Gingrich Thread

[rlg94086]

Gingrich did great in the debate.

I agree. Homerun. If my decision was purely on debate skills and fiscal policy, Gingrich would edge out Romney.

 

[mary_bobo]

Gingrich is too rehearsed and pompous, on stage. Very self-serving, and I don’t see him speaking from the heart. You must not have followed him for very long.
His debate performances which may impress some biased conservatives – leave me cool, to thinking this is an opportunist who loves the “applause” and wants all the credit. Wants credit to his name. Thinks of himself in viewpoint of "how can I go down in history books?? "Interesting. On what do you base your assessment? Do you know Newt? He is from academia and his demeanor is typical of someone from that venue.

Don’t know how far he would go, in a General Election setting. Since he’s not that likable. No charisma.
Disconnected, diplomatically. What does that mean. And talk about no charisma. Romney, who would probably make a good president, has no charisma. And that was the problem with McCain. When you have an electorate that chooses who to vote for with that criteria in mind, the country has a problem.

And he only plays to a partisan crowd. Don’t know how that would translate to independents and apoliticals who don’t like Obama. But aren’t into “beating their chests for the Republican Partisanship” If you don’t excite your base, you are in trouble before you start.

I also have a concern for Gingrich. Because if he’s sincere from his conversion and changed. I don’t think it’s wise for him to thrust himself since at the beginning of his campaign he wasn’t serious about running to win. Just to participate and whatever self interests (Many reports have said his organization seemed he was more into book signing, and not fundraising) And you know this because? Because some report says so?

By a change of events , i n the election. Here is facing a possibility to vie for the highest office in the land and a seat of power again.

nytimes.com/2011/12/17/us/politics/newt-gingrich-represents-new-political-era-for-catholics.html?_r=1&ref=politics

 

[Caldera]

His first wife is alive and well. She did not die, nor was she deathly ill. Another myth propagated by the MSM.

Just goes to show how frightened the left is of…cough… the truth!

 

[estesbob]

Well he wouldn’t need an annulment from his wife that died, as any marriage he had with her ended with her death, if his second wife is still living he absolutely would have needed an annulment unless he agreed to live chastely. All marriages are presumed to be valid, even those of non Catholics.

None of his ex wives died

 

[_Abyssinia]

Newt: Obama Most Radical Pro-Abortion President in History:

lifenews.com/2012/01/17/newt-obama-most-radical-pro-abortion-president-in-history/

 

[Veridical16]

Actually, he is the author or co-author of at least 25 books since 1982. If you add up the non-fiction books, the historical novels, etc. Plus at least one film.

And because of that, he has spent a LOT of time researching and thinking and writing about these various issues.

So, it’s not that he is rehearsed or not speaking from the heart.

It’s that he knows the issues intimately.

Because he is so familiar with them.

He just happens to be very competent.

He actually knows his stuff.

Here is a list from Wiki:

Books

Nonfiction

Gingrich has authored or co-authored 17 non-fiction books since 1982.

The Government’s Role in Solving Societal Problems, Associated Faculty Press, Incorporated. January 1982 ISBN 978-0-86733-026-7

Window of Opportunity. Tom Doherty Associates, December 1985. ISBN 978-0-312-93923-6

Contract with America (co-editor). Times Books, December 1994. ISBN 978-0-8129-2586-9

Restoring the Dream. Times Books, May 1995. ISBN 978-0-8129-2666-8

Quotations from Speaker Newt. Workman Publishing Company, Inc., July 1995. ISBN 978-0-7611-0092-8

To Renew America. Farrar Straus & Giroux, July 1996. ISBN 978-0-06-109539-9

Lessons Learned The Hard Way. HarperCollins Publishers, May 1998 ISBN 978-0-06-019106-1

Presidential Determination Regarding Certification of the Thirty-Two Major Illicit Narcotics Producing and Transit Countries. DIANE Publishing Company, September 1999. ISBN 978-0-7881-3186-8

Saving Lives and Saving Money. Alexis de Tocqueville Institution, April 2003. ISBN 978-0-9705485-4-2

Winning the Future. Regnery Publishing, January 2005. ISBN 978-0-89526-042-0

Rediscovering God in America: Reflections on the Role of Faith in Our Nation’s History and Future, Integrity Publishers, October 2006. ISBN 978-1-59145-482-3

The Art of Transformation, with Nancy Desmond. CHT Press, November 29, 2006, ISBN 978-1-933966-00-7

A Contract with the Earth, with Terry L. Maple. Johns Hopkins University Press, October 1, 2007. ISBN 978-0-8018-8780-2

