Skip to comments.Gingrich: Mitt Romney is a liar
Posted on 01/03/2012 6:45:42 AM PST by Daffynition
Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, whose support in Iowa has withered after riding on top of the polls, on Tuesday called former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney a liar who would mislead the American people if elected to the White House - but added that he would still vote for him if Romney won the GOP nomination.
On CBS' "The Early Show" this morning, CBS News chief White House correspondent Norah O'Donnell asked Gingrich about comments he had previously made about his chief rival and the Super PAC whose negative campaign ads have hurt his campaign: "You scolded Mitt Romney, his friends who are running this Super PAC that has funded that, and you said of Mitt Romney, 'Someone who will lie to you to get to be president will lie to you when they are president. I have to ask you, are you calling Mitt Romney a liar?"
"Yes," Gingrich replied.
"You're calling Mitt Romney a liar?"
(Excerpt) Read more at cbsnews.com ...
ROFL: 41% STILL UNDECIDED????
Interesting question, I think that when a leader makes a bad decision or announces a bad policy he/she can be made to see the foolishness of his/her way. So I am giving Paul a little time to see if he sincerely walks back his crazy ideas on Islam in general and Iran in particular. If he doesn’t he will lose me.
41 percent undecided, wow, anyone can win in Iowa.
Romney is a liar. You and I saying it is different from a candidate saying it. It baffles me how Newt is self destructing. Too bad because unless Perry or Santorum surge and withstand the next round of scrutiny, we will likely end up with Romney.
To consider, how long has he had these views, and polished and refined and reconsidered them before presentation at this time?
Then, if he changes now, does a complete 180 on a fundamental and substantial segment of his platform, how strong did he hold those beliefs, and what of his others?
I think that the Iowians are still very undecided. When I see the candidates in the town hall meetings there, I started thinking those people were not necessarialy their backers.
They most likely went to ALL the candidates meetings, they went to listen and learn, then DECIDE.
Viewed from that angle, any upset is possible.
I like him on spending and fidelity to the Constitution. I love to see Ron Paul appoint judges to the Supreme Court. I love to see him appoint the AG. I’d love to see him axe the Dep of Ed, EPA, HUD, Energy, etc. And I’d like to know if the gold is still in Fort Knocks, lol. So there is a lot in Paul that appeals to me. I think we are probably to broke to continue policing the world so that part of his foreign policy does not brother me. But I don’t care how broke we are we can not allow Iran to gain nuclear weapons and we would be wise to finally face the fact that Islam is not our friend. So my litmus test will be allowing Iran a nuke, if Paul does not change his position on that I am gone.
He's not going to walk back that stinker..he gets too emotional about it. Been like that for years...
Bain capital is in the business of risking its own money on a bet that a given company will be a winner. That’s a far sight different than using taxpayer money, IMO.
I’m more of a mind that the Romneycare issue should be front and center - with appreciative statements from Obamacare architects front and center in the ads.
>>He reminds me of a boxer losing a fight late in the rounds throwing haymakers wildly hoping for a miracle knockout.<<
It’s like watching someone throwing a punch for a knock-out right hook and ending up only breaking the opponent’s tooth.
It’s disconcerting to watch our own hopefuls engaged in infighting; we have to keep the focus on defeating Hussein Obama, first and foremost.
I’d like to see the nominees focus their passions on saving this Republic! Not on giving Hussein’s DNC ammo to fire back at us. They’ll dig up enough on their own, let’s not help them. They will take advantage of *divide and conquer* soon enough.
I saw one headline this morning that said:** Newt calls Romney a BIG liar** Geesh; it’s started already.
The truth about liberal Romney in his own words:
MORE MYTHS from MYTH ROMNEY
"Mitt Romney Lies About Father Marching With Martin Luther King, Jr."
"Mitt Romney has been caught in yet another lie.
Only yesterday Romneys claim of not supporting Planned Parenthood abortion mills was abruptly smashed by a photograph surfacing of him at one of their fundraisers in 1994.
Today, its Romneys claim that his father marched with famed civil rights leader Martin Luther King, Jr.
During his Im a Mormon but it doesnt matter speech, Mitt Romney claimed he saw his father,
George Romney, marching with MLK during a 1968 civil rights march through Grosse Pointe, Michigan.
It was a stirring account of the efforts of his father to show that the Romney family have always reached across ecumenical lines.
Only one little problem it never happened."
"Mitt Romney went a step further in a 1978 interview with the Boston Herald.
Talking about the Mormon Church and racial discrimination, he said:
"My father and I marched with Martin Luther King Jr. through the streets of Detroit."
"Yesterday (12/20/07), Romney spokesman Eric Fehrnstrom acknowledged that was not true.
"Mitt Romney did not march with Martin Luther King,"
he said in an e-mail statement to the Globe.
Against Myth Romney is 1:
"On Sunday, June 23, 1963, 125,000 people marched down Detroit's Woodward Avenue
to the Civic Center, in what was described at the time as the largest civil-rights demonstration in the nation's history.
According to the next day's account in the Holland Evening Sentinel,
the crowd at the Center "lustily booed," when representatives of Governor George W. Romney
read a proclamation declaring "Freedom March Day in Michigan." But Martin Luther King Jr. didn't fault Romney for his absence,
which the governor ascribed to his policy against public appearances on the Sabbath.
"At a news conference following the march . .
[King] refused to criticize Romney for not attending the demonstration," the Sentinel reported."
Against Myth Romney is 2:
Susan Englander, assistant editor of the Martin Luther King Jr. Papers Project at Stanford University, who is editing the King papers from that era,
says Myth Romney was untruthful, when she told the Globe yesterday:
"I researched this question, and indeed it is untrue that George Romney marched with [Dr.] King."
Against Myth Romney is 3:
"King never marched in Grosse Pointe, according to the Grosse Pointe Historical Society,
and had not appeared in the town at all at the time the Broder book was published.
Im quite certain of that, says Suzy Berschback, curator of the Grosse Pointe Historical Society"
Yes, we know. I had to LOL when I saw this. Love it! Go Newt!
Romney’s experience with Bain Capital has absolutely zero to do with the presidency. The president is NOT a corporate CEO and America is NOT a venture, er, vulture capital company. And Bain was not even a big company. It produced nothing, had no big payroll or budget. It does not directly apply.
Newt’s highly successful experience as congressman and Speaker of the House, and with the Reagan Revolution of the 80’s and the Republican Revolution of the 90’s is vastly superior to Mitt’s limited experience at Bain. When it comes to working with the congress in cutting taxes, cutting government spending, cutting the deficit, cutting regulations, balancing the federal budget, repealing or blocking socialized healthcare programs, reforming welfare, etc, Newt has done it and is determined to do it again and even more so. Mitt has done the exact opposite. In fact, Mitt is the architect of ObamaCare!!
Mitt’s government experience saddled his state with socialized healthcare, $50.00 taxpayer funded abortion, gay marriage, liberal activist judges, banned guns, busted budgets, and an all but destroyed Republican label.
Newt’s plan is a radical reduction in the size and scope of government and a drastic reduction in government spending, taxing and regulations, and he’s determined to take the activist judiciary head-on. Mitt’s plan simply trims around the edges and leaves big government and the activist judiciary intact.
Newt is a tea party rebel. Mitt is a big government guy.
And their records of actual accomplishments in government prove it.
My only regret is that our conservative candidates did not point all of this out in a big way from day one. I guarantee you that if Romney get’s the nomination, Obama will expose the real truth about liberal Romney and his many failures as governor of Massachusetts from the get go.
And it’s all documented in living technicolor and wraparound sound straight from Romney’s big liberal lying mouth:
God Bless your Friends!!!!! Go Santorum!!!
I’ve heard others say that Romney is a sneak and that he was the one behind the Cain meltdown.
My wife and I had a couple over for a New Years Eve dinner weve been friends with for years. The couple are both southerners, strong fiscal/social conservatives, and steadfastedly evangelical.
Both of them point blank said they would never vote for Newt Gingrich even though they detest Obama. She considers it a matter of principle. It is because of his three marriages (cheating on his wife). I tried making the lesser of the two evils argument and it was not pursuasive.
They are both hoping that Santorum does well and are interested in hearing more about him.
I hear about people like this and I want to SCREAM.
What does the concept of Forgiveness mean to them? Or do they prescribe to a cafeteria style Christianity?
I suppose they see themselves as the final judges on a person’s behavior.
Does the issue of abortion resonate with them at ALL?
Makes me ill to think people like this are out there. I’m sure they’re nice folks and I’m sorry — I mean nothing personal by it. But it’s such shortsighted reasoning.
i figure thats at least another field goal shaved from ole greengrinches campaign...
added that he would still vote for him if Romney won the GOP nomination.
so the 'lies' are worth noting for the record, but arent enuff to discourage his vote ??? sounds like the nooter is claiming that we have nothing to fear with willard, and that he would'make a fine president' indeed...
i think the point shaving is a tradeoff for a cabinet/insider position...