Newt received millions from healthcare industry

And so it begins. Just like they’ve done with every GOP frontrunner, the mainstream media is parading every skeleton (real or fictitious) in the GOP closet. Earlier this week it was revealed that Gingrich received in excess of a million dollars from Freddie Mac, and now it seems as though he may have received additional funding from the healthcare industry by way of his think tank, The Center for Health Transformation. The Washington Post reports:

A think tank founded by GOP presidential candidate Newt Gingrich collected at least $37 million over the past eight years from major health-care companies and industry groups, offering special access to the former House speaker and other perks, according to records and interviews.

The Center for Health Transformation, which opened in 2003, brought in dues of as much as $200,000 per year from insurers and other health-care firms, offering some of them “access to Newt Gingrich” and “direct Newt interaction,” according to promotional materials. The biggest funders, including firms such as AstraZeneca, Blue Cross Blue Shield and Novo Nordisk, were also eligible to receive discounts on “products and workshops” from other Gingrich groups.

The health center advocated, among other things, requiring that “anyone who earns more than $50,000 a year must purchase health insurance or post a bond,” a type of insurance mandate that has since become anathema to conservatives.

The group also pushed proposals to build centralized electronic medical records and use such data to research treatment effectiveness, both central features of President Obama’s health-care reforms.

Gingrich, who has been under fire recently for his lucrative consulting business, left the health-care think tank earlier this year to run for president. But his time there exemplifies the former Georgia congressman’s post-legislative career as a well-paid consultant and policy guru, a role that earned him and his companies tens of millions of dollars over the past decade.

His experience at the think tank also illustrates Gingrich’s past flirtations with moderate policies — on health care, the environment and other hot-button issues — that have become the subject of controversy and criticism in the presidential race.

The Gingrich campaign referred questions about the center to the think tank. Susan Meyers, a center spokeswoman, declined to comment on the think tank’s income or staffing levels because it is a private-sector organization. She said that neither the center nor Gingrich has engaged in formal lobbying.

Meyers called Gingrich “a health-care visionary” who was advocating far-reaching reforms “before many of these concepts in health care became mainstream.” She said the think tank’s members don’t always agree on specific issues but are working “toward a common vision of saving lives and money.”

Gingrich has been criticized in recent days after Bloomberg News reported that he earned as much as $1.8 million in consulting fees from Freddie Mac, a quasi-public corporation that many conservatives blame for the housing crisis. After first suggesting he was hired for a short time as a “historian,” Gingrich has since acknowledged acting as a consultant for the mortgage giant “over a long period of time.”

“I was approached to offer strategic advice; I was glad to offer strategic advice,” Gingrich told reporters in Iowa this week. “We did it for a number of companies, and Gingrich Group was very successful.”

I’m curious to see how the base will respond not only to the media’s ‘vetting’ of Gingrich, but to the fact that he supported(s) an individual health care mandate (soon to receive the scrutiny of the Supreme Court). And the GOP primary drama continues…

Comment Policy: Please read our comment policy before making a comment. In short, please be respectful of others and do not engage in personal attacks. Otherwise we will revoke your comment privileges.

To our ad-free users: I apologize for the ad below but unfortunately DISQUS requires this ad in order to use their commenting system and I cannot make it go away.

120 thoughts on “Newt received millions from healthcare industry

  1. Amy I like Ron Paul he is the smartist guy in the room however the smartist guy in the room can’t get much done. The idea ticket would be Cain and Ron this is politics Cain can bring in democratic voter Paul can’t. Cain can bring people together Paul would be more like Obama. Cain didn’t do the things he was accused of the power brokers fear him they can’t control him so they tried to tak him out. Amy did you know that Herman has had secret service for over a month now how well would you preform with that over your head. I don’t think I would be at my best.

  2. Doesn’t matter who the republican candidate is the media’s intent and sole purpose is to tear them down compared to the covering up, building up, and protecting any democrat that comes along. It’s very obvious. I’d prefer that both sides be properly vetted. This might prevent another Obama from being elected. 4 years is a long time for the country to survive with a destructive force like we have now in the WH.

  3. I’ve noticed many conservatives are happily attacking Newt as well.

    We’ve got a sociopath in the White House, but so what? Newt and the mandate thingie. Much worse.

    1. I think Newt is also a sociopath. He is lying to our faces about the global warming thing. Check out his “Contract with the Earth” book. There’s a pattern of misbehavior that has only been “fixed” within the past year with his run for the President. He’s saying what we want to hear… and I don’t like that in a man. I want a man who says what he believes, and who cares if someone doesn’t like it.

  4. Should we put The Heritage Foundation under indictment too? This is ridiculous. Heritage and Newt both supported a version of the mandate that was a lesser evil when faced with HillaryCare. Now both Newt and The Heritage Foundation are opposed to the ObamaCare mandate. Nothing to see here. Newt’s Center for Health Transformation has been vehemently opposed to ObamaCare from the start.

  5. This is no vetting. It’s the same old pile-on the lib media has been doing since 2008 to any conservative candidate. I don’t think that even now the repubs understand that they brought this on themselves by being “moderate” and “accommodating” and “reaching across the aisle”. The lefties smelled weak wills, and they are closing in like sharks and hanging on like remoras. (I used to live ten miles from the beach in Florida.)

    At this point I could not care less if Newt rode into town on a broomstick rated at 10 mpg, with KKK bumper stickers, and sold synthetic snake oil on weekends. Understand, I don’t want him to be president, but God help us, four more years of obama?

    Regardless of all other considerations, I think Newt could wipe that arrogant, smug look off obama’s face, and I’d pay good money to see that. Not that I’m morphing into a Newt fan. Heaven forbid. It’s just that obama deserves a truckload of humiliation.

    The lib media shares a prominent characteristic with the Occupiers: they have to shout down an opponent because they have no functional ideas about how to run a government. They have such an inferiority complex that they must drown out all opposition, since they literally can’t bear to listen to the echoing emptiness of their own minds, or see all around them the evidence that almost everyone else is more intelligent, more industrious, more productive, more worthy, and better liked.

    In my area, voting can be very simple: you just pick up a copy of the local Communist Times paper near elections and vote the opposite. So much for the lib media.

  6. So now it’s the clever DC insider vs. the rich moderate flip-flopper vs. the bold but unpredictable businessman.

  7. con·sult·ant   [kuhn-suhl-tnt]
    1. a person who gives professional or expert advice: a consultant on business methods.

    Newt is not “my guy” but the last time I checked, being a consultant was not a crime in the USA.

    1. That’s how I feel. We need to be careful that we don’t throw our own under the bus on every knee jerk LSM headline!

    2. It’s as illegal as earning more than $250,000. I think they call it corporate greed. Or being part of the one percent. Or something like that. Very down twinkles.

  8. First off, I don’t blame Gingrich for receiving consultant money from Freddie Mac – if he worked for it he’s entitled to be paid. WTHeck my wife and I receive money from para government housing entities ourselves for a product we provide – it’s how we put food on the table and gas in the car.

    Secondly, what’s the problem with wanting to reform Health Care? The Health care field is out of control. Obviously Obamacare is a bloated bureaucratic nightmare, but that doesn’t mean the Health Care industry should not be reformed, I for one applaud Newt for being a visionary. Don’t get me wrong I am against an individual mandate, but I would like t hear what he has to say first before being the first throw the proverbial rocks.

    Third, Newt is the best we have. He’s not my first choice (she bowed out last month), but who else can debate Obama and win? Perry? Cain? Paul (don’t make me laugh)?

    …I yield the floor…

    1. Romney! who has all the same attributes as Newt and all the same stances on the issues, cap and trade, individual mandate, thinks ryan plan is social engineering, believes in global warming, had affair with staffer while speaker of the house, what is he going to have “up” on obama. He is the “lobby” king. This guy has more skeletons in the closet than all the rest (including Romney) put together. Why go for a Rino with all this baggage when you can go for a Rino with much less. I for one will pass on BOTH …I yield back

      1. deo, who are you voting for and do you think that person will be able to debate his annointedship and win? Like I said Newt is not my first choice, but heaven help me I will vote for him if given the current field of candidates.

        But to address some of the points you made…
        1. Ryan’s plan he apologized to Ryan himself on this flap.
        2. He has claimed remorse and asked God for forgiveness base on his adulterous encounters.
        3. He’s not as much a RINO as Romney. Yes he’s not a ultra conservative, but WTHeck, I’ll take a George W. Bush conservative at this point if that’s all we’ve got!
        4. In the LSM view every republican candidate has “Baggage” and by gum they will make sure we know about it. Doesn’t matter if it’s hearsay, if it even has the odor of scandal they are on it like flys on poop! The heck with due process!

        …I yield back…

        1. A lawn gnome can debate obama and win have you not seen the duh duh duh videos of obama without a teleprompter so tht argument is a non argument . I am not voting for a debater in cheif anyway .

          1. Do not even go there with his comments on paul ryan “right wing social engineering” is what he said, THAT is not a slip of the tongue that is a DELIBERATE pre thought out statement . THAT cannot be apologized away unless its for political expediency .which makes him even more pathetic

          2. I hope god forgives him and I forgive him(though my forgivness is worth nothing ) But I will not FORGET. Btw do you forgive Bill Clinton and Anthony Weiner

          3. HE IS every bit a RINO as Romney A much bigger one in fact, have you seen Romney on a couch with NANCY PELOSI telling us to pass cap and trade or marching with AL SHARPTON on behalf of the TEACHERS UNION ?

          4. Everyone elses baggage is nuanced Newts baggage is, raw, in your face and in one case, sleazy , very easy to point out and prove, no he said she said there, just plain and CRINGE worthy.

          I do not know who i will vote for but it will not be Newt, Romney or Ron Paul if my vote is wasted on a hopeless candidate so be it my heart and consience will be clear.. I respectfully yield back sir

          1. With all due respect deo, you should not underestimate Obama in debates. In sports and war you are never to underestimate your opponent, and I think that qualifies for politics also.

            – Ryan accepted Newt’s apology. I think that’s should be good enough

            2. I don’t forget very easily like you, but I agree we should forgive if the offender is remorseful. I would forgive Clinton and Weiner if they offended me and asked for forgiveness, after all who am I, but a lowly sinner myself in need of forgiveness.

            3. I guess we disagree on this point. I still contend that Romney is more of a RINO then Newt. I listened to Newt’s explanation of why he sat on the couch with Pelosi and I accept that fact that he looks back at it with regret – who wouldn’t.

            4. Some of Newt’s baggage (and this concerned me before I started to consider him) is his adulterous habit. Newt has said he asked God forgiveness and is a changed man, I believe him. I sincerely believe some of his other so called baggage is just unfortunate mishaps which the LSM will enlarge before us, but I am able to look past the LSM’s attacks and make a judgement call myself. And please understand the LSM will try to destroy all non romney candidates in the primary, but not Romney; what does that tell you about Romney – even RS has a new post about this issue.

            I agree with you that I will not for for Romney or Paul in the primary. At this point Newt has my vote, but that could change. Heck I might not make my decision until I’m standing at the ballot box. But I sure as heck will vote for whoever the republican candidate is in the general election against Obama!

            deo, I don’t think we are that far apart in our beliefs. It’s just been a hectic election cycle so far and I am sick of the LSM attacks against Cain, Perry, Newt, fill in the blank. Let us not destroy our own, but let us be united in our fight to defeat Obama!

            1. Sorry i cannot vote for newt under any circumstances there is no bigger washington insider than a former speaker of the house who does consulting work for the biggest government slush fund to have ever existed in the history of mankind (not an exaggeration). then worked as a lobbiest for anyone who would pay . he hated the tea party he paled around with the biggest progressive scum around and lent stature and gravitas to their liberal agendas all to further his brand . This man has no honesty or honor . That is hard to look past and we will be revisiting these issues in detail in the coming weeks not by me but by others who will remember why we turned away from this guy in the first place

    2. Newt was prominently against the Tea Party from the beginning with the whole Dede fiasco.

      Sorry…Newt is dead to me (for POTUS, he could prove valuable elsewhere).

        1. Cain is the best hope for the long-term viability if the Conservative/Tea Party movement.

          Santorum and Bachmann would also do well.

          I don’t hate Newt, just don’t think his resume translates well to the Presidency…and he is non-Conservative to boot.

      1. Wow…I remember that. If I remember correctly Dede was Pro abortion,pro union and and she was actually considered more liberal or just as liberal as the Democrat and that is why a conservative ran. If I am not mistaken,Dede knew she was going to lose towards the end, so then she went and threw her support behind the Democrat and not the conservative and Newt was a big DeDe supporter! This just highlights Newts true colors. He is an opportunist who is pandering to the tea party saying anything and everything they want to hear to win the nomination. This precisely fits Newts character.

  9. Bachmann just said that “Solyndra makes Watergate look like child’s play”.

    When’s Newt going to have that baby anyway? His water could break at any moment.

  10. Wow and he couldn’t pay his jewelery bill after all that money if this guy cannot run his own finances worth a damm how can he run a country

    1. What he does with his own money is none of our business. Mrs. Obama flying to Costa del Sol with an entourage paid by our tax dollars IS our business.

  11. “The health center advocated, among other things, requiring that “anyone who earns more than $50,000 a year must purchase health insurance or post a bond,” a type of insurance mandate that has since become anathema to conservatives.”

    THIS IS A MANDATE. Now we have another CARE, ObamaCare, RomneyCare and now NewtCare.

    1. Hey, breathe in/breathe out, people! That’s exactly what the mainstream media want. They are going to try to destroy anyone who is a threat to Obama. Since WHEN do we conservatives object to people making money? All we need to know is that when he was Speaker he balanced the budget and it’s likely that he will do it again. He LOVES this country. He will be strong on foreign policy and he will have great ideas SOME of which can be implemented and SOME which will not. The guy is a force. Obama won’t know what hit him. BUT, the mainstream media knows this so they are now in destroy mode. So, stop crying like little girls and stand behind the man.

      1. Newt took money to support leftist/progressive ideas.

        No thank you.

        I am voting for the most Conservative candidate….any one of Cain, Santorum, or Bachmann.

  12. Predictable. It is blatantly obvious how the press jumps on anyone who attempts to threaten Romney’s lead. Can’t anyone see this?

    They want Romney to sail through, because they have 100 tons of dirt loaded up for when he comes out of the primary. It isn’t that Romney is dirty. It is that he was the odds on favorite for some time now to be the primary leader. The dirt digging on him has been an ongoing process for a few years now. They also know that if Romney is the primary winner, there won’t be a surge in turn-out. Conversely, if a Tea Party-like candidate wins the primary, all the bussed in illegals and homeless people in the world won’t compete with the turnout. It will be 2010 all over again. They know this. Therefore, They will viciously go after anyone who polls well against Romney. If only they made even 1% of this effort to look in to Obama in 2008….


    1. That’s my feeling too!


  14. I keep telling all of you….whatever you might think of Perry in a negative way, he is the one who can take the ball and run with it. I read so many of the posts on the conservative blogs and all of you seem to be floundering with your support. I get that but, honestly, he can do the job and do it well.

    1. I really don’t think he can. He needs to be able to drum up the base and the guy is not linguistically talented. Being from Texas, I don’t see that he did anything for Texas that wasn’t all ready there. I’m not an expert on his policies or experience, but I know Texas has been on a path to success for over a decade.

      1. I appreciate your opinion, omega, but Cain is in WAY over his head. The foreign policy questions have substantiated that…Newt is NOT conservative, nor Romney, nor Huntsman. Santorum is too angry, Paul doesn’t support Israel and is worse in his foreign views than Cain. As much as I like Bachmann, she isn’t ready yet and not the right woman for the job at this time.

        I am from Texas and there’s a lot to be said for Perry NOT rocking the existing boat that has proved us being so successful in addition to his Tort reform. He also listens to the people of the State. Something I MUCH admire. He doesn’t believe in fixing something that isn’t broke…

        1. I believe Ron Paul has the MOST support for Israel. He has said specifically that with the money we send Israel, we FORCE Israel to do what we want (not fight back or defend themselves). Ron Paul wants to let Israel but the sovereign nation it should be and let them decide how they want to defend themselves. AND he wants to stop giving aid & weapons to countries that oppose Israel. That is the MOST PRO-ISRAEL stance there is. Of course….media tries to twist his viewpoint!

          1. I don’t claim to be a expert on Ron Paul but I have heard him speak about Israel and he is NOT the most supportive.

  15. So? Obama received millions from his website after over-riding the Visa/Mastercard international fraud protection features that prevent international donors from giving to an American presidential candidate and the media chirped.

  16. Where’s the beef…

    The Washington Post said… something about Newton Gingrich and gave it a negative spin.

    So, what else is new?

    When a contract is signed and made public, where’s the beef?

    As Yackov Smirnoff said, “America, what a country.”

    “In Russia is freedom of speech.
    “In America is also freedom after speech.

    >> Yackov on stage 1982 –


  17. Yea! Newt only developed and promoted the Individual Mandate, was against then for Hillarycare (or was it the other way around), and just a month ago was talking up the Individual Mandate…yea he has changed!

    I believe Newt! (despite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary)

  18. And so it begins. Newt is on top and while it’s reasonable he should be vetted, the media is sitting in wait, pen and paper in hand, scouring his background for anything to discredit him.

    This isn’t an endorsement of Newt, just the reality of the slimestream media lying in wait to cross Newt off the list…….

  19. I’m curious where people will go if Newt does begin to lose support.
    Also, can someone explain the polls in Iowa to me? I keep hearing how candidates nearly have to move there and know everyones name and birthday in order to get support. Yet Bachmann and Santorm are the ones who is supposingly spending the most time there and they are no where near the top of the polling boards. Yet, Romney is polling second or third and he isn’t spending anytime there.

    1. I think we’re seeing a big shift this election cycle about how people get involved politically. Debates are nationally televised. We get info through the internet and social media all day long. It used to be that people learned about candidates by meeting them. Now its google and therightscoop.

      Its no longer necessary to “work” the states as intensely for people to become familiar with you.

      Santorum and Bachmann didn’t get the memo and I expect they’ll drop out the next day

    2. Back to Cain! If is not the nominee than wishing for a Sarah Palin third party run, which brings me to……..

      I know it’s not realistic but the thought is soooo delicious I can’t help to indulged.

      If the option on the ballot in 2012 is President Zero – Romney – Sarah Palin who would you think the nation will choose? Hmmmmmmmm

  20. Hmm … So, Gingrich was involved in a successful think tank, and somehow this is wrong?

    I don’t get the attack.

    As to the mandate issue, he has already explained that he changed his position and acknowledged that his original support for mandates was wrong.

    1. I turned against Gingrich when I learned he was a co-sponsor of the fairness doctrine. Someone on here pointed out that it was 14 years ago and Newt has changed since then, and they are correct. I’ve changed my mind too as I learned more. I was a democrat until 2005 and learned how wrong I was. Now I do at least 3-4 hours of research on the candidates everyday. We can’t afford to buy another pig in a poke as happened in 2008.

      1. It was me 🙂

        That Fiarness Doctrine biz was in 1987. That was 24 years ago. The left had a monpoly on the media at that time.

          1. Reagan didn’t want Government to control or regulate much of anything, opting rather to allow the private market to take care of it. The “invisible hand”. Newt was trying to help our side. Trying to correct a wrong, albeit the wrong way 🙂

            History vindicates Reagan…again. Newt learned something. Sure he’s a conservative. Whether he fits your definition like a custom-made suit, I can’t tell. Were you paying attention in the 90’s? He did some great things for our side. He made some mistakes too.

              1. Ever what you say. I don’t think the word “conservative” is a skin-tight straight jacket. I think Newt could fit into it.

                1. Sorry, somebody for centralized federal healthcare will never find anything to fit them in the Conservative wardrobe.

        1. You are correct. I meant to type 24. Thanks for correcting me.Unfortunately spell check won’t catch errors on numbers. I thank you for pointing out last week that he has changed.

      2. Gingrich was also one of the Republicans who voted for the Department of Education. The Department of Education was approved by a 3 vote margin and Newt was one of the Republicans who voted for it. Newt was a BIG proponent of the NATIONAL Healthcare Individual mandate back in 2005 and 2006 and I really would like to know what Freddie MAC paid Newt 1.8 million for and I find it absolutely hysterical that the Tea Party types are flocking to Gingrich when Gingrich slammed Paul Ryan’s budget plan 6 months ago with his liberal buddies on Meet the Press. He referred to Ryan’s plan as Right Wing Social Engineering.

        Gingrich represents everything that I thought the Tea Party was against-what a joke. Gingrich is the ultimate Washington Insider and Crony Capitalist and he has made his millions from BIG government!

        If Gingrich wins the GOP nomination-good luck with the women’s vote-we all know that this is a small voting block-NOT!

        1. Video and transcript

          Meet the Press transcript for May 15, 2011
          May 15: Gingrich, Dionne, Noonan, Halperin, Cooper, Bai

          .MR. GREGORY: What about entitlements? The Medicare trust fund, in stories that have come out over the weekend, is now going to be depleted by 2024, five years earlier than predicted. Do you think that Republicans ought to buck the public opposition and really move forward to completely change Medicare, turn it into a voucher program where you give seniors…

          REP. GINGRICH: Right.

          MR. GREGORY: …some premium support and–so that they can go out and buy private insurance?

          REP. GINGRICH: I don’t think right-wing social engineering is any more desirable than left-wing social engineering. I don’t think imposing radical change from the right or the left is a very good way for a free society to operate. I think we need a national conversation to get to a better Medicare system with more choices for seniors. But there are specific things you can do. At the Center for Health Transformation, which I helped found, we published a book called “Stop Paying the Crooks.” We thought that was a clear enough, simple enough idea, even for Washington. We–between Medicare and Medicaid, we pay between $70 billion and $120 billion a year to crooks. And IBM has agreed to help solve it, American Express has agreed to help solve it, Visa’s agreed to help solve it. You can’t get anybody in this town to look at it. That’s, that’s almost $1 trillion over a decade. So there are things you can do to improve Medicare.

          MR. GREGORY: But not what Paul Ryan is suggesting, which is completely changing Medicare.

          REP. GINGRICH: I, I think that, I think, I think that that is too big a jump. I think what you want to have is a system where people voluntarily migrate to better outcomes, better solutions, better options, not one where you suddenly impose upon the–I don’t want to–I’m against Obamacare, which is imposing radical change, and I would be against a conservative imposing radical change.

        2. Great comment! I could not remember if a year had gone by since Gingrich piled on Paul Ryan! Oh but he has changed stripes! If I were on death row for killing 2 or 3 people and I “changed” my mind by converting to a religion or have “seen the light” would you still take me to the prom or do I still have to be executed!

  21. I’m not worried about the left Scoop. It is the beltway repubs like Krauthammer, Kristol, etc., that are the are the problem. An allegation goes viral and they kick the candidate down before any evidence comes forward.

  22. If he did receive millions, he was not an elected politician, he was a founder and member of a think tank. Not that it doesn’t create questions about any health care policies he brings up as a candidate, I see this no worse than those in Congress who have been paricipating in insider trading.
    I’m not wanting Newt as president, but this is lame.

    1. It is what they do, while they ignore absolute corruption, lawlessness and subversion at every level of the Central Government.

      Colonel West’s admonishment of the press this week still rings in my ears.

      The greatest treason in the Republic lies in the media.

    2. People can see no difference between an individual who leaves public office, sets up a think tank, which is not involved in lobbying and which is successful versus someone in public office, who is elected to Congress and while in office is involved in insider trading?!?

      There is a huge difference.

      The first is a legitimate business venture. The second is unethical and should be illegal.

      This is a garbage attack by the WaPo.

      Oh look, the think tank he was involved in earned 37 million dollars from the health care industry.

      Well, yes he was involved in a successful business. All power to him, or is that now somehow a crime in America?

      Oh look, the think tank he was involved with had a different position on mandates.

      Yes, lots of people at one time supported mandates, but have since come to realize that this is the wrong approach.

      So, now it is wrong to change your view when you come to realize that your initial analysis was wrong. That is crazy.

      This is just “smear” journalism.

      1. Good point. It would be easy for the media to point that out – but what purpose would that serve the oligarchy?

  23. He did balance the budget 4 years in a row as Speaker. He has also retracted his support for the ‘mandate’ being referred to and offered explanation in another video.

    1. But, as this points out (above), he character is deeply flawed and can be bought for a price. A man like that is no better than any of the other politicians who put THEIR pocketbook before the American people. I just can’t believe conservatives are going to end up with another 4 years of Bush if they don’t wake up! Who is going to actually do ANYTHING that will serve American’s interests before serving the special interests???? I implore you all to step back and think about the fact that “THE QUEST FOR EMPIRE EVENTUALLY DESTROYS ALL GREAT NATIONS” ~Ron Paul (and by the way, you cannot convince me it’s not an empire when we are spread throughout 130 nations in the world, but cannot defend ourselves properly when attacked – 911 is proof of that as I sat in DC that day wondering ‘where is our military’ as one plane, a second plane, a third plane…..and still….NO MILITARY). Do you ever think that maybe our country is weaker WITHOUT our military presence here?

      1. Let us hope that SCOTUS solves the health care dilemma for us.

        I think the Tea Party will make some congressional adjustment in 2012, too.

        There is a big difference between a ‘quest for empire’ and the defense of an empire. The biggest threat to this nation isn’t a foreign nation, it is the liberal democrat.

        1. The biggest threat to this nation is those so entrenched in their beliefs, they are afraid to step back and recognize IF they are wrong. I used to believe what you believe, but I actually studied what Ron Paul said – not what the media said ABOUT him. We see liberals do this to conservatives all the time, but I’ve noticed that conservatives are just as gullible to believe whatever their favorite media member says just as liberals are.

          Fortunately, my historian dad made me watch a bunch of videos and read about Austrian economics and how the Nazi’s came to power before ANYONE in the media was talking about it. So, the first time I heard Ron Paul speak, I recognized he was a man who truly understood economics and history. It took longer for me to understand his foreign policy, but I finally got it and he’s right. IMAGINE: Armed Chinese Troops in Texas! (and wake up):

          “The sad thing is our foreign policy will change eventually as Rome’s did when all monetary and budgetary tricks to fund it are exhausted!” ~Ron Paul

          1. His foreign policy was the hardest for me to accept as well. You may not be able to tell from my comments that I make now, but it is true. I found that it was the “Christian” Right propaganda that made it difficult for me. Also it is not always clear how strong Paul is on national defense, but his house floor speaches, even as far back as 1983, are amazing – his predictions of increased terrorism on US soil, expanding wars, etc.

        2. I hope the SCOTUS will indeed do that. However, Kagan will not recuse. The press will point to Thomas as an excuse for her not to. Apparently, the press is trotting around the idea that since Thomas’ wife is an advocate for dumping Obamacare, that there is a moral equivalency with Kagan. Thus, neither recuse. So, it will come down to Kennedy….unfortunately. I have a pit in my stomach on this one.

  24. And yet, the man with no baggage (with actual integrity & honesty) cannot be the choice for nomination because he will actually cut spending and bring us a smaller government (because he keeps his word). Without his reforms to our monetary policy, it doesn’t matter what you believe about foreign policy because when the dollar crashes, the troops will have to come home. What a shame because as Judge Andrew Napolitano said “The Thomas Jefferson of our day, Ron Paul is one of us”!

    1. With all due respect, here are some of the problems with Paul:

      – no executive experience in public office.

      – no effort to reform Congress and fight the endemic corruption.

      (I stand corrected, but while he was never involved, he never co-sponsored the STOCK Act, nor took any other steps to fight for ethical reforms.)

      – a strain of antisemitism in his support base that Representative Paul has failed to address.

      – a view on the foreign threats that are facing America which is well meaning, but naive.

      – false eyebrows?!?

      The reality is that non of the candidates are prefect. All have flaws, in part because they are human.

      1. Really…no executive experience is a problem for you? He’s the MOST knowledgeable candidate out there. I know he’s one of those crazy people who actually READS the reports, the bills, and studies policies, etc. Obama knows nothing and Cain is right there with him in the know nothing category. Bachmann used to go to Ron Paul’s study lunches (yes, the man take his job seriously) where he would teach Austrian economics to others and help them understand the problems. So, maybe you should look at knowledge of government more than executive experience.

        And no effort to reform Congress? Are you kidding me? He has been the one standing alone in the wilderness fighting corruption through his votes, his speeches, educating others, trying to audit the FED…and so on. Wow, this one shouldn’t be on the list.

        No Antisemitism from Paul. The problem is he believes in FREEDOM and that even means for those who don’t hold his viewpoint. He doesn’t tell his supporters what they should or should not believe personally because that is part of our right of free speech – part of the liberty he promotes. So, while he may not agree with it, he believes in other’s right to have their own views.

        Foreign Policy – again, I’ll quote: “The sad thing is our foreign policy will change eventually as Rome’s did when all monetary and budgetary tricks to fund it are exhausted!” ~Ron Paul (It’s not naivety, it’s reality). We cannot maintain this foreign policy so what would you suggest? Just wait for the bottom to fall out?

      2. What executive experience does Obama or McCain have? How about Newt? Paul has had a successful career as a doctor… his reputation from that is largely what got him elected to Congress. Or wait, do you not consider small business ownership as real executive experience? Does your guy has to have experience as a crony-capitalist?

        His given nickname of Dr. No, I think, is enough proof of his effort to fight endemic corruption in Congress. In addition to speaking out against it (which he frequently does), what else can he do?

        Any antisemitism in Paul’s base is largely exaggerated. I, for example, am all for Israel doing what they need to do to protect themselves. I just feel that their military is strong enough to do it without us needing to get involved. Our foreign aid to them is a joke, it is basically coupons to buy US made jet parts… nothing more than a form of corporate welfare.

        Many people on here do not agree with his foreign policy, that’s fine… but what you need to realize is that if we’re going to keep up this military presence in 130 countries, we will need to cut virtually everything else from our budget (social security, medicare, etc.). Our defense spending is approaching 1/2 as much as we bring in in revenues… I’m all for getting rid of these social programs, but I don’t think libs (nor many Republicans) will let us do that. All RP is suggesting is that defense be cut 15% – we would still be spending more than 4x as much as ANY other country on defense.

      3. I am pretty certain running a successful small business is worth a ton of executive experience. His Foreign policy is not naive, it is the only fiscally sound policy any candidate has put forth. We can not and should not be the worlds police, end of story period. Also any and all acts of war must be declared by congress. The president may be the Commander in Chief but the congress is the only branch that can declare a war, something the constitution calls the seperation of powers. Besides Ron Paul has the financial support of the US Servicemembers by a margin of 2-1 against all others combines.

        Last but not least lets look at the words of Bibi earlier this year: “My friends, you don’t need to do nation building in Israel. We’re already built. You don’t need to export democracy to Israel. We’ve already got it. You don’t need to send American troops to defend Israel. We defend ourselves.”

        ~ Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu,
        May 2011 before the U.S. Congress

    2. His whack-job supporters are his baggage…I’m not saying you or all of them…but MANY Ron Paul supporters insure he’ll never win with their attacks and trolling of every other candidate

      1. The Paul trolling does hurt him – certainly with me. Paul supporters need to find alignment with those of us who are searching for any small sign that these candidates are small government Constitutionalists.

        They may well take heed of the comment from the reporter in the video Dave posted this morning comparing Paul to the others in Iowa.

        “Ron Paul’s plan isn’t more radical than the others, it is just more specific”

        1. A lot of Paul supporters are young and vocal… yes. Another thing though is that we’re a little jaded from frequently being discredited as nutjobs, antisemitic, isolationists, pinkos, etc… and yes, maybe a few of us are nuts, but it certainly is not always the case. Largely, we just want to revert government back to where it was at the end of the 19th century, prior to the Progressive movement – I sure many of you would like to do the same. It’s just that we would prefer to take a huge leap in that direction, whereas many of you would rather take baby steps.

          1. I want it immediately. Eliminate the obviously destructive agencies like DoE DoEd, & Commerce on day one. Then cut funding for the rest of the Central government by 20% a year for 3 years.

            Starting anywhere else (taxes, reforms, legislation) will only serve to feed the beast.

            1. That is essentially RP’s plan, cut 5 departments immediately plus cuts elsewhere will balance budget within 3 years – while also cutting taxes and regulation (to boost economy).

        1. How do you know really? Because Fox said so? I mean, this is what I’m talking about. The drum is beat over and over until Americans feel threatened so then we want to take care of the threat. The same was done with Iraq. What about North Korea? We ignore them…why? Why did we go into Libya?…what about Egypt? Look at a map and tell me we are safer today as we help each of these nations GO SHARIA LAW – are we helping them get their Caliphate??? Is Sharia Law in these places making us safer? COME ON – WAKE UP….I woke up about Iraq as soon as I heard they voted for Sharia Law. That is not going to make us safer and it’s already more dangerous for Christians there. You cannot spread democracy. It doesn’t work and for all our money and help, the resent us because even with all the good we do, people do get displaced, their lives uprooted and then they blame us for it. We would do the EXACT same thing if Chinese troops came here to “help us”. We would refuse their help because we are Americans. Do you not believe the people we help have their own national identity and maybe they don’t really want some other country “HELPING” them and taking land to make a permanent base there??? I’m guessing it’s because we’ve never had that happen so we have no experience on which to base our opinions except to believe that other countries don’t have the same love of their county as we do our own.

        2. We’ve found a way to have economic friendship with China… we’ve benefited from a lower cost of living (cheaper products).

          We may not wish for so many jobs to move over there, but we can only blame ourselves for that. If there weren’t so many regulations here, nor any corporate tax, we’d be able to keep a lot more jobs.

          1. Actually, it is now cheaper and more efficient for businesses to manufacture in the Southern US vs. Coastal China.

            Inland China still has very low costs, however.

        3. Anyone that really wants to see a deeper understanding of foreign policy should listen to at least part 1 of the 2002 house floor speach. The first few minutes should be enough of a tease for you to listen to the rest.

          NHC – stop taking 3 word clips as indications of foreign policy. Every country should be offered friendship, backed up by the knowledge that you don’t mess with the US. Don’t be so arrogant to think you are the only one that understands Islam. In your zeal you seem to forget that the biggest threat from Islam is the internal one, caused be big government that is grown by endless wars. Study up on how a country gets tyranny over it’s people through wars.

        4. BTW – if you think that sanctions against Iran are good, then you are an isolationist. With sanctions enforced, if Russia or China trades with Iran, then the US is not supposed to trade with them. Cutting of trade and diplomacy is what a true isolationist is.

        1. Simple, we just call out the cronies as we see them. For example: Mitt is heavily backed by Goldman Sachs as well as many other of the same backers as Obama AND Bush – if that doesn’t tell you what kind of President Mitt will be, I don’t know what will.

          1. I am an not a Mitt supporter. Never was. (Can’t stand the man’s pollitics if I’m honest) You have made an erroneous assumption here.

    3. Paul has baggage. All he needs to do is be the Non-Romney front runner and I assure you the LSM will dig something up. No one is immune to their tactics. If they have to, they will call Gloria Allred and crap will be hitting the fan pronto!

      1. They’ve already tried to do that in the last election. All they have is some articles that he didn’t write in a newsletter with his name on it. He’s already explained it all and proven with his track record that what was published isn’t in alignment with his belief system.
        That’s all they’ve got. He’s clean.

Comments are closed.