USA Today‘s front page today (12/2/12) seemed to know– their “Newsline” headline was, “Flip-Flops by Gingrich Fail to Alarm His Conservative Base.”
The piece inside by Jackie Kucinich–which is actually fairly comprehensive–unfortunately bore this headline:
Gingrich Endures Shifts in Policy
Candidate sees no backlash from base
So he’s able to endure himself?
It’s truly amazing, that you can, with a straight face, continue to bitch about the “flip-flopping” from people like Romney and Gingrich, while pretending that Obama has not done the same thing, and done it in on the most important issues facing his administration.
Im a tea party member.Newt is not getting four stars from us. Although he is miles above Obama on most things(a given),I do not think he can beat him. And Issues aside- he is damn unlikable.As a Washington insider he has changed direction on a number of things.And I have not heard a clear question on global climate change ,and how he would handle that.My guess is he will fade
What’s not particularly amazing, in our two-party-dominated politics, is that people see criticism of one party and and assume it means praise for the other party.
https://fair.org/blog/2010/11/16/obama-flip-flop-on-taxes-dont-be-so-uptight-says-lat/
https://fair.org/blog/2010/12/01/nyt-wonders-will-obama-finally-slam-dem-base/
Also not amazing is that people now trying to choose among the clowns of the Republican primaries assume everyone else is tickled pink with Obama. Note to those on both sides of the current political stalemate who make frequent superficial comments here: Bush II handed your country’s natural resources over to private industry to deplete at will, and neither major party has the ability or the motivation to prevent a catastrophic environmental disaster coupled with a complete political breakdown within the next half-decade.
Anybody actually have anything to say about the subject (=media criticism)? “Flip-flop” equals “shift in policy” at McPaper. Comments? Is it possible to focus, people?
I am registered Democrat, but did not vote for one of the two major parties in the last election. They are both far too corporate for me to back either of them. Obama just sounds more intelligent than the Republican candidates do. He probably is smarter than all of them in the sense that can be measured by universities that churn out smarmy people interested in their own bank accounts – but he obviously has no real ethics as a leader and little backbone. He is politics as usual, Bush-style for the most part. I certainly can’t support that.
Newt helped Clinton push that disasterous NAFTA thouugh Congress in the 1990’s which helped
deindustrialize America and they want him to be President? He is a first class hypocrite on the
socalled “moral issues”. Can’t the GOP whose history gave us men like the late Mark Hartfield,
Abe Lincoln and many other fine leaders do any better than the president selection?
Bob I think that sadly we are seeing a man like Newt who really has no chance riding the polls due at least as much to his political machine, as with his ideas.Don’t worry he won’t make it over the finnish line.
My interest at this point is who will be Mitts running mate.
Michael e seems to have spotted something few have noticed. The Fins have set up some sort of line to keep Newt out, but nevertheless somebody named Mitts may want to mate with him on the run.
Foony Ge-orge.But I have “spotted” no one.Some of the candidates tried to change theirs it is true ,but I am not involved.And it was Mr Cain who was “mating” on the run.I don’t know if she was Finnish.Eye talian maybe.
Newt????Who the hell gives their kid that name?Mit????Not much better.Barrack?????Look where that got us.But I digress.
Oh, Mit Mitts. Now I know who your are talking about. Mit Mitts. Of course.
I like “the haircut”.