You Had me at "Moon Colony"

Dragon-X the first private spacecraft orbited in 2010.

Okay, I admit I was less than happy with Newt Gingrich as the potential Republican presidential candidate. I heard a lot of complaints that he wasn't a "real" conservative, that he had some problems with morals, that he had ethical problems and that he didn't get along with members of his own party.

It didn't quite match the "get 'er done" Speaker of the House I remember from his years in the House during the Clinton Administration. It doesn't quite match the in-your-face bulldog I've been seeing in the debates. Then last week when a Romney acolyte complained that Newt was a "loose cannon" and didn't get along with the Republican leadership, it was a bridge too far.

You mean he didn't get along with the country club Republican good old boys that gave us Bob Dole as a presidential candidate? You mean he didn't get along with the country club Republican leadership that took a conservative mandate and turned it into a spineless policy game that put the Democrats back in power in the Capitol?  You mean the Republican leadership that compromised with Democrats time and time again and managed to allow the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac crisis and the housing mortgage crisis with hardly a whimper from the "Republican leadership". President Bush complained. A few scattered members of Congress and the Senate raised a ruckus, but they didn't get much more than lip service level backing from the "Republican leadership".

I kind of like it that Newt makes those guys nervous.

Also, several of my favorite Republicans have endorsed Newt, including Sarah Palin, Herman Cain, Rick Perry and Fred Thompson. Can you imagine if Newt put them all on his cabinet? Wowie-zowie!

Finally, during the debate, Newt said we ought to go for a moon colony in the next decade or so. I admit it, I'm a space junkie. I love the idea of building new spacecraft, space stations, landing on the moon and exploring the solar system. I suspect that Newt would encourage private enterprise to lead the way. That would be exciting.

But Newt had me at "moon colony".  Unless someone else makes me believe they would push the space program forward, I'm afraid the Newtmeister moved to the top of my candidates I find least objectionable.

I admit it. I'm that easy!

Tom King (Native of Texas - home of NASA ground control)

The Romnians are doing for Mitt what the Paulestinians are doing for Congressman Ron.

One of the Romney accolytes today made a statement on Fox News that was supposed to show us that the Newtster wasn't a good choice for president.  He said something to the effect that when Newt was Speaker of the House, he was considered a loose cannon by the Republican Leadership because he wouldn't "cooperate" with them.

Wow!  A loose cannon, angry conservative who debates well and doesn't mind hacking off the country club Republicans.

How cool is that?

And the comment led to a follow up question by Fox asking why folk should think Romney was a conservative when he voted for both Jimmy Carter and Walter Mondale against Ronald Reagan.

You know if Romney's supporters keep it up, they're going to do for Governor Romney what Ron Paul's supporters have done for the Congressman.

Can you say "single digits", boys and girls? 

Uh, huh, I knew you could.

Tom

Corporations Are People Too.....?

Bill Moyers demonstrates once again that he is not an unbiased journalist. In the attached vid, he encourages citizens to oppose the Supreme Court decision in the Citizen's United case, the one that established that free speech extends to corporations.

The case was over an unflattering documentary about Hillary Clinton that the Federal Election Commission wanted to ban during a senate election cycle. (Thank you McCain/Feingold by the way.) The court ruled FOR free speech and in support of Citizen's United. It did add that there had to be proper disclosure if you're going to say unkind things about politicians. I rather wonder if that's the part of the Supreme Court decision that's what all the hoo-rah is really about. Perhaps when folk like George Soros pays for vids and ads that say nasty things about Republicans, they would prefer not to put their names on it. After all, folk like Soros and Warren Buffet are, themselves, "evil corporations" (or "good corporations" if you're making a nasty movie about George Bush.)

Moyers thinks we need an amendment that says corporation can be muzzled because they "aren't people". So Move-On.org is people and Citizens United is not? I have no problem with Moyers being a leftie. Just would appreciate it if the wouldn't keep telling folk he's an unbiased journalist.

Maybe there should be an amendment about that.

Just sayin'

Tom King