Sure, Dick Morris, and Condi Rice is gonna defeat Hillary Clinton cuz that Obama guy has no chance...
Posted on 11/17/2011 2:25:24 PM PST by TitansAFC
As the debates accumulate, it becomes more and more evident that Newt Gingrich’s intellect, experience, articulateness and depth of knowledge elevate him to the top of the GOP field. Anyone should be happy to pay admission to watch him duel with President Obama in debate! He’s not as charismatic as Herman Cain or as smooth as Mitt Romney, but boy, does he have a brain!
Ever since the campaign started, Newt has always gotten in his own way. Now he has graciously stepped aside and let his creativity and intellect shine through.
Earlier in the debates, he bit the questioners’ heads off in a pique of surly crankiness. No longer. Now he just answers the questions as they come, often hitting them out of the ballpark. His perspective and insights are penetrating and his condescension has vanished (or at least is sublimated).
Unfortunately, he does owe some of his current surge to the unsubstantiated and vague charges against Cain. While Republicans generally dismiss these charges, they worry that they will hurt him in November should he win the nomination. Herman will recover. His positive solutions for our economy will lift him back into the top tier of contention. Michele Bachmann might also come back, lifted by a tide of opposition to any tax increases embedded in the deficit-reduction supercommittee’s recommendations.
But any recovery by Cain or Bachmann will not bump Newt from the top tier. The likely result of the debate process is to bequeath to Iowa three or four contending candidates and leave it to them to sort out.
If Newt is the candidate, will his personal baggage drag him down? It will hurt, no doubt about that. His marriages will be dissected by the media, and his family will be deluged with questions and well-laid traps.
His ratings will decline as the inevitable baptism of fire begins. As with Cain, he will experience a few bad weeks. But, as with Cain, his positive strengths will carry him through the fire and he will come out the other end.
But once Newt survives the process, he will be inoculated against the charges. He will have immunity against the issue.
And here is the core of Obama’s problem. All of the Republican candidates will be so thoroughly vetted — and purified — by the brutal process they are going through that they will be immune to his charges against them in the fall.
John Kerry never went through that process. His quick knockout of Howard Dean and the tepid challenge mounted by John Edwards did nothing to vet his claims of hero status in Vietnam.
Obama, on the other hand, survived the Rev. Jeremiah Wright and Bill Ayers charges in the primary. When the general election came, they were old hat and had no electoral punch. Similarly, Bill Clinton got the nomination only after he had survived Gennifer Flowers and the accusations of draft-dodging. In November, those charges were spent bullets.
That’s the good news for Republicans. The nominating process has been so combative and the media scrutiny so searing that the candidates have been pre-screened. The FBI screening process is nowhere near as intense as the negative-research capacities of the media and political opponents.
If nominated, Romney will have survived the accusations of flip-flopping, Cain will have overcome the sexual harassment charges and Newt’s marital history will be yesterday’s news. And then we can get on with the business of winning the election.
And win it we will. Obama cannot survive his 60 percent disapproval rating on his handling of the economy (the highest ever recorded by CBS during his administration). Under his leadership, Gallup reports an almost 10-point edge for the Republican Party on handling the economy. Against a generic opponent, Obama draws only 43 percent of the vote. With the personal negatives on the Republican candidates aired and used up during the primaries, there will be nothing for Obama to hide behind.
Aren’t you people getting worn out carry the heave load - of water for the enemy?
It’s really getting old. So are the circular firing squads...when it comes time to fight obama, we’ll have no ammunition...just a lot of dead bodies - on OUR side. Time to grow up and deal with the case that IS.
There should be a rule of FR that when you post such crap - Post it fine.
But then tell who CAN take down both obama and the media - and WHY.
You two first.
Oh, about Newt on Pelosi and Gore - both in 2009
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ACek8xwMpJs&feature=related
testifying against Gore - 2009
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G7VUg7nG3lw&feature=related
Nope....I merely said I wasn't voting for Gingrich in the primary and that's all you need to know.......
“Gingrich had dozens & dozens of ethics complaints filed against him, a favorite lib tactic “
STOP mimmicking the msm or STOP complaining about them if you are going to repeat and believe their BS. The year was 1996, think free thinkers what that year brought to the dems.......there were 75 ethic charges brought against Newt, 74 were found baseless, leaving one which they had to dig hard for to save face, and it was about a book he wrote and tax exemptions. You can find tons of dirt on Newt written by HuffPo, Salon, Politico, Vanity Fair, Time and the liberal trash list goes on. You can do research yourself or continue to accept what you are fed.
Exactly. This is - or used to be - beneath FR standards
For the bashers - Go ahead and knock Newt - or any of the candidates.
But then, give us the largess of your wisdom and tell which candidate CAN now beat both obama and the media - AND WHY.
Otherwise, maybe go do some research so you CAN...
Start with each of the leaders plans for running the country - Try to be honest with yourself. Go ahead, give it a try. It's only our country's very survival that is at steak...
Maybe you could forgo one episode of 'Dancing With the Stars" and do some research...
"He has the right to criticize who has the heart to help" Abraham Lincoln
I'm crushed. I'll be up all night worrying about it - not
But there is an inherent dishonesty in constantly slamming one candidate while not offering us valid reasons as to who and why someone else can better win.
You already stated that you're not going to lose sleep over it.........take your own advice and go to bed.
I’m for Newt. He is a most intelligent man. I will not let the things of his past bother me. God forgives Newt and He forgives me and He forgives others who ask.
I truly believe he could wipe up the floor (in a nice way) with Obama in a debate. I don’t think there’s a subject that he couldn’t discuss intelligently in a debate.
I would like to be on your Ping list! Thanks!
YOU, jaycee, are a breath of fresh air.
The pontifical holier-than-thou remarks regurgitated ad nauseum over Newt's past - much of which are half-truths and bald face lies - by people professing to be Christian - has been disheartening.
I came across this saying the other day and thought - 'that reminds me of so many FREEPER posts.
"A clear conscience is usually the sign of a bad memory."
Or maybe FR just has an amazing number of people who have NEVER EVER made a mistake in their whole lives...and/or if it isn't the SAME mistakes Newt made, they somehow don't count.
I'm not sure you can intelligently argue with that statement. And the damage each of these three moderates has done is roughly proportional to their time in elective office.
BTTT!
Helping himself to the FM/FM gravy train doesn’t help.
After Carter, he couldn't get any worse. Don't really care what he did as governor, that state is over 2000 miles away from me..and over 30 years ago when he was first elected. I am lucky to even remember it, getting on in years you know.
But I remember Carter, he was so bad. Obama is the younger crowds Carter.
Carter also, like Obama blamed the citizens for his crappy economy, told us to put on sweaters if we got cold in the house
gas lines that went on for in some cases a mile long...some stations only let you buy 8 gallons of gas at a time.
Hell, Reagan looked good by comparison.
Carter also gave away the Panama Canal, didn't sign a new lease after the 99 year one came up for signing again.
Nightline started because of Carter and the Iranian take over of the embassy. America Held Hostage was what it was called. It was on nightly telling us about the situation.
Screwed up a supposed rescue by not using enough power and when a helo went down in the dessert, it was pretty much over...
Do you really think anyone thought Carter deserved to be reelected, and the stupid democrats ran another far lefty.
That was the mess Reagan inherited. Oh yes, I also remember CD's were paying 16% due to inflation...You must have just been a tot during those years.
Don't worry about my consistency, Newt stinks...
PS to my reply to you. Carter’s actions also turned Iran over to the radical muslims....
Sure, Dick Morris, and Condi Rice is gonna defeat Hillary Clinton cuz that Obama guy has no chance...
Have a good night sleep Granny. By the way, I’ve been around politics since the Johnson era.
Newt was taken out by Tom Delay and others in the GOP. I consider what they did to be motivate by little more than petty jealousy. Delay is proud of his role in getting rid of Newt.
From a transcript of Rush’s show with Delay as guest:
[RUSH: Now, how many of the ‘94 freshmen were involved in the coup? I’ve talked to some of them, and of course they arrived bright-eyed and bushy-tailed and they really believed that they were there to implement the agenda they had all campaigned on, and it was a revolutionary thing here. They had taken over the Congress. A number of freshmen here that gave the Republicans this huge majority, how many of them were dispirited by what they learned and saw and how long did it take for that to happen?
DELAY: At least half of them, 35 to 40 of them. It took a couple of years, particularly the second term of Newt Gingrich, where the members had just had enough. At the end of 1997, they wanted to see a change, and they didn’t see Newt bringing about that change, so they were going to take him down. So Dick Armey, myself, Bill Paxon from New York, and John Boehner — the now minority leader — came together, frankly, to handle the situation and try to keep that up. Whether you were supporting Newt Gingrich or not wasn’t the point. The point was our conference did not need this kind of divisive action right in the middle of our Congress. It would have destroyed everything that we were working for.]
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1802383/posts
This leads to an obvious question: Considering how much was accomplished under Newt’s leadership compared to what the Republicans accomplished after his departure, why would anyone be proud of having gotten rid of him?
Yea another great democrat. I go back a little farther than Johnson, not much, but some....sweet dreams to you also...GG
“This leads to an obvious question: Considering how much was accomplished under Newt’s leadership compared to what the Republicans accomplished after his departure, why would anyone be proud of having gotten rid of him?”
Good question.
“(no really)”.
No, not really.
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.