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

Skip to comments.

Newt Gingrich: Yes, Past Performance Does Indicate Future Results
Red State ^ | March 19, 2012 | Newt Gingrich

Posted on 03/20/2012 4:36:52 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife

Rick Santorum makes an excellent point that “past performance really does indicate future results.” I completely agree—but not just “in Mitt Romney’s case.” Rick Santorum became the third-highest ranking Republican in the Senate in 2001 at a time when Republicans inherited balanced budgets, surpluses, and conservative, pro-life majorities. Senator Santorum and his big spending GOP allies proceeded to squander this inheritance.

The leadership of the Rick Santorum Republicans proved disastrous:

* The Rick Santorum Republicans never passed a single balanced budget, after inheriting balanced budgets and record surpluses. They racked up $1.7 trillion in deficits and increased the average number of earmarks by almost 500 percent. The Senator even voted for the Bridge to Nowhere.

* The Rick Santorum Republicans increased the national debt by 12 percent and voted to raise the debt ceiling five times to accommodate it—even while dealing with a president of their own party.

* The Senator voted with Democrats and Big Labor to defeat the National Right to Work Act of 1995. He justifies this vote saying he was representing Pennsylvania where forced unionization is the law but today, PA Senator Toomey is cosponsoring nearly identical legislation.

* The Senator voted with Democrats and Big Labor — repeatedly — to protect Davis-Bacon legislation, an old law on the books that requires the federal government to pay more to its contractors. He was so wedded to big labor that he even voted against waiving Davis-Bacon in times of emergency. By voting to protect Davis-Bacon, the Senator cost taxpayers many millions in higher taxes, deficits, and national debt.

* The Senator sponsored the “Santorum Amendment” to raise the Minimum Wage 21.4%. He supported Ted Kennedy’s proposed hike in the Minimum Wage. And, in a 2006 campaign commercial, he bragged about his support for a higher Minimum Wage.

* The Rick Santorum Republicans abandoned their principles, resulting in the worst electoral defeat for Republicans since Watergate and the loss of GOP Congressional majorities in both the House and Senate. This left Congress in the hands of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. And in destroying the Republican brand of balanced budgets and spending control, the Rick Santorum Republican failure gave us Barack Obama in 2008.

This is not a record of leadership to be proud of, and in 2006 it resulted in a catastrophic 18-point defeat. I fear it would do so again in the fall of 2012 if he were the nominee.

Unlike Senator Santorum, I did not go to Washington seeing politics as a “team sport.” Instead, I set out to change the game, and was willing to fight the forces of the establishment within the Republican Party to do so. The result was the first GOP majority in 40 years and the largest increase in pro-life votes in House of Representatives history. When I was Speaker, we balanced the budget for the first time since the 1920s — and it stayed balanced for four straight years. We reformed welfare, lifting millions of Americans from poverty. We passed the biggest capital gains tax cut in history, helping create 11 million jobs. And we did it all while paying down the national debt by $400 billion.

If you agree with Senator Santorum that “past performance really does indicate future results,” it means there’s only one candidate in this race who can offer the change our country desperately needs.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Government; Politics
KEYWORDS: conservatism; economy; gingrich2012; leadership; newt2012
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-124 next last
FYI (a 10 day old poll):

WWL-TV's polling results for the 2012 Louisiana Republican presidential primary:

» Undecided: 26.21 percent
» Rick Santorum: 25.44 percent
» Mitt Romney: 20.97 percent
» Newt Gingrich: 19.81 percent
» Ron Paul: 5.63 percent
» Other: 1.94 percent

Source: WWL-TV election analyst Greg Rigamer/GCR & Associates via a telephone poll of 515 likely Republican voters in Louisiana from March 8-10. The poll has a 4.4% margin of error.

1 posted on 03/20/2012 4:37:06 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: onyx; All
..."House Speaker Newt Gingrich and his wife, Callista, will be campaigning in Louisiana all week. They will be at Strawn's Eat Shop Too in Shreveport to meet voters this morning from 8:30 to 9:30, followed by a town-hall meeting at Louisiana Tech in Ruston at 11 a.m. and a meet-and-greet at the Atrium Hotel in Monroe from 3:30 p.m. to 4:30 p.m.

