Newt Gingrich for President?

Newt GingrichMr. Gingrich has been in and around the political arena for a long, long time. After all these years he knows how to play the political game, or at least he thinks he still does. I believe that his most recent presidential interviews clearly show that he has mellowed out politically since his true-blue conservative days of the nineties. I can clearly see from his recent political flip-flopping statements that he believes that he has to appear to be both a conservative liberal and a moderate conservative to have any true hopes of ever getting into the White House. (One of the most obvious examples of this is Newt’s climate control spot with ultra-liberal Nancy Pelosi. Many conservatives believe these types of ads will ‘hurt’ Newt’s chances of winning a presidential race. I do not think so. I personally believe this ad, like other seemingly politically correct, anti-conservative ads, are part of Newt’s (future) scheme to win over those voters who would not vote for him if he chose to run for president as a dedicated conservative.)
Mr. Gingrich is a very, very intelligent (I.Q. intelligent) person, but so was the Absent Minded Professor. (Sometimes very intelligent people say or do real dumb, unthinking things.) Now, none of us are perfect, but the conservative public is not going to be quick to forget a very blatant political or personal slight, especially when it is done against a very nice conservative or liberal politician, as when Newt recently referred to Congressman Paul Ryan’s budget plan as some sort of “Right Wing Social Engineering.”. Mr. Gingrich recently found that his lack of tact when criticizing Congressman Paul Ryan’s budget plan has back-fired politically causing him to walk it back and issue several apologies. I believe the words ‘political traitor’ have rolled off the lips of many true conservatives in America because of what Newt said about Paul’s budget plan! (Newt Gingrich, he of supposedly very high intelligence showing a lack of basic political wisdom.) He has since apologized, or so it would appear. Oh, I know that publically Newt has said he was sorry for what he said about Paul Ryan’s budget plan. My question is, was it a genuine apology or simple political theater ? There are those arrogant politicians who are so into themselves that they actually believe that everything they say will be received well because, after all, they said it. (President Obama is a good example of that.) Newt needs to remind himself that this type of political arrogance works well for liberals but not for conservatives.

I know that many people, especially true conservatives, believe that Mr. Gingrich pretty much ended any presidential aspirations for 2012, when he publically ridiculed fellow conservative Paul Ryan’s budget proposals. I disagree. I believe when Newt slammed Paul Ryan (and then ‘apologized’ a day later for doing that) Newt caught the attention a lot of possible voters who voted for Obama in the last election, but who are not going to vote for him again. I believe Newt’s anti-Paul Ryan comments caught the ear of voters who are disenchanted with President Obama and who are looking for a candidate who is not too far to the right of the political center, and someone who is conservative enough to get America on track economically. ( kind of like more of a Blue Dog Democrat instead of a Conservative Republican.) Someone not so conservative that they would touch the sacred cows of Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security, even though technically, those programs are on their way to insolvency if they are not reformed very soon. (Newt kind of pulled the same political game when he went to Iowa and started telling the people of Iowa that ethanol was a great product—even though most Americans and Newt know that it is not. Ethanol subsidies also cost the U.S. taxpayer over $11 billion dollars in 2010.)

Though there is a wonderful conservative Tea Party movement going on in America I do not believe the movement is large enough to dominate or determine the outcome of a national presidential race,although I do believe they do have the clout to determine which Republican candidate will be in the national election. So I believe Newt is willing to ‘sell his soul’ to moderate or conservative Democrats, moderate Republicans, and many Independents in hopes of winning a presidential election. That is why I personally believe the slamming of Paul Ryan’s budget plan was either purposely planned, or politically used by Newt in an attempt to gain support from a wide range of voters on the national political level.

Unfortunately for Newt, I don’t believe he thought he was going to get so much conservative backlash from what he said about Paul Ryan’s budget proposals. (I believe Newt is finding out those ‘pesky’ Tea Party Conservatives are the real deal!) So once Newt starting receiving all the Tea Party-like backlash from his careless comments about Ryan’s budget planes he wisely ‘back-downed’ (at least verbally) with an apology. ( Newt is also smart enough to know he also needs the conservative vote, along with the moderate Democratic and Independent vote if he wants to be president.)

