Gingrich came under sharp attack from rival Republican presidential candidates on Thursday at the last debate before Iowa launches the U.S. 2012 election season.
Gingrich is in a tight race with Ron Paul and Mitt Romney in Iowa less than three weeks before the state’s Republicans decide on Jan. 3 who they want as their presidential candidate. It is anybody’s guess at this stage as to who will win.
At a Sioux City debate, Gingrich’s rivals quickly pounced on his receiving up to $1.6 million in payments from troubled mortgage giant Freddie Mac as evidence that he has profited as a Washington insider from an enterprise that was at the heart of America’s housing crisis.
Michele Bachmann, hoping Iowa’s evangelical conservatives will give her a surprise victory in Iowa, said she was shocked that Gingrich was being considered as a potential Republican presidential nominee after acting as a “lobbyist” for Freddie Mac.
“We can’t have as our nominee for the Republican Party someone who continues to stand for Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. They need to be shut down, not built up,” Bachmann said.
Gingrich fired back that Bachmann’s charge was “simply not true,” that he was not a lobbyist for Freddie Mae, and insisted, “I did no lobbying of any kind for any organization.”
Gingrich, who has emerged as the lead conservative alternative to the more moderate Romney, compared himself to the Republicans’ iconic President Ronald Reagan. He scoffed at his rivals’ attacks on him as “kind of laughable.”
“I think people have to watch my career and decide,” said Gingrich, ticking off a conservative record he said he built up as House speaker in the 1990s.
Already, Gingrich is showing signs of fatigue among Republicans in this Midwestern state, an indication that they remain open to voting for someone else as a barrage of negative ads and verbal punches takes a toll on him.
A Public Policy Polling survey in Iowa this week said Gingrich’s support had dropped several percentage points and was leading Paul narrowly by 22 percent to 21 percent, with 16 percent for Romney and Michele Bachmann at 11 percent.
The fact that this is the last debate before the Iowa caucuses increased pressure on Gingrich’s rivals to press the attack against him and try to raise doubts about him.
Gingrich's main adversary was not former Massachusetts Governor Romney as anticipated, but instead it was Michele Bachmann, the Minnesota congresswoman who won Iowa's straw poll of Republicans in August and would like to score a surprise victory here.
Bachmann repeatedly tried to raise doubts about Gingrich's conservative principles and accused him of being a Washington lobbyist for accepting up to $1.6 million in payments from troubled mortgage giant Freddie Mac, which was at the heart of America's housing crisis.
"We can't have as our nominee for the Republican Party someone who continues to stand for Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. They need to be shut down, not built up," Bachmann said.
In a standoff over whether Gingrich in his congressional past had supported late-term abortion, Gingrich said Bachmann had her facts wrong.
Already, Gingrich is showing signs of fatigue among Republicans in this Midwestern state, an indication that they remain open to voting for someone else as a barrage of negative ads and verbal punches takes a toll on him.
Public Policy Polling survey in Iowa this week said Gingrich's support had dropped several percentage points and he was leading Paul narrowly by 22 percent to 21 percent, with 16 percent for Romney and Michele Bachmann at 11 percent.
We know without a shadow of a doubt that Iran will take a nuclear weapon, they will use it to wipe our ally Israel off the face of the map," she said.
Texas Governor Rick Perry, who is hoping a 44-city bus tour of Iowa will allow him to rebound after a string of bad debates, compared himself to American football star quarterback Tim Tebow, who has managed to win a string of games for NFL's Denver Broncos despite some obvious deficiencies.
"I hope I am the Tim Tebow of the Iowa caucuses. There were a lot of folks who said Tim Tebow would not be a very good professional quarterback," he said.
Gingrich, who has emerged as the lead conservative alternative to the more moderate Romney, compared himself to the Republicans' iconic President Ronald Reagan. He scoffed at his rivals' attacks on him as "kind of laughable."
I think people have to watch my career and decide," said Gingrich, ticking off a conservative record he said he built up as House speaker in the 1990s.
The fact that this is the last debate before the Iowa caucuses increased pressure on Gingrich's rivals to press the attack against him and try to raise doubts about him.
Former Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum noted that Gingrich was not well liked as House speaker.
Speaker had a conservative revolution against him when he was speaker of the House," said Santorum, who also subtly raised character issues about the thrice-married Gingrich, saying, "We need someone who is strong in the political and personal side.
SIOUX CITY, Ia. — A congenial Newt Gingrich defended government aid, waxed on about the beauty of bipartisanship, complimented chief rival Mitt Romney, and, in keeping with his promise not to tussle with his fellow Republicans, saved his fire in Thursday night’s GOP debate for the Democratic resident of the White House.
Gingrich’s rivals had spent most of the previous week’s debate in Des Moines whacking on him. This final debate before the Jan. 3 Iowa caucuses was far tamer.
One of the most dramatic moments came when Ron Paul suggested that worries about Iran’s potential nuclear powers are exaggerated and warned against overreaction.
“There’s no U.N. evidence of Iran trying to get a nuclear weapon,” he said. “To me the greatest danger is that we will have a president who will overreact and we will soon bomb Iran.”
That triggered a whiplash response from Michele Bachmann, who called his claim “dangerous.”
Analysts had warned before the debate that Paul’s pacifist themes could alienate conservatives, but the Texas congressman argued that he will be electable in the general election because he appeals to independents and Democrats.
Mr Gingrich said in his opening remarks: "I believe I can debate Barack Obama and I think in seven three-hour debates, Barack Obama will not have a leg to stand on in trying to defend a record that is terrible and an ideology that is radical."
Mr Romney lambasted President Obama for trying to "appease or accommodate the tyrants of the world", criticising his approach to retrieving a drone which recently went down in Iran.
"Foreign policy based on pretty please? You have to be kidding," Mr Romney said.
