Gingrich: The Founding Fathers would be ‘very severe critics’ of Obama if they were alive today.
Gingrich: The Founding Fathers would be ‘very severe critics’ of Obama if they were alive today.
Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich spoke before a conservative audience in Naples, FL yesterday. Gingrich gave a talk about his new book, To Try Men’s Souls, which tells the story of men who played a critical role in the Revolutionary War. When a reporter with the Naples News asked Gingrich what the Founding Fathers would “say about our current issues” if they were alive today, he suggested that they would be “very severe critics” of President Obama:
I think they would be very, very severe critics of the current system. And they would tell us that if we continue to drive God out of public life and we continue to increase power in Washington, we are literally putting our freedom at risk.
Watch it:
Gingrich also dodged a question about who he prefers in the Republican primary in Florida’s Senate race. He said former Florida House Speaker Marco Rubio (he initially slipped and called him “Mario”) is “a very aggressive, very articulate conservative,” while Gov. Charlie Crist is “a very solid political figure.” Gingrich also said that, “at the moment,” he’s not thinking about running for President in 2012.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
The same founding fathers that strove to separate religion and government? The same founding fathers, many of which were atheists? Gee Newt, all those years in government and you can’t even talk about the founding fathers without distorting history to push a political viewpoint?
Seriously, does anyone outside of Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin even care what he thinks? Seriously?
November 7th, 2009 at 5:01 pmNewt? Frankly, you’re full of shit.
November 7th, 2009 at 5:03 pmAh Newtie not going down the NY-23 road again, are you? How our forefathers would have loathed your cowardice.
November 7th, 2009 at 5:05 pmNewt has the remarkable capacity to formulate an opinion or change his stance depending on who he’s talking about. Like Jell-O, he’s soft and moldable–to whatever shape he needs to be at the time.
Yes, I agree Annie–he’s full of himself–which is shyt.
November 7th, 2009 at 5:08 pmIf the founding fathers were brought back to life, they would be unable to cross a street, and would be so overwhelmed that they would have to be given a shot of thorazine. The idea that they could judge President Obama is absurd.
November 7th, 2009 at 5:09 pmLOL! Who gives a sh*t what Newt says? His own Repug Party neutered him. After the disasterous election in NY, he has been rebuffed by his own. Now the leaders are Palin, Bachman, Limpballs and Becky. Hey, Newt. How does it feel to be obsolete? Not very good, huh?
November 7th, 2009 at 5:11 pmNewt is out of his mind
November 7th, 2009 at 5:12 pmSo Newt is now channeling the founding fathers, eh? Elsewhere this might be called delusional.
November 7th, 2009 at 5:16 pmWe all know who Newt would prefer. Crist. Newt knows Rubio will scare away Independants and women. But he doesn’t have the Balls to say it. After what happened in NY he won’t dare go against the new leaders of the Repug Party. After all these years, Newt turned into a wimp. Unreal huh?
November 7th, 2009 at 5:17 pmThe Founding Fathers would have HUNG Newt, Bush and Cheney, along with their minions for being TRAITORS.
November 7th, 2009 at 5:18 pmIf the founding fathers were alive they would be underwhelmed and embarrassed by us, shrugging their shoulders and saying “..we fought so you idiots could trade fealty from the immoral King George III to immoral corporations? Some patriots.”
November 7th, 2009 at 5:20 pmThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
This comment has been voted down. Click to read.
Along with being a lousy politician, Gingrich is also a crummy historian. There were states rights advocates, it is true, among the Founding Fathers. Some of them were from the small state, worried about loss of control to the federal government. More of the states rights advocates were southern states that were worried the federal government might interfere with their immoral slave trade.
However, there was an equally large contingent of Fathers who, having seen the multiple failures of the states under the Articles of Confederation–representatives at the Constitutional Convention from Pennsylvania, Massachusetts and Virginia–were eager for a strong central government.
The tug of war continues to this day between the two forces. But Gingrich couldn’t be more wrong than to suggest history is on his side and that the Fathers, as a group, would have opposed the powers of a strong central government.
The issue of religion and government were equally contentious in that period. Jefferson and Washington would talk out of both sides of their mouth, one time beseeching the powers of divinity to aid the government, another time writing in private that there should be a wall separating the state and religion. Gingrich, quite simply, is just full of it.
November 7th, 2009 at 5:22 pm#12
Flagged for inherent racism.
That does it–y’all can deal with these trolls.
November 7th, 2009 at 5:23 pmBetween the bible and American history,
November 7th, 2009 at 5:25 pmNewt’s head is overflowing with dead people.
Newt–I remember 1994–I remember the Contract for America, I remember your ethics violations, I remember the $300,000–I remember the government shut down. You can try and discredit this President- and by doing so, you only confirm my opinion of you. As far as I am concerned, as reporters introduce you on FOX and every other network, network they should say, “Here is the disgraced former speaker of the house”. When that happpens–the press will be doing its job. The American people need to be reminded-just how big of a pig you are.
November 7th, 2009 at 5:26 pmIf the founding fathers were alive they’d be horrified by the preponderance of automatic weapons and armor piercing bullets. What would they think of the 12 soldiers shot by the legally purchased “cop killer”? STFU Newton. Where were you when the Bush administration stomped all over the Constitution and W said it was just a damn piece of paper. And all of a sudden you’re a religious man. You disgust me.
November 7th, 2009 at 5:26 pmI wonder if Newt knows the difference between the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution? Or is he as ignorant John Bohner?
November 7th, 2009 at 5:26 pmNo, Newt, you buffoon & liar, the Founding Fathers would love Obama, his attempts at bringing the country together, & the way he has made the world appreciate the U.S. again, after 8 years of hating Bush/Cheney. What the Founding Fathers would criticize, even lambaste, is the way the GOP is trying to destroy democracy as they scream & yell like petulant children in Congress. The Founding Fathers would be mortified at the GOP’s ridiculous antics, their racism, their lying.
November 7th, 2009 at 5:28 pmLondra kulesi muhaf?z? It may be trendy among idiots to describe America’s founding fathers as slave owners but the reality is far more complex.
First of all not all of them owend slaves.
Second of all of those who did own slaves some owned less than three and others came by their ownership via inheritance or debt collection.
Thirdly more than one founder freed their slaves and if my memory is correct one of them was murdered for planning to do so.
I could further educate you but I frankly don’t think you’ll bother to even read this.
November 7th, 2009 at 5:29 pmGo ahead Newt, make my day. Run for President. We can start pulling the skeletons out of your closet.
November 7th, 2009 at 5:30 pmBush and Cheney would have sent the founding fathers to Gitmo.
November 7th, 2009 at 5:30 pmShayne@22, Yeah, and good ole Newt has a lot of them, doesn’t he?
November 7th, 2009 at 5:31 pmFor any rational, intelligent person, it’s really impossible to understand how the Repubs come up with the lying garbage they invent. We know they’ll do it, but it’s still so disturbing to see their blatant dishonesty & hatred of anything ethical.
November 7th, 2009 at 5:33 pm@ jalevitator “The same founding fathers, many of which were atheists?”
jalevitator your lack of historical knowledge is stunning.
Of the signers of the Consitution their religious affiliation were as follows:
Episcopalian/Anglican 31 55%+
November 7th, 2009 at 5:37 pmPresbyterian 16 29.1%
Congregationalist 8 14.5%
Quaker 3 5.5%
Catholic 2 3.6%
Methodist 2 3.6%
Lutheran 2 3.6%
Dutch Reformed 2 3.6%
Newt, Newt, Newt. If the founding fathers were alive today they would likely OWN Obama!
You should flip that. If Obama were alive in 1776, he likely would have been a slave. And, yes, many of the founding fathers, including George Washington and Thomas Jefferson owned slaves. That’s not racism, that’s just a fact.
Oh, and jalevitator, many were Diests, not athiests.
We must remember, Newt is speaking to evangelical christians and telling them what they want to hear. It does not matter that it is false, it matters that he said it.
November 7th, 2009 at 5:37 pmI wonder what our founding fathers would have thought about Newt’s collaboration with war profiteering lobbyists to legalize off-shore corporations?
November 7th, 2009 at 5:39 pmMr Jefferson – build up that wall.
November 7th, 2009 at 5:40 pmAnd what would Lincoln think of his Republican Party today? They are calling for secession, making racist attacks against the President, abandoning all decorm in the House of Representatives, putting States’ Rights paramount over the preservation of the Union, threatening violence, even revolution, all to keep from providing health care to the neediest of their fellow men, women and children.
Lincoln could not run as a Republican in today’s Republican Party.
November 7th, 2009 at 5:42 pm13, They’d marvel at a free black man being president and feel quite proud of themselves.
As well they should.
November 7th, 2009 at 5:42 pmNot all of them owend slaves.
Second of all of those who did own slaves some owned less than three and others came by their ownership via inheritance or debt collection.
Thirdly more than one founder freed their slaves and if my memory is correct one of them was murdered for planning to do so.
And of the signers of the Consitution their religious affiliation were as follows:
Episcopalian/Anglican 31 55%+
November 7th, 2009 at 5:44 pmPresbyterian 16 29.1%
Congregationalist 8 14.5%
Quaker 3 5.5%
Catholic 2 3.6%
Methodist 2 3.6%
Lutheran 2 3.6%
Dutch Reformed 2 3.6%
Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blind-folded fear.
- Thomas Jefferson
___
Stunning.
