As Gingrich points out – the Karl Rove meltdown on Fox News that night was emblematic as to how delusional the GOP and its loathsome “consulting class” are. Gingrich also laments that Romney was forced to run as something he clearly was not – a hard core social conservative.
Meanwhile chew on this comment “By the way, Reagan’s approval when he left office, among African Americans, was something like 42 percent. I would argue that there was a brief moment between Reagan and Jack Kemp when we were almost breaking through – and then we relapsed into being normal Republicans.”
by Steve Kornacki
There was a popular theory for much of the 2012 Republican presidential campaign that Newt Gingrich wasn’t actually running for the GOP nomination – that he was instead leveraging the stature and visibility that comes with being a candidate to market his personal brand. Whether by brilliant design or complete accident, though, the former House Speaker managed to catch fire – twice – delivering a memorable blow to Mitt Romney in the South Carolina primary before falling apart in Florida and fading from contention.
That rise-fall-rise-fall cycle neatly reflects the role Gingrich plays in national politics. He has an enduring knack for attracting attention and making himself relevant to the political conversation of the moment, even if most opinion-shapers in his party ultimately aren’t comfortable with him being their public face. So it’s no surprise that even as he nears 70, Gingrich is a vocal participant in the debate over the Republican Party’s direction, one who’s made news recently by taking shots at Stuart Stevens, the architect of Mitt Romney’s ’12 campaign, and Karl Rove.
He entered the fray shortly after the election with a memo to GOP Chairman Reince Priebus, describing himself as blindsided by the November result and “shaken” that he and so many other Republicans had misread the state of play so badly. He outlined 25 principles for a “deep, bold, thorough and lengthy” reform process within the party. Among the points of emphasis: the need to compete for non-white voters and to stop writing off urban areas. More recently, he pointed the finger at Romney and his strategists for worsening the party’s plight with Latinos by running far to the right on immigration during last year’s primary (a tactic that helped Romney derail Gingrich, who had struck a more inclusive tone on the issue).
Salon spoke with Gingrich about where the Republican Party is and where it’s going. The transcript of the conversation, slightly edited and condensed for clarity, is below.
The pre-election polls were pretty clear in showing Obama had a decent advantage. Why do you think you and so many Republicans were so confident? What did you get wrong about the campaign?
First, there was a belief in economic determinism, that you couldn’t have that level of unemployment and have a president get re-elected. So people just sort of had a bias that as long as the economy stayed bad, he would lose. And of course they proved that in many ways identity politics beat economic politics, which I think is a considerable achievement.
Second, I think we underestimated the degree to which they were winning the argument. There’s an old Margaret Thatcher phrase I use over and over: “First you win the argument, then you win the vote.” If you look at the attitudes of the country, they ended up blaming George W. Bush, not Obama. They ended up thinking that ObamaCare actually was a net plus by the election. None of that seemed at all obvious to us.
And third, I think conservatives in general got in the habit of talking to themselves. I think that they in a sense got isolated into their own little world. [.......]
You talked about the information bubble that existed through Fox News, talk radio, that sort of thing. Has that changed at all since the election?
I think that there are a lot of Republicans who are a lot more skeptical today than they were on the morning of the election. In some ways, the final symbol was Rove arguing over Ohio on Fox News after the Fox decision desk had called the state. I’m not picking on Karl, but I’m saying Karl in that sense personified a mindset that I was part of and that an amazing number of people were part of.
To give him some credit, Frank Luntz did a conference call that Callista and I listened to about 5:30 that day, and he went through exit polls and we just stared at each other because it was clear that the exit polls were so different from our expectation — that it was going to be a very long night.
One of the stories of 2012 is that the electorate is less white than ever, and it’s trending in an even less white direction. I don’t think there’s been an election after ’64 when Republicans broke 20 percent with the black vote, the Hispanic vote now, two straight elections…
By the way, Reagan’s approval when he left office, among African Americans, was something like 42 percent. I would argue that there was a brief moment between Reagan and Jack Kemp when we were almost breaking through – and then we relapsed into being normal Republicans.
When you look at the Republican Party’s relationship with African Americans and Hispanics, what is the message you want to deliver to those voters?
I’m for a big rethinking. I don’t think a modestly reformed Republican Party has any real chance of competing in the absence of a dramatic disaster. If there was a big disaster, people would be driven away from the Democrats, but in the absence of a really big disaster, if you want to compete in a difficult but not impossible world, we’re going to have to have very large fundamental rethinking.
The first thing you have to do with African Americans, Latinos, and Asian-Americans and Native Americans is go there. They don’t need to come to you; you need to go to them. And when you go there, listen. Phase one is not going there to tell about you. Why is it we can have entire cities that are disasters, that we can have 500 people getting killed in Chicago, we can have Detroit collapsing, we can have the highest black unemployment teenage in modern history, and no Republican politician can figure out that going there to say, “Gee, shouldn’t we do something to make this better”? And then talk about it jointly, so it becomes a joint product — that it’s not “Let me re-explain conservatism.” I don’t mean to walk away from conservatism, but we need to understand conservatism in the context of people who are talking with us.
Does there need to be a rethinking of conservatism then, as it relates to voters the party’s kind of written off in recent elections?
Sure, sure. And Kemp is significant part of that. If you go back and look, again, one of the reasons that the Reagan-Kemp period was so exciting was that you had a NFL quarterback and Hollywood movie star, and they were breaking out of the Republican norm. People have to know that you care before they care that you know, and I think that really captures a large part of this. One of my messages to Republicans is very simple: One-third of your schedule should be listening to people in minority communities. And today, if you’re not putting one-third of your schedule – and of course, no consultant will suggest this, because you’re not going to get a huge vote in the first trial run – but what you’re going to do, is start to change the whole pattern of dialogue and you learn a whole new language, you’re going to learn a whole new reality. [.......]
When I hear that, my skeptical response in terms of the politics of it from the Republican standpoint would be that the Democratic vote, in 2012 is more tightly condensed geographically than the Democratic vote really has ever been. Obama won like 690 counties – less than Dukakis even did. So you’ve got a situation now where the Republicans at the House level can sustain a majority while writing off these urban Democratic districts.
Look, they just can’t become a governing majority. If they want to be like the old Democratic Party which was doing just fine in Congress, but had no message for the country and no understanding of presidential campaigns, that’s certainly a track they can take. I think it’s bad for America and I think it’s bad for the Republican Party. This requires looking at guys who are in totally safe seats, who could coast the rest of their lives, “You owe it to the country and you owe it to the party to go and do some things you don’t have to do for reelection, but you do have to do for America.” We’ll see what happens. [........]
So how does that advice square with – and I think you kind of experienced this when you ran last year – the threat to the average Republican congressman of a primary challenge if he or she strays at all from conservative orthodoxy, like you did on immigration?
Accept it and go win the challenge. I think the position I took on immigration, for example, was the right position and actually it didn’t hurt me at all. I think some of these people run in a frightened way that they don’t need to, so all you have to do is stand up and explain yourself. [........]
But when you see some of these primary results – like a Christine O’Donnell winning in Delaware, a Ken Buck in Colorado, a Joe Miller in Alaska – don’t you think that sends a frightening message to incumbents? The risk here…
That should send a message to incumbents that you clearly weren’t getting the message that people were extraordinarily angry. Part of the job of an incumbent is to listen to and represent a community. That doesn’t mean you need to be dictated to. That’s literally what actually happened to Bob Bennett (the former Utah senator defeated for re-nomination in 2010) and Orrin Hatch (who was re-elected in Utah in 2012). Orrin understood it early, went home early, listened to people, introduced them to legislation that made them feel pretty good, and he did fine.
But Hatch ran far to the right, and basically ran on the same platform that Romney was sort of forced to run on in the fall, and it worked in Utah, but it didn’t work in swing states…
That’s what I was going to say, that works in Utah.
Right. But you were describing a problem of getting out of safe red states and safe red districts.
I don’t think you’re automatically trapped in this. If you are saying, “Is it harder to build a successful national movement from where we are right now than it would be to coast?” the answer is yes. I’ve done this twice before. It was harder in the late ‘70s with Reagan, and I was a very junior member of the House in ’79 and ‘80. And I had lost twice. I lost in the Watergate year (1974) and I lost in the Jimmy Carter ear (1976) to the Democratic Party ticket. We had to rebuild after the first Bush. And then the ’94 campaign was the culmination of 16 years of work.
Yes, creating a modern, dynamic Republican Party capable of listening to 100 percent of the country is going to be a ton of work. [........]
Do you believe long-term that the demographics are the biggest threat to the Republican Party?
No, I think the lack of ideas is the biggest threat. Look at what’s gone on with the sequester, OK? The fact that they haven’t held hearing after hearing for better ideas, that they haven’t told everybody in risk of being furloughed, “Show us the ways to save money,” that were just sort of – cut, to me, is not exactly a battle cry around which you build a majority. Saving, to some extent, is, but breaking out with better ideas, a better future, better solutions – that to me is where we’re going to have to go. And if you do it right, you can then appeal to virtually everybody in the country.
Does John Boehner have the power, though, given all the skepticism towards him from conservative members and the conservative movement, to lead that kind of effort?
He has the position to encourage it. [........] One of my core arguments is going to be, we need to be the party of a better future, not the anti-Obama party. And we better think through what that’s going to require and how do we achieve that.
When you look at the dynamic that’s now emerging in the House – we saw it in the Violence Against Women act last week, we saw it with Sandy aid and we saw it with fiscal cliff, with Boehner bringing to the floor bills that an overwhelming majority of the conference oppose, then pass on the strength of Democratic votes. What do you make of that? What does that say about what’s going on in the Republican Party right now?
I think it’s tactically where we are at the moment. I don’t draw a great deal out of it for the long-term. We occasionally did that when I was speaker. So it’s not necessarily today or tomorrow – it’s over a period of time. Somebody just pointed out that Reagan and I are two people who have their tapes at the national archives. In my case, it’s the GOPAC training tapes that we did (in the 1980s). It’s easy to forget, but in that long stretch, we were creating the party that won in ’94. [........]
But the long term challenge to the Republican Party is to decide if it is prepared to fundamentally rethink what it’s doing? Is it prepared to make that real on a personal and practical level? Does it involve the whole country, and does it involve focusing on a better future rather than just fighting Obama? The party that makes the right choice in those cases, I think, is going have a very good future.
Read the rest - “In the real world we were kidding ourselves”
Tags: Newt Gingrich
I was surprised to see how high Reagan’s approval ratings amongst blacks was when he left office.
“dramatic disaster”…
odds are improving everyday, don’t bet better than even money against it
The Clinton Machine is waiting for us in 2016 and we better get our stuff together.
Amen to that!
That pig and his chalk boards should never have been brought back to Fox.
The folks who predicted a Romney landslide with references to 1980 were living in a dream world.
The problem was obama…period. First this, first that, and first everything. Something new….as long as Republicans keep eating their own they will never, ever get anywhere anymore.
That whole argument sounds vaguely familiar…
Speranza wrote:
It was a 50/50 chance. And just because *some* people thought that the people of the United States would actually, finally see how terrible a president obama was doesn’t mean they were living in a dream…they were all about hope. I never referenced Romney with 1980. People were blind is all I could say….Romney does love this country…obama was all about the negative.
I’ve killed the thread. Again.
