How could he without being called a liar.
Posted on 12/12/2011 9:09:39 AM PST by Halfmanhalfamazing
when you're talking about Glenn Beck now he actually, the other day, called you a progressive on FOX Business channel. What do you say to that sort of claim?"
Gingrich: "I don't know. It depends on what standard you're using, you know? The fact is I balanced the budget for four consecutive years. And we did so by cutting taxes and increasing employment so people went back to work, they left welfare, they left food stamps, they left unemployment, they left Medicaid. Who else has that record of achievement? I worked with Reagan in '79, '80. I worked with Reagan in defeating the Soviet Empire. I think those are relatively conservative credentials."
(Excerpt) Read more at realclearpolitics.com ...
LLS
Is Beck blatantly backing Romney?
lyndsey graham also has a 90% lifetime rating.
LLS
Didn’t Reagan say he was admirer of FDR?
Wow, every day Ron Paul supporters make me more and more thoroughly disgusted by him.
Oooh.... the Democrats filed endless ethical complaints against him. Does that make him (1) evil, or (2) hated by liberals? Well, he was found innocent of all charges. He did acknowledge submitting false financial data to the House, but he was NOT convicted of any wrong-doing as implied by the statement that he had to pay $300,000. Rather, he covered the costs of the witch hunters who were sent chasing a rabbit trail by his lawyer’s clerical error.
I am troubled by Gingrich’s admiration for the enemy, and by his personal failures. I am disgusted by what a desperate, mudslinging attention whore Paul’s campaign has become.
Talk about “ethical failures”: The Paul campaign has launched “Blue Republicans,” a campaign to get Democrats to commit fraud to vote for him in the Republican Primary. I denounced Rush Limbaugh’s “Operation Chaos,” but Limbuagh never, to my knowledge, targeted states wherein Republicans would have to violate their oaths to vote in the Democratic Party primaries, as “Blue Republicans” have done.
How could he without being called a liar.
Back in the day there were two gentlemen in the neighborhood who lived side by side.
One was a tomato growing enthusiast. His life revolved around his greenhouse, his seed beds, the weather and water quality. At harvest time he was the most popular man on the street for he gave out free tomatoes.
The other man was a dilettante - all things interested and excited him. He grew a few tomatoes - which shriveled, a few cucumbers which tasted bitter and stringy green beans on high trellises. He had all the best tools, ladders and equipment. When his neighbor’s plumbing leaked he fixed it. When the power went out he fashioned a generator. When the snow blocked streets he attached a blade to his truck and cleared them. He loaned his books, his time and his learning to assist all.
When it came time to elect a neighborhood representative the tomato man had to be persuaded to sign up - he didn’t want to leave his tomatoes unattended. The tool man said he would love to be responsible for identifying problems and finding solutions.
The vote was not even close. The tomato man won in a landslide.
When asked how and why they voted - the neighbors explained.
We like our free tomatoes.
Makes no sense does it?
“It depends what standard you’re using” pretty plainly means, “it depends how you define ‘progressive.’”
To some people, “progressive” means simply that society or government must adapt to a changing world, and continue to advance justice. To liberals, the presumption is that “progressive” means that “justice” means socialism and modernism. Many conservatives have picked up on the code words. But to accept that “progressive” in the 21st century means to relapse into the totalitarianism and central control of dead 20th-century regimes is as wrong-headed as to accept that an “economic liberal” is one who favors state control.
Recognizing competing meanings, Gingrich was clear that he accepted one meaning, but not another.
Sheesh. It was a nice way for Newt to say that what Glenn Beck thinks is quite irrelevant.
I thought Glenn Beck left the planet a year ago.
Roach Paul’s days in the GOP are becoming numbered rapidly.
If not Newt who then? And why?
I will make my decision in the voting booth come primary time next month...all I can say with ANY certainty is that I will NOT vote for Romney or Huntsman, as both are too cozy with Zero.
Seriously: If you want to intelligently critique Newt, rather than proof-texting his comments, or engaging, as others do, in calumny, how about attacking his actual position when they are liberal?
Newt supports an “amnesty,” and seems purposefully vague on whether it would apply only (reasonably) to those whose presence here predates the Reagan amnesty, and who have jobs, dependents, etc., in America, or one which would apply broadly to most immigrants.
Newt caves to what he believes is inevitable. He now says he opposed an individual mandate. Fine, I’ll believe him. The problem is that I don’t want a “leader” who will buckle under to evil the moment he believes evil is winning. Saying, “Oh, wait, we’re winning now? Let ME grab the flag!” is no trait of leadership.
On the other hand, his statements about the right to life lead me to conclude he will pick excellent Supreme Court justices. And for this reason, I support him over Mitt Romney, who has appointed tyrrants to the bench, Ron Paul who is bat-shot insane, and will probably appoint bat-shot insane justices, and Rick Perry, who seems to think that tyranny and oppression are fine as long as its the states, not the federal government.
I’d’ve been happy with Cain or Santorum (although Santorum shares Gingrich’s flaw of buckling.) I’d love to see Gingrich adopt certain of Paul’s libertarian beliefs, but it’s too bad that Paul is, yes, I’ll say it again, bat-shot insane.
he crybabied his way off of Fox a year ago....and now expects his ‘base’ to pay to see him on the internet....
Just as we saw with Rick Perry a few months back, there’s a big push on this forum to annoint Newt and smear anyone who disagrees.
I don’t particularly see the value in all that.
Ronald Reagan on Franklin Roosevelt:
The Significance of Style
K. Alan Snyder - 08/20/08
“Reagan was a New Deal Democrat. He joked that he had probably become a Democrat by birth, given that his father, Jack, was so devoted to the Democratic Party. The younger Reagan cast his first presidential vote in 1932 for Franklin Roosevelt, and did so again in the succeeding three presidential contests. His faith in FDR remained undimmed even after World War II, when he called himself “a New Dealer to the core.” He summarized his views in this way: “I thought government could solve all our postwar problems just as it had ended the Depression and won the war. I didn’t trust big business. I thought government, not private companies, should own our big public utilities; if there wasn’t enough housing to shelter the American people, I thought government should build it; if we needed better medical care, the answer was socialized medicine.” When his brother, Moon, became a Republican and argued with his sibling, the younger Reagan concluded “he was just spouting Republican propaganda.”
Of course, Reagan was to change his views drastically in the coming years, but even when one examines his later comments about Franklin Roosevelt and the New Deal, one comes away with the sense that he never got over his youthful admiration of a man he considered a great leader. He would carefully parse his criticisms of the New Deal, often focusing on the honorable intent of the heart over the practical effect of the policies. Critique and praise would be mixed together as he attempted to separate the man from his programs.”
REAGAN changed his philosophy... romney and newt have not... and will not. Reagan also granted Amnesty to 1.5 million mexican illegals and withdrew from Lebanon... allowing al qaeda to form and grow strong. Should we embrace the Conservative Reagan and his later Conservative ideology and his correct decisions or embrace his early progressivism and repeat his mistakes again today. Should we learn from our past mistakes or just keep repeating them?
LLS
I’m not a “Perrybot”...unless you’re into mindless namecalling.
We who support him never went anywhere...well, a few did to escape the scorched earth brigade on every thread...that’s why we’re still here.
Depends on the meaning of “Progressive”, eh?
Is that anything like, depends on the what the meaning of “is”, is?
Perry will take a wrecking ball to overwhelming, out of control, Washington DC.
That doesn’t mean a mindless wrecking ball, but a well thought out plan.
RE: Is Beck blatantly backing Romney?
Yes, Beck has endorsed Romney. Piss on both of them.
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.