Skip to comments.Gingrich: If it comes to a shutdown, the GOP should stick to its principles
Posted on 02/11/2012 10:50:08 PM PST by JediJones
The Washington establishment believes that the government shutdown of 1995 was a disastrous mistake that accomplished little and cost House Republicans politically.
The facts are exactly the opposite.
While the shutdown produced some short-term pain, it set the stage for a budget deal in 1996 that led to the largest drop in federal discretionary spending since 1969. The discipline imposed by this budget overall spending grew at an average of 2.9 percent a year while I was speaker of the House, the slowest rate in decades allowed us to reach a balanced-budget deal in 1997.
...the balanced budget was an outcome driven by House Republicans with limited support from skeptical Senate Republicans [Me: RINOs.].
House Republicans passed a constitutional amendment requiring a balanced budget. Seventy-two Democrats joined us, giving us the required two-thirdsmajority to amend the Constitution. Unfortunately, the Senate failed to reach this threshold by one vote.
Our constitutional amendment would have set a seven-year deadline to balance the budget. We adopted the same timetable and created a plan that would end deficit spending by 2002.
It was President Bill Clintons veto of our budget in December 1995 that closed the government. The White House knew that it could use the power of the presidency and the support of liberal media to blame us.
We could cave in and be accepted by the Washington establishment, or we could stand firm for a balanced budget for the American people.
We decided to stick to our principles through a very contentious and difficult period.
Nonetheless, the ultimate result was the first four consecutive balanced budgets since the 1920s...
Becoming one more promise-breaking, Washington-dominated, sellout group is a much worse fate politically and ethically than having the government close for a few days.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Look closer, this was written by Newt Gingrich.
Newt would have kept the gov’t shut down! It was quisling Dole that genuflected— I can still vividly see him standing at his desk in the Senate, cutting the rug form under the House conservative insurgents and Newt.
Regrettably, that capitulation by Dole- was what began the down slide in Newt’s revolution— one now he will hopefully revive in 2013.
“This would all have been impossible had Republicans not stood firm in 1995 and shown the American people (and the White House) that we were serious about reducing spending.”
That works for me. Thanks for sharing.
If that’s the point you were trying to make, then I have to give you the award for the dumbest post I’ve seen on FR in the last week. The idea that the content of this article, which contains nothing liberal, is deemed by you as being liberal simply because it was published in the Washington Post is beyond stupid. Not to mention, they publish Charles Krauthammer’s columns, many of which I can assure you express conservative opinions.
Gingrich conveniently leaves the fact that back in the mid-90s he was trying to get his caucus to back down on their conservative principles. And Gingrich, IN HIS OWN WORDS, said "he melted around Clinton."
The Washington Post would not be giving aid and comfort to a presidential nominee at this time. They want one of their guys - Romney or Gingrich- to be the nominee. They will own support one of the megaRINOs.
Your post says a lot about you, loser. Seems you are more attracted to liars than patriots.
Check the date on the article, this is from last year. I noticed it had never been posted on FR so I posted it since the history on the government shutdown is worth talking about. It shows Newt has always been willing to fight the establishment.
Sorry, but a random out-of-context quote here and there cannot rewrite the history that Newt presided over the most conservative House any of us have seen in modern times. Sorry if every GOP member wasn’t happy with it, but as Ron Paul shows us, it’s very easy to be a Congressman in a safe district to push for right-wing perfection, but harder to negotiate such a deal with a liberal President. The Republicans in the 2000s had a Republican president, and still didn’t accomplish as many conservative achievements as Newt did under Clinton.
Who is a liar? You actually believe adultery is patriotism?
And that was driven by the moderate mentality that it was bad for Dole’s presidential election.
>> Look even closer, it’s in the Washington Post. I think this says a lot about Gingrich.
LOL... shoot the messenger...
>> You actually believe adultery is patriotism?
C’mon, have you ever seen his ex?
I am old enough to remember 1998 and 1999. I was on Free Republic back then. It was critical we get Bill Clinton out of office. Newt Gingrich saved his presidency. The second he was caught having his affair Clinton was saved. And Gingrich knew that. He is a traitor.
I just realized that no one can do a FUBO like acronym with Charles Krautmammer's name without getting the language police down on you.
Nope, Chester Lott and Santorum saved his presidency and I don’t recall you being here in ‘99. You’re very fortunate Jim has given you a pass when it comes to slandering Newt Gingrich because you’re one of the worst vile offenders.
So we can all agree with Santorum on this, that MORE immigrants, (open the spigot- in his words) is what is needed to fix our problems, including our low birthrates correct? This is what he said. And that they learn English- (his words again) and just a guess I but I think I know where these new immigrants will be comming from don't you?. http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=sUSUGIfggTI
Thanks very much for this posterity posting!
“Newt would have kept the govt shut down! It was quisling Dole that genuflected I can still vividly see him standing at his desk in the Senate, cutting the rug form under the House conservative insurgents and Newt.”
And, the shut down was seen as hurting Dole’s chance to be elected...................as if.
You are both right!
I believe the ‘rats were one day away from caving before Dole pulled the rug out.
For everybody else, the 1994 election was about the American people and the Constitution. Why for Gingrich and his supporters, it's all about Gingrich and slamming everyone else. If nothing else, this throwing Reagan, the Constitution, the American people, all the other Senators and Reps under the bus is a real turnoff. If Gingrich was a real conservative, he wouldn't need to put himself above everyone and everything. If only Gingrich would praise Reagan or the Constitution as much as he does Nancy Pelosi.
(Why don't you read the post Gingrich put on his web site after endorsing Scozzafava, where he declares jihad on conservatives/ Oh, yeah, he took it down to fool conservatives)
“Newt Gingrich saved his presidency.”
Bob Dole saved Clinton’s presidency.
PS. Rick Santorum has backtracked from his 2008 endorsement of Mitt Romney by saying he was for anyone but McCain. In this 2008 interview with Laura Ingraham Santorum praised Romney at great length contradicting some of what he says today. In the interview, Santorum calls Romney a true conservative and says he is someone we can trust. http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/seven-minutes-of-rick-santorum-talking-about-how-g
To be fair, I was here in ‘98 and ‘99, too...just not registered.
Man oh man, what a free for all it was back then! You guys scared me to death! lol
And Dole now supports? RS
I was here in ‘98 using WebTV....LOL.
“The second he was caught having his affair Clinton was saved.”
How can that be? Newt didn’t resign until ‘99.
Clinton was reelected in ‘96.
You better check the threads, because I have held my tongue for about a month. But now there’s a conservative that can beat Romney, not just Romney Jr.
Dole endorsed Mittens.
God love you for being so smart. I never could figure that thing out. lol
Here’s the link.
You really aren’t going to convince anyone. Nancy Reagan was the most protective of President Reagan, and in ‘95 she handed the mantle or torch that belonged to Reagan to Newt Gingrich that was handed to him by Barry Goldwater!
Now THAT’s funny.
Oh, I didn’t post after I got told off after my second post, when I neglected to close the bold font, so when I got a computer I signed up under this screen name instead of the variation of my own name. I was a mess trying to learn on WebTV!
More importantly, the timeline is off from what you claim. Once Ginrich's affair was out, the public was never going to tolerate Clinton being removed from office. So in December of '98 and January 1999, the damage was done. You can't blame Santorum for the situation Gingrich put all of them in. He was the traitor.
Ha! Now that you mention it.......;o)
Very clever, lwoodham!
I was talking about his impeachment/removal from office.
I’m impressed that you tried!
I remember one of my first posts, and someone didn’t close their tags. I had no clue as to what that was. I thought I broke FR!
It was a while before I figured that one out. lol
First of all, we all know Nancy was never as conservative as Reagan, and supported many things he didn’t. She endorsed McCain in ‘08, and would endorse Romney this year, if he’s the nominee. Second, is Nancy now claiming she doesn’t support Gingrich, etc.
