Mitt Romney hands Newt Gingrich his head over investments

Don't be fooled by Mitt Romney's "innocent" looks. There's some "fight" in that man, especially over his investments. During the Florida debates when Newt Gingrich tried to raise doubts about investments by Mitt Romney, as shared on CNN.com, the ex-governor gave Gingrich a verbal spanking in front of millions—and Gingrich took it.

File:Mitt Romney 2007 profile portrait.jpg
Photo credit: Steve Jurvetson

During the video, the look in Romney's eyes is unmistakable. He was offended and unwilling to take any more of Gingrich's mud-slinging. The tone in his voice demonstrated he wasn't giving memorized lines provided by a speech-writer. He spoke from his gut, and—by golly—the audience liked it. It was a joy to watch someone neuter the Newt in front of so many.

Accentuating Gingrich's faults, as demonstrated in the South Carolina debates when Newt Gingrich exposed himself as a candidate above questioning, is easy. He seems to believe himself above questions which journalists and Americans want to ask. What Mitt Romney did, though, was even better. He showed himself as willing to face off with a little man who believes himself better than the same questions every other candidate has ever endured. Mitt Romney showed the nation he's willing to fight back.

Come visit me on DonPennington.info.

Ron Paul is Facing Something Less Than a Conspiracy

COMMENTARY | According to The Washington Post's Mention Machine, the media has only mentioned the name Ron Paul 2,821 times - but as of January 17, 2012 - his name has been invoked 266,874 times in general. Still, the headline reads as if it's Mitt Romney's big week. Right. Obviously, Romney may be the media darling, but it's Ron Paul who's the people's candidate-of-choice among the Republicans.

Anybody else also notice it was Ron Paul who received Senator Tom Davis' endorsement? In a powerfully-worded statement on SenatorTomDavis.com, he states "I'm endorsing Ron Paul because enough is enough. Despite this wave of unprecedented government spending, our unemployment rate has remained above 8 percent for the last 34 months and 146.4 million Americans - one out of every two people in this country - are now classified as poor or low-income."

Before he chose to endorse the Texas Congressman, the Senator's endorsement was "vital." Now, conveniently, it's not all that important. Is there anything the Libertarian candidate can win which doesn't immediately get downgraded to unimportant? Has there been a debate, poll or survey where Ron Paul has done well, but another candidate's horn gets tooted? No, not one. Why?

My guess is it's not a conspiracy, in any way. A "conspiracy" would imply some sort of secret plan to engage in criminal behavior. And all of this is not the criminal behavior - the criminal behavior is reserved for after a candidate wins the office. No, this is no criminal conspiracy.

From what I've surmised, the media - every website, newspaper, radio and television station in America - is no longer in the news business. They're now strictly advertising - all advertising, all the time. And while Ron Paul is popular among the voters of the U.S. because he has honesty, consistency and more than one good idea, other candidates simply bought their favor. Mitt "Waffles" Romney is in the pocket of every media outlet he can be. Nothing personal. It's just business.

It's understandable. Every business on Earth must pay their employees, bills and also earn a profit. So, saying and doing what a sponsor says is their job, like it or not. But, has Romney spent enough to guarantee he'll out-shine a candidate who makes all other politicians look bad in comparison? Or, will Ron Paul offering a good plan trump the power of the almighty dollar?

Come visit me on DonPennington.info.

So, exactly when has Mitt Romney been the front-runner? Comments please

I've been following the 2012 election campaign about as close as any other American in the general public. I'm struck by something. Although former Governor Mitt Romney has only won 4 (maybe 5 depending on perspective) out of the 33 straw polls held thus far, the media references him as the “front-runner.” This is odd to me.

On the other hand, I'm seeing two other candidates who seem to be somewhat mopping the floor with Mitt Romney's well-styled hairdo. The first is a guy who seems to come from out of nowhere and claims to espouse a “business-minded” style of managing government. His name is Herman Cain. With 12 straw poll wins under his belt, Cain still faces the challenge of his 9-9-9 plan. Even if you buy his 9.99 special, there are many misgivings among the ever-increasingly Libertarian party-influenced non-Democrats in the “right wing” voting segment of society.

Cain's recent pandering to the religious segment of society is sounding quite a lot like bigotry. (Gay people aren't seeking “gay rights.” They're interested in their “individual rights,” just like anyone else would be – regardless of religious beliefs.) Also, with an ever-increasing segment of society coming out into the light and declaring themselves as atheist or agnostic, the idea of another candidate who wants to inflict their god on the rest of America just seems so...Dominionist. We do not need an American Taliban.

Then there's the Congressman from Texas, Dr. Ron Paul. This is his third shot at the presidency. In spite of a State-influenced media working so hard at “ignoring” someone who they try to claim is irrelevant, he sure does seem to have a knack for garnering contributions, volunteers and passion in his supporters. Ron Paul is promoting a platform which consists of/includes elimination of the I.R.S. As well as the Federal Reserve, a return to basic Constitutional principles and a non-interventionist foreign policy. With 11 solid straw poll wins, one in debate from Arizona (supporters say the online votes should be counted too, giving the doctor a sweeping win), and another in dispute since CNN doesn't seem to want to include him as one of the options, Dr Ron Paul is showing quite well too.

I'd even go so far as to say these three men are running neck and neck. But in now way is Mitt Romney showing as the clear “front-runner” as is so often touted by the main stream press. I just don't see it, and that's not personal bias. It's just the numbers. His supporters may come along to this post and start in with their “but,” and “well I” and I still just can't see where Mitt Romney is the clear front-runner.

Besides, Paul's latest straw poll victory was in Ohio at an incredible 53% of the votes. How many times has it been said the presidency often comes down to who wins Ohio? Paul has an appealing quality of being a sincere, down-to-Earth, non-psychopath – unlike most other candidates. He's business-friendly (something which really upsets American Communists). And, he's no lawyer. For all of the talking heads who try to claim his being irrelevant, he sure was re-elected a lot of times from his district. So, he's also very experienced with how the U.S. Federal Government works.

Okay. That's enough of my horn-tooting for the good doctor. Back to the point, right? Can any of my readers please try to show me where Mitt Romney is actually the front-runner in anything? I'm willing to hear you out with an open mind. I promise to publish comments, even if you show me wrong. I'm not afraid to be wrong, when I am. Mitt Romney isn't the front-runner of Jack Squat.

Come visit me on DonPennington.info.