16 responses so far ↓

• GAWire // Sep 16, 2007 at 3:51 pm

  

  And that’s great news because …??????????

• Federalist // Sep 16, 2007 at 6:42 pm

  

  Because Newt Gingrich is a douce bag. He can not win the nomination or a national election anyways. He is saving himself a huge embarassment. The only good thing that could come from his candidacy would be taking away support from Thompson in the south, handing the nomination over to Guliani or Romney.

• Federalist // Sep 16, 2007 at 6:42 pm

  

  *douche bag (sorry for the misspelling)

• LoyaltyIsMyHonor // Sep 16, 2007 at 8:16 pm

  

  lol…Douchebag…I love it. Simple but effective.
  Ooooops, is that one word or two?

• Raymond McKinney // Sep 16, 2007 at 9:33 pm

  

  Two I believe.

• Federalist // Sep 16, 2007 at 9:36 pm

  

  Well, I have found it spelled as one word, two words, and hyphenated…so for the sake of humor and grammatics: Newt Gingrish is a bag of douche.

• Raymond McKinney // Sep 17, 2007 at 8:20 am

  

  For the curious mind only.

  A douche is a device used to introduce a stream of water into the body for medical or hygienic reasons, or the stream of water itself. The word comes from the French language, in which its principal meaning is a shower (it is thus a notorious false friend encountered by non-native speakers of English; the phrase for vaginal douching is douche vaginale, meaning vaginal shower).

  The word can refer to the rinsing of any body cavity but usually applies to vaginal irrigation, rinsing of the vagina. A douche bag is a piece of equipment for douching: a bag for holding the water or fluid used in douching (the term douche bag can also be used as an insult; see below for slang uses). To avoid transferring intestinal bacteria into the vagina, the same bag must not be used for a vaginal douche and an enema.

• Bill Simon // Sep 17, 2007 at 10:07 am

  

  Speaking of irritating things that need to be rinsed-out, what’s this crap I read in the AJC about Senator Eric Johnson and his merry band of “let’s-see-how-far-we-can-stick-our-noses-into-other-people’s-business” committee on putting limits on how many embryos infertile couples can produce in order to produce a fetus?

  For a group of people so insistent on “pro-life” issues, they sure like to interfere a lot into other people’s business.

  Eric Johnson and Preston Smith should work on sticking to their most difficult tasks as Georgia Republican state senators: keeping their minds on their reproductive systems and stick their nose OUT of other people’s situations.

• Federalist // Sep 17, 2007 at 11:40 am

  

  This is not a life/choice issue, it is a free market issue. If a person is willing to pay, he/she should be allowed to keep as many frozen embryos as they like. If they are trying to make this a pro-life issue they should bring up the fact that over a quarter-million (400,000 is the estimate) frozen embryos reach expiration annually and must be destroyed. To make this a morality issue, I proposed a simple question: Do you use those embryos for stem-cell research, or incinerate them? The current method for discarding these embryos is incineration, but what does humanity gain from that?

• StevePerkins // Sep 17, 2007 at 12:13 pm

  

  I think Newt was keeping himself open to playing the role now being played by Fred Thompson (i.e. a “warm body” who enters the race late and soaks up the support of those dissatisfied with the entire GOP field). Since Thompson has announced, there’s really no place for Newt in the field now (unfortunately).

• Federalist // Sep 17, 2007 at 1:07 pm

  

  Unfortunately?!!!! The guy has proven to be an ineffective leader. Case and point,…the failed contract with america. Not to mention his scandalous nature, to which the only thing to say about is…America is sick and tired of the run of the mill scandalous republican. He can not play the evangelical, I am a christian republican-so vote for me candidate. Not to mention the affair he was having while trying to remove Clinton from office for what…(do not say perjury, the GOP could care less about lying…particularly to the American people)…an oral-affair. I wish god existed so he could treat Newt as “he” treated prometheus (with the exception that prometheus had a heart and felt for humankind.) Newt is an opportunist and would destroy this country so much more than the Bush’s could ever try.

• SpaceyG // Sep 17, 2007 at 6:06 pm

  

  Ditto anything Fed has to say on this matter. He da man.

• LoyaltyIsMyHonor // Sep 17, 2007 at 8:38 pm

  

  Douche-Bag
  Douchebag
  Douche Bag
  Bag of Douche
  Hmmmm? Which looks most effective?

• GodHatesTrash // Sep 17, 2007 at 8:40 pm

  

  Newt-bag.

• Bill Simon // Sep 18, 2007 at 11:14 am

  

  Fed,

  I’m not sure what you mean by “failed” Contract With America.

  In 1995, the newly elected GOP Congress DID introduce and pass 9 of their 10 promises within their first 100 days. They introduced the 1oth one as well, but it did not pass. That was the one on term limits.

  Meanwhile, what has YOUR Demo breathren accomplished in ….no, not 100 days….not even 200 days….what have THEY accomplished? Absolutely ZERO. NADA.

• Federalist // Sep 18, 2007 at 2:18 pm

  

  The dems never made up some political stunt like the contract with america. Your splitting hairs on the success of the contract, too, bill. most of the policies failed, were vetoed, or ruled unconstitutional. the crime bills did not accomplish their goals. with the gop in control, you can not dream of a balanced budget. putting a dollar value on human life is not common sense. term limits! come on! these guys obviously never read “The Papers.”

You must log in to post a comment.