Image 01 Image 03

Various “it’s all falling apart” things

Various “it’s all falling apart” things

Here are some things going on:


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


The Hubbert Peak Theory of Rock, or, Why We’re All Out of Good Songs
(i.e. the Correlation of Rock Music Quality vs US Oil Production)
There is no information as to which is the leading of lagging indicator.

the obama interview was a disgrace. the cornfields of iowa have less strawmen.

Confirmed, Glenn Beck is Obama’s kamikaze pilot.

Wow… just wow…

Bye Beck, and thanks for the memories.

“Newt’s first tactical error, getting in the mud with Romney, who can afford more mud than Newt. Stick to what has worked so far, and let Romney sink in his campaign’s own negativity.”

See, Mr. Jacobson, we DO agree on something. If Newt would stick to being “Uncle Newt,” he’d be very hard to beat in the primary.

But he. just. can’t. do. it. because he is undisciplined – with plenty of examples in both his private life and in his public life.

Even Barack Obama has more self-control than Newt, which is pretty sad.

    GrumpyOne in reply to Astroman. | December 12, 2011 at 7:43 pm

    Astroman, you have pointed out one of the major reasons, (discipline), that I believe that Newt will implode. The others include the copious excess baggage with which the DNC operatives will have a field day along with stance on illegal immigration.

    I guess that we should be asking ourselves, “Why are we not surprised.”

      Darkstar58 in reply to GrumpyOne. | December 12, 2011 at 8:25 pm

      And see, I see those two things as strengths – not weaknesses.

      Newts policy on immigration is polling in the 50% support range, and is far and away the most popular of each of the candidates on the issue among each of the three voter bases.

      And his so-called baggage is already well known. Someone brings up the baggage again, and it becomes nothing more then a “are you still harping on this” situation. Democrats going back 20 years, to holler about something we already know, in an attempt to smear him, are going to look pitiful with everyone…

      Newt being a bit of a wild-card with his mouth is the only thing that should be considered a negative imo. At the same time though, that mouth is also the thing that makes him a much, much, much stronger candidate – he is willing to speak strongly instead of tip-toe around trying to stay PC at all costs. The verbal slams we all so love in the debates come from the same place those slip-ups may.

      That said, he has handled himself much more adult-like then any other candidate in the field (outside maybe Santorium), so its possible he has been able to reign in his tendency with maturity. (As similar brilliant Conservative minds did as they matured – ie, Churchill, Nixon, Reagan, etc)

Yet another “occupy” article that describes them as “largely peaceful”. Aside from all of the murders, they were largely peaceful except of course for all the rapes, but besides those they were “largely peaceful” other than when they are throwing molotov cocktails at police that is, etc, etc, etc,

Could the legacy media go to more ridiculous extremes to cover for these people? Every time I doubt it, they find a new low…

Tagg? The Romney’s have a young man named Tagg?

And the Left ripped the Palin’s? Betcha’ if Romney is the nominee, the Tagg Team of axlerod and obama will address the issue.

Michael Savage offered Newt 1mil to drop out of the race


It seems the only thing Newt really has to fear is self-righteous idiots with a podium who think they should be the only ones able to decide who we get behind…

What’s next Savage, are we all “sodomite pigs” if we don’t bow to your will?

    Darkstar58 in reply to Darkstar58. | December 12, 2011 at 4:56 pm

    Oh, irony:


    (sorry, Cap-lock issue was his – not mine)

    But its great to know Savage has done this foolish action off the ever-so-strong issue of “electability” and the Democrats/Liberals narrative of Romney being the “only serious candidate”… *sigh*

    I have to agree, I’m a Romney fan personally but Newt is a far cry from “unelectable”. Newt has made his mistakes, but if anyone thinks that his past behavior will make all that much of a difference, they do not understand the American people. We get distracted by things that are revealed last minute, but things that have already been out there and are rather diffuse, we don’t pay too much attention to them. I mean, Obama did cocaine, and it was reported every now and then, but because he had long since admitted to it, it was hard for even Fox to make an issue out of it.
    End result, Newt is probably as “electable” as Romney.

Beck’s brain seems to have fried wiring, supporting a 30 year do-nothing Ronulan politician- who has run for president since 1988- driven by crack-case Alex Jones Infowar freakzoids who are as ferociously anti-Isreal as are Obama’s Marxist Proggs.

Hey Beck, the first sign of Progressivism is the Jew-hatred and Ron Paul is a heck of a lot closer to Progressive Obama than Newt Gingrich.

    GrumpyOne in reply to syn. | December 12, 2011 at 8:47 pm

    Quite frankly, I’ve never heard Beck speak cohesively about anything. I don’t know what his attraction is as I have never experienced anything of merit that originated from him.

    Maybe I’m not sophisticated enough…

      Henry Hawkins in reply to GrumpyOne. | December 13, 2011 at 9:01 am

      If you want some insight into what attracts Beck’s fans to him, go to his website, The Blaze, and read the comment section. Good folks, I’m sure, but not among America’s best and brightest.

      I followed a link there for my first visit, to a story about the possibility that scientists had found the Higgs boson, aka ‘the God particle.’ Blaze commenters went absolutely nuts with anti-science, pro-God comments. How dare those scientists try to explain away God with science!

      Every tenth post or so would be from someone who understood the origins of the phrase ‘God particle’. (It came from a book describing the theory supporting the existence of the Higgs boson, and that, if true and real, would go a long way toward Explaining Everything. Accordingly, given that power of explanation, the author labeled it ‘the God particle’. In other words, there was no religious connotation nor intended insult and, in fact, the author was in a way honoring God with his tongue-in-cheek naming of the Higgs boson).

      But the Blaze commenters would have none of it. They had identified the villain in their anti-religion conspiracy fears and were not ready to let the facts intrude on a soul-satisfying jihad.

      I was amazed at such blind, willful ignorance and returned a couple times a day while the story remained front page. At last count there were over 400 such posts, all of them based on pure ignorance.