I'm not going to defend the long ago newsletters which had Ron Pauls masthead. He needed to know what was in them, and if he didn't that's his tough luck.

Gingrich: "I will go to the NAACP convention and tell the African-American community why they should demand paychecks instead of food stamps." He also said “Young children who are poor ought to learn how to go to work,” he continued. “What I’ve said is, for example, it would be great if inner city schools and poor neighborhood schools actually hired the children to do things. Some of the things they could do is work in the library, work in the front office. Some of them frankly, could be janitorial. Gingrich continued, “this all started when people on the Left laughed about and derided what they call hamburger flipping jobs. I did an entire thing in one of my courses on the number of people whose first job was at McDonald’s who are now very successful multi-millionaires. And my point is, any work that gets you in the habit of working beats no work.”
http://theminorityeye.com/newt-gingr...-p1167-158.htm

Santorum: "I don't want to make black people's lives better by giving them other people's money." "I want to give them the opportunity to go out and earn their money and provide for themselves and their families," he added. "The best way to do that is to get the manufacturing sector of the economy rolling."

(postscript: Santorum's remarks were made while the employment rate for blacks has risen to 16%; 17% among black men and a staggering 41% among black teens; all while President Obama claims "recovery")
http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/...6-percent.html

Santorum: On the subject of gay marriage, he was asked by a student “How you justify your belief based on these morals you have about all men being created equal when two men who want to marry the person that they love ...” “What about three men?” Santorum interjected. “Reason says that if you think it’s OK for two, you have to differentiate with me why it’s not OK for three,” he added. “Let’s just have a discussion about what that means. If she reflects the values that marriage can be for anybody or any group of people, as many as is necessary, any two people or any three or four, marriage really means whatever you want it to mean.”

Anyone with any honesty knows that Santorum was only responding to someone who wants to change the definition on what is marriage. Once you change it for one group aren't you discriminating against other groups who want to enact into law their definition on what constitutes a marriage?
http://www.suntimes.com/news/nation/...ve-enough.html

Amazing what putting things in context will do. It all about making you think. I know it's tough, but try it.

:1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:rubicon~ It took me a minute...but then :1rotfl: :1rotfl: :1rotfl::1rotfl:

You will be waiting for quite some time to receive an apology from me on this item. I have apologized to others on this forum publicly, but in your case, that has no chance of every happening. I would doubt that your arrogant attitude even allows you to understand that word.

As always, you distort and in each case there is more than one side to the story but AS USUAL again, you ignore any fact that does not serve your flaming agenda.

I am betting that you would take great offense to anyone bringing up President Obamas relationship with a racist minister for 20 years whom he called him mentor, and I could understand your taking offense. While it is troubling, nobody has shown any concrete evidence of the President sharing those thoughts although his mentor had those thoughts and spewed them.

As always, you are so totally closed minded and full of hate for anyone who does not subscribe to your wishes and thoughts, you look only for that hate.

I will not defend those you choose to malign and will not malign those I oppose without looking at both sides of what is happening or asking questions. You will continue to do what you do....post inane half truths on here instead of any conversation. You are predictable, boring, ill informed and tiring.

You are not any of those things because of your political leanings. It is very informative and helpful when folks with whom you disagree list how they feel and why, but cut and paste smear jobs by immature hacks and general name calling of anyone who disagrees with you along with your tiring use of the party lines and spins is just overwhelming.

PS...by the way, none of your links worked but that is ok....EVERYONE in the universe has heard or read this spin but smartly felt it was nothing that was important enough to share on here....thankfully, there are posters who have pride in what they post !

I would like to thank janmcn for the posting that prompted this response and thanks to Richielion for the "rest of the story"!

RICH,...thanks for the work you have done to embarrass this poster for being so shallow and limited in ability. Not only ill informed, also well behind the times !

Whatever Richie and Bucco say is to their credit for looking up the full quotations - however, the damage is already on the Internet without all the explanations for people to read - and to have their own minds made up.

It does not matter if a candidate makes a statement that can be explained easily but just does not sound good, the implication is already out there on the Internet with possibly other explanations of what was really meant.

Many times, it is a case of presumed guilty until proven innocent and the masses will not accept the proof of innocense because it is not what they wanted to hear in the first place.

Candidates should be very careful in choosing their words the first time and too often they do not - and the spectre will haunt them for a long time in voter's minds.

You make good points here Buggyone. BUT the circles I travel in are made of people like Richielion, who dig much deeper to find the facts on issues. There are more of them out there than you might suspect.

Most American voters, unfortunately, are not like the circle you travel with. They are not digging deep but feeding on the headlines without reading deep into the articles.

Lots and lots of the statements will stay with the candidate even though it may not true. Some is due to the stupidity of the candidate - such as the rock with the N-word on Perry's hunting lodge. Why couldn't that have just been buried or broken up years ago instead of just turned over? Even though Perry had nothing to do with it, that stain will stay with him.

It is a mistake to mention race in a campaign because some will take it as a slur no matter what was said. It is a lose-lose situation.

Same thing goes for gay and lesbian issues. No matter what is said, someone will take offense to it.

Hell, the vast majority aren't even reading the headlines - they are getting their information from paid ads -- at best!

Where do you get your facts on how well informed people are and how well the dig for the facts? ...Ads and headlines?

It's my opinion, based on personal observation - never meant it as fact and didn't think anyone would see it as such.

ditto

I have to agree with you here most forthrightly my friend Buggy. By your own words here you allude to the fact that Democrats count on people who are shallow, ill informed and misinformed. It's facts that get in the way of Democrats keeping power.

Here's hoping there's more informed people than there are Democrat voters.

[QUOTE=RichieLion;437265]I have to agree with you here most forthrightly my friend Buggy. By your own words here you allude to the fact that Democrats count on people who are shallow, ill informed and misinformed. It's facts that get in the way of Democrats keeping power.

Here's hoping there's more informed people than there are Democrat voters.[/QUOTE]

So you're saying that Democrat voters are uninformed. Pretty arrogant statement in my opinion. Does that mean anyone who votes for any Democrat, or just those that vote a straight Democrat ticket? Do you have a link that indicates that is the case?

Richie, I meant voters of all parties. Lots of uninformed on both sides of the aisle. Those who say they will vote for anyone but Republican and those who say they would never vote Republican no matter who the candidate is.

Both parties want voters who are shallow and ill-informed. They count on the 30 second sound bites to sway voters.

Of course, that would never happen here in The Villages since everyone here is savvy enough to read all the information available in newspapers online and to listen to different news channels to get all the viewpoints - and then sort it out for themselves.