Categorized | Commentary/Editorial

Gingrich Lacks the Character to Carry the Conservative Banner; Updated With Video: Newt Sounds More Like Obama Than Obama





After election night of 2008 had passed with Obama having emerged victorious, many conservatives were disappointed to hear that a powerful McCain ad had gone unaired due to McCain’s refusal to mention Obama’s anti-American Pastor.  The ad, leaked after the elections were over, highlighted the very different paths the two candidates had taken as young men.

Narrator: Long before anyone knew who John McCain or Barack Obama were, one chose to honor his fellow soldiers by refusing to walk out of a prisoner of war camp.  The other chose not to even walk out of a church where a pastor was spewing hatred.

Rev. Wright: Not God bless America! God damn America!

Narrator: Character matters, especially when no one’s looking.

No candidate is perfect since no human being is without flaws.  It is therefore crucial for every individual to carefully research the strengths and flaws of each candidate and then choose to support a candidate despite his or her flaws.  Obviously each individual will tolerate different flaws.  For instance, some consider social issues to be a major deciding factor while others focus on a candidate’s voting record and yet a third individual looks at executive experience as a priority.  For most conservatives all of these are pretty high on the list.

There is one vital component, however, which a candidate must have and which takes absolute priority above everything else: character.  Character is what has made this country a beacon of light amongst the nations and what gives a person the strength to choose right from wrong.  How can an individual be trusted to practice what they preach, fulfill their promises, and to make the correct choices in the unknown future if they lack basic character?

In 2008 McCain was of the minority amongst the conservative movement who opposed airing the above ad and who refused to denounce the fact that the Obamas had attended Wright’s church for over twenty years.  The 2012 primary though is revealing that a considerable chunk and perhaps even a majority of the conservative movement no longer view character as a vital component of a candidate.  With their support for a characterless candidate, they inevitably condone Obama’s friendship with terrorist William Ayers and the fact that Jeremiah Wright was privileged to have the Obamas attend his church for over two decades.

Newt’s campaign has recently been gaining an increasing amount of traction as more and more conservative express their support for his candidacy.  He has made a favorable impression on many thanks to his expert debating skills, his steadfastness conservative talk, and his dignified presidential manner at the debates when he refused to engage in petty attacks against the others.  These are indeed positive qualities and the excitement for an Obama/Gingrich debate is easily understood.  However, it is crucial to stop and consider while one is still able, whether the serious implication that will result if the bulk of the conservative movement throws its support behind Newt is worth it, even it leads to victory.  For Newt’s character is seriously lacking.

Two short years ago Gingrich had proudly teamed up, at the behest of Obama, with the rabble-rousing demagogue Al Sharpton to promote the Obama administration’s education policies.  Awareness of their joint project was accomplished via rallies across the country and appearances on Sunday TV Shows.

I couldn’t imagine where and what has qualified Al Sharpton to be an education expert until I remembered Obama’s response when questioned about his association with the terrorist William Ayers. Obama spoke of a guy he knew who worked in the education field with nary a mention of Ayers’ terrorist past, his continued support of terrorism after 9/11, or their true relationship.  With education experts such as Ayers and Sharpton one has got the answer to the problems plaguing the education system at one’s fingertips.

Several months prior to the Gingrich/Sharpton education stint, Gingrich graced Al Sharpton’s annual National Action Network Conference.  For those unfamiliar, the National Action Network serves as Sharpton’s front, is used by Sharpton to promote racial division, and whose actions often fall into the violent and criminal category.

Gingrich’s readiness to team up with an individual such as Al Sharpton, who has no experience in education or any other field except for stirring up violence and racial divisiveness, is appalling. With their project completed, Gingrich continued to act chummy with violence-inciting Al Sharpton.  This past October, Gingrich surprised Sharpton by calling into his TV show to wish him happy birthday.  He praised the opportunistic, race baiting, hatred-inciting, narcissist, Al Sharpton, as one who “did a lot of good things.”

For those unfamiliar with Al Sharpton’s rabble-rousing violent history, here’s a sprinkling of the many acts he’s directly responsible for.

1987: Sharpton spread the incendiary Tawana Brawley Hoax despite his knowledge of the true facts.  He heatedly played defendant of the 15-year-old black girl who was supposedly abducted, raped, and smeared with feces by a group of white men, and singled out Steve Pagones, a young prosecutor, as guilty of a crime which never occurred.  Despite Sharpton being aware of Pagones’ innocence, he taunted him, “If we’re lying, sue us, so we can . . . prove you did it.”  Pagones courageously fought for his innocence, sued Sharpton, and eventually won a $345,000 verdict for defamation.  To this day though, Sharpton refuses to recant the slander or apologize for his role in the odious affair.

1989: Al Sharpton also led a vitriolic campaign to vilify the young white woman who had been raped and viciously beaten in the Central Park “wilding” case, since the rapist was black.  He led demonstrations against the victim and accused her boyfriend of being the real assailant.  Here too Al Sharpton never owned up to the facts despite the criminal’s admittance of his guilt and the DNA testing which proved the black rapist to be guilty of the crime.

1991: A Hasidic Jewish driver in Brooklyn’s Crown Heights section accidentally killed Gavin Cato, a 7-year-old black child.  An anti-Semitic riot erupted, and thanks to Sharpton’s arrival, it lasted for three full days.  At Gavin’s funeral he railed against the “diamond merchants” — code for Jews – who have “the blood of innocent babies” on their hands.  He mobilized and led hundreds of demonstrators who marched through the Jewish neighborhood and chanted “No justice, no peace.”  A rabbinical student, Yankel Rosenbaum, was surrounded by a frenzied mob shouting “Kill the Jews!” and was stabbed to death.  Two weeks later, Italian-American Anthony Graziosi, whose full beard and dark clothing caused him to be mistaken for a Hasidic Jew, was dragged out of his passing car, brutally beaten and stabbed to death.

1995: The United House of Prayer, a large black landlord in Harlem, raised the rent on Freddy’s Fashion Mart.  Freddy’s white Jewish owner was therefore forced to raise the rent on his subtenant, a black-owned music store.  A landlord-tenant dispute ensued and before one could blink an eye Sharpton had arrived at the scene and jumped at the opportunity to incite racial hatred.  “We will not stand by and allow them to move this brother so that some white interloper can expand his business,” Sharpton proclaimed.  He ignored the original cause of the rent hike and the lack of racist action from Freddy’s, and had the National Action Network, set up picket lines.  They spat and cursed as “traitors” and “Uncle Toms” anyone who dared shop at Freddy’s, and shouts of “Burn down the Jew store!” were heard.  Protestors simulated the striking of matches while Sharpton’s colleague Morris Powell kept the frenzy going with lines like “We’re going to see that this cracker suffers.” On Dec. 8, one of the protesters burst into Freddy’s, shot four employees point-blank, and then set the store on fire.  Seven employees died in the inferno.

Al Sharpton has also shared a stage with gay-bashing, Jew-hating, anti-Catholic racist Khalid Muhammad and praised him as “an articulate and courageous brother.”

Fellow conservatives, we don’t need such an individual to be associated with a candidate of ours. Besides its potential for disqualifying the campaign led against Obama, it brands us as hypocrites and portrays us as morally equivalent to liberals.  Carefully vetting a candidate’s record is of extreme importance.  Greater priority though should be given to the character of the individual.

Newt proudly referred to his partnership with Al Sharpton as the original “odd couple” and explained his actions with the “education comes before party” lines.  Noble sounding indeed except that the left is notorious for having implemented and supported action which raised the bar for the teachers union bosses, not the bar of education.  Obama wrongly stopped the DC school vouchers Scholarship Program which had greatly benefited minorities who were stuck in under-performing public schools.

The program had been economically smart since the government paid per voucher less than half of the price they currently spend for each child which is educated in a failing D.C. public schools Additionally, after the Department of Education researched eleven programs, they found that scholarship programs achieved the largest gains.  Despite all these facts, Obama found it more important to curry favor with the teachers unions, and his Education Secretary, Duncan, revoked the scholarship of 216 students already on the program.  Education “specialist” Al Sharpton who is usually the very first to protest any act with the slightest smell of racism, remained shockingly silent and did not utter a whimper in protest of Obama’s decision which hurt minorities most.

With the closure of the D.C. vouchers program, Obama’s, Duncan’s, and Sharpton’s true colors were exposed yet Gingrich agreed to join teams with these very same individuals in an effort to promote better education for minorities. It would be quite hilarious if the results wouldn’t be so pathetic.  After meeting with Obama, Gingrich praised Obama’s stance on education.  Throughout the tour, Gingrich didn’t find it necessary to question Sharpton for his inaction.  Nor did he take to task Obama’s education Secretary Arne Duncan, who had joined them as a direct representative of Obama in their endeavor to publicly laud Obama’s efforts to reform public education.

Was Newt so stupid as to really think Obama, Duncan, and Sharpton are the type of people who would take positive action to help minorities stuck in failing public schools after their blatant disregard to the minorities in D.C.?  Gingrich’s actions can be understood in one of two ways:

A- He’s often turned to government for solutions especially in regard to education.  He voted for and helped gather the necessary support Carter needed in order to pass the legislation which created the Department of Education.  Under his leadership, Congress passed the largest single spending increase on education in US history, a whopping $3.5 billion dollars!  At times, his persuasive skills have sure come to use … for the Democrats.

B-His quest to expand the Republican tent have often led to compromises and bipartisan acts which somehow amounted to conservatives giving in to Democrat demands.  (See below)

Either way, his recent actions are in direct contradiction to the image he’s attempted to create of himself throughout his current campaign.

In addition to his lack of character, which unfortunately is no longer considered as a deciding factor for many, Newt’s record is far from unblemished.  Since some of his actions are downright disturbing, here’s a handful of some of the Newt controversies, both well-known and lesser — known.

In a speech given to the Center For Strategic and International Affairs in 1995, Newt Gingrich said this: “The American challenge in leading the world is compounded by our Constitution…Either we are going to have to re-think our Constitution or we are going to have to rethink our process of making decisions.”

He stumped for Bush’s prescription drug bill and urged all conservatives to vote for it despite it having created an additional seventeen trillion dollars in unfunded liabilities. This is one more of many instances where Newt’s smooth talk was used not to promote conservatism, but to promote big government.

Newt agreed with John Kerry regarding the urgency to take action to stop global warming and a need for “Green Conservatism.”  He also participated in a global warming ad created by Al Gore’s company, in which he sat one couch with Pelosi (and for which he apologized after having launched his presidential campaign.)

Newt’s firm received 1.6 million dollars from Freddie Mac for “consulting services” and another $312,000 from the ethanol lobby (which may explain his confusion regarding the myth of global warming.)

He was  the recipient of President Clinton’s heartfelt thanks for his support of The Violent Crime and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 which placed many restrictions on the 2nd Amendment Right and federalized certain crimes involving a firearm.  This increased both the size and the scope of the Federal Government, and wouldn’t have passed without Gingrich.

Newt has endorsed moderate and questionable individuals such as Dede Scozzafava, an ACORN-friendly, union-pandering, tax-and-spend radical Republican who ran against a solid conservative, Doug Hoffman.  Newt defended his endorsement of Scozzafava (before backtracking once she backed out of the race) saying that “If you seek to be a perfect minority, you’ll remain a minority” thus revealing his true colors and history of compromising with the left rather than sticking to one’s guns.  Never mind that it wasn’t even applicable in this case since NY-23 is a Republican district.

Newt supported individual mandates in his book released in 2008.

Gingrich called Paul Ryan’s plan “right-wing social engineering” despite Ryan’s bravery in being the very first to actually present a plan (and for this too he later apologized after receiving heavy flak from conservatives.)

Gingrich had been the only Speaker of the House ever to have been disciplined for ethics violations.

Newt Gingrich has been a member for the past twenty one years of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) which has been single mindedly dedicated to the goal of undermining our National Sovereignty in order to promote a One World Government!

My sincerest apologies for any Newt apologies inadvertently not mentioned.  They are slightly difficult to keep track of.  One thing is certain though.  He hasn’t apologized for his teaming up with the Obama team, Obama’s education secretary, and most importantly, Al Sharpton.  In fact, he honored Al Sharpton on his new MSNBC show with a surprise happy birthday call this past October in which he cited the time they’ve worked together as memorable and unforgettable.  He then heaped lavish praise upon Sharpton’s head including saying that Sharpton “did a lot of good things.”  Newt correctly assumed conservatives and family members of Sharpton’s victims weren’t listening to the show, thus providing him with the opportunity to reveal his chumminess with Al Sharpton without receiving any heavy backlash.

Last June, Newt Gingrich gave a speech for the Maryland Republican party in which he said that one only needs the courage to enter and communicate with the African American communities as to how Obama’s policies have caused their unemployment figures to rise and have only hurt the black people.

Mr. Gingrich, although your above statement is true there’s an additional reason why black communities’ sufferings are worse than that of the rest of the country, and you are part of the problem. Black communities are hurting precisely because of rabble rousers like Al Sharpton whose entire career is built through the suppression of blacks.  He ensures they remain victims in their minds forever so that they remain thankful and faithful to their masters who provide them with food stamps and other programs in exchange for votes.  Instead of denouncing and decrying these despicable racists, you’ve teamed up with him and continue to praise, embolden, and encourage Al Sharpton.  This further validates this criminal and hurts the African American communities to no end, as detailed in a past article I’ve written.

If you truly seek better education for minorities, denounce Al Sharpton.  Additionally, recognize that the Department of Education which you’ve supported from the start and the ridiculous union demands are the main reasons why minorities suffer from worse educations.  Therefore, your promotion of additional government control and federal spending are not only not the solution, but actually part of the problem.

Conservatives have always stood a notch above liberals since conservatives are individuals with character.  Conservatism should not stoop to the level of liberals for America simply cannot afford another characterless president.  We’ve got to prove that our values are not for sale.  Vehement opposition to Gingrich’s association with Sharpton is the only way to remain consistent about the unaired McCain ad and our opposition of Obama’s troubling past.  Perhaps if character would have been given stronger focus in 2008 we wouldn’t be stuck now with our current president.  The clock can’t be turned back, but the future is still open and waiting to be molded.

 

Update:

Since many in the comments may have missed this piece of information since it’s a lengthy article it bears repeating. Newt’s partnership with Al Sharpton took place two years ago and he called in to his TV show at the beginning of October 2011 and showered him with praise. Al Sharpton is far worse than your typical liberal for he has personally incited conflict which has led to the deaths of over a dozen innocent individuals. Newt has thus chosen to pal around with a guy whose hands are covered in blood.

Yes, an Obama/Newt debate may be extremely tempting. When considering who to vote for as a presidential candidate though it shouldn’t be top priority, as I’ve explained in my open letter to William Jacobson. Regarding his persuasive skills and leadership you can read my article, The New Hampshire Union Leader tells us we need a leader – even if he leads us in the wrong direction.

Update II by Nicole:

My friend Al Garcia over at Conservatives4Congress posted this interesting video about Newt …

Newt in 2005 Supporting Individual Mandate 



Tags: , , , , ,

Comment Policy: The Editors reserve the right to delete any comments which in their sole discretion are deemed false or misleading, profane, pornographic, defamatory, harassment, name calling, libelous, threatening, or otherwise inappropriate. Additionally, the Editors reserve the right to ban any registered poster who, in their sole discretion, violates the terms of use. Do not post any information about yourself reasonably construed as private or confidential. Conservatives4Palin and its contributors are not liable if users allow others to contact them offsite.

  • SonOfOriginalTed

    It boils down to this:

    WE NEED SARAH PALIN NOW!!!

    (Mark Steyn’s entire show today — subbing for Rush — SAID THIS, without specifically having to say it!)

    (actually, Mark Steyn more than "said this"; STEYN ESSENTIALLY SCREAMED OUT LOUD FOR THIS!)

    … WHERE IS SARAH PALIN!!??!! (forgive the caps)

    • goldenprez

      SonOfOriginalTed … Mr. Steyn laughingly, and succinctly summed it up very well.

      Conservatives trade Romney, a man who believes in an individual mandate, global warming, and amnesty …

      For Newt Gingrich, a man who believes in an individual mandate, global warming, and amnesty …

      Believe none of what you hear, and only half of what you see.

      Illegitimi non carborundum.

      Barracudas Maximus.

      • Guest

        They made the trade cuz Newt took a page out of The Guv’s book on the LBSM.

      • Conservative_Hippie

        Read Newt’s Answers page before spewing talking points.  The paragraph below was taken from his answers page:  http://www.newt.org/answers

        "In the 1990s, Newt and many other conservatives, such as the Heritage
        Foundation, proposed a mandate to purchase health insurance as the
        alternative to Hillarycare.  However, the problems outlined above caused
        Newt to come to the principled conclusion that a mandate to purchase
        health insurance was unconstitutional, unworkable and counterproductive to lowering the cost of healthcare."

        • kalkasam

          That may clear him on the mandate issue.  Now lets see the stuff that will clear him for paling around with the hate monger and racist Sharpton. ???????  The Idiot Pelosi and the others he has buddied up to.  ?????

          • Conservative_Hippie

            kal, most of the issues that were mentioned in the post have been addressed at Newt’s answer page.

            • kalkasam

              hip, good, still not enough for me.  If he jumps around like that, don’t want him!

              • Conservative_Hippie

                Fair enough, I just wanted you to be aware that he has addressed most of the issues that are out there.

          • alien4palin

            Sharpton is one of the most disgusting, despicable evil racist who have been given a big megaphone by the left via the MSM (Leftist’s Gatekeepers). Rev.Jesse Jackson is the other one perhaps to a lesser degree but none the less equally evil and play the racist card in his entire existence on the national stage. The female versions, look no further than Jackie Lee-Jackson and Maxine Waters………….
            Botox Polesi is one of the most dangerous evil walking idiot who should have been put out to pasture a long time ago.

            Jenkell and Hyde??????

        • goldenprez

          Conservative_Hippie … Your use of the word "spewing" is uncalled for, rude, and gives you away as the pretentious fool that you are.

          If you wish to correspond with me, I’ll thank you to keep a civil tongue in your head, so to speak, or just go away. Otherwise, I will respond in kind, as I do not suffer fools gladly. Especially ones who are snidely disrespectful.

          If you are willing to accept Mr. Gingrich’s backing and filling, be my guest. That the Heritage Foundation was just as stupid, is no excuse. The Heritage Foundation, which is not the be all and end all of conservatism, has made many policy mistakes, for which they have also backtracked and filled. Not to mention that The Heritage Foundation is not running for President of The United States.

          Newt Gingrich has come to many "principled conclusions" while running for the Presidency that contradict his previous positions and proclamations. So has Willard Mitt Romney. It seems these "career politicians" get religion only when they are running for office, and have to walk back their previous "principled conclusions."

          From this, one can draw their own "principled conclusions" as to the depth, and sincerity, of those "principled conclusions" suddenly realized by the party of the first part.

          More importantly, why are you stumping for Newt Gingrich on Conservatives 4 Palin?

          Shouldn’t you be "spewing" your bullcrap on the site Conservatives 4 Gingrich?

          Believe none of what you hear, and only half of what you see.

          Illegitimi non carborundum.

          Barracudas Maximus.
           

          • Conservative_Hippie

            golden,

            I apologize if spewing comes acroos as rude that was not my intention.  I am not stumping Newt here, I am defending him against what I feel is an unfair attack.

            I am first and foremost a Palin supporter that is why I am here.

            • goldenprez

              Conservative_Hippie … Your use of the snide word "spewing" was very surprising to me.

              I have seen many of your posts on a number of websites, and for the most part I do not remember your being rude or nasty.

              You may feel that a review of Mr. Gingrich’s previous positions, and his current flip-flopping, a la Mr. Romeny, is an "attack." With all due respect, that is hardly an "attack." That is simply pointing out that Mr. Gingrich’s "new" "principled conclusions" are in contradiction of his "old" "principled conclusions."

              It is up to the individual to decide if Mr. Gingrich’s "new" "principled conclusions" are sincere, or is he just trying to "get elected?" As a long-time "establishment" insider, believer in "big government," and slick politician, my money is on the latter.

              The recent conversion of Mr. Gingrich leaves much to be desired. It is only of recent vintage that Mr. Gingrich has arrived at his "new" "principled conclusions." As early as this year, his "principled conclusions" caused him to say that Paul Ryan’s budget approach to Social Security and Medicare was "right wing social engineering."

              Of course, he rushed to Rush to tap-dance that back, and explain "what he really meant," which was not recognizable as anything other than double-talk. He explained that he had "new" "principled conclusions" in direct opposition to his statement.

              That is just the tip of the Newt Gingrich iceberg of anti-conservative statements and "principled conclusions." Who was the first "conservative" to say, "The Reagan era is over?" Do you wish to hazard a guess?

              If you wish to be taken in by Mr. Gingrich and his "new" "principled conclusions," based on his laughable answerpage explanations, that is your business. I assure you there are no Sarah Palin supporters who are buying this bushwah. We all know a politician willing to say, or do anything to get elected, including selling their soul to the devil, when we see one.

              Mr. Gingrich is the epitome of that type of characterless individual.

              This is a statement of pure, unadulterated fact. If you view that as an "attack," unfair or otherwise, then come forth with something to refute it, other than a con man’s own words.

              If you are going to continue to try and defend Mr. Gingrich, and his "principled conclusions" on this site, I promise you I will devastate you with the facts every time. I assure you, I can do this with half my brain tied behind my back.

              Especially where Mr. Gingrich is concerned, I caution you to …

              Believe none of what you hear, and only half of what you see.

              Illegitimi non carborundum.

              Barracudas Maximus.

              • Conservative_Hippie

                First off I am full boat Sarah Palin supporter.  There was nothing in my post that attacks her, on the contrary I would defend her and have defended her on the blogosphere.  The fact that you say that I cannot be a Sarah Palin supporter and still take Newt at his word on his answers page is blatantly false.

                Secondly, I reject the notion that I am being "taken in" by Newt’s answers.  You may be surprised to hear that I was originally anti-Newt, mainly becuase of his adultery.  But he has done so well in the debates that I decided to research some of the claims out there that say he is not a conservative.  After reading his side of the story (there are always two sides of a story, and sometimes three) I decided to take him at his word.  That does not mean I am no longer a Sarah Palin supporter.  If Sarah Palin decided to renter the race she would have my 100% support!

                You said "Believe none of what you hear, and only half of what you see." This is precisely why I defended Newt, and will continue to defend not only Newt, but anyone who, IMO, is being unfairly criticized.  My main beef with the original poster was that he said that Newt is more like Obama than Obama which makes no sense.  I will defend that because it is not true.  So continue to devastate me if you want but remember we agreed to be civil in our discourse.

                • goldenprez

                  Conservative_Hippie … First off, I did not say you were not a Sarah Palin supporter. Which is totally immaterial to the discussion of Newt Gingrich.

                  Secondly, you may "reject" to your heart’s content. That you are willing to "take him at his word," simply proves your gullibility. Exactly in which "word" are you placing your faith? His previous word, his present word, or his future word. All of which always prove to be quite different. Mostly repudiations of all his previous "words," after he realizes that he gave himself away.

                  He is already walking-back his "amnesty" position. Just like John McLame, who continuously insisted that his plan was not "amnesty," while anyone with one working brain cell could see that it was, Mr. Gingrich is now insisting his plan is not "amnesty" because he doesn’t use the word "amnesty." John McLame said the same thing.

                  There is a saying in Zen Buddhism, "You can call a tail a leg, but that does not make it a leg."

                  In other words, as in Zen Buddhism, "it is what it does."

                  No one says Newt Gingrich is not a conservative. Nor do they say he is not a "big government establishment Republican." Nor do they say that he doesn’t hold way too many "liberal" and "progressive" ideas. Nor do they say he is a fighter for constitutional conservatism, mainly because he has already said that the Constitution of the United States of America is outdated.

                  In truth, I tire of this. This is like beating a dead horse. Every position that Newt Gingrich has held in the past, when he was out of office, and many while he was in office, he is currently contradicting as a candidate. If you are unable to discern the truth of his total lack of character and  principles, with facts to back them up, then there is nothing further to discuss. Your gullibility is beyond redemption.

                  Your misplaced sense of "fair play" is totally "out of place" on this website.

                  By the way, I do not really care about Newt’s adultery. As regards that, he can only hurt himself and those around him. As President of The United States, he can hurt us all, and his hubris doesn’t allow him to care.

                  Another point. I never said anything about Newt and Obamao. The original post of mine, to which you responded (check above), was a quote by Mark Steyn subbing for Rush on Tuesday. The quote was that conservatives had traded Romney, a man who believes in an individual mandate, global warming, and amnesty … for Newt Gingrich, a man who believes in an individual mandate, global warming, and amnesty.

                  Newt has stated, as recently as one of the last "debates," in front of millions of people, that he believes in amnesty, even though he didn’t use the actual word (see Zen Buddhism above). I really don’t care what his backtracking answerpage says. It is all after the fact, and after the excrement hit the fan. Which is completely Newt, and is totally indicative of the way he operates.

                  If you wish to believe anything Newt Gingrich says, which is all damage control, that is your affair. However, if you are really a "conservative," as your handle implies, defending Newt Gingrich will make you one sad, disappointed "conservative" in the immediate future.

                  Along with that, you will lose all credibility. I, for one, will laugh at you for having so easily been "taken in."

                  Incidentally, but hardly tertiary, Truth does not have two sides.

                  Only "stories" have two, or more sides.

                  Believe none of what you hear, and only half of what you see.

                  Illegitimi non carborundum.

                  Barracudas Maximus.

                  • Conservative_Hippie

                    goldenprez,

                    May God be with you.  See you on the boards.

                    Conservative_Hippie

            • kalkasam

              you need to go to a different site hip.

              • Conservative_Hippie

                I have as much right to be here as you do Kal.

          • kalkasam

            Well put goldenprez..

  • Guest

    Now THAT is some powerful words, Abie!  I honestly think that you must have hacked my computer because I have written a VERY similar article that I was going to submit to a friend’s blog since C4P…up until now….appeared to be posting only pro-Newt articles.  You used a bunch of the same articles and links.  Thank you for posting what some of us have been afraid to post!  ;-)

    • Abie Rubin

      I’m so technologically challenged, the thought of me capable of hacking someone’s computer sure got me laughing! :)

      thanks for the comment!

      • Guest

        Abie….I know the last couple of weeks have probably been a bit difficult….but thank you!  I sincerely mean that….thank you! 

        If I can make one person laugh a day….then my life is worth it!  ;-)  You know what they say….great minds think alike!

  • Jean_A

    What are we going to do????

    • Guest

      Jean….we need to fight for our beliefs and our country…..THAT is what we need to do.  A civilized conservative revolution!

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_6K6VEPRAR23STTROX3CH46EWDY Rich

      Exactly, What are we going to do NOW…?

      We need an HONEST LEADER with INTEGRITY and no SKELETONS…?

      I wonder where they are all hiding?

    • kalkasam

      Pray to GOD that Governor Palin gets in.

      • wandrako

        That would be great but nigh unto impossible at this point.  She can be very influential in this race anyway and I hope she comes out soon to help us get a competent leader. 

  • Sue Lynn

    SARAH SARAH SARAH

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Christine-Riordan-Brown/1302488096 Christine Riordan Brown

    WE NEED SARAH !!!!!!!!!!!HELP !!!!!!SARAH HEAR OUR CRIES !!!!!!!

  • http://twitter.com/isleofyouth PhilipJames

    Here is a link to the unaired ad that works…

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XUa-I6p0B3M

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Christine-Riordan-Brown/1302488096 Christine Riordan Brown

    AMERICA WEEPS

  • patnatasha

    We need you sarah. america is weeping.

  • ProudAmerican247

    Conservatism wins every time it’s tried.

    Sarah is the ultimate Conservative.

    Sarah Running=Sarah Winning

    PALIN 2012

  • http://twitter.com/isleofyouth PhilipJames

    And Newt is the best candidate Republicans have besides Mittens…
    what does that say for the sorry state of the Republican Party?

    Can I ask the question….  should the Republican Party survive if this is what it gets us?

    Maybe its time for a third party made up of the majority of the regular folk from the right, the middle and just over the edge of the middle to the left. A fresh new start is a lot better than a retread, isn’t it? Even if it takes a few election cycles to get there.

    You know that if either Newt or Mittens were to win, nothing changes… really. As Sarah said, what is the point of change if all you do is change the uniforms.

    • Guest

      No….if this is "the best" of what the GOP has to offer….it should NOT survive.  But that is part of the point of a Palin presidency….to get rid of the corruption from the ground up.  Rebuild the GOP first….THEN we will have the credibility to take on the other side.  You can’t have ads that can honestly say….."but my guy is less corrupt than your guy is" but that is what we currently have now.

    • ProudAmerican247

      I’m ready for an ((((EARTHQUAKE))))!!

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_WWFTUCBOPWNF5NAZKRWWH22BDA Blackwater

      I would almost be tempted to vote for Obama over Newt … ALMOST.

      Newt is not a Conservative in any way, form, or fashion. He’s a left wing democrat who for some reason thinks he must pose as a Republican. He’s a liar of the highest order, and more dangerous than Obama.

      He’s more corrupt than Rick Perry.

      He has FAR more flip-flops than Mittens, and has more extreme left wing ideas.

      A vote for Newt would be WORSE than a second Obama term.

      • HuntingMoose

        That is insane what you state.

        And quoting Rush who summarized it:

        All the republican candidates, including hazmat mitt and hunts, they all want to do what is best for the country. Compare that to obama whose goal is to cut this country down and destroy it.

        Newt has so far given me the clearest indication of his push for cleanup the mess by calling on Sarah if he would be elected. And Newt is not that ignorant to not know that Sarah will expose anyone, even if it is the person who brought her in. Her resume is there for us to see. And so for newt. But what makes me wonder, why do the other candidates have not yet stated the same and until that happens, newt is my preference by lack of better commitments

        • Guest

          Moose….that is called pandering.  I put more weight behind what candidates do or don’t do when they are not currently running for office.  Newt was not so nice to Sarah Palin until he started running for president and realized it would be a good idea to try to tap into some of her support. 

          • ProudAmerican247

            Newt was complimentary towards Sarah when she was running for VP.

            When McCain lost…not so much. Newt dropped her like a hot potato; acted like she didn’t exist. Her name never came up in TV interviews.

            Not so long ago…she "needed to slow down", he said.

            Now, accolades all over the place.

            Sorry, but that’s typical behavior of someone who has been in DC tooooooo looooong.

            It’s a turn off and I’m tired of it.

             

            • Guest

              I totally agree with that!

          • HuntingMoose

            pandering or not, that is minor to what I really care about.

            I care about is having Sarah be able to clean the clock of Corruption Pelosi, Obama, Reid and all other crony-insider-lobbyist-loving politicians.

            If something is not OK with newt, I have great trust in her ability to call him out on it when the time is right. But for now, I am waiting for the other dwarfs to follow his lead in this pandering.

        • Jack_Franklin

          Newt, as a member of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), would do more than clean up, he would clean our clocks!  CFR is dedicated to the establishment of a New World Order.  Newt has been close friends with Alvin Toffler for years, and even wrote the forward to his book "The Third Wave."  Further insight into Newt’s background and associations, and WHY this is a big deal can be found at http://www.jbs.org/birchtube/viewvideo/923/conspiracy/the-real-newt-gingrich–libertynewsnetwork

          BTW Abie, you did a fantastic job on this article!   

        • Ron Brown

          And as we keep supporting and electing these type politicians our country continues to crash and burn. As Sarah Palin has said, our country is at the tipping point. These politicians like Newt have proved time and again that they will say whatever it takes to get elected. The prove is in a clear and accurate review of their historical record. That was not done with President Obama, but hopefully it will be done with this crop of politicians. We can’t just keep repeating history and hoping for different results.

          If Sarah Palin is again put under the thumb of someone else (see 2008 with John McCain) why do we think that we can repeat history by putting her under the thumb of somebody else like Newt Gingrich and expect different results?  Isn’t that the definition of insanity?

          The insane are currently running the asylum in D.C. right now.

          Can’t we expect more?  Is that wrong? Can’t "We The People" call for a true reformer?

          Can’t we petition for Governor Palin?

          RUN SARAH RUN

          • HuntingMoose

            don’t get me wrong. I want her very badly in the WH.

            and I don’t want those half-a*s that just drive the train slightly slower into the abyss.

            But I do not think that Sarah will ever, ever, let herself be muzzled as was in 2008. She has learned her lesson and next time will just speak up like she did while in Alaska.

      • $8196935

        You probably voted for Obama the first time.

        • Guest

          Yankee4Palin- No we did not vote for Obama the first time or anytime. Stop assuming because people are speaking the truth about Newt  that it  is a vote for Obama. Newt is an insider, yes indeed. We do not need to be told who to vote for. I read your comments and you are such a die hard republican American that  you can’t see the forest for the trees I am an independent American oh yes (red white and blue American)…. btw.Thank you Gov. Palin for speaking for us!!!  Everyone knows that none of these self-centered politicians running for the presidency  spoke up for Gov. Palin when it counted, No skin in the game no way!!!  We are the ones who spoke up for Gov. Palin yesterday today and always. We are her supporters. Thank you very much,  Enough Already!!! btw. I voted for McCain because of Gov. Palin
          Pure and Simple. I cannot vote for any of these Insider Establishment Clowns who are working against We The People. We are Country Before Party… I am not 4 sale.Please Please Please Where Are You Gov. Palin?

      • IwjwI

        Newt Gingrich is More Dangerous To America Than Obama and I Can Prove It! http://wp.me/pxxfo-1rm

        Newt Gingrich’s Skeleton Closet http://bit.ly/tnY2Wv

        • Jack_Franklin

          lwjwl, thank you for these comprehensive links (THESE ARE A MUST READ)!  An excellent compliment to Abie’s article here.  It was SO worth the time to read them. 

          I better understand how Newt would be more dangerous than Obama, as illogical as that may seem.  As an historian, you think Gingrich would know that it was a matter of time before his own history caught up with him!

          • http://www.facebook.com/people/Suki-Pero/100001668382968 Suki Pero

            Yes, great articles, thanks for sharing.

      • lanahi

        We have a record of his time as Speaker of the House, and it is impresive.  It’s the record that counts and tells us what he would push for as president…it is the record of a conservative.  I suggest you study it.

    • wandrako

      No third party.  That will guarantee that Obama gets a second term and we are doomed.I

  • blerch

    Not even counting his personal baggage, how many political mistakes does Newt have to apologize for before people start to realize that maybe his judgement is not that great?

    • generictrainee

      999..

    • susiepuma

      Oh, but he’s a brilliant debater and would just outshine the fraud – too bad there is more than debating involved in being the President of the United States – we’ve got one do nothing in the WH – we don’t need another ……………..

      BTW – I have never liked Gingrich since the first time I saw him – there was just something about him that gave me a bad vibe and that continues to this day – I see him as arrogant, condescending, mean-spirited, petty and completely full of himself – kinda reminds me of those PPP establishment elitists who think they know what’s best for us illiterate, ignorant, bitter clingers who live in fly-over country…    oh, oops …bbbbbut he’s the savior of the GOP
      …my bad….

    • ProudAmerican247

      Exactly.

      Just because Newt’s brain is a walking encyclopedia of History, doesn’t mean he would make a great President.

  • Guest

    After reading this article…..view this again and ask the question…..

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=nmQvt2GnDz4

  • tomlyn

    Newt is not a conservative !.  Why would Bill Clinton back him like he did recently unless Clinton feels Newt is his type of politician.  I could never vote for him and I’m glad to see this report on Newt which brings out alot of his faults.

