FREE REPUBLIC WILL BE BETTER THAN EVER!
We need new servers
Click the Pic
Support Free Republic
Posted on 02/21/2012 3:44:56 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
Oklahoma City - According to Republican Presidential candidate and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, defeating Obama at the November poll is a matter of urgent national security because he is the "most dangerous president in modern American history."
CBS News reports Gingrich said this while discussing the threat of Iran before a large and enthusiastic crowd of about 4,000 people in a basket ball arena at the Oral Roberts University campus on Monday. Gingrich said defeating Obama was "...in fact, a duty of national security...Because the fact is, he is incapable of defending the United States.” USA Today reports he said about Obama, "You can't put a gun rack in a volt."
ABC News reports that Gingrich described Obama, who ordered raids that killed Osama bin Laden and most of al-Qaeda's top leaders, as particularly weak in facing the threat of radical Islamic terrorists. According to MSNBC, Gingrich told his youthful audience that they were facing the risk "someday in your lifetime of losing an American city," that is, American cities are facing the threat of being wiped out in a terrorist attack because Obama's administration refuses to acknowledge the reality of radical Islamists willing to harm the U.S.
CBS News comments, however, that in-spite of Gingrich's assessment of Obama on foreign policy and fighting terrorism, the American public awards him generally high marks.
But Gingrich, expressing his views, said: “All of you should be very deeply concerned about national security. Barack Obama is the most dangerous president in modern American history."
He said that because the Obama administration was unwilling to acknowledge the threat from radical Islamists it was displaying "willful dishonesty" in its account of what motivated the suspected terrorist from Morocco, who was arrested on Friday by FBI agents for allegedly plotting a suicide bomb attack on the Capitol.
Gingrich, according to ABC News, said: “Any honest person knows what motivated the person who came here.This is not smearing everybody, this is not Islamaphobia. If we can’t have honest conversation about radical Islamists and we can’t figure out — there is a very specific group of people across the planet — there’s a very specific desire to kill us.”
Gingrich was possibly criticizing the statement by a U.S. attorney assigned to the case that said the Moroccan man "allegedly believed he was working with al-Qaeda." In Gingrich's view, such statement reflects an unwillingness in the Obama administration to say exactly what motivated the Moroccan because, according to Gingrich, under the Obama administration, it would be "highly inappropriate to describe what motivated (him) because that would somehow be politically incorrect."
Gingrich said further that Obama's administration was "intellectually disarmed" and "morally disarmed" and thus incapable of saying in plain words the threats that face the United States.
Gingrich also accused Obama's administration of an anti-Israel policy. He said: “The president wants to unilaterally weaken the United States, he wants to cut the aide to Israel for its anti-ballistic missile defense, he refuses to take Iran seriously. We are in a world that is very dangerous. And I say this to those of you who represent the next generation because you’re going to bear the consequences.”
MSNBC reports Gingrich, speaking a few hours after the White House announced that Obama would meet the Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu next month, said: "No American can second-guess an Israeli prime minister on the matter of survival." He said, therefore, Obama's message to the Iranians should make it clear to them that, "...you need to stop your program before you get hit, because you should be under no illusions. If you refuse to stop your program, long before it is completed you are going to get hit, and we are not in any way going to stop the Israelis from defending themselves."
Gingrich campaigning ahead of Super Tuesday USA Today reports Gingrich has lost ground in polls since Rick Santorum surged to the forefront of the Republican presidential nomination race in recent weeks. Gingrich has not been campaigning in Michigan due to hold a primary on February 28, rather he has been raising money and campaigning in Oklahoma.
Oklahoma is one of the several states that will hold GOP primaries on March 6, Super Tuesday. According to The Atlantic Journal Constitution (AJC), Gingrich is looking to Oklahoma as "fertile ground." He is "betting that Oklahoma Republicans....are culturally similar to their Georgia counterparts..." The AJC reports Gingrich is hoping to "score big" on Super Tuesday and revive his campaign that has scored a primary victory only in South Carolina.
Gingrich held rallies in Tulsa and Oklahoma City on Monday and will address the Oklahoma Legislature on Tuesday morning. Gingrich's hope to do well in Oklahoma is hinged on the fact that it is one of the "reddest" states in the United States. About 70 percent of Oklahoma Republicans identify themselves as evangelical Christians. AJC quotes GOP pollster Pat McFerrron, saying: "Really what this battle is in Oklahoma for the next two weeks is between Gingrich and Santorum to see if any one of them can consolidate the anti-Romney vote."
Hat-tip to Txrangerette!
I’ll buy that.
Hat-tip to Txrangerette!
AND "cutepuppy!"
Bumped to you!
Truth!
“He (Gingrich) said that because the Obama administration was unwilling to acknowledge the threat from radical Islamists it was displaying “willful dishonesty” in its account of what motivated the suspected terrorist from Morocco, who was arrested on Friday by FBI agents for allegedly plotting a suicide bomb attack on the Capitol...
...Gingrich was possibly criticizing the statement by a U.S. attorney assigned to the case that said the Moroccan man “allegedly believed he was working with al-Qaeda.” In Gingrich’s view, such statement reflects an unwillingness in the Obama administration to say exactly what motivated the Moroccan because, according to Gingrich, under the Obama administration, it would be “highly inappropriate to describe what motivated (him) because that would somehow be politically incorrect.””
More like, “because that would somehow be detrimental to Al Qaeda”.
“Most dangerous president in American history.”
At the 34:00 part of his speech (just prior to taking questions).
And the Nigerian who put this column together from news reports, knows it’s true.
Newt mentions Nigerian Christians being murdered in the segment about national security starting at 34:00 of the LINK in Post #1.
Newt is 100% correct.
Obama is a threat to National Security.
We cannot exist for another 4 years under this arrogant, ignorant,Marxist.
While you were out of pocket yesterday, this story on Newt’s speech was posted, but I believe the source and the headline was a bit different. In fact it was posted in slightly different form by two different FReepers. Not complaining, mind you...it can’t get too much publicity.
On another thread, it was noted that Santorum spent the past few days talking about...well, we know what types of topics he was mainly speaking on, so I won’t belabor the point here.
Meanwhile, this Newt speech is so true and on point.
Only the overlay of Bush-Cheney national security policies through these Obama years have helped stave off disaster.
But time is running out.
Newt is the best leader we have among those still running, hands down.
“Dugan also plans to streamline the number of projects the agency pursues; in fiscal 2011, DARPA oversaw 230 separate R&D programs. For 2013, that figure would drop by more than a quarter, to 169, the article says, adding that instead the agency plans to spend $50 million to push the envelope on hypersonics, the ability to race through the air at five times the speed of sound or more.”
http://defensesystems.com/articles/2012/02/14/agg-darpa-keeps-budget.aspx
The ‘people’ numbers may stay, but ‘that’s all.’
And that’s all I am going to say about that.
If Obama is a national security threat, we have two other branches of government to prosecute that threat.
Newt is right
however, where was he in 2008, when Uriah Heep McCain the putative head of the GOP was sniveling and groveling to the press because he thought they liked him, and telling us, “my friends”, that obama was a swell guy
Obama and his “science and technology” czar (John. P. Holdren — co-author of, “Population Bomb”) are dismantling our defenses and our technology pool — while transferring that budget to his supporters and crippling national programs.
....DARPA
The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency dodges a (high-tech) bullet. As Smart Planet points out, it loses a very modest $1.4 million from its nearly $3 billion budget. But some individual projects are losing out: “Machine intelligence” is losing funding, while an unnamed “classified” project is being cut down to $3 million from $107 million. (Oh, to know what is going on with that endeavor.) A new $50 million priority for DARPA is hypersonics, which would allow for travel at more than five times the speed of sound. A plane that takes off and lands vertically and a “counter-laser technologies program” also receive more funds, according to Aviation Week.
Clean Energy
Obama hopes for $325 million to go to DARPA’s Department of Energy cousin, E-ARPA.
Unmanned Aerial Vehicles
The Pentagon budget released a couple of weeks ago contains some good news, some bad for UAVs, better known as drones. The Global Hawk surveillance drone from Northrop Grunman, which was designed to fly at 60,000 feet, has been canceled. But other cuts to the military—including a plan to reduced the number of troops by as many as 100,000—means that there will be more reliance on drones than ever before. In addition to surveillance and fighter UAVs, “sea-based unmanned systems” will be funded, too. For one thing, as Marketplace points out, drones are cheaper to build than fighter planes.”....
There are a few speeches in my lifetime that a phrase from which will never be forgotten. One is Lyndon B. Johnson saying “I will take from the haves and give to the have-nots”.
Another phrase is when Barack Hussein Obama’s oponent Juan McLaim said to a lady in the audience “oh you have nothing to fear from an Obama presidency!!!”. THAT my dear is the day that the GOP LOST that election.
Don’t EVER forget what McCain did to this country. The GOP IS part of this problem. It’s up to us to solve this mess.
"Across the planet today, the forces of religious repression are on the march and this administration has intellectually disarmed, it has morally disarmed, it is incapable of describing what threatens us."
Let the games begin! Start packin' your stuff Hussein. It's over! You, truly, are unelectable!
“crippling national programs”
All I am going to say in print
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.