Newt, an intelectual but...

RandFan said:
That's a damn good point. There is nothing, nothing a president could do that would cause foreigners to attack America. For instance, NO WAY radicals would crash planes into the twin towers and drag America into two costly wars.
Click to expand...

Now try reading what I wrote and responding to that.
 
I'd call Newt an intellectual who's lacking in conviction and integrity. I respect him as an intelligent man, but at the same time he's shown that he'll change what he says he believes to fit in with what he thinks you want to hear. I've seen Newt be so very many different people. Right now he's being Newt the anti-establishment outsider. Since I don't believe he actually changes his core beliefs, only his outward appearance, he comes off to me as slimy and devious.

I have this complaint about lots of politicians; Newt is not unusual. I wish they'd just clearly state what they believe and what they plan to do, so we could actually make an intelligent choice and vote for someone who actually might do the things they say. Instead we have people trying to appeal to everyone, even the voters that know they won't actually represent and the voters they plan to actively work against.
 
Brainster said:
I'm not a Newt supporter, but I have to question whether this is realistic. There can't be a country foolish enough to go voluntarily to war with the United States no matter what the President says.
Click to expand...

If the President said something that would make a foreign government fear immanent first strike, they might think it prudent to pre-empt.
 
Even NPR, while detailing how even his rationale for his idea is BS, described him as a "professor stirring up debate". No, he proposed a plan for poor kids with ignorance as to their environment and based on fuzzy ideas about puritan work ethic.
 
Ginrich is not an intellectual.

He just plays one on TV.

I have no respect for that guy.
 
Cleon said:
Newt's one of those people that's good at sounding intellectual. He's got the confidence, the "let-me-explain-it-to-you" demeanor, the whole bit. He doesn't rant, he explains. He's damn good at sounding like he knows what he's talking about.
Click to expand...

That's a pretty good bit of sounding, confidently, intellectual, using a let-me-explain-it-to-you demeanor. You haven't ranted, you've explained. You're damn good at sounding like you know what you are talking about.

But you know what? IF you actually had the intellectual integrity to take on Newt's ideas, you'd simply - and accurately - enumerate some of them, and then apply your astute confidence and intellectual demeanor to criticizing those ideas.

There'd be no need to lie about what his ideas were, or misrepresent them, as is the case 90% of the time on this forum.
 
RandFan said:
Let's be fair, Newt did suggest that the movie Boys Town would be a good model to solve problems for many poor children.
Click to expand...

:dl:

The sad thing is that at first I thought you were talking about Boystown, Chicago's gay village. There are places like the Center on Halsted there that are, among other community programs, assisting homeless LGBT youth. It turns out the local bourgeoisie queers didn't like the homely kids hanging about, and a few cases of violence against the kids (with just a hint of race bias) lead to "community outrage" and wanting to "take their neighbourhood back". Of course, this ignores that they still have quite low crime rates for a Chicago neighbourhood. The whole thing makes me really bitter.
 
My biggest complaint about Newt isn't intelligence or ethics or how he treated his wives. I don't like that he resigned from the Congress as soon as he lost control. He'd just been elected. If you're going to run you should stick around to represent the people who elected you. What would he do as president if he couldn't get programs through Congress? Taking his marbles home because he didn't get his way? He has brains and gravitas and stuff but his actions show he's a lightweight.
 
Minoosh said:
I don't like that he resigned from the Congress as soon as he lost control. He'd just been elected. If you're going to run you should stick around to represent the people who elected you. What would he do as president if he couldn't get programs through Congress? Taking his marbles home because he didn't get his way?
Click to expand...
That's why I support Palin.
 
Gingrich showed his intellectual might by promising he'd pick John Bolton as the Secretary of State. Such wisdom!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom