That's what I want to know!

the election was on 1/21,
so it appears that the Television "news" weren't too eager to "report" shit!

The media doesn't actually care who wins, or what the truth is.

All they care about is that the election be "close". If Romney becomes the nominee now, BORING ... the GE is too far away.

So they need a primary fight. So they are going to give Newt a free pass, right up to the point where HE looks like he could end it, then they'll go back to Romney. If they can, they want this to go on at least into April or May.

Then we have the summer, most folks are worried about vacations, and folks tend to ignore politics ... then we get the conventions at the end of August and early Sept, and then its game time.

The pundits need something to do between now and May / June. The truth won't get in the way of that.

read it here! http://www.democratsforprogress.com/2012/01/21/why-2012-will-be-a-close-election/

There is an organized and intentional effort to discourage Democrats and depress their turnout.

If you watch the talking head shows, you'll often see a right wing pundit and a left wing pundit.

If the topic is economics ... the right wing pundit attacks Obama, claiming he is a socialist. Then the left wing pundit on the same show claims that the left is angry because Obama is actually a Corporate whore.

If the topic is terrorism ... the right wing pundit says Obama is an appeaser. Then the left wing pundit on the same show argues that Obama is destroyed civil liberties and likes to kill American citizens with drone strikes as a hobby.

Energize the right wing so they vote ... demoralize the left so they stay home ... keep the election close.

Obama should win in a landslide that would make Reagan's corpse crawl out of its grave and scream "WOW, now THAT is a landslide!!"

But the media is going to do its best to prevent any such thing. They get paid either way.

Kind of like Romney when he took over a business. No matter what happened, he made tons of money.

They have so many hours of coverage and so little time to report real facts

Gnewt even lies in his sleep...just ask his ex-wives.

If this shitbag is breathin' he's lyin...

Supposedly he accepted a challenge to debate Reverend Al this week...it'd be pure joy to see Cadrich use that "food stamp" line and Al ramming it up his oversized patoot...

and emailed it to him as well!

So hopefully, he will have it by his talk show tomorrow....
and he and Rev. Sharpton are good friends!

Looks like he got the info...a Teabagger tried to use the "Food Stamp President" line and got it shoved back at him.

he emailed me back last night thanking me for the info and stating that we would be discussing it on air, and on television!

Once the faux news shepple hear a story it is a fact. Anything else is the "liberal media" trying to protect our "illegal President"

"That man lies faster than I can talk"

Last edited Mon Jan 23, 2012, 06:47 PM - Edit history (1)

that's not even the point to Gingrich. It's offensive and it's a "dog-whistle" to the racist GOP base.

However, frankly, I would be proud to be known as a "Food Stamp President" that helps make sure people have food during these tough economic times (that Gingrich and his ilk are largely responsible for due to their policies) rather than a "Let-Them-Die-Hungry-In-The-Streets President" who seeks to deny needy people assistance. If Gingrich and his ilk are so obsessed with getting people a paycheck, you'd never know it-judging by their inattention to the task of actually creating jobs (and no, seeking to cut domestic spending to the bone has NOTHING to do with creating jobs!)

I guarantee you we will hear it again tonight. I can't count the times I've seen that stupid FOODSTAMP bar chart pasted on my Facebook Wall by Morons who believe everything they hear.

sure, gingrivitis is a liar. but we knew that ages ago.

why make a stink out of this particular issue? bush's tenure in office is closed and his number won't increase, but obama's still in office and his number will increase. soon gingrivitis's statement will become true. again, sure, he's lying NOW, but if this story sticks around for any duration, eventually it will become true and that's not good for us at all.

if we're going to attack on this one, at least we need to cut to the core -- the statistic is phony because so many of those added while obama was president were before he had a chance to enact any new policies, and due to the bush economic disaster that obama is (slowly) mending.

on the one hand you state..." if this story sticks around for any duration, eventually it will become true and that's not good for us at all."....and yet on the other hand you say ask.."Please just drop this.....why make a stink out of this particular issue?".....

The stats are in, and Gingrich lied, and he needs to be called on it.

