Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: KLP who wrote (467287)	1/25/2012 2:26:17 AM
From: simplicity	4 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793520

Thanks for posting the excellent article. It beautifully describes the witch hunt that took place back in the 90s, whose catalyst was simply a few people who had it in for Gingrich, a complicit media that continued to hone their 'tar and feathering' skills on people who are to the right of their own political ilk, and a few democrats in the House that simply would not let go without a thorough investigation of a non-crime. All we have to do is look at the Watergate Scandal, the Iran-Contra Affair, and other similar media-hyped 'scandals' to see the similarities in their modus operandi. But now to have a fellow republican, and fellow candidate for the republican nomination, resorting to the same kind of tactics -- i.e., harking back to a 'scandal', and the 'fact' that Newt 'resigned in disgrace', is an amazingly treacherous campaign tactic that I suspect most republicans who know the facts and circumstances behind Newt's resignation from the speakership will find more than distasteful. Romney has stepped far beyond Reagan's credo of never saying anything negative about a fellow republican. He's picked up a soiled twenty-year-old banner, one that has been proven to be bogus (at least in the minds of those who were paying attention and looking beneath all the negative hype), and he is attempting to use it against a member of his party for his own political gain. Pretty low, if you ask me. I am not completely convinced that Gingrich should be the party's nominee. But I believe, as a viable candidate at this point, his opponents should be seeking genuine issues on which to debate him rather than resurrecting old, disproven, partisan finger-pointing.

To: KLP who wrote (467287)	1/25/2012 9:43:12 AM
From: Geoff Altman	4 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793520

Which brings to mind one thing that the left is good at......targeting, demonizing and destroying people whom they disagree with, by any means necessary...... Why target Gingrich? Because he was an effective speaker.... everything else is a load of crap.

To: KLP who wrote (467287)	1/25/2012 12:37:22 PM
From: Neeka	1 Recommendation Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 793520

Here we have the crux of the matter. Cole obviously hated Newt Gingrich and knew he had "unclean" intentions that "lurked in the heart." Is this not just absolutely typical behavior by democrats? This kind of person is despicable and dangerous. Unfortunately, congress is full of them. Cole did not argue that the case was not educational. It plainly was. But Cole suggested that the standard for determining wrongdoing was whether any unclean intent lurked in the heart of the creator of the course, even if it was unquestionably educational.