Posted on 05/17/2011 6:05:32 AM PDT by Lexluthor69
Newt Gingrich’s ambition to be President of the US did not take a shot in the foot over the past weekend – it was a headshot! You can stick a fork in him ‘cause … he’s DONE!
Either Newt, or his campaign folks, grievously misread conservative voters concerning the nation’s financial mess and socialized medicine.
Two things the Gingrich campaign apparently missed: One is that Conservatives know drastic cuts in government spending must be made to salvage our country. The other is that conservatives do not like, nor do we want, socialized medicine … in any form or by any name … period!
No amount of “backing and filling” will get Newt out of this hole. He might just as well get out of the race — right now. Any chance he DID have has vanished. Kaput!
As I survey the Republican field of candidates for President today, I have to conclude the GOP has conceded the raced to Obama and the democrats.
I must tell you, I have strong suspicions the GOP does not want to have a republican in the Oval Office with the country in the financial mess it is in today. They do not want to be painted with the same brush as the current occupant — and they sure as heck do want to create a modern “Hoover Days” presidency.
As an American who believes the US is in dire need of rescuing from the clutches of the socialists in our government, I must tell you that should I confirm that is the policy of the GOP concerning this Presidential Election, I will immediately resign my membership in the Republican Party and become an Independent.
(Excerpt) Read more at silentmajority09.com ...
Like Hell.
McCain/Palin 2012.
It's a lot more complicated than that, but here's the short version.
The 'establishement' you're talking about is the Bush wing, formerly the Rockefeller wing, of the GOP. (E-GOP)
The 'establishment' on the other side is the Clinton wing of the DNC. These two wings are cosmetically quite different, but they share a lot of the same DNA as far as globalism, international objectives, and domestic policies. (E-DNC)
Obama leads the new establishment-in-development, the Cloward Piven / Soros wing. This wing wants to enact policies that force America into a path she can't escape, which will fundamentally alter the country. Basically a revolution through policy means. (CP-DNC)
The Tea Party is the counter-revolution establishment-in-development. The idea is to return America to its roots, financially, culturally and legally. (T-GOP)
The GOP establishment, as such, is at war with all three other factions, but not in the same way. The Tea Party is an existential threat to the GOP establishment, whereas the other two are just political opponents. So, to get back to your point, what does the E-GOP want?
It's better to win with an E-GOP party loyalist. If that can't be done, they'd rather an E-DNC loyalist wins (like Hillary Clinton) who respects the Establishment rules. If that can't be done, they'd rather a CP-DNC type wins (Obama), so they can blame him for screwing up and be positioned to win again. The very last thing they want is a T-GOP (Palin, Bachmann) to win.
Establishments can only lose so much ground before they become the fringe, and the upstarts become the new order. At the current rate of decay, the E-GOP and E-DNC will be extinct in ten years, replaced from within by the T-GOP and CP-DNC. They can turn it around, (or delay the inevitable), but they need to start turning it soon.
One of the best , clearest, and most to the point explanations I’ve read in the longest time! The CP-DNC is on the ascendency ‘fer shur’, with a mobocracy standing at the door to take over in the chaos they’re working so hard to institute. That bunch lies as easily as they breathe, as their commie-in-chief has proven almost daily!
“Palin 2012.”
AMEN! The GOP has got to realize that only a CONSERVATIVE candidate can beat Obama in 2012, and that is SARAH PALIN! The answer has been obvious for so long, yet the GOP Establishment desperately clings to their RINOism and refuse to accept the fact that Palin is the only one who can beat Obama.
That said, I would strongly urge Republicans not to focus on a specific candidate, during the next six months. Rather the focus must be on Obama--his past actions, words, history & associates.
If we are able to educate the public, despite the media efforts to anoint Obama; there will be a rising tide of opinion that will force most of the prospective candidates to the Right. It is that tide which must be created, then harnessed. Squabbling among ourselves, now, will enable the media to acerbate our differences--and you know they will--and defuse our focus.
Nothing that Obama stands for is in accord with fundamental American values. None of those who originally promoted him from a radical alien nurturing into world prominence are in any sense loyal to the traditions we cherish. We need to focus on these fundamental differences from all that most rooted Americans take for granted; to make the essential points. Then, and only then, we can sort out the candidates.
William Flax
Newt's statement essentially supported Obama, and did so at the expense of the current GOP plan and GOP players.
As far as the backlash goes, it's unfortunate, but it's in line with your reasoning. We must keep the focus on Obama. Undoing his works. Destroying his legacy. De-legitimizing his goals. What we cannot abide is a contender for the Presidency who praises the core of Obama's works, namely ObamaCare. Especially if he wants to do so while kicking our team in the field.
Newt, and all contenders, need to be taught a harsh lesson. This isn't a time to make nice to be loved by the Sunday talk shows, or to throw out your back by reaching across the aisle. (Lookin' at you, John McCain.) It's a time to lock onto Obama's policies as a target, politically scorch the earth he's built on, then salt it.
I absolutely agree, with both of you, which is why I think we need to be creative in the solution.
The left knew, (until recently) that the way to achieve what they wanted was by having long-range plans - including making large swaths of society dependent upon government, and starting programs that people would eventually have a hard time giving up. The list is very long, and the more that gets added to it the harder it is to go back in the other direction.
Precisely because of the NIMBY attitude about debt reduction, and because the left uses this as a stick to beat on their conservative opponents, the solution has to be approached in a multi-prong manner, and will have to have short-term and longer-term components. If you don't get elected, you can't fix the problem, and proposing the types of dramatic spending reductions that we really do need right now will be successfully characterized by the left as ‘heartless’ etc.
As you point out, we didn't get into this mess overnight, and whereas a ‘fast’ is probably what we need right now to start our fiscal diet, it's easier to sell a less abrupt progressive reduction in spending.
That, of course, leaves out the old pols like Romney, Newt, probably Daniels, Santorum etc.
You make great points. Do you have any specific ideas about what should done?
As an afterthought, the Constitution is our long range plan. We need people in office who will start dismantling things that do not comply with the Constitution. That would include health care of any sort, SS, the graduated income tax, the Departments of Energy, Education, Commerce, Agriculture, the EPA, and an bunch of others.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.