His past may indeed keep him from becoming President. Or not. From a Biblical perspective, you could make both cases. I humbly submit both are possible and simply disagree with those who say that his past is an automatic disqualifier.
I would also point to the fact that there is a lot of good in his past. In fact, in all of his PC or liberal dalliances, none of it led to substantive negative change. Meanwhile, the Contract w America congress led to some great positive change.
I was disappointed that he did not follow through on all of it.
It's too bad he allowed himself to be pushed out of the speakership, and then resign congress after just being elected again.
As far as his liberal “dalliances,” I think they are very important.
I think if he is nominated that Obama will pee his pants at the thought of debating Gingrich. The sissy will probably not grant debates.
: > )
No, it is a misunderstanding of Jesus' teachings that leads to that conclusion because He often didn't specify restitution be made upon forgiveness because it was presumed under Torah. He NEVER contradicted Torah. Accordingly, repentance must be followed by payment or restitution. That is where Syncro's examples apply: David paid, Moshe paid, Samson paid. According to Torah, the thief must return his booty plus 20%.
I have never seen Newt repent of his infidelities, much less seek to make them right with the women he wronged. Yet here we are, considering elevating him to our principal leadership? Look at how he has whirled from issue to issue, Global Warming, Carbon Trading, Mandated Health Insurance... and he claims to be a conservative? You believe that? What did he claim to his prior wives? Is he truly believable now?
There was a reason for a death penalty for infidelity for the damage it does to succeeding generations. It leads to standards of acceptance that divide families and raise children fatherless and faithless, a process that necessarily spirals a society into the abyss.
As we have seen.