Posted on 01/15/2012 3:25:48 PM PST by billys kid
In her book Slander, conservative commentator and pundit Ann Coulter called Newt Gingrich one of the most consequential politicians in the last century. Why would she make such a claim? What did he do that had such consequence? In 1993, the Republican Party was the minority party. It had been in the minority since 1955. Even President Reagan had to deal with a Democrat Congress in the 80s and was limited in his ability to change Washington as a result. Newt Gingrich had seen this up close and personal. He had tried to help Reagan with the Conservative Opportunity Society. By 1993 he had become the Republican whip in the house. With his leadership the Republicans crafted a proposal called the Contract With America (CWA). It was designed so that Republican candidates could campaign on conservative principles in order to win their congressional seats and then govern in a conservative manner. The electorate responded. It handed the House and Senate over to the Republicans. This was a revolution unheard of in the times they occurred. Gingrich became the Speaker of the House as a result. The CWA was a conservative proposition. It held that the electorate could hold their representatives responsible and could remove them if they didn't perform. The representatives would be responsible to their constituents. But it also implied that they should perform like they would under a business contract. Did Gingrich write the contract himself? No. But he led the effort for congressional candidates to sign up. And most did. He led educational efforts for those potential conservative congressmen to help them campaign. Since then Gingrich has lead other congressional education efforts. He has been a constant source of education for congressional representatives. What did the Contract propose to do? There were two parts to the CWA.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Newt almost foiled it though, with his clownish "contract." The GOP lead started downward when he brought it out, and we barely made it to the election.
Newt was a giant in his term as Speaker. What disturbs me is that so much effort has been to destroy his chances as President by ignorant people. Washington now is corrupt beyond belief and that corruption has worked hard to destroy him. Sometimes I feel like millions of Americans want to destroy the very system that feeds them.
I feel if we lose this chance to endorse Newt we will have finished our great nation. None of the candidates have the knowledge and would never be able to overcome the communists machine that has America in its grip. If we do not get the Senate and retain the House we certainly are finished.
>> “Reagan was a big NAFTA supporter and believer.” <<
No, Reagan was only a supporter of a guest worker program for agriculture.
Sorry, buddy...but the meme is correct. Gingrich "did" have a larger impact on this country. And I would hazard a guess that if Bush the First had adhered to Gingrich/conservative ideals, and not booted every Reaganite in the administration out onto the street, that 9/11 probably wouldn't have happened.
I think what happens if Obama is reelected is that our country is to be pushed to secession by one and then more than one state. My first bet is Texas. I think even with a strong result in the congressional elections, Obama will continue his disregard for separation of powers and do as he wants. The recent recess appointments while the senate was in session went by with barely a yawn. Any efforts to stop profligate spending will be blocked by a majority of democrats and republican moderates.
A big concern I have is for the five most important Americans: Justices Scalia, Kennedy, Thomas, Roberts and Alito. The loss of any one of those five under an Obama second term would be an immeasurable, irreversible catastrophe for our constitution.
I totally agree that Gingrich is one of the giants of the conservative cause and we never would have gained what we did in this past generation without him. We conservatives need to realize that our biggest opponents now are not the liberals, it’s the moderates. Newt’s efforts to expose Romney’s activities at Bain plus Romney’s weak single term as governor of Mass., reveals the truth as a player, not a conservative leader. Romney is a player in the same way that the Clinton’s, the Kennedy’s, the Bush’s, McCain’s, Dole’s, are players. Not good for our future if Romney wins.
That person was Ronald Reagan, not NAFTA Newt whose main contribution to today’s political landscape was to bawlderize national political discourse to the level of the Springer Show
Newt forgot the first rule of politics...being likeable...and he really turned me off with his bain capital attacks, trying to be a populist when he turned out to be just as corrupt. He shoots himself in the mouth by not watching what he says.
And of course, nobody is his campaign is saying, “you know what, I better stop taking my self too seriously. That’s how Reagan got elected.”
BTW-reagan won the Senate...along with GWB.
Delusional : http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delusion
I agree, you certainly are.
>> “ Too much revisionist history on FR surrounding Newt.” <<
.
You can blame Limbaugh for most of it.
He invented Newt’s “conservatism,” and the “conservatism” of the Free Traders, who are really globalists at heart.
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.