Video: Romney goes on the attack against Gingrich

posted at 8:40 am on December 9, 2011 by Ed Morrissey

As I predicted yesterday, Mitt Romney has decided to attack Newt Gingrich in Iowa in an attempt to get conservatives to rethink their new allegiance to the frontrunner du jour — and Romney knows just where to aim.  In a new 60-second spot, the campaign hammers Gingrich for his attack on Paul Ryan’s budget-reform plan earlier this year, and stressed this line of attack in a conference call with the media yesterday:

Though Romney himself didn’t embrace Paul Ryan’s budget proposal in the spring, Talent and Sununu attacked Gingrich for distancing himself from the plan, which Gingrich dubbed “right-wing social engineering” in May on “Meet the Press” before walking the statement back days later.

“For Newt Gingrich, in an effort of self-aggrandizement, to come out and throw a clever phrase that has no other purpose than to make him sound a little smarter than the conservative Republican leadership, to undercut Paul Ryan, is the most self-serving, anti-conservative thing one can imagine happening,” Sununu said.

During the 21-minute call, the two mentioned Ryan’s name 25 times.

On MSNBC minutes later, Sununu mentioned Ryan 10 times during a five-minute hit. He called Gingrich “a faux conservative” and added: “I believe Newt Gingrich is a Gingrichite. All he cares about is Newt Gingrich.”

This attack is effective because it comes after Gingrich’s reinvention. Gingrich can chalk up his partnership with Nancy Pelosi as a big mistake and can explain away his political and personal baggage from years gone by as lessons learned the hard way. The attack on Ryan as a purveyor of “right-wing social engineering” came just a few months ago, when Gingrich was already a candidate in this cycle. Gingrich has tried to soften that criticism since then and claimed that the only objection he had was that Ryan didn’t leave the option to allow people to stay in the current system, but that would negate the reform entirely. Keeping the current structure of Medicare while at the same time adding a premium-support option would be close to what we have now with Medicare Advantage, only in Gingrich’s version we would have more money flowing out of the system.

It’s interesting that Romney is conducting this attack with his own campaign.  His super-PAC launched an attack ad on Obama in Iowa this week, which one would have expected from a traditional campaign, so we’re seeing a bit of role reversal here.  The campaign’s imprimatur underscores just how urgent they see their task in slowing down Gingrich’s momentum, especially with Tea Party voters who idolize Paul Ryan.  Romney may not pick up that support if those voters do dump Gingrich, but Romney doesn’t really need to do so, as long as they don’t rally to one alternative candidate alone, especially Rick Perry.

Romney’s not likely to get that support, either, unless he learns to engage better with conservatives.  Matt Lewis offers a facepalm moment from Team Romney’s pitch to argue that they’re more conservative than Gingrich:

As you probably heard, some Mitt Romney surrogates hosted a conference call today to attack Newt Gingrich. Because Romney is attempting to win a Republican primary — and cast Newt Gingrich as unacceptable to conservatives — you probably assume that center-right journalists or conservative bloggers got to ask some questions, right?

Wrong. Here’s the list of reporters and media outlets who were permitted to ask questions:

JOHN DICKERSON, CBS NEWS
MARK HALPERIN, TIME
LLOYD GROVE, THE DAILY BEAST
EVAN MCMORRIS-SANTORO, TPM
DAVID CORN, MOTHER JONES
PHIL RUCKER, WASHINGTON POST

That’s it. No Townhall.com, HotAir, Daily Caller, Washington Examiner, National Review, Weekly Standard, American Spectator, or Washington Times … you get the picture.

Mother JonesTPM?  Great roll call you fellow had, there, for a lecture on conservatism.  As far as I know, we didn’t get an invitation to this conference call, although to be fair we were so swamped with registration issues that we could have easily missed it.  But if Team Romney wants to argue for conservative support — or at least to argue that conservatives shouldn’t support Gingrich — shouldn’t they be talking with conservative media to get that message out?

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4

So let me get this straight… the GOP bigwigs aren’t willing to “personally” attack Obama because they feel uncomfortable demonizing him as indicated by the National Review article earlier today… yet they’re willing to go after Newt Gingrich lock, stock, and barrel?

Stoic Patriot on December 9, 2011 at 11:26 AM

Be happy Newt is being stripped bare – he is no conservative. A Speaker Newt had no choice but be conservative because he had others pushing him.

A President Newt is a World War II bomb waiting to go off. Amnd when he does, he will bring the whole party down with him.

If the GOP doesn’t air his dirty laundry now, the media/Dems will in the general and it won’t be pretty.

TheRightMan on December 9, 2011 at 11:33 AM

When you finally get an acceptable candidate that meets all of Hot Air criteria he or she will not be electable. I can’t believe we may nominate a candidate that has no chance to beat Obama. Who can win the independents? That is the question we should ask. Not do we agree with this candidate 100%. If we lose the big picture we are doomed to defeat. I think we need to ease up on Romney a little on here before we wreck any chance of retaking the White House.
D. VanderMolen

dangr on December 9, 2011 at 11:33 AM

Don’t let Newt Gingrich make you wife number four.

Heh. I think you and Fallon just gave Team Romney a premise for their next attack ad against Newt.

RepubChica on December 9, 2011 at 11:14 AM

This is the kind of stuff that Obama and the MSM are going to annihilate poor RINO Newt with once he gets the nomination…

Ruiner on December 9, 2011 at 11:20 AM

Oh please, the MSM will use it against Romney, too. You know he’s a Mormon, right? It’ll be ugly no matter who gets the nomination.

Fallon on December 9, 2011 at 11:40 AM

Good luck with those attacks, Mitt, but I think you’re a little late. Looks like the Gigrich-train has too much steam behind it and you’re going to get run over.

jfs756 on December 9, 2011 at 10:52 AM

I hate to tell you this, but that train you speak of has had multiple conductors over the last few months, and it still hasn’t gone anywhere.

Haldol on December 9, 2011 at 11:43 AM

Gingrich is not the enemy.
Romney is not the enemy.
Obama is the enemy here.
Skandia Recluse on December 9, 2011 at 8:58 AM

OUR #1 ENEMY IS THE LYING MSM.

No matter who we elect we will still be left with a corrupt media out to destroy Conservatives at any cost. We need a candidate that can slice and dice them into oblivion. I think Newt can do that job.

redridinghood on December 9, 2011 at 11:45 AM

Ed –

So you think this conservative cred Romney ad is “effective” in Iowa, yet conclude the glaring problem with Romney… his roster of conservative cred isnt at all conservative…

These headlines really do auto write themselves, regardless of the actual content.

Oh – and let me point out 1 other issue:

Though Romney himself didn’t embrace Paul Ryan’s budget proposal in the spring

… see its that ole Romney double edge sword again.

So his effective con cred ad is magically going to mute the argument – he never stood for the proposal, filled with not so con cred folks on conference calls. HAHAHAHA, thats cute.

Romney’s biggest problem is he stands for nothing and everything at the same time. Like a good establishment squish or moron who thinks “moving to the middle wins elections”

Odie1941 on December 9, 2011 at 11:45 AM

Question is, will Willard actually attack Newt face to face, in the debates as well or pull a Pawlenty?

Valkyriepundit on December 9, 2011 at 11:45 AM

Aside the trial lobby, it appears Rick Perry also has the gay lobby up in arms against him for speaking the truth in his ad “Strong”.

President Obama launches a campaign to force foreign countries to recognize gay rights but doesn’t give a hoot about those being persecuted because of their religion.

Kids are being encouraged to come out of the closet as gays but told to stay in the closet with their religious beliefs.

This is not meant to disparage gays but to show the sort of alternate reality world we now find ourselves.

TheRightMan on December 9, 2011 at 11:48 AM

I hate to tell you this, but that train you speak of has had multiple conductors over the last few months, and it still hasn’t gone anywhere.

Haldol on December 9, 2011 at 11:43 AM

HaHa

Off the Cain Train and onto the Newtitantic.

swamp_yankee on December 9, 2011 at 11:49 AM

Gingrich is not the enemy.
Romney is not the enemy.
Obama is the enemy here.
Skandia Recluse on December 9, 2011 at 8:58 AM

Everybody who supports big government and generational theft is my “enemy”, so to speak.

FloatingRock on December 9, 2011 at 11:53 AM

Don’t buy into the meme that he is dumb – it takes someone supremely smart to accomplish what he has accomplished without the connections and Ivy League education that is prevalent in today’s politics.

TheRightMan on December 9, 2011 at 11:30 AM

Meh. Perry can’t seal the deal with his own supporters, much less those more critical of him. I liked him till he turned out to be a gaffe machine. Then again he did come in second place in three polls – his internal campaign poll, the Hotgas poll, and….what was that third one again…

Ruiner on December 9, 2011 at 12:02 PM

Mark my words….. this is how we will usher in four more years of odumbo. The REAL REASON that Newt is ahead is because he attacks odumbo, not his fellow repubics….. Why are repubics so stunningly stupid? sigh……………

ultracon on December 9, 2011 at 12:03 PM

Be happy Newt is being stripped bare – he is no conservative. A Speaker Newt had no choice but be conservative because he had others pushing him.

A President Newt is a World War II bomb waiting to go off. Amnd when he does, he will bring the whole party down with him.

If the GOP doesn’t air his dirty laundry now, the media/Dems will in the general and it won’t be pretty.

TheRightMan on December 9, 2011 at 11:33 AM

Don’t get me wrong. I don’t mind attacking Newt for legitimate malfeasance on his part (I happen to be a Santorum supporter). What I find galling though is the extent to which the GOP establishment is tripping over themselves to save Romney.

Stoic Patriot on December 9, 2011 at 12:03 PM

200+ comments from people who never planned to vote for Romney no matter what he did or said, advising Romney how to run his campaign!

What’s the purpose of a primary? isn’t it to try to make voters think that candidate A is different then candidate B?

If it turns out that this ad hurts Gingrich and he doesn’t win the primary that is a good thing, since it shows that Romney had the right strategy, And vice versa if Gingrich wins due to his not attacking fellow republicans, then i am happy as well, since it shows that he had the better strategy,

If this was a misleading ad i might have a problem with it, but this is as fair as an ad as it gets, and i hope Gingrich fires back with ads pointing out Romney’s failures,

The idea of a primary is to make the eventual nominee stronger, and better prepared to fight against a much more vicious campaign, i am all in for candidates pointing out other candidates flaws, as long as it is not misleading

OrthodoxJew on December 9, 2011 at 12:05 PM

First Thoughts: Newt’s moment of truth
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/12/09/9324581-first-thoughts-newts-moment-of-truth

Can Gingrich survive the scrutiny, negative attacks to come?

When is Obama to undergo some negative attacks?

Or even some basic scrutiny of his record as a Communist organizer?

Chip on December 9, 2011 at 12:07 PM

OUR #1 ENEMY IS THE LYING MSM.

No matter who we elect we will still be left with a corrupt media out to destroy Conservatives at any cost. We need a candidate that can slice and dice them into oblivion. I think Newt can do that job.

redridinghood on December 9, 2011 at 11:45 AM

I actually, generally, agree with you. Our public conversation is being moderated in a pretty hateful way, and we’re suffering pretty miserably because of it. But I think only we can do something about the media.

Axe on December 9, 2011 at 12:08 PM

I’d much rather see Mitt go on the attack about this…..

http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterferrara/2011/12/08/obama-channels-hugo-chavez-shows-why-he-cant-lead-on-the-economy/

God please help us survive this administration.

PappyD61 on December 9, 2011 at 12:13 PM

How about this one….

http://www.azcentral.com/offbeat/articles/2008/10/15/20081015campaign-dirt1015-ON.html

When Mitt accuses Newt of wearing panties……..THEN we’ll be talking dirty.

WASHINGTON – You want to talk dirty politics? Oh, we’ll talk dirty. We’ll talk about … 1800!

Thomas Jefferson was attacked by ministers who accused him of being an “infidel” and an “unbeliever.” A Federalist cartoon depicted him as a drunken anarchist, and the president of Yale warned that if Jefferson came to power, “we may see our wives and daughters the victims of legal prostitution.”

A Connecticut newspaper warned that his election would mean “murder, robbery, rape, adultery and incest will openly be taught and practiced” – though the paper (now the Hartford Courant) did apologize some years later.

John Adams, the sitting president in 1800, also got hit with his share of slung mud. James Callender, a journalist in league with Jefferson, told the country that Adams was a rageful, lying, warmongering fellow, a “repulsive pedant” and “gross hypocrite” who behaved neither like a man nor like a woman but instead possessed a “hideous hermaphroditical character.”

There was also a nasty rumor that Adams had sent his veep to Europe to bring back four mistresses, two for each of them.

In 1835, Davy Crockett, who briefly considered a run for the presidency, released a campaign tract that noted Martin Van Buren’s baldness, described his face as “a good deal shrivelled,” compared Van Buren to “dung” and described his personality as “secret, sly, selfish, cold, calculating.” Then he got nasty. Van Buren, he wrote, was “a dandy. When he enters the senate chamber in the morning, he struts and swaggers like a crow in the gutter. He is laced up in corsets, such as women in a town wear, and, if possible, tighter than the best of them.”

Great link and article to put things in perspective.

PappyD61 on December 9, 2011 at 12:20 PM

bzip on December 9, 2011 at 10:48 AM

Troll for Perry!!! Go home troll!!!

coach1228 on December 9, 2011 at 12:25 PM

The key element here is to understand that team Romney isn’t interested in winning over potential Gingrich supporters, but rather just to ensure that those voters don’t support Newt.

powerpro on December 9, 2011 at 12:34 PM

As Speaker, he made, forced Clinton into the middle, has Mitt done anything like that? Just the opposite, he was the one forced to the left because he was so weak…thus Mass ended up with Romney Care.
I prefer someone other than Newt, but Newt is worlds above Romney in experience, and in being a conservative.

right2bright on December 9, 2011 at 11:16 AM

Clinton wasn’t forced to the middle by Newt Gingrich. The man responsible for Clinton’s ideological ‘flexibility’ (for lack of a better word) was Dick Morris. Clinton saw that his more leftwing policies were killing him in the polls and endangering his reelection chances. None of Clinton’s closest advisers–the hardcore Leftists who surrounded the President–knew how to respond–all but Morris, who happened to be the only right-of-center member of Clinton’s inner circle. It should be remembered, too, that Bill Clinton was and is very much a traditional Democrat, a man’s whose boyhood idol was JFK. Unlike Hillary, Bill is as comfortable in the center as he is on the left. Morris told Clinton the winning strategy would be a tack to the center, and so it turned out to be.

So no, Gingrich wasn’t dealing with rigid neo-socialist ideologue like Barack Obama. He was dealing with an old-school Democratic politician, the kind who likes wheeling-and-dealing and revels in the give-and-take of the political game.

Hard to believe I’m missing the good old days of Bill Clinton, but compared to President Obama, Clinton was downright statesmanlike. Republicans could work with Clinton. Not so our current President.

troyriser_gopftw on December 9, 2011 at 12:35 PM

…A Speaker Newt had no choice but be conservative because he had others pushing him.

TheRightMan on December 9, 2011 at 11:33 AM

So when he was gone the house GOP took a sharp turn to the right….

Oh…..yeah…..

Random Numbers (Brian Epps) on December 9, 2011 at 12:35 PM

Typical. “Off” the canyon, not “into” it. How they heck does one throw something “off” a canyon? Off the top, sure. That’s how these people view things–from on high. IMO, they have a fundamentally skewed view of reality.

Christien on December 9, 2011 at 12:44 PM

…A Speaker Newt had no choice but be conservative because he had others pushing him.

TheRightMan on December 9, 2011 at 11:33 AM

Same can be said for Perry, i know its much easier to be conservative in Taxes,

OrthodoxJew on December 9, 2011 at 12:50 PM

I give Gingrich enormous credit for the Republican majority of ’94 and the ’95 stand off that finally got us to levy a balanced budget.

But his Global Warming commercial with Pelosi along with his attack on Paul Ryan’s plan was two strikes with no need for a third. I don’t trust the core ideology of this candidate.