He chose not to take the bait when the moderator asked whether he would like to respond to a previous challenge by Mr Gingrich that the former governor of Massachusetts should give back the millions he earned bankrupting companies while working at a private equity group.
"I think the president will level the same attack," Mr Romney said. "In the real world that the president has not lived in... not every business succeeds."
While the two front-runners sought to stay positive, despite increasingly barbed attacks in their day-to-day campaigns, they came under fire from Mrs Bachmann and Mr Santorum.
Mrs Bachmann forcefully assailed Mr Gingrich for collecting "influence-peddling" fees from government-owned mortgage lender Freddie Mac, which is blamed by many conservatives for America's home foreclosure crisis. She said his role had been to "keep the scam going".
"What she just said is factually not true," Mr Gingrich shot back. "I never lobbied under any circumstances."
As for Romney, he repeatedly argued that Obama does not have any business experience and does not understand the U.S. economy.
"I'll have credibility on the economy, when he doesn't," said Romney, a former Massachusetts governor who also led a capital investment firm known as Bain Capital.
Electability was a strong issue in the debate as Republicans seek the best candidate to take on Obama.
Romney is seen by some as someone who will not be able to stand up to Obama on a national stage. He disputed that, arguing his 25 years in business make him the best candidate to tackle the Democrat when the economy will be at center stage in next year's campaign.
Gingrich tried to counter the argument that he often shoots from the hip and can't win the support of independents. Iowa Gov. Terry Branstad recently questioned whether Gingrich had the "discipline" or "focus" to be the GOP nominee.
Gingrich argued that he has shown himself capable of working with members on both sides of the political aisle, saying that during his years as House speaker he worked with Democratic President Bill Clinton to pass a balanced budget and welfare reform.
While Romney did not attack Gingrich, other GOP candidates who are struggling in the polls took several shots at him.
Michele Bachmann aggressively took Gingrich to task for taking $1.6 million in consulting fees from Freddie Mac, the controversial mortgage company. She accused him of "influence peddling" and working to keep a government "scam" going when other Republicans were trying to shut it down.
Gingrich said he worked for Freddie Mac as a consultant when he was no longer in office.
Gingrich stood by his work for Freddie Mac, saying he continues to support the idea that government-sponsored entities can help Americans to buy homes.
The debate also afforded Iowans a rare glimpse of Jon Huntsman, the former Utah governor who has essentially ignored the Hawkeye State.
Huntsman, who supports civil unions for gays and is Obama's former ambassador to China, figured he could not compete in a state that has a strong social conservative movement.
Huntsman was asked if his refusal to sign a no-new-tax pledge would handicap him.
He argued it would actually help in a general election, trying to position himself as a moderate who could woo Democrats and independents.
Gay men's health improves when their state legalizes same-sex marriage, a new study finds.
The results showed gay and bisexual men in Massachusetts had significant fewer medical- and mental-health-care visits, and lower mental-health-care costs in the year after the state legalized gay marriage, compared with the previous year.
This amounted to a 13-percent reduction in total health-care visits, and a 14-percent reduction in health-care costs for this group. The reductions were similar for partnered and single gay men.
Previous research has shown that excluding lesbian, gay and bisexual individuals from marriage has a stressful impact on this population, according to the study.
There were also reductions in cases of hypertension and depression, according to the study. Both conditions are associated with stress.
The findings suggest that legalizing same-sex marriage could benefit public health "by reducing the occurrence of stress-related health conditions in gay and bisexual men," said study researcher Mark Hatzenbuehler, of Columbia University's Mailman School of Public Health.
However, among HIV-positive men, there was no reduction in HIV-related visits, suggesting that those in need of HIV/AIDS care continued to seek needed health-care services, the researchers said.
The researchers surveyed 1,211 patients from a large, community-based health clinic in Massachusetts that focuses on serving these groups.
In the 12 months following the 2003 legalization of same-sex marriage in Massachusetts, gay and bisexual men had a significant decrease in medical care visits, mental health care visits, and mental health care costs, compared with the 12 months before the law change. This amounted to a 13-percent reduction in health care visits and a 14-percent reduction in health care costs. These health effects were similar for partnered and single gay men.
Among HIV-positive men, there was no reduction in HIV-related visits, suggesting that those in need of HIV/AIDS care continued to seek needed health care services.
For the study, researchers surveyed 1,211 patients from a large, community-based health clinic in Massachusetts that focuses on serving sexual minorities. Examining the clinic's billing records in the wake of the approval of Massachusetts' same-sex marriage law, researchers found a reduction in hypertension, depression, and adjustment disorders—all conditions associated with stress.
"These findings suggest that marriage equality may produce broad public health benefits by reducing the occurrence of stress-related health conditions in gay and bisexual men," Dr. Hatzenbuehler said.
Previous studies have documented that excluding lesbian, gay, and bisexual individuals from marriage has a stressful impact on this population. Dr. Hatzenbuehler's study is the first study to examine whether same-sex marriage policies influence health care use and health care expenditures among sexual minorities. Lesbians were not included in the survey due to insufficient sample size among the patients who visit the clinic.
"This research makes important contributions to a growing body of evidence on the social, economic, and health benefits of marriage equality," Dr. Hatzenbuehler said. The research findings presented here are those of the researcher and are not necessarily the views of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.
There was a reduction in blood pressure problems, depression and "adjustment disorders", which the authors claimed could be the result of reduced stress.
Lesbian women were not included in the study as there were insufficient numbers to give a statistically meaningful result.
Dr Mark Hatzenbuehler, who led the study, said: "Our results suggest that removing these barriers improves the health of gay and bisexual men
"Marriage equality may produce broad public health benefits by reducing the occurrence of stress-related health conditions."
A spokesman for the Terrence Higgins Trust, a UK-based sexual health and HIV charity, said: "There is a known link between health and happiness.
"It's no surprise that people who are treated as second class citizens tend to have low self esteem, which in turn makes them more likely to take risks.
"Whether this is drugs, alcohol abuse, or unsafe sex, treating gay men unequally has lasting repercussions for their health.
Shortly before the passage of President Obama’s stimulus bill in 2009, Newt Gingrich’s political committee put out a video of Mr. Gingrich denouncing it as a “big politician, big bureaucracy, pork-laden bill.”
But at the same time, Mr. Gingrich was cheering a $19 billion part of the package that promoted the use of electronic health records, something that benefited clients of his consulting business. “I am delighted that President Obama has picked this as a key part of the stimulus package,” he told health care executives in a January 2009 conference call.
After the bill was passed a month later, Mr. Gingrich’s consultancy, the Center for Health Transformation, joined two of its clients, Allscripts and Microsoft, in an “Electronic Health Records Stimulus Tour” that traveled the country, encouraging doctors and hospitals to buy their products with the billions in new federal subsidies. “Get Engaged, Get Incentives,” one promotion read.
Bachmann repeatedly tried to raise doubts about Gingrich's conservative principles and accused him of being a Washington lobbyist for accepting up to $1.6 million in payments from troubled mortgage giant Freddie Mac, which was at the heart of America's housing crisis.
"We can't have as our nominee for the Republican Party someone who continues to stand for Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. They need to be shut down, not built up," Bachmann said.
In a standoff over whether Gingrich in his congressional past had supported late-term abortion, Gingrich said Bachmann had her facts wrong.
Already, Gingrich is showing signs of fatigue among Republicans in this Midwestern state, an indication that they remain open to voting for someone else as a barrage of negative ads and verbal punches takes a toll on him.
A Public Policy Polling survey in Iowa this week said Gingrich's support had dropped several percentage points and he was leading Paul narrowly by 22 percent to 21 percent, with 16 percent for Romney and Michele Bachmann at 11 percent.
All told, Gingrich appeared to hold his own at the debate and Romney might have missed a chance to follow up on attacks he has been making against the former speaker in the media all week.
"I'm very concerned about not appearing to be zany," Gingrich said at one point, breezily making reference to a criticism of him this week by Romney.
ROMNEY: "I'm firmly in support of people not being discriminated against based upon their sexual orientation. At the same time, I oppose same-sex marriage. That's been my position from the beginning."
THE FACTS: In large measure, Romney has been consistent in those two positions, despite accusations of flip-flopping on gay rights.
He walked a fine line back in his failed 1994 Senate campaign, vowing to fight for equality but stopping short of endorsing gay marriage. That's the same line he walked Thursday night.
He has changed, though, on whether gay marriage should be addressed at the state or federal level. He has favored a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage at least since the beginning of his 2008 presidential bid, when he was the only major Republican candidate to do so. In 1994, he had said the matter should be decided by individual states. That was before the idea of a constitutional ban had gained traction in politics.
BACHMANN: "After the debates that we had last week, PolitiFact came out and said that everything I said was true."
For the second debate in a row, Gingrich complained that Bachmann wasn't getting her facts straight, this time when she went after him for the big money he made from Freddie Mac. In her own defense, Bachmann cited ratings from PolitiFact, a fact-checking organization that ranks statements on a scale from true to false, with the worst offender being "Pants on Fire" false.
PolitiFact rated two Bachmann statements from last week's debate. One, claiming Gingrich believed in an individual health care mandate as Massachusetts governor, was ranked mostly true. The other, that Romney introduced "socialized medicine" in his state, was judged burning-pants false.
Indeed, Bachmann has the worst record of accuracy in the Republican field, as rated by that organization and traced by others. Fully 73 percent of her statements checked by PolitiFact were judged mostly false or worse. Gingrich was wrong the next most often, 59 percent of the time.
Five-year-old Suri Cruise – and her golden high heeled shoes – threw a major temper tantrum yesterday at FAO Schwarz in New York City. We spotted the tot red faced and crying – even shouting at Katie Holmes – in the middle of the store. Certainly FAO Schwarz is the location of many childhood breakdowns. Most kids who go in there probably aren’t going to leave with the toys they wanted. Scenes ensue. Of course it’s generally agreed that parents shouldn’t give in to temper tantrums – but not surprisingly, Suri was pacified with a lollipop and toys. A good lesson learned.
While it's unclear exactly what all the fuss was about, the fashionable tot was determined to stand her ground in the face of her famous mother.
However, Holmes managed to calm Suri down with a lollipop and some toy purchases in an effort to avoid attracting any further attention.
Earlier in the day, Katie had taken Suri to her gymnastics class and like a true diva, wore gold heeled shoes and tiara.
The well-to-do youngster has a penchant for shoes and has already amassed a $150,000 collection.
As seven Republican presidential contenders began their sprint toward the first-in-the-nation Iowa caucuses on Jan. 3, each of the top candidates ran through a gauntlet of challenges in their Thursday night debate.
Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich came under fire from Rep. Michele Bachmann, R- Minn., for his consulting work for the government-sponsored enterprise Freddie Mac. Gingrich made more than $1.6 million for his Freddie Mac work.
As he has in previous debates Gingrich said that he had done no lobbying for the agency and that his consulting work was simply a private business endeavor.
But Gingrich won big applause from the crowd in Sioux City, Iowa when he accused President Obama of caving in to “left-wing environmental extremists in San Francisco” by refusing to approve the Keystone oil pipeline from Canada.
Bachmann sharply criticized Rep Ron Paul, R- Texas for saying that there was no evidence that Iran is close to building a nuclear weapon, dismissing it as “war propaganda.” Such thinking, said Paul, “is how we got into that useless war in Iraq.”
“I have never heard a more dangerous answer,” said Bachmann.
This prompted Paul to defend himself by saying, “I don’t want Iran to have a nuclear weapon” -- although earlier in the debate he’d said he could understand why the Tehran regime, surrounded by nuclear-armed powers, would want to acquire nuclear weapons.
Time and time over these last two or three debates, he gets questioned on his inconsistency of his record and every time he has the same response about not having our facts straight,” said Keith Nahigian, Bachmann’s national campaign manager. “And every time, he admits it the next day that we had our facts right.”
Gingrich has essentially acknowledged the accuracy of Bachmann’s criticism in previous debates on immigration and the individual mandate to purchase health insurance – but only after the fact, added Bachmann campaign spokeswoman Alice Stewart.
“Sometimes professors don’t like to be wrong, but sometimes they are,” Nahigian said.
But Gingrich’s Iowa campaign chairwoman, Linda Upmeyer, reiterated the campaign’s disagreement with Bachmann’s criticism tonight, which concerned Gingrich’s paid consulting work and his actions concerning abortion as a member of Congress.
Win
Gingrich
Newt was clearly relishing his night in the spotlight. Currently leading in the polls, the former House speaker basked in his front-runner status on Thursday, even poking fun at recent critiques of his "zany" reputation. Gingrich almost seem to enjoy being the evening's punching bag, aggressively hitting back his critics and questioning the factual accuracy of complaints leveled against him. (Particularly those by Rep. Michele Bachmann, whose relationship with the facts he called out as dubious.) And despite being hammered hard for his relationship with mortgage giant Freddie Mac in the first half of the debate, Gingrich rebounded quickly in the night's second hour. Plus, he managed to keep his pledge to positivity - and aimed most of his criticism at president Obama.
Romney
Early presidential debates, Romney stayed focused on the candidate he clearly sees himself running against down the line: President Obama. The former Massachusetts governor focused his efforts almost exclusively at criticizing the president, and laying out his vision for the future. Romney took swipes at Gingrich in the debate a few days ago, without much luck. (Remember that $10,000 bet?). Romney returned to comfortable territory Thursday--hitting Mr. Obama--and it worked. Still, at some point the former Bay State governor will have to prove that he can dish it out just as well as he can take it. After all, in a general election, there won't be another candidate to look ahead to.
Bachmann
Bachmann showed on Thursday that she knows how to take a punch. From lambasting Newt Gingrich for having his "hand out" to mortgage finance giant Freddie Mac to blasting Ron Paul for his position in Iran, the candidate went all out against her opponents. She even sent out a release criticizing "Newt Romney" in the middle of the debate. But confidence has never been Bachmann's problem - and some of her statements have already been proven false, including one about Iran's nuclear capabilities.
Perry
Registered any screen time for the first half of the debate, but Texas Gov. Rick Perry seemed more confident on stage Thursday night than he has since the early days of his campaign. "I'm kind of starting to like these debates," he quipped at the beginning of the evening. And he displayed equal aplomb knocking his opponents, taking Newt Gingrich to task for being unable to "tell the difference between a lobbyist or a consultant." But Perry's most memorable moment? Comparing himself to Bronco's quarterback Tim Tebow, who has made come-from-behind victories a personal specialty. Still, if Perry wants a shot at that sort of comeback, he's going to need to boost his poll numbers - and guarantee himself more stage time in debates.
Paul
Ron Paul with Sioux City - He was obviously enjoying his moment in the sun. The candidate, who has a huge base in Iowa and is effectively polling third in the state, got significantly more airtime than in any previous debate. And while the Texas congressman - and staunch libertarian - is pretty far outside of the mainstream when it comes to foreign policy, the crowd in Sioux City, Iowa didn't seem to mind too much. Still, it's hard to imagine that Paul picked up a huge number of new supporters Thursday night.
LOSE
R Santorum
Former Pennsylvania governor did nothing to hurt himself in Thursday's debate, but he also failed to make the leap he needed to significantly raise his profile among the field of contenders. Santorum delivered confident answers on questions about gay marriage and Obamacare - favorite topics of the staunch Christian conservative - but at the end of the day, he failed to deliver the game-changing performance that could have changed his status in the pack.
J Huntsman
J Huntsman has spent most of the Republican presidential debates on the relative sidelines - and that didn't change in Thursday night's debate. The candidate, who has consistently sat at the bottom of the polls, failed to make a deep impression with the little screen time he got. Despite a few memorable one-liners - including telling voters "we are getting screwed as Americans" -- the candidate likely did little to significantly alter his standing in the field.
Credible and serious presidential candidate from one of the major political parties -- in fact, his party's current frontrunner -- feels the need to make a public declaration that he will be faithful to his marriage vows. It's a fair assumption that he has done so not to get closer to God, but because he thinks the stunt could get him one step closer to the White House. And, given that this candidate has twice before broken his marriage vows, when you think about it, what he's really saying is that he promises to be more faithful to voters than he was to his first two wives.
The best that you can hope for from presidential campaigns is that they're empowering, enlightening, and engaging. Sadly, with this detour into fidelity pledges, the current Republican contest has gone right to embarrassing.
As a presidential candidate, Newt Gingrich has been fairly unflappable. He can take a punch, and hit back twice as hard -- usually in the same news cycle. He stands his ground in debates, even when he's being fired upon from all directions.
And yet, now, apparently, something has rattled Gingrich: the possibility that his well-publicized marital shortcomings could undermine his appeal in a conservative state like Iowa.
Think of it this way: Republicans want to beat Obama. They just don't want the drama. And so Gingrich's opponents have made it their mission to stir up that very thing -- focusing on the former House speaker's personal life.
In the past month, the former House Speaker has actually become more unpopular among independents and Democrats alike, raising questions about his ability to win the general election. This past week, a University of Iowa poll, while not rated highly enough for air by ABC News, showed that Gingrich’s support in the state had declined from its recent peaks, a trend that the pollsters cited as an indication that “his support may be starting to slide, as it has with previous frontrunners.”
Other roadblocks lie ahead, too. In Iowa, the evangelical vote is key. In the 2008 caucuses, 60 percent of GOP voters identified themselves as evangelicals, a huge presence that propelled Mike Huckabee to victory there over Romney. The Arkansas governor secured 46 percent of evangelical support, compared to just 19 percent for Romney. To date, Iowa evangelicals have yet to rally around a single candidate, leaving a potentially major shift still up in the air.
Then there is the unique nature of Iowa’s caucuses, a voting process that puts an emphasis on organizational power. With nearly 1,800 caucuses taking place across the state on Jan. 3, one candidate’s superior organization can lead to a far higher voter turnout than a candidate who struggles to get out the vote.
The straw poll in August is seen as a test both of a candidate’s ability to inspire enough passion in voters to win their vote and enough organizational might to get them to Ames, Iowa, but the poll’s victor — Bachmann — has faded badly. However, Paul, the runner-up that day, has steadily placed in the top tier in Iowa polls. Plus, the Texas congressman only lost the straw poll by a scant 152 votes. And consider this: In 2008, the second-place finisher was none other than Huckabee, the eventual caucus winner.
With so much still up for grabs in Iowa, perhaps that is why every candidate except Jon Huntsman has elected to make a determined push for a caucus victory. Neither Gingrich nor Romney has spent a great deal of time there, but the former Massachusetts governor has a volunteer army engaging in door-to-door combat for him, and Gingrich has lately ramped up his operation in the state. Other candidates such as Paul, Bachmann, Perry and Rick Santorum have logged countless hours in Iowa over the past five months. Perry, in fact, just launched a whirlwind bus tour that, save a brief stop for Christmas, will keep the Texas governor in the state right up until caucus day.
Chevrolet can't wait to get the redesigned Malibu midsize sedan into the market, giving it a stronger contender against the powerhouse sedans that control the biggest single segment of the new car market.
Nor could General Motors CEO Dan "Do It Yesterday" Akerson. He pushed Chevy to accelerate development by six months. It takes roughly three years to develop a car, from planning to production, so slicing six months is a big deal.
Result: The 2013 Malibu goes on sale in the first quarter next year with just one drivetrain: a mild hybrid system that GM calls eAssist. Chevy will market it as the Malibu Eco. GM's Buick brand also uses eAssist.
Compared to the current Malibu, the all-new 2013 Malibu is nearly three inches (76 mm) wider and has:
More than 1.5 inches (38 mm) greater front shoulder room and 3.5 inches (89 mm) greater rear shoulder room.
2.7 inches (68 mm) more front hip room and 2.8 inches (71 mm) of additional rear hip room.
Nearly four cubic feet (113 L) of additional interior volume.
More than one additional cubic foot (28 L) of usable trunk capacity: 16.3 cu. ft. / 462 L (14.3 cu. ft. / 405 L on Eco).
And with Chevrolet MyLink, the new Malibu packs the connectivity of a smartphone, with online services like Pandora ® internet radio and Stitcher SmartRadio ®, as well as the safety of hands-free operation of mobile phone apps. MyLink is simple, safe and connected.
At a glance: The new Malibu’s interior gives customers a touch of luxury, with premium features, high quality materials and easy-to-use technology. It incorporates a more subtle take on Chevrolet’s signature dual cockpit design and features a flowing, uninterrupted theme that reinforces its greater spaciousness. The “center stack” is integrated with the instrument panel, for example, which runs into the front door panels. A richer complement of details throughout the cabin – including high-tech lighting elements – and high-quality materials support the Malibu’s more sophisticated presence.
A “dual cockpit zone” mid-instrument panel flows through the doors and enhances the feeling of spaciousness. On most models, it is trimmed with a three-dimensional “tipped” grain surface typically found on luxury cars that enables unique, dual dimensional layers of color and tactility.
The center stack sweeps forward and away , enhancing the feeling of spaciousness.
Available seven-inch touch screen with full-color interface display that swivels up to reveal a six-inch-deep (152 mm) hidden and illuminated storage compartment deep enough to stow phones, wallets or even a small purse.
Control knobs, switches and touch points feature firm, tactile operation and, with certain controls, a higher-quality chrome finish that accent Malibu’s premium appointments.
Metallic, chrome or wood accents , depending on the model, are located around the shifter, surrounding the center stack, around the instrument cluster and on doors and the steering wheel.
Soft, ice blue ambient lighting illuminates control knobs and storage areas. Ambient IP and door lighting uses light-pipe technology to ensure even, consistent illumination on Eco, LT and LTZ models.
Three-point steering wheel tilts and telescopes and includes redundant audio and cruise controls, as well as controls for OnStar and Bluetooth.
Auxiliary input jack and USB port in center console and a 250-watt amplifier, nine speaker Pioneer Premium Sound System system available on LT, LTZ and Eco models.
Split-folding 60/40 rear seatback on all models for convenience and additional storage capacity.
Four interior cloth and leather color combinations available: Jet Black, Jet Black and Dark Titanium, Cocoa and Light Neutral or Jet Black and Brownstone leather (available on LTZ only).
Four option packages: Package 1 (Power Convenience): cargo net, auto-dimming mirror, rearview backup camera, remote start, eight-way driver seat with lumbar control, universal garage door opener; Package 2 (Premium Audio) adds: fog lamps, leather-wrapped shifter knob, Pioneer nine-speaker audio system with high-output amplifier; Package 3 (Leather) adds: heated front seats, eight-way passenger seat with lumbar control, leather-trimmed seating; Package 4 (Navigation) adds: memory seats and mirrors, navigation system, driver’s window with express-up feature.
In the Malibu Eco, a power flow display in the driver information center – or the center console screen when equipped with the navigation system – indicates which of the following modes the vehicle is operating in:
Battery charging – the eAssist motor is charging the high-voltage battery when the vehicle is slowing
Electric assist – the eAssist motor is providing electric power boost to the engine
Auto-Stop – the vehicle is stopped, the engine has automatically shut off and is ready to automatically restart when needed.
Driver-selectable modes are offered to enable maximum comfort or efficiency of the air conditioning system and include:
Eco mode – which maximizes the frequency and duration of Auto-Stop, while providing excellent cabin comfort
Comfort mode – reduces the frequency and duration of Auto-Stop to maximize cabin cabin comfort.
“There is a high level of functional fashion throughout the Malibu’s interior,” said Crystal Windham, director, Passenger Car Interior Design. “We didn’t look at one thing, we looked at everything to make the new Malibu a car that would stand out around the world.”
President Obama today said there is no reason for the government to shut down over the fight to extend the payroll tax cut and warned lawmakers again not to leave town for the holidays until this issue is resolved.
“There’s no reason why we shouldn’t be able to extend these items — the payroll tax cut, [unemployment insurance] — before the holidays. There’s no reason the government should shut down over this,” Obama said during remarks at a “We Can’t Wait” event at the White House. “I expect all of us to do what’s necessary in order to do the people’s business and make sure that it’s done before the end of the year.”
The president pressed lawmakers to extend the payroll tax cut before it expires at the end of the year and warned that if they don’t, 160 million middle class Americans would see their taxes go up on Jan. 1.
‘’Congress should not and cannot go on vacation before they have made sure that working families aren’t seeing their taxes go up by $1,000 and those who are out there looking for work don’t see their unemployment insurance expire,’’ President Barack Obama said Thursday as he encouraged Congress to reach a compromise.
Administration officials said they would insist that the payroll tax holiday be extended to prevent damage to the struggling economy.
As the Senate convened Thursday, Kentucky Sen. Mitch McConnell, the Republican leader, said he was ‘‘confident and optimistic’’ that Congress would be able to pass a huge spending measure and continue the payroll tax break before adjourning for the holidays. It was a departure from the previous day, when he asserted that Democrats ‘‘obviously want to have the government shut down.’’
Sen. Harry Reid of Nevada, the majority leader, also sounded more hopeful, saying that he and McConnell intended to ‘‘come up with something that will get us out of here at a reasonable time in the next few days.’’
For weeks, Republicans and Democrats have been fighting over how to pay for an extension of a payroll tax holiday for 160 million U.S. workers, one that will expire at the end of the year if Congress does not take action. That measure has become linked to a large spending bill that would keep the government financed through the rest of the fiscal year.
While both sides have spent much of the week trying to outmaneuver one another and gain the political high ground, Thursday seemed to presage the second stage of what has become a familiar pattern in the 112th Congress — the ratcheting back of Stage 1, which is recriminations via press conference — on the road to Stage 3: a final, grudging compromise.
At a minimum, the Senate, which has until Dec. 31 to act on the payroll tax before it reverts to a higher level, will seek a two-month stopgap extension of the payroll tax holiday, unemployment insurance and Medicare payment rates for doctors, at a cost of an estimated $40 billion. Senate leaders were still hoping to reach a deal on a longer-term plan.
While Democrats have dropped their idea of imposing a surtax on income of more than $1 million, they are now considering a plan that would find savings in other ways, including fees on the federal housing finance agencies, and could seek to end certain deductions and other tax benefits for millionaires.
Staff members on both sides began poring through the 800-page spending bill, preparing for a vote as early as Friday, although the entire process is expected to bleed into the weekend. Republican leaders in the House said there would be a meeting Friday morning with their members to discuss the plan.
The White House declined to allow Democrats to sign off on the bill until restrictions on travel to Cuba were removed. Rep. Jose E. Serrano, D-N.Y., a senior member of the House Appropriations Committee, said the proposed restrictions had been ‘‘the one last sticking point’’ in negotiations on the omnibus spending bill. Republicans wanted to reinstate restrictions on travel to Cuba and remittances sent there from the United States. Since Obama relaxed the restrictions in 2009, Cuba has seen a surge in visitors and remittances.
House Republicans, including Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart of Florida, sought the tougher restrictions, saying that tourist travel and remittances yielded a windfall to the Cuban government.
Speaker John A. Boehner also appeared to change his tone Thursday, saying that a solution to the deadlock on spending was in sight.
9 years ago the war in Iraq began with shock and awe, but it ended Thursday with quiet reflection for some Chicagoans.
During the Thursday ceremony in Baghdad, troops lowered the U.S. Forces-Iraq flag and wrapped it in camouflage in an Army tradition called "casing."
"To be sure the cost was high -- in blood and treasure of the United States and also the Iraqi people," Defense Secretary Leon Panetta told the roughly 200 troops and others in attendance. "Those lives have not been lost in vain. They gave birth to an independent, free and sovereign Iraq.
All U.S. troops will leave Iraq by the end of the year. But many will come home without comrades; 4,487 American troops were killed in the war and 32,000 were wounded. The war has cost more than $800 billion.
As the war comes to an end, Chicagoans whose lives were forever changed by it spoke of honor, sacrifice and lessons learned.
Loretta Capeheart's nephew died in Iraq and she said, "It's certainly not over for the Iraqi people. It's not over for my family. It's not over for the families of the 4500 soldiers who were lost."
Capeheart visited a memorial at Northeastern Illinois University where thousands of dog tags honor those killed in Iraq. One of those tags is for Capeheart's nephew, who died six years ago.
"Anytime you lose a young person, it's devastating because of the potential. He has a fiancé, who as far as I know still considers herself his fiancé, although it's been many years now," Capeheart said.
"I'm glad they're coming out, and I really hope we don't rush into anything too soon," Jim Smiley, who served two tours in Iraq, said.
Though Smiley believes it was a just war, he and fellow Marine Ryan Hulett are left with mixed emotions.
Well, you know, I think that I can speak for soldiers in one regard and that's that, you know, we're happy that we're not going to be going back there. You know, I mean, our families have had to endure us being gone as much as we've, you know, endured being there, so on that level, you know, it's nice to see that it's over.
I know there are some folks that kind of agree with what Senator McCain said today, which is, you know, basically the fact that we're not staying with some level of force may not bode well for the future, but I probably fall in the camp, personally, of - we needed to go. There are a lot of open issues there, and as long as we were there, we were really kind of, you know, the lid on the boiling pot.
You know, and that's the truth. We didn't really fight a nine year war. We fought nine one year wars because, you know, each unit would go there. They would learn what they could in two weeks from whoever they were replacing and they'd spend three months trying to figure out, you know, what the heck was going on.
And about, you know, month three, you start to get your legs under you and you're starting to understand what's going on and you got about six good months of trying to make a difference and then the last three months was spent getting ready for the next unit to come and repeat the cycle.
And I think, in a lot of ways, it made the war last a lot longer than it should have.
Why was it like that? Was that intentional? Was that a sort of a nod to sensibilities back home that people didn't want to see people over there for too long? Why is it? Why was it like that?
PROCTOR: You know, one of the other hats I wear is as a Vietnam historian. I'm working on my Ph.D. right now. And Vietnam - you know, as I kind of say at the beginning of the book, Vietnam really very much played an important part in how the Army approached this war. You know, in Vietnam, you know, the soldiers would go over there on one-year tours, but the units would stay. That created a lot of heartache for the units in the field and also for families back home.
From the time, really, they started this war, they made a decision very early to go in one-year rotations by unit so that you had that unit cohesion and all of the unit's families could take care of each other back home.
For Iraq, you know, Saddam Hussein - you know, he was a brutal dictator and the folks in Iraq do have an opportunity - if they can pull things together and they can settle their arguments without blowing each other up - at making a better future for their country.
On a personal level, I can speak for our unit when we went. Our battalion commander, Lieutenant Colonel Bubba Cain, he formed a really close relationship with an Iraqi police battalion commander there, Lieutenant Colonel Ahmed al-Fahal. And about halfway through our rotation, Colonel Ahmed was killed by a suicide vest, you know, and that's something that, you know, we - that hit us every bit as hard as losing a soldier, I mean, because we were very much focused on partnering and working with Iraqis.
I think that, you know, those are the little stories that we kind of have to carry with us.
Well, that does kind of lead, though, to the larger question. Was, at the end of the day - and I do recognize, again, that you are still on active duty and you are speaking for yourself - but at the end of the day, was the U.S. presence in Iraq a force for good or not? Did we accomplish anything, I guess, is the question.
Yeah. You know, and I think what I would say is we are not going to know the answer to that question until we actually leave. You know, and I think that's why I have kind of a positive feeling about us going.
Before I let you go, I just have to ask. You know, we often ask our guests, you know, what wisdom they have to pass on and you seem as good a person as any to ask that question. Do you have some wisdom to pass on from this very long experience that you saw up close that was so profound for so - for the country, but with the sacrifice, which was borne by, as we said, a few.
Yeah. Well, I guess, my one chance here to talk to the American electorate, I guess what I would say is be careful what you ask your U.S. military to do because we don't like to lose and we don't like to accept defeat. And so we are going to try and try and try and we're going to try to get as much time as we can to try.
And so, you know, I would hope that everybody would think, you know, be very sober and deliberative before they ask us to engage in war because, you know, as we've seen here and as we continue to see in Afghanistan, you are making a deep, deep, deep commitment.
Lieutenant Colonel Pat Proctor served two tours in Iraq. He's the author of the new book, "Task Force Patriot and the End of Combat Operations in Iraq." He wants to emphasize once again that the views expressed here are his and his alone. And he was kind enough to join us from member station KANU in Lawrence, Kansas.
Lieutenant Colonel, thank you for joining us. Thank you once again for your service. Thank your family again for their service. Thanks for talking to us.
Florida Gov. Rick Scott "has strongly recommended" that the trustees of Florida A&M University suspend, "effective immediately," the school's president in the wake of alleged hazing and "financial irregularities," the governor's office announced Thursday.
The governor's action drew a quick response from a group of several hundred FAMU students who marched to the governor's house Thursday night. They massed outside the governor's home and said they would not leave until Scott rescinded his recommendation.
At one point, Scott came out of his home and addressed the group using a megaphone and had heated exchanges with the crowd.
Earlier, Scott had told the chairman of FAMU's board of trustees, Solomon L. Badger III, that he felt the board should take further action against university President James Ammons when it meets Monday, the statement said. The governor also "placed a call" to Ammons to notify him of these conversations.
"I think it's in his best interests (to) make sure that there is no question that this university is doing the right thing and cooperating," Scott said Thursday.
The discussions came after Scott returned Thursday from a trade mission to Israel and was briefed by staffers on recent developments out of the Tallahassee university, according to the governor's office.
Ammons responded Thursday that he was "sure that this investigation will determine that, under my leadership, the administration acted appropriately." At the same time, he said he was prepared to accept his fate.
Scott's office would not say whether any new information about the death of student Robert Champion last month in Orlando prompted the governor's recommendation. Scott had been traveling on a trade mission to Israel and, upon his return Thursday, was briefed on the "latest developments," his office said.
Though police have not detailed exactly what happened to Champion, a member of FAMU's "Marching 100" band, they have blamed a hazing incident aboard a parked bus that took place after the Florida Classic football game.
Some claimed Champion had been punched repeatedly. A 911 caller told a dispatcher he vomited and lost consciousness. Champion died a short time later at a local hospital.
