Posted on 01/21/2012 6:43:43 AM PST by tomkat
It's 0930 EST and there's nothing in the sidebar that looks like a live thread for the SC primary . . .
“I find that pathetic, hippocritical and disenguineness.”
In the way you state this, it does seem wrong of us. However, Bill Clinton did his thing in the Oval Office as a sitting POTUS. Additionally, he lied to a federal grand jury about it. He went on TV and wagged his finger in our faces telling us that he “did not have sex with that woman, Monica Lewinsky”.
For one, he never wholeheartedly apologized for lying to us for lying in our faces. And the big thing that many overlook is that he positioned himself to be bribed by foreign governments had they possessed that knowledge.
I do not want a sitting president who commits adultery, but I can take someone who has done that, but is seeming repentant.
The first part of your statement is an opinion, and not a fact.
I respect that opinion, and share it to a degree, but my point is that it doesn't give Newt supporters the right to belittle and berate Santorum supporters.
When conservatives supporting either Newt or Santorum batter each other, it brings us all down.
"I believe it will keeppeopleWIMPS home.
There, I fixed it for you!
Sorry for the multiple postings. Keyboard jammed.
Are we related?
I wish we could combine the best attributes of Santorum and Gingrich into one candidate, then we’d have a winner.
The thing is getting some of these guys to realize that this is an actual WAR. Maybe they will get that in war, you get behind the guy that will fight in a dirty outfit next to you, not the one with a fine-pressed dress uniform back behind the lines.
Exactly, if you have Patton at your disposal, you overlook his flaws, because you want somebody in there who will kill as many Nazis as possible.
Isn't that what we're all supposed to desire in a leader?
I am all for unity. I call out the nasty posters who run down Newt, and lift santorum to a pedestal where he does not deserve to be.
You see, I know a great amount of detail about Santorum and his record when he was a Senator. I stand by what I say. And like Newt Gingrich, I tell it as I see it, which is why I like him so much.
You have a problem with honesty and call it being nasty, then by all means. I must be “nasty” then.
I’m ok with either Santorum or Newt, may the best man win, and whomever finishes second, should step down after today, so we can be united against Mitt.
You ARE a nasty poster. Call yourself out, psycho.
What did Santorum lie about Newt on?
When he said Character counts? It does.
When he said that he brought to Newt in a closed door House meeting corruption issues going on and said Newt swept them under the rug? Notice in Newt’s answer that he didn’t deny the charge, he just referred to all the times he did stand up to corruption.
When he said Newt spoke to House members and candidates gearing up for 2010 and told them to put a “low key on Social Issues”? Again, Newt didn’t deny he said that, but diverted the charge to his involvement in bringing about the largest House transformation in history with the 2010 Election.
When he said Gingrich supported TARP? Newt griped about it on TV, then in the 2008 interview with Greta, after TARP had been passed said he would have voted for legislation as well. Of course, to divert attention from this statement, he goes off about his activity in trying to repeal Sarbanes-Oxley and changes some SEC-mandated valuation requirements.
When he said Gingrich supports global warming? Newt sat on the couch with Nancy Pelosi, and while he might call that “the biggest mistake of his career”, Newt won’t call out climate change for what it is “junk science”.
When he said Gingrich was for the individual mandate? He was. How conveinent of Newt to change on that issue in the same year he declares to run for President. Anything that goes beyond the ideas Reagan illustrated in his 60’s speech against socialized medicne is nothing but more big government intrusion. I like how in the last debate Newt craftily put in the remark that they would “kill the bill” first because he didn’t trust to bureaucrats, but again, the 300-pages of whatever might seem to be good will give the Government the life it needs to implement Government-run health care later on down the road.
When he said Gingrich was an idea a minute with no organization? True. Lots of ideas were proposed but never enacted in the 90’s Congress. Unless the plan, such as the Contract with America, is fully, specifically, and written down prior to Newt assuming the WH, the chances are nil that anything will get done.
When he said Gingrich is for a form of amnesty? He is. All Newt is doing with his plan is to try and take the heat off the President in granting amnesty and giving that role to “Citizen Review Baords” and the local community of which a “family” has to sponsor the illegal immigrant. In other words, when we gripe about illegal immigration, Newt can put the blame on people instead of himself. How nice. It’s still amnesty though, whichever way you look at it.
I’ve watched Gingrich closely in these debates. He’s crafty. When attacked on something he know’s he’s wrong on, he diverts it to where he can point out all of his strengths that supposedly outweigh the weakness on the issue.
My favorite Newt quote is from Michelle Malkin.com
“It doesn’t matter what I do,” he answered. “People need to hear what I have to say. There’s no one else who can say what I can say. It doesn’t matter what I live.” (Newt’s answer to Marianne in regards to how he could give a speech on family values, yet carry on an affair with another woman)
Newt’s a fraud. Just because one speaks conservative doesn’t make themselves a conservative. Just like all the bandwagon fans that poured onto the Michael Steele RNC train and were left bitter after it turned out he was a RINO (which was pointed out by several FReepers before he took the position, but they were ridiculed). Or Scott Brown in MA, which if you watched his debated with Coakley realized he was nowhere near what a conservative is. In time, people (and FReepers) will come to regret their decision to get behind Newt. Argue all you want now. In a few years from now, I will have been proven right, like I was on Steele and Brown.
This problem solves itself. If Rick Santorum cannot come close to Romney, much less Newt in SC, he will have a very hard time raising money to fight on. A Newt victory today ensures he gets the bulk of conservative money moving forward. Santorum will not have strength without money.
The real story in the next week will be all-out war in the Republican Party of the Establishment vs. the Conservatives. This is the follow-up to the 2010 Tea Party election. The conservatives gave the Republicans power, and the establishment leadership is squandering it. Newt is very well positioned to lead the conservative side of this war.
I dont mean Rick stay in much longer..
but Newt is not alone..
Romney is still in..
and then there is Ron Paul...
Sigh...
HOWEVER
Romney dropped out Feb 7, 2008
2 days after Super Tuesday..
Romney had won AK, CO, MA, ME, MI, MN, MT, NV, ND, UT, WY
In FL he came in 2nd, in TN he was 3rd (Huckabee won TN)
So he will probably hang on till after Super Tuesday this time too
March 15
BTW, who are you to be the arbiter of which of these candidates actually live by God's standards?
Be very careful before you answer that question.
BTTT
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.