Thread: Are You Angry That Newt Isn't Going To Get The Nomination?

Originally Posted by Dan40

Where did Newt stand 90 days ago and 60 days ago? Single digits and low single digits at that. And a little further back he had NO staff at all.

Now he has surged to the front and is being attacked by Republicans and Democrats alike.

He carries the most baggage, but he also carries the best credentials.
When Clinton was campaigning for President he promised welfare reform. Once elected he IGNORED any attempt at welfare reform and concentrated on Universal Health Care, the nation bankrupting obsession of the left. Gingrich FORCED welfare reform AND a balanced budget. A balanced budget was claimed to be impossible then by liberals just as they claim it cannot be done now. They were wrong then, they are wrong now. It not only CAN be balanced, it MUST be balanced. The chaos of the EU should make that clear to all. Gingrich is the only candidate that HAS done it. And he is the only candidate that spends 99% of his talking time being positive and not attacking his fellow Republicans.

You know, I really like how the right likes to give Newt all the credit for the balanced budgets of the nineties. But, when it goes bust, it is all the presidents fault. The president don't even have a vote on the budget. When things are going good, its because of them. when it goes bad its the other guys fault. Newt's a joke just like the other flavor of the month thet preceded him, Bachman,Perry, Cain, now Newt Just look at how foolish the house Republicans look right now after this debackle over extending the payroll tax cut. They are going to loose the house come Nov.

Originally Posted by other guy

You know, I really like how the right likes to give Newt all the credit for the balanced budgets of the nineties. But, when it goes bust, it is all the presidents fault. The president don't even have a vote on the budget. When things are going good, its because of them. when it goes bad its the other guys fault. Newt's a joke just like the other flavor of the month thet preceded him, Bachman,Perry, Cain, now Newt Just look at how foolish the house Republicans look right now after this debackle over extending the payroll tax cut. They are going to loose the house come Nov.

IF you wish to respond to my post, then respond to what I say, not the nebulous "right." If you research, you'll find that I primarily blame CONGRESS. The president gets the heat only when the president WITH his own party in control of Congress ADDS to the problems.

However in b.o.'s case, HE is the one that has pursued and maintained a completely failed policy of Stimulus. And 12 MONTHS AGO, when it was disgustingly obvious that the Stimulus money was gone and no stimulus had happened, that b.o. was given a report and a plan to solve our problems. That plan came from the debt commission that b.o. and ONLY b,o. picked and appointed. The Simpson-Bowles plan would easily be passed by Republicans in the House and in the Senate. I do not see any way Republicans could argue against it. And there are enough, non radical liberal, Democrats to pass it too. b.o. tossed that plan in the trash a year ago. HE didn't agree with it. President Clinton said THIS WEEK that HE was for that plan and did not understand why b.o. rejected it.

Originally Posted by other guy

You know, I really like how the right likes to give Newt all the credit for the balanced budgets of the nineties. But, when it goes bust, it is all the presidents fault. The president don't even have a vote on the budget. When things are going good, its because of them. when it goes bad its the other guys fault. Newt's a joke just like the other flavor of the month thet preceded him, Bachman,Perry, Cain, now Newt Just look at how foolish the house Republicans look right now after this debackle over extending the payroll tax cut. They are going to loose the house come Nov.

LOL, this is rich coming from an Obama-lovin liberal. You know, the president who gets NO blame for his own failed policies?

The only ones who look foolish are the Dems who insisted on a two-week bandaid so they could get their (*)(*)(*)(*) together.

I woulda voted for Newt... but then again, I'll be voting for ANYBODY BUT OBAMA in 2012. Like all sane Americans.

Too bad the OP tucked tail and ran... typical lefty.

Silly neocons

Originally Posted by Dan40

IF you wish to respond to my post, then respond to what I say, not the nebulous "right." If you research, you'll find that I primarily blame CONGRESS. The president gets the heat only when the president WITH his own party in control of Congress ADDS to the problems.

However in b.o.'s case, HE is the one that has pursued and maintained a completely failed policy of Stimulus. And 12 MONTHS AGO, when it was disgustingly obvious that the Stimulus money was gone and no stimulus had happened, that b.o. was given a report and a plan to solve our problems. That plan came from the debt commission that b.o. and ONLY b,o. picked and appointed. The Simpson-Bowles plan would easily be passed by Republicans in the House and in the Senate. I do not see any way Republicans could argue against it. And there are enough, non radical liberal, Democrats to pass it too. b.o. tossed that plan in the trash a year ago. HE didn't agree with it. President Clinton said THIS WEEK that HE was for that plan and did not understand why b.o. rejected it.

You were the one tootin ol Newts horn giving him all the credit for the balanced budgets. I don't understand how you can say that the stimilus did not work. When Obama took office we were loosing 750,000 jobs a month. Obama does the stimulus and we start adding 100,000 a month. The right says thats not enough. The stimulus did not work. Would you have suggested to just leave it alone and continue to lose 750,000 jobs a month. As for Simpson-Bowle, Obama agreed with parts of it, but there were areas where they could not agree, and lef it open. For example, how to deal with th Bush tax cuts. Just that one isue is a stopper that they cannot come to agreement on, so to say it would have passed is silly. The way it has turned out if Obama agrees to a tax cut the republicans are against it. So to think they could have agreed on this is silly. To blame Obama for any of ths mess is silly. During 8 years of Bush we started 2 wars and passed the prescription drug bill, all on the credit card and bankrupted the country. Obama takes office and al of a sudden we are on a cash opnly policy. Even ObamaCare had to be deficit nuetral. Obama has not been allowed to spend a nickel without cutting it from somewere else. I'm not saying this is bad, but don;t understand how he can be blamed for our debt. Even George Bush and a lot of republicans said the stimulus was necessary to avoid a great deppression. Now look what they say HUH. I can't wait for NOV when all you righties are going to see what the American people have to say. Just look at Wisconsin , they are on track to Remove their Tea Party republican governor. Ohio just overturned Union busting legislation passed by their new Republican state gov't. People have gotten a little taste of what these republicans are about and don'tlikewhat thy see. Its all across the country , this will be a good year for the dems because the blacks and Latinos will bne coming out of the woodwork unlike in 2010 when they stayed home because their man was not on the ballot. Add to this th weak candidates on the republican side, It looks like Mitt, A lot of republicans will stay home rather than vote fora morman. Its looking like ther could be a 3rd pary run which wil further weaken any republican . See you in Nov.

Originally Posted by gregdavidson

Just the thought of waking up one morning and discovering that Newt Gingrich is your new president makes me cringe a little. But it seems to me like the REAL Republican Party is "slowly" giving up on their last true Republican and going along with Romney. That's like music to my ears! We can actually have a DECENT election! Are you angry that you're not going to get to vote for a true conservative?

Your premise is all wrong. Romney is 100% more conservative than Obama....and that's who he'll be running against!! Go Romney!!!

Healthcare and attacks on the 2nd amendment is why we must destroy Romn~, I mean Obama.

Originally Posted by other guy

You were the one tootin ol Newts horn giving him all the credit for the balanced budgets. I don't understand how you can say that the stimilus did not work. When Obama took office we were loosing 750,000 jobs a month. Obama does the stimulus and we start adding 100,000 a month. The right says thats not enough. The stimulus did not work. Would you have suggested to just leave it alone and continue to lose 750,000 jobs a month. As for Simpson-Bowle, Obama agreed with parts of it, but there were areas where they could not agree, and lef it open. For example, how to deal with th Bush tax cuts. Just that one isue is a stopper that they cannot come to agreement on, so to say it would have passed is silly. The way it has turned out if Obama agrees to a tax cut the republicans are against it. So to think they could have agreed on this is silly. To blame Obama for any of ths mess is silly. During 8 years of Bush we started 2 wars and passed the prescription drug bill, all on the credit card and bankrupted the country. Obama takes office and al of a sudden we are on a cash opnly policy. Even ObamaCare had to be deficit nuetral. Obama has not been allowed to spend a nickel without cutting it from somewere else. I'm not saying this is bad, but don;t understand how he can be blamed for our debt. Even George Bush and a lot of republicans said the stimulus was necessary to avoid a great deppression. Now look what they say HUH. I can't wait for NOV when all you righties are going to see what the American people have to say. Just look at Wisconsin , they are on track to Remove their Tea Party republican governor. Ohio just overturned Union busting legislation passed by their new Republican state gov't. People have gotten a little taste of what these republicans are about and don'tlikewhat thy see. Its all across the country , this will be a good year for the dems because the blacks and Latinos will bne coming out of the woodwork unlike in 2010 when they stayed home because their man was not on the ballot. Add to this th weak candidates on the republican side, It looks like Mitt, A lot of republicans will stay home rather than vote fora morman. Its looking like ther could be a 3rd pary run which wil further weaken any republican . See you in Nov.

PROPAGANDA!

Check with the BLS.gov.

Stimulus passed 2/09. 11/11 the BLS says there are MORE THAN A MILLION FEWER people working today than 2/09. That was 33 months ago. If the lying propaganda that you have been swindled into believing is true and 100,000 jobs a month have been found, that is 3.3 million jobs. Since we now HAVE over a million FEWER jobs, then 133,000 jobs a month have been lost. THAT IS FAILURE.

Second, there has been a steady stream of "ECONOMIC ADVISERS" and "CHIEF ECONOMIC ADVISERS" leaving the White house, "to pursue other interests." i.e. FIRED! EVERY one of them has said upon leaving the WH, EVERY ONE OF THEM. "The Stimulus failed because it was too small."

"Too Small" is fiscal idiocy. "FAILED" is the operative word in their universally consistent statements.

AND b.o. has come out with STIMULUS 2.01/2 this year. IF Stimulus 1.0 worked, why is 2.01/2 necessary? FAILURE of 1.0 is why. And the ignored, laughed at request for Stimulus 2.01/2 also tells the analytical mind that Stimulus 1.0 is long OVER. Meaning any gains in the economy at this late date ARE NOT attributable to Stimulus 1.0. But ARE the results of the ever present desire of many, many entrepreneurs to better their lives. The natural real driver of economies.

And you evidently have not read the Simpson-Bowles report. First, there was no one to disagree WITH about any part of it. b.o. (*)(*)(*)(*)canned it, plain and simple. 2. If the tax code is thrown out and redrawn as S-B recommends. The Bush/Obama tax cuts are history, replaced by LOWER tax rates for ALL. So you have told me quite clearly, YOU have not read the report. And it is only a report, not a plan. Altho it could easily be turned into a PASSABLE plan.

Lying propaganda may satisfy you. But reality is necessary for me.

Originally Posted by Dan40

PROPAGANDA!

Check with the BLS.gov.

Stimulus passed 2/09. 11/11 the BLS says there are MORE THAN A MILLION FEWER people working today than 2/09. That was 33 months ago. If the lying propaganda that you have been swindled into believing is true and 100,000 jobs a month have been found, that is 3.3 million jobs. Since we now HAVE over a million FEWER jobs, then 133,000 jobs a month have been lost. THAT IS FAILURE.

Second, there has been a steady stream of "ECONOMIC ADVISERS" and "CHIEF ECONOMIC ADVISERS" leaving the White house, "to pursue other interests." i.e. FIRED! EVERY one of them has said upon leaving the WH, EVERY ONE OF THEM. "The Stimulus failed because it was too small."

"Too Small" is fiscal idiocy. "FAILED" is the operative word in their universally consistent statements.

AND b.o. has come out with STIMULUS 2.01/2 this year. IF Stimulus 1.0 worked, why is 2.01/2 necessary? FAILURE of 1.0 is why. And the ignored, laughed at request for Stimulus 2.01/2 also tells the analytical mind that Stimulus 1.0 is long OVER. Meaning any gains in the economy at this late date ARE NOT attributable to Stimulus 1.0. But ARE the results of the ever present desire of many, many entrepreneurs to better their lives. The natural real driver of economies.

And you evidently have not read the Simpson-Bowles report. First, there was no one to disagree WITH about any part of it. b.o. (*)(*)(*)(*)canned it, plain and simple. 2. If the tax code is thrown out and redrawn as S-B recommends. The Bush/Obama tax cuts are history, replaced by LOWER tax rates for ALL. So you have told me quite clearly, YOU have not read the report. And it is only a report, not a plan. Altho it could easily be turned into a PASSABLE plan.

Lying propaganda may satisfy you. But reality is necessary for me.

I went and read it before the last post, maybe you should try and do the same. OK, even by your numbers, We went from losing 750,00 to only losing 133,000 a month. That is what you call failure ??. To me that looks like a 600,000 a month improvement. You righties really like to resort to name calling. Just read your post above and count the number of times you call me a liar. Go back and read my posts, I don't call you names. I don't think you are lying. I think you believe what you say. I just disagree. You don't have to resort to name calling when someone disagrees with you. Back to Simpson-Boyle, The report list multiple options they could take along with what they think would be the results. Eliminating the taxcode was one of the options. Others included letting the Bush Tax cuts expire, All, and to not include the rich. There were things in there that we couldall agree. But, taken in its entirety, it was something that none of us could agree. If the republicans think it is such a great idea, John Boehner can bring it up for a vote in the house and see where it goes. Obama can't stop him. See how easy it is to discuss something without calling someone names. You should try it sometime.

Originally Posted by Dan40

PROPAGANDA!

Check with the BLS.gov.

Stimulus passed 2/09. 11/11 the BLS says there are MORE THAN A MILLION FEWER people working today than 2/09. That was 33 months ago. If the lying propaganda that you have been swindled into believing is true and 100,000 jobs a month have been found, that is 3.3 million jobs. Since we now HAVE over a million FEWER jobs, then 133,000 jobs a month have been lost. THAT IS FAILURE.

Second, there has been a steady stream of "ECONOMIC ADVISERS" and "CHIEF ECONOMIC ADVISERS" leaving the White house, "to pursue other interests." i.e. FIRED! EVERY one of them has said upon leaving the WH, EVERY ONE OF THEM. "The Stimulus failed because it was too small."

"Too Small" is fiscal idiocy. "FAILED" is the operative word in their universally consistent statements.

AND b.o. has come out with STIMULUS 2.01/2 this year. IF Stimulus 1.0 worked, why is 2.01/2 necessary? FAILURE of 1.0 is why. And the ignored, laughed at request for Stimulus 2.01/2 also tells the analytical mind that Stimulus 1.0 is long OVER. Meaning any gains in the economy at this late date ARE NOT attributable to Stimulus 1.0. But ARE the results of the ever present desire of many, many entrepreneurs to better their lives. The natural real driver of economies.

And you evidently have not read the Simpson-Bowles report. First, there was no one to disagree WITH about any part of it. b.o. (*)(*)(*)(*)canned it, plain and simple. 2. If the tax code is thrown out and redrawn as S-B recommends. The Bush/Obama tax cuts are history, replaced by LOWER tax rates for ALL. So you have told me quite clearly, YOU have not read the report. And it is only a report, not a plan. Altho it could easily be turned into a PASSABLE plan.

Lying propaganda may satisfy you. But reality is necessary for me.

You call what I post as propaganda, thats painting it with a broad brush. What is it that I say that is not true. Be specific, I am more than happy to debate it with you.