Posted on 12/01/2011 10:17:53 AM PST by Maceman
I don't have time to write about my reaction, but I would be interested in the perspective of my fellow Freepers.
Personally, I thought Newt was VERY impressive, and for a whole hour.
I still haven't decided whom to support (not that it matters, since the Massachusetts primary is not going be a game changer anyway).
I have been in Cain's camp, but I am reassessing in light of what I perceive as the Cain team's mis-management of the whole sex attack thing.
Also, rightly or wrongly, unless Cain manages to win a very sympathetic public vindication in a very short time I am seriously doubting his ability to continue in this race.
I'm sad about that. But I was greatly impressed by Newt last nite for a lot of reasons I don't have time to get into just now.
What did alla y'alls think?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Newt_Gingrich
The list just posted against Newt was a small fraction of the countless other good things Newt did and was edited on purpose to make him look as bad as possible.
The above link shows Newt’s actual current stands
and also shows his conservative strengths and logical ability to run government. But above all else, it is a more fair and not so dishonest comparison as well.
A real answer! Thanks, PF.
Simply to help people decern, and not fall for the Establishment’s next Progressive just because he/she is not Obama. Know them by their Fruits, not their Words.
Sarah Palin quoted Plato in her book too, remember??
Yours appears to be the Angle/O'Donnell/Cain/Palin mindset which is very, very strong on FR. It's the mindset which holds that naivete and artlessness are not only acceptable in a candidate, they are downright required. Even a hint of scholarly attainment in a candidate is despised.
This is an understandable reaction to the we-know-better-than-you hyper academicism of the Obama administration. But it's an overreaction, and in my opinion it's gone way too far.
I haven’t picked a candidate because as a WA voter, who knows who I’ll actually get to vote for. I found Newt very impressive last night. It will be ugly if he gets the nomination, but I loved the idea of him following Obama around a rebutting what he says.
It’s going to be an ugly, hard election no matter who our candidate is.
On a sidenote, I found Romney’s snarkiness on Fox exciting. He knows he’s stuck at 25 percent. He looked less like the annoited one and more like the floundering one.
Oh dear.
Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear.
Shall we hang him, or will nothing less than drawing and quartering suffice???
In all honesty, there needs to be a more open and pragmatic discussion around here. Above all else, honesty, full disclosure and respect for each others positions.
Must be the same company that has created all the fake support for him today.
Looks like it's working.
He’s the only one so far that kicks Obama and the media in the nuts regularly and doesnt sound like an imbecile while doing so. A debate with him and Obama would have Zero curling up in the fetal position begging for his teleprompters. LOL.
I don't put Newt on a pedestal at all. I leave that sort of thing for more naive Freepers to do with their candidates of choice.
Newt is not my hero. I don't go to sleep with his picture under my pillow.
To me he is simply the least imperfect of those who are liable to wind up on my primary ballot.
If DeMint, Daniels, Barbour, Ryan, or Jindal were in the race, Newt would not be my first choice.
But they aren't and he is.
In 2007, Gingrich released the book A Contract with the Earth, co-written with Terry Maple. In the book, Gingrich presented his policies for a market-based approach to environmentalism that incentivizes conservation and green technology, rather than relying on regulations or litigation.[49] In particular, Gingrich has proposed using monetary prizes and tax incentives to spur environmentally friendly innovations, such as hydrogen engines, 100-mile-per-gallon conventional fuel engines and ethanol fuels that do not rely on corn or cane sugar.[47]
Gingrich has expressed skepticism in interviews that mankind is significantly altering the climate, yet supports curbing carbon emissions as an act of prudence. Like many of his environmental positions, he believes this is best accomplished through market-incentives, rather than taxes or cap-and-trade plans. He has opposed the Kyoto Protocol, stating that the protocols unfairly favor Europe, China and India to the disadvantage of the U.S.[47]
In answer to your question, yes I saw some of it and was sorry not to have caught it from the beginning. And, yes it was impressive :)
As Rush said yesterday [paraphrasing]: “Of course none of the Republicans running are perfect. I’m not running.”
Repeatedly posting this list isn’t meant to encourage legitimate debate. It’s lazy.
I open to a refutation of any of the facts presented.
So far all I’ve gotten for feedback is a few complaining about the list being posted and many more giving thanks for providing the list.
[That’s a huge list. Where did you get it?]
Looks like a list Romney might carry around in his pocket
I have not chosen any candidate yet. But we must remember that Reagan was once a democrat. People change...
I would be very concerned about the potential for a Herman Cain-type bimbo eruption to be sprung on him after the convention.
A debate with him and Obama would have Zero curling up in the fetal position begging for his teleprompters.
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.