Moreover, I think he’s more likely to lose than Romney. I’m definitely not a Mitt fan, but Gingrich is much less likable to the general public than most of my conservative friends think. Beyond the ability to hold a debate to win their minds, you have to win their hearts as well. Romney is definitely not A Class in this regard, but he’s heads and tails above Gingrich.

JrJr on December 9, 2011 at 12:55 PM

The key element here is to understand that team Romney isn’t interested in winning over potential Gingrich supporters, but rather just to ensure that those voters don’t support Newt.

powerpro on December 9, 2011 at 12:34 PM

Has Romney ever been sincerely interested in winning support from conservative voters? After all, where are they gonna go in a Romney/Obama matchup?

Classic RINO triangulation : just a tad premature … oops …

RedPepper on December 9, 2011 at 1:03 PM

Meh. Perry can’t seal the deal with his own supporters, much less those more critical of him. I liked him till he turned out to be a gaffe machine. Then again he did come in second place in three polls – his internal campaign poll, the Hotgas poll, and….what was that third one again…

Ruiner on December 9, 2011 at 12:02 PM

In your opinion, who does the dumbest things – Gingrich or Perry?

That is a decision conservatives will have to make:

- Support a pseudoconservative who talks smart but acts dumb (Gingrich) or the solid conservative who talks dumb but acts smart (Perry).

A no-brainer, if you ask me.

TheRightMan on December 9, 2011 at 1:06 PM

LOL… it’s also funny reading comments whining about how Gingrich is being treated.

Smart rhetoric can never hide a dumb record – and that is Gingrich in a package.

With Gingrich, Dems will not bother to manufacture an outrage like the Perry “racist rock” incident – the ads beg to write themselves.

Conservatives should not be fooled into thinking Gingrich is a viable choice – he is probably the least electable candidate in the bunch – yes, even less than Ron Paul or Marco Huntsman.

TheRightMan on December 9, 2011 at 1:09 PM

troyriser_gopftw on December 9, 2011 at 12:35 PM

Indeed, Clinton was a DLC stooge. Guys like him already knew the writing was on the wall for old-school paleoliberalism and instead championed crony capitalism to keep liberalism afloat (which as we now know from Fannie, Freddie, and Wall Street is not a great idea). Newt himself had endless praise for Clinton and threw hissyfits when he was snubbed by him; hardly a nemesis there.

The other thing is that most of then-Speaker Newt’s pet causes were almost all political winners anyway, practically mandated by the people. They were already demanding things like welfare reform and term limits. The problem was that Newt’s bombastic, a-hole attitude allowed the press and the D-Rats to paint what the people themselves wanted as extremist, crazed ideas, and so too many of those reforms would fail when they needn’t have.

smiley on December 9, 2011 at 1:10 PM

This isn’t a very smart attack ad. Romney is reminding seniors — who he is losing — that Gingrich will not run with Ryan’s Medicare reform plan. Romney is also reminding Republicans that he values Pat Buchanan’s opinion — the same Pat Buchanan who works for MSNBC and is reviled by the more hawkish elements of the GOP. We already know Romney isn’t a conservative, but at the same time Romney is telling moderates and independents to give Gingrich a second look by bringing up Gingrich’s squishy positions.

Punchenko on December 9, 2011 at 1:13 PM

I’d rather vote for RP than Mitt.

tinkerthinker on December 9, 2011 at 1:15 PM

I find it amusing that people are complaining about an ad that violates the so-called 11th commandment that Reagan himself abandoned in ’76 against Ford.

If I were in the mood to defend Gingrich, I would avoid bringing up commandments at all, for what should be painfully obvious reasons.

Andrew D on December 9, 2011 at 1:17 PM

Newt explained his poorly worded remark about the Ryan plan. He said he was referring the the possible method of adoption, not the plan itself. He said making the Medicare alternative an option to present Medicare instead of the only option would make it a good plan.

Complain about Newt all you want. The only realistic options for beating Obama are Romney or Newt. I think Newt would be a much stronger campaigner, but I would vote for Romney over Obama in a heartbeat.

JayDick on December 9, 2011 at 1:21 PM

test

rdbrewer on December 9, 2011 at 1:26 PM

Oh please, the MSM will use it against Romney, too. You know he’s a Mormon, right? It’ll be ugly no matter who gets the nomination.

Fallon on December 9, 2011 at 11:40 AM

For the most part people can see bigoted attacks on one’s faith as the desperate smear job that it is, as opposed to factual attacks on Newts obviously promiscuous character. Big difference.

With Newt the election will be about Newt’s personal and political failures.

With Romney it will be about the issues because they won’t have much personal baggage to work with.

Swerve22 on December 9, 2011 at 1:33 PM

Gingrich is a fraud. He has made $55 million lobbying the last 11 years. Even worst he’s lobbied for Big goverment, 2003 Medicare fix, against reforming Freddie Mac (he was paid $1.8 million), loobying for ethanol subsidies ($312,000) etc..

My hope is Romneycare and Gingrich tear each other apart. The nomination is not decided and it gets brokered at the convention. Then a true conservative like Gov. palin gets the nomination.

Truth is Romneycare & Gingich can’t beat the anti christ Obama. We need someone who has already been vetted and has charisma.

Gingich has never won a statewide race, Obamacare will use his $1 billion war chest to destoy him. He’ll make adolph hitler more popular than Gingrich when he’s done.

I’m a newbie at this site, be gentle…. he! he!

Danielvito on December 9, 2011 at 1:38 PM

ROMNEY IS FINISHED!!! MITTENS IS OUT OF THE BAG. RINO!!

CLICK LINK BELOW….

coach1228 on December 9, 2011 at 1:40 PM

It’s a good ad, and I’m a Gingrich supporter. I have trouble finding anything wrong with using any candidates own words against them when you are talking about legitimate policy positions.

That said, I do think that all of the candidates need to be a little careful in their attacks on each other. At some point, they may actually turn off some voters so much that regardless of who gets the nomination, some will simply stay home on election day. We really can’t afford to have that happen in this next election.

jmalmberg on December 9, 2011 at 1:42 PM

http://dailycaller.com/2011/12/08/romney-conference-call-takes-questions-from-mother-jones-and-tpm-no-conservative-outlets/

coach1228 on December 9, 2011 at 1:41 PM

Almost as bad as…say…sitting on a couch with the most prominently disliked liberal in congress and demanding your base pass economy destroying liberal agenda items?

Swerve22 on December 9, 2011 at 1:43 PM

Almost as bad as…say…sitting on a couch with the most prominently disliked liberal in congress and demanding your base pass economy destroying liberal agenda items?

Swerve22 on December 9, 2011 at 1:43 PM

No not really.

Flapjackmaka on December 9, 2011 at 1:47 PM

http://dailycaller.com/2011/12/08/romney-conference-call-takes-questions-from-mother-jones-and-tpm-no-conservative-outlets/

coach1228 on December 9, 2011 at 1:41 PM

Almost as bad as…say…sitting on a couch with the most prominently disliked liberal in congress and demanding your base pass economy destroying liberal agenda items?

Swerve22 on December 9, 2011 at 1:43 PM

ARE YOU FLIPPIN KIDDING ME?? LOOK ON THAT LIST OF LIB MEDIA…..AND NOT ONE…ONE CONSERVATIVE OUTLET!!! GET A GRIP!!PLEASE…ANYBODY BUT ROMNEY!!

coach1228 on December 9, 2011 at 1:47 PM

Complain about Newt all you want. The only realistic options for beating Obama are Romney or Newt. I think Newt would be a much stronger campaigner, but I would vote for Romney over Obama in a heartbeat.

JayDick on December 9, 2011 at 1:21 PM

Newt Gingrich is not the only realistic option for beating Obama. The opposite is true. There are millions of indpendent voters out there who don’t know Newt Gingrich’s history or record. If Gingrich wins the GOP nomination, there will be $1 billion in President Obama’s campaign war chest that will ensure they know all there is to know about Gingrich, and none of it will be good.

Could Romney beat Obama? Only if he learns to fight between now and the general election, show some passion–or even occasional outbursts of actual emotion. Coming off as a particularly well-rehearsed empty suit won’t get the job done.

Perry? That shift to social issues by the Perry campaign was a long-term strategic blunder, in my view. I know why Perry did it: he did it to make a showing in socially conservative Iowa. But social issues aren’t and won’t be Perry’s biggest selling point, which is his reputation as a capable executive solidly grounded in conservative principles. He committed a profound messaging error; that is, he took focus away from the economy. To win, whenever voters thought about improving the economic situation, they should think of him. Not now. If he somehow wins the nomination, he’ll be spending half his time defending his views on same-sex marriage and re-implementation of DADT. It’ll muddy the waters and lose the election.

Bachmann? I wish she would repudiate her Gardrisil statements altogether, admit to an unforced error, and move forward. She’s been consistently on-point throughout the primaries, but for that. I like her, too, and think that–with polish–she could be a formidable competitor. Too late now.

Huntsman, Santorum, Roemer, and Johnson need to drop out. Ron Paul, that ongoing libertarian embarrassment to the Republican Party, needs to be called out by one of the top-tier candidates and banished to the darkness and obscurity of the fringe, where he can hang out with Pat ‘Hitler was a great man’ Buchanan and discuss the ‘Zionist problem’ at length.

troyriser_gopftw on December 9, 2011 at 1:54 PM

You don’t have to vote for Romney or Gingrich just as Florida didn’t have to vote for Crist over Rubio – simply because the media and polls are trumpeting them as frontrunners.

Take a second look at Gov. Perry – the whole of Texas knows him as someone who follows through with his promises. He is solidly conservative and will not mince words. He is a straight shooter.

Don’t buy into the meme that he is dumb – it takes someone supremely smart to accomplish what he has accomplished without the connections and Ivy League education that is prevalent in today’s politics.
TheRightMan on December 9, 2011 at 11:30 AM

I don’t have to believe he is dumb. I, perfectly logically, believe he is terrible at communicating.

That’s important.

I also don’t have to believe he isn’t mostly conservative. I believe he is a “compassionate conservative.” That “then you have no heart” revelation hurt him a lot.

For Mr. Perry to get another look from me, he will have to earn it. And, honestly, given I expect him to act like President Bush pre-9/11, I don’t know what he can do to regain my vote.

makattak on December 9, 2011 at 1:57 PM

Danielvito:
“Then a true conservative like Gov. Palin gets the nomination.”

I’m a newbie at this site too, so I don’t have to be gentle with you;-)

Palin wouldn’t have a chance against Obama. Either Newt or Romney could give Obama better than they got, although I think Newt would absolutely destroy Obama on the campaign trail.

JayDick on December 9, 2011 at 1:58 PM

Let them duke it out. Neither Newt nor Mitt are candidates I will get excited about. They’ll either “both lay dead sprawled out on the bed, neither one knowing the other is dead,” or one will come out stronger. If it’s the first, we’ll have to hope for a candidate who can beat Obama and energize the base. THAT’s a long shot. Carry on!

dloye on December 9, 2011 at 2:04 PM

makattak:
“I don’t have to believe he is dumb. I, perfectly logically, believe he is terrible at communicating.

That’s important.”

Boy is it ever. I think Perry, Bachmann, and, to a lesser degree, Santorum all have the same problem.

I think that’s what makes Romney and Gingrich the most likely to beat Obama, with Newt the stronger of the two. In today’s politics, ability to campaign, especially ability to clearly describe ideas, is invaluable. It can make up for a lot of other shortcomings, witness Obama 2008.

JayDick on December 9, 2011 at 2:05 PM

There are three things I look for in a candidate:
1. character
2. competence
3. sharing my views
For me, Gingrich doesn’t rate much above a 0 on the first of these. He does much better on the second, but even here, I’m not sure his book smarts translate into wise action. The fact that the people who worked under him in the House don’t have a very high opinion of him, coupled with his difficulties managing a campaign staff, doesn’t speak too well for his competence to lead the country. On the third point, I’m not even sure what his views are.

acorn on December 9, 2011 at 2:05 PM

Personally, I would like to know where all these RINO’s and independents are coming from with all the support for either romney or gingrich. Neither is a conservative but still gets most of the support from republicans and conservatives! What is going on here?
Republicans and conservatives need to get their heads out of the sand and start supporting a real conservative, = bachmann, santorum, or even huntsman.
And, is this the time for a primary candidate to spend time going after obama? I think that should wait, at least for the most part, until a candidate is selected. Then hit obama with all barrels!

boogieboy on December 9, 2011 at 2:22 PM

great, effective ad…

jimver on December 9, 2011 at 2:27 PM

acorn:

You left out the most important thing, at least for this election: The ability to beat Obama. Nominating your ideal candidate will do no good if he/she loses. If Obama gets reelected, we are doomed.

Right now, I would rank Gingrich as the most likely to beat Obama and Romney second. Perry would be a very distant third.

Are any of them my favorite person for President? Heck no. But the people I think would be better aren’t running.

JayDick on December 9, 2011 at 2:29 PM

Could Romney beat Obama? Only if he learns to fight between now and the general election, show some passion–or even occasional outbursts of actual emotion.

troyriser_gopftw on December 9, 2011 at 1:54 PM

he will, he will, all in good time…he’s just pacing himself, why wasting all his energy and resources at this point in time…he ran an excellent campaign so far and he will intensify his attacks as he gets closer to clenching the nomination…

jimver on December 9, 2011 at 2:30 PM

I believe the voters want Obama’s socialist policies, along
with Obamacare, reversed.

I also think conservative voters don’t much care who does
the job as long as it gets done. No half ass liberal compromises.

The bottom line issue is who do we trust to accomplish this?

Right now it looks like Newt vs. Romney as the frontrunners.
Which one do you trust to reverse Obama’s policies?

BTW, I think it is interesting that many refer to Newt Gingrich
as “Newt” and Mitt Romney as “Romney” (never Mitt). What does
that mean? I have no clue.

Amjean on December 9, 2011 at 2:32 PM

start supporting a real conservative, = bachmann, santorum, or even huntsman.

The part where you included Huntsman. That’s where you lost me.

spiritof61 on December 9, 2011 at 2:41 PM

Sooooo, the guy who was for the health insurance mandate and profited from the Fannie & Freddie fiasco is the Republican frontrunner?

And the other frontrunner is a Northeastern liberal?

The GOP really is the stupid party!

Seriously guys, give me Perry, or Santorum, or Bachmann, or Huntsman (?) or (gulp) even Ron Paul, but Newt/Mitt?

Only in such a bizarro world as this (Obama vs. Newt/Mitt) does a third party Trump sound almost reasonable.

IcedTea on December 9, 2011 at 2:44 PM

Reading all the previous posts crack me up.

You all know that over the last 6 months or at least since the debates started the mantra was:
Why isn’t anybody attacking Romney
Why is Romney so weak and doesn’t stand up for himself?
Romney never attacks or focuses on Obama.
Romney this or Romney that…

Now Romney rolls out ads pointing out differences in Gingrich and fellow candidates and people say Romney shouldn’t be doing that…
The Iowa group asking Romney not attack Gingrich? Why? Because they are true and effective?
Romney HAS and WILL CONTINUE to attack Obama. He was the original candidate that ONLY focused on Obama. The Obama campaign has ONLY been attacking Romney until Gingrich this week. One of the main reasons Obama did not make the Hawaii trip was due to Romney’s ad campaign attacking Obama meaning it was effective.

As several posted earlier, many of you who do not like Romney in the Primaries sure do have a lot of advice for him. Romney is this to win it and he has GREAT caliber people surrounding him.

Again as I have posted in the past, look to see who Congress and former Congressman are backing and it is Romney as they see him as the more effective leader and one with the executive skills that it will take to pull us out of this economic mess!

g2825m on December 9, 2011 at 2:45 PM

No one can seem to accept that Gingrich is a RINO. Has and will always be. His process is that he has a government answer to everything…but is a conservative way. Doesn’t quite add up.

rubberneck on December 9, 2011 at 2:51 PM

Is the main argument for Romney

A. That only a moderate, reach-across-the-aisle compromise with liberals kinda guy can get a majority in the electoral college?

or

B. That only a faithful, non-adulterous kinda guy can get a
majority in the electoral college?

spiritof61 on December 9, 2011 at 2:51 PM

Perry will win Iowa and this why. By far, Perry has the most enormous support by the veteran groups throughout the country. Below is a list of those who are already serving on the Veterans for Perry Coalition. Gov. Perry has also received numerous endorsements.
National Co-Chairs
• Major General James Everett Livingston, MOH, U.S. Marine Corp (Ret.) (South Carolina)
• Chuck Larson, Sr., Fmr. U.S. Attorney and Justice Attaché to U.S. Ambassador to Iraq, Colonel (USAR, Ret.) (Iowa)
• Dakota Meyer, Sergeant, USMC (Ret.) (Kentucky)
• William R. Mann, Lt. Colonel, US Army (Ret.) (Florida)
• The Honorable Allen B. Clark , Fmr. Assistant Secretary for Veterans Liaison and Program Coordination and Director, National Cemetery System at the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, CPT (USA-Ret) (Texas)
National Steering Committee
• The Honorable James Inhofe, U.S. Senator, Oklahoma, U.S. Army (Ret.)
• The Honorable Sam Johnson, United States Congressman, U.S. Air Force (Ret.)
• The Honorable Brian Birdwell, Texas State Senator, District 22, Lt. Col. U.S. Army (Ret.)
• The Honorable Jerry Patterson, Texas Land Commissioner, Lt. Col. U.S. Marine Corp (Ret.)
• Dr. Richard Box, U.S. Army (Ret.)
• Marcus Luttrell, Petty Officer First Class, U.S. Navy Seal (Ret.)
• Mike Thornton, U.S. Navy Seal (Ret.)
• Daniel P. Moran, Captain, U.S. Marine Corps (Ret.)
State Leadership Teams
Iowa
• State Chair: Chuck Larson, Sr., Fmr. U.S. Attorney and Justice Attaché to U.S. Ambassador to Iraq, Colonel (USAR, Ret.) (Iowa)
• State Co-Chair: The Honorable Royd Chambers, State Representative, District 5 and Master Sergeant, Iowa National Air Guard, U.S. Air Force (Ret.)
• Steering Committee:
• Dale Andres, Brigadier General, U.S. Army (Ret.)
• Gary Fischer, Captain, U.S. Army (Ret.)
• Wayne Vanderkrol, Captain, Army National Guard (Chaplain)
• Gannon Hendrick, Captain, U.S. Army Reserve
• Andy Andersen, Colonel, U.S. Army (Ret.)
• Lee D. Booton, U.S. Navy, Seaman 1st Class
• Rick LaMere, US Army, (Ret.)
• John W. Sturdy, Sgt. Major, U.S. Army (Ret.)
• Jeffrey A. Havenner, Major, U.S. Army
• Dick L. Rattray, Lt. Colonel, USMCR (Ret.)
• Tom Hanrahan, U.S. Navy
• Zac Buttercase, Army National Guard
• Gabe Haugland, Army National Guard
New Hampshire
• State Chair: The Honorable Frank McCarthy, State Representative, Major, U.S. Marine Corps (Ret. Mustang)
• State Chair: Jim Adams, Pittsfield, Petty Officer Second Class, U.S. Navy
• Steering Committee:
• The Honorable Fred Rice, State Representative, Major, U.S. Army (Ret.)
• The Honorable Larry Gagne, State Representative, Petty Officer Third Class, U.S. Navy (Ret.)
• The Honorable Emile Beaulieu, Mayor of Manchester, Senior Master Sergeant, U.S. Air Force (Ret.)
• The Honorable Chuck Douglas, Colonel, U.S. Army (Ret.)
• Ambassador Joe Petrone, Colonel, U.S. Army (Ret.)
• Dan Fleetham, Jr, Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army (Ret.)
• The Honorable Al Baldassaro, State Representative, First Sergeant, U.S. Marines (Ret.)
Florida
• State Chair: The Honorable Jeff Brandes , State Representative, District 52, U.S. Army (Ret.)
• State Chair: The Honorable George Moraitis, Jr., State Representative, District 91, U.S. Navy (Ret.)
• Steering Committee:
• Tavis McElheny, Lieutenant, U.S. Coast Guard (Ret.)
• Tony Buntyn, Colonel, U.S. Air Force (Ret.)
• Richard Sugg, Staff Sgt, U.S. Air Force (Ret.)
• Harlen Twible, Lieutenant U.S. Navy (Ret.)
• Carl Jackson, Petty Officer Second Class, U.S. Navy
• Chet Renfro, Major, U.S. Army (Ret.)
• Bill Helmich, Lance Corporal, U.S. Marine Corps (Ret.)
• Ben Warren, Corporal, U.S. Marine Corps (Ret.)
• Fred Manno, Air Man First First Class – U.S. Air Force (Ret.)
• Yvonne Pillmore , Lt. Colonel, U.S. Air Force (Ret.)
South Carolina
• State Chair: James Everett Livingston, Major General U.S. Marines (Ret.)
• Steering Committee:
• Major General Bob Livingston , Adjutant General – State of South Carolina
• Herb Ellis, Colonel, U.S. Army (Ret.)
• James “Boo” Alford, Command Sergeant Major, U.S. Army (Ret.)
• Darwin Simpson, Major General, S.C. Army National Guard (Ret.)
• Todd Humphries, Staff Sergeant., U.S. Army (Ret.)
• Roger Sanderson, Sergeant First Class, U.S. Army (Ret.)
• Mark Kelly , Sergeant, U.S. Air Force (Ret.)
• Daniel Jones, Sergeant, US Army
• Charles E. Edge, Lieutenant Colonel, US Army (Ret.)

nancysabet on December 9, 2011 at 2:59 PM

That’s an awful lot of chairs, nancysabet. Not much of a comment though.

spiritof61 on December 9, 2011 at 3:06 PM

This going to hurt a little…granted I recognize the source…but he also was/is one of the Tea Party favorites. This is also my complaint to those jumping on the Gingrich bandwagon is Gingrich is NOT a TP conservative. Romney IS and HAS been more consistent than Gingrich, truly.

Tea Party Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky (R) says Newt Gingrich is unworthy of Tea Party support.

In a scathing Op-Ed in the Des Moines Register, Paul said electing “big government status quo Republicans like New Gingrich” would be a “giant leap backward.”

Paul obviously has a personal interest in the race. His father is Gingrich rival, Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX).

But in an interview with Bill Hemmer on America’s Newsroom, Paul said his real interest is protecting the core values of the Tea Party which he says, Gingrich doesn’t come close to representing.

“What I’m afraid of is the Tea Party movement and the conservative wing of the Republican Party could be destroyed by nominating somebody like Newt Gingrich, who in the end, really isn’t a conservative,” said Paul.

http://politics.blogs.foxnews.com/2011/12/09/rand-paul-newt-gingrich-unworthy-tea-party-support

g2825m on December 9, 2011 at 3:15 PM

Perry will win Iowa and this why. By far, Perry has the most enormous support by the veteran groups throughout the country.

nancysabet on December 9, 2011 at 2:59 PM

Something happened between those two sentences. Something strange, frightening, and otherworldly.

Andrew D on December 9, 2011 at 3:18 PM

Be happy Newt is being stripped bare – he is no conservative. A Speaker Newt had no choice but be conservative because he had others pushing him.

