Re: Newt Gingrich, Weasel

 
To prove my point, I will take the time to refute another one of your dumb, "cut and paste" posts. 
 
As usual,  Michael  took an article from a Moonbat,  Tom Woods, who quotes another Moonbat, Bob Wenzel, in their bashing of Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich,  the crux of the articles amount to nothing other than some name calling, specifically that Mr. Gingrich is a weasel. 

So far we see the typical fallacy spew.

 
Let's review:
 
First,  Woods  cites Wentzel's "brief" article as being somehow "sharp"  and "insightful".    Here's what Wentzel said, according to Woods, the, "brief,  sharp insightful"  article in its entirety:
 
"Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich will officially jump into the race for the Republican presidential nomination on Wednesday with announcements on Facebook and Twitter,
 
The Gingrich campaign strategy appears to be that he will run not on any principles, but more on the fact that he is not President Obama.

A Gingrich snippet:

The fact is, we are not going to close the deficit and move towards a balanced budget unless we follow the policies that foster the economic growth necessary to create jobs.The first and most immediate step would be to employ the policies that encourage investment, create jobs, and reward innovation and entrepreneurship -- exactly the opposite of the Obama anti-jobs policies

 

Aside from the attack on President Obama, the underlying message here is that Gingrich wants to balance the budget not by reducing government spending, but by increasing tax revenues through more jobs. In other words, Gingrich sees no problem with the current size of government."
 
========
 
Obviously,  both Wentzel and Woods are either just total ignoramuses, and/or they are purposely attempting to besmirch Mr. Gingrich's long record and established policy of smaller federal government.  For example,  here is a speech from just two months ago,  on Mr. Gingrich's policies on smaller, limited federal government:
 
http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/118653/20110304/newt-gingrich-2012-presidential-aspirations-smaller-government.htm

Is see ... your problem is that you are STILL operating in the "intentions" and "talk" realm rather than the "ACTION" realm.
In his 'speech' he TALKS about 'reform' -- reform, of course, means re-arranging the deck chairs (you know, an embrace of socialist policy operated in a manner he agrees). There are also a lot of generalities and promises for 'Blue Ribbon Commissions' to study and look into purported problems. (this, too, is meaningless political spew). He wants to balance the budget -- another charade.
He also TALKS about the Tenth Amendment (as though he embraces it) and yet he recently affirmed parts of ObamaCare -- something CONTRARY to Amendment X.

Was there something SPECIFIC from that speech that was supposed to somehow SUPPORT your assertions?

 
"We need to declare our independence from trying to protect and defend failed bureaucracies that magically become ours as soon as we are in charge of them. We appoint solid conservatives to a department and within three weeks they are defending and protecting the very department that they would have been attacking before they got appointed.

I think that there are two grave lessons for the conservative movement since 1980. The first, which we still haven't come to grips with, is that governing..."

Source: Speech at 2011 Conservative Political Action Conference Feb 9, 2008