Newt Gingrich has been exposed!

[Galileo]

Newt Gingrich has been exposed!

SEE NEW WEBSITE HERE:

http://www.newtexposed.com/

:lmao

[ChumpDumper]

No thanks.

[DMC]

Yeah... don't care to see him exposed.

[Galileo]

No thanks.

You are not a true conservative.

:lol

[Wild Cobra]

Yeah... don't care to see him exposed.
Didn't Weiner already do that?

[boutons_deux]

Gingrich the candidate? GOP lawmakers grapple with the idea

Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina once led a band of GOP rebels who tried to oust Gingrich, and hadn't spoken to him about those days of internecine warfare in the 14 years since.

"Some people are willing to reconsider him. I'm not," said Rep. Steven C. LaTourette (R-Ohio), one of the remaining members of the Class of '94, whose arrival in the House made Gingrich the first Republican speaker in 40 years. "His leadership skills back in the '90s were not consistent with what I would want to see in the president of the United States."

Budget fights with President Clinton led to two government shutdowns. Gingrich led the push to impeach Clinton for lying about infidelity, even as Gingrich was in the midst of his own extramarital affair. An ethics investigation found the speaker had mingled political and nonprofit enterprises — and then given false information to investigators. The House, in an overwhelming bipartisan vote, reprimanded Gingrich and fined him $300,000.

Almost 15 years later, Gingrich has garnered only a handful of congressional endorsements, most from his home state of Georgia. Interviews with more than a dozen lawmakers from the Gingrich era show the memories — or in some cases the tales — have left many queasy about embracing a revival.

"I'm not endorsing Newt," said Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-Huntington Beach). "Those of us who served with him, who watched his leadership up close, aren't endorsing him. That says something."

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-gingrich-congress-20111210,0,4330067,full.story

[boutons_deux]

"historian" Noot's revisionist/lying "history" of Palestinians

Newt Gingrich: Palestinians are 'an invented' people

Republican presidential hopeful Newt Gingrich, in an interview with the Jewish Channel, called the Israeli-Palestinian peace process “delusional,” and said Palestinians are “an invented” people.

Asked if he identifies as a Zionist, Gingrich said: “I believe that the Jewish people have the right to have a state.”

Referring back to the early 20th century, when the British government, in the Balfour Declaration of 1917, declared its support for “the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people,” Gingrich suggested that at the time, the occupants of that territory – the Palestinians – did not have a legitimate claim to the land.

“I believe that the commitments that were made at the time – remember, there was no Palestine as a state,” Gingrich said. “It was part of the Ottoman Empire. And I think that we’ve had an invented Palestinian people, who are in fact Arabs and were historically part of the Arab community. And they had a chance to go many places.”

That view is held by some Israelis, but is generally rejected by the rest of the world.

U.S. presidents from both parties have in recent history supported a two-state solution to the ongoing conflict, in which Palestinians would live in a state of their own alongside Israel.

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-gingrich-palestinians-20111209,0,357727.story

========

Repugs groveling (no need to add "shamelessly") for AIPAC contributions.

Jew Jon Stewart's "Who Loves Jews The Most?" show is classic.

[boutons_deux]

As debate approaches, Republicans, conservatives target Newt Gingrich

Ronald Reagan’s 11th Commandment – “Thou shalt not speak ill of any fellow Republican” – will be tossed aside as the other candidates and their surrogates pile on like defensive linemen on a scrambling quarterback.

Gingrich will be the center of attention in a smaller group of six debaters, since Herman Cain is history and Jon Huntsman got disinvited because his poll numbers are so low.

The voices of criticism are numerous and growing.

John Sununu, former chief of staff to President George H.W. Bush: “Gingrich “is more concerned about Newt Gingrich than he is about conservative principle.”

Former Sen. Jim Talent, who served in the House when Gingrich was Speaker: “He’s not a reliable or trustworthy leader.”

Sen. Tom Coburn, who also served with Gingrich in the House: “I just found his leadership lacking.” (A year ago, Coburn was quoted as saying that Gingrich is “the last person I’d vote for president of the United States [because] his life indicates he does not have the character traits necessary.")

Former George W. Bush speechwriter David Frum: “What presidents must inescapably do is respond to emergencies…. And there, what usually ends up mattering most is not the president’s philosophy, but his judgment, coolness and steadiness. Those are the grounds on which [Mitt] Romney reassures and Gingrich terrifies.”

ome evangelicals have said they’ve forgiven Gingrich for the adulterous relationships that ended his first two marriages.

But not The Rev. Cary Gordon of Cornerstone World Outreach church in Sioux City, Iowa. He’s sent a YouTube video slamming Gingrich as untrustworthy to one million cell phones in Iowa. Gingrich, it declares, is “The Kim Kardashian of the GOP.

“My vote is not connected to someone else’s repentance, it’s connected to their record,” Gordon told Politico.com. “I don’t trust him and I have no reason to trust him. He has done nothing to earn my trust.”

Meanwhile, the conservative commentariat has laid into Gingrich as well.

“He has every negative character trait that conservatives associate with ’60s excess: narcissism, self-righteousness, self-indulgence and intemperance,” writes New York Times conservative columnist David Brooks. “As nearly everyone who has ever worked with him knows, he would severely damage conservatism and the Republican Party if nominated.”

Like Brooks, Peggy Noonan at the Wall Street Journal says Gingrich’s temperament and character would be his (and likely his party’s) undoing.

“He's philosophically unanchored, an unstable element,” she writes. “There are too many storms within him, and he seeks out external storms in order to equalize his own atmosphere. He's a trouble magnet, a starter of fights that need not be fought…. He is a human hand grenade who walks around with his hand on the pin, saying, ‘Watch this!’”

Speaking on ABC, conservative Washington Post columnist George Will said Gingrich “embodies almost everything disagreeable about modern Washington.”

“Gingrich has a self-regard so immense that it rivals Obama’s – but, unlike Obama’s, is untamed by self-discipline,” charges Charles Krauthammer, Will’s fellow conservative on the Washington Post op-ed page.

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Elections/President/2011/1210/As-debate-approaches-Republicans-conservatives-target-Newt-Gingrich?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+feeds%2Fcsm+%28Christian+Scie nce+Monitor+|+All+Stories%29&utm_content=Google+Reader

[ChumpDumper]

"historian" Noot's revisionist/lying "history" of Palestinians

Newt Gingrich: Palestinians are 'an invented' people

Republican presidential hopeful Newt Gingrich, in an interview with the Jewish Channel, called the Israeli-Palestinian peace process “delusional,” and said Palestinians are “an invented” people.

Asked if he identifies as a Zionist, Gingrich said: “I believe that the Jewish people have the right to have a state.”

Referring back to the early 20th century, when the British government, in the Balfour Declaration of 1917, declared its support for “the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people,” Gingrich suggested that at the time, the occupants of that territory – the Palestinians – did not have a legitimate claim to the land.

“I believe that the commitments that were made at the time – remember, there was no Palestine as a state,” Gingrich said. “It was part of the Ottoman Empire. And I think that we’ve had an invented Palestinian people, who are in fact Arabs and were historically part of the Arab community. And they had a chance to go many places.”

That view is held by some Israelis, but is generally rejected by the rest of the world.

U.S. presidents from both parties have in recent history supported a two-state solution to the ongoing conflict, in which Palestinians would live in a state of their own alongside Israel.

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-gingrich-palestinians-20111209,0,357727.storyNewt wants to ethnically cleanse greater Israel.

[boutons_deux]

Government-Sponsored Sinner

Who would have thought that Republican voters would prove so accepting of sin? At least when it’s committed by a white guy, like the serial philanderer Newt Gingrich, who betrayed not one but two wives while they were enduring serious medical difficulties.

In the latest New York Times/CBS poll of Iowa Republicans, alleged philanderer Herman Cain’s once impressive support shifts to the new front-runner, Gingrich, whose richer history of marital deceit is not a problem even for the self-described evangelical Christian voters who favor him over Mitt Romney by a ratio of 3-1.

It is the first time that I have felt sympathy for a candidate experiencing the prejudice directed at a practicing Mormon. Clearly the ultimate of “squeaky clean” doesn’t cut it for a presidential contender of that faith among Republican Christian “values voters,” even when he is compared with a sexual roué of Gingrich’s considerable magnitude.

Or perhaps it is Newt’s peerless capacity to mask moral hypocrisy with the appearance of religious propriety, first as a Protestant and now as a Roman Catholic, that endears him to other Republicans who wear their religion on their sleeves. Many of those were willing to tear the country apart over the sexual wanderings of a Democrat in the White House, but now they are quite willing to send someone of Gingrich’s reputation to the Oval Office. We are speaking of a politician who was having an extramarital affair with a congressional staff member 27 years his junior, now more appropriately his third wife, during the very years when he was so energetically stoking the Clinton sex scandal.

But Newt did manage to cooperate closely with the Democratic president in passing the “welfare reform” legislation that in effect ended the main federal poverty program. Given that 70 percent of those covered by the gutted welfare program were children, it is at least consistent that the former House speaker now favors further aiding those children by wiping out the long-standing restraints on the exploitation of child labor.

Gingrich also cooperated successfully with President Clinton on the Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997, which legislated drastic cuts in the capital gains tax benefiting the wealthy. In addition, he was a great partner for Clinton in whipping up enthusiasm for a broader agenda of deregulation that set the stage for the housing mortgage bubble and resultant Great Recession. It is Gingrich’s hypocrisy concerning these economic matters that will prove more troubling as his chances of becoming president increase.

Given that Gingrich was on the payroll of Freddie Mac to the tune of $1.6 million, how in the world will he be able, in a one-on-one debate with Barack Obama, to logically make what has become the standard Republican case: that it was liberal do-gooders at the government-sponsored enterprises (GSEs) Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac who forced the banks to make bad housing loans?

The honest answer, politically awkward of course, would be to admit that those agencies were government sponsored only on the risk end, and as for profit entities they were owned and traded by investors in the stock market. They got in trouble for the same reason Citigroup did, because the obscenely huge bonuses of their top executives were driven by their profit performance and not the quality of the home mortgages they backed.

The packaging of hugely profitable but eventually toxic mortgage securities, with the GSE seal of approval, that is at the heart of the economic crisis was the result of a Republican-engineered deregulatory mania that Newt abetted and Clinton supported. A mania that Sen. Obama criticized, but not Gingrich, who was a highly paid booster for Freddie Mac even as the housing market was imploding.

The private/public GSE model of the two housing agencies in which the risk but not the profits was carried by the public is the very arrangement that Gingrich is on record as celebrating as late as 2007 when the crisis was visibly under way. Gingrich favored it as a model not just for housing but even the space program. “I’m convinced that if NASA were a GSE, we probably would be on Mars today,” he declared in a post on the Freddie Mac website on April 14, 2007.

Although Gingrich now claims that when he was on the Freddie Mac gravy train he was simply giving objective advice as a “historian” that sought to improve the agency’s performance, the truth is quite the opposite. Obama will no doubt delight in quoting back to Gingrich his assertion that “while we need to improve the regulation of the GSEs, I would be very cautious about changing their role or the model itself.”

Gingrich, who ran into trouble with the House Ethics Committee when he was speaker and paid a $300,000 fine, is himself a variant of a GSE, having turned his government backing into a hugely profitable enterprise. After he left office, his various personal business enterprises had revenues of about $100 million. Last week in South Carolina, Gingrich scoffed at the idea that he needed to work as a lobbyist; after all, he noted, he is paid $60,000 a speech.

You would think that with a sorry personal and political record like Gingrich’s—and there is so much more—the Republicans would never nominate him as their presidential candidate if they expected to win. But I wouldn’t rule it out, for the driving faith of the GOP has become the notion that the toxic mixture of moral hypocrisy and unfettered greed is a formula for victory. Newt could be their man.

http://www.truthdig.com/report/print/government-sponsored_sinner_20111208/

====

Repugs and their "Christian" "family values voters" love scumbags. :lol

vs Willard Gekko, The Jobs/Company Destroying predatory capitalist.

Will be very entertaining to watch the flip-flopping battle royale, scumbag vs moneybag.

[boutons_deux]

FACT CHECK: Newt’s erroneous ethics alibi


Newt Gingrich falsely claimed the House ethics panel that voted to reprimand him in 1997 was “a very partisan political committee.” He was also off base when he said the inquiry was “a Pelosi-driven effort.”

In fact, the House Committee on Ethics is the only House panel evenly divided by party. And Pelosi was a relatively junior House member and not in a leadership position at the time. It’s true she was one of four members on the subcommittee that conducted the investigation, but she was just one of eight members on the full committee — which dismissed 83 of the charges that other Democrats brought against Gingrich.

The ethics panel was far from a “partisan” committee. Three of the panel’s Republican members joined all four Democrats in the 7-1 vote to recommend that the full House reprimand Gingrich — on a single charge of misleading the committee. On the day the committee released its final report, the Republican chairwoman praised Pelosi and other subcommittee members for working “in a collegial, nonpartisan manner in a difficult environment.”

And far from being “driven” by Pelosi, the case against Gingrich actually was pressed most prominently by Rep. David Bonior of Michigan, who was then the Democratic whip. Pelosi was still years away from joining the ranks of the Democratic leadership, which she did when she succeeded Bonior as whip in January 2002.

http://www.iwatchnews.org/2011/12/08/7595/fact-check-newt-s-erroneous-ethics-alibi

[Yonivore]

"historian" Noot's revisionist/lying "history" of Palestinians

Newt Gingrich: Palestinians are 'an invented' people

Republican presidential hopeful Newt Gingrich, in an interview with the Jewish Channel, called the Israeli-Palestinian peace process “delusional,” and said Palestinians are “an invented” people.

Asked if he identifies as a Zionist, Gingrich said: “I believe that the Jewish people have the right to have a state.”

Referring back to the early 20th century, when the British government, in the Balfour Declaration of 1917, declared its support for “the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people,” Gingrich suggested that at the time, the occupants of that territory – the Palestinians – did not have a legitimate claim to the land.

“I believe that the commitments that were made at the time – remember, there was no Palestine as a state,” Gingrich said. “It was part of the Ottoman Empire. And I think that we’ve had an invented Palestinian people, who are in fact Arabs and were historically part of the Arab community. And they had a chance to go many places.”

That view is held by some Israelis, but is generally rejected by the rest of the world.

U.S. presidents from both parties have in recent history supported a two-state solution to the ongoing conflict, in which Palestinians would live in a state of their own alongside Israel.

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-gingrich-palestinians-20111209,0,357727.story

========

Repugs groveling (no need to add "shamelessly") for AIPAC contributions.

Jew Jon Stewart's "Who Loves Jews The Most?" show is classic.

PLO Executive Committee Member Zahir Muhsein, told the Dutch newspaper Trouw in March 1977 that...


"[t]he Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct 'Palestinian people' to oppose Zionism."
Multiple sources, google it.

"Palestinian" Auni Bey Abdul-Hadi's said during the 1937 Peel Commission partition hearings,...


"[t]here is no such country as Palestine! 'Palestine' is a term the Zionists invented ... Our country was for centuries part of Syria!"
Again, multiple sources, google it.

Newt, once again, knows his history; the "Palestinians" had no national identity until one was invented for the purpose of fomenting hatred of Israel.

[ChumpDumper]

lol yoni doesn't understand Pan-Arabism.

[Yonivore]

Anyone believing this is a stumbling block for Gingrich...

Americans Maintain Broad Support for Israel (http://www.gallup.com/poll/146408/americans-maintain-broad-support-israel.aspx)


PRINCETON, NJ -- Americans' views toward the Israeli-Palestinian conflict held fairly steady over the past year, with a near record-high 63% continuing to say their sympathies lie more with the Israelis. Seventeen percent sympathize more with the Palestinians.

http://sas-origin.onstreammedia.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Production/Cms/POLL/8epwwsmayeegxgthtobk5a.gif
And trending up.

If there is one candidate that can eloquently and convincingly support his view on the illegitimacy of the "Palestinian" cause, that is Newt Gingrich.

[ChumpDumper]

Why do you kiss Israel's ass, yoni?

[ChumpDumper]

http://l.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/b82fQ1E_X7QLNqmcZNjj4g--/YXBwaWQ9eW5ld3M7cT04NTt3PTYzMA--/http://media.zenfs.com/en/blogs/theenvoy/s-GINGRICH-PALESTINE-large640.jpg

[Blake]

http://l.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/b82fQ1E_X7QLNqmcZNjj4g--/YXBwaWQ9eW5ld3M7cT04NTt3PTYzMA--/http://media.zenfs.com/en/blogs/theenvoy/s-GINGRICH-PALESTINE-large640.jpg

that dude in the back left resembles Ron Paul

[ChumpDumper]

It's obviously Lee Marvin.

[Blake]

It's obviously Lee Marvin.

:lol wow.

I notice Lee died in '87, so since the pic is from '93, I'm sticking with Ron.

[ChumpDumper]

A little thing like death isn't going to stop Lee Marvin from meeting imagined people.

[4>0rings]

But the other guys a mormon!

[boutons_deux]

Why do you kiss Israel's ass, yoni?

Yoni hates all Muslims, therefore he loves Israel as Muslim ethnic cleansers.

