children's heads when youngsters didn't want to eat something about starving kids in Africa or China.

If DNA wasn't good enough to convict OJ Simpson, why should some lab report convince us that it was Bin Ladin laying (at least for 5 minutes) on some mortuary slab.

So when the government kills Christian fugitives, are they put to rest quickly or stuffed in the morgue freezer indefinitely?

The existence of the First Amendment is inflammatory. Should we abolish it all together to placate the Islamists?

Since Islamic cultures discount the testimony of women, aren't we obligated to honor their culture and ignore Bin Ladin's daughter's account of events.

Obama said we don't need to spike the football. But who was it that had to reconstruct the temple of Zeus at Pergamum for his acceptance speech at the Democratic convention.

If Judge Napolitano is opposed to the Bin Ladin elimination, perhaps he's not fit to be Glenn Beck's replacement after all.

If Bin Laden had been a Christian, would the naval chaplain been allowed to end the prayer in the name of Christ? According to some interpretations of naval regulations, that is not permitted?

Actually, Bin Ladin's people did put pictures of American bodies on the Internet. And unlike how their kind would react, we did not riot. By default, that means our civilization (contrary to the multicultralists) is inherently superior to theirs.

If the media is to harp on the discomfort of waterboarding, how about a detailed forensic analysis of how it feels to be incinerated as a jetliner hits a skyscraper if your lucky or how it feels to have multiple floors to collapse down upon you?

If Bin Ladin was dead, why should the funeral service be translated into Arabic. Not like the manurebag could hear it.

If America does not have the spine to fly our flag over GITMO for fear of offending terrorists, it won't be long until the flag of the terrorists if flying all over the United States.

Makes you wonder if it is now wrong to celebrate the demise of the Axis hierarchy at the end of WWII.

All Obama has ever done is spike footballs. Does anyone else remember his turning back the rise of the oceans speech?

Bin Ladin's minion killed 20 in Iraqi. This will elicit less outrage from the American left than 2 bullets through Bin Ladin's head.

Perhaps Christian Reconstructionists so discombobulated over the Bin Ladin elimination should volunteer to go live in Islamic nations to defend them. See if you last more than two days. I bet it won’t be the U.S. military that ends up doing you in.

The Archbishop of Canterbury criticized the Bin Ladin elimination. Need I remind you that that was the man at the Royal Wedding whose gown was even more girliefied than the one worn by the actual bride?

The Daily Telegraph describes the Archbishop of Canterbury as a "mainstream religious leader". The man is a practicing Druid. No wonder the Muslims are about to take over Britain.

Bin Ladin and his wife hadn't left compound in nearly 5 years. That's about as often as you will get out of the house if Obama's transportation policies go into affect.

If we can't see photos of Bin Ladin's blown off head because it might generate sympathy for him, why in the name of Hades is there talk of releasing his home videos?

The Pentagon intends to release details of life inside of the Bin Ladin compound. Maybe they should couple that with stories of the lives ruined by Bin Ladin.

Before the final analysis, there will probably be some legalistic fanatic that gets all bent out of shape that Bin Ladin's death was announced on a Sunday.

It is estimated that American taxpayers spent nearly $3 trillion on the hunt for Bin Ladin. You'd think we would at least be owed the opportunity to glance at the polaroids.

by Frederick Meekins

Maobama Does The Border Shuffle.

And no, it’s not the old soft-shoe either… though our race-baiting, Balkanizing, anti-American President looks more and more like some Vaudeville clown with every passing day.

Before I explore that farther, I’d like to take this opportunity to address a few comments we got yesterday that I feel need to be addressed. These comments were along the lines of, “If the leadership votes to increase the debt ceiling, I will have had it with the (Republican) party”.

Hey, I feel you, I really do… but listen. No splinter group, no third party, will ever be successful in this political climate. At best, what will occur is that the Conservative vote will be split, handing the DeMarxists another victory. I don’t think we’ll be fooled by another Ross Perot, but if you look at the way the Lame Stream Media is pushing Mitch Daniels as one of the few people the White House is afraid of… give me break please… sic ad nauseum. Mitch Daniels is another in the mold of centrist deal-makers that the GOP keeps pushing forward. Anybody that the inside-the-beltway pundits want to bring forward can’t be good for Conservatism or America.

What we need to do, folks, is to make the RINOs pay at the ballot box. We have the numbers for it. Don’t believe the LSM when they try to convince you that the Tea Party is finished… that we’ve shot our bolt. Man, are they in for some culture shock! We’re here… and we’re getting more angry every day that the clowns on both sides of the political spectrum delay the inevitable reckoning with the obscene 14 trillion debt which is crushing this country… and any hint of a real recovery.

Meanwhile, down in Texas, the Anointed One has launched into full illegal alien amnesty mode and the Demarxists have re-launched the Dream Act, which should be put back to bed for a long sleep… like permanently. There was not one single word of truth in anything that Obama said in his demagogic rant. Apparently, I’m not the only one who thought so. There were audible cries of ‘racist’.

It’s a far cry from the adulation of the empty-headed masses. Gee, Obama, maybe you should have made it a kegger. Now, if the Repubic leadership can just figure out who the enemy is….

Semper Vigilans, Semper Fidelis

© Skip MacLure 2011

Obamanomics: You Can’t Have It ‘Cause I Want It. It’s Too Good For You.

No matter how you slice it, just about all of us have had all of Barack Hussein Obama’s non-existent recovery… or his delusional monetary policies… forget Geithner and Bernanke. This economy is Obama and Obama alone… if, and that’s a big ‘if’, with the questionable leadership of the Republicans who ‘came in like a lion’ and are currently slinking around in the background, trying to figure out how to get out of all that bold talk about how they were going to be the forefront of the Conservative Revolution.

This isn’t what we sent them to Congress for, folks… not by a long shot. The Repubics (thanks, Mark, it just sounds so much like what they are) have been distancing themselves from Paul Ryan’s proposed cuts.

What’s really sticking in my craw, and probably a lot of yours too, is that His Imperial Wannabe and his entire rotten regime are so imminently beatable. Him and his Senate have absolutely nothing to run on… nothing! And yet we are witnessing a Republican Party, and most especially a leadership, which is working hard to lose it all for us.

They pretty obviously have forgotten who put them in office. Some weak Repubics are just going along to be part of the herd. Sorry… not good enough. To those establishment Repubics who think they have hijacked, or somehow or another suborned, the Tea Party Patriot movements… you’ve shown us just what and who you are. The debt ceiling issue may very well turn out to be the leadership’s swan song as far as the Conservatives/Tea Party/Patriots are concerned.

There are very few families, or singles for that matter, who have not been affected by this recession/depression. We’re all pretty sore about it. People do know who’s responsible. I’m predicting a large scale RINO hunt.

Semper Vigilans, Semper Fidelis

© Skip MacLure 2011

Does The DC Government Care If Terrorists Kill Christians?

A story posted at Yahoo News detailed the steps taken in Washington, DC to prepare for a retaliatory attack on the part of Al Qaeda over the death of Osama Bin Ladin. Among the measures included increased police protection of synagogues and mosques.

What about Christian churches?

Aren’t these structures as worthy of protection?

However, they were not mentioned in the article.

If not, shouldn’t the DC government admit that they are not as concerned about any Christians that die in an attack as they are Jews or Muslims?

Those that properly recall their history will remember that one of the things that turned Bin Ladin against the United States initially was the presence of “Crusaders” in lands deemed sacred and holy by devout Muslims such as Saudi Arabia.

“Crusaders” is a term some Muslims utilize when speaking of Christians in reference to the conflicts during the Middle Ages where Roman Catholic authorities attempted to liberate the Biblical Holy Lands from Islamic control.

As such, if you wanted to strike back at an enemy that you thought was attacking your religion wouldn’t the Washington National Cathedral or the National Shrine of the Basilica of the Immaculate Conception --- prominent structures admired and beloved not only by native Washingtonians but by enthusiasts of religious art across the county --- be better targets?

A fundamental principle of American jurisprudence is equal protection under the law.

When a terrorist bomb explodes, the projectile shrapnel of the device can just as easily take out the lives of bystander Christians, Jews, or even Muslims.

by Frederick Meekins

GM Exec: Reporting GM's Failures Hurts… Republicans?

-By Warner Todd Huston

In an odd turn of events, former GM Vice Chairman Bob Lutz thinks that anyone that criticizes GM is not only "mis-informed" but insists that those "foaming ideologues" that criticize the car giant are "damaging the Republican Party."