Okay wishing some posters were here…..
/gee I seem to repel them.
Lily wrote:
Nah. Just gathering ingredients for dinner. Plainer than the last new thing I tried two nights back (a Morrocan chicken dish -- tangy!) or even the bourbon and OJ spiced pork tenderloin with sweet taters and apples the wife did last night.
@ Lily:
Yeah, we just underestimated the stupidity of the electorate.
@ Lily:
hmmm what’s this?? looks like a freshly killed thread… well I wasn’t here so I got an alibi
Where’s my Romney PPPPPPHONNNNNE????
We gotta get a new president…really.
…
http://weaselzippers.us/2013/03/06/sickening-citgos-houston-hq-flies-american-flag-at-half-mast-to-mourn-death-of-anti-american-leader-hugo-chavez
still listing to Paul… he is doing well.
Mike C. wrote:
Sounds like you are having fun!
@ brookly red:
You’ll notice that Obama decrees that he can kill Americans without trial, and there are crickets from the Left. All of that bullshit about civil rights is just that: bullshit. They don’t believe in any of it. It is just talking points for them to bitch about Republicans.
mskelly wrote:
No kidding …the stupid was very strong..I never thought it would be so strong. Boy am I seeing it now though..they aren’t hiding it anymore in fact they have doubled down on it with a smile.
/disgusting I say.
Iron Fist wrote:
/they thought he meant in the 3rd trimester…
brookly red wrote:
Who says you weren’t the one? Hmmmmmmm all dressed up like The Lily and killing the thread…while I was in the kitchen getting my cold, cold Dr. Pepper and talking to the the little mutt if he doesn’t behave *gator bait*. I think he got the message all while you were setting me up.
/that’s my story and I’m sticking to it.
@ Iron Fist:
The left protested when Bush drones killed terrorists on foreign soil, they protested when Bush drones killed American citizens on foreign soil;
but they have no problem with Obama drones killing American citizens on American soil!
waldensianspirit wrote:
HEY!!!! They are giving them to dead people down here.
/really!
Lily wrote:
I never use * as “… that’s your handwriting.
Actually, Ron Wyden (D-OR) has now joined in.
Iron Fist wrote:
I said it yesterday, I’ll say it again: for Eric Holder, “due process” means he has an appointment with his barber.
BatGuano wrote:
woe to be judged as a hypocrit
Lily wrote:
It was a different country back then.
From earlier today:
But they’ll do it anyway.
“These aren’t the drones you’re looking for.”
—Obama-Wan Benghazi
lobo91 wrote:
Cruz was on before…
I think that proving they will actually filibuster is a good tactic. Maybe congress will find it’s backbone
BatGuano wrote:
Of course not! obama can do NO WRONG!! Oh and where oh where are the anti-war protesters??????? I really want to know. Can’t depend on them can you?
@ brookly red:
Not every day that you see a bipartisan fillibuster.
@ Lily:
I think they’re still protesting outside Cheney’s house.
@ Lily:
We;re just trying to get some use out of this veritable mountain of recipes around here. I’ve had that Morrocan chicken recipe in my ring binder for at least 4 years without ever trying it. It was pretty damned good.
lobo91 wrote:
I am telling you O’s shit is unraveling
lobo91 wrote:
Wyden, a senator since 1996…interesting
Mike C. wrote:
Morrocan is a good break from the same old same old
Paul is showing he can shoot from the hip with out a teleprompter… I think he is going to run.
brookly red wrote:
*SHAKES HEAD* I don’t see *as* now I see gator bait….you never use that…but I might be mistaken…feeling poorly today. So I’ll go with this….have a headache and backache…..it’s so WRONG! Just for me and oh and you can listen too.
One of my theme songs. 
brookly red wrote:
I like Rand Paul but the media will destroy him just for having an insane father.
@ brookly red:
Yup. I was surprised at how spicey it was, although I shouldn’t have been, given the amount of stuff in it.
brookly red wrote:
Darn it….my little star…yeah that’s all me. Damn I misread that! Duh! It looks more pretty than “
Speranza wrote:
The GOP is SO FAR from getting the “black vote,” that I think something beyond outreach would be necessary if the effort is to simply try and get African-American votes.
African-Americans in particular are taught through public school, handouts, and propaganda that to be “Black” is to vote Democrat.
Those of conservative minds are always forced, in the end, to choose between their principles and their race. The repercussions for violating this within the “community” are severe.
I don’t know how you fix that, but they need to know WHY ON EARTH they’d ever vote not vote Democrat.
So…they kick out two of our people, and we respond by sucking up to them?
MikeA wrote:
for every degree of trouble BO faces, same for the media…and BO is starting to lose traction, not a lot but some…and any little setback makes him that much vulnerable…anything can happen
lobo91 wrote:
maybe our people got caught in the cookie jar..I never read why they were expelled
MikeA wrote:
the media will try to destroy anybody, that is no reason not to run
Speranza wrote:
Yes sir it was! It’s sad that we can say *back in the day* (stars instead of ” for brookly and Speranza I hope you enjoyed them too.)
/sometimes you just have to lighten up things, especially if you have a headache.
Lily wrote:
forensics… get ya every time
lobo91 wrote:
Good heavens the crazy is strong lately.
lobo91 wrote:
hearts and minds…
lobo91 wrote:
He’s evil you know. Of course they are there or at home watching TV. One or the other.
Mike C. wrote:
LOL! Finally got around to trying the recipe! 4 years??????????????
brookly red wrote:
I agree and it is going to be a site to see! *
@ Lily:
They’re idiots. Cheney owns several homes in different states. I remember one time there were a bunch of protesters outside his house in NM. They were all mad because there was no reaction from inside.
There was nobody there.
expelled military guys “involved in conspiracy”
pretty thin
http://venezuelanalysis.com/news/8031
@ Lily:
Be careful what you wish for. Given Obama’s history, he has a zero percent chance of learning from his mistakes.
He’ll double down on the stupid.
Lily wrote:
Benghazi ain’t going away…
heysoos wrote:
It’s Venezuela. What do you expect?
@ brookly red:
Neither is Obama.
You think Nixon went crazy when things starting crumbling around him?
Just wait.
lobo91 wrote:
something with more substance
@ lobo91:
Up thread I said we need a new president…ASAP …Badly. Too bad the election is over. obama is like kryptonite to our country….
Jesus Christ.
We’ve got a president who thinks he can murder Americans at will and is currently doing the American people willful harm -- and Newt says it’s not about Obama and the Republicans need ideas.
God help us
lobo91 wrote:
threatening journalists, enemies list, stonewalling investigations… it’s already hear.
@ heysoos:
Calling Venezuela’s govenment a clown show is an insult to clowns.
Their newly-appointed VP/bus driver claimed that the US caused Chavez’ cancer. Then they expelled two US military attaches.
Connect the dots.
@ brookly red:
Darn it you got your mojo on today…I have an excuse…a headache..so I’m off the hook! *************
@ brookly red:
This is nothing.
Wait until he starts having journalists imprisoned and assassinating his enemies.
lobo91 wrote:
hadn’t heard that one…he sounds just as nutty as Chavez
lobo91 wrote:
when Ahmadinejad’s hair falls out I will take them seriously…
@ heysoos:
He was appointed by Chavez, after all.
@ brookly red:
I think you missed my point.
There’s nothing to take seriously. The Venezuelans are trying to make it look like they’re standing up to the evil Americans.
It’s all bullshit.
lobo91 wrote:
I have stood fast to the fact that we in our country have a *idiot* problem…major one if I say so myself. I’ve seen them in real life and in real action…oh dear night in Georgia….all I can say is *really these people vote????* It’s sad I tell ya. Very sad how much of an idiot some people are.
lobo91 wrote:
there will be no token election?
Chambliss too? wow
lobo91 wrote:
of course it is but we have to play the game…
lobo91 wrote:
You have a point…I must say…he doesn’t learn from his mistakes..
Chavez was killed by the crappy Cuban healthcare system. If he’d been treated by doctors who had a clue, he’d be alive today.
There was a doctor on TV yesterday who explained what happened. The Cubans misdiagnosed the type of cancer he had, and gave him the wrong type of chemotherapy. Rather than killing it, it made the cancer worse.
brookly red wrote:
Oh I hope not…and I hope he pays dearly for Benghazi…dearly.
lobo91 wrote:
note to dictators: If you a. have stolen 2 billion and b. get sick the c. go to Paris.
heysoos wrote:
Chavez appointed the guy as VP a couple weeks back. He only stays in charge until the election. That’s why they’re still referring to him as VP, because it’s not like our system where he’d become president.
They’ll have an election, and whoever the candidate is from Chavez’ party (which may or may not be the new VP, who’s apparently an idiot) will win.
eaglesoars wrote:
Yep we have tons of crazy going on in this country…and NOT VERY MANY PEOPLE ARE NOTICING! The crazy, the idiot, the evil is very strong at this point.
@ brookly red:
Didn’t help Arafat.
lobo91 wrote:
It’s a evil circus?
@ brookly red:
Don’t go to Cuba, anyway.
Why are republican congress critters saying that the presidents nominees are entitled to an up or down vote? Tom Daschle didn’t believe so.
Paul reams Reid.
@ Lily:
Oh, we’ve got books and binders and loose piles of recipes that haven’t been tried yet. We won’t live long enough to try them all. OTOH, we had a casserole last week that we’ve been making for probably 40 years.
lobo91 wrote:
Was Chavez on heavy drugs at the time? Evil and more evil.
lobo91 wrote:
might not have helped Chavez either but the food would have been better
@ Lily:
I would assume so.
@ brookly red:
Right now, Chavez is probably wishing for some ice water.
lobo91 wrote:
Michael Moore go *boom* on how great Cuba’s heealth-care system is.
Dear night in heaven ….Cuba has a better health-care system than ours? If anyone believed that they are idiots.
Toomey joins the fray
@ buzzsawmonkey:
Buzzi -- went over to Zip and checked out the thread like you suggested. Holy moley -- you KNOW you have come across as a complete moron when the lovely Kate the moderator has to come on and call you an idiot.
Which he was… so completely and utterly.
@ Lily:
Our pets get better healthcare than Cubans do.
Mike C. wrote:
Hey what works and is good….stick with it! I say!
lobo91 wrote:
I’m sure.
lobo91 wrote:
well that is true of at least half the people on the planet…
Anyone want to take any bets on that?
lobo91 wrote:
I would not want to be him at all…because more peeps are singing *Oh Happy Day* than *praying for his soul*….bad mojo there.
Carolina Girl wrote:
I love reading in that place… maybe when I grow up I can comment there
Damn Paul is on fire
@ Lily:
Maybe Venezuela will have a chance to improve in a few years now.
Chavez’ party will undoubtedly win the election to replace him, because they have no organized opposition.
But whoever they elect isn’t going to be able to pull off the same sort of crap Chavez did. It was all a cult of personality.
Someone else will win the election after this one.
filibuster record…
In 1957, Strom Thurmond spoke for a dawn-chasing 24 hours and 18 minutes, in opposition to the Civil Rights Act of 1957.
factoid
brookly red wrote:
Did you mention the The Fray….my fav…
lobo91 wrote:
No kidding! But if you want to lose weight you know like to extremely ill thin…Cuba is your place!
lobo91 wrote:
I lay down 500,000/ nope!
