Paul's new ad: Gingrich - Serial Hypocrisy

Well made, aimed at the right rather than people like me.

"He's flipped and flopped based upon who is paying him". An ad Paul could make against Romney and if he was to win, against Obama.

1Perry said:

"He's flipped and flopped based upon who is paying him". An ad Paul could make against Romney and if he was to win, against Obama.

Click to expand...

You can make that against most politicians. They do more for who gives them money than by their duty and obligation to the People and through the restraints and chains of the Constitution.

I think that politicians should have to wear patches for contributors to their campaign like NASCAR drivers.

Ikari said:

I think that politicians should have to wear patches for contributors to their campaign like NASCAR drivers.

Click to expand...

I think it should be illegal to pay money to politicians or their campaigns!

AdamT said:

I think it should be illegal to pay money to politicians or their campaigns!

Click to expand...

That's one way to do it; but then it just becomes incentives after the fact. Maybe you get no money now, but you know I'll be looking for a VP of ****ing Off when you're getting done with Congress...and maybe I'll just guarantee you that job right now. Pays 10's of millions/year. And if law X is passed, well I won't be able to have that job opening.

Here's a real si-fi idea...stop all elections and put in a mega computer to do nothing more than follow the constitution and make no more laws...we have enough already. Think of the money saved...no retirement for flunkies, no salaries for them or their helpers, no need to spend money for air travel (computers don't travel) and on and on. Now some will say we can't be ruled by a machine, but if the machine follows the constitution to the letter, what is there to gripe about. There wouldn't be any hankey-pankey either, computers don't boink.

...and now comes all the people to say how crazy this idea is...good, it's what makes Forums fun!

Ikari said:

You can make that against most politicians. They do more for who gives them money than by their duty and obligation to the People and through the restraints and chains of the Constitution.

I think that politicians should have to wear patches for contributors to their campaign like NASCAR drivers.

Click to expand...

I agree completely but my post was directed at the idea that Paul was addressing "the right" whatever that is supposed to mean.

1Perry said:

I agree completely but my post was directed at the idea that Paul was addressing "the right" whatever that is supposed to mean.

Click to expand...

If he wanted to address the "right" what he could do is campaign on the changed political platform of the Republicans which now more closely resembles the Democrats. There's lots of good propaganda there. The party of Reagan is dead.

Ikari said:

That's one way to do it; but then it just becomes incentives after the fact. Maybe you get no money now, but you know I'll be looking for a VP of ****ing Off when you're getting done with Congress...and maybe I'll just guarantee you that job right now. Pays 10's of millions/year. And if law X is passed, well I won't be able to have that job opening.

Click to expand...

That's avoidable to some extent. In addition to outlawing contributions you could pass a law preventing officials from being employed by companies affected by legislation the official supported for X number of years.

coolwalker said:

Here's a real si-fi idea...stop all elections and put in a mega computer to do nothing more than follow the constitution and make no more laws...we have enough already. Think of the money saved...no retirement for flunkies, no salaries for them or their helpers, no need to spend money for air travel (computers don't travel) and on and on. Now some will say we can't be ruled by a machine, but if the machine follows the constitution to the letter, what is there to gripe about. There wouldn't be any hankey-pankey either, computers don't boink.

...and now comes all the people to say how crazy this idea is...good, it's what makes Forums fun!

Click to expand...

Actually it would be a software program making decisions based solely on the paramters set forth by a programmer. Now, I don't know about you but there isn't a single programmer (or group of programmers) that I would trust to write a software program that would so called "make decisions based upon the constituion". Nice idea, but it would be poorly executed.

Just imagine it, "Microsoft Consitution 2012".

I don't think so lol

AdamT said:

That's avoidable to some extent. In addition to outlawing contributions you could pass a law preventing officials from being employed by companies affected by legislation the official supported for X number of years.

Click to expand...

There is certainly a lot which can be controlled, yes. But doubtful that government would hamstring its members in such a manner.

TheNextEra said:

Actually it would be a software program making decisions based solely on the paramters set forth by a programmer. Now, I don't know about you but there isn't a single programmer (or group of programmers) that I would trust to write a software program that would so called "make decisions based upon the constituion". Nice idea, but it would be poorly executed.

Just imagine it, "Microsoft Consitution 2012".

I don't think so lol

Click to expand...

This is pretty much a joke you know...no one likes the government but most Americans agree the constitution is our cornerstone. A machine wouldn't change that, but a person would. Like people that call it "a living document". It is not a living document. It should have been written in stone like The Ten Commandments.

coolwalker said:

It is not a living document.

Click to expand...

If it isn't, then there would have been no need to have an amendment process. But I think it was recognized that times change, and the challenges of the country change, and dogmatically living by a piece of paper to the word forever simply cannot work.

The only constant is change.

1Perry said:

I agree completely but my post was directed at the idea that Paul was addressing "the right" whatever that is supposed to mean.

Click to expand...

It means the ad uses Limbaugh and Ryan, figures liked by some of the people who position themselves at the political right whereas one is reviled and the other distrusted by people like me.

nonpareil said:

It means the ad uses Limbaugh and Ryan, figures liked by some of the people who position themselves at the political right whereas one is reviled and the other distrusted by people like me.

Click to expand...

Ron Paul remembers Gingrich from 1997-1998 in the Republican controlled Congress, when Gingrich increased US Government spending.


"One thing that makes Newt Gingrich an attractive presidential candidate to many conservatives is his term as Speaker of the House and his role as the captain of the Republican Revolution of 1994. But a closer look at the history of the years between 1995 and when he stepped down as speaker in 1998 show that Gingrich was usually at odds with those pushing the Reaganite vision of a truly limited federal government. In fact, when the Republican Revolution succeeded at all it was often in spite of Newt Gingrich, not because of him. Unfortunately, too many conservatives have forgotten this or perhaps may not have known it at all...

"The final straw for many was the 1998 budget. When Kasich presented a budget that harkened back to the Contract with America days and included real budget cuts, Gingrich lambasted the budget-cutters in a closed-door meeting. Gingrich’s pushback against fiscal conservatives was a prelude to Congress, a few weeks before the midterm elections of 1998, passing a budget that hiked non-defense discretionary spending by over 5% that year – twice the 1997 budget deal’s increase – and funded a record amount of pork-barrel projects. It was in every way a rout of the very ideals that won the GOP a majority in Congress in the first place. When presented with an option by then-Rep. Tom Coburn of Oklahoma and a number of other conservatives in the House to offset some of these hikes with spending cuts in other parts of the budget, Gingrich nixed the idea outright."


How Speaker Newt Gingrich Betrayed the Republican Revolution | United Liberty | Free Market - Individual Liberty - Limited Government



"Gingrich’s colleagues were, however, right to bring his tenure to an end. His character flaws — his impulsiveness, his grandiosity, his weakness for half-baked (and not especially conservative) ideas — made him a poor Speaker of the House. Again and again he combined incendiary rhetoric with irresolute action, bringing Republicans all the political costs of a hardline position without actually taking one. Again and again he put his own interests above those of the causes he championed in public."


http://www.unitedliberty.org/articles/9203-national-review-comes-out-against-newt-gingrich


"Gingrich's campaign manager noted the onslaught in a fundraising pitch to donors.


"With Newt's opponents spending $9 million on attack ads in Iowa, we need to quickly ramp up our messaging," Michael Krull said Saturday.


Anti-Gingrich ads, courtesy of Romney allies, dominate in Iowa. The Restore Our Future political action committee on Friday spent an additional $1 million on airtime, and broadcast almost $790,000 in commercials against Gingrich last week alone. Gingrich, by comparison, spent roughly 100,000 on broadcast and cable ads."



http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57344701/gingrich-says-rivals-criticism-taking-a-toll/




12-15-11

"Mr. Gingrich is now at 20 percent, down from 32 percent a month ago, reports pollster Scott Rasmussen. Mr. Romney, the former governor of Massachusetts, is at 23 percent, and Rep. Ron Paul (R) of Texas is at 18 percent. With a four-point margin of error, the poll points to a bunch-up that could spell potential victory for any of those three candidates."


http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politi...cker-Gingrich-tanks-in-Iowa-Romney-now-on-top




//

"




[SUP]][/SUP]


Republican Party presidential primaries, 2012 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia




''

Republican Primary Dates:

2012 Primary Schedule « 2012 Election Central

"The FBI heard second- and third-hand that an arms dealer was bragging about having connections to Gingrich, who would singlehandedly lift the arms embargo on Saddam Hussein’s Iraq ... because a 'cooperating witness' told them that he talked to someone who said he was acting on Marianne Gingrich’s behalf."

Newt Gingrich Was Nearby FBI Sting Target Over Alleged Bribe

"According to the Wall Street Journal, a company hired Marianne Gingrich (Newt's wife) for $2,500 a month plus commissions in September 1994 after he announced support for a free trade zone in Israel that they are trying to build. Her "job" for Israel Export Development Co. is to find tenants for the trade zone. Gingrich's spokesman said that since her job did not involve working with the US government, there was no conflict of interest."


Possible Presidential Candidate Newt Gingrich - The Dark Side

"We were talking Tuesday morning in a courtroom in the Superior Court of Washington, minutes before the latest hearing in the case, and I remarked that it was hard to
make sense of Newt’s scorched-earth approach to the divorce, which has already
revealed his six-year-long extramarital affair with congressional aide Calista Bisek and tainted whatever was left of his image as a family-values Republican."


"He was asked to identify “any and all persons, other than your wife, with whom you’ve had
sexual relations during this marriage” and to provide the “dates, times and places in which said sexual relations occurred.” He also was asked to identify anyone who knew of these affairs. Question No. 25 inquired, “Do you believe that you have conducted your private life in this marriage in accordance with the concept of ‘family values’ you have espoused politically
and professionally?”

These are questions Newt presumably would prefer not to answer — especially not for the public record. Rather than reply, he had his lawyer challenge the interrogatories. But on Nov. 15 his challenge failed, and a judge in
Cobb County, Ga., ordered Gingrich to provide answers by Dec. 5."


Gingrich vs. Gingrich - Newt Gingrich - Salon.com


"A new e-book on the 2012 election released Friday says that Republican candidate Newt Gingrich went on an ill-timed cruise to Greece this year and spent over $1 million in jewelry at Tiffany's to "buy off" his reluctant wife, Callista, so that she would not object to his running for president."


New Book Says Newt Gingrich 'Bought Off' His Wife To Stay In The Race








//

"She may be Newt's former mistress, but Callista Gingrich is also a churchgoing Roman Catholic who's responsible for converting Newt to Catholicism in 2009. The pious husband and wife duo teamed up to write Rediscovering God in America, a New York Times best-seller that seeks to underscore the "importance of our Creator to our nation's founders and their successors." Callista and Newt also made a film about Pope John Paul II titled Nine Days That Changed the World. "


10 Things You Didn't Know About Callista Gingrich | Gallery | POWERWALL



Callista Gingrich - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"she met Gingrich and began the long affair that carried through to Newt's resignation from Congress in 1999 following a stormy tenure as speaker and a formal reprimand for ethics violations. In December of that year he divorced his second wife, Marianne, and married Callista eight months later.
Callista continued working as the chief clerk of the House Committee on Agriculture for the next seven years while Newt built up a network of for-profit and non-profit companies. She left in 2007 when she and her husband set up yet another enterprise, Gingrich Productions, where Callista, as president, could fulfill her dream of working in media as a photographer and documentary filmmaker."


Special report: Callista Gingrich - The ultimate running mate | Reuters




136 Views



//

No one is more the serial hypocrite than Ron Paul.

Gingrich has always been a wheeler-dealer. A person just has to decide if overall the results have been good or bad from him doing so.

I do not understand Gingrich deciding to pork barrel in 1998, after being thrifty with the Contact With America in 1994.


Contract with America - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Perhaps the increased Pork Barrel spending advocated by Gingrich in 1998 was purely to get more Repuclicans elected.


Newt Gingrich: Big Spender - ABC News

"They were a major disappointment to the Republican Party, which was expecting to gain seats due to the embarrassment Clinton suffered during the Monica Lewinsky scandal, and the "six year itch" effect observed in most second-term midterm elections. Instead, the GOP lost five seats to the Democratic Party, but retained a narrow majority in the House. A wave of Republican discontent with Speaker Newt Gingrich prompted him to resign shortly after the election.

The campaign was marked by Republican attacks on the morality of President Clinton, with Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr having released his report on the Lewinsky scandal and House leaders having initiated an inquiry into whether impeachable offenses had occurred. However, exit polls indicated that most voters opposed impeaching Clinton, and predictions of high Republican or low Democratic turnout due to the scandal failed to materialize."


United States House of Representatives elections, 1998 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


I wonder if Gingrich's second wife, Marrianne played a role in the increased spending for 1997. They separated in 1999.

"Marianne and Newt separated again on May 10, 1999 and Newt filed for divorce on July 29, 1999. "

http://marriage.about.com/od/politics/a/gingrichn_3.htm




//

Maybe the fiscally responsible spending provisions of the Contract with America were just gimicks to get Republicans elected, rather than part of a list of principles for which Republicans stood. So Pork Barrell by the Republican Congress in 1997 and 1998 was consistent with cutting spending in1994-1996, in that both were attempts to please more voters interests/polls of two different times, to get more Republicans elected.

"Additionally, the act raised the value of inherited estates and gifts that could be sheltered from taxation.[48] Gingrich has been credited with creating the agenda for the reduction in capital gains tax, especially in the "Contract with America", which set out to balance the budget and implement decreases in estate and capital gains tax. Some Republicans felt that the compromise reached with Clinton on the budget and tax act was inadequate,[49] however Gingrich has stated that the tax cuts were a significant accomplishment for the Republican Congress in the face of opposition from the Clinton administration.[50]"


Newt Gingrich - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



//

I don't like the way that Gingrich handles his mistakes, what comments he makes about his mistakes.

Like abut when Gingrich took money for lobbying from Fannie and Freddie Mac, he said the money was not that much, rather than that he could have said he regretted the collapse of the housing market in 2008, caused in part by Freddie and Fannie..

Now he did not collect enough valid signatures, for the Virginia Primary, he is complaining about Virginia. There are services that will get teh signatures you need, but Gingrich did not seek help of people tha know what they are doing. The question is what is the skill level of Gingrich evaluating his staff skill levels, and getting them extra services when something is imortant, or complicated.

"With the only recourse of calling it a “failed system”, Newt Gingrich failed to make the VA ballot."

Conservative Daily News: The Top Source for American Conservative Political News


Gingrich, Perry Fail To Qualify For Va. Primary - Politics News Story - WSOC Charlotte


//