The Herd: A Look at The Republican Vice Presidential Candidates. Newt Gingrich

Bookmark and Share   The Herd is a special White House 2012 series covering the obvious and not so obvious potential choices to be selected as Mitt Romney’s vice presidential running mate on the Republican presidential ticket.  Each day, White House 2012 will introduce you to one the many Republicans which we believe will be at least considered for the vice presidency by the now inevitable presidential nominee, Mitt Romney.

In addition to a biographical information and a brief assessment of each potential nominee and their chances of being selected by Mitt Romney, White House 2012′s coverage also includes each potential nominee’s voting records, as well as a listing of their public statements and links to their web sites.

Today White House 2012 takes a look at former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich.

Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich

Born: June 17, 1943, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania

Spouse(s):Jackie Battley (1962-1981), Marianne Ginther (1981-2000), Callista Gingrich(2000-?)

Children: Two daughters, two sons-in-law and two grandchildren.

Residence : Carrollton, Georgia (79-93), Marrietta, Georgia (93-99) McLean Virginia (Current)

Alma mater:Emory University,Tulane University

Profession:College Professor, author, Member of Congress

Religion: Roman Catholic

Political Career :

  • Two unsuccessful runs for Congress in Georgia’s sixth congressional district in 1974 and 1976
  • Elected to Congress in 1978 and subsequently served for 8 more terms until 1999
  • From 1989 to 1995 he served as the 16th United States House Minority Whip
  • From 1995 to 1999 he served as the 58th Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives

Throughout his continuing career, Gingrich has proven to be a prolific and top selling author. Most of his novels are comprised of innovative, conservative policy initiatives and directions that are rooted in the founding principle of our nation. His first book was published in January of 1982. It was entitledThe Government’s Role in Solving Societal Problems and offered a solid foundation for conservative leadership in America. But his breakout book came in 1985 withWindow of Opportunity, a profound compilation of of path to prosperity in America.

Other works include:

  • Contract with America (co-editor).
  • Restoring the Dream
  • Quotations from Speaker Newt
  • To Renew America
  • Lessons Learned The Hard Way
  • Presidential Determination Regarding Certification of the Thirty-Two Major Illicit Narcotics Producing and Transit Countries
  • Saving Lives and Saving Money
  • Winning the Future
  • Rediscovering God in America
  • A Contract with the Earth
  • Drill Here, Drill Now, Pay Less: A Handbook for Slashing Gas Prices and Solving Our Energy Crisis
  • Real Change: From the World That Fails to the World That Works
  • To Save America: Stopping Obama’s Secular-Socialist Machine

Newt has also written a substantial number of historical novels:

  • 1945
  • Gettysburg: A Novel of the Civil War
  • Grant Comes East Thomas Dunne Books
  • Never Call Retreat: Lee and Grant: The Final Victory
  • Pearl Harbor: A Novel of December 8th
  • Days of Infamy

See a more detailed bio of Newt here on his White House 2012 presidential contender page

Newt is probably not going to be Mitt Romney’s choice as a running mate. While he is consistently considered the smartest man in the room, he is also one of the loosest cannon in any room and although he can easily bring some very positive qualities to the ticket, it his baggage that may  prevent us from every seeing how positive those qualities may be on the G.O.P. presidential ticket.

Newt would certainly be impressive in any vice presidential debates, although it is more than likely that the Obama ticket will only allow one vice presidential debate, if even that. Newt would also certainly be able to condense the election down to several very succinct and powerful words that the average voter would be able to relate to in a most convincing way.

But Newt will also shoot from the hip and in what will undoubtedly be a highly negative campaign waged with the near billion dollar campaign war chest of the Obama ticket, any stray bullets fired off by Newt could become lethal distractions that the Romney campaign can ill afford.  Just having Newt on the ticket will be a very distraction.  The left’s venom of Newt is so strong, that a daily rush of personal name calling and attacks will be discussed in a pro-liberal mainstream media to such a great extent, that the Romney-Gingrich message would be overshadowed and muted.

As a play it safe kind of guy, Newt is probably too much of a risk for Romney’s liking and Newt’s long and accomplished political career is most likely open to the type of criticism that Mitt Romney does not want to deal with. Therefore, despite Newt’s ability to compensate for several of Mitt’s shortcomings, such as a lack of innovation and boldness as well as a lack of any popular anti-establishment sentiments, Newt will probably not be Vice President anytime soon.  Add to that a bitter campaign between the two of them and what you have is a personal relationship that does not preclude the idea from consideration, but is not exactly conducive to the creation of an enthusiastic partnership at the top of the presidential ticket.

Pros:

  • Articulate and has a great capacity for shaping issues in a way that makes the conservative approach to our problems seem like common sense
  • Has an anti-establishmentarian streak that can appeal to independents and T.E.A. Party activists and compensate for Romney’s establishment image
  • Great in debate
  • Brings unappalled experience to the ticket
  • Would help Romney among Southern conservatives who are not comfortable with him

Cons:

  • Has personal baggage which can easily become a distraction in the campaign
  • Has been a harsh critic of Mitt Romney and his policies
  • Shoots from the hip and can be a very loose cannon
  • Has the potential to overshadow Mitt Romney

Overall Assesment:

In some ways, Newt would be the perfect Vice President. Having once been the second in line for presidency, his experience is invaluable. He is also incredibly articulate and dogged in his defense of conservative values and tireless in his efforts to find innovative solutions to our problems and ways to remove government from our everyday lives. But Newt has an ego problem and it often gets in his way and it is that ego problem which Mitt Romney will probably not allow to get in the way of his winning the White House.  So when it comes to Newt Gingrich, he would not be the perfect Vice President for Mitt Romney.

Furthermore; while Newt was relatively competitive in the first half of the primary process, he never quite caught on and proved that he can’t be even be counted on as a favorite son of the South who could motivate those Southern voters uninspired by Romney.  And that is an important factor because for Mitt Romney to win this election, he will need to have the Republican base come out to vote for him in near record numbers.

Overall, while the selection of Newt would be a good one from a policy, management, and issue oriented angle, from a political perspective regarding an election, Newt is not the best choice for Mitt.

Photobucket

Some Past Key Votes

H Res 611 – Impeachment Resolution: Article One

Legislation-Resolution (Yea)

Dec. 19, 1998 – President Clinton was charged with willfully providing perjurious, false and misleading testimony to the grand jury concerning one or more of the following:: – …

H Res 611 – Impeachment Resolution: Article Three

Legislation-Resolution (Yea)

Dec. 19, 1998 – -Accuses President Clinton of obstructing justice by coaching White House Secretary Betty Currie in potential testimony, encouraging Monica Lewinsky to lie under oath and by …

H Res 611 – Impeachment Resolution: Article Two

Legislation-Resolution (Yea)

Dec. 19, 1998 – – Accuses President Clinton of committing perjury on December 23, 1997, during his testimony in a Federal civil rights action brought against him by Paula …

More Key Votes

Photobucket

Gingrich on the Issues

Foreign Policy Gun Control Budget & Economy Education
Homeland Security Crime Government Reform Health Care
War & Peace Drugs Tax Reform Abortion
Free Trade Civil Rights Social Security Families & Children
Immigration Jobs Welfare & Poverty Corporations
Energy & Oil Environment Technology Principles & Values

Photobucket

Is Mitt Bouyant? Or Santorum Sinking?

The day before Super Tuesday, Mitt Romney is looking good.  It’s looking like he will take the key state of Ohio and could take Tennessee.  Both of these are very close races.  But Romney’s ascendency back to the top is marked by Santorum’s dive in the polls, and Newt’s resurgence again.  Newt will win Georgia, which has the most delegates of any Super Tuesday state.  Newt is also now tied with Santorum and within one point of Romney in Tennessee according to one poll.  Just last week, Santorum was looking good in both Ohio and Tennessee.

If Santorum is suddenly seen as faltering, we may see the polls seesaw back to Newt on fears of unelectability.  However, at this late stage that may serve to only help Romney, unless Santorum loses big time.  If Santorum comes in third in Tennessee or Ohio and Gingrich easily wins Georgia, the shift back to Newt could be significant.

Consider this, if Santorum was not in the race and his voters went to Newt, Newt would sweep Ohio, Tennessee, and Georgia.  On the other hand, the same could be said for Santorum if Newt dropped out and his votes went to Santorum.  In either case, Romney is the beneficiary of the social conservative split.  Meanwhile, Ron Paul is fleeing from social issues as he descends back into below 10% irrelevancy.

This could be short lived however, as Republicans revisit the myth that social issues are losers in elections.  As I pointed out the other day, a one dimensional economy candidate is going to struggle against Obama.  Republicans are more likely to be inspired to go to the polls for a bold conservative, and Romney is all pastels.  If Santorum falters tomorrow and Newt remains on message, this one could be far from over.

Why Drudge is Headlining Newt

Romney barely eeked out a win in his homestate Michigan.  Newt barely registered.  Judging from Arizona and Michigan, which Newt conceded before they even started, Newt is less likely than Ron Paul to be the nominee.  So why is Drudge front paging a 2% Gallup poll increase for Newt as a third comeback?  Simple, Drudge wants Romney to win.

It’s no secret Drudge is a Romney supporter.  Santorum has Romney on the ropes, especially when heading into some of the southern more conservative states.  If Newt’s votes in Michigan went to Santorum, Romney would have lost.  What has kept Romney in this race is a split vote between Newt and Santorum.  Romney needs that split to survive.

I wish Newt would make another comeback.  He is the best candidate with the best ideas.  But don’t get your hopes up.  Romney wants a perceived Newt resurgence almost as much as Newt wants a real resurgence.

 

Wishful thinking?

Newt Gingrich Issues A Response to President Obama’s State of the Union Address

Bookmark and Share  Shortly after the President delivered his 65 minute long, third State of the Union Address and set the stage for his reelection campaign, former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich, issued a rebuttal to the President’s remarks.

In his response, Gingrich aggressively characterized the President’s stated vision as one of big government, bureaucratic control, and as one strives to create a food stamp economy designed to make Americans dependent upon government.

Newt Gingrich’s SOTU Response

“We have a crisis of work in this country and tonight President Obama proposed nothing in the way of policy changes that will get us to robust job creation and dramatic economic growth. Instead, the president described his conviction that his big government is built to last and should be paid for with higher taxes. But bigger government and higher taxes will not lead to jobs and growth.

Bigger government and higher taxes will instead lead to more people on food stamps, a situation which the President and his party defend as a fair outcome. Here we have to confront the truth about President Obama.  Economic growth and prosperity is not really at the top of his agenda. He will always prefer a food stamp economy to a paycheck economy and call it fair. For the president and a large part of the political class, it’s about their power, their right to rule.  They just want to take money from Joe the Plumber – the small business people who makes over 90 per cent of the new jobs — and redistribute it to the government bureaucracy and their political friends and allies. 

That’s why so much of that nearly trillion-dollar stimulus didn’t create jobs but just went into the pockets of special interests who support President Obama and the leadership of the Democratic Party. No better example of this exists than in the crisis of American energy. President Obama and his political allies – not of few of whom love living in energy inefficient houses or driving gas-guzzling luxury vehicles – openly admit they want gas prices to remain high so that the rest of America will learn to live more modestly.

They think it’s good for rest of us.  Only recently, the president canceled the Keystone XL Pipeline that would have created countless new jobs and helped America on the way to energy independence because he wanted to appease the far left of his party.  And yet not a single word on the Keystone XL pipeline tonight. To create jobs and growth in this country, we must start with dramatic tax reform that lowers taxes and maximizes capital investment and job creation. We must return to a dollar as good as gold whose purchasing power is the same in thirty years as it is today.  We must dramatically expand American energy production. We must have smarter regulation at the same time we abolish destructive and costly regulatory systems beginning with Obamacare, Dodd-Franks, and Sarbanes-Oxley.

And finally, unlike the current administration, we must have faith in job creators.  With these policies the state of the union will be much better.  They will create an explosion in job creation and lead to robust economic growth and a return to prosperity.  Furthermore, a paycheck economy will put us on a path to balanced budgets and paying down our national debt.”

Bookmark and Share

Does Newt Really Have The Momentum to Keep Winning?

Bookmark and Share  If one were to look at Florida, the answer is yes.

Since his exceptionally strong, first place, landslide victory in the South Carolina Republican presidential primary, Newt Gingrich has at least temporarily established himself as the only candidate with momentum on his side.

Ron Paul, and his supposed ever growing massive number of supporters doesn’t seem to be quite as massive or as rapidly growing as once thought, since his last place showing in South Carolina, and he has all but conceited the election and admitted that he is just in this thing not win, but to pick up enough delegates to finally become politically relevant.

Rick Santorum, has gone from being the surprise underdog winner of the Iowa Caucus to being the man who many question why he is still running.  And Mitt Romney has seen himself gone from a frontrunner and the inevitable nominee, to being the candidate who many are  beginning to feel that if he hasn’t locked up the nomination yet, he may never do it.

But Newt Gingrich’s recent resurrection, from political death which propelled him to become the winner of the first in the South Primary has clearly set the stage for him to finally hit a stride that will make this a two man race between himself and Mitt Romney.

In less than 24 hours of his winning South Carolina, Newt raised a million dollars and since than he has more than doubled that total. Furthermore; in Florida, Gingrich has opened seven  offices with two more yet to be opened, hired 14 paid staffers and signed up 5,000.  By contrast, Romney’s campaign had just five staffers and three offices in Florida by early this week. And on top of that, when it concerns the polls, Gingrich has gone from 27% last week, to 35% this week, a swing of eight percent which now finds Romney falling two percent and in to second place.  Such dramatic numbers would certainly indicate that Newt has the wind at his back, while Romney and the others are now encountering strong headwinds in Florida.

Normally, even though these are solid signs for Newt, I would not be very confident in his ability to keep this recent turn of events moving in his direction.  In the past Newt’s proclivity for the untraditional has forced him to rely on instincts which motivate him to go with unconventional strategies, strategies which, like his previous attempt to attack Mitt Romney from the left and go off the deep end by distorting Mitt’s record of success in the free market, have hurt him.  However after Monday night’s debate, Newt demonstrated a degree of political maturity which he has not often displayed prior to now.  He carried himself as a humble frontrunner and held back any desire he may have had to respond to Mitt Romney’s own distortions with any exaggerated flare that could have undermined Newt’s credibility.  Instead it was Mitt Romney who appeared to be desperate and stretching to find any fatal flaws in Newt Gingrich’s record.

In addition to that, up to now, Newt has not had the type of financial resources that permitted him to to take proper advantage of media advertising which helps to carry his message beyond the audiences that may sit and watch the debates which he typically excels in.  And at the same time, even though Mitt Romney has already spent upwards of $10.5 million on Florida advertising,  he is losing ground.  This bodes quite well for Newt who with his coffers filling up, and with the aid a $5 million single donation to a Gingrich Super PAC in Florida, can now chip away at the dominance of Romney’s campaign in the Sunshine State.

But that’s not the only reason I remain optimistic for Newt at least in Florida.

In his attempt to stop the newtmentum, Romney seems to be making some of his first strategic stumbles.  In the most recent debate, while hoping to paint Newt as a Washington insider and influence peddler, he brought up the issue of Medicaid Part D and claimed that Newt was paid by health companies that could benefit from a piece of legislation, to lobby Congress Medicaid Part D’s passage.  During Monday’s debate he said to Gingrich;

“If you’re getting paid by health companies, if your  entities are getting paid by, and you then meet with Republican congressmen and  encourage them to support that legislation, you can call it whatever you  like. I call it influence peddling” .

The argument could potentially have legs, but not in Florida, where the nation’s largest population of senior citizens benefitted from the program and where Gingrich successfully dismissed Romney’s claims and accused Mitt of being a serial twister of the truth.   Gingrich countered Mitt’s charge in part by stating

 “I think it’s pretty clear to say that I have never,  ever gone and done any lobbying,”

 He also added that he was  proud of the fact that he publicly, openly advocated the prescription drug program.

That last statement was essentially the punch that ended and won that round for Newt.  It successfully appealed to the very large senior citizen voting bloc in Florida, the voters who when it’s time to cast their ballots, happen to turn out in the largest numbers .

Additionally, Romney seems to be counting on tieing Newt Gingrich to the tide of foreclosures in Florida.

Florida took a hit second only to Nevada in the housing crisis and by claiming Newt made money from Freddie Mac which essentially oversaw the creation and bursting of the housing bubble, he is hoping that Floridians who lost their homes will see Newt Gingrich as the villain who profited from their losses.  The problem is that Republicans are not buying what Mitt is trying to sell in that area of political campaigning.  And another thing to note is that those individuals who lost their homes because they provided mortgages that they were not qualified for in the first place, are not voting for either Newt or Mitt.  So clearly, Mitt Romney is throwing a wildly wrong  pitch and throwing it to the wrong people.

Then there is something else working against Mitt in Florida.

Unlike the previous three contests, Florida is a closed primary.

In a closed primary or caucus, only registered members of a Party may vote in that Party’s primary and Independents, those not registered with either major Party, are not permitted to vote in either major Party’s primary. Democrats who may like Mitt Romney’s moderate image, will not be able to influence who Republicans nominate as their Party’s candidate.  This is the way I believe it should be.  It is also one of the reasons why Ron Paul has written Florida off.  Since his hero worshippers from outside of the G.O.P. and within the sphere of liberal-tarian lunacy, can not sabotage the Republican process, they are picking up their toys and not playing in the Sunshine State.  All of this is good news for Newt, who if he keeps it together, just might be able to extend his good fortune into the forseeable future.

But even if he does hold it together in Florida, he will still forced to confront some very rough seas.

Following Florida will be two contests that Mitt Romney so far looks unbetable in….Nevada and Michigan.  This will provide at least a psychological sense of momentum that swings back towards Mitt  and away from Newt.  When that time comes, Newt will have to confront his challenge, a challenge that will force him to prove he has the staying power to comeback, and put Romney back on the ropes.  So far Newt has proven that he has considerable political stamina, but if he wins Florida, he will have to turn that stamina in to a knockout punch that he can land sometime after Nevada and Michigan.  If he can’t land such a punch, Republicans could very easily end up seeing this race last longer than the 2008 Democrat nomination between President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, or worse…….maybe even the first brokered convention since 1976 when President Gerald Ford was almost dumped by the Party in exchange for future President Ronald Reagan.

Bookmark and Share

Cain’s strong numbers baffle all but voters

Cain still polls strong

When discussing republican presidential candidate and front-runner Herman Cain, the reaction one receives is contingent upon with whom you speak.  When listening to established political pundits, the are miffed.  They are shocked at his seemingly sudden rise.  They have no explaination for it.  They attempt to explain it based on their previous experience with campaigns and elections.  The best explaination is actually under everyone’s nose.  The flaw in their theories is that they seem to, yet again, under-estimate the strength of the tea party.   Now is the first time we have had to contend with the tea party in a presidential election.  One year ago, the 2010 elections threw many state governments and even The House of Representatives, a curve ball.  Many seats were not only taken by republicans, but taken by tea party backed candidates.  Being a tea party backed candidate is differentiated by passing the tea party litmus test and maintaining that high score when pop quizes are administered by the voters.  So now, let’s see how Cain has such strong support and why his numbers will not change…unless he fails the litmus test.

