Posted on 12/01/2011 7:57:27 AM PST by Fred
NEWT GINGRICH is the latest unlikely figure to vault to the top of Republican presidential polls, and unlike those who preceded him - Donald Trump, Michele Bachmann, Rick Perry, Herman Cain - he’s likely to stick around. That’s partly due to necessity. With just a month until the Iowa caucuses, conservatives don’t have time to anoint a new savior. It’s also because, despite his copious shortcomings, he seems immune to what felled the others. An able debater, he won’t flop like Perry and Cain. He’s not a full-on nut like Trump. And his legislative record eclipses Bachmann’s, which barely exists.
But his late emergence as the “true conservative’’ poised to challenge Mitt Romney is rich, and its broader significance underappreciated. For two years, the driving force in national politics has been the Tea Party, whose founding myth was that ordinary citizens were rising up in defiant objection to the hidebound, self-dealing ways of Washington. Greedy politicians, this view held, had bloated the government and lined their own pockets at taxpayers’ expense, while letting the country go to rot.
(Excerpt) Read more at bostonglobe.com ...
Oh really? Where were you when the GOP was nominating Nixon, Ford (over Reagan), Bob Dole, & John McCain???
I love all these johnny-come-lately conservative drama-queens who act like “all is lost” if Newt (gasp! horrors!) is the nominee. Oh, by the way, Bush I wasn’t all that conservative, and W Bush did some good things, but also signed an education bill written by Ted Kennedy, passed a new Medicare entitlement, and championed “compassionate” (aka big government) conservatism.
Y’all need a serious REALITY CHECK.
I’m with you on that one.
Jewish World Review Nov 29, 2011 / 3 Kislev, 5772
Who’s the Most Conservative of Them All?
By Mona Charen
http://www.JewishWorldReview.com | While the nation was digesting its turkey dinner, Rep. Michelle Bachmann was seizing an opportunity to score points at Newt Gingrich’s expense. Suggesting that his position on illegal immigration amounts to “amnesty,” Bachmann predicted that the GOP electorate would “come home” to the person who has been the most “consistent conservative.” That would be, she offers, herself.
The voters may not agree with her solution, but many in the GOP do seem to be looking for a — forgive the expression — “thrill down the leg” candidate to take on Obama in the general election. Thus, the seismic spikes for Bachmann, Perry, Cain and even, briefly, Trump. It is now, apparently, Newt Gingrich’s turn in what Brit Hume called “the single most dangerous place to be in American politics, which is the non-Romney leader in the Republican field.”
The adage has it that when the two parties pick their nominees, “Democrats want to fall in love and Republicans want to fall in line.” It will probably hold true. But there is more than a whiff of Democrat-style swooning in the Republican contest so far.
The Union Leader’s endorsement didn’t quite put it the way The Augusta Chronicle did (”Why not Newt?”), but it did cite Gingrich’s “courage and conviction.” Yet, curiously, within its editorial endorsment, the Union Leader inadvertently cited the best reason not to support Newt Gingrich: “ . . . Republican primary voters too often make the mistake of preferring an unattainable ideal to the best candidate who is actually running.”
Just so, but back to Gingrich.
It isn’t the three marriages — though the hospital visit to discuss divorce proceedings while his first wife was recuperating from cancer surgery is not an agreeable image. It isn’t the ethics violation, for which the House Ethics Committee cited him when he was speaker. (The Internal Revenue Service later ruled that he had not violated the tax laws.) And it isn’t his position on illegal immigrants with deep roots in America.
Newt Gingrich is a bad bet because he will embarrass the Republican Party. He will do so through things he has already said and done and in ways we cannot predict except to be sure — because character will win out — that they will happen.
No sooner had Republicans, with a huge boost from Gingrich, achieved the long-denied prize of control of the House of Representatives than Gingrich embarrassed the party by signing a $4.5 million book deal. Though an effective, even inspired, backbencher in Congress, Gingrich proved an incompetent and sometimes petulant leader. He explained that his decision to shut down the government in 1995 was in part motivated by Bill Clinton’s failure to spend time with him on Air Force One when the two were returning from Yitzhak Rabin’s funeral. “It’s petty, but I think it’s human,” said Gingrich.
Gingrich was the only speaker of the House in U.S. history to be removed by his own party. It wasn’t a cabal of liberals who forced him out, but Dick Armey, Bill Paxon, Tom DeLay and John Boehner.