[Yonivore]

::Bump::


"historian" Noot's revisionist/lying "history" of Palestinians

Newt Gingrich: Palestinians are 'an invented' people

Republican presidential hopeful Newt Gingrich, in an interview with the Jewish Channel, called the Israeli-Palestinian peace process “delusional,” and said Palestinians are “an invented” people.

Asked if he identifies as a Zionist, Gingrich said: “I believe that the Jewish people have the right to have a state.”

Referring back to the early 20th century, when the British government, in the Balfour Declaration of 1917, declared its support for “the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people,” Gingrich suggested that at the time, the occupants of that territory – the Palestinians – did not have a legitimate claim to the land.

“I believe that the commitments that were made at the time – remember, there was no Palestine as a state,” Gingrich said. “It was part of the Ottoman Empire. And I think that we’ve had an invented Palestinian people, who are in fact Arabs and were historically part of the Arab community. And they had a chance to go many places.”

That view is held by some Israelis, but is generally rejected by the rest of the world.

U.S. presidents from both parties have in recent history supported a two-state solution to the ongoing conflict, in which Palestinians would live in a state of their own alongside Israel.

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-gingrich-palestinians-20111209,0,357727.story

========

Repugs groveling (no need to add "shamelessly") for AIPAC contributions.

Jew Jon Stewart's "Who Loves Jews The Most?" show is classic.

PLO Executive Committee Member Zahir Muhsein, told the Dutch newspaper Trouw in March 1977 that...


"[t]he Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct 'Palestinian people' to oppose Zionism."
Multiple sources, google it.

"Palestinian" Auni Bey Abdul-Hadi's said during the 1937 Peel Commission partition hearings,...


"[t]here is no such country as Palestine! 'Palestine' is a term the Zionists invented ... Our country was for centuries part of Syria!"
Again, multiple sources, google it.

Newt, once again, knows his history; the "Palestinians" had no national identity until one was invented for the purpose of fomenting hatred of Israel.

[ChumpDumper]

:Bump::
http://l.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/b82fQ1E_X7QLNqmcZNjj4g--/YXBwaWQ9eW5ld3M7cT04NTt3PTYzMA--/http://media.zenfs.com/en/blogs/theenvoy/s-GINGRICH-PALESTINE-large640.jpg

[Winehole23]

The "invented people" schtick smacks of what Michael Gerson (http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-problem-with-gingrichs-simplistic-attack-on-sharia/2011/12/12/gIQAv0nZqO_story.html) calls Mr Gingrich's penchant for "the passionate embrace of shallow ideas". Obviously the Palestinians are an invented people; so is every people. To quote Benedict Anderson (http://www.amazon.com/Imagined-Communities-Reflections-Origin-Nationalism/dp/1844670864) quoting Ernest Gellner (http://www.amazon.com/Thought-Change-Midway-reprints-Gellner/dp/0226286983/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1323819868&sr=1-1): "Nationalism is not the awakening of nations to self-consciousness; it invents nations where they do not exist." There was no American people before the American project of national self-invention began in the 18th century, no German or Russian peoples before the same process took place in the 19th. The Israeli people are the result of a fervent project of ideological self-invention between about the 1880s and the 1950s. As such, they were perhaps the last in the long period of self-invention by European nations that spanned the 19th century, making use of what Mr Anderson called the "toolkit" for nation-building provided by the French Revolution. The encounter with the Israeli nation-building project fed the Palestinian one, much as the French project fed the German one. It is fruitless to attempt to deny the reality of a nation once it has come into being, though it's also a typical strategy of imperial control. The French relied on differences in dialect and political fragmentation to deny there was any such thing as a Vietnamese people, breaking the country up into Tonkin, Annam, and Cochinchine. (That argument recently resurfaced in Mark Moyar's "Triumph Forsaken (http://www.amazon.com/Triumph-Forsaken-Vietnam-War-1954-1965/dp/0521757630/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1323821106&sr=1-1)", an apologia for America's Vietnam War.) I've heard Turkish nationalists insist at great length that there is literally no such thing as Kurds, denying even the existence of the Kurdish language. Chinese will deny the existence of a separate Tibetan people. Serbs long insisted there was no such thing as a Bosnian. Some Russians used to insist that Ukrainians were simply Russians who spoke a difficult dialect. And had a few wars and other political events turned out differently, they might have been right.


But they weren't. In an alternate universe, the Dutch might be Germans, the Americans might be Canadians, and the Palestinians might be Jordanians. But we live in this universe, and presidential candidates, whatever their passion for sci-fi, better do so as well.


http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2011/12/newts-travails

[spursncowboys]

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?335999-NEW-SITE-NewtExposed.com&

Ron Paul's people

[ChumpDumper]

http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2011/12/newts-travailsThis is true. It's laughable that an American could possible bitch about "invented people."

WTF does he say the Iraqi people are?

[boutons_deux]

the point about invented people is his denigrating an ethnic group (genetically identical to native Israelis)) while grovelling to Israel's extreme right ethnic cleansers, and while dog-whistling to "Christian" and right-wing haters of all Muslims.

[Yonivore]

the point about invented people is his denigrating an ethnic group (genetically identical to native Israelis)) while grovelling to Israel's extreme right ethnic cleansers, and while dog-whistling to "Christian" and right-wing haters of all Muslims.
So, PLO Executive Committee Member Zahir Muhsein, in 1977, and, "Palestinian" Auni Bey Abdul-Hadi, in 1937, were denigrating their own "ethnic group while groveling to Israel's extreme right ethnic cleansers?

Got it.

By their own admission, "Palestinians" were invented to advance an illegitimate political end. Period.

[boutons_deux]

Israeli terrorists(murderers) overthrew the British to INVENT Israel for an illegitimate political end. period.

[Yonivore]

Israeli terrorists(murderers) overthrew the British to INVENT Israel for an illegitimate political end. period.
With a complicit UN and a large segment of their Arab population that continues to enjoy more civil rights than any other Arab population on the planet -- aside from, possibly, those in the United States.

[Winehole23]

ingrates!

[Yonivore]

ingrates!
In the UN Resolution, the current inhabitants of the UN created Israel were guaranteed religious freedom...more than they are willing to afford anyone else.

So, if it had been the other way and the UN had established a "Palestine," where would Israeli Jews be today?

And, what of the estimated $300 Billion in assets stripped from Jews when they were exiled, en mass, from every other Arab country in the region? Where is their redress? Their right of return?

Yes, they are ingrates. Violent, murderous ingrates.

[Winehole23]

So, if it had been the other way and the UN had established a "Palestine," where would Israeli Jews be today?in countries that didn't want them then and don't want them now, probably. your point?

[Winehole23]

And, what of the estimated $300 Billion in assets stripped from Jews when they were exiled, en mass, from every other Arab country in the region? Where is their redress? Their right of return?Is the right claimed? Do Jews want to go back to Libya, Iraq, Yemen et al?

as for the 300 billion dollars emigres to Israel weren't allowed to take with them b/w 1948-1972, I have no idea. how many Jews who fled Europe in the last century got their money back? bet it wasn't a majority.

[Winehole23]

It's laughable that an American could possible bitch about "invented people."also typical

[JoeChalupa]

He is slipping in the polls as we all knew he would. Looks like Iowa is now in play for almost every candidate.

[boutons_deux]

The Little-Known, Inside Story About How Newt Became the Man He Is

*The following is excerpted from Max Blumenthal's book, Republican Gomorrah.

When Clinton returned to the White House for a second term, DobLuck_The_Fakers_son redoubled his efforts against the Republican leadership, particularly in undermining Newt Gingrich, whom conservatives within the House Republican Conference and outside it had come to regard as chronically unreliable because of deals he had made with Clinton, despite his shutting down the federal government twice. Dobson and Luck_The_Fakers_DeLay agreed that Gingrich lacked not only the lust for confrontation that they sought in a party leader but also the moral qualities to be “a friend of The Family.” Referring to the Speaker, DeLay later wrote, “Men with such secrets are not likely to sound a high moral tone at a moment of national crisis.” Throughout his career in public life, Gingrich brushed off concerns about his moral fitness as mere distractions, reflecting to journalist Gail Sheehy, “I think you can write a psychological profile of me that says I found a way to immerse my insecurities in a cause large enough to justify whatever I wanted it to.” Newt Gingrich was born Newt McPherson to teenaged parents. Gingrich’s mother divorced his father and married a Marine officer, who adopted him and throughout his childhood savagely beat him and his mother. (Gingrich’s half-sister, Candace, became a lesbian activist. At the moment Newt became Speaker, she became the Human Rights Campaign’s National Coming Out Project Spokesperson.) As a young man, Gingrich, fascinated with zoos and dinosaurs, longed for an illustrious career in academia. He wound up teaching history and environmental studies at West Georgia College.

Gingrich grew his hair long, emulating the style of the counterLuck_The_Fakers_culture that he secretly yearned to join. In 1974, as the Vietnam War drew to a close, the ambitious draft dodger entered politics, attempting to win a congressional seat in a suburban Atlanta district populated by conservative whites who fled the city when its public institutions and neighborhoods were desegregated. Appealing to the backlash sensibility of these voters, Gingrich declared the “Great Society countercultural model” his nemesis and their enemy.

Initially, Gingrich proved a lackluster politician, losing his first bid for the House. His campaign scheduler offered a candid assessment of the candidate’s failures: “We would have won if we could have kept him out of the office and screwing [a young campaign staffer] on his desk.” Gingrich was married at the time to his former high school geometry teacher, Jackie Battley, seven years his senior, whom he married when he was nineteen years old. Soon after his first extramarital tryst, Gingrich became involved with another woman, Ann Manning, who was also married. Manning said of her encounters with Gingrich, “We had oral sex. He prefers that modus operandi because then he can say, ‘I never slept with her.’” In 1978, Gingrich was finally elected to the House of Representatives. A year earlier, he had divorced Battley, serving her papers while she lay in bed recovering from cancer surgery. “She wasn’t pretty enough to be first lady,” he later remarked of his ex-wife. Gingrich refused to pay alimony or offer child support for his two children, forcing Battley’s church to take up a collection for her. In 1981, he married the mistress he had left her for, Marianne Ginther.

Within the Congress, Gingrich immediately fell under the influence of the Republican whip, Dick Cheney. Cheney, who had been President Gerald Ford’s White House chief of staff and was granted deference among House Republicans, acted as the hidden hand promoting Gingrich’s rise. Gingrich’s staff soon ginned up a whisper campaign falsely accusing Speaker of the House Tom Foley, a Democrat, of being a closet homosexual. Gingrich stoked yet another manufactured scandal over some House members’ supposed abuse of their credit union, and this attack inadvertently led to the resignation of several Republicans and also tainted the House as a whole as corrupt. Gingrich was willing to sacrifice even close allies in his own party to advance his cause and ambition. The bodies of others were rungs on his ladder.

When President George H. W. Bush appointed Cheney secretary of defense, Gingrich, his secret protégé, filled his job as the House whip. With Clinton’s reelection, however, Speaker Gingrich’s career reached its nadir. When his national approval rating plummeted to 28 percent, he devoted his last reserves of political capital to press for Clinton’s impeachment. On cable news shows, he accused Clinton of felony perjury for his convoluted explanation of his affair with Monica LewinLuck_The_Fakers_sky. But Gingrich’s leading role in the witch hunt compounded his private problems. Away from the klieg lights, Gingrich was embroiled in yet another affair, this time with Calista Bisek, a young blonde staffer twenty-three years his junior who he had arranged to be put on the House payroll. The wild mood swings that had always characterized Gingrich’s beLuck_The_Fakers_havior intensified. Staffers discovered the Speaker crying at his desk.

Unknown to Gingrich, a cabal of Republicans led by DeLay and LarLuck_The_Fakers_gent were conspiring to force his resignation. They had the blessing of Dobson, who envisioned his hunting buddy Largent as the next majority leader. During a meeting in Largent’s office in the summer of 1997, the group of twenty congressional “rebels” hatched a plan to confront Gingrich with an offer they thought he could not refuse: Step aside or face certain defeat in a vote of no confidence in the House Republican Conference. At the last moment, however, the rebels lost the support of Armey as soon as he realized he was not their choice to succeed Gingrich. Armey dispatched his chief of staff to alert Gingrich to the plot against him, effectively halting the coup in its tracks. Gingrich emerged severely weakened, but for the moment his position appeared secure.

Dobson remained determined to dislodge Gingrich from his post. At a February 1998 meeting of the Council for National Policy (CNP), Dobson sought to mobilize the Christian Right for another coup attempt. The CNP is a highly secretive group that brings together top right-wing activists with conservative moneymen to shape political strategy. Its membership lists are never disclosed, and its meetings are strictly off-the-record. But Dobson’s speech to the CNP resounded beyond the walls of the Phoenix hotel where it was delivered. And although he did not address Gingrich by name, Dobson’s audience clearly recognized his target.

After an introduction by Elsa Prince, the kindly mother of Blackwater founder Erik and widow of Focus on the Family financial angel Edgar, whom Dobson had eulogized at his funeral three years before, Dobson appeared at the podium. He immediately launched into a jeremiad. The Republicans “are so intimidated. They are so pinned down,” he moaned. Then he threatened to carry out the political equivaLuck_The_Fakers_lent of a suicide bombing:

Does the Republican Party want our votes—no strings attached—to court us every two years, and then to say, “Don’t call me. I’ll call you?” Dobson asked. And not to care about the moral law of the universe? Is that what they want? Is that what the plan is? Is that the way the system works? And if so, is it going to stay that way? Is this the way it’s going to be? If it is, I’m gone, and if I go—I’m not trying to threaten anybody because I don’t influence the world—but if I go, I will do everything I can to take as many people with me as possible.

A month later, Dobson summoned twenty-five House Republicans for a meeting in the Capitol basement. There he restated his threats, pledging to bolt from the GOP unless Congress acceded to his far-Luck_The_Fakers_reaching demands, from eliminating the National Endowment for the Arts to defunding Planned Parenthood. Dobson’s tone was so severe that he reduced the wife of one congressman to tears. Armey confronted Dobson, accusing him of “whining and complaining” as well as knowing “nothing about the legislative process.” Dobson retaliated by directing another failed coup attempt, this time pitting Largent against Armey. Focus on the Family mobilized its members by informing them falsely that Armey was a paid consultant to the ACLU. The majority leader later whimpered, “I was never so wrongfully and viciously attacked in all my eighteen years in Washington as I was by the Christian leaders.” As midterm elections approached, Gingrich advanced impeaching the president as his party’s unifying campaign theme. Armey lent the Speaker his full-throated support. “If I were in the President’s place I would not have gotten a chance to resign,” Armey told a reporter at the time. “I would be lying in a pool of my own blood, hearing Mrs. Armey standing over me saying, ‘How do I reload this damn thing?’” But the strategy backfired, resulting in the loss of five Republican House seats—the worst midterm-election defeat in sixty-four years for a party that did not control the White House. Gingrich promptly resigned from Congress. The intimate knowledge that other House Luck_The_Fakers_Republican leaders had of his affair had sealed his fate.

Gingrich now turned to matters of the heart, dumping his second wife, Ginther, as soon as he quit Congress. He announced his intention to divorce her just as he had done with Battley—while she was lying in a hospital bed, immobilized after a major medical procedure. (Ginther’s appendix had ruptured.) He never bothered to tell his wife in person that he was leaving her for another woman. He simply called her on the phone, delivered the news, and hung up. Gingrich’s curious predilection for recovery room breakups suggested that his fear of confrontation ran deeper than even DeLay suspected. In the political wilderness, Gingrich bided his time, waiting for the right moment to reenter the fray. He cooled his heels at the neoconservative American Enterprise Institute, churning out op-ed articles and speeches battering away at the neocon punching bag, the State Department. He also found the time to author a trilogy of “alternative” historical novels in which the Confederacy won the Civil War. Then as DeLay’s ethical transgressions made his decline seem inevitable, Gingrich stepped back into the political spotlight.

During a November 2006 speech in New Hampshire, a key presidential primary state and requisite stop for White House hopefuls, Gingrich warned that “before we actually lose a city” to a terrorist attack, the government should consider limiting free speech. He complemented his brave stand against terrorism with a book-length appeal to the sentiments of the Christian Right. In this manifesto, Luck_The_Fakers_Rediscovering God in America, Gingrich asserted America’s status as a Christian nation. “There is no attack on American culture more deadly and more historically dishonest than the secular effort to drive God out of America’s public life,” he insisted.

Gingrich’s renewed activity generated questions about whether he would try to run for president in 2008. For some in the conservative movement, however, Gingrich could never live down his serial philandering. Jeffrey Kuhner, editor of the right-wing Web magazine Luck_The_Fakers_Insight, neatly summarized the movement’s mood. “Mr. Gingrich,” Kuhner wrote in March 2007, “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.” Kuhner concluded, “He is yesterday’s man.”

But for all his flaws, Gingrich remained a clever operator. He had a strategy to refurbish his image, if not resurrect his political career. And so in March 2007, Gingrich picked up his phone and dialed in to Focus on the Family. A producer promptly transferred him to a studio line, and the radio broadcast that he and Dobson had planned a month earlier during a meeting in Washington began.