November 7th, 2009 at 5:46 pmSorry, Newt, but the Founding Fathers would be “very severe critics” of you and the other neocons who are trying to erase the separation of church and state they worked so hard to maintain. They REBELLED against a king who was also head of the Church of England. Woe to us if we merge church and state, as Iran and the Taliban have done, to abusive effect. No thanks! Is it any coincidence that the words “under God” were added during the McCarthy era, a period of shame in American history? I think not. McCarthy was a repressive, embarassing figure whose influence we should remember in an effort never to repeat.
November 7th, 2009 at 5:48 pmI am anxious to see the doctrine of one god commenced in our state.
- Thomas Jefferson
___
Epic.
November 7th, 2009 at 5:49 pm@26 Sorry, I meant to say deists, not atheists. A typo being misunderstood for knowledge is not surprising from someone like you. But thanks for missing the larger point in your feeble attempt to belittle me over a typo. Stay classy! LMAO
November 7th, 2009 at 5:51 pm“All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions, set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power and profit.” Thomas Paine
“I do not believe in the creed professed by the Jewish Church, by the Roman Church, by the Greek Church, by the Turkish Church, by the Protestant Church, nor by any Church that I know of. My own mind is my own Church.”
[Thomas Paine, The Age of Reason]
I do not believe that any type of religion should ever be introduced into the public schools of the United States.
November 7th, 2009 at 5:52 pmThomas Edison
ROTFLMFAO
Thomas Edison was not a founding father.
November 7th, 2009 at 5:53 pm“Should the infidel Jefferson be elected to the Presidency, the seal of death is that moment set on our holy religion, our churches will be prostrated, and some infamous prostitute, under the title of goddess of reason, will preside in the sanctuaries now devoted to the worship of the most High.”
- The New England Palladium, 1800 presidential race
____
Sounds familiar to our time.
November 7th, 2009 at 5:54 pmjalevitator once again of the signers of the consitution their religions were as follow:
Episcopalian/Anglican 31 55%+
November 7th, 2009 at 5:56 pmPresbyterian 16 29.1%
Congregationalist 8 14.5%
Quaker 3 5.5%
Catholic 2 3.6%
Methodist 2 3.6%
Lutheran 2 3.6%
Dutch Reformed 2 3.6%
The rest of the quote:
“I am anxious to see the doctrine of one god commenced in our state. But the population of my neighborhood is too slender, and is too much divided into other sects to maintain any one preacher well. I must therefore be contented to be an Unitarian by myself, altho I know there are many around me who would become so, if once they could hear the questions fairly stated.”
- Thomas Jefferson
___
For some reason you omitted it.
November 7th, 2009 at 5:57 pmIndeed Melvin misinformation took place even in Jefferson’s time.
November 7th, 2009 at 5:57 pmif they were alive today, he suggested that they would be “very severe critics” of President Obama
– - Because the founding fathers were by their nature highly critical of the intricacies of government. They might criticize Obama but they’d have hung the BushCo Crime Family.
November 7th, 2009 at 5:58 pmHey, cd.
November 7th, 2009 at 5:58 pmThomas Edison WAS the founding father of music videos,
by way of the phonograph and movie camera.
This comment has been voted down. Click to read.
I love how the winguts use the term “Founding Fathers” as if they were some monolithic fraternity that all agreed on the shape and design of the fledgling nation.
In fact, they fought among themselves just as vigorously as Democrats and Republicans do today.
November 7th, 2009 at 6:01 pm42, Yes, they had their Rupert Murdoch’s too.
November 7th, 2009 at 6:02 pmWhat would the founding fathers think of your personal life Newt? Face it, you’re not a good human, but you are a sanctimonious blowhard.
November 7th, 2009 at 6:02 pmokie Edition may or may not have done many things this thread however is about America’s founding fathers and Newt’s being an idiot not about famous inventors.
November 7th, 2009 at 6:03 pmcd says:
November 7th, 2009 at 5:37 pm
There’s a difference being affiliated with a certain religion, and being religious. Most of the Founding Fathers were Deists, and they had excellent reasons for wanting to keep church and state separate.
If anything, they’d be highly disappointed by the blurring of the lines regarding that issue.
November 7th, 2009 at 6:03 pm45, He was lonely for other Unitarians the way you’re lonely for logic and intellect.
November 7th, 2009 at 6:04 pm@ 32. cd says:… And of the signers of the Consitution their religious affiliation were as follows:
Episcopalian/Anglican 31 55%+
Presbyterian 16 29.1%
Congregationalist 8 14.5%
Quaker 3 5.5%
Catholic 2 3.6%
Methodist 2 3.6%
Lutheran 2 3.6%
Dutch Reformed 2 3.6%
November 7th, 2009 at 5:44 pm
No no no, cd, I tell ya they was Talibabtists; just go down to yer local First Talibabtist Church of the South Ron Talibabtist Conventions and they’ll tell ya that no matter what the Founding Fathers’ official affiliation, they was all Talibabtists. (just a touch more snark and it’ll be ripe)
I have great disrespect for the people that engage in discussions of what religion or Christian sect the Founders held to because a number of those churches have changed significantly since that time, and more importantly, the modern evangelical movement hadn’t even come into being then. We could more easily divide the Founders simply into members of the established church (Church of England or Catholic) and those who came from Dissenting Church or Protestant backgrounds; they did live in a time when there was perhaps more substance to the Dissenting or Protestant tradition.
The Fracking Newtster ought to know better than to stick his oar in that water, or anywhere else regarding what the Founders may or may not have thought (but he obviously doesn’t). The Founders were men of their time and Newt is an idiot creature of ours, so Newt’s assumption that he can say with certainty what they would think is just more bloviating BS.
November 7th, 2009 at 6:07 pmThe Jefferson Bible.
He took out the miracles and the mysticism.
Careful cd. It might burn your eyes.
November 7th, 2009 at 6:09 pmZooey much as some would love to claim the majority of the signers of the Consitution were Deists the reality is about 90% of them were undeniably Christians as far as all evidence point.
And of the remaining 10% their religious beliefs were of such that I doubt they can be encapsulated with a single word.
November 7th, 2009 at 6:09 pm@ Virtual Pebble lol now that was funny!
Thanks man I needed a good joke and unlike some peoples your snark about the Talibabtists was awsome.
November 7th, 2009 at 6:12 pmfunny how everytime the newt opens his mouth…crap falls out.
November 7th, 2009 at 6:14 pmMillions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined and imprisoned; yet we have not advanced one inch towards uniformity.
-Thomas Jefferson
“““““““““`
EPIC
November 7th, 2009 at 6:14 pmMany called themselves “Christian”.
And made slavery legal.
Is slavery “Christian”?
If not then were the founding fathers really “Christian”?
November 7th, 2009 at 6:14 pmIn every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own.
-Thomas Jefferson
“““““““““`
EPIC
November 7th, 2009 at 6:16 pmRidicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them; and no man ever had a distinct idea of the trinity. It is the mere Abracadabra of the mountebanks calling themselves the priests of Jesus.”
-Thomas Jefferson,
“““““““““`
EPIC
November 7th, 2009 at 6:17 pmquote mining?
really?
November 7th, 2009 at 6:17 pmIn spite of right-wing Christian attempts to rewrite history to make Jefferson into a Christian, little about his philosophy resembles that of Christianity. Although Jefferson in the Declaration of Independence wrote of the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God, there exists nothing in the Declaration about Christianity.
Although Jefferson believed in a Creator, his concept of it resembled that of the god of deism (the term “Nature’s God” used by deists of the time). With his scientific bent, Jefferson sought to organize his thoughts on religion. He rejected the superstitions and mysticism of Christianity and even went so far as to edit the gospels, removing the miracles and mysticism of Jesus (see The Jefferson Bible) leaving only what he deemed the correct moral philosophy of Jesus.
Distortions of history occur in the minds of many Christians whenever they see the word “God” embossed in statue or memorial concrete. For example, those who visit the Jefferson Memorial in Washington will read Jefferson’s words engraved: “I have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility against every from of tyranny over the mind of man.” When they see the word “God” many Christians see this as “proof” of his Christianity without thinking that “God” can have many definitions ranging from nature to supernatural. Yet how many of them realize that this passage aimed at attacking the tyranny of the Christian clergy of Philadelphia, or that Jefferson’s God was not the personal god of Christianity? Those memorial words came from a letter written to Benjamin Rush in 1800 in response to Rush’s warning about the Philadelphia clergy attacking Jefferson (Jefferson was seen as an infidel by his enemies during his election for President). The complete statement reads as follows:
“The returning good sense of our country threatens abortion to their hopes, & they [the clergy] believe that any portion of power confided to me, will be exerted in opposition to their schemes. And they believe rightly; for I have sworn upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man. But this is all they have to fear from me: & enough too in their opinion, & this is the cause of their printing lying pamphlets against me. . .”
Jefferson aimed at laissez-faire liberalism in the name of individual freedom, He felt that any form of government control, not only of religion, but of individual mercantilism consisted of tyranny. He thought that our civil rights have no dependence on our religious opinions, any more than our opinions in physics or geometry.
If anything can clear of the misconceptions of Jeffersonian history, it can come best from the author himself. Although Jefferson had a complex view of religion, too vast for this presentation, the following quotes provide a glimpse of how Thomas Jefferson viewed the corruptions of Christianity and religion.
by Jim Walker
November 7th, 2009 at 6:18 pmLiz one could just as easily write:
Many called themselves “Americans”.
And made slavery legal.
Is slavery “ American”?
If not then were the founding fathers really “ American”?
November 7th, 2009 at 6:19 pmGlad to see you admit to it.
November 7th, 2009 at 6:19 pmThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
America and Americans are not a religion. We are a secular nation.
That was easy.
November 7th, 2009 at 6:21 pmThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
65, cd, this might be a good time for you to post your breakdown of the religious affiliations of the signers of the Constitution again.
November 7th, 2009 at 6:22 pmThomas Paine:
I do not believe in the creed professed by the Jewish church, by the Roman church, by the Greek church, by the Turkish church, by the Protestant church, nor by any church that I know of…Each of those churches accuse the other of unbelief; and for my own part, I disbelieve them all.”
Thomas Jefferson:
The Christian priesthood, finding the doctrines of Christ levelled to every understanding and too plain to need explanation, saw, in the mysticisms of Plato, materials with which they might build up an artificial system which might, from its indistinctness, admit everlasting controversy, give employment for their order, and introduce it to profit, power, and pre-eminence. The doctrines which flowed from the lips of Jesus himself are within the comprehension of a child; but thousands of volumes have not yet explained the Platonisms engrafted on them: and for this obvious reason that nonsense can never be explained.”
James Madison:
“Religious bondage shackles and debilitates the mind and unfits it for every noble enterprise.”
“During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What have been its fruits? More or less in all places, pride and indolence in the Clergy, ignorance and servility in the laity, in both, superstition, bigotry and persecution.”
Benjamin Franklin:
As to Jesus of Nazareth, my Opinion of whom you particularly desire, I think the System of Morals and his Religion…has received various corrupting Changes, and I have, with most of the present dissenters in England, some doubts as to his Divinity; tho’ it is a question I do not dogmatize upon, having never studied it, and think it needless to busy myself with it
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
EPIC
November 7th, 2009 at 6:23 pmcd, you’re strecthing here. The founding fathers, whether christian or deists, were VERY emphatic about the separation of their faith and the state. For eye of newt to imply otherwise is totally off the mark.
November 7th, 2009 at 6:23 pmcd says:
November 7th, 2009 at 6:09 pm
It seems important to you, for some reason, that the founding fathers were christians. Ok, whatever.
The FACT is that the founding fathers wanted this country to be secular — in other words, not religious.
You can argue with me until you’re blue in the face about whether or not the founding fathers were christians — practicing or not — but you cannot get around their desire for a secular nation.
November 7th, 2009 at 6:23 pmcd, you can f**k yourself with your father’s d**k you anti-American, twat.
November 7th, 2009 at 6:24 pmHis comments and lack of thorough knowledge of U.S. history show why Newt was a professor of European history at West GA College.
November 7th, 2009 at 6:24 pmoops..stretching. Darn I wish I had payed attention is spelling class.
November 7th, 2009 at 6:24 pmLiz it is an example I thought you’d get that.
November 7th, 2009 at 6:24 pmOh dear Matt seems to be having a bad day.
November 7th, 2009 at 6:25 pmSorry Zooey. I didn’t type quickly enough. You made to same point more coherently
November 7th, 2009 at 6:26 pmOf course many of the Founding Fathers would be severe critics of President Obama. He’s a black man! I doubt few (if any) of the founders would have agreed with the concept. Heck, most of them were okay with slavery.
Ya know what? That doesn’t matter. The Founding Fathers put us on the pathway to being a nation that can improve ourselves over time. That was their greatness.
November 7th, 2009 at 6:26 pmcd, you’re the one that f**ks on your own father; hence, it appears you are having the bad day and life, you terrorist supporting lowlife.
November 7th, 2009 at 6:26 pmIf Newt thinks the founding fathers were against Health Care, he’s probably right.
Back in those days, Health Care was Hazardous to your Health.
November 7th, 2009 at 6:26 pmBTW, how come conservatives always project that God and the Founding Fathers would always be on their side? It never occurs to them to stop and consider.
November 7th, 2009 at 6:27 pmThe founding Father’s would be ashame of Newt and his Republican male friends looking at Sarah as a sex object. Rusm racist druggie Limbaugh being the leading of the Republican Party. Newt only wants the top job in the White House so he can get some more woman. John Boehner showed he can’t read and is clueless of the US Constitution.
November 7th, 2009 at 6:28 pmGood point Badger.
My memory is that back in those days if you went to the hospital for anything you had a 50/50 chance of leaving alive.
November 7th, 2009 at 6:28 pm“Liz it is an example I thought you’d get that.”
s/b “Liz it is an example. I thought you’d get that.”
or “LIz it is an example, I thought you’d get that.”
___
It is a false comparison and does not work.
November 7th, 2009 at 6:28 pm83, LOL, how old are you?
November 7th, 2009 at 6:30 pmWhy thank you liz for pointing out that in my haste to post I made a mistake.
November 7th, 2009 at 6:31 pmI think it’s probably no accident that the right wing specifies the “signers of the constitution, not the framers, or the religious affiliation of the “founding fathers” overall. But one of the signers, James Wilson of Pennsylvania is shown to be Episcopal/Deist, perhaps considering his religion by birth and that of practice.
November 7th, 2009 at 6:33 pmCd,
Didn’t George Washington die from being Bled to Death by his Physicians …who were following Accepted 17th Century Medical Procedures?
November 7th, 2009 at 6:34 pmThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
CD, I’m still trying to see your point. The Founding Fathers (according to your stats) were varous Christian denominations. This proves what, exactly.
My recollection of history (history minor) is that they still wanted a SECULAR government. A government that didn’t want religious doctrine to enter into the equation.
November 7th, 2009 at 6:35 pmHis forefathers wouldn’t understand the 21st century, you idiot.
The founders would have shot newtie and the rest of the teabaggers. If you really want to know.
They would be proud of President Obama.
November 7th, 2009 at 6:36 pmNewt is now officially a has-been. Now that the Right-wing nut jobs have taken over the Repug Party, Newt isn’t ‘Conservative’ enough (????). The Palins and the Limpballs are now putting up the Hoffmans and the Rubios. I still laugh when I remember the Righties saying they DIDN’T lose NY, just wait till next year! Just like their argument that the American people are ‘center right’ not ‘center left’ LOL! Yeah Repugs, you keep believing that.
November 7th, 2009 at 6:37 pmcd
slavery goes back thousands of years so it is hardly an american invention
November 7th, 2009 at 6:42 pm…”we continue to drive God out of public life”
Newt is just pulling things out of his round, fat ass.
He doesn’t have a clue about the founding fathers – they were deists — Deists asserted that everything that concerned the physical and human universes could be comprehended independently of religious concerns or explanations.
They never had any intention of “god” governing our government.
November 7th, 2009 at 6:43 pmP.D.@92 Great comment. What’s disturbing to me is that Eye of Newt is now considered moderate and “mainstream”. Where the heck does that leave Everett Dirksen, John Lindsey et. al.? Socialists? Commies? Or just plain run of the mill Whakos?
November 7th, 2009 at 6:43 pmP.D. I agree with you. He’s old, he’s tired and Rushbo hates him. Power and influence have slipped through his fingers. Beck wags the dog. Newt’s day is done.
November 7th, 2009 at 6:44 pmOf the Special Elections to fill congressional vacancies , since Obama took office…
The Dems are 5 for 5.
But according to the main stream Pundits;
the Democratic Party is in shambles after Tuesday’s elections!
November 7th, 2009 at 6:44 pm@ stormy
It stands to reason they wouldn’t want a Church dominating the country they way the Anglican Church had dominated England.
It also stands to reason that they would want everyone to be able to practice any civilized religion they wished.
But did each and every one of them want a wall between the government and even the most generalized, ecumenical, universalistic hope of a deity/deities?
I’m not sure.
Whatever they believed though they weren’t jerks like Newt about it.
November 7th, 2009 at 6:46 pmThe founding fathers would drop you off in indian country, Newt.
November 7th, 2009 at 6:48 pmcd says:
Whatever they believed though they weren’t jerks like Newt about it.
On that we can agree, Count of St. Germain.
November 7th, 2009 at 6:48 pmThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
If we continue to drive the Flying Spaghetti Monster out of public life, and we continue to regulate corporations, we are
literally putting our freedom at risk.
There. FIFY, Newt.
November 7th, 2009 at 6:51 pmWell, Newt, the forefathers definitely were not for selling your ethically challenged office you sold to lobbyists.
Pseudo Aretes are a cancer on society
November 7th, 2009 at 6:51 pmCD,
“But did each and every one of them want a wall between the government and even the most generalized, ecumenical, universalistic hope of a deity/deities?”
Yeah, I’m fairly sure that they did. Otherwise, why an ammendment specifically separating church and state. They wanted a wall.
It’s my belief that they wanted religious beliefs to be what they should be………personal. You want to believe in the fairy in the sky..Your choice. A choice that may be correct, but one in which I put not credence.
November 7th, 2009 at 6:52 pmSockpuppetry
November 7th, 2009 at 6:53 pmCD,
You haven’t answered yet. Where is E. Dirksen and J. Lindsey in todays GOP?
Just curious.
November 7th, 2009 at 6:58 pmStormy he part of the First Amendment you are refering to reads: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof”
November 7th, 2009 at 6:58 pmsorry that should read “he part”
November 7th, 2009 at 7:00 pmCD@107,
Maybe I’m just dense, but that sounds a lot like a wall to me.
Freedom of religion is also freedom FROM religiion. Why then to the crazies on the right insist that their God is the only god, and If I’m a non-believer, I’m somehow I become irrelevant?
November 7th, 2009 at 7:02 pmMathazar:
We hardly regulate big business they way you think. Hell they own the congress and senate.
if they are as regulated and controlled as you say how did they get nearly half of the nations wealth???
see below link and except
http://economics.about.com/library/weekly/aa043004a.htm#_ftn3
Political philosopher David Schweickart pinpoints income inequality reality with a dramatic statement: “…If we divided the income of the US into thirds, we find that the top ten percent of the population gets a third, the next thirty percent gets another third, and the bottom sixty percent get the last third. If we divide the wealth of the US into thirds, we find that the top one percent own a third, the next nine percent own another third, and the bottom ninety percent claim the rest. Actually, these percentages true a decade ago, are now out of
date. The top one percent are now estimated to own between forty and fifty percent of the nation’s wealth, more than the combined wealth of the bottom 95%.”[3]
November 7th, 2009 at 7:02 pmHaving been to the Jefferson Memorial in October, I was struck by this inscription:
“I am not an advocate for frequent changes in laws and constitutions. But laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind. As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths discovered and manners and opinions change, with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also to keep pace with the times. We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors.” Thomas Jefferson
November 7th, 2009 at 7:06 pmI can’t even think of a political Party full of Bachmans and Palins. Number 1, They are stupid, Number 2, Their religious beliefs are truly frightening. Number 3, They are crazy. Just like when Rep. King stated EVERYBOBY has health insurance on the floor today, or Virginia Foxx’s comment that Matthew Shepard’s death was a botched robbery. These people has no business making legislation, Hell, they have no business working in a drive thru window at Burger King.
November 7th, 2009 at 7:09 pmCD,
I apologize. I asked the question about Dirksen and Lindsey of someone else. I thought I asked you. But as long as we’re here, Where do you think they would stand in the GOP of today?
November 7th, 2009 at 7:09 pmToday’s Politicians give lip service to a Secular Society…but I’ll believe it when a self proclaimed Athiest gets elected to anything.
November 7th, 2009 at 7:10 pmIt’s cool stormy.
IMHO to say constitutional interpetation is complex is may be the understatement of the year.
And the founders personal opinions don’t make it any easier.
What is to be said after all about someone who not only allows but attends weekly church services in the US House of Representatives?
November 7th, 2009 at 7:12 pmP.D. says:
——————————————————————————–
I can’t even think of a political Party full of Bachmans and Palins. Number 1, They are stupid, Number 2, Their religious beliefs are truly frightening. Number 3, They are crazy. Just like when Rep. King stated EVERYBOBY has health insurance on the floor today, or Virginia Foxx’s comment that Matthew Shepard’s death was a botched robbery. These people has no business making legislation, Hell, they have no business working in a drive thru window at Burger King.
P.D. Great comment that deserves repeating. I am more frightened of this than I am of any terrorist attack. The guy on the soap box in the park is one thing, elected officials calling for revolution is quite another.
November 7th, 2009 at 7:12 pmAs for the separation of Church and State Thomas Jefferson had this to say:
“Almighty God hath created the mind free…All attempts to influence it by temporal punishments or burthens…are a departure from the plan of the Holy Author of our religion…No man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship or ministry or shall otherwise suffer on account of his religious opinions or belief, but all men shall be free to profess and by argument to maintain, their opinions in matters of religion. I know but one code of morality for men whether acting singly or collectively.”
November 7th, 2009 at 7:13 pmAnd this man is a history professor ?!
Is our children learning ?
November 7th, 2009 at 7:14 pmDirksen and Lindsey?
They’d likely be treated like Collins and Snowe unless the GOP could find a sure fire way to have them removed from office and a Gopeep put in their place.
November 7th, 2009 at 7:14 pm“I’ll believe it when a self proclaimed Athiest gets elected to anything.”
You’ll believe what?
November 7th, 2009 at 7:15 pmcd says:
——————————————————————————–
It’s cool stormy.
IMHO to say constitutional interpetation is complex is may be the understatement of the year.
And the founders personal opinions don’t make it any easier.
What is to be said after all about someone who not only allows but attends weekly church services in the US House of Representatives?
As long as those services are not conducted on”government” time I have no problem with that. But you still haven’t addressed by argument that the 1st ammendent isn’t a wall.
Having a congressional chaplin is something with which I’ve never been comfortable. It’s obviously a rather low wall.
November 7th, 2009 at 7:16 pmNobody does Bible thumping/flag humping like Newt Gingrich. But how can Gingrich call himself a patriot when he dodged the draft during the Vietnam War? Gingrich applied for and received numerous college deferments from the military draft while he was actually cheerleading for the war.
November 7th, 2009 at 7:18 pmConservatism isnt religion. It makes use of religion.
November 7th, 2009 at 7:21 pmStormy I doubt that the services were held on government time since they took place on a Sunday.
But then we get off into the question of people having sunday off.
Anyhow the services were still held in a government building.
November 7th, 2009 at 7:22 pmThat Americans are free to believe in any God they choose…or to believe in No God at all…
without suffering any social sanctions. The Secular paradigm.
November 7th, 2009 at 7:22 pm“Xisithrus says: It makes use of religion”
Makes use of and abuses.
How’s is going tonight Xisithrus? It’s been a couple of weeks. Buth thanks again.
November 7th, 2009 at 7:24 pmNewt and many left and right consider public office ’serving’ your country.
They also use that rational [publically] to soak the taxpayer [Revolving doors]
My POV
November 7th, 2009 at 7:25 pmHow’s is going tonight Xisithrus?
I am good stormy, hope all is well with you and yours.
November 7th, 2009 at 7:26 pm118, Mathazar, thanks, that gave me a good laugh.
:)
November 7th, 2009 at 7:32 pmcd says: “Anyhow the services were still held in a government building”
I agree. That was the point I was trying to make with the congressional chaplin comment. It’s wrong in any sense of the word. But then again, being retired AF, it disturbed me that our tax dollars are being used to build chaples on military installations. I always justified it, in my mind at least, as something that obviously brings solice (sp?) to some is ok. After all, just because I beleive there isn’t a fairy in the sky, I have to right to deny others their belief.
Rationalization….maybe.
November 7th, 2009 at 7:33 pmericrazar, 110# I’m not sure if you noticed the anniversary
November 7th, 2009 at 7:36 pmthat just passed. Nov. 5 was ten years since Glass- Stegeall
was repealed. Recall Graham Leach Bliley ?
X, I also hope all is well with you and yours. It’s fantastic here.
CD, I’ve enjoyed our conversations. I hope you also have a great evening.
I’ve got to go and finish up fixing dinner for my wife…I wish both of you a terrific evening.
November 7th, 2009 at 7:40 pmI’m not sure Jell-o is the right substance…
Soft, moldable, and squishy… yes…
Jell-o??? No…
November 7th, 2009 at 7:43 pmI am not bothered by chapels on base as long as they arent engaging in prosyletising and that they are multi religious facilities not engaging in politics.
GN stormy, have a good evening
November 7th, 2009 at 7:46 pmAnd if Newt has to sockpuppet the founding fathers instead of making a cogent argument based on factual information..he has no plans, nothing to offer, I think.
November 7th, 2009 at 7:49 pm____________
And we all know just how vicious those Hindus can be…
November 7th, 2009 at 7:50 pmThings are about to heat up on Capitol Hill,
The Stupak Abortion Amendment is coming up for debate.
This Amendment is supposed to prevent Federal Funding of Abortion (except in cases of rape, incest, health of the mother) in accordance with the Hyde Ammendment.
What it really does, is prevent Women from being covered for a Legal Medial Procedure thru their Private Insurance Plan, which they Pay for themselves ….they must purchase a special supplemental policy which covers Abortions.
This Stupak Ammendment is Likely to pass…but many female congresspersons are Not Happy.
November 7th, 2009 at 7:51 pmMathazar 131
yea I know banking restrictions were relaxed about 10 years ago. Now you see what happens when you let the big banks and corporations run amuck with the new freedoms. They now have even more money to buy politicians.
http://www.investopedia.com/articles/03/071603.asp
November 7th, 2009 at 7:53 pmThis Amendment is supposed to prevent Federal Funding of Abortion (except in cases of rape, incest, health of the mother) in accordance with the Hyde Ammendment.
Are they talking about amending the Hyde amendment? WTF?
November 7th, 2009 at 7:55 pmMathazar says:
ericrazar, 110# I’m not sure if you noticed the anniversary
that just passed. Nov. 5 was ten years since Glass- Stegeall
was repealed. Recall Graham Leach Bliley ?
It’s a shame that Bush didn’t vetoed that bill, we wouldn’t be in such sad shape today.
November 7th, 2009 at 7:57 pmThe Stupak Abortion Amendment is coming up for debate.
I cant help but think this is actually about subsidising and the private insurance folks making it a pre-existing condition they wont want to pay for.
November 7th, 2009 at 7:58 pmThat is the Hyde amendment already stops federal funding for abortion and they want to do the same for subsidized [rescission basically] health insurance
November 7th, 2009 at 7:59 pmBadger says:
This Stupak Ammendment is Likely to pass…but many female congresspersons are Not Happy.
November 7th, 2009 at 7:51 pm
I see it as a steepening of the slippery slope toward making abortion completely illegal. And if not completely illegal, then virtually unattainable.
Women in this country are once again becoming second class citizens.
November 7th, 2009 at 8:02 pmThe GOP how found a new way to make me want to spit up.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/11/07/rep-quotes-infant-on-house-floor-maddie-wants-patient-choice/
November 7th, 2009 at 8:02 pmI think it has little to do with religion or making women second class citizens but that its profit motivated.
November 7th, 2009 at 8:03 pmLondra kulesi muhaf?z?
Mathazar says:
ericrazar, 110# I’m not sure if you noticed the anniversary
that just passed. Nov. 5 was ten years since Glass- Stegeall
was repealed. Recall Graham Leach Bliley ?
It’s a shame that Bush didn’t vetoed that bill, we wouldn’t be in such sad shape today.
