Posted on 03/15/2012 8:03:28 AM PDT by BO Stinkss
Even in an open convention, Gingrich wouldn't have a prayer of getting the nomination. But that seems to matter less to him than blowing up Mitt Romney.
Gingrich no longer says he can capture the 1,144 delegates required to wrap up the Republican nomination. Instead, he now speaks frankly about a new plan: Keep Romney from getting to 1,144 by the end of the GOP primary season in June, and then start what Gingrich calls a "conversation" about who should be the Republican nominee. That conversation, the plan goes, would lead to a brokered GOP convention at which Gingrich would emerge as the eventual nominee.
"Our goal first is to keep Romney well below 1,000," Gingrich spokesman R.C. Hammond said an hour before Gingrich addressed a small crowd of disappointed supporters gathered at the Wynfrey Hotel. "It doesn't have to be 1,000, or 1,050 -- it has to be below 1,100." If Gingrich succeeds, Hammond continued, "This will be the first time in our party in modern politics that we're going to go to the convention floor."
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Paul Ryan would make a great Sec Treasury, IMO.
There is lots to clean up there when little Timmy is gone.
Obama will not be defeated in the Fall by a candidate who is either unable, or unwilling, to educate enough citizens about,
1)the ideas of liberty underlying our Constitution's protections for individual citizens, and,
2)the counterfeit ideas to which the President is committed and which, in every society where they have been imposed, have led to oppression and want.
On the first point, back in January, Charles Krauthammer, who certainly has not been a Gingrich supporter, said of Romney:
". . . But he (Romney) simply doesn’t have the capacity to explain with some color and sort of force conservative ideas.".
As of today, Romney continues to fail to explain conservative principles in a manner which can educate and persuade voters of the superiority of Founding ideas of liberty over those of coercive government power to "take" and redistribute earnings, of government's assuming powers over freedom of religion, conscience and speech, and displaying increasing attempts at takeover of the press.
Just this morning, Romney restated to Bill Hemmer his oft-repeated line that Obama "simply doesn't understand how the economy works." Usually, that line has been accompanied by a declaration that the "President is in over his head."
Such statements by the so-called "leading contender" for the opposition in the Fall are either made out of naivete and ignorance, or they are deliberate misrepresentations of the President's commitment to an ideology which bears no resemblance to the philosophy of individual liberty laid out in the Declaration of Independence and structured into a "People's" Constitution to limit government power.
If the GOP candidate will not, or cannot, educate generations who have been "dumbed down" in the "progressive" education system to the ideas that made them free, and cannot, or will not, describe the philosophy which has motivated and imposed its will on America since the 2008 election, then that candidate is not the candidate who can "restore" America--either its "foundations" or its "future," which must rest on its "foundations."
2012 may well mark the year when future generations, reading objective histories of this period in America's 200+ experiment in liberty, will cry out, "Why did 'the People' of 2012 not choose liberty as did the people of 1776 and 1787?"
Perhaps we should consult that great writer of our Declaration of Independence for advice:
1801 Inaugural Address of Thomas Jefferson
(Excerpt) "Let us, then, with courage and confidence pursue our own Federal and Republican principles, our attachment to union and representative government. Kindly separated by nature and a wide ocean from the exterminating havoc of one quarter of the globe; too high-minded to endure the degradations of the others; possessing a chosen country, with room enough for our descendants to the thousandth and thousandth generation; entertaining a due sense of our equal right to the use of our own faculties, to the acquisitions of our own industry, to honor and confidence from our fellow-citizens, resulting not from birth, but from our actions and their sense of them; enlightened by a benign religion, professed, indeed, and practiced in various forms, yet all of them inculcating honesty, truth, temperance, gratitude, and the love of man; acknowledging and adoring an overruling Providence, which by all its dispensations proves that it delights in the happiness of man here and his greater happiness hereafter—with all these blessings, what more is necessary to make us a happy and a prosperous people? Still one thing more, fellow-citizens—a wise and frugal Government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government, and this is necessary to close the circle of our felicities.
"About to enter, fellow-citizens, on the exercise of duties which comprehend everything dear and valuable to you, it is proper you should understand what I deem the essential principles of our Government, and consequently those which ought to shape its Administration. I will compress them within the narrowest compass they will bear, stating the general principle, but not all its limitations. Equal and exact justice to all men, of whatever state or persuasion, religious or political; peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none; the support of the State governments in all their rights, as the most competent administrations for our domestic concerns and the surest bulwarks against antirepublican tendencies; the preservation of the General Government in its whole constitutional vigor, as the sheet anchor of our peace at home and safety abroad; a jealous care of the right of election by the people—a mild and safe corrective of abuses which are lopped by the sword of revolution where peaceable remedies are unprovided; absolute acquiescence in the decisions of the majority, the vital principle of republics, from which is no appeal but to force, the vital principle and immediate parent of despotism; a well disciplined militia, our best reliance in peace and for the first moments of war, till regulars may relieve them; the supremacy of the civil over the military authority; economy in the public expense, that labor may be lightly burthened; the honest payment of our debts and sacred preservation of the public faith; encouragement of agriculture, and of commerce as its handmaid; the diffusion of information and arraignment of all abuses at the bar of the public reason; freedom of religion; freedom of the press, and freedom of person under the protection of the habeas corpus, and trial by juries impartially selected. These principles form the bright constellation which has gone before us and guided our steps through an age of revolution and reformation. The wisdom of our sages and blood of our heroes have been devoted to their attainment. They should be the creed of our political faith, the text of civic instruction, the touchstone by which to try the services of those we trust; and should we wander from them in moments of error or of alarm, let us hasten to retrace our steps and to regain the road which alone leads to peace, liberty, and safety."
Read my post #109
Just sit back and watch their reaction when it dawns on them what you said. Enjoy the day!! lol
Compared to whom? Do you remember who it was that Gerald Ford dropped to put Bob Dole in the VP slot? None other than Nelson Rockerfeller who, you must admit, was way to the left of Bob Dole. Even today, the RINO wing claims Ford could have won the election if he had left Rocky on the ticket.
And while Jack Kemp was indeed soft on illegal immigration, it wasn't a big issue in 1996. The man was also pro-life, so it is really unfair to describe him as a social liberal. His close association with Reagan certainly won him the conservative label at the time.
Bob Dole didn't lose in 1996 because of a lack of conservative turn-out. He lost because the economy was humming along reasonably well and he offered no clear contrast to Bill Clinton. And was much less exciting.
I’d take Mitch or Paul any day over the blowheart Gingrich. In a heart beat.
Hell of a book tour paid by his faithful followers.
Daniels has the charisma of Elmer Fudd, among other liabilities. Just as a campaigner, he is a dead letter. Christie has a terrible record on judges and social issues. I also think Christie would sell well outside of the NE. Ryan would be worth a good look.
I agree that Mittens is the worst of the bunch.
Somebody call a waaaahmbulance for poor Rick Moron. Newt wants to deny Rick’s precious Mitt Romney his coronation.
The nerve of that guy!
Use that tin foil for wrapping your lunch instead, it's a much better use of your money.
My apologies in advance for my marked ignorance of the “brokered convention”. I’m just curious....can Palin or Allen West jump in if things get to that point?
gag
No, I don’t think the scenarios I saw the other night by John King were assuming all Newt votes went to Rick. He was fairly generous with Rick winning some of the big contests that are potentials for him, but the point was to show how different the scenario if Newt is still in it. It helps Romney get the delegates before the convention. ENOUGH of Newt’s votes will go to Santorum.
He used CNN’s very cool graphic touch screen delegate map, which was very easy to follow.
Have you seen proof? if so present it soonest.
Do you think it only coincidence that all six of them refuse to provide proof of being a natural born citizen?
Blowing up Romney is good. Time for a Darkhorse at the convention.
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.