Newt Gingrich on the issues

[24Carat]

Originally Posted by steveh_131

Oh, you were being serious?

Once I saw this I assumed you were making a joke:

First clue, no Purple .

But I can see you point.

[mrjarrell]

Originally Posted by Expat

I could have said the flag of the new caliphate.

I would have gone with a burning American flag, personally. Much more apt.

[mrjarrell]

Originally Posted by steveh_131

According to what I've read, this is because they wanted to recognize Palestine as a state.

Is he anti-U.N. otherwise? I can't find info much regarding his general stance on the U.N.

I don't know that he has a pro or con outlook towards them. I would have to put him at neutral, really. He's doing much of what was done in years past, where they're concerned. Not much change. At least he isn't using them to promote wars, as his predecessor did.

[rambone]

Originally Posted by dross

So, Rambone, if Newt is Fascism wrapped in an American flag, is Obama Communism wrapped in a..a what. a burning American flag, a peace flag?

In a way there are parallels to what I am saying... candidates getting elected under a false banner and delivering statism.

Obama got elected under the premise of less war, but has gone out of his way to start new wars and enhance the domestic Police State. Peace and civil rights was his false banner. He brought fascism.

Now we have Gingrich, with a track record that should appall most any of us. He's running on being a principled conservative, when his record shows the exact opposite. The complicit media perpetuates that myth. We have been deceived. We cannot be unwilling to let ourselves admit that we have a statist in our midst.

And the media mind control has been so effective that we have people saying stuff like this...

Originally Posted by 24Carat

I personally see Newt as a committed, driven patriot and an invaluable national resource. His standing in history will be on par with the founding fathers.

Ben Franklin: Those who would trade essential liberty for security deserve neither.

Newt Gingrich: Let government keep you safe and secure, or else we'll lose a city!

[24Carat]

Originally Posted by rambone

In a way there are parallels to what I am saying... candidates getting elected under a false banner and delivering statism.

Obama got elected under the premise of less war, but has gone out of his way to start new wars and enhance the domestic Police State. Peace and civil rights was his false banner. He brought fascism.

Now we have Gingrich, with a track record that should appall most any of us. He's running on being a principled conservative, when his record shows the exact opposite. The complicit media perpetuates that myth. We have been deceived. We cannot be unwilling to let ourselves admit that we have a statist in our midst.

And the media mind control has been so effective that we have people saying stuff like this...



Ben Franklin: Those who would trade essential liberty for security deserve neither.

Newt Gingrich: Let government keep you safe and secure, or else we'll lose a city!

Yes, the actual Franklin quote is “Those who would give up Essential Liberty, to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety"

An exhaustive search shows no quote as above that can be attributed to Newt.

You keep using the term Statist as if it has some inherent negative or evil characteristic when in fact it is rather general and benign:

"Statism (French; étatisme) is a term usually describing a political philosophy, whether of the right or the left, that emphasises the role of the state in politics or supports the use of the state to achieve economic, military or social goals. People who believe that the state is either good or necessary are called statists."

"The practice or doctrine of giving a centralized government control over economic planning and policy."

At the extreme we have" :

From the Ayn Rand Lexicon: "A statist system—whether of a communist, fascist, Nazi, socialist or “welfare” type—is based on the . . . government’s unlimited power, which means: on the rule of brute force. The differences among statist systems are only a matter of time and degree; the principle is the same. Under statism, the government is not a policeman, but a legalized criminal that holds the power to use physical force in any manner and for any purpose it pleases against legally disarmed, defenseless victims.

Nothing can ever justify so monstrously evil a theory. Nothing can justify the horror, the brutality, the plunder, the destruction, the starvation, the slave-labor camps, the torture chambers, the wholesale slaughter of statist dictatorships."

Yep, sounds like newt Gingrich to me !

[88GT]

Originally Posted by steveh_131

Are you just trying to pick a fight?

This is a thread about Gingrich's policies. If you don't want to discuss them, then...don't discuss them. I won't be offended.

No. Did you read my response to your last bit of snarkiness? I am not playing that game.

But back on topic: these aren't discussions about someone's platforms. These are bait traps so the some can proselytize how superior they are to every one else for using a different standard to evaluate candidates.

[steveh_131]

Originally Posted by 88GT

But back on topic: these aren't discussions about someone's platforms. These are bait traps so the some can proselytize how superior they are to every one else for using a different standard to evaluate candidates.

Then don't discuss his issues. Nobody is forcing you to participate in this discussion.

[woundedyak]

You Tube

You Tube

[rambone]

I just found that Newt Gingrich co-sponsored the 1987 Fairness Doctrine.

Perhaps he was playing the Devil's advocate for regulating free speech once again.

[rambone]

List updated:

01/06/1996 - Gingrich himself conceived a secret CIA mission to topple the Iranian leadership.

In an unusual operation conceived by Speaker Newt Gingrich, the Central Intelligence Agency is to mount a $18 million covert action to change the nature of the Government of Iran. The operation has not started, but the counteroffensive has.The directive became public here and in Iran three months ago -- long before it became law. Now the C.I.A. finds itself required, against its better judgment, to plan a "secret" mission, with its cover already blown, in a region where American policy has suffered failures and fiascos.

The money for the mission was included in a secret bill passed on Dec. 31 that authorizes intelligence spending for this year. Iran reacted to its passage almost immediately: On Jan. 6, it proclaimed that three Iranians jailed on charges of spying for the United States would be sentenced to death.

On Tuesday, Iran's Parliament announced a $20 million operation "to counter the Great Satan" and combat the American plan.

The history of the C.I.A. in Iran includes sponsoring the 1953 coup that installed Shah Riza Pahlevi; the 1979 revolution, in which fundamentalists toppled the Shah, seized the American Embassy and the C.I.A. station for 444 days and painstakingly pieced together the agency's shredded files; and the secret arms deals of a decade ago, in which the C.I.A. helped ship missiles to Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini and the Revolutionary Guards.