Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:
Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.
“100% - Gingrich”
RINO! We’re better-off with Obama!
Math is hard. I’m a girl. . . This is good for Newt, isn’t it?
American Conservative Union Chairman David Keene Endorses Mitt Romney
1998 was the last year that Gingrich, Paul and Santorum were all in Congress. Gingrich’s annual and lifetime ACU ratings were better than both of the others:
(100% = perfect conservative voting record)
100% - Gingrich: Annual 1998 ACU Rating (90% Lifetime Rating as of 1998)
88% - Paul: Annual 1998 ACU Rating (88% Lifetime Rating as of 1998)
84% - Santorum: Annual 1998 ACU Rating (83% Lifetime Rating as of 1998)
Source: http://www.conservative.org/ratings/ratingsarchive/1998/98houseratings.htm
The chart is worthless without the questions asked.
I don’t care about 1998. I want 2011. Newt would NOT get 100 percent for 2010 and 2011 for sure. I know he is not in office, but he has become way moderate to liberal since 1998.
Palin is behind Santorum. 84% ‘aint bad. Of course, now I totally ignore the ACU ratings considering they have Suhail Khan on their board, and welcome GOProud to CPAC.
That’s part of the reason I’ve been so shocked, in the 2000s, that Newt drank the Gore-Bal Warming Kool-Aid, plumped for ethanol subsidies and took about $1.5M from Freddy Mac. He’s just gotten more liberal on a number of issues, and for a man in his 60s, that’s troubling.
Ron Paul gets an 88 for voting “wrong” on 3 out of 10 votes. But was he wrong?
He got dinged for Vote #10, on a constitutional amendment that failed. His explanation is here:
http://www.ronpaularchive.com/1998/06/religious-freedom-found-in-following-constitution/
I don’t think there is anything unconservative about his position on it.
Then he gets dinged for voting against the Child Custody protection Act. His explanation is here, and is a conservative argument:
http://ronpaulquotes.com/chapters/1998-77.html
The last “wrong” vote was against a Dick Armey voucher program for DC schools. Ron Paul’s conservative argument against vouchers is here:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul132.html
In short, the ACU rating is for dummies.
The fact that Newt’s lifetime ACU rating was 90 is evidence that his voting record over his two decades in Congress was overwhelmingly conservative. But the fact that Newt had a 100 ACU rating in 1998 tells us next to nothing, since Newt was Speaker that year and the Speaker very rarely votes unless there’s a tie. I wouldn’t be surprised if the only 1998 votes scored by the ACU in which Newt participated were regarding the Clinton impeachment.
1998 was a long time ago.
Bump
ACU is sold to the highest bidder and a joke, Santorum lower then Newt the amnesty mandate tool, what a joke, that is impossible.
That’s a different Newt. It’s like judging Al Gore on his 1984 ACU.
American Conservative Union
100% - Gingrich: Annual 1998 ACU Rating (90% Lifetime Rating as of 1998) 88% - Paul: Annual 1998 ACU Rating (88% Lifetime Rating as of 1998) 84% - Santorum: Annual 1998 ACU Rating (83% Lifetime Rating as of 1998)
Gingrich 100%? I’d understand 50%, but this makes him a traitor to the cause!
Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:
Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.
Santorum voted against NAFTA, which has been a disaster, IMO. That’s why his rating is lower. It’s selective use of statistics at play here. Bob
Here’s another poll on the GOP race that just got started, so the numbers are very skewed right now. Everyone can forward it around to anyone planning on voting in the Republican GOP primary or caucus, in an attempt to get a larger and more representative voting base:
http://micropoll.com/t/LEzBOZFlnc