As I see and hear of Newt ‘compromising’ his conservative values, I believe Newt is not seeing an important piece of the puzzle that is critical to his making it to the White House in 2012. He has to win the Republican nomination first! I believe Newt has over-looked that fact that it is not the moderate or conservative Democrats that make up the the Republican base of voters. If Newt Gingrich truly wants to have any hopes of making it to the White House, he had better figure out ways to soundly and truthfully reconcile himself to the true conservative base in the Republican Party. These are the voters who will either make or break him at the Republican Convention—the first of two steps to White House.

When a conservative politician aspires to be in office and then makes statements to the contrary of what they are supposed to believe in, it is very difficult for that conservative/moderate/flip-flopping conservative to explain all of the ‘new’ (confusing and misleading) positions they now claim to have. (This is what is commonly known as political waffling, and it speaks of a lack of character.) This type of tactic works well if one is running as a beloved liberal with total media support, but if you are running as any type of conservative this will not work! Newt has already found out that the same ‘media love’ for liberals is not offered to conservatives—no matter how middle of the road they say they are! An obvious example of this was when Newt ‘bashed’ Paul Ryan’s budget plans. The liberal Democrats used that situation to falsely proclaim in false, Medicare cut ads that stated that even some conservative Republicans do not agree with the Paul Ryan’s ‘extreme’ budget plant; which of course was not true. One extreme Democratic ad even went so far as to portray Paul Ryan as pushing Granny in a wheelchair off of a cliff to her death!

The political times are very different today, then they were in the nineties, back in days of Newt’s previous political powerhouse. Not only do I believe this will be the most expensive presidential election we’ve ever had, I also believe this upcoming presidential race is going to be the politically meanest and dirtiest election in a real long time. The internet has changed the way people get information—and unfortunately much of that ‘information’ is made-up political lies. Also, much of the information you read on the internet about political candidates is much more personally detailed than it has ever been before. By the time the presidential election roles around in 2012 people are going to know much more about the personal and private life of Newt Gingrich then they might even know about their own parents.

Mr. Gingrich also has the baggage of past sexual affairs in his political resume. These are tough to overcome when you are running as a Conservative. I know, I know, a lot of people say a man’s personal life should not be a determining factor when voting for someone. I believe many disagree with that opinion—especially people on the Conservative side of the ticket. Many believe that if a person cannot keep their wedding promises, how will they ever keep their political promises? Do people make mistakes? Absolutely! However, many believe making the decision to cheat on your husband or wife shows a true lack of moral character, and leads people to not trust in that person. Many agree that if you cheat on your spouse, you will also cheat (lie) to get into office. Voters do not forget adulterous affairs that easily,especially if the politician was a conservative.

I personally believe that ultimately it is not Newt’s (sometime) lack of conservative savvy or lack of political tact which might cost him this election. I believe at the end of the day it might boil down to his lack of personal charisma. For many Newt comes across as curmudgeon of a politician who is just going through the motions of feeding his ego in running for president. He just does not seem to be excited about the political quest he has involved himself in. From what I have seen of Newt so far, (and it still early in the race) he just does not come across as a presidential candidate who has the ‘fire burning in his belly’ to really want the job.

Let’s also face some other facts about Newt. He is not what some might call an attractive person, and he does not come across as being a charismatic speaker, even though he is a very intelligent speaker. A lot of Americans are very superficial when it comes to finally deciding who they are going to vote for as president. A lot of Americans will simply vote for a candidate if that candidate both looks good and talks good. Again, I know it is early in the 2012 Presidential primaries, but Newt does not come across as the much favored “fresh face” many voters are demanding in 2012.

This country is pretty much split down the middle between the two major political parties. Both sides are in the fight of their lives. I would encourage Mr. Gingrich to try to avoid burning the conservative bridges as he strives to reach the White House. ( he may have already burned too many ) Chances are that the very conservatives he ridicules, mocks, or ignores (on his march to Pennsylvania Avenue) will run him out of town at the Republican Convention!

While we are still a long way off from the 2012 election, Newt Gingrich has certainly made his path to win the 2012 Republican nomination for President a lot more difficult by alienating a good percentage of the conservative voters in America. I believe that Newt could make a good president, but he definitely has to pick up his game a bit. He not only needs to work on his political demeanor, but I also believe he also needs to work on being a more likeable (i.e. funny, charismatic, friendly, but conservatively bold) Reagon-esque type of candidate. The question is whether or not Newt will ever be able to recover from his recent statements that have really turned a lot of conservatives and Republicans alike away from him. Only time will tell.


See the profiles of other potential 2012 GOP Candidates

Support Conservative Daily News with a small donation via Paypal or credit card that will go towards supporting the news and commentary you've come to appreciate.

Rich Mitchell

Rich Mitchell is the editor-in-chief of Conservative Daily News and the president of Bald Eagle Media, LLC. His posts may contain opinions that are his own and are not necessarily shared by Bald Eagle Media, CDN, staff or .. much of anyone else. Find him on twitter, facebook and

Related Articles

One Comment

  1. As a Republican, I am beginning to resent the TEA PARTY. You better realize that not ALL republicans (and I have plenty of friends) are behind Paul Ryan’s plan. If the tea party REALLY cares about this country, and they DON’T WANT ANOTHER FOUR YEARS OF OBAMA, they better get their act together and STOP criticizing Newt Gingrich. Many BELIEVE he is the ONLY ONE with the intellect to turn this country around and would rather stay home and NOT vote AND START figuring out where we are going to move to as opposed to another 4 years of Obama. If you really believe that idiots like Ron Paul and phonies like Bachman can win the independants and persuade democrats to cross over, then you may as well start packing too because we’re dead. Romney is a flip flopper and Gingrich may have back tracked BUT you know where his core beliefs are if you’ve followed his solutions for years.
    So smarten up people. Shame on you.

    1. Wait, which party is it you think you represent? Gingrich left the house head down and shamed having failed to impeach Clinton and having cheated on his own wife. Most moral human beings call that hypocrisy.

      Ethics comes down to doing the right thing even when no one is looking. Newt failed that test.

      Your odd defense of Romney is even more baseless.

      Hating the Tea Parties (not the Tea Party) is a left-of-center tactic. Only liberals or uninformed centrists would make the mistake of thinking that Tea Parties (loose groups of concerned citizens) are a third or alternative party.

      You sound more like an angry liberal than a Republican with friends. Then again if you are an angry liberal, you may not have all those friends you mentioned either.

      1. I think you should take a deep breath and re-read my comment. If you read, I never said that I hated the tea party, my comment was that I was beginning to resent it. They do not speak for ALL republicans, and to set the record straight, I AM a republican and the majority of my friends, acquaintences and business associates are republicans. With that said, I will ALSO clarify that Paul Ryan’s plan does NOT appeal to ALL republicans such as myself and those I speak to. We don’t want his plan shoved down our throats anymore than Obamacare. The TEA Party’s choice of candidate does not SPEAK for all of us. We are trying to win an election in 2012 and for that reason, we would rather have Newt Gingrich’s solution to have a plan similar to Ryan’s be by choice, NOT mandatory. A President is supposed to represent ALL the people, not just the Tea Party, not just the Democrats and and not just the Republicans. If the Tea Party establishes a third party candidate, we’ll all be stuck with Obama. This country is divided enough, the tea party does not need to divide it more. With that said, your personal attack on candidates (calling any other candidate a “Rino” etc) is not the way a conservative reacts OR thinks. You further went on to attack me personally by calling me and angry liberal which quite frankly, made me laugh hysterically along with those I have forwarded your comment to. We all agree, you must be a truly devoted Ron Paul fan; and his views and policies will never win the majority vote in a General Election. In the same respect, let’s get back to Gingrich. It seems more likely that you have not researched or are aware of the good things he has already accomplished in the past and prefer to attack him personally as opposed to clarify which of his solutions for the future you strongly disagree with. In as far as his “past” personal life, it is unforgivable IF you are his ex-wife or plan to marry the guy. That is between him, the God he chooses to worship, and his family and I am not defending it but to you I say, “he who casts the first stone…. ” His past does NOT disqualify him from getting this country back in the right direction. He did not sit in Rev. Wright’s church for twenty years. If you attack his revolving credit at Tiffany’s than that is hypocrisy, criticizing someone who’s hard worked has paid off, for we all should be able to do what we want with money that is earned through hard work as opposed to having the government take it to “spread the wealth” or enable people to grow dependant and rely on the government for everything.
        For me, I stand by my original comment. I am beginning to resent the Tea Party. They are going to split this country further, and with candidates with an ideolgy like Paul Ryan, or far far right Bachman, we will ALL be STUCK with Obama for another four years and America will never survive. It was fortunate to survive the liberal Jimmy Carter after only four LONG years. Obama will destroy this country if we are not fortunate enough to find someone like Ron Reagan. I doubt that Gingrich will win the GOP nomination, BUT I would vote for him for reasons I find MOST important. I have researched his accomplishments, I agree with his solutions, I admire his intellect and at though I have an open mind to future candidates, I feel that he is the ONLY qualified one so far to straighten out the mess this country is in, and turn it around so it gets back on the right track. He may not have the charisma of Ron Regan, but I will not vote for someone inexperienced. If you want to attack him, attack his solutions, neither the GOP or the Tea Party should attack any candidate personally, NOR should you assume that we ALL agree with it on its choice of candidate. It started out as something good but it can also destroy our chances to get rid of Obama.

