Pelosi: I’ll reveal information on Gingrich 'when the time is right'

A couple of things come to mind. 1. pelosi has a whole mess of skeletons in her closet, maybe she should consider what Newt knows about her before she opens a can of worms. 2. The democrats really seem to be scared of Newt. His rise in the polls are due to his ability to come up with common sense solutions to the problems facing our Country.

This isn't to say that I am on board with Newt, but as the options dwindle away, he seems to be the best of what we have left. Romney just isn't the guy, in my opinion.

It's going to be funny when pelosi decides "the time is right". She is one crooked, insider trading, wicked witch bitch and it will be nice to see the tables turned on her.

The made up attacks on Herman Cain were effective because Cain hasn't been a long time politician. You don't think a man with the experience of Newt Gingrich won't have an arsenal of dirt on each of his detractors? And  Newt is so much more intelligent than pelosi, it will almost be unfair. I'm looking forward to it...

By Alicia M. Cohn - The Hill

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) is holding back some information on Republican Newt Gingrich that could detract from his presidential campaign, according to a report published Monday.

“One of these days we’ll have a conversation about Newt Gingrich,” Pelosi told Talking Points Memo. “When the time is right. … I know a lot about him. I served on the investigative committee that investigated him, four of us locked in a room in an undisclosed location for a year. A thousand pages of his stuff."

Gingrich, who served as Speaker of the House, worked with Pelosi in Congress from 1987 to 1999. Pelosi also served on the ethics committee that investigated Gingrich for tax cheating and campaign finance violations in the late ’90s.

Gingrich reacted to Pelosi's comments by thanking her for an "early Christmas gift."

He also said Pelosi would be violating House rules and abusing the ethics process if she disclosed anything from the ethics investigation.

"That is a fundamental violation of the rules of the House," Gingrich said in New York following a meeting with Donald Trump. "She's now prepared to totally abuse the ethics process."

Releasing the material would show the "tainted ethics process the House was engaged in," Gingrich said.

The ethics investigation of Gingrich took place when Republicans controlled the House. Gringrich resigned from the House in 1998.

Responding to Gingrich's comments, a spokesman for Pelosi said the former Speaker was "clearly referring to the extensive amount of information that is in the public record, including the comprehensive committee report with which the public may not be fully aware.”

A spokesman for the House Ethics Committee declined to comment on "current rules in the context of allegations concerning past conduct, or hypothetical future conduct governed by past rules."

Read the rest at the link above...

Herman Cain calls it quits...

Herman Cain announced today that he is suspending his bid for the presidency. All of the accusations of infidelity and sexual miscinduct are hurting his family and hindering his ability to raise campaign funds.

Herman Cain is Done Like Dinner...

Herman Cain should pack up his toys and go home. Even if he is 100% innocent of all the accusations that have been brought against him, he is damaged goods. The circus has become to much of a distraction.

Couple all of the claims of sexual misconduct with his lack of foreign policy experience and he is a no go.

It's too bad. I really liked him and he seemed to be doing well in the beginning.

This is the wonderful thing about debates, they shed light on the strengths and weaknesses of the candidates. Had we not had all of these debates with different formats and topics of conversation, we might have glossed over Herman Cain's lack of foreign policy knowledge. Granted, he could have done what obama tried to do and just learned it on the job. He would have been much better at it than obama has proven to be though.

But with the shape of the world today, we will need a leader who can jump in with both feet and start putting out fires. Cain isn't that guy. Who is? Is it Newt or Mitt Romney? Maybe Michele Bachmann?

Let's hope that the next debates help us narrow down who is who...

Republican Debate - 11-12-2011

I watched the first half of the debate on TV earlier. Since then I have been trying to watch the second part online. Since I have the some of the crappiest internet service on the planet, it has been impossible. I'll have to wait for the Youtube version.

My take on the first part...

Rick Perry looked good. He gave solid answers. His foreign aid plan is outstanding. Starting every one out at ZERO is perfect. It's pretty damn dumb on the part of our government to give foreign aid to countries that hate us. If a country isn't our ally and isn't willing to cooperate with us they shouldn't get a DIME of tax payer money. Pakistan is NOT our ally. Those assclowns hid osama bin laden from us for YEARS. There is no way in HELL that bin laden was in that city, for that long, without pakistan knowing about it. Anyone who believes differently is an idiot.

Newt also looked awesome. His answers were typical Newt. He knew what he was talking about. He doesn't sugar coat it. He tells the hard truth. He came up a little more in my view.

Mitt Romney looked pretty good too. He is getting better at covering the fact that he is a rino. I don't trust the guy. He is trying to make us believe he s something that he is not.