On Wednesday, Gingrich will conduct a town-hall meeting at Louisiana College in Pineville from 9 to 10 a.m., followed by meet-and-greets in Lake Charles at 1 p.m. and Lafayette at 4 p.m.

He will make other stops in Louisiana on Thursday, the details of which have yet to be announced. On Friday, Gingrich will tour Port Fouchon in the morning, participate in a Hispanic roundtable meeting at Oakland Plantation Estates in the afternoon, and conduct a town-hall meeting at his alma mater, Tulane University, from 4 to 5 p.m."

Source

2 posted on 03/20/2012 4:45:38 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

Lordy...I just wish Newt had a chance.


3 posted on 03/20/2012 4:48:49 AM PDT by Dudoight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife
Well, since Newt Gingrich has as much a chance of winning the GOP nomination as Haagen Dazs on a hot plate in Hell—why is he spending so much time and money attacking the only other conservative in the race AND the only conservative in the race who can still beat Mitt Romney?

What kind of deal did he make with Mitt Romney? Hope it was better than the one Mitt made with Ron Paul. Perhaps after Obama beats Mitt we will find out.

4 posted on 03/20/2012 4:55:54 AM PDT by Happy Rain ("11/4/2008: The day America elected a pyromaniac in the middle of a fire storm.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

This is positive campaigning? Did we not go to war about this time? Quite disingenuous and unworthy of Newt. I expect better.


5 posted on 03/20/2012 4:59:23 AM PDT by steve8714 (Clay...Carnahan...who is the least of these?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Happy Rain
...why is he spending so much time and money attacking the only other conservative in the race AND the only conservative in the race who can still beat Mitt Romney?

I will comment on the top two mistakes in your post.

1) Santorum is no conservative.

2) Santorum cannot win the nomination.

6 posted on 03/20/2012 5:01:48 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife
Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Mark Levin and yes, even Glenn Beck say Santorum is a conservative—heck Levin says he would still vote for him.

But then what is THEIR opinions compared to yours?

LOL here.

7 posted on 03/20/2012 5:05:58 AM PDT by Happy Rain ("11/4/2008: The day America elected a pyromaniac in the middle of a fire storm.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Happy Rain
the only other conservative in the race AND the only conservative in the race who can still beat Mitt Romney

Santorum is NOT a conservative politician. It is misleading to call Santorum "conservative". He may be a moral man but as a politician he is a spender and tries to go along (like Bush did). Santorum (again like Bush) would be unable to veto any spending bill. To be a fiscal conservative politician, you have to be able to veto and veto again and veto yet again until they give you the very limited spending you want. Gingrich is or can be a conservative politician.

The veto, and only the veto can bring spending under control. Bush refused to do it. Obama refuses to do it. Spending will remain out of control until they get a backbone and VETO bills.

8 posted on 03/20/2012 5:09:07 AM PDT by Rapscallion (The corruption and mismanagement persist because YOU tolerate it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: steve8714

Santorum (as well as Romney) “lifts” all the conservative policy talking points Newt gets good buzz on. He also likes, so has adopted, Newt’s term for Mitt — “Massachusetts Moderate.”

Why vote for an imitation?

Newt spells it out in his OpEd; they’re both moderates masquerading as conservatives.


9 posted on 03/20/2012 5:09:42 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Happy Rain

It does seem odd. Since Newt has no chance except at a brokered convention, you would think he would focus on Mitt Romney.

Newt is even behind in Louisiana and behind a lot in Illinois. He can’t get 75% of the remaining delegates. So why is he not focused on Romney?

It is beginning to appear he is helping Romney in one way or another.


10 posted on 03/20/2012 5:14:43 AM PDT by dforest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Happy Rain
....But then what is THEIR opinions compared to yours?

That you resort to an appeal to authority, is interesting.

I guess because there is a "consensus" about "catastrophic" climate change, I should go along with fake science. [?] All these radio hosts have been stringing us along. Rush and the others bashed Perry and Newt for their Bain/Romney comments. Will they now bash Rick for doing the same?

11 posted on 03/20/2012 5:16:34 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife
The Senator voted with Democrats and Big Labor — repeatedly — to protect Davis-Bacon legislation, an old law on the books that requires the federal government to pay more to its contractors.

I was so pissed at Rick when he did this.

Davis-Bacon was a 1933 law designed by the KKK wing of the demonRAT party in order to keep southern black laborers from coming north and doing work for non union companies in major construction projects.

The blacks today have almost no membership in the craft unions where they work projects out of union halls, electrical, plumbers and steamfitters etc.

If you ever go to a union hall check out the skin color and if there is 2% black it's an over representation and it's very rare.

Black union membership is much higher in service unions {SEIU} and manufacturing {UAW} where the worker goes to the same place every day.

12 posted on 03/20/2012 5:18:37 AM PDT by USS Alaska (Nuke the terrorists savages.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife
Good points.

The more I read from Santorum supporters the more I think they want social changes but no big changes in the underlying system that is the cause of everything going down the tubes.

A lot of people who back Lawyer Ricky and Bishop Romney seem to think that a little nudge here and a minor tweak there is going to get things back on the right track. Unfortunately for such folks, we're way beyond the point that we can make little changes and watch things straighten out over time. We're already over the cliff and falling fast.

All that we can really do is elect someone who knows that we need an airbag to survive the impact and major changes that clearly show the world that we've turned the corner and won't go back to business as usual. If the world sees us actually headed toward energy independence and going back to the policies that worked so well for Reagan and Gingrich in the past, we can have things in pretty fair shape within a decade.

Every year people waste tweaking the existing mess probably adds two or three years to the length of time it'll take to get over seventy years of fascist democrat control of Congress "We The People" voted for all these years.

JMHO

13 posted on 03/20/2012 5:23:46 AM PDT by Rashputin (Only Newt can defeat both the Fascist democrats and the Vichy GOP)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

‘Why vote for an imitation?’

Indeed! Well said!


14 posted on 03/20/2012 5:29:51 AM PDT by chrisnj
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: USS Alaska

Rick will just manage the mess. He will not use the Bully Pulpit to make Americans hold Congress’ feet to the fire on spending and for their support in removing bloated, overbearing regulations and Federal Agencies!

His “team” playing is appreciated and applauded by the Establishment.

Newt on the other hand, is not their cup of tea.


15 posted on 03/20/2012 5:36:21 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Rashputin
......If the world sees us actually headed toward energy independence and going back to the policies that worked so well for Reagan and Gingrich in the past, we can have things in pretty fair shape within a decade.....

BUMP!!!

16 posted on 03/20/2012 5:37:15 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Happy Rain

excellent


17 posted on 03/20/2012 5:42:23 AM PDT by silverleaf (Funny how all the people who are for abortion are already born)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: dforest
It is beginning to appear he is helping Romney in one way or another.

He is.

I see Condi Rice being floated at Mitty's running mate.
18 posted on 03/20/2012 5:45:50 AM PDT by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: dforest

If Newt focused on OBAMA he’d get lots of attention

People dont dislike Santorum or even Romney as much as they dislike OBAMA

So yes, Newt is masquerading as Mitt’s “Ross Perot” to divide the 60% of GOP anti-Mitt vote

Hello VP Gingrich, enjoy that bucket of warm spit assuming you get Mitt annointed


19 posted on 03/20/2012 5:46:13 AM PDT by silverleaf (Funny how all the people who are for abortion are already born)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

I saw her yakking on Fox this morning. Doesn’t excite me at all.


20 posted on 03/20/2012 5:47:38 AM PDT by dforest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife
Did Newt oppose the Bush 2001 tax cuts? Because this is what the liberals say, that it was the Bush 2001 tax cuts that created deficits?

Or does he think we should have cut spending after 9/11? Because 9/11 pushed our country deeper into recession, while at the same time requiring a large re-buildup of our armed forces.

Does Gingrich think we shouldn't have built up the Armed Forces in response to 9/11? One way the budget was "balanced" was Clinton's military cuts. Does Gingrich think that was a good thing?

After 9/11, we went to war in Afghanistan, and that cost hundreds of billions. Does Newt Gingrich think we should not have done that? We then invaded Iraq, and that cost hundreds of billions. Does Newt think that was a mistake?

Unemployment shot up before and after 9/11. Does Newt think we should have cancelled the tax cuts when revenue was clearly going down because of the recession? Does he think we should have cut the programs that increased after 9/11 because of increased unemployment -- food stamps, unemployment payments?

Where is a quote from Newt Gingrich in 2001 complaining about the deficit spending in that first budget after 9/11? Or in 2002, or in 2003, or in 2004? Where is Gingrich telling us not to do more tax cuts in 2003?

What was one of the biggest spending increases in the 2000s? The Medicare Prescription Drug Benefit. Did Gingrich oppose that? Not at all, he is responsible for it:

Newt Gingrich played the role of political godfather in pushing the Medicare prescription drug benefit into law, returning to Capitol Hill in November 2003 to deliver a pivotal speech that turned some conservative skeptics into believers.
...
“Newt was critical to the passage of Medicare Part D,” recalls John Feehery, who was Speaker Dennis Hastert’s chief spokesman at the time. The speech “was very powerful,” Feehery said.
...
His sales pitch, more than anything else, switched my vote and votes of others on a bill that still took most of the night to pass while the vote was held open,” former Rep. Mark Souder (R-Ind.) recalled in a recent interview with POLITICO conducted via e-mail. “And Medicare is going broke faster than ever.”

Of course, while we had deficit spending in the early 2000s, that spending was coming back down. Too slowly, but we were working back toward balance, until TARP. GIngrich opposed TARP, right? Well, not quite:

STEPHANOPOULOS: “Speaker Gingrich, there’s also, I think, a recognition, at least in some of the polls I’ve seen, that something has to be done.”

SPEAKER NEWT GINGRICH: “Sure, look, something has to be done. … I suspect were I still in Congress, in the end George [Will] is right, and I probably would end up voting reluctantly yes....

Of course, the important thing is to beat Romney in Illinois. And by attacking Santorum for not balancing the budget, that will certainly draw more voters away from Romney and to Santorum in Illinois today, right? I mean, it's not like Gingrich is going to get enough votes in Illinois to matter, he's not even running advertising there. Heck, Santorum even started using Gingrich's flawed attacks on Romney's Bain Capital days, in a last-ditch effort to stop him (seems to be working about as well as when Gingrich tried it though), and then Gingrich attacks Santorum for spending too much?

But as a Gingrich supporter, I'm sure you will have a bunch of quotes from 2001 and 2003 where Gingrich says the congress is overspending and asks for specific spending cuts to get back to balance, right?

21 posted on 03/20/2012 5:50:50 AM PDT by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

Has Newt changed his mind about Climate Change or is he still lecturing us on being wrong about it? They all have their flaws.

Pray for America


22 posted on 03/20/2012 5:51:13 AM PDT by bray (Power to We the People)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: silverleaf

I believe that after Santorum is unable to win in the primary math, we will hear soon after that Adelson is cutting the funding on Newt. Newt will give the appropriate speech to announce his departure.

There really is no reason for him to stay. He is just spending money for nothing. Neither Newt or Santorum will win in a brokered convention. I am sure they both know that.


23 posted on 03/20/2012 5:55:03 AM PDT by dforest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: bray
Newt Rips Gore's 'Facts' To Pieces 2009 Newt testifying on Climate Change before Congress.
24 posted on 03/20/2012 5:55:34 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

Of course, the undecided won’t stay that way. But in Loisiana, the 20 statewide delegates are awarded proportionally based on a 25% threshold. If nobody gets 25%, they go as uncommitted, and can vote for anybody.

So if the numbers actually stayed as they are, except gingrich got 4% of Santorum’s vote by attacking him, Gingrich would have the effect of turning Santorum delegates into uncommitted delegates who could vote for Romney.

Now, if GIngrich just ran attacks on Romney, and could keep Romney below 25%, his time in Loisiana could actually be a good thing. But in a proportional contest, it HURTS conservatives when Gingrich attacks Santorum. It hurt us in Georgia, where Gingrich robocalled against Santorum, and pushed Santorum just below 20% — which gave Romney 4-6 more delegates.

And if he manages to suppress the Santorum vote here enough that Romney gets 25%, he’ll end up giving delegates to Romney. Would it be good for Gingrich if Gingrich and Romney got the delegates, instead of Santorum? Well, I guess - but it certainly wouldn’t be good for the plan to stop Romney.


25 posted on 03/20/2012 5:56:39 AM PDT by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

On a radio newsbreak, I heard a clip of Rick being played from the IL primary campaign.

Of course it was a gotcha moment...the reporter was bagged for Mitt, it was obvious...but first time I actually heard Rick’s voice saying the unemployment rate doesn’t matter, I don’t care about that, as preface to making a point about his candidacy.

Apparently somebody asked him a question...no
way would you say that out of the blue.

Then they had a clip of him clarifying his remarks.

No worse than Mitt saying he likes to fire people, and his wife drives a couple of cadillacs, etc. But that was a bit ago in time, which allowed the reporter to ignore it and focus on Rick.

Made me think, when you’re anybody but Obama and Romney, there is no margin for error. There is no room for gaffes, mistakes etc. The Dems, your own side, the media, will all savage you and never give you a pass.

Newt, imperfect as are we all, fares best in such an unfair scenario. He has more substance, more experience, more knowledge, more communication skills, more demonstrated success.

Without Mitt’s scorched earth backed by many millions, that Newt didn’t have, in IA and FL, Newt would be standing tall today.

Rick walked into that yawning chasm of opportunity and with a lot of help from the evangelical pastors put himself where he is.

He can’t close the sale with enough people, and we are talking Republican primaries, we aren’t even talking the general.

There’s no margin for error. That’s unfair and a shame, but it’s true.

Errors there will be.

Newt works best.


26 posted on 03/20/2012 5:57:57 AM PDT by txrangerette ("HOLD TO THE TRUTH...SPEAK WITHOUT FEAR" - Glenn Beck)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT

Illinois is all Mitt’s and Rick’s.

Let’s see what Santorum can do mano-a-mano against Romney.

Newt took the weekend off and is in Louisiana all week.

Go pout somewhere else.


27 posted on 03/20/2012 5:58:48 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Rapscallion
Rick Santorum is a Hard-Core Conservative.

Newt Gingrich is a Hard-Core Conservative.

Santorum is better than Gingrich on this ranking.

Santorum's lifetime ACU rating is within two points of Gingrich's lifetime ACU rating (88.1 to 89.9).

28 posted on 03/20/2012 6:02:37 AM PDT by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Rashputin

Actually, so far as I can tell, most Santorum supporters want to stop Romney, and realize that GIngrich can’t do it, given that Gingrich stopped winning anything after his only win outside his home state, in South Carolina, back in january.

That we are still even talking about the possibility of Newt Gingrich as winning the nomination, when he can’t win a single state and hasn’t beat Santorum anywhere except Georgia since the Nevada caucus, is rediculous.

Most freepers were ready to support Newt Gingrich when it looked like he could win. When he imploded (cue the “it’s not his fault he can’t win, Romney has too much money” crowd), we needed another candidate — because you can’t force the general population to vote for the candidate YOU like just because you think that’s the right thing to do.

I’m not telling people to stop supporting Gingrich — people should vote their conscience, and for those who are at the point where it’s not important anymore who wins the nomination, just that they personally vote for the guy they think is the best, Newt is still a valid choice.


29 posted on 03/20/2012 6:06:50 AM PDT by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: txrangerette
....Of course it was a gotcha moment...the reporter was bagged for Mitt, it was obvious...but first time I actually heard Rick’s voice saying the unemployment rate doesn’t matter, I don’t care about that, as preface to making a point about his candidac.......

Yesterday Romney was saying that the economy is improving (Santorum recently said that the economy isn't the main issue anymore).

We're in economic quicksand and we cannot have a moderate in the White House.

30 posted on 03/20/2012 6:08:32 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

Not to mention, if Newt vaporized, there are hardcore Newt backers who think both Mitt and Rick are terrible alternatives, and who actually think Rick is worse than Mitt, as a candidate to put forward. Gallup polled Newt backers second choices after Newt and there was a decided SPLIT.

People are trying with all their might to debunk that, because they’re meme is that if no Newt, they all go to Santorum.

That might be a Free Republic result, although many here say they would not vote, but most say Rick if not Newt.

But FR is not a representative sample of state by state or national GOP primary voters.

No matter how hard some try to pretend otherwise.

I understand how people could say Mitt was less bad than Rick, to put forward as a candidate.

It all goes back to the superficial...well, he was a BUSINESSMAN and saved the Olympics. And he was a Governor (never mind what he did).


31 posted on 03/20/2012 6:13:01 AM PDT by txrangerette ("HOLD TO THE TRUTH...SPEAK WITHOUT FEAR" - Glenn Beck)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: txrangerette

REmember how Newt lost the battled to reform Medicare? He made a perfectly valid point, but the way he said it gave the Democrats a national advertisement to beat up all republicans, and because of that, medicare reform was dead.

“Now, we don’t get rid of it in round one because we don’t think that that’s politically smart, and we don’t think that’s the right way to go through a transition. But we believe it’s going to wither on the vine because we think people are voluntarily going to leave it — voluntarily.”

As I said, a perfectly valid statement — talking about one specific aspect of Medicare. But it was the WRONG WAY to say it apparently, by the criteria used here against Santorum, because his quote became a national rallying cry against conservatives.

And if you somehow want to argue the point, just google Newt “whither on the vine”, and see all the thousands of references to that by the media.

Rick’s voice, by the way, said that the unemployment rate was not what was driving his campaign. The unemployment rate is manipulated by the administration, and if it drops in October of 2012, Obama still needs to go.

Freedom is all that government can really do to impact unemployment numbers conservatively. Freedom from regulation is what will get companies hiring again. This is the conservative message.

If I am asked “what will you do if the unemployment rate drops before the election”, I say “I’m not voting because of the unemployment rate, I’m voting to stop Obama taking away our rights and freedoms.”


32 posted on 03/20/2012 6:14:12 AM PDT by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

Right, because nobody in Illinois will be able to read Newt Gingrich’s article.

Gingrich sure does take off a lot for a guy who says he is running for President.


33 posted on 03/20/2012 6:21:24 AM PDT by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: txrangerette
....I understand how people could say Mitt was less bad than Rick, to put forward as a candidate....

I think voters would say that because they have had it rubbed in their faces that Romney has the GOP-e money and muscle in his camp. I also believe that the GOP-e has gone easy on Rick so that the Rick and Newt camps will be so busy "attacking" each other that Mitt doesn't have to get his hands dirty (Mitt "I know nothing about those attack ads" Romney).

The GOP-e sees Rick as the weakest one to eliminate once there are two. Newt clearly sees, that if he leaves the race, there will be no choice but the Massachusetts Moderate and that means 4 more years of Obama.

By going to the convention we can air all this dirty GOP-Establish laundry. Let's let it flap in the breeze on prime time for all to see.

The audience can hear the conservative message sized up against the party mush.

34 posted on 03/20/2012 6:22:10 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT
Right, because nobody in Illinois will be able to read Newt Gingrich’s article.

Google Newt! He's just "all over the news!" /S

Red State published this in their blog. I hope that doesn't offend your idea of free speech.

35 posted on 03/20/2012 6:25:06 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: bray
Factual observations are not appreciated by some FRiends these days, but they are by me.
36 posted on 03/20/2012 6:25:50 AM PDT by Rational Thought
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT

There is a perception lingering about Newt Gingrich that he was a critic of Paul Ryan’s budget plan and therefore a critic of conservative fiscal policy in the House of Representatives. Is that conclusion true? Or is it an oversimplification? Like many misconceptions floating around during a heated political season, it is not true. Let’s examine the facts.

On April 5, 2011, Representative Paul Ryan, the House Budget Committee chairman, introduced the Republican budget for 2012. Included in that budget was a premium support model for Medicare. This budget was based on a similar plan previously laid out by Ryan called The Roadmap for America’s Future. That document had been a Republican Party policy call to change the budget and put it on sound fiscal grounds compared to the Democrats’ unwillingness to budget at all and tax and spend into infinity. The Harry Reid-run Senate has not passed a budget for over three years, even though they are required to by law.

Gingrich praised the Ryan plan in an article in Human Events on April 13. He called it the most serious attempt by an elected official to rethink our public finances and the modern welfare state in a generation. That is quite a compliment from a former speaker of the House to a current committee chairman. Using a golfing metaphor, Gingrich celebrated the plan, calling it a Ryan “eagle.” Is that comparison a negative critique, or is it commendation? One week later, on April 20, Gingrich in the same space heaped more praise on the plan. He compared Paul Ryan to Paul Revere, one of our nation’s great heroes, and compared the Ryan Medicare plan with his own previous welfare reform. Why would he disparage something he would compare to one of his greatest achievements? Gingrich later said he would have voted for the plan if he had had the opportunity.

On May 15, 2011, Gingrich was on Meet the Press. He had a slightly disjointed discussion with host David Gregory because Gregory kept interrupting him. After a substantial discussion on the debt-ceiling debate, Gregory turned to entitlements and asked Gingrich a hypothetical and loaded question. He said, “What about entitlements? The Medicare trust fund, in stories that have come out over the weekend, is now going to be depleted by 2024, five years earlier than predicted. Do you think that Republicans ought to buck the public opposition and really move forward to completely change Medicare, turn it into a voucher program where you give seniors...some premium support and — so that they can go out and buy private insurance?”

Notice that his question is not about whether the Ryan plan is a good plan. Gingrich had already praised the plan. The question was, should Republicans buck public opposition and completely change Medicare? Gingrich’s answer was a criticism not of the change, but how it should be implemented. Not because it wasn’t the right thing to do, but because politicians should get the public behind it first. Note what Gingrich said:..................

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/02/does_ryan_now_agree_with_gingrich.html#ixzz1pfBN7AUT


37 posted on 03/20/2012 6:27:48 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

Yes, I caught that there was a context behind Rick being asked about the unemployment rate, but he actually said the words, I don’t care about the unemployment rate, that doesn’t matter, blah blah blah, then had to backtrack on what he meant.

Romney is wrong that the economy is improving, if by that you mean the people thrown out of work are getting jobs back.

The housing market continues to crash. Millions of young people are living with their parents because they can’t help it. Growth is anemic at best.

Gasoline prices are through the roof, and people are running up debt again instead of paying it down like they did. The deficit and debt is growing faster than ever.

Rick is wrong to say the economy isn’t the main issue anymore.

What did he say was, the loss of our Freedoms? That is of course absolutely critical, but they are all tied in together. The more people hurt financially, the more they tend to bow down to dependency on government. Food stamps, anyone??

And the main point is, in the minds of most Americans, the economy is still number one.

Newt can handle these complexities the best, the most informative, the most direct, the most reassuring.


38 posted on 03/20/2012 6:29:44 AM PDT by txrangerette ("HOLD TO THE TRUTH...SPEAK WITHOUT FEAR" - Glenn Beck)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

You make no sense. If Newt really wanted this to go to a convention, he wouldn’t be attacking the one person who is making it a remote possibility.

All this brokered convention blarney is merely an excuse to continue to split the vote until nobody left can beat Mitt.

Helping Romney is exactly what people here said they would not do, yet they are.

Then you will probably proclaim, no Romney, no way. Huh?


39 posted on 03/20/2012 6:29:44 AM PDT by dforest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: txrangerette

He can’t close the sale with enough people, and we are talking Republican primaries, we aren’t even talking the general.

There’s no margin for error. That’s unfair and a shame, but it’s true. Errors there will be. Newt works best.”

Except for Iowa, Minnesota, North Dakota, Kansas, Tennessee, Alabama, Mississippi, Colorado, Oklahoma, Missouri ....

Santorum lost Michigan (Romneys “home state”) to Romney by 4%, Romney 41%, Santorum 37%

Newt got 6.5 % of the vote total

Assuming the conservative race is against the establishment Romney the GOP and democrats have pre-selected for us, and thus for #2, tell us, if “Newt works best” why are so many GOP voters in so many states so stupid, and why does Santorum have twice as many delegates as Newt, and 5 times as many primary victories?


40 posted on 03/20/2012 6:31:13 AM PDT by silverleaf (Funny how all the people who are for abortion are already born)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT; Cincinatus' Wife

I need no reminding about Newt’s history.

Imperfect as it is, it stacks up great against Romney and Santorum.

There is no contest.

That you have chosen sides and chosen to try to make your weaker one appear better than Newt’s, history wise and performance wise, hurts your credibility with me.

Not that you care about that.

I say this to say, your horse is weaker than mine, by far. Not in polling and votes right now, but on the merits and the substance.

Imperfection with Newt, compare to imperfection with R or S, even with low numbers?

I’ll take that stand.

As we used to say, any day of the week and twice on Sunday.


41 posted on 03/20/2012 6:38:40 AM PDT by txrangerette ("HOLD TO THE TRUTH...SPEAK WITHOUT FEAR" - Glenn Beck)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Rational Thought

Good try, but we make factual observations CONSTANTLY.


42 posted on 03/20/2012 6:41:55 AM PDT by txrangerette ("HOLD TO THE TRUTH...SPEAK WITHOUT FEAR" - Glenn Beck)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT
I think you're exactly right. This election has to be about the big picture. Gas prices and unemployment numbers are too transitory. Romeny is even rendering his own primary argument moot by continually admitting the economy is recovering. Once the Bush tax cuts go away and Obamacare starts to kick in after the election, everything will head south again, but I expect most things will look rosy in November. I watched the panel on Fox Special Report claim last night that Romney would still be able to attack Obama on Obamacare. Really? Obama will be able to construct commercials that will show how Obamacare is identical with Romneycare point by point. They will also be able to show Romney's many pro-Obamacare episodes leading up to it's passage. Romney will not only look like he's not really any different on the issue, he'll appear hypocritical. In other words Obamacare will not only not be a negative for Obama, it will be a negative for Romney.
43 posted on 03/20/2012 6:45:45 AM PDT by throwback ( The object of opening the mind, as of opening the mouth, is to shut it again on something solid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Happy Rain

Why don’t you try convinces people to vote for your Candidate instead of Bashing Newt all the time.

What that clean enough for you Pro-Santorum supporters.


44 posted on 03/20/2012 6:50:41 AM PDT by Bailee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: dforest
You still try to second guess the most dynamic politician this country has had in over a century. Newt is staying in for a good reason, not because he is just stubborn, but because without him, Romney would win the nomination sooner if just Santorum were in the race.

Don't try to argue with people who have made a lifetime career out of Political Science. There are things that we will never see, that drives the direction of genius politicians/Sates man like Newt Gingrich.

The internal polling also indicates that if Newt were to drop out, Romney would gain the most from it.

45 posted on 03/20/2012 6:51:08 AM PDT by PSYCHO-FREEP (If you come to a fork in the road, take it........)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

Newt says it, you believe it, that settles it? Santorum has been on the air long enough to have his own. If talking points win, God help us all. We look at the total man. Remember, we have to vote for a man, not a speech nor an idea. I don’t see a better man in this contest than Santorum, who has been tested by life and stuck to his real life principles even when “inconvenient”.


46 posted on 03/20/2012 6:52:13 AM PDT by steve8714 (Clay...Carnahan...who is the least of these?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT

Gingrich sure does take off a lot for a guy who says he is running for President.


Polling is almost non-existent for the LA primary. But Newt is spending time there trying to get his numbers above 25% of the vote which is the mandated number in order to share proportionally in 20 of the 46 delegates to be selected via the primary vote. JMO ...


47 posted on 03/20/2012 6:53:27 AM PDT by deport (..............God Bless Texas............)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: silverleaf; Cincinatus' Wife

Santorum became the fad after people decided Newt was toast because of what Romney’s lying ads did to him in IA and FL.

That is just a FACT.

Santorum profited most off of Mitt’s millions worth of lies. People didn’t gravitate to the scummy Mitt, they gravitated away from Newt who had been leading the polls, towards a different non Romney.

It was not on the relative merits of the two men’s records and candidacies.

Rick Santorum is majorly challenged in all of those areas. His severe record flaws have been noted, ad nauseum. His lack of Newt level abilities has been observed. People will admit Newt is in a class by himself and still say, but he can’t win, so we picked Rick.

What do you say when Rick does himself in?

Oh if only, if only...it was NEWT’S fault...he didn’t drop out.

Like I said, if Rick had dropped out and endorsed Newt when Perry did and Cain, things would be different for Newt.

I didn’t say all who support Santorum are stupid.

I believe they fell for a diversion.

A siren song.

And I will believe than until my last breath.

The objective realities back me up.


48 posted on 03/20/2012 6:55:04 AM PDT by txrangerette ("HOLD TO THE TRUTH...SPEAK WITHOUT FEAR" - Glenn Beck)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: silverleaf

One of the biggest problem for Newt is that he skips too many states.

He only competes where he thinks he will do well instead of getting in there in less friendly states and making his case.

Rudy tried that in 2008 and it was a disaster. He was able to discern that it was a losing venture and got out.

With Newt it isn’t the message, it is the messenger that is losing. Newt is still standing on the deck of the Titanic and declaring “the ship is not sinking”.


49 posted on 03/20/2012 6:58:45 AM PDT by dforest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: txrangerette
Newt can handle these complexities the best, the most informative, the most direct, the most reassuring.

Well said.

50 posted on 03/20/2012 7:04:36 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-124 next 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
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson