Gingrich has a Reverend Wright too

Paulie

Diamond Member
May 19, 2007
40,769
6,382
1,830
A couple, actually. Named Alvin and Heidi Troffler.

41gVWM1Iy0L._SL500_AA300_.jpg


Give it a read sometime. It's only all about how US sovereignty is outdated and obsolete, and the US constitution should be "altered and replaced".

This guy is quite a friend to the United States.

You should definitely defend this and maintain your support for him :thup:
 
What did Rev. Wright say that was wrong? no one seems to have an answer.

That's irrelevant. The point is that republicans perceived Wright's views as anti-American. If Wright's views were anti-American, what does that make the views of the Trofflers?
 
What did Rev. Wright say that was wrong? no one seems to have an answer.

Here ya go asswipe. Sorry you missed it the first 1,000,000 times....

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jc2FCJ7zWEQ]Barack Obama Pastor Jeremiah Wright NEW TAPES!!!! - YouTube[/ame]
 
When you guys are done reiterating the Wright situation, feel free to comment on this Gingrich situation.
 
I read Future Shock! At the time, it made quite an impression on me.
It made an impression on me as well.

I have not read Creating a New Civilization.

Newt seems to think that is part of his task.

Here are some doodlenotes from Gingrich himself on the matter:

These notes and doodles, handwritten by Newt Gingrich, appear in a series of exhibits appended to a report published on Jan. 17, 1997 by the House Select Committee on Ethics. The notes are mainly from the period leading up to his big 1994 victory. The text at left reads:
Gingrich—Primary Mission
—Advocate of civilization
—definer of civilization
—Teacher of the rules of civilization
—arouser of those who form civilization
—Organizer of the pro-civilization activists
—leader (possibly) of the civilizing forces.


gingrich.jpg




Gingrich’s Doodles - Slate Magazine

Can you just imagine if Obama had notes like these how the rabble would be squawking?
 
What did Rev. Wright say that was wrong? no one seems to have an answer.

That's irrelevant. The point is that republicans perceived Wright's views as anti-American. If Wright's views were anti-American, what does that make the views of the Trofflers?

Really OLD! Mostly discredited TODAY, but at the time, quite popular.

Mostly discredited today? Every year a little more, and a little more, sovereignty is given away in the name of "fresh ideas". If anything, these views are alive and well in the US government and I see Gingrich as being front and center.
 
Somehow, these old positions have the same impact as whether or not a candidate once believed in Santa Clause.

If people do not mature and learn in their lifetimes, what does that say about them?
 
Somehow, these old positions have the same impact as whether or not a candidate once believed in Santa Clause.

If people do not mature and learn in their lifetimes, what does that say about them?

Listen to what you're saying...

You're saying that it should be considered ok that Newt endorsed the idea of erasing borders and ending US sovereignty, and replacing the US constitution.

This was only like 15 years ago.

It's NEVER been ok to have views like this. NEVER.

How you could possibly bring yourself to trust the man after something like this is incredible. This is about as anti-American as it gets without actually taking up arms against the US.
 
Keep in mind, Newt would wave this book around all the time during congressional sessions. This was on what you would call his required reading list.

It's not like he just had a weird viewpoint one day and then decided a week later it was stupid. This guy was pushing congress to support this crap.
 

Forum List

Back
Top