Even Newt Gingrich can't *defend the indefensible*
Posted By: PK on 2006-05-12
In Reply to:
if you missed it on Hannity and Colmes, you can see the video here. Newt in his own words. Definitely worth watching.
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/05/12.html#a8260
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
A letter to Newt Gingrich from his sister
Dear Newt,
I recently had the displeasure of watching you bash the protestors of the Prop 8 marriage ban to Bill O'Reilly on FOX News. I must say, after years of watching you build your career by stirring up the fears and prejudices of the far right, I feel compelled to use the words of your idol, Ronald Reagan, "There you go, again."
However, I realize that you may have been a little preoccupied lately with planning your resurrection as the savior of your party, so I thought I would fill you in on a few important developments you might have overlooked.
The truth is that you're living in a world that no longer exists. I, along with millions of Americans, clearly see the world the way it as -- and we embrace what it can be. You, on the other hand, seem incapable of looking for new ideas or moving beyond what worked in the past.
Welcome to the 21st century, big bro. I can understand why you're so afraid of the energy that has been unleashed after gay and lesbian couples had their rights stripped away from them by a hateful campaign. I can see why you're sounding the alarm against the activists who use all the latest tech tools to build these rallies from the ground up in cities across the country.
This unstoppable progress has at its core a group we at HRC call Generation Equality. They are the most supportive of full LGBT equality than any American generation ever -- and when it comes to the politics of division, well, they don't roll that way. 18-24 year olds voted overwhelmingly against Prop 8 and overwhelmingly for Barack Obama. And the numbers of young progressive voters will only continue to grow. According to the Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning, about 23 million 18-29 year olds voted on Nov. 4, 2008 -- the most young voters ever to cast a ballot in a presidential election. That's an increase of 3 million more voters compared to 2004.
These are the same people who helped elect Barack Obama and sent a decisive message to your party. These young people are the future and their energy will continue to drive our country forward. Even older Americans are turning their backs on the politics of fear and demagoguery that you and your cronies have perfected over the years.
This is a movement of the people that you most fear. It's a movement of progress -- and your words on FOX News only show how truly desperate you are to maintain control of a world that is changing before your very eyes.
Then again, we've seen these tactics before. We know how much the right likes to play political and cultural hardball, and then turn around and accuse us of lashing out first. You give a pass to a religious group -- one that looks down upon minorities and women -- when they use their money and membership roles to roll back the rights of others, and then you label us "fascists" when we fight back. You belittle the relationships of gay and lesbian couples, and yet somehow neglect to explain who anointed you the protector of "traditional" marriage. And, of course, you've also mastered taking the foolish actions of a few people and then indicting an entire population based on those mistakes. I fail to see how any of these patterns coincide with the values of "historic Christianity" you claim to champion.
Again, nothing new here. This is just more of the blatant hypocrisy we're used to hearing.
What really worries me is that you are always willing to use LGBT Americans as political weapons to further your ambitions. That's really so ྖs, Newt. In this day and age, it's embarrassing to watch you talk like that. You should be more afraid of the new political climate in America, because, there is no place for you in it.
In other words, stop being a hater, big bro.
Gingrich didn't have to step down
from being the speaker. He resigned of his own accord. He was not forced to resign.
Pelosi Erases Gingrich's Long-Standing Fairness Rules....sm
Pelosi Erases Gingrich's Long-Standing Fairness Rules
by Connie Hair
01/05/2009
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi plans to re-write House rules today to ensure that the Republican minority is unable to have any influence on legislation. Pelosi’s proposals are so draconian, and will so polarize the Capitol, that any thought President-elect Obama has of bipartisan cooperation will be rendered impossible before he even takes office.
Pelosi’s rule changes -- which may be voted on today -- will reverse the fairness rules that were written around Newt Gingrich’s “Contract with America.”
In reaction, the House Republican leadership is sending a letter today to Pelosi to object to changes to House Rules this week that would bar Republicans from offering alternative bills, amendments to Democrat bills or even the guarantee of open debate accessible by motions to recommit for any piece of legislation during the entire 111th Congress. These procedural abuses, as outlined in the below letter obtained by HUMAN EVENTS, would also include the repeal of six-year limit for committee chairmen and other House Rules reform measures enacted in 1995 as part of the Contract with America.
After decades of Democrat control of the House of Representatives, gross abuses to the legislative process and several high-profile scandals contributed to an overwhelming Republican House Congressional landslide victory in 1994. Reforms to the House Rules as part of the Contract with America were designed to open up to public scrutiny what had become under this decades-long Democrat majority a dangerously secretive House legislative process. The Republican reform of the way the House did business included opening committee meetings to the public and media, making Congress actually subject to federal law, term limits for committee chairmen ending decades-long committee fiefdoms, truth in budgeting, elimination of the committee proxy vote, authorization of a House audit, specific requirements for blanket rules waivers, and guarantees to the then-Democrat minority party to offer amendments to pieces of legislation.
Pelosi’s proposed repeal of decades-long House accountability reforms exposes a tyrannical Democrat leadership poised to assemble legislation in secret, then goose-step it through Congress by the elimination of debate and amendment procedures as part of America’s governing legislative process.
Below is the text of the letter on which the House Republican leadership has signed off.
January 5, 2009
The Honorable Nancy Pelosi
Speaker of the House
H-232, U.S. Capitol
Washington, D.C. 20515
Dear Madame Speaker,
We hope you and your family had a joyful holiday season, and as we begin a new year and a new Congress, we look forward to working with you, our colleagues on both sides of the aisle, and President-elect Obama in tackling the many challenges facing our nation.
President Obama has pledged to lead a government that is open and transparent. With that in mind, we are deeply troubled by media reports indicating that the Democratic leadership is poised to repeal reforms put in place in 1995 that were intended to help restore Americans’ trust and confidence in the People’s House. Specifically, these reports note that the Majority, as part of its rules package governing the new Congress, will end six-year term limits for Committee chairs and further restrict the opportunity for all members to offer alternative legislation. This does not represent change; it is reverting back to the undemocratic one-party rule and backroom deals that the American people rejected more than a decade ago. And it has grave implications for the American people and their freedom, coming at a time when an unprecedented expansion of federal power and spending is being hastily planned by a single party behind closed doors. Republicans will vigorously oppose repealing these reforms if they are brought to a vote on the House floor.
As you know, after Republicans gained the majority in the House in 1995, our chamber adopted rules to limit the terms of all committee chairs to three terms in order to reward new ideas, innovation, and merit rather than the strict longevity that determined chairmanships in the past. This reform was intended to help restore the faith and trust of the American people in their government – a theme central to President-elect Obama’s campaign last year. He promoted a message of “change,” but Madame Speaker, abolishing term limit reform is the opposite of “change.” Instead, it will entrench a handful of Members of the House in positions of permanent power, with little regard for its impact on the American people.
The American people also stand to pay a price if the Majority further shuts down free and open debate on the House floor by refusing to allow all members the opportunity to offer substantive alternatives to important legislation -- the same opportunities that Republicans guaranteed to Democrats as motions to recommit during their 12 years in the Minority. The Majority’s record in the last Congress was the worst in history when it came to having a free and open debate on the issues.
This proposed change also would prevent Members from exposing and offering proposals to eliminate tax increases hidden by the Democratic Majority in larger pieces of legislation. This is not the kind of openness and transparency that President-elect Obama promised. This change would deprive tens of millions of Americans the opportunity to have a voice in the most important policy decisions facing our country.
Madame Speaker, we urge you to reconsider the decision to repeal these reforms, which could come up for a vote as early as tomorrow. Just as a new year brings fresh feelings of optimism and renewal for the American people, so too should a new Congress. Changing the House rules in the manner highlighted by recent media reports would have the opposite effect: further breaching the trust between our nation’s elected representatives and the men and women who send them to Washington to serve their interests and protect their freedom.
Sincerely,
Rep. John Boehner (R-Ohio), Republican Leader
Rep. Eric Cantor (R-Va.), Republican Whip
Rep. Mike Pence (R-Ind.), Conference Chairman
Rep. Thaddeus McCotter (R-Mich.), Policy Committee Chairman
Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-Wyo.), Conference Vice-Chair
Rep. John Carter (R-Texas), Conference Secretary
Rep. Pete Sessions (R-Texas), NRCC Chairman
Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), Chief Deputy Whip
Rep. David Dreier (R-Calif.), Rules Committee Ranking Republican
(Click here for a pdf copy of the letter with signatures.)
Newt.
First of all, the clip was only a short segment of Alan questioning Newt. It stopped just as Sean started questioning. What was said during that interview? To be fair, it should have been included. Second, Newt did not seem to have a problem with the wire tapping so much as the explanation that was given to the American people. He felt Americans were confused...they are, but he also forcefully reiterated twice that he was in favor of VERY AGGRESSIVE anti-terrorist measures. The fact remains, though, that we are not privy to the entire conversation and so context is totally lacking.
newt and his ilk
O'Reilly, Hannity, Krauthammer, etc. Remember Mort Downey? He had a show where he would just scream vile things at people who lived other than the "traditional nuclear Christian family" model. People watched at first for the novelty but then his popularity faded away. I think this is the same fate that these old dudes like those above will share. Their time is over. The tactics of diverting the public's attention by creating scapegoats to hate whilst the corporations plundered the wealth has brought the country to its knees. Now is the time for young, fresh, idealistic individuals to assume control of their political parties and undo the damage.
Viva LA Obama.
Newt
I remember Newt wanting to put all the babies in new orphanages. Orphanages are things of the past. He wants no abortion, instead build and orphanage. I think he is small minded.
Was Newt thinking for himself...(sm)
when he voted for the bailout? What could he possibly have to say at one of these things? Maybe talk about taxes? You should probably look of the history of some of these people before you go blindly following them like sheep.
Is Newt your president? Lets stick with the present
There is about to be an explosion of spending and for those that really do work and think they won't be paying taxes, think again! You could only use half your brain or whatever is lucid and understand the ONLY way to pay for that kind of spending is by EVERYONE who works to pay taxes.
You really need to get off your one-party tunnel vision way of thinking, and I would say think like an individual, but I can see you are a follower of Obama, and as we all know, most of them have never thought for themselves.
I'm an independent......sure as heck didn't want a totalitarian government in power and if I had to choose between Newt and that backside kisser we have in office now, I'd choose Newt....
Too bad we're stuck with Obama and his crooked cronies!!
I feel it safe to say you have never had an independent thought in your life.....
No, it's Newt...No, it's Sarah...No, it's Anne Coulter...No, it's Steele...
X
Dems leak Palin's SSN, Fred on Fire, Newt
A few tidbits from Rush today. Compare Nancy Pelosi to Newt--not even a contest!
Mr. Newt Rips NBC Reporter
Gingrich fights back
Fred Thompson's speech at RNC video)
Would you defend her?
Thursday, March 9, 2006
Last modified Wednesday, March 8, 2006 11:16 PM PST
Woman sues for alleged firing over talk show bumper sticker
By: TERI FIGUEROA - Staff Writer
VISTA ---- A San Diego County woman is suing her former employer, accusing her manager of firing her on the spot when she saw the woman's car had a bumper sticker advertising a progressive talk radio station.
The suit also alleges that, after seeing the sticker, the employer commented that the woman could be a member of al-Qaida.
In a civil suit filed at the county courthouse in Vista, Linda Laroca is targeting both her former manager, Beverly Fath, and the company she briefly worked for last year, Advantage Sales and Marketing, Inc.
Neither Laroca nor the defendants could be reached for comment Wednesday. Laroca's attorney declined comment.
Laroca, who was hired by the company as a sales representative, is seeking lost wages and damages for wrongful termination for violations of both public policy and the state labor code. She is also claiming state constitutional violations and emotional distress.
The California labor code prohibits employers from controlling or directing the political activities of employees.
According to Laroca's suit, the bumper sticker in question read only: 1360 Air America Progressive Talk Radio.
The nationwide syndicated radio programming from left-wing Air America, which describes itself as progressive entertainment talk radio features show hosts such as comedian and author Al Franken. The network programming is carried locally by radio station KLSD 1360 AM.
A call to Clear Channel-owned KLSD on Wednesday afternoon was not immediately returned.
In her Feb. 21 claim, Laroca asserts that on Oct. 8, three weeks after she started working for the marketing company, Fath called her on a Saturday and requested they meet at a nearby grocery store parking lot so Laroca could pass on some documents Fath needed.
During the brief encounter, Laroca charges, the manager pointed to the bumper sticker ---- the only one on Laroca's car ---- and remarked that it was a new sticker and called it that Al Franken left-wing radical radio station.
Laroca alleges in her suit that Fath then told her, The country is on a high state of alert. For all I know, you could be al-Qaida.
A stunned Laroca laughed nervously at the statement, the suit alleges, and then was dealt the final blow when Fath fired her on the spot.
Not asking you to defend ... just an fyi...
in looking for answers to DW's question as to who was opposing the expansion and why, I ran onto an explanation of the President's health care proposal...which I hate to admit, I did not know the particulars of, because no one in media is reporting it. It was in article by the HEW Secretary. At any rate...Bush proposes a $15,000 tax cut for every American family who buys their own private health insurance. It is estimated that it would cover 20 million more American families...the whole family, not just the children...where the SCHIP expansion would only cover 3 million more, and a good many of those newly eligible kids (under higher income limits) are already covered by private health insurance, according to the CBO study commissioned by the bipartisan congressional committee looking at the SCHIP expansion. What that basically means is that children already covered by private insurance would leave that and go to a public assistance program.
