Tonight, Mark finally had enough of the wishy-washy nonsense coming from Newt Gingrich. A four-year-old can understand what Rush Limbaugh meant by wanting Obama to fail. So, why can’t Newt? It’s so easy to understand that I can only conclude Newt wants Rush’s comments to be misinterpreted. Newt is adding fuel for the state-run media. Why? Does Newt want socialism in this country?
Newt had better make up his mind on that. I think Newt sees an ‘I’ in ‘team’ someplace. Newt had better get with the program or he will be kicked OFF the team!
Poor Rush,Can't even enjoy the dam superbowl this year.And it took two government motor's to beat one Ford Fusion... 
.jpg)
Years ago, I met Newt and shook his hand at the Wilmington, Delaware train station. I old him I thought he was great! At the time, he was! But, not now. It’s very sad, too.
I use to have respect for Newt Gingrich too, a long time ago. A time before he started compromising on values, ethics, right and wrong, and doing what way too many of these elected politicians do in the backdoor deals of Congress. When I look at these 20, 25, and 30 year career politicians, I ask, what have you done for our Country? What sacrifice did you make? How have you improved upon the American way of life? Most of today’s New Free Style Politicians answer this question first: “What’s in it for me, and my buddies”? What can I get out of this effort? The mentality of the left has always been strange, today, it is clinically, medically, and even psychologically sickening and diseased……. How has socialism, fascism, and marxism ever liberated individuals to be all they can be, and achieve their potential greatness?
Maaan. I’m really torn about today’s show. In my lifetime…there’s been only three conservatives I could listen to forever. Reagan, Gingrich, and Levin. Taking shots at Gingrich is like taking shots at Reagan to me. I don’t disagree with what Mark said on his show tonight regarding some of Newt’s recent comments, I simply wonder about the motivation of why Newt said what he said. Especially regarding Powell.
Gingrich has always been a love him or hate him type of guy with the public. I’ve have never questioned his conservatism though. Anyone see his half hour speech at the Senate/House Conservative dinner tonight on C-Span? He was as brilliant as ever!
Regarding that traitor Powell though, Newt is a consumate politician. Could he simply be trying to soften his persona among moderates to expand his base for a 2012 Presidential run? I sure hope so.
I remember clearly his contract with America. And how he was vilified by the left “a la Sarah Palin” and basically forced out of office.
Please think this through more Mr Levin. I hear you with your comments on Repubics. I’m not ready to accept Gingrich is one though. I’m thinking he’s simply playing the libral media right now with some of his past comments…such as you pointed out tonight.
cbc, with all due respect, Mark has thought this through more than you will ever know. Perhaps you need to listen to Mark’s comments again and think THEM through. Just some friendly advice.
MLF,
Did you listen to the Senate/House Republican dinner last night? Newt said all the right things to our members of Congress. He’s without a doubt the most articulate spokesperson within the GOP.
Regarding Cap and Trade…he said he can’t even bring himself to call it that. He calls it Cap and Tax. The loon/Pelosi perspective of inhibiting all domestic resource utilization is the antithesis of what Newt believes. Despite their commercial together.
He though, like most Americans, believes that developing all sources of energy is best for this country. I think everyone with a clear mind agrees with that. It’s the liberal’s perspective that wind and solar is all we should do that we so adamantly disagree with.
Personally, i’m done with Powell. Never really trusted him to begin with. So it’s with mixed feelings I listened to Newt calling Powell a good Repub. I completely disagree. But i’ll give him the benefit of the doubt that he’s simply playing to the larger “voting” choir when he says that. That it’s strictly a politically inclusive statement.
Nothing he’s done or said to date has put a question in my mind that he’s not the devout conservative i’ve always known him to be. I think that attacking an Icon of the right “from within”…is done so at our own risk. There’s many, many conservatives (like me) who place Newt at the pinnacle of the party. Attacking Newt only has the potential to generate infighting withing our party. To the delight of the left I might add.
So I stand by my above statement that this should be thought through more…and until proven otherwise…we should not be starting any of the Newt bashing that i’ve observed already on this site, and with some radio call ins. I don’t believe that even Mark wants that to happen.
btw mlf…
…I’m open to your opinion. But I don’t need any advice.
The speech Newt gave last night was given to a conservative audience. He is no doubt smart, articulate and fast on his feet but he has an almost schizophrenic mentality when speaking to the MSM. For years I regarded him as the intellectual who could be counted upon to delivery the conservative message. Some of his environmental positions I understand (not global warming or domestic energy production) but he cannot state on one hand that he believes in unalienable rights, as he did last night at the dinner, and on other occasions think that Colin Powell is a republican as is Cheney and only purists would argue against this. If Colin Powell is a republican then so is Barack Obama. If you think that he can argue that a mouse is larger than an elephant I don’t care if Stephan Hawkins gives the argument in mathematical terms because it is not true and a thousand Newt Gingrich’s saying the same thing will not make it so. Unalienable rights and the right to acquire and use property are inseparable and Barack Obama, supported by Powell, strikes at the core concepts that underpins conservatism. And ML was right; he took a parting shot, at the most propitious time to enact the most damage, at his buddy McCain, that was directed to land, right between his eyes. He effectively endorsed Obama while simultaneously discrediting McCain and all republicans and jumped at the chance to do it in a fashion that Oprah could not have done better.
If I were Levin, I might also hate to say what he said but he had to do it and on this site many of us have already stated the same thing over a year ago. You can be a republican if you believe that early abortions or the day after pill is ok. You can be a republican if you believe that “don’t ask don’t tell’ is not important and that it should not make any difference either way. You can be a republican if you believe that killing wolves in Idaho or Alaska is not a good management practice. But you cannot be a republican, let alone a conservative, if you don’t believe in the rule of law, in property rights, in unalienable rights guaranteeing liberty, freedom and the pursuit of happiness.
Newt understands this and we all know he does so is he who left me and other republicans. We did not leave him. Conservatives support principles and when the man no longer embodies those principles then we cannot support that man. In fact I want Obama to succeed. I want him to become constitutional and adopt the Bill of Rights that is consistent with freedom and the acquisition of property and not the confiscation of it otherwise freedom and liberty are simultaneously lost in the process. That is not the Obamanonics strategy. He is socialist and that is incompatible with conservatism so if socialism succeeds than liberty and freedom expires. It is just that simple and Newt and other apologists need not beat around the bush to explain this and undermine what Rush Limbaugh and others have said without ambiguity.
cbc, who is attacking who here? It was Newt that is being two-faced. One day he attacks Rush and kisses up to Nancy Pelosi. The next day he sounds like a conservative, again? Will the real Newt Gingrich please stand up! Rush is the real conservative Icon, not Newt. Not when Newt suffers from Schizophrenia. If there is any Newt bashing on this site, it’s because Newt has brought it on himself.
Wanting the President to succeed and his liberal policies to fail is contradictory. I believe that, and I also believe Newt knows that. I simply believe he’s playing to the ignorant majority among our population. Those who don’t follow anything but liberal political soundbites, if anything at all.
None of the complaints i’ve heard about Newt to date is pertinent to his position on conservative policy. It’s all in regards to his throwing out some political bones to those of which we all dislike or disagree with.
Again, I believe Newt’s conservative values are intact. And he’s the best spokesman we have to disceminate it to date. Outside of FOX, and unlike the radio talk show hosts we all love, Newt gets the opportunity to express our position in the liberal media. He can’t afford to come across as harsh in that format. As I believe he’s setting himself up for a 2012 run.
Agree or disagree…that’s my opinion.
cbc, what do you think of Sarah Palin? She was interviewed by Sean Hannity on TV last night. Just curious.
Mark Levin made his point last night. For the good of the Party, I believe he’s said all he has to.
Anyone that thinks we need to solve the crisis of Man-made Global Warming is an idiot KOOK in my mind and is NOT an intellectual.
I love Palin. I’ve contributed to her financially, just as I have Michelle Brachmann during her congressional run.
Her speech at the convention was the best speech I’ve ever heard. Got it recorded on disc. She does seem to lose a bit though in some of the one off interviews she gives.
“Anyone that thinks we need to solve the crisis of Man-made Global Warming is an idiot KOOK in my mind and is NOT an intellectual”
You’re singing to the choir here. And I know Newt agrees with that. His motivation is not global warming. It’s energy independence. Who can disagree with that?
Newt Gingrich: “…but we do agree our country must take action to address climate change.”
Um, sounds like he’s talking about the climate change hoax, to me.
Here’s Newt’s stance on energy. I agree with every one of his positions.
http://www.ontheissues.org/2008/Newt_Gingrich_Energy_+_Oil.htm
And he’s doing it in a fashion that can attract those who don’t follow the issues, but believe being a good envioronmental steward is best.
I’m sure if you think about this, you’ll see the genious in this. He’s addressing the uninformed in that commercial, who’ve become leans to the left cause they want to protect the envioronment. But he’s setting them up to do it in a rational, positive economic way.
It’s politics. And it’s the genious of Newt Gingrich…
cbc, here’s the bottom line. I do not like a man that bashes Rush the way he did. That is unacceptable. I don’t give a damn about his views on energy, if he’s going to bash Rush.
I wholeheartedly agree with Levin that it’s our conservative principles that are going to rid us of the loons that are currently running our country.
But I also believe we can’t be right wing drones about it either. Some within our party are undeniably Repubics. I believe others “like Newt” are playing the media and the populace.
It’s why he retracted his Sotomayor is a racist comment. We all know she is. And he knows he was right. And it’s been proven even more correct since he first said it. But he also knows it was harsh…and was a mistake. And wishes he hadn’t said it. Cause there is a small segment of the population that such language turns off. And it provides the left wing media fodder to bash him with.
I really believe Gingrich is the smartest politician i’ve experienced in my lifetime.
When did Newt bash Rush? What did he say? I must have missed it.
I found it. I disagree with Newt’s comment. But it’s all political symantics. Again I think he’s trying to broaden his base. It’s not any sort of indictment on any policy belief Newt or Rush has. I fully believe they’e both on the same page.
As I said before…Newt is just trying to play the media instead of the media playing Newt.
Mark, Rush & Sean all believe the time for softening the tone is over. A soft tone breeds moderation. We must be specific and to the point with our message if we ever want to win, again. We can’t play politics in the hopes of attracting a larger audience. We need to win over the undecided with irrefutable truth and confident leadership. We need to bring the moderates along with us, not try to follow the moderates. That is the difference between the likes of Newt and the likes of Mark and Rush. We need Newt the leader of old, not Newt the “genius politician” of today.
See, I said in my first comment that you should listen to Mark’s comments, again. I wasn’t trying to be smart. But, you concede that you didn’t remember Newt bashing Rush. Had you listened again as I suggested, you would have heard that.
http://marklevinfan.com/Audio/ItsAboutWinningNewt.wma
Newt’s broad base includes Colin Powell, an Obomba voter. That kind of base will only support defeat. He has lost track of the solidarity of principle in favor of appeasement to the muddle of the middle. The fool made a commercial with Pelousy supporting the socialist scam of Global Warming. Step aside Gingrich lest the conservative movement be “Newt-ered”.
Newt didn’t bash Rush. He simply framed his comments in a fashion many disagree with. And as I said. I agree with what Mark said. I simply disagree with any contention that Newt is a politician of moderation…or of appeasement.
It’s fine to hold hard line views. I know I sure do. Doesn’t mean one has to express it as a hard *ss in public.
Neither Rush, Mark, nor anyone else on this board is a potential candidate. Newt is. And until one can show me evidence anywhere that shows Newt doesn’t hold strong conservative principles…he’s still the best potential candidate we currently have. IMO
“Softening the tone” means shutting up on issues that are important. Is Obama “softening” his tone on controlling business, bashing the United States, or bashing the “wealthy”?
cbc, Here’s a snippet of what Newt has stated about energy:
“The US should support substantial research into climate science, managing the response to climate change, and in developing new non-carbon energy systems.”
Doesn’t sound like a person that doesn’t believe in the Global Warming farce, does it?
“Managing the response to climate change” implies our government should actually try to change the weather. How utterly futile and ridiculous, yet Newt buys in. And, he’s not just being a clever politician, (saying one thing when he really believes another).
“Substantial research into climate science” also implies belief in Global Warming. We should be more concerned with Global Cooling because only in the last 20,000 years have we had moderate enough conditions for crops to grow and mankind to flourish. The majority of the time on Earth, we’ve had a brutally cold climate (can you say “Ice-Age”?).
That’s pretty slick willy. But how about showing the rest of that same 2006 snippent now?
“It is astounding to watch people blithely propose trillions of dollars in spending on a topic on which we have failed to spend modest amounts to better understand.
It is astounding to have people focus myopically on carbon as the sole source of climate change. The world’s climate has changed in the past with sudden speed and dramatic impact. Global warming may happen. On the other hand it is possible Europe will experience another ice age”
That suggests to me that what Newt is saying is…let’s prove/DISPROVE what the loons are forcing down on us.
Global warming is a farce. The media has been force feeding this issue based on crackpot science. What’s wrong with investing a little to find out what’s really happening? Seems to me it actually just happened. Didn’t NASA just last week report that climate change is based on the sun?…not carbon emissions?
“Doesn’t mean one has to express it as a hard *ss in public. ” Hey cbc, ya know what, that comment sounds like something Frum said to Mark, do you have a problem with freedom of speech? If you are concerned that poor Newt may lose face when being verbally slapped by Levin, perhaps you should hope that Newt can “take it like a man.”
If Newt is such a consumate politician and is as you say, “playing the media and the populace,” then surely he should know who his friends are.
But I’d really like to talk to you about this comment of yours about Newt’s Sotomotor comment, “But he also knows it was harsh…and was a mistake. And wishes he hadn’t said it. Cause there is a small segment of the population that such language turns off. And it provides the left wing media fodder to bash him with.”
If Newt wishes he hadn’t said the truth about Sotomotor, then you must understand the absolute disgust some conservatives feel toward him when he tells a lie about them. A small segment of the population, indeed.
I have enjoyed bashing him in the past as I will in the future.
Sounds like something Frum said? Right. People hear what they want.
So what do we have here now? Willy pulling an Osama and making a charge about Gingrich based on redacted information? You making lame insinuations about me being against freedom of speech based on my support for a pillar of the conservative movement.
Sadly…what we’re learning in here is that the drones exist at both ends of the political spectrum.
Hey slick, I think we pissed the pansy off.
Nah. I’m not pissed I’m simply dealing with you in the same fashion as Mark would deal with a San Francisco librul.
Go stick your pillar.
LOL!
good comeback…
OK…my final thoughts. I can appreciate where everyone in here is coming from regarding those select comments by Gingrich. I cringed myself when I heard them. None though are reflective on his policy. IMO And for all the respect I’ve had for him over the past 2 decades…i’m not going to dismiss him as someone I respect and who I think could still lead us out of this mess.
I’m hopeful that he somehow gets the message from last nights broadcast…and is more careful in saying such type of things in the future. Without conservatives making any more of a deal out of it.
I really think that’s where ML is coming from too…
I love listening to ML. I love listening to this even more. I challenge the conservatism of anyone who can listen to this…and find fault with it.
http://newt.org/MediaArchives/tabid/217/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/4279/Default.aspx
cbc, Newt apparently took his meds that day. Problem is, he sometimes forgets.
He gave that speech to a conservative group. He would immediately be institutionalized if he compared Powell with Cheney, or eulogized about melting ice caps and the need for cap and trade, let alone referring to the best elements of the conservative philosophy as “puristsâ€, at such a gathering. I would never say that Gingrich is stupid so, on that occasion, I expect this exact type of speech. But when he gets into the MSM theater he becomes bipolar and almost reminds me of Biden; he is that unpredictable. At least Biden has an excuse; he is stupid. I could never give a pass on some of Newt’s inane comments any more than I would give Limbaugh or ML a pass on the same. Generally as you age you become more conservative, not less. I have had plenty of arguments with republicans and the way they waste money and that includes the BLM, how poorly they get paid for timber leases that we actually subsidize and then export cheaper wood to Japan than we ourselves pay; we entertain ridiculous farm subsidies and have built western dams that have demolished a commercial salmon fishery and don’t provide nearly the savings per/kilowatt that nuclear power does, let alone the damage to businesses; in these instances I understand where Gingrich is coming from but when you marginalize core principles, on major networks, at prime time, for the sake of superficiality, you yourself need to be marginalized.
The speech he gave was great. I’m sure you could also find some Sotomayor decisions that are also terrific. When you add context, instead of removing it, you get a much different impression… one that is very difficult to defend and support. Newt, the historian the, strategist, the conservative is an enormous disappointment and I just can’t follow the man that he is based upon the man that he was.
task, wait for it. cbc will be back with more “final thoughts” where he will claim you excellent comments are wrong is some way.
My first Pres election was Nixon. I’m old enough to know. And i’ve always been a staunch conservative. Hell…I even got an award for it in college.
As Newt stated in this speech…Reagan called to conservatives, independents and moderate Democrats in every speech. And that’s exactly what Newt does in the MSM.
See…he’s smart enough to know that one can win holding to staunch conservative principles, as long as he can do so in a fashion that appeals to those that don’t. It’s how Reagan won. And the only way conservatives will win today now too.
There are terms for psychological disorders other then bipolar…for those who can’t figure this much out.
I challenge any of you to post an example of where Gingrich holds to a non-conservative principle.
You have proven without a doubt that you don’t have a clue why Reagan won in massive landslides. Reagan did not reach out to anyone, as we are seeing with Newt. People reached out to Reagan.
“I challenge any of you to post an example of where Gingrich holds to a non-conservative principle.”
OK, now you are annoying me. I have done that several times on this very thread. I don’t think any more examples will sway your opinion. This discussion is getting pointless.
Wow! What a statement! As I said…there’s ideological drones on both sides of the aisle
Well CBC you are certainly not bi-polar. You are as predictable as MLF claimed that you would be and give strong support as to why ML has no tolerance for recycling the facts for ears that will not listen, eyes that will not see and minds that can’t be changed.
cbc said he was giving us he final thoughts 2 days ago. I was very relieved to hear that. However, as is typical with trolls, he couldn’t stay away. Now, since he has resorted to calling me a drone, I have insured that those were his final thoughts.
But, nobody can say I didn’t give him enough time to express himself.