I agree with Newt Gingrich ( who knew? )

Good stuff in that article! It's like he's arguing for more reasonableness. Wow. Thanks, Chris!

At the same time, he said, any candidate who dares to change position on an issue during a two-year campaign risks being labeled a "flip-flopper" -- an epithet used to undercut 2004 Democratic nominee John Kerry and one being waved at current Republican hopeful Mitt Romney.

"You begin to trap people," Gingrich said. "As the campaigns get longer, you're asking a person who's going to be sworn in in January of 2009 to tell you what they'll do in January of 2007, when they haven't got a clue -- because they don't know what the world will be like, and you're suggesting they won't learn anything through the two years of campaigning."

"For the most powerful nation on Earth to have an election in which Swift Boat veterans versus National Guard papers becomes a major theme verges on insane," said Gingrich, referring to 2004 campaign controversies that targeted Kerry and President Bush. "I mean, it's just -- and to watch those debates, I found painful -- for both people. They're both smarter than the debates."

He blamed the pressures of sound-bite campaigning for the recent controversy over Sen. Barack Obama's declaration that he would dispatch U.S. troops to Pakistan to attack leaders of the al Qaeda terrorist network if Pakistani authorities fail to get them.

Gingrich said the Illinois Democrat, one of his party's leading presidential candidates, "said a very insightful thing in a very dangerous way." But the response, he said, "was to attack Senator Obama, not to explore the underlying kernel of what he said."

Gingrich's answer to the problems would be to get rid of limits on campaign financing, which he said have made the problems worse by requiring more individual donations to meet the same goals, and to stage a series of "dialogues" among the major-party candidates -- once a week, for 90 minutes, for nine weeks before the elections.

Candidates would pick the topics, and their answers would be uninterrupted "except for fairness on time," he said.

"After nine 90-minute conversations in their living rooms, the American people would have a remarkable sense of the two personalities and which person had the right ideas, the right character, the right capacity to be a leader," he said.

Raises some good points, but BOY, do I disagree about the solution!  Trust fewer, wealthier people & corporations to influence the candidates instead?

I suspect this is the way of politics throughout human history, in one form or another.

From tmwelshy Even an evil bastard can point out the danger of running with scissors. Don’t worry that you agree with him, chalk it up to planets aligning or go with I can’t believe he agrees with me, even, but don’t give him credit for pointing out the obvious… J

I have asked this question before why do people on the left feel the need to resort to personal attacks when addressing political questions?  I like Newt and agree with most of his positions I wonder what is it about him that makes him an evil bastard?

Same reason people on the right do. 

While Newt's wife was on her deathbed suffering from cancer, he divorced her. While he was having an affair. While at the same time preaching family values from the pulpit of the Speaker's lectern.

Also, lots of ethics violations.

Show me a Rep. who had an affair, I'll show you a Dem. who enjoyed a cigar a little more than he should have in Oval Office.  Show me a Dem. who took bribes and stored the money in his freezer, and I'll show you a Rep. who took trips and gifts from Jack Abramoff.  Show me a Rep. on the DC Madam's list, and I'll show you a Dem. on the same list.

It is pointless and a waste of time and bandwidth to banter back and forth on one bad apple, when pretty much the entire tree is rotten.  I prefer to lump them all into the same steaming and festering pile of you-know-what.

Sadly, I don't have faith in any of them to do the right thing, whatever that is, I've lost interest in politics, and I haven't voted in the last few non-Presidential elections.  Along with about 1/2 the population of this country.  Sad, but true.  In the last Presidential election... for the Libertarian candidate.  Protest vote kind-of-thing.

I wonder if there will ever be a candidate who truly inspires me. 

Sure, but CBarnes asked specifically about Mr. Gingrich, so I gave specific examples.

Fair enough.   

CBarnes - 2007-08-09 6:06 AM

ChineseDemocracy - 2007-08-08 10:50 PM

Evil bastard? I guess you could start with any quote of his talking about Bill Clinton's personal escapades while he was busy banging Miss Notmywife at the same time. I don't know, hypocrisy would have to be pretty high up there on the "evil bastard checklist." On topic, I too agree with a lot of Newt's main points but disagree with his proposed solutions. I truly hope he can wrest the Rep. nomination from Rudy...he'd be much easier to defeat in the '08 election.

Hmm his comments on Clinton’s affair perhaps you should read this http://archive.salon.com/news/1998/08/28news.html

OK this will be a partisan response.

Newt is a no good hypocrit con artist who despite all his holier than thou spewing:

Never served a day in uniform.

Cheated on a sick/dying wife.

Sold his following of republican lemmings on a list of 10 changes that would make America perfect forever if only we had a republican congress.

Had he lived 2000 years earlier he would have obviously been a pharisee.

I personally think he needs to spend more time hunting with Dick Cheney.