Posted on 04/14/2012 4:35:57 PM PDT by CutePuppy
I believe you were in a coma. If you notice, most of the primary voters must agree with me.
Got it? I am done taking the insults. So what? I don’t
agree.
I have never taken drugs and I have taken very few pills most of my life. So I don’t appreciate what you said.
:)
You see those posts about Newt going to CNN now?
It seems that he is saying that FNC lost the primary for him even after all the times he assured us that he would win it.
He has two modes : 1) overconfidence, and 2) sore loser, at least recently anyway. Lots of silly ideas too.
Newt is the establishment??? Good grief. No wonder our country is messed up.
Mitt Romney was opposed to best conservative politics in the last 30 years: he was against President Reagan politics in the 80ies and against the Republican Congress majority politics and the Contract with America in the 90ies.
Romney had been a lifelong independent before he decided to run for Ted Kennedy’s Senate seat in Massachusetts in 1994, the Boston Globe reported at the time.
After Romney entered the 1994 Senate race, his wife Ann said: “We didn’t know a single Republican when we jumped in.”
When House Speaker Newt Gingrich was promoting his “Contract with America” in 1994, Romney “had not read the document and had no plans to support it,” the Boston Globe reported.
Brent Bozell’s Conservative Victory Committee said that Romney in 1994 “was running away from conservative Republican themes and espousing a left-wing agenda.”
David Broder observed during the 1994 Senate campaign: “Eager to show that he is a moderate independent and no ideologue, Romney stressed his support for universal health insurance and abortion rights, criticized the Republican ‘Contract with America,’ and was more outspoken than Kennedy in arguing that the Boy Scouts should not exclude homosexual youths.”
Romney donated to the 1992 campaign of U.S. Rep. Dick Swett, a New Hampshire Democrat; Rep. John LaFalce, a New York Democrat; and Democrat Doug Anderson, who was running for the Senate from Utah.
“OK Einstein, who ya gonna vote for in November?”
Newt won’t be on the ballot.
I’ll be voting for the nominee whoever it is. see my tag line.
People like you and dforest are the reason we are stuck with pro abortion pro gay marriage Romney. The damage of both are to under mind civilization and morality as we know. You people are either slow or Romney supporters. No conservative would throw off on Gingrich this deep to help a person as Romney-you have been busted.
What about the transformative, cleansing power of Jesus Christ - who Newt confesses as his Savior. Aren't old things passed away and all things become new in Him, aren't we ALL new creatures in Christ Jesus?
I wrote the following to explain how I see the claims, usually from Santorum supporters, that Newt is ineligible because of his past..
If that is the case, then not only is Newt still exactly who he was back then, then Callista is still an adultress, then Karen Santorum is still a whore fornicating outside the vows of marriage with a known abortionist... and Rick Santorum is still a compromised political hack, who endorsed Specter... That is the Santorum Standard, and apparently yours, but you can apply it selectively, though that seems to be what rick and his supporters do continually.
Somewhere Santorum and his supporters seemed to have decided because he wears his religion on his sleeve that gives them the right to decide who and what is evil or good in this world...
"On Santorum: No, I’ve never met him. I’ve read about him, some of the corruption he is associated with, I’ve watched him, I’ve listened when he was disrespectful to his mentor for political expediency’s sake. I study his voting record. I know a charity of his gathered millions of dollars, and only spent 32% of their funds on the poor, for whose benefit the charity was formed; and that the normative ethical ratio is for most charities to spend 82% of their funds on their targeted constituency - while most of Santorum’s donations went to give his political friends cushy “charity” jobs. Good Neighbor, I think it was called. I listened as this so-called “good” Christian man stood on a stage and said his character was the quality of character that Americans needed in the White House, unlike the character of others who had personal baggage in their past, without once mentioning the forgiving saving transforming power of Jesus Christ, who is the center of the faith Sanctimonium so piously professes to live by... and sets his principles upon...
If you are not a Christian, you can’t really appreciate what is so appalling and galling about the man, in light of true christians, who don’t abrogate the work of Christ with attempts at self righteousness attained by their outside of the cup persona and behaviors..
What you are doing, and why so many sincere Christians have great problems with Santorum, is he, as well as you, overlook how the transformative power an encounter with the True Christ impacts a man’s entire soul and being; he becomes a new creature in Christ Jesus, old things pass away, all things are made new.
Newt has confessed his sins, said he did things he is ashamed of, has sought to make reconciliation with the members of his family, and others he has hurt. He has blamed no one else but himself. He has come to a new and apparently cleansing faith in Christ Jesus and, most importantly, there is no evidence of any of the same behavioral sins in his life since this long journey of his repentance, rebirth, and renewal began.
And, yet, people cannot let the man leave his past behind. After 20 years - think of it - 20 years - there are still a majority of people in the press, politics - Santorum, and a lot of his supporters - who consider Newt the same man he was 20 years ago, and dare he try to take one step away from his past, to step into the new, as his faith promises him he can, they are there loudly, hypocritically, self-righteously to pull him right back. They won’t let him step away from his sinful past, though no apparent evidence of that sinful past exists any longer, or any evidence that he is the same man he was 20 years ago. He is being judged as the man he was - while that man no longer exists. He is, I repeat, a new creature in Christ Jesus.
Finally, Christians, who truly fully embrace and receive the saving work of Christ, who are transformed deeply, understand that Newt could have done all those things back then, even worse, and still today be a new creature in Christ Jesus - but no one, not Santorum, nor his minions, will allow for that, or accept that might ever be true. So, the final finally: it says more about the people who can’t let Newt be this new creature many believing Christians trust he is, if only because they are likewise sinners, great sinners, saved and transformed by the same power that Newt claims has saved and transformed him. It is religious bigotry, hard hearts, and people like Santorum, who behaviorally have hit many of the right notes in their outward lives, though it is hard to believe that is extensively true - I am sure we will find out - whose self-righteousness - whose pride in their outward manifestations of sinlessness, and acceptable conduct, that causes believing Christians to distance themselves from him, to see him as a hypocrite, saved more by his self-perceived good works than the miraculous, healing work of a Perfect Savior, by his love and tender mercy, towards those who are fully unworthy.
Santorum is about none of that, he is about a gospel of works and self denial, of earned salvation. Newt is simply a sinner being saved by by the gift of grace, he could never earn or be worthy of... through no goodness of his own... the same as most of those Christians who can’t support Santorum’s apostasy."
“The 1994 wins were not a victory for conservatives, it was a GOP victory. Newt has not been a conservative until this year when he ran for President.”
Spoken like somebody who was in a drug-induced coma between 1994 and 1998.”
For a Congressman with over 92% conservative voting record in 20 years and 10 terms as Georgia Rep. in the House, Newt Gingrich is one of the staunchest conservatives ever.
dforest’s “darling” Rick is lagging far behind...
I said before that whining isn’t attractive. It wasn’t when Santorum did it either.
“it says more about the people who can’t let Newt be this new creature many believing Christians trust he is, if only because they are likewise sinners, great sinners, saved and transformed by the same power that Newt claims has saved and transformed him.”
Great post, TBF.
Sounds like a conservative to me and he also sounds like someone who can get things done.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5MJtkUxIzdA&feature=youtu.be
Newt haters are WRONG.
Nor me.... We need to keep reaching out to evangelicals... and reminding them what the Cross of Christ really means in the life of someone who has repented, confessed his sins publicly and sought reconciliation and making things right with those whom he has hurt..
I don't think you will find the answer to this question ("forgiveness") in religion... you will find it in politics.
Truth is, many of the evangelicals "leaders" and their organizations find themselves quite comfortable with the "kinder, gentler, compassionate conservative" GOP structure that provides them a certain measure of importance (or they just might support a "conservative" Democrat). All they are interested in, just as most "minority" groups within a structure is increasing (or at least not losing) their influence relative to some other groups.
They are a slice of a bigger slice which represents government within a political-economic pizza pie. You can grow two ways - by growing your slice within the government slice, or by growing the government slice within a pizza pie that represents entire economy. The bigger the government, within the economy, the bigger their own influence overall.
Smaller government advocates don't give them anything. As a matter of fact, the Tea Party "platform," such as it is, (ideally) calls for the diminished role of government, and the influence of the Special Interest Groups within it, through tax and regulatory reforms. That would cut the role (slice) of the government within the economic pie, and it would also cut their own influence (and many other SIGs) within the government sector (slice).
It's a double-whammy for some evangelical "leaders" and they don't consider it a good thing. That's why Gingrich (most representative and early supporter of the Tea Party movement) was, in reality, the nemesis of this part of the evangelical "community" of "leaders" who went to endorse Santorum at that "non-consensus consensus" meeting near Houston.
That's the real reason why, despite Gingrich's organizations providing real, tangible (including financial) help to these evangelical "leaders" some of them would choose "anybody but Newt" as a nominee - he is for a "radically" smaller government and its influence in the economy and people's lives, and for smaller influence of special interest groups within the government - the worst outcome for some evangelical "leaders," despite Gingrich himself, like Reagan, being personally quite sympathetic and favorable to their stated spiritual goals.
That's what explains Huckabee and Santorum runs, and the choice of "family values" VP Dan Quayle by George H.W. Bush and their embrace of George W. Bush. That's what at the heart of the more outspoken and "visible" supporters of Santorum, whose names I brought up in the post. They see Tea Party and the concept of smaller government as a threat to them, just as the GOPe, so they are "natural" allies in this interparty struggle.
Of course, not all evangelical "leaders" see it like that; many truly want the government out of the way, and they are the ones who supported Gingrich - that's why the sharp and quite public and acrimonious split this year that most people who didn't pay attention to it, missed.
Many people didn't see it because they assumed that "we are all on the same side" and have the same or similar goals. Just like the case with GOPe, it was not exactly true.
Bla-Bla-Bla, Santurum kicked New’s behind in the primary. So you are just whining.
I enjoyed (entertainment) when Newt started running against “Rich guy gets rich laying off workers” all while his plan would cut the same rich guy's taxes to zero for ‘laying off workers’ making the evil rich guy even richer for doing what he was accusing him of doing. Like Newt was not going to get caught for that.
Newt was not a serious candidate.
You are busted LOL.
Right ON Marguerite! he has a terrible record and he has not done anything to advance the conservative cause but now he is the “GOD of Conservatism”. The sheep are lining up behind him as he leads us to the slaughter
“We need to keep reaching out to evangelicals... and reminding them what the Cross of Christ really means in the life of someone who has repented, confessed his sins publicly and sought reconciliation and making things right with those whom he has hurt..”
If I touch my nose, will that count as reaching out to evangelicals?
Evangelical! ——> Freeper Psalm 144 <-—— Evangelical!
As to your summation of the work of grace, credo!
:-)
If that is the choice, so be it. I will fight for ABR until then. We do still have a choice.
LOL, responsible for the end of civilization..
Where have we seen such drama ...??
I think some of your Marianne/Callista chronology is off. If Newt and Marianne had been separated for 6 years by 1993, why was she with him at virtually every press conference when he was Speaker (eff. Jan. 1995)? Just as he now endlessly says “Callista and I,” back then it was “Marianne and I,” as if they’re a team. That doesn’t make sense.
Not that I much care, other than as it seems to have damaged Newt’s chances to be our nominee, which is a real loss, both to the GOP and to the USA.
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.