You are currently browsing comments. If you would like to return to the full story, you can read the full entry here: “Newt Gingrich Leads GOP Field, For Now”.
Newt Gingrich Leads GOP Field, For Now
November 24, 2011
Related Posts
Obama’s “Failure of Leadership” and “Breach...
Tweet
0 comments
Allen West Officially Joins Fox News...
Tweet
3 comments
Rep.Rooney Calls for Elimination of “Sinister,...
Tweet
0 comments
Comments
21 Responses to “Newt Gingrich Leads GOP Field, For Now”
There are already rules on the books for immigration into AMERICA. The rules clearly spell out procedures for aliens to enter and work in AMERICA. What needs to be done is to follow those rules.
What I want to know is when you are elected as president how you will enforce those rules?
And laws http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/uscode/8/12/II/VIII/1325
Don’t any of you get it? Big business wants the cheap illegal alien labor, big business funds the republican party and the tea bag boys and girls. As long as big business wants that cheap labor, the republicans aren’t going to do a damn thing about the illegals.
The Democrats want their votes, so nothing will happen until we take the money out of politics which will force our “leaders” to do what is good for the people.
Our soldiers leave their families behind to defend the constitution and the laws of the land. I would ask Newt Gingrich why does he think that family ties for illegals are more important than for our soldiers?
No question but I want him to continue to comment on his first day in office and especially the executive orders on the czars and abortion.
All the executive orders won’t end abortions. Pride and respect in oneself will lessen abortions.
It is the law of the land.
Answer this, if abortion were to be outlawed tomorrow, would YOU want to pay the additional taxes to take care of all those unwanted and unloved children? Think about this before you answer.
There are always potential parents for unwanted children, as many people cannot produce children.
Ask yourself, are you part of a civilization that eliminates unborn children? Would you call that civilization? What will you do, when they declare you unfit for survival?
Think about that Rich.
Excellent Rich…so you finally showed your true colors! Another O fan trying to trash any opponents? Abortions became the law of the land because 7 of the9 supremes declared it must be so. There were no laws enacted by the legislatures and approved by the executive branch. Just 7 crinials in black robes (all appointed by demoncratic presidents)that stated this was what the law is henceforth. So in answer to your question, I would love to help those whose lives were spared. Just because their mothers and fathers do not want them, does not mean that they are unwanted or unloved.
I would like to ask Newt if there are additional major problems besides the current ones he sees the US facing in 10 years if we continue down the current political path.
If only Romney would go away, the GOP would not be looking for the anti-Romney candidate but the best candidate.
Should the USA remain a member of the U.N. and the IMF?
The goals of the U.N. apparently are globalization, centralized control, and redistribution of America’s wealth to third-world leaders. The goals of the I.M.F appear similar, and are related. For instance, taking money from wealthy nations to bail-out bad loans by socialist nations around the globe.
Ask Gingrich if he still stands behind his 1978 (I think) vote that barely passed creating the Federal Board of Edcation.@@
Education…
Two questions for Newt Gingrich: (1) How would he cut spending? How much of Ron Paul’s idea of eliminating or substantially downsizing agencies does he support?
(2) What does he think of Rick Perry’s idea of cutting the salaries of Congress and making them a part-time Congress, meeting for a certain time frame every year or other year?
Anyone REMOTELY considering Newt Gingrich needs to have their head examined.
Be informed.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=exs41FdfqpY&feature=player_embedded
Newt anti-gun rights
http://paracom.paramountcommunication.com/hostedemail/email.htm?CID=10427452821&ch=1B082A1BFEB3A8A2FACBF9EC2017A14B&h=1f9d5c63d5d0bca3ada314fcfc5aba93&ei=WrvX9eTUN
Please be informed by reading the following on his broken contract with Americans:
http://www.campaignforliberty.com/blog.php?view=36799
I was for Newt until I heard Rush Limbaugh say his immigration policy was going to the courts and he would be done.Plus I think Miss Callista is too much to watch as first lady for 4 years.Of course I want Rubio as vp for any ticket but I will support ANYONE but that fake President in office now.My misery index keeps getting higher.
Newt said that his plan doesn’t represent Amnesty for the illegals that are here, but a selective process to determine which of the ones that are here for a long time deserve to be considered for residents but without given them citenship. That is much better than what Mitt Romeny suggested in 2007 in an interview with Meet the Press where he said that he was in favor of a complete Amnesty and citenship.
I like Perry’s plan for a part time, lowwr pay, less perks and term limits….But we all know Congress won’t give up entitlements so whay should they take a pay cut and pay into social security, forgoing FAT
pensions after only 6 years of service, I heard your comments which amounts to amnesty for illegals who are already here. I think to offer amnesty is to encourage more to enter illegally. I wish you would take a stonger stand on legal and illegal immigtation, Please stop VISA LOTTERIES. I LIKE YOUR PLAN TO STOP GIVING MILITARY AID TO COUNTRIES WHO HATE US. TED POE (R) Texas seems to be the only politician with a plan. Join with Ted, My Question, Knowing you cannot get the Hispanic vote, why do you pander to them?
I WANTED TO COMMENT ON NEWTS’ AMNESTY FOR ILLEGALS. IF AMNESTY IS GIVEN IT WILL ONLY ENCOURAGE MORE ILLEGALS TO COME.YOU CANNOT CARRY THE HISPANIC VOTE SO WHY DO YOU PANDER TO THEM? I LIKK PERRY’S PLAM FOR A PART TIME CONGRESS. PAYING INTO SOCIAL SECURITY. DRAWING IN THEIR LATE 60; INSTEAD OF IN 6 YEARS. TED POE ( R) TEXAS IS THE ONLY POLITICIAN WHO HAS A BILL IN THE HOUSE TO ELIMINATE FUNDING TO COUNTIES WHO HATE US. WE COULD BALANCE THE ELIMINATED THE SINGLE BILL THAT FUNDS THESE GIVE AWAYS. I WISH YOU GOOD LUCK IMPROVING YOUR CONTRACT WITH AMERICA. JIM IN PENSACOLA
If anyone is looking for a globalist, Newt is your guy… NAFTA, WTO, CFR… when a bigger federal govt just isn’t big enuff…
Newt will have a difficult time winning the general election. He simply has too much baggage. It begins with his first marriage. It ends with his denouncement of Paul Ryan’s health care proposal. He has flip flopped on numerious issues. Don’t forget how he left his Speakership in ’98. Democrats will make certain that the long sad saga is rehashed in living color! Count on it! Obama has no record to run on. But he has a truckload of money. No doubt, it will be used effectively in the most blistering negative campaign the country has seen. Romney will catch a “class warfare” campaign. Gingrich will be positioned as “wife beating, political opportunitist,” who has changed his positions almost as much as Romney. Democrats are quick to note that Newt is “a smart guy.” He has the experience to navigate to Washington’s “viper pit.” But he is also an “inside-the-beltway insider.” When Republicans are “reacquainted” with the Speaker, they’ll say “thanks but no thanks.” Of course Democrats would love to face Newt in the general election. For one reason: “he won’t deliver 50% of the female vote.” It is a mathematical certainty! Make nomistake! Newt Gingrich would be a great asset to any administration. But he might best serve the country as Secretary of State. Then, his talents could be used accordingly.