1 posted on
11/28/2011 12:32:32 PM PST by
Fred
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-54 next last
To: Fred
Translated from RINO this means that Newt scares the hell out of the Democrats.
2 posted on
11/28/2011 12:33:49 PM PST by
MeganC
(Are you better off than you were four years ago?)
To: Fred
His “obvious corruption?” Do they really want to talk about “obvious corruption?”
3 posted on
11/28/2011 12:34:51 PM PST by
ponygirl
To: Fred
Romney is the Dems’ pick for the Rep candidate. Mainly because they know Obama will cream him in the election with the help from the News Media.
4 posted on
11/28/2011 12:35:40 PM PST by
wrench
To: Fred
I am a realist. I think four more years of Obama would be mother of all disasters!
I actually like what I’m hearing from Speaker Gingrich.
5 posted on
11/28/2011 12:36:26 PM PST by
SumProVita
(Cogito, ergo...Sum Pro Vita. (Modified Decartes))
To: Fred
By 1997, Gingrich was facing dozens of ethics charges. Although many of them were dismissed, he was fined an unprecedented $300,000 by the House Ethics Committee (still run by Republicans at the time), and admitted to giving "inaccurate, incomplete and unreliable statements were given to the committee." Newt did this precisely during a time he was trying to impeach the president for perjury. If Clinton was eligible for a third term his impeachment would mean nothing.
6 posted on
11/28/2011 12:36:45 PM PST by
CaptainK
(...please make it stop. Shake a can of pennies at it.)
To: Fred
And I suppose Mittens Romney would be just peachy as a nomination...
Newts not perfect, but he’s 100 times better than Romney. My only fear about Newt is what I like to call the likability factor. Everyone who wins the Presidency has to have it. I’m not sure that Newt does. Look, I’m thinking as the “Man on the Street” thinks. To many, he’s percieved as not very likable....
To: Fred
And who can the Republicans put up that won’t that won’t be a “disaster” ? If it’s going to be a disaster why are the Dems & RINOS so concerned?
To: Fred
Just wait till the Dems. bring out that pic of Romney with his big money buddies and the bills hanging out their pants/mouths/etc.
To: Fred
Still into Cain here. I’d really like to see a debate between him and Obama. Sadly, this can’t happen since Obama will not be his party’s nominee.
10 posted on
11/28/2011 12:38:34 PM PST by
cuban leaf
(Were doomed! Details at eleven.)
To: Fred
Maybe a disaster is what the Republican Party needs.
11 posted on
11/28/2011 12:39:14 PM PST by
Romulus
(The Traditional Latin Mass is the real Youth Mass)
To: Fred
Business Insider definitely leans Left and has made fum of Palin, even running at least one article about her supposed fake pregnancy, for instance. Don’t take their political articles seriously. They are just blather. That site is, however, one of the best at finding interesting and unusual collections of photos occasionally.
To: Fred
they are all the same old same old candidates.
How about Mr West congressman from Fl?
To: Fred
It’s IMPORTANT to remember that Gingrich was FORCED OUT by corrupt Repubs wanting to create a campaign money system like the Democrats Shadow Party Organizations.
His return, in spite of the baggage, has a LOT of people in DC fearing revenge.
14 posted on
11/28/2011 12:42:06 PM PST by
tcrlaf
(Election 2012: THE RAPTURE OF THE DEMOCRATS)
To: Fred
I've seen almost the exact same headline about every candidate in the race.
Somebody's gotta win the thing.
18 posted on
11/28/2011 12:44:32 PM PST by
dead
(I've got my eye out for Mullah Omar.)
To: Fred
Newt Gingrich is now suddenly the candidate to beat Mitt Romney. And conservatives are said to be "salivating" at the chance of watching him debate President Obama.
But the truth is that a Newt Gingrich nomination would be a disaster for the Republican party: He cannot win. Bull Shit.
20 posted on
11/28/2011 12:45:46 PM PST by
JakeS
(This would be a good time to read John chapter three 1-21)
To: Fred
they are running the same old duds cause obama is supposed to be there 4 more years. NO CHOICES!
To: Fred; ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas; stephenjohnbanker; DoughtyOne; calcowgirl; Gilbo_3; NFHale; ...
RE :"
The New Hampshire Union Leader credits Newt Gingrich with engineering the 1994 Republican Revolution when Republicans took their first majority in Congress in 50 years and Newt ascended to the role of Speaker. But Gingrich deserves more credit for ship-wrecking that Revolution. Within just two years, Newt Gingrich shut-down the government and his approval rating dropped to just 25 percent. It never recovered"
Newt doesnt sound quite that brilliant when the rubber meets the road and he is under stress, compared to being on a stage throwing out half-baked ideas that few question. He has been known to blow the whole game by not understanding the game and how to play it, and by talking.
27 posted on
11/28/2011 12:49:33 PM PST by
sickoflibs
(Cain :"My parents didn't raise me to beg the government for other peoples money")
To: All
LET'S GET REAL: A Newt Gingrich Republican Nomination Would Be A Disaster For The Republican Party.
Fixed it.
28 posted on
11/28/2011 12:50:12 PM PST by
j_k_l
To: Fred
He blames Newt for the Republican Revolution of 1994 foundering. In reality, Bob Dole led a broadside assault against all Revolutionaries in his 1996, telling them to get the hell out of HIS party. A fiery speech by Buchanan had put Dole into the lead going into his convention speech, but Dole’s speech equated reform with extremism.
30 posted on
11/28/2011 12:50:33 PM PST by
dangus
To: Fred
36 posted on
11/28/2011 12:52:45 PM PST by
South40
(NO TO RINOS! NO TO AMNESTY! NO TO NEWT!)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-54 next last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson