Apply Now!

Now we have Gingrich Newsletters

chefdennis

chefdennis

Veteran Expediter
Yea right he didn't write it... I am pretty sure I have heard him say he supported Romney and MassCare....as well he should and everyone else should also....if there is going to be a "mandated" healthcare program, UNLIKE BARRYCARE WHICH IS AN ILLEGAL FEDERAL mandate, it should be on the STATE level where it is legal....so supporting a STATE mandate is fine....But all of them need to quit this BS lying crap....man up...
 
Turtle

Turtle

Administrator
Staff member
Retired Expediter
It's actually very common in newsletters in general, where the namesake doesn't write the content.

What's interesting, I think, is the blatant hypocrisy of Newt on both the health care issue with Romney, then as opposed to now, as well as his hypocrisy of chiding Paul for not writing his own content, despite Newt doing the same thing. Notice how very few people with newsletters have come out against Paul's? It's because they know. And they know if they come out against Paul's, their own newsletters will get a little more scrutiny, and they don't want that. The smallest things can come back, out of context, and bite you in the butt.
 
davekc

davekc

Senior Moderator
Staff member
Fleet Owner
Turtle said:
It's actually very common in newsletters in general, where the namesake doesn't write the content.

What's interesting, I think, is the blatant hypocrisy of Newt on both the health care issue with Romney, then as opposed to now, as well as his hypocrisy of chiding Paul for not writing his own content, despite Newt doing the same thing. Notice how very few people with newsletters have come out against Paul's? It's because they know. And they know if they come out against Paul's, their own newsletters will get a little more scrutiny, and they don't want that. The smallest things can come back, out of context, and bite you in the butt.
Click to expand...

That is pretty much how I looked at that.
 
RLENT

RLENT

Veteran Expediter
davekc said:
Thought some might find this of interest. And guess what? He claims he didn't write them either.
Funny how that seems to be a common political theme.
Click to expand...
Well, they've all tried to emulate Dr. Paul on a variety of his positions already (Federal Reserve, smaller government, etc., etc.) ..... so why not on this ? :rolleyes:

The problem for Newt is, as Dennis rightly points out, he's already got a record that aligns with his newsletters ..... right out of his own mouth.

Same cannot be said for Dr. Paul however.

If folks would look closely at a lot of the stuff Newt has been saying for a long time (that hasn't got a whole lot of coverage at any point along the line) they would find a far different person than his apparent public persona ... ;)
 
dieseldiva

dieseldiva

Veteran Expediter
RLENT said:
Well, they've all tried to emulate Dr. Paul on a variety of his positions already (Federal Reserve, smaller government, etc., etc.) ..... so why not on this ? :rolleyes:

The problem for Newt is, as Dennis rightly points out, he's already got a record that aligns with his newsletters ..... right out of his own mouth.

Same cannot be said for Dr. Paul however.

If folks would look closely at a lot of the stuff Newt has been saying for a long time (that hasn't got a whole lot of coverage at any point along the line) they would find a far different person than his apparent public persona ... ;)
Click to expand...

I'm having a hard time wrapping my heart around ANY of these guys. Would like to see Santorum bubble to the top but that doesn't seem likely. HOWEVER.....YOU, Rlent.....are "ate up" over Ron Paul.....:p
 
RLENT

RLENT

Veteran Expediter
dieseldiva said:
I'm having a hard time wrapping my heart around ANY of these guys. Would like to see Santorum bubble to the top but that doesn't seem likely.
Click to expand...
Diva,

Out of respect for you I'll forego any commentary on Santorum at the moment - as you say, it's unlikely that he will pose any threat.

dieseldiva said:
HOWEVER.....YOU, Rlent.....are "ate up" over Ron Paul.....:p
Click to expand...
Indeed :D

From my view point, it's better to have some passion .... than to suffer from a lack it ..... :p


"I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice! And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue!" - Barry Goldwater​
 
dieseldiva

dieseldiva

Veteran Expediter
RLENT said:
Diva,

Out of respect for you I'll forego any commentary on Santorum at the moment - as you say, it's unlikely that he will pose any threat.


Indeed :D

From my view point, it's better to have some passion .... than to suffer from a lack it ..... :p


"I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice! And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue!" - Barry Goldwater​
Click to expand...

True that about the passion and my only passion thus far with this election season is that heck or high water, Obama has to go!

As far as Santorum, I really don't know that much about him, he just talks a good talk. I suppose if he WERE to "bubble up", we'd be learning a bunch of stuff.:rolleyes:
 
layoutshooter

layoutshooter

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
No matter who ends up "bubbling up" and goes up to defeat the "boy god" Obama you are going to see every attempt by the Democratic controlled news media to destroy that person in every way, shape and form. Pravda taught our students well. :mad:
 
RLENT

RLENT

Veteran Expediter
dieseldiva said:
True that about the passion and my only passion thus far with this election season is that heck or high water, Obama has to go!
Click to expand...
I would agree - with the qualification that whoever we get to replace him shouldn't be worse .... or even as bad ....

dieseldiva said:
As far as Santorum, I really don't know that much about him, he just talks a good talk. I suppose if he WERE to "bubble up", we'd be learning a bunch of stuff.
Click to expand...
Actually, I would expect that he will be pretty clean on the personal morals/corruption side (maybe some financial issues) - although the whole thing with Bob Vander Platts' endorsement, based on what I know thus far, is a little unseemly for Rick (****ing for Vander Platts)

The personal philosophy though is where the problem is - he would not stand a chance against Obama in the general. He has very little - if any - ability to pull the crossover vote.
 
layoutshooter

layoutshooter

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
"The personal philosophy though is where the problem is - he would not stand a chance against Obama in the general. He has very little - if any - ability to pull the crossover vote."

Few people who have the courage of their convictions can pull the crossover vote. That is why they never really say anything when they campaign. They are more concerned with turning some off than presenting themselves as they are. Cowards.
 
tbubster

tbubster

Seasoned Expediter
Turtle said:
Huh?. What's old news, Ron Paul's 20 year old newsletter, or Newt's 5 year old newsletter?
Click to expand...

Newts old news.He was for it at the state level then after seeing the effects it had decided it was not such a good idea.Old news.Ron pauls letters are a deal killer for millions and millions of voters.Myself I really do not belive if anyone is honest with themselfs they really belive that paul does not know who wrote them.Which shows paul is in fact just like the rest a liar!!!!!!
 
AMonger

AMonger

Veteran Expediter
tbubster said:
Newts old news.He was for it at the state level then after seeing the effects it had decided it was not such a good idea.Old news.Ron pauls letters are a deal killer for millions and millions of voters.Myself I really do not belive if anyone is honest with themselfs they really belive that paul does not know who wrote them.Which shows paul is in fact just like the rest a liar!!!!!!
Click to expand...

No, it shows that if you start with a probably false premise, as you do, he looks like a liar.

What is it about freedom that you hate? It's Ron Paul or despotism. What other option do you see?

--

You know the problem with bad cops? They make the other 5% look bad.
 
tbubster

tbubster

Seasoned Expediter
AMonger said:
No, it shows that if you start with a probably false premise, as you do, he looks like a liar.

What is it about freedom that you hate? It's Ron Paul or despotism. What other option do you see?

--

You know the problem with bad cops? They make the other 5% look bad.
Click to expand...

Ok so I dont see ron paul as the guy to beable to pull this country from the brink.I see him just as I see the rest a liar and a guy who has a lot of bad ideas and you think I dont like freedom?Thats funny.Paul says he is going to cut 1 trillion right off the bat.We all know that is not going to happen as the president does not make the budget congress does.yet he keeps saying this is something he is going to do.Let him veto it both houses of congress votes again and with 2/3 voting for ir it passes with out Paul.Paul would become to known as the most powerless president in the countrys history.


Paul says he will end the fed.Yet if you dig I have posted it here befor Paul also says he knows this is not something that can happen.Paul has sponcerd over 600 bills yet only one of them has ever become a law.Why is it so many of you are Delusional to belive that if Paul were to become president a switch gets flipped and all of a sudden he gets things done.
 
Pilgrim

Pilgrim

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
Now that you bring that up, maybe something people ought to consider - assuming they believe Paul is a serious candidate - is what kind president would he really be? Would he cut a trillion $$ in spending the first year? Of course not. He probably would not get much done at all economically. However, the area he would impact the most is the area where he could do the most damage: foreign policy.
Other things to consider:

  • who would be his vice president - Lew Rockwell??
  • who would be in his cabinet, and his chief of staff??
  • how well would he work with Congress, and the Democrats? Does he have a record in congress that would indicate he knows how to bring both parties together to get a deal done?
  • how would he work with our foreign allies, especially the ones he wants to leave hanging out to dry like Israel?
  • How would he handle our enemies like North Korea or Iran? How about Russia or China?
There are other factors that need to be considered, but you get the idea. The problem is that he has no record in some of these areas because he has no experience as a chief executive and no direct foreign policy experience. As previously stated, there's a reason no member of the House has been elected POTUS since the early 1800s. There's nothing in this guy's background that would make one think he's prepared to take over the world's most demanding Chief Executive position.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top