REPUBLICAN REDEFINED » Uncategorized

Newt Gingrich Center Stage at Fox News Iowa Republican Debate (VIDEO)

T. CHRISTOPHER — Fri, 16 Dec 2011 11:36:23 +0000

—–
Charles Krauthammer says Newt Gingrich has an “establishment republican” problem. Anyone wanna bet whether he solved that problem Thursday night?

No takers here.

That said, Newt once again demonstrated the undeniable talents that helped catapult his campaign to the forefront. He was center-stage – literally and figuratively – and took the best shots from the rest of the field and the moderators; and I’m inclined to believe he emerged relatively unscathed.

But first, the negatives…

I thought Gingrich made an overly academic and shamelessly vague defense of his time working for the overlords of federally subsidized home ownership by defending GSE’s and attempting to compare the Freddie/Fannie giants to “your local electric cooperatives and credit unions.” I very literally laughed out loud when I heard the words coming from his mouth. I laughed harder when no one effectively called him on his BS argument.

While defending his Paul Ryan “right wing social engineering” Meet the Press remarks, Newt once again doubled-down on his position that sound leadership is governing from the most conservative position that Americans can support. Probably a fine practical approach; but not exactly the kind of things folks like to hear in a primary debate, now is it?

The positives…

Anyone else notice that every time another candidate was about to unleash or Newt – or just unleashed on Newt – he paid them a compliment and rendered them absolutely silent? Brilliant.

On Israel, Gingrich made one of the most articulate and grounded arguments of the evening for the flawed position on the “peace process” put forth by the Obama administration saying, “People talk about a peace process… 11 missiles fired into Israel last month; over 200 missiles fired at Israel this year. You think if we had 11 missiles fired into the United States – well with this president he might say ‘gee if we could communicate you might like us more’ – most Americans would say if you’re firing missiles at me that might not be a very good gesture.”

When asked how he would advise Republican leadership to handle the Keystone pipeline / payroll tax cut debate, he took a shot at Romney’s “zany” remarks and said,

“I sometimes get accused of using language that’s too strong. So I’ve been standing here editing. I’m very concerned about not appearing as zany. The President cannot figure out — I’m using mild words here – it is utterly irrational to say I’m now going to veto a middle class tax cut to protect left wing environmental extremists in San Francisco so that we’re going to kill American jobs, weaken American energy, make us more vulnerable to the Iranians, and do so in a way that makes no sense to any normal rational American.”

Attach it to middle class tax cut- send it to president -make him veto it.

Perhaps, the best moment of the night for Gingrich came when Megyn Kelly asked Newt to defend comments he made regarding subpoenaing federal judges or possibly eliminating courts altogether. Kelly said to Newt – some say that will shift the balance of power?

Newt’s response?

They’re right. The courts are far too powerful, dictatorial, and way too arrogant in respect to their opinions on the interpretation of the Constitution. Then he gave a history lesson on the judicial system – which will no doubt be fact-checked endlessly.

He drew a huge response from the crowd when he said, “If judges are so radically anti-american that they thought One Nation Under God was wrong, then they shouldn’t be on the court.” In a nutshell, Newt said he would take on the entire judicial system if it refused to restrict itself. When asked how he would respond to his critics, Newt fired back.

NEWT: ”Have they studied Jefferson? In 1802 he abolished 18 of 35 federal judges.”

KELLY: “Something that was highly criticized

NEWT: ”Not by anybody in power in 1802… Jefferson was asked, is Supreme Court supreme? That is absurd…That would be an oligarchy… Lincoln repudiates Dred Scott decision in his first inaugural address in 1861 and says no 9 people can make law in this country. That would be an end to our freedom.”

I share that little history lesson from Newt not because it was all that impressive from where I sit, but only because I do believe the casual political enthusiast was more than impressed with his sense of history. Newt’s been playing the “I’m a historian – not a politician” card for a while now, and I do believe this was the most effective argument he’s made directly to the American People to support that claim. I guess we’ll have to see if the folks of Iowa were buying it.

Newt gets an (8) following the standard for front-runners from previous debates – emerge in one piece and the night goes down as a success.

Rick Santorum: ABC Yahoo News Iowa Republican Debate

T. CHRISTOPHER — Sun, 11 Dec 2011 07:22:35 +0000

Full Candidate Debate Breakdown here…

—

It may surprise some folks, but I do believe Santorum was among the “winners” of this debate. Understanding that winning is more than a subjective term, I say he’s among the winners because the dude is making a very good case for why he deserves a second look.

As much as it may have pained me, I said half a dozen debates or so ago that I thought Santorum to be the most genuine and across-the-board conservative on the stage. I wasn’t so wise as to have predicted a Cain collapse or a Gingrich surge, but I was then – and am now – relatively confident that conservatives will be giving Santorum a look. For most, it’s probably a “first” and not a second, but a look is a look is a look.

I thought he wisely kissed up to Newt Gingrich while simultaneously calling him a sellout. At least twice he mentioned listening to Gingrich tapes as an impressionable up-and-coming political figure… and then added that the guy on the tape was no longer the Former Speaker standing across the stage.

I thought he landed what may have been the best hit-Gingrich line of the night when he reacted to Gingrich’s claim that “conservatives supported the individual mandate” as an alternative to HillaryCare by saying, “I was one of those conservatives…and I opposed the individual mandate.”

Like I said here, I think he effectively marginalized Bachmann by applauding her for her passionate defense of conservative principles; but then pointing out that she has no record of achieving anything for all her work. It gave him an opportunity to once again point out his own record and the fact that he comes from a Blue State and has demonstrated the ability to “win over” even those who most believe will “hate” his candidacy in the general election.

Like Bachmann, he too was asked to weigh in on the Gingrich-Romney Israel-Palestinian debate about Gingrich’s calling the Palestinians an “inventive people.” While his response, at first, appeared wishy-washy; he quickly fleshed out his full position after a brief interruption from the moderator.

He said “You speak the truth – with prudence – this isn’t an academic exercise.” Responding to Newt’s comparison to Reagan and the “Mr. Gorbachev, Tear Down this Wall” line, he pointed out that in dealings with the Soviet Union we “didn’t have an ally. We had people contained in gulags.” (paraphrasing) He said, in Israel, we have an ally capable of making decisions and shaping policy for itself. It’s our job, our obligation to support that ally by “speaking the truth” but being mindful that our words have consequences in that region. Fine point – and one I hope Mr. Obama was paying attention to.

Nailing down a score for Santorum is probably the hardest one to calculate here. Objectively speaking, I think he probably deserves a 8or an 8.5. Realistically speaking – given the fact that he’s the least known candidate on the stage – I think a 7 is probably more reflective. You can only score points when the people doing the scoring are paying attention. I’d score him higher, but I think it’s a little late in this race for a surge.

Newt Gingrich: ABC Yahoo News Iowa Republican Debate

T. CHRISTOPHER — Sun, 11 Dec 2011 07:17:39 +0000

Full Candidate Debate Breakdown here…

—

Considering that the biggest question heading into the evening was “is there anyone willing to go toe-to-toe with Newt Gingrich” and the answer was NO – save for the moderators and the people that wrote the questions – I have to say Newt emerged with front-runner status still very much intact. Bachmann continued along the line of the “Father and Grandfather of ObamaCare” rhetoric by calling the pair “Newt-Romney.” Clever? Who cares? Lame.

The subject/question of the night that will ultimately determine how people feel Gingrich performed – and whether he will emerge as the Party’s nominee – will likely be the matter of his past transgressions and infidelity. Once again, he owned his past, admitted wrongdoing, and asked the electorate to look at the “68-year-old grandfather of today” and not the guy once ran out of Washington.

That’s a tough sell by any measure. How does one look at the “New Newt” and not the old on the personal front, but still call upon “successes and accomplishments” of Old Newt while ignoring the political flip-flop artist New Newt has become?

