Posted on 11/07/2011 7:00:02 AM PST by SeekAndFind
The Republican Party seems to be struggling to find a candidate it can unite around. One impediment may be a mindset common among some of my fellow Tea Partiers, a false dichotomy that if you are in government you are part of the problem, and if you are not in government, you are part of the solution -- whatever those problems or solutions may be.
Herman Cain says, "The folks in Washington have held public office. How's that working out for you?" It's a catchy comeback. But is government tenure, whether recent or not, the reality of the problems in Washington? The biggest problem in Washington today is that we have a president who basically has no experience doing anything important or relevant. And he has surrounded himself with advisors and staff that are inexperienced as well. That's the problem.
This problem can befall Democrats or Republicans. Let me give a Republican example. President Bush's first cabinet had many folks with Washington experience like Donald Rumsfeld, John Ashcroft, Mel Martinez, Norm Mineta, and Spencer Abraham. All of these, except Mineta, were conservatives. Many of their replacements had no Washington experience. Most folks would agree that Bush's second term was not as successful as his first. Experience was the difference. Next, let's look at the recent Tea Party successes. Two of the biggest successes are Marco Rubio, who had legislative experience, and Scott Walker, who had much executive and legislative experience. I won't belabor the Tea Party failures here. Needless to say, some of them lacked valuable experience. And what about folks in Washington who agree with the Tea Party, like Senator DeMint or Congressman Pence? They predate the Tea Party but they believe the same policies. Are they part of the problem? No, they are not.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
I think of Newt as the Tony Romo of politics: dazzling during the first 3 quarters, major meltdowns when the game is on the line.
Clinton pwn'ed Newt during the shutdown.
His acceptance of global warming, his fondness for selective amnesty, his backing of Dede Scozzafava when there was a true conservative in the race, all these make him untrustworthy, IMO. I’ll not back the man for president. Somewhere in the administration (not VP) where he can be kept in control; yes. There’s a lot he could offer in such a position. But not as president.
Newt did not support Doug Hoffman-NY23. The nations first unofficial Tea Party Candidate. Newt supported the Rino, DeDe
....when he spoke on Dobson's radio show in 2007, Gingrich refused to say that he was actually repentant. The evangelical leader repeatedly pressed him on that point: "When I hear you talk about this dark side of your life...you didn't mention repentance. Do you understand that word repentance?"On Gingrich: A legacy of surrender
-- from the thread Newt and Evangelicals: Not a Match Made in Heaven
When the Tea Party had it’s first unoffical candidate, Doug Hoffman NY-23, Newt chose Dede, the Rino.
Newtus Agustus could not see a new wind blowing.
Try to watch a C-Span replay of their Saturday night debate. The mutual respect and chemistry between the two was wonderful. It allowed both men to explore issues at length and in depth. They are clearly in tune with each other and mutually very supportive. They demonstrated a clear alternative to the MSN Gotcha-Media 30-second soundbite trivial game-show approach to the GOP field.
The question isn’t whether or not Newt has serious flaws. Of course he does. It’s simply a matter of weighing his flaws versus the flaws of the other choices. The mere fact that Newt is now getting serious consideration, here and elsewhere, tells you all you need to know about the quality of the field (Limbaugh’s pom-pom waving notwithstanding.)
I OPT for: “someone who has the experience and RECORD to get us out of our present funk?”
Newt is a one world globalist...He'll take up where Obama left off...
I would, at a minimum, like to see him make mincemeat of Obama in a debate - he could do it with half his brain & one hand tied behind his back.
Cain had to REBOOT several times, can't find the knowledge and rambles around in GOOGLE.
RE: Newt supported the Rino, DeDe
I acknowledged that in my first post on this thread.
I’d suggest better sourcing than Slate.
Also, Dobson’s interview proves zip.
FTR, I am for Cain & look forward to voting for him early & often.
Newt would be better than Mittens & he would destroy Obama in any debate, IMO.
As time goes on Im liking Newt more and more....
Me too.
None of the candidates are perfect. I don’t think Cain is going to recover from these scandals, whether they’re true or not, just my opinion. I think Newt probably is the best anti Romney choice we have, he will make obumbles look like the idiot that he is in a debate.
May copy this to my home page - tired of posting it over and over;) People need to do some research instead of just repeating the same erroneous nonsense;)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newt_Gingrich
Congress fulfilled Gingrich’s Contract promise to bring all ten of the Contract’s issues to a vote within the first 100 days of the session, even though most legislation was initially held up in the Senate. Over the objection of liberal/progressive interest groups[29] and President Clinton, who called it the “Contract on America”,[30] many aspects of the proposal were implemented in subsequent legislation.
Legislation proposed by the 104th United States Congress included term limits for Congressional Representatives, tax cuts, welfare reform, and a balanced budget amendment, as well as independent auditing of the finances of the House of Representatives and elimination of non-essential services such as the House barbershop and shoe-shine concessions. Following Gingrich’s first two years as House Speaker, the Republican majority was re-elected in the 1996 election, the first time Republicans had done so in 68 years, and the first simultaneous with a Democratic president winning re-election.[31]
Just for starters:
I defended Newt back in the 90's. I thought he was a great speaker of the house who just hadn't learned to play the rough and tumble game of politics with the skill of a Clinton.
But every chance he has been given since has shown that he has learned little. Like John McCain, he is too infatuated with the adoration of the press. The same press which is the enemedia and the root cause of so much of what is wrong with America.
Kevin, Kevin, Kevin - - - - . Where do I start? First, your line “ - - - The Republican Party seems to be struggling to find a candidate it can unite around. “ is false.
We are listening for IDEAS from Candidates. “Finding a Candidate” is the last thing that we want to do, because once a candidate has the nomination sewed up, he/she stops creating ideas that will solve the problems, and starts caving in so as to “broaden the base.”
So far, NOBODY has a clue as how to solve our number one problem: How do we get out of the financial death spiral that America is in?
We have had two Presidents destroy 8 TRILLION dollars in 11 years. NOBODY is addressing how that is going to be paid off in their lifetimes, or AT ALL!
Kevin, “the problem” in the District of Corruption is not with who sits in the Oval Office.
The problem is that our “Checks and Balances” system has ceased to function.
Cain has not figured that out yet, but he comes very close to discovering it as you quote him: “ - - - Herman Cain says, “The folks in Washington have held public office. How’s that working out for you?” - - - .”
Stupid people are in Washington because even more stupid people will not investigate their crimes of commission and omission.
BTW, my dictionary says: stupid adj. 1. Very slow of apprehension or understanding.
He is the smartest guy up there.....
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.