Posted on 11/21/2011 11:32:24 AM PST by Fred
I can’t understand why Newt Gingrich is getting such a pass on his Freddie Mac consulting. He claims to have been a historian for this outfit? FHLMC needs a historian like the U.S.A. needs a Department of Education, like Europe needs a common currency, like … like … I dunno, like Michelle Obama needs another $12,000 accessory.
I sputtered about this on last week’s Radio Derb:
Newt’s trying to ju-jitsu the thing, telling us that his experience as a shill for Freddie Mac gave him valuable insider understanding of governmental affairs. Isn’t that what we want in a candidate, valuable insider understanding of governmental affairs? Quote from Newt, on the campaign trail in Iowa Wednesday, quote: “It reminds people that I know a great deal about Washington. We just tried four years of amateur ignorance, and it didn’t work very well. So having someone who actually knows Washington might be a really good thing.”
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...
WHAT?? Newt single-handedly changed the nation with the Contract with America in 1994. Listen, you have a right not to support him, but don’t you dare minimize his contribution to the Republican Party.
The eager wide-eyed expression on Newt's face is priceless.
http://okhenderson.com/2011/11/16/newt-responds-to-1-6-m-freddie-mac-payment-audio/
I’ll wait for your apology. Man up.
Newt’s a doer not a talker. He’s the only person who actually pushed through balanced budgets.
I just don’t see Cain, Santorum, Bachmann, etc. being able to deliver.
I’m attending the GOP debate tomorrow night, so I’ll see what I can get out of the candidates.
I posted from it. Your issue is with it.
It’s just like the cartoon upthread. And look out the window in the cartoon to see how it ends.
“READ. THE. ARTICLE. I posted from it. Your issue is with it.”
I suppose I should have expected weasel words.
if you can do it in a way that is financially sound, every American should be interested in expanding housing opportunities for people
We have BANKS to figure that out, or at least we used to until the government started telling them to lend money to people who did not meet bank standards in the name of the racial fairness that Newt is extolling here. We don't need Washington wonks or NGOs to expand home ownership - they made the problem worse. Newt takes a government-centric view of things, and that is exactly the opposite of what we need.
Not true at all. Both are smart guys but when it comes to politicking Clinton rolled over Newt like he was an amateur just brought up from the town council. Newt's own personal failings at the time didn't help things but even without that he still got rolled. I wouldn't vote for Newt unless I was so convinced staying home would turn the election that I would vomit and drag myself to the polls.
Excuse me, nitwit - how is it weasel words to say I pasted the quote verbatim from the linked article? You are the one accusing me specifically of twisting Newt's words - a very specific allegation. And now you're too puny a punk to retreact that slur when I pointed out what happened.
What is it with this Populist insanity, that in order to correct this vast network of governmental ambiguity that has been created over the last 100 years, that we can best do so by getting rid of all the experienced professional people, and replacing them with complete amateurs and trainees.
That would be like firing all the Generals in the Military, and replacing them with boot camp civilians. Imagine all the wars we would win by doing something that stupid? Well, what you are saying we need to do, is essentially the same thing.
The Newt-haters are ridiculous.
"Derbyshire has differed from his fellow writers at National Review on many subjects. For example, Derbyshire supported Michael Schiavo's position in the Terri Schiavo case, ridiculed George W. Bush's "itty-bitty tax cut, paid for by dumping a slew of federal debt on your children and grandchildren", has derided Bush in general for being too sure of his religious convictions and for his "rich-kid-ness", dismisses small-government conservatism as unlikely to ever take hold (although he is not unsympathetic to it), has called for immediate U.S. withdrawal from Iraq (but favored the invasion), opposes market reforms or any other changes in Social Security, is pro-choice on abortion, supports euthanasia in a fairly wide range of circumstances, and has suggested that he might (in a time of international crisis) vote for Hillary Clinton as president."
How many ways and how many times can you mischaracterize the sentence? “Every American should be interested in expanding housing opportunities.” Explain to me how that sentence is so doamning in your eyes, to Newt’s position on the eceonomy, why to reign in Freedie and Fanny, and how your repeated efforts as spittlgeist to try and assassinate Newt via msicharacterization is hleping whom you support for the nomination. BTW, whom was it again that you want to support by assassiantion of Newt’s character?
Perhaps because the professionals have screwed everything up so royally, because their professional training is so divorced from the real world?
Somehow, I just can’t imagine Jon Huntsman’s name on one of those bottles. Just sayin’ ...
I guess I lived through a different housing meltdown than you did. Silly me.
Newt is pushing good intentions. We all know how that road is paved and where it took us. He is rationalizing taking money from one of the key players in the meltdown.
to Newt’s position on the eceonomy, why to reign in Freedie and Fanny, and how your repeated efforts as spittlgeist to try and assassinate Newt via msicharacterization is hleping whom you support for the nomination.
I am neutral now. I just don't think Newt is the right answer. And I never realized that pointing out all of the times that Newt has stood with Democrats, and all of the Beltway money he has taken, is assasination. I always thought it was the underlying truth. I guess you just don't like it.
It's a Diet Coke. Caffeine-free.
Ah, so in your mental tagteam you are now prepared to tell us how the sentence is so damning. Perhaps you will also tell us the ‘deeper’ meaning of the sentence, how it reveals some dark side in Newt Gingrich? Spitting incessantly in the end exposes your lack of epth, your lack of understanding, and it works to aid Barry the Bassturd by suppressing conservativeturnout and destroying the momentum oc conservatism to get the coomie bassturds out of office. But then I suspect n00bs like you know that and it is why you are here pretending to be in such agreement with any who will continue the cirular firing squad. Sadly, the poor deluded posters do not see you for what you are, n00b.
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.