Gingrich is lauded as a “conviction” politician and a man of ideas. But his convictions are flexible, and his ideas are half-baked when they’re not loopy. Always glib and self-assured, Gingrich declared on March 7 that he would impose a no-fly zone on Libya. On March 23, he just as smoothly declared, “I would not have intervened. I think there were a lot of other ways to affect Qaddafi.” Though he now says he doesn’t know whether the globe is warming, he filmed a commercial with Nancy Pelosi in 2008 saying, “our country must take action to combat climate change.”
Gingrich rose to prominence in the Republican Party by citing the loose ethics of Speaker Jim Wright. Yet in his post-government career, he has been playing the traditional game of selling influence. Among his many lucrative clients was Freddie Mac. The government-sponsored enterprise reportedly paid the former speaker $1.8 million. Gingrich explained that this was for his “advice as a historian.” Because of his grandiosity, it’s possible that Gingrich actually believes this. Either way — whether he was for sale or so vain that he missed what was obvious to others — it’s not inspiring leadership.
Gingrich once said that to understand him, you needed to do no more than to read “futurist” Alvin Toffler. The former speaker’s sweeping generalizations, flamboyant pronouncements and soaring banalities do indeed seem influenced by Toffler. But Toffler is the opposite of a conservative. In “The Third Wave,” he declared that the founders were “obsolete.” So should Toffler’s acolyte be.
The can’t win at the national level. Hunter never broke 2% in his run, and Palin had historically high negatives even among most Republicans.
Newt Gingrich is the poster child for these sort of “flexible” principles.
I’ve been around the block a few times (I’m about to start my 20th year as a gun rights lobbyist) and dealt with literally thousands of candidates and politicians, but no Republican politician has managed to support and vote for anti-gun legislation and still proclaim that he is “pro-gun” more effectively than Newt Gingrich.
Don’t be fooled by his rise in the polls; Newt Gingrich has a long history of supporting gun control ...
... and he has blatantly refused to return his National Association for Gun Rights Presidential Survey.
With more than three decades as a public figure, Newt is the quintessential political chameleon, shifting his views to reflect whatever is popular with the Washington, D.C. chattering class.
Make no mistake, while Newt may talk a solid conservative game, his record is that of a typical Inside-the-Beltway politician who will cut ANY compromise or make ANY deal with anyone for his own political or personal gain.
While Newt used the institutional gun lobby as a mouthpiece to convince millions of gun owners nationwide that “as long as he is Speaker, no gun-control legislation is going to move in committee or on the House floor,” he was working behind the scenes to pass gun control.
In 1996, Newt Gingrich turned his back on gun owners and voted for the anti-gun Brady Campaign’s Lautenberg Gun Ban, which strips the Second Amendment rights of citizens involved in misdemeanor domestic violence charges or temporary protection orders –- in some cases for actions as minor as spanking a child or grabbing a spouse’s wrist.(1)
Gingrich even called the anti-gun measure “reasonable,” and predicted that it would sail through his Republican-controlled House of Representatives with little trouble.(2)
The Lautenberg Gun Ban is one of the Congressional Republicans’ worst betrayals of gun owners, and those complicit in its passage deserve nothing but contempt from gun owners.
This gun control measure ranks right up there with the Brady Registration Act as the most aggressive gun control in America, denying hundreds of thousands of would-be gun owners the right to self defense.
Gingrich also stood shoulder to shoulder with Nancy Pelosi to pass the “Criminal Safezones Act” which prevents armed citizens from defending themselves in certain arbitrary locations. You and I both know that Criminal Safezones don’t protect law-abiding citizens, but actually protect the criminals who ignore them.(3)
As you can see, Newt Gingrich is no friend of gun owners, or small government conservatives. He simply can’t be trusted, and his record reflects his contempt not only for the truth, but his own integrity and the integrity of the very people he’s asking to vote for him to be the most powerful man in the modern world.
This is the same man who railed against the Obama bailouts of Fannie and Freddie Mac while receiving more than $1.5 million from Fannie Mae as a “consultant”(4) while his firm also raised $37 million to pass healthcare insurance mandates.(5)
He’s also the same man who sat next to Nancy Pelosi and insisted global warming was a man-made problem in need of a government-mandated solution. Now that he’s running for the Republican nomination, he doesn’t believe in global warming and calls the TV ad he did with Pelosi “inexplicable.” Please click here to watch the video.(6)
I’m concerned, though, that Newt’s snake-oil act is catching on.
