Difference between revisions of "Talk:Newt Gingrich"

Revision as of 00:15, January 23, 2012

Let's get a citation for the affair thing. It's publicly acknowledged, but it'll carry more weight if it has one. --John 23:11, 9 March 2007 (EST)

Recommend

Conservapedia:Manual_of_Style/Politicians - Myk 02:19, 3 April 2007 (EDT)

I noticed he was categorized under Category: 2008 Presidential candidates. He never officially declared candidacy, therefore he shouldn't be in it. -Additioner 17:39, 20 January 2008 (EST)

Liberal Vs. Conservative

I have removed Mr. Gingrich from the conservative category into that of of detestable liberals, as the front page of Conservapedia has claimed him to no longer be a true conservative, having embraced socialistic views on Medicare. --TeaPartyFreedom76 19:12, 16 May 2011 (EDT)

Ethics Charges

Despite what his spokesperson says he was found guilty of ethics violation and had to pay a $300,000 fine. The panel found that he violated Rule 42 many times. The last three charges were dropped, as his spokesman said, in 1998 but not because they were without merit. The committee found that there was no evidence that he was still violating the rule and saw no reason to impose further sanctions.^[1]^[2] I'm going to remove the quote from his spokesperson. Ayzmo :) 14:04, 29 November 2011 (EST)

Issues vs. quotes

I've started a new section, which shows his stand on issues (or at least indicates areas of concern to him). This may contain direct quotations, but it would not be a random collection of quotes. Wikipedia has quote farms, some of which are use for quote mining (like "Bushisms"): Gingrich said this, see how it proves he's a nutcase!

I want our readers to be able to read a straightforward statement of the man's views, not "distortion by selection". See Star Parker for a test case. See also Quotation out of context and Putting words into someone's mouth. --Ed Poor ^Talk 11:27, 9 January 2012 (EST)

Personal life

Gingrich is an orphan. The fact an orphan rises to the third highest office in the United States and is considered a viable candidate for President would be of more interest than the marital troubles intended as an obvious attack on his character should have precedence, at least in website written from a conservative viewpoint. Rob Smith 19:06, 22 January 2012 (EST)

Ah, so we should give him a by for being an two-time (at least) adulterer. Okay, I give up. Whatever. Whitewash it anyway you want, Rob. --SharonW 19:08, 22 January 2012 (EST)

Gingrich is an orphan, right but that does not give him the right to live a sinful life !--PhilipN 19:09, 22 January 2012 (EST)

John 8:10-11, Where are thine accusers? She said, No man, Lord. "Neither do I condemn thee." [1] Rob Smith 19:15, 22 January 2012 (EST)

[1] ttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/govt/leadership/stories/101198.htm

[2] ttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/govt/leadership/stories/gingrich123198.htm

[1]

[2]

@@ Line 28: / Line 28: @@
 :Ah, so we should give him a by for being an two-time (at least) adulterer. Okay, I give up. Whatever. Whitewash it anyway you want, Rob. --[[User:SharonW|SharonW]] 19:08, 22 January 2012 (EST)
 ::Gingrich is an orphan, right but that does not give him the right to live a sinful life !--[[User:PhilipN|PhilipN]] 19:09, 22 January 2012 (EST)
+:::John 8:10-11, ''Where are thine accusers?'' She said, ''No man, Lord.'' "Neither do I condemn thee."  [http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John%208:10-11&version=KJV]  [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 19:15, 22 January 2012 (EST)