Bush couldn’t have vetoed it that was on Clintons watch.
but bush helped deregulate a lot of stuff on his own.
November 7th, 2009 at 8:05 pmSo Newt took a brief trip into the logical realm then decided he likes it better on looney side. This is the Newt that I know.
November 7th, 2009 at 8:06 pmXisithrus says:
I think it has little to do with religion or making women second class citizens but that its profit motivated.
November 7th, 2009 at 8:03 pm
Just a couple happy side benefits to the profit, to make the Repiggies squeal with glee.
November 7th, 2009 at 8:06 pm“However, on religious issues there can be little or no compromise. There is no position on which people are so immovable as their religious beliefs. There is no more powerful ally one can claim in a debate than Jesus Christ, or God, or Allah, or whatever one calls this supreme being.But like any powerful weapon, the use of God’s name on one’s behalf should be used sparingly. The religious factions that are growing throughout our land are not using their religious clout with wisdom.They are trying to force government leaders into following their position 100 percent. If you disagree with these religious groups on a particular moral issue, they complain, they threaten you with a loss of money or votes or both. I’m frankly sick and tired of the political preachers across this country telling me as a citizen that if I want to be a moral person, I must believe in “A,” “B,” “C,” and “D.” Just who do they think they are? And from where do they presume to claim the right to dictate their moral beliefs to me? And I am even more angry as a legislator who must endure the threats of every religious group who thinks it has some God-granted right to control my vote on every roll call in the Senate. I am warning them today: I will fight them every step of the way if they try to dictate their moral convictions to all Americans in the name of “conservatism.” [Senator Barry Goldwater]
November 7th, 2009 at 8:06 pmLondra,
Please find a calendar, before you hurt yourself. 10 years ago, 1999, Bill Clinton was president, not the traitor dinkledoofus bush. It was Clinton who was pressured to sign that piece of crap bill, by the Out of control GOPER congress.
November 7th, 2009 at 8:06 pmThe evangelicals are hell bent to rewrite American history
the way they have with the bible and religion.
Having lived most all my life in what is now the buckle of the bible belt,
home to Crazy Michele’s alma mater,
I’ve witnessed (probably not the best word choice)
their numbers escalation as well as their fervor to proselytize and impose their beliefs on others, to the point of requiring legal protection.
Right now, a state rep from this area is consulting with the groundskeepers at the state capitol, on the best placement of a ten commandment monument that he plans to donate.
He knows it’s unconstitutional, but he simply doesn’t care,
yet he continues to hold office and participate in our government.
More than 70 people rallied Friday, on the steps of that same capitol,
protesting HB1595, which would require women seeking abortions to give personal information that would be posted on a state-run web site.
And a faith based private prison is being promoted by
November 7th, 2009 at 8:07 pm“Correctional Concepts” to the tiny town of Wakita, OK,
who is a three time convicted ex-con himself,
and has received “praises” from his fellow Texan, George W. Bush.
Women in this country are once again becoming second class citizens.
Well…that’s certainly true for Poor Women….or those that can’t afford Health Insurance.
Wealthier Women have ALWAYS had access to safe Abortions…even if they had to go to Sweden.
November 7th, 2009 at 8:08 pmDeath Counselor says:
November 7th, 2009 at 8:06 pm
The troll gets a chance for a “Clinton did it!,” and still fcuks it up.
November 7th, 2009 at 8:09 pmI ttruly amazes me how easy it is to deflate the relgious rights BS stance (doing the lord’s will) on Abortion or whatever.
The almighty gawd cannot control our freewill, that is a fact the right conceeds.
If the gawd cannot control, or know, our free will, the how does the human put themselves into a position MORE powerful than gawd, and say the human KNOWS the will of gawd?
OMFG Just blast ANY of the teabaggers with this conundrum.
They wish to elevate themselves to a status higher than their gawd.
November 7th, 2009 at 8:09 pmJust a couple happy side benefits to the profit, to make the Repiggies squeal with glee.
Oh sure, they will use religion, no doubt about that, only they [pro-lifers] havent seen how, for decades, the politicians like to keep that issue alive.
November 7th, 2009 at 8:11 pmBadger says:
Well…that’s certainly true for Poor Women….or those that can’t afford Health Insurance.
That’s more and more of us all the time.
Wealthier Women have ALWAYS had access to safe Abortions…even if they had to go to Sweden.
November 7th, 2009 at 8:08 pm
I remember my mom winking at the neighbor ladies when they talked about a woman having to go in for a D&C — she called it a “dusting & cleaning.” We weren’t wealthy, but apparently the women had an abortion resource on the down low.
November 7th, 2009 at 8:13 pmDeath Counselor says:
Londra,
Please find a calendar, before you hurt yourself. 10 years ago, 1999, Bill Clinton was president, not the traitor dinkledoofus bush. It was Clinton who was pressured to sign that piece of crap bill, by the Out of control GOPER congress
My bad, I must have been thinking of the 2000 Commodities Modernization Act, you know the Enron Loophole. That must have been Bush and his oil buddies, right?
November 7th, 2009 at 8:13 pmZooey says:
The troll gets a chance for a “Clinton did it!,” and still fcuks it up.
In your dreams you pissed soaked dumb azz.
November 7th, 2009 at 8:16 pmokie dokie,
I feel for you and the dimwits down there.
http://www.news9.com/global/story.asp?s=10945863
(the comments are great]
http://kwtv.images.worldnow.com/images/incoming/pdf/0902/FAITH%20(4).pdf
unfriggin-beleivable
November 7th, 2009 at 8:19 pmLondra kulesi muhaf?z? says:
In your dreams you pissed soaked dumb azz.
November 7th, 2009 at 8:16 pm
Now I’m going to cry for a whole week.
**eyes rolling**
November 7th, 2009 at 8:19 pmIt really burns me up to hear Newt claim to know what our founding fathers would say about our President. The party of no is not the same Republican party that Lincoln belonged. How come they keep acting so patriotic when discussing issues. I discovered on another blog the most of those who protests the loudest never served in the military…this burns me up…please read the names in the following link..it was an eye opener for me…..nuff said…
http://www.awolbush.com/whoserved.html
November 7th, 2009 at 8:19 pmLondra kulesi muhaf?z? mumbles:
My bad, I must have been thinking.
There, fixed it for ya.
November 7th, 2009 at 8:21 pmOT,
Arizona Republican Rep. John Shadegg Uses Baby [Maddie] As Prop During Anti-Health Reform Speech On House Floor
I hope she pukes on his $3500 imported Italian suit.
h/t Huffpo
November 7th, 2009 at 8:22 pmLondra, that act was passed with a republican congress [1994-2006] and Clinton could not veto it.
November 7th, 2009 at 8:22 pmBesides, the FIRE sector had been working for some time to defeat Glass Steagall and when it comes to the FIRE sector they play both sides of the political field
November 7th, 2009 at 8:23 pmThe problem with a two party political system is that its two wolves and a sheep voting on whats for dinner.
November 7th, 2009 at 8:26 pmdeath counsellor 154:
you would love this one for the evangelicals to make there head spin too.
You Don’t Need God to be Good
http://godisimaginary.wordpress.com/2009/02/13/you-dont-need-god-to-be-good/
and the founding fathers did have the right idea of chuch and state
(excerpt from above article)
“According to several global studies, the safest and most humane societies are the ones where religion and state are kept separate.
For example, the Journal of Religion and Society, a U.S academic journal, reported in 2005 that ‘higher rates of belief in and worship of a creator correlate with higher rates of homicide, juvenile and early adult mortality, STD infection rates, teen pregnancy and abortion in the prosperous democracies.’”
November 7th, 2009 at 8:29 pmOh yeah as if the piece of crap 2000 Commodities Future Modernization Act, didn’t have anything to do with the present meltdown. The GOP were the one’s who devised, drafted it, and then threw it into a late December, special session bill. Typical FCUKING REICHTWING PUSSIES THE GOP ARE OINE AND ALL. FUKCING GRAMM
“After the House passed H.R. 4541 press reports indicated Sen. Gramm was blocking Senate action based on his continued insistence that the bill be expanded to prevent the SEC from regulating swaps and the desire to broaden the protections against CFTC regulation for “bank products.”[45] Nevertheless, with Congress adjourned for the 2000 elections, but scheduled to return for a “lame duck” session, Treasury Secretary Summers “urged” Congress to move forward with legislation on OTC derivatives based on the “extraordinary bipartisan consensus this year on these very complex issues.”[46].
When Congress returned into session for two days in mid-November, the sponsor of H.R. 4541, Representative Thomas Ewing (R-IL), described Senator Gramm as the “one man” blocking Senate passage of H.R. 4541.[47] Senator Richard G. Lugar (R-IN), the sponsor of S. 2697, was reported to be considering forcing H.R. 4541 to the Senate Floor against Senator Gramm’s objections.[48]
After Congress returned into session on December 4, 2000, there were reports Senator Gramm and the Treasury Department were exchanging proposed language to deal with the issues raised by Sen. Gramm, followed by a report those negotiations had reached an impasse.[49] On December 14, however, the Treasury Department announced agreement had been reached the night before and urged Congress to enact into law the agreed upon language.[50]
The “compromise language” was introduced in the House on December 14, 2000, as H.R. 5660.[51] The same language was introduced in the Senate on December 15, 2000 as S. 3283.[52] The Senate and House conference called to reconcile differences in H.R. 4577 appropriations adopted the “compromise language” by incorporating H.R. 5660 (the “CFMA”) into H.R. 4577, which was titled “Consolidated Appropriations Act for FY 2001”.[53] The House passed the Conference Report and, therefore, H.R. 4577 in a vote of 292-60.[54] The Senate passed the Conference Report, and therefore H.R. 4577, by “unanimous consent.”[55] The Chairs and Ranking members of each of the five Congressional Committees that considered H.R. 4541 or S. 2697 supported, or entered into the Congressional Record statements in support of, the CFMA. The PWG issued letters expressing the unanimous support of each of its four members for the CFMA.[56] H.R. 4577, including H.R. 5660, was signed into law by President Clinton on December 21, 2000″
November 7th, 2009 at 8:30 pmAnd now for an example of misinformation.
Poor mad Matt quoted Franklin as having said
“As to Jesus of Nazareth, my Opinion of whom you particularly desire, I think the System of Morals and his Religion…has received various corrupting Changes[...]”
Does any one else notice the “…” in the quote?
What Matt left out was “as he left them to us, to be the best the world has ever seen, or is likely to see. But I believe”.
In other words the actual quote should read:
“As to Jesus of Nazareth, my Opinion of whom you particularly desire, I think the System of Morals and his Religion as he left them to us, to be the best the world has ever seen, or is likely to see. But I believe has received various corrupting Changes[...]“
November 7th, 2009 at 8:31 pm.
NEWT GINGRICH THINKS AMERICA SHOULD BE ATTACKED AGAIN!
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x5lmje_newt-gingrich-bush-should-allow-rem_news
.
November 7th, 2009 at 8:36 pm.
SO DOES OSAMMA BIN LADEN!
.
November 7th, 2009 at 8:37 pmHe didn’t ask you about President Obama, you washed up imbecile.
Our founders would be proud that there is only a few stupidass teabaggers left.
November 7th, 2009 at 8:38 pmLooks like the father-raped cd is obsessed with me now. I must have touched a nerve. EPIC! Please describe to us in detail, father f**ker, the “misinformation” that occurred in the truncated quote. In your thesis be sure to include how the meaning of the quote is changed, incest-loving terrorist.
Keep obsessing over me…
November 7th, 2009 at 8:39 pmcd, you father-raped loser, you’ve been making a fool of yourself for three hours straight. EPIC. Get a life, loser. I suppose your father is out at the bar picking up little boys, so you get a break from your nightly rituals. Have at it, loser.
November 7th, 2009 at 8:41 pmcd says:
November 7th, 2009 at 8:31 pm
Give it up, you’re being pathetic.
November 7th, 2009 at 8:41 pmWow Matt still thinks that by being foul he’s winning.
Now that’s pathetic.
November 7th, 2009 at 8:45 pmcd says:
And now for an example of misinformation.
Poor mad Matt quoted Franklin as having said
“As to Jesus of Nazareth, my Opinion of whom you particularly desire, I think the System of Morals and his Religion…has received various corrupting Changes[...]”
Does any one else notice the “…” in the quote?
What Matt left out was “as he left them to us, to be the best the world has ever seen, or is likely to see. But I believe”.
In other words the actual quote should read:
“As to Jesus of Nazareth, my Opinion of whom you particularly desire, I think the System of Morals and his Religion as he left them to us, to be the best the world has ever seen, or is likely to see. But I believe has received various corrupting Changes[...]“
That’s deep.
November 7th, 2009 at 8:46 pmThe founding fathers would be apalled at the corrupt government we have today.
November 7th, 2009 at 8:48 pmthis is what the banking establishment thinks of politicians
http://www.iamthewitness.com/DarylBradfordSmith_Rothschild.htm
it goes back over 200 years
1790: Mayer Amschel Rothschild states,
“Let me issue and control a nation’s money and I care not who writes the laws.”
1791: The Rothschilds get, “control of a nation’s money,” through Alexander Hamilton (their agent in George Washington’s cabinet) when they set up a central bank in the USA called the First Bank of the United States. This is established with a 20 year charter.
November 7th, 2009 at 8:51 pmThe founding fathers would be apalled at the corrupt government we have today.
I concur
November 7th, 2009 at 8:52 pmThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
Liz Morrison says:
OT,
Arizona Republican Rep. John Shadegg Uses Baby [Maddie] As Prop During Anti-Health Reform Speech On House Floor
I hope she pukes on his $3500 imported Italian suit.
h/t Huffpo
Oh please, how pathetic was that bs. He screwed up when he asked Mattie, Isn’t that right, Mattie.
The Senator had it right when he called him out on his stupid skit.
repugs are good for nothing.
November 7th, 2009 at 8:57 pmGingrich: The Founding Fathers would be ‘very severe critics’ of Obama if they were alive today.
WRONG.
The founding fathers would be severely upset if they saw the transnational corporate take over, running the media, our congress,defense, health care, pharmaceuticals, banks and shipping jobs over seas.
We are so screwed until we get campaign finance reform.
November 7th, 2009 at 9:00 pmMax Anax junius -1 says:
NEWT GINGRICH THINKS AMERICA SHOULD BE ATTACKED AGAIN!
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x5lmje_newt-gingrich-bush-should-allow-rem_news
and bin laden too!!!!
of course OSBL would . he was on the CIA payroll
http://www.unconfirmedsources.com/index.php?itemid=1935
November 7th, 2009 at 9:06 pmNEWT GINGRICH THINKS AMERICA SHOULD BE ATTACKED AGAIN!
If that happened, do you think Republicans in Congress would allow Obama to utilize warrantless wiretaps, monitoring of the internet, indefinite detentions without charges, waterboarding, invading one or more countries of his choice, so long as he says they were somehow connected to the attacks?
Would Republicans stand behind the President/Commander in Chief if he felt it necessary to declare martial law and implement the powers granted to Bush to utilize Regular Army forces on U.S. Soil?
Or would they filibuster and otherwise block everything Obama would propose to deal with the crises?
November 7th, 2009 at 9:23 pma major bombshell about OSBL
http://www.amconmag.com/article/2009/nov/01/00006/
he was on the gov payroll somehow.
November 7th, 2009 at 9:28 pmOT: as campaigns are around the corner, this site was brought up on progressive radio:
Republicans For Rape
from Huffington Post:
Franken’s amendment ended up passing, 68-30. Here’s a list of the Senators who showed broad support for Roman Polanski by voting against it:
Alexander (R-TN)
Barrasso (R-WY)
Bond (R-MO)
Brownback (R-KS)
Bunning (R-KY)
Burr (R-NC)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Coburn (R-OK)
Cochran (R-MS)
Corker (R-TN)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Crapo (R-ID)
DeMint (R-SC)
Ensign (R-NV)
Enzi (R-WY)
Graham (R-SC)
Gregg (R-NH)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Isakson (R-GA)
Johanns (R-NE)
Kyl (R-AZ)
McCain (R-AZ)
McConnell (R-KY)
Risch (R-ID)
Roberts (R-KS)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shelby (R-AL)
Thune (R-SD)
Vitter (R-LA)
Wicker (R-MS)
ADDENDUM: It’s been pointed out to me that the U.S. Chamber of Commerce lobbied against the Franken amendment as well
November 7th, 2009 at 9:28 pmOkay, it looks like we’re getting close to a vote on the House Bill. According to TPM, Democrats now have the 218 votes necessary to pass the HCR Bill(Finally!). Still no word on the anti-abortion amendment. I believe that vote is coming very soon from what I’ve seen. Still too close to say whether it will pass or not. Hopefully, enough Dems see that amendment for the sham that it is and will vote no. Stay tuned.
November 7th, 2009 at 9:33 pmNo wonder Gingrich has no comprehension
of the founding fathers intentions.
Look at the placement of that “EXIT” sign on the clip photo!
November 7th, 2009 at 9:45 pmhad enough says:
——————————————————————————–
OT: as campaigns are around the corner, this site was brought up on progressive radio:
Republicans For Rape
those republican pricks have no souls.
if what happened to Jamie Leigh Jones happend to their daughter’s maybe they wouldnt think so stupidly to just vote no
especially McCain with a daugter about that age.
November 7th, 2009 at 9:45 pmIf the founding fathers were alive today, it would be a medical miracle.
November 7th, 2009 at 9:58 pmOur Founding Fathers, culture, religion and worldview was nothing what Falwell, Dobson or Palin tried or try to project upon the masses. Our Founding Fathers were not Southern Baptist or Pentecostals. Read just a few of their quotes and remember a large number were the dreaded Free Masons that most right wing churches reject.
“Of all the tyrannies that affect mankind, tyranny in religion is the worst.” Thomas Paine
“Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined, imprisoned; yet we have not advanced an inch towards uniformity. What has been the effect of coercion? To make one half the world fools, and the other half hypocrites. To support roguery and error all over the earth.”
“Notes on Virginia” Thomas Jeffreson
“I wish it (Christianity) were more productive of good works … I mean real good works … not holy-day keeping, sermon-hearing … or making long prayers, filled with flatteries and compliments despised by wise men, and much less capable of pleasing the Deity.”
November 7th, 2009 at 10:00 pmWorks, Vol. VII, p. 75 Ben Franklin
182, GoL, Henry Waxman got off the best line of the night about Shadegg:
Henry Waxman made a joke and said: “That was a remarkable child,” “and a great ventriloquist.”
h/t C&L
November 7th, 2009 at 10:01 pm“And they would tell us that if we continue to drive God out of public life”
ole newtiepie must have one of experimental degrees in revisionsit history. the founding fathers saw what having “God in your life” created in colonial america during the witchcraft trials and had little use for religion and governance together.
November 7th, 2009 at 10:08 pmIf this passes, I can’t wait to see the ‘Tea-baggers’ reaction. I mean, Health Care for all, who wants that? Except for the SOBs who were SAVED when they collapsed at the rally. But they are so stupid, they don’t realize the ‘Government’ saved them. And when the rally was over some of them took the Mass Transit system, all the while complaining the trains were late….
November 7th, 2009 at 10:25 pmBreaking… House rejects abortion measure. Clearing the way for the full vote.
November 7th, 2009 at 10:33 pmGuess it’s time to invest in coat hangers, the democrat controlled house just voted to ban abortions in HCR.
November 7th, 2009 at 10:45 pmSilly newtie obviously didn’t pay too much attention in history class, otherwise he would have known that most of our founding fathers were deists. However, both deists and christians believed in a creator and “natural law” or “god’s law” and Jefferson did reference to it in the Declaration of Independence in “…The Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God…”, and paine also referenced god a few times in eaither “Common Sense” or “The Crisis” or both ( I can’t remember which one off the top of my head).
November 7th, 2009 at 10:53 pmP.D. say,
PD, are you sure? CNN has it passing 240-194. Thats unfortunate to say the least. I’ll check again but thats what I saw.
November 7th, 2009 at 11:00 pmSTFU Londra.
November 7th, 2009 at 11:01 pmJim@200, Amen to that. I’m to tired to deal with this crap.
November 7th, 2009 at 11:06 pmI’ve been watching highlites(if you can call them that) of the House debate. If the DCCC doesn’t make use of this video next year then they’re wasting a golden opportunity to paint the Repiggies for what they are.
November 7th, 2009 at 11:06 pmI have never seen such ad hominen attacks like the pigs have been making all night. It is seriously embarrasing to watch. I knew the GNOP was unhinged but this takes the cake. Bachmann needs to be committed to an insane asylum.
In the runup to a final vote, conservatives from the two political parties joined forces to impose tough new restrictions on abortion coverage in insurance policies to be sold to many individuals and small groups. They prevailed on a roll call of 240-194.
The vote added to the Democratic bill an amendment sponsored by Rep. Bart Stupak, D-Mich., and others, that prohibits individuals who receive insurance subsidies from purchasing any plan that pays for elective abortions.
Like I said a bit back
November 7th, 2009 at 11:08 pmOkay, back to the mud pits. I’ll check in later.
November 7th, 2009 at 11:08 pmSubsidies!
November 7th, 2009 at 11:09 pmJim@202, The whole thing was a disgrace. GOP leaders basically shouting down the women. Rep King claiming that everyone has Health care. WTF? These people are demented.
November 7th, 2009 at 11:11 pmJim Wolf359 says:
STFU Londra.
Oh sure, get mad at me! It’s your democrat party.
I’m just as concerned, I favor abortion. In fact, mandatory in many situations.
November 7th, 2009 at 11:11 pmXisithrus says@ 203,
I concur with that X. Does this replace Hyde or is it an add on? Hopefully, it gets stripped out of the Final Bill but I’m not hopeful of that.
November 7th, 2009 at 11:12 pmActually nothing has changed given the Hyde amendment.
Why they wasted so much time and effort..mind boggling
November 7th, 2009 at 11:14 pmLondra, crawl back into the hell hole you came out of or STFU! I’m really tired of your stupidity.
November 7th, 2009 at 11:14 pm207, I see your mom forgot to eat the afterbirth.
November 7th, 2009 at 11:15 pmJim@210, These trolls are as bad as the Repug leaders aren’t they? They don’t have a clue and are terminally stupid. I just try to ignore them. It makes me saner.
November 7th, 2009 at 11:16 pmP. D. says,
Yeah, they brought the Tea Party inside the House Chamber. wait till the Senate gets going.
November 7th, 2009 at 11:17 pmWhat a disgrace. The rest of the world must think we’re insane.
Okay, now I am going back to watch the rest of this travesty. Back after the vote or before if I really get fed up with it.
November 7th, 2009 at 11:18 pmKeep the faith gang.
Breaking… MSNBC House approves Bill.
November 7th, 2009 at 11:19 pmIts done! 220 yeas. It looks like Joeseph Cao was the lone republican to vote for it. Man, is his life about to become hell.
November 7th, 2009 at 11:20 pmFinal Count 220 to 215, WTF are the cretins who voted against health care for Americans? They will pay come election time.
November 7th, 2009 at 11:23 pmJim@216, Yeah, but it is his job. Cao is doing what is required, work for the people, not himself. I never understood how people look to politicians as Gods. In France, you piss off the people, they torch the city.
November 7th, 2009 at 11:26 pmNot a perfect bill, but a victory! Progress comes in fits and starts, but it’s coming!
November 7th, 2009 at 11:27 pmJoeseph Cao, Dede Scozzafava, lonely are the brave.
November 7th, 2009 at 11:27 pmLiz@220, If they were smart, they would become Dems. The Repug tent is getting smaller by the day. Unlike Repugs, we don’t require a ‘Litmus Test’ to see if you are pure enough. I believe in allowing all cultures and ideas, the Repugs want white, born again, and mostly male. Small tent indeed.
November 7th, 2009 at 11:31 pmP.D., The GOP wants Aryan Republicans.
November 7th, 2009 at 11:35 pmI concur with that X. Does this replace Hyde or is it an add on? Hopefully, it gets stripped out of the Final Bill but I’m not hopeful of that.
I think its toothless in regards to abortion and changes things very littl
I block the packets of dsta
November 7th, 2009 at 11:35 pmGN Folks
November 7th, 2009 at 11:40 pmThey put a new thread up with the news. On a Saturday night! I know, it’s amazing.
November 7th, 2009 at 11:42 pmWhats Nutty Newt talking about…Obama is now our father….just as he stated a few days before the election “we are fundamentally transforming America” so let us alone. Obama, with our help are not going to remodel the old building, we are going to completely tear it down and start over. Spreading the wealth around. Creating jobs. Taking from those who stole it in the first place and giving it freely to those who need it. Free health care fore everyone who cant afford it and you will be jailed if you can afford it and refuse to participate. Read the bill. This is the new America. A new day. Bush and all his repug friends who stole from the people to get rich will be brought to justice. All their sins will be revealed and they will be punished accordingly. This complete rebuilding of America in a way that reflects the progressive thinking of the 21st century and not ancient history will begin soon after the new year and I cant wait. Even the repugs will understand the philosophy….just like in kindergarten…..if someone brings cookies and there is not enough to go around the teacher will take them in, cut them up and all will receive equal share…..this will be the new America…..a strong central government will assure equality for everyone….long live Obama!
November 7th, 2009 at 11:50 pmcd says:
Londra kulesi muhaf?z? It may be trendy among idiots to describe America’s founding fathers as slave owners but the reality is far more complex.
It’s not complex at all. They didn’t believe Black folks were a whole person. They also went with the one drop rule. So saying the post isn’t a complicate d as you think it should be is just bs. The foundation of the Constitution is built on racism. That’s is just reality.
First of all not all of them owend slaves.
First of all who f9ucking cares. They benefited and their ancestors are still benefiting from the hideous practices, including the jim crow era. Now it the repug party.
Second of all of those who did own slaves some owned less than three and others came by their ownership via inheritance or debt collection.
I smell stromfront bullshit.
Thirdly more than one founder freed their slaves and if my memory is correct one of them was murdered for planning to do so.
BiG Whoop-De-F0ucking-Hoo, thank you masta for branding me, the infection did me good. You are out your f9ucking mind.
I could further educate you but I frankly don’t think you’ll bother to even read this.
Please don’t “educate” anybody. And I read your bs.
November 7th, 2009 at 11:57 pmHuge new prisons will need to be built to house the Republicans who fail to participate in the new American way of life. This will probably be one of the first new government labor projects to the rebuilding of America.
http://republicans.waysandmeans.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=153583
Actually I agree with Anita Dunn, Obamas soon to be Czar of journalistic acceptance and communications that Mao was a master at changing the attitudes of the non conformists quickly and efficiently as history tells us. Very smooth indeed and a shining light for future society’s to follow.
November 8th, 2009 at 12:01 amP.D. says:
Final Count 220 to 215, WTF are the cretins who voted against health care for Americans? They will pay come election time.
You are damn right!
November 8th, 2009 at 12:46 amSlappy @ 228,
What in the hell are you getting at?
It may be clear to you, but you have lost me.
November 8th, 2009 at 12:57 amNewt, if you’re hearing voices and you think they’re Madison, Jefferson & Co., see a doctor!
November 8th, 2009 at 1:21 amIf a godly man invokes a divinity, it can be inspiring.
If a true statesman invokes the “founding fathers” it can be inspiring.
Newt, you are an imposter, inspiring nothing, and breeding my contempt for you!
November 8th, 2009 at 1:40 amthey would kick your a$$, newtie.
November 8th, 2009 at 4:56 amWingers–who are always white guys–talk about the Founding Fathers as if they were guys driving around in pick-up trucks. The whole Age of Enlightenment, birth of science thing tends to get forgotten.
November 8th, 2009 at 5:28 amThe Founding Fathers would make the party of NO turn in their security badges, keys, health insurance and salaries being paid with taxpayer dollars and send them back home. The party of No is not earning their salaries for they do not do a day’s work. Obstruction is not governance.
November 8th, 2009 at 6:25 amHe is carefully choosing his words to appeal to the Tea Bag crowd just to sell books. He is a fraud.
November 8th, 2009 at 6:37 amNewt hypothesizes so much about things when he knows his hypotheses cannot be tested.
So, let me try one. The founding fathers put in place safeguards against people such as the state amphibian of Georgia (Newt Gingrich).
November 8th, 2009 at 7:07 amA Newt, NO SHIT!!!! The founding Fathers all owned slaves correct? Well fat ass let that stew for a miuntes
November 8th, 2009 at 7:54 amOf Course they know what the Founding fathers “would think”. They’re the same group that “knows” what GOD thinks. The founding fathers are a no brainer for them.
November 8th, 2009 at 9:20 amThe ONLY reason Newt dares to even mention the founding fathers is because they aren’t around to correct him.
If they were, I dare say that Newt (and irresponsible liars like him) would be the target of their criticism.
November 8th, 2009 at 9:31 amflight says:
Slappy @ 228,
What in the hell are you getting at?
It may be clear to you, but you have lost me.
flight you either have to watch Beck on Fox or follow rightwing media or you will never hear what Obama’s Czars believe or the speeches they make in the halls of academe…HAVE YOU EVER SEEN ONE HERE? Mao was a leader of China one time and Anita Dunn, Obamas communications Czar said in a speech to a graduating class that one of the 2 person she looks to for guidance is Mao who had to kill 70,000,000 people to achieve his goal….Maoism. As you know there are millions of redneck rightwing repugs that will NEVER conform for the betterment of society and the hope and change Americans voted for in the past election…..what do you do with them? Like Anita Dunn, Obamas advisor, said Mao had the answer. I know bullets are expensive but this could be one of the first big government work projects and it could start early next year. The elimination of these sub-standard American terrorist infestation is nothing that has not been done down through history dozens of times. Cleansing of Russia, China, Vietnam, Rome, Germany, Italy, Sudan, Darfur, the civil war for the love of a monkey it is something that just has to be done periodically and now it is time again. Its the way of the world and its always been that way! Not because I said it or she said it, its just the way it is and to deny it is to lie to yourself. This aint “HEAVEN MAN” no matter what Wavy Gravy may have said.
November 8th, 2009 at 10:54 am31. Harold Melvin says:
13, They’d marvel at a free black man being president and feel quite proud of themselves.
As well they should.
November 7th, 2009 at 5:42 pm
—————–
EXACTLY!!
November 8th, 2009 at 11:40 amGo ahead Newtie, run for President of these United States and get your ugly miserable face cracked all to pieces!!
November 8th, 2009 at 11:41 amMy response to Newt is: Prove it. If he says he can’t because they’re dead – exactly. Unless Newt, you can invent a time machine and go back and get the founding fathers to put it in writing, bring it back and show us what they said, SHUT UP YOU SCUM SUCKING PIG!!!
November 8th, 2009 at 12:31 pmObama addressed separation of church and state in “The Audacity of Hope”. His understanding was that the Founding Fathers rejected the idea of having a specific religion recognized as official religion of the U.S. government because it would lead to the same religious intolerance that drove many colonists to flee England. Americans would be free to worship as they saw fit. Even the fledgling evangelical movement (extremists at that time) was protected.
November 8th, 2009 at 1:30 pmNewt’s not thinking about 2012, he’s probably thinking about his next affair/divorce.
November 8th, 2009 at 1:33 pmmotorfingaz says:
13, They’d marvel at a free black man being president and feel quite proud of themselves.
I thought O’Bama was Irish?
November 8th, 2009 at 1:57 pm.
You know Newt, in the Catholic Church, LYING IS A SIN!
.
November 8th, 2009 at 3:18 pm.
Dear SlappyBastard,
Are you upset that Obama is only half white…
… Or is it that he passes as a black man?
.
November 8th, 2009 at 3:20 pmSlappy @ 241
It appears this is a right wing mantra, not the lefts. I haven’t heard of any Administration official even elude to discourse you are suggesting, but I do hear it repeatedly from the Right. I am beginning to suspect this is projection. The Republicans are at present conducting purges of the Republican Party, to cleanse the party of all but the true conservative element. The repeated references to Nazi Germany and fascism, indicate a perverse preoccupation with totalitarianism.
The conduct you are outlining is more in line with Republican behavior at present than anything I see concerning the Obama Administration, or the Democrats.
November 8th, 2009 at 3:24 pmThomas Mifflin is identified as a Quaker by the Library of Congress. A Worthy Company: Brief Lives of the Framers of the United States Constitution by M. E. Bradford was cited as the source stating he was later a Lutheran. (Source: Ian Dorion, “Table of the Religious Affiliations of American Founders”, 1997).
Either way he was a Christian.
George Clymer is regarded as a Quaker by the Library of Congress however the book Brief Lives of the Framers of the United States Constitution by M. E. Bradford was cited as the source stating he was later an Episcopalian. (Source: Ian Dorion, “Table of the Religious Affiliations of American Founders”, 1997).
Oh but there’s more:
Abraham Baldwin graduated from Yale College in 1772; subsequently studied theology at the college and was licensed to preach in 1775; served as a tutor in that institution 1775-1779, when he resigned to enter the Army as a chaplain in the Second Connecticut Brigade, Revolutionary Army, from 1777 until 1783, when the troops disbanded.
None of these men were deists let alone atheists.
November 8th, 2009 at 4:12 pmWho gives a shit what their attitudes about the possibilities of fantasy possibilities?
November 8th, 2009 at 4:23 pmthe 10 commandments in a nutshell:
1) be honest and faithful
2) no killing [ not negotiable]
But they need to add the following:
3) keep your religion to yourself
George Carlin
Newt has failed the commandments on each count… Newt has failed the Three Commandments and thereby he fails the ten commandments hands down…
Newt failed the Ten Commandments too in case there is any doubt.
November 8th, 2009 at 7:09 pmThe founding fathers would own the President. No, really.
Who gives a frack what those slave owning pukes would think.
November 8th, 2009 at 7:35 pmNewt looks like a Keebler elf.
November 8th, 2009 at 7:42 pmHis political ‘opinion’ carries about as much weight.
He just spews whatever crap is convenient to his campaign of self-promotion.
As a moderate Republican, I can tell you that I think the founding fathers would tell Gingrich to shut his mouth since it was their intent that every last person, whether black or white, has a God given right to express their opinions. Gingrich is free to express HIS opinion as I am sure he just did in this article but he does NOT speak for the founding fathers. It is rigid mind control people like Gingrich who has ruined the Republican name.
November 8th, 2009 at 8:42 pmWhy do these people think they know what our “Founding Fathers” were like? First it’s Beck and now Newtie.. Why are they trying to rewrite history? But then again, these are the same people who are trying to rewrite the Bible as well as the Constitution, so I guess it’s no suprise that they are trying to twist our “Founding Fathers” into something that would fit their own agenda.
November 8th, 2009 at 8:45 pmAs much as I despise Newtie, I would have to agree with him on this one.
November 8th, 2009 at 10:28 pmI think that most of the founding fathers would disapprove of President Obama.
Not because of any of his frankly corporatist and middle of the road policies, but because most of the founding fathers OWNED people who looked like him.
I think that most of the founding fathers would grab their chests and drop dead at the idea that a man with brown skin would ever be elected President.
Here’s to CHANGE.
Too bad that we haven’t seen any “Change you can believe in.” from President Obama.
SlappyBeggerino
Please tell us you are not REALLY that stupid and brainwashed. Only the stupidest people known to man would believe for one second that we would get any truth or insight from Beck or Fox. My GOD we get that you are a moron but PLEASE you are talking to intelligent people here. Not brainwashed morons like yourself. The whole Czar thing is a stupid red herring. Bush had more of them than Obama does. You are so stupid and so easily led it is pathetic. If you had the brains or any idea what self respect was you would be embarassed to be so stupid and gullible.
November 8th, 2009 at 11:52 pmThe founding fathers would not like a lot of things: domestic spying, pre-emptive wars, electronic voting machines, false flag operations, the CIA…
November 9th, 2009 at 12:20 am“Severe critics of Obama”? That’s a euphemism for they would whip him, then hang him for running away from the plantation.
November 9th, 2009 at 12:27 amA) Newt Gingrich just converted to catholicism. The supreme joke is overwhelmingly catholic and Newt is always ahead of the curve.
B) To the best of my knowledge, his lesbian sister is the only person in his immediate family that HAS NEVER BEEN OFF of the government tit. His mother might have worked for a couple of years in a JC Pennys but that was it. All of the family income from his stepfather to his children has ALL come from taxes.
C) This little weasel would prostitute his mother and his father if he could get one more little vote for whatever he is campaigning for.
D) Newt Gingrich is the best reason for not voting for the republican/democrat party in america. He is a total whore for the rich.
November 9th, 2009 at 3:22 amThe same “fathers” who would only have considered Mr. Obama 3/5 of a person. The president must be devastated by such an idea!
November 9th, 2009 at 10:32 amThe same “fathers” who would only have considered Mr. Obama 3/5 of a person? The president must be devastated by such an idea!
November 9th, 2009 at 10:32 amYeah, everyone seems to forget (conveniently) that the founding fathers had slaves. Bunch ‘a nice guys, huh? Also, I love the way Republicans quote the founding fathers, only when it suits their purposes. They ignore the founding fathers when they do something the founding fathers wouldn’t approve of. It’s called “being selective”, or convenient memory loss.
November 9th, 2009 at 10:55 amSo Gingrich, are you trying to tell me that The Founding Fathers would be thrilled with your party and the two men who occupied the White House before Obama – and what they did to the Constitution?
November 9th, 2009 at 11:35 amI don’t know which of the Founding Fathers Newt thinks would approve his trope about driving God out of public life. I’ll stick with this one:
“Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legislative powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should ‘make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof’, thus building a wall of separation between church and State.”
That was Founding Father Thomas Jefferson, Patriot, Philosopher, President, Wall Builder
November 9th, 2009 at 5:10 pmThat some people are unable to deal with the fact that the majority of the founders viewed themselves as Christians is sad.
November 10th, 2009 at 11:06 pm