Posted on 02/16/2012 10:10:29 PM PST by VinL
If anyone needed proof that there's only one intellectual heavyweight in the GOP race, this news proves it. Here's the breaking news: [ Romney, Santorum Paul drop out of the GOP debate].
TRANSLATION: Mitt Romney, Rick Santorum and Ron Paul are afraid of getting bested by the best debater in the GOP field.
Here's the reality: Speaker Gingrich has frequently mopped the floor with these candidates' backsides in the debates. Can anyone picture Ronald Reagan backing out of the opportunity to debate an opponent?
It's true that this "strips Mr. Gingrich of his preferred mode of campaigning," it gives him a different opportunity to belittle his opponents. Why would Mitt 'Mr. Inevitable' Romney and Rick 'Mr. Momentum' Santorum run from the opportunity to debate 'Down in the polls' Newt Gingrich?
They've now told the world that they're afraid to debate the smartest conservative on that stage. Think of how this looks to the average voter. These candidates aren't projecting an image of strength. They're projecting inferiority. They're projecting a lack of confidence.
Conversely, the image that Newt is projecting is that of being the superior solutions guy, the intellectual heavyweight and the man who won't back down from a fight. That's the image a winner projects...
Real men fight battles. Instead of fighting, these 'gentlemen' chose to run and hide. In hiding, these candidates showed they don't have the fortitude it takes to be the leader of the free world. If they can't stand up to a candidate, why think that they'll stand up to Putin, Ahmadinejad or Chavez?
(Excerpt) Read more at examiner.com ...
The debate is on TV. It's a great way to get out a message to the voters of all the states that you are trying to win.
So what is the right number of debates?
Pick a number. How many have we had?
I don’t vote for a debater. I have every expectation that Obama will not debate Gingrich fairly. He will either refuse to debate, or will lie during the debate. Of course Gingrich may lie too, but the general rule is “the first liar doesnt have a chance”.
I will vote for anyone over Obama.
I don’t think the 1994 contract with America was conservative. One provision, term limits, was (1) never enacted and (2) was rather a liberal position.
Many of the attack ads on Santorum are from “Newt’s” PAC. Many of Newt’s recent comments have been negative about Santorum. Was it really worth the risk? Conventional wisdom is to never debate the guy in third, especially when you are more than double his numbers in the polls.
Then you should have written a different post, you made them sound like a team of three.
You did not explain why they all chickened out and avoided a chance to debate each other and argue their candidacy’s view on the issues.
Please point to one- just one, attack ad by Newt. In Co, Mn and Mo- Newt ran 3 ads- 2 visits- he didn’t even campaign.
Ads are on “you tube”— please give me a link to Newt’s attack ad on Rick. Thanks
Vin
Incidentally “negative Newt” just said this about Rick:
“Rick’s having a great week and I think you have to respect him for it and he’s worked hard for it and we’ll see how the next two weeks evolve,” said one time front runner, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich.
“I want conservative solutions that are tried, tested and true.”
I have never once heard a plan or strategy from Romney or Santorum’s interventions in ANY debate . Other than platitudes like “fight for the soul of America” (Romney dixit) or “The ultimate homeland security is fight for the family values” (Santorum dixit).
Only Newt did present extensively solutions for redressing the economy, creating jobs, dismantling the over-bloated federal bureaucracy, enforcing the National Security and fundamentally changing the foreign policy, as the following collection of his interventions in the debates prove.
CNN National Security Debate - 11-22-2011 - Newt Gingrich
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_rphLhILva8
Newt Gingrich on jobs, spending, taxes, social security and healthcare, September, 2011
http://www.newt.org/solutions/
“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.
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.” —– Newt Gingrich, at the 2011 NRA’s Celebration of American Values Leadership Forum
The one I was thinking of turns out to be Newt’s staff. The headline attributed the comment to Newt and it is on his website as part of the content. Then I have no idea, other than his advisers think it is wrong, as to why they don’t have a fun debate.
Real men fight battles. Instead of fighting, these 'gentlemen' chose to run and hide. In hiding, these candidates showed they don't have the fortitude it takes to be the leader of the free world.
THE LEADER OF THE FREE WORLD!!!! This is the soberest hire we'll ever, EVER make. Shouldn't we loan it to the most experienced one who doesn't back down?
A leader LEADS. Why vote for a coward???
GO NEWT!!!
All of these guys are supposed to debate in Mesa.
Quit calling Gingrich a chicken for not being willing to debate Obama if the wrong network moderates. Everyone has reasons. Sometimes they are chicken and sometimes they have other reasons. But you need to quit running Newt down.
First you said that the three chickened out together because Gingrich was no longer a threat, which made no sense because they still should have wanted to advance their own arguments against each other, now you are claiming that they all (except Newt) chickened out from debating each other because it is the wrong network?
Then you make up lies about me saying something bizarre about Newt, I guess that goes with the childish name calling.
Yep. You are a complete idiot.
Enjoyable. But stupid.
What is with the uncalled for personal attacks?
“I want conservative solutions that are tried, tested and true.”
Well then Newt is your guy. Look at the 80’s and 90’s.
Tried, tested and true.
JB
LOL, after the Florida debates where Newt didn’t shine, the Newt fans were all saying that the candidates were stupid doing debates with the MSM. It was time to stop it.
Well...now, all the candidates but Newt are bad for declining one more MSM run debate.
Could it be that Newt’s only hope is a debate? The MSM already showed us that the debates could be controlled.
Newt best check out another place to shine other than a debate. Obama and the MSM will carefully control any debate with the opposition.
I got a call from a Pauly and I just said I am not interested. It Pi**es me off that they got my name and phone number when I attended a TEA PARTY rally to promote Clint Didier against Patty Murray for Senate. It didn't take me long to realize that our supposed tea party here is Libertarians. I haven't gone to another party.
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.