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.
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 They will compromise to allow the creation of a national sales tax but unless the income tax is repealed first, all we will end up with is a new tax on top of the others.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.
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.
I like Herman Cain . . . In fact, he is the only candidate who I have sent a small contribution in this election. However, in recent weeks Cain on a number of occasions apparently has not chosen his words as carefully as perhaps he should. Personally, I am trying to give him the benefit of the doubt that these situations may be due to inexperience as a seasoned campaigner and heavy speaking schedules . . . I trust that this may be the reason it has become necessary for him to "walk back" some of his recent comments. However, if he continues to run into situations where he has to justify comments with "I mis-spoke" or "I didn't understand the question" or "that isn't what I meant," my concern about what Cain's POVs really are will continue. We already have a front-runner candidate who demonstrates, "if you don't like my position on this issue, then here's another one." Hopefully Herman Cain is not another one who plays this political "game.".
Someone has now gone after Cain. Not sure if the story that broke today about him and women laying complaints against him is true or not and wonder what took your old guard so long to put it out there? They have chosen someone and that would be Romney ..... but he is wrong, wrong wrong for this .....
I questioned your call at first Judson but now see the forest for the trees. Gingrich will take Obie out. WTH can the old guard throw at him they have not already done in the past? Wish I were an American and would gladly support Gingrich as I see he will not be controlled by the old elites ......
we need to start countering obamas new slogan "WE CANT WAIT" with replies like"we cant wait for you to be gone"
or "we cant wait for 2012 and a new president" or "we cant wait for you to go back to chicago"or "we cant wait for you to be unemployed too" theres probably plenty more folks can come up with. when he tried out the "winning the future" slogan and people started saying 'WTF?" he changed it in a hurry. lets see if we cant make him change it again. even if just for laffs. we could use some.
Yup their is alot of MONKEY BUSINESS in the "House of Bonzo" and it's getting worse. You heard of Bonzo calling Hawaii is so called home is Asia. Was his telepromter out out order, or recalled that's a good thought. We need the money. I hope they can't fill Airforce One with over 100$ a barrel so he can't return.
I have heard Cain speak with Neal Boortz on Boortz radio show. I have not read the plan myself, but Cain does have it on his website where one can download the 9-9-9 plan via PDF. However, Cain stated on Boortz show that the plan is a plan that if passed as is as law would end the income tax within four years. What you would have is, in four years, the 9 percent income tax decreasing to 0% and the sales (consumer) tax increasing to 12 to 14%. It is intended as a way to get rid of income tax all together while not just overturning the whole system on its head in one year. I agree however, if the conservatives and libertarians, and constitutionalist do not stand their ground we could see it compromised down to where we have all three taxes. Then the progressives would have a platform (if they get in power again) to raise the all three taxes or turn the consumer tax into a VAT.
I agree with you Judson that either of the three (Gingrich, Bachmann, or Cain) are the best possible options. I think Cain could be on the top of the ticket though. Only if he choses Gingrich as his VP. With this, Gingrich would be the president of the Senate and he could get the bills through congress with great effectiveness based upon his experience. However, Gingrich would tear BO up on the debates. I like Cain because he can truly run as an anti-washtington establishment candidate. Of course Bachmann would be a good VP for Gingrich as well. January 2009 I was saying it would take the likes of Gingrich and Palin to get this country back on the track of the intent of the founders. However, Bachmann could be a good fill-in without the perceived divisiveness the media has built around Palin.
It was in this spirit that I read the bill that is being discussed before this committee and it is in this spirit that I report to you today my conclusion that this is the wrong bill.
THIS BILL IS WRONG FOR NATIONAL SECURITY
For over 30 years we've proclaimed the need for energy independence, but bad policies have forced us to become more and more reliant on dictators and kings for our energy. Instead of being independent, we are now bowing to kings and shaking hands with dictators to get our energy.
What this bill will do is continue to push us along that path to destruction. Instead of opening up America's vast resources of oil, natural gas, and coal, this bill guarantees that we will remain reliant upon OPEC if we want to continue to drive cars, heat our homes, and run our appliances.
AN ENERGY TAX IS WRONG FOR THE ECONOMY
When you consider President Obama's budget, this proposed legislation has a price tag for the American people of at least $646 billion. We know from news reports that senior Obama administration officials have indicated that $646 billion is a conservative amount and that the overall figure may be as much as three times that amount or $1.9 trillion in new taxes.
This is currently a 648 page bill, or, put another way, $1-3 billion per page. This is quite a costly bill, even for the standards of this Congress. It would be two and a half times the size of the giant stimulus package passed earlier this year. And it would be a tax burden not a spending stimulus so it would deeply burden the American people and the economy.
THIS BILL IS WRONG FOR GOVERNMENT OF, BY, AND FOR THE PEOPLE
If we have learned any lesson out of the decay of government over the last twenty years, it ought to be that the scale of bureaucracy and the scale of micromanagement as laid out in this bill are an invitation to corruption and an invitation to more politicians playing games.
With the prospect of up to $2 trillion dollars being collected by the federal government under this massive new tax proposal and ready for redistribution, are we surprised that so many companies are lining up like panting dogs, vying for their cut of the green spoils? With $2 trillion up for grabs, the environmental pieties begin to be a little difficult to take seriously. Lobbyists have not been hired for good citizenship and idealism. Lobbyists have been hired to ensure their clients get rich off this new government managed flow of cash.
Our politicians have reversed Abraham Lincoln's understanding of America. In a free society governments should serve the people. But bills like this are the opposite of Lincoln's call at Gettysburg. It's not government of the people, by the people, for the people; it's government over the people, punishing the people, and telling the people how they can and cannot live their lives.
For the last thirty-six years, I have watched the anti-energy, pro-regulation, pro-litigation, pro-taxation environmental extremists label themselves as the only Americans who care about the environment.
These extremists would have you believe that to protect clean air and water, biodiversity, and the future of the earth, we have to buy into their catastrophic scenarios and sign onto their command-and-control, anti-energy, big-bureaucracy agenda, including dramatic increases in government power and draconian policies that will devastate our economy.
But this is just extremism. The truth is that we can produce more American energy and do it responsibly. We will not - and cannot - eliminate all risk of harm to the environment as we produce more energy. All energy sources have risks, but the key is to take measures to minimize the risks. More important, it's vital that we understand and appreciate what we've been able to accomplish in minimizing risks to the environment as we've developed more American energy.
It is possible to be totally committed to American principles -- to individual liberty, a market economy, entrepreneurship, and lower taxes -- and still be pro-environment. It is possible that with the sound use of science and technology and the right incentives to encourage entrepreneurs, American principles can provide a better solution for the health of our planet than can environmental extremism.
Poster's Note: In Newt's testimony, he set out 38 goals and solutions for more U.S. energy production, lower energy prices, cutting billions of dollars to U.S. energy producers and tax payers . . .and still protect the environment. There are also numerous videos available on different parts of his testimony . . . however, I have not found a video Online of his entire testimony.
I have but one bone to pick with you about Cain. Tis obvious that you've not read the full discloseur of the 9-9-9 plan. Judson you said that the 9-9-9 plan will leave income tax as we know it in place. That is just not factual, income tax would be reduced to 9% which is less than the current 15% of withholding for everyone across the board. No loopholes.
Aside from that it would also remove the hidden 23% to 29% hidden taxes on every single artlcie, substance, or service we use every day. That 23 to 29% hidden tax would become 9% open tax.
Now if you look at the savings that is a savings of 6% on each & every paycheck that is issued, & a savings of 14 to 20% on new goods &/or services. There would be no sales tax on used articles.
One last thing, the 9% could be raised...provided the House & Senate could muster a super majority in both for the rate to be raised.
All this information can be found at one or another of the various sites Cain supporters have currently.
Mr. Cain has been my choice since before he "officially" announced....He's still my choice.