Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Newt Gingrich The Grinch Who Stole Conservatism
The South Carolin Conservative Dot Com ^ | April 24, 2012 | By: Javan Browder

Posted on 04/27/2012 10:34:48 AM PDT by jacknhoo

You’re a mean one Mr. Grinch You really are a heel. You’re as cuddly as a cactus, And as charming as an eel, Mr. Grinch! You’re a bad banana, With a greasy black peel! You’re a monster, Mr. Grinch! Your heart’s an empty hole. Your brain is full of spiders. You’ve got garlic in your soul, Mr. Grinch!

Well, that’s a pretty good beginning at describing how most conservatives feel about Newt Gingrich these days. More of that later. Of course, many of us felt this way before the 2012 GOP presidential primary began, and have been vindicated as Newt has once again shown his true self to the world.

There are probably zealot followers of Newt who are stacking the wood to burn me at the stake as I write this. But I have long since stopped with political politeness toward those in the GOP who claim conservatism, yet through their actions continue to set the conservative movement back. No one has done that more than Newt Gingrich.

As the time was coming around toward the primary, most conservatives longed to have a strong conservative candidate emerge as the one that we could get behind. Knowing that Massachusetts moderate Mitt Romney was the establishment’s pick, and that the media would be strongly behind him all the way; we desired for unity among conservatives so that Romney might be defeated.

One phrase that has been repeated over and over is “anyone but Romney.” It really didn’t seem like that tall of an order, and it really shouldn’t have been. On the heels of the tea party’s great successes in the 2010 primaries I fully expected for conservatives to rally at some point and send Mr. “Obamaneycare” into political retirement.

Early on the field was very crowded. Some of us conservatives were with Bachmann, others with Santorum, Cain, or Perry. But who would have ever thought that any conservatives would have rallied around Newt Gingrich of all possibilities? Considering that Newt last held office in 1999 and had a coup held against him in 1997 by the conservative wing of the GOP. Considering that Newt stepped down in shame after he led the GOP to the single greatest loss in Congress that ANY party in history had ever suffered in the 1998 midterm elections, who would have thought it?

I wouldn’t touch you With a thirty-nine-and-a-half foot pole! You’re a vile one, Mr. Grinch! You have termites in your smile. You have all the tender sweetness Of a seasick crocodile, Mr. Grinch! Given the choice between the two of you, I’d take the seasick crocodile! You’re a foul one, Mr. Grinch! You’re a nasty, wasty skunk! Your heart is full of unwashed socks. Your soul is full of gunk, Mr. Grinch!

But slowly and surely the field narrowed as Cain dropped out due to scandal, then Bachmann after Iowa, and then Perry before South Carolina. Rick Santorum sailed almost totally under the radar until his surprise win in Iowa and seemed to be the clear conservative choice going forward. Newt finished a very distant 4th place in Iowa, and then 5th behind Santorum in New Hampshire. So going into South Carolina it would have seemed the better part of valor for Newt to have dropped out and helped consolidate the conservative “not- Romney” vote for Santorum. But it was not to be. In fact, Mr. 4th/5th place Gingrich was actually calling for Santorum to drop out and back him at that point. What arrogance!

Newt greatly benefited from the emotions of the moment surrounding the Charleston debate, and won South Carolina. Well ok, at that point Santorum, Romney, and Newt had each won 1 state, so each had a claim at staying in and fighting it out. In fact, it looked like Newt might just ride the wave of momentum from South Carolina on to the nomination. But then came Florida, where Newt, pandering to the NASA community literally promised the moon with his wild and wacky moon colony he promised to build before the end of his first term. Florida was a bust for Newt as Romney defeated him badly.

Then came Nevada where Newt finished another distant 2nd place, and afterwards gave an unprecedented speech blaming everyone but himself for his demise. But Nevada was actually the last state that Newt would finish as high as second place all the way until winning his home state of Georgia on Super Tuesday. Next it was Rick Santorum who surprised the world by sweeping all three states of Minnesota, Missouri and Colorado in one day. So at that point Santorum had won 4 states with Romney also having won 4. With Newt flailing, it seemed time for him to drop out and solidify the conservative vote behind the last conservative standing- Rick Santorum. But no, Newt promised his new “southern strategy” where he would concentrate on the southern states to stage his comeback.

The three words that best describe you Are as follows, and I quote, “Stink, stank, stunk!” You’re a rotter, Mr. Grinch! You’re the king of sinful sots! Your heart’s a dead tomato, Splotched with moldy, purple spots, Mr. Grinch!

But Newt’s southern strategy also went bust as Santorum took Tennessee and Oklahoma on Super Tuesday. Then Santorum swept Alabama and Mississippi were Newt had campaigned heavily. Finally, Santorum took Louisiana with nearly 50% of the vote while Newt finished a distant third. So surely by then with Newt’s southern strategy having totally failed he would have seen the handwriting on the wall. Surely he would try and salvage what little respect he had left among conservatives by giving Santorum the benefit of a consolidated conservative “not-Romney” electorate as the primary calendar turned back towards Romney’s blue states.

Not so. Even with top conservative voices such as Richard Viguerie, and even Michael Reagan who had endorsed Newt now calling for him to step aside for the sake of conservatism, Newt’s massive ego would not let him. Newt even earned the name “Newt Perot.” He continued to vow to fight on until the convention in Tampa. It seemed fairly obvious to many of us all along, that Newt’s campaign had been nothing more than him dancing for the Puppet Master in order to help Romney by keeping the conservative vote split.

What’s very telling about this is that Newt has raised very little actual campaign money and is now at least $4.3 million in debt. Basically all of Newt’s big money came through his super pac - Winning Our Future. And almost all of the super pac money came from corrupt billionaire casino mogul Sheldon Adelson and his wife, a total of more than $20 million. Winning Our Future has raised a total of $23 million. Sources close to Adelson said as early on as mid February that Adelson was only funding Newt in order to help destroy Santorum’s chances of beating Romney. Further proof of that, is that Winning Our Future ran mostly anti-Santorum ads. In reality, if Newt truly was all about the conservative movement as he claims, he would have condemned the ads and focused his efforts on Romney instead of helping to destroy the only conservative candidate who had a real chance at defeating Romney. More on Adelson later.

Let’s look for a minute at Newt’s record in this primary contest:

Newt finished dead last in 21 of 36 states, which is dead last in over half of the states.

3rd place in 10 states. *3 of the 3rd place finishes came after Santorum was out of the race

2nd place in 5 states. *1 of the 2nd place finishes came after Santorum was out of the race

1st place in 2 states.

Newt has finished dead last in 4 more states than all his 1st, 2nd, and 3rd place finishes. combined, and 1 2nd place and 3 3rd place finishes came after Santorum was out of the race.

Newt had a losing record with every other candidate.

Newt 4 Romney 32

Newt 4 Santorum 27

Newt 14 Paul 22

Every other candidate beat Newt more times than Newt has beat them.

When even Ron Paul has beaten you 8 more times than you have beaten him, it’s a very sad thing. Continuing to lose to Paul should have been a wake up call for Newt to drop the heck out, but Newt will only follow where his ego leads him.

Let’s consider for a minute what would have happened if Newt wasn’t solely driven by ego. What if he was truly committed to the conservative movement and had gotten out before Super Tuesday? Well, it’s clear that would have meant that Santorum would have won the key state of Ohio, as well as Alaska, and Georgia in addition to the other 3 states he won on Super Tuesday. Santorum would have taken 6 of 11 states in one day leaving Romney with only 5 instead of the 7 he got. Think of the total game changing momentum that would have caused in Santorum’s favor. Then Santorum would have gone on to win Wisconsin as well. If Newt had dropped out when he really should have after New Hampshire, then Santorum would have also won South Carolina and could have dealt Romney an effective death blow in Romney’s home state of Michigan. That would have given Santorum 6 more states and lots more delegates, and denied Romney 5 states and many delegates.

The whole argument from the Newt camp was that his being in the race was helping defeat Romney by Newt getting delegates instead of Romney. But that argument is absurd because it’s a far more effective way to defeat an enemy by having one strong challenger instead of multiple weaker ones. This is especially true for the winner take all states like Wisconsin, because Newt prevented Santorum from even getting any delegates and allowed Romney to take them all. If Newt had dropped out before South Carolina, Santorum would have won at least 16 states instead of 11, and Romney only 15 instead of 18. If he had dropped out before Super Tuesday it would have been Santorum 14, Romney 16, (Newt 1). I will not even bother to get into how the delegate count would have gone.

Your soul is an apalling dump-heap, Overflowing with the most disgraceful assortment of deplorable rubbish imaginable, Mangled-up in tangled-up knots! You nauseate me, Mr. Grinch! With a nauseous super naus! You’re a crooked jerky jockey, And you drive a crooked hoss, Mr. Grinch! You’re a three-decker sauerkraut and toadstool sandwich, With arsenic sauce!

As the process lingered on, it was becoming all about preventing Romney from getting to 1,144 delegates and allowing the convention in Tampa in August to be open and contested. But since Newt served as Romney’s wing man helping to destroy Santorum, we can all but rule out that possibility now. Romney will most likely coast onto his needed delegates and the nomination without a strong candidate such as Santorum to stop him. And no, Ron Paul is not a strong candidate. Ron Paul took on Romney one on one in Virginia due to no other candidates making the ballot, but Paul could only muster 40% of the vote. Paul hasn’t won a single state, though he has managed to take some extra delegates by hijacking delegate conventions in states like Minnesota and Missouri. But without winning at least 5 states neither Paul nor Newt one will be able to get their names on the ballot at the convention.

Newt has had to lay off one third of his campaign staff and is over $4 million in campaign debt. Even his flagship “The Gingrich Group” has filed for bankruptcy within the last few weeks, which is only one of at least a dozen such enterprises that Newt has led into bankruptcy over the last 30 years. But still Newt continued to flail around jousting at windmills.

After finishing dead last in 4 of 5 states on Tuesday, Newt has finally decided to drop out at long last. Though it is satisfying to see him admit defeat, it comes way too late to do have any real meaning or give any help to a fellow conservative such as Santorum. Had it come weeks or months earlier it would have certainly meant the defeat of Romney, and victory for a conservative.

To me the timing of Newt dropping out is very telling. He stayed in long enough to make certain Santorum was out, but had he dropped out then, it would have been obvious that he was the intentional spoiler. He continued to run a ghost campaign knowing that he would lose badly on Tuesday and then used that as the excuse to drop out. Adelson’s wife recently gave another $5 million to Newt’s super pac even though the Adelsons had changed their support over to Romney and Sheldon had stated that Newt was “at the end of his game” weeks ago.

The three headed snake of the GOP establishment – Sheldon Adelson, Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney

Even though Newt’s campaign was $4.3 million in debt, Winning Our Future made no plans to spend any of the $5 million in any way. It seems that the plan was/is for it to sit there; because once Newt is officially no longer a candidate he can use it as he pleases with one exception, – he cannot use it to pay off campaign debt by law. However, he can use it in any other way he pleases and can actually pay off the campaign debt in an indirect way. For instance, he could purchase $5 million in property and then sell it and use the profits to pay off the debt. He could also put it into one of his business ventures and then give himself a pay bonus and use it to pay the debt. The point here being that Newt has more money at his disposal than he has debt; and it was given to him by someone who was supporting Romney at the time it was given, and given by a person who knew that Newt was not going to be able to win or even continue in the race at that point.

There is no “smoking gun” that directly proves that Adelson was funding Newt as a means to help Romney, but speculation has been risng for quite a while. We know for sure out of Adelson’s own mouth that he wanted to help destroy Santorum. We also know that Adelson had long since given up on Newt and was backing Romney for weeks prior to giving additional millions to Newt. We also know that Adelson has said that he is pro-choice and socially liberal. It would stand to reason then that he would have interest in helping Romney because of Romney’s pro-choice and socially moderate stances.

Whether Adelson’s game plan all along was to help Romney, or if that became plan B for him is not 100% clear. But what is clear is that Adelson had his bets hedged. (What else would we expect from corrupt guy who has made billions from casinos?) I smell a rat and say that 2+2 = payoff…….

Newt Gingrich is a political has-been that never really was, and never will be. Unless a miracle happens between now and the convention, Newt will always be remembered as the one who cost conservatives the single most important election in modern times. He will be known as the “Grinch Who Stole Conservatism”. At least the Grinch who stole Christmas eventually saw the light and gave Christmas back to the people of Whoville. But Newt cannot give back the 2012 GOP nomination to conservatives. In fact, by ensuring Romney the nomination he may well have handed Obama his second term.

It’s important to point out that the people who supported Newt also bear a great deal of the blame in ruining conservative chances in 2012, especially those who call themselves “tea partiers.” As someone who has been part of the tea party movement from the beginning, I knew that Newt Gingrich was last candidate I should get behind. But many others ignored the warnings. They got caught up in a bloodlust to see Obama embarrassed in a debate and fed the troll, so to speak. They acted as co-conspirators with Newt in stealing conservatism, and they will share in whatever consequences the are to come.

Yes indeed, you’re a mean one……. Mr. GinGrinch!

By: Javan Browder

TOPICS: Government; Politics
KEYWORDS: 1newt4mitt; 1percentsantorum; 1rick4gope; 1rick4mitt; 1rick4rick; 2percentsantorum; attackfromtheleft; authorondrugs; bigots4rick; bigots4santorum; bloodythursday; bloodythursdaypart2; demonizingnewt; evangelicalhaters; evangelicals; gds; gingrich; gingrich4romney; liberaldrivel; mittlovesnewt; mittthanksnewt; nds; newt4romney; newtbashing; newtbashingcontinues; newtbashingpart2; newthatingcontinues; notonlyliberalshate; paul; religioushaters; rewritinghistory; romney; romneyspew; santorum; santorumitedelusions; santorumitefantasy; santorumitehaters; santorumzealots; santorumzombies; waronnewt; whydidudoitnewt; whysantorumwhines; writerisondrugs; writerondrugs
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-74 last
To: McGruff

1974 - At age 31, Newt makes his first bid for Congress against Conservative Democrat incumbent, Jack Flynt. He runs as a so-called “Progressive Republican” far to the left of the very Conservative Flynt. Newt is supported by his liberal colleagues from college and is endorsed by environmentalists, including the League of Conservation Voters. He loses.

1976 - In 1976 Newt made his second bid for Congress. He again runs as a left-wing Republican Progressive, with environmentalists’ backing. Again, he loses.

1978 - Newt runs for Congress for a third time. With Conservative Democrat Jack Flynt retiring, Newt changes his stripes and runs as a Conservative, against a more liberal Democrat.
May 16, 1979 - As a freshman Congressman, Newt immediately betrays his Conservative platform. He votes for a federal land grab that put tens of millions of acres in the hands of Washington bureaucrats, under the guise of so-called “environmentalism”. To the astute observer, this behaviour is unsurprising given Newt’s previous obsession with environmentalism as a College teacher.

June 28, 1979 - Gingrich voted for an oil windfall profits tax in 1979, which was signed by Jimmy Carter.

September 20, 1979 - Gingrich voted to raise the debt ceiling.

September 27, 1979 - Gingrich voted to establish the Federal Department of Education

October 23, 1979 - Gingrich voted for gasoline rationing and Jimmy Carter’s Emergency Energy Conservation Act.

October 24, 1979 - Gingrich voted for federal farm subsidies to encourage the use of green energy on farms.

October 31, 1979 - Gingrich voted for Jimmy Carter’s “Energy Mobilization Board.” Carter wanted the authority to ration gasoline, form an ‘energy mobilization board,’ create a bureaucracy to guarantee that we would ‘never use more foreign oil than we did in 1977,’ set oil import quotas and develop solar power. ‘These efforts will cost money,’ Carter explained, “a lot of money….”

November 8, 1979 - Gingrich voted for federal subsidies on milk prices.

December 4, 1979 - Gingrich voted for federally-funded wind energy research.

December 18, 1979 - Gingrich voted in favor of the Chrysler Bailout and a 3-year wage freeze on Chrysler workers.

December 19, 1979 - Gingrich voted to extend HUD programs in 1979.

April 16, 1980 - Gingrich voted for another federal land grab, the 2.3M-Acre Idaho River of No Return Wilderness.

June 4, 1980 - Newt voted to raise the debt ceiling for the second time.

September, 1980 - Gingrich’s wife Jackie is taken to hospital to be treated for uterine cancer.

Stephen Talbot of Salon wrote...

“The most notorious incident in Gingrich’s marriage ... was when he cornered Jackie in her hospital room where she was recovering from uterine cancer surgery and insisted on discussing the terms of the divorce he was seeking. Shortly after that infamous encounter, Gingrich refused to pay his alimony and child-support payments. The First Baptist Church in his hometown had to take up a collection to support the family Gingrich had deserted. Six months after divorcing Jackie, Gingrich married a younger woman, Marianne, with whom he had been having an affair.”

Peter Boyer of Vanity Fair wrote that...

“She [Jackie] says that Gingrich walked out on her in the spring of 1980. That fall, while she was in the hospital recovering from surgery for uterine cancer, he appeared at her bedside with a yellow legal pad outlining the details for their divorce.”

February 5, 1981 - Gingrich votes to raise the debt ceiling for the third time.

June 24, 1981 - Gingrich voted for continued authorizations of the federal Corporation of Public Broadcasting in 1981, and again in 1984, and resisted efforts to cut the public broadcasting budget.

July 28, 1981 - Gingrich voted for the creation of the U.S. Travel and Tourism Administration.

August, 1981 - Newt Gingrich marries Marianne, the woman with whom he was having an affair.

October 28, 1981 - Gingrich voted for increased powers to the FDIC to bail out struggling savings and loans through reorganization, purchase of bad assets, or recapitalization (TARP-Lite).

December 16, 1981 - Gingrich voted for an increase in taxes on coal producers in 1981.

March 9, 1982 - Gingrich voted for federally-funded research on potatoes (no joke - Bill was called POTATO RESEARCH PROMOTION ACT).

March 18, 1982 - Gingrich voted to reaffirm that the cash deposits are backed by the full faith and credit of the United States.

May 12, 1982 - Gingrich voted for a $1 Billion increase in federal mortgage subsidies in 1982 - condoning the federal involvement in the mortgage industry that led to the housing collapse.

May 20, 1982 - Gingrich voted to strengthen the federal home loan agencies “to ensure the availability of home mortgage loans’ - again, condoning the federal involvement in the mortgage industry that led to the housing collapse.

August 4, 1982 - Gingrich voted for another federal land grab, expanding the Sipsey Wilderness.

December 6, 1982 - Gingrich voted for an increase in the gas tax.

December 16, 1982 - Gingrich voted for another federal land grab, expanding the 1.5M-Acre Mark Twain National Forest.

April 12, 1983 - Gingrich voted for another federal land grab, a 2.3M-Acre national forest in California.

November 16, 1983 - Gingrich voted for another federal land grab, designation of large wilderness areas in Wisconsin and North Carolina.

February 9, 1984 - Gingrich voted for hundreds of millions of federal research dollars going toward environmental research and development in 1984 and 1985.

May 8, 1984 - Gingrich voted for another federal land grab, designation of large wilderness areas in Virginia.

June 28, 1984 - Gingrich votes to raise the debt ceiling for the fourth time.

October 2, 1984 - Gingrich was one of the few who voted against the 1984 bill requiring the President and Congress to submit a balanced budget.

April 2, 1987 - Gingrich co-sponsors H.R. 1934, to implement the infamous & unconstitutional “Fairness Doctrine”. Gingrich now claims he only wanted the Fairness Doctrine to hinder left-wing networks. Ronald Reagan ultimately vetoed the legislation.

April 11, 1988 - Newt says “If Bush runs as a continuation of Reaganism, I think he’ll lose.” Gingrich now repeatedly mentions Ronald Reagan positively, to improve his standing among conservatives.


February 22, 1989 - In 1989, Gingrich was one of the sponsors behind a bill that would have made controlling the growth of the world population a goal of the U.S. government. The bill was the Global Warming Prevention Act of 1989. The bill “Declares it is the policy of the United States that family planning services should be made available to all persons requesting them. Authorizes appropriations for FY 1991 through 1995 for international population and family planning assistance.”


June 9, 1989 - Newt Gingrich warns Democrats against criticizing Savings & Loan bail-out.

June 15, 1989 - Newt voted for the bail-out of Savings & Loan.

November 15, 1990 - Clean Air Act Amendments are signed into law. They contain a cap-and-trade system and are supported by the then Minority Whip, Newt Gingrich.


7 May 1991 - Newt Gingrich tells Republicans to “.. at one level, Relax and accept” abortion for the sake of Party unity.


December 8, 1993 - Gingrich preached NAFTA and whipped Republicans into supporting it. Gingrich later said NAFTA was good because it created jobs in Mexico, not the US.

September 27, 1994 - The “Contract with America” is announced. Newt Gingrich had worked hard to make sure the so-called “Contract with America” was mere tinkering on the economic front, and excluded important conservative issues like abortion. He later admitted this .

Tom Woods writes in his book Back on the Road to Serfdom (2011) ...

The failure of conservatives to make significant inroads into the federal apparatus was symbolized by the Contract with America, the series of proposals Republicans promised to support on the eve of their off-year landslide in 1994. What was portrayed as a bold array of policy initiatives was in fact a timid and insignificant list of changes that would have left the federal apparatus for all intents and purposes unchanged.

The establishmentarian Brookings Institution later correctly observed that ...

Viewed historically, the Contract represents the final consolidation of the bedrock domestic policies and programs of the New Deal, the Great Society, the post-Second World War defense establishment, and, most importantly, the deeply rooted national political culture that has grown up around them.


November, 1994 - The fake Republican revolution against big-government sweeps Gingrich into the Speakership.

Jacob G. Hornberger, Founder of the Future of Freedom Foundation, later writes ...

“With the Republican takeover of both houses of Congress in 1994, the Republicans announced that a new “revolution” had swept America, led by Senator Robert Dole and Representatives Newt Gingrich and Richard Armey. Of course, there was the famous “Contract with America,” but the provisions of that document involved minor tinkering with the system, at best.”

January 2, 1995 - Newt Gingrich says he wants the federal government to fund Ballet!, among other arts projects...

“I’d like to find some way to look at bloc-granting to the states, some money for the arts, at the state and local level. I’m for the Atlanta Ballet. I’m for the High Museum of Art or the Metropolitan Museum of Art.

January 4, 1995 - Newt Gingrich becomes Speaker of the House and recommends all members of the House read the works of Alvin and Heidi Toffler, two futurists who are pro-abortion and believe the American Constitution is outdated. In his opening speech he repeatedly praises FDR and the New Deal.

January 31, 1995 - Gingrich strongly supported Bill Clinton’s Bail-Out of the Mexican Peso, without the approval of his own Congress.

April 10, 1995 - Gingrich supports federal funding of abortion.

June 11, 1995 - Gingrich has a love-fest “debate” with President Clinton in Claremont, New Hampshire. Gingrich said he was a big fan of Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson.

July 6, 1995 - Appearing on Charlie Rose, Gingrich admits that he purposely excluded abortion from the “Contract with America” and bemoans that the Republicans wouldn’t have a majority if they excluded the pro-abortionists.

July, 1995 - In a speech at the Center for Strategic and International Affairs Gingrich brazenly admitted his disdain for the Constitution.

Gingrich told the gathering ...

“The American challenge in leading the world is compounded by our Constitution,” he said. “Under our [constitutional system] - either we’re going to have to rethink our Constitution, or we’re going to have to rethink our process of decision-making.” He went on to profess an oxymoronic belief in “very strong but limited federal government,” and pledged, “I am for the United Nations.” That is certainly no surprise since his mentor is none other than former Secretary of State and National Security Advisor Henry Kissinger (also a CFR member and one-world internationalist)

June 12, 1996 - Gingrich says there needs to be a “sense of tolerance” of abortion in the Republican Party.

July 5, 1996 - “There is alot of room in the Republican party for pro-choice republicans”

September 16, 1996 - Gingrich voted for the Lautenberg Gun Ban.

September 28, 1996 - Gingrich voted for the “Gun Free School Zones Act”, making schools easier targets.

December, 1996 - Gingrich recieves a “D” rating from Gun Owners of America.

January 17, 1998 - Gingrich gets up at an RNC meeting, and announces that he’ll campaign for Republican candidates who support Partial Birth Abortion. He was responding to a motion that was put forth to ban funding to Republican candidates that support Partial Birth abortion. He urged the members to defeat the motion, an utterly disgusting act.

March 1, 1998 - Appearing on Iowa Public Television, Gingrich renews his support for ethanol subsidies.

April 6, 1998 - Appearing on Charlie Rose, Gingrich admits the failure of the “Contract with America”.

June 26, 1998 - Speaker Gingrich supports tax-payer funding of the International Monetary Fund (IMF). This is foreign “aid” for third world dictatorships.

November 6, 1998 - Gingrich resigns from the Speakership in disgrace, an embarrasment to conservatives. As a means of highlighting Gingrich’s big-government record, it is later reported that Gingrich, in the previous 12 years, had co-sponsored a total of 418 bills with liberal Democrat Nancy Pelosi.

February 21, 2002 - Gingrich praises the progressive movement and Franklin D. Roosevelt’s New Deal

January, 2003 - Gingrich founds the Center for Health Transformation, which advocates its own version of socialized medicine.

January 20, 2005 - In an interview with Charlies Rose, Gingrich says Roe V Wade won’t be overturned. Consistent with his career-long lack of fervor on the abortion issue, he expresses no frustration or willingness to fight to overturn it.

July 20, 2005 - Gingrich speaks with Hillary Clinton at an event called “Ceasefire on Health Care”. In this discussion he agrees with Hillary on many points and also expresses his support (yet again) for an individual mandate.

August 8, 2005 - In an interview on NPR (which i’ve embedded below), Gingrich again supports the individual mandate.

October 12, 2005 - Gingrich calls for the DNA testing of all US citizens

February 15, 2007 - Gingrich speaks out in favor of a cap-and-trade system...

“I think if you have mandatory carbon caps combined with a trading system, much like we did with sulfur, and if you have a tax-incentive program for investing in the solutions, that there’s a package there that’s very, very good. And frankly, it’s something I would strongly support.”

March 27, 2007 - In an interview with Charlie Rose, Gingrich denounces the manner in which the Kyoto Treaty was rejected and says reducing carbon dioxide is a “totally sound concept”

March 28, 2007 - In an interview with Hugh Hewitt, Gingrich calls for restrictions on 2nd amendment rights.

April 10, 2007 - In a love-fest debate on climate policy with Sen. John Kerry (D-MA), Gingrich says “the evidence is sufficient that we should move towards the most effective possible steps to reduce carbon-loading of the atmosphere,” and that we should “do it urgently.” In the same debate Gingrich touts his “green” credentials, including his key role in maintaining the economically-crippling so-called “Endangered Species Act”.

April 24, 2007 - Gingrich says about Government-Sponsored Enterprises (GSEs): “conservatives should embrace [them] and want to extend as widely as possible.”

September 27, 2007 - Gingrich launches his new organisation, American Solutions. This organisation went on to endorse federal involvement in areas such as energy, education, labor and the environment.

October, 2007 - Newt Gingrich’s pro-environmentalist book “A Contract with the Earth” is published.

December 2, 2007 - In an appearance on C-SPAN Gingrich denies going soft on Bill Clinton in their debate in the 90s. He re-iterates that government should act to reduce carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, calling it “a prudent step”. Gingrich re-iterates that he favors taxpayer-funded subsidies for so-called green energy, like wind and solar power, and further states that he’s always been an environmentalist. Also responding to a question about unconstitutional behavior, he favorably quotes Supreme Court Justice Robert H. Jackson (A left-wing, statist FDR appointee) who in 1949 argued that free speech restrictions are legitimate.

April, 2008 - Newt accepts Al Gore’s invitation to make a global warming commercial with Nancy Pelosi, for Gore’s organization. Newt calls Gore a “friend”.

March 31, 2009 - Gingrich converts to Catholicism, his third religion.

April 24, 2009 - Congressional committee hearings on Cap-and-Trade take place. Gingrich, after previously supporting Cap-and-Trade, testifies against the Waxman-Markey Cap-and-Trade Bill. His flip-flop is exposed by a member of the committee, and he reponds by saying he would consider supporting cap-and-trade under certain circumstances.

May, 2009 - Gingrich publically supports the ObamaCare individual mandate. He says ObamaCare is a “Healthier ... More Open” process than HillaryCare.

2009 - Gingrich was hired as a consultant to an ethanol lobbying group, called Growth Energy, for a wage of more than $300,000 per year.

October 16, 2009 - Newt Gingrich endorses Dede Scozzafava in New York District 23.

September, 2009 - Gingrich’s launches his “Americanos” site, pandering and promoting himself to illegal immigrants.

May 18, 2010 - Newt Gingrich defends his global warming ad with Nancy Pelosi, and goes further by saying he’d be willing to do an ad with Al Gore.

October 12, 2010 - Newt’s American Solutions Spam-Scam is exposed.

November 15, 2010 - Gingrich defends RomneyCare.

December 12, 2010 - Gingrich gets into heated debate with Laura Ingraham over his advocacy of a path to legality for illegal immigrants.

December 16, 2010 - Newt’s American Solutions Spam-Scam is exposed.... again

January 25, 2011 - Travels to Iowa for the Renewable Fuels Association conference. He renews his support for ethanol subsidies and proclaims that he won’t abolish the EPA, but will merely rebrand it.

March 7, 2011 - Gingrich blames his marital infidelity on patriotism

March 14, 2011 - Gingrich says NAFTA worked because it created jobs in Mexico

March 17, 2011 - It is revealed that Newt Gingrich had up to $500,000 in debt to high-end jewellery company Tiffanys in 2005/2006. It is later revealed that the debt to Tiffanys was actually more than a million dollars. Further, following the scandal, Gingrich and his wife are spotted shopping at Tiffanys yet again.

March 23, 2011 - Gingrich completes a massive flip-flop on Obama’s War in Libya

May 15, 2011 - Appearing on Meet the Press, Gingrich calls Paul Ryan’s budget plan “right-wing social engineering” & he renews his 20-year-long support for the unconsitutional individual mandate on purchasing healthcare .

November 18, 2011 - Newt’s Direct Mail Spam-Scam is exposed ... again.

December 8, 2011 - Liberal David Brooks writes in the New York Times...

In the first place, Gingrich loves government more than I do. He has no Hayekian modesty to restrain his faith in statist endeavor. For example, he has called for “a massive new program to build a permanent lunar colony to exploit the Moon’s resources.” He has suggested that “a mirror system in space could provide the light equivalent of many full moons so that there would be no need for nighttime lighting of the highways.”

December 8, 2011 - LA Times reports that Gingrich has a book coming out about environmentalism, that he edited with his friend Terry Maple. The book contains a chapter on global warming by scientist Katharine Hayhoe, an alarmist advocate of the theory of man-made global warming. Naturally, publishing of the book has been delayed until after the 2012 elections. Later (Dec 29), Newt told a concerned supporter that the chapter on global warming had been taken out, and denied any prior knowledge that the chapter existed (in his own book).

January 23, 2012 - At an NBC debate, Newt says he wants American tax-payers to fund his idea for a manned mission to Mars and a “permanent” Moon base. He also insinuates that he was a supporter of Barry Goldwater in the 1960’s. A C-SPAN interview from 1988 then surfaced, with Gingrich saying he supported Nelson Rockefeller and the Progressive, establishment Republicans over Barry Goldwater, Ronald Reagan and the conservatives.

61 posted on 04/30/2012 6:36:25 AM PDT by jacknhoo (Luke 12:51. Think ye, that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, no; but separation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: jacknhoo
September 29, 2011, 8:17 pm

Gingrich’s Newer, and Longer, Contract With America

<p>Top: Newt Gingrich presented his 21st Century Contract with America to employees of the Principal Financial Group in Des Moines on Friday. Bottom: Mr. Gingrich, the House whip, was joined by other Republican candidates on Capitol Hill at the unveiling of the original Contract with America on Sept. 27, 1994.Top: Charlie Neibergall/Associated Press; bottom: John Duricka/Associated PressTop, Newt Gingrich presented his 21st Century Contract With America to employees of the Principal Financial Group in Des Moines on Friday. Bottom, Mr. Gingrich in September 1994 unveiling the original Contract With America.

Newt Gingrich stood alone on a stage in a Des Moines auditorium on Thursday, flanked only by two banners, propped up like tricolor tablets, that outlined his 21st Century Contract With America.

The scene was in sharp contrast with the unveiling of the original Contract With America in 1994, when Mr. Gingrich was flanked by hundreds of Republican candidates.

He is trying to repeat the success of that dramatic campaign commitment, which was credited with helping Republicans retake the House after decades in the minority, with Mr. Gingrich leading the charge.

But at 26 wonky pages — and more to come — the contemporary contract is hardly the succinct, poll-tested, 10-point legislative agenda unveiled 17 years ago. It included proposals for a balanced budget amendment, welfare reform and term limits.

“It seems what Newt really needs is a good editor,” said John Feehery, a top Republican aide in the House during that era.

The new document, which Mr. Gingrich first released to The Des Moines Register, has four parts: legislative proposals; a set of “First Day” changes that Mr. Gingrich says he would make by executive order, including repealing the health care overhaul; a training program for the transition team and appointees to “lead the shift back to constitutional, limited government”; and a plan to create a “system of citizen involvement.”

More details on the latter two initiatives are “coming soon,” according to Mr. Gingrich’s Web site, because he is still formulating the ideas.

“In an age where massive pieces of legislation are written in secret and passed before anyone has time to understand their contents, it is my hope that this open process of developing the 21st Century Contract With America will help restore the bonds of trust between the American people and their elected representatives,” Mr. Gingrich writes.

The process and timing of this contract — about four months before the first presidential nominating contest — deprive it of the “visceral premise” behind the 1994 contract, which was unveiled just over a month before the general election, said Mr. Feehery, now president of the strategic communications firm Quinn Gillespie & Associates.

“It was a contract not only with a candidate, but with almost every House candidate running and almost all the incumbents running,” Mr. Feehery said of the original. Mr. Gingrich’s latest effort “just seems to me to be same old stuff.”

Once hailed as a Republican Party hero, Mr. Gingrich has struggled to regain the esteem of primary voters. In the last New York Times/CBS News poll, conducted Sept. 10-15, 36 percent of the people who said they planned to vote in the Republican primaries said they had a favorable view of Mr. Gingrich, up 12 points since June. His unfavorable ratings remained static over that period at 34 percent.

Marjorie Connelly contributed reporting.

What has your guy done for the Conservative cause?

62 posted on 04/30/2012 7:58:51 AM PDT by McGruff (Support your local Republican candidates. They are our last line of defense.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: McGruff

October, 2007 - Newt Gingrich’s pro-environmentalist book “A Contract with the Earth” is published.

63 posted on 04/30/2012 12:03:09 PM PDT by jacknhoo (Luke 12:51. Think ye, that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, no; but separation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: McGruff

Remember also the appalling Nancy Pelosi and Newt Gingrich Commercial on Climate Change — Watch it yourself:

Both Romney and Gingrich have connections to the environmentalists.

An uprising by voters must get both Romney and Gingrich to be responsive to rural, private property and Federal land issues. Whoever wins, they must be stopped from putting environmentalist activists into positions of power.

See the Quote below how the environmentalists boasting about the importance of these appointments to them from the bio for Douglas Foy who was appointed by Romney to an influential position when he was governor of MA:

Doug Foy ­ BS, Princeton University; JD, Harvard University ­ As a super-secretary in Governor Mitt Romney’s cabinet, Doug oversaw transportation, housing, environment, and energy agencies, with combined annual capital budgets of $5 billion, and a total workforce exceeding 11,000. This unique position enabled him to put into practice many of the policies he developed over twenty-five years as head of the Conservation Law Foundation, New England’s premier environmental advocacy organization. Widely acknowledged as a leading environmentalist, Doug received the President’s Environmental and Conservation Challenge Award, the country’s highest conservation award, the Woodrow Wilson Award for Public Service and an honorary “Officer of the Order of the British Empire”.

64 posted on 04/30/2012 12:22:04 PM PDT by jacknhoo (Luke 12:51. Think ye, that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, no; but separation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

You libs, and yes liberal Republicans are libs, too, get testy when proven wrong, and often resort to name calling.

Here it is again:

“According to Gingrich spokesman R.C. Hammond, on Wednesday morning, the former House Speaker spoke to Romney by phone and shared that he will endorse him for the presidency, The Wall Street Journal reported.”

But I bet you still can’t figure it out.

Here more from the link:

“The former Pennsylvania senator has avoided using the word “endorsement”’

But WORSE, Newt helped Romney win the nomination, even after Romney did this to Newt:

“Romney insists on trying to destroy Newt Gingrich over the same false, trumped-up ethics charges just like Democrats did. He’s acting exactly like a power hungry Democrat who is willing to say anything to get elected ..”


Romney joins the Dems, with their trumped up charges, even though Newt was vindicated, but yet, Newt helped Romney. How ironic.

65 posted on 04/30/2012 8:17:15 PM PDT by Sun (Pray that God sends us good leaders. Please say a prayer now.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: jacknhoo

“Both Romney and Gingrich have connections to the environmentalists.”

Maybe that’s why Gingrich helped Romney rather than Santorum.

66 posted on 04/30/2012 8:21:44 PM PDT by Sun (Pray that God sends us good leaders. Please say a prayer now.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Sun
I didn't resort to anything that wasn't correct in my posts above. No, I'm correct and you can't read.

wrong, and often resort to name calling.

I've seen more than a few of your recent nasty postings and the "simpleton" shoe fits you so well as it is an accurate description of your posts. You can call 1-800-Waaaah-For-Libs.

67 posted on 04/30/2012 8:55:33 PM PDT by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

You are the nasty one, and you know it, and you can dish it out but can’t take it.

68 posted on 04/30/2012 9:32:22 PM PDT by Sun (Pray that God sends us good leaders. Please say a prayer now.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: Sun

LoL. Go cry somewhere else girl.

69 posted on 04/30/2012 9:36:21 PM PDT by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: All

From the OP:

“It’s important to point out that the people who supported Newt also bear a great deal of the blame in ruining conservative chances in 2012, ..”

But what bothers me most is that Newt/Romney zealots tried to destroy anyone who got in Newt/Romney’s way. No matter if what they said was untrue.

70 posted on 04/30/2012 9:39:01 PM PDT by Sun (Pray that God sends us good leaders. Please say a prayer now.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: jacknhoo; Lazlo in PA; Antoninus; AmericanInTokyo; writer33; napscoordinator; cripplecreek; caww; ..
I supported Rick Santorum, but I don't find this kind of thing to be helpful, especially now that both Santorum and Gingrich are out of the race. I see nothing good coming out of demonizing fellow conservatives like Newt Gingrich, and this article goes well beyond simple criticism.

Once Santorum dropped out, I said our last chance was Gingrich so we need to back Gingrich as an “anybody but Romney” candidate.

That's now gone too.

As conservatives, we've lost. Barring something totally unforeseen, Romney is going to be the Republican nominee, and that means there's a very good chance Barack Obama is going to win re-election this fall.

We can blame lots of people for that.

Gingrich made mistakes — a lot of them. So did Santorum, Perry, Bachmann, and Cain. The bottom line is that I think Santorum and Gingrich get along much better than some of their supporters. Once this election is over, we're going to have to figure out a way to come together to pick up the pieces of this mess that has hit the Republican Party.

71 posted on 05/03/2012 7:58:43 PM PDT by darrellmaurina
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: darrellmaurina

Black eyes can be quite helpful, towards purification, in the end.

And Conservatives, have a huge black eye, getting behind liberals and globalists.

It is good that you supported Santorum. And you are absolutely correct - conservatives lost, and I will add, America has lost.

I would like to know, though,how you can pretend that acknowledging the truth of how conservatives lost is is delusion helpful?

72 posted on 05/04/2012 1:12:56 AM PDT by jacknhoo (Luke 12:51. Think ye, that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, no; but separation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: jacknhoo; JLAGRAYFOX; mnehring; DallasSun; sam_paine; NoLibZone; Christie at the beach; ...
Fair question, jacknhoo. I agree with you that deluding ourselves helps nobody.

On the other hand, I believe that demonization of Newt Gingrich is unhelpful at best, and is just as damaging as vicious attacks on Rick Santorum. Both are now out. What's the point of “piling on” at this late date?

Criticizing a candidate is one thing, but what has happened in this election cycle goes beyond simple criticism; we're using the sort of language against fellow conservatives that ought to be reserved for liberals and worse. That has produced two different bad results: we have antagonized people who we need in order to win elections, and we have nominated the least conservative of the major candidates.

It's nothing new to say the conservative movement has three overlapping but distinct components: social conservatives, economic conservatives and national defense conservatives.

Obviously some are in all three categories — I'm an evangelical, I live and work outside Fort Leonard Wood where I moved after 9/11, originally to work as a civilian in Army Public Affairs though I now run my own business and am definitely a supporter of free enterprise. Many conservatives, however, focus primarily on one or two of those three legs of the stool, and that has led to a serious conflict within the Republican Party that in 2008 and 2012 resulted in virtually the worst possible candidate getting nominated.

If we were in a European-style parliamentary democracy with proportional representation, the Republican Party would be at least three different parties, and in some ways that might be a very good thing. We'd have at least one explicitly Christian political party (more likely, two different parties, one of evangelicals and one of Roman Catholics), we'd have a libertarian-leaning pro-business party focused mostly on economic issues, and we'd have a party focused on military issues. (Of course, the Democrats would have even more division, with separate parties for blacks, hispanics, labor interests, the far-left socialists and environmentalists, rural Southern rural voters who traditionally were more populist than conservative, and several other groups as well.)

There are some real advantages to a proportional representation system or at least a system of multimember districts such as what the West Virginia state legislature still has, and which many school boards and city councils have in a lot of states.

In multimember districts, not just the top candidate but the top two, three, or sometimes more candidates get elected. Under a full-blown parliamentary system, voters choose the political party which best represents their political views, and then the leaders of similar political parties get together in parliament to assemble a coalition to run the government with different parties getting assigned cabinet portfolios that match their major areas of concern.

In our system, however, none of that is going to happen as long as we have single-member districts. We can't get our conservative candidate elected unless we can piece together enough voters to reach either a 50 percent absolute majority or (in some states) a plurality of voters in which the leading candidate gets elected even if he or she has less than 50 percent.

I do not believe Mitt Romney would have been able to get to 50 percent of the Republican Party primary voters and caucusgoers in a one-on-one race; he won with a plurality of voters, not an absolute majority, until his money essentially forced everyone else out of the race.

However, if we're going to win most elections at the state and federal level, we need to get to 50 percent. That means people who support Gingrich, Santorum, Cain, Perry and Bachmann need to realize we all have more in common with each other than any of us have with Romney.

Antagonizing each other helps none of us and simply ensures that we'll repeat the 2008 and 2012 losses in 2016 as well.

73 posted on 05/04/2012 8:47:51 AM PDT by darrellmaurina
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: darrellmaurina

You are exactly correct and right on. For better or worse, Romney is the candidate. That is reality. If we splinter and fight among ourselves, I can assure you we will lose this nation, not only for us, but....more importantly our children. Romney was not my choice, but he came out on top. Politiics, by nature is a dirty business, so...hard feelings, and extreme rants rule the day. That is just the way it is.

All the POTUS candidates has a fair shot at the prize through, God knows, how many debates. If we fragment, Obama wins. I am not ready to let that happen. I want Obama and the entire Democrat Party destroyed politically for a long time to come. However, the hate, venom, personal attacks by many on this site serve absolutely no useful purpose whatsoever, right into the hands of Obama and his destroy America ilk.

IMHO, we all must unite, not to elect Romney, but to insure the defeat of America hater, Obama and his destructive minions.

74 posted on 05/04/2012 9:57:17 AM PDT by JLAGRAYFOX (My only objective is defeat and destroy Obama & his Democrat Party, politically!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-74 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson