Gringrich Smartest one in the Bunch

[Guest 6.8 AR]

I like Newt. I will vote for him if nominated. But he has done some stupid things.

That was one reminder I didn't need to see. I remember seeing that stupid commercial

on TV.

[greenego]

[quote

That was one reminder I didn't need to see. I remember seeing that stupid commercial

on TV.

Sorry to bring up bad memories. I never understood why he did this. Now says it was one of his biggest mistakes. At least he admits it. More than I can say for most politicians.

[Guest ArmyVeteran37214]

I can not with a good conscience vote for this dbag. He has too much baggage!

Gingrich: Republican front-runner running behind - Yahoo! News

JEFFERSON, Iowa (Reuters) - The new man of the moment in the Republican presidential race tears down Iowa's two-lane highways in a rental car driven by his campaign director, with just two other staffers - a 20-something assistant and a press secretary - along for the ride.The tiny retinue is symptomatic.

With Texas Governor Rick Perry and businessman Herman Cain having wilted after major gaffes, Newt Gingrich is soaring in the polls. The former Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives finds himself surprised by success, trying to catch up on staffing and fund-raising even as he fends off charges of crony capitalism.

Starting off his talk to a packed "meet and greet" in Jefferson, Iowa, the 68-year-old cracked: "That's the first time anybody anywhere has introduced me as the leading candidate for president of the United States."

Welcome to the irony of answered prayers.

No sooner had Gingrich's poll numbers come up when reports emerged this week about his earnings from the financial and healthcare industries over the past decade.

On Wednesday, after Gingrich headlined an early morning fund-raiser for an Iowa state Senate candidate, word came of the Bloomberg story that he was paid up to $1.8 million in consulting fees by Freddie Mac, which he has hammered in the past as a leading cause of the financial crisis.

Gingrich's first response - that he worked as a "historian" for the troubled mortgage giant - was widely dismissed.

Two days later, The Washington Post reported Gingrich's Center for Health Transformation, a for-profit think tank, had taken in some $37 million over the past eight years from major healthcare companies and industry groups.

USA Today reported on Thursday that Gingrich had written and spoken extensively on healthcare issues without disclosing his business ties to the industry.

Gingrich's campaign has responded he did not lobby for his clients and they sought him out for his ideas as a 20-year veteran of Congress.

HARD BATTLE IN IOWA

The latest news may hurt him with some voters, and it's not the only problem facing the Gingrich campaign.

The new Republican front-runner has only a fraction of the people he needs to deal with the mounting demands and attention - his 30 staffers across the country are well below the 120 or so many campaign strategists say is the minimum a team with national aspirations.

President Barack Obama's re-election campaign has more than 200 people working at its headquarters in Chicago alone.

As of this week, Gingrich had no paid staff in Iowa, a state whose bellwether January 3 caucuses require a small army of volunteers to bring out voters to meetings in school gyms and private homes across 1,700 precincts on a cold winter night.

"They're the ones who are going to stand up and advocate on your behalf on January 3. So if you don't have anything cooking in that department, I think it's going to be very difficult," said Craig Robinson, former political director of the state Republican Party.

Gingrich is better off for staff in the next two primary election states, with six in New Hampshire and nine in South Carolina. Asked if the campaign could contend despite so few people, spokesman R.C. Hammond said: "Which poll do you want me to send you?"

Limited staff is sign of a bigger problem: Gingrich's fund-raising lags far behind that of his Republican rivals.

For the first nine months of 2011, he raised just $2.8 million, less than a tenth of $32 million haul of former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney, the most consistent front-runner in the Republican nomination race.

Gingrich's staff says his fund-raising has picked up sharply as his poll numbers have risen, bringing in more than $3 million since the start of October.

The warchests of all of the Republican candidates look paltry beside the $156 million Obama has already raised for himself and the Democratic Party going into the November 2012 election.

HIT BY CHARGES

The lack of organization also shows up on Gingrich's schedule, which fits meetings with voters into a meandering program of radio call-ins, book signings and screenings of films he and his wife have made.

On one recent day in Iowa, his public calendar included a meeting with employees at an insurance company in the capital Des Moines and the "meet and greet" at a community center with members of a county Republican association.

Later that day, he and his wife Callista hosted a reception at a winery. They signed copies of their books for about an hour - Callista's children's book on U.S. history and Newt's novels and many non-fiction works on subjects including history and religion.

Gingrich then gave a short version of his campaign speech and took questions on job creation and immigration before they showed their 94-minute documentary on Pope John Paul II.

