"Just like Mr. Clinton, Mr. Gingrich views women as little more than sex objects who are discarded like an empty Coke bottle when they fail to satisfy his near-limitless appetite. During his early congressional career, Newt was widely rumored to prey on his female staff members. He divorced his first wife while she was battling cancer. In fact, he urged her to sign the divorce papers while she was still in a hospital bed. After he left Congress, he announced his divorce to his second wife right after she had been diagnosed with Multiple Sclerosis. He left her for a congressional aide who is 23 years younger."
- www.insightmag.com/Media/MediaManager/KuhnerGingrich.htm
Newt in '08 - I Really Don't Think So
Discussion in 'Political Debate & Discussion' started by KenH, Dec 22, 2006.
Page 1 of 2
-
We are voting for a POTUS not a pastor.
-
This is not a matter of Newt's religious beliefs. It's a matter of his morals. There are people of various kinds of religions - or even no religion - that have better morals than Newt.
I guess it just comes down to trust and I don't trust him. -
:applause: :applause: :laugh: :laugh:
I still like Newt. I just wish he had a chance to win.
Thanks for the laugh. -
There is maybe one man more likely to get my vote in the primary. Of course, it is still very early in the process... but I like the things Newt believes when it comes to government. Not sure I would want him around my girlfriend, but that isn't what we're voting for.
-
So it's ok to not vote for someone because you don't trust them? How about if you don't trust them, because of the decisions they have made in their life? Is that still ok, to not vote for them for that reason?
Jamie -
Someone can vote for someone or not vote for someone for any reason he/she wishes. :)
-
Thanks for allowing us to vote how we see fit. :)
:laugh:
Jamie -
-
A person's married life can tell you a lot about them.
To me, Newt demonstrates a lack of character in his deeds.
Could this affect his governance as President? Would it? I don't know, but it is pretty indicative of the kind of person he is away from the cameras.
Giuliani is the same way.
Why would we expect someone to honor their vow to America and the Constitution if they won't even honor vows to their spouse taken before God?
I'm not saying I wouldn't vote for him or someone else with a similar background, but it does make me very, very hesitant about trusting that person's word. -
As far as I am concerned Newt, McCain, Giuliani, and Romney are all non-starters. The Republican party is going to have to do much better than that before they get my vote. So far the Democrats have a good field. Hillary Clinton, Barak Obama, and Jonathan Edwards are going to prove to be very strong candidates. In fact I predict, right now, that one of those three will be the next President of the United States. While I would never vote for Obama or Clinton both, apart or together, would prove to be very difficult (if not impossible) for the Republicans to defeat. As for Edwards, well if a Tarheel is on the top of the ticket...
At this point, thanks to President Bush and the Republican congress, the Republicans don't have a prayer in '08.
Alan Keyes for President!!! -
There expect that there will be some folks on the extreme religious right who will be disappointed by the two major parties' nominees in 2008. Fortunately for such folks there is the Constitution Party - if it hasn't totally torn itself apart over the abortion issue by 2008. -
Newt ticked off a lot of people some years ago when he suggested that poor children be taken away from their families and be placed in orphanages. My parents were dirt poor during the Great Depression. They were outraged at what he said. Dad shouted, "Boot the Newt!" No, I definitely would not vote for Newt. Word that he sleeps around is only one more reason why I wouldn't vote for him. :mad:
-
But even if that was the case, is a young (sometimes 16 0r 17) single mother the best enviorment for a child? That are countless instances where this is going on generation after generation.
Bottom line, it is NOT the goverments job to give away money to poor people, or anyone for that matter. It is the Duty of the church to help those in need. The problem is those who are greedy.
Now if a church is to help a family, then seculars will complain that we are trying to convert them. So what. I once had a Mormon help me out of a jam. He gave me a Book of Mormon. Fine, I accepted it with grace, and I appreciated his help.
There is just tooo much goverment regulation, even in helping others. (and not just the poor)
I would say New might be the man we need. GOVERMENT SPENDING MUST DECREASE GREATLY.
sALTY -
It seems to me like someone would have difficulty in supporting Newt if they condemned Bill Clinton during his presidency. Of course, I'm a democrat and wouldn't vote for Newt anyway.
-
http://www.gsm.uci.edu/~mckenzie/rethink/mck97-ch6.htm
I'm not worried, though. My Persian cat has a better chance of being elected president than Newt does. :laugh: -
-
Either way, I wonder if it character will be discussed when the talk focuses on Newt Gingrich. IMO, he's just a bad guy all around, and I had a VERY low opinion of him back in my right-wing days (before my epiphany). But that is my opinion, and I have qualified it as such.......
Regards to you - hope you are feeling better,
BiR -
Newt is the only candidate with enough intelligence and understanding, and who supports my views on pertinent issues. I question the truthfulness of the attacks on him. Time will tell, but I hope to be able to support him. -
Regards,
BiR
Page 1 of 2