Newt Gingrich Attacks GOP ‘Culture’ That Rewards ‘Vicious’ Attacks But Not Ideas

[Straight Shooter]

Former House Speaker and co-host of CNN’s Crossfire , Newt Gingrich, tore into the present state of the Republican Party and what the its most prominent voices chose to reward rather than condemn. In remarks for his upcoming book, Breakout, Gingrich savaged the GOP for rewarding “vicious” or “negative” attacks on Democrats over the advancement of a positive set of ideas.

Gingrich said that the GOP is on a course for failure with their opposition to the Affordable Care Act because, unlike in 1994 when the Republicans took control of the House for the first time in decades, the Republicans do not have “a positive alternative approach” to health care reform.

“I will bet you, for most of you, you go home in the next two weeks when your members of Congress are home, and you look them in the eye and you say, ‘What is your positive replacement for Obamacare?’ They will have zero answer,” Gingrich said.

“We are caught up right now in a culture, and you see it every single day, where as long as we are negative and as long as we are vicious and as long as we can tear down our opponent, we don’t have to learn anything,” the former Speaker continued. “We have to do the homework.”

When CNN asked Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus to respond to Gingrich’s comments, he said that he did not agree with them. Priebus told CNN that the GOP has advanced a number of health care proposals.

http://www.mediaite.com/online/newt...e-that-rewards-vicious-attacks-but-not-ideas/

As the president said, you can't just be against something, you have to be for something

 

[Jack Davenport]

Obama can thank his lucky stars that Gingrich wasn't the nominee. The election may have turned out differently.

 

[Mayhem]

Obama can thank his lucky stars that Gingrich wasn't the nominee. The election may have turned out differently.

Bwahahahaha. Give me a break. :rofl2: Candidate Gingrich would have suffered a more crushing smackdown than anyone other than Bachmann and Cain.

This is something that will, alas, never be fully analyzed. For all the hatred you people have for Obama, that was the best primary field you could put forward.

You guys really should be more humiliated than you are. acing:

 

[Jack Davenport]

Hey fuckstick! You aren't talking to your boy Sammy Fisher here. I am a NC delegate. I was and still am privy to more internal polling by accident than you will ever see on purpose. For the most part I try to engage in civil dialogue with you but ultimately you show your true angry colors. Debates turn elections and Obama would have all he could handle with Newt.

 

[Mayhem]

First of all, I showed no angry colors. What's there to be angry about? Gingrich lost, Romney lost, GOP imploding, Tea Party running amok and looking stupid at the same time.

And Newt would have lost by a wider margin than Romney by coming off as a complete moonbat during the debates. That was as poor of a response that you ever could have come back with.

If your points hold any validity, why wasn't Newt your candidate? Seriously, don't bother to reply if you don't have an answer for that one. Because you're right, I'm not talking to Sammwich. Keep it that way please.

 

[Jack Davenport]

He didn't win the nomination because he didn't have the money that Mittens did nor did he have the support of the establishment repubs who had an axe to grind against him. That is an incredible obstacle to ouercome. Had he became the nominee he would have energized more southern voters. I said MAY have turned out differently not would have or mosdef. We will never know.

 

[Mayhem]

I'm seriously not trying to get overly confrontational with you, but when you say "we'll never know", speak for yourself. First of all, getting the nomination is part of the deal, even if your name is Newt. Secondly, there's no fuckin' way this country puts Newt "Moonbase" Gingrich in the White House. Period. I don't think there was ever a hope, but when he said he'd lock up judges, that was his 47% moment.

In any event, I know. You don't have too.

And come to think of it, Newt had Sheldon Adelson, so enough with the waaa-waaa-waa about not having resources. Enough with the excuses. Newt is a mediocre candidate who couldn't peddle his bullshit to the country. And the country responded ... to Newt, and then to Mitt.

 

[HehehehehehehehehehahaHyena]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1d/Die_Osmanen.JPG

 

[Jack Davenport]

Just come on back Vodkaz and stop hiding behind the WaawaawaawedweHyena Adelson's money always had conditions attached and Gingrich was not getting RNC support neither their money. Newt never had the chance to debate Obama and so of course you claim to be clairvoyant but you're not.

 

[Rey C.]

http://www.mediaite.com/online/newt...e-that-rewards-vicious-attacks-but-not-ideas/

Former House Speaker and co-host of CNN’s Crossfire , Newt Gingrich, tore into the present state of the Republican Party and what the its most prominent voices chose to reward rather than condemn. In remarks for his upcoming book, Breakout, Gingrich savaged the GOP for rewarding “vicious” or “negative” attacks on Democrats over the advancement of a positive set of ideas.

Gingrich said that the GOP is on a course for failure with their opposition to the Affordable Care Act because, unlike in 1994 when the Republicans took control of the House for the first time in decades, the Republicans do not have “a positive alternative approach” to health care reform.

“I will bet you, for most of you, you go home in the next two weeks when your members of Congress are home, and you look them in the eye and you say, ‘What is your positive replacement for Obamacare?’ They will have zero answer,” Gingrich said.

“We are caught up right now in a culture, and you see it every single day, where as long as we are negative and as long as we are vicious and as long as we can tear down our opponent, we don’t have to learn anything,” the former Speaker continued. “We have to do the homework.”

When CNN asked Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus to respond to Gingrich’s comments, he said that he did not agree with them. Priebus told CNN that the GOP has advanced a number of health care proposals.

As the president said, you can't just be against something, you have to be for something

I think he is most correct on this point. And it pretty much backs up what Bobby Jindal and other Republicans have said recently. Whether it's because of fear of the TEA Party posing a primary threat or something else, the GOP is allowing itself to be seen as marginalized, radicalized and unable/unwilling to govern. Stomping your feet and always screaming No!!! No!!! No!!! will not win you votes from anyone but other wingnuts.

While I'm not in the Newt Fan Club, he does represent the (shrinking) thinking wing of the GOP. I agree with him on some things and disagree on others. Much like Pat Buchanan, he will say controversial things from time to time, but he is usually able to present his arguments with some amount of logic... something that people like Bachmann, Perry and Cain had major trouble doing. If he'd won the nomination, I think he would have still lost the election. Padding the score in southern states that even Romney won, while still likely losing the same ones Romney lost, would have done nothing for the general election. Also, Newt's tendency to play "Musical Wives" didn't exactly help him with the lady folks.

But like I said, I think he's right on this one. You can't just be a bomb thrower. And the House GOP is probably the worst collection of political leaders this nation has seen in many, many decades. That is not an endorsement of Obama or the Democrats... it just says how much these people suck balls right now.