Skip to comments.Newt Gingrich Responds To Glenn Beck (He doesn't deny being a progressive)
Posted on 12/12/2011 9:09:39 AM PST by Halfmanhalfamazing
when you're talking about Glenn Beck now he actually, the other day, called you a progressive on FOX Business channel. What do you say to that sort of claim?"
Gingrich: "I don't know. It depends on what standard you're using, you know? The fact is I balanced the budget for four consecutive years. And we did so by cutting taxes and increasing employment so people went back to work, they left welfare, they left food stamps, they left unemployment, they left Medicaid. Who else has that record of achievement? I worked with Reagan in '79, '80. I worked with Reagan in defeating the Soviet Empire. I think those are relatively conservative credentials."
(Excerpt) Read more at realclearpolitics.com ...
No, I don't know, how about the progressive standard? You know how I would answer that? "Glenn says I'm a progressive? He's wrong. I do not in any way believe in big government". Then I would continue on with the rest of what he said. But Gingrich did not.
I'd bet every freeper would answer this in roughly the same way I would. I would be personally offended to be called a progressive, and while I wouldn't respond in an offended way, I would certainly categorically refute it instead of playing the word games that progressives always play.
This is aggravating to be talked down to like this from Newt. We know what progressivism is, and you sir are a progressive.
Well, Newt’s favourite president was FDR:
And according to him, if Bush had followed on Reagan’s footsteps he would have lost:
No cherry picking on Gingrich’s record all is fair game....
Why should we let the left define the language we use. Liberals are reactionaries, not progressives. Conservatives are the real progressives. We want the United States to progress by adopting conservative principles.
Glenn Beck is a crybaby....and I could never stand his whiny approach to conservatism....
If by "balanced the budget" you mean "government spent less than it took in", that hasn't happened since the Eisenhower Administration.
I’m tired of the Newt haters on this forum distorting the record.
Here is the entire text at your link.
Paul Westcott, radio host: “One of the things that did come up was — and I mention this specially, he’s on right after me, a guy named Glenn Beck. You had a pretty tough interview with him. You know, he was asking some pretty tough stuff. I think you handled it extraordinarily well. But, when you’re talking about Glenn Beck now he actually, the other day, called you a progressive on FOX Business channel. What do you say to that sort of claim?”
Gingrich: “I don’t know. It depends on what standard you’re using, you know? The fact is I balanced the budget for four consecutive years. And we did so by cutting taxes and increasing employment so people went back to work, they left welfare, they left food stamps, they left unemployment, they left Medicaid. Who else has that record of achievement? I worked with Reagan in ‘79, ‘80. I worked with Reagan in defeating the Soviet Empire. I think those are relatively conservative credentials.”
Your parenthetical remarks on the headline leave a false impression. All Newt did was repeat his impressive conservative record.
FRiends, the Newt-haters have to resort to distortion and falsehoods to try and win points. Alway check the links and make up your own minds, because a lot of people here are not shooting straight.
Oh boy, that’s a stretch.
I suggest people read the third chapter of Newt's To Renew America to see why he gave praise to FDR. It was not a praise of the New Deal, but something everyone needs to read and understand. I will not give away the conclusion.
A progressive/leftist Pubbie (aka RINO) in the spirit of TR?
Your use of half-truths is a clear indication that you are either another spoiled crybaby Conservative, “Oh Waaaaa. That candidate is not conservative ENOUGH!” or a DU troll who wants us to ignore the record.
Gingrich has a lifetime 90% rating with ACU.
Amen!!!! I am getting so tired of this tendency to throw out the baby with the bath water...
Fred and Paulistinians think Ron Paul is the only man who can save us all.
I notice Newt Gingrich didn’t deny being a space alien, either. Must mean he’s a speace alien.
Are they Paul-bots? Jim Rob has made it clear he wants no Romney-bots on this forum. At this point, Newt seems best able of all the candidates to checkmate Romney. No matter how much one likes Bachmann, Huntsman or Paul, they barely register in the polls. Once this campaign became debate oriented (and after Cain's departure), Newt emerged as the best chance for no Romney. I don't know what all the anti-Newts here are trying to do (probably they'll write in Palin).
I agree that Newt effectively refuted Beck with his response.
Newt must be thinkin’ that it means to be a forward thinker who embraces reform.
Perhaps he needs a lesson or two:
Progressive: One who believes in taxation and spending without limits.
Progressive: One who advocates a progression of a capitalist society to a socialist one.
“It depends upon what standard you’re using”. WTH?
Okay Newt, you lost me. I can never, ever in a million years support anyone who makes a statement that is so utterly stupid and radical.
Perrybots: are you still out there?
Count me in!
Conservatives will see their mistake about a week after the nomination.
“Your parenthetical remarks on the headline leave a false impression. All Newt did was repeat his impressive conservative record.”
I know. I heard Glenn Beck this morning and he of course only played the part he wanted his listeners to hear. He did not play the whole thing. Glenn in fact did what he accuses others of doing.
select your next president.....
is what you get.
