Looks like they got to Newt he's backing down from the film

[bigdarryl]

Cenk was on Current last night and predicted this would happen. I think they threatened him in some way like his career http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/13/newt-gingrich-bain-attack-film-edit-romney_n_1204814.html

[Enrique]

1. yeah backing down

but only after the video gets released. So sorry about that bomb I just dropped on you! Oh well.

[roguevalley]

38. actually, he said take it down if its flawed.

[BlueCaliDem]

2. Yep. Liberals fall in love. Republicans fall in line.

That's why they're still part of our government. It's about winning. They'll criticize and complain after the elections, but their team is in - and yes, that's how they see their political party. As their home team.

I wished more Liberals would take a page out of the Republican playbook. Kvetch all you want after the elections, but for chrissakes, get our people in first or we'll never get this country moving forward.

[EOTE]

25. But there's a difference between party establishment and political websites.

Yes, republican individuals certainly lambaste a number of their candidates, but the GOP establishment is pretty much lock step.

[BlueCaliDem]

28. Although I haven't been coming here regularly

the atmosphere is too RP and too negative for Obama for my taste these days, this is the first post I've read about Nancy Pelosi having a DEMOCRATIC President's back as if it's a sin.

Are you sure you're on the right site?

[EOTE]

31. The sin is the democratic party thinking it's OK to dismiss science in order to appease fundies.

You're damn right that Pelosi should have given Obama loads of shit for that one. I'm not going to support a (D) simply because of the D. They need to learn that our votes need to be earned. They're NOT automatic.

[BlueCaliDem]

33. How positively telling

but it's nice you're thinking of the good of the whole country as opposed to just yourself.

[EOTE]

34. What on earth does that even mean?

Seriously, I've read your comment a good four times and it's still as incomprehensible to me as the first. What don't you understand about this? A democratic president doing this awful shit is just as bad as a republican doing it. If Bush did that, you'd rightly be throwing a fit over it. For some reason, when Obama does it, it's all fine and dandy. Please attempt to bring some logic into your discourse.

[EOTE]

29. You make a good point.

I guess I was referring more to the primary process, but even that's not so much true anymore. I still hold on to thoughts of election 2000. I think back to then and I think of how incredibly different the world would be now if the dem establishment passionately defended Gore against the ridiculous attacks that he faced.

[BlueCaliDem]

27. I don't do rightwing sites. Sorry.

But even you know when it's crunch time, Republicans will fall in line. It's tradition.

[politicallycorrect]

4. the film is full of lies

[mattvermont]

5. see ya around

[politicallycorrect]

6. so the film speaks the complete truth?

all im getting at is that the ad tells lies.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

7. Care to list them and explain how they are lies?

[DCKit]

8. Well, it IS a film about Mitt (R)-money.

Lies would be the body of the story.

[politicallycorrect]

10. would help if you could spell...

[arcane1]

11. It would also help if you were civil

and had a sense of humor: that misspelled word is deliberate

[DCKit]

13. ...

[politicallycorrect]

9. here is a link that shows 4 lies in the ad

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/four-pinocchios-for-king-of-bain/2012/01/12/gIQADX8WuP_blog.html?hpid=z1&tid=sm_twitter_washingtonpost

[arcane1]

12. It's an ad produced by republicans

Of course it's going to have lies in it- that's all they have!!

[politicallycorrect]

14. ALL political ads are horrible.

they all have short video clips that are taken out of context.

its all bull shit.

[Kingofalldems]

16. Big Romney fan?

[mac56]

18. Answer the question, please. Big Romney fan, or not?

[Kingofalldems]

21. I missed PC's reply to me, must have been a gem.

And now it's gone.

[Motown_Johnny]

22. Oh My! A Conservative Like Newt Knowingly Telling Falsehoods?!?!?!

Alert The Media!

[dkf]

23. Lol they didn't tell the interviewees what this was for?

Wow nice exposé of Republican ad making. This is fun!

[dkf]

19. So it's not based on the NYT article?

I haven't read the article nor seen the piece but I'll take a gander now that you've piqued my interest.

[snooper2]

24. LIES I TELL YOU LIES

[Fire Walk With Me]

15. Newt is too selfish to take that for very long.

[Motown_Johnny]

20. they can't threaten his career

all he has been doing is making money off his (bad) name.

Anything that boosts his name recognition is good for his con game.




I'm just curious what the copyright laws are concerning it. Can a Super PAC air this thing in the fall without Gingrich's permission? Can Newt's name still be attached to it when/if this happens.

How much can be placed into ads without violating a copyright law and can Gingrich's name still be on the clip in the ad?



The (R)s are arguing that it is better to get this out now but I disagree. I think it validates the argument and eliminates any "the socialists don't like it" retort.

[Spazito]

37. Actually, by law, if Gingrich were to 'interfere' with the SuperPac...

he and the SuperPac would be breaking the law which governs SuperPacs. Because SuperPacs supporting specific candidates cannot communicate with said candidates (wink, wink, nod, nod) Newt has 'NO' say over the ad or his name being attached to it.

Hence, Gingrich can say, gosh/darn/gee whiz, I have NO control over what this SuperPac does, I don't like the ad and wish they would remove it but, hey, it's out of my hands while grinning like a Cheshire cat behind closed doors. That's my take, anyway.

[Motown_Johnny]

39. This presents an interesting possibility

A Super PAC which airs overly negative ads that seemingly favor one candidate while actually planning on the backlash to harm that candidate.


The attacks could even be provable lies so that the candidate who seems to be the focus of the attack can counter with the truth about the subjects in the ads.


I know this is a bit but it does seem possible

[Spazito]

40. Generally speaking, that could well happen...

I don't think that is so in this case mainly because the ad is using specific incidences wrt Romney and Bain Capital. I honestly think Gingrich was "going all in" when he thought he was not only in the running but the anointed front-runner and used the SuperPac to make sure his closest rival was targeted.

Gingrich is known to be VERY vindictive and void of any ethical conscience and his SuperPac with this ad merely reflects that side of him, imo.

[tanyev]

30. Nope. Commando team ready to go in and confiscate all of Callista's diamonds.

[spanone]

32. the 'powers that be' want romney...they will get romney

no one will stand in their way...not even the voting population

[malaise]

35. Mybe they called him in for a farewell

Breakfast at Tiffanys

[Liberal In Texas]

36. They probably told him that if he wanted to keep flying in small planes

he'd better cool his jets.