Gingrich Announces Presidential Run

page: 2
13
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 11 2011 @ 10:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by pyrodudeAnnee, I find it very rude that you said you would just cancel out this persons vote. The ENTIRE reason we do this is so that everyone's vote may be counted, to claim to deny ones freedom to do so, or in this case deem it useless, denies this person of the rights we cherish. Which is not what we are here for and accomplishes absolutely nothing.


I don't think she meant it in a sense of taking away my rights type canceling it out but that her vote for Obama was as certain as mine was against and it makes the two into a zero sum gain for either...

Annee is many things and as left as Karl Marx but a vote disenfranchiser isn't one of them.




posted on May, 11 2011 @ 10:59 PM
link   
We've known that he was going to do this for years. Why is this news?

Yawn.



posted on May, 11 2011 @ 11:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Golf66

Originally posted by pyrodudeAnnee, I find it very rude that you said you would just cancel out this persons vote. The ENTIRE reason we do this is so that everyone's vote may be counted, to claim to deny ones freedom to do so, or in this case deem it useless, denies this person of the rights we cherish. Which is not what we are here for and accomplishes absolutely nothing.


I don't think she meant it in a sense of taking away my rights type canceling it out but that her vote for Obama was as certain as mine was against and it makes the two into a zero sum gain for either...

Annee is many things and as left as Karl Marx but a vote disenfranchiser isn't one of them.


No - - and I've also voted for someone because I thought the other guy sucked.

Its just really sad that anyone has to feel that way.



posted on May, 11 2011 @ 11:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by Janky Red
 


theres a big difference tho with the pro obama main stream cheerleaders for obama

newt does not have the base that obama has or those cheerleaders..


myself i dont think newt can win.


I agree with you on all counts



posted on May, 12 2011 @ 09:35 AM
link   
reply to post by Golf66
 


@Annee - why don’t you tighten up and not tell people there vote will be useless!

@Golf - Annee is entitled to her opinion as are you and I. I simply found her comment rude and stated so, not judging her character.

While I'm here I'll get back on subject. I will vote for whatever candidate will bring about a smaller more efficient government and if that is Newt than so be it.



posted on May, 12 2011 @ 09:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by pyrodude
While I'm here I'll get back on subject. I will vote for whatever candidate will bring about a smaller more efficient government and if that is Newt than so be it.


Actually - I agree with that. I'm pretty much only liberal on social issues - such as equal rights and women's rights.

We just look at it differently.



posted on May, 12 2011 @ 09:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Golf66
He is the antithesis of who an American President should be - he is a liar; a cheat, a criminal thug and for good measure a racist as well.


From the first slave-owning president through Nixon up until the last president. I had trouble finding more than a handful to not make your statement completely ironic.
edit on 12-5-2011 by Runaway1977 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 12 2011 @ 09:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Runaway1977From the first slave-owning president through Nixon up until the last president. I had trouble finding more than a handful to not make your statement completely ironic.
edit on 12-5-2011 by Runaway1977 because: (no reason given)


So you are saying that all George Washinton's contributions are null becasue he kept slaves as alowed by law at the time? Thomas Jefferson? Madison?

Andrew Jackson would have been jailed for murder under our current law for having a duel which was leagal at the time.

All Presidents have thier issues - call them waht you will but they were American's and proud of it not ashamed and appologetic.

Until now we have never had one who's goal seems to be to make America(ns) less prosperous than before. w00t - I can't afford 4 more years of appology and saving the planet.



posted on May, 12 2011 @ 10:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Golf66
So you are saying that all George Washinton's contributions are null becasue he kept slaves as alowed by law at the time? Thomas Jefferson? Madison?

Did you read that anywhere in my post? I felt pretty safe in pointing out the inherent racism involved in being a slave owner, legal or not.


Andrew Jackson would have been jailed for murder under our current law for having a duel which was leagal at the time.

Which has what to do with being a racist, liar, and cheat?


All Presidents have thier issues - call them waht you will but they were American's and proud of it not ashamed and appologetic.

I was pointing out that those problems outlined as being so specifically Obama's actually applied to most of your presidents. You seem to have read some arbitrary legal argument somewhere and are attempting to respond to that.


Until now we have never had one who's goal seems to be to make America(ns) less prosperous than before. w00t - I can't afford 4 more years of appology and saving the planet.

I am sorry that you did not understand one word of my post but I will take the spelling in yours as a hint. Thanks for the discussion much the same though.



posted on May, 12 2011 @ 10:48 PM
link   
I've said it before, if Obama has to face Gingrich in a one on one Presidential debate for all the world to witness...
Obama will lose in spectacular fashion.

The left will have to run a hard core smear campaign against Gingrich, relentless and dirty if they hope to have any chance at beating him. Unfortunately for Newt it seems he has given them plenty to start with.



posted on May, 13 2011 @ 01:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Runaway1977
 


Soooo Runaway, do you call coca cola drug dealers because they had cocain in their original formula?

Newt can destroy Barry in a debate, but Trump is the only one he is afraid of.
edit on 13-5-2011 by pyrodude because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 13 2011 @ 01:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by ladyinwaiting
I'm rather surprised he has the audacity to run, after the things he did and the lies he told.
The sight of him is the epitome of hypocrisy -- I can't abide it. I don't think he'll do well.


Sounds like you just described Obama to me.



posted on May, 13 2011 @ 07:29 PM
link   


gingrich doesnt have a chance in hell





newt just go away you dont have to go away mad just go away



posted on May, 13 2011 @ 10:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by pyrodude
reply to post by Runaway1977
 


Soooo Runaway, do you call coca cola drug dealers because they had cocain in their original formula?

Newt can destroy Barry in a debate, but Trump is the only one he is afraid of.
edit on 13-5-2011 by pyrodude because: (no reason given)


That would make sense were any of those slave owners alive today but no longer owning slaves. I am not sure what you do not understand about slave-owners having been racist. Because slavery was abolished, slaveowners are absolved from racism? I do not understand your point. You described your founding fathers and the vast majority of your presidents and to a good extent even Newt. You want to talk about integrity and honesty? I would like to know why you think Newt would "destroy" Obama in a debate? Is he going to sweat him down? Maybe you know something of Newt that I do not. Please explain it. You might want to give up trying to say people that owned slaves are not racist though. That is not helping you out.



posted on May, 13 2011 @ 10:24 PM
link   
I vividly remember the whipping that Gingrich took during his years as Speaker of the House when he was at the helm of a govt. shutdown and those who dished out the lashes are still active in politics(Chuck Schumer) and the media.

Then of course, his fellow republicans (John Boehner) pushed for his resignation. Gingrich has exceeded his baggage limit for this flight to the White House. Overload

His announcement to run has me stumped when you consider his history.

Wow! His withdrawal should be predictable....



posted on May, 13 2011 @ 11:09 PM
link   
Maybe some people just do not remember the 1990s when Newt managed to make his own party boot him out for making Bill Clinton look moral in comparison. I think any debate with Newt will end as far as the Christian Right go with the question of gay marriage. Newt is going to have a very very very very very very tough time expounding on the sanctity of marriage and as unimportant as that should be, it seems to be a big issue with a lot of the voters he would be hoping to snag.



posted on May, 14 2011 @ 04:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Runaway1977
 


Well at least in the 1990's we knew where Newt Gingrich was.Nobody knows where Barack Obama/Barry Sotello was.

Gingrich Knows he does not have a snowballs chance of even winning the first two primary's.

He is just trying to sell books.

He will make a great Sec.of State when the newly elected President Herman Cain nominates him!



posted on May, 14 2011 @ 08:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by IamJustanAmerican
reply to post by Runaway1977
 


Gingrich Knows he does not have a snowballs chance of even winning the first two primary's.

He is just trying to sell books.



See, that's the problem right there. He surely must know he doesn't stand a chance. With the amount of baggage the man is carrying he's going to sink like a stone, much less tread water.

If this is nothing more than a marketing ploy a la Trump, then that doesn't bode very well for the GOP. The election is just around the proverbial corner and the only three people that have managed to make any kind of a splash have been an egotistical real estate magnate, a hypocritical philanderer standing on a weak family values/morality platform, and a woman who could not bother to finish out her term as governor -- but, gee whiz, there was plenty of time for that reality show...

Seriously, the GOP needs to get its act together.

The front runners all along ought to have been Mike Huckabee, Mitt Romney and Ron Paul. Those are the strongest contenders.

Unfortunately...

Mike Huckabee has just announced he's not running for office.

Mitt Romney will continue to battle his health care fiasco.

Ron Paul admitted he would not have supported civil rights.

Yikes!



posted on May, 14 2011 @ 08:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Janky Red
 


As much as I dislike newt 1945 was actually a good book.

On the topic of the thread, no he doesn't stand a chance. His hypocrisy during the Clinton scandal will bury him in the court of public opinion.



posted on May, 14 2011 @ 08:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by IamJustanAmerican
reply to post by Runaway1977
 


Well at least in the 1990's we knew where Newt Gingrich was.Nobody knows where Barack Obama/Barry Sotello was.


I have no idea who "Sotello" is and I tried googling it. This is the second post within just minutes where someone offered up their praise for X in the form of "I do not like Y." Yes, we sure do know where Newt was in the '90s and the only thing that matters in concern to Newt is where Newt has been. If you are hoping for Newt because of how you feel about someone else (Obama) then you deserve what you get. I am sure any man that dumps his dying wife in the hospital to run off with one of his mistresses only has the best intentions for the rest of you. Charles Manson is still alive and he is also not Obama. I cannot wait to see his campaign signs from the same people that like Newt, just because he is not Obama.





new topics
top topics
 
13
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join