TheRightMan on December 9, 2011 at 11:33 AM

I don’t know what candidate you are pimping but that is an OUTRIGHT LIE. Stop making things up.

stenwin77 on December 9, 2011 at 3:30 PM

Perry will win Iowa and this why. By far, Perry has the most enormous support by the veteran groups throughout the country. Below is a list of those who are already serving on the Veterans for Perry Coalition. Gov. Perry has also received numerous endorsements.
National Co-Chairs
• Major General James Everett Livingston, MOH, U.S. Marine Corp (Ret.) (South Carolina)
• Chuck Larson, Sr., Fmr. U.S. Attorney and Justice Attaché to U.S. Ambassador to Iraq, Colonel (USAR, Ret.) (Iowa)
• Dakota Meyer, Sergeant, USMC (Ret.) (Kentucky)
• William R. Mann, Lt. Colonel, US Army (Ret.) (Florida)
• The Honorable Allen B. Clark , Fmr. Assistant Secretary for Veterans Liaison and Program Coordination and Director, National Cemetery System at the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, CPT (USA-Ret) (Texas)
National Steering Committee
• The Honorable James Inhofe, U.S. Senator, Oklahoma, U.S. Army (Ret.)
• The Honorable Sam Johnson, United States Congressman, U.S. Air Force (Ret.)
• The Honorable Brian Birdwell, Texas State Senator, District 22, Lt. Col. U.S. Army (Ret.)
• The Honorable Jerry Patterson, Texas Land Commissioner, Lt. Col. U.S. Marine Corp (Ret.)
• Dr. Richard Box, U.S. Army (Ret.)
• Marcus Luttrell, Petty Officer First Class, U.S. Navy Seal (Ret.)
• Mike Thornton, U.S. Navy Seal (Ret.)
• Daniel P. Moran, Captain, U.S. Marine Corps (Ret.)
State Leadership Teams
Iowa
• State Chair: Chuck Larson, Sr., Fmr. U.S. Attorney and Justice Attaché to U.S. Ambassador to Iraq, Colonel (USAR, Ret.) (Iowa)
• State Co-Chair: The Honorable Royd Chambers, State Representative, District 5 and Master Sergeant, Iowa National Air Guard, U.S. Air Force (Ret.)
• Steering Committee:
• Dale Andres, Brigadier General, U.S. Army (Ret.)
• Gary Fischer, Captain, U.S. Army (Ret.)
• Wayne Vanderkrol, Captain, Army National Guard (Chaplain)
• Gannon Hendrick, Captain, U.S. Army Reserve
• Andy Andersen, Colonel, U.S. Army (Ret.)
• Lee D. Booton, U.S. Navy, Seaman 1st Class
• Rick LaMere, US Army, (Ret.)
• John W. Sturdy, Sgt. Major, U.S. Army (Ret.)
• Jeffrey A. Havenner, Major, U.S. Army
• Dick L. Rattray, Lt. Colonel, USMCR (Ret.)
• Tom Hanrahan, U.S. Navy
• Zac Buttercase, Army National Guard
• Gabe Haugland, Army National Guard
New Hampshire
• State Chair: The Honorable Frank McCarthy, State Representative, Major, U.S. Marine Corps (Ret. Mustang)
• State Chair: Jim Adams, Pittsfield, Petty Officer Second Class, U.S. Navy
• Steering Committee:
• The Honorable Fred Rice, State Representative, Major, U.S. Army (Ret.)
• The Honorable Larry Gagne, State Representative, Petty Officer Third Class, U.S. Navy (Ret.)
• The Honorable Emile Beaulieu, Mayor of Manchester, Senior Master Sergeant, U.S. Air Force (Ret.)
• The Honorable Chuck Douglas, Colonel, U.S. Army (Ret.)
• Ambassador Joe Petrone, Colonel, U.S. Army (Ret.)
• Dan Fleetham, Jr, Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army (Ret.)
• The Honorable Al Baldassaro, State Representative, First Sergeant, U.S. Marines (Ret.)
Florida
• State Chair: The Honorable Jeff Brandes , State Representative, District 52, U.S. Army (Ret.)
• State Chair: The Honorable George Moraitis, Jr., State Representative, District 91, U.S. Navy (Ret.)
• Steering Committee:
• Tavis McElheny, Lieutenant, U.S. Coast Guard (Ret.)
• Tony Buntyn, Colonel, U.S. Air Force (Ret.)
• Richard Sugg, Staff Sgt, U.S. Air Force (Ret.)
• Harlen Twible, Lieutenant U.S. Navy (Ret.)
• Carl Jackson, Petty Officer Second Class, U.S. Navy
• Chet Renfro, Major, U.S. Army (Ret.)
• Bill Helmich, Lance Corporal, U.S. Marine Corps (Ret.)
• Ben Warren, Corporal, U.S. Marine Corps (Ret.)
• Fred Manno, Air Man First First Class – U.S. Air Force (Ret.)
• Yvonne Pillmore , Lt. Colonel, U.S. Air Force (Ret.)
South Carolina
• State Chair: James Everett Livingston, Major General U.S. Marines (Ret.)
• Steering Committee:
• Major General Bob Livingston , Adjutant General – State of South Carolina
• Herb Ellis, Colonel, U.S. Army (Ret.)
• James “Boo” Alford, Command Sergeant Major, U.S. Army (Ret.)
• Darwin Simpson, Major General, S.C. Army National Guard (Ret.)
• Todd Humphries, Staff Sergeant., U.S. Army (Ret.)
• Roger Sanderson, Sergeant First Class, U.S. Army (Ret.)
• Mark Kelly , Sergeant, U.S. Air Force (Ret.)
• Daniel Jones, Sergeant, US Army
• Charles E. Edge, Lieutenant Colonel, US Army (Ret.)

nancysabet on December 9, 2011 at 2:59 PM

(sigh) If he could only TALK ! (without peeing his pants)

stenwin77 on December 9, 2011 at 3:33 PM

I bet Newt will put out another “Feel Good about America” ad, about how we can and will solve our problems together and the real enemy is the Communist in the Oval Office.

It will make Mitt look small and desperate., which he is.

So what are your ideas, Mitt.? We know Newt has warts.

stenwin77 on December 9, 2011 at 3:36 PM

The ‘enemy’ is in the WH.

Redford on December 9, 2011 at 3:38 PM

From Jim Robinson @ Free Republic FWIW – it’s pretty much how I feel.

Just posted to another thread where a FReeper asked me about “progressive” Newt:

Well, I’ll tell you, after Palin declined to run I really didn’t have a dog in this race. I liked Bachmann and Cain a lot, even Perry, but not as much as I liked Palin. Bachmann and Cain are both conservative enough, but neither have really been tested in higher office, nor do they have much experience in world affairs.

I also had high hopes for Perry because it looks like he’s done a great job in Texas, but his positions on the border issues turned off a lot of people. And his “heartless” statement didn’t win him much opportunity to turn that around.

I guess Santorum is conservative enough and possibly Huntsman, but neither engender much enthusiasm or excitement. Seems they’re just going through the motions. Don’t know if they have the real world experience to be CINC anyway.

Bachmann seems to be trying really hard but don’t know if she’s really qualified for the top spot either. Even so, had Bachmann really lit a fuse on the trail, I probably would have stood by and supported her, but she flopped and is unlikely to recover.

I thought early on that if Perry got into the race (without Palin) that he’d suck all the air out of it and would dominate. But he flopped. And then Cain took off like a rocket and he flopped.

Now Cain didn’t have elective experience, but he looked like a great conservative so we were all hoping and pulling for him. Well, that didn’t turn out well.

Mind you, that abortionist, lib progressive bastard Mitt Romney is just sitting there smiling through all this and he, Rove and the GOP elite think they’ve got it in the bag. Just gotta hang in there, not say anything rash, not rock the boat, no mistakes, just play defense as one by one the upstart tea party conservative candidates burn themselves out.

In my mind, we must defeat Romney AND Obama. I don’t think George Washington is going to be smiling down on us if we had this great tea party opportunity to knock off the progressives and we let Rove, Romney and the corrupt good old boys club bushwhack us. We’re supposed to be the bushwhackers.

So like a whole lot of conservative Republicans and tea party folks, we’re bouncing candidate to candidate looking for the one to knock off Romney so we can take the tea party battle directly to Obama. Romney is no tea party person. He and Rove, et al, sneer at us. No way in hell are they going to do anything we’re interested in doing even if they do get elected. It’ll be government as usual. Big. They hate us worse than they hate the democrats because we’re a direct threat to their power base.

So in comes Gingrich. Didn’t much care for him at first, mainly because of his well known baggage, and his perceived RINO plumage, but he began making a lot of sense and scoring a lot of points in the debates. Turns out his depth of knowledge and experience in government affairs both domestic and foreign and his experience with Ronald Reagan, the Reagan Revolution and the Republican Revolution of the 90’s are quite extensive and quite impressive if you look.

He’s been through the mill and that’s what a lot of our younger less experienced, less traveled candidates are missing. In the debates he comes off as a wiser, more experienced, more knowledgeable, level-headed senior statesman. And it appeared to me that the other candidates acknowledged and respected that.

So I start thinking back about his history as a congressman and speaker, and lo and behold, it appears to me he’s not such a RINO after all. He was a genuine Reagan protege. And he learned well from the master communicator. He eventually set a goal for himself to build a Republican majority and to take the speakership, and he determinately accomplished that goal.

And he had some great conservative accomplishments as congressman and speaker. He passed the contract with America. He cut taxes. Cut the deficit. Reformed welfare. Blocked HillaryCare. Became a thorn in President Clinton’s side, blocked much of his liberal agenda and ultimately allowed impeachment to proceed. Then of course, he resigned due to his own infidelity scandal. But, unlike Clinton, he didn’t deny it, didn’t lie about it, and he did the right thing by resigning.

Bottom line though, through his years with the Reagan Revolution and the Republican majority much conservative good was accomplished. The Wall came down, the Soviet Union collapsed and our great Reagan economy flourished for two decades.

Now, if a progressive RINO had been in charge of the congress during this period, who knows what would have happened. I’m sure the history would have been a lot different. Remember, before Gingrich and his Republican Majority, we conservatives had wandered in the wilderness for 40 years!! And our country was on life support after Jimmy Carter nearly killed it. And the democrats were saying at the time that there was nothing we could do about it. We were going to be stuck with the cold war. Stuck with the Soviet Union, stuck with Iran. Stuck with high oil prices, gas lines and rationing. Stuck with recession, high interest rates, high inflation and high unemployment from that point forward. They could not be fixed. Jimmy Carter and the democrats had given up on America and surrendered the USA to our fate as a failed nation.

In walk Ronald Reagan and Newt Gingrich and reestablish that great shining city on the hill! Thank God! It’s not the end of the world after all. Iran returns the hostages immediately. Reagan takes the Soviet Union head on! Reagan takes the democrats head on and doesn’t take no for an answer. Takes his ideas to the people. It was a struggle but eventually the economy began turning. Reagan’s central theme domestically was that the government was too big, too intrusive, taxes too high, too much spending, too many regulations, too many restrictions on business and industry and they all must be cut. And he took that battle over the heads of the democrat congress to the tax payers and they loved it. Sound familiar?

And in 1994, Newt Gingrich leads the charge against the democrats who had been in power for 40 years and the Republicans take the majority and Gingrich becomes Speaker. He dreams up the contract with America which was designed as an extension of the Reagan Revolution and and included items attempting to balance the budget, reform welfare, tort reform, term limits, line item veto, etc. Some of it was successfully implemented, some not. But under Gingrich they did cut the deficit and balance the budget four years running. Sound desirable? Sound progressive?

How many times in our history have you seen a liberal progressive, cut taxes, cut regulations, cut spending, cut welfare, balance the budget, block big government programs like HillaryCare, impeach a sitting president, etc?

Never! In other words, all this to say Newt is NO RINO!! He’s a pro-life, pro-small government, pro-national security, Reagan conservative!! In short, we’re desperate, and he’s exactly what we’re looking for, and he’s running head and shoulders over the rest of the field, so what the hell are we squabbling about?

Yes, Romney and Rove hate him, the Republican establishment elite ruling class hates him, the liberals hate him, the democrats hate him and they hate him for the same reasons the taxpayers will support him, the lovers of liberty will support him, the defenders of life will support him, the defenders of national security will support him, the lovers of the Reagan Revolution will support him, and we the tea party should support him!! He’s a tax cutting, budget balancing, strong defense, small government, pro-life Reagan CONSERVATIVE!!

I’ll take a chance with Newt. Over Romney? You betcha!!

stenwin77 on December 9, 2011 at 3:44 PM

Mitt Romney has shown himself to be inherently unlikable. His whole persona seems contrived. He wasn’t asked to run for president, he dedicated his life to it. In the General Election, Romney will come off as disingenuous, out-of-touch and rich. Before this presidential run he had over four houses–you may not care, but General Election voters will. The only consistent political position he holds is on a healthcare mandate–voters want someone they can trust. Romney is ripe for attacks. David Axlerod will paint Romney as an out-of-touch opportunist and it will stick enough to convince independents in OH, FL and PA to stick with the known quantity of Obama.

nancysabet on December 9, 2011 at 4:01 PM

First time to comment here but I’ve been a long time reader, so I’ll just post one of my favorite quotes from a conservative with regards to both Romney & Gingrich and the excellent topic.

“Our party cannot be all things to all people. It can’t be. Our loudest opponents on the left are never going to like us so let’s stop trying to curry favor with them.”
Gov. Rick Perry

Howdy from the Lone Star State.

Gig Em’

workingclass artist on December 9, 2011 at 4:07 PM

So what are your ideas, Mitt.? We know Newt has genital warts.

stenwin77 on December 9, 2011 at 3:36 PM

most horn-dogs do… May still vote for Newter yet.

Laura in Maryland on December 9, 2011 at 4:09 PM

stenwin77 on December 9, 2011 at 3:44 PM

Next time link, please. JimRob has his own site. Let him diatribe from there.

btw, he’s also the guy who went all in for Alan Keyes a few election cycles ago. How’d that work out?

troyriser_gopftw on December 9, 2011 at 4:12 PM

Mark my words….. this is how we will usher in four more years of odumbo. The REAL REASON that Newt is ahead is because he attacks odumbo, not his fellow repubics….. Why are repubics so stunningly stupid? sigh……………

ultracon on December 9, 2011 at 12:03 PM

Indeed. If Romney (AKA Reed “Mr. Fantastic” Richards–soft and pliable enough to stand on either side of an issue at the same time without mussing up his “dark-on-the-top/graying-on-the-sides” ‘do) would excoriate a fellow Republican in a conference call with solidly left-leaning members of the LSM, can anyone really be sure that he wouldn’t simply stand there during a debate with Obama, nodding agreeably to everything Obama vomits up with a lens-flaring smile?

For better or worse, Newt’s the only one currently on the roster who has both the intelligence and the irascibility to expose Obama, once and for all, as the SCOAMF he truly is to the undiscerning American voter.

We lost in 2008 because our nominee all but refused to put up a fight against Obama. If we support Romney for the GOP nomination in ’12, then I’m afraid we’re insane for expecting different results with his campaign against Obama.

——-

BTW, my first Hot Air® post–finally! I’ve enjoyed visiting here for the past few years, ever since Chuckles banned me for having the audacity to break from the lizard groupthink just after The Won’s win and declare LGF’s abruptly about-face, pro-Obama ideology “highly weaselly.” (Pony-tailed jazz guitar hacks are simply far too sensitive–and characterless–to be political bloggers.) I’ve come to enjoy the articles here and the wacky bridge mix of characters who comment on those articles. The place just has an all-around great atmosphere, and I’m happy to finally have the opportunity to add to it.

Dime IV on December 9, 2011 at 4:14 PM

This is how the GOP always gets to candidates like McCain. Attack each other and last man standing will be the weakest conservative. I’m not say Newt is conservative, but he is more conservative than Mitt.

The GOP better wake up and realize that Obama is the problem, not those you are running against in the GOP primary. Any GOP candidate needs to put what their polices will be against Obama then let those registered in the GOP primary to vote for the strongest candidate.

The strongest should be conservative. Anything else is just a RINO, which is what we will get again by attacking each other. Obama is who they will be running against. Start there, then campaign.

Conservative4Ever on December 9, 2011 at 4:51 PM

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2818373/posts

Here ya go.

stenwin77 on December 9, 2011 at 4:54 PM

But, but, I thought Romney was above the fray? He wanted to be “Mr. Cool” at the debates and let others attack him! Now that HE’S behind in the polls (every credible poll out there has him falling further, and further behind Newt), he’s become an attack dog! So, which is it Romney? You can’t have it both ways.

jfs756 on December 9, 2011 at 5:11 PM

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2818373/posts

Here ya go.

stenwin77 on December 9, 2011 at 4:54 PM

Wow that is a great write up. Said much better than I ever could. Nice find

Conservative4Ever on December 9, 2011 at 5:11 PM

I can understand preferring another candidate instead of Romney, but what I don’t understand is the “Not Romney” crowd backing Newt Gingrich.

He is the ultimate symbol of sleazy insider Establishment (lobbyist for Freddie Mac) mixed with policy foolishness like supporting a federal health insurance mandate, global warming nonsense, and Amnesty. Oh, and he also has a REALLY messy personal life that involves a lot of mistresses that will destroy any chance of attracting female voters.

Gingrich Nomination=Obama’s 2nd Term

BradTank on December 9, 2011 at 5:22 PM

It will be pretty stupid to vote for a candidate who loves sticking his fingers into his part’s base. Don’t you think so?

:)

TheRightMan on December 9, 2011 at 10:13 AM

Speaking of stupid, how is Perry doing in the debates?

csdeven on December 9, 2011 at 5:43 PM

DRayRaven on December 9, 2011 at 11:10 AM

Well, if you have to ask that question, your head is so far up your @ss that you need a porthole installed in your stomach so you can see where you’re going.

csdeven on December 9, 2011 at 5:45 PM

jfs756 on December 9, 2011 at 5:11 PM

You Romney haters need to get your stories straight.

Should a candidate fight back or stay above the fray?

The entire group waits with baited breath!

lol

csdeven on December 9, 2011 at 5:48 PM

rdbrewer on December 9, 2011 at 1:26 PM

test? what test? litmus test we on the right don’t have no stinking litmus test only our friends across the isle can do.

ConcealedKerry on December 9, 2011 at 6:10 PM

So Mother Jones is driving Republican Primary voters to one candidate or another?

Can I ask when that happens?

gekkobear on December 9, 2011 at 6:15 PM

lol

csdeven on December 9, 2011 at 5:48 PM

You are right that is funny. Almost as funny as that person with the first comment on the second page telling us that Romney was teleconferencing with Mother Jones, Talking Points Memo and the Daily Beast because reasonable moderates read liberal blogs. Lots of comedians today I guess.

Dawnsblood on December 9, 2011 at 6:21 PM

(sigh) If he could only TALK ! (without peeing his pants)

stenwin77 on December 9, 2011 at 3:33 PM

He didn’t “pee his pants” here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K0l6XBPgrtI&feature=player_embedded#!

The above is from Dec. 1st at the NH legislature. He didn’t “pee his pants” at the foreign polic debate (the debate after the “brain-freeze”) where many pundits thought he won, not at the Thanksgiving forum, nor at the debate after that, nor at Huckabee’s forum where Huck called it his “shining moment and best performance” and the attorneys general who were on the panel agreed (esp. Cuchinelli had really great things to say). He did great on Leno… in fact, he’s been doing very well ever since the “brain-freeze” (heck, he’d been having his best debate just before that infamous 53 seconds). Hiring a new debate coach right before that has helped.

-Aslan’s Girl

Aslans Girl on December 9, 2011 at 6:26 PM

We know Newt has warts.

stenwin77 on December 9, 2011 at 3:36 PM

The average voter does NOT know Newt’s warts. Even *I*, a political junkie, didn’t know until recently that Newt supported Cap & Trade. I thought The Couch (TM) was just his believing in warming (which, imo, was bad enough), not that he believed in man-made warming and wanted to implement SORO’s economy-destroying Cap & Trade. He didn’t just “sit on the couch” either. He went to what was supposed to be a debate on global warming with Kerry and his opening remark was, “I agree with you.” Some “debate”. John Kerry’s face is priceless — even with the Botox, he looks shocked that Newt agreed with him on AGW. The vid’s on youtube.

Aslans Girl on December 9, 2011 at 6:30 PM

Hiring a new debate coach right before that has helped.

-Aslan’s Girl

Oy, I don’t even know how to respond to that. The word “teleprompters” comes to mind.

stenwin77 on December 9, 2011 at 6:39 PM

Ha!!

The Neutering of Newt has begun.

Swede With Attitude on December 9, 2011 at 6:45 PM

Romney is not a conservative, but he likes to play one on TV. Anyone who gives an interview to Mother Jones is clueless about reaching out to conservatives.

cat_owner on December 9, 2011 at 6:48 PM

didn’t know until recently that Newt supported Cap & Trade. Aslans Girl on December 9, 2011 at 6:30 PM

You should listen to Newt smack down Waxman in a testimony before Congress where Newt was FIGHTING CAP & TRADE.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VzDutBRMsXw

Waxman tells Newt Americans have to be “forced” to change. Listen to Newt’s response. (Waxman starts at 29 min, Newt smacks him down at about 30 min)

The whole tape is excellent but I like that the most.

Newt is far from perfect but he will take it to the media and Obama. The media is our worst enemy right now.

stenwin77 on December 9, 2011 at 6:49 PM

Aslans Girl on December 9, 2011 at 6:30 PM

By the way, I was around and politically involved during the Reagan years. Newt was an absolutely brilliant Speaker of the House.

stenwin77 on December 9, 2011 at 6:50 PM

stenwin77 on December 9, 2011 at 6:39 PM

All candidates get debate prep and coaches. In fact, Perry’s debate coach is BACHMANN’s former coach. Everybody gets this kind of help. It’s nothing like teleprompters.

Aslans Girl on December 9, 2011 at 6:51 PM

stenwin77 on December 9, 2011 at 6:50 PM

I was a 15 year-old political junkie when Newt was Speaker. Loved him back then. But that was 16 years ago. What he’s done LATELY is important and NONE of it’s good. Heck, things I’ve learned from his Speaker days are a mixed bag — back then there was no internet to keep up with everything — so I’ve learned about his obsession/infatuation with the Tofflers (creepy) and of course there was his fooling around with Calista back then, too.

It’s funny. Newt supporters want to point to 16 years ago for Newt policy, but don’t look at his personal life from back then! Yet, they want us to look at his personal life today, but don’t look at his policy from as recent as mere months ago.

As for his being against Cap & Trade… uh, no. AllahP posted about a dozen article with Newt on record supporting that anti-American legistlation AND he had a silly environmental book out called “Contract with the Earth” AND he’s got a NEW cliamte change book due after the election. Newt’s a AGW believer who drank the kool-aid.

Aslans Girl on December 9, 2011 at 6:56 PM

And, oh yes, Newt was so brilliant as Speaker that his own party forced him to resign AND many of his colleagues have so far not endorsed him and don’t have anything nice to say about him (see Coburn for one).

Aslans Girl on December 9, 2011 at 6:59 PM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VzDutBRMsXw

Waxman tells Newt Americans have to be “forced” to change. Listen to Newt’s response. (Waxman starts at 29 min, Newt smacks him down at about 30 min)
stenwin77 on December 9, 2011 at 6:49 PM

So well put. Thanks for the link. It distills to an essence Gingrich as the most accomplished and confident (and even charming, in this case, as he guts Waxman with a smile) conservative locutionist and warrior that we have.

rrpjr on December 9, 2011 at 7:17 PM

First post… Newt’s baggage being what it is, is going to turn off a lot of people if he gets the nomination. The thing I love about him is the way he can take down a liberal media type or a liberal politician like a hot knife through butter. The guy is intelligent as hell … just wish we could find a candidate with his knowledge and brashness (and not afraid to go after Obama)that is also one we can trust… sighhhh

vamp57mw on December 9, 2011 at 7:37 PM

And, oh yes, Newt was so brilliant as Speaker that his own party forced him to resign AND many of his colleagues have so far not endorsed him and don’t have anything nice to say about him (see Coburn for one).

Aslans Girl on December 9, 2011 at 6:59 PM

As I recall, his “party”… the good old boys in the GOP, thought he was way TOO CONSERVATIVE so they PALINIZED him (hmm, I wonder where McCain was in that debate). Newt has scores to settle in Congress and THEY KNOW IT. That is why they are afraid that he is going to win.

stenwin77 on December 9, 2011 at 7:51 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4