Letters to the Editor

Your views in 200 words or less

OBAMA: Gingrich right with ‘food stamp’ label

Letter by Tom Settles, Gig Harbor on Jan. 19, 2012 at 1:44 pm with 110 Comments »
January 19, 2012 1:56 pm

Newt Gingrich has correctly labeled Barack Obama the “food stamp president.”

Now our president has refused to allow the building of the Keystone pipeline, which would cut our need for Mideast oil by 40 to 45 percent and would create 20,000-plus private sector jobs. The bipartisan American Jobs Panel gave Obama an “F” for failing to enact any of its 46 recommendations made in 2010 and only partially acting on two of those 46.

Obama took office with 6.8 percent unemployment and $10 trillion debt. After three years his policies have given us 8.7 percent unemployment and $16.1 trillion debt.

I suspect the White House realizes that Gingrich has found a tag for Obama that sums up his failed presidency that all voters will understand.

Tags:
,
Leave a comment Comments → 110
  1. menopaws says:

    Ummm—food stamp needs go up during a recession. This isn’t rocket science—does this writer have any memories of when this recession started….and how? Newt is the king of the quasi- racist spin. I sincerely have hope that he gets his party’s nomination. You will see a turnout of the poor and minority community at the polls that will break records. He will be the gift the Republicans give to the Democrats. This man has many pretensions of intellect—but this voter might note to others: he has a PH.D and has taught at several universities……..And yet, he has NEVER been offered tenure anywhere he taught……..Wonder why an ace university like Western Georgia didn’t jump to keep Newt on their faculty?? He talks a good game….but he is not, as my Ozark Daddy would say, the “sharpest tool in the shed”………So. let him continue to rock and roll……..can’t wait to see this crash and burn……It should be spectacular!!!!!

  2. Tom needs to turn the channel to something other than Fox News. Clearly he is not seeing the whole picture from any sense of objectivity at all. He is absolutely wrong on all counts!

  3. Keystone pipeline, which would cut our need for Mideast oil by 40 to 45 percent and would create 20,000-plus private sector jobs.

    Where the hell are you getting those numbers? The jobs creations numbers I’ve seen are 6,000 jobs, mostly temporary and less than 15% would go to local Americans.

    # In 2008, TransCanada’s Presidential Permit application for Keystone XL to the State Department indicated “a peak workforce of approximately 3,500 to 4,200 construction personnel” to build the pipeline.

    # Jobs estimates above those listed in its application draw from a 2011 report commissioned by TransCanada that estimates 20,000 “person-years” of employment based on a non-public forecast model using undisclosed inputs provided by TransCanada.

    # According to TransCanada’s own data, just 11% of the construction jobs on the Keystone I pipeline in South Dakota were filled by South Dakotans–most of them for temporary, low-paying manual labor.

    Keystone XL will not lessen U.S. dependence on foreign oil, but transport Canadian oil to American refineries for export to overseas markets.
    http://www.tarsandsaction.org/spread-the-word/key-facts-keystone-xl/

    Meanwhile – the pipeline as proposed would be routed through a major Nebraska aquifer – putting a huge number of people’s drinking water at risk.

  4. the letter writer shows his obvious shortcomings.
    but why are they putting this nonsense in peoples newspaper?
    online discussion i get; i just sincerely hope that the normal people who read news papers are not exposed to these fabrications, innuendos, and out right lies by mr callaghan

  5. 20,000 jobs? actually 6000 is the generous estimate. with as few as 50 permanent jobs. 20,000 is a croc.
    and if you believe, as the letter writer does, that obama failed to enact his policies? then tell the congress and senate to actually go to work and vote.
    the office of the president simply does not enact much.
    thats not how are system works. checks and balances.
    least active congress since the 1940’s.
    when president obama took office, we were hemmorraging 750,000 jobs A MONTH.
    while we have had 22 straight months of job growth while he’s been in office.
    oh, and the national debt was 11.9 trillion when our president took office.
    but it was only 5.8 trillion when bush took office. even though he chose not to pay for two foreign wars and tax cuts at the same time.

  6. philichi says:

    This country has hudreds of years of energy in the ground. We can not even harvest the gas because there are not enough pipe lines. Who cares if it is 20,000 jobs are 2 jobs, we need energy infostructure all over America.
    Can you belived that Obama has wasted billions on Wind mills and solar Panels? We have more gas and oil than anywhere in the world!
    This president likes being the Food Stamp President!

  7. The US is 3rd in nations that export crude. Can somebody please tell us WHY we are importing oil (When we have refineries) and WHY gas prices keep going up?

  8. I am curious as to how jellee came up with the figures quoted.The figures of 750,000 comes out to 9 million jobs per year lost.Can anyone prove or disprove those numbers?As far as the deficit being at 11.9 trillion,the latest figures I read about,was that Obama was asking for that figure to be raised to 16.1 Trillion from 15.Trillion.Is this supposed to be an improvement?Also if there has been 22 Months straight of job growth why is the unemployment figures at 8.7%?Some one is needed to get some true figures out to the public!

  9. jandkgibbs says:

    The liberals that comment here are trying their best to cover for their president. They know he has made a terrible mistake in stratgy and turned moderate voters away from himself and for good. I read fear in their comments that there favorite community organizer has just shot himself in the foot. Mr. Settles tells the truth and there are published facts to back up what he says.

    The Keystone project was proposed in 2005, it has been under extensive environmental studies since 2007. Where they want to lay this pipe is already covered in enough pipe to wrap around the world at the equator. The environmental wing of a political party put pressure on the President to say NO when the congress insisted he make the pipeline decision before the 2012 election. They forced his hand and he folded his cards at the expense of the American people.

    We have gotten to a place where we can’t build anything in this country because of radical environmentalist and the influence they have in the (D) party. Do a goggle search and every wind, solar, coal, nuclear and most natural gas projects are entwined in lawsuits from environmental groups. They just pulled the plug on the Columbia River wind power projects because of noise, bird damage and the tribes didn’t want the wide turn radius roads on their happy hunting ground.

    President Obama was already on the outs with the envrionazi groups over previous waivers he granted relating to greenhouse gases. He was told if he built the pipeline the environmental lobby would divorce him and he needs them to get reelected. The threw America under the bus for political reasons.

    I love the outdoors. It’s why I live here. I demand clean water and air. But we must have an economy too. Their must be balance and science, not emotion, must guide those decisions.

    The fact that he said “no” to shovel ready high paying jobs, jobs his union friends want and need, and caved to the lunatic fringe of his party shows he is not a leader wanting the best for this country, He is just another politician wanting to stay in power. In my opinion he has shown his true colors on this decision. He may never say again that he is for jobs. I honestly feel that we will never have an economic recovery in this country under his administration. We all have an important decision to make this Nov. for this state and the nation.

    I think reasonable people, no matter their party, know this country is going in the wrong direction and I think 4 more years of Mr. Obama will do more harm than good.

  10. Vox_clamantis_in_deserto says:

    Frida, actually the US is 10th in oil exports according to the most recent information available (2009).

    https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2176rank.html

    But I get your point.

  11. philichi “We have more gas and oil than anywhere in the world!”

    Where’s your proof of that statement phil? Do you really expect anyone to believe that the U.S. has more oil in the ground than the countries of the mideast including Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Iraq?

    Maybe you meant to write, “We USE more gas and oil than anywhere in the world!” which I believe may be true.

    The United States does NOT have more oil and gas reserves than anywhere in the world. That is common knowledge. The U.S. has been called the Saudi Arabia of COAL, but not oil.

    If you still think your original statement is correct, then PROVE IT with some documentation, okay!

  12. truthbusterguy says:

    I think that Mr. Settles makes two points in his letter.
    1. obummer has shown himself to be all in for green eneregy even if he destroys the economy. He is not smart enough to realize we are 20 years away from technology efficent enough to move a car more than 60 miles on a battery. We need oil, the world runs on it.
    2. How can liberal democrats and the media defend obama when we have 44 million Americans on food stamps. This alone is a measurement of his total failure.

    We could ALL be standing in the breadline and the liberals and biased media would still defend this “shell of a man”.

  13. sandblower says:

    So much ignorance, so little time to teach. The author is completely wrong and his supporters are no better at knowing the truth.

  14. concernedtacoma7 says:

    Funny that when the govt creates a dollar out of thin air (making everything we own worth less) and spends it on a project like solyndra, the left tells us that dollar becomes 6 and dozens of jobs.

    When the private sector tries to make a project benefiting us all, it creates no jobs and is evil. Hypocrites.

  15. t-b-g,

    1. President Obama is going to be reelected.

    2. The Conservative Republican Right is a crazy clown circus.

    After the election all people who vote against President Obama will be deported. (Oh, if wishes could only come true!)

  16. t-b-g

    I win when President Obama is reelected, then you leave these blogs FOREVER. You can never return under any new or different screen names or email addresses.

    Fair enough?

  17. Tom Settles, Gig Harbor I love the way you left out the reason behind the rejection. Which was” the primary reason for Obama’s rejection was because of the bed Republicans had made him, demanding a decision before the State Department could facilitate a full review of the pipeline’s environmental impacts. Nebraska became ground zero over the fight after environmental officials in the state highlighted concerns about ecological risks” . http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/01/18/the-reasons-behind-obama-s-decision-rejecting-the-keystone-pipeline.html . The oil crisis isn’t as bad as it was a few years ago since the U.S. is currently exporting it.
    So once this oil starts flowing through the pipeline don’t expect the gas prices to drop pre Bush prices.
    Beside congress believe the oil industry isn’t price gouging even though they’re making billions in profits

  18. Lots of propaganda in Tom’s letter.

    TransCanada’s initial estimate of 20,000 jobs, which it said included 13,000 direct construction jobs and 7,000 jobs among supply manufacturers is a misrepresentation for propaganda purposes. TransCanada conceded that they calculated 13,000 of those jobs on “job years spent on the project,” not jobs. In other words, if a job were to last two years, it would count as two jobs. Recalculating correctly then, would bring the job count for construction employment to 6500 jobs on a two year project, which number is close to the 5000-6000 jobs calculated by the U.S. State Department

    Of the remaining 7000 indirect supply chain jobs in TransCanada’s calculations, many of those jobs are gone, because they included jobs for materials that have already been produced and are presently stored in Canadian warehouses, none of which was manufactured in the U.S., The primary steel supplier has been a Russian-owned manufacturer in Canada, and it only makes sense that they would also manufacter the remaining steel.

    After a decline in oil production under the Bush administration, the number of oil rigs in production in the U.S. in 2010-2011 has reached a 24-year high, according to oil field services company Baker Hughes.
    Goldman Sachs expects that the U.S. will become the world’s number one oil producer by 2017. So why then, is it so urgent to build a pipeline crossing the U.S. without extensive caution and planning, just to create a few thousand temporary jobs?

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/keystone-pipeline-debate-heats-up/2011/11/04/gIQA824rpM_story.html
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/keystone-pipeline-debate-heats-up/2011/11/04/gIQA824rpM_story.html
    http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505123_162-57361212/keystone-pipeline-how-many-jobs-really-at-stake/

  19. bobcat1a says:

    Anyone who fouls a post with a juvenile epithet like “obummer” has forfeited any expectation of respect and certainly has made it clear he has no intention to persuade but is rather intent on fostering hate.

  20. Toocan: There was more Tom forgot to mention in his letter. Tom said “Obama took office with 6.8 percent unemployment and $10 trillion debt. After three years his policies have given us 8.7 percent unemployment and $16.1 trillion debt.”

    Tom forgot to mention that the economy was on a fast track to hades when Obama took office: A financial meltdown was in progress, the housing market was collapsing and 800,000 jobs per month were being lost. Much of Obama’s spending is servicing inherited debt, paying for previously mandated expenses, and bailing out the economy.

    It’s remarkable that only 6 months into the Obama administration, the nightmare turned an About-Face.

  21. SwordofPerseus says:

    Tom S, phillichy, ct7, tbguy, gibs, VOX, ad nausium;

    Oil is coming to an end, we are cooking the planet by burning the last precious few hours of ancient sunlight, at our peril. The sooner we come to grips with this earth changing truth the sooner we will begin to devise the means to live without fossil fuel, any fossil fuel as an energy source.
    Scientists developed methods and technologies decades ago, big oil has chosen to bury them politically, legally and/or otherwise purely for profit at any cost. This will end, voluntarily or otherwise as well.

    It is not a matter of if, it is simply when, and if we ignore the problem for much longer it will be the end of man as we know it.

  22. And – just to be clear here – it isn’t oil but oil sands that would be piped.

  23. Newt Gingrich has correctly labeled Barack Obama the “food stamp president.”

    And yet, Republoyalist continue to insist that there is no racism involved in the anti-Obama crowd….

  24. philichi says:

    Mucklbr, if I provided information to you that showed that we had more reserves under Alaska and the Dakotas than Saudi Arabia, How would you feel about spending money on wind mills? If I presented information about Texas alone having over 100 years ofUS natural gas under it, how would you feel about the President’s energy policy? How would you feel about spending almost $4.00 at the pump? If I submitted you pages of geological research would you even read it? If I told you that there is so much natural gas under Oklahoma, Colorado, and everywhere else that drillers are just letting it burn because they can’t move it to your house, how would you feel about the president’s idea to blow $800 billion on cash for clunkers and State bail outs and food stamps? If the supply of energy went up in American, wouldn’t that cause a decline in the price? If the price went down would’t that cause a growth in the economy? We expect a 2% growth rate for 2012. Who do you blame for this?

  25. You haven’t actually presented anything.

  26. concernedtacoma7 says:

    SOP- every year the world’s proven reserves go up! Even factoring increased demand, there is enough to last for centuries.

    Muck- the US has the largest energy reserves in the world, totaling coal, gas, and oil.

  27. i repeat, for the slow ones who require clarification. here’s a link. 750,000 jobs lost a month over the three months BEFORE our president, barack obama, took office.
    and currently we have 22 stright months of job growth. in spite of the do-nothing congress with it’s 11% approval rating. and republican senate minortiy leader mitch mcconnell leading fillibuster after fillibuster in his “#1 priority of making obama a one term president.”.
    from the bureau of labor statistics…
    https://my.barackobama.com/page/-/Blog%202012/JobCreation_dec07_dec11_480px.jpg
    and here’s another one showing how foreign oil imports has been drastically cut since our president took office. the lowest in 16 years. when we had a democrat in office.
    http://www.barackobama.com/news/entry/cutting-foreign-oil-imports
    obama has helped create jobs and reduce the importing of foreign oil.
    case closed.

  28. concernedtacoma7 says:

    Case open. He has spent $6 trillion of our deficit. Slowest recovery in modern history! Stopped by TARP (thanks Bush), BHO made a mess of things with a terribly timed financial overhaul (for the Keynes fans out there this directly goes against his recommendations) and Obamacare that no one wanted, adding more confusion and uncertainty.

    Stimulus and ‘green jobs’ were a failure. Cash for clunkers. Waste.

    The market created jobs in spite of BHO. Imagine what they would have done if he got out of the way.

  29. concernedtacoma7 says:

    Why do we import less oil? Because the economy stalled.

    Also, Bush’s energy policies. BHO has done nothing to help us become more independent. On top of the recent pipeline battle (yes, Canadian oil but still not ME or Hugo’s) you forget the gulf moratorium and ANWR. Yup, he has really done a lot

  30. philichi says:

    This information about gluts of unharvested energy is all public knowledge. I can povide it to you within minutes.
    That is not at issue. The real issue is will it change your mind on cash for clunkers, wind mills, Solindra and Foodstamp nation? If not, what would be the point? How will you feel about paying almost $4 dollars per gallon at the pump?
    By the way, the oil companies are ready to go. They are also ready to pay the US huge royalties. (tax revenue)And hire many people. Now how do you feel about a $1.4 trillion deficit? and a President that wants to blame rich people?Who should he really be blaming?

  31. Since when are food stamp references racist? Never even occurred to me to make THAT association.

  32. philichi: “if I provided information to you that showed that we had more reserves under Alaska and the Dakotas than Saudi Arabia, How would you feel about spending money on wind mills?”

    muckibr: Show me the proof! Then I’ll tell you how I feel about windmills.

    philichi: If I presented information about Texas alone having over 100 years of US natural gas under it, how would you feel about the President’s energy policy?

    muckibr: Show me the proof. Then I’ll tell you how I feel.

    philichi: How would you feel about spending almost $4.00 at the pump?

    muckibr: Been There Done That! I track my gas purchases and mileage.
    I buy my gas mostly at Costco, and from 6/4/2008 through to 7/30/2008 Regular was over $4 per gallon. It peaked on 6/15/2008 at $4.299 per gal. On 5/2/2011 gas was up to $3.899 per gal. The last time I filled up at Costco on 1/13/2012 gas Regular was $3.329 per gal.

    philichi: If I submitted you pages of geological research would you even read it?

    muckibr: Show me the pages. Yes, I would read them.

    philichi: If I told you that there is so much natural gas under Oklahoma, Colorado, and everywhere else that drillers are just letting it burn because they can’t move it to your house, how would you feel about the president’s idea to blow $800 billion on cash for clunkers and State bail outs and food stamps?

    muckibr: Show me the proof, but I don’t see the connection between cash for clunkers which was temporary program, state bailouts which did not happen because the government bailed-out financial institutions that were too big to allow to fail supposedly, and food stamps is a program that predates President Obama by decades. Non sequitur.

    philichi: If the supply of energy went up in American, wouldn’t that cause a decline in the price?

    muckibr: I don’t know, I am not an economist. Are you?

    philichi: If the price went down would’t that cause a growth in the economy?

    muckibr: I don’t know, I am not an economist. Are you?

    philichi: We expect a 2% growth rate for 2012. Who do you blame for this?

    muckibr: Personally I blame the George W. Bush administration which cut taxes and stared unfunded wars, Republicans who went along with Bush and have been filibustering and otherwise blocking efforts to fix the economic problems, and the ultra-greedy ultra-rich who have put their wealth ahead of all else screwing-over everyone just so they can get richer, for three. But, that’s just my opinion. I could be wrong.

  33. philoichi, BTW…

    No State Bailouts, Lawmaker Says

    WASHINGTON—House Majority Leader Eric Cantor said he didn’t support allowing states to seek bankruptcy protection and ruled out any federal bailouts of state governments.

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703555804576102502825849450.html

  34. Vox_clamantis_in_deserto says:

    And was it not bB who only recently posted the fact that the majority of food stamp recipients are not minorities?

  35. Vox_clamantis_in_deserto says:

    mybarrackobama.com? barrackobama.com? LMAO!

    Hey jellee, you may be able to spin your lefty rants more effectively if you could only substantiate them by using an unbiased source.

  36. Vox_clamantis_in_deserto says:

    SoP, did you sell that stupid sword yet?

    I think you would do the world a great favor by pushing your doomsday scenario off on the Chinese. Because like every ignorant alarmist I know, you conveniently turn a blind eye to the fact that emerging economies and the third world are/ will buy up any cheap energy source available on the world market – whether we choose to participate or not.

    Even if what you and al gore are selling is true, your preaching to the choir here – the EPA and this administration will make sure of that.

  37. concernedtacoma7 says:

    Oil reserves, interesting article

    http://www.radford.edu/~wkovarik/oil/

    No, we do not have anywhere near Saudi. Google proven reserves.

  38. hey vox … if you had bothered to click… it says Bureau of Labor Statistics. you want another link? i need to waste my time finding another link just for you?
    http://www.bls.gov/web/empsit/ceshighlights.pdf
    but that doesnt matter to you, does it? all that matters to you is that obama did it, so it must be a wrong. obama said it, so it must be a lie.
    try doing some research before exclaiming that other people must be wrong just because you don’t agree with the inconvenient facts presented to you.

  39. alindasue says:

    On a related note, here’s what FactCheck.org has to say about Newt Gingrich’s claims regarding food stamps:
    http://factcheck.org/2012/01/newts-faulty-food-stamp-claim/

  40. menopaws says:

    Newt is on a march to cement his utter narcissism—-if he takes his party down in the process—doesn’t matter to him. This man is utterly self-absorbed and believes he is smarter than everyone else. Some would call that delusional—I just think he’s so in love with himself, he’s flat out stupid……..Listened to him giving John King a hard time over his ex-wife’s interview that King asked about……….He climbed up on his pedestal and got irate—–shades of Sarah Palin………It’s funny—I don’t remember that anger and moral high ground when it was Bill Clinton……….The rules are “different” for Newt because he’s soooo special………He’s is a piece of slime and all his moral redemption can be bought if it feeds his ego and ambition……….The “family values” crowd is starting to look like hypocrites these days……….Definitely do as I say—not as I do………good luck with that ploy at the polls………Republicans need to go find their souls—seems to be on the auction block this election cycle!

  41. that was hilarious how newt blamed the president and the media for the comments made by his ex-wife.
    then the rest of those clowns just stood there and let him get away with prancing around the issue instead of calling him out on his blatant hypocrisy.
    but my favorite part was when romney claimed to be “from the real streets”. i was dying.
    and ron paul with “these are not cogent thoughts”.
    his quote perfectly describes these debates.

  42. To anyone who sees racism in calling Obama the “food stamp president”. Time to look in the mirror and explain to us how you aren’t racist for assuming that only blacks are on food stamps.

  43. 49% of food stamps recipients are children.
    35% of food stamps recipients are white.
    22% of food stamps recipients are black.

  44. The feigned ignorance and counter-accusations that follow my post pointing out the implied racial overtones of Gingrich’s tone are so full of it your eyes must be brown.

    Kinda like pretending Reagan’s “welfare queen” didn’t have racial overtones…

    Lee AwaterAtwater: You start out in 1954 by saying, “N_____, n_____, n_____.” By 1968 you can’t say “n____” — that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states’ rights and all that stuff. You’re getting so abstract now [that] you’re talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you’re talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is [that] blacks get hurt worse than whites. And subconsciously maybe that is part of it. I’m not saying that. But I’m saying that if it is getting that abstract, and that coded, that we are doing away with the racial problem one way or the other. You follow me — because obviously sitting around saying, “We want to cut this,” is much more abstract than even the busing thing, and a hell of a lot more abstract than “N____, n____.”[6]

  45. Newter, Newter, Newter?

    Newter?

    Newter, Newter!

  46. Yo philichi!

    PHILICHI!

    Has anyone seen philichi?

    Maybe he’s off getting me all that information he promised to provide.

    Well, I hope he checks-in soon, so he knows he doesn’t need to get any info on the State Bail-Outs that never happened (which I provided the link above), the Food Stamp Program (which alindasue provided the link that completely refutes Gingrich’s claims about President Obama and food stamps), and also this temporary program philichi mentioned that didn’t even last for 2 months.

    “Cash for Clunkers”, was a $3 billion U.S. federal scrappage program intended to provide economic incentives to U.S. residents to purchase a new, more fuel-efficient vehicle when trading in a less fuel-efficient vehicle. The program was promoted as providing stimulus to the economy by boosting auto sales, while putting safer, cleaner and more fuel-efficient vehicles on the roadways.”

    “Although the program officially started on July 1, 2009, the processing of claims did not begin until July 24,[2] and the program ended on August 24, as the appropriated resources were exhausted.”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Car_Allowance_Rebate_System

  47. About brown eyes, bBoy, check the mirror.

  48. The letter is about Newt and the ridiculous claim that calling Obama the “foodstamp president” is somehow racist.
    Still, how is assuming that only/mostly blacks are on foodstamps ISN’T racist?

  49. BTW, we are talking about 8 years compared to 3.

  50. SPeters, I can’t really tell what point you are trying to make about the Newt Gingrich charge that President Obama is the Food stamp president, but it is clearly a racist comment, even though Gingrich himself doesn’t realize or recognize it. Gingrich doesn’t see it as a racist remark precisely because Gingrich is a racist.

    Gingrich said it. That’s a fact. As you can see from alindasues comment at 11:17 AM Gingrich’s comment is wrong. That is a fact. As you can see from jellee’s comment at 11:58 AM there are more white Americans getting food stamps than there are black Americans getting food stamps. That is a fact.

    And Newt has said more about black Americans and food stamps as is documented here by FOX NEWS.

    Gingrich: Blacks Should Demand Paychecks Not Food Stamps

    Republican presidential candidate Newt Gingrich said Thursday he is willing to go before the NAACP and urge blacks to demand paychecks, not food stamps.

    http://nation.foxnews.com/newt-gingrich/2012/01/06/newt-african-american-community-should-demand-pay-checks-and-not-be-satisfied-food-stamps

    One more thing…

    I just heard on the TV that Newt Gingrich has a Phd. I suspect that in Newt’s case it simply means “Piled higher and deeper.” (Just threw that in as a bonus funny to lighten things up!)

  51. concernedtacoma7 says:

    Everyone here is dancing around the facts that as a demographic, blacks are much more likely to be unemployed and recieve food stamps.

    Addressing this issue is not racist! When BHO gets criticized for not helping the community get jobs by black leaders, is the message not the same as Newt’s?

    64% of black kids are born to a single family household. Black are less likely to graduate high school, get arrested, or recieve govt monies for poverty. All facts. Discussing ways to fix these concerns is not racist, unless you think the status quo is just fine.

    The PC left are attacking themselves and a group of their base on this one.

  52. SPeters – I don’t assume that most black folks are on food stamps – what I assume is that most of the (white) folks who are applauding Gingrich’s food stamps line (along with his line about Spanish being a ghetto language) assume that most black folks are on food stamps.

    The sophistry of the right when called upon the race baiting of their leaders is soooooooo transparent. Classic D.O.C tactics: Deny, Obfuscate, Counter-accuse! Isn’t that something put forward by Alinsky?

  53. Your assumption says more about you beerboy.

    Are you white? I am, and not until I heard the assinine assumption about Newt’s comment being racist did I imagine he was talking about black folks.

    But what the heck, the left has been using that tactic for a long time. If you can’t win in the arena of ideas, label your opponent as a racist, bigot, etc., etc., ect. Speaking of transparency.

  54. philichi says:

    http://www.forbes.com/sites/christopherhelman/2011/06/27/tycoon-says-north-dakota-oil-field-will-yield-24-billion-barrels-among-worlds-biggest/http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204555904577166713425845328.html
    Mukibr these articles should get you started. This doesn’t include the huge finds in the gulf. There is much much more. Just read the WSJ daily.
    If you don’t know where the $800 billion went, (not banks) most all paid theirs back. The States all got some. It was to thank the public sector unions for their support in the 2008 election.
    Finally, yes I was an economics major in college; I suppose that makes me an economist.
    If you produce more of a resource the price will go down. Since our economy runs on energy, if the cost goes down, the activity and growth of the economy will rise. When you raise the price, the economy begins to slow down. But isn’t this obvious?

  55. It’ll fall on deaf ears.

  56. philichi, Thanks for getting back with the links. I will check them out!

  57. philichi, I clicked on your link, but there was not article, just this…

    HTTP Status 404 – /sites/christopherhelman/2011/06/27/tycoon-says-north-dakota-oil-field-will-yield-24-billion-barrels-among-worlds-biggest/http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204555904577166713425845328.html

    type Status report

    message /sites/christopherhelman/2011/06/27/tycoon-says-north-dakota-oil-field-will-yield-24-billion-barrels-among-worlds-biggest/http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204555904577166713425845328.html

    description The requested resource (/sites/christopherhelman/2011/06/27/tycoon-says-north-dakota-oil-field-will-yield-24-billion-barrels-among-worlds-biggest/http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204555904577166713425845328.html) is not available.

    Apache Tomcat/6.0.29

  58. philichi, BUT, then I did several searches, and when I tried this one

    tycoon-says-north-dakota-oil-field-will-yield-24-billion-barrels-among-worlds-biggest

    It took me to a Forbes article as follows:

    Tycoon Says North Dakota Oil Field Will Yield 24 Billion Barrels, Among World’s Biggest

    Billionaire Harold Hamm is convinced thereʼs 24 billion barrels of oil to be coaxed from the Bakken field of North Dakota and Montana. No one has more acres there than he does.

    http://www.forbes.com/sites/christopherhelman/2011/06/27/tycoon-says-north-dakota-oil-field-will-yield-24-billion-barrels-among-worlds-biggest/

    It looks to me like this is the story you referenced, by Christopher Helman. Correct?

    Okay, you are starting to make me question the other so-called experts. Is there more info that you have to share?

  59. philichi, Just did a quick pass on this article so far, but picked-up at least two issues that caught my eye. But, this interests me, and I will be rereading this article and looking for more, I assure you.

    Issue #1 – I remember this! I was working for SeaFirst Bank in ’82, which had invested very very heavily in Oklahoma Oil Drilling Contracts, and the bank lost it’s shirt, tie and pants when the boom busted. Hence, the reason why Bank of America was able to buy SeaFirst lock, stock and empty barrel.

    From the article: “Oklahoma’s drilling boom faded when prices slumped in 1982. The rigs left; the easy oil and gas long since discovered. Then came the drilling revolution— using horizontal drilling and fracture stimulation (fracking) to bore far deeper than before into a trickier reservoir called the Woodford shale.”

    Issue #2 – We have heard a lot about the dangers of “fracking” for oil, and this seems to be a significant concern for the future success of these fields.

    From the article: “What could go wrong, both for Continental and Americaʼs nascent oil and gas boom? Oil prices would have to slump below $50 to make Bakken development uneconomic. Environmentalists could block the pipelines needed to get the Bakken crude to market. But the scariest spectre is the threat of federal regulation of fracking–which could halt Bakken drilling for up to two years as companies proved to the feds that what they’re doing is safe.”

    Okay, it looks like there’s oil in them thar hills! But, at what price, and can it be gotten out?

  60. philichi: If the supply of energy went up in American, wouldn’t that cause a decline in the price?

    Okay, here’s a question for you. I understand the basic law of supply and demand, but, the article says that the OPEC control over the price per barrel is what made the oil in the Dakota unprofitable for a long time. So, if the supply of oil goes up due to these new Dakota resources, the price won’t necessarily come down because of the higher costs of getting this oil out of the ground, right?

  61. Vox_clamantis_in_deserto says:

    Tip-O’-the-day goes out to………………………………jellee!
    Shift Key.

    HTH

    hey vox … if you had bothered to click… it says Bureau of Labor Statistics.

    Uh… no it doesn’t. The graph they used is by BLS, but both of your links were to 0bama propaganda sites. And no, I don’t contribute to hit counts for propaganda sites.

    750,000 jobs lost a month over the three months BEFORE… barack obama, took office.

    Do you even know how to read a graph? The total job losses for the three months after your… president 0bama took office are at least equal, if not greater than the total for the three months before.

    and currently we have 22 stright months of job growth.

    Fan of Debbie Wassername Shults, ’eh jells. Isn’t that like calling a 5% increase on a 5% tax just a 5% increase, rather than a 100% increase? Noting from noting…

    From Politifact
    “If you start counting at the low point of the past few years — February 2010 — (you’re) right. Since that time, the number of private-sector jobs has risen by 2.77 million, or 2.8 million if you round up. (Over the same period, the number of government jobs has shrunk, weakening the overall jobs picture.)

    But using other date ranges will produce lower — even negative — totals. Since the Obama presidency began in January 2009, the number of private-sector jobs has actually decreased by more than 1.4 million.“

    “And if you look at the numbers since the day Obama took office, manufacturing jobs have actually fallen by 800,000.“

    in spite of the do-nothing congress with it’s 11% approval rating.

    ’Yep, right where pelosi and reid parked it in July 2010:

    http://www.gallup.com/poll/141512/Congress-Ranks-Last-Confidence-Institutions.aspx
    from the bureau of labor statistics…

    and here’s another one showing how foreign oil imports has been drastically cut since our president took office.

    Addition by subtraction, jelly. Spin aside genius, you do realize the graph you linked shows the trend downward began in the last 3 years of the Bush Administration, and that the percentage of decline under 0bama is roughly the same as under Bush. I know you do – you just won’t admit it.

    obama has helped create jobs and reduce the importing of foreign oil.
    case closed.

    LMAO! Koolaid hangover up next.

  62. SPeters – I am definitely not the only person who has come to the conclusion that:

    Gingrich Won’t Win the Presidency, But He May Always Be the GOP’s #1 Racist
    http://www.alternet.org/newsandviews/article/764530/gingrich_won%27t_win_the_presidency%2C_but_he_may_always_be_the_gop%27s_%231_racist/

  63. philichi says:

    muckbr the cost to harvest a resource has no play in the price. The only time that it matters is if is raises or lowers the supply… However, we are all missing the point here. The gas that comes off of the oil wells is free right now. The WSJ said last week that drillers have simply stopped drilling. The good news is that our cost to produce steel is way cheaper than most around the world. (because of cheap energy) That my Friend is how to create jobs, not cash for clunkers. Fracking is going to turn the world upside down. The Saudis will be begging for money someday.

  64. philichi, “Fracking is going to turn the world upside down. The Saudis will be begging for money someday.”

    I really hope you are right, and that fracking doesn’t damage the aquifers, because if is does then we may be begging for water. Right?

  65. Go Newt! Four more years.

  66. The link that ct7 provided (1/20 @ 9:30 AM) seems to indicate that Europe & Eurasia, Middle East and S. & Central America all have greater potential oil reserves than does North America.

    The article clearly indicates that The Mideast is still the leader far and away with all the proved & recoverable oil reserves and only second to S. & Central America for the unconventional reserves, which technology can’t affordably extract at present.

    It does look as if there is still more than enough oil for generations to come, but there seems to be some conflicting info here. Though it sure does look like there’s a lot of oil still available, versus the “peak” or decline that some would have us believe, ct.’s source doesn’t really indicate that North America has more than the Mideast. Am I reading that correctly or is there something missing?

    BTW

    philichi, you asked how I would feel about windmills… Still, I wouldn’t want our government to totally abandon programs that encourage research on cleaner energy resources, because we all have to agree that burning oil and coal still pollutes the atmosphere, and that is the cause of a whole set of problems that contribute to a lot of hazards for human life, correct?

  67. LOL, I made no prediction whether or not Newt would win the presidency. Thanks anyway.

  68. BTW, don’t read stuff into Newt’s comment. A lot of people only read into the comment what they want to read into it. Just listen to what he said, and not what YOU THINK he said.
    Have a nice day, God bless.

  69. philichi says:

    mucklbr I impressed. you sound like a genuine interested student. Ok I have just explained that there is a glut of natural gas. What I have left out is that every car in American can be adjusted, like busses to run on it. Busses and cabs do now, right? So, every house in America now has gas hooked up to it, right? What do you think about a President wasting our money on wind mills, solar panels and Chevrolet Volt”s (that currently run on coal).

  70. philichi, I keep telling people on these blogs that one of the main reasons I am here is to learn new things, but few believe me. Anyway!

    Natural gas powered cars is a good idea, and I have often wondered why that technology has been practically speaking all but abandoned. I read several years ago, and it was fairly common knowledge, that there were/are huge reserves of Natural Gas in Canada. I never understood why they have pretty much limited the use of NG to home and factory heating. If there’s so much of it why not convert coal fired extreme polluting power plants to NG and make them instantly cleaner. I don’t get why that hasn’t been done.

    Now you are telling me there are huge NG reserves here in the US. And I have no reason to doubt twhat you say. Again, that should be great news to get us off of the oil and coal. Besides the government regulations, why isn’t that happening. Private industry should be, could be leading the way on that right?

    Please don’t get me started on The Volt! I said that car was a joke when it first came out. Chevy claims it’s an “electric car” but it is no more that than my wife’s Prius. They are both Hybrids, except that our Prius won’t spontaneously combust like some of the Volt’s have. Now, if they fix the batery issues, and reintroduce it as a hybrid, then that would be better.

    But, there still needs to be some money put into research on windmills, solar, etc… Science needs to move forward on those ideas too, because there just might be a way to make those sources of energy work for us at a cost effective rate. Can you compromise with me on that much?

  71. Speter – you don’t need to be an expert in semiotics to read Gingrich’s remark – he already made the connection between the NAACP – food stamps – Obama. Gee….what group of people is he talking about? I guess I must be racist to infer that, by directing connecting food stamps to the NAACP, he is talking about blacks!

  72. directly not directing

  73. ReadNLearn says:

    Why do some equate food stamp use to racial issues? There are slackers of every racial group who take food stamps. There are people of every race who make poor life choices and bring too many children into the world they can’t support. As depicted in the movie Idiocracy, we’re subsidizing failures at the expense of those who are successful and if you subsidize something, you get more of it.

  74. Gingrich is the one who equated it by connecting it to NAACP

  75. Vox_clamantis_in_deserto says:

    “And so I’m prepared if the NAACP invites me, I’ll go to their convention and talk about why the African American community should demand paychecks and not be satisfied with food stamps,”

    Sorry, bB, but your “equating” that statement to “racial issues” “by connecting it to NAACP” or making “the connection between the NAACP – food stamps – Obama” is a stretch that would make Gumby jealous.

    But you could be the Twister champ at my next 60’s party.

  76. At this point I seriously doubt that even Herman Cain would vote for Newt Gingrich, given the racist remarks Newt has spewed.

  77. Yea, surely Cain will vote for Barry… lol.

  78. concernedtacoma7 says:

    BHO has led blacks straight into the poor house. Newt wants EVERY American to have opportunities for a living wage. What a racist!!!!

  79. Youse guys got nothing on Lee Atwater – except he acknowledged what he was doing.

  80. ct7, Even you can’t really believe that Newt Gingrich wants anything for anybody except what he can get for himself.

  81. Racist – I thought it was regionalist!

    youse

    1. (regional) You (plural). Sometimes as youse guys
    2. (Boston, New York and Philadelphia) You (singular).

    I extend my heartfelt apology to any ewes who were offended by my reference to the 3 Stooges.

    And, thank god that I am disqualified from holding future elected office – I was a little worried there.

  82. concernedtacoma7 says:

    Can you really call it an apology when you call us female sheep in the same sentence? Or were you referring to the people of Togo?

    I include myself among those offended since I am actually from the ‘youse guys’ region.

  83. That was at least as honest and heartfelt apology as you could ever get from any politician.

  84. On second thought….insincere apologies….that wasn’t so hard….maybe I could be a politician!

  85. alindasue says:

    beerBoy said, “Racist – I thought it was regionalist!”

    You had the wrong region – or maybe your list of regions was just incomplete. It took my step-dad, a white guy from south Chicago, a good four decades before he finally quit saying “youse guys” all the time. He’s a wonderful and intelligent person who just happened to have a bit of a regional accident.

    SPeters,
    Herman Cain has more in common with Newt Gingrich (i.e. past mistress problems) than he does with President Obama.

    Vox_clamantis_in_deserto quoted, “And so I’m prepared if the NAACP invites me, I’ll go to their convention and talk about why the African American community should demand paychecks and not be satisfied with food stamps,”

    Why would he consider food stamps to be an “African American community” issue when it really should be a general economy issue – unless, in his mind being African American equated with participation in food stamp programs? It really is an issue that has more to do with the general economy than it does with the NAACP.

    By the way, FactCheck.org still says that Newt Gingrich was inaccurate in his claim regarding President Obama and food stamps.
    http://factcheck.org/2012/01/newts-faulty-food-stamp-claim/

  86. Vox_clamantis_in_deserto says:

    Why would he consider food stamps to be an “African American community” issue when it really should be a general economy issue unless, in his mind being African American equated with participation in food stamp programs? It really is an issue that has more to do with the general economy than it does with the NAACP.

    Why would you consider his comments to be about a preponderance of welfare recipients, rather than a lack of jobs in the black community? You see, the same racist aspersions could be cast upon your inferences.

    By the way, FactCheck.org still says that Newt Gingrich was inaccurate in his claim regarding President Obama and food stamps.

    Really?

    That is indeed what your link says. But what it doesn’t say is that they are comparing 8 years of Bush to 3 years of 0bama. So while Gingrich’s statement was off… by 400,000 recipients, I hardly think it even a moral victory to claim your administration added 14.2 million to the welfare roles in less than three years compared to your predecessor, who saw 14.7 million added in 8 years.

    And that this fact was not even mentioned in the factcheck.org piece just adds credence to some conservative’s claims that the Annenberg Public Policy Center-funded site (whose director is one Kathleen Hall Jamieson – author of “Echo Chamber: Rush Limbaugh and the Conservative Media Establishment”) is frequently more than a bit left-leaning.

  87. Vox_clamantis_in_deserto says:

    And before Kardy comes out of hiding to correct me, make that 500,000 recipients.

  88. sandblower says:

    And Vox, you forgot to add in the recession which did have an effect on the number of food stamp claims. Now who do you suppose gets the credit for the recession, more or less in total?
    Be careful that your response matches the data please.

  89. Vox_clamantis_in_deserto says:

    And blower, the recession officially ended in June 2009

    http://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2010/09/americas_recession

    yet food stamp recipients have continued to soar upward at a steep rate for a longer period of time than any under the Bush years. Now who do you suppose gets the “credit” for that? We’re talking better that 50% of the 0bama term here, sandy – no recession.

    Be careful that you response matches reality… or at least alindasue’s link.

  90. Newt Gingrich is the phoniest presidential candidate ever

    After having affairs and dropping two wives, he had gall to attack Bill Clinton over Monica Lewinsky

    Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/newt-gingrich-phoniest-presidential-candidate-article-1.1009014#ixzz1kG3G9o7E

  91. ReadNLearn says:

    I don’t know if Welfare President is the right legacy as that’s Johnson’s baby…however, as he’s the first American President to bow before a foreign leader, he’d be the Kow-Tow President.

  92. 20091116‑fncbow2.jpg  – Eisenhower bows to French President. [AP image #5909020306

    bush_bow.jpg – Here’s President Bush bowing.

    bushholdinghands.jpg – Here President Bush, holds hands with Saudi King

    bushkiss_0.jpg  – Here President Bush kisses a Saudi King

  93. The links above don’t work, so just google the descriptions and then click on images. You’ll see a number of presidents prior to Obama who have bowed (Eisenhower, Nixon, Bush-1), held hands (Bush-2) and even kissed (Bush-2) foreign leaders. President Obama is not the first, and he won’t be the last.

  94. alindasue says:

    Vox_clamantis_in_deserto,

    The claim that “the recession officially ended in June 2009″ goes right up there with that picture of President Bush standing on that ship with the “Mission Accomplished” banner behind him. The mission was far from accomplished in 2003 and the recession did not end in 2009. In fact, I think its safe to say that it is still up for debate whether the recession has yet to fully end, and it’s still going to take us a few years to recover completely.

    You said, “Why would you consider his comments to be about a preponderance of welfare recipients, rather than a lack of jobs in the black community? You see, the same racist aspersions could be cast upon your inferences.

    I did not say anything at all about a “preponderance of welfare recipients”. You somehow inferred that, although I don’t know how.

    I said that the food stamp issue was “a general economy issue”. More people are receiving food stamps in the last decade because more people are qualifying to receive them due to the economy. That is not a racial issue – which is why I find it perplexing why Newt Gingrich would feel the need to address the NAACP specifically about it.

  95. Vox_clamantis_in_deserto says:

    Economists accepted definition of “recession”:

    A period of general economic decline; typically defined as a decline in GDP for two or more consecutive quarters.

    These conditions have not existed since the end of the second quarter (June) 2009. I would not argue the improvement of the economy, though the 0bama administration certainly did (remember the Summer of Recovery?), but the fact is sandblower specifically mentioned “recession”.

    As for the remainder of your response, let me sum it up thusly:

    … in his mind being African American equated with participation in food stamp programs?

    Since he did not say that, would that not also make you guilty of inference? And since your inference could also be construed as making assumptions about the black community, would that not be equally racist thinking, based on the very same identity politics definition of inferred racism now being employed by the left and their media surrogates, to twist anything stated by anyone on the right, into some sort of squishy proof of racism? If not, why even make this into something it isn’t?

    Call me crazy, but I hold out hope that even the most ardent of liberals and Gingrich haters, here, know in their hearts this is just a political attack on him – nothing more. So go ahead and have fun with it… at your own peril, lest it should boomerang.

    Did Newt thoughtlessly blurt out something that would subject him to this phony criticism? Yes. Was it a “racist” statement? Only in the most… liberal of definitions. Does it suggest he is a racist? Please. Is Newt Gingrich a perfect candidate for president? Hardly. But then… who is?

  96. vox – how is calling out the NAACP in his comment not related to race?

    Gingrich may not be a racist but he is most definitely a race-baiter who has re-awakened the Southern Strategy in his campaign in the South.

  97. Plausible deniability only works when it is plausible.

    Your defense of Gingrich is classic D.O.C. – Deny, Obfuscate, Counter-accuse.

  98. And Newt didn’t thoughtlessly blurt it out – it was repeated too many times. It was a well thought out, extremely cynical strategy to play on the worst of America in order to craft a win in S.C.

  99. alindasue… Are you a racist?

    Voxy says you are as he wrote “As for the remainder of your response, let me sum it up thusly: ‘… in his mind being African American equated with participation in food stamp programs?’ Since he did not say that, would that not also make you guilty of inference? And since your inference could also be construed as making assumptions about the black community, would that not be equally racist thinking,”

    But I thought Gingrich did say essentially what you, alindasue, said he said, and it was kind of reported that way, by FOX NEWS, wasn’t it”

    Gingrich: Blacks Should Demand Paychecks Not Food Stamps

    Republican presidential candidate Newt Gingrich said Thursday he is willing to go before the NAACP and urge blacks to demand paychecks, not food stamps.

    http://nation.foxnews.com/newt-gingrich/2012/01/06/newt-african-american-community-should-demand-pay-checks-and-not-be-satisfied-food-stamps

  100. Vox_clamantis_in_deserto says:

    And Newt didn’t thoughtlessly blurt it out – it was repeated too many times.

    bB, you are entitled to your own spin – even dredging-up a supposedly resurrected… strategy rumored to have been employed by a disgraced former president to win re-election nearly 45 years ago, if you like. All it does is demonstrate a desperate play on an old reality, juxtaposed onto current events. (As I stated above, I am holding out hope you truly are not that gullible.) But you cannot play with facts. Gingrich made the offer to appear before the NAACP only once, as you well know.

  101. alindasue… Yes, I’m pretty sure that voxy has called you a racist.

    And then voxy wrote, “Call me crazy, but I hold out hope that even the most ardent of liberals and Gingrich haters, here, know in their hearts this is just a political attack on him – nothing more.” Okay voxy, you are crazy. There! Happy now?

    Why are you crazy voxy? Well, let’s see, you also wrote, “Did Newt thoughtlessly blurt out something that would subject him to this phony criticism? Yes. Was it a “racist” statement?”

    Yes, as a matter of fact it was a very racist statement. Even FOX NEWS says so voxy!!!