It is interesting that an executive in the company derided as "Government Motors" is trying to direct attention away from his minders in the Obama administration and toward the opposing party, and just before a general election at that.

It is also interesting to see Lutz defending GM as the "future" of the car business. Lately GM has not been turning out the sort of products that puts the company at the head of much of anything.

For one thing, value seems to be an area where GM is in the back of the pack. James B. Stewart of the Wall Street Journal's SmartMoney.com found late in April that car shoppers don't find GM to have much value to its products.

"Indeed, value was a theme I heard over and over," Stewart wrote, "a reminder that high gas prices and malaise about the economy are having a profound effect on consumers, even the auto buffs who tend to populate car shows. This struck me as a marketing challenge for GM. Much as many shoppers seemed to like the GM offerings, nearly all of them cited models they deemed better values elsewhere at the show."

If GM is the future of the auto industry as Lutz claims, its products are going to have to give customers the value they are looking for. Thus far they aren’t.

Speaking of the high cost of fuel, GM did seem to lead the field in one area. As Reuters recently reported, it led in inaccurate fuel gages.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration said on its website it opened a preliminary investigation covering Chevrolet Trailblazers, GMC Envoys, Buick Rainiers and Saab 9-7s from model years 2005-2007 after receiving 668 complaints alleging inaccurate fuel gauge readings.

In fact, there is yet another area where GM leads: in some of the industry's worst cars. Last month GM found nine of its models in the bottom eleven cars.

Those models ranked as some of the worst in value, safety, and/or reliability, and gas mileage. As David Freddoso quipped, "Thank goodness we put up $80 billion to bail out GM and Chrysler. They are now building such wonderful cars that they have achieved total dominance of the Forbes "Worst Cars on the Road" list…"

Still, Vice Chairman Lutz wants to label anyone that sleights GM as a "foaming ideologue" for doubting the company. One wonders if his spin is merely bluff or something else?

U.S. University Giving Award to Anti-American, Terror Supporting Al-Jazeera TV

-By Warner Todd Huston

Columbia University announced last week that its Graduate School of Journalism is awarding its highest award to America's enemies, Al-Jazeera TV.

The university is awarding Al-Jazeera with its journalism award for the Arab-centric mid eastern "news" it has produced. Al-Jazeera is apparently being recognized for "singular journalism in the public interest."

"Al Jazeera English has performed a great service in bringing the English-speaking world in-depth coverage of the turmoil in the Middle East," said Nicholas Lemann, dean of Columbia's Graduate School of Journalism.

So, once again we have a leftist American university turning its back on America this time to award its top honors to a foreign TV service whose goal includes the daily denunciation of the United States of America.

One has to wonder if there were awards given by American universities for the Nazi Party's newspapers or radio broadcasts during WWII? Were there great American awards given the U.S.S.R.'s Pravda or Izvestia during the Cold War, even? Yet here we are in the middle of a war between freedom, liberty, and democracy and the backwards, oppressive forces of radical Islam that Al-Jazeera represents and our publicly supported university is giving great awards to supporters of our enemy.

This is typical of the vapid thinking of the Democrat Party and America's liberals. To them we are the evil that plagues the world. To them we are the monsters. To liberals our enemies need to be awarded and recognized as the better side of the argument.

Last week, Bill O'Reilly tackled this topic and made some great points.

Watch the latest video at video.foxnews.com

An Open Letter to Speaker Boehner & My Congressman

Cross posted to Chris of Rights

TO: House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH-08) CC: Congressman Dan Burton (R-IN-05)

Mr. Speaker,

I realize that the election of 2010, while historic, granted the Republican party very limited power in Washingon, D.C. We still have to deal with President Barack Obama (D-USA) and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV). However, I wonder if you are making proper use of even what limited power you have. Like Velma Hart, I am exhausted of defending you. I stood by you after the budget deal over the CR for the rest of fiscal year 2011. I understand the difference between appropriations and allocations, and I realize that you probably got all you were going to be able to get out of that deal. I think you got played on the “czars” part of the deal, but I have faith you won’t let that happen again, and will punish Obama for bargaining in bad faith.

However, your recent comments regarding Congressman Paul Ryan's (R-WI-01) Path to Prosperity leave me gravely concerned. You seem to agree with Congressman Dave Camp’s (R-MI-04) statement regarding the plan:

"I'm not really interested in laying down more markers," said Rep. Dave Camp (R-Mich.). "I'd rather have the committee working with the Senate and with the president to focus on savings and reforms that can be signed into law."

