NRO’s Newt trashing exposed as FALSE

Posted by The Right Scoop on January 27th, 2012 in Politics | 159 Comments

Another MUST READ article vindicating Newt Gingrich from the assault on him yesterday from National Review Online’s Elliot Abrams. In short, Newt was taken out of context from a speech back in 1986 and the fragments were used to suggest he was insulting and attacking Reagan’s policies against the Soviet Union.

Click on the photo to read the article vindicating Newt Gingrich, by Jeffrey Lord at the American Spectator.

And then ask yourself where this misinformation came from. My guess it was part of an opposition research file dug up by the Romney campaign.

—

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.

Anonymous

Hey Prince you need to go!

Anonymous

This isn’t just Romney, it’s the RINO ESTABLISHMENT…and guess who they support?Sickening we have to battle not only the demonic-rats but the GOP establishment as well. Someone should be looking into RNC chair background…Wonder if that’s Alinsky like Barry’s. Either way Establishment has wanted this wrapped up quickly and are getting nervous since it’s going to go a long time, which is good. That’s why the bullpen is active with RINO Mitch Daniels.

http://twitter.com/doorsxp Doors Xp

This is SO unFbelievably slimy.

Confirmed (yet again): Mitt is a DB.

Florida, are you just ignorant OR do you really prefer this dirty bastard to the other candidates?

Anonymous

Your absolutely right Newt is the Republican savior… PUN INTENDED.
Anonymous

You are jumping to conclusions.
PFFV

This is what we are fighting against, the establishments on the right and the left. Government is way to big, greedy, corrupt, and out of control. The only solution is to shrink the size of government and its anti-business, anti-freedom policies and I don’t mean a little, I mean by nearly half. Romney sure won’t cut anything. Paul is a joke. Santorum, I love the guy but don’t see him catching fire anytime soon. Newt is the only one I see with a clear plan and that is brave enough to stand up to the national media, Obama’s Alinsky ideology, and the political correctness absurdity in this country.

Gingrich West 2012

http://twitter.com/PoeAllen Allen Poe

No, mixed message. what we are fighting is the liberals of both parties. Many conservatives, have been there a long time. You can act like a teenager, and attack the whole government, or you can root out the evil. We do not need change, especially Obama’s change. We need to unite. Together we can root out the evil seed. Don’t throw out the baby , with the wash water.
D. Swanson

“Gingrich West 2012″ Damn right!

Anonymous

The RINO establishment will do any and every thing to stop Newt.
Let the people decide.
I, for one, have not made up my mind but I do not need or want their help.

Anonymous

LOL: Newt is part of that same establishment Annei…

That is what this election is all about, are you suggesting that people aren’t making up their own mind?

I think people are easily swayed one direction or another. People have got to look at their principles. You have to ask yourself what you; yourself believe in. That is how we should choose a candidate. To suggest that these guys are choosing for you or anyone ells because of ads being put out is highly irresponsible. We are living in the end of the information age and are starting the social information age. News travels faster today than ever before in history. If people can’t do their own homework and fact check for them self’s, is irresponsible in itself. All anyone has to do is Google any of these stories and read the good and bad about them. It only takes reading time. But 1 hour a week leading up to the election is plenty.
Anonymous

It is intellectually lazy in the extreme to label someone who dissagrees with you on Romney as RINO establishment. It is exactly (EXACTLY) like a liberal caling anyone who dissagrees with Obama a racist or a right wing extremist or some other name. Calling someone a name or ridiculing them is an attempt to diminish them as NOT worthy of consideration. It relieves you of having to actually debate on the merits. If you want to take issue with someone like me (i.e. a tea party, constitution supporting conservative who has nothing to do with any non-existent republican establishment), who supports Romney than make your case. Don’t call me a name.

Or to put it another way, it is becoming increasingly apparent that if you support Romney you are part of the Republican establishment.
Anonymous

Why are you guys so hell bent on supporting Newt over Romney. They are both BIG government progressives. Rick Santorum is the only guy that claim the mantle of being a conservative. Honestly how many times does Newt have to say that he has a man crush on FDR, Woodrow Wilson, and Teddy Roosevelt before you get it? So instead of defending Newt against Mitt over and over again when it’s much easier to support Rick Santorum not mention it just makes sense.

Anonymous

Can you read?
I said that I have not made up my mind….you seem to have done so.

Anonymous

Lol… I’ll give you that. I saw the republic establishment against Newt thing and its really beginning to drive me absolutley insane. That was is the idea I am attacking. To be honest I’m not really a big Rick Santorum fan but he is much better than both Newt and Romney, and if Ron Paul wasn’t so naive on radical Islam I would be for Ron.

Anonymous

Look, I agree that we don’t have a great choice this time but I get the feeling you are too young to know jack about Newt Gingrich. he was villified but the GOP establishment when he was speaker. You have no idea what you are talking about and it’s obvious because of how far off of the mark you are. Go do some independant research on Newt and you will see that he and Romney are polar opposites.

Anonymous

BTW I am young…25 too be exact. However, that does not excuse the fact that Newt has been for the individual mandate for over 20 years (up until last year- 2011) and that he has spoken over and over again about how great the progressive movement is and I don’t know how you guys can simply excuse it.

Not to mention Newt is willing to jump into the classwarfare rhetoric (Bain capital is evil…cayman island and Swiss bank account) garbage. So whether the so called “establishment” is against him or for him makes no difference to me. I judge him based on is own actions and words. In other words Romney = Newt — said simplisticly.

Anonymous

As you grow older you will look back on your own action and words and think to yourself,”What was I thinking?” My point being, you are holding Newt’s actions and words from an entirely different time against him today whereas, Romney’s questionable activity is current events. I graduated highschool in 1988, around the time of Newt’s Speakership and I can attest, it was a completely different world then.

Anonymous

Good comment…I hope he heeds it.
Anonymous

Thank you. I have just recently learned to be calm and peaceful in my soul. It makes a huge difference in every aspect of your day when you find it. It took me 41 years and 2 wars.
Anonymous

I have a long way to go to be peaceful, but I know that I was just like him in my opinions when I was that age, and I have mellowed a bit, and hope to be where you are at one day..minus the wars(which I thank-you for your service)
Psyphurr Lock

I served is the Army from 1982 until 2000. I lived through this Reagan/Newt period and remember it well. Reforger, the fall of the Wall, East to West Germany migrations, etc. I remember how proud I was to be in uniform and that our President truly cared about us. I also remember all the pay raises he directed to show his appreciation for our sacrifices. Wish we had someone like him to vote for this time around….

Anyway, I remember Newt fighting against both Democrats and left leaning Republicans at that time. Those left leaning Republicans ARE what we call the establishment today. To them this is pay back against Newt for making their lives hell while he was the Speaker. Romney will not rock their boat and they know it. Newt will…. again, hence their concentrated attack against him. So people need to really take some time and *think* about why the establishment is so hell bent on destroying Newt. Has nothing to do with his personal life. Nothing at all.

So many of us are fed up with the Republican establishment not standing strong against the President and the Democraps actions and policies. All the Conservative calls for throwing the bums out and starting fresh. Guess what….. Newt is the only one who has the courage to do it. Again, that’s why the establishment is so focused on destroying him.

If we really want to shake up the Republican Party establishment it will take more than a Presidential candidate to do it. We have to vote their butts out of office and remove their power to influence. Newt will be seriously hindered in executing any of his proposed plans with the existing establishment still in place. Anyone but the establishments preferred candidate that is.

Folks this is just one battle in a very long war to take back our country. We really need to keep our eye on the end game. We are doing the Democraps work for them…..
Anonymous

I feel I jumped out of a cosmic rabbit hole when I hear someone say that Newt Gingrich is anti-establishment.
Anonymous

He has been in Washington a long time but rails against the ones that dig in their heels and want to continue to spend which makes him anti-establishment. If all of the establisment are coming out against him saying he isn’t conservative then yes something smells fishy. Even BillO said what is happening is crazy, that Newt is a conservative. Romney has never been a conservative, never voted or governed as one…please prove me wrong with actual facts, and not your bloviating.
Anonymous

So you and I remember it the same way. I wasn’t worried about my Marine stickers on my car as no one would even consider touching it, back then. Today, it makes you a target.

The confirmation is reassuring. I was worried I was remembering it wrong due to the death of brain cells.
Anonymous

http://townhall.com/video/newt-gingrich-supports-individual-mandate

He supported a FEDERAL individual mandate up until last year (2011). That is pretty da#n recent. So you can’t make that argument to me.

Look you can make the case to me that Gingrich is better than Romney when Romney and Gingrich are our only choice. I say that only because of the things he along with others did during his time as speaker (balance the budget and welfare reform).

However, presently speaking we have Santorum in the race and he clearly stands against the individual mandate and always has.
Anonymous

You are right, but he also supported Unions and worse Gov’t unions which are sucking the life right out of states. He is not perfrect either. Let’s see how he does in the polls, if he still can’t get past 11-15% than he is in trouble.
Anonymous

I concur he isn’t perfect, but he is the best we have left. However, the vote shouldn’t be split between Newt and Rick it should be split between Mitt and Newt. For some reason most won’t accept that. Most think that Newt is the conservative alternative to Mitt and he is not.

Look you are talking to a practical libertarian. I believe the Federal Goverment is limited to what is outline in the constitution. That means things like Medicare, Social Security, Medicaid (all individual mandates) , and so much more is all unconstitutional.

The easiest ways to fix those is to declare them unconstitutional and turn those programs back to the states to do with them what they will. The only reason I’m not for Ron Paul is because he is totally naive on Radical Islam (not to mention he is a terrible communicator). Therefore, the next in line would logically be Rick Santorum.

I wish Rand Paul could have ran this year ( both articulate and understands the Middle East). But it’s not a reality at this point is time.
Anonymous

Now that was a good post, sir.
Anonymous

redd500r is schooling your asses! redd500r you can’t have an honest argument with people who will not be honest with themselves. They said do research and when you did the excuse machine rolled out. I hereby call them Newttards.
Anonymous

you are exactly right – it’s different era every decade – see above where i said age changes men – i graduated in HS in 1970 a rebel without a cause.

i have a cause now – GO NEWT

Øbama 2Ø12

Anonymous

Swiss Bank Accounts have always been precieved as negative, as they often hid ‘bad’ money. Hitler used them, Mob bosses use them, secret society’s use them…it is not weird to question why Mitt uses one.

Anonymous

And people that just want to keep their money safe from the crooks belonging to the US government.

Newt is playing the leftist card and I don’t like it period.
Anonymous

Are you saying Mitt doesn’t want to pay his fair share?

http://twitter.com/113KriEger 13Krieger

Exactly right! Newt is not the establishment and he is definitely Conservative versus RINO Romney the progressive. redd500r and klaffner need to go back and read this forum because it is a PROVEN fact that Newt Gingrich is a anti-establishment Constitutional Conservative. Who says so?? Try asking Rush Limbaugh, Michael Reagan, Mark Levin, Laura Ingraham, Sean Hannity, Hermann Cain, Rick Perry, Jame Baker, etc… etc… etc…

Also, you two need to go do some objective reading on the platforms and you will most definitely see the differences between moderates like Krauthammer, Chris ”Krispy Kreme” Christie, John McCain, and other moderate liberal Repbulicans that are the current establishment. Big difference! But you have to be willing to do the reading and research.

Anonymous

Yep, and that job of reading and researching is made more difficult by the blatant lies and misrepresentations. It’s a big job and takes work but it is the only way to learn the truth. It is so important, today to get the truth. I thank Scoop for making it a bit easier by giving us this forum to do just that.
Anonymous

Again Newt, Romney, John Mccain, Lindsay Grahmn, Chris Christie are all progressives. Please do the research!!! Newt and Mitt are equals. Why do you excuse Newt…..Whyyyyyyyyy. My eyes are bleeding…aaaahhhhhhh!

As previously mentioned:

“Honestly how many times does Newt have to say that he has a man crush on FDR, Woodrow Wilson, and Teddy Roosevelt before you get it? So instead of defending Newt against Mitt over and over again when it’s much easier to support Rick Santorum not mention it just makes sense.”

Dan

you sound like the reprobate Beck….you don’t listen to it do you???????
Anonymous

I don’t even know who Glenn Beck is??lol. Are you now a Glenn Beck hater because he isn’t blindly supporting your guy Newt? Wow…pathetic!

Newt: I’m a big fan of FDR & Woodrow Wilson

—http://www.glennbeck.com/2012/01/27/newt-im-a-big-fan-of-fdr-woodrow-wilson/
Anonymous

I think his blind support, much like your blindness, comes from both of you bleeding from the eyes.

Anonymous

Hey mike, so to know something about someone or something you have to have lived in their time? Wow, what do I do with my books on Winston Churchill or my biographies on Joe DeMaggio? I wasn’t around then so should I throw them out?

You know why Newt gets attacked? Cause there is sh*t to attack. I’m not a Romney guy but at least he has run something and been very successful at it. We know that he doesn’t run out on his family. Where are those people who were supposed to back Newt up against his ex-wifes allegations? The same people sticking up for Newt are the same people that bashed Donald Trump for his divorces. To support Newt is to accept double standards. One more election and we will be no different than the liberals.

Hey Mike, so you were there when Newt was chastising Clinton for adultery?

Anonymous

Newt wasn’t getting a blowjob in the oval office while talking on the phone to the PM of Israel. Huge difference. One is morally wrong, the other is a violation of national security and would have landed me and Virus X in Levanworth for 20 years. Apples and oranges.

I wouldn’t sleep with Newt’s ex or Hillary so I have some sympathy, though I wouldn’t have married them either.

Psyphurr Lock

I think Ryan is a paid plant of Romney or the RNC. His agressive, non-stop berating of anyone who has a different view than his generates either a violent verbal outburst, usually designed to shut down discussion, or he reverts to side topics, thereby averting discussing somethng he can not defend effectively on behalf of his masters.

If we ignore him and advise others to do the same, maybe he will go back to his OWS groupies and leave the adults alone so theny can try to solve the countries problems.

His cussing is also flag worthy.
Anonymous

I don’t mind engaging pinheads. It’s a Marine thang. Plus, there are people who think that way and need to see the answers that dumb comments can generate. You know me, never met a challenge I didn’t destroy.
LOL

D. Swanson

For me it comes down to one thing… Trust.
I am old enough that I know all about Newt and Mitt. When it comes to dismantling what Obama has done… I TRUST Newt to rip it all apart and toss in garbage can. However, I do NOT TRUST Mitt to do the same.

Anonymous

You, sir, are a naive fool.

Anonymous

Solid argument …Dumb ass!

K-Bob

A) Never pick a fight with a marine.
B) Namecalling isn’t useful.
C) Keep it civil, please.

Anonymous

For true conservative there is little left to hellbent about in the Republican lineup.

I am supporting Santorum’s campaign, my default, after SarahPAC and Bachmann’s. So here we are again holding our noses and voting for the least progressive big government elephant. I try to be realistic about Santorum so I also started supporting Newt through whom we may get a slight window of opportunity to save the Republic. The republican establishment, media and democrats are against Newt so I will go with that.

If Romney wins we get a continuation, another progressive insider who understand that government healthcare is needed to control the population and the Republic is finished.

Anonymous

Exactly where I’m at, sDee. Santorum if he can go the distance; Newt if he can’t. The one thing that cannot be denied is that Newt did bring about a Republican majority for the first time in decades.

Some obviously didn’t like what it took to do it, but it sounds like politics to me. I’m sure that’s why the Dems despised him then and now. It also explains the witch hunt over ethics charges that were found in the end to be groundless.

We need a fighter and I’m liking Santorum’s stance right now

Maxsteele

Have you or the other Newt bashers even read the article? Or watched the interview with Michael Reagan?
Every single one of the claims that Romney has stated is patently false. Romney is a snake. No matter what Newts political position is on a specific topic, I believe he is being honest. Can you name a specific issue that Newt has brought up about himself or Romney that he has lied about?
Yet, Romney and his supporters make vicious, venemous, libelous attacks on Newt on a daily basis.
I am a Santorum fan but you guys cannot be this blind or perhaps you are Romneybots. The RINO establishment has gotten rid of Cain and now is working hard to get rid of Newt, Santorum is next.
Yet, do you truly believe that Romney and his slimey politics can defeat the slimiest politician of all time?
You do not defeat lies with bigger lies, you defeat them with truth.
Romney, is a liberal, democrat disguising himself as a republican.

Anonymous

I agree Romeny is a progressive, but Newt isn’t? Newt is a big government rebublican progressive by his own admission. I’m not here to defend Romney. I’m just pointing out that Newt isn’t any better, but people can’t accept that and continue to excuse everthing that Newt has said or done. From being a proponent of Global Warming legislation to an Individual mandate to labeling himself a progressive and prasing past progressive presidents ( Woodrow Wilson, FDR, Teddy R). Newt is not better than Mitt and vice versa.

Anonymous

Please show me where he was for Cap N Trade…I saw a video of him a Congress testifying against it. Yes he was for the individual mandate, but so were a lot of conservatives, such as Heritage Group. Point is, he says it was a mistake, why hasn;t Romney? hell, he still defended it last night! Newt actually did conservative things, he reformed welfare, he cut taxes, he balanced the budget, pray tell me what has Romney done that is even remotely conservative besides having a family and working in the private sector(which many liberals can attest to)?

Anonymous

Do you want me to find anymore? Clearly the evidence is stacked against him that he is NO better than Mitt Romney. As Al Gore would say “the debate is over”. lol

Newt Gingrich “The Evidence is Sufficient” on Global Warming
-http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=upphPTRr_PE

The Newt Gingrich — John Kerry Global Warming Love-Fest
-http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wY2Uh6TKqnk

Newt Gingrich supporting a Progressive Republican over a conservative republican–Supported Scozzafava over Hoffman
-http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sbbHaEq1o2Y&feature=related

Newt Gingrich: I’m a Rockefeller Republican
-http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hJQsLFhuyOY&feature=related

Newt Gingrich: I’m a Wilsonian and I still believe the four freedom work
-http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T76lD4zV1bo&feature=related

The four Freedoms
-Freedom of speech and expression
Freedom of worship
Freedom from want
Freedom from fear

Newt Gingrich Progressive Ideals
-http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zex6qptVIPU&feature=related

Newt Gingrich Admits He’s a Progressive in the Theodore Roosevelt Tradition
– http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qi314LJ6uwM&feature=related

Newt Gingrich Loves FDR
-http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CgdzZJePL04&feature=related

Newt Gingrich: “Increase the Size of the State Department by 50%
-http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U51paRRllvk&feature=related

Newt in 2005 Supporting Individual Mandate
-http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rcSjLvWLcxE

Gingrich Supports ‘Variation’ on Obamacare-Type Health Insurance Mandate both in 1993 and 2011
– http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ThwVp0cwOMA

Newt Flip Flop
-http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wz3OKbAZapk&feature=related

Anonymous

wow you had a lot of that handy didn’t you

you must be a paid shill

people learn . and as they age they often learn that they were of an incorrect opinion on some issue, and they change their stance. some will admit it, some won’t.

Anonymous

That Old Republican Establishment has been put in it;s place. Thanks for this one Scoop. GO NEWT !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Anonymous

This is laughable; Newt is part of the so called establishment. Not to mention he is the I love FDR guy…geez. The Newt Gingrich supporters have become the new crazy Ron Paul fans.

Psyphurr Lock

If that were true then the “establishment” would not be attacking him as relentlessly as they have been. It would be better to say that Newt “used to be” part of the establishment. They don’t want him…. therefore he must represent an external threat to the establishment.

Regarding someone else’s comments about Newt’s staffer stating that the establishment was stacking the debate audience with anti-Newt people. Since it was the RNC that distributed 900 of the 1200 tickets to the debate, and the RNC *IS* the public arm of the establishment, and since the establishment has come out against Newt, logic could suggest that the staffer’s statement has merit. Seriously, 3/4 of the tickets distributed by the RNC… the establishment. Where there’s smoke there’s usually fine. Just saying….

For the record, I am not a pro-Newt person. Still waiting to see what happens. However, I am anti-Romney. I am not excited about RS, he has very little fire in the belly or appealing personality, and Dr. Paul is simply not going anywhere in this race so is more or less irrelevant.
Anonymous

Does the redd in your screen name relate to your communist ties?

Anonymous

You caught me…lol…wow. You are tough to get by.
Anonymous

Yeah, what do you think about Newt loving FDR,Woodrow Wilson and Teddy Roosevelt? Usually when someone looks up to someone then they inevitably try to imitate them. Why would he like those guys? Why does he love Pelosi’s couch? Global warming? On and on.

cabensg

What I think is you don’t know how to read a transcript or evaluate information. Using someone else s talking points is not an argument.

Psyphurr Lock

He is a troll. Stop feeding the troll. Count his posts. Troll worthy.

Anonymous

I’m a troll? I’ve been using this site forever. Ive been making comments on here forever. I agree sometimes and dont others. Count my posts? Whats that got to do with anything? Your ass has left many comments this afternoon. What are you? A troll-lite? Should I go back and count? What you really don’t like is getting schooled.

Why don’t you lace panties comment on what I said? You know why you think what I said about FDR, Woodrow Wilson and Teddy sound like talking points? Because they hurt Newty.

Please explain Newts fascination with these guys instead of acting like you just got cornholed. If you don’t have an explanation then at least admit that you lose.

Weren’t you the one that said that you were in the Army or Marines? Then why are you such a pusscake?

Anonymous

Funny. I’ve been on this site for a long time and I’ve never seen you here before last week.
Anonymous

Well, according to Disqus I have made 788 comments with 1390 likes. Since I have a job it would be hard to pull that off in a week. It would be even harder to get 1390 likes from people in a week because I would assume they have a job also.

I work for a living and must get up very early. I read my news from about three to five in the morning central time. If you wish I bet if you could wake up around then you will see a comment from me. Not everyday but enough for you to get it.
Anonymous

‘Why don’t you lace panties comment on what I said?’ — Ryan

No, they don’t respond because it’s already been done dozens of times. Sooner or later we all just look at your talking points meme and yawn.

Anonymous

They are called Newtered

http://www.facebook.com/people/Steven-Valdez/1806887704 Steven Valdez

That’s what Rush said yesterday it was opposition research dump…
Anonymous

Willard Mitt Romney: baptizing the dead, proxy baptism, baptism of the unrelated dead against the express wishes of their descendants? When pressed during an interview on these practices of the Mormon church, Romney was apparently “startled”.

When Newsweek magazine asked Romney if he personally had performed posthumous baptisms on anyone, author Jonathan Darman wrote, “he looked slightly startled and answered, ‘I have in my life, but I haven’t recently.’ The awareness of how odd this will sound to many Americans is what makes Romney hesitant to elaborate on the Mormon question.”

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/25/mormon-church-mitt-romney_n_1229322.html

http://www.facebook.com/people/Mike-Florey/100002838321254 Mike Florey

I suppose he could say the same thing about supporting socialized medicine: ‘I have in my life, but I haven’t recently.’

Anonymous

What could he not say this about?
Anonymous

Yeah, he did it, but he didn’t inhale….

Anonymous

Thank you for the post and how telling it is. You obviously don’t like Romney’s religion there for you will not vote for him. Baptisms for the dead is a ritual the church does. You say in your statement that the dead has expresses against it. It is a wonder how you yourself communicate with the dead… The truth of the matter is that there are some entities out there that have asked the church to stop doing baptisms for the dead, for instance the Jewish Community has asked them to stop because of their religious beliefs. As far as I know the church has agreed to stop, not according to the dead people them self’s but to the living who practice another religion. It is no secret that the Mormon church does baptisms for the dead. We believe in giving the dead, the ones who did not get baptized while they were alive the blessings as everyone ells… Why do people care about this.

I am going to make a statement but I want to first give my testimony that I “know” the church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints is the true church. My following statement I am making is to re-butt only to the ones who disbelieve.

If the LDS Church is a farce. Who would care that they are doing baptisms for the dead. Would it even matter?

Do I care that the Christian church does not do full submersion baptisms. Should I bring that up every time a Christian is running for president?

Should I bring up subjects about communion or Repentance??? things that also differ from the Mormon church. To bring up iatrical parts of a religion and their beliefs make you; uninformed at the best. if you want to learn more about baptisms for the dead link below.

I think Romney was more surprised and taken back that the question was asked in the first place. Not because he was hesitant to defend his church…

http://www.lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?vgnextoid=bbd508f54922d010VgnVCM1000004d82620aRCRD&sourceId=1ec52f2324d98010VgnVCM1000004d82620a____

Anonymous

Though it may surprise you, as much as quite a few things appear to surprise Romney, the rest of the world simply does not view issues spiritual or material from a Mormon perspective, and, in fact, large numbers of people reject altogther the history and theology espoused by the Mormon church. That, in my opinion, is unlikely to change.

(You may need to look the word ‘descendant’ up in the dictionary if, as you intimate in your reply, you believe it has anything to do with ‘communicating with the dead’–I have no idea how you arrive at such a belief.)
Anonymous

“Do I care that the Christian church does not do full submersion baptisms. Should I bring that up every time a Christian is running for president?” (lapitup)

Every Christian Church (Protestant) I’ve ever been part of did full submersion baptisms. What are you talking about? The statement above is incorrect.
So, no, you should never bring it up. It is false.

The “true church”…which began in the 1820′s or so? Whose book of Morman was written around 1830? Okeedokie

Anonymous

I wonder what will happen when obama’s people ask him about his cult?
Anonymous

Religious attack AND quoting HuffPo in the same post?

Are you trying to look like a liberal shill?

I am LDS and though I understand that this kind of attack comes out of ignorance, I have never understood the issue other religions have with baptisms for the dead. I mean, if you don’t believe the LDS church has the Priesthood of God, or that we are even ‘Christian’, how in the world do you think anything we do would change anything for deceased ancestors? We’re not changing anything on any historical documents, nothing in this world is changed, and if we don’t have the power of God, then nothing on the other side is changed.

Essentially, what I am saying is that if you have a problem with this, either you are illogically paranoid, or you DO believe the LDS church holds the Priesthood of God.

I’ve heard religious attacks before, and there are some that even have some teeth, but this has always been ridiculous. Not only does it defy logic, but it is slanderous and simply doesn’t take any of the doctrine or procedure into account.

Fact is that the Church DOES have policies to keep it so that only decedents or family members can submit names. (yes that does allow you to go back quite a ways.) But the Church often goes through and, due to complaints, does remove names from the registry. Ex: holocaust survivors have requested that holocaust victims not be placed on the registry – and the Church complies. As for Doctrine, just because a proxy baptism is performed, it doesn’t automatically make that deceased person a member. We believe they get the choice. Simply put.

So… what is the problem?

Anonymous

If, as you’ve written, you’ve “never understood the issue other religions have with baptisms for the dead”, then it is you who are currently “ignorant”, as you also write.

You will find that a tremendous number of people take exception to the Mormon practices described in the article, especially in the person of a candidate for US president, and that they also reject your conceptual framework regarding the issue.

I suggest you read the article carefully, and consider that–whatever you might wish others thought about it–these practices do and will offend; will certainly be regarded as an unwelcome intrusion; and that it is exceedingly unlikely, for reasons most non-Mormons readily understand, that attitude will ever substantially change.

Anonymous

You assume that since I haven’t agreed with you that I haven’t read or haven’t looked into other religions or talked to people… I simply stated that I don’t understand why they feel it is so important.

Do you truly understand why liberals refuse to accept logic? I think I do, but I don’t know. My theory? People are lying to themselves because they want to, are emotional, and simply want their way and to infringe on others.

Your argument of “It insults people” is the same argument used by Atheists to remove God from our society, it is the same argument used by militant Islam to remove Christ.

You are not entitled to go through life without feeling insulted. I’ve found tremendous amounts of people in every camp. Logically, this religious practice shouldn’t matter, (as I stated), and for anyone who cares to look at the facts and accept them, it shouldn’t matter in any situation. That they are offended at their deceased relatives being given a choice, that’s all a choice, is irrational, but is their prerogative.
I said this is born out of misunderstanding, and it only offends due to misunderstanding. Ex. Catholics are often criticized for their belief of the Eucharist being the blood and flesh of Christ. This attack is akin to calling Catholics heretic cannibals when they partake of the sacrament. Based on truth, parts are technically correct, but based on a flat out misunderstanding and intended to smear; a lie.

“You will find that a tremendous number of people…”

“…A tremendous number of people” believe all sorts of things, do, have done, and will do all sorts of things under the guise of ‘religion’. I disagree with it, but it doesn’t make religion invalid. A tremendous amount of people love communism and hate capitalism and the United States. Your argument is an appeal to authority, and is invalid as an authority. Sure, you are going to insult people, a tremendous amount of people… but is there anything you can do that will not?

Does it offend you? And if so, is it irrational offense you are taking, or is it based on something logical? Help me understand.

Anonymous

‘Posthumous and/or proxy baptism’ even of unrelated individuals, even without prior permission from the now-deceased or the next of kin, even over the objections of the living relatives, etc….

You write: “My theory? People are lying to themselves because they want to, are emotional, and simply want their way and to infringe on others.”

Do you not understand that most non-Mormons would regard being implicated as an unwilling participant in a personal spiritual ritual by proxy as a gross infringement?

*************

Elsewhere you write: “But the best way to answer your question [is] with another question… Who gives a spouse permission to decide when to pull the plug on their comatose partner? Who gives a father permission to decide anything for a child? A child or a parent?”

So in the end, we are all just naive children of the great paternal Mormon church, which has every right to make decisions on our behalf, and involve us personally in rituals we regard as distastefully contrary to our own religious beliefs?

So all the many who object to themselves or their loved ones being made the unwilling object of this Mormon practice must be ungrateful children?

But, of course, your quick-and-ready dose of ‘logic’ should straighten them out,…unless,… there’s even something more that is wrong with them…?

Anonymous

“Do you not understand that most non-Mormons would regard being implicated as an unwilling participant in a personal spiritual ritual by proxy as a gross infringement?”

“So all the many who object to themselves or their loved ones being made the unwilling object of this Mormon practice must be ungrateful children?”

First: It is their choice. Did you miss when I said that three times? It is THEIR CHOICE.
Second: If we don’t have the authority of God, then there we have no power to do anything. If we do, then who are you to complain that we have the Priesthood?

“But, of course, your quick-and-ready dose of ‘logic’ should straighten them out,…unless,… there’s even something more that is wrong with them…?”

Perhaps you didn’t read my whole comment? Or only what you wanted to see? Am I the irrational one here who doesn’t want to have my beliefs infringed and failing to see how someone who doesn’t believe that I have any authority at all would care what I do with that ‘authority’?

My point? If you believe I am imposing or infringing my beliefs on you, I ask… How? That is what I don’t understand, that is what I wrote in the first post, and that is the logic you have yet to address.

Anonymous

Are you saying you don’t understand why people would object to having their own and their loved ones’ names used intentionally in religious rituals which they find theologically aberrant and/or distasteful or worse?

It is true that I don’t care at all about your alleged authority, what you uttterly fail to adequately comprehend is that I certainly may care deeply about my loved ones–and simply do not want their name, or my own, appropriated by strangers and employed in any way in ritual practices that have not been consented to and that I, or my loved ones, regard as darkly aberrant.

The fact that you claim to have trouble understanding this very straightforward sentiment is itself a prime reason for suspicion regarding adherents of Mormonism.

Anonymous

According to you, I have no authority. So anything I do to affect the other side essentially accomplishes nothing – right? Did I get your point of view correct?

I do understand that you care about your loved ones, as much as I care about mine. (which is why I DO proxy work, btw.) No need to label me heartless or unfeeling. But the fact remains that even if I DO have authority, I am only providing choice to your loved ones. That is the effect. Nothing else. Do you ‘love’ them enough to deny them choice? That’s just like a well-intending, loving father driving off suitors for his ‘baby girl’ long past the time she moves out; it doesn’t really help or show love, just control. After a while, though she’ll understand and think it is ‘sweet’, she’s going to ask dad to stop messing in her business.

But since you claim I don’t have authority, forgive me for thinking that your demand that I stop doing nothing to your family, is somewhat silly and irrational.

I’ve been trying to see your point of view, and I am glad that the personal attacks are slowing down… Have you tried to see my point of view?
Anonymous

Many people, as referenced in the article, object to having thier names used in these rituals. You probably realize by now that many Christians and Jews consider these posthumous/proxy rituals to be altogether heretical or otherwise unacceptable–and want not to be associated with them in any way.

Knowing this, the reasonable and respectful thing to do would be to procure their or the next of kin’s agreement prior to being included in the ritual–that is, an actual choice whether or not to be included in the ritual at all in the first place. The fact that you avoid this issue, and repeatedly refer instead to your ‘authority’ is, as you likely know, indicative generally of the ongoing suspicion toward Mormon beliefs and practices.
Anonymous

So, you ARE asking me to stop practicing my religion because my doing nothing to your descendents is ‘offensive’. And you state that I am avoiding the truth…

Tell me, do you believe in the freedom of religion?

“Many people, as referenced in the article, object to having their names used in these rituals. You probably realize by now that many Christians and Jews consider these posthumous/proxy rituals to be altogether heretical or otherwise unacceptable”

…yes. Which is what I pointed out in the beginning doesn’t make rational sense. It is an emotional response to a misunderstood and badly misrepresented situation, and I do not claim to understand it.

As for ‘due respect’, honestly, would there be any point of effort the church could go to which would stop the complaints? The permission of one relative? Two? Three? Is a majority enough? Or do you demand unanimous permission? How far down the line would it be required? You know, at some point you stop trying to make everyone happy because you realize you never can.

With such an irrational response to the actual facts, what would you do? Put yourself in my situation and honestly respond.

(Keep in mind that any Christian preaching to any Muslim is extremely offensive. Would you require unanimous consent from all Islamic family members for that? There is no guarantee of conversion there, only a choice. It is essentially the same thing.)
Anonymous

If you are doing “nothing” you shouldn’t object to voluntarily halting the use of other families’ members’ names in religious rituals to which they object.

Attempting to verbally proselytize to a living individual is not at all the same as using the names of the dead without permission in posthumous/proxy rituals you already know most object to.
Anonymous

You’re a riot. You could have at least tried to see my point of view instead of simply discarding it or claiming it as invalid.

I asked you to look at it from my point of view, and you refused. I asked what you would do, and even gave a parallel from someone who understands how the LDS view the proxy ordinances… which you also refused to acknowledge, (do you assume I don’t know the LDS doctrine behind it?), and then you claim that since you didn’t try, you don’t have to address the question.

Regardless of whether you feel the example was valid or not, the underlying principle still is, even from your point of view. You have to admit that you support the preaching of the Gospel of Christ regardless of who it offends, yet you refuse to grant the exact same privilege to anyone else.

We are at a stalemate, my friend; you are holding to the truth that people are offended, while believing I am accomplishing nothing. While I believe I am providing opportunity and choice, while misunderstanding how you can be offended at ‘nothing’. You refuse to address the illogical stance, while I state that I have a right to believe and practice as I will. I also believe that you are fully in your rights to believe and practice as you will, and to be offended if you choose… I just hope you understand how irrational your irritation is.

Neither of us is willing to move. So my friend, unless you would like to continue to call me insensitive, inconsiderate, and offensive, and have me call you irrational, we should agree to disagree and part as neighbors.

God Bless.

Anonymous

I’m curious. Who gives relatives of Mormons permission to submit their names for baptism after their death?

I have relatives of that faith but I sure as heck don’t want someone taking that authority upon himself on my behalf.

Anonymous

Then tell them so.

But, logically, why would, assuming that you do believe we hold the Priesthood of God, being given a choice be offensive?

A choice. You are not forced into anything.

Anonymous

Firstly, I am of another faith and have no belief in the LDS Priesthood. But how is it a choice for someone who is already dead? I believe it is my relationship with God that seals my fate for eternity.

I am not being indignant. Just questioning as it does seem presumptous to assume that anyone can submit names of deceased for proxy baptizing.

Your commments regarding life and death medical decisions of and for the living have no bearing on this issue.

Anonymous

I am always willing to answer an honest question, but the answer is not a simple one. I will try to be very brief, and you are not bound to agree or accept, this is simply an explanation of my belief.
(KJV)
John 3:5,16
5.”Jesus answered, Verily verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.”
16. “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son…” (you can quote the rest, I’m sure you know it by heart. )

-We believe baptism, by immersion, and by the proper authority (Priesthood) is required to enter the Kingdom. We also believe that Christ was sent to redeem the whole world, not just those who hear about him during life. The whole world.

1 Peter 3:18-19 (read-21 for full context)
“For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit:
By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison;”
1 Peter 4:6
“For, for this cause was the gospel preached also to them that are dead, that they might be judged according to man in the flesh, but live according to God in the spirit.”

-We believe that God, as a just God, ensures that everyone has the same chance to accept or deny the Lord Jesus Christ. How can they do so if they are not taught? And how can they fulfill the requirement to be baptized if they are spirit? Proxy baptism fulfills that need, while allowing them to either accept or deny on their own.

2 Cor. 15:29
“Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? Why are they then baptized for the dead?”

-Is it such a stretch to believe that God would provide the same love and choice and opportunity to one who lived in an area or time where they never heard of Christ, but would have accepted if they had? Should they be condemned to hell? This simply provides the choice. No force, but simply the choice, according to the justice, love, and mercy of God to all.

“Your commments regarding life and death medical decisions of and for the living have no bearing on this issue.”
-Perhaps not from your point of view. If you consider it from a viewpoint of eternal life or death, then it is very much the same. Again, you don’t have to agree.

You are right that it is our individual relationships to God that determine or ensure our salvation or death. I have no quarrel with that. Proxy baptism for the dead doesn’t change any of that.

That was too long. Sorry, but I wanted to answer your question. This is my belief, not yours, but if you are trying to understand it, I wanted to be fair and explain myself.

God bless.

Anonymous

Thanks for taking time to explain though it still feels as over reaching as our government. I guess I’d better put on my tombstone that I don’t want anyone else interfering with my religious convictions once I’m gone …

Anonymous

LOL. I guess you should.

But, as I desperately tried to point out to others, if we don’t have the priesthood authority, then we can’t change anything. If we do, you get a choice, we can’t change anything for you. It is still between you and the Lord.

Anonymous

I didn’t answer your first question, and I should. I assume it wasn’t said in indignation… But the best way to answer your question with another question… Who gives a spouse permission to decide when to pull the plug on their comatose partner? Who gives a father permission to decide anything for a child? A child for a parent?

Anonymous

“So… what is the problem?”

As I understand it – and I may be wrong on this – the problem is that the Mormon church counts those it baptizes as members. Even the dead. So if this is true that *all* that have been baptized are counted as members of the church, the membership numbers of the Mormon church are highly inflated.

Anonymous

Does the LDS church count proxy baptisms members? No. We count that their “work” has been done and do not repeat it, that is all. (Could they be? Sure, we’d be insane if we baptized for the dead believing that they couldn’t be.) It is their choice whether they accept that work or not, not mine, not the church’s, theirs. The choice and opportunity is offered, that’s all. Unless a messenger from God, an angel, proclaims the choice of those who have had their ‘work done’, we won’t know and it would be ridiculous to claim that they have accepted.

Every April the church auditing department gives a report to the members. The number of how many members of the church is kept and reported there; it does not include any deceased; no LDS deceased, not proxy work. We do, however, count all ‘living baptisms’ as members.

I am not the LDS church, nor do my statements consist of any official proclamation or church standard. I am a member. I am sorry I or any other member gave you the impression that we count them all LDS. It simply is not the case.

http://twitter.com/2Eskies2Many Kari George

Hopefully this story will be posted somewhere else (I swore off HuffPo after the ObamaRomneycare battles), but this just points out another highly disturbing similarity in the mindset that Romney shares with Obama (& democrats & commies):
“We know what is best for people and don’t care what they think/ want, so we will cram what we want down your throat, regardless”. In other words, tyranny.

I imagine this will be couched as intending “benevolence” just as it is with “bleeding heart” (read: bloodletting) liberals.

I don’t know, at this point, who I despise more. I guess equal. To he77 with them.

-KGeorge
Anonymous

Common guys, there are many legitimate reasons and issues you can raise against any candidate, no need to bring Religion, faith, and belief into this. As far as I know no Mormons has ever worn a suicide vest. Focus on issues please.

Anonymous

Thank you.

Anonymous

Mark 16:16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved….
Dead people do not hear anything and can’t believe.

Major914 = FACT

Dan

but they can vote in the U.S. elections and the demon-craps will make sure of it
http://twitter.com/PoeAllen Allen Poe

So sorry you have no faith.

Anonymous

Rush has this story too. Florida is Rush country.

(Of course, when driving slow in the left lane with the right turn signal on it does not seem that traffic rushes down here.)

GB
http://www.facebook.com/people/Steven-Valdez/1806887704 Steven Valdez

Wow after reading that article it’s stuff like that makes me hate Romney even more and makes me not want to vote for him in any way even up against Obama…

http://twitter.com/PoeAllen Allen Poe

You see, even if obvious lies are presented to you, you act on it.

Anonymous

“My guess it was part of an opposition research file dug up by the Romney campaign.”

…Or it was the establishment. Not everything has to be from Romney. You’re jumping to conclusions without evidence. Plenty of people and organizations have motivation to derail Newt… including all the senators/representatives he irked while speaker. Hell, even princess Pelosi has been attacking.
Anonymous

It is nice to see some push back, some defense of candidates is finally starting to take place. Some in conservative media are finally starting to do the deep research needed to defend candidates and saying context matters.
Anonymous

Yeah Newt is the estbalishment.. It’s so funny you hear the Real Establishment calling Romney the establishment.. They have Newt on videos saying bad thing sabout Reagan. Newt is Mr Washington, he took money from Freddie and Fannie, he sat on the couch with Pelosi.

Rush and Levin are th eestablishment, four years ago, they didn’t get behind Romeny till it was too late, They gave us Mccain, thus giving us BHO!

Newt was lying about Romeny, Rubio got on to Newt for it.

All Romeny does is point out the differences, Somehow that’s called an attacks lol.

We already had one Cheating President, don’t want another..

The President represents WE THE PEOPLE

Anonymous

Listen, don’t come here to defend Mittens, you won’t get very far. He purposely lied to the voters about Newt resigning in disgrace when he know that it is false(read Byron York’s piece) he lied about Newt saying Spanish is the language of the Ghetto, he said that Newt was never close to Reagan…he is willing to do anything to get elected. So go to Fox Nation, or Drudge, or Townhall, or even Daily Caller to get a better reception for your Mittens defense!

Anonymous

I see you writing all that stuff and then you defend Newt Gingrich? I cant believe anyone here could defend this guy. Dont we all hate fannie and freddy? Don’t we all hate global warming BS. The fact that he isn’t even loyal to his family and worse lies about it? The fact that he could be so hypocrytical as to want Clinton out of office while at the same time he is screwing another woman? Even Ron Paul laid waste to his ass when he exposed Newt’s balanced budget BS. Remember Paul Ryans plan? Remember that he says he is anti-establishment? I would like to ask him, Then why the fu*k were you there so long? Do you have a clandestine operation going?

Funny that the very same people here were trashing the hell out of Newt for months and then he decides to go after the media and BAM! everyone jumps on the train. Is that all you guys want?

The fu*king guy has never run anything! Nothing. He has zero morals or principles. He is the best salesman I have ever seen. He uses a lot of words and a professor like demeanor and a little trash talking to the media.

Anonymous

I can’t argue with you if you refuse to deal in facts. I realize we all have hopes pinned on our guys, and I appreciate your passion, as I have the same passion in the opposite direction. I admit that Newt says things that I scratch my head at, he has taken positions on things that surprise me, but I look at his record and his acheivements and that satisfies me. I don’t care if he was a cheater, he has been redeemed, I only care where he takes the country. He has always been strong on Life, on National Security, on cutting taxes and Gov’t. Fine, you want Ron Paul(who I admire) but he won’t win because of his National Security issues. At least Newt is for auditing the Fed, and the Gold Standard.

Anonymous

Who said I was for Ron Paul???? You’ve got me screwed up with someone else. I said EVEN Ron Paul pasted him to the wall on his government sponsored fuzzy math. Newt knew and has known a long time that that was crap. I’m sorry but I won’t protect a candidate against his own lies. Not mine nor anyone else. I’ve seen things and learned things from people on this site that I didn’t want to hear about a candidate that I liked but out of respect for myself I had to admit they were right.

You may not care about how a man handles his family and the fact that he breached their trust. You think he wouldn’t do it too you? Yes, men have made mistakes but he has told many versions of this story which leads to questionable character.

Anonymous

Sigh, fine you hate newt…don’t vote for him then.

Anonymous

I hate no one. I just remember all the stuff he has said over the years and believe him.

Anonymous

Intelligence; you think on your own and I applaud you for it.
You will come to notice that your one statement cannot be echoed by most who comment on this site:

“I’ve seen things and learned things from people on this site that I didn’t want to hear about a candidate that I liked but out of respect for myself I had to admit they were right.”

I only want a rational discussion based on the real facts, so a true decision can be made, not this emotional mud-flinging fight that is erupting here. It is rare to come across anyone admitting facts and not dismissing them.

Every candidate has lied, every candidate has gone negative, and every one has serious issues, yet I’ve found that only Gingrich and Ron Paul supporters completely ignore anything negative about their own candidates, regardless of what it is or how verified it is, and do so by simply attacking your character in return. Anyone who disagrees with them is immediately labeled a ‘mitt’ or ‘Paul’ shill.

No wonder the conservative party is fractured… and after this kind of treatment, they’ll demand that we all ‘fall in behind the nominee’. Personally, I want no part of a party or group of voters who ignore reality and facts in favor of personality and emotional responses, and cannot address or confront facts that do exist. That won’t help the U.S., the government living in fantasy is a big part of the problem.

I am starting to think that intelligent posts are to be found elsewhere. They are getting very thin here… very thin indeed.

Anonymous

if you hate fannie and freddie, you are also hating mitt

Anonymous

I think about Mitt the same the same way I think about Newt. They both suck. Just in different ways.

http://twitter.com/PoeAllen Allen Poe

Aha! Go to the DNC, and get paid.

http://twitter.com/PoeAllen Allen Poe

Tough when your guy loses, an adult accepts, and moves on. They do not then try to ruin the party their guy has helping build.

Anonymous

Mitt Romney is a liberal. He bankrupted his state and passed a version of obamacare before anyone knew who obama was. Go away troll.

Anonymous

Maybe you meant John Corzine. He broke that state.

Anonymous

No, I’m pretty sure he said Mitt Romney. If it was Corzine, it would have been called Corzinecare. But it’s called “ROMNEYcare”.

http://twitter.com/2Eskies2Many Kari George

Actually, Romney bald faced lied last night about his investments in Fannie & Freddie.
CNN has the story here

http://www.cnn.com/2012/01/27/politics/truth-squad-investments/index.html

He didn’t answer one single question question that was asked of him.
The *only* thing he can do is try to tear down others and that’s all he has ever done in his many failed campaigns.
In other words, Mitt can’t win anything fair & square. Chickens*t & underhanded is his preferred MO. Heh. What was that about cheating?
Psyphurr Lock

“…. there you go again.” regarding the establishment comments.

Personally, Romney acts like he “deserves” to be President. That right there is the biggest strike against him in my book. Secondly, if ever, he does not understand the middle or lower classes. Golden spoon guy. He belongs to the class of people that think they know whats best for everyone else. No thank you. He should be the model that the OWS crowd uses as a poster child for what they stand against….

Anonymous

Class warfare? I hear you, it’s only when liberals do it, right?

Psyphurr Lock

“…. there you go again.”

Anonymous

“Gee Wally, you really showed them.” – Beaver Cleaver

StNikao

Obama and Romney both feel ordained/destined/deserving to be president for spiritual* and biological reasons.

Obama is the biological son of Malcolm X, a black supremacist turned Sunni Muslim convert/martyr. BO, Sr. is his adopted father.

Romney is the biological and spiritual son of Presidential candidates. George his father (Alinsky follower) ran for president in the 60s and Jos. Smith, his spiritual father, founder of Mormonism who ran in 1844, but was killed while in jail for fraud (two bank scams). Mormons consider him a martyr and covet the US presidency as an ‘undo’ of their perceived injustice (hence there are Mormon trolls on every blog, trying to trash the other candidates).

If Romney succeeds in getting the nomination, this will be a battle between two books claiming special revelation beyond the Old and New Testaments: the Koran and the Book of Mormon, and two spiritual systems: Islam and Mormonism, both claiming to be more true than and superior to Judaism and Christianity combined.

This is a spiritual battle as much as it is a political battle, one that is unique in American History. Granted, a number of early fathers and politicians throughout US history were members of the Masons and other groups that had extra-Christian beliefs, but this will be the first time for the presidency to be a battle between two (non-communicant: do not share baptism/communion) religions that both claim to be superior to traditional Christianity.

*[Do not claim that Obama is a Christian and not a Muslim. His sister has stated that his family is Muslim; he was brought up Muslim. He is posing as a Christian as part of taqqyia and plan.]

Anonymous

excellent and informative, hopefully to many

Anonymous

I approve that message.

Anonymous

I have said through this entire process that whomever the nominee is, I will support them because the stakes are too high. I would not be so enthusiastic about Romney, but would do what needs to be done. The last few days have soured me so much towards this man’s campaign and the conservative elite media that I really fear that I may not be able to do what I pledged to myself. Don’t be fooled. If Romney is the nominee, it is four more years of Obama destruction. There is no intellegent way to define himself as anything other than a distant cousin to Obama policy. The Independents that are everyone is so enamored with will not be swayed to the GOP side. The electorate is always tenative to toss an incumbent and when the option is so similar, it will be even more difficult. I just hope I can stomach this guy’s campaign methods and have a clear conscience to vote for him in November. I don’t want to sit it out, but Romney is really showing himself to be a weasel and I can’t cast a ballot for that. I compromised and did that in 2008, I promised I would not do that again.

Anonymous

I agree 100%. Romney and MAobama are the same candidate. They are both George Soros, universal control, stacked deck nominees.

Anonymous

even George Soros is saying they are so alike he isn’t concerned about which one wins.

Anonymous

That should tell you everything you need to know. If that vile pig that has an agenda that is so personally destructive and is the arm of the most disgusting elements of the far left doesn’t see much difference…sad. But, I think he knows that a Romney matchup would be a slam dunk for his cause. There is no way he would want to prop up a formidable candidate against Obama with a psuedo endorsement. The most interesting thing that the conservative media elites are missing is that the left wants Romney to be the nominee. I wonder why that is?

Anonymous

I’m exactly in the same place you are right now. I’ve been ABO, but I’ve also been ABR all along, and I’m not sure I can click the box for him on election day. His campaign has been so nasty and the elites have angered me so much, I’d almost rather see him lose to Obama so maybe they can learn something from all this.

Anonymous

We can’t overlook the fact that Romney is far more likely to appoint more conservative judges. That’s the one big thing that separates the two IMHO.

I will vote for ABO just as I did for McCain. I could never forgive myself if I didn’t vote and Zero didn’t lose.

Anonymous

Are you kidding me about Romney appointing conservative judges?? Take a look at Mitties track record of appointing liberal judges in MA.
This guy isn’t a closet Lib. He’s all the way out there.

Anonymous

I think the chances are better that Romney’s picks would be much better than Obama’s. With a Republican congress he might have to act more like a conservative than he did in MA with a Dem legislature. That’s not saying that he would give us another Antonin Scalia or Clarence Thomas but we know “diversity” is the most important qualification in this Administration.

http://www.facebook.com/people/Steven-Valdez/1806887704 Steven Valdez

The Romney candidate is going to destroy the middle class by helping Obama push his class-warfare rhetoric and share the wealth agenda. Making him the face of the way he earns his income the same way millions of retired Americans do is a terrible mistake in this political climate.

Anonymous

Oh yeah, it’s the Romney conspiracy. The establishment against the outsider Newt. This is the first time Newt has been anywhere close to Washington and that Romney guy has camped out in DC his entire life. See the establishment doesn’t want Newt because of his squeaky clean image and his moral values. That damn Romney would do anything to cover the fact that he worked for Fanny and Freddie even if it meant lying and saying Newt did it. Man Romney is good!
Anonymous

The post at AmSpec does not vindicate Newt at all. He basically referred to Reagan as a paper tiger in that his weak policies did not match his rhetoric. He claimed that Reagan was going to fail.
Anonymous

Meet the new boss… same as the old boss…
K-Bob

A couple of things:

1) Mitt is evidently exploring new lows in this campaign. Check out the email campaign where they accuse Newt of being mentaly unstable.

2) Gallup’s national daily tracking poll has Newt up 1 point, with Newt at 32% and Romney at 24% (Paul 14%, Santorum 13% — daily poll is on the right side of the page).

StNikao

Newt’s PAC is about to blow the whistle on Romney’s medicare fraud story soon, so it looks like getting hotter, and no one is calling off the attack dogs.

Anonymous

If you’re talking about the Damon, Inc. story, it looks suspicious of Mitt, but I haven’t seen anything that can pin him to it. He denies knowledge on one hand and claims he helped expose it on the other. Closer look shows the typical sleazy Mitt, but nothing criminal that will stick unless more comes out.
K-Bob

The mud must flow!

StNikao

A commenter at the Spectator article mentioned Bachmann helping the Romney campaign. Does anyone know about this?

She has a short article about Obama’s SOTUS at Town Hall today and that’s the first time I have heard anything out of her since she suspended her campaign.
Anonymous

Let’s face it folks. It’s all over. Romney is swimming in cash and it will be flowing in from Wall Street and establishment bundlers. RINO has spent over $8.5MM in FL alone. Newt and all of us here can cry lie, lie, lie but, in Romney’s case, if you say these things enough times about Newt, they become true. When will the stabliment learn…Dole, McCain and now Romney? They all lost or will lose to their Dem/Lib opponents. The only way to teach these guys a lesson is to go third pary. The GOP has sold conservatives down the river too many times. The RINO/GOP candidates wrap themselves in the Tear Party flag and continue business as usual.

Time for the revolutionto begin!
StNikao

Revealing quotes from comments at the Jeffrey Lord Spectator post linked above:

1. “Drudge also got involved in the hit job on Mr. Gingrich. Follow the money! The communications company which owns Drudge is owned by…Bain Capital!”

2. From a longtime Republican Party worker in VA.
A. “The originator of the title “Tax Collector for the Welfare State.” for Bobdole and friends. – Rep. Newton Leroy Gingrich” (explains Dole’s endorsement of Romney)
B. “The people who called him erratic are the same people who were mad at him for continuing the Revolution when all they wanted was to join the Establishment. Newt rocked the boat that they had just climbed into. He was undermined and driven off by the Establishment. It is now the Establishment that wants him politically eliminated for good. He threatens their golden goose.”
StNikao

Again, according to a commenter at the Spectator article, the company that owns Drudge is owned by BAIN CAPITAL.

Anonymous

Bain Capital Owns Clear Channel (Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck, Michael Savage, Etc.)

—-http://www.infowars.com/bain-capital-owns-clear-channel-rush-limbaugh-sean-hannity-glenn-beck-michael-savage-etc/

Sorry that doesn’t mean much. This is the Alex Jones Crap that drives me crazy. That is that nobody has an opinion that isn’t independent of the people or company that owns them. I just don’t buy into that garbage and not to mention those that are mentioned in this article disagree with each other. So how does that work? Shouldn’t they all have the same opinion???

Is_Sense_Common

I decided to not listen to anyone’s ad or claims about another candidate and just do my own damn homework and make my decision based on what I see, hear, and believe. I just refuse to let another person tell me what to think. In the end, my opinion won’t really matter, as my Primary doesn’t take place until May & I would imagine it will be over by then. However I am trying to arm myself with knowledge & my own analysis & encourage you to do the same. None are trustworthy to be your brain-surrogate.
Richard Laycock

It’s too bad Herman took the bait that Perry was behind the bimbo eruptions. Does anyone not now figure it was Romney’s team? While Mitt was smiling at Herman his crew was stabbing him in the back.

More ominous is the undeniable links between a couple of the bimbos and David Axelrod. Does Romney and the RNC have a handshake deal with the Obama team?

Anonymous

I had that same feeling that Herman Cain was taken out by the Romney crowd and the RNC establishment elites. My, Oh my this good looking guy seemed more like a keeper of mud and dirt behind that sleek and well made up facade!

http://twitter.com/113KriEger 13Krieger

Take a look at the confirmation…..It appears Elliott Abrams has been trolling for a job in the Romney administration. DOH!

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

Talk about a hacket job….this guy is a proven Romney hack!
Anonymous

Recommend Spectator’s Ferrara to fellow readers (link at bottom). He’s an excellent quant: along the order of Paul Ryan…has also prepared similar analyses on FICA. /budgets/macro-economy.

His article on “Gingrich’s frame”, ( below link) is extremely thorough: convincing me that despite, or maybe because of his eccentricities, Only Gingrich has identified and unequivocally and aggressively articulated the two fundamental threats to our civilization embodied in the vehicle of the “anonymous incubus”, in the White House.

1. The Post-Warren Court erosion of Individual vs. Group rights and of the fundamental Rule Of Law and the growing threat of Judiciary supremacy over the other constitutional “Pillars” of federalism.

2. The near total corruption of American civic/educational/cultural institutions by the dominance of a militant Neo-Marxist union ideology which has come to control America’s Governmental and Education Systems K-PHD since WW II.

Ultimately, this process has occurred as imperceptibly but assiduously as the old tale of the boiling frog. Consequently, only those of us who can recall life changes over the last 6-7 decades are fully conscious of these trends.
If you have some neighbor or family member in such an age category, get their memory-dumps on these mundane occurrences things like:

mandatory school Prayer-flag salutes-corporal punishment beat cop’s KITA but no report to your family — not restricted to family elders. neighborhood practices. Lots of 4- room 4 grade schoolhouses visiting nurses ..never heard of psychologists, counselors; school office was teacher/principal’s desk, from which rattans were administered between classes. HS graduation rate probably less than 50%; others to factories after age 16: most marrying by age 21.

home-based funeral/ wakes with neighbor families and mothers pulling housekeeping shifts; sending food to attendees: guns across 12 yr-old Kid crow hunters’ handlebars /targets/ universal personal pocket knives/ daily tic- tac-toe in the school yard, home for lunch, homemade sandwiches from jr high on…Home ownership around the 10-15% rate: biking to local summer night carnival attendance: home by 10P or else etc..etc…etc. Family cars: 3-5%

How many of these liberties have been lost.. why? how? Try a family oltimer quiz of such a listing. I’d love to hear the results.

http://spectator.org/archives/2012/01/25/gingrich-frames-the-debate
Anonymous

So Gingrich cannot be made into a puppet and a robot, he criticized when he saw things needed improvement or lacking, and was not afraid to speak his mind and offend when needed no matter of whom it hits… sounds like Tea Party to me. Reading the whole thing surprises me how long political correctness has been instilled and entrenched in our sub consciousness by the media, academia, and the political elites. Funny the problem before still rings true today notched even to a more dangerous degree by the current occupier of the White House and the more radicalized DNC, media, and academia and with the help of apathetic and indifferent RNC.

This is probably why the biggies in RNC are scared big time, what will happen to theirs, their family, and their friends’ clout? My foot, all those influence, money and connection would be gone…panic attack!
Anonymous

Rereading this Newt’s speech makes me realize that Newt then was even more conservative than Reagan.
Anonymous

Newt has my vote. I’m just trying to figure out how I can hook up with a couple of these Filipino girls in the advertisement. ME SO HOOOONY

NRO’s Newt trashing exposed as FALSE

awesome meter

subscribe to us

Places of Interest

Admin

archives

required viewing