NBC FL 2012 Debate Winner: Santorum and Paul Steady, Gingrich Calm, Romney 2008 Redux, – NBC’s Mitchell: RNC will Not Allow Gingrich Win

The 2012 GOP Candidates - image the Daily Beast

The NBC 2012 Florida Debate was billed as a shootout between Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich – however, Gingrich did not shoot back – leaving those looking for “red meat” out of luck – the former Speaker, who to some appeared flustered by the Romney attacks (See: National Journal: Gingrich Lost His Crowd Pleasing Groove in Tampa” an article which belies the fact that the debate was held in a more controlled environment vis a vis NBC versus CNN) to Gingrich appearing more “Presidential” as a “Frontrunner” not “rising to the bait” and besting Romney (abridged see video below from NBC News Post Debate Analysis for exact verbiage).

From this perspective Gingrich appeared over cautious, professorial and not at all on the defensive, rather, almost bored with Romney, whose attacks were overlong as he hammered home Gingrich’s work with Freddie Mac (Gingrich released his contract with the mortgage giant yesterday), and charged him with “influence peddling”, which Gingrich, after a prolonged attack simply shook his head at Romney and noted that Romney had used the same tactics in 2008 with Huckabee and McCain and the American people saw through him. Gingrich brought up the fact that he is supported by former Congressman, J.C. Watts, who was the Conservative watchdog for both Freddie and Fannie during the time Romney refers to – and is a staunch supporter of Gingrich. To wit, Romney overstayed his attack, which is not unusual given his obvious frustration with his loss in Iowa to Santorum and his huge loss in S.C. to Gingrich – It was a panicked Romney that was on the podium last night.

Rick Santorum, however, calmly waited out both Romney’s long diatribe and Gingrich’s, short, pointed rebuttals, and came in with a focus on Obama – later in the debate he attacked both Romney and Gingrich, without either man answering the charges completely. Ron Paul, when given the time, was on point on economics, and to those who are more hawkish – “off the reservation” on national security. Case in point, both Paul and Santorum appeared as winners in the debate, along with Gingrich (depending, on if one is a moderate and or independent, or if one is seeking a “red-meat, rough and tumble” character in the office.”)

The fact that Gingrich is the smartest guy on the podium cannot be disputed, given the obvious attention paid to him by the post debate team at NBC, leaving one to believe they were watching an episode of the twilight zone, as the Republican Debate analysis gave Gingrich the nod as previously stated, and that included local NBC news affiliates airing footage that characterized Romney’s as a “billionaire who’s taxes will be released tomorrow, and Gingrich as one who was “calm” throughout, as if there was a cosmic shift in support of the speaker – not quite.

In the NBC post debate analysis, Andrea Mitchell brought up an interesting point, one which, if true, will mean the end of the modern Republican Party as it is known – an aid close to the Romney campaign indicated that the elite who control the party will not allow Gingrich to be the nominee. (he was credited with the failed bid for a second term by George H. Bush, hated by the moderate Bob Dole, who felt Gingrich was a competitor, and feel on the proverbial Republican Sword (he was not “ousted from the Speakership as implied), for not producing Congressional wins large enough to please those who would see an “insider” not Gingrich as Speaker.)

Apparently, the Republican elite plan to go to a brokered election should Romney fail in Florida and put up, of all people, Jeb Bush or a “Mitch Daniels”, going the route of the Democrats Super Delegate Convention that led to the election of Barack Obama. Therefore, those who run Washington and the GOP will throw a hissy fit if their chosen candidate “Mitt Romney” does not perform and will simply negate the votes of the people, and put in whomever they chose – a losing proposition no matter which way the wind blows and they know it. With no love lost on Republicans, Andrea Mitchell appears to know it as well, almost gleefully quoting the source.

As this blog is obviously supporting Speaker Gingrich, it was the “red meat” that was lacking, but with the knowledge that Gingrich is an astute politician and that he would appeal to the independent Florida vote, he would have been credited with a win, if it were not for the best debate performance to date by his protégé, Rick Santorum. Indeed, Ron Paul, who this blog strongly disagrees with on foreign policy issues, suggests that his performance outshone the speaker when, again, Paul was given a chance to weigh in – therefore a tie.

The next debate will be held on this Thursday, January 26t at 8PM on CNN The network offers an option to submit a question for a candidate in an on-site form here . the Florida primary will be held on January 31st, and Gingrich currently holds the lead in polling in both Florida and nationally (*See New York Times overview)

The Florida Primary - If Romney repeats his performance in this upcoming debate, one can be sure he will under perform in Florida and it is likely that given CNN in Jacksonville (on the Georgia Line), as the Debate arena, Gingrich should produce an even debate and will over- perform in the primary with the distinct possibility that Rick Santorum may pull second to Gingrich. (Given his debate performance) Ron Paul, made the decision not to heavily campaign in Florida, and will likely pull 4th – This depends on how much damage Romney’s debate performance, couple with the release of his tax returns, and his consistent negative campaigning, will do in the Sunshine State.

Final caveat, what one must understand is that this blog is centered in Massachusetts and as such, one might think that the blog should support Mitt Romney, however, one must be assured that after careful consideration, one has chosen to support the candidate that will best perform against the President, in both debates and with the general electorate, and one who has the history behind him to prove just that. One apparently little known tool available to all is the Library of Congress, where one can fact check all day long. It can be a slog, but it is worth knowing what the candidates supported, who they worked for and specifically what occurred during the time Gingrich was Speaker. The records are indisputable: the Speaker was under assault from the Democrats, who wanted (literally states) to “get even” with the Speaker, which was followed by Ethics charges, etc., all of which again, is available at The Library of Congress. During that time he worked in concert with the House and the White House, did indeed balance the budget, put forth the contract with America and reformed Welfare. One must look at the mettle of the man, regardless of the somewhat misleading charges brought by his opponents, (given facts), he had survived one of the most brutal assaults on a Speaker in the history of Congress, by both Democrats bitter over a loss, and Republican’s vying for power – he survived by accomplishing for the American people regardless of the personal loss he suffered. This not withstanding he is willing to do so again – which makes a tried, tested, and brilliant man this blogs choice. The chips should therefore, fall where they may, be it a Gingrich nominee, a Santorum Nominee, or a Paul nominee with no meddling from those in Washington or the GOP who think they know better than those who support them. (The rank and file).



NBC Post Debate Analysis

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

The NBC Full Debate

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.

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.

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.

2012 GOP Update: Newt Gingrich At the Top of the Charts – Latest Poll: Gingrich, Cain, Romney

The brilliant and affiable New Gingrich Tops the GOP Charts - image Letsgetrealblog

From Public Policy Polling: (PDF), latest national poll consisting of 576 Republican Primary Voters (4% very liberal, 3% somewhat liberal, 18% moderate, 39% somewhat conservative and 36% conservative, shows New Gingrich in the lead with 28%, Cain at 25%, and Romney at 18%. The balance of the field in this poll in order of %: Perry (6%), Bachmann, Paul (tied 5%), Huntsman (3%), Johnson and Santorum (tied 1%) and not yet sure rounding out the field at 9%.

A good majority of the questions focused on the fact that Cain has been accused of sexual harassment; the results, a majority believe the allegations are false, and that Cain should stay in the race. Newt Gingrich, who has made what, is touted in the accompanying article by Public Policy Polling, a remarkable gain in a short period. While Romney remains stagnant and/or in this case has lost poll numbers. Perry, despite a solid performance in the last debate, ended up losing % points in this PPP poll.

Although in this point in the game, with approximately 8 weeks before the Iowa Caucus, the polls show a candidates strength (advancing or maintaining % in the polls) or their weaknesses (losing points, or under double digits). That said, this is a very fluid field where a candidate all but given up for “politically dead”, is able to rise to the occasion, by a win in Iowa, or South Carolina, propelling that candidate forward through the South and Midwest come Super Tuesday. From this perspective of the current field, at this time and with this poll, the outcome would be either Gingrich/Cain at the top come Super Tuesday. This is probable should the polling remain the same in regards to the allegations against Cain (plus positive for Cain).

With Newt Gingrich on the top of the polls, one can expect a media assault to begin on the former Speaker, any second. This will be the most highly vetted GOP field in history, given the media’s penchant for the current President, and an obvious distaste for any GOP Candidate (see CNN Reporter asking Obama if the GOP candidates are uninformed, out of touch or just irresponsible (Real Clear Politics video).

Depending upon which side of the political aisle one sits, there is good and bad news - trust in the media (both print and broadcast) is at an all time low according to a recent Gallup “Trust in Institutions” poll, with only 25% trusting Newspapers or TV News.

2012 GOP Bloomberg Debate Winners: Romney, Bachmann – Best Quote of the Debate – Full Video - Opinion and Analysis

The GOP Field - Capable - image The Blazed dot com


Mitt Romney and Michelle Bachmann were the obvious winners in the Bloomberg – Washington Post – WBIN TV GOP Debate held last evening – Romney for his measured responses, cool composure and a show of humor more than met the expectations set by the nature of the forum – the economy. Bachmann, who is not performing in the polls as well as her counterparts, did an outstanding job last evening – it appeared, during two particular exchanges as if Romney and Bachmann would make a perfect pairing – both agreeing, calling upon and complementing each other. In the second segment of the “kitchen table” style debate, moderated by PBS’s, Charlie Rose, the candidates asked questions of one another – Most were aimed at Romney, not without criticism: Romney however, turn to Bachmann, asking a question that invited a serious response, rather than critique – she more than met expectations – later Bachmann acknowledged Romney very positively in response – setting up a candidates chemistry with one another. The fact that the field of eight offers six extremely effective candidates: those who have solid ideas and plans on the economy, the background, knowledge, and most importantly, the drive to take on the most difficult task at the most difficult economic time, makes this one of the best GOP fields seen in decades.

In this opinion and in order of performance, the field placed: Romney, Bachmann, Santorum, Paul, Huntsman, Cain, Gingrich, Perry. It is not without some prejudice that the focus on Romney and Cain and Perry, left little time for other candidates to show their worth in both previous and this debate. Based on the tone of answers, the content and overall demeanor of the candidate: Santorum, if given more time, is solid and knowledgeable, and has risen substantially in expectation, Paul, who is more Libertarian than Republican, gave solid answers, and appeared to feel most at home in this environment – again, with Paul as with Santorum, a lack of focus on the candidates does not give full time for viewers to assess the individual merit. Huntsman also held his own, although appearing a little less confident than in previous debates while Gingrich, the one that can be counted on for both wit and worthy answers in the forum, appeared to sit this one out – as if he were not feeling up to par. Cain, needed to expound on more than his 9-9-9 plan – and when asked his choice of the individual he would choose to replace Timothy Geithner answered Greenspan. Cain was on the board at the Kansas City Federal Reserve in the 1990’s – this was a time of virtual prosperity, and although that may have been his basis, it belief the fact that Greenspan, as notably pointed out by Ron Paul, was in his career assessment entirety at the Fed, “A disaster”. Paul chose Volker an appointee of Jimmy Carter, who served until 1987 at the Fed and was, in Paul’s (and this bloggers) opinion, responsible for holding the line on inflation during the 1980’s. It would be Paul’s preference to eliminate the Federal Reserve and re-institute the gold standard.

Finally, Rick Perry’s performance in this debate mirrored the past performances – dismal. The Governor of Texas does not appear comfortable in the debate forum.

Best line of the debate goes to Michele Bachmann during a discussion on the merits of Cain’s economic plan and the distrust by most of those on the podium of giving Congress another “revenue stream” (Bachmann): “When you take the 999 Plan and you turn in upside down I think the Devil’s in the Details”

If one is a reader of this blog, it is apparent that, residing in Massachusetts does not make for a Mitt Romney “fan”, however, in looking at the performance, and content placed in the performance, one must give Romney his due. Additionally, in honestly recalling his performance as Govenor (based on being a constituent only), the Commonwealth fared well – given the fact that Romney was the sole line of defense against a legislature that is comprised of an overwhelming majority of Democrats, the vast majority Progressives. (Thus giving the handle: The Peoples Republic of Massachusetts” to the Commonwealth when locals speak to the state government). Negatives from this point, are his refusal to acknowledge that although his health care plan was sound in theory, that once he left office, it fell to the Democrat controlled legislature and under the control of the new Govenor, Deval Patrick. In that time, mandates appeared, which have driven the cost of the program over the edge. In addition, private insurance in the state (there is limited choice of carriers) is consistently (on an annual basis) rising in cost by double digital percentages. Commonwealth Care, the State’s plan, is no longer accepting new “clients”, and those who cannot afford either the state insurance (if it were available) or the more costly private plans, are able to obtain a hardship waiver, and avoid the fees assessed for non-compliance to the mandatory program. Mandatory and Fees are what make this health care program in Massachusetts a Conservatives’’ nightmare. Granted Romney, at the time did not have a crystal ball, however, trusting the Democrats controlling this particular state (home to Barney Frank, Richard Neal (known as Pelosi’s Tax man) and the balance of the state’s Congressional democrats) not to drive a limited savings program into a billion dollar giveaway, which ultimately hurt the middle class, was, in a word: naive. Therefore, choice of Romney is not out of out “state pride”, or any “GOP” label, but an honest assessment of the man and his performance – he appears more than capable of taking on the task at hand.

As does Bachman, Santorum, Gingrich, Paul and Cain.

The full video via the Washington Post is shown below.

The next GOP Debate will be held on the 18th of October: CNN is the Network, sponsored by the Western Republican Leadership Conference and held in Las Vegas, NV.

In closing there is a good reason why the Obama Team is attempting to diminish the field of eight, outside of the obvious From Bloomberg: Obama Aides Seek to Counter Republican’s Message on the Economy Before the Debate” worth the read. It is that the field is effective and has the plans that are proven, are confident that they are able to take on the task, and hold no illusions as to its difficulty – noting this all with both the gravity of the situation, however, with the clear point that as a nation, the American People will prevail, and perhaps most importantly, they have a sense of humor.

Perhaps the most telling as to winners and losers and the overall appeal of the field comes from personal conversations during the debate, from a conservative viewpoint and one which many might consider the “typical New York East Coast Elite liberal viewpoint: These diverse individuals saw and agreed on the same points in this debate: favorite quote of the conversation and most telling for Michele Bachmann (from a devotee of the press) “I’m not hating her” – translation: She’s capable, worth watching and I may be changing my mind – The fact that those Democrats who are Democrats (rather than Progressives, and even some who may be Progressive, but on the fringe, are now desperate for an environment and a leader who will get us on the path to “out of this mess”. They are looking towards the GOP field, and they, as well as Conservatives, like what they see.

The Washington Post Debate in its entirety