Newt defines the Obama administration

Amerika wrote: »

Watching the GOP debate last night, Newt Gingrich articulated the essence of the Obama administration in this short segment. Every American should see this clip over and over again leading up to the presidential election. If it doesn’t scare the hell out of you, and cause you to understand how much we need a change from the path taken under the current president's leadership... I don’t know what would.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xdh97eGR2IE

It may certainly add weight to some peoples argument that a change of direction could be helpful. However the question posed to Newt raises questions about the suitability of the GOP to take over. For example, they came into the house on the back of an anti-incumbancy drive. People were sick of Washington insiders and career politicians doing the same 'ol dirty tricks and here we have repubs attaching an unrelated oil pipeline to a two month extension of a tax cut. However, such antics have always existed in DC, so perhaps they just became alcimatised to how DC works. What is disturbing is that the GOP fought long and hard to ensure a tax break for America wealthiest and yet here they are putting up opposition to a tax break for the middle and lower paid workers. This, despite the fact that the Wealthiest Americans have seen a massive increase in their share of the American pie over the last 3 decades whereas middle class income has stagnated in the same period.

Amerika wrote: »

Don’t you think this video is something every eligible voting American should see ahead of the election?

It's available on youtube so I don't see any reason why they can't see the video. Though while they are at it, they should also read a synopsis of the GOP by the economist and unlike Newt; the economist (which has stronger republican sympathies than Democrat) is not a biased source of opinion.

http://www.economist.com/node/21542180/comments?page=11

two selected extracts which were particularly apt

Nowadays, a candidate must believe not just some but all of the following things: that abortion should be illegal in all cases; that gay marriage must be banned even in states that want it; that the 12m illegal immigrants, even those who have lived in America for decades, must all be sent home; that the 46m people who lack health insurance have only themselves to blame; that global warming is a conspiracy; that any form of gun control is unconstitutional; that any form of tax increase must be vetoed, even if the increase is only the cancelling of an expensive and market-distorting perk; that Israel can do no wrong and the “so-called Palestinians”, to use Mr Gingrich’s term, can do no right; that the Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of Education and others whose names you do not have to remember should be abolished.

A Republican could stake out a way to cut the deficit, reform taxes and refashion government. But instead of businesslike pragmatism, there is zealotry. The candidates have made a fetish out of never raising taxes (even when it involves getting rid of loopholes), while mostly ignoring tough decisions about cutting spending on defence or pensions. Such compassionless conservatism (slashing taxes for the rich and expenditure on the poor) comes with little thought as to which bits of government spending are useful. Investing in infrastructure, redesigning public education and maintaining unemployment benefits in the worst downturn since the Depression are hardly acts of communism.