.

.

Thursday, January 26, 2012

Nancy has Something on Newt? Oh really?

I mean come on who takes her seriously except maybe herself,which in itself is a scary thought.

Just listen to this

and this

25 comments:

  1. good point. What WE have on HER is having attempted to ruin our country!
    I hate to think what she's got on Newt because, true or not, the leftwingers will run with it in the media.
    Hard times again......

    ReplyDelete
  2. There is NOTHING the democrats won't do or say.

    ReplyDelete
  3. We don't really need anything on Newt... he does it all to himself...

    I know Clinton was a pig morally regarding his marriages, but the Dems have never claimed to be about personal character/morals when it comes to relationships and sex.

    Don't any of the conservatives now supporting Newt, who in the past were very critical of the Dems for ethical lapses think supporting Newt now is the least bit hypocritical?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Dave Miller
    "We don't really need anything on Newt... he does it all to himself...I know Clinton was a pig morally regarding his marriages, but the Dems have never claimed to be about personal character/morals when it comes to relationships and sex.

    Don't any of the conservatives now supporting Newt, who in the past were very critical of the Dems for ethical lapses think supporting Newt now is the least bit hypocritical?"


    Reminds me of that song "Cry me a river.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Dave it doesn't' matter anymore and the people are sick of the mud slinging mostly done by the left. It's time to vote out Obama before he totally destroys the country At this point n time,I'd vote for a felon if it means beating BHO

    ReplyDelete
  6. Dave, is it okay for a Dem to do what he wants to do because "Dems have never claimed to be about personal character/morals...etc."? That's one of the lowest comments about ethics I've maybe ever seen, though I have seen other Dems other than yourself say similar.

    Newt's not someone I respect in ANY way, but I'll vote for him tomorrow if I have to........anybody but Obama.
    Any sexual dalliance is better than what Obama's doing to our kids and to our country.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Pelosi is blowing air again, nothing more. I don't believe one word that woman says.

    ReplyDelete
  8. It has been very clear that Nancy Pelosi has been delusional for a long, long time.
    And now she's been back-pedaling because Newt told her to either put up or shut-up. I think that she chose to shut-up.

    ReplyDelete
  9. She has to quit drinking that mushroom tea.

    ReplyDelete
  10. "Dave, is it okay for a Dem to do what he wants to do because "Dems have never claimed to be about personal character/morals...etc."? That's one of the lowest comments about ethics I've maybe ever seen, though I have seen other Dems other than yourself say similar."

    That's not what Dave said. It's what YOU misinterpreted.

    What Dave is referring to is the Family Values Right's willingness to embrace a serial adulterer and liar and justify it with any exucuse, which is a sickening indictment of your values. You obviously don't have any if you find Gingrich's betrayal of his marital vows not once, not twice, BUT THREE TIMES, something you can casually overlook for the convenience of politics. That is stomach turning.

    You and others are willing to throw over your values for the sake of a politician? Ha! Your Xtian values and family values are worthless if you do so.

    BTW, Mr. Obama is the family value guy in this situation. He hasn't betrayed his vows, and yet you hypocritally go for the man who has publicly sullied all that Xtian marital fidelity doctrine holds precious in family health just to beat the black guy in the White House! What a laughable, hypocritial bunch of jackals. Where is your shame?

    ReplyDelete
  11. Shaw Family values is no longer a criteria. And the criteria is to beat the finger pointing,blame everyone else,pit Americans against each other ,OWS inspirer, lecturer in chief in Novemeber. You may fall for his charm but once in awhile he can't help but let the real Obama sneak out.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Well Lisa, at least you are willing to say it... family values no longer matter to the GOP... I wonder what Rick Santorum or George W. Bush would say about that? Or how about Beth?

    And yes Shaw, I am used to people being unable to understand a simple statement...

    But for me, here's the issue... if it is wrong and dishonorable for a democrat to act a certain way, at least the GOP partisans could be consistent and say that it is wrong when a republican acts the same way... but to avoid that part of the issue is just intellectually lazy.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Lisa: "Shaw Family values is no longer a criteria."

    If a man serially lies and cheats on his wives, that has no bearing on anything? Okay. Let's all remember this new territory Lisa and the Xtian right have staked out for anyone running for president, so long as he/she shares their political goals.

    Hmmm. I wonder if the Xtians here will then be able to overlook, say, a candidate for public office whose wife or mistress, or even herself, has had an abortion, or who rejects religion altogether and embraces atheism, or who moves his/her paramour into the White House without benefit of marriage. If you're all willing to say family values don't matter, then none of that matters to you and you would approve of all of these instances.


    We'll be watching to see if you really, really believe that, even when it applies to a liberal.

    BTW, congratulations on being so LIBERAL on family values matters!

    ReplyDelete
  14. Is the person who comments above serious? Is she referring that Liberals have more family values than others do?
    Does the name Bill Clinton come in to mind?
    And does the name Anthony Weiner who's lack of respect for his marriage come to mind?
    Any one with any amount of family values would know that sending lewd pictures over the Internet is inappropriate, let alone having a 20 year old intern get on her knees to give the president a blowsky is highly inappropriate behavior and lacks the common sense that would make him unfit as the leader of the USA.

    ReplyDelete
  15. SCS wrote: "Is the person who comments above serious? Is she referring that Liberals have more family values than others do?"


    Dear SCS, No. I never wrote those words nor did I suggest them. You're misdirecting and misinterpreting the discussion. The discussion is about CONSERVATIVES and THEIR boasts about their dedication to family values.

    Liberals do not pontificate about how others should live their private lives, nor do they, as do conservatives, set up organizations like Focus on the Family, etc., whose main purpose is to emphasize how family oriented and pure the GOPers are.

    SCS wrote: "Does the name Bill Clinton come in to mind?"

    Dear Sun Cracked, you again seem unable to understand that it is the Conservatives who go on and on and on about family values, not the Liberals. It is the Liberals who understand human failings, and it is the Conservatives who wish to stick their noses in other people's lives, for example, gay and lesbians' marriages, the right to serve one's country whether one is straight or gay, and women who are pro-choice.

    SCS wrote: "And does the name Anthony Weiner who's lack of respect for his marriage come to mind?"

    Please. You're comparing Anthony Weiner's childish exhibitionist photos to Newt Gingrich's admitted serial adulteries and requests for an "open marriage?" Laughable.

    SCS: "Any one with any amount of family values would know that sending lewd pictures over the Internet is inappropriate, let alone having a 20 year old intern get on her knees to give the president a blowsky is highly inappropriate behavior and lacks the common sense that would make him unfit as the leader of the USA."

    Again, Sun Cracked, you don't get it, nor do I think you ever will.

    But let's have a little thought exercise. You just wrote that getting a bj by a sitting, er standing, president is highly inappropriate and makes that president unfit to serve his country.

    So tell me, what do you think about a man who cheats on his wives? Who, according to Wife No. 2, called her while he was shagging mistress No. Who Knows in Wife No. 2's marital bed, and asked Wife No. 2 for an "open marriage?"

    Does it make Newt Gingrich more acceptable to you Conservatives because he engaged in that behavior while he was not the president? Does that make him more Family Values oriented?

    I'd like to know how you reconcile his behavior with your beliefs.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Well that was quite a comment.
    Where do I begin? Before I explain my position let me say that your response was a complete misconception of what I wrote. Look both you and I know that it really is pretty childish to compare one parties group of sexual deviants to an-others because it's irrelevant, so lets not. Although I did notice that your blog was reeking with trash like that.
    First of all, I never said that I approved of what Newt Gingrich did, nor did I say that it was more acceptable.
    What I did say was that the lack of family values was not limited to Conservatives as you sort of underhanded tried to say. What I got out of your comment was that you were suggesting that liberals don't do the things that the former conservative Speaker of the House had done. So I stated some examples to remind you of a few just in case you needed a few more reminders.

    And as the Obama support that you are, and I know that you are because I just visited your blog.
    You seem to feel that all of us conservatives are evil monsters who eat the souls of our unborn children.

    How can liberals claim to be in favor of achieving the American dream when they punish the successful through the progressive income tax, through the inheritance tax and through the capitol gains tax?
    And why make people dependent on the government hand-outs such as welfare,and promote people via affirmative action and therefore limit their initiative to work.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Shaw what you are not realizing is we don't care!!! What we care about is replacing the incompetent in the White House!

    ReplyDelete
  18. Dear Sun Cracked,

    In your very first response to my comment, you engaged in exactly what you said was childish--commenting on another political party's sexual deviants. This is what YOU wrote:

    "Is the person who comments above serious? Is she referring that Liberals have more family values than others do?
    Does the name Bill Clinton come in to mind?
    And does the name Anthony Weiner who's lack of respect for his marriage come to mind?
    Any one with any amount of family values would know that sending lewd pictures over the Internet is inappropriate, let alone having a 20 year old intern get on her knees to give the president a blowsky is highly inappropriate behavior and lacks the common sense that would make him unfit as the leader of the USA."

    So now you're saying that's childish? But you began your comments to me by engaging in what YOU define as "childish."

    Nowhere do I say anything about approving or disapproving how Gingrich behaved in the past. I merely point out his moral hypocrisy and conservatives' willingness to accept it. What this discussion is about is how quickly the family values conservatives abandon their values as soon as a politician they like seems to have a chance of securing the nomination. To me, that means conservative values are fungible. You change them whenever it is convenient, therefore, those values are valueless.

    You fail to read my comment accurately. I did not say that Liberals don't have failings, I state that we know humans are flawed, we accept that. What we don't do is pretend that we have a lock on family values, as do the conservatives, hence their many organizations that supposedly uphold family values.

    The rest of your comment to me is meaningless, since you've contradicted yourself, and then try to pin your contradictions on someone else.

    I am a Liberal. I don't have to apologize for that. It is you and the people here who find it easy to overlook huge character flaws in one of your politicians because it suits the moment.

    Some people call that dishonest. And no amount of equivocation about Gingrich or an attempt to disguise that truth changes the fact that you and other conservatives--hello Lisa!--excuse behavior that you would otherwise find execrable in a Liberal.

    Hypocrisy.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Err, excuse me, do I sense a bit of cynicism? May I ask you where in my comment did I ask you, or even come close to suggest to you to apologize? And I wasn't trying to convince you about any one or anything. You seem so easily irritated, are you aware of that?
    I commented on this blog because of the subject being about that loud and obnoxious Nancy Pelosi saying hateful and lies about Newt Gingrich, not about family values, and you chimed in with your super liberal hatred hostility because of my politic stance.
    Further, I think that you have a chip on your shoulder and I'm not in the mood to argue with a mule, especially a bleeding heart. I'm not here to argue anything that we differ about. I thought that this was an open discussion. But I can see that you are here to do exactly that.
    So I think I'll just pass on this one.
    Bye...

    ReplyDelete
  20. Sun Cracked, this is tiring. You can't seem to be able to look at the comments here and see that you're entirely wrong.

    I commented here TWICE, and only after that did YOU post a comment asking if I were serious and brought up the sexual escapades of Democrats--something you then characterized as childish--after you yourself did it!

    It is very easy to simply go back and read this thread to verify this.

    But let's just drop it and say you're not interested in accuracy, just in scoring points and making stuff up to cover for your inaccuracies and confusion.

    ReplyDelete
  21. thanks SC great last comment.
    Shaw Sue is waiting for you ,so you can fantasize about Obama.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Dear Lisa, it is you who live in Fantasyland.

    ReplyDelete
  23. hey Shaw did you catch Michelle Obama on Leno last night? When she mentioned he was gorgeous even though he is graying the audience response was like a group orgasm,you'd swear it was the second "coming".
    Talk about a cult following.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Lisa, have you forgotten already the swooning over GWB in 2003 as he landed on the USS Lincoln with his crotch bulging flight suit, while overhead the banner proclaimed "Mission Accomplished."

    MATTHEWS: Ann Coulter, you're the first to speak tonight on the buzz. The president's performance tonight, redolent of the best of Reagan -- what do you think?

    COULTER: It's stunning. It's amazing. I think it's huge. I mean, he's landing on a boat at 150 miles per hour. It's tremendous. It's hard to imagine any Democrat being able to do that. And it doesn't matter if Democrats try to ridicule it. It's stunning, and it speaks for itself.


    LOL! GWB says years later in his memoir after that phoney exhibition of bravado that he regretted that silly banner.

    But his cultists loved it!

    ReplyDelete
  25. Shaw your desperation is unfitting. Taht is a minor regret compared to this

    ReplyDelete