Newt is running, period; he has been laying the ground work for the last 6 months, Romney or Ron with Newt on the ticket will sweep the country; put palin on the ticket and he is a dead loser!

Let's see, Newt Gingrich, a man with a personal life to rival Bill Clinton (once served divorce papers on his wife while she was in the hospital) and who was sanctioned for ethic violations by a Republican House of Representatives.

Yes... one hell of a candidate. I think he should choose South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford as his running mate and maybe Ralph Reed as his campaign manager. Then we can get all the Republican hypocrites on one ticket.

I agree. obamarx is out no matter who runs, but newt is a smart man and will bring reagan conservatism and prosperity back to the country

I agree. obamarx is out no matter who runs, but newt is a smart man and will bring reagan conservatism and prosperity back to the country

You call tripling the deficit prosperity? Because that is what Reagan did.

His numbers... $900B to $3.2T

REAL conservative there.

Oh the Republican'ts will forgive Newt for all of his infidelities. Let's not forget, while he was Speaker of the House, and was pushing to impeach Clinton, he was having an affair with his current wife, while married to another. Oh yes, the Republican'ts are very easy to forgive, as long as you aren't one of them liberals.

ha ha ha ha ha aha aha ha ha ha ha aha aha aha ha aha ha ha ha aha aha.......

Sorry - every time I hear the name "Newt Gingrich" or see a picture of him I just bust out laughing...I do apologize for my outburst.

dman #1.2,

I don't think a marital problem and serving a divorce proceeding anyplace is a moral condemnation. There is never a good place to do it.

I think that the major lies and slander of his "Contract with America" will come out as more ammo for democranks to spew.

ps. all major party candidates are hypocrites because they promise what they think the audience in front of them 'wants' to hear, following the party script structures, and should know they can't fullfill them by themselves.

Each party has spent $million$ for social engineers to the best buzz words and hot buttons like; lobbyist, special interests, right wing, left wing, fanatical, hypocrite, socialist, religious, meglomaniac, nazi, facist, rich, corporate lackey, etc., etc,

All labels to distract from the real issues and discredit the opposition by deflecting the discussion to name calling like a bunch of puerile brats.

Hey Newtie, how's that divorce thingy workin for ya?

Gingrich need not bother. This country has had ENOUGH of the same old foxes running the hen house, who strongly believes that nothing needs to change.

The last thing this country needs is to be ruined/run by a FORMER CONGRESSIONAL SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE who was REMOVED for gross improprieties - and one who has proven himself BELOW reproach, GREEDY, and have no ETHICS.

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

This is a person who really does think we buy into the lie that "time heals all wounds (or disgraces)."

Hear this, WE HAVE NOT AND NEVER WILL FORGET YOUR DIRTY PAST GINGRICH! And unless you're a Genie, who can cross those fat arms, blank your eyes and head, and make your sordid past go away - I say don't waste our time.

Yep newt, you go ahead and run for POTUS 2012. We have a lot of old, old memories waiting for you!

Anthony - I would say that serving divorce papers on your wife while she is in the hospital with cancer does not qualify you as a particularly moral person. Certainly he could have waited a few weeks until she was out of the hospital.

I think that the major lies and slander of his "Contract with America" will come out as more ammo for democranks to spew.

I'm unsure of the meaning of the above remark. His contract with America was a bad joke back in 1995; it is political history now. Far more significant was his official reprimand by the Republican-controlled House of Representatives for ethics violations. This was the first time in the then 208-year history of the House that it had taken such an action against the Speaker.

I'll say it again for emphasis: it was Republican dominated house which issued this reprimand, not one composed of "spewing Democranks", as you put it.

He's a sleaze-ball, and unlike Clinton, he has little stomach for political infighting. In 1998, he walked away from his congressional seat and the people who had just voted for him.

Now he is back and wants to be President. I hope it never happens.

We do not need more of the same. We need someone who believes in our Constitution and who would not sign any bill into law that violates it, and would work on appealing the disasterous Obama and Bush communist programs (healthcare takeover, sky high taxes on anyone who is not already poor, patriot act, needless/pointless wars we can't afford, financial bills that give MORE power to the very entities that caused the meltdown, etc...)

I only see Ron Paul and Peter Schiff (if Peter can win in CT - probably not) as viable candidates or possilbly Jindal. I think Rand Paul would follow the constitution, but I would not support his stance on the federal government getting involved in womens' reproductive issues (why republicans always go there when we have massive financial problems is STUPID - leave it up to the states where it belongs or better yet, each individual). Additionally, he does not handle the media well.

Please, NO!!! We just do not deserve a president named NEWT. USA has been Newtered after dubyah.

Yeah, john, I've noticed how his popularity polls are absolutely soaring!

Incumbents have a great advantage in a presidental election. If Bush could be re-elected so too could a ham sandwich. Obama is far better than either.

If the election were held today, or even this November, Obama might have trouble beating even a Newt Gingrich. But the election year is in 2012, not 2010, and a lot can happen in the meantime.

'Dear John' - Hate to be the one to break this to you, but for all intents and purposes, BO just happens to be the pointman at this particular juncture in time. He was never meant to serve a second term. It's simply not in the plans of the grand omnipotent Puppet Master, George Soros. Fret not though, America is being lined up for a new 'First' in political history. As the spotlight dims on Bo's presidency... Glance over to the left of center and you may notice a gal who's a tad long in the tooth, drooling through jowls with a hungry growl, eager in anticipation and biting fiercely at the bit to be put back in the game. And indeed she will be - Of that you may rest assured.

Dear ThunderProof, If you are referring to Hillary Clinton you might be correct and indeed she will get my vote.

ahhahaahahhhahahahaaaa. anti socialists outnumber mooches 2 to 1

He was never meant to serve a second term. It's simply not in the plans of the grand omnipotent Puppet Master, George Soros.

There is a deep streak of paranoia in American political life. I see it on the right and on the left. These vast conspiracies are revealed by people who never seem to have actual proof; yet they know. Somehow they have seen strings controlling the puppets that only a few others can see. But if you ask for proof, they only smile knowingly and say something cryptic.

ThunderProof - If Obama and the Democratic Party are so weak in 2012 that he loses the nomination, then neither Hillary Clinton, or any other Democrat will have a chance. But chances are Obama will win his party's nomination once again, and, if the economy is recovering, he'll probably win.

Hillary Clinton had her best shot at the nomination in 2008. She was the front-runner. She came up a yard short. I doubt she'll be any more attractive as a candidate in 2012.

Dear John, So glad to see you got my message. :)

dman - Unless Obama brings up his GPA significantly from where it presently rests, he won't make a very good showing. The election in 2012 will also show something else... If the American voter's level of awareness has risen or not and whether they were paying any attention to the previous four years. None of us here are soothsayers. All one can do is speculate as to what the future holds. I wouldn't count Hillary out at all. The Clinton's are quite chummy with George Soros.

With regards to your comment about "...seeing strings controlling the puppets that only a few others can see." - What I can offer you as proof is to do some research into George Soros yourself. That is the only way one can truly connect the dots and see for themselves. I shouldn't have to do your homework for you. That is the responsibility of each and every American in order to vote intelligently, rather than just casting a vote for the best spot announcement they saw on the boob tube. Besides, no one ever learned a thing by having someone else do their homework. The Clinton's connection with George Soros is no big mystery and there is ample proof to back up what you call "conspiracies". There is a very sound reason why "only a few others can see." They are complacent and perfectly satisfied to be spoonfed whatever mainstream media serves up as the Blue Plate Special which coincidentally follows the political agenda of the corporate owners. They are perfectly content to remain seated and never think outside the box or even so much as dare to take a peek outside of the box. As stated earlier, the 2012 election is mere speculation on anyones part. There's nothing cryptic about it.

What I can offer you as proof is to do some research into George Soros yourself.

Sorry, before I go on a protracted search, you'll have to offer more proof of a conspiracy, or direct control via some master plan. George Sorros may be a person of great influence. But nobody can utterly control the political process in this country.

As to your assessment of Barrack Obama, fortunes sometimes change. I remember that back in 1991, directly following his success in driving Saddam Hussein out of Kuwait, the popularity of George H.W. Bush was soaring; he appeared unbeatable. Yet less than 2 years later he was beaten soundly by a virtuallyl unknown politician, William Jefferson Clinton. The victor was from one of the smallest and poorest states in the country, Arkansas. In the intervening time, our country had fallen into a recession, and the elder Bush appeared out of touch.

Just as politician's fortunes can fade rapidly, so too can they rise, and if the economy has sufficiently recovered in 2012, Obama's popularity will rise.

As to Hillary Clinton, like New Gingrich, Nancy Pelosi, and a handful of other polarizing figures, she stirs too many uneasy feelings among middle of the road voters. There are those who love her, but many more who would never vote for her. In short, she is unelectable.

you can be conservative, educated and open to responsible change

Not if one is a republican leader, as that person can be conservative, but most likely uneducated and not open to any possibility of change.

