• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Newt Gingrich is a big fat liar

Autodidact

Autodidact

Intentionally Blank
Newt Gingrich on March 7:

VAN SUSTEREN: What would you do about Libya?
GINGRICH: Exercise a no-fly zone this evening, communicate to the Libyan military that Gadhafi was gone and that the sooner they switch sides, the more like they were to survive, provided help to the rebels to replace him. I mean, the idea that we're confused about a man who has been an anti-American dictator since 1969 just tells you how inept this administration is. They were very quick to jump on Mubarak, who was their ally for 30 years, and they were confused about getting rid of Gadhafi. This is a moment to get rid of him. Do it. Get it over with.
Click to expand...

Newt Gingrich on March 23:
LAUER: Do you think Moammar Qaddafi has to go as a result of this intervention?

GINGRICH: Let me draw the distinction. I would not have intervened. I think there were a lot of other ways to affect Qaddafi. I think there are a lot of other allies in the region we could have worked with. I would not have used American and European forces.
Click to expand...
from here
 
YmirGF

YmirGF

Bodhisattva in Recovery
Never trust a person named "Newt".

Then again, it should be assumed, given he is a politician, that if you see his/her lips moving, he/she is lying to you. It's what politician's do.
 
Autodidact

Autodidact

Intentionally Blank
YmirGF said:
Never trust a person named "Newt".

Then again, it should be assumed, given he is a politician, that if you see his/her lips moving, he/she is lying to you. It's what politician's do.
Click to expand...

This view bothers me. No, all politicians are not alike. That attitude effectively suspends judgment of bad people caught in lies.
 
YmirGF

YmirGF

Bodhisattva in Recovery
Autodidact said:
This view bothers me. No, all politicians are not alike. That attitude effectively suspends judgment of bad people caught in lies.
Click to expand...
They are all lying, Auto. If you don't understand that then you are naive and I don't use that word lightly around you.
 
Levite

Levite

Higher and Higher
Autodidact said:
This view bothers me. No, all politicians are not alike. That attitude effectively suspends judgment of bad people caught in lies.
Click to expand...

Just because they all do it doesn't make it okay. It just means that those of us who are in massive denial about that fact outnumber those of us who would like to confront it.
 
Autodidact

Autodidact

Intentionally Blank
Levite said:
Just because they all do it doesn't make it okay. It just means that those of us who are in massive denial about that fact outnumber those of us who would like to confront it.
Click to expand...

If you lump all politicians into one basket, you rob yourself of the ability to discern between them to make important decisions--like who to vote for.
 
HiddenDjinn

HiddenDjinn

Well-Known Member
It's My Birthday!
Autodidact said:
If you lump all politicians into one basket, you rob yourself of the ability to discern between them to make important decisions--like who to vote for.
Click to expand...
No you don't. You just vote for what you see as the lesser of the evils. Or you can do what others do, which is abstain from the process.

There is no such thing as an honest American politician. Not even the often-praised Obama.
 
Levite

Levite

Higher and Higher
Autodidact said:
If you lump all politicians into one basket, you rob yourself of the ability to discern between them to make important decisions--like who to vote for.
Click to expand...

yosi said:
No you don't. You just vote for what you see as the lesser of the evils. Or you can do what others do, which is abstain from the process.
Click to expand...

What yosi said. If you know they all suck, you pick the one you think will do the least damage. And, hopefully, participate in grassroots movements to attempt to shift the balance of the sociopolitical paradigm in such a way as to create the possibility of electing politicians that don't all suck.
 
YmirGF

YmirGF

Bodhisattva in Recovery
yosi said:
No you don't. You just vote for what you see as the lesser of the evils. Or you can do what others do, which is abstain from the process.
Click to expand...
Indeed. Though I would never consider abstaining from voting to be a reasonable choice.

yosi said:
There is no such thing as an honest American politician. Not even the often-praised Obama.
Click to expand...
:yes:
 
Revoltingest

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
YmirGF said:
They are all lying, Auto. If you don't understand that then you are naive and I don't use that word lightly around you.
Click to expand...
You're wrong. The problem is that liars are the most successful politicians, so it give the false appearance that they all lie.
Not all politicians are a Gingrich, Bush, Nixon, Obama or Johnson. Arnold, Ron Paul & Jimmy Carter seem true to their word.
I wouldn't necessarily vote for them just cuz they're honest, but it's a nice quality which can appear in any part of the political spectrum.
 
Falvlun

Falvlun

Earthbending Lemur
Premium Member
Here's Newt's defense:
When Gingrich's apparently dramatic change of heart was widely noted, the former Speaker wasted little time before posting on his Facebook page a statement in which he maintained that his own position had been consistent -- and that it was Obama who had waffled.
Gingrich said that while he initially opposed military action, once Obama said on March 3 that it was "time for Gaddafi to go," a show of force became the only viable solution.
"From the moment of the president's declaration, he put the prestige and authority of the United States</SPAN> on the line," Gingrich said in his statement. "After March 3, anything short of a successful, public campaign for regime change would have been seen as a defeat for the United States."
Click to expand...
from Here.

Anyone else smell a pant load of BS? If that was his reasoning, then he should have said that from the get-go, not his originally given reasons of humanitarian moral necessity, and comments about Obama's "ineptitude" and "confusion" in not taking a firm and forceful stance against Ghadafi.
 
Magic Man

Magic Man

Reaper of Conversation
Revoltingest said:
You're wrong. The problem is that liars are the most successful politicians, so it give the false appearance that they all lie.
Not all politicians are a Gingrich, Bush, Nixon, Obama or Johnson. Arnold, Ron Paul & Jimmy Carter seem true to their word.
I wouldn't necessarily vote for them just cuz they're honest, but it's a nice quality which can appear in any part of the political spectrum.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Claiming that all American politicians are liars is like seeing a bunch of Asians driving horribly, and assuming all Asians can't drive well. It's not that there aren't honest politicians; it's that you don't hear about them much, mostly because they don't make great stories, and they don't make bold claims.
 
Revoltingest

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
mball1297 said:
Exactly. Claiming that all American politicians are liars is like seeing a bunch of Asians driving horribly, and assuming all Asians can't drive well. It's not that there aren't honest politicians; it's that you don't hear about them much, mostly because they don't make great stories, and they don't make bold claims.
Click to expand...
Of course, only 90% of Asian drivers are bad.
This bears re-posting....
[youtube]IKZfzPNepmc[/youtube]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IKZfzPNepmc
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top