Back in Washington, the storm was brewing over his consulting work. The reminder that Gingrich has spent decades as a political power player could alienate supporters who reject the big-spending Washington establishment.

"I think it's very difficult for someone to speak as an outsider when he's been such a part of this inside game," said Russell Walker, national political director of FreedomWorks, an umbrella group for the Tea Party movement, which favors smaller government.

"Authenticity is important to voters, especially to Tea Partiers, who are looking for someone who not just speaks like a fiscal conservative but is a fiscal conservative."

(Editing by Claudia Parsons)

[greenego]

I can not with a good conscience vote for this dbag. He has too much baggage!

I agree Newt has a LOT of baggage. There maybe better chooses for the GOP nomination. This election is coming down to, do you want the country to continue down the path Obama has blazed or do you want to derail it? In the end it will come down to anyone but Obama.

[TM01]

Ron Paul...Nuff said. His record speaks for itself. His morality meter has always been intact. There is a reason that the mainstream media ignores him and it is simply because those that run the system in place also own the media.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

You can find a similar pound of dirt on almost anyone running. Newt Gingrich has

good and bad attached like the rest. Now, do you really want to compare him to

the current Occupier of the White House? Or would you rather let the primary run

it's course and try to live with the results?

Take heed to what OS said. A lot of us have been saying it for quite a while. If

you don't vote against the criminal in the WH, you may be stuck another four years.

You may be a conscientious objector against Newt Gingrich, but enough to let things

stay where they are? Whoever the nominee is, is better.

[-Bristol-]

The Statistics and the Media. They do their research and if a candidate begins to rise in the polls and crosses a majical threshold, they release the dogs, making 20 year old claims, no legal action just claims. It is a proper vetting and I invite it, why they failed to do such vetting with BHO should be clear to us all. Senator John McCain was pretty clean but went on to lose. Some amount of baggage will be tolerable if it is offset with large amounts of other stuff, like being the smartest man in the room. We must not allow the liberal media to pick our candidate. By continuing to run and make reference to the baggage, the media can direct the sheep into a pre-determined result. Don't be the sheep.

Edited November 19, 2011 by -Bristol-

[kieefer]

I don't care about Newt's baggage. I want to see him tear oblamo a new hole in a one-on-one debate.

I think he could turn the economy around because he's seen it done and helped make it happen.

He also has a better chance of getting the nomination than the not-electable Dr. No.

[Oh Shoot]

Just so sad.

You know, I'll say one thing for the Dems, they generally come up with several interesting candidates (for their traditional support bases anyway), any one of which most Dems can vote for without gagging. Sure can't say that for GOP.

Hildebeeste would have won last time around too. I used to have nightmares early on thinking that she might become president and was actually somewhat relieved that O won out. Wow, how naive can a jaded guy be still be?

Actually, about any Dem would have won after Dubya and the GOP mucked things so badly, maybe even friggin Barney Frank. Maybe even a Hispanic lesbian atheist female.

- OS

[Guest 6.8 AR]

You're pushing it with Barney, but the other might have:D

[BryanP]

If we elect him he'll just run off with a younger, prettier, (and by all accounts crazier) country.

[enfield]

There isn't going to be any one-on-one debate between O and Gingrich.

My personal opinion is that there is no more than a 30% chance that there will be an election next November. We'll have an 'emergency' requiring an executive order delaying the election until a more 'opportune' time.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

That idea has been floated by otherwise unknown liberals, but if it does happen, there will be

your war in the United States. If that man-child President does anything remotely like that, he

might as well bury himself in Martha's Vineyard, because he won't be in the White House again.

I doubt anyone would tolerate that.

Come to think of it, add the "Occupy Lower Broad" people, Van Jones and George Soros and

see if that isn't their idea, also. If Van Jones wants his "Revolution", bring it on, you commie!

He's written about it. George Soros is funding the destruction of this country. And Occupy,

well they are a bunch of fools doing their part.

Edited November 20, 2011 by 6.8 AR
add

[TM01]

There isn't going to be any one-on-one debate between O and Gingrich.

My personal opinion is that there is no more than a 30% chance that there will be an election next November. We'll have an 'emergency' requiring an executive order delaying the election until a more 'opportune' time.

Very interesting and seeing the history of the constitution smashing criminal currently sitting this theory could actually hold water. Thanks for the food for thought. I would not put it past Him at all. He in fact has proven himself to be one of the biggest bald faced liars yet.

[TM01]

That idea has been floated by otherwise unknown liberals, but if it does happen, there will be

your war in the United States. If that man-child President does anything remotely like that, he

might as well bury himself in Martha's Vineyard, because he won't be in the White House again.

I doubt anyone would tolerate that.

Come to think of it, add the "Occupy Lower Broad" people, Van Jones and George Soros and

see if that isn't their idea, also. If Van Jones wants his "Revolution", bring it on, you commie!

He's written about it. George Soros is funding the destruction of this country. And Occupy,

well they are a bunch of fools doing their part.

Look at the infractions upon our civil liberties as we speak. The sheeple population in America today is large enough to actually fall for it. Hell look at the whole TSA debacle and you will see what folks are willing to put up with if enough fear mongering gets thrown in there faces.

[Guest mikedwood]

So you think Freddie Mac paid Newt a multimillion dollar "CON-sulting" fee to do what?

Pedal influence? Or does Freddie Mac really need a historian that bad? Would no historian work for less?

Newt rails against Fannie and Freddie but it's quite obvious he can be bought. Wake the ____ up people!

[kieefer]

All of them will have trash dug up on them when they rise in the polls.

Newt's earnings, or payoff, whatever you want to call it fails in comparison to what many others ripped us off for, and yet there's no outcry about them.

Franklin Raines

Jamie Gorelick

Jim Johnson

BHO has ripped us off more than anyone. He is also involved in more scandals than any of them and the MSM ignores it. Whoever the nominee is better have enough brains to focus the attention on this administrations failed policies, scandals and destruction of our freedoms.

If Newt is it, that's where my vote is.

[greenego]

So you think Freddie Mac paid Newt a multimillion dollar "CON-sulting" fee to do what?

Pedal influence? Or does Freddie Mac really need a historian that bad? Would no historian work for less?

Newt rails against Fannie and Freddie but it's quite obvious he can be bought. Wake the ____ up people!

I am sure whatever Newt did for them, it was worth every penny they paid him. Newt is a player.

[kieefer]

I am sure whatever Newt did for them, it was worth every penny they paid him. Newt is a player.

1.6 or 1.8 million.

Newt's been asked to disclose, might see the real numbers and why at the next debate

Franklin Raines - 90 million.

[BryanP]

There isn't going to be any one-on-one debate between O and Gingrich.

My personal opinion is that there is no more than a 30% chance that there will be an election next November. We'll have an 'emergency' requiring an executive order delaying the election until a more 'opportune' time.

Oddly enough I heard the same sort of thing from liberals when W was running for his second term. And then again at the end of his second term And the same thing from conservatives back when Clinton ran for his second term and yet again at the end of his second term. I suspect if Obama wins we'll hear the same thing again at the end of his second term.

[Guest mikedwood]

So are you saying we take the least of the crookedest crooks? The most crooked?

Obama is so crooked that if we have to accept this new Newt that's great cause he's not Obama and Newt swears up and down that he has reformed himself. No more commercials with Nancy, he doesn't believe in Cap and Trade anymore or mandated healthcare and on and on and on.

Newt is reformed and he's all better now? I think I even read that Jesus told him so........

What if we elected someone that has stuck to conservative values since well before the 80's? Now who would that person be?

[Guest 6.8 AR]

At the rate Obama's destroying this country, if he gets re-elected, at the end of his second

term, there won't be much left and elections won't matter. I don't remember the numbers

accurate enough to argue, but if you will try to recall that during Bush's 8 years money spent,

Obama did it in 2, and is still trying to beat that.

I think any of the candidates would fare better than him. Mark Steyn called Obama's spending

"Obamacrous speed" compared to previous admins. I think it fits.

It's almost time for pitchforks and torches.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Mike, I would vote for Ron Paul if he is the nominee, but you wouldn't vote for Newt if he is?

Come on.

[Guest mikedwood]

6.8 I value your opinion and yeah the country is not going down but it's down the crapper. We just can't tell yet.

But what if anything has Obama done that wasn't just a carry forward at light speed of what Bush was doing? Nothing, not a freaking thing.

The only possible answer would be the healthcare bill, Now the two front runners of GOP have a history of mandated healthcare.

Other than that things are coasting full steam ahead.

Bush tax cuts are in place, wars on wars and looking at a couple of other options, up to QE what now?

Fast and Furious? They say Bush was doing that as well.

A field of 9 and I like Paul best, no one is in 2nd for me. Would be a great year for a 3rd party. Would be cool if Jesse Ventura ran. I'd love to have a president that believed in liberty and could kick Putin's a..... butt.

[enfield]

Me too - I wish Jesse Ventura could be your President,

but not mine.