Nationally he had 37% to Romney’s 21% back in December.
The ad says that Gingrich “co-sponsored a bill with Nancy Pelosi that would have given $60 million a year to a U.N. program supporting China’s brutal one-child policy.” Actually, the bill attempted to address climate change, and a third of House members were co-sponsors. The bill did propose money for the United Nations Population Fund, but it stated specifically that its funding could not be used for “involuntary sterilization or abortion or to coerce any person to accept family planning.” The ad’s claim rests on repeated distortions, so we rate the statement Pants on Fire!
politifact.com/florida/statements/2012/jan/12/restore-our-future/newt-gingrich-nancy-pelosi-china-one-child-policy/
Sarah Palin: “If I were in South Carolina, I’d vote for Newt Gingrich”
youtube.com/watch?v=dFn46hz96CY
Evangelicals for Perry Endorses Newt Gingrich for President
evangelicals4perry.net/2012/01/evangelicals-for-perry-endorses-newt.html
Rep. Trent Franks Endorses Gingrich for President
newsmax.com/Politics/Rep-TrentFranksEndorsesGingrichforPresident/2012/01/13/id/424189
“Newt Gingrich’s singularly bold plan for economic recovery, his unmatched record of conservative achievement and job creation, his unwavering commitment to the core principles enshrined in our Constitution, and his unmatched debate skill means he is far and away the best Republican candidate to challenge and defeat Barack Obama this November.”
…
“Lastly, I believe Newt Gingrich’s plan to restore the proper role of the judicial branch under the Constitution is the most effective and well-thought out plan of any candidate seeking to address the heretofore unchallenged judicial oligarchy that has cost the lives of 50 million unborn children, has undermined American national security, and continues to threaten Americans’ most cherished values and religious liberty.”
Politifact??!! LOL!! Don’t tell me you fall for their “truth” meters and the pretense of unbiased factchecking! Politifact is a project run by the Tampa Bay Times. In 2003, the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette described the Tampa Bay Times as a “usually liberal” newspaper. I would take Politifact’s factual selection and context with a grain of salt.
But back to Newt and the bill (H.R. 1078), that Newt and Pelosi cosponsored in 1989:
SEC. 1102. FAMILY PLANNING SERVICES. (a) POLICY- It is the policy of the United States that family planning services should be made available to all persons requesting them. (b) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS- There are authorized to be appropriated a minimum of $500,000,000 for fiscal year 1991, $540,000,000 for fiscal year 1992, and $580,000,000 for each of fiscal years 1993, 1994, and 1995 for family planning services provided under authorized programs. Of the funds appropriated, not less than 16 percent, or $60,000,000, whichever is less, shall be available annually for the United Nations Population Fund.”
Lifesite News had this to say on Newt’s bill:
The bill in question, the “Global Warming Prevention Act of 1989,” never came before Congress for a vote.
While the bill would have provided $60 million for the United Nations Population Fund, which has been found to be complicit in China’s one-child policy, it barred funds for “involuntary sterilization or abortion” and “the coercion of any person to accept family planning services.” President Reagan’s Mexico City Policy, which forbade taxpayer funding of foreign abortions, was also in effect at the time. President Clinton repealed the policy in 1993.
However, there remained concerns about the fungibility of the funds to UNFPA. Gingrich’s website states, “Newt supported a very limited aspect of the 1989 bill that promoted hydrogen energy research.” (In other words, an excuse)
Lifesite News goes on to report that:
"
However, Newt did support taxpayer-funded abortion while he was Speaker of the House. In 1995, Gingrich publicly supported “funding in the case of rape or incest, or [to save the] life of the mother,” backed funding for embryonic stem-cell research, and later offered his endorsement to Republicans who supported partial-birth abortion. The Des Moines Register reported in November, “Gingrich has switched his position on federal funding. He now thinks the government should not ask taxpayers to pay for any abortions.”
Gingrich caused a stir in December, before the Iowa caucuses, when he said life begins at “implantation,” then backpedaled to say life begins at “conception.”
Now, contrast Newt’s record with Ron Paul’s, and I think you will realize who the true pro-life conservative is.
If all you care about is someone who is a good debater (a sophist in other words) then by all means, vote for Newt.
I’m not willing to take a chance on pretty faces and soothing voices this election. The stakes are too high this time I will vote strictly based on the candidate’s record. As far as I am concerned, Ron Paul is the only candidate who a truly pro-life, pro-constitution voting recored and is not afraid to be unpopular with or chide his own Party for their failure to live up to their supposed conservative values.
If you want Obama for a second term then please vote for anyone OTHER than Ron Paul.