FAMU trustees discussed suspending Ammons, who has led the historically black university since 2007, during a meeting last week but opted instead to reprimand him. Some trustees said he had done a poor job of keeping them informed and consulting them about issues related to Champion's death.
The 26-year-old's death has set off a public outcry about hazing at FAMU, and particularly in its famous marching band, and prompted investigations into not only the most recent death but how the university handled other hazing allegations.
A separate incident that came to light this week involved a freshman FAMU band member who was beaten so harshly during a hazing incident that her femur cracked, authorities said. That student plans to sue the university, as does Champion's family.
The Florida Department of Law Enforcement is investigating Champion's death as well as possible fraud issues at the university.
After Champion died, Ammons moved to fire FAMU's band director, Julian White. But FDLE asked that any disciplinary action at the school be postponed until its work is finished.
White, the band director for 13 years, has said that he will fight an effort to fire him and that during his tenure he took action to end violent hazing.
Local official has vowed to "strike hard" against the leaders of a revolt in the southern Chinese fishing village of Wukan, and urged them to surrender, at the same time as announcing the property project that triggered the unrest is being put on hold.
The comments by Wu Zili, the acting mayor of Shanwei prefecture, which includes Wukan, suggested that authorities were taking a cautious, carrot-and-stick approach as they attempt to resolve the situation without embarrassing Beijing by prompting further violence or emboldening other protesters.
Mr. Wu said his government had almost resolved the standoff, which started in September, and blamed two village representatives for a surge in unrest since the death of a villager in police custody on Sunday.
The government says the man died of a heart attack, but residents allege he was murdered, and have erected barricades to prevent officials and police from re-entering the village in the prosperous southern province of Guangdong, which produces many of China's exports.
The Wukan revolt is this year's most serious case of mass unrest in China, which analysts say has been escalating in large part because of local officials who commandeer farmland at below market prices and then sell it to developers and pocket most of the profits.
A Wall Street Journal reporter was blocked from entering Wukan, but saw hundreds of paramilitary police, many of them with automatic weapons, guarding approaches to the village while dozens of police vehicles patrolled the surrounding area.
The protests in Wukan began months ago when the Fengtian Livestock company and Country Garden collaborated to use disputed land for development. The villagers claimed the land for their agricultural uses.
This is just one of many protests involving land grabs that have been heightened over the past few years as a result of China’s real estate boom and urbanization, which local governments rely on to boost their incomes.
So why is this one any different? There are several things about this protest that have caught our attention.
First, the duration. The villagers have maintained these protests for over several months. Usually these protests die down when local officials are able to buy off a handful of people or strike some sort of negotiation.
Second, the numbers. Although the protesters themselves only amount to a thousand or so citizens, the entire village of approximately 20,000 appears united in its stance against the local government.
And third, the response. The protests lead to the retreat of village officials and the cordoning off of the entire village from any ingoing or outgoing traffic. Although we’ve seen this tactic employed at least once before in Zhejiang province, it is not common and therefore notable.
As we’ve always stated before, many of these protests are local and can be contained locally. Ultimately they pose little threat to the central government. However, we’ve noted several incidents, including the recent protests over a factory in Dalian, where the local government has capitulated to citizen demands.
People look to Beijing to intervene against corrupt local officials, and Beijing is often able to shield itself from criticism by setting itself apart from local governments that are most often the targets of social unrest.
As China’s economy slows — and we are witnessing a rapidly slowing economy as Europe’s economic turmoil affects China’s exports — protests increase and put increasing pressure on Beijing to manage local uprisings with dwindling economic resources.
As similar protests occur throughout the country, and if they demonstrate the same level of solidarity as in Wukan, Beijing will be forced to respond and will do so through a mixture of force and incentives.
If Beijing mishandles these protests — and the margin for error increases as the protests expand and become more united — the focus could turn to the central government. Further, if protest tactics are able to increasingly force a favorable response for the citizens, they become emboldened. In the end, Beijing will not hesitate to resort to force, especially if the mandate of the Chinese Communist Party comes into question.
With just under three weeks left until the Iowa caucuses, Michele Bachmann is about to embark on a bus tour of all 99 Iowa counties, and Rick Perry plans to hit 44 cities. Mitt Romney is hoping Newt Gingrich’s surge in the state fades fast, while Gingrich is recouping from the sting of a top Iowa aide’s resignation.
And Ron Paul is eyeing new poll results that show the first-in-the-nation caucuses could be his for the taking.
With the fate of a Donald Trump/Newsmax debate in limbo, a Thursday debate in Sioux City, Iowa, will likely be the last time all the GOP hopefuls square off before caucus-goers make their voices heard.
Bret Baier will moderate the debate, which is scheduled to air at 9 p.m. on Fox News.
Rick Perry’s looking energized and feisty. “I hope I am the Tim Tebow of the Iowa caucuses,” he said.
Jon Huntsman may be the most impressive so far. He sounds like a man who has nothing to lose and is saying what he really thinks, including, “I’m not going to sign any of those silly pledges.”
Newt Gingrich, looking statesmanlike and avuncular, invoked Ronald Reagan in the opening minutes of the debate, noting that at this point in 1979, the Gipper was 30 points behind Jimmy Carter.
“I believe I can debate Barack Obama,” Gingrich said, answering questions about his electability. He predicted that Obama “will not have a leg to stand on trying to defend a record that is terrible and an ideology that is radical.”
“I’m kinda gettin’ to where I like these debates,” Perry says, smiling. He does seem more energized, more relaxed, and got the biggest applause of the night with his clarion call for a part-time Congress.
It’s one of his stump-speech staples, one of numerous proposals based on the way the Lone Star State does things. Members of Congress should have their pay and time and staff cut in half, he said, and lawmakers should come to Washington only every other year – just like Texas.
