Author Topic: Newt Vs. Mitt  (Read 5816 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

charlesoakwood

  • Guest
Re: Newt Vs. Mitt
« Reply #20 on: January 27, 2012, 12:24:50 PM »
During the Reagan Administration Elliott Abrams was in a vantage point to have a clear view of where Gingrich stood and how he did or didn't support administration policy .

Oh oh, Rush is deconstructing Abrams' article, sounds like he got punked and didn't bother checking his facts and merely regurgitated somebody elses (Romney's) dirty work.  Looks like my contextual concerns were spot on.

Here is the article Rush is citing -

http://spectator.org/blog/2012/01/27/elliott-abrams-caught-misleadi

Last election Romney's dirty tricks and campaign slander were not discussed.  I exited that election thinking
Mr.Clean got screwed by the machine. 


Offline Sectionhand

  • Conservative Hero
  • ****
  • Posts: 2520
Re: Newt Vs. Mitt
« Reply #21 on: January 27, 2012, 01:03:01 PM »
During the Reagan Administration Elliott Abrams was in a vantage point to have a clear view of where Gingrich stood and how he did or didn't support administration policy .

Oh oh, Rush is deconstructing Abrams' article, sounds like he got punked and didn't bother checking his facts and merely regurgitated somebody elses (Romney's) dirty work.  Looks like my contextual concerns were spot on.

Here is the article Rush is citing -

http://spectator.org/blog/2012/01/27/elliott-abrams-caught-misleadi

This depends on whether or not you accept Jeff Lord's "deconstructs" or Rush's asessments at face value ... I don't . Lord is the one probably looking for a job . As the Under Secretary of State for Inter-American Affairs in the Reagan Administration , Elliott was far more engaged with the Republican members of congress than Mr. Lord when it came to promoting policy . Which leads me to ask ... Who the fvck ever heard of Jeffrey Lord ?

Offline Libertas

  • Conservative Superhero
  • *****
  • Posts: 63653
  • Alea iacta est! Libertatem aut mori!
Re: Newt Vs. Mitt
« Reply #22 on: January 27, 2012, 01:34:45 PM »
During the Reagan Administration Elliott Abrams was in a vantage point to have a clear view of where Gingrich stood and how he did or didn't support administration policy .

Oh oh, Rush is deconstructing Abrams' article, sounds like he got punked and didn't bother checking his facts and merely regurgitated somebody elses (Romney's) dirty work.  Looks like my contextual concerns were spot on.

Here is the article Rush is citing -

http://spectator.org/blog/2012/01/27/elliott-abrams-caught-misleadi

This depends on whether or not you accept Jeff Lord's "deconstructs" or Rush's asessments at face value ... I don't . Lord is the one probably looking for a job . As the Under Secretary of State for Inter-American Affairs in the Reagan Administration , Elliott was far more engaged with the Republican members of congress than Mr. Lord when it came to promoting policy . Which leads me to ask ... Who the fvck ever heard of Jeffrey Lord ?

Jeffrey Lord, a contributing editor to The American Spectator, is a former aide to Jack Kemp and Ronald Reagan. He writes from Pennsylvania at jlpa1@aol.com.

http://spectator.org/people/jeffrey-lord/all

Former Reaganite and doesn't look like a crank to me.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeff_Lord

I tried to find congressional record for 1986 but online searches only go back to 1994, and before that I cannot get info from the site the gubmint shoots me too, no matter what search criteria I use.   Lord says this Chris guy got the record, so I at least see something backing up what Lord says and nobody backing up what Elliot said.  I think the ball is in Elliot's court to either pony up his evidence or walk-back his allegations.
We are now where The Founders were when they faced despotism.

Online IronDioPriest

  • Administrator
  • Conservative Superhero
  • *****
  • Posts: 10828
  • I refuse to accept my civil servants as my rulers
Re: Newt Vs. Mitt
« Reply #23 on: January 27, 2012, 01:41:19 PM »
Nancy Reagan said point blank in 1995 that "Barry Goldwater handed the torch to Ronnie, and in turn, Ronnie turned that torch over to Newt and the Republican members of congress to keep that dream alive. For what it's worth...

Nancy Reagan 1995: Ronnie turned that torch over to Newt

Michael Reagan says, "Newt exemplifies the conservative principles my father championed."

For what it's worth.

