I Wear Pants;995248 wrote:He's not the "best fiscally conservative candidate in the mix" he's the only one.

I Wear Pants;995248 wrote:He's not the "best fiscally conservative candidate in the mix" he's the only one.

believer;995373 wrote:Fair enough....but he still lacks the qualities necessary to get elected.

Cleveland Buck;995278 wrote:[video=youtube;CWKTOCP45zY][/video]

Dear Eric,

I am going to describe a candidate for you right now, and I want you to think about whether or not you would support him.

This candidate was for the individual mandate that served as the model for "ObamaCare." He was originally for the TARP bank bailouts before he was against them. He joined with Nancy Pelosi to promote the anti-business "global warming" agenda.

He slammed Paul Ryan's budget plan as "extreme," calling it "right wing social engineering."

You might think I am talking about Mitt Romney. Heck, you might think I'm talking about a liberal Democrat. But I'm not.

That candidate I'm talking about is Newt Gingrich. He is what I like to call a "counterfeit conservative."

And I have barely even scratched the surface!

My campaign team has put together a great video that tells you more about Gingrich and his liberal positions over the years. It tells you how he flip-flopped on a host of important issues.

And it shows, despite his claims, he is simply not a conservative.

You can take a look at the video HERE.




You might have seen recently that Mr. Gingrich traded on his former political office to land a $1.8 million lobbying contract with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

Why is this so disturbing?

Because while these out-of-control federal agencies were ruining the housing market and causing millions of homeowners to lose their homes and life savings, Newt Gingrich was earning millions advising them.

At that same exact time, I was publicly declaring they needed to be stopped before they ruined the economy.

I guess Newt Gingrich and I have a different idea of what to do with federal bureaucracies. I fight to rein them in and shut them down before they can do harm. He pads his personal bank account while they wreck our economy.

While I was fighting environmental extremists, the out-of-control EPA, and the Soros-funded green movement, Newt Gingrich was filming commercials with Nancy Pelosi.

While I was fighting government bailouts, Newt was saying he would have voted FOR them.

Don't be fooled by the words candidates use when they are running for office. Look hard at their records. My record is one of true limited government, anti-Washington, D.C. conservatism.

Newt Gingrich has a long record of liberal appeasement, flip-flopping on key issues, and lobbying for insider millions.

Millions. That's right. Remember the individual mandate I mentioned earlier that Newt supported? His healthcare group received nearly $40 MILLION in contributions from the healthcare industry.

I have rarely seen a candidate who represents so much of what is wrong with Washington and what is wrong with our political system.

We can and must demand better.

We must demand REAL conservative values. We must demand a person who puts faith, family, and freedom ahead of all else. And we must demand a candidate who has remained true to principle his entire career.

I believe I am that candidate, and I ask you to take a look at my Plan to Restore America at www.ronpaul2012.com.

You can tell I mean every word in it -- just as I've meant every word I have said in public life. And that's something that everyone will admit, whether they agree with all of my positions or not.

With me, what you see and hear is what you get. Wouldn't that be a nice change?

I am the only true conservative in the top tier of candidates running for the GOP nomination. And I ask for your support.

Together we can stop the counterfeit conservatives AND the liberals in the White House. We can take back and Restore America Now.


For Liberty,

Ron Paul

P.S. Whether it's flip-flopping on TARP, supporting the individual mandate that served as a model for "ObamaCare," joining with Nancy Pelosi in support of the global-warming crowd's radical agenda, or making millions off of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as they helped destroy our economy, Newt Gingrich is trying to pull the wool over our eyes.

He's what I call a "counterfeit conservative."

Here's an ad my campaign put together explaining his record of supporting liberal policies. Please take a moment to watch it.

And, if possible, contribute to my campaign as generously as you can to help me run this ad and get my message of liberty out with mail, internet advertising, and an all-out media blitz.

When 234 Marines were killed by a suicide bomber in Lebanon, Reagan did NOT invade half the world and engage in a ten year war that will end up bankrupting the nation, while at the same time turning the US into a police state.

No.

He left.

Basically saying: you people are all nuts and I'm not going to get a bunch of people killed fighting your endless dirty little wars.

That was Reagan

Cleveland Buck;995764 wrote:Think about it. What if a world war broke out right now? We are already on the verge of bankruptcy, are we really strong enough to win a war a like that? We don't even have any factories anymore, the dollar is at the edge of a cliff, no one wants to lend us any more money. We would be absolutely fucked. Our foreign and economic and monetary policies over the last 80 years have destroyed us.

rydawg5;995784 wrote:From the debates I've watched, Newt seems like he has what it takes to lead this country.

majorspark;995802 wrote:Well if it was a world war like the last one and the rest of the industrialized world destroyed itself and we ramped up our industrial might unscathed it might just save our ass. At least is worked for us the last time.

majorspark;995802 wrote:Well if it was a world war like the last one and the rest of the industrialized world destroyed itself and we ramped up our industrial might unscathed it might just save our ass. At least is worked for us the last time.

I Wear Pants;995815 wrote:I'd wager we'd be a battlefield in any new world war because of our position economically and militarily.

believer;995373 wrote:Fair enough....but he still lacks the qualities necessary to get elected.

Cleveland Buck;995813 wrote:Yes, let's not forget that it is the debates that are important. No one cares about what they really believe or what they have done in the past. It is critical that we elect someone that can spin their 30 second non-answers in the debates the most eloquently.

pmoney25;995748 wrote:Agreed. How long will it take for you to feel safer that another 9/11 wont happen? Another 10 years over there, how bout 20?


I would also like for someone to show me an example of an Empire that was successful the more it spread itself out and the more countries they occupied.

Cleveland Buck;995769 wrote:Here is one of the top comments on that Newt video up there. Smart guy.

rydawg5;995784 wrote:From the debates I've watched, Newt seems like he has what it takes to lead this country.

majorspark;995802 wrote:Well if it was a world war like the last one and the rest of the industrialized world destroyed itself and we ramped up our industrial might unscathed it might just save our ass. At least is worked for us the last time.

Cleveland Buck;995826 wrote:Back then our money was still worth something, and we were a creditor nation. We had money. We have nothing now. We really don't even have any credit anymore since we are just printing the money to buy our debt anyway. Are people going to work for free? We are going to mobilize for a world war while starving here at home? We would have to try to form a military dictatorship for it to work at all, only then we would need the military here instead of around the world because the fiercest fighting would be here against our own government.

I Wear Pants;995815 wrote:I'd wager we'd be a battlefield in any new world war because of our position economically and militarily.

majorspark;995902 wrote:... keynsian ec kkk eeeee a'l;jdfkjdafpoiq[puer[qper[pqi[poeripqoierp[oqip[eiq[owr[qrpiap[eiew[ economics ...

majorspark;995902 wrote:I agree. There was a little veiled humor behind the comment. Also a veiled point that FDR and keynsian economics did not lift us out of the depression. Nearly all of the industrialized world was destroyed save us. Appearently no one got it.

O-Trap;995906 wrote:lol'd