PDA

View Full Version : Gingrich Rips Ron Paul



BonMallari
12-22-2011, 09:52 PM
Well so much for running a positive campaign......

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203686204577115011619273538.html?m od=googlenews_wsj




By PATRICK O'CONNOR And DANNY YADRON

Republican presidential candidate Newt Gingrich lashed out at rival Ron Paul Thursday, despite a promise to focus his campaign on "positive ideas,'' saying that Mr. Paul wasn't taking foreign threats to the U.S. and Israel seriously.

The former House Speaker's criticism highlighted how Mr. Paul, a Texas congressman, has become a potent force in the Republican contest, overtaking Mr. Gingrich recently in public-opinion surveys of Iowa as the two jockey to become the leading alternative to Mitt Romney.

Mr. Paul has gained ground in part through a barrage of campaign advertising—both positive and negative. In one spot, he accuses Mr. Gingrich of "serial hypocrisy" for earning an estimated $1.6 million in consulting fees from Freddie Mac and then later criticizing the company for its role in the housing sector downturn.

The former Georgia congressman fired back at Mr. Paul Thursday in a radio interview with conservative commentator John McCaslin. He described Mr. Paul as "a guy who basically says, if the United States were only nice, it wouldn't have had 9/11."

"He doesn't want to blame the bad guys," Mr. Gingrich said. "He dismisses the danger of [an] Iranian nuclear weapon and seems to be indifferent to the idea that Israel could be wiped out."

Mr. Gingrich went on to say the "key to [Mr. Paul's] volunteer base is people who want to legalize drugs."

Franco
12-23-2011, 11:14 AM
Well so much for running a positive campaign......

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203686204577115011619273538.html?m od=googlenews_wsj

A desperate Newt will say desperate things!

Nor_Cal_Angler
12-23-2011, 07:26 PM
Well so much for running a positive campaign......

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203686204577115011619273538.html?m od=googlenews_wsj

I do not understand....what is negative about that.

Those are all things that are fact...Dr. Ron Paul said all of them (he has said that the USA is to blame for 9/11, and his stance is "Oh well for Isreal" let them deal with it)...and yes, Dr. Ron Paul wants to legalize drugs, so one could say that his base is populated with people that want drugs legal as well.

Nothing negative so far.

Just like it is fare to say Newt was seen in a tv commerical with Nancy Pelosi, and that his COMPANY did recieve 1.6 (or there abouts) million from Freddie.

Jake

Franco
12-25-2011, 12:45 PM
I do not understand....what is negative about that.

Those are all things that are fact...Dr. Ron Paul said all of them (he has said that the USA is to blame for 9/11, and his stance is "Oh well for Isreal" let them deal with it)...and yes, Dr. Ron Paul wants to legalize drugs, so one could say that his base is populated with people that want drugs legal as well.

Nothing negative so far.

Just like it is fare to say Newt was seen in a tv commerical with Nancy Pelosi, and that his COMPANY did recieve 1.6 (or there abouts) million from Freddie.

Jake

Lets be honest. RP said that US POLICY was to blame for 9/11 which it was.

He also did not say "oh well" about Israel. What he said was that with 300 nuclear warheads that they were more then capable of taking care of themselves, which they are. Especially with the billions in annual public donations that they receive from US citizens.

And, The USA's war on drugs has not only been a massive failure, we have made criminal wealthy beyond belief. No different than Alcohol Prohibition finanaced organized crime and grew crime syndicates across the globe.

Nor_Cal_Angler
12-25-2011, 01:51 PM
Exactly Franco...

You said nothing different about it than I did...I used short form

He said the US via it's policy is to blame...
He said Isreal can deal with it themselves....
He is in support of legalization of Drugs...

again...what is negative??????

Jake

Franco
12-25-2011, 02:13 PM
Exactly Franco...

You said nothing different about it than I did...I used short form

He said the US via it's policy is to blame...
He said Isreal can deal with it themselves....
He is in support of legalization of Drugs...

again...what is negative??????

Jake

There is a big difference between saying the USA as opposed to what he said USA Policy. Had our POLICY not been interventionist, we wouldn't have grown Islamic terrorism to the extent we have.

RP's thoughts on Israel is no different than Thomas Jefferson's warning about being interventionist.

Uncle Bill
12-26-2011, 01:10 PM
Had our POLICY not been interventionist, we wouldn't have grown Islamic terrorism to the extent we have.

.


How naive. Islamic terrorism has had the Americans in their crosshairs before you were born. Total annihilation of any nation NOT Muslim is their goal. Stop trying to 'educate' us ignorants as to why suddenly the US is the instigators of Jihad and the rest of that Muslim hatred. It's in their DNA from birth, and being supported by their education? system from the time they can be taught.

UB

Uncle Bill
12-29-2011, 10:29 AM
A desperate Newt will say desperate things!



Please explain the 'desperation' in a factual statement.

Mr. Gingrich went on to say the "key to [Mr. Paul's] volunteer base is people who want to legalize drugs."

What's not factual about that? It would be nice if the Iowa caucuses would have records for the ages of the RP followers. It's my bet, that Newt statement would be totally corroborated.

UB

J. Walker
12-29-2011, 11:45 AM
I have to ask though, why does this matter? Neither one stands a snowball's chance of getting the nomination let alone elected as president. Both are unelectable for a variety of reasons.

charly_t
12-29-2011, 02:29 PM
Please explain the 'desperation' in a factual statement.

Mr. Gingrich went on to say the "key to [Mr. Paul's] volunteer base is people who want to legalize drugs."

What's not factual about that? It would be nice if the Iowa caucuses would have records for the ages of the RP followers. It's my bet, that Newt statement would be totally corroborated.

UB
Well I must say that it entered my mind that the cheering crowd on Jay Leno last night cheered louder when RP said something about making certain drugs legal. This is a very interesting bunch running right now, vbg.

Cody Covey
12-29-2011, 02:32 PM
I have to ask though, why does this matter? Neither one stands a snowball's chance of getting the nomination let alone elected as president. Both are unelectable for a variety of reasons.

Polls disagree for what it is worth...Paul is second in Iowa and third overall and Gingrich is neck and neck with Romney

JDogger
12-29-2011, 08:22 PM
I have to ask though, why does this matter? Neither one stands a snowball's chance of getting the nomination let alone elected as president. Both are unelectable for a variety of reasons.

Chuckle :p JD

batcave4
12-29-2011, 08:48 PM
Id have a ton more respect for Ron Paul if he just ran as the Libertarian that he is.

JMiller
12-29-2011, 10:02 PM
Did anyone really think Newt could keep it positive after all the blasting they gave him? Don't think I could alst a minute

Jim