I know what Santorum and Romney supporters will say so please do not threadjack. I am asking only Newt supporters, including those who switched on March 13, 2012 after the primaries in Missisippi and Alabama. Newt says he is staying. I would like for us to have an honest discussion. This is like a family affair!

http://thedaleygator.wordpress.com/2011/11/28/videos-newt-gingrich-what-an-american-president-should-sound-like/

On Super Tuesday, I was attending night school and missed most of the coverage. As soon as I got back, I logged on to RS and to my dismay found many references to Newt’s supposedly  horrible victory speech. Friends of Fox Juan Williams, probably still smarting from his liver being eaten by Newt complained that people should stop giving Newt any more money. Most complained that Newt’s $2.50 a gallon gas was just pandering and that his speech was too long.

So I went to www.Newt.org and listened to all 25 minutes of it. I honestly couldn’t find anything not to like about it. And true to form, Newt found a way to put a noose around Obama’s neck and somehow tied the energy millstone to that noose. Critics are simply dishonest for saying that candidates must focus on Obama and yet not crediting Newt for doing it in a way that only he can. For those who complained that his speech was too long failed to note that Ann Romney took even longer in her husband’s victory speech and she wasn’t even the candidate!

————————————————————————————————————————

Wolf said it so well here:-

http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/mar/8/mitt-beat-rick-but-newt-beat-barack/#.T1l18CAyzFh.twitter

Here are some clips:-

In a 30-minute video titled “$2.50 per Gallon Gasoline, Energy Independence and Jobs,” Mr. Gingrich unveiled his vision for renewed American prosperity centered around oil and natural-gas production. He demonstrated his unparalleled insight into the intersection of energy, security and prosperity. Mr. Gingrich rightly declared that never again should an American president bow before a Saudi king. Meanwhile, Mr. Obama, stung by his recent half-billion-dollar failed Solyndra boondoggle, began floating his latest green fantasy of harvesting algae to cure the pain at the pump.

Panicked by Mr. Gingrich, Mr. Obama was forced off his game and repeatedly tried to respond, only making matters worse for himself. He stayed true to the Democrats’ anti-energy agenda and mocked Republicans for wanting to drill for new oil. This made the president the butt of a joke for Jay Leno on “The Tonight Show”: Democrats claim that new drilling for oil won’t help us for at least 10 years, but haven’t they been saying that now for more than 10 years?

Mr. Obama boasts that oil production is up under his administration. True, but only because the president hasn’t yet stopped production on privately owned land. Mr. Gingrich cut right through his profound dishonesty: “Under President Obama, because he is so anti-American-energy, we have actually had a 40 percent reduction in development of oil offshore, and we have had a 40 percent reduction in the development of oil on federal lands,” Mr. Gingrich pounced. “So in the area he controls, production is down and the area that is hard at the free enterprise stuff where people get rich, production is up. So he is now claiming credit for the area he can’t control in order to have us think he is actually for what he opposes.”

Mr. Gingrich reduced the once-confident “Yes, we can!” 2008 version of Mr. Obama into the backpedaling “It’s not my fault” 2012 version right before our eyes. A defensive Mr. Obama dissembled: “We know there’s no silver bullet that will bring down gas prices or reduce our dependence on foreign oil overnight.” Wait, what about that algae?

——————————————————————————————————————-

Listen to Newt’s speech again……

 

In the past few days, President has gone out of his way telling the international community that he is not bluffing when he said that the military option is not off the table. Presumably, he must be concerned that the Iranians might not take him seriously enough!

In my memory of past presidents since Nixon, this is probably the first time a sitting President has to struggled so hard to maintain credibility. I venture to guess that since he was inaugurated a little over three years ago, Obama had left a litany of broken words that it is almost a given that he could be bluffing.

Some of his more memorable broken promises include not raising taxes on those making $250K or less, having the most transparent administration, no lobbyists allowed, healthcare negotiations telecasted on Cspan.

I have a funny feeling that with Iran, obama may have cried wolf one time too many!

On January 26, 2012, just days before the Florida primary, a massive orchestrated attack on Newt’s perceived relationship with Reagan began with an article by Elliot Abrams on NRO where he took clips of Newt’s speech out of context and slammed Newt as spewing hate and vitriole against Reagan. A slew of headlines on the Drudge Report slammed Newt as a direct result of Abrams’ smear.  The massive smear campaign effectively took down Newt’s front runner status and despite protestation from Jeffery Lord, Rush, and Mark Levin, Newt lost Florida.  At the risk of looking like I am flogging a dead horse, I am determined to dig up the truth  behind the smear. If it is indeed a smear, guys like Abrams must not go unpunished and Romney must not be rewarded for falsehood.

I got a copy of the actual speech and true enough, Newt was talking about the weakness of Reagan’s anti-Soviet policies versus his rhethorics against them. In other words, Reagan’s tough talk was not matched by tough actions. The State Department was responsible for implementing Reagan’s agenda  and in the case of the Soviet, they were frustrating Reagan at every turn. The State Department was more interested in accomodating the Soviet in the hope that they will stop their aggressive transnational expansion. Newt main complaint in his speech was that America’s response to the Soviet transnational expansion (via the State Department) was failing and will continue to fail unless massive policy changes are put in place.

Ben Hart  in another article talked about the same thing. As a 20-something working for Heritage Foundation, Ben Hart wrote an article titled “Rhethoric vs Reality: How the State Department betrayed Reagan’s Vision”  which provided the ammunition for what Newt was saying in his speech on March 21, 1986 about how Reagan’s appointees at the State Department were undermining and sabotaging Reagan’s stated policy of wanting to arm and supply anti-Soviet resistance movements around the world — including the Mujahideen in Afghanistan, the Contras in Nicaragua, and Jonas Savimbi in Angola.

Abrams who was working for the State Department at that time vehemently protested the article and even went to Heritage top brass to get Ben Hart fired.  Ben was called in to see the Top Brass and got to present his paper and they loved it and Ben’s job was safe!

This paper received a lot of media coverage at the time and was cited by many conservative leaders and commentators (including George Will, Charles Krauthammer, Jeane Kirkpatrick, Newt, and others) who were concerned that Reagan’s appointees at the State Department were not carrying out Reagan’s objectives — who were, in fact, undermining the Reagan Doctrine.

It is vital that the truth about Newt’s relationship with Reagan be communicated far and wide. Newt is running on shaking Washington DC and the one Department that needs shaking is none other than the State Department. Please read the rest of the article and disemminate this info far and wide.

——————————————————————————————————————-

http://www.escapetyranny.com/2012/01/27/rush-limbaugh-exposes-elliot-abrams-lie-in-national-review-that-newt-was-disloyal-to-reagan/

Here are some clips of what Ben Hart had to say about Abrams:-

He (Abrams) did get caught up in the Iran-Contra scandal and ended up pleading guilty to some misdemeanors for withholding information from Congress. Without the plea deal, he might well have been convicted of felony perjury. So that was yet another example of Abrams using deception to achieve what he wants, this time deceiving Congress.  He doesn’t even let the law stop him from doing whatever he wants to do — the classic Machiavellian “ends justify the means” mentality. That’s Elliot Abrams for you.

So now Abrams has decided he’s for Mitt over Newt. He seems to have a habit of lying about, and trying to destroy, all who get in the way of what Elliot Abrams wants. I was a target of Elliot in the 1980s. Now Newt is a target of Elliot over the very same issue. The problem for Elliot Abrams is that what he’s saying is a provable lie . . . by a proven liar who was even convicted of, well, lying (that is, convicted of unlawfully withholding important information from Congress). So this guy has zero credibility. Why any publication would give any credence to anything Abrams writes, even publish it without checking it, is a mystery.

————————————————————————————————————————–

 True enough, Newt was distracted from what he wanted to say in Florida. True enough, Newt did not have the money nor the organization to get the truth out to every primary voter in Florida in the 48 hours since Abrams’ article was published. But it is not true that Romney will get the nomination because of Abrams’ lie and it is our job to make sure of that!

 

 

After some very serious thought, I have decided to write a Diary on why I think Newt Gingrich’s record, skills, vision, and ability uniquely made him the most qualified person to take on this gargantum task of turning around USA, Inc. My objective is not to tear down any of the other candidates but to shed light on Newt’s past record and to defend those record against all comers. I would strongly suggest that supporters of Ron, Romney, and Rick do the same. There is enough negativity here and I am not convinced that is the best way to go through the rest of the primary.

I strongly encourage other Newt’s supporters to add to this diary.
Newt ran for congress twice before succeeding on his third try in 1978. Following Reagan’s Presidential election in 1980, Newt and a few of his colleagues in the House formed the Conservative Opportune Society (COS) in 1983 and took it upon themselves to defend the President against a fusilage of criticism from his enemies. Back in those days, Newt and
his colleagues would take turns to speak on the House floor, frequently to an empty audience. CSPAN will telecast the entire speech to the nation. It is believed that Newt and his young colleagues became known as Reagan’s young lieutenants because of those speeches to the empty House Floor. Unfortunately, it was during one such speech in March 21st, 1986 that Newt was caught lambasting Reagan’s reaching out to Gorbachev. Critics of Newt, including Romney’s super PAC friends used that little segment and took it out of context to assail the Speaker as being anti-Reagan when in fact in the very same speech, he was highly supportive of the President. The same critics failed to mentioned that most conservatives of that day were on Newt’s side. On January, 26, in an orchestrated move, the Drudge Report was flooded with a deluge of headlines lambasting Newt’s anti-Reagan speech, including a piece by serious conservative writer Elliot Abrams. Despite attempts by Mark Levin and Rush Limbaugh to correct the error, damage was done and Newt paid the political price at the Florida primary a few days later.

While in congress, Newt

• Founded the Conservative Opportune Society which met weekly to discuss ideas many of which were adopted by Reagan during his second term supporting the group’s conservative goals on economic growth, education, crime, and social issues.
• Co founded the Congressional Military Reform Caucus and the Congressional Aviation and Space Caucus
• Led charges against the Democrat Speaker of the House Jim Wright
• Became House Minority Whip in 1989
• In 1990, he came up with a paper titled  ”Language, a Key Mechanism of Control”, that encouraged Republicans to “speak like Newt” and contained lists of “contrasting words” – words with negative connotations such as “radical”, “sick,” and “traitors” – and “optimistic positive governing words” such as “opportunity”, “courage”, and “principled”, that Gingrich recommended for use in describing Democrats and Republicans, respectively…Now we know why he is so good with words during the debates.
• Gingrich and several other Republicans,  in an effort to offer an alternative to Democratic policies and to unite distant wings of the Republican Party came up with a Contract with America which laid out ten policies that Republicans promised to bring to a vote on the House floor during the first hundred days of the new Congress if they won the elections. The contract was signed by Gingrich and other Republican candidates for the House of Representatives. The contract ranged from issues such as welfare reform, term limits, tougher crime laws, and a balanced budget law, to more specialized legislation such as restrictions on American military participation in UN missions. In the November 1994 elections, Republicans gained 54 seats and took control of the House for the first time since 1954.
• Congress fulfilled Gingrich’s Contract promise to bring all ten of the Contract’s issues to a vote within the first 100 days of the session
• Legislation proposed by the 104th US Congress included term limits for Congressional Representatives, tax cuts, welfare reform, and a balanced budget amendment, as well as independent auditing of the finances of the House of Representatives and elimination of non-essential services such as the House barbershop and shoe-shine concessions.
• Newt led the Republican majority to an re-election in 1996, the first time Republicans had done so in 68 years, and the first time simultaneously with a Democratic president winning re-election.
• In 1996, Newt pushed for the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act which was intended to reconstruct the welfare system. The act gave state governments more autonomy over welfare delivery, while also reducing the federal government’s responsibilities. It instituted the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program, which placed time limits on welfare assistance and replaced the longstanding Aid to Families with Dependent Children program. Other changes to the welfare system included stricter conditions for food stamp eligibility, reductions in immigrant welfare assistance, and recipient work requirements. The said act was signed into law on Aug 22, 1996.
• Pushed Clinton for a Federal Balanced Budget- The plan included a total of $152 billion in Republican sponsored tax cuts over five years. Other major parts of the spending plan called for $115 billion to be saved through a restructuring of Medicare, $24 billion set aside to extend health insurance to children of the working poor, tax credits for college tuition, and a $2 billion welfare-to-work jobs initiative. Plan was to have a balanced budget by 2002 but was achieved in 1999, three years ahead of schedule.
• Through the Contract with America, Gingrich was credited with the largest Capital Gains Tax Cut in US History with the 1997 US Tax Relief Act

In an article published on Townhall (Romney’s defacto home base) Byron York made a decent attempt at uncovering what really happened to Gingrich’s Ethics case. With Townhall very much in the running against the NRO to see who annoints Romney the quickest, one has to wonder why would they allow such an article to be published. My best guess is that TPTB having determined that Newt is so far behind that he is no longer a threat decided that Townhall could use a little bit of reporting on the other side to give some semblance that they are still a fair and balance organization, unlike the NRO and Fox News. The significance of uncovering the truth is huge, given the fact that the Romney campaign had used the Ethics Investigation and the $300,000 “fine” to devastating effect against Gingrich in the Florida primary. Even on RS, there are a few diarists who routinely cite those against the former Speaker.

One of the most prominent ad involves Tom Brokaw on NBC news saying that Speaker Newt Gingrich was fined $300,000 in the ethics violation case. Interestingly, Tom Brokaw and NBC had asked the Romney campaign to stop using that particular newsclip in its ad. Rush Limbaugh took NBC to task for not doing enough. They should have come out and corrected an error in reporting because Newt Gingrich was totally exonerated by the IRS and that Newt was cleared of all but two of the charges in the Ethics case. On the Thursday before the Florida Primary, the Drudge Report was innundated with massive headlines attacking Newt Gingrich in an attack that Rush described as orchestrated. A few conservatives came to Newt’s defence, including Rush, and Mark Levin. Elliot Abrams hack piece on the Drudge Report was deemed a smear but the attack ads continued. Romney went on to beat out Newt in the Floridian primary. 

The Republican Establishment continues to turn a blind eye towards Romney’s negative and patently false attacks on Newt. The $300,000 continues to be called a fine instead of a reimbursement of the cost of hiring an outside lawyer to investigate Newt. No one ever talks of the IRS exonerating Newt of all the 85 charges, including the one he pleaded guilty to (in order to bring the case to a close) misleadingly claiming the course he taught was not political but educational. In the end, the IRS confirmed the course was educational.  Byron did a good job and I would include the conclusion to his article here. You all should read his article in its entirety. Well worth your time!

————————————————————————————————————————-

“It is hard to convey today how much the media became preoccupied with the case, and how much pressure fell on Gingrich and Republicans to end the ordeal. In January 1997, Gingrich agreed to plead guilty to the previously unknown offense of failing to seek sufficiently detailed advice from a tax lawyer before proceeding with the course. (Gingrich had, in fact, sought advice from two such lawyers in relation to the course.) Gingrich also admitted that he had provided “inaccurate, incomplete and unreliable” information to Ethics Committee investigators. That “inaccurate” information was largely Gingrich’s contention that the course was not political — a claim the IRS later would support.

Why did Gingrich admit wrongdoing? “The atmosphere at the time was so rancorous, partisan, and personal that everyone, including Newt, was desperately seeking a way to end the whole thing,” Gingrich attorney Jan Baran said in 1999. “He was admitting to w hatever he could to get the case over with.”

It was a huge victory for Democrats. They had deeply wounded the speaker. But they wanted more, and they pressed the IRS to investigate.

Experts examined every word Gingrich spoke in every class; they examined the financing and administration of the course; and they examined how the course might have fit into Gingrich’s political network.

In the end, in 1999, the IRS released a highly detailed 74-page report that concluded the course was, in fact, a legitimate educational exercise. “The ‘Renewing American Civilization’ course was educational … and not biased toward any of those who were supposed to be benefited,” the IRS concluded.

bottom line: Gingrich acted properly and violated no laws. Of course, by that time, Gingrich was out of office, widely presumed to be guilty of something, and his career in politics was (seemingly) o ver. Now he’s having to fight the fight all over again.”

http://townhall.com/columnists/byronyork/2012/02/06/what_really_happened_to_the_gingrich_ethics_case/page/full/

Guys like Dick Armey came out very strongly against Newt for not quitting and his so called personal vendetta against the GOP front runner. Apparently, Newt must clear the way for Romney. Whatever happened to the other 45 states yet to vote? So nobody has anything to say about Romney’s outspending Newt in negative ads?

Will guys like Dick Armey also call on Romney to tone down his attacks on Newt? On a level playing field with no negative ads, it will be Newt Gingrich by a landslide. I
can’t see Romney stopping his negative ads. It has been proven time and again that they works. And Romney’s super PAC has tons of money. Romney will just let off for a while and whenever Newt draws too close for comfort, his super PAC will unleash those same negative ads. It does not matter that most of those negative ads had been proven to be false.

It is really hypocritical of the GOP establishment to keep harping on the candidates that they need to stop attacking each other and then turn a blind eye to Romney’s relentless attacks on Newt. When Newt tries to fight back, they condemn the man for waging a personal vendetta and for not looking out for the party. I would tell Newt…to hell with the party, just talk to the American people. Yes, people’s power versus money power! Sounds rather populist but what choice does the man has?

Newt is really fighting for the soul of the Republican Party….the Tea Party faction versus the traditional establishment wing. It is conceievable that conservatism is itself at stake. What will it take for all conservatives to coalesce around Newt Gingrich? What will take for Rick Santorum to follow the noble path that Gov Rick Perry took by withdrawing and endorsing Newt? Two of the former non-Romney front runners havecalready endorsed Newt. Just waiting for Bachmann and Santorum to follow suit.

Make no mistake! Conservatism is at stake. Even more at stake is the fate of America. In a battle for the soul of the country, squishy moderates always lose! Just ask Bob Dole, McCain and GHWBush(1992). Are we really thinking of sending another moderate to fight Obama? God forbid! There is too much at stake! Just what is in Romney’s record that tells us that he will be able to roll back the Federal Government, repeal Obamacare, and pull the country in a 180 turn towards conservatism. Or are we simply wishing that Romney will somehow pull it out! Records matter!and Romney had no record of conservatism in his core. First, the GOP establishment needs to wake up! Middle America will wake up in time to send Obama back to wherever he came from! We wish him Godspeed!

Despite protest from Rush Limbaugh, Michael Reagan, Mike Levin, amongst others, Mitt Romney persisted in his disingenuous negative attacks on Speaker Gingrich that he resigned in disgrace from Congress. Despite well documented proof that the IRS had exonerated Gingrich from those ethics charges, Romney continued with those attacks. Outspent 5:1 or even 8:1 depending on the sources, it is a miracle that Newt was able to garner a respectable 32% of the Floridian votes. While it is true that more of Newt’s former colleagues came out to attack him rather than defend him, Mark Souder, one of his fellow congressman who served under him found it totally unacceptable that Romney persisted in misrepresenting the Former Speaker’s record in the House and had decided to speak up. One key note is his observation that right around 1999, the House Republicans have decided that George W Bush could very well be the new leader of the GOP and the House no longer needs an “idea” leader but rather a manager for GWBush’s ideas. Thus, the plan was to replace Newt with Bob Livingstone or Hastert. The rest is history as we know it.

Interesting enough, in 2012, America is again in a very precarious position that no where in her history is a leader with big ideas and vision needed as much as NOW. So just as Churchill was discarded after WWI during peacetime, his service to the nation was needed in WW2 and he was promptly reelected to lead England through her darkest days. Likewise, Newt Gingrich was called upon to lead the Republican Revolution in the late 80′s and early 90′s and discarded in 1997. In 2012, when the country needs him most, let’s hope we have the courage and wisdom to reelect him. Like he said “I pledge my Life, my Wealth, and my Sacred Honor”. I believe that Newton Leroy Gingrich was prepared by God for a time like no other!

——————————————————————————————————–

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/newt-did-not-resign-disgrace_620900.html

Romney’s failure to adequately answer questions about his tax returns were widely perceived as the reason for his woes in South Carolina. When asked whether he would release his tax returns….he initially said no. Later, he changed that to April by which time the primary will be over. Finally he caved and released his 2010 return and the 2011 estimated return. Incredibly he answered, “maybe!” when asked if he will follow his father’s example of transparency by releasing 12 years of return.  The whole episode left an impression of a bungling person uncomfortable with his wealth and success and does give the impression that he has something to hide.

Questions abound and it is better that they are asked now than later! One day before the Florida Primary, Romney’s Finances is indeed coming under withering fire from his opponents! Check this out!

—————————————————————————————————————

Presidential candidate Mitt Romney’s vast fortune is putting him under withering fire just one day before the most important vote so far in the Republican primary calendar.

Discrepancies between Romney’s tax returns and the financial disclosure he filed when he started his run for the White House last year are raising new questions about whether he has hidden huge sums from the Internal Revenue Service, claims the campaign of his nearest rival, Newt Gingrich.

“Governor Romney’s taxes are like an onion,” Gingrich communications director Joe DeSantis alleged on Monday, 24 hours before the Florida primary. “The more layers you peel back, the stronger the aroma.

“The people of Florida — indeed, the people of the United States — deserve answers to the questions raised by his secret network of hidden foreign bank accounts and shady tax accounting procedures.”

Among the new questions raised:

• Why does Romney need to squirrel his money away in foreign banks, best known for their ability to hide income from the tax man?
• Why does he claim he provides “services” to his former company, Bain Capital, so allowing him to pay reduced taxes, at the same time as saying he retired from the company more than a decade ago?
• Is the barrage of vicious attack ads that he has launched against Gingrich, in effect being funded by government bailout money given to his biggest donor, Goldman Sachs?

“Every time he takes a step toward transparency, new questions emerge,” DeSantis said in an exclusive interview with Newsmax.

“Why does an American citizen even need a Swiss bank account? There are plenty of banks here in the U.S. He says he pays taxes on everything and that’s great. But why does he need to place this money overseas in the first place?

“We all know that foreign accounts are usually used to obscure something, so we have to ask: What is it he is trying to hide?

“Putting it simply, it looks like he is trying to game the system.”

Questions were first raised last week by the Los Angeles Times, which compared Romney’s tax returns with his filings with the Federal Elections Commission. The paper discovered at least 23 overseas accounts on his tax return that were not included on his financial disclosure forms.

Among his assets were funds based in what the Times called “low-tax foreign countries such as Bermuda, the Cayman Islands and Luxembourg.”

Then The Wall Street Journal raised the question of whether Romney should be entitled to pay 15 percent tax on money he earned from “services” to Bain, when he previously had claimed he had retired from the company in 1999.

A Romney campaign official acknowledged to the Journal that the form was completed using “boilerplate language” and Romney had not actually provided any new services to Bain. Under complex tax laws, “you can have it both ways,” said the official, who also acknowledge that, “from a consistency standpoint,” the situation looked odd.

“In the complex accounting of Mr. Romney’s income, that could land him with a bill for back taxes,” the Journal reported.

DeSantis told Newsmax, “If you just look at the failure to disclose foreign bank accounts in his FEC report, you have to wonder why. There seems no good reason why any lawyer worth his salt would think you don’t need to include these assets.”

Romney already had come under attack from the nonprofit Sunlight Foundation which advocates for open government. Editorial director Bill Allison said failing to tell everything defeats the purpose of disclosure reports.

Romney’s campaign has claimed that the omissions were “trivial.” His spokeswoman, Andrea Saul, called it “a minor discrepancy” and said the former Massachusetts governor would be amending his FEC filing to include the information.

DeSantis said that, if that omission were the only issue concerning Romney’s finances, he could accept his word. However, he said it was “part of a pattern,” with too many other issues raised, such as whether he is entitled to a lower rate for his work for Bain, and his acceptance of $367,000 in campaign donations from Goldman Sachs, which received billions in bail out money.

“You have this perverse situation where this company received taxpayer money and is now donating to Romney to fund his attack ads.

“This comes at the same time that he is finding clever ways to reduce his own taxes, which in turn raises real suspicions even in such a respected conservative newspaper as The Wall Street Journal,” said DeSantis, who described Goldman Sachs as “the poster child for crony capitalism.

“The American people, and Republican voters in particular, know about the grotesqueries of Mitt Romney’s tax situation, his unwillingness to be completely transparent and his general attitude of gamesmanship when it comes to disclosing his sources of income,” DeSantis said.

“He treated the FEC in the same way he treats the taxpayer — looking for every loophole he can.”

Read more on Newsmax.com: Romney Finances Face New Fire
Important: Do You Support Pres. Obama’s Re-Election? Vote Here Now!

Very important to millions of Americans it seems! 

 In 2010, millions of Americans all over the country were so enraged by the proceedings which gave rise to Obamacare (like Senate votes held on Christmas and New Year’s Eve 12:00MN while America sleeps, Louisiana Purchase, etc) that a grass root movement mushroomed into the Tea Party Movement which eventually swept 87 freshman congressman into the House and banished Nancy (vote for the bill so that you get to see what is in it) Pelosi to  the sidelines. As a side note, Newt Gingrich was forced to resign his speakership after the 1998 elections which saw the GOP retained the majority with a net loss of 5 seats while Pelosi retained her leadership position after such a drubbing which goes to show that the LEFT are far more united in their quest to destroy America than we are in defending her!

Nothing to get angry about….according to Romney!

That says it all folks…..Romney is prepared to cede Obamacare to Obama over the wishes of millions of Americans. We are doomed if Romney gets the nomination. Martin Gould from American Spectator said it better than I can ever do. Check it out!

———————————————————————————————————————

Mitt Romney’s retort during last Thursday’s debate that healthcare is “not worth getting angry about,” is his own admission that he cannot beat President Barack Obama in the election, according to the American Spectator.

“Most Republican voters, and more than a few independents, would disagree,” wrote healthcare expert David Catron. “Romney apparently didn’t notice that the hundreds of thousands of people who showed up at the nation’s capitol to protest the impending passage of Obamacare were pretty angry.”

Romney made his remark after fellow candidate Rick Santorum challenged him on his position on Obama’s healthcare reforms. “Folks, we can’t give this issue away in this election. It is about fundamental freedom,” the former Pennsylvania senator said.

Santorum’s tone showed that he cares about the issue, Catron wrote.

“It’s not an easy thing for a man of genuine principle to tolerate an opportunist like Romney, who obviously sees the issue as just another lever that he can use to hoist himself into public office.”

Catron said Romney’s “prissy” remark showed him as a man without convictions. Combined with his changing stances on gun control and abortion, he is giving Obama’s campaign too much ammunition should he win the Republican nomination.

“It will … be very easy for Obama and his creatures to exploit Romney’s flip-flops in the general election,” he wrote. “They will make sure the voters understand that these reversals reveal Romney as just another unprincipled politician willing to say anything to win the election,” wrote Catron. “That the president himself is cut of the same cloth won’t matter.”

Read more on Newsmax.com: American Spectator: Romney Knows He Can’t Beat Obama
Important: Do You Support Pres. Obama’s Re-Election? Vote Here Now!

Winning our Future and Newt Gingrich were excoriated for their perceived attack on Capitalism in their previous film When Mitt Romney Came to Town. In my opinion, it was fair game to examine Mitt’s record of job creation since that was one of his campaign pillars. Many did not agree and Newt took a beating from no less an authority than Rush Limbaugh and Rudy Giuliani amongst others.  Granted that film wasn’t the best use of Newt’s and Winning Our Future’s War Chest.

This latest video is whole new ball game. It is about the largest federal medicare fraud in it’s time and most of those frauds occurred under the management of Mitt Romney. In one of the debate, Romney stated explicitly that he had never done any business with the government (another lie). Just as the Feds were completing the investigation on Damon Capital, Mitt Romney sold Damon Capital to Corning (questionable timing!). Initially Romney claimed to have no knowledge of the medicare fraud which happened under his watch. Then he changed his tune that he reported the fraud to the authorities (so which is which Mitt?). The sale of Damon Capital netted Bain Capital $12M of which Mitt Romney netted $437,000 ( not much!!!!). So if Newt was asked by Mitt to return the $1.6M earned from Freddie Mac over 6 years, shouldn’t Mitt return that $437,000 of blood money earned in a single sale transaction plus all the fraudulent billing to Medicare under his watch?

It is unlikely that supporters of Romney will be able to spin this as another attack on Capitalism (I have no doubt they will try). This simply reinforces the prevalent opinion that Mitt plays to a different set of rules from the rest of us and will be a perfect 1% foil for Mr Obama’s 99% (Personally I detest Obama’s class warfare but it is what it is and are we going to walk right into his trap by nominating Romeny?)

So here is the full length video. You decide!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jVUQuJDEs04

Unless true conservatives come out in droves between now and next Tuesday and defend Newt Gingrich, conservatism as a movement could be destroyed or set back for a generation. Mark Levin was especially critical of guys like Bob Dole who was part of the problem.

—————————————————————————————-

Conservative talk radio star Mark Levin offered a passionate defense of Republican presidential candidate Newt Gingrich on his show Thursday.

Levin was upset at recent attacks against the former House speaker by GOP pundits on the Internet and by Republican politicians in various public forums.

“If this is what the conservative movement has come to, then count me out,” Levin said. “I am not a special pleader for Gingrich. Newt Gingrich and I aren’t friends. We aren’t even acquaintances.”

