JTF.ORG Forum
General Category => General Discussion => Topic started by: Chaim Ben Pesach on December 10, 2011, 11:21:00 pm
-
בס''ד
I will discuss how Newt Gingrich, whom we attacked so ferociously in a dozen videos, has since been making extremely positive statements on "Palestinians" being an invented people, on the "peace" process being delusional, on the need to stop Iran's nuclear bombing-making program etc. Gingrich also says now that he would seriously consider freeing Jewish hero Jonathan Pollard.
Since we did our anti-Gingrich videos, Gingrich has turned into another Mike Huckabee on Israel. Can we believe him? Who knows? Should we now take a chance and back him? I think so.
I hope to do the long weekly video in the next day or two, G-d willing.
Of course, we will not make an endorsement unless we have a majority vote by JTFers in an online poll.
I know this would be a complete switch, but Gingrich was not speaking like this until the past few days.
-
At the same time, do consider that now that he has (correctly) pointed out that there is no Fakestinian race, he is being ferociously attacked from all sides as a "racist", especially from Jews, insane as they are. This could wind up being another George Allen moment, you know a "racial" comment that destroys a candidacy.
-
Chaim, to say the least I was impressed with Newt Gingrich both this evening and the other day when he first stated that the 'Palestinians' are an invented people. On the other hand, Mitt Romney's response to Gingrich in tonight's debate demonstrates that Romney doesn't have what it takes to debate the ruthless Barack Hussein Obama.
While Newt Gingrich certainly has more than his share of baggage, he seems much more up for the challenge to battle Hussein Obama. After trying to force myself to support Romney if he was the only candidate that could beat Gingrich, right now I prefer Gingrich.
-
I did not see the debate, but from what I heard he is for the "2 state solution". I think it was one of the tickers at Fox News. (After writing about his statement on "palestinians" )
-
What channel was the debate? Was it the trump debate?
-
I did not see the debate, but from what I heard he is for the "2 state solution". I think it was one of the tickers at Fox News. (After writing about his statement on "palestinians" )
Unfortunately Newt Gingrich still does support the so called two state solution. Yet, there's no candidate in the race ( I'm not including Ron Paul ) who totally dismisses a so called two state solution. Even Michele Bachmann, who has the best all around positions on Israel of the candidates, would support a so called two state solution if the " P.A." meets certain conditions. Granted, conditions they likely will not meet but the best course of action would be to come out against a so called two state solution, period!
-
What channel was the debate? Was it the trump debate?
It was on ABC.
The Trump Debate, if it goes forward, will be late this month.
-
Chaim,
I think, he is pretty consistent on Israel. See the video from early 1990s:
http://www.youtube.com/embed/8_shVIbKbRE (http://www.youtube.com/embed/8_shVIbKbRE)
Do you plan on pulling your videos on him down?
Thank you.
-
actions speak louder than words. he shouldnt have kept pollard from being freed.
-
actions speak louder than words. he shouldnt have kept pollard from being freed.
Which is why I take what he says now with a grain of salt.
-
Here's more http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=js1qwxop_IE (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=js1qwxop_IE)
-
The following article has some of the quotes from the segment of the debate that dealt with Israel and the Fakestinians. Right now, the only way I can envision supporting Mitt Romney is out of necessity (if he wins the Republican Nomination ):
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57340910-503544/gingrich-sticks-by-comment-calling-palestinians-invented-people/
December 11, 2011 12:27 AM Gingrich sticks by comment calling Palestinians "invented" people
By Kevin Hechtkopf
Newt Gingrich is standing by comments he made earlier this week when he called the Palestinians an "invented" people.
"Remember, there was no Palestine as a state. It was part of the Ottoman Empire," the former House speaker told the Jewish Channel this week. "And I think that we've have invented the Palestinian people, who are in fact Arabs and are historically part of the Arab community, and they had the chance to go many places."
Gingrich's comments immediately caused a stir in the Middle East and elsewhere. A Palestinian legislator said Gingrich had "lost touch with reality," while another official described called him "ignorant," according to the Associated Press.
Gingrich was then asked about the comments during Saturday night's Republican presidential debate from Iowa, which was sponsored by ABC News.
"Is what I said factually correct? Yes. Is it historically true? Yes," he answered. "Are we in a situation where every day rockets are fired into Israel while the United States? The current administration tries to pressure the Israelis into a peace process... Somebody ought to have the courage to tell the truth. These people are terrorists. They teach terrorism in their schools. They have textbooks that say, if there are 13 Jews and nine Jews are killed, how many Jews are left? We pay for those textbooks through our aid money. It's fundamentally time for somebody to have the guts to stand up and say, enough lying about the Middle East."
Gingrich draws notice over Palestinian remark
Gingrich's rivals criticized him for the remark, but none too harshly. Republicans often tout their commitment to standing up for Israel in front of audiences of conservative voters who tend to have strong feelings toward Israel.
Notably, Rep. Ron Paul of Texas said Gingrich's statement was "just stirring up trouble."
"Technically and historically, yes-- you know, under the Ottoman Empire, the Palestinians didn't have a state, but neither did Israel have a state then too," Paul said.
The modern state of Israel was created in 1948 by the United Nations.
"I happen to agree with... most of the speaker said, except by going out and saying the Palestinians are an invented people. That I think was a mistake on the speaker's part," Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney said.
Romney also attacked Gingrich for causing controversy with his statements.
"The last thing [Israeli Prime Minister] Bibi Netanyahu needs to have is not just a person who's a historian, but someone who is also running for president of the United States stand up and say things that create extraordinary tumult in... his neighborhood," Romney said. "And if I'm president of the United States, I will exercise sobriety, care, stability and make sure that I don't say anything like this. Anything I say that can affect a place with -- with rockets going in, with people dying. I don't do anything that would harm that -- that process. And, therefore, before I made a statement of that nature, I'd get on the phone to my friend, Bibi Netanyahu and say, would it help if I say this? What would you like me to do? Let's work together because we're partners. I'm not a bomb-thrower. Rhetorically or literally."
Gingrich responded by evoking Ronald Reagan and saying he had the "courage to tell the truth."
"I think sometimes it is helpful to have a president of the United States who has the courage to tell the truth, just as it was Ronald Reagan who went around his entire national security apparatus to call the Soviet Union an evil empire, and who overruled his entire State Department in order to say, 'Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall,'" he said. "Reagan believed the power of truth restated the world and re framed the world. I am a Reaganite. I'm proud to be a Reaganite. I will tell the truth, even if it's at the risk of causing some confusion sometimes with the timid."
Moderator Diane Sawyer asked Former Sen. Rick Santorum who won the point between Romney and Gingrich.
"I think you have to speak the truth. But you have to do so with prudence.. it's a combination," Santorum said. "I sat there and I listened to both. I thought they both... made excellent points. But we're in a real life situation. This isn't an academic exercise... We have an ally here that we have to work closely with. And I think Mitt's point... was the correct one. We need to be working with the Israelis to find out, you know what? Is this a wise thing for us to do? To step forward and to engage this issue? Maybe it is. My guess is at this point in time, it's not. Not that we shouldn't tell the truth, but we should be talking to our allies. It's their fight."
-
actions speak louder than words. he shouldnt have kept pollard from being freed.
Great point. The man is a very good debater especially compared to the competition (all bad at debates). He is a politician who knows what to say. I doubt he actually ends up doing 20% of what he says he is going to do. I don't see the point of a JTF endorsement at this juncture. We have no idea what is going to happen next in this race. Palin could endorse someone and tilt the Iowa scales in another candidate's direction. You may want to make a " I might have been wrong about Gingrich" video. I think this will reflect a lot of American's feelings towards him and it will show that JTF is a group that is willing to give a guy another chance if he begins to sound like he supports the correct side of issues.
-
Chaim, you said yourself in one of your videos that if Newt gets the nomination, he will not win. I don't think we should back him yet. I honestly think that Mitt Romney has a better chance in the general election. One of the videos I saw said that before this campaign that Newt was one of the most hated politicians in America with an approval rating of about 3%.
I don't trust him one bit on the Israel issue any more than I would trust Obama when Obama says he is pro-Israel when he goes before AIPAC.
Have you changed your mind now and you actually think he has a chance against Obama?
One of the points you made in regards to this was that Newt has a whole lot of skeletons in his background, and that while Obama does too, the media will give Obama a free ride on those like they did last time, and they won't do the same for Newt.
Also remember that this is the same Newt who screwed us all over on the 'contract with America'.
-
For those of you who didn't see the Iowa Debate this past evening or want to see it again, the following is the part of the Debate that focused on Israel and the Fakeastinians:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gyJsr43yOiA
-
I think he deserves our support for the following two reasons:
1, Even if he's going to brake his promises if elected president, he already has made a great deal of good by simply introducing the truth about Palestinian myth to the highest public arena and educating hundreds of millions of people about this issue;
2. No one else on the stage supported this idea, which automatically shows they are no good for Israel even before they are elected.
-
Chaim, you said yourself in one of your videos that if Newt gets the nomination, he will not win. I don't think we should back him yet. I honestly think that Mitt Romney has a better chance in the general election. One of the videos I saw said that before this campaign that Newt was one of the most hated politicians in America with an approval rating of about 3%.
I don't trust him one bit on the Israel issue any more than I would trust Obama when Obama says he is pro-Israel when he goes before AIPAC.
Have you changed your mind now and you actually think he has a chance against Obama?
One of the points you made in regards to this was that Newt has a whole lot of skeletons in his background, and that while Obama does too, the media will give Obama a free ride on those like they did last time, and they won't do the same for Newt.
Also remember that this is the same Newt who screwed us all over on the 'contract with America'.
Rubystars, I completely understand why you are skeptical of Newt Gingrich. The same with everyone else in JTF who expressed those thoughts in the last few hours.
While Newt's record on many issues is problematic, I'm not confident at all in Mitt Romney being able to defeating Barack Hussein Obama. Romney always seems to go the politically correct route. The path of least resistance comes to mind. The only way I can see Romney winning the general election is Obama's popularity dropping to such an extent that the American voters finally reach the point of anyone but Obama. On the other hand, the recent comments by Gingrich give me some hope that he will be aggressive against BHO in the general election.
-
Rubystars, I completely understand why you are skeptical of Newt Gingrich. The same with everyone else in JTF who expressed those thoughts in the last few hours.
While Newt's record on many issues is problematic, I'm not confident at all in Mitt Romney being able to defeating Barack Hussein Obama. Romney always seems to go the politically correct route. The path of least resistance comes to mind. The only way I can see Romney winning the general election is Obama's popularity dropping to such an extent that the American voters finally reach the point of anyone but Obama. On the other hand, the recent comments by Gingrich give me some hope that he will be aggressive against BHO in the general election.
I don't like either of them but I remember when Newt was Speaker and how I was young and naive enough at the time to think he was telling the truth about the contract with America. I thought finally, they're going to do something about all this liberal crap messing up our country, but no..... it was all a lie.
I just can't believe we just put up all these videos attacking Newt for very legitimate reasons and now people are ready to jump right onto this bandwagon.
This looks shizophrenic.
He's been saying some very good things with regard to Israel, but I have no reason to trust that this is what he will actually do when he gets into office. Chaim himself just VERY recently said if Gingrich gets the nomination he will lose. So I'm wondering why Chaim now thinks the opposite.
-
Romney STILL has a better chance to beat Obama than Newt. To me, that really trumps everything. Every poll shows this, and I just don't wanna gamble on this election because far too much is at stake.
-
Rubystars, I'm one of the people who criticized Newt Gingrich heavily in the JTF videos that Chaim made recently.
It's hard to overlook all of the great points that Chaim and others have made about Gingrich in the recent JTF videos. Yet, when factoring in that Gingrich at least said some very truthful ( politically incorrect ) comments regarding the Fakeastians, including his criticism of Fatah, and that Mitt Romney is such a flawed candidate, I currently have more confidence in Gingrich than I do with Romney.
Regarding Israel, under Romney's logic, if the Israeli Government is comfortable committing suicide for the Country, no one should undermine the Israeli Government's efforts because Israel is considered an American ally. While Gingrich supports a so called two state solution, at least he's brought up the truth about the Fakeastians in general and Fatah specifically. Like Zvulun Ben Moshe mentioned, a multitude of people never heard this message before. This offers hope.
-
While Newt's record on many issues is problematic, I'm not confident at all in Mitt Romney being able to defeating Barack Hussein Obama. Romney always seems to go the politically correct route.
This is not the case. The last 3 polls have ALL shown that Mitt has a much better chance against Obama than Newt. We need to remember this.
-
Chaim,
I think, he is pretty consistent on Israel. See the video from early 1990s:
http://www.youtube.com/embed/8_shVIbKbRE (http://www.youtube.com/embed/8_shVIbKbRE)
Do you plan on pulling your videos on him down?
Thank you.
בס''ד
You are mistaken. This video is not from the early 1990s. This video was made in recent years. Gingrich speaks in the video about statements from Arab terrorists in 2002 and afterward, and also about Ahmedinajad.
Also this video is not that impressive. Gingrich is condemning Hamas, Hezballah and Iran for wanting to destroy Israel - even leftists concede that they want to destroy Israel. However, in the past several days, Gingrich has said there is no real difference between Fatah and Hamas - something which Netanyahu and the Israeli government don't have the guts to say. Gingrich has certainly moved much closer to the truth in the past several days.
-
This is not the case. The last 3 polls have ALL shown that Mitt has a much better chance against Obama than Newt. We need to remember this.
briann, a huge concern on this end is the polls don't take into account how Mitt Romney will perform against Barack Hussein Obama in debates. Especially since Obama will likely have his teleprompter, the debate moderators on his side in the majority ( if not all of the debates ) of the debates, and the media coming to Obama's aid when grading the debates. In my opinion, Newt Gingrich is much better in debates than Romney. The latter is far too cautious with his remarks. Romney reminds me of a football coach who plays not to lose instead of playing to win.
-
briann, a huge concern on this end is the polls don't take into account how Mitt Romney will perform against Barack Hussein Obama in debates. Especially since Obama will likely have his teleprompter, the debate moderators on his side in the majority ( if not all of the debates ) of the debates, and the media coming to Obama's aid when grading the debates. In my opinion, Newt Gingrich is much better in debates than Romney. The latter is far too cautious with his remarks. Romney reminds me of a football coach who plays not to lose instead of playing to win.
Thats true. I will admit that Newt is by far the best debater. I will continue to watch the polls, but I just know that many voters feel like Rubystars... like Newt is a sleazy politician. Maybe this feeling will change.
-
Chaim, you said yourself in one of your videos that if Newt gets the nomination, he will not win. I don't think we should back him yet. I honestly think that Mitt Romney has a better chance in the general election. One of the videos I saw said that before this campaign that Newt was one of the most hated politicians in America with an approval rating of about 3%.
I don't trust him one bit on the Israel issue any more than I would trust Obama when Obama says he is pro-Israel when he goes before AIPAC.
Have you changed your mind now and you actually think he has a chance against Obama?
One of the points you made in regards to this was that Newt has a whole lot of skeletons in his background, and that while Obama does too, the media will give Obama a free ride on those like they did last time, and they won't do the same for Newt.
Also remember that this is the same Newt who screwed us all over on the 'contract with America'.
בס''ד
There's no question that we would be taking a big chance. Gingrich does have a lot of skeletons in his closet. However, so far he has handled intense attacks very effectively. Just look at the debate - everyone ganged up on him and he came out the clear winner, in my opinion. I think he could beat Obama in the debates.
But you make a good point that this would be risky. The question is, would Mitt Romney have a better chance against Obama? I'm not so sure. I think we're going to have an uphill fight no matter who the Republican nominee is because Obama has the fanatic support of the evil news media, a billion dollar campaign budget, the labor unions and he is the incumbent president who can use his office to control events.
-
I'm going to have to think about this for a while this is upsetting me right now. Why are all the choices a bunch of sleaze bags?
-
Thats true. I will admit that Newt is by far the best debater. I will continue to watch the polls, but I just know that many voters feel like Rubystars... like Newt is a sleazy politician. Maybe this feeling will change.
It wouldn't surprise me that the winner of the Florida primary will go on to win the Republican Nomination. By then, I think we will have a better idea of Newt Gingrich's public perception. Of course, there's always concern that the Obama campaign and the media ( basically the same thing ) will find much more dirt on Gingrich. The bottom line is we have an uphill battle to defeat Hussein Obama, regardless who wins the Republican Nomination. Both Mitt Romney and Gingrich certainly have a multitude of shortcomings.
-
בס''ד
There's no question that we would be taking a big chance. Gingrich does have a lot of skeletons in his closet. However, so far he has handled intense attacks very effectively. Just look at the debate - everyone ganged up on him and he came out the clear winner, in my opinion. I think he could beat Obama in the debates.
It's good if he can beat Obama in debates. It seems like he's not very afraid right now to take politically incorrect positions, so that's better than John McCain was anyway.
But you make a good point that this would be risky. The question is, would Mitt Romney have a better chance against Obama? I'm not so sure. I think we're going to have an uphill fight no matter who the Republican nominee is because Obama has the fanatic support of the evil news media, a billion dollar campaign budget, the labor unions and he is the incumbent president who can use his office to control events.
With these choices I'm afraid that Obama is a sure win at this point and all this is just fighting over who gets to lose to him.
Of course I want the republican to win, whoever that is. Thanks for replying to me.
-
It wouldn't surprise me that the winner of the Florida primary will go on to win the Republican Nomination. By then, I think we will have a better idea of Newt Gingrich's public perception. Of course, there's always concern that the Obama campaign and the media ( basically the same thing ) will find much more dirt on Gingrich. The bottom line is we have an uphill battle to defeat Hussein Obama, regardless who wins the Republican Nomination. Both Mitt Romney and Gingrich certainly have a multitude of shortcomings.
I have noticed a lot of republicans are starting to be weary of Mitt. Mitt's comments about Muslims have got a LOT of conservatives VERY angry. Its got me pretty angry as well.... I dont want a president who thinks like this.
-
Chaim, you haven't really addressed the "racism" card. If the NWO media wants to drive it home they can really make Gingrich out to be a "racist" for saying the Fakestinians don't exist. Granted, average Americans don't worship Arabs to the extent that they worship schvartzes but they are still terrified of being seen as racists. Don't you see the real danger that Newt could be completely destroyed by these comments?
-
Chaim, you haven't really addressed the "racism" card. If the NWO media wants to drive it home they can really make Gingrich out to be a "racist" for saying the Fakestinians don't exist. Granted, average Americans don't worship Arabs to the extent that they worship schvartzes but they are still terrified of being seen as racists. Don't you see the real danger that Newt could be completely destroyed by these comments?
Thats a valid point..... we will certainly see the media and CAIR, etc focusing in on this, trying to dismiss Newt as a Racist. I am more interested to see how Newt responds to this criticism.
-
If the racist label really gains momentum it won't matter how he responds. We all saw what happened with George Allen in 2006 and VA is a conservative state, and the national culture was less obsessed with "racism" five years ago than it is now.
It's five years later and America as a whole is much more left-wing than Virginia.
So, the real question is whether CAIR, the ADL, the NAACP, and of course their loyal servants in the NWO petromedia will be able to make the label stick in the eyes of average Americans.
-
Chaim, you haven't really addressed the "racism" card. If the NWO media wants to drive it home they can really make Gingrich out to be a "racist" for saying the Fakestinians don't exist. Granted, average Americans don't worship Arabs to the extent that they worship schvartzes but they are still terrified of being seen as racists. Don't you see the real danger that Newt could be completely destroyed by these comments?
בס''ד
I don't think so. I don't think most Americans will regard this truthful exposing of history as racist.
However, you are certainly correct that any Republican nominee is going to be accused of racism if he goes after Barack Hussein Obama aggressively. Not racism against Arabs, but racism against blacks. Despite this, I think if the Republican candidate doesn't attack aggressively, we will lose. John McCain played it safe, he said Obama is a decent and wonderful man and a patriot, he told Sarah Palin not to call Obama a socialist, he ordered everyone not to use Obama's middle name Hussein - look at the disastrous results. Romney is using the McCain strategy of being nice to Obama. Romney says that Obama is a good person but he just doesn't understand the economy. At least Gingrich attacks aggressively.
Yes, the polls show Romney slightly stronger against Obama now. But the 2008 polls showed that McCain would be the strongest Republican candidate.
I could be wrong. I did a dozen videos against Gingrich, and now I feel I made a mistake. So I certainly respect the views of JTFers who may disagree with me on this.
-
Whereas everybody else is sitting on the ground, Newt has clearly gone up a step on the ladder. He has many more steps to go up on the ladder, but now all others will start shaking the ladder violently.
-
I have noticed a lot of republicans are starting to be weary of Mitt. Mitt's comments about Muslims have got a LOT of conservatives VERY angry. Its got me pretty angry as well.... I dont want a president who thinks like this.
We do now... at least Willard would be constrained by the fact that he would have to face the voters again unlike Obama.
I hate Obama the worst but I also hate Willard and Newt.
Chaim you made a very good point in talking about how aggressive Newt is willing to be versus Romney playing nice, I think that's something to consider for certain.
-
בס''ד
I don't think so. I don't think most Americans will regard this truthful exposing of history as racist.
However, you are certainly correct that any Republican nominee is going to be accused of racism if he goes after Barack Hussein Obama aggressively. Not racism against Arabs, but racism against blacks. Despite this, I think if the Republican candidate doesn't attack aggressively, we will lose. John McCain played it safe, he said Obama is a decent and wonderful man and a patriot, he told Sarah Palin not to call Obama a socialist, he ordered everyone not to use Obama's middle name Hussein - look at the disastrous results. Romney is using the McCain strategy of being nice to Obama. Romney says that Obama is a good person but he just doesn't understand the economy. At least Gingrich attacks aggressively.
Yes, the polls show Romney slightly stronger against Obama now. But the 2008 polls showed that McCain would be the strongest Republican candidate.
I could be wrong. I did a dozen videos against Gingrich, and now I feel I made a mistake. So I certainly respect the views of JTFers who may disagree with me on this.
Should we take down the anti-Gingrich videos on our channels?
-
We do now... at least Willard would be constrained by the fact that he would have to face the voters again unlike Obama.
I hate Obama the worst but I also hate Willard and Newt.
בס''ד
I think we all hate these phony hypocrites. But there is too much at stake for us not to work to defeat Obama.
-
בס''ד
I think we all hate these phony hypocrites. But there is too much at stake for us not to work to defeat Obama.
You're right about that. I think I'm going to remove the anti-Gingrich videos from my Obamawilllose2012 channel for now and we can always put them back up if we decide they're useful again
-
Should we take down the anti-Gingrich videos on our channels?
בס''ד
We're not going to endorse anyone until we have a majority vote from JTFers on this forum. Let's think about this for a few days. I'll put up an online poll after I do my long weekly video.
-
בס''ד
We're not going to endorse anyone until we have a majority vote from JTFers on this forum. Let's think about this for a few days. I'll put up an online poll after I do my long weekly video.
Thanks Chaim. I just set them to private for now so that if we decide we need to support Gingrich then the videos won't contradict each other. I'm looking forward to your weekly video. I think the point you made about the willingness to be aggressive versus scared to say something 'racist' would be a plus in Gingrich's favor.
-
Chaim, you did not make a mistake. Newt definitely was, and probably still is, a liar, a lowlife, and a phony. If anything it is JTF's pressure and that of other real conservatives that have forced Newt to take some good (on paper) positions.
I agree we need a GOP candidate who is willing to really fight Obama with all he has. McCain didn't do this and as far as I am concerned he deliberately took a dive. I think that there is a good chance that really going after Obama will cause a backlash and a sympathy reaction (and many people I spoke to in 2008 thought McCain would have done worse than he did if he took that route) but what is certain is that doing nothing will cause BHO to be reelected. We can't afford not to try and if Gingrich is the only candidate really willing to attack Obama, maybe we do need to back him.
-
I think JTF shouldn't back anyone, as JTF power is in attacking and exposing the faults of candidates. We can't back someone who we know is very inconsistent and we don't believe what he says. If our tactical goal is to help Newt, then the best strategy would be to attack Romney. BUT, I think we should let them fight it out because I really don't think Newt is the better candidate, especially as some people pointed out, when it comes to his chances of defeating Obama.
-
I think attacking obama is a better strategy than helping the enemy by attacking republican candidates. Although it is part of JTF's job to point out all the flaws in every candidate, which is something no one else does.
-
I think attacking obama is a better strategy than helping the enemy by attacking republican candidates. Although it is part of JTF's job to point out all the flaws in every candidate, which is something no one else does.
i agree. Whilst its impiortant we get the best possible candidate, i think we can all agree the candidates are never going to be great.
I think Chaim should concentrate on obama economic polices in the video and stances on israel. Because at the end of the day we need to create this alernative media ha doesnt worship obama.
-
Newt was good last night, I hope he wins.
-
In Gingrich's favor is the state of the economy. We are in a deep recession and that should hurt Obama's re-election chances. Unhappy voters want a change. Let's hope the econmy doesn't turn around in 11 months, before the next election.
Ben Bernanke is doing everything he can to artificially prop up this economy, hopefully it can't continue.
-
Personally I felt from the start that it was not in our best interests to produce video's against candidates like Gingrich that have a very high chance of being the contender against our sitting president in the general elections... It would have been far better to speak about the positive aspects of the candidate we wished to see as the front runner... Sadly there is such little difference between Romney and Gingrich that its almost impossible to go in that direction... Backing lesser candidates such as Bachmann or Santurm is a waste of time since they have little chances of winning in the primary and even less in a general election... For now we should sit tight and allow the front runner to emerge and then get behind whoever that turns out to be... I actually have no problem supporting Gingrich against our sitting president and to be honest Gingrich is about as far to the right as the crossover vote is willing to go... If conservatives think they are going to sit this election out because they are not getting a true conservative candidate they will be making a big mistake... Gingrich for all his faults is still worlds better than what we are dealing with now
-
Personally I felt from the start that it was not in our best interests to produce video's against candidates like Gingrich that have a very high chance of being the contender against our sitting president in the general elections... It would have been far better to speak about the positive aspects of the candidate we wished to see as the front runner... Sadly there is such little difference between Romney and Gingrich that its almost impossible to go in that direction... Backing lesser candidates such as Bachmann or Santurm is a waste of time since they have little chances of winning in the primary and even less in a general election... For now we should sit tight and allow the front runner to emerge and then get behind whoever that turns out to be... I actually have no problem supporting Gingrich against our sitting president and to be honest Gingrich is about as far to the right as the crossover vote is willing to go... If conservatives think they are going to sit this election out because they are not getting a true conservative candidate they will be making a big mistake... Gingrich for all his faults is still worlds better than what we are dealing with now
You were right CJD. You did say this before.
-
Personally I felt from the start that it was not in our best interests to produce video's against candidates like Gingrich that have a very high chance of being the contender against our sitting president in the general elections... It would have been far better to speak about the positive aspects of the candidate we wished to see as the front runner... Sadly there is such little difference between Romney and Gingrich that its almost impossible to go in that direction... Backing lesser candidates such as Bachmann or Santurm is a waste of time since they have little chances of winning in the primary and even less in a general election... For now we should sit tight and allow the front runner to emerge and then get behind whoever that turns out to be... I actually have no problem supporting Gingrich against our sitting president and to be honest Gingrich is about as far to the right as the crossover vote is willing to go... If conservatives think they are going to sit this election out because they are not getting a true conservative candidate they will be making a big mistake... Gingrich for all his faults is still worlds better than what we are dealing with now
I agree with CJD. Gingrich is worlds better than Obama. Also, Netenyahu will be pressure crushed under a 2nd administration of Obama. He will do whatever Obama demands. Israel won't recover.
-
Unfortunately Newt Gingrich still does support the so called two state solution. Yet, there's no candidate in the race ( I'm not including Ron Paul ) who totally dismisses a so called two state solution. Even Michele Bachmann, who has the best all around positions on Israel of the candidates, would support a so called two state solution if the " P.A." meets certain conditions. Granted, conditions they likely will not meet but the best course of action would be to come out against a so called two state solution, period!
The best course of action would be for the USA to respect Israel's sovereignty and not try to make these decisions for her.
-
Chaim, you haven't really addressed the "racism" card. If the NWO media wants to drive it home they can really make Gingrich out to be a "racist" for saying the Fakestinians don't exist. Granted, average Americans don't worship Arabs to the extent that they worship schvartzes but they are still terrified of being seen as racists. Don't you see the real danger that Newt could be completely destroyed by these comments?
All the more reason for us to rally aroun Newt. If he goes down in flames for this nobody else will do it.
-
Ron paul's reply shows he's an ignoramus and a nazi and gives lie to his supporters' claims that he will "leave Israel alone." He ALWAYS tries to equate the arab nazis with (lehavdil) the Jews.
I like the fact that newt will say the truth about the middle east and does not care what the self hating wimps in the israeli govt think about it.
Mitt romney, by saying he would only do what the Israeli regime wants from him, shows us that he will be 100% a tool of the far left israeli regime and the peace process. He will do exactly what the israelis ask of him, which will be "pressure us in public so we can blame our capitulation to the arabs on needing to obey you." Romney convinced me he is the worst candidate with this response.
-
For those of you who didn't see the Iowa Debate this past evening or want to see it again, the following is the part of the Debate that focused on Israel and the Fakeastinians:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gyJsr43yOiA
I have a feeling that if Gingrich keeps it up, he will be endorsed by almost all of the remaining GOP candidates that won't win, over Romney.
Hearing what Gingrich had to say, I can feel a little more relieved that he isn't has bad as I thought he was on issues regarding Israel. Certainly his answer was far better than Romney's, who felt that you shouldn't be too honest about history....this type of attitude frightens me as much as Cain's lack of knowledge of history.
Santorum also sided with truth and stated that the "West Bank" belongs to Israel.
Bachman didn't sound like she knew what she was talking about, but was implying a truth that these Fakestinians are liers and cannot be trusted.
Ron Paul is an outright nazi.
Perry is a dimwit.
I am going to fall short on giving my full support for Gingrich. However as Baltimore Jew wrote, I would be good to make an English video stating that Gingrich did say some nice things and we are going to take one step back from outright condemning him. We should still point out his misdeeds of the past with Pollard and etc.
-
Boy, the more I watch Mitt, the more I hate him. His responses are so pathetically P.C. I am hoping that Newt becomes a stronger contender vs Obama so I can at least feel better about supporting him.
-
JTF has no alternative but to now support Gingrich. Sure, Romney has an almost 100% of chance of beating Obama; however Gingrich's Israel platform which has now been enunciated twice should be as close to JTF's position as we will ever get.
-
At this point lets face the facts. Gingrich is only slightly better the Romney, because he has flip flopped on less issues, and helped balanced the budget in the 1990's. Other than that Gingrich is just another beltway insider, who is in Washington to enrich himself at the expense of the country.
People here need to avoid TB (True Believerism), because any front runner being propped up by the mainstream media is probably a sellout.
-
JTF has no alternative but to now support Gingrich. Sure, Romney has an almost 100% of chance of beating Obama; however Gingrich's Israel platform which has now been enunciated twice should be as close to JTF's position as we will ever get.
Romney does not have an almost 100% chance of beating Obama. Some people here are saying that as of today it appears he has a better shot of beating Obama than Gingrich does. At this point Obama is the favorite to win the 2012 General election. It will take a well-run well-funded aggressive campaign for a Republican to have a shot since the media will be firmly behind Obama.
-
Mitt Romney continued to publicly criticize Newt Gingrich for expressing that the ' Palestinians' were invented. Romney said that this is no way for a Presidential candidate to act.
Memo to Mitt Romney: this is how a Presidential candidate should act! If the United States agrees to give up the Rocky Mountain States and the Pacific Coast States, wouldn't you want an ally to speak up against the terrorist entity that would gain much of the United States?????
eb22
http://content.usatoday.com/communities/onpolitics/post/2011/12/mitt-romney-newt-gingrich-palestinians-invented-/1
Dec 12, 2011
Romney jabs Gingrich for 'erratic outspokenness'
Comments 13 By Catalina Camia, USA TODAY Updated 6h 19m ago
Mitt Romney, left, and Newt Gingrich disagree during a GOP presidential debate in Iowa. CAPTIONBy Kevork Djansezian, Getty Images
Updated 11:41 a.m. ET
Mitt Romney says Newt Gingrich displayed "erratic outspokenness" when he said Palestinians are an "invented" people as he turned up the criticism on his GOP presidential rival.
Romney, speaking to Fox News this morning, also said the former House speaker should return the money he received from Freddie Mac. Gingrich made at least $1.6 million from the mortgage giant, providing what he called "strategic advice."
Gingrich responded by suggesting Romney should return money he earned while leading Bain Capital, a venture capital firm. Romney has been criticized for his work at Bain, whose leveraged buyouts of companies sometimes led to layoffs.
"If Governor Romney would give back all the money he's earned from bankrupting companies and laying off employees over the years at Bain, then I would be glad to listen to him," he told reporters in New Hampshire. "But I bet you $10, not $10,000, that he won't take the offer."
In another attack on Gingrich, Romney's campaign says Gingrich is an "unreliable leader" and plays up a public service announcement that Gingrich filmed with House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi on climate change.
The campaign e-mail sent to reporters contains an image of Pelosi and Gingrich and says "With friends like Nancy." Gingrich has called the commercial the "dumbest single thing I've done in recent years."
Gingrich has been eclipsing Romney in national and some state polls for the GOP nomination. Romney, his campaign and his surrogates have been stepping up their attacks on Gingrich as Iowa voters gear up for the nation's lead off caucuses on Jan. 3.
Gingrich's comment about Palestinians to The Jewish Channel sparked a firestorm this weekend, and he did not back down from it during the GOP presidential debate Saturday night.
Romney said Gingrich's remark "shows a level of erratic outspokenness which may be great in a campaign but not great for someone running for president."
In calling for Gingrich to return the money he received from Freddie Mac, Romney told Fox News that the "whole crowd of Washington insiders" who earn money because of their connections is "something the American people are tired of."
The Democratic group, American Bridge, is reminding reporters that Romney made money from his investments in Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae.
(Contributing: Associated Press)
-
At this point lets face the facts. Gingrich is only slightly better the Romney, because he has flip flopped on less issues, and helped balanced the budget in the 1990's. Other than that Gingrich is just another beltway insider, who is in Washington to enrich himself at the expense of the country.
People here need to avoid TB (True Believerism), because any front runner being propped up by the mainstream media is probably a sellout.
Nice Nice point Maimonides
-
When Gingrich said that he was the only one with the guts to tell it like it is by saying that there's no such thing as a Palestinian and that they're Arabs... PLUS when he said that all they want to do is kill Jews.... well, frankly, that's when I had only love in my heart for Newt Gingrich. If a man can tell the truth like this, which no one had the guts to say, then Gingrich has my vote. I'm still kvelling from what he said that night.
How can I NOT vote for this man who could go on national TV and say this?? For heaven sakes, our own people don't say this truth!
He also acknowledged the lunacy of letting Iran get nuclear bombing capability.
G-d bless Newt Gingrich for telling the truth about the Mideast.
Also: I think he's an excellent debater which means he has a quick mind. I liked what he said about getting our economy back in shape and getting people hired again.
And if he is sleazy, then I'll tell you this: I'd rather have a sleazeball as President saying the truth about the so-called Palestinians, then the most moral President who can't speak the truth.
I also think that Mitt Romney will be a disaster as President. He couldn't even figure out that people all over this country are having trouble making ends meet and he's making a bet for $10,000 over nothing.
-
I just hope whoever the nominee is goes after Obama tooth and nail.
-
When Gingrich said that he was the only one with the guts to tell it like it is by saying that there's no such thing as a Palestinian and that they're Arabs... PLUS when he said that all they want to do is kill Jews.... well, frankly, that's when I had only love in my heart for Newt Gingrich. If a man can tell the truth like this, which no one had the guts to say, then Gingrich has my vote. I'm still kvelling from what he said that night.
How can I NOT vote for this man who could go on national TV and say this?? For heaven sakes, our own people don't say this truth!
He also acknowledged the lunacy of letting Iran get nuclear bombing capability.
G-d bless Newt Gingrich for telling the truth about the Mideast.
Also: I think he's an excellent debater which means he has a quick mind. I liked what he said about getting our economy back in shape and getting people hired again.
And if he is sleazy, then I'll tell you this: I'd rather have a sleazeball as President saying the truth about the so-called Palestinians, then the most moral President who can't speak the truth.
I also think that Mitt Romney will be a disaster as President. He couldn't even figure out that people all over this country are having trouble making ends meet and he's making a bet for $10,000 over nothing.
My thoughts on Newt precisely. Here is Newt calling fakestinians invented.
http://www.jpost.com/International/Article.aspx?id=248865
I would love to hear Romney say the same thing, but I doubt he would take the risk of shedding his RINO skin.
-
http://www.jpost.com/International/Article.aspx?id=248865
So what do y'all think about this?
-
http://www.jpost.com/International/Article.aspx?id=248865
So what do y'all think about this?
We posted the video of the debate..i'm going to link your post to that one.
-
Who was the guy who said
"The problem is this president, not something newt gingrich said.
I liked that guy!
-
http://www.jpost.com/International/Article.aspx?id=248865
So what do y'all think about this?
Love it! President Gingrich WILL pardon Pollard. And if Iran doesn't have nukes by the time Gingrich is in office, then Gringrich will make sure they won't get them!
What I am very unhappy about now, though, is how well Ron Paul is doing in Iowa. He's only 5 points behind Newt. President Paul will be the death of us all. (Of course, he'll never be President, so I'm not that worried.)
-
I agree with you Chaim...He is by far the most qualified-capable person to be President and as a Historian he knows how important it is to support allies, and also not to allow Dictators to bully the US and Israel. I think he would be United with Israel instead of condemning everything they do like Obama and Panetta. Who in the World do we Trust? Will God Show us the Candidate of his choice who is righteous, honest, and God Fearing, Or does that person exist?