Gingrich: the assault on Romney will be more intense than ever.

ORLANDO — Is a third resurrection possible for Newt Gingrich?

The former House speaker, who has charted the most topsy-turvy course of any of the up-again-down-again candidates during this presidential election cycle, insisted Tuesday night that he would revive his campaign once more.

“We are going to contest every place and we are going to win, and we will be in Tampa as the nominee in August,” Gingrich said following his second-place finish, declaring that “people power” will defeat “money power” over the next six months.

Gingrich’s money — or lack thereof — could determine his fate. His campaign reported having $2.1 million in the bank, but $1.2 million in debt, at the end of December, according to new financial forms released on Tuesday. While he raised another $5 million over the course of the last month, he spent another $1.7 million on advertisements alone in Florida — cutting sharply into his cash on hand. Gingrich’s ability to stay in the race will also depend on the willingness of one billionaire donor, casino magnate Sheldon Adelson, to continue funding the “super PAC” backing the former speaker.

Yet according to Gingrich, the campaign will be fueled as it was during its darkest days earlier in the race — by ideas, and by attacks.

Even before the Florida results were in, Gingrich launched a fresh assault on Mitt Romney and President Obama, saying there is hardly daylight between the two. Gingrich also called Romney a liar for the content of some of his negative ads. The goal, Gingrich said, is to drive home the point that voting for Romney is akin to granting Obama a second term.

“I didn’t realize how true that was until yesterday, when George Soros, a very well-known, ultra-left billionaire, gave an interview in Europe,” Gingrich in Orlando before balloting finished. “He said, ‘There’s really no difference between Romney and Obama. They’re both fine as far was we are concerned. But no Gingrich — that would be a real shame.’ ”

At the same time, Gingrich has begun expounding on the number of major actions he would take upon entering the White House in an effort to show how different a president he would be from Romney and Obama. In recent days, he said he would overturn Obama’s health-care program, eliminate the White House “czars” on various issues, repeal the Dodd-Frank banking overhaul and approve the Keystone XL oil pipeline deal. On Tuesday night, he listed those promises and added another: that he would not sing in public, unlike Obama and Romney, who have recently crooned on stage.

Above all, Gingrich cast himself as the clear outsider, even as he envisioned himself in the Oval Office.

“We’re putting together a people’s campaign, not a Republican campaign, not an establishment campaign, not a Wall Street campaign,” Gingrich said Tuesday night. “We ask you to join us in imposing it on the establishment and imposing it on both parties.”

Still, the Florida results were clear. Gingrich suffered a resounding defeat among conservatives and other groups of voters, especially women. Going forward, it may be difficult for him to regain momentum and convince voters — and donors — that he can still win the nomination.

Gingrich is counting on some factors and discounting others. He needs former Pennsylvania senator Rick Santorum, who won the Iowa caucuses, to drop out. Santorum has shown no sign that this is imminent, announcing a campaign schedule in Nevada and Colorado and expanding to include bus and airplane charters for the traveling media.

Gingrich is also counting on a strong showing in several upcoming southern states — notably his home state of Georgia, which will vote on March 6. Other states Gingrich deems friendly with approaching contests include Tennessee, also on March 6; Alabama on March 13; and Texas on April 3.

The Gingrich logic is that these conservative states will gravitate to him much like South Carolina did in January. He cites his Southern roots, his support within the tea party movement and his promise to bring more conservative reform to Washington among the factors that could tip the balance in his favor.

Yet after securing endorsements from prominent conservatives — from Texas Gov. Rick Perry to Herman Cain — he still fell flat in Florida. Even praise from Sarah Palin, who urged Floridians to vote for Gingrich to “rage against the machine,” did not help.

If Gingrich has admitted a mistake of his own, it was his performance during last Thursday’s debate, in which he failed to offer a zinging delivery. Gingrich blamed Romney’s misstatements, claiming he was left speechless by his opponent’s remarks.

Since that moment, Gingrich said, he has been formulating a new path forward, one similar to the path he followed earlier in the campaign: pointed attacks.

The first time he cratered last spring, Gingrich rebuilt his popularity with debate performances, regularly smacking the media and Obama. The second time, in December, after Romney and his supporters spent millions on negative ads in Iowa, Gingrich aimed his ire at Romney.

This time, Gingrich said, the assault on Romney will be more intense than ever.

Staff writers T.W. Farnam, Dan Eggen and Nia-Malika Henderson contributed to this report.

Newt Gingrich Interview Hannity - "The first four Executive Orders are..".

EXECUTIVE ORDERS NEWT GINGRICH WILL SIGN ON THE FIRST DAY 



The first four Executive Orders President Newt Gingrich will sign are…


1. Eliminate the thirty-nine White House "Czar" positions created during the current administration. The president does not have the authority to appoint bureaucrats to power who are not accountable to the Congress.

2. "Mexico City Policy" of Respect for Life. Reauthorize President Ronald Reagan’s policy – also known as the "Mexico City Policy"— to stop tax payer dollars from being used to fund or promote abortions in foreign countries.

3. Restore conscience clause protections for Healthcare Workers. No American working in a medical environment should be forced to perform any procedure that he or she finds morally or ethically objectionable based on religious teaching. This protection should include, but not be limited to abortion. Existing conscience clause protections need to be strengthened.

4. Respect Each Sovereign Nation’s Choice of its Capital. Each sovereign nation, under international law and custom, may designate its own Capital. Accordingly, the U.S. State Department should be instructed to respect the choice of each sovereign nation and place the American embassy in their Capital. (Israel is the only country the United States discriminates against in this regard. The people of Israel have designated Jerusalem as their capital. Yet the United States retains its embassy in Tel Aviv.)

Contrast Newt wants to repeal Obamacare, Mitt wants to fund Obamacare?

Mitt Romney Wants to Fund Obama Care!!!

Romney. The guy who lost to McCain, who lost to Obama.

Good Choice?


Insanity: doing the same thing over again and expecting different results.
Albert Einstein

No Room for Allen West- or You- in Romney’s GOP

By John Ransom

With Friends Like Romney's . . .

Norm Coleman tells voters the GOP won't repeal ObamaCare.

This is the same GOP gang that gave us Charlie Crist, Romneycare, real estate bailouts, automaker bailouts, abortion bailouts, assault weapon bans.
Yeah, yeah, Obama is the Devil, but Mitt and company have been willing accomplices.

Get ready for the all new GOP, under the lead of Mitt Romney.

It’s a GOP where the Tea Party won’t be welcome, where the federal government will continue to bailout out banks and unions and everyone who’s anyone will continue to make money- except of course you and me.

We’ll just continue to get stuck with the 100 year mortgage payment, as the GOP continues to be the “tax collector for the welfare state,” in the WSJ’s apt phrase.

That’s the takeaway from Florida where Florida Representative Will Weatherford, a Romney proxy, helped redistrict Tea Party favorite Congressman and retired Col. Allen West into a much more liberal district than he previously represented.

I guess Tea Party ideas of limited government and fiscal responsibility aren't wanted in the GOP under Mitt.

Writes the Florida political blog the Shark Tank:

West’s congressional district inexplicably sheds the most out support as compared to all other incumbent Republican and Democrat Congressman. A few weeks back we quoted an unnamed legislator saying that, “Allen West was screwed”, a statement which was originally made about made five months before the purposed maps were made public, leading insiders to believe that the fix was in against Allen West. But in light of Weatherford’s comment, it is increasingly clear that this is a fait accompli. 

Republicans control both houses of the Florida state legislature plus the governor’s office and could have written the new congressional districts however they wanted. But they decided to throw a bone to liberals in the state by redistricting Allen West out of a job.

Why should that surprise anyone?

Throwing a bone to liberals is the thing that Romney, McCain, Dole, Bush and company do best. They recoil under the assault of the left-wing media in this country, seeking refuge in the “bipartisan” label, reaching across the aisle to “get things done” so that they can hit the cocktail circuit and make jokes about guys like Col. West…oh, and you too.   

This is the same GOP gang that gave us Charlie Crist, Romneycare, real estate bailouts, automaker bailouts, abortion bailouts, assault weapon bans.

Yeah, yeah, Obama is the Devil, but Mitt and company have been willing accomplices.

And because of that complicity, conservatives will under-vote for president in 2012 rather than support another Bush-Dole-Bush clone in the White House. Heck, there are lots of positive things to say about the Bushes and the Doles, but little good to say about Romney.

He’s Bush-Dole without character.

But give him this: The guy really, really wants to be president. Toward that end, he’ll say anything you want to hear just as soon as he knows what you want to hear. So don’t believe anything that comes out of Romney’s mouth. When he says “read  my lips,” you should plug your ears- and just imagine Mitt saying whatever you want to hear.

It won’t matter anyway. 

As Romney advisor, former Minnesota Senator Norm Coleman- you know, the guy who lost to Al Freakin’ Franken?- admitted recently, Romney is not going to repeal Obamacare no matter what he says on the campaign trail. 

Observes the Wall Street Journal:

It was a remarkable admission, especially given the aspiring Republican President whose ear Mr. Coleman happens to have. Then again, it may also be evidence of his kind of crack political thinking that couldn't outwit Al Franken of all people in the 2008 race and again in the 2009 recount and thus provided the 60th Senate vote for ObamaCare.

The larger point is that the path of least political resistance for the GOP would be to revert to its historic minority role as tax collectors for the welfare state, and this temptation is especially strong for health care. No one doubts that repealing and replacing ObamaCare will be a hard slog if the party does take the White House and Senate in 2012, namely because the American political system is designed to make change hard (even if those controls failed in 2010 amid Democratic abuses). Mr. Coleman's advice is, essentially, why bother trying.

But that hasn’t stopped Romney from bravely telling us that Obamacare’s individual mandate is unconstitutional, while Romenycare’s individual mandate is not.

The Obamacare repeal will be Mitt’s 0-97 vote in the Senate, just the way Obama’s budget was an oh-fer in 2011.

Oh-well-they-tried.

And here it is: Romney is lying to you one way or another.

He’ll keep one big, fat Obamacare or he’ll try to foist on you 57 varieties of Romneycare that add up to the same thing.

But in either case, like Allen West, the rest of us will pay the price for Romney’s intellectual inconsistencies in pursuit of the great, white house.

Because if Romney wins the nomination, expect neither hope nor change for the GOP.

Expect four more for Obama or in the best case scenario, Obama lite.  source:

Top Three Conservative Arguments About Romney’s Record No One Has Made Effectively

Republicans listening to last night’s primary debate might have been surprised to hear the question asked of former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney by Fox News Channel’s Juan Williams.

“Gov. Romney, Speaker Gingrich says your record of support for gun owners is weak,” Williams said. “You signed the nation’s first ban on assault weapons in Massachusetts and steeply increased fees on gun owners in that state, in fact by 400 percent. How can you convince gun owners that you will be an advocate for them as president?”

Romney answered that the legislation he signed “was crafted both by the pro-gun lobby and the anti-gun lobby. Massachusetts has some very restrictive rules and the pro-gun lobby said, ‘You know what, this legislation is good for us, it includes provisions that we want that allows us, for instance, to cross roads with weapons when we’re hunting that had not been previously allowed.’ And so the pro-gun folks in our state, the Gun Owners Action League and others said, ‘Look, we would like you to sign this legislation.’ And the day when we announced our signing, we had both the pro-gun owners and anti-gun folks all together on the stage because it worked. We worked together. We found common ground.”

Romney’s overall gun record is more mixed that that. The Gun Owners Action League that Romney cites issued a February 2007 report  asserting that Romney made “some rather serious political missteps” early in his administration, though “relations dramatically improved,” and eventually Romney became the most supportive governor of the group’s issues since 1979.

But the larger issue for voters may have been: Romney raised fees on guns? He did? Where? How? When?

Indeed, largely due to the inability of Romney’s competitors to run credible national campaigns that include voter registration and Get-Out-the-Vote, fundraising, event planning and– for the purposes of this discussion — opposition research, the governor has not had to answer many items about his record.

I’m not judging Gov. Romney as having done anything wrong in any of the below stories. Indeed, there will be readers who peruse the below and approve.

But these are aspects of Romney’s record that conservative Republican primary voters are almost certainly unaware of, and in which they may be interested — certainly more so than the attacks that have so far been leveled, such as the populist digs at Romney’s time at Bain Capital, which have in many ways solidified support for the front-runner among some business conservatives.

For whatever reason — likely because of the anemic opposition research efforts in Romney’s rivals’ struggling campaigns — these aspects of the Romney have not been raised.

Here are the Top Three Missed Opportunities for Conservative Attacks:

1. Free Cars for Welfare Recipients?

In 2006, Romney started a program to provide welfare recipients without access to public transportation with free cars. The idea was to provide them with a way to get to work so they could eventually get off welfare.

The cars were donated by charities, while Massachusetts taxpayers funded — as the Boston Herald reported in 2009 — “repairs, registration, insurance, excise tax, the title and AAA membership for one year.”

Romney’s Department of Transitional Assistance started the program, officially called “Transportation Support,” and nicknamed “Welfare Wheels” by the Boston Herald.

You can read more about the program HERE.

The program was discontinued in 2009.

“I don’t care who started it,” said then-state senator (now U.S. Senator) Scott Brown, a Republican. “In this day and age, it’s not appropriate. I mean, we’re paying for Triple A? You’ve got to be kidding me.”

“We can’t be giving out freebies,” Democratic state Sen. Steven Baddour said. “At a time when we’re cutting programs across the spectrum and working families are struggling to pay the bills, this program is just too rich for this budget.”

In 2011, Romney for President spokeswoman Gail Gitcho defended the program to the Herald, saying “over 80 percent of participants have moved off of welfare.” In 2006, the program cost Massachusetts taxpayers $400,000; Gitcho claimed over three years the program saved the state almost $1 million in welfare payments.

2. Early Release for Prisoners Serving ‘Life’ Sentences Peaked Under Romney

Romney and former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum got into a back-and-forth last night about voting rights for felons. Santorum brought up the issue, because a Romney-supporting super PAC is depicting him as supporting prisoners getting voting rights, in his view, as opposed to giving rights to those who have served their time, earned parole, and paid their debt to society.

While Santorum was hoping to show that Romney was a hypocrite — the law in Massachusetts while Romney was governor was more permissive than what Santorum had voted for — the debate allowed Romney to say, “I don’t think people who have committed violent crimes should be allowed to vote again. That’s my own view.”

What Santorum may or may not know is that, according to a 2011 analysis by the Boston Globe, “over the past 20 years, the percentage of inmates paroled while serving a life sentence … peaked in 2004″ — when Romney was governor — “and when all seven members of the state Parole Board had been appointed or reappointed by Republican governors.”

And that, according to the Boston Herald in 2008, “Some 118 killers and rapists were sprung early from prison under former Gov. Mitt Romney’s watch … allowed to walk out the gates by the Department of Correction by claiming so-called ‘good time’ that in some cases substantially reduced their sentences.”

That’s likely more of a concern to Republican primary voters than those ex-cons’ suffrage.

The Romney campaign has pointed out that the governor’s first two nominees to the Parole Board were rejected by The Governor’s Council as too hard-line. A majority of the appointees on the Parole Board were not Romney’s until late 2005. As governor, Romney did not issue a single commutation or pardon, and he tried, to no avail, to reinstate the death penalty.

3. Free Abortions

“On every piece of legislation, I came down on the side of life,” Romney said at the Family Research Council’s Values Voters Summit in 2007.

That’s a matter of interpretation.

For instance, Romney’s Massachusetts health care reform law created an 11-member “Health Care Connector Board” that would ensure affordable pricing for various health insurance plans. Romney appointed actuary Bruce Butler, CEO of Associated Industries of Massachusetts Rick Lord, and economist Jonathan Gruber. Four administration officials from Romney’s cabinet were also appointed to the board, per the law: his Secretary of the Executive Office for Administration and Finance; the Medicaid Director in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts; the Commissioner of Insurance; and the Executive Director of the Group Insurance Commission.

The law also allowed the governor to appoint the executive director of the Connector Authority, and Romney picked senior vice president for policy development at Tufts Associated Health Plan Jon Kingsdale.

Kingsdale wrote a memo to the Connector Authority recommending that for abortions, insurance companies require co-pays between $0 and $100, depending on income level. In September 2006, that was approved by the Connector Authority. Every health care plan offered to low-income Massachusetts residents covers abortion.

Want to see for yourself? Go to this archived page from the 2006 Connector Authority,  and download the “Commonwealth Care Frequently Asked Questions” at the bottom left side of the page.

At the 2009 Value Voters Summit, Mike Huckabee said, “The only thing inexpensive about Massachusetts’ health care bill is that there you can get a $50 abortion.”

The Romney campaign’s response is to assert that “The Connector Authority” is independent and separate from the governor’s office. That’s technically true, but the majority of members of the Connector Authority were appointed by the governor one way or another.

(UPDATE: The Weekly Standard’s John McCormack points out thatGingrich has indeed made the abortion argument — just maybe not effectively. So I am adding the link and I changed the title to “effectively,” though I haven’t seen the other two items mentioned above even uttered by Romney’s rivals.)

-Jake Tapper

Gingrich Surging, Race 'Tighter Than Expected'

InsiderAdvantage Poll: Gingrich Surging, Race 'Tighter Than Expected'

A new InsiderAdvantage poll conducted Sunday night of likely Republican voters in the state of Florida shows a significant surge for Newt Gingrich.

The poll has Romney leading with 36 percent of voters, followed by Gingrich at 31 percent.

The Sunday results of 646 likely GOP voters are as follows:

• Romney 36 percent 
• Gingrich 31 percent 
• Santorum 12 percent 
• Paul 12 percent 
• Other/Undecided 9 percent

"The race will be tighter than expected," Matt Towery, chief pollster of InsiderAdvantage told Newsmax.

Towery noted that his poll showed a surge for Romney on Wednesday, with him leading Gingrich by 8 points. The InsiderAdvantage poll was among the first to show Romney's resurgence after his dismal showing in the S. Carolina primary.

The InsiderAdvantage poll was also the first to show Gingrich's rise in S. Carolina and accurately forecast his win there.

"The trend is favoring Gingrich," Towery said, noting that while Romney's lead was still outside the margin of error of 3.8 percent, "It's not by much."

Towery said Gingrich is doing "substantially better" with men than Romney, 38 to 28, but the former House Speaker still faces a "gender gap," as women are still favoring Romney.

"Men are moving in droves to Gingrich and away from Romney," Towery said.

As for Florida's important Latino vote, InsiderAdvantage has Gingrich beating Romney by a large margin, leading 42 percent to 29 percent.

Monday, January 30, 2012

DNC Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz: Mitt Romney is extreme or something

A Republican who was elected to statewide office in Massachusetts is "extreme?" DNC Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz must consider Karl Marx a moderate.

(CBS News) — The chair of the Democratic National Committee, Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, attacked GOP presidential contender Mitt Romney for being “out-of-step” and “extreme” on Sunday’s “Face the Nation.”

“Each of them are trying to out right-wing each other,” Wasserman Schultz told “Face the Nation” host Bob Schieffer.

The Florida congresswoman focused most of her attention on Romney. She said the former Massachusetts governor is a “dramatic contrast” to what President Obama offers the country.
Ahead of Tuesday’s Florida primary, she said “Romney is out-of-step with the priorities of Floridians.”

“Mitt Romney benefits from the tax loopholes that exist today and he wants them to continue,” Wasserman Schultz said. “That’s the dramatic contrast” to President Obama,” she said.
He is part of an “extreme Republican field” that would do nothing to “help homeowners remain in their homes,” Wasserman Schultz said, referring to the high rate of foreclosures in Florida.

Newt Gingrich calls Obama "food stamp President" again

Newt Gingrich calls Obama "food stamp President" again

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

Hero: Newt Gingrich calls Obama "food stamp President" again

In his South Carolina victory speech, Newt Gingrich called Obama the "food stamp President" again. Liberal heads explode in 3...2...1...

"President Obama has been historically the most effective food stamp president in American history."

SOURCE: 

Gingrich Slams CNN's King: 'I Am Appalled That You Would Begin a Presidential Debate With a Topic Like That'

Gingrich Slams CNN's King: 'I Am Appalled That You Would Begin a Presidential Debate With a Topic Like That'

Rolling to a crescendo, the former Speaker said, “I am tired of the elite media protecting Barack Obama by attacking Republicans.”

CNN’s John King despicably started Thursday’s Republican presidential debate in South Carolina by bringing up allegations made by Newt Gingrich’s ex-wife earlier in the day.

When asked to respond to the controversy, the former Speaker of the House said, “I am appalled that you would begin a presidential debate with a topic like that,” (video follows with transcribed highlights and commentary):

To the amazement of those in the audience as well as viewers at home, King addressed this issue right out of the gate.

“As you know," said the moderator to the former Speaker, "your ex-wife gave an interview to ABC News and another interview with the Washington Post and this story has now gone viral on the Internet. In it, she says you came to her in 1999 at a time when you were having an affair. She says you asked her, Sir, to enter into an open marriage. Would you like to take some time to respond to that?”

“No,” answered Gingrich, “but I will.”

After a pause, the former Speaker said, "I think the destructive, vicious, negative nature of much of the news media makes it harder to govern this country, harder to attract decent people to run for public office, and I am appalled that you would begin a presidential debate with a topic like that.”

This elicited a standing ovation from the crowd on hand.

When they settled down, Gingrich continued, “Every person in here knows personal pain. Every person in here has had someone close to them go through painful things. To take an ex-wife and make it two days before a primary a significant question in a presidential campaign is as close to despicable as anything I can imagine.”

This evoked more applause from the audience.

“My two daughters,” continued the former Speaker, “wrote the head of ABC and made the point that it was wrong, that they should pull it, and I am frankly astounded that CNN would take trash like that and use it to open a presidential debate.”

Once again, the audience applauded Gingrich’s remarks, after which King said, “As you noted, Mr. Speaker, this story did not come from our network. As you also know, it is the subject of conversation on the campaign.”

The former Speaker was having none of this and scolded, “John, it was repeated by your network. You chose to start the debate with it. Don’t try to blame somebody else. You and your staff chose to start this debate with that.”

Obviously feeling he needed to now explain the matter, Gingrich said, “The story is false. Every personal friend I have who knew us in that period says the story is false. We offered several of them to ABC to prove it was false. They weren’t interested because they would like to attack any Republican.”

Rolling to a crescendo, the former Speaker said, “I am tired of the elite media protecting Barack Obama by attacking Republicans.”

Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2012/01/19/gingrich-slams-cnns-king-i-am-appalled-you-would-begin-presidential-d#ixzz1k0ZknMr2