Posted on 11/14/2011 4:30:15 PM PST by presidio9
The ONE ethics scandal (that I'm aware of anyway) was hardly a scandal, more trumped-up bullshit than anything else.
As far as Newt's personal baggage is concerned, that's been a well-trodden road for awhile now. Sure there's some segment of the population that may not know about it, but think about it: how will Newt's personal problem's compare to Obama's complete lack of leadership and hatred for All Things America?
This country is desperate for someone who can solve problems and go after the bigger issues. Currently, Newt's becoming that guy. I also think Herman Cain has that capability to some smaller degree.
Newt's flip-flops on "global warming" for example are concerning to me. The vivid images of him sitting on a sofa with Princess Pelosi are still in the front of my mind, and I think he was dead-wrong on that issue.
Still, seeing Gingrich literally shred Obama to bits in the debates would be worth him getting the nomination. (No teleprompter made can save Obama from the complete whipping he'd get from Gingrich.)
Do your mommy and daddy know you're on their computer? Best get to bed there junior, 5th grade starts early in the morning.
Hmmmm...so Newt's endorsement of Scozzy in NY-23 is out of date and irrelevant?
As is his backstabbing of Paul Ryan and his "right wing social engineering" sneer?
As is his weak defense of sitting on that couch with Pelosi?
As is his support for Obama's "Individual Mandate"?
As is his belief that Sarah Palin should not have attacked Obama's "community organizer" background?
Wow...using that logic, we might as well just ignore the candidates' records altogether, focusing only on what they said or did yesterday.
Nice.
There's a lot more involved in being a candidate than these so-called "debates," which are nothing of the sort.
It never ceases to amaze me how easily people are fooled by these slimy RINOs time and again, and then sit back and scratch their heads wondering why we always get stuck with them.
Again, if you see no difference between the current president and the less than desirable crop of challengers, you must be covering your ears when Mark Levin argues against this belief every night. The reason for our party's failure to nominate a satisfactorily conservative candidate so often has zero to do with the general election. It is based on the fact that the Republican party is divided between three factions: The conservatives, the libertarians, and the Rockafellers/neocons/establishment Republicans. Currently, the conservatives make up the majority of the registered members of the party. Romney appeals to the Rockafellers, and is getting virtually all of their votes, making him the front runner. Like it or not, Cain, Perry and Gingrich all appeal to different segments of the conservative vote, and are dividing it. Paul is getting his people. Unfortunately, group psychology has shown that the vast majority of voters in a primary simply don't know much about the candidates, and will vote for the front runner. People like you, who spend their time trashing Romney's competitors are doing their unawarring best to ensure that Romeny is the candidate. I'm certainly not asking you to stop making stupid arguments against Gingrich, but you should be aware that if you are attacking Romney's competition, you are doing what you can to ensure that he ends up with the nomination. Palin isn't running because even when she was she couldn't crack double digits. I love the woman, but she would have a much better chance if she served a few years in a Republican cabinet before giving it another shot.
You do understand that the word "several" is not synonymous with the word "all," right?
His problem was that he couldn't keep his pants zipped and he said so himself. Went sour? By his own doing.
Well, let's ask Mark directly and see what he says then, since you seem so keen on invoking his name.
People like you, who spend their time trashing Romney's competitors are doing their unawarring best to ensure that Romeny is the candidate.
Ah, so we should all then just close our eyes and ears, and hold our noses, and support the least repulsive out of the bunch? Sorry, no can do! I go in with eyes and ears wide open. And it's either Conservative or nothing as far as I'm concerned. I don't do "lesser of evils" anymore.
The first time I saw that ad, I took it this way: Newt is DEFITITELY running for president. He needs to do something to begin to counter his negatives with independents (who, ironically, see him as the poster-boy for hardcore inflexible conservatives), but he will NEVER live this one down with the base. At the time, I was thinking Palinites, but obviously the majority of them have moved on to Cain.
I just saw Newt on with Sean Hannity and he did say he did not support the cap and trade legislation. That is a positive for me. Newt is looking better and better.
Making stupid points is one thing. Being a smartass about making stupid points puts you in another category. I am invoking Mark Levin's name for one reason, and one reason only: Because you thought his opinion was important enough to include this story among the endless list you originally compiled for post 18 of this thread (and then duplicate posted to several other threads):
Mark Levin grills Newt Gingrich on his comments about Paul Ryan’s plan
Now, based on your smartass response, it appears that you never bothered to read the stories you keep demanding others read. Color me shocked.
Ignore them as you wish. Newt's record is clear and he can't run away from it, no matter how hard he tries, or how blind his newfound supporters become.
Presido... THANK YOU sooo much for laying it out straight! I love Cain, but he has performed poorly under pressure.. Sorry, but you have to be honest. PALIN IS NOT RUNNING! so anyone with those fanasties needs to just get out of your footy pajamas and wake up... the race now is as Presido has clearly stated - for the NOT ROMNEY candidate and it comes down to choosing the best-athlete. Romeny sucks, but Ginrich sucks less and he handles the press press like a freaking master... he understands questions with false premises, which is a rare skill among our team. I may have to hold my nose - but with Romney (who will win unless the con’s converge on one choice) I will need a gas-mask to vote for him. then we get lack of enthusiasm (ala-McCain) and Obama wins again. at least Newt is taking the fight to the real enemy and not engaging in friendly fire as much as the other hopefuls
He was for it before he was against it.
Put it this way: You do understand the meaning of the term "straw man," right? I am on record on this very thread saying that Gingrich is neither ideal, nor my personal first choice. This is about Romney vs. "not Romney," and idiots like yourself are trying very hard to make sure we get stuck with the former.
So you now have a problem with Mark Levin?
I guess you didn't bother to listen to his interview with Newt, who was reduced to babbling.
Then you will have no cause later on to complain about RINOs infecting the Conservative movement.
Well then, you go right on ahead and hold that nose of yours and see where it gets you.
I guess you didn't bother to listen to his interview with Newt, who was reduced to babbling.
I referrenced Mark Levin's frequently repeated opinion that there are clear differences between Obama and all the Republican candidates. You are the one in disagreement with him.
Let's start with "the only chance we'll ever have in our lifetime to dismantle Obamacare."
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.