Posted on 11/13/2009 2:54:47 PM PST by rabscuttle385
Newt Gingrich, the former Republican House speaker and purveyor of the GOP "Contract With America'' that helped his party win control of the House after President Bill Clinton's election, says GOP chairman Michael Steele has started work on a new framework for 2010 that he is calling "First principles.''
"I've been talking with Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele, '' Gingrich said today, speaking with students at C-SPAN's Cable Center Class.
"He is developing a first principles model that I think is a very exciting , positive step in the right direction,'' said Gingrich, who has said that he will decide by February about waging his own campaign for president. "B September , it might be very, very good for the Republicans in the House and Senate to have a common ground on which to campaign, whether they call it a Contract for America or some other device.
"Having a positive set of things that say, 'if you elect us, these are the positive steps we will take,'' Gingrich said, on a program that C-SPAN3 is airing at 5 pm EST. This "may well be the key building block to really become the alternative party, not the opposition party.''...
"If the Democrats stay stuck over on a very left wing program and if they continue to have a job-killing record in Congress, I think by September and October you could suddenly have a very exciting election.''
(Excerpt) Read more at swamppolitics.com ...
Will we let some real conservatives make government responsible to the people.
Or maybe not...latest news is that some "errors" in counting were discovered and the candidates are now separated by 3200 votes with 10,000 absentee ballots to count. My bet is the Hoffman ends up winning the seat.
Hey Newt, please go away, and take Juan with you.
Exactly. If terms limits had ever really been enacted, a lot of the foolishness the past 10-15 years would have never occured. The Chris Dodds, Barney Franks, Joe Bidens, John Conyers, Harry Reids, Chuck E Schumer, William Jeffersons and Charlie Rangels would have been long gone or better yet never entered national politics in the first place.
No money it in it.
1. He should at least be consulted on matters pertaining to the Republicans' electoral efforts in 2010.
2. You would be opposed to the GOP regaining control of the House because you are a subversive.
RINO Alert - These tools are just trying to get in your pocket book. They hold to principals like the wind. When principals are announced by leaders of principal, we may listen.
I am not opposed to conservatives and small-l libertarians gaining control of either house of Congress.
I am, however, deeply opposed to liberals and statists keeping control of either house of Congress.
It seems obvious that you dont know what youre talking about, regarding the Contract With America.
There’s a lot of truth in that. It’s my biggest gripe about the GOP.
You don’t have to preach what you’ll do tomorrow if elected. You can at lease speak out against this vile thing.
When addressing Democrats or people who support abortion on demand, I cover it like this.
“Folks, I realize we’re not going to agree in total about abortion. What we can agree on, is that in excess of one million little unborn humans being ripped arm, and leg, and head, and bits and pieces apart each year, is far more carnage than any of us is happy about. In our hearts, we want this number to go down.
We should find common ground here and find ways to reduce those numbers by leaps and bounds. We owe the unborn that much, even if we cannot agree to eliminate abortions outright.
I would ask you to please consider from time to time what takes place each time an abortion is committed, and see if you can’t find it in your heart to help us reduce those numbers.
This needn’t be a total outright ban, to reduce the number significantly. We need to think of abortion as wrong, then work together to reduce them. If we individually think of abortions as wrong, we will as a people will do as much as we can to reduce them in our own lives.
That to me seems to be an admirable goal we all can agree to.”
You know, you don’t make any calls, you don’t make any sales. The Republican party refuses to talk about fewer abortions, fiscal restraint, support for the military and why, the need for a robust capitalist system, and much much more. I mean, who hawks these things public these days? If we don’t who will?
Is the GOP leadership? Heck no, they’re too busy trying to get us to back Democrat policy. And no, I’m not kidding.
Where are the two of them, or even ONE of them cheerleading for the possibility Hoffman may still win the NY seat? The silence by both with regard to news of new votes for Hoffman is deafening. Had it been Scuzzyfusa methinks comment would have already been made by either or both of them.
This is a time when encouragement for all political candidates running as conservatives is direly needed by those with the political power to give them much needed public support. Instead we get hot air and an attempt to shine the light on Gingrich and Steele themselves who bottom line really don't matter).
So what?
I’m not a LP member, and I have no intent of joining.
Furthermore, by your logic, all Republicans must be nasty because Larry Craig was tapping toes in an airport washroom.
Didn’t it say they were going to do away with the Dept. of Education?
Recd one of their robo calls today. Did tell them no and why and told them to take me off their call list and expunge me from all emails. Caller said she understood. Really???
My bad, after a quick review I was wrong.
As if....
What’s your point here, beyond lobbing ad hominems at me, Cedric?
“1. He should at least be consulted on matters pertaining to the Republicans’ electoral efforts in 2010.”
Why? Do we need more lessons on how to lose?
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.