Back to the Porch Website

www.offmyfrontporch.com

Track How your Congressman and Senators Vote: MegaVote

Get Twitter alerts on breaking stories, follow us as we publish the truth at http://twitter.com/rooster0916

http://twitter.com/mdavis1949

Constitutional expert says arguments over Barack Sr. strong on Eligibility for President

A recognized expert on the U.S. Constitution says the arguments put forward in a hearing today in Georgia challenging Barack Obama’s eligibility to be president because his father never was a U.S. citizen are strong.

“That is much stronger than the question of where he was born,” Herb Titus told WND today after the hearing. “That alone is evidence. … They don’t need anything additional.”

Watch Part 1 here

Read more

Where a person is born has no bearing on where your a “natural born citizen” or not. Both your parents must be US citizens at your birth to be a “natural born” citizen…..For those that still doubt Obama is qualified:

Supreme Court definition of “natural born” citizen:

 

Minor v. Happersett , 88 U.S. 162 (1875)

 

The Constitution does not in words say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Some authorities go further and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their parents. As to this class there have been doubts, but never as to the first.

 

United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898)

 

At common law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children, born in a country of parents who were its citizens, became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners.

 

The Supreme Court of the United States has never applied the term “natural born citizen” to any other category than “those born in the country of parents who are citizens thereof”

Your Tax Dollars at Work…In Bankruptcy Court

Don’t you love it when a plan works…and it works so big that the Vice President visits, can’t remember it’s name, then it makes a visit to Federal court because it can’t make it with “free” money????

Electric-Car Firm That Got Biden Visit, $118M in Stimulus, Files for Bankruptcy

By Fred Lucas

January 26, 2012

Vice President Joe Biden viewed an electric car that used Ener1 batteries as he toured the Ener1 battery factory in Greenfield, Ind., on Jan. 26, 2011. (White House photo/David Lienemann)

(CNSNews.com) – Ener1–a company that manufactures batteries for electric cars, and that received $118.5 million in federal stimulus money, and that Vice President Joe Biden visited last year the day after President Obama’s State of the Union Address—announced today that it has filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.

In last year’s State of the Union Address, delivered Jan. 25, 2011, President Obama set a national goal of having a million electric vehicles on the road in the United States by 2015—a goal that would be achieved, Obama said, by taking money out of the oil industry and “investing” it in new technology.

“With more research and incentives, we can break our dependence on oil with biofuels and become the first country to have a million electric vehicles on the road by 2015,” said Obama.

“We need to get behind this innovation,” he said. “And to help pay for it, I’m asking Congress to eliminate the billions in taxpayer dollars we currently give to oil companies. I don’t know if you’ve noticed, but they’re doing just fine on their own. So instead of subsidizing yesterday’s energy, let’s invest in tomorrow’s.”

The next day, Biden visited the Ener1 plant in Greenfield, Ind.—which the White House said at the time had received a $118.5 million grant from the Department of Energy and was the type of investment the president was talking about in his State of the Union.

Brian Levine, deputy domestic policy adviser to Biden, wrote an article about Biden’s visit to Ener1 on the White House webpage for the White House Middle Class Task Force, which Biden leads. The article was headlined “Our Plan to Put One Million Advanced Technology Vehicles on America’s Roads.”

“Last night, President Obama set a goal of making the United States the first country in the world to put one million advanced technology vehicles on the road,” Levine wrote. “This goal is part of the President’s plan to rebuild our economy by investing in innovation to create the jobs and industries of the future.

“Today, Vice President Biden visited Ener1, Inc., a manufacturer of advanced batteries for electric vehicles, in Greenfield, Indiana to announce our plan to reach this one million vehicle goal by 2015,” wrote Levine. “The facility that the Vice President visited would not exist if not for a $118.5 million grant from the Department of Energy, which was part of a $2.4 billion Recovery Act investment in electric vehicles. Ener1 added 120 jobs across the company in 2010 and the future looks bright. They expect to expand the manufacturing and assembly operation in Greenfield from 80 workers today to over a thousand by the start of 2013.”

At the Ener1 plant, Biden made a gaffe, mistakenly referring to Ener1—as Enron1.

“Well, ladies and gentlemen, here at Ener1, we’re going to harness electricity and bring it to the world like Edison did more than a century ago,” said Biden. “We’re going to reshape the way Americans drive, the way Americans consume, the way Americans power their lives. And in turn, we’re going to reshape America itself. We may not make battery power so cheap that only the rich can afford to drive their cars on imported oil, but—but–with Enron1 (sic) leading the way, we’re certainly going to come pretty close.”

Ener1 produces advanced lithium-ion battery systems for electric vehicles.

On Thursday, the company put out a statement announcing that it was filing for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court in the Southern District of New York.

Ener1, the statement said, “announced that it has reached agreement with its primary investors and lenders on a restructuring plan that will significantly reduce its debt and provide up to $81 million to recapitalize the Company to support its long-term business objectives and strategic plan. To implement this restructuring plan, the Company has voluntarily initiated a ‘pre-packaged’ Chapter 11 case in U.S. Bankruptcy Court in the Southern District of New York, in which it is requesting that the Court confirm a pre-packaged Plan of Reorganization to implement the restructuring.”

The Ener1 Chapter 11 filing came a year to the day after Vice President Biden visited the companies Greenfield plant—and a year to the day after Biden’s aide wrote on the White House website: “They expect to expand the manufacturing and assembly operation in Greenfield from 80 workers today to over a thousand by the start of 2013.”

The Obama administration has previously come under fire for a $535 million loan the Energy Department made to Solyndra, a California-based solar panel company. Solyndra filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection last fall.

In his visit to Ener1 last year, Vice President Biden said that in order to reach the president’s goal of one million “advanced-technology vehicles” by 2015, the administration was not only subsidizing companies like Ener1 but wanted to give a $7,500 rebate to people who purchased an electric car like those that would be powered by Ener1 batteries.

“As the president said last night, by 2015 we we will be the first nation in the world to have a million advanced-technology vehicles on the road, a million,” said Biden.

“So, folks, here’s how we’re going to do it. Here’s how we’re going to meet that goal,” said Biden. “It’s not enough just to make these batteries. That alone, all by itself, will not get us there. We have to do three more things. We have to convince people at the threshold of this new automobile breakthrough, the new investment. We’ve got to convince them at the threshold to take a chance, to invest in these vehicles.”

“In order to spur this, to increase the number of people that are using the automobiles run by the batteries you are producing, to increase demand,” said Biden, “we proposed changing what is now an existing tax credit of $7,500 that if you buy an automobile like this to an immediate rebate. You get a check for $7,500–just like the cash for clunkers program. You don’t have to wait. You don’t have to wait till tax time to get the extra money to pay for that vehicle.”

Media Bias At It’s Peak

I use the Drudge report to catch headlines of what’s going on around the world. For years, Matt Drudge has been pretty much a poster of stories and he let them speak for themselves. Not this year, it’s pretty obvious where his head is…up the rear of establishment Republicans and Mitt Romney. I unabashedly say that I favor Newt Gingrich so far. Why? Because all this crap being thrown at him is just that…crap. He IS the most conservative of the candidates there, he has more of a chance to beat Obama than the next choice, Rick Santorum. Ron Paul, while an excellent constitutionalist, takes his libertarian side a little to far to isolationism. The founders were correct in calling for congress to approve wars, and the President cannot…we have to remember that. Ron’s isolationalist ideals won’t play well with what’s happening in the world right now. A spade is a spade…Iran cannot make a nuke, Palestine cannot run Israel off, and Iraq is already folding after all that….

Ok, back to why I made this post. Matt Drudge has stopped being an impartial poster of headlines. He’s still posting them, but they have taken a partisan lean. Problem is, he’s quoting errant messages, manipulated videos and playing into the hands of the elitists. Rush Limbaugh today answered Newts conservative credentials, as well as Newt is endorsed by Michael Reagan, and even Nancy Reagan handed the torch to Newt. Drudge now joins the ranks of MSNBC and the networks by using a partisan slant and worst of all, baited stories.  

Not only did Limbaugh strike back, so did a lot of conservatives in…get this…the New York Times:

Conservatives Criticize Drudge for Anti-Gingrich Assault

By MICHAEL D. SHEAR

Furious conservatives have taken to blogs and Twitter on Thursday to vent their ire against what they allege is a conspiratorial dumping of twisted and manipulated negative attacks on Newt Gingrich.

The target of their fury: The Drudge Report.

For the last 48 hours, the conservative Web site led by Matt Drudge has become a virtual campaign arm for Mitt Romney, featuring huge, screaming headlines about Mr. Gingrich and his past.

That prompted conservatives who support Mr. Gingrich to accuse Mr. Drudge of selling out to the Republican establishment — many of whom have come to Mr. Romney’s aid as the battle with Mr. Gingrich has heated up.

Ana Beavenhouser, whose Twitter profile says that she is “so right wing, my symbol is not the elephant … it is the WOOLY MAMMOTH!!” posted on Twitter:

@anabeavenhouser ana beavenhouser

Where the hell was all this effort into “exposing” a candidate when #obama was running? #Drudgeis officially irrelevant now!

Across the Internet, conservatives questioned whether Mr. Drudge had become as much the enemy as the liberal media.

@verigatari verigatari

Is this #Drudge report, or MSNBC? Matt Drudge is no better than Chris Matthews, distorting the facts! #tcot#withNewt

And many suggested that a new media elite — joined by the once-conservative Mr. Drudge — had banded together to keep Mr. Gingrich from becoming the Republican Party‘s presidential nominee.

@10thAmendment Elizabeth

@olretiree it’s not the voters creating a division it’s not teaparty , it’s #GOP#RNC#Drudge#Coulter#FNC#MSN co-ordinated attacks#tcot

The Drudge Report was borne out of the Monica Lewinsky scandal and for years has been seen as a reliable place to find some of the most hard-core attacks on Democrats and liberals. The site is one of the most heavily trafficked on the Internet, especially among conservatives.

But in recent days, Mr. Drudge has used his valuable digital real estate for a frontal assault on Mr. Gingrich’s candidacy. For hours on Thursday, the site led with the headline: “INSIDER: GINGRICH REPEATEDLY INSULTED REAGAN.”

Another headline that was up for hours read: “NEWT 1988: ‘If Bush runs as continuation of Reaganism he will lose’…”

That headline linked to a carefully-cropped video that purported to show Mr. Gingrich saying that George H. W. Bush should run against the record of Ronald Reagan.

But as conservative supporters of Mr. Gingrich quickly pointed out, the complete video makes it clear that Mr. Gingrich was not criticizing Mr. Reagan’s record, but was rather suggesting that Mr. Bush — like any politician — should look to the future, not the past.

“Cherry-picked quotes, biased headlines and hyperlinks to Newt-hating op-eds in order to patch together an ugly and distorted mosaic of the former House speaker is not journalism,” Matt Barber, a blogger, wrote in a post titled “The Drudge Distort.” He continued, “It’s mercenary-style political prostitution.”

Another blog post declared Thursday to be “Bloody Thursday the Day the Drudge Report Sold Out.”

The writer said, “I have read the Drudge Report daily ever since he broke the Lewinsky story. I have NEVER seen him attack anyone with the volume of coverage and with the venom that he has attacked this Gingrich fellow.”

The blog post concluded, “On this Thursday, this quite bloody Thursday, I can only say, et tu Matt.”

By Thursday evening, Mr. Drudge’s home page again featured a picture of a glum-looking President Obama atop headlines about a worsening situation in Syria and Egypt. But the main headline was still anti-Newt: “NOW DOLE DROPS STINK ON NEWT.”

And many of the headlines on the page continued to question Mr. Gingrich’s credentials as a conservative. “DeLay: Newt ‘not really a conservative’…” said one. “NEWT FLASHBACK 1983: REAGAN RESPONSIBLE FOR NATIONAL ‘DECAY’…” read another.

Rush Limbaugh, on his radio show on Thursday, also took note of the headlines, calling it a “coordinated” effort to smear Mr. Gingrich.

“Now, when I saw all it is stuff — and obviously it’s a coordinated document dump here, opposition research dump. It’s obviously coordinated,” said Mr. Limbaugh, who has not been a fan of Mr. Romney’s in the past.

Whether the conservative backlash against Mr. Drudge has any long-term effect on the Web site is unclear. But at least in the short term, Mr. Drudge’s harsh critique of Mr. Gingrich has stirred up conservatives.

While Rush doesn’t really support Newt on his radio show, (he has vowed not to endorse anyone) he points out during his ramblings that Newt didn’t do quite what’s been told about him. Here is a transcript from Rush’s show:

RUSH: How long’s it gonna be, folks, before we start seeing billboards all over, Florida, other upcoming primary states with Rick Perry on ‘em saying, “Miss me yet?” How long’s that gonna be? You remember when they had the George Bush billboards, “Miss me yet?” a couple months into the regime?
Anyway, great to have you here, folks, already Thursday, fastest week in the media. Goes even faster when one of the days you spend 12 hours, 10 hours, whatever it was, in an airplane, like I did? Great to have you here, as always, it really is a thrill and a delight. Telephone number if you want to be on the program today, 800-282-2882, and the e-mail address, ElRushbo@eibnet.com.

