Are these crackers delusional or can they actual defeat the President?
Does Haley Barbour Or Newt Gingrich Have Any Chance Of Winning Against Obama?
- Thread starter thoughtone
- Start date
Neither of those two stand a chance and they both know it, that's why neither has formally announced or is even on pace to. Barbour would have had a hard time anyway, being from Mississippi and having that deep, deep Southern accent. But his "race relations weren't that bad in my hometown" comment and his revisionist remembering of his hometown White Citizens' Council killed any hopes he had.
Gingrich is a non-starter but he makes a ton of money pretending he might run, same as Sarah Palin.
Gingrich is a non-starter but he makes a ton of money pretending he might run, same as Sarah Palin.
Just Newt's past? I think Barbour's comments are far more damaging.
source: Huffington Post
<SCRIPT type=text/javascript> var extra_view = false; if (document.referrer != '' && typeof(document.referrer) == 'string') { if (document.referrer.indexOf(window.location.hostname) != -1 && document.referrer.indexOf(window.location.pathname) != -1) { extra_view = true; } } var stats_project_image_src = "http://entry-stats.huffpost.com/?829014&" + Math.random().toString(16).replace('0.','') + '&'; if (document.referrer != '') { stats_project_image_src += escape(document.referrer); } stats_project_image_src += '&' + extra_view.toString(); document.write('
Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour's memory of a 1962 event in which he claimed he and some friends had gone to hear Martin Luther King Jr. speak in his hometown of Yazoo City, Miss., was called into question this weekend, in a report by the Clarion Ledger.
"We wanted to hear him speak," Barbour told the Weekly Standard of King in a December interview that stirred controversy due to his claim that the civil rights era wasn't "that bad" in Mississippi. "The truth is, we couldn't hear very well. We were sort of out there on the periphery. We just sat on our cars, watching the girls, talking, doing what boys do. We paid more attention to the girls than to King."
The new examination by the Clarion Ledger, however, raises questions about the veracity of Barbour's account:
A search of the King Papers at the Martin Luther King Jr. Research and Education Institute and the papers of David Garrow, author of the definitive biography on King, Bearing the Cross, failed to find evidence King spoke in Yazoo City in 1962.
Despite David Garrow's inability to find any evidence of King speaking in Yazoo City, he was unwilling to charge the governor with intentionally misstating history."It's fundamentally unfair of people to gang up on Barbour because he's got some fuzzy memory of an event from 40-plus years ago that he didn't particularly focus on at the time," Garrow told the Ledger.
Barbour's campaign has maintained to the Ledger that the governor indeed "saw Dr. King in Yazoo City," but the best evidence the newspaper could find of a King appearance in the town was from the Yazoo Herald on June 23, 1966:
"Martin Luther King was expected in Yazoo City Tuesday and Wednesday, but made no public appearance," the paper reported at the time. "It was learned later that he did meet in secret with some of the marchers, presumably to plan strategy."
In a Republican primary, Newt's sorted past hurts him more than Barbour's comments do him.
Last edited:
Just Newt's past? I think Barbour's comments are far more damaging.
source: Huffington Post
<SCRIPT type=text/javascript> var extra_view = false; if (document.referrer != '' && typeof(document.referrer) == 'string') { if (document.referrer.indexOf(window.location.hostname) != -1 && document.referrer.indexOf(window.location.pathname) != -1) { extra_view = true; } } var stats_project_image_src = "http://entry-stats.huffpost.com/?829014&" + Math.random().toString(16).replace('0.','') + '&'; if (document.referrer != '') { stats_project_image_src += escape(document.referrer); } stats_project_image_src += '&' + extra_view.toString(); document.write(''); // SNP tracking SNProject.track('829014','entry_view',0); ViewTracker.VerticalType = "2"; ViewTracker.AddView(); </SCRIPT>
Haley Barbour Has 'Fuzzy Memory' Of MLK Speech, Says Historian
Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour's memory of a 1962 event in which he claimed he and some friends had gone to hear Martin Luther King Jr. speak in his hometown of Yazoo City, Miss., was called into question this weekend, in a report by the Clarion Ledger.
"We wanted to hear him speak," Barbour told the Weekly Standard of King in a December interview that stirred controversy due to his claim that the civil rights era wasn't "that bad" in Mississippi. "The truth is, we couldn't hear very well. We were sort of out there on the periphery. We just sat on our cars, watching the girls, talking, doing what boys do. We paid more attention to the girls than to King."
The new examination by the Clarion Ledger, however, raises questions about the veracity of Barbour's account:
A search of the King Papers at the Martin Luther King Jr. Research and Education Institute and the papers of David Garrow, author of the definitive biography on King, Bearing the Cross, failed to find evidence King spoke in Yazoo City in 1962.Despite David Garrow's inability to find any evidence of King speaking in Yazoo City, he was unwilling to charge the governor with intentionally misstating history.
"It's fundamentally unfair of people to gang up on Barbour because he's got some fuzzy memory of an event from 40-plus years ago that he didn't particularly focus on at the time," Garrow told the Ledger.
Barbour's campaign has maintained to the Ledger that the governor indeed "saw Dr. King in Yazoo City," but the best evidence the newspaper could find of a King appearance in the town was from the Yazoo Herald on June 23, 1966:
"Martin Luther King was expected in Yazoo City Tuesday and Wednesday, but made no public appearance," the paper reported at the time. "It was learned later that he did meet in secret with some of the marchers, presumably to plan strategy."
Well I'll be clear then. Anyone who ran the last time hell no. I like the new cats Indiana's Gov, Allen West or Chris Christie. Anyone else would be another term for Obama. At this time we need leadership centered around fiscal responsibility.
Dude don't go there with the KKK, civil rights angle. Besides the picture of Newt and Barbour, It was a racist Bull Connor (Democrat) that turned the dogs on our people.
George Wallace another democrat stood at the doors of the University of Mississippi. The KKK was a political branch of the democratic party.
Pick up a book a read rather than posting pictures of subject matters you obviously know absolutely nothing about.
Then you have the nerve to have Brother X as an avatar. Do a little research and see what he says about democrats
<font size="3">
Vivian Malone Jones's effort to enroll at the University of Alabama led to George Wallace's infamous "stand in the schoolhouse door" in 1963. </span>
<font size="5">
<SPAN style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffff00">"you obviously know absolutely nothing"</span>
</font size>
-
Does it really matter? ? ?
We still have the Patriot Act
FISA will still be in place
NAFTA, CAFTA, WTO will still be in place
We will still be occupying Iraq
Further de-industrialization of the nation will continue
BERNANKE WILL STILL BE PRINTING THE MONEY TO PAY THE BILLS
AND WALL STREET WILL STILL BE DRUNK
I would expect you to fail to see the difference between these neo-confederates and President Obama.
The magnitude of some peeps obliviousness is astonishing.
The entire existence of the United States of America is less than a quarter millennium; a blip when compared to a country like China with their 4,000 year continuous history.
Despite America’s short presence on the world stage, a plurality of its citizens have engaged in cognitive dissonance when confronted with the reality of America history, versus the raison d'être stated in its founding documents.
America’s founding papers (The Declaration Of Independence) says ‘We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness”.
America’s Constitution says “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves”.
The reality of America’s 235 years history is; Genocide against “Native Americans”, Human Bondage (Slavery), Monopoly Class-Based Predatory Capitalism, 90 Years of “Jim Crow” (Apartheid) post Slavery - this entire wretched history is enveloped in the axiom of “White Supremacy”.
W.E.B. DuBois the first Black man to graduate from America’s oldest institution of higher learning Harvard said “The problem of the twentieth century is the problem of the color-line”. He didn’t have to mention the nineteenth, eighteenth or seventeenth centuries, the blood of our Black ancestors was still fresh on the soil.
It’s about “White Supremacy” not party labels, not religious affiliation.
WHITE SUPREMACY is what its all about.
Malcolm X spoke about this in The Ballot or the Bullet speech of 1964
Download the audio HERE (Right-Click with your mouse to download to your computer).
Newt Gingrich, Haley Barbour, Bill Clinton, Jimmy Carter are all sons of the apartheid South. They were there for the dogs, the fire hoses, the Black church bombings, the terrorism and murder inflicted upon thousands of Black men, women and children. They all saw, heard and felt AmeriKKKan apartheid; they lived it.
Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter have moved forward and away from the apartheid past.
<div><iframe height="339" width="425" src="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22425001/vp/32867107#32867107" frameborder="0" scrolling="no"></iframe><p style="font-size:11px; font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; color: #999; margin-top: 5px; background: transparent; text-align: center; width: 425px;">Visit msnbc.com for <a style="text-decoration:none !important; border-bottom: 1px dotted #999 !important; font-weight:normal !important; height: 13px; color:#5799DB !important;" href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com">Breaking News</a></p></div>
Newt Gingrich and Haley Barbour are still willfully stuck in apartheid America. That is why they are pictured with the images of apartheid AmeriKKKa, the dogs, the Klan etc. Gingrich and Barbour have never psychically left the 'Old South'. They defend the confederate flag, civil war reenactments, plantation life reenactments etc.
Gingrich had to recant his racist blast against Justice Sonia Sotomayor when he realized the civilized world was looking at him and wondering ‘does this guy realize its 2009 and not 1949’?
Gingrich once again proved he hasn’t evolved from apartheid America when he a ‘self-proclaimed’ scholar said that President “Obama's perspective on the world is factually insane and only make sense when it's understood that he has a Kenyan, ‘anti-colonial’ attitude”. Gingrich is still stuck in apartheid AmeriKKKa.
As far as Haley Barbour goes, he doesn’t even try to hide his love for the “Old South”, the Confederacy, the Klan. His good friend former senator Trent Lott spoke for Barbour when he said in 2002 "I want to say this about my state (Mississippi) When Strom Thurmond ran for president, we voted for him. We're proud of it. And if the rest of the country had followed our lead, we wouldn't have had all these problems over all these years, either,"
About 27% to 30% of white Americans are still stuck in apartheid AmeriKKKa. The good news is that they’ll soon be dead including the Gingrich’s and the Barbour’s and the Lott’s.
<hr noshade color="#ff0000" size="8"></hr>
Last edited:
Seriously. West. Seriously.
Daniels could be a real contender but it's unlikely he would win.
Straight out...
<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="480" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/x1L8y-MX3pg" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="480" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/x1L8y-MX3pg" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
As bad as it has been...
as desperate as it has gotten...
as hopeless as it seems...
I do not see anyone beating Obama right now.
The Republicans are doing a great job of self-destructing.
It shows how weak the leadership is in the United States and how hopeless the baby boomers are.
Please, no more baby boomer Presidents! They've done enough damage as it is (those irresponsible, spoiled, entitled, sleazy scumbags).
as desperate as it has gotten...
as hopeless as it seems...
I do not see anyone beating Obama right now.
The Republicans are doing a great job of self-destructing.
It shows how weak the leadership is in the United States and how hopeless the baby boomers are.
Please, no more baby boomer Presidents! They've done enough damage as it is (those irresponsible, spoiled, entitled, sleazy scumbags).
source: Think Progress
Gingrich’s Twenty Years Of Global Warming Flip-Flops »
Newt Gingrich really doesn’t like it when Barack Obama takes his advice. It’s not just true of intervention with Libya — it’s also the case with fighting global warming pollution. In short, Newt was for carbon cap and trade, until Obama became president:
FLIP
1989: Rep. Newt Gingrich (R-GA) co-sponsors the ambitious Global Warming Prevention Act (H.R. 1078), which finds that “the Earth’s atmosphere is being changed at an unprecedented rate by pollutants resulting from human activities, inefficient and wasteful fossil fuel use, and the effects of rapid population growth in many regions,” that “global warming imperils human health and well-being” and calls for policies “to reduce world emissions of carbon dioxide by at least 20 percent from 1988 levels by 2000.” The legislation recognizes that global warming is a “major threat to political stability, international security, and economic prosperity.” [H.R. 1078, 6/15/1989]
FLOP
More »« Less
<!-- post updates would go here in theory -->
<!-- end #entryContent -->
Gingrich tried to explain his incoherent stances by telling Van Susteren that he is merely responding to what Obama does. “I was responding in each case to changes in Obama’s positon,” he said last night. Indeed, no matter what Obama does, Gingrich will be sure to oppose it — even if he supported that exact policy two weeks ago.
<!-- post updates would go here in theory -->
<!-- end #entryContent -->
Gingrich’s Twenty Years Of Global Warming Flip-Flops »
February 15, 2007: “I think if you have mandatory carbon caps combined with a trading system, much like we did with sulfur, and if you have a tax-incentive program for investing in the solutions, that there’s a package there that’s very, very good. And frankly, it’s something I would strongly support.” [Frontline, 2/15/07]
April 4, 2009: “And now, in 2009, instead of making energy cheaper—which would help create jobs and save Americans money—President Obama wants to impose a cap-and-trade regime. Such a plan would have the effect of an across-the-board energy tax on every American. That will make our artificial energy crisis even worse—and raising taxes during a deep economic recession will only accelerate American job losses.” [Newsweek, 4/4/09]
Gingrich’s full record on global warming is a series of epic flip-flops over more than two decades, with his positions mostly coinciding with whether the party holding the presidency is a Republican or a Democrat. Since 1989, when Gingrich supported aggressive climate action against “wasteful fossil fuel use,” until today, as he proposes abolishing the Environmental Protection Agency, the level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has risen from 353 ppm to 391 ppm (from 26 percent above pre-industrial levels to 40 percent above), and the five-year global mean temperature anomaly has nearly doubled from 0.3°C to 0.56°C.April 4, 2009: “And now, in 2009, instead of making energy cheaper—which would help create jobs and save Americans money—President Obama wants to impose a cap-and-trade regime. Such a plan would have the effect of an across-the-board energy tax on every American. That will make our artificial energy crisis even worse—and raising taxes during a deep economic recession will only accelerate American job losses.” [Newsweek, 4/4/09]
FLIP
1989: Rep. Newt Gingrich (R-GA) co-sponsors the ambitious Global Warming Prevention Act (H.R. 1078), which finds that “the Earth’s atmosphere is being changed at an unprecedented rate by pollutants resulting from human activities, inefficient and wasteful fossil fuel use, and the effects of rapid population growth in many regions,” that “global warming imperils human health and well-being” and calls for policies “to reduce world emissions of carbon dioxide by at least 20 percent from 1988 levels by 2000.” The legislation recognizes that global warming is a “major threat to political stability, international security, and economic prosperity.” [H.R. 1078, 6/15/1989]
FLOP
1992: Gingrich calls the environmental proposals in Al Gore’s book Earth in Balance “devastatingly threatening to most American pocketbooks and jobs.” [National Journal, 9/5/92]
1995: Gingrich’s budget shuts down climate action, killing the U.S. Congress Office of Technology Assessment, NASA’s Mission to Planet Earth program, and NOAA global warming research. Carl Sagan asks, “Is it wise to close our eyes to a possibly serious danger to the planetary environment so as not to offend such companies and those members of Congress whose reelection campaigns they support?” [Los Angeles Times, 7/16/95]
1996: At a speech for the Detroit Economic Club, Gingrich mocks “Al Gore’s global warming,” citing “the largest snowstorm in New York City’s history”: “We were in the middle of budget negotiations; the football games were coming up and we noticed on the weather channel that an early symptom of Al Gore’s global warming was coming to the East Coast. And it does make you wonder sometimes, doesn’t it, how theoretical statisticians in the middle of the largest snowstorm in New York City’s history could stand there and say, ‘I don’t care what it’s doing. It’s going to get very hot soon.’” [FDCH Political Transcripts, 1/16/96]
1995: Gingrich’s budget shuts down climate action, killing the U.S. Congress Office of Technology Assessment, NASA’s Mission to Planet Earth program, and NOAA global warming research. Carl Sagan asks, “Is it wise to close our eyes to a possibly serious danger to the planetary environment so as not to offend such companies and those members of Congress whose reelection campaigns they support?” [Los Angeles Times, 7/16/95]
1996: At a speech for the Detroit Economic Club, Gingrich mocks “Al Gore’s global warming,” citing “the largest snowstorm in New York City’s history”: “We were in the middle of budget negotiations; the football games were coming up and we noticed on the weather channel that an early symptom of Al Gore’s global warming was coming to the East Coast. And it does make you wonder sometimes, doesn’t it, how theoretical statisticians in the middle of the largest snowstorm in New York City’s history could stand there and say, ‘I don’t care what it’s doing. It’s going to get very hot soon.’” [FDCH Political Transcripts, 1/16/96]
More »« Less
<!-- post updates would go here in theory -->
<!-- end #entryContent -->
- <IFRAME title="YouTube video player" height=260 src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/alCfCrBjMlA" frameBorder=0 width=320 allowfullscreen></IFRAME>
Gingrich tried to explain his incoherent stances by telling Van Susteren that he is merely responding to what Obama does. “I was responding in each case to changes in Obama’s positon,” he said last night. Indeed, no matter what Obama does, Gingrich will be sure to oppose it — even if he supported that exact policy two weeks ago.
<!-- post updates would go here in theory -->
<!-- end #entryContent -->
source: Think Progress
ThinkProgress Confronts Gingrich In Iowa Over Libya Flip-Flop; Newt Digs In: ‘I Didn’t Flip-Flop’
ThinkProgress filed this report from West Des Moines, IA.
On Wednesday, ThinkProgress broke the story of presidential aspirant Newt Gingrich’s brazen flip-flop concerning the American response to the crisis in Libya. After our article was published, Gingrich’s campaign offered one incoherent and contradictory response after another, even committing another flip-flop last night on Fox News in the process. The flap earned Gingrich a “full flop” from the non-partisan PolitiFact’s Truth-o-Meter.
ThinkProgress confronted the former House Speaker over his evolving position on Libya at an event in Iowa today. Gingrich stuck to his guns, declaring that it was “inaccurate” of PolitiFact to say he had flip-flopped on Libya. When asked to respond to his own 2004 declaration that “you can’t flip-flop and be commander-in-chief,” Gingrich brushed off his own standard, maintaining that if people “look at what I actually said[,] they’ll find I didn’t flip-flop”:
<CENTER><IFRAME title="YouTube video player" height=260 src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/rE5Pn0swowE" frameBorder=0 width=320 allowfullscreen></IFRAME></CENTER>
If you take a look at “what he actually said,” you’ll find that Newt has flip-flopped not once, but twice. Watch them both:
<CENTER><IFRAME title="YouTube video player" height=200 src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/RiXPLmbrefI" frameBorder=0 width=220 allowfullscreen></IFRAME><IFRAME title="YouTube video player" height=200 src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/alCfCrBjMlA" frameBorder=0 width=220 allowfullscreen></IFRAME></CENTER>
<!-- post updates would go here in theory -->
<!-- end #entryContent -->
ThinkProgress Confronts Gingrich In Iowa Over Libya Flip-Flop; Newt Digs In: ‘I Didn’t Flip-Flop’
ThinkProgress filed this report from West Des Moines, IA.
On Wednesday, ThinkProgress broke the story of presidential aspirant Newt Gingrich’s brazen flip-flop concerning the American response to the crisis in Libya. After our article was published, Gingrich’s campaign offered one incoherent and contradictory response after another, even committing another flip-flop last night on Fox News in the process. The flap earned Gingrich a “full flop” from the non-partisan PolitiFact’s Truth-o-Meter.ThinkProgress confronted the former House Speaker over his evolving position on Libya at an event in Iowa today. Gingrich stuck to his guns, declaring that it was “inaccurate” of PolitiFact to say he had flip-flopped on Libya. When asked to respond to his own 2004 declaration that “you can’t flip-flop and be commander-in-chief,” Gingrich brushed off his own standard, maintaining that if people “look at what I actually said[,] they’ll find I didn’t flip-flop”:
KEYES: Is it possible to get your thoughts real quick on the Libya situation? I know that PolitiFact said that it was a total, a “full flip-flop.” What’s your response to that?
GINGRICH: It’s inaccurate. I have responded since the middle of February to this situation as it changed. And obviously as the facts change the analysis changes. I’ve consistently worked through exactly where we were at any given moment.
KEYES: I know in 2004 you were quoted as saying that “you can’t flip-flop and be commander-in-chief.” What would you say to critics who would point to that?
GINGRICH: I would say that they should look at what I actually said and they’ll find I didn’t flip-flop.
Watch it:GINGRICH: It’s inaccurate. I have responded since the middle of February to this situation as it changed. And obviously as the facts change the analysis changes. I’ve consistently worked through exactly where we were at any given moment.
KEYES: I know in 2004 you were quoted as saying that “you can’t flip-flop and be commander-in-chief.” What would you say to critics who would point to that?
GINGRICH: I would say that they should look at what I actually said and they’ll find I didn’t flip-flop.
