Considering the number of lies circulating about Newt from the so-called Republican establishment, you would think they were trolling for jobs in a second Obama administration.
“Elliott Abrams Caught Misleading on Newt”
Why don’t people ever say “lying” anymore? Is Calling someone a liar MORE offensive than the lie itself?
Elliot Abrams, you sir are a damned liar!
BTTT!
Rush is saying he “thinks” Abrams was spoon-fed. He doesn’t know. I think the little creep out and out lied. I think they have all openly lied and now they’ve been exposed. Our “betters” are certainly a stupid, immoral bunch.
Can we put this in breaking news? We need to refute these lies!
Considering the number of lies circulating about Newt from the so-called Republican establishment, you would think they were trolling for jobs in a second Obama administration.
But we are where we are, so the next question is whether the Arab Spring will actually fulfill its promise of greater democratic rights or whether it will simply usher in an era of extremist Islamist regimes or new forms of authoritarianism. The pessimists might yet be proved right -- any comparison of the Arab lands to Eastern Europe suggests that many positive elements are missing, not least the magnet and model of the European Union.The article's dated January 23, 2012.
Is this the sort of thing that Mittens’ Mormon faith permits him to do? I thought that Mormonism is all peace and love whereas the experience I am getting is in-the-gutter vitriol and lies. Is this why initially, it was ‘Anyone But Mitt’. Inquiring Minds want to know why the sudden pivot to ‘We Love Mitt - anyone But Newt’. It was too sudden and too complete not to be an orchestrated effort. I smell a conspiracy.
Bleepin’ Rush. Yesterday he kept repeating, “,this man is above repraxh, blah blah, blah.” I started counting my spoons. It was so obvious that he was setting something up. Now he’s trying to walk it back. Too late Rush. Next time question the people feeding you this crap.
I can’t believe this. How can someone who everyone says is honest lie like this. It’s disgusting. If Willard is the nominee, I’m done with the GOP until they get back to Reagan’s roots.
This whole episode has literally made me sick at my stomach. It is like a bad conspiracy movie about rigging elections, doing anything to get elected. AND IT IS COMING FROM OUR SIDE!!! THIS JUST EXPOSES THEM ALL TO WHAT THEY REALLY ARE AND I WILL NEVER PULL THE LEVER FOR MITT ROMNEY!
(and yes, I am yelling:))
• "Let me be clear: I have the greatest respect for President Reagan. I think he personally understands the threat of communism." Gingrich then goes on -- at Newtonian length -- praising Reagan for Reagan's understanding of Lenin, Reagan's understanding of the real "purposes of a Soviet dictatorship" and much more. He lists and applauds Reagan repeatedly for the President's appreciation of "the threat in a more powerful Soviet empire" and the threats posed by Communist Cuba and Nicaragua. He ranks Reagan with the great cold war presidents in protecting freedom."
The Establishment have to resort to lies to win FL.
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.
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....
I noticed that the “impartial reporter” Drudge does not show this article “Elliott Abrams Caught Misleading on Newt” on his website.