Newt: he's what's for dinner.

Well, if anyone would know about 'truly stupid', he's the man.

sometimes I can't tell if the GOP is serious or if they're just trolling us via media soundbytes....

He will be needing a new "wife" soon.

Newt Gingrich proposed a plan Friday that would allow poor children to clean their schools for money

wtf

On Christmas Eve, Newt "Scrooge" Gingrich will be visited by three ghosts:

The ghost of campaigns past, where Newt is visited by his cancer stricken wife.

The ghost of campaigns present, where Newt says things like "Child labor laws are truly stupid"

and the ghost of campaigns future, where Obama is elected in 2012.

I assume that Marcellus Wallace had a conversation with him and told him that on November 20, his ass goes down.

Gingrich 2012.

Newt has now broken his own frontrunner implosion record.

Yeah. That's not okay. What on earth is he thinking?

You know what isn't progress? Revoking child labor laws.

If you're running as a Republican these days, you're voluntarily joining a group that is having honest discussions about revoking child labor laws. Amongst other insanities. You can't claim that you aren't affiliating yourself with these people.

America truly isn't free until we can make 6 year olds do the job of criminally overpaid janitors working at minimum wage.

GAT_00: America truly isn't free until we can make 6 year olds do the job of criminally overpaid janitors working at minimum wage.

oh, and above all do NOT let those kids join a union! Because unions are the debbil.

RTFA, it's not what the headline would lead you to think.

And while we're at it, let's get rid of that whole fire marshal thing. I mean, what's the worst that could happen from locking hundreds of young women into a textile factory without adequate exits?

Hmmm.

I can just see the backlash as janitors and support staff show up screaming, "THEY'RE TAKING OUR JORBS!"

Congrats Newt, you're going to lose the NASCAR vote...

GAT_00: America truly isn't free until we can make 6 year olds do the job of criminally overpaid janitors working at minimum wage.

Oh, remember, GAT, minimum wage is also evil. So it's 6 year olds working for three bucks an hour.

The Republicans really should go ahead and grow curly mustaches so they have something to twirl as they cackle.

DamnYankees: Newt Gingrich proposed a plan Friday that would allow poor children to clean their schools for money

wtf

Not only is that destroying janitorial jobs through government regulation, it creates a virtual army of tweens and teens beholden to politicians for their jobs. A union, if you will.

Javacrucian: RTFA, it's not what the headline would lead you to think.

Yes it is. He's saying that school janitors should be replaced by children.

Javacrucian: RTFA, it's not what the headline would lead you to think.

Actually, it's a lot worse. It's a wedge issue sort of thing. You allow a particular case, then it opens the door wider, which then leads to forcing it open a bit more. Then a bit more. It's the same as trying to "Teach the Controversy."

It's just as disingenuous and reprehensible, but given that this is Newt, it's not exactly surprising.

Ok. I give up. pwned by the filter

I was trying to name the farking villain from Oliver Twist who also believed child labor was a good thing. But, the filter thinks I'm being rude.

TheOther: [fastcache.gawkerassets.com image 320x240]

So, TheOther, I must know: Was using that picture an ironic statement on child labor? I mean, being that she was working at the time that picture was taken.

Also, I'm curious what Farkers think about kids in show business? Personally, I am completely against it for so many reasons.

He is just trying to make sure his next wife is an earner.

How about a plan to require all public school children to contribute labor towards cleaning and upkeep of their schools? If it works so well giving people a sense of purpose and worthwhile work, it should be mandatory for all, right, Newt ? Why limit it to poor kids?

Javacrucian: RTFA, it's not what the headline would lead you to think.

So, you don't have any issues with this FTA?

"I tried for years to have a very simple model. These schools should get rid of unionized janitors, have one master janitor, pay local students to take care of the school. The kids would actually do work; they'd have cash; they'd have pride in the schools. They'd begin the process of rising."



You don't have an issue with people losing their jobs so that children can take them over? How are the janitors who lose their jobs supposed to support themselves or their families?

And don't get me started on the chemicals (commercial grade cleansers, etc.) and equipment a typical school janitor uses. Most states don't allow minors to handle certain substances nor use certain types of equipment (floor buffers & the like).

TheOther: I think it is more a projection of what entitled white kids would think of the idea of having to work. Of course, when Newt says 'poor', what he means is 'black', so it really doesn't apply.

I used to think the Republicans wanted to take us back to 1950. With their current economic policies of erasing all lessons from the Great Depression and before, and now this, I'm thinking their wanting to take us back to 1890ish.

TheOther:
As for children in show business, and children anywhere, I believe W C Fields' attitude exemplifies my own. Still, I don't know that children should not be portrayed in theatre or television or movies, so what do you do? There are only so many midgets and dwarves...CGI is possible, I suppose.

I like the CGI suggestion. I realize it's impossible to portray real life without showing children, but it seems highly unfair to ask a child to give up their childhood just so that their parents can steal from them and feel important while doing so.

...I'm thinking they are wanting to take us back to 1890ish.

I really need to read what I type at least once...

WorldCitizen: I used to think the Republicans wanted to take us back to 1950. With their current economic policies of erasing all lessons from the Great Depression and before, and now this, I'm thinking their wanting to take us back to 1890ish.

There is a current that REALLY would like to see the heady days of the Robber Barons come back.

The thing is, they hooked up with Prosperity Gospel Idiots, so they've got folks actively working against their own self interest, and both have hijacked the narrative from within the party, and we just don't have a Teddy Roosevelt or Eisenhower to stand up to either of these elements...

WorldCitizen: ...I'm thinking they are wanting to take us back to 1890ish.

My suspicion is they're actually aiming for early July 1877 -- though a minority might prefer January 1870.

Please Mr. Gingrich, can I 'ave some more?

Runs_With_Scissors_: Ok. I give up. pwned by the filter

I was trying to name the farking villain from Oliver Twist who also believed child labor was a good thing. But, the filter thinks I'm being rude.

I'm reviewing... the situation.

Uchiha_Cycliste: Sorry kid, you were born poor. Either you get to work to eat, or starve; but I'll be damned if you get to be a kid, because I'm a compassionate Christian conservative.

Would love to be a fly on the wall (cloud?) when these "compassionate Christian Conservatives" have to explain themselves to St Peter.

A republican wants young people to stop living off the hard-earned money of older people and Democrats are opposed to it. I'm stunned. Really. I am. No wait. I'm not. Stupid libs. Go take a bath. Stupid libs.

I don't imagine that this would affect children whose adulterous parents have half-a-million dollar revolving credit accounts with Tiffanys.

Sleeping Monkey: I don't imagine that this would affect children whose adulterous parents have half-a-million dollar revolving credit accounts with Tiffanys.

Sleeping Monkey: I don't imagine that this would affect children whose adulterous parents have half-a-million dollar revolving credit accounts with Tiffanys.



Mr. Newt! I have your diamonds for you!

oldebayer: When Newt is right, he's right. Let me know when this actually happens.

there's a first time for everything.