Cecilie1200
Diamond Member
I am now waiting to see how many pages it takes before someone actually talks about Newt's healthcare policy proposal, rather than "I know he's THIS sort of person", and "his marital history is THIS", and "I'm sure THIS is what he thinks about healthcare, because look at this soundbyte". I'm betting it's at least three pages, given how many of the people currently discussing on this thread seem to be allergic to real, substantive discussion of issues.
I think you're missing the point Cecilie. The reason we're not talking about his proposals is that we have no idea if he'll have the same views a year from now when he (assuming his nominated and elected) takes office. Credibility and consistency have to be there before campaign promises and proposals can be taken seriously.
I think YOU'RE missing the point. There's a huge difference between being "inconsistent" and changing your opinion over a period of years because you've realized you were wrong about something. I wouldn't WANT to vote for someone who had reached his sixties and held the exact same opinions and views the entire time, because I would seriously wonder if he had matured at all in his lifetime.
I should point out that Ronald Reagan was once a Democrat and signed a very liberal abortion bill into law as Governor of California. Does that make him "inconsistent"? Should we have worried when he was elected that he was going to change positions on a whim at any moment? Bullshit.
One thing no one has ever accused Newt Gingrich of that I am aware is making empty campaign promises, and then neglecting to at least try to follow through after being elected.
The reason we're not talking about Newt's actual policy positions and proposals is that it's more fun to speculate, gossip, and backbite like a bunch of old biddies at a hen party.