As I mentioned in a previous post, while Mitt Romney is probably the Republicans best hope of defeating Obama, but there seems to be a reluctance of the GOP voters to endorse him. There are various reasons for this. Hes considered a light-weight conservative (or vaguely sane as wed describe it in these Islands ;D). Hes a rich guy and they arent exactly popular within the GOP after the financial crisis…this last one is confusing as prior to the current campaign any liberal who complained about billionaires buying votes was denounced by republicans as a socialist and making class warfare…yet many in the GOP are doing the same thing to Mitt Romney right now! Do Republicans understand the concept of irony or hypocrisy! 😀
Newt Gingrich has quickly risen to the top as the obvious alternative to Mitt Romney. Newts major selling point for republicans is…that hes not Mitt Romney. Unfortunately, his principle disadvantage is that hes Newt fuckin Gingrich! ;D It is ironic in extreme that many in the tea party, who are anti-establishment and against big government have gravitated over to him. You cannot get more establishment, career politician and pro-big government than Newt Gingrich (few nice links on that here).
Casing point, recently Newt Gingrich made a speech calling for an American Moonbase by 2020. It is estimated that such a base, a crude one mind, would cost about $35 Billion to build and $7.5 Billion a year to maintain. I find these figures decidedly on the low side, likely youd be talking a figure substantially higher than this. Consider that an Apollo like rocket, which would take a good $100 Billion+ to develop and deploy, can deliver about 12-20 tons to the Lunar surface (depending on launch profile and where you intend to land). A 1,000 ton base (roughly the size of the ISS) would take a good 50 launches to assemble at a cost of about $2 Billion a pop (so $100 billion just to launch our base nevermind development costs or construction costs). It takes 30 kgs of resources to keep an astronaut alive in space, so assuming a crew of 12 on our base (the minimum youd need to do anything useful) => 12x30x365 = 131,400 kgs/yr => 6-11 launches/yr…and a rotation schedule of 6 months per year per crewman (4 per capsule)(12/4)*2 per year = 6 => 12-17 launches a year just to maintain and keep alive a crew up there, thats about $24-34 Billion per year! These figures are roughly on par with many pervious studies done by NASA such as here and here. Consider that the Total NASA budget right now is only £18 billion and it pays for lots of other stuff too! Bottom line anyone talking about building moon bases with existing rocket technology is wasting his time.
So given that Newt has previously promised to bring down the deficit, how does such a grandiose space policy fit in with a deficit reduction plan, I mean even Obamas been cutting back on the space budget. Well its probably because Newt Gingrich made the speech in question down in Florida on the space coast. In short one cannot escape the conclusion that hell say literally anything to get himself elected.
And if youre a social conservative, then it would seem strange that so many of them are backing Newt Gingrich, who tired to arrange a open relationship with his former wife. He got rather upset about that when it was brought up in a debate. And I agree, it shouldnt matter what a guy does in his private life….then why did Newt lead the charge against Bill Clinton for his infidelity, distracting the president at a crucial time of his presidency when Clinton could have been hunting down Bin laden or sorting out the deficit or something. Then again many republicans (for whom relationships with sisters, cousins or farm animals being seen as okay :no:) dont strike me as the best people to be lecturing the rest of us on morality issues.
In short, if you want a cynical politician wholl say anything to get elected and pull any dirty trick to wrong foot his foes regardless of the consequences to the country and ultimately treat the office of president as a money making opportunity for him and his cronies, vote for Newt Gingrich.
And of course, if Newt Gingrich gets the Republican nomination his primary, sorry…ONLY credential for office will be the fact that hes not Obama. Unfortunately for the GOP the democrats have a ready made rebuttal, ya but you’re still Newt feckin Gingrich! A politician whose flip flopped more than John Kerry on a beach holiday and has had more affairs than Clinton in the playboy mansion and more corrupt that Bush in a brown envelope factory :)).
Of course, Im not suggesting Mitt Romney s much better. The last thing that America needs with so many people struggling in the country to make ends meet and a looming deficit crisis is some rich guy who will inevitably pursue a rich man’s agenda. He will not impose a patriot tax, nor take any concrete measures to solve the deficit, but instead whip the poor essentially for being poor.
I would honestly prefer to see Santorium or Gingrich or maybe even Ron Paul get the nomination than Mitt Romney because that would increase Obamas chances of re-election. I just find it amusing to point out the hypocrisies of the right and the mental gymnastics that the republican party members are forced to play in being against a big government spender like Obama (who has cut the space budget) or Clinton (the only US president to return a balanced budget in the last three decades) but in favour of politicians who it is almost certain will raise the deficit yet further. Or they can be pro life but in favour of the death penalty, against wealthy politicians, but unwilling to enact policies to curp the excesses of wealth. I would have to question whether anyone whom the republicans select is ultimately electable in the current climate.
Mention Ron Paul
I will finish by mentioning Ron Paul. His cult of supporters are constantly complaining that the mainstream media never mention him, supposedly because well if only everyone had heard of him theyd look into those big puppy dog eyes and fall in love with his ravings (I’m quite sure the Brownshirts said something similar back in the 1930’s).
Of course the reality is that the mainstream media dont talk about Ron Paul because they know hes a nut job :crazy: who hasnt a snowballs chance in hell of ever getting elected. Furthermore his policies, as I pointed out here, simply dont add up. Inevitably any journalist doing anything you could remotely describe as a balanced piece would have to point out the glaringly obvious (that his policies are insane and dont stand up to rational scrutiny). And the consequences of daring to state the obvious or saying the slightest bad thing about the “Dear Leader“ are not pretty as CNN journalist Dana Bash recently found out after she made the mistake of criticising Ron Paul. An army of Ron Paul’s angry trolls promptly began bombarding her and CNN with a barrage of scary e-mails or coming up to her and berating her for it in public(see video of that here). A Dr Campion who also made the mistake of criticising Ron was also attacked and harassed by an angry mob of “Paulestinians“…only for it to turn out they were harassing the wrong Dr Campion!
Such incidents merely serve too send a clear message to journalists to just let Ron and his kool-aid drinking followers putter in they’re sand box. But all in all, its probably just as well for the cult of Ron Paul that their candidate doesnt get much airtime, it would do more harm than good!
Update – Inevitably it seems Mitt Romney has won in Florida, with Newt 2nd and Ron Paul dead last…with but 7% of the vote! His loyal “underpants gnomes“, unable to conceive of any logical reason why they’re “Dear Leader” would only take in 7% of the vote (here’s a theory…because even 93% of Republicans could figure out he’s batshit crazy!). They are now peddling the conspiracy theory on their blogs that the voting was rigged :crazy:….Kool Aid anyone?