In fact, your own words on the subject are these:

"My interpretation of what Mr. Camp said is a recognition of the political realities that we face. While Republicans control the House, the Democrats control the Senate and they control the White House," Boehner said at a Thursday press conference.

Again, I understand the political realities we face. I realize that in the end, to pass both chambers and to get the President’s signature, any measure will have to have bipartisan support. I also understand the desire to avoid a vote that will be interpreted by many as purely symbolic. Mr. Camp is correct that the Ryan plan does not have any chance of success in the Senate.

However, I think this path is fraught with peril.

The people that brought you this majority in 2010, did so because we are gravely concerned about the future of this country. Not just for our children, not just for our retirement savings, but we have serious doubts about the next 10 years. We see the headlines about Greece and other countries in the EU, and we wonder if we’re very far behind. Just this weekend it was revealed that the Greece bailout may be failing and that while there is a high risk of default, further bailouts are being considered.

“We have not been discussing the exit of Greece from the euro area. This is a stupid idea. It is in no way - it is an avenue we would never take,” [Head of Eurogroup] Juncker told reporters.

“We don't want to have the euro area exploding without reason. We were excluding the restructuring option, which is discussed heavily in certain quarters of the financial markets.

“We think that Greece does need a further adjustment program,” Juncker said. “This has to be discussed in detail.”

In fact, some economists are not just saying that we’re following Greece, but we’re already there.

[Boston University Economics Professor Laurence] Kotlikoff believes a better benchmark of fiscal fitness is the fiscal gap, or the present value difference between all future expenditures and receipts. His calculations reveal Greece future expenditure at 11.5% of the value of future GDP, after incorporating the new austerity measures.

The US figure, based on the CBO projections--12.2%--is worse than that of Greece, but not by too much.

However, Kotlikoff says the U.S. is in much worse shape than the 12.2% figure suggests, because the CBO’s projections assume “a 7.2% of GDP belt-tightening by 2020,” with "highly speculative” assumptions, such as a substantial rise in tax receipts and wage growth.

A separate analysis by the New York Times also put the U.S. debt--measured by medium term deficit as a percentage of GDP--higher than that of Greece. (See chart)  Furthermore, in a roundabout way, Kotlikoff and Da Gong, the largest credit rating agency in China, seem to be in agreement as to the fiscal position of the United States; although many have dismissed Da Gong’s objectivity when it downgraded the U.S. from AAA to AA.

Mr. Speaker, the time has come to draw a line in the sand. This far. No further. The people that gave you this majority are not interested in bipartisanship. They are interested in saving this country. That will take some hard bargaining on your part, and some strong efforts by Mr. Camp and others, as well as your counterparts in the Senate. We realize that Medicare reform as designed by Chairman Ryan may not pass, but we can not afford to take it off the table without getting something just as significant in return. The Ryan plan should be the starting point in negotiations. We can not move the starting point even further to the left.

We expect you, no, we need you, to stand firm against the destructive plans of Leader Reid and President Obama. We will do our best to give you more tools to work with in 2012, but you have to prove that you’re willing to use the tools that we’ve given you so far.

It’s not entirely your fault, but the citizenry of this country has acquired a high level of distrust for our elected officials. We came out in historic numbers in 2010, not because we suddenly believe in the Republican party, but because of our concerns for the future. We had hope and belief that you understood your mandate and what we expected of you. Then we read things that make it seem as if nothing has changed in Washington, and that you still don’t get it. That doesn’t help your case in attempting to regain our trust. If you want more of our trust and more tools, you’re going to earn it. That means fighting for us, every day, every hour, with every breath you have. We demand, expect, and will accept nothing less. Because we will be doing the same.

If you’re not willing to do that, let us know now. We’re tired of being fooled and we’re tired of waiting for real leadership.

Fox is flailing...Again.

Nope, no bias here at all! Let's back the guy who backed TARP, and who doesn't think the Fed should be audited. Because he'll be SO different from President Obama!! Sigh...I think I'm getting flashbacks from last time's primary losers who thought they'd win. http://hammeroftruth.com/2011/how-many-debate-polls-does-fox-need/

Syndicate content