>> If only Gingrich would praise Reagan or the Constitution as much as he does Nancy Pelosi.
I was giving your post an honest read up until the Pelosi silliness.
So I can only assume you prefer Santorum, who is a big govt nanny-statist, yes, no?
Seriously, there’s no one else contending that can drive the Country out of the ditch. There’s no way in Hell Santorum can deal with this. His aptitude is less than half of what’s required.
Oh! I see what you mean. thank you for the clarification.
I think you can lay Clinton’s non-removal from office squarely at the Senate’s feet. They didn’t want to go up against an incumbent President Gore.
All I know about Dole is that he’s reported to have stamina.
And so does his dog. I think I remember his dog doing Britny Spears in a TV commercial.
Clinton has the press on his side. He was a rock star and Ken Starr was a nosy troll.
I didn’t even want Santorum to run, but at least he’s a conservative, unlike the other three.
My point was and is, that Nancy Reagan wouldn’t have participated had she thought Newt Gingrich was a backstabber to HER Ronnie and that was Romney’s intent in his attack ads and also the theme of the establishment and news media running against Newt Gingrich.
During a recent debate, an ABC News commentator passed a bag of stones to Republicans on stage (in the form of questions about marital infidelity and personal character). Every candidate, except for one, grabbed a handful of rocks, to throw at the man they considered the sinner amongst them. In a scene right out of, well, the Bible, Republican candidates - again and again - pelted the sinner, a great sinner, to be sure, with stones; all the while, reassuring the audience: they, the upstanding candidates, were nothing like the sinner. Each of them, they made it clear, were more fit to the hold the office. Their sins were small, not the large sort the sinner was guilty of; humans of quality, they.
In another scene, right out of, well, the Bible, Jesus once spoke to those with great confidence in their own goodness: "Two men went to the Temple to pray. One was a Pharisee, and the other was a dishonest tax collector. The proud Pharisee stood by himself and prayed this prayer: `I thank you, God, that I am not a sinner like everyone else, especially like that tax collector over there! For I never cheat, I don't sin, I don't commit adultery, I fast twice a week, and I give you a tenth of my income.'
But the tax collector stood at a distance and dared not even lift his eyes to heaven as he prayed. Instead, he beat his chest in sorrow, saying, `O God, be merciful to me, for I am a sinner.' I tell you, this sinner, not the Pharisee, returned home justified before God."
This sinner. Old as the Message is, it is so new and wonderful, if rightly presented, as to awaken astonishment in the weary, imperfect hearts who hear. When babes in Christ give themselves to the Lord - justified through the Redeemer's sacrifice, brought into the family of God, begotten of the Holy Spirit - it means a great change for these. It means a Miracle. Old things pass away; all things become new.
Only Now, just like Then whited walls, the outside-of-the-cup crowd, invested in the appearance of good conduct and their "core" principles, make the Precious Savior, Bringer of Peace, Lifter of Burdens, unapproachable, uninviting, intimidating, to sinners seeking forgiveness, desperate for a second chance. The Rick Perrys, the Michelle Bachmanns, the Ron Pauls, the Rick Santorums and Mitt Romneys of today's world, their banners of spiritual pride waving high, keep multitudes of sinners standing afar off, sure they are unworthy to approach the only One who can make them new.
On that stage, that night, there was not one word - not one word - from the political Christians about the miraculous saving work of Christ Jesus, sufficient to change, to make all things new, to transform the worst sinner, even Newt, into a new creature.
America is full of sinners, who love their country, many of whom would die for it, and according to the purity test of the republicans on stage that night, they probably couldnt run for dog catcher. Steve Deace sees things a little differently: sometimes the greatest sinners, "the most broken people are the ones God does the most tremendous work through."
No one has walked a mile in Newt's shoes, except for Newt. No one on that stage knows the crowded corners of Newt's heart. There is only one thing every believer truly knows about Newt... he is forgiven.
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.