Michele Bachmann seemed to be getting kicked to the curb. The moderators wouldn't let her speak. Her foreign policy knowledge is good. I don't agree with some of her opinions, but she knows her stuff.

Ron Paul didn't get any time. This poor guy. I know he has a cult following and those people would like to hear what he has to say.

Herman Cain was a little out of his element in this debate. His lack of experience hurt him here. He is right though, a president has to surround themselves with the best and the brightest in order to make sound decisions. But it helps to have a base of knowledge to pull from.

Jon Huntsman didn't really say anything different. It seems that every debate brings up the issue of China and trade. Huntsman would continue to allow China to walk all over us. In this area I fully agree with Mitt Romney. China doesn't want a trade war with us. They sell billions of dollars worth of goods in this Country every year. It would be in China's best interests to have a discussion with us about our concerns. Huntsman would continue the same passive approach that has led to the issues we face now.

Rick Santorum must have read the reviews from the last debate. He appeared much less arrogant than he has in the past. His answers to the questions were about what you would expect from him. Nothing exciting.

There was a question about torture. Most of the candidates expressed an interest in returning to the policies of the past, policies allowing our Military and CIA to use enhanced interrogation techniques, including waterboarding. Ron Paul made some comments I found to be a little disturbing. He said that waterboarding isn't proven to result in reliable intelligence. He said something about waterboarding a hundred people hoping to get actionable intelligence from a few. Ok, waterboarding DOES create accurate and dependable intelligence. Our Military and CIA waterboarded THREE people, not hundreds. Those waterboarding of those THREE people resulted in intelligence that saved American lives. That intelligence led to the capture and/or killing of many more terrorists.

It's very misleading when a person of Ron Paul's standing makes it sound as if hundreds of people were tortured and waterboarded and no intelligence was gained. It's not fair and it's not true...

Did you see the Republican debate last night?

First, it was good to see the candidates being civil with each other instead of the bickering back and forth.

I think Newt Gingrich came out of last night as the clear winner. I'm still not a huge Newt fan, but in every debate he is courteous to the other candidates, critical of the press, straight forward in his answers and knows what he is talking about.

Huntsman should just pull out now. He isn't a conservative and trying to act like one isn't working.

Ron Paul was Ron Paul. He makes a lot of sense, he says a lot of things I fully agree with. He is just out there on some things and enough of them to make him troubling in my mind.

Bachmann was good last night. She knew her facts and figures. She looked confident. But she has no chance.

Herman Cain looked good, as always. He is such a likeable guy. His troubles over the past couple of weeks didn't seem to affect him. I have to admit though, I'm getting a bit tired of his pimpage of 999 at every single opportunity.

Romney was Romney. A democrat in Republican clothes. He is trying hard to convince us that he is something different than what he really is.

Rick Santorum always polls in the bottom 2 or 3 candidates. But his arrogance during the debate would lead one to believe he is way out in front. I don't get him. He always seems as if the debates and being on stage with the other candidates is somehow beneath him. He is another one that has zero chance and should pull out now. And if he is planning to run for anything in the future, he might check the attitude at the door.

Rick Perry, OMG, Dude. I still like Perry, but holy crap, can you even imagine a worse time for a total brain fart? I really felt for the guy last night. I mean, seriously, we have all had those moments. I just hope that my next one isn't so public or important. I think he may have done himself in last night. Up until that one moment, Perry was having his best debate so far. He was relaxed and confident. It's funny though, the Rick Perry you see on the debate stage is not the real Rick Perry. Off of that stage he is a force to be reckoned with. He is very intelligent, confident and able and has a world of practical experience for the job of President.

The hits keep on coming for Herman Cain...

OMG! How many women are the democrats going to be able to dig up to accuse this guy of stuff?

I've found I'm not as big a fan of Herman Cain as I was in the beginning but it has nothing to do with these accusations. We've been over that. His stance on gun control is a little scary.

As far as these women accusing him of various things, most of it is going to be he said, she said. And I always get a little skeptical when gloria allred has her face plastered all over the TV.

Here is the part that kills me. Right now the accusations are front page news every where you look, but when these women are discredited or they claims are proven to be false, will THAT be front page news? No, it will be buried in there somewhere, but certainly not out front for everyone to see. And do you think anyone will apologize to Herman Cain for attempting to assainate his character? Haha, not bloody likely!

Herman Cain seems to be a stand up guy. I can imagine that in his business life he was a true professional. Could he have made some comments that were misinterpreted? Sure. Does that stuff happen all the time? Yep. Do I believe these women actually had a case against him? I doubt it. I do think sometimes people want to get paid and big shots can make good targets.

Why now is this becoming a huge deal? Because Cain was surging in the polls and it was freaking some people out. Maybe it was one of the republican candidates, but my money is on this being somehow linked to obama and his gang of thugs...