Skip to comments.UNBELIEVABLE?! Newt Loves FDR, Models Himself After Woodrow Wilson and Admires SEIUís Andy Stern
Posted on 01/21/2012 11:52:56 AM PST by Steelfish
UNBELIEVABLE?! Newt Loves FDR, Models Himself After Woodrow Wilson and Admires SEIUs Andy Stern Tuesday, Dec 13, 2011 at 3:52 PM EST
ts not as if Newt couldnt have known his past comments were going to eventually be called into question. Hes capably navigated his way through his big government tendencies so far and miraculously still has solid support in the Tea Party. Will the latest damaging clip have any impact? Gingrich is caught praising his favorite president of the 20th century: FDR. Yup, he picked the mother of all progressives ahead of Ronald Reagan.
Watch the video montage below:
Cue sound of heads exploding across the country NOW!
Seriously?! This is unbelievable.
This goes back to what Newt Gingrich said on this program. You got to get things done. Thats akin to saying we all love the Constitution but there are things we got to do, Glenn warned.
FDR did get things done, and then they were ruled unconstitutional, Stu joked.
But thats not the worst thing on the clip at the top of the page Glenn reads a story where Gingrich praised SEIUs Andy Stern in one of his books.
In his book Real Chance: From the World That Fails to the World That Works, Gingrich praises the SEIU head, who remains a close adviser of the President Obama. Pitching the need for conservatives to respect organized labor, while simultaneously pushing back against some of Labors more cherished legislative goals, he wrote the following:
Conservatives cannot cheer unions overseas and then be blindly anti-union here at home. There are legitimate historic reasons for workers to organize together, and there is a strong need for a healthy, competitive, union, movement that helps improve the lives of its members and the competitiveness of our country.
(Excerpt) Read more at glennbeck.com ...
Notice that Beck - while he doesnt directly endorse Romney - goes berserk whenever the inevitability of Milt is in question.
- - - -
Bingo. The attempt to appear neutral is also a Mormon technique. How do I know? It was one I was taught when I was Mormon.
Wow! I wish all those Newtards who flamed me will read your post.
I don’t necessarily object to posts like this, particularly from Beck because it shows what I have been saying for almost 2 yeara - Beck is off the rails.
You dont have to like or agree with Glenn, but his research is excellant
- - - -
His ‘research’ quit being ‘excellent’ years ago. He makes boneheaded research mistakes that a 15 second google would show, like his lecture on ‘church history’ last year with Constantine, the Trinity, the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Nag Hammadi.
If you can’t trust him to get facts that are taught in freshman courses correct, then you can’t trust him to get graduate level facts correct.
He is turned into a parody of himself.
Beck lost it awhile ago, wake up people.
Beck wouldn’t know the truth if it bit him on the backside. He has sold his soul to his feelings, literally.
After awhile the Mormon brainwashing eats your brain cells, at least when it comes to ‘the Church’ or other LDS. (See my tagline).
I did a little too much LDS in the 1980’s.
For that reason, he sees no qualitative difference between Barack Obama or Gingrich or Romney, all of whom have expressed Progressive ideas at one time or another. And yet, in truth, they vary dramatically in the extent to which they adhere to Progressive doctrine. Obama is an extreme Progressive. Romney is somewhat less so, and Gingrich considerably less than Romney. But Beck clearly hates Gingrich on a very personal level, and that poisons his judgment.
As a conservative, I don't care for the choices, but one must be made. Romney is a non-starter for me, and always has been. He has no core beliefs, and will be destroyed by Obama in the general election for the same reason that McCain was: he stands for what the GOP leadership does: nothing.
Newt has great flaws, but he also has a great virtue: he thinks that ideas matter and can articulate them. And many of his ideas are very good ones. Rick Santorum would be my choice at this point, because he lacks Newt's personal baggage and is closer to my own ideal of conservatism. Yet we are going to have to select eventually the last man standing. If it is Romney, I will do what I did with McCain: vote for him against Obama and drink a shitload of scotch to wash the sin from my gullet.
I’m pretty unlikely to cast a vote in this presidential election and despite the blame that will come my way for Obama being reelected, my conscience is clear.
America is finished and I’m looking out for my own soul and voting for the lesser evil isn’t conducive to that goal.
BTW why dont Mormon temples have a cross on the steeples?...
(thats not a punchline, I want to know)
- - - - - - -
Mormons NEVER use the cross as a symbol either in their chapels which have a spire only or for jewelry, in their pictures in their homes, or on their temples (which have a gold statue of the Angel Moroni). Mormons truly shun the Cross.
The first answer they will give you is that the cross represents the death of Christ and they focus on the resurrection of Christ. Sometimes you will get a snarky reply like “If Jesus was shot would you wear a gun around your neck?!?”
The other answer is related to their theology. According to the LDS Jesus shed his blood by sweating drops of blood in the Garden to pay for sin, thus the sin bearing mostly took place in the garden not on the Cross and that the Cross was really only a method of execution and technically Jesus COULD have died of old age because he had already born the sins in the garden. The point of Christ’s death, in Mormonism is because he HAD to die SIMPLY to be resurrected IN ORDER that we could all be resurrected.
Here is are 2 links to some more information and I am always happy to answer either in forum or via freepmail.
Is being wrong an unpardonable sin for LDS?
- - - -
Yes as a matter of fact, it is... ;)
I can’t blame you; not at all. But I’m not quite ready to concede America’s perpetual demise. At least not as long as I can reload.
So, are you lying when you dated this 1-21-12, or are you just being ignorant?
“If revenue exceeded spending, why did the debt increase?”
Some don’t count the payment of interest on the national debt when saying a budget is “balanced”. So, if your annual budget has a projected revenue of $3.2T and a projected expenditure of $3T, it would be balanced (no annual budget deficit) and actually show a “surplus” of $200B. Then, although the national debt was not increased by those annual expenditures it still went up by $200B when, say $400B in interest payments were added on.
Of course, most of us in the real world understand that the interest payments are indeed expenditures (or at least obligations) and should be considered when attempting to say you’re going to “balance” the budget.
Newt would possibly be correct if he said “Not counting interest payments on the national debt, I helped pass 4 consecutive annual budgets that spent less than was taken in”. Or some such thing.
Wish I could do that.
"Not counting the interest on my mortgage, I'm rich!"
Don't do that - at least vote third-party or write someone in.
That's what I'm likely to do.
Clinton never had a balanced budget, and the "prosperity" was the Internet bubble which was collapsing during his final year in office.
Could say the same thing about The Won.
Stop being silly. The article dates itself. This has been a great debate on Glenn Beck and the nature of Newt’s comments on FDR. It’s always useful when folks address the substance and not try to deflect on an inadvertent error.
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.