What did Santorum lie about Newt on?
When he said Character counts? It does.
When he said that he brought to Newt in a closed door House meeting corruption issues going on and said Newt swept them under the rug? Notice in Newt’s answer that he didn’t deny the charge, he just referred to all the times he did stand up to corruption.
When he said Newt spoke to House members and candidates gearing up for 2010 and told them to put a “low key on Social Issues”? Again, Newt didn’t deny he said that, but diverted the charge to his involvement in bringing about the largest House transformation in history with the 2010 Election.
When he said Gingrich supported TARP? Newt griped about it on TV, then in the 2008 interview with Greta, after TARP had been passed said he would have voted for legislation as well. Of course, to divert attention from this statement, he goes off about his activity in trying to repeal Sarbanes-Oxley and changes some SEC-mandated valuation requirements.
When he said Gingrich supports global warming? Newt sat on the couch with Nancy Pelosi, and while he might call that “the biggest mistake of his career”, Newt won’t call out climate change for what it is “junk science”.
When he said Gingrich was for the individual mandate? He was. How conveinent of Newt to change on that issue in the same year he declares to run for President. Anything that goes beyond the ideas Reagan illustrated in his 60’s speech against socialized medicne is nothing but more big government intrusion. I like how in the last debate Newt craftily put in the remark that they would “kill the bill” first because he didn’t trust to bureaucrats, but again, the 300-pages of whatever might seem to be good will give the Government the life it needs to implement Government-run health care later on down the road.
When he said Gingrich was an idea a minute with no organization? True. Lots of ideas were proposed but never enacted in the 90’s Congress. Unless the plan, such as the Contract with America, is fully, specifically, and written down prior to Newt assuming the WH, the chances are nil that anything will get done.
When he said Gingrich is for a form of amnesty? He is. All Newt is doing with his plan is to try and take the heat off the President in granting amnesty and giving that role to “Citizen Review Baords” and the local community of which a “family” has to sponsor the illegal immigrant. In other words, when we gripe about illegal immigration, Newt can put the blame on people instead of himself. How nice. It’s still amnesty though, whichever way you look at it.
I’ve watched Gingrich closely in these debates. He’s crafty. When attacked on something he know’s he’s wrong on, he diverts it to where he can point out all of his strengths that supposedly outweigh the weakness on the issue.
My favorite Newt quote is from Michelle Malkin.com
“It doesn’t matter what I do,” he answered. “People need to hear what I have to say. There’s no one else who can say what I can say. It doesn’t matter what I live.” (Newt’s answer to Marianne in regards to how he could give a speech on family values, yet carry on an affair with another woman)
Newt’s a fraud. Just because one speaks conservative doesn’t make themselves a conservative. Just like all the bandwagon fans that poured onto the Michael Steele RNC train and were left bitter after it turned out he was a RINO (which was pointed out by several FReepers before he took the position, but they were ridiculed). Or Scott Brown in MA, which if you watched his debated with Coakley realized he was nowhere near what a conservative is. In time, people (and FReepers) will come to regret their decision to get behind Newt. Argue all you want now. In a few years from now, I will have been proven right, like I was on Steele and Brown.
I have been reading your posts over the past few weeks and until this post, I couldn’t determine which candidate you supported. Perhaps I wasn’t on the threads where you posted a preference, I don’t know.
That being said, there are choices we make beyond the facts based upon intangibles, a gut feeling, a vibe, whatever.
That’s my issue with Santorum. I just don’t like his look. It’s quite like nObama’s in a way. He looks down his nose in the way nObama lift’s his chin. People have used the word “petulant” to describe him. I’ll go one further and say he’s a snot, in plain English.
On the other hand, Speaker Gingrich has done some controversial things. That doesn’t bother me. Thinkers do controversial things. Cowards shrink from controversy. For every RINO deed performed, 10 bold Conservative initiatives were introduced.
America needs bold if we are to survive.