    • barracuda43

      Maybe because they both got something meaningful done for the country even if they disagreed on a lot.Do you think Reagan and Tip Oneal agreed on a lot.No but they worked together and got things done in a positive way.

  • patnatasha

    newt is his own worse enemy which is bad for us as well.

  • Guest

    And now I have ONE article that sums it all up so when people ask me why I can’t support him…I can link this one article instead of the 20+ it took to write it.  It’s nice and compact and to the point.   

    • lanahi

      And extremely one-sided.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_WWFTUCBOPWNF5NAZKRWWH22BDA Blackwater

    Newt Gingrich is More Dangerous To America Than Obama & I Can Prove It!

    http://wp.me/pxxfo-1rm

    • $8196935

      that is what some said about the Jews vs Hitler

    • barracuda43

      Wow.Have another drink.

  • exodus2011

    Thanks for doing this V E T T I N G Abie, in your usual meticulous fashion

    The American People must know the truth about those who would lead them

  • generictrainee

    great guy..

  • LLDub

    Ok….so Newt’s out.   Cain has been destroyed by the press (and maybe himself, but we really don’t know for sure, do we), Perry’s an idiot, according to so many who post here (and others of course), because his oratory doesn’t flow like "we’d" like, Bachmann’s getting nowhere being a zero charisma, nobody but isolationists will even look at Ron Paul, even I wouldn’t vote for Huntsman, and I can’t even think of any others that may even be running they’re so obscure.

    Oh, and the Guv isn’t running and won’t be.  Unlike so many others it seems, I’ve read the dictionary definition of "no".

    So this is just great.   All should keep in mind, however,  that if you don’t vote for Romney when he’s the nominee, you’re voting for Obama.

    Good luck on that.

    • Guest

      Maybe the GOP will WAKE UP and stop scaring off and threatening good candidates then and stop pushing these "also rans" on us.  How about we finally take a stand and fight instead of just rolling over?  Someone has to have the courage to do it!  It’s OUR COUNTRY FOR GOD’S SAKE!  Isn’t that worth putting up a fight for?  It was what my grandfather fought for in WWII.  And it was what my great-great-great-great-great-great-great grandfather fought in the Revolutionary War for.  My family has been here since 1653!  We have fought for our country.  I ain’t about to roll-over on them when it’s MY turn to fight!

      • PhillyCon

        Exactly, speppers.  This answers the "we don’t have anyone else" question.  Now, why is that?  

        I would further argue that having a weak field full of weak candidates is precisely what the GOP  is aiming for.  "These are the selections and now don’t complain" is something Rove probably says on a daily basis.

        We should all know our place after all. 

        • Guest

          Exactly!  I am done settling!  Period!  End of sentence!  There is still almost a year until the general election and almost exactly 9 months until the convention.  Look at what has happened in just the last 2 months!  SOOOOOOOOOOO much can happen until the convention.  I will wait but not silently.  We have tools and we need to learn how to use them.

    • exodus2011

      it looks like as each of these Bowling Alley PINS fall ….. that more people will start to look around rather desperately for SOMEONE …… someone who can at least STAND the test of scrutiny

      and maybe if they peel off the blinders from their eyes they will recognise the GOLD Candidate …. who has sidelined herself from the GOP Primary (read = mudfight in the shallow water), while she does the heavy lifting, along with her patriotic Associates, of getting the *Lawful* Corruptocrats EXPOSED for who they are and how they have been SHAFTING America and Americans for DECADES

      (((( GROUND OPENING UP ! )))) 2012

      *__*

  • Bill__Hughes

    I’m not sure that this kind of post is helpful.  Newt has always been supportive toward Palin.  To have a Palin site burn bridges with this seems unproductive.  Additionally, a lot of the "evidence" cited in this article has already been refuted and lacks the context.  For example, Newt praised Obama’s "focus" on education reform not necessarily the policies.  He was promoting education reform in general and felt that the right had a place in that debate.  I’m not here to argue the merits of that, but I’m finding a lot of the Newt criticisms to be completely taken out of the historical context and lacking the full explanation.  When you hear the full story the take-away is very different.  Newt has had issues in the past.  He’s not solid on everything.  There are plenty of things in his record to cringe at.  That said, I’m not sure he’s this evil maniacal opportunist that his critics make him out to be.  Again, I don’t think this is helpful.  What happens if Palin endorses him? She’s only ever said positive things about him, so he’s certainly in the running unless she changes her mind.

    • hrh40

      No, he has not always been supportive of Palin. He said, get this, he actually said, that Palin should slow down and think a bit before she talks. And this was after the very-well-thought-out and put-together video she released after she had been accused of mass murder for three days.

      Newt supports who he thinks will support Newt the best at the time.

      See: Nancy Pelosi

      See: Al Sharpton

      See: Arne Duncan

      See: Sarah Palin

      • ellengba

        My goodness is that all you got.  Some advice about a video that was being attacked.  His comment was mild.  Perhaps he thought it supportive.

        Hell the advice is not worse then saying keep you elbow up.

        Post some actual attack, some joke at her expense.  You can find plenty of those did he join in.

Open Thread

Governor Palin’s Tweets