A good assessment and a decent start. But frankly, I think some things are missing, such as improving schools (I'm not letting that go, since the very people who want "logical, think for yourself" people, can't do it themselves) and revisiting ethics. Not morals, ethics.

But, you have to start somewhere.

Fixing our broken politics
Cal Thomas, syndicated columnist - 03.09.2007
Admit it, you hate politics: the gotcha games in which a quote can be taken out of context and used as a pretext for bashing one

I really hope Gingrich gets in the race, I wish he could win but I know thats wishful thinking. maybe a VP Newt though? He's easily the smartest person in politics in terms of policy and vision.

that said, Democrats will never agree to what he's proposing. Actually debating substance does them no good politically.

GGniner Wrote:I really hope Gingrich gets in the race, I wish he could win but I know thats wishful thinking. maybe a VP Newt though? He's easily the smartest person in politics in terms of policy and vision.

that said, Democrats will never agree to what he's proposing. Actually debating substance does them no good politically.

Because only Republicans debate substance? C'mon. They're both equally bad. As an Independent, I can see both sides, unfortunately.

One thing I would add is that during debates, candidates can't throw out "Facts" that turn out not to be facts, but it's only discovered much later after the TV is off. Many numbers they throw out there, while possibly true, are deceiving, which aren't any better. They sound like freakin' used car salesmen trying to foist a clunker on somebody.

GGniner Wrote:I really hope Gingrich gets in the race, I wish he could win but I know thats wishful thinking. maybe a VP Newt though? He's easily the smartest person in politics in terms of policy and vision.

that said, Democrats will never agree to what he's proposing. Actually debating substance does them no good politically.

Yes so do I. I can't wait to see how the right embrases him after just confessing to adultry today. lmfao If they do embrace him, they are hypocrates.

RobertN Wrote:

GGniner Wrote:I really hope Gingrich gets in the race, I wish he could win but I know thats wishful thinking. maybe a VP Newt though? He's easily the smartest person in politics in terms of policy and vision.

that said, Democrats will never agree to what he's proposing. Actually debating substance does them no good politically.

Yes so do I. I can't wait to see how the right embrases him after just confessing to adultry today. lmfao If they do embrace him, they are hypocrates.

First, please get spellcheck.

Second, how would the right embracing him make them hypocrites? Is it because Clinton had an affair and he was impeached? Last I checked, Newt didn't lie to a grand jury, which is why Clinton was impeached.

dfarr Wrote:

RobertN Wrote:

GGniner Wrote:I really hope Gingrich gets in the race, I wish he could win but I know thats wishful thinking. maybe a VP Newt though? He's easily the smartest person in politics in terms of policy and vision.

that said, Democrats will never agree to what he's proposing. Actually debating substance does them no good politically.

Yes so do I. I can't wait to see how the right embrases him after just confessing to adultry today. lmfao If they do embrace him, they are hypocrates.

First, please get spellcheck.

Second, how would the right embracing him make them hypocrites? Is it because Clinton had an affair and he was impeached? Last I checked, Newt didn't lie to a grand jury, which is why Clinton was impeached.

While you're absolutely right, I think Robert N actually is on to something. Newt probably does have the best vision of any politician today (certainly on the right) yet the conservative Christians who support that side of the political spectrum would be less than pleased to vote for him b/c of the adultry.

NIU007 Wrote:

GGniner Wrote:I really hope Gingrich gets in the race, I wish he could win but I know thats wishful thinking. maybe a VP Newt though? He's easily the smartest person in politics in terms of policy and vision.

that said, Democrats will never agree to what he's proposing. Actually debating substance does them no good politically.

Because only Republicans debate substance? C'mon. They're both equally bad. As an Independent, I can see both sides, unfortunately.

One thing I would add is that during debates, candidates can't throw out "Facts" that turn out not to be facts, but it's only discovered much later after the TV is off. Many numbers they throw out there, while possibly true, are deceiving, which aren't any better. They sound like freakin' used car salesmen trying to foist a clunker on somebody.

I say that because the American public, when the issues are broke down and actually analyzed lean to the right overwhelmingly. the political process blurs that, alot.

dfarr Wrote:

RobertN Wrote:

GGniner Wrote:I really hope Gingrich gets in the race, I wish he could win but I know thats wishful thinking. maybe a VP Newt though? He's easily the smartest person in politics in terms of policy and vision.

that said, Democrats will never agree to what he's proposing. Actually debating substance does them no good politically.

Yes so do I. I can't wait to see how the right embrases him after just confessing to adultry today. lmfao If they do embrace him, they are hypocrates.

First, please get spellcheck.

Second, how would the right embracing him make them hypocrites? Is it because Clinton had an affair and he was impeached? Last I checked, Newt didn't lie to a grand jury, which is why Clinton was impeached.

Oh, yes. Lying to a grand jury in a case where there was no underlying crime... that is a most unfortunate occurrence. I agree... we can't show any tolerance to that kind of behavior.

GGniner Wrote:

NIU007 Wrote:

GGniner Wrote:I really hope Gingrich gets in the race, I wish he could win but I know thats wishful thinking. maybe a VP Newt though? He's easily the smartest person in politics in terms of policy and vision.

that said, Democrats will never agree to what he's proposing. Actually debating substance does them no good politically.

Because only Republicans debate substance? C'mon. They're both equally bad. As an Independent, I can see both sides, unfortunately.

One thing I would add is that during debates, candidates can't throw out "Facts" that turn out not to be facts, but it's only discovered much later after the TV is off. Many numbers they throw out there, while possibly true, are deceiving, which aren't any better. They sound like freakin' used car salesmen trying to foist a clunker on somebody.

I say that because the American public, when the issues are broke down and actually analyzed lean to the right overwhelmingly. the political process blurs that, alot.

Liberals say the same thing.