Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Newt: I Would Never Vote For Ron Paul
TPM ^ | 12/27/2011 | BENJY SARLIN

Posted on 12/27/2011 2:54:17 PM PST by TBBT

Newt Gingrich on Tuesday lit into Ron Paul over extremist newsletters he once published, saying that he would not vote for him if he were the Republican nominee.

Asked by CNN’s Wolf Blitzer about tough attack ads Paul has been running against him, Gingrich slammed his rival, who he said “disowns ten years of his own letter, says he doesn’t really realize what was in it, had no idea that he was making money on, that it was racist, anti-Semitic.”

“He’s attacking me for serial hypocrisy and he spent ten years out of earning money off a newsletter that had his name that he didn’t notice,” he said. “He’s got to come up with some very straight answers to get somebody to take him seriously. Would I be willing to listen to him? Sure. I think the choice of Ron Paul or Barack Obama would be a very bad choice for America.”

Gingrich flatly said “no” when asked if he would vote for Paul himself.

“There will come a morning people won’t take him as a serious person,” Gingrich said, saying he was a “reasonable candidate” as a protest vote.

“As a potential president, a person who thinks the United States was [responsible] for 9/11, a person who believes, who wrote in his newsletter, that the World Trade Center bombing in 1993 might have been a CIA plot, the person who says it doesn’t matter if the Iranians have a nuclear weapon — you look at Ron Paul’s record of systemic avoidance of reality, his ads are about as accurate as his newsletter.”

(Excerpt) Read more at 2012.talkingpointsmemo.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: newt; paul
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-68 last
To: TBBT

I wouldn’t vote for Paul either, EVER.

Paul is a lunatic that would get us all killed.


61 posted on 12/27/2011 6:57:15 PM PST by TexasFreeper2009 (Newt Gingrich 2012!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WilliamHouston

I’m a bit confused by your statement which includes ‘classical liberals’ in the set of all liberals.
I thought that Thomas Jefferson was what is thought of today as a “classical liberal’ and he was not like the typical progressive liberals of today.

Regarding your contention #2,perhaps I have been sadly mistaken in thinking that both liberty and equality are basic principles or as you put it values, of liberalism rather than Conservatism.

If liberty and equality are liberal values rather than conservative,I ask that you or someone else respond and tell me straightforwardly what then are the basics of Conservatism?


62 posted on 12/27/2011 10:45:46 PM PST by FreeDeerHawk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: FreeDeerHawk

Good gosh,I mean basic conservative rather than liberal values when we speak of liberty and equality. I do not see those as liberal values.


63 posted on 12/27/2011 11:00:10 PM PST by FreeDeerHawk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: WilliamHouston

“Judging by the degenerate state of contemporary America (where “liberty” and “equality” have been taken to unimaginable extremes), it is clear they were right.”

Would you agree that part of the trouble might be that the definitions of “liberty” and “equality” have often been grossly distorted in our present time?


64 posted on 12/27/2011 11:20:55 PM PST by FreeDeerHawk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: WilliamHouston
Newt is a typical flabby, pasty faced warmongering neocon Baby Boomer idiot who wants to send young people overseas to fight in the type of wars he himself opted out on.

Put the bong down. Newt was not allowed to serve, he did not opt out.
Ronald Reagan also did not serve. Did that make him a poor president. John Kerry, John Murtha and Ron Paul served. All of them are cowards and none of them would be fit to command our military.
65 posted on 12/28/2011 3:41:24 AM PST by John D
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: WilliamHouston
At least with Ron Paul, we know for certain that he will oppose frivolous foreign wars and curtail government spending, and the neocons will be shut out of power.

Still on the bong aren't you. If you were sober you would know the surrender monkey is not going to do anything to curtail government spending. Cut and Run has been in Washington for over a quarter century and what has he ever done to curtail government spending? He knows how to bring home the bacon, with all the earmarks he acquires, but that in no way is curtailing government spending. He talks much, accomplishes nothing.
66 posted on 12/28/2011 3:55:48 AM PST by John D
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: WilliamHouston
The Iraq War really was fomented by neocon globalists in the Bush administration who believed that “democracy” could be transplanted there.

So Iraq did not invade Kuwait, one of our allies in the region?
I am sure the surrender monkey would have just let a friend be invaded and done nothing but blame Kuwait for not just surrendering.
67 posted on 12/28/2011 4:07:59 AM PST by John D
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: All

Newt: “I Would Never Vote For Ron Paul.”

Me neither, Newt.


68 posted on 12/28/2011 6:26:19 AM PST by 506Lake (I'll say it again... no more compromise.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-68 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson