Posted on 12/08/2011 2:02:38 PM PST by libertarian neocon
After starting out for Tim Pawlenty, praying for Mitch Daniels & Paul Ryan, then flirting with Michele Bachmann, hoping for Rick Perry and wondering about Herman Cain, I have found my candidate, and it is Newt Gingrich. Part of it was, of course, a process of elimination. Though I generally like the policy stands of the three most conservative candidates in the race, Bachmann is unelectable, Perry makes W look sophisticated and Santorum has a likability issue that is keeping him from catching on, despite being an articulate speaker and high quality candidate. I even took a fresh look at Huntsman recently, hoping I was wrong with my initial assessment. Yesterday's speech at the Republican Jewish Coalition reminded me about why I didn't like him in the first place. He just couldn't be pinned down in any way to show his support for Israel, barely even mentioning it in his prepared remarks (though he did get questions about it from the audience). What about Mitt you ask? The unpopular one-term Governor of Massachusetts whose main achievement is Obamneycare? Early on, I did try to forget that fact that he is wishy-washy thanks to some of his very good debate performances which led me to believe Obama would be toast against him. But the more I listened to him (thanks to the gazillion debates we have had so far) the less I trusted him. I just couldn't help but think he was a pretend conservative and a pretend hawk. Then of course there was the sense of entitlement which he exhibited in this exchange with Perry (talking down to/patronizing Perry) as well as his reaction to the fair questions from Bret Baier. Sending out John Sununu to attack Newt for opposing the George H.W. Bush tax increases just reinforced my dislike of Mitt and just reminded me that he really doesn't believe in anything except for getting himself ahead. While he would be a better President than Obama, voting for him would leave a very bad taste in my mouth.
Now, that is not to imply that I am only supporting Newt because I just don't like the others. I really enjoyed watching him in the debates. While all the others were busy trying to pick each other off and, other than Santorum & Romney, would have cringeworthy moments in debates, he kept the message of the debate focused on defeating Obama. I remember thinking during a few of the debates how, despite his low levels in the polls, he was really adding value by eloquently communicating the conservative message to millions of viewers (as well as pointing out some of the nonsensical positions this administration has taken). And he has continued to do so, constantly appearing in interviews, both friendly and relatively hostile (unlike Mitt who has insulated himself from any real scrutiny). Also, as I mentioned before, Newt's actual record is quite conservative:
I am not saying by any means that he is perfect, but nobody is going to be perfect. Take Ronald Reagan. He raised taxes as Governor of California and 11 different times as President. Federal spending grew by 7.6% a year under his administration, more than double the rate that it grew when Newt was speaker (3.1% a year). He granted amnesty to illegal immigrants. He negotiated with Iran and the evil empire itself, the Soviet Union. Also, back in 1976, he promised to pick a liberal northeastern running mate, Richard Schweiker, in order to be more palatable to the establishment Republicans. Despite these imperfections, Reagan was still the greatest President since at least Abraham Lincoln thanks to the really great things that he did. First, he made America feel good about itself again after years of liberals convincing everyone that America had peaked and things were only going to get worse. I remember quite a few people thought eventual Soviet victory was inevitable and that it was only a matter of time. Even Republicans like Kissinger believed that to some extent. Second, he got the economy moving again through his sweeping tax cuts. Third, he was able to defeat the greatest threat to mankind since the Nazis, the Soviets, freeing hundreds of millions of people (many of whom are current NATO allies).
Now take a look at Churchill, as Steven Hayward did expertly today, both on his blog and in the National Review. Here are some things that were said about Churchill (and if you replace Churchill's name with Newt's as Hayward did on his blog, you would be surprised they weren't talking about Gingrich):
"Winston is often right, but when he is wrong, well, my God!" "His planning is all wishing and guessing." "He is easily taken in by quacks and charlatans." "Mr. Churchill carries great guns, but his navigation is uncertain." He is "a genius without judgment." He is a man of "transitory convictions," who has been "on every side of every question." "His mind is essentially critical and volcanic and he is used to proposing and propounding schemes and ideas . . . and as a rule gracefully withdrawing them." About his military views, one high-ranking officer said, "He knows no details, has only half the picture in his mind, talks absurdities and makes my blood boil to listen to his nonsense." His many non-fiction books have been dismissed as "autobiographies disguised as a history of the universe." Even his historical novels get the lash, with critics calling them "crude and immature," revealing Churchill to be "a perfect poseur, adept at the arts of notoriety." One of his accomplished peers in public office said, "He will never get to the top in politics; with all his wonderful gifts. . . [he] does not inspire trust." Even the kindest description of him cannot avoid noting his flaws, such as "He is like a wonderful piece of machinery with a flywheel which occasionally makes unexpected movements."
Churchill also was the king of flip-floppers, changing parties not once, but twice, going from Conservative to Liberal (for 20 years!) and then back to Conservative.
I'm sure some of you are thinking "then doesn't this excuse Romney as well?" No. Despite flip-flopping, Churchill and Reagan, like Newt, actually had a core set of values that they didn't alter. I really can't say the same for Mitt Romney. I couldn't tell you what he really believes in. And unlike Churchill, Reagan and Newt, Romney doesn't have a long public record. He has one term as a Massachusetts Governor and that is a net negative, if anything, given Obamneycare.
Right now, the United States faces an enormous number of threats. Our economy continues to be weak, with millions of long term unemployed and a constantly disintegrating currency. Our standing across the globe is greatly weakened due to our withdrawal from Iraq, both Egypt and Turkey turning Islamist, the threat of a nuclear Iran and our backstabbing of allies the world over.
Newt Gingrich has what it takes to be a really great President of the United States just when we need one the most, and that is why I am supporting him for President.
May God bless America.
I could have written that.
(if I were smarter)
Can anyone be honest and show how McCain voted on that exact slate?
I’m not in love with any of our candidates but Newt is more qualified and more intelligent than the rest which is something the country could probably benefit from. I would like to see Bachmann as his running mate and I hope we have a tea party senate and House to ensure that few to no liberal ideas find their way into the legislation crossing the President’s desk whoever he or she may be.
Neither can I.
Sitting on a couch with Nasty Pelosi parroting AGW nonsense doesn't speak well for his convictions either.
Bachmann doesn't have the Gecko's baggage.
“Good post - there are some rat trolls which will blast you (and me and whoever posts positive responses), but Newt has what it takes to be a great POTUS. May God bless America.”
I’m a Republican Jew living in a very blue area. I’m used to defending my views.
Thanks for the support! God Bless America.
No thanks...
>> Bachmann doesn’t have the Gecko’s baggage. >>
Right.
Nor the accomplishments.
Nor the intelligence.
Nor the decency to speak well of other GOP candidates.
Nor the debate ability.
Nor 20 books to her credit (maybe she did read that many).
If lack of baggage were the end all be all, let’s nominate a baby!
She's also head an shoulders over the Gecko on he House record as a conservative, better on RKBA, foreign policy, taxes, education, welfare State...
Of course, if Gecko wins we could always hook his ass up to a turbine generator. As he spins in circles trying to find the moderate center of every issue, he'd generate a few KW...
“How come they cherrypicked easy votes. I bet McCain and a host other RINOs had the same votes.”
“Can anyone be honest and show how McCain voted on that exact slate?”
I think Newt is definitely more conservative than McCain though I dont have how he voted on these issues in front of me. First, Newt gets a lifetime ACU score of 90 while McCain is only at 82. Also, McCain opposed the Bush tax cuts (siding with Kennedy) while based on his record and his statements, Newt supported them.
“One of my main issues is RKBA. Newt’s record sucks on that one topic alone.”
“Sitting on a couch with Nasty Pelosi parroting AGW nonsense doesn’t speak well for his convictions either.”
“Bachmann doesn’t have the Gecko’s baggage.”
On RKBA, even Reagan supported the Brady Bill. The Pelosi thing was stupid, as is AGW. But if not Newt, then who? Bachmann would be great if elected President but Im not sure she can be.
I never said she was a moron or totally non accomplished - but its obvious you have to exaggerate my case and invent straw issues and false choices to hide the fact that I am of course right in comparing the two.
She is smart, but not as smart as Newt IMO. She is a fair debator, but not nearly as good as Newt. She is accomplished, but nothing she has done is even close to the CWA and close to forcing Bill Clinton to sign good legislation that Clinton did not want to sign. Newt has. Newt was a college professor, so I don’t think either has an academic advantage.
Moreover, Newt has made it a point in every debate to talk about how all eight candidates are far superior to Obama, while MB has snarked about guardacil and tried to paint Rick Perry as the second coming of Joseph Mengele and then has tried to paint Cain as pro choice and several other ridiculous (AND VOTE LOSING) charades.
She’s fine in congress. She ain’t prime time.
She does have a better conservative record (on the pure percentages of voting) but she is no where near the conservative success.
“I’m not in love with any of our candidates but Newt is more qualified and more intelligent than the rest which is something the country could probably benefit from. I would like to see Bachmann as his running mate and I hope we have a tea party senate and House to ensure that few to no liberal ideas find their way into the legislation crossing the President’s desk whoever he or she may be.”
I’m actually thinking Bob McDonnell from Virginia would be a great selection from VP. High approval rate in a battleground state and a very principled and well-spoken conservative.
I’ll vote for whoever gets the nomination. I’ll be ecstatic if it isn’t Mitt Romney. The longer this nomination process drags on, the more it divides us and harm us. There will always be those who will never be satisfied and those who want to unnecessarily prolong this process but the poll numbers are looking like Newt can unify the party for the most part. That alone is worth voting for. For better or worse, Newt will do as far as I’m concerned.
Thank you for the post. As a former Cain supporter (I still support him personally), this helps confirm my choice of Republican presidential nominees left standing. My batting average lately is 0-4(2008 Romney (ugh), Mc Cain 2008 (ugh), whoever was running against Gov Moonbeam, and now the Cainster. Can Newt survive the upcoming onslaught from not only the left but from his own party elites? I think he has the smarts and political experience Mr. Cain just did not have, to hopefully deal with it effectively.
“Don’t forget, Romney PERMANENTLY banned assault rifles in Massachusetts.”
Darn it, I should have put that in there. Romney as Prez would probably be a replay of papa Bush. Just painful.
Get your facts straight...
No wonder you are falling for Gecko's rhetoric. You do know he's a political opportunist who has sold us out before? Right?
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.