Hucks Army - Faith. Family. Freedom. [Grassroots] JOIN HUCKS ARMY | GET INVOLVED | FUNDRAISING | LINKS | LEADERSHIP | ABOUT
It is currently Fri Dec 13, 2019 5:42 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 24 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Sat Dec 19, 2009 7:16 pm 
Offline
Lieutenant Colonel

Joined: Sat Oct 27, 2007 4:39 pm
Posts: 392
Likes: 2
Liked: 20
Excellent speech by Newt (at a Restoration Weekend conference) giving his opinion on how to take back this country. Even though I don't approve of all of Newt's past, I can't help but think this man is quite brilliant. His strategy is to polarize the "secular, socialist, left" that only makes up 15% of the country and win elections with a good 80% of the vote.....interesting.

http://newsmax.com/InsideCover/newt-gingrich-video-david/2009/12/19/id/343936

Part 1


Part 2


Part 3


Part 4


Part 5



Post by Landon Liked by: akprayingmom
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sat Dec 19, 2009 7:19 pm 
Offline
***** General
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2007 11:31 pm
Posts: 3475
Likes: 0
Liked: 6
I saw part of this speech yesterday online and it is fantastic. He knows how to put together a plan.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sat Dec 19, 2009 10:29 pm 
Offline
*** General

Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2008 2:36 pm
Posts: 1339
Likes: 0
Liked: 25
He needs to be on Huckabee's cabinet, period.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sun Dec 20, 2009 12:24 am 
Offline
***** General

Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 7:23 pm
Posts: 2158
Likes: 4
Liked: 32
Quote:
He needs to be on Huckabee's cabinet, period.


I have a feeling he could end up on a Huckabee ticket. Newt was the only one who did not take a stab at Huckabee's clemency problems; and, if you recall, Huckabee really defended Newt on the NY-23 Dede vote.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sun Dec 20, 2009 2:54 pm 
Offline
Lieutenant General

Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2007 11:11 am
Posts: 1037
Location: Florence, SC
Likes: 0
Liked: 1
Newt Gingrich has been my hero since 1993. He is also fatally politically flawed. Not a problem as far as I am concerned, but a high percentage of the rest of the known world will remember both is infidelities--oh, let me count the politicians and other luminaries who have fallen since!!!--and his economic wrongs (publication gate anyone?)

Newt is the current reigning Elder Statesman and can successfully capitalize on this title. Not only that, he has figured out what the public wants and--huge amounts of laughter here--has advised politicians to stand athwart history yelling "full steam ahead!"

I have forwarded this post to 56 of my contacts. Please, please forward it to yours!


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Tue Dec 22, 2009 1:13 am 
Offline
MODERATOR
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 3:22 am
Posts: 399
Location: Chicago, IL
Likes: 2
Liked: 8
I stayed up late watching the first three videos. Excellent.

They were so good they prompted me to buy the audio book version of Real Change today. I encourage others to read the book. It also is excellent.

_________________
Whatever doesn't kill Mike Huckabee makes him stronger.
- ABC's The Note


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Tue Dec 22, 2009 12:22 pm 
Offline
Brigadier Geneal

Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2007 11:49 pm
Posts: 641
Location: Loganville, GA
Likes: 0
Liked: 11
I'm probably the only person who wasn't really happy with the speech. Sure, he knows how to put together a campaign that will win, but so what? Winning and governing are very different things.

1. It was a call for Contract with America 2.0 in different language. Basically, his advise was to find major winning issues and stand beside them. Make the libs stand beside them to, and you have a winning campaign. But why should anyone trust the Republicans to do anything different when we vote them in? Their behavior after CWA 1 wasn't inspiring, and the recent antics of people like Grassley and the three who voted for the spending bill hardly give me any renewed confidence.

2. I am concerned about any campaign that is based on popular issues. The reason is simple: if what you win on is popular support, why should I think you will suddenly pivot and govern on ingrained principles? Isn't it more likely that if a person wins on popular support, they'll govern in the same way (just as the did before)?

3. I am one who believes that no matter how sound our fiscal policy is, if we let social issues go, then we've already lost the war. It's like Huckabee said in the Nebraska speech: once we decide that some lives are more important than others, our fiscal policy will decide who lives or dies. That makes fiscal discipline a tyranny, not a blessing! On this I will not compromise: moral issues come first. Fiscal policy is simply the package in which we deliver our moral governance.

Like I said, the guy knows how to win. I just don't know that people who would use his plan are capable, in principle, of governing.

Bottom line: I support a principle based campaign, not an issue one.

_________________
To Give a Reason for the Hope - a practical, twelve week, online series to help Christians effectively defend and share their faith.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Tue Dec 22, 2009 1:42 pm 
Offline
***** General
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2007 11:12 am
Posts: 3819
Location: St. Augustine, FL
Likes: 194
Liked: 215
Quote:
Bottom line: I support a principle based campaign, not an issue one.


Amen.

_________________
Ken


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Tue Dec 22, 2009 2:39 pm 
Offline
MODERATOR
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 3:22 am
Posts: 399
Location: Chicago, IL
Likes: 2
Liked: 8
I don't think principle and issues based campaigns are mutually exclusive. Further, I assume any principles based individual would only select issues consistent with his or her principles or they would not, in fact, be a principles based individual.

Quote:
Their behavior after CWA 1 wasn't inspiring

This is not an indictment of CWA or Gingrich. This is an indictment of those specific Republicans.

Quote:
I am one who believes that no matter how sound our fiscal policy is, if we let social issues go, then we've already lost the war. It's like Huckabee said in the Nebraska speech: once we decide that some lives are more important than others, our fiscal policy will decide who lives or dies. That makes fiscal discipline a tyranny, not a blessing! On this I will not compromise: moral issues come first. Fiscal policy is simply the package in which we deliver our moral governance.

This is true. I agree. And I watched all five videos and he never suggested this.

_________________
Whatever doesn't kill Mike Huckabee makes him stronger.
- ABC's The Note


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Tue Dec 22, 2009 2:50 pm 
Offline
Brigadier Geneal

Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2007 11:49 pm
Posts: 641
Location: Loganville, GA
Likes: 0
Liked: 11
Quote:
I don't think principle and issues based campaigns are mutually exclusive. Further, I assume any principles based individual would only select issues consistent with his or her principles or they would not, in fact, be a principles based individual.

Maybe not, but when you have to go looking for 70-80% issues, that implies a disjunction.

Quote:
This is not an indictment of CWA or Gingrich. This is an indictment of those specific Republicans.

It's an indictment of the Republican party generally. I'm sorry, but it pains me to hear them harping out fiscal discipline when they invented TARP. Their fiscal discipline is pure politics. They fact is they buy votes just like anybody else.

Quote:
This is true. I agree. And I watched all five videos and he never suggested this.

Sure he did. Why do you think he backed Scozi? That was the whole spiel on recruiting moderate democrats who could win in places like CA was about. He's telling social conservatives to back down, that our issues aren't as important there.

I'm fine with moderates and libs in the party. They just don't get a say in policy. Sorry if that makes me narrow and closed minded. Principles first. Principles always. No more compromise on the value of human life--not for ANY political points.

In any case, I've said my peace. You, or anybody else, can have the last word. I just wanted to offer a counter thought and a brief defense. Nothing more.

_________________
To Give a Reason for the Hope - a practical, twelve week, online series to help Christians effectively defend and share their faith.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Tue Dec 22, 2009 5:08 pm 
Offline
Brigadier Geneal

Joined: Sat Oct 20, 2007 2:54 pm
Posts: 579
Location: norfolk
Likes: 0
Liked: 23
I've read some articles about Newt, and even in the 1994 campaign he was about issues not principles. That is why other than the few items on his Contract with America, he couldn't pull the republicans together to do anything worthwhile. I admire Newt for winning the election, but his pragmatic view of governing is not what we need going forward. His American Solutions organization has failed to actually accomplish anything.

_________________
Be My Friend on Facebook

Follow me on Twitter


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Tue Dec 22, 2009 9:17 pm 
Offline
Lieutenant General

Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2007 11:11 am
Posts: 1037
Location: Florence, SC
Likes: 0
Liked: 1
What we have right now in Washington is the most highly polarized government since Andrew Jackson became President. The main difference being that voters in 1829 did not have access to TV, internet and radio 24/7. This unprecedented access has even further divided the nation. Newt is trying to find common ground.

If the political parties cannot find a way to work together to solve those problems identified by an incredibly high percentage of voters we risk a series of de-stabilizing governments where Democrats enact laws which are promptly repealed by Republicans when they regain power and visa versa. This kind of see-sawing creates a toxic economic climate for business which has no way to project what is in its best interest. Pointing fingers at the Democrats saying "They did it first!" is both petulant and childish.