<CENTER><IFRAME title="YouTube video player" height=260 src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/rE5Pn0swowE" frameBorder=0 width=320 allowfullscreen></IFRAME></CENTER>
If you take a look at “what he actually said,” you’ll find that Newt has flip-flopped not once, but twice. Watch them both:
<CENTER><IFRAME title="YouTube video player" height=200 src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/RiXPLmbrefI" frameBorder=0 width=220 allowfullscreen></IFRAME><IFRAME title="YouTube video player" height=200 src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/alCfCrBjMlA" frameBorder=0 width=220 allowfullscreen></IFRAME></CENTER>
<!-- post updates would go here in theory -->
<!-- end #entryContent -->
Would the one person that voted that Barbour would have a legitimate chance at the presidency please expose yourself!
source: Governor Barbour.com
April 25, 2011
"I will not be a candidate for president next year. This has been a difficult, personal decision, and I am very grateful to my family for their total support of my going forward, had that been what I decided.
"Hundreds of people have encouraged me to run and offered both to give and raise money for a presidential campaign. Many volunteers have organized events in support of my pursuing the race. Some have dedicated virtually full time to setting up preliminary organizations in critical, early states and to helping plan what has been several months of intensive activity.
"I greatly appreciate each and every one of them and all their outstanding efforts. If I have disappointed any of them in this decision, I sincerely regret it.
"A candidate for president today is embracing a ten-year commitment to an all-consuming effort, to the virtual exclusion of all else. His (or her) supporters expect and deserve no less than absolute fire in the belly from their candidate. I cannot offer that with certainty, and total certainty is required.
"This decision means I will continue my job as Governor of Mississippi, my role in the Republican Governors Association and my efforts to elect a new Republican president in 2012, as the stakes for the nation require that effort to be successful."
<!-- InstanceEndEditable -->
source: Governor Barbour.com
April 25, 2011
STATEMENT OF GOV. BARBOUR
"I will not be a candidate for president next year. This has been a difficult, personal decision, and I am very grateful to my family for their total support of my going forward, had that been what I decided.
"Hundreds of people have encouraged me to run and offered both to give and raise money for a presidential campaign. Many volunteers have organized events in support of my pursuing the race. Some have dedicated virtually full time to setting up preliminary organizations in critical, early states and to helping plan what has been several months of intensive activity.
"I greatly appreciate each and every one of them and all their outstanding efforts. If I have disappointed any of them in this decision, I sincerely regret it.
"A candidate for president today is embracing a ten-year commitment to an all-consuming effort, to the virtual exclusion of all else. His (or her) supporters expect and deserve no less than absolute fire in the belly from their candidate. I cannot offer that with certainty, and total certainty is required.
"This decision means I will continue my job as Governor of Mississippi, my role in the Republican Governors Association and my efforts to elect a new Republican president in 2012, as the stakes for the nation require that effort to be successful."
<!-- InstanceEndEditable -->
Would the one person that voted that Barbour would have a legitimate chance at the presidency please expose yourself!
source: Governor Barbour.com
April 25, 2011
STATEMENT OF GOV. BARBOUR
<SPAN style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffff00">"I will not be a candidate for president next year. This has been a difficult, personal decision</span>, and I am very grateful to my family for their total support of my going forward, had that been what I decided.
"Hundreds of people have encouraged me to run and offered both to give and raise money for a presidential campaign. Many volunteers have organized events in support of my pursuing the race. Some have dedicated virtually full time to setting up preliminary organizations in critical, early states and to helping plan what has been several months of intensive activity.
"I greatly appreciate each and every one of them and all their outstanding efforts. If I have disappointed any of them in this decision, I sincerely regret it.
"A candidate for president today is embracing a ten-year commitment to an all-consuming effort, to the virtual exclusion of all else. His (or her) supporters expect and deserve no less than absolute fire in the belly from their candidate. I cannot offer that with certainty, and total certainty is required.
"This decision means I will continue my job as Governor of Mississippi, my role in the Republican Governors Association and my efforts to elect a new Republican president in 2012, as the stakes for the nation require that effort to be successful."
<!-- InstanceEndEditable -->
And now, the other one bites the dust ???
At least 16 of the former lawmaker’s advisers, including all of his
senior campaign aides, departed the fledgling operation in a major
and potentially devastating shake-up as Newt Gingrich’s campaign
for the 2012 Republican presidential <SPAN style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffff00">nomination imploded on Thursday</span>
High command quits Gingrich campaign
<iframe src="http://videos.mediaite.com/embed/player/?layout=&playlist_cid=&media_type=video&content=PDB9FN1F9X0GXVTY&read_more=1&widget_type_cid=svp" width="420" height="421" frameborder="0" marginheight="0" marginwidth="0" scrolling="no" allowtransparency="true"></iframe>
BUMP
Similar threads
