Posted on 12/21/2011 6:46:36 AM PST by Responsibility2nd
Newt Gingrich isn't exactly chasing the gay vote.
The Republican presidential candidate told a homosexual Iowa man at a campaign event on Tuesday to vote for President Obama.
Scott Arnold, a Democrat and associate professor of writing at William Penn University, approached the ex-House speaker in Oskaloosa wanting to know how Gingrich would represent him as President, according to the Des Moines Register.
(Excerpt) Read more at nydailynews.com ...
“Newt will treat homosexuals no different than any other citizen, but he will not pander to them.”
Well...
There goes the support of 60-70% of today’s mainstream media, including most of the management.
they don’t call the entirely-queer New York Times Editorial Board “The Gay Mafia”, for nothing...
Okay, what does Rick Perry say to the same gay guy who comes up to him and asks, “What are you going to do for the gays?”
We're getting one side of the story, and probably from a liberal plant at that. I'm sure Newt's answer was a bit more involved than reported or else that the guy asking the questions was confrontational, perhaps rude, and so finally Newt tells him to just go support the other side since it's obvious you're never going to agree with me and that you never were interested in having a genuine discussion in the first place.
“...uncharacteristically fluffed him off.”
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Really?? You see it that way? Look at the replies on this thread. 9/10 FReepers think Newt deserves an “attaboy” for this answer.
If Newt didn’t blow off (no pun intended) this perv, then he should have.
Is there a video for this encounter? I’d like to hang it on my wall. :)
The professor undoubtedly is a total liberal as well as gay so telling him about cutting the deficit, etc, would be pointless.
Of course the professor is a liar. He wasn’t there to ask an honest question but Gingrich gave him an honest answer.
So. You would vote for Obama over Romney. Got it. Good to know.
It completely disappeared when he went to DC. I kept waiting for that guy to make an appearance at press conferences, but it never happened.
This time around, I want a fighter. I want someone who is willing to change the language. Someone who is willing to talk about budgets from a base line, and not the bizarre DC terminology that claims a 4% increase is a huge cut that will starve children and kill women.
I want an agency serial killer.
I want the blunt rude truth.
“Is that the best Newt can come up with?
Ok, you oppose same sex marriage and so do I. But, we really want to tell people to go vote for the other guy? God forbid this loose cannon becomes our candidate.”
Here, I’ll explain it to you. When a democrat comes up to you trying to get you to pander to him so he can say “Look at the mealy-mouthed republican try to pander to me!”, you tell the democrat to go take a flying leap.
“Homosexuals make up well less than 5% of voters,”
Yet SO MUCH of today’s mainstream media, as has been documented on FR, for a decade.
In 2008, 58% of NBC News New York Staffers were Bi,Gay, Lesbian, or Trans-Gendered. The Village Voice calls the New York Times Editorial Board “The Gay Mafia”. Every single one of them, including Pinch, is gay, and almost all are Radical Gays.
This list could go on and on. these are the people who are feeding the Democrat Propaganda into your home.
Newt supporter here, but that was dumb. he should have said, “if you care about what really matters right now, don’t vote for Obama, because all the gay rights issues won’t matter when the economy is trashed and the rest of our freedoms are gone”.
“There goes the support of 60-70% of today’s mainstream media, including most of the management.”
What % of them do you suppose supported him prior to this alleged comment?
Translation: Queers should vote queerly because their queer..
woot !
Go Newt!
tell it like it is!
“”What you don’t tell him is that my America doesn’t include you, which is essentially what Newt did.””
So you know what Newt told him? Please tell the rest of us!
Why should homosexuals be given the nod by anyone that they are unique or separately identifiable for particular political attention?
We have already made that mistake with blacks, latinos, asians, muslims, Jews and women.
and it’s a viper nest
all designed to do nothing but diminish the politica power of the majority (and founding) culture by the power of it’s own emotion
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.