Skip to comments.I dreamed of trolling against Newt in my maidenform bra and all I got was this big old zot
Posted on 01/20/2012 7:33:09 PM PST by Hoodat
ORANGEBURG, S.C. Newt Gingrich on Friday backed at least a portion of the Dream Act, saying that he would grant a path to citizenship to illegal immigrant youths who agree to sign up and serve in the U.S. military.
Thats a much tighter standard than the full Dream Act, which President Obama wants. That legislation would allow legal status and an eventual path to citizenship for children and young adults who join the military, but would also apply to those who go to college a much broader class of people.
I am opposed to anybody who came here illegally getting citizenship. Thats entirely wrong, the GOP presidential candidate and former House speaker told a young man who asked about illegal immigrant students. The only exception I would make is if young people, the ones you are dealing with, are willing to join the American military and serve the United States.
Speaking a day before South Carolinas GOP primary, Mr. Gingrich said that would put them on par with any other foreign-born legal resident who joins the U.S. military, and who under the law has a path to citizenship.
Mr. Gingrichs stance puts him in between Mr. Obama and GOP rival Mitt Romney, who has said he would veto the Dream Act.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
You're finally getting Newt.
He is a technocrat. Full of "ideas" but they all involve tinkering with Gov't.
He doesn't really have the vision to return power to the power notwithstanding his "soaring" rhetoric.
Newt is unsteady and will disappoint. Guaranteed.
Should be “power to the people”.
True, and establishing guidelines for which people are given legal status is one aspect of immigration law that would have to be done centrally or chaos would result.
This local board nonsense is a totally dumb idea and an insult to every citizen in its pretense that local communities would have some meaningful decision making role.
Newt's a disaster waiting to happen on the immigration issue. We'll have to have a Congress to keep the next president in check, whoever it might be.
I think it’s down to if we aren’t going to have a candidate who is completely for us, at least it’s fun to cheer for one who is so good at being against them. This is a strange election, good reason to oppose any one of them but we can’t, we have to pick one and support them, this is all there will be now.
Youre really on an anti-Newt rampage tonight. Who are you supporting? Mitt or Santorum or Paul
Look, if FR is not your cup of tea just move on. Continue trolling and you will be moved along and I can guaranfreepingtee you that.
401 posted on Friday, January 20, 2012 6:15:59 PM by Jim Robinson (Rebellion is brewing!! Impeach the corrupt Marxist bastard!!)
If you search “citizen immigration boards” on youtube, you will see him talking about it over several debates.
Romney is the enemy, after fighting him for so many years it gets tiresome to listen to his cult people and having to repeat ourselves.
Yeah...like Sharon Angle, Chrisine Odonell etc...etc...It called you actually have to get the majority of votes to actually win. Just wanted to give you heads up on how democracy works. You don’t get majority of votes you don’t win...aka once in a life time thing.:)
“saying that he would grant a path to citizenship to illegal immigrant youths who agree to sign up and serve”
The US has been doing this with the Filipinos for years and years. As said above the numbers would be minuscule. Hoodat is trying to make a mountain out of a molehill but does not know his history.
You give Rush a pass for “all he’s done,” but give Newt zero credit for bringing the GOP its first majority in 40 years while Myth Romney was disparaging Ronald Reagan. Gotcha.
I guess it was all Rick Santorum’s doing.
No kidding, a hard core romneybot.
Wow, that was very clever and subtle. You put Newt’s name in a sentence with Luis Guiterrez and Dick Durbin, so I therefore MUST conclude that he’s just like them.
With “logic” like that, you should do opp. research for Myth Romney.
If you aren’t already.
So you are all for Mitt Romney?
So is this what we have come to as conservatives?
Support a serial adulterer
Support a person who supports replacing Obamacare (said there were a good 300 pages of Obamacare)
Endorsed a government mandate in healthcare in 1994 & 1995, and beyond.
In 2003, Newt talked about how the government has to take the lead in regulatory control of healthcare
In 2005, he talks about redistribution of wealth to the poor to support healthcare
His healthcare thinktank has taken in $30 million from insurance companies
In 2011, Newt opposed Paul Ryans medicare reform. Said it was too much radical reform.
Newt claimed FDR was the greatest president of the 20th century
Support a person who made a global warming ad with Pelosi
Supported Government subsidies for Ethanol to reduce GHG’s
Said he believed carbon emissions are going up in the atmosphere
Support a person who would have signed the dream act
Support a person who goes after capitalism (Bain)
Only speaker sanctioned with Ethics issues
Forced to resign from the house (400 members, including 100 republicans voted him out)
Made $1.5m from lobbying Freddie and Fannie
Was critical of Bush’s anti-terror policies
Opposed the surge in Iraq
These are just a few things I am aware of. And they are not conspiracies, lies or things taken out of context. Almost all the items above, you can find a video of Newt saying them in his own words.
To me, it seems like Newt is flipping and flopping as much as Romney.
Of course....that makes sense, doesn't it? He's seeing the numbers tonight showing his lying, scummy, born-on-third-base-and-thinks-he-hit-a-triple, leftist empty-suit getting trashed in SC and he's lashing out.
Hey, Myth'll probably still win. But for a Mythbot to call Newt a liberal? Really. It's like Janet Reno calling someone ugly, or Chris Christie calling someone fat.
Or Myth Romney calling someone a lizard.
Fact Check: Latest Ad by Pro-Romney Super PAC “Restore Our Future” Contains Numerous Lies and Falsehoods
Atlanta, GA - Newt 2012 released a fact sheet today responding to the latest dishonest attack ad aired by pro-Romney Super-Pac “Restore our Future”:
Falsehood: Freddie Mac paid Newt $30,000 an hour - $1.6 million.
I think less than maybe once a month, they [Freddie Mac] would drop by. We’d spend an hour [talking].
-Newt Gingrich, On the Record with Greta Van Susteren, 11/17/11
It is this remark which the Super-Pac uses to justify this gross distortion.
First, Freddie Mac was a client of the Gingrich Group, a firm with thirty employees and offices in three cities. The client fees were not paid directly to Newt, they were paid to the company, and the vast majority of it went to staff salaries, health insurance, rent and other overhead.
Second, like any consulting firm, a great deal of work and research goes into the recommendations given. Newt and his staff spent time preparing for these meetings, putting in hours of research to bring a well informed opinion. To report that a one hour meeting is the extent of their work is ignorant of standard business practice.
Falsehood: Gingrich teamed up with Nancy Pelosi on global warming.
The Truth: Newt absolutely opposes cap and trade, which Nancy Pelosi supports, as well as any system of taxing carbon emissions. He testified before Congress against the Nancy Pelosi-backed cap and trade effort in 2009 and led a grassroots effort while he was the Chairman of American Solutions to block its passage in the House and Senate. Newt repeatedly states there is no scientific evidence to justify a large government, centralized response.
Falsehood: Together [Gingrich & Pelosi] they co-sponsored a bill that gave $60 million a year to a U.N. program supporting Chinas brutal One Child policy.
The Truth: Newt never voted for this legislation and this never became law. Additionally, Ronald Reagans Mexico City Policy was in place in 1989, which would have prevented any money going toward abortions in support of Chinas One Child Policy:
As to US contributions to the United Nations Fund for Population Activities, their continuation will be conditional on concrete assurances that no part of the US monies will be used for abortion and the Fund does not support abortion or coercive family planning programs.
-US Policy Statement for the International Conference on Population, 1984
This policy applied to any legislation passed through 1993, and implicitly prohibits any US funds from going to Chinas One Child policy.
Falsehood: As Speaker, Gingrich even supported taxpayer funding of some abortions.
House Speaker Newt Gingrich on Sunday supported the availability of federally- financed abortions for poor women who are victims of rape or incest.
-Chicago Tribune, April 10, 1995
Newt supported Hyde amendment language, which prohibits federal funding for abortions. This language often makes exceptions for rape, incest, or the life of the mother, and is supported by conservative members of Congress. These clauses were found in the Republican supported Stupak Amendment to President Obamas healthcare bill. Newt recognized that an outright ban on federal funding of abortion would not be signed by Bill Clinton, and worked to remove federal abortion funding as much as possible in the existing political framework.
Falsehood: [Newt] was fined $300,000 for ethics violations by a Republican Congress.
The Truth: Eighty-four politically motivated ethics charges were filed against Newt when he was Speaker of the House regarding the use of tax exempt funds for a college course he taught titled Renewing American Civilization. Eighty-three of the eighty-four charges were found to be without merit and dropped.
The remaining charge had to do with contradictory documents prepared by Newts lawyer supplied during the course of the investigation. Newt took responsibility for the error and agreed to reimburse the committee the cost of the investigation into that discrepancy. The agreement specifically noted that the payment was not a fine, but instead a “cost assessment.” The House vote affirmed this agreement.
In 1999, after a 3 ½ year investigation, the Internal Revenue Service (under President Bill Clinton, nonetheless) concluded that Gingrich did not violate any tax laws, leading renowned CNN Investigative Reporter Brooks Jackson to remark on air it turns out [Gingrich] was right and those who accused him of tax fraud were wrong.
For more facts about Newt Gingrich’s record, please visit Newt.org/answers.
Contact: R.C. Hammond
Get with the program.Perry was torn down on these here message boards for his immigration like it was a mortal sin but Gingrich gets a pass on all.Because everybody got chewed up and spat out because ONE didn’t run and there is no one left.As well as every 4 years we hear ‘I M M I G R A T I O N R E F O R M REIGN IN B I G GOVERNMENT E D U C A T I O N REFORM.But because the country is on her knees J O B S are all that counts so they will BS us again and do nothing about any of it but maybe get some jobs back to appease us.Anybody but Obama so anything goes...
Bozell Statement: Newt Was Found Innocent Nearly 13 Years Ago Networks Have Yet To Report It
By Brent Bozell | December 07, 2011 | 14:40
Change font size: A | A
Brent Bozell’s picture
Following the recent threats from Nancy Pelosi and the heavy brush with which the media are painting Newt Gingrich as unethical, the Media Research Center is now calling on the networks to seize the moment and report the truth from nearly 13 years ago.
It has been 4,689 days since the IRS formally cleared Newt Gingrich of any violation of tax law. Its been 4,689 days since ABC, CBS, and NBC have had the opportunity to report it. What the heck. Why not today? Now is the time for these networks to report the truth for once. The networks owe it to the American people to report the fact that in 1999 the IRS completely vindicated Gingrich.
Between December 15, 1996 and January 31, 1997 the network morning and evening newscasts filed a staggering 244 stories. Total number of network stories on the news that Newt was completely innocent? Zero. Thats beyond pathetic.
Oh and what about CNN? We found that the cable network filed one — count ‘em, one — story. They’re probably exhausted by all that effort, so we’ll let them off the hook.
See Bozell’s column “ Newt Is Vindicated, But Nobody Knows It” in February of 1999, detailing how the IRS cleared Gingrich of any violation of the tax laws but was spiked from being covered by ABC, CBS and NBC News.
House Rep’s statement on Newt Gingrich’s Non Fine...
Numerous statements from elected officials and other individuals associated with the Committees investigation make it clear that the sanction levied against Speaker Gingrich was nothing more than a cost assessment. In presenting the Report to the Members of the House, former Congresswoman Nancy Johnson (R-CT) characterized the Speakers payment in the following manner:
Likewise in past cases where the committee imposed monetary sanctions on a Member, the committee found that the Member had been personally enriched by the misconduct. The committee made no such finding against Representative Gingrich, yet recommends that a cost reimbursement of $300,000 be paid to the House by him.
Likewise, Democrat Congressman Adam Schiff (D-CA), a member of the Investigation Subcommittee, described the Report findings in the Congressional Record as follows:
Based upon the allegation, the violations we found, the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct on a 7-to-1 vote, full committee now, entire committee, recommended the following penalty. It recommended a reprimand and a cost assessment of $300,000. . . . We set $300,000 as the estimated costs of that portion of the investigation that dealt with clearing up the misstatements that we received, which may be begun to be prepared in Mr. Gingrichs law firm, but for which he is responsible as Member of the House.
Indeed, even Democrat Congressman (now Senator) Ben Cardin (D-MD) agreed on the proper classification of the Speakers $300,000 payment. In his remarks to the House urging adoption of the Ethics Committee Report and Resolution, then-Congressman Cardin described the proposed sanction against Speaker Gingrich in the following manner:
It provides a reprimand plus a required $300,000 contribution by Mr. Gingrich to the cost of these proceedings.
Moreover, in the transcript of the sanctions proceedings before the House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct, Special Counsel to the House Ethics Committee James Cole could not have made it more clear when he responded to questions from Congressman Thomas Sawyer (D-OH) as follows:
In addition, this is not a fine that we are recommending. The rule book says that a fine is an appropriate sanction when a member has received personal gain. And as Mr. Smith had asked and as I told him, no, we did not find that.
In sum, there was never any fine levied against Speaker Gingrich as a result of the findings of the House Ethics Committee Report referenced in the subject advertisements. Any statement to the contrary in any broadcast communication produced on behalf of Governor Romney, any other presidential candidate, or any SuperPAC is all at once false, misleading, and defamatory.
Hey - it’s OK ! He’ll beat Obama in the debates . ; ) Duh !
Few people are more predisposed to liking Newt than I. But I cannot get past his sabotage of the immigration reform movement in 1995 and 1995, when there was bipartisan and even liberal support for reducing immigration, and his silly ideas today.
These Newtbashers are like ABC News--they don' need no steenkin' facts.
They are BACKED UP, I know how difficult it is for some to be able to look up the truth but it is there IF they want to find it. ;)
In other words Gingrich is in favor of a policy that has been in place for at least 200 years.
Thank you so much!
Look, pal, they were conservative tea party candidates who were backed by the grassroots and with our hard work and support won their respective primaries. Elite establishment RINOs like Karl Rove then torpedoed them nightly on FOX News, just like he and his establishment RINO friends and dumbass RINO trolls like you are trying to do to Newt. NO MORE!! We’ve declared war on you turncoat tools and idiots!!
Hoodat is an idiot troll whose days are numbered on FR.
How stupid is hoodat to think that this is any different than policy that has been in place for 200 years.
Oh, hell. Why drag this out? Get the hell off of this conservative site, troll. Go troll for Romney or Paul or whomever on some other site!!
A few good illegal Muslims, Mexican cartel runners and gay Haitians in the mix will make our military a stronger, kinder and more diverse line of defense for our Counrty. God did say the most important thing was for us to love on another. Ain’t this new America just great! //s
Your recent rash of problems with FR has been solved.
Change the freaking channel already. Delete your FR cookies and bookmark. Click and troll to your heart’s content, ELSEWHERE!!
You’re going to need a small broom to affix upside down on your keyboard!
Been looking forward to a few of these you have taken out.
The Romans held out that particular carrot and it worked rather well for them.
I'd love to hear Victor Davis Hanson's take on that -- in particular, if it merely represented one more step in Rome's decline.
Check the title of this thread.
All for you. ;)
A thread for the ages.
A triple zot by the Boss himself at posts 75(GoMonster),82(Hoodat) and 84(Siena Dreaming).
The judges are putting up signs that all read “10”.
We can use illegals to do the “military service” citizens won’t do....
Sorry... but the November election may very well be my first since I began voting, to skip the President box (or screen with the new voting machines).
I thought I liked Santorum until he started spouting off his anti-Constitutional/freedom views...
You’re not immune to the zot either my friend. Leftists, MittBots, PaulBots, RINOs, Karl Rove establishment types and trolls of many stripes and colors have one-by-one driven our leading grassroots conservative candidates out of the race. They worked for years on Palin, then Perry, then Cain, then Bachmann, now Newt. When ever a non-establishment, non-RINO conservative gets into the lead they open fire and 24/7 trash and torpedo until they drive them out.
If you want to troll and trash our conservative candidates, take your business elsewhere. PaulBots can take it to a liberaltaraian site. RomneyBots to FOX News. Trolls to DU. I don’t care where you go, but if you’re here to trash Newt, I’m gunning for your azz!!
WAR IS HELL!!
REBELLION IS HERE!!
DON’T TREAD ON ME!!
Post 90 was meant for you.
It is amazing and a little sad that it took 77 posts before that simple truth was pointed out.
See Post 90.
A triple zot within 9 posts by the Boss.
If you call all the crap you’ve been spewing on this thread being “informed” you might want to get a dictionary.
Hahaha, wasn’t the title when I posted. ZOT! :)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.