Posted on 12/06/2011 11:46:09 AM PST by RobinMasters
I don’t really care what Newt was doing in 1968. What he said the other night on the Huckabee forum should be more than enough to send most conservatives running the other way.
Rush?
“I guess she’s not close enough to 0% yet.”
LOL. Well put!!
She’s sounding awfully desperate.
There was an old woman who lived in a shoe.
She had so many children, she didn’t know what to do.......
+10
None of which changes the point that Newt did exactly what was promised. It was designed to be 10 items that most Americans supported, not a comprehensive conservative wish list.
“11th commandment” etc..
So if all republican candidates attack obama, do potential voters just vote for the one that criticized O the best?
Since they are competing against each other at this point (as O is the only on on the dem side) it’s no surprise to find arrows being shot, by definition, from one repub to another.
As long as they are not simply personal insults, or UNTRUE. Calling Newt a frugal socialist is a good way to characterize him while pointing out her differences.
We need a candidate committed to rolling back the welfare state and returning to the values of our Founders. The welfare state is unsustainable not matter how efficient you try to make it.
“did exactly what was promised”
But the subject of this thread is Bachmann calling him a “frugal socialist”.
So are you saying that’s ok, because he’s a “frugal socialist that keeps his word”?.
I think Bachmann would keep her word too, and actually act conservative, not just compromise for the sake of compromise as so many “moderates” seem to do.
I don’t know what’s gotten into the waters lately. MB seems to be as hated on FR as John McCain. WTF?
Bachmann rightfully goes after Newt on his liberal stances and some people want to throw the whole 11th Commandment thing around? EXCUSE ME? Using that absurd logic, I guess we can’t attack Mitt Romney. Nice try though.
This woman represents every fundamental principle of conservatism and has been on the front lines fighting for it. And what does she get in return? A bunch of snide remarks from a bunch of low-life, compromising, retards.
If she is good enough for Rush Limbaugh and Mark Levin, then she’s good enough for me. I thought when conservatives voted, they actually voted on principle, but I guess I was wrong. We’ve got a bunch of “calculating” gurus that are trying to run us into the ground like 2004, when the Democrats thought they were playing it safe with Kerry instead of going with Dean.
Newt’s a big-tent, RINO-establishment type Republican.
Again, looking at the Electoral Map, ANY GOP candidate is going to get the same 219 Electoral Votes by winning all the McCain States + NC + IN + VA. People that think Bachmann couldn’t win FL are delusional. What they are saying is that in a race with a Conservative and a RINO, it’s better to go with the RINO, despite what we learned in Rubio v Crist. That leaves OH and 1 more state to fight for.
Bachmann can win the General Election because not only because she is a strong conservative, but because the Electoral Map is also in the GOP’s favor this time. She is right when she says there is no need for a “watered-down” nominee.
Tea Party and Conservatives are going to have to ask themselves this question: Are they going to demand a conservative and vote on principle, or are they going to try and play it safe with a less than optimal candidate.
I said this back in July and I’ll say it again. Anyone who bashes Bachmann for doing and saying the right thing is not a conservative. She’s totally correct with what she pointed out about Newt. Would I like to see her hammer Romney just as hard? Absolutely. But it still doesn’t take away from thae fact that she is right.
IMO, today’s politics—one way or the other—won’t have any effect on the situation ten years from now. There won’t be enough revenues of value for any kind of socialist politician to do much damage with. All candidates that we’ve seen so far are fascist socialists and social rebels against the wisdoms of their ancestors, including all who’ve said otherwise. Damage has already been done—damage the likes, we’ve never seen or imagined.
There’s not enough production of useful items in our country to sustain any paradigm sought by most of us chattering, ineffective constituents, and the leading constituents behind the politicians are determined that there won’t be. All of the rich moguls worshiped by local, government-dependent, self-described conservatives, all: anti-social, hard socialists in favor of gun control, inheritance taxes, empty eduocracy (whatever social studies), effete plutocracy, radical environmentalism, (zoning) regulations against new manufacturing starts and much more.
IMO, we should each get away from potential areas of misery and prepare ourselves to the best of our technical abilities to live in peace and health. Tomorrow’s government will be small, indeed—far smaller than most political folks will be able to stand.
She is also a tax ligation attorney and has run a small business. s/
And John Kerry was in Vietnam. :-)
As much as I respect Rush (and am a 99.784% dittohead), there's an individual that I hold in even higher esteem. Unlike Rush Limbaugh, the person I quoted had a distinguished career in the military in the 1960's (and that's not a slam against Rush who has performed enormous service on behalf of America by advancing Conservatism).
Keep guessing! :-)
Make that “litigation”.
Didn't you hear the RNC sent out a message they are NOT to say bad things about Obama.
I am sick about this whole political process.
Bachmann: Romney, Newt 'frugal socialists'
She was right on both counts. Newt and Mitt will make the welfare state run more efficiently and cheaper. They will not roll it back, which is what is needed.
[ Let’s see, when Newt was speaker he promised to balance the budget, reform welfare, and bring all 10 items in the Contract With America to a vote on the floor. How many did he do...oh yeah, ALL OF THEM. ]
True.. I was a Nooter then too...
Then was then, now is now.. Back then we had no idea of the power of the Progressives..
OR even that there were “republican” progressives..
Obama is Plan “A”, Romney is Plan “B” and NooT is Plan “C”..
Cain is also progressive but was a diversion.. seemed to have “worked” beautifully..
Michele Bachmann IS THE ONLY conservative.. Santorum is way too white..
Only a woman can trump Obamas blackness..’
Gingrich, Bachmann said, “is the same as Mitt Romney.” She explained, “You’d think these guys had been the standard bearer for the conservative movement and the Republican Party, but they’re great pretenders — they’re frugal socialists,” Bachmann said. “People want something that’s very bold and very different, they won’t get it in either Mitt Romney or Newt Gingrich.”
I was responding to the comment that Newt couldn’t be trusted to do what he says.
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.