Gingrich for prez?

seriously dude...what are you babbling about? i have not backed off anything i've said in this thread, my OP stands, my second post stands and so forth....

you're a weird little person that thinks "discussion and debating" is throwing out random lies about your adversary and then declaring yourself a winner

i think i'll start responding to you in like fashion and then maybe draw your out of this weird mindset

Post #6.

I shall now await your apology, birther.

:)
 
so bill clinton was not a hypocrite? they were both having extra marital affairs, they will make great presidents!!! it didn't matter how many he had, you support him, so what if gingrich bitch about clinton but had one himself.....what politican doesn't bitch about what the other side does and then turns around and does it himself? can you link to where gingrich was found to have perjured himself....

gingrich is your man jarod!

this is the post onceler claims i said there is no hypocrisy and that i back peddled...

of course he can't actually explain why or how...he merely points it, as if proclaiming "i shit gold".... makes it so!

:rolleyes:

i also notice no link was ever produced to the claim that gingrich perjured himself....
 
a typical onceler "debate"

you can't read

you can't read

you can't read

you can't read

you can't read

you can't read

you can't read

you can't read

you can't read
 
Newt should not attempt running, as his personal life makes him unelectable. He kind of reminds me of Edwards.

He kind of reminds me of Edwards too. Both are hardcore ideologues, albeit on opposite sides. Both are articulate and smart too but I think that Newt would have a much better chance of winning. The man is a student of history and knows probably better than anyone else what his weaknesses are and what he needs to do to overcome them and how best play to his strengths. He's not a religious fanatic and doesn't have the kind of baggage in that regard that both Huckabee and Romney are carrying. That makes him a lot more acceptable to independents.

Newt also has a deep, clear understanding of his conservative ideals and can articulate them in a very understandable way. In a debate I honestly believe that he would destroy any of the current republican front runners.

I would never in a million years vote for him, but I think he's easily the most formidable opponent that Obama would face and stands the best chance to beat him.
 
Ironic this is also the position of the Atheist Left, isn't it?

Oh... and add in, perjurer as well.

Remind me again...which group constantly tries to impose their moral values on everyone else?

Which group likes to lord their "moral superiority" over anyone who doesn't believe in God?

Which group likes to wag their finger while sanctimoniously "cluck clucking" over any infidelity from the left while dismissing as "just human" anyone from the Right guilty of the same sin?
 
Remind me again...which group constantly tries to impose their moral values on everyone else?

Which group likes to lord their "moral superiority" over anyone who doesn't believe in God?

Which group likes to wag their finger while sanctimoniously "cluck clucking" over any infidelity from the left while dismissing as "just human" anyone from the Right guilty of the same sin?

I would say, since we have radical lefties shooting congresspeople in the head, it's probably not a bad idea to encourage morality more. In fact, I think an argument might be made, that leftist ant-god immorality leads to psychopaths doing what Loughner did, because they have no moral value of human life.

As far as I know, no one is trying to impose their moral value on you, there are those who oppose their tax dollars going to fund immorality they don't believe in. They have that right.
 
I nominate the cousin marrier Dixie as the dumbest knuckle dragger on the site.
10 to 1 he has a grand wizard sheet in his closet.
 
Back
Top