The Republicans have themselves to blame for their pitiful selection of candidates. They ran Reagan trying to recover from Nixon's disgrace and bought an empty suit. Bush Sr was at least somewhat competent, junior a disaster. It is a shame the party of Eisenhower would sink to thee levels. We need an honorable and competent opposition badly in this country. Enough of the comedy shows like Palin.

Maybe because one of the alternative definitions of sport is: an object of mockery.

Take it easy, Art, help is on the way. There must be nitrous oxide leaking into your cell. :)

HAhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I think it's beginning to affect me too! HA! ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Hope they get here soon.........

I think it's all the Ultra Libs that are addicted to Bush. They can't go a minute without talking about him.

You might want to do some research about Bush and see just how many lawsuits he and his administration have wracked up. I'd also like to see the Nelson vs US and the States Secret Priviledge resolved. If you all don't know what I'm talking about, look it up under Wikipedia.

Don't tell me, you support the Tea Party?

You fell short on the stupid Republicans list....need to add Palin, Boehner, Sanford, Schwarzenegger, Limbaugh, Hannity, Beck, O'Reilly, Bachman.......wish I had more time and space to list them all!

Where's the left's version of Bernie Goldberg. Ya know, the guy that wrote about all the liberals that are destroying the country. We need a list to let everyone know who on the right is destroying the country. I think you've done a pretty good start in getting the list started.

Because we can kick this around just for laughs.

Ah; the tax cuts didn't lead to a robust economy as predicted. If it didn't work then, it won't work now. They'll just stuff the extra cash into offshore accounts or buy foreclosures from the middle class. Screw the rich, their buddies got us into Iraq and the second depression, they can help pay to get us out. Besides; hiring employees and buying equipment is a WRITE OFF anyway, so rich people, quit whinning and do your part for America by INVESTING IN AMERICA, not some offshore sweatshop you greedy bastards.

I don't think the country can stand having Republicans in positions of power.

Get used to it. It is coming in 100 days. Congress job approval rating 16% among the crucial independent voters, 38% for Obama.

Agreed, I think repubs will get a surge in 2010 but that will be short-lived. Demographics are working against them long term, don't think a coalition of big business and angry white evangelicals will be enough in the future to be a viable party base, republicans will have to re-invent themselves, but a tall order to be more inclusive AND hang on to their base.

I don't think the independents are evangelicals and angry whites. Most of them like my office mate are right-of-center who voted for Obama through curiosity and the need to get someone who was not Bush. That strategy won't work anymore.

JobSeeker, are you not aware of the polls that show that the vast majority of americans who disapprove of Congress blame the Repubs for the problems? It must be true, because I heard it on Fox news this morning.

What are the Repubs approval ratings there pal...yeah. No one I know is looking to them for answers. It's one thing to see the problems, it's another to see who has the solutions. It ain't the GOP.

The White House has already thrown in the towel on the economy by projecting the unemployment rate to be over 9% through 2011.

How is that the fault of the White House JobSeeker? They have proposed tax breaks for companies to hire new workers, trying to get energy legislation passed to create green jobs in this country. President Obama cannot force big business to stop outsourcing jobs and building plants overseas. The joblessness rate has at least stabilized and is moving downward, but will be probably be late 2011 until is starts to get better according to economists. What do you propose, tax breaks for the wealthy? Like I said, the guy ain't perfect, but I shudder to think how worst things might be if the other guys had won, at least we have a reasonably intelligent guy trying to make things right. You may disagree, fair enough if you do, I'm trying to deal in facts as much as one can.

What do you propose, tax breaks for the wealthy?

Although I am not rich, I like that idea. All my employers are rich people.

For two years, liberals have been reminding us that it took Reagan two years before the unemployment rate began to come down. Fair enough. It takes that long for policies to material into jobs. But Obama is already conceding that the unemployment rate will not improve through his third year.

So what kinds of companies have you worked for that all your employers are so rich??? Did they out source any jobs? And if you're "JobSeeker" does that mean you aren't working? Reagan seems the best that Republicans can do and yet it's Reagan that started this whole deregulation mess that we are in! I feel sorry for the Republican party and what it represents now. I really wish they did provide checks and balances but when Dick "Deficits Don't Matter" Cheney took control he sunk the Republicans for a very long time indeed.

Lol Ed. If he's the best they can offer ... things will not be too promising for them in 2012 as far as the presidential election goes. Think he is just trying to get some attention and fluff up his ego. Maybe he and his wife like to role play, he's Bill Clinton and she's Monica Lewinsky ... maybe in one of those French maid outfits.

That made me laugh...thank you!