    Newt didn’t “thoughtlessly blurt out” anything. He knew exactly what he was saying when he said it.

    It’s pretty obvious that Newt Gingrich is a racist. And, anyone who supports and defends Gingrich is probably a racist too, even if they don’t or won’t admit it. That’s not my opinion, it’s simply a logical conclusion based on the transitive property of equality.

  102. NAACP National Association for the Advancement of Colored People.

    Since the very title of their organization infers their mission is the advancement of colored people, it makes sense to point out their mission failure of advancing colored people.

  103. alindasue says:

    muckibr said, “alindasue… Are you a racist?”

    I tend to take the crayon box view of race; that is, I don’t see people as black, white, red, or yellow, but rather as colors all across the spectrum. I’ve yet to meet anyone who was actually white or black. The “whitest” person I know is a man with albino qualities, although only his hair is fully white. The “blackest” man I know is actually a very very dark brown Tongan.

    That doesn’t mean I am not aware of racial issues. It’s just that I’ve found that most racial stereotypes don’t generally hold true.

    beerBoy said, “Gingrich may not be a racist but he is most definitely a race-baiter…”

    What’s the difference? Is there a difference?

    Vox_clamantis_in_deserto said, “Call me crazy, but I hold out hope that even the most ardent of liberals and Gingrich haters, here, know in their hearts this is just a political attack on him – nothing more. So go ahead and have fun with it… at your own peril, lest it should boomerang.”

    Okay. You are crazy. (Just kidding.)

    Seriously, it’s all “just a political attack” whether it be aimed at Newt Gingrich or Mitt Romney or President Obama or any other politician. It’s all political.

    I don’t need to “have fun with it”. The truth is that I consider Newt Gingrich to be his own worst political enemy. He has a tendency to “thoughtlessly blurt out” (as you put it) way too often for a person who wants to be considered as a serious candidate for the office of US President.

  104. Vox_clamantis_in_deserto says:

    alindasue, I would not disagree with your impression of Newt – nor would he be my first choice as a candidate. But, having said that, I would also not hesitate to pull the lever for him over 0bama. Neither do I have any doubt he would be equally as divisive a figure as 0bama, but his experience and policies would far better serve our country.

    And as to your definition of “race baiting”, Sharpton, Jackson, West, Wright, Jackson/ Lee, et al (this list is way too long), said to say “hi”.

  105. alindasue says:

    Vox_clamantis_in_deserto said, “And as to your definition of “race baiting”, Sharpton, Jackson, West, Wright, Jackson/ Lee, et al (this list is way too long), said to say “hi”.”

    I didn’t give a definition of race baiting. I asked what the difference was between being a “racist” and “race baiting”. The words sound very similar.

    I wish you would type whole names when you comment. I only recognize half the names in your list and would have to look up the other half. Jackson, Lee, and West are all very common names.

    Based on my understanding of the words “race baiting”, then I would agree that the Reverends Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton are also both race baiters and, perhaps, also racist. It doesn’t look any prettier on them than it does on Newt Gingrich.

  106. so vox – your defense of Gingrich is that what he said was neither racist nor race-baiting because, as we all know, he suffers from the right-wing equivalent to Tourette Syndrome. “He isn’t using the Southern Strategy – he just blurts out these things without any self-control!”

    Not exactly a big confidence builder for the guy youse guys want to be the big guy. I’m thinking that you would be better off saying “So what – I want a president who is cynical and manipulative”

  107. alindasue, just so you know, for sure, I was NOT accusing you of being a racist, okay? I was just wondering if others were, and if you were aware of that.

    beerBoy, you’re gonna get in trouble for using “youse guys” again!

    I think it’s really funny when people say stuff like “Did Newt thoughtlessly blurt out something that would subject him to this phony criticism?” to deflect criticism away from their guy, by saying he just “blurted it out” or it was a “slip of the tongue” or “he really didn’t mean it that way.” Yet, when someone on the other side says something controversial, those same kinds of people will pounce on that and dissect the meaning of every single syllable to prove whatever they want to prove, and that’s not “phony criticism” at all!

    I’m specifically thinking of years ago when H. Ross Perot was speaking before the NAACP and he accidentally said, “You people…” Wow! Did a whole lotta people dump on Ross for that! Just those two simple words!!! I was watching that speech on TV, and I honestly believe, based on the look on his face when he said those words and said them again, that he had no idea that anyone at all would take any offense at those two simple words.

    At the same event Al Gore … caught himself as he stumbled over the word “plan” in discussing … Clinton’s economic plan. To widespread laughter, Al Gore said, “I almost said the Klan.”

    Now, had Perot said “I almost said the Klan.” instead of “You people,” do you suppose they would have laughter it off?

    Just saying, a lot of people just don’t like Newt Gingrich. I admit that I don’t like him, but I don’t hate him either. His “blurt” if that’s what you want to call it, is just another of many many reasons not to like Newt Gingrich. But, come on! Don’t try to defend it. If nothing else, it was Freudian slip that reveals his real feelings for African Americans, who he says should try getting themselves some pay checks instead of just taking food stamps.

    http://www.nytimes.com/1992/07/12/us/the-1992-campaign-racial-politics-perot-speech-gets-cool-reception-at-naacp.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm

  108. Vox_clamantis_in_deserto says:

    Not exactly a big confidence builder for the guy youse guys want to be the big guy.

    I think youse should re-read my post @ 9:23.

    I’m thinking that you would be better off saying “So what – I want a president who is cynical and manipulative”

    We already have THAT guy.

  109. Vox_clamantis_in_deserto says:

    I didn’t give a definition of race baiting.

    But you defined Gingrich as one.

    I asked what the difference was between being a “racist” and “race baiting”.

    To the extent that I believe one must be a racist to engage in race baiting, I would agree there is no difference. But I do not see Gingrich’s comments as racist, or race baiting. Poor choice of words – absolutely. Especially considering that the left leaning media and their race profiteering allies in the race baiting business are so eager to portray Republicans as racist. Any statement or position that could be wildly and carelessly construed – in any way – to have a few parts per trillion of racist odor will be used as a cudgel against any candidate who is not now the sitting president. This has been the pattern for at least four years now, and Newt should know better than to allow himself to get sucked into that vortex.

    I wish you would type whole names when you comment.

    Jesse Jackson – senior and junior, Sheila Jackson-Lee, and Cornell West (to name a fraction of qualifiers).

    HTH

  110. beerBoy, you’re gonna get in trouble for using “youse guys” again!

    Ummm, no he won’t. Youse guys are held to a much lower standard than everyone else here.

*
We welcome comments. Please keep them civil, short and to the point. ALL CAPS, spam, obscene, profane, abusive and off topic comments will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be blocked. Thanks for taking part and abiding by these simple rules.

JavaScript is required to post comments.

Follow the comments on this post with RSS 2.0