Skip to comments.Gingrich Ramps Up Anti-Romney Message
Posted on 01/07/2012 2:26:31 PM PST by Jim Robinson
No more Mr. Nice Newt?
Newt Gingrich, after being walloped by negative ads in Iowa and finishing fourth, is planning a far more aggressive strategy to "contrast" himself against Mitt Romney in the run-up to the South Carolina primary.
Voters will get a glimpse of Gingrich's post-Iowa tone during back-to-back debates in New Hampshire ahead of that state's primary on Tuesday. The former House speaker told Fox News on Saturday that he won't be "mean-spirited" but will talk about the differences between himself and the former Massachusetts governor.
While Gingrich is vowing to shun the kind of "negative" ads he claims were responsible for bringing him down in Iowa, his campaign and his campaign's supporters are certainly dialing up the heat on Romney. For starters, Gingrich has started to talk about Romney's record on abortion.
"I am genuinely right-to-life -- Romneycare includes tax-paid abortions," Gingrich said Saturday. His campaign is planning to air an ad "soon" on the abortion issue.
While Gingrich claims Romney's abortion record is sullied by his state's health care overhaul -- or "Romneycare" -- the candidate has said the state faced a court order to cover abortions, and it's misleading to suggest he ever pushed taxpayer funding for abortions. Romney's campaign also released a letter from several conservative leaders Saturday praising his record on abortion and marriage. But Gingrich has repeated the abortion charge on a new web site his campaign rolled out called NotRomney.org.
The site includes a flier that states "Mitt Romney has a record of supporting taxpayer funded abortions." It also accuses Romney of backing "higher taxes" and nominating "liberal, activist judges," while arguing that he "is not electable."
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Mitt Romney on abortion, gay rights, gun control, RomneyCare, mandates, etc, in his own words, in Technicolor and SurroundSound:
In addition Romney will bore people to tears by election day. We need a vibrant, head banging, revolutionary, controversial candidate to win this thing. NEWT!
Why we’re so angry.
Negative ads work.
Bout time someone on our side figured that out.
Someone needs to run an advertisement featuring the video of mittens at a recent town hall in which mitt actually stated that he would keep some of the ‘good’ parts of 0-care. Figures that mittens knows some of the ‘good’ parts because he and his friends probably wrote them for romneycare.
With a smile and a soft voice he will carry the big stick of TRUTH!
GOOOOO NEWT Gingrich!
Newt needs to run a negative ad on Romney regarding jobs and the economy based upon his past record. People are hurting and scared out here and that kind of ad will have a great impact on their voting.
I have a feeling Romney would love to call in sick for today’s debate.
What I want is someone to take off the gloves and beat Obama and Romney repeatedly about the face and ears.
Someone who can stand in Ronald Reagan’s place and call islam for what it is. An Evil Empire.
Someone who has the guts to take on illegal immigration.
Someone who has the guts to put a bullet in the EPA, IRS, DOJ, etc.
We need a leader. Not a talking head.
I don’t want a kinder, gentler version. I want someone who is there to kick a$$ and take names.
The only thing I know of that is too big to fail is Almighty God.
That candidate needs to be good with that.
If Newt can, then go Newt.
Re: Romney camp claiming that "the state faced a court order to cover abortions, and it's misleading to suggest he ever pushed taxpayer funding for abortions" -- the discussions we had on FR in January '08 clearly showed then that the "court order" being referenced by the Romney camp references mandates that Massachusetts cover abortions for rape & incest ONLY! (Not $50 abortions funded by Bay State taxpayers under RomneyCare!)
More evidence of the less-than-forthright Mitt and his Mittiacs and Mittites who by such words show they are indeed clones off the old block.
In late 2007 and January '08 we had FR Mittiacs trying to defend these MA abortions. They would claim -- like Mitt is now -- that this was a court order and that these $50 abortions "were thrown in by a judge. Romney had nothing to do with it."
I said even back then: Under normal circumstances, this would be a half truth they were telling. But since abortions due to rape & incest are significantly less than 1% of all abortions, their truth telling in this instance was of an equal percentage.
Bottom line: If Romney can't be held accountable for abortion subsidies in '06 & beyond in MA, then Obama can't be held accountable for taxpayer-funded abortions under ObamaCare!
ALL: This is why every pro-lifer needs to vote AGAINST Romney!!!!
More on this next post.
Gingrich shouldn't have too much trouble with that with all he has to choose from as a conservative!
I hope Newt can get his mojo back. The debate should be interesting.
I still don’t quite understand what happened to Newt ????
More on Romney camp claiming that "the state faced a court order to cover abortions, and it's misleading to suggest he ever pushed taxpayer funding for abortions" -- the discussions we had on FR in January '08 clearly showed then that the "court order" being referenced by the Romney camp references mandates that Massachusetts cover abortions for rape & incest ONLY! (Not $50 abortions funded by Bay State taxpayers under RomneyCare!)
In the '08 campaign debates, Mitt Romney was on record saying:
(A) "Commonwealth Care" mandated insurance for the 7% of Bay State residents who did not have insurance.
(B) One-fourth of those who lacked insurance in the Bay State--almost 2% of the population--were earning $75,000 or more.
Then, RomneyCare came along and offered $50 abortions by subsidizing almost 2% of the female population who were earning $75,000 or more (women who were NOT covered by the court mandate -- as it dealt with Medicaid funded abortions)...
...and another 2% to almost 3% of the female population were likely women above or around the Medicaid border for receiving such assistance.
Translation: 4-5% of the female population in MA can thank RomneyCare for getting cheap abortions they were not eligible under Medicaid-provisions pre-RomneyCare.
Bottom line: Even excluding abortions in MA tied to rape and incest, RomneyCare's been the likely DIRECT ties "sponsor" of 1 out of every 20-25 abortions in the Bay State.
Mitt Romney, the deep-coffers source of dismembering 1 in 20-25 babies in the Bay State.
Sh!t happens. In this case, it was in the name of FOX, Rove, Romney, Inc.
Finally! Someone is going to talk about RomneyCare. Why bring up just the abortion issue, though, Newt? Hit the whole darned thing! Talk about it being the original ObamaCare!
I think that’s exactly right. Newt’s the best out of the bunch.
That’s frickin’ scary.
Newt or someone needs to point out that whether or not Republicans agree with it or not, Romney has said many things that the Democrats will be able to wallop him with. Newt should ask him, how is Romney going to defend remarks like this about foreclosures when Obama brings them up...
“Dont try to stop the foreclosure process. Let it run its course and hit the bottom,” Romney said when asked what he would do to jump-start the floundering housing market.
“Allow investors to buy homes, put renters in them, fix the homes up and let it turn around and come back up,” he continued. “The Obama administration has slow walked the foreclosure process ... that has long existed and as a result we still have a foreclosure overhang.”
Oh come on. I’m fine with reasonable debatebacking up allegations with substantive evidence, etc. But these childish smears need to stop.
Good for Newt. I like him to take out Romney and self immolate the way he has been doing for the past two plus weeks. It will then be between Perry and Santorum. Small government conservative vs. big government conservative. Executive leader vs. legislative leader. At least, it will be between two humble, grounded, grown poor, American success stories in Perry and Santorum.
Not an ego maniac like Newt and a twist in the wind stick figure Romney.
Newt happened to Newt. He could not cover up his personality flaws long enough. He is who he is.
He can’t. He gave his full support right after Romneycare passed. Both will go down and I will be too happy.
Newt better pump up the volume tonight and tomorrow morning or we are all going to be left with choosing between Mitt from Column A and Mitt from Column B.
“Newt needs to run a negative ad on Romney regarding jobs and the economy based upon his past record”
Nah—Newt’s PACs should run the ads and when mittens whines about it, Newt can simply shrug his shoulders and say he can’t contol what other people do. Nothing like striking back the same way or harder than when one is struck.
So then who? Perry? He can't debate his way out of a paper bag which won't gain any votes. I'd gladly vote for him but he's no where near prepared to play down and dirty in Chicago politics.
We don’t want Romneycare anymore than we wanted Obamacare.
Throw out the bum.
And, I might add: Pro-God, pro-life, small government, big defense Ronald Reagan conservative Newt Gingrich is the only candidate I see openly willing to challenge and take on the liberal activist judiciary. The others, especially Mitt, will simply roll over for business as usual and acquiesce to our black robed rulers.
God has so richly blessed the United States of America with our divinely conceived Declaration of Independence, Constitution and Bill of Rights as the only nation on earth that recognizes our unalienable rights come directly from God, our creator, and all legal powers are enumerated, balanced and distributed among the three coequal branches, the states and we the people, especially we the people as the sovereigns, as government derives its just powers only at the consent of the governed.
May I get an Amen?
Noot should bring this up.
You should be quite familiar by now with the fact that Mitt Romney gave $150.00 to Planned Parenthood in 1994 when claiming he had always been pro-abortion.
You should also know that in 2004, Mitt Romney says he personally converted to the pro-life position. In fact, according to ABC News on June 14, 2007, Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney has long cited a November 2004 meeting with a Harvard stem-cell researcher as the moment that changed his long-held stance of supporting abortion rights to his current pro-life position opposing legal abortion. But several actions Romney took mere months after that meeting call into question how deep-seated his conversion truly was.
What was one of those actions?
Two months after his pro-life conversion, Mitt Romney appointed Matthew Nestor to the bench in Massachusetts. Romney seeming bowed to political pressure making Nestor a judge even after Nestor, according to the Boston Globe as far back as 1994, had campaigned for political office championing his pro-abortion views....
Hear the prayer of you children, Lord
#20 - most inane post I have ever read on FR, and I’ve been here a long time.
#20 - most inane post I have ever read on FR, and I’ve been here a long time.
I can agree with that!
The Man Who Couldnt Beat Obama Endorses the Man Who Couldnt Beat McCain
Concur. I will take Santorum over Newt any day.
Newt has become a petulant, undisciplined, childish whiner who cannot play in the big leagues. He is demonstrating that he doesn’t have temperament to be President.
Imagine if the GOP were to nominate Gingrich. By Labor Day Obama will have the Rose Garden, serial adulterer Gingrich would have the tabloids.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,
--That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
Don't let them ever forget it.
When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.
If you don’t have anything useful to add to the discussion, how about not saying anything at all.
Winston Churchill was not a handsome or imposing man. He was very difficult to put up with.. arrogant, drunken, slovenly, a bully at times, either depressed or wildly ecstatic, rude to employees, in short, he was often insufferable.
But his saving grace, that which allowed him to achieve and wield great power for good was his intelligence and his gift of oratory. When the man spoke the earth seemed to tremble.
Newt reminds me of Churchill for many of the same reasons.
Remember that in spite of Churchill’s flaws he was the one man able to rally a nation against incredible odds in a war that most thought was a lost cause. Where would the world be now if not for that flawed man?
I support Newt! Not in spite of his flaws but in fact because of them. We need someone with the will to fight. I believe Newt is the right man at the right time.... if not Newt then just who has both the intellect and will to accomplish the impossible and place this nation on a road to moral and economic recovery?
If Newt does not get the nomination and win the election then we will all soon or late come to wish for what might have been.
I agree. This creep is really nuts.
They did a job on him all right.
Hope he gets ‘em back tonite.
You are exactly right. Newt does remind me of Churchill. For the first time since Sarah Palin declined to run, I was encouraged when Newt started to surge. I’ve lived a long time and have seen a lot of politicians. Newt has already done more for this country than any politician other than Reagan. He will go down in history books.
And to all of the candidates not named Willard-if any you want to have a prayer of winning, tonight better be one giant Romney pile on.
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.