How to Join Member's Area Private Library Search Today's Topics p Login
Main Forums Discussion Tech Talk Mature Content Archives
   Nav Win
 Discussion
 The Alley
 Gingrich - the next target   [ Page: 1  2  3  4  ]
 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Follow us on Facebook

 Moderated by: Ron   (Admins )

 
User Options
Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Admin Print Send ECard
Passions in Poetry

Gingrich - the next target

 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


0 posted 12-05-2011 07:51 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/election-2012/post/newt-gingrich-slams-pelosi-for-allegedly-threatening-ethics-disclosure/2011/12/05/gIQAYL86WO_blog.html


Typical for a party that cannot run on it's own record.
Essorant
Member Elite
since 08-10-2002
Posts 4689
Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada


1 posted 12-06-2011 12:17 AM       View Profile for Essorant   Email Essorant   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Essorant's Home Page   View IP for Essorant

People that have negative baggage shouldn't try to become the president if they don't want that baggage to become public.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


2 posted 12-06-2011 07:35 AM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

IN that case, God himself wouldn't be able to run for president. Point out any president or contender that had no negative baggage, Ess....easier finding Yeti.

The question is not whether or not they have negative baggage....they all do. The question is how much and how it will be portrayed by the media. Obama was given a pass by the media over things another person would have been barbequed over. Clinton was given a big pass over his infidelities and charges from multiple women with regards to everything from unwanted advances to attempted rape. Now, every republican candidate who takes the lead not only gets the bullseye by the democrats but also by the press eager to make it front page news.

I don't think the negatives of any candidate, or president, should be swept under the rug. They should all have to account for their actions. The definitive word there is ALL. When one like Obama gets the pass while others, who happen to all be republicans, are attacked like a ham sandwich at an Overeaters Anonymous convention, then there is something wrong....as if knowing there is something wrong with the biased way the press presents the news were not public knowledge.
Huan Yi
Member Ascendant
since 10-12-2004
Posts 6334
Waukegan


3 posted 12-06-2011 01:05 PM       View Profile for Huan Yi   Email Huan Yi   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Huan Yi

.


Not Newt
Not Mitt

We're simply stuck with those
willing to take the heat and that's
an ever shorter list.

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/284652/mitt-vs-newt-charles-krauthammer?pg=1

.

[This message has been edited by Huan Yi (12-06-2011 02:02 PM).]

Grinch
Member Elite
since 12-31-2005
Posts 2710
Whoville


4 posted 12-06-2011 02:56 PM       View Profile for Grinch   Email Grinch   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Grinch


quote:
The question is not whether or not they have negative baggage....they all do. The question is how much and how it will be portrayed by the media


Interesting question Mike.

Should the media treat politicians equally and report controversial issues of public importance fairly and responsibly or do they have a first amendment right to report what they think sells?

.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


5 posted 12-06-2011 04:02 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Why does that need to be an either or question?
Grinch
Member Elite
since 12-31-2005
Posts 2710
Whoville


6 posted 12-06-2011 04:06 PM       View Profile for Grinch   Email Grinch   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Grinch

Is there a third option Mike?

.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


7 posted 12-06-2011 05:11 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

That doesn't answer my question. Why either/or? Why not both?
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 05-19-99
Posts 9708
Michigan, US


8 posted 12-06-2011 06:28 PM       View Profile for Ron   Email Ron   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Ron's Home Page   View IP for Ron

LOL. Think about it, Mike. You're going to call it Free Speech and THEN insist everyone do it your way? Sorry, old friend, but it can't be both.


Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


9 posted 12-06-2011 06:37 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Gotta tell you, Ron. I don't understand either one of you. AL l I said was the playing field is not level and should be. Grinch makes the claim that the press can either be fair or sell more newspapers, which I don't understand at all and you claim that my belief that there should be equality is me trying to force the press to do it MY way. Well, you are right. My way is that both should be treated equally and if you feel that's being unfair of me, then so be it.
Grinch
Member Elite
since 12-31-2005
Posts 2710
Whoville


10 posted 12-06-2011 07:35 PM       View Profile for Grinch   Email Grinch   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Grinch

quote:
Why not both?


You mean why couldn't they freely decide to report fairly and without bias?

They could Mike (though I've never met anyone totally free of bias) but they're equally free to choose not to and if your claim is true they obviously choose not to. I suppose that you could force them to be fair and balanced, by introducing some kind of fairness doctrine, but forcing someone to do something sounds suspiciously like infringing on their freedom to me.

You can't have freedom of speech then complain when people use it and you can't force people to say what you want to hear while maintaining their freedom of speech. The two things are mutually exclusive - you either have one or the other.

.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


11 posted 12-06-2011 07:55 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Well, you have me shaking my head in amazement.

OK, you guys win. it is unfair of me to believe that the news reporting agencies should be fair. It is unfair to believe that they should display impartiality in their coverage. I apologize for such irrational behavior.

Have a nice evening
Grinch
Member Elite
since 12-31-2005
Posts 2710
Whoville


12 posted 12-06-2011 08:12 PM       View Profile for Grinch   Email Grinch   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Grinch


quote:
it is unfair of me to believe that the news reporting agencies should be fair


I don't think it's unfair of you Mike, in fact I actually agree with you, the media should be fair and balanced I was simply pointing out that there was a potential cost involved.

.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


13 posted 12-06-2011 11:20 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Cost involved? The only cost is that they live up to what they claim to be. What is the cost that they cover individuals, regardless of party affiliation? You stated that they had a choice between being fair or making more money. Does that mean covering both parties instead of one would cause them to make less money? Why?  How do you come to that conclusion?  They are the ones to claim to have integrity, to be moral and fair. It's not up to me or you to tell them they have to be. They should want to be, if they want to be considered as being worthy of respect.  They are showing themselves to be nothing but shills for the Democratic party.  

I can't make them be honest and fair, nor do I want them to be forced to. I am simply pointing out what they are.  
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


14 posted 12-07-2011 02:49 AM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



     Sorry guys, as far as I'm concerned somebody's sexual activities so long as they are legal are pretty much private.  I couldn't care less.  What bothered me about Clinton was the duplicity involved.  I could understand why he wanted to lie about it to protect his wife and his marriage and thought that he did a bad job of it all around.    I felt sorry for him, sorry for her and sorry for the intern, and felt that making a big deal out of it was understandable political theater.  

     The problem with understandable political theater is that it's difficult to see beyond the short term advantage, of which there seemed a great deal to be gained, though not so much as was apparently hoped at the time.  Part of the fallout was the fall of Mr. Gingrich and a series of other Republican leaders who felt that it was a good bet that nobody would look at what they were doing while they were accusing the President of immorality.  It appears that they got caught up in the backlash.  

     Was the President wrong?

     Yes, he was wrong.

     To blame the press for the reaction of the public suggests that the reaction of the press is not pretty predictable, however.  It is pretty predictable, otherwise the stance of the various political parties toward various parts of the press would not be as predictable as it is, would it?  We would not have Democrats growling about the conservative press and the talk shows, nor would we have the conservatives growling about the main stream media.  We would not even have these positions to identify as old or familiar positions.  

     They are both old and familiar, though, aren't they?

     In planning political strategies, both parties understand what role the press is likely to take, and the complaints only become serious when there has been some sort of serious miscalculation made by one side or the other.  Here we are talking about the miscalculations the Republicans made about President Clinton about the impeachment (which they pulled of nicely, I think) and the terrible miscalculation they made about the nature of moral high ground in politics.

     While folks were clear the Clinton acted badly, they also liked him a lot and his popularity grew through the whole scandal.  The more bizarre and grundyish the accusations became, the more foolish the accusers looked, especially when it became clear that they were getting more and more hypocritical by the minute.  The net effect was to hurt Clinton but also to hurt the Republican power structure and to make them look like serious hypocrites.  Many had to leave office under sexual or financial clouds; sometimes both.

     We are still dealing with the fallout of that situation today.  The statements of the Republicans about the nature of marriage and society, the sanctity of marriage and fidelity and the evils of non church approved sexual behavior remain as proclamations ringingly proclaimed throughout the land.  Many of these proclamations are at odds with actual public behavior, many are at odds with the behavior of the actual legislators who make the proclamations and who say they hold the values.

     While I believe that hypocrisy is one of the great old fashioned American values, and believe that history supports me in this, I would not expect many of my fellows to agree with me here.  To blame the press for the miscalculation in their approach to President Clinton and to their insistence that Officials be held to standards they they as legislators had frequently been unable to meet, the Republicans of that era and the more conservative Democrats who were foolish enough to support them have created a trap from which it is difficult now to extract themselves.

     Certainly it seems very foolish to attempt to do so by blaming the press for acting like the press rather than as the political sycophants the conservatives (in this case) would rather see.  Forty years ago, to be fair, one might have made the same observations about the more hawkish Democrats.  This is not a one party foolishness.  It seems to have something to do with needing to have somebody to scapegoat for severe political miscalculations.

     To suggest that Speaker Gingrich is not at fault for at least a substantial piece of his own mess  is close to willful blindness, the same way that one might have said the same about Gary Hart in the was it? the 1988 elections.

     And when one says that he's never been a lobbyist and so obviously benefited from his connections as a former speaker while pretending to offer his expertise as a historian to financial Institutions that desperately needed Republican support at the time, one has to wonder exactly how smart he believes he is in relationship to the general public; or how stupid he believes they may be, rather, in relation to him?  And why such a historical opinion might be worth the amount of money he charged when there might be much better pure historians than he available at a significantly lower cost?

    
Grinch
Member Elite
since 12-31-2005
Posts 2710
Whoville


15 posted 12-07-2011 01:21 PM       View Profile for Grinch   Email Grinch   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Grinch

quote:
I can't make them be honest and fair, nor do I want them to be forced to. I am simply pointing out what they are.


My mistake Mike, I thought you wanted to discuss the subject of biased reporting in the media.

Yes there is biased reporting in the media - I agree.

.
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


16 posted 12-07-2011 09:08 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



quote:

Typical for a party that cannot run on it's own record



     What do you mean?

     My understanding was that at this point it was Gingrich who was running, and that he was trying to deal with his own record.  He was apparently quite outspoken about other people's records, real and exaggerated, yet quite thin skinned about his own.  Why shouldn't the man run on his own record?  And why shouldn't journalists investigate him the same way as he encouraged them to investigate Whitewater, President Clinton's bedroom habits, and Barney Frank's sex life?  I don't particularly like the investigative habits of the press about bedroom material in general, but Doctor Gingrich was aggressive about his demands that these avenues be explored when he felt he could exploit the results to his advantage.  

     It is a foolish man who makes such accusations who doesn't lead a blameless life himself, and it is a foolish man who tries to blame others for creating the atmosphere in which it may feel like a guilty pleasure to point out Doctor Gingrich's own hypocrisy.  Doctor Gingrich's base will, of course, forgive him anything.  He is a man who is capable of inspiring that sort of loyalty, and he is a fluent and convincing speaker with whom I have almost complete disagreement.  That doesn't mean that everybody does or should.

     I have trouble with his advocacy of such things as apprenticeships in the way he's set them forth.  An apprenticeship is supposed to teach somebody a craft and to give them status and a leg up to mastery and an entry to a profession with a specific skill set and an honored tradition.  Carpenters, plumbers, upholsterers, vintners and barber/surgeons were all crafts that began with apprenticeships.

     The apprenticeships that I haver seen suggested by Dr. Gingrich were part-time low paying jobs, like janitorial work, with no complex skill sets and no actual level of mastery involved.  They are, near as I can tell, a way of using child labor as a way of undercutting the cost of low-paying jobs that are customarily taken by adults on the low end of the poverty scale to support families at poverty or just above poverty wages.

     This is one of the reasons, by the way, that child labor laws were made illegal early in the last century, in addition to the fact that it stole childhood from children, and sometimes put children into positions where they were in actual danger.  The thoughtfulness of Doctor Gingrich has seldom failed to astonish me.  I can say this with all sincerity.  He spurs me to suggest adjectives that the most broadminded of people here would shudder to consider.  

     Doctor Gingrich, while seeking to limit knowledge of the details of his previous record, certainly seems to be willing to forge ahead in the creation of a new record that may even surpass his old in its potential for the requirement of suppression, that is if his current suggestions about blaming others for the need to keep his record quiet are to be believed.  Ms. Pelosi is apparently at fault for the problems with the record, not because she has threatened to say anything about them, but because it's to Doctor Gingrich's advantage to play the victim here.  As I recall, the congress that got rid of Doctor Gingrich was a Republican one, wasn't it?  Or do I have that wrong?

     The Democrats have plenty to answer for, but the quality of the Republican Presidential field is not one of them.  Blaming the Democrats for these guys is simply a waste of time, and trying to smear all the Democrats and all the newspapers in the world will not make Newt Gingrich into a silk purse.  You're going to have to find a candidate that the American people think is better than Obama, and as good a job as you've done tearing down Obama, and as much as I may agree with some of the criticisms you have, and as many criticisms as I might have on my own, The Republicans still have a HUGE problem on their hands here.

     This doesn't mean they won't solve it.  This doesn't mean they can't win the Presidency or control the power balance in the country or both.  But the Republican field looks pretty strange, on the whole, to almost everybody but the Republican die-hards, and even a lot of them seem to be scratching their heads.  
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


17 posted 12-07-2011 11:11 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Typical for a party that cannot run on it's own record

Yes, that refers to the Democrat party, Bob, for obvious reasons. Looking at the state of the country from when Obama took over to now says it all, from national debt to unemployment rates, it is clear that Democrats will not be running on Obama's achievements. That leaves little more than trashing whoever runs against him. I have little doubt that this will be one of the dirtiest presidential campaigns ever, and it will be coming from the Democrats as their only weapon.

Want a taste?

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/upshot/michele-bachmann-vs-8-old-192125455.html

An 8 year old was used to create a gotcha moment with Michelle Bachmann as the mother got it all with her video camera and then got it on the internet. An 8 year old....and this is just the beginning, I'm sure.
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


18 posted 12-08-2011 08:18 AM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



     You thought she was the candidate you wanted to vote for, Mike?  You think her position makes sense?

     It's a gotcha moment for those folks who support that position, perhaps, and it may feel strange to them, but for most of us; no, not really.  We already thought she was unlikely and this doesn't change anything.  It catches her out in the absurdity of one of her most absurd places.

     The Republicans need a real candidate that can appeal not only to the far right base, but to the center where most of the votes are; and that's a stretch that's increasinly hard to make these days.  At least that's my contention.  Ms. Bachman's position was way out there the whole time.  It really doesn't take an eight year old to remind people of that.  The fact that an eight year old could, well. . . .

     Be out of town for a few days.  Have a good time.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


19 posted 12-08-2011 08:52 AM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

No, she was not a viable candidate, Bob, which makes their actions even more non-sensical....they are just covering bases, throwing dirt on whatever Republican candidate they can. There will be plenty to come...stay tuned.
Huan Yi
Member Ascendant
since 10-12-2004
Posts 6334
Waukegan


20 posted 12-08-2011 07:21 PM       View Profile for Huan Yi   Email Huan Yi   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Huan Yi

.


I had other issues with him, yet regarding Herman Cain,
what does history show a Democrat can do
and still get to be president . . .


.
Essorant
Member Elite
since 08-10-2002
Posts 4689
Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada


21 posted 12-09-2011 04:47 PM       View Profile for Essorant   Email Essorant   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Essorant's Home Page   View IP for Essorant

quote:
Obama was given a pass by the media over things another person would have been barbequed over. Clinton was given a big pass over his infidelities and charges from multiple women with regards to everything from unwanted advances to attempted rape. Now, every republican candidate who takes the lead not only gets the bullseye by the democrats but also by the press eager to make it front page news


That is because Clinton and Obama succeeded in becoming presidents.  When you succeed in becoming the president, then people will defend you more vigorously through a scandal.  If you can't even make it through the job interview without already having scandalous baggage and setting off the security alarms, that is probably a good reason why your presidential ambitions should be fried on the spot.    
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


22 posted 12-09-2011 05:36 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

When you succeed in becoming the president, then people will defend you more vigorously through a scandal.

You would have Bush rolling on the floor laughing at that comment, Ess...
Huan Yi
Member Ascendant
since 10-12-2004
Posts 6334
Waukegan


23 posted 12-09-2011 06:49 PM       View Profile for Huan Yi   Email Huan Yi   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Huan Yi

.


I think the issues regarding Clinton
were known beforehand.  I don't think
Kennedy was much of a secret
from the media either.


.
Essorant
Member Elite
since 08-10-2002
Posts 4689
Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada


24 posted 12-10-2011 12:55 PM       View Profile for Essorant   Email Essorant   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Essorant's Home Page   View IP for Essorant

Bush's mistakes and the damage leftover were/are much more devastating and long-lasting.  Why would people be expected to treat him the same way as Clinton or Obama?  But none of that matters when talking about candidates.  Candidates aren't presidents; they haven't been voted for or proved themselves at all in that role, so they don't have any presidency or presidential reptutation established to fall back upon.  

[This message has been edited by Essorant (12-11-2011 11:42 AM).]

 
 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
All times are ET (US) Top
  User Options
>> Discussion >> The Alley >> Gingrich - the next target   [ Page: 1  2  3  4  ] Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Print Send ECard

 

pipTalk Home Page | Main Poetry Forums

How to Join | Member's Area / Help | Private Library | Search | Contact Us | Today's Topics | Login
Discussion | Tech Talk | Archives | Sanctuary



© Passions in Poetry and netpoets.com 1998-2013
All Poetry and Prose is copyrighted by the individual authors