Whether or not an individual would vote for former U.S. House Speaker Newt Gingrich as a GOP candidate for the U.S. presidency, like and admire him or not, it is important for all Americans to hear his message.
The former lawmaker, now chairman of American Solutions for Winning the Future, was in Lawrence this week and made three presentations: one primarily for KU students, one for a group called Friends of the Dole Institute and one for the general public at the Dole Institute of Politics.
There is no question that Gingrich is a strong, extremely smart, effective and articulate spokesman for the Republican Party. However, he is an even stronger, more passionate and outspoken advocate for a morally, economically and militarily strong United States.
He is crisscrossing the country delivering his message on the importance of the American public being far more aware and concerned about America’s fragile position in the world, whether in moral leadership, education, national security, or economic and business leadership.
He doesn’t hide his concern and distrust of President Obama and the eventual goals of the Obama administration. He doesn’t pull any punches in his criticism of many U.S. actions or policies during the Bush 43 administration.
In his hour-long, note-free address at the Dole Institute and a long question-and-answer period, the former GOP congressman stressed three major concerns: “Who are we,” “how do we compete with China and India to create jobs and maintain our economic position as a world leader” and our “national security.”
Granted, there are political implications on how best to address these issues, but these questions or concerns should be of great importance to all Americans whether they are Democrats, Republicans or somewhere in between.
On the question of where are we, he pointed out that those who worked so hard in drafting the Declaration of Independence actually believed in what they wrote. They believed it when they wrote, “We hold these Truths to be self evident that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain, unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.”
He said those writing the declaration didn’t say the government “owed” anyone but did say they had the right to “pursue.” They also acknowledged there was a God and a creator, which, in American classrooms today, might be challenged by the ACLU.
He said it is important for Americans to believe in the truth, not what someone in government might want you to believe. He said the most important political slogan in the coming years may be “two plus two equals four,” meaning don’t accept and don’t believe two plus two equals five or that one plus two equals four rather than three. Believe in the truth, not what someone is trying to sell you.
He urged those in his audience to compare what American school children learn in their high school years with what students of comparable age learn in their classrooms in China or India. He said, “If you don’t learn, you shouldn’t get a diploma.”
In regard to competing with China and India, he said what is happening in those two countries is “a fact. … The problem is how do we deal with it?”
He pointed out the growth of the economies in both China and India and how they are structuring their business and industrial development.
Gingrich said there is no question that America is and can continue to be a world leader, but due to various developments and government polices, we have lost our ability, commitment or zeal to achieve success. He pointed out that in a period of 44 months, from the time the U.S. entered World War II until the end of the war, America had defeated two war machines on two sides of the globe, Germany and Japan, built a two-ocean Navy, built the Pentagon, developed the atom bomb, built thousands of ships, tanks and planes, mobilized millions of men and women and, after the war, helped rebuild Europe and Japan.
And yet, he said, the U.S. has been fighting a war in Afghanistan for eight years — and there’s not much to show for the effort — and there isn’t a building to replace the World Trade Center destroyed in 2001. He said we should have had a massive building up within 18 months to show this country can bounce back and is not going to be knocked down by terrorists.
He stressed the point that this country and its people can accomplish so many great things, but for some reason, we have lost the drive, commitment and desire to excel.
On the national security matter, he said far too many Americans do not realize we are in a war, that the enemy wants to kill us and that it is as simple as the late President Reagan said when asked about the Soviet Union, “We win, they lose.”
Gingrich said the last 30 years have been difficult for the United States, and the public needs to realize just how serious the current situation is. “When we have arrests of suspected terrorists only a few days ago in Denver, Detroit and New York, and we know they want to kill us, this should make it very clear just how serious the situation is.”
Undoubtedly, there are those who would argue and disagree with many of the things Gingrich said, but such thinking probably is colored by political leanings, not the true “two plus two equals four” facts presented by Gingrich. Granted, he did not have many good things to say about Obama and former President Carter, but putting this aside, there is no question that far too many people in this country are complacent about our educational system, our economic situation, the almost unbelievable and mounting debt, and our national security.
There doesn’t seem to be a sense of urgency or a feeling that this country and its people are in a giant competition with those who hate us, as well as those in China and India, who are determined to match us, or beat us, in the world of business, manufacturing, industrial development and finance.
Why isn’t there more concern? The same could be said about the city of Lawrence, Kansas University and the state of Kansas. Why aren’t more people actively engaged in trying to get better, beat the competition and be a leader? In the case of KU, why settle for just being the best in Kansas? Why not aim for being one of the best in the country and do what it takes to try to reach this goal? Sad to say, but KU has dropped in its national ranking in recent years.
