Newt and the neocons / A frightening view of U.S. power

Mpls (red)Star Tribune ^ | 4/25/03 | 3 idiots ans a moron

[Valin]

Newt Gingrich should return to the political obscurity that he earned for himself nearly five years ago. The United States doesn't need another dose of the divisive venom he spews, and which he demonstrated anew Tuesday with a vicious, unwarranted attack on the State Department and Secretary of State Colin Powell.

[goldstategop]

Ehhh... Leftie upset mainstream conservatives are in the drivers' seat? I guess his gloom means the rest of us are enjoying beautiful weather.

[UCFRoadWarrior]

The left doesnt know the proper definition of the term "neo-conservative"

Traditionally, a neo-conservative was a liberal or moderate who becomes more conversative. A neo-con is not someone who is already conservative and is strongly conservative.

It is kind of interesting that Newt hasnt addressed this "neo-con" misuse....he has been a professor of political science at various colleges

[Russ]

This is another example of people not knowing how to engage is honest debate. Newt, whether one agrees with him or not, brings out a point of view shared by many and is accused of spewing "devisive venom". How does this kind of language contribute to the healthy debate of an issue?

We are also seeing this in the comments about Rick Santorum. Attack the person, don't debate the issue. This is a dangerous road we are traleling.

[Eric in the Ozarks]

Newt was always too full of himself for my tastes. If the Mpls Redstar wants to use him as a strawman, so be it.

[billbears]

Traditionally, a neo-conservative was a liberal or moderate who becomes more conversative. A neo-con is not someone who is already conservative and is strongly conservative.

First generation of neo-con that's true. Second generation of neocons I've seen however are pretty much Republican. One aspect of a neocon is anyone who instead of wanting to limit the size and power of government chooses to use the size and power of government to further their 'conservative' initiatives

[gcruse]

The United States doesn't need another dose of the divisive venom he spews, and which he demonstrated anew Tuesday with a vicious, unwarranted attack

Jeez, I had to go to the site to see if this was a letter to the editor. It isn't.
What kind of journalism uses incendiary language like that? Somebody
needs a hug, then firing.

[Jorge]

Newt Gingrich should return to the political obscurity that he earned for himself nearly five years ago. The United States doesn't need another dose of the divisive venom he spews, and which he demonstrated anew Tuesday with a vicious, unwarranted attack on the State Department and Secretary of State Colin Powell.

I saw Newt's entire dialogue. It was thoughtful, insightful and challenging.

Leave it up to a left wing wanker to describe it as a personal attack on Powell or "divisive venom". It was neither.

[okie01]

"Powell did his job like the good soldier he is, but what a humiliation he suffered when much of what he offered was proven wrong."

Is anybody aware of what might have been "proven wrong"?

Or does the Minneapolis Red Star-Tribune know where Saddam hid the stuff?

[Valin]

What kind of journalism uses incendiary language like that?

No No No! Any resemblance between journalism and the red Stars editorial page is purely coincidental.
This is a rag that the NY Times called "loony left" a couple of years ago.

[gcruse]

Boy, that newspaper is the awfulest!

[jazzyjen97]

What's interesting is that neo-conservatives, don't call themselves neo-conservative, but others in office neo-conservative as if it's some kind of disease infecting everyone except themselves. Even though they hold the same exact ideology as the person they're referred to as neo-conservative.
I find that very interesting.

[skeeter]

Right. Gingrich was directing his criticism at endemic problems within the State Dept, not at individuals, and pointed out the consistency of the nature of the mistakes over several administrations.

He also said that liberal attempts to make hey of his criticism are indicative of why honestly addressing problems in DC is impossible these days.

[familyofman]

How different were Newt's comments regarding "diplomacy" failures prior to Operation Iraqi Freedom from those made by Sen. Daschle's on the same topic? It seems there might be some truth in at least one of their viewpoints.

[Jorge]

"Powell did his job like the good soldier he is, but what a humiliation he suffered when much of what he offered was proven wrong."

Is anybody aware of what might have been "proven wrong"?

Or does the Minneapolis Red Star-Tribune know where Saddam hid the stuff?

Good point. They have only begun searching for it..and we also have the reports from the Iraqi scientist claiming much of it was destroyed or moved immediately before the war.

Of course, regardless of how long it takes..if WMDs are EVER found..Powell will be proven right the Iraq had them at the time we went to war.

Of course there are examples where it looks like Powell was misled...by the French and others at the UN, and perhaps by Turkey.

[okie01]

"Of course, regardless of how long it takes..if WMDs are EVER found..Powell will be proven right the Iraq had them at the time we went to war."

What the liberal media insists on overlooking is that we know Saddam had WMD. Everybody knew! And they have known for almost five years.

Recall that, before they were withdrawn from Iraq in Nov '98 (so that Willie could wag the dog in the face of an impeachment campaign), the UN weapons inspectors had confirmed the existence of "hundreds of tons of chemical weapons" and "thousands of liters of biological weapons".

Thus, the objective of Blix's team was to find out what had happened to Saddam's WMD -- NOT to determine whether he had any.

The Democrats and liberal media ignore these facts because they find them inconvenient.