Just some alternative information. You do not need to respond and I am not trying to pick a fight. Just giving information.
AW, I am disappointed that you would defend
anyone on these boards wishing anyone else to burn in hell for eternity, particularly two very young and inexperienced women.
As far as the conservative board, if it is a "cesspool," it is at least in part because conservative posters cannot post conservative opinions there without being attacked relentlessly. I suppose it is fortunate for the liberals on this board that they have not had to experience such conditions when voicing their liberal opinions here.
So, how do you defend Mr. O's back-
the comments, the associations, etc......ROFL.
as usual....can't defend...
//
Do you also defend the innocent
people in our local prisons because I'm sure that there are a few in there who are actually innocent......however, most of them are NOT.
As for me not knowing for sure whether they were indeed tortured or not......how do you know that they were tortured? Were you there? Did you talk to them? Do you have a pin pal at Gitmo, do ya?
I'm sure there are some innocent men at Gitmo but this is war. It was war when the terrorists killed thousands of Americans in one day and then celebrated their actions. We have gone from a 9/11 mentality to a pre 9/11 mentality. We seem to have forgetten that we were attacked and that these people desire nothing more than our death.
You mean you defend all people who
are innocent. You cannot know someone else's heart no matter how much you want to think you do. When it comes to these terrorists, they have only one feeling for America and Americans - cold, calculated, murderous, black, hate! You need to wake up to this fact and accept it. I hope you do not think for a moment they would try to defend you for anything. They would cut your heart out and roast it in a NY minute!
I'm sure you defend Cindy Sheehan just the same, don't you?
Not a bet I'd take.
I certainly don't defend the remarks, but they were taken out of context
Obviously, the example Bennett used of aborting every black child was a very poorly thought out example, but his remarks were also taken grossly out of context by the mainstream media. He went on say it would be a morally reprehensible thing to do. He was commenting on the idiots that said that crime or poverty was down since the legalizing of abortion. He thinks abortion of any kind is wrong...he was turning their logic around on them. He certainly does not think that every black baby should be aborted. GRANTED, there are radical right wingers (the KKK, aryan nation etc.) would think this was a great idea, but they are radical and not the mainstream as Ms. Libby FALSELY stated...
Go ahead and defend a racist
even if it's so out of character for a liberal.
Sheez! How do Repubs defend this?
Boggles the mind! But also learned another curious thing tonight - several people have told me they can't buy any ammunition for their guns, I think they told me AR15's or whatever the civilian model of an M16 is? - they said the rounds are not available by mail or at stores and they are told it's all being stopped at the ports and sent to Iraq. Say what??
Anybody else having a similar experience or know anything else about this? Would be curious to know if the situation in Iraq is really so bad that all civilian ammo has to be confiscated so it can be sent there.
Hard to defend something that isn't happening.
No problem getting ammo here in the great NW.
I am not going to defend Free Republic sm
only because no website knows who it is that is posting on it. I used to post on FR but they banned me because I didn't walk lock-step with their philosophy, which does not tolerate dissent. However, I have seen death threats right here on this site, so linking this guy to a web site isn't really relative. I hope they prosecute him. He is sick.
Not necessary to defend Obama. He's doing just fine
.
Nice try. Once again, only way to defend Obama is
nm
I defend anyone who tried to save thousands of
nm
I defend all innocent people....nm
nm
I hope you're not one of the ones who defend the lies that ...sm
launched the war in Iraq ???
If so, the hypocrisy is reeking.
You are absolutely right. And I certainly do not defend Bush on most things.
But as I said in my post to Lurker below, this is not exactly the political forum I am used to posting in. I just could not resist commenting on this issue as I feel it is deeply disturbing and all parents should look at this closely.
When you can't defend the present why do you always bring up the past?
Why do you defend killing of innocent civilians?
I have never said I defend Hezbollah. I don't defend Hezbollah. They're terrorists, and they're horrible.
But blindly defending Israel, regardless of what they do, doesn't work for me either. What is most disquieting to me is that you defend Israel's placement of landmines to kill innocent civilians, designed to go off at a later date when people least expect it? Why don't you consider that terrorism, as well?
Maybe we can get David Ogden to defend him? LOLOLOL!
Nothing like a hypocrite take a fall to make MY day!
I don't see how a conservative, prolifer could attempt to defend his statements...nm
x
My post ' I defend all innocent people' was a reply to the
question
'Do you also defend the innocent people in our local prisons because I'm sure that there are a few in there who are actually innocent..'
Even quoting the New Testament here will not defend the horrifying tragedy what was the Bush adminis
nm
|
