Newt on "Occupy Wall Street"...
 

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/vid...ke_a_bath.html

Newt Gingrich offers his advice to the "Occupy" protesters.

"Go get a job after you take a bath," he said to raucous applause at the Thanksgiving Family Forum in Des Moines, Iowa.

I dont know whats worse, his comment regarding Occupy Wall Street, or that he participated in the Thanksgiving Family Forum :zz:

come on Newt, you're better than that. No need to butter up the outrageous religous right.

Smart guy this serial adulterer running for president and all and assuming ALL supporters of Occupy Wallstreet are Dems and insulting them. :zz:

He's made comments linking the protestors to a "breakdown of the country's moral values"...pot, meet kettle! Newt my man, you've been gaining in the polls thanks largely to keeping your mouth shut....weird time to abandon that practice.

I hope he was just being an a$$ because he was talking infront of a large number of assholes (Thanksgiving Family Forum).. just being a typical politician.

Newt is probably the most brilliant choice we have for 2012... and he needs to stay far far away from being a typical religious hypocrite.

Brilliant? How in the world so?

Newt is a wholly-owned lobbyist. He's a serial liar, wholly untrustworthy. He was never "brilliant" in a smart way, especially when he was in office - he was literally kicked out by his party just after he was just re-elected.

Brilliant in that he's probably forgot more about good policy and politics than Obama has ever learned.

Well, good policy and good politics are two entirely different things ;)

The only credit I'll give Newt (having lived through his first political incarnation) is that he rightly would cross party lines to make deals, as they all should. However, he woefully exaggerates his place in history throughout his term as Speaker.

:tro: Winner

well, i guess with newt you know what you're getting, unlike other pols. well, you know what you're getting with all them too, but they act like they're not your typical politician.

If you woke up tomorrow and needed somebody to take the reigns, you'd have to go with Newt, as imperfect as that might be. I think he's the only one with a fighting chance against President Obama - and I don't believe that will be (or should be) enough.

I agree - just one correction: I think you meant "take the reins". Sounds the same but big difference - after all, we are a constitutionally federated republic and we do not have a king - no matter what the current occupant of the White House thinks.

So you guys that like Newt ... do you like his idea for poor kids in elementary school working for their education by cleaning the bathrooms in their schools?

How about poor children being taken away from their parents, if the parents are on welfare, and put into orphanages to save the state money by not paying that parent for child welfare? You know, keep those welfare queens from making more babies just for the riches.

:zz: How so? Specific example?

Wow, if there's one word on this board that I should get right you would think it would be "reins." I appreciate the catch.

Given the developments of the last couple of days I would welcome some "reigning." All very sad. Sometimes I wish President Obama would do a little more reigning. Right now everything feels very directionless. Hard to believe 12 smart people can be put in a room for months and come out with nothing. I just have trouble understanding that.

when do the tea partiers start chewing newt's leg off over his long standing support for individual mandates?

aren't we in a constitutional crisis over this?

that heritage foundation is a fount of socialistic idea's.

i don't care for newt; i think he has too much baggage to actually be a viable candidate.
but, he's the latest non-romney to get attention. i don't care for any of the choices for 2010 at this point. and that includes the current office holder.

Might be a little out there but......not very along in ago in this nations growing regions it was expected that if you could walk and talk you better get your butt to work to help out. Cut the grass , pull weeds, haul hay and muck stalls, along with feeidng the livestock. Everyone should know the value of hardwork its what makes getting an education more valuable.
Some of those kids from crap homes would be well served to learn how to clean and do janitorial work. They could grow up and have a skill, join the Union and get very well payed for scrubbing toilets.

Americans secretly love socialism. Newt vs. Obama will be an epic battle.

Yeah how awful.

It seems Newts point was entirely missed by his fans:

Elementary school education should not be free and open to everyone.
It should be privatized and cost money.

(Right there, I can't see how anyone could support that change in the United States of America.)

Yet, Newt goes on:

Those children too poor to afford the cost of a basic education could work for it.

They could do so by doing a job that is now considered too dangerous and illegal for them to do (work with toxic chemicals, exposure to disease, etc)

Child labor laws are "stupid" (Newt's word) and now prevent that, and should be repealed to allow this.

Newts ideas have nothing at all to do with the way kids nowadays start their work careers at age 14 or so by working part-time after school or on weekends.

So what. Maybe with a little hard work we won't end up with feminine sissies like Justin Bieber.

I had a work permit when I was 14 and had a weekend job that paid under the table cleaning stalls for a family friend when I was 13.
I was riding race horses at the track when I was 15 and I think I managed to scrub some bathrooms and clean in my dads machine shop without killing myself with disease and "toxic chemicals" somewhere around the age of 9 or 10 and I did it because I wanted to make some money.
I think if you give children who have been stuck in circle of poverty for generations a chance to learn something about hard work and earning money that they will be able to see that there is a light at the end of the tunnel and go on to make something of their lives.
There is nothing wrong with children getting a job and making some money if that is what they want to do. Kids in America have it pretty freaking good compared to the stories I have been told about working in fields all day long when you are 5 because if you didnt help out then you didnt eat.

Yeah and lets be real...Chicken McNuggets are more harmful to children than some cleaning supplies. They've got plastic in them, ffs.

Lets just stop with the disingenuous "Oh teh kids" nonsense that has basically turned all of them into wussies.

Repealing child labor laws would have a horrible effect on both America and the world. The founding fathers (many of whom were Masons by the way) believed strongly that it's every American's right to free education through High School. Rich folks have the option to send their kids to private schools at a cost. The middle class would rebel if faced with paying for their child(s) education K-12, you think the Occupy Movement is inconvenient how would millions of Americans protesting in the streets and the probability of things turning violent suit you? That is absolutely the worst idea I have heard in my lifetime and anyone supporting such crap better start searching for their soul...it's missing!

I have been searching the web and cant seem to find an article where Newt says children should pay to go to elementary school. If you know where I can read about that at would you post a link. Thanks in advance.

Yeah, I responded to the idea, notice I didn't reference Newt...Riot posted that he said that, I hope she's mistaken or the remark was completely out of context. I can't imagine any politician suggesting such a thing! Might as well tear up the Constitution...hard work never hurt anyone, I started in the orchards at 15, but I wanted to work...we were middle class (even though Dad worked 2 jobs) but having to pay for my education through 12th grade would have ruined us. The concept of first graders working for their education is insane...worse than any third world country.

Unless the place you live has no local property taxes, you already are paying for the education, along with your neighbors, whether they have kids or not. The nicer the area, the better the schools, the higher the property taxes. If you live near me, you get to send your kids to a good school but do not think for a second it is "free".

We are not talking in gross generalities (I had my first job at 12 years old), we are talking in specifics: do you think child labor laws and OSHA regulations should be repealed, so 10-year-old children can work as janitors in hospitals, schools, businesses?

Do you think 10-year-old children should work as janitors exactly as Newt said? Cleaning bathrooms, mopping halls, waxing floors, wiping up feces and urine, vomit, changing light bulbs, climbing ladders, etc?

Newt wants to end that, and privatize schools.

No more property taxes? Or just the 70% of them that go to the public school system?
The President has zero authority over local municipalities and their local property tax structure.

Newt said that schools should be privatized and for profit: Newts web page: http://www.issues2000.org/Newt_Gingrich.htm

If you google " Newt child labor laws privatize education " you will get literally thousands of hits. This is a speaking engagement he had a few days ago, then since he's come out and "clarified" his child labor law repeal.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1111/68729.html

Yes, but some who would be President would eliminate 100% of the funding for education that the federal government now subsidizes; and the Republican Governors Association has a goal of union-busting teachers, so they can more easily privatize school districts.

Newt wants to privatize schools, and make them for profit. Yes, your taxes for education would no longer be necessary.

And if the poor kids can't afford to go to elementary school, they can work as janitors to pay for it, and clean up the pee and feces and vomit of the rich kids.

The Republican Party has one goal: privatize everything: police, fire, Social Security, Medicare, keep healthcare private, no unions, school districts, government (see Michigan). Why? It's the only money left to take in this country. There is no middle class, with a disposable income, any more. 45% of this country are financially insecure, living paycheck to paycheck.
People with full time jobs can't afford housing and food on minimum wage. The Repubs don't care about that. They are sitting on 1.2 Trillion dollars, there is no need to "put any of it into the economy" to "create jobs" (as they don't care about that, either) - they just want to take the rest of the money that is left. And the only source of that left is government dollars going into programs, local and federal. Privatize those programs, and that equals a huge source of income.

Excuse me, but let's be real: children have no business with quarternary ammonium compounds (professional cleaning supplies).

And yes, chicken mcnuggets are not even real food. Its congealed chicken waste products (bones, meat) decolorized and flavored.

Do you think current child labor laws should be eliminated? So children can go back to work in factories and mines?

I am torn.
They waste so much of my tax dollar now, yet I would hate to see poor people having to work too.
Has anyone successfully busted a union and privatized a school district completely? As someone with no kids this neighborhood sounds appealing to me.

i definitely qualify as middle class along with pretty much 90% of my neighbors.

But the Republicans want to repeal child labor laws, because they "inhibit job creation". If they can hire children at $3.00 an hour to work in factories here, instead of having to pay adults a federally-mandated minimum wage, and they eliminate OSHA regulations that prevent them from endangering children's and employees lives, they don't have to outsource to Mumbai.

See? Repealing child labor laws and OSHA laws is all about "job creation!" ;)

Here is the Republican agenda:

Defund "we're broke"
Bust the unions to enable privatization, remove legal impediments
Privatize to "save money"

The union-busted in Ohio, but it was just repealed at the ballot box (that is the first step to privatizing).

Walker union-busted in Wisconsin, now's he's under recall.

Scott in Florida is trying to privatize.

Michigan (Kasich) has privatized municipalities - he passed a law that for broke towns, he can come in and take over their town government (your elections no longer matter) and he can appoint a Czar to rule the town (Benton Harbor)

Republican Governor Chris Christie wants to start privatizing some New Jersey schools: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/0..._n_875262.html

Ohio has a teachers union, so does Wisconsin.

Christie has "chosen" the worst possible schools in NJ, clearly the status quo is a failure in those areas and based on Newark (where it costs almost the same per year to send a kid to school as does Yale) it is probably a good idea.

But they have been badly battered by having the Republican governors remove some of their bargaining rights. Remove this, remove that, defund - and oh, we're broke, we'll have to hire a private company to run it, and we'll give all your state dollars to them.

Privatize Social Security, Medicare, keep healthcare privatized (we can see the disaster that is), privatize police, fire, EMS, schools. Get those tax dollars into the hands of corporations.

Look: the Republican Governors Association is very clear on now these govs are supposed to go about this. It's no secret. It's what the party "stands for".