OK folks - it's that time again.
Old drums of Freepitude have been piling up to the point that I can't get to the air filtration controls any more, and that's just not safe.
OK - blowers are on 10 - let's get cracking!
First of all, Jim Rob has had two bold red banners up on the index page for some time now :
Newt's Position on Activist Judges, Rebalancing the Judiciary, Restoring Freedom!
Strangely, they both disappeared this past Monday. I wonder why? Perhaps Jimbo has realized that he's backed the wrong horse (again), and is preparing to jump on the Santorum Explosion?
But at this point in time (the end of Janurary) it's balls to the wall for Newtie!
I dreamed of trolling against Newt in my maidenform bra and all I got was this big old zot
Washington Times ^ | Jan 20, 2012 | Stephen Dinan
Posted on Friday, January 20, 2012 9:33:09 PM by Hoodat
Hmm - the mods appear to have altered the title just a tad.
(This thread no longer exists, BTW)
ORANGEBURG, S.C. — Newt Gingrich on Friday backed at least a portion of the Dream Act, saying that he would grant a path to citizenship to illegal immigrant youths who agree to sign up and serve in the U.S. military.
That’s a much tighter standard than the full Dream Act, which President Obama wants. That legislation would allow legal status and an eventual path to citizenship for children and young adults who join the military, but would also apply to those who go to college — a much broader class of people.
“I am opposed to anybody who came here illegally getting citizenship. That’s entirely wrong,” the GOP presidential candidate and former House speaker told a young man who asked about illegal immigrant students. “The only exception I would make is if young people, the ones you are dealing with, are willing to join the American military and serve the United States.”
Speaking a day before South Carolina’s GOP primary, Mr. Gingrich said that would put them on par with any other foreign-born legal resident who joins the U.S. military, and who under the law has a path to citizenship.
Mr. Gingrich’s stance puts him in between Mr. Obama and GOP rival Mitt Romney, who has said he would veto the Dream Act.************************************
Remember the outrage on these boards when the Dems were pushing for passage of the DREAM Act?
To: HoodatYou’re really on an anti-Newt rampage tonight. Who are you supporting? Mitt or Santorum or Paul2 posted on Friday, January 20, 2012 9:34:47 PM by ReneeLynn (Socialism is SO yesterday. Fascism, it's the new black. Mmm mmm mmm...)..To: ReneeLynnI’m supporting the kid from Winchester, VA.6 posted on Friday, January 20, 2012 9:38:58 PM by Hoodat (Because they do not change, Therefore they do not fear God. -Psalm 55:19-)..To: HoodatNewt lovers will disregard this just like global warming, lobbying freddie mac, the Newt leftist here on this board love him working goverment for 20 years then cashing in making 3-5 million a year, but romney can’t invest his own money open up a business and make a real honest living. Amazing group of leftist and hypocrites we now have here...
To: gswilderSo is this what we have come to as conservatives?
Support a serial adulterer
Support a person who supports replacing Obamacare (said there were a good 300 pages of Obamacare)
Endorsed a government mandate in healthcare in 1994 & 1995, and beyond.
In 2003, Newt talked about how the government has to take the lead in regulatory control of healthcare
In 2005, he talks about redistribution of wealth to the poor to support healthcare
His healthcare thinktank has taken in $30 million from insurance companies
In 2011, Newt opposed Paul Ryans medicare reform. Said it was too much radical reform.
Newt claimed FDR was the greatest president of the 20th century
Support a person who made a global warming ad with Pelosi
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VuBd1atfhQ4
Supported Government subsidies for Ethanol to reduce GHG’s
Said he believed carbon emissions are going up in the atmosphere
Support a person who would have signed the dream act
Support a person who goes after capitalism (Bain)
Only speaker sanctioned with Ethics issues
Forced to resign from the house (400 members, including 100 republicans voted him out)
Made $1.5m from lobbying Freddie and Fannie
Was critical of Bush’s anti-terror policies
Opposed the surge in Iraq
These are just a few things I am aware of. And they are not conspiracies, lies or things taken out of context. Almost all the items above, you can find a video of Newt saying them in his own words.
To me, it seems like Newt is flipping and flopping as much as Romney.
To: GoMonsterbye75 posted on Friday, January 20, 2012 11:51:33 PM by Jim Robinson (Rebellion is brewing!! Impeach the corrupt Marxist bastard!!)..To: freedomfiter2Wow, we have a once in a lifetime opportunity to elect a real conservative and it looks like we’re getting another hold your nose election. My sentiments exactly. And with McNewt as the nominee, we may actually lose.
To: gswilderAnd I saw a video of him last night talking about replacing Obamacare with another similar plan.You're finally getting Newt.
He is a technocrat. Full of "ideas" but they all involve tinkering with Gov't.
He doesn't really have the vision to return power to the power notwithstanding his "soaring" rhetoric.
Newt is unsteady and will disappoint. Guaranteed.51 posted on Friday, January 20, 2012 11:06:55 PM by Siena Dreaming
To: GoMonsterthe Newt leftist here on this board love him working goverment for 20 years then cashing in making 3-5 million a year, but romney can’t invest his own money open up a business and make a real honest living.As someone who has called Romney some pretty vile names I have to wonder why this very important fact can't even be discussed here. It seems all discussion of Romney is verbotten (sp)--he's the enemy, and any DISCUSSION of who he is beyond anti-Mormon stuff is out of the question.
I seem to recall a website where everyone heaped praise on Sarah Palin for starting a business and meeting a payroll. I seem to recall a website where Obama was bashed relentlessly for living only in the world of academia and government/'community leadership.'
I seem to recall a website where we wanted Washington insiders out, and people who were actual businessmen were in, and where capitalism was championed--real capitalism, not government payouts, but where failing companies were reorganized and all the realities (some not so comfortable) that entailed.
I keep looking for that website, where having money wasn't a crime particularly when the rich were giving much of their money to charity (in Romney's case, this includes many non-Mormon causes). That same site praised Sarah Palin for her devotion to her husband and kids through good times and bad.
Not sure what happened to that site. I keep finding this other one, where a serial philanderer and do-as-I-say, not-as-I-do Big Government guy who took money from the hated Fannie Mae when he wasn't in government or teaching (not that there's anything wrong with either, but one needs more varied experience) is being toasted as a conservative icon.44 posted on Friday, January 20, 2012 10:49:56 PM by Darkwolf377 ( It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies.--C.S. Lewis)
I'm about all Newt-ered out, but I guess we can squeeze in one more now that all the bannings have subsided - America hates Newt? Unpossible!
America hates Newt Gingrich
Wash Examiner ^ | 1-20-12 | Conn Carroll
Posted on Friday, January 20, 2012 8:26:19 PM by tcrlaf
Unlike Mitt Romney, who occasionally beats President Obama in general election poll match ups, Newt Gingrich trails far behind President Obama in every survey. But just how bad are Gingrich's unfavorable among the general public compared to Obama and Romney?
Not every poll releases their full results, so here are the most recent favorability results I could find for Obama, Romney, and Newt.
Fox News, 1/12-1/14: Obama, fav/unfav, 51%/46%, +5 Romney, fav/unfav, 45%/38%, +7 Gingrich, fav/unfav, 27%/56%, -29
CBS/NYT, 1/12-1/17: Obama, fav/unfav, 38%/45%, -7 Romney, fav/unfav, 21%/35%, -14 Gingrich, fav/unfav, 17%/49%, -32
PPP, 1/13-1/17: Obama, app/dis, 47%/50%, -3 Romney, fav/unfav, 35%/53%, -18 Gingrich, fav/unfav, 26%/60%, -34
America does not love Romney, but boy do they hate Newt.Give Newt a little money, and the TV exposure that comes with WINNING South Carolina, and he can drive those negatives up, that millions have been spent driving down.
To: tcrlafThis more than anything else illustrates how Republicans are committing political suicide by nominating Newt Gingrich. These numbers show that roughly half of the voters will not vote for Newt. Let’s find a candidate who has much lower unfavorability numbers before it’s too late.
To: Hoodat“There are plenty of folks here who are stuck on some river in Egypt. “
I posted a half dozen videos from youtube the other night with NEWTS OWN WORDS right on camera for all to see...Guess what he was saying?
I will give you a hint...They were not the words of a conservative.
I want Mitt Romney beat and out of the race as much as I want Obama to be beaten in November. But to say that Newt is the CONSERVATIVE to do it is nonsense. The guy is NOT a conservative.
He has changed ALOT over the past few years. Why in the hell did he endorse liberal republicans instead of the conservative choice? Why was his ass sitting on a couch with one of the most evil women in America in present day?
Why? Why?
Exhume Ronald Reagan! (Vanity)Posted on Wednesday, February 22, 2012 10:44:38 AM by ConorMacNessa
His mouldering corpse could do a better job than any of the present Republican candidates!
1 posted on Wednesday, February 22, 2012 10:44:44 AM by ConorMacNessa
.
To: ConorMacNessa
To: AllThis is in bad taste.
To: patriot08true, but it’s still true that a dead RR would be a better President. ;)
7 posted on Wednesday, February 22, 2012 11:32:44 PM by Shadowstrike (Be polite, Be professional, but have a plan to kill everyone you meet.)
To: patriot08while it may be disrespectful, I think it speaks to the desperation of the American public.
and that’s the saddest thing.
10 posted on Thursday, February 23, 2012 10:16:52 PM by Shadowstrike (Be polite, Be professional, but have a plan to kill everyone you meet.)
Tea party v. establishment in 2012 race: A battle for the GOP soul?
FOX News ^ | Jan 29, 2012
Posted on Monday, January 30, 2012 1:50:43 AM by Jim Robinson
Tea Party or establishment. That's the name of the game in the battle for the Republican presidential primary nomination.
But sometimes it's hard to determine who's who. Frontrunner Mitt Romney has never worked in Washington but has accumulated dozens of endorsements from Republican officialdom. Newt Gingrich was House speaker for four years, and has lived in Washington ever since his 1999 departure from Congress, but he's running as the outsider who knows how to use his experience to crash the corrupt system and rebuild.
The expressions of support are an indicator where the divisions are lining up.
Sarah and Todd Palin have both said they're Gingrich fans. While the former 2008 vice presidential candidate hasn't expressly offered an endorsement, Sarah Palin has frequently worn the mantle of Tea Party spokeswoman.
On Saturday, businessman and one-time candidate Herman Cain jumped in at a Tea Party Express rally vowing his support for Gingrich -- for now.
"I'm not against Mitt Romney if Mitt Romney gets the nomination, I'm gonna support him. But right now, I'm hoping Newt Gingrich gets the nomination and I'm going to work, and try to see to it that he gets the nomination," Cain told Fox News.
On the flip side, Romney has pulled out former Senate Majority Leader Bob Dole, the speaker's former Senate partner on Capitol Hill, to back him up against Gingrich. And on Sunday, Arizona Sen. John McCain explained why Mitt's the man.
"I would say that we had some rather unpleasant experiences with Newt Gingrich and one of them was the government shut down in 1995," said McCain, the 2008 Republican presidential candidate. "My problems with Newt has been over earmark spending, billions and billions and billions. When Newt Gingrich became speaker they turned earmarks into an art form."
1 posted on Monday, January 30, 2012 1:51:05 AM by Jim Robinson..To: stormhillNewt failed against Clinton during the government shutdown because his ego drove him to play the PR angle wrong. The minute Gingrich proclaimed he was going to shut the government down he handed Clinton a sledgehammer Clinton and the media used to bludgeon Gingrich and the Republicans. The concept of shutting down the government frightened many Americans. The beneficiaries of the welfare state were concerned about missing a check. The media focused on government programs most Americans enjoy and perceive should not close such as the national parks. Gingrich wanted to show the people he was as powerful as the President so he proclaimed “he” (Newt) was shutting down the government even though it was the President’s veto actually shutting it down.
The right way to have played the PR game would have been to pass the budget cuts and take the high road by publicly stating he hoped the President would work with Congress to bring our budget under control by signing the bill. Had Clinton signed, and taken credit, the country would have benefited. If instead Clinton vetoed the bill Gingrich could have played the same hand Clinton played by going to the American people and telling them the President was playing with fire by shutting down the government. The public would have turned against Clinton and the Republicans could have quickly passed a slightly modified “compromise” bill which Clinton would have immediately signed to end the shutdown for which the President was being blamed. Victory to Newt but he wouldn’t have had the ego pleasing moments in front of the camera beating his chest.
Hopefully Newt has learned to be more subtle when playing hardball power politics in Washington. Sometimes to win the PR battle with the public you need to appear to be the good guy.
Especially when you're actually the bad guy. The public is so easy to fool....
Playing the good guy occasionally means taking the first punch not giving it.
Democrats play the PR game much more effectively than the Republicans because they are playing for the long term and understand the power of propaganda on the masses. Intelligent conservatives such as Newt overestimate the ability of the public to see through the Democrat spin. It is sad but well less than 50% of voters are paying attention or even understand the Constitution. They do understand what cutting off benefit checks or closing the Grand Canyon means.
Unfortunately for you. "Smaller government" always sounds so good in the abstact - until people realize that it means the disassembly of the things they rely on and really want for themselves and their children.
24 posted on Monday, January 30, 2012 5:07:51 AM by Soul of the South (When times are tough the tough get going.)
Santorum on Marianne Gingrich accusations: These are issues of character
http://hotair.com/archives/2012/01/20/santorum-on-marianne-gingrich-accusations-these-are-issues-of-character/ ^
Posted on Friday, January 20, 2012 7:18:17 PM by chessplayer
Rick Santorum walked a fine line in his response to questions about Marianne Gingrich’s accusations against her ex-husband and Santorum’s GOP rival, Newt.
“Personal matters are personal matters, but they are matters that are — particularly when you are in public life as he was at the time and the people involved were also in a sense in public life — those issues are issues that people will look at,” Santorum responded.
“I believe in forgiveness, I’m called to believe in forgiveness,” he continued. “I do believe having some accountability to a higher calling other than self is a very, very important aspect and perspective that is important for leaders.
“To make the final comment, these are issues of character and these are issues that people will consider based upon the time, when, where, how all those thing will factor in and I’ll let people make that decision, I’m certainly not going to make it for them,” he said to a crowd of about 150 people.
1 posted on Friday, January 20, 2012 7:18:20 PM by chessplayer..To: chessplayerI like Santorum; I think it took guts to say what he said because it’s not the popular line. The popular line is to overlook Gingrich’s past abuse of wives. It shows a lot of hypocrisy, though, on the part of the blow-hards who condemned Clinton for his womanizing but are willing to turn a blind eye and deaf ear to Gingrich’s sleazy activities.5 posted on Friday, January 20, 2012 7:26:58 PM by Saundra Duffy ( For victory & freedom!!!)
To: kimoajax“Blue nose”? What does that mean? Santorum is the son of Italian immigrants. His grandfather worked in the coal mines until he was in his 70s. Santorum is a graduate of Dickinson College and the University of Pittsburgh, not Ivy-League schools. He’s no spoiled rich kid from a privileged background. He won four of five elections in a state in which Democrats greatly outnumber Republicans. Gingrich won elections in safe Republican districts in Georgia. He only served four years as speaker before his own colleagues kicked him out. Many of them have now come forward publicly to say he lacks the discipline, temperament and managerial skills to be president. I don’t think they should be dismissed as quickly as some on this forum are willing to do.27 posted on Friday, January 20, 2012 7:42:14 PM by WestSylvanian
Newt: Mitt Can Have Florida But This Is Going All The Way To The Convention
Talking Points Memo ^ | January 29, 2012 | Pema Levy
Posted on Sunday, January 29, 2012 2:54:42 PM by 2ndDivisionVet
With the Florida primary set for January 31, the Romney and Gingrich camps are competing to set the stage for the coming contest. With Mitt Romney opening up a wide lead in Florida — by up to 15 percentage points in the latest NBC/Marist poll — the two camps are trying to shape the narrative and explain what a likely Romney win in Florida really means.
The Romney camp is looking to capitalize on a win in the Sunshine State by framing the race as crucial to becoming the nominee. “I think it means perhaps even more than it did in 2008 because you’ve got a split between New Hampshire and South Carolina,” said Romney-surrogate Sen. John McCain on Meet the Press. “So, it’s a vital race here and I’m glad to see Mitt’s doing so well.”
There to speak for Gingrich was surrogate former Sen. Fred Thompson, who downplayed the importance of the Florida primary as his own candidate heads toward what looks to be a loss on Tuesday. To the Newt camp, the magnitude of Romney’s win in Florida should be compared to Gingrich’s 13-point win in South Carolina. “You know, in South Carolina Newt won practically every, every group there except those with higher incomes and those with advanced degrees,” said Thompson. Finally, he said, “If it’s a victory for Mitt, we’ll break it down and see what it means. But it’s probably about 10% of the delegates.”
This is the big takeaway from the Gingrich campaign: Florida isn’t symbolic or important; it’s about the delegate count. And in terms of adding up delegates, Newt won’t be far behind without Florida. Gingrich, making the rounds on the morning shows Sunday, made the same case.
“But the fact is, this race is going to go on. The conservatives clearly are rejecting Romney. He is nowhere near getting a majority. And the fact is, once you get beyond Florida, these are all proportional representation states, and he’s not going to be anywhere near a majority by April,” Gingrich explained to ABC’s Jake Tapper Sunday morning. “And so this is going to go on all the way to the convention.”
Florida’s 50 delegates are allocated on a winner-take-all basis and would make up about 5% of the delegates necessary to reach the magic number of 1144 by the time of the convention. But as has been noted, it’s very possible that the winner-take-all status will be contested; the fight for Florida’s delegates is not likely to end Tuesday.
After Tuesday, Romney will likely walk a way with a big win. But Gingrich is already defining the primary as a long battle to shore up a grassroots conservative base against “Mitt Romney’s liberalism” — setting expectations of a long battle for the soul of the party. Whether Gingrich will be able to fund that battle, and whether the party ranks firmly close around Romney, will be critical things to watch in the days after Florida.
1 posted on Sunday, January 29, 2012 2:54:46 PM by 2ndDivisionVet..This thread has been pulled.
Pulled on 01/29/2012 4:51:06 PM PST by Jim Robinson, reason:Bogger is wrong. Newt did not say Mitt can have Florida!
Jeezus pleaseus - now that stupid fuck is whacking entire threads!!
Amazingly, 2ndDivisionVet still has a Free Republic account....
What else we got here?
Ah yes - Hair today - Goon tomorrow!!
CNN Headline News Breaking Trump to endorse ROMNEY!!!!!
self | 2/2/2012 | self
Posted on Thursday, February 02, 2012 1:15:57 PM by sodpoodle
CNN just announced Trump will endorse Romney.
Trump admires his hair
What a disappointment...To: sodpoodleI don’t think Trump’s endorsement means much.
..To: umgudI don’t think Trump’s endorsement means much.Last night, there was a thread that he was going to endorse Gingrich.
Much trumpeting on FR about how valuable it would be. What a difference a day makes, eh?
One comment, by a prescient FReeper was "Trump's words have a short shelf life". My guess? Regardless of who he endorsed, it will be forgotten by Monday.
The only thing that I dislike is that Trump will wait until a winner is obvious, then back him. That doesn't bode well for Gingrich.
To: sodpoodleBack when combover boy was leading all the birth-certificate-obsessed around by the nose, I told ya again and again and again that he was no conservative, but a crony capitalist who would sell out conservatism in a “New York Minute”.
Told ya so, birthers.
59 posted on Thursday, February 02, 2012 3:14:02 PM by Notary Sojac (Liberalism: Ideas so good, they have to be mandatory!!)..To: sodpoodleWhat the hell difference does any of this make. This republic was done for the minute Obama was sworn in - well- actually several decades ago but now it is too late to recover. So it makes no difference who the nominees are of either party. Too much corruption, too much debt, too far gone. If you don’t believe me, ask me again in 16 years - well make that 8 years since I’m 69 years old.
And yet, he's the future of the GOP.
Hell - ask him again in 16 minutes, and he'll have forgotten the question.
I have First Editions younger than him, and one is "Tom Swift And His Electric Runabout".
One of the first blog-based books, the anthology Special Plans examines Feith's role in misleading America into war. Buy from 
There is nothing sweeter than Jim Robinson's tears.
Posted by: Scott | February 27, 2012 at 06:12
It's just a matter of time until Jim Robinson gets a little TOO quick with the ban-hammer, and manages to ban himself.
I just hope that someone is quick enough to get a screencap of it.
Posted by: Snarki, child of Loki | February 27, 2012 at 07:08
How about "Ban and Superban", Tommy?
Posted by: azportsider | February 27, 2012 at 07:24
Wow. gswilder tells it like it is. Let's find out more about him!
This account has been banned or suspended.
Or not.
That was terrific. Years and years ago, I went on FR and lasted approx 3 minutes before I was banned.It's nice to know I have a lot of company.
Posted by: David Terrenoire | February 27, 2012 at 09:19
Ban of Brothers
Zotting Hill
And The Ban Played On
Newt Jack City
The Newt Radicals
All Bans Considered (accompanied by a plea for cash)
Zot Fuzz
Ok, getting bad.
Posted by: MarcD | February 27, 2012 at 09:22
Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity....
And what rough beast, its hour come round at last,
Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?
Yeats would have a field day with Freepers.
Posted by: left rev.; proud cheesehead | February 27, 2012 at 10:56
Wow! You can't even discuss the differences between the republican candidates without getting banned!
And love the comment:" This republic was done for the minute Obama was sworn in - well- actually several decades ago but now it is too late to recover. So it makes no difference who the nominees are of either party. Too much corruption, too much debt, too far gone."
A couple of decades ago would be the 80s to early 90s/. Wasn't that repub heaven at the time ???
Posted by: MapleStreet | February 27, 2012 at 17:54
Tommy--
I’ve been trying to get into South Freepistan for several hours now (to see whether the never-ending Freepathon is still going), but have hit nothing but timeouts and proxy errors. Are you sure you didn’t accidentally hit the SCRAM button and drop the control rods?
Tommy, I’m pretty sure you did.
Anyway, on to what you found spilling out...
I think that pretty well sums up most GOP attitudes toward the current field.
Oh, and check out that tough-guy user name: James Bond working Crime Scene Investigations. Since he’s been zotted keep on the lookout for new user CSI00724hr.
Was born. Was bred. Apparently the two major accomplishments of her life. Her tombstone will probably add “died” to the list.
OK, I see Mitt’s plan. Get advice from the two experts at this game: (1) spend years building a reputation as a moderate; (2) destroy it all in a few months by going (or at least pretending to go) batshit crazy to win the GOP nomination; (3) lose spectacularly in November. Yep, works for me.
--Kibitzer
Posted by: Kibitzer 2006 | February 28, 2012 at 01:39
Thanks, all - you guys are the best!
Tommy
Posted by: Tommy T | February 28, 2012 at 05:30
Tommy--
Have you noticed that South Freepistan is still heading for cold shutdown? Maybe that's your plan :). It will spare you a lot of semi-thankless labor. (We all appreciate it: "We few, we happy few, we band of brothers [and sisters]"). But it will also eliminate your best opportunity for ridicule and snark.
--Kibitzer
Posted by: Kibitzer 2006 | February 28, 2012 at 19:18
Kibitzer - the site was down all day yesterday.
I guess the $96,000.00 (extra for supposed new servers) raised in the just-finished Freepathon just wasn't enough to keep the lights on.
Tommy
Posted by: Tommy T | February 29, 2012 at 13:52
Tommy--
It's back just in time for the Freeperati to flip out over Sheriff Joe-Orly Arpaio-Taitz's conclusive evidence that Obama's birth certificate is a forgery (it's obvious--the BC says he was born in Hawaii, but everyone knows he was born in Kenya) and the theory that Obama had Andrew Breitbart taken out.
You'll be busy.
--Kibitzer
Posted by: Kibitzer 2006 | March 02, 2012 at 00:20