On the illegal immigration issue, I’m not sure Gingrich clarified much, but I do believe he effectively made a case for how and why he’s been misrepresented in the media. Whether that flies with conservative voters or not… who knows?

I think this was his general position. Local knowledge is the starting point. The criteria for qualifying an illegal for some kind of special treatment in lieu of deportation would be something like this… 25 years, good local citizen, “may well belong to your church”, be a good citizen, have an American family sponsor. Then they’d get “residency” and be forced to pay a penalty. Oh and make deportation “dramatically easier” and make English the official language.

When asked to defend his Palestinians are “inventive people” comments, he was defiantly steadfast in sticking to his original assertion. He said he wasn’t speaking for the Israeli’s, but was simply speaking as an “historian.” He called upon Reagan and his “tear down this wall” proclamation of the Cold War and said “I’m a Reaganite – I speak the truth.”

And there was also this gem aimed at Romney’s recent attempts to attack Gingrich for being a “career politician.”

“The only reason you didn’t become a career politician is because you lost to Teddy Kennedy.”

video platform video management video solutions video player

On the whole, I think Gingrich held the front rather well – that is if his position at the front is more than a house of cards. He took a few minor shots, but his skill as a debater is still second to no one in this field – or in this race as we move toward next November. While I would certainly like to see him match up with BO, anyone voting for Newt based on seeing that heavyweight bout should probably go in another direction. Because there’s no way Obama’s camp is letting him debate more than once if Gingrich is the nominee.

I give Newt a 7. Given that I’ve been forced to watch Romney hold the top spot for months, it was nice to see someone perform the act without hiding in the corner hoping not to take a punch.

Mitt Romney: ABC Yahoo News Iowa Republican Debate

T. CHRISTOPHER — Sun, 11 Dec 2011 07:12:22 +0000

Full Candidate Debate Breakdown here…

–

Another solid debate for the Former Massachusetts Governor. Nothing gained; nothing lost. That is unless the $10,000 bet with Rick Perry rubs the rest of the country the same way it rubbed me. While school girl bickering with Rick Perry about a passage removed from Romney’s book about the national implementation of RomneyCare, Mitt casually offered to bet Perry $10,000 that he was misquoting the passage.

Let’s just be clear about one thing. I don’t care who is actually “right” or correct here. If I hear about RomneyCare anymore from these candidates I may actually vomit. If his supporting something similar to ObamaCare is a deal-breaker, consider it broken. What I do care about is a guy casually throwing around a $10k wager. Is that sort of thing even legal? Beyond that, who’s got that kind of loot just laying around tucked under sofa cushions that he casually bets $10k? I wouldn’t bet someone five bucks that I could accurately quote what I wrote about Bachmann at the top of this page. Are you kidding me Mitt? $10k. You just a third of the average Iowan’s salary as if it was a wager for the last friggin Oreo.

As to the rest of it… I guess the ABC crowd felt like poking Gingrich about his record of broken marriages, so they decided to use Romney as the conduit. He recently released an ad in Iowa where he shows off the Romney clan and was asked by Stephanopoulos if that sort of thing is “important”, or something. Romney quickly said the ad was released because an Obama PAC released an ad attacking his “core.” I’m sure it had nothing at all to do with the fact that Gingrich is on wife number three and Romney’s a Mormon still on wife number one… but who’s really counting?

He offered his alternative plan to Gingrich’s “amnesty” proposal by doubling-down on his previous statements that illegals should be granted a “transition period” and then sent home to “get in the back of the line” seeking citizenship. I’m sure that would have scored him points… if it wasn’t for the fact that the crowd “toughest” on immigration wasn’t also the same crowd that wrote him off four years ago.

He got into a bit of a childish back-and-forth with Newt over who knew BB Netanyahu longer – I’m pretty sure Romney was one syllable away from uttering nanny nanny booboo, but I can’t be certain. Either way, the takeaway was that Romney’s a supporter of Israel and he thinks Newt needs to watch his tongue on the campaign trail when “speaking the truth” about foreign policy. In a nutshell, it was more of Mitt attempting to look like the most presidential candidate on the stage.

From where I sit, looking presidential has never really been his problem.

I score Romney a (6). Nothing lost, nothing gained. And until I see that Newt can turn poll numbers into actual supporters, he’s still the front-runner by my calculation. I tend to overestimate “outrage”, so I can’t really gauge the reaction to the $10,000 bet. But if the rest of the Republican electorate is as much of a hot-head as I, that six may wind up looking more like a (0) – as in the straw that finally broke the back of Mr. Slow and Steady.

Michele Bachman: ABC Yahoo News Iowa Republican Debate

T. CHRISTOPHER — Sun, 11 Dec 2011 07:08:51 +0000

Full Candidate Debate Breakdown here…

—

Pundits post-debate were quick to assert that she’d scored “big points” with the Iowa faithful. While I do believe this was her best performance in a while, I still fail to see how her performance was worthy of such high praise.

Santorum nailed her, again, on her lack of successes as a champion of the Right. She responded by saying she “didn’t just sit on her hands – she was a fighter in a Pelosi-led House.” Fair point; but that sure sounded like an excuse-laden response, no?

She rambled on with a story about a visit to Israel when she was asked to play substitute moderator for a moment between Newt and Mitt. I’ll defer to her supporters for an explanation of the point she was trying to make.

I did think she scored some points when she shared a story from her childhood in response to the “describe a time when you struggled economically” question. She said her parents got divorced, her mom became a single mom, and she was forced to get a job at 13. (I do wonder, though, if that strengthens Newt’s “kids need jobs” argument?) She went on to say she’s still a “coupon clipper” and shops at “consignment stores.” Ready the shopping police to investigate every outfit she wears from this day forward.

Anyone want to place a “gentlemen’s bet” on the first Lefty rag to break down the cost of her outfit?

But then any points she may have scored, she quickly squandered by pandering to the former Herman Cain supporters. On two occasions, she threw a shout-out to the Cain Train. Did someone forget to tell her that his campaign just went down in flames? Either she’s brilliant by a variable unbeknownst to me or she’s really just not been paying attention.

“Win Win Win”??? Probably not. I give it a 5. It’s a good five because from whence she came – that being the bottom and Iowa, I suppose.

Rick Perry: ABC Yahoo News Iowa Republican Debate

T. CHRISTOPHER — Sun, 11 Dec 2011 07:04:50 +0000

Full Candidate Debate Breakdown here…

——

Don’t Call it a Comeback…

Okay, probably not; but it was one hell of a performance from a guy that’s taken presidential debating to an all-time low. After a somewhat slow start, Governor Perry kicked it into high gear and almost looked like the guy most were begging to enter this race a few short months ago. He even dropped a list of three – and remembered all three.

Watching this debate performance, I’ve come up with what I like to refer to as the Rick Perry – Tim Tebow theory of debating; suck for three quarters (of the debates) and then come raging back in the fourth quarter for the “W.”

Alright, maybe not for the win, but at least to make this thing competitive. I contend that if the Rick Perry we saw tonight would have been the guy we’ve been watching for the last few months, that guy would be our nominee. He was funny at times, he appeared less nervous, he was still awake at the end, and he even dropped in a word of the day – Lexicon.

I thought he had a great line on the Newt Gingrich / fidelity question when he said a “Vow to God was even stronger than a handshake in Texas.” Folks were probably lapping that stuff up. And then he got to answer the “tell me about a time when you weren’t so rich” question.

Just a point of reference first…. I’m kind of a jerk. Specifically, the kind of jerk that wrote Perry off some where a debate or two ago. That said, his answer to that question made me listen a little differently to Gov Perry the rest of the debate – and maybe going forward.

He said his mom sewed his clothes until he went off to college. Luxury wasn’t even in the Rick Perry “lexicon.” He said his Social Security reporting for 1978 said $0. But then he closed by saying that he never felt like he didn’t have anything he really ever needed. That my friends will sink home with American voters.

His next best line of the evening came out of the Newt-Palestinian “inventive people” business. Much to my surprise, he pulled a Newt and blamed the media…. and sold it. He said it was an issue the media was blowing out of proportion while ignoring the fact that the current president dropped the ball on Iran, Egypt, and Libya. That’s also where he dropped in his list of three – as in the three choices President Obama had when the RQ-170 drone was lost in Iran – 1) Retrieve it; 2) Destroy it; or 3) do nothing.

Rick Perry – “This president is the problem - not something Newt Gingrich said.” Certainly among the lines of the night.

Governor Perry gets a 7. Considering that’s double what I expected him to score, let’s call this a big night for the Texas Governor. Heck let’s even call him a “winner.”

Doctor Death Jack Kevorkian is Dead

T. CHRISTOPHER — Fri, 03 Jun 2011 13:20:30 +0000

Assisted-suicide champion and pathologist Dr. Jack Kevorkian has reportedly died Beaumont Hospital in Royal Oak, Michigan. Kevorkian, who claimed to have had a hand in at least 130 suicides, was released from prison in 2007 after serving 8 years for second degree murder. The Detroit Free Press reports that he was hospitalized with kidney problems and pneumonia, and died from a pulmonary thrombosis.

(Attorney) Morganroth said it appears Kevorkian suffered a pulmonary thrombosis when a blood clot from his leg broke free and lodged in his heart. With Kevorkian were his niece Ava Janus and Morganroth.

“It was peaceful,” Morganroth told the paper. “He didn’t feel a thing.”

Charles Krauthammer: “Syria’s ‘Reformer’”

T. CHRISTOPHER — Fri, 01 Apr 2011 16:52:09 +0000

CHARLES KRAUTHAMMER: “Many of the members of Congress of both parties who have gone to Syria in recent months have said they believe he’s a reformer.” - Hillary Clinton on Bashar al-Assad, March 27.

Few things said by this administration in its two years can match this one for moral bankruptcy and strategic incomprehensibility.

First, it’s demonstrably false. It was hoped that President Assad would be a reformer when he inherited his father’s dictatorship a decade ago. Being a London-educated eye doctor, he received the full Yuri Andropov treatment — the assumption that having been exposed to Western ways, he’d been Westernized. Wrong. Assad has run the same iron-fisted Alawite police state as did his father.

Bashar made promises of reform during the short-lived Arab Spring of 2005. The promises were broken. During the current brutally suppressed protests, his spokeswoman made renewed promises of reform. Then Wednesday, appearing before parliament, Assad was shockingly defiant. He offered no concessions. None.

Second,

Glenn Beck to Pull an Oprah, Leave Fox News and Start New Network?

T. CHRISTOPHER — Wed, 23 Mar 2011 13:12:52 +0000

NEW YORK TIMES: The possibility that Glenn Beck will exit the Fox News Channel at the end of the year has prompted a big question in media circles: if he leaves, how will he bring his considerable audience with him?

Two of the options Mr. Beck has contemplated, according to people who have spoken about it with him, are a partial or wholesale takeover of a cable channel, or an expansion of his subscription video service on the Web.

Reports this week that Joel Cheatwood, a senior Fox News executive, would soon join Mr. Beck’s growing media company, Mercury Radio Arts, were the latest indication that Mr. Beck intended to leave Fox, a unit of the News Corporation, when his contract expired at the end of this year.

Notably, Mr. Beck’s company has been staffing up — making Web shows, some of which have little or nothing to do with Mr. Beck, and charging a monthly subscription for access to the shows.

Were Mr. Beck to set off on his own, it would be a landmark moment for the media industry, reflecting a shift in the balance of power between media institutions and the personal brands of people they employ.

Tsunami Hits Japan (Video)

T. CHRISTOPHER — Fri, 11 Mar 2011 08:53:17 +0000

This is incredible video and is no doubt the first of its kind. The size and force of this thing are like nothing I have ever seen. Both Fox News and CNN were carrying the same local coverage, but CNN is the first to post it online; so here it is.

Even watching the video makes it extremely difficult to gain perspective. The water seems to be moving slowly, but the path of destruction clearly tells a different story.