Gingrich Delivers
The absolute best moment of last Monday night’s Fox News debate in South Carolina is encapsulated in this video, when Juan Williams asked Gingrich a racially charged question, Gingrich rejected the premise, and rocked the auditorium, and was rewarded with a thunderous standing ovation from a crowd that was clearly ecstatic to hear conservatism expressed in such a clear and thorough manner. This is the sort of thing the conservative base has been waiting for to rally around one of these candidates. I don’t know if he can win, but this moment in the debate may have been the best single moment for any candidate in the whole campaign season.
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4c1-22w2G7M]
What Gingrich said here is important in understanding why we must defeat Barack Obama. We cannot permit the left to set the terms of the debate, and in this instance, Gingrich absolutely demonstrated why this is true. I’ve had my issues with Gingrich, to be sure, but this was a perfect response to a question intended to trip him up.
Newt has his flaws, but this was amazing, and I was happy to see him stand for unfettered, unrestrained unapologetic conservatism. It made me think very much of Reagan’s standard for measuring success of welfare programs:
“We should measure welfare’s success by how many people leave welfare, not by how many are added.” – Ronald Reagan
Fox News Channel Megyn Kelly hires "Newt Haters" in veiled attempt to repair damage done to Juan Williams and herself during Fox sponsored GOP debate. Shut Up, Megyn!
I just about came out of my seat watching Newt tell Juan how it is! To win in life, one must believe they have a chance to take a step. Then a trott, then a full run at the gold ring. I wish I was young again with the things I know in my mind now and I could have soared with the Eagles and not slept with the lizards.
Reblogged this on Republican Presidential Candidates 2012.
Impressive and stimulating. Maybe we're in for a NWO and Newt to tell that order American exceptionalism is in charge…"Don't Tread On Me." That's in the West as the promoters. Ditto for those others…you know who…Mid and East.
I also clapped here watching the debate when Newt really said the best of any debates so far. I shined shoes, mowed lawns when I was in the 4th-9th grade. My daughter worked as a waitress at 15, son worked as dishwasher in a restaurant. Don't tell me a janitorial job, working in the cafeteria, helping in school is benieth young peoples social values. I think it is the parents tha just might think it is benieth their values….maybe they should teach their kids how to work then…by example.
This goes back to the GW Bush "jobs that Amercans will not do" mantra. I have to wonder what has happened to the country I grew up in. Working is supposed to give you a healthy respect for what it takes to earn a living and the value of money. I know it did for me. No job is beneath you. These are entry-level jobs not "forever" jobs.
Amen, Dave. I worked picking apples in an orchard as a teenager alongside the "migrant worker" who were doing the jobs Americans (except me and many other youngsters) wouldn't do.
So Newt cut down the cherry tree. He's seems to be fessing up. We have what we have to support. No more choices are available…gotta pick. You want the picked one? By both establishments, Dem and Rep. Keep postponing your pick. It''ll soon be picked for you.
Not perfectly happy, but I pick Newt, futuristic prognosticator with Toffler and all. Some form of global governance is coming. Newt knows it as does any political person you can name, they all understand that.
Think like neighborhood watch, but you still watch your own and are in charge.
Who will keep the global neighborhood at bay.
Time to choose.
" I had a dream " last night…Newt the nominee and Sarah Palin the VP pick…( I'm the guy with the simple math 8 years VP + 8 years as POTUS= 16 years of cleaning the swamp )…I think alot can be learned from Newt…Would ANYBODY be able to stand up against the Newt and Sarah…there would be blood in the streets !!!!…I believe that there would be a NO HOLDS BARRED program this time…Newt will let the BIG DOG HUNT…STANDING OVATIONS would be common place…
Which Newt was that we saw on the debate last night? Was that the one that claims to be a conservative or the one that believes in Global Warming? If we elect Newt, which one of his many personas are we going to get as President?
Dave, I think that's always been the trouble with Newt. Still, I'm more willing to consider him after last night.
Newt is certainly better than Santorum. Much smarter and a better debater, but not much better ethically. Both are in it for themselves and not for the country. He has really good-sounding ideas. All he has to do for me is to explain how each of his ideas is constitutional or helps bring us back to our constitution and I'm sold. Never gonna happen.
I'm still not hearing enough talk about the constitution to make me change from Ron Paul. None of the other candidates' careers are tied to it at all, even though the constitution is the document they all swore to support and defend. The job of the president is not to protect us. It is to keep us free by defending the constitution. We have given the President way too much power and the only one who is talking about giving that power back to the people through the constitution is Ron Paul. Very sad. I would like there to be another candidate that I could trust to keep their oath of office, but none, except Paul, has. We let the current dictator-in-chief get into office with all kinds of talk without actually looking at his record. We don't need to make the same mistake again.
Dave, let me ask you a hypothetical question or two, if you don't mind. Like you, I'd prefer candidates who had a greater devotion to strict constitutional adherence, but let's be honest, just between you, me, a fence-post, and the rest of the readers here: Do you think Ron Paul will win the nomination?
See, here's the thing, and it's what I can get past: I can't figure out any way Paul gets more than 20-25% of the primary vote. I could be wrong, but that's what I see from here. My question is, even if he does, he will at best finish second.
If that's so, then the question is who finishes first, and so my question to you is: Would you prefer Romney or Gingrich, as you suggest? See, here's what I'm afraid: Among these three choices, it seems you would rank them: Paul, Gingrich, Romney. Unfortunately, it doesn't look all too likely you'll get that finishing order in delegates. So let's stick with the same three, and if Paul can finish second or third, the difference being who finishes first and second, which way would you go? I'm not asking or advocating you do this. I'm asking how you see this. Would you vote Gingrich knowing it would bump Paul to third if you also knew it would give you Gingrich rather than Romney?
This is all speculative, and I'm just trying to get a sense of your thinking. I don't suggest you vote in a primary for anybody but who you prefer. On the other hand, if I can't have who I want, (and I can't, since she's not running,) my question then becomes how do I avoid the worst alternative(Romney in my view) who I think can get the nomination?
See where I'm stuck? I'm wondering if you feel the same… Thanks for reading!
May eat my words later but, "which one of his many personas are we going to get"…IF president. He'll still proclaim American exceptionalism as he has now for a while. He seems repentant to cutting down the cherry tree. But I think…yes he will do dialogue with tree lovers, climate change, and the general global discussion, all for control as was the purpose of the League after WWI, the Roosevelt, Churchill, Stalin plan for UN during WWll, various trade treaties, and WTO.
But think the other puppets won't?
Other contestants…"What is a cherry tree?"
Still maybe he will keep America first.
S. C. …original Gadsden Flag, Continental Marine Flag, First Navy Jack 1775…see if spirit continues Saturday in S.C.