Posted on 12/04/2011 2:07:57 PM PST by rabscuttle385
Yes, he worked with Reagan. But, he also supported TARP, supported the federal mandate for me to purchase (insert item/service here), supported Cap/Trade, had an affair with a federal subordinate, has problems keeping the most sacred vows made to his multiple wives, and effectively threw Paul Ryan under the bus this year and last week.
I can keep going, but these are my main issues with Newt, with the support of the main pillar of Obamacare being the biggest. Will I vote for him if he's the nominee? Probably. But as of right now, I cannot support him. But, I don't think it will come to that, as he has no organization, no money, and has missed ballot deadlines for the primary.
Bachmann
Santorum
Perry
Gingrich...in that order
The rest can stick it where the sun don't shine.
Really don’t like the individual mandate he pushed. Says a lot about his boundaries.
Seconded.
I worry that Gingrich’s commitment to smaller government will end when he discovers the most singularly important issue of our times, whatever that might be.
I trust him to nominate strict Constitutionalists to SCOTUS and I think he's the best equipped to fight the Marxist and the media.
Gingrich gets what this election is all about. A referendum on the Marxist, who must be stopped if we're going to save our Republic.
” But, he also supported TARP, supported the federal mandate for me to purchase (insert item/service here), supported Cap/Trade, had an affair with a federal subordinate, has problems keeping the most sacred vows made to his multiple wives, and effectively threw Paul Ryan under the bus this year and last week.”
And all this while voting on it? Which office was he holding?
Those are very simple statements made about matters that were a little more complex.
Why is it that we are so focused on what this man did off the field than on the field? Would he have had the same reactions? I don’t know. I really don’t. Would deeper insight or knowledge of the conditions changed his opinion? I don’t know, but he wasn’t in that position, either.
Would any of the others? I don’t know. I really don’t. But I do know what they have accomplished in office by looking at voting records and movements they led, pieces of legislation they have passed and large scale revolutions they have led.
That answer is none that I know of. I’m sure they are all much nicer people and Newt is a bastard, though, because that’s what everyone says.
Let’s elect a nice person. They always finish....
I agree with you Jim, but we have a role too. I'm sad to say I fell in line with conventional wisdom early on, and kind of wrote off Santorum as having no shot. The reason he didn't have a shot is because everybody was like me, assuming he had no shot. Friday night on Greta, Santorum challenged Newt to a Lincoln-Douglas debate. If nothing else, the community here, talk radio, Fox, etc. need to talk that up and get an answer from Gingrich's campaign, or at least make it as well known as Gingrich's challenge to Romney. If not, Santorum's failure to get "traction" is no more his fault than a great set of tires on wet clay.
I just want a President that will cut the number of federal employees and the total budget by 30%.
Imho, neither Santorum nor Bachmann were presidential in last night’s debate. I’m sorry.
Sarah has chosen not to run.
I don’t have a TV. Do tell...
Well, I'm heartened. When America desperately needs Big Government rolled back, Newt promises he won't push even Bigger Government, i.e., status quo .... if you can believe him.
Out of this morass ... Sarah ... please come back.
It appears Santorum is just plain not likable personally to most voters. Seems to be the same problem with Bachmann. I like Bachmann a lot, but apparently not many others do. She was actually second on my list after Palin. I had hopes for Perry to do better, but his “heartless” statement regarding border security conservatives did him in. It’s doubtful that any of the five percenters will ever get their campaigns back on track. But who knows? McCain’s primary campaign was written off early too, but didn’t actually die—until the general.
I am voting for Cain.
I may have to settle in the general election against Obama, but I sure as heck don’t have to settle in the primary.
Do you have a computer? :)
He did not support Obamacare. You need to research that a bit, I think. As far as Ryan's statement, I think he makes a valid point; why does a mandate from the right make it any less a mandate? And I believe that if you are not going to cover yourself for insurance, holding the taxpayer blameless is a good idea. "In some way..." That is a far cry from a mandate.
“I agree that all of us have a responsibility to help pay for health care. And I think that there are ways to do it that make most libertarians relatively happy,” Mr. Gingrich told the host David Gregory. “I’ve said consistently, where there’s some requirement you either have health insurance or you post a bond or in some way you indicate you’re going to be held accountable.”
Mr. Gingrich also said on the show that he’s uncomfortable with the proposed changes to Medicare in the budget put forth by Representative Paul Ryan of Wisconsin, the chairman of the House budget committee.
“I don’t think right-wing social engineering is any more desirable than left-wing social engineering,” Mr. Gingrich said Sunday. “I don’t think imposing radical change from the right or the left is a very good way for a free society to operate.”
That brought a quick retort from Mr. Ryan on Monday morning, who asked on a conservative radio program, “With allies like that, who needs the left?”
Rick Tyler, a spokesman for Mr. Gingrich, sought to soften his boss’s comments. In an e-mail to The Weekly Standard, Mr. Tyler wrote that “there is little daylight between Ryan and Gingrich.”
“But look how it gets reported,” Mr. Tyler continued. “Newt would fully support Ryan if it were not compulsory. We need to design a better system that people will voluntarily move to. That is a major difference in design but not substance.”
The problem we face more than anything else is in our own willingness to believe how things are reported or to suspend belief until we hear clarification from the individual. The old lies about his dumping his wife on her death bed have been repeated so often even his own daughter's statements clearing that up are being called false.
Well Jim, if it comes down to Gingrich v. Obama, there’s no question I’ll pull the Newt lever. In the primary fight however, Santorum is the hill on which I’m going to die.
No argument there. However, Gingrich is also somewhat mercurial and one has to question his core conservative values. I'll be watching Newt's statements/interviews and how he handles himself now that he's in the lead and open to the predictable leftmedia attacks. I'm willing to vote for Gingrich but he has to earn it. The next few weeks should be interesting.
Yeah. Maybe amnesty, individual mandate in obamacare, global warming are not that bad. Maybe we learn to love amnesty!
Besides, fairness doctrine and working for fannie mae lobbyist and lying about are nothing to worry about.
Yeah. Maybe amnesty, individual mandate in obamacare, global warming are not that bad. Maybe we learn to love amnesty!
Besides, fairness doctrine and working for fannie mae lobbyist and lying about are nothing to worry about.
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.