I know what my own eyes, ears, and intellect tell me about Newt Gingrich. I don't trust him, for a whole set of reasons differently than the ones that cause me to mistrust Mitt Romney. All this piling on and demonization and writing and rewriting the past is just cacophony to me. My opinion is based on my own observation, and what some aide says he recalls from 25 years ago, or what some RiNO congressman says they recall from 25 years ago, means squat to me.
"A strict observance of the written laws is doubtless one of the high duties of a good citizen, but it is not the highest. The laws of necessity, of self-preservation, of saving our country when in danger, are of higher obligation. To lose our country by a scrupulous adherence to written law, would be to lose the law itself, with life, liberty, property and all those who are enjoying them with us; thus absurdly sacrificing the end to the means."

- Thomas Jefferson

Offline fporretto

  • Newb
  • *
  • Posts: 31
  • Long Island's crazy libertarian-conservative
    • Liberty's Torch
Re: Newt Vs. Mitt
« Reply #24 on: January 27, 2012, 01:56:55 PM »
Neither of these candidates has covered himself with glory. Even before this endless series of debates, I had a fairly low opinion of both of them. If one of them is to be the nominee, I can't be sanguine about Republican chances in November.

Much has been said about Romney's "character" and Gingrich's "conservative values." But a strong character is not consistent with a record of changing one's positions to suit one's audience, or the office one is pursuing. Neither are conservative values consistent with a tendency to fall in love with one shiny new statist idea after another, as if the cure for America's troubles weren't freedom but rather the right kind of tyranny.

There's still time to find a good candidate...but where shall we look?
This post is programming you in undetectable ways.

Online IronDioPriest

  • Administrator
  • Conservative Superhero
  • *****
  • Posts: 10828
  • I refuse to accept my civil servants as my rulers
Re: Newt Vs. Mitt
« Reply #25 on: January 27, 2012, 02:07:08 PM »
Idunno Fran. It seems late now. I pay heed to those who say that anyone jumping in at this moment or at a brokered convention would have a cash and campaign infrastructure deficit so large that overcoming the Obama warchest juggernaut would be nearly impossible.

To have a prayer of success, it would have to be someone who has instant name recognition, political "star" power or charisma to generate it quickly, an already vetted past, acceptable to the Tea Party & establishment base, and some presidential qualification, whether it be tangible or intangible. The long introductory period has come and gone. It would have to be someone who could enter the race and smash down all the barriers to that late entrance being successful. I don't see that person anywhere.

ETA: Thanks for chiming in, BTW. You're welcome any time.
"A strict observance of the written laws is doubtless one of the high duties of a good citizen, but it is not the highest. The laws of necessity, of self-preservation, of saving our country when in danger, are of higher obligation. To lose our country by a scrupulous adherence to written law, would be to lose the law itself, with life, liberty, property and all those who are enjoying them with us; thus absurdly sacrificing the end to the means."

- Thomas Jefferson

Offline Glock32

  • Conservative Superhero
  • *****
  • Posts: 8747
  • Get some!
Re: Newt Vs. Mitt
« Reply #26 on: January 27, 2012, 02:14:09 PM »
I heard a good line on Rush yesterday: "The trouble with Romney is that he doesn't believe in anything. The trouble with Gingrich is that he believes in everything."
"The Fourth Estate is less honorable than the First Profession."

- Yours Truly

Offline Sectionhand

  • Conservative Hero
  • ****
  • Posts: 2520
Re: Newt Vs. Mitt
« Reply #27 on: January 27, 2012, 03:25:55 PM »
During the Reagan Administration Elliott Abrams was in a vantage point to have a clear view of where Gingrich stood and how he did or didn't support administration policy .

Oh oh, Rush is deconstructing Abrams' article, sounds like he got punked and didn't bother checking his facts and merely regurgitated somebody elses (Romney's) dirty work.  Looks like my contextual concerns were spot on.

Here is the article Rush is citing -

http://spectator.org/blog/2012/01/27/elliott-abrams-caught-misleadi

This depends on whether or not you accept Jeff Lord's "deconstructs" or Rush's asessments at face value ... I don't . Lord is the one probably looking for a job . As the Under Secretary of State for Inter-American Affairs in the Reagan Administration , Elliott was far more engaged with the Republican members of congress than Mr. Lord when it came to promoting policy . Which leads me to ask ... Who the fvck ever heard of Jeffrey Lord ?

Jeffrey Lord, a contributing editor to The American Spectator, is a former aide to Jack Kemp and Ronald Reagan. He writes from Pennsylvania at jlpa1@aol.com.

http://spectator.org/people/jeffrey-lord/all

Former Reaganite and doesn't look like a crank to me.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeff_Lord

I tried to find congressional record for 1986 but online searches only go back to 1994, and before that I cannot get info from the site the gubmint shoots me too, no matter what search criteria I use.   Lord says this Chris guy got the record, so I at least see something backing up what Lord says and nobody backing up what Elliot said.  I think the ball is in Elliot's court to either pony up his evidence or walk-back his allegations.

This isn't going anywhere . I have to go with the guy I know .

Online IronDioPriest

  • Administrator
  • Conservative Superhero
  • *****
  • Posts: 10828
  • I refuse to accept my civil servants as my rulers
Re: Newt Vs. Mitt
« Reply #28 on: January 27, 2012, 03:32:00 PM »
This isn't going anywhere . I have to go with the guy I know .

That is exactly why all this has become white noise to me. I have to go with what and who I know.

I know what I know about Gingrich & Romney. After all the back and forth, and trying to convince myself this, that or the other thing about whomever I thought was the best candidate in the race at any given time over the months, the idea that we are left with these two bastards disgusts me. Both are repulsive to me. I just cannot twist myself into enough knots to think that Newt frikking Gingrich is going to be the President that America needs at this crucial moment in history. And I never bothered trying with Romney.
"A strict observance of the written laws is doubtless one of the high duties of a good citizen, but it is not the highest. The laws of necessity, of self-preservation, of saving our country when in danger, are of higher obligation. To lose our country by a scrupulous adherence to written law, would be to lose the law itself, with life, liberty, property and all those who are enjoying them with us; thus absurdly sacrificing the end to the means."

- Thomas Jefferson

Offline Alphabet Soup

  • Conservative Superhero
  • *****
  • Posts: 5610
  • Hier standt ich. Ich kann nicht anders
Re: Newt Vs. Mitt
« Reply #29 on: January 27, 2012, 04:27:33 PM »

Offline Glock32

  • Conservative Superhero
  • *****
  • Posts: 8747
  • Get some!
Re: Newt Vs. Mitt
« Reply #30 on: January 27, 2012, 10:24:31 PM »
Bob Dole: a decent enough old chap who knows how to give a dignified concession speech.

That's what the GOP establishment thinks is a recipe for victory.
"The Fourth Estate is less honorable than the First Profession."

- Yours Truly

Offline radioman

  • A Regular
  • ***
  • Posts: 622
Re: Newt Vs. Mitt
« Reply #31 on: January 27, 2012, 10:30:13 PM »
Anybody notice that the conservatives always get locked out of the primaries?
TGIF - "Thank God I'm Forgiven"

Offline Libertas

  • Conservative Superhero
  • *****
  • Posts: 63653
  • Alea iacta est! Libertatem aut mori!
Re: Newt Vs. Mitt
« Reply #32 on: January 28, 2012, 06:50:32 PM »
During the Reagan Administration Elliott Abrams was in a vantage point to have a clear view of where Gingrich stood and how he did or didn't support administration policy .

Oh oh, Rush is deconstructing Abrams' article, sounds like he got punked and didn't bother checking his facts and merely regurgitated somebody elses (Romney's) dirty work.  Looks like my contextual concerns were spot on.

Here is the article Rush is citing -

http://spectator.org/blog/2012/01/27/elliott-abrams-caught-misleadi

This depends on whether or not you accept Jeff Lord's "deconstructs" or Rush's asessments at face value ... I don't . Lord is the one probably looking for a job . As the Under Secretary of State for Inter-American Affairs in the Reagan Administration , Elliott was far more engaged with the Republican members of congress than Mr. Lord when it came to promoting policy . Which leads me to ask ... Who the fvck ever heard of Jeffrey Lord ?

Jeffrey Lord, a contributing editor to The American Spectator, is a former aide to Jack Kemp and Ronald Reagan. He writes from Pennsylvania at jlpa1@aol.com.

http://spectator.org/people/jeffrey-lord/all

Former Reaganite and doesn't look like a crank to me.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeff_Lord

I tried to find congressional record for 1986 but online searches only go back to 1994, and before that I cannot get info from the site the gubmint shoots me too, no matter what search criteria I use.   Lord says this Chris guy got the record, so I at least see something backing up what Lord says and nobody backing up what Elliot said.  I think the ball is in Elliot's court to either pony up his evidence or walk-back his allegations.

This isn't going anywhere . I have to go with the guy I know .

I understand and respect that SH, but even people we know are capable of mistakes.  I think Elliott made one here.  Regardless, the cannibalistic nature of the GOP Establishment is not helping things.  Like her or hate her, Sarah Palin makes some fine points in an article she posted (see link below) and this is the part that steams me the most -

"And I question whether the GOP establishment would ever employ the same harsh tactics they used on Newt against Obama." 

We have to start asking ourselves who do these people who are not in the race coming out to support?  Actions have consequences.  Right now attacks like the one launched by Elliott cannot help anyone except the targets chief rival - Romney.  If this in any way enables Romney to gain momentum and secure the nomination I am going to be pissed and I will remember who contributed to advancing the most flawed candidate in the race, the one whom I would not vote for under any circumstance.  And the point by Sarah is valid, none of these people will attack Obama on any of the myriad of character flaws he has for fear of attacking "the first black president".  What is good for the goose ought to be good for the gander.  Either we have a level playing field or we do not.  We could all do without the "white noise".

http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=10150516734848435
We are now where The Founders were when they faced despotism.

Offline Sectionhand

  • Conservative Hero
  • ****
  • Posts: 2520
Re: Newt Vs. Mitt
« Reply #33 on: January 29, 2012, 02:16:28 AM »
I've said many times before that this should be about Stymie and only Stymie . Nobody deplores more than I the way this campaign has disintegrated into name calling and character assassination . Regardless of who we support or don't support , it appears more likely by the day that the Kenyan mongrel who occupies the White House will continue to do so for another four years . And it's our own God d*amned fault .

charlesoakwood

  • Guest
Re: Newt Vs. Mitt
« Reply #34 on: January 29, 2012, 09:50:54 AM »

I think the MSM (destroyer of worlds) and the GOP (handmaidens to the devil) have helped as much as possible.

Offline John Florida

  • Conservative Superhero
  • *****
  • Posts: 10059
  • IT'S MY FONT AND I'LL USE IT IF I WANT TO!!
Re: Newt Vs. Mitt
« Reply #35 on: January 29, 2012, 10:03:19 AM »
  If we learned nothing else from the last go around whe should learn that not voting isn't the answer. You can hate it but this time the choice isn't the repub that runs but do we want another 4 years of the person in the WH now.I'm for the last man standing.
All men are created equal"
 Filippo Mazzie

Online Pandora

  • Administrator
  • Conservative Superhero
  • *****
  • Posts: 19529
  • I iz also makin a list. U on it pal.
Re: Newt Vs. Mitt
« Reply #36 on: January 29, 2012, 10:23:18 AM »
  If we learned nothing else from the last go around whe should learn that not voting isn't the answer. You can hate it but this time the choice isn't the repub that runs but do we want another 4 years of the person in the WH now.I'm for the last man standing.

Got to be; we've no other choice.

"Under certain circumstances, profanity provides a relief denied even to prayer." - Mark Twain

"Let us assume for the moment everything you say about me is true. That just makes your problem bigger, doesn't it?"

Offline Libertas

  • Conservative Superhero
  • *****
  • Posts: 63653
  • Alea iacta est! Libertatem aut mori!
Re: Newt Vs. Mitt
« Reply #37 on: January 29, 2012, 10:44:50 AM »
I hate being treated like a chump on one hand and the cause for all ill on the other, I am really beginning to care less about the rest of the damned nation if so many are for either certain suicide or a long drawn out illness that ends in death no matter what.  What kind of choice is that?  The collective "We" is stupid and deserves what it gets.
We are now where The Founders were when they faced despotism.

Offline Libertas

  • Conservative Superhero
  • *****
  • Posts: 63653
  • Alea iacta est! Libertatem aut mori!
Re: Newt Vs. Mitt
« Reply #38 on: January 29, 2012, 10:46:09 AM »
We are now where The Founders were when they faced despotism.

charlesoakwood

  • Guest
Re: Newt Vs. Mitt
« Reply #39 on: January 29, 2012, 10:47:06 AM »
  If we learned nothing else from the last go around whe should learn that not voting isn't the answer. You can hate it but this time the choice isn't the repub that runs but do we want another 4 years of the person in the WH now.I'm for the last man standing.

Got to be; we've no other choice.



Absolutely.

But it is our civic duty to know how it happened, who the players are, and what they did.
No matter who the winner we must know who to trust and where to put our money and
support for the next four years.