        1. Of course the Tea Party doesn’t speak for ALL of the GOP. No one does. Even the GOP doesn’t speak to ALL of the GOP.

          Everyone has their own opinions. But resenting the Tea Party because they don’t support Newt? Why is that different than you not supporting Paul Ryan?

          The beauty of a primary system is that we all get to vote for who we really want early next year. Then, we all come together around who wins the nomination and defeat Obama.

          For now, we get to like who we like, even if not all of your GOP friends like them too.

    2. Anne, I must observe that TrueGOPer appears to have nailed you.

      I consider myself a conservative Republican and find your views and comments alien at best. You deprecate the most honest exhibition of a natural groundswell of political pro-activity in recent memory, the so-called Tea Party movement. What this Tea Party advocacy of disparate groups under no centralized leadeship is doing is single-handedly influencing the debate between the two major parties in power. One might observe accurately that it has become a de facto third party. I would suggest to you that you remove your intellectual ‘blinkers’ and step back to view from the wider perspective.

      Should Boehner and his bunch capitulate on this extending of the debt limit, that single act of weak-kneed betrayal will have squandered us the opportunity to take back control of BOTH houses of congress in 2012 and simultaneously assert the conservatives as the determining influence to the right in the Republican Party. I truly believe that you may then see talk of the various Tea Party entities announcing state meetings with the goal of establishing themselves as a third party alternative. You appear to have little understanding of how the TeaParty appeals to a myriad of independent voters of differing beliefs who ALL now feel impotent politically and frustrated at NOT being able to make their voices and votes turn into real political power. Those folks may be joined by disgusted Republicans who will see a capitulating House leadership as bending to the will of the RINO influences of those like McCain, Romney, et al and further dragging us to the left. We…will join those very independents in a move to replace the Republican Party and render IT as the new “third party”.

      I have made a ‘reasonable’ case for you to consider a revision in your thinking. I suggest you strongly consider it..

      1. I stand by my comment and the fact that it is not simply my opinion. And for the record, I am a republican. The tea party started out as good, I am beginning to resent it. First, it should be able to take criticism and listen to other Republicans and Independents. It is partly the fault of the tea party that we do not have BOTH the House AND the Senate. It should have vetted some of its candidates a lttle more thoroughly. It should not personally attack other GOP candidates. Endorse who they want, it will not influence EVERYBODY’S decision. You are already attacking Boehner and as you put it “his bunch”. The Tea Party started out as good representing the people. Now it appears to be growing power hungry and trying to run the country, and rip apart even GOP candidates personally. If EVERYBODY agreed with the TEA PARTY than EVERYBODY would join one and there would be no discussion. It would be we the people against the government. I said it before, the President is supposed to represent ALL of the people, that is the only way to win the election.

        1. Opine as you will, that’s your right and something we honor this Memorial Day weekend, as we pay homage to the sacrifices of those who guaranteed that right with their lives and blood.

          You do though have a limited and ill-conceived perspective. You habitually refer to the Tea Party as “it”. You did so about a dozen times as if “it” were some centrally organized authority in control of vast numbers of disparate peoples. How wrong can you be? Reread my description of what the Tea Party is. It’s an accurate description. In your mind you incorrectly made “it” the ‘whipping boy’ for every perceived shortcoming of the Republican Party and all that you disagree with. I find that broad a scope of inaccuracy coming from one I presume to be an adult…astounding in the mere contemplation.

          The beauty of the so-called Tea Party is it is NOT a centrally controlled or managed organization. It’s a catch-all and very loosely organized group of American concerned citizens, and goes by many names, who see this very constitutional republic under assault from the left and slipping away. It is accurate to observe that our outlandish accumulated debt and tax and spend policies are the glue that binds them. They are disgusted that an elected body of the peoples’ representatives would manage this country to a lower standard than they manage their own household finances. I could humiliate you by taking you on point-by-point as to your responses, but I’d rather get you to re-evaluate your TOTALLY inaccurate perception of what the Tea Party is, because you couldn’t be more wrong!.

          1. If you read your own reply, you also refer to the Tea Party as “it”. Frankly, I referred to the Tea Party as “it” because I thought it more polite than to express my frustration directly at “you”. I am fully aware of what the Tea Party represents and as I stated, it did start out as good, and as previously stated, I am beginning to resent “it”; not directed at one particular person, for I firmly believe that it can damage our mutual goal of winning the 2012 election by splitting the Republican Party completely if IT becomes a third party. Read the reponses again, referring to McCain as a “Rino”; referring to “Bohener and his bunch”…these are insulting attacks rather than expressing political views. You seem to have the mind set that I hate the Tea Party, which is far from my views if you read carefully. I am frustrated with IT, not one person. It seems that any individual who dares criticize it’s endorsement of one particular candidate, he or she is therefore labled as an “angry liberal” or a centrist which is as ridiculous as the lame stream media labeling ‘it” as a group of far right radicals or racists. If the Tea Party wants to grow, IT needs to STOP attacking republican candidates personally. A candidate MUST represent ALL the people, and this election cannot be about Left vs. Right or Obama will falsely campaign down the middle and we will be stuck. Look at how The Tea Party has turned against Newt G for one interview on MSNBC. LISTEN to his words my friend, he did not attack Paul Ryan personally, and I happen to agree whith him that ANY reform cannot go from one extreme to the other and be shoved down the throats of Americans. What is it that you OR the Tea Party have against his solutions? Is there not ONE person in the entire Tea Party that has been divorced, or re-married more than once? Who is the Tea Party to judge and jury of someone’s personal life? This country is on its knees and needs an EXPERIENCED indivdual to turn it around. In 1995, the idea of balancing the federal budget was not only a pipe dream but was the subject of ridicule in sophisticated Washington circles. President Clinton’s budgets showed deficits of hundreds of billions of dollars as far out as the eye could see. It was Newt’s strategy and leadership as speaker of the House that not only changed the terms of the debate that year, but within three years produced real balanced budgets. In his earliest days as a congressman, he began to challenge the “Old Bulls” who were the Republican establishment on Capitol Hill. When he saw corruption in the House of Representatives, he took it on. He established the Conservative Opportunity Society, a group of young activists who pushed for a legislative agenda emphasizing conservative values and individual opportunity solutions .He challenged the foundations of the liberal welfare state by calling for and achieving significant government reforms. Newt understood the value of supporting science and technology as an underpinning of the rising new economic reality so that even when budget cuts were necessary, he favored the research and development needed to keep American technological leadership.When others called for weakening our national defense posture, Newt stood strong for American military strength. It was Newt Gingrich’s leadership that ended 40 years of liberal Democratic rule in the U.S. House of Representatives and brought in a Republican majority, which not only changed the legislative agenda, but the entire political landscape in America. When endorsing a candidate, the Tea Party should look at the mess inexperience has produced and decide that a new generation of leadership requires someone who bears the scars of winning in an arena that is tough and unforgiving. Are you, or the Tea Party collectively aware that The American military often holds exercises in which the troops simulate real national emergency situations. On many occasions, they have asked Newt to take the role of president in those exercises. One of the most respected institutions in America, our armed forces, has recognized the capability of this leader for good judgment. Values set by the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. It is not a new theme for him, but one that he has studied and written about for more than two decades. Yet the Tea Party, or perhaps even you personally don’t even consider these facts when endorsing a candidate. Certain people including members of the Tea Party such as “true GOPer” above would rather simply refer to this experienced, qualified candidate as a rhino, or be the judge and jury on his qualifications as President because of his past personal life and anything he has done since then is considered by some as irrelevant. Pity. The American people didn’t seem to flinch on Obama’s history with Rev. Wright, or Bill Ayers or past real estate dealings in Chicago. True GOPer also talks about “ethics”. I wonder if he’s aware that all ethics charges brought against Gingrich by Democratic Whip David Bonior were dropped due to inaccurate information. And as a result of the budget fight between Congressional Repbulicans and Clinton, Gingrich led a Republican revolt to allow parts of the Federal Gov’t to shut down, and because of this, many blame him for Republicans losing their seat. BUT the budget was balanced…only Clinton took the credit and was re-elected. Bohener knows this, he was among republicans who wanted Gingrich to step down as speaker. And that’s why Bohener knows he has to negotiate. And Gingrich learned the hard way that a leader has to negotiate. And yet the Tea Party or some of its members such as “true GOPer refer to them as “Bohener and his Bunch”. Hmmm…I’ve heard Bachman say “shut the government down.” without realizing the repercussions it may have as a whole? Is the Tea Party so confident that we could not lose the house in 2012 and get stuck again with Pelosi or even worse? Again, if the Tea Party believes that becoming the “new” 3rd party is going to make Obama the first one term President since Carter, this country is doomed. Stop attacking the other GOP candidates on a personal level. And you should tell that to true GOPer who has no arguement but to call someone a Rhino. That to me, sounds like a liberal.

  2. Of course I referred to the Tea Party as “it” a few times, only so as not to keep repeating that term. I can see by the tone of your response that I’m not about to change your mind so won’t waste any more of my time trying to.

    I will though comment on your assertion that House Majority Leader Boehner needs to compromise. That is a vote for the status quo from one who wants change. Patently illogical. That is political capitulation.

    In these times, when so many people are jusifiably concerned about the dire threat that accumulated financial irresponsibility has imposed on this country by our elected representatives Boehner must be a principled leader, not a vacillating compromiser. There can be no compromising of principles, because principles are not negotiable. Therein lies the difference between your pedestrian politician and the all too rare statesman. Politicians got us in this mess, but it will take statesmen to extricate us out of it. How do you hope to inspire politicians to act like statesmen when you believe in capitulation, in the form of compromise, is the answer?

  3. This has been an exciting comment stream to read. I have purposefully stayed out of it because we have been hotly debating this subject on twitter and on the weekly radio show (https://conservativedailynews.com/on-air/).

    What I have done is to create a poll for all sides to vote in. I am curious to see where the right-of-center really is. If you guys are serious about your friends and who will likely go which way .. vote in the poll, let’s see where the numbers fall. send the link to your friends – let’s learn together.

    Who would you vote for in the 2012 GOP Presidential Primary? (https://conservativedailynews.com/2011/05/who-would-you-vote-for-in-the-2012-presidential-primary/)

    1. Your poll is a list of descriptives and what conclusion will you make at the end? You offer no named potential candfidates which, at minimum, would show who those here support the most. When you step into the booth and exercise that right to vote it’s not important how you define he/she who you vote for, but WHO it is you vote vote. Who cares if the person is hard-right conservative or a conservative Republican. These are perceptions not easily defined, but easily disagreed about when you do try to define them. It’s like people who throw around the term “neo-con” and have no idea of the modern relativity that defines them. Then you have fiscal and social conservative. For me non sequiturs…inane inferences. They mean nothing. If you’re a true conservative you are conservative fiscally and in every other way or you’re, by my measure, a CINO, closely akin to a RINO. A pragmatist with your finger in the wind unwilling to stand on principle. An all too pedestrian politico with a well-defined label. Did you ever hear of a fiscal and social liberal? Ridiculous!

      For instance the person I would put as my first choice would be John Bolton. I select him, because I perceive him to be a straight-talker and principled in his beliefs and convictions. I could care less if he’s identified as an independent, conservative, conservative Republican or whatever. For me a character perception matters above all else. An individual who understands the meaning of the phrase. “public trust” and will always respect that unlike the current abomination we’ve been cursed with. I want someone who understands what “traditional American values” means and who respects the “original Intent” of our Constitution. The current usurper in that highest office quite literally perjured himself in assuming the Oath of Office.

      We’d best start forgetting about labels and pay more attention to the quality of character content of those whom we entrust with the power to govern us.

      By the way my “you” references are rhetorical observations not directed at you.

  4. Point taken…and appreciated. Now we are having a reasonable conversation and not attacking any candidate personally or referring to him/her by a cruel name, nor are we accusing one another of being liberal. This is something that I have also seen on many blogs and questioned whether the insult is is actually from a conservative or coming from someone on the far left. Personal nasty, childish name calling that would come from someone that has no constructive criticism of a candidate and state a valid reason why they won’t vote for that person. I think we all have the SAME goal; and that is to elect a candidate that can and will straighten out this country and WIN and I would like to see the electoral map turn RED just as it did when Ron R. won the election. I believe the only way we are going to do this is to have Democrats crossover and the majority of independants come to the right, but this will NOT happen if we continue to beat up our own potential candidates IF the comments I read are coming from conservatives, and I think we’re better than that. Residing in a State that I have read will be a key deciding factor if the election is close, I will bring to your attention that if a hurricane strength wind hits a solid object, it will fall over or collapse; yet if that same object is a little bit flexible and has the ability to bend or give just a little, the wind will flow right through it and it will remain standing after the storm. This is going to be a nasty enough election without ripping our own candidates apart in the process. For this reason, it is NOT only my belief nor is it only my opinion , that IF the Tea Party endorses a candidate TOO FAR right OR becomes an official third party on the ticket, then the 2012 election could very well fall apart and the mere thought of 4 more years of Obama have me terrified. We have enough to deal with because the mainstream media is to the left.
    Having said this, I will clarify that I have maintained an OPEN mind to all candidates and have not yet decided on a particular one. However, I do feel impelled to defend Gingrich when referred to as a RINO or compared to John McCain. To this I say, that Ron Regan was born in 1911 and took office in Jan 1980 AND in the same respect, I am NOT comparing Gingrich to Regan for we do not have ONE candidate at this point who comes close to the great communicator. While John McCain traveled his bus “introducing” himself at townhalls by talking over and over about his military career and took so much “pride” on “crossing over” and siding in the democrats and listening to problems of the people with really no solutions, Gingrich has made his solutions very clear, most of which I personally agree. Contrary to McCain, (whom I did not vote for in the Primary), Newt is brilliant and has solutions. I am not here to talk about him or defend him, I know about his past. But to social conservatives, I say people make mistakes in their personal life, he who casts the first stone….it is between him, his wife, his family and the God he chooses to worship. Nobody is going to marry the guy and there is much more to judging someone’s ethics and character than basing it solely on circumstances that happened over a decade ago; as to looking at the big picture and weighing the good vs. bad otherwise, no potential candidate will step forward. There is no “perfect” candidate. It is said that the white house was a revolving door with John Kennedy…and then there’s Clinton. Americans are either a forgiving people or they will close their eyes and will vote their pocketbooks, otherwise I personally don’t believe Obama would have never been elected after Rev. Wright because his affliliation with him was recent, not over a decade before and it boils down to whether or not you believe a person has made ammends and changed their ways. And I do not wish to make this entire statement defending anything about Gingrich, I wish to make one more point to those Republicans or Conservates who criticize him about Tiffany’s. Hats off to him for being able to afford it and who is anybody to criticize what should be done with your money. He worked for it, didn’t he? Why else do small business owners work 12 hours a day, seven days a week. The American Dream.
    Now enough about Newt. I hope I have made my point that there should be no personal attacks on our own candidates IF we want to win this election.
    I would also like to voice some concerns AND suggestions and I do have questions for you. I talk to alot of people on a daily basis. If the Tea Party wants to do some good, I believe that it should also work on solving problems. The mainstream media. There are many people in this economy who can no longer afford cable tv and many senior citizens who live on social security do not have it. They do not have the advantage of fair and balanced reporting. I wish something could be done so that Fox news would take off the old re-runs of sitcoms in the 5 and 6 pm time slot and put on a NEWS program with someone like Major Garrett to REPORT the NEWS, not an opinion show, in order to take coverage away from local , non cable stations. Fair and balanced, good and BAD facts about Obama and his blunders. Facts. Lack of information is a big problem to people who can no longer afford or do not have cable for one reason or another. I am also very concerned that our military personnel stationed overseas will not get their absentee ballots on time. Perhaps I’m wrong, but if I recall, they either went out late or for one reason or another there was a problem getting it to them and getting them back in time to be counted during the last election. This should be resolved ahead of time. I also believe that there should be some sort of security at the voting polls to prevent any sort of intimidation at the polls so we don’t have a repeat of certain groups intimidating people from voting. Perhaps this is too extreme but it was a concern during the last election with a certain group collecting at the entrance at more than one poll.. Perhaps the presence of a squad car at the entrance or exit of every voting poll would prevent the issue from happening again.
    And finally, this is a question about the Tea Party….since it is not supposed to be a centrally located or managed organization, please educate me on just what is the method used to determine the “Tea Party favorite” and how is your endorsement of any candidate decided? Is there a vote? How is it that your “collective” public endorsement will be determined in the Primary Presidential Election; and I am not questioning the State by State Representatives or Senators. I want to know who and how the Presidential PRIMARYTea Party candidate of choice is selected for the endorsement. There are people who will cast a vote based on the overall polls or crowd, and there are others who cast their vote based on their own opinion and research. In the 2012 primary, I will be casting my vote based on my own research and opinion on the candidate who comes closest to my opinion and on their solutions for this country AND very important, the one who I feel has the BEST chance of beating Obama in the General election even if he/or she may not be my first choice. I want to collectively win. I am sorry to tell you this but I do not believe that in certain states that I will not mention, the Tea Party did not vett the candidates enough and we should have taken both the house and the senate. If we had, Harry Reid would no longer be the majority leader in the Senate. Yes, the Tea Party had a substantial influence on the House, BUT it did not bend in certain States whereas I believe if the collective endorsements would have realized the BIG picture, a lot more would’ve been accomplished through Congress at this point because there would’ve been a different balance in the Senate. And this is the core of my concern, and pardon me if I use the phrase I first used when I made my original comment “I’m beginning to resent the Tea Party”. I never said I hated it, I never said it’s not good for the country, and look how exaggerated into something I did not say. All of a sudden I was accused of being an angry liberal and attacked. If we don’t win in 2012, this Country will never recover 4 more years of Obama, of that we agree. When I’m impressed with a good speech filled with all the words I want to hear, I guess I’m the sort of person who cares enough to research the facts behind the speech, otherwise I will only want to shake hands with the speechwriter. So again I ask, how does the Tea Party base their collective enorsement? I’m sure there are some people that will jump all over me and accuse me of “selling out my core principles” when I say this, my vote in 2012 Primary may not be based on my first candidate of choice, I will also base my vote on the candidate who I believe has a better chance to WIN. 50% of something is better than 100% of nothing. Tell me where I am wrong.

    1. From your entire comment I’ve extracted this one comment that continues to define your misconception and is highlighted by your persistence in asking me to answer an irrelevant question.:
      “So again I ask, how does the Tea Party base their collective enorsement?”

      Have you not been paying attention. I keep saying that there IS NO CENTRAL CONTROL for what is generally perceived as The Tea Party. Try this source> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tea_Party_movement as it’s fairly accurate, but the pidgeon-holing into politcal labelling, in my opinion, is not very accurate, but one must bear in mind that pollsters and media types need labels to define people. The term “Tea Party” is an amalgam of disconnected individual and state groups and organizations that sprung up and unite under that umbrella. If they have a common desire it is to stop spending money we don’t have. [sarcasm] They have that outlandish idea that we ought to impose the same standards of financial responsibilities that we have as individuals and families upon government. How refreshing and novel an idea![/sarcasm]

      If you ever went to a so-called Tea Party demonstration/ gathering you’d understand that and I wouldn’t have to keep making that case for you. I’ve been to three so far just to interchange with people there out of my own curiosity. One was on the Fourth of July in 2009 and a great experience. That is how I know what they are. You want one general statement or descriptive I found to be common? Those I met and talked with have those “traditional American values” I mention regularly. They understand the this Great Experiment was conceived in Equal Opportunity for all and NOT equal outcome for all; that government is our servant not our master; that the Constitution doesn’t need to be changeable, because it’s a cornerstone of our freedoms and the rigid base of principled conviction all else is built upon. An overriding impression that I came away with is that though most are not familiar historically with names and dates they understand the how and why this nation coming to be and they recognize the threat from within that is upon her now. In short they are, in the main, good and legitimately concerned Americans.

Back to top button