South Carolina To Chuckie:

Gingrich won South Carolina, eas­i­ly beat­ing out Mitt Romney, the fast talk­ing Former Governor and Venture cap­i­tal­ist who pegged his cam­paign on his expe­ri­ence in the pri­vate sec­tor and what he char­ac­ter­ized as his abil­i­ty to cre­ate jobs. Much of the claims of job cre­ation made by Romney has come under scruti­ny, not by Democrats but by Romney’s Republican rivals for the nom­i­na­tion. Romney, who (if the pun­dits were to be believed) was already the pre­sump­tive nom­i­nee, now have a wake up call and was as ear­ly as Friday January 20^th the day before the elec­tion seek­ing to low­er expec­ta­tions as to how he would do in South Carolina.

Romney (we were told) lit­er­al­ly had the nom­i­na­tion sewn up; after all as far as the pun­dits were con­cerned, he had tons of mon­ey, has been run­ning for pres­i­dent for years and was next in line of suc­ces­sion to be the nom­i­nee based on the Republican method of pick­ing the next guy in line to be their nom­i­nee. Now Romney may very well end up being the nom­i­nee Republicans choose to go up against President Barack Obama, but at least for one pri­ma­ry the pun­dits have been shamed into (mea cul­pa) “oops”.

Now that the pun­dits have been shamed twice, we real­ize that they do not know what will hap­pen par­tic­u­lar­ly as it relates to Gingrich. Juan Williams and Conservative icon Charles Krauthammer have been two of the pun­dits who have lit­er­al­ly said that Gingrich’s cam­paign is dead, over, yet he has risen from the dead to win South Carolina, and win it deci­sive­ly. Many, includ­ing those in the media who make a liv­ing from cri­tiquing their own pro­fes­sion (like Howard Kurtz) have exco­ri­at­ed CNN’s John King for ask­ing Newt Gingrich about his alleged infi­deli­ties at the top of the South Carolina debates.

As I have point­ed out in recent blogs, those who ques­tion John King’s deci­sion are indeed brain-dead and are will­ing to shoot the mes­sen­ger instead of address­ing the mes­sage. If King is to be crit­i­cized for any­thing it would be for fail­ing to push back , and push­ing back force­ful­ly at Gingrich for his clear and appar­ent hypocrisy for feign­ing out­rage at being asked about his ser­i­al phi­lan­der­ing when he was at the fore­front of the attack on President Clinton while he was doing exact­ly the very same thing, and indeed stat­ing to his sec­ond wife when she chal­lenged him on his hypocrisy, stat­ing quote,“peo­ple should fol­low what I say not what I do”.

The tragedy of this is that it is an age-old tact used by repub­li­can politi­cians from Nixon to Reagan, from George Bush to Gingrich to Romney they have all used the strat­e­gy of attack­ing the press to par­ry atten­tion from the issue at hand, this strat­e­gy has been per­fect­ed by Karl Rove an admir­er and pro­po­nent of Orwellian strat­a­gem Wikipedia) “(Eric Blair and can­di­date for President Newt Gingrich. South Carolinians love to boast that they pick Presidents, in fact they have giv­en wins to all repub­li­can nom­i­nees for President since Ronald Reagan. If that pat­tern holds true we would have to assume that Gingrich will be the next pres­i­dent, if that premise is cor­rect we will have to accept the fact that South Carolinian repub­li­can vot­ers who call them­selves evan­gel­i­cal Christians are will­ing to over­look the sins of a ser­i­al adul­ter­er, who was rep­ri­mand­ed and forced out of lead­er­ship in Congress because of ethics violations.

If vot­ers in South Carolina are will­ing to over­look these trans­gres­sions then it is real­ly inter­est­ing to see where the pres­i­den­cy is going and what peo­ple want their pres­i­dent to rep­re­sent. The real ques­tion to my mind is, are South Carolinians real­ly sold on Newt Gingrich’s brand of race bait­ing , media demo­niz­ing pol­i­tics, or are they des­per­ate search­ing for an anti-Romney?

The week of January 15^th to 21^st was one the Romney cam­paign would cer­tain­ly want to have back; their can­di­date waf­fled on whether he would release his tax returns, and when pressed waf­fled on how much of it he would release. On this alone he was booed dur­ing the debates in South Carolina. That was not all-there is the ques­tion of his sug­ges­tion that he pays about a 15% tax rate, one that is low­er than what the aver­age American pays. Then there is the issue of Romney hav­ing off-shore accounts in the Cayman Islands, and his gaffe to reporters that the well over three hun­dred thou­sand dol­lars he earned as speak­ing fees last year was quote “not a lot”. This would indi­cate that at least to some peo­ple Romney is a pho­ny and a man who is much clos­er to the 1% than the rest of us who make up the 99%.

inter­est­ing­ly, after the loss in South Carolina Mitt Romney has told the media Sunday morn­ing that he plans to release two years of tax returns. This shows that Romney real­izes this issue is going nowhere, and may have con­tributed to the drub­bing he took in South Carolina, the irony though is that Romney’s cam­paign still does not get it they feel they can skirt around the issue and peo­ple will forget.

What is Romney afraid of in his tax returns that caus­es him to be so queezy regard­ing releas­ing them in num­bers? When asked by John King if he would emu­late his father and release mul­ti­ple years of tax returns Romney stut­tered in a ram­bling exchange that drew boos from the crowd. Someone asked me why are the pun­dits not talk­ing about the fact that Gingrich was forced out of Congress, and Romney isn’t run­ning on his record as Governor of Massachuset? I told her sim­ply that this is a dog fight between repub­li­cans who real­ly are try­ing hard not to bloody each oth­er too much.

Democrats for their part refus­es, or are inca­pable of speak­ing direct­ly and con­nect­ing with the American peo­ple in the way they like to be spo­ken to in sim­ple direct terms. They speak in terms that do not con­nect with the aver­age vot­er cir­cling the issues rather than call­ing a spade a spade.This makes them seem elit­ist. They refuse to use the word “lie“if some­one tells a lie, respond­ing instead by say­ing the per­son­’s state­ment bears no rela­tion­ship with the truth”, what the hell is the prob­lem with say­ing some­one is lying if that per­son is lied? The short­est dis­tance between two points is a straight line, use that straight line to con­trast the dif­fer­ence between the record of this pres­i­dent with that of Romney who is run­ning away from his record as Governor of Massachuset, the same way their par­ty is run­ning away from for­eign pol­i­cy their tra­di­tion­al suit.

Democrats do not con­nect with vot­ers also because of the issues they embrace. America is still a coun­try that is evolv­ing as it relates to social issues, we are dif­fer­ent from Europe on many social issues, some say we are behind, I would not be that pre­sump­tu­ous to say that. Maybe Europe are to far ahead on some of those issues , peo­ple deter­mine the way they chose to live their lives. I for one though not a sup­port­er of repub­li­can poli­cies, believe mar­riage is sacro­sanct and should be reserved for a man and a woman , that does not mean that gay peo­ple should not have all the rights and priv­i­leges that every­one else enjoys. Lets just not say their union is a mar­riage, call it some­thing else.

Republicans are also more dis­ci­plined on mes­sage, they may be wrong , the sto­ry they tell may be lies but they all repeat the same refrain loy­al­ly. Democrats can­not even sup­port their own pres­i­dent, they seek out nuanced posi­tions often times try­ing to pro­tect their own cow­ard­ly back-sides. This President has not got­ten the lev­el of sup­port he needs from con­gres­sion­al democ­rats or from demo­c­ra­t­ic gov­er­nors whom have ben­e­fit­ted from his poli­cies. They are stay­ing low watch­ing eco­nom­ic trends rather than robust­ly get­ting out there and defend­ing this pres­i­den­t’s record. Some in the con­gres­sion­al black cau­cus were seen in Jamaica at the swear­ing-in event of the PNP gov­ern­ment that just came to pow­er in that coun­try, when they should be here sup­port­ing their own pres­i­dent in the uphill strug­gle he faces.

This goes for the con­gres­sion­al black cau­cus and the new crop of black media-types,never in my life have I seen such an abun­dance of black repub­li­cans on tele­vi­sion I won­der how much the repub­li­can par­ty is pay­ing these sell­outs to dis­re­spect our first African-American pres­i­dent.(see black repub­li­can­ism in America)

Romney can­not run on his record as Governor of the lib­er­al state of Massachuset because pres­i­dent Obama has tied his health care plan in that state to the mod­el he designed for the coun­try, Romney gam­bles that his record as a ven­ture cap­i­tal­ist is more ten­able that his stint as Governor. The down side to this strat­e­gy is that Romney will have to embell­ish his record as a ven­ture cap­i­tal­ist ‚he paints him­self as a job cre­ator when that dis­ci­pline has very lit­tle to do with job cre­ation. This is a strat­e­gy that is bound to fall as flat as Hillary Clinton’s asser­tion to duck­ing bul­lets in the Balkans may have con­tributed to her demise in the Democratic cam­paign of 2008 against then can­di­date Obama.

Republican can­di­dates vying for their par­ty’s nom­i­na­tion has char­ac­ter­ized this as the most impor­tant elec­tion ever. Never mind that this coun­try tore itself apart in a civ­il war and that the very state that first seced­ed from the union , a trea­so­nous move in my esti­ma­tion, still flies the very sym­bol of that trea­son, the con­fed­er­ate flag over its cap­i­tal rotun­da. Romney says this elec­tion is for the heart and soul of this coun­try.www.theblaze.com/…/rom­ney-post-sc-pri­ma­ry-speech-this-…Cached

Romney Gingrich

Gingrich the king of grandios­i­ty as per Rick Santorum (now lost in the shuf­fle) not to be out­done, makes the same argu­ment but with much more dra­mat­ic effect, he would not be sat­is­fied in assail­ing the pres­i­dent as a fail­ure as the oth­ers have done,he has to show he is head and shoul­ders above them using of course.…. you guessed it grandios­i­ty! He refers to the pres­i­dent as a Saul Alinsky rad­i­cal who wants to rad­i­cal­ly trans­form America.

Saul David Alinsky (January 30, 1909 – June 12, 1972) was an American com­mu­ni­ty orga­niz­er and writer. He is gen­er­al­ly con­sid­ered to be the founder of mod­ern com­mu­ni­ty orga­niz­ing, and has been com­pared to Thomas Paine as being “one of the great American lead­ers of the nonso­cial­ist left.”^[4] He is often not­ed for his book Rules for Radicals.

In the course of near­ly four decades of polit­i­cal orga­niz­ing, Alinsky received much crit­i­cism, but also gained praise from many pub­lic fig­ures. His orga­niz­ing skills were focused on improv­ing the liv­ing con­di­tions of poor com­mu­ni­ties across North America. In the 1950s, he began turn­ing his atten­tion to improv­ing con­di­tions of the African-American ghet­tos, begin­ning with Chicago’s and lat­er trav­el­ing to oth­er ghet­tos in California, Michigan, New York City, and a dozen oth­er “trou­ble spots”.

Saul David Alinsky

His ideas were lat­er adapt­ed by some U.S. col­lege stu­dents and oth­er young orga­niz­ers in the late 1960s and formed part of their strate­gies for orga­niz­ing on cam­pus and beyond.^[5] Time mag­a­zine once wrote that “American democ­ra­cy is being altered by Alinsky’s ideas,” and con­ser­v­a­tive author William F. Buckley said he was “very close to being an orga­ni­za­tion­al genius.”^[4]Wikipedia

When Gingrich seeks to dem­a­gogue pres­i­dent Obama he is mak­ing a con­nec­tion between two Americans whom have made sig­nif­i­cant con­tri­bu­tion to their com­mu­ni­ties , some­thing Gingrich and Republicans could well learn from. Gingrich seeks con­verse­ly to turn Alinskys con­tri­bu­tion on its head labelling them as neg­a­tives because they were most­ly aimed at improv­ing the lot of the dis­pos­sessed in Chicago in the 60’s , and attach­ing them to pres­i­dent Obama sole­ly on the basis of geog­ra­phy. When Gingrich calls the pres­i­dent a Saul Alinksy rad­i­cal he hopes that peo­ple will attach the word rad­i­cal with an east­ern European sound­ing name and with­out doing the research assign a neg­a­tive con­no­ta­tion, mark you Gingrich nev­er miss­es a oppur­tu­ni­ty to call the pres­i­dent a dan­ger­ous Saul Alinsky rad­i­cal. He how­ev­er nev­er tells you who Saul David Alinsky was and he hopes you will nev­er both­er to find out for yourselves.

Gingrich well under­stands the impact cer­tain words have on the men­tal psy­che of peo­ple , after all he har­vest­ed a litany of words which he has used to label Democrats in a demean­ing way which have stuck in some cas­es leav­ing vot­ers turned off from any­one thus labelled. The term “rad­i­cal” is not accidental,it is one of the code words they are using. Gingrich can­not run on ethics or accom­plish­ments, so he is pre­pared to run on Reagan and even Bill Clinton’s record, when that gets swat­ted away by Romney, Gingrich resorts to the ran­cid pol­i­tics of racial hatred and fear. It worked in South Carolina the epic-cen­ter of racial intol­er­ance.

Barack Obama has prob­a­bly weath­ered more to become pres­i­dent of these United States than any oth­er per­son in his­to­ry, he was labelled a rad­i­cal, inex­pe­ri­enced, not ready,naïve, and that was from democ­rats. We were told by wild-eyed Republicans that Obama was the equiv­a­lent to of Manchurian can­di­date, well we found out how much of a Manchurian can­di­date Obama turned out to be.

Ended the Iraq war:

Saw the end of Osama Bin Laden:

Saw to the sal­va­tion of the American economy:

Saved the American auto industry:

Oversaw the cre­ation of over two mil­lion jobs after los­ing three mil­lion before he could enact one pol­i­cy decision:

Appointed rea­son­able less activist judges to the supreme court:

And many more but I will pro­vide you with a link of some peo­ple of whom I am a fan, they are far more com­pe­tent and capa­ble of artic­u­lat­ing this pres­i­den­t’s achieve­ments than I ever could.3CHICSPOLITICO

President of the United States of America Barack Hussein Obama

During the gen­er­al elec­tions of 2008 repub­li­cans sought to scare Americans with Jeremiah Wright , they paint­ed Barack Obama as a wild-eyed lib­er­al who could not be trust­ed , who if elect­ed would destroy America, they made the argu­ment that Obama sat in a church as the pas­tor berat­ed and damned America, for the first time a can­di­date for pres­i­dent was being held account­able for the actions of anoth­er per­son, this prompt­ed Obama to craft and deliv­er a speech that will go down in the annals of his­to­ry as one of the most sig­nif­i­cant and soul impact­ful speech in the his­to­ry of this coun­try. (God said he would turn what one’s ene­mies has craft­ed for evil to the ben­e­fit of those who trust him). In fair­ness democ­rats stood on the side­lines, and skirt­ed the issue rather than stand for some­thing and be count­ed , this includes even some in his cab­i­net as we speak. Many of those who vot­ed as pub­lic offi­cials not to have a day des­ig­nat­ed in hon­or of Dr. King are now some of the first to invoke his name when they try to appeal for support.

None of those who exco­ri­at­ed Jeremiah Wright both­ered to men­tion that this man is a patri­ot who served his coun­try in the US Marine corps, then lat­er the US Navy, after which he accom­plished a laud­able string of aca­d­e­m­ic accomplishments .

In 1967 Wright enrolled at Howard University in Washington, D.C., where he earned a bach­e­lor’s degree in 1968 and a master’s degree in English in 1969. He also earned a mas­ter’s degree from the University of Chicago Divinity School.^[11] Wright holds a Doctor of Ministry degree (1990) from the United Theological Seminary in Dayton, Ohio, where he stud­ied under Samuel DeWitt Proctor, a men­tor to Martin Luther King, Jr.^{[16]Wikipedia.}

^{Jeremiah Wright served his country in war when most of the those who criticised and demonized him cowardly hid behind deferments and other acts of cowardice in order to avoid going to war. That includes Gingrich and Romney , who now wants America to believe they are bulwarks of conservatism, these jokers all of them with the exception of Perry and Paul who served ‚talk a good game about Military action , flexing their muscle and threatening military action if they are elected president. They are quite willing to have someone else do the killing and risk getting killed, as long as they are not the ones doing any of the lifting.} 

As this pri­ma­ry sea­son con­tin­ues the strate­gies will dif­fer from state to state, Gingrich has shown that his strat­e­gy will be to dem­a­gogue minori­ties and the press,and say what he thinks res­i­dents of each state wants him to say. He will also mage grand promis­es, as Santorum labeled him grandiose, Gingrich will con­tin­ue to appeal to the most base instincts of the far­thest right of the repub­li­can par­ty. Romney seem­ing shell-shocked at his loss in South Carolina will con­tin­ue to try to ignore Gingrich, attack­ing the pres­i­dent with his froth­ing mouth full of lies and mis-state­ments. As Romney spends more and more money,Gingrich will con­tin­ue to present him­self as the attack dog red state repub­li­cans who hate Obama are look­ing for. The prob­lem with that strat­e­gy is the fur­ther to the right Gingrich forces Romney as he posi­tions him­self, is the far­ther they move away from rea­son­able vot­ers in the middle.

Can any­one say sec­ond term mis­ter president?

^.