The Right Scoop
I hold a mastres of structional engineering, and don't believe Cain had the math.
equ. to that, for the Univ. he attended did not teeach real hi math.
Another thing, Cain never thought he could win, he only used to platform to collect a lot of money and he has. Semper Fi
"... don't fall ..."
I hear your plaint NHConservative0221.
However, everything I have posted here on TRS is pragmatic.
As you will notice in the post to which you are responding, I use the word "IF" in quotes.
"IF" Gingrich wins the Republican wreath -
POTUS Gingrich
and
V-POTUS Santorum
... or vice versa.
or
POTUS Gingrich
and
V-POTUS Bachmann
... or vice versa.
Why?
It's either Romney OR Gingrich
It's either Romney OR Bachmann
It's either Romney OR Paul
It's either Romney OR Perry
It's either Romney OR Santorum
Of course, Romney might be TKOed early.
And, unless something changes to elevate Bachmann, Paul, Perry OR Santorum, it looks like it's going to be Romney OR Gingrich.
That's all.
That's it.
Art
Yes. I was quite shocked at the way he acted today. I would have thought better from Mr. ''the truth has no agenda''. Beck has always complained about how much bias there is in the media and the need for more objective journalism. Today he did not seem to show any of that because he pitched real softball questions to Bachmann. He needed to nail more specifics from her on exactly how she plans on pushing healthcare reform and enforcement of deporting the 11 million illegal. First how do you find them and second what massive new government organization will be needed to implement and control it.
Gingrich just doesn't get it. I totally understand his points and these would all be valid ideas provided there is no corruption in government or in the businesses receiving government money. Unfortunitely for Mr. Gingrich here, corruption is precisely what the problem is. No matter how good an idea is when it passes through bad government it becomes bad. This idealistic notion that government can ever be free from corruption is rediculous because it is not accountable to the same laws that govern we the people, not legal nor economic, because it is the source of that power. Therefore everything the government touches to some extent becomes illegal and uneconomical. The government is accountable to the people and the people only. The only option is for we the people to limit its scope of power and authority and to stand guard at all times.
Listen to this clip...this is NOT how progressives sound.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J6LoMB_bvVQ
Look at his accomplishments as Speaker....this is now how progressives act.
Look at his ratings from Conservative Ratings groups....95% lifetime Conservative rating is not what progressives recieve.
To put is plainly....YOU ARE JUST WRONG....it is that simple.
I challenge you to look at what Newt says, has done as Speaker, and his ratings by well respected CONSERVATIVE groups and then ask yourself the same questions. I think if you are truely open minded and objective you will agree he is a conservative.
Newt, Mitt, McCain... 2008 all over again without Palin to inspire us. The Tea Party vs. the Republican Establishment: www.imperfectamerica.com.
don't listen to FNC sophistry, and get behind Perry. He is the one that can go into Washington and get the job done based on his TX legislature experience. It's not too late, and his live debating skills are getting better all the time.
Ethanol subsidies are pure political vote buying. Every politician who wants to win Iowa supports the subsidies. Ethanol is as big of a scam as AGW.
Car Insurance = State and locality mandated. Insurance for when you CHOOSE to own and operate a car. Individual mandate = Federal mandated. Insurance for simply...breathing. Can't opt out.
Newt is most certainly a progressive. The question becomes, should that be a deterant? Ever see the movie independence day? Did you care about whether the president was a progressive or a conservative? No, because the country faced a fictional existential crisis.
However, we face a very real crisis today. The deficit. If not addressed, it will destroy the entire country.
Newt is the most capable man of addressing this issue. Ideological purity is a luxury we cannot afford.
There is no such thing as a "conservative" who wants the federal government who wants the federal government to do the things that Gingrich wants it to do.
what happen? seems like the video was cut short, only 9:51 and cut off in the middle of a question
Glenn asked some great questions, but he didn't do the follow up questions.
When Newt gets pinned down he throws up a giant snow storm. Beck got lost. After his question on ethanol subsidies and Newt's answer can anyone say if Newt is in favor or them or against them? Do you support subsidies, Newt? It's not a gotcha question. It's a straight forward yes or no.
When he asked about the drug benefit he rambled on about health savings accounts. What health savings accounts? Did I miss something?
Let's hope people see through Newt's double talk.
Perry/Rubio 2012 because their baggage is just carry on luggage compared to Newt's.
Newt is exactly right. There are minimal things that government should regulate..you know like...it is against the law to kill people. it is against the law for businesses to NOT protect workers from obvious hazzards like protective glasses for drill operators. As Newt says it is NOT the role of government to bailout GM, Goldman Sachs, or Lehman Brothers. There is no reason for ''too big to fail''. So, there are limitations on where Government should be and more importantly where is should NOT be.
However, The idea of having economic incentives for manufacturing goes back to Alexander Hamilton’s first report of manufacturing which I believe was 1791. The idea of opening up oil fields for drilling in Texas and Alaska and providing incentives to drive for American energy independence is exactly what the USA needs. When you incentivise an entire industry you are not picking individual winners and loosers you are picking American industry over foreign industry that is backed by foreign government....it is leveling the playing field. Perfect plan that is needed now.
His example on kideny dialysis is an excellent example of how we need to revamp medicade/medicare. Diversity in healthcare is just like free competition...it will always lead to more effecienies in the marketplace and provide individuals with better services at a lower cost.
I think that Glenn Becks attack on the ''right wing social engineering'' is not correct even though Newt apologized to Paul Ryan he was in no way attacking the Ryan plan. All Gingrich was saying that to impose any form of social engineering whether it be right or left is bad government and an encrochment on the rights of the individual. That is all. For some reason people want to pull that one out even after Gingrich and Ryan agree that there is not attack on the Ryan plan and try to make a ''gotcha'' moment out of it. I think it is disingenuous and hurts Becks creditbility for him to pull such a ''gotcha'' moment especially after all the comments Beck has made in the past against the media for the exact same conduct.
It is true that ''the truth has no agenda'' but it appears Glenn does....I find that sad because I really like Glenn Beck when he was on Fox. GBTV however is giving me bad vibes....and that is concerning.
I classify a true conservative as one that is for less intrusive government, pro-business with minimal regulation, and the guaranteeing of more individual rights and freedoms. (i.e. no more TSA pat downs, no more scan machines that give you cancer). I think you will find that Newt Gingrich is a true conservative. To say he is a progressive is an absolute false statement and totally untrue. Again, how can you be a progressive and have a 95% lifetime conservative rating from respected conservative organizations....answer...you can't!
Like it or not
Newt is a C O N S E R V A T I V E....
Gingrich is a C O N S T I T U T I O N A L I S T.....
and he will follow through on his 21st Century Contract with America promises just like he followed through as Speaker on the original Contract with America in the 1990s.
Newt is definitely a smart guy, but this can actually be detrimental if your guiding principles are wrong. Listening to this interview with Glenn, as well as one with Rush a few months back (after the Ryan kerfuffle), it seems that every time Newt is asked a question, his 'overactive' mind kicks in with government solutions.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g_0NaNPzXRE&feature=related
The solutions we are after are not complicated. They are things like repealing Obamacare; shutting down the federal education, energy, and EPA departments, introducing cut-cap-balance, transferring powers back to the states as per the 10th amendment, making Washington a part-time legislature, etc., etc. Can we have confidence in Newt in shaking up Washington when he always tends to think of things via. a Washington mindset? not so sure....
"government is not the solution to our problem, government IS the problem"
We conservatives are for truth. And as much as I don't see Newt as an orthodox conservative, he is very much conservative. Let's face it, Reagan didn't do all what orthodox conservatives would want.
That's why it bothers me when Newt is again and again asked about his "right-wing engineering" comments. If you listen carefully, you'll notice he said he is against "imposing" on the American people, regardless if it comes from the left or the right.
Same thing regarding prescription coverage. He is saying that you have to do things in the "right" direction, if they are politically doable. That's a huge important thing.
The worst we could do to bury the conservative cause is come to office and ram our correct ideas through everybody's throat. It will backfire.
Regarding the couch with Pelosi (I'm happy Beck didn't ask about it) Newt has said enough times he did a stupid thing. That's it.
As conservatives, let's stick to the truth, and avoid having "here they go again"s said at us.
"... the best record ..."
Yep, Bachmann has a more conservative record.
But, there's just something missing... maybe it's the wisdom that comes with experience.
Both Gingrich and Santorum have tons of experience and wisdom regarding the social issues in America and the international issues.
Bachmann has been representing Minnesota's 6th congressional district since 2007.
That's only 4 years.
She certainly has much more experience than BHObama had after 1 year and 6 months as Senator.
However, my point is that, however RIGHT ON Bachmann is on conservative issues she is articulating today, it just seems to me that something is missing in her resume which is found in abundance in Gingrich and Santorum.
To me, that something missing is simply the wisdom that comes with experience on international issues.
As a member of the Intelligence Committee, Bachmann has current knowledge and perspective about international issues, but current knowledge and perspective needs something more.
That something more is simply wisdom.
However, to restate a previous comment here on TRS...
So.
IF Mr. Cain endorses Mr. Gingrich, or not, and IF Gingrich wins the Republican primary wreath, and IF Gingrich asks Mr. Cain to be his Secretary of Commerce, or not, I could definitely go with a
POTUS Gingrich
and
V-POTUS Santorum
... or vice versa.
or
POTUS Gingrich
and
V-POTUS Bachmann
... or vice versa.
Why?
Gingrich has said that a nanosecond after being sworn in as POTUS he will use Executive Order authority to blast to smithereens ALL of the Zero czars.
THAT sounds very, VERY good to me... for a start...
... IF Gingrich wins the Republican primary wreath and then the general election.
Art
Romney's support among independents is 10 times that of Newt so he is easily more electable than Newt and much less dangerous ... And I hate Romney, so it was not easy to write that first sentence . Anybody but Newt Neuter Newt now before its too late
Like I said, if SOCIALIZED MEDICINE floats your boat, You are as big a PROGRESSIVE as Newt. How does this fool(Newt) now argue against Obamacare?? ..How do you?
And Newt the Progressive won't, you obviously have not done any vetting of Gingrich, His personal life matches his political life and the both stink to high heaven. But hey, go ahead and nominate him all will come out. He is ,after all, the guy Obama most wants to run against...why??
The problem with Newt is that he's a long game Republican. He'll do anything or say anything if he thinks it will benefit the Republican party in the long run. It doesn't matter if he believes it or not. The couch with Pelosi is a great example. Does he believe in AGW? who knows, but I'm betting he did that as a big tent thing. Guys like that are awful because they continually are moving their goalposts and morals. Once he's on the top and President I wonder if he'll ever actually govern by his principals or if he really has any to start with. Notice his strawmen with the medicare. Everything is a political calculation with him. It's like baseline budgeting with the size of the govt. Why can't we ever get a guy or girl who will get in there and take it from zero and move ahead instead of STARTING with bloated and going slower than the Progressives? It's like he's already resigned to the fact that we can't go back on the size but just slower. I'm ready to vote for debater Newt, but real Newt has me turned off. I know who gets the knife in the back and it's not the Progressives or opposite party.
Rubbish, Newt is as big a PROGRESSIVE as Pelosi or Obama his deeds and his past words Make him the most Dangerous candidate in the race
Great Post - THANKS
Newt will be tested again and again
Great exercise when he chops up Romney or "THE ONE"
with 1/2 of his brain tied behind his back
(B/c the vid was cut off. Here's the end after a couple more tough questions)
GLENN: Newt, I have to tell you, I ‑‑ you know, because, you know, it’s obvious it was very clear in advance and I hope my staff made this very clear that this isn’t going to be an easy interview but I think you’ve ‑‑ you know, there was no gaffes here by any stretch of the imagination. I didn’t expect any. But I appreciate the willingness to come on and answer the tough questions, and I wish you the best.
GINGRICH: Well, sir, you and I have always had a great relationship and I admire your courage and I admire the way in which you’ve always stood up and told the truth and I think you’ve had a huge impact as I go around the country with Tea Party folks in maximizing interest in American history and interest in the Founding Fathers and I think much of what you’ve done, you know, you and I don’t have to agree on some things to have a great deal of mutual respect and I think you’ve been a very powerful force for good and I wish you well in your new ventures.
GLENN: Thank you very much. Newt Gingrich, thank you for being on the program. Back in just a second.
Can't wait to see the Bachmann interview that followed... Can just imagine the hard-hitting questions that were asked...
Beck: "Congresswoman Bachmann, why are you so dreamy and such a perfect, wonderful candidate that I can fawn over?" ;)
(Note to the humor-impaired: That was a joke. Now, back to your regular TRS viewing.)
I didn't even know Glenn Beck was still around until I heard about this interview this morning. Seems he hasn't changed much at all.
Unfortunately, that isn't a video of the entire interview... It cuts off the last portion of it...
I said it once I will say it again Gingrich is far far worse than Romney or even Ron Paul. We need to NEUTER NEWT this guy is dangerous and trecherous and a total scumbag
An excellent interview...
Gingrich responded fully.
Beck's comments after the interview about Gingrich's progressive mindset are focused on the issue of the history of Teddy Roosevelt progressivism.
A few days ago here on TRS I had a comment about the progressive choice we have today as related to how we got the 16th amendment and the tax on income.
"... third wave progressivism"... - The entire comment is here -
- - - - - - - - -
"The progress of Progressivism and acceptance of a tax on income" -
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sixteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution
- "On July 12, 1909, the resolution proposing the Sixteenth Amendment was passed by the Sixty-first Congress and submitted to the state legislatures.
- "The presidential election of 1912 was contested between three advocates of an income tax.
- - - - - - - -
The election was "contested between three advocates of an income tax."
That means that in the progressive Woodrow Wilson administration the choice was between 3 progressives...
...pick 1 of 3 progressives... any progressive will do.
As it was then in 1912, so also it was in 2008...
... pick a progressive Obama or pick a progressive McCain.
So, now, what is difference 100 years later, 1912 vs. 2012?
Nothing.
It seems that in 2012 we will have the choice again between progressive Romney vs. progressive Gingrich.
However.
BHObama and his regime has gotta go.
If Mr. Cain endorses Mr. Gingrich, or not, and if Gingrich wins the Republican primary wreath, and if Gingrich asks Mr. Cain to be his Secretary of Commerce, or not, I could definitely go with a
POTUS Gingrich
and
V-POTUS Santorum
Why?
Gingrich has said that a nanosecond after being sworn in as POTUS he will use Executive Order authority to blast to smithereens ALL of the Zero czars.
THAT sounds very, VERY good to me... for a start.
Art
Actually it sounds like verbal slop. Newt is a political Viper with a past that will make the accusations against Herman Cain seem like a bedtime story ,whose progressive views make Romney look like a tea partier, whose radical views make Ron paul look like a choir boy ,whose willingness to "brown nose" democrats makes Huntsman look like Mark Levin . And all of that is clearly shown in Beck's interview. Neuter Newt before its too late .
"... verbal slop"...
Newt answered fully, and Gregg, Pat and Stuart all agreed that Gingrich was coherent in his answers.
Of course, deo heerai, that does not mean they agreed with 100% of what Gingrich said.
Gregg was surprised that his decades long friend Pat was drawn towards Gingrich and how he handled himself as he answered very tough question about his "progressive" past.
Only the voters can "neuter Newt"... so, time will tell.
Art
"Only the voters can "neuter Newt"... so, time will tell.
Art"
I am with you 100% on that my brother god bless the democratic process . But vetting must be done and Newt fails and has been found wanting
Beck has become alittle too arrogant in the last couple years. Now that Cain is gone I am looking to see who would even consider backing or proposing ideas like Cain's 999. Only Newt and Perry come to mind.
nice try trying to get cain supporters to switch to newt, NO WAY! Gingrich is a dirty progressive and trying to blame Glenn Beck is pathetic
Comment Policy: Please read our new comment policy before making a comment. In short, please be respectful of others and do not engage in personal attacks. Otherwise we will revoke your comment privileges.