Perhaps as a Black American, I believe that lying on an entire group of people is simply unacceptable, period....and I will do whatever I can to fight that shit. That's the least that I can do.....and if more of us did the same, we might be in a better place!

so why keep it in the news? yes, it's false now, and odious forever, no argument there.
but if we make a bit of a scandal out of it, in a few months it will become newsworthy when enough people are added that his statement will then be true. so then he can say, golly, i was premature, but i'm right.

i just don't think we get a lot of bang for the buck by attacking gingrinch for being premature with his attack.

if we're going to fight back on this topic, we should fight back on the grounds that it's a vile attack and misplaced as bush is more to blame. but altogether, i don't think this is a winning topic for us and so i'd rather use anti-gangreench bandwidth on more effective topics. the open marriage thing, the "unstable" meme, etc.

Newt knows it's a lie. But it just like when a lawyer says something that is stricken from the record. You can't unring a bell --- and the poor slobs that will vote against their own best interest by voting for him will remember the lie as a fact.

Thanks though for posting the facts.

during Bush’s last year the amount of people receiving EBT tripled and the fact that while Bush inherited a $236 billion surplus from Bill Clinton, Obama inherited a $5 trillion deficit and a recession from Bush.

as well...."More people are on food stamps, but Obama’s policies didn’t contribute to that. The surge is due to a combination of economic problems Obama inherited and longstanding policy changes that expanded access to the program. The policies began under President George W. Bush.
Read more here: http://www.bradenton.com/2012/01/22/3811140/fact-checking-the-gop-presidential.html#storylink=cpy


The rise started long before Obama took office, and accelerated as the nation was plunging into the worst economic recession since the Great Depression.

The economic downturn began in December 2007. In the 12 months before Obama was sworn in, 4.4 million were added to the rolls, triple the 1.4 million added in 2007.

To be sure, Obama is responsible for some portion of the increase since then. The stimulus bill he signed in 2009 increased benefit levels, making the program more attractive. A family of four saw an increase of $80 per month, for example. That increase remains in effect and is not set to expire until late next year, according to USDA spokeswoman Jean Daniel.

The stimulus also made more people eligible. Able-bodied jobless adults without dependents could get benefits for longer than three months. That special easing of eligibility also expired on Sept. 30, 2010. Spokeswoman Daniel told us that 46 states have been able to continue the longer benefit period under special waivers granted because of high unemployment. Previously, able-bodied adults without dependents could collect food stamps for only three months out of any three-year period.
http://factcheck.org/2012/01/newts-faulty-food-stamp-claim/

Last edited Tue Jan 24, 2012, 10:29 AM - Edit history (1)

You're not going to gain points from struggling Americans by trying to argue that things aren't as bad for them as someone else says they are, even if that "someone" is Gingrich.

That is a tone deaf political argument in this economy. People have lost their life savings and their middle class standard of living, and they are struggling to maintain food and shelter for their children. They look around them and see a broken, corrupt system; disappearing jobs; and an elite at the top who are taking everything. They are frankly sick of hearing their distress and the scope of the problem denied or minimized in any way by politicians. You will turn them off with this argument, even if it is technically true. They are still suffering and angry about what is happening to their country and their lives, and they will not be encouraged to trust you to fix these problems if the argument they hear from you is that the other guy is lying when he says how bad things are.

What people want to hear is an acknowledgement of the depth of the distress, paired with concrete, bold, and decisive actions showing that you, more than the other guy, are deadly serious about FIXING what is wrong in a fundamental, systemic way, and punishing the thieves who did this to all of us.

of food stamps, while calling this President "The Food Stamp" president, and saying that the youth (read that Black youth) should be janitors being paid under the minimum wage....I'm gonna pull out the stats and spread them, and I don't give a fuck if some don't think it is "helpful" (whatever that really means) since it is all relative anyways.

You can believe that what we are talking about here is all about the economy if you want....because I know better. Newt's references are racial and nothing but....both when he stereotypes Black people as well as when he emphasize that this is the Black President who likes giving out food stamps.

So you go ahead and do what you do in the realm of politics,
and I'll do what I do...cause I won't be allowing a White man who is running for President and who wants White America to blame Black Americans for 30 years of White men’s policies that has kept 99% of White People poor to get away with making racist ass comments.
You may not care that much....and so be it!

I'm just dieing to see when Newt stands in front of an NAACP crowd the tell them how they can stop Settling for Food Stamps and start Demanding Pay-Checks.

Last edited Tue Jan 24, 2012, 07:48 PM - Edit history (1)

And you'll see quite a bit more of the same.

http://www.politifact.com/personalities/newt-gingrich/