Cornyn get on board… this has legs.
brookly red wrote:
Dude that’s going to be a looooooooooooonnnnnnnnnnnnng time. Maybe in 2020…*MAYBE*.
Lily wrote:
For Michael Moore I would suggest the North Korean Diet…
brookly red wrote:
seems like it…if they go for the record they are 1/3 way there and not even winded yet…in other words, the gab still makes good sense
@ brookly red:
he could feed most of the country
Lily wrote:
I always get what I want because I am patient
@ lobo91:
I have to agree with you….the people will finally have a chance.
lobo91 wrote:
once…
brookly red wrote:
Now there is an idea…..I like it!
A bunch of ms tfk’s phone bank people have been calling all of Cornyns offices all over Texas and the D.C. office for hours.
Looks like it worked.
Another crapweasel who needs to be impeached.
brookly red wrote:
Dude….get a triple by-pass surgery at a early age and Lily go *boom* you’ll get it faster…but a little warning…you gotta be bada$$ to go through it. Just saying.
ms tfk gave me and others a good line to use on Cornyn.
“Remember what happened to David Dewhurst” “Get off your ass and aid your fellow Texan he is about to be over run like the Alamo was.”
taxfreekiller wrote:
this is about Brennan?
I watched Paul for a few hours today.
good guy
and Ted Cruz
holder says about his contempt vote…
“It was an effort that had a predetermined result,”
as if there is something wrong with that?….does droning citizens have a predetermined effect?
@ Carolina Girl:
Nifty, huh?
lobo91 wrote:
congress needs to put their hand in their pants and do an inventory check…
Obama ******* and his Arab Spring!
http://weaselzippers.us/2013/03/06/egypt-al-azhar-professor-says-christians-will-pay-sharia-based-jizya-tax/
Lily wrote:
Copts and robbers…
Lily wrote:
and we give these people foreign aid… so yes we already do.
lobo91 wrote:
Impeached? Oh HELL no.
He needs to be in jail.
In Mexico.
That man has blood on his hands.
@ brookly red:
We do not pay any money to these evil cult! Again I say we need a new president….ASAP!
buzzsawmonkey wrote:
*Shakes head* Oh buzz no you didn’t? But I must say fitting.
tset
eaglesoars wrote:
Yes he does…and Mexico sounds like a nice place if I say so myself.
Excellent idea eaglesoars…excellent. No nicey, nicey there!
yes,
We had Ralp Hall call Cornyn’s office and tell him to get off his ass and help a fellow Texan under attack. That and many of the guys at the Alamo were from Kentucky…..@ eaglesoars:
taxfreekiller wrote:
New word? Is it a bird?
/
@ eaglesoars:
Pretty hard to jail the sitting Attorney General, since the federal law enforcement apparatus (and the Bureau of Prisons) works for him.
After he’s been removed from office, they can do what they like with him.
taxfreekiller wrote:
Lily wrote:
I’m not a nice person.
eaglesoars wrote:
LOL! Louisiana ladies can hold their own….for sure!
lobo91 wrote:
first problem -- how to get him to Mexico.
somehow I don’t think the Mexican gov’t would have trouble keeping him in their gentle custody -- how many Mexicans has he killed? 300 or so?
And this murderer has to think about whether it’s constitutional to use drones to kill Americans on American soil
I want him gone.
@ eaglesoars:
How to get him to Mexico…..he doesn’t visit the South….but if you ask someone and the price is right…just saying..
lobo91 wrote:
threaten BO with impeachment if he doesn’t fire Holder
If you are not listing to Paul you should be … http://www.c-span.org/Live-Video/C-SPAN2/
@ eaglesoars:
A lovely woman…would do it for the right price if you get my drift.
eaglesoars wrote:
Tie his feet to the rear bumper of a Washington cab, pay the flat rate, and have the cab drag him.
buzzsawmonkey wrote:
I went with the soft touch first…then after they get in Mexico…whatever! If you get what I mean.
buzzsawmonkey wrote:
as Jack Reacher would say…
“not perfect, but reasonable”
Lily wrote:
no, do tell.
buzzsawmonkey wrote:
you are dreaming. some of the laziest people you will ever meet.
when I have to run around town I hire a private car.
I do the same thing in NYC but I must say the cabbies there can be marvelous
CSPAN just left Paul and went to Graham
heysoos wrote:
why not just impeach BO?
eaglesoars wrote:
I got Paul http://www.c-span.org/Live-Video/C-SPAN2/
here’s the Cruzer smackdown of Holder, via Rush…this guy does not pussy foot around big shots…you gotta love that
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2013/03/06/fearless_cruz_breaks_down_holder
@ heysoos:
Not much of a threat, since he knows it would never get through the Senate.
He’d count being impeached on a party line vote in the House as a badge of honor.
brookly red wrote:
on what grounds?
bad test
@ brookly red:
A drone strike would be better.
heysoos wrote:
circumvention of congress.
brookly red wrote:
martyrdom
brookly red wrote:
thank you sweetie
Cruz is now a target…should be interesting how that shakes out
Greg Gutfeld on THE FIVE had a good point.
Soon we’ll all have our own drones.
THE RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS
Paul is getting tired……………..
heysoos wrote:
I don’t think that man can be intimidated.
eaglesoars wrote:
is he a natural born citizen, with regard to POTUS?
heysoos wrote:
ok you lost me
heysoos wrote:
You mean “which” grounds, don’t you?
@ heysoos:
He was born in Canada.
buzzsawmonkey wrote:
Chief Many Grounds
heysoos wrote:
his mother was a US citizen…how does that work?
Are we starting again with the “natural born citizen”?
@ heysoos:
If he was born in a foreign country, the answer is no.
McCain was an exception, because he was born in what used to be the Panama Canal Zone, which was a US territory at the time.
Speranza wrote:
Speranza wrote:
no, it was me alone, the rest are innocent
brookly red wrote:
Women can be some of the deadiest people out there…especially in the south…a son goes and tells on his daddy if daddy is bad….it’s a bad sight…everything goes side-ways after that.
lobo91 wrote:
surfing the question real quick….there is a strong argument for him being natural born, but there is no precedent, this particular combination
I just got an email from a friend in Wales.
They’re watching Rand Paul on CSPAN
transfixed
eaglesoars wrote:
probably waiting for him to mount his horse, fix his ten gallon hat, draw his Peacemaker and ride to glory
@ heysoos:
There’s no precedent, period. It’s not a defined term by statute or in the Constitution, and the courts have never ruled on it.
eaglesoars wrote:
this is major. If Obama was Imperial Japan, Paul is the Doolittle raid… this is the beginning of the resistance.
Lily wrote:
well they sure can kill a thread
lobo91 wrote:
it appears that if one parent is a natural born citizen, then any child is as well regardless of location…I just skimmed 3 sources which all concluded that no one actually knows what ‘natural born’ means
lobo91 wrote:
time to update the files
Senator Moran from Kansas is now pinch hitting for Rand Paul.
It goes on.
RIX wrote:
we are watching history, this is the first shot in resistance.
RIX wrote:
free hot dogs and beer!…
help out and pig out!
eaglesoars wrote:
Oh yes….piss a woman off ..you got trouble..especially a voodoo priestist….*shakes head* Really bad mojo.
@ heysoos:
No, that makes the person a US citizen by birth. Not the same thing.
That’s the right answer. It’s never been settled.
brookly red wrote:
See? You can see it in r.e.a.l. time.
Lily wrote:
do tell…
@ brookly red:
@ heysoos:
This is a civics lesson. Rand Paul is the real deal.
lobo91 wrote:
not really a big deal to me but an interesting question…and Cruz has aspiration written all over him…he well may be the tipping point to fix the definitions
eaglesoars wrote:
I’ve been really out of it the past few days…and I’m totally out of the loop here.
/so please excuse my ignoranist here. Still trying to recover.
Lily wrote:
You got that right.
I also think that the technical tools the Dems had for reaching the lo-fo voters, and their setup for election theft in every city of any size, played a huge part in it.
*putting on prediction hat* I do not believe that the “good guys” (such as they are) will ever succeed in taking back the US federal government and restoring a functional republic under some semblance of Constitutional rule. I just don’t see it happening. No matter who runs, no matter how hard they work, no matter what message they try. Why? Partly because of the dumbing down and indoctrination of the public. In addition, too much damage has already been done to the US economy. The debt level combined with the political stranglehold means that a deep economic collapse cannot now be avoided. We are just in the beginning stages of a second, and greater, depression. I predict it will last a minimum of two to three decades, and I would not bet on a recovery happening ever.
I decline to predict whether or not there will be armed conflict. We already have tyranny, and it will get worse. I would suggest that the likeliest scenario is that the Chinese will eventually come in and mop up the scraps of whatever is left.
*sadly removing prediction hat*
RIX wrote:
God grant him strength
brookly red wrote:
With style too!
/oh and the shoes are to die for!
@ 1389AD:
I highly disagree that “we already have tyranny”…a president run amok, fucking around with EO’s is hardly tyranny
brookly red wrote:
He probably is.
That said, so was Newt.
brookly red wrote:
spinach does the same thing
heysoos wrote:
That’s exactly what it is.
Our country is based on the concept of a government that operates with “the consent of the governed.”
That ship has sailed.
heysoos wrote:
That is only because all of the health-care regs, the added business regs, the loss of power in the grid from the shuttering of coal plants, the increases in the cost of gasoline, the increases in the cost of food, the continued flatlining of property values, the loss of jobs, etc., have not really hit yet.
The reason they have not hit is because the President, running out of control with no budget, is borrowing trillions from the Chinese to soften the blows…for the moment.
But a tyranny where everyone is getting their gubmint dole is still a tyranny.
heysoos wrote:
I respectfully disagree. There’s much more going on than EOs. The Dems already pretty much own the court system. They have the White House. They have the Senate. The only reason they didn’t get the House is because the distribution of Congressional districts still makes it too hard for them to steal the whole thing. They own the media. They own the schools. They own the NGOs and foundations.
When Reagan was in office, who could have imagined the level of tyranny of “political correctness” that we are facing today?
If you don’t call that tyranny, I sure do.
As I see it, the federal government has crushed the economy with regulations that never existed before, and that has caused many hard working people to face destitution as they get older. The opportunities that once existed are gone.
I call that tyranny.
heysoos wrote:
I love you like a bro’ but you REALLY haven’t been paying attention to the EPA
buzzsawmonkey wrote:
Some of us don’t get the gubmint dole now.
And we wont get SS or medicare later, or if we do, it won’t be enough to keep body & soul together.
I’m in a public wifi and have to leave now. I have cellphone dialup and our ISP is down. Probably will be gone until tomorrow.
lobo91 wrote:
you exaggerate…if you believed that then why the hell are you paying income taxes?…conservatives are getting pushed around but I don’t see much tyranny, as in the people have no power…they could have voted BO out of office but didn’t…if it’s tyranny it’s certainly beatable…if Congress does not want him to have his power, then they can deny it through impeachment, or defunding, or simply outvoting his legislature…attempting tyranny is not the same as accomplishing tyrrany
eaglesoars wrote:
the means to shut down the EPA is there…defund them
heysoos wrote:
?
/really you went there. *shakes head*
@ eaglesoars:
Just look at the situation with the courts.
We have federal courts literally deciding that the will of the people doesn’t matter by overturning the results of referenda.
If that’s not tyranny, I don’t know what is.
brookly red wrote:
Indeed!
lobo91 wrote:
Tyranny indeed.
/obama goes around congress, everything and rules by decree and if that isn’t tyranny what is?
heysoos wrote:
Hiding from tyranny and not earning enough to pay taxes is not the same as not having tyranny.
A tyranny of the majority (whether a real majority or a stolen one) is tyranny nonetheless. That is exactly what our Founders wanted to avoid.
Impeachment (and the impeachment trial in the Senate) always breaks down along political lines. The bad guys already own the Senate.
See ya later, God willing.
lobo91 wrote:
bulls eye…the real power is in the appointed federal courts…I’m not saying that tyranny is not impossible…we’re just not there yet
@ heysoos:
If you think we actually have a voice in how this country runs today, then you need to put down the bong.
We have officials of our government discussing whether or not they can assassinate you.
Here is Paul’s contact page
write to say thank you.
do it
lobo91 wrote:
Said it before, will say it again: Supreme Court, this spring. Same-sex marriage declared “a civil right,” imposed on all fifty states. Prop 8 vote voided, which means the people cannot amend their own state constitution and the Tenth Amendment is dead. Same-sex marriage imposed as a “civil right” will destroy the First Amendment, as it was intended to do.
Is that “tyranny,” or just “tranny?”
lobo91 wrote:
That ship has sunk…
lobo91 wrote:
you’re preaching to the choir bro…as it is, the voters allow this situation, where they could have resisted it with more firepower…as for the feds doing whatever they want, they cannot dismiss a clear and honest vote…what we are seeing is a sort of morph into pre-tyranny and most voters are as yet aware of it…the liberals may win some form of tyranny in the future, but that’s a long way off…I have spent many words here describing federal authority and my personal beliefs…but we are not yet there
@ heysoos:
What you’re actually saying is that you don’t know the meaning of the word.
heysoos wrote:
when did you get naive?
our (I use the term loosely) POTUS thinks he can assassinate American citizens w/o due process -- Rand Paul has been fillibustering for over 7 hrs -- Holder murders citizens of other countries in order to make the case for taking our weapons and the Dept Of Education has its own SWAT team.
Your smart ass, off the cuff -- ‘defund’ remark is unworthy of you.
Of all people.
@ 1389AD:
You have some good points…but you have no idea what the next generation is all about. They are not going to let their country swirl down the drain. They are buying guns like no tomorrow…(I’m talking 20′s and 30′s young adults and they are not in trouble…they obey the law)…..keep the faith. You would be surprised exactly how many people KNOW something is wrong and refuse to back down.
lobo91 wrote:
relax, no reason to insult me, not a good idea…this is a flowing discussion, not your idea of perfection
If there’s anything restraining Obama’s exercise of power, I sure as hell don’t see it.
heysoos wrote:
Lobo served this country I think he knows what tyranny is all about.
WHAT??
What is Durbin doing? ducking the vote?
@ Lily:
See #221
lobo91 wrote:
The Second Amendment
lobo91 wrote:
starting to get the gist of how the GOP let down their money sending, sleepy eyed drones?….BO could not have done it himself, if he’s tyrannical, how did you and your party allow this to happen?…you accuse me of stupidity, I saw republicans are guilty, not me
lobo91 wrote:
Lobo go *boom* you got it right!
@ heysoos:
You’re right. It’s clearly my fault.
heysoos wrote:
You and lobo91 can have your own fight -- but what you’re leaving out is the utter complicity of the media.
lobo91 wrote:
Neither do I.
Bumr50 wrote:
I thought Cosby was more intelligent than that.
heysoos wrote:
Republicans didn’t lose it……people were not paying attention. I mean Benghazi so close to the election and obama still wins…we have a nation of idiots. Or at least 1/2 idiots.
lobo91 wrote:
lobo91 wrote:
not much of an answer…BO did not sneak up on anyone…when I first posted here not even a year ago, I spoke of my disgust with the GOP and that I didn’t trust them etc…a number of people called me a troll…well lookie here, BO copped another term and the GOP is on life support…tell me when was the last time they did you any favors?…oh yeah, 2010
Speranza wrote:
Cosby’s criticism of the black community’s mores was for internal consumption. As far as the larger society is concerned, despite his huge success within the larger society, Cosby’s point of view is every bit as blinkered as Al Sharpton’s.
lobo91 wrote:
Right huh? Not!
eaglesoars wrote:
Bingo and did hey even vote?
Speranza wrote:
yeah, very disappointing from I guy I admired alot…he should stick to his fatherless child gig
DAMN Paul is letting it all hang out
Speranza wrote:
Again …we have a nation of idiots it seems.
brookly red wrote:
he still going?…anybody rescue him?
@ Lily:
None of the things they taught you in civics class are operational anymore.
Impeachment is a hollow threat. There’s almost no chance that you’ll ever see a big enough Senate majority to remove a president from office, and it certainly won’t happen with this one.
Congressional oversight? We have Cabinet secretaries ignoring contempt citations and just telling Congress to go to hell.
Same thing with court orders.
Defunding them is a non-starter, as well, for the same reason as impeachment. Besides, we haven’t had a budget since 2009, anyway.
What we’ve really seen over the past few years is some glaring flaws in our Constitution that nobody ever thought would come up. The framers didn’t think about the possibility that we might one day elect someone who would just ignore the rules.
Lily wrote:
Dr. Cosby has made his wealth and now like a good liberal he will play the race card… I welcome him to to go to hell.
heysoos wrote:
OK. Let’s look at my discussions, recently, of same-sex marriage. Many people, you among them, have said to me, “what’s the big deal? Live and let live, yadda yadda—whom does it hurt?”
