Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

To: Optimus Maximus
While I disagree with your assertions, I appreciate that you stated your views intelligently. Thank you for that.

Newt Gingrich should receive credit for putting together the conservative revolution of 1994. He did many things well in Congress, and he showed himself to be an effective legislator. He has many years of faithful party service, and that service has earned him the support of many party stalwarts.

On the other hand, he shouldn't get as much credit for some of the accomplishments as some give him. Welfare reform began to gain support in the late 80's and was supported by a huge majority of the voters in 1995. The balanced budgets of the 1990's came largely from Bill Clinton's deep cuts in the military, the so-called "peace dividend." The late 90's were also a time of increased revenue from the internet explosion. Some good things happened during that time, but Newt Gingrich doesn't deserve as much credit as he sometimes claims.

Against those successes are some failures. Many people in Congress during that time were not happy with his leadership. He was good at creating the revolution. He was no so good at keeping things running smoothly as leader. Unlike Sarah Palin who was forced out of office by false accusations, Newt Gingrich was forced from his leadership position by his own bad character.

Newt Gingrich is a good man and an intelligent man, but he's not the purist conservative that many try to claim. He was an early proponent of individual mandates at the federal level. To me, the individual mandate is the least destructive part of Obamacare, but to claim that Newt Gingrich is so far above and removed from mandates and other policies that we dislike is false. He has supported cap and trade. He chases after a million ideas and some of those ideas end up being bigger government ideas.

He hasn't run his campaign that well, and running a campaign is one way to demonstrate the executive skills that would make a good president. He's had ballot access problems. The vacation immediately after making his announcement was ill-timed. If he'd started focusing on ballot access and other issues at that time, maybe he'd be doing better now. Certainly, he's have appeared to be a more serious candidate.

I don't dislike Newt Gingrich, but I can't see him being a particularly effective president.

54 posted on 03/18/2012 1:34:09 PM PDT by WFTR (Liberty isn't for cowards)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies ]



Some good things happened during that time, but Newt Gingrich doesn’t deserve as much credit as he sometimes claims.
Really? Name one of those “good things” that was not proposed in the Contract with America, a Gringrich design, and was not pushed through by the majorities Gingrich was responsible for getting elected.

On the other side, can you cite ONE conservative advance proposed and supported by Romney?

Newt has continued to work through his American Solutions project to identify other conservative ideals that poll in the 70% support and above range from ALL voters. That is the way to move the ball forward toward reversing decades of constitutional encroachment. That is the mark of a leader.

He does have lots of ideas, and some not so good. To me, that’s a much better approach than no ideas maintenance of the status quo. Take his latest energy observations. Has anyone else pointed out the reduction in the national debt possible from the royalties that would be realized if domestic energy production by the private sector was unleashed? When coupled with the jobs and the reduction in oil prices, these are the types of practical solutions that catch the imagination of the average voter and propel them to the voting booth.
Newt Gingrich was forced from his leadership position by his own bad character.

Surely you know that is a meda/lib/progressive talking point and is patently untrue. As I said previously, he was “Palinized” before Palin made a splash on the national scene. I think that’s why she supports him. He was cleared of ALL charges, which were simply used to smear his name by the MSM/Liberal/Progressive cabal because they wanted to stop him. As usual, the mushy moderate GOP-E would NOT engage to defend one of our own. He resigned of his own volition because the repubs lost seats in the mid-term elections of 1998, the GOP-E was tired of the negative MSM onslaught against him, and he felt they would no longer support him, based on their non-support in the ethics slander against him. If that’s resigning in disgrace, we need a lot more politicians that act that way. Please do not continue making such a historically inaccurate slanderous charge. Support whomever you choose, but do it based on honesty and ideas, not falsehoods, please.

Once elected, to be effective in implementing conservative principles, we will need either a conservative majority in both houses, or a conservative POTUS that can go over the head of the MSM/Lib/progressive misrepresentation of those ideas a la Reagan. I do not see either Romney or Santorum capable of pulling off either of those requirements.

I fear for our future, and the time for half-measures is long past.

61 posted on 03/18/2012 3:02:38 PM PDT by Optimus Maximus (The criterion of truth is that it works even if nobody is prepared to acknowledge it -L von Mises)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

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