• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Gingrich's Evolving Position on Libya

Politifact has awarded Gingrich a full flop.

It's fairly indicative of modern right-wing politics in America. Just do whatever Obama is not doing.

My God... The Republicans are political hipsters.
 
Biscuit said:
Oh gingrich would clearly trounce Obama! With Obama hovering around 50% job approval and a whooping 28% favorability rating for the newtster.

poll

I think the majority of people can see through the smoke screen of right wing criticism. Looks like I may need to start printing the old "no newt is good newt" bumper stickers!
Click to expand...

50% job approvel is normally considered a death sentence for a sitting President, but the way things are going it looks as though 2012 will be an exception.
 
I think it's worth noting that 100% of all U.S. presidents pursued a policy of not being Newt Gingrich. Perhaps Gingrich ought to take heed of that and try it himself.
 
As you can tell from this thread, leftists sure dislike Gingrich, don't they folks?

Perhaps what leftists are so vocal about not liking is what we need? ;)
 
BeAChooser,

So, you're saying that Gingrich was opposed to military involvement until Obama left us with no other option?
 
BeAChooser said:
As you can tell from this thread, leftists sure dislike Gingrich, don't they folks?

Perhaps what leftists are so vocal about not liking is what we need? ;)
Click to expand...


That would actually be 72% of americans dislike newt.
 
dudalb said:
50% job approvel is normally considered a death sentence for a sitting President, but the way things are going it looks as though 2012 will be an exception.
Click to expand...

The claim the Newt could beat Obama was what I was addressing. If 50% is a death sentence what is 28%?
 
As a tribute to BAC, I will now address all my posts to an imaginary person named Gary.

So how about this Newt Gingrich character? He's a real piece of work, isn't he, Gary?
 
Last edited:
Y'see, Gary, BAC is desperate to validate his world view by trivializing anything that challenges it as, say, jealousy or envy. The fact is, Gingrich is a sleaze bag of a human being, don't you think, Gary?
 
Let me get this straight.

In a different thread, you argue that Obama was premature in sending forces to Libya,
then in this thread you argue that Newt was correct to say that Obama was too slow to send forces to Libya and that Newt was also correct when he later said that Obama was too quick to send forces to Libya.

I think your cognitive dissonance alert system is broken.
 
sarge said:
Let me get this straight.

In a different thread, you argue that Obama was premature in sending forces to Libya,
then in this thread you argue that Newt was correct to say that Obama was too slow to send forces to Libya and that Newt was also correct when he later said that Obama was too quick to send forces to Libya.

I think your cognitive dissonance alert system is broken.
Click to expand...

From what BeAChooser posted, it seems that Newt wasn't criticizing Obama's decision to use militaristic action. Rather, he was criticizing Obama's delay in taking a non-militaristic action. Once Obama had waited too long (according to when Newt thinks non-militaristic action was no longer an option), Newt was in favor of doing whatever necessary.

Looking at it that way, it doesn't seem like an actual flip flop. When it was still an option, Newt favored non-militaristic action. When it got to the point when militaristic action was the only option, he favored that. In hindsight, Newt wouldn't have waited as long as Obama and would have used non-militaristic methods to out Ghadaffi.

Do I have that right?
 
Gingrich's Evolving Position on Libya
Gingrich Criticized Obama For Not Intervening In Libya, But Now Criticizes Him For Intervening In Libya



dude...he IS a Republican, after all.

;)


folks, this action did not take place in a political vacuum. its after Iraq and Afghanistan, which are not going well.

The USA is NOT the most popular nation in the Middle East, and Obama wanted to make sure this was not an America-only or even a Britain/USA only operation.

I think for the most part, Obama was right to make sure we had a wide-coalition including Arab states, supporting the action. The no-fly zone came no sooner than it could have come.

I know Republicans and Conservatives like to just go it all alone and damn/screw the world, because America is always right and Jesus is on our side, but that hasn't worked out soo good for us lately.
 
Last edited:
Gingrich Criticized Obama For Not Intervening In Libya, But Now Criticizes Him For Intervening In Libya
Click to expand...

If my analysis of this is correct, then the above headline is misleading. It should read, "Gingrich Criticized Obama For Not Intervening Quickly in Libya, And Now Criticizes Him for Intervening Militarily In Libya"
 
spaaron22 said:
Looking at it that way, it doesn't seem like an actual flip flop. When it was still an option, Newt favored non-militaristic action. When it got to the point when militaristic action was the only option, he favored that. In hindsight, Newt wouldn't have waited as long as Obama and would have used non-militaristic methods to out Ghadaffi.

Do I have that right?
Click to expand...

Essentially, yes.
 
So, basicly the squeeky-voiced toad is saying that Obama should have done something sooner that did not involve lethal force but appparently, being the militarily uselss putz that he is, has not said what that non-lethal measure should have been.

So Republicon of him.
 
leftysergeant said:
So, basicly the squeeky-voiced toad is saying that Obama should have done something sooner that did not involve lethal force but appparently, being the militarily uselss putz that he is, has not said what that non-lethal measure should have been.
Click to expand...

If there's something to criticize Gingrich for in this instance, this would be it. He somehow not only knew how to take out Gaddaffi without military action, but he also knew when the time for such actions had expired. And yet, he hasn't really explained any of that.
 
That Newt is a "professor" of some sort may explain something about the state of education in this country.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom