Posted on 12/27/2011 3:36:01 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
The Iowa caucuses are upon us, and with it the official start of the 2012 presidential election campaign. Therefore, it’s time to evaluate the Republican field. When you get to it, this race is really about one person: Newt Gingrich.
This really is Newt, Part 2. For all of us who remember 1994, and the Republican Revolution, which is already 18 long years ago, we conservatives are playing jilted wife to that political lothario, Newt Gingrich. Should we take him back and give him another chance? Or is it a case of fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me? A brief disclosure, I was still a conservative Democrat in 1994 and not fully vested in the conservative cause and its home in the Republican Party.
Almost miraculously, Newt has resurrected his political career, since being faced down by Bill Clinton over shutting down the federal government in 1995, and by ethics investigations and censures from which in the long run Newt was mostly absolved. Since those times, Newt has also divorced and remarried. He also has been a highly-paid lobbyist for Washington bad guys, the now government agencies of Fannie and Freddie. He is and has been a bomb-thrower with the English language, controversial, and self-referential, to a fault. Nevertheless, for true-believers like me, we are enthralled with his star.
For example, Gingrich said what everybody who knows any history knows to be true: that the Palestinians are a made up people. Equally outrageous to some is Newt’s comment that the judiciary should be ignored when they render unconstitutional judgments. He is flat out correct about that....
(Excerpt) Read more at canadafreepress.com ...
Fool me twice, shame on me.
It’s Newt’s turn. That’s how the GOP selects their cnadidates, which ever lackluster moderate that’s next in line.
Otherwise, we will see a second term for sure.
Then we need to pound the fact that Santorum or Bachmann need to take the primary or the GOP is done for.
Conservatives have had it with center of the road defiance while getting along against a hard drive to the left political shift by the democrats!
Romney is a absolutely, positively - NO GO!
Gingrich is an insider, and has too much baggage. - NO GO!
Perry is an empty suit, chokes in the debates, and is pro amnesty. - NO GO!
Michelle Bachman is too shrill and easily rattled. Women won't vote for her. - NO GO!
Ron Paul is a looney, and possibly racist, not even taking into account his hate for Israel.NO GO!Santorum, Huntsman, etc... All too unknown and too poor to get any traction. All of them - NO GO!
So the clear winner of the 2012 Presidential elections, according to all the experts here on FreeRepublic is . . . . .
(Mmmm, Mmmm, Mmmm!)
You think Newt is a insider Republican? Part of the establishment? Could have fooled me!
They, at least, probably have a minor clue.
Texan going to listen to a Canadian about who to vote for? I'm not polite to other Texans on the subject.
KMA. (Canada, not you)
/johnny
Cokie Roberts called Newt a “bomb-thrower” on This Weak on Sunday...
I’m all for it.
Beats a mayonnaise sandwich on white bread.(Mitt)
Newt is far from perfect...
... but as it turns out, there is no Ronaldus Magnus running in 2012, so perfect isn’t the issue this time around.
We will vote based on imperfect and decide whose baggage is small enough, whose values match ours enough, who is closest to meeting up to the job enough, despite their serious flaws.
Newt has a problem. He can explode.
Newtonium is this way - volatile. It must be held in check by outside control - the House, the Senate, some counsel of reasonable advisers in the inner circle.
Newtonium also has advantages to consider...
It can cause large change, create ideas outside the box, build strategies, etc.
If Newt can trump RINOmney, I’m for him. Willard has no force of change. He is an administrator, manager, status quo wimp.
It will not be pretty, if he wins, but Newt, under control by outside forces may bring dramatic changes.
Anything else will not fix the severe problems in the country.
I would prefer Perry to Newt, but he ain’t risin’ yet and may not.
If it is “none of the above,” you can be sure here will be sparks flying at the Republican National Convention. There will be a candidate emerge who is someone we did not expect.
Psssss! S.P. + M.B. (Clean up D.C. America!)
If it is “none of the above,” you can be sure there (I hate it when keys don’t work) will be sparks flying at the Republican National Convention. There will be a candidate emerge who is someone we did not expect.
Psssss! S.P. + M.B. (Clean up D.C. America!)
I've read some ignorant posts, and yours is one for the ages.
It's "Romney's turn."
Romney ran in '08, NOT Gingrich, who's also NOT a moderate.
A lot of American writers post articles in Canada Free Press. Lots.
Newtonium also has advantages to consider...
It can cause large change, create ideas outside the box, build strategies, etc.
Yours is one of the better (and more creative) rationales I've seen for giving our votes to Newt. Very well done.
Newtonium....I like it!
If Sarah doesn't step in, I'm going to vote nuclear.
I can’t say that Newt is part of the establishment. I think he is the Newt wing of the GOP. I didn’t mean that the establishment calls all the shots, just that the conservative wing can’t decide what it wants which leads to less than stellar results.
Newt toyed with the idea last time hoping for enough attention to get in. Newt’s probably not moderate given the full political spectrum, but he’s a moderate Republican.
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.