Newt Gingrich – Out of the GOP Race Today – Former Rivals will Coalesces Around the Presumptive Nominee

Newt Gingrich Thanks His Supporters Via Facebook as He Bids Farewell to his Campaign

CNNNewt Gingrich will be ending his campaign for the GOP Presidential Nomination on Wed., according to “sources “from CNN. Newt Gingrich on Facebook as of yesterday evening, had made it quite clear he was out of the race, with a banner that read “Thank You” and the introduction of a new website: Obama Failures.net. It is quite obvious, and has been from the onset of the GOP contest that there would be winners, and losers, and those would eventually support whichever candidate won the nomination. Amongst the most vocal regarding this scenario was Gingrich himself, who had mentioned that option, time and again, during early debates.

Gingrich, who came into the race polling near the bottom, enjoyed a brief period of being the top candidate, based mostly on his debate performances, which were fairly consistent, with the exception of the Florida debate, which he appeared rather tired.
Romney and Ron Paul savaged the former speaker in AD campaigns during his rise to the top, however, that is nothing new in politics, given the contentious 2008 primary campaigns – from both major parties.

Going forward one can anticipate endorsements from former candidates for Mitt Romney as the presumptive nominee.

GOP Heads to Illinois, McClatchy outlines Problems Faced by Romney in the Land of Lincoln

Romney trouble connecting to moderates? (Shown with Ron Paul) - image Libertarian Peacenick.com


From: St. Louis Today: “Several Hurdles Ahead for Romney in Illinois”, a piece by David Lightman, McClatchy Newspapers, speaks to the problems that Mitt Romney faces going forward into Illinois. It is difficult to assess, which of the issues pointed out by the author, is the most difficult for Romney – one that was not mentioned as an issue and perhaps should have been was the opening paragraph noting that Romney’s ads are everywhere – if they are the negative ads run against Santorum in Mississippi and Alabama, one might not hesitate to put that in a negative column. Exit polls in those states showed the excessive negative advertising by the Romney campaign cost him votes, and was a net plus for Santorum. The list of issues highlighted in this piece includes:

His own “persona”, which apparently does not resonate with voters, is number one on the list. This is followed by a related litany “Romney is having trouble erasing doubts that he's too stiff, too politically inept and too insensitive to constituents who confront gasoline prices over $4 a gallon every time they drive down a street.”

The economy has not improved rapidly follows, however, Romney is touted as “Mr. Fix it”, therefore, if this appears to be a problem, he has not sufficiently sold the electorate on his skills (see above)

They are concerned about Santorum, spending millions more on ads, and adding campaign spots (see problem with negatives).

The Romney Camp counts the wins in Michigan and Ohio (slim victories, one with less than 1%) as having given him momentum, and that a loss in Illinois would be damaging.
Santorum is a problem, polling well in the Chicago Suburbs with “evangelicals” , and in the balance of the State – (note: in the poll referred to, Chicago Tribune, Romney was leading in the Chicago Suburbs only (but see population), with Santorum taking a larger lead in 95% (approximate) of the balance of the state).

Those voters seen as potential Romney voters do not appear enthused.

The problem form the perspective of this writer notes that Romney’s attempt at being Conservative has turned off the reliable moderate voter (i.e. Romney voter).

Above all it is his persona, which the article cites as the one reason Romney may not do as well as he potentially should in Illinois: Complete with quotes:

Romney's passion problem stems from two sources. One is his style, which many find wooden and distant.

"One word: Plastic," said Judy Thorne, a Mount Prospect, Ill., retiree.
"I just have this feeling he won't get things done. He's a little bit of a pushover," added Madeline Mainzer, a Niles microbiologist. "He's too influenced by people too much, and doesn't really know what he hopes to do."
Romney's other dilemma involves the economy. Voters routinely quote his recent gaffes about his wife's two Cadillacs or his friendships with NASCAR or professional football team owners.

While the economy has begun to recover in this state, people remain uneasy.
Craig Ochoa, a Hanover Township, Ill., highway commissioner, found that while the economy "may be changing for big manufacturers, for most people things aren't changing as much as they would like.

"That's the issue," he said. "Most people couldn't tell you the difference between a conservative and a liberal."

In fairness to all candidates, which would include President Obama, if they do not appeal to the party base, in the beginning of the campaign stages, and then move to the middle after the nomination process, they stand a chance of going no-where. Obama, however, has a personality that is charismatic, which, when marketed correctly, overcame the dual-messages necessary to get him elected.

Romney, when attempting to appeal to the base, falls flat, and this attempt, although well played, has not garnered the support of the base (going to Santorum and then Gingrich), and at the same time has alienated the moderates – that is the difficulty that all candidates face in the information age 24/7 news cycle, - one can say something in Peoria, and it is news in Idaho Falls. If a candidate can stick to principles, and his person elicits trust, be that candidate a conservative or a liberal, those qualities will bring them to the nomination (most often), and once nominated, the onus is on the candidate to either moderate their message, and move slightly to the center – the most successful in doing so, was Ronald Reagan, who was dismissed as too conservative to take the nomination by the establishment GOP (who preferred he more moderate George H Bush), and the media threw everything in the book at Reagan, from questioning his intellect, to the fact that he was “conservative”. However, he maintained his base, and moved only slightly to the middle – of course, he had Jimmy Carter to run against.

Obama, who is similar in style to Carter, would find a conservative Candidate difficult to best. This may be why a Chicago group of Obama campaign activists headed to the island of Puerto Rico (and Romney does very well in all the territories), to denounce Santorum. It may be the polling that shows Santorum besting Obama in key states - Ohio, Florida, North Carolina and Virginia, while Obama Bests Romney by 2 points. (Rasmussen). This calls into question which candidate the President would prefer to run against: the one that the media supports, or the one which the media takes every opportunity to maligned.

CNN GOP AZ Debate 2 23 12 – Winner Gingrich, Romney Lies Through Teeth but Strong on Delivery, Santorum Strong on Defense, Paul – just Ron Paul

The Candidates; Paul, Santorum, Romney, Gingrich seated for CNN debate - image Gaurdian UK


A Matter of Trust

The 2012 GOP Candidates gathered in Arizona for the last debate prior to the Primaries to be held in Arizona, Michigan on the 28th and the Super Tuesday State Primaries on March 6th. The four remaining GOP candidates went from the usual introduction, to an attack by Ron Paul and Mitt Romney on the one Candidate running strongest in the polls, Senator Rick Santorum. Newt Gingrich, stayed out of the battle of what amounted to “he said, she said” – between Ron Paul (the pot who calls the kettle black when it comes to earmarks, then babbles his way to - “protect the constitution, or some such snippet of a slogan” to get his point across – which apparently is: I’m going to attack whoever is the front runner, regardless of whether or not, I’ve done the same thing, and then end it with something my supporters understand.

Former Governor Mitt Romney did the same, however, his delivery was stellar, and he managed to continue to pound home on Santorum to the point where he sounded believable – to anyone who hasn’t exactly “fact checked” Mitt Romney. The opening remarks he made regarding the Catholic Church, which is a hot button issue, was a major stretch – considering it was his usual excuse to those who reside in Massachusetts and looked towards a positive outcome: (Paraphrasing) “There is nothing I can do – the deck is stacked against me, too many Democrats!” – The most egregious assertion was his "work" with the Catholic Church and their ability to operate as an adopt service in Massachusetts – from Cactholic Culture.org:

Boston Catholic Charities has decided to pull out of adoption services, rather than comply with Massachusetts law that requires adoption agencies not to discriminate against homosexual couples.
The surprise move by Boston Church officials, announced on March 10, avoids a political showdown in Massachusetts. The state's bishops had said last week that they would seek an exemption from the law that mandates equal treatment for same-sex couples.
The Boston office of Catholic Charities has been caught up in a controversy since last November, when it came to light that the agency had placed several children in homosexual households. Church teachings say that adoption by same-sex couples is a form of violence against children.
In December, Boston's Archbishop Sean O'Malley reportedly received a direct instruction from the Vatican saying that a Catholic agency cannot be involved in adoptions by gay couples. (The San Francisco archdiocese has recently acknowledged a similar message from Rome, responding to same-sex adoptions arranged by the office of Catholic Charities there.)
On February 28, the four diocesan bishops of Massachusetts joined in a public statements indicating that they would seek an exemption from the government's non-discrimination policy. Today's announcement indicates that the bishops have abandoned their effort.
"We have encountered a dilemma we cannot resolve," said Father J. Bryan Hehir and Jeffrey Kaneb, the president and chairman, respectively, of Boston Catholic Charities. Their joint statement concluded that they could not find a way to "reconcile the teaching of the Church which guides our work and the statutes and regulations of the commonwealth."
Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney had said that he did not have the authority to grant an exemption for Catholic Charities from the state's anti-discrimination laws, but he indicated that he would be sympathetic to legislation advancing that goal. However, leaders of the state legislature warned that a Church bid for an exemption would be unsuccessful, leaving the bishops no other option but a court battle.

The same story can be found on the Boston Globe’s website, for those who might think that Catholics are a bit too worried about good and evil getting in the way of a few facts.

Romney Lobbied hard for the Salt Lake City Olympics, and yet, continues to pound on Rick Santorum on doing the same (as does Ron Paul). He also taxed and fee’ed his way to a mandated balanced budget, in Massachusetts, everything that Santorum attacked or counterattacked to the left and right of him was the truth – it was the delivery. He appeared tired., and he became technical – at one point, which is surprising, Santorum was describing the workings of the Congress, something which Mitt Romney declared, he could not understand – it was a minor point, to be certain, however, Romney if elected, should understand how the legislature works – it was understandable the delivery dry, and a high school student (hopefully form one of the “best schools in Massachusetts” (There are a handful of the state’s schools that do have graduation rates over 60%), could understand. Mitt Romney apparently needs a civics lesson. His new debating coach however, is doing a fine job.

In the final questions, Romney refused to answer a question on what the one misconception the public might have about him – instead going into a “Why you should elect me President” stump speech – coming off as a bit arrogant. In total he was the second to least “frazzled” appearing candidate on the stage, the most composed goes to:

Newt Gingrich, the former Speaker of the House, answered very few questions, with short, pointed statements that were well structured and well spoken – he was consistent throughout the debate – and, appeared to be a different man, the Newt Gingrich of the pre-South Carolina Debates, who did not show up for the Florida debate – he was back last night. Best line of the night: In referring to Mitt Romney’s assertions against Santorum and Romney’s work with the Catholic Church – Newt Gingrich held that “incredible” look on his face, until he leaned to Romney and said “Nice Try” – then went onto support both his and Santorum’s assertions against Romney by noting – the truth. It was easily brushed aside by one Mitt Romney.

Rick Santorum, of course, being charged as one of “those Catholics” that actually practice their religion, had a few good points in the debate, but appeared flustered at points, most likely due to the Ron Paul on his right and Romney on his left, and their continual assault on his record, while apparently, ignoring their own, or outright lying. He was the most passionate in his delivery in defense of Iran, and his grasp of the situation in the area (going a back at least a decade) is of import. Although one can give credit for Mitt Romney’s ability to get the foreign policy talking points down, and Newt Gingrich, (goes without saying), knows whereof he speaks on foreign policy) – it boils down after watching what amount to a three ring circus (Paul, Romney and Santorum) – of one question.
Who do you trust not to act rashly, but to come to be sensible on the points relating to Iran, and oil production and delivery and the options on the table leading to stabilizing the Iranian Theocracy? Who do you trust to be as honest as a boy scout, best Obama in the polls (in September) and to deliver a plan on economics that has not wavered and would best serve both those in Manufacturing jobs, of which there are very few (especially in Massachusetts)?

It is the fact that Santorum, who is now saddled with the “crazy Catholic” moniker over a speech given at a Catholic College (private church institution) in 2006, where he used the word “Satan” - something those on the left feel would not resonate with Catholics, and the views he personally holds that are within the confines of Catholic doctrine, which one would expect a Catholic to hold. However, he is the Boy Scout, next to another Catholic, Newt Gingrich. Santorum may have lost the debate on form, but on substance, he held on. He appeared somewhat tired, not unlike Romney’s worst debate performances (the man who owns that title over the plethora of debates held to date), and Gingrich’s performance on two occasions, one which was critical – that of Florida.

It will be perception and the battle lines of delivery on the ground in each of the states, and the reality that if there were to be a comeback for Gingrich, it has to happen not on Super Tuesday, but in Arizona and Michigan. Therefore, it is up to the Santorum Team, to ensure that their candidate is well-rested, at every stump speech made between now and the Super Tuesday and to come out swinging, staying on point, as everything he said for the last five decades (he would have been two) will be brought to bear on the media.

However, it is that nagging question of which one of those candidates, appears most trustworthy to lead the nation, to protect the nation, to deliver on their promises, and who has a record of delivery on promises made in the past – whether or not one might agree with supporting state programs (through earmarks), or if one is in the anti-Catholic Camp, the Right media followed by the left media, and those American’s who were concerned about JFK’s Catholicism. As it happened in 2008, when the extremely qualified, 2-1/2 term Govenor of the State of Arkansas ran against Mitt Romney and John McCain (two moderates who were sure to lose, either the primary or the general election as is historically the case when moderate Republicans run for the office of the Presidency), each article, each newscast, would begin with “The Baptist Minister, and somewhere near the end of the article or newscast, or perhaps not at all, the point as made as an afterthought, the successful two and one half term Governor of Arkansas, a state one might point out that has a fairly strong Democrat to Republican ratio.

It was that Huckabee was rising against Mitt Romney, as is Santorum now, so if one cannot beat someone on their record, or resonate with the people, the press (from the left and the right), goes after that individuals faith, making it appear that it would be central to their governing the nation, with evidence in droves to the contrary, in the form of state governors records, and/or legislation signed by a Governor, and or votes taken, legislation written by a Senator.

Romney looked good – this time, has grown stronger in the debate arena, but only time will tell if those in Arizona and Michigan will trust Romney enough to throw their full support behind the “businessman” and one-term Governor of the State of Massachusetts In the upcoming primaries.

There is no answer to that question, however, one can assess how the standard media is handling the last debate – in Massachusetts the report by CBS locals used snippets of the debate video that caught each of the candidates in the worst one-frame, part-answer to a question that made them all look – pretty bad – that newscast went on to speak about Obama’s Campaign the fact that the Massachusetts Governor, Deval Patrick, would be co-chairing the Obama Campaign. As sure sign, if any, that Massachusetts is being considered a state that needs a figurehead – how odd one might think – almost as odd as the constant adds run by Romney’s back currently hitting the airwaves In MA – ads are attacking: Rick Santorum.

In the interest and practice of full disclosure, this bloggers supports Rick Santorum as the 2012 GOP Nominee. The reasoning is not based on Social Issues, although his remarks following the Obama Administration assault on the Catholic Church resonated (given that this non-practicing Catholic is still a Catholic), further, the assertion by the media, Drudge Report to New York Times that Santorum is some sort of “religious nut” when he is merely practicing and speaking about Church Doctrine, strikes a cord of support rather than the intended result. It is his stance on economics, specifically his plans for manufacturing that are vital to this nation, his grasp, and strong grasp of foreign policy issues, which are always the key to this bloggers choices: foreign policy and economies. The social issues are secondary, if considered at all. In making this choice of a Santorum candidacy, it was not done lightly, as readers understand that this bog has favored several different candidates over the course of the campaign. However, in the debate arena, in the stump speeches, and in the laity to tell the truth even if it hurts, (goes to trust) of all the candidates, Santorum is the only one that satisfies both criteria. Is he able to beat Obama, polls have indicated that yes, indeed he is – so although technical points were awarded to both Gingrich and Romney due to their delivery, it was the passion and knowledge portrayed by Santorum, once again, that keeps this Massachusetts Moderate a supporter. Massachusetts Moderate – then why not Romney? It is the issue with truth, and when one can stand on the stage and in front of a nation deliver barbs against opponents, with a PAC that runs advertising that is patently false, then that individual’s quest to win at any cost, including abandoning truth and running on record, turns this voter flat. In the 2008 elections, when faced with a choice between McCain or the not yet decided Democrat Candidates, Barack Obama (and yes, Newt had that born alive issue down pat – it was for this reasons (Obama’s support for the doctors, not the living child who managed to escape the physicians ice pick) that Obama received the highest rank of any candidate by NARAL (A pro-abortion group) or Hillary Clinton, this blogger (feel free to check the archives), supported Clinton. Not due to the fact that she was a “woman” (goes to the feminist moniker), although that was a plus, but more on her voting record in the U.S. Senate on issues of defense (she has more, to be blunt, cajones than either McCain or Obama on record, this Massachusetts Moderate would have preferred a Clinton Presidency to a McCain or Obama Presidency – but was left with no choice but to vote against Obama, not for McCain. Sue me, I also voted for Carter, people change their minds, in a matter of a period of years sometimes, just not on a daily basis (if one needs to think about whom I’m referring, then one needs to read more about Massachusetts favorite sons John Kerry and Mitt Romney (ok Kerry has higher favorable).

Therefore, this blogger goes on records, and the ability to face the American public straight on without reservation, and with truthful assertions and explanations that Mitt Romney may not understand about how Congress works.

It is however, a fact in this mind, given the records of three of the individuals vis a vis Obama, (and a dose of reality, no matter how many delegates Ron Paul has, in truth, the polls and the results thus far, are not encouraging as far as any known path to the nomination) is that they are all, to a man, even one who can stand there and stretch he truth like a slinky, are all a better choice to run the nation. Therefore, the preference is: Santorum, Gingrich, Romney (goes to trust, but in the end, Romney may be more trustworthy than Obama, so one would have to vote for him regardless.)

As to a brokered convention: poppycock: The candidates for all their flaws and foibles, are still our candidates, and let the chips fall where they may – again, with exceptions, they are all preferable.

The video in 9 parts courtesy of 2012 Debates You Tube Channel
Part I

Part II

Part III

Part IV

Part V

Part VI

Part VII

Part VIII

Part IX

2012 GOP Update: National - Santorum Leads Obama, Romney Falls Behind – Media turns up Santorum “Religious” rhetoric, Ignores Polling on MO, CO, MN

Rick Santorum surrounded by Press - image Salon.com

2012 GOP Presidential Candidate, Rick Santorum is now leading President Obama in the Rasmussen Daily Presidential-GOP match-up polling by 45 to 44%, while Romney has fallen to 43% versus Obama 47%. In addition, Public Policy Polling has has Santorum in 2nd place in the Colorado primary to be held on Tuesday, while he leads in both Missouri and Minnesota. One would, given the fact that it is early in the primary contest, and the Massachusetts Governor has three rivals in Santorum, Gingrich and Paul heading into Super Tuesday, one would think that the media push for one candidate, an early winner in Romney, be premature. This given the polling data, as well as the fact that the other candidates, specifically Gingrich and Santorum, have each won a primary or caucus to Romney’s three wins, two of which were anticipated early (Nevada and New Hampshire). In the Maine Caucus, which has had little to no attention, one would anticipate a Romney win as well, however, Ron Paul is favored to win as the Maine caucus began on Saturday with Nevada, but will not finish on the same day.(The Hill)

Yet Rick Santorum keeps hammering home the same message, “don’t count me out” – he is clearly able to articulate the contrast he presents to voters versus Romney. On the eve of the Nevada contest, it was brought home in the most ridiculous of manners by CNN’s Wolf Blitzer, who, covering the Romney victory speech, noted back and forth with the field reporter, that Romney’s teleprompter was in place. Although that may seem petty in the broader scheme of things, it is another point in the litany of “why Romney is just like Obama” and faces an uphill battle against a president who, by all polling data, especially Gallup, should not win a second turn. (The others being: Moderate, Massachusetts, Health Care and Romney’s “miss-speak” on the fate of the nation’s poor versus the middle class.
Meanwhile, the media, regardless of which way it leans is refusing to accept the fact that there are other candidates in the race that might win at all – and since it looks like the beginning of a Santorum surge, and Santorum is “squeaky clean” as one can be in politics – there are only two tactics left: Denial and Religion.

In a lively piece by the Los Angeles Times: entitled: “As Nevada counts, Republican candidates press on” which details Gingrich’s second place win, his press conference rather than traditional post-primary speech and a lampoon on Saturday Night Live. They also touched on the dust-up between Obama and the Catholic Church, the new ruling that insists the Church affiliates must provide insurance that covers contraceptives, which is against Catholic doctrine. Both Gingrich and Santorum are Catholics and both had different takes on the ruling, which inserts the Government into Religious institutions - Gingrich straight forward Catholic defender, while Santorum held to a more Constitutional viewpoint. Yet, in the pro-Romney piece, the Times speaks to Santorum as the candidate that is specifically courting the evangelical vote, noting that his appearances in Colorado focused solely on that Demographics in rallies, which is blatantly false. In addition, the AP released an article this morning specifically aimed at Santorum titled: “Santorum refuses to bow despite another loss”as if winning only one out of 5 contests held to date, and having the potential to a) best the President, and b) win multiple states between now and Super Tuesday, just weren’t on the table.

What is on the table is religion - the fact that the piece focused on one of several events Santorum had attended in Colorado on Saturday, a church service, while ignoring the Republican sponsored events such as a Lincoln Breakfast. In addition, it dismisses his win in Iowa completely and although one might reasonably assume Romney, who has the backing of the establishment GOP, the DNC (they would want to run against no other candidate), and of course, the media, it is the blatant disregard for the facts and the Presidential candidate, that is most evidenced by this on small AP article.

Super Tuesday on March 6th, will, in all likelihood, be the bellwether as to who stays in and who leaves the GOP nominating process – and it is far too early to call this a Romney dominated contest given the makeup and geography associated with the Super Tuesday States, it may well show multiple wins, by multiple candidates, and with a plethora of proportional delegate states (including Massachusetts), Ron Paul will continue to amass delegates – and may give Romney a headache in Virginia, where he bested him in the 2008 primary – Romney and Paul being the only two on the ballot.

What is healthy for the GOP is a continued process; this is basically due to several factors, including a full vetting of the candidates, and the media being forced to focus on the events. If one were to sign up for Google News alerts on all candidates, one would find that those alerts, which were in the hundreds two weeks ago, have dwindled to merely mentions – former presidential candidate, Mike Huckabee, and Sarah Palin, former VP candidate, both had more news alerts this past weekend, despite two caucuses being held, than any of the candidates – no one more evident than Mitt Romney.

Therefore, one might want to pause before discounting Rick Santorum, Mitt Romney’s campaign is just beginning to wake up to the fact that Santorum should be next in line for hits from Mr. Negative, who’s staff begin to send out emails on Santorum(according to the LA Times article: “In a tacit acknowledgment of Santorum's potential to do well Tuesday, Romney's campaign attacked him in an email Sunday as a defender of congressional earmarks.”
However, Santorum, unlike other candidates in the race, has bested Romney in the Florida Debates, and has little that the Romney campaign can truthfully challenge. In fact, there are few if any Congressional Representatives and or Senators, who do not accept earmarks, and Governors, accept those earmarks – even Governors like Mitt Romney.

Therefore, before one counts out anyone, pick a candidate, either Gingrich, Santorum or Paul, and donate – to keep it going and if one is not a fan of the Massachusetts Governor, it’s a sense of gratification to donate to a campaign that can do well, is doing well, be it any of the aforementioned (in truth, Santorum is doing the best at this point and has the greatest potential, next to Ron Paul to actually defeat Mitt Romney and go on to defeat President Obama. This makes one wonder if, back in the early stages of the debate process, where Gingrich acknowledge his friendship and pride in Santorum, and later continued to promise to stop Mitt Romney, if he weren’t throwing himself on the proverbial sword, in an attempt to weaken Romney while Santorum rose in the polls. If this were the case (speculation only), it would explain a lot.

Rick Santorum, Catholic, and Italian American – would be the first Catholic-Italian American President of the United States, just imagine the field day the press would have with that one – and the pride that Italian Americans’ would feel in being able to cast their votes for the first time for one of their own. Of note: there are 70 million Catholic voters, most of which tend to vote Democrat as they are blue collar (if the nation still had a blue collar workforce), and that is Rick Santorum’s bailiwick. That should give pause to any contender, be they GOP or the President.
According to the latest U.S. census Italian Americans’ are third in overall population with those of Irish decent in 2nd, and those of Germanic Decent being the largest group.

Therefore, one has to use the old adage, which may not be terribly politically correct but true non-the-less: “It ain’t over until the fat lady sings” and she hasn’t even begun a tune at this stage.

To donate to the Santorum Campaign visit: www.ricksantorum.com - although money can’t buy love, it can buy airtime.

Romney’s PAC Attacks Gingrich Again - Runs Same Inaccurate Ads from Iowa in SC/FL GOP/Mainstream Defends Romney – Handing the election to Obama -Oped

The Players: Romney, Paul and Gingrich - image: Houston Chronicle

Mitt Romney’s PAC is now running ads in Florida and South Carolina that are either the same ad or similar in scope to those run in Iowa (Time Magazine) The problem with the ad is that is it far from accurate, and this is ok with both the candidate Romney and those who remain silent in the media. Time after time, from the very beginning of the Romney’s machine’s attacks on Gingrich for being ahead in the polls, Gingrich ask Romney to denounce the ads run in his name, but to no avail – therefore, the gloves came off and a pro-Gingrich group began to run ads touting the former Govenor of Massachusetts’ record as a principle player in Bain Financial Group. It was not Capitalism that the group targeted in their 30 minute ad, rather Mitt Romney himself and the decisions he made to gut companies, sell their assets and make a profit for investors and those principles in the Bain firm, including Romney. Watching both ads is similar to taking a trip to the dentist to have a tooth pulled. However, one has to ask the question, regardless of the fact that Romney’s Camp came out gunning first, and despite the fact that their ads are targeted Gingrich to the point where he lost 20 points in the polls, and regardless of the fact that Mitt Romney merely smiled at Gingrich when he was asked to put a halt to the ads – why do those Romney supporters and the media continue to claim Romney as “innocent”, while Gingrich, who has done nothing more or less than Romney after the fact, is tarred as anti-Capitalist?

The most ridiculous assertions are those coming from the Romney surrogates that it is simply not OK to question Romney’s business decisions – no matter what the charge – this coming from newly elected Govenor of S.C., Nikki Haley, (on Sean Hannity on Fox last evening). Yet at the same time it is fine to make assertions that are false against the former Speaker of the House, Newt Gingrich.

If Romney is not responsible for the ads run by his PAC, then Gingrich is not responsible for the ads run by his PAC - regardless of the levels of truth involved in either PAC’s advertisements.

There should be questions raised about the way in which Mr. Romney ran the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, as well as the way in which Mr. Romney behaved during his tenure at Bain Capital. It is unfortunate that the media and those power brokers are able to target an opposition candidate with falsehoods (proven), while giving Romney a complete pass (sound familiar?). What makes Romney so different from President Obama? Obama has the Chicago Machine, true, he was merely a Community Organizer before running for the State Legislature and the Senate, holding terms that were not lengthy, and he was ideologically left, while presenting himself as ideologically moderate in his ads against Hillary Clinton and then John McCain. However, one has to ask which one of the candidates, Romney or the President appears to be more ethical, both in their choice of businesses as well as their commitment to their political ideology. When one examines, without rose colored glasses, both mens measures, then one has to wonder why the GOP and those pundits believe Romney to be the better of the two to run the country. When elected as Governor of Massachusetts, Romney ran on a variety of platforms contradicting him once in office, for the short period of time, before beginning his run for the Presidency in pre-2006. His record at Bain Capital can surely be explained in simple terms - you win some, you lose some, however, one has to ask – why a firm that basically liquidated the assets of a company to make a fast buck? That did not always happen, which is true, he has two examples that he constantly uses, the largest being “Staples”, but those jobs created at Staples are retail jobs, not manufacturing jobs – if one has to be honest, the President has created more jobs in manufacturing that Romney did at Bain in his career, regardless of whether one agrees with the Presidents ideology - or the manner in which the Government has changed to a European model under President Obama’s tenure.

Therefore, drawing a contrast between Romney and the President, regardless of how low the President’s approval ratings are at the moment, does not favor the favorite son of the GOP. It is that simple, and that is why the number of those showing up at the polls to vote in Republican primaries are mainly independents and democrats, rather than the core conservatives – their hearts are not in the race – they have no candidate they feel they can back, and this lays at the feet of the Romney campaign and his attacks on Gingrich. Gingrich has baggage, but the father and grandfather, also has gravitas, the ability to debate, and ideas that are the core of the American system of free enterprise and exceptionalism. There is a sharp contrast between the President and the former Speaker, while no such contrast exists for the Governor.

Yet, it is apparent that no one is listening, and the feeling that another John McCain is being shoved at the Conservatives, again, is pushing those individuals away from the polls. The question is has Romney damaged Gingrich to the extent that both men are unelectable? That remains to be seen – Romney is the status quo and Gingrich, not so much (even if he was a former Speaker, a position which, when one is honest, is of extreme import, requires a willingness to work across aisles in order to get things done, and involves compromise, something that is anathema to those who work for the money machines that are the GOP and DNC campaigns and organizations.
The aforementioned is how it appears, it appears as dirty politics, and politics as usual, and the player primarily responsible for this apathy and the tone of the camp gin is one Mitt Romney. One hears that Romney is the one who is best suited to take the White House from the President – where is the data to back that up? One or two polls perhaps, however, those same polls show Ron Paul in a similar position. The GOP is also dismissive of Paul to their own peril. His message and his website are, indeed one of isolationism, but those who would not have looked at Ron Paul in a lifetime are now taking a second and third look.
The strongest contrast between any mainstream Republican and the Democrats is one Ron Paul, and frankly, should Romney continue to attack Gingrich with falsehoods, while he must be aware that the Gingrich camp has just as much information on him during his tenure as Govenor of Massachusetts as the Obama campaign, and the mainstream media chastises Gingrich for drawing the contrast between himself and Romney, the last man standing may well be Ron Paul.

There is it – although Romney and his staff destroyed every smidgen of electronic communication available form his tenure as Governor, the hard copies were left behind and they were released by the Secretary of State of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts under the Freedom of Information Act. To those who were not watching, Gingrich was in Boston at approximately the same time this occurred – if fact, Gingrich has spent more time in the Bay State than Romney, something one might question since no GOP candidate campaigns in this wasteland. Therefore, it is more than possible that Gingrich and his camp are quite prepared to back up their assertions against Romney, just as much as Team Obama.

Writing as a moderate, and having lived in Massachusetts under Romney’s very short tenure as Governor (viewed by moderates and others in the Commonwealth as being used as a stepping stone to run for President, nothing more nothing less), it was evident, jobs were lost, the backs of the middle class were burdened with fees and taxes, and it was glaringly apparent he would not win reelection. Coming from Massachusetts one does not are what religion one might subscribe to, one does not care particularly which party one aligns themselves with either, one only cares about how one conducts themselves when governing or in the legislature, whether one agrees or disagrees with the Governor, Senator or President’s actions . One only need look at Scott Brown as a shining example, ask a Democrat, a Republican, or an Independent about the upcoming race for reelection, and Brown is normally the choice, not Warren, and the reason is simple: Brown is doing, as Senator, exactly what he said he would do from the very beginning – his constituents would agree and sometimes disagree with his decisions, but that he would make them for the people of the state using his best judgment.

That’s honest.

That’s what the people want in a Mayor, in a Congressional Representative, a Senator and yes, the President, honesty – therefore, one has to ask the final question, and put this question to those who have not voted in a primary or general election. Which of the GOP candidates is the most honest? About their past, and about their records – is there enough contrast with the President? Will those moderates and especially those conservatives come out in droves (and it is known to happen), for a candidate that does not have a sharp contrast? Judging from the turnout to date, that answer is no. However, one may find that during the general election, should Romney be the GOP Nominee, the GOP had better hope they can promise the people a majority in both houses, otherwise, the gains made by the Tea Party will have been for naught. There simply is no positive contrast between the President and one Mitt Romney.

There is a contrast however, between Newt Gingrich and Ron Paul and Mitt Romney (those are the most reasonable choices for those voting in the GOP primaries and caucuses, in this opinion - Santorum is a weaker candidate backing down quickly when challenged, and delivering a rather lackluster performance, even though the man appears to have good intent, and the same can be said for Huntsman, Governor Perry, who is a stalwart conservative appears to be more comfortable as Governor of Texas, perhaps a disservice to the Governor, but nonetheless, the impression.) Those who are not taking part, out of apathy, or out of disgust, one hopes will come to their senses and cast their primary and caucus votes according to the one or two or three men left standing, and then in the general, do the same. It is indeed a dark time for the Republic of the United States of American and there can be revisions, but it has to be with a candidate that one can implicitly trust to deliver the legislation necessary to right the ship – even if that candidate has baggage, or may be a outside the mainstream, as long as the message they have delivered in their roles as Congressman, Speaker and Governor has been consistent.

For one, all the pundits in the world, all the endorsements from supporters, regardless of candidate, mean nothing, what means something in the end game is the mettle of the man (woe there is no woman), who can stand on their record for good or for ill (politically), in all honesty. That candidate will gender goals. From this Massachusetts Concrvative Moderate is it my wish for the nation (having already warned about Massachusetts legislation and certain players form this state being exported to the other 49 for years)that New Gingrich has the backing of the voters to stop Romney in both South Carolina and in Florida. To those those individuals watching Romney's PAC's ads, understand they are what they are- rehashed form Iowa and above all - dishonest.

Ron Paul Chasing Romney in NH – The Big What If Game Changer for Romney and the GOP Establishment - Gingrich and Paul as the Last Men Standing

Paul and Gingrich in the debate format - image abcnewsradioonline.com

From the Boston Globe’s: “Paul sparks passion in Granite State”comes an article that speaks to the depth of “passion” supporters of the Texas Congressman who would be President, elicits from supporters. These supporters have, in the past, been younger – college students and those in their mid-to late 20’s – times are a-changing. Paul is now garnering support not only from his traditional base of the youth vote, but from those who might otherwise be considered more conservative and not shocking at all, more liberal. Paul, who is a Libertarian and runs as a Republican, has a philosophy of limited government, individual freedom, and, perhaps most appealing to a great range of age demographics, a non-interventionist policy towards use of the military.

In random “kitchen table” conversations over the holidays, one found that those that are traditional Democrats are looking at Ron Paul as an alternative to the standard GOP as well as the incumbent, President Barack Obama. Generally, those in Massachusetts that are considered “solid Democrat” are also anti-war, on a scale that is perhaps larger than the balance of the nation. To find those individuals seriously considering, or committed to the Ron Paul campaign is at first startling, as it crosses party lines that are rarely crossed (see Massachusetts General Election voting history, where in only two cases in recent memory did the Bay State vote Republican: twice for Ronald Reagan.)

Paul appeals to those who are “sick of government” or “tired of all these wars” and alternately, those who want “government out of our schools, and our lives” – from hard-line Constitutionalists (i.e. Tea Party) to those who are still banging bongo drums in protest of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan to the youth who see no recourse and no hope for the future as long as the government remains in the status quo.

It may explain why Paul is doing so well in Iowa; he has the ability to attract the grassroots support necessary to push a win in a Caucus state, one that allows independents to participate in the nominating process. Iowa is not the only state to prescribe to the “open primary or caucus” – in fact Paul’s supporters are well aware of the 17 states that allow open primaries, and of those states, most take place on or before Super Tuesday. That said, the GOP has released the 2012 delegate playbook (PDF download here form the Weekly Standard,) which suggest that some states adopt a “Winner Take ALL “ delegate allocation, however, it is anticipated that certain states will continue to offer “proportional delegate allocation”. In this process, states that are designated as winner take all release all delegates to the candidate that amasses 50% or more of the total primary/caucus vote. In states where the rules are proportional allocation, delegates are allocated based on the percentage of the vote candidates receive (see “participation trophy”). Those states are few and far between after Super Tuesday.

In general, the candidate that amasses the most delegates by mid-March is seen as the eventual nominee, not only in terms of the ability to raise money based on their standing, but also in the makeup of the balance of the primary states.

The Polls: From Real Clear Politics one finds a variety of GOP polls , from national to the primary states, using a method of a “combined” score used for all candidates (averages all polls taken to rank a candidate). At this stage, Ron Paul ranks third nationally, behind Romney and Gingrich; all three have double digit leads, with Gingrich and Romney showing double Paul’s percentage. However, at this early stage in polling, these numbers are extremely fluid, and are subject to change on a weekly basis. In Iowa, Paul leads within the margin of error, with Romney and Gingrich following, In New Hampshire Romney leads, with Paul and Gingrich following. In South Carolina, Gingrich has a commanding lead of 37%, but again, Romney and Paul follow and the same scenario exists in Florida. These are the first four states that hold either a caucus or primary.

As attack ads from the Romney and Paul campaigns have weakened Gingrich’s lead in New Hampshire and Iowa, the consequence has been a rise in the polls for Paul. In addition, in Virginia, the Republican Committee disqualified over 1,000 signatures for both the Gingrich and the Perry campaign (Gingrich was leading Romney in the polls in Virginia and Romney is considered the “GOP establishment choice for nominee”). The only two that qualified for the ballot were Romney and Paul. In 2008, Paul bested Romney by a large margin in Virginia – the state GOP in attempting to block Romney’s competitors, set up a probable win for Paul in that Super Tuesday State.

Taking all of the preceding into account, the opportunity for Paul’s campaign to take the lead in several states, with Gingers continuing to poll high in South Carolina and Florida, sets up a 2008 déjà vu for Romney, and the possibility to Paul to seriously compete, especially in states where there are more liberal/moderate primary and caucus voters, and large delegate shares. This brings up the question as to who the Democrats would rather have as an opposition candidate – Romney is their first choice due to the media and GOP focus on Romney, the Obama campaign amassed vast amounts of political intelligence on the former Massachusetts Governor, all but ignoring the rest of the candidates. At this stage it the game, it would be difficult but not impossible to attempt to garner the same intelligence against Paul and Gingrich, who both have long and open records, which are more difficult to distort. In addition, both Gingrich and Paul can claim Washington “outsider” status – Gingrich on the length of team out of Congress and Paul simply because of his Libertarian ideology. In Paul’s case, especially, an ideology that appeals to the Democrat anti-war base.

All bets are currently off the table as to which way this primary will go, however, the eventual nominee, should the current Presidential Approval rankings hold, will face an incumbent that has an average approval well under 50%, with a majority of American’s dissatisfied with the direction of the country, in numbers not seen since 1979 (the last year of the Carter administration, where President Carter, not unlike President Obama, saw a job approval spike in the later end of that year – to no avail.) Therefore, either Gingrich, Romney or Paul would be in a position to win the general, however, it is more likely, given the historical makeup of the 2008 general GOP primaries, that both Gingrich and Paul will be the last men standing, unless Romney can, on a national and state by state level, move past is 20 – 25% support, with New Hampshire currently, the only state where he is above 20% in pre-primary polling.

Gingrich a Look Back – The Bush Take-down and Rise of the Republican Congress – Reviled and Respected by Both Parties – The Negotiator and Deal Maker

Newt Gingrich and Bill Clinton talking Budgets - image Washington Post

From the Washington Post: a column by Bob Woodward, offers insight into the rise and fall of Newt Gingrich within the Republican Party and those in the establishment who still harbor resentment for actions taken by the powerful Speaker of the House. In brief, Gingrich is blamed by President H.W. Bush for his eventual loss of the Presidency, not for the fact that he actually was drummed out of office on the pledge that he would not raise taxes, then did so in a deal with Democrats, but because in this article, Gig rich clearly would not sign onto a deal that he felt was not in the best interest of the American People, and was not well negotiated, it was a bad deal.

This is of course, paraphrased, in an article that covers the history of Gingrich and the House by Woodward, and it is suggested that he entire article be read to fully understand how an outsider, one who does not go with the Republican Party, is treated by the Establishment, as well as how a Powerful Speaker who is also a Republican, and who works closely with a Democrat President to get things done (President Bill Clinton), is anathema to both parties who would prefer to sit back and draw partisan lines in the sand and call it a day.

Key words that stuck out like a sore thumb, better negotiation and deals – if that does not make Gingrich sound like the Donald Trump candidate, no one does. Which brings up a point – Trump has stated on numerous occasions that if the Republicans’ fail to nominate the right candidate, then he would run as an independent. Understanding that he may not be referring to Gingrich at all, but speculating that he may given the verbiage used and the former Speakers ideology about negotiating from a point of strength, in addition to the latest move of the Establishment GOP to oust Gingrich off the Virginia Primary ballot by disqualifying over 1000 signatures, insisting that each one must have a voter ID, whereas that was not a previous requirement, smacks of a set-up to knock Gingrich out of the race. (See the point that Romney may not make it past Super Tuesday and the possibility that Ron Paul may take Virginia) – Should Donald Trump carry through on his promise to run given the circumstances of the Republican nomination and not knowing which candidate he feels would be the best to broker deals and be the best negotiator, one can only understand that Trump will take votes from both Democrats and Republicans, in numbers sufficient to throw the race back to Barack Obama. It is the Democrats Dream.

The scenario of a third party candidate was the exact circumstance that led to the reelection of Deval Patrick in Massachusetts by one point – an election, David Axelrod, Obama advisor and campaign guru, watched closely and hoped to put into play for the 2012 general.

The Newt Gingrich as anti-Republican, and in plain language egotistical, is seen in the latest article from Politico, that headlines: Newt Gingrich, Bill Clinton battle over 1990s legacy one finds that there is no quote from Bill Clinton, rather those “Democrat Strategist” pulled for the beltway to remark on events in which they were clearly not involved. This completely contradicts Clinton’s own words, in an interview with Newsmax (Article Here: in which he Praises his “Old Foe, Gingrich)

Suffice it to say, that not one of the pundits have a crystal ball, nor the blogger or the hundreds of pollsters how have come out of the woodwork lately, to give an indication of how the vote will go in the GOP primary – but the constant media drumbeat is as follows: Mitt Romney will be the nominee, Newt Gingrich will continue to decline in the “polls”, and Ron Paul is not a serious candidate. One might recall the constant drumbeat for Romney in 2008 and McCain in 2008, two individuals who are keen moderates in the vein of an Olympia Snow of Maine, and who the Republican Party believes will be able to “play ball” and keep the status quo. It is the conservative candidates that who might cross party lines to get the job done, without caving in completely (See current Speaker Boehner), that are poison to both he GOP and the DNC.

It may well be that Romney is the nominee, and in that case, everyone from the Obama campaign (who has the opposition research to launch a very aggressive campaign against Romney) to the establishment Republican’s who have another Bob Dole or John McCain, will be thrilled, while millions of independents and Republican’s (not the political class) will find themselves either staying home, or going to the polls knowing that the vote they cast may have one of two results. Romney would lose, similar to those who have gone before with the same ideology and marketing, and /or Romney will win, and that means we have a former Governor of Massachusetts in the White House, and from this perspective, it will mean little change from one administration to the other – there will be no bold moves, and lots of compromises in order to maintain the status quo.

Of course, a lot will depend on Donald Trump and Ron Paul, who one can gather will have an impact on the outcome of the 2012 election. It appears that the GOP has grossly underestimated Ron Paul’s constituency, and his national appeal to those who would cross party lines – to vote for a man who has a foreign policy ideology that is slightly more progressive in practice than President Obama!

To achieve the above scenario, one must also takes into consideration that the media does not hold the sway they did in 2006 to 2008, and that the negative ads that Romney and Paul have unleashed on Gingrich will then be turned upon one-another. It will be a Phoenix that rises out of the ashes of that fiasco that will eventually gain the nomination. One thing may be stated without one prediction being made; the race may indeed be decided by March. The outcome of which, is anyone’s guess, but looking at current polling and should the GOP keep its hands off the state’s primary process, then that candidate may well be Newt Gingrich. Suggest watching Clinton Interview with Newsmax.

Romney Picks Up Endorsements – Des Moine Iowa Register and Bob Dole Latest to Get in Lockstep Behind Beltway’s Choice

Romney after Dole endorsed McCain in 2008 wonkette.com

From ABC News: Mitt Romney has received the endorsement of Bob Dole, former Senator from Iowa and 1996 Republican Presidential Nominee – Dole lost to Clinton in what might have been characterized as a “lackluster” campaign. Mitt Romney was pleased to accept Dole’s endorsement, a change of heart from the 2008 election when Romney stated Dole was "probably the last person I would have wanted write a letter for me." (WIBW.com)

Romney, who has the backing of the political class, is seen as “next in line” to the GOP nomination, given McCain’s win in 2008. (McCain lost to Bush in 2000). Romney also received the endorsement of the Des Moines Iowa Register, the paper which endorsed Barack Obama in the 2008 Iowa Caucus (ABC News).

Bob Dole, as Majority Leader from 1994 to 1996, was openly critical of Newt Gingrich as he worked across the aisle to force a balanced budget and welfare reform. Known as “Dour Dole, he went so far as to slam Gingrich for his fictional novels (Wilmington DE Star Journal, June 6, 1995). It was suggested at the time, that Dole was “taking a swipe” at Gingrich “a potential rival for the Republican presidential nomination.” (Boston Herald, June 6 1995)

It remains to be seen how much a factor endorsements will play in the 2012 primary and caucuses – generally endorsements have little to no effect on on the outcome. (Pew Research)

ABC Debate December 10th Draws 7.6 Million Viewers – Poll Dec. 11th Gingrich Now Leads GOP Contenders Nationally by 16% with 8.7% Undecided

The Candidates at the ABC Debate - image: National Journal


ABC News hit the Debate Jackpot in viewership on Saturday night, drawing 7.6 Million viewers, beating out Fox’s 6.11 Million Viewers in September, and CBS’s 5.2 Million in November. Fox has a GOP debate scheduled for this Thursday, November 15th at 9 EST and as interest in the national GOP contest appears high, one can anticipate that at the least Fox will meet or exceed previous viewership. The ABC Debate, billed by some in the media, as “fight night” between Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich may have fueled some of that viewership, however Gingrich appears to have gotten the best of the bunch by staying more positive and giving clear and measured answers to each of the opposition candidates who questioned his stance on several issues –specifically, Ron Paul and Mitt Romney.

Romney and Paul are those perceived to be closest to Gingrich in the polls and scrambling to put up the numbers necessary to take Iowa, the first in the nation to caucus in January. With both Paul and Romney running negative ads against Gingrich (Romney using Surrogates), it was anticipated that there would be a downturn for Gingrich given the questions about his “conservatism” that were the topic of the ads. In the end however, when Gingrich questioned Paul on a point of historical accuracy, Dr. Paul had to agree with Gingrich. Further, Michelle Bachmann attacked both Gingrich and Romney for having the same political philosophy and not being a “true Conservative “by lumping them together as “Newt-Mitt” (or Mitt-Newt) which drew not a little laughter from the two. Romney replied that “Newt’s a friend of mine, but we’re not clones”, and never directly attacked the former Speaker throughout the debate. Rick Santorum, former Senator from Pennsylvania, when asked where he found his Conservatism, answered in listening to tapes and reading books by: Newt Gingrich. All in all, December 12th was a good night for Gingrich to be viewed by seven million potential voters, given his stellar performance in the latest polling.

The latest poll coming from Poll Position (Crosstabs here in PDF) has Gingrich leading the pack by 16 points, across the political, age, gender and ethnic demographics. In this particular survey, there were 8.2% “undecided. However, as far as telephone surveys go (This one conducted for Poll Position by marketing firm Majority Opinion Research, shows equal numbers of political ideologies’ which is, in and of itself, interesting. In this case, Gingrich racks 21.4% of the Democrats surveyed, they also have the most “undecideds” at 14.2%, with Republicans at 9.1% and Independents at 5.4%. The closet competitor is Mitt Romney who takes 23.3% overall followed by Ron Paul, at 10.8%.
Compared to Gallup’s National Daily Tracking (from Dec. 8th-10th just prior to the debate), Gingrich led Romney 33 to 23, with Dr. Ron Paul at 9%. Although using the same methodology (phone surveys), but focusing only on the Republican and Republican leading independents in the polls, one sees consistency in the numbers only three weeks out from the Iowa Caucus.

How accurate are polls (state or national) at this point? See historical perspective of polling and analysis here from this blog focus on the 2008 polling and its accuracy in predicting Mike Huckabee’s win in Iowa four weeks from the beginning of the Caucus.

It is this opinion, that polling done within days of any political contest are the most accurate, and a great deal depends on the firm, and whether or not the data is weighted to accurately reflect the electorate. The polls referenced above, give an overview of the electorates choices nationally – it is the latest Iowa Polls that would matter most this close to the election. – this week. That said, at this point and time, with only three weeks to go in Iowa, Gingrich leads with enthusiasm among likely caucus goers by 44% to Ron Paul’s 31%, Mitt Romney at 28%(Des Moines Register.

It appears, at this juncture, with polls in the key early voting states of Iowa, NH and S.C., that Newt Gingrich, should the numbers hold and/or improve, should be well positioned going into Super Tuesday. If this is a repeat of 2008, it would then be a matter of time (March) before Romney exited the campaign. The fact that there is a robust and contentious GOP contest is not out of the ordinary as many in the media would have one believe. Historically, both parties have had their share of contentious general primaries, the most recent, in 2008 between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.

2012 Update – The Natural Order in Campaigns – Gingrich as the Non-GOP Establishment Candidate - Obama Campaign Hubris In the Face of the Inevitable

Gingrich, Paul and Romney - The Nominating Process Begins in Four Weeks - image cnn.com


It goes without saying that a political campaign, much like a beauty pageant, is nothing more or nothing less than a contest, albeit one of immense import. The fact is that candidates in a primary must compete against one another for the top slot and that will evoke mud-slinging in the hopes of gaining points, especially as there are only weeks left before the primaries and caucuses begin. Therefore, one will find that lower tier and top tier candidates will release ads “knocking” one another, or if one candidate is in the lead, knocking one only. These advertisements and press releases, becoming more frequent, sound more desperate than honest – specifically as the aforementioned become more shrill and or “informative” as the time to vote draws nearer. (See: ”Game-Iowa GOP Attacks Target Gingrich” (Yahoo News) . It’s a game that is as old as the nominating process, and one can anticipate much the same in a national election (as the mud-slinging was just as, if not more, egregious when there were only thirteen states).

However, if the establishment political class (those who are in government) and a media hostile to one political ideology and/or party, attempt to knock a front-runner this close to the beginning of the voting process, one can bet the House (and possibly the Senate) that there is good reason – that individual is most likely not going to “play ball” with those entrenched, those elite, and those who would crown a “king” over allowing the “masses” to decide whom they felt would best lead the nation forward. It is obvious that the anti-establishment candidate is one Newt Gingrich, former Speaker of the House, the current GOP front-runner, and the individual preferred by the political class is one Mitt Romney, the former one-term Governor of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts who has in recent weeks received endorsements from U.S. Senators, the Bush Family, Dan Quayle (former President H.W. Bush’s, Vice President), numerous pundits and the Fox News Network (which may explain the sudden surge in audience share that CNN is experiencing.)

In an AP article via the Boston Globe “Gingrich Surge Unnerves Some Republican Lawmakers” one is under the impression that Gingrich’s Peers of twenty-odd years ago (that is an established politician – or entrenched.) are horrified at the prospect of Gingrich as leader of the Free World, and notwithstanding, leader of the Republican Party. These few politicians (the five that are named), are not all in the Congress, but in the Senate where they would not have worked quit as closely with Gingrich over his entire career. They point to personal issues, and make statements that are vague or not particularly germane (given the time Gingrich has been out of the Congress) but nevertheless demeaning - and to a man they all support Mitt Romney. As one reads the second page, however, one runs into a similar group - this one a bit more pragmatic; recalling a different Gingrich, one who was focused, one who broke Gridlock. That is the Gingrich the political class fears – one who will get the job done, whether it fits their agenda or no.

In an email from the Romney Campaign, both Mitt Romney and former Governor of New Hampshire John Sununu and Senator Jim Talent will hold a press conference call outlining the many issues those three might have with Newt Gingrich’s “record”. That record is available online at The Library of Congress, and anyone can go back through Newt Gingrich’s entire career to find – baseless allegations being made by those who are in a political campaign.

It is interesting that there is little mention of the fact that the Massachusetts Secretary of State is making available correspondence from Mitt Romney’s time in office. These are hard copy documents, as the then, Romney Gubernatorial staff, purchased Commonwealth Computers and summarily wiped all email correspondence from the hard-drives (see article:here>). This is the type of politics that those living in the 16th and 17th century would find somewhat average, a bit of backstabbing, fabrication and business as usual.

It is for Gingrich, if he is to continue to be the front-runner, to either ignore or answer – to date, he has focused more on policy rather than political attacks on his record dating back two decades. What voters need to ask themselves, and one can believe they may have already done so given the polls, is “Can man (or woman) truly change their minds on an issue in twenty years?” The answer is obvious: anyone with an once of common sense understands that human nature and age and the factors of changes in society, advances in science and technology, allows individuals to change their minds, religion and even political affiliation. Changing one’s mind over the course of two decades is, therefore, not unusual. What is unusual is a change of heart and mind over a period of a year, or a month – that would be someone who could be categorized as a political opportunist.

What is perhaps the most amusing take on the rise of Gingrich and Romney as "underdog" comes from the New York Times in concert with the Obama Campaign Manger, David Axelrod. Axelrod seems to believe that the Democrats are somehow able to influence the Republican Race. That is, of course, somewhat possible (See Mitt Romney accusing Deval Patrick for leaking Romney’s staff erasing their computers contents to the Boston Globe as “politically motivated”.) Then again, with a historically low approval rating, four weeks before the primary and caucus season begins, the Presidents’ campaign should be doing their best to undercut the opposition, down to the last candidate, at the lowest level. The odds are not exactly in their favor, and it is David Axelrod’s job to say the “darndest things”.

What history has proven is a man in last place in any major political party primary, may end up being the winner - that a party will have a clear winner at a nominating Convention and choose to use a method involving “Super Delegates” (those of the political class), to choose another candidate (One who would more easily “fit” what the political “party leaders” desired, rather than say, nominate the woman who actually won the nomination). It is certain that poll numbers can and do change, and that the fortunes of a candidate do not necessarily ride on the polls (unless they have a 20 point advantage four weeks from the actual primary or caucus - then one can make a fairly safe bet on the front-runner). The aforementioned are historical and statistical facts. As we round the corner of December, with two debates scheduled for the GOP, (the next on the 12th of December (Saturday) on ABC at 8:00 Eastern, in Iowa and sponsored by the Des Moines Press Register) it will be those debates and the candidates performances that will reach the millions who will eventually decide who has the mettle to lead. It is part and parcel of the process - it is what makes these United States such an amazing country in which to reside as a citizen. This because, a “ruling political class” can be pushed, and reformed by the simple act of voting, and a leader can emerge by the will of the people, rather than by the will of a “class” pushing one candidate over another. (Of course, as a feminist, one is compelled to mention one more time, that one example where the people’s choice did not materialize, that of the 2008 Democrat Convention).

The “Vetting” of Newt Gingrich – From Pelosi to Axelrod to a a Few Select Peers to The Media – Fear Drives The Ridiculous Into Action

The Targets: Gingrich, Pual and Romney - image allvoices.com

Of all the GOP Presidential Candidates, Newt Gingrich has one of, if not the most, public record available. For that matter, his public record exceeds that of the current occupant of the White House, President Barack Obama, and other GOP front runners has risen to the top, they were also picked apart, accused, assessed by the opposition, only to be dismissed (or put on hold) by those who are watching the debate process. If credit were to be given to the press and those pundits who can’t pick a fish out of a barrel of one, then the entire process would have been wrapped up long ago – but the nominating process is a slow one, and rightly so, it gives times for those interested in the candidates who may be President of these United States, the opportunity to either succeed to fail, according to what they do in their public appearances, generally the debate arena.

Herman Cain, who now is allegedly a “footnote”, which the media would have one believe was due to the many “women” who came forward to accuse the man of everything from sexual misconduct to assault, to a thirteen year affair, has suspended his campaign, yet will continue to be involved in the process – one need only go to the http://thecainsolutions.com to understand that Herman Cain intends to remain a force in national politics. There is, of course, Mitt Romney, the one who is preferred by the Beltway, political class, and, as a moderate, the one who is least likely to achieve his goal – if the polls are any indication (and at this stage, they tend to be the winnowing of the wheat from the chaff, Romney will see a repeat of the 2008 primary process. There is Dr. Ron Paul, who is rising above Romney is Iowa now, a staunch Libertarian, running on the Republican ticket, who has the financial credentials, as well as time spent in the Legislator and the ability to appeal to the youth and more over, a wide spectrum of the political process. If anyone had predicted that going into the home stretch of the beginning of the primary process that the two candidates to rise to the top would be former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich and Dr. Ron Paul, the Libertarian from Texas, would be at the top of the “heap”, they would have been summarily dismissed.

Why? It was a 24/7 Mitt Romney and Sarah Palin show on the media, beginning with appearances in late 2010 (immediately following the mid-terms) on late night talk shows (Letterman and Leno) and the daytime crew (The View) – it was expected, or implied more to the point, that one or the other would be at the top, and stay there. However, time and the ups and downs of politics, with a little help from the left and those who would see a different candidate in place, resulted in a front-runner that is a bigger thorn in the side of the DNC than any candidate in decades. The idea man, the guy on the bench in Congress who, while writing a ton of legislation and getting his legislation passed, also became a back-bench whip, insuring that GOP congressional leadership, at the time, got the votes they needed. The man rose to the position of the Speaker of the House, worked with one of the most moderate of modern Democrat President (William Jefferson Clinton), and together, they balanced the budget, and pushed through health care reform. During his entire tenure, he continued to write legislation, some which passed, and some which never made it out of committee. He was, and continues to be a man of ideas, as well as a man who puts those ideas into action – all of this information is available in the Congressional Record, which is online, and involved a bit of research on the part of anyone who really wants to know what their Congressperson, or Senator has accomplished. It was during Newt Gingrich’s rise as the Speaker, that the problems began, those problems are known as opposition ethics charges. Charges that are based on theory, rumor, and some facts, and are played out in “secret committees” (according to Nancy Pelosi), and the subject is generally censored if found guilty of say fifteen or so charges of income tax evasion (See Charles Rangel, Barney Frank, or any number of high profile Democrats that committed crimes, and then were “chastised” by a group of their peers.) The process for the truly guilty is to stand in the well of the Congress and say “I’m sorry” to the members of Congress – all is then forgiven and life goes on as normal. Problematically, when Newt Gingrich was being “investigated by Nancy Pelosi (say that carefully and then think about it carefully), he did what most Republican members of the Congress or Senate had been known to do – resign. Although Gingrich was cleared of every charge but one (something to do with forgetting to sign a Congressional document – that is not a joke). Therefore, as far as records go, the man came up with great ideas for the country, implemented a good percentage of those ideas through legislation he wrote, and then rose to the Speakership and worked across the aisle, and he also bullied those in the GOP who were not overly happy with that situation (Those you can find on talk shows noting Newt Gingrich’s lack of leadership skills – in other words, someone who refuses to tow the party line, and “just say no” rather than get something done.

However, one did not get the impression that Newt was pure as the driven snow, he was of an age, and he was in Washington, and let’s face it, from a women’s perspective, he’s a man – all of which leads to some moral and or ethical issues that, in the world of Democrats would lead to impeachment, and a bump in the polls, but which is now considered, unforgivable by the same – go figure. People make mistakes, people change their mind – over a period of two decades, Gingrich came to a new place, with the same intellect and the same political drive, minus the ethics and moral issues not generally associated with the GOP – which is considered to be made of rapid right wing Christian’s who carry bibles in one hand and guns in the other. In reality –however, that is hardly the case, those who are Christian, look at the mettle of the man or woman, and if decades have passed, forgive and move on.

The GOP has taken a different mold, their members are varied, from young and old libertarians, to former Democrats, to the hard –right, it’s a mixed bag – and that is driving the Progressive Democrats to distraction.

Enter Nancy Pelosi, former Speaker of the House, and Mistress of the Closet of Skeletons, who was reported as saying: Hill.com (blog from the Nation’s Capital)

One of these days we’ll have a conversation about Newt Gingrich,” Pelosi told Talking Points Memo. “When the time is right. … I know a lot about him. I served on the investigative committee that investigated him, four of us locked in a room in an undisclosed location for a year. A thousand pages of his stuff."

Thousands of pages of distraction is more like it, with baseless nonsense designed to embarrass and stymie and stop the forward march of then Speaker of the House, Newt Gingrich – the aforementioned charges that were dropped, except for that horrid neglect to sign a “document” charge. Three words for Miss Pelosi: “Freedom of Information”. If Pelosi had anything on Mr. Gingrich, she would have been spouting it from the rooftops, however, she appears to have nothing more than innuendo – and why?
Newt has risen 20 points in the polls and he is four weeks out from Iowa, and in a statistical tie with Obama.
Plus, face it, Nancy likes the press, the limelight and she says the darndest things- all taken with a grain of salt.
The “Old Newt” as a Republican would have hidden under a rock and exited the race in shame”, (theoretically mind you), however now - not so much.

The very same Blog of the Beltway (Can that really be a good thing?): offered Newt’s response: in true Gingrich style:

Newt Gingrich said that a threat from ex-Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) to disclose information she learned while serving on an ethics committee investigating him during his time as Speaker of the House would "totally abuse the ethics process" and violate rules of the House of Representatives.
"I want to thank Speaker Pelosi for what I regard as an early Christmas gift," Gingrich said at a press conference in Manhattan Monday.

If Newt were able to publicly humiliate Nancy Pelosi, (and even an attempt may count), he would be a national hero and one could just skip the primary. Outside of Washington, the media, and per made for Nancy District #8 (only San Francisco – they broke up the 8th district, taking the more conservative San Mateo County out, in order to allow Nancy to have her own Kingdome that would actually elect her – the 8th District of California includes only one city - San Francisco) Frankly, the only way to get rid of Nancy is for someone who is a more ridiculous a figure , to challenge her in a primary and win, otherwise, she will be the Robert Byrd of California’s 8th. – We’re stuck with Nancy – safe in her made for lunacy 8th District – for now. That would be a Christmas Present, Mr. Speaker, for the entire country.

David Axelrod, chief engineer of “How to Elect Barack Obama” an obscure state senator with zero experience to the office of the presidency, while basing every move on an even more Obscure figure, the Governor of Massachusetts as a model (Yes – we can (do what?!) – is now chatting on about Newt Gingrich. Axelrod, a Chicago Political Consultant, is on talk shows (usually MSNBC or somewhere on a blog) has now, according to “Polticifact” coined a phrase for Gingrich: “The Godfather of Gridlock”. Interesting in that the phrase has little to do with the amount of legislation Gingrich managed to get passed in his lengthily tenure in the House, but none-the-less, a sign that Gingrich is now the guy that worries the Obama Campaign more than any other. Axelrod is the Obama Campaign, and if he’s looking for a “Yes we can” slogan for his “masses”, that will fire up the base against Candidate for President Newt Gingrich – “The Godfather of Gridlock” is snappy, but easily dismissed as ridiculous. Is Axelrod losing his touch – or did he run out of really pithy slogans like “yes, we can”.

Finally, the media has joined with Axelrod and Nancy to do its due diligence to keep any Republican out of the White House, and therefore, are picking up on anything Gingrich has to say (and that man has to say a lot, as he has a lot of suggestions to make, probably more that one can imagine, as there are more things just wrong enough with this country, that could be so easily made right, with a bit of tweaking, a la Newt, that in his multiple books, appearance and now on the campaign trail, sound bites a plenty appear on an almost second by second basis.

Over at CBS the media has taken some umbrage at the fact that Gingrich, in a debate, suggested that youth be taught the value of working for a dollar, to build a sense of accomplishment, and teach youngsters how to get a job, keep a job, and save some cash in the process, thereby becoming, eventually, upstanding citizens, rather than gang members about to shoot at the White House. The key words here are “youth” and “work”. This somehow translates into “horror of horrors – breaking the “child labor laws”. Under the current systems, millions and millions of today’s youth cannot work until they are sixteen (and must obtain a permit) (Massachusetts state law). If they want to be newspapers carriers (that time tested, 50’s model of earning a few bucks), their parents must take on the job, and be hopeful they don’t’ get caught letting their kids deliver the Sunday paper. The Child Labor Laws were originally designed to avoid putting an under aged youth into a factory setting that involved twelve hour shifts, and since has morphed into the ridiculous – which may account for the high rate of unemployment among today’s youngsters, who may even want to work. His plan which involved pretty much the paper route, and or community service route, for these youngsters, especially in inner cities, to earn and appreciate the value of a dollar, to have some self-respect, and to become more vested in their futures, is a bad thing? This coming from one who as a child, picked beans for 25 cents a bushel in a farm down the road, moved to the paper route, as soon as one was available, and at the age of sixteen, was working in retail looking forward to saving enough money to go to college and of course, buy a car. Then Jimmy Carter came along and blew that up. But, this adult now has no fear of work, and understands the value of a dollar, and as soon as able, pushed her sixteen year old (the age of the “work permit”) into finding a job, keeping the job, keeping up her grades, and learning to manage her finance. When that child saw her first paycheck, one has to wonder who was most proud, the child or the parent?

This is one of Newt Gingrich’s ideas, one which has been summarily dismissed by the lot of idiots who are currently in charge of the way we are supposed to think and our government. Is it any wonder that he is being attacked form the left and the left in order to stop him from going back to Washington, as a President who might work with the speaker (regardless of the party in power), and the Senate (again the same), and who might actually get the nation on the right track economically and get a few kids off the street at the same time?
It makes sense, so it must be dangerous to Axelrod and Company, because if the moderate voter thinks Gingrich is ok, then there is trouble in Chicago.

Should, and as those who follow politics know, another candidate take the lead in these last weeks before the primary/caucus begins (say Ron Paul, who is next in line by the polls), then what can those in Chicago and San Francisco, due to the Good Doctor? Stay tuned. The problem that Team Obama has is that every one of the candidates, including Herman Cain, are perceived as being able to do a better job at managing the affairs of the country – specifically by the GOP and those who vote in those primaries, and those who vote in those primaries are, sometimes moderate Conservative Feminist, former Democrats, newly minted Republicans, all with the notion that there just has to be a better alternative. It will not be an easy race, by any means, the race to the GOP nomination and the race to the White House, but a race that is clearly competitive on the side of the GOP and the eventual nominee, be it Gingrich or Ron Paul or Jon Huntsman or Michele Bachmann’s to win.