Friday, December 16, 2011

Iowan Republi-Con Religious Conservative Hypocrisy

UPDATE III: The winners after last night's debate: "Romney (who might have revived his frontrunner status) and Bachmann. And the rest of us, who don’t have to wade through any more debates [Republi-CON lies] — until 2012." [The tautology, Republi-CON lies, added by editor.] Read the Washington Post, Romney wins, Gingrich and Paul falter in Sioux City and Fact checking the Fox News debate in Iowa.

UPDATE II: Tonight's the night, the sweet sixteen of the Republi-con debate-a-thon, the last debate before the Iowa caucuses. Read The New York Times, Final Debate of 2011 Poses Danger for Hopefuls and the Washington Post, GOP debates, both interesting and important, score in TV ratings.

UPDATE: Speaking of Iowa, "[t]he race for the Republican nomination may be coming down to Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney, but in the contest for the Iowa caucuses, their high-profile battle might still turn out to be a sideshow. The national party has spent the last two weeks resigning itself to a choice between the former speaker and the former Massachusetts governor. But Iowa Republicans may end up choosing between Gingrich and Representative Ron Paul. . .

Should Iowa really come down to Paul versus Gingrich, the clash will make for a fascinating contrast. Physically, neither man resembles a classic presidential candidate (especially compared to Romney and Perry) but for completely different reasons. Paul is all bone and sinew and nervous energy – an Ichabod Crane or a Jack Sprat, hunched and herky-jerky in too-large suits. Gingrich is broad and self-assured and faintly decadent, with a Cheshire Cat’s face and a body that looks like it’s ready for its toga.

Neither man talks like a typical presidential candidate, either: They’re more verbose, less sound bite-ridden, more digressive and less embarrassed about displaying erudition. But again, their specific rhetorical styles are worlds apart. It’s useful to imagine both of them as the kind of eccentric uncle who talks your ear off at a Christmas party. Uncle Newt has an easygoing and expansive mien, the latest gadget on his belt, and a remarkably persuasive five-point case for why you should invest in his new business venture. Uncle Ron just wants to hector you about the evils of the Trilateral Commission.

Most important, they represent two very different endpoints for the Tea Party movement. Paul, for all his crankishness, is the kind of conservative that Tea Partiers want to believe themselves to be: Deeply principled, impressively consistent, a foe of big government in nearly all its forms (the Department of Defense very much included), a man of ideas rather than of party.

Gingrich, on the other hand, is the kind of conservative that liberals believe most Tea Partiers to be – not a genuine “don’t tread on me” libertarian, but a partisan Republican whose unstinting support for George W. Bush’s deficit spending morphed into hand-wringing horror of “socialism” once a Democrat captured the Oval Office."

Read The New York Times, Ron Paul Rising.

"The latest polls show a surging Newt Gingrich winning substantial support among white evangelical voters, the key voting bloc in the upcoming Iowa Caucuses. Those same voters, who comprise the core of the religious right movement, powered former minister Mike Huckabee to a Corn State upset in 2008. Huckabee’s decision to not run this election cycle created an opening for the rest of the GOP field to now court their support.

Yet Gingrich may seem unlikely as their choice for leader.

The thrice-married Gingrich has acknowledged infidelities and other personal failings, and a recent Public Religion Research poll finds religious conservatives in overwhelming agreement that marital infidelity is a disqualifier for public office. . .

[But] Gingrich's checkered past, along with his failure to build a grassroots organization, defies the conventional wisdom about how to win Iowa. But this year, religious conservatives everywhere appear to be looking for a different kind of faith: They want a conservative GOP leader whose message makes them believe that he can make Obama a one-term president."

Read the Washington Post, Newt Gingrich and religious conservatives: A marriage of convenience.

Gingrich is Soft on Crime

UPDATE: Maybe the title of the post should be Gingrich the hypocrite. Read Sentencing Law and Policy, "Newt Gingrich A Hypocrite For Supporting Death Penalty For Marijuana Smugglers, Gary Johnson Says".

But he is a Republi-CON so you should already know that he is a hypocrite.

The Tea Party has failed the test of 'limited government, free markets, and fiscal responsibility,' but they may finally have a soft on crime candidate. Read Sentencing Law and Policy, When might media (or GOP opponents) discuss Newt Gingrich's "Right on Crime" positions?