Dobson led into the broadcast by reading portions of Gingrich’s New Hampshire speech calling for restricting the rights guaranteed by the First Amendment. After this glowing introduction, Gingrich launched into an extended polemic about the threat of Islamic extremism and introduced a vague plan for splitting the FBI into two agencies, only one of which would “respect every civil liberty.” Everything between the former Speaker and the broadcaster seemed to be going swimmingly. Then Dobson turned to Gingrich’s marital history.

“Let me ask you about your family life,” Dobson said. “You’ve been married three times under some circumstances that have disappointed your supporters. There are some questions of that era that remain unanswered with regard to an affair and maybe more than one.” Dobson then asked his subject about the affair he had with Bisek while leading impeachment proceedings against Clinton. With that, Gingrich’s volatile temper flared. “This is one of the things the Left tries to do,” he snapped at his host. “The challenge I was faced with wasn’t about judging Bill Clinton as a person,” Gingrich continued. “I wasn’t going to cast the first stone because I can’t cast the first stone. Because I have in fact as every member of every jury of America has had weaknesses. And if that was the standard our whole system would collapse.”

Gingrich’s argument noticeably irritated Dobson. Dobson was convinced that at least he had the right to cast the first stone. He was a Nazarene, after all, and had been spiritually perfect since he was a toddler. Further, Gingrich’s assertion that “every member of every jury of America has had weaknesses” ran counter to Dobson’s Manichaean vision of a struggle between secular humanists and pure-hearted Christian possessors of absolute truth. The more Gingrich defended himself, the more the host’s tone sharpened.

“You answered that question in regard to Bill Clinton instead of referring to yourself,” Dobson reminded Gingrich. “May I ask you to address it personally? I believe you to be a confessing Christian and you and I have prayed together, but when I heard you talk about this dark side of your life when we were in Washington, you spoke about it with a great deal of pain and anguish, but you didn’t speak about repentance. Do you understand the meaning of repentance?”

With Dobson’s questioning of Gingrich’s faith, the sinner suddenly turned reflective. “They say when you’re younger you want justice and when you’re older you want mercy,” Gingrich said. “I also believe there are things in my own life that I have turned to God and got on my knees and prayed to God and asked for forgiveness. I don’t know how you could live with yourself without breaking down and trying to find some way to deal with your own weaknesses and to go to God about them.”

Dobson seemed pleased by Gingrich’s confession, and especially by the image of the sorry politician on his knees before the Lord. The depth of Gingrich’s sincerity was beside the point. What mattered most was that Gingrich, like a modern-day Lazarus, had given Dobson the power to lift him out of darkness and depravity. Having given his host ultimate satisfaction, Gingrich was worthy to receive the good graces of Dobson’s empire.

From his office in Lynchburg, Virginia, Jerry Falwell listened intently to Gingrich’s confessional interview. He was richly satisfied by what he heard. “I was pleased to hear Mr. Gingrich state, ‘I’ve gotten on my knees and sought God’s forgiveness,’” Falwell said. “He has admitted his moral shortcomings to me, as well, in private conversations. And he has also told me that he has, in recent years, come to grips with his personal failures and sought God’s forgiveness.” That day, Falwell invited Gingrich to speak at the graduation ceremony of his Liberty University’s senior class, a prominent forum for conservative political figures.

Two months later, Falwell was found slumped over his desk, dead at the age of seventy-three. Funeral arrangements for the legendary pastor were complicated by the arrest of a Liberty University student, Mark David Uhl, who had disclosed to a family member his plot to commit mass murder. The family of notorious Kansas pastor Fred Phelps, known for picketing soldiers’ funerals with signs reading “Fag Troops” (“Military funerals are pagan orgies of idolatrous blasphemy,” Phelps reasoned) had scheduled a protest outside Falwell’s funeral. Uhl had assembled several bombs he planned to deploy against the Phelpses.

The young would-be terrorist, whose personal computer was discovered by investigators loaded with images of young people giving Nazi salutes, had honed his destructive techniques by attacking his former high school on prom night with a homemade teargas bomb. Afterward, he claimed righteous motives, boasting to a friend that he had “saved a lot of people from losing their virginity that night.” The dreary atmosphere that had consumed Liberty University’s campus began to brighten at the school’s commencement ceremony four days later. There, Gingrich issued a rousing call for graduates to honor the spirit of Falwell by confronting “the growing culture of radical secularism.” The students, assembled before him on the field of Liberty’s football stadium, responded with thunderous chants: “Jerry! Jerry!” Gingrich’s sins seemed to evaporate with the rising euphoria he had incited.

In October 2007, as the Republican presidential primary season commenced in earnest, Dobson invited Gingrich to appear alongside the rest of the GOP presidential contenders at the Family Research Council’s annual Value Voters Summit in Washington. Gingrich was rewarded with the final speaking slot of the conference. When he strode on stage, the crowd of 1,500 evangelical activists rose to their feet to salute their prodigal son.

At the podium, Gingrich read the results of a poll he commissioned that supposedly provided conclusive evidence of how out of touch “secular elites” were from average Americans. The poll consisted of a series of tilted questions and hyped answers packaged as bombshell revelations, such as the news flash that 93 percent of respondents “believe Al Qaeda poses a very serious threat for the United States.” Seated at tables in front of the stage, several middle-aged women diligently wrote down this statistic and other important numbers on paper napkins.

Afterward, a line for Gingrich’s signing of his book Rediscovering God in America snaked around the convention’s exhibition hall for almost fifty yards. Young evangelicals approached the former Speaker in droves, posing beside him while their doting parents snapped pictures. Gingrich’s presidential aspirations would remain a distant fantasy, but with Dobson’s help, yesterday’s man had become a sought-after novelty act.

Gingrich’s instant and relatively easy redemption was not unique. He followed a long line of sinners, including serial killers such as Ted Bundy and David Berkowitz, forgiven and redeemed by Dobson simply because they had confessed their evil deeds and professed a commitment to evangelical religion. The sincerity of their tales was never questioned, even if, like Gingrich and Bundy, they had displayed established patterns of deception and cynicism throughout their lives. These reconstructed sinners were too useful to be doubted—useful both as poster children for the ravages of secular society and as charismatic fundraisers for the movement. Dietrich Bonhoeffer, a German clergyman executed by the Nazis for publicly opposing Hitler and denouncing church leaders who acquiesced to his rule, had a phrase for this phenomenon. He called it “cheap grace.” “Cheap grace means grace sold on the market like a cheapjack’s wares,” Bonhoeffer wrote in 1943 in his book The Cost of Discipleship. “The sacraments, the forgiveness of sin, and the consolations of religion are thrown away at cut-rate prices . . . In such a Church the world finds a cheap covering for its sins; no contrition is required, still less any real desire to be delivered from sin.”

http://www.alternet.org/module/printversion/153483

===

aka, Repugs and "Christians" love scumbags.

Noot's somewhat reasonable, humane position on illegals is enough to kill his chances of nomination. Humane and reasonable do not apply to Repugs.

[boutons_deux]

........

[Yonivore]

He is slipping in the polls as we all knew he would. Looks like Iowa is now in play for almost every candidate.
Doesn't help when another former Speaker commits a felony (http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/12/did_pelosi_commit_blackmail.html) to harm his campaign.

[JoeChalupa]

Doesn't help when another former Speaker commits a felony (http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/12/did_pelosi_commit_blackmail.html) to harm his campaign.

"ALLEDGED". That is very important for nothing has been proven.

[Yonivore]

"ALLEDGED". That is very important for nothing has been proven.
I don't have to allege it; a court or prosecutor might but, I don't. She's a public person and it is my opinion she committed a felony.

Besides, nothing's going to come from it anyway.

[scott]

Newt, once again, knows his history; the "Palestinians" had no national identity until one was invented

A true statement.

One that can also be said of Israel. Or any other nation really.

[JoeChalupa]

I don't have to allege it; a court or prosecutor might but, I don't. She's a public person and it is my opinion she committed a felony.

Besides, nothing's going to come from it anyway.

Oh, well then say it is your opinion and not fact.

[Winehole23]

it may be his opinion that his opinion is fact. the power of tautology is strong with this one.

[Winehole23]

http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/images/Style_Templates/Flashskin/statusicon/user_online.gif

[Winehole23]

Yonivore
Just Right of Atilla the Hun http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/images/misc/no-profile-picture.jpg
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/images/Style_Templates/Flashskin/buttons/collapse_generic.gif (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=48#top) What's up with Yonivore?


Yonivore has nothing to say Last Activity: Today 01:48 PM

Current Activity: Replying to Thread Newt Gingrich has been exposed! (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=187633)
bailing out?

[Yonivore]

Oh, well then say it is your opinion and not fact.
I don't have to do that either.

[Winehole23]

what do you think about Holder's alleged explosives tie-in to OKC? did you lend any credence to that?

[Yonivore]

what do you think about Holder's alleged explosives tie-in to OKC? did you lend any credence to that?
I haven't followed it, sounds intriguing.

[Winehole23]

http://americanfreepress.net/?p=1885

[Winehole23]

free republic, alex jones and a slew of survivalist and racialist sources are reporting this

[Winehole23]

(checking RP to see if it's still there)

[Yonivore]

(checking RP to see if it's still there)
Doesn't appear to be at the link.

[Winehole23]

nothing @ daily paul, nothing in campaign for liberty. multitudinous hits for bulletin board posts.

[Winehole23]

Doesn't appear to be at the link.they took it down.

reproduced for your convenience, here:

http://nesaranews.blogspot.com/2011/12/attorney-general-holder-tied-to-okc.html

you can find it at stormfront and free republic too.

[Yonivore]

nothing @ daily paul, nothing in campaign for liberty. multitudinous hits for bulletin board posts.
I guess I don't think anything about it then.

[Winehole23]

yesterday all the hits relied on the American Free Press article

[Winehole23]

that article is long gone, but lives on forever in its epigones

[Yonivore]

that article is long gone, but lives on forever in its epigones
I found this [First Google Return - I haven't even read the article beyond the first sentence]:

AG Eric Holder was responsible for 168 deaths in the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing…and more (http://www.sodahead.com/united-states/ag-eric-holder-was-responsible-for-168-deaths-in-the-1995-oklahoma-city-bombingand-more/question-2347193/)

Is it what you're talking about?

First of all, I've never relied on anything Alex Jones is pimping and, second, the first sentence implies there are documents that are not provided with the article. Not a good way to instill confidence.


Documents obtained by Salt Lake City attorney Jesse Trentadue in a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit show then Clinton Deputy Attorney General Eric Holder authorized members of the FBI to provide explosives to Oklahoma City bombing criminals Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols immediately prior to the April, 1995 bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah building.
There have long been conspiracy theories the Clinton administration either bungled or were complicit in the bombing.

If they have documents, they should be released.

[Winehole23]

FOIA documents are copiously referred to but have not been posted anywhere that I've seen

[Winehole23]

http://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca10/08-4207/08-4207-2011-03-14.html

[Winehole23]

scrubbed here (http://campaigntrailreport.com/2011/12/18/attorney-general-holder-tied-to-oklahoma-city-bombing) too

[Yonivore]

http://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca10/08-4207/08-4207-2011-03-14.html
Interestingly, I read an article a few weeks back that accused law.justia.com of redacting and scrubbing specific cites from court cases because they didn't fit a certain narrative.

I'll see if I can find it if you're interested.

[Winehole23]

hmm

[Yonivore]

hmm
I don't think it was related to the OKC bombing but, instead, to Obamacare.