Tag Archives: primary

Musings on the Republican Primary 5

Posted on by

By Jay Hansen

First and foremost, allow me to sincerely apologize for the lack of updates on my website this week. Work has been absolutely murderous; I’ve only just now gotten off a 14 hour shift, but insist on uploading at least one article this week. I’m very sorry if there are no further updates this week. I would encourage all of you to check ThinkProgress and The Young Turk’s youtube channel for this week’s best stories. Thank you for reading, and for your patience.

It’s been a long time since I’ve weighed in my two cents on the Republican primary. A lot has developed since the Iowa caucuses, but I think we may finally be soon reaching a possible conclusion. What I have to say may shock you, but first, let’s start with the obvious.

Ron Paul

You tried man, you really did, and you certainly did better than in 2008, but let’s face it, it’s time to pack up and go home. I was rooting for Dr. Paul, I really was. He was the only one of the Republican candidates that even had the slightest chance of winning my vote because of his strong, principled stances on civil liberties, the war on drugs, foreign interventionalism, and select others. What’s saddest about Paul’s loss, though, is that I think he was genuinely the most likely of these four candidates to defeat Obama. Many of you may remember me saying some time ago that Paul had almost no chance of beating Obama because he was so flagrant with his ultimate, highly unpopular political goals. Now, I think he’s the most likely to beat Obama not because his odds have necessarily improved much, but mostly because the odds of any of his three opponents left have gone down so drastically. So it’s not that he’s gotten better; his opponents have only gotten so much worse. Think about it this way; Paul is rather inarguably the only candidate that could have pulled away some of Obama’s support, especially among young voters, because Obama’s defenders are quite fervent (even if not out of support of Obama, but rather great disdain for his opponents, given how radical they are). Romney is fake, Gingrich is loathsome, Santorum is outlandishly religious, and all three of them are the definition of polarizing candidates. Plus, young voters are very idealistic and protective of their civil liberties, which is possibly Ron Paul’s biggest issue. Most importantly, Paul is a very strong candidate. When he says he’s going to do something, he’s doing it, even if he has to blow up the entire government (figuratively) to get it done. When Obama says he wants to do something, I’d go as far to say a majority of the time he doesn’t, whether it’s because he can’t get it done or that he just flat-out doesn’t try. On top of that, Obama is now developing an even worse track record on civil liberties than the Bush administration. To many Americans, this is their number one issue, especially among Democratic voters. Paul’s strength alone would be enough to pull support out from under Obama’s campaign into his own. Add to this the fact that Republican voters are much more likely to vote for a candidate based on party affiliation (because someone has an R next to their name instead of a D) than Democrats means that a lot of these Republicans claiming they “would never” vote for Ron Paul, or that just generally dislike him, are largely blowing smoke. They’d still vote for him over Obama any day, giving Paul a unique advantage of having actual bipartisan, non-polarized support.

It’s a real shame that he’s going to lose the primary. That would have been a fascinating general election.

Mitt Romney

Romney’s doing the best thus far in the race, but to say he’s unstoppable is fairly naive. As of a week ago, he had amassed 53% of the delegates, but he’s only won 38% of the popular vote. That means 62% of Republicans do not want Romney. Granted, I wouldn’t really expect a landslide majority in a primary with as many candidates as this one has had, but 38% still seems low. On top of that, let’s not forget that the harder he tries to secure the social conservative vote that continues to elude him, the more he alienates independent voters. When Romney campaigned in Florida, he fought an extremely dirty campaign with virtually nothing but attack ads in an attempt to bring down his far more social conservative opponents. While it secured him the victory there, it cost him, because around the same time polls started showing a massive dip in Romney’s popularity among independents; a crowd he does not have to win over to secure the primary, but one he does to win the general election. This is the classic problem for all politicians running in primaries; they have to run away from the center, which can make the majority of voters in the general election squeamish, and in turn, makes the general election harder. With Newt Gingrich wanting to decimate the judicial branch, Rick Santorum literally wanting to establish a theocracy, and both of them waging war against women, birth control, and (for Santorum at least) even pornography, it’s impossible for Romney’s social conservative credentials to keep up with them while at the same time maintaining any shred of sanity, or for that matter, hope of winning the general election. Worse yet though, is that even his efforts to appear more socially conservative are turning around to bite him in the butt, because it only goes to show Romney as more of a politician and poll-chaser, meaning he’ll do and say whatever is necessary to win. While that may be true to a degree for all politicians, Romney by far does the worst job I’ve ever seen at pretending otherwise. This is why people view him as a disdainful, greasy politician, and not someone who genuinely wants to make America better for everyone. Let’s not even go too much into detail of how disconnected he is from a vast majority of society as a member of the 1%. There are way too many individual stories about Romney, a man worth at least a quarter of a billion dollars, trying to relate to the every man by telling everyone that he counts as a sports fan because his friends own sports teams, that he considers corporations people, that he’s horribly mistreated his family dog, that he doesn’t care about the poor, that his wife, who doesn’t consider herself or her family rich, drives a couple of Cadillacs, and many others. This list from the guys over at MAD magazine makes the disturbingly apt analogy in the style of a matching game between quotes from Mitt Romney and those from Mr. Burns from The Simpsons, and pretty much communicates this point well enough.

Romney may still stand a very good chance at winning the primary, but in doing so he’ll end his chances of winning the general election, ironically, no matter how hard he may try to run back to the center upon winning.

“Not concerned about the poor? Get rid of Planned Parenthood? Did I say that? No, not me! I’m good-old centrist Mitt!”

But that’s still not even Romney’s most immediate concern; the end of the primary and the inevitable rush back to the center is centuries away in political years. While he may still be on a winning streak after taking Illinois last night, there’s one big threat still in the game that could shake the very foundations of the Republican Party.

The Gingrich – Santorum Paradigm

First of all, Gingrich’s chances of winning the general election were higher than most people thought. I mean, for starters, just look at how aggressive he has been even in the face of impossible odds in the primary, despite massive pressure to stop. Plus, in the general election, he could whip out a bunch of his old-school experience and bipartisanship. Keep in mind that he was the Speaker of the House that managed to balance the budget working with the Clinton administration. In today’s political atmosphere, that could score some points. Of course, he’s still so slimy that if he got any slimier you could kill him with a box of salt (Bill Maher joke, not mine), which would definitely impede his efforts, to say the least. Plus, it’s just damn sad that this primary’s candidates are just so pitiful that Newt Gingrich was among the most likely, or rather least unlikely, to win in the general election.

None of that matters at this point though, because after his losses in the South Gingrich is out. He’s officially in the same camp as Ron Paul now; thanks for playing, you will receive your consolation gifts at the door, so get out before you embarrass yourself any further. At this point all Gingrich is doing is helping Romney, because he’s leeching votes away from Santorum. If he was smart, he’d strike some sort of deal with Romney, be it for cash or an administration position, to stay in the game and keep grinding Santorum into the ground. Of course, that’s if he was smart. If he was smarter, and in the mood to be striking deals (and it’s Gingrich, so of course he is), he should strike one with Santorum, which is why I named this section what I did. Romney is likely too overconfident and would never accept a deal from such a loser like Gingrich, even to give him an extremely low administrative position, after all that he’s said and done to Romney throughout the campaign. Santorum, on the other hand, has everything to gain, and Gingrich could easily milk more from him than he ever could appealing to Romney, which leads me to my biggest, boldest prediction yet about this primary:

If Gingrich drops out of the race, Santorum will win the nomination.*

Note the asterisk. I put it in there because obviously it depends on when Gingrich drops out. He’s obviously not winning, so it’s just a matter of time. If he hangs in there until convention time, then it’s not likely Santorum will win given Romney’s massive delegate lead. I’m not a math wiz, nor could I even tell you which primaries happen when in what order and how many delegates go to those who win what percentage of the votes in which states blah-biddy-blah-biddy-blah… But, if Gingrich drops out before some of the bigger states like California or New York, to name a couple, the social conservative and anti-Romney title will no longer be challenged. A majority of Gingrich’s support would almost certainly flock to Santorum, and the anti-Romney crowd that only cast their votes to oppose Romney would have their choices considerably narrowed, with their serious choices down to just a single candidate (Santorum).

Hey, I’ve been wrong before. If you recall, I said Santorum was out months ago, calling him “laughably illegitimate” because he’s so radically right-wing on social issues. That’s why it’s just so pitifully sad that he’s actually within realistic reaching distance of the nomination now, and worse, that he’s the only one left standing against Romney. What does that say about the state of the Republican Party as a whole, when their two absolute best men to represent the different sub-factions of their party are Romney and Santorum?

But of course, Santorum and Gingrich would have to cut the deal first. Newt is way too proud to admit defeat in most situations, but I think even he is beginning to realize what kind of trouble he’s gotten himself into. Santorum, on the other hand hardly seems too proud, or intelligent, to strike a deal with Gingrich something along the lines of Gingrich agreeing to drop out of the race in exchange for a spot on the ticket as Vice President. Could you imagine that? Santorum Gingrich 2012? I’m fairly certain that would literally be the worst presidential ticket in United States history, the two are so extreme and loathsome, which is why I don’t think Santorum is intelligent enough to not make that deal. Even if he is smart enough to realize the disaster that ticket would be, in order to get the deal he’d still likely offer Gingrich a cabinet position, such as Secretary of State (which just scares me). Maybe he can be Secretary of Moon Colonization?

But realistically, who could be Santorum’s VP pick? I’ve been thinking about this more and more lately, and hope to soon write an article over it, and I’m somewhat stumped on Santorum. He’s not as savvy as Romney, who would play politics and balance the ticket as well as possible ethnically, such as with Senator Marco Rubio (pretty much the nation’s only Latino Republican), or ideologically with a hard-right wing conservative with unquestionable credentials like Senators Rand Paul or Jim DeMint. Santorum, on the other hand, seems like a principle-narcissist, meaning he’s so obsessed with his ideology he might actually be dumb enough to pick someone just like him, such as Newt Gingrich, or worse. His biggest Achilles’ heel image wise in this nation may actually be with female voters, which is saying a lot given his image among Latino and other ethnic minority voters. His stances on issues like opposing birth control and insinuating women who want it are sexually promiscuous whores, opposing women working outside of the home, and medical claims of abortion being needed to save a woman’s life, no matter how rare or doctor-mandated, are “phony,” among many others, disenfranchise a massive group in America that isn’t even a minority. Given that, a woman pick would be good to balance the ticket, but in all honesty, what woman, even Republican woman, would choose run with Rick Santorum? What woman would be so much of a sell out to support these ideologies when even female Republican politicians are railing against their own party establishment, something not tolerated in the Republican Party, to oppose them?

Oh I swear to God… You know what? Never mind. Not even he could be that dumb.

The most fascinating part of all this, though, is that Gingrich might not need to make this deal. If he and Santorum together can accumulate enough delegates by time the Republican National Convention rolls around, we could see something fascinating and really historic. Apparently, it’s called a contested convention. I really don’t know much about them as it’s such a rare occurrence, but Cenk Uygur of The Young Turks proposed that it would be possible, if Gingrich and Santorum had a combined total of delegates that rivaled or beat Romney they could decide to team up during the convention on a Santorum-Gingrich ticket and take it from Romney at the last second. Is that allowed? I honestly don’t know, nor could I even imagine how the nation would take it. If it came down to this option, the party would likely be in such shambles and so weak politically Obama will have gotten his wish, which is to drive them so far to the right by agreeing with everything they say they are forced off the deep end and voters have no choice but to vote for the only candidate that’s mildly sane… conservative, but sane.

The only other option is that Romney takes the nomination, and like I pointed out, he’s only secured 38% of the popular vote in his own Party, and the Obama administration has been gearing up since day one of their campaign to go up against Romney. I won’t go back into all the details I just talked about above as to why he would lose in a general election, but suffice to say Romney could get clobbered easily in the general election.

Then again, leave it up to the Democrats to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. Plus, with mind-boggling, downright disturbing amounts of Super PAC money and donations from the ultra wealthy of this nation already flooding the election in record levels before even ending the primary, once all that money gets focused at Obama, he’d better have his fighting gloves on and ready to go. The question that would remain in this situation is an important one that could shape the future of America and all modern democracies. Which is mightier for shaping public opinion; big, wealthy donor money, or overt disdain and disregard for the lower classes and majority of one’s voting constituency?

Man, I knew this was going to be a big, historic election season, but I had no idea how historic.

30 Reasons Why Not to Vote for Rick Santorum

Posted on by

By Jay Hansen
Happy Leap Day everyone! I love Leap Day!

I’m really disgusted by the fact that Santorum is still in the race, let alone the fact that he is now leading the pack, with some national polls showing him ahead by as many as eight points. At the very least, he’s neck-in-neck with Romney now, and the two have started bashing each other to pieces. Romney was sleazy, haughty, and corrupt, which annoyed me, Perry was mad, stupid, and corrupt, which scared me, Gingrich was megalomaniactic, arrogant, and oh yeah, corrupt, which disgusted me, but Santorum is something else. The fact that he’s leading in the polls makes me feel all these same feelings I experienced for these past three front runners, except also experience them towards the actual Republican voters that keep handing more and more victories to Santorum, who has now won four out of eleven states (Minnesota, Colorado, Missouri, and Iowa). If the Republican candidates were gastrointestinal processes (which isn’t that far of a stretch), Santorum would be the silent-but-deadly fart. You never hear or see it coming, but when you realize what’s happened it’s too late, and you’re stuck with a horrible stench in the air that no one can get out of their noses, no matter how much odor-killer Mitt may spray. Yeah, that’s how I think of Rick Santorum (which I feel is quite apt given the definition of his name).

The fact that Santorum is being taken seriously, even among Republican voters, is indescribably woeful. You thought I had little hope for the party before he came along? You have no idea how far, radically right-wing Santorum is. Because of his silent-but-deadly nature, I’ve finally been compelled to make a list of reasons as to why Santorum is a horrible candidate. At long last he reaches the honorary levels of gruesomeness and despicability that Newt Gingrich, Rick Perry, and Congressman James Lankford have reached on my website already. Like my Gingrich list, it started as just 10, but quickly and immediately ballooned up to 30 – not as lengthy as Gingrich’s, but hey, Santorum isn’t competing for Biggest Douche in the Universe like Gingrich is (but, then again…)

So here it is, from the most benign to the most heinous, 30 Reasons Why Not to Vote for Rick Santorum.

Rick Santorum…

  1. Defines “Washington Insider,” and has been described as a “stealth lobbyist” because of all the work he does for, and money he gets from, lobbying and corporate donors. Santorum himself ran the K Street Project, which was a project wherein Republicans decided to make demands of lobbyists and corporate donors upon gaining control of Congress. It was the K Street Project, as led by Santorum, that paved the way for infamous lobbyist Jack Abramoff and many others to gain such political influence, and is to blame for such drastically higher levels of political corruption in the past decade or so compared to that of the 1990s. And we all have Senator Santorum to thank for that. Thanks Rick.
  2. Created a tax plan that will increase the deficit by $1.3 trillion, giving on average $448,000 in tax cuts to each and every millionaire in the country. The upper 0.1% alone get an additional $1.3 million in tax cuts annually under the Santorum plan. Should I even be surprised by this any more?
  3. Supported tort reform to cap medical malpractice damages at $250,000 , only for his wife to turn around, with Rick’s full support, and sue her doctor for medical malpractice in the sum of $500,000 because of back problems, depression and weight gain supposedly brought on by her doctor. Hypocrisy? What’s that?
  4. Believes insurers should be allowed to discriminate based on pre-existing conditions, be it by charging them more or denying them coverage all together.
  5. Believes medical care is a luxury, not a right, and that it’s “a blessing” that the uninsured have to pay $200 a month for pills they need in order to live. To pay for it, Santorum says the poor should cut back on luxuries in their lives, and insinuates people complaining about the cost of health care are just selfish. Damn, and we thought Mitt Romney was a disconnected upperclassman. Speaking of which, Santorum also…
  6. Supports income inequality. No joke or exaggeration. To be fair to Rick, he was trying to use the two words in a more literal meaning. He supports those that have work harder making more money. To that, I say DUH RICK! We ALL support that. The problem in society is that our current state of income inequality as reached a point where the gap between the rich and poor is historically and disturbingly large, and unfortunately all too often the wealthy allocate more of the nation’s wealth undeservingly. Let’s not forget it’s the taxpayers that bailed out many of the same banks that are now reporting big gains and often record profits while paying out record bonuses to their CEOs. Other issues may be more visibly so, but I feel this statement goes to show the depth of Santorum’s out-of-touch mindset with the mainstream, middle and working class American family.
  7. Flip-flopped on abortion; he used to be pro-choice. Yes, dear conservatives, even your precious, perfect social conservative Rick Santorum actually used to be pro-choice. Republicans love Santorum because of his “solid” conservative principles, unlike the waffling, flip-flopper Mitt Romney, right? Well it turns out Santorum is on exactly the same page as Romney when it comes to abortion. Both of them wised up and realized there was more money in politics if you sold out as a Republican, and so they hopped on that bandwagon and switched to being pro-life entirely for political reasons. Santorum is no more a solid social conservative than the man he was meant to replace. This doesn’t mean much to me, but it illustrates a point about the Republican candidates and Party right now; even the most legitimate, principled looking ones are actually just poll-chasing politicians, and nothing more.
  8. Believes the President has authority over the Supreme Court, at least to a degree. In an interview with David Gregory on Meet the Press, Santorum was asked about the possible Supreme Court case regarding the constitutionality of Proposition 8 in California. Santorum said that if the Supreme Court ruled Proposition 8 unconstitutional, he “would seek to try and overturn it.” He goes on to talk about “judicial tyranny” reminiscent of Gingrich’s war against the judicial branch (read more about it here, points 34-41). What he said was not a direct call to abolish the authority of the courts or the courts themselves, but many conservatives (like Gingrich) are already of that persuasion. It wouldn’t be a far cry at all if we see Santorum go down that path as well, especially if he keeps talking about “judicial tyranny.”
  9. Was endorsed by Rupert Murdoch, the owner of News Corp. This one is actually more significant than most people believe. Roger Ailes is the President of FOX News, and he historically has been considered the “kingmaker” of Republicans. He has picked many of the last Republican Presidents and Presidential candidates, and already slammed Romney as someone who wouldn’t make a good President. He himself is yet to make a direct endorsement for 2012, but Rupert Murdoch is his boss. Murdoch is the kingmaker’s boss, if that gives you any idea of what his endorsement means. On top of that, Glenn Beck has also shown support for Santorum (one of the few conservatives so radical he got kicked off FOX News). This could mean Santorum is the “FOX News” candidate, which could spell for an information disaster. If he has all of FOX News, as well as the conservative media, rooting for him as the favorite, the amount of propaganda and damage they could do to an already corrupted and muddled democratic system is nightmarish.
  10. Supports torture, and ignorantly so. Allow me to elaborate. Senator McCain came out against torture, or “enhanced interrogations,” a long time ago because he himself was tortured in Vietnam. Senator Santorum, in his infinite genius, responded by saying “McCain doesn’t understand how enhanced interrogation works… You break somebody and after they’re broken, they become cooperative.” When it was pointed out to Santorum that McCain served in Vietnam and was tortured, he immediately back pedaled, but not well enough. A former McCain aide came out and responded “For pure blind stupidity, nobody beats Santorum. In my 20 years in the Senate I’ve never met a dumber member, which he reminded me of today.”
  11. Completely ignores all United States military intelligence on Iran, saying the exact opposite of the Secretary of Defense regarding Iran’s nuclear program. Santorum says Panetta is the one who is wrong, not him. Can you say cognitive dissonance? Santorum is itching for another disastrous war in the Middle East, and when you read about his religious ideology below, it’s almost certainly because he is yet another conservative that actually wants a world-ending war to happen just to fulfill his ideology. He wants the world to be destroyed just so he can be right.
  12. Completely ignores and even refutes statistical fact, even when it is forced directly in front of his face. During an interview with on CNN, Santorum claimed Obama lost jobs because (I’m using his own logic here – watch the video in the link if you don’t believe me) in December of 2010 the Obama Administration reported creating 280 million jobs with the stimulus package, but by mid 2011 the Administration forecasted that the stimulus had only created 240 million jobs, meaning there was a net gain of jobs, just a smaller one than originally predicted. So, in reality, Santorum is claiming that Obama created 240 million jobs, and therefore, cost… America… jobs? Could someone explain this logic to me? The reporter tried to explain it directly to his face, but couldn’t get through. Santorum kept claiming that Obama lost jobs even with the numbers not just right in front of his face, but coming out of his own mouth! Kudos to the interviewer by the way; that was an example of real journalism that you don’t see much of any more.
  13. Is just generally dumb. There are tons of individual “facts” Santorum has cited that are just flat-out wrong, but to give them all their own bullet point would make this list go on forever. To name a nice little lump of things he’s said that are simply wrong, Santorum claims Planned Parenthood was founded on eugenics and racism, and still practices eugenics today by placing facilities in minority areas and gearing their advertising towards minorities, which they don’t. It’s simply factually untrue. He claims abortion is to blame for Social Security failing. He claims that no society ever in the history of the world has allowed homosexual marriage, and equates homosexuality to bestiality and pedophilia. He claims the sex scandals in the Catholic Church should be blamed on the liberal media for promoting alternative lifestyles. Despite giving a speech on “foreign policy,” he didn’t have any plans for what he would do or would have done in Afghanistan or Libya if elected President, but still criticized the President for his action in Libya despite not having his own. In 2006, Santorum announced the United States had found Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq – an abject lie. He claims that radical Islam is actively attempting to enforce Sharia Law in the United States, and insinuates they are succeeding. There, enjoy some raw stupidity.
  14. Building on this theme of stupidity(and I will be for a while), Santorum praises George Bush for his foreign policy and efforts in the war on terror. In 2008, Republicans were smart enough to not even mention his name during their campaigns because he was such a disaster in popularity and policy. Now though, Santorum is embracing him.
  15. Claims we don’t need food stamps because obesity rates are so high. Again, I’m not kidding. Do I even really need to say anything here? The primary reason obesity is greater among the poor is because low quality, fatty foods are cheaper, not because they have access to too much food. Thousands of Americans have to go to bed hungry every night because they don’t have food, and for many of them food stamps and similar programs are their only means to obtain food. Santorum literally wants to take food out of the mouths of the hungry because he thinks they’re too fat. That’s awful Christian of you, Rick.
  16. Insists homosexuality is a choice, even though that’s scientifically untrue. According to the American Psychological Association, “Scientific and medical understanding is that sexual orientation is not a choice, but rather a complex interplay of biological and environmental factors” (quote from Wikipedia). This actually could have significant implications about Santorum himself, because, as I elaborate here, most people who insist homosexuality is a choice may only vehemently preach as much to convince themselves that they are “straight” when in reality they are experiencing powerful homosexual urges themselves, making them, in fact, homosexuals. What aren’t you telling us, Rick?
  17. Indicated he wants to outlaw gay sex entirely, as well as any form of sex he deems wrong because people should not have right to “sexual liberty,” and that “if ‘pursuit of happiness’ means ‘pursuit of pleasure,’ we won’t be a country very long.” Last I checked, I think sex is the one thing that 100% of Americans like (that and food), yet Santorum is the one guy now saying we don’t have a right to it. At this point, I have to remind you, Santorum is still leading in a lot of polls for the Republican nomination in 2012. So gay sex and untraditional sex are out under President Santorum.
  18. Believes all of Islam is evil. The religion of Islam only encourages violence and oppression as much as Christianity or any other religion does when taken to ridiculous extremes of fundamentalism. There are over 1.5 billion Muslims in the world today, yet when at their peak, Al Qaeda, possibly the largest Islamic terrorist organization, had no more than 1,000 members in Afghanistan, their “bastion,” as America frequently referred to it.
  19. Promotes the idea that Obama is a Muslim and continually claims the President is working with Muslims and against the United States. Santorum is essentially accusing Obama of treason, which is just about the heaviest crime imaginable, on absolute bullshit. Obama is not a Muslim. That is fact. Obama is not working with Islamic extremists. That is fact. Obama was born in America. That is fact. Now, why might Santorum be saying these things? Well, that ties me straight into my next point.
  20. Says things that strongly indicate he’s a flat-out racist. That’s a heavy charge, but given what he says about black people in the linked stories, and more importantly how he panders about Obama being a Muslim, a radical, or a foreigner is just his way of saying Obama is “different,” pouring gas on the flame of racism and hatred. Plus, keep in mind his open prejudice against homosexuals, having said that he holds right to discriminate against them. Santorum is either blindly irresponsible in his bigoted, false smears against the President in attempt to score political points among the ever-illusive racist vote, or he himself is a bigot.
  21. Believes there’s no reason women need to work to provide for their family if there is a man doing it, and worse, that the only reason a woman want to have careers is because of a “radical feminist plot.” In other words, Santorum doesn’t want women working. So far, that’s strong, outward hatred for LGBT citizens, Muslims, black people, and now women. But wait, there’s more.
  22. Refuses to make exceptions in banning all abortions for rape or if the life of the mother is in danger because he believes the claims that some women could die if they don’t get an abortion are “phony” and not real problems. I’m officially running out of commentary on this sleaze ball.
  23. Claims birth control is dangerous and responsible for detrimental problems in society. He also says that contraceptives are “not okay,” because they are “a license to do things,” referring to all of sexuality, insinuating that all forms sexuality are bad. Santorum also said states should have the right to ban birth control if they so chose, completely ignoring the court system that says otherwise. So gay sex, untraditional sex, and recreational sex are all out under President Santorum.
  24. Believes pornography is the biggest problem in America today. He put the “dangers” of pornography as his first issue on his campaign website, well ahead of taxation, the budget, economy, foreign affairs, or anything else. He wants to bring light to the “pandemic” of pornography and how it is “toxic” to society. To be fair, he quickly back-pedaled and put this point near the bottom of his list, and there is good chance it may have been a genuine editing mistake, but nonetheless, offers a brief insight into Santorum’s priorities. So, with pornography also immoral in Santorum’s world; gay sex, untraditional sex, recreational sex, and masturbation are all out under President Santorum.
  25. Believes sex and sensuality are naturally sinful and should only be used for procreation purposes within a marriage. Could somebody please tell Santorum we’re in the 21st God-damn century, and not the 17th century as he seems to believe? Oh, and if you think that’s shocking, buckle up; these last five points will blow your freaking mind.
  26. Does not believe in science. There’s just no other way to put this. He does not believe in Evolution, he believes homosexuality is a choice, and has even gone so far as to just bluntly and ignorantly state “there is no such thing as global warming,” meaning he not only denies global climate change but the inarguable scientific fact that the planet is warming up. This is the key problem with Santorum; he believes education and knowledge are wrong. Don’t believe me? Move on to the next point.
  27. Believes education and academia are Satanic, or at least are possessed by Satan. He opposes both public education and higher education like colleges and universities because they “kill religion,” and because they’re satanic. He’s even gone on to say that Obama is a “snob” for wanting every American to go to college. It does not get much lower than this, and yet, my list still has three bullets left in it. Santorum opposes education because it’s Satanic. How? He takes the bible literally, that’s how. What was the very first sin to be committed in the bible? Adam and Eve ate from the tree of KNOWLEDGE. Therefore, in Rick Santorum’s mind, knowledge must be Satanic. This is exactly how the church oppressed people for hundreds of years throughout the Dark Ages. This is exactly how fascist dictatorships always start out, by getting rid of all the intellectual and educated. Theocratic dictatorships, no matter where or when they were in history, depend on people being ignorant, because if they’re educated and knowledgeable, they’ll realize that a lot of the religion they are forced to follow is absolute bullshit. I don’t mean to attack religion as a whole, but Santorum has officially taken the crown in modern American history for weaponizing religion. I don’t even want to write any more on this topic because it makes me so mad, but thus is the nature of these articles. On to Santorum’s next train wreck…
  28. Believes Protestantism is also satanic, or at least is possessed by Satan. Protestantism makes up a majority, just over 51%, of American Christians. Santorum, a Catholic, says Protestants are not real Christians and that Protestantism is “in shambles.” Santorum, though, made damn sure to clarify that the Catholic Church was certainly not possessed by Satan – only the Protestant church is. How on Earth is this guy so popular in the Republican Party, when he thinks a vast majority of them don’t count as real Christians, and are in fact possessed by Satan? This is perhaps the best testament to the ignorance of the average Republican voter I’ve ever seen.
  29. Does not believe in separation of church and state. Do I even really have to say anything here? He said an “absolute separation of church and state” made him want to “vomit.” He went on to say “the idea that the church can have no influence or no involvement in the operation of the state is absolutely antithetical to the objectives and visions of our country.” Clearly, Santorum has absolutely no idea what this country was founded on. Jon Stewart elaborates more here.
  30. In the end, Rick Santorum is nothing more than a sugar-coated Pat Robertson. Well, a Catholic, sugar-coated Pat Robertson. Okay, okay, a Catholic, sugar-coated Pat Robertson on steroids. And not so much sugar, maybe more like some sort of sugar substitute that people don’t really like, like high-fructose corn syrup. That’s it – Rick Santorum is a high-fructose corn syrup covered, Catholic Pat Robertson on steroids… that’s actually leading in Republican polls and could win the nomination for President in 2012. If I haven’t yet proven to you this man’s religious zealotry, consider the fact that there’s a high likelihood that he’s an Opus Dei Catholic. For those of you that don’t know, such as myself when I first heard about them, the Opus Dei Catholics are a super secret sect of Catholicism. They were featured in the novel and movie adaptation of The Da Vinci Code as the primary antagonistic organization (though they were wildly historically inaccurate – I just wanted to give people some sort of reference). Members are greatly discouraged from revealing themselves, likely because of the amount of criticism and scrutiny the organization receives over controversial practices such as extreme confidentiality, aggressive recruiting tactics, and mortification of the flesh, which is when someone physically beats themselves or inflicts great pain upon themselves as a form of repentance or apologizing for having any degree of mortal pleasure. Given how greatly they discourage members from revealing themselves, combined with Santorum’s extremely radical religious ideology and respect for the founder of the organization (having attended his birthday celebrations), it’s likely he is a member. Already we know Santorum belongs to at least one “specialized” sect of the Catholic Church; the Knights of Malta. Santorum is a “Knight” of this organization, which is the oldest order of chivalry on Earth. Keep in mind, they are old school chivalry though, which would explain Santorum’s sexist tendencies. I’m not one to judge based on religious beliefs, but when you’re as entrenched in it as Santorum is, you’re a little nuts. To me, things like orders of chivalry, secret religious societies, and so on, are all just extremely silly and goofy – like something I would play in a video game, a fantasy setting, and then leave it behind in that fantasy setting when I go back to the real world. For Santorum, things like that are real, and that is why I saved this as my final point about Santorum; he’s religious to the point of delusion, and wants to force his beliefs onto the entire country, which, if he is successful in bringing all of them to the level of federal government, would begin a new Dark Age.

Santorum is still leading in some national polls, but last night his efforts to win the nomination hit a major road block after losing Michigan and Arizona to Romney. He’s clearly undeserving of the nomination, but then again, which of the four candidates left are? Gingrich was loathsome, Romney was fake, Paul was half brilliant, half insane, Perry was dangerous, Bachmann was stupid… but Santorum? I don’t even know how to categorize him. This article actually took much longer for me to write than most because I just feel no passion for Santorum at all. I mean… really Republicans? This is your guy? I doubt it, but the funny thing is I don’t even doubt it as passionately as I doubted Gingrich. It’s just so extremely disappointing to see Republicans support such a disturbing candidate so fervently. Personally, I still doubt he’ll win the primary, and even if he does, of the four candidates left in the race, Obama could squish him easier than any of them, so I’m not real concerned at all.

Nonetheless, I have to give props to Ben Mankiewicz of The Young Turks. Long ago, way back after the very first debate or two of this primary, he predicted Santorum could win. No one else agreed with him, but it looks like he could get to hand out a tall glass of shut up juice to the whole crew, not to mention me.

Also, I’m pretty sure Santorum is doing everything in his power to look like a Sith Lord. Just watch this video of him giving a speech from a tower balcony. I’d suggest even muting it and watching his smug look when he sees the police start arresting and brutalizing protesters.

It can be hard to make out in this video, but that’s his campaign banner in front of him on the side of the building. If you can’t see it, I’ll just tell you; the official colors of his campaign are red, white, and BLACK. Seriously, black. His campaign just started putting up signs here in Edmond the other day and I snagged some pictures; here’s Santorum’s ominously dark campaign signs:

You know, his speech and color choice seem so familiar. Where have I seen this before?

High Chancellor Adam Susan from V for Vendetta

Oh yeah….

…wait a second…

... meh, close enough

Oh, and in case you missed it at the top of the page, I’ll just finish with this. If Santorum wins the primary, I have full intent of posting this video everywhere on the internet. Because I mean really; when are we going to just cave and re-name the 2012 Republican Primary the Biggest Douche in the Universe? That’s all they’re really competing for any more.

Musings on the Republican Primary 4

Posted on by

By Jay Hansen
(Originally published December 28th, 2011)

Now that America is recovering from its chocolate and eggnog hangover from the Christmas season (though for me it’s just chocolate – I hate eggnog…), we’re starting to realize the first primary election is less than a week away. The first Tuesday of the new year will be Iowa’s primary, and things have really been shaken up just in the past week or two. So, given that, allow me to give my very last pre-election predictions about the Republican primary. Let’s take a look at our contestants!

The Losers

Huntsman, Bachmann, Santorum, Perry

You all put up a good show with plenty of theatrics and drama, but I’m afraid you all just didn’t make the cut. Huntsman, you faired pretty well for someone who certainly did not fair very well at all. You’re just too cheesy and weasely with your cheap pot-shots at other candidates and poor sense of humor, not to mention the fact that you could be Mitt Romney’s mini-me. Most of all though was your actual somewhat sane political ideologies. You’re aware you’re running in the Republican primary, right? And you actually believe in science? That won’t fly in today’s Republican Party. Try coming back in 2016, or maybe even 2020, after the party has had ample opportunity to run itself of an ideological cliff and will actually be looking for a “centrist” to save them.

As for the rest of you – Bachmann, Santorum, and Perry – get your shit and get out. These three ran as “social conservatives,” yet all three had two major things in common; bigotry towards homosexuals and jaw-dropping stupidity. I’ve regained some slight hope for humanity in the fact that all three of these vapidly stupid and openly hateful candidates were so illegitimate and dismissed by vast majorities of Republican voters. This, though, has been Obama’s strategy all along. At least, that’s the most I can make of it. It’s the only logical explanation I have for Obama to continually agree with Republicans other than just being a poor negotiator (or disingenuous liar); he agreed with Republicans to force their party even further right, because Lord knows if Obama takes a position, Republicans must disagree and be further to the right. He did so in hopes of making them so right-wing the majority of Americans find them way too extreme. Obama himself proudly reminds voters “don’t judge me against the Almighty; judge me against the alternative,” meaning he doesn’t want to be judged based on a standard of greatness, but rather by how much worse his opponent’s beliefs and policies may be. Traditionally, social conservatives are more right-wing than financial conservatives, from what I can tell, so naturally, they were the first ones to be pushed so far right they fell off. So congratulations President Obama; your constant capitulation and surrenders to the Republicans half-way worked because half of their candidates for President, the entirety of the social conservative collection, has been pushed off the cliff of electability at the federal level. Was it worth it?

Newt Gingrich

Given how loathsome and despicable of a human being you are, you put up quite the fight Mr. Gingrich. Nonetheless, it’s time for us to say goodbye. I’ve already said that I refuse to believe Gingrich would win the nomination, and it looks like I was right. Already he’s lost the lead in Iowa, and his chances of winning are slipping elsewhere too. In Virginia, he couldn’t even get on the ballot for the primary because he didn’t finish the sufficient paperwork to do so. Keep in mind that Virginia is Newt’s home state, meaning that’s where he’s registered to vote. If he wants to vote in the primaries at all, he’ll have to vote for one of his opponents – a fail truly worthy of the Gingrich campaign. Also in true Gingrich, hypocritical fashion, his campaign director shortly thereafter wrote that this problem in Virginia is both not catastrophic and catastrophic in the same facebook post. I predicted Perry was out long before his numbers were gone simply because of how extremely unpalatable to the American people he was, and now I’m saying the same thing for Gingrich. He’s on his way down again, and for the last time. He’s still leading nationally, but something tells me that’ll start to go down really soon, especially after he loses Iowa. I highly doubt he’s making it to Super Tuesday.

Gingrich will not win the primary. Sure, he may win a few states here and there, and may even be in a run-off or two, but he will not win the nomination.

But wait a minute… that’s five out of the seven candidates. Could that mean we’re finally down to our last two competitors? My prediction is that we are, and it’s the same two I’ve been predicting since I first started writing these pieces.

Main Event

Mitt Romney vs. Ron Paul

 

LET’S GET READY TO RUMBLE

Man how pissed will social conservatives be if this turns out to be true?

Ron Paul has recently taken the lead in Iowa, the first of the primary states, giving him a big shot in the arm. If he actually wins Iowa, it’s a game changer, and not just for the Republican Party; it’s a game changer for the entire nation. The establishment, especially of the Republican Party, utterly despises Ron Paul despite his conservative ideology. The reason why is because Paul isn’t a sell out. He won’t do something just because someone cut him a check – he’s got his ideology and he’s sticking to it. He’s a real budget hawk that will go after wasteful defense spending. He’s a real civil libertarian that will put an end to grievous violations of civil liberties from both Bush and Obama administrations. He is strongly opposed to the war on drugs, believing it to be a waste of money, resources, and unfairly targets minorities. He’s opposed to foreign interventionalism and wants to bring an end to the war in Afghanistan. There’s tons of issues on which I wholeheartedly agree with Paul, and it’s because of many of these reasons the establishment hates him. The Young Turks put together a great compilation of the establishment’s reaction to Paul’s rise to the top, and I couldn’t have put it better myself, so I’ll let Cenk do the talking for me.

Of course, all stories have two sides, and no politician is without baggage. Now that he’s starting to lead the pack, old information about many racist remarks published in newsletters carrying Ron Paul’s name have re-surfaced, drawing into question his beliefs of minorities, especially given his voting record and the fact that he never directly denounced the pieces until 2008, two decades later when running for President. A former staffer for Ron Paul has also recently come forward, claiming that Ron Paul is somewhat bigoted towards homosexuals. Worse yet, Paul, a medical doctor, allegedly does not believe in the medical science behind the transmission of AIDS and HIV, and that it can be caught through saliva or sharing a toilet seat with someone infected. He also supposedly has refused to even shake the hands of homosexuals or use restroom facilities used by a homosexual, even if they were staunch supporters. Now keep in mind, these stories are all from a former staffer, so take them with a huge grain of salt. Right now, they are largely just allegations, and I’m yet to hear Paul’s response. Given what we already know about Paul’s newsletters, however, it does seem to fit. Even given that though, Paul has defended minorities when it comes to the war on drugs unfairly targeting them, as aforementioned, which could be a sign that he either wants to help minorities, or it could just be him making any argument he can against the war. There’s so many variables among this massive cloud of information that’s surfacing about Ron Paul now it’s hard to tell what’s true and what’s not, especially given how much the mainstream media despises Paul as I’ve already highlighted and could very likely be using everything they can to smear him. I’m not defending Paul’s publications, remarks, or alleged behavior around homosexuals. If they turn out to be true, and Paul does hold such bigoted beliefs, then it’s obviously horrible and I would likely not be able to support him (him being the only Republican candidate that even has a slight chance of taking my support away from Obama), but I am also somewhat leery of anything the mainstream media may have to say about him, now that he’s steadily rising up to first place. Besides, think of it this way; people had to go back 20-30 years to find serious dirt on Ron Paul. To me, that seems to signal desperation.

Also as The Young Turks pointed out, even if he does hold these personal beliefs, many of his positions don’t seem to carry these beliefs into federal policy. Ending the war on drugs, for example, will greatly benefit racial minorities in this country and drastically lower their incarceration rates. Paul also believes gay marriage is an issue for each state to decide, and that the federal government should stay out, putting him on-par with Obama’s own ideology of gay marriage.

Of course, then there’s just the obvious criticism; Ron Paul wants to blow up the federal government. He seems to be of the opinion that if the constitution does not directly, illicitly allow something, then it’s unconstitutional. The federal reserve? Not in the constitution, kill it. The EPA? Not in there, kill it. Paper money? Not in there, kill it. The federal income tax? Not in the… well, it kind of is in there by way of an amendment, but it’s not in the original constitution, so kill it. This argument is arguably a good one in a Republican primary with so many voters seeking to shrink if not eliminate the federal government in extreme ways, but as Cenk pointed out in his epic Ron Paul rantings of the past few days, the argument is “fundamentally, obviously, blatantly wrong,” because it would virtually defeat all authority the federal government has to pass any legislation at all. “[The constitution] is not supposed to be all of our laws. It is supposed to be a very broad framework for what is and is not permissible.”

Ron Paul’s a real mixed bag. He wants to give people their freedom back, but wants to end all social safety nets. He wants to end the war in Afghanistan, but dump more fuel on the upper classes’ war against the lower classes. He wants to end the war on drugs, as well as paper money and all federal agencies. A lot of his crazier ideas, such as ending paper money, likely won’t be doable with Congress opposing him, but some of the things I most strongly agree with him he could do completely on his own, such as stopping violations of civil liberties and ending the war in Afghanistan as Commander-in-Chief of the US military. These things he could do on day one, without Congress’ approval. So needless to say, Paul is still up in the air as a potential candidate I for whom I could vote. A lot of this information on Paul is still surfacing and yet to develop, so we’ll just have to wait and see how these last few crucial days and weeks of primary season.

Right now, Paul is in a good spot to win Iowa. If that happens, it will help him for sure, but it may actually help Mitt Romney more than anyone. Already members of the media said that if Paul wins Iowa it “doesn’t count” for unexplainable reasons. The establishment is so deathly afraid of Paul that if he wins the first primary, everyone, and I mean everyone, that is a big supporter of the corporatist Republican establishment will begin dumping support behind Mitt Romney out of fear because he’s the only other candidate that may have a chance at beating Paul in the primaries. There are lots of people in powerful places that didn’t like Romney going into this primary, but I can promise you the only other candidate they hate more is Ron Paul, and will do anything to stop him, even if that means siding with a greasy politician with one of the worst track records of flip-flopping in the nation.

There is the possibility that Ron Paul could run as a third-party candidate still, likely on the Libertarian ticket which Gary Johnson is already seeking, and the 2012 election is screaming for a good third-party candidate because people are just so fed up with the two establishment parties. Honestly, as logical of a move as it may be, I’m not sure if I see Ron Paul doing it. I don’t know why exactly. Maybe it’s just because the media already dismisses him as a serious candidate. If he becomes third-party, the media won’t even bother to criticism him any more. Don’t get me wrong; he’d still have a shot to win even as a third-party candidate, but I just don’t see Paul putting a third name on the ballot for some reason. It could happen. It’s just some instinct of mine that makes me feel this and I have no logical reasoning behind it. Personally, I’d love to see the political play-out from that, but I just don’t feel it’s going to happen. Take that as you may.

That is, unless the Republican Party goes nuclear and tells Paul he doesn’t get the nomination even if he wins, or just directly kicks him out of the party or something.

In the end, I still think Romney is most likely to win, but that’s not a very confident statement. What may happen is that the endless musical chairs of this primary may leave voters with no candidate for whom they feel strongly at all come Election Day, but they’re still going to vote. The only solution, then, would be to vote for the candidate most likely to win in the general election, and right now that appears, on the surface level, to still be Mitt Romney. The same thing happened in 2004 when Democrats panicked and voted for the candidate they felt was the most electable and not necessarily the best, which ended up getting them stuck with John Kerry, further likening this election to 2004.

The most important reason why I think Romney will win, though, is a sad, historical fact about our democracy; he has the most money. Money always wins elections these days. 10% of the nation’s billionaires have already donated to Romney, and that’s before the general elections or the panic of Ron Paul possibly winning Iowa. He also has gotten more donations from Wall Street and the financial sector than all the other candidates combined, supports Citizens United, and believes corporations are people, ensuring the support of all the extremely profitable and powerful corporations, banks, and financial institutions in our nation, making him a personified embodiment of the upper 1%. If you think Romney will represent the people who vote him in you’re either delusional or ignorant, because his real constituents are clearly the ultra wealthy of this nation, and doing their bidding will be his primary purpose, regardless of the damage it may do to all of society. Hell, ignorant isn’t even good enough; you’re just stupid if you’re middle class or lower and support Romney in the primary because it’s so painfully obvious what incentivizes him.

Whether Romney or Paul wins in Iowa, it’s Romney that will likely benefit the most from it.

I did come to one question the other day about this election though that somewhat shocked me. If Ron Paul does win the nomination, what does that mean for Obama? Think about it; the establishment is terrified on Ron Paul. With Obama, they’re at least comfortable. Obama has done nothing but cut taxes, deliver millions of new customers to private insurance, pass financial reform that is an absolute joke, brings in nothing but core establishment guys into his administration and advisory positions, and generally plays the “good cop” to the Republicans’ “bad cop.” He’ll bring up good legislation every now and then, like the surtax on millionaires, but he’ll drop it the moment Republicans tell him “no” and not fight for it. Given the popularity of raising taxes on the wealthy, could you imagine how easily such a plan would have passed had he fought for it like he fought for the payroll tax cut extension? There’s no way Obama doesn’t know that you have to fight for a cause to win, so the only answer whenever he half-asses something like the public option or raising taxes is that he didn’t really want it to pass at all. He introduced it to look liberal, but then immediately gave up, fulfilling the roll of “good cop” so he can tell voters “Oh well, I tried, but the bad cops stopped me.” Come back and tell me that after you’ve gone in there and actually fought, Mr. President, like I know you can after seeing DADT’s repeal and the payroll tax extension, and I might accept that answer.

But think about that; Obama isn’t really looking to fight or challenge the establishment. He’s made that clear (even though his initial campaign’s very slogan was change). The only reason the establishment fights Obama so passionately is because Republicans are willing to give the establishment 150% of what they ask for and do so in such a way voters don’t notice the con job pulled on them. Obama is only willing to give the establishment 80%-90% of what they want, which is clearly not enough for such self-entitled individuals. Ron Paul wants to slash the military budget, infuriating defense contractors. He wants to end the Federal Reserve, which is responsible for propping up failed banks and financial institutions with taxpayer money. While Ron Paul is a Republican, he would be much less friendly to many members of the super wealthy than Obama is today. So given that, I can’t help but ask; if Paul wins the nomination, will the establishment flip? Will corporations, banks, financial institutions, and other massive profit organizations start to support Obama? His 80% of what they want would be massively better than Paul’s maybe 30%-50% of what they want (depending on where in the upper class someone may be).

And if I may add speculation to speculation here, what ramifications would that hold for the future? If Obama defeats Paul with corporate backing, what would that spell for the relationship between Democrats and the super wealthy? I’ll leave you with these questions to ponder this next week.

Buckle up guys – the wheel’s about to stop spinning and we’re going to have our first winner within a week. Sh*t’s about to get serious.

60 Reasons Why Not to Vote for Newt Gingrich

Posted on by

By Jay Hansen
(Originally published December 19th, 2011)

Okay, it’s been over a month since Newt Gingrich took the lead in the Republican Primary polls, and it’s starting to get on my nerves. I originally set out just to make a humorous piece about certain shocking similarities between Newt and a certain green grinchy creature that tried to steal Christmas, but one thing led to another and this article was born. Sure, I wrote part of it in a past piece, but the list started to grow out of control. I’ve already got 10 Reasons Why Not to Vote for Rick Perry and 5 Reasons Why Not to Vote for James Lankford, so now I give you 60 Reasons Why Not to Vote for Newt Gingrich. Believe me, I know there’s probably even more than this, but I had to stop myself somewhere. Without further adieu, here are 60 Reasons Why Not to Vote for Newt Gingrich.

Newt Gingrich…

  1. Was the first and only Speaker of the House to be reprimanded and disciplined for ethical wrongdoing.
  2. Shut down the federal government in 1995 when he was Speaker of the House because of a personal feud with President Clinton
  3. Committed many acts of adultery while preaching about the sanctity of marriage and family values to others.
  4. Strongly criticized President Bill Clinton for having an extra-marital affair while he was having an extra-marital affair of his own
  5. Claims he was driven to cheat on his wife because of “how passionately [he] felt about this country” and that he had “worked too hard.”
  6. Traded political and financial support to Bob Vander Plaats, head of the large social conservative organization The FAMiLY Leader, for forgiveness of his marital infidelity and political endorsement.
  7. Convinced The FAMiLY Leader to amend their “Marriage Fidelity Pledge” so Gingrich could sign it without encountering conflicts with his marital infidelity.
  8. Condoned hypocrisy by saying “It doesn’t matter what I do. People need to hear what I have to say. There’s no one else who can say what I can say. It doesn’t matter what I live” when his ex-wife asked him how he could give a speech about family values while having an extra marital affair of his own (literally the definition of hypocrisy).
  9. Demonized big government while fighting for more federal subsidies and pork-barrel spending
  10. Demonized the food stamp program, but fought to expand it
  11. Gives “strategic advice” to businesses of the health care industry, as well as Fannie Mac and Freddie Mae in the past, and “builds bridges” between these companies with politicians, speaking with members of Congress on behalf of these companies, but insists he is not a lobbyist and refuses to register as one.
  12. Consulted with Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae for $1.6-$1.8 million in pay, but also said that politicians that consult with Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae should be arrested.
  13. Accuses Obama for being anti-manufacturing, but hires manufacturers from El Salvador to make merchandise for his campaign
  14. Strongly supported a federal mandate to buy health insurance, but flip-flopped in 2010 when President Obama started supporting it.
  15. Supported cap-and-trade, but flip-flopped in 2009 when President Obama started supporting it.
  16. Said there is no advantage to the United States staying in Iraq, but 13 seconds later flip-flops by saying Obama was wrong to leave Iraq.
  17. Flip-flopped countless times on Libya
  18. Believes that the poor are culturally inferior to the rich
  19. Proposed that mothers on welfare should have their children taken away and placed in orphanages.
  20. Believes Obama and the Democrats are as dangerous as Nazi Germany
  21. Blamed the massacre at Columbine, the Virginia Tech shooting, and Susan Smith’s murder of her two sons all on “liberals” and “liberalism.”
  22. Says we should intentionally allow terrorists to attack the United States occasionally to remind us of the danger of not stopping terrorist attacks.
  23. Supports re-instating poll tests for people to register to vote, violating the 1965 Voting Rights Act.
  24. Believes people convicted of drug-related offenses should be executed.
  25. Accused Obama of having a “Kenyan, anti-colonial” worldview, implying that Gingrich does not believe Obama was born in the United States and supports the birther movement, which is laughably illegitimate.
  26. Demonstrated how profoundly at the mercy of the conservative media and Republican establishment he is when he criticized the Paul Ryan plan to eliminate Medicare, earning him massive pressure from them to backpedal and flip-flop on the issue. Immediately he began profusely apologizing.
  27. Has said that any campaign ad against him that directly quotes him is a falsehood (even if the quote is real and in-context).
  28. Believes that “personhood” begins at conception and supports a constitutional amendment stating as much, which would outlaw abortion, the birth control pill, and in vitro fertilization.
  29. Is deeply unlikeable as a candidate and a person, having come in second for the most hated Republican in the country earlier this year.
  30. Wants John Bolton, infamous neo-conservative and fellow FOX News contributor, to be his Secretary of State. Bolton is outspoken in his strong belief that America should go to war with Iran, and in 2006 the Senate refused to appoint him as UN ambassador when Bush nominated him.
  31. Believes child labor laws are “stupid,” and that poor children should have to clean public schools.
  32. Believes tens of thousands of Americans that work as janitors in public schools should be fired to make way for child labor.
  33. Accused Supreme Court Justice Sotomayor of being a “latina woman racist.”
  34. Strongly opposes the judicial branch entirely and wages a political war to weaken if not eliminate its power, saying, and I quote, “There is no Supreme Court in the American constitution,” which is an egregious lie.
  35. Believes the President has the authority to deem any Supreme Court ruling irrelevant and ignore the Supreme Court entirely.
  36. Believes that Congress has the authority to ignore the Supreme Court entirely.
  37. Believes that judges should be punished for rulings the President finds disagreeable by having their court abolished
  38. Threatens to send US Marshalls or Capitol Police to arrest judges he believes to be “activists,” out of step with the country, or that the President otherwise deems unfit.
  39. Believes judges and justices should be called before Congress to justify their rulings.
  40. Believes that the Supreme Court should not hold the power to overrule legislation at all. This, combined with his other beliefs on the courts, seems to indicate he seeks to completely eliminate the courts’ authority altogether.
  41. Believes it was a mistake for the Supreme Court to rule in 1958 that state governments do not hold the right to defy the federal government.
  42. Believes corporations and businesses should determine what their own tax rates should be
  43. Believes corporate tax loopholes should not be closed.
  44. Believes corporations will willingly stop evading taxes if we lower the tax rate even if we don’t close the loopholes
  45. Believes banks and the financial sector should not be regulated whatsoever, and politicians that support financial reform should be imprisoned.
  46. Created and supports a tax plan where millionaires will pay lower rates than middle class families
  47. Created and supports a tax plan where millionaires will receive an average tax cut of more than $600,000 per year
  48. Created and supports a tax plan where the richest 1% would get a bigger tax cut than the bottom 99% combined
  49. Created and supports a tax plan where middle-class families will have to calculate their taxes twice to figure out what they owe, completely defying the conservative taxation ideology of “simple is better.”
  50. Created and supports a tax plan where the tax rate for the richest 0.1% would be cut by more than two-thirds
  51. Created and supports a tax plan where the tax rate paid by the richest 1% would drop to its lowest level in modern history.
  52. Created and supports a tax plan that cuts taxes for millionaires at the cost of more than $360 billion per year.
  53. Created and supports a tax plan where revenue would be at such historic lows that by 2030, America’s publicly held debt is projected to be at 142% of GDP
  54. Created and supports a tax plan with tax cuts for the top 1% that are 5.4 times larger than the Bush Tax cuts, which are already responsible for creating a vast majority of the current deficit, and lead to the loss of over $1 trillion in revenue since implementation in 2001.
  55. Practices questionable financial behavior in his personal life with two credit lines at Tiffany’s for more than $1.5 million combined, further distancing him from the lower and middle classes, all while claiming to live a “frugal” lifestyle.
  56. Used his non-profit charity to funnel money to his and private business and personal profits.
  57. Sells t-shirts, coffee mugs, and other merchandise at campaign rallies to supporters under the impression the proceeds will support the campaign, when in reality they go to Gingrich’s personal profits.
  58. Ran up more than $1 million in debt in his campaign, spending nearly $3 for every $2 his campaign brought in, but he still claims to be “frugal” and fiscally responsible.
  59. Seems unusually detached from his own campaign given that he went on a vacation immediately upon declaring his candidacy and has spent a sizeable portion of his campaign on a book tour.
  60. Infamously corrupt lobbyist Jack Abramoff accused Newt Gingrich of being too corrupt. When Jack-freaking-Abramoff tells you you’re too corrupt, YOU’RE TOO CORRUPT.
  61. And one bonus one for you. It may go without saying, but Gingrich fits into this song just way too well.

All of this… ALL OF THIS… and Newt Gingrich is still leading in the polls to win the Republican Primary. That blows me away. That’s just sad. Think about what that says about Republican voters; they actually believe that Newt Gingrich is the best, most honest portrayal of what they believe and value. Who looks at this guy and thinks “Oh yeah, that’s my man – he’s just what this country needs!” The answer, from what I can tell, is idiots who are brainwashed into thinking Gingrich will fix the government and end corruption (that literally was hard for me to type it’s so mind-bogglingly, obviously wrong) and the super rich who don’t want to see the government fixed because they love how they’ve got the system rigged. Tragically, based on Gingrich’s poll numbers, it would appear that these two groups alone make up a very large portion of the Republican base today.