Posted on 05/14/2007 6:46:39 AM PDT by Hadean
He worked in the private sector from 1976 until his election to congress in 1980.
Four years is better than probably most people in congress. Yes, it would be nice to see more.
In fact, if I were the king of the country, I'd make it a rule that a person had to spend one year in the private sector or on active military service for every year they spent in public office. All high level bureaucrats would have to be hired from the private sector and could spend no more time in government service than years they had experience in the private sector. And mandatory retirement age for all those at mid level and below would be age 40.
There’s bound to be a lot of that going around when any people end up being governed by lawyers.............which is another of my problems with Washington.
4 years isn’t enough. There needs to be a Constitutional Ammendment that no individual can spend more than 20 years in Federal elected office. This means Senators can only have 3 terms, and any Congressman who serves over 12 would be prohibited from the PResidency. We need more turnover up there, not less. A lot of the corruption stems from these career types, IMO.
President Bush should be an inspiration to all who follow!
I believe Newt has proven that he is capable of accomplishing good things for our country, and that he has much to contribute, but not as POTUS.
This country needs a person of strength in that office, and no one deserves it who admitted and demonstrated, as did Newt, that he was “weak-kneed” around Bill Clinton (or anyone else, for that matter, except God Almighty).
All have sinned, but some have the courage, and strength of character to withstand the blackmailer’s threat with humility and the truth, relying on the mercy of God and the people, and willing to accept the consequences. He was tested on the world stage and he failed the test. The information that apparently made him weak-kneed came out anyway, as he should have known it would do, and the way it came out diminished his crediblility, imo. We are at a point in our history,imho, that we cannot afford to trust him not to fail again, in a far more important position, should he face something or someone else that made him weak-kneed.
Newt DON’T run.
Not interested.
> Hes the only one with negatives approaching Hillarys.
Really. As much as Gingrich accomplished as Speaker, whom do you think the Dems would most like to run vs. Hillary?
Go Newt!
I don’t think he will get past the primaries, but I think he will force the other candidates to actually discuss what it means to be a fiscal conservative. I had hoped Ron Paul would have ignited that debate, but he is too minor a figure. Newt, on the other hand, would bring it to the forefront. And if nothing else, he might get the nod for the Vice President slot.
Hannity will be having Newtgasms today!
Right. He committed serial adultery, dumped two wives after they became seriously ill, and wouldn’t support his children, so the family had to get support from their church.
Sounds like a fine upstanding guy.
In my book, he’s just as bad as Giuliani or Clinton.
Hes the only one with negatives approaching Hillarys.
Guess you’ve never heard of Rudy..
Please FreepMail me if you want on or off my Pro-Life Ping List.
And how does Joe Six-Pack vote if he has a choice between Newt and Hillary?
I believe you can put Rudy and McCrazy in that same boat. Let him who is without sin cast the first stone.
He lost me when he folded on global warming to JohN (Viet Nam) Kerrey. Newt’s not tough enough, especially after he resigned as speaker.
Newt is only fooling himself. He has absolutely no chance and should quit before he really makes a fool of himself.
Newt's Contract was nice, but it was just paper. He quickly sold out. Read Tom Coburn's "Breach of Trust."
Heres an interesting hypocrisy-exposer regarding the current “candidates”... How many senators running for president claim to want to reduce so-called global warming, or at least our dependence on oil from the Middle East? Plenty. BUT(!) have you noticed how theyre nevertheless so lacking in vision (or integrity, amidst the petro dollars that they seek) that they still refuse to sponsor the Energy Departments potential H Prize for hydrogen fuel breakthroughs? Where are McCain, Hillary, Obama, & Kerry?
One can learn more about the H Prize at:
http://thomas.loc.gov , S.365
In the House, H.R.632 already has several dozen co-sponsors AND ACTUALLY PASSED LAST YEAR...only to languish due to Senate inaction including that of Senators McCain, Obama, Kerry(!) and Hillary Clinton.
For some reasonably recent articles on the H Prize:
http://www.fuelcellsworks.com/Supppage6788.html
http://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/01/24/41211.aspx
&
http://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/01/22/38371.aspx
EXCERPT: [p]rizes can provide an extra push, particularly for innovators who may be flying under the big automakers radar.
And for an additional analysis of the prizes paradigm:
http://www.spaceprojects.com/prizes
http://www.CentennialChallenges.NASA.gov
http://www.Darpa.mil/urbanchallenge
And most interestingly nowadays, for relevant information about the only current or potential presidential candidate who aggressively backs government-sponsored prizes:
http://www.newt.org/backpage.asp?art=3055
Remember how exciting it was when he shut down the federal government 12 years ago for its wastefulness? Since he left office our national debt has nearly doubled.
That piece of scripture has been taken out of context, way too often.
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.