The 12 (Revised: Now 20!) Reasons Why I Just Can't Support or Endorse Newt Gingrich

I respect and honor each person's freedom and liberty, and would defend to my death your right to not only choose who you think is best for President in 2012, but to voice your opinion.  That's the entire basis and premise of freedom upon which this nation is founded.

I have been a lifelong conservative.  On the continuum of right to left, I am probably somewhat slightly right of Ronald Reagan.  I joined this movement and website, Tea Party Nation, because I had grown sick and tired and fed-up over many years and many Administrations and Congresses with the status quo, from both Parties (which are now really simply different sides of the same coin, very nearly one and the same), and looking for like-minded patriotic Americans who truly cared about the original founding fathers' ideals of individual freedom and liberty, of small, limited government, and of government BY, FOR and OF the people (vs. the other way around). I also yearned for a return to fiscal responsibilty, accountability and sanity, and believe government - at all levels - needs to live within their means, just as we are expected to as individual citizens.  These are true conservative ideals, and, from what I could tell, the basis and common ground for those that had started and enjoined the tea party movement.  I finally got confirmation that I was not alone, and that there were others - many, many others - who were frustrated and disenfranchised and ready to take action to restore these ideals and freedoms, just like me.

I continue to think and feel the exact same way today.  And as such, for me, every single person that is vying for the Presidential nominee ad vying for my support and vote, as a conservative, MUST pass some very basic, straightforward tests of true conservatism.

I've thought about Newt Gingrich, and particularly whether or not he deserves my support and vote as a true conservative, for several months now.  I've studied him, read a great deal about him, listened to him and his responses throughout a score of debates and really prayed about this.  I've wanted to be as objective as possible, remaining open and acknowledging all of Gingrich's many fine points as well as the challenges and "baggage" that comes with him.  And here's my conclusion:

PROS:  Speaker Gingrich has many commendable points:

1. He’s skilled at crafting conservative policy proposals (e.g., the original Contract for America)
2. He is very intelligent and has an amazing capacity and memory for history and the lessons that we should have learned from it.
3. He is an accomplished debater - unquestionably the best of the current GOP candidate bunch - and proponent of conservative ideas.
4. Conservatives remember Gingrich fondly for leading the GOP to victory with the Contract for America.
5. Gingrich deserves credit for working with President Clinton to pass welfare reform.
6. He also deserves some credit for the balanced budgets that existed prior to 9/11.

WARNING, DANGER, WILL ROBINSON:

However, we have to remember history, as it REALLY happened. As someone once famously stated, the truth is the truth, whether we choose to believe it or not.  And the truth is:  things did not go so well once Gingrich was in the Speaker's seat. His troubled tenure from 1995-99 as well as his post-speakership career raise several red flags that true conservatives like Tea Party movement participants would be wise to consider:

1. Big Spending:  While Gingrich was Speaker, Congress and the President balanced the budget.  That's a fact.  However, this did not come about through hard choices, but rather through a booming economy. As the information age dawned and the dotcom boom began, government coffers surged with "revenues". As part of the balanced budget agreement that came with the Contract With America, Congress put in place spending caps. With the huge surge of revenue, however, Gingrich and Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott decided to break the spending caps that had been put in place in the balanced budget agreement and increased federal spending. This practice was continued under Gingrich’s successor, Dennis Hastert. The predictable result of the Republican Congress’ shameless and reckless dissoluteness on spending was that once the dotcom bubble burst and economic growth slowed, the only way that Congress could afford to continue the increases they’d made in the good years of the economy was to run up deficits.  This is when they betrayed the conservative ideals that had gotten them into office in the first place and began looking and acting like Democrats - which has carried forward as the policy du jour for the GOP to this day.  In my mind, Gingrich’s speakership  was dealt a telling blow as a result of his ineptness in negotiating the FY1999 budget which was passed a month before the 1998 elections and increased spending without delivering any major tax reductions. Then-Rep. Mike Castle (R-DE) said voters complained to him that nobody read the bill and “the President (Clinton) got virtually everything he wanted.”

2. Huge Expansion of Earmarks:  To add even more salt to the wound, one part of Gingrich’s legacy that has remained long after he left was the expanded role of earmarks in Congressional politics. During his tenure as Speaker, Gingrich doubled the number of earmarks in Congress and his office sent out memos encouraging the use of earmarks for protecting vulnerable members of Congress. The number of earmarks would eventually increase to 14,000 per year and would lead to the end of the Republican majority. While the greatest excesses did not occur during Gingrich’s Speakership, the first steps toward the Republican train wreck of 2006 were unquestionably taken during Gingrich’s tenure.

3. Dysfunctional Leadership and Failed Communication:  Taking Ronald Reagan's example, in order for conservatives survive long enough to create and implement lasting legacies, they need to survive politically and communicate to the public well. During the government shutdown in 1995-96, Speaker Gingrich and the House Republicans failed to formulate an effective response to the Democratic message. Gingrich’s inexplicable statement that President Clinton failed to give him proper seating on Air Force One to a state funeral for Yitzhak Rabin only made the problems worse, deflating his approval rating to a terminal 20%. Gingrich’s speakership led to a historic lack of confidence from Republican leaders and the rank and file "core". In 1997, nine Republican members of the House refused to support Gingrich’s re-election to the Speakership and the GOP leadership rallied barely enough votes to keep Gingrich in office. In July of that year, Gingrich faced a coup from his top lieutenants that collapsed due to incompetence. After the 1998 elections, Gingrich was forced to step aside. A guy can't be a very effective President if he can't even lead his own Party, can he?
4. Washington Insider:  Gingrich does not shy away from being a Washington insider. He responded to criticism of his work for Freddie Mac and the Washington insider label by stating that we need to elect someone who knows how Washington works in order to change Washington.  Conservatives and Tea Party movement participants have reason to be wary of this idea for a number of reasons, not the least of which is Gingrich’s flawed record as Speaker (see: above), suggesting that his success at changing Washington has been slipshod at best, and that his career tendency has been to go along rather than address tough issues when called for.  In an October debate, while Gingrich lauded Herman Cain for proposing his 9-9-9 tax plan, Gingrich cautioned, “Change on this scale takes years to think through if you’re going to do it right.” It’s worth noting that sixteen years ago, Gingrich appointed Cain to Jack Kemp’s tax commission and since then several other tax reform commissions have been appointed. How many more years do we need to “think through” tax reform until we actually do something significant? It is standard Washington tactics to kick big issues down the road for others to deal with, just as we saw BOTH Parties do with the Debt and Deficit/Spending Crisis earlier this year.  One has to wonder, in all seriousness, whether Gingrich is part of a solution that's desperately needed from the oustide, or too big a part of that system on the inside to change it.
5. Endorsing Liberal Candidates:  Newt Gingrich backed liberal Republican Dede Scozzafava while conservatives and tea party groups were rallying around Conservative Doug Hoffman. Gingrich almost unbelievably scolded conservative activists for backing Hoffman. Hoffman, for his part, is forgiving of the whole thing and urges Republicans not to hold Gingrich’s action against him. While this is kind of Mr. Hoffman, conservatives would do well to ignore the advice because Gingrich’s belligerent defense of Scozzafava is part of a larger pattern of key betrayals of conservative values and interests.  Another example:

6. Endorsing Liberal Candidates #2:  While Gingrich was speaker, he and the NRCC were notorious for backing liberal Republicans over conservatives. For example, in 1997, Gingrich recruited liberal state Assemblyman Brook Firestone and supported him over conservative Tom Bordonaro in a special congressional election. Primary voters in the district rejected Firestone as well as Gingrich’s attempts to play kingmaker.

7. Betraying Conservatives on Key Issues:  Hard to either forget or ignore his letter in support of Bush’s immigration reform, which many conservatives labeled amnesty. In the process, he also showed an ugly and divisive side: when Gingrich opposes conservatives, he tends to do it in a very dramatic way that’s very belligerent to conservatives who disagree with him.

8. Endorsing the Individual Mandate:  It gets worse.  There is no question that Gingrich is for an individual health care mandate.  Conservatives - and particularly Tea Party members - are supposed to be against Obamacare, and particularly a key sticking point in it that forces each and every American to purchase health insurance - an unprecedented breach of our individual liberty as protected by the Constitution.  And yet somehow a huge percentage of conservatives and Tea Party members are supporting a candidate that was pushing an individual mandate long before either Romneycare OR Obamacare was ever even invented. In June 2007, Gingrich made the following statement....

   “Personal responsibility extends to the purchase of health insurance. Citizens should not be able to cheat their neighbors by not buying insurance, particularly when they can afford it, and expect others to pay for their care when they need it.”

   That doesn't sound very conservative.  And it wasn't some mistake, a slip of the tongue or misquote: in 2008, Gingrich followed up his comments by writing a book entitled "Real Change" in which he endorsedan individual health care mandate, formally and for all to see for all time, in perpetuity.   Gingrich has reaffirmed his commitment to an individual mandate over and over again - including earlier this year!  The following is an excerpt from an exchange between host David Gregory and Gingrich during an interview earlier this year on NBC's Meet The Press....

   MR. GREGORY: You agree with Mitt Romney on this point.

   REP. GINGRICH: Well, I agree that all of us have a responsibility to pay--help pay for health care. And, and I think that there are ways to do it that make most libertarians relatively happy. I've said consistently we ought to have some requirement that you either have health insurance or you post a bond...

   MR. GREGORY: Mm-hmm.

   REP. GINGRICH: ...or in some way you indicate you're going to be held accountable.

   MR. GREGORY: But that is the individual mandate, is it not?

   REP. GINGRICH: It's a variation on it.

   If you are against Obamacare, you must be against Newt Gingrich.  I really don't see any middle ground.

9. Endorsing Obama's Education Policy:  There's more.  Gingrich teamed up with Al Sharpton on Obama’s behalf on a cross-country education promotional stint during which Gingrich piled heaps of praise upon Obama for his wonderful stance on education.  Who in his right mind would choose Al Sharpton, from the entire country, as the “education professor” who will help reform the broken system?  Where was Al when Obama closed the voucher program in D.C. which had helped poor, struggling, mostly minority students get a better education at a cheaper cost? More importantly, where was/is Gingrich?!?

10. Endorsing Climate Change, Cap and Trade:  But wait, that's not all.  Tell 'em what they've won, Don Pardo:  In addition to endorsements for liberal Republicans, immigration amnesty and the individual mandate, and stumping coast to coast for Obama's socialist education policy, Gingrich has been more than willing to endorse still other liberal causes as well. Among examples of this are the famous television commercial of him just 3 years ago in 2008 sitting on a couch with Nancy Pelosi calling for government action to address climate change, declaring that "our country must take action to address climate change".

    Not only that, Gingrich has also promoted the idea of a "cap and trade" carbon trading scheme.  Back in 2007, Gingrich said the following....

    “I think if you have mandatory carbon caps combined with a trading system, much like we did with sulfur, and if you have a tax-incentive program for investing in the solutions, that there’s a package there that’s very, very good. And frankly, it’s something I would strongly support.”

    Not to mention, infamously

11. Endorsing TARP.  In 2008, Gingrich declared that he would have voted for the TARP bailout if he was still a member of Congress.  Nuff said.
12. Character Counts. In addition to everything else above, Newt Gingrich has shown that he does not have the character to be President.  The Republican Party is supposed to be the party of "family values", but they are getting ready to send someone to the White House who has a track record that would make Bill Clinton blush.  Gingrich has been divorced twice and has admitted to infidelity in both cases (his earlier marriages). Hey, I'm not judging the guy for it, but let's all swallow a "Reality Pill": That's a high hurdle to overcome in American politics. His explanation for what he agrees were poor choices is that he loved America too much. That at least seems to be his explanation:

    There's no question at times of my life, partially driven by how passionately I felt about this country, that I worked far too hard and things happened in my life that were not appropriate.

    It's hard to see that argument winning many votes in Graettinger, Iowa, Gilmanton, New Hampshire, or Gaffney, South Carolina.

    Callista, Gingrich's third and current wife, plans to play a vital role in his campaign. We've already heard her talk about his conversion to Roman Catholicism and his commitment to Christian causes (is there such a thing as a "born-again Catholic?!?"). I recognize that redemption provides a powerful narrative in American politics. Still, it's probably not powerful enough to vault Gingrich into the White House.

    What Gingrich brings to the GOP race is provocative and innovative thinking. Count on him to say something that shakes up the race. Just don't count on it helping his electoral chances. The following is how a recent Business Insider article described the "skeletons in the closet" from his personal life....

    Newt's personal baggage is either weird or scary. He married his high-school geometry teacher. He cheated on her and divorced her while she had cancer. So he married Marianne Ginther six months later. But that wasn't to last.

    Gingrich conducted a tawdry affair behind her back with one of his staffers while making political hay out of Clinton's affair with a White House intern. He then divorced Marianne and married the staffer.
    

13. Considers FDR greatest President of 20th Century.As I was reading about his love and admiration ofFDR as the person he admires as "the greatest and most effective President of the 20th century" (this, from a self-proclaimed "conservative"?!?!  Over Reagan!?!?).  Did you ever hear, say, Barry Goldwater speak gushingly about FDR?  How 'bout President Reagan? But don't take my word for it, check out Newt in his own words right here:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CgdzZJePL04&feature=player_embedded

14.  Defense and Support of Labor Unions, Andy Stern: No kidding.  Newt's also expressed his love and staunch defense of labor unions and his admiration of Andy Stern, the highly liberal and progressive head of the SEIU (Service Employees International Union) and who remains a close advisor to Obama re: progressive labor policy and regulation. No kidding, no BS.  Again, don't take it from me, read it for YOURSELVES (and THINK for yourselves!), in his book, "Real Chance: From the World That Fails to the World That Works", pitching the need for conservatives to "respect" organized labor while praising Stern, the SEIU head:

    ” Conservatives cannot cheer unions overseas and then be blindly

    anti-union here at home. There are legitimate historic reasons for
    workers to organize together, and there is a strong need for a
    healthy, competitive, union, movement that helps improve the lives of
    its members and the competitiveness of our country.

    Andy Stern, the head of the Service Employees International Union,
    is the union leader who probably best understands the challenge of the
    world market and the need to make American union members productive in
    the face of world competition. Sadly, he is a distinct minority among
    union leaders. “

    Yes, that's a direct quote.  Andy Stern.  Andy Stern?!?  REALLY?!?

15. Self-described "realpolitik Wilsonian": In a recent speech, Gingrich self-describes himself as a "realpolitik Wilsonian" (yes, actually, as in Woodrow Wilson!!!), and evoked "the 4 Freedoms" that were claimed by the early 20th century progressives Teddy and Franklin D Roosevelt as well as Woodrow Wilson, claiming that "the 4 Freedoms still work".  Let's recap what these "4 Freedoms" are that he's referring to:  #1. Freedom of Speech - OK, that's in the Bill of Rights. #2. Freedom of Worship - OK, that one's good, too, but wait for it, that's not all:  #3. Freedom from Want, and #4. Freedom from Fear - WHAT?!? You heard/read it correctly.  These last 2 are where Gingrich goes off the rails.  These "freedoms" are progressive lies that, if you believe them, leads and drives us towards subtle and not-so-subtle changes to reverse the Constitution and our individual liberties and freedoms in the name of socialism and quite frankly communism.  This is an Obama manifesto.  I'm not making this stuff up.  Here's the recording (audio) of Gingrich via Beck:

    As Glenn Beck posted on Facebook just a few days ago:

    
    

    "Do not be duped by the establishment GOP. Do not exchange your values and principles for electability...or we'll keep heading down the same path..."

16. Calls Ryan Medicare Reform "Right-wing Social Engineering": He called Paul Ryan's plan to reform and refinance Medicare, in an effort to actually save it and make it sustainable (which it currently most definitely is NOT), "right-wing social engineering".  And he did it THIS YEAR.  Very publicly. REALLY, Newt?!? Paul Ryan?!?  He's about as close to a bona fide HERO as we true conservatives will find in Washington!!! Seriously, what must a former Republican Congressman (and Speaker, no less!) possibly be thinking that would drive him to say such a ridiculous, baseless and destructive thing? Against a guy like Paul Ryan - one of the few "solutions" to the problem!!!
17. He's a long-time member of the CFR (Council on Foreign Relations). Since 1990. And the Tri-Lateral Commission - you know, the George Soros "One World Government" people?!?

18. He has alienated people who's help he needs to win. Sarah Palin isn't a Gingrich fan. She referred to him and other Republican colleagues in a 2009 email as “egotistical, narrow-minded machine goons.” Don't ask New York Times columnist David Brooks for a Gingrich endorsement. He recently told Time: Newt Gingrich is not going to be president. I wouldn't let that guy run a 7-Eleven, let alone a country.

19.  He can't stay on message. Gingrich's fits of pique are legendary, and derailed his Speakership all the way back in the '90s. He led reporters to believe he was declaring his candidacy back in February '11 and then decided not to. Then on May 12th last year he announced.  On March 7, 2011 he called for a no-fly zone over Libya and the ouster of Qaddafi. Sixteen days later, he criticized President Obama for imposing a no-fly zone on Libya.

20. He has a long political history (emphasis on LONG). This is a kind of "sister" issue/reason that goes along with the "Washington Insider" point above.  Republicans are hungering for a fresh face. Gingrich is anything but. As former George W. Bush adviser Mark McKinnon explains, he has:

    been around the track one too many times. At a time when people are hungry for something different, new and refreshing, Newt just feels stale.

    Gallup poll data sums up the problem: Gingrich is well-known to Republicans and Republican-leaning independents. But he is also widely disliked and distrusted  – and his negative ratings are growing.

My conclusion, based on the above acts, is that I just cannot support or vote for Newt Gingrich.  I just don't trust him.  Plain and simple, straight up: conservatives and Tea Party movement participants betting on Gingrich have to hope that something has changed Gingrich over the past thirteen years that will transform him into someone who can not only talk about conservative ideas, but can implement conservative solutions. Given the totality of the Gingrich record, as highlighted above, I have to seriously question and doubt that assertion.

The ultimate question that certain Tea Party members ask "infidel" unbelievers (in Gingrich) like myself is, "Would you really vote for Obama (or, "not vote", or, "split the Party and conservative votes with a 3rd party candidate", and other such nonsense), and here's my answer:  If we continue on the current course (that of insanity and blindness) and somehow Gingrich makes it through the funnel and into the nomination for GOP presidential candidate, I would VERY UNFORTUNATELY have to vote for him, but only under serious duress in not being able to stomach the thought of completely destroying the country with another 4 years of Obama.  But if that were the case, and should Gingrich actually be elected President, I certainly wouldn't expect much if anything to change in D.C. or in our country's future or fate.  And neither should YOU, if you support Gingrich.

Yes, four more years of Barack Obama would be a complete and total nightmare for America.  But I'm not convinced that four years of Newt Gingrich would be any picnic or trip to the "promised land".