Posted on 11/16/2009 6:44:33 AM PST by MNJohnnie
Doug Hoffman just told Glenn Beck they are 2000 votes behind in NY 23with 10,000 absentee votes left to count.
This is NOT over.
Newt didn’t pick Dede. The GOP did. As Newt explained on Hannity, his job was to support whomever the GOP selected, and he did. I accept that explanation. What was he supposed to do? Tell the GOP to F-off? Why aren’t you going after or blaming/accusing the ones that actually picked Dede here? I’m curious.
Did you see my post above?
| > How could he have changed from not just a good > conservative, but a great conservative, to a RINO? It's called being a Washingtonian for too long like Newt and other once-Conservatives have. It tends to corrupt the soul, if not toward Criminality and Corruption, then toward the shameless practice of another “C” word — Compromise. There was a time for most Conservatives that Newt could do no wrong. But like so many others steeped in the Compromising-RNC, they're unable to see that the ENTIRE nation THIRSTS for Conservatism RIGHT NOW in American history. Supporting RINOs is responsible for handing the GOP the minority in the first place, as well as the slippery slope to Progressivism that the nation is enduring under Obama today! Yeah, yeah, I know Newt is trying to build up enough “R's” across the nation to take away the Speakership from Pelosi. The Blue Dogs in 2009 have stymied Pelosi and Reid enough to make my last point:
I'll support a true Conservative Democrat before I'll vote for a Liberal Republican.Most Conservatives today that I know feel the same way — PRINCIPLES OVER PARTY! |
Newt is more despicable than Arlen Specter. We may get ObamaCare thanks to Newt and Dede.
Look, you’re preaching to the choir here re: politician corruption. But I’m really trying hard to figure out why Newt is being blamed, hated and targeted so rabidly here.
From what little I’ve read, he seems logical and reasonable in his explanations re: support for Dede and his enviro stance.
What ELSE has he done that is so bad? I’m all ears (cyber speaking). If there’s really something stinky/rino about him, I want to know.
Congressman Billybob
| > What ELSE has he done that is so bad? Well, in addition to his endorsing Liberal Republican, I think many Conservatives find Newt's duplicity of having an affair on his wife, especially DURING the Clinton/Lewinsky affair as VERY hypocritical and morally-repugnant:
Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich Acknowledges Having Affair During Clinton Impeachment
WASHINGTON — Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich was having an extramarital affair even as he led the charge against President Clinton over the Monica Lewinsky affair, he acknowledged in an interview with a conservative Christian group.
“The honest answer is yes,” Gingrich, a potential 2008 Republican presidential candidate, said in an interview with Focus on the Family founder James Dobson to be aired Friday, according to a transcript provided to The Associated Press. “There are times that I have fallen short of my own standards. There's certainly times when I've fallen short of God's standards.”
Gingrich argued in the interview, however, that he should not be viewed as a hypocrite for pursuing Clinton's infidelity |
Sorry, but legal scholars, both conservative and liberal, have pretty much agreed on this one for a couple of centuries now. Nowhere in the Constitution does it say anything about state courts being tge judge of the election of House members, whereas there is a specific, unambiguoug clause in Article I that provides that each House is the judge of the election of its members. James Madison et al couldn’t have made it any clearer had they drawn a picture. I know that it sounds counterintuitive that the House gets to decide election contests involving House members, but that’s what the Framers wanted and wrote into the Constitution. If you want to give state courts the last word, you should ask your Congressmen to ibtroduce a constitutional amendment, but, frankly, there are la couple of dozen other things that I would prefer to change about the Constitution first.
No, I believe you are confusing several issues. Let's look at your previous post.
First you incorrectly say that the House has the final say if a member meets the Constitutional requirements...
And then you correctly say that the Supreme Court has the final say if a member meets the constitutional requirements....
So you do admit that the SC has the final say on the constitutional requirements...and of course they do.
As I said in my previous post, the Constitution says that "the House of Representatives shall be composed of Members chosen every second Year by the People". The House has to follow those rule when they judge the election and if they don't the final arbiter on constitutional requirements -- as you pointed out -- is of course the SC.
Ok. So he endorsed Dede AFTER the NRCC chose/selected her. Again, what was he supposed to do? Tell the NRCC/RNC/GOP to F-off? He was supposed to endorse/support who they picked and he did. Why aren’t you and Frantzie going after, blaming, targeting the NRCC for having picked that liberal RINO? I’ve asked Frantzie that same question but he doesn’t seem to want to address THAT issue. I wonder why. Perhaps you can or will, eh?
And again, I don’t CARE what Newt’s personal life is, was or will be. Adultery is rampant in today’s society. Let he who is without sin cast the first stone. Why am I betting that that wouldn’t (couldn’t) be you?
| And again, I don’t CARE what Newt’s personal life is, was or will be. Adultery is rampant in today’s society. Let he who is without sin cast the first stone. Why am I betting that that wouldn’t (couldn’t) be you? We all commit sin on a daily basis — we're human. Adultery may be rampant in SOME demographic areas, but I'm NOT sure I agree with that blanket statement. There are some who still believes marriage is a SOLID vow of trust to your best friend. When that bond is broken, while it DOES reinforce that man IS mortal and imperfect, it also reaffirms that someone BROKE their promise to their most-trusted friend and confidant — their spouse — often formed in the house of God. However, this is not a religious discussion, but a political one ... Abe Lincoln once said:
If you once forfeit the confidence of your fellow citizens, you can never regain their respect and esteem.
To borrow some of the words of old Honest Abe ... to many Conservatives, Newt has lost the confidence, respect and esteem of his fellow Conservative citizens. If he were to act like a Conservative ALL of the time, instead of when it's convenient, I'm more apt to know he's a man of principle who CAN be TRUSTED. I'm sure other Conservatives might feel the same way, too ... |
off topic but please everyone......lets keep using “global warming” and not the “climate change” they’re trying to indoctrinate us with now....
Don’t count your votes until the liberal judges do.
And as for my main question to you, I see you managed to ignore it just AS pointedly as did Frantzie. Odd, that. You both seem to have the same ailment.
"Why aren’t you and Frantzie going after, blaming, targeting the NRCC for having picked that liberal RINO?"
didn’t al gore un-concede during the 2000 election? He conceded at first, but when he found out how close it it, it pursue legal action for the florida recount
No, you are reading way too much into Powell v. McCormack (assuming that you’ve read it). The case is about Adam Clayton Powell, Rangel’s corrupt predecessor in the House. The Democrat House leadership wanted to expel him for corruption, but didn’t have the 2/3 needed to do so, so they instead tried to exclude him for corruption by simple majority vote. The Supreme Court ruled that while each house is the sole judge of the qualifications, elections and returns of is members, the House could not add to the qualifications set forth in the Constitution, and being honest and non-corrupt are not constitutional qualifications.
But don’t take my word for it; read Powell v. McCormack and the sources cited therein.
I believe that was before the military vote, they had a different postmark date than the rest of the absentee ballots.
Was he in the race when the absentee ballots were sent out?
The GOP just needs to run on defending IT.
He will be out next year.
We had the same problem in the Sugar Land congressional election in 2006.
Delay resigned.
The GOP had to have a write-in candidate (who almost won).
A Democrat won.
He was gone the next election.
The District itself may not even exist after 2010.
So many people miss this point these days.
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.