I’ve tried to point out to people here that the legal re-definition of marriage—not the denial of some legal protections to same-sex unions, but re-defining “marriage” to accommodate them—was an axe-blow to the trunk of the Bill of Rights. Despite the conservative inclinations of most people here, that warning has fallen on largely deaf ears. Lots of people who can see how the squandering of vast sums of money is a bad idea, but many fewer, alas, seem willing or able to wrap their minds around how the distortion of this abstract thing called “rights” can come back to bite them on the ass.
So it does not surprise me that so many people have fallen for the Snakeoil Salesman in Chief. There are lots of people who are not sophisticated when it comes to money; there are lots of people who fall for promises of free stuff; there are lots of people—the same-sex marriage discussions here have taught me that—who haven’t the foggiest clue how “rights” work.
Meanwhile, from our friends in the media, who are supposed to act as watchdogs:
buzzsawmonkey wrote:
I don’t give much weight to someone’s so-called ‘moral authority’ who has spent years betraying his marital vows.
brookly red wrote:
“Cozbi” is the name of the Midianite woman in Numbers 25 who was the leader of the orgy that caused a plague to come upon the Israelites.
heh.
Cruz noting that twitter is ‘blowing up’
@ lobo91:
Just don’t waterboard ‘em Lobo — that would be a big no no.
@ buzzsawmonkey:
We haven’t spent trillions on public education for nothing, you know…
//
Carolina Girl wrote:
Or make them listen to loud music. Or be too hot or too cold. Or feed them non-halal meals. Or touch their Korans.
@ lobo91:
@ lobo91:
well said…
the only device left to the GOP is the law…I hate the thought of impeachment because I feel it demeans all Americans and this heretofor cool system we live under…we invented this system, it’s ours and I really bothers me to see it’s flaws exposed…so does Lobo, we might disagree one pound but we do agree one ton…in the next year, depending, the GOP needs to make their aims clear, forget the media, and press on with the constitution…there are ways around an EO, but is the GOP even pursuing that?…now that Holder is in contempt of Congress what is the GOP plan? I have not heard one…BO has the GOP running around in 3 different circles, creating division…where is the GOP defense?…this little dustup in the senate right now is exactly the politics the GOP should play, on every issue, every day 24/7…but they don’t…if you don’t challenge BO with the available tools, then what?
Wouldn’t It Be Nice?
—apologies to the Beach Boys and “Wouldn’t It Be Nice?“
Wouldn’t it be nice to be dictator
And to not pay Congress any mind?
And wouldn’t it be nice to just pay later
Without debt ceilings of any kind?
You know that it would be a time of plenty
Without Republican intransigency
Wouldn’t it be nice if I could give you
All the lovely things you don’t have yet?
Don’t you know I only haven’t done so
Because some folks have corporate jets
Just a little expansion of powers
And this life of lotus would be ours
Wouldn’t it be nice?
Maybe if I went and expanded the Fourteenth Amendment
With an interpretation that was never intended
I’d get my own way
And then I’d be happy
Wouldn’t it be nice?
I wouldn’t say a coup is contemplated
But listening to Congress seems so dated
So I’ve only stated
Wouldn’t it be nice?
heysoos wrote:
excellent point
one reason we are living in tyranny is because the GOP is run by self-interested cowards
@ buzzsawmonkey:
excellent…I’m a Beach Boy fan
heysoos wrote:
Impeachment is not a practical option—but it should be pointed out that this is part of the law, and part of what you call “this heretofore cool system we live under.”
It is a particular legal option for a particular problem. That it cannot be followed with any expectation of success because of partisanship is part of the problem.
@ eaglesoars:
Again, that situation brings up one of the flaws in our system. Congress has no actual enforcement mechanism against the executive branch.
It never occured to the framers that we’d have a president who would just ignore the rules.
eaglesoars wrote:
the GOP needs to get inside BO’s head…fish around and exploit his vanity…spread rumors, a head nod, a fake..whatever it takes but attack his weakness, create a vibe that irritates him into shit he wished he hadn’t…at least try
lobo91 wrote:
“Now, show me on this stuffed, plush Koran where the big, bad man touched yours…”
buzzsawmonkey wrote:
up thread I suggested the GOP toss around the idea, possibly even a direct threat…it’s a tool
lobo91 wrote:
Yes they do. U.S. Marshalls. They just won’t use it. Salazar and Holder should have been frog marched to Levenworth.
SCOTUS doesn’t have enforcement powers -- and that is a problem.
eaglesoars wrote:
Especially when the Chief Justice seems to be lacking a SCROTUS.
heysoos wrote:
do you have ANY idea how many people in Chicago think he’s on the downlow?
eaglesoars wrote:
What’s the population of Chicago?
@ eaglesoars:
The Marshalls Service is part of DoJ. They’re executive branch. Congress has no authority to order them to do anything.
The only law enforcement agency that works for Congress is the Capitol Police, and they have no jurisdiction outside of the Capitol complex.
I was in contempt of court once…defending myself against 4th rate IRS lawyers…spent two nights in jail and the fuckers wouldn’t even let me go home t shower…I went from lock up straight back to court..the feds can be bog time assholes
buzzsawmonkey wrote:
no clue
guess 2-3 million?
@ eaglesoars:
@ lobo91:
The Founders did not contemplate the possibility of a rogue President.
lobo91 wrote:
I think that is incorrect.
Let me check
buzzsawmonkey wrote:
They assumed that the people would be engaged enough that they’d only elect good people as their leaders.
Fooled them…
eaglesoars wrote:
lobo I will check but right now Molly is having an incident -- gotta go
@ heysoos:
Two Party Evil Money Cult. TPEMC