Newt had his chance, but he blew it: Why Gingrich won’t earn the 2012 GOP presidential nomination

NY Daily News ^ | 11-23-11 | SE Cupp

[MNJohnnie]

I was only 15 in 1994, when Newt Gingrich experienced his last great moment. (Well, before this one, where he’s surging in the polls, with his campaign having figured out how to run for President.) So I don’t really remember Newt’s glory days.

I have interviewed him on many occasions, however, as far back as 2006 and as recently as last month, and every time we talk, I’m struck by how smart he is. Despite that, I can’t get past the nagging voice in my head telling me that no matter how good he would be at running the country, he doesn’t deserve to.

Call me a square, but Newt’s past mistakes occupy both columns: character and politics. From his ugly romantic entanglements to his flirtation with environmentalism to his questionable relationship with Freddie Mac, bad decisions and lapses in judgment have been too frequent for a man of such obvious intelligence.

And yet, for all his mistakes, Newt remains startlingly unembarrassed, which makes those mistakes even less palatable. Though arrogance and a lack of shame characterize Capitol Hill, I’m suspicious of a guy who’s had so many public errors, and is so untroubled by them.

[hinckley buzzard]

That other 50% of illegals he mentions, those here for years. There is no way that they vast majority of them could have stayed, put down roots, without doing something illegal... Should they be deported?

What do you think? Should they?

[dragnet2]

Time for Newt to join Perry on the stage..

[presently no screen name]

deport them- a sentiment shared by the majority of Americans, let alone conservatives.

A sentiment doesn't mean it can be a reality! My sentiment is Mitt doesn't belong on the panel and my sentiment is I want all liberals in one state. Then there is reality. I want them all deported, also. I can't get out of my mind that rancher in AZ who was killed by illegals who came on his property about a year ago. And it wasn't the first time they came on his property - it was on going - something he had to live with for a long time! And that is just 'one' incident. It isn't even touching on how they are allowed to rob our systems whether it's health, welfare, licenses or school and everything else they are given. They can't have it unless it's given to them. So America has it's own illegal acts.

Oh, and even Sarah Palin said deport them.

Wrong - Show me where Sarah said that. She speaks common sense and she doesn't promise pie in the sky. So go get the info where Sarah said that. You are all rhetoric, also.

[hinckley buzzard]

So what’s Newt going to do about the ones who have only been here 10 years or less? What are the details about that situation? He’d better come out and clarify it, or he’s lost my vote.

He answered that in detail last night but like so many idiot newtbashers, you apparently didn't care enough to pay attention.

If you cared enough to listen to the debate you would know the answer. But you don't really give a sh^t, you're just hocking up spew.

Take your vote and shove it, Newt won't need you anyway..

[moehoward]

Are you a single woman, because I think I’m in love.

[Toespi]

There is NO candidate that will ever pack’m up and move’m out. You know why? They will never be elected.

[normy]

It seems pro-life, pro-gun, pro-tax cuts, pro military is not enough anymore. Purity means backing my impure candidate.

[hinckley buzzard]

Newt described how, once the border is secure, he would go about finding and deporting those who were not embedded longterm in their communities. The Newt-haters here conveniently overlook the fact that, as with other things, Newt is the only candidate with a fully thought-out plan, and which decidedly does not include citizenship. Those are the facts as of last night's debate, but many here prefer lying to telling the truth.

[hinckley buzzard]

I’m glad Bachmann was willing to step up and slap him up against the head.

What is Bachmann's plan? Quickly now. How will she solve the problem?

[ken5050]

I'm not sure...Here's what conflicts me..

1.As I think I understand Newt and Perry, they want to be able to let them stay.permanently..but NOT as citizens. I gather the main difference will be that they won't be able to vote. I agree with that, but am not sure if I like the idea of creaing a permanent separate class of several million in this country.

Also, I'm no expert on immigration law, but I believe we have provisos where peopel who emigrate legally to theis country, become citizens, are then able to legally bring over their immediate family members. There would be tremendous pressure to enbale this new class to do the same..thus adding millions more.

And what about benefits, entitlements... especially medical costs as they age. It adds trillons..

No, I think they have to go back..

[hinckley buzzard]

No, I think you missed what Newt said about deportation.

Tell the truth--you didn't hear the debate, did you.

[presently no screen name]

LOL! You’re right. They keep adding to their demands. They sound like kidnappers holding others hostage.

[hinckley buzzard]

I'm glad you pointed that out, but the anti-Newt slugs will have none of it. They don't care about no steenkin' laws.

[wardaddy]

I am a Newt supporter..but u r quite right

I was never a good enuff for them Sarah supportet

Now I will be called amnestybot which is hilarious if anyone here knows my 11 year history

[txroadkill]

Newt described how, once the border is secure, he would go about finding and deporting those who were not embedded longterm in their communities. The Newt-haters here conveniently overlook the fact that, as with other things, Newt is the only candidate with a fully thought-out plan, and which decidedly does not include citizenship. Those are the facts as of last night's debate, but many here prefer lying to telling the truth.

Here is the problem with what Newt said last night. He is supposed to be the smartest guy in the room,but there is a really good reason why others have not said what they would with those already here, we don't have a secure border. Specifying a plan Like Newt did last night with an open border could cause a disaster for those of us living in border states.

Newt was leading in some polls going into that debate and what he said could signal to people in Mexico to get here now because 'Newt is going to let us stay!' Was Newt's plan right? maybe, I don't believe the American people have the will to throw people out of this country. But it was irresponsible for him to say that in the position he is in now and on the stage that he said it. That leads me to question his judgement and knowledge of what is actually happening on the border.

There was no reason for him to say it last night, his answer should have been, "Secure the Border, then we'll talk". By doing so it leaves me to believe he was pandering to moderates to take votes from Mittens, and being disrespectful, once again, to the base (TEA Party).

[Toespi]

“What is Bachmann’s plan? Quickly now. How will she solve the problem?”

I can answer that. First, she will go in to the elementary schools and take every child K-5 of an illegal immigrant out of the classroom, send them to Mexico, if their parents want to see them again, they will have to move back to Mexico. Secondly, she will show up at every Cathlic mass and voila, instant deportation. Mexican food stores, huge grab there!

[LibsRJerks]

Oh, I think he’ll need my vote. But I don’t think he wants it. Not sure the guy even wants to be president at this point.

Sorry, but I did NOT hear the details of what he’d do. He was far too focused on the endearing long-term illegals we have in this country. Like we should all just push aside the rule of law so they can all feel more comfortable —

Talk about spew.

[rintense]

Google Palin on BOR and read for yourself.

[presently no screen name]

Exactly. He did his homework. The others just say ‘what we need’ and everyone gets excited hearing what we already know. That seems enough for them with like you said - no plan attached to their rhetoric.

Yes, they sure appear to not prefer the truth as we can see here.

Did you see this thread -

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2811564/posts

[presently no screen name]

Not good enough - you said it - you back it up!