why would any american pledge allegiance to anything other than the flag and the republic for which it stands? One nation; indivisible with liberty and justice for all.
That's what I have a problem with when it comes to office holders throwing in with 'pledges' to Norquist. Their first, lawfully sworn duty
is to all of the people for whom they are elected to represent THEIR interests in this government, not to one of its citizens who doesn't want to pay his fair share of taxes.
How would norquist know what was going on in meetings and negotiations Obama is having with whatever party? It's not like
he's in the room--anything he hears, he hears second hand, a.k.a. hearsay, inadmissible. Clearly, he doesn't take seriously
the various polling numbers which have come out recently showing the nation's total disgust with republicans of every level of
government. Wisconsin must have gotten past him.
It is insane and proof of living in an alternative universe to say that Obama has made no effort to work with congress. That has
been the main problem! He goes too far for consensus, when norquist and all those of his stripe know that their mission was
to frustrate the president implementing his policies. It has been admitted to as much by far too many.
they're trying to preserve decorum, but Neut is one of those people you have to push, like Nicholson in "A Few Good Men". He has to be pushed to the point of outting himself and none of them are man enough to do it.
"The best defense is a good offense" is his game. Had John King been up on the facts of Gingrich's past he could have stood totally in the truth and been a journalist and done an effective job of push-back. "It was ABC who did the interview" was some weak sauce on the part of King in defending it. In that sense, gingrich was right--why is CNN leading with it then? Yeah, John, why are you bringing it up like a little bitch if you dont' have anything more than "well, they're the ones who ran it..."
That why Gingrich gets away with fobbing off his complicity in his past transgressions as "the Main Stream Media with a vendetta". '???? Dude! The media wasn't the one having an affair with Marianne when you asked your sick wife for a divorce. They weren't the one in between Callista's thighs while you were married to Marianne---you were.
They aren't the one who made you do whatever it was you did to warrant an ethics investigation in the first place. You thought it was good policy to do what you did and you got thumped for it.' Don't be mad if it keeps coming up.
To put it in a Scalia context: "then dont' run for president if you don't want to discuss what is on the Congressional Record as to what you did". THAT is your truth, s0n.
God may forgive, but he's not registered to vote for president in any state in the union and if someone tried to register him, that would be illegal. Now. Back to us mortals who will decide your fate--us mortals who have a bit of an issue with you irreverent and indifferent attitude to breaching one of the backbones to your alleged "family values" society: the ability of grown man to hold fast to his vows. There should be some level of indignation from way more people that this man presume to aspire to be the leader of the free world when he's shown time and time again that he can't keep faithful to ANY vow he has ever taken in the past. Quite frankly he has done nothing to deserve to make this vow--this oath to the office of presidency-- the one that changes all things.
Why is someone who was run out of town on ethics charges--that goes directly to character--even in a race for the highest office in the country? WTF is that about?