All republican candidates have been given the tea party litmus test.  All republican candidates seek the approval of the tea party, knowing they are the key to clinching their primary win.  While mainstream media sees the tossing of support from several other candidates as flickle and fluid, there actually is a method to what seems to be madness.  The tea party litmus test consists of three commandements.  The components are as follows: The first component is that thou must be authentic.  You can’t be too closely attached to anything mainstream, status quo or business-as-usual.  The further you are from it, the more you appeal to a tea party voter.  This includes all media, political contacts, previous work experience, legislation and associations.  It will all be scrutinized thoroughly.  The second tea party commandent is thou shalt not tread on my constitional rights.  This includes implied, direct and covert actions.  Anything that could appear as a violation of individual constitutional right and order will be condemned and so shall the candidate.  The third and final commandment is thou shall not raise taxes.  When they say no increase, they mean no increase.  Staying on budget, cutting waste and directing influence away from Wasington is central to this decree.

Now that we know the commandments, let’s analyze how each former front-runners took the tea party litmus test and failed.  When support shifts towards a candidate, they are taking the tea party litmus test.  If they maintain it, they are passing.  If not, they fail and it will never return.  Mitt Romney has always been seen as a front-runner.  However, most primary voters are seeking an alternative to him.  Why, you may ask?  Romney fails the tea party litmus test because he violates two commandments.  Tea party voters do not see him as authentic.  He is seen as an establishment crony.  He cannot shake the stigma of Romneycare (essentially making him public enemy number one to tea pary voters).  He has run and lost before both as governor and as a presidential nominee.  Many say this gives him the perception of a loser. 

The tea party voter will want the Romney alternative.  Initially, all support went towards Michele Bachmann.  Though we love the fact that she has a large family and is described as a tea party darling, she is not able to pass the litmus test because she violates the first commandment.  Though seen as an outsider, this is not the type of environment where voters are forgiving of those in Congress.  In fact, voter’s dislike Congress more than they dislike Obama.  So, away went Bachmann.

Rick Perry threw his ten-gallon cowboy hat into the ring and support shifted to him immediately.  Mainstream media said his debates are what sunk him.  That may be partially true.  The debates are where he failed the litmus test because he broke all three commandments.  Requiring young women to be vaccianated for cervical cancer violates “thou shalt not infringe on my constitutional rights” and “thou shan’t be linked to mainstream or big business.”  Fair or not, it is held against him by voters.  It took away his authenticity.  His stance on the education of illegal immigrants violates the third commandment.  This is seen as waste of tax-payer funds.  These voters don’t care for any rationale behind it.  It is of no consequence.  So, once discovered, support waned immediately.

Now, we have Herman Cain as the front-runner.  Despite  what could have been a scandal for most candidates, he still stays at the top of the polls.  This is because he has kept all three commandments so far.  Since the story broke from a mainstream media outlet and the accusers remain annonymous, most put no creedance into the story.  Even if they had revealed themselves, it would not have mattered.  Unless it comes from a trusted, conservative outlet, it will do little to sway Cain’s support.  The fact that it is rumored to have been leaked by a Perry or Romney consultant just bodes well for Cain.  Those candidates have violated the first commandment already.  Therefore, no one will listen.  The more media gaffes Cain makes, the more authentic he becomes to voters.  This just solidifies his public image to the voter and frankly, they like it.  In addition, he has no record in public office that would have allowed him to violate the second or third commandments.  Essentially, as long as he and his policies line up with the three commandents, he may very well ride this wave to the end.

Ron Paulbots Really Have It In for Herman Cain

Bookmark and Share  I recently observed some of the bantering going on at the Ron Paul Forum and noticed that Ron Paul fanatics despise Herman Cain even more than I thought.

Referring to a White House 2012 article on Herman Cain’s 2004 senate race in Georgia, one Paulbot tries to suggest that Cain is a liar because in his recent interview with Piers Morgan, Cain claimed that he made an impressive showing in that race.  The creator of this particular Ron Paul Forum thread also suggests that Cain lied because in that same interview Cain he refered to that same election by stating  “I almost pulled it off. I came within 2 percentage points.”

The truth is that Herman Cain’s descriptions of his 2004 senate campaign are not lies.  The fact that Herman Cain, a relative unknown and a definite political novice, came in second in a race against two well established incumbent congressmen is impressive.  And as was stated in the White House 2012 referenced earlier, the campaign team of Johnny Isakson, the man who went on to win that senate race,  state that Cain gave them a good scare and a run for their money.

As for the claim that Cain lied when he stated that he came within two percent in that race, what the accuser does not understand is first, what they are talking about, and second, that Cain’s reference to 2%, is a reference to the fact that had he polled a fraction more than 2%, he would have forced Isakson in to a runoff election for the Republican nomination.  In Georgia, no one can win an election without more than 50% of the vote.  That was noted in White House 2012.

Despite the truth, respondents in this particular thread go on to write things such as;

“I honestly believe that he [Cain]  is the most dishonest man I have ever heard of in my entire life. It’s one thing for Romney to flip flop on every thing over the course of a few years. Cain is lying and changing positions every day now, and some times twice.”     

To which “Cutlerzzz” replies;

“Seriously. He’s either a compulsive liar, or a major flip flopper.”  

Pauliticalfan chimes in with “Seriously. He’s either a compulsive liar, or a major flip flopper.”

Ron Paul’s kool-aid swigging base goes on with their attempt to make Cain out to be a liar, based on the remarks he made about 2004 senate campaign.  And then “Bruno” suddenly adds;

“So Cain is ‘not a politician’  only because he has failed numerous times to become one?  Interesting.  Let’s help keep that trend going so he can still say he is not a politician in 2012.”

The funny thing is that “Bruno’s” signature in the Ron Paul Forum is a quote from Ron Paul that reads;

“I’m not just trying to win or get elected. I am trying to change the course of history”

And therein lies the hypocrisy of Paulbots and Ron paul himself.  If he is not running to get elected, why has been running for and getting elected to office for two decades and is now embarking on his third race for President?  I dare suggest that if after 17 runs for elected office, and two decades in office, if you haven’t changed history yet, I doubt you will do it next the 14 months.  I will also add that if anyone is a politician it is someone has been in politics and playing it for more than a quarter of century.

I find it truly hysterical that Ron Paul’s base is quick to call others liars and denounce the game of politics when their own messiah, Ron Paul himself lies about his own record and both he and his supporters are so willing to play political games themselves.   We are talking about a man who while preaching fiscal responsibility and pushing for the federal government to get our lives, is earmarking hundreds of millions of dollars to have the federal subsidize a study on shrimp.  And as for his supporters, while they preach the ills of politics, as demonstrated in their attempted lynching of Herman Cain, are quick to play politics and distort the record and words of Herman Cain.

And tomorrow, they will drop their focus on Cain and aim it towards the next Republican who is beating Ron Paul at the top of the polls.

Meanwhile, all Ron paul supporters are doing is running an ad hoc Obama reelection committee.  For in the end, if they succeed, the reelection of Barack Obama is all that they will achieve.

To be sure, Herman Cain has no love lost for Ron Paul and his dangerous, lunatic, fringe supporters.  In the same Piers Morgan interview dealot with earlier, Cain made it clear that he thinks that of elected President,. Ron Paul would be quite bad for America.  Cain adds that he disagrees with Paul’s solutions that simply throw the baby out with the bath water.  And as for Paul’s supporters, there again there is no love lost.

In his book, “This Is Herman Cain”, Cain claims that Paul’s supporters are “threatened”  by him and  that they are “trying to destroy” him “on the fact that I was once affiliated with” the  Federal Reserve.

After reading this thread about Herman Cain that comes from Ron Paul’s fans, it appears to me that Herman Cain is not the liar, but that those who doth protest too much are.

Bookmark and Share

Cain Campaign Collapsing?

Bookmark and Share    As many Republican presidential campaigns are just beginning to increase their levels of activity, a string of cancellations seem to indicate that the campaign of  Herman Cain is doing just the opposite. But it is the type of events that he has withdrawn from which force one to wonder if there is not something more behind the cutting back of activity.

For an underdog campaign, earned media events, the type of events that cost hardly anything but afford you great exposure, are as a good as having ownership of a toll booth on the state turnpike, during rush hour.  You just don’t pass such an opportunity up. Yet the Cain campaign has done just that by pulling out of a Thursday evening appearance on the Colbert Report, a speaking engagement at an event in Cedar Rapids, Iowa , and a cancellation of his giving the keynote address at the Fayette County Republican Picnic in Iowa.

What’s more is, that there seems to be no good reasons for these cancellations. A review of the campaign’s schedule does not reveal any schedule conflicts with the three cancelled appearances. In fact the Cain campaign has nothing at all scheduled on the three dates in question. This all leads one to wonder as to why Herman Cain would give up the chance to appear before a national audience on the Colbert Report , and with the Iowa Straw Poll just about two weeks away, why would he pass up two premium speaking engagements in the very state that will conduct that all important symbolic poll?

From the very beginning, Herman Cain’s presidential path was plotted out on a steep incline. Still his ability to articulate a truly conservative message, combined with the appeal of his outsider status, made him a novel candidate that many wanted to hear more from. This was especially the case after the first nationally aired Republican presidential debate that took place on Fox News. Some of his most enthusiastic supporters came from those within the TEA movement. But since that first Fox News debate, something known as the Bachmann campaign entered the picture.

Michele Bachmann’s entry in to the Republican presidential nomination contest sucked much of the air out of Herman Cain’sign campa. But Bachmann alone can not be blamed for the faltering Cain Campaign.   A slew of staff resignations, especially within his Iowa organization, have added to the slowing down of Cain’s momentum.

Still, these factors would not explain why “The Hermanator” cancelled three very valuable, expense free, high profile events that do not conflict with any other “scheduled” campaign activity. Additionally, Cain has only two campaign events scheduled this week and non until at least Friday of next week. Such a slimming down of the schedule leads me to believe that there are one of two things at work here. Herman Cain could be sensing that his campaign’s momentum is not at a pace that is fast enough to catch up to the front of the field of candidates. As a result Cain is therefore just biding his time till the Iowa Straw Poll in Ames, in case by some chance he finishes strong enough to give him hope of more forward momentum. Or there could be a more serious and most unfortunate circumstance behind it all.

In 2006, Cain began a battle with stage IV cancer in both his colon and his liver. Those suffering with Stage IV tumors have only a 10 percent survival rate, yet Herman Cain bravely and miraculously beat the odds. Studies have indicated that the chance for recurrence of certain cancers such as Stage IV colorectal cancer is in excess of 41%. While this is purely conjecture, the early treatment for a reoccurrence could explain why Cain has been cancelling events instead of  just folding up the presidential campaign tent. Hopefully, this is not the case, but a lack of any further explanation of a schedule that is light on events and heavy on cancellations, gives one cause to wonder what exactly is behind it all.

The most likely scenario is that Herman Cain is just accepting the writing on the wall regarding his chances of winning the nomination among the existing field of candidates.

For many, it looks like Herman Cain’s campaign reached its peek, the height of which was now many weeks ago. Even in the area of fundraising, while Cain’s most recent quarterly filing with the FEC boasted a haul of $2.46 million, was half the amount that Michele Bachmann raised. Cain’s fundraising was still better than others like Gary Johnson and Rick Santorum who raised a measly $582,348 but when compared to frontrunner Mitt Romney’s second quarter report of $18.25 million, Herman Cain’s 2.46 million in fundraising is a mere drop in the bucket .

Bookmark and Share

Does Newt Gingrich Deserve Another Chance?

Bookmark and Share    Going so long without a clear and popular frontrunner with a willingness to run in the Republican presidential field has forced many to create an almost impossible standard for those who are willing to run or even think about running for President. Republicans have themselves been the most critical but nearly all voters and pundits have become frustrated by the fact that none of the candidates or potential candidates are perfect. While I too would love a perfect candidate to suddenly materialize, I have also come to grips with the fact that there is no perfect candidate. For that reason, perhaps more than most observers, I have had a genuine willingness to give the entire field a fair chance to prove who is the best candidate.

I have been especially willing to give Newt Gingrich a chance.

No matter what, for his past achievements, Newt is a remarkable political leader. But as it turns out, one of the best things about Newt Gingrich, is turning out to be the most damaging thing to his chances of being elected President.

Gingrich is a leader who is eager to think outside of the box and go against the grain. He is undeniably innovative and always seeking and coming up with original legislative solutions that are free market based and require as little government involvement as possible. And while often viewed as an establishment politician, his independent thinking and penchant for going against the flow, makes him a true leader with an anti-establishment streak that could and should appeal to the growing TEA Party movement. Yet these same qualities that make Gingrich a uniquely qualified prospect for President, have come to seemingly derail his presidential candidacy. All of these qualities are based on an apprehension for discipline. Newt prefers to break rules rather than follow them. For him conventional rules lead to traditional thinking which he feels stifles the pace of innovation and leaves one mired in the past.

For Newt, a traditional campaign was not good enough. His dislike of a standard regimen along with a typical politicians ego that has him believing he is so special that he need not run a campaign like “traditional” candidates, has led to the resignation of his leadership team and a short term collapse of his campaign that is looking like the beginning of the end for his presidential ambitions. As such, as talented as Newt Gingrich is, it is becoming apparent that his talents are not suited for being the country’s only nationally elected leader.

In a nation that needs leadership that is modest, honest, and shrewd, I have come to conclude that Newt lacks two out of three of those prerequisites. His lack of modesty prevents him from even being honest with himself. So much so, that he can not, or is not, willing to realize that he is no more special than any other candidate in this race. By not accepting that, Newt is at a disadvantage, a disadvantage that his leadership team sees quite clearly, but that Newt quite clearly does not see. This then begs the question, if Newt is so arrogant that he can’t even properly lead a campaign which is designed to serve his own best interests, than can he do proper service to a job which has the sole purpose of serving the nation’s best interests?

There is still time for Gingrich to prove that he  has the judgment needed. But much of that opportunity requires a willingness by conservatives to still consider Gingrich as a viable candidate.  He may have exhausted their willingness to give him another chance.  But now that hehas  returned from his very inappropriately timed vacation to Greece that followed the bungled announcement of his presidential candidacy, the reality check that the en masse resignation of 16 members of his leadership team provided him, might be enough to get Newt on track. Unless of course it is too late.

Much of the team that abandoned him, quickly aligned themselves with candidates who will are running against Newt. On top of that, some of the other most talented operatives out there have already been snatched up by many of those same candidates. So it is hard to say if Newt can now assemble a major league campaign team with a minor league staff.

As much as I want to give Newt Gingrich a chance to show the promise of his potential that I do believe is there, with the clock ticking, even, I am beginning to close the door on his candidacy. I deeply believe that we have yet to begin to see just how good many of the candidates in the Republican presidential field can be. Part of that thinking is based upon the magic that I know a good campaign do. A good campaign can turn an obscure Governor of a relatively small Southern state and make them the hope of a nation, i.e. Carter and Clinton. But as we have seen with Carter and Clinton, for a good candidate to become a truly good President, they need more than just a good campaign. Eventually the campaign ends and leading must begin. Up till now, despite the personal indiscretions which remained personal and were not national scandals, and despite an initially rocky start to his campaign, I believed that Newt Gingrich could serve the conservative purpose as President. I believed that he could effectively administer limited government in limited areas where it was absolutely necessary but otherwise release the genius of the American people from the chains of excessive regulation and taxation.

The problem is that I also believe there are several others who have that ability. Of those running, or with the realistic potential to run, I believe it could be Palin, Santorum, Romney, Pawlenty, Rick Perry, or even Herman Cain. And right now, after seeing how hard it has been for Newt Gingrich to prove he has the judgment and skills that it takes to administer the conservative ideology that we share into government , I am holding out more hope for any of those other names to have a better ability to do so than Newt seems to have.

I will still keep an open to mind to the possibilities. In 2012 we Republicans must, I repeat, must get it right. And if Newt doesn’t get things right fast, he will remain a leader who I believe did great things as Speaker of the House and who is full of good ideas, but does not have the ability to implement those ideas as President.

Bookmark and Share

Newt Gingrich Announces His Presidential Candidacy

Gingrich Presents His Tax Plan in New Hampshire

Bookmark and Share Speaking to an audience at New Hampshires St. Anselm College in Manchester, Newt Gingrich laid out a tax plan that claims will shift nearly 2/3 of the people on unemployment and dependent on government, into becoming independent, self sufficient, taxpayers and thereby be the single biggest step you can take back toward balancing the budget,

The former Speaker of the House and likely presidential candidate called for cutting the capital gains tax to zero, making the so-called George Bush tax cuts permanent, eliminating the estate tax, an allowance for companies to write off 100% of new equipment purchases in the first year, and a 12.5 percent corporate tax rate.

Gingrich explained that reasonable tax rates will prevent companies like General Electric from sheltering profits to avoid paying federal taxes. He also stated that the slight increase of jobs recently added to the market only occurred after President agreed to extend the Bush tax cuts for another year. He added though, that businesses still remain leery to adding jobs because those tax cuts are set to expire and if they do, businesses will take a hit that they are prepared for.

Gingrichs plan is seemingly sound, but is it truly brave and bold, or is it just the same cut tax mantra that Republicans have always rightly called for? Dont get me wrong, tax cuts are necessary, but we can keep on raising and lowering taxes and tinkering with a broken tax code for the next two hundred years. Or we can fix the broken and antiquated tax system by calling for bold reforms such as a flat tax.

Personally I am disappointed in Newts tax proposal. As someone who has a proven record as an innovator, I expect more from him than the same old solution, a solution we must repeat every time Democrats raise taxes. A Flat tax would truly spur economic growth. In the case of former Soviet bloc nations, such a taxcode created some of the fastest growing economies in the world. A Flat tax is one rate for one nation and its time for Republicans to demonstrate the will to bring about true reform and show some true vision.

Bookmark and Share

Newt Explore 2012. Gingrich Launches His Presidential Exploratory Committee

NewtExplore2012Bookmark and Share Newt Gingrich today launched his Presidential exploratory committee, not with an announcement and press conference, but with the introduction of Newt Explore 2012, a website for his presidential exploratory committee. In it Newt writes;

“America’s greatness lies in “We the People.”

We are a nation like no other. To remain so will require the dedicated participation of every citizen, of every neighborhood, of every background. This is the responsibility of a free people.

We are excited about exploring whether there is sufficient support for my potential candidacy for President of this exceptional country.”

Newt also set up a Facebook pagefor his exploratory committee.

His website is interactive andin exploring options for his potential candidacy in 2012 he asks that people use his websiteto send him and his teamyour questions and ideas.

The establishment of an exploratorycommittee is a necessary legal step encouraged by federal election law. As an exploratory committee, one can test the waters with polls and trips to events without having to make public where the money comes from.

Bookmark and Share

Newt Gingrich to Announce First Step in Run for President on Thursday

Bookmark and ShareAs mentioned by White House 2012 this past weekend, Newt Gingrich is said to be beginning a run for the Republican presidential nomination. Sources close to Gingrich and in Washington have reportedly been told to get ready to travel to Atlanta Thursday when Gingrich will announce the creation of a presidential exploratory committee.

Other sources claim that some of the closest aides to the former Speaker are beginning to move their email addresses away from his political organization, American Solutions, and toward a strictly political campaign committee mail address.

As reported here in White House 2012 during January of this year, Gingrich had already picked out office space in Atlanta, Georgia where he intends to base his campaign headquarters.

If Gingrich does indeed announce his creation of a presidential exploratory committee, he will become thefourth major contender to take this first step toward a run for the Presidential nomination. Mitt Romney was the first, Tim Pawlenty, was the second, andboth arestill supposedly in the exploratory stages. Former Rick Santorum is the other major contender to have done the same. Lesser known names who have established exploratory committees include, former New Mexico Governor Gary Johnson, activist Fred Karger of California, and former radio talk show host and Godfather Pizza CEO, Herman Cain.

Establishing exploratory committees are largely a sign of a definite run for President. They are usually precursors that give a candidate two bangs for the buck. It allows them to get the attention of two announcements, the creation of their committee and then their actual official campaign kick off announcement. But it also creates a technical legal ability for a candidate who expects to spend more than $5,000 while contemplating an actual run for office. According to election law, exploratory money may be raised without the full disclosure of sources required of true candidates. Only when the candidate drops the exploratory label does the full responsibility of transparency apply.

In addition to these exploratory committees being used as a transitional phase for their bookkeeping but often mainly for the media attention that they afford to a candidate.

Correction;

In the above post I erroneously stated that former New Mexico Governor Gary Johnson hasan existingexploratory committee. That is a mistake. Governor Johnson goes to great lengthsto point out that he is not a candidate and is currently operating a 501(c)4 committee, which by law precludes him from running for office through that committee. While Governor Johnson is widely expected to run, he is not officially doing so yet with an exploratory committee.

This is something which I should be acutely aware of since Governor Johnson has declined an interview with White House 2012 on the grounds that he is a 501 (c)4 and not running for President at the moment.

Thanks to White House 2012 readerBen forcorrecting the record.

Bookmark and Share

“Happy Birthday to the TEA Party” from Newt Gingrich

Bookmark and ShareOn the heels of a week which rumor has it that former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich may announce his establishment of a presidential exploratory committee, Newt issued a happy birthday message to the TEA Party movement. In a tweet on his Twitter account, the former Speaker wrote;

“Happy Birthday to the Tea Party Movement!”

He linked his message to his Facebook page whichoutined a historical foundation for the TEA Party which places the date of the creation of the TEA Party on February 27th 2009.

In it he writes;

Fed up with a Republican Party that forgot its reformer roots and a Democratic Party where every solution involved more government, tea party rallies began brewing in over 50 cities with an estimated 30,000 people attending.”

Gingrich goes on to write that those numbers increased to 1.5 million two months later on April 15th,. tax filing day. The remainder of his message discusses the big government mentality which helped the rise of the TEA Party and elegantly concludes by him writing;

“Through countless hours, an undying faith in America, and sheer force of will, the Tea Party movement has turned our political system on its head.

In doing so, the movement has built upon the great legacy of our forebears in Boston Harbor, who ignited a revolution of liberty over 237 years ago.

Happy second Birthday to the Tea Party movement.

Here’s to many more.

Your Friend,

Newt”

Gingrich’s salute to the TEA Party is most definitely a sincere one. Newt has always opposed bureaucratic government growth and solutions in favor of solutions solved through individual responsibility and the free market. But at the same time, his hat tip to the TEA movement is also a signal of just how critically important TEA Party support is for anyone with any desire to win the G.O.P. presidential nomination as well as any other elected office.

Could Newt be setting the stage for a long courtship of the TEA Party? Most definitely.

And it is my opinion, that despite Newt’s insider image his courtship does have the potential to blossom in to a romance that can help him greatly in early primary and caucus states like Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina.

Bookmark and Share

Gingrich Tells House Republicans to Place Budget Cuts Over Government Shutdown

Bookmark and Share As President Obama and Senate Democrats face-off with House Republicans on matters of the budget that could force a March 6th shutdown of the federal government, former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich recently penned an excellent editorial in the Washington Post which lent advice to Republicans that wasbased upon his own firs hand experience . It was 16 years ago when the Gingrich led House of Representatives and President Clinton clashed over the budget and actually forced a shutdown of government.

In his editorial Gingrich explains that at a crucial juncture in 1995, after technically fulfilling several budgetary aspects of the Contract With America , he and fellow Republicans weren’t interested in procedural success but instead understood that they were elected to deliver results. So the House Republican leadership decided that they would voluntarily balance the budget eventhough they were unable toachievea balanced budgetamendment mandating such a thing.

The former Speaker states that after the House adopted a timetable and created a plan that would end deficit spending by 2002, the Clinton White House and Senate Democrats set out to test our seriousness. They made a calculated, cynical decision to use the threat of a presidential veto – which would close the government – to insist that we drop our balanced budget.

Gingrich adds that:

it was President Bill Clinton’s veto of our budget in December 1995 that closed the government. The White House knew that it could use the power of the presidency and the support of liberal media to blame us. So, we faced a choice. We could cave in and be accepted by the Washington establishment, or we could stand firm for a balanced budget for the American people. We decided to stick to our principles through a very contentious and difficult period. Our attempt to balance the federal budget was distorted in the news media as an effort to ruin family vacations, frustrate visitors to the nation’s capital and prevent government employees from going to work. For the Republican leadership, the effort to hold together the House and Senate caucuses while negotiating with the White House became extraordinarily exhausting.

But in the end it was Republican determination which ultimately produced the first of four consecutive balanced budgets since the 1920s balanced budgets that paid off more than $450 billion in federal debt, overhauled welfare, strengthened Medicare and enacted the first tax cut in 16 years. Gingrich added;

It was this tax cut that boosted economic growth and allowed us to balance the budget four years earlier than projected. During my years as speaker, more than 8.4 million new jobs were created, reducing the national unemployment rate from 5.6 percent to 4.3 percent.”

After laying out the case Newt urges the G.O.P. to work to keep the government open, unless it requires breaking their word to the American people and giving up their principles. It his belief that House Republicans should give President Obama and Senate Democrats the opportunity to sign significant spending reductions and keep the government open, or to veto their cuts and close the government. And if they go for the second option Republicans must;

make clear that it is their stubborn liberalism that is closing the government.

The approach which Gingrich takes is both a moral one and a strategic one. Morally we as Republicans know that the moral thing to do is to begin to make sure that we stop spending more than we have. Furthermore; we realize that the proper way to do this is by cutting spending not raising taxes. Therefore the Gingrich approach is the right thing to do. It is in fact what they were elected to do.

Strategically though Gingrich is also correct to warn us to preempt the liberal media biases and general liberal spin machine that will undoubtedly try to paint Republicans as the heartless fiends who would should down government and take from the poor to give to the rich.

For Gingrichs advice to work, every Republican entity from the RNC to state and local Republican committees and from the Republican Governors Association the National Republican Senatorial and Congressional campaign committees must get on the same page and join with TEA Party groups across the nation in a campaign that can make Democrats inability to stop spending like drunken sailors the blame for such a a government shutdown.

Only if the forces which elected the new Republican House majority, stay united behind the issues they voted on, and only if House Republicans prove to be committed to those issues will it work. Without such a partnership of commitment to cuts by legislators and of , commitment by voters to the legislators who support such cuts, the news will not be good for the G.O.P. But if this partnership holds firm the real bad guys can take the heat for their real bad decisions.

I would also add this. Republicans should be much more afraid of compromising their principles than of a government shutdown. If they do not go all out to achieve the significant budget cuts they seek, voters will turn their backs on them for years to come. For many voters, 2010 was a last chance for Democrats to prove themselves to be sincere fiscal conservatives not liberal spenders. As such if the government remains open on March 6th but Republicans failed to achieve any significant spending solutions, the majorities that elected them in to office will be much less inclined to vote for them again. On the other hand, if there is a government shutdown and Republicans have shown that it is because Democrats refused to make necessary spending cuts, those who supported them before, will continue to do so and more will join them.

The bottom line is that Newt is right. Now if he is willing to take this message and translate it into a Republican campaign for President, it just make have a lot of play.

Bookmark and Share

CPAC 2011: Newt Gingrich’s Speech at CPAC

Bookmark and Share In what can be described as a solid foundation to run a presidential campaign on, Newt Gingrich spoke to CPACstriking many chords with the conservative audience that he addressed. In it he indirectly laid out some of the immediate priorities that he would act upon if he were President. He outlined, in detail,what he called two large strategies that would lead to jobs creation. It included a call to end the environmentalProtection Agencies’war against American oil and gasand the creationof an Environmental Solutions Agency that would replace the Environmental Protection Agency and create a truly American energy plan.

In his speech, Newt suggested that President Obama be invited to give the keynote address at the 2012 Conservative Political Action Conference, but only if he makes good on his perceived attempts to move to the center. According to Gingrich he could prove himself sincere in that goal and be deserving of the invite to CPAC if he did the following seven things;

  1. Sign the repeal of Obamacare
  2. Sign tort reform for doctors
  3. Sign the permanent repeal of the death tax
  4. Sign a new Hyde Amendment so that no taxpayer money funds abortions
  5. Sign a new Paul Ryan drafted budget act to control spending and move to a balanced budget
  6. Sign a law to decisively control the border now
  7. Sign a 1oth Amendment Implementation Act that returns power to the states and the people thereof

While Newt’s speech was not a rah-rah, inspirational call to arms for conservatives, instead of coming off as a conservative firebrand, he presented himself as the quintessential optimistic, ideas man and proved that underestimating him in a potential 2012 race for the presidency would be a foolish thing to do.

Bookmark and Share

Newt Gingrich vs. Howard Dean Debate Shows Why Newt Can’t Be Underestimated in 2012

Bookmark and Share On Tuesday, C-Span aired a live debate between former Vermont Governor and DNC Chairman Howard Dean, and former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich. The forum was the first joint venture between College Democrats and College Republicans on the campus of George Washington University. Together the two partisan political entities hammered out the details andarranged fora debate that was engaging and enlightening.

While Dean and Gingrich demonstrated their usual ideological passion, both men avoided any truly partisan bickering and instead embarked upon an insightful exchange of ideas and opinions. To be sure, there were differences but each man expressed themselves in eloquently articulate ways that at times, won both of them points from both sides of the aisle in the campus auditorium. Right out of the gate, Newt noted where he parted from where during his opening statement, Howard referred to America as a multicultural nation. Gingrich, in his opening statement stated We are not a multicultural country. We are a multiethnic country.

Newt explained that people come here to become American and be a part of an American civilization which is very different from Europe and Asia and Africa and demonstrated that in the United States, we come together to work as one common nation not divided by different cultures.

For Republicans, Newt Gingrich provided good reason for him to be given a fair hearing in the Republican presidential nomination process. Throughout the debate, Gingrich showed himself to be quite artful and adept at laying out the problems that our nation faces. He also proved himself to be one of the best spokesman for conservatism in America that we have today. Be it on immigration, healthcare reform, gay marriage or terrorism, Newt Gingrich has an unmatched ability to paint a picture of conservative thinking that is hard for even the most liberal of Democrats to not understand and see a degree of logic in.

The only moment during the debate that approached being confrontational came toward the end of the forum when Taylor Barnes a student from the audience set up a question regarding Republican opposition to the gay agenda and asked Newt Gingrich if he truly believed that LGBT individuals should not have the right to marry those who they truly love, I ask that you tell all of us, all of my friends who happen to be gay, why you believe that right now? During the question, Gingrich sat back in his seat and looked at the questioner with an expression of consternation, but when it was time for him to respond, he leaned forward and said Look Im quite happy to say that I come out of a tradition, which is several thousand years old, that says marriage is between a man and a woman. And I am prepared to defend that tradition, and I happen to believe it and I believe I have as much right to my opinion that you have to yours.

In its entirety, the Gingrich-Dean GWU debate is one that is worth anyones while to watch. Insofar as it pertains to Republicans, after viewing it, many will begin to understand why I have consistently stated that Newt Gingrich has the ability to surprise many if he does actually run for President. If Newt becomes an official candidate for the Republican nomination, no one should write him anytime soon and in the end, no matter who wins the nomination, Newts active participation in the process will do nothing but help the cause of conservatism in America.

Bookmark and Share
%d bloggers like this: