Newt Gingrich at CPAC 2012
Mitt Romney at CPAC 2012
Posted by Brian
By Scott Whitlock | January 23, 2012 | 12:30
Showing posts with label Newt Gingrich. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Newt Gingrich. Show all posts
2/11/2012
CPAC 2012 Speeches - The Candidates: Santorum, Gingrich, Romney
Rick Santorum at CPAC 2012
Newt Gingrich at CPAC 2012
Mitt Romney at CPAC 2012
Posted by Brian
Newt Gingrich at CPAC 2012
Mitt Romney at CPAC 2012
Posted by Brian
2/09/2012
Hey Romney! Tell Us Why We Should Vote FOR You!!
Posted by Brian
Mitt Romney's plan so far is to speak in platitudes while he tells us why we should vote against this or that candidate. He has yet to tell us why we should vote FOR him. For this, the media and establishment crowned him the presumptive nominee before the Iowa caucuses. Only one problem: he lost the Iowa caucus to Santorum (though we didn't know until S. Carolina's primary). After winning New Hampshire, he promptly lost S. Carolina to Newt Gingrich. He seemed to get his footing, winning Florida and Nevada with a barrage of negative campaign ads against Gingrich. This past Tuesday saw Santorum wax the entire field with positive messaging and addressing the issues, while Romney and Gingrich slammed each other in a petty game of he said/he said.
Romney now realizes that there are two candidates that are a threat to his inevitability and is now lumping both together from their 1990's time in Congress. He attacks their fiscal conservatism and support of earmarks from that time with no context. They are just big government wolves in sheeps' clothing, according to Romney. But is that really true?
According to the Congressional Budget Office, during the 1990's the federal deficit went from a high of $290 Billion in 1992 to a $236 Billion surplus by the year 2000. When Gingrich Became the Speaker of the House (1995), the deficit was over $200B. This was also when Rick Santorum became a part of the freshman class of Republicans after the 1994 GOP landslide. This freshman class was incredibly successful passing welfare reform, eliminating the marriage penalty in taxes, as well as balancing the federal budget.
Romney's attacks on the earmarks and the 1994-2000 GOP Congress is a complete smokescreen. They were one of the most successful Congress' in the modern era.
However, what was Romney doing during this same period? Romney was running away from Reagan conservatism, saying “I was an independent during the time of Reagan-Bush. I’m not trying to return to Reagan-Bush.” He also backed liberal Democrat Paul Tsongas for President in 1992. In 2002, Romney claimed he was a "moderate", and his "views were progressive". And then again there is the issue of RomneyCare, where Romney praised Ted Kennedy as his "collaborator" in helping craft RomneyCare.
Romney's problem isn't Rick Santorum or Newt Gingrich - it's Mitt Romney! Unless, or until he starts telling voters why they should vote for him, voters will continue to look elsewhere. The thing is, will voters now trust him enough?
Romney: Rivals are 'Republicans who acted like Democrats'
Posted by CNN Political Producer Rachel Streitfeld
Mitt Romney's plan so far is to speak in platitudes while he tells us why we should vote against this or that candidate. He has yet to tell us why we should vote FOR him. For this, the media and establishment crowned him the presumptive nominee before the Iowa caucuses. Only one problem: he lost the Iowa caucus to Santorum (though we didn't know until S. Carolina's primary). After winning New Hampshire, he promptly lost S. Carolina to Newt Gingrich. He seemed to get his footing, winning Florida and Nevada with a barrage of negative campaign ads against Gingrich. This past Tuesday saw Santorum wax the entire field with positive messaging and addressing the issues, while Romney and Gingrich slammed each other in a petty game of he said/he said.
Romney now realizes that there are two candidates that are a threat to his inevitability and is now lumping both together from their 1990's time in Congress. He attacks their fiscal conservatism and support of earmarks from that time with no context. They are just big government wolves in sheeps' clothing, according to Romney. But is that really true?
According to the Congressional Budget Office, during the 1990's the federal deficit went from a high of $290 Billion in 1992 to a $236 Billion surplus by the year 2000. When Gingrich Became the Speaker of the House (1995), the deficit was over $200B. This was also when Rick Santorum became a part of the freshman class of Republicans after the 1994 GOP landslide. This freshman class was incredibly successful passing welfare reform, eliminating the marriage penalty in taxes, as well as balancing the federal budget.
Romney's attacks on the earmarks and the 1994-2000 GOP Congress is a complete smokescreen. They were one of the most successful Congress' in the modern era.
However, what was Romney doing during this same period? Romney was running away from Reagan conservatism, saying “I was an independent during the time of Reagan-Bush. I’m not trying to return to Reagan-Bush.” He also backed liberal Democrat Paul Tsongas for President in 1992. In 2002, Romney claimed he was a "moderate", and his "views were progressive". And then again there is the issue of RomneyCare, where Romney praised Ted Kennedy as his "collaborator" in helping craft RomneyCare.
Romney's problem isn't Rick Santorum or Newt Gingrich - it's Mitt Romney! Unless, or until he starts telling voters why they should vote for him, voters will continue to look elsewhere. The thing is, will voters now trust him enough?
Romney: Rivals are 'Republicans who acted like Democrats'
Posted by CNN Political Producer Rachel Streitfeld
Atlanta (CNN) - The day after an embarrassing defeat in a trio of early voting states, Mitt Romney painted his GOP rivals as standard bearers of a Republican party that "lost its way" in recent years in Washington.
The GOP candidate, faced with a pair of doggedly persistent opponents in former Sen. Rick Santorum and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, pointed to both men's experience in the nation's capital as a disqualifying factor.
VIDEO: Romney - Cut Defense Waste To "Pay For ObamaCare"
Comment from Mitt Romney cutting defense to "pay for ObamaCare" comes at about the 3:40 mark.
Is Mitt Romney a liar?
This montage makes the case that there is enough evidence to convict Mitt Romney in a court of law for being dishonest to the American people about his intent on Obama Care. Mitt Romney's statements away from the press were caught by a citizen journalist in Florida that shows Mitt Romney has no intention of repealing ObamaCare. Romney's own adviser says Romney knows he is being deceitful on the matter. The standard set here for the word lieing is the standard set by Eric Holder in the Fast and Furious hearings.
Posted by Brian
Is Mitt Romney a liar?
This montage makes the case that there is enough evidence to convict Mitt Romney in a court of law for being dishonest to the American people about his intent on Obama Care. Mitt Romney's statements away from the press were caught by a citizen journalist in Florida that shows Mitt Romney has no intention of repealing ObamaCare. Romney's own adviser says Romney knows he is being deceitful on the matter. The standard set here for the word lieing is the standard set by Eric Holder in the Fast and Furious hearings.
Posted by Brian
2/01/2012
Let's Honor, Not Stretch, the Buckley Rule
Posted by Brian
Excellent piece by David Limbaugh on some weak-kneed conservatives redefining the "Buckley Rule" with so-called strategic political calculations. Even the previously staunch conservative Ann Coulter has blinked in this campaign season, throwing her support behind the least conservative candidate, Mitt Romney, claiming that he is the only one who can beat Barack Obama, and that a vote for Newt Gingrich is a vote Obama. This after her political crush on New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, who initially gained favor with conservatives for his bombastic YouTube videos of him directly taking on unions in NJ. He has since been shown through his stances on cap and trade, gun control, amnesty, and campaigning for GOP moderate Mike Castle in Delaware, among other less than conservative stances, to not be the staunch conservative as initially thought. He may be conservative for a northeast liberal state, but a Reagan conservative? Hardly.
This article by David Limbaugh lays out succinctly what the Buckley rule is, how the prevailing wisdom that any one candidate should be ordained by an Obama-friendly media, while reminding us that we should not compromise our principles due to who those in the Beltway GOP establishment say is "electable".
Let the primary process run it's course, but don't apologize for who your gut, and more importantly, your brain tell you is the best candidate. Not who others claim is most electable. We were told that Reagan wasn't electable either.
This article by David Limbaugh lays out succinctly what the Buckley rule is, how the prevailing wisdom that any one candidate should be ordained by an Obama-friendly media, while reminding us that we should not compromise our principles due to who those in the Beltway GOP establishment say is "electable".
Let the primary process run it's course, but don't apologize for who your gut, and more importantly, your brain tell you is the best candidate. Not who others claim is most electable. We were told that Reagan wasn't electable either.
Let's Honor, Not Stretch, the Buckley Rule
In the intense heat of the present, it is easy to forget even the relatively recent past, but it seems to me that this GOP primary season is more acrimonious than the past few, probably because the stakes are so high.
When I've noted that this is the most important presidential election of our lifetimes, a few excitability-resistant conservative friends have said, "They have been saying that about every election for more than a generation." My response to that is:
When I've noted that this is the most important presidential election of our lifetimes, a few excitability-resistant conservative friends have said, "They have been saying that about every election for more than a generation." My response to that is:
1/31/2012
Laffer: Gingrich Flat Tax Plan "Significantly Better" Than Romney's
Posted by Brian
Why Gingrich's Tax Plan Beats Romney's
Newt's flat tax would do a lot more to attract capital, spur growth and reduce compliance costs.
Mr. Gingrich has a significantly better plan than does Mr. Romney, and he has twice before been instrumental in implementing a successful tax plan on a national level—once when he served in Congress as a Reagan supporter in the 1980s and again when he was President Clinton's partner as speaker of the House of Representatives in the 1990s. During both of these periods the economy prospered incredibly—in good part because of Mr. Gingrich.
Why Gingrich's Tax Plan Beats Romney's
Newt's flat tax would do a lot more to attract capital, spur growth and reduce compliance costs.
By ARTHUR B. LAFFER
If we judge both leading contenders in the Republican primary, Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney, by what they've done in life and by what they propose to do if elected, either one could be an excellent president. But when it comes to the election's core issue—restoring a healthy economy—the key is a good tax plan and the ability to implement it.
Jobs and wealth are created by those who are taxed, not by those who do the taxing. Government, by its very nature, doesn't create resources but redistributes resources. To minimize the damages taxes cause the economy, the best way for government to raise revenue is a broad-based, low-rate flat tax that provides people and businesses with the fewest incentives to avoid or otherwise not report taxable income, and the least number of places where they can escape taxation. On these counts it doesn't get any better than Mr. Gingrich's optional 15% flat tax for individuals and his 12.5% flat tax for business. Each of these taxes has been tried and tested and found to be enormously successful.
1/27/2012
Former Reagan Aide: Gingrich Was A "Loyal Friend And Ally" To Reagan
Posted by Brian
The long knives are out for Gingrich, both from the media and Mitt Romney acolytes. A recent hit piece in National Review has been totally debunked, thanks to some serious legwork by a former aide of Newt Gingrich, as well as a former aide to Ronald Reagan. The piece, which claims that Gingrich was hyper-critical of the former President and his policies, has been shown to be a mishmash of statements taken out of context, and other statements that were purposefully misrepresented.
Gingrich most undoubtedly has some baggage, but being anti-Reagan is not one of those bags. This would help explain the endorsements by Michael Reagan and former Reagan economic advisor Art Laffer, as well as Nancy Reagan passing the conservative torch to Gingrich at a 1995 Goldwater Institute dinner honoring Ronald Reagan. Perhaps it is the Romney supporters who are concerned that it will finally bubble to the top that it is in fact Romney who has repeatedly distanced himself from Reagan in the past, (See videos below) as well as telling reporters that he is a moderate and a progressive, which are not exactly Reagan-esque.
Romney and his supporters just got caught with their hand in the cookie jar.
Elliott Abrams Caught Misleading on Newt
By Jeffrey Lord on 1.27.12 @ 11:28AM
Gingrich most undoubtedly has some baggage, but being anti-Reagan is not one of those bags. This would help explain the endorsements by Michael Reagan and former Reagan economic advisor Art Laffer, as well as Nancy Reagan passing the conservative torch to Gingrich at a 1995 Goldwater Institute dinner honoring Ronald Reagan. Perhaps it is the Romney supporters who are concerned that it will finally bubble to the top that it is in fact Romney who has repeatedly distanced himself from Reagan in the past, (See videos below) as well as telling reporters that he is a moderate and a progressive, which are not exactly Reagan-esque.
Romney and his supporters just got caught with their hand in the cookie jar.
Elliott Abrams Caught Misleading on Newt
By Jeffrey Lord on 1.27.12 @ 11:28AM
As Ronald Reagan used to say: Well.
Yesterday we took note of former Reagan State Department official Elliott Abrams' piece over at NRO that went after Newt Gingrich on his relationship with Reagan. While voting regularly with Reagan as a young congressman from Georgia, Gingrich, claimed Abrams, "often spewed insulting rhetoric at Reagan, his top aides and his policies to defeat Communism." Abrams then goes on to cite " a famous floor statement Gingrich made on March 21, 1986."
Or sort of cites it.
In fact, I'm sorry to say, what appears to be going on here is that Elliott Abrams, a considerably admirable public servant and a very smart guy, has been swept up in the GOP Establishment's Romney frothings over the rise of Newt Gingrich in the Republican primaries. He is even being accused of trolling for a job in a Romney administration. No way!!!! Really????
What else can possibly explain a piece like the one Abrams penned on a day when Gingrich was being of a mysterious sudden targeted in one hit piece after another for his ties to Reagan? The pieces invariably following the Romney line that Newt had some version of nothing to do with Reagan.
1/24/2012
Gingrich Accuses Obama Of Being Alinsky-ite, WH Dodges Question
Posted by Brian
A question posed to WH Press Secretary Jay Carney may have been as telling for what he said as much as for what he didn't say. Following comments this week from Newt Gingrich that Barack Obama is a devoted follower of the teachings and tactics of the Marxist Saul Alinsky, Jay Carney chose, on the one hand, to obfuscate whether Obama does in fact buy into the Alinsky's "rules For Radicals" model. On the other hand, he pulled directly from Alinsky when he reminisced of his time as a reporter during the late '90s, saying of Gingrich, “Have I said how much fun I had as a reporter covering Congress from 1996 to 1998?”, referring to a time when Gingrich was speaker. “There was a certain bombast to it at the time, a lot of colorful things to cover.” This was straight out of Alinsky's book, using the following tactics: RULE 5: “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon”, and RULE 12: “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.”
Apparently there are some such as Jay Carney who are schooled in the Alinsky ways.
A question posed to WH Press Secretary Jay Carney may have been as telling for what he said as much as for what he didn't say. Following comments this week from Newt Gingrich that Barack Obama is a devoted follower of the teachings and tactics of the Marxist Saul Alinsky, Jay Carney chose, on the one hand, to obfuscate whether Obama does in fact buy into the Alinsky's "rules For Radicals" model. On the other hand, he pulled directly from Alinsky when he reminisced of his time as a reporter during the late '90s, saying of Gingrich, “Have I said how much fun I had as a reporter covering Congress from 1996 to 1998?”, referring to a time when Gingrich was speaker. “There was a certain bombast to it at the time, a lot of colorful things to cover.” This was straight out of Alinsky's book, using the following tactics: RULE 5: “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon”, and RULE 12: “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.”
Apparently there are some such as Jay Carney who are schooled in the Alinsky ways.
White House Sidesteps Question on Obama and Alinsky
(CNSNews.com) – The White House did not even attempt to shoot down the assertions by new GOP presidential frontrunner Newt Gingrich that President Obama is deeply influenced by the radical Chicago community organizer Saul Alinsky.
White House press secretary Jay Carney replied to a question on the subject at Monday’s press briefing by saying the president’s time as a community organizer was “well documented,” and adding, “his experience is a broad-based one that includes a lot of other areas in his life. I’ll just leave it at that.” Read More at CNS News
1/23/2012
Bill Clinton's Man In Charge Of "Bimbo Eruptions" Grills Gingrich On Character
Posted by Brian
Irony alert: Former Clinton operative George Stephanopoulos on Monday questioned Newt Gingrich's "character and temperament." The Good Morning America co-anchor interviewed the Republican presidential candidate and unselfconsciously scolded, "I know you've faced these kinds of questions before. Is there any way for you to put this issue of temperament to rest?" [See video below. MP3 audio here.]
Read More at News Busters
Ex-Clinton Operative Stephanopoulos Questions Gingrich's 'Character and Temperament'
Irony alert: Former Clinton operative George Stephanopoulos on Monday questioned Newt Gingrich's "character and temperament." The Good Morning America co-anchor interviewed the Republican presidential candidate and unselfconsciously scolded, "I know you've faced these kinds of questions before. Is there any way for you to put this issue of temperament to rest?" [See video below. MP3 audio here.]Read More at News Busters
1/20/2012
Gingrich Daughters: 'Open Marriage' Charge 'Simply Not True'
Posted by Brian
By MATTHEW MOSK and LAURA REDDY
GOP Debate: Candidates Plans On Illegal Immigration
Romney's Plan To End Illegal Immigration
Newt Gingrich's Plan To End Illegal Immigration
Ron Paul: We Can't Defend Mexican Border While Troops Are On Afghanistan/Pakistan Border
Santorum Challenges Romney On Immigration Stance
Posted by Brian
Newt Gingrich's Plan To End Illegal Immigration
Ron Paul: We Can't Defend Mexican Border While Troops Are On Afghanistan/Pakistan Border
Santorum Challenges Romney On Immigration Stance
Posted by Brian
South Carolina GOP Debate Highlights
Newt Destroys John King, Media Over Ex-Wife Question To Thunderous Standing Ovation
Santorum On Healthcare: Newt And Mitt Played Footsie With Left
Posted by Brian
Santorum Calls Newt Grandiose And Erratic
Santorum On Healthcare: Newt And Mitt Played Footsie With Left
Posted by Brian
Newt Ally Calls Ex-Wife Unstable, Unhinged
Posted by Brian
January 19, 2012
Allies of embattled GOP presidential candidate Newt Gingrich are coming to his defense against his ex-wife's new and salacious charges, labeling Marianne as "unstable" and "unhinged."
What's more is that they are slapping at ABC, which is set to run an interview Thursday with Marianne Gingrich in which she claims the former speaker wanted an open marriage so he could date his current wife, Callista. Gingrich's supporters claim the network is trying to get the Republican out of the race just as he's peaking in the polls.
1/19/2012
And Then There Were Four: Perry Dropping Out Of Race
Posted by Brian
Even as Rick Perry is dropping out of the GOP Race and saying that he supports Newt Gingrich, another bombshell is being dropped - accusation by Newt's ex-wife that he wanted an "open" marriage, among other things. My question is: will Perry supporters actually shift their support to Newt now that these accusations are coming to light? Or does Rick Santorum get a double boost with Perry supporters shifting their allegiance AND Gingrich supporters fleeing his candidacy to put their support behind the only conservative left, in a race between Santorum, Romney, and Ron Paul?
It will be interesting to see how this develops.
Even as Rick Perry is dropping out of the GOP Race and saying that he supports Newt Gingrich, another bombshell is being dropped - accusation by Newt's ex-wife that he wanted an "open" marriage, among other things. My question is: will Perry supporters actually shift their support to Newt now that these accusations are coming to light? Or does Rick Santorum get a double boost with Perry supporters shifting their allegiance AND Gingrich supporters fleeing his candidacy to put their support behind the only conservative left, in a race between Santorum, Romney, and Ron Paul?
It will be interesting to see how this develops.
FIRST ON CNN: Sources: Perry dropping out of GOP race
Charleston, South Carolina (CNN) - Rick Perry is telling supporters that he will drop his bid Thursday for the Republican presidential nomination, two sources familiar with his plans told CNN.
The Texas governor will make the announcement before the CNN debate in South Carolina, the sources said.
The move comes two days before the South Carolina primary and hours before the final debate ahead of the voting, which will take place on CNN Thursday night.
The campaigns of Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum reached out to the Perry campaign Thursday morning in an "aggressive effort" to get his endorsement, according to a source close to Perry.
Perry will indicate his support for Newt Gingrich but will not explicitly endorse him, a source with knowledge of Perry's decision told CNN.
Gingrich Ex: Newt Wanted Open Marriage
Posted by Brian
Exclusive: Gingrich Lacks Moral Character to Be President, Ex-Wife Says
By BRIAN ROSS (@brianross) and RHONDA SCHWARTZ
Jan. 19, 2012
Newt Gingrich lacks the moral character to serve as President, his second ex-wife Marianne told ABC News, saying his campaign positions on the sanctity of marriage and the importance of family values do not square with what she saw during their 18 years of marriage.
In her first television interview since the 1999 divorce, to be broadcast tonight on Nightline, Marianne Gingrich, a self-described conservative Republican, said she is coming forward now so voters can know what she knows about Gingrich.
In her most provocative comments, the ex-Mrs. Gingrich said Newt sought an "open marriage" arrangement so he could have a mistress and a wife.
1/07/2012
12/13/2011
Gingrich: "I'm a Realpolitik Wilsonian"
Image by IowaPolitics.com via FlickrIs Newt Imploding...Again?
Newt Gingrich, who in nearly every poll, leads all GOP candidates for the presidential nomination, is shown in the video below espousing some extremely progressive ideas. This is disturbing, to say the least. The U.S. is only three week out from the first primary in Iowa, and Newt Gingrich is aligning his views with two of the most progressive President's to ever hold the office. This is not a small blip for Gingrich. This could be devastating to his chances if, and when this gets out to the conservatives in the heartland.
First, what does it mean when he says he is a "Realpolitik Wilsonian"? According to Dictionary.com's "world english dictionary" definition, it is
a ruthlessly realistic and opportunist approach to statesmanship, rather than a moralistic one, esp as exemplified by Bismarck The next question is, when applied to what he says he agrees with, which are "Wilsonian" politics, what does that portend? To do that one must understand a little of who Woodrow Wilson was, and what his philosophy was. Wilson is generally seen as one of the most progressive people to ever hold the oval office. and was part of the "Progressive Era" from 1890 to 1920. Part of Wilson's legacy is the Federal Reserve and segregation of the military. Jonah Goldberg, in an excellent piece in the Christian Science Monitor, writes: "Wilson's two terms in office provide the clearest historical window into the soul of progressivism. Wilson's racism, his ideological rigidity, and his antipathy toward the Constitution were all products of the progressive worldview." Gingrich said that "Wilson's speeches still work". He needs to explain what he means when he says this. One of the things that Wilson wrote is this: In his 1890 essay, "Leaders of Men," Wilson explained that a "true leader" uses the masses like "tools." He must inflame their passions with little heed for the facts. "Men are as clay in the hands of the consummate leader." Using terms like "the masses" and "true leader" seem more like the words coming out of the leaders of the former Soviet Union than from a former U.S. President I believe that Mr. Gingrich should address this seeming incompatibility of conservatism and Wilsonian progressivism. It was during the Progressive era that Jim Crow laws were passed, aided by such Supreme Court cases as Plessy vs. Ferguson, which "upheld segregation in public accommodations so long as “separate but equal” facilities were provided for each race, setting off an orgy of legislation throughout the old Confederacy". Wilson was also a proponent of "eugenics", or improving humanity by "practices" which "improve the genetic composition of a population". This was also the view of Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood, who sought to use abortion to lower the number of blacks, as she and other Progressives viewed them as weakening the the population. It wasn't until WW2 that eugenics got a bad name, as the Nazi's had used this theory to attempt to eliminate the Jews. Now I am NOT saying that Newt Gingrich is for segregation, or eugenics, or many of the other things that Wilson represents. I am saying that if you are going to call yourself a conservative, and then align yourself with figures who are seen as some of the most progressive in our nation's history, then that needs to be addressed. Gingrich also states that FDR's "Four Freedoms" still work. The first two, freedom of speech and freedom of religion, I would agree with. They are constitutional and God-given rights. However, his third and fourth freedoms, freedom from "want" and freedom from "fear", are progressive ideas. Two weeks ago Newt Gingrich looked unstoppable, and I would have to agree that he has been rock solid in the debates, with virtually zero missteps for his opponents to jump on. But many have said that Gingrich is entirely capable of imploding, knowing his past history with off-the cuff remarks. He certainly seems to have stepped in it here. Maybe, because it was on C-Span, he thought no one would notice. This is a headache that Gingrich did not need three weeks out from the first primary. |
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)