Gingrich: I’ll ‘ignore’ any Supreme Court ruling I disagree with

This just goes along with my theory that Newt is intentionally trying to throw his own candidacy. He knows he's polling way behind Romney in a head to head race versus Obama.

It's more than that. Gingrich does not have the courage to accept the barrage of criticism 24/7/365 that he and every other president receives once they accede to the office. His megalomania is so fragile that he cannot deal with conflict and that is why, almost every time he faces it, he regresses into child-like responses; even his body English is a dead giveaway. I am convinced he was abused and bullied as a child as he manifests virtually all of the textbook personality traits of one who was. I also think that serving as president would be such a come-down in income, that he actually does not want to undergo the emotional, intellectual and financial challenges he would face as president. I see him as simply engaged in marketing himself like Herman Cain did, with no real hope - let alone desire - of actually winning the job.

This is the Newt I remember from the Clinton era. He's Back. For those who don't remember, he was kicked out by his own people for just this type of stuff. So he hasn't changed one bit, well he is a little smoother so when he says crazy stuff some people will believe him, especially the republicans who have ODS.

If I wasn't living here I'd hope he would win just so the republicans were finally out of power for years, which is what he will do. You have no idea how bad it can be.

Newt is the current front runner? Republicans are scraping the bottom of the barrel with Newt. If he becomes the GOP nominee to run for president in the general election, Republicans are going to get stomped flat in the election.

Space - New name I see...well you probably have your reasons....Barry is the best thing that has happened to this country in the past fifty years. Sorry to pop your bubble there, but history will bear me out. Newt....You're kidding, right? I mean, really?

All debunked conservative talking points.

Could you be anymore partisan?

He should have been protesting that stupid Citizens United ruling.

Hey, just like the Bible!

That explains why he refers to children who needa school lunch as serfs. Newt you are an OLD FUDDY DUDDY. NOT KING by a long shot. As an American Woman I don't want Newt involved with Children. NEWT HAS BEEN CAMPAIGNING AGAINST CHILDREN.

But the rest of us don't have any use for him.

And would he use the military to keep himself in power? What are we, The Philippines?

Actually, I compare a Gingrich presidency to that of Robert Mugabe in Zimbabwe. Fortunately, we have a Constitution with built-in checks and balances that will withstand any serious challenge. But, if we didn't, Mugabe would be my model for Pig Newton. I think they share many very similar personality traits, attitudes and hardly even superficial concern for anyone other than themselves - and then only for their own political purposes and self-aggrandizement. And that is why virtually every REPUBLICAN officeholder who served under Gingrich or knew him or interacted with him on any level is warning us away from him with a level of near-hysteria that I have never seen in political life before now.

Yes, he wants to take over where shrub left off.

The man is so psychological skewed he should take the oath of whatever office he ever reaches (because it wont be the presidency) on the DSM.

Where has Obama ever say in the exact words that Gingrich has used with this statement to prove your statement.

I swear people are so blinded by their own self-loathing they don't have the self-awareness to realize how ignorant they sound.

But it's the weekend and the Vine becomes a troll's playpen

Spoken like a true troll.

The only difference is we aren't desperate to have a voice that we have to re-reg....

Newt is the true NaziCommunist.

Sorry Mr. Gnome but tour not pi**ing off folks,you're making yourself a parody of your stupid handle. Do you write jokes for Denneis Miller?

Then why don't you let your testes undescend and stop being a troll and something useful for a change.

You don't piss us off.....we pity you....we make fun of you. You are nothing but an amusement and cheap entertainment....much like the GOP is.

......Another re-reg has been accepted into the bin of rejects.

Enjoy your stay.

Nobody tell him how collapsing actually works, I'm sure he already knows.

Don't you have something better to do with your life?

sushi, naaaaaaaa, it pisses you off to have someone point out all your liberal propoganda and lies.

In your dreams schoolboy.

Tyler, I knew it! Thanks!

Damn. My money was on Amosonandy.

Puddin' uses a different style of nom de guerres Grae. I was guessing OIGA.

Everyone knows Newt would disagree with that one.

TROLL.

"narcissism +megalomania".............equals re-regs

TROLL.

It's Amosonandy - That's why it's on ignore.

Trolls don't deserve respect.

Obamas A communist

You have posted on several seeds

New member 12/2011

There is absolutley no reason to continue insulting Liberals.

Stop it.

OAC

What ever, why are you so angry?????

Then go to FoxNation or the Blaze and take out your teenage angst. Your success rate is zero.

MJ, you mean other than their all out attacks and insults against everything and everybody that is non-liberal on here?

We insult anyone who posts stupid, worthless crap. If you were to make an intelligent point then we would have more respect. It's your own fault.

OAC, you've not defended anything. All you've done here is call liberals and Obama names.

I'd love to understand what you think is a compelling argument. I've certainly not seen anything in your comments that would qualify as compelling to me. All I've seen are talking points and name calling from you.

If you think anything you've said here is compelling, now I understand why you're so frustrated here.

obamasacommunist

I believe what you mean to say is that Obama is a Socialist, NOT Communist. There is a big difference between the two.

And Obama is neither a Socialist or a Communist. A society that has social programs is not necessarily Socialist. Try educating yourself a little and it won't be so obvious that you are talking out of your secondary orifice.

I believe what you mean to say is that Obama is a Socialist, NOT Communist.

Actually he's neither. He's a corporate centrist. I'm a socialist and he's nothing like me.

If you want to assume that universal education + health care = socialist, you're way off the mark.

I agree, that's why my second paragraph stated he was neither socialist or communist.

I too am a socialist.... but not the type of socialist that the right would like to portray. there is a wide range of socialist views, I consider myself a conservative socialist as opposed to a liberal socialist.

I believe in the loosest sense Obama could be considered an ultra conservative "socialist" but even that is stretching it.

Grae

Gingrich: I’ll ‘ignore’ any Supreme Court ruling I disagree with

And GW said the Constitution was just a piece of paper, I guess that tells us what the GOP mind set is.

Marcel Villa

#21- "Constitution or not" you say? So apparently you are one of those who love the consititution and is willing to protect it as long as it adheres to your political point of view, when it doesn't you propose to change it or throw it out all together, as you said "Constitution or not".

I'm military 35 years Army, still serving and have served in war, our military personnel have not sacrificed their lives for people like you to manipulate the Constitution just because it doesn't fit into your political agenda. The Constitution is the Law of the Land and should be respected as such even in disagreement because we are a Democracy and the Supreme Court is the highest court in the land and in any judicial decision there are winners and losers. That's DEMOCRACY...

To state that you will attempt to stack the deck in your favor to render the judicial decision you and Newt desires doesn't reflect an individual that respects the true meaning of Democracy and the sacrifices that were made to keep this nation free.

Politicoman,

The constitution is created by men. Granted it is an almost perfect piece of laws that is almost and I repeat almost impossible to change, still it has been presented and made by man. In short it is man made and in this world there is no such thing as a perfect idealistic principle.

Some may stand the test of time like the christian religion which up to now for thousand of years persists, or the concept of the military, just as you and I have serve which to serve and protect the country, it's principles and it's inhabitants from enemies both within and from outside but which, please correct me if I am wrong, being used by others to propagate dictatorship and the rise to power of some lunatics or the mandate on the individuals rights and privileges which is now grossly being abused by many and even the concept of marriage which is between a man and a woman which is now a controversial issue or even the fact that some of these stupid, moronic Supreme Court judges making decisions that corporations are human beings and not just a non breathing entity, clearly shows that even the constitution is not perfect.

People must be made to understand that the founding fathers of the constitution are of high moral character, very religious and totally family oriented people and some of their concept of whatever will be may not completely apply anymore merely because just as an example, we don't need horses to drive around to shout "The British are coming, the british are coming". Such a scene are now buried in the sand of time.

I did not state to stack the deck in my favor nor in your favor. The President is the duly elected representative of the people and is duty bound to react to the best interest of those he have sworn to serve not the founding fathers and those who have long been dead. As much as possible, he has a duty to preserve the constitution but when the context of the constitution starts to nibble away the rights it has sworn to protect because it is stated in a general form where there will be a lot of interpretation that can be attached to it, It again, is the duty of the President to see to it that the legislation must conform to the real intent of the constitution which is to protect the inhabitants and the country in general.

What I was trying to convey is to stack the deck with all the means to protect the old constitution by making laws that will enhance it's provisions and make it work under the present system. The present Supreme Court have now abused their power. Their main job is to decide whether a legislated law is right, wrong or unconstitutional. Their power has to stop there because the constitution has guaranteed the separation of power. It does so, so that none of the three branches of the government, the Judiciary, the executive and the legislative will not be able to trample the rights of the other and so protect the people by providing counter balances.

The present courts have now began to make decisions not only to declare a law illegal but making decisions requiring the state to follow court mandated order virtually making a law on their own. These they do not have a business of doing so. Only the Legislative body of the State of the Federal Government in concurrence with the Executive Branch of the government which is the Oval office can and promulgate laws, NOT THE COURTS. The legislative body or the executive body in case of executive orders can revise what is passed or pass another law to make if feasible if the courts declare a legislated law invalid or unconstitutional. The courts can or not express their opinions as to the reasons for doing so but they have no business stating what has to be done to the law. If is not their job. It is usurpation of powers.

So, I am not stacking the deck on my favor, instead, I dare say I want that constitution to be followed sensibly and with common sense.

THAT SIR is a very Touching Comment. Thank you so much.

It is Mame and you are welcome.

Was just going to mention that. From my understanding of what is going on right now, the constitution is being ignored. We have yet to hear from the courts. That comment alone is enough for me not to vote for Gingrich.

I have only seen one candidate that emraces the constitution. Unless you want to count Gary Johnson too. He has been completely ignored by the media.

Roy Batty

#25.4- Totally agree with you regarding Paul, John Huntsman is the other candidate I respect. Both Paul and Huntsman has demonstrated a willingness to stand their ground and not pander to the audience for votes. Neither has had an audience with THE DON and kissed his ring, stating that is beneath the office of the Presidency and I totally agree.. Makes me wonder if THE DON had dropped his pants, would someone kissed another part of his anatomy just to get his endorsement... If people don't see through these candidates, they never will and will always be played for idiots by politicians.....

Roy Batty

#25.2- Thanks for reminding those that accuse the President of stepping on the Constitution that "Obamacares" was PASSED by BOTH CHAMBERS in Congress...which is part of our Constitutional process....

I'm actually surprised you'd say that when we take a moment and remember that Das Shrub used more signing statements in his time in office than ANY other pres in HISTORY!!!!

To my knowledge- Obama hasn't used ONE.