But Levin took issue with those who cite a TV interview from 1988 as evidence that Gingrich broke from former President Ronald Reagan. “Newt Gingrich didn’t trash Ronald Reagan,” Levin said. “He said going forward we need tactical changes from the Reagan era, not changes in principle, not that we shouldn’t promote Reagan.”

Levin then played an audio clip from the interview to prove his point. “Reaganism is a value system which carried 49 states last time [in the 1984 election],” Gingrich said. “It’s fairly inclusive, more than just a personality issue.”

Republicans must remember that Gingrich was the first GOP speaker of the House in almost 50 years, Levin said. “He was fighting Democrats to win the House of Representatives before most of the people trashing him on the Internet were old enough to wipe themselves … before most of the commentators on TV were switching from Democrats to Republicans.”

It’s OK to criticize Gingrich, Levin said. “But don’t count me among those who are going to destroy the man,” he continued. “You can disagree with the man on substance, but don’t turn him into some Marxist, Reagan-hating mental case, because he’s not.”

Levin is particularly angry with New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, an aggressive Romney supporter. “I was appalled when the two-year governor of New Jersey, who has done absolutely zero for the conservative movement, gets on TV and regurgitates all the ethical bull crap thrown at Newt Gingrich when he was speaker of the House.”

Levin’s not too happy about recent criticism of Gingrich from former Sen. Bob Dole, either. “Bob Dole was part of the problem,” he said.

An underlying motive drives the GOP criticism of Gingrich, Levin said. “There’s an effort to clear the path for Romney. If [Rick] Santorum was considered a threat, they’d be pulling out quotes from him and turning him into a pretzel too.”

It’s self-destructive for Republicans to launch negative commercials about Gingrich rather than focusing on President Barack Obama, Levin said. What’s most important is to defeat the establishment.

He had some choice words for Gingrich’s presidential opponent, Mitt Romney. “What was Mitt Romney doing when Newt Gingrich was speaker of the House fighting Democrats? He was running against Ted Kennedy as a self-identified progressive.”

Levin was referring to Romney’s unsuccessful bid to take former Massachusetts Sen. Kennedy’s seat away from him in 1994.

“Newt Gingrich, if he does nothing else, did more for the conservative movement than virtually everyone today who’s criticizing him,” Levin said.

To be sure, Gingrich made some mistakes in the past, Levin acknowledged. “I make no excuses for his personal life, which was a mess,” he said.

“But he has found his faith now, he has found God. Why would we act like Marxist leftists ourselves, like a bunch of frenzied nut jobs trying to turn this man into something he’s not. We would not have taken back the House of Representatives but for Newt Gingrich.”

As for those criticizing Gingrich, “What the hell did they do to take back the House of Representatives?” Levin said.

Read more on Newsmax.com: Mark Levin: Gingrich Is Strong Conservative
Important: Do You Support Pres. Obama’s Re-Election? Vote Here Now!

In a desperate attempt to stop Newt Gingrich, Romney and the GOP Establishment hit a new low…a coordinated attack to take down Newt Gingrich by picturing the former Speaker as a strong critic of President Ronald Reagan. In an era where Ronald Reagan was clearly a visionary in his dealings with Gorbachev, Newt may have disagreed with the President’s approach but to take that one area of disagreement over a lifetime of fighting for Reagan’s agenda is clearly disingenuous. What is disturbing is that many well intentioned people or otherwise had taken the story and ran with it. 

The perpetrators of the smear have clearly chosen to ignore the endorsement of Michael Reagan and Nancy Reagan. Rush Limgaugh and Michael Reagan came out strongly and lambasted the Romney’s campaign:-

 

———————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————

Ronald Reagan’s eldest son Mike Reagan has issued a statement lambasting Mitt Romney and his supporters for claims that Romney’s Republican presidential rival Newt Gingrich was a strong critic of President Reagan.

Reagan says such claims are false.

Even Rush Limbaugh, shocked by the Romney claims, chimed on his Thursday radio broadcast to say “This is obviously a coordinated attack to take Newt out here in Florida.”

Rush slammed the Romney-backed smear campaign against Newt.

“That kind of stuff is why people hate Romney so much,” Limbaugh said.

Limbaugh added that Newt has always been a conservative from his early days in national talk radio in the 1980s.

Editor’s Note: Do You Support Gingrich or Romney?  Ron Paul?  Vote in Urgen Poll — Click Here Now

“He was perhaps the premier defender of Ronald Reagan,” Limbaugh said.

On Thursday, Mike Reagan responded to the Gingrich critics with this statement to Newsmax:

“I am deeply disturbed that supporters of Mitt Romney are claiming that Newt Gingrich is not a true Reaganite and are even claiming that Newt was a strong critic of my father.

“Recently I endorsed Newt Gingrich for president because I believe that Newt is the only Republican candidate who has both consistently backed the conservative policies that my father championed and the only Republican that will continue to implement his vision.

“It surprises me that Mitt Romney and his supporters would raise this issue — when Mitt by his own admission voted for Jimmy Carter and Walter Mondale who opposed my father, and later supported liberal Democrat Paul Tsongas for president.

“As governor of Massachusetts, Romney’s achievement was the most socialistic healthcare plan in the nation up until that time.

“Say what you want about Newt Gingrich but when he was Speaker of the House he surrounded himself with Reagan conservatives and implemented a Ronald Reagan program of low taxes and restrained federal spending.

“Newt’s conservative program created a huge economic boom and balanced the budget for the first time in more than a generation.”

Mike Reagan concluded: “I would take Newt Gingrich’s record any day over Mitt Romney’s.”

Read more on Newsmax.com: Mike Reagan, Rush Limbaugh Blast Romney
Important: Do You Support Pres. Obama’s Re-Election? Vote Here Now!

In 2008, Huckabee won Iowa and decided to participate in NH when he could have gone on to SC directly and campaign for a win. Instead, he did poorly in NH, and lost valuable time to counter Fred’s onslaught in SC and came out second to McCain in SC. The rest is history!

So in 2012, it is interesting to know what Newt, Santorum, and Perry would do in the next two weeks. Romney needs to be careful as not to be too focussed on stopping Newt and let Santorum sneak in a winner at SC! My hope is that Newt has somehow stopped his decline and mount a furious fightback! In the primary, i am a ABR&P as in anybody but Romney and Paul!

A strong, free and God-fearing America stands squarely in the way of the One-World-Order. BHO gets an A+ for ushering in this One-World-Order by removing its greatest obstacle- the United States of America.

…..Let’s start with the need to elect a pro-family, pro-life President. The importance of this objective cannot be overstated. Between 2009 and 2012, there will likely be two or more opportunities for the President to nominate new justices to the Supreme Court. Some court watchers say there could be as many as four resignations. That alone should give us serious pause as we consider for whom to cast our votes. In the months ahead, the Supreme Court will likely hand down rulings that will impact America for generations to come. We need a President who will nominate conservative, strict-constructionist judges to the Court. If that doesn’t happen, the highest court in the land could become stackedóeven more than it already isówith justices who will endeavor to legislate from the bench and impose a liberal agenda on the nation. It will likely affect the definition of marriage, religious freedom, and the protection (or lack thereof) of life in the womb.

To read the entire newsletter, click below

http://www.citizenlink.org/focusaction/updates/A000008358.cfm

As we enter the final week of this election season, here is a call to all my fellow Christians to seek the face of our Almighty God to have mercy on this beloved country of ours.

Our Father in Heaven,

We thank you for this great nation that was founded on Judeo-Christian principles. We thank you that you have watched over this nation for the last 232 years. Even as our nation prepares to elect a new President and numerous senators, congressmen, state and local government officials, judges, as well as numerous state propositions, we beseech Thee Lord to have mercy on this country. Lord, first of all, we ask your forgiveness for the sins of our country. As a nation, we have seen fit to murder 2 million babies a year (46 million since Roe v Wade) while they were being formed in their mothers’ womb. Like the blood of Abel, these 46 million babies cries out to you day and night for justice. Yet, You are a merciful God whose Faithfulness endures for a thousand generations to those who love you. Several of our states have also legalized same-sex marriage and are trying to legitimize the homosexual life style which is an abomination to You. As a nation, we have not lived within our means and am saddled with record national debts. We have removed prayers from public schools and have sought to remove the Ten Commandments and every other vestige of our spiritual heritage from the public square.

Lord, as we seek your mercy, please give us a leader we NEED and not a leader we deserved. Please give us a leader who will honor our Constitution and protect each and every American. Give us a leader who will protect life, especially the most vulnerable and weakest ones among us. Pray that You will give us a leader who is both strong and resolute in leading our country to face the challenges of the 21st century.

We pray Father God that just as you reserved for yourself 5000 prophets who have not bowed to Baal, you will also release the 5000 journalists who have not bowed to the altar of Obama so that they can fearlessly report the truth about Obama to the American people. We also pray that you will give all the pastors in the land the boldness to preach to their congregation this final weekend before the elections about their duty to elect a leader whose philosophy matches their Christian world view. We pray that God you will impress upon all your people to vote.

We know Lord that this nation is ripe for judgement but we beseech you Lord to have mercy on us, and relent your hand of judgement on this great nation that you have nurtured over the last 232 years. No matter what happens on Nov 4, we pray that God you will keep our hearts and minds in Christ Jesus and to continue to trust that you are in control. While this nation is ripe for judgement, she is also ready for a great spiritual revival. We eagerly await the next outpouring of your Spirit on this great land.

In Jesus’ Name. Amen!

An excerpt from the writer:

*…..Republicans are justifiably foaming at the mouth over the sheer one-sidedness of the press coverage of the two candidates and their running mates. But in the last few days, even Democrats, who have been gloating over the pass — no, make that shameless support — they’ve gotten from the press, are starting to get uncomfortable as they realize that no one wins in the long run when we don’t have a free and fair press. *

This is long but well worth the time.

http://abcnews.go.com/Business/Story?id=6099188&page=5