Posted on 07/27/2010 7:10:01 AM PDT by Brices Crossroads
The news that former House Speaker Newt Gingrich folded like a cheap suit in the wake of a brazen political attack on the tea party movement was sad. But not surprising.
As far back as his second term in Congress, in 1980, Gingrich sided with big labor interests until brought to his knees by a National Right to Work education campaign. Contrary to his image, Gingrich has demonstrated throughout his political career that he possesses no real ideological mooring.
Now, his legitimizing the NAACP’s crass political attempt to play the race card reveals him to be nothing more than a rank political opportunist – a White House-aspiring demagogue who prefers looking good for the liberal legacy media to standing up for our rights as citizens and taxpayers.
Practically-speaking, Gingrich no more subscribes to the tea party ideals of limited government, individual liberty and personal responsibility than President Barack Obama. At least, that’s what one could infer from his endorsement of liberal “stimulus”-supporter Dede Scozzafava in upstate New York last year.
In fact, Gingrich previously dismissed the tea party as nothing more than the “militant wing of the Republican Party” — a crude diminution of a diverse group of freedom-loving Americans.
That’s why, when the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People decided to play the race card against the tea party earlier this month, it wasn’t shocking to see Gingrich immediately raise the white flag and suggest that the Tea Party should give credence to this attack by co-hosting town hall meetings with the NAACP. Rather than rebuking this unfounded attack and exposing its political motivations, Gingrich chose to cave – again – in hopes of giving America a “teachable moment.”
This policy of appeasement had disastrous results in past. In fact, it is responsible for the GOP’s fateful retreat from its limited government roots after the “Republican Revolution” of 1994.
“When the Republican Party faced withering criticism during the government shutdown of 1995 to 1996, our leaders folded instead of standing their ground,” then-former Rep. Tom Coburn wrote in his 2001 book, “Breach of Trust.” “Rather than doing the hard work of explaining to the public, or even to rank-and-file Republicans, what was necessary to reduce the size of government, our leaders retreated.”
By taking the easy way out, and bowing to the altar of political-correctness, Gingrich established a pattern of appeasement that has defined the GOP to this day. Making matters worse, it was his arrogance which precipitated the costly sellout.
"He told a room full of reporters that he forced the shutdown because Clinton had rudely made him and Bob Dole sit at the back of Air Force One,” former House majority leader Tom DeLay later wrote. “Newt had been careless to say such a thing, and now the whole moral tone of the shutdown had been lost. What had been a noble battle for fiscal sanity began to look like the tirade of a spoiled child. The revolution, I can tell you, was never the same.”
Nor was the Republican Party -- which from that moment began caving left and right to the Washington establishment it was elected to uproot.
In short order, Gingrich’s Contract with America gave way to bridges to nowhere and other big government spending outrages.
Now, in the hope of positioning himself as a legitimate presidential contender in 2012, Gingrich is again betraying the ideals of the limited government movement for his own political gains. Instead of calling NAACP leaders out as intellectual frauds, Gingrich is seeking to give their race-baiting views a national platform at the tea party’s expense.
Such appeasement is a recipe for disaster.
True limited government advocates should recognize both the NAACP and Gingrich for what they are – enemies in the fight for greater personal and economic freedom for all Americans.
That is the real “teachable moment” of Gingrich’s latest betrayal.
Ping!
A legacy of betrayal and appeasement. Newt is all mouth, all the time.
NO NEWT!!!!
One of Hannity’s Pals !
As they say in the bayous - “Don’t let that alligator mouth overload that mosquito ass”
Yesterday, Michael Savage correctly stated that Gingrich is going to be just another put up candidate by the Rinos as McLame was. And he would lose against Obama just as McLame did as planned by the Rinos. Expect to see the left hyping Gingrich as a great candidate.
You are correct, but not as much as Romney.
Brave Sir New ran away.
Bravely ran away, away!
When danger reared its ugly head,
He bravely turned his tail and fled.
Yes, brave Sir Newt turned about
And gallantly he chickened out.
Bravely taking to his feet
He beat a very brave retreat,
Bravest of the brave, Sir Newt!
If the republican establishment allows the MSM to chose the republican candidate AGAIN, they have only themselves to blame when they lose. I WILL NOT VOTE FOR A REPUBLICAN JUST BECAUSE HE IS NOT A DEMOCRAT. IT WILL NOT WORK THIS TIME. I WILL ONLY VOTE FOR A CONSERVATIVE. SO, IF THE REPUBLICANS WANT TO WIN, THEY NEED TO RUN A CONSERVATIVE.
Maybe, if I say it loud enough and often enough, the pubbies might hear me. /wishful thinking
I watched the VP debate, she wiped the floor with Biden.
Her obvious limits are in your mind... I’ll take Palin over anybody if she runs. Thou Demint would be my second choice if she does not run.
Gingrich did what nobody thought was ever possible - his Contract With America swept in the first Republican controlled House and Senate in decades.
Then he pi$$ed it all away. Bye-bye, Newty.
Even though I don't like Newt for anything other than a political commentator or maybe history teacher...this statement is pretty silly.
So obvious, I guess you think these "limits" go without saying. Sounds a bit like the easy dismissal tactic of the MSM and our lefty enemies. You don't get off that easy here at FreeRepublic.
So I'll ask: such as_________________________________?
You must have seen a different debate than I saw. She wouldn’t answer any questions. You know how at the end of political debates the candidates are allowed “closing statements”? Her entire debate was one long closing statement. Biden never responded or attacked because there was no need to. Obama was carrying the election and the only thing Biden could do was harm their campaign. Nobody on either side forgets the dangers of debating women. You can ask Rick Lazio about that.
Macroeconomics
According to Rush yesterday, Newt is saying and doing what it will take to get the GOP nomination.
Now what does that tell you?
See my tagline....
It tells me that Caligula will get four more years to complete his marxist takeover.
In the near future will you also be telling us that Bertha Lewis is soon to become the next Mother-Teresa.
Is Sarah Palin the next Joan of Arc??
Caddis the Elder
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.