It’s time for gun owners and liberty-minded, small government activists to hold Newt’s feet to the fire.
That’s why I need you to call the Gingrich campaign headquarters right now at (678) 973-2306. Demand that Newt Gingrich apologize for his past support of gun control, and make a dramatic turnaround statement of support to repeal the gun controls he’s supported.
Tell his campaign that you expect Newt to not only apologize for his past support of anti-gun measures but also to reveal where he stands on international gun grabs like the UN “Small Arms Treaty” and domestic anti-gun schemes like the banning of .50 caliber rifles.
Demand he quit stonewalling gun owners and return his National Association for Gun Rights Presidential Survey — at once. You and I both know that election season, when they’re begging for the votes of gun owners, is one of the best times to lobby candidates and politicians.
With Republican presidential primaries in Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina mere weeks away, it’s vital that gun owners know where the Republican candidates for President stand on important Second Amendment issues.
Newt’s record is as crooked as a dog’s hind leg. With a horrible voting record on Second Amendment issues, gun owners just don’t know which side Newt’s on.
Please call the Gingrich campaign headquarters right now at (678) 973-2306. Demand that Newt Gingrich apologize for his past support of gun control.
For Freedom,
Dudley Brown
Executive Director
P.S. Newt Gingrich’s anti-gun record is too important — and dangerous — to ignore. That’s why I felt compelled to inform you.
His support for numerous gun controls is in direct contradiction to his current campaign statements.
I have no doubt that Romney or Newt would be OK. Newt is a dynamic speaker though and is likely to be able to shape the agenda much to his liking. He pushed things through congress before.
So I’d actually be MORE concerned with Newt getting bad policies through the process than I would be about Romney, who seems much more likely to sign what comes to his desk.
Gingrich is more conservative than Romney, but if the choice is which one to elect given a majority in congress, I’m not sure Gingrich is the “better” choice. Unless you like his plans for things like immigration and government health care and striking the good middle road on global warming.
Yeah... you are right... trusting and voting for party line republicans has worked so well for us in the past. Why change now! Maybe we can find another gerald ford or bob dole!
LLS
Obama is the vehicle. The poison he brought will remain when he's gone. If what you administer is just a palliative that covers up the symptoms and not really an antidote, you'll just be helping the poison work.
A partial list of Newt’s Record:
04/02/1987 – He cosponsored the 1987 Fairness Doctrine
10/22/1991 – He voted for an amendment that would create a National Police Corps.
03/–/1993 – He Voted for sending $1.6 Billion in foreign aid to Russia.
11/19/1993 – He voted for the NAFTA Implementation Act.
11/27/1994 – He supported the GATT Treaty giving sovereignty to the U.N.
08/27/1995 – He suggests that drug smuggling should carry a death sentence.
04/25/1996 – Voted for the single largest increase on Federal education spending ($3.5 Billion)
04/10/1995 – He supported Federal taxdollars being spent on abortions.
06/01/1996 – He helped a Democrat switch parties in an attempt to defeat constitutionalist Ron Paul in the 1996 election.
09/25/1996 – Introduced H.R. 4170, demanded life-sentence or execution for someone bringing 2 ounces of marijuana across the border.
01/22/1997 – Congress gave him a record-setting $300,000 fine for ethical wrongdoing.
11/29/2006 – He said that free speech should be curtailed in order to fight terrorism. Wants to stop terrorists from using the internet. Called for a “serious debate about the 1st Amendment.”
11/29/2006 – He called for a “Geneva Convention for terrorists” so it would be clear who the Constitution need not apply to.
02/15/2007 – He supported Bush’s proposal for mandatory carbon caps.
09/28/2008 – Says if he were in office, he would have reluctantly voted for the $700B TARP bailout.
10/01/2008 – Says in an article that TARP was a “workout, not a bailout.”
12/08/2008 – He was paid $300,000 by Freddie Mac to halt Congress from bringing necessary reform.
03/31/2009 – Says we should have Singapore-style drug tests for Americans.
07/30/2010 – Says that Iraq was just step one in defeating the “Axis of Evil”.
08/03/2010 – Advocates attacks on Iran & North Korea.
08/16/2010 – Opposes property rights of the mosque owner in NYC.
11/15/2010 – He defended Romneycare
12/05/2010 – He said that a website owner should be considered an enemy combatant, hunted down and executed, for publishing leaked government memos.
01/30/2011 – He lobbied for ethanol subsidies.
01/30/2011 – He suggested that flex-fuel vehicles be mandated for Americans.
02/13/2011 – He criticized Obama for sending less U.S. taxdollars to Egypt.
02/15/2011 – His book said that he believes man-made climate-change and advocated creating “a new endowment for conservation and the environment.”
03/09/2011 – He blames his infidelity to multiple wives on his passion for the country.
03/15/2011 – Says that NAFTA worked because it created jobs in Mexico.
03/19/2011 – He has no regrets about supporting Medicare drug coverage. (Now $7.2T unfunded liability)
03/23/2011 – He completely flip-flopped on Libyan intervention in 16 days.
03/25/2011 – He plans to sign as many as 200 executive orders on his first day as president.
04/25/2011 – He’s a paid lobbyist for Federal ethanol subsidies.
05/12/2011 – He was more supportive of individual health-care mandates than Mitt Romney.
06/09/2011 – His own campaign staff resigned en masse.
07/15/2011 – His poorly managed campaign is over $1 Million in debt.
08/01/2011 – He hired a company to create fake Twitter to appear as if he had a following.
10/07/2011 – He said he’d ignore the Supreme Court if need be.
11/16/2011 – Was revealed he actually received 1.6 million from Freddie Mac, vs. his previously stated $300,000
- Gingrich voted for an increase in the debt ceiling in 1979, 1980, 1981, and 1984
- Gingrich voted to permit the Federal Reserve to purchase Treasury Debt
- Bailed out savings and loan institutions in 1991. $40B Bank bailout
- Gingrich voted to strengthen the federal home loan agencies
- Gingrich voted for increased powers to the FDIC to bail out struggling savings and loans through reorganization, purchase of bad assets, or recapitalization.
- Gingrich voted in favor of the Chrysler Bailout in 1979
- Gingrich voted for an oil windfall profits tax in 1979, which was signed by Jimmy Carter.
- Urged the House to repeal the War Powers Act and give the Presidency more power.
- Urged Clinton to expand military presence in Bosnia.
- Gingrich voted against a provision requiring congressional approval prior to deployment of U.S. troops into Central America in 1983.
- Gingrich voted to increase CIA secrecy and against any requirement that the President report covert activity to congress before it is initiated.
- Gingrich voted for Jimmy Carter’s “Energy Mobilization Board.”
- Gingrich voted for an increase in taxes on coal producers in 1981
- Gingrich voted for a 5-cent increase in the gas tax to fund highway and other mass-transit projects.
- Gingrich was one of the few who voted against the 1984 bill requiring the President and Congress to submit a balanced budget
- Gingrich voted for a congressional pay raise
- Gingrich voted against a bipartisan 1% cut to the Department of Defense budget for 1983
- He was a draft-dodger during the Vietnam War, yet pushed aggressive foreign interventionism his entire political career, and did say that Vietnam was the “right battlefield at the right time.”
If what you say is true... then we just need to cancel our elections and let you frigging decide for us.
LLS
The Tea Party is held to a standard no other political movement has ever been held to, so I think saying the first presidential election since its inception not going its way indicating its failure—after a successful Congressional election is, no offense, retarded.
When asked about Alinsky/Ayers last night Newt said they were fair game. He is not going to be a McCain type candidate.
Nice tantrum. Too bad none of it has any basis in reality.
This is the Boston Glob.
They are full of shit. The tea party has won because put the brakes on Obamas leftist radical agenda.The Tea party had the biggest election turnaround in 70 years.
This like saying the original tea party back in the 1700’s was a failure because the Brits didn’t pack up and leave immediatley.
Some of you people who agree with horseshit column are just as insane as the flea baggers.You cannot turn around the titanic on a dime.And those that think that you will or can elect a crystl pure true conservative candidate are f’n clueless and please don’t drive alone. I don’t give a shit what Limbaugh says.Ask Rush how operation chaos worked out for ya. (without the spin)
The tea party has changed the course of this country and the conversation without a doubt.
I stand with you and I will NEVER vote for newt or romney. All of these sellouts can vote however they wish to vote... but they had better stay out of my ballot.
LLS
I can’t imagine any global warming or amnesty bill getting through the House, which is and will be more conservative than the Senate. I think it will be easier to get rid of Obamacare with Newt.
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.