There is no room for complacency or accepting what is as what should be the case, whether in education, moral leadership, the role of government, keeping America strong economically and militarily, or for those in Lawrence to accept and be satisfied with average, mediocre performance in the city, at the university or at the state level.
As noted above, the Gingrich message should be heard by as many Americans as possible, whether or not they would vote for the man. At a time when this country faces so many challenges and when we have a president who is determined to change this country in such a radical way, the public needs to get far more excited and concerned and demand better and more courageous leadership.
Comments
nbnozzy
Posted 7:12 a.m., November 7, 2009
Suggest removal
Okay Dolph, I tend to agree with what you wrote. According to your report on what Newt said, the former Congressman laid out the reality of how the world is shaping up today. And it's scary. And I believe it boils down to mostly one thing: Americans are apathetic. Fat and lazy. Wanting something for nothing. Let the other guy do the work. Let other people think for them. And I don't believe they are going to change for the better any time soon.
Regarding KU: I don't know if it's because the University's standards have slipped or if it's because there are other college campuses that have upped their game in academics? I'd be interested in seeing graduation rates of all Division I schools.
merrill
Posted 7:27 a.m., November 7, 2009
Suggest removal
Let ME pay for National Health Insurance with MY tax dollars for MY National Health insurance.
Here's the deal. National Health Insurance is not a free ride and never will be perhaps with few exceptions.
You see my tax dollars will pay for my portion therefore no one else would be paying for MY National Health Insurance coverage. A 3.3% payroll tax is doable.
However if you listen to the republican party NOT and Max Baucus you would be led to believe that my tax dollars are not my tax dollars. How can that be?
The fact that National Health Insurance would come from the rather substantial tax dollar cookie jars simply means that no monthly or weekly deductions would come out of my pay check per se..
Since federal, state, and local governments collect trillions in taxes of all kinds—income, sales, property, corporate etc etc this is how medical bills would be paid as it is now.
You see as we speak the government tax dollars support medical insurance payments to the tune of at least $1.2 trillion which is quite a gravy train I'd say. Next year this will increase by changing nothing and not passing the National Health Insurance Act.
In essence MY tax dollar amount to pay MY portion of National Health Insurance would be about $2700 annually for the entire family.
What coverage would this buy the family:
*long term care such that cancer demands
*prescription drugs
* hospital
* surgical
* outpatient services
* primary and preventive care
* emergency services
* dental
* mental health
* home health
* physical therapy
* rehabilitation (including for substance abuse)
* vision care
* hearing services including hearing aids
* chiropractic
* durable medical equipment
* palliative care
A good deal that would free up more expendable cash to be spent elsewhere thus creating new jobs. Things like birthdays,christmas,home improvements,taking better care of my lover and investments would benefit.
Social Security and Medicare are two very smart insurance plans.
merrill
Posted 7:34 a.m., November 7, 2009
Suggest removal
Newt is only beating up on GW and Cheney because it is fashionable and acceptable. Reagan/Bush created a ton of fiscal chaos while they were in office with Newt. Newt is a slick talker no question about it.
Newt Gingrich is as much a RINO as any other of todays republicans NOT.
The dollar may be trouble in fact it may be deemed worthless in many circles.
Jobs jobs jobs is the central issue. Reagan/Bush began the big push of shoving jobs beyond our borders. Consequently millions upon millions upon millions lost jobs that have yet to be replaced.
FACE IT the USA needs 20 million new jobs with NEW INDUSTRY as the source.
USA citizens have got to say SCREW IT we don’t need bi-partianship WE NEED JOBS and WE NEED NEW INDUSTRY! The Kansas legislature has not been real good at new strong economic growth or public school support which is important to new economc growth.
For the new administration it is about how Bush/Cheney wrecked the economy. It is about how Bush/Cheney and their worshippers being idiots trying to blame Obama for the economy AFTER Bush/Cheney managed to put 8 million people out of work.
This is about the RINO party that took over the republican party and wrecking the good republican name.
This RINO party is neither fiscally responsible nor socially responsible.
RINO's have taken over our city,state and federal governments. RINO's represent Reaganomics = Wreckanomics by way of tax favors, war and financial scandals.
It's about the NEW RINO party that first entered the scene in 1980 which has cost the nation 15-20 million USA jobs.
This is the problem:
RINO's have taken over our city,state and federal governments.
RINO's represent Reaganomics = Wreckanomics by way of tax favors, war and financial scandals.
Pilgrim2
Posted 7:41 a.m., November 7, 2009
Suggest removal
merrill (Anonymous) says…
The fact that National Health Insurance would come from the rather substantial tax dollar cookie jars simply means that no monthly or weekly deductions would come out of my pay check per se..
*******************************************
BS, Richard, and you know it. The deductions will come in the form of ever higher taxes that will more than exceed what your insurance premiums are now.
And btw:
What the Pelosi Health-Care Bill Really Says
Here are some important passages in the 2,000 page
legislation.
By BETSY MCCAUGHEY
The health bill that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is bringing to a vote (H.R. 3962) is 1,990 pages. Here are some of the details you need to know.
What the government will require you to do:
• Sec. 202 (p. 91-92) of the bill requires you to enroll in a "qualified plan." If you get your insurance at work, your employer will have a "grace period" to switch you to a "qualified plan," meaning a plan designed by the Secretary of Health and Human Services. If you buy your own insurance, there's no grace period. You'll have to enroll in a qualified plan as soon as any term in your contract changes, such as the co-pay, deductible or benefit.
• Sec. 224 (p. 118) provides that 18 months after the bill becomes law, the Secretary of Health and Human Services will decide what a "qualified plan" covers and how much you'll be legally required to pay for it. That's like a banker telling you to sign the loan agreement now, then filling in the interest rate and repayment terms 18 months later.
On Nov. 2, the Congressional Budget Office estimated what the plans will likely cost. An individual earning $44,000 before taxes who purchases his own insurance will have to pay a $5,300 premium and an estimated $2,000 in out-of-pocket expenses, for a total of $7,300 a year, which is 17% of his pre-tax income. A family earning $102,100 a year before taxes will have to pay a $15,000 premium plus an estimated $5,300 out-of-pocket, for a $20,300 total, or 20% of its pre-tax income. Individuals and families earning less than these amounts will be eligible for subsidies paid directly to their insurer.
• Sec. 303 (pp. 167-168) makes it clear that, although the "qualified plan" is not yet designed, it will be of the "one size fits all" variety. The bill claims to offer choice—basic, enhanced and premium levels—but the benefits are the same. Only the co-pays and deductibles differ. You will have to enroll in the same plan, whether the government is paying for it or you and your employer are footing the bill.
• Sec. 59b (pp. 297-299) says that when you file your taxes, you must include proof that you are in a qualified plan. If not, you will be fined thousands of dollars. Illegal immigrants are exempt from this requirement.
Pilgrim2
Posted 7:43 a.m., November 7, 2009
Suggest removal
(cont.)
• Sec. 412 (p. 272) says that employers must provide a "qualified plan" for their employees and pay 72.5% of the cost, and a smaller share of family coverage, or incur an 8% payroll tax. Small businesses, with payrolls from $500,000 to $750,000, are fined less.
Eviscerating Medicare:
In addition to reducing future Medicare funding by an estimated $500 billion, the bill fundamentally changes how Medicare pays doctors and hospitals, permitting the government to dictate treatment decisions.
• Sec. 1302 (pp. 672-692) moves Medicare from a fee-for-service payment system, in which patients choose which doctors to see and doctors are paid for each service they provide, toward what's called a "medical home."
The medical home is this decade's version of HMO-restrictions on care. A primary-care provider manages access to costly specialists and diagnostic tests for a flat monthly fee. The bill specifies that patients may have to settle for a nurse practitioner rather than a physician as the primary-care provider. Medical homes begin with demonstration projects, but the HHS secretary is authorized to "disseminate this approach rapidly on a national basis."
A December 2008 Congressional Budget Office report noted that "medical homes" were likely to resemble the unpopular gatekeepers of 20 years ago if cost control was a priority.
• Sec. 1114 (pp. 391-393) replaces physicians with physician assistants in overseeing care for hospice patients.
• Secs. 1158-1160 (pp. 499-520) initiates programs to reduce payments for patient care to what it costs in the lowest cost regions of the country. This will reduce payments for care (and by implication the standard of care) for hospital patients in higher cost areas such as New York and Florida.
• Sec. 1161 (pp. 520-545) cuts payments to Medicare Advantage plans (used by 20% of seniors). Advantage plans have warned this will result in reductions in optional benefits such as vision and dental care.
• Sec. 1402 (p. 756) says that the results of comparative effectiveness research conducted by the government will be delivered to doctors electronically to guide their use of "medical items and services."
Pilgrim2
Posted 7:44 a.m., November 7, 2009
Suggest removal
(cont.)
Questionable Priorities:
While the bill will slash Medicare funding, it will also direct billions of dollars to numerous inner-city social work and diversity programs with vague standards of accountability.
• Sec. 399V (p. 1422) provides for grants to community "entities" with no required qualifications except having "documented community activity and experience with community healthcare workers" to "educate, guide, and provide experiential learning opportunities" aimed at drug abuse, poor nutrition, smoking and obesity. "Each community health worker program receiving funds under the grant will provide services in the cultural context most appropriate for the individual served by the program."
These programs will "enhance the capacity of individuals to utilize health services and health related social services under Federal, State and local programs by assisting individuals in establishing eligibility . . . and in receiving services and other benefits" including transportation and translation services.
• Sec. 222 (p. 617) provides reimbursement for culturally and linguistically appropriate services. This program will train health-care workers to inform Medicare beneficiaries of their "right" to have an interpreter at all times and with no co-pays for language services.
• Secs. 2521 and 2533 (pp. 1379 and 1437) establishes racial and ethnic preferences in awarding grants for training nurses and creating secondary-school health science programs. For example, grants for nursing schools should "give preference to programs that provide for improving the diversity of new nurse graduates to reflect changes in the demographics of the patient population." And secondary-school grants should go to schools "graduating students from disadvantaged backgrounds including racial and ethnic minorities."
• Sec. 305 (p. 189) Provides for automatic Medicaid enrollment of newborns who do not otherwise have insurance.
For the text of the bill with page numbers, see www.defendyourhealthcare.us.
Ms. McCaughey is chairman of the Committee to Reduce Infection Deaths and a former Lt. Governor of New York state.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001...
jayhawklawrence
Posted 7:48 a.m., November 7, 2009
Suggest removal
If you are one of those who is scratching your head and wondering why Newt didn't really say anything...you are not alone.
It is all vapor with no substance. Neither political party is worth their salaries or their speaker fees.
The dismantling of the industrial infrastructure of the United States is the fault of both political parties and to the benefit of the new too large to fail investment groups who sold off our jobs to fatten their wallets and inflate their egos.
The US CAN compete in the world market if we don't keep getting screwed by our own government.
Newt is part of that group of egomaniacs who pushed us off the cliff with his BS.
Made_in_China
Posted 7:54 a.m., November 7, 2009
Suggest removal
"There is no question that Gingrich is a strong, extremely smart, effective and articulate spokesman..." ===
Pretty good column, sir. Better than the usual. Newt is very clever, and a strategic thinker, perhaps the first the R's have had since Richard Nixon. The Elephants, however, won't let him run for president because he won't breathe the vapors and spend energy worrying about zygotes and gay relationships. It's too bad, as N.G. could bring the Republicans back to the middle and 'reality' as it used to be defined.
barrypenders
Posted 7:58 a.m., November 7, 2009
Suggest removal
Pilgrim2, "BS, Richard, and you know it"
merrill is a grasshopper. He needs to be taken care of. He has said that he wants music at 11am in the streets of Lawrence to improve the sales at the businesses.
Stimulus and evolution lives
Darwin bless you
corduroypants
Posted 8:05 a.m., November 7, 2009
Suggest removal
Because when I think of "moral leadership," Newt Gingrich immediately comes to mind.
TomShewmon
Posted 8:13 a.m., November 7, 2009
Suggest removal
As much as it pains me to say this, it may not be so much the message from the GOP, but the message from the left that is going to pull a 180 over the next 3 years. Just as how I voted for McCain, many may hold their noses and go with the Republican candidate after observing the current disaster.
merrill
Posted 8:21 a.m., November 7, 2009
Suggest removal
The republican party has definitely developed some very colorful history beginning with Reagan/Bush in which Newt was a part of. Newt is depending on lazy memories.
For example:
1. The Reagan/ Bush Home Loan Scandal = huge losses in jobs and retirement programs
http://rationalrevolution0.tripod.com...
2. The Bush/Cheney Home Loan Scandal = huge losses in jobs and retirement programs
http://www.dollarsandsense.org/archiv...
3. What did Bush and Henry Paulson do with the bail out money?
http://www.democracynow.org/2009/9/10...
4. Why did GW Bush Lie About Social Security?( This would cost taxpayers $4 trillion and wreck the economy)
http://www.dollarsandsense.org/archiv...
5. Reagan/Bush Iran-Contra Secret Weapons Deal
* http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/nsa/publ...
