HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Newt Gingrich on child la...

Mon Dec 12, 2011, 12:29 AM

Newt Gingrich on child labor laws today:

Former House speaker Gingrich last month described some child labor laws as "stupid" and argued that low-income children would learn critical values by working at a younger age. He then outlined his proposal to replace "unionized janitors" with a "master janitor" and several students.

"It is tragic what we do in the poorest neighborhoods, entrapping children in child laws which are truly stupid," Gingrich said during a speech at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government. "Saying to people you shouldn't go to work before you're 14, 16. You're totally poor, you're in a school that's failing with a teacher that's failing."


From the same article, Newt's position on child labor in 1996:

But in a 1996 ad titled "Cookie," Gingrich slammed his then-congressional opponent, Michael Coles, former CEO of Great American Cookie Co., as an "unscrupulous businessman" partly because of a 1993 violation of child labor laws and accused him of using children "for hazardous labor," according to a transcript of the ad in The Atlanta Journal-Constitution.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/story/2011-12-11/gingrich-child-labor/51818250/1


Hypocritical piece of crap to the very core. He is not fit to be our commander in chief.

6 replies, 2442 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 6 replies Author Time Post
Reply Newt Gingrich on child labor laws today: (Original post)
Initech Dec 2011 OP
one_voice Dec 2011 #1
Initech Dec 2011 #2
coalition_unwilling Dec 2011 #4
aint_no_life_nowhere Dec 2011 #3
murielm99 Dec 2011 #5
Initech Dec 2011 #6

Response to Initech (Original post)

Mon Dec 12, 2011, 12:34 AM

1. He's not fit...

to be among the human race. He's much closer to a snake.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to one_voice (Reply #1)

Mon Dec 12, 2011, 12:37 AM

2. Yeah but snakes serve a purpose.

Hell, even shit serves a purpose - and I wouldn't put Newt in with shit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to one_voice (Reply #1)

Mon Dec 12, 2011, 01:08 AM

4. On a positive note, if the Grinch is the Repuke nominee, such is my visceral hatred for his

 

smug, unctuous ass that I will set aside my misgivings about Obama and pull the lever for him in 2012. I dislike Romney and the rest of the Repukes running, but not enough to cause me to waste time voting for Obama. But when and if the Grinch is the Repuke standard bearer, my vote for Obama will be my primal scream.

If Obama's campaign is smart, it will mobilize this Grinch-hatred factor (as personified by me

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Initech (Original post)

Mon Dec 12, 2011, 12:56 AM

3. Gingrich is just playing up to the psychopathic base of his party

Sure he's a hypocrite who condemned the violation of child labor laws in the past. But as ugly as Gingrich is, the modern Republican electorate is even uglier. Gingrich is just reaching for things the far right wants to hear, like electrocuting aliens at the border or letting uninsured people die. He's heard the cheers and applause of other candidates at the debates in celebration of cruelty. I don't think Gingrich is a true believer. He'll say just about anything. What he wants is power, evidenced by the way he spent decades lusting to be Speaker of the House before he even ran for public office. That explains his ever-changing positions. The worse scum than Gingrich are our average fellow United States citizens who support this kind of filth and who clearly are of very low character and morality.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Initech (Original post)

Mon Dec 12, 2011, 01:26 AM

5. They would learn critical values by working at a younger age, only if they are poorer?

Many people who are "poorer" know how to work hard. They often value their dollars more, because they have fewer of them. They know what it is like to work very hard for very little in return.

Many "richer" children are the ones who do not know the value of anything. Everything is handed to them. Make them work, too, but even harder than their poorer counterparts. Don't all children need to learn critical values, regardless of the income level of their parents?

I would curse Newt, but he is not worth the effort. And I don't the curse to rebound on me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to murielm99 (Reply #5)

Mon Dec 12, 2011, 01:56 AM

6. I don't get that logic either.

Of course in the GOP world - it doesn't apply either so it's stupid to waste brain power on trying to comprehend their utter stupidity and hypocrisy.

I agree that the uber-rich kids are the ones who need to be taught that stuff, if they only had compassion for those that don't live like they do I think the human race would be better off.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread