The economic disaster has apparently left a lot of formerly wealthy Rinos very susceptible to Romney's 30 pieces of silver. So they are cashing in for their 30 pieces of silver and selling out to trash Newt!:
Posted on 01/27/2012 9:38:08 AM PST by sheikdetailfeather
As Ronald Reagan used to say: Well.
Yesterday we took note of former Reagan State Department official Elliott Abrams' piece over at NRO that went after Newt Gingrich on his relationship with Reagan. While voting regularly with Reagan as a young congressman from Georgia, Gingrich, claimed Abrams, "often spewed insulting rhetoric at Reagan, his top aides and his policies to defeat Communism." Abrams then goes on to cite " a famous floor statement Gingrich made on March 21, 1986."
Or sort of cites it.
In fact, I'm sorry to say, what appears to be going on here is that Elliott Abrams, a considerably admirable public servant and a very smart guy, has been swept up in the GOP Establishment's Romney frothings over the rise of Newt Gingrich in the Republican primaries. He is even being accused of trolling for a job in a Romney administration. No way!!!! Really????
(Excerpt) Read more at spectator.org ...
The American Spectator did! Good work, AS and Gingrich aides!
I, too, am sick about this. You don’t even have to be a fan of Newt to be repulsed by this disgusting Romney trick. He’s Clintonian.
I actually thought Rush sounded stunned yesterday and was hinting that the speech must have been creatively edited, but he didn’t have the evidence so wouldn’t come right out and say it.
Sometimes I feel like the oldest person on FR! I guess no one but me goes back far enough to remember poor crazy Howard Hughes’ “Mormon Mafia.” Hughes thought Mormons were more honest than other people and only hired them. Eventually, as his mental illnesses began to overcome him, he became a prisoner of his Mormon employees who would not get him access to much medical care. Sad story; maybe a Romney family member was employed!
Praise to Jeff Lord!
Romney can’t run on his liberal record and win the GOP primary so all he can do is smear and lie about Newt.
Certainly one of the oldest, it seems. Sigh...
Your right! Romney and Abrams are LIARS!!!!!!!!!!
Then he should have checked it out before passing along unverified comments that turned out to be lies. No better than filthy gossipmongering, and to an audience as huge as his, it's disgraceful.
Now if he'll just as promptly check and retract the dozen other steaming road apples he shared with everyone...
The economic disaster has apparently left a lot of formerly wealthy Rinos very susceptible to Romney's 30 pieces of silver. So they are cashing in for their 30 pieces of silver and selling out to trash Newt!:
And it's fun to call it "lying" when someone making a point doesn't include the argument against their point.
Here, from the referenced American Spectator story, is the relevant quote:
"The fact is that George Will, Charles Krauthammer, Irving Kristol, and Jeane Kirkpatrick are right in pointing out the enormous gap between President Reagan's strong rhetoric, which is adequate, and his administration's weak policies, which are inadequate and will ultimately fail."The "misleading" aspect was that Abrams didn't tell us that other people were equally wrong as Gingrich was, and that Gingrich was agreeing with those people.
Nowadays, if you tried to defend a conservative saying that Reagan's policies would fail by noting they were just agreeing with George Will, you probably wouldn't get far on a conservative forum.
Of course, some of us never put much stock in this attack, at least as it was SUPPOSED to be. It seems I always see some other aspect of things than I'm supposed to. To me, the issue wasn't "Gingrich attacks Reagan". Everybody deserves to be questioned, and I think it was sleazy of Romney, of all people, to suggest that Gingrich disagreement with Reagan on this matter suggested Gingrich wasn't a Reagan supporter.
But what I would have expected Gingrich to do in response was to come out, note that he did think Reagan wasn't being forceful enough, and to admit that in the end, Gingrich was wrong about that assessment. For extra credit, Gingrich could have said he learned from that, and it would make him a better President, seeing that when you have a weapon like the United States, you can be less forceful and acheive results.
But attacking Abrams for this is silly. The quotes while not the full story were true. It's in the "refutation" -- Gingrich DID say that he agreed that Reagan wasn't being forceful enough.
Rather than attacking Abrams for pointing that out, why not instead acknowledge the error and use it to advantage?
There's also a part of the spectator story about Gingrich taking ABC on over his ex-wife. I'd love to say something about that, but I can't, because I love being here at FR and already feel like I'm treading on thin ice simply pointing out the flaw in the argument above, without raising any other issues.
You are correct Elliot Abrams is a LIAR, just like Mitt 'providential' Romney is a liar. I am sick of these hypocrites that cover up for liars saying words like 'spoon-fed'. GIVE me a break. Some of our 'rich' conservatives, fatted off their yakking have become LAZY.
It's also misleading in that it doesn't make it clear that he shared the same goal as Reagan, he just wanted Reagan to step even harder on the gas pedal to get there.
It was a difference in degree not substance.
Sidebar Moderator was lost at sea for many months, in fact we thought that we lost him or her for good, so, please, go easy on him or her.... ;-)
Although when I read the Abram’s piece, that is exactly the message I got from it. I didn’t think Gingrich opposed Reagan, was able to see the quotes and understand. Maybe Abrams SAID we should think otherwise, I don’t remember — but I focused on the quotes Abrams gave, and thought Gingrich wanted communism ended, and didn’t think Reagan was doing enough in that regard.
Maybe it’s because I didn’t buy that Gingrich opposed Reagan (I’ve never bought that Gingrich was somehow instrumental in Reagan’s success, although he certainly was one of many who helped). I also knew that Reagan wanted to end communism, and couldn’t ever imagine Gingrich would think differently, so I knew that wasn’t what Gingrich was saying.
And it doesn’t bother me a bit that Gingrich, being young and somewhat uninformed, could think that Reagan wasn’t doing enough.
When we discussed this, I ended up in an argument with some Gingrich supporter who suggested that Gingrich was right, Reagan wasn’t doing enough, and was probably suffering from Alzeihmers and allowing George Bush to run the country.
Anyway, I thought the big thing about this was it emphasized that while Gingrich had disagreements with Reagan, Romney actively opposed Reagan at the time. And I certainly don’t think getting something wrong in 1986 disqualifies you from being President.
It seems this Romney campaign has no problem with lying, kinda similar to what Joe Wilson shouted out in the crowded House Chamber when the chosen one was speaking....
Oh, you were arguing with a bonehead! I've done that!
Newt's OK and was almost always on board with Reagan in those years. It's a ridiculous line of attack for the Mittens crew. Romney's an oily one.
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.