* http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/reagan/p...
6. Reagan/Bush - Bush/Cheney Weapons Deals
* http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0...
* http://www.inthesetimes.com/article/4...
7. $9 Billion Lost In Iraq
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/0...
8. Thousands of Weapons Lost In Iraq May be Going To Taliban
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/...
9. Strategic Errors of Monumental Proportions -What Can Be Done in Iraq?
by Lt. Gen. William E. Odom (Ret.)
http://www.antiwar.com/orig/odom.php?...
merrill
Posted 8:26 a.m., November 7, 2009
Suggest removal
Report Card on Single-Payer and Public Option
View for yourselves National Health Insurance vs Public Option
http://www.healthcare-now.org/report-...
merrill
Posted 8:31 a.m., November 7, 2009
Suggest removal
More republicans anywhere in government is a recipe for economic disaster.
Millions of jobs were lost during the Reagan/Bush Savings and Loan/home loan scandal(first one) and during the global economy push = outsourcing.
Then Bush/Quale came along.
Bush/Cheney lost 2 million in their first admin and 6 million during the second admin when the second home/loan scandal surfaced.
The USA is down about 20 million jobs. No new industry has been been developed to bring those jobs and their pay scales back = loss of national wealth.
merrill
Posted 8:36 a.m., November 7, 2009
Suggest removal
Paying More, Getting Less
How much is the sick U.S. health care system costing you?
By Joel A. Harrison
This article is from the May/June 2008 issue of Dollars & Sense: The Magazine of Economic Justice available at http://www.dollarsandsense.org/archiv...
By any measure, the United States spends an enormous amount of money on health care. Here are a few of those measures. In 2006, U.S. health care spending exceeded 16% of the nation’s GDP.
To put U.S. spending into perspective: the United States spent 15.3% of GDP on health care in 2004, while Canada spent 9.9%, France 10.7%, Germany 10.9%, Sweden 9.1%, and the United Kingdom 8.7%. Or consider per capita spending: the United States spent $6,037 per person in 2004, compared to Canada at $3,161, France at $3,191, Germany at $3,169, and the U.K. at $2,560.
By now the high overall cost of health care in the United States is broadly recognized. And many Americans are acutely aware of how much they pay for their own care. Those without health insurance face sky-high doctor and hospital bills and ever more aggressive collection tactics—when they receive care at all.
Those who are fortunate enough to have insurance experience steep annual premium hikes along with rising deductibles and co-pays, and, all too often, a well-founded fear of losing their coverage should they lose a job or have a serious illness in the family.
Still, Americans may well underestimate the degree to which they subsidize the current U.S. health care system out of their own pockets.
And almost no one recognizes that even people without health insurance pay substantial sums into the system today. If more people understood the full size of the health care bill that they as individuals are already paying—and for a system that provides seriously inadequate care to millions of Americans—then the corporate opponents of a universal single-payer system might find it far more difficult to frighten the public about the costs of that system.
In other words, to recognize the advantages of a single-payer system, we have to understand how the United States funds health care and health research and how much it actually costs us today.
merrill
Posted 8:38 a.m., November 7, 2009
Suggest removal
Con't:
Where Does All the Money Go?
After you’ve finished gasping in surprise at the share of your income that is already going into health care, you may wonder where all that money goes.
One answer is that the United States has the most bureaucratic health care system in the world, including over 1,500 different companies, each offering multiple plans, each with its own marketing program and enrollment procedures, its own paperwork and policies, its CEO salaries, sales commissions, and other non-clinical costs—and, of course, if it is a for-profit company, its profits.
Compared to the overhead costs of the single-payer approach, this fragmented system takes almost 25 cents more out of every health care dollar for expenses other than actually providing care.
Of the additional overhead in the current U.S. system, approximately half is borne by doctors’ offices and hospitals, which are forced to maintain large billing and negotiating staffs to deal with all the plans. By contrast, under
Canada’s single-payer system (which is run by the provinces, not by the federal government), each medical specialty organization negotiates once a year with the nonprofit payer for each province to set fees, and doctors and hospitals need only bill that one payer.
Of course, the United States already has a universal, single-payer health care program: Medicare. Medicare, which serves the elderly and people with disabilities, operates with overhead costs equal to just 3% of total expenditures, compared to 15% to 25% overhead in private health programs.
Since Medicare collects its revenue through the IRS, there is no need to collect from individuals, groups, or businesses.
Some complexity remains—after all, Medicare must exist in the fragmented world that is American health care—but no matter how creative the opponents of single-payer get, there is no way they can show convincingly how the administrative costs of a single-payer system could come close to the current level.
Some opponents use current U.S. government expenditures for Medicare and Medicaid to arrive at frightening cost estimates for a universal single-payer health care system.
They may use Medicare’s $8,568 per person, or $34,272 for a family of four (2006). But they fail to mention that Medicare covers a very atypical, high-cost slice of the U.S. population: senior citizens, regardless of pre-existing conditions, and people with disabilities, including diagnoses such as AIDS and end-stage renal disease.
Or they use Medicaid costs—forgetting to mention that half of Medicaid dollars pay for nursing homes, while the other half of Medicaid provides basic health care coverage, primarily to children in low-income households, at a cost of only about $1,500 a year per child.
Jane
Posted 8:58 a.m., November 7, 2009
Suggest removal
pilgrim, thanks for the info.
tom, i think you are right about 2012.
revolution anyone?
ahimsa
Posted 10:35 a.m., November 7, 2009
Suggest removal
Maybe China or India will take over the US as our civilization declines. Then we would definitely have night markets and lots of really good food. Plus, our kids would learn high school math by 5th grade, and we'd be multi-lingual. We'd all be more fit doing yoga or tai chi everyday. I say, "bring it on!"
Thing
Posted 1:39 p.m., November 7, 2009
Suggest removal
I would like to know why Merrill hasn't been dissappeared! His cut and paste operations are nothing more than repeated garbage time and time again.
commuter
Posted 4:01 p.m., November 7, 2009
Suggest removal
Merrill how much are you getting from Obama for your cut and paste crap???
weeslicket
Posted 7:01 p.m., November 7, 2009
Suggest removal
1. ahhhhhh. too much merrill.
2. ahhhhhh. too much pilgrim2.
3. made in china: "It's too bad, as N.G. could bring the Republicans back to the middle and 'reality' as it used to be defined."
wow. newt gingrich now is an example of moderation.
wow, tom shewmon.
just wow.
4. tom shewmon: "As much as it pains me to say this, ..."
mild wow. more like a harrummph.
5. at least dolph signed his name to this one.
weeslicket
Posted 7:41 p.m., November 7, 2009
Suggest removal
oh crap! i also meant to add:
6. i noticed dolph gave himself two spots on the online ljword.
chuckle. chuckle. snort.
yourworstnightmare
Posted 4:15 p.m., November 8, 2009
Suggest removal
Gingrich is correct that 1 + 1 = 2 is what will save america.
Guidance by objective, scientific realities. Not religious mumbo-jumbo that flies in the face of reality or political spin and lies trying to distort the perception of reality.
Evidence-based decision making coupled with true performance standards and regulations are the saviors of this country.
Spirit mystics (religion) and muscle mystics (partisan politicians), to borrow from Ayn Rand, are the problem. The solution is objective reality and the decisions based upon it.
Religious fundamentalists, science deniers, and partisan hacks: you are the problem.
yourworstnightmare
Posted 4:17 p.m., November 8, 2009
Suggest removal
Ironic that Gingrich is delivering this message. He was/is a master of political spin and reality denial for political purposes.
jimmyjms
Posted 12:07 p.m., November 9, 2009
Suggest removal
Oh yes.
Let's see...83 ethics sanctions.
$300,000 in fines.
Three marriages, two adulterous affairs (which were ongoing as he lambasted President Clinton for, ahem, having an adulterous affair), and serving papers to his wife, whom he was cheating on, while she was in the hospital with cancer.
You republicans sure have interesting morals.
If Dolph didn't own the paper, this garbage wouldn't be printed, as it's nonsense.
JHOK32
Posted 12:30 p.m., November 9, 2009
Suggest removal
We spent 8 years drowning the very rich with even more money, the big oil companies, the big defense contractors, Wall street execs, Insurance execs, etc, etc, until Bush & Cheney totally wrecked our entire economy. This is why the nation overwhelmingly voted for change and this is why perhaps the average Joe on main street might just get to have adequate healthcare for himself & his family. Is this too much to ask? All the Republicans want to do is whine, stall, & destroy anything that helps the little guy. Well I've got news, the little guy is still treading water, we got the health bill through the house & we'll get something through the senate. It is wonderful news to know that somebody is fighting for the little guy for a change. It's high time the filthy rich gave back to this country & it's high time we had a President and a Congress that isn't handing over mountains of our money to the wealthiest 10% of our population.
Log in to comment