Real Change: From the World That Fails to the World That Works, Regnery Publishing, January 2008. ISBN 978-1-59698-053-2

Drill Here, Drill Now, Pay Less: A Handbook for Slashing Gas Prices and Solving Our Energy Crisis, with Vince Haley. Regnery Publishing, September 2008 ISBN 978-1-59698-576-6

5 Principles for a Successful Life: From Our Family to Yours, with Jackie Gingrich Cushman, Crown Publishing Group, May 2009 ISBN 978-0-307-46232-9

To Save America: Stopping Obama’s Secular-Socialist Machine, with Joe DeSantis. Regnery Publishing, May 2010 ISBN 978-1-59698-596-4

Fiction
Gingrich co-wrote the following alternate history novels and series of novels with William R. Forstchen.

1945 : Baen Books, August 1995 ISBN 978-0-671-87739-2

Civil War Series

Gettysburg: A Novel of the Civil War Thomas Dunne Books, June 2003 ISBN 978-0-312-30935-0

Grant Comes East Thomas Dunne Books, June 2004 ISBN 978-0-312-30937-4

Never Call Retreat: Lee and Grant: The Final Victory Thomas Dunne Books, June 2005 ISBN 978-0-312-34298-2

Pacific War Series

Pearl Harbor: A Novel of December 8th Thomas Dunne Books, May 2007 ISBN 978-0-312-36350-5

Days of Infamy Thomas Dunne Books, April 2008 ISBN 978-0-312-36351-2

Revolutionary War Series

To Try Men’s Souls: A Novel of George Washington and the Fight for American Freedom, October 2009, ISBN 978-0-312-59106-9

Valley Forge: George Washington and the Crucible of Victory, November 2010, ISBN 978-0-312-59107-6

Films

Nine Days that Changed the World, Gingrich Productions, April 2010[170]

You missed my point. By rehearsed, i mean Gingrich prepares himself to impress the crowd with his knowledge. Not because its necessarily relevant for the answer.

If you have to prove you know something, in spite of knowing it, Already?? Then you have some sort of insecurity still.

Newt used to be a professor. Some people print books and collect it together because its a good source of income.

In the world of academia, it’s not really that impressive over thirty years, this collection

Especially since he doesn’t really offer anything but recycled information.

For instance, his Global Warming book, was just fluff, and based on a trend.

There are many published nobodies. It’s not about volume…

For instance I would learn a lot more about Catholicism than from Newt Gingrich. Who knows how to collect source material, to compile his own book. NO THANKS. I’ll read other books. A supposed Catholic , who recently converted, talks on and on about John Paul II only to screw up and says
Life BEGINS AT IMPLANTATION…
Which Father Z has said was perplexing.

Newt knows how to get published that’s all.

Anyone can get a book publish given the tools. Look at all those comedians.

He may impress some of the people with this, pretense that he has to continually be seen as a big intellectual giant. But if you look closer he isn’t really this authentic giant. Unique individual. He just wants to carry himself as IF HE IS ONE.
He is just an intellectual politician with some complex.

And knowledge isn’t everything. You can know a lot, but it’s not a sign of good leadership.

 

[Veridical16]

"Interesting. On what do you base your assessment? Do you know Newt? He is from academia and his demeanor is typical of someone from that venue.

I’m familiar enough with him and have been following him.
He is also a politician. And he has a disconnect with many voters.
I know of professors who don’t have his demeanor and they are and were smarter than puffed up reputation Newt tries to build himself as. Actual scientists? PhD’s. Doctors. Historians who don’t have to flaunt it.
Knowledge only gets you so far anyway.

What does that mean. And talk about no charisma. Romney, who would probably make a good president, has no charisma. And that was the problem with McCain. When you have an electorate that chooses who to vote for with that criteria in mind, the country has a problem.

I am not talking about Romney. What i’m saying is you have to at LEAST communicate to more than just your base.

If you don’t excite your base, you are in trouble before you start.

Obama should be enough incentive to excite conservatives. You just have to place a generic Republican. Gingrich can’t maintain excitement the base because he is all over the map. Many Republicans don’t like him either.
Unless you count people who only listen to Talk Radio. And even they are all over the place.

Gingrich reminds many people why Republican Party isn’t really worth joining.

(Many reports have said his organization seemed he was more into book signing, and not fundraising) And you know this because? Because some report says so?

I know this because I can READ the reports and know what is spin.
And what is actual reporting.

He has had more than one instance. There is a reason why he did poorly in Iowa and New Hampshire. It also had to do with his campaigning.
Staffers don’t abandon ship immediately because it’s just false reported facts to filter out.

Gingrich may fool some of the people with his bombastic demagoguery, but he may be the same old Newt.

Ego-centric, and being a political con artist.

 

[Birdpreacher]

And he has a disconnect with many voters.
I know of professors who don’t have his demeanor and they are and were smarter than puffed up reputation Newt tries to build himself as. Actual scientists? PhD’s. Doctors. Historians who don’t have to flaunt it.

He lost me when he claimed that he had the insight on the issue of climate change by blurting out "I’m an amateur paleontologist"
mediaite.com/tv/newt-gingrich-defends-climate-change-credentials-i-am-an-amateur-paleontologist/

http://images.politico.com/global/2011/12/111231_newt_gingrich_ap_328.jpg

 

[Veridical16]

Just goes to show how frightened the left is of…cough… the truth!

Yeah the “death bed myth” Gingrich relies on the red herring that because the Media Lied about One instance in his life on a detail, it means that we all have to look away at all his other personally/public past actions based in FACT.

Gingrich appears to be frightened of the truth when he can’t really answer contritely whenever asked about BOTH personal and political black marks against him, and defers to his campaign website to explain things better.

 

[Veridical16]

He lost me when he claimed that he had the insight on the issue of climate change by blurting out "I’m an amateur paleontologist"
mediaite.com/tv/newt-gingrich-defends-climate-change-credentials-i-am-an-amateur-paleontologist/

http://images.politico.com/global/2011/12/111231_newt_gingrich_ap_328.jpg

Ha good one.

His climate change hemming and hawing whenever he’s confronted for his flip-flopping . I watched his interview he does his homework, BUT he can’t really be honest that (if you read between the lines of his answers in interviews) he still has valid reasons to side with those who want to offer “solutions” for Climate Change.

I don’t agree with him. (He is either willfully ignorant , or complicit with other factors in the AGW scam/players)

I don’t like George Will. But he was right when he said Gingrich

" is a stupid man’s idea of what a smart person sounds like."

(Because it takes one to know one! )

However , it still is true about Gingrich trying to schmooze the audience, especially in last night’s debate.

His Andrew Jackson reference, while good for the crowd, was not the best example to justify countering Ron Paul.

I don’t like any one politician conning the public that they are more than they are not.

Which is what I see Gingrich doing. Especially when he insults nobodies like me.

I know enough to catch him citing things for no reason and trying to pass off himself as familiar with something, he isn’t really familiar with.

 

[gilliam]

Sara Palin endorses Newt–sort of. She tells Hannity, “If I had to vote in SC, in order to keep this thing going I’d vote for Newt”

 

[Roy5]

10 top Reasons for opposing Gingrich

1. His vanity is enormous, a man of unbridled ego. A messiah complex? Perhaps.
2. Many conservatives who know him well, including Congressmen who served with him in the House, stongly oppose his nomination.
3. He has a questionable temperament, with little of the calm and coolness that is so much needed by a president when guiding this great nation in difficult times.
4. He took a large amount of money as an ‘historian’ for Freddie Mac, while saying that Clifford Dodd and Barney Frank should be in jail for their involvement with similar activities.
5. He suggests that judges that don’t rule ‘correctly’ should be called before Congress to defend their decisions. What a contradiction to the Constitution!
6. He had to pay a fine of $300,000 for ethical misconduct while in the House.
7. The House GOP forced him out when they became annoyed and distrustful of his leadership.
8. He has changed his opinion on a variety of important issues, and seems to be an opportunist. Because he is a smooth debater he has gotten away with many such flip-flops, but more will come else once the Democrats make him a target.
9. He was divorced twice, married three times, and this personal baggage will alienate many Christian conservatives who will sit on their hands or perhaps vote third party. A sad role model, especially for our youth.
10. Adelson, who has provided him $5 million to lambast Romney and others, made his millions off gambling casinos. Another superb example of family values?

 

[Fiat_Lux_redux]

Ha good one.

His climate change hemming and hawing whenever he’s confronted for his flip-flopping . I watched his interview he does his homework, BUT he can’t really be honest that (if you read between the lines of his answers in interviews) he still has valid reasons to side with those who want to offer “solutions” for Climate Change.

I don’t agree with him. (He is either willfully ignorant , or complicit with other factors in the AGW scam/players)

I don’t like George Will. But he was right when he said Gingrich

(Because it takes one to know one! )

However , it still is true about Gingrich trying to schmooze the audience, especially in last night’s debate.

His Andrew Jackson reference, while good for the crowd, was not the best example to justify countering Ron Paul.

I don’t like any one politician conning the public that they are more than they are not.

Which is what I see Gingrich doing. Especially when he insults nobodies like me.

I know enough to catch him citing things for no reason and trying to pass off himself as familiar with something, he isn’t really familiar with.

Well said. If it’s any consolation, he will not be the nominee. I just won’t happen.

 

[Veridical16]

Sara Palin endorses Newt–sort of. She tells Hannity, “If I had to vote in SC, in order to keep this thing going I’d vote for Newt”

I like Sarah Palin. She’s a welcome voice.

But she is doing the typical keep all options open routine…

if she’s going to endorse Newt. Endorse. Otherwise people spend time reading into it, and both desired effects DONT have the impact she is shooting for…

The “todd palin” went Rogue before the New Hampshire elections, was really a safety net. And such a deniable out to not be responsible for her trial balloon endorsement for Newt.

If she wants to influence the elections, she needs to endorse. Otherwise she thinks too much, about her “sway” in trying to herd, or turn voters heads one way or the other.

Now is not the time to be playing games.

If she wants to stop Romney do so. Attack him. It doesn’t stop Karl Rove from attacking all the other candidates and promoting Romney.

But if she wants to promote Newt. Then say so and endorse him already

The whole thing where she is withholding her endorsement, for the sake of seeing how the voters decide. You can’t have it both ways.

Somewhere along the line Sarah Palin believed she commands the media with her calculated sound bytes by being too affected by her “new media” presence and puts too much stock in her clout from such blinders of the 24/7 News Cycle, which does not really affect a huge percentage of voters paying attention. Which is why she believes she can help replace Obama from the “outside” I don’t need a title to affect change.

She has influence (on hard core conservatives as it is now) no doubt and could use it correctly, but she’s being too clever to the point of ineffectual impotence – about how she can influence the races. She can’t if she tries to keep throwing out hints against Romney. Hints for this or that candidate.

As if she’s immune to the effects of diminishing returns.

Fox News is lame too with their Ratings gimmick "will she endorse today? or won’t she? "

 

[Veridical16]

10 top Reasons for opposing Gingrich

1. His vanity is enormous, a man of unbridled ego. A messiah complex? Perhaps.
2. Many conservatives who know him well, including Congressmen who served with him in the House, stongly oppose his nomination.
3. He has a questionable temperament, with little of the calm and coolness that is so much needed by a president when guiding this great nation in difficult times.
4. He took a large amount of money as an ‘historian’ for Freddie Mac, while saying that Clifford Dodd and Barney Frank should be in jail for their involvement with similar activities.
5. He suggests that judges that don’t rule ‘correctly’ should be called before Congress to defend their decisions. What a contradiction to the Constitution!
6. He had to pay a fine of $300,000 for ethical misconduct while in the House.
7. The House GOP forced him out when they became annoyed and distrustful of his leadership.
8. He has changed his opinion on a variety of important issues, and seems to be an opportunist. Because he is a smooth debater he has gotten away with many such flip-flops, but more will come else once the Democrats make him a target.
9. He was divorced twice, married three times, and this personal baggage will alienate many Christian conservatives who will sit on their hands or perhaps vote third party. A sad role model, especially for our youth.

10. Adelson, who has provided him $5 million to lambast Romney and others, made his millions off gambling casinos. Another superb example of family values?

The last one is the most recent Roy. So one can’t say it’s ALL in the past.

A quid pro quo deal. That has to do with Israel…

Gingrich is doing a dance with Romney, he basically was speecheless when Romney turned the Super Pac Complaints against Gingrich and Gingricn said “well…yes”

The choices betweeen Romney and Gingrich aren’t that different.
They both would keep parts of Obamacare OR POSSIBLY THE WHOLE THING

 

[CMatt25]

10 top Reasons for opposing Gingrich

1. His vanity is enormous, a man of unbridled ego. A messiah complex? Perhaps.
2. Many conservatives who know him well, including Congressmen who served with him in the House, stongly oppose his nomination.
3. He has a questionable temperament, with little of the calm and coolness that is so much needed by a president when guiding this great nation in difficult times.
4. He took a large amount of money as an ‘historian’ for Freddie Mac, while saying that Clifford Dodd and Barney Frank should be in jail for their involvement with similar activities.
5. He suggests that judges that don’t rule ‘correctly’ should be called before Congress to defend their decisions. What a contradiction to the Constitution!
6. He had to pay a fine of $300,000 for ethical misconduct while in the House.
7. The House GOP forced him out when they became annoyed and distrustful of his leadership.
8. He has changed his opinion on a variety of important issues, and seems to be an opportunist. Because he is a smooth debater he has gotten away with many such flip-flops, but more will come else once the Democrats make him a target.
9. He was divorced twice, married three times, and this personal baggage will alienate many Christian conservatives who will sit on their hands or perhaps vote third party. A sad role model, especially for our youth.
10. Adelson, who has provided him $5 million to lambast Romney and others, made his millions off gambling casinos. Another superb example of family values?

Roy, your points well taken. Would that make him one of the highest paid “historians”?

 

[Veridical16]

Ha good one.

I don’t like George Will. But he was right when he said Gingrich

** " a stupid man’s idea of what a smart person sounds like " **

I should make a correction.

Paul Krugman said that and he was quoting someone else…so nobody really said that.

George Will said this. “Newt is a classic rental politician”

blasted Gingrich for his “absurd rhetorical grandiosity” in reference to the candidate’s statement that he is “really deeply concerned about understanding America and understanding what’s happening to it, both here and around the world.”

“He says that he’s the only man in the Republican race who’s really deeply concerned about the fate of the Republic. Not true,” Will said.

Although not a historian, Gingrich plays one on television, where he recently cited Franklin Roosevelt (and Jefferson, Jackson and Lincoln) as “just like” him in being “prepared to take on the judiciary.” Roosevelt, infuriated by Supreme Court decisions declaring various progressive policies incompatible with the Constitution’s architecture of limited government, tried to “pack” the court by enlarging it and attempted to purge from Congress some Democrats who opposed him.

“Freddy Mac he says, hired him as a Historian. He’s not a historian. Hire Sean Sean Wilentz, hire Gordon Wood if you want a historian”

thinkprogress.org/politics/2011/11/20/372968/george-will-excoriates-gingrichs-influence-peddling/?mobile=nc

politico.com/news/stories/1111/68801.html

washingtonpost.com/opinions/gingrich-the-anti-conservative/2011/12/20/gIQALq8CAP_story_1.html

These are the people that know Newt by the way by being in his presence. Beltway people.

I think Newt should just come out and say he is an amateur everything. His campaigning isn’t that great.

 

[kubark]

Nationally, Gingrich doesn’t have a chance.

If all you pro-life utilitarians took yourselves seriously, you would get behind the only candidate that is going to have a chance at beating Obama in the general election: Ron Paul.

Quit pretending that Gingrich and Romney and Santorum are conservatives. They represent everything that the Tea Party threw out of office in 2010.

But since this thread is all about the Georgia GOPAC Tick (Spinelus cavinien) aka Newt Gingrich, I thought I would bring to your attention just one inconvienent, relevant fact:

Gingrich voted $60 million to a UN program supporting abortion in China.

Oops!!

 

[rlg94086]

Nationally, Gingrich doesn’t have a chance.

If all you pro-life utilitarians took yourselves seriously, you would get behind the only candidate that is going to have a chance at beating Obama in the general election: Ron Paul.

Quit pretending that Gingrich and Romney and Santorum are conservatives. They represent everything that the Tea Party threw out of office in 2010.

But since this thread is all about the Georgia GOPAC Tick (Spinelus cavinien) aka Newt Gingrich, I thought I would bring to your attention just one inconvienent, relevant fact:

Gingrich voted $60 million to a UN program supporting abortion in China.

Oops!!

A Ron Paul supporter lecturing Newt Gingrich supporters about their candidate’s chances.

 

[Veridical16]

A Ron Paul supporter lecturing Newt Gingrich supporters about their candidate’s chances.

Yeah, because Obama isn’t going to play the race card against Ron Paul.

And this time…it will be the reverse effect of 2008’s election, where there won’t be backlash and cynicism.
Because Ron Paul really is connected to these extremist groups.

Another report was out today of more racist newsletters.

I don’t know what Ron Paul’s Internet Team think they’re doing by saying Ron Paul is the most pure bringing talking points and ad references against the other conservative canddiates,

but he can’t go far with Catholics. With his neo-Nazi, neo-Confederate , anti-semitic background and connections.

Let alone the extreme individualism, moral relativism applied through full blown, and perverted application of Libertarianism .

*’ Everybody is okay, as long as we don’t tell people about any responsibility, nor laws connected to moral order. As long as we aren’t hurting anyone directly. ’ *

Philosophy is at odds with the Faith.

pro-life utilitarians