Look out Obama...someones got your number!
Posted on 12/16/2011 6:12:39 AM PST by shortstop
No Newt, no thanks.
He's fun to listen to in a debate, but he doesn't belong on the ballot or in the Oval Office.
Because a brilliant bad man is still a bad man, and Newt Gingrich is a bad man.
He is not good for the Republican Party, and he is not good for the United States. And his popularity in the polls is both troublesome and inexplicable. A big-government career politician, an only sporadic conservative, he has somehow caught the attention and affection of just enough Republicans to be the top contender for the party's presidential nomination.
That is insane. It is time for the infatution to end.
Newt Gingrich is not worthy to be either the nominee of his party nor the the president of his country. He fails the basic test of integrity and temperament.
Yes, anybody would be better than Barack Obama, but in a country of 310 million people, we can do better than Newt Gingrich.
Let's go down the list of reasons why.
First, he is not a nice man. He is shrill, ego-centric, spiteful and vindictive. That is not my observation, it is the report of dozens and dozens who have worked with him. He doesn't have a Napolean complex, he has a God complex. He is a bitter man who, in private dealings with his supposed friends and allies, has no regard for others and their interests.
The Contract with America, which was largely penned by Newt Gingrich in 1994, was a strong document and agenda and it led in large part to the Republican revolution of that year. The anti-liberal backlash of those days made Newt speaker of the House. The agenda was successful, but the man ended up a failure. He was ripped over ethics, and he was turned on by his own as he treated Republicans in the House in a domineering and condescending fashion.
I witnessed a small piece of this personally while walking through the corridors of the Capitol after a State of the Union address one year. To the oohs and aahs of the crowds, Speaker Gingrich hustled through. He was the focus of a crowd of hangers on, lackeys and other ne'er do wells, all attending to him like he was a queen bee. He just swaggered past us, imperious, the chips on his shoulders making it almost impossible for him to walk.
But you don't dump a guy for a passing impression.
You dump Newt Gingrich for the way he treated the members of Congress he supervised and for the hypocrisy he demonstrated as speaker of the House. Newt Gingrich was vicious to his most loyal lieutenants, and dealt with subordinates in an unfair and capricious fashion. I personally knew an exceptional member of Congress, a true Boy Scout, who Gingrich destroyed as a pure act of spite. It was just plain mean.
And that's who he is.
I also was around when Bill Clinton was getting the heat for his relationship with Harmonica Lewinsky, a true national scandal. Not to dredge through yesterday's ugliness, but there were two aspects of that case: The relationship itself, and the subsequent lying under oath. Some felt comfortable commenting on one, but not the other, or vice versa. Newt Gingrich focused on the affair. He repeatedly and resoundingly denounced the married Clinton for having sexual contact with Lewinsky, who -- as an intern -- was a subordinate. Gingrich repeatedly pointed out how wrong that was.
Which is fine.
What wasn't fine was the subsequent revelation that at exactly the same time, Newt Gingrich was himself having a long-running extra-marital affair with a subordinate government employee. He was sleeping with the help -- all the way -- and did so for an extended period of time, at the same time he was ripping Clinton for a marginally less-significant transgression.
That's incredible. He could have shut his mouth, he could have focused on the lie, he could have done any number of things. But what he chose to do is to condemn a guy who was doing the same thing he was. Amazing.
That is Newt Gingrich.
Yes, he is a genius. Yes, it is fun listening to him in the debates. He has a great mind and often speaks powerfully for conservative issues. He is, in some ways, an appealing candidate.
But he is a bad man. And Republicans would be wise to remember that.
Because if they don't, general election voters will.
He supports BIG government with his BIG ideas
He supports mandated health reform
He believes in global warming
He supports planned parenthood funding
He used his position to consult and advise big government programs.
He is an adulterer, not once but three times
I am still looking for a conservative candidate. Right now Newt is the only clown on the bus that at least talks a good game. When the circus starts again in January 2013 it's just a matter of who the new Ring Leader will be at this point. They are all Beltway Insiders looking to make their fortunes bigger.
People like you that want to tear down Newt on the “hope that someone else will enter”, or “we will have a brokered convention” ... are doing nothing but working for Romney.
I Love Newt...I like his personality, intelligence, Patriotism, policies, intent...I could go on and on.....
“Romney is going to be the next President whether we like it or not.”
I believe that Romney could be the GOP candidate..but not necessarily that he will beat Bam in the general.
I also agree that there is alot more to be concerned about. Freepers are focused like lasers on the Presidential election. The scary potential of four years of the Usurper is that he will be able appoint as many as four new Supremes: Four more Elena Kagens, people.
Then we lose all chance of a Conservative majority in that branch of government.
When you make such strong assertions as Lonsberry, then you ought to deliver substantively. He didn’t! I’m a Conservative. So, generally speaking, my aims don’t align with those of the Republican Party. I, often, wonder what’s Republican about the party? Nonetheless, beyond the usual research I do, vetting candidates for myself; I get impressions from people and they’re usually correct. Regrettably, I get the impression from Romney that he’s not trusworthy. But then, that’s me.
At this point, I hope a real conservative alternative emerges from the back of the pack. Since Pennsylvania’s primary is late, if it comes down to Newt and Mitt, I will vote for whichever one is behind at the time. Our only hope is for a brokered convention where we end up with neither at the top of the ticket.
Just a few minutes ago, I just heard Steve Hayes (interviewed by Bill Hemmer on Fox) deliver a blistering attack on Newt. And then went on to say that Romney did well last night.
I usually like Hayes, but his attack on Newt was downright venomous. The GOP establishment is going to try to bring Newt down...just to help Romney.
Go Newt!
I remember being amazed at low the democrats had to stoop to come up with the charge, especially following on the heels of the Clinton scandals.
My number one choice for the 2012 Republican presidential nominee was Sarah Palin but she declined to run, much to my disappointment. Unless she changes her mind about running, which is highly unlikely, conservatives just don't have much to choose from. So, we take what we can can get. I'm very suspicious of Newt Gingrich and have always suspected that he had a 'character issue'. However, time is running out and we have to choose a candidate. I won't touch Romney unless he ends up the Republican nominee. Then, I'll have no choice but to vote for him, holding my nose all the while - again. I may not even bother to vote in my state's Republican primary because it's in February and by then, the GOP candidate is pretty much known by virtue of the results in the preceding primaries. However, unless he crashes and burns - which is entirely possible - if I vote in the Republican primary, I'll likely vote for Newt, with grave reservations surmounted only by the sure knowledge that another four yers of Obama, unfettered by the need to secure re-election, will be an unmitigated disaster for America and result in negative changes that may never be undone. On that negative basis, even (gulp) Romney would be better for the country. For that matter, so would Rick Perry. We'll soon find out.
Why is it that every two-bit nitwit with a keyboard has to chime in with his or her GOP bash column. It’s bad enough that the world has to stomach George Will and his ilk, but every Tom, Dick and Dick has to pile on. Geeze. Enough. Let’s get back to something we can all enjoy like Michael Douglas’s wife!!!!!!!!!!
Sounds like Obama.
Absolutely correct assessment.
The left is afraid of Newt. Let's face it, Obama's short tenure has begun to shake the foundation of the house of cards liberalism has always been.
These people are vulnerable, and the thing they fear most is exposure.
That's why they fear Newt. He's running for Sheriff. He's the one who said Barney Frank and Chris Dodd should go to jail. He's a gunslinger, bursting through the saloon doors firing real bullets while the other candidates are at the bar ordering sasparilla.
Newt's a historian. He can articulate the reasons liberalism has failed, and why Obama's policies are wrong for America. Newt has called Obama an "Alinsky radical". Who else has fired that shot?
Newt said the Palestinians are an invented people. Bang. Newt has said John Bolton would be in his cabinet. Bang. Bang!
Liberals fear exposure and Newt's the one for the job. He will not only put Obama on the defensive, he will put liberalism itself on trial. The left is afraid of Newt because he alone has the weapons to fire at Obama, Obama's policies, and most importantly Obama's liberal (ok socialist) ideology.
Sounds like a Romney ballwasher to me.
You are supporting Romney then.
Grow up and admit it.
It is either Romney or Newt, at this point.
Propping up Newt by castigating others is not the best recommendation. And calling Bachmann, the most consservative candidate in the race, a "psycho" is beyond the pale. The Leftist MSM have tried to portray Bachmann in this light starting with the cover of Newsweak. Your mouthing of this same kind of vicious slander reflects more on you than Bachmann. You certainly aren't a conservative.
Look out Obama...someones got your number!
Agreed....Calling Bachman a desperate psycho?...Sorry! sounds like a lurking whack leftist to me...
“Rick Perry is appealing but inarticulate, too much like George W. Bush in that regard.”
GW won twice, and Perry is well to the right of GW. Rick Perry will get my vote in the primary.
I would vote for Noot in the general, but if worthless evil bastard Romney gets the nomination, I’ll leave the POTUS slot on the ballot blank.
The rest of the field are just a sideshow of also-rans at this point.
I just plagiarized your response.
I copied and forwarded it to everyone on my email acct. list.
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.