Boy, this Newt stuff. Did you know any of this Newt stuff, Snerdley? Let’s go through the list. By the way, you should know, there’s a blog in the Washington Post. It’s called The Plum Line and it’s written by a guy named Greg Sargent, and I think he used to be at Editor and Publisher back when it was in business. He was one of the guys there when it went out of business. Very, very left-leaning. He’s got a post that includes this. “The New York Times reports today — based on unclear sourcing — that Mitt Romney has endorsed a strategy of raising doubts about Newt Gingrich’s ‘emotional stability.’” And then there are others that are raising questions here about Newt and his mendacity, his forthrightness.

It is incredible. Yeah, yeah. Well, during the CNN debate with John King, he said that he had all kinds of friends that could vouch for the fact that he had never told his wife he wanted an open marriage. And so yesterday Newt in the campaign said, (paraphrasing) “Nope, nope, there aren’t any friends. It’s just my two daughters. What I said in the debate, that wasn’t true.” But that’s just the tip of the iceberg. Here’s the front page of Drudge. Let’s give you the headlines.

Newt flashback, 1983: “Reagan Responsible for National Decay.” This is Newt saying these things.

Newt 1986: “The Reagan Administration Has Failed, Is Failing.”

Newt, 1988: “If Bush Runs as a Continuation of Reaganism, He Will Lose.” Now, of course, Bush ran as a continuation of Reaganism, and he won, and he soundly defeated the loser, Michael Dukakis.

Then here’s the story on the debate claim. “During last Thursday’s debate, when CNN moderator John King asked about Marianne Gingrich’s interview on ABC accusing Newt Gingrich of having requested an ‘open marriage,’ part of Gingrich’s crowd-pleasing answer was this charge: ‘Let me be quite clear. The story is false. Every personal friend I have who knew us in that period said the story was false. We offered several of them to ABC to prove it was false. They weren’t interested because they would like to attack any Republican.’

“Now, last night, King reported on his show CNN’s John King, USA that Gingrich had spoken inaccurately when he said that friends had been offered to ABC to rebut the story. ‘Well, tonight, after persistent questioning by our staff, the Gingrich campaign concedes now Speaker Gingrich was wrong both in his debate answer and in our interview yesterday,’ King said. ‘Gingrich spokesman R.C. Hammond says the only people the campaign offered to ABC were the Speaker’s two daughters from his first marriage.’” So he’s out there, and he told John King during the debate, this is one of the answers that got a standing O. That he’d offered ABC a whole bunch of friends of his to rebut this point that he never said to his wife he wanted an open marriage. That turns out not to be true.

Then there is YouTube video in 1988: “Bush Won’t Win if He Runs to Continue Reaganism.” Of course, Bush 41 won in a landslide in 1988 and it was largely because the American people wanted four more years of Reagan. There are other examples of this profound criticism of Reagan. Drudge’s lead headline is, “Insider: Gingrich Repeatedly Insulted Reagan.” Now, when I saw all of this stuff — and obviously it’s a coordinated document dump here, opposition research dump. It’s obviously coordinated. And this stuff, by the way, that’s on Greg Sargent’s blog, Plum Line, that’s the thinly sourced stuff in the New York Times about Newt being emotionally unstable and Romney putting that out, that’s why Romney is not liked by the Republicans that don’t like him. It’s that kind of stuff that his campaign puts out.

If you want to know, why do these people hate Romney so much? In 2008, you recall, Huckabee and McCain hated Romney. Now they both love Romney, but back then they hated Romney. It’s because of stuff like this. He’s doing stuff like this in ads before they had any money to run their own ads. And, I’ll tell you what, the way this hit me, I told you people this before. I first heard of Newt Gingrich when he was perhaps the premiere defender of Ronald Reagan. This was in the early 1980s of course, Reagan assumed office in 1981. I was working in Kansas City. Between 1979 and 1983 I was working for the Kansas City Royals. In 1983 I left the Royals and corporate America and went back to radio. I was gonna give it one more shot because that was my passion, it’s what I loved and it’s what I did best. And I learned that corporate structures were not for me.

But even during those last two years, of course, I’m in my private time which there wasn’t a lot of when you work for a professional baseball team, 18-hour days, during home stands and so forth. But, nevertheless, I was as immersed in politics then as I am now. What’s funny is nobody at the Royals knew it because nobody ever talked about it. All you did was talk baseball there. If you talked about anything other than what was in the sports page, there was something wrong with you. So nobody I worked with had any idea that I had any interest whatsoever or knowledge whatsoever in politics. But I’m watching this stuff and what happened was, the moment Reagan’s inaugurated, the Democrats, the media, it was as vicious an assault on a human being, on a Republican, as there is today.

Now, those of you who were not paying attention back then — or who were too young to pay attention — don’t doubt me, it was vicious. And Reagan did not have a media on his side. It was the three networks and CNN and the newspapers. There was no talk radio. There were no blogs, of course. There wasn’t the Internet. There was no alternative media. Reagan had National Review. That was his lone ally in the media, William Buckley’s National Review. That was it. And early on in the Reagan years, does the name David Stockman ring a bell? David Stockman, the first budget director for Reagan, within the first year goes rogue and says Reaganomics won’t work, can’t work, it was bad.

It was a total back stab. That’s where the name “trickle down” actually got created I think, and became standard vernacular in the popular lexicon. That, and supply-side. And I remember the stories about Reagan taking Stockman to the woodshed. That’s a quote from the story. That’s how it was described, to get his mind right. But that unleashed a torrent from Tip O’Neill, from every Democrat, I mean all these people. Reagan lied, Bush was right, it is voodoo economics, oh, this is horrible. We were in a great recession at the time here. The Democrats loved what Stockman did, and the guy who self-appointed himself to stop all this was Newt. And that’s where I first heard of him.

Newt Gingrich and Bob Walker and a couple of others that were members of what was called the Conservative Opportunity Society, I don’t know that it had been named as such yet, but it was a bunch of young, relatively new members of the House on the Republican side who were conservatives. They had special orders every night. Once the House had finished its official business, as long as somebody shows up on the floor of the House to speak, the cameras on C-SPAN stay on. It didn’t matter that nobody else was in the House chamber. They stayed on until the last person left the floor. And Newt and his guys were in there five hours a night. They were rotating, each of them would speak for an hour. They would yield to each other. They would interrupt themselves for questions and so forth. But the cameras only were focused on the well. You never knew that there was no audience there, except there was never any applause. You never knew that the House chamber was empty, unless you knew what the special orders were.

And this went on for years. And it’s where I heard of Newt Gingrich. And Newt had appointed himself the personal defender of Ronald Reagan and had appointed himself the singular person with his buddies to counter all of what he thought were the lies of the day being spouted by the media and the Democrats. Then I leave the Royals and I get back into radio. And I decide that I want to get this guy Gingrich on the air to have a chat with, and it was difficult. Couldn’t do it. The requests that Gingrich were getting were overwhelming; he wasn’t really interested in doing a lot of them. He didn’t really have a whole lot of time.

The station I was working on was owned by the Mormon church, Bonneville Broadcasting. It turned out that somebody inside Bonneville Broadcasting unearthed a contact that was able to get to Newt, and I got an interview with him for about 20 or 25 minutes. I don’t remember anything about the interview. These are just little details here to spice up the story. But this went on for years. These special orders went on for years, and it wasn’t just the defense of Reagan. Newt Gingrich was ripping the Speaker of the House at the time, Tip O’Neill; and when Tip left and “Fort Worthless” Jim Wright came in, the assault continued.

It was everything you wish was happening today, is all I can tell you. It was everything you wish the entire Republican Party was doing today. It was led by Newt Gingrich, and what was he doing? He was defending Reagan. Now, all of this stuff that hit Drudge and everywhere else last night about Newt telling everybody the country goes to hell if they continue Reaganism and that Newt insulted Reagan and that the Reagan administration failed and Iran-Contra… I never heard any of that. I started doing this particular program in Sacramento in 1984, and I was just as immersed in national politics then as I am now, and I could honestly tell you this.

I’m not denying it happened, don’t misunderstand. I’m just telling you, because it did happen. I’ve got the audio; the YouTube video is out there. Newt did say this stuff. I just don’t remember it. I don’t remember anybody in 1988 telling George Bush, “You’re gonna lose big if you just continue Reagan,” because the whole Republican Party strategy was to fool Republicans into thinking that that’s what Bush was gonna do. Their whole strategy was to tell the Republicans, “Okay, I’m going to.” I remember George Bush at that New Orleans convention. His theme was, “I’m gonna complete my mission,” and it was based off the fact he had been shot down in World War II.

They had the video of him being rescued at sea after his plane was shot down. He had to parachute out of his plane to be shot down. Great hero story. “Complete my mission.” It was all intertwined with continuing what had happened after Reagan, economically. Now, you people know that I am blessed with a pretty good memory. And I don’t remember Newt Gingrich in the 1980s — I’m not denying it happened. I’m just telling you, this stuff was a total shock to me last night when I learned that Newt had said this stuff. (interruption) I don’t know. Well, we’ve got the audio and we’ll listen to it and see whether it was off the cuff or what, ’cause Newt does… (interruption)

It’s like… (interruption) Well, it’s like… (interruption) He does. The latest thing he blurted out is a moon colony. We’re gonna have a moon colony, get 13,000 people on the moon, and make it the 51st state. And we can have honeymoons in space, honeymoons and weddings in space. It would be really funny because of weightlessness. Wait ’til people find out how much fun you can have when you’re weightless! This stuff just came rolling out yesterday. Now, here’s the problem with that. Here we are in Florida and Obama has effectively killed the space program so obviously Newt says (summarized), “Hey, I got an idea for space: We’ll colonize the moon!

“We’ll make at it 51st state, we’ll have weddings and honeymoons and weightlessness.” Well, the problem with that is the other part of his campaign is focused on reducing spending and reforming entitlements and some modification in health care spending, Social Security spending. So you’re in a state where that is a crucially important thing to people. I mean, you’re telling them to do all that and then at the same time you’re gonna go colonize the moon. It’s a disconnect. But that would fall under the category of “grandiose,” and it just came out of nowhere. Then National Review Online has a DEVASTATING piece on Newt.

Elliott Abrams, who was in the Reagan administration for foreign policy. Elliott Abrams is married to the daughter of Norman Podhoretz. Elliott Abrams is of impeccable reputation and character. I think Elliott Abrams… In fact, last time he was at the White House he was walking out of the West Wing as I walked in. He’s always been nice, stopped, shook my hand, thanked me for saving the country. (These guys always say that, then they smile and walk off.) But anyway, this piece by Elliott Abrams, it just slices and dices with the most harmless tone. There nothing vicious about it.

You’ve got another piece by Bob Tyrrell (known in public as R. Emmett Tyrrell. He started the American Spectator.) It just dumps on Newt, and Elliott Abrams’ piece specifically focuses on Newt’s relationship with Reagan and how there really wasn’t one. So this is obviously a coordinated attack that’s designed to take Newt out here in Florida. That’s what’s going on. It’s happening. We all knew stuff like this was gonna happen. We all worry about when candidates are gonna implode and this kind of thing. My only point here is: I didn’t know any of this stuff. That’s the only thing I’m telling you, and I was shocked when I read it.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: You’ve got Nancy Reagan. People have produced, I think, either a letter or a video from Nancy Reagan saying that Newt would be the obvious inheritor of Reaganism. And you’ve got Michael Reagan, Ronald Reagan’s son, who’s endorsed Newt. This Elliott Abrams piece, though, folks, of all the stuff that’s out there is probably the most devastating because Elliott Abrams’ credentials are impeccable. He almost went to jail for the cause. For example, here’s one thing he says about Newt: “As a new member of Congress in the Reagan years — and I was an assistant secretary of state — Gingrich voted with the president regularly, but equally often spewed insulting rhetoric at Reagan, his top aides and his policies to defeat communism. Gingrich was voluble and certain in predicting that Reagan’s policies would fail, and in all of this he was dead wrong.” That’s the tone of the entire piece by Elliott Abrams. But there’s more than just an opposition research document dump here going on. You have Elliott Abrams, Bob Tyrrell coming out with some of this stuff. It is overwhelming, and it happens in one day.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Now, back to this Newt stuff. I got a note from Jeffrey Lord. Jeffrey Lord writes for the American Spectator, which is Bob Tyrrell’s bunch. Bob Tyrrell has a devastating piece: Newt is Bill Clinton, only worse! Oh, it’s devastating. This Elliott Abrams piece is devastating. And they all happen the same day. So Jeffrey Lord says: Wait a minute now, Nancy Reagan, 1985, Goldwater Institute, after the Reagan era — and Jeff Lord says, “Believe me, if Nancy Reagan thought for a nanosecond that Newt was anti-Reagan, she would never have been on the same platform with him.” I can vouch for that. I’ve never seen a more protective wife of anybody than Nancy Reagan. If you in your life said one thing against Ronald Reagan, you were gone. You were banished. You were never allowed to be in the same room.

Talk to the people who knew them both and worked with them, and they’ll confirm that. So Jeff Lord says (paraphrased), “Well, if all this that we’re hearing yesterday’s true, what the hell’s Nancy Reagan doing out there giving Newt basically a huge award?” She said, “The dramatic movement of 1995,” that was going on then, “is an outgrowth of a much earlier crusade that goes back half a century. Barry Goldwater handed the torch to Ronnie,” her husband, “and in turn Ronnie turned the torch over to Newt and the Republican members of Congress to keep that dream alive.” That’s Nancy Reagan in 1985. Now, Jeff Lord worked in the Reagan White House.

He’s posted that Elliott Abrams never said a word to him at the time about Newt, not one. And Jeff says, “Suffice to say the political office of the Reagan White House made it our job to defend Reagan from Republican members of Congress. I never heard any criticism of Newt, either, firsthand from Elliott or secondhand from anybody else,” and then he posts his take on all it is at American Spectator. So what do we have here? Tyrrell says that Newt Gingrich is Bill Clinton without Clinton’s charm. This is a long list of people here who have just come out both barrels blazing on the same day, or within close proximity of the same day: Elliott Abrams, Bob Tyrrell, Drudge, Brit Hume of Fox News, Dr. Krauthammer, the New York Sun, the National Review, Vin Weber.

We’ve got the audio. I don’t have it ready to play yet. It’s back in the stack somewhere. I’ll find it eventually, but he did say all this stuff. I just didn’t know it. That’s what has me stunned. My memory of Newt Gingrich is as a premiere defender of Ronald Reagan. So this stuff caught me totally by surprise. And all these people — Elliott Abrams, Bob Tyrrell, Dr. Krauthammer — have impeccable credentials. And then there’s this. This is a post at The Corner, National Review Online. “Operation Chaos in Reverse.” It’s actually a front-page Washington Post story. “Liberal Groups Join in Florida Ad War Against Romney — Newt Gingrich isn’t the only one trying to beat Romney in Florida.

“Several liberal groups are funding new ad campaigns in Florida, targeting the vulnerable GOP presidential candidate, part of an unusually bold effort by Democrat supporters to bolster Obama’s chances in November by influencing the Republican primaries.” So the Democrats are doing Operation Chaos here in Florida. The unions are running anti-Romney ads, big time, all over the state. This is an expensive media market. There are ten sizeable, significant media markets in the state of Florida. You need a lot of money to saturate this state with TV ads. And these pro-Obama people are coming in. You’ve got a $1 million ad buy from the American Federation of State County, Municipal, Employees. That’s the nation’s largest public employee union. They’re focusing on Romney’s history as head of Bain Capital.

SEIU and Priorities USA Action, a pro-Obama super PAC, have also jointly launched a Spanish-language radio campaign in Florida accusing Romney of having two faces, and they’re even… Reuters has a hit piece on Marco Rubio coming tomorrow. I mean, folks, everybody involved in politics with a vested interest has opened both barrels of the shotgun and are firing at everybody. Every Republican of note and of stature is under a full-fledged assault in this state today. If you didn’t know better after this Reuters piece, you would think that Marco Rubio contributed money to Adolf Hitler’s campaign. That’s how bad this hit piece is.

It just all over. Newt was on Univision. He was on Univision, and he was talking some weeks ago how he gave depositions in his divorce case. There weren’t any depositions in his divorce case. He didn’t give any depositions. His wife told the media there weren’t any depositions. So everybody is scratching their heads. “Why would Newt say that all kinds of friends were available to prove to ABC? Why would he do this? Why would he tell ABC that he had all kinds of friends who could back up his claim that his wife was lying, Marianne was lying that he never did ask for an open marriage — and then tells Univision that he had depositions in his divorce when there weren’t any depositions?”

Then this grandiose stuff with the moon colony! Ha. You add all this up, it’s amazing. You know, I had hopes that this campaign would go on and on and on and on all the way to the convention, and I’ll tell you something that’s happened. Folks, Romney’s getting hit, too. Romney’s doing his own version. He’s got some imploding going on out there with Romneycare. There’s a devastating ad that somebody’s put together, pointing out that Obamacare is Romneycare. Oh, it’s one of Newt’s super PACs. And then there’s another ad that makes the bridge, completes the bridge from Romneycare to Obamacare and does it with Romney’s two advisers that went from Massachusetts to the Oval Office. The point is one guy is emerging entirely unscathed in all of this, and that’s Santorum.

Santorum, nobody is saying a negative word about. He’s not under assault by anybody. And we want this campaign to go on and on. There are two reasons. There are two primary reasons that we want this campaign to go on. I know a lot of people are panicked. They can’t handle all this negative stuff about Republicans in the media every day, but it’s going to happen. If they have to lie and make stuff up, this is going to happen. Republicans are hit every day in the media. There’s no way this can be stopped. You’re just gonna have to come to grips with it. There’s nothing I can do, there’s nothing anybody can do to stop the media assault on any Republican candidate or high-profile personality.

So it’s gonna happen. What we don’t want to happen… If we happen to choose a nominee after Florida, if our race is essentially over after Florida and we have our nominee — either after Super Tuesday or right at Super Tuesday — then guess what? Obama can start his focused negative ads on our nominee in March and run them continually through the election. If the campaign can be dragged out, no winner until right before the convention, then Obama can’t focus specifically on the nominee. They have to focus on everybody that’s running and it could delay him, and Obama’s got a lot of money. One of the ways of equalizing the disparity in the money is to have a long, drawn-out campaign that delays Obama’s focused spending against our nominee.

‘Cause we can compete financially in a two, three-month campaign that starts in September, but we can’t keep up with ‘em starting in March, or it would be hard. The preferable way… The second reason is, keep this conservative debate going in the news, in the media each and every day. So as long as Obama doesn’t know who specifically to destroy, he’s gotta aim at everybody. That means dividing and diluting his resources. Newt’s also stepped in it, too. He said that he was a Goldwater supporter when he was a Rockefeller state chair. These are the kinds of things, as you heard in the early part of the campaign, people worry about what Newt is going to say at any time, and you don’t know where it’s gonna come from and you don’t know… (interruption) Yeah, he did say it. He said he’s a Goldwater supporter. He was a Rockefeller state chair. He was a regional chair for Rockefeller. (interruption) Nelson Rockefeller. Yeah. Yeah. The Rockefeller wing of the party. Correct. Exactly right.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Here’s some audio. And welcome back. Rush Limbaugh, half my brain tied behind my back just to make it fair.

Tom DeLay has joined the fray. Tom DeLay is now saying Newt Gingrich is another Bill Clinton. DeLay says, (paraphrasing) “Yeah, we’d have leadership meetings almost every day and every day Newt had a new agenda. Nothing was ever organized.” You know, the criticism is a lot of people say Romney doesn’t believe in anything and Newt believes in everything. It just depends on the day. Now, if Romney’s behind this attack, we may have to rethink our opinion of his cut ‘em off at the knees talents. The question is, whoever’s doing this, do you think they have the guts to do this against Obama? That’s the real question. (interruption) You do? Have you seen any evidence of this? Have you seen any evidence the Republican Party’s willing to go after Obama like they’re going after each other? I haven’t.

I hope that Elliott Abrams and Bob Tyrrell and the rest of them will have just as much fire against Obama as they do Newt. I hope that we see this same kind of focused opposition to Obama once that day comes. I really do. Snerdley says, “Oh, yeah, no doubt.” Really? Where’s the evidence? Where’s the evidence that anybody in our party’s got the guts to go after Obama the way they’re going after Newt here, the way they’ve gone after Perry, the way some of them have gone after Romney, where’s the evidence? We don’t have the evidence. We have to wait and see. And I’ll bet you a bunch of people in this audience, if you ask ‘em to make a bet, they would bet the Republican Party doesn’t have the guts to go after Democrats the way they’re going after themselves. I’ll just bet you. We’ll find out. We’ll ask ‘em when I get to the phones tomorrow. Just kidding. We’ll get to the phones today. Here’s Romney. This is an ad and you’ll hear Gingrich in this ad. This is a pro-Romney super PAC Restore Our Future ad.

GINGRICH: I worked with President Ronald Reagan. Worked with Ronald Reagan. Ronald Reagan playbook. President Reagan. Reagan. Reagan.

ANNOUNCER: Gingrich exaggerates, dropping Reagan’s name 50 times. But in his diaries Reagan mentioned Gingrich only once. Reagan criticized Gingrich, saying, Newt’s ideas, quote, “would cripple our defense program.”

RUSH: April 11th, 1988, Gingrich on a show, host says, “Can the vice president run as Bush on the issues that provided such success for Reagan?”

GINGRICH: I don’t think so at all. I think that the years of 1980-1984 are the past, and the American people are a people peculiarly addicted to the future. If George Bush runs as a continuation of Reaganism, I think he’ll lose because I think on Election Day the American people, given a choice between more of eight years or something new, will vote for something new.

RUSH: So that’s one of the things circulating. And this is January 13th, 2008, four years ago on This Week with George “Snuffleufagus.”

GINGRICH: We are at the end of the Reagan era. We’re at a point in time when we’re about to start redefining, as a number of people have started talking about, that we’re starting to redefine the nature of the Republican Party in response to what the country needs.

RUSH: Newt was one of the early signatories to the premise “the era of Reagan is over.” That’s 2008. (imitating Newt) “We’re at the end of the Reagan era here, in 1988. Nah, nah years of ’80, ’84, that’s the past, American people peculiarly addicted to the future. If George Bush runs as a continuation of Reaganism, he’ll lose.” Newt was wrong. The stuff’s out there. Last night was the first time, and I was shocked, ’cause I know everything, and I remember everything, and I had never heard that stuff before.

RUSH: You know, every time I mention a blogger, it doesn’t matter what blog site I cite, other bloggers send me e-mails saying they’re phonies, they’re creeps. The hatred in the blogger community is funny. Sometimes I’m hesitant to mention bloggers ’cause I don’t like getting e-mails, “That blogger, he’s a phony, he’s a thief, that was mine first, everybody steals.” But I’ve got a blog here, guy named Dan Riehl. He claims that the video of Newt bashing Reagan is bogus, this 1988 audio that we played of Newt saying that Reagan’s wrong.
Here’s the little blog post. “There’s a short excerpt of a 1988 C-SPAN video purportedly showing Newt Gingrich bashing Reagan when talking about how Bush, Sr. should run” his campaign, should not run as more Reagan, but do something new. Riehl writes, “As I suspected, it’s edited to give a false impression. What you don’t see is immediately after when Gingrich praises Reaganism and the Reagan platform. If you can’t watch it all, it begins at about 2:30 in to confirm it’s the same segment. It’s the minute or two afterward you also need to hear to understand that Newt wasn’t bashing Reagan at all. He was merely saying, Bush isn’t Reagan and the GOP needs something new to sell.”

So I knew something like this was gonna happen. It’s not really that it’s been doctored, but that it has been selectively chosen from. So I sent it up to Cookie ’cause I can’t listen to it, I didn’t have the time to listen it. Cookie said, “Look, this thing is an hour long. I’m sure he praises Reagan at some point or another, but I wouldn’t say it’s doctored.” So my expert says it’s not doctored. The blogger says it’s been selectively edited or chosen. So I just wanted to get it out there. I think Cookie is protesting having to listen to an hour of Newt, basically, in order to find — (laughing) — what I asked her to find. He-he-he-he-he-he.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Cookie is defiant. She’s giving me a minute and a half after of the Newt bite and she’s insistent that nobody’s doctored this and nobody’s changed — and I’ve read the transcript, that’s true. Newt still says look, the eighties were great but we gotta look forward, people — people care about the future, da-da-da-da-da. He praises Reagan in the bite, which the first — the — the excerpted bite doesn’t include any of but it doesn’t change the fact that while praising Reaganism, he still says to George Bush, you — you’re wasting your time if you campaign on Reaganism. Nobody wants more of the past. We want to look forward, nothing changes about that. So the — the Cookster was right.

Well, it was a long read, but you get the point. This was quoted from followers of CNN when Bob Dole endorsed Romney: What has happened to the once-proud Republican Party? Where are the Republicans in the mode of Bob Dole and John Warner of Virginia, men of education and intelligence who cared deeply about this county and who you were proud to represent your state?. What we now have are extreme right wing wackos like Newt Gingrich, Michelle Bachmann, Rick Perry and Sarah Palin so totally unsuitable for the presidency and viewed by many Independents as total flakes and lack true leadership. We need two strong political parties but the Republicans have “run-off” all reasonable candidates.I’m sorry but the Republican Party,- A Party of HATE has to REAP what it has SOWED– seeds of TEA-PARTY WING-NUTS. Now with Newt SURGING to the TOP they want to kill the crop. Go FIGURE !!!!!

Go Figure is correct…the country is waking up to moral decay and elitists in Washington. We’re tired of them not listening and ignoring the Constitution. Liberals, you see what happened in 2008…another Tea Party fire will happen in 2012. Newt is surging to the top because of who is endorsing Romney-more of the establishment and media…a third party will happen if this continues. We hope eyes open soon before more people believe the crap that’s being slung on Newt Gingrich. Not that he doesn’t have his faults and issues. There is no perfect candidate in the Republican Party for 2012. But, Obama and his blueprint Republican buddy Mitt Romney are not what this country needs…it needs an enema!

A Picture Worth A Thousand Words

This was posted on Facebook. An unbelievable, yet believable portrait of the Presidents, and the meaning is deafening!

 

Enough Said!!!

Glenn Beck: Economic Collapse and War Coming

Folks, this is coming, I know for a fact that law enforcement has been training for this to possibly happen before elections this year.

Glenn Beck: Economic Collapase and War Coming, posted with vodpod

George Soros is no stranger to Blaze readers. The billionaire currency speculator and philanthropist has long been in the news, especially since the fateful day in 1992 when he helped crash England’s economy. In fact, since that day, he has been commonly referred to as “the man who broke the bank of England.”

Soros is shrewd, he has a keen eye for investments, and he knows how to play the markets. Therefore, when he makes a prediction, it might be safe to say it’s worth a listen. After all, his predictions (among other things) have made him the multi-billionaire he is today.

So you might want to pay attention to a recent story from The Daily Beast that claims George Soros is nervous about the future of the global economy and that he warns of dark things to come.

“At times like these, survival is the most important thing,” Soros said.

As he sees it, the world faces one of the most dangerous periods of modern history—a period of “evil,” writes the Beasts’ John Arlidge. “Europe is confronting a descent into chaos and conflict. In America [Soros] predicts riots in the streets that will lead to a brutal clampdown that will dramatically curtail civil liberties [emphases added]. The global economic system could even collapse altogether.”

And to add a little color, Aldridge notes Soros says it all while “peering through his owlish glasses and brushing wisps of gray hair off his forehead.”

“I am not here to cheer you up. The situation is about as serious and difficult as I’ve experienced in my career,” Soros told Newsweek. “We are facing an extremely difficult time, comparable in many ways to the 1930s, the Great Depression. We are facing now a general retrenchment in the developed world, which threatens to put us in a decade of more stagnation, or worse. The best-case scenario is a deflationary environment. The worst-case scenario is a collapse of the financial system.”

Read more

Sen. Paul Delivers State of the Union Response

Tennessee Balance of Powers Act

The “Tennessee Balance of Powers Act” is moving forward in the TN legislature! This is critical “states rights” legislation drafted by Liberty Legal Foundation and designed be a model for every state in the nation to protect its citizens against unconstitutional Federal laws.

The “Tennessee Balance of Powers Act” acknowledges that the State has an ongoing duty to defend the rights of Tennesseans against federal abuses of authority. Since our country’s founding states have left it to citizens to correct federal abuses of authority. Citizens usually have to allow the federal government to violate their Constitutional rights in order to have standing to challenge a federal law. Then the individual private citizen is left to take on the entire federal government, by themselves, in federal court.

The “Tennessee Balance of Powers Act” will change that paradigm. It will allow the State of Tennessee to file original challenges directly with the U.S. Supreme Court before anyone’s rights are violated. Note that the Supreme Court has no discretion to refuse such cases. Such challenges will be limited to instances where Congress passes laws that are clearly in violation of the Constitution. Such challenges will greatly enhance Congresses respect for the Constitution, and will re-assert state authority over the federal government, pursuant to the Constitution.

Stay tuned for more important updates about this vital legislation.

Liberty Legal Foundation

Canadian Talk Show Host Destroys Obama Over Keystone Pipeline Decision

Ezra Levant hosts a show, The Source, for Canada’s Sun News. In a very well-researched presentation, he takes a comprehensive look at Obama’s idiocy over the Keystone Pipeline.  Be sure to watch the whole thing and pay particular attention to the map of the alleged “pristine, environmentally sensitive area” through which the pipleline will pass.

If Charlie Crist Was A Closet Dem, What Is Mitt?

Well, if this doesn’t prove that Mitt’s a moderate, liberal front for the Republican elites, nothing will. Everyone in Florida should know this one…From Newsmax.com:

 

As Mitt Romney puts the South Carolina primary in his rear-view mirror and hits the accelerator in a bid to win Florida, he may discover himself crashing headlong into the bitter legacy of Charlie Crist, the former Florida governor who defected from the GOP and was soundly defeated for the U.S. Senate by Marco Rubio.
Romney’s “Charlie Crist” problem is this: Romney’s chief campaign strategist and several of his most senior campaign staff were Crist’s top political advisers — the same ones who crafted Crist’s moderate, ignore-the-tea-party strategy epitomized in Crist’s famous “hug” of President Barack Obama. That strategy led Crist, once the most popular Republican governor in the nation, to defeat.

Crist’s erstwhile political team was led by controversial GOP strategist Stuart Stevens. Stevens and partner Russ Schriefer are the principals in the high-profile Stevens & Schriefer Group consultant firm and are playing the lead role in crafting Romney’s primary and national campaign strategy. 

According to the Stevens & Schriefer website, the firm had a long history with Crist, serving as chief strategists for his bids for education commissioner, attorney general, governor, and later for the U.S. Senate. 

Other senior Crist political aides from his failed Senate campaign now hold key posts in Romney’s campaign. Amanda Henneberg, who had served as  Crist’s press secretary, now is a spokeswoman with the Romney 2012 campaign. Likewise, Andrea Saul, who was Crist’s communications director, now is Romney’s press secretary.

The Stevens & Schriefer firm has played a central role in several GOP presidential campaigns, including Romney’s failed bid in 2008. It also holds a strong track record of winning campaigns, mainly for more moderate Republicans. 

The firm specializes in helping Blue State Republicans woo moderates, swing voters, and Democrats to help the GOP win statewide elections. Stevens & Schreifer advised Republican Chris Christie in his bid for New Jersey governor.

The firm’s appeal to the GOP conservative base, however, may be mixed at best — especially when its role in Crist’s unsuccessful 2010 Senate bid is factored in.

When former Florida House Speaker Marco Rubio announced his bid to challenge Crist for Senate in May 2009, he trailed the popular Republican governor in positive name recognition in the Sunshine State by 36 points (13 percent to 49 percent), according to the Mason-Dixon polling company. Nevertheless, Crist went on to suffer one of the worst political meltdowns in recent history.

For his Senate bid, Stevens crafted a moderate Crist message that proved very much at odds with the tea party sentiment then sweeping Florida and the nation. Many analysts believe the Stevens strategy was played out, creating a mortal wound for Crist, when he gave Obama the infamous “hug.”

It came during a Feb. 10, 2009, rally in Fort Myers in support of the president’s controversial $850 billion stimulus program. Crist joined Obama on stage, praised the plan, and physically embraced the president. 

That was a defining moment for Crist and his Senate campaign: He had embraced the opposition but had ignored the party’s conservative base.

During the campaign Jeb Bush, the influential former Florida governor, gave an exclusive interview to Newsmax and declared that Crist had committed an “unforgiveable” act by supporting the Obama stimulus.

Bush’s remark triggered a downward spiral in the polls from which Crist never recovered. In April 2010, before the Republican primary vote, Crist left the Republican Party and ran as an independent. Rubio defeated him decisively in the November election.

When Crist bolted from the Republican Party, Stevens and his firm resigned from the Crist campaign, as did senior aides Saul and Henneberg. 

Florida 2012: Crist vs. Rubio Déjà Vu

With Florida’s Jan. 31 primary shaping up to be a bitter and critical battle between the establishment GOP represented by Romney on one side and the Main Street/tea party Republicans who are backing Gingrich, the race looks like it could be a do-over of the bitterly contested 2010 Florida Senate race.

The primary drama may offer a replay of Crist-Rubio, with Crist’s former associate Stevens crafting the Romney message and Jose Mallea, who was Rubio’s Senate campaign manager, leading the Gingrich campaign in Florida.

For example, when a November poll briefly showed former House Speaker Gingrich leading Romney in Florida, GOP strategist Alex Castellanos tweeted sarcastically: “Don’t worry, Stuart [Stevens] will deliver [a] Crist endorsement.”

To some, the Florida race has all the markings of a repeat of the Crist-Rubio showdown. Veteran political strategist Roger Stone tells Newsmax that the Romney campaign has been “tone deaf when it comes to conservatives.”

The Miami-based Stone adds: “Stuart Stevens, while he is a smart guy, he is not a conservative. He does not come from the conservative movement, he does not understand the conservative movement.”

So far, Romney’s national campaign playbook has been eerily similar to Crist’s strategy, embracing swing, middle-of-the-road voters while keeping the GOP’s conservative base at a distance.

Editor’s Note: Do You Support Gingrich or Romney? Ron Paul? Vote in Urgent Poll — Click Here Now 

The Romney campaign did not respond to a request for comment. But Gingrich has emphasized that his campaign is surrounded by conservatives, and that the GOP leadership ranks during his tenure as House speaker were filled by conservatives as well.

During an appearance on shows and in a recent debate, Gingrich trumpeted the fact that he has been a “Reagan populist conservative” and that Rubio’s former campaign manager runs his Florida campaign.

Gingrich will have to play the Rubio underdog role adroitly, however, given that the primary election is only a week away. Gingrich hasn’t run a single ad in Florida, though Romney has been barraging the state with 30-second ads for weeks. Before South Carolina, polls showed Gingrich trailing Romney in the Sunshine State.

But as the Crist-Rubio paradigm indicates, things can change quickly in Florida.

“Crist never took Rubio seriously because Rubio had no name ID,” Stone recalls. “Charlie was universally known, with a 73 percent approval, and said ‘conservative’ with every other word out of his mouth.” 

But Florida voters saw through the spin and viewed Crist as too moderate for their taste.

Will Romney move more to the right after his resounding loss to Gingrich in the Palmetto State? His strategy will unfold in the days ahead, but most analysts expect Romney to focus on Gingrich’s shortcomings.

In December, the Miami Herald reported that “Charlie Crist’s Marco Rubio-bashing team” was heading up the Romney campaign. The story described the Crist tactics that Stevens helped devise against Rubio as “Call him a crook and a hypocrite.”

This playbook seems to have been dusted off for implementation. 

Post-South Carolina, the Romney spin already appears to be focusing on Gingrich’s ethics troubles as speaker and his role in mortgage giants Fannie and Freddie. It appears that a rerun of the Crist-Rubio fight is in full throttle.

Oliver Stone: Ron Paul is the only one saying anything intelligent

Legendary filmmaker Oliver Stone, known for his controversial movies, told Rock Cellar Magazine in a recent interview that he would vote for Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul if he was running against President Barack Obama. “He’s the only one of anybody who’s saying anything intelligent about the future of the world,” Mr. Stone told Rock Cellar Magazine’s Ed Rampell.

Mr. Stone is not the first celebrity to say something positive about Mr. Paul. American Idol winner Kelly Clarkson endorsed Mr. Paul to the dismay of her many followers.

“I love Ron Paul. I liked him a lot during the last republican nomination and no one gave him a chance. If he wins the nomination for the Republican party in 2012 he’s got my vote. Too bad he probably won’t,” Ms. Clarkson tweeted in December.

Mr. Stone is unlikely to receive the same reaction from his fan base that Ms. Clarkson did after making pro-Ron Paul comments. Platoon and Born on the Fourth of July, two of Mr. Stone’s anti-war movies, are most likely favorites of many of Mr. Paul’s supporters.

Congressman Paul (R-TX) is still in the mix to win the Republican presidential nomination, although he trails former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich in the delegate count. Unable to secure a top-tier finish in the South Carolina Republican primary, Mr. Paul is looking past Florida in order to pursue delegates in the caucus states of Nevada and Minnesota.

Mr. Stone is not the first celebrity to say something positive about Mr. Paul. American Idol winner Kelly Clarkson endorsed Mr. Paul to the dismay of her many followers.

“I love Ron Paul. I liked him a lot during the last republican nomination and no one gave him a chance. If he wins the nomination for the Republican party in 2012 he’s got my vote. Too bad he probably won’t,” Ms. Clarkson tweeted in December.

Mr. Stone is unlikely to receive the same reaction from his fan base that Ms. Clarkson did after making pro-Ron Paul comments. Platoon and Born on the Fourth of July, two of Mr. Stone’s anti-war movies, are most likely favorites of many of Mr. Paul’s supporters.

Congressman Paul (R-TX) is still in the mix to win the Republican presidential nomination, although he trails former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich in the delegate count. Unable to secure a top-tier finish in the South Carolina Republican primary, Mr. Paul is looking past Florida in order to pursue delegates in the caucus states of Nevada and Minnesota.

Read more