Posted on 12/19/2011 7:40:36 AM PST by TBBT
In the face of attack ads casting Newt Gingrich as less than a true conservative - spots that may be eroding his support - a super PAC supporting Gingrich has released a new spot deeming the former House Speaker a "proven conservative leader."
The spot, from the newly-formed Winning Our Future, is not officially affiliated with the Gingrich campaign, and it cannot coordinate with the campaign. But like many super PACs, it has strong ties to the candidate. Winning Our Future is led by Becky Burkett, a onetime official with a now-defunct group American Solutions for Winning the Future that Gingrich founded after leaving Congress. Super PACs can accept unlimited contributions to advertize and advocate on behalf of a candidate, without revealing donors; Winning Our Future is one of two super PACs (along with "Solutions 2012") backing Gingrich this cycle.
(Excerpt) Read more at cbsnews.com ...
Newt Gingrich endorses Dede Scozzafava in NY-23 House race
Gingrich Explains Scozzafava Endorsement, Slams Right-Wing Critics
Memo to Gingrich: Get Lost. Now
Gingrich Backs Obamacare's Individual Mandate Requiring Health Insurance
Gingrich donors dropping like flies
Bill Bennett to Gingrich: You’re Shooting at [Paul Ryan] From Behind! (Testy Radio Interview)
Mark Levin grills Newt Gingrich on his comments about Paul Ryan’s plan
Gingrich Calls GOP Medicare Plan 'Right-Wing Social Engineering' (supports individual mandate)
Gingrich Backs Obamacare's Individual Mandate Requiring Health Insurance (Newt praises Romneycare)
Gingrich Backs Obamacare's Individual Mandate
Gingrich Apologizes to Paul Ryan for 'Right-Wing Social Engineering' Criticism
Gingrich: ‘Strategic Blunder’ for Palin to Mock Obama as ‘Community Organizer’
Palin Accuses Gingrich of Caving to the Media
Newt Gingrich Acknowledges ‘Contradictions’ On His Libya Views, ‘I Was Trying To Follow Obama’
Gingrich: My Ad on Global Warming with Pelosi was a "Debate," I will "Not Apologize"
Kerry and Gingrich Hugging Trees -- and (Almost) Each Other
Newt Gingrich Al Sharpton Education Tour (VIDEO)
Gingrich cashed in supporting subsidies for big business (Ethanol)
Gingrich think tank collected millions from health-care industry ($37 million & MANDATE)
Newt calls for ‘humane’ immigration policy
Gingrich 'prepared to take the heat' with talk of amnesty ("Let's be humane in enforcing the law")
Slapping Romney, DNC stands up for Gingrich immigration stand
On Newt's 'humane' immigration policy (Thomas Sowell)
ENDING THE DISHONESTY: THE WAY FORWARD ON BORDER CONTROL AND PATRIOTIC IMMIGRATION
When Newt Gingrich fought for the moderates
Gingrich’s environmental proposals include altering climate with giant mirrors
Gingrich is NOT a Reagan.
Not even close.
He’s closer than any of the others. He actually worked with Reagan while Michele Bachmann was working for Jimmy Carter and Rick Perry was working for Al Gore.
He was contributed with the biggest FAR RIGHT turn in politics in our recent history.
He will challange the corrupt legal system and face islamism head on.
If not Newt, it will be Mitt.
So what’s it going to be? You going the let Romney win it with his 25%?
They don’t care. They’d rather keep spreading this filth to take Newt down out of spite over own loser candidate’s failure to rise.
Conservatives seem to be the dumbest voting bloc in politics.
They seem destined to give themselves Mitt...and they will likely get their wish.
But they are ideologically pure, and that counts more than winning elections.
“They seem destined to give themselves Mitt...and they will likely get their wish.”
And if Mitt becomes our nominee, Obama is going to throw at him the fact that they modeled their health care plan after his.
Neither Mitt nor Newt have the ability to defeat Obama, IMO.
It seems that way. We had several solid conservatives, and back then conservatives knew who they were, and knew Mitt and Newt weren’t among them.
But when Bachman was rising in the polls, some people, including some who were pining for Sarah Palin, decided she was a threat and took her out. And when Perry joined the fray, he was also seen as a threat and taken out.
And when Palin announced she wasn’t running, Cain sucked all the conservative oxygen out of the room, preventing any of the serious conservative candidates from getting a second look. And he turned out to not be a serious candidate, dropping out before the first vote; but first he played footsie with Newt Gingrich, somehow sprinkling Newt with “conservative fairy dust” or something, and suddenly Newt was the savior of the Tea party.
And now we are all supposed to support Newt to stop Mitt. Well, if we wanted to stop Mitt, we could have kept silent about our little annoyances with Bachman, and let her rise to the top. Or we could have decided that the occasional miscues of Perry weren’t as important as stopping Mitt, and not destroyed him over an ill-fated and never enacted Gardasil requirement.
But no, we kept looking for perfection (or Sarah Palin), and now we are supposedly “stuck” with Newt, even though again no votes have been cast yet.
And Newt is showing his unelectability with his radical proposals (not conservative — conservative at it’s core is about reasoned change after considering the unintended consequences, it’s about consistancy and stability, not radical off-the-wall ideas about destroying our judicial system, saving the world from the dangers of Carbon pollution, and finding “conservative” big-government solutions to our problems).
But we are so afraid of Mitt, and so worried we’ve waited too long, that suddenly we are all supposed to give a sloppy wet kiss to Newt Gingrich, and if we don’t we are “dumb”. No, dumb was torpedoeing every good conservative candidate we had in the hopes we could keep the field clear for some other candidate, or for Sarah Palin. And deciding Cain was the answer. That wasn’t very smart either.
in 2008, we avoided the horrors of Mitt Romney, by picking John McCain. We all knew John McCain wasn’t a reliable conservative, despite years especially in the 1990s when he had solid conservative ratings. But John never did a commercial supporting big-government global-warming solutions with Nancy Pelosi.
I beg to differ. Bachmann and Perry did fantastic jobs of taking themselves out on their own.
The ad doesn’t prove Newt is conservative, it simply asserts that he is. It mentions how he “stood with Ronald Reagan” — which is true on the sense that in the 1980s, Newt did vote for Reagan’s policies (as did most republicans). Did Newt support Reagan’s mistaken tax increases, or Reagan’s mistaken amnesty program?
It says he “stood up to Bill Clinton”, except he quit in 1998 when his policies helped lose seats in the election, so he didn’t “stand up” so much as “run away”. It is clear who “won” the fight between Clinton and Newt. Newt DID pass welfare reform that Clinton supported and signed, which was a conservative thing and also helped Clinton save his presidency.
The ad claims Newt “created millions of jobs”. Clinton passed a big tax increase, Newt never managed to get that reversed, and the job market was recovering before Newt became speaker, so it’s hard to say he personally deserves any credit for job-creation. Maybe if they told us what legislation he pushed that he had to stand up to Clinton about and which improved the job market?
It didn’t mention the one thing he did that was truly conservative, balancing the budget — although that was partly because of the large increase in tax revenues because of the booming economy that was partly driven by the dot-com bubble which burst right before Bush took over the Presidency.
And it didn’t mention one thing he has done in the past 10 years. Probably because it’s hard to find something he has done in the past 10 years that would be considered particularly conservative — certainly not his support for republican establishment candidates, his “non-lobbying” for Freddie and Fannie, his arm-twisting to pass the medicare prescription drug plan, his support for individual mandates at a time Obama really needed that kind of help, or his support for carbon trade and big-government solutions to global warming.
Newt is definitely more conservative than Mitt Romney, especially if you look at the 1980s and 1990s. But that’s not a high bar to get over. Richard Lugar is more conservative than Mitt Romney, and nobody wants HIM to be President.
We are our worst enemy here. This down between Newt and Mitten’s.
I am a realist and not fanatical blinder conservative that will fall on the sword and allow a communist run this country.
Go ahead and keep this up. All of you that keep bashing the candidates that could possibly un-seat this POS will have this on your hands.
I am conservative but I understand what reality looks like. We keep this crap up and we will have another 4 years of Obama. Our way of life cannot stand another 4 years of this.
Newt could well be done, his polls are dropping. If Ron Paul ends up 2nd or 1st, are you going to suggest we should all fall lock-step into supporting Paul just to stop Romney, or will you sanely suggest we find a conservative?
My point is that, based on what sins we are forgiving for Newt in order to consider him the “conservative replacement”, if Perry or Bachmann were the current leader instead of Gingrich, their “sins” for which they were dismissed are much less severe than those of Newt.
It’s just that when we found out their foibles, we had “plenty of time” and people were still assuming Sarah Palin would get in the race or that THEIR preferred candidate would rise up and win the day.
But as we got closer to the actual voting, people’s standards kept dropping. Fact is, Jeb Bush would be a better conservative candidate than Newt Gingrich. And nobody would have considered Jeb Bush 6 months ago, just as few here would have given Newt the time of day 6 months ago.
Please tell me who that might be? I am not against your thesis but telling me where we need to go.
We are truly screwed here. Other than Romney I am way cool with the sorry bunch we have. I’m just being a realist and trying to find the best of a shit lot.
GOD, I really want to retire at some point in the near future.
Best Regards Man
In my opinion, we go back, put all the cards on the table, and re-evaluate all the candidates with the same criteria. Why reject Bachmann based on July criteria, and Perry on August criteria, and then just accept Gingrich, who we actually rejected back in the spring, and in the summer, until we had eliminated all the others?
There’s no rule that says we can’t choose to go back to Perry, or Bachmann, or of course move on to Rick Santorum.
If a fresh look at all the candidates, based on their records and their positions rather than “electability” still leads you to pick Gingrich, then vote for him with the knowledge he’s the “best conservative you could find”.
But don’t let the polls make your decision for you.
Reagan isn’t even a Reagan.
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.