Please Note: Discussion is welcomed not attacks. I am not tearing anyone down but simply pointing out that Gingrich, no matter what he says, has been no Friend to OUR rights.
These things can be proven by simply researching previous positions that are on the record. There has been no recent epiphany regarding these positions. The only epiphany is the one that his tongue has had.
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to KEEP AND BEAR ARMS, SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED
Newt Gingrich Stabs Gun Owners in the Back
Katherine Mangu-Ward | December 5, 2011
In my inbox today, a message from Georgia Gun Owners who are grumpy about GOP darling of the day Newt Gingrich's record on gun control. They note his support for restrictions on the gun rights of people involved in misdemeanor domestic violence charges and the fact that he played nice with Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) on gun-free school zone legislation. "But the biggest knife that Newt plunged into the back of all Americans and gun owners who wish to defend themselves and their families, was his coming out in support of a national thumbprint database for gun owners," said [D.R. Leonard, Political Director of Georgia Gun Owners]. Hey, at least his choice of weapons is ideologically consistent!
A claimed "commerce clause" power that even the SCOTUS couldn't find---and that's saying something.
Newt lied? NO WAY
I wish Rudy Guiliano would get in this race. As a good conservative I could now vote for him since morals and values no longer count.
Newt on (fill in the blank), a mixed record.
But Newt’s so smart, just ask him, he’ll tell ya.
The REAL Newt Gingrich. Conservative as all get-out. Except when he’s not. And that’s only on minor things like gun control, healthcare reform, carbon caps, amnesty, NAFTA, et c.,. On meaningless procedural issues, he’d have our back - even if it means sacrificing every bit of political capital on lost causes. And that’s what really matters. Right?
If Obama is reelected in 2012, everyone in America who is not a leftist or statist will be steaming mad, watching everything he does and screaming about it for four years.
If an establishment Republican is elected, those same people will ASSUME that “things will be better” and will not so intensely follow what goes on.
GINGRICH: That's just objectively a fact. I think if Governor (notice..it is Governor Reagan and Not President Reagan) Reagan were here today, and he were looking at where America should go, he wouldn't be saying, "Let's go back to 1980." He'd be saying, "Here are the solutions, here are the policies, here's what will carry us into the future." And I think we've watched these guys run around saying, "I'm like Reagan. I'm like Reagan." Reagan was a unique one-time personality whose great achievement in eliminating the Soviet empire was historic. Now we have a different world with a different set of problems. I don't think it can be, "Here's how you go back 28 years to reinvent Reagan." It's gotta be, "Here's how you apply conservatism to solve America's problems today."
RUSH: Wait a minute, Newt, how are you going to apply conservatism to today's problems when you just said it's dead? Reaganism is simply conservatism. That's all it is, and if the era of Reagan being over is objectively a fact, then conservatism's finished. Now, nobody's talking about going back to the 1980s and reliving the same set of policies. What we're talking about is applying principles, which is what Reagan did, to the existing problems of that era. Those policies, the premises of conservatism, work. They are timeless. It's not a scheme. It doesn't have to be bent, molded, and shaped. Tenets of conservatism survive throughout the ages, just like liberalism does. They're both philosophical ideas. For our side to run around saying, "Well, it's over," misses the whole point. Nobody's talking about bringing Reagan back the identical set of problems in 1980. We're talking about the principles of conservatism and applying them to today's problems, and not moderating them, not modifying these principles so they're a little liberal here, a little liberal here, maybe a little moderate over here.
Michele Bachmann picked up a hefty endorsement from Phyllis Schlafly today and she doesn’t qualify her promise to try to eliminate the EPA with a promise to create another federal agency to replace it like Newty.
Pro Amnesty and weak on guns?
This is our new messiah?
Dunno who I'm going to vote for, but if events go the way I think they will, it won't matter. It's like Ann Barnhardt said: "It's like a pageant has broken out on the fantail of the Titanic amongst the oblivious at 2:00am on the 15th, with the winner to be announced upon docking at the port of New York. That's what this election cycle is like."
"I think we prefer to go to instant check on an immediate basis and try to accelerate implementing instant checks so that you could literally check by thumbprint... Instant check is a much better system than the Brady process." -- June 27, 1997
This weekend, your National Association for Gun Rights, working in conjunction with our Iowa state-level affiliate, Iowa Gun Owners, began using phone calls designed to alert tens of thousands of gun rights activists across Iowa about Newt Gingrich's decades-long support of gun control . . .
. . . and his refusal to return his National Association for Gun Rights Presidential Survey.
Newt Gingrich should quit stonewalling gun owners and return his National Association for Gun Rights Presidential Survey -- IMMEDIATELY!
Newt is bad news for gun owners. His record is as bad as Mittens if not worse.
Hi lady! I read through the thread you were on yesterday and saw the major zot that was done, lol. That one won’t be missed, twill be a blessing!