Posted on 01/25/2012 3:53:39 PM PST by Nonstatist
Newt up against the Prophet Obama would be a painful thing to watch. He might be deft with one-liners but it would be futile. There are .. uncommitted voters to be cultivated in 2012 — all would be unmoved by Newt’s juggling of conservative shibboleths..
Now Newt is hustling my fellow conservatives .. The last time around he successfully hustled conservatives in the House of Representatives and on the House impeachment committee.. He blew the impeachment and .. his role as Speaker. He now says Republicans in the House were exhausted with his great projects. Nonsense, they were exhausted with his atrocious leadership...
He is playing the liberal media card and saying he embodies conservative values. Newt is hoping conservatives suffer amnesia. Perhaps they cannot recall mere months ago when this insufferable whiz kid was lambasting the great Congressman Paul Ryan for “right-wing social engineering” — more evidence of Newt’s not-so-hidden longing for the approval of the liberal media.
Newt and Bill ..went on to create empires, Bill in philanthropy and cheap thought, Newt in public policy and cheap thought. Bill has wrung up an unprecedented $75.6 million since absconding from the White House with White House loot and shameless pardons. Newt .. got between $1.6 million to $1.8 million from Freddie Mac, and he lobbied for Medicare Part B while receiving, according to the Washington Examiner’s Tim Carney, “Big Bucks Pushing Corporate Welfare.” Now after a lifetime in Washington he is promoting himself as an outsider.
Conservatives should not be surprised by the scandals that lie ahead, if they stick with him. Those of us, who raised the question of character in 1992, were confronted by an indignant Bill Clinton, treating the topic as a low blow. By now we know. Character matters.. Newt has Clinton’s character.
(Excerpt) Read more at nysun.com ...
So we can’t have ANY issue with extra-marital affairs? It’s an issue and a problem and we can’t just ignore it. How can we slam Clinton up and down the wall for the same thing? It’s NOT okay when our guys do it.
I understand fully wanting to see ABR, but we can’t lose our soul. Many of us here are believers and I can’t put aside what I KNOW to be wrong just for politics.
I mean no disrespect, but I would hope that MY position is also respected. Thanks.
Newt did the right thing by stepping down. Livingston did the right thing by stepping down. Remember this all happened during the holidays. Tom "The Hammer" caught the Dems off guard during the holiday break. The Dems expected the impetus for impeachment had to come through the speaker's leadership and old Tommy outfoxed them. I think the only way Clinton got impeached was by the unexpected almost surprise attack by DeLay. To say Newt blew the impeachment is just not an accurate reading of historical fact and is just as mean spirited on your part as it was by Tyrell.
Bottom line: Clinton was impeached.
The Senate didn’t convict.
It’s that simple.
Oh no, surely not.
Her accomplishments during the second half of her term are legndary.
Whew, I’m glad to hear that because I never had anyone else to discuss the matter with and I like to learn that it wasn’t just me.
It became like a tabloid magazine, full of great investigative stories about my enemies that made me ecstatic, but after a few of those it became clear that there were just too many scoops, the stories got weirder and less believable and time wasn’t bearing them out.
Character matters. Paul, Santorum, and Romney have it.
Absurd. Newt may not be perfect, but neither are the other three. Romney is far less perfect.
If you do the bidding of statist Romney’s camp on this site you get the zot. I won’t be arguing with you on this point.
R. Emmett also wrote this in the article:
After Newt’s and Bill’s disastrous experiences in government....Now people can argue on what made the 90's what they were, but to imply that being at peace and having a great economy was a disastrous experience shows a man doing all he can to rewrite history to try and further an agenda.
Disingenuous if not downright dishonest.
Correct me if my feeble memory is suffering, but I do recall quite a few posts by you or your namesake jumping in her shiite because she was a quitter, did not finish her term, she resigned, etc.
Now you are a strong Newt supporter because he is our last and best hope.
Surely you are aware that shortly after his last election win, if I remember correctly a month or so after, he was hit with numerous allegations of ethical misconduct. Of course, as with Mrs. Palin, they all proved to be false, even the last one, the one that some blame for his leaving the House. He did in fact resign his term, did not finish it, which was especially alarming and disappointing to his supporters because he was just given another term.
We accepted his explanation at that time, and new he was in fact innocent, because the dems were making a case out of whole cloth.
Later, it proved to be the case.
The point being, it appears Mr. Gingrich gets a pass, but Mrs. palin does not. I a simply wonder why.
If you have reconsidered Mr. Newt, perhaps you can lay off the vitriol regards Mrs. Palin?
Now I’m worried. Should I even consider posting the latest headlined story at Drudge by Elliott Abrams regarding Gingrich’s statements about the Reagan Administration? Or will that put me in the Tower of London? And what’s more, I have been cheering for Newt these couple of weeks.
“R. EMMETT TYRRELL,” eh? Well, Mr. politically correct effete, your main argument is made of at least two glaring fallacies.
You know what newbie?
I've looked back at all of your posts in the six weeks since you joined and the only conclusion I can reach is that you are a "concern troll" pushing Romney.
Oh yeah, your posts about the Rooty Tooty bug zapper thread also indicate that you are a retread troll.
Perhaps you should go back to Wankers for Romney.
Rather than posting that trash that already got a poster banned, you should post this:
http://spectator.org/archives/2012/01/24/reagans-young-lieutenant/
You can have any issue you want with extra marital affairs but to continue to discuss it is just counterproductive. We all know what happened but now it’s up to you to make up your mind whether it matters. There is absolutely no point in arguing about it. It is what it is.
As far as Clinton goes let me know when Newt is accused of raping women.
Again very slowly.
I have been with my company for 20 plus years, they have until Nov disallowed any posting on the clock. I do not go online when I get home, my wife and i enjoy dinner and watching some TV. I have read FR for some 11 years or so and never joined because i simply cant post during the day.
call me names fine , if you knew me personally and knew the work I have done in the past for congressman Lungren and GOV Deukmejian you would think otherwise, but then that would ruin your narrative, right ?
There is nothing mean spirited about facts. Tom Delay was excellent. Newt and Livingston’s resignations assured Clinton would not be rightfully convicted by the senate. Their resignations directly resulted from their philandering. This is history, not opinion.
Up until yesterday, Drudge was my homepage. I checked news there first, then came to FR to get the “rest of the story”.
Yesterday, for the first time in almost a decade, I stopped using Drudge as my homepage... FR is now my homepage.
In case you didn’t know (or notice), Drudge is now being ran (or edited, if that’s what you would call it( by 2 psycho, limp-wristed romneybots, along with Ann assisting.
Clinton wasn’t convicted because there were too many wussy boys in the Senate, not because of Newt. The Senate did not do their job.
Concern trolls don't typically last long around here, you might want to get it out a little quicker.
I have been with my company for 20 plus years, they have until Nov disallowed any posting on the clock. I do not go online when I get home, my wife and i enjoy dinner and watching some TV. I have read FR for some 11 years or so and never joined because i simply cant post during the day.
So, your excuse is that you were free to READ FR all day at work, but not post?
Even if true it still doesn't explain the concern trolling for Romney.
call me names fine , if you knew me personally and knew the work I have done in the past for congressman Lungren and GOV Deukmejian you would think otherwise, but then that would ruin your narrative, right ?
That means nothing, and Deukmejian was effectively pro-abortion.
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.