Skip to comments.Gingrich Has Most Exceptional Moment of 2012 Election Cycle
Posted on 01/14/2012 7:29:31 PM PST by TBBT
Speaking at the Greenville/Spartanburg GOP Bronze Elephant Dinner in Duncan, South Carolina on Friday night, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, in response to a question about what the American dream is about, had the most exceptional moment of the 2012 cycle.
As he is emerging as the chief anti-Mitt Romney challenger in South Carolina (Gingrich is a strong second, according to numerous South Carolina polls released this week), Gingrich described the America many feel will be just a memory if President Barack Obama wins another term and articulated why the preservation of that America should never be taken for granted and how Americans should be proactive in ensuring their children and grandchildren inherit an American with gritty, Jacksonian values not unlike the one they inherited.
Countries can die, Gingrich powerfully said, referring to a lesson he learned while his father was stationed overseas. And Leadership can make an enormous difference.
Gingrich noted that he grew up surrounded by people who were passionate about America who loved America because they did not have that much economically and was raised by a grandmother who was from a generation that instilled in him a belief that George Washington was a heroic figure and the founding fathers led remarkable lives.
We didnt think we were poor, Gingrich said. We were Americans, and therefore we were rich, we had freedoms and a sense of safety.
Gingrich said that the American dream is to recognize first that we exist under our Creator with unalienable rights and, therefore, no president, judge, or bureaucrat can take away our rights.
(Excerpt) Read more at humanevents.com ...
Thanks for this full version. The Townhall article/five min. excerpt already mailed to my list.
Direct link to the Gingrich video described in the article:
Oops, sorry! The link I posted above is a 4-minute excerpt. The following link from Utmost Certainty gives the full 1 hour & 21 minute video.
I hear the Newties throwing around the word true Conservative or “Reaganesque” like a cheap tokens to buy off the gullible. A man who isnt faithful to one he has given a sacred vow will not be faithful to one who has given him his trust. Not very conservative if you ask me.
Bookmark for later
I leave you with excerpts from his book:
"I want to encourage you to be a little anxious, and then I want to encourage you to turn that anxiety into engergy. We will create a better future and renew America only if enough people decide that there is a problem and that we can do something about it . . . "
". . . I am not suggesting that each of us needs to be heroic in the tradition of Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, or Roosevelt. Quite the opposite. I believe the heroism we need today is the quiet steady work of millions--parents, teachers, volunteers, cab drivers, government officials, individual citizens--each making his or her own contribution with his or her own talents . . ."
". . . Since each American is uniquely endowed by the Creator with inalienable rights, there is not and cannot be a single American dream. There are 260,000,000 American dreamers. Because we have been so empowered by our dreams and our right to pursue our dreams, we have become a great country filled with good people."
Newt - “each making his or her own contribution with his or her own talents.”
Rick! Santorium promoting his book, told NPR in 2006:
“One of the criticisms I make is to what I refer to as more of a libertarianish right. You know, the left has gone so far left and the right in some respects has gone so far right that they touch each other. They come around in the circle. This whole idea of personal autonomy, well I dont think most conservatives hold that point of view. Some do. They have this idea that people should be left alone, be able to do whatever they want to do, government should keep our taxes down and keep our regulations low, that we shouldnt get involved in the bedroom, we shouldnt get involved in cultural issues. You know, people should do whatever they want. Well, that is not how traditional conservatives view the world and I think most conservatives understand that individuals cant go it alone. That there is no such society that I am aware of, where weve had radical individualism and that it succeeds as a culture.” http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/rick-santorum-v-limited-government/
With that said, we're talking about the first Speaker of the House ever to be disciplined by Congress for an ethical wrongdoing. The guy was sanctioned $300,000 on a 39528 House vote. He had eighty-four ethics charges levied against him. The man's ethical shortcomings cost us the midterm elections in '98, after which he was pretty much ran out of town.
The man announced his intention to divorce his first wife while she was on her hospital bed because he was having an affair with another woman. Although Gingrich denies it, L. H. Carter, Gingrich's former campaign treasurer, claims that Gingrich said, "She's not young enough or pretty enough to be the wife of the President. And besides, she has cancer." He remarried just six months after finalizing his divorce, only to have another affair with another woman (almost half his age) while simultaneously going after Bill Clinton for the exact same thing.
The essence of America, everything that makes us good, prosperous, and free, lies within our moral values. Gingrich is a brilliant man who has a way with words but you cannot convince me that he actually "gets" in his heart what makes America tick -- the very way he lives his life and the character he has repeatedly shown proves that he does not get it.
Again, I'm not saying I would not vote for Gingrich. The man has done impressive things and can probably rightfully be credited with stopping Clinton from taking this country in the direction Obama has. But I caution everyone reading to approach the man with the healthy distrust due to all slick politicians and not to be swooned by the fact that he knows how to play to your heartstrings. I pray that I am wrong but Newt Gingrich has struck me as, at the end of the day, always having been in it for Newt Gingrich -- he says and does the things he says and does less because he believes in them and more because he knows it's a fruitful path to power. He did not, after all, go after Bill Clinton because he thought the guy did something wrong, like the rest of us did -- it was something he was doing himself. He did it because he figured it would bolster his own standing.
One can advocate and promote all the right things for all the wrong reasons. As conservatives we distrust the government in part precisely because it is run by politicians like Gingrich. This is what sets us apart from Democrats -- we know we can't trust our guys and we pressure them accordingly. If we start trusting them because they say what they know we want to hear, however... well, we become useful idiots just like those across the aisle.
Please list all the campaign promises Newt broke in the two decades he served in Congress. Funny, I’ve never seen any of the Newt bashers mention even one.
He who is without sin cast the first stone! If you're looking for a perfect Messiah I suggest you vote for the incumbent! If you don't have a problem with a flawed human being who understands this time in history I suggest you stop looking at personal sins (for which he has repented) and start looking at his vision for restoring America. I watched Newt balance the f'ing budget and reform welfare with a democratic President so don't tell me he's not conservative. Please point me to ANYONE who has actually accomplished anything close to this??
MWS, why have you so willingly drunk the liberal, MSM and RINO Kool-Aid? We get tired around her debunking the same old urban myths people like to parrot about Newt, because they were too lazy to do a fact-check on them themselves.
ANYONE can level any frivolous ethics charges they want. Don’t you remember that’s how they drove Sarah Palin out of office in Alaska? Pelosi won control of the House in 2006 by claiming all the Republicans were unethical. This is the standard Washington playbook. 83 out of the 84 against Newt were dismissed by the house. They kicked the 84th one to the IRS and the IRS later came back and said Newt was not guilty of anything there either. Newt agreed to pay the $300,000 solely to cover the cost of the investigation. This was resolved almost 2 years before the 1998 election and probably had nothing to do with the results.
Newt specifically said at the time, like I think every Republican repeated over and over at the time, that they went after Clinton for committing perjury, not because he was having an affair. There is NO hypocrisy there, period. Anyone who had more powers of observation than a potted plant at the time would have known this, which makes it suspicious that you’re simply a plant here trolling for another campaign.
It’s a lie that he announced his intention to divorce his wife while she was in the hospital. This accusation was originally made by saying his wife was on her deathbed at the time. Since she’s still alive today, that alone should tell you it was a lie when it was first said and remains a lie today.
I wish I lived in your America where things were going so well and there were so few serious problems that I could afford to base my decision on who to elect for President on such a frivolous, inconsequential matter that has no discernible impact on a President’s job performance.
The first time, perhaps youthful indescretion could be forgiven. However, he broke the vow between himself, his spouse and God. At least I can sleep at night knowing I've never broken that SACRED vow...when you do, the rest is moot and you have zero credibility to stand on as a conservative. I could dig up plenty of his actual record in congress if you prefer, but the main item I am voting on (given the choices we've been dealt in the last two decades) is all based on one word...TRUST. If he cannot keep the covenant between himself, his spouse, his God, the rest are meaningless to him and he will be a tyrant equal to the one we already have.
Romney was the architect of Obama Care, he voted against the 2nd Amendment, raised taxes, voted for abortion, and on and on. The "System" will make it where it won't matter who wins,.......AGAIN!
I'm 60 years old and realized decades ago thet the "System" sets it up where nothing will ever change. We will keep spending money we don't have, murdering babies, homosexual marriage, or whatever, because the "unseen hand" keeps it power that way. Just imagine what a country we could have if we turned back the clock 30 years. My daughter will never know the freedoms we have lost because she never knew them. This internal insanity is drummed up from somewhere deep in the bowels of some smoke filled room and is carried out each election cycle. We saw it in technicolor used on Sarah Palin. She had an 80% approval rate in her last days as governor, but within a few months, I'm not sure any candidate would even be proud to have her endorsement now. She has been tainted with this insanity just as Newt has been now. We keep hearing that Newt is the smartest guy in the room, but then a new wave of attacks come and makes everyone almost ashamed to like the man. He may be the only one on stage now to save the country, but even Limbaugh has dedicated hours of propaganda against him.
No, I don't think Newt is perfect, but we don't need perfect to save the country. We just need someone that believes in America as it was in the beginning and could be again. Do people really believe Romney won't compromise if he gets into office? What did he do in Mass that was principled,....patriotic,....wise,.....to enhance freedom? Everything isn't about the "bottom line" as in a business. Santorum is a good man, but he was just a soldier under Newt and doesn't seem to muster the horsepower to be president. Perry is basically a good man, but is way out of his league also. Paul is a purist that will rain radiation down on America because he doesn't understand who the 12th Imam is. Huntsman, well he's another rich son fulfilling his fathers dreams. For me, it's between Newt and Romney. Newt isn't perfect, but if you read his books and listen to him speak, you know he's the one,...he gets it. Romney is just the establishment boy that is "next in line". A clone of McCain. McCain was the Maverick until he went against the Dems, then he became the idiot. Palin was tainted, just for that reason.
Please, people, look inside these people and see that Newt will re establish what we have been losing, instead of continuing the cancer that is eating away at the culture. Bush wasn't perfect, but was 4% unemployment that bad? Was a 14k DOW that terrible? I didn't like the medicare drug plan, or a couple of other things he did, but would you have rather had Kerry or Gore?
Newt isn't perfect, but Romney is closer to Obama than Hillary. Try to imagine the debate with Romney as Obama praises Romney for Romney care. He will site his gun control measures and abortion provisions in Romney care and Gay marriage. I pray we will have a better choice than Tweedle Dee or Tweedle Dum.
If you just list all the things that have gone against the American will in the last 50 years, it is traced back to the courts. Prayer bans, abortion, Gay marriage, EPA rules, and on and on. Newt is the ONLY ONE with guts enough to say..... ENOUGH! He was even attacked for that. Homosexual marriage has FAILED in EVERY election when on the ballot, yet we have several states now allowing it over the objections of the voters. It's time to face the facts that we are NOT a democratic republic any longer. It doesn't matter what we vote on if it's turned over in court. To elect representatives is a sham if we keep losing our rights. How does it happen that we can't close the borders? We can't even cut funding for PBS. Nothing works anymore and we keep electing the fools they prop up in front of us. Maybe the guy that is reviled and smeared is the one we should look at. I would vote for Palin in a heartbeat, yet I am abused when just mentioning her name. Why is she so hated? What has she done to deserve such revulsion? She isn't part of the system,...,. that's what. She couldn't be controlled, by this invisible force that seems to control rational thinking. Newt's the guy, IMHO, that could turn things around, but we will somehow get the guy that inspired Obama Care. He doesn't like the Tea Party, He doesn't revere gun ownership, He voted to kill babies. What is the draw to such a man? The best they can come up with is, "At least he isn't Newt"?
I find it ironic that you accuse me of drinking grape kool-aid while offering me cherry kool-aid of your own.
If you want to believe the man is a saint and dismiss his track record in a blanket fashion because it doesn’t jive with what you want to believe about the world, that’s your prerogative.
As for me, I’m a conservative. I see politicians and government as necessary evils and will always treat them as such — with due suspicion. My trust has to be earned. That used to be a common sentiment among conservatives.
There is a term for those who will defend everyone and everything that happens on their side of the political aisle while dismissing any and all accusations of wrongdoing levied against them: “useful idiots.” In the past they were primarily found on the left. I’m dismayed at the frequency I find them popping up among conservatives these days as well.
LOL! Is that you John Edwards? I thought your “condition” prevented you from posting...TWO AMERICAS???? Give me a break! Last time I checked (especially in the primaries), we voted for THE CLOSEST CANDIDATE TO OUR VALUES and not base our vote on “who can win” nonsense.
It has also been proven that when a candidate choses to adopt a conservative solution to America’s ills, that platform can win (see 1980 and 1984, as well as campaigns since who have mocked that message - running on it but failing to deliver then pay the price through utter - or udder defeat, leaving more to suck from the gov’t teat).
Most important to me is a respect for LIFE, LIBERTY, and the PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS and ability to defend it at every opportunity. If you have trained yourself well, from an early age, you don’t have to rely on someone in “Foggy Bottom” to deliver it to you on a silver platter. Sorry for those who choose SLAVERY’s sustinence over actual substance.
I don't know who you look to for your forgiveness but if any of us only gets a "first time" we're all in a bad way. Of course I'm sure you have never broken any sacred vow with your God. I personally have broken many, and the older I get the more I realize that I even break them without being aware! Thankfully for me I don't have to live them out in the public square. King David had a man killed . . . did that disqualify him with God? Or with leading Israel? You can bring up anything you want about Newt's congressional record but he is still the PRIME MOVER in ending 40 years of democratic rule AND in implementing THE MOST conservative government agenda in my lifetime. He is, along with Ronald Reagan, the most accomplished conservative of this generation and there is a case to be made that he accomplished more actual government reform than Reagan did. There is NOTHING to suggest he would be a tyrant, and everything to suggest that he has the potential to ACTUALLY change things because HE ACTUALLY HAS A RECORD OF DOING SO!
By the way — I find it rich that you would accuse me of being a troll planted here by some other campaign.
I’ve been registered on this site since before 9/11. I haven’t advocated for anyone this election cycle because I think the options quite simply suck. I even straight out said TWICE in the post that you responded to that Gingrich is probably the best choice this time around and will most likely have my vote.
It’s one thing to get caught up in a discussion but quite another to start levying unfounded and nonsensical accusations against a long-term member of this site in good standing.
I'll defer to this post if you're interested...doubful, but a must read regarding Newt's "conservative record" of accomplishment (I've got plenty more of my own if you wish)...
What suggests he'll be a tyrant is his attitude. Rather than being "cool, calm and collected" Mr. Newt's experience has only gained him the ability to fly off the handle, half-cocked and shoot himself in the foot time and again while looking like an ignorant OWS fool in the process.
Newt also has a record outside of congessional "service" if you cared to look...one of appeasing every left-wing cause he could find while lining his pockets full of "crony capitalism" cash. Rudy-McRomney all wrapped up into one candidate - Newt Gingrich!
Try to imagine the debate with Romney as Obama praises Romney for Romney care. He will site his gun control measures and abortion provisions in Romney care and Gay marriage.
I sent Newt's site and his SuperPac's site an idea for an anti-Romney ad last week that did just that. Obama has a great opportunity to give an opening statement in the debate praising Romney for his liberal record as governor, as below. It's laughable to me that in the town hall yesterday, Romney told the questioner to look at his record as governor to prove to her that he's a conservative. The only way he gets nominated is precisely if people DON'T look at his record.
"If I could, let me just take a moment to congratulate Governor Romney on his record in Massachusetts. He provided our nation with the first working model for universal health coverage, including funding to guarantee a womans right to choose, he led the nation in instituting gay marriage rights, he passed an assault weapons ban, and he had the political courage to raise taxes and fees to balance his state's budget. Unlike many Republicans, Governor Romney has shown real leadership on these issues and I have to give him credit for that."
we voted for THE CLOSEST CANDIDATE TO OUR VALUES It has also been proven that when a candidate choses to adopt a conservative solution to Americas ills, that platform can win Most important to me is a respect for LIFE, LIBERTY, and the PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS and ability to defend it at every opportunity.
When you repeat a series of liberal and RINO talking points almost verbatim that have been proven to be false on this forum numerous times, excuse me for believing you’re a propagandist working for one of the campaigns and not a loyal forum member. You saying you’d vote for Newt Gingrich in your post sounded just like the classic “I’m a lifelong Republican, BUT” line that all of the liberal operatives use when they call talk radio. If you’re going to accuse me of making unfounded and nonsensical accusations, that’s awfully hypocritical considering you posted the same type of thing about Newt.
That’s not a “must read,” it’s just a string of highly propagandistic accusations made with almost no sources being cited. I believe Newt went around with Al Sharpton promoting school choice, i.e. getting kids off of government schools, a highly anti-Democrat agenda. Of course everybody agreed to raise the debt ceiling in the 1980s in order to outspend the Soviet Union and win the Cold War. And the idea that Newt supported abortion legislation is pretty ridiculous considering he has a 98.6% pro-life rating. Again, show me the links and sources for each of those accusations and link to the actual legislation that was passed, so we can see if those are true or if it’s a propagandist’s highly skewed opinion of what was in there.
The country would be in great shape if Newt were POTUS. Unfortunately he’s not from central casting. Too bad the illiterate electorate hods the keys (ie electing incompetents such as Obama).
You really want to play this game? I have a posting history that goes back 11 years on this site. I don’t post often and I’ve only commented on the candidates in this current election a handful of times. Nothing in all the previous posts I’ve made throughout the years is a red flag that screams “political operative.”
Now let’s look at your posting history. You created your account in 2002. You posted here and there through 2004, twice in 2005, backed McCain with your three posts in 2008, put in a good word for Avatar at the beginning of 2010... came back December 11th of 2011 and then, starting December 14th, have been posting HARD for Newt Gingrich, viciously attacking his detractors and heavily criticizing his opponents. The posts you have made since December 14th of last year probably constitute a good 95% of your contributions to this forum and the biggest chunk of them have been heavy in the bag for Mr. Gingrich.
It’s easy to deflect attention from yourself by accusing those from whom you wish to detract of what you yourself are doing. Anyone who would take the time to read our respective posts throughout the history of this website will plainly see that YOU are far more likely “political plant” than me.
What a steaming pile of crap. You are free to base your vote on the purity of the candidate's marital history, but as for me, I want the best man to stop Obamo-fascism and turn America back around. I'm voting for Newt.
MWS, thanks for your anti-Newtisms as it fired me up to do some hard thinking about great leaders. With a little time I could research this better, but briefly, here goes:
David (of the Old Testament) - Committed adultery and sent the woman’s husband to the front lines so he would be killed.
Solomon - Had hundreds and hundreds (I forget how many) of wives and concubines.
Churchill - Responsible for the deaths of more than 30,000 men at Gallipoli (World War I).
Roosevelt - Personally approved Operation Keelhaul, which forcibly sent hundreds of thousands of Soviet citizens back to Russia to be killed. You should see the old movie, “Red Danube” - it’ll break your heart.
And last but not least, my personal hero Reagan actually signed a pro-abortion bill while governor of California.
Nobody’s perfect. Right now, I would vote for the devil himself if he could save America.
...And it is easy to be an agent provacateur, sowing dissention with half-truths and lies, sir.
What I have cautioned against, however, is fawning him in the manner which liberals fawned over Obama... which is what I'm seeing a lot of in this thread. Yes, the man is good with words -- but I think it's a crying shame that he's the best we have to offer this time around.
Gingrich is no King David. He's no Solomon or Churchill either. He sure as heck isn't a Reagan. This level of Gingrich worship is starting to approach levels I previously thought reserved for the likes of Obama and Paul. Gingrich is a flawed yet intelligent man with some good ideas and who is probably the best candidate in the running this time around. He can have my grudging support but he'll have to earn my respect and trust. That's how it should be with any candidate, in my opinion.
And I'd be weary of anyone who would deal with the devil to save a worldly realm. You can't serve both God and mammon. Thankfully, Newt is certainly not the devil.
“He can have my grudging support but he’ll have to earn my respect and trust. That’s how it should be with any candidate, in my opinion.”
Never trust a politician any further than you can throw him. If Newt’s elected watch him like a hawk, but I support him 100% because I haven’t heard an articulate defense of conservative principals, on a regular bases for more than 16 years(except for listening to Reagan on You Tube).
Absolutely right on. We are all hungry to hear Reagan again. But I’d like to point out an area in which Newt is actually superior to Reagan. His command of history is amazing. I learn something new and useful each time he talks.
Listening to his speech in S. Carolina, I realized we are not helpless in the face of judicial tyranny. It has been dealt with many times by previous presidents in the way the founders planned - they put a provision in the constitution for it. But it takes brains and courage which Newt certainly has. We are fools if we don’t put him in the White House.
Yes! Very well stated.
I certainly did not mean to seem as though I was discouraging support for the guy — I was just a bit concerned when I saw people speaking as though an establishment politician really understands their hearts and souls.
We’re all flawed, at the end of the day, but the flaws of some of us are more public than the flaws of others. That in itself is no reason not to support someone. My point, however, is that at the end of the day Newt Gingrich is merely a man and that we should be cautious about treating him as a political savior until he actually delivers the goods — it’s a good way to get burned. Politicians are in it for themselves... that some of them have a knack for saying what the people want to hear is less a matter of being a true believer and more a matter of being politically astute.
With that said, I have nothing against supporting someone who I feel is politically astute that says and does the right things for the wrong reasons... so long as he delivers on what he says.
bases = basis
So, you are more righteous than us all perhaps, because you have kept your vow between you and your spouse ... or maybe many of us have also and your little tirade has another motive? Perhaps politics is too unrighteous for your type, so you want to chide us all for not being righteous, at least righteous enough to do as you doa nd condemn Newt Gingrich because he broke his vows to his wives, two of the three who still support him politically? ... That approach may influence some voters, but if anything it will cause folks to try and ignore your self-righteous pomposity unless your rants serve their agendas.
Their education, experience, and record of accomplishments, and he looked better to me than the others. I also wanted very much to have an articulate candidate to make the conservative message clear and he won hands down there.
When Newt took on the judges - that sealed the deal. They have been forcing the majority of Americans to live the way 20% or less think we should.
I have been disagreeing with the judges ever since Roe v Wade and banning prayer in schools. Lots of years of additional insults and injury. I know you probably understand what I mean, when I say I'm so mad at judges, I could spit.
I always say look at their record before you vote. Over all, his record in office was satisfactory enough to support, and waaaay better than mittens.
I don’t mind admitting I am an old conservative. Followed Reagan from the very moment he gave “The Speech” in 1964 for Goldwater. He used to write articles for Human Events and National Review, so it was easy to see how his political philosophy developed. When you’ve been devoted to a candidate over the years you get a real sense of their sincerity to the cause.
Gingrich reached his public in the eighties when he gave late-night talks on C-Span from the House of Representatives. I remember the camera constantly panned the empty seats behind him but who cared. He was talking about freedom!
I can’t help comparing Reagan and Gingrich. I’ve heard both talk about freedom and their love of America hundreds of times. Newt may not be quite as lovable as Reagan but he’s as good a communicator and he knows more about history. He’ll always have my vote.
You do make good points. And I do admit to being a bit harsher on Newt than I really intended. To put things in perspective, I turn 31 this month. The first election I ever had the chance to participate in was back in 2000. My first presidential candidate was George W. Bush — his “compassionate conservatism” aside, I backed him rather enthusiastically, if only because I feared the consequences of seeing Algore take the Oval Office. I backed him again, of course, in 2004. George W. Bush was no Ronald Reagan. In practice, quite a bit of his governance came straight out of the liberal playbook — government solutions to all our problems and whatnot. Then, in 2008, my presidential candidate was McCain, whose only saving grace was that he was not Barack Obama, a man about whom I had suspicions ever since I first heard about him in 2004.
Throw on top of those two a lack of inspiring Republicans in Congress and you might start to see what I’m getting at. I’m rather jaded when it comes to politicians, who seem, in my experience, to have this knack for saying one thing with great, wonderful words and then go off to do just the opposite. Even when they do right they seem to find ways to sink their hooks straight in so they can take a chunk to call their own. Sure, I’ll back Republicans... but it’s only because they at least pay lip service to that in which I believe. But I can’t get excited about them. It’s all phony to me, albeit less than the crap the Democrats pull off (I wanted to vomit back during the Wellstone Memorial... that sealed my opinion of that den of vipers).
I was in my teens when Gingrich became Speaker of the House. I admittedly never had much against him and could tell that he was getting the raw end of the deal when it came to a lot of the coverage he received. All the same, I’d readily admit that perhaps it tainted my opinion of him a bit on a subconscious level which, when coupled with my general distrust of politicians as being all hat and no cattle, makes me hesitant to jump on the gung-ho bandwagon.
Like I said, I’ll support the man. But I’ll need to see accomplishments over the next four years before I’m willing to start extending my trust.
What exactly does "fly off the handle" mean sir? Twice now you've used that term. I've barely heard him raise his voice, and agree with him or not, he always gives an intellectual account for his actions, beliefs and thoughts. Again, I DEFY you name another person who has designed and accomplished an ACTUAL conservative agenda even approaching what Newt has, because you can't. They don't exist.
Gingrich easily gets my vote before Mitt. No worries there.
Like I said, if he can’t be trusted to keep his vow to his wife, he won’t keep his vow to uphold and defend the constitution. It’s as simple as that.
Rick! Santorium promoting his book, told NPR in 2006:That is disturbing quote by Santorum. IMO, far worse than Newt's Pelosi couch moment. Not one of the republican contenders is consistently conservative (in the FR sense of the word, not as Santorum defined it above).
One of the criticisms I make is to what I refer to as more of a libertarianish right. You know, the left has gone so far left and the right in some respects has gone so far right that they touch each other. They come around in the circle. This whole idea of personal autonomy, well I dont think most conservatives hold that point of view. Some do. They have this idea that people should be left alone, be able to do whatever they want to do, government should keep our taxes down and keep our regulations low, that we shouldnt get involved in the bedroom, we shouldnt get involved in cultural issues. You know, people should do whatever they want. Well, that is not how traditional conservatives view the world and I think most conservatives understand that individuals cant go it alone. That there is no such society that I am aware of, where weve had radical individualism and that it succeeds as a culture. http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/rick-santorum-v-limited-government/
I don’t care about a vow to his wife because I was not there when the marriage fell apart, and I am in no position to judge his infidelity. God will judge him on that. I am in a position to judge his voting record and getting a D from Gun Owners is a much more serious matter in my mind than worrying about whether his zipper stayed zipped.
By the way, this quote is demonstrably false.
This is the Newt that I want to see in the White House.
Hope S. Carolina agrees. I wish mittens would come in at about 15% or less at this point. Get him out, and let the conservatives duke it out!LOL I know it ain’t gonna happen but its an entertaining thought.
He never gets weak kneed, he just sez one thing, then changes his mind later. His campaign theme song should be Blind Willie Johnson’s “Nobody’s Fault But Mine”.
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.