Newt: Obama the most dangerous president in modern American history

You can’t put a gun rack in a Volt

New Gingrich
To Young Republicans at ORU

I just listened to a debate on this on Megyn’s show (Lars and that liberal Leslie woman).
In my opinion, Newt did not say an untrue thing.
Obama is a threat to our National Security.

Gingrich: America’s Churchill.

Derided, flawed, provocative, bold thinker, and the right man for the times.

Again, I’m hoping people know I don’t like Gingrich, but unlike Rumpelstiltskin, I don’t so thoroughly despise him, that I will refuse to acknowledge anything he says.

The real problem with what he’s saying is the stupidity of the American voter; specifically the democrat, so-called “independent” and RINO. Obama’s reasoning is both simple, and cloudy, simultaneously. Looking at his policies, listening to him talk, and looking at his associations, what I see is an egomaniac that is more desperate than ever to have himself type-cast as the Prince of Peace, and to do this, he bows and scrapes to our worst, and literally avowed, enemies, the muslims. He thinks that in being “nice” to them, they’ll obey [his] golden rule, and be “nicer” to us, in return. He believes that true threat to peace [besides us] comes from nations like Israel, for their dogged refusal to negotiate on their survival, and so to show the world that he “gets it”, he mistreats Bibi at every opportunity, and pals around with anti-Semites [like Sarkozy]. He sends letters to the government of Iran, pledging not to use military force against them, while allowing his administration to openly issue threats to shoot down Israeli planes and kill their pilots, if they dare attack Iran. In dealing with our other long-time, hated enemies, the Soviets and Red Chinese, he calls himself being the peacemaker, by destroying one of the very things that keeps us safe: nuclear détente. Through the destruction of our nuclear arsenal, which has demonstrably kept the Soviets and Red Chinese out of our way, and was even literally demonstrated to be frightening enough to the Soviets and PRC to get them running to the bargaining table in the 1950s [Korean War], he seeks to be the guy in the movie that lowers his gun, first, thinking his little show will cause the others to do the same. He doesn’t want to campaign on his accomplishments, and that’s for a reason; he’s done more than any other president in history to endanger the most lives. Removing the missile shielding from Europe and the Near East; offering top secret defensive technologies to one of our most hated enemies [the Soviets, and, probably by extension, the Red Chinese], showing his utter bigotry-based contempt for our only ally in the Middle East [Israel], musing publicly about slashing our nuclear stockpile, just a few years after releasing information about the UK’s nuclear program, and threatening Israel’s, etc. Literally billions of lives live under the gun, now, thanks to Obama.

What’s worse is the fact that we still can’t pin down his reasoning.

1: If he doesn’t understand that his actions have proven to be nothing but destructive to not only national security, but international security, he is one of, if not the worst, incompetent to sit in the Oval Office, even over the buffoonish peanut farmer, James Earl Carter. This would mean he is literally not intelligent enough to understand the consequences of his action, and that, to him, wrong is right, all in the pursuit of his “Ameritopian” dream-state that can never come true, not in his lifetime, not in anyone else’s.

2: This is all a ploy. I don’t remember who came up with it, but some leftists postulated a way to effect fundamental change is to so overload a system, that it self-destructs and collapses under it’s own weight [such as some are trying with the welfare state]. Perhaps this is what Obama is trying; to create fundamental change through intentionally destructive policy, in order to bring about a [possibly world] collapse, which will leave “visionaries” like him with the power and “responsibility” to finally implement that “fundamental change” he’s been wanting, for so long, and nevermind the cost in lives, all in the pursuit of his “Ameritopian” dream-state that can never come true, not in his lifetime, not in anyone else’s.

Adelson announced he may give Newt up to $100 Million dollars this election. whew! He makes like $4 Million per day, so he can afford it.

Take that Romney and Santorum.

That was great news to me when I read it yesterday.

This does not remove us from helping. I post Newt’s speeches on Facebook and email them to my email list. What ever state your in it’s time to get the word our however you can. We have to influence the vote as much as we can and spreading the word is the only way I’m able to help I hope those who support Newt will do the same.

Who’s pushing the Establishment to dislike Newt? Ms. Barbra Bush “the top momma dog” that’s who. She’s the Achilles heal to Newt getting anywhere near the WH– and much less, take the spot light away from the ~BUSH’S DYNASTY~ Yes, the former 1st. lady is no different in that Monarchy thinking then that of The Kennedy’s.

They “their inner circle” (which are many waiting for the bank rolls and kick-back’s) they could careless that the GOPe doesn’t pull a win, this time around– because it’s the 2016 election for Jeb. That’s the goal here.

All the more reason to get behind Newt……” Yeah, Newt is the old white dude, that everyone likes to mock– an Ideology of grandiose thinking that gets in his way etc, etc and blah, blah, blah. Up-theirs and complete B.S.!

Newt by far……….. makes the rest of these candidates look like amateurs, and the “Establishment” know’s this better then anyone, including the left. AKA: Romney is the front man to keep Newt out.

Just like with Sarah Palin/Tea Party, the same go’s for Newt. All the more reason to get behind him with our support.

Funny too: why is “the chatter” with this possible brokered convention, have Jeb Bush’s name being mentioned?

I don’t about you but I am tired of hearing about theology, contraception, amino synthesis and now Catholic Protestant wars. I think Newt’s third resurrection might not be too far off.

Look at the size of that crowd! Good for Newt!

I think it’s a very good sign that so many young people were nodding in agreement with what Newt was saying. Some of the under 30 crowd actually get it. Thank you Lord.

Did anyone else see PBS’s American Experience last night about Bill Clinton? The best part was about the Republican Revolution of 1994. The narration says, “Clinton was about to be challenged by a new and formidable rival.”

The rival was a young Newt Gingrich with his plan to take both houses of Congress in the 1994 elections. Newt is giving a speech and says, “I am a genuine revolutionary. They are the genuine reactionaries. We are going to change their world, they will do anything to stop us.

If you’d like to see it, the link is here:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/films/clinton/player/

You don’t have to watch the enitre video, just move along the timeline. Newt is featured in chapter 13 of 14, “The Midterm Elections”. There are some interviews from a few of the people who have been bashing Gingrich of late. It’s clear that Newt p*ssed these losers off and they hold a grudge.

I just can’t understand with the danger we’re in, why they won’t force this guy to produce his papers, and why others are so reluctant to force the issue. No issue where this psychopath Obama is concerned should be off limits. Whatever it takes.

Just finished watching the whole thing. Highly recommend you do also.

Notice how Obama never stands up and says “this is my birth certificate”? He always distances himself, let’s some other org. post it.

We don’t know if he’s even 35 years old technically speaking. That’a a pretty simple requirement of Article II.

Or actually who he is since he’s had several names. But age 35 and a name that’s legit would be a good place to start as far as eligibility goes.

LET OBAMA STAND UP AND GIVE A PIECE OF PAPER BIRTH CERTIFICATE AND STATE THAT THIS IS HIS so he can held criminally liable for it, and it can be analyzed in a court.