What’s Wrong With This Picture?

“Don’t use words too big for the subject. Don’t say infinitely when you mean very; otherwise you’ll have no word left when you want to talk about something really infinite.” -C.S. Lewis

This picture was spotted on Facebook. It was linked by a liberal friend of mine who does agree with it. She also happens to be the only liberal I know who doesn’t openly hope that I’ll be shot in the face. We agree to disagree on politics, pretty much sticking to films and other such subjects.

Look carefully at this, and ponder the claims.

First, Gingrich. The very first claim made is the only honest one – yes, he has been married three times. I don’t like it. There’s a lot of conservatives who don’t like it. I’m not, however, willing to use it as a reason to push him out of politics because of it. The second claim is that he was indicted for scandal; this is either a bald-faced lie or an ignorant mistake. The whole scandal revolved around the improper usage of tax-exempt donations and using the chairman of GOPAC to help him develop the legislation that the GOP would support during his tenure as the Speaker of the House; the use of a consultant violated House rule 45 (which apparently bars the use of official resources for unofficial purposes, yet I cannot find a single document that lists what the rules were for the 104th Congress), as did apparently allowing a man named Donald Jones to use his Congressional office to work on a reading program for children that was supposed to tie in with the Speaker’s “Earning by Learning” program.

“Indicted” means just cause was found to bring charges before a court because a crime was committed. Gingrich was investigated but never indicted – nor was he ever impeached. In fact, 83 of the original 84 ethics complaints against him were dropped after an extensive four-year investigation because it was determined that none of the violations occurred while Gingrich was the Speaker of the House – which was when the violations were alleged to have taken place. The only complaint that remained was a claim that he had failed to abide by federal tax law in regards to donations. THAT was tossed as well when the IRS and a federal judge determined the law had not been broken (the original complaint stated that GOPAC had improperly funded his campaign and failed to publicize its list of donors). In the end, he was fined $300,000 to repay the cost of the investigation.

The third allegation is where the C.S. Lewis quote comes in. It simply says “racist/homophobic”. The only evidence anyone has ever provided that he’s a racist was his comment, made in 2008, that “Spanish is the language of living in the ghetto.” He was talking about the importance of teaching English in this country. Now, he almost immediately apologized for how it sounded, but not one of the people who claim he is a racist has acknowledged that fact. He clarified that what he was trying to say was that English is the language spoken in the United States and it is important to learn our language if you want to really succeed here. He is correct about that, and there’s nothing racist about it. Every other claim is that he’s used “coded racist speech” (translation: we want to call him a racist to shut him up but he won’t cooperate and use overt hate speech so we’ll read into his words whatever we want).

Homophobic? I don’t think so. He has said that he doesn’t believe genetics have to be followed, he believes homosexuality to be a choice, and he is against gay marriage, but I don’t consider that homophobic. A person who has an irrational fear of homosexuals is a homophobe, and not one person can claim that he has an irrational fear of us (see my previous post for genuine evidence of homophobia). It is ridiculous to claim that the man is a racist or a homophobe because there is no evidence of either – and when you do call him those things, when you come up against the real deal you no longer have a word to describe them.

Now, for the claims about the Big O!

Married once – yes, that’s true. Has he been faithful? We honestly don’t know. At least three separate claims of infidelity from both Barack AND Michelle have been made, but the press is sleeping on the job. They’re about as interested in investigating these claims as I am in having my wisdom teeth removed.

No scandals? I beg to differ. Fast & Furious leaps to mind – under Bush, it was known as Project Gunrunner and when they figured out it was going to be a failure they killed it. Obama resurrected it, gave it three times the original budget and four times the manpower, and it became a train wreck on steroids. Obama’s Attorney General, Eric Holder, has already lied in Congressional hearings about his knowledge of the program – and is now dodging subpoenas. At least one ATF official, Patrick Cunningham, has pleaded the Fifth (and has since resigned). There’s Carol Browner and Ken Salazar, who both helped draw up the completely illegal offshore drilling ban, complete with invented claims attributed to a Congressional panel that actually strongly objected to the ban. The administration was later called out by a Louisiana judge for continuing to enforce the illegal ban. There’s the administration’s loan to Solyndra, $535M to be exact. More recently, other “green” companies that received millions of taxpayer dollars – Evergreen Energy, Beacon Power Corp., and electric car manufacturer Ener1 – have gone belly-up, with several others teetering on the edge of bankruptcy.

There was the no-bid $433M contract awarded to Siga Technologies for an experimental smallpox drug that some experts say may not even work. There’s the ongoing issues with former NJ governor Jon Corzine, who quietly got his Obama campaign donations back although Obama hasn’t commented on Corzine’s role in the MF Global scandal (and Corzine wasn’t the only MF Global head who had supported Obama). The Obamacare waivers, however, are one of the biggest scandals of all – every single one went to DNC supporters, including labor unions, Nevada casinos and fancy restaurants in Pelosi’s district responsible for thousands in Obama campaign money (literally 20% of those waivers landed in Pelosi’s district).

Oh, but he ended DADT! That’s great, right? Well, I’d buy that if it weren’t for his continued support of DOMA, originally signed into law by Bill Clinton (sorry, lefties – claiming that he doesn’t because he’s telling the DOJ not to defend it in court isn’t enough, he does not support repeal at all). You’ll never see a photo like this containing Mitt Romney. He has no scandals in his personal life and he signed gay marriage rights into law when he was governor of Massachusetts. The gay left has no response to him, so they’re going to attack Newt.

And, really…Jeremiah Wright? Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn? Tony Rezko? ACORN?!? No scandal, my backside.

Thinking About Newt

Last night on Greta’s program following the debate, Sarah Palin joined the Fox News host to discuss the candidates.  I agree with Palin’s assessment of not getting a whole heck of a lot out of it other than some usual banter between the candidates.  However; I did take note later in the segment when she began to say that Newt Gingrich would “clobber” Barack Obama in a debate.

One of the reasons my heart was so broken after Palin announced she wasn’t running is because I truly supported her positions and her “plan” which she laid out in Indianola, Iowa at the speech she delivered on September 3rd.

1.) Eliminate corporate income tax.  This gives corporations less incentives for lobbyists as they won’t be seeking tax breaks and favors.  It cuts the crony capitalism which I believe is going on with a couple other of our candidates.  It makes America the most attractive place in the world to do business in.

2.) True stimulus = robust and aggressive development of our own resources here at home.  This will create about a million GOOD-PAYING jobs.

3.) Entitlement reform.  As Palin said, we MUST deal with it.  If not, the European markets will force us to deal with it down the road.

4.) Repeal Obama Care. 

5.) Return power back to the states.

Immediately after her speech in Iowa, Newt immediately pounced on it and had it analyzed by his campaign.  He then said to Greta:

Governor Palin’s speech in Iowa last weekend on crony capitalism and on the problems of both parties is a very, very important speech. I’m going to be tweeting a link to it. I’m also going to be doing some other things with it. I think it was maybe one of the most important speeches she’s ever given, and I think it raised a series of very profound questions that all of us — Democrat and Republican — have to wrestle with as citizens. And she did it very well. It’s a very, very impressive speech.”

You can see the video over at Texans for Sarah Palin.

The night of Palin’s announcement, she said that many current candidates had already began contacting her to meet with her.  The article posted to Politico the day after reported that Newt was one who reached out to her — even seeking her endorsement.

Further, Newt went on to defend her “Death Panels” comment in the last debate.

Since I cannot have Sarah Palin, the emphasis myself and many contributing writers over at C4P are doing are focusing on the remaining candidates as well as the House and Senate, using Governor Palin’s platform as our guide.  You can catch my last analysis on the Missouri Senate Race here.

While Newt has a few skeletons of infidelity in his closet, the remaining candidates for President bring their own baggage as well.  But without a doubt, I agree that among all of them, the biggest asset of intellectual firepower we have is Speaker Gingrich. 

Maybe I’m almost there.  😉

Any thoughts?

Newt’s campaign website.