PDA

View Full Version : Response from Gingrich supporter about "Hypocrisy" Ad




ZanZibar
11-30-2011, 11:52 PM
So I sent on the newest ad detailing Newt's Serial Hypocrisy to a bunch of people and here is what one of them responded....






On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 9:34 PM, <xxxxxxxx wrote:

I will be voting for speaker Gingrich, given any opportunity. If somewhere out there, a video, or story comes up showcasing the former speaker an axe murderer, I will still vote for him. So, I wont be looking at discovery videos telling me something new about the speaker anytime real soon. Let me tell you why:

Speaker Gingrich is the only candidate running for US President that can destroy Obama in debate. Oh, and its going to be better than a headline HBO boxing match, simply just one sided. I give Obama two debates to defeat & make marginal Gov Romney, with Romneycare being the national model for Obamacare. Two debates at max. I give Obama two debates (at max) with Gingrich, to never want to debate with him any more. It wont be a wise decision, even though I want to see many Newt debates with Obama.

Gingrich can easily recall positive legislation that worked for our nation, and can clearly recall (instant total recall) any poor legislation, dates, times and quips, he has this granted ability from our God, to dissect Obama in debate ruthlessly, exposing this man on his own track record and poor leadership as he occupies the White House (OWH). I have to witness this mandate coming to a network near you. Keep in mind, regardless of each of the candidates running against Obama, you must know that speaker Gingrich has already done, completed most all of the nations business as others running say that they want to do. Michelle Bachman is a good cheerleader, but, I am quite sure that a measure of quantifiable accomplishments are what I (we) specifically want to see in our next President.

Gingrich Supporter - steadfast.
xxxxxxxx Douglas

fred584
12-01-2011, 12:00 AM
Gingrich can easily recall positive legislation that worked for our nation

and then he will do exactly what the masters tell him to do.

Tea Party (http://www.teaparty11.com)

kylejack
12-01-2011, 12:02 AM
If somewhere out there, a video, or story comes up showcasing the former speaker an axe murderer, I will still vote for him.
Well, at least he saved you some time! May as well write him off as a loon.

ZanZibar
12-01-2011, 12:03 AM
I sent him an e-mail back explaining that Gingrich is just as bad as Obama and listed his voting record to back it up.

bluesc
12-01-2011, 12:04 AM
He's right about Gingrich in debates. Shame that what Newt would actually do once in the White House doesn't matter to this guy. The debates won't do it for Newt though, with his crazy comments about drug laws, wars, and civil liberties, the liberals and independents would run away screaming back to Obama.

kylejack
12-01-2011, 12:07 AM
Don't believe the Newt debate mythology. That's a story he's been telling himself. No guarantee that Obama would agree to Lincoln-Douglas style debates. Furthermore, did you watch that debate with Cain? It was an absolutely terrible format, and they didn't even stick to the rules.

Darthbrooklyn
12-01-2011, 02:06 PM
Good debaters dont make good presidents. There are good speakers currently in the white house that have helped destroy our nation.. so his whole reasoning for gingrich is that he would do well in a debate.. this is what he hangs his hat on?

aclove
12-01-2011, 02:16 PM
Based on some conversations I've had this week, I've come to the conclusion that most of the non-Paul Tea Party activists are so scared shitless of Obama that they'll deliberately turn their rational minds off to vote for any Republican they have to, with the possible exception of Romney (although if it came down to it, they'd probably vote for him, too).

The above Gingrich supporter says it perfectly clearly: "If somewhere out there, a video, or story comes up showcasing the former speaker an axe murderer, I will still vote for him." These people don't care what the record is, they don't care how often they've lied, and they don't really care what they'd do once in office. They've convinced themselves that Obama is the Anti-christ or something, and all that matters is getting him out of office. Who goes into that office is irrelevant, as long as it's not Barack.

I don't know how we get around that bowel-loosening terror, or if these people are small enough in number that we don't really have to. Any thoughts?

roversaurus
12-01-2011, 02:32 PM
Ask them what a Conservative is.

Is a Conservative defined as someone that Democrats hate?
Is what they want someone who will "fight"?
Do you decide what your principles and policies are based on what Democrats do and say and then you just oppose them? If so then you have let Democrats determine who you are.

I believe this to be true for most people active in politics(Left or Right). I think it's how the Republican party got suckered in to nation building. It was a way to pummel Democrats.

But the best response to the guy? "cuckoo cuckoo" Just repeat what he said and laugh at him.

Krugerrand
12-01-2011, 02:33 PM
Based on some conversations I've had this week, I've come to the conclusion that most of the non-Paul Tea Party activists are so scared shitless of Obama that they'll deliberately turn their rational minds off to vote for any Republican they have to, with the possible exception of Romney (although if it came down to it, they'd probably vote for him, too).

The above Gingrich supporter says it perfectly clearly: "If somewhere out there, a video, or story comes up showcasing the former speaker an axe murderer, I will still vote for him." These people don't care what the record is, they don't care how often they've lied, and they don't really care what they'd do once in office. They've convinced themselves that Obama is the Anti-christ or something, and all that matters is getting him out of office. Who goes into that office is irrelevant, as long as it's not Barack.

I don't know how we get around that bowel-loosening terror, or if these people are small enough in number that we don't really have to. Any thoughts?

The point to drive home with these people is that if Obama is their enemy, a Gingrich ticket will cinch Obama's reelection.

Even if I loved the guy ... the DEMs HATE him. The independents HATE him. Obama's supporters aren't that happy with Obama. They do not have much motivation to go to the voting booth. BUT - put Gingrich on the ticket and that's all the motivation that they will need. It would be an Obama landslide.

Is an Obama landslide re-election worth watching Newt tear Obama up in a couple debates?

Todd
12-01-2011, 02:36 PM
Person is beyond reaching.

They believe Civics is something akin to a game... Lol that he actually admits this in his statement.

They see Gingrich's qualifications as:

1. Better Debater than the Democrat

2. Worked in government longer

Let it go

Krugerrand
12-01-2011, 02:41 PM
Person is beyond reaching.

They believe Civics is something akin to a game... Lol that he actually admits this in his statement.

They see Gingrich's qualifications as:

1. Better Debater than the Democrat

2. Worked in government longer

Let it go

My strategy is to ask people what's important to them and show them that Ron Paul is the best answer to that concern.

Abortion
National Security
Economy
Stop Corporate Welfare
Immigration
Stop Obama re-election
Stop the wars
Republicans are evil
Democrats are evil
Patriot Act bad


Really ... the only people who it won't work on are those that want more government funding for abortion, banks, and insurance companies. And, we won't get that vote anyway.

Son of Detroit
12-01-2011, 02:59 PM
A Gingrich fan on the Hannity forums has also defended him against the ad:

http://forums.hannity.com/showthread.php?t=2357041


Imagine a "Republican" attacking a fellow Republican with an ad that relied mostly on quotes from liberal Democrats and that repeated attacks that have been circulated by liberals. Impossible? Never happen? Sorry, but it has, thanks to Ron Paul.

This is the new low to which Ron Paul has sunk with his new atrociously misleading and dishonest anti-Newt attack ad. And, of course, the liberal media outlets are eating this up and giving this deceptive ad maximum air time in order to damage the GOP frontrunner. Nice going, Ron Paul.

The ad's dishonest tone is set right away when it starts with the long-since already explained generic public service ad that Newt did with Nancy Pelosi on climate change. Ron Paul and his campaign staff know darn well that Newt has long since said that it was a mistake to do that ad because it gave people the wrong impression about his views on climate change and how to respond to it. Newt discussed this in some detail just a few days ago on O'Reilly.

http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/oreill...gration-policy

But the ad gets much worse. It proceeds to attack Newt as flip-flopping on climate change by playing sound snippets from . . . ABC News . . . and with text from . . . the Los Angeles Times.

http://www.newt.org/answers#GlobalWarming

Then, in an ad that's about Newt's alleged "hypocrisy," the Paul campaign attacks Newt over one of his early, off-the-cuff comments about the Ryan budget--which Ron Paul voted against and which Newt has said he would have voted for. Yeah, talk about hypocrisy.

And the ad never mentions that Newt's only point was that Republicans shouldn't try to ram the Ryan budget through without due consideration, and that Newt said he liked the bill on its merits and also said he'd vote for it if he were in Congress.

http://www.newt.org/answers#Ryan

Next up in the ad is an attack on Newt for the money he made doing consulting for Freddie Mac and for the money that his think tank received from the healthcare industry. The ad falsely implies criminal wrongdoing by quoting Newt on the fact that some people associated with the financial meltdown should have gone to jail. Two of the people quoted to buttress this misleading attack are Wolf Blitzer of CNN and Ed Schultz of MSNBC.

The ad doesn't mention the fact that Freddie Mac ignored Newt's advice and that Newt never did any lobbying for Freddie Mac. In fact, the ad quotes an unidentified journalist saying that Newt engaged in high-powered lobbying, without citing any evidence to support this claim.

And, the last time I checked, it's still legal to earn money by doing consulting if the agency or firm values your views enough to pay for them.

http://www.newt.org/answers#Freddie

The ad then quotes more critics, two of whom the ad fails to identify, who claim that Newt has changed his positions on issues when he was paid to do so, a false and baseless charge. One of those critics is Anderson Cooper (his voice is easy to recognize).

The ad quotes Rush on a couple issues over which Rush and Newt disagree, but it never mentions that Rush, in spite of these disagreements, continues to speak highly of Newt and has defended him against leftist attacks. Just today Rush spent several minutes praising Newt's defense of Reagan in the '80s.

The ad concludes by quoting what Newt said about candidates who change their views seemingly for political reasons only, as if to imply that Newt is guilty of this act. The ad does not cite a shred of evidence to support this implication.

This is one of the most dishonest, hack-job political ads I've ever seen. Ron Paul and his supporters should be thoroughly ashamed of it.

For more info on Newt Gingrich, including replies to current attacks on him, see the following:

http://www.newt.org/answers#Menu

http://www.votesmart.org/candidate/evaluations/26821

http://www.clubforgrowth.org/whitepa...sec=137&id=903

ZanZibar
12-01-2011, 10:19 PM
Based on some conversations I've had this week, I've come to the conclusion that most of the non-Paul Tea Party activists are so scared shitless of Obama that they'll deliberately turn their rational minds off to vote for any Republican they have to, with the possible exception of Romney (although if it came down to it, they'd probably vote for him, too).Most voters aren't rational. If they were then RP would've been President in 88.

Kodaddy
12-01-2011, 10:38 PM
Geez, didn't that guy realize it was.Newt talking most of the time? The ad is practically all of Newt's own words. We've got to save this country for these types of people, in spite of these kind of people?!?...

georgiaboy
12-02-2011, 10:39 AM
Ha! The larger point the guy is also ignoring is that Newt tries to portray himself as a small gov't against the system conservative, when over and over his remarks vacillate and his actions decidely do not reflect such.

muzzled dogg
12-02-2011, 10:48 AM
He's absolutely right about the debates

xFiFtyOnE
12-02-2011, 11:03 AM
I personally think Ron Paul would do better in debates VS Obama. ;)

VanBummel
12-02-2011, 11:12 AM
If somewhere out there, a video, or story comes up showcasing the former speaker an axe murderer, I will still vote for him.

If, on the other hand, FOX News tells me to vote for someone else...

Justinfrom1776
12-02-2011, 11:32 AM
Newt would get obliterated by the supreme leader Barack Hussein.. Wait til that George Soros money starts to pour in and every 10 minutes on your T.V. you see ads much more condemning than the one Paul just released..

If this is what they did to McCain:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PluoMotgl2w

He will absolutely annihilate Gingrich. He couldn't run ads like this against Paul.

qh4dotcom
12-02-2011, 11:33 AM
I personally think Ron Paul would do better in debates VS Obama. ;)

Could Ron Paul handle a 3 hour Lincoln-Douglas style debate with Obama? I hope he can.

Eric21ND
12-05-2011, 12:51 PM
Some of Newt’s Progressive Dossier:

04/02/1987 – He cosponsored the 1987 Fairness Doctrine
10/22/1991 – He voted for an amendment that would create a National Police Corps.
03/–/1993 – He Voted for sending $1.6 Billion in foreign aid to Russia.
11/19/1993 – He voted for the NAFTA Implementation Act.
11/27/1994 – He supported the GATT Treaty subjecting US Sovereignty to the WTO
08/27/1995 – He suggests that drug smuggling should carry a death sentence.
04/25/1996 – Voted for the single largest increase on Federal education spending ($3.5 Billion)
04/10/1995 – He supported Federal tax dollars being spent on abortions.
06/01/1996 – He helped a Democrat switch parties in an attempt to defeat Ron Paul in the 1996 election.
09/25/1996 – Introduced H.R. 4170, demanded life-sentence or execution for someone bringing 2 ounces of marijuana across the border.
01/22/1997 – Congress gave him a record-setting $300,000 fine for ethical wrongdoing.
11/29/2006 – He said that free speech should be curtailed in order to fight terrorism. Wants to stop terrorists from using the internet. Called for a “serious debate about the 1st Amendment.”
11/29/2006 – He called for a “Geneva Convention for terrorists” so it would be clear who the Constitution need not apply to.
02/15/2007 – He supported Bush’s proposal for mandatory carbon caps.
09/28/2008 – Says if he were in office, he would have reluctantly voted for the $700B TARP bailout.
10/01/2008 – Says in an article that TARP was a “workout, not a bailout.”
12/08/2008 – He was paid $300,000 by Freddie Mac to halt Congress from bringing necessary reform.
03/31/2009 – Says we should have Singapore-style drug tests for Americans.
07/30/2010 – Says that Iraq was just step one in defeating the “Axis of Evil”.
08/03/2010 – Advocates attacks on Iran & North Korea.
08/16/2010 – Opposes property rights of the mosque owner in NYC.
11/15/2010 – He defended Romneycare
12/05/2010 – He said that a website owner should be considered an enemy combatant, hunted down and executed, for publishing leaked government memos.
01/30/2011 – He lobbied for ethanol subsidies.
01/30/2011 – He suggested that flex-fuel vehicles be mandated for Americans.
02/13/2011 – He criticized Obama for sending less U.S. taxdollars to Egypt.
02/15/2011 – His book said that he believes man-made climate-change and advocated creating “a new endowment for conservation and the environment.”
03/09/2011 – He blames his infidelity to multiple wives on his passion for the country.
03/15/2011 – Says that NAFTA worked because it created jobs in Mexico.
03/19/2011 – He has no regrets about supporting Medicare drug coverage. (Now $7.2T unfunded liability)
03/23/2011 – He completely flip-flopped on Libyan intervention in 16 days.
03/25/2011 – He plans to sign as many as 200 executive orders on his first day as president.
04/25/2011 – He’s a paid lobbyist for Federal ethanol subsidies.
05/12/2011 – He was more supportive of individual health-care mandates than Mitt Romney.
08/01/2011 – He hired a company to create fake Twitter to appear as if he had a following.
10/07/2011 – He said he’d ignore the Supreme Court if need be.
11/16/2011 – Was revealed he actually received 1.6 million from Freddie Mac, vs. his previously stated $300,000-

2009-2010 Travels around the country with Al Sharpton and Arne Duncan to promote President Obama’s new educational policies: i.e. increased local control of schools with increased Federal subsidies and regulations from Washington.

2010 Supported ultra-liberal, pro-abortion, pro-union, establishment candidate Dede Scozzafava in New York’s 23rd Congressional District in a special election, over conservative candidate Doug Hoffman.

1995 Gingrich Wrote the foreword to Alvin Toffler’s book, “The Politics of the Third Wave, Creating a New Civilization” and advocated all members of Congress should read the book. The book calls for a “New Democracy” for the 21st century which is essentially based on following Plato’s Third Wave virtues:
1. Private property must be abolished, the wealthy hated and their wealth redistributed by state mandate.
2. Children belong to, and are born to serve the state. The influence of parents is noxious and disruptive to the interest of the state, thus every child should be raised in government nurseries, without knowledge of who his or her parents are and without the parents having knowledge of who their offspring are. Every child becomes the common property of every parent in the city. Every parent has the collective duty to watch over them.
3. Private education, like traditional parenting, is at the very headwaters of falsehood and social strife. It must be eliminated and replaced with a closely monitored state school system.
4. Old values passed down in history, song, children’s books, all need to be rewritten to discredit and erase the old virtues and to exalt and enthrone the new.
5. Frivolous children’s games eliminated, new games developed that emphasize law and order.
6. Private industry is self serving. State should have absolute control of all industry for benefit of the whole.
7. Class mobility is a revolutionary idea that threatens the stability of the state and the pre-eminence of true philosophy. A strict caste system and the elimination of career choice is the answer.
8. Talent must never be allowed to wander or be wasted. Early on, children must be identified and channeled by the state for the benefit of the state into careers selected by the state.
9. Under the guise of equality, women ought to be exploited: first to foment ‘class war’ during the Third Wave (women’s roles are reversed to men’s); next, to be promptly put into their place as part of a ‘community of women’ to be shared collectively by male guardians.
10. Selective breeding is beneficial to the state.
11. Unwanted babies, inferior babies, deformed babies, and the adult handicapped are an unnecessary drag on the prosperity and well-being of society. They should be left to die. Unproductive adults, likewise, should be terminated.
12. Homosexuality is morally acceptable and homosexual rape of lower-class males and boys is a right of rulers, guardians and war heroes.
13. Only a few men are foreordained to understand life and higher good… the rest are equivalent of dumb sheep.
14. Absolute loyalty to the government is vital for the success and safety of society. A state sanctioned National Police network is an essential good.
15. Wealth is not essential to the safety of the state.

- Gingrich voted to permit the Federal Reserve to purchase Treasury Debt
- Bailed out savings and loan institutions in 1991. $40B Bank bailout
- Gingrich voted to strengthen the federal home loan agencies
- Gingrich voted for increased powers to the FDIC to bail out struggling savings and loans through reorganization, purchase of bad assets, or recapitalization.
- Gingrich voted in favor of the Chrysler Bailout in 1979
- Gingrich voted for an oil windfall profits tax in 1979, which was signed by Jimmy Carter.
- Urged the House to repeal the War Powers Act and give the Presidency more power.
- Urged Clinton to expand military presence in Bosnia.
- Gingrich voted against a provision requiring congressional approval prior to deployment of U.S. troops into Central America in 1983.
- Gingrich voted to increase CIA secrecy and against any requirement that the President report covert activity to congress before it is initiated.
- Gingrich voted for Jimmy Carter’s “Energy Mobilization Board.”
- Gingrich voted for an increase in taxes on coal producers in 1981
- Gingrich voted for a 5-cent increase in the gas tax to fund highway and other mass-transit projects.
- Gingrich was one of the few who voted against the 1984 bill requiring the President and Congress to submit a balanced budget
- Gingrich voted for a congressional pay raise
- Gingrich voted against a bipartisan 1% cut to the Department of Defense budget for 1983

sailingaway
12-05-2011, 12:53 PM
Look at the latest Marist poll of Iowa. Gingrich and Romney both lose to Obama. Ron Paul doesn't.

kylejack
12-05-2011, 12:54 PM
09/25/1996 – Introduced H.R. 4170, demanded life-sentence or execution for someone bringing 2 ounces of marijuana across the border.
Yet in 1982 had wrote a letter supporting medical marijuana.

Todd
12-05-2011, 12:55 PM
Some of Newt’s Progressive Dossier:



Needs it's own thread....:cool:

nayjevin
12-05-2011, 03:32 PM
Needs it's own thread....:cool:

and sources!

GopBlackList
12-05-2011, 03:43 PM
So I sent on the newest ad detailing Newt's Serial Hypocrisy to a bunch of people and here is what one of them responded....





[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT][/FONT][/COLOR]
[/INDENT]

You have to admit that a lot of the liberal pundits that says the conservatives are too brain dead is probably true. Just look at the anger and vitriol in that letter.

ctiger2
12-05-2011, 03:53 PM
lol! Gingrich debating Obama is like Obama debating himself. That would be very frustrating indeed! Luckily it WON'T happen.