Newt 2012!

I am absolutely riveted by the newly launched campaign for president by a corpulent, adulterous, hypocritical, three-times married grifter, dismissed from office on charges of egregious ethical misconduct, who since leaving his post in disgrace, formed a multi-million dollar network of fraudulent, extortionate direct mail schemes for his own self-enrichment (appropriately headquartered on Washington’s infamously corrupt “K Street” it should be noted), who now wants to be a “moral leader” for the United States of America in the amazing years to come…

Newt is promising to balance the budget, deliver full employment, and provide a fantastical unicorn in every pot. Good grief. If anyone thinks this growling faker is pretending to run for office other than as a means to another profitable scam, then they are sadly deluded.

Speaking of which, does Newt have to declare enthusiastic promotional videos posted by his former employer Fox “News” as “gifts in kind” or something of that nature?

30 Comments

Filed under 2012 U.S. Election, Republican Party

30 responses to “Newt 2012!

  1. I wouldn’t put it past the American electorate to vote for this cretin.

  2. “Cretin Hop” by The Ramones

    There’s no stoppin’ the cretins from hoppin’
    You gotta keep it beatin’
    For all the hoppin’ cretins

    Cretin! Cretin!

    I’m gonna go for a whirl with my cretin girl
    My feet won’t stop
    Doin’ the Cretin Hop

    Cretin! Cretin!

    1-2-3-4
    Cretins wanna hop some more
    4-5-6-7
    All good cretins go to heaven

    [repeat all]

  3. Rotterdam

    He would be my last choice for Republican nominee.
    Americans had no problem with Bill Clinton’s corruption and moral indiscretions, so who knows.

  4. Off topic. Do you have a place on your blog where you discuss your interpretation of “Red Tory”? Are you the Joe Clark or George Grant version or some kind of hybrid? I’ve been reading your comments and I assume you’re more of a modern Clark-ian type.

    On topic, Newt is another pathological liar/sociopath. There needs to be an overseer that starts eliminating these people from politics. Newt is a great example why we need a more effective monarchy. There was a King for a reason.

  5. Lockeford: You are a sight for sore eyes !

  6. ATY:

    Indeed. It looks like another exotic artifact has risen from the dark depths of the buried Tory nationalist Atlantis. Pity he’s rather barking up the wrong tree here. Google can be like GPS that way sometimes.

    Not a huge fan of Lockeford’s crypto-Powellite proclivities (the notion of an exclusively “European” Canada would have puzzled Tecumseh and the men of the Coloured Artificers who fought at Queenston Heights), but, like Churchill in ’41, I’ll take whatever allies I can get.

  7. SF:

    Many (real) Tories I know fall into the Powellian trap – but do so because they fail to see that the disloyalty of some newer Canadians has to do with the Pearsonian gutting of our identity in the 1960’s and the imposition of a ban on the teaching of Canada’s actual history and civics in the Public School systems.

    William Hall, VC and Andrew Mynarski, VC had no problem being loyal Canadians despite the fact that they were not “ethnically British”, whatever that means (as British people are amongst the most heterogeneous of any nationality).

  8. Oh, lordy, pius Aeneas, pompous maximus, and Frank, side-kickus ignorans, with two totally expected comments to a typically boring and predictable post. Why continue with the farce any longer, RT?

    Ha, ha! Charade you are.

  9. Lockeford: I’ve been through that discussion many times in the past. My use of the term isn’t rigorous and could be used interchangeably with “progressive conservative”… It’s not aligned to any particular leader or political thinker of the past. I adhere to many traditionally Tory positions, am inclined to a fiscal conservatism, but also believe in a more robust form of federalism and favour a more libertarian stance on most social issues. Having been adamantly rejected on multiple occasions for inclusion in the CPC, that mix of opinions has landed me in the ranks of the Liberals, where they might not agree with me on everything, but are generally less hostile to divergent points of view.

  10. Abuabasabat: Not being a mind-reader, maybe you need to explain the meaning of your question… What “farce” are you referring to?

  11. Looks like someone’s having trouble staying on his methadone program.

  12. Red Tory,

    So you were rejected from the CPC due to the libertarian social issues, then? I didn’t think they were that exclusionary when the other factors are lined up. If you have landed with the liberals then perhaps you really are a right liberal.

    What are your Tory beliefs that differ from liberals?

    For example, do you support the monarchy?

    Would you support economic nationalist policies such as tariffs or are you like the modern Conservatives and Liberals, a liberal on economics?

  13. Tomm

    This is the perfect example of things just spiralling right out of control.

    We start with a video of Newt Gingrich looking sane, folksy and ready to lead. We then move toward sharing our collective experience which is a startling contradiction to what our eyes and ears have just sensed. We then quote a little Ramones before sliding into a question of labeling our host.

    Old home week is next, followed by an archaic philosophical reference and a couple drive by smears.

    In my view “…social dialectics is not a single theory but a family of theories…”

    I just wanted to quote some ambiguous crap so I could be part of the team. Can I play?

  14. I support the idea of the “Crown” as an abstract institution at the head of state, but would be less than honest if I said that I was a fan of the monarchy per se… at least its present iteration, which is a mediocre collection of inbred Germanic twats.

    As for your economic question, I’m leery of so-called “free trade” as it’s been devised over the last 30 years and favour instead a system that provides tariff protection to domestic producers shielding them from predatory global competition based on slave labour and the outright thievery of intellectual property.

  15. sapphireandsteel

    After my time in the UK, my view of the royalty became more like Charlie Brooker’s. I arrive there 5 days before Diana died and I still cringe when she’s brought up.

    Im also a bit conflicted on the royal family. My family’s half Irish so mother Britain hasn’t always been good to us. Half English/half Irish adds a lot of conundrums to the entire thing.

  16. How has the Royal Family been bad to Ireland ?
    It seems to me that the Republican regime of Oliver Cromwell was a disaster for Ireland. It is hard to believe that Charles I and Charles II compare badly in such a matter as Anglo-Irish relations.

  17. But, let’s not let facts get in the way of a good Royal-bashing.

  18. Red Tory,

    I’m gathering from your replies and the preceding responses from Abuabasbat and Sir Francis that this site may not be very Red Tory at all, at least not as it was understood for most of Canadian history.

    Your views still seem very similar to variants of liberalism. Please correct me if I’m mistaken. It’s your prerogative as a blogger if you wish to call it something else, of course. Could you articulate what you think are your specifically “Tory” political views? I remain unclear what they might be.

  19. sapphireandsteel

    I didnt do any bashing at all ATY. But if you think the Windsors are some ideal to look up to feel free to do so.

    Usually people are a lot more tolerant to different opinions ATY.

  20. sapphireandsteel

    No disagreement regarding Cromwell, but really? How much of Irish land was doled over to English landlords of the period of occupation? Do we need to go into the Troubles? Starvation, occupation and well bloody Sunday. Not really what I would call an ideal society to be a “British subject”.

    I guess we can agree to disagree, though I still respect your opinion, if you do not mine.

  21. Lockeford: I find your line of inquiry profoundly tiresome.

    Might I suggest you go pick the nits of so-called “conservatives” on the Bloggin’ Tories’ board and grill those who espouse Republican talking points and who wholly embrace American values about THEIR credentials. (You won’t have to look far to find piles of them…)

  22. Whoa!

    I’m not trying to pick nits. I’m just not clear on what you mean by choosing the phrase. It’s a term with significant history so I guess our reading of it is a little different. I’ve read at least ten of your posts trying to grasp what you see as the distinction of your ideology or how it connects to the historical position of Red Tories.

    I thought you were into some precision by calling out Harper’s Conservatives as fake Conservatives, but maybe it’s just doomed to be unclear.

    Chill out, bud. I had nothing but good intentions in asking. It was an honest inquiry. I am interested in the state of Red Tories so it’s only natural to see what is out there in cyberspace on the subject.

  23. Lockeford: Sorry for taking umbrage. However, I thought I made it pretty clear from the outset that I don’t take the term all that seriously with respect to historical precedent and most certainly don’t blog in accordance with some rigid ideological code of what constitutes a “Red Tory”…

    To my way of thinking it’s just a matter of taking the best aspects of both parties and arriving at the right balance of opinion — one that respects tradition but is also progressive in outlook.

  24. S&S:

    Note that I talk about The Royal Family, which is a much different thing post-Victoria, than the British Government.

    Nothing personal. I am trying to be exact here though – especially given The Queen’s up-coming and historical visit to the Irish Republic.

  25. tofkw

    Lockeford, not that Martin needs anyone to help him, but after hanging around this site now for over two years and reading all these blog posts, one can confirm that he ascribes to:

    – fiscal conservatism

    – argues against welfare-state monopolies, though is supportive of social programs provided they are cost-effective and help preserve the common good (the ‘progressive’ half of the progressive conservatives)

    – likewise also argues against laissez-faire economics and market monopolies, or alternatively, supports the common man’s participation in a fair market

    – socially libertarian (as opposed to social conservatism)

    Or at least these are the traits I’ve come to identify with his world view, incidentally ones which I also share. There is some George Grant in his posts, along with some Joe Clark.

    If you look through some of the regulars here you will see many of the old differences that existed within the old Progressive Conservative household. For example Aeneas and Sir Francis are definitely Grant-Tories while I’m more on the Clark side. However everyone here agrees that the current ruling party has co-opted the name Conservative, as they are really nothing more than cheerleaders for neo-liberal, pro-USA/Anti-Canadian economics wrapped in US-style GOP populism.

    – – – – – – – – – –

    Now getting onto the original topic of this blog post, I am very surprised to see Newt appears serious this time around in his presidential ambitions. After all, for the past 20 years he’s been ‘studying’ the concept as means to make millions off of all the gullible, simpletons within the Republican party
    …which does make up about 90% of them.

  26. tofkw

    Lockeford, not that Martin needs anyone to help him, but after hanging around this site now for over two years and reading all these blog posts, one can confirm that he ascribes to:

    – fiscal conservatism

    – argues against welfare-state monopolies, though is supportive of social programs provided they are cost-effective and help preserve the common good (the ‘progressive’ half of the progressive conservatives)

    – likewise also argues against laissez-faire economics and market monopolies, or alternatively, supports the common man’s participation in a fair market

    – socially libertarian (as opposed to social conservatism)

    Or at least these are the traits I’ve come to identify with his world view, incidentally ones which I also share. There is some George Grant in his posts, along with some Joe Clark.

    If you look through some of the regulars here you will see many of the old differences that existed within the old Progressive Conservative household. For example Aeneas and Sir Francis are definitely Grant-Tories while I’m more on the Clark side. However everyone here agrees that the current ruling party has co-opted the name Conservative, as they are really nothing more than cheerleaders for neo-liberal, pro-USA/Anti-Canadian economics wrapped in US-style GOP populism.

    – – – – – – – – – –

    Now getting onto the original topic of this blog post, I am very surprised to see Newt appears serious this time around in his presidential ambitions. After all, for the past 20 years he’s been ‘studying’ the concept as means to make millions off of all the gullible, simpletons within the Republican party
    …which does make up about 90% of them.

  27. TofKW: Sorry your comments got hung up in the spam catcher. It seems to apprehend anything that’s lengthy. Just FYI.

    Thanks by the way for attempting to clarify matters for our inquisitive friend Lockeford. The traits you outlined are certainly things that I ascribe to.

    As for Newt, I cannot possibly believe for a moment that Squarehead Spongepants really considers himself a serious contender for the office of president. I think it’s just his “last hurrah” before total geezerhood in which he can amass a shitload of contributions to feather his nest and provide fuel for future books and speaking gigs. I really do believe he’s that cynical.

  28. tofkw

    Apologies for the double-post RT. I have a comment stuck in the Rand Paul post as well.

    I do enjoy long-winded responses so I maybe should take this as motivation to live by sound-bites …like most of our politicians now do.

  29. It sucks that it’s one of the criteria it uses (apparently) and I have no way of adjusting it. Needless to say, every one of Scotian’s comments gets sandbagged in there too! 😉

    Unfortunately, I don’t have the time these days to monitor things as much as I’d like too, hence the delay…

  30. “Im also a bit conflicted on the royal family. My family’s half Irish so mother Britain hasn’t always been good to us. Half English/half Irish adds a lot of conundrums to the entire thing.”

    Try being half Irish/half German. The urge to drink excessively, and invade Poland pervades my soul…

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s