Showing posts with label newt gingrich. Show all posts
Showing posts with label newt gingrich. Show all posts

Saturday, March 24, 2012

2 weeks of humor - whoops forgot to post this

Hey Gang here is two weeks of humor, I mean not two weeks worth of reading, I mean two weeks of humor I saved up, I mean you know two weeks of jokes, you know I like my humor, its all the right size. 


Is Mitt worried?  Not at all.  Mitt had this to say.... People are still getting to know me, if I don't get the nomination this year I am confident by the year 2032 I will.  It just takes perseverance.
 
I have come up with many nicknames suitable for Romney.  The newest stems from all the super pac money he has. Mitts newest name is.... Pac-man.

People thought it was a dumb move to hold a speech for Romney inside such a huge stadium in Detroit that was mostly empty when he talked.  Romney's handlers knew exactly what they were doing, they wanted to make sure they had enough room for Mitt's ego.

Mitt said he was glad to be in Michigan where all the trees are the right size.  Someone told me that has to be code language.  Well I figured it out.  It's socialism talk.  One size fits all.  That's pretty bad when a GOP candidate talks about trees being the right size you would expect that from the Democratic or Green Party.

Newt said you can't mount a gun rack on a Chevy Volt and Obama said but you can mount a stun gun.

Obama recently was singing the blues in the East Room of the White House.  Its the first time he has connected with the voting public who have been singing the blues since he got elected. 

 They keep talking about the bridge to no where, it seems like poor Newt is traveling on it because he is going no where.

Contraception was admitted to the recent transportation bill.  I guess they are trying to prevent accidents.

Mitt once again had to explain his flip flop this time about the Blunt Amendment.  He said...
I got confused when I said I was against when it I am actually for it.   I got confused because I thought the blunt amendment had to do with politicians being blunt, I mean I am all for being honest but not blunt, I mean do we need a blunt amendment, I mean its a good thing to be blunt but not all the time but then I found out it had to do with contraception and then I thought being blunt would be good having to be blunt and telling someone I want sex only, that's a good blunt, I mean I like the blunt amendment I really do, in fact I like amendments in Washington DC they are all the right size.

    Serious though folks I really honestly do feel Mitt would be good for this country.  Both parties would be happy.  The Dems can have him on the odd numbered days and the Repubs can have him on the even number.  There will be no more explaining his flip flops, everyone will be happy.

HEY which side of the bed does Mitt wake up on?    BOTH!!!


                                         Carey Masci

Wednesday, December 14, 2011

just a few intersting tidbits

Hey Gang,
I think we are all still in disbelief that Herman Cain dropped out. I thought for sure he was going to say I decided to take my talents and join Dwayne Wade in South Beach.

The public just never fails to amaze me. When Cain's supposed 13 year affair leaked out many of his supporters went to Gingrich who has had as many affairs if not more than Cain.

Obama's new way to tally unemployment is if a person after three months has not found work it is assumed he doesn't want a job and taken off the unemployment list. By doing it this way unemployment will be well below -2% by mid 2012.

Mitt Romney is questioning Newt Gingrich on issues of character. Newt went from being a Lutheran, to Baptist to now being Catholic. Unlike Mitt who has believed in one religion his whole life, even if its a false religion.

Awww I can't help but bring up this old dirt on Mitt, remember when he said he marched with Martin Luther King Jr.? No punch line, I still think its funny.

Perry finally remembered the departments he would cut, but now a new problem, he can't remember why he would cut them.

Who wants to make a $10,000.00 bet? I bet Mitt Romney never read his own book.

Mitt as pres would make an excellent negotiator. I can see him now, I bet you $10,000 Iran has nukes.

That's it for this round.
Carey Masci

Sunday, June 19, 2011

My thoughts on the second Republican presidential TV debate on CNN

My thoughts on the second Republican presidential TV debate on CNN.

First I like to bring up the moderator was extremely annoying with his grunts trying to hurry up the candidates he wanted to rush. Secondly, those lame little questions - deep dish or thin crust pizza. Who cares. The dumbest question by John King was when he said that Cain wanted to ask certain questions to Muslims but not to Christians or Jews. Why was that so hard for John to understand? Who are we at war with? Newt finally spoke up on this issue explained why and put the question to rest. And lastly the last few minutes of the debate was stupid and a waste of time.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

One candidate that gets no review other than my thoughts on him, is Mitt Romney. Everything from Mitt's placement in center, the longer time given to answer questions and it even seemed he got more questions than the others is set up for him to take the prize.
Mitt has changed his stance and opinion on a quite a few issues. Mitt at one time said he would do more for the gay agenda than Teddy Kennedy but now he is for a Constitutional Amendment that defines marriage as between a man and woman only. He seems too packaged, too prepared and will say anything to get elected. Enough on him. Don't trust him.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The candidate I was surprised to see finally given recognition was Ron Paul. Usually they have him placed on the flank and he is hardly ever shown. He has worked his way into the lime light or maybe I should say his supporters got him there. Either way its good to see. He hasn't wavered in his views or opinions.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I was glad that the issue of an amendment defining marriage was raised. Santorum, Bachman, Pawlenty, Romney and Newt were for it and gave excellent reasons why. Paul blurted out his answer but I couldn't understand it, still don't know if he would support the amendment or not.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Pawlenty had some good moments but at times sounded to much like a politician with little substance. His recognition of the vet who had asked a question had no merit, Mitt had just thanked the same person. To politician like, just not needed, seemed to canned.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Gingrich's intelligence and grasp of issues was superb, as was Paul's knowledge.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
So who was the winner? I thought four came out on top. These four looked presidential and gave solid answers. In no particular order they were Gingrich, Bachman, Santorum and Paul. Cain was also very close in the running.

Looking at this crop of candidates I don't find much weakness. I like this field of candidates way better than the ones who ran in '08. And compared to what the Dems are offering this is a far more moral and qualified group. Pick one and we should be OK.


Santorum gave the key sentence in the debate when he said ..you need to look at the authenticity of a candidate and looking at their record over time of what they fought for.
And that's where we come in. If we expect this country to turn around we best research each candidate to insure we get the right person elected as its up to us to educate and inform people of who is the correct choice because if we leave it up to the media they will give us another Obama or an unstable moderate that America may never recover from.

Carey Masci

Monday, November 01, 2010

A FOLLOW UP message from Terry - 61 years Young

Carey,

My quote of “vote the incumbents out.” was an extreme generalization for my friends.

After sitting with the gang (ALL BABY BOOMERS) and trying to talk Politics, it seemed much simpler (for THEM) to ask all to just “vote the incumbents out”.  IF I convinced them to even Vote at all next Tuesday.

Carey, you ARE correct in that we DO have a few Incumbents that deserve a second try.  It is just there are too many Politics As Usual heads on the entire Team in Washington that (in the words from the movie “Charley Wilson’s War”) …get to vote YES a lot!”  It seems in my view, the simpler of directions for my friends to be heard and help make the change.

I grew up a Democrat. UAW member, then with the Teamsters. Kennedy was Assassinated on my 14th Birthday.

I look at my children and see how they suffer today, but they try to keep a straight face. Their smiles are worn and few.

Disillusioned I voted for Perot. I now support the Republicans AND the T Party.

IF Newt Gingrich runs in 2012 HE is my man of choice.
Next Tuesday we need to set the stage for his arrival.
Thanks
TB