Posted on 12/01/2011 4:56:29 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
..A few of Newt Gingrichs Not-So-Greatest Hits:
August 30, 2004: Now hes back, preaching the gospel of party moderation. At an Aug. 30 forum held by the centrist Republican Main Street Partnership, Gingrich heralded the GOPs new, bigger big tent. Everywhere Ive been, Ive argued in favor of electing the moderates, Gingrich said He even chastised the fiscally conservative Club for Growth a group that finances primary challengers to Republican incumbents they deem too liberal for not getting with the program. Their strategy is explicitly wrong, Gingrich said. The key is to elect more Republicans and have a bigger majority and be more inclusive.
In June 2005, the New York Times raved about a balanced and thoughtful report from a bipartisan task force headed by Newt Gingrich, the former House speaker, and George Mitchell, the former Senate majority leader, declaring, Lawmakers should take the time to at least thumb through this report, especially those who have been demanding Secretary General Kofi Annans resignation, supporting the ill-conceived nomination of John Bolton as the United States ambassador to the United Nations and backing the latest benighted attempt to withhold Americas legally obligated dues.
In October 2005, Gingrich called for universal but confidential DNA testing.
In April 2006,...
In April 2007, he raved about the leadership skills of New York City Mayor Mike Bloomberg:....
....In 2007, he accused the Bush administration of fighting a phony war on terrorism, and declared a more effective approach would begin with a national energy strategy aimed at weaning the country from its reliance on imported oil.
In 2008, he hailed John McCains efforts in the crafting of the TARP legislation:....
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...
Newt is a looming disaster for us. The media will savage him, and he’ll be lucky to get 45% of the vote. 300 million people in this country, and we’ve now got Perry, Romney or Gingrich to choose from. Sad.
Sarah Pretty Please.
Yeah.
Affirmative discrimination.
Illegal Immigration.
“Climate Change” or whatever they call it today.
Neither Newt nor Mitt.
Newt is one cocky SOB and I fully expect not only Cain to drop out but Newt to have his ass handed to him by Romney in the next debate. Newt has survived on being in the back of the pack and while Romney has his issues he is equal or better than Newt at debating. Newt's at least as big of a flip flopper as Mitt.
"I would agree with about 60 percent of this book," he added.
Kerry of Massachusetts also took a friendly stance in his opening remarks before turning to the debate, sponsored by New York University's John Brademas Center for the Study of Congress.
"While I don't have his book in hand, and I don't know what it's about, I've always enjoyed every dialogue he and I have ever had," Kerry said, calling the global-warming face-off the "environmental version of the Lincoln-Douglas debates."
....Gingrich raised some discrepancies among the science that has led to the current data on climate change, but when asked pointedly about science doubters, like Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., Gingrich strongly held the case that climate change is a problem.
"What would you say to Sen. Inhofe and others in the Senate who are resisting even science? What's your message to them here today?" Kerry asked.
"My message, I think is that the evidence is sufficient that we should move towards the most effective possible steps to reduce carbon loading in the atmosphere "
"And do it urgently, now?" Kerry interrupted.
"Urgently, yes," Gingrich said."................
If you are not a racist sexist, you can still vote for Cain
He's a narcissist and we DON'T want one of those. He will be a disaster.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tpX06eAm4sw
Here’s the 40-min Gingrich interview with Hannity, 11/30/11.
I’m still not sure about Newt, but that quote was from 2004 and history says he was right on that one as shortly thereafter Republicans were swept out of the White House and the congress.
“In 2007, he accused the Bush administration of fighting a phony war on terrorism, and declared a more effective approach would begin with a national energy strategy aimed at weaning the country from its reliance on imported oil. “
there’s a lot of truth to this...as much as i admired GWB he did nothing to really impact domestic oil production the way it should’ve been done....
I think we held on to the White House in 2004, actually. Fellow named Kerry lost, long face, French-looking, served in Viet-Nam
If Newt were elected, I wonder if his presidency would be a repeat of the other Georgian president? I suspect that Newt would micromanage, as did Carter, due to the fact he believes he knows it all. Micromanagers have difficulties retaining good people because good executives or managers would not tolerate such interferences within the areas of their responsibilities.
Lucking, none of the other candidates, including Rick Perry, have anything on record from the past that would lead us to believe they won’t be a 100% Conservative....
except for voting for the biggest tax hike in TX history,
the DREAM Act,
helping Bill Clinton get elected....
well.....maybe just a few more things......
but we should only hold it against Newt Gingrich. Just him.
This was the opinion of the author - NOT NEWT GINGRICH!!!
***Lawmakers should take the time to at least thumb through this report, especially those who have been demanding Secretary General Kofi Annan’s resignation, supporting the ill-conceived nomination of John Bolton as the United States ambassador to the United Nations and backing the latest benighted attempt to withhold America’s legally obligated dues.***
READ THE WHOLE ARTICLE FOR CONTEXT!!
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/16/opinion/16thu1.html
I think we held on to the White House in 2004, actually. Fellow named Kerry lost, long face, French-looking, served in Viet-Nam
But didn’t we lose both houses? Didn’t a lot of state legistlatures also turn during that time?
National Review should just drop all pretenses and come out right now and endorse Mittens.
As for me, I vote for the candidate with the best chances of denying my states delegates to Romney.
I suggest you get some rest. You’re incoherent.
That was definitely the Republican rule in 2004 under the Bush/Rove era. Remember when GWB campaigned for Spector against Toomey? But GWB’s second term and Obama/Pelosi elections changed some minds about that strategy. Newt was just blowing with the wind. Heck, he still claims Clinton caved to him under pressure in 1995 budget standoff.
If house Republicans take a beating in next years elections then there will another re-thinking. I say they need to learn messaging and how to fight political battles. They still have to win elections and cant do that without explaining themselves, or giving in.
It's interesting, if extremely disouraging, that we appear to be heading towards a choice between two RINO's (and I never use that term lightly).
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.