Given the Clear Choice Between Truth and Consistency or Proven Hypocrisy Which Will the GOP Choose?

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny

As Mr. Gingrich continues his recent surge in polling a Ron Paul campaign ad offers a reality check.

Unfortunately the ad will not air on television. However, the Paul campaign is saying it will be e-mailed to select conservatives nationally.

(WSJ) Texas Rep. Ron Paul is tearing into Republican presidential rival Newt Gingrich with a new web ad that ranks among the most scathing of the year.

Hitting similar themes that the Democrats used earlier this week with a video highlighting Mitt Romney’s litany of flip-flops, the Paul campaign blasts the former House speaker in a video entitled: “Newt Gingrich: Serial Hypocrisy.”

Largely using news clips from recent weeks, the ad seeks to paint Mr. Gingrich as a paid hatchet man for the health-care industry and the mortgage giant Freddie Mac. It is also heavy with clips of conservative icons such as Rush Limbaugh and Rep. Paul Ryan taking swipes at Mr. Gingrich’s positions. {Read More}

The choice is clear. The outcome remains uncertain.

Via: Memeorandum


  1. Looks to me like Newt is just another Washington as usual govt insider... Suckling at the teat and eying the juiciest teat of them all.

  2. It's all so clear now. Everything you've said about this race boils down to, "If Ron Paul isn't the Republican nominee, then you don't care if Obama is reelected."


    As long as your hands and conscience are clean, it's OK to watch the relentless drive of statism as a jaded spectator.

  3. Let's face facts: If Rush is speaking against Gingrich, he's going to take a huge hit in popularity. It's simply how it is, like it or not.

    I see good things in all the GOP candidates, but not one of them encapsulates my personal ideals. I'm sure that is the case with many of you, as well. Even Bachmann, whom I believe is mildly insane, has some good sound bites going for her.

    Hmm. What if we could pick and choose the best of each candidate and pull a Frankenstein and create the perfect candidate? If only.

    Ron Paul: Financial accountability
    Cain: Likability
    Bachmann, Santorum, Huntsman: Good ideas
    Gingrich: Experience and smarts
    Romney: Makes the coffee and smiles a lot
    Perry: ....? hair?

    Just a thought.

  4. "Politics ain't beanbags."
    -- Mr. Dooley, an Irish-American character created by writer Finley Peter Dunne in an 1895 newspaper column.

  5. Nick - republicans like the two you could support in fact are among the willing that are marching the country down the road of further statism . I guess for some statism is acceptable as long as it is "republican statism."

  6. Les,

    Like racism is to the faithful sheeple Democrats, (It's not racism when we say it! We're Democrats! We can't possibly be racist!), so it goes with the GOP faithful sheeple regarding statism. (We're Republicans! We can't possibly support statism!)

    Blah blah blah...

  7. No, Les, that's not what I'm saying at all.

    Paul is not going to be nominated, ever. No one in the field with any chance of winning meets your ideological purity test.

    So I have to ask, are you going to just keep your hands clean and willingly assist Obama in winning, or are you going to realize that feuding over the Republican nominee is counterproductive?

    It would be more productive if you focused on how bad things will get if Obama is reelected.

    It would be more productive if you focused on issues rather than people.

    You might as well be arguing about which German politician is CDU in name only. That would be just as helpful and relevant.

  8. I do focus on issues. Which is PRECISELY why I support Ron Paul.

    Honestly, if Paul were to run as a third party candidate he would get my vote.

    Statism is statism, irrespective of flavor {party}.

  9. So you are perfectly willing to vote and encourage others in swing states to vote against the Republican candidate, even if it gets Obama reelected. Thanks for making that crystal clear.

    Let's hope you don't join the ranks of at least 538 voters in Florida who felt like complete morons after voting for Ralph Nader out of similarly misguided idealism.

    You know Les, the first step in protecting our freedom is understanding something about the structure of our political system. Chanting about the 'Republic' is meaningless unless you understand how it works.

    You don't achieve desirable changes by losing elections.

  10. Nick Rowe,

    Statism is, (whether it comes from Obama or Romney), as Les has said, statism.

    Allow me to pose this question to you, sir:
    If Romney doesn't get the nod, but Gingrich does, will you vote for Gingrich, regardless of how you view him? What about Bachmann, or Cain, or any of them besides Romney.

    You make the invite that we should focus more on the issues rather than the people. I must again side with Les on this one. I've looked deeply into Romney's stance on the issues facing our nation. No thanks. I'll pass on Romney.

    Please stop beating the drum that if we all don't vote for Romney that means we are voting for Obama. That's ridiculous.

    I, for one, do not fear another four years of Obama. I have my ducks in a row and my chickens all counted. Do I want another four years of Obama? Not at all. I'm a Conservative, and he and his kind hate me. But I do not fear another four years of him in the White House. I have handled worse than him.

    If this means I bide my time and simply wait until 2016 to again re-enter the world of politics, then so be it. I'm very patient, and I am no one's whipping boy or water-carrier. If the American people cast their hopes onto Romney, that will be just Obama-Lite as far as I'm concerned. I don't fear Romney, either.

    Nope, Mr. Rowe, I will simply bide my time and attend to my small piece of this life as I have been doing since Reagan. But it will be awesome indeed when Obama is sent packing, I will say that much. :)

    You are into Romney. I am not. *shrugs* No worries.

  11. Well Mr. Rowe, we shall simply have to agree to disagree.

    And yes, sir, I understand something about the structure of our political system, perhaps a lot more than you realize. But as one might say, so what.

    The reality is statism is statism. The further reality is we have advanced so far down that slippery path it is possible there is no return.

    I Mr. Rowe simply refuse to swallow the statist pill. Whether it be statism heavy or statism light.

    So yes, I stand by principle, convictions, and yes Ron Paul gets my vote. It has to start somewhere. If not here, where? If mot now, When?

    Neither Romney nor Gingrich will fight for more liberty. They stand in opposition to the concept of more liberty and strong constitutional government.

    I, like ecc102 do not fear President Obama. He is just a pawn. Like Romney and Gingrich. Perhaps if Obama wins again in 2016 the opposition party will have figured out what they really stand for. Lets hope they get it right.

  12. Les,

    "The reality is statism is statism. The further reality is we have advanced so far down that slippery path it is possible there is no return.

    I Mr. Rowe simply refuse to swallow the statist pill. Whether it be statism heavy or statism light."

    Well said, sir.

  13. "Unfortunately the ad will not air on television. However..."
    I have it on my site and e-mailed to ALL I know!

  14. This comment has been removed by the author.

  15. Nick, I am not a defeatist sir. I merely speak the truth. I do not carry water for any party nor anyone during the build up to the presidential nomination. For that is the time when opposing views most need to be heard.

    When the republican field thins out and ultimately the party has its nominee the decision needs to be made as to who to support in the general election.

    At that time I shall decide. In the interim sir I shall continue to exercise my constitutional right of free speech and make my case based on my observations. It is up to each individual to decide for themselves their final position.

    It is the American way.

    PS: You make a valid point with respect to Supreme Court nominations.

  16. Well we have found agreement Sir Les. I have not really disagreed with any of your views nor your right to say it. If you had the magical power to remake the world, I should like to live in it.

    I have but one goal right now, and that it to send Obama and his whole crew back to Chicago by Amtrak on January 20, 2013.

    At sunrise on January 21, 2013, whoever occupies the White House will hear from me (us) what we expect from him.

    I believe it will be the start of a new era, and even though he won't be in Congress, I'm sure we will hear more from Dr. Paul.

  17. Nick Rowe,

    You said:
    "At sunrise on January 21, 2013, whoever occupies the White House will hear from me (us) what we expect from him."

    Bingo. You nailed it.

    I firmly believe that Mr. Obama and his crew will be headed back to Chicago, as you say. And if the GOP elites get their way, we will be looking at Romney or Gingrich as the next American President.

  18. Nick,

    I'd like to live in a world of Les' making. At least I now there would be good music and a proper wine selection. :)

  19. Nick, think about this. Which is worse a Marxist president who creates popular opposition from the people and Congress, or a fake conservative who does all the same things and works for the same people?

  20. Yes Nick we have found agreement. And whomever is sitting in the "big chair" on 1/21/13 will most assuredly hear from us. Ron Paul will continue to provide what is often the only objective voice in crowd.

    Chakam, indeed fine wine and music are equally as important as fine politics. ;)

    The world any of us would create would be objective and thus by far better than the one we are forced to deal with daily.


Commenting here is a privilege, not a right. Comments that contain cursing or insults and those failing to add to the discussion will be summarily deleted.