Posted on 02/14/2012 9:48:34 PM PST by Domandred
Republican Presidential hopeful Rick Santorum visited Boise tonight to a packed house at Capitol High School. More than 30 minutes before the speech started, the 1300 capacity auditorium was full and any new arrivals were sent to a spillover gym across campus.
Santorum started his speech speaking about his family. There was applause when he spoke about his seven children, ranging in ages from 3 to 20. He said “Last time I said I had 7 children, I was in NY, and there wasn’t applause. I bet a lot of you have that many children.”
He also used his family to talk about who he is, and perhaps even his other challengers. “If I am the only one who accepts the challenge of faith and family, I will take that.”
The rest of the speech was aimed against the Obama administration and other government. He also spoke about global warming, Habeas Corpus, Obama’s health insurance plan, religious freedom and contraception. There were a few mentions of his now-famous sweater vests.
He was well received by most the audience, although a few times throughout the night a jeer was shouted out. Besides that, there were no demonstrations or other hecklers apparent.
At one point he pulled out his pocket copy of the Declaration of Independence and said “We are the greatest country in the history of the world.” When he read the line “endowed by their creator” there was much applause when he emphasized the word “creator.” He followed the applause with “You people in Idaho know these things.”
He then spoke of how he believes it is our now our duty to do the right thing for our country, pushing the point that “We will be the last stand.”
There were many state legislators in attendance, Russ Fulcher and Bob Nonini being two. Treasurer Ron Crane was also in the crowd.
Santorum finished his speech with the thought that “That’s what every election is about…the future.”
Santorum then took about 30 minutes of questions from the crowd.
“Obviously there is no standard regarding Newt’s record, other than claiming his alignment with DUmocrats were all”
“mistakes” that should be explained away without substantial demonstration of a “change of heart”.”
That’s basically a lie, just like you lied about me attacking Rick Santorum’s family. If not a lie, a very gross malfunction in your brain. You are basically ignoring huge portions of Newt’s record.
You’re talking about a guy who has done battle against the Libs and RINOs in our own party since the 80s. There is nothing that changes that. He did not support Cap and Trade. Sitting on the couch with Pelosi didn’t change his overall philosophy. Sitting on the couch with Pelosi doesn’t change his leadership role. Once upon a time, this guy used to be called the “Hard line leader of the conservative Republicans” by the media. He was hated then as he is hated now. But look at you, utterly unwilling to acknowledge this historical reality... and why? Because, like Santorum, you can’t bring yourself to say anything positive about your political opponent.
“He admits his long-time support of such issues were mistakes, then devotes himself to making new ones.”
Like what? Can you be specific?
“That describes Newt’s reaction all through the campaign and most likely a reason for his decline since the latest news coming out from his staff is now claiming he’s once again “changed” focus of his campaign after losing ground through baseless attacks he himself was guilty of.”
That’s another lie, or you are incredibly delusional. I know Newt has gone after Romney pretty hard. He hasn’t gone over Santorum hard at all. In fact, it was Newt early on who urged conservatives not to go negative at all.
Santorum has called Newt crass, irresponsible, pandering, suggested that he is dishonest, suggested that he is not conservative.
Can you please find me an example where Newt has lied about Santorum’s record, or smeared Santorum by calling him names or suggesting he has poor character?
If you can’t, I’ll just put it in the list of lies you’ve told.
Newt has a long history of talking a good game, making it a point during this campaign to say “all the good things” (we’ve already got one of those in the White House). I’ll take a leader who LIVES IT every day and doesn’t run the ball for the other team during his down time.”
“Newt has a long history of talking a good game, making it a point during this campaign to say “all the good things” (we’ve already got one of those in the White House). “
So, giving specifics about what his plans are, what he intends to do, are “all the good things” that he is just saying to get elected?
“I’ll take a leader who LIVES IT every day and doesn’t run the ball for the other team during his down time.”
So not giving specifics, emphasizing his family image and his social concerns, over actually promoting a platform is what you would call “living it”?
I’m going to ask you for the 3rd or 4th time.
Try defending Santorum’s platform. Explain how it is better than Newt’s platform. Immediately accusing Newt of being an absolute liar in everything he says does not fulfill this experiment.
I just perused your recent posts and see nothing but slamming Rick and offering nothing in the way of constructive support for any candidate. One post right after the other. If this Sanctimonious Papist candidate so offends you, get off your lazy a$$ and get out there and campaign, promote and go door to door for your preferred guy like the rest of us do for ours.
Out of the 4 remaining candidates, I have chosen my man and have no reason to bother with someone like you who is obviously not interested in anything but giving long winded screeds against a Conservative candidate for their own self satisfaction. I also took note that you are not making many FRiends here in your very short posting time. That usually means a short stay here. Sitting in your dorm room pumping out hate and nit wittery is no way to go through life.
“I just perused your recent posts”
And only you would take the time to do something like that.
“...and see nothing but slamming Rick and offering nothing in the way of constructive support for any candidate. One post right after the other. If this Sanctimonious Papist candidate so offends you, get off your lazy a$$ and get out there and campaign, promote and go door to door for your preferred guy like the rest of us do for ours.”
And, as usual, you can do nothing except go after the character of the person you’re speaking with.
I’ve asked YOU multiple times for you to address things of substance. All I get from you are diversions, attacks, lies and mockery.
You even attack me again with a suggestion that I hate Catholics, even though I’ve been pretty clear in my support of Newt.
How about you accuse me of attacking Santorum’s family again?
This behavior of yours doesn’t induce anything meaningful.
I’ll ask you again, as I’ve asked many Santorumbots over and over again. Are you able to explain how your candidate’s platform is better than Newt’s? A response along the lines of “Newt is a liar and you can’t believe anything he says” is not a legitimate reply.
First of all, I owe you nothing here, noob. You “defend” Newt by starting off with more personal attacks? Many of his supporters seem to have a grudge against Catholics (”St. Rick”) and attack him for having the courage to stand for family values.
You demonstrated that you have a problem with featuring his family in his campaign, which tells me his religion and family values seem to be a concern in the campaign that Newt supporters are using to base their line of attack.
Regarding Newts “record”, I look at things that matter rather than media driven soundbites. On on issue after issue in the debates, I’ve heard Newt say “Rick is right on that” or “Rick was a leader” on this or that issue.
I think a moon base while we’re trillions in debt is a dumb idea. I’ll also wager that Newt’s own campaign will attest that his method of attacking Romney on Bain was mis-directed, mis-guided...oh yea, Newt’s own words “a mistake”.
Gingrich Admits ‘Mistake’ With Romney Attack - NYTimes.com
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/12/15/gingrich-admits-mistake-with-romney-attack/
Newt Gingrich: I Didn’t Admit Attacking Mitt Romney On Bain ...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/11/newt-gingrich-attack-ad-mitt-romney-bain_n_1200415.html
But coming from Newt, that seems to be a campaign theme....
Gingrich campaign admits error – CNN Political Ticker - CNN.com ...
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/01/26/gingrich-admits-error/
Newt Gingrich: ‘I made a mistake’ on Medicare plan criticism ...
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0511/55186.html
Newt Gingrich on Ryan budget slam: ‘I made a mistake’ - Los ...
http://articles.latimes.com/2011/may/18/news/la-pn-gingrich-mistake-20110518
Newt Gingrich: I made a mistake in saying I wouldn’t win the Iowa caucuses
http://caucuses.desmoinesregister.com/2012/01/02/newt-gingrich-i-made-a-mistake-in-saying-i-wouldnt-win-the-iowa-caucuses/
Newt Gingrich: Doug Hoffman support a ‘mistake’ - Andy Barr ...
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1009/28730.html
The Page by Mark Halperin | Newt Admits Campaign Mistake
http://thepage.time.com/2011/12/31/newt-admits-campaign-mistake/
“Newt has admitted it was a mistake to back Dede Scozzafava, the Republican nominee in the 2009 NY-23 special election”
www.newt.org/answers
KEENE: Gingrich makes critical mistake in Virginia - Washington Times
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/dec/26/gingrich-makes-critical-mistake-in-virginia/
Branstad: Gingrich vacation a big mistake | Iowa Caucuses
http://caucuses.desmoinesregister.com/2011/06/10/branstad-gingrich-vacation-a-big-mistake/
There is an article earlier today regarding “refocusing” after sliding to 4th in many polls, but I’m not following Newt’s campaign around with a shovel, nor do I troll his threads like you and other spammers of Santorum threads do.
That said, there are plenty of examples where Newt has REVERSED course, but the main issue is that what Newt says now is not what he’s always promoted. Santorum authored Health Savings Accounts while in Congress, Newt pushed for government-mandated single payer healthcare.
What matters most is electing a candidate to stand up against the culture of death pushed by the DUmocrats. The erosion of our liberty and freedom is a primary consern and goes into every issue. But then I guess we should all just “relax and accept it”, just like Newt says....lest we pi$$ off the BIG TENT “moderates”....
Newt Gingrich on abortion in 1991: “Relax and accept it”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aiQo3pRmr-4
Gun Owners of America: Newt Ain’t Great on 2nd Amendment Rights, Broke His Promise to America
If you cannot get RIGHT TO LIFE or THE MEANS TO DEFEND IT correct, how can you claim to be a conservative? If a candidate gets those three correct they are more likely to get all the other issues correct as well.
Newt’s “off-the-reservation” moments are too numerous, too freguent, and increasingly too recent. Santorum has been consistent in his pro-life, pro-marriage, pro-second amendment stance....Newt has been all over the map trying to appeal to “moderates” and JACKASSES. His last line of attack wasn’t gaining traction and only hurt his cause, and it shows. Newt still needs a his only competition out of the way to get a boost where Rick just needs to stick to his message and he defeats both Romney and Obama.
It is a very common practice with n00bs getting involved with bitter hate filled comments.
Why Ricks platform is better? He wants to cut taxes across the board, cut spending across the board, end Obamacare and eliminate all regulations the Regime put in place. That is all that there will be time for in the first term of a new President. There is no money and time to waste on space missions to the moon. The country is a shambles and it needs to be the number one focus, not legacy building projects/
Why do I think Rick is better than Newt to win? He is more electable. His polling is miles ahead of Newt. You are not old enough to remember, but Newt was radioactive when he left congress. Looking at his current unfavorables, he hasn't been able to repair the damage in his time out of office. Rick has the highest favorables, he is getting support from old Reagan democrats, he has a message tailor made for swing states by focusing on lost manufacturing jobs and he is winning against Romney on a consistent basis. He is running a far smarter and consistent campaign than Newt has this whole cycle.
Now go off and play beer pong, 52 pick up, hide the salami or whatever you kids do these days.
“It is a very common practice with n00bs getting involved with bitter hate filled comments.”
Of which you have become the master of. I’m only reacting to the blatant dishonesty and dishonorable behavior.
“Why Ricks platform is better? He wants to cut taxes across the board, cut spending across the board, end Obamacare and eliminate all regulations the Regime put in place.”
That doesn’t really explain how it’s “better”, unless you’re saying no one else shares that concept. Perhaps you don’t know what Santorum’s platform is. Or you’ve never had to discuss it before, and so you can’t give specifics.
Saint Rick plans to lower the tax rate for individuals to 10 percent and 28 percent. Of course, that’s just for the income tax, they still pay FICA. On corporate taxes, he plans to have it at 17 percent and 0 for manufacturers. He keeps the Capital Gains tax, though it’s lowered to 12 percent. I don’t recall him saying he’ll repeal “all regulations” Obama has put in place. He has said he will repeal the regulations that are “onerous”, whatever that means. Spending levels he hopes to reduce to will be back to 2008 levels. On Social security, there is a terrible emptiness of specifics and, from what is said, nothing really gets changed. Something about increasing retirement age, making sure social security funds go to social security, blah blah blah. There is a similar lack of specifics on many other topics, so I won’t even bother to bring them up.
Newt’s plan is a flat tax rate of 15 percent, or you can choose to remain in the progressive tax system currently in place. Corporate rate is a flat 12.5 percent for ALL businesses, not just for manufacturers. The Capital Gains tax is eliminated, amongst other things to be eliminated. Younger works will have the opportunity to embrace privatization of social security, which is a good important first step to utterly removing it.
None of this is perfect, mind you, but they are all good important first steps in the right direction. The real source of our problems is in the tax system itself, and in the very EXISTENCE of the entitlements.
Santorum just goofs around with the system as it is, but doesn’t make any major changes that can’t be undone later. He does throw a bone at us with the Balanced Budget Amendment, but I have never heard him once really use that to campaign on... which I think means it’s just something to put out there since everybody on the Pub side wants it. Except for Romney, anyway. He does not even attempt this style of reform in any of his other proposals.
Eliminating the tax code entirely and moving over into a purely equitable system of taxation should be the ultimate goal. We should not be playing winners and losers, or punishing success, no matter how big that success is OR that loss. To destroy the tax system would be to strike a major blow against the leftists, who use the current progressive system as a method of control.
Social security ought to ultimately be abolished. The Chilean Model, from which Newt’s (and Cain’s) social security plan derives is a good alternative. That system has been shown to be successful and even has been shown to give a better return on money invested therein.
I’m a Fair Tax guy myself, but Newt simply goes farther in his proposals.
This is why you never want to discuss it, and why you are so shallow in your explanation of Saint Rick’s “plans”. Oh, and this is but a TASTE.
“You “defend” Newt by starting off with more personal attacks? Many of his supporters seem to have a grudge against Catholics (”St. Rick”) and attack him for having the courage to stand for family values.”
Your posts are starting to look a lot like spam, just sayin.
You said I have demonstrated a problem with Santorum’s family and religion. That simply isn’t true. I have demonstrated a problem, as I have made clear quite directly and clearly over and over again, that my problem is that Santorum is campaigning primarily on family and religion. I know this distinction might be hard for a Santorumbot to comprehend, but I have immeidiate proof that even you can see.
Go to Rick Santorum’s “Issues” page on his official website and look at his “issues”. It leads off with an article talking about striking a terrible blow against “illegal pornography”. The next few stories mention something about his grand pa working in a coal mine, American unity, blah blah blah.
It’s just family stuff. Religion. Pandering on image. Even when he does talk about an issue of some substance, it’s washed over in a bunch of family and religion talking-points. Unity this. Family! Friends! Love! Patriotism! Unite! Blah blah blah.
I’m not the type of guy who gets all worked up over emotional language. I like numbers. Data. Grand strategy.
You don’t got it. He don’t got it. Ergo, your candidate is shallow, and your support for him is about an inch deep.
It may be your child like innocence or that you are sitting in Newts campaign headquarters and are one of the many election time sign ons that has one mission, BUT there is no way half of Newts ideas are going to pass congress. Look around at who is in there. Santorums support for the Ryan plan is even a long shot at passing. Newt can make all sorts of promises like ending 40% of Obama policies the first day but it isn’t possible. The President cannot unilaterally just wave a magic wand and it happens. Congress must be involved and they are going to be maxed out getting rid of Obamacare and setting our finances in order. A flat tax is a great idea, but there is no support in congress for it. I will support the guy with a realistic vision that a guy selling me stuff that can’t happen.
BTW, how did hide the salami go?
“It may be your child like innocence or that you are sitting in Newts campaign headquarters and are one of the many election time sign ons that has one mission, BUT there is no way half of Newts ideas are going to pass congress. Look around at who is in there. Santorums support for the Ryan plan is even a long shot at passing. Newt can make all sorts of promises like ending 40% of Obama policies the first day but it isn’t possible. The President cannot unilaterally just wave a magic wand and it happens. Congress must be involved and they are going to be maxed out getting rid of Obamacare and setting our finances in order. A flat tax is a great idea, but there is no support in congress for it. I will support the guy with a realistic vision that a guy selling me stuff that can’t happen.
BTW, how did hide the salami go?”
LOL, great argument. So now I know how to beat you down whenever I feel like it. So your argument is basically “it can’t get passed” when faced with the cold hard reality that Saint Rick’s platform is lackluster compared to his “true conservative” rhetoric.
Just so you know, the whole point of elections is to (fasten your seat belts! This might be a novel idea for you!) ELECT PEOPLE. And, you know, there’s something else that you might not be aware of... in politics we... it’s... well... how can I say this?... it’s about running a campaign, running on issues, debating, fighting, gathering support, and making changes.
The whole “we can’t do this, so let’s not bother to try” thing died when Obama came into office. We are dealing with an openly socialist and vulnerable Democratic President. If there ever was a time to capitalize on his weakness to move for some big changes, it’s now or it’s never.
This nomination process has taken our eyes off the ball. But once you and your kind have been subjugated and sent to the back of the bus, we’ll have a united force to refocus on Barack Obama and the progressive machine in this country. It doesn’t end with Newt, or ANYONE, coming into office. It only just begins. I support Newt because he is campaign minded. He has experience in crafting messages, running campaigns and getting people into power. That’s really what I want the most. I want a focused conservative movement utterly dedicated to gaining majorities in congress. Part of this fight is going to involve pushing for novel ideas, such as Fair taxes, Flat taxes, privatization, whatever. We don’t just go back to sleep and stop campaigning. We keep on going and we stay passionate and alive. Big ideas, even if we don’t accomplish them right away, can keep our movement and our momentum going strong.
Santorum distorted Cain’s 999 and voted against the Flat tax. His platform does not suggest that he has any sweeping vision for the country, unless waging a war against Pornography is a major issue Americans are concerned with. I’m sure with your child-like thought processes, you think that is something everyone will jump on board for. For some reason I don’t have “faith” that that is what’s keeping Americans up at night. I also do not like how he has made the campaign too much about himself, instead of making it about major issues we need fixed. His attacks on the other candidates (except Romney) have also been damaging to the potential future careers of people who can still be useful to us. It all strikes me as just stuff from a professional politician interested in getting elected for his own sake, but not for the sake of the country. It can’t end after just repealing Obummercare and raising the retirement age or whatever. I want a Campaigner in Chief, not just a Commander in Chief. Going for Santorum is like going back to sleep from step one.
It would be a national tragedy if that were to occur. Anyway, isn’t it getting late? I thought Mr and Mrs. Santorum would have told you to go to bed already. Or is there no set bed time for the Santorum kids on the campaign bus? And I hope you haven’t figured out how to unlock the parental controls on that computer!
Your the guy who said he was a college student. I on the other hand have a family, a business, houses, cars, toys and a life. It upsets you that I don't bother giving you detailed facts and figures. I do that for two reasons. A) I don't like you. B) Generally long screeds are not read here and they are defiantly not worth the time with people who are set against changing their mind and are just here for the fight.
You get “worked up” over empty words whenever your candidate manages to squeak out an applause line in a debate, from a candidate who helped create all the government largess he now claims to wish dismantled. His “history” is creating massive problems, then later claiming it was a “mistake” and he was wrong on every issue.
Again, keep supporting your candidate with slander of conservatives and personal attacks rather than accomplishment, we’ll see how many you win over. You have contributed absolutely ZERO to this thread or any other where you troll. But as many Santorum threads you spam, I guess Newt’s getting his money’s worth...
Newt Gingrich accused of ‘buying’ followers on Twitter
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/twitter/8677715/Newt-Gingrich-accused-of-buying-followers-on-Twitter.html
You have contributed absolutely ZERO to this thread or any other where you troll, which is exactly where his campaign is going.
Your response is weak. Since it is so terribly weak, it’ll be worth challenging you to argue from Santorum’s platform in every thread you start bleating about eeeevil Newt Gingrich. I won’t stalk you the way you apparently stalk me, but I got your weakness. Your talking points in favor of Santorum are vapid and have no substance... just like the candidate himself.
http://www.newt.org/answers#ProLife
Consistent Pro-Life Record
Newt Gingrich has consistently upheld a pro-life standard. He had a consistent pro-life voting record throughout his twenty years in Congress, including his four years as Speaker of the House of Representatives.
Gingrich pledges to uphold this consistent pro-life standard as president.
Gingrich’s consistent pro-life standard is reflected by the following:
1. 98.6% Lifetime Pro-Life Rating from the National Right to Life Committee (NRLC). For the 20 years that Gingrich served in Congress (1979-1999), Gingrich supported the pro-life position in 70 out of 71 votes. (In the one instance that he did not take the NRLC position, it was because the NRLC opposed an early 1995 version of welfare reform because it changed certain welfare payments for mothers with children; NRLC did not oppose the final version of Gingrich’s welfare reform passed in 1996)
2. Supported the Hyde Amendment. Gingrich consistently voted for the Hyde amendment and other bans on government funding of abortions.
3. Partial Birth Abortion Ban. During Gingrich’s tenure as Speaker, the House of Representatives twice passed legislation banning partial birth abortions. President Clinton vetoed this legislation both times. Finally, a partial birth abortion ban was signed into law in 2003. The legislative effort to ban partial birth abortions had a very positive impact increasing pro-life support in the United States.
4. Signed the Susan B. Anthony List Pro-Life Leadership Presidential Pledge. In June 2011, Gingrich signed the SBA List Pro-Life Leadership Presidential pledge in which Gingrich pledges to the American people that if elected President he will (i) only nominate judges to the Supreme Court and federal judiciary who are committed to restraint and applying the original meaning of the Constitution, and not legislating from the bench (ii) select pro-life appointees for relevant executive branch positions, (iii) advance pro-life legislation to permanently end all taxpayer funding of abortion in all domestic and international spending programs, (iv) defund Planned Parenthood; and (v) advance and sign into law a Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act to protect unborn children who are capable of feeling pain from abortion.
5. Pledges to Sign Two Pro-life Executive Orders on the first day of a Gingrich Administration.
i. “Mexico City Policy” of Respect for Life. Reauthorize President Ronald Reagan’s policy – also known as the “Mexico City Policy”— to stop the federal funding of any non-governmental agencies or charities that perform or promote abortions in foreign countries.
ii. Respect the Beliefs and Integrity of Healthcare Workers. No American working in a medical environment should be forced to perform any action or procedure that he or she finds morally or ethically objectionable. This protection should include, but not be limited to, abortion and sterilization procedures. Existing conscience clause protections need to be strengthened.
http://www.newt.org/answers#Second
Second Amendment
Newt has been long recognized as a strong defender of the Second Amendment’s right to bear arms. Newt is a recipient of the National Rifle Association’s Defender of the Second Amendment Award. His legislative voting record was consistently scored by the NRA as either an A or A+ all 20 years that he served in Congress. Furthermore, Newt is the only candidate in the GOP race who has spoken out about the threat to the second amendment from the United Nations and other global governance organizations, and on the first day, he will instruct the Department of Justice and State Department to defend American sovereignty and block all international treaties that infringe on Second Amendment rights.
Defending Second Amendment Rights
The right to bear arms is a political right designed to safeguard freedom so that no government can take away from you the rights which God has given you.
– Newt Gingrich, NRA’s Celebration of American Values Leadership Forum
We live in a time when international organizations and our own federal government are devoting significant efforts to eliminate the right of Americans to keep and bear arms. We must forcefully echo the Declaration of Independence and insist that the first duty of government is to provide for our safety. At the core of this is the Constitutional right of the people to provide for their own safety.
THE GINGRICH RECORD DEFENDING SECOND AMENDMENT RIGHTS:
* Newt has been a committed and vigilant defender of Second Amendment rights since first being elected by the people of Georgia’s Sixth District in 1978.
* Newt is a Life Member of the National Rifle Association, and speaks regularly at the NRA’s Annual Meeting. He received an A or A-plus rating from the NRA all ten terms that he served in the House of Representatives, and received the NRA’s Defender of the Second Amendment award in 2010.
WHAT NEWT WILL DO ON DAY ONE:
* Instruct the Department of Justice and State Department to defend American sovereignty and block all international treaties that infringe on Second Amendment rights.
* Take immediate steps to decisively control the border so Mexican drug cartels are blocked from entering the United States.
* End all illegal gun exports to Mexico by the federal government.
* End the discriminatory treatment of firearms imports. If a gun can be legally made and sold in the United States, it should be importable from outside the United States.
View Newt’s responses to the Gun Owners of America survey here.
http://www.newt.org/sites/newt.org/files/images/GOASurveyPDF.pdf
http://www.newt.org/answers#Dede
Dede Scozzafava Endorsement
Newt has admitted it was a mistake to back Dede Scozzafava, the Republican nominee in the 2009 NY-23 special election.
Whether it was helping to build the Republican Party of Georgia back when Democrats controlled the entire state or leading the nationwide effort in 1994 to break 40 years of Democratic rule in the House, Newt has always tried to advance the cause of a truly conservative Republican party. This has always meant supporting the most conservative nominee possible as selected by Republican primary voters.
Therefore, Newt will almost always back the nominee of the Republican party and not back an independent candidate in a race against a Democratic candidate.
Newt still believes in this principle, however, he has admitted it was a mistake to back Dede Scozzafava, the Republican nominee in the 2009 NY-23 special election. Although she was the Republican nominee, the problem was that Republican primary voters did not pick her, the local party leaders did, otherwise her liberal views would have prevented her from becoming the nominee. The Conservative Party candidate whom Scozzafava was running against, Doug Hoffman, recently remarked about Newt’s endorsement of his rival, “I would advise other conservative republicans: Don’t hold this against him.”
Are you done with your campaign spam yet? “MISTAKE”...the theme for Newt’s campaign.
After working for Nelson Rockefeller (Southern Regional Director of the Nelson Rockefeller Presidential campaign in 1968, pro-abortion & supported big-government, socialist programs), Newt lost in 1974 and 1976 running as a progressive republican.
Newt wasn’t a “conservative” until 1978, but it didn’t take long for Newt to resort back to his progressive ways.
1979:
Gingrich votes FOR a massive federal land grab. Millions of acres in Alaska are transferred to Washington bureaucrats.
Gingrich votes FOR raising the debt ceiling.
Gingrich votes FOR establishing the Federal Department of Education.
1980’s:
In the 1980’s Gingrich voted, numerous times, to raise the debt ceiling.
In 1987, Gingrich co-sponsors H.R. 1934, to implement the infamous & unconstitutional “Fairness Doctrine”.
In 1988, Gingrich wanted Republicans to move away from Reaganism.
In 1989, Gingrich co-sponsors the Global Warming Prevention Act.
1990’s:
In 1993, Gingrich preached NAFTA and whipped Republicans into supporting it.
In 1994, Gingrich supported the GATT Treaty, surrendering sovereignty to the U.N.
4th January, 1995 Newly sworn in Speaker Gingrich speaks positively of FDR and his socialist New Deal.
10th April, 1995 Gingrich supports federal funding of abortion.
18th April, 1996 Gingrich voted for restrictions on laser sighting devices.
16th September, 1996 Gingrich voted for the Lautenberg Gun Ban.
28th September, 1996 Gingrich voted for the “Gun Free School Zones Act”, making schools easier targets.
Gingrich earned a “D” rating from the Gun Owners of America in 1996.
21st January, 1997 A Republican congress fined Gingrich a record $300,000 for ethics violations.
26th June, 1998 Gingrich supports foreign aid and the International Monetary Fund (IMF).
5th November, 1998 Gingrich resigns.
Life after Congress:
12th October, 2005 - Gingrich calls for the DNA testing of all US citizens.
15th February, 2007 - He supported George W. Bush’s proposal for mandatory carbon caps.
April, 2007 - He calls for restrictions on 2nd amendment rights.
10th April, 2007 - In a event with John Kerry, Newt agreed with Kerry’s views on the environment, praised his book, and almost hugged him.
24th April, 2007 - He said about Government-Sponsored Enterprises (GSEs): “conservatives should embrace [them] and want to extend as widely as possible.”
November, 2007 - Gingrich’s book ‘A Contract with the Earth’ is published, in which he touts his ‘green’ credentials.
April, 2008 - Newt accepts Al Gore’s invitation to make a global warming commercial with Nancy Pelosi, for Gore’s organization. Newt calls Gore a “friend”.
29th September, 2008 - Says if he were in office, he would have reluctantly voted for the $700B TARP bailout.
16th October, 2009 - Gingrich endorses big-government, pro-abortion NY-23 candidate Dede Scozzafava.
15th November, 2010 - He defended Romneycare.
12th December, 2010 - He advocates a pathway to citizenship for illegal aliens.
25th January, 2011 - Gingrich renews his support for ethanol subsidies.
25th January, 2011 - Gingrich says he will re-brand, not abolish, the EPA.
7th March, 2011 - Gingrich blames his infidelity on patriotism.
14th March, 2011 - Gingrich says NAFTA worked because it created jobs in Mexico
18th March, 2011 - Gingrich renews support for indebted prescription drug program.
23rd March, 2011 - Gingrich completes a flip-flop on Libyan military intervention.
15th May, 2011 - He calls Paul Ryan’s budget plan “right-wing social engineering” and renews support for the individual mandate.
And the myth of Newt’s “Conservatism” continues....
Are you done posting your PURE AND TOTAL LIES which in extremely liberal fashion attempt to smear and destroy the leader of the hard-line conservative rebels in Congress who became an insider-revolutionary who led the most conservative Congress in our lifetime? ANYONE who thinks Newt is NOT one of the biggest conservatives who has ever been elected to national public office IS AN ABSOLUTE IGNORANT IDIOT. You are quoting the worst lies from Drudge and Romney including that Newt supposedly wanted to move away from the policies of Reagan or that he paid a fine in Congress...COMPLETE AND UTTER LIES. STOP posting these LIES! I believe lying is against the policy of this forum but we can ask the mods about that.
http://www.newt.org/answers#Ethics
Ethics Investigation
In 1999, after a 3 ½ year investigation, the Internal Revenue Service (under President Bill Clinton) concluded that Gingrich did not violate any tax laws, leading renowned CNN Investigative Reporter Brooks Jackson to remark on air “it turns out [Gingrich] was right and those who accused him of tax fraud were wrong.”
Eighty four politically motivated ethics charges were filed against Newt when he was Speaker of the House regarding the use of tax exempt funds for a college course he taught titled “Renewing American Civilization.” Eighty-three of the eighty-four charges were found to be without merit and dropped. The remaining charge had to do with contradictory documents prepared by Newt’s lawyer supplied during the course of the investigation. Newt took responsibility for the error and agreed to reimburse the committee the cost of the investigation into that discrepancy. In 1999, after a 3 ½ year investigation, the Internal Revenue Service (under President Bill Clinton, nonetheless) concluded that Gingrich did not violate any tax laws, leading renowned CNN Investigative Reporter Brooks Jackson to remark on air “it turns out [Gingrich] was right and those who accused him of tax fraud were wrong.”
http://www.newt.org/answers#EdDept
Vote for Department of Education
As President, Newt will dramatically shrink the Department of Education to a research and reporting overview agency, and restore decision-making powers to states and communities.
When Newt voted for the creation of the Department of Education, the institution was only structured to provide research and collect data. Unfortunately, the bureaucracy ballooned, so while Speaker, Newt aggressively campaigned to pare down the Department back to its appropriate role and return power to the states.
As President, Newt will dramatically shrink the Department of Education to a research and reporting overview agency, and restore decision-making powers to states and communities. Most responsibilities and positions will be eliminated, and its new role will be to help find new and innovative approaches to then be adopted voluntarily at the local level. Newt will steadfastly oppose any national curriculum standards, and will reverse Barack Obama’s nationalization of the student loan industry.
http://www.newt.org/answers#NAFTA
NAFTA
As an ardent supporter of capitalism and the free market, Newt has always been a staunch supporter of expanding opportunities for American manufacturers, farmers, and businesses to bring their goods and services to the world market.
Since first entering Congress, Newt has put the interests of American entrepreneurs, producers and consumers first, as he supported the historic Reagan tax cuts, then went against many in his own party to oppose the George Bush and Clinton tax hikes. When the North American Free Trade Agreement in came up for a vote in 1993, Newt recalled the words of Ronald Reagan in 1979: “A developing closeness among Canada, Mexico, and the United States—a North American accord—would permit achievement of that potential in each country beyond that which I believe any of them, strong as they are, could accomplish in the absence of such cooperation.”
Although controversial at first, NAFTA has created vast new opportunities for American producers and consumers. In the first fifteen years after NAFTA’s passage, U.S. industrial production rose 57% and unemployment averaged 5.1%. In the decade preceding the trade agreements, industrial production only rose 28% and unemployment average 7.1%.
However, a strong American manufacturing base is an economic and national security imperative, and there are steps that Newt will take on day one to rebuild American industry. Newt will immediately eliminate the capital gains tax for all manufacturers, and will give manufacturers the opportunity to fully write-off capital investments in one year, freeing up more resources to hire more employees. Gingrich will implement an “all of the above” American Energy Plan to lower energy costs for manufacturers and their employees, and replace the EPA, ending its 40-year assault on American energy and entrepreneurship.
http://www.newt.org/answers#CFR
U.S. Sovereignty/Council on Foreign Relations
Newt believes that we must always be vigilant about our sovereignty, and hold our lawmakers and courts accountable to our Constitution – and only our Constitution.
This is a belief firmly rooted in American Exceptionalism. As citizens, we came together to create an American government and body of laws of the people, by the people, and for the people.
Newt has vocally stood up for American sovereignty against Washington elites and an Obama Administration who view America as an unremarkable nation.
Newt believes that it is a violation of our sovereignty when the Department of Justice attempts to cite “international norms” to restrict our Second Amendment rights. It is a violation of our sovereignty when the White House sends taxpayer dollars towards a UN environmental program, Agenda 21, that infringes on Americans’ property rights. And it is certainly a violation of our sovereignty when our President seeks approval from the United Nations – not Congress – to send our troops into war, as he did with Libya.
Q: If he is a defender of U.S. Sovereignty why is Newt a member of the Council on Foreign Relations?
After 9/11, Newt was asked to serve on CFR’s Terrorism Task Force and he accepted. On this task force he has brought his same commitment to defending U.S. sovereignty as he has throughout his career.
http://www.newt.org/answers#FDR
Praise for FDR
When the Japanese sneak attack at Pearl Harbor threw the United States into a global war against Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy and Imperial Japan, Franklin Delano Roosevelt rose to the challenge. He led the allies in a global war with remarkable skill and built the greatest military in history. Newt believes that without FDR’s leadership as Commander in Chief during World War II, the 20th century would have been a Nazi century rather than an American century. Ronald Reagan too praised FDR, saying that “like the Founding Fathers before him, F.D.R. was an American giant.”
http://www.newt.org/answers#TARP
TARP
Newt believes that the reckless, secretive and opaque way in which the Federal Reserve and the Treasury Department administered the bailouts has been an affront to democracy.
Newt was appalled and disgusted at the amount of dictatorial power that Secretary of the Treasury Henry Paulson tried to grab for himself at the outset of the financial crisis. However, he reluctantly supported a scaled-down plan after Paulson told the country that the world financial system was going to collapse without this emergency support.
Newt believes that the reckless, secretive and opaque way in which the Federal Reserve and the Treasury Department administered the bailouts has been an affront to democracy. The Fed was picking winners and losers, using several emergency lending facilities to make all types of loans to connected parties, including to a bank owned by the Libyan government.
This is why broadly scaling back the role of the Federal Reserve and repealing the Dodd-Frank bill are two of the central pillars of Newt’s 21st Century Contract with America. The Fed will be fully audited and made more transparent to ensure the events of 2008 are never repeated, and getting rid of Dodd-Frank will once and for all end the destructive policy of “too big to fail.”
http://www.newt.org/answers#Mandate
Mandate to Purchase health insurance
Newt opposes Governor Romney’s health insurance mandate, and Newt opposes President Obama’s health insurance mandate. Newt believes mandates to buy health insurance are wrong on principle, and in the case of the Obamacare health insurance mandate, unconstitutional as well.
With respect to President Obama’s health insurance mandate, Newt believes it is an unprecedented and unconstitutional expansion of federal power. If the federal government can coerce individuals—by threat of fines—to buy health insurance, there is no stopping the federal government from forcing Americans to buy any good or service. It is a serious and unconstitutional infringement of individual liberty.
With respect to Governor Romney’s mandate, we have observed that it doesn’t achieve its goal of providing low cost catastrophic coverage for the uninsured. The intractable problem we have learned from experience with health insurance mandates is this: once you have a mandate, the government has to specify exactly what coverage must be included in insurance for it to qualify. This introduces political considerations into determining these minimum standards, guaranteeing that nothing desired by the special interests will be left out.
In the 1990s, Newt and many other conservatives, such as the Heritage Foundation, proposed a mandate to purchase health insurance as the alternative to Hillarycare. However, the problems outlined above caused Newt to come to the principled conclusion that a mandate to purchase health insurance was unconstitutional, unworkable and counterproductive to lowering the cost of healthcare.
Today, Newt carries the banner in fighting for the repeal of Obamacare and advocates for a “patient power” replacement that will create a free market framework for healthcare, provide affordable, portable, and reliable healthcare coverage, and establish a healthcare safety net focused on those truly in need. This system moves us towards the goal of healthcare for all with no unconstitutional mandate of any kind.
http://www.newt.org/answers#DREAM
Immigration/DREAM Act
In his 21st Century Contract with America, Newt pledges to control the southern border by January 1, 2014, waiving any regulations and pushing aside any bureaucracies that get in the way.
Newt is opposed to amnesty and has a clear record of vigorous opposition to the Bush era amnesty legislation.
Newt believes America must be a nation of laws. The first duty of the federal government is national defense, and it is inexcusable that we haven’t secured the border. In his 21st Century Contract with America, Newt pledges to control the southern border by January 1, 2014, waiving any regulations and pushing aside any bureaucracies that get in the way.
As we secure the border, we must make an aggressive and serious effort to deport all criminals, gang members, and any other threats to our society as quickly as possible. We must also tap into the ingenuity of the private sector to better validate who is in the United States legally.
Newt opposed the DREAM Act. However, he did agree with part of the legislation which allowed those who came to the United States illegally as children to serve in the U.S. Military to earn their citizenship, just as foreign nationals are today allowed to do the same.
Furthermore, Newt has proposed giving local communities the authority to allow those with long established roots in the neighborhood a legal residency status, but not citizenship. Newt believes local communities are at a better vantage point to determine if those there illegally should stay or go. Under this system, we will send home those who are not self-sufficient, who have no family or community ties and quickly deport those who have committed criminal and other destructive acts, while providing minimal disruption to families and communities.
Read Newt’s 10 step immigration plan here.
http://www.newt.org/solutions/immigration
http://www.newt.org/answers#Ryan
Paul Ryan (and the House GOP’s) Medicare Plan
Like Ryan and the House GOP, Newt supports a premium support model for Medicare. However, he wants seniors to have the choice to opt into the new system or to stay in traditional Medicare.
Newt agrees wholeheartedly with Rep. Ryan that we must give our seniors more choices than the current one-size-fits-all Medicare model. Both concur that creating the opportunity for seniors to buy private insurance is the key to both improving care and lowering costs.
The one key difference is that under Newt’s plan, as outlined in his 21st Century Contract with America, seniors will also have the choice to stay in the current Medicare system or choose a private insurance plan with support from the government to pay the premiums. The other difference is that Newt believes that seniors should have this option starting next year, not in ten years.
Q: So why did Newt use the term “right wing social engineering” on Meet the Press when discussing these proposed changes to Medicare?
Gingrich is opposed to any political party imposing dramatic change against the consent of the governed. Afterwards, Newt quickly admitted that his choice of words was too extreme, and he apologized to Congressman Ryan shortly thereafter.
In response to the host’s hypothetical question of whether Republicans should change Medicare even if there is public opposition, Gingrich’s response was no you should not. One of Newt’s basic governing philosophies is that government should offer a better alternative to existing entitlement programs that seniors can freely choose. Gingrich is opposed to any political party imposing dramatic change against the consent of the governed. Afterwards, Newt quickly admitted that his choice of words was too extreme, and he apologized to Congressman Ryan shortly thereafter. Newt regards Paul Ryan as one of the biggest innovators in Washington, D.C. and he deeply admires the seriousness and boldness of his historic Path to Prosperity budget.
More spam from the campaign....are you one of Noot’s paid twitter twits?
Newt’s own words are “leftist”??? Stuff your campaign propaganda and the crap you cut-n-paste from it...I need no lessons from you, junior.
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.