Newt cannot bring home the “base” as you know....if you doubt it, read more FreeRepublic comments on any Newt thread.
Mitt will get destroyed by oblique discussions of Mormon beliefs and customs (fed to the Media by Axelrod)
Ron (F the Fed) Paul cannot be elected while being ignored and marginalized as a Kook.
really, I vote. its anyone but Obama. just put them up there on the ticket.
i don’t like any of them. i don’t like the government. i don’t want more of this. i would move to a foreign country but i am already living in one.
of the whole spectrum of declared candidates from all parties i really think Newt is the best. and, i do not like him.
Palin, that’s who.
I hope for a deadlocked convention and Palin to emerge as the nominee. at least i could vote for someone i like.
What Gingrich is saying is that there are some who hear what he has done and will call it progressive no matter what he says.
If you wish to call balancing the budget, getting people off welfare, and defeating the Soviet Union progressive, then have at it.
The same with Glen Beck.
Is Beck blatantly backing Romney?
lyndsey graham also has a 90% lifetime rating.
Didn’t Reagan say he was admirer of FDR?
Wow, every day Ron Paul supporters make me more and more thoroughly disgusted by him.
Oooh.... the Democrats filed endless ethical complaints against him. Does that make him (1) evil, or (2) hated by liberals? Well, he was found innocent of all charges. He did acknowledge submitting false financial data to the House, but he was NOT convicted of any wrong-doing as implied by the statement that he had to pay $300,000. Rather, he covered the costs of the witch hunters who were sent chasing a rabbit trail by his lawyer’s clerical error.
I am troubled by Gingrich’s admiration for the enemy, and by his personal failures. I am disgusted by what a desperate, mudslinging attention whore Paul’s campaign has become.
Talk about “ethical failures”: The Paul campaign has launched “Blue Republicans,” a campaign to get Democrats to commit fraud to vote for him in the Republican Primary. I denounced Rush Limbaugh’s “Operation Chaos,” but Limbuagh never, to my knowledge, targeted states wherein Republicans would have to violate their oaths to vote in the Democratic Party primaries, as “Blue Republicans” have done.
How could he without being called a liar.
Back in the day there were two gentlemen in the neighborhood who lived side by side.
One was a tomato growing enthusiast. His life revolved around his greenhouse, his seed beds, the weather and water quality. At harvest time he was the most popular man on the street for he gave out free tomatoes.
The other man was a dilettante - all things interested and excited him. He grew a few tomatoes - which shriveled, a few cucumbers which tasted bitter and stringy green beans on high trellises. He had all the best tools, ladders and equipment. When his neighbor’s plumbing leaked he fixed it. When the power went out he fashioned a generator. When the snow blocked streets he attached a blade to his truck and cleared them. He loaned his books, his time and his learning to assist all.
When it came time to elect a neighborhood representative the tomato man had to be persuaded to sign up - he didn’t want to leave his tomatoes unattended. The tool man said he would love to be responsible for identifying problems and finding solutions.
The vote was not even close. The tomato man won in a landslide.
When asked how and why they voted - the neighbors explained.
We like our free tomatoes.
Makes no sense does it?
“It depends what standard you’re using” pretty plainly means, “it depends how you define ‘progressive.’”
To some people, “progressive” means simply that society or government must adapt to a changing world, and continue to advance justice. To liberals, the presumption is that “progressive” means that “justice” means socialism and modernism. Many conservatives have picked up on the code words. But to accept that “progressive” in the 21st century means to relapse into the totalitarianism and central control of dead 20th-century regimes is as wrong-headed as to accept that an “economic liberal” is one who favors state control.
Recognizing competing meanings, Gingrich was clear that he accepted one meaning, but not another.
Sheesh. It was a nice way for Newt to say that what Glenn Beck thinks is quite irrelevant.
I thought Glenn Beck left the planet a year ago.
Roach Paul’s days in the GOP are becoming numbered rapidly.
If not Newt who then? And why?
I will make my decision in the voting booth come primary time next month...all I can say with ANY certainty is that I will NOT vote for Romney or Huntsman, as both are too cozy with Zero.
Seriously: If you want to intelligently critique Newt, rather than proof-texting his comments, or engaging, as others do, in calumny, how about attacking his actual position when they are liberal?
Newt supports an “amnesty,” and seems purposefully vague on whether it would apply only (reasonably) to those whose presence here predates the Reagan amnesty, and who have jobs, dependents, etc., in America, or one which would apply broadly to most immigrants.
Newt caves to what he believes is inevitable. He now says he opposed an individual mandate. Fine, I’ll believe him. The problem is that I don’t want a “leader” who will buckle under to evil the moment he believes evil is winning. Saying, “Oh, wait, we’re winning now? Let ME grab the flag!” is no trait of leadership.
On the other hand, his statements about the right to life lead me to conclude he will pick excellent Supreme Court justices. And for this reason, I support him over Mitt Romney, who has appointed tyrrants to the bench, Ron Paul who is bat-shot insane, and will probably appoint bat-shot insane justices, and Rick Perry, who seems to think that tyranny and oppression are fine as long as its the states, not the federal government.
I’d’ve been happy with Cain or Santorum (although Santorum shares Gingrich’s flaw of buckling.) I’d love to see Gingrich adopt certain of Paul’s libertarian beliefs, but it’s too bad that Paul is, yes, I’ll say it again, bat-shot insane.
he crybabied his way off of Fox a year ago....and now expects his ‘base’ to pay to see him on the internet....
Just as we saw with Rick Perry a few months back, there’s a big push on this forum to annoint Newt and smear anyone who disagrees.
I don’t particularly see the value in all that.
Ronald Reagan on Franklin Roosevelt:
The Significance of Style
K. Alan Snyder - 08/20/08
“Reagan was a New Deal Democrat. He joked that he had probably become a Democrat by birth, given that his father, Jack, was so devoted to the Democratic Party. The younger Reagan cast his first presidential vote in 1932 for Franklin Roosevelt, and did so again in the succeeding three presidential contests. His faith in FDR remained undimmed even after World War II, when he called himself a New Dealer to the core. He summarized his views in this way: I thought government could solve all our postwar problems just as it had ended the Depression and won the war. I didnt trust big business. I thought government, not private companies, should own our big public utilities; if there wasnt enough housing to shelter the American people, I thought government should build it; if we needed better medical care, the answer was socialized medicine. When his brother, Moon, became a Republican and argued with his sibling, the younger Reagan concluded he was just spouting Republican propaganda.
Of course, Reagan was to change his views drastically in the coming years, but even when one examines his later comments about Franklin Roosevelt and the New Deal, one comes away with the sense that he never got over his youthful admiration of a man he considered a great leader. He would carefully parse his criticisms of the New Deal, often focusing on the honorable intent of the heart over the practical effect of the policies. Critique and praise would be mixed together as he attempted to separate the man from his programs.”
REAGAN changed his philosophy... romney and newt have not... and will not. Reagan also granted Amnesty to 1.5 million mexican illegals and withdrew from Lebanon... allowing al qaeda to form and grow strong. Should we embrace the Conservative Reagan and his later Conservative ideology and his correct decisions or embrace his early progressivism and repeat his mistakes again today. Should we learn from our past mistakes or just keep repeating them?
I’m not a “Perrybot”...unless you’re into mindless namecalling.
We who support him never went anywhere...well, a few did to escape the scorched earth brigade on every thread...that’s why we’re still here.
Depends on the meaning of “Progressive”, eh?
Is that anything like, depends on the what the meaning of “is”, is?
Perry will take a wrecking ball to overwhelming, out of control, Washington DC.
That doesn’t mean a mindless wrecking ball, but a well thought out plan.
RE: Is Beck blatantly backing Romney?
Yes, Beck has endorsed Romney. Piss on both of them.
Thanks for misstating and otherwise acting like a propagandist of whom the total control statists would be proud, Rick Perry’s views on state government vs federal power.
Those are good clips. I didn’t see them before.
“FRiends, the Newt-haters have to resort to distortion and falsehoods to try and win points.”
Every day, on every Newt post and around the clock. I see very little difference between them and the libs.
I watched Judge Napolitano’s latest show. Beck was the guest. These two were in full attack mode against Gingrich. They were spinning and they even out right lied.
Their hate for Gingrich was more than apparent and they are obviously panicking.......their attacks were over the top.
Newt is strong, but he is going to have to be even stronger to fight through the wall that Newt hating Fox has been building.
Go Newt Go.........
Glenn Beck is mentally ill and should be treated accordingly.
Beck has said he would vote for Bachmann.....that of course, may help Romney by splitting votes.
But to say that Beck endorsed Romney is not to tell the truth.
Also interesting regarding Glenn Beck and presidential canddates is that Beck has spoken of Hunstsman’s father as his “mentor” and Beck actually apologized to the elder Huntsman for comments criticizing his son.
>>Is Beck blatantly backing Romney?<<
Actually, Michelle Bachmann.
>>Yes, Beck has endorsed Romney. Piss on both of them.<<
No he hasn’t. He was pitching for both Santorum and Bachmann just this morning.
(and Merry Christmas my FRiend. I haven’t seen you in a while)
RE: Is Beck blatantly backing Romney?
Yes, Beck has endorsed Romney. Piss on both of them.
From what I have heard and read, he is supporting Michelle Bachmann.
When Newt wins the nomination, how will Fox be treating Newt? Will they still be bashing him then? With the goal being to defeat a Marxist leader, I don’t understand why they’re not rallying with the majority of conservatives? Maybe our goal and their goal are two different things????
No he hasn't. He said if it were down to Obama or Romney, he would vote Romney even though it would be against his will.
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.