The most wonderfully principled politician is useless unless (s)he can get elected. I cannot stress strongly enough that a thorough knowledge of just how both the House and Senate actually work should be taught in both junior high and high school. The Speaker of the House and the Senate Majority leader are members of the majority party, and they control what legislation gets considered. One fact you must consider when excoriating Dede Scozzafava from NY 23 is that she pledged to vote for Boehner as Speaker of the House.

I for one do not want to remain a member of a permanent Republican minority limited to pelting Democratic legislation with rotten tomatoes. You can't run a hard-core Conservative in a moderate district and expect to take the seat. If you want an anti-abortion legislator, you first have to have an anti-abortion district.

If you want to convince voters that abortion is infanticide, that capitalism creates more opportunity than any other economic system, and that self-reliance is superior to dependence on government aid you don't do it on the hustings. That is what TV, radio and the internet are for. There is a reason they say the pen is mightier than the sword.

Newt wants to put Republicans back in a position of power. I would listen to him very carefully. It is up to Mike Huckabee and other reasonable, likeable former members of government (John Kasich also comes to mind) to use the bully media pulpit to convince the voting public the conservative approach works best.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Tue Dec 22, 2009 9:58 pm 
Offline
Brigadier Geneal

Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2007 11:49 pm
Posts: 641
Location: Loganville, GA
Likes: 0
Liked: 11
Quote:
I for one do not want to remain a member of a permanent Republican minority limited to pelting Democratic legislation with rotten tomatoes.

I already said I'm not going to defend my position further, lrobb, and I'm not. People can read our positions side by side and see with whom they are more likely to agree. I did, however, want to respond to this by way of clarification.

I take your phrase "pelting Democratic legislation with rotten tomatoes" to refer to attacking and condemning what they see as bad legislation (viz, the entire HC debate). In that case, I'm totally with you, but I'll raise you one. I'm not interesting in being a member of a permanent Republican majority that spends their time practicing such negativity.

That's one of the reasons I was so drawn to Huckabee. He was genuinely cordial to his opposition. He has been less so recently, but on his show, he still very much is. I would hate to see him go down that same path.

I'm not saying you can't point out bad ideas. What I am saying is that the flaws need to be pointed out with the focus being on the merits of the logic, not with person who made the statements. Further, any statement of why something is a bad idea should always serve as a introduction to why your idea is a better one. I want to see the Republicans talking about why conservatives principles and values are better, not why Democrat policies are wicked. What's the old mantra around here? Vertical politics? I take it seriously. And being vertical, I am simply saying that I will never, ever again compromise on moral issues. EVER. And I will argue to the best of my abilities that no one else should, either, regardless of the consequences.

So, on this, I think you and I have common ground. Neither of seem to be interested in a primarily negative party.

_________________
To Give a Reason for the Hope - a practical, twelve week, online series to help Christians effectively defend and share their faith.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 24, 2009 1:07 pm 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 8:03 am
Posts: 4844
Likes: 1174
Liked: 782
One of Huckabee's, and I believe Newt's, objects is to appeal to what is good for all Americans, not just those of one party or another.

Newt does have a certain genius for seeing where the faults lie and proposing great solutions. While I would not choose him as President, he has a great record of helping lead the legislature. He can feel the pulse of the nation and detect what needs to be done to further the conservative viewpoint and power. And I like that his ideas are forwarded by the power of principled concepts over and against corruption, and of ideals and reason over and against lies and bribes.

After our Merry Christmas and Happy New Year, let's get back to America's problems with great vigor and thoughtfulness. Let's think how to speak out. "Come let us reason together..."

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sat Dec 26, 2009 1:40 pm 
Offline
Major General
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 25, 2007 8:08 pm
Posts: 747
Likes: 0
Liked: 8
Newt is one of many brilliant people that have chosen to devote part of their life to politics. There are more smart people out there, but they are smart enough to avoid political life like the plague. This is part of the problem. I supported Huckabee and even became a delegate because I thought him the best of the candidates and the best chance to defeat the policies of the coming Obama administration.

Perhaps Huckabee will run, perhaps he will not. He certainly loves his position at Foxnews. Who will be the best candidate this time? Problem is, you cannot find out much about folks unless you are privy to these kind of long speaches which are never covered in the regular media.

I think Newt would be an excellent candidate,VP, or cabinet member. Would you support him? He is certainly the smartest person in the room. Would you support Sarah Palin? She certainly is an electric personality. Would you support any of the other contenders? All of the people(human beings) have certain flaws, past stumbles, etc. You will not find Mr. or Mrs. perfect. Question is, who has the best ideas, who is a leader, whom can inspire the people, who has historical perspective and a strategic vision, and moreover, who can defeat Obama and the liberal elite?



Post by USA#1 Liked by: justgrace
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Tue Dec 29, 2009 11:42 am 
Offline
***** General
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2008 10:58 am
Posts: 3019
Likes: 0
Liked: 190
I think Huckabee/Gingrich would be a powerful ticket. No one could deny that Gingrich could DO the job of president. He has been around Washington forever....NOT A GOOD SELLING POINT right now for president, but certainly a plus or a vp. Some Republicans absolutely think he is the "cat's meow." It would sure fire up the base. Whoever the candidate is....it HAS to be someone the public has 1000% confidence "could do the job." After this fiasco administration, we want someone tried and true. Like, maybe, someone with 10 1/2 yrs. executive experience.... :lol:


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Wed Dec 30, 2009 11:03 pm 
Offline
Lieutenant General

Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2007 11:11 am
Posts: 1037
Location: Florence, SC
Likes: 0
Liked: 1
Newt somewhat defies definition. His background precludes him from higher political office in today's information age because his pecadillos are all over the net, however he really is the smartest politician in any room and usually one of the wittiest. A comparison with Benjamin Franklin is in order. The highest office Franklin ever held was Postmaster General, but he is nonetheless one of the premier Founding Fathers.

Which goes to prove Newt being Newt-on-the-net is probably more persuasive than anyone else being in public office. I have always said public office is highly overrated when considering an individual's influence on politics and culture. Think Rush Limbaugh.

And start thinking Mike Huckabee. Would you rather be king or kingmaker?


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 31, 2009 6:37 pm 
Offline
***** General

Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2008 11:12 am
Posts: 1658
Location: The Occupied Territory of Northern VA
Likes: 257
Liked: 169
Can anyone provide specific, sourced quotes where Gingrich has expressed remorse, repentance, or at least regret, for some of his immoral choices in his personal life?

After all, if your own spouse can't trust you, why should the voters?

Brief background for those who don't already know: Newton Leroy Gingrich, though admittedly brilliant and well-spoken, has been married 3 times. His first marriage, at age 19, was to his former geography teacher. (She was 26 when they wed.) He later demanded a divorce from her, while she was recovering from cancer surgery.

He then married wife #2 in 1981, and they stayed married until the year 2000. During the 1990s, while he was leading the charge for impeaching Bill Clinton, Gingrich carried on an affair with a young Congressional aide.

After divorcing wife #2, he quickly married the young aide: present wife Callista.

I know that no one is perfect, including me. It's a rare leader who is fiscally conservative, pro-life, well-spoken, AND still married and faithful to his wife. [Think: Mark Sanford] BUT... this pattern of behavior disturbs me. It reminds me of some other leaders I've known, who went through life with an outlook that says, "Rules are for the little people." If they play "fast & loose" with their closest family members, who will they treat their staff, the other leaders in the U.S. government, and the American voter?

And, what other scandals might be as yet uncovered, which would be brought to light in a presidential campaign?

Also, I don't know that Gingrich would make a good match as a VP for Mike Huckabee, who clearly would run on a platform of restoring (or at least inspiring) America's goodness.

_________________
Recovering Huck-a-holic


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 9:33 am 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 8:03 am
Posts: 4844
Likes: 1174
Liked: 782
All-in-for-Mike wrote:
Can anyone provide specific, sourced quotes where Gingrich has expressed remorse, repentance, or at least regret, for some of his immoral choices in his personal life?

After all, if your own spouse can't trust you, why should the voters?

Brief background for those who don't already know: Newton Leroy Gingrich, though admittedly brilliant and well-spoken, has been married 3 times. His first marriage, at age 19, was to his former geography teacher. (She was 26 when they wed.) He later demanded a divorce from her, while she was recovering from cancer surgery.

He then married wife #2 in 1981, and they stayed married until the year 2000. During the 1990s, while he was leading the charge for impeaching Bill Clinton, Gingrich carried on an affair with a young Congressional aide.

After divorcing wife #2, he quickly married the young aide: present wife Callista.

I know that no one is perfect, including me. It's a rare leader who is fiscally conservative, pro-life, well-spoken, AND still married and faithful to his wife. [Think: Mark Sanford] BUT... this pattern of behavior disturbs me. It reminds me of some other leaders I've known, who went through life with an outlook that says, "Rules are for the little people." If they play "fast & loose" with their closest family members, who will they treat their staff, the other leaders in the U.S. government, and the American voter?

And, what other scandals might be as yet uncovered, which would be brought to light in a presidential campaign?

Also, I don't know that Gingrich would make a good match as a VP for Mike Huckabee, who clearly would run on a platform of restoring (or at least inspiring) America's goodness.


You make some interesting and good points. I was aware that Newt had been married before, but not that this was his third wife and that Callista was a former aide. Judging only on his more recent books and videos, such as Rediscovering God in America, it would appear that he has had a heart change. But before he would accept a public office, he needs to let conservatives know that he is really a changed man, morally and spiritually. And many of us could not vote for him based on this past. Wasn't McCain also guilty of forsaking a wife?

This reminds me of how important it is for our public servants (re: legislators, judges, and chief executives) to be honest and morally exemplary. For this reason I would not like for Gingrich to be a Vice Presidential running mate. Still, he is one of the most eloquent voices for conservatism and has those skills to put together solutions for a better America. He can learn from his mistakes and share what is right.

Whenever public servants try to hide past or current indiscretions (sins), they affect all over whom they lead. People deceive themselves, first, before they deceive others, into thinking they can get away with sin. We all sin (hopefully not intentionally) and need forgiveness. So, while we can and do forgive, we still need to use judgment about the private lives and examples our leaders bring to their office. It may startle most people to realize that our Founders wanted only strong, moral Christians to be the leaders of colleges (like Harvard), legislature, and even the press.

In some way, our secret lives and sins affect everyone our lives touch, if only through the power of example. Yes, if Newt and Callista claim to be believers in Christ, they need to be honest and repent. I always wonder what the first and second wife would say if interviewed. How do (or did) they feel about how they were treated? What is their measure of the man?

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 12:36 pm 
Offline
***** General

Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2008 11:12 am
Posts: 1658
Location: The Occupied Territory of Northern VA
Likes: 257
Liked: 169
justgrace wrote:
You make some interesting and good points. I was aware that Newt had been married before, but not that this was his third wife and that Callista was a former aide. Judging only on his more recent books and videos, such as Rediscovering God in America, it would appear that he has had a heart change. But before he would accept a public office, he needs to let conservatives know that he is really a changed man, morally and spiritually. And many of us could not vote for him based on this past. Wasn't McCain also guilty of forsaking a wife?

Yes, McCain divorced his first wife, a former model who apparently waited for him during his long imprisonment at Vietnam. While he was gone, she suffered severe injuries in a terrible car accident, and had difficulty regaining the ability to walk. She also gained weight and was not nearly as attractive as when he married her years previously. While she was still recovering, he cheated on her repeatedly and in public, finally serving divorce papers on her and marrying Cindy, his present wife, shortly thereafter. Cindy, as I'm sure everyone already knows, was younger, stunning, and a Coors heiress, so she brought a large dowry to his political ambitions.
Quote:
In some way, our secret lives and sins affect everyone our lives touch, if only through the power of example. Yes, if Newt and Callista claim to be believers in Christ, they need to be honest and repent. I always wonder what the first and second wife would say if interviewed. How do (or did) they feel about how they were treated? What is their measure of the man?

Great questions! Anyone have any source info on quotes or interviews from the first 2 wives? I think I remember that one or two of his adult children from the first marriage were active in his presidential campaign. (No time to go look it up today.)

If someone like Newt were to stand up and speak FRANKLY about their past misdeeds, it could go a long way toward helping not only their own political career, but the moral atmosphere in America. Rather than parsing sentences or blathering some evasive mumbo-jumbo about "past indiscretions," how refreshing it would be to hear someone Newt's age say something like this: "You know, I badly mistreated my first wife. I wish I could go back and have a do-over. I would do it all differently, and better. I hurt her and my children deeply, and those wounds still have present-day ramifications in all their lives. I have asked my first wife for the forgiveness I don't deserve, and she has graciously granted that forgiveness. And I have asked God to forgive me, and make me a more righteous person in all areas of my life. I'm thankful that God forgives anyone who asks Him with a humble and penitent heart. But that doesn't undo the damage I caused to my family, and to the bad example I set for the American people. I am truly sorry."

_________________
Recovering Huck-a-holic


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 24 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
POWERED_BY