Add Responsibility2nd.
“Personal responsibility extends to the purchase of health insurance. Citizens should not be able to cheat their neighbors by not buying insurance, particularly when they can afford it, and expect others to pay for their care when they need it.”That doesn't sound very conservative.
“I think if you have mandatory carbon caps combined with a trading system, much like we did with sulfur, and if you have a tax-incentive program for investing in the solutions, that there’s a package there that’s very, very good. And frankly, it’s something I would strongly support.”#5 While he was in Congress, Newt Gingrich co-sponsored 418 bills with Nancy Pelosi.
None of the former Freddie Mac officials who spoke on condition of anonymity said Gingrich raised the issue of the housing bubble or was critical of Freddie Mac’s business model.It turns out that much of the "work" that Gingrich was expected to do never actually got done....
Former Freddie Mac officials familiar with his work in 2006 say Gingrich was asked to build bridges to Capitol Hill Republicans and develop an argument on behalf of the company’s public-private structure that would resonate with conservatives seeking to dismantle it.#10 The Republican Party is supposed to be the party of "moral values", but they are getting ready to send someone to the White House that has a track record that would make Bill Clinton blush.
He was expected to provide written material that could be circulated among free-market conservatives in Congress and in outside organizations, said two former company executives familiar with Gingrich’s role at the firm. He didn’t produce a white paper or any other document the firm could use on its behalf, they said.
Newt's personal baggage is either weird or scary. He married his high-school geometry teacher. He cheated on her and divorced her while she had cancer. So he married Marianne Ginther six months later. But that wasn't to last.How in the world can Republicans be supporting this guy?
Gingrich conducted a tawdry affair behind her back with one of his staffers while making political hay out of Clinton's affair with a White House intern. He then divorced Marianne and married the staffer.
Both Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich supported the outrageous $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program, or TARP, bailouts — “one of the most unpopular government programs in American history,” even according to President Obama’s own Treasury Department.
Both Romney and Gingrich have been outspoken and unapologetic supporters of the individual mandate. This is the heart and soul of ObamaCare.
Since the tea party started as a reaction to Republicans who voted for TARP, and was strengthened into a national political force during the fight over ObamaCare, I believe this disqualifies both Romney and Gingrich from tea party support.
Gingrich began his career as a Rockefeller Republican from the liberal wing of the party. And though he has often spoken and occasionally acted like he left that wing, it is clear from his flip-flops and multiple “apologies” that his heart is still there.
His record features “highlights” such as global warming commercials with Nancy Pelosi, support for cap-and-trade, funding Planned Parenthood, and, recently, announcing that life does not begin at conception.
Not only that, but Gingrich took money as a Freddie Mac lobbyist — one of the well-known government-backed agencies that served as a root cause of the financial meltdown of 2008.
While one candidate in the race, my father, Rep. Ron Paul, was publicly warning about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and the crisis they were helping to create, Gingrich was earning millions to not only endorse but also promote the status quo.
One group of Gingrich’s also took in nearly $40 million promoting big-government ideas, such as the individual mandate.
His lobbying and promotion of the housing crisis and the health care mandate have helped to make him a wealthy man, but they have also put him outside the conservative mainstream on most issues.
So I will conclude by saying two things: Gingrich is not from the tea party. He is not even a conservative.
He is part of the Washington establishment I was sent to fight. He has been wrong on many of the major issues of the day, and he has taken money from those who helped cause the housing crisis and create millions of foreclosures.
http://www.newt.org/answers
It has a lot of FACTual information.
you're welcome.
Nice compilation of largely unsourced material—especially the excerpts from RP and Alex Jones sites, lol.
#1) This isn’t the same kind of individual mandate per Obamacare. If you listen to what he actually says:
“GINGRICH: If I see somebody who’s earning over $50,000 a year, who has made the calculated decision not to buy health insurance, I’m looking at somebody who is absolutely as irresponsible as anyone who was ever on welfare. Because what they’ve said is, A, I’m gambling that I won’t get sick, and B, I’m gambling that if I do get sick, I can cheat all my neighbors. Now, when you talk to hospitals, a very significant part of their non-collectibles are people who have money, but have calculated it’s not worth the cost to pay. And so I’m actually in favor of finding a way to say, whatever the appropriate level of income is, you ought to have either health insurance, or you ought to post a bond. But we have no right in this society to have a free rider approach, if we’re well off economically, to cheat our neighbors.” Source: http://nation.foxnews.com/newt-gingrich/2011/11/29/2005-flashback-video-newt-backs-individual-mandate
#2) Sharpton is sketchy to be sure, but I can understand that pairing the two makes for strong publicity. I don’t see anything about promoting socialist education policies in here.
#3) Climate change or anthropogenic climate change? There’s a big difference between the two. It’s one thing to say that climate change is occurring and that we ought to understand it and what it may do—it’s quite another to say that humans are influencing climate change in any significant way. AFAIK, his stated position on that is “we don’t know.” I’m fine with that position, because given the available scientific facts and evidence, “we don’t know” is the honest answer.
#4) This claim has no provided source, so I’ve no idea what was actually said.
#5) Even the source admits that the vast majority of the co-authored legislative proposals were innocuous: “Many of the bills Gingrich and Pelosi co-sponsored were hardly divisive: authorizing an award for Mother Teresa, giving a congressional gold medal to former President Gerald Ford and recognizing the 50th anniversary of the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute.”
With exception of 1 potential bill which never made it out of committee. This sounds like a non-issue to me.
#6) Didn’t hear anything about amnesty and he’s stated he would secure the border within a year. Is there a single candidate who has vowed to throw every single illegal out, no exceptions? Don’t think so.
#7) Funny how the cited source (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hJb2NfqwghY) cuts off mid-sentence. I wonder what Newt actually said.
#8) Symptom of a growing economy, perhaps? Tax revenues increased under Reagan, too. I guess Reagan was a liberal.
#9) $1.6 million paid out to a consulting firm over the course of 10 years, is chump change. And apparently Newt didn’t do anything that Freddie Mac believed they could use on their behalf—perhaps because Newt told them what they didn’t want to hear? I don’t see what the big deal here is.
#10) Rand Paul is obviously stumping for daddy, so none of this is even worth addressing.
Wow, you must be dizzy from all that spinning.
Add Responsibility2nd.