When the Tea Party movement began in 2009, we began as a movement against not only socialism but against America’s first socialist President.
At one of the first Tea Party rallies, I told the crowd, “It is not enough to replace bad leadership. We must replace bad leadership with good leadership.” Our ultimate goal is to not only replace the Obama regime, put in good leadership and put in leadership that will not only repeal Obamacare but will also dismantle socialism.
We have seen a number of debates. The serious candidates are in the race. It is time, at least for me, to choose.
In choosing who is my candidate, there are some criteria I look at. First, the candidate must be electable. We can have the best candidate in the world but if they are unelectable, it does not matter. The candidate must be conservative. The candidate does not have to be perfect.
Why?
There is no such thing as a perfect candidate. Perfection is the standard the left tries to hold us to and we cannot play that game.
Finally, the candidate must have the vision to put forward plans to dismantle the massive government bureaucracy that we have seen grow under both Republican and Democrat administrations.
In culling the herd, there are some obvious people who can be voted off the island quickly. Who is quickly eliminated?
Gary Johnson. While he does have a few good ideas, he is way off the main stream and has no following. He is totally unelectable.
Ron Paul. Same as Gary Johnson.
Jon Huntsman. Could someone tell me why this guy is running as a Republican? He is an Obama fan boy who loves liberal policies. He would have to move significantly to the right just to become “Obama-lite.”
Mitt Romney. Mitt wins the panderer in chief award. He is more of a flip-flop than John Kerry was. He is a politician without conviction. He believes in big government as long as the Republican establishment is in charge of it. Perry called him “Obama-lite” the other day and that is pretty much spot on.
Rick Santorum. Santorum is a nice guy who has been savaged because of his social conservatism. He is unelectable.
Herman Cain. Cain is a great guy with a terrible plan. While he says his 9-9-9 plan is a precursor to implementation of the Fair Tax, it opens the door to a new tax without repealing the income tax. The left will love that. They will compromise to allow the creation of a national sales tax but unless the income tax is repealed first, all we will end up with is a new tax on top of the others. Dwight Eisenhower once said, “a plan seldom survives initial contact with the enemy.” That is the problem with Cain’s plan. Unfortunately, he does not realize this problem and that disqualifies him for me.
That takes us down to the remaining three candidates, Michele Bachmann, Rick Perry and Newt Gingrich.
Rick Perry has made an impressive start. But he has a lot of problems. The greatest problem for him is the illegal immigration issue. He was hammered in Thursday night’s debate. Perry refuses to back off on what he said earlier and his support for illegal alien friendly policies that have been a mainstay of Texas politics for the last decade of Perry’s tenure as governor. If elected, Rick Perry will not do anything about illegal immigration. We will see the same thing we have seen for the last twenty-five years on the border. Nothing will change and that is not acceptable.
Michele Bachmann is a rock star in the Tea Party movement. There is no doubt about that. She is bright, articulate and has electrified the rallies she has spoken to. Bachmann has two problems. First, she is running from the House of Representatives. The last sitting Congressman who was elected to the White House was James Garfield in 1880. Going from Congress to the White House is probably a bridge too far. Second, as much as I really like Bachmann, she is a Constitutional conservative committed to repealing Obamacare, but she is not the visionary needed to really dismantle large sections of the Federal Government.
It is for the reasons stated above, Newt Gingrich is now my personal choice to be the 45th President of the United States.
Why Newt?
First, he is a conservative. Perhaps not as conservative as some would like, but remember no candidate is perfect. Newt is electable. If you have seen the GOP debates, Gingrich has been the best debater. He does really well in that format and he looks Presidential. Gingrich has got the experience. He has been in Congress and rose to the Speakership. When Gingrich entered Congress, the Republicans were a minority. The Democrats treated the Republicans with contempt and the GOP leadership was perfectly happy to be in the minority. Gingrich changed that. He was the man with the vision to make a Republican majority possible.
Gingrich is the candidate who has the vision to fundamentally change the Federal Government. Gingrich has the unique capabilities to be the field general. He is the big idea man, much as Ronald Reagan was.
Gingrich against Obama is a great contrast. He has a track record of accomplishments and has worked at the national level. Gingrich can rightfully claim credit for everything from welfare reform to balancing the budget. Obama can offer nothing against him.
Gingrich does have some personal issues in his past but those are ancient history.
This election is the Republican Party’s lose. Unless there is a dramatic turn around in this country, Obama is going to be running for reelection with $4 a gallon gas and almost 10% unemployment. That is an almost impossible burden to overcome, unless the Republicans blow it by picking the wrong candidate.
Newt Gingrich is the right candidate to not only help us take this country back from socialism, but roll socialism back.
I am thrilled to endorse Newt Gingrich to be the Republican nominee and the next President of the United States.
Tags: 2012, campaign, gingrich, newt, presidential, republican
Permalink Reply by Joel Davis on Permalink Reply by Thomas Angle on Permalink Reply by Beth Stevens on Permalink Reply by Thomas Angle on Here are a few. Here is a quote from the americanhistory.about.com page, "including women's suffrage, social welfare assistance for women and children, farm relief, revisions in banking, health insurance in industries, and worker's compensation. The party also wanted an easier method to amend the constitution." They also failed to mention the vast amount of land he gobbled up for so called national parks. I like a lot of what Glenn says, but sometimes he has a tendency to overlook things.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theodore_Roosevelt
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_Party_(United_States,_1912)
http://americanhistory.about.com/od/politicalparties/p/bull_moose.htm
http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h1755.html
Permalink Reply by jalina susan stutte on Permalink Reply by Lawrence Yarborough on I have made my choice and it was not easy.I think Newt is the best man for the job.He is the most knowlegable in the mechanics of capital hill.We dont have time for on the job training.We
need a candidate who knows capital hill.
Permalink Reply by John Bowens on I think you would find that the Tea Party consists of many former Democrats, like myself, who were forced out of the Democratic Party by it's Socialist take-over. During the FDR administration the Democratic Party was perceived as workers and farmers and the Republicans as bankers and businessmen. The recent undoing of much of the financial sector legislation enacted during the Roosevelt administration and which sustained us during the forties, fifties, and part of the sixties has almost completely lead to our financial straits today. It is very important to remember that much of such original legislation was initiated by Republicans who worked together with the FDR administration to prevent a future Depression. True Democrats and Republicans can work together today as they did then, but the Socialization of the Democratic Party prevents such from happening. It is also important to realize that many who have had a hand in undoing the FDR era legislation, and who have profitted immensly from doing so, have been members of the Obama administration.
Permalink Reply by John Bowens on Just what the hell are you trying to say?
Permalink Reply by JC Patriot on On the other hand, it sounds like mindless drivel to some of us. FDR's first presidential campaign consisted of attacking his opponent as a big-government stooge, but after he was elected, FDR turned into the worst big-government president ever, at least until the current one came along. Their policies to "prevent" and "fix" things only create more problems, like almost every other government solution.
Permalink Reply by John Bowens on Maybe you should reread my reply. Please note that I do not praise FDR except to point out that he did cooperate with Republicans in efforts to prevent a future depression. There has been no real cooperation with Republicans by the present administration, in fact, it appears as if Conservatives were to completely reverse their positions, the Leftists would still vehemently oppose them! Before you accuse people of "mindless drival" I can tell you that the most assinine comments I see seem to come from people who use like to use the word "patriot". Would a real patriot steal such Leftist tactics to further divide and polarize his countrymen? Perhaps finding a little common ground and working from there would be far better? You seem to be a prime example of where the Liberals get their ammunition when they put down the Tea Party.
Permalink Reply by JC Patriot on So you didn't like me expressing my opinion on what I thought sounded like carefully-worded patting of FDR on the back, and you question my intentions for it, claiming that's just what liberals like to use to smear the tea party. And you further attack my use of the word patriot, because in your vast experience you have known this to be used by people who make assinine comments. Hmmm, I knew I smelled liberalism in that FDR post, and the subsequent personal attack confirms it.
Permalink Reply by John Bowens on Not really...you smell a former Democrat forced to take sides with the Republicans because of the Liberal take over of his Party! And a real patrot doesn't have to tell people they're a patriot. Others instinctively know it. And the FDR administration did co-operate with the Republicans to draft legislation to prevent another depression. And said legislation worked very well until people started tampering with it and allowed greedy speculators to play with taxpayer guaranteed money, among other vile things. I know all this from my vast experience, which you apparently don't have, because you lump the present Democratic Party with that Democratic Party, which